7207962 stephen hawking a history of science

7/30/2019 7207962 Stephen Hawking a History of Science

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/7207962-stephen-hawking-a-history-of-science 1/156

AHI STORY OF SCI ENCEBYHENRY SMI TH WI LLI AMS, M. D. , LL. D.ASSI STED BYEDWARD H. WI LLI AMS, M. D.

I N FI VE VOLUMESVOLUME I .

THE BEGI NNI NGS OF SCI ENCE

BOOK I .

CONTENTS

CHAPTER I . PREHI STORI C SCI ENCE

CHAPTER I I . EGYPTI AN SCI ENCE

CHAPTER I I I . SCI ENCE OF BABYLONI A AND ASSYRI A

CHAPTER I V. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE ALPHABET

CHAPTER V. THE BEGI NNI NGS OF GREEK SCI ENCE

CHAPTER VI . THE EARLY GREEK PHI LOSOPHERS I N I TALY

CHAPTER VI I . GREEK SCI ENCE I N THE EARLY ATTI C PERI OD

CHAPTER VI I I . POST- SOCRATI C SCI ENCE AT ATHENS

CHAPTER I X. GREEK SCI ENCE OF THE ALEXANDRI AN OR HELLENI STI CPERI OD

CHAPTER X. SCI ENCE OF THE ROMAN PERI OD

CHAPTER XI . A RETROSPECTI VE GLANCE AT CLASSI CAL SCI ENCE

APPENDI X

A HI STORY OF SCI ENCE

BOOK I

Shoul d t he story t hat i s about t o be unf ol ded be f ound t o l acki nt er est , t he wr i t er s must st and convi ct ed of unpar donabl e l ackof ar t . Nothi ng but dul ness i n t he t el l i ng coul d mar t he st or y,f or i n i t sel f i t i s t he r ecor d of t he gr owt h of t hose i deas t hathave made our r ace and i t s ci vi l i zat i on what t hey ar e; of i deasi nst i nct wi t h human i nt er est , vi t al wi t h meani ng f or our r ace;



f undament al i n t hei r i nf l uence on human devel opment ; par t andpar cel of t he mechani sm of human t hought on t he one hand, and of pr act i cal ci vi l i zat i on on t he ot her . Such a phr ase as" f undament al pr i nci pl es" may seem at f i r st t hought a har d sayi ng,but t he i dea i t i mpl i es i s l ess repel l ent t han t he phr ase i t sel f ,f or t he f undament al pr i nci pl es i n quest i on ar e so cl osel y l i nkedwi t h t he pr esent i nt er est s of ever y one of us t hat t hey l i ewi t hi n t he grasp of every aver age man and woman- - nay, of ever ywel l - devel oped boy and gi r l . These pr i nci pl es ar e not mer el y t hest eppi ngst ones t o cul t ur e, t he pr er equi si t es of knowl edge- - t heyare, i n t hemsel ves, an essent i al par t of t he knowl edge of ever ycul t i vat ed per son.

I t i s our t ask, not mer el y to show what t hese pr i nci pl es are, butt o poi nt out how t hey have been di scovered by our predecessors.We shal l t r ace t he gr owt h of t hese i deas f r omt hei r f i r st vaguebegi nni ngs. We shal l see how vagueness of t hought gave way topreci si on; how a general t r ut h, once gr asped and f ormul ated, wasf ound t o be a st eppi ngst one t o ot her t r ut hs. We shal l see t hatt her e ar e no i sol at ed f acts, no i sol at ed pr i nci pl es, i n nat ur e;

t hat each par t of our st ory i s l i nked by i ndi ssol ubl e bands wi t ht hat whi ch goes bef ore, and wi t h that whi ch comes af t er. For t hemost par t t he di scover y of t hi s pr i nci pl e or t hat i n a gi vensequence i s no acci dent . Gal i l eo and Keppl er must precede Newt on.Cuvi er and Lyal l must come bef or e Dar wi n; - - Whi ch, af t er al l , i sno more than sayi ng that i n our Templ e of Sci ence, as i n anyother pi ece of ar chi t ect ur e, t he f oundat i on must pr ecede t hesuper st r uct ur e.

We shal l best under st and our st ory of t he gr owt h of sci ence i f wet hi nk of each new pr i nci pl e as a st eppi ngst one whi ch must f i ti nt o i t s own par t i cul ar ni che; and i f we r ef l ect t hat t he ent i r est r uct ur e of moder n ci vi l i zat i on woul d be di f f er ent f r om what i ti s, and l ess per f ect t han i t i s, had not t hat par t i cul arst eppi ngst one been f ound and shaped and pl aced i n posi t i on.

Taken as a whol e, our st eppi ngst ones l ead us up and up t owardst he al l ur i ng hei ght s of an acr opol i s of knowl edge, on whi chst ands t he Templ e of Modern Sci ence. The st ory of t he bui l di ng of t hi s wonder f ul st r ucture i s i n i t sel f f asci nat i ng and beaut i f ul .

I . PREHI STORI C SCI ENCE

To speak of a prehi st or i c sci ence may seeml i ke a cont r adi ct i onof t er ms. The word pr ehi st ori c seems t o i mpl y bar bar i sm, whi l esci ence, cl ear l y enough, seems t he out gr owt h of ci vi l i zat i on; but

r i ght l y consi der ed, t her e i s no cont r adi ct i on. For , on t he onehand, man had ceased t o be a bar bar i an l ong bef ore t he begi nni ngof what we cal l t he hi st ori cal per i od; and, on t he ot her hand,sci ence, of a ki nd, i s no l ess a pr ecur sor and a cause of ci vi l i zat i on t han i t i s a consequent . To get t hi s cl earl y i nmi nd, we must ask our sel ves: What , t hen, i s sci ence? The wordr uns gl i bl y enough upon t he t ongue of our every- day speech, buti t i s not of t en, per haps, t hat t hey who use i t habi t ual l y askt hemsel ves j ust what i t means. Yet t he answer i s not di f f i cul t . Al i t t l e at t ent i on wi l l show t hat sci ence, as t he wor d i s commonl y



used, i mpl i es t hese t hi ngs: f i r st , t he gat her i ng of knowl edget hr ough obser vat i on; second, t he cl assi f i cat i on of suchknowl edge, and t hr ough t hi s cl assi f i cat i on, t he el abor at i on of gener al i deas or pri nci pl es. I n t he f ami l i ar def i ni t i on of Herber t Spencer , sci ence i s or gani zed knowl edge.

Now i t i s pat ent enough, at f i r st gl ance, t hat t he ver i est savagemust have been an observer of t he phenomena of nat ure. But i t maynot be so obvi ous t hat he must al so have been a cl assi f i er of hi sobservat i ons- - an organi zer of knowl edge. Yet t he more we consi dert he case, t he more cl ear i t wi l l become that t he two methods aret oo cl osel y l i nked t oget her t o be di ssever ed. To obser ve out si dephenomena i s not more i nherent i n the nat ure of t he mi nd t han todraw i nf erences f r om t hese phenomena. A deer passi ng t hr ough t hef orest scent s t he gr ound and det ects a cert ai n odor . A sequenceof i deas i s gener at ed i n t he mi nd of t he deer. Nothi ng i n t hedeer ' s exper i ence can pr oduce t hat odor but a wol f ; t her ef ore t hesci ent i f i c i nf erence i s drawn t hat wol ves have passed t hat way.But i t i s a par t of t he deer ' s sci ent i f i c knowl edge, based onpr evi ous exper i ence, i ndi vi dual and r aci al ; t hat wol ves ar e

danger ous beast s, and so, combi ni ng di r ect observat i on i n thepr esent wi t h t he appl i cat i on of a gener al pr i nci pl e based on pastexper i ence, t he deer r eaches t he ver y l ogi cal concl usi on t hat i tmay wi sel y t ur n about and r un i n anot her di r ect i on. Al l t hi si mpl i es, essent i al l y, a compr ehensi on and use of sci ent i f i cpr i nci pl es; and, st r ange as i t seems t o speak of a deer aspossessi ng sci ent i f i c knowl edge, yet t her e i s r eal l y no absur di t yi n the st atement . The deer does possess sci ent i f i c knowl edge;knowl edge di f f er i ng i n degr ee onl y, not i n ki nd, f r om t heknowl edge of a Newt on. Nor i s t he ani mal , wi t hi n the range of i t si nt el l i gence, l ess l ogi cal , l ess sci ent i f i c i n t he appl i cat i on of t hat knowl edge, t han i s t he man. The ani mal t hat coul d not makeaccur at e sci ent i f i c obser vat i ons of i t s sur r oundi ngs, and deduceaccur at e sci ent i f i c concl usi ons f r om t hem, woul d soon pay t hepenal t y of i t s l ack of l ogi c.

What i s t r ue of man' s pr ecur sors i n t he ani mal scal e i s, of cour se, t r ue i n a wi der and f ul l er sense of man hi msel f at t hever y l owest st age of hi s devel opment . Ages bef ore t he t i me whi cht he l i mi t at i ons of our knowl edge f orce us t o speak of as t he dawnof hi st ory, man had reached a hi gh st age of devel opment . As asoci al bei ng, he had devel oped al l t he el ement s of a pr i mi t i veci vi l i zat i on. I f , f or conveni ence of cl assi f i cat i on, we speak of hi s st at e as savage, or bar bar i c, we use ter ms whi ch, af t er al l ,ar e r el at i ve, and whi ch do not shut of f our pr i mi t i ve ancest or sf r om a tol er abl y cl ose associ at i on wi t h our own i deal s. We knowt hat , even i n t he Stone Age, man had l ear ned how t o domest i cat e

ani mal s and make t hemusef ul t o hi m, and that he had al so l ear nedt o cul t i vat e t he soi l . Lat er on, doubt l ess by sl ow and pai nf ulst ages, he at t ai ned t hose wonder f ul el ement s of knowl edge t hatenabl ed hi m t o smel t metal s and t o pr oduce i mpl ement s of bronze,and then of i r on. Even i n the Stone Age he was a mechani c of mar vel l ous ski l l , as any one of t o- day may sat i sf y hi msel f byat t empt i ng t o dupl i cat e such an i mpl ement as a chi ppedarr ow- head. And a barbari an who coul d f ashi on an axe or a kni f eof br onze had cer t ai nl y gone f ar i n hi s knowl edge of sci ent i f i cpr i nci pl es and t hei r pr acti cal appl i cat i on. The pr acti cal



appl i cat i on was, doubt l ess, t he onl y t hought t hat our pr i mi t i veancest or had i n mi nd; qui t e pr obabl y t he quest i on as t opr i nci pl es t hat mi ght be i nvol ved t r oubl ed hi m not at al l . Yet ,i n spi t e of hi msel f , he knew cer t ai n r udi ment ar y pr i nci pl es of sci ence, even t hough he di d not f ormul at e them.

Let us i nqui r e what some of t hese pr i nci pl es are. Such an i nqui r ywi l l , as i t wer e, cl ear t he gr ound f or our st r uct ur e of sci ence.I t wi l l show t he pl ane of knowl edge on whi ch hi st ori cali nvest i gat i on begi ns. I nci dent al l y, per haps, i t wi l l r eveal t o usunsuspected af f i ni t i es between our sel ves and our r emot e ancest or .Wi t hout at t empt i ng anythi ng l i ke a f ul l anal ysi s, we may note i npassi ng, not merel y what pr i mi t i ve man knew, but what he di d notknow; t hat at l east a vague not i on may be gai ned of t he f i el d f orsci ent i f i c resear ch t hat l ay open f or hi st or i c man t o cul t i vat e.

I t must be underst ood that t he knowl edge of pr i mi t i ve man, as wear e about t o out l i ne i t , i s i nf er ent i al . We cannot t r ace t hedevel opment of t hese pr i nci pl es, much l ess can we say who

di scovered t hem. Some of t hem, as al r eady suggest ed, are man' sher i t age f r omnon- human ancest ors. Ot hers can onl y have beengr asped by hi m af t er he had r eached a rel at i vel y hi gh stage of human devel opment . But al l t he pr i nci pl es her e l i st ed must sur el yhave been par t s of our pr i mi t i ve ancest or' s knowl edge bef oret hose ear l i est days of Egypt i an and Babyl oni an ci vi l i zat i on, t her ecor ds of whi ch const i t ut e our f i r st i nt r oducti on t o theso- cal l ed hi st ori cal per i od. Taken somewhat i n t he or der of t hei rpr obabl e di scover y, t he sci ent i f i c i deas of pr i mi t i ve man may ber oughl y l i st ed as f ol l ows:

1. Pri mi t i ve man must have concei ved t hat t he ear t h i s f l at andof l i mi t l ess extent . By thi s i t i s not meant t o i mpl y that he hada di st i nct concept i on of i nf i ni t y, but , f or t hat mat t er, i tcannot be sai d t hat any one t o- day has a concept i on of i nf i ni t yt hat coul d be cal l ed def i ni t e. But , r easoni ng f r omexper i ence andt he repor t s of t r avel l er s, t her e was not hi ng to suggest t o ear l yman t he l i mi t of t he ear t h. He di d, i ndeed, f i nd i n hi swander i ngs, t hat changed cl i mat i c condi t i ons bar r ed hi m f r omf ar t her pr ogr ess; but beyond t he f ar t hest r eaches of hi smi gr at i ons, t he seemi ngl y f l at l and- sur f aces and wat er - sur f acesst r etched away unbr oken and, t o al l appearances, wi t hout end. I twoul d requi r e a r each of t he phi l osophi cal i magi nat i on toconcei ve a l i mi t t o t he eart h, and whi l e such i magi ni ngs may havebeen cur r ent i n the pr ehi st ori c peri od, we can have no pr oof of t hem, and we may wel l post pone consi der at i on of man' s ear l ydreami ngs as t o the shape of t he ear t h unt i l we ent er t he

hi st ori cal epoch where we st and on f i r m gr ound.

2. Pri mi t i ve man must , f r oma ver y ear l y per i od, have observedt hat t he sun gi ves heat and l i ght , and t hat t he moon and st arsseem t o gi ve l i ght onl y and no heat . I t r equi r ed but a sl i ghtext ensi on of t hi s observat i on t o note that t he changi ng phases of t he seasons were associ at ed wi t h t he seemi ng approach andr ecessi on of t he sun. Thi s observat i on, however , coul d not havebeen made unt i l man had mi gr ated f r omt he t r opi cal r egi ons, andhad r eached a st age of mechani cal devel opment enabl i ng hi m t o



l i ve i n subt r opi cal or t emper at e zones. Even t hen i t i sconcei vabl e t hat a l ong per i od must have el apsed bef ore a di r ectcausal r el at i on was f el t t o exi st bet ween t he shi f t i ng of t he sunand t he shi f t i ng of t he seasons; because, as ever y one knows, t heper i ods of gr eat est heat i n summer and gr eat est col d i n wi nt erusual l y come some weeks af t er t he t i me of t he sol st i ces. Yet , t hef act t hat t hese ext r emes of t emperatur e ar e associ ated i n someway wi t h the change of t he sun' s pl ace i n the heavens must , i nt i me, have i mpr essed i t sel f upon even a rudi ment ary i nt el l i gence.I t i s har dl y necessar y t o add that t hi s i s not meant t o i mpl y anydef i ni t e knowl edge of t he r eal meani ng of , t he seemi ngosci l l at i ons of t he sun. We shal l see t hat , even at a r el at i vel yl at e per i od, t he vaguest not i ons wer e st i l l i n vogue as t o t hecause of t he sun' s changes of posi t i on.

That t he sun, moon, and st ar s move acr oss t he heavens mustobvi ousl y have been among t he ear l i est sci ent i f i c observat i ons.I t must not be i nf er r ed, however , t hat t hi s obser vat i on i mpl i ed anecessary concept i on of t he compl ete revol ut i on of t hese bodi esabout t he ear t h. I t i s unnecessary to specul at e her e as to how

t he pr i mi t i ve i nt el l i gence concei ved t he t r ansf er of t he sun f r omt he wester n t o the east er n hori zon, t o be ef f ect ed each ni ght ,f or we shal l have occasi on t o exami ne some hi st or i calspecul at i ons r egardi ng thi s phenomenon. We may assume, however ,t hat t he i dea of t he t r ansf er of t he heavenl y bodi es beneath t heear t h (whatever t he concept i on as t o t he f orm of t hat body) mustear l y have pr esent ed i t sel f .

I t r equi r ed a r el at i vel y hi gh devel opment of t he obser vi ngf acul t i es, yet a devel opment whi ch man must have at t ai ned agesbef or e the hi st or i cal per i od, t o not e that t he moon has asecondar y mot i on, whi ch l eads i t t o shi f t i t s r el at i ve posi t i oni n t he heavens, as r egar ds t he st ars; t hat t he st ar s t hemsel ves,on t he other hand, keep a f i xed r el at i on as regards one another ,wi t h t he not abl e except i on of t wo or t hr ee of t he most br i l l i antmembers of t he gal axy, t he l at t er bei ng t he bodi es whi ch came t obe known f i nal l y as pl anets, or wander i ng st ar s. The wanderi ngpr opensi t i es of such br i l l i ant bodi es as J upi t er and Venus cannotwel l have escaped det ect i on. We may saf el y assume, however , t hatt hese anomal ous mot i ons of t he moon and pl anet s f ound noexpl anat i on t hat coul d be cal l ed sci ent i f i c unt i l a r el at i vel yl at e per i od.

3. Tur ni ng f r omt he heavens t o t he ear t h, and i gnori ng suchpr i mi t i ve obser vat i ons as t hat of t he di st i nct i on bet ween l andand water, we may not e t hat t her e was one gr eat sci ent i f i c l awwhi ch must have f or ced i t sel f upon t he at t ent i on of pr i mi t i ve

man. Thi s i s t he l aw of uni ver sal t er r est r i al gr avi t at i on. Theword gr avi t at i on suggest s t he name of Newt on, and i t may exci t esurpr i se t o hear a knowl edge of gr avi t at i on ascr i bed t o men whopr eceded t hat phi l osopher by, say, t went y- f i ve or f i f t y t housandyear s. Yet t he sl i ght est consi der at i on of t he f act s wi l l make i tcl ear t hat t he gr eat cent r al l aw t hat al l heavy bodi es f al ldi r ect l y t owar ds t he ear t h, cannot have escaped t he at t ent i on of t he most pri mi t i ve i nt el l i gence. The ar bor eal habi t s of ourpr i mi t i ve ancest or s gave oppor t uni t i es f or const ant obser vat i onof t he pr act i cal i t i es of t hi s l aw. And, so soon as man had



devel oped t he ment al capaci t y t o f ormul at e i deas, one of t heear l i est i deas must have been t he concept i on, however vaguel yphr ased i n wor ds, t hat al l unsupport ed bodi es f al l t owar ds t heear t h. The same phenomenon bei ng obser ved t o oper at e onwat er - sur f aces, and no al t er at i on bei ng obser ved i n i t s oper at i oni n di f f er ent por t i ons of man' s habi t at , t he most pr i mi t i vewanderer must have come to have f ul l f ai t h i n t he uni ver salact i on of t he obser ved l aw of gr avi t at i on. I ndeed, i t i si nconcei vabl e t hat he can have i magi ned a pl ace on t he eart hwhere t hi s l aw does not operat e. On t he ot her hand, of cour se, henever gr asped t he concept i on of t he operat i on of t hi s l aw beyondt he cl ose pr oxi mi t y of t he ear t h. To ext end t he r each of gr avi t at i on out t o t he moon and t o the st ar s, i ncl udi ng wi t hi ni t s compass every part i cl e of mat t er i n t he uni ver se, was t hework of Newt on, as we shal l see i n due cour se. Meant i me we shal lbet t er under st and t hat work i f we recal l t hat t he mer e l ocal f actof t er r est r i al gr avi t at i on has been t he f ami l i ar knowl edge of al lgenerat i ons of men. I t may f ur t her hel p to connect us i n sympathywi t h our pr i meval ancest or i f we r ecal l t hat i n t he at t empt t oexpl ai n t hi s f act of t er r est r i al gr avi t at i on Newt on made no

advance, and we of t o- day ar e scarcel y more enl i ght ened t han t heman of t he St one Age. Li ke t he man of t he St one Age, we know t hatan ar r ow shot i nt o t he sky f al l s back t o the ear t h. We cancal cul at e, as he coul d not do, t he ar c i t wi l l descri be and t heexact speed of i t s f al l ; but as t o why i t r et ur ns t o ear t h atal l , t he gr eat est phi l osopher of t o- day i s al most as much i n t hedar k as was t he f i r st pr i mi t i ve bowman t hat ever made theexper i ment .

Ot her physi cal f act s goi ng t o make up an el ement ary sci ence of mechani cs, t hat were demonst r at i vel y known t o pr ehi st or i c man,wer e such as t hese: t he r i gi di t y of sol i ds and t he mobi l i t y of l i qui ds; t he f act t hat changes of t emper at ur e t r ansf or m sol i ds t ol i qui ds and vi ce ver sa- - t hat heat , f or exampl e, mel t s copper andeven i r on, and t hat col d congeal s wat er ; and t he f act t hatf r i cti on, as i l l ust r at ed i n t he r ubbi ng t oget her of t wo st i cks,may pr oduce heat enough t o cause a f i r e. The r at i onal e of t hi sl ast exper i ment di d not r ecei ve an expl anat i on unt i l about t hebegi nni ng of t he ni net eent h cent ur y of our own er a. But t heexperi ment al f act was so wel l known t o pr ehi st or i c man t hat heempl oyed thi s met hod, as var i ous savage t r i bes empl oy i t t o t hi sday, f or t he al t oget her pr act i cal pur pose of maki ng a f i r e; j ustas he empl oyed hi s pract i cal knowl edge of t he mut abi l i t y of sol i ds and l i qui ds i n smel t i ng or es, i n al l oyi ng copper wi t h t i nt o make br onze, and i n cast i ng t hi s al l oy i n mol ds to makevari ous i mpl ement s and weapons. Here, t hen, were t he ger ms of anel ement ary sci ence of physi cs. Meanwhi l e such observat i ons as

t hat of t he sol ut i on of sal t i n wat er may be consi der ed as gi vi nga f i r st l esson i n chemi st r y, but beyond such al t oget herr udi ment ary concept i ons chemi cal knowl edge coul d not havegone- - unl ess, i ndeed, t he pr act i cal obser vat i on of t he ef f ect s of f i r e be i ncl uded; nor can thi s wel l be over l ooked, si nce scar cel yanot her si ngl e l i ne of pr act i cal obser vat i on had a mor e di r ecti nf l uence i n pr omot i ng t he pr ogr ess of man t owards t he hei ght s of ci vi l i zat i on.

4. I n the f i el d of what we now speak of as bi ol ogi cal knowl edge,



pr i mi t i ve man had obvi ousl y t he wi dest opport uni t y f or pract i calobservat i on. We can hardl y doubt t hat man at t ai ned, at an ear l yday, t o t hat concept i on of i dent i t y and of di f f er ence whi ch Pl at opl aces at t he head of hi s metaphysi cal syst em. We shal l ur gepr esent l y t hat i t i s pr eci sel y such gener al i deas as t hese t hatwer e man' s ear l i est i nduct i ons f r omobservat i on, and hence t hatcame t o seem t he most uni ver sal and "i nnat e" i deas of hi sment al i t y. I t i s qui t e i nconcei vabl e, f or exampl e, t hat even t hemost r udi ment ary i nt el l i gence t hat coul d be cal l ed human coul df ai l t o di scri mi nat e bet ween l i vi ng t hi ngs and, l et us say, t her ocks of t he ear t h. The most pr i mi t i ve i nt el l i gence, t hen, musthave made a t aci t cl assi f i cat i on of t he nat ur al obj ect s about i ti nt o t he gr and di vi si ons of ani mat e and i nani mat e nat ur e.Doubt l ess t he nascent sci ent i st may have i magi ned l i f e ani mat i ngmany bodi es t hat we shoul d cal l i nani mate- - such as t he sun,wander i ng pl anets, t he wi nds, and l i ght ni ng; and, on t he otherhand, he may qui t e l i kel y have r el egat ed such obj ect s as t r ees t ot he ranks of t he non- l i vi ng; but t hat he recogni zed a f undament aldi st i nct i on bet ween, l et us say, a wol f and a gr ani t e bowl der wecannot wel l doubt . A st ep beyond t hi s- - a st ep, however , t hat may

have r equi r ed cent ur i es or mi l l enni ums i n t he taki ng- - must havecar r i ed man t o a pl ane of i nt el l i gence f r om whi ch a pr i mi t i veAr i st ot l e or Li nnaeus was enabl ed t o note di f f er ences andr esembl ances connot i ng such gr oups of t hi ngs as f i shes, bi r ds,and f ur r y beast s. Thi s concept i on, t o be sur e, i s an abst r act i onof a rel at i vel y hi gh or der. We know t hat t here ar e savage racest o- day whose l anguage contai ns no word f or such an abst r act i on asbi r d or t r ee. We ar e bound t o bel i eve, t hen, t hat t her e were l ongages of human progr ess dur i ng whi ch t he hi ghest man had at t ai nedno such st age of abst r act i on; but , on t he ot her hand, i t i sequal l y l i t t l e i n quest i on t hat t hi s degr ee of ment al devel opmenthad been at t ai ned l ong bef ore t he openi ng of our hi st ori calper i od. The pr i meval man, t hen, whose sci ent i f i c knowl edge we ar eat t empt i ng to pr edi cate, had become, t hrough hi s concept i on of f i shes, bi r ds, and hai r y ani mal s as separ at e cl asses, asci ent i f i c zool ogi st of r el at i vel y hi gh at t ai nment s.

I n t he pr act i cal f i el d of medi cal knowl edge, a cer t ai n st age of devel opment must have been r eached at a very earl y day. Evenani mal s pi ck and choose among t he veget abl es about t hem, and att i mes seek out cer t ai n her bs qui t e di f f er ent f r om t hei r or di nar yf ood, pr acti si ng a sor t of i nst i ncti ve t her apeut i cs. The cat ' sf ondness f or cat ni p i s a case i n poi nt . The most pr i mi t i ve man,t hen, must have i nher i t ed a r aci al or i nst i nct i ve knowl edge of t he medi ci nal ef f ect s of cer t ai n her bs; i n par t i cul ar he musthave had such el ement ary knowl edge of t oxi col ogy as woul d enabl ehi m t o avoi d eat i ng cer t ai n poi sonous ber r i es. Per haps, i ndeed,

we ar e pl aci ng the ef f ect bef ore t he cause t o some ext ent ; f or,af t er al l , t he ani mal syst em possesses mar vel l ous powers of adapt i on, and t here i s perhaps har dl y any poi sonous vegetabl ewhi ch man mi ght not have l ear ned t o eat wi t hout del eter i ousef f ect , pr ovi ded t he experi ment were made gr adual l y. To a cer t ai next ent , t hen, t he observed poi sonous ef f ect s of numer ous pl ant supon t he human syst em are to be expl ai ned by t he f act t hat ourancest or s have avoi ded t hi s par t i cul ar veget abl e. Cer t ai n f r ui t sand ber r i es mi ght have come t o have been a part of man' s di et ,had t hey gr own i n t he r egi ons he i nhabi t ed at an ear l y day, whi ch



now ar e poi sonous t o hi s syst em. Thi s t hought , however , car r i esus too f ar af i el d. For pr acti cal pur poses, i t suf f i ces thatcer t ai n r oot s, l eaves, and f r ui t s possess pr i nci pl es t hat ar epoi sonous t o t he human syst em, and t hat unl ess man had l ear ned i nsome way t o avoi d t hese, our r ace must have come to di sast er . I npoi nt of f act , he di d l earn t o avoi d t hem; and such evi dencei mpl i ed, as has been sai d, an el ement ary knowl edge of t oxi col ogy.

Coupl ed wi t h thi s knowl edge of t hi ngs danger ous t o t he humansyst em, t her e must have grown up, at a very ear l y day, a bel i ef i n t he r emedi al char act er of var i ous veget abl es as agent s t ocombat di sease. Here, of cour se, was a r udi ment ary therapeut i cs,a crude pr i nci pl e of an empi r i cal ar t of medi ci ne. As j ustsuggest ed, t he l ower order of ani mal s have an i nst i nct i veknowl edge t hat enabl es t hem t o seek out r emedi al her bs ( t hough wepr obabl y exagger at e t he extent of t hi s i nst i nct i ve knowl edge) ;and i f t hi s be t r ue, man must have i nher i t ed f r om hi s prehumanancest or s t hi s i nst i nct al ong wi t h t he ot her s. That he extendedt hi s knowl edge thr ough observat i on and pr act i ce, and came earl yt o make ext ensi ve use of dr ugs i n the t r eat ment of di sease, i s

pl aced beyond cavi l t hr ough t he observat i on of t he var i ousexi st i ng bar bar i c t r i bes, near l y al l of whom pr acti ce el abor at esyst ems of t herapeut i cs. We shal l have occasi on t o see t hat evenwi t hi n hi st or i c t i mes t he par t i cul ar t her apeut i c measur esempl oyed were of t en cr ude, and, as we are accust omed t o say,unsci ent i f i c; but even t he crudest of t hem ar e r eal l y based uponsci ent i f i c pr i nci pl es, i nasmuch as t hei r appl i cat i on i mpl i es t hededuct i on of pr i nci pl es of act i on f r om pr evi ous obser vat i ons.Cert ai n dr ugs ar e appl i ed t o appease cer t ai n symptoms of di seasebecause i n t he bel i ef of t he medi ci ne- man such drugs have provedbenef i ci al i n pr evi ous si mi l ar cases.

Al l t hi s, however , i mpl i es an appr eci at i on of t he f act t hat mani s subj ect t o "nat ur al " di seases, and t hat i f t hese di seases ar enot combated, death may r esul t . But i t shoul d be underst ood thatt he ear l i est man pr obabl y had no such concept i on as thi s.

Throughout al l t he ages of ear l y devel opment , what we cal l"nat ur al " di sease and "natur al " deat h meant t he onsl aught of at angi bl e enemy. A st udy of t hi s quest i on l eads us t o some verycuri ous i nf erences. The more we l ook i nto the mat t er t he more thet hought f orces i t sel f home to us t hat t he i dea of nat ur al deat h,as we now concei ve i t , came to pr i mi t i ve man as a rel at i vel y l atesci ent i f i c i nduct i on. Thi s t hought seems al most st ar t l i ng, soaxi omat i c has t he concept i on "man i s mor t al " come to appear . Yeta st udy of t he i deas of exi st i ng savages, combi ned wi t h ourknowl edge of t he poi nt of vi ew f r omwhi ch hi st or i cal peopl esr egar d di sease, make i t more pr obabl e that t he pr i mi t i ve

concept i on of human l i f e di d not i ncl ude t he i dea of necessarydeat h. We ar e tol d t hat t he Aust r al i an savage who f al l s f r om at r ee and br eaks hi s neck i s not r egarded as havi ng met a natur aldeat h, but as havi ng been the vi ct i m of t he magi cal pr act i ces of t he "medi ci ne- man" of some nei ghbori ng t r i be. Si mi l ar l y, we shal lf i nd t hat t he Egypt i an and t he Babyl oni an of t he ear l y hi st or i calper i od concei ved i l l ness as bei ng al most i nvar i abl y t he r esul t of t he machi nat i ons of an enemy. One need but r ecal l t hesupers t i t i ous observances of t he Mi ddl e Ages, and t he yet morer ecent bel i ef i n wi t chcraf t , t o real i ze how gener al l y di sease has



been per soni f i ed as a mal i ci ous agent i nvoked by an unf r i endl ymi nd. I ndeed, t he phr aseol ogy of our pr esent - day speech i s st i l lr emi ni scent of t hi s; as when, f or exampl e, we speak of an "at t ackof f ever , " and t he l i ke.

When, f ol l owi ng out t hi s i dea, we pi ct ur e t o our sel ves t hecondi t i ons under whi ch pr i mi t i ve man l i ved, i t wi l l be evi dent atonce how r el at i vel y i nf r equent must have been hi s observat i on of what we usual l y term natural death. Hi s wor l d was a wor l d of st r i f e; he l i ved by t he chase; he saw ani mal s ki l l one another ;he wi t nessed t he deat h of hi s own f el l ows at t he hands of enemi es. Natural l y enough, t hen, when a member of hi s f ami l y was"st r uck down" by i nvi si bl e agent s, he ascr i bed t hi s deat h al so tovi ol ence, even t hough t he of f ensi ve agent was conceal ed.Mor eover , havi ng ver y l i t t l e i dea of t he l apse of t i me- - bei ngqui t e unaccust omed, t hat i s, t o reckon event s f r omany f i xedera- - pri mi t i ve man cannot have gai ned at once a cl ear concept i onof age as appl i ed t o hi s f el l ows. Unt i l a r el at i vel y l at e st ageof devel opment made t r i bal l i f e possi bl e, i t cannot have beenusual f or man t o have knowl edge of hi s grandparents; as a rul e he

di d not know hi s own parent s af t er he had passed the adol escentst age and had been t ur ned out upon t he wor l d t o car e f or hi msel f .I f , t hen, cer t ai n of hi s f el l ow- bei ngs showed t hose evi dences of i nf i r mi t y whi ch we ascri be t o age, i t di d not necessar i l y f ol l owt hat he saw any associ at i on between such i nf i r mi t i es and t hel engt h of t i me whi ch t hose per sons had l i ved. The ver y f act t hatsome bar bar i c nat i ons r et ai n t he cust om of ki l l i ng t he aged andi nf i rm, i n i t sel f suggests t he possi bi l i t y t hat t hi s customarosebef ore a cl ear concept i on had been at t ai ned t hat such dr ags upont he communi t y woul d be removed pr esent l y i n the nat ural order of t hi ngs. To a person who had no cl ear concept i on of t he l apse of t i me and no pr econcept i on as t o t he l i mi t ed per i od of man' s l i f e,t he i nf i r mi t i es of age mi ght ver y nat ur al l y be ascr i bed t o t her epeat ed at t acks of t hose i ni mi cal powers whi ch were underst oodsooner or l ater t o car r y of f most members of t he race. Andcoupl ed wi t h thi s t hought woul d go t he concept i on t hat i nasmuchas some peopl e t hrough l uck had escaped the vengeance of al lt hei r enemi es f or l ong peri ods, t hese same i ndi vi dual s mi ghtcont i nue t o escape f or i ndef i ni t e per i ods of t he f ut ur e. Ther ewer e no wr i t t en r ecords t o tel l pr i meval man of event s of l ongago. He l i ved i n t he pr esent , and hi s sweep of i deas scarcel ycar r i ed hi m back beyond t he l i mi t s of hi s i ndi vi dual memory. Butmemory i s observed t o be f al l aci ous. I t must ear l y have beennoted that some peopl e recal l ed event s whi ch ot her par t i ci pant si n t hemhad qui t e f orgot t en, and i t may r eadi l y enough have beeni nf err ed t hat t hose members of t he t r i be who spoke of event swhi ch ot her s coul d not r ecal l were merel y t he ones who were

gi f t ed wi t h t he best memor i es. I f t hese r eached a peri od whent hei r memori es became vague, i t di d not f ol l ow t hat t hei rr ecol l ect i ons had car r i ed t hem back t o t he begi nni ngs of t hei rl i ves. I ndeed, i t i s cont r ar y to al l exper i ence t o bel i eve t hatany man r emembers al l t he t hi ngs he has once known, and t heobser ved f al l aci ousness and evanescence of memory woul d t hus t endt o subst ant i at e r at her t han t o cont r over t t he i dea t hat var i ousmember s of a t r i be had been al i ve f or an i ndef i ni t e peri od.

Wi t hout f ur t her el abor at i ng t he ar gument , i t seems a j ust i f i abl e



i nf er ence t hat t he f i r st concept i on pr i mi t i ve man woul d have of hi s own l i f e woul d not i ncl ude t he t hought of nat ur al deat h, butwoul d, conver sel y, connote t he vague concept i on of endl ess l i f e.Our own ancest or s, a f ew gener at i ons r emoved, had not got r i d of t hi s concept i on, as t he per pet ual quest of t he spr i ng of et er nalyout h ampl y test i f i es. A nat ur al i st of our own day has suggest edt hat per haps bi r ds never di e except by vi ol ence. The t hought ,t hen, t hat man has a term of years beyond whi ch "i n the natur e of t hi ngs, " as t he sayi ng goes, he may not l i ve, woul d have dawnedbut gr adual l y upon t he devel opi ng i nt el l i gence of successi vegenerat i ons of men; and we cannot f eel sure that he woul d f ul l yhave grasped t he concept i on of a "nat ur al " t ermi nat i on of humanl i f e unt i l he had shaken hi msel f f r ee f r om t he i dea t hat di seasei s al ways t he r esul t of t he magi c pr act i ce of an enemy. Ourobservat i on of hi st ori cal man i n ant i qui t y makes i t somewhatdoubt f ul whet her t hi s concept i on had been at t ai ned bef ore t hecl ose of t he pr ehi st or i c per i od. I f i t had, t hi s concept i on of t he mort al i t y of man was one of t he most st r i ki ng sci ent i f i ci nduct i ons t o whi ch pr ehi st or i c man at t ai ned. I nci dent al l y, i tmay be not ed t hat t he concept i on of eternal l i f e f or t he human

body bei ng a more pr i mi t i ve i dea than t he concept i on of natur aldeat h, t he i dea of t he i mmor t al i t y of t he spi r i t woul d be t hemost nat ur al of concept i ons. The i mmor t al spi r i t , i ndeed, woul dbe but a cor r el at i ve of t he i mmort al body, and t he i dea whi ch weshal l see pr eval ent among t he Egypt i ans t hat t he soul per si st sonl y as l ong as t he body i s i nt act - - t he i dea upon whi ch t hepract i ce of mummi f yi ng t he dead depended- - f i nds a readyexpl anat i on. But t hi s phase of t he subj ect car r i es us somewhataf i el d. For our pr esent pur pose i t suf f i ces t o have poi nt ed outt hat t he concept i on of man' s mort al i t y- - a concept i on whi ch nowseems of al l other s t he most nat ur al and " i nnat e" - - was i n al lprobabi l i t y a r el at i vel y l at e sci ent i f i c i nducti on of ourpr i mi t i ve ancest or s.

5. Tur ni ng f r om t he consi der at i on of t he body to i t s ment alcompl ement , we ar e f orced t o admi t t hat her e, al so, our pr i mi t i veman must have made cert ai n el ement ary obser vat i ons t hat under l i esuch sci ences as psychol ogy, mathemat i cs, and pol i t i cal economy.

The el ementary emot i ons associ at ed wi t h hunger and wi t h sat i et y,wi t h l ove and wi t h hat r ed, must have f or ced t hemsel ves upon t heear l i est i nt el l i gence t hat r eached the pl ane of consci oussel f - obser vat i on. The capaci t y t o count , at l east t o t he numberf our or f i ve, i s wi t hi n t he r ange of even ani mal i nt el l i gence.Cer t ai n savages have gone scar cel y f ar t her t han t hi s; but ourpr i meval ancest or , who was f or gi ng on towar ds ci vi l i zat i on, hadl ear ned t o count hi s f i nger s and toes, and to number obj ect sabout hi m by f i ves and t ens i n consequence, bef ore be passed

beyond the pl ane of numerous exi st i ng bar bar i ans. How much beyondt hi s he had gone we need not at t empt t o i nqui r e; but t her el at i vel y hi gh devel opment of mat hemat i cs i n t he ear l yhi st ori cal per i od suggest s t hat pr i meval man had at t ai ned a noti nconsi der abl e knowl edge of number s. The humdrumvocat i on of l ooki ng af t er a numerous progeny must have t aught t he mot her t her udi ment s of addi t i on and subt r act i on; and t he el ement s of mul t i pl i cat i on and di vi si on ar e i mpl i ed i n t he capaci t y t o car r yon even t he r udest f or m of bar t er , such as t he var i ous t r i besmust have pr act i sed f r om an ear l y day.



As t o pol i t i cal i deas, even t he crudest t r i bal l i f e was based oncer t ai n concept i ons of owner shi p, at l east of t r i bal owner shi p,and t he appl i cat i on of t he pr i nci pl e of l i keness and di f f er encet o whi ch we have al r eady ref er r ed. Each t r i be, of cour se,di f f er ed i n some r egar d f r om other t r i bes, and t he r ecogni t i on of t hese di f f erences i mpl i ed i n i t sel f a pol i t i cal c l assi f i cat i on. Acer t ai n t r i be t ook possessi on of a par t i cul ar hunt i nggr ound,whi ch became, f or t he t i me bei ng, i t s home, and over whi ch i tcame t o exer ci se cer t ai n r i ght s. An i nvasi on of t hi s t er r i t or y byanother t r i be mi ght l ead to war, and the bandi ng toget her of t hemembers of t he t r i be t o r epel t he i nvader i mpl i ed both ar ecogni t i on of communal uni t y and a speci es of pr ej udi ce i n f avorof t hat communi t y t hat const i t ut ed a pr i mi t i ve pat r i ot i sm. Butt hi s uni t y of act i on i n opposi ng anot her t r i be woul d not pr eventa cer t ai n r i val r y of i nt erest between t he members of t he samet r i be, whi ch woul d show i t sel f more and more pr omi nent l y as t het r i be i ncr eased i n si ze. The associ at i on of t wo or mor e per sonsi mpl i es, al ways, t he ascendency of some and the subordi nat i on of other s. Leader shi p and subordi nat i on ar e necessary cor r el at i ves

of di f f er ence of physi cal and ment al endowment , and ri val r ybet ween l eader s woul d i nevi t abl y l ead to t he f ormat i on of pr i mi t i ve pol i t i cal par t i es. Wi t h t he ul t i mat e success andascendency of one l eader , who secures ei t her absol ute power orpower modi f i ed i n accor dance wi t h t he advi ce of subordi natel eader s, we have t he ger ms of an el aborat e pol i t i cal syst em- - anembryo sci ence of government .

Meanwhi l e, t he ver y exi st ence of such a communi t y i mpl i es t her ecogni t i on on the par t of i t s member s of cer t ai n i ndi vi dualr i ght s, t he recogni t i on of whi ch i s essent i al t o communalhar mony. The r i ght of i ndi vi dual owner shi p of t he var i ousart i cl es and i mpl ement s of ever y- day l i f e must be recogni zed, oral l har mony woul d be at an end. Cer t ai n rul es of j ust i ce- -pr i mi t i ve l aws- - must , by common consent , gi ve pr otect i on t o t heweakest member s of t he communi t y. Here are t he r udi ment s of asystem of et hi cs. I t may seem anomal ous t o speak of t hi spr i mi t i ve mor al i t y, t hi s ear l y r ecogni t i on of t he pr i nci pl es of r i ght and wr ong, as havi ng any rel at i on to sci ence. Yet , r i ght l yconsi der ed, t her e i s no i ncongr ui t y i n such a ci t at i on. Ther ecannot wel l be a doubt t hat t he adopt i on of t hose br oadpr i nci pl es of r i ght and wr ong whi ch under l i e t he ent i r e st r uct ur eof moder n ci vi l i zat i on was due to sci ent i f i c i nducti on, - - i n ot herwords, t o the bel i ef , based on observat i on and exper i ence, t hatt he pr i nci pl es i mpl i ed were essent i al t o communal pr ogr ess. Hewho has scanned t he pageant of hi st ory knows how of t en t hesepr i nci pl es seem t o be absent i n t he i nt er cour se of men and

nat i ons. Yet t he i deal i s al ways t her e as a st andar d by whi ch al ldeeds ar e j udged.

I t woul d appear , t hen, t hat t he ent i r e super st r uct ur e of l at ersci ence had i t s f oundat i on i n the knowl edge and pr act i ce of pr ehi st or i c man. The ci vi l i zat i on of t he hi st or i cal per i od coul dnot have advanced as i t has had t her e not been count l essgener at i ons of cul t ur e back of i t . The new pr i nci pl es of sci encecoul d not have been evol ved had t her e not been great basal



pri nci pl es whi ch ages of unconsci ous experi ment had i mpr essedupon t he mi nd of our r ace. Due meed of prai se must be gi ven,t hen, t o our pr i mi t i ve ancest or f or hi s sci ent i f i caccompl i shment s; but j ust i ce demands t hat we shoul d l ook a l i t t l ef ar t her and consi der t he rever se si de of t he pi ct ur e. We have hadt o do, t hus f ar , chi ef l y wi t h t he posi t i ve si de of accompl i shment . We have poi nted out what our pr i mi t i ve ancest orknew, i nt i mat i ng, per haps, t he l i mi t at i ons of hi s knowl edge; butwe have had l i t t l e t o say of one al l - i mpor t ant f eat ur e of hi ssci ent i f i c t heor i zi ng. The f eat ur e i n quest i on i s based on t hehi ghl y sci ent i f i c desi r e and pr opensi t y t o f i nd expl anat i ons f ort he phenomena of nat ure. Wi t hout such desi r e no pr ogr ess coul d bemade. I t i s, as we have seen, t he gener al i zi ng f r omexper i encet hat const i t ut es real sci ent i f i c pr ogr ess; and yet , j ust as mostother good t hi ngs can be over done, t hi s sci ent i f i c pr opensi t y maybe car r i ed t o a di sast r ous excess.

Pr i meval man di d not escape thi s danger . He obser ved, her easoned, he f ound expl anat i ons; but he di d not al waysdi scr i mi nat e as t o t he l ogi cal i t y of hi s r easoni ngs. He f ai l ed t o

r ecogni ze t he l i mi t at i ons of hi s knowl edge. The observeduni f ormi t y i n the sequence of cer t ai n event s i mpr essed on hi smi nd t he i dea of cause and ef f ect . Proxi mate causes known, hesought r emoter causes; chi l dl i ke, hi s i nqui r i ng mi nd was al waysaski ng, Why? and, chi l dl i ke, he demanded an expl i ci t answer. I f t he f orces of nat ur e seemed t o combat hi m, i f wi nd and rai nopposed hi s progress and t hunder and l i ght ni ng seemed t o menacehi s exi st ence, he was l ed i r r evocabl y t o thi nk of t hose humanf oes who warr ed wi t h hi m, and to see, back of t he warf are of t heel ement s, an i nscrut abl e mal evol ent i nt el l i gence whi ch t ook t hi smet hod t o expr ess i t s di spl easure. But ever y ot her l i ne of sci ent i f i c obser vat i on l eads equal l y, f ol l owi ng back a sequenceof event s, t o seemi ngl y causel ess begi nni ngs. Modern sci ence canexpl ai n t he l i ght ni ng, as i t can expl ai n a gr eat number of t hemyst er i es whi ch t he pr i meval i nt el l i gence coul d not penet r at e.But t he pr i mordi al man coul d not wai t f or t he r evel at i ons of sci ent i f i c i nvest i gat i on: he must vaul t at once t o a f i nalsol ut i on of al l sci ent i f i c pr obl ems. He f ound hi s sol ut i on bypeopl i ng t he worl d wi t h i nvi si bl e f or ces, ant hr opomor phi c i nt hei r concept i on, l i ke hi msel f i n t hei r t hought and act i on,di f f er i ng onl y i n t he l i mi t at i ons of t hei r power s. Hi s own dr eamexi st ence gave hi m seemi ng pr oof of t he exi st ence of an al t erego, a spi r i t ual por t i on of hi msel f t hat coul d di ssever i t sel f f r om hi s body and wander at wi l l ; hi s sci ent i f i c i nducti onsseemed t o tel l hi m of a wor l d of i nvi si bl e bei ngs, capabl e of i nf l uenci ng hi m f or good or i l l . Fromt he sci ent i f i c exerci se of hi s f acul t i es he evol ved t he al l - encompassi ng gener al i zat i ons of

i nvi si bl e and al l - powerf ul causes back of t he phenomena of nat ur e. These gener al i zat i ons, ear l y devel oped and seemi ngl ysupport ed by t he observat i ons of count l ess gener at i ons, came t obe among the most f i r ml y est abl i shed sci ent i f i c i nduct i ons of ourpri meval ancest or . They obt ai ned a hol d upon t he ment al i t y of ourr ace t hat l ed subsequent generat i ons t o t hi nk of t hem, somet i mest o speak of t hem, as "i nnat e" i deas. The observat i ons upon whi cht hey were based are now, f or t he most par t , suscept i bl e of otheri nt er pr et at i ons; but t he ol d i nt er pr et at i ons have pr ecedent andprej udi ce back of t hem, and t hey repr esent i deas t hat are more



di f f i cul t t han al most any ot her s t o er adi cat e. Al ways, andever ywher e, super st i t i ons based upon unwar r ant ed ear l y sci ent i f i cdeduct i ons have been t he most i mpl acabl e f oes t o the progr ess of sci ence. Men have bui l t syst ems of phi l osophy around t hei rconcept i on of ant hr opomorphi c dei t i es; t hey have l i nked t o thesesystems of phi l osophy t he al l i ed concept i on of t he i mmut abi l i t yof man' s spi r i t , and t hey have asked t hat sci ent i f i c pr ogr essshoul d stop short at t he br i nk of t hese syst ems of phi l osophy andaccept t hei r di ctates as f i nal . Yet t her e i s not t o- day i nexi st ence, and t her e never has been, one j ot of sci ent i f i cevi dence f or t he exi st ence of t hese i nt angi bl e ant hr opomorphi cpower s back of nat ur e t hat i s not suscept i bl e of sci ent i f i cchal l enge and of mor e l ogi cal i nt er pr et at i on. I n despi t e of whi cht he super st i t i ous bel i ef s ar e st i l l as f i r ml y f i xed i n t he mi ndsof a l ar ge maj ori t y of our r ace as t hey wer e i n the mi nd of ourpr ehi st or i c ancest or . The f act of t hi s bal ef ul her i t age must notbe f or got t en i n est i mat i ng t he debt of gr at i t ude whi ch hi st or i cman owes t o hi s bar bar i c predecessor .

I I . EGYPTI AN SCI ENCE

I n t he pr evi ous chapt er we have pur posel y ref r ai ned f r omr ef er r i ng t o any par t i cul ar t r i be or r ace of hi st or i cal man. Now,however , we ar e at t he begi nni ngs of nat i onal exi st ence, and wehave t o consi der t he accompl i shment s of an i ndi vi dual r ace; orr at her , perhaps, of t wo or more r aces t hat occupi ed successi vel yt he same geogr aphi cal t err i t ory. But even now our st udi es mustf or a t i me r emai n ver y gener al ; we shal l see l i t t l e or not hi ng of t he deeds of i ndi vi dual sci ent i st s i n t he cour se of our st udy of Egypt i an cul t ur e. We ar e st i l l , i t must be under st ood, at t hebegi nni ngs of hi st or y; i ndeed, we must f i r st br i dge over t he gapf r om t he pr ehi st or i c bef ore we may f i nd our sel ves f ai r l y on t hel i ne of mar ch of hi st or i cal sci ence.

At t he very out set we may wel l ask what const i t ut es t hedi st i nct i on bet ween pr ehi st or i c and hi st or i c epochs - - adi st i nct i on whi ch has been const ant l y i mpl i ed i n much that wehave sai d. The repl y savor s somewhat of vagueness. I t i s adi st i nct i on havi ng to do, not so much wi t h f act s of humanpr ogr ess as wi t h our i nt erpret at i on of t hese f act s. When we speakof t he dawn of hi st ory we must not be unders t ood t o i mpl y t hat ,at t he per i od i n quest i on, t here was any sudden change i n thei nt el l ect ual st at us of t he human r ace or i n t he st at us of anyi ndi vi dual t r i be or nat i on of men. What we mean i s t hat modernknowl edge has penetr ated t he mi st s of t he past f or t he per i od we

t er m hi st ori cal wi t h somet hi ng mor e of cl ear ness and pr eci si ont han i t has been abl e t o br i ng t o bear upon yet ear l i er per i ods.New accessi ons of knowl edge may t hus shi f t f r omt i me to t i me thebounds of t he so- cal l ed hi st or i cal per i od. The cl ear esti l l ustr at i on of t hi s i s f urni shed by our i nt erpretat i on of Egypt i an hi st or y. Unt i l r ecent l y t he bi bl i cal r ecor ds of t heHebr ew capt i vi t y or ser vi ce, t oget her wi t h t he si mi l ar account of

J osephus, f urni shed about al l t hat was known of Egypt i an hi st or yeven of so compar at i vel y recent a t i me as t hat of Ramses I I .( f i f t eent h cent ur y B. C. ) , and f r om t hat per i od on t her e was



al most a compl et e gap unt i l t he st ory was t aken up by t he Gr eekhi st or i ans Her odot us and Di odor us. I t i s t r ue t hat t he ki ng- l i st sof t he Al exandr i an hi st or i an, Manet ho, wer e al l al ong accessi bl ei n somewhat gar bl ed copi es. But at best t hey seemed t o suppl yuni nt el l i gi bl e l i st s of names and dat es whi ch no one was di sposedt o t ake ser i ousl y. That t hey wer e, br oadl y speaki ng, t r uehi st or i cal r ecor ds, and most i mpor t ant hi st or i cal r ecor ds att hat , was not r ecogni zed by moder n schol ar s unt i l f r esh l i ght hadbeen t hr own on t he subj ect f r om al t ogether new sour ces.

These new sour ces of knowl edge of anci ent hi st or y demand amoment ' s consi der at i on. They are al l - i mport ant because t hey havebeen t he means of ext endi ng t he hi st ori cal per i od of Egypt i anhi st or y (usi ng t he wor d hi st or y i n t he way j ust expl ai ned) byt hr ee or f our t housand year s. As j ust suggest ed, t hat hi st or i calper i od car r i ed t he schol ar shi p of t he ear l y ni net eent h cent ur yscar cel y beyond t he f i f t eent h cent ur y B. C. , but t o- day' s vi si onextends wi t h t ol er abl e cl ear ness t o about t he mi ddl e of t he f i f t hmi l l enni um B. C. Thi s change has been br ought about chi ef l yt hr ough st udy of t he Egypt i an hi er ogl yphi cs. These hi er ogl yphi cs

const i t ut e, as we now know, a hi ghl y devel oped syst em of wr i t i ng;a syst emt hat was pr act i sed f or some t housands of years, butwhi ch f el l ut t er l y i nt o di suse i n t he l at er Roman per i od, and t heknowl edge of whi ch passed absol ut el y f r omt he mi nd of man. Forabout t wo t housand years no one was abl e t o r ead, wi t h any degr eeof expl i ci t ness, a si ngl e char acter of t hi s st r ange scri pt , andt he i dea became pr eval ent t hat i t di d not const i t ut e a r ealsystem of wr i t i ng, but onl y a mor e or l ess bar bar i c syst em of r el i gi ous symbol i sm. The f al si t y of t hi s vi ew was shown ear l y i nt he ni net eent h century when Dr . Thomas Young was l ed, t hroughst udy of t he f amous t r i l i ngual i nscri pt i on of t he Roset t a st one,t o make t he f i r st successf ul at t empt at cl eari ng up t he myst er i esof t he hi er ogl yphi cs.

Thi s i s not t he pl ace t o t el l t he st or y of hi s f asci nat i ngdi scover i es and those of hi s successor s. That st ory bel ongs t oni net eent h- cent ur y sci ence, not t o t he sci ence of t he Egypt i ans.Suf f i ce i t her e t hat Young gai ned t he f i r st cl ew t o a f ew of t hephonet i c val ues of t he Egypt i an symbol s, and that t he work of di scovery was car r i ed on and vast l y ext ended by t he Fr enchmanChampol l i on, a l i t t l e l at er, wi t h t he r esul t t hat t he f i rmf oundat i ons of t he modern sci ence of Egypt ol ogy were l ai d.Subsequent l y such st udent s as Rosel l i ni t he I t al i an, Lepsi us t heGer man, and Wi l ki nson t he Engl i shman, ent er ed t he f i el d, whi ch i ndue course was cul t i vat ed by De Rouge i n Fr ance and Bi r ch i nEngl and, and by such di st i ngui shed l at t erday worker s as Chabas,Mar i et t e, Masper o, Amel i neau, and De Mor gan among t he Frenchmen;

Prof essor Pet r i e and Dr . Budge i n Engl and; and Br ugsch Pasha andProf essor Er man i n Germany, not t o ment i on a l arge cot eri e of somewhat l ess f ami l i ar names. These men worki ng, some of t hem i nt he f i el d of pr act i cal expl or at i on, some as st udent s of t heEgypt i an l anguage and wr i t i ng, have r est ored t o us a tol er abl ypr eci se knowl edge of t he hi st ory of Egypt f r om t he ti me of t hef i r st hi st or i cal ki ng, Mena, whose dat e i s pl aced at about t hemi ddl e of t he f i f t h century B. C. We know not merel y t he names of most of t he subsequent r ul ers , but some t hi ng of t he deeds of many of t hem; and, what i s vast l y more i mpor t ant , we know, t hanks



t o t he moder n i nt er pr et at i on of t he ol d l i t er at ur e, many thi ngsconcer ni ng t he l i f e of t he peopl e, and i n par t i cul ar concer ni ngt hei r hi ghest cul t ur e, t hei r met hods of t hought , and t hei rsci ent i f i c at t ai nment s, whi ch mi ght wel l have been supposed to bepast f i ndi ng out . Nor has moder n i nvest i gat i on hal t ed wi t h thet i me of t he f i r st ki ngs; t he r ecent expl or at i ons of sucharchaeol ogi st s as Amel i neau, De Morgan, and Pet r i e have broughtt o l i ght numerous r emai ns of what i s now spoken of as t hepr edynast i c per i od- - a per i od when t he i nhabi t ant s of t he Ni l eVal l ey used i mpl ement s of chi pped st one, when t hei r pot t ery wasmade wi t hout t he use of t he pot t er ' s wheel , and when t hey bur i edt hei r dead i n cur i ousl y cramped at t i t udes wi t hout at t empt atmummi f i cat i on. These abori gi nal i nhabi t ant s of Egypt cannotper haps wi t h st r i ct pr opr i et y be spoken of as l i vi ng wi t hi n t hehi st or i cal per i od, si nce we cannot dat e t hei r r el i cs wi t h anyaccur acy. But t hey gi ve us gl i mpses of t he ear l y st ages of ci vi l i zat i on upon whi ch t he Egypt i ans of t he dynast i c per i od wer et o advance.

I t i s hel d t hat t he nascent ci vi l i zat i on of t hese Egypt i ans of

t he Neol i t hi c, or l ate St one Age, was over t hr own by the i nvadi nghosts of a more hi ghl y ci vi l i zed r ace whi ch pr obabl y came f r omt he East , and whi ch may have been of a Semi t i c st ock. Thepr esumpt i on i s t hat t hi s i nvadi ng peopl e br ought wi t h i t aknowl edge of t he art s of war and peace, devel oped or adopt ed i ni t s ol d home. The i nt r oduct i on of t hese ar t s served t o br i dgesomewhat suddenl y, so f ar as Egypt i s concer ned, t hat gap betweent he pr ehi st or i c and t he hi st or i c st age of cul t ur e t o whi ch wehave al l al ong r ef er r ed. The essent i al st r uct ur e of t hat br i dge,l et i t now be cl ear l y under st ood, consi st ed of a si ngl e el ement .

That el ement i s t he capaci t y t o make wr i t t en r ecor ds: a knowl edgeof t he ar t of wr i t i ng. Cl ear l y under st ood, i t i s t hi s el ement of knowl edge t hat f orms t he l i ne boundi ng t he hi st ori cal per i od.Number l ess mement os ar e i n exi st ence t hat t el l of t hei nt el l ect ual act i vi t i es of pr ehi st or i c man; such mement os asf l i nt i mpl ement s, pi eces of pot t er y, and f r agment s of bone,i nscr i bed wi t h pi ct ur es t hat may f ai r l y be spoken of as works of art ; but so l ong as no wr i t t en word accompani es these r ecor ds, sol ong as no name of ki ng or scr i be comes down t o us, we f eel t hatt hese r ecor ds bel ong t o the domai n of archaeol ogy rather t han t ot hat of hi st or y. Yet i t must be under st ood al l al ong t hat t heset wo domai ns shade one i nt o t he ot her and, i t has al r eady beenur ged, t hat t he di st i nct i on bet ween t hem i s one t hat per t ai nsr ather t o modern schol arshi p t han t o t he devel opment of c i vi l i zat i on i t sel f . Bear i ng t hi s di st i nct i on st i l l i n mi nd, andr ecal l i ng t hat t he hi st or i cal per i od, whi ch i s t o be t he f i el d of our obser vat i on thr oughout t he rest of our st udi es, extends f or

Egypt wel l back i nt o t he f i f t h mi l l enni um B. C. , l et us br i ef l yr evi ew t he pr act i cal phases of t hat ci vi l i zat i on t o whi ch t heEgypt i an had at t ai ned bef ore t he begi nni ng of t he dynast i cper i od. Si nce t heor et i cal sci ence i s ever ywher e l i nked wi t h t hemechani cal ar t s, t hi s sur vey wi l l gi ve us a cl ear compr ehensi onof t he f i el d t hat l i es open f or t he pr ogr ess of sci ence i n t hel ong st ages of hi st ori cal t i me upon whi ch we ar e j ust ent eri ng.

We may pass over such rudi ment ary advances i n t he di r ect i on of ci vi l i zat i on as ar e i mpl i ed i n t he use of ar t i cul at e l anguage,



t he appl i cat i on of f i r e to the uses of man, and t he syst emat i cmaki ng of dwel l i ngs of one sor t or anot her , si nce al l of t heseare st ages of pr ogr ess t hat were r eached ver y ear l y i n thepr ehi st or i c per i od. What mor e di r ect l y concer ns us i s t o not et hat a r eal l y hi gh st age of mechani cal devel opment had beenr eached bef ore t he dawni ngs of Egypt i an hi st ory proper . Al lmanner of househol d utensi l s were empl oyed; t he pot t er ' s wheelai ded i n t he const r uct i on of a gr eat var i et y of ear t hen vessel s;weavi ng had become a f i ne art , and weapons of bronze, i ncl udi ngaxes, spears, kni ves, and ar r ow- heads, wer e i n const ant use.Ani mal s had l ong been domest i cat ed, i n par t i cul ar t he dog, t hecat , and t he ox; t he hor se was i nt r oduced l at er f r om t he East .

The pract i cal ar t s of agr i cul t ure were pract i sed al most as t heyare at t he pr esent day i n Egypt , t her e bei ng, of cour se, t he samedependence t hen as now upon t he i nundat i ons of t he Ni l e.

As t o government , t he Egypt i an of t he f i r st dynast y regar ded hi ski ng as a demi - god t o be act ual l y dei f i ed af t er hi s deat h, andt hi s poi nt of vi ew was not changed thr oughout t he st ages of l at erEgypt i an hi st or y. I n poi nt of ar t , mar vel l ous advances upon t he

ski l l of t he pr ehi st ori c man had been made, pr obabl y i n partunder Asi at i c i nf l uences, and t hat uni que st yl e of st i l t ed yetexpr essi ve dr awi ng had come i nt o vogue, whi ch was t o ber emember ed i n af t er t i mes as t ypi cal l y Egypt i an. More i mpor t antt han al l el se, our Egypt i an of t he ear l i est hi st or i cal per i od wasi n possessi on of t he ar t of wr i t i ng. He had begun t o make thosespeci f i c r ecor ds whi ch were i mpossi bl e t o t he man of t he StoneAge, and t hus he had ent ered f ul l y upon t he way of hi st or i calpr ogr ess whi ch, as al r eady poi nt ed out , has i t s ver y f oundat i oni n wr i t t en r ecor ds. From now on t he deeds of i ndi vi dual ki ngscoul d f i nd speci f i c r ecor d. I t began t o be possi bl e t o f i x thechronol ogy of r emote events wi t h some accur acy; and wi t h t hi ssame f i xi ng of chr onol ogi es came the advent of t r ue hi st ory. Theper i od whi ch pr ecedes what i s usual l y spoken of as the f i r stdynast y i n Egypt i s one i nt o whi ch t he pr esent - day sear cher i sst i l l abl e t o see but dar kl y. The evi dence seems t o suggest t hanan i nvasi on of r el at i vel y cul t ur ed peopl e f r om t he Eastover t hr ew, and i n t i me suppl ant ed, t he Neol i t hi c ci vi l i zat i on of t he Ni l e Val l ey. I t i s i mpossi bl e t o dat e t hi s i nvasi onaccur atel y, but i t cannot wel l have been l at er t han t he year 5000B. C. , and i t may have been a gr eat many cent ur i es earl i er t hant hi s. Be t he exact dat es what t hey may, we f i nd the Egypt i an of t he f i f t h mi l l enni um B. C. i n f ul l possessi on of a hi ghl yorgani zed ci vi l i zat i on.

Al l subsequent ages have marvel l ed at t he pyr ami ds, some of whi chdat e f r om about t he year 4000 B. C. , t hough we may not e i n passi ng

t hat t hese dat es must not be t aken t oo l i t er al l y. The chr onol ogyof anci ent Egypt cannot as yet be f i xed wi t h exact accur acy, butt he di sagr eement s bet ween the vari ous st udent s of t he subj ectneed gi ve us l i t t l e concer n. For our pr esent pur pose i t does noti n the l east matt er whet her t he pyrami ds wer e bui l t t hr eet housand or f our t housand years bef ore the begi nni ng of our era.I t suf f i ces t hat t hey dat e back to a per i od l ong ant ecedent t ot he begi nni ngs of ci vi l i zat i on i n West er n Eur ope. They pr ove thatt he Egypt i an of t hat ear l y day had at t ai ned a knowl edge of pr act i cal mechani cs whi ch, even f r omt he t went i et h- cent ur y poi nt



of vi ew, i s not t o be spoken of l i ght l y. I t has somet i mes beensuggest ed t hat t hese mi ght y pyrami ds, bui l t as t hey ar e of gr eatbl ocks of st one, speak f or an al most mi r acul ous knowl edge on t hepar t of t hei r bui l der s; but a saner vi ew of t he condi t i ons gi vesno war r ant f or t hi s t hought . Di odor as, t he Si ci l i an, i n hi sf amous Worl d' s Hi st ory, wr i t t en about t he begi nni ng of our er a,expl ai ns t he bui l di ng of t he pyrami ds by suggest i ng t hat gr eatquant i t i es of ear t h wer e pi l ed agai nst t he si de of t he r i si ngst r uct ur e t o f orm an i ncl i ned pl ane up whi ch t he bl ocks of st onewer e dr agged. He gi ves us cer t ai n f i gur es, based, doubt l ess, onr eport s made t o hi m by Egypt i an pr i est s, who i n t ur n drew upont he t r adi t i ons of t hei r count r y, per haps even upon wr i t t enr ecor ds no l onger preserved. He says t hat one hundred and twent yt housand men were empl oyed i n the const r uct i on of t he l argestpyrami d, and t hat , not wi t hst andi ng t he si ze of t hi s host of worker s, t he t ask occupi ed t went y years . We must not pl ace t oomuch dependence upon such f i gur es as t hese, f or t he anci enthi st or i ans ar e not or i ousl y gi ven t o exagger at i on i n r ecor di ngnumber s; yet we need not doubt t hat t he r epor t gi ven by Di odorusi s subst ant i al l y accur at e i n i t s mai n out l i nes as t o t he met hod

t hrough whi ch t he pyr ami ds were const r uct ed. A host of menput t i ng thei r added wei ght and st r engt h to t he task, wi t h the ai dof ropes, pul l eys, r ol l er s, and l evers, and ut i l i z i ng t hepr i nci pl e of t he i ncl i ned pl ane, coul d undoubt edl y move andel evat e and pl ace i n posi t i on t he l ar gest bl ocks t hat ent er i nt ot he pyrami ds or - - what seems even more wonder f ul - - t he mostgi gant i c obel i sks, wi t hout t he ai d of any ot her ki nd of mechani smor of any more occul t power. The same hands coul d, as Di odorussuggest s, r emove al l t r ace of t he debr i s of const r uct i on andl eave t he pyrami ds and obel i sks st andi ng i n wei r d i sol at i on, asi f spr ung i nt o bei ng t hr ough a mi r acl e.

ASTRONOMI CAL SCI ENCE

I t has been necessar y to bear i n mi nd t hese phases of pr act i calci vi l i zat i on because much t hat we know of t he pur el y sci ent i f i cat t ai nment s of t he Egypt i ans i s based upon modern obser vat i on of t hei r pyrami ds and t empl es. I t was earl y observed, f or exampl e,t hat t he pyrami ds are obvi ousl y or i ent ed as r egar ds t he di r ect i oni n whi ch t hey f ace, i n st r i ct accor dance wi t h some ast r onomi calpr i nci pl e. Ear l y i n t he ni net eent h cent ur y t he Frenchman Bi otmade i nt er est i ng st udi es i n r egar d t o t hi s subj ect , and a hundr edyears l ater , i n our own t i me, Si r J oseph Norman Lockyer ,f ol l owi ng up t he work of var i ous i nt er medi ar y observers , hasgi ven t he subj ect much at t ent i on, maki ng i t t he cent r al t heme of hi s work on The Dawn of Ast r onomy. [ 1] Lockyer ' s r esear ches make

i t cl ear t hat i n t he mai n t he t empl es of Egypt were or i ent ed wi t hr ef er ence t o the poi nt at whi ch t he sun r i ses on t he day of t hesummer sol st i ce. The t i me of t he sol st i ce had pecul i ar i nt er estf or t he Egypt i ans, because i t cor r esponded r at her cl osel y wi t ht he t i me of t he r i si ng of t he Ni l e. The f l oods of t hat r i verappear wi t h ver y gr eat r egul ar i t y; t he on- r ushi ng ti de reachest he r egi on of Hel i opol i s and Memphi s al most pr eci sel y on t he dayof t he summer sol st i ce. The t i me var i es at di f f er ent st ages of t he r i ver ' s cour se, but as the ci vi l i zat i on of t he ear l ydynast i es cent r ed at Memphi s, observat i ons made at t hi s pl ace had



wi dest vogue.

Consi der i ng t he al l - essent i al char act er of t he Ni l ef l oods- wi t hout whi ch ci vi l i zat i on woul d be i mpossi bl e i nEgypt - - i t i s not st r ange t hat t he t i me of t hei r appear ance shoul dbe t aken as marki ng t he begi nni ng of a new year . The f act t hatt hei r comi ng coi nci des wi t h t he sol st i ce makes such a di vi si on of t he cal endar per f ectl y nat ur al . I n poi nt of f act, f r om t heear l i est per i ods of whi ch recor ds have come down to us, t he newyear of t he Egypt i ans dat es f r om t he summer sol st i ce. I t i scer t ai n t hat f r om t he ear l i est hi st or i cal per i ods t he Egypt i answere aware of t he appr oxi mate l ength of t he year . I t woul d best r ange were i t otherwi se, consi deri ng the ease wi t h whi ch ar ecor d of days coul d be kept f r om Ni l e f l ood t o Ni l e f l ood, orf romsol sti ce t o sol st i ce. But t hi s, of cour se, appl i es onl y t oan approxi mate count . There i s some r eason t o bel i eve that i n t heear l i est per i od t he Egypt i ans made t hi s count onl y 360 days. Thef act t hat t hei r year was di vi ded i nt o t wel ve mont hs of t hi r t ydays each l ends col or t o thi s bel i ef ; but , i n any event , t hemi st ake was di scovered i n due t i me and a par t i al r emedy was

appl i ed t hr ough t he i nt er pol at i on of a "l i t t l e mont h" of f i vedays between t he end of t he t wel f t h mont h and t he new year . Thi snear l y but not qui t e remedi ed the mat t er. What i t obvi ousl yf ai l ed t o do was t o take account of t hat addi t i onal quar t er of aday whi ch real l y r ounds out t he act ual year .

I t woul d have been a vast l y conveni ent t hi ng f or humani t y had i tchanced that t he ear t h had so accommodat ed i t s r ot ary mot i on wi t hi t s speed of t r ansi t about t he sun as t o make i t s annual f l i ghti n pr eci sel y 360 days. Twel ve l unar mont hs of t hi r t y days eachwoul d then have coi nci ded exact l y wi t h the sol ar year, and mostof t he compl exi t i es of t he cal endar, whi ch have so puzzl edhi st ori cal st udent s, woul d have been avoi ded; but , on t he ot herhand, perhaps t hi s ver y si mpl i ci t y woul d have pr oved det r i ment alt o ast r onomi cal sci ence by pr event i ng men f r omsear chi ng t heheavens as caref ul l y as t hey have done. Be that as i t may, t hecompl exi t y exi st s. The act ual year of t hr ee hundr ed andsi xty- f i ve and ( about ) one- quart er days cannot be di vi ded evenl yi nt o mont hs, and some such expedi ent as t he i nt ercal at i on of daysher e and t her e i s essent i al , el se the cal endar wi l l becomeabsol utel y out of harmony wi t h the seasons.

I n t he case of t he Egypt i ans, t he at t empt at adj ust ment was made,as j ust not ed, by t he i nt r oduct i on of t he f i ve days, const i t ut i ngwhat t he Egypt i ans t hemsel ves t ermed " t he f i ve days over andabove t he year . " These so- cal l ed epagomenal days were undoubtedl yi nt r oduced at a ver y ear l y per i od. Masper o hol ds t hat t hey wer e

i n use bef or e t he f i r st Thi ni t e dynast y, ci t i ng i n evi dence t hef act t hat t he l egend of Osi r i s expl ai ns t hese days as havi ng beencr eat ed by t he god Thot i n or der t o per mi t Nui t t o gi ve bi r t h t oal l her chi l dr en; t hi s expedi ent bei ng necessary to over come aban whi ch had been pronounced agai nst Nui t , accordi ng t o whi chshe coul d not gi ve bi r t h t o chi l dr en on any day of t he year. But ,of cour se, t he f i ve addi t i onal days do not suf f i ce f ul l y t or ect i f y t he cal endar . Ther e r emai ns t he addi t i onal quar t er of aday to be account ed f or. Thi s, of cour se, amount s t o a f ul l dayever y f our t h year . We shal l see that l at er Al exandr i an sci ence



hi t upon t he expedi ent of addi ng a day t o ever y f our t h year; anexpedi ent whi ch t he J ul i an cal endar adopt ed and whi ch st i l l gi vesus our f ami l i ar l eap- year . But , unf or t unat el y, t he anci entEgypt i an f ai l ed t o r ecogni ze t he need of t hi s addi t i onal day, ori f he di d r ecogni ze i t he f ai l ed t o act on hi s knowl edge, and soi t happened t hat , st art i ng somewhere back i n the remot e past wi t ha new year ' s day t hat coi nci ded wi t h t he i nundat i on of t he Ni l e,t her e was a const ant l y shi f t i ng mal adj ust ment of cal endar andseasons as t i me went on.

The Egypt i an seasons, i t shoul d be expl ai ned, wer e t hree i nnumber: t he season of t he i nundat i on, t he season of t heseed- t i me, and the season of t he harvest ; each season bei ng, of cour se, f our mont hs i n extent . Or i gi nal l y, as j ust ment i oned, t heseason of t he i nundat i ons began and coi nci ded wi t h the act ualt i me of i nundat i on. The more preci se f i xi ng of new year ' s day wasaccompl i shed t hr ough observat i on of t he t i me of t he so- cal l edhel i acal r i si ng of t he dog- st ar , Si r i us, whi ch bor e t he Egypt i anname Sothi s. I t chances t hat , as vi ewed f r omabout t he regi on of Hel i opol i s, t he sun at t he t i me of t he summer sol st i ce occupi es

an appar ent posi t i on i n t he heavens cl ose t o t he dog- st ar . Now,as i s wel l known, t he Egypt i ans, seei ng di vi ni t y back of al mostever y phenomenon of nat ur e, ver y nat ur al l y pai d par t i cul arr ever ence t o so obvi ousl y i nf l uent i al a per sonage as t he sun- god.I n par t i cul ar t hey t hought i t f i t t i ng t o do homage t o hi m j ust ashe was st art i ng out on hi s t our of Egypt i n the morni ng; and thatt hey mi ght know t he preci se moment of hi s comi ng, t he Egypt i anast r onomer pr i est s, per ched on t he hi l l - t ops near t hei r t empl es,were wont t o scan t he east ern hor i zon wi t h ref erence t o some st arwhi ch had been obser ved t o pr ecede t he sol ar l umi nar y. Of cour set he pr ecessi on of t he equi noxes, due t o that axi al wobbl e i nwhi ch our cl umsy ear t h i ndul ges, woul d change t he appar entposi t i on of t he f i xed st ar s i n r ef er ence t o t he sun, so t hat t hesame st ar coul d not do servi ce as hel i acal messengeri ndef i ni t el y; but , on t he ot her hand, t hese changes ar e so sl owt hat obser vat i ons by many generat i ons of ast r onomers woul d ber equi r ed t o det ect t he shi f t i ng. I t i s bel i eved by Lockyer ,t hough t he evi dence i s not qui t e demonst r at i ve, t hat t heast r onomi cal observat i ons of t he Egypt i ans dat e back t o a per i odwhen Sot hi s, t he dog- st ar , was not i n cl ose associ at i on wi t h t hesun on t he morni ng of t he summer sol st i ce. Yet , accor di ng t o t hecal cul at i ons of Bi ot , t he hel i acal r i s i ng of Sot hi s at t hesol st i ce was noted as ear l y as t he year 3285 B. C. , and i t i scer t ai n that t hi s st ar cont i nued thr oughout subsequent cent ur i est o keep t hi s posi t i on of pecul i ar pr est i ge. Hence i t was t hatSothi s came to be associ ated wi t h I si s, one of t he most i mport antdi vi ni t i es of Egypt , and t hat t he day i n whi ch Sot hi s was f i r st

vi si bl e i n the morni ng sky marked the begi nni ng of t he new year ;t hat day coi nci di ng, as al r eady noted, wi t h t he summer sol st i ceand wi t h t he begi nni ng of t he Ni l e f l ow.

But now f or t he di f f i cul t i es i nt r oduced by t hat unr eckonedquar t er of a day. Obvi ousl y wi t h a cal endar of 365 days onl y, att he end of f our year s, t he cal endar year, or vague year, as theEgypt i ans came t o cal l i t , had gai ned by one f ul l day upon t heactual sol ar year - - t hat i s to say, t he hel i acal r i si ng of Sothi s, t he dog- st ar, woul d not occur on new year' s day of t he



f aul t y cal endar , but a day l at er . And wi t h each succeedi ng per i odof f our year s t he day of hel i acal r i si ng, whi ch mar ked t he tr uebegi nni ng of t he year - - and whi ch st i l l , of cour se, coi nci ded wi t ht he i nundat i on- - woul d have f al l en another day behi nd thecal endar . I n the cour se of 120 year s an ent i r e mont h woul d bel ost ; and i n 480 years so gr eat woul d become t he shi f t i ng t hatt he seasons woul d be al t ogether mi spl aced; t he actual t i me of i nundat i ons cor r espondi ng wi t h what t he cal endar r egi st er ed ast he seed- t i me, and t he act ual seed- t i me i n t ur n corr espondi ngwi t h t he har vest - t i me of t he cal endar .

At f i r st t hought t hi s seems ver y awkwar d and conf usi ng, but i nal l pr obabi l i t y t he ef f ects were by no means so much so i n actualpract i ce. We need go no f art her t han to our own experi ence t oknow t hat t he names of seasons, as of mont hs and days, come t ohave i n the mi nds of most of us a pur el y convent i onalsi gni f i cance. Few of us st op t o gi ve a t hought t o t he meani ng of t he words J anuary, Febr uary, etc. , except as t hey connote cer t ai ncl i mat i c condi t i ons. I f , t hen, our own cal endar wer e so def ect i vet hat i n t he cour se of 120 years t he mont h of Febr uary had shi f t ed

back t o occupy t he posi t i on of t he or i gi nal J anuar y, t he changewoul d have been so gr adual , cover i ng t he per i od of t wo l i f e- t i mesor of f our or f i ve aver age gener at i ons, t hat i t mi ght wel l escapegener al observat i on.

Each succeedi ng generat i on of Egypt i ans, t hen, may not i mprobabl yhave associ ated t he names of t he seasons wi t h t he cont empor arycl i mat i c condi t i ons, t r oubl i ng t hemsel ves l i t t l e wi t h t he t houghtt hat i n an ear l i er age the cl i mat i c condi t i ons f or each per i od of t he cal endar were qui t e di f f erent . We cannot wel l suppose,however , t hat t he ast r onomer pr i est s were obl i vi ous t o the t r uest at e of t hi ngs. Upon t hem devol ved t he dut y of pr edi ct i ng t het i me of t he Ni l e f l ood; a dut y they wer e enabl ed t o perf ormwi t hout di f f i cul t y through obser vat i on of t he r i si ng of t hesol st i t i al sun and i t s Sothi c messenger . To t hese obser ver s i tmust f i nal l y have been appar ent t hat t he shi f t i ng of t he seasonswas at t he rate of one day i n f our year s; t hi s known, i t r equi r edno gr eat mat hemat i cal ski l l t o comput e that t hi s shi f t i ng woul df i nal l y ef f ect a compl et e ci r cui t of t he cal endar , so t hat af t er( 4 X 365 =) 1460 years t he f i r st day of t he cal endar year woul dagai n coi nci de wi t h t he hel i acal r i si ng of Sot hi s and wi t h t hecomi ng of t he Ni l e f l ood. I n ot her words, 1461 vague years orEgypt i an cal endar year s Of 365 days each cor r espond to 1460act ual sol ar year s of 365 1/ 4 days each. Thi s per i od, measuredt hus by t he hel i acal r i si ng of Sot hi s, i s spoken of as t he Sot hi ccycl e.

To us who are t r ai ned f r om chi l dhood t o underst and t hat t he yearconsi st s of ( appr oxi mat el y) 365 1/ 4 days, and to know t hat t hecal endar may be regul ated appr oxi matel y by t he i nt r oduct i on of anext r a day ever y f our t h year , t hi s r ecogni t i on of t he Sot hi c cycl eseems si mpl e enough. Yet i f t he average man of us wi l l r ef l ecthow l i t t l e he knows, of hi s own knowl edge, of t he exact l engt h of t he year , i t wi l l soon become evi dent t hat t he appr eci at i on of t he f aul t s of t he cal endar and the knowl edge of i t s per i odi caladj ust ment const i t ut ed a rel at i vel y hi gh devel opment of sci ent i f i c knowl edge on the par t of t he Egypt i an ast r onomer . I t



may be added t hat var i ous ef f ort s t o ref orm t he cal endar wer emade by t he anci ent Egypt i ans, but t hat t hey cannot be credi t edwi t h a sat i sf act or y sol ut i on of t he pr obl em; f or , of cour se, t heAl exandr i an sci ent i st s of t he Pt ol emai c per i od ( whose work weshal l have occasi on t o r evi ew pr esent l y) wer e not Egypt i ans i nany pr oper sense of t he word, but Gr eeks.

Si nce so much of t he t i me of t he ast r onomer pr i est s was devot edt o obser vat i on of t he heavenl y bodi es, i t i s not sur pr i si ng t hatt hey shoul d have mapped out t he apparent course of t he moon andt he vi si bl e pl anet s i n t hei r ni ght l y t our of t he heavens, andt hat t hey shoul d have di vi ded t he star s of t he f i r mament i nt omor e or l ess ar bi t r ar y gr oups or const el l at i ons. That t hey di d soi s evi denced by var i ous scul pt ur ed r epr esent at i ons of const el l at i ons cor r espondi ng t o si gns of t he zodi ac whi ch st i l lornament t he cei l i ngs of var i ous anci ent t empl es. Unf ort unat el yt he decorat i ve sense, whi ch was al ways predomi nant wi t h t heEgypt i an scul pt or , l ed hi m t o t ake var i ous l i ber t i es wi t h t hedi st r i but i on of f i gur es i n t hese r epr esent at i ons of t heconst el l at i ons, so t hat t he i nf er ences dr awn f r om t hem as t o t he

exact map of t he heavens as t he Egypt i ans concei ved i t cannot bef ul l y rel i ed upon. I t appear s, however , t hat t he Egypt i anast r onomer di vi ded t he zodi ac i nt o t went y- f our decani , orconst el l at i ons. The ar bi t r ar y gr oupi ngs of f i gur es, wi t h t he ai dof whi ch t hese are del i neat ed, bear a cl ose r esembl ance t o theequal l y ar bi t r ar y out l i nes whi ch we ar e sti l l accust omed t o usef or t he same purpose.

I DEAS OF COSMOLOGY

I n vi ewi ng t hi s ast r onomi cal syst emof t he Egypt i ans one cannotavoi d t he quest i on as to j ust what i nt erpret at i on was pl aced uponi t as r egar ds t he act ual mechani cal st r uct ur e of t he uni ver se. Aproxi mal answer t o t he quest i on i s suppl i ed us wi t h a good dealof cl ear ness. I t appear s t hat t he Egypt i an concei ved t he sky as asort of t angi bl e or mat er i al r oof pl aced above the wor l d, andsuppor t ed at each of i t s f our cor ner s by a col umn or pi l l ar ,whi ch was l ater on concei ved as a great mountai n. The eart hi t sel f was concei ved t o be a r ect angul ar box, l onger f r om nor t ht o sout h t han f r om east t o west ; t he upper sur f ace of t hi s box,upon whi ch man l i ved, bei ng sl i ght l y concave and havi ng, of cour se, t he val l ey of t he Ni l e as i t s cent r e. The pi l l ar s of support were si t uat ed at t he poi nt s of t he compass; t he nort her none bei ng l ocat ed beyond the Medi t err anean Sea; t he souther n oneaway beyond t he habi t abl e regi ons t owards t he sour ce of t he Ni l e,and the easter n and west ern ones i n equal l y i naccessi bl e regi ons.

Ci r cl i ng about t he sout her n si de of t he, wor l d was a gr eat r i versuspended i n mi d- ai r on somethi ng comparabl e to mount ai n cl i f f s;on whi ch r i ver t he sun- god made hi s dai l y cour se i n a boat ,f i ght i ng day by day hi s ever - r ecur r i ng bat t l e agai nst Set , t hedemon of dar kness. The wi de channel of t hi s r i ver enabl ed t hesun- god t o al t er hi s cour se f r om t i me t o t i me, as he i s obser vedt o do; i n wi nt er di r ect i ng hi s bar k towar ds t he f ar t her bank of t he channel ; i n summer gl i di ng cl ose t o t he near er bank. As t ot he st ar s, t hey wer e si mi l ar l i ght s, suspended f r om t he vaul t of t he heaven; but j ust how t hei r observed mot i on of t r ansl at i on



acr oss t he heavens was expl ai ned i s not apparent . I t i s more t hanpr obabl e t hat no one expl anat i on was, uni ver sal l y accept ed.

I n expl ai ni ng t he or i gi n of t hi s mechani sm of t he heavens, t heEgypt i an i magi nat i on r an r i ot . Each separ at e par t of Egypt hadi t s own hi er ar chy of gods, and more or l ess i t s own expl anat i onsof cosmogony. Ther e does not appear t o have been any one cent r alst ory of cr eat i on t hat f ound uni ver sal accept ance, any more t hant her e was one speci f i c dei t y ever ywher e r ecogni zed as supr emeamong the gods. Per haps t he most i nterest i ng of t he cosmogoni cmyt hs was t hat whi ch concei ved that Nui t , t he goddess of ni ght ,had been torn f r omt he ar ms of her husband, Si bu the eart h- god,and el evated t o t he sky despi t e her pr ot est s and her husband' sst r uggl es, t her e t o remai n support ed by her f our l i mbs, whi chbecame metamorphosed i nt o t he pi l l ars , or mount ai ns, al r eadyment i oned. The f orci bl e el evat i on of Nui t had been ef f ect ed ont he day of cr eat i on by a new god, Shu, who came f ort h f r om t hepr i meval wat er s. A pai nt i ng on t he mummy case of one Bet uhamon,now i n the Tur i n Museum, i l l ust r at es, i n the gr aphi c manner sochar acteri st i c of t he Egypt i ans, t hi s act of creat i on. As

Masper o[ 2] poi nt s out , t he st r uggl e of Si bu r esul t ed i ncont or t ed at t i t udes t o whi ch t he i r r egul ar i t i es of t he ear t h' ssurf ace ar e t o be ascr i bed.

I n contempl at i ng such a scheme of cel est i al mechani cs as t hat j ust out l i ned, one cannot avoi d r ai si ng t he quest i on as t o j ustt he degr ee of l i t er al ness whi ch the Egypt i ans t hemsel ves put uponi t . We know how essent i al l y eye- mi nded t he Egypt i an was, t o use amoder n psychol ogi cal phr ase- - t hat i s t o say, how essent i al t o hi mi t seemed t hat al l hi s concept i ons shoul d be vi sual i zed. Theevi dences of t hi s are ever ywhere: al l hi s gods were madet angi bl e; he bel i eved i n t he i mmor t al i t y of t he soul , yet hecoul d not concei ve of such i mmor t al i t y except i n associ at i on wi t han i mmor t al body; he must mummi f y t he body of t he dead, el se, ashe f i r ml y bel i eved, t he di ssol ut i on of t he spi r i t woul d t akepl ace al ong wi t h t he di ssol ut i on of t he body i t sel f . Hi s wor l dwas peopl ed ever ywhere wi t h spi r i t s, but t hey wer e spi r i t sassoci ated al ways wi t h corporeal bodi es; hi s gods f ound l odgmenti n sun and moon and st ars ; i n eart h and water ; i n the bodi es of r ept i l es and bi r ds and mammal s. He worshi pped al l of t heset hi ngs: t he sun, t he moon, wat er , ear t h, t he spi r i t of t he Ni l e,t he i bi s, t he cat , t he r am, and api s t he bul l ; but , so f ar as wecan j udge, hi s i magi nat i on di d not r each t o the i dea of anabsol ut el y i ncor por eal dei t y. Si mi l ar l y hi s concept i on of t hemechani sm of t he heavens must be a t angi bl y mechani cal one. Hemust t hi nk of t he st ar r y f i r mament as a subst ant i al ent i t y whi chcoul d not def y the l aw of gr avi t at i on, and whi ch, t her ef ore, must

have t he same manner of suppor t as i s r equi r ed by t he roof of ahouse or t empl e. We know t hat t hi s i dea of t he mater i al i t y of t hef i r mament f ound el aborat e expr essi on i n t hose l at er cosmol ogi calguesses whi ch were t o domi nate t he t hought of Eur ope unt i l t het i me of Newt on. We need not doubt , t her ef ore, t hat f or t heEgypt i an t hi s sol i d vaul t of t he heavens had a ver y realexi st ence. I f now and t hen some dr eamer concei ved t he greatbodi es of t he f i r mament as f l oat i ng i n a l ess mat er i alpl enum- - and such i conocl ast i c dr eamer s t her e ar e i n al l ages- - nor ecord of hi s musi ngs has come down to us, and we must f r eel y



admi t t hat i f such t hought s exi st ed t hey wer e al i en t o t hechar acter of t he Egypt i an mi nd as a whol e.

Whi l e t he Egypt i ans concei ved the heavenl y bodi es as t heabi di ng- pl ace of var i ous of t hei r dei t i es, i t does not appeart hat t hey pr act i sed ast r ol ogy i n t he l at er accept ance of t hatword. Thi s i s t he more r emar kabl e si nce the concept i on of l uckyand unl ucky days was car r i ed by t he Egypt i ans t o t he extr emes of absurdi t y. "One day was l ucky or unl ucky, " says Er man, [ 3]"accor di ng as a good or bad myt hol ogi cal i nci dent t ook pl ace ont hat day. For i nst ance, t he 1st of Mechi r , on whi ch day t he skywas r ai sed, and t he 27t h of At hyr , when Horus and, Set concl udedpeace toget her and di vi ded the wor l d bet ween t hem, were l uckydays; on t he other hand, t he 14t h of Tybi , on whi ch I si s andNephthys mour ned f or Osi r i s, was an unl ucky day. Wi t h t he unl uckydays, whi ch, f ort unatel y, wer e l ess i n number t han t he l uckydays, t hey di st i ngui shed di f f er ent degr ees of i l l - l uck. Some wer ever y unl ucky, other s onl y t hr eat ened i l l - l uck, and many, l i ke t he17t h and t he 27t h Choi akh, were par t l y good and par t l y badaccor di ng to the t i me of day. Lucky days mi ght , as a r ul e, be

di sr egar ded. At most i t mi ght be as wel l t o vi si t some speci al l yr enowned t empl e, or t o ' cel ebr at e a j oyf ul day at home, ' but nopar t i cul ar pr ecaut i ons wer e real l y necessar y; and, above al l , i twas sai d, ' what t hou al so seest on t he day i s l ucky. ' I t wasqui t e ot herwi se wi t h t he unl ucky and dangerous days, whi chi mposed so many and such great l i mi t at i ons on peopl e t hat t hosewho wi shed to be pr udent were al ways obl i ged to bear t hem i n mi ndwhen det ermi ni ng on any cour se of act i on. Cert ai n condi t i ons wereeasy t o car r y out . Musi c and si ngi ng were to be avoi ded on t he14t h Tybi , t he day of t he mour ni ng of Osi r i s, and no one wasal l owed t o wash on t he 16t h Tybi ; whi l st t he name of Set mi ghtnot be pronounced on t he 24t h of Pharmuthi . Fi sh was f orbi dden oncer t ai n days; and what was st i l l mor e di f f i cul t i n a count r y sor i ch i n mi ce, on t he 12t h of Tybi no mouse mi ght be seen. Themost t i r esome prohi bi t i ons, however , were t hose whi ch occur r ednot i nf r equent l y, namel y, t hose concerni ng work and goi ng out :f or i nst ance, f our t i mes i n Paophi t he peopl e had t o ' do not hi ngat al l , ' and f i ve t i mes t o si t t he whol e day or hal f t he day i nt he house; and the same rul e had t o be obser ved each mont h. I twas i mpossi bl e to rej oi ce i f a chi l d was born on the 23d of

Thoth; t he parents knew i t coul d not l i ve. Those born on t he 20thof Choi akh woul d become bl i nd, and t hose bor n on t he 3d of Choi akh, deaf . "

CHARMS AND I NCANTATI ONS

Where such concept i ons as these pert ai ned, i t goes wi t hout sayi ngt hat char ms and i ncant at i ons i nt ended t o br eak t he spel l of t heunl ucky omens were equal l y pr eval ent . Such i ncant at i ons consi st edusual l y of t he r eci t at i on of cer t ai n phr ases based or i gi nal l y, i twoul d appear , upon i nci dent s i n t he hi st ory of t he gods. Thewords whi ch t he god had spoken i n connect i on wi t h some l uckyi nci dent woul d, i t was t hought , pr ove ef f ect i ve now i n br i ngi nggood l uck t o the human suppl i cant - - t hat i s t o say, t he magi ci anhoped t hr ough repeat i ng the words of t he god t o exer ci se t hemagi c power of t he god. I t was even possi bl e, wi t h t he ai d of t he



magi cal obser vances, par t l y t o bal k f at e i t sel f . Thus t he per sonpredest i ned t hr ough bi r t h on an unl ucky day t o di e of a serpentbi t e mi ght post pone t he t i me of t hi s f at ef ul vi si t at i on t oext r eme ol d age. The l i ke uncer t ai nt y at t ached t o t hose spel l swhi ch one person was supposed t o be abl e t o exerci se overanot her . I t was hel d, f or exampl e, t hat i f somet hi ng bel ongi ng toan i ndi vi dual , such as a l ock of hai r or a par i ng of t he nai l s,coul d be secur ed and i ncorpor ated i n a waxen f i gur e, t hi s f i gur ewoul d be i nt i mat el y associ at ed wi t h t he per sonal i t y of t hati ndi vi dual . An enemy mi ght t hus secur e occul t power over one; anyi ndi gni t y pr act i sed upon t he waxen f i gur e woul d r esul t i n l i kei nj ur y to i t s human pr ot otype. I f t he f i gur e wer e br ui sed orbeaten, some acci dent woul d overt ake i t s doubl e; i f t he i magewer e pl aced over a f i r e, t he human bei ng woul d f al l i nt o a f ever ,and so on. But , of cour se, such myst er i ous evi l s as t hese woul dbe met and combat ed by equal l y myst er i ous pr ocesses; and so i twas t hat t he ent i r e ar t of medi ci ne was cl osel y l i nked wi t hmagi cal pr act i ces. I t was not , i ndeed, hel d, accor di ng toMaspero, t hat t he magi cal spel l s of enemi es were t he sol e sour cesof human ai l ment s, but one coul d never be sur e t o what ext ent

such spel l s ent er ed i nt o the af f l i ct i on; and so cl osel y wer e t hehuman act i vi t i es associ at ed i n the mi nd of t he Egypt i an wi t h onef or m or anot her of occul t i nf l uences t hat pur el y physi calcondi t i ons wer e at a di scount . I n t he l at er t i mes, at any rate,t he physi ci an was usual l y a pr i est , and t her e was a cl oseassoci at i on bet ween t he mat er i al and spi r i t ual phases of t her apeut i cs. Er man[ 4] t el l s us t hat t he f ol l owi ng f or mul a had t obe r eci t ed at t he pr epar at i on of al l medi cament s: "That I si smi ght make f r ee, make f r ee. That I si s mi ght make Horus f r ee f r omal l evi l t hat hi s br ot her Set had done to hi m when he sl ew hi sf at her , Osi r i s. O I si s, gr eat enchant r ess, f r ee me, r el ease mef r om al l evi l r ed t hi ngs, f r om t he f ever of t he god, and t hef ever of t he goddess, f r omdeath and deat h f r ompai n, and t hepai n whi ch comes over me; as t hou hast f r eed, as t hou hastr el eased t hy son Hor us, whi l st I ent er i nt o t he f i r e and comef or t h f r om t he wat er , " et c. Agai n, when t he i nval i d t ook t hemedi ci ne, an i ncantat i on had t o be sai d whi ch began t hus: "Comer emedy, come dr i ve i t out of my hear t , out of t hese l i mbs st r ongi n magi c power wi t h t he r emedy. " He adds: "There may have been af ew r at i onal i st s amongst t he Egypt i an doct ors , f or t he number of magi c f ormul ae var i es much i n the di f f erent books. The book t hatwe have speci al l y taken f or a f oundat i on f or t hi s account of Egypt i an medi ci ne- - t he gr eat papyrus of t he ei ght eent h dynast yedi t ed by Eber s[ 5] - - cont ai ns, f or i nst ance, f ar f ewer exor ci smst han some l at er wr i t i ngs wi t h si mi l ar cont ent s, pr obabl y becauset he doctor who compi l ed t hi s book of r eci pes f r omol der sour ceshad very l i t t l e l i ki ng f or magi c. "

I t must be underst ood, however- - i ndeed, what has j ust been sai di mpl i es as much- - t hat t he physi ci an by no means r el i ed uponi ncant at i ons al one; on t he cont r ar y, he equi pped hi msel f wi t h anastoni shi ng var i et y of medi cament s. He had a par t i cul ar f ondnessf or what t he modern physi ci an speaks of as a "shot - gun"pr escri pt i on- - one cont ai ni ng a gr eat var i et y of i ngr edi ent s. Notonl y di d her bs of many ki nds ent er i nt o t hi s, but such subst ancesas l i zar d' s bl ood, t he teet h of swi ne, put r i d meat , t he moi st ur ef r ompi gs' ear s, boi l ed hor n, and numerous other even more



r epel l ent i ngr edi ent s. Whoever i s f ami l i ar wi t h t he f ormul aeempl oyed by European physi ci ans even so recent l y as t heei ght eent h cent ur y wi l l not e a st r i ki ng si mi l ar i t y her e. Er manpoi nt s out t hat t he modern Egypt i an even of t hi s day hol dscl osel y to many of t he pr act i ces of hi s r emote ancest or. I npar t i cul ar , t he ef f i cacy of t he beet l e as a medi ci nal agent hasst ood t he t est of ages of pr act i ce. "Agai nst al l ki nds of wi t chcr af t , " says an anci ent f or mul a, "a gr eat scar abaeus beet l e;cut of f hi s head and wi ngs, boi l hi m; put hi m i n oi l and l ay hi mout ; t hen cook hi s head and wi ngs, put t hem i n snake f at , boi l ,and l et t he pat i ent dr i nk t he mi xt ur e. " The moder n Egypt i an, saysErman, uses al most preci sel y t he same r eci pe, except t hat t hesnake f at i s r epl aced by moder n oi l .

I n evi dence of t he i mport ance whi ch was at t ached t o pr act i calmedi ci ne i n the Egypt of an ear l y day, t he names of sever alphysi ci ans have come down to us f r om an age whi ch has preser vedver y f ew names i ndeed, save those of ki ngs. I n r ef er ence t o thi sErman says[ 6] : "We st i l l know t he names of some of t he ear l y bodyphysi ci ans of t hi s t i me; Sechmet na' eonch, ' chi ef physi ci an of t he

Phar aoh, ' and Nesmenan hi s chi ef , t he ' super i nt endent of t hephysi ci ans of t he Phar aoh. ' The pr i est s al so of t hel i oness- headed goddess Sechmet seemt o have been f amed f or t hei rmedi cal wi sdom, whi l st t he son of t hi s goddess, t he demi - godI mhotep, was i n l at er t i mes consi der ed to be the creat or of medi cal knowl edge. These anci ent doct or s of t he New Empi r e do notseemt o have i mproved upon t he ol der concept i ons about t heconst r uct i on of t he human body. "

As t o the act ual sci ent i f i c at t ai nment s of t he Egypt i anphysi ci an, i t i s di f f i cul t t o speak wi t h preci si on. Despi t e t hecumber some f ormul ae and the grot esque i ncant at i ons, we need notdoubt t hat a cer t ai n pr act i cal val ue at t ended hi s t her apeut i cs.He pr act i sed al most pur e empi r i ci sm, however , and cer t ai nl y i tmust have been al most i mpossi bl e to det ermi ne whi ch ones, i f any,of t he numer ous i ngr edi ent s of t he pr escr i pt i on had r ealef f i cacy.

The pract i cal anat omi cal knowl edge of t he physi ci an, t here i sever y reason t o bel i eve, was ext r emel y l i mi t ed. At f i r st t houghti t mi ght seem t hat t he pr act i ce of embal mi ng woul d have l ed t ot he cust omof di ssect i ng human bodi es, and t hat t he Egypt i ans, asa resul t of t hi s, woul d have excel l ed i n t he knowl edge of anat omy. But t he act ual r esul t s were rat her t he r ever se of t hi s.Embal mi ng the dead, i t must be recal l ed, was a pur el y r el i gi ousobservance. I t t ook pl ace under t he super i nt endence of t hepri est s, but so great was t he reverence f or t he human body t hat

t he pr i est s t hemsel ves were not per mi t t ed t o make t he abdomi nali nci si on whi ch was a necessary pr el i mi nar y of t he pr ocess. Thi si nci si on, as we are i nf ormed by bot h Herodot us[ 7] andDi odorus[ 8] , was made by a speci al of f i cer , whose st at us, i f wemay bel i eve t he expl i ci t st at ement of Di odorus, was qui t ecompar abl e t o t hat of t he modern hangman. The paraschi st as, as hewas cal l ed, havi ng perf ormed hi s necessary but obnoxi ousf unct i on, wi t h t he ai d of a shar p Et hi opi an st one, r et i r edhast i l y, l eavi ng t he r emai ni ng pr ocesses t o t he pr i est s. These,however , conf i ned t hei r observat i ons t o the abdomi nal vi scera;



under no consi der at i on di d they make ot her i nci si ons i n the body.I t f ol l ows, t her ef or e, t hat t hei r oppor t uni t y f or anat omi calobservat i ons was most l i mi t ed.

Si nce even t he necessary mut i l at i on i nf l i ct ed on t he corpse wasr egar ded wi t h such hor r or , i t f ol l ows t hat anythi ng i n the way of di ssect i on f or a l ess sacred pur pose was absol ut el y pr ohi bi t ed.Probabl y t he same prohi bi t i on ext ended t o a l arge number of ani mal s, si nce most of t hese were hel d sacr ed i n one part of Egypt or another . Moreover , t her e i s nothi ng i n what we know of t he Egypt i an mi nd t o suggest t he pr obabi l i t y t hat any Egypt i anphysi ci an woul d make ext ensi ve anatomi cal observat i ons f or t hel ove of pur e knowl edge. Al l Egypt i an sci ence i s emi nent l ypr acti cal . I f we t hi nk of t he Egypt i an as myst er i ous, i t i sbecause of t he superst i t i ous observances t hat we ever ywhereassoci at e wi t h hi s dai l y act s; but t hese, as we have al r eadyt r i ed t o make cl ear , wer e r eal l y based on sci ent i f i c obser vat i onsof a ki nd, and t he at t empt at t r ue i nf er ences f r omt heseobservat i ons. But whet her or not t he Egypt i an physi ci an desi r edanat omi cal knowl edge, t he r esul t s of hi s i nqui r i es wer e cer t ai nl y

most meagr e. The essent i al s of hi s syst em had t o do wi t h a ser i esof vessel s, al l eged to be twent y- t wo or t went y- f our i n number ,whi ch penetr at ed t he head and wer e di st r i but ed i n pai r s t o t hevar i ous member s of t he body, and whi ch were vaguel y t hought of ascarr i ers of wat er, ai r , excret ory f l ui ds, et c. Yet back of t hi svagueness, as must not be over l ooked, t here was an al l - essent i alr ecogni t i on of t he hear t as t he cent r al vascul ar or gan. The hear ti s cal l ed t he begi nni ng of al l t he member s. I t s vessel s, we ar et ol d, " l ead t o al l t he member s; whet her t he doct or l ays hi sf i nger on t he f orehead, on t he back of t he head, on t he hands, ont he pl ace of t he stomach ( ?) , on t he ar ms, or on t he f eet ,everywhere he meet s wi t h t he heart , because i t s vessel s l ead t oal l t he member s. " [ 9] Thi s r ecogni t i on of t he pul se must becr edi t ed t o the Egypt i an physi ci an as a pi ece of pr act i calknowl edge, i n some measure of f - set t i ng the vagueness of hi sanat omi cal t heori es.

ABSTRACT SCI ENCE

But , i ndeed, pr act i cal knowl edge was, as has been sai d over andover , t he essent i al char act er i st i c of Egypt i an sci ence. Yetanot her i l l ust r at i on of t hi s i s f ur ni shed us i f we t ur n t o t hemore abst r act depar t ment s of t hought and i nqui r e what were theEgypt i an at t empts i n such a f i el d as mat hemat i cs. The answer doesnot t end gr eat l y t o i ncrease our admi r at i on f or t he Egypt i anmi nd. We ar e l ed t o see, i ndeed, t hat t he Egypt i an merchant was

abl e t o per f or m al l t he comput at i ons necessar y t o hi s craf t , butwe are f or ced t o concl ude that t he knowl edge of number s scarcel yextended beyond thi s, and that even her e the methods of r eckoni ngwere t edi ous and cumber some. Our knowl edge of t he subj ect r est sl ar gel y upon t he so- cal l ed papyrus Rhi nd, [ 10] whi ch i s a sor t of mythol ogi cal hand- book of t he anci ent Egypt i ans. Anal yzi ng t hi sdocument , Prof essor Erman concl udes t hat t he knowl edge of t heEgypt i ans was adequate t o al l pr act i cal r equi r ement s. Thei rmathemat i cs t aught t hem "how i n the exchange of bread f or beert he r espect i ve val ue was t o be det ermi ned when conver t ed i nto a



quant i t y of cor n; how t o reckon t he si ze of a f i el d; how t odet ermi ne how a gi ven quant i t y of corn woul d go i nto a granary of a cer t ai n si ze, " and l i ke ever y- day pr obl ems. Yet t hey wer eobl i ged t o make some of t hei r si mpl e comput at i ons i n a ver yr oundabout way. I t woul d appear , f or exampl e, t hat t hei r ment alari t hmet i c di d not enabl e them t o mul t i pl y by a number l ar gert han t wo, and t hat t hey di d not r each a cl ear concept i on of compl ex f r act i onal number s. They di d, i ndeed, r ecogni ze t hat eachpar t of an obj ect di vi ded i nt o 10 pi eces became 1/ 10 of t hatobj ect ; t hey even gr asped t he i dea of 2/ 3 t hi s bei ng a concept i oneasi l y vi sual i zed; but t hey appar ent l y di d not vi sual i ze such aconcept i on as 3/ 10 except i n t he cr ude f orm of 1/ 10 pl us 1/ 10pl us 1/ 10. Thei r ent i r e i dea of di vi si on seems def ect i ve. Theyvi ewed t he subj ect f r omt he more el ement ary st andpoi nt of mul t i pl i cat i on. Thus, i n or der t o f i nd out how many t i mes 7 i scont ai ned i n 77, an exi st i ng exampl e shows t hat t he number sr epr esent i ng 1 t i mes 7, 2 t i mes 7, 4 t i mes 7, 8 t i mes 7 were setdown successi vel y and var i ous exper i ment al addi t i ons made to f i ndout whi ch set s of t hese number s aggr egat ed 77.

- -1 7- - 2 14- - 4 28- - 8 56

A l i ne bef or e the f i r st , second, and f our t h of t hese number si ndi cat ed t hat i t i s necessar y to mul t i pl y 7 by 1 pl us 2 pl us8- - t hat i s, by 11, i n or der t o obt ai n 77; t hat i s t o say, 7 goes11 t i mes i n 77. Al l t hi s seems ver y cumber some i ndeed, yet wemust not overl ook t he f act t hat t he pr ocess whi ch goes on i n ourown mi nds i n perf ormi ng such a pr obl em as t hi s i s pr eci sel ysi mi l ar , except t hat we have l ear ned t o sl ur over cer t ai n of t hei nt er medi ate st eps wi t h t he ai d of a memori zed mul t i pl i cat i ont abl e. I n t he l ast anal ysi s, di vi si on i s onl y t he obver se si de of mul t i pl i cat i on, and any one who has not l ear ned hi smul t i pl i cat i on t abl e i s r educed t o some such expedi ent as t hat of t he Egypt i an. I ndeed, whenever we pass beyond t he range of ourmemori zed mul t i pl i cat i on t abl e- whi ch f or most of us ends wi t h t het wel ves- - t he exper i ment al char act er of t he t r i al mul t i pl i cat i ont hr ough whi ch di vi si on i s f i nal l y ef f ect ed does not so gr eat l ydi f f er f r omt he exper i ment al ef f or t s whi ch t he Egypt i an wasobl i ged t o appl y to smal l er numbers.

Despi t e hi s def ect i ve compr ehensi on of f r act i ons, t he Egypt i anwas abl e t o work out pr obl ems of r el at i ve compl exi t y; f orexampl e, he coul d determi ne the answer of such a pr obl emas t hi s:a number t oget her wi t h i t s f i f t h par t makes 21; what i s t he

number ? The process by whi ch t he Egypt i an sol ved t hi s probl emseems very cumbersome t o any one f or whom a r udi mentar y knowl edgeof al gebra makes i t si mpl e, yet t he met hod whi ch we empl oydi f f er s onl y i n that we ar e enabl ed, t hanks t o our hypot het i calx, t o make a short cut , and t he essent i al f act must not beover l ooked t hat t he Egypt i an r eached a cor r ect sol ut i on of t hepr obl em. Wi t h al l due desi r e t o gi ve cr edi t , however , t he f actr emai ns t hat t he Egypt i an was but a crude mat hemat i ci an. Here, asel sewher e, i t i s i mpossi bl e to admi r e hi m f or any hi ghdevel opment of t heor et i cal sci ence. Fi r st , l ast , and al l t he



t i me, he was pr act i cal , and t her e i s nothi ng t o show t hat t het hought of sci ence f or i t s own sake, f or t he mer e l ove of knowi ng, ever ent ered hi s head.

I n general , t hen, we must admi t t hat t he Egypt i an had notpr ogr essed f ar i n t he har d way of abst r act t hi nki ng. Heworshi pped everyt hi ng about hi m because he f ear ed t he r esul t of f ai l i ng t o do so. He embal med the dead l est t he spi r i t of t henegl ect ed one mi ght come t o t or ment hi m. Eye- mi nded as he was, hecame to have an ar t i st i c sense, t o l ove decor at i ve ef f ect s. Buthe l et t hese al ways t ake pr ecedence over hi s sense of t r ut h; as,f or exampl e, when he modi f i ed hi s l i st s of ki ngs at Abydos t o f i tt he space whi ch t he ar chi t ect had l ef t t o be f i l l ed; he had nohi st or i cal sense to show t o hi m t hat t r ut h shoul d take pr ecedenceover mere decor at i on. And everywher e he l i ved i n t he samehappy- go- l ucky way. He l oved per sonal ease, t he pl easures of t het abl e, t he l uxur i es of l i f e, games, r ecreat i ons, f est i val s. Het ook no heed f or t he morr ow, except as t he morr ow mi ght mi ni st ert o hi s per sonal needs. Essent i al l y a sensual bei ng, he scar cel yconcei ved the meani ng of t he i nt el l ect ual l i f e i n the moder n

sense of t he t erm. He had per f orce l ear ned some t hi ngs aboutast r onomy, because t hese were necessary t o hi s worshi p of t hegods; about pr act i cal medi ci ne, because thi s mi ni st er ed t o hi smat er i al needs; about pr act i cal ar i t hmet i c, because t hi s ai dedhi m i n ever y- day af f ai r s. The bar e rudi ment s of an hi st or i calsci ence may be sai d t o be crudel y out l i ned i n hi s def ect i ve l i st sof ki ngs. But beyond t hi s he di d not go. Sci ence as sci ence, andf or i t s own sake, was unknown to hi m. He had gods f or al lmat er i al f unct i ons, and f est i val s i n honor of ever y god; butt her e was no goddess of mere wi sdomi n hi s pant heon. Theconcept i on of Mi ner va was r eserved f or t he creat i ve geni us of anot her peopl e.

I I I . SCI ENCE OF BABYLONI A AND ASSYRI A

Throughout cl ass i cal ant i qui t y Egypt i an sci ence was f amous. Weknow t hat Pl ato spent some year s i n Egypt i n the hope of penet r at i ng t he al l eged myster i es of i t s f abl ed l ear ni ng; and t hest or y of t he Egypt i an pr i est who pat r oni zi ngl y assur ed Sol on thatt he Gr eeks were but babes was quoted everywhere wi t houtdi sappr oval . Even so l at e as t he t i me of August us, we f i ndDi odor us, t he Si ci l i an, l ooki ng back wi t h vener at i on upon t heOr i ent al l ear ni ng, t o whi ch Pl i ny al so ref er s wi t h unboundedr espect . Fromwhat we have seen of Egypt i an sci ence, al l t hi sf urni shes us wi t h a somewhat st r i ki ng comment ary upon t heat t ai nment s of t he Gr eeks and Romans t hemsel ves. To ref er at

l engt h t o thi s woul d be t o ant i ci pat e our pur pose; what nowconcer ns us i s t o r ecal l t hat al l al ong t her e was anot her nat i on,or gr oup of nat i ons, t hat di sput ed t he pal m f or sci ent i f i cat t ai nment s. Thi s group of nat i ons f ound a home i n the val l ey of t he Ti gr i s and Euphr ates. Thei r l and was named Mesopot ami a by t heGr eeks, because a l arge par t of i t l ay bet ween t he t wo ri ver s

j ust ment i oned. The peopl es t hemsel ves are f ami l i ar t o every oneas t he Babyl oni ans and t he Assyr i ans. These peopl es were of Semi t i c stock- - al l i ed, t her ef ore, t o t he anci ent Hebr ews andPhoeni ci ans and of t he same raci al st emwi t h t he Ar ameans and



Ar abs.

The great capi t al of t he Babyl oni ans duri ng t he l at er peri od of t hei r hi st or y was t he f amed ci t y of Babyl on i t sel f ; t he mostf amous capi t al of t he Assyr i ans was Ni neveh, t hat ci t y t o whi ch,as ever y Bi bl e- st udent wi l l r ecal l , t he pr ophet J onah was

j ourneyi ng when he had a much- expl oi t ed exper i ence, t he r ecor d of whi ch f or ms no par t of sci ent i f i c annal s. I t was t he ki ngs of Assyri a, i ssui ng f r omt hei r pal aces i n Ni neveh, who domi nat ed t heci vi l i zat i on of West er n Asi a dur i ng the heyday of Hebr ew hi st or y,and whose deeds are so f r equent l y ment i oned i n t he Hebr ewchr oni cl es. Lat er on, i n t he year 606 B. C. , Ni neveh wasover t hrown by t he Medes[ 1] and Babyl oni ans. The f amous ci t y wascompl etel y dest r oyed, never t o be rebui l t . Babyl on, however ,t hough conquered subsequent l y by Cyrus and hel d i n subj ect i on byDar i us, [ 2] t he Per si an ki ngs, cont i nued t o hol d sway as a gr eatwor l d- capi t al f or some cent ur i es. The l ast gr eat hi st or i cal eventt hat occur r ed wi t hi n i t s wal l s was t he deat h of Al exander t heGr eat , whi ch t ook pl ace t here i n t he year 322 B. C.

I n t he t i me of Herodot us t he f ame of Babyl on was at i t s hei ght ,and t he f ather of hi st ory has l ef t us a most ent ert ai ni ng accountof what he saw when he vi si t ed t he wonder f ul capi t al .Unf ort unat el y, Her odotus was not a schol ar i n the pr operaccept ance of t he t erm. He pr obabl y had no i nkl i ng of t heBabyl oni an l anguage, so the vol umi nous r ecor ds of i t s l i t er at ur ewer e ent i r el y shut of f f r om hi s obser vat i on. He t her ef or eenl i ght ens us but l i t t l e r egar di ng t he sci ence of t heBabyl oni ans, t hough hi s obser vat i ons on t hei r pr act i calci vi l i zat i on gi ve us i nci dent al r ef er ences of no smal li mport ance. Somewhat more det ai l ed ref erences t o t he sci ent i f i cat t ai nment s of t he Babyl oni ans are f ound i n t he f r agment s t hathave come down t o us of t he wr i t i ngs of t he gr eat Babyl oni anhi st or i an, Berosus, [ 3] who was born i n Babyl on about 330 B. C. ,and who was, t her ef ore, a contempor ary of Al exander t he Gr eat .But t he wr i t i ngs of Ber osus al so, or at l east such par t s of t hemas have come down to us, l eave ver y much t o be desi r ed i n poi ntof expl i ci t ness. They gi ve some gl i mpses of Babyl oni an hi st ory,and they det ai l at some l engt h the st r ange mythi cal t al es of cr eat i on t hat ent er ed i nt o t he Babyl oni an concept i on of cosmogony- - det ai l s whi ch f i nd thei r count er par t i n t he al l i edr eci t al s of t he Hebr ews. But t aken al l i n al l , t he gl i mpses of t he act ual st at e of Chal dean[ 4] l ear ni ng, as i t was commonl ycal l ed, amounted t o scarcel y more than vague wonder - t al es. No oner eal l y knew j ust what i nt er pr et at i on t o put upon t hese tal esunt i l t he expl orer s of t he ni net eent h cent ur y had excavat ed t her ui ns of t he Babyl oni an and Assyr i an ci t i es, br i ngi ng t o l i ght

t he rel i cs of t hei r wonderf ul ci vi l i zat i on. But t hese rel i csf ort unat el y i ncl uded vast number s of wr i t t en document s, i nscr i bedon t abl et s, pr i sms, and cyl i nder s of t er r a- cot t a. Whenni net eent h- cent ur y schol arshi p had penetr at ed t he myst er i es of t he st r ange scr i pt , and f er r et ed out t he secret s of an unknownt ongue, t he worl d at l ast was i n possessi on of aut hent i c r ecor dsby whi ch t he t r adi t i ons r egar di ng the Babyl oni ans and Assyr i anscoul d be t est ed. Thanks t o t hese mat er i al s, a new sci encecommonl y spoken of as Assyr i ol ogy came i nto bei ng, and a mosti mport ant chapt er of human hi st ory was br ought t o l i ght . I t



became appar ent t hat t he Gr eek i deas concerni ng Mesopot ami a,t hough vague i n the ext r eme, were f ounded on f act . No one anyl onger quest i ons t hat t he Mesopot ami an ci vi l i zat i on was f ul l y ona par wi t h t hat of Egypt ; i ndeed, i t i s r at her hel d t hatsuper i or i t y l ay wi t h t he Asi at i cs. Cer t ai nl y, i n poi nt of pur el ysci ent i f i c at t ai nment s, t he Babyl oni ans passed somewhat beyondt hei r Egypt i an compet i t ors . Al l t he evi dence seems t o suggestal so that t he Babyl oni an ci vi l i zat i on was even more anci ent t hant hat of Egypt . The pr eci se dat es are her e i n di sput e; nor f or ourpresent purpose need they gr eat l y concern us. But t heAssyr i o- Babyl oni an r ecor ds have much gr eat er hi st ori cal accur acyas regards matt ers of chr onol ogy t han have t he Egypt i an, and i ti s bel i eved t hat our knowl edge of t he ear l y Babyl oni an hi st or y i scar r i ed back, wi t h some cer t ai nt y, t o Ki ng Sar gon of Agade, [ 5]f or whom t he date 3800 B. C. i s gener al l y accept ed; whi l e somewhatvaguer r ecor ds gi ve us gl i mpses of peri ods as r emote as t hesi xt h, perhaps even t he sevent h or ei ghth mi l l enni ums bef ore ourera.

At a ver y ear l y per i od Babyl on i t sel f was not a capi t al and

Ni neveh had not come i nt o exi st ence. The i mport ant ci t i es, suchas Ni ppur and Shi r pur l a, wer e si t uat ed f ar t her t o t he sout h. I ti s on t he si t e of t hese ci t i es t hat t he r ecent excavat i ons havebeen made, such as t hose of t he Uni ver si t y of Pennsyl vani aexpedi t i ons at Ni ppur , [ 6] whi ch ar e gi vi ng us gl i mpses i nt or emot er r ecesses of t he hi st or i cal per i od.

Even i f we di sr egard t he more pr obl emat i cal ear l y dates, we arest i l l concer ned wi t h t he recor ds of a ci vi l i zat i on ext endi ngunbr oken t hr oughout a per i od of about f our t housand years ; t heactual per i od i s i n al l probabi l i t y t wi ce or t hr i ce t hat .Nat ur al l y enough, t he cur r ent of hi st or y i s not an unbr okenst r eam t hr oughout t hi s l ong epoch. I t appear s t hat at l east t wout t er l y di f f er ent et hni c el ement s are i nvol ved. A pr eponder anceof evi dence seems t o show t hat t he ear l i est ci vi l i zed i nhabi t ant sof Mesopot ami a were not Semi t i c, but an al i en r ace, whi ch i s nowcommonl y spoken of as Sumer i an. Thi s peopl e, of whom we cat chgl i mpses chi ef l y thr ough t he r ecor ds of i t s successor s, appear st o have been subj ugat ed or over t hrown by Semi t i c i nvaders, who,comi ng per haps f r om Ar abi a ( t hei r or i gi n i s i n di sput e) , t ookpossessi on of t he regi on of t he Ti gr i s and Euphr at es, l ear nedf r omt he Sumer i ans many of t he usef ul art s, and, par t l y perhapsbecause of t hei r mi xed l i neage, were enabl ed t o devel op t he mostwonder f ul ci vi l i zat i on of ant i qui t y. Coul d we anal yze t he det ai l sof t hi s ci vi l i zat i on f rom i t s ear l i est t o i t s l at est per i od weshoul d of cour se f i nd t he same changes whi ch al ways at t end raci alprogr ess and decay. We shoul d then be abl e, no doubt , t o speak of

cer t ai n gol den epochs and t hei r per i ods of decl i ne. To a cer t ai nmeagre ext ent we ar e abl e t o do t hi s now. We know, f or exampl e,t hat Ki ng Khammurabi , who l i ved about 2200 B. C. , was a greatl aw- gi ver , t he anci ent pr ot ot ype of J ust i ni an; and t he epochs of such Assyri an ki ngs as Sar gon I I . , Asshur nazi r pal , Sennacher i b,and Asshur banapal st and out wi t h much di st i nctness. Yet , as awhol e, t he recor d does not enabl e us t o t r ace wi t h cl ear ness t hepr ogr ess of sci ent i f i c t hought . At best we can gai n f ewergl i mpses i n t hi s di r ecti on t han i n al most any ot her , f or i t i st he recor d of war and conquest r at her t han of t he peacef ul ar t s



t hat commanded the at t ent i on of t he anci ent scr i be. So i n deal i ngwi t h t he sci ent i f i c achi evement s of t hese peopl es, we shal lper f or ce consi der t hei r var i ed ci vi l i zat i ons as a uni t y, andat t empt , as best we may, t o summar i ze t hei r achi evement s as awhol e. For t he most par t , we shal l not at t empt t o di scr i mi nat e ast o what shar e i n t he f i nal pr oduct was due to Sumeri an, what t oBabyl oni an, and what t o Assyr i an. We shal l speak of Babyl oni ansci ence as i ncl udi ng al l t hese el ement s; and dr awi ng ouri nf or mat i on chi ef l y f r om t he r el at i vel y l at e Assyr i an andBabyl oni an sour ces, whi ch, t her ef ore, r epr esent t he cul mi nat i ngachi evement s of al l t hese ages of ef f or t , we shal l at t empt t odi scover what was t he actual st atus of Mesopot ami an sci ence ati t s cl i max. I n so f ar as we succeed, we shal l be abl e t o j udgewhat sci ent i f i c her i t age Eur ope r ecei ved f r om t he Or i ent ; f or i nt he records of Babyl oni an sci ence we have to do wi t h t he East ernmi nd at i t s best . Let us t ur n t o t he speci f i c i nqui r y as t o t heachi evement s of t he Chal dean sci ent i st whose f ame so dazzl ed t heeyes of hi s cont emporari es of t he cl assi c worl d.

BABYLONI AN ASTRONOMY

Our f i r st concer n nat ur al l y i s ast r onomy, t hi s bei ng her e, as i nEgypt , t he f i r st - bor n and the most i mport ant of t he sci ences. Thef ame of t he Chal dean ast r onomer was i ndeed what chi ef l y commandedt he admi r at i on of t he Gr eeks, and i t was t hr ough the resul t s of ast r onomi cal observat i ons t hat Babyl oni a t r ansmi t t ed her mosti mpor t ant i nf l uences t o t he West er n wor l d. "Our di vi si on of t i mei s of Babyl oni an ori gi n, " says Hornmel ; [ 7] " t o Babyl oni a we owet he week of seven days, wi t h the names of t he pl anets f or t hedays of t he week, and the di vi si on i nt o hour s and mont hs. " Hencet he al most personal i nt erest whi ch we of t o- day must needs f eeli n t he ef f or t s of t he Babyl oni an st ar - gazer .

I t must not be supposed, however , t hat t he Chal dean ast r onomerhad made any ver y ext r aordi nar y advances upon t he knowl edge of t he Egypt i an "wat cher s of t he ni ght . " Af t er al l , i t r equi r edpat i ent obser vat i on rather t han any pecul i ar geni us i n theobserver t o not e i n the cour se of t i me such br oad ast r onomi calcondi t i ons as the r egul ar i t y of t he moon' s phases, and t her el at i on of t he l unar per i ods t o t he l onger per i odi calosci l l at i ons of t he sun. Nor coul d t he cur i ous wander i ngs of t hepl anets escape t he at t ent i on of even a moderatel y keen observer .

The chi ef di st i nct i on between t he Chal dean and Egypt i anast r onomer s appear s t o have consi st ed i n the rel at i ve i mport ancet hey at t ached t o var i ous of t he phenomena whi ch t hey bot hobserved. The Egypt i an, as we have seen, cent r ed hi s at t ent i on

upon t he sun. That l umi nar y was t he abode of one of hi s mosti mpor t ant gods. Hi s wor shi p was essent i al l y sol ar . TheBabyl oni an, on t he ot her hand, appears t o have been pecul i arl yi mpressed wi t h the i mpor t ance of t he moon. He coul d not , of cour se, over l ook t he at t ent i on- compel l i ng f act of t he sol ar year ;but hi s uni t of t i me was t he l unar per i od of t hi r t y days, and hi syear consi st ed of t wel ve l unar per i ods, or 360 days. He wasper f ect l y awar e, however , t hat t hi s per i od di d not coi nci de wi t ht he act ual year ; but t he rel at i ve uni mport ance whi ch he ascr i bedt o t he sol ar year i s evi denced by the f act t hat he i nt er pol at ed



an added mont h to adj ust t he cal endar onl y once i n si x years.I ndeed, i t woul d appear t hat t he Babyl oni ans and Assyr i ans di dnot adopt pr eci sel y t he same method of adj ust i ng the cal endar,si nce the Babyl oni ans had two i nt ercul ar mont hs cal l ed El ul andAdar, whereas t he Assyr i ans had onl y a si ngl e such mont h, cal l edt he second Adar . [ 8] ( The Ve' Adar of t he Hebr ews. ) Thi s di ver si t yf ur t her emphasi zes t he f act t hat i t was t he l unar per i od whi chr ecei ved chi ef at t ent i on, t he adj ust ment of t hi s per i od wi t h t hesol ar seasons bei ng a necessar y expedi ent of secondaryi mpor t ance. I t i s hel d that t hese l unar per i ods have of t en beenmade t o do servi ce f or years i n the Babyl oni an comput at i ons andi n t he al l i ed comput at i ons of t he ear l y Hebr ews. The l i ves of t heHebr ew pat r i ar chs, f or exampl e, as r ecorded i n t he Bi bl e, ar eper haps r eckoned i n l unar "years. " Di vi ded by twel ve, t he "year s"of Met husel ah accor d f ai r l y wi t h the usual exper i ence of manki nd.

Yet , on t he ot her hand, t he conveni ence of t he sol ar year i ncomput i ng l ong peri ods of t i me was not unr ecogni zed, si nce t hi sper i od i s ut i l i zed i n r eckoni ng t he r ei gns of t he Assyr i an ki ngs.I t may be added t hat t he rei gn of a ki ng "was not r eckoned f r om

t he day of hi s accessi on, but f r omt he Assyr i an new year ' s day,ei t her bef ore or af t er t he day of accessi on. Ther e does notappear t o have been any f i xed rul e as t o whi ch new year ' s dayshoul d be chosen; but f r om t he number of known cases, i t appear st o have been the gener al pr act i ce to count t he rei gni ng year sf r om t he new year ' s day near est t he accessi on, and t o cal l t heper i od between the accessi on day and the f i r st new year ' s day' t he begi nni ng of t he r ei gn, ' when t he year f r omt he new year ' sday was cal l ed t he f i r st year , and t he f ol l owi ng ones wer ebr ought successi vel y f r om i t . Not wi t hst andi ng, i n the dat es of sever al Assyr i an and Babyl oni an sover ei gns t her e ar e cases of t heyear of accessi on bei ng consi der ed as t he f i r st year , t hus gi vi ngt wo reckoni ngs f or t he rei gns of var i ous monarchs, among ot hers ,Shal maneser, Sennacher i b, Nebuchadr ezzar . " [ 9] Thi s uncer t ai nt y ast o the years of r eckoni ng agai n emphasi zes t he f act t hat t hesol ar year di d not have f or t he Assyr i an chr onol ogy qui t e t hesame si gni f i cance t hat i t has f or us.

The Assyr i an mont h commenced on t he eveni ng when t he new moon wasf i r st obser ved, or , i n case t he moon was not vi si bl e, t he newmont h st ar t ed t hi r t y days af t er t he l ast mont h. Si nce t he act uall unar per i od i s about t went y- ni ne and one- hal f days, a pr act i caladj ust ment was r equi r ed bet ween t he mont hs t hemsel ves, and t hi swas pr obabl y ef f ected by count i ng al t ernate mont hs as Onl y 29days i n l engt h. Mr . R. Campbel l Thompson[ 10] i s l ed by hi sst udi es of t he ast r ol ogi cal t abl et s t o emphasi ze t hi s f act . Hebel i eves t hat "t he obj ect of t he ast r ol ogi cal r epor t s whi ch

r el ated t o t he appearance of t he moon and sun was t o hel pdet er mi ne and f oret el l t he l engt h of t he l unar mont h. " Mr .

Thompson bel i eves al so t hat t here i s evi dence t o show t hat t hei nt er cul ar y mont h was added at a per i od l ess t han si x year s. I npoi nt of f act , i t does not appear t o be qui t e cl ear l y est abl i shedas t o pr eci sel y how t he adj ust ment of days wi t h the l unar mont hs,and l unar mont hs wi t h t he sol ar year , was ef f ect ed. I t i s cl ear ,however , accor di ng to Smi t h, " t hat t he f i r st 28 days of ever ymont h were di vi ded i nto f our weeks of seven days each; t hesevent h, f our t eent h, t went y- f i r st , t went y- ei ght h days



r espect i vel y bei ng Sabbaths, and t hat t here was a generalpr ohi bi t i on of wor k on t hese days. " Her e, of cour se, i s t hef oundat i on of t he Hebr ew syst emof Sabbat i cal days whi ch we havei nher i t ed. The sacredness of t he number seven i t sel f - - t he bel i ef i n whi ch has not been qui t e shaken of f even t o thi s day - - wasdeduced by t he Assyr i an ast r onomer f r omhi s observat i on of t heseven pl anetary bodi es- - namel y, Si n ( t he moon) , Samas ( t he sun) ,Umunpawddu ( J upi t er) , Di l bat ( Venus) , Kai manu (Satur n) , Gudud( Mer cur y) , Must abar r u- mut anu ( Mar s) . [ 11] Twel ve l unar per i ods,maki ng up appr oxi matel y t he sol ar year, gave pecul i ar i mpor t ancet o the number t wel ve al so. Thus the zodi ac was di vi ded i nt ot wel ve si gns whi ch ast r onomers of al l subsequent t i mes havecont i nued to recogni ze; and t he duodeci mal syst em of count i ngt ook precedence wi t h t he Babyl oni an mat hemat i ci ans over t he morepr i mi t i ve and, as i t seems t o us, more sat i sf act ory deci malsyst em.

Anot her di scr epancy bet ween the Babyl oni an and Egypt i an year sappear s i n t he f act t hat t he Babyl oni an new year dat es f r om aboutt he per i od of t he ver nal equi nox and not f r omt he sol st i ce.

Lockyer associ at es t hi s wi t h t he f act t hat t he per i odi cali nundat i on of t he Ti gr i s and Euphr at es occur s about t heequi noct i al per i od, wher eas, as we have seen, t he Ni l e f l oodcomes at t he t i me of t he sol st i ce. I t i s but nat ur al t hat soi mpor t ant a phenomenon as t he Ni l e f l ood shoul d make a st r ongi mpr essi on upon t he mi nds of a peopl e l i vi ng i n a val l ey. Thef act t hat occasi onal excessi ve i nundat i ons have l ed t o mostdi sast r ous resul t s i s evi denced i n t he i ncor por at i on of st or i esof t he al most t otal dest r uct i on of manki nd by such f l oods amongt he myth t al es of al l peopl es who resi de i n val l ey count r i es. Thef l oodi ng of t he Ti gr i s and Euphr at es had not , i t i s t r ue, qui t et he same si gni f i cance f or t he Mesopotami ans t hat t he Ni l e f l oodhad f or t he Egypt i ans. Nevert hel ess i t was a most i mpor t antphenomenon, and may very r eadi l y be i magi ned t o have been themost t angi bl e i ndex t o the seasons. But i n r ecogni zi ng t he t i meof t he i nundat i ons and t he ver nal equi nox, t he Assyr i ans di d notdet hr one t he moon f r om i t s accust omed precedence, f or t he yearwas r eckoned as commenci ng not preci sel y at t he vernal equi nox,but at t he new moon next bef or e t he equi nox.

ASTROLOGY

Beyond mar ki ng the seasons, t he chi ef i nt er ests t hat act uated t heBabyl oni an ast r onomer i n hi s observat i ons were ast r ol ogi cal .Af t er quot i ng Di odor us t o t he ef f ect t hat t he Babyl oni an pr i est sobser ved t he posi t i on of cer t ai n st ar s i n or der t o cast

horoscopes, Thompson t el l s us t hat f r oma very ear l y day t he veryname Chal dean became synonymous wi t h magi ci an. He adds t hat " f r omMesopot ami a, by way of Gr eece and Rome, a cer t ai n amount of Babyl oni an ast r ol ogy made i t s way among the nat i ons of t he west ,and i t i s qui t e pr obabl e that many superst i t i ons whi ch wecommonl y r ecor d as t he pecul i ar pr oduct of west er n ci vi l i zat i ont ook t hei r or i gi n f r om t hose of t he ear l y dwel l er s on t heal l uvi al l ands of Mesopot ami a. One Assur bani pal , ki ng of Assyri aB. C. 668- 626, added t o t he r oyal l i br ar y at Ni neveh hi scont r i but i on of t abl et s, whi ch i ncl uded many ser i es of document s



whi ch r el at ed excl usi vel y to t he ast r ol ogy of t he anci entBabyl oni ans, who i n t ur n had borr owed i t wi t h modi f i cat i ons f r omt he Sumer i an i nvaders of t he count r y. Among t hese must bement i oned t he ser i es whi ch was commonl y cal l ed ' t he Day of Bel , 'and whi ch was decr eed by t he l ear ned to have been wr i t t en i n thet i me of t he gr eat Sargon I . , ki ng of Agade, 3800 B. C. Wi t h suchanci ent works as t hese t o gui de t hem, t he pr of essi on of deduci ngomens f r omdai l y event s r eached such a pi t ch of i mport ance i n t hel ast Assyri an Empi r e that a system of maki ng per i odi cal r epor t scame i nt o bei ng. By t hese t he ki ng was i nf ormed of al l t heoccur r ences i n the heavens and on eart h, and the resul t s of ast r ol ogi cal st udi es i n r espect t o af t er event s. The heads of t heast r ol ogi cal pr of essi on wer e men of hi gh r ank and posi t i on, andt hei r of f i ce was her edi t ar y. The var i et y of i nf or mat i on cont ai nedi n t hese r epor t s i s best gat her ed f r om t he f act t hat t hey wer esent f r om ci t i es as f ar r emoved f r om each ot her as Assur i n t henor t h and Erech i n t he south, and i t can onl y be assumed t hatt hey were despatched by r unner s, or men mount ed on swi f t horses.As r eport s al so came f r omDi l bat , Kut ba, Ni ppur , and Bur si ppa,al l ci t i es of anci ent f oundat i on, t he ki ng was pr obabl y wel l

acquai nt ed wi t h t he gener al cour se of event s i n hi s empi r e. " [ 12]

Fromcer t ai n passages i n t he ast r ol ogi cal t abl et s, Thompson dr awst he i nt er est i ng concl usi on t hat t he Chal dean ast r onomers wer eacquai nted wi t h some ki nd of a machi ne f or r eckoni ng t i me. Hef i nds i n one of t he tabl ets a phr ase whi ch he i nt er pr ets t o meanmeasur e- gover nor, and he i nf er s f r om t hi s t he exi st ence of a ki ndof a cal cul at or . He cal l s at t ent i on al so t o t he f act t hat Sext usEmpi r i cus[ 13] st ates that t he cl epsydr a was known t o t heChal deans, and t hat Herodot us asser t s t hat t he Gr eeks bor r owedcer t ai n measur es of t i me f r omt he Babyl oni ans. He f i nds f ur t hercorr oborat i on i n the f act t hat t he Babyl oni ans had a t i me- measureby whi ch they di vi ded t he day and the ni ght ; a measure cal l edkasbu, whi ch cont ai ned t wo hour s. I n a r eport r el at i ng t o the dayof t he ver nal equi nox, i t i s st at ed t hat t her e ar e si x kasbu of t he day and si x kasbu of t he ni ght .

Whi l e the ast r ol oger s deduced t hei r omens f r om al l t he cel est i albodi es known to t hem, t hey chi ef l y gave at t ent i on t o t he moon,not i ng wi t h gr eat car e the shape of i t s hor ns, and deduci ng sucha concl usi on as t hat "i f t he hor ns ar e poi nt ed t he ki ng wi l lovercome what ever he gor et h, " and t hat "when t he moon i s l ow ati t s appear ance, t he submi ssi on (of t he peopl e) of a f ar count r ywi l l come. " [ 14] The rel at i ons of t he moon and sun were a sour ceof const ant observat i on, i t bei ng noted whether t he sun and moonwere seen toget her above t he hor i zon; whet her one set as t heot her r ose, and the l i ke. And what ever t he phenomena, t her e was

al ways, of cour se, a di r ect associ at i on between such phenomenaand t he wel l - bei ng of human ki nd- - i n par t i cul ar t he ki ng, atwhose i nst ance, and doubt l ess at whose expense, t he obser vat i onswer e car r i ed out .

Fromomens associ at ed wi t h t he heavenl y bodi es i t i s but a st ept o omens based upon other phenomena of nat ure, and we, shal l seei n a moment t hat t he Babyl oni an prophet s made f r ee use of t hei roppor t uni t i es i n t hi s di r ecti on al so. But bef or e we t ur n f r om t hef i el d of ast r onomy, i t wi l l be wel l t o i nf or m our sel ves as t o



what syst emt he Chal dean ast r onomer had i nvent ed i n expl anat i onof t he mechani cs of t he uni ver se. Our answer t o t hi s i nqui r y i snot qui t e as def i ni t e as coul d be desi r ed, t he vagueness of t her ecor ds, no doubt , coi nci di ng wi t h t he l i ke vagueness i n t hemi nds of t he Chal deans t hemsel ves. So f ar as we can i nterpr et t hesomewhat myst i cal r ef erences t hat have come down t o us, however ,t he Babyl oni an cosmol ogy woul d seemt o have repr esent ed t he ear t has a ci r cul ar pl ane sur r ounded by a gr eat ci r cul ar r i ver , beyondwhi ch rose an i mpr egnabl e barr i er of mount ai ns, and r est i ng uponan i nf i ni t e sea of wat er s. The mat er i al vaul t of t he heavens wassupposed t o f i nd support upon t he out l yi ng ci r cl e of mount ai ns.But t he pr eci se mechani sm t hr ough whi ch t he observed r evol ut i onof t he heavenl y bodi es was ef f ected r emai ns her e, as wi t h t heEgypt i an cosmol ogy, somewhat conj ectur al . The si mpl e f act woul dappear t o be that , f or t he Chal deans as f or t he Egypt i ans,despi t e thei r most car ef ul observat i ons of t he tangi bl e phenomenaof t he heavens, no r eal l y sat i sf act ory mechani cal concept i on of t he cosmos was at t ai nabl e. We shal l see i n due cour se by whatf al t er i ng steps t he Eur opean i magi nat i on advanced f r omt he crudei deas of Egypt and Babyl oni a t o t he r el at i vel y cl ear vi si on of

Newt on and Lapl ace.

CHALDEAN MAGI C

We t ur n now f r omt he f i el d of t he ast r ol oger t o t he cl osel yal l i ed pr ovi nce of Chal dean magi c- - a pr ovi nce whi ch i ncl udes t heother ; whi ch, i ndeed, i s so al l - encompassi ng as scar cel y tol eave any phase of Babyl oni an t hought out si de i t s bounds.

The t abl et s havi ng t o do wi t h omens, exorci sms, and t he l i kemagi c pr act i ces make up an ast oni shi ngl y l ar ge pr oport i on of t heBabyl oni an recor ds. I n vi ewi ng them i t i s har d t o avoi d t heconcl usi on that t he super st i t i ons whi ch t hey evi denced absol ut el ydomi nated t he l i f e of t he Babyl oni ans of ever y degr ee. Yet i tmust not be f or got t en that t he gr eat est i nconsi st enci esever ywher e exi st bet ween t he super st i t i ous bel i ef s of a peopl eand the pr act i cal obser vances of t hat peopl e. No ot her pr obl em i sso di f f i cul t f or t he hi st or i an as t hat whi ch conf r ont s hi m whenhe endeavor s t o penetr at e t he myst er i es of an al i en r el i gi on; andwhen, as i n t he pr esent case, t he super st i t i ons i nvol ved havebeen t r ansmi t t ed f r omgener at i on t o gener at i on, t hei r exactpr act i cal phases as i nt er pr et ed by any par t i cul ar generat i on mustbe somewhat probl emat i cal . The t abl ets upon whi ch our knowl edgeof t hese omens i s based are many of t hemf r omt he l i br ar i es of t he l ater ki ngs of Ni neveh; but t he omens t hemsel ves are, i n suchcases, i nscr i bed i n t he ori gi nal Accadi an f orm i n whi ch t hey have

come down f r om r emot e ages, accompani ed by an Assyr i ant r ansl at i on. Thus t he super st i t i ons i nvol ved had back of t hemhundr eds of years, even t housands of years , of pr ecedent ; and weneed not doubt t hat t he i deas wi t h whi ch they are associ ated werei nt er woven wi t h al most ever y t hought and deed of t he l i f e of t hepeopl e. Prof essor Sayce assures us t hat t he Assyr i ans andBabyl oni ans count ed no f ewer t han t hr ee hundred spi r i t s of heaven, and si x hundr ed spi r i t s of ear t h. "Li ke t he J ews of t he

Tal mud, " he says, " t hey bel i eved t hat t he wor l d was swarmi ng wi t hnoxi ous spi r i t s, who pr oduced t he vari ous di seases t o whi ch man



i s l i abl e, and mi ght be swal l owed wi t h the f ood and dr i nk whi chsuppor t l i f e. " Fox Tal bot was i ncl i ned t o bel i eve t hat exor ci smswere t he excl usi ve means used t o dr i ve away the t orment i ngspi r i t s. Thi s seems unl i kel y, consi der i ng t he uni f or m associ at i onof dr ugs wi t h t he magi cal pr act i ces among t hei r peopl e. Yet t herei s cer t ai nl y a st r ange si l ence of t he t abl et s i n r egar d t omedi ci ne. Tal bot t el l s us t hat somet i mes di vi ne i mages wer ebr ought i nt o the si ck- chamber , and wr i t t en t exts t aken f r omhol ybooks were pl aced on t he wal l s and bound around t he si ck man' smember s. I f t hese f ai l ed, r ecour se was had t o the i nf l uence of t he mami t , whi ch the evi l powers were unabl e to resi st . On at abl et , wr i t t en i n t he Accadi an l anguage onl y, t he Assyri anver si on bei ng t aken, however, was f ound t he f ol l owi ng:

1. Take a whi t e cl oth. I n i t pl ace t he mami t ,2. i n t he si ck man' s r i ght hand.3. Take a bl ack cl oth,4. wr ap i t ar ound hi s l ef t hand.5. Then al l t he evi l spi r i t s (a l ong l i st of t hem i s gi ven)6. and t he si ns whi ch he has commi t t ed

7. shal l qui t t hei r hol d of hi m8. and shal l never r et ur n.

The symbol i sm of t he bl ack cl ot h i n t he l ef t hand seems evi dent . The dyi ng man r epent s of hi s f or mer evi l deeds, and he put s hi st r ust i n hol i ness, symbol i zed by the whi t e cl ot h i n hi s r i ghthand. Then f ol l ow some obscur e l i nes about t he spi r i t s:

1. Thei r heads shal l r emove f r omhi s head.2. Thei r heads shal l l et go hi s hands.3. Thei r f eet shal l depart f romhi s f eet .

Whi ch perhaps may be expl ai ned t hus: we l ear n f r om anot her t abl ett hat t he var i ous cl asses of evi l spi r i t s tr oubl ed di f f er ent par t sof t he body; some i nj ured t he head, some the hands and the f eet ,etc. , t heref ore the passage bef ore may mean " t he spi r i t s whosepower i s over t he hand shal l l oose t hei r hands f r om hi s, " et c."But , " concl udes Tal bot , "I can of f er no deci ded opi ni on uponsuch obscur e poi nt s of t hei r super st i t i on. "[ 15]

I n r egar d t o evi l spi r i t s, as el sewher e, t he number seven had apecul i ar si gni f i cance, i t bei ng hel d t hat t hat number of spi r i t smi ght ent er i nt o a man t oget her. Tal bot has t r ansl at ed[ 16] a"wi l d chant " whi ch he names "The Song of t he Seven Spi r i t s. "

1. There ar e seven! There ar e seven!

2. I n t he dept hs of t he ocean t her e ar e seven!3. I n t he hei ght s of t he heaven t here are seven!4. I n the ocean st r eam i n a pal ace they were born.5. Mal e they are not : f emal e they are not !6. Wi ves t hey have not ! Chi l dr en are not bor n t o t hem!7. Rul es t hey have not ! Government t hey know not!8. Prayer s t hey hear not !9. There are seven! There ar e seven! Twi ce over t here ar e

seven!



The t abl et s make f r equent al l usi on t o t hese seven spi r i t s. Onestarts thus:

1. The god ( - - - ) shal l st and by hi s bedsi de;2. These seven evi l spi r i t s he shal l r oot out and shal l expel

t hem f r om hi s body,3. and t hese seven shal l never r etur n t o the si ck man

agai n. [ 17]

Al t ogether si mi l ar are t he exor ci sms i nt ended t o war d of f di sease. Prof essor Sayce has publ i shed t r ansl at i ons of some of t hese. [ 18] Each of t hese ends wi t h t he same phrase, and t heydi f f er onl y i n r egar d t o t he par t i cul ar mal adi es f r om whi chf r eedomi s desi r ed. One reads:

"From wasti ng, f romwant of heal t h, f romt he evi l spi r i t of t heul cer , f r om t he spr eadi ng qui nsy of t he gul l et , f r om t he vi ol entul cer , f r omt he noxi ous ul cer , may the ki ng of heaven pr eserve,may t he ki ng of ear t h pr eser ve. "

Another i s phr ased t hus:

"From t he cruel spi r i t of t he head, f romt he str ong spi r i t of t hehead, f r om t he head spi r i t t hat depar t s not , f r om t he head spi r i tt hat comes not f or t h, f r om t he head spi r i t t hat wi l l not go, f r omt he noxi ous head spi r i t , may t he ki ng of heaven pr eser ve, may t heki ng of ear t h pr eser ve. "

As t o omens havi ng t o do wi t h t he af f ai r s of ever yday l i f e t henumber i s l egi on. For exampl e, Moppert has publ i shed, i n t he

J ournal Asi at i que, [ 19] t he t r ansl at i on of a t abl et whi ch cont ai nson i t s t wo si des sever al scor es of bi r t h- por t ent s, a f ew of whi chmaybe quot ed at r andom:

"When a woman bears a chi l d and i t has t he ear s of a l i on, ast r ong ki ng i s i n the count r y. " "When a woman bear s a chi l d andi t has a bi r d' s beak, t hat count r y i s oppr essed. " "When a womanbear s a chi l d and i t s r i ght hand i s want i ng, t hat count r y goes t odest r uct i on. " "When a woman bear s a chi l d and i t s f eet arewant i ng, t he r oads of t he count r y ar e cut ; t hat house i sdest r oyed. " "When a woman bears a chi l d and at t he t i me of i t sbi r t h i t s bear d i s gr own, f l oods ar e i n t he count r y. " "When awoman bear s a chi l d and at t he t i me of i t s bi r t h i t s mout h i sopen and speaks, t her e i s pest i l ence i n the count r y, t he Ai r - godi nundat es t he cr ops of t he count r y, i nj ur y i n t he count r y i scaused. "

Some of t hese port ent s, i t wi l l be observed, ar e not i n muchdanger of r eal i zat i on, and i t i s cur i ous t o sur mi se by whatst r et ch of t he i magi nat i on t hey can have been i nvent ed. Ther e i s,f or exampl e, on t he same tabl et j ust quot ed, one ref erence whi chassur es us t hat "when a sheep bear s a l i on t he f orces marchmul t i t udi nousl y; t he ki ng has not a r i val . " Ther e ar e ot heromens, however , t hat ar e so easy of r eal i zat i on as t o l ead one tosuppose that any Babyl oni an who r egar ded al l t he super st i t i oussi gns must have been i n const ant t er r or. Thus a t abl et t r ansl at ed



by Pr of essor Sayce[ 20] gi ves a l ong l i st of omens f ur ni shed bydogs, i n whi ch we ar e assur ed t hat :

1. I f a yel l ow dog ent er s i nt o t he pal ace, exi t f r om t hatpal ace wi l l be bal ef ul .

2. I f a dog t o the pal ace goes, and on a thr one l i es down, t hatpal ace i s bur ned.

3. i f a bl ack dog i nt o a t empl e ent er s, t he f oundat i on of t hatt empl e i s not st abl e.

4. I f f emal e dogs one l i t t er bear , dest r uct i on t o t he ci t y.

I t i s needl ess t o cont i nue t hese ci t at i ons, si nce t hey butr ei t er at e endl essl y t he same st or y. I t i s i nt er est i ng t o r ecal l ,however , t hat t he obser vat i ons of ani mate natur e, whi ch weredoubt l ess super st i t i ous i n t hei r mot i ve, had gi ven t heBabyl oni ans some i nkl i ngs of a knowl edge of cl assi f i cat i on. Thus,accor di ng to Menant , [ 21] some of t he tabl et s f r omNi neveh, whi chare wr i t t en, as usual , i n both t he Sumeri an and Assyr i anl anguages, and whi ch, t her ef or e, l i ke pr act i cal l y al l Assyr i anbooks, dr aw upon t he knowl edge of ol d Babyl oni a, gi ve l i st s of

ani mal s, maki ng an at t empt at cl assi f i cat i on. The dog, l i on, andwol f are pl aced i n one category; t he ox, sheep, and goat i nanot her ; t he dog f ami l y i t sel f i s di vi ded i nt o var i ous r aces, ast he domest i c dog, t he cour si ng dog, t he smal l dog, t he dog of El an, et c. Si mi l ar at t empt s at cl assi f i cat i on of bi r ds ar e f ound.

Thus, bi r ds of r api d f l i ght , sea- bi r ds, and marsh- bi r ds ar edi f f er ent i at ed. I nsects ar e cl assi f i ed accor di ng t o habi t ; t hoset hat at t ack pl ant s, ani mal s, cl ot hi ng, or wood. Veget abl es seemt o be cl assi f i ed accor di ng t o thei r usef ul ness. One t abl etenumer at es t he uses of wood accor di ng t o i t s adapt abi l i t y f ort i mber - wor k of pal aces, or const r uct i on of vessel s, t he maki ng of i mpl ement s of husbandr y, or even f ur ni t ur e. Mi neral s occupy al ong ser i es i n t hese t abl et s. They ar e cl assed accor di ng t o t hei rqual i t i es, gol d and si l ver occupyi ng a di vi si on apar t ; pr eci ousst ones f ormi ng another seri es. Our Babyl oni ans, t hen, must becr edi t ed wi t h t he devel opment of a rudi ment ary sci ence of natur alhi story.

BABYLONI AN MEDI CI NE

We have j ust seen t hat medi cal pr act i ce i n t he Babyl oni an wor l dwas st r angel y under t he cl oud of super st i t i on. But i t shoul d beunder st ood t hat our est i mat e, t hr ough l ack of cor r ect dat a,pr obabl y does much l ess t han j ust i ce to t he at t ai nment s of t hephysi ci an of t he t i me. As al r eady not ed, t he exi st i ng t abl et schance not t o t hr ow much l i ght on t he subj ect . I t i s known,

however , t hat t he pr act i t i oner of medi ci ne occupi ed a posi t i on of some, aut hor i t y and r esponsi bi l i t y. The pr oof of t hi s i s f ound i nt he cl auses r el at i ng to t he l egal st at us of t he physi ci an whi chare cont ai ned i n t he now f amous code[ 22] of t he Babyl oni an Ki ngKhamurabi , who r ei gned about 2300 years bef ore our era. Thesecl auses, t hough t hr owi ng no l i ght on t he sci ent i f i c at t ai nment sof t he physi ci an of t he per i od, ar e t oo cur i ous t o be omi t t ed.

They ar e cl auses 215 t o 227 of t he cel ebrat ed code, and ar e asf ol l ows:



215. I f a doctor has t r eat ed a man f or a sever e wound wi t h al ancet of bronze and has cured t he man, or has opened a t umorwi t h a br onze l ancet and has cured t he man' s eye, he shal lr ecei ve t en shekel s of si l ver .

216. I f i t was a f r eedman, he shal l r ecei ve f i ve shekel s of s i l ver .

217. I f i t was a man' s sl ave, t he owner of t he sl ave shal l gi vet he doct or t wo shekel s of si l ver .

218. I f a physi ci an has t r eat ed a f r ee- born man f or a sever ewound wi t h a l ancet of bronze and has caused t he man t o di e, orhas opened a t umor of t he man wi t h a l ancet of bronze and hasdest r oyed hi s eye, hi s hands one shal l cut of f .

219. I f t he doctor has t r eat ed t he sl ave of a f r eedman f or asever e wound wi t h a br onze l ancet and has caused hi m t o di e, heshal l gi ve back sl ave f or sl ave.

220. I f he has opened hi s t umor wi t h a br onze l ancet and hasr ui ned hi s eye, he shal l pay t he hal f of hi s pr i ce i n money.

221. I f a doctor has cur ed t he br oken l i mb of a man, or hasheal ed hi s si ck body, t he pat i ent shal l pay t he doct or f i veshekel s of si l ver .

222. I f i t was a f r eedman, he shal l gi ve t hr ee shekel s of si l ver .

223. I f i t was a man' s sl ave, t he owner of t he sl ave shal l gi vet wo shekel s of si l ver t o t he doct or.

224. I f t he doct or of oxen and asses has t r eat ed an ox or an assf or a gr ave wound and has cur ed i t , t he owner of t he ox or t heass shal l gi ve t o the doct or as hi s pay one- si xth of a shekel of s i l ver .

225. I f he has t r eat ed an ox or an ass f or a severe wound and hascaused i t s deat h, he shal l pay one- f our t h of i t s pr i ce t o theowner of t he ox or t he ass.

226. I f a bar ber- sur geon, wi t hout consent of t he owner of asl ave, has branded t he sl ave wi t h an i ndel i bl e mark, one shal lcut of f t he hands of t hat bar ber .

227. I f any one decei ve t he sur geon- bar ber and make hi m brand asl ave wi t h an i ndel i bl e mar k, one shal l ki l l t hat man and bur y

hi m i n hi s house. The bar ber shal l swear , "I di d not mar k hi mwi t t i ngl y, " and he shal l be gui l t l ess.

ESTI MATES OF BABYLONI AN SCI ENCE

Bef or e turni ng f r om t he Or i ent al wor l d i t i s per haps wor t h whi l et o at t empt t o est i mat e somewhat speci f i cal l y t he wor l d- i nf l uenceof t he name, Babyl oni an sci ence. Per haps we cannot bet t er gai n ani dea as t o t he est i mat e put upon t hat sci ence by t he cl assi cal



wor l d than t hr ough a somewhat ext ended quotat i on f r om a cl assi calaut hor. Di odorus Si cul us, who, as al r eady noted, l i ved at aboutt he t i me of August us, and who, t heref ore, scanned i n per spect i vet he ent i r e sweep of cl assi cal Gr eek hi st or y, has l ef t us ast r i ki ng summar y whi ch i s doubl y val uabl e because of i t scompar i sons of Babyl oni an wi t h Gr eek i nf l uence. Havi ng vi ewed t hesci ence of Babyl oni a i n t he l i ght of t he i nt er pr et at i ons madepossi bl e by t he recent st udy of ori gi nal document s, we ar eprepared t o dr aw our own concl usi ons f r omt he st atement s of t heGr eek hi st or i an. Her e i s hi s est i mat e i n t he wor ds of t he quai ntt r ansl at i on made by Phi l emon Hol l and i n the year 1700: [ 23]

"They bei ng t he most anci ent Babyl oni ans, hol d t he same st at i onand di gni t y i n t he Common- weal t h as t he Egypt i an Pr i est s do i nEgypt : For bei ng deput ed t o Di vi ne Of f i ces, t hey spend al l t hei r

Ti me i n t he st udy of Phi l osophy, and ar e especi al l y f amous f ort he Ar t of Ast r ol ogy. They ar e mi ght i l y gi ven t o Di vi nat i on, andf oret el f ut ur e Event s, and i mpl oy t hemsel ves ei t her byPur i f i cat i ons, Sacri f i ces, or ot her I nchant ment s t o aver t Evi l s,

or pr ocur e good For t une and Success. They ar e ski l f ul l i kewi se i nt he Ar t of Di vi nat i on, by the f l yi ng of Bi r ds, and i nt er pr et i ngof Dr eams and Prodi gi es: And are r eput ed as t r ue Or acl es ( i ndecl ar i ng what wi l l come t o pass) by t hei r exact and di l i gentvi ewi ng t he I nt r al s of t he Sacri f i ces. But t hey at t ai n not t ot hi s Knowl edge i n t he same manner as t he Gr eci ans do; f or t heChal deans l ear n i t by Tr adi t i on f r om t hei r Ancest or s, t he Sonf r om t he Fat her , who ar e al l i n t he mean t i me f r ee f r omal l ot herpubl i ck Of f i ces and At t endances; and because t hei r Par ent s aret hei r Tut ors, t hey bot h l ear n ever y thi ng wi t hout Envy, and r el ywi t h more conf i dence upon t he t r ut h of what i s t aught t hem; andbei ng t r ai n' d up i n t hi s Lear ni ng, f r om t hei r ver y Chi l dhood,t hey become most f amous Phi l osophers, ( t hat Age bei ng mostcapabl e of Lear ni ng, wherei n t hey spend much of t hei r t i me) . Butt he Gr eci ans f or t he most par t come r aw t o t hi s st udy, unf i t t edand unpr epar' d, and ar e l ong bef ore they at t ai n t o the Knowl edgeof t hi s Phi l osophy: And af t er t hey have spent some smal l t i me i nt hi s St udy, t hey ar e many t i mes cal l ' d of f and f orc' d t o l eavei t , i n or der t o get a Li vel i hood and Subsi st ence. And al t houghsome, f ew do i ndust r i ousl y appl y t hemsel ves t o Phi l osophy, yetf or t he sake of Gai n, t hese ver y Men ar e opi ni onat i ve, and everand anon st ar t i ng new and hi gh Poi nt s, and never f i x i n the st epsof t hei r Ancest or s. But t he Bar bar i ans keepi ng const ant l y cl oset o the same thi ng, at t ai n to a per f ect and di st i nct Knowl edge i never y par t i cul ar .

"But t he Gr eci ans, cunni ngl y cat chi ng at al l Opport uni t i es of

Gai n, make new Sects and Part i es, and by t hei r cont r ary Opi ni onswr angl i ng and quar el l i ng concer ni ng t he chi ef est Poi nt s, l eadt hei r Schol ars i nt o a Maze; and bei ng uncert ai n and doubt f ul whatt o pi t ch upon f or cer t ai n t r ut h, t hei r Mi nds ar e f l uct uat i ng andi n suspence al l t he days of t hei r Li ves, and unabl e t o gi ve acer t ai n assent unt o any t hi ng. For i f any Man wi l l but exami net he most emi nent Sect s of t he Phi l osopher s, he shal l f i nd t hemmuch di f f er i ng among t hemsel ves, and even opposi ng one anot her i nt he most wei ght y par t s of t hei r Phi l osophy. But t o ret ur n t o theChal deans, t hey hol d that t he Worl d i s et er nal , whi ch had nei t her



any cer t ai n Begi nni ng, nor shal l have any End; but al l agr ee,t hat al l t hi ngs ar e or der ' d, and t hi s beaut i f ul Fabr i ck i ssuppor t ed by a Di vi ne Provi dence, and t hat t he Mot i ons of t heHeavens are not per f orm' d by chance and of t hei r own accor d, butby a cer t ai n and det ermi nat e Wi l l and Appoi ntment of t he Gods.

"Ther ef ore f r oma l ong observat i on of t he St ar s, and an exactKnowl edge of t he mot i ons and i nf l uences of ever y one of t hem,wher ei n t hey excel al l ot her s, t hey f or t el many t hi ngs t hat ar et o come t o pass .

"They say t hat t he Fi ve St ar s whi ch some cal l Pl anet s, but t heyI nt er pr et er s, ar e most wort hy of Consi der at i on, bot h f or t hei rmot i ons and thei r r emar kabl e i nf l uences, especi al l y t hat whi cht he Gr eci ans cal l Sat ur n. The br i ght est of t hem al l , and whi chof t en port ends many and gr eat Event s, t hey cal l Sol , t he ot herFour t hey name Mars , Venus, Mercur y, and J upi t er, wi t h our ownCount r y Ast r ol oger s. They gi ve t he Name of I nt er pr et er s t o t heseSt ar s, because t hese onl y by a pecul i ar Mot i on do port end t hi ngst o come, and i nst ead of J upi t ers, do decl ar e to Men bef ore- hand

t he good- wi l l of t he Gods; wher eas t he ot her St ars ( not bei ng of t he number of t he Pl anets) have a const ant ordi nary mot i on.Fut ur e Event s ( t hey say) are poi nt ed at somet i mes by t hei rRi si ng, and somet i mes by t hei r Set t i ng, and at other t i mes byt hei r Col our , as may be exper i enc' d by t hose that wi l l di l i gent l yobserve i t ; somet i mes f oreshewi ng Hur r i canes, at other t i mes

Tempest uous Rai ns, and t hen agai n exceedi ng Dr ought s. By t hese,t hey say, are of t en port ended t he appear ance of Comets, Ecl i psesof t he Sun and Moon, Eart hquakes and al l other t he var i ousChanges and r emarkabl e ef f ect s i n the Ai r , bodi ng good and bad,not onl y t o Nat i ons i n gener al , but t o Ki ngs and Pri vat e Per sonsi n par t i cul ar . Under t he cour se of t hese Pl anet s, t hey say ar e

Thi r t y St ar s, whi ch t hey cal l Counsel l i ng Gods, hal f of whomobserve what i s done under t he Eart h, and t he other hal f t akenot i ce of t he act i ons of Men upon t he Ear t h, and what i st r ansact ed i n t he Heavens. Once every Ten Days space ( t hey say)one of t he hi ghest Or der of t hese St ar s descends t o them t hat areof t he l owest , l i ke a Messenger sent f r omt hem above; and t henagai n anot her ascends f r om t hose bel ow t o them above, and thatt hi s i s t hei r const ant nat ur al mot i on t o cont i nue f or ever . Thechi ef of t hese Gods, t hey say, are Twel ve i n number , t o each of whi ch t hey at t r i but e a Mont h, and one Si gn of t he Twel ve i n t heZodi ack.

"Thr ough t hese Twel ve Si gns t he Sun, Moon, and t he ot her Fi vePl anets r un t hei r Cour se. The Sun i n a Years t i me, and the Mooni n t he space of a Mont h. To every one of t he Pl anets t hey assi gn

t hei r own pr oper Cour ses, whi ch ar e per f orm' d var i ousl y i n l esseror shor t er t i me accor di ng as t hei r several mot i ons ar e qui cker orsl ower . These St ar s, t hey say, have a gr eat i nf l uence both as t ogood and bad i n Mens Nat i vi t i es; and f r omt he consi der at i on of t hei r several Natur es, may be f oreknown what wi l l bef al Menaf t er war ds. As t hey f oret ol d t hi ngs t o come t o other Ki ngsf ormer l y, so they di d t o Al exander who conquer ' d Dari us, and t ohi s Successor s Ant i gonus and Sel eucus Ni cat or; and accor di ngl yt hi ngs f el l out as t hey decl ar ' d; whi ch we shal l r el at epar t i cul ar l y her eaf t er i n a more conveni ent t i me. They t el l



l i kewi se pr i vat e Men t hei r For t unes so cer t ai nl y, t hat t hose whohave f ound t he thi ng t r ue by Exper i ence, have est eem' d i t aMi r acl e, and above t he r each of man t o perf orm. Out of t he Ci r cl eof t he Zodi ack they descr i be Four and Twent y St ars, Twel vet owards t he Nor t h Pol e, and as many t o t he South.

"Those whi ch we see, t hey assi gn to t he l i vi ng; and the ot hert hat do not appear , t hey concei ve ar e Const el l at i ons f or t heDead; and t hey ter m t hem J udges of al l t hi ngs. The Moon, t heysay, i s i n the l owest Or b; and bei ng t her ef ore next t o t he Ear t h( because she i s so smal l ) , she f i ni shes her Cour se i n a l i t t l et i me, not t hr ough t he swi f t ness of her Mot i on, but t he short nessof her Sphear . I n t hat whi ch t hey af f i r m ( t hat she has but abor r ow' d l i ght , and t hat when she i s ecl i ps' d, i t ' s caus' d by t hei nt er posi t i on of t he shadow of t he Ear t h) t hey agr ee wi t h theGr eci ans.

"Thei r Rul es and Not i ons concer ni ng t he Ecl i pses of t he Sun ar ebut weak and mean, whi ch t hey dare not posi t i vel y f oretel , norf i x a cer t ai n t i me f or t hem. They have l i kewi se Opi ni ons

concer ni ng t he Ear t h pecul i ar t o t hemsel ves, af f i r mi ng i t t or esembl e a Boat , and t o be hol l ow, t o pr ove whi ch, and ot hert hi ngs r el at i ng t o t he f r ame of t he Worl d, t hey abound i nAr gument s; but t o gi ve a part i cul ar Account of ' em, we concei vewoul d be a t hi ng f orei gn to our Hi st ory. But t hi s any Man may

j ust l y and t r ul y say, That t he Chal deans f ar exceed al l ot her Meni n t he Knowl edge of Ast r ol ogy, and have st udy' d i t most of anyot her Art or Sci ence: But t he number of years dur i ng whi ch t heChal deans say, t hose of t hei r Prof essi on have gi ven themsel ves t ot he st udy of t hi s nat ur al Phi l osophy, i s i ncredi bl e; f or whenAl exander was i n Asi a, t hey reckon' d up Four Hundred and Sevent y

Thousand Years si nce t hey f i r st began t o obser ve t he Mot i ons of t he St ar s. "

Let us now suppl ement t hi s est i mat e of Babyl oni an i nf l uence wi t hanother est i mate wr i t t en i n our own day, and quot ed by one of t hemost r ecent hi st ori ans of Babyl oni a and Assyr i a. [ 24] The est i matei n quest i on i s t hat of Canon Rawl i nson i n hi s Gr eat Or i ent alMonarchi es. [ 25] Of Babyl oni a he says:

"Hers was apparent l y t he geni us whi ch excogi t ated an al phabet ;worked out t he si mpl er pr obl ems of ar i t hmet i c; i nvent edi mpl ement s f or measur i ng the l apse of t i me; concei ved the i dea of r ai si ng enor mous st r uct ur es wi t h t he poor est of al l mat er i al s,cl ay; di scover ed t he ar t of pol i shi ng, bor i ng, and engr avi nggems; r epr oduced wi t h t r uthf ul ness t he out l i nes of human and

ani mal f or ms; at t ai ned t o hi gh per f ect i on i n t ext i l e f abr i cs;st udi ed wi t h success t he mot i ons of t he heavenl y bodi es;concei ved of gr ammar as a sci ence; el aborated a syst emof l aw;saw t he val ue of an exact chr onol ogy- - i n al most every branch of sci ence made a begi nni ng, t hus r enderi ng i t comparat i vel y easyf or ot her nat i ons t o pr oceed wi t h t he super st r uct ur e. . . . I t wasf r om t he East , not f r om Egypt , t hat Gr eece der i ved herar chi t ect ur e, her scul pt ur e, her sci ence, her phi l osophy, hermat hemat i cal knowl edge- - i n a wor d, her i nt el l ect ual l i f e. AndBabyl on was t he sour ce t o whi ch t he ent i r e st r eam of East ern



ci vi l i zat i on may be t r aced. I t i s scar cel y t oo much t o say t hat ,but f or Babyl on, r eal ci vi l i zat i on mi ght not yet have dawned upont he ear t h. "

Consi der i ng t hat a per i od of al most t wo thousand years separat est he t i mes of wr i t i ng of t hese t wo est i mat es, t he est i mat est hemsel ves are si ngul ar l y i n uni son. They show t hat t he gr eat estof Or i ent al nat i ons has not suf f er ed i n r eput at i on at t he handsof post er i t y. I t i s i ndeed al most i mpossi bl e t o cont empl at e t hemonument s of Babyl oni an and Assyr i an ci vi l i zat i on t hat ar e nowpreser ved i n the European and Amer i can museums wi t hout becomi ngent husi ast i c. That cer t ai nl y was a wonder f ul ci vi l i zat i on whi chhas l ef t us t he tabl et s on whi ch ar e i nscr i bed t he l aws of aKhamurabi on t he one hand, and the art t r easur es of t he pal ace of an Asshur bani pal on t he other . Yet a candi d consi der at i on of t hesci ent i f i c at t ai nment s of t he Babyl oni ans and Assyri ans canscar cel y ar ouse us t o a l i ke ent husi asm. I n consi der i ng t hesubj ect we have seen t hat , so f ar as pur e sci ence i s concerned,t he ef f or t s of t he Babyl oni ans and Assyri ans chi ef l y cent r ed

about t he subj ect s of ast r ol ogy and magi c. Wi t h the recor ds of t hei r ghost - haunt ed sci ence f r esh i n mi nd, one mi ght be f orgi venf or a moment ary desi r e t o t ake i ssue wi t h Canon Rawl i nson' swords. We ar e assur ed t hat t he sci ent i f i c at t ai nment s of Eur opeare al most sol el y t o be credi t ed t o Babyl oni a and not t o Egypt ,but we shoul d not f orget t hat Pl at o, t he gr eat est of t he Gr eekt hi nker s, went t o Egypt and not t o Babyl oni a to pur sue hi sst udi es when he wi shed t o penet r ate t he secr ets of Or i ent alsci ence and phi l osophy. Cl ear l y, t hen, cl assi cal Gr eece di d notconsi der Babyl oni a as havi ng a monopol y of sci ent i f i c knowl edge,and we of t o- day, when we at t empt t o wei gh t he new evi dence t hathas come to us i n r ecent generat i ons wi t h t he Babyl oni an r ecor dst hemsel ves, f i nd t hat some, at l east , of t he her i t ages f or whi chBabyl oni a has been pr ai sed are of more t han doubt f ul val ue.Babyl oni a, f or exampl e, gave us our seven- day week and our syst emof comput i ng by t wel ves. But surel y t he wor l d coul d have got onas wel l wi t hout t hat magi c number seven; and af t er some hundredsof gener at i ons we ar e comi ng to f eel t hat t he deci mal syst em of t he Egypt i ans has advant ages over t he duodeci mal syst emof t heBabyl oni ans. Agai n, t he Babyl oni ans di d not i nvent t he al phabet ;t hey di d not even accept i t when al l t he r est of t he worl d hadr ecogni zed i t s val ue. I n gr ammar and ar i t hmet i c, as wi t hast r onomy, t hey seemed not t o have advanced gr eat l y, i f at al l ,upon t he Egypt i ans. One f i el d i n whi ch t hey st and out i nst ar t l i ng pr e- emi nence i s the f i el d of ast r ol ogy; but t hi s, i nt he est i mate of modern t hought , i s t he ver y negat i on of sci ence.Babyl oni a i mpr essed her supers t i t i ons on t he West ern wor l d, and

when we consi der t he bal ef ul i nf l uence of t hese super st i t i ons, wemay al most quest i on whet her we mi ght not r ever se CanonRawl i nson' s est i mate and say t hat perhaps but f or Babyl oni a r ealci vi l i zat i on, based on t he appl i cat i on of t r ue sci ence, mi ghthave dawned upon t he eart h a scor e of cent ur i es bef ore i t di d.

Yet , af t er al l , perhaps t hi s est i mat e i s unj ust . Soci et y, l i ke ani ndi vi dual organi sm, must cr eep bef ore i t can wal k, and perhapst he Babyl oni an exper i ment s i n ast r ol ogy and magi c, whi ch Eur opeanci vi l i zat i on was dest i ned to copy f or some t hr ee or f our t housandyear s, must have been made a par t of t he necessar y evol ut i on of



our r ace i n one pl ace or i n another. That t hought , however , neednot bl i nd us t o t he essent i al f act , whi ch t he hi st or i an of sci ence must needs admi t , t hat f or t he Babyl oni an, despi t e hi sboast ed cul t ur e, sci ence spel l ed super st i t i on.

I V. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE ALPHABET

Bef or e we turn speci f i cal l y to the new wor l d of t he west , i tr emai ns t o t ake not e of what may perhaps be r egarded as t he verygr eat est achi evement of anci ent sci ence. Thi s was t he anal ysi s of speech sounds, and t he resul t i ng devel opment of a syst emof al phabet i cal wr i t i ng. To compr ehend t he ser i es of sci ent i f i ci nduct i ons whi ch l ed to t hi s r esul t , we must go back i ni magi nat i on and t r ace br i ef l y t he devel opment of t he methods of r ecor di ng t hought by means of gr aphi c symbol s. I n ot her words, wemust t r ace t he evol ut i on of t he ar t of wr i t i ng. I n doi ng so wecannot hol d t o nat i onal l i nes as we have done i n t he precedi ngt wo chapt er s, t hough t he ef f or t s of t he two gr eat sci ent i f i c

nat i ons j ust consi der ed wi l l ent er pr omi nent l y i nt o the st or y.

The f ami l i ar Gr eek l egend assures us t hat a Phoeni ci an namedKadmus was t he f i r st t o br i ng a knowl edge of l et t er s i nt o Eur ope.An el abor at i on of t he st ory, cur r ent t hr oughout cl assi cal t i mes,of f er ed t he f ur t her expl anat i on t hat t he Phoeni ci ans had i n t ur nacqui r ed t he ar t of wr i t i ng f r om t he Egypt i ans or Babyl oni ans.Knowl edge as t o t he t r ue or i gi n and devel opment of t he ar t of wr i t i ng di d not extend i n ant i qui t y beyond such vagar i es ast hese. Ni net eent h- cent ur y studi es gave t he f i r st r eal cl ews t o anunder st andi ng of t he subj ect . These st udi es t ended t oaut hent i cate the essent i al f act on whi ch the l egend of Kadmus wasf ounded; t o t he extent , at l east , of maki ng i t pr obabl e t hat t hel at er Gr eci an al phabet was i nt r oduced f r omPhoeni ci a- - t hough not ,of cour se, by any i ndi vi dual named Kadmus, t he l at t er bei ng,i ndeed, a name of pur el y Gr eek or i gi n. Fur t her st udi es of t hepast gener at i on tended t o cor r obor at e the anci ent bel i ef as t ot he or i gi nal sour ce of t he Phoeni ci an al phabet , but di vi dedschol ars bet ween t wo opi ni ons: t he one cont endi ng t hat t heEgypt i an hi erogl yphi cs were the sour ce upon whi ch the Phoeni ci ansdr ew; and the ot her cont endi ng wi t h equal f ervor t hat t heBabyl oni an wedge charact er must be conceded t hat honor .

But , as has of t en happened i n other f i el ds af t er year s of acr i moni ous cont r oversy, a new di scover y or t wo may suf f i ce t oshow t hat nei t her cont est ant was r i ght . Af t er t he Egypt ol ogi st sof t he school of De Rouge[ 1] t hought t hey had demonst r ated t hat

t he f ami l i ar symbol s of t he Phoeni ci an al phabet had been copi edf r om t hat modi f i ed f or m of Egypt i an hi er ogl yphi cs known as t hehi er at i c wr i t i ng, t he Assyri ol ogi st s came f orwar d t o pr ove t hatcer t ai n char act er s of t he Babyl oni an syl l abary al so show al i keness t o t he al phabet i cal char act er s t hat seemi ngl y coul d notbe due to chance. And t hen, when a set t l ement of t he di sput eseemed al most hopel ess, i t was shown through t he Egypt i anexcavat i ons t hat charact ers even more cl osel y r esembl i ng t hose i ndi sput e had been i n use al l about t he shores of t heMedi t er r anean, qui t e i ndependent l y of ei t her Egypt i an or Assyri an



wr i t i ngs, f r om per i ods so anci ent as to be vi r t ual l y pr ehi st or i c.

Coupl ed wi t h t hi s di sconcer t i ng di scover y ar e t he r evel at i onsbr ought t o l i ght by the excavat i ons at t he si t es of Knossos andot her l ong- bur i ed ci t i es of t he i sl and of Cr et e. [ 2] Theseexcavat i ons, whi ch ar e st i l l i n pr ogr ess, show t hat t he ar t of wr i t i ng was known and pr act i sed i ndependent l y i n Cr ete bef oret hat cat acl ysmi c over t hr ow of t he ear l y Gr eek ci vi l i zat i on whi charchaeol ogi st s are accust omed to ascr i be to t he hypothet i cali nvasi on of t he Dor i ans. The si gni f i cance of t hi s i s t hat t he ar tof wr i t i ng was known i n Eur ope l ong bef ore the advent of t hemythi cal Kadmus. But si nce the ear l y Cr et an scri pt s are not t o bei dent i f i ed wi t h t he scri pt s used i n Gr eece i n hi st or i cal t i mes,wher eas t he l at t er ar e undoubt edl y of l i neal descent f r om t hePhoeni ci an al phabet , t he val i di t y of t he Kadmus l egend, i n amodi f i ed f orm, must st i l l be admi t t ed.

As has j ust been suggest ed, t he new knowl edge, part i cul arl y thatwhi ch r el at ed t o the gr eat ant i qui t y of char act er s si mi l ar t o thePhoeni ci an al phabet i cal si gns, i s somewhat di sconcer t i ng. I t s

gener al t r end, however , i s qui t e i n t he same di r ect i on wi t h mostof t he new ar chaeol ogi cal knowl edge of r ecent decades- - - t hat i st o say, i t t ends t o emphasi ze t he i dea t hat human ci vi l i zat i on i nmost of i t s i mpor t ant el abor at i ons i s vast l y ol der t han hashi t her t o been supposed. I t may be added, however , t hat nodef i ni t e cl ews ar e as yet avai l abl e t hat enabl e us t o f i x even anappr oxi mat e dat e f or t he ori gi n of t he Phoeni ci an al phabet . Thesi gns, t o whi ch ref erence has been made, may wel l have been i nexi st ence f or t housands of year s, ut i l i zed mer el y as pr oper t ymar ks, symbol s f or count i ng and t he l i ke, bef ore t he i dea of set t i ng t hem asi de as phonet i c symbol s was ever concei ved.Nothi ng i s more cer t ai n, i n t he j udgment of t he pr esent - dayi nvest i gat or, t han t hat man l ear ned t o wr i t e by sl ow and pai nf ulst ages. I t i s pr obabl e t hat t he concept i on of such an anal ysi s of speech sounds as woul d make t he i dea of an al phabet possi bl e cameat a ver y l at e st age of soci al evol ut i on, and as t he cul mi nat i ngachi evement of a l ong ser i es of i mpr ovement s i n t he ar t of wr i t i ng. The pr eci se st eps t hat mar ked t hi s pat h of i nt el l ect ualdevel opment can f or t he most par t be known onl y by i nf erence; yeti t i s probabl e that t he mai n chapt er s of t he st ory may ber epr oduced wi t h essent i al accur acy.

FI RST STEPS

For t he ver y f i r st chapt ers of t he story we must go back i ni magi nat i on t o t he pr ehi st or i c per i od. Even bar bar i c man f eel s

t he need of sel f - expr essi on, and st r i ves t o make hi s i deasmani f est t o other men by pi ct ori al si gns. The cave- dwel l er sscr atched pi ct ures of men and ani mal s on t he sur f ace of ar ei ndeer horn or mammot h tusk as mementos of hi s pr owess. TheAmeri can I ndi an does essent i al l y the same t hi ng t o- day, maki ngpi ct ur es t hat cr udel y record hi s successes i n war and the chase.

The Nor t hern I ndi an had got no f ar t her t han t hi s when t he whi t eman di scovered Amer i ca; but t he Azt ecs of t he Southwest and theMaya peopl e of Yucatan had carr i ed t hei r pi ct ur e- maki ng t o amuch hi gher st ate of el aborat i on. [ 3] They had devel oped syst ems



of pi ct ogr aphs or hi er ogl yphi cs t hat woul d doubt l ess i n t hecour se of gener at i ons have been el aborat ed i nt o al phabet i calsystems, had not t he Eur opeans cut of f t he ci vi l i zat i on of whi cht hey were t he hi ghest exponents.

What t he Azt ec and Maya were st r i vi ng t owards i n t he si xt eent hcent ur y A. D. , var i ous Or i ent al nat i ons had at t ai ned at l east f i veor si x thousand year s ear l i er . I n Egypt at t he t i me of t hepyr ami d- bui l ders, and i n Babyl oni a at t he same epoch, t he peopl ehad devel oped syst ems of wr i t i ng t hat enabl ed t hemnot merel y t opr esent a l i mi t ed r ange of i deas pi ct or i al l y, but t o expr ess i nf ul l el aborat i on and wi t h f i ner shades of meani ng al l t he i deast hat per t ai n t o hi ghl y cul t ur ed exi st ence. The man of t hat t i memade recor ds of mi l i t ar y achi evement s, r ecor ded t he t r ansact i onsof ever y- day busi ness l i f e, and gave expr essi on t o hi s moral andspi r i t ual aspi r at i ons i n a way st r angel y compar abl e to t he mannerof our own t i me. He had per f ected hi ghl y el aborate syst ems of wri t i ng.

EGYPTI AN WRI TI NG

Of t he two anci ent systems of wr i t i ng j ust r ef er r ed t o as bei ngi n vogue at t he so- cal l ed dawni ngs of hi st ory, t he morepi ct ur esque and suggest i ve was t he hi er ogl yphi c syst em of t heEgypt i ans. Thi s i s a cur i ousl y congl omer at e system of wr i t i ng,made up i n part of symbol s r emi ni scent of t he cr udest st ages of pi ct ur e- wr i t i ng, i n par t of symbol s havi ng t he phonet i c val ue of syl l abl es, and i n par t of t r ue al phabet i cal l et t er s. I n a wor d,t he Egypt i an wr i t i ng repr esent s i n i t sel f t he el ement s of t hevar i ous st ages t hr ough whi ch t he art of wr i t i ng has devel oped. [ 4]We must concei ve that new f eat ures were f r om t i me t o t i me addedt o i t , whi l e t he ol d f eat ur es, cur i ousl y enough, wer e not gi venup.

Her e, f or exampl e, i n t he mi dst of uni nt el l i gi bl e l i nes andpot - hooks, ar e var i ous pi ct ur es t hat ar e i nst ant l y recogni zabl eas r epr esent at i ons of hawks, l i ons, i bi ses, and t he l i ke. I t canhar dl y be quest i oned that when these pi ct ur es wer e f i r st usedcal l i gr aphi cal l y they wer e meant t o repr esent t he i dea of a bi r dor ani mal . I n ot her wor ds, t he f i r st st age of pi cture- wr i t i ng di dnot go beyond the mere repr esent at i on of an eagl e by t he pi ct ur eof an eagl e. But t hi s, obvi ousl y, woul d conf i ne t he pr esent at i onof i deas wi t hi n ver y nar r ow l i mi t s. I n due cour se some i nvent i vegeni us concei ved t he t hought of symbol i zi ng a pi ct ur e. To hi m t heout l i ne of an eagl e mi ght r epr esent not mer el y an act ual bi r d,but t he t hought of st r engt h, of cour age, or of swi f t pr ogr ess.

Such a use of symbol s obvi ousl y ext ends t he r ange of ut i l i t y of anascent art of wr i t i ng. Then i n due cour se some wonderf ulpsychol ogi st - - or per haps t he j oi nt ef f ort s of many gener at i ons of psychol ogi st s- - made t he ast oundi ng di scover y t hat t he humanvoi ce, whi ch seems t o f l ow on i n an unbr oken st r eam of endl essl yvar i ed modul at i ons and i nt onat i ons, may real l y be anal yzed i nt o acomparat i vel y l i mi t ed number of component sounds- - i nt o a f ewhundr eds of syl l abl es. That wonder f ul i dea concei ved, i t was onl ya mat t er of t i me unt i l i t woul d occur t o some ot her ent er pr i si nggeni us t hat by sel ect i ng an ar bi t r ar y symbol t o r epr esent each



one of t hese el ement ary sounds i t woul d be possi bl e to make awr i t t en r ecord of t he words of human speech whi ch coul d ber epr oduced- - r ephonat ed- - by some one who had never heard t he wor dsand di d not know i n advance what t hi s wr i t t en r ecor d cont ai ned.

Thi s, of cour se, i s what every chi l d l earns t o do now i n t hepr i mer cl ass, but we may f eel assured t hat such an i dea neveroccur r ed t o any human bei ng unt i l t he pecul i ar f orms of pi ct ogr aphi c wr i t i ng j ust r ef er r ed to had been pr act i sed f or manycent ur i es. Yet , as we have sai d, some geni us of pr ehi st ori c Egyptconcei ved t he i dea and put i t i nt o pr act i cal execut i on, and t hehi er ogl yphi c wr i t i ng of whi ch t he Egypt i ans wer e i n f ul lpossessi on at t he ver y begi nni ng of what we t er m t he hi st ori calper i od made use of t hi s phonet i c syst em al ong wi t h t hei deogr aphi c system al r eady descr i bed.

So f ond were t he Egypt i ans of t hei r pi ct ori al symbol s usedi deogr aphi cal l y t hat t hey cl ung t o t hem per si st ent l y t hr oughoutt he ent i r e per i od of Egypt i an hi st ory. They used symbol s asphonet i c equi val ent s ver y f r equent l y, but t hey never l ear ned todepend upon t hemexcl usi vel y. The scri be al ways i nt er sper sed hi s

phonet i c si gns wi t h some ot her si gns i nt ended as graphi c ai ds.Af t er spel l i ng a wor d out i n f ul l , he added a pi ct ur e, somet i meseven t wo or t hr ee pi ct ur es, r epr esent at i ve of t he i ndi vi dualt hi ng, or at l east of t he t ype of t hi ng t o whi ch t he wor dbel ongs. Two or t hr ee i l l ust r at i ons wi l l make t hi s cl ear .

Thus qef t en, monkey, i s spel l ed out i n f ul l , but t he pi ct ure of amonkey i s added as a determi nat i ve; second, qenu, caval r y, af t erbei ng spel l ed, i s made unequi vocal by the i nt r oduct i on of api ct ur e of a hor se; t hi r d, t emat i , wi ngs, t hough spel l edel abor at el y, has pi ct ur es of wi ngs added; and f our t h, t at u,quadr upeds, af t er bei ng spel l ed, has a pi ct ur e of a quadr uped,and t hen t he pi ct ur e of a hi de, whi ch i s t he usual det er mi nat i veof a quadr uped, f ol l owed by t hr ee dashes t o i ndi cat e the pl ur alnumber .

I t must not be supposed, however , t hat i t was a mere whi m whi chl ed t he Egypt i ans t o the use of t hi s system of det er mi nat i ves.

There was sound r eason back of i t . I t amount ed t o no mor e t hant he expedi ent we adopt when we spel l " t o, " " t wo, " or " t oo, " i ni ndi cat i on of a si ngl e sound wi t h t hr ee di f f er ent meani ngs. TheEgypt i an l anguage abounds i n words havi ng mor e t han one meani ng,and i n wr i t i ng t hese i t i s obvi ous t hat some means of di st i nct i oni s desi r abl e. The same thi ng occur s even more f r equent l y i n theChi nese l anguage, whi ch i s monosyl l abi c. The Chi nese adopt a morecl umsy expedi ent , suppl yi ng a di f f er ent symbol f or each of t hemeani ngs of a syl l abl e; so t hat whi l e the act ual word- sounds of

t hei r speech are onl y a f ew hundr eds i n number , t he charact ers of t hei r wr i t t en l anguage mount hi gh i nt o the t housands.

BABYLONI AN WRI TI NG

Whi l e t he ci vi l i zat i on of t he Ni l e Val l ey was devel opi ng t hi sext r aor di nar y syst em of hi er ogl yphi cs, t he i nhabi t ant s of Babyl oni a were pr act i si ng t he art of wr i t i ng al ong somewhatdi f f er ent l i nes. I t i s cer t ai n t hat t hey began wi t h



pi ct ur e- maki ng, and that i n due cour se t hey advanced t o thedevel opment of t he syl l abar y; but , unl i ke t hei r Egypt i an cousi ns,t he men of Babyl oni a saw f i t t o di scar d t he ol d syst em when t heyhad perf ect ed a bet t er one. [ 5] So at a ver y ear l y day t hei rwr i t i ng- - as reveal ed to us now t hr ough the recentexcavat i ons- - had ceased t o have t hat pi ct ori al aspect whi chdi st i ngui shes t he Egypt i an scr i pt . What had or i gi nal l y beenpi ct ur es of obj ect s- - f i sh, houses, and the l i ke- - had come to ber epr esented by mere aggr egat i ons of wedge- shaped marks. As t hewr i t i ng of t he Babvl oni ans was chi ef l y i nscr i bed on sof t cl ay,t he adapt at i on of t hi s wedge- shaped mar k i n l i eu of an or di nar yl i ne was pr obabl y a mere matt er of conveni ence, si nce theshar p- cor ner ed i mpl ement used i n maki ng t he i nscr i pt i on natur al l ymade a wedge- shaped i mpressi on i n t he cl ay. That , however , i s adet ai l . The essent i al t hi ng i s t hat t he Babyl oni an had so f ul l yanal yzed t he speech- sounds t hat he f el t ent i r e conf i dence i nt hem, and havi ng sel ected a suf f i ci ent number of convent i onalchar acters - - each made up of wedge- shaped l i nes- - t o r epr esent al lt he phonet i c sounds of hi s l anguage, spel l ed t he words out i nsyl l abl es and t o some ext ent di spensed wi t h t he det ermi nat i ve

si gns whi ch, as we have seen, pl ayed so pr omi nent a part i n theEgypt i an wr i t i ng. Hi s cousi ns t he Assyri ans used habi t ual l y asyst em of wr i t i ng t he f oundat i on of whi ch was an el aborat ephonet i c syl l abar y; a system, t her ef or e, f ar r emoved f r om t he ol dcr ude pi ct ogr aph, and i n some respect s much more devel oped t hant he compl i cat ed Egypt i an met hod; yet , af t er al l , a system t hatst opped shor t of per f ect i on by t he wi de gap that separ at es t hesyl l abar y f r om t he t r ue al phabet .

A br i ef anal ysi s of speech sounds wi l l ai d us i n under st andi ngt he r eal nat ur e of t he syl l abar y. Let us t ake f or consi der at i ont he consonant al sound r epr esented by t he l et t er b. A moment ' sconsi der at i on wi l l make i t cl ear t hat t hi s sound ent er s i nt o al ar ge number of syl l abl es. Ther e ar e, f or exampl e, at l eastt went y vowel sounds i n the Engl i sh l anguage, not t o speak of cer t ai n di gr aphs; t hat i s t o say, each of t he i mpor t ant vowel shas f r om t wo to si x sounds. Each of t hese vowel sounds may ent eri nt o combi nat i on wi t h t he b sound al one to f or m t hr ee syl l abl es;as ba, ab, bal , be, eb, bel , et c. Thus t her e ar e at l east si xt yb- sound syl l abl es. But t hi s i s not t he end, f or other consonant alsounds may be associ ated i n t he syl l abl es i n such combi nat i ons asbad, bed, bar , bar k, cab, et c. As each of t he ot her t went y oddconsonant al sounds may ent er i nt o si mi l ar combi nat i ons, i t i sobvi ous t hat t her e ar e sever al hundr eds of f undament al syl l abl est o be taken i nt o account i n any syl l abi c syst em of wr i t i ng. Foreach of t hese syl l abl es a symbol must be set asi de and hel d i nr eser ve as t he r epr esent at i ve of t hat par t i cul ar sound. A per f ect

syl l abary, t hen, woul d requi r e some hundr ed or more of symbol s t or epr esent b sounds al one; and si nce t he sounds f or c, d, f , andt he r est ar e equal l y var i ed, t he ent i r e syl l abar y woul d r un i nt ot housands of char act er s, al most r i val l i ng i n compl exi t y t heChi nese syst em. But i n pr act i ce t he most per f ect syl l abar y, Suchas t hat of t he Babyl oni ans, f el l shor t of t hi s degr ee of pr eci si on t hr ough i gnori ng t he mi nor shades of sound; j ust as ourown al phabet i s cont ent t o repr esent some thi r t y vowel sounds byf i ve l et t er s, i gnor i ng t he f act t hat a, f or exampl e, has r eal l yhal f a dozen di st i nct phonet i c val ues. By such sl ur r i ng of sounds



t he syl l abar y i s r educed f ar bel ow i t s i deal l i mi t s; yet even soi t r et ai ns t hr ee or f our hundr ed char act er s.

I n poi nt of f act , such a wor k as Pr of essor Del i t zsch' s Assyr i anGr ammar[ 6] pr esent s si gns f or t hr ee hundr ed and t hi r t y- f oursyl l abl es, t oget her wi t h sundr y al t er nat i ve si gns anddet ermi nat i ves t o tax t he memory of t he woul d- be r eader of Assyr i an. Let us t ake f or exampl e a f ew of t he b sounds. I t hasbeen expl ai ned t hat t he basi s of t he Assyr i an wr i t t en char act eri s a si mpl e wedge- shaped or ar r ow- head mark. Var i ousl y repeat edand grouped, t hese marks make up t he syl l abi c char act ers.

To l earn some f our hundred such si gns as t hese was t he t ask set ,as an equi val ent of l ear ni ng t he a b c' s, t o any pr i mer cl ass i nol d Assyr i a i n t he l ong gener at i ons when t hat l and was t hecul t ur e Cent r e of t he worl d. Nor was t he t ask conf i ned t o thenat i ves of Babyl oni a and Assyri a al one. About t he f i f t eent hcent ur y B. C. , and pr obabl y f or a l ong t i me bef ore and af t er t hatper i od, t he exceedi ngl y compl ex syl l abary of t he Babyl oni ans wast he of f i ci al means of communi cat i on t hr oughout west ern Asi a and

bet ween Asi a and Egypt , as we know f r om t he chance di scovery of acol l ect i on of l et t er s bel ongi ng t o t he Egypt i an ki ng Khun- at en,preserved at Tel - el - Amarna. I n t he t i me of Ramses t he Gr eat t heBabyl oni an wr i t i ng was i n al l pr obabi l i t y consi der ed by amaj or i t y of t he most hi ghl y ci vi l i zed peopl e i n t he worl d t o bet he most per f ect scr i pt pr act i cabl e. Doubt l ess t he aver age scr i beof t he ti me di d not i n t he l east r eal i ze the wast e of ener gyi nvol ved i n hi s l abors, or ever suspect t hat t her e coul d be anybet t er way of wr i t i ng.

Yet t he anal ysi s of any one of t hese hundreds of syl l abl es i nt oi t s component phonet i c el ement s- - had any one been geni us enought o make such anal ysi s- - oul d have gi ven the key t o si mpl er andbet t er t hi ngs. But such an anal ysi s was very har d t o make, as t hesequel shows. Nor i s t he ut i l i t y of such an anal ysi ssel f - evi dent , as t he exper i ence of t he Egypt i ans proved. Thevowel sound i s so i nt i mat el y l i nked wi t h the consonant - - t hecon- sonant , i mpl yi ng t hi s i nt i mat e rel at i on i n i t s ver yname- - t hat i t seemed ext r emel y di f f i cul t t o gi ve i t i ndi vi dualr ecogni t i on. To set of f t he mer e l abi al begi nni ng of t he sound byi t sel f , and t o r ecogni ze i t as an al l - essent i al el ement of phonat i on, was t he f eat at whi ch human i nt el l i gence so l ongbal ked. The ger m of gr eat t hi ngs l ay i n t hat anal ysi s. I t was apr ocess of si mpl i f i cat i on, and al l ar t devel opment i s f r om t hecompl ex t o t he si mpl e. Unf ort unat el y, however , i t di d not seem asi mpl i f i cat i on, but r at her qui t e t he r ever se. We may wel l supposet hat t he i dea of wr est i ng f r om t he syl l abar y i t s secret of

consonants and vowel s, and gi vi ng t o each consonantal sound adi st i nct si gn, seemed a most cumber some and embar r assi ngcompl i cat i on t o t he anci ent schol ar s- - t hat i s t o say, af t er t het i me arr i ved when any one gave such an i dea expressi on. We cani magi ne t hem sayi ng: "You wi l l obl i ge us t o use f our si gnsi nst ead of one t o wr i t e such an el ement ar y syl l abl e as ' bar d, 'f or exampl e. Out upon such endl ess per pl exi t y! " Nor i s such asuggest i on pur el y gr at ui t ous, f or i t i s an hi st or i cal f act t hatt he ol d syl l abary cont i nued t o be used i n Babyl on hundreds of year s af t er t he al phabet i cal system had been i nt r oduced. [ 7]



Cust om i s ever ythi ng i n est abl i shi ng our pr ej udi ces. The J apaneset o- day rebel agai nst t he i nt r oduct i on of an al phabet , t hi nki ng i tambi guous.

Yet , i n t he end, conser vat i sm al ways yi el ds, and so i t was wi t hopposi t i on t o t he al phabet . Once t he i dea of t he consonant hadbeen f i r ml y gr asped, t he ol d syl l abary was doomed, t houghgenerat i ons of t i me mi ght be r equi r ed t o compl ete theobsequi es- - generat i ons of t i me and the i nf l uence of a new nat i on.We have now t o i nqui r e how and by whom t hi s advance was made.

THE ALPHABET ACHI EVED

We cannot bel i eve t hat any nat i on coul d have vaul t ed t o the f i nalst age of t he si mpl e al phabet i cal wr i t i ng wi t hout t r aci ng t hedevi ous and di f f i cul t way of t he pi ct ogr aph and t he syl l abar y. I ti s possi bl e, however , f or a cul t i vat ed nat i on t o bui l d upon t heshoul der s of i t s nei ghbor s, and, pr of i t i ng by t he exper i ence of ot her s, t o make sudden l eaps upward and onward. And t hi s i s

seemi ngl y what happened i n the f i nal devel opment of t he art of wr i t i ng. For whi l e t he Babyl oni ans and Assyr i ans r est ed cont entwi t h t hei r el abor at e syl l abar y, a nat i on on ei t her si de of t hem,geogr aphi cal l y speaki ng, sol ved t he pr obl em, whi ch t hey perhapsdi d not even recogni ze as a pr obl em; wr est ed f r om t hei r syl l abar yi t s secret of consonant s and vowel s, and by adopt i ng an ar bi t r arysi gn f or each consonant al sound, produced t hat most wonderf ul of human i nvent i ons, t he al phabet .

The t wo nat i ons cr edi t ed wi t h t hi s wonder f ul achi evement ar e t hePhoeni ci ans and t he Per si ans. But i t i s not usual l y conceded t hatt he t wo ar e ent i t l ed t o anythi ng l i ke equal credi t . The Per si ans,pr obabl y i n t he t i me of Cyrus t he Gr eat , used cer t ai n char act er sof t he Babyl oni an scr i pt f or t he const r uct i on of an al phabet ; butat t hi s t i me the Phoeni ci an al phabet had undoubt edl y been i n usef or some cent ur i es, and i t i s more t han pr obabl e t hat t he Per si anborr owed hi s i dea of an al phabet f r oma Phoeni ci an sour ce. Andt hat , of cour se, makes al l t he di f f er ence. Gr ant ed t he i dea of anal phabet , i t r equi r es no gr eat r each of const r uct i ve geni us t osuppl y a set of al phabet i cal char act er s; t hough even her e, i t maybe added par ent het i cal l y, a st udy of t he devel opment of al phabetswi l l show t hat manki nd has al l al ong had a char act er i st i cpr opensi t y to copy r at her t han t o i nvent .

Regar di ng the Per si an al phabet - maker , t hen, as a copyi st r at hert han a tr ue i nvent or , i t r emai ns t o turn at t ent i on t o thePhoeni ci an sour ce whence, as i s commonl y bel i eved, t he or i gi nal

al phabet whi ch became "t he mot her of al l exi st i ng al phabets" camei nt o bei ng. I t must be admi t t ed at t he out set t hat evi dence f ort he Phoeni ci an or i gi n of t hi s al phabet i s t r adi t i onal r at her t handemonst r at i ve. The Phoeni ci ans were t he gr eat t r aders of ant i qui t y; undoubt edl y they wer e l ar gel y responsi bl e f or t het r ansmi ssi on of t he al phabet f r om one par t of t he wor l d t oanother , once i t had been i nvent ed. Too much credi t cannot begi ven themf or t hi s; and as t he wor l d al ways honors hi m who makesan i dea f er t i l e r at her t han t he or i gi nat or of t he i dea, t her e canbe l i t t l e i nj ust i ce i n cont i nui ng t o speak of t he Phoeni ci ans as



t he i nvent or s of t he al phabet . But t he act ual f act s of t he casewi l l probabl y never be known. For aught we know, i t may have beensome dreamy- eyed I sr ael i t e, some Babyl oni an phi l osopher , someEgypt i an myst i c, per haps even some obscur e Cr et an, who gave t ot he hard- headed Phoeni ci an t r ader t hi s concept i on of adi smember ed syl l abl e wi t h i t s al l - essent i al , el ement al ,wonder - worki ng consonant . But i t i s f ut i l e now t o at t empt even t osurmi se on such unf athomabl e det ai l s as t hese. Suf f i ce i t t hatt he anal ysi s was made; t hat one si gn and no more was adopt ed f oreach consonant al sound of t he Semi t i c t ongue, and t hat t he ent i r ecumber some mechani sm of t he Egypt i an and Babyl oni an wr i t i ngsyst ems was render ed obsol escent . These syst ems di d not yi el d atonce, t o be sur e; al l human exper i ence woul d have been set atnaught had t hey done so. They hel d t hei r own, and much mor e t hanhel d t hei r own, f or many cent ur i es. Af t er t he Phoeni ci ans as anat i on had ceased t o have i mport ance; af t er t hei r or i gi nal scr i pthad been endl essl y modi f i ed by many al i en nat i ons; af t er t heori gi nal al phabet had made the conquest of al l ci vi l i zed Eur opeand of f ar out l yi ng por t i ons of t he Or i ent - - t he Egypt i an andBabyl oni an scr i bes cont i nued t o i ndi t e thei r mi ssi ves i n t he same

ol d pi ct ogr aphs and syl l abl es.

The i nvent i ve t hi nker must have been st r uck wi t h amazement when,af t er maki ng t he f ul l est anal ysi s of speech- sounds of whi ch hewas capabl e, he f ound hi msel f suppl i ed wi t h onl y a scor e or so of symbol s. Yet as r egards t he consonantal sounds he had exhaust edt he r esour ces of t he Semi t i c t ongue. As t o vowel s, he scar cel yconsi der ed t hem at al l . I t seemed t o hi m suf f i ci ent t o use onesymbol f or each consonant al sound. Thi s r educed t he hi t hert ocompl ex mechani sm of wr i t i ng t o so si mpl e a syst emt hat t hei nvent or must have r egar ded i t wi t h sheer del i ght . On t he ot herhand, t he conser vat i ve schol ar doubt l ess t hought i t di st i nct l yambi guous. I n t r ut h, i t must be admi t t ed t hat t he syst em wasi mper f ect . I t was a vast i mpr ovement on t he ol d syl l abar y, but i thad i t s drawbacks. Per haps i t had been made a bi t t oo si mpl e;cert ai nl y i t shoul d have had symbol s f or t he vowel sounds as wel las f or t he consonant s. Never t hel ess, t he vowel - l acki ng al phabetseems t o have t aken t he popul ar f ancy, and to t hi s day Semi t i cpeopl e have never suppl i ed i t s def i ci enci es save wi t h cer t ai ndots and poi nt s.

Peopl es usi ng t he Ar yan speech soon saw t he def ect , and t heGr eeks suppl i ed symbol s f or sever al new sounds at a very earl yday. [ 8] But t here t he mat t er r est ed, and the al phabet hasr emai ned i mperf ect . For t he purposes of t he Engl i sh l anguaget her e shoul d cert ai nl y have been added a dozen or more newchar acters. I t i s cl ear , f or exampl e, t hat , i n t he i nt er est of

expl i ci t ness, we shoul d have a separat e symbol f or t he vowelsound i n each of t he f ol l owi ng syl l abl es: bar , bay, bann, bal l ,t o ci t e a s i ngl e i l l ustr at i on.

There i s, t o be sur e, a seemi ngl y val i d r eason f or not ext endi ngour al phabet , i n t he f act t hat i n mul t i pl yi ng syl l abl es i t woul dbe di f f i cul t t o sel ect char act er s at once easy t o make andunambi guous. Moreover , t he conservat i ves mi ght poi nt out , wi t ht el l i ng ef f ect , t hat t he pr esent al phabet has pr oved admi r abl yef f ect i ve f or about t hr ee thousand year s. Yet t he f act t hat our



di ct i onar i es suppl y di acri t i cal mar ks f or some t hi r t y vowel ssounds t o i ndi cat e t he pr onunci at i on of t he words of ourevery- day speech, shows how we l et memor y and guess i ng do thework t hat mi ght r easonabl y be demanded of a real l y compl et eal phabet . But , what ever i t s def ect s, t he exi st i ng al phabet i s amarvel l ous pi ece of mechani sm, t he resul t of t housands of yearsof i nt el l ectual ef f ort . I t i s , per haps wi t hout except i on, t hemost st upendous i nvent i on of t he human i nt el l ect wi t hi nhi st ori cal t i mes- - an achi evement t aki ng r ank wi t h such gr eatpr ehi st or i c di scover i es as t he use of ar t i cul at e speech, t hemaki ng of a f i r e, and t he i nvent i on of st one i mpl ement s, of t hewheel and axl e, and of pi ct ur e- wr i t i ng. I t made possi bl e f or t hef i r st t i me that educat i on of t he masses upon whi ch al l l at erpr ogr ess of ci vi l i zat i on was so l ar gel y t o depend.

V. THE BEGI NNI NGS OF GREEK SCI ENCE

Her odotus, t he Fat her of Hi st ory, t el l s us t hat once upon a

t i me- - whi ch t i me, as t he modern comput at or shows us, was aboutt he year 590 B. C. - - a war had r i sen bet ween t he Lydi ans and t heMedes and cont i nued f i ve years . " I n t hese years t he Medes of t endi scomf i t ed t he Lydi ans and t he Lydi ans of t en di scomf i t ed t heMedes ( and among ot her t hi ngs t hey f ought a bat t l e by ni ght ) ; andyet t hey st i l l car r i ed on t he war wi t h equal l y bal ancedf or t i t ude. I n t he si xt h year a bat t l e t ook pl ace i n whi ch i thappened, when t he f i ght had begun, t hat suddenl y t he day becameni ght . And t hi s change of t he day Thal es, t he Mi l esi an, hadf or et ol d t o t he I oni ans, l ayi ng down as a l i mi t t hi s ver y year i nwhi ch t he change t ook pl ace. The Lydi ans, however , and t he Medes,when they saw t hat i t had become ni ght i nst ead of day, ceasedf r omt hei r f i ght i ng and were much more eager , bot h of t hem, t hatpeace shoul d be made between t hem. "

Thi s memor abl e i nci dent occur r ed whi l e Al yat t us, f at her of Cr oesus, was ki ng of t he Lydi ans. The modern ast r onomer ,r eckoni ng backwar d, est i mat es t hi s ecl i pse as occur r i ng pr obabl yMay 25t h, 585 B. C. The date i s i mport ant as f i xi ng a mi l e- st onei n t he chr onol ogy of anci ent hi st ory, but i t i s doubl y memor abl ebecause i t i s t he f i r st r ecor ded i nst ance of a pr edi ct ed ecl i pse.Her odotus, who tel l s t he st ory, was not born unt i l about onehundr ed year s af t er t he i nci dent occur r ed, but t i me had notdi mmed t he f ame of t he man who had perf or med t he necr omant i c f eatof pr ophecy. Thal es, t he Mi l esi an, t hanks i n par t at l east t ot hi s accompl i shment , had been known i n l i f e as f i r st on t he l i stof t he Seven Wi se Men of Gr eece, and had passed i nto hi st ory as

t he f at her of Gr eek phi l osophy. We may add t hat he had even f oundwi der popul ar f ame t hrough bei ng named by Hi ppol yt us, and t hen byFat her aesop, as t he phi l osopher who, i nt ent on st udyi ng t heheavens, f el l i nt o a wel l ; "wher eupon, " says Hi ppol ytus, "amai d- servant named Thr at t a l aughed at hi m and sai d, ' I n hi ssear ch f or t hi ngs i n t he sky he does not see what i s at hi sf eet . ' "

Such ci t at i ons as these ser ve t o br i ng vi vi dl y to mi nd t he f actt hat we are ent eri ng a new epoch of t hought . Hi t her t o our st udi es



have been i mper sonal . Among Egypt i ans and Babyl oni ans al i ke wehave had t o deal wi t h cl asses of sci ent i f i c r ecor ds, but we havescar cel y come acr oss a si ngl e name. Now, however , we shal l begi nt o f i nd r ecor ds of t he wor k of i ndi vi dual i nvest i gat or s. I ngener al , f r omnow on, we shal l be abl e to t r ace each gr eat i dea,i f not t o i t s ori gi nat or , at l east t o some one man of geni us whowas pr omi nent i n br i ngi ng i t bef or e t he wor l d. The f i r st of t hesevi t al i zer s of t hought , who st ands out at t he begi nni ngs of Gr eekhi st or y, i s t hi s same Thal es, of Mi l et us. Hi s i s not a ver yshar pl y def i ned personal i t y as we l ook back upon i t , and we canby no means be cer t ai n t hat al l t he di scover i es whi ch ar eascri bed t o hi m are speci f i cal l y hi s. Of hi s i ndi vi dual i t y as aman we know ver y l i t t l e. I t i s not even qui t e cer t ai n as t o wherehe was bor n; Mi l et us i s usual l y accept ed as hi s bi r t hpl ace, butone t r adi t i on makes hi m by bi r t h a Pheni ci an. I t i s not at al l i nquest i on, however , t hat by bl ood he was at l east i n part anI oni an Gr eek. I t wi l l be r ecal l ed t hat i n t he sevent h cent ur yB. C. , when Thal es was born- - and f or a l ong t i me t her eaf t er - - t heeast ern shores of t he aegean Sea were qui t e as pr omi nent l y t hecent r e of Gr eek i nf l uence as was t he peni nsul a of Gr eece i t sel f .

Not merel y Thal es, but hi s f ol l owers and di sci pl es, Anaxi manderand Anaxi menes, were born t her e. So al so was Herodot as, t heFat her of Hi st or y, not t o ext end t he l i st . Ther e i s not hi nganomal ous, t hen, i n the f act t hat Thal es, t he f at her of Gr eekt hought , was bor n and passed hi s l i f e on soi l t hat was notgeogr aphi cal l y a par t of Gr eece; but t he f act has an i mport antsi gni f i cance of anot her ki nd. Thanks t o hi s envi r onment , Thal eswas necessar i l y br ought more or l ess i n cont act wi t h Or i ent ali deas. There was cl ose commerci al cont act between the l and of hi snat i vi t y and t he gr eat Babyl oni an capi t al of f t o the east , asal so wi t h Egypt . Doubt l ess t hi s associ at i on was of i nf l uence i nshapi ng t he devel opment of Thal es' s mi nd. I ndeed, i t was anaccept ed tr adi t i on throughout cl assi cal t i mes t hat t he Mi l esi anphi l osopher had t r avel l ed i n Egypt , and had t her e gai ned at l eastt he r udi ment s of hi s knowl edge of geometr y. I n t he f ul l est sense,t hen, Thal es may be regar ded as r epr esent i ng a l i nk i n t he chai nof t hought connect i ng t he l ear ni ng of t he ol d Or i ent wi t h thenascent schol ar shi p of t he new Occi dent . Occupyi ng t hi s posi t i on,i t i s f i t t i ng t hat t he per sonal i t y of Thal es shoul d par t akesomewhat of myst ery; t hat t he scene may not be shi f t ed t oosuddenl y f r om t he vague, i mper sonal East t o t he i ndi vi dual i sm of Eur ope.

Al l of t hi s, however , must not be taken as cast i ng any doubt upont he exi st ence of Thal es as a r eal per son. Even t he dat es of hi sl i f e- - 640 t o 546 B. C. - - may be accept ed as at l east appr oxi mat el yt r ust wor t hy; and t he speci f i c di scover i es ascri bed t o hi m

i l l ust r at e equal l y wel l t he stage of devel opment of Gr eekt hought , whet her Thal es hi msel f or one of hi s i mmedi at e di sci pl eswere t he di scoverer . We have al r eady ment i oned t he f eat whi ch wassai d t o have gi ven Thal es hi s great r eput at i on. That Thal es wasuni ver sal l y cr edi t ed wi t h havi ng pr edi ct ed t he f amous ecl i pse i sbeyond quest i on. That he act ual l y di d pr edi ct i t i n any pr eci sesense of t he word i s open t o doubt . At al l event s, hi s pr edi ct i onwas not based upon any such pr eci se knowl edge as t hat of t hemodern ast r onomer. There i s, i ndeed, onl y one way i n whi ch hecoul d have f oret ol d t he ecl i pse, and t hat i s t hr ough knowl edge of



t he r egul ar successi on of pr ecedi ng ecl i pses. But t hat knowl edgei mpl i es access on t he par t of some one to l ong seri es of r ecor dsof pr act i cal observat i ons of t he heavens. Such r ecords, as wehave seen, exi st ed i n Egypt and even more not abl y i n Babyl oni a.

That t hese r ecor ds were t he sour ce of t he i nf or mat i on whi chest abl i shed t he reput at i on of Thal es i s an unavoi dabl e i nf er ence.I n ot her wor ds, t he magi cal pr evi si on of t he f at her of Gr eekt hought was but a r ef l ex of Or i ent al wi sdom. Never t hel ess, i tsuf f i ced t o est abl i sh Thal es as t he f at her of Gr eek ast r onomy. I npoi nt of f act , hi s act ual ast r onomi cal at t ai nment s woul d appeart o have been meagr e enough. Ther e i s not hi ng t o show t hat hegai ned an i nkl i ng of t he t r ue char act er of t he sol ar system. Hedi d not even r ecogni ze t he spher i ci t y of t he ear t h, but hel d,sti l l f ol l owi ng t he Ori ent al aut hori t i es, t hat t he wor l d i s af l at di sk. Even hi s f amous cosmogoni c guess, accor di ng t o whi chwat er i s t he essence of al l t hi ngs and t he pr i mordi al el ement outof whi ch t he eart h was devel oped, i s but an el aborat i on of t heBabyl oni an concept i on.

When we turn to t he ot her f i el d of t hought wi t h whi ch t he name of

Thal es i s associ at ed- - namel y, geomet r y- - we agai n f i nd evi dence of t he Or i ent al i nf l uence. The sci ence of geometr y, Her odotusassur es us, was i nvent ed i n Egypt . I t was t her e an emi nent l ypr act i cal sci ence, bei ng appl i ed, as t he name l i t er al l y suggest s,t o the measur ement of t he ear t h' s sur f ace. Her odotus t el l s ust hat t he Egypt i ans wer e obl i ged t o cul t i vat e t he sci ence becauset he per i odi cal i nundat i ons washed away the boundary- l i nes betweent hei r f ar ms. The pr i mi t i ve geomet er, t hen, was a sur veyor . TheEgypt i an r ecor ds, as now r eveal ed t o us, show t hat t he sci encehad not been car r i ed f ar i n t he l and of i t s bi r t h. The Egypt i angeometer was abl e to measure i r r egul ar pi eces of l and onl yappr oxi mat el y. He never f ul l y gr asped t he i dea of t heper pendi cul ar as t he t r ue i ndex of measurement f or t he t r i angl e,but based hi s cal cul at i ons upon measurement s of t he actual si deof t hat f i gur e. Never t hel ess, he had l ear ned t o squar e t he ci r cl ewi t h a cl ose appr oxi mat i on t o t he t r ut h, and, i n gener al , hi smeasur ement suf f i ced f or al l hi s pract i cal needs. J ust how muchof t he geomet r i cal knowl edge whi ch added t o t he f ame of Thal eswas bor r owed di r ect l y f r om t he Egypt i ans, and how much heact ual l y cr eat ed we cannot be sur e. Nor i s t he quest i on r ai sed i ndi spar agement of hi s geni us. Recept i vi t y i s t he f i r stpr er equi si t e to pr ogr essi ve t hi nki ng, and that Thal es r eached outaf t er and i mbi bed port i ons of Or i ent al wi sdomar gues i n i t sel f f or t he cr eat i ve charact er of hi s geni us. Whet her borr ower of ori gi nat or , however , Thal es i s cr edi t ed wi t h t he expr essi on of t he f ol l owi ng geomet r i cal t r ut hs:

1. That t he ci r cl e i s bi sect ed by i t s di amet er .

2. That t he angl es at t he base of an i soscel es t r i angl e ar eequal .

3. That when t wo st r ai ght l i nes cut each other t he ver t i calopposi t e angl es ar e equal .

4. That t he angl e i n a semi ci r cl e i s a ri ght angl e.



5. That one si de and one acut e angl e of a r i ght - angl e t r i angl edet er mi ne the other si des of t he t r i angl e.

I t was by the appl i cat i on of t he l ast of t hese pr i nci pl es t hat Thal es i s sai d t o have perf or med t he r eal l y notabl e f eat of measur i ng the di st ance of a shi p f r omt he shore, hi s met hod bei ngpr eci sel y t he same i n pr i nci pl e as t hat by whi ch t he guns aresi ght ed on a modern manof - war . Anot her pr act i cal demonst r at i onwhi ch Thal es was cr edi t ed wi t h maki ng, and to whi ch al so hi sgeomet r i cal st udi es l ed hi m, was t he measurement of any t al lobj ect , such as a pyrami d or bui l di ng or t r ee, by means of i t sshadow. The met hod, t hough si mpl e enough, was i ngeni ous. I tconsi st ed merel y i n observi ng t he moment of t he day when aper pendi cul ar st i ck cast s a shadow equal t o i t s own l engt h.Obvi ousl y t he t r ee or monument woul d al so cast a shadow equal t oi t s own hei ght at t he same moment . I t r emai ns t hen but t o measur et he l engt h of t hi s shadow t o det er mi ne the hei ght of t he obj ect .Such f eat s as t hi s evi dence t he pr act i cal i t y of t he geni us of

Thal es. They suggest t hat Gr eek sc i ence, gui ded by i magi nat i on,was st ar t i ng on t he hi gh- r oad of observat i on. We ar e t ol d t hat

Thal es concei ved f or t he f i r st t i me t he geomet r y of l i nes, andt hat t hi s, i ndeed, const i t ut ed hi s r eal advance upon t heEgypt i ans. We are t ol d al so that he concei ved t he ecl i pse of t hesun as a pur el y natural phenomenon, and that herei n l ay hi sadvance upon t he Chal dean poi nt of vi ew. But i f t hi s be t r ue

Thal es was great l y i n advance of hi s t i me, f or i t wi l l ber ecal l ed t hat f ul l y t wo hundr ed year s l at er t he Gr eeks underNi ci as bef ore Syr acuse were so di sconcert ed by t he appearance of an ecl i pse, whi ch was i nt erpr eted as a di r ect omen and warni ng,t hat Ni ci as t hr ew away t he l ast opport uni t y t o rescue hi s army.

Thucydi des, i t i s t r ue, i n r ecor di ng t hi s f act speaksdi spar agi ngl y of t he super st i t i ous bent of t he mi nd of Ni ci as,but Thucydi des al so was a man f ar i n advance of hi s t i me.

Al l t hat we know of t he psychol ogy of Thal es i s summed up i n t hef amous maxi m, "Know t hysel f , " a maxi m whi ch, t aken i n connect i onwi t h t he pr oven recept i vi t y of t he phi l osopher ' s mi nd, suggest st o us a marvel l ousl y rounded per sonal i t y.

The di sci pl es or successor s of Thal es, Anaxi mander andAnaxi menes, were cr edi t ed wi t h advanci ng knowl edge t hrough t hei nvent i on or i nt r oduct i on of t he sundi al . We may be sur e,however , t hat t he gnomon, whi ch i s t he rudi ment ary sundi al , hadbeen known and used f r om r emot e per i ods i n t he Or i ent , and t hemost t hat i s probabl e i s t hat Anaxi mander may have el aborat edsome speci al desi gn, possi bl y t he bowl - shaped sundi al , t hr oughwhi ch t he shadow of t he gnomon woul d i ndi cat e t he t i me. The same

phi l osopher i s sai d to have made the f i r st sket ch of ageogr aphi cal map, but t hi s agai n i s a st atement whi ch modernr esear ches have shown to be f al l aci ous, si nce a Babyl oni anat t empt at depi ct i ng t he geogr aphy of t he worl d i s st i l lpreserved to us on a cl ay tabl et . Anaxi mander may, however , havebeen t he f i r st Gr eek t o make an at t empt of t hi s ki nd. Here agai nt he i nf l uence of Babyl oni an sci ence upon t he germi nat i ng West ernt hought i s suggest ed.

I t i s sai d that Anaxi mander depar t ed f r om Thal es' s concept i on of



t he eart h, and, i t may be added, f r omt he Babyl oni an concept i onal so, i n t hat he concei ved i t as a cyl i nder , or r at her as at r uncat ed cone, t he upper end of whi ch i s t he habi t abl e port i on.

Thi s concept i on i s perhaps t he f i r st of t hese guesses t hroughwhi ch the Gr eek mi nd at t empt ed t o expl ai n t he appar ent f i xi t y of t he eart h. To ask what support s t he ear t h i n space i s mostnat ur al , but t he answer gi ven by Anaxi mander , l i ke t hat moref ami l i ar Gr eek sol ut i on whi ch t r ansf or med the cone, or cyl i nder ,i nt o t he gi ant At l as, i s but anot her i l l ust r at i on of t hatsubst i t ut i on of unwar r ant ed i nf er ence f or sci ent i f i c i nducti onwhi ch we have al r eady so of t en poi nt ed out as charact eri st i c of t he pr i mi t i ve st ages of t hought .

Anaxi mander hel d at l east one theory whi ch, as vouched f or byvar i ous copyi st s and comment at ors, ent i t l es hi m t o be consi der edper haps t he f i r st t eacher of t he i dea of or gani c evol ut i on.Accor di ng t o thi s i dea, man devel oped f r om a f i shl i ke ancest or ,"gr owi ng up as shar ks do unt i l abl e to hel p hi msel f and t hencomi ng f ort h on dr y l and. " [ 1] The t hought here expr essed f i ndsi t s germ, per haps, i n t he Babyl oni an concept i on t hat ever yt hi ng

came f ort h f r oma chaos of wat er s. Yet t he f act t hat t he t houghtof Anaxi mander has come down t o post er i t y t hrough such var i ouschannel s suggest s t hat t he Gr eek t hi nker had got f ar enough awayf r om t he Or i ent al concept i on t o make hi s vi ew seem t o hi scont emporar i es a novel and i ndi vi dual one. I ndeed, not hi ng weknow of t he Or i ent al l i ne of t hought conveys any suggest i on of t he i dea of t r ansf or mat i on of speci es, wher eas t hat i dea i sdi st i nct l y f or mul at ed i n t he t r adi t i onal vi ews of Anaxi mander .

VI . THE EARLY GREEK PHI LOSOPHERS I N I TALY

Di ogenes Laer t i us t el l s a st ory about a yout h who, cl ad i n apur pl e t oga, ent ered t he arena at t he Ol ympi an games and asked tocompete wi t h t he other yout hs i n boxi ng. He was deri si vel y deni edadmi ss i on, presumabl y because he was beyond t he l egi t i mate agef or j uveni l e cont est ant s. Not hi ng daunt ed, t he yout h ent er ed thel i st s of men, and t ur ned the l augh on hi s cr i t i cs by comi ng of f vi ct or . The yout h who per f ormed t hi s f eat was named Pythagor as.He was t he same man, i f we may credi t t he st ory, who af t erwardsmi gr ated t o I t al y and became t he f ounder of t he f amous Cr ot oni anSchool of Phi l osophy; t he man who devel oped t he r el i gi on of t heOr phi c myst eri es; who concei ved t he i dea of t he musi c of t hespheres; who promul gat ed t he doct r i ne of met empsychosi s; whof i r st , per haps, of al l men cl ear l y concei ved t he not i on t hat t hi swor l d on whi ch we l i ve i s a bal l whi ch moves i n space and whi ch

may be habi t abl e on ever y si de.

A st r ange devel opment t hat f or a st r i pl i ng pugi l i st . But we mustnot f orget t hat i n t he Gr eek wor l d at hl et i cs hel d a pecul i arpl ace. The chi ef wi nner of Ol ympi an games gave hi s name to anepoch ( t he ensui ng Ol ympi ad of f our years) , and was honoredal most bef ore al l other s i n the l and. A sound mi nd i n a soundbody was t he mot t o of t he day. To excel i n f eat s of st r ength anddext er i t y was an accompl i shment t hat even a phi l osopher need notscor n. I t wi l l be r ecal l ed t hat aeschyl us di st i ngui shed hi msel f



at t he bat t l e of Mar at hon; t hat Thucydi des, t he gr eat est of Gr eekhi st ori ans, was a gener al i n t he Pel oponnesi an War; t hatXenophon, t he pupi l and bi ogr apher of Socr ates, was chi ef l y f amedf or havi ng l ed t he Ten Thousand i n t he memor abl e campai gn of Cyrus t he Younger ; t hat Pl at o hi msel f was cr edi t ed wi t h havi ngshown gr eat apt i t ude i n ear l y l i f e as a wr est l er . I f , t hen,Pythagor as t he phi l osopher was real l y the Pythagor as who won t heboxi ng contest , we may suppose that i n l ooki ng back upon t hi sat hl et i c f eat f r om t he hei ght s of hi s pr i est hood- - f or he came t obe al most dei f i ed- - he regar ded i t not as an i ndi screti on of hi syout h, but as one of t he gr eat est achi evement s of hi s l i f e. Notunl i kel y he r ecal l ed wi t h pr i de t hat he was cr edi t ed wi t h bei ngno l ess an i nnovat or i n at hl et i cs t han i n phi l osophy. At al levent s, t r adi t i on credi t s hi m wi t h t he i nvent i on of "sci ent i f i c"boxi ng. Was i t he, per haps, who t aught t he Gr eeks t o st r i ke ar i si ng and swi ngi ng bl ow f r omt he hi p, as depi ct ed i n t he f amousmetopes of t he Par t henon? I f so, t he i nnovat i on of Pyt hagoras wasas l i t t l e heeded i n t hi s r egar d i n a subsequent age as was hi st heor y of t he mot i on of t he ear t h; f or t o st r i ke a swi ngi ng bl owf r om t he hi p, r at her t han f r om t he shoul der , i s a t r i ck whi ch t he

pugi l i st l ear ned anew i n our own day.

But enough of pugi l i sm and of what , at best , i s a doubt f ult r adi t i on. Our concer n i s wi t h another "sci ence" t han t hat of t hear ena. We must f ol l ow t he pur pl e- r obed vi ct or t o I t al y- - i f ,i ndeed, we be not over - cr edul ous i n accept i ng t he t r adi t i on- - andl ear n of t r i umphs of a di f f er ent ki nd t hat have pl aced the nameof Pythagoras hi gh on t he l i st of t he f at her s of Gr eci an t hought .

To I t al y? Yes, t o t he west ern l i mi t s of t he Gr eek wor l d. Here i twas, beyond t he conf i nes of act ual Gr eek ter r i t or y, t hat Hel l eni ct hought f ound i t s second home, i t s f i r st home bei ng, as we haveseen, i n Asi a Mi nor. Pyt hagoras, i ndeed, t o whomwe have j ustbeen i nt r oduced, was born on the i sl and of Samos, whi ch l i es neart he coast of Asi a Mi nor, but he pr obabl y mi gr at ed at an earl y dayt o Cr otona, i n I t al y. Ther e he l i ved, t aught , and devel oped hi sphi l osophy unt i l r at her l at e i n l i f e, when, havi ng i ncur r ed t hedi spl easur e of hi s f el l ow- ci t i zens, he suf f er ed t he not unusualpenal t y of bani shment .

Of t he t hr ee ot her gr eat I t al i c l eader s of t hought of t he ear l yper i od, Xenophanes came rat her l at e i n l i f e t o El ea and f oundedt he f amous El eat i c School , of whi ch Parmeni des became the mostdi st i ngui shed or nament . These t wo wer e I oni ans, and they l i ved i nt he si xth cent ur y bef or e our er a. Empedocl es, t he Si ci l i an, wasof Dor i c or i gi n. He l i ved about t he mi ddl e of t he f i f t h cent ur yB. C. , at a t i me, t her ef or e, when At hens had at t ai ned a posi t i onof chi ef gl ory among the Gr eek st ates; but t her e i s no evi dence

t hat Empedocl es ever vi si t ed t hat ci t y, t hough i t was r umoredt hat he r etur ned t o the Pel oponnesus t o di e. The other greatI t al i c phi l osopher s j ust named, l i vi ng, as we have seen, i n t heprevi ous cent ur y, can scarcel y have t hought of At hens as a cent r eof Gr eek t hought . I ndeed, t he ver y f act t hat t hese men l i ved i nI t al y made t hat peni nsul a, r at her t han the mother - l and of Gr eece,t he cent r e of Hel l eni c i nf l uence. But al l t hese men, i t mustconst ant l y be bor ne i n mi nd, were Gr eeks by bi r t h and l anguage,f ul l y recogni zed as such i n t hei r own t i me and by post er i t y. Yett he f act t hat t hey l i ved i n a l and whi ch was at no t i me a par t of



t he geogr aphi cal t er r i t ory of Gr eece must not be f orgot t en. They,or t hei r ancest ors of r ecent generat i ons, had been pi oneer s amongt hose vent ur esome col oni st s who reached out i nt o di st ant port i onsof t he wor l d, and made homes f or t hemsel ves i n much t he samespi r i t i n whi ch col oni st s f r om Eur ope began to popul at e Amer i casome t wo t housand year s l at er . I n gener al , col oni st s f r om t hedi f f erent part s of Gr eece l ocal i zed t hemsel ves somewhatdef i ni t el y i n t hei r new homes; yet t her e must nat ur al l y have beena good deal of commi ngl i ng among t he vari ous f ami l i es of pi oneer s, and, t o a cer t ai n extent , a mi ngl i ng al so wi t h t heear l i er i nhabi t ant s of t he count r y. Thi s r aci al mi ngl i ng,combi ned wi t h t he wel l - known vi t al i zi ng i nf l uence of t he pi oneerl i f e, l ed, we may suppose, t o a more rapi d and more var i eddevel opment t han occur r ed among t he home- st ayi ng Gr eeks. I n proof of t hi s, wi t ness t he remar kabl e school s of phi l osophy whi ch, aswe have seen, were t hus devel oped at t he conf i nes of t he Gr eekworl d, and whi ch wer e pr esent l y t o i nvade and, as i t wer e, t akeby st or m t he mot her - count r y i t sel f .

As t o the per sonal i t y of t hese pi oneer phi l osophers of t he West ,

our knowl edge i s f or t he most par t more or l ess t r adi t i onal . Whathas been sai d of Thal es may be repeat ed, i n t he mai n, r egardi ngPythagor as, Par meni des, and Empedocl es. That t hey were realper sons i s not at al l i n quest i on, but much t hat i s mer el yt r adi t i onal has come t o be associ ated wi t h thei r names.Pyt hagoras was t he seni or , and doubt l ess hi s i deas may havei nf l uenced t he ot her s more or l ess, t hough each i s usual l y spokenof as t he f ounder of an i ndependent school . Much conf usi on hasal l al ong exi st ed, however , as t o the pr eci se i deas whi ch wer e t obe ascr i bed t o each of t he l eader s. Number l ess comment ator s,i ndeed, have endeavor ed t o pi ck out f r om among t he t r adi t i ons of ant i qui t y, ai ded by such f r agment s, of t he wr i t i ng of t hephi l osophers as have come down t o us, t he part i cul ar i deas t hatchar act er i zed each t hi nker , and t o weave t hese i deas i nt osyst ems. But such ef f ort s, notwi t hst andi ng the ment al ener gy t hathas been expended upon t hem, wer e, of necessi t y, f ut i l e, si nce,i n t he f i r st pl ace, t he anci ent phi l osopher s t hemsel ves di d notspeci al i ze and syst emat i ze thei r i deas accordi ng t o moder nnot i ons, and, i n t he second pl ace, t he r ecor ds of t hei ri ndi vi dual t eachi ngs have been t oo scant i l y pr eserved t o servef or t he pur pose of cl assi f i cat i on. I t i s f r eel y admi t t ed t hatf abl e has woven an i mpenet r abl e mesh of cont r adi ct i ons about t heper sonal i t i es of t hese anci ent t hi nker s, and i t woul d be f ol l y t ohope t hat t hi s same ar t i f i cer had been l ess busy wi t h t hei rbel i ef s and theor i es. When one reads t hat Pyt hagoras advocated anexcl usi vel y veget abl e di et , yet t hat he was t he f i r st t o t r ai nat hl et es on meat di et ; t hat he sacr i f i ced onl y i nani mat e t hi ngs,

yet t hat he of f ered up a hundr ed oxen i n honor of hi s greatdi scover y r egar di ng t he si des of a t r i angl e, and such l i kei nconsi st enci es i n t he same bi ogr aphy, one gai ns a real i zi ngsense of t he extent t o whi ch di ver se t r adi t i ons ent er i nt o t hest ory as i t has come down to us. And yet we must r ef l ect t hatmost men change t hei r opi ni ons i n the cour se of a l ong l i f et i me,and t hat t he ant agoni st i c r epor t s may bot h be t r ue.

Tr ue or f al se, t hese f abl es have an abi di ng i nt er est , si nce t heypr ove t he uni que and ext r aordi nar y char act er of t he personal i t y



about whi ch they ar e woven. The al l eged wi t t i ci sms of a Whi st l er,i n our own day, were doubt l ess, f or t he most part , qui t e unknownt o Whi st l er hi msel f , yet t hey never woul d have been ascr i bed tohi m wer e t hey not aki n t o wi t t i ci sms t hat he di d or i gi nat e- - wer et hey not , i n shor t , t ypi cal expr essi ons of hi s per sonal i t y. Andso of t he her oes of t he past . "I t i s no or di nar y man, " sai dGeor ge Henr y Lewes, speaki ng of Pyt hagoras, "whom f abl e exal t si nt o t he poet i c r egi on. Whenever you f i nd romant i c or mi r acul ousdeeds at t r i but ed, be cer t ai n that t he her o was great enough tomai nt ai n t he wei ght of t he cr own of t hi s f abul ous gl ory. " [ 1] Wemay not doubt , t hen, t hat Pythagor as, Par meni des, and Empedocl es,wi t h whose names f abl e was so busy t hroughout ant i qui t y, were menof ext r aordi nar y per sonal i t y. We are here chi ef l y concer ned,however , nei t her wi t h t he per sonal i t y of t he man nor yet wi t h t hepreci se doct r i nes whi ch each one of t hemt aught . A knowl edge of t he l at t er woul d be i nt er est i ng wer e i t at t ai nabl e, but i n t heconf used st ate of t he r epor t s t hat have come down t o us we cannothope t o be abl e t o ascri be each i dea wi t h pr eci si on t o i t s pr opersour ce. At best we can merel y out l i ne, even here not t oopr eci sel y, t he sci ent i f i c doctr i nes whi ch t he I t al i c phi l osopher s

as a whol e seem t o have advocat ed.

Fi r st and f or emost , t her e i s t he doct r i ne t hat t he ear t h i s aspher e. Pyt hagoras i s sai d t o have been t he f i r st advocat e of t hi s t heor y; but , unf or t unat el y, i t i s repor t ed al so t hatPar meni des was i t s aut hor . Thi s r i val shi p f or t he di scover y of ani mport ant t r ut h we shal l see r epeat ed over and over i n morer ecent t i mes. Coul d we know t he whol e t r ut h, i t woul d perhapsappear t hat t he i dea of t he spher i ci t y of t he ear t h wasori gi nat ed l ong bef ore t he ti me of t he Gr eek phi l osopher s. But i tmust be admi t t ed t hat t here i s no r ecor d of any sor t t o gi vet angi bl e suppor t t o such an assumpt i on. So f ar as we canascer t ai n, no Egypt i an or Babyl oni an ast r onomer ever grasped t hewonder f ul concept i on t hat t he ear t h i s r ound. That t he I t al i cGr eeks shoul d have concei ved t hat i dea was per haps not so muchbecause t hey were ast r onomers as because t hey were pract i calgeogr apher s and geomet ers. Pyt hagoras, as we have not ed, was bornat Samos, and, t her ef ore, made a r el at i vel y l ong sea voyage i npassi ng t o I t al y. Now, as ever y one knows, t he most si mpl e andt angi bl e demonst r at i on of t he convexi t y of t he ear t h' s sur f ace i sf ur ni shed by obser vat i on of an approachi ng shi p at sea. On acl ear day a keen eye may di scern t he mast and sai l s r i si nggr adual l y above the hori zon, t o be f ol l owed i n due cour se by t hehul l . Si mi l ar l y, on appr oachi ng the shore, hi gh obj ect s becomevi si bl e bef or e t hose t hat l i e near er t he wat er . I t i s at l east apl ausi bl e supposi t i on t hat Pythagor as may have made suchobservat i ons as these dur i ng t he voyage i n quest i on, and t hat

t her ei n may l i e the ger m of t hat wonder f ul concept i on of t hewor l d as a sphere.

To what ext ent f ur t her proof , based on t he f act t hat t he ear t h' sshadow when t he moon i s ecl i psed i s al ways convex, may have beenknown to Pyt hagor as we cannot say. There i s no pr oof t hat any of t he I t al i c phi l osopher s made ext ensi ve r ecor ds of ast r onomi calobser vat i ons as di d t he Egypt i ans and Babyl oni ans; but we mustconst ant l y recal l t hat t he wr i t i ngs of cl assi cal ant i qui t y havebeen al most al t ogether dest r oyed. The absence of ast r onomi cal



r ecor ds i s, t her ef or e, no pr oof t hat such r ecor ds never exi st ed.Pyt hagor as, i t shoul d be sai d, i s r epor t ed t o have t r avel l ed i nEgypt , and he must t here have gai ned an i nkl i ng of ast r onomi calmet hods. I ndeed, he speaks of hi msel f speci f i cal l y, i n a l et t erquot ed by Di ogenes, as one who i s accust omed t o st udy ast r onomy.

Yet a l at er sent ence of t he l et t er , whi ch asser t s t hat t hephi l osopher i s not al ways occupi ed about specul at i ons of hi s ownf ancy, suggest i ng, as i t does, t he dr eamer r at her t han t heobser ver , gi ves us pr obabl y a tr uer gl i mpse i nt o t hephi l osopher' s mi nd. Ther e i s, i ndeed, r eason t o suppose t hat t hedoct r i ne of t he spher i ci t y of t he ear t h appeal ed to Pyt hagor aschi ef l y because i t accor ded wi t h hi s concept i on t hat t he spher ei s t he most per f ect sol i d, j ust as t he ci r cl e i s t he most per f ectpl ane sur f ace. Be t hat as i t may, t he f act r emai ns that we haveher e, as f ar as we can t r ace i t s or i gi n, t he f i r st expr essi on of t he sci ent i f i c t heor y that t he ear t h i s r ound. Had t he I t al i cphi l osophers accompl i shed nothi ng more t han thi s, t hei raccompl i shment woul d none t he l ess mark an epoch i n the progr essof t hought .

That Pyt hagor as was an obser ver of t he heavens i s f ur t herevi denced by t he st at ement made by Di ogenes, on t he aut hor i t y of Par meni des, t hat Pyt hagoras was t he f i r st person who di scover edor asser t ed t he i dent i t y of Hesper us and Luci f er - - t hat i s t o say,of t he morni ng and t he eveni ng st ar . Thi s was real l y a r emarkabl edi scover y, and one t hat was no doubt i nst r ument al l at er on i ndet ermi ni ng t hat t heory of t he mechani cs of t he heavens whi ch weshal l see el aborated pr esent l y. To have made such a di scover yar gues agai n f or t he pr act i cal i t y of t he mi nd of Pythagor as. Hi s,i ndeed, woul d seemt o have been a mi nd i n whi ch pract i calcommon- sense was st r angel y bl ended wi t h t he capaci t y f or wi de andi magi nat i ve gener al i zat i on. As f ur t her evi dence of hi spr act i cal i t y, i t i s asser t ed t hat he was t he f i r st per son whoi nt r oduced measures and wei ght s among t he Gr eeks, t hi s assert i onbei ng made on t he aut hori t y of Ar i st oxenus. I t wi l l be observedt hat he i s sai d t o have i nt r oduced, not t o have i nvent ed, wei ght sand measures, a st at ement whi ch suggest s a knowl edge on the par tof t he Gr eeks t hat wei ght s and measures were pr evi ousl y empl oyedi n Egypt and Babyl oni a.

The mi nd t hat coul d concei ve t he wor l d as a sphere and t hati nt er ested i t sel f i n wei ght s and measur es was, obvi ousl y, a mi ndof t he vi sual i zi ng t ype. I t i s charact er i st i c of t hi s t ype of mi nd t o be i nt er est ed i n t he t angi bi l i t i es of geomet r y, hence i ti s not sur pr i si ng t o be t ol d t hat Pyt hagor as " car r i ed t hatsci ence t o per f ect i on. " The most f amous di scover y of Pyt hagorasi n t hi s f i el d was t hat t he squar e of t he hypot enuse of a

r i ght - angl ed t r i angl e i s equal t o the squar es of t he ot her si desof t he t r i angl e. We have al r eady noted t he f abl e t hat hi sent husi asm over t hi s di scover y l ed hi m t o sacr i f i ce a hecat omb.Doubt l ess t he st or y i s apocryphal , but doubt l ess, al so, i texpr esses t he t r ut h as t o t he f er vi d j oy wi t h whi ch t hephi l osopher must have cont empl at ed t he resul t s of hi s cr eat i vei magi nat i on.

No l i ne al l eged t o have been wr i t t en by Pyt hagor as has come downt o us. We ar e t ol d t hat he r ef r ai ned f r om publ i shi ng hi s



doct r i nes, except by word of mout h. "The Lucani ans and t hePeucet i ans, and the Messapi ans and t he Romans, " we ar e assured," f l ocked ar ound hi m, comi ng wi t h eagerness t o hear hi sdi scour ses; no f ewer t han si x hundred came t o hi m every ni ght ;and i f any one of t hem had ever been per mi t t ed t o see t he mast er ,t hey wr ot e of i t t o thei r f r i ends as i f t hey had gai ned somegr eat advant age. " Never t hel ess, we ar e assured t hat unt i l t het i me of Phi l ol aus no doct r i nes of Pyt hagoras wer e ever publ i shed,t o whi ch st at ement i t i s added t hat "when the t hr ee cel ebr at edbooks wer e publ i shed, Pl ato wr ote t o have t hem pur chased f or hi mf or a hundr ed mi nas. "[ 2] But i f such books exi st ed, t hey ar e l ostt o the modern wor l d, and we ar e obl i ged t o accept t he asser t i onsof r el at i vel y l at e wr i t er s as t o t he t heor i es of t he gr eatCr otoni an.

Per haps we cannot do bet t er t han quote at l engt h f r om ani mport ant summary of t he remai ni ng doct r i nes of Pyt hagoras, whi chDi ogenes hi msel f quoted f r omt he work of a pr edecessor . [ 3]Despi t e i t s somewhat i nchoat e char act er , t hi s summary i s a mostr emar kabl e one, as a br i ef anal ysi s of i t s cont ent s wi l l show. I t

shoul d be expl ai ned t hat Al exander ( whose work i s now l ost ) i ssai d t o have f ound t hese dogmas set down i n t he comment ar i es of Pyt hagoras. I f t hi s asser t i on be accept ed, we ar e br ought onest ep near er t he phi l osopher hi msel f . The summar y i s as f ol l ows:

"That t he monad was t he begi nni ng of ever yt hi ng. Fr om t he monadproceeds an i ndef i ni t e duad, whi ch i s subordi nate to the monad ast o i t s cause. That f r omt he monad and t he i ndef i ni t e duad pr oceednumber s. And f r omnumber s si gns. And f r omt hese l ast , l i nes of whi ch pl ane f i gur es consi st . And f r om pl ane f i gur es ar e der i vedsol i d bodi es. And f r om sol i d bodi es sensi bl e bodi es, of whi chl ast t her e ar e f our el ement s- - f i r e, wat er , ear t h, and ai r . Andt hat t he wor l d, whi ch i s i ndued wi t h l i f e and i nt el l ect , andwhi ch i s of a spher i cal f i gur e, havi ng t he ear t h, whi ch i s al sospher i cal , and i nhabi t ed al l over i n i t s cent r e, [ 4] r esul t s f r oma combi nat i on of t hese el ement s, and deri ves i t s mot i on f r omt hem; and al so t hat t here are ant i podes, and t hat what i s bel ow,as respect s us, i s above i n r espect of t hem.

"He al so t aught t hat l i ght and dar kness, and col d and heat , anddr yness and moi st ur e, wer e equal l y di vi ded i n the worl d; and thatwhi l e heat was predomi nant i t was summer ; whi l e col d had t hemast er y, i t was wi nt er ; when dr yness pr evai l ed, i t was spri ng;and when moi st ure pr eponder ated, wi nt er . And whi l e al l t hesequal i t i es wer e on a l evel , t hen was t he l ovel i est season of t heyear ; of whi ch the f l our i shi ng spr i ng was t he whol esome peri od,

and the season of aut umn the most per ni ci ous one. Of t he day, hesai d t hat t he f l our i shi ng per i od was t he morni ng, and t he f adi ngone t he eveni ng; on whi ch account t hat al so was t he l east heal t hyt i me.

"Another of hi s t heori es was t hat t he ai r ar ound the ear t h wasi mmovabl e and pregnant wi t h di sease, and t hat everyt hi ng i n i twas mor t al ; but t hat t he upper ai r was i n perpetual mot i on, andpur e and sal ubr i ous, and t hat ever ythi ng i n t hat was i mmort al ,and on t hat account di vi ne. And t hat t he sun and t he moon and t he



st ar s wer e al l gods; f or i n t hem t he war m pr i nci pl e pr edomi nat eswhi ch i s t he cause of l i f e. And t hat t he moon der i ves i t s l i ghtf r omt he sun. And that t her e i s a r el at i onshi p between men andt he gods, because men part ake of t he di vi ne pr i nci pl e; on whi chaccount , al so, God exer ci ses hi s provi dence f or our advant age.Al so, t hat Fat e i s t he cause of t he ar r angement of t he worl d bothgener al l y and par t i cul ar l y. Mor eover , t hat a ray f r om t he sunpenetr ated both t he col d aether and the dense aet her; and t heycal l t he ai r t he col d aet her , and t he sea and moi st ur e t hey cal lt he dense aet her. And thi s r ay descends i nt o t he dept hs, and i nt hi s way vi vi f i es ever ythi ng. And ever yt hi ng whi ch par t akes of t he pr i nci pl e of heat l i ves, on whi ch account , al so, pl ant s ar eani mat ed bei ngs; but t hat al l l i vi ng t hi ngs have not necessar i l ysoul s. And t hat t he soul i s a somet hi ng t om of f f r om t he aet her ,bot h war m and col d, f r om i t s par t aki ng of t he col d aet her . Andt hat t he soul i s somet hi ng di f f erent f r om l i f e. Al so, t hat i t i si mmort al , because t hat f r omwhi ch i t has been det ached i si mmort al .

"Al so, t hat ani mal s are born f r omone another by seeds, and t hat

i t i s i mpossi bl e f or t her e t o be any spont aneous pr oduct i on byt he eart h. And t hat seed i s a dr op f r omt he br ai n whi ch cont ai nsi n i t sel f a war m vapor; and t hat when t hi s i s appl i ed t o t he wombi t t r ansmi t s vi r t ue and moi st ur e and bl ood f r om t he br ai n, f r omwhi ch f l esh and si news and bones and hai r and t he whol e body arepr oduced. And f r omt he vapor i s produced t he soul , and al sosensat i on. And t hat t he i nf ant f i r st becomes a sol i d body at t heend of f or t y days; but , accor di ng to t he pr i nci pl es of har mony,i t i s not per f ect t i l l seven, or per haps ni ne, or at most t enmont hs, and t hen i t i s br ought f or t h. And t hat i t cont ai ns i ni t sel f al l t he pr i nci pl es of l i f e, whi ch are al l connectedt ogether , and by t hei r uni on and combi nat i on f orm a harmoni ouswhol e, each of t hem devel opi ng i t sel f at t he appoi nt ed ti me.

"The senses i n gener al , and especi al l y the si ght , ar e a vapor of excess i ve warmt h, and on t hi s account a man i s sai d t o seet hr ough ai r and t hr ough wat er . For t he hot pr i nci pl e i s opposedby the col d one; si nce, i f t he vapor i n t he eyes wer e col d, i twoul d have t he same t emper at ure as t he ai r , and so woul d bedi ssi pat ed. As i t i s, i n some passages he cal l s t he eyes t hegat es of t he sun; and he speaks i n a si mi l ar manner of hear i ngand of t he ot her senses.

"He al so says t hat t he soul of man i s di vi ded i nt o thr ee par t s:i nt o i nt ui t i on and r eason and mi nd, and t hat t he f i r st and l astdi vi si ons ar e f ound al so i n ot her ani mal s, but t hat t he mi ddl eone, r eason, i s onl y f ound i n man. And t hat t he chi ef abode of

t he soul i s i n t hose part s of t he body whi ch are between t hehear t and t he br ai n. And t hat t hat por t i on of i t whi ch i s i n t hehear t i s t he mi nd; but t hat del i ber at i on and r eason r esi de i n t hebr ai n.

Moreover , t hat t he senses ar e dr ops f r omt hem; and that t her easoni ng sense i s i mmort al , but t he ot her s are mort al . And thatt he soul i s nour i shed by t he bl ood; and t hat r easons are t hewi nds of t he soul . That i t i s i nvi si bl e, and so ar e i t s r easons,si nce t he aet her i t sel f i s i nvi si bl e. That t he l i nks of t he soul



are t he vei ns and the ar t er i es and the ner ves. But t hat when i ti s vi gor ous, and i s by i t sel f i n a qui escent st at e, t hen i t sl i nks ar e wor ds and act i ons. That when i t i s cast f or t h upon t heear t h i t wanders about , r esembl i ng t he body. Moreover , t hatMer cur y i s t he st eward of t he soul s, and t hat on t hi s account hehas t he name of Conduct or , and Commerci al , and I nf ernal , si nce i ti s he who conduct s t he soul s f r om t hei r bodi es, and f r om ear t hand sea; and that he conduct s t he pur e soul s t o t he hi ghestr egi on, and that he does not al l ow t he i mpur e ones t o appr oacht hem, nor t o come near one anot her , but commi t s t hem t o be boundi n i ndi ssol ubl e f et t er s by t he Fur i es. The Pyt hagor eans al soasser t t hat t he whol e ai r i s f ul l of soul s, and t hat t hese ar et hose whi ch ar e account ed daemons and her oes. Al so, t hat i t i s byt hem t hat dreams ar e sent among men, and al so t he t okens of di sease and heal t h; t hese l ast , t oo, bei ng sent not onl y to men,but t o sheep al so, and ot her cat t l e. Al so t hat i t i s t hey who ar econcer ned wi t h pur i f i cat i ons and expi at i ons and al l ki nds of di vi nat i on and or acul ar pr edi ct i ons, and t hi ngs of t hat ki nd. "[ 5]

A br i ef consi derat i on of t hi s summar y of t he doct r i nes of Pyt hagor as wi l l show t hat i t at l east out l i nes a mostext r aor di nar y var i et y of sci ent i f i c i deas. ( 1) Ther e i s suggest eda t heory of monads and t he concept i on of t he devel opment f r omsi mpl e to more compl ex bodi es, pass i ng t hrough t he st ages of l i nes, pl ai n f i gur es, and sol i ds t o sensi bl e bodi es. ( 2) Thedoctr i ne of t he f our el ement s- - f i r e, wat er , ear t h, and ai r - - ast he basi s of al l or gani sms i s put f or war d. ( 3) The i dea, notmer el y of t he spher i ci t y of t he ear t h, but an expl i ci t concept i onof t he ant i podes, i s expr essed. ( 4) A concept i on of t he sani t ar yi nf l uence of t he ai r i s cl ear l y expr essed. ( 5) An i dea of t hepr obl ems of gener at i on and her edi t y i s shown, t oget her wi t h adi st i nct di savowal of t he doct r i ne of spont aneous gener at i on- - adoct r i ne whi ch, i t may be added, r emai ned i n vogue, nevert hel ess,f or some t went y- f our hundred years af t er t he t i me of Pyt hagoras.( 6) A r emarkabl e anal ysi s of mi nd i s made, and a di st i nct i onbetween ani mal mi nds and t he human mi nd i s based on t hi sanal ysi s. The physi ol ogi cal doct r i ne t hat t he hear t i s t he or ganof one depart ment of mi nd i s of f set by the cl ear st atement t hatt he r emai ni ng f act or s of mi nd r esi de i n t he br ai n. Thi s ear l yr ecogni t i on of br ai n as t he or gan of mi nd must not be f orgot t eni n our l at er st udi es. I t shoul d be r ecal l ed, however , t hat aCr ot oni an physi ci an, Al emaean, a younger cont empor ary of Pyt hagor as, i s al so credi t ed wi t h the same theor y. ( 7) Aknowl edge of anatomy i s at l east vaguel y f oreshadowed i n t heasser t i on t hat vei ns, ar t er i es, and ner ves ar e t he l i nks of t hesoul . I n t hi s connect i on i t shoul d be recal l ed t hat Pythagor as

was a pr act i cal physi ci an.

As agai nst t hese sci ent i f i c doct r i nes, however , some of t hembei ng at l east r emar kabl e guesses at t he t r ut h, at t ent i on must becal l ed to t he concl udi ng par agr aph of our quot at i on, i n whi ch t heol d f ami l i ar daemonol ogy i s out l i ned, qui t e af t er t he Or i ent alf ashi on. We shal l have occasi on t o say more as t o t hi s phase of t he subj ect l at er on. Meant i me, bef or e l eavi ng Pythagoras, l et usnot e t hat hi s pr act i cal st udi es of humani t y l ed hi m t o asser t t hedoct r i ne t hat " t he pr oper t y of f r i ends i s common, and t hat



f r i endshi p i s equal i t y. " Hi s di sci pl es, we ar e t ol d, used t o putal l t hei r possessi ons t oget her i n one st or e and use t hem i ncommon. Here, t hen, seemi ngl y, i s t he doct r i ne of communi sm putt o t he t est of exper i ment at t hi s ear l y day. I f i t seem t hatr ef er ence t o thi s carr i es us beyond t he bounds of sci ence, i t maybe r epl i ed t hat quest i ons such as t hi s wi l l not l i e beyond t hebounds of t he sci ence of t he near f ut ur e.

XENOPHANES AND PARMENI DES

There i s a whi msi cal t al e about Pyt hagor as, accor di ng t o whi cht he phi l osopher was wont t o decl ar e t hat i n an earl i er st ate hehad vi si t ed Hades, and had t her e seen Homer and Hesi od t or t uredbecause of t he absur d t hi ngs t hey had sai d about t he gods.Apocrypbal or ot herwi se, t he t al e suggest s t hat Pyt hagoras was anagnost i c as r egar ds t he cur r ent Gr eek rel i gi on of hi s t i me. Thesame t hi ng i s per haps t r ue of most of t he gr eat t hi nker s of t hi sear l i est per i od. But one among t hemwas r emembered i n l ater t i mesas havi ng had a pecul i ar avers i on t o the ant hr opomorphi c

concept i ons of hi s f el l ows. Thi s was Xenophanes, who was born atCol ophon pr obabl y about t he year 580 B. C. , and who, af t er a l i f eof wander i ng, set t l ed f i nal l y i n I t al y and became the f ounder of t he so- cal l ed El eat i c School .

A f ew f r agment s of t he phi l osophi cal poem i n whi ch Xenophanesexpr essed hi s vi ews have come down t o us, and t hese f r agment si ncl ude a t ol er abl y def i ni t e avowal of hi s f ai t h. "God i s onesupreme among gods and men, and not l i ke mor t al s i n body or i nmi nd, " says Xenophanes. Agai n he asser t s t hat "mor t al s supposet hat t he gods are born ( as t hey t hemsel ves are) , t hat t hey wearman' s cl ot hi ng and have human voi ce and body; but , " he cont i nues," i f cat t l e or l i ons had hands so as t o pai nt wi t h t hei r hands andproduce works of art as men do, t hey woul d pai nt t hei r gods andgi ve t hem bodi es i n f or m l i ke t hei r own- - hor ses l i ke hor ses,cat t l e l i ke cat t l e. " El sewher e he says, wi t h gr eat acumen: "Ther ehas not been a man, nor wi l l t here be, who knows di st i nct l y whatI say about t he gods or i n r egar d t o al l t hi ngs. For even i f onechance f or t he most par t t o say what i s t r ue, st i l l he woul d notknow; but every one t hi nks t hat he knows. " [ 6]

I n t he same spi r i t Xenophanes speaks of t he bat t l es of Ti t ans, of gi ant s, and of cent aur s as "f i ct i ons of f or mer ages. " Al l t hi st el l s of t he quest i oni ng spi r i t whi ch di st i ngui shes t hesci ent i f i c i nvesti gat or. Preci sel y whi t her t hi s spi r i t l ed hi m wedo not know, but t he wr i t er s of a l at er t i me have pr eserved at r adi t i on r egar di ng a bel i ef of Xenophanes t hat per haps ent i t l es

hi m t o be consi der ed t he f at her of geol ogy. Thus Hi ppol ytusr ecor ds t hat Xenophanes st udi ed t he f ossi l s t o be f ound i nquar r i es, and dr ew f r om t hei r obser vat i on remar kabl e concl usi ons.Hi s words are as f ol l ows: "Xenophanes bel i eves that once t heear t h was mi ngl ed wi t h t he sea, but i n the cour se of t i me i tbecame f r eed f r ommoi st ur e; and hi s proof s are such as t hese:t hat shel l s are f ound i n t he mi dst of t he l and and among t hemount ai ns, t hat i n t he quar r i es of Syracuse the i mpr i nt s of af i sh and of seal s had been f ound, and i n Par os t he i mpr i nt of ananchovy at some dept h i n t he st one, and i n Mel i t e shal l ow



i mpr essi ons of al l sort s of sea pr oduct s. He says that t hesei mpr i nt s were made when everyt hi ng l ong ago was covered wi t h mud,and t hen t he i mpr i nt dr i ed i n t he mud. Fur t her , he says t hat al lmen wi l l be dest r oyed when t he eart h si nks i nt o t he sea andbecomes mud, and t hat t he r ace wi l l begi n anew f r om t hebegi nni ng; and t hi s t r ansf or mat i on t akes pl ace f or al lwor l ds. "[ 7] Her e, t hen, we see t hi s ear l i est of pal eont ol ogi st sst udyi ng t he f ossi l - bear i ng st r at a of t he ear t h, and dr awi ng f r omhi s obser vat i ons a mar vel l ousl y sci ent i f i c i nduct i on. Al most t wot housand year s l at er another f amous ci t i zen of I t al y, Leonar do daVi nci , was i ndependent l y t o t hi nk out si mi l ar concl usi ons f r oml i ke obser vat i ons. But not unt i l t he ni net eent h cent ur y of ourera, some twent y- f our hundr ed years af t er t he t i me of Xenophanes,was t he ol d Gr eek' s doct r i ne t o be accept ed by t he sci ent i f i cwor l d. The i deas of Xenophanes were known t o hi s cont empor ar i esand, as we see, quot ed f or a f ew cent ur i es by hi s successor s,t hen t hey wer e i gnored or qui t e f orgot t en; and i f any phi l osopherof an ensui ng age bef ore the t i me of Leonardo champi oned a l i ker at i onal expl anat i on of t he f ossi l s, we have no r ecor d of t hef act . The geol ogi cal doct r i ne of Xenophanes, t hen, must be l i st ed

among t hose r emarkabl e Gr eek ant i ci pat i ons of ni net eenth - cent urysci ence whi ch suf f er ed al most t ot al ecl i pse i n t he i nt er veni ngcent ur i es.

Among t he pupi l s of Xenophanes was Parmeni des, t he t hi nker whowas dest i ned t o car r y on the work of hi s mast er al ong the samesci ent i f i c l i nes, t hough at t he same t i me mi ngl i ng hi s sci ent i f i cconcept i ons wi t h t he myst i ci sm of t he poet . We have al r eady hadoccasi on t o ment i on t hat Par meni des champi oned t he i dea that t heear t h i s r ound; not i ng al so that doubt s exi st as t o whet her he orPyt hagor as ori gi nat ed t hi s doct r i ne. No expl i ci t answer t o thi squest i on can possi bl y be hoped f or. I t seems cl ear, however , t hatf or a l ong t i me t he I t al i c School , t o whi ch bot h t hesephi l osophers bel onged, had a monopol y of t he bel i ef i n quest i on.Par meni des, l i ke Pythagor as, i s cr edi t ed wi t h havi ng bel i eved i nt he mot i on of t he ear t h, t hough t he evi dence f ur ni shed by thewr i t i ngs of t he phi l osopher hi msel f i s not as demonst r at i ve asone coul d wi sh. Unf ort unat el y, t he copyi st s of a l at er age wer emore concer ned wi t h metaphysi cal specul at i ons t han wi t h moret angi bl e thi ngs. But as f ar as t he f r agment ar y ref er ences t o thei deas of Par meni des may be accept ed, t hey do not suppor t t he i deaof t he eart h' s mot i on. I ndeed, Par meni des i s made to sayexpl i ci t l y, i n pr eser ved f r agment s, t hat "t he wor l d i s i mmovabl e,l i mi t ed, and spher oi dal i n f or m. "[ 8]

Nevert hel ess, some modern i nt erpr eters have f ound an opposi t emeani ng i n Par meni des. Thus Ri t t er i nt erpret s hi m as supposi ng

" t hat t he ear t h i s i n t he cent r e spher i cal , and mai nt ai ned i nr ot ar y mot i on by i t s equi ponder ance; ar ound i t l i e cer t ai n r i ngs,t he hi ghest composed of t he rar e el ement f i r e, t he next l ower acompound of l i ght and darkness, and l owest of al l one whol l y of ni ght , whi ch pr obabl y i ndi cat ed t o hi s mi nd the sur f ace of t heear t h, t he cent r e of whi ch agai n he pr obabl y consi der ed t o bef i r e. "[ 9] But t hi s, l i ke t oo many i nt er pr et at i ons of anci entt hought , appear s t o read i nt o t he f r agment s i deas whi ch the wordst hemsel ves do not war r ant . There seems no reason t o doubt ,however , t hat Par meni des actual l y hel d t he doct r i ne of t he



ear t h' s spher i ci t y. Anot her gl i mpse of hi s astr onomi cal doct r i nesi s f ur ni shed us by a f r agment whi ch t el l s us t hat he concei vedt he morni ng and t he eveni ng st ars t o be t he same, a doct r i newhi ch, as we have seen, was ascr i bed al so t o Pyt hagoras. I ndeed,we may repeat t hat i t i s qui t e i mpossi bl e t o di st i ngui sh bet weent he ast r onomi cal doct r i nes of t hese t wo phi l osopher s.

The poemof Parmeni des i n whi ch t he cosmogoni c specul at i ons occurt r eat s al so of t he or i gi n of man. The aut hor seems t o have had acl ear concept i on t hat i nt el l i gence depends on bodi l y or gani sm,and t hat t he more el aboratel y devel oped t he or gani sm t he hi ghert he i nt el l i gence. But i n t he i nt er pr et at i on of t hi s t hought weare hampered by t he charact eri st i c vagueness of expr essi on, whi chmay best be evi denced by put t i ng bef ore t he r eader t wo Engl i sht r ansl at i ons of t he same st anza. Her e i s Ri t t er ' s r ender i ng, asmade i nt o Engl i sh by hi s t r ansl at or, Morr i son:

"For exact l y as each has t he st at e of hi s l i mbs many- j oi nt ed,So i nvar i abl y st ands i t wi t h men i n t hei r mi nd and t hei rr eason; For t he syst em of l i mbs i s that whi ch t hi nket h i n

manki nd Al i ke i n al l and i n each: f or t hought i s thef ul ness. "[ 10]

The same st anza i s gi ven t hus by George Henry Lewes:

"Such as t o each man i s t he natur e of hi s many- j oi nt ed l i mbs,Such al so i s the i nt el l i gence of each man; f or i t i s The nat ur eof l i mbs ( organi zat i on) whi ch t hi nket h i n men, Both i n one andi n al l ; f or t he hi ghest degr ee of or gani zat i on gi ves t hehi ghest degr ee of t hought . " [ 11]

Her e i t wi l l be observed t hat t her e i s vi r t ual agr eement bet weent he t r ansl at or s except as t o t he l ast cl ause, but t hat cl ause i smost essent i al . The Gr eek phrase i s <gr t o gar pl eon est i nohma>.Ri t t er , i t wi l l be obser ved, r ender s thi s, "f or t hought i s thef ul ness. " Lewes par aphr ases i t , "f or t he hi ghest degr ee of organi zat i on gi ves t he hi ghest degr ee of t hought . " The di f f er encei s i nt ent i onal , si nce Lewes hi msel f cri t i ci ses t he t r ansl at i on of Ri t t er . Ri t t er ' s tr ansl at i on i s cert ai nl y t he mor e l i t eral , butt he f act t hat such di ver si t y i s possi bl e suggest s one of t hechi ef el ement s of uncer t ai nt y t hat hamper our i nt er pr etat i on of t he t hought of ant i qui t y. Unf ort unat el y, t he mi nd of t hecomment ator has usual l y been di r ected t owards such subt l et i es,r ather t han t owards t he expr essi on of preci se knowl edge. Hence i ti s t hat t he phi l osopher s of Gr eece ar e usual l y thought of as meredr eamer s, and t hat t hei r t r ue st at us as sci ent i f i c di scover er s i s

so of t en over l ooked. Wi t h these i nt angi bi l i t i es we have nopr esent concer n beyond t hi s bar e ment i on; f or us i t suf f i ces t ogai n as cl ear an i dea as we may of t he real l y sci ent i f i cconcept i ons of t hese t hi nker s, l eavi ng t he subt l et i es of t hei rdeduct i ve r easoni ng f or t he most par t unt ouched.

EMPEDOCLES

The l at est of t he i mport ant pre- Socr at i c phi l osophers of t he



I t al i c school was Empedocl es, who was bor n about 494 B. C. andl i ved t o the age of si xty. These dat es make Empedocl es st r i ct l ycont emporary wi t h Anaxagoras, a f act whi ch we shal l do wel l t obear i n mi nd when we come to consi der t he l at t er' s phi l osophy i nt he succeedi ng chapt er. Li ke Pyt hagoras, Empedocl es i s ani mposi ng f i gur e. I ndeed, t her e i s much of si mi l ar i t y bet ween theper sonal i t i es, as bet ween the doct r i nes, of t he two men.Empedocl es, l i ke Pythagor as, was a physi ci an; l i ke hi m al so hewas t he f ounder of a cul t . As st at esman, pr ophet , physi ci st ,physi ci an, r ef ormer , and poet he showed a ver sat i l i t y t hat ,coupl ed wi t h pr of undi t y, mar ks t he hi ghest geni us. I n poi nt of ver sat i l i t y we shal l per haps har dl y f i nd hi s equal at a l at erday- - unl ess, i ndeed, an except i on be made of Er atost henes. Themyt hs t hat have grown about t he name of Empedocl es show t hat hewas a remarkabl e personal i t y. He i s sai d to have been anawe- i nspi r i ng f i gur e, cl ot hi ng hi msel f i n Or i ent al spl endor andmovi ng among manki nd as a super i or bei ng. Tradi t i on has i t t hathe t hr ew hi msel f i nt o the crat er of a vol cano that hi s other wi seunexpl ai ned di sappearance mi ght l ead hi s di sci pl es t o bel i evet hat he had been mi r acul ousl y t r ansl at ed; but t r adi t i on goes on

t o say t hat one of t he br azen sl i pper s of t he phi l osopher wast hr own up by t he vol cano, t hus r eveal i ng hi s subt er f uge. Anothert r adi t i on of f ar mor e cr edi bl e aspect asser t s t hat Empedocl esr et r eat ed f r om I t al y, r et ur ni ng t o the home of hi s f at her s i nPel oponnesus to di e ther e obscur el y. I t seems odd t hat t he f act sr egardi ng t he death of so gr eat a man, at so compar at i vel y l ate aper i od, shoul d be obscur e; but t hi s, per haps, i s i n keepi ng wi t ht he per sonal i t y of t he man hi msel f . Hi s di sci pl es woul d hesi t at et o ascr i be a merel y nat ur al deat h t o so i nspi r ed a pr ophet .

Empedocl es appears t o have been at once an obser ver and adr eamer . He i s cr edi t ed wi t h not i ng t hat t he pr essur e of ai r wi l lsust ai n t he wei ght of wat er i n an i nver t ed t ube; wi t h di vi ni ng,wi t hout t he possi bi l i t y of pr oof , t hat l i ght has actual mot i on i nspace; and wi t h asser t i ng that cent r i f ugal mot i on must keep t heheavens f r om f al l i ng. He i s credi t ed wi t h a gr eat sani t ar y f eati n the dr ai ni ng of a marsh, and hi s knowl edge of medi ci ne washel d t o be supernat ur al . For t unat el y, some f r agment s of t hewr i t i ngs of Empedocl es have come down to us, enabl i ng us t o j udgeat f i r st hand as to par t of hi s doctr i nes; whi l e st i l l mor e i sknown t hr ough t he r ef er ences made to hi m by Pl at o, Ar i st ot l e, andot her comment at or s. Empedocl es was a poet whose ver ses st ood t het est of cr i t i c i sm. I n t hi s regard he i s i n a l i ke posi t i on wi t hPar meni des; but i n nei t her case are the pr eser ved f r agment ssuf f i ci ent t o enabl e us f ul l y to est i mat e t hei r aut hor ' ssci ent i f i c at t ai nment s. Phi l osophi cal wr i t i ngs are obscur e enoughat t he best , and they per f orce become doubl y so when expr essed i n

ver se. Yet t her e ar e cer t ai n passages of Empedocl es t hat areunequi vocal and f ul l of i nt er est . Per haps t he most i mport antconcept i on whi ch the works of Empedocl es reveal t o us i s t hedeni al of ant hr opomorphi sm as appl i ed t o dei t y. We have seen howear l y t he anthropomorphi c concept i on was devel oped and howcl osel y i t was al l al ong cl ung t o; t o shake t he mi nd f r ee f r om i tt hen was a remarkabl e f eat , i n accompl i shi ng whi ch Empedocl est ook a l ong st ep i n t he di r ect i on of r at i onal i sm. Hi s concept i oni s par al l el ed by that of anot her physi ci an, Al cmaeon, of Prot on,who cont ended t hat man' s i deas of t he gods amount ed to mere



supposi t i ons at t he ver y most . A r at i onal i st i c or scept i calt endency has been t he accompani ment of medi cal t r ai ni ng i n al lages.

The wor ds i n whi ch Empedocl es expresses hi s concept i on of dei t yhave been pr eser ved and are wel l wort h quot i ng: " I t i s noti mpossi bl e, " he says, " t o dr aw near ( t o god) even wi t h the eyesor t o take hol d of hi m wi t h our hands, whi ch i n t r ut h i s t he besthi ghway of per suasi on i n the mi nd of man; f or he has no humanhead f i t t ed t o a body, nor do t wo shoot s br anch out f r omt het r unk, nor has he f eet , nor swi f t l egs, nor hai r y par t s, but hei s sacred and i nef f abl e mi nd al one, dar t i ng t hr ough t he whol ewor l d wi t h swi f t t hought s. "[ 8]

How f ar Empedocl es car r i ed hi s deni al of ant hr opomorphi sm i si l l ust r at ed by a r ef er ence of Ar i st ot l e, who asser t s "t hatEmpedocl es r egards god as most l acki ng i n t he power of per cept i on; f or he al one does not know one of t he el ement s,St r i f e ( hence) , of per i shabl e t hi ngs. " I t i s di f f i cul t t o avoi dt he f eel i ng t hat Empedocl es her e appr oaches t he modern

phi l osophi cal concept i on t hat God, however postul at ed asi mmut abl e, must al so be post ul ated as unconsci ous, si ncei nt el l i gence, as we know i t , i s dependent upon t he t r ansmut at i onsof mat t er . But t o ur ge t hi s t hought woul d be t o yi el d t o t hatphi l osophi zi ng tendency whi ch has been the bane of i nt er pr et at i onas appl i ed t o t he anci ent t hi nker s.

Consi der i ng f or a moment t he more t angi bl e accompl i shment s of Empedocl es, we f i nd i t al l eged that one of hi s " mi r acl es"consi st ed of t he pr eser vat i on of a dead body wi t hout put r ef act i onf or some weeks af t er deat h. We may assume f r om t hi s t hat he hadgai ned i n some way a knowl edge of embal mi ng. As he wasnotori ousl y f ond of exper i ment , and as t he body i n quest i on( assumi ng f or t he moment t he aut hent i ci t y of t he l egend) musthave been pr eserved wi t hout di sf i gur ement , i t i s concei vabl e event hat he had hi t upon t he i dea of i nj ect i ng t he ar t er i es. Thi s, of cour se, i s pur e conj ect ur e; yet i t f i nds a cer t ai n war r ant , bot hi n t he f act t hat t he words of Pyt hagoras l ead us t o bel i eve t hatt he ar t er i es were known and st udi ed, and i n the f act t hatEmpedocl es' own words reveal hi m al so as a st udent of t hevascul ar syst em. Thus Pl ut ar ch ci t es Empedocl es as bel i evi ng"t hat t he r ul i ng par t i s not i n t he head or i n t he br east , but i nt he bl ood; wheref ore i n whatever par t of t he body t he more of t hi s i s spread i n t hat part men excel . " [ 13] And Empedocl es' ownwor ds, as preser ved by St obaeus, asser t "( t he hear t ) l i es i n seasof bl ood whi ch dar t i n opposi t e di r ect i ons, and t her e most of al li nt el l i gence cent r es f or men; f or bl ood about t he hear t i s

i nt el l i gence i n t he case of man. " Al l t hi s i mpl i es a r eal l yr emar kabl e appr eci at i on of t he dependence of vi t al act i vi t i esupon the bl ood.

Thi s cor r ect physi ol ogi cal concept i on, however , was by no meanst he most r emarkabl e of t he i deas t o whi ch Empedoel es was l ed byhi s anatomi cal st udi es. Hi s great est accompl i shment was t o haveconcei ved and cl ear l y expr essed an i dea whi ch t he modernevol ut i oni st connotes when he speaks of homol ogous par t s- - an i deawhi ch f ound a f amous modern exposi t or i n Goet he, as we shal l see



when we come t o deal wi t h ei ght eenth- cent ury sci ence. Empedocl esexpr esses t he i dea i n t hese words: "Hai r , and l eaves, and t hi ckf eat her s of bi r ds, ar e t he same t hi ng i n or i gi n, and r ept i l escal es too on st r ong l i mbs. But on hedgehogs shar p- poi nt ed hai rbr i st l es on t hei r backs. " [ 14] That t he i dea of t r ansmut at i on of par t s, as wel l as of mere homol ogy, was i n mi nd i s evi denced by aver y r emar kabl e sent ence i n whi ch Ar i st ot l e asser t s, "Empedocl essays t hat f i nger nai l s r i se f r om si new f r om har deni ng. " Nor i st hi s qui t e al l , f or sur el y we f i nd t he ger m of t he Lamar cki anconcept i on of evol ut i on t hr ough the t r ansmi ssi on of acqui r edchar act er s i n t he asser t i on t hat "many char act er i st i cs appear i nani mal s because i t happened t o be thus i n t hei r bi r t h, as t hatt hey have such a spi ne because t hey happen t o be descended f r omone t hat bent i t sel f backwar d. "[ 15] Ar i st ot l e, i n quot i ng t hi sr emar k, asser t s, wi t h t he dogmat i sm whi ch char act er i zes thephi l osophi cal comment ators of every age, t hat "Empedocl es i swr ong, " i n maki ng t hi s asser t i on; but Lamar ck, who l i vedt went y- t hr ee hundr ed years af t er Empedocl es, i s f amous i n t hehi st or y of t he doctr i ne of evol ut i on f or el abor at i ng t hi s ver yi dea.

I t i s f ai r t o add, however , t hat t he dr eami ngs of Empedocl esr egar di ng t he ori gi n of l i vi ng or gani sms l ed hi m t o someconcept i ons t hat were much l ess l umi nous. On occasi on, Empedocl est he poet got t he bet t er of Empedocl es t he sci ent i st , and we ar epresent ed wi t h a concept i on of cr eat i on as gr otesque as thatwhi ch del i ght ed t he r eaders of Par adi se Lost at a l at er day.Empedocl es assures us t hat "many heads gr ow up wi t hout necks, andarms were wander i ng about , necks ber ef t of shoul der s, and eyesr oamed about al one wi t h no f oreheads. " [ 16] Thi s chaot i ccondi t i on, so t he poet dr eamed, l ed t o t he uni on of manyi ncongr uous par t s, pr oduci ng "cr eatur es wi t h doubl e f aces,of f spr i ng of oxen wi t h human f aces, and chi l dr en of men wi t h oxenheads. " But out of t hi s chaos came, f i nal l y, we ar e l ed t o i nf er ,a har moni ous aggr egat i on of part s, pr oduci ng ul t i mat el y theper f ected organi sms t hat we see. Unf ort unatel y t he pr eser vedport i ons of t he wr i t i ngs of Empedocl es do not enl i ght en us as tot he pr eci se way i n whi ch f i nal evol ut i on was supposed t o beef f ect ed; al t hough the i dea of endl ess exper i ment at i on unt i lnat ur al sel ect i on r esul t ed i n sur vi val of t he f i t t est seems notf ar af i el d f r om cer t ai n of t he poet i cal asser t i ons. Thus: "Asdi vi ni t y was mi ngl ed yet mor e wi t h di vi ni t y, t hese t hi ngs ( t hevar i ous member s) kept comi ng t oget her i n what ever way each mi ghtchance. " Agai n: "At one t i me al l t he l i mbs whi ch f orm t he bodyuni t ed i nt o one by l ove gr ew vi gor ousl y i n t he pr i me of l i f e; butyet at another t i me, separat ed by evi l St r i f e, t hey wander eachi n di f f er ent di r ecti ons al ong t he br eaker s of t he sea of l i f e.

J ust so i s i t wi t h pl ants, and wi t h f i shes dwel l i ng i n wat eryhal l s, and beast s whose l ai r i s i n the mount ai ns, and bi r ds bor neon wi ngs. " [ 17]

Al l t hi s i s poet r y rat her t han sci ence, yet such i magi ni ngs coul dcome onl y t o one who was gropi ng t owards what we moder ns shoul dt er m an evol ut i onar y concept i on of t he or i gi ns of or gani c l i f e;and however grot esque some of t hese expr essi ons may appear , i tmust be admi t t ed t hat t he morphol ogi cal i deas of Empedocl es, asabove quot ed, gi ve t he Si ci l i an phi l osopher a secure pl ace among



t he ant i ci pat or s of t he moder n evol ut i oni st .

VI I . GREEK SCI ENCE I N THE EARLY ATTI C PERI OD

We have t r avel l ed r ather f ar i n our st udy of Gr eek sci ence, andyet we have not unt i l now come t o Gr eece i t sel f . And even now,t he men whose names we are t o consi der were, f or t he most par t ,bor n i n out - l yi ng por t i ons of t he empi r e; t hey di f f er ed f r om t heot hers we have consi dered onl y i n the f act t hat t hey were drawnpr esent l y t o the capi t al . The change i s due to a most i nt er est i ngsequence of hi st ori cal event s. I n the day when Thal es and hi si mmedi ate successors t aught i n Mi l etus, when t he gr eat men of t heI t al i c school wer e i n t hei r pr i me, t her e was no si ngl e undi sput edCent r e of Gr eek i nf l uence. The Gr eeks were a di sor gani zed companyof pet t y nat i ons, wel ded toget her chi ef l y by uni t y of speech; butnow, ear l y i n t he f i f t h cent ur y B. C. , occur r ed t hat f amous at t ackupon t he West ern wor l d by t he Per si ans under Dar i us and hi s sonand successor Xerxes. A f ew mont hs of bat t l i ng determi ned t he

f at e of t he West er n worl d. The Or i ent al s wer e hur l ed back; t hegl or i ous memor i es of Marat hon, Sal ami s, and Pl ataea st i mul atedt he pat r i ot i sm and ent husi asm of al l chi l dr en of t he Gr eek race.

The Gr eeks, f or t he f i r st t i me, occupi ed t he cent r e of t hehi st or i cal st age; f or t he br i ef i nt er val of about hal f a cent ur yt he di f f er ent Greci an pr i nci pal i t i es l i ved t oget her i n rel at i vehar mony. One ci t y was recogni zed as t he metr opol i s of t he l oosel ybound empi r e; one ci t y became t he home of cul t ure and t he Meccat owar ds whi ch al l eyes t ur ned; t hat ci t y, of cour se, was At hens.For a br i ef t i me al l r oads l ed t o At hens, as, at a l at er dat e,t hey al l l ed t o Rome. The waterways whi ch al one bound t he wi del yscat t er ed par t s of Hel l as i nt o a uni t ed whol e l ed out f r om At hensand back to At hens, as t he spokes of a wheel t o i t s hub. At henswas t he commer ci al cent r e, and, l ar gel y f or t hat r eason, i tbecame t he cent r e of cul t ur e and i nt el l ect ual i nf l uence al so. Thewi se men f r om t he col oni es vi si t ed the met r opol i s, and the wi seAt heni ans went out t o the col oni es. Whoever aspi r ed t o become al eader i n pol i t i cs, i n ar t , i n l i t erature, or i n phi l osophy, madehi s way to the capi t al , and so, wi t h al most bewi l der i ngsuddenness, t here bl ossomed t he ci vi l i zat i on of t he age of Per i cl es; t he ci vi l i zat i on whi ch pr oduced aeschyl us, Sophocl es,Eur i pi des, Her odotus, and Thucydi des; t he ci vi l i zat i on whi ch madepossi bl e the bui l di ng of t he Par t henon.

ANAXAGORAS

Somet i me dur i ng the earl y part of t hi s gol den age t here came toAt hens a mi ddl e- aged man f r om Cl azomenae, who, f r om our presentst andpoi nt , was a more i nt er est i ng per sonal i t y t han per haps anyot her i n t he great gal axy of r emarkabl e men assembl ed t her e. Thename of t hi s new- comer was Anaxagoras. I t was sai d i n af t er - t i me,we know not wi t h what degree of t r uth, t hat he had been a pupi lof Anaxi menes. I f so, he was a pupi l who depar t ed f ar f r omt het eachi ngs of hi s mast er . What we know f or cer t ai n i s t hatAnaxagoras was a t r ul y or i gi nal t hi nker , and that he became acl ose f r i end- - i n a sense t he t eacher - - of Per i cl es and of



Eur i pi des. J ust how l ong he r emai ned at At hens i s not cer t ai n;but t he t i me came when he had made hi msel f i n some wayobj ect i onabl e to the At heni an popul ace thr ough hi s t eachi ngs.Fi l l ed wi t h t he spi r i t of t he i nvest i gat or , he coul d not acceptt he cur r ent concept i ons as t o t he gods. He was a scept i c, ani nnovator . Such men are never wel come; t hey are t he chi ef f actorsi n t he pr ogr ess of t hought , but t hey must l ook al ways t oposter i t y f or r ecogni t i on of t hei r wort h; f r om t hei rcont emporar i es t hey recei ve, not t hanks, but per secut i on.Somet i mes t hi s per secut i on t akes one f orm, somet i mes another ; t ot he credi t of t he Gr eeks be i t sai d, t hat wi t h t hem i t usual l yl ed t o not hi ng more severe t han bani shment . I n the case of Anaxagoras, i t i s al l eged t hat t he sent ence pr onounced was deat h;but t hat , t hanks to t he i nf l uence of Per i cl es, t hi s sent ence wascommut ed t o bani shment . I n any event , t he aged phi l osopher wassent away f r omt he ci t y of hi s adopt i on. He r et i r ed t o Lampsacus."I t i s not I t hat have l ost t he At heni ans, " he sai d; " i t i s t heAt heni ans t hat have l ost me. "

The exact posi t i on whi ch Anaxagoras had among hi s cont emporar i es,

and hi s exact pl ace i n the devel opment of phi l osophy, have al waysbeen somewhat i n di sput e. I t i s not known, of a cer t ai nt y, t hathe even hel d an open school at At hens. Ri t t er t hi nks i t doubt f ult hat he di d. I t was hi s f at e to be mi sunder st ood, orunder est i mat ed, by Ar i st ot l e; t hat i n i t sel f woul d have suf f i cedgr eat l y to di m hi s f ame- - mi ght , i ndeed, have l ed t o hi s al mostent i r e negl ect had he not been a t r ul y remar kabl e thi nker . Wi t hmost of t he quest i ons t hat have exerci sed the comment at ors wehave but scant concer n. Fol l owi ng Ar i st ot l e, most hi st or i ans of phi l osophy have been metaphysi ci ans; t hey have concernedt hemsel ves f ar l ess wi t h what t he anci ent t hi nker s real l y knewt han wi t h what t hey t hought . A chance usi ng of a verbal qui bbl e,an esot er i c phr ase, t he expr essi on of a vague myst i ci sm- - t hesewoul d suf f i ce t o cal l f or t h r eams of exposi t i on. I t has been t hef avor i t e past i me of hi st ori ans t o weave t hei r own anachr oni st i ct heor i es upon t he scanty woof of t he hal f - r emember ed t houghts of t he anci ent phi l osopher s. To make such cl oth of t he i magi nat i onas t hi s i s an al l ur i ng past i me, but one that must not di ver t usher e. Our poi nt of vi ew r ever ses t hat of t he phi l osopher s. We arechi ef l y concerned, not wi t h some vague sayi ng of Anaxagoras, butwi t h what he r eal l y knew r egardi ng t he phenomena of nat ure; wi t hwhat he obser ved, and wi t h t he comprehensi bl e deduct i ons t hat heder i ved f r om hi s obser vat i ons. I n at t empt i ng t o answer t hesei nqui r i es, we ar e obl i ged, i n par t , t o t ake our evi dence atsecond- hand; but , f ort unatel y, some f r agment s of wr i t i ngs of Anaxagoras have come down t o us. We are t ol d t hat he wr ot e onl y asi ngl e book. I t was sai d even ( by Di ogenes) t hat he was the f i r st

man t hat ever wr ote a work i n pr ose. The l at t er st atement woul dnot bear t oo cl ose an exami nat i on, yet i t i s t r ue t hat noext ensi ve pr ose composi t i ons of an ear l i er day than t hi s havebeen preser ved, t hough numerous other s ar e known by t hei rf r agment s. Her odot us, "t he f at her of pr ose, " was a sl i ght l yyounger cont empor ary of t he Cl azomenaean phi l osopher ; notunl i kel y t he t wo men may have met at At hens.

Not wi t hst andi ng t he l oss of t he gr eat er par t of t he wr i t i ngs of Anaxagoras, however , a t ol er abl y pr eci se account of hi s



sci ent i f i c doct r i nes i s accessi bl e. Di ogenes Laer t i us expr essessome of t hem i n very cl ear and pr eci se t erms. We have al r eadypoi nt ed out t he uncer t ai nt y t hat at t aches t o such evi dence ast hi s, but i t i s as val i d f or Anaxagor as as f or anot her . I f wer ej ect such evi dence, we shal l of t en have al most not hi ng l ef t ; i naccept i ng i t we may at l east f eel cer t ai n t hat we ar e vi ewi ng t het hi nker as hi s cont emporar i es and i mmedi ate successor s vi ewedhi m. Fol l owi ng Di ogenes, t hen, we shal l f i nd some r emarkabl esci ent i f i c opi ni ons ascr i bed t o Anaxagoras. "He asser t ed, " we ar et ol d, " t hat t he sun was a mass of bur ni ng i r on, gr eat er t hanPel oponnesus, and that t he moon cont ai ned houses and al so hi l l sand r avi nes. " I n cor r obor at i on of t hi s, Pl at o r epr esent s hi m ashavi ng conj ect ur ed t he ri ght expl anat i on of t he moon' s l i ght , andof t he sol ar and l unar ecl i pses. He had ot her ast r onomi calt heor i es t hat wer e mor e f anci f ul ; t hus "he sai d t hat t he st ar sor i gi nal l y moved about i n i r r egul ar conf usi on, so t hat at f i r stt he pol e- st ar , whi ch i s cont i nual l y vi si bl e, al ways appear ed i nt he zeni t h, but t hat af t er war ds i t acqui r ed a cer t ai ndecl i nat i on, and t hat t he Mi l ky Way was a r ef l ect i on of t he l i ghtof t he sun when the st ars di d not appear . The comets he

consi der ed to be a concour se of pl anet s emi t t i ng rays, and theshoot i ngst ar s he t hought wer e spar ks, as i t wer e, l eapi ng f r omt he f i r mament . "

Much of t hi s i s f ar enough f r omt he t r ut h, as we now know i t , yetal l of i t shows an ear nest endeavor t o expl ai n t he observedphenomena of t he heavens on rat i onal pr i nci pl es. To havepredi cat ed t he sun as a great mol t en mass of i r on was i ndeed awonder f ul ant i ci pat i on of t he r esul t s of t he modern spect r oscope.Nor can i t be sai d that t hi s hypothesi s of Anaxagoras was apurel y vi s i onar y guess. I t was i n al l probabi l i t y a sci ent i f i cdeduct i on f r omt he observed char act er of met eori c st ones.Ref erence has al r eady been made to t he al l eged pr edi ct i on of t hef al l of t he f amous meteor at aegespotomi by Anaxagoras. Theasser t i on t hat he act ual l y pr edi ct ed t hi s f al l i n any pr opersense of t he word woul d be obvi ousl y absur d. Yet t he f act t hathi s name i s associ at ed wi t h i t suggest s t hat he had st udi edsi mi l ar met eor i t es, or el se t hat he st udi ed t hi s par t i cul ar one,si nce i t i s not qui t e cl ear whet her i t was bef or e or af t er t hi sf al l t hat he made the f amous asser t i on that space i s f ul l of f al l i ng st ones. We shoul d st r et ch t he pr obabi l i t i es wer e we t oassert t hat Anaxagoras knew t hat shoot i ngst ars and meteor s weret he same, yet t her e i s an i nt er est i ng suggest i veness i n hi sl i keni ng t he shoot i ngst ar s t o spar ks l eapi ng f r omt he f i r mament ,t aken i n connect i on wi t h hi s observat i on on met eori t es. Be t hi sas i t may, t he f act t hat somet hi ng whi ch f al l s f r omheaven as abl azi ng l i ght t ur ns out t o be an i r on- l i ke mass may very wel l

have suggested to the most r at i onal of t hi nker s t hat t he gr eatbl azi ng l i ght cal l ed t he sun has t he same composi t i on. Thi s i deagr asped, i t was a not unnat ur al ext ensi on t o concei ve t he ot herheavenl y bodi es as havi ng t he same composi t i on.

Thi s l ed t o a t r ul y st ar t l i ng t hought . Si nce t he heavenl y bodi esare of t he same composi t i on as t he eart h, and si nce t hey ar eobser ved t o be whi r l i ng about t he ear t h i n space, may we notsuppose t hat t hey were once a par t of t he eart h i t sel f , and t hatt hey have been thr own of f by t he f orce of a whi r l i ng mot i on? Such



was t he concl usi on whi ch Anaxagoras r eached; such hi s expl anat i onof t he ori gi n of t he heavenl y bodi es. I t was a marvel l ous guess.Deduct f r om i t al l t hat r ecent sci ence has shown t o be unt r ue;bear i n mi nd that t he st ars ar e suns, compared wi t h whi ch theear t h i s a mer e speck of dust ; r ecal l t hat t he sun i s par ent , notdaught er , of t he ear t h, and despi t e al l t hese deduct i ons, t hecosmogoni c guess of Anaxagoras r emai ns, as i t seems t o us, one of t he most mar vel l ous f eat s of human i nt el l i gence. I t was t he f i r stexpl anat i on of t he cosmi c bodi es t hat coul d be cal l ed, i n anysense, an ant i ci pat i on of what t he sci ence of our own day acceptsas a t r ue expl anat i on of cosmi c or i gi ns. Mor eover , l et us ur geagai n that t hi s was no mer e acci dent al f l i ght of t he i magi nat i on;i t was a sci ent i f i c i nduct i on based on t he onl y dat a avai l abl e;per haps i t i s not t oo much t o say that i t was t he onl y sci ent i f i ci nduct i on whi ch t hese dat a woul d f ai r l y sust ai n. Of cour se i t i snot f or a moment t o be i nf err ed t hat Anaxagoras unders t ood, i nt he moder n sense, t he charact er of t hat whi r l i ng f orce whi ch wecal l cent r i f ugal . About t wo t housand year s wer e yet t o el apsebef ore t hat f orce was expl ai ned as el ement ar y i nert i a; and event hat expl anat i on, l et us not f or get , mer el y suf f i ced t o push back

t he barr i ers of myst er y by one ot her st age; f or even i n our dayi ner t i a i s a st at ement of f act r at her t han an expl anat i on.

But however l i t t l e Anaxagor as coul d expl ai n t he cent r i f ugal f or ceon mechani cal pr i nci pl es, t he pr act i cal power s of t hat f or ce wer esuf f i ci ent l y open t o hi s observat i on. The mere exper i ment of t hr owi ng a stone f r oma sl i ng woul d, t o an observi ng mi nd, bef ul l of suggest i veness. I t woul d be obvi ous t hat by whi r l i ng t hesl i ng about , t he st one whi ch i t hel d woul d be sust ai ned i n i t sci r cl i ng pat h about t he hand i n seemi ng def i ance of t he eart h' spul l , and af t er t he st one had l ef t t he sl i ng, i t coul d f l y awayf r omt he ear t h t o a di st ance whi ch t he most casual observat i onwoul d pr ove t o be pr opor t i onat e t o the speed of i t s f l i ght .Extr emel y rapi d mot i on, t hen, mi ght pr oj ect bodi es f r omt heear t h' s sur f ace of f i nt o space; a suf f i ci ent l y r api d whi r l woul dkeep t hem t her e. Anaxagoras concei ved t hat t hi s was preci sel ywhat had occur r ed. Hi s i magi nat i on even car r i ed hi m a st epf ar t her - - t o a concept i on of a sl ackeni ng of speed, t hr ough whi cht he heavenl y bodi es woul d l ose thei r cent r i f ugal f or ce, and,r espondi ng t o the per pet ual pul l of gr avi t at i on, woul d f al l backt o the eart h, j ust as t he gr eat st one at aegespot omi had beenobser ved t o do.

Here we woul d seemt o have a cl ear concept i on of t he i dea of uni ver sal gr avi t at i on, and Anaxagoras st ands bef ore us as t heant i ci pat or of Newt on. Wer e i t not f or one sci ent i f i c maxi m, wemi ght exal t t he ol d Gr eek above t he great est of modern nat ural

phi l osopher s; but t hat maxi m bi ds us pause. I t i s phr ased t hus,"He di scover s who pr oves. " Anaxagoras coul d not prove; hi sargument was at best suggest i ve, not demonst r at i ve. He di d noteven know t he l aws whi ch govern f al l i ng bodi es; much l ess coul dhe appl y such l aws, even had he known t hem, t o si der eal bodi es atwhose si ze and di st ance he coul d onl y guess i n t he vaguest t erms.St i l l hi s cosmogoni c specul at i on r emai ns as per haps t he mostr emar kabl e one of ant i qui t y. How wi del y hi s specul at i on f oundcur r ency among hi s i mmedi ate successor s i s i nst anced i n a passagef r om Pl at o, wher e Socr at es i s r epr esent ed as scor nf ul l y answer i ng



a cal umni ator i n t hese t erms: "He asser t s t hat I say t he sun i s ast one and t he moon an ear t h. Do you t hi nk of accusi ng Anaxagoras,Mi l etas, and have you so l ow an opi ni on of t hese men, and t hi nkt hem so unski l l ed i n l aws, as not t o know t hat t he books of Anaxagoras t he Cl azomenaean are f ul l of t hese doct r i nes. Andf orsooth t he young men are l ear ni ng t hese mat t ers f r om me whi chsomet i mes t hey can buy f r omt he orchest r a f or a dr achma, at t hemost , and l augh at Socrates i f he pr etends t hey arehi s- par t i cul ar l y seei ng t hey ar e so st r ange. "

The el ement of er r or cont ai ned i n t hese cosmogoni c specul at i onsof Anaxagoras has l ed cr i t i cs t o do t hemsomet hi ng l ess t han

j ust i ce. But t here i s one ot her ast r onomi cal specul at i on f orwhi ch t he Cl azomenaean phi l osopher has r ecei ved f ul l cr edi t . I ti s gener al l y admi t t ed t hat i t was he who f i r st f ound out t heexpl anat i on of t he phases of t he moon; a knowl edge t hat t hat bodyshi nes onl y by ref l ected l i ght , and t hat i t s vi si bl e f or ms,waxi ng and wani ng mont h by mont h f r om cr escent t o di sk and f r omdi sk to crescent , mer el y repr esent our shi f t i ng vi ew of i t ssun- i l l umi ned f ace. I t i s di f f i cul t t o put oursel ves i n t he pl ace

of t he anci ent observer and r eal i ze how l i t t l e t he appear ancessuggest t he act ual f act . That a body of t he same st r uct ur e as t heear t h shoul d shi ne wi t h t he r adi ance of t he moon merel y becausesunl i ght i s ref l ected f rom i t , i s i n i t sel f a suppos i t i onseemi ngl y cont r adi ct ed by or di nar y exper i ence. I t r equi r ed themi nd of a phi l osopher , sust ai ned, perhaps, by some experi ment alobservat i ons, t o concei ve t he i dea t hat what seems so obvi ousl ybr i ght may be i n r eal i t y dar k. The ger m of t he concept i on of whatt he phi l osopher speaks of as t he noumena, or act ual i t i es, back of phenomena or appearances, had perhaps t hi s cr ude begi nni ng.Anaxagoras coul d surel y poi nt t o t he moon i n suppor t of hi sseemi ng par adox that snow, bei ng r eal l y composed of wat er , whi chi s dar k, i s i n r eal i t y bl ack and not whi t e- - a cont ent i on t o whi chwe shal l r ef er more at l ength i n a moment .

But t her e i s yet another st r i ki ng thought connect ed wi t h thi s newexpl anat i on of t he phases of t he moon. The expl anat i on i mpl i esnot mer el y t he ref l ect i on of l i ght by a dar k body, but by a dar kbody of a par t i cul ar f or m. Gr ant ed t hat r ef l ect i ons ar e i nquest i on, no body but a spheri cal one coul d gi ve an appear ancewhi ch t he moon presents. The moon, t hen, i s not merel y a mass of ear t h, i t i s a spher i cal mass of ear t h. Her e ther e wer e no f l awsi n the r easoni ng of Anaxagor as. By sci ent i f i c i nduct i on he passedf r omobservat i on t o expl anat i on. A new and most i mport ant el ementwas added to the sci ence of ast r onomy.

Looki ng back f r om t he l at t er - day stand- poi nt , i t woul d seem as i f

t he mi nd of t he phi l osopher must have t aken one ot her st ep: t hemi nd t hat had concei ved sun, moon, st ars, and eart h to be of onesubst ance mi ght nat ur al l y, we shoul d thi nk, have r eached out t ot he f ur t her i nduct i on t hat , si nce t he moon i s a spher e, t he ot hercosmi c bodi es, i ncl udi ng the ear t h, must be spher es al so. Butgener al i zer as he was, Anaxagoras was t oo r i gi dl y sci ent i f i c at hi nker t o make t hi s assumpt i on. The dat a at hi s command di d not ,as he anal yzed t hem, seem t o poi nt t o t hi s concl usi on. We haveseen t hat Pyt hagoras pr obabl y, and Par meni des sur el y, out t herei n I t al y had concei ved t he i dea of t he ear t h' s r ot undi t y, but t he



Pyt hagorean doct r i nes were not r api dl y t aken up i n the mot her-count r y, and Par meni des, i t must be r ecal l ed, was a st r i ctcont emporar y of Anaxagoras hi msel f . I t i s no repr oach, t heref ore,t o t he Cl azomenaean phi l osopher t hat he shoul d have hel d t o t heol d i dea t hat t he ear t h i s f l at , or at most a convex di sk- - t hel at t er bei ng t he Babyl oni an concept i on whi ch pr obabl y domi natedt hat Mi l esi an school t o whi ch Anaxagoras harked back.

Anaxagoras may never have seen an ecl i pse of t he moon, and eveni f he had he mi ght have r ef l ect ed t hat , f r om cer t ai n di r ect i ons,a di sk may throw preci sel y t he same shadow as a sphere. Mor eover ,i n ref er ence to t he shadow cast by t he ear t h, t here was, soAnaxagoras bel i eved, an observat i on open t o hi m ni ght l y whi ch, wemay wel l suppose, was not wi t hout i nf l uence i n suggest i ng to hi smi nd t he probabl e shape of t he ear t h. The Mi l ky Way, whi chdoubt l ess had puzzl ed ast r onomer s f r omt he begi nni ngs of hi st oryand whi ch was t o cont i nue to puzzl e t hemf or many cent ur i es af t ert he day of Anaxagoras, was expl ai ned by t he Cl azomenaeanphi l osopher on a t heor y obvi ousl y suggest ed by the t heor y of t hemoon' s phases. Si nce the ear t h- l i ke moon shi nes by r ef l ect ed

l i ght at ni ght , and si nce t he st ar s seem obvi ousl y br i ght er ondar k ni ght s, Anaxagoras was but f ol l owi ng up a perf ect l y l ogi cali nduct i on when he pr opounded t he t heor y t hat t he st ars i n t heMi l ky Way seem more numerous and br i ght er t han t hose of any otherpar t of t he heavens, merel y because t he Mi l ky Way marks t heshadow of t he eart h. Of cour se t he i nf erence was wr ong, so f ar ast he shadow of t he eart h i s concer ned; yet i t cont ai ned a par tt r ut h, t he f or ce of whi ch was never f ul l y r ecogni zed unt i l t het i me of Gal i l eo. Thi s consi st s i n t he asser t i on t hat t hebr i ght ness of t he Mi l ky Way i s merel y due t o t he gl ow of manyst ars . The shadow- t heor y of Anaxagoras woul d natur al l y cease t ohave val i di t y so soon as t he spher i ci t y of t he eart h was proved,and wi t h i t , seemi ngl y, f el l f or t he ti me the compani on t heor yt hat t he Mi l ky Way i s made up of a mul t i t ude of st ars .

I t has been sai d by a modern cr i t i c[ 1] t hat t he shadow- t heor y waschi l di sh i n t hat i t f ai l ed t o not e t hat t he Mi l ky Way does notf ol l ow t he cour se of t he ecl i pt i c. But t hi s cr i t i c i sm onl y hol dsgood so l ong as we ref l ect on t he t r ue char act er of t he eart h asa symmet r i cal body poi sed i n space. I t i s qui t e possi bl e t oconcei ve a body occupyi ng the posi t i on of t he ear t h wi t hr ef erence t o t he sun whi ch woul d cast a shadow havi ng such at enuous f orm as t he Mi l ky Way pr esent s. Such a body obvi ousl ywoul d not be a gl obe, but a l ong- dr awn- out , at t enuat ed f i gur e.

There i s, t o be sur e, no di r ect evi dence preser ved t o show t hatAnaxagoras concei ved t he wor l d t o pr esent such a f i gur e as thi s,but what we know of t hat phi l osopher ' s cl ose- r easoni ng, l ogi cal

mi nd gi ves some warr ant t o t he assumpt i on- - grat ui t ous t hough i n asense i t be- - t hat t he aut hor of t he t heory of t he moon' s phaseshad not f ai l ed t o ask hi msel f what must be t he f orm of t hatt er r est r i al body whi ch coul d cast t he tenuous shadow of t he Mi l kyWay. Moreover , we must r ecal l t hat t he habi t abl e eart h, as knownt o t he Gr eeks of t hat day, was a r el at i vel y narr ow band of t er r i t or y, st r et chi ng f ar t o t he east and t o t he west .

Anaxagor as as Meteor ol ogi st



The man who had st udi ed t he met eor i t e of aegospot ami , and beenput by i t on t he t r ack of such r emar kabl e i nduct i ons, was,nat ur al l y, not obl i vi ous t o t he other phenomena of t heat mosphere. I ndeed, such a mi nd as t hat of Anaxagor as was sur e t oi nvest i gate al l manner of natural phenomena, and al most equal l ysur e t o throw new l i ght on any subj ect t hat i t i nvest i gat ed.Hence i t i s not sur pr i si ng t o f i nd Anaxagor as credi t ed wi t hexpl ai ni ng the wi nds as due to t he rar ef act i ons of t he at mospherepr oduced by the sun. Thi s expl anat i on gi ves Anaxagoras f ul l r i ghtt o be cal l ed "t he f at her of met eor ol ogy, " a ti t l e whi ch, i t maybe, no one has t hought of appl yi ng to hi m, chi ef l y because t hesci ence of met eor ol ogy di d not make i t s r eal begi nni ngs unt i lsome t went y- f our hundr ed year s af t er t he deat h of i t s f i r st gr eatvot ar y. Not cont ent wi t h expl ai ni ng t he wi nds, t hi s pr ot ot ype of Frankl i n t ur ned hi s at t ent i on even t o t he t i pper at mospher e."Thunder , " he i s r eput ed t o have sai d, "was pr oduced by t hecol l i si on of t he cl ouds, and l i ght ni ng by t he r ubbi ng t oget her of t he cl ouds. " We dar e not go so f ar as t o suggest t hat t hi si mpl i es an associ at i on i n the mi nd of Anaxagoras between the

f r i ct i on of t he cl ouds and t he obser ved el ect r i cal ef f ect sgener at ed by t he f r i ct i on of such a subst ance as amber . To makesuch a suggest i on doubt l ess woul d be to f al l vi ct i m t o t he ol df ami l i ar pr opensi t y t o read i nto Homer t hi ngs that Homer neverknew. Yet t he si gni f i cant f act r emai ns t hat Anaxagoras ascr i bedt o t hunder and t o l i ght ni ng t hei r t r ue posi t i on as str i ctl ynat ural phenomena. For hi m i t was no god t hat menaced humani t ywi t h t hunder i ng voi ce and t he f l ash of hi s di vi ne f i r es f r om t hecl ouds. Li t t l e wonder t hat t he t hi nker whose sci ence car r i ed hi mt o such scept i ci sm as t hi s shoul d have f el t t he wr at h of t hesuper st i t i ous At heni ans.

Bi ol ogi cal Specul at i ons

Passi ng f r omt he phenomena of t he ai r t o those of t he ear t hi t sel f , we l ear n that Anaxagoras expl ai ned an ear t hquake as bei ngpr oduced by t he ret ur ni ng of ai r i nt o t he eart h. We cannot besure as t o t he exact meani ng here, t hough the i dea t hat gases ar ei mpr i soned i n t he subst ance of t he ear t h seems not f ar af i el d.But a f ar more remarkabl e i nsi ght t han thi s woul d i mpl y was shownby Anaxagoras when he assert ed t hat a cer t ai n amount of ai r i scont ai ned i n wat er , and t hat f i shes br eat he thi s ai r . The passageof Ar i st ot l e i n whi ch t hi s opi ni on i s ascri bed t o Anaxagor as i sof suf f i ci ent i nt er est t o be quot ed at l engt h:

"Democri t us, of Abdera, " says Ar i st ot l e, "and some other s, t hat

have spoken concerni ng r espi r at i on, have determi ned not hi ngconcerni ng other ani mal s, but seem t o have supposed t hat al lani mal s r espi r e. But Anaxagoras and Di ogenes ( Apol l oni at es) , whosay t hat al l ani mal s r espi r e, have al so endeavor ed t o expl ai n howf i shes, and al l t hose ani mal s t hat have a har d, r ough shel l , suchas oyst er s, mussel s, et c. , r espi r e. And Anaxagor as, i ndeed, sayst hat f i shes, when t hey emi t wat er t hr ough t hei r gi l l s, at t r actai r f r om t he mout h t o the vacuum i n t he vi scer a f r om t he wat erwhi ch sur r ounds t he mout h; as i f ai r was i nher ent i n t hewat er . "[ 2]



I t shoul d be r ecal l ed t hat of t he t hr ee phi l osopher s t husment i oned as cont endi ng t hat al l ani mal s r espi r e, Anaxagoras wast he el der ; he, t her ef or e, was pr esumabl y the or i gi nat or of t hei dea. I t wi l l be obser ved, t oo, t hat Anaxagor as al one i s hel dr esponsi bl e f or t he i dea t hat f i shes respi r e ai r t hr ough t hei rgi l l s, "at t r acti ng" i t f r om t he wat er . Thi s cer t ai nl y was one of t he shrewdest physi ol ogi cal guesses of any age, i f i t be r egar dedas a mer e guess. Wi t h gr eat er j ust i ce we mi ght r ef er t o i t as apr of ound deduct i on f r om t he pr i nci pl e of t he uni f or mi t y of nat ur e.

I n maki ng such a deduct i on, Anaxagor as was f ar i n advance of hi st i me as i l l ust r at ed by t he f act t hat Ar i st ot l e makes t he ci t at i onwe have j ust quot ed merel y t o add t hat "such t hi ngs ar ei mpossi bl e, " and to r ef ut e t hese " i mpossi bl e" i deas by means of metaphysi cal r easoni ngs t hat seemed demonst r at i ve not merel y tohi msel f , but t o many gener at i ons of hi s f ol l ower s.

We are t ol d t hat Anaxagoras al l eged t hat al l ani mal s were

or i gi nal l y gener at ed out of moi st ur e, heat , and ear t h par t i cl es. J ust what opi ni on he hel d concer ni ng man' s devel opment we are noti nf ormed. Yet t her e i s one of hi s phr ases whi chsuggest s- - wi t hout , per haps, qui t e pr ovi ng- - t hat he was anevol ut i oni st. Thi s phrase assert s, wi t h i nsi ght t hat i s f ai r l yst ar t l i ng, t hat man i s t he most i nt el l i gent of ani mal s because hehas hands. The man who coul d make t hat asser t i on must , i t woul dseem, have had i n mi nd t he i dea of t he devel opment of i nt el l i gence t hr ough t he use of hands- - an i dea t he f ul l f or ce of whi ch was not evi dent t o subsequent gener at i ons of t hi nker s unt i lt he t i me of Darwi n.

Physi cal Specul at i ons

Anaxagor as i s ci t ed by Ar i st ot l e as bel i evi ng t hat "pl ant s ar eani mal s and f eel pl easur e and pai n, i nf er r i ng t hi s because t heyshed t hei r l eaves and l et t hem gr ow agai n. " The i dea i s f anci f ul ,yet i t suggest s agai n a tr ul y phi l osophi cal concept i on of t heuni t y of nat ure. The man who coul d concei ve that i dea was butl i t t l e hamper ed by t r adi t i onal concept i ons. He was exer ci si ng ar are combi nat i on of t he r i gi dl y sci ent i f i c spi r i t wi t h t hepoet i cal i magi nat i on. He who possesses t hese gi f t s i s sure not t ost op i n hi s quest i oni ngs of natur e unt i l he has f ound somet hi nkabl e expl anat i on of t he char act er of mat t er i t sel f .Anaxagor as f ound such an expl anat i on, and, as good l uck woul dhave i t , t hat expl anat i on has been pr eserved. Let us exami ne hi s

r easoni ng i n some detai l . We have al r eady ref er r ed t o the cl ai mal l eged t o have been made by Anaxagoras t hat snow i s not r eal l ywhi t e, but bl ack. The phi l osopher expl ai ned hi s par adox, we ar et ol d, by asser t i ng t hat snow i s r eal l y wat er , and t hat wat er i sdar k, when vi ewed under pr oper condi t i ons- - as at t he bot t omof awel l . That i dea cont ai ns t he ger m of t he Cl azomenaeanphi l osopher ' s concept i on of t he nat ur e of mat t er . I ndeed, i t i snot unl i kel y t hat t hi s t heor y of mat t er gr ew out of hi sobservat i on of t he changi ng f orms of water. He seems cl ear l y tohave gr asped t he i dea t hat snow on the one hand, and vapor on t he



other , ar e of t he same i nt i mat e subst ance as t he wat er f r omwhi cht hey are der i ved and i nto whi ch t hey may be agai n t r ansf ormed.

The f act t hat st eam and snow can be changed back i nt o wat er , andby si mpl e mani pul at i on cannot be changed i nto any ot hersubst ance, f i nds, as we now bel i eve, i t s t r ue expl anat i on i n t hef act t hat t he mol ecul ar st r uct ur e, as we phr ase i t - - t hat i s t osay, t he ul t i mate part i cl e of whi ch wat er i s composed, i s notchanged, and t hi s i s pr eci sel y t he expl anat i on whi ch Anaxagorasgave of t he same phenomena. For hi m t he uni t part i cl e of waterconst i t ut ed an el ement ary body, uncreated, unchangeabl e,i ndestr ucti bl e. Thi s part i cl e, i n associ at i on wi t h l i kepar t i cl es, const i t ut es t he subst ance whi ch we cal l wat er . Thesame par t i cl e i n associ at i on wi t h par t i cl es unl i ke i t sel f , mi ghtpr oduce t otal l y di f f er ent subst ances- - as, f or exampl e, when wat eri s t aken up by t he root s of a pl ant and becomes, seemi ngl y, apar t of t he subst ance of t he pl ant . But whatever t he changedassoci at i on, so Anaxagor as r easoned, t he ul t i mat e par t i cl e of wat er r emai ns a par t i cl e of water st i l l . And what was t r ue of water was t r ue al so, so he concei ved, of every ot her subst ance.Gol d, si l ver , i r on, ear t h, and the var i ous veget abl es and ani mal

t i ssues- - i n shor t , each and ever y one of al l t he di f f er entsubst ances wi t h whi ch exper i ence makes us f ami l i ar , i s made up of uni t par t i cl es whi ch mai nt ai n t hei r i nt egr i t y i n what evercombi nat i on t hey may be associ at ed. Thi s i mpl i es, obvi ousl y, amul t i t ude of pr i mor di al par t i cl es, each one havi ng ani ndi vi dual i t y of i t s own; each one, l i ke t he par t i cl e of wat eral r eady ci t ed, uncreat ed, unchangeabl e, and i ndest r uct i bl e.

Fort unat el y, we have t he phi l osopher ' s own words t o gui de us ast o hi s specul at i ons her e. The f r agment s of hi s wr i t i ngs t hat havecome down to us ( chi ef l y t hr ough t he quotat i ons of Si mpl i ci us)deal al most excl usi vel y wi t h t hese ul t i mat e concept i ons of hi si magi nat i on. I n ascri bi ng to hi m, t hen, t hi s concept i on of di ver se, uncr eated, pr i mordi al el ement s, whi ch can never bechanged, but can onl y be mi xed t ogether t o f orm subst ances of t hemateri al wor l d, we are not r eadi ng back post - Dal t oni an knowl edgei nt o t he syst emof Anaxagoras. Here are hi s words: "The Gr eeks donot r i ght l y use t he t er ms ' comi ng i nt o bei ng' and ' per i shi ng. 'For nothi ng comes i nt o bei ng, nor, yet , does anyt hi ng per i sh; butt her e i s mi xtur e and separat i on of t hi ngs t hat ar e. So they woul ddo r i ght i n cal l i ng ' comi ng i nt o bei ng' ' mi xture' and ' per i shi ng'' separ at i on. ' For how coul d hai r come f r om what i s not hai r ? Orf l esh f r om what i s not f l esh?"

El sewher e he t el l s us t hat ( at one stage of t he wor l d' sdevel opment ) "t he dense, t he moi st , t he col d, t he dar k, col l ect edt her e wher e now i s ear t h; t he rar e, t he war m, t he dr y, t he

br i ght , depar t ed t owar ds t he f ur t her par t of t he aet her . Theear t h i s condensed out of t hese thi ngs t hat ar e separ ated, f orwat er i s separ at ed f r om t he cl ouds, and ear t h f r omt he wat er ; andf r omt he ear t h st ones ar e condensed by the col d, and t hese aresepar at ed f ar t her f r om t he wat er . " Her e agai n t he i nf l uence of heat and col d i n det er mi ni ng physi cal qual i t i es i s keptpr e- emi nent l y i n mi nd. The dense, t he moi st , t he col d, t he dar kare cont r asted wi t h t he r ar e, t he war m, t he dr y, and br i ght ; andt he f ormat i on of st ones i s spoken of as a speci f i c condensat i ondue t o the i nf l uence of col d. Her e, t hen, we have near l y al l t he



el ement s of t he Dal t oni an t heory of atoms on t he one hand, andt he nebul ar hypot hesi s of Lapl ace on t he ot her . But t hi s i s notqui t e al l . I n addi t i on t o such di ver se el ement ar y par t i cl es ast hose of gol d, wat er , and the rest , Anaxagoras concei ved aspeci es of par t i cl es di f f er i ng f r om al l t he ot her s, not mer el y ast hey di f f er f r om one anot her , but const i t ut i ng a cl ass byt hemsel ves; par t i cl es i nf i ni t el y smal l er t han t he ot her s;par t i cl es t hat ar e descr i bed as i nf i ni t e, sel f - power f ul , mi xedwi t h not hi ng, but exi st i ng al one. That i s t o say ( i nt er pr et i ngt he t heory i n t he onl y way t hat seems pl ausi bl e) , t hese mostmi nut e par t i cl es do not mi x wi t h t he ot her pr i mor di al par t i cl est o f orm materi al subst ances i n the same way i n whi ch these mi xedwi t h one anot her . But , on t he ot her hand, t hese " i nf i ni t e,sel f - powerf ul , and unmi xed" part i cl es commi ngl e everywhere and i never y subst ance what ever wi t h t he mi xed par t i cl es t hat go t o makeup t he subst ances.

There i s a di st i nct i on here, i t wi l l be obser ved, whi ch at oncesuggest s t he modern di st i nct i on between physi cal pr ocesses andchemi cal pr ocesses, or, put t i ng i t otherwi se, bet ween mol ecul ar

processes and at omi c processes; but t he r eader must be guardedagai nst supposi ng that Anaxagoras had any such t hought as t hi s i nmi nd. Hi s ul t i mate mi xabl e part i cl es can be compared onl y wi t ht he Dal t oni an atom, not wi t h t he mol ecul e of t he modernphysi ci st , and hi s "i nf i ni t e, sel f - power f ul , and unmi xabl e"par t i cl es are not compar abl e wi t h anythi ng but t he et her of t hemodern physi ci st , wi t h whi ch hypot het i cal subst ance t hey havemany poi nt s of r esembl ance. But t he "i nf i ni t e, sel f - power f ul ,and unmi xed" par t i cl es const i t ut i ng t hus an et her - l i ke pl enumwhi ch per meat es al l mat er i al st r uct ur es, have al so, i n t he mi ndof Anaxagoras, a f unct i on whi ch car r i es t hem per haps a st agebeyond t he pr ovi nce of t he moder n et her . For t hese "i nf i ni t e,sel f power f ul , and unmi xed" part i cl es are i mbued wi t h, and,i ndeed, t hemsel ves const i t ut e, what Anaxagoras t erms nous, a wordwhi ch the modern t r ansl ator has usual l y paraphr ased as " mi nd. "Nei t her t hat word nor any ot her avai l abl e one pr obabl y conveys anaccurat e i dea of what Anaxagor as meant t o i mpl y by t he wor d nous.For hi m t he word meant not merel y "mi nd" i n the sense of r ecept i ve and compr ehendi ng i nt el l i gence, but di r ect i ve andcr eat i ve i nt el l i gence as wel l . Agai n l et Anaxagor as speak f orhi msel f : "Ot her t hi ngs i ncl ude a por t i on of ever ythi ng, but nousi s i nf i ni t e, and sel f - power f ul , and mi xed wi t h not hi ng, but i texi sts al one, i t sel f by i t sel f . For i f i t were not by i t sel f , butwer e mi xed wi t h anyt hi ng el se, i t woul d i ncl ude par t s of al lt hi ngs, i f i t wer e mi xed wi t h anyt hi ng; f or a por t i on of everyt hi ng exi st s i n every thi ng, as has been sai d by me bef ore,and t hi ngs mi ngl ed wi t h i t woul d pr event i t f r omhavi ng power

over anythi ng i n the same way t hat i t does now t hat i t i s al oneby i t sel f . For i t i s t he most r ar ef i ed of al l t hi ngs and t hepur est , and i t has al l knowl edge i n r egar d t o ever ythi ng and t hegr eat est power ; over al l t hat has l i f e, bot h gr eat er and l ess,nous r ul es. And nous r ul ed t he rot at i on of t he whol e, so that i tset i t i n r ot at i on i n t he begi nni ng. Fi r st i t began t he r ot at i onf r oma smal l begi nni ng, t hen more and more was i ncl uded i n themot i on, and yet more wi l l be i ncl uded. Both t he mi xed and t hesepar ated and di st i nct , al l t hi ngs nous r ecogni zed. And what evert hi ngs were to be, and what ever t hi ngs were, as many as are now,



and what ever t hi ngs shal l be, al l t hese nous arr anged i n order ;and i t ar r anged t hat r otat i on, accor di ng t o whi ch now r otatest ars and sun and moon and ai r and aether , now t hat t hey aresepar ated. Rotat i on i t sel f caused t he separ at i on, and t he densei s separ at ed f r om t he r ar e, t he war m f r om t he col d, t he br i ghtf r omt he dar k, t he dry f r omt he moi st . And when nous began t o sett hi ngs i n mot i on, t her e was separ at i on f r omever yt hi ng t hat wasi n mot i on, al l t hi s was made di st i nct . The r ot at i on of t he thi ngst hat were moved and made di st i nct caused t hem t o be yet mor edi s t i nct . " [ 3]

Nous, t hen, as Anaxagoras concei ves i t , i s " t he most r ar ef i ed of al l t hi ngs, and the pur est , and i t has knowl edge i n r egar d toever ythi ng and t he gr eat est power ; over al l t hat has l i f e, bot hgr eat er and l ess, i t r ul es. " But t hese ar e post ul ant s of omni pr esence and omni sci ence. I n ot her words, nous i s not hi ngl ess t han t he omni pot ent ar t i f i cer of t he mat er i al uni ver se. I tl acks nothi ng of t he power of dei t y, save onl y t hat we ar e notassur ed t hat i t creat ed t he pr i mor di al par t i cl es. The cr eat i on of t hese par t i cl es was a concept i on t hat f or Anaxagoras, as f or t he

modern Spencer, l ay beyond the range of i magi nat i on. Nous i s t hear t i f i cer , wor ki ng wi t h "uncreat ed" par t i cl es. Back of nous andt he par t i cl es l i es, f or an Anaxagoras as f or a Spencer , t heUnknowabl e. But nous i t sel f i s t he equi val ent of t hat uni ver salenergy of mot i on whi ch sci ence r ecogni zes as operat i ng betweent he par t i cl es of mat t er , and whi ch t he t heol ogi st per soni f i es asDei t y. I t i s Pant hei st i c dei t y as Anaxagor as concei ves i t ; hi smay be cal l ed t he f i r st sci ent i f i c concept i on of a non-ant hr opomorphi c god. I n el aborat i ng t hi s concept i on Anaxagor asproved hi msel f one of t he most r emarkabl e sci ent i f i c dr eamers of ant i qui t y. To have subst i t ut ed f or t he Gr eek Pant heon of ant hr opomorphi c dei t i es t he concept i on of a non- ant hr opomorphi ci mmat er i al and et her eal ent i t y, of al l t hi ngs i n t he wor l d "t hemost r ar ef i ed and the pur est , " i s t o have perf ormed a f eat whi ch,consi der i ng t he age and t he envi r onment i n whi ch i t wasaccompl i shed, st agger s t he i magi nat i on. As a st r i ct l y sci ent i f i caccompl i shment t he gr eat t hi nker ' s concept i on of pr i mordi alel ement s cont ai ned a germ of t he t r ut h whi ch was t o l i e dormantf or 2200 year s, but whi ch t hen, as modi f i ed and vi t al i zed by thegeni us of Dal t on, was t o domi nat e t he new chemi cal sci ence of t heni net eent h cent ur y. I f t her e ar e i nt i mat i ons t hat t he pr i mor di alel ement of Anaxagoras and of Dal t on may t urn out i n t he nearf ut ur e to be i t sel f a compound, t her e wi l l st i l l r emai n t he yetf i ner par t i cl es of t he nous of Anaxagor as t o baf f l e the mostsubt l e anal ysi s of whi ch t o- day' s sci ence gi ves us anypr e- vi si on. Al l i n al l , t hen, t he wor k of Anaxagoras must st andas t hat of per haps t he most f ar - seei ng sci ent i f i c i magi nat i on of

pr e- Socrat i c ant i qui t y.

LEUCI PPUS AND DEMOCRI TUS

But we must not l eave t hi s al l ur i ng f i el d of specul at i on as t ot he nat ur e of mat t er wi t hout r ef er r i ng t o anot her sci ent i f i cguess, whi ch soon f ol l owed t hat of Anaxagoras and was dest i ned t ogai n even wi der f ame, and whi ch i n modern t i mes has been somewhatunj ust l y hel d t o ecl i pse the gl ory of t he other achi evement . We



mean, of cour se, t he atomi c t heory of Leuci ppus and Democr i t us. Thi s t heor y r educed al l mat t er t o pr i mor di al el ements, cal l edat oms <gr at oma> because t hey ar e by hypot hesi s i ncapabl e of f ur t her di vi si on. These at oms, maki ng up t he ent i r e mater i aluni ver se, ar e i n t hi s t heor y concei ved as qual i t at i vel yi dent i cal , di f f er i ng f r om one anot her onl y i n si ze and per haps i nshape. The uni on of di f f erent - si zed at oms i n endl ess combi nat i onsproduces t he di ver se subst ances wi t h whi ch our senses make usf ami l i ar .

Bef or e we pass t o a consi der at i on of t hi s al l ur i ng t heor y, andpar t i cul ar l y t o a compar i son of i t wi t h the t heor y of Anaxagor as,we must cat ch a gl i mpse of t he per sonal i t y of t he men t o whom t het heor y owes i t s ori gi n. One of t hese, Leuci ppus, pr esent s souncer t ai n a f i gur e as t o be al most mythi cal . I ndeed, i t was l ongquest i oned whet her such a man had act ual l y l i ved, or whet her bewer e not r eal l y an i nvent i on of hi s al l eged di sci pl e, Democr i t us.Lat t er day schol ar shi p, however , accept s hi m as a r eal per sonage,t hough knowi ng scar cel y more of hi m t han t hat he was t he aut horof t he f amous t heor y wi t h whi ch hi s name was associ ated. I t i s

suggest ed t hat he was a wanderer, l i ke most phi l osophers of hi st i me, and that l at er i n l i f e he came to Abder a, i n Thr ace, andt hr ough t hi s ci r cumst ance became t he teacher of Democr i t us. Thi sf abl e answers as wel l as another . What we real l y know i s t hatDemocr i t us hi msel f , t hr ough whose wr i t i ngs and t eachi ngs t heat omi c t heory gai ned vogue, was bor n i n Abdera, about t he year460 B. C. - - t hat i s t o say, j ust about t he ti me when hi s greatpr ecur sor, Anaxagoras, was mi gr at i ng t o At hens. Democr i t us, l i kemost ot her s of t he ear l y Gr eek t hi nker s, l i ves i n t r adi t i on as api ct ur esque f i gur e. I t i s vaguel y r epor t ed t hat he t r avel l ed f ora t i me, perhaps i n t he East and i n Egypt , and t hat t hen heset t l ed down t o spend t he remai nder of hi s l i f e i n Abder a.Whether or not he vi si t ed At hens i n t he cour se of hi s wander i ngswe do not know. At Abdera he was r ever ed as a sage, but hi si nf l uence upon t he pr act i cal ci vi l i zat i on of t he ti me was notmarked. He was pr e- emi nent l y a dreamer and a wr i t er . Li ke hi sconf r er es of t he epoch, he ent er ed al l f i el ds of t hought . Hewr ot e vol umi nousl y, but , unf or t unat el y, hi s wr i t i ngs have, f ort he most par t , per i shed. The f abl es and t r adi t i ons of a l at er dayassert ed t hat Democr i t us had vol untari l y put out hi s own eyest hat he mi ght t ur n hi s t hought s i nward wi t h more concent r at i on.Doubt l ess thi s i s f i ct i on, yet , as usual wi t h such f i ct i ons, i tcont ai ns a ger m of t r ut h; f or we may wel l suppose t hat t hepromul gator of t he atomi c t heory was a man whose mi nd wasat t r act ed by the subt l et i es of t hought r at her t han by t het angi bi l i t i es of obser vat i on. Yet t he t er m "l aughi ngphi l osopher, " whi ch seems t o have been uni ver sal l y appl i ed to

Democr i t us, suggest s a mi nd not al t ogether wi t hdr awn f r om t heworl d of pract i cal i t i es.

So much f or Democr i t us t he man. Let us r eturn now t o hi s t heoryof atoms. Thi s t heor y, i t must be conf essed, made no ver y gr eati mpr essi on upon hi s cont emporar i es. I t f ound an exposi t or, al i t t l e l at er , i n t he phi l osopher Epi curus, and l at er st i l l t hepoet Lucr et i us gave i t popul ar expr essi on. But i t seemed scarcel ymore t han t he dr eam of a phi l osopher or t he vagary of a poetunt i l t he day when modern sci ence began t o penet r ate t he



myst er i es of matt er . When, f i nal l y, t he r esear ches of Dal t on andhi s f ol l ower s had pl aced t he atomi c t heor y on a surer f oot i ng ast he f oundat i on of moder n chemi st r y, t he i deas of t he ol d l aughi ngphi l osopher of Abder a, whi ch al l al ong had been hal f der i si vel yr emember ed, were recal l ed wi t h a new i nterest . Now i t appearedt hat t hese i deas had cur i ousl y f oreshadowed ni net eent h- cent ur yknowl edge. I t appear ed t hat away back i n t he f i f t h cent ur y B. C. aman had dr eamed out a concept i on of t he ul t i mate nature of mat t erwhi ch had wai t ed al l t hese cent ur i es f or cor r oborat i on. And nowt he hi st or i ans of phi l osophy became more t han anxi ous t o do

j ust i ce t o t he memor y of Democr i t us.

I t i s possi bl e t hat t hi s ef f or t at poet i cal rest i t ut i on hascar r i ed t he ent husi ast t oo f ar . Ther e i s, i ndeed, a cur i oussuggest i veness i n t he t heor y of Democr i t us; t her e i sphi l osophi cal al l ur ement i n hi s r educt i on of al l mat t er t o asi ngl e el ement ; i t cont ai ns, i t may be, not mer el y a ger m of t hesci ence of t he ni net eent h- cent ur y chemi st r y, but per haps t heger ms al so of t he yet undevel oped chemi st r y of t he t went i ethcent ur y. Yet we dar e suggest t hat i n t hei r ent husi asm f or t he

atomi c t heor y of Democr i t us t he hi st ori ans of our generat i on havedone somet hi ng l ess t han j ust i ce t o that phi l osopher ' s precur sor,Anaxagoras. And one suspect s t hat t he mere acci dent of a name hasbeen i nst r ument al i n pr oduci ng t hi s r esul t . Democr i t us cal l ed hi spri mordi al el ement an atom; Anaxagor as, t oo, concei ved apr i mordi al el ement , but he cal l ed i t merel y a seed or t hi ng; hef ai l ed t o chr i st en i t di st i nct i vel y. Moder n sci ence adopt ed t heword atom and gave i t uni ver sal vogue. I t owed a debt of gr at i t ude t o Democr i t us f or suppl yi ng i t t he wor d, but i tsomewhat overpai d t he debt i n t oo cl osel y l i nki ng t he new meani ngof t he wor d wi t h i t s ol d or i gi nal one. For , l et i t be cl ear l yunder st ood, t he Dal t oni an at om i s not preci sel y compar abl e wi t ht he atomof Democr i t us. The atom, as Democr i t us concei ved i t , wasmoni st i c; al l at oms, accor di ng t o thi s hypot hesi s, ar e of t hesame subst ance; one at omdi f f ers f r omanother mer el y i n si ze andshape, but not at al l i n qual i t y. But t he Dal t oni an hypot hesi sconcei ved, and near l y al l t he exper i ment al ef f or t s of t heni net eenth century seemed t o pr ove, t hat t her e ar e numerouscl asses of at oms, each di f f er i ng i n i t s ver y essence f r om t heother s.

As t he case st ands t o- day t he chemi st deal s wi t h seventy- oddsubst ances, whi ch he cal l s el ement s. Each one of t hese subst ancesi s, as he concei ves i t , made up of el ement ary at oms havi ng auni que per sonal i t y, each di f f er i ng i n qual i t y f r om al l t heother s. As f ar as exper i ment has t hus f ar saf el y car r i ed us, t heatomof gol d i s a pr i mordi al el ement whi ch r emai ns an at omof

gol d and nothi ng el se, no mat t er wi t h what other at oms i t i sassoci at ed. So, t oo, of t he at om of si l ver, or zi nc, orsodi um- - i n short , of each and ever y one of t he sevent y- oddel ement s. There ar e, i ndeed, as we shal l see, exper i ment s t hatsuggest t he di ssol ut i on of t he at om- - t hat suggest , i n shor t , t hatt he Dal t oni an atom i s mi snamed, bei ng a st r uctur e that may, undercer t ai n condi t i ons, be br oken asunder . But t hese exper i ment shave, as yet , t he warr ant r at her of phi l osophy than of pur esci ence, and to- day we demand t hat t he phi l osophy of sci enceshal l be t he handmai d of exper i ment .



When exper i ment shal l have demonst r ated t hat t he Dal t oni an atomi s a compound, and t hat i n t r ut h t her e i s but a si ngl e t r ue at om,whi ch, combi ni ng wi t h i t s f el l ows per haps i n var yi ng numbers andi n di f f er ent speci al r el at i ons, pr oduces t he Dal t oni an at oms,t hen t he phi l osophi cal t heor y of moni sm wi l l have t heexper i ment al warr ant whi ch t o- day i t l acks; t hen we shal l be ast ep near er t o the at om of Democr i t us i n one di r ect i on, a stepf ar t her away i n the ot her . We shal l be near er , i n that t heconcept i on of Democr i t us was, i n a sense, moni st i c; f art her away,i n t hat al l t he at oms of Democr i t us, l ar ge and smal l al i ke, wer econsi der ed as per manent l y f i xed i n si ze. Democr i t us post ul at edal l hi s at oms as of t he same subst ance, di f f er i ng not at al l i nqual i t y; yet he was obl i ged t o concei ve t hat t he var yi ng si ze of t he at oms gave t o them varyi ng f unct i ons whi ch amounted t oqual i t at i ve di f f er ences. He mi ght cl ai m f or hi s l ar gest at om t hesame qual i t y of subst ance as f or hi s smal l est , but so l ong as heconcei ved that t he l ar ge at oms, when adj ust ed t oget her t o f orm at angi bl e subst ance, f or med a subst ance di f f er ent i n qual i t y f r omt he subst ance whi ch t he smal l at oms woul d make up when si mi l ar l y

gr ouped, t hi s concessi on amount s t o t he pr edi cat i on of di f f er enceof qual i t y between t he atoms t hemsel ves. The ent i r e quest i onr educes i t sel f vi r t ual l y t o a qui bbl e over t he wor d qual i t y, Sol ong as one at omconcei ved t o be pr i mor di al and i ndi vi si bl e i sconceded t o be of such a natur e as necessari l y t o pr oduce adi f f er ent i mpr essi on on our senses, when gr ouped wi t h i t sf el l ows, f r omt he i mpr essi on produced by other atoms whensi mi l arl y gr ouped, such pr i mordi al at oms do di f f er amongt hemsel ves i n pr eci sel y the same way f or al l pr act i cal pur posesas do the pr i mordi al el ement s of Anaxagoras.

The moni st i c concept i on t owards whi ch t went i et h- cent urychemi st r y seems t o be car r yi ng us may per haps show t hat al l t heso- cal l ed atoms are compounded of a si ngl e el ement . Al l t he t r ueat oms maki ng up t hat el ement may t hen pr oper l y be sai d t o havet he same qual i t y, but none t he l ess wi l l i t r emai n t r ue t hat t hecombi nat i ons of t hat el ement t hat go to make up t he di f f erentDal t oni an at oms di f f er f r om one anot her i n qual i t y i n pr eci sel yt he same sense i n whi ch such t angi bl e subst ances as gol d, andoxygen, and mercur y, and di amonds di f f er f r om one anot her. I n t hel ast anal ysi s of t he moni st i c phi l osophy, t her e i s but onesubst ance and one qual i t y i n t he uni ver se. I n t he wi dest vi ew of t hat phi l osophy, gol d and oxygen and mercury and di amonds ar e onesubst ance, and, i f you pl ease, one qual i t y. But such r ef i nement sof anal ysi s as t hi s ar e f or t he t r anscendent al phi l osopher , andnot f or t he sci ent i st . What ever t he al l ur ement of such r easoni ng,we must f or t he pur pose of sci ence l et words have a speci f i c

meani ng, nor must we l et a mere word- j uggl ery bl i nd us t o t heevi dence of f acts. That was t he r ock on whi ch Gr eek sci encef oundered; i t i s t he r ock whi ch t he moder n hel msman somet i mesf i nds i t di f f i cul t t o avoi d. And i f we mi st ake not , t hi s case of t he at om of Democr i t us i s preci sel y a case i n poi nt . BecauseDemocri t us sai d t hat hi s at oms di d not di f f er i n qual i t y, t hemoder n phi l osopher has seen i n hi s t heory t he essent i al s of moni sm; has di scover ed i n i t not mer el y a f orecast of t hechemi st r y of t he ni net eent h cent ur y, but a f or ecast of t hehypothet i cal chemi st r y of t he f ut ur e. And, on t he other hand,



because Anaxagoras pr edi ct ed a di f f er ent qual i t y f or hi spr i mor di al el ement s, t he phi l osopher of our day has di scredi t edt he pr i mordi al el ement of Anaxagoras.

Yet i f our anal ysi s does not l ead us ast r ay, t he t heor y of Democr i t us was not t r ul y moni st i c; hi s i ndest r uct i bl e at oms,di f f er i ng f r om one anot her i n si ze and shape, ut t er l y i ncapabl eof bei ng changed f r omt he f orm whi ch t hey had mai nt ai ned f r omt hebegi nni ng, wer e i n r eal i t y as t r ul y and pr i mor di al l y di f f er ent asare t he pr i mordi al el ement s of Anaxagoras. I n other words, t heatomof Democr i t us i s nothi ng l ess t han t he pr i mordi al seed of Anaxagor as, a l i t t l e mor e tangi bl y vi sual i zed and gi ven adi st i nct i ve name. Anaxagoras expl i ci t l y concei ved hi s el ement s asi nvi si bl y smal l , as i nf i ni t e i n number , and as made up of ani ndef i ni t e number of ki nds- - one f or each di st i nct i ve subst ance i nt he wor l d. But pr eci sel y t he same post ul ates ar e made of t he atomof Democr i t us. These al so ar e i nvi si bl y smal l ; t hese al so ar ei nf i ni t e i n number ; t hese al so ar e made up of an i ndef i ni t enumber of ki nds, cor r espondi ng wi t h t he observed di f f erence of subst ances i n t he worl d. "Pr i mi t i ve seeds, " or "at oms, " wer e

al i ke concei ved t o be pr i mordi al , unchangeabl e, andi ndest r uct i bl e. Wher ei n t hen l i es t he di f f er ence? We answer,chi ef l y i n a name; al most sol el y i n t he f act t hat Anaxagor as di dnot at t empt t o postul at e t he physi cal pr oper t i es of t he el ement sbeyond st at i ng t hat each has a di st i nct i ve per sonal i t y, whi l eDemocr i t us di d at t empt t o post ul at e t hese pr oper t i es. He, t oo,admi t t ed t hat each ki nd of el ement has i t s di st i nct i veper sonal i t y, and he at t empt ed t o vi sual i ze and descri be t hechar acteri st i cs of t he per sonal i t y.

Thus whi l e Anaxagoras t el l s us not hi ng of hi s el ements exceptt hat t hey di f f er f r omone anot her , Democr i t us post ul at es adi f f erence i n si ze, i magi nes some el ement s as heavi er and some asl i ght er , and concei ves even that t he el ement s may be pr ovi dedwi t h pr oj ect i ng hooks, wi t h the ai d of whi ch t hey l i nk t hemsel vesone wi t h another. No one t o- day t akes t hese crude vi sual i zi ngsser i ousl y as t o thei r det ai l s. The sol e el ement of t r ut h whi cht hese dr eami ngs cont ai n, as di st i ngui shi ng t hem f r om t hedr eami ngs of Anaxagoras, i s i n the concept i on t hat t he var i ousatoms di f f er i n si ze and wei ght . Her e, i ndeed, i s a vaguef oreshadowi ng of t hat chemi st r y of f orm whi ch began t o come i nt opromi nence t owards t he cl ose of t he ni net eenth cent ur y. To havef orecast even di ml y thi s newest phase of chemi cal knowl edge,acr oss t he abyss of cent ur i es, i s i ndeed a f eat t o put Democr i t usi n t he f r ont r ank of t hi nker s. But t hi s est i mat e shoul d not bl i ndus t o the f act t hat t he pr e- vi si on of Democr i t us was but a sl i ghtel abor at i on of a theor y whi ch had i t s ori gi n wi t h anot her

t hi nker . The associ at i on bet ween Anaxagor as and Democr i t us cannotbe di r ect l y t r aced, but i t i s an associ at i on whi ch t he hi st or i anof i deas shoul d never f or a moment f orget . I f we ar e not t o bemi sl ed by mere word- j uggl ery, we shal l r ecogni ze t he f ounder of t he at omi c t heory of mat t er i n Anaxagoras; i t s exposi t ors al ongsl i ght l y di f f er ent l i nes i n Leuci ppus and Democri t us; i t sr e- di scover er of t he ni net eent h cent ur y i n Dal t on. Al l i n al l ,t hen, j ust as Anaxagor as pr eceded Democr i t us i n t i me, so must het ake pr ecedence over hi m al so as an i nduct i ve t hi nker , whocar r i ed t he use of t he sci ent i f i c i magi nat i on t o i t s f ar t hest



r each.

An anal ysi s of t he t heor i es of t he t wo men l eads t o somewhat t hesame concl usi on t hat mi ght be reached f r oma compar i son of t hei rl i ves. Anaxagor as was a scept i cal , exper i ment al sci ent i st , gi f t edal so wi t h t he pr ophet i c i magi nat i on. He r easoned al ways f r omt hepar t i cul ar t o t he gener al , af t er t he manner of t r ue i nduct i on,and he scar cel y t ook a st ep beyond the conf i nes of secur ei nduct i on. Tr ue sci ent i st t hat he was, he coul d cont ent hi msel f wi t h post ul at i ng di f f er ent qual i t i es f or hi s el ement s, wi t houtpr et endi ng to know how t hese qual i t i es coul d be def i ned. Hi sel ement s were by hypothesi s i nvi si bl e, hence he woul d not at t emptt o vi sual i ze t hem. Democr i t us, on t he other hand, r ef used t or ecogni ze thi s bar r i er . Wher e he coul d not know, he st i l l di d nothesi t at e t o guess. J ust as he concei ved hi s at om of a def i ni t ef or m wi t h a def i ni t e st r uct ur e, even so he concei ved t hat t heat mospher e about hi m was f ul l of i nvi si bl e spi r i t s; he accept edt he cur r ent super st i t i ons of hi s t i me. Li ke t he aver age Gr eeks of hi s day, he even bel i eved i n such omens as t hose f ur ni shed byi nspect i ng t he ent r ai l s of a f owl . These chance bi t s of bi ogr aphy

are weat her- vanes of t he mi nd of Democr i t us. They tend t osubst ant i ate our convi ct i on t hat Democr i t us must r ank bel owAnaxagoras as a devot ee of pur e sci ence. But , af t er al l , suchcompar i sons and est i mat es as t hi s ar e ut t er l y f ut i l e. Theessent i al f act f or us i s t hat her e, i n t he f i f t h cent ur y bef or eour era, we f i nd put f orward t he most penetr at i ng guess as t o theconst i t ut i on of mat t er t hat t he hi st or y of anci ent t hought has t opr esent t o us. I n one di r ect i on, t he avenue of pr ogr ess i sbar r ed; t her e wi l l be no f ar t her st ep t hat way t i l l we come downt he cent ur i es t o the t i me of Dal t on.

HI PPOCRATES AND GREEK MEDI CI NE

These st udi es of t he const i t ut i on of mat t er have car r i ed us t ot he l i mi t s of t he f i el d of sci ent i f i c i magi nat i on i n ant i qui t y;l et us now t ur n shar pl y and consi der a depart ment of sci ence i nwhi ch t heory j oi ns hands wi t h pr act i cal i t y. Let us wi t ness t hebegi nni ngs of sci ent i f i c t her apeut i cs.

Medi ci ne among the earl y Gr eeks, bef ore t he t i me of Hi ppocrates,was a crude mi xt ur e of r el i gi on, necr omancy, and myst i ci sm.

Templ es wer e er ect ed t o t he god of medi ci ne, aescul api us, andsi ck persons made t hei r way, or were carr i ed, t o these t empl es,where t hey sought t o gai n t he f avor of t he god by sui t abl eof f er i ngs, and l ear n t he way to r egai n t hei r heal t h t hr oughr emedi es or met hods r eveal ed t o t hem i n dr eams by t he god. When

t he pat i ent had been t hus cured, he pl aced a t abl et i n t he t empl edescr i bi ng hi s si ckness, and t el l i ng by what method t he god hadcured hi m. He agai n made sui t abl e of f er i ngs at t he t empl e, whi chwer e somet i mes i n t he f or m of gol d or si l ver r epr esent at i ons of t he di seased organ- - a gol d or s i l ver model of a hear t , hand,f oot , et c.

Never t hel ess, despi t e t hi s bel i ef i n t he super nat ur al , many dr ugsand heal i ng l ot i ons were empl oyed, and t he Gr eek physi ci anspossessed consi derabl e ski l l i n dr essi ng wounds and bandagi ng.



But t hey di d not depend upon t hese surgi cal dr essi ngs al one,usi ng wi t h them cer t ai n appr opr i at e pr ayer s and i ncant at i ons,r eci t ed over t he i nj ur ed member at t he t i me of appl yi ng t hedr essi ngs.

Even t he very ear l y Gr eeks had l ear ned somet hi ng of anatomy. Thedai l y cont act wi t h wounds and br oken bones must of necessi t y l eadt o a crude underst andi ng of anat omy i n gener al . The f i r st Gr eekanat omi st , however , who i s r ecogni zed as such, i s sai d to havebeen Al cmaeon. He i s sai d to have made ext ensi ve di ssect i ons of t he l ower ani mal s, and to have descr i bed many hi t her t o unknownst r uct ur es, such as t he opt i c ner ve and t he Eust achi an canal - - t hesmal l t ube l eadi ng i nt o t he t hr oat f r om t he ear . He i s credi t edwi t h many uni que expl anat i ons of nat ural phenomena, such as, f orexampl e, t he expl anat i on t hat "heari ng i s produced by t he hol l owbone behi nd t he ear ; f or al l hol l ow t hi ngs are sonorous. " He wasa rat i onal i st , and he t aught t hat t he br ai n i s t he or gan of mi nd.

The sour ces of our i nf or mat i on about hi s wor k, however , ar eunr el i abl e.

Democedes, who l i ved i n t he si xth cent ur y B. C. , i s t he f i r stphysi ci an of whomwe have any t r ust wort hy hi st ory. We l ear n f r omHerodot us t hat he came f r omCr oton t o aegi na, where, i nr ecogni t i on of hi s ski l l , he was appoi nt ed medi cal of f i cer of t heci t y. Fromaegi na he was cal l ed t o At hens at an i ncr eased sal ar y,and l at er was i n char ge of medi cal af f ai r s i n sever al ot her Gr eekci t i es. He was f i nal l y cal l ed t o Samos by t he t yrant Pol ycr at es,who r ei gned t her e f r om about 536 t o 522 B. C. But on t he death of Pol ycr at es, who was murdered by the Per si ans, Democedes became asl ave. Hi s f ame as a physi ci an, however , had r eached the ears of t he Per si an monarch, and shor t l y af t er hi s capt ur e he wasper mi t t ed to show hi s ski l l upon Ki ng Dar i us hi msel f . The Per si anmonar ch was suf f er i ng f r oma spr ai ned ankl e, whi ch hi s Egypt i ansur geons had been unabl e t o cure. Democedes not onl y cured t hei nj ur ed member but used hi s i nf l uence i n savi ng t he l i ves of hi sEgypt i an r i val s, who had been condemned t o death by t he ki ng.

At anot her t i me he showed hi s ski l l by cur i ng t he queen, who wassuf f er i ng f r om a chr oni c abscess of l ong st andi ng. Thi s sopl eased t he monarch t hat he of f ered hi m as a reward anyt hi ng hemi ght desi r e, except hi s l i ber t y. But t he cost l y gi f t s of Dar i usdi d not sat i sf y hi m so l ong as he r emai ned a sl ave; anddet er mi ned t o secur e hi s f r eedomat any cost , he vol unt eer ed t ol ead some Per si an spi es i nt o hi s nat i ve count r y, pr omi si ng t o usehi s i nf l uence i n conver t i ng some of t he l eadi ng men of hi s nat i ont o the Per si an cause. Laden wi t h t he weal t h that had been heapedupon hi m by Dar i us, he set f ort h upon hi s mi ssi on, but upon

r eachi ng hi s nat i ve ci t y of Cr oton he t hr ew of f hi s mask,r enounced hi s Per si an mi ss i on, and became once mor e a f r ee Gr eek.

Whi l e t he st ory of Democedes t hr ows l i t t l e l i ght upon t he medi calpr act i ces of t he t i me, i t shows t hat pai d ci t y medi cal of f i cer sexi st ed i n Gr eece as ear l y as t he f i f t h and si xth cent ur i es B. C.Even then ther e wer e di f f er ent "school s" of medi ci ne, whosedi sci pl es di sagr eed r adi cal l y i n t hei r met hods of t r eat i ngdi seases; and t her e wer e al so speci al i st s i n cer t ai n di seases,quacks, and char l atans. Some physi ci ans depended ent i r el y upon



ext er nal l ot i ons f or heal i ng al l di sor der s; ot her s wer e"hydr other apeut i st s" or "bat h- physi ci ans"; whi l e t her e wer e ahost of physi ci ans who admi ni st er ed a gr eat var i ety of her bs anddrugs. There were al so magi ci ans who pretended to heal bysorcer y, and gr eat number s of bone- set t er s, ocul i st s, anddent i st s.

Many of t he weal t hy physi ci ans had hospi t al s, or cl i ni cs, wher epat i ent s were operat ed upon and t r eat ed. They were not hospi t al si n our modern unders t andi ng of t he t erm, but were more l i kedi spensari es, wher e pat i ent s wer e t r eat ed t emporar i l y, but wer enot al l owed t o r emai n f or any l engt h of t i me. Cer t ai n communi t i esestabl i shed and support ed t hese di spensari es f or t he car e of t hepoor .

But anyt hi ng appr oachi ng a r at i onal syst emof medi ci ne was notest abl i shed, unt i l Hi ppocrat es of Cos, t he "f at her of medi ci ne, "came upon t he scene. I n an age t hat pr oduced Phi di as, Lysi as,Her odotus, Sophocl es, and Per i cl es, i t seems but nat ur al t hat t hemedi cal ar t shoul d f i nd an exponent who woul d r i se above

supers t i t i ous dogmas and l ay t he f oundat i on f or a medi calsci ence. Hi s r ej ect i on of t he super nat ur al al one stamps t hegr eat ness of hi s geni us. But , besi des t hi s, he i nt r oduced mor edet ai l ed observat i on of di seases, and demonst r ated t he i mpor t ancet hat at t aches t o pr ognosi s.

Hi ppocr ates was born at Cos, about 460 B. C. , but spent most of hi s l i f e at Lar i ssa, i n Thessal y. He was educat ed as a physi ci anby hi s f at her , and t r avel l ed ext ensi vel y as an i t i ner antpr acti t i oner f or sever al year s. Hi s tr avel s i n di f f er ent cl i mat esand among many di f f erent peopl e undoubt edl y t ended t o shar pen hi skeen sense of observat i on. He was a pract i cal physi ci an as wel las a t heor i st , and, wi t hal , a cl ear and conci se wr i t er . "Li f e i sshor t , " he says, "oppor t uni t y f l eet i ng, j udgment di f f i cul t ,t r eat ment easy, but t r eat ment af t er t hought i s proper andprof i t abl e. "

Hi s knowl edge of anat omy was necessar i l y ver y i mper f ect , and wasgai ned l ar gel y f r om hi s predecessors, t o whomhe gave f ul lcr edi t . Di ssect i ons of t he human body were f orbi dden hi m, and hewas obl i ged t o conf i ne hi s exper i ment al r esear ches to oper at i onson t he l ower ani mal s. Hi s knowl edge of t he st r uct ur e andarr angement of t he bones, however, was f ai r l y accur ate, but t heanat omy of t he sof t er t i ssues, as he concei ved i t , was a queer

j umbl i ng t oget her of bl ood- vessel s, muscl es, and t endons. He doesr ef er t o "ner ves, " t o be sur e, but appar ent l y t he st r uct ur esr ef er r ed to ar e t he t endons and l i gament s, r at her t han the ner ves

t hemsel ves. He was bet t er acquai nt ed wi t h the pr i nci pal organs i nt he cavi t i es of t he body, and knew, f or exampl e, t hat t he hear ti s di vi ded i nt o f our cavi t i es, t wo of whi ch he supposed t ocont ai n bl ood, and t he other t wo ai r .

Hi s most r evol ut i onary st ep was hi s di vor ci ng of t he super nat ur alf r om t he nat ur al , and est abl i shi ng t he f act t hat di sease i s duet o nat ur al causes and shoul d be t r eat ed accor di ngl y. The ef f ectof such an at t i t ude can har dl y be over - est i mat ed. Theestabl i shment of such a theory was nat ur al l y f ol l owed by a cl ose



observat i on as t o the cour se of di seases and t he ef f ect s of t r eat ment . To f aci l i t at e t hi s, he i nt r oduced t he cust om of wr i t i ng down hi s observat i ons as he made t hem- - t he "cl i ni calhi st or y" of t he case. Such cl i ni cal r ecor ds ar e i n use al l overt he worl d t o- day, and t hei r i mpor t ance i s so obvi ous t hat i t i sal most i ncompr ehensi bl e t hat t hey shoul d have f al l en i nt o di suseshor t l y af t er t he t i me of Hi ppocrat es, and not br ought i nt ogener al use agai n unt i l al most t wo t housand year s l at er.

But scar cel y l ess i mpor t ant t han hi s r ecogni t i on of di sease as anat ural phenomenon was t he i mpor t ance he at t r i but ed t o pr ognosi s.Prognosi s, i n t he sense of prophecy, was common bef ore the t i meof Hi ppocr at es. But pr ognosi s, as he pr act i sed i t and as weunder st and i t t o- day, i s prophecy based on car ef ul observat i on of t he cour se of di seases- - somet hi ng more t han super st i t i ousconj ect ur e.

Al t hough Hi ppocrat i c medi ci ne r est ed on t he bel i ef i n nat ur alcauses, nevert hel ess, dogma and t heory hel d an i mport ant pl ace.

The humor al t heory of di sease was an al l - i mpor t ant one, and so

f ul l y was t hi s t heor y accept ed t hat i t i nf l uenced t he sci ence of medi ci ne al l t hr ough succeedi ng cent ur i es. Accor di ng to t hi scel ebr at ed theory t her e ar e f our humors i n the body- - bl ood,phl egm, yel l ow bi l e, and bl ack bi l e. When these humors ar e mi xedi n exact pr opor t i ons t hey const i t ut e heal t h; but any devi at i onsf r om t hese pr opor t i ons pr oduce di sease. I n t r eat i ng di seases t heai m of t he physi ci an was t o di scover whi ch of t hese humors wereout of pr opor t i on and t o r est ore t hem t o t hei r nat ur alequi l i br i um. I t was i n t he met hods empl oyed i n t hi s r est i t ut i on,r ather t han a di sagr eement about t he humors t hemsel ves, t hatr esul t ed i n t he var i ous " school s" of medi ci ne.

I n many ways t he sur ger y of Hi ppocr ates showed a bet t erunder st andi ng of t he st r uct ur e of t he or gans t han of t hei rf unct i ons. Some of t he surgi cal pr ocedur es as descr i bed by hi mar e f ol l owed, wi t h sl i ght modi f i cat i ons, t o- day. Many of hi smet hods were ent i r el y l ost si ght of unt i l moder n t i mes, and one,t he t r eat ment of di sl ocat i on of t he out er end of t he col l ar - bone,was not r evi ved unt i l some t i me i n t he ei ght eent h cent ur y.

Hi ppocrat es, i t seems, l i ke moder n physi ci ans, somet i mes suf f er edf r om t he i ngr at i t ude of hi s pat i ent s. "The physi ci an vi si t s apat i ent suf f er i ng f r om f ever or a wound, and pr escr i bes f or hi m, "he says; "on t he next day, i f t he pat i ent f eel s worse t he bl amei s l ai d upon t he physi ci an; i f , on t he ot her hand, he f eel sbet t er , nat ur e i s extol l ed, and t he physi ci an r eaps no pr ai se. "

The essence of t hi s has been r epeat ed i n r hyme and prose by

wr i t er s i n ever y age and count r y, but t he " f at her of medi ci ne"caut i ons physi ci ans agai nst al l owi ng i t t o i nf l uence t hei rat t i t ude t owar ds t hei r pr of essi on.

VI I I . POST- SOCRATI C SCI ENCE AT ATHENS- - PLATO, ARI STOTLE, AND THEOPHRASTUS

Doubt l ess i t has been not i ced t hat our ear l i er sci ent i st s wer e as



f ar r emoved as possi bl e f r om t he l i mi t at i ons of speci al i sm. I npoi nt of f act , i n t hi s ear l y day, knowl edge had not beencl assi f i ed as i t came t o be l at er on. The phi l osopher was, as hi sname i mpl i ed, a l over of knowl edge, and he di d not f i nd i t beyondt he reach of hi s capaci t y t o appl y hi msel f t o al l depar t ment s of t he f i el d of human i nvest i gat i on. I t i s not hi ng st r ange t odi scover t hat Anaxi mander and the Pyt hagor eans and Anaxagor ashave propounded t heor i es r egardi ng the st r uct ur e of t he cosmos,t he or i gi n and devel opment of ani mal s and man, and the nat ure of matt er i t sel f . Nowadays, so enormousl y i nvol ved has become t hemass of mere f act s r egardi ng each of t hese depar t ment s of knowl edge t hat no one man has t he t emer i t y t o at t empt t o mast ert hem al l . But i t was di f f er ent i n t hose days of begi nni ngs. Thent he methods of observat i on wer e st i l l cr ude, and i t was qui t e t hecust om f or a t hi nker of f or cef ul per sonal i t y t o f i nd an eagerf ol l owi ng among di sci pl es who never t hought of put t i ng hi st heor i es t o t he t est of exper i ment . The gr eat l esson t hat t r uesci ence i n the l ast r esor t depends upon observat i on andmeasur ement , upon compass and bal ance, had not yet been l earned,t hough here and t her e a t hi nker l i ke Anaxagor as had gai ned an

i nkl i ng of i t .

For t he moment , i ndeed, t here i n At t i ca, whi ch was now, t hanks t ot hat out bur st of Per i cl ean cul t ur e, t he cent r e of t he wor l d' sci vi l i zat i on, t he t r end of t hought was t o t ake qui t e anot herdi r ect i on. The ver y year whi ch saw t he bi r t h of Democr i t us atAbder a, and of Hi ppocrat es, marked al so t he bi r t h, at At hens, of another r emarkabl e man, whose i nf l uence i t woul d scar cel y bepossi bl e t o over- est i mate. Thi s man was Socrates. The mai n f actsof hi s hi st or y ar e f ami l i ar t o ever y one. I t wi l l be r ecal l edt hat Socrat es spent hi s ent i r e l i f e i n At hens, mi ngl i ngever ywher e wi t h t he popul ace; har angui ng, so t he t r adi t i on goes,ever y one who woul d l i st en; i ncul cat i ng moral l essons, andf i nal l y i ncur r i ng t he di sappr obat i on of at l east a vot i ngmaj or i t y of hi s f el l ow- ci t i zens. He gat her ed about hi m a companyof r emar kabl e men wi t h Pl at o at t hei r head, but t hi s coul d notsave hi m f r om t he di sappr obat i on of t he mul t i t udes, at whosehands he suf f er ed deat h, l egal l y admi ni st er ed af t er a publ i ct r i al . The f acts at command as t o cer t ai n cust oms of t he Gr eeksat t hi s peri od make i t possi bl e t o r ai se a quest i on as t o whet hert he al l eged "corr upt i on of yout h, " wi t h whi ch Socrat es waschar ged, may not have had a di f f er ent i mpl i cat i on f r omwhatpost er i t y has pr ef er r ed t o ascri be t o i t . But t hi s t hought ,al most shocki ng t o t he moder n mi nd and seemi ng al t oget hersacri l egi ous t o most st udent s of Gr eek phi l osophy, need not her edet ai n us; nei t her have we much concern i n t he pr esent connect i onwi t h any par t of t he teachi ng of t he mart yred phi l osopher . For

t he hi st ori an of met aphysi cs, Socr at es mar ks an epoch, but f ort he hi st or i an of sci ence he i s a much l ess consequent i al f i gur e.

Si mi l ar l y regar di ng Pl at o, t he ar i st ocrat i c At heni an who sat att he f eet of Socrat es, and thr ough whose wr i t i ngs t he t eachi ngs of t he mast er f ound wi dest curr ency. Some st udent s of phi l osophyf i nd i n Pl at o "t he gr eat est t hi nker and wr i t er of al l t i me. "[ 1]

The st udent of sci ence must r ecogni ze i n hi m a t hi nker whosepoi nt of vi ew was essent i al l y non- sci ent i f i c; one who tendedal ways to r eason f r omt he gener al t o t he par t i cul ar r at her t han



f r om t he par t i cul ar t o t he gener al . Pl at o' s wr i t i ngs cover edal most t he ent i r e f i el d of t hought , and hi s i deas wer e pr esent edwi t h such l i t er ar y char m t hat successi ve gener at i ons of r eader st ur ned to t hem wi t h unf l aggi ng i nt er est , and gave t hem wi decur r ency t hr ough copi es t hat f i nal l y pr eser ved them t o our ownt i me. Thus we are not obl i ged i n hi s case, as we ar e i n t he caseof ever y other Gr eek phi l osopher , t o est i mat e hi s t eachi ngsl ar gel y f r om hear say evi dence. Pl at o hi msel f speaks t o usdi r ectl y. I t i s t r ue, t he l i t er ar y f or m whi ch he al ways adopt ed,namel y, t he di al ogue, does not gi ve qui t e t he same cer t ai nt y ast o when he i s expr essi ng hi s own opi ni ons t hat a more di r ectnar r at i ve woul d have gi ven; yet , i n t he mai n, t her e i s l i t t l edoubt as t o t he t enor of hi s own opi ni ons- - except , i ndeed, suchdoubt as al ways at t aches t o t he phi l osophi cal r easoni ng of t heabst r act t hi nker .

What i s chi ef l y si gni f i cant f r om our present st andpoi nt i s t hatt he gr eat et hi cal t eacher had no si gni f i cant message t o gi ve t heworl d regardi ng t he physi cal sci ences. He appar ent l y had noshar pl y def i ned opi ni ons as to the mechani sm of t he uni ver se; no

cl ear concept i on as t o t he ori gi n or devel opment of organi cbei ngs; no tangi bl e i deas as to t he pr obl ems of physi cs; nof avor i t e dr eams as t o t he nat ur e of mat t er . Vi r t ual l y hi s backwas turned on t hi s ent i r e f i el d of t hought . He was under t he swayof t hose i nnate i deas whi ch, as we have ur ged, were among t heear l i est i nduct i ons of sci ence. But he never f or a momentsuspected such an or i gi n f or t hese i deas. He supposed hi sconcept i ons of bei ng, hi s st andar ds of et hi cs, t o l i e back of al lexper i ence; f or hi m t hey were t he most f undament al and mostdependabl e of f act s. He cr i t i ci sed Anaxagoras f or havi ng t endedt o deduce general l aws f r omobservat i on. As we moderns see i t ,such cr i t i ci smi s the hi ghest possi bl e prai se. I t i s a cr i t i ci smt hat mar ks t he di st i nct i on bet ween t he sci ent i st who i s al so aphi l osopher and the phi l osopher who has but a vague not i on of physi cal sci ence. Pl at o seemed, i ndeed, t o real i ze the val ue of sci ent i f i c i nvest i gat i on; he r ef er r ed t o the ast r onomi cal st udi esof t he Egypt i ans and Chal deans, and spoke hopef ul l y of t her esul t s t hat mi ght accrue were such st udi es t o be taken up byt hat Gr eek mi nd whi ch, as he j ust l y concei ved, had t he power t ovi t al i ze and enr i ch al l t hat i t t ouched. But he t ol d her e of whathe woul d have ot hers do, not of what he hi msel f t hought of doi ng.Hi s voi ce was pr ophet i c, but i t st i mul ated no worker of hi s ownt i me.

Pl at o hi msel f had t r avel l ed wi del y. I t i s a f ami l i ar l egend t hathe l i ved f or year s i n Egypt , endeavori ng t here to penetr at e t hemyster i es of Egypt i an sci ence. I t i s sai d even t hat t he rudi ment s

of geomet r y whi ch he acqui r ed t her e i nf l uenced al l hi s l at ert eachi ngs. But be t hat as i t may, t he hi st ori an of sci ence mustr ecogni ze i n the f ounder of t he Academy a moral t eacher andmet aphysi cal dr eamer and soci ol ogi st , but not , i n t he modernaccept ance of t he term, a sci ent i st . Those wi der phases of bi ol ogi cal sci ence whi ch f i nd t hei r expr essi on i n met aphysi cs, i net hi cs, i n pol i t i cal economy, l i e wi t hout our pr esent scope; andf or t he devel opment of t hose subj ect s wi t h whi ch we ar e moredi r ect l y concer ned, Pl at o, l i ke hi s mast er , has a negat i vesi gni f i cance.



ARI STOTLE ( 384- 322 B. C. )

When we pass t o t hat t hi r d gr eat At heni an teacher , Ar i st ot l e, t hecase i s f ar di f f erent . Here was a man whose name was t o ber ecei ved as al most a synonym f or Gr eek sci ence f or more than at housand year s af t er hi s deat h. Al l t hr ough t he Mi ddl e Ages hi swr i t i ngs wer e to be accept ed as vi r t ual l y t he l ast wor d r egar di ngt he pr obl ems of nat ur e. We shal l see t hat hi s f ol l ower s act ual l ypref err ed hi s mandate to t he t est i mony of t hei r own senses. Weshal l see, f ur t her , t hat moder n sci ence pr ogr essed somewhat i npr opor t i on as i t over t hr ew t he Ar i st ot el i an dogmas. But t het r adi t i ons of sevent een or ei ght een cent ur i es ar e not easi l y setasi de, and i t i s per haps not t oo much t o say that t he name of Ar i st ot l e st ands, even i n our own t i me, as vaguel y r epr esent at i vei n t he popul ar mi nd of al l t hat was hi ghest and best i n t hesci ence of ant i qui t y. Yet , per haps, i t woul d not be goi ng t oo f art o asser t t hat somet hi ng l i ke a r ever sal of t hi s j udgment woul dbe near er t he t r ut h. Ar i st ot l e di d, i ndeed, br i ng t oget her a

great mass of f acts r egardi ng ani mal s i n hi s work on nat ur alhi st ory, whi ch, bei ng pr eser ved, has been deemed t o ent i t l e i t saut hor t o be cal l ed t he " f at her of zool ogy. " But t her e i s nor eason t o suppose t hat any consi derabl e port i on of t hi s workcont ai ned mat t er t hat was novel , or r ecorded observat i ons t hatwer e or i gi nal wi t h Ar i st ot l e; and t he cl assi f i cat i ons t her eout l i ned are at best but a vague f oreshadowi ng of t he el aborat i onof t he sci ence. Such as i t i s, however , t he nat ur al hi st or yst ands t o t he cr edi t of t he St agi r i t e. He must be credi t ed, t oo,wi t h a cl ear enunci at i on of one most i mpor t ant sci ent i f i cdoct r i ne- - namel y, t he doct r i ne of t he spher i cal f i gur e of t heear t h. We have al r eady seen t hat t hi s t heory ori gi nat ed wi t h t hePyt hagorean phi l osopher s out i n I t al y. We have seen, t oo, t hatt he doctr i ne had not made i t s way i n At t i ca i n the t i me of Anaxagoras. But i n the i nt er veni ng cent ur y i t had gai ned wi decur r ency, el se so essent i al l y conser vat i ve a t hi nker as Ar i st ot l ewoul d scar cel y have accept ed i t . He di d accept i t , however , andgave t he doct r i ne cl ear est and most pr eci se expr essi on. Here ar ehi s words: [ 2]

"As t o t he f i gur e of t he ear t h i t must necessar i l y bespher i cal . . . . I f i t wer e not so, t he ecl i pses of t he moon woul dnot have such sect i ons as t hey have. For i n the conf i gur at i ons i nt he cour se of a mont h t he def i ci ent par t t akes al l di f f er entshapes; i t i s st r ai ght , and concave, and convex; but i n ecl i psesi t al ways has t he l i ne of di vi si ons convex; wher ef or e, si nce t he

moon i s ecl i psed i n consequence of t he i nt er posi t i on of t heear t h, t he per i pher y of t he eart h must be t he cause of t hi s byhavi ng a spher i cal f orm. And agai n, f r omt he appear ance of t hest ar s i t i s cl ear , not onl y t hat t he ear t h i s round, but t hat i t ssi ze i s not ver y l arge; f or when we make a smal l r emoval t o t hesout h or t he nort h, t he ci r cl e of t he hori zon becomes pal pabl ydi f f er ent , so t hat t he st ar s over head under go a gr eat change, andare not t he same to t hose t hat t r avel i n t he nort h and to t hesout h. For some st ars are seen i n Egypt or at Cypr us, but are notseen i n t he count r i es t o t he nor t h of t hese; and the st ar s t hat



i n t he nor t h ar e vi si bl e whi l e they make a compl et e ci r cui t ,t her e under go a set t i ng. So t hat f r om t hi s i t i s mani f est , notonl y t hat t he f or m of t he ear t h i s round, but al so t hat i t i s apar t of a not ver y l ar ge spher e; f or ot her wi se t he di f f er encewoul d not be so obvi ous t o per sons maki ng so smal l a change of pl ace. Wher ef or e we may j udge t hat t hose per sons who connect t her egi on i n t he nei ghbor hood of t he pi l l ar s of Her cul es wi t h t hatt owar ds I ndi a, and who asser t t hat i n t hi s way t he sea i s one, donot asser t t hi ngs ver y i mpr obabl e. They conf i r m t hi s conj ect ur emoreover by t he el ephants, whi ch ar e sai d t o be of t he samespeci es t owards each ext r eme; as i f t hi s ci r cumst ance was aconsequence of t he conj unct i on of t he ext r emes. Themathemat i ci ans who t r y t o cal cul ate t he measure of t heci r cumf erence, make i t amount t o f our hundr ed t housand st adi a;whence we col l ect t hat t he ear t h i s not onl y spher i cal , but i snot l arge compared wi t h t he magni t ude of t he ot her s t ars. "

But i n gi vi ng f ul l meed of pr ai se t o Ar i st ot l e f or t hepr omul gat i on of t hi s doct r i ne of t he spher i ci t y of t he ear t h, i tmust unf or t unatel y be added t hat t he conservat i ve phi l osopher

paused wi t hout t aki ng one ot her i mport ant st ep. He coul d notaccept , but , on t he cont r ar y, he expr essl y repudi at ed, t hedoct r i ne of t he ear t h' s mot i on. We have seen t hat t hi s i dea al sowas a part of t he Pyt hagorean doct r i ne, and we shal l haveoccasi on t o dwel l more at l engt h on t hi s poi nt i n a succeedi ngchapt er . I t has even been cont ended by some cr i t i cs t hat i t wast he adver se convi ct i on of t he Per i pat et i c phi l osopher whi ch, moret han any other si ngl e i nf l uence, t ended t o r et ar d t he pr ogr ess of t he t r ue doct r i ne r egardi ng t he mechani sm of t he heavens.Ar i st ot l e accept ed t he spher i ci t y of t he ear t h, and t hat doct r i nebecame a commonpl ace of sci ent i f i c knowl edge, and so cont i nuedt hr oughout cl assi cal ant i qui t y. But Ar i st ot l e r ej ected t hedoct r i ne of t he ear t h' s mot i on, and t hat doct r i ne, t houghpromul gat ed act i vel y by a f ew cont empor ar i es and i mmedi atesuccessor s of t he St agi r i t e, was t hen doomed t o si nk out of vi ewf or more t han a thousand year s. I f i t be a corr ect assumpt i ont hat t he i nf l uence of Ar i st ot l e was, i n a l ar ge measur e,r esponsi bl e f or t hi s r esul t , t hen we shal l per haps not be f arast r ay i n assumi ng t hat t he gr eat f ounder of t he Per i pat et i cschool was, on t he whol e, more i nst r ument al i n ret ar di ng theprogress of ast r onomi cal sci ence t hat any ot her one man t hat everl i ved.

The f i el d of sc i ence i n whi ch Ar i st ot l e was pre- emi nent l y apat hf i nder i s zool ogy. Hi s wr i t i ngs on nat ur al hi st or y havel ar gel y been pr eserved, and they const i t ut e by f ar t he mosti mport ant cont r i but i on t o the subj ect t hat has come down t o us

f r om ant i qui t y. They show us t hat Ar i st ot l e had gai ned possessi onof t he wi dest r ange of f acts r egardi ng t he ani mal ki ngdom, and,what i s f ar more i mport ant , had at t empt ed t o cl assi f y t hesef acts. I n so doi ng he became t he f ounder of syst emat i c zool ogy.Ar i st otl e' s cl assi f i cat i on of t he ani mal ki ngdom was known andst udi ed t hr oughout t he Mi ddl e Ages, and, i n f act , r emai ned i nvogue unt i l super seded by t hat of Cuvi er i n t he ni net eent hcent ur y. I t i s not t o be supposed t hat al l t he t er ms of Ar i st ot l e' s cl assi f i cat i on or i gi nat ed wi t h hi m. Some of t hedi vi si ons are t oo patent t o have escaped t he observat i on of hi s



pr edecessor s. Thus, f or exampl e, t he di st i nct i on bet ween bi r dsand f i shes as separ at e cl asses of ani mal s i s so obvi ous t hat i tmust appeal t o a chi l d or t o a savage. But t he ef f ort s of Ar i st otl e extended, as we shal l see, t o l ess pat entgener al i zat i ons. At t he ver y out set , hi s gr and di vi si on of t heani mal ki ngdomi nt o bl ood- bear i ng and bl oodl ess ani mal s i mpl i es aver y br oad and phi l osophi cal concept i on of t he ent i r e ani malki ngdom. The modern physi ol ogi st does not accept t hecl assi f i cat i on, i nasmuch as i t i s now known t hat col or l ess f l ui dsper f or m t he f unct i ons of bl ood f or al l t he l ower or gani sms. Butt he f act r emai ns t hat Ar i st ot l e' s gr and di vi si ons cor r espond t ot he gr and di vi si ons of t he Lamar cki an syst em- - ver t ebr ates andi nver t ebr ates- - whi ch ever y one now accept s. Ar i st ot l e, as wehave sai d, based hi s cl assi f i cat i on upon obser vat i on of t hebl ood; Lamarck was gui ded by a st udy of t he skel eton. The f actt hat such di ver se poi nt s of vi ew coul d di r ect t he observert owar ds t he same resul t gi ves, i nf er ent i al l y, a suggest i ve l essoni n what t he moder n physi ol ogi st cal l s t he homol ogi es of part s of t he or gani sm.

Ar i st ot l e di vi des hi s so- cal l ed bl ood- bear i ng ani mal s i nt o f i vecl asses: ( 1) Four - f oot ed ani mal s t hat br i ng f or t h t hei r youngal i ve; ( 2) bi r ds; ( 3) egg- l ayi ng f our - f oot ed ani mal s ( i ncl udi ngwhat moder n nat ur al i st s cal l r ept i l es and amphi bi ans) ; ( 4) whal esand t hei r al l i es ; ( 5) f i shes. Thi s cl assi f i cat i on, as wi l l beobser ved, i s not so ver y f ar af i el d f r om t he moder n di vi si onsi nt o mammal s, bi r ds, r ept i l es, amphi bi ans, and f i shes. ThatAr i st otl e shoul d have r ecogni zed t he f undament al di st i nct i onbet ween f i shes and t he f i sh- l i ke whal es, dol phi ns, and porpoi sespr oves t he f ar f r om super f i ci al char acter of hi s st udi es.Ar i st ot l e knew t hat t hese ani mal s br eat he by means of l ungs andt hat t hey pr oduce l i vi ng young. He recogni zed, t her ef ore, t hei raf f i ni t y wi t h hi s f i r st cl ass of ani mal s, even i f he di d not ,l i ke t he moder n nat ur al i st , consi der t hese af f i ni t i es cl oseenough t o j ust i f y br i ngi ng t he t wo types t oget her i nt o a si ngl ecl ass.

The bl oodl ess ani mal s wer e al so di vi ded by Ar i st ot l e i nt o f i vecl asses- - namel y: ( 1) Cephal opoda ( t he oct opus, cut t l e- f i sh,et c. ) ; ( 2) weak-shel l ed ani mal s ( crabs, et c. ) ; ( 3) i nsects andt hei r al l i es ( i ncl udi ng var i ous f or ms, such as spi der s andcent i pedes, whi ch t he moder n cl assi f i er pr ef er s t o pl ace byt hemsel ves) ; ( 4) har d- shel l ed ani mal s ( cl ams, oyst er s, snai l s,et c. ) ; ( 5) a congl omer at e gr oup of mar i ne f orms, i ncl udi ngst ar - f i sh, sea- ur chi ns, and var i ous anomal ous f orms t hat wer er egar ded as l i nki ng t he ani mal t o the veget abl e worl ds. Thi scl assi f i cat i on of t he l ower f or ms of ani mal l i f e cont i nued i n

vogue unt i l Cuvi er subst i t ut ed f or i t hi s f amous gr oupi ng i nt oar t i cul at es, mol l usks, and r adi at es; whi ch gr oupi ng i n t ur n wasi n par t super seded l at er i n t he ni net eent h cent ur y.

What Ar i st ot l e di d f or t he ani mal ki ngdom hi s pupi l , Theophrast us, di d i n some measur e f or t he veget abl e ki ngdom. Theophrast us, however , was much l ess a cl ass i f i er t han hi smast er , and hi s work on botany, cal l ed The Nat ur al Hi st ory of Devel opment , pays compar at i vel y sl i ght at t ent i on t o t heoret i calquest i ons. I t deal s l ar gel y wi t h such pr acti cal i t i es as t he



maki ng of char coal , of pi t ch, and of r esi n, and t he ef f ect s of var i ous pl ant s on t he ani mal organi sm when t aken as f oods or asmedi ci nes. I n t hi s r egar d t he work of Theophr ast us, i s morenearl y aki n t o the nat ur al hi st ory of t he f amous Roman compi l er ,Pl i ny. I t r emai ned, however , t hr oughout ant i qui t y as t he mosti mpor t ant wor k on i t s subj ect , and i t ent i t l es Theophr ast us t o becal l ed t he "f at her of bot any. " Theophr ast us deal s al so wi t h t hemi neral ki ngdom af t er much the same f ashi on, and here agai n hi swork i s t he most not abl e t hat was pr oduced i n ant i qui t y.

I X. GREEK SCI ENCE OF THE ALEXANDRI AN OR HELLENI STI C PERI OD

We are enter i ng now upon t he most i mpor t ant sci ent i f i c epoch of ant i qui t y. When Ar i st ot l e and Theophr ast us passed f r omt he scene,At hens ceased t o be i n any sense t he sci ent i f i c cent r e of t hewor l d. That ci t y st i l l r et ai ned i t s remi ni scent gl or y, and cannotbe i gnor ed i n t he hi st or y of cul t ur e, but no gr eat sci ent i f i cl eader was ever agai n to be born or t o t ake up hi s permanent

abode wi t hi n t he conf i nes of Gr eece pr oper. Wi t h al mostcatacl ysmi c suddenness, a new i nt el l ectual cent r e appear ed on t hesout h shore of t he Medi t err anean. Thi s was t he ci t y of Al exandr i a, a ci t y whi ch Al exander t he Gr eat had f ounded dur i nghi s br i ef vi si t t o Egypt , and whi ch became the capi t al of Pt ol emySot er when he chose Egypt as hi s por t i on of t he di smember edempi r e of t he great Macedoni an. Pt ol emy had been wi t h hi s mast eri n the East , and was wi t h hi m i n Babyl oni a when he di ed. He hadt her ef ore come per sonal l y i n cont act wi t h Babyl oni anci vi l i zat i on, and we cannot doubt t hat t hi s had a most i mport anti nf l uence upon hi s l i f e, and t hr ough hi m upon t he newci vi l i zat i on of t he West . I n poi nt of cul t ur e, Al exandr i a must ber egar ded as t he successor of Babyl on, scar cel y l ess di r ect l y thanof Gr eece. Fol l owi ng t he Babyl oni an model , Pt ol emy er ected agr eat museum and began col l ect i ng a l i br ar y. Bef ore hi s deat h i twas sai d that he had col l ect ed no f ewer t han two hundred t housandmanuscr i pt s. He had gat her ed al so a company of great t eacher s andf ounded a school of sci ence whi ch, as has j ust been sai d, madeAl exandr i a t he cul t ur e- cent r e of t he worl d.

At hens i n t he day of her pr i me had known not hi ng qui t e l i ke t hi s.Such pr i vat e ci t i zens as Ar i st ot l e ar e known t o have hadl i br ar i es, but t her e wer e no gr eat publ i c col l ect i ons of books i nAt hens, or i n any ot her par t of t he Gr eek domai n, unt i l Ptol emyf ounded hi s f amous l i br ar y. As i s wel l known, such l i br ar i es hadexi st ed i n Babyl oni a f or t housands of year s. The char act er whi cht he Pt ol emai c epoch t ook on was no doubt due t o Babyl oni an

i nf l uence, but qui t e as much t o t he per sonal experi ence of Ptol emy hi msel f as an expl orer i n the Far East . The marvel l ousconquer i ng j our ney of Al exander had enor mousl y wi dened t hehor i zon of t he Gr eek geographer , and st i mul ated t he i magi nat i onof al l r anks of t he peopl e, I t was but nat ur al , t hen, t hatgeogr aphy and i t s par ent sci ence ast r onomy shoul d occupy t heat t ent i on of t he best mi nds i n thi s succeedi ng epoch. I n poi nt of f act , such a company of st ar - gazer s and ear t h- measurers came upont he scene i n t hi s t hi r d cent ur y B. C. as had never bef ore exi st edanywher e i n the wor l d. The whol e t r end of t he t i me was t owards



mechani cs. I t was as i f t he gr eat est t hi nker s had squarel y f acedabout f r om t he at t i t ude of t he myst i cal phi l osopher s of t hepr ecedi ng cent ur y, and had set t hemsel ves t he task of sol vi ng al lt he mechani cal r i ddl es of t he uni ver se, They no l onger t r oubl edt hemsel ves about probl ems of "bei ng" and "becomi ng" ; t hey gavebut l i t t l e heed t o met aphysi cal subt l et i es; t hey demanded t hatt hei r t hought s shoul d be gauged by obj ect i ve r eal i t i es. Hencet here ar ose a successi on of gr eat geometers , and t hei rconcept i ons were appl i ed t o t he const r uct i on of new mechani calcont r i vances on t he one hand, and to the el aborat i on of t heori esof si der eal mechani cs on the ot her .

The wonder f ul company of men who perf or med t he f eat s t hat areabout t o be r ecorded di d not al l f i nd t hei r home i n Al exandr i a,t o be sur e; but t hey al l came more or l ess under t he Al exandr i ani nf l uence. We shal l see t hat t her e ar e two ot her i mport antcent r es; one out i n Si ci l y, al most at t he conf i nes of t he Gr eekt er r i t or y i n t he west ; t he ot her i n Asi a Mi nor , not abl y on t hei sl and of Samos- - t he i sl and whi ch, i t wi l l be r ecal l ed, was at anear l i er day t he bi r t hpl ace of Pythagor as. But wher eas i n t he

pr evi ous cent ur y col oni st s f r om t he conf i nes of t he ci vi l i zedwor l d came t o At hens, now al l eyes t ur ned towards Al exandr i a, andso i mproved were t he f aci l i t i es f or communi cat i on t hat no doubtt he di scover i es of one coter i e of workers were known t o al l t heot her s much more qui ckl y t han had ever been possi bl e bef ore. Wel ear n, f or exampl e, t hat t he st udi es of Ar i st ar chus of Samos weredef i ni t el y known t o Ar chi medes of Syracuse, out i n Si ci l y.I ndeed, as we shal l see, i t i s t hr ough a chance r ef er encepr eserved i n one of t he wr i t i ngs of Ar chi medes t hat one of t hemost i mpor t ant specul at i ons of Ar i st archus i s made known to us.

Thi s i l l ust r at es suf f i ci ent l y t he i nt er communi cat i on t hroughwhi ch t he t hought of t he Al exandr i an epoch was br ought i nt o asi ngl e channel . We no l onger , as i n t he day of t he ear l i erschool s of Gr eek phi l osophy, have i sol ated gr oups of t hi nker s.

The sc i ent i f i c drama i s now pl ayed out upon a si ngl e st age; andi f we pass, as we shal l i n t he pr esent chapt er , f r om Al exandr i at o Syracuse and f r om Syracuse to Samos, t he shi f t of scenes doesno vi ol ence t o the dr amat i c uni t i es.

Not wi t hst andi ng t he number of great workers who were not proper l yAl exandr i ans, none t he l ess t he epoch i s wi t h pr opr i et y termedAl exandr i an. Not mer el y i n t he t hi r d cent ur y B. C. , but t hr oughoutt he l apse of at l east f our succeedi ng cent ur i es, t he ci t y of Al exander and t he Pt ol emi es cont i nued t o hol d i t s pl ace as t heundi sput ed cul t ur e- cent r e of t he worl d. Dur i ng t hat peri od Romer ose to i t s pi nnacl e of gl or y and began to decl i ne, wi t hout everchal l engi ng t he i nt el l ect ual supr emacy of t he Egypt i an ci t y. We

shal l see, i n a l at er chapt er , t hat t he Al exandr i an i nf l uenceswere passed on t o t he Mohammedan conquer or s, and every one i saware t hat when Al exandr i a was f i nal l y over t hr own i t s pl ace wast aken by another Gr eek ci t y, Byzant i um or Const ant i nopl e. Butt hat t r ansf er di d not occur unt i l Al exandr i a had enj oyed a l ongerper i od of supr emacy as an i nt el l ectual cent r e t han had perhapsever bef ore been gr ant ed t o any ci t y, wi t h t he possi bl eexcept i on of Babyl on.



EUCLI D ( ABOUT 300 B. C. )

Our pr esent concer n i s wi t h t hat f i r st wonderf ul devel opment of sci ent i f i c act i vi t y whi ch began under t he f i r st Pt ol emy, andwhi ch pr esent s, i n t he cour se of t he f i r st cent ur y of Al exandr i ani nf l uence, t he most r emar kabl e cot er i e of sci ent i f i c wor ker s andt hi nker s t hat ant i qui t y pr oduced. The ear l i est gr oup of t hese newl eader s i n sci ence had at i t s head a man whose name has been ahousehol d word ever si nce. Thi s was Eucl i d, t he f at her of systemat i c geomet r y. Tr adi t i on has pr eser ved t o us but l i t t l e of t he per sonal i t y of t hi s r emar kabl e teacher ; but , on t he ot herhand, hi s most i mpor t ant work has come down t o us i n i t sent i r ety. The El ement s of Geometr y, wi t h whi ch t he name of Eucl i di s associ ated i n t he mi nd of ever y school - boy, pr esent ed t hechi ef pr oposi t i ons of i t s subj ect i n so si mpl e and l ogi cal a f or mt hat t he work r emai ned a textbook ever ywher e f or more than twot housand years . I ndeed i t i s onl y now begi nni ng t o be superseded.I t i s not t went y years si nce Engl i sh mathemat i ci ans coul d depl oret he f act t hat , despi t e cer t ai n r at her obvi ous def ect s of t he workof Eucl i d, no bet t er t ext book than t hi s was avai l abl e. Eucl i d' s

work, of cour se, gi ves expr essi on t o much knowl edge that di d notor i gi nat e wi t h hi m. We have al r eady seen t hat sever al i mpor t antproposi t i ons of geomet r y had been devel oped by Thal es, and one byPyt hagoras, and that t he rudi ment s of t he subj ect wer e at l eastas ol d as Egypt i an ci vi l i zat i on. Preci sel y how much Eucl i d addedt hr ough hi s own i nvest i gat i ons cannot be ascert ai ned. I t seemsprobabl e t hat he was a di f f user of knowl edge rat her t han anori gi nat or , but as a gr eat t eacher hi s f ame i s secur e. He i scredi t ed wi t h an epi gr am whi ch i n i t sel f mi ght i nsur e hi mper pet ui t y of f ame: "Ther e i s no r oyal r oad to geomet r y, " was hi sanswer t o Ptol emy when that r ul er had quest i oned whet her t heEl ement s mi ght not be si mpl i f i ed. Doubt l ess t hi s, l i ke mostsi mi l ar good sayi ngs, i s apocr yphal ; but whoever i nvent ed i t hasmade t he wor l d hi s debt or .

HEROPHI LUS AND ERASI STRATUS

The cat hol i ci t y of Pt ol emy' s t ast es l ed hi m, natural l y enough, t ocul t i vat e t he bi ol ogi cal no l ess t han t he physi cal sci ences. I npar t i cul ar hi s i nf l uence per mi t t ed an epochal advance i n thef i el d of medi ci ne. Two anat omi st s became f amous t hrough t hei nvest i gat i ons t hey were per mi t t ed t o make under t he patr onage of t he enl i ght ened r ul er . These ear l i est of r eal l y sci ent i f i ci nvest i gat or s of t he mechani sm of t he human body were namedHer ophi l us and Er asi st r at us. These t wo anat omi st s gai ned t hei rknowl edge by the di ssect i on of human bodi es ( t hei r s are t he f i r st

r ecor ds that we have of such pract i ces) , and Ki ng Ptol emy hi msel f i s sai d to have been pr esent at some of t hese di ssect i ons. Theywer e t he f i r st t o di scover t hat t he ner ve- t r unks have t hei rori gi n i n t he br ai n and spi nal cor d, and t hey ar e credi t ed al sowi t h t he di scover y t hat t hese ner ve- t r unks ar e of t wo di f f er entki nds- - one to convey motor , and t he other sensory i mpul ses. Theydi scover ed, descr i bed, and named t he coveri ngs of t he br ai n. Thename of Her ophi l us i s st i l l appl i ed by anat omi st s, i n honor of t he di scover er , t o one of t he si nuses or l ar ge canal s t hat conveyt he venous bl ood f r omt he head. Herophi l us al so not i ced and



descri bed f our cavi t i es or vent r i cl es i n t he br ai n, and r eachedt he concl usi on that one of t hese vent r i cl es was t he seat of t hesoul - - a bel i ef shar ed unt i l compar at i vel y r ecent t i mes by manyphysi ol ogi st s. He made al so a car ef ul and f ai r l y accur at e studyof t he anatomy of t he eye, a great l y i mpr oved t he ol d operat i onf or cat ar act.

Wi t h t he i ncreased knowl edge of anatomy came al so cor r espondi ngadvances i n sur gery, and many exper i ment al operat i ons ar e sai d t ohave been perf or med upon condemned cr i mi nal s who wer e handed overt o t he sur geons by t he Pt ol emi es. Whi l e many modern wr i t ers haveat t empt ed to di scredi t t hese asser t i ons, i t i s not i mpr obabl et hat such oper at i ons were perf ormed. I n an age when human l i f ewas hel d so cheap, and among a peopl e accust omed t o t or t ur i ngcondemned pr i soner s f or compar at i vel y sl i ght of f ences, i t i s notunl i kel y t hat t he sur geons wer e al l owed t o i nf l i ct per haps l esspai nf ul t ort ur es i n t he cause of sci ence. Fur t her more, we knowt hat condemned cr i mi nal s were somet i mes handed over t o t hemedi cal pr of essi on t o be "operated upon and ki l l ed i n whateverway t hey t hought best " even as l ate as t he si xt eent h cent ury.

Ter t ul l i an[1] probabl y exaggerat es, however , when he puts t henumber of such vi ct i ms i n Al exandr i a at si x hundr ed.

Had Herophi l us and Erasi st r atus been as happy i n t hei r deduct i onsas t o t he f unct i ons of t he or gans as t hey were i n thei r knowl edgeof anat omy, t he sci ence of medi ci ne woul d have been pl aced upon aver y hi gh pl ane even i n t hei r t i me. Unf ort unat el y, however , t heynot onl y dr ew err oneous i nf er ences as to t he f unct i ons of t heorgans, but al so di sagr eed r adi cal l y as t o what f unct i ons cer t ai norgans per f ormed, and how di seases shoul d be t r eat ed, even whenagr eei ng per f ect l y on t he subj ect of anat omy i t sel f . Thei rcont r i but i on t o t he knowl edge of t he sci ent i f i c t r eat ment of di seases hol ds no such pl ace, t her ef ore, as t hei r anat omi cali nvest i gat i ons.

Hal f a cent ur y af t er t he t i me of Her ophi l us t her e appear ed aGr eek physi ci an, Her acl i des, whose r eput at i on i n t he use of dr ugsf ar surpasses t hat of t he anat omi st s of t he Al exandr i an school .Hi s r eputat i on has been handed down t hrough t he cent ur i es as t hatof a physi ci an, r at her t han a sur geon, al t hough i n hi s own t i mehe was consi dered one of t he gr eat surgeons of t he per i od.Her acl i des bel onged to t he "Empi r i c" school , whi ch r ej ect edanatomy as usel ess, dependi ng ent i r el y on t he use of drugs. He i st hought t o have been the f i r st physi ci an t o poi nt out t he val ueof opi um i n cer t ai n pai nf ul di seases. Hi s pr escr i pt i on of t hi sdr ug f or cer t ai n cases of "sl eepl essness, spasm, chol er a, andcol i c, " shows t hat hi s use of i t was not unl i ke t hat of t he

moder n physi ci an i n cer t ai n cases; and hi s t r eat ment of f ever s,by keepi ng t he pat i ent ' s head cool and f aci l i t at i ng t hesecret i ons of t he body, i s st i l l r ecogni zed as "good pr act i ce. "He advocated a f r ee use of l i qui ds i n quenchi ng t he f everpat i ent ' s t hi r st - - a r ecogni zed t her apeut i c measur e t o- day, butone t hat was wi del y condemned a century ago.

ARCHI MEDES OF SYRACUSE AND THE FOUNDATI ON OF MECHANI CS



We do not know j ust when Eucl i d di ed, but as he was at t he hei ghtof hi s f ame i n the t i me of Ptol emy I . , whose r ei gn ended i n t heyear 285 B. C. , i t i s har dl y pr obabl e t hat he was st i l l l i vi ngwhen a young man named Ar chi medes came t o Al exandr i a t o st udy.Ar chi medes was born i n t he Gr eek col ony of Syr acuse, on t hei sl and of Si ci l y, i n t he year 287 B. C. When he vi si t ed Al exandr i ahe pr obabl y f ound Apol l oni us of Per ga, t he pupi l of Eucl i d, att he head of t he mathemat i cal school t here. J ust how l ongAr chi medes r emai ned at Al exandr i a i s not known. When he hadsat i sf i ed hi s cur i osi t y or compl et ed hi s st udi es, he r et ur ned t oSyracuse and spent hi s l i f e t her e, chi ef l y under t he pat r onage of Ki ng Hi er o, who seems f ul l y to have appr eci at ed hi s abi l i t i es.

Ar chi medes was pr i mar i l y a mathemat i ci an. Lef t t o hi s owndevi ces, he woul d pr obabl y have devoted hi s ent i r e t i me t o thest udy of geomet r i cal pr obl ems. But Ki ng Hi ero had di scover ed t hathi s pr ot ege had wonder f ul mechani cal i ngenui t y, and he made gooduse of t hi s di scover y. Under st r ess of t he ki ng' s ur gi ngs, t hephi l osopher was l ed to i nvent a gr eat var i et y of mechani calcont r i vances, some of t hem most cur i ous ones. Ant i qui t y credi t ed

hi m wi t h t he i nvent i on of mor e than f or t y machi nes, and i t i st hese, r at her t han hi s pur el y mat hemat i cal di scover i es, t hat gavehi s name popul ar vogue both among hi s cont empor ar i es and wi t hpost er i t y. Ever y one has hear d of t he screw of Ar chi medes,t hrough whi ch the par adoxi cal ef f ect was pr oduced of maki ng wat erseem t o f l ow up hi l l . The best i dea of t hi s cur i ous mechani sm i sobt ai ned i f one wi l l t ake i n hand an ordi nar y corkscr ew, andi magi ne t hi s i nst r ument t o be changed i nt o a hol l ow t ube,r et ai ni ng pr eci sel y t he same shape but i ncr eased t o some f eet i nl engt h and t o a pr opor t i onat e di amet er . I f one wi l l hol d t hecor kscrew i n a sl ant i ng di r ect i on and t ur n i t sl owl y to t her i ght , supposi ng t hat t he poi nt di ps up a port i on of wat er eacht i me i t r evol ves, one can i n i magi nat i on f ol l ow t he f l ow of t hatpor t i on of wat er f r om spi r al t o spi r al , t he wat er al ways r unni ngdownwar d, of cour se, yet par adoxi cal l y bei ng l i f t ed hi gher andhi gher t owar ds t he base of t he cor kscrew, unt i l f i nal l y i t pour sout ( i n t he act ual Ar chi medes' t ube) at t he t op. Ther e i s anotherf or m of t he scr ew i n whi ch a r evol vi ng spi r al bl ade oper at eswi t hi n a cyl i nder , but t he pr i nci pl e i s pr eci sel y the same. Wi t hei t her f or m wat er may be l i f t ed, by the mer e turni ng of t hescr ew, t o any desi r ed hei ght . The i ngeni ous mechani sm exci t ed thewonder of t he cont emporar i es of Ar chi medes, as wel l i t mi ght .More ef f i ci ent devi ces have super seded i t i n modern t i mes, but i tst i l l exci t es t he admi r at i on of al l who exami ne i t , and i t sef f ect s seem as par adoxi cal as ever .

Some ot her of t he mechani sms of Ar chi medes have been made known

t o successi ve generat i ons of r eaders t hrough t he pages of Pol ybi us and Pl ut ar ch. These ar e t he devi ces t hr ough whi chAr chi medes ai ded Ki ng Hi ero t o ward of f t he at t acks of t he Romangener al Marcel l us, who i n the cour se of t he second Puni c war l ai dsi ege t o Syr acuse.

Pl ut ar ch, i n hi s l i f e of Mar cel l us, descri bes t he Roman' s at t ackand Ar chi medes' def ence i n much det ai l . I nci dent al l y he tel l s usal so how Ar chi medes came t o make the devi ces t hat r ender ed t hesi ege so f amous:



"Mar cel l us hi msel f , wi t h t hr eescor e gal l eys of f i ve r ower s atever y bank, wel l ar med and f ul l of al l sor t s of ar t i l l er y andf i r eworks, di d assaul t by sea, and r owed har d t o t he wal l , havi ngmade a gr eat engi ne and devi ce of bat t ery, upon ei ght gal l eyschai ned t oget her , t o bat t er t he wal l : t r ust i ng i n t he gr eatmul t i t ude of hi s engi nes of bat t er y, and t o al l such othernecessary pr ovi si on as he had f or war s, as al so i n hi s ownr eput at i on. But Ar chi medes made l i ght account of al l hi s devi ces,as i ndeed they were not hi ng compar abl e to the engi nes hi msel f hadi nvent ed. Thi s i nvent i ve ar t t o f r ame i nst r ument s and engi nes( whi ch are cal l ed mechani cal , or or gani cal , so hi ghl y commendedand est eemed of al l sor t s of peopl e) was f i r st set f or t h byAr chi t as, and by Eudoxus: par t l y to beaut i f y a l i t t l e t he sci enceof geomet r y by t hi s f i neness, and par t l y t o pr ove and conf i r m bymat er i al exampl es and sensi bl e i nst r ument s, cer t ai n geomet r i calconcl usi ons, wher e of a man cannot f i nd out t he concei vabl edemonst r at i ons by enf orced r easons and pr oof s. As t hat concl usi onwhi ch i nst r uct eth one to sear ch out t wo l i nes mean pr oport i onal ,whi ch cannot be pr oved by r eason demonst r at i ve, and yet

not wi t hst andi ng i s a pr i nci pl e and an accept ed gr ound f or manyt hi ngs whi ch ar e cont ai ned i n t he ar t of por t r ai t ur e. Bot h of t hem have f ashi oned i t t o t he workmanshi p of cer t ai n i nst r ument s,cal l ed mesol abes or mesogr aphs, whi ch serve to f i nd t hese meanl i nes pr opor t i onal , by dr awi ng cer t ai n cur ve l i nes, andover t hwar t and obl i que sect i ons. But af t er t hat Pl at o wasof f ended wi t h them, and mai nt ai ned agai nst t hem, t hat t hey di dut t er l y corr upt and di sgr ace, t he wort hi ness and excel l ence of geomet r y, maki ng i t t o descend f r om t hi ngs not compr ehensi bl e andwi t hout body, unt o t hi ngs sensi bl e and mat er i al , and t o br i ng i tt o a pal pabl e subst ance, wher e the vi l e and base handi work of mani s t o be empl oyed: si nce t hat t i me, I say, handi craf t , or t he ar tof engi nes, came to be separat ed f r omgeomet r y, and bei ng l ongt i me despi sed by t he phi l osopher s, i t came t o be one of t hewar l i ke ar t s.

"But Ar chi medes havi ng t ol d Ki ng Hi ero, hi s ki nsman and f r i end,t hat i t was possi bl e t o remove as great a wei ght as he woul d,wi t h as l i t t l e st r engt h as he l i st ed t o put t o i t : and boast i nghi msel f t hus ( as t hey repor t of hi m) and t r ust i ng t o the f or ce of hi s r easons, wher ewi t h he pr oved t hi s concl usi on, t hat i f t her ewere another gl obe of ear t h, he was abl e to remove thi s of our s,and pass i t over t o the ot her: Ki ng Hi ero wonderi ng t o hear hi m,r equi r ed hi m t o put hi s devi ce i n execut i on, and to make hi m seeby exper i ence, some gr eat or heavy wei ght r emoved, by l i t t l ef orce. So Ar chi medes caught hol d wi t h a book of one of t hegr eat est car ect s, or hul ks of t he ki ng ( t hat t o dr aw i t t o t he

shor e out of t he water r equi r ed a marvel l ous number of peopl e t ogo about i t , and was har dl y t o be done so) and put a gr eat numberof men more i nto her , t han her ordi nar y burden: and he hi msel f si t t i ng al one at hi s ease f ar of f , wi t hout any st r ai ni ng at al l ,drawi ng t he end of an engi ne wi t h many wheel s and pul l eys, f ai rand sof t l y wi t h hi s hand, made i t come as gent l y and smoot hl y t ohi m, as i t had f l oat ed i n t he sea. The ki ng wonderi ng t o see t hesi ght , and knowi ng by pr oof t he gr eat ness of hi s art ; be pr ayedhi m t o make hi m some engi nes, both to assaul t and def end, i n al lmanner of si eges and assaul t s. So Ar chi medes made hi m many



engi nes, but Ki ng Hi ero never occupi ed any of t hem, because her ei gned t he most part of hi s t i me i n peace wi t hout any wars. Butt hi s pr ovi si on and muni t i on of engi nes, served t he Syracusan' st ur n mar vel l ousl y at t hat t i me: and not onl y the pr ovi si on of t heengi nes r eady made, but al so t he engi neer and work- mast erhi msel f , t hat had i nvent ed t hem.

"Now t he Syracusans, seei ng t hemsel ves assaul t ed by t he Romans,bot h by sea and by l and, were marvel l ousl y perpl exed, and coul dnot t el l what t o say, t hey wer e so af r ai d: i magi ni ng i t wasi mpossi bl e f or t hemt o wi t hst and so gr eat an army. But whenAr chi medes f el l t o handl i ng hi s engi nes, and to set t hem atl i bert y, t here f l ew i n t he ai r i nf i ni t e ki nds of shot , andmar vel l ous gr eat st ones, wi t h an i ncr edi bl e noi se and f orce ont he sudden, upon t he f oot men t hat came t o assaul t t he ci t y byl and, bear i ng down, and t ear i ng i n pi eces al l t hose whi ch cameagai nst t hem, or i n what pl ace soever t hey l i ght ed, no ear t hl ybody bei ng abl e to resi st t he vi ol ence of so heavy a wei ght : sot hat al l t hei r r anks wer e mar vel l ousl y di sor der ed. And as f or t hegal l eys t hat gave assaul t by sea, some were sunk wi t h l ong pi eces

of t i mber l i ke unt o the yar ds of shi ps, wher et o t hey f ast en t hei rsai l s, whi ch were suddenl y bl own over t he wal l s wi t h f orce of t hei r engi nes i nt o t hei r gal l eys, and so sunk t hem by t hei r overgr eat wei ght . "

Pol ybi us descr i bes what was perhaps t he most i mpor t ant of t hesecont r i vances, whi ch was, he tel l s us, "a band of i r on, hangi ng bya chai n f r omt he beak of a machi ne, whi ch was used i n t hef ol l owi ng manner. The per son who, l i ke a pi l ot , gui ded the beak,havi ng l et f al l t he hand, and cat ched hol d of t he pr ow of anyvessel , drew down the opposi t e end of t he machi ne t hat was on t hei nsi de of t he wal l s. And when the vessel was t hus r ai sed erectupon i t s st em, t he machi ne i t sel f was hel d i mmovabl e; but , t hechai n bei ng suddenl y l oosened f r om t he beak by t he means of pul l eys, some of t he vessel s wer e thr own upon t hei r si des, otherst ur ned wi t h t he bot t omupwar ds; and t he gr eatest par t , as t hepr ows wer e pl unged f r oma consi der abl e hei ght i nt o t he sea, wer ef i l l ed wi t h wat er , and al l t hat wer e on boar d thrown i nt o t umul tand di sorder .

"Marcel l us was i n no smal l degr ee embarr assed, " Pol ybi uscont i nues, "when he f ound hi msel f encountered i n every at t empt bysuch r esi st ance. He per cei ved t hat al l hi s ef f or t s wer e def eat edwi t h l oss; and were even deri ded by t he enemy. But , ami dst al lt he anxi et y t hat he suf f er ed, he coul d not hel p j est i ng upon t hei nvent i ons of Ar chi medes. Thi s man, sai d he, empl oys our shi ps as

bucket s t o dr aw water : and boxi ng about our sackbut s, as i f t heywer e unwort hy to be associ at ed wi t h hi m, dr i ves t hem f r omhi scompany wi t h di sgrace. Such was t he success of t he si ege on t hesi de of t he sea. "

Subsequent l y, however , Marcel l us t ook t he ci t y by st r ategy, andAr chi medes was ki l l ed, cont r ar y, i t i s sai d, t o t he expr essorder s of Mar cel l us. "Syr acuse bei ng taken, " says Pl ut ar ch,"nothi ng gr i eved Marcel l us more t han the l oss of Ar chi medes. Who,bei ng i n hi s st udy when t he ci t y was t aken, busi l y seeki ng out by



hi msel f t he demonst r at i on of some geomet r i cal pr oposi t i on whi chhe had dr awn i n f i gur e, and so ear nest l y occupi ed ther ei n, as henei t her saw nor heard any noi se of enemi es t hat r an up and downt he ci t y, and much l ess knew i t was t aken: he wondered when hesaw a sol di er by hi m, t hat bade hi m go wi t h hi m t o Mar cel l us.Not wi t hst andi ng, he spake t o t he sol di er , and bade hi m t ar r yunt i l he had done hi s concl usi on, and br ought i t t odemonst r at i on: but t he sol di er bei ng angr y wi t h hi s answer , dr ewout hi s sword and ki l l ed hi m. Ot hers say, t hat t he Roman sol di erwhen he came, of f er ed t he sword' s poi nt t o hi m, t o ki l l hi m: andt hat Ar chi medes when he saw hi m, prayed hi m t o hol d hi s hand al i t t l e, t hat he mi ght not l eave t he mat t er he l ooked f ori mper f ect , wi t hout demonst r at i on. But t he sol di er maki ng nor eckoni ng of hi s specul at i on, ki l l ed hi m present l y. I t i sr epor t ed a t hi r d way al so, sayi ng t hat cer t ai n sol di er s met hi mi n t he st r eet s goi ng to Mar cel l us, car r yi ng cer t ai n mat hemat i cali nst r ument s i n a l i t t l e pr et t y cof f er , as di al s f or t he sun,spheres, and angl es, wherewi t h t hey measure t he gr eat ness of t hebody of t he sun by vi ew: and t hey supposi ng he had car r i ed somegol d or s i l ver, or ot her preci ous j ewel s i n t hat l i t t l e cof f er,

sl ew hi m f or i t . But i t i s most cer t ai n t hat Mar cel l us wasmar vel l ousl y sor r y f or hi s deat h, and ever af t er hat ed t hevi l l ai n t hat sl ew hi m, as a cur sed and execr abl e per son: and howhe had made al so marvel l ous much af t erwards of Ar chi medes'ki nsmen f or hi s sake. "

We ar e f ur t her i ndebt ed t o Pl utarch f or a summary of t hechar act er and i nf l uence of Ar chi medes, and f or an i nt erest i ngsuggest i on as to t he est i mate whi ch t he gr eat phi l osopher putupon t he r el at i ve i mport ance of hi s own di scover i es."Not wi t hst andi ng Ar chi medes had such a great mi nd, and was sopr of oundl y l ear ned, havi ng hi dden i n hi m t he onl y t r easur e andsecret s of geomet r i cal i nvent i ons: as be woul d never set f or t hany book how t o make al l t hese war l i ke engi nes, whi ch won hi m att hat t i me t he f ame and gl ory, not of man' s knowl edge, but r atherof di vi ne wi sdom. But he est eemi ng al l ki nd of handi cr af t andi nvent i on t o make engi nes, and general l y al l manner of sci encesbr i ngi ng common commodi t y by t he use of t hem, t o be but vi l e,beggar l y, and mercenar y dr oss: empl oyed hi s wi t and st udy onl y t owr i t e t hi ngs, t he beaut y and subt l ety whereof were not mi ngl edanyt hi ng at al l wi t h necessi t y. For al l t hat he hat h wr i t t en, ar egeomet r i cal pr oposi t i ons, whi ch ar e wi t hout compari son of anyot her wr i t i ngs whatsoever : because the subj ect wher e of t heyt r eat , doth appear by demonst r at i on, t he maker gi ves t hem t hegrace and t he greatness, and t he demonst r at i on pr ovi ng i t soexqui si t el y, wi t h wonder f ul r eason and f aci l i t y, as i t i s notr epugnabl e. For i n al l geometr y ar e not t o be f ound more pr of ound

and di f f i cul t mat t er s wr i t t en, i n mor e pl ai n and si mpl e t er ms,and by more easy pr i nci pl es, t han t hose whi ch he hath i nvent ed.Now some do i mput e t hi s, t o the sharpness of hi s wi t andunder st andi ng, whi ch was a nat ur al gi f t i n hi m: other s do ref eri t t o t he ext r eme pai ns he took, whi ch made t hese t hi ngs come soeasi l y f r omhi m, t hat t hey seemed as i f t hey had been no t r oubl et o hi m at al l . For no man l i vi ng of hi msel f can devi se t hedemonst r at i on of hi s pr oposi t i ons, what pai ns soever he t ake t oseek i t : and yet st r ai ght so soon as he cometh t o decl are andopen i t , every man t hen i magi net h wi t h hi msel f he coul d have



f ound i t out wel l enough, he can t hen so pl ai nl y makedemonst r at i on of t he t hi ng he meanet h t o show. And t her ef ore t hatmet hi nks i s l i kel y t o be t r ue, whi ch t hey wr i t e of hi m: t hat hewas so r avi shed and dr unk wi t h t he sweet ent i cement s of t hi ssi r en, whi ch as i t wer e l ay cont i nual l y wi t h hi m, as he f orgothi s meat and dr i nk, and was carel ess ot her wi se of hi msel f , t hatof t ent i mes hi s ser vant s got hi m agai nst hi s wi l l t o t he bat hs t owash and anoi nt hi m: and yet bei ng t her e, he woul d ever bedr awi ng out of t he geomet r i cal f i gur es, even i n t he very i mber sof t he chi mney. And whi l e t hey wer e anoi nt i ng of hi m wi t h oi l sand sweet savour s, wi t h hi s f i nger he di d dr aw l i nes upon hi snaked body: so f ar was he t aken f r omhi msel f , and br ought i nt o anecst asy or t r ance, wi t h t he del i ght he had i n t he st udy of geomet r y, and t r ul y ravi shed wi t h t he l ove of t he Muses. Butamongst many not abl e t hi ngs he devi sed, i t appear eth, t hat hemost est eemed t he demonst r at i on of t he propor t i on bet ween t hecyl i nder ( t o wi t , t he r ound col umn) and t he spher e or gl obecont ai ned i n t he same: f or he pr ayed hi s ki nsmen and f r i ends,t hat af t er hi s deat h they woul d put a cyl i nder upon hi s t omb,cont ai ni ng a massy spher e, wi t h an i nscr i pt i on of t he pr opor t i on,

wher eof t he cont i nent exceedet h the thi ng cont ai ned. " [ 2]

I t shoul d be observed t hat nei t her Pol ybi us nor Pl ut ar ch ment i onst he use of bur ni ng- gl asses i n connect i on wi t h t he si ege of Syr acuse, nor i ndeed are t hese r ef err ed t o by any ot her anci entwr i t er of aut hori t y. Never t hel ess, a st ory gai ned cr edence downt o a l at e day t o the ef f ect t hat Ar chi medes had set f i r e t o thef l eet of t he enemy wi t h t he ai d of concave mi r r ors. An experi mentwas made by Si r I saac Newt on t o show t he possi bi l i t y of aphenomenon so wel l i n accor d wi t h t he geni us of Ar chi medes, butt he si l ence of al l t he ear l y aut hori t i es makes i t mor e t handoubt f ul whether any such expedi ent was r eal l y adopt ed.

I t wi l l be obser ved t hat t he chi ef pr i nci pl e i nvol ved i n al lt hese mechani sms was a capaci t y t o t r ansmi t great power t hroughl ever s and pul l eys, and t hi s bri ngs us t o the most i mport antf i el d of t he Syracusan phi l osopher ' s act i vi t y. I t was as ast udent of t he l ever and the pul l ey t hat Ar chi medes was l ed t osome of hi s gr eat est mechani cal di scoveri es. He i s even cr edi t edwi t h bei ng the di scover er of t he compound pul l ey. More l i kel y hewas i t s devel oper onl y, si nce t he pr i nci pl e of t he pul l ey wasknown t o t he ol d Babyl oni ans, as t hei r scul pt ur es t est i f y. Butt her e i s no reason t o doubt t he gener al out l i nes of t he st or yt hat Ar chi medes ast ounded Ki ng Hi ero by pr ovi ng t hat , wi t h t heai d of mul t i pl e pul l eys, t he st r engt h of one man coul d suf f i ce t odr ag t he l ar gest shi p f r om i t s moor i ngs.

The proper t y of t he l ever , f r om i t s f undamental pr i nci pl e, wasst udi ed by hi m, begi nni ng wi t h the sel f - evi dent f act t hat "equalbodi es at t he ends of t he equal ar ms of a rod, support ed on i t smi ddl e poi nt , wi l l bal ance each other " ; or, what amount s t o t hesame t hi ng stat ed i n anot her way, a regul ar cyl i nder of uni f or mmat t er wi l l bal ance at i t s mi ddl e poi nt . Fr om t hi s st ar t i ng- poi nthe el aborat ed t he subj ect on such cl ear and sat i sf act orypr i nci pl es t hat t hey st and to- day pr act i cal l y unchanged and wi t hf ew addi t i ons. Fromal l hi s st udi es and exper i ment s he f i nal l yf or mul at ed t he pr i nci pl e t hat "bodi es wi l l be i n equi l i br i o when



t hei r di st ance f r om t he f ul crum or poi nt of suppor t i s i nver sel yas t hei r wei ght . " He i s cr edi t ed wi t h havi ng summed up hi sest i mat e of t he capabi l i t i es of t he l ever wi t h t he wel l - knownexpr essi on, "Gi ve me a f ul cr um on whi ch t o rest or a pl ace onwhi ch t o st and, and I wi l l move t he ear t h. "

But perhaps t he f eat of al l other s t hat most appeal ed t o thei magi nat i on of hi s cont emporar i es, and possi bl y al so t he one t hathad t he gr eat est bear i ng upon t he posi t i on of Ar chi medes as asci ent i f i c di scover er , was t he one made f ami l i ar t hr ough t he t al eof t he crown of Hi er o. Thi s cr own, so t he st ory goes, wassupposed t o be made of sol i d gol d, but Ki ng Hi ero f or some reasonsuspect ed the honest y of t he j ewel l er , and desi r ed t o know i f Ar chi medes coul d devi se a way of t est i ng t he quest i on wi t houti nj ur i ng t he cr own. Gr eek i magi nat i on sel dom spoi l ed a st ory i nt he t el l i ng, and i n t hi s case t he t al e was al l owed t o take on t hemost pi ct uresque of phases. The phi l osopher, we ar e assur ed,ponder ed t he pr obl em f or a l ong t i me wi t hout succeedi ng, but oneday as he st epped i nt o a bat h, hi s at t ent i on was at t r act ed by t heover f l ow of wat er . A new t r ai n of i deas was st ar t ed i n hi s

ever - r ecept i ve br ai n. Wi l d wi t h ent husi asm he spr ang f r om t hebat h, and, f or get t i ng hi s r obe, dashed al ong t he str eet s of Syracuse, shout i ng: "Eur eka! Eur eka! " ( I have f ound i t ! ) Thet hought t hat had come i nto hi s mi nd was t hi s: That any heavysubst ance must have a bul k pr oport i onat e t o i t s wei ght ; t hat gol dand si l ver di f f er i n wei ght , bul k f or bul k, and t hat t he way tot est t he bul k of such an i r r egul ar obj ect as a crown was t oi mmerse i t i n water . The exper i ment was made. A l ump of pur e gol dof t he wei ght of t he crown was i mmersed i n a cert ai n receptacl ef i l l ed wi t h wat er , and t he overf l ow noted. Then a l ump of pur esi l ver of t he same wei ght was si mi l ar l y i mmer sed; l ast l y t hecr own i t sel f was i mmer sed, and of cour se- - f or t he st ory must notl ack i t s dr amat i c sequel - - was f ound bul ki er t han i t s wei ght of pur e gol d. Thus t he geni us t hat coul d bal k war r i ors and ar mi escoul d al so f oi l t he wi l es of t he si l ver smi t h.

What ever t he t r ut h of t hi s pi ct ur esque nar r at i ve, t he f actr emai ns t hat some, such exper i ment s as t hese must have paved theway f or per haps t he gr eat est of al l t he studi es of Ar chi medes- - t hose t hat r el at e to t he buoyancy of wat er . Leavi ngt he f i el d of f abl e, we must now exami ne t hese wi t h somepr eci si on. For t unat el y, t he wr i t i ngs of Ar chi medes hi msel f ar est i l l ext ant , i n whi ch t he resul t s of hi s r emar kabl e exper i ment sare r el at ed, so we may pr esent t he resul t s i n t he words of t hedi scover er .

Her e t hey ar e: "Fi r st : The sur f ace of ever y coher ent l i qui d i n a

st at e of r est i s spher i cal , and t he cent r e of t he spher ecoi nci des wi t h the cent r e of t he ear t h. Second: A sol i d bodywhi ch, bul k f or bul k, i s of t he same wei ght as a l i qui d, i f i mmer sed i n t he l i qui d wi l l si nk so t hat t he sur f ace of t he bodyi s even wi t h t he sur f ace of t he l i qui d, but wi l l not si nk deeper .

Thi r d: Any sol i d body whi ch i s l i ghter , bul k f or bul k, t han al i qui d, i f pl aced i n t he l i qui d wi l l si nk so deep as t o di spl acet he mass of l i qui d equal i n wei ght t o anot her body. Four t h: I f abody whi ch i s l i ght er t han a l i qui d i s f or ci bl y i mmer sed i n t hel i qui d, i t wi l l be pr essed upwar d wi t h a f or ce cor r espondi ng t o



t he wei ght of a l i ke vol ume of wat er , l ess t he wei ght of t he bodyi t sel f . Fi f t h: Sol i d bodi es whi ch, bul k f or bul k, ar e heavi ert han a l i qui d, when i mmer sed i n the l i qui d si nk t o t he bot t om,but become i n the l i qui d as much l i ght er as t he wei ght of t hedi spl aced wat er i t sel f di f f er s f r om t he wei ght of t he sol i d. "

These proposi t i ons ar e not di f f i cul t t o demonst r at e, once t heyare concei ved, but t hei r di scover y, combi ned wi t h t he di scover yof t he l aws of st at i cs al r eady ref er r ed t o, may j ust l y beconsi der ed as pr ovi ng Ar chi medes t he most i nvent i ve exper i ment erof ant i qui t y.

Cur i ousl y enough, t he di scover y whi ch Ar chi medes hi msel f i s sai dt o have consi der ed t he most i mpor t ant of al l hi s i nnovat i ons i sone t hat seems much l ess st r i ki ng. I t i s t he answer t o thequest i on, What i s t he r el at i on i n bul k bet ween a spher e and i t sci r cumscri bi ng cyl i nder ? Ar chi medes f i nds t hat t he rat i o i ssi mpl y t wo t o t hree. We ar e not i nf ormed as t o how he r eached hi sconcl usi on, but an obvi ous met hod woul d be t o i mmerse a bal l i n acyl i ndri cal cup. The exper i ment i s one whi ch any one can make f orhi msel f , wi t h appr oxi mat e accur acy, wi t h the ai d of a t umbl er and

a sol i d rubber bal l or a bi l l i ard- bal l of j ust t he r i ght s i ze.Anot her geomet r i cal probl emwhi ch Ar chi medes sol ved was thepr obl em as t o t he si ze of a tr i angl e whi ch has equal ar ea wi t h aci r cl e; t he answer bei ng, a t r i angl e havi ng f or i t s base t heci r cumf er ence of t he ci r cl e and f or i t s al t i t ude t he r adi us.Ar chi medes sol ved al so the pr obl em of t he r el at i on of t hedi amet er of t he ci r cl e t o i t s ci r cumf er ence; hi s answer bei ng acl ose appr oxi mat i on to t he f ami l i ar 3. 1416, whi ch ever y t yro i ngeomet r y wi l l r ecal l as t he equi val ent of pi .

Numerous other of t he st udi es of Ar chi medes havi ng r ef erence t oconi c sect i ons, pr oper t i es of cur ves and spi r al s, and t he l i ke,ar e t oo t echni cal t o be det ai l ed her e. The extent of hi smathemat i cal knowl edge, however , i s suggest ed by t he f act t hat hecomput ed i n gr eat detai l t he number of gr ai ns of sand that woul dbe r equi r ed t o cover t he spher e of t he sun' s orbi t , maki ngcer t ai n hypot het i cal assumpt i ons as t o t he si ze of t he ear t h andt he di st ance of t he sun f or t he purposes of argument .Mat hemat i ci ans f i nd hi s comput at i on pecul i ar l y i nt er est i ngbecause i t evi dences a cr ude concept i on of t he i dea of l ogar i t hms. From our pr esent st andpoi nt , t he paper i n whi ch t hi scal cul at i on i s cont ai ned has consi der abl e i nt er est because of i t sassumpt i ons as to cel est i al mechani cs. Thus Ar chi medes st art s outwi t h t he pr el i mi nar y assumpt i on t hat t he ci r cumf erence of t heear t h i s l ess t han t hr ee mi l l i on st adi a. I t must be under st oodt hat t hi s assumpt i on i s pur el y f or t he sake of ar gument .Ar chi medes expr essl y st ates t hat he t akes t hi s number because i t

i s " t en t i mes as l arge as t he eart h has been supposed t o be bycer t ai n i nvest i gat or s. " Her e, per haps, t he r ef er ence i s t oEratost henes, whose measur ement of t he ear t h we shal l haveoccasi on t o r evert t o i n a moment . Cont i nui ng, Ar chi medes asser t st hat t he sun i s l ar ger t han t he ear t h, and t he ear t h l ar ger t hant he moon. I n t hi s assumpt i on, he says, he i s f ol l owi ng theopi ni on of t he maj or i t y of ast r onomer s. I n t he t hi r d pl ace,Ar chi medes assumes t hat t he di amet er of t he sun i s not more t hant hi r t y t i mes gr eat er t han t hat of t he moon. Her e he i s probabl ybasi ng hi s ar gument upon anot her set of measur ement s of



Ar i st ar chus, t o whi ch, al so, we shal l pr esent l y r ef er mor e atl engt h. I n r eal i t y, hi s assumpt i on i s ver y f ar f r om t he t r ut h,si nce t he act ual di ameter of t he sun, as we now know, i ssomet hi ng l i ke f our hundr ed t i mes t hat of t he moon. Four t h, t heci r cumf er ence of t he sun i s gr eat er t han one si de of t het housand- f aced f i gur e i nscr i bed i n i t s orbi t . The measur ement ,i t i s expr essl y st at ed, i s based on t he measurement s of Ar i st archus, who makes the di ameter of t he sun 1/ 170 of i t sorbi t . Ar chi medes adds, however , t hat he hi msel f has measured t heangl e and t hat i t appear s t o hi m t o be l ess t han 1/ 164, andgr eat er t han 1/ 200 par t of t he or bi t . That i s t o say, r educed t omoder n t er mi nol ogy, he pl aces t he l i mi t of t he sun' s appar entsi ze between t hi r t y- t hr ee mi nutes and t went y- seven mi nut es of ar c. As t he r eal di amet er i s t hi r t y- t wo mi nut es, t hi s cal cul at i oni s sur pr i si ngl y exact , consi der i ng the i mpl ement s t hen atcommand. But t he honor of f i r st maki ng i t must be gi ven toAr i st archus and not t o Ar chi medes.

We need not f ol l ow Ar chi medes t o t he l i mi t s of hi si ncompr ehensi bl e number s of sand- gr ai ns. The cal cul at i on i s

chi ef l y remarkabl e because i t was made bef ore t he i nt r oduct i on of t he so- cal l ed Ar abi c numeral s had si mpl i f i ed mathemat i calcal cul at i ons. I t wi l l be r ecal l ed t hat t he Gr eeks used l et t er sf or numeral s, and, havi ng no ci pher , t hey soon f ound t hemsel vesi n di f f i cul t i es when l arge numbers were i nvol ved. The Romansyst em of numer al s s i mpl i f i ed t he mat t er somewhat , but t hebeaut i f ul si mpl i ci t y of t he deci mal syst em di d not come i nt ovogue unt i l t he Mi ddl e Ages, as we shal l see. Notwi t hst andi ng t hedi f f i cul t i es, however , Ar chi medes f ol l owed out hi s cal cul at i onst o the pi l i ng up of bewi l deri ng numbers , whi ch t he modernmathemat i ci an f i nds t o be the consi st ent out come of t he pr obl emhe had set hi msel f .

But i t r emai ns t o not i ce t he most i nt er est i ng f eat ur e of t hi sdocument i n whi ch t he cal cul at i on of t he sand- gr ai ns i scont ai ned. " I t was known t o me, " says Ar chi medes, " t hat mostast r onomer s under st and by t he expr essi on ' worl d' ( uni ver se) abal l of whi ch t he cent r e i s t he mi ddl e poi nt of t he ear t h, and of whi ch t he radi us i s a st r ai ght l i ne bet ween t he cent r e of t heear t h and t he sun. " Ar chi medes hi msel f appear s t o accept t hi sopi ni on of t he maj or i t y, - - i t at l east ser ves as wel l as t hecont r ar y hypot hesi s f or t he pur pose of hi s cal cul at i on, - - but hegoes on t o say: "Ar i st ar chus of Samos, i n hi s wr i t i ng agai nst t heast r onomer s, seeks t o est abl i sh t he f act t hat t he wor l d i s r eal l yver y di f f er ent f r om t hi s. He hol ds t he opi ni on t hat t he f i xedst ars and the sun ar e i mmovabl e and t hat t he eart h revol ves i n aci r cul ar l i ne about t he sun, t he sun bei ng at t he cent r e of t hi s

ci r cl e. " Thi s r emar kabl e bi t of t est i mony est abl i shes beyondquest i on t he posi t i on of Ar i st ar chus of Samos as t he Coper ni cusof ant i qui t y. We must make f ur t her i nqui r y as t o t he teachi ngs of t he man who had gai ned such a r emarkabl e i nsi ght i nto t he t r uesyst em of t he heavens.

ARI STARCHUS OF SAMOS, THE COPERNI CUS OF ANTI QUI TY

I t appears t hat Ar i st archus was a cont emporary of Ar chi medes, but



t he exact dat es of hi s l i f e ar e not known. He was act i vel yengaged i n maki ng ast r onomi cal obser vat i ons i n Samos somewhatbef or e t he mi ddl e of t he t hi r d cent ur y B. C. ; i n other wor ds, j ustat t he t i me when t he act i vi t i es of t he Al exandr i an school wer e att hei r hei ght . Hi ppar chus, at a l at er day, was enabl ed to compar ehi s own obser vat i ons wi t h t hose made by Ar i st archus, and, as wehave j ust seen, hi s work was wel l known t o so di st ant acont emporar y as Ar chi medes. Yet t he f act s of hi s l i f e ar e al mosta bl ank f or us, and of hi s wr i t i ngs onl y a si ngl e one has beenpr eserved. That one, however , i s a most i mport ant and i nt erest i ngpaper on t he measurement s of t he sun and t he moon. Unf or t unat el y,t hi s paper gi ves us no di r ect cl ew as t o t he opi ni ons of Ar i st ar chus concer ni ng t he r el at i ve posi t i ons of t he ear t h andsun. But t he test i mony of Ar chi medes as t o t hi s i s unequi vocal ,and t hi s t est i mony i s support ed by ot her r umors i n t hemsel vesl ess aut hor i t at i ve.

I n cont empl at i ng t hi s ast r onomer of Samos, t hen, we are i n t hepresence of a man who had sol ved i n i t s essent i al s t he pr obl emof t he mechani sm of t he sol ar syst em. I t appear s f r omt he words of

Ar chi medes that Ari st archus; had propounded hi s t heor y i nexpl i ci t wr i t i ngs. Unquest i onabl y, t hen, he hel d t o i t as aposi t i ve doct r i ne, not as a mere vague guess. We shal l show, i n amoment , on what grounds he based hi s opi ni on. Had hi s t eachi ngf ound vogue, t he st ory of sci ence woul d be ver y di f f er ent f r omwhat i t i s. We shoul d t hen have no tal e t o t el l of a Coper ni cuscomi ng upon t he scene f ul l y sevent een hundr ed years l ater wi t ht he r evol ut i onar y doct r i ne t hat our wor l d i s not t he cent r e of t he uni ver se. We shoul d not have t o t el l of t he per secut i on of aBr uno or of a Gal i l eo f or t eachi ng t hi s doct r i ne i n t hesevent eent h cent ur y of an er a whi ch di d not begi n t i l l t wohundr ed years af t er t he death of Ar i st archus. But , as we know,t he teachi ng of t he ast r onomer of Samos di d not wi n i t s way. Theol d conservat i ve geocent r i c doct r i ne, seemi ngl y so much more i naccor dance wi t h the ever y- day observat i ons of manki nd, support edby t he maj or i t y of ast r onomer s wi t h the Per i pat et i c phi l osopher sat t hei r head, hel d i t s pl ace. I t f ound f r esh suppor t er spr esent l y among the l at er Al exandr i ans, and so f ul l y ecl i psed thehel i ocent r i c vi ew t hat we shoul d scarcel y know t hat vi ew had evenf ound an advocat e were i t not f or her e and t her e such a chancer ecor d as t he phr ases we have j ust quot ed f r omAr chi medes. Yet ,as we now see, t he hel i ocent r i c doct r i ne, whi ch we know t o bet r ue, had been t hought out and advocated as t he cor r ect t heory of cel est i al mechani cs by at l east one wor ker of t he thi r d cent ur yB. C. Such an i dea, we may be sur e, di d not spr i ng i nt o t he mi ndof i t s ori gi nat or except as t he cul mi nat i on of a l ong ser i es of observat i ons and i nf er ences. The pr eci se charact er of t he

evol ut i on we per haps cannot t r ace, but i t s broader out l i nes areopen t o our obser vat i on, and we may not l eave so i mpor t ant at opi c wi t hout at l east br i ef l y not i ng t hem.

Ful l y to unders t and t he t heor y of Ar i st archus, we must go back acent ur y or t wo and r ecal l t hat as l ong ago as t he t i me of t hatot her gr eat nat i ve of Samos, Pyt hagoras, t he concept i on had beenr eached t hat t he ear t h i s i n mot i on. We saw, i n deal i ng wi t hPyt hagoras, t hat we coul d not be sure as t o pr eci sel y what hehi msel f t aught , but t her e i s no quest i on t hat t he i dea of t he



wor l d' s mot i on became f r om an ear l y day a so- cal l ed Pyt hagoreandoct r i ne. Whi l e al l t he ot her phi l osopher s, so f ar as we know,st i l l bel i eved t hat t he wor l d was f l at , t he Pyt hagor eans out i nI t al y t aught t hat t he worl d i s a spher e and t hat t he appar entmot i ons of t he heavenl y bodi es ar e real l y due t o t he act ualmot i on of t he ear t h i t sel f . They di d not, however , vaul t t o t heconcl usi on t hat t hi s t r ue mot i on of t he ear t h t akes pl ace i n t hef or m of a ci r cui t about t he sun. I nst ead of t hat , t hey concei vedt he cent r al body of t he uni ver se t o be a gr eat f i r e, i nvi si bl ef r om t he ear t h, because t he i nhabi t ed si de of t he t er r est r i albal l was t ur ned away f r om i t . The sun, i t was hel d, i s but agr eat mi r r or , whi ch r ef l ects t he l i ght f r om t he cent r al f i r e. Sunand ear t h al i ke r evol ve about t hi s gr eat f i r e, each i n i t s ownorbi t . Bet ween t he ear t h and t he cent r al f i r e t here was,cur i ousl y enough, supposed t o be an i nvi si bl e ear t hl i ke bodywhi ch was gi ven t he name of Ant i ct hon, or count er- ear t h. Thi sbody, i t sel f r evol vi ng about t he cent r al f i r e, was supposed t oshut of f t he cent r al l i ght now and agai n f r om t he sun or f r om t hemoon, and t hus t o account f or cer t ai n ecl i pses f or whi ch t heshadow of t he ear t h di d not seem r esponsi bl e. I t was, per haps,

l ar gel y t o account f or such ecl i pses t hat t he count er - ear t h wasi nvent ed. But i t i s supposed t hat t her e was another r eason. ThePyt hagoreans hel d t hat t her e i s a pecul i ar sacredness i n t henumber t en. J ust as t he Babyl oni ans of t he ear l y day and t heHegel i an phi l osopher s of a more recent epoch saw a sacr edconnect i on bet ween t he number seven and t he number of pl anet arybodi es, so t he Pyt hagoreans t hought t hat t he uni ver se must bearr anged i n accor dance wi t h t he number t en. Thei r count of t heheavenl y bodi es, i ncl udi ng t he spher e of t he f i xed st ars, seemedt o show ni ne, and t he count er- ear t h suppl i ed t he mi ssi ng body.

The preci se genesi s and devel opment of t hi s i dea cannot now bef ol l owed, but t hat i t was pr eval ent about t he f i f t h cent ur y B. C.as a Pyt hagorean doct r i ne cannot be quest i oned. Anaxagoras al soi s sai d t o have t aken account of t he hypot het i cal count er - ear t hi n hi s expl anat i on of ecl i pses; t hough, as we have seen, hepr obabl y di d not accept t hat par t of t he doctr i ne whi ch hel d t heear t h to be a sphere. The names of Phi l ol aus and Heracl i des havebeen l i nked wi t h cer t ai n of t hese Pythagorean doctr i nes. Eudoxus,t oo, who, l i ke t he ot her s, l i ved i n Asi a Mi nor i n t he f our t hcent ur y B. C. , was hel d to have made speci al st udi es of t heheavenl y spheres and perhaps t o have t aught t hat t he ear t h moves.So, t oo, Ni cet as must be named among t hose whom r umor cr edi t edwi t h havi ng t aught t hat t he worl d i s i n mot i on. I n a wor d, t heevi dence, so f ar as we can gar ner i t f r omt he r emai ni ngf r agment s, t ends t o show t hat al l al ong, f r omt he t i me of t heear l y Pyt hagoreans, t her e had been an under cur r ent of opi ni on i n

t he phi l osophi cal worl d whi ch quest i oned t he f i xi t y of t he ear t h;and i t woul d seem t hat t he school of t hi nker s who t ended t oaccept t he r evol ut i onar y vi ew cent r ed i n Asi a Mi nor , not f ar f r omt he earl y home of t he f ounder of t he Pyt hagorean doct r i nes. I twas not st r ange, t hen, t hat t he man who was f i nal l y t o car r yt hese new opi ni ons t o thei r l ogi cal concl usi on shoul d hai l f r omSamos.

But what was the support whi ch observat i on coul d gi ve t o thi snew, st r ange concept i on t hat t he heavenl y bodi es do not i n



r eal i t y move as they seem t o move, but t hat t hei r apparent mot i oni s due t o the act ual r evol ut i on of t he ear t h? I t i s extr emel ydi f f i cul t f or any one nowadays t o put hi msel f i n a ment alposi t i on t o answer t hi s quest i on. We are so accust omed t oconcei ve t he sol ar syst emas we know i t t o be, t hat we ar e wontt o f or get how ver y di f f er ent i t i s f r om what i t seems. Yet oneneeds but t o gl ance up at t he sky, and then to gl ance about oneat t he sol i d ear t h, t o gr ant , on a moment ' s r ef l ect i on, t hat t hegeocent r i c i dea i s of al l ot her s t he most nat ur al ; and t hat t oconcei ve t he sun as t he act ual Cent r e of t he sol ar system i s ani dea whi ch must l ook f or suppor t t o some ot her evi dence t han thatwhi ch or di nary obser vat i on can gi ve. Such was t he vi ew of most of t he anci ent phi l osopher s, and such cont i nued to be the opi ni on of t he maj or i t y of manki nd l ong af t er t he t i me of Coperni cus. Wemust not f orget t hat even so great an observi ng ast r onomer as

Tycho Br ahe, so l at e as t he sevent eent h cent ury, decl i ned t oaccept t he hel i ocent r i c t heor y, t hough admi t t i ng that al l t hepl anets except t he ear t h r evol ve about t he sun. We shal l see t hatbef or e the Al exandr i an school l ost i t s i nf l uence a geocent r i cscheme had been evol ved whi ch f ul l y expl ai ned al l t he appar ent

mot i ons of t he heavenl y bodi es. Al l t hi s, t hen, makes us butwonder t he more that t he geni us of an Ar i st archus coul d gi vepr ecedence t o sci ent i f i c i nduct i on as agai nst t he seemi ngl y cl earevi dence of t he senses.

What , t hen, was t he l i ne of sci ent i f i c i nduct i on t hat l edAr i st ar chus t o thi s wonder f ul goal ? For t unat el y, we ar e abl e t oanswer t hat quer y, at l east i n par t . Ar i st ar chus gai ned hi sevi dence t hrough some wonder f ul measurement s. Fi r st , he measuredt he di sks of t he sun and t he moon. Thi s, of cour se, coul d i ni t sel f gi ve hi m no cl ew t o the di st ance of t hese bodi es, andt her ef or e no cl ew as t o t hei r r el at i ve si ze; but i n at t empt i ng t oobt ai n such a cl ew he hi t upon a wonderf ul yet al t ogether s i mpl eexper i ment . I t occur r ed t o hi m t hat when t he moon i s pr eci sel ydi chot omi zed- - t hat i s t o say, pr eci sel y at t he hal f - t he l i ne of vi si on f r omt he ear t h t o t he moon must be pr eci sel y at r i ghtangl es wi t h t he l i ne of l i ght passi ng f r om t he sun t o the moon.At t hi s moment , t hen, t he i magi nar y l i nes j oi ni ng the sun, t hemoon, and the ear t h, make a ri ght angl e t r i angl e. But t hepr oper t i es of t he r i ght - angl e tr i angl e had l ong been st udi ed andwere wel l under s t ood. One acut e angl e of such a t r i angl edet er mi nes t he f i gur e of t he t r i angl e i t sel f . We have al r eadyseen t hat Thal es, t he ver y ear l i est of t he Gr eek phi l osopher s,measur ed t he di st ance of a shi p at sea by the appl i cat i on of t hi spr i nci pl e. Now Ar i st ar chus si ght s t he sun i n pl ace of Thal es'shi p, and, si ght i ng t he moon at t he same t i me, measures t he angl eand est abl i shes t he shape of hi s r i ght - angl e t r i angl e. Thi s does

not t el l hi m t he di st ance of t he sun, t o be sur e, f or he does notknow t he l engt h of hi s base- l i ne- - t hat i s t o say, of t he l i nebet ween the moon and the eart h. But i t does est abl i sh t her el at i on of t hat base- l i ne t o t he ot her l i nes of t he t r i angl e; i not her wor ds, i t t el l s hi m t he di st ance of t he sun i n t er ms of t hemoon' s di st ance. As Ar i st ar chus st r i kes t he angl e, i t shows t hatt he sun i s ei ghteen t i mes as di st ant as t he moon. Now, bycompar i ng the apparent si ze of t he sun wi t h the apparent si ze of t he moon- - whi ch, as we have seen, Ar i st archus has al r eadymeasur ed- - he i s abl e to tel l us t hat , t he sun i s " more t han 5832



t i mes, and l ess t han 8000" t i mes l arger t han t he moon; t hough hi smeasur ement s, t aken by t hemsel ves, gi ve no cl ew t o t he act ualbul k of ei t her body. These concl usi ons, be i t under st ood, ar eabsol ut el y val i d i nf er ences- - nay, demonst r at i ons- - f r om t hemeasur ement s i nvol ved, provi ded onl y that t hese measur ement s havebeen cor r ect . Unf or t unat el y, t he angl e of t he t r i angl e we have

j ust seen measur ed i s exceedi ngl y di f f i cul t t o determi ne wi t haccur acy, whi l e at t he same t i me, as a moment ' s r ef l ect i on wi l lshow, i t i s so l ar ge an angl e t hat a ver y sl i ght devi at i on f r omt he t r ut h wi l l gr eat l y af f ect t he di st ance at whi ch i t s l i ne

j oi ns t he ot her si de of t he t r i angl e. Then agai n, i t i s vi r t ual l yi mpossi bl e to t el l t he pr eci se moment when t he moon i s at hal f ,as t he l i ne i t gi ves i s not so shar p t hat we can f i x i t wi t habsol ut e accur acy. Ther e i s, moreover , another el ement of er r ordue t o the ref r act i on of l i ght by t he ear t h' s at mospher e. Theexper i ment was pr obabl y made when t he sun was near t he hor i zon,at whi ch t i me, as we now know, but as Ar i st archus pr obabl y di dnot suspect , t he appar ent di spl acement of t he sun' s posi t i on i sconsi der abl e; and t hi s di spl acement , i t wi l l be obser ved, i s i nt he di r ect i on t o l essen t he angl e i n quest i on.

I n poi nt of f act , Ar i st ar chus est i mat ed t he angl e at ei ght y- sevendegrees. Had hi s i nst r ument been more preci se, and had he beenabl e t o take account of al l t he el ement s of er r or, he woul d havef ound i t ei ght y- seven degr ees and f i f t y- t wo mi nut es. Thedi f f er ence of measur ement seems sl i ght ; but i t suf f i ced t o maket he comput at i ons di f f er absur dl y f r om t he t r ut h. The sun i sr eal l y not merel y ei ght een t i mes but more than t wo hundred t i mest he di st ance of t he moon, as Wendel ei n di scover ed on r epeat i ngt he exper i ment of Ar i st ar chus about t wo t housand year s l at er . Yett hi s di scr epancy does not i n t he l east t ake away f r om t heval i di t y of t he met hod whi ch Ar i st ar chus empl oyed. Moreover , hi sconcl usi on, st at ed i n gener al t er ms, was per f ect l y cor r ect : t hesun i s many t i mes more di st ant t han the moon and vast l y l argert han t hat body. Gr ant ed, t hen, t hat t he moon i s, as Ar i st archuscor r ect l y bel i eved, consi der abl y l ess i n si ze t han t he ear t h, t hesun must be enormousl y l arger t han t he ear t h; and t hi s i s t hevi t al i nf erence whi ch, more t han any ot her , must have seemed t oAr i st ar chus t o conf i r m t he suspi ci on t hat t he sun and not t heear t h i s t he cent r e of t he pl anet ary syst em. I t seemed t o hi mi nher ent l y i mpr obabl e t hat an enormousl y l ar ge body l i ke t he sunshoul d r evol ve about a smal l one such as the ear t h. And agai n, i tseemed i nconcei vabl e t hat a body so di st ant as t he sun shoul dwhi r l t hr ough space so r api dl y as t o make t he ci r cui t of i t sorbi t i n t went y- f our hour s. But , on t he ot her hand, t hat a smal lbody l i ke t he ear t h shoul d r evol ve about t he gi gant i c sun seemedi nher ent l y pr obabl e. Thi s pr oposi t i on gr ant ed, t he r ot at i on of

t he eart h on i t s axi s f ol l ows as a necessary consequence i nexpl anat i on of t he seemi ng mot i on of t he st ars. Her e, t hen, wast he hel i ocent r i c doct r i ne reduced t o a vi r t ual demonst r at i on byAr i st archus of Samos, somewhere about t he mi ddl e of t he t hi r dcent ur y B. C.

I t must be under st ood t hat i n f ol l owi ng out t he, st eps of r easoni ng by whi ch we suppose Ar i st archus t o have reached sor emarkabl e a concl usi on, we have t o some ext ent guessed at t hepr ocesses of t hought - devel opment ; f or no l i ne of expl i cat i on



wr i t t en by t he ast r onomer hi msel f on t hi s par t i cul ar poi nt hascome down to us. There does exi st , however , as we have al r eadyst at ed, a ver y remar kabl e t r eat i se by Ar i st archus on t he Si ze andDi st ance of t he Sun and the Moon, whi ch so cl ear l y suggest s t hemet hods of r easoni ng of t he gr eat ast r onomer , and so expl i ci t l yci t es t he resul t s of hi s measurement s, t hat we cannot wel l passi t by wi t hout quot i ng f r om i t at some l engt h. I t i s cer t ai nl y oneof t he most r emar kabl e sci ent i f i c document s of ant i qui t y. Asal r eady not ed, t he hel i ocent r i c doct r i ne i s not expr essl y statedher e. I t seems t o be t aci t l y i mpl i ed t hr oughout , but i t i s not anecessary consequence of any of t he pr oposi t i ons expr essl yst at ed. These pr oposi t i ons have t o do wi t h cer t ai n observat i onsand measurement s and what Ar i st archus bel i eves t o be i nevi t abl ededuct i ons f r om t hem, and he perhaps di d not wi sh t o have t hesededuct i ons chal l enged t hr ough associ at i ng t hem wi t h a t heorywhi ch hi s cont emporar i es di d not accept . I n a word, t he paper of Ar i st ar chus i s a r i gi dl y sci ent i f i c document unvi t i at ed byassoci at i on wi t h any t heori zi ngs t hat ar e not di r ect l y ger mane toi t s cent r al t heme. The t r eat i se opens wi t h cer t ai n hypotheses asf ol l ows:

"Fi r st . The moon r ecei ves i t s l i ght f r om t he sun.

"Second. The ear t h may be consi der ed as a poi nt and as t he cent r eof t he or bi t of t he moon.

"Thi r d. When t he moon appears t o us di chot omi zed i t of f ers t o ourvi ew a gr eat ci r cl e [or act ual mer i di an] of i t s ci r cumf er encewhi ch di vi des t he i l l umi nat ed par t f r om t he dar k par t .

"Four t h. When t he moon appear s di chot omi zed i t s di st ance f r omt hesun i s l ess t han a quar t er of t he ci r cumf er ence [ of i t s or bi t ] bya t hi r t i et h par t of t hat quart er. "

That i s t o say, i n moder n t ermi nol ogy, t he moon at t hi s t i mel acks t hr ee degr ees ( one t hi r t i et h of ni net y degr ees) of bei ng atr i ght angl es wi t h t he l i ne of t he sun as vi ewed f r om t he ear t h;or, st at ed ot her wi se, t he angul ar di st ance of t he moon f r omt hesun as vi ewed f r om t he ear t h i s at t hi s t i me ei ght y- sevendegr ees- - t hi s bei ng, as we have al r eady observed, t he f undament almeasur ement upon whi ch so much depends. We may f ai r l y supposet hat some pr evi ous paper of Ar i st archus' s has det ai l ed t hemeasurement whi ch here i s t aken f or gr ant ed, yet whi ch of cour secoul d depend sol el y on observat i on.

"Fi f t h. The di amet er of t he shadow [ cast by t he ear t h at t hepoi nt wher e t he moon' s or bi t cut s t hat shadow when t he moon i s

ecl i psed] i s doubl e the di amet er of t he moon. "

Here agai n a knowl edge of previ ousl y est abl i shed measur ement s i st aken f or gr ant ed; but , i ndeed, t hi s i s t he case t hr oughout t het reat i se.

"Si xth. The ar c subt ended i n t he sky by t he moon i s a f i f t eent hpar t of a si gn" of t he zodi ac; t hat i s t o say, si nce t her e ar et went y- f our , si gns i n t he zodi ac, one- f i f t eent h of onet went y- f our t h, or i n modern termi nol ogy, one degr ee of ar c. Thi s



i s Ar i st archus' s measurement of t he moon t o whi ch we have al r eadyr ef er r ed when speaki ng of t he measur ement s of Ar chi medes.

" I f we admi t t hese si x hypot heses, " Ar i st ar chus cont i nues, "i tf ol l ows t hat t he sun i s more t han ei ght een t i mes more di st antf r om t he ear t h t han i s t he moon, and t hat i t i s l ess t han t went yt i mes more di st ant , and t hat t he di ameter of t he sun bears acorr espondi ng r el at i on t o t he di amet er of t he moon; whi ch i sproved by t he posi t i on of t he moon when di chot omi zed. But t her at i o of t he di amet er of t he sun t o t hat of t he ear t h i s gr eat ert han ni net een t o t hr ee and l ess t han f or t y- t hr ee t o si x. Thi s i sdemonst r at ed by t he rel at i on of t he di st ances, by t he posi t i on[ of t he moon] i n r el at i on t o the ear t h' s shadow, and by the f actt hat t he ar c subt ended by t he moon i s a f i f t eent h par t of as i gn. "

Ar i st ar chus f ol l ows wi t h ni net een pr oposi t i ons i nt ended t oel uci dat e hi s hypotheses and t o demonst r at e hi s vari ouscont ent i ons. These show a si ngul ar l y cl ear gr asp of geomet r i calprobl ems and an al t ogether cor r ect concept i on of t he general

r el at i ons as to si ze and posi t i on of t he ear t h, t he moon, and t hesun. Hi s r easoni ng has t o do l argel y wi t h t he shadow cast by theear t h and by t he moon, and i t presupposes a consi der abl eknowl edge of t he phenomena of ecl i pses. Hi s f i r st pr oposi t i on i st hat " t wo equal spheres may al ways be ci r cumscr i bed i n acyl i nder ; t wo unequal spheres i n a cone of whi ch t he apex i sf ound on t he si de of t he smal l er spher e; and a st r ai ght l i ne

j oi ni ng t he cent r es of t hese spher es i s perpendi cul ar t o each of t he two ci r cl es made by t he cont act of t he sur f ace of t hecyl i nder or of t he cone wi t h t he spher es. "

I t wi l l be observed t hat Ar i st archus has i n mi nd here t he moon,t he ear t h, and t he sun as spheres to be ci r cumscr i bed wi t hi n acone, whi ch cone i s made t angi bl e and measur abl e by the shadowscast by the non- l umi nous bodi es; si nce, cont i nui ng, he cl ear l yst at es i n pr oposi t i on ni ne, t hat "when t he sun i s t ot al l yecl i psed, an obser ver on the ear t h' s surf ace i s at an apex of acone compr i si ng t he moon and t he sun. " Vari ous pr oposi t i ons dealwi t h ot her r el at i ons of t he shadows whi ch need not detai n ussi nce t hey ar e not f undament al l y i mpor t ant , and we may pass t ot he f i nal concl usi ons of Ar i st ar chus, as r eached i n hi spr oposi t i ons t en t o ni net een.

Now, si nce ( pr oposi t i on t en) " t he di ameter of t he sun i s moret han ei ght een t i mes and l ess t han t went y t i mes gr eat er t han t hatof t he moon, " i t f ol l ows ( pr oposi t i on el even) "t hat t he bul k of t he sun i s t o t hat of t he moon i n r at i o, gr eat er t han 5832 t o 1,

and l ess t han 8000 to 1. "

"Proposi t i on si xteen. The di amet er of t he sun i s t o t he di amet erof t he ear t h i n gr eat er pr opor t i on t han ni net een t o three, andl ess than f or t y- t hr ee t o si x.

"Pr oposi t i on sevent een. The bul k of t he sun i s t o that of t heear t h i n gr eat er pr oport i on t han 6859 to 27, and l ess t han 79, 507t o 216.



"Pr oposi t i on ei ght een. The di amet er of t he ear t h i s t o thedi ameter of t he moon i n gr eat er pr oport i on t han 108 to 43 andl ess t han 60 t o 19.

"Proposi t i on ni net een. The bul k of t he ear t h i s t o t hat of t hemoon i n gr eat er pr oport i on t han 1, 259, 712 t o 79, 507 and l ess t han20, 000 t o 6859. "

Such t hen are t he more i mport ant concl usi ons of t hi s ver yr emarkabl e paper- - a paper whi ch seems t o have i nt erest t o t hesuccessor s of Ar i st ar chus gener at i on af t er gener at i on, si nce t hi sal one of al l t he wr i t i ngs of t he gr eat ast r onomer has beenpreserved. How wi del y t he exact r esul t s of t he measurement s of Ar i st ar chus, di f f er f r om t he t r ut h, we have poi nt ed out as wepr ogr essed. But l et i t be r epeat ed t hat t hi s det r acts l i t t l e f r omt he credi t of t he ast r onomer who had such cl ear and cor r ectconcept i ons of t he rel at i ons of t he heavenl y bodi es and whoi nvent ed such cor r ect methods of measurement . Let i t bepar t i cul ar l y obser ved, however , t hat al l t he concl usi ons of Ar i st archus ar e st at ed i n r el at i ve t er ms. He nowher e at t empt s t o

est i mat e t he pr eci se si ze of t he ear t h, of t he moon, or of t hesun, or t he act ual di st ance of one of t hese bodi es f r omanot her .

The obvi ous r eason f or t hi s i s t hat no data were at hand f r omwhi ch t o make such pr eci se measurement s. Had Ar i st archus knownt he si ze of any one of t he bodi es i n quest i on, he mi ght r eadi l y,of cour se, have determi ned t he si ze of t he ot hers by t he mereappl i cat i on of hi s r el at i ve scal e; but he had no means of det er mi ni ng t he si ze of t he ear t h, and t o t hi s extent hi s systemof measurement s r emai ned i mper f ect . Wher e Ar i st archus hal t ed,however , anot her worker of t he same per i od t ook t he t ask i n handand by an al t ogether wonder f ul measurement det ermi ned t he si ze of t he ear t h, and t hus br ought t he sci ent i f i c t heor i es of cosmol ogyt o thei r cl i max. Thi s wort hy suppl ement or of t he work of Ar i st archus was Erat osthenes of Al exandr i a.

ERATOSTHENES, "THE SURVEYOR OF THE WORLD"

An al t oget her r emarkabl e man was t hi s nat i ve of Cyr ene, who camet o Al exandr i a f r om At hens t o be the chi ef l i br ar i an of Pt ol emyEuerget es. He was not merel y an ast r onomer and a geogr apher , buta poet and gr ammari an as wel l . Hi s cont emporari es j est i ngl ycal l ed hi m Beta t he Second, because he was sai d thr ough t heuni ver sal i t y of hi s att ai nment s t o be "a second Pl at o" i nphi l osophy, "a second Thal es" i n ast r onomy, and so on t hr oughoutt he l i st . He was al so cal l ed t he "surveyor of t he wor l d, " i nr ecogni t i on of hi s servi ces t o geogr aphy. Hi ppar chus sai d of hi m,

per haps hal f j est i ngl y, t hat he had st udi ed ast r onomy as ageogr apher and geogr aphy as an ast r onomer. I t i s not qui t e cl earwhether t he epi gr amwas meant as compl i ment or as cr i t i ci sm.Si mi l ar phr ases have been t ur ned agai nst men of ver sat i l e t al enti n ever y age. Be t hat as i t may, Er at ost henes passed i nt o hi st oryas t he f at her of sci ent i f i c geogr aphy and of sci ent i f i cchronol ogy; as the ast r onomer who f i r st measured t he obl i qui t y of t he ecl i pt i c; and as t he i nvent i ve geni us who per f ormed t heast oundi ng f eat of measur i ng the si ze of t he gl obe on whi ch wel i ve at a t i me when onl y a r el at i vel y smal l por t i on of t hat



gl obe' s sur f ace was known t o ci vi l i zed man. I t i s no di scredi t t oappr oach ast r onomy as a geographer and geography as anast r onomer i f t he r esul t s are such as these. WhatErat ost henes r eal l y di d was t o approach both ast r onomy andgeogr aphy f r omt wo seemi ngl y di ver gent poi nt s of at t ack- - namel y,f r om t he st andpoi nt of t he geomet er and al so f r omt hat of t hepoet . Per haps no man i n any age has brought a bet t er combi nat i onof obser vi ng and i magi nat i ve f acul t i es t o t he ai d of sci ence.

Near l y al l t he di scover i es of Er at ost henes ar e associ at ed wi t hobser vat i ons of t he shadows cast by t he sun. We have seen that ,i n the st udy of t he heavenl y bodi es, much depends on t hemeasur ement of angl es. Now t he easi est way i n whi ch angl es can bemeasur ed, when sol ar angl es are i n quest i on, i s t o pay at t ent i on,not t o the sun i t sel f , but t o the shadow t hat i t cast s. We sawt hat Thal es made some remarkabl e measur ements wi t h the ai d of shadows, and we have more t han once r ef er r ed t o t he gnomon, whi chi s t he most pr i mi t i ve, but whi ch l ong r emai ned t he mosti mpor t ant , of ast r onomi cal i nst r ument s. I t i s bel i eved thatErat ost henes i nvent ed an i mpor t ant modi f i cat i on of t he gnomon

whi ch was el aborated af t erwards by Hi pparchus and cal l ed anar mi l l ar y spher e. Thi s consi st s essent i al l y of a smal l gnomon, orper pendi cul ar post , at t ached to a pl ane repr esent i ng the ear t h' sequat or and a hemi spher e i n i mi t at i on of t he ear t h' s surf ace.Wi t h t he ai d of t hi s, t he shadow cast by t he sun coul d be veryaccur at el y measur ed. I t i nvol ves no new pr i nci pl e. Ever yper pendi cul ar post or obj ect of any ki nd pl aced i n t he sunl i ghtcast s a shadow f r om whi ch the angl es now i n quest i on coul d ber oughl y measured. The pr ovi nce of t he ar mi l l ary sphere was t omake t hese measur ements ext r emel y accur at e.

Wi t h the ai d of t hi s i mpl ement , Er at ost henes caref ul l y not ed thel ongest and t he shor t est shadows cast by t he gnomon- - t hat i s t osay, t he shadows cast on t he days of t he sol st i ces. He f ound thatt he di st ance bet ween t he t r opi cs t hus measur ed r epr esent ed 47degr ees 42' 39" of ar c. One- hal f of t hi s, or 23 degr ees 5, '19. 5", r epr esent ed t he obl i qui t y of t he ecl i pt i c- - t hat i s t o say,t he angl e by whi ch t he eart h' s axi s di pped f r omt he perpendi cul arwi t h r ef er ence t o i t s orbi t . Thi s was a most i mport antobservat i on, and because of i t s accur acy i t has ser ved modernast r onomer s wel l f or compar i son i n measuri ng t he t r i f l i ng changedue to our ear t h' s sl ow, swi ngi ng wobbl e. For t he ear t h, be i tunder st ood, l i ke a gr eat t op spi nni ng t hr ough space, hol ds i t sposi t i on wi t h r el at i ve but not qui t e absol ut e f i xi t y. I t must notbe supposed, however , t hat t he experi ment i n quest i on was qui t enew wi t h Er at ost henes. Hi s mer i t consi st s r ather i n t he accur acywi t h whi ch he made hi s observat i on t han i n t he novel t y of t he

concept i on; f or i t i s r ecor ded t hat Eudoxus, a f ul l cent ur year l i er , had r emar ked t he obl i qui t y of t he ecl i pt i c. Thatobserver had sai d t hat t he obl i qui t y corr esponded t o t he si de of a pent adecagon, or f i f t een- si ded f i gur e, whi ch i s equi val ent i nmoder n phr aseol ogy t o twent y- f our degr ees of ar c. But so l i t t l ei s known regardi ng t he way i n whi ch Eudoxus r eached hi s est i mat et hat t he measurement of Erat ost henes i s usual l y spoken of as i f i t wer e t he f i r st ef f ort of t he ki nd.

Much mor e str i ki ng, at l east i n i t s appeal t o the popul ar



i magi nat i on, was t hat other gr eat f eat whi ch Er at osthenesper f ormed wi t h t he ai d of hi s per f ect ed gnomon- - t he measur ementof t he ear t h i t sel f . When we r ef l ect t hat at t hi s per i od t heport i on of t he ear t h open t o observat i on ext ended onl y f r omt heSt r ai t s of Gi br al t ar on t he west t o I ndi a on t he east , and f r omt he Nort h Sea t o Upper Egypt , i t cer t ai nl y seems eni gmat i cal - - atf i r st t hought al most mi r acul ous- - t hat an observer shoul d havebeen abl e to measure the ent i r e gl obe. That he shoul d haveaccompl i shed t hi s t hrough observat i on of not hi ng more t han a t i nybi t of Egypt i an t er r i t ory and a gl i mpse of t he sun' s shadow makesi t seem but t he more wonder f ul . Yet t he method of Er atost henes,l i ke many anot her eni gma, seems s i mpl e enough once i t i sexpl ai ned. I t r equi r ed but t he appl i cat i on of a ver y el ement ar yknowl edge of t he geometr y of ci r cl es, combi ned wi t h t he use of af act or t wo f r om l ocal geogr aphy- - whi ch det r act s not hi ng f r om t hegeni us of t he man who coul d r eason f r om such si mpl e premi ses t oso wonder f ul a concl usi on.

Stated i n a f ew words, t he exper i ment of Er atost henes was t hi s.Hi s geogr aphi cal st udi es had t aught hi m t hat t he town of Syene

l ay di r ect l y sout h of Al exandr i a, or , as we shoul d say, on t hesame mer i di an of l at i t ude. He had l ear ned, f ur t her, t hat Syenel ay di r ect l y under t he t r opi c, si nce i t was r epor t ed t hat at noonon the day of t he summer sol st i ce t he gnomon ther e cast noshadow, whi l e a deep wel l was i l l umi ned t o t he bot t om by t he sun.A t hi r d i t em of knowl edge, suppl i ed by the surveyor s of Ptol emy,made t he di st ance bet ween Syene and Al exandr i a f i ve t housandst adi a. These, t hen, wer e t he pr el i mi nary data r equi r ed byEr at ost henes. Thei r si gni f i cance consi st s i n t he f act t hat her ei s a measur ed bi t of t he ear t h' s ar c f i ve t housand st adi a i nl engt h. I f we coul d f i nd out what angl e that bi t of ar c subt ends,a mer e mat t er of mul t i pl i cat i on woul d gi ve us t he si ze of t heear t h. But how det ermi ne t hi s al l - i mpor t ant number ? The answercame t hr ough ref l ect i on on the r el at i ons of concent r i c ci r cl es.I f you dr aw any number of ci r cl es, of what ever si ze, about agi ven cent r e, a pai r of r adi i dr awn f r om t hat cent r e wi l l cutar cs of t he same r el at i ve si ze f r om al l t he ci r cl es. One ci r cl emay be so smal l t hat t he act ual arc subt ended by t he r adi i i n agi ven case may be but an i nch i n l engt h, whi l e another ci r cl e i sso l ar ge t hat i t s cor r espondi ng ar e i s measur ed i n mi l l i ons of mi l es; but i n each case t he same number of so- cal l ed degr ees wi l lr epr esent t he rel at i on of each ar c t o i t s ci r cumf er ence. Now,Er at ost henes knew, as j ust st ated, t hat t he sun, when on themer i di an on the day of t he summer sol st i ce, was di r ect l y over t het own of Syene. Thi s meant t hat at t hat moment a radi us of t heear t h pr oj ect ed f r omSyene woul d poi nt di r ect l y t owar ds t he sun.Meanwhi l e, of cour se, t he zeni t h woul d r epr esent t he pr oj ect i on

of t he r adi us of t he ear t h passi ng t hr ough Al exandr i a. Al l t hatwas requi r ed, t hen, was to measure, at Al exandr i a, t he angul ardi st ance of t he sun f r omt he zeni t h at noon on t he day of t hesol st i ce t o secure an approxi mate measurement of t he ar c of t hesun' s ci r cumf er ence, cor r espondi ng to t he ar c of t he ear t h' ssur f ace r epr esent ed by t he measured di st ance between Al exandri aand Syene.

The r eader wi l l obser ve t hat t he measur ement coul d not beabsol ut el y accur at e, because i t i s made f r om t he sur f ace of t he



ear t h, and not f r om t he ear t h' s cent r e, but t he si ze of t he ear t hi s so i nsi gni f i cant i n compar i son wi t h t he di st ance of t he sunt hat t hi s sl i ght di scr epancy coul d be di sr egar ded.

The way i n whi ch Erat ost henes measur ed t hi s angl e was verysi mpl e. He merel y measured t he angl e of t he shadow whi ch hi sper pendi cul ar gnomon at Al exandri a cast at mi d- day on the day of t he sol st i ce, when, as al r eady not ed, t he sun was di r ect l yper pendi cul ar at Syene. Now a gl ance at t he di agr am wi l l make i tcl ear t hat t he measurement of t hi s angl e of t he shadow i s merel ya conveni ent means of determi ni ng t he preci sel y equal opposi t eangl e subt endi ng an ar c of an i magi nar y ci r cl e passi ng thr ought he sun; t he ar e whi ch, as al r eady expl ai ned, cor r esponds wi t ht he ar c of t he ear t h' s surf ace repr esent ed by t he di st ancebet ween Al exandri a and Syene. He f ound t hi s angl e t o r epr esent 7degr ees 12' , or one- f i f t i et h of t he ci r cl e. Fi ve thousand st adi a,t hen, r epr esent one- f i f t i et h of t he ear t h' s ci r cumf er ence; t heent i r e ci r cumf er ence bei ng, t her ef or e, 250, 000 st adi a.Unf ort unatel y, we do not know whi ch one of t he var i ousmeasurement s used i n ant i qui t y i s r epr esent ed by t he st adi a of

Er at ost henes. Accor di ng t o t he resear ches of Lepsi us, however ,t he st adi um i n quest i on r epr esent ed 180 met ers, and t hi s woul dmake t he ear t h, accordi ng t o t he measur ement of Eratost henes,about t went y- ei ght t housand mi l es i n ci r cumf erence, an answersuf f i ci ent l y exact t o j ust i f y t he wonder whi ch t he exper i mentexci t ed i n ant i qui t y, and the admi r at i on wi t h whi ch i t has eversi nce been regarded.

{i l l ust r at i on capt i on = DI AGRAM TO I LLUSTRATE ERATOSTHENES'MEASUREMENT OF THE GLOBE

FI G. 1. AF i s a gnomon at Al exandr i a; SB a gnomon at Svene; I Sand J K r epr esent t he sun' s r ays. The angl e actual l y measured byEratost henes i s KFA, as determi ned by t he shadow cast by t hegnomon AF. Thi s angl e i s equal t o t he opposi t e angl e J FL, whi chmeasur es t he sun' s di st ance f r om t he zeni t h; and whi ch i s al soequal t o the angl e AES- - t o det er mi ne t he Si ze of whi ch i s t her eal obj ect of t he ent i r e measurement .

FI G. 2 shows t he f orm of t he gnomon actual l y empl oyed i nant i qui t y. The hemi spher e KA bei ng mar ked wi t h a scal e, i t i sobvi ous t hat i n act ual pr act i ce Er at ost henes r equi r ed onl y t o sethi s gnomon i n t he sunl i ght at t he pr oper moment , and read of f t heanswer t o hi s pr obl emat a gl ance. The si mpl i ci t y of t he met hodmakes t he resul t seem al l t he more wonder f ul . }

Of cour se i t i s t he met hod, and not i t s det ai l s or i t s exact

r esul t s, t hat exci t es our i nt er est . And beyond quest i on t hemethod was an admi r abl e one. I t s r esul t , however, coul d not havebeen absol ut el y accur at e, because, whi l e cor r ect i n pr i nci pl e,i t s dat a wer e def ect i ve. I n poi nt of f act Syene di d not l i epr eci sel y on t he same mer i di an as Al exandr i a, nei t her di d i t l i eexact l y on t he t r opi c. Here, t hen, ar e two el ement s of i naccur acy. Moreover , i t i s doubt f ul whet her Er at osthenes madeal l owance, as he shoul d have done, f or t he semi - di ameter of t hesun i n measur i ng t he angl e of t he shadow. But t hese are meredet ai l s, scar cel y wort hy of ment i on f r omour pr esent st andpoi nt .



What per haps i s deser vi ng of mor e at t ent i on i s t he f act t hat t hi sepoch- maki ng measur ement of Erat ost henes may not have been t hef i r st one to be made. A passage of Ar i st ot l e recor ds t hat t hesi ze of t he ear t h was sai d t o be 400, 000 st adi a. Somecomment at ors have t hought t hat Ar i st ot l e mer el y r ef er r ed t o t hear ea of t he i nhabi t ed por t i on of t he ear t h and not t o t heci r cumf er ence of t he ear t h i t sel f , but hi s wor ds seem doubt f ul l ysuscept i bl e of t hi s i nt er pr et at i on; and i f he meant , as hi s wor dsseem t o i mpl y, t hat phi l osopher s of hi s day had a t ol er abl ypreci se i dea of t he gl obe, we must assume that t hi s i dea wasbased upon some sor t of measur ement . The r ecorded si ze, 400, 000st adi a, i s a suf f i ci ent appr oxi mat i on t o t he t r ut h t o suggestsomet hi ng more t han a mere unsuppor t ed guess . Now, si nceAr i st ot l e di ed more than f i f t y years bef ore Er at ost henes wasbor n, hi s r epor t as t o t he al l eged si ze of t he ear t h cer t ai nl yhas a suggest i veness t hat cannot be over l ooked; but i t ar ousesspecul at i ons wi t hout gi vi ng an i nkl i ng as t o thei r sol ut i on. I f Erat ost henes had a pr ecur sor as an eart h- measurer , no hi nt orr umor has come down t o us t hat woul d enabl e us t o guess who thatprecur sor may have been. Hi s per sonal i t y i s as deepl y envel oped

i n t he mi st s of t he past as ar e t he per sonal i t i es of t he gr eatpr ehi st or i c di scover er s. For t he pur pose of t he hi st or i an,Erat ost henes must st and as t he i nvent or of t he method wi t h whi chhi s name i s associ ated, and as t he f i r st man of whomwe can saywi t h cer t ai nt y that he measur ed t he si ze of t he ear t h. Ri ghtwort hi l y, t hen, had t he Al exandr i an phi l osopher won hi s pr oudt i t l e of "sur veyor of t he wor l d. "

HI PPARCHUS, "THE LOVER OF TRUTH"

Er at ost henes out l i ved most of hi s great cont emporar i es. He sawt he t ur ni ng of t hat f i r st and gr eat est cent ur y of Al exandr i ansci ence, t he t hi r d cent ur y bef ore our era. He di ed i n t he year196 B. C. , havi ng, i t i s sai d, st ar ved hi msel f t o deat h t o escapet he mi ser i es of bl i ndness; - - t o t he measur er of shadows, l i f ewi t hout l i ght seemed not wor t h t he l i vi ng. Er at ost henes l ef t noi mmedi ate successor . A generat i on l ater , however, anot her greatf i gur e appear ed i n the ast r onomi cal worl d i n the per son of Hi pparchus, a man who, as a techni cal obser ver, had perhaps nopeer i n the anci ent wor l d: one who set so hi gh a val ue uponaccur acy of obser vat i on as t o ear n t he t i t l e of " t he l over of t r ut h. " Hi ppar chus was born at Ni caea, i n Bi t hyni a, i n the year160 B. C. Hi s l i f e, al l t oo shor t f or t he i nt er est s of sci ence,ended i n the year 125 B. C. The observat i ons of t he gr eatast r onomer were made chi ef l y, perhaps ent i r el y, at Rhodes. Ami si nt er pr et at i on of Pt ol emy' s wr i t i ngs l ed t o the i dea t hat

Hi ppar chus, per f or med hi s chi ef l abor s i n Al exandr i a, but i t i snow admi t t ed that t her e i s no evi dence f or t hi s. Del ambr edoubt ed, and most subsequent wr i t ers f ol l ow hi m her e, whetherHi pparchus ever so much as vi si t ed Al exandr i a. I n any event t hereseems t o be no quest i on t hat Rhodes may cl ai m t he honor of bei ngt he chi ef s i t e of hi s act i vi t i es .

I t was Hi ppar chus whose somewhat equi vocal comment on t he wor k of Erat ost henes we have al r eady noted. No count er- char ge i n ki ndcoul d be made agai nst t he cr i t i c hi msel f ; he was an ast r onomer



pur e and si mpl e. Hi s gi f t was t he gi f t of accur at e obser vat i onr at her t han t he gi f t of i magi nat i on. No sci ent i f i c pr ogr ess i spossi bl e wi t hout sci ent i f i c guessi ng, but Hi ppar chus bel onged t ot hat cl ass of obser ver s wi t h whom hypot hesi s i s hel d r i gi dl ysubser vi ent t o f act . I t was not t o be expect ed t hat hi s mi ndwoul d be at t r act ed by the hel i ocent r i c t heor y of Ar i st ar chus. Heused t he f acts and observat i ons gat hered by hi s great pr edecessorof Samos, but he decl i ned t o accept hi s t heori es. For hi m t hewor l d was cent r al ; hi s pr obl em was t o expl ai n, i f he coul d, t hei r r egul ar i t i es of mot i on whi ch sun, moon, and pl anet s showed i nt hei r seemi ng ci r cui t s about t he eart h. Hi ppar chus had t he gnomonof Er at ost henes- - doubt l ess i n a per f ect ed f orm- - t o ai d hi m, andhe soon pr oved hi msel f a mast er i n i t s use. For hi m, as we havesai d, accur acy was ever yt hi ng; t hi s was t he one el ement t hat l edt o al l hi s gr eat successes.

Per haps hi s gr eat est f eat was t o demonst r at e the eccent r i ci t y of t he sun' s seemi ng orbi t . We of t o- day, t hanks t o Keppl er and hi sf ol l ower s, know t hat t he ear t h and t he other pl anet ar y bodi es i nt hei r ci r cui t about t he sun descri be an el l i pse and not a ci r cl e.

But i n the day of Hi ppar chus, t hough the el l i pse was r ecogni zedas a geomet r i cal f i gur e ( i t had been descr i bed and named al ongwi t h the par abol a and hyper bol a by Apol l oni us of Per ga, t he pupi lof Eucl i d) , yet i t woul d have been the rankest heresy t o suggestan el l i pt i cal cour se f or any heavenl y body. A met aphysi calt heory, as pr opounded per haps by t he Pythagor eans but ardent l ysuppor t ed by Ar i st ot l e, decl ar ed t hat t he ci r cl e i s t he per f ectf i gur e, and pr onounced i t i nconcei vabl e t hat t he mot i ons of t hespher es shoul d be ot her t han ci r cul ar . Thi s t hought domi nated t hemi nd of Hi pparchus, and so when hi s car ef ul measur ement s l ed hi mt o the di scover y t hat t he nort hward and sout hward j our neyi ngs of t he sun di d not di vi de the year i nt o f our equal par t s, t her e wasnot hi ng open t o hi m but t o ei t her assume t hat t he eart h does notl i e pr eci sel y at t he cent r e of t he sun' s ci r cul ar orbi t or t of i nd some al t er nat i ve hypothesi s.

I n poi nt of f act , t he sun ( r ever si ng t he poi nt of vi ew i naccor dance wi t h modern di scoveri es) does l i e at one f ocus of t heear t h' s el l i pt i cal or bi t , and t her ef or e away f r om t he physi calcent r e of t hat or bi t ; i n ot her wor ds, t he obser vat i ons of Hi ppar chus wer e absol ut el y accur at e. He was qui t e cor r ect i nf i ndi ng t hat t he sun spends more t i me on one si de of t he equatort han on t he other . When, t her ef ore, he est i mat ed t he r el at i vedi st ance of t he ear t h f r omt he geomet r i cal cent r e of t he sun' ssupposed ci r cul ar orbi t , and spoke of t hi s as the measure of t hesun' s eccent r i ci t y, he pr opounded a t heor y i n whi ch t r ue dat a of obser vat i on wer e cur i ousl y mi ngl ed wi t h a posi t i vel y i nver t ed

t heory. That t he theor y of Hi ppar chus was absol ut el y consi st entwi t h al l t he f acts of t hi s par t i cul ar obser vat i on i s t he bestevi dence t hat coul d be gi ven of t he di f f i cul t i es t hat st ood i nt he way of a t r ue expl anat i on of t he mechani sm of t he heavens.

But i t i s not merel y t he sun whi ch was observed t o vary i n t hespeed of i t s orbi t al pr ogr ess; t he moon and t he pl anet s al so showcur i ous accel er at i ons and r et ardat i ons of mot i on. The moon i npar t i cul ar r ecei ved most car ef ul at t ent i on f r om Hi ppar chus.Domi nated by hi s concept i on of t he per f ect spher es, he coul d f i nd



but one expl anat i on of t he anomal ous mot i ons whi ch he obser ved,and t hi s was t o assume that t he vari ous heavenl y bodi es do notf l y on i n an unvar yi ng ar c i n t hei r ci r cui t about t he ear t h, butdescr i be mi nor ci r cl es as t hey go whi ch can be l i kened to nothi ngso tangi bl y as t o a l i ght at t ached t o t he r i m of a wagon- wheel i nmot i on. I f such an i nvi si bl e wheel be i magi ned as car r yi ng t hesun, f or exampl e, on i t s ri m, whi l e i t s i nvi si bl e hub f ol l owsunswer vi ngl y the ci r cl e of t he sun' s mean or bi t ( t hi s wheel , bei t under st ood, l yi ng i n t he pl ane of t he or bi t , not at r i ght -angl es t o i t ) , t hen i t must be obvi ous t hat whi l e the hub r emai nsal ways at t he same di st ance f r om t he ear t h, t he ci r cl i ng r i m wi l lcar r y t he sun near er t he ear t h, t hen f art her away, and t hat whi l ei t i s t r aver si ng t hat por t i on of t he ar e whi ch br i ngs i t t owar dst he ear t h, t he act ual f or war d pr ogr ess of t he sun wi l l ber et ar ded not wi t hst andi ng the uni f orm moti on of t he hub, j ust asi t wi l l be accel er at ed i n t he opposi t e ar c. Now, i f we supposeour sun- bear i ng wheel t o t ur n so sl owl y t hat t he sun revol ves butonce about i t s i magi nar y hub whi l e the wheel i t sel f i s maki ng t heent i r e ci r cui t of t he or bi t , we shal l have account ed f or t heobserved f act t hat t he sun passes more qui ckl y t hrough one- hal f

of t he orbi t t han t hr ough t he other. Moreover , i f we canvi sual i ze the pr ocess and i magi ne the sun t o have l ef t a vi si bl el i ne of f i r e behi nd hi m t hr oughout t he cour se, we shal l see t hati n r eal i t y the t wo ci r cul ar mot i ons i nvol ved have r eal l y resul t edi n produci ng an el l i pt i cal orbi t .

The i dea i s perhaps made cl earer i f we pi ct ure t he act ualpr ogr ess of t he l ant er n at t ached t o t he r i m of an or di nar ycart - wheel . When t he car t i s drawn f orward t he l ant ern i s made tor evol ve i n a ci r cl e as r egar ds t he hub of t he wheel , but si ncet hat hub i s const ant l y goi ng f or war d, t he act ual pat h descr i bedby t he l ant er n i s not a ci r cl e at al l but a wavi ng l i ne. I t i spr eci sel y t he same wi t h t he i magi ned cour se of t he sun i n i t sorbi t , onl y t hat we vi ew t hese l i nes j ust as we shoul d vi ew t hel ant er n on t he wheel i f we l ooked at i t f r om di r ect l y above andnot f r om t he si de. The pr oof t hat t he sun i s descri bi ng t hi swavi ng l i ne, and t heref ore must be consi dered as at t ached t o ani magi nar y wheel , i s f ur ni shed, as i t seemed t o Hi ppar chus, by t heobserved f act of t he sun' s var yi ng speed.

That i s one way of l ooki ng at t he mat t er . I t i s an hypot hesi st hat expl ai ns t he obser ved f act s- - af t er a f ashi on, and i ndeed aver y remarkabl e f ashi on. The i dea of such an expl anat i on di d notor i gi nat e wi t h Hi pparchus. The germs of t he thought were as ol das t he Pyt hagorean doct r i ne that t he eart h revol ves about acent r e that we cannot see. Eudoxus gave t he concept i on great ert angi bi l i t y, and may be consi der ed as t he f at her of t hi s doct r i ne

of wheel s- - epi cycl es, as t hey came t o be cal l ed. Two cent ur i esbef ore the t i me of Hi pparchus he concei ved a doct r i ne of sphereswhi ch Ar i st ot l e f ound most i nt er est i ng, and whi ch served t oexpl ai n, al ong the l i nes we have j ust f ol l owed, t he obser vedmot i ons of t he heavenl y bodi es. Cal i ppus, t he r ef ormer of t hecal endar , i s sai d t o have car r i ed an account of t hi s t heor y t oAr i st otl e. As new i r r egul ar i t i es of mot i on of t he sun, moon, andpl anetary bodi es were poi nt ed out , new epi cycl es were i nvent ed.

There i s no l i mi t t o t he number of i magi nary ci r cl es t hat may bei nscr i bed about an i magi nar y cent r e, and i f we concei ve each one



of t hese ci r cl es to have a pr oper mot i on of i t s own, and each onet o car r y t he sun i n t he l i ne of t hat mot i on, except as i t i sdi ver t ed by t he ot her mot i ons- - i f we can vi sual i ze thi s compl exmi ngl i ng of wheel s- - we shal l cer t ai nl y be abl e to i magi ne theheavenl y body whi ch l i es at t he j unct ur e of al l t he r i ms, asbei ng carr i ed f orward i n as er r at i c and wobbl y a manner as coul dbe desi r ed. I n ot her wor ds, t he t heor y of epi cycl es wi l l accountf or al l t he f act s of t he obser ved mot i ons of al l t he heavenl ybodi es, but i n so doi ng i t f i l l s t he uni ver se wi t h a mostbewi l der i ng net wor k of i nt er sect i ng ci r cl es. Even i n t he t i me of Cal i ppus f i f t y- f i ve of t hese spher es were comput ed.

We may wel l bel i eve t hat t he cl ear - seei ng Ar i st ar chus woul d l ookaskance at such a compl ex syst emof i magi nar y machi ner y. ButHi ppar chus, pr e- emi nent l y an observer r at her t han a t heori zer,seems t o have been cont ent t o accept t he t heor y of epi cycl es ashe f ound i t , t hough hi s st udi es added t o i t s compl exi t i es; andHi ppar chus was t he domi nant sci ent i f i c per sonal i t y of hi scent ury. What he bel i eved became as a l aw t o hi s i mmedi atesuccessor s. Hi s t enets were accept ed as f i nal by thei r gr eat

popul ar i zer , Pt ol emy, t hr ee cent ur i es l at er ; and so thehel i ocent r i c t heory of Ar i st ar chus passed under a cl oud al most att he hour of i t s dawni ng, t her e t o remai n obscur ed and f orgot t enf or t he l ong l apse of cent ur i es. A t housand pi t i es t hat t hegr eat est obser vi ng ast r onomer of ant i qui t y coul d not , l i ke one of hi s gr eat pr ecur sor s, have approached ast r onomy f r omt hest andpoi nt of geogr aphy and poet r y. Had he done so, per haps hemi ght have r ef l ect ed, l i ke Ar i st ar chus bef or e hi m, t hat i t seemsabsur d f or our ear t h t o hol d t he gi ant sun i n t hr al dom; t henper haps hi s i magi nat i on woul d have reached out t o t hehel i ocent r i c doct r i ne, and the cobweb hypot hesi s of epi cycl es,wi t h t hat yet mor e i nt angi bl e f i gment of t he per f ect ci r cl e,mi ght have been wi ped away.

But i t was not t o be. Wi t h Ar i st ar chus t he sci ent i f i c i magi nat i onhad r eached i t s hi ghest f l i ght ; but wi t h Hi ppar chus i t wasbegi nni ng t o set t l e back i nt o regi ons of f oggi er at mospher e andnar r ower hor i zons. For what , af t er al l , does i t mat t er t hatHi pparchus shoul d go on t o measure the preci se l ength of t he yearand the apparent si ze of t he moon' s di sk; t hat he shoul d make achar t of t he heavens showi ng the pl ace of 1080 st ars ; even t hathe shoul d di scover t he pr ecessi on of t he equi nox; - - what , af t eral l , i s the si gni f i cance of t hese det ai l s as agai nst t heal l - essent i al f act t hat t he gr eat est sci ent i f i c aut hor i t y of hi scent ur y- - t he one t r ul y her oi c sci ent i f i c f i gur e of hi sepoch- - shoul d have l ent al l t he f orces of hi s commandi ngi nf l uence t o the ol d, f al se theor y of cosmol ogy, when the t r ue

t heor y had been propounded and when he, perhaps, was t he onl y mani n the worl d who mi ght have subst ant i at ed and vi t al i zed t hatt heor y? I t i s easy t o over est i mat e t he i nf l uence of any si ngl eman, and, cont r ar i wi se, t o under est i mat e t he power of t heZei t gei st . But when we ref l ect t hat t he doct r i nes of Hi ppar chus,as pr omul gat ed by Pt ol emy, became, as i t were, t he l ast word of ast r onomi cal sci ence f or both t he East ern and West ern wor l ds, andso cont i nued af t er a t housand year s, i t i s per haps not t oo mucht o say t hat Hi ppar chus, " t he l over of t r ut h, " mi ssed one of t hegr eat est oppor t uni t i es f or t he pr omul gat i on of t r ut h ever



vouchsaf ed t o a devot ee of pur e sci ence.

But al l t hi s, of cour se, det r acts not hi ng f r om t he mer i t s of Hi pparchus as an obser vi ng ast r onomer . A f ew words mor e must besai d as to hi s speci f i c di scover i es i n t hi s f i el d. Accor di ng t ohi s measurement , t he t r opi c year consi st s of 365 days, 5 hour s,and 49 mi nut es, var yi ng t hus onl y 12 seconds f r om t he t r ue year ,as t he modern ast r onomer est i mates i t . Yet more remarkabl e,because of t he gr eat er di f f i cul t i es i nvol ved, was Hi ppar chus' sat t empt t o measure t he actual di st ance of t he moon. Ar i st archushad made a si mi l ar at t empt bef ore hi m. Hi pparchus based hi scomput at i ons on st udi es of t he moon i n ecl i pse, and he reachedt he concl usi on t hat t he di st ance of t he moon i s equal t o 59 r adi iof t he ear t h ( i n r eal i t y i t i s 60. 27 r adi i ) . Her e, t hen, was themeasur e of t he base- l i ne of t hat f amous t r i angl e wi t h whi chAr i st archus had measur ed t he di st ance of t he sun. Hi pparchus musthave known of t hat measur ement , si nce he quotes t he wor k of Ar i st archus i n other f i el ds. Had he now but r epeated t heexper i ment of Ar i st ar chus, wi t h hi s per f ect ed i nst r ument s and hi sper haps gr eat er obser vat i onal ski l l , he was i n posi t i on t o

comput e t he actual di st ance of t he sun i n t erms not merel y of t hemoon' s di st ance but of t he ear t h' s r adi us. And now t here was theexper i ment of Er at ost henes t o gi ve t he l engt h of t hat r adi us i npreci se t erms. I n ot her words, Hi pparchus mi ght have measur ed t hedi st ance of t he sun i n st adi a. But i f he had made theat t empt - - and, i ndeed, i t i s mor e t han l i kel y that he di d so- - t heel ement s of er r or i n hi s measurement s woul d st i l l have kept hi mwi de of t he t r ue f i gur es.

The chi ef st udi es of Hi ppar chus wer e di r ect ed, as we have seen,t owards t he sun and t he moon, but a phenomenon that occur r ed i nt he year 134 B. C. l ed hi m f or a ti me to gi ve mor e par t i cul arat t ent i on t o t he f i xed st ars . The phenomenon i n quest i on was thesudden out bur st of a new st ar ; a phenomenon whi ch has beenr epeat ed now and agai n, but whi ch i s suf f i ci ent l y rar e andsuf f i ci ent l y myster i ous t o have exci t ed t he unusual at t ent i on of ast r onomer s i n al l gener at i ons. Moder n sci ence of f er s anexpl anat i on of t he phenomenon, as we shal l see i n due cour se. Wedo not know t hat Hi pparchus at t empted t o expl ai n i t , but he wasl ed t o make a char t of t he heavens, pr obabl y wi t h the i dea of gui di ng f ut ur e observers i n t he observat i on of new st ars. Her eagai n Hi ppar chus was not al t ogether an i nnovator , si nce a chartshowi ng t he br i ght est st ars had been made by Er at ost henes; butt he new chart s were much el abor at ed.

The st udi es of Hi ppar chus l ed hi m t o obser ve t he st ar s chi ef l ywi t h r ef er ence t o t he mer i di an r at her t han wi t h r ef er ence t o

t hei r r i si ng, as had hi t her t o been t he cust om. I n maki ng t hesest udi es of t he r el at i ve posi t i on of t he st ar s, Hi ppar chus was l edt o compare hi s observat i ons wi t h t hose of t he Babyl oni ans, whi ch,i t was sai d, Al exander had caused t o be t r ansmi t t ed t o Gr eece. Hemade use al so of t he observat i ons of Ar i st archus and ot hers of hi s Gr eek pr ecur sors . The resul t of hi s compar i sons proved thatt he spher e of t he f i xed st ar s had appar ent l y shi f t ed i t s posi t i oni n r ef er ence t o the pl ane of t he sun' s or bi t - - t hat i s t o say, t hepl ane of t he ecl i pt i c no l onger seemed t o cut t he sphere of t hef i xed st ar s at pr eci sel y the poi nt wher e t he t wo coi nci ded i n



f or mer cent ur i es. The pl ane of t he ecl i pt i c must t her ef or e beconcei ved as sl owl y revol vi ng i n such a way as gradual l y t oci r cumnavi gat e t he heavens. Thi s i mpor t ant phenomenon i sdescr i bed as t he pr ecessi on of t he equi noxes.

I t i s much i n quest i on whet her t hi s phenomenon was not known t ot he anci ent Egypt i an ast r onomers; but i n any event , Hi ppar chus i st o be credi t ed wi t h demonst r at i ng the f act and maki ng i t known tot he Wester n worl d. A f ur t her servi ce was render ed theoret i calast r onomy by Hi pparchus t hr ough hi s i nvent i on of t he pl anosphere,an i nst r ument f or t he r epr esent at i on of t he mechani sm of t heheavens. Hi s comput at i ons of t he pr oper t i es of t he spher es l edhi m al so to what was vi r t ual l y a di scover y of t he met hod of t r i gonomet r y, gi vi ng hi m, t her ef or e, a hi gh posi t i on i n t he f i el dof mat hemat i cs. Al l i n al l , t hen, Hi ppar chus i s a most her oi cf i gur e. He may wel l be consi dered t he gr eat est st ar - gazer of ant i qui t y, t hough he cannot , wi t hout i nj ust i ce t o hi s gr eatpr ecur sor s, be al l owed the t i t l e whi ch i s somet i mes gi ven hi m of " f at her of syst emat i c ast r onomy. "

CTESI BI US AND HERO: MAGI CI ANS OF ALEXANDRI A

J ust about t he t i me when Hi ppar chus was wor ki ng out at Rhodes hi spuzzl es of cel est i al mechani cs, t her e was a man i n Al exandri a whowas exer ci si ng a st r angel y i nvent i ve geni us over mechani calprobl ems of anot her sor t ; a man who, f ol l owi ng the exampl e set byAr chi medes a cent ury bef ore, was st udyi ng t he probl ems of mat t erand put t i ng hi s st udi es t o pr act i cal appl i cat i on t hr ough t hei nvent i on of wei r d devi ces. The man' s name was Ct esi bi us. We knowscar cel y mor e of hi m t han t hat he l i ved i n Al exandr i a, pr obabl yi n t he f i r st hal f of t he second cent ur y B. C. Hi s ant ecedent s, t hepl ace and exact t i me of hi s bi r t h and death, are qui t e unknown.Nei t her ar e we qui t e cer t ai n as t o t he pr eci se range of hi sst udi es or t he exact number of hi s di scover i es. I t appear s t hathe had a pupi l named Her o, whose per sonal i t y, unf ort unat el y, i sscarcel y l ess obscur e than t hat of hi s mast er, but who wr ote abook t hr ough whi ch t he record of t he mast er' s i nvent i ons waspr eserved t o post er i t y. Her o, i ndeed, wr ote sever al books, t houghonl y one of t hemhas been pr eser ved. The ones t hat are l ost beart he f ol l owi ng suggest i ve t i t l es: On t he Const r uct i on of Sl i ngs;On t he Const r uct i on of Mi ssi l es; On t he Aut omaton; On t he Methodof Li f t i ng Heavy Bodi es; On t he Di opt r i c or Spyi ng- t ube. The workt hat r emai ns i s cal l ed Pneumat i cs, and so i nt er est i ng a work i ti s as t o make us doubl y regr et t he l oss of i t s compani on vol umes.Had t hese ot her books been pr eser ved we shoul d doubt l ess have acl ear er i nsi ght t han i s now possi bl e i nt o some at l east of t he

mechani cal pr obl ems t hat exerc i sed t he mi nds of t he anci entphi l osopher s. The book t hat r emai ns i s chi ef l y concer ned, as i t sname i mpl i es, wi t h t he study of gases, or , r at her , wi t h t he studyof a si ngl e gas, t hi s bei ng, of course, t he ai r . But i t t el l s usal so of cer t ai n st udi es i n t he dynami cs of wat er t hat ar e mosti nt er est i ng, and f or t he hi st ori an of sci ence most i mpor t ant .

Unf or t unat el y, t he pupi l of Ct esi bi us, what ever hi s i ngenui t y,was a man wi t h a def i ci ent sense of t he et hi cs of sci ence. Het el l s us i n hi s pr ef ace t hat t he obj ect of hi s book i s t o r ecor d



some i ngeni ous di scover i es of ot her s, t oget her wi t h addi t i onaldi scover i es of hi s own, but nowher e i n t he book i t sel f does hegi ve us t he, sl i ght est cl ew as t o wher e the l i ne i s dr awn bet weent he ol d and the new. Once, i n di scussi ng the wei ght of wat er , hement i ons t he l aw of Ar chi medes regardi ng a f l oat i ng body, butt hi s i s the onl y case i n whi ch a sci ent i f i c pr i nci pl e i s t r acedt o i t s sour ce or i n whi ch credi t i s gi ven t o any one f or adi scover y. Thi s i s t he more t o be regr et t ed because Hero hasdi scussed at some l engt h t he t heor i es i nvol ved i n t he t r eat mentof hi s subj ect . Thi s r et i cence on t he par t of Her o, combi ned wi t ht he f act t hat such somewhat l at er wr i t er s as Pl i ny and Vi t r uvi usdo not ment i on Hero' s name, whi l e t hey f r equent l y ment i on t hename of hi s mast er , Ct esi bi us, has l ed moder n cr i t i cs t o asomewhat scept i cal at t i t ude r egar di ng t he posi t i on of Her o as anact ual di scover er .

The man who woul d cool l y appr opr i at e some di scover i es of ot hersunder cl oak of a mere pr ef ator i al r ef erence was perhaps anexpounder r at her t han an i nnovat or, and had, i t i s shrewdl ysuspect ed, not much of hi s own t o of f er . Meanwhi l e, i t i s

t ol er abl y cer t ai n t hat Ct esi bi us was t he di scover er of t hepr i nci pl e of t he si phon, of t he f orci ng- pump, and of a pneumat i corgan. An exami nat i on of Hero' s book wi l l show t hat t hese ar er eal l y the chi ef pr i nci pl es i nvol ved i n most of t he var i ousi nt erest i ng mechani sms whi ch he descr i bes. We ar e const r ai ned,t hen, t o bel i eve t hat t he i nvent i ve geni us who was r eal l yr esponsi bl e f or t he mechani sms we ar e about t o descr i be wasCt esi bi us, t he mast er . Yet we owe a debt of gr at i t ude t o Hero,t he pupi l , f or havi ng gi ven wi der vogue t o t hese di scover i es, andi n par t i cul ar f or t he di scussi on of t he pr i nci pl es of hydr ost at i cs and pneumat i cs cont ai ned i n the i nt r oduct i on t o hi sbook. Thi s di scussi on f ur ni shes us al most our onl y knowl edge ast o t he pr ogr ess of Gr eek phi l osopher s i n t he f i el d of mechani cssi nce t he t i me of Ar chi medes.

The mai n purpose of Hero i n hi s prel i mi nary t hesi s has t o do wi t ht he nat ur e of mat t er , and r ecal l s, t her ef or e, t he st udi es of Anaxagor as and Democr i t us. Hero, however , approaches hi s subj ectf r om a pur el y mat er i al or pr act i cal st andpoi nt . He i s anexpl i ci t champi on of what we nowadays cal l t he mol ecul ar t heor yof mat t er . "Ever y body, " he t el l s us, " i s composed of mi nut epar t i cl es, between whi ch ar e empt y spaces l ess t han t hesepar t i cl es of t he body. I t i s, t her ef or e, er r oneous t o say t hatt her e i s no vacuum except by t he appl i cat i on of f orce, and t hatever y space i s f ul l ei t her of ai r or wat er or some ot hersubst ance. But i n pr oport i on as any one of t hese par t i cl esr ecedes, some other f ol l ows i t and f i l l s t he vacant space;

t heref ore there i s no cont i nuous vacuum, except by t heappl i cat i on of some f or ce [ l i ke sucti on] - - t hat i s t o say, anabsol ut e vacuum i s never f ound, except as i t i s pr oducedar t i f i ci al l y. " Her o br i ngs f or war d some thor oughl y convi nci ngpr oof s of t he t hesi s he i s mai nt ai ni ng. "I f t her e wer e no voi dpl aces bet ween t he par t i cl es of water , " he says, " t he r ays of l i ght coul d not penet r at e the wat er ; moreover , anot her l i qui d,such as wi ne, coul d not spr ead i t sel f t hr ough t he wat er , as i t i sobserved t o do, wer e t he par t i cl es of wat er absol ut el ycont i nuous. " The l at t er i l l ust r at i on i s one t he val i di t y of whi ch



appeal s as f or ci bl y to t he physi ci st s of t o- day as i t di d t oHero. The same i s t r ue of t he argument drawn f r om t hecompr essi bi l i t y of gases. Her o has evi dent l y made a car ef ul st udyof t hi s subj ect . He knows t hat an i nver t ed t ube f ul l of ai r maybe i mmersed i n water wi t hout becomi ng wet on t he i nsi de, provi ngt hat ai r i s a physi cal subst ance; but he knows al so t hat t hi ssame ai r may be caused to expand t o a much gr eat er bul k by t heappl i cat i on of heat , or may, on t he other hand, be condensed bypr essur e, i n whi ch case, as he i s wel l awar e, t he ai r exer t sf or ce i n t he at t empt t o regai n i t s nor mal bul k. But , he ar gues,sur el y we ar e not t o bel i eve t hat t he par t i cl es of ai r expand t of i l l al l t he space when t he bul k of ai r as a whol e expands undert he i nf l uence of heat ; nor can we concei ve t hat t he par t i cl es of normal ai r ar e i n act ual cont act , el se we shoul d not be abl e t ocompr ess t he ai r . Hence hi s concl usi on, whi ch, as we have seen,he makes gener al i n i t s appl i cat i on t o al l mat t er , t hat t her e ar espaces, or, as he cal l s t hem, vacua, between t he par t i cl es t hatgo t o make up al l subst ances, whet her l i qui d, sol i d, or gaseous.

Her e, cl earl y enough, was t he i dea of t he "at omi c" nat ur e of

mat t er accept ed as a f undament al not i on. The ar gument at i veat t i t ude assumed by Hero shows t hat t he doct r i ne coul d not beexpect ed to go unchal l enged. But , on t he ot her hand, t her e i snot hi ng i n hi s phr asi ng t o suggest an i nt ent i on t o cl ai mori gi nal i t y f or any phase of t he doct r i ne. We may i nf er t hat i nt he t hree hundr ed years t hat had el apsed si nce t he t i me of Anaxagoras, t hat phi l osopher ' s i dea of t he mol ecul ar nat ur e of matt er had gai ned f ai r l y wi de cur r ency. As t o the expansi ve powerof gas, whi ch Hero descr i bes at some l engt h wi t hout gi vi ng us acl ew t o hi s aut hor i t i es, we may assume that Ct esi bi us was anori gi nal wor ker , yet t he gener al f act s i nvol ved wer e doubt l essmuch ol der t han hi s day. Her o, f or exampl e, t el l s us of t hecuppi ng- gl ass used by physi ci ans, whi ch he says i s made i nto avacuum by bur ni ng up the ai r i n i t ; but t hi s appar at us hadpr obabl y been l ong i n use, and Her o ment i ons i t not i n or der t odescr i be t he or di nar y cuppi ng- gl ass whi ch i s r ef er r ed t o, but amodi f i cat i on of i t . He ref ers t o t he ol d f or m as i f i t wer esomet hi ng f ami l i ar t o al l .

Agai n, we know t hat Empedocl es st udi ed t he pr essur e of t he ai r i nt he f i f t h cent ur y B. C. , and di scover ed t hat i t woul d support acol umn of wat er i n a cl osed t ube, so thi s phase of t he subj ect i snot new. But t her e i s no hi nt anywhere bef ore t hi s work of Heroof a cl ear under st andi ng that t he expansi ve pr oper t i es of t he ai rwhen compressed, or when heated, may be made avai l abl e as a mot orpower. Hero, however , has the cl ear est not i ons on t he subj ect andput s t hem t o t he pr act i cal t est of exper i ment . Thus he const r uct s

numerous mechani sms i n whi ch t he expansi ve power of ai r underpressure i s made t o do work, and ot her s i n whi ch t he same end i saccompl i shed t hrough t he expansi ve power of heat ed ai r . Forexampl e, t he door s of a t empl e are made t o swi ng openaut omat i cal l y when a f i r e i s l i ght ed on a di st ant al t ar , cl osi ngagai n when t he f i r e di es out - - ef f ect s whi ch must have f i l l ed t hemi nds of t he pi ous observers wi t h bewi l der ment and wonder ,servi ng a most usef ul pur pose f or t he pr i est s, who al one, we mayassume, were i n t he secr et . There were t wo methods by whi ch t hi sappar at us was worked. I n one t he heated ai r pressed on t he water



i n a cl ose r et ort connect ed wi t h t he al t ar , f or ci ng wat er out of t he r et or t i nt o a bucket , whi ch by i t s wei ght appl i ed a f orcet hr ough pul l eys and ropes t hat t ur ned t he st andards on whi ch t het empl e door s r evol ved. When the f i r e di ed down the ai rcont r acted, t he water was si phoned back f r om t he bucket , whi ch,bei ng thus l i ght ened, l et t he door s cl ose agai n t hr ough t heact i on of an ordi nary wei ght . The ot her method was a sl i ghtmodi f i cat i on, i n whi ch t he r et ort of water was di spensed wi t h anda l eat her sack l i ke a l ar ge f oot bal l subst i t ued. The r opesand pul l eys were connected wi t h t hi s sack, whi ch exert ed a pul lwhen t he hot ai r expanded, and whi ch col l apsed and t hus r el axedi t s st r ai n when t he ai r cool ed. A gl ance at t he i l l ust r at i onst aken f r om Her o' s book wi l l make t he det ai l s cl ear .

Ot her mechani sms ut i l i zed a somewhat di f f erent combi nat i on of wei ght s, pul l eys, and si phons, operated by t he expansi ve power of ai r , unheated but under pr essure, such pr essure bei ng appl i edwi t h a f orce- pump, or by t he wei ght of wat er r unni ng i nt o acl osed r ecept acl e. One such mechani sm gi ves us a const ant j et of wat er or per pet ual f ount ai n. Anot her cur i ous appl i cat i on of t he

pr i nci pl e f ur ni shes us wi t h an el abor at e t oy, consi st i ng of agr oup of bi r ds whi ch al t er nat el y whi st l e or ar e si l ent , whi l e anowl seated on a nei ghbor i ng per ch turns t owards t he bi r ds whent hei r song begi ns and away f r omt hem when i t ends. The "si ngi ng"of t he bi r ds, i t must be expl ai ned, i s produced by t he expul si onof ai r t hr ough t i ny t ubes passi ng up t hr ough t hei r t hr oat s f r om at ank bel ow. The owl i s made to t ur n by a mechani sm si mi l ar t ot hat whi ch mani pul at es t he t empl e door s. The pr essure i s suppl i edmer el y by a st r eam of r unni ng wat er , and t he per i odi cal si l enceof t he bi r ds i s due t o t he f act t hat t hi s pr essur e i s r el i evedt hr ough t he aut omat i c si phoni ng of f of t he water when i t r eachesa cer t ai n hei ght . The act i on of t he si phon, i t may be added, i scorr ect l y expl ai ned by Hero as due to t he gr eat er wei ght of t hewat er i n the l onger ar m of t he bent t ube. As bef ore ment i oned,t he si phon i s r epeat edl y used i n t hese mechani sms of Hero. Thedi agr am wi l l make cl ear t he exact appl i cat i on of i t i n t hepresent most i ngeni ous mechani sm. We may add t hat t he pr i nci pl eof t he whi st l e was a f avor i t e one of Hero. By the ai d of asi mi l ar mechani sm he brought about t he bl owi ng of t r umpet s whent he t empl e door s wer e opened, a phenomenon whi ch must great l yhave enhanced t he myst i f i cat i on. I t i s possi bl e t hat t hi spr i nci pl e was ut i l i zed al so i n connect i on wi t h st at ues t o pr oduceseemi ngl y super nat ur al ef f ect s. Thi s may be t he expl anat i on of t he t r adi t i on of t he speaki ng st atue i n the templ e of Ammon at

Thebes.

{i l l ust r at i on capt i on = DEVI CE FOR CAUSI NG THE DOORS OF THE

TEMPLE TO OPEN WHEN THE FI RE ON THE ALTAR I S LI GHTED ( Ai r heat edi n t he al t ar F dr i ves wat er f r om t he cl osed r ecept acl e H t hr ought he tube KL i nt o t he bucket M, whi ch descends t hr ough gr avi t y,t hus openi ng t he door s. When t he al t ar cool s, t he ai r cont r act s,t he water i s sucked f r omt he bucket , and t he wei ght and pul l eycl ose t he door s. ) }

{i l l ust r at i on capt i on = THE STEAM- ENGI NE OF HERO ( The st eamgenerat ed i n t he r ecept acl e AB passes t hr ough t he tube EF i nt ot he gl obe, and escapes t hrough t he bent t ubes H and K, causi ng



t he gl obe to r otat e on t he axi s LG. ) }

The ut i l i zat i on of t he proper t i es of compressed ai r was notconf i ned, however , excl usi vel y to mer e t oys, or t o pr oducemi r acul ous ef f ect s. The same pr i nci pl e was appl i ed t o a pr act i calf i r e- engi ne, worked by l ever s and f orce- pumps; an apparat us, i nshort , al t oget her si mi l ar t o t hat st i l l i n use i n ruraldi st r i cts. A sl i ght l y di f f er ent appl i cat i on of t he mot i ve powerof expandi ng ai r i s f ur ni shed i n a ver y cur i ous t oy cal l ed "t hedanci ng f i gur es. " I n t hi s, ai r heat ed i n a r et or t l i ke ami ni at ur e al t ar i s al l owed t o escape t hr ough t he si des of t wopai r s of r evol vi ng ar ms pr eci sel y l i ke t hose of t he or di nar yr evol vi ng f ountai n wi t h whi ch we are accust omed t o wat er ourl awns, t he revol vi ng ar ms bei ng at t ached t o a pl ane on whi chsever al pai r s of st at uet t es r epr esent i ng dancer s are pl aced, Aneven mor e i nt er est i ng appl i cat i on of t hi s pr i nci pl e of set t i ng awheel i n mot i on i s f ur ni shed i n a mechani sm whi ch must beconsi der ed t he ear l i est of st eam- engi nes. Here, as t he namei mpl i es, t he gas suppl yi ng t he mot i ve power i s actual l y st eam.

The apparat us made t o r evol ve i s a gl obe connect ed wi t h t hest eam- r et ort by a t ube whi ch serves as one of i t s axes, t he steamescapi ng f r omt he gl obe t hr ough two bent t ubes pl aced at ei t herend of an equator i al di ameter. I t does not appear t hat Hero hadany thought of maki ng pr act i cal use of t hi s st eam- engi ne. I t wasmerel y a curi ous t oy- - not hi ng more. Yet had not t he age t hatsucceeded that of Hero been one i n whi ch i nvent i ve geni us wasdor mant , some one must soon have hi t upon t he i dea t hat t hi sst eam- engi ne mi ght be i mproved and made t o ser ve a usef ulpur pose. As t he case st ands, however , t her e was no advance madeupon t he st eam mot or of Hero f or al most t wo thousand year s. And,i ndeed, when the pr act i cal appl i cat i on of st eam was made, t owar dst he cl ose of t he ei ght eent h cent ur y, i t was made pr obabl y qui t ewi t hout r ef erence t o t he exper i ment of Hero, t hough knowl edge of hi s t oy may perhaps have gi ven a cl ew t o Wat t or hi spredecessor s.

{i l l ust r at i on capt i on = THE SLOT- MACHI NE OF HERO ( The coi ni nt r oduced at A f al l s on t he l ever R, and by i t s wei ght opens t heval ve S, per mi t t i ng t he l i qui d t o escape t hr ough t he i nvi si bl et ube LM. As t he l ever t i ps, t he coi n sl i des of f and t he val vecl oses. The l i qui d i n t ank must of cour se be kept above F. ) }

I n recent t i mes t her e has been a t endency t o gi ve t o t hi sst eam- engi ne of Hero somet hi ng mor e than f ul l meed of appr eci at i on. To be sur e, i t mar ked a most i mpor t ant pr i nci pl e i n

t he concept i on t hat st eam mi ght be used as a mot i ve power, but ,except i n the demonst r at i on of t hi s pr i nci pl e, t he mechani sm of Hero was much too pr i mi t i ve t o be of any i mpor t ance. But t here i sone mechani sm descr i bed by Hero whi ch was a most expl i ci tant i ci pat i on of a devi ce, whi ch pr esumabl y soon went out of use,and whi ch was not r ei nvent ed unt i l t owards t he cl ose of t heni neteent h cent ur y. Thi s was a devi ce whi ch has become f ami l i ari n r ecent t i mes as t he penny- i n- t hesl ot machi ne. When t owardst he cl ose of t he ni net eent h cent ur y some i nvent i ve cr af t sman hi tupon t he i dea of an aut omat i c machi ne t o suppl y candy, a box of



ci garet t es, or a whi f f of perf umery, he may or may not haveborr owed hi s i dea f r omt he sl ot - machi ne of Her o; but i n anyevent , i nst ead of bei ng an i nnovat or he was real l y two thousandyear s behi nd t he ti mes, f or t he sl ot - machi ne of Her o i s t hepreci se pr ot ot ype of t hese modern ones.

The part i cul ar f unct i on whi ch t he mechani sm of Her o was dest i nedt o f ul f i l was t he di st r i but i on of a j et of wat er , pr esumabl y usedf or sacrament al pur poses, whi ch was gi ven out aut omat i cal l y whena f i ve- dr achma coi n was dropped i nt o the sl ot at t he top of t hemachi ne. The i nternal mechani sm of t he machi ne was si mpl e enough,consi st i ng merel y of a l ever oper at i ng a val ve whi ch was openedby the wei ght of t he coi n dr oppi ng on t he l i t t l e shel f at t he endof t he l ever , and whi ch cl osed agai n when t he coi n sl i d of f t heshel f . The i l l ust r at i on wi l l show how si mpl e thi s mechani sm was.

Yet t o t he wor shi pper s, who probabl y had entered t he t empl et hrough doors mi r acul ousl y opened, and who now wi t nessed t hi sseemi ngl y i nt el l i gent r esponse of a machi ne, t he resul t must haveseemed myst i f yi ng enough; and, i ndeed, f or us al so, when weconsi der how r el at i vel y cr ude was t he mechani cal knowl edge of t he

t i me, t hi s must seem not hi ng l ess t han mar vel l ous. As i ni magi nat i on we wal k up t o t he sacr ed t ank, drop our drachma i nt he sl ot , and hol d our hand f or t he spur t of hol y- wat er, can wer eal i ze t hat t hi s i s t he l and of t he Phar aohs, not Engl and orAmer i ca; t hat t he ki ngdom of t he Pt ol emi es i s sti l l at i t shei ght ; t hat t he r epubl i c of Rome i s mi st r ess of t he wor l d; t hatal l Eur ope nor t h of t he Al ps i s i nhabi t ed sol el y by bar bar i ans;t hat Cl eopat r a and J ul i us Caesar are yet unborn; t hat t heChr i st i an er a has not yet begun? Trul y, i t seems as i f t her ecoul d be no new t hi ng under t he sun.

X. SCI ENCE OF THE ROMAN PERI OD

We have seen t hat t he t hi r d cent ury B. C. was a t i me whenAl exandr i an sci ence was at i t s hei ght , but t hat t he secondcent ur y pr oduced al so i n Hi pparchus at l east one i nvest i gator of t he ver y f i r st r ank; t hough, t o be sur e, Hi ppar chus can be cal l edan Al exandr i an onl y by cour t esy. I n t he ensui ng gener at i ons t heGr eek capi t al at t he mout h of t he Ni l e cont i nued to hol d i t spl ace as t he cent r e of sci ent i f i c and phi l osophi cal t hought . Theki ngdom of t he Pt ol emi es sti l l f l our i shed wi t h at l east t heout ward appear ances of i t s ol d- t i me gl ory, and a company of grammar i ans and comment at or s of no smal l mer i t coul d al ways bef ound i n t he ser vi ce of t he f amous museum and l i br ar y; but t hewhol e aspect of worl d- hi st ory was r api dl y changi ng. Gr eece, af t er

her br i ef day of pol i t i cal supr emacy, was si nki ng rapi dl yi nto desuet ude, and t he hard- headed Roman i n t he West was maki nghi msel f mast er everywher e. Whi l e Hi pparchus of Rhodes was i n hi spr i me, Cor i nt h, t he l ast st r onghol d of t he mai n- l and of Gr eece,had f al l en bef ore t he pr owess of t he Roman, and t he ki ngdom of t he Ptol emi es, t hough st i l l nomi nal l y f r ee, had begun t o comewi t hi n the sphere of Roman i nf l uence.

J ust what shar e t hese pol i t i cal changes had i n changi ng t heaspect of Gr eek t hought i s a quest i on r egar di ng whi ch di f f er ence



of opi ni on mi ght easi l y pr evai l ; but t her e can be no quest i ont hat , f or one r eason or another, t he Al exandr i an school as acr eat i ve cent r e went i nt o a r api d decl i ne at about t he t i me of t he Roman r i se t o wor l d- power. There ar e some di st i ngui shednames, but , as a gener al r ul e, t he spi r i t of t he ti mes i sr emi ni scent r at her t han cr eat i ve; t he wor ker s t end t o col l at e t her esearches of t hei r pr edecessor s r ather t han t o make new andori gi nal r esear ches f or t hemsel ves. Er at ost henes, t he i nvent i veworl d- measurer , was succeeded by St r abo, t he i ndust r i ous col l at orof f act s; Ar i st ar chus and Hi ppar chus, t he or i gi nat or s of newast r onomi cal met hods, were succeeded by Pt ol emy, t he per f ect er of t hei r methods and the syst emat i zer of t hei r knowl edge. Meanwhi l e,i n the West , Rome never became a t r ue cul t ure- cent r e. The gr eatgeni us of t he Roman was pol i t i cal ; t he August an Age produced af ew gr eat hi st ori ans and poet s, but not a si ngl e gr eatphi l osopher or creat i ve devot ee of sci ence. Ci cer o, Luci an,Seneca, Mar cus Aur el i us, gi ve us at best a ref l ect i on of Gr eekphi l osophy. Pl i ny, t he one wor l d- f amous name i n t he sci ent i f i cannal s of Rome, can l ay cl ai m t o no hi gher cr edi t t han t hat of amar vel l ousl y i ndust r i ous col l ect or of f act s- - t he compi l er of an

encycl opaedi a whi ch cont ai ns not one cr eat i ve t ouch.

Al l i n al l , t hen, t hi s epoch of Roman domi nat i on i s one t hat needdet ai n t he hi st ori an of sci ence but a br i ef moment . Wi t h t hecul mi nat i on of Gr eek ef f or t i n the so- cal l ed Hel l eni st i c per i odwe have seen anci ent sci ence at i t s cl i max. The Roman peri od i sbut a t i me of t r ansi t i on, mar ki ng, as i t wer e, a pl at eau on t hesl ope bet ween those ear l i er hei ght s and the deep, dar k val l eys of t he Mi ddl e Ages. Yet we cannot qui t e di sr egard t he ef f ort s of such worker s as t hose we have j ust named. Let us t ake a mor especi f i c gl ance at t hei r accompl i shment s.

STRABO THE GEOGRAPHER

The ear l i est of t hese wor ker s i n poi nt of t i me i s St r abo. Thi smost f amous of anci ent geogr apher s was bor n i n Amasi a, Pontus,about 63 B. C. , and l i ved t o the year 24 A. D. , l i vi ng, t her ef or e,i n t he age of Caesar and August us, dur i ng whi ch t he f i nalt r ansf or mat i on i n t he pol i t i cal posi t i on of t he ki ngdom of Egyptwas ef f ect ed. The name of St r abo i n a modi f i ed f orm has becomepopul ari zed t hr ough a cur i ous ci r cumst ance. The geogr apher , i tappear s, was af f l i ct ed wi t h a pecul i ar squi nt of t he eyes, hencet he name st r abi smus, whi ch the modern ocul i st appl i es t o t hatpart i cul ar i nf i rmi t y.

Fort unat el y, t he gr eat geogr apher has not been f orced t o depend

upon hearsay evi dence f or r ecogni t i on. Hi s compr ehensi ve work ongeogr aphy has been pr eserved i n i t s ent i r et y, bei ng one of t hef ew expansi ve cl assi cal wr i t i ngs of whi ch t hi s i s t r ue. The ot herwr i t i ngs of St r abo, however , i ncl udi ng cer t ai n hi st or i es of whi chr eport s have come down t o us, are ent i r el y l ost . The geogr aphy i si n many ways a r emarkabl e book. I t i s not , however , a work i nwhi ch any i mport ant new pr i nci pl es ar e i nvol ved. Rat her i s i tt ypi cal of i t s age i n t hat i t i s an el abor at e compi l at i on and acri t i cal r evi ew of t he l abor s of St r abo' s pr edecessor s. Doubt l essi t cont ai ns a vast deal of new i nf or mat i on as t o the det ai l s of



geogr aphy- - pr eci se ar eas and di st ance, quest i ons of geogr aphi call ocat i ons as t o l at i t ude and zones, and t he l i ke. But howeveri mpor t ant t hese detai l s may have been f r om a contempor aryst andpoi nt , t hey, of cour se, can have nothi ng more t hanhi st or i cal i nt er est t o post er i t y. The val ue of t he wor k f r om ourpr esent st andpoi nt i s chi ef l y due to t he cr i t i ci sms whi ch St r abopasses upon hi s f or er unner s, and t o t he i nci dent al hi st or i cal andsci ent i f i c r ef er ences wi t h whi ch hi s work abounds. Bei ng wr i t t eni n t hi s cl osi ng per i od of anci ent pr ogr ess, and summar i zi ng, asi t does, i n f ul l det ai l t he geogr aphi cal knowl edge of t he t i me,i t serves as an i mport ant gui de- mark f or t he st udent of t hepr ogr ess of sci ent i f i c thought . We cannot do bet t er t han br i ef l yt o f ol l ow St r abo i n hi s est i mat es and cr i t i ci sms of t he work of hi s pr edecessor s, t aki ng not e t hus of t he poi nt of vi ew f r omwhi ch he hi msel f l ooked out upon t he wor l d. We shal l t hus gai n acl ear i dea as t o t he st at e of sci ent i f i c geogr aphy t owar ds t hecl ose of t he cl assi cal epoch.

"I f t he sci ent i f i c i nvest i gat i on of any subj ect be t he pr operavocat i on of t he phi l osopher , " says St r abo, "geogr aphy, t he

sci ence of whi ch we pr opose t o tr eat , i s cer t ai nl y ent i t l ed t o ahi gh pl ace; and t hi s i s evi dent f r om many consi der at i ons. Theywho f i r st undert ook t o handl e t he matt er were di st i ngui shed men.Homer , Anaxi mander t he Mi l esi an, and Hecaeus ( hi s f el l ow- ci t i zenaccor di ng t o Er at ost henes) , Democr i t us, Eudoxus, Di caear chus, andEphorus, wi t h many other s, and af t er t hese, Er at ost henes,Pol ybi us, and Posi doni us, al l of t hem phi l osopher s. Nor i s t hegreat l ear ni ng t hr ough whi ch al one t hi s subj ect can be approachedpossessed by any but a per son acquai nted wi t h bot h human anddi vi ne t hi ngs, and t hese at t ai nment s const i t ut e what i s cal l edphi l osophy. I n addi t i on t o i t s vast i mpor t ance i n r egar d t osoci al l i f e and t he ar t of gover nment , geogr aphy unf ol ds t o us acel est i al phenomena, acquai nt s us wi t h t he occupant s of t he l andand ocean, and t he veget at i on, f r ui t s, and pecul i ar i t i es of t hevar i ous quart ers of t he ear t h, a knowl edge of whi ch marks hi m whocul t i vat es i t as a man ear nest i n t he gr eat pr obl em of l i f e andhappi ness. "

St r abo goes on t o say t hat i n common wi t h ot her cr i t i cs,i ncl udi ng Hi pparchus, he regar ds Homer as t he f i r st gr eatgeogr apher . He has much t o say on t he geogr aphi cal knowl edge of t he bard, but t hi s need not detai n us. We ar e chi ef l y concer nedwi t h hi s comment upon hi s more recent predecessor s, begi nni ngwi t h Er at ost henes. The const ant r ef er ence to t hi s worker showst he i mport ant posi t i on whi ch he hel d. St r abo appear s nei t her asdet r act or nor as par t i san, but as one who earnest l y desi r es thet r ut h. Somet i mes he seems capt i ous i n hi s cr i t i ci sms r egar di ng

some det ai l , nor i s he al ways cor r ect i n hi s emendat i ons of t hel abors of other s; but , on t he whol e, hi s work i s mar ked by anevi dent at t empt at f ai r ness. I n r eadi ng hi s book, however , one i sf or ced t o t he concl usi on t hat St r abo i s an i nvest i gat or of det ai l s, not an or i gi nal t hi nker . He seems more concer ned wi t hpreci se measurement s t han wi t h quest i oni ngs as t o the openprobl ems of hi s sci ence. What ever he accept s, t hen, may be t akenas vi r t ual l y t he st ock doct r i ne of t he per i od.

"As t he si ze of t he eart h, " he says, "has been demonst r ated by



other wr i t er s, we shal l her e t ake f or grant ed and r ecei ve asaccur at e what t hey have advanced. We shal l al so assume t hat t heear t h i s spher oi dal , t hat i t s sur f ace i s l i kewi se spher oi dal and,above al l , t hat bodi es have a tendency towar ds i t s cent r e, whi chl at t er poi nt i s cl ear t o t he per cept i on of t he most aver ageunder st andi ng. However , we may show summar i l y that t he ear t h i sspher oi dal , f r om t he consi der at i on t hat al l t hi ngs, howeverdi st ant , t end t o i t s cent r e, and t hat ever y body i s at t r act edt owar ds i t s cent r e by gr avi t y. Thi s i s mor e di st i nct l y pr ovedf r omobservat i ons of t he sea and sky, f or her e t he evi dence of t he senses and common observat i on i s al one requi si t e. Theconvexi t y of t he sea i s a f ur t her pr oof of t hi s t o those who havesai l ed, f or t hey cannot per cei ve l i ght s at a di st ance when pl acedat t he same l evel as t hei r eyes, and i f r ai sed on hi gh t hey atonce become percept i bl e t o vi si on t hough at t he same t i me f art herr emoved. So when the eye i s r ai sed i t sees what bef ore wasutt erl y i mpercept i bl e. Homer speaks of t hi s when he says:

" ' Li f t ed up on t he vast wave he qui ckl y behel d af ar . '

Sai l or s as t hey appr oach t hei r dest i nat i on behol d the shor econt i nual l y r ai si ng i t sel f t o t hei r vi ew, and obj ect s whi ch hadat f i r st seemed l ow begi n t o l i f t t hemsel ves. Our gnomons, al so,are, among other t hi ngs, evi dence of t he r evol ut i on of t heheavenl y bodi es, and common- sense at once shows us t hat i f t hedept h of t he ear t h wer e i nf i ni t e such a revol ut i on coul d not t akepl ace. "[ 1]

El sewher e St r abo cr i t i ci ses Er at ost henes f or havi ng ent er ed i nt oa l ong di scussi on as t o t he f orm of t he ear t h. Thi s mat t er ,St r abo t hi nks, "shoul d have been di sposed of i n t he compass of af ew wor ds. " Obvi ousl y thi s doct r i ne of t he gl obe' s spher i ci t yhad, i n t he cour se of 600 year s, become so f i r ml y est abl i shedamong the Gr eek t hi nker s as t o seem al most axi omat i c. We shal lsee l at er on how t he West ern wor l d made a cur i ous r ecessi on f r omt hi s seemi ngl y secur e posi t i on under st i mul us of an Or i ent almi sconcept i on. As t o the si ze of t he gl obe, St r abo i s di sposed t oaccept wi t hout par t i cul ar comment t he measur ement s of Eratost henes. He speaks, however , of "more recent measur ement s, "r ef er r i ng i n par t i cul ar t o that adopt ed by Posi doni us, accor di ngt o whi ch t he ci r cumf erence i s onl y about one hundred and ei ght yt housand st adi a. Posi doni us, we may not e i n passi ng, was acont emporar y and f r i end of Ci cer o, and hence l i ved short l y bef oret he t i me of St r abo. Hi s measur ement of t he ear t h was based onobservat i ons of a st ar whi ch bar el y r ose above the sout her nhor i zon at Rhodes as compar ed wi t h the hei ght of t he same st ar

when obser ved at Al exandr i a. Thi s measur ement of Posi doni us,t oget her wi t h t he even mor e f amous measur ement of Erat ost henes,appear s t o have been pr act i cal l y t he sol e gui de as to the si ze of t he ear t h t hr oughout t he l at er per i ods of ant i qui t y, and, i ndeed,unt i l t he l at er Mi ddl e Ages.

As becomes a wr i t er who i s pri mari l y geogr apher and hi st or i anr ather t han ast r onomer, St r abo shows a much keener i nt erest i nt he habi t abl e port i ons of t he gl obe t han i n t he gl obe as a whol e.He assur es us t hat t hi s habi t abl e por t i on of t he ear t h i s a gr eat



i sl and, "si nce wher ever men have approached t he t ermi nat i on of t he l and, t he sea, whi ch we desi gnate ocean, has been met wi t h,and r eason assur es us of t he si mi l ar i t y of t hi s pl ace whi ch oursenses have not been t empted t o survey. " He poi nts out t hatwhereas sai l ors have not ci r cumnavi gated t he gl obe, t hat t hey hadnot been pr event ed f r omdoi ng so by any cont i nent , and i t seemst o hi m al t oget her unl i kel y t hat t he At l ant i c Ocean i s di vi dedi nto t wo seas by nar r ow i st hmuses so pl aced as t o pr eventci r cumnavi gat i on. "How much more probabl e t hat i t i s conf l uentand uni nt er r upt ed. Thi s t heor y, " he adds, "goes bet t er wi t h theebb and f l ow of t he ocean. Moreover ( and here hi s r easoni ngbecomes more f anci f ul ) , t he gr eat er t he amount of moi st ur esur r oundi ng t he ear t h, t he easi er woul d t he heavenl y bodi es besuppl i ed wi t h vapor f r om t hence. " Yet he i s di sposed t o bel i eve,f ol l owi ng Pl at o, t hat t he t r adi t i on "concer ni ng t he i sl and of At l ant os mi ght be recei ved as somethi ng more t han i dl e f i ct i on,i t havi ng been rel at ed by Sol on, on t he aut hor i t y of t he Egypt i anpr i est s, t hat t hi s i sl and, al most as l ar ge as a cont i nent , wasf ormer l y i n exi st ence al t hough now i t had di sappear ed. " [ 2]

I n a word, t hen, St r abo ent er t ai ns no doubt what ever t hat i twoul d be possi bl e t o sai l ar ound t he gl obe f r om Spai n t o I ndi a.I ndeed, so mat t er - of - f act an i nf er ence was t hi s t hat t he f eat of Col umbus woul d have seemed l ess surpr i si ng i n t he f i r st cent ur yof our er a t han i t di d when act ual l y per f or med i n t he f i f t eent hcent ur y. The terr ors of t he gr eat ocean hel d the mar i ner back,r ather t han any doubt as t o wher e he woul d ar r i ve at t he end of t he voyage.

Coupl ed wi t h t he i dea t hat t he habi t abl e por t i on of t he ear t h i san i sl and, t her e was l i nked a t ol er abl y def i ni t e not i on as t o t heshape of t hi s i sl and. Thi s shape St r abo l i kens t o a mi l i t ar ycl oak. The compar i son does not seem pecul i ar l y apt when we ar et ol d pr esent l y that t he l engt h of t he habi t abl e ear t h i s mor et han t wi ce i t s br eadt h. Thi s i dea, St r abo assur es us, accor dswi t h t he most accur ate obser vat i ons " bot h anci ent and modern. "

These obser vat i ons seemed t o show t hat i t i s not possi bl e t o l i vei n t he regi on cl ose t o the equat or, and t hat , on t he other hand,t he col d t emper at ur e shar pl y l i mi t s t he habi t abi l i t y of t he gl obet owar ds the nor t h. Al l t he ci vi l i zat i on of ant i qui t y cl ust er edabout t he Medi t err anean, or ext ended of f t owards t he east atabout t he same l at i t ude. Hence geographer s came t o thi nk of t hehabi t abl e gl obe as havi ng the somewhat l ent i cul ar shape whi ch acr ude map of t hese r egi ons suggest s. We have al r eady had occasi ont o see that at an ear l i er day Anaxagoras was perhaps i nf l uencedi n hi s concept i on of t he shape of t he ear t h by t hi s i dea, and t heconst ant r ef erences of St r abo i mpr ess upon us t he thought t hat

t hi s l ong, r el at i vel y nar r ow ar ea of t he ear t h' s sur f ace i s t heonl y one whi ch can be concei ved of as habi t abl e.

St r abo had much t o tel l us concer ni ng zones, whi ch, f ol l owi ngPosi doni us, he bel i eves t o have been f i r st descr i bed byPar meni des. We may not e, however, t hat other t r adi t i ons asser tt hat bot h Thal es and Pyt hagoras had di vi ded t he ear t h i nt o zones.

The number of zones accept ed by St r abo i s f i ve, and hecr i t i ci ses Pol ybi us f or maki ng t he number si x. The f i vezones accept ed by St r abo ar e as f ol l ows: t he uni nhabi t abl e tor r i d



zone l yi ng i n t he r egi on of t he equat or; a zone on ei t her si de of t hi s ext endi ng to t he t r opi c; and then the t emper at e zonesext endi ng i n ei t her di r ecti on f r om t he t r opi c to the ar cti cr egi ons. Ther e seems t o have been a good deal of di sput e amongt he schol ars of t he t i me as to the exact arr angement of t hesezones, but t he gener al i dea t hat t he nort h- t emper at e zone i s t hepar t of t he ear t h wi t h whi ch t he geogr apher deal s seemed cl ear l yest abl i shed. That t he sout h- t emperate zone woul d al so pr esent ahabi t abl e area i s an i dea t hat i s somet i mes suggest ed, t houghsel dom or never di st i nct l y expr essed. I t i s pr obabl e t hatdi f f er ent opi ni ons wer e hel d as t o thi s, and no di r ect evi dencebei ng avai l abl e, a caut i ousl y sci ent i f i c geogr apher l i ke St r abowoul d nat ur al l y avoi d t he expr essi on of an opi ni on r egar di ng i t .I ndeed, hi s own words l eave us somewhat i n doubt as t o t hepr eci se char act er of hi s not i on r egar di ng t he zones. Per haps weshal l do best t o quot e them:

"Let t he ear t h be supposed t o consi st of f i ve zones. ( 1) Theequat or i al ci r cl e descr i bed ar ound i t . ( 2) Anot her par al l el t ot hi s, and def i ni ng t he f r i gi d zone of t he nort her n hemi spher e.

( 3) A ci r cl e passi ng t hr ough t he pol es and cut t i ng t he t wopr ecedi ng ci r cl es at r i ght - angl es. The nor t her n hemi spher econt ai ns t wo quar t ers of t he eart h, whi ch are bounded by t heequat or and ci r cl e passi ng t hr ough t he pol es. Each of t hesequar t er s shoul d be supposed t o cont ai n a f our - si ded di st r i ct , i t snor t her n si de bei ng of one- hal f of t he par al l el next t he pol e,i t s sout her n by the hal f of t he equat or , and i t s r emai ni ng si desby t wo segment s of t he ci r cl e dr awn t hr ough t he pol es, opposi t et o each other , and equal i n l engt h. I n one of t hese ( whi ch of t hem i s of no consequence) t he ear t h whi ch we i nhabi t i ssi t uat ed, sur r ounded by a sea and si mi l ar t o an i sl and. Thi s, aswe sai d bef ore, i s evi dent both to our senses and to our r eason.But l et any one doubt t hi s, i t makes no di f f er ence so f ar asgeogr aphy i s concerned whet her you bel i eve the por t i on of t heear t h whi ch we i nhabi t t o be an i sl and or onl y admi t what we knowf r om exper i ence - - namel y, t hat whet her you st ar t f r om t he east ort he west you may sai l al l ar ound i t . Cert ai n i nt ermedi at e spacesmay have been l ef t ( unexpl ored) , but t hese ar e as l i kel y t o beoccupi ed by sea as uni nhabi t ed l and. The obj ect of t he geogr apheri s t o descr i be known count r i es. Those whi ch ar e unknown he passesover equal l y wi t h those beyond the l i mi t s of t he i nhabi t ed ear t h.I t wi l l , t her ef or e, be suf f i ci ent f or descr i bi ng t he cont our of t he i sl and we have been speaki ng of , i f we j oi n by a r i ght l i net he outmost poi nt s whi ch, up t o thi s t i me, have been expl ored byvoyagers al ong t he coast on ei t her si de. " [ 3]

We may pass over t he speci f i c cr i t i ci sms of St r abo upon var i ous

expl or at i ons t hat seem t o have been of gr eat i nt er est t o hi scont emporar i es, i ncl udi ng an al l eged t r i p of one Eudoxus out i nt ot he At l ant i c, and t he j our neyi ngs of Pytheas i n t he f ar nor t h. I ti s Pyt heas, we may add, who was ci t ed by Hi pparchus as havi ngmade t he mi st aken observat i on t hat t he l ength of t he shadow of t he gnomon i s t he same at Marsei l l es and Byzant i um, hence thatt hese t wo pl aces ar e on t he same paral l el . Modern comment at orshave def ended Pyt heas as r egards t hi s observat i on, cl ai mi ng t hati t was Hi pparchus and not Pyt heas who made t he second obser vat i onf r om whi ch t he f aul t y i nduct i on was dr awn. The poi nt i s of no



gr eat si gni f i cance, however , except as showi ng t hat a corr ectmethod of determi ni ng t he pr obl ems of l at i t ude had t hus ear l ybeen suggest ed. That f aul t y obser vat i ons and f aul t y appl i cat i onof t he cor r ect pr i nci pl e shoul d have been made i s not sur pr i si ng.Nei t her need we concer n our sel ves wi t h the det ai l s as t o t hegeogr aphi cal di st ances, whi ch St r abo f ound so wor t hy of cr i t i ci smand cont r over sy. But i n l eavi ng t he great geogr apher we mayemphasi ze hi s poi nt of vi ew and t hat of hi s cont emporar i es byquot i ng t hr ee f undament al pr i nci pl es whi ch he r ei t er at es as bei ngamong the "f act s establ i shed by nat ur al phi l osopher s. " He tel l sus t hat " ( 1) The ear t h and heavens are spher oi dal . ( 2) Thet endency of al l bodi es havi ng wei ght i s t owards a cent r e. ( 3)Fur t her , t he eart h bei ng spheroi dal and havi ng t he same cent r e ast he heavens, i s mot i onl ess, as wel l as t he axi s t hat passest hrough bot h i t and the heavens. The heavens t urn round bot h t heear t h and i t s axi s, f r om east t o west . The f i xed st ar s t ur n r oundwi t h i t at t he same r at e as t he whol e. These f i xed st ar s f ol l owi n t hei r cour se par al l el ci r cl es, t he pr i nci pal of whi ch ar e t heequat or , t wo t r opi cs, and t he ar ct i c ci r cl es; whi l e t he pl anet s,t he sun, and t he moon descr i be cer t ai n ci r cl es compr ehended

wi t hi n t he zodi ac. "[ 4]

Her e, t hen, i s a cur i ous mi ngl i ng of t r ut h and er r or . ThePythagor ean doct r i ne t hat t he ear t h i s r ound had become acommonpl ace, but i t woul d appear t hat t he t heory of Ar i st archus,accor di ng to whi ch t he eart h i s i n mot i on, has been al mostabsol ut el y f or got t en. St r abo does not so much as r ef er t o i t ;nei t her , as we shal l see, i s i t t r eat ed wi t h gr eat er r espect byt he ot her wr i t er s of t he per i od.

TWO FAMOUS EXPOSI TORS- - PLI NY AND PTOLEMY

Whi l e St r abo was pur sui ng hi s geogr aphi cal st udi es at Al exandr i a,a young man came t o Rome who was dest i ned t o make hi s name mor ewi del y known i n sci ent i f i c annal s t han t hat of any ot her Lat i nwr i t er of ant i qui t y. Thi s man was Pl i ni us Secundus, who, t odi st i ngui sh hi m f r om hi s nephew, a f amous wr i t er i n anot herf i el d, i s usual l y spoken of as Pl i ny the El der . Ther e i s a f amousst ory t o t he ef f ect t hat t he gr eat Roman hi st ori an Li vy on oneoccasi on addr essed a casual associ ate i n t he amphi t heat r e atRome, and on l ear ni ng that t he st r anger hai l ed f r om t he out l yi ngSpani sh pr ovi nce of t he empi r e, r emarked to hi m, "Yet you havedoubt l ess hear d of my wr i t i ngs even t here. " " Then, " r epl i ed t hest r anger , "you must be ei t her Li vy or Pl i ny. "

The anecdot e i l l ust r at es t he wi de f ame whi ch t he Roman natural i st

achi eved i n hi s own day. And t he recor ds of t he Mi ddl e Ages showt hat t hi s popul ar i t y di d not abat e i n succeedi ng ti mes. I ndeed,t he Nat ur al Hi st or y of Pl i ny i s one of t he compar at i vel y f ewbul ky wr i t i ngs of ant i qui t y t hat t he ef f or t s of copyi st s havepr eser ved to us al most ent i r e. I t i s, i ndeed, a remar kabl e wor kand emi nent l y typi cal of i t s t i me; but i t s aut hor was ani ndust r i ous compi l er , not a cr eat i ve geni us. As a monument of i ndust r y i t has sel dom been equal l ed, and i n t hi s r egar d i t seemst he mor e remarkabl e i nasmuch as Pl i ny was a pr act i cal man of af f ai r s who occupi ed most of hi s l i f e as a sol di er f i ght i ng t he



bat t l es of t he empi r e. He compi l ed hi s book i n t he l ei sur e hour sst ol en f r om sl eep, of t en wr i t i ng by the l i ght of t he camp- f i r e.

Yet he ci t es or quot es f r om about f our t housand wor ks, most of whi ch ar e known to us onl y by hi s r ef er ences. Doubt l ess Pl i nyadded much t hrough hi s own obser vat i ons. We know how keen was hi sdesi r e t o i nvest i gat e, si nce he l ost hi s l i f e t hr ough at t empt i ngt o appr oach the crat er of Vesuvi us on t he occasi on of t hatmemorabl e er upt i on whi ch bur i ed t he ci t i es of Hercul aneum andPompei i .

Doubt l ess t he wander i ng l i f e of t he sol di er had gi ven Pl i nyabundant oppor t uni t y f or per sonal obser vat i on i n hi s f avor i t ef i el ds of botany and zool ogy. But t he r ecor ds of hi s ownobservat i ons are so i nt ermi ngl ed wi t h knowl edge dr awn f r om bookst hat i t i s di f f i cul t t o di st i ngui sh t he one f romt he ot her . Nordoes t hi s gr eat l y mat t er , f or whet her as cl oset - st udent orf i el d- nat ural i s t , Pl i ny' s tr ai t of mi nd i s essent i al l y t hat of t he compi l er . He was no phi l osophi cal t hi nker , no gener al i zer , nopat h- maker i n sci ence. He l i ved at t he cl ose of a gr eatpr ogr essi ve epoch of t hought ; i n one of t hose st at i c per i ods when

number l ess observer s pi l ed up an i mmense mass of det ai l s whi chmi ght advant ageousl y be sor t ed i nt o a ki nd of encycl opaedi a. Suchan encycl opaedi a i s t he so- cal l ed Nat ur al Hi st or y of Pl i ny. I t i sa vast j umbl e of more or l ess uncr i t i cal st atement s r egar di ngal most every f i el d of cont emporary knowl edge. The descr i pt i ons of ani mal s and pl ant s pr edomi nat e, but t he work as a whol e woul dhave been i mmensel y i mproved had t he compi l er shown a mor ecri t i cal spi r i t . As i t i s, he seems rat her di sposed t o quot e anyi nt er est i ng ci t at i on that he comes across i n hi s omni vor ousr eadi ngs, shi el di ng hi msel f behi nd an equi vocal "i t i s sai d, " or"so and so al l eges. " A si ngl e i l l ustr at i on wi l l suf f i ce t o showwhat manner of t hi ng i s t hought wort hy of r epet i t i on.

"I t i s assert ed, " he says, "t hat i f t he f i sh cal l ed a sea- star i ssmear ed wi t h t he f ox' s bl ood and t hen nai l ed to t he upper l i nt elof t he door , or t o t he door i t sel f , wi t h a copper nai l , nonoxi ous spel l wi l l be abl e t o obt ai n admi t t ance, or , at al levent s, be pr oducti ve of any i l l ef f ects. "

I t i s easi l y compr ehensi bl e t hat a wor k f or t i f i ed wi t h suchpr act i cal det ai l s as t hi s shoul d have gai ned wi de popul ar i t y.Doubt l ess t he nat ur al hi st ori es of our own day woul d f i nd r eadi ersal e wer e t hey t o pander t o var i ous super st i t i ons not al t oget herdi f f er ent f r omt hat her e suggested. The man, f or exampl e, whobel i eves t hat t o have a bl ack cat cr oss hi s pat h i s a l ucky omenwoul d nat ur al l y f i nd hi msel f at t r act ed by a book whi ch t ookaccount of t hi s and si mi l ar i mpor t ant det ai l s of nat ur al hi st or y.

Per haps, t her ef or e, i t was i t s i ncl usi on of absur di t i es, qui t e asmuch as i t s l egi t i mate val ue, t hat gave vogue to t he cel ebr at edwork of Pl i ny. But be t hat as i t may, t he most f amous sci ent i stof Rome must be remember ed as a popul ar wr i t er r at her t han as anexper i ment al worker. I n t he hi st ory of t he pr omul gat i on of sci ent i f i c knowl edge hi s wor k i s i mpor t ant ; i n t he hi st or y of sci ent i f i c pr i nci pl es i t may vi r t ual l y be di sregar ded.

PTOLEMY, THE LAST GREAT ASTRONOMER OF ANTI QUI TY



Al most t he same t hi ng may be sai d of Pt ol emy, an even morecel ebr at ed wr i t er , who was born not ver y l ong af t er t he deat h of Pl i ny. The exact dat es of Pt ol emy' s l i f e ar e not known, but hi sr ecor ded obser vat i ons ext end to t he year 151 A. D. He was aworki ng ast r onomer, and he made at l east one or i gi nal di scover yof some si gni f i cance- - namel y, t he obser vat i on of a hi t her t ounr ecor ded i r r egul ar i t y of t he moon' s mot i on, whi ch came t o bespoken of as t he moon' s evect i on. Thi s consi st s of per i odi calaber r at i ons f r om t he moon' s r egul ar mot i on i n i t s orbi t , whi ch,as we now know, are due to the gr avi t at i on pul l of t he sun, butwhi ch remai ned unexpl ai ned unt i l t he t i me of Newt on. Pt ol emy al somade or i gi nal observat i ons as t o t he mot i ons of t he pl anet s. Hei s, t her ef or e, ent i t l ed t o a r espect abl e pl ace as an obser vi ngast r onomer ; but hi s chi ef f ame rest s on hi s wr i t i ngs.

Hi s gr eat works have to do wi t h geography and ast r onomy. I n thef ormer f i el d he makes an advance upon St r abo, ci t i ng t he l at i t udeof no f ewer t han f i ve t housand pl aces. I n t he f i el d of ast r onomy,hi s great ser vi ce was t o have made known t o t he wor l d the l abor s

of Hi pparchus. Ptol emy has been accused of t aki ng t he st ar - chartof hi s great pr edecessor wi t hout due cr edi t , and i ndeed i t seemsdi f f i cul t t o cl ear hi m of t hi s charge. Yet i t i s at l east open t odoubt whet her be i ntended any i mpropr i et y, i nasmuch as be al lal ong i s sedul ous i n hi s r ef er ences t o hi s pr edecessor . I ndeed,hi s work mi ght al most be cal l ed an exposi t i on of t he ast r onomi caldoct r i nes of Hi ppar chus. No one pr et ends t hat Ptol emy i s t o becompar ed wi t h t he Rhodesi an observer as an or i gi nal i nvest i gat or,but as a popul ar expounder hi s super i ori t y i s evi denced i n t hef act t hat t he wr i t i ngs of Pt ol emy became pr act i cal l y the sol east r onomi cal t ext - book of t he Mi ddl e Ages bot h i n the East and i nt he West , whi l e the wr i t i ngs of Hi ppar chus wer e al l owed t oper i sh.

The most not ed of al l t he wr i t i ngs of Pt ol emy i s t he wor k whi chbecame f amous under t he Ar abi c name of Al magest . Thi s word i scur i ousl y der i ved f r om t he Gr eek t i t l e <gr h megi st h sunt azi s>," t he gr eat est const r uct i on, " a name gi ven the book t o di st i ngui shi t f r oma work on ast r ol ogy i n f our books by t he same aut hor. Forconveni ence of r ef erence i t came t o be spoken of merel y as <gr hmegi st h>, f r om whi ch t he Ar abs f or m t he ti t l e Tabai r al Magi st hi ,under whi ch t i t l e the book was publ i shed i n the year 827. Fromt hi s i t der i ved t he word Al magest , by whi ch Ptol emy' s workcont i nued t o be known among t he Ar abs, and subsequent l y amongEuropeans when t he book agai n became known i n the West . Pt ol emy' sbook, as has been sai d, i s vi r t ual l y an el abor at i on of t hedoct r i nes of Hi ppar chus. I t assumes t hat t he ear t h i s t he f i xed

cent r e of t he sol ar syst em, and t hat t he st ars and pl anet sr evol ve about i t i n t went y- f our hour s, t he ear t h bei ng, of cour se, spher i cal . I t was not t o be expect ed t hat Ptol emy shoul dhave adopt ed t he hel i ocent r i c i dea of Ar i st ar chus. Yet i t i s mucht o be regr et t ed t hat he f ai l ed t o do so, si nce t he def er encewhi ch was accor ded hi s author i t y t hr oughout t he Mi ddl e Ages woul ddoubt l ess have been ext ended i n some measure at l east t o t hi st heory as wel l , had he champi oned i t . Cont r ari wi se, hi sunqual i f i ed accept ance of t he geocent r i c doct r i ne suf f i ced t opl ace t hat doct r i ne beyond the range of chal l enge.



The Al magest t r eats of al l manner of ast r onomi cal probl ems, butt he f eat ur e of i t whi ch gai ned i t wi dest cel ebr i t y was per hapst hat whi ch has t o do wi t h eccent r i cs and epi cycl es. Thi s t heor ywas, of cour se, but an el aborat i on of t he i deas of Hi ppar chus;but , owi ng t o t he cel ebr i t y of t he exposi t or , i t has come t o bespoken of as t he t heor y of Ptol emy. We have suf f i ci ent l y det ai l edt he t heory i n speaki ng of Hi ppar chus. I t shoul d be expl ai ned,however , t hat , wi t h both Hi pparchus and Pt ol emy, t he theor y of epi cycl es woul d appear t o have been hel d rather as a worki nghypot hesi s t han as a cer t ai nt y, so f ar as t he act ual i t y of t hemi nor spher es or epi cycl es i s concer ned. That i s t o say, t heseast r onomer s pr obabl y di d not concei ve ei t her t he epi cycl es or t hegr eat er spher es as const i t ut i ng act ual sol i d subst ances.Subsequent generat i ons, however , put t hi s i nt er pr et at i on upon t het heor y, concei vi ng the var i ous spher es as act ual cryst al l i nebodi es. I t i s di f f i cul t t o i magi ne j ust how t he var i ous epi cycl eswer e supposed to revol ve wi t hout i nt er f er i ng wi t h the maj orspher es, but per haps t hi s i s no gr eat er di f f i cul t y t han i spr esent ed by t he al l eged pr opert i es of t he ether , whi ch

physi ci st s of t o- day accept as at l east a worki ng hypothesi s. Weshal l see l at er on how f i r ml y t he concept i on of concent r i ccr yst al l i ne spher es was hel d t o, and t hat no real chal l enge wasever gi ven that t heor y unt i l t he di scover y was made that cometshave an or bi t t hat must necessar i l y i nt er sect t he spher es of t hevar i ous pl anet s.

Ptol emy' s syst emof geogr aphy i n ei ght books, f ounded on that of Mar i nus of Tyr e, was scarcel y l ess cel ebr at ed t hr oughout t heMi ddl e Ages t han t he Al magest . I t cont ai ned l i t t l e, however , t hatneed concer n us her e, bei ng rat her an el aborat i on of t hedoct r i nes t o whi ch we have al r eady suf f i ci ent l y r ef er r ed. None of Pt ol emy' s or i gi nal manuscr i pt s has come down t o us, but t her e i san al l eged f i f t h- cent ur y manuscr i pt at t r i but ed to Agat hadamon of Al exandr i a whi ch has pecul i ar i nt er est because i t cont ai ns aser i es of t went y- seven el aboratel y col ored maps t hat ar e supposedt o be deri ved f r ommaps drawn up by Pt ol emy hi msel f . I n thesemaps t he sea i s col ored green, t he mountai ns r ed or dark yel l ow,and the l and whi t e. Pt ol emy assumed t hat a degr ee at t he equat orwas 500 st adi a i nst ead of 604 st adi a i n l ength. We ar e noti nf ormed as t o t he grounds on whi ch t hi s assumpt i on was made, buti t has been suggest ed t hat t he er r or was at l east par t i al l yi nst r ument al i n l eadi ng t o one ver y cur i ous r esul t . "Taki ng t hepar al l el of Rhodes, " says Donal dson, [ 5] "he cal cul at ed t hel ongi t udes f r om t he For t unat e I sl ands t o Cat t i gar a or t he westcoast of Borneo at 180 degr ees, concei vi ng t hi s t o be one- hal f t he ci r cumf er ence of t he gl obe. The r eal di st ance i s onl y 125

degrees or 127 degr ees, so t hat hi s measurement i s wr ong by onet hi r d of t he whol e, one- si xth f or t he err or i n t he measur ement of a degr ee and one- si xt h f or t he er r ors i n measur i ng t he di st ancegeomet r i cal l y. These er r or s, owi ng to t he aut hor i t y at t r i but ed tot he geogr aphy of Pt ol emy i n t he Mi ddl e Ages, produced aconsequence of t he gr eat est i mport ance. They real l y l ed t o t hedi scover y of Amer i ca. For t he desi gn of Col umbus t o sai l f r om t hewest of Europe t o the east of Asi a was f ounded on t he supposi t i ont hat t he di st ance was l ess by one t hi r d t han i t r eal l y was. " Thi svi ew i s per haps a t r i f l e f anci f ul , si nce t her e i s not hi ng t o



suggest t hat t he cour age of Col umbus woul d have bal ked at t hegr eat er di st ance, and si nce t he pr ot est s of t he sai l or s, whi chnear l y t hwar t ed hi s ef f ort s, wer e made l ong bef ore t he di st anceas est i mated by Pt ol emy had been covered; nevert hel ess i t i si nt er est i ng t o recal l t hat t he gr eat geogr aphi cal doct r i nes, uponwhi ch Col umbus must chi ef l y have based hi s ar gument s, had beenbef or e t he wor l d i n an aut hor i t at i ve f orm pr act i cal l y unheededf or more t han t wel ve hundr ed year s, awai t i ng a champi on wi t hcour age enough t o put t hemt o the test .

GALEN- - THE LAST GREAT ALEXANDRI AN

There i s one ot her f i el d of sc i ent i f i c i nvest i gat i on t o whi ch wemust gi ve br i ef at t ent i on bef ore l eavi ng t he ant i que wor l d. Thi si s t he f i el d of physi ol ogy and medi ci ne. I n consi der i ng i t weshal l have t o do wi t h t he ver y l ast gr eat sci ent i st of t heAl exandri an school . Thi s was Cl audi us Gal enus, commonl y known asGal en, a man whose f ame was dest i ned to ecl i pse t hat of al l otherphysi ci ans of ant i qui t y except Hi ppocr ates, and whose doct r i nes

wer e t o have t he same f orce i n t hei r f i el d t hr oughout t he Mi ddl eAges t hat t he doct r i nes of Ar i st ot l e had f or physi cal sci ence.But bef or e we t ake up Gal en' s speci f i c l abor s, i t wi l l be wel l t oi nqui r e br i ef l y as t o t he st at e of medi cal ar t and sci ence i n t heRoman wor l d at t he t i me when t he l ast great physi ci an of ant i qui t y came upon t he scene.

The Romans, i t woul d appear , had done l i t t l e i n t he way of sci ent i f i c di scover i es i n t he f i el d of medi ci ne, but ,never t hel ess, wi t h t hei r pr act i cal i t y of mi nd, t hey had t ur ned t obet t er account many mor e of t he sci ent i f i c di scover i es of t heGr eeks t han di d t he di scover er s t hemsel ves. The pr act i si ngphysi ci ans i n ear l y Rome were most l y men of Gr eek or i gi n, whocame t o t he capi t al af t er t he over t hr ow of t he Gr eeks by t heRomans. Many of t hem were sl aves, as ear ni ng money by ei t herbodi l y or ment al l abor was consi dered beneat h the di gni t y of aRoman ci t i zen. The weal t hy Romans, who owned l arge est at es andnumerous sl aves, were i n t he habi t of pur chasi ng some of t hesesl ave doct ors, and thus savi ng medi cal f ees by havi ng them at t endt o t he heal t h of t hei r f ami l i es.

By the begi nni ng of t he Chr i st i an er a medi ci ne as a pr of essi onhad sadl y degenerat ed, and i n pl ace of a cl ass of physi ci ans whopr act i sed medi ci ne al ong r at i onal or l egi t i mat e l i nes, i n t hef oot st eps of t he gr eat Hi ppocrates, t here appear ed gr eat numbersof "speci al i st s, " most of t hem char l at ans, who pr et ended t opossess super nat ur al i nsi ght i n t he met hods of t r eat i ng cer t ai n

f orms of di sease. These physi ci ans r i ght l y ear ned t he cont empt of t he bet t er cl ass of Romans, and were made the obj ect of manyat t acks by the sat i r i st s of t he t i me. Such speci al i st s t r avel l edabout f r om pl ace to pl ace i n much t he same manner as t hei t i ner ant "I ndi an doct or s" and "l i ght ni ng t oot h- ext r act or s" dot o- day. Eye- doctors seem t o have been par t i cul ar l y numer ous, andt hese were di vi ded i nt o t wo cl asses, eye- surgeons and eye- doctorsproper . The eye- surgeon per f ormed such operat i ons as caut er i zi ngf or i ngr owi ng eyel ashes and oper at i ng upon growt hs about t heeyes; whi l e t he eye- doctors depended ent i r el y upon sal ves and



l ot i ons. These eye- sal ves wer e f r equent l y st amped wi t h t he sealof t he physi ci an who compounded t hem, somet hi ng l i ke t wo hundredof t hese seal s bei ng st i l l i n exi st ence. Ther e wer e besi des t hesequacks, however , r eputabl e eye- doct ors who must have possessedconsi der abl e ski l l i n the t r eat ment of cer t ai n opht hal mi as. Amongsome Roman sur gi cal i nst r ument s di scovered at Rhei ms were f oundal so some drugs empl oyed by ophthal mi c surgeons, and an anal ysi sof t hese show t hat t hey cont ai ned, among ot her i ngr edi ent s, somet hat ar e st i l l empl oyed i n t he tr eat ment of cer t ai n af f ect i ons of t he eye.

One of t he f i r st st eps t aken i n r ecogni t i on of t he ser vi ces of physi ci ans was by J ul i us Caesar , who gr ant ed ci t i zenshi p t o al lphysi ci ans pr act i si ng i n Rome. Thi s was about f i f t y year s bef or et he Chr i st i an era, and f r omt hat t i me on t here was a gr aduali mprovement i n t he at t i t ude of t he Romans t owards t he member s of t he medi cal pr of essi on. As t he Romans degenerated f r om a race of st urdy war r i ors and became more and more depr aved physi cal l y, t henecessi t y f or physi ci ans made i t sel f more evi dent . Cour tphysi ci ans, and physi ci ans- i n- or di nar y, wer e cr eat ed by the

emper ors, as wer e al so ci t y and di st r i ct physi ci ans. I n t he year133 A. D. Hadr i an gr ant ed i mmuni t y f r omt axes and mi l i t ar y ser vi cet o physi ci ans i n r ecogni t i on of t hei r publ i c ser vi ces.

The ci t y and di st r i ct physi ci ans, known as t he ar chi at r ipopul ai r es, t r eat ed and car ed f or t he poor wi t hout r emuner at i on,havi ng a posi t i on and sal ar y f i xed by l aw and pai d themsemi - annual l y. These wer e honorabl e posi t i ons, and t he ar chi at r iwer e obl i ged t o gi ve i nst r uct i on i n medi ci ne, wi t hout pay, t o t hepoor st udent s. They were al l owed t o recei ve f ees and donat i onsf r om t hei r pat i ent s, but not , however , unt i l t he danger f r om t hemal ady was past . Speci al l aws were enact ed t o pr ot ect t hem, andany per son subj ect i ng t hem t o an i nsul t was l i abl e t o a f i ne "notexceedi ng one t housand pounds. "

An exampl e of Roman pract i cal i t y i s shown i n t he method of t r eat i ng hemorr hage, as descr i bed by Aul us Cornel i us Cel sus ( 53B. C. t o 7 A. D. ) . Hi ppocrat es and Hi ppocr at i c wr i t er s t r eat edhemor r hage by appl i cat i on of col d, pr essur e, st ypt i cs, andsomet i mes by act ual caut er i zi ng; but t hey knew not hi ng of t hesi mpl e met hod of st oppi ng a hemorr hage by a l i gat ure t i ed aroundt he bl eedi ng vessel . Cel sus not onl y recommended t yi ng t he end of t he i nj ur ed vessel , but descr i bes t he met hod of appl yi ng t wol i gat ur es bef ore t he ar t ery i s di vi ded by t he sur geon- - a commonpract i ce among sur geons at t he present t i me. The cut i s madebet ween t hese t wo, and t hus hemorr hage i s avoi ded f r om ei t her endof t he di vi ded vessel .

Another Roman surgeon, Hel i odorus, not onl y descr i bes t he use of t he l i gat ur e i n stoppi ng hemor r hage, but al so t he pr act i ce of t or si on- - t wi st i ng smal l er vessel s, whi ch causes t hei r l i ni ngmembrane t o cont r act i n a manner t hat produces coagul at i on andst ops hemorr hage. I t i s r emar kabl e that so si mpl e and pr act i cal amethod as t he use of t he l i gatur e i n st oppi ng hemorr hage coul dhave gone out of use, once i t had been di scover ed; but dur i ng t heMi ddl e Ages i t was al most ent i r el y l ost si ght of , and was notr ei nt r oduced unt i l t he t i me of Ambr oi se Par e, i n t he si xteent h



cent ur y.

Even at a ver y ear l y per i od t he Romans r ecogni zed the advant ageof sur gi cal met hods on t he f i el d of bat t l e. Each sol di er wassuppl i ed wi t h bandages, and was pr obabl y i nst r uct ed i n appl yi ngt hem, somet hi ng i n t he same manner as i s done now i n al l modernarmi es. The Romans al so made use of mi l i t ary hospi t al s and hadest abl i shed a r ude but ver y pr act i cal f i el d- ambul ance ser vi ce." I n ever y t r oop or bandon of t wo or f our hundr ed men, ei ght ort en st out f el l ows were deput ed t o ri de i mmedi atel y behi nd t hef i ght i ng- l i ne t o pi ck up and r escue t he wounded, f or whi chpur pose t hei r saddl es had t wo st i r r ups on t he l ef t si de, whi l et hey t hemsel ves were provi ded wi t h water- f l asks, and perhapsappl i ed t empor ary bandages. They were encouraged by a r eward of api ece of gol d f or each man t hey rescued. ' Noscomi ' were mal enur ses at t ached t o t he mi l i t ar y hospi t al s, but not i nscri bed ' onst r engt h' of t he l egi ons, and wer e pr obabl y f or t he most par t of t he servi l e cl ass. "[ 6]

From t he t i me of t he ear l y Al exandr i ans, Her ophi l us and

Erasi st r at us, whose work we have al r eady exami ned, t her e had beenvar i ous anatomi st s of some i mpor t ance i n t he Al exandr i an school ,t hough none qui t e equal t o t hese ear l i er worker s. The best - knownnames are t hose of Cel sus ( of whom we have al r eady spoken) , whocont i nued the work of anatomi cal i nvest i gat i on, and Mari nus, whol i ved dur i ng t he r ei gn of Ner o, and Ruf us of Ephesus. Probabl yal l of t hese woul d have been bet t er r emember ed by succeedi nggener at i ons had t hei r ef f ort s not been ecl i psed by those of Gal en. Thi s great est of anci ent anatomi st s was born at Per gamusof Gr eek parent s. Hi s f ather, Ni con, was an archi t ect and a manof consi der abl e abi l i t y. Unt i l hi s f i f t eent h year t he yout hf ulGal en was i nst r uct ed at home, chi ef l y by hi s f at her ; but af t ert hat t i me he was pl aced under sui t abl e teacher s f or i nst r uct i oni n t he phi l osophi cal systems i n vogue at t hat per i od. Shor t l yaf t er t hi s, however , t he super st i t i ous Ni con, f ol l owi ng t hei nt er pr et at i ons of a dr eam, deci ded t hat hi s son shoul d t ake upt he st udy of medi ci ne, and pl aced hi m under t he i nst r uct i on of sever al l ear ned physi ci ans.

Gal en was a t i r el ess worker, maki ng l ong tour s i nt o Asi a Mi norand Pal est i ne t o i mprove hi msel f i n pharmacol ogy, and st udyi nganatomy f or some t i me at Al exandri a. He appear s t o have been f ul lof t he super st i t i ons of t he age, however , and ear l y i n hi s car eermade an ext ended t our i nt o west ern Asi a i n search of t hechi mer i cal "j et - st one"- - a st one possessi ng t he pecul i ar qual i t i esof "bur ni ng wi t h a bi t umi nous odor and supposed t o possess gr eatpot ency i n cur i ng such di seases as epi l epsy, hyster i a, and gout . "

By t he t i me he had r eached hi s t went y- ei ght h year he hadper f ected hi s educat i on i n medi ci ne and r eturned t o hi s home i nPer gamus. Even at t hat t i me he had acqui r ed consi der abl e f ame asa sur geon, and hi s f el l ow- ci t i zens showed t hei r conf i dence i n hi sabi l i t y by choosi ng hi m as sur geon t o t he wounded gl adi at orsshor t l y af t er hi s retur n t o hi s nat i ve ci t y. I n t hese dut i es hi sknowl edge of anatomy ai ded hi m gr eat l y, and he i s sai d t o haveheal ed cer t ai n ki nds of wounds t hat had pr evi ousl y baf f l ed t hesur geons.



I n the t i me of Gal en di ssect i ons of t he human body were f orbi ddenby l aw, and he was obl i ged t o conf i ne hi msel f t o di ssect i ons of t he l ower ani mal s. He had t he advant age, however, of t heanatomi cal works of Herophi l us and Er asi st r atus, and he must havedepended upon t hem i n per f ect i ng hi s compar i son bet ween t heanat omy of men and the l ower ani mal s. I t i s possi bl e t hat he di dmake human di ssect i ons sur r ept i t i ousl y, but of t hi s we have nopr oof .

He was f ami l i ar wi t h the compl i cat ed st r uct ur e of t he bones of t he cr ani um. He descr i bed t he ver t ebr ae cl earl y, di vi ded t hemi nto gr oups, and named t hem af t er t he manner of anatomi st s of t o- day. He was l ess accur at e i n hi s descr i pt i on of t he muscl es,al t hough a l arge number of t hese were descr i bed by hi m. Li ke al lanatomi st s bef ore t he t i me of Harvey, he had a very er r oneousconcept i on of t he ci r cul at i on, al t hough he under st ood t hat t heheart was an organ f or t he pr opul si on of bl ood, and he showedt hat t he ar t er i es of t he l i vi ng ani mal s di d not cont ai n ai ral one, as was t aught by many anatomi st s. He knew, al so, t hat t he

hear t was made up of l ayer s of f i br es t hat r an i n cer t ai n f i xeddi r ecti ons- - t hat i s, l ongi t udi nal , t r ansver se, and obl i que; buthe di d not r ecogni ze t he hear t as a muscul ar organ. I n pr oof of t hi s he poi nt ed out t hat al l muscl es r equi r e r est , and as t hehear t di d not r est i t coul d not be composed of muscul ar t i ssue.

Many of hi s physi ol ogi cal exper i ment s were conduct ed uponsci ent i f i c pr i nci pl es. Thus he pr oved t hat cer t ai n muscl es wer eunder t he cont r ol of def i ni t e set s of ner ves by cut t i ng t hesener ves i n l i vi ng ani mal s, and observi ng t hat t he muscl es suppl i edby t hemwere r endered usel ess. He poi nt ed out al so t hat nerveshave no power i n themsel ves, but merel y conduct i mpul ses t o andf r om t he br ai n and spi nal - cor d. He turned t hi s pecul i ar knowl edget o account i n t he case of a cel ebr at ed sophi st , Pausani as, whohad been under t he t r eat ment of vari ous physi ci ans f or a numbnessi n t he f our t h and f i f t h f i nger s of hi s l ef t hand. Thesephysi ci ans had been t r eat i ng t hi s condi t i on by appl i cat i ons of poul t i ces t o t he hand i t sel f . Gal en, bei ng cal l ed i nconsul t at i on, poi nt ed out t hat t he i nj ur y was pr obabl y not i n t hehand i t sel f , but i n t he ul ner ner ve, whi ch cont r ol s sensat i on i nt he f our t h and f i f t h f i nger s. Sur mi si ng that t he ner ve must havebeen i nj ur ed i n some way, he made car ef ul i nqui r i es of t hepat i ent , who r ecal l ed t hat he had been t hr own f r omhi s chari otsome t i me bef or e, st r i ki ng and i nj ur i ng hi s back. Act i ng upont hi s i nf or mat i on, Gal en appl i ed st i mul at i ng r emedi es t o t hesour ce of t he ner ve i t sel f - - t hat i s, t o t he bundl e of ner ve- t r unks known as the br achi al pl exus, i n t he shoul der . To

t he sur pr i se and conf usi on of hi s f el l ow- physi ci ans, t hi s met hodof t r eat ment pr oved ef f ect i ve and t he pat i ent r ecover edcompl etel y i n a short t i me.

Al t hough the f unct i ons of t he or gans i n the chest wer e not wel lunder st ood by Gal en, he was wel l acquai nted wi t h thei r anat omy.He knew t hat t he l ungs wer e covered by thi n membrane, and t hatt he hear t was surr ounded by a sac of ver y si mi l ar t i ssue. He madeconst ant compar i sons al so between t hese organs i n di f f erentani mal s, as hi s di ssect i ons were per f ormed upon beast s r angi ng i n



si ze f r om a mouse to an el ephant . The mi nut eness of hi sobservat i ons i s shown by t he f act t hat he had not ed and descr i bedt he r i ng of bone f ound i n t he hear t s of cer t ai n ani mal s, such ast he hor se, al t hough not f ound i n t he human heart or i n mostani mal s.

Hi s descr i pt i on of t he abdomi nal organs was i n gener al accur at e.He had not ed t hat t he abdomi nal cavi t y was l i ned wi t h a pecul i arsacl i ke membrane, t he per i t oneum, whi ch al so surr ounded most of t he or gans cont ai ned i n t he cavi t y, and he made speci al not e thatt hi s membr ane al so envel oped t he l i ver i n a pecul i ar manner . Theexact ness of t he l ast obser vat i on seems t he more wonder f ul whenwe ref l ect t hat even to- day t he medi cal , st udent f i nds a cor r ectunder st andi ng of t he posi t i on of t he f ol ds of t he per i t oneum oneof t he most di f f i cul t subj ect s i n anat omy.

As a pr act i cal physi ci an he was hel d i n t he hi ghest est eem by theRomans. The Emper or Marcus Aurel i us cal l ed hi m t o Rome andappoi nted hi m physi ci an- i nordi nary t o hi s son Commodus, and onspeci al occasi ons Mar cus Aur el i us hi msel f cal l ed i n Gal en as hi s

medi cal advi ser . On one occasi on, t he thr ee army sur geons i nat t endance upon t he emper or decl ared t hat he was about t o beat t acked by a f ever. Gal en r el ates how "on speci al command I f el thi s pul se, and f i ndi ng i t qui t e normal , consi der i ng hi s age andt he t i me of day, I decl ar ed i t was no f ever but a di gest i vedi sorder , due t o t he f ood he had eat en, whi ch must be conver t edi nt o phl egm bef ore bei ng excr eted. Then t he emperor r epeat edt hr ee t i mes, ' That ' s t he ver y t hi ng, ' and asked what was t o bedone. I answered t hat I usual l y gave a gl ass of wi ne wi t h pepperspr i nkl ed on i t , but f or you ki ngs we onl y use the saf estr emedi es, and i t wi l l suf f i ce t o appl y wool soaked i n hot nar doi nt ment l ocal l y. The emper or ordered t he wool , wi ne, et c. , t o bebrought , and I l ef t t he room. Hi s f eet were warmed by rubbi ngwi t h hot hands, and af t er dr i nki ng the peppered wi ne, he sai d t oPi t hol aus ( hi s son' s t ut or) , ' We have onl y one doct or , and t hatan honest one, ' and went on t o descr i be me as t he f i r st of physi ci ans and the onl y phi l osopher, f or he had t r i ed many bef orewho were not onl y l overs of money, but al so cont ent i ous,ambi t i ous, envi ous, and mal i gnant . " [ 7]

I t wi l l be seen f r om t hi s t hat Gal en had a f ul l appr eci at i on of hi s own abi l i t i es as a physi ci an, but i nasmuch as succeedi nggener at i ons f or a thousand years concur r ed i n t he al l egedst at ement made by Marcus Aur el i us as t o hi s abi l i t y, he i sper haps excusabl e f or hi s open avowal of hi s bel i ef i n hi spower s. Hi s f ai t h i n hi s accur acy i n di agnosi s and pr ognosi s wasshown when a col l eague once sai d t o hi m, " I have used the

prognost i cs of Hi ppocrates as wel l as you. Why can I notpr ognost i cat e as wel l as you?" To t hi s Gal en r epl i ed, "By God' shel p I have never been decei ved i n my pr ognosi s. " [ 8] I t i sprobabl e t hat t hi s st atement was made i n the heat of argument ,and i t i s har dl y t o be supposed t hat he meant i t l i t er al l y.

Hi s syst ems of t r eat ment wer e f ar i n advance of hi s t heori esr egar di ng t he f unct i ons of or gans, causes of di sease, et c. , andsome of t hem ar e sti l l f i rst pr i nci pl es wi t h physi ci ans. Li keHi ppocrat es, he l ai d gr eat st r ess on cor r ect di et , exer ci se, and



r el i ance upon nat ur e. "Natur e i s t he over seer by whomheal t h i ssuppl i ed t o t he si ck, " he says. "Nat ur e l ends her ai d on al lsi des, she deci des and cures di seases. No one can be saved unl essnat ur e conquers t he di sease, and no one di es unl ess nat ur esuccumbs. "

Fr omt he pi ct ur e thus dr awn of Gal en as an anatomi st andphysi ci an, one mi ght i nf er t hat he shoul d r ank very hi gh as asci ent i f i c exponent of medi ci ne, even i n compari son wi t h modernphysi ci ans. Ther e i s, however , another si de t o t he pi ct ur e. Hi sknowl edge of anatomy was cer t ai nl y ver y consi der abl e, but many of hi s deduct i ons and t heor i es as t o the f unct i ons of or gans, t hecause of di seases, and hi s methods of t r eat i ng t hem, woul d ber ecogni zed as absur d by a modern school - boy of aver agei nt el l i gence. Hi s gr eat ness must be j udged i n compar i son wi t hanci ent , not wi t h moder n, sci ent i st s. He mai nt ai ned, f or exampl e,t hat r espi r at i on and the pul se- beat were f or one and t he samepur pose- - t hat of t he recept i on of ai r i nt o the ar t er i es of t hebody. To hi m t he act of br eat hi ng was f or t he pur pose of admi t t i ng ai r i nt o t he l ungs, whence i t f ound i t s way i nt o the

hear t , and f r omt her e was di st r i but ed t hr oughout t he body bymeans of t he ar t er i es. The ski n al so pl ayed an i mport ant par t i nsuppl yi ng t he body wi t h ai r , t he pores absorbi ng t he ai r anddi st r i but i ng i t t hr ough t he ar t er i es. But , as we know t hat he wasawar e of t he f act t hat t he ar t er i es al so cont ai ned bl ood, he musthave bel i eved t hat t hese vessel s cont ai ned a mi xt ur e of t he t wo.

Modern anatomi st s know t hat t he hear t i s di vi ded i nt o twoapproxi mat el y equal par t s by an i mper meabl e sept umof t oughf i br es. Yet , Gal en, who di ssected the hear t s of a vast number of t he l ower ani mal s accor di ng t o hi s own account , mai nt ai ned t hatt hi s sept um was per meabl e, and t hat t he ai r , ent eri ng one si de of t he hear t f r om t he l ungs, passed t hr ough i t i nt o t he opposi t esi de and was t hen t r ansf err ed t o t he ar t er i es.

He was equal l y at f aul t , al t hough perhaps more excusabl y so, i nhi s expl anat i on of t he act i on of t he ner ves. He had r i ght l ypoi nt ed out t hat nerves were merel y connect i ons between t he br ai nand spi nal - cord and di st ant muscl es and or gans, and hadr ecogni zed t hat t her e wer e two ki nds of ner ves, but hi sexpl anat i on of t he act i on of t hese ner ves was t hat "nervousspi r i t s" wer e car r i ed t o t he cavi t i es of t he br ai n bybl ood- vessel s, and f r omt her e t r ansmi t t ed t hr ough t he body al ongt he nerve- t r unks.

I n t he human skul l , over l yi ng t he nasal cavi t y, t her e ar e twot hi n pl at es of bone per f orat ed wi t h numer ous smal l apert ur es.

These aper t ures al l ow t he passage of numerous nerve- f i l amentswhi ch extend f r om a gr oup of cel l s i n t he br ai n t o t he del i cat emembr anes i n t he nasal cavi t y. These perf orat i ons i n t he bone,t her ef ore, ar e si mpl y to al l ow t he passage of t he ner ves. ButGal en gave a very di f f er ent expl anat i on. He bel i eved t hat i mpur e"ani mal spi r i t s" wer e car r i ed t o t he cavi t i es of t he br ai n by thear t er i es i n t he neck and f r om t her e wer e si f t ed out t hr ough t heseper f orat ed bones, and so expel l ed f r omt he body.

He had observed t hat t he ski n pl ayed an i mpor t ant part i n cool i ng



t he body, but he seems t o have bel i eved t hat t he heart wasequal l y act i ve i n over heat i ng i t . The ski n, t her ef or e, absor bedai r f or t he pur pose of "cool i ng t he hear t , " and t hi s cool i ngpr ocess was ai ded by t he br ai n, whose secret i ons ai ded al so i nt he cool i ng pr ocess. The hear t i t sel f was t he seat of cour age;t he br ai n t he seat of t he rat i onal soul ; and t he l i ver t he seatof l ove.

The greatness of Gal en' s t eachi ngs l ay i n hi s knowl edge of anat omy of t he or gans; hi s weakness was i n hi s i nt er pr et at i ons of t hei r f unct i ons. Unf or t unat el y, succeedi ng gener at i ons of physi ci ans f or somet hi ng l i ke a t housand years r ej ect ed t hef ormer but cl ung t o t he l at t er , so t hat t he advances he had madewere compl etel y overshadowed by t he mi st akes of hi s t eachi ngs.

XI . A RETROSPECTI VE GLANCE AT CLASSI CAL SCI ENCE

I t i s a f avor i t e t enet of t he moder n hi st or i an t hat hi st or y i s a

cont i nuous st r eam. The cont ent i on has f ul l est war r ant . Sharpl i nes of demar cat i on ar e an evi dence of man' s anal yt i calpr opensi t y rat her t han t he work of nat ur e. Never t hel ess i t woul dbe absurd t o deny that t he st r eam of hi st ory pr esent s anever- var yi ng curr ent . There are t i mes when i t seems t o rushr api dl y on; t i mes when i t spr eads out i nt o a br oad- - seemi ngl yst at i c- - cur r ent ; t i mes when i t s catast r ophi c changes r emi nd us of not hi ng but a gi gant i c cat ar act . Rapi ds and whi r l pool s, br oadest uar i es and t umul t uous cat aracts are i ndeed part of t he samest r eam, but t hey ar e par t s t hat var y one f r omanother i n t hei rsal i ent f eat ur es i n such a way as t o f orce t he mi nd t o cl assi f yt hem as thi ngs apar t and gi ve t hem i ndi vi dual names.

So i t i s wi t h t he st r eam of hi st or y; however st r ongl y we i nsi ston i t s cont i nui t y we ar e none t he l ess f or ced t o recogni ze i t sper i odi ci t y. I t may not be desi r abl e t o f i x on speci f i c dat es ast ur ni ng- poi nt s t o the ext ent t hat our pr edecessor s wer e wont t odo. We may not , f or exampl e, be di sposed to admi t t hat t he RomanEmpi r e came t o any such catacl ysmi c f i ni sh as t he year 476 A. D. ,when ci t ed i n connect i on wi t h the over t hr ow of t he l ast RomanEmpi r e of t he West , mi ght seem t o i ndi cat e. But , on t he otherhand, no st udent of t he per i od can f ai l t o r eal i ze t hat a gr eatchange came over t he aspect of t he hi st ori cal st r eam t owar ds t hecl ose of t he Roman epoch.

The span f r om Thal es t o Gal en has compassed about ei ght hundredyear s- - l et us say thi r t y gener at i ons. Thr oughout t hi s per i od

t her e i s scarcel y a gener at i on t hat has not pr oduced gr eatsci ent i f i c t hi nker s- - men who have put t hei r mar k upon t hepr ogr ess of ci vi l i zat i on; but we shal l see, as we l ook f or war df or a cor r espondi ng per i od, t hat t he ensui ng t hi r t y gener at i onspr oduced scar cel y a si ngl e sci ent i f i c t hi nker of t he f i r st r ank.Ei ght hundr ed year s of i nt el l ectual acti vi t y -- t hi r t y gener at i onsof gr eat ness; t hen ei ght hundr ed year s of st asi s- - t hi r t ygenerat i ons of medi ocr i t y; such seems t o be the recor d as vi ewedi n per spect i ve. Doubt l ess i t seemed f ar di f f er ent t o t hecont emporar y observer; i t i s onl y i n r easonabl e per spect i ve t hat



any scene can be vi ewed f ai r l y. But f or us, l ooki ng back wi t houtpr ej udi ce across t he st age of year s, i t seems i ndi sput abl e t hat agreat epoch came t o a cl ose at about t he t i me when the bar bar i annat i ons of Eur ope began t o sweep down i nto Gr eece and I t al y. Weare f orced t o f eel t hat we have r eached t he l i mi t s of pr ogr ess of what hi st ori ans are pl eased t o cal l t he anci ent wor l d. For aboutei ght hundr ed year s Gr eek t hought has been domi nant , but i n t heensui ng per i od i t i s t o pl ay a qui t e subor di nat e par t , except i nso f ar as i t i nf l uences t he t hought of an al i en r ace. As we l eavet hi s cl assi cal epoch, t hen, we may wel l r ecapi t ul at e i n br i ef i t st r i umphs. A f ew words wi l l suf f i ce t o summar i ze a st ory t hedet ai l s of whi ch have made up our r ecent chapters.

I n the f i el d of cosmol ogy, Gr eek geni us has demonst r at ed t hat t heear t h i s spher oi dal , t hat t he moon i s ear t hl i ke i n st r uct ur e andmuch smal l er t han our gl obe, and that t he sun i s vast l y l argerand many t i mes more di st ant t han the moon. The act ual si ze of t heear t h and t he angl e of i t s axi s wi t h t he ecl i pt i c have beenmeasur ed wi t h appr oxi mate accuracy. I t has been shown t hat t hesun and moon present i nequal i t i es of mot i on whi ch may be

t heor et i cal l y expl ai ned by supposi ng t hat t he ear t h i s notsi t uat ed pr eci sel y at t he cent r e of t hei r or bi t s. A syst em of eccent r i cs and epi cycl es has been el aborated whi ch serves t oexpl ai n t he appar ent mot i ons of t he heavenl y bodi es i n a mannert hat may be cal l ed sci ent i f i c even t hough i t i s based, as we nowknow, upon a f al se hypothesi s. The t r ue hypothesi s, whi ch pl acest he sun at t he cent r e of t he pl anetar y syst emand post ul at es t heorbi t al and axi al moti ons of our ear t h i n expl anat i on of t hemot i ons of t he heavenl y bodi es, has been put f orward and ar dent l ychampi oned, but , unf ort unat el y, i s not accepted by t he domi nantt hi nker s at t he cl ose of our epoch. I n t hi s r egar d, t her ef or e, avast r evol ut i onar y wor k remai ns f or t he t hi nker s of a l at erper i od. Moreover , such observat i ons as t he pr ecessi on of t heequi noxes and t he moon' s evect i on are as yet unexpl ai ned, andmeasur ement s of t he ear t h' s si ze, and of t he sun' s si ze anddi st ance, are so crude and i mper f ect as t o be i n one case onl y anappr oxi mat i on, and i n t he ot her an absurdl y i nadequatesuggest i on. But wi t h al l t hese def ect s, t he tot al achi evement of t he Gr eek ast r onomers i s st upendous. To have cl ear l y gr asped t hei dea t hat t he ear t h i s r ound i s i n i t sel f an achi evement t hatmar ks of f t he cl assi cal f r om t he Or i ent al per i od as by a gr eatgul f .

I n the physi cal sci ences we have seen at l east t he begi nni ngs of gr eat t hi ngs. Dynami cs and hydr ost at i cs may now, f or t he f i r stt i me, cl ai m a pl ace among t he sci ences. Geomet r y has beenper f ect ed and t r i gonomet r y has made a sur e begi nni ng. The

concept i on t hat t her e ar e f our el ement ary subst ances, ear t h,wat er , ai r , and f i r e, may not appear a secur e f oundat i on f orchemi st r y, yet i t mar ks at l east an at t empt i n t he r i ghtdi r ect i on. Si mi l ar l y, t he concept i on t hat al l mat t er i s made upof i ndi vi si bl e par t i cl es and t hat t hese have adj ust ed t hemsel vesand ar e per haps hel d i n pl ace by a whi r l i ng mot i on, whi l e i t i sscar cel y mor e t han a sci ent i f i c dr eam, i s, af t er al l , a dr eam of mar vel l ous i nsi ght .

I n t he f i el d of bi ol ogi cal sci ence pr ogr ess has not been so



marked, yet t he el aborate garneri ng of f acts r egardi ng anatomy,physi ol ogy, and the zool ogi cal sci ences i s at l east a val uabl epr epar at i on f or t he gener al i zat i ons of a l at er t i me.

I f wi t h a map bef ore us we gl ance at t he por t i on of t he gl obewhi ch was known to t he workers of t he per i od now i n quest i on,bear i ng i n mi nd at t he same t i me what we have l earned as t o t heseat of l abor s of t he var i ous gr eat sci ent i f i c thi nker s f r om

Thal es t o Gal en, we cannot f ai l t o be st r uck wi t h a r at herst ar t l i ng f act , i nt i mat i ons of whi ch have been gi ven f r om t i me tot i me- - t he f act , namel y, t hat most of t he gr eat Gr eek t hi nker s di dnot l i ve i n Gr eece i t sel f . As our eye f al l s upon Asi a Mi nor andi t s out l yi ng i sl ands, we r ef l ect t hat her e wer e born such men as

Thal es, Anaxi mander , Anaxi menes, Heracl i t us, Pyt hagor as,Anaxagoras, Socrat es, Ar i st ar chus, Hi ppar chus, Eudoxus,Phi l ol aus, and Gal en. From t he nor t hern shores of t he aegean cameLuci ppus, Democri t us, and Ar i st ot l e. I t al y, of f t o t he west , i st he home of Pyt hagoras and Xenophanes i n thei r l ater years , andof Parmeni des and Empedocl es, Zeno, and Ar chi medes. Nor t her nAf r i ca can cl ai m, by bi r t h or by adopt i on, such names as Eucl i d,

Apol l oni us of Per ga, Her ophi l us, Er asi st r at us, Ar i st i ppus,Er at ost henes, Ct esi bi us, Her o, St r abo, and Ptol emy. Thi s i s butr unni ng over t he l i st of gr eat men whose di scover i es have cl ai medour at t ent i on. Wer e we t o extend t he l i st t o i ncl ude a host of worker s of t he second r ank, we shoul d but emphasi ze t he samef act .

Al l al ong we ar e speaki ng of Gr eeks, or, as t hey cal l t hemsel ves,Hel l enes, and we mean by t hese wor ds t he peopl e whose home was asmal l j agged peni nsul a j ut t i ng i nt o the Medi t er r anean at t hesout heast ern ext r emi t y of Eur ope. We t hi nk of t hi s peni nsul a ast he home of Gr eek cul t ur e, yet of al l t he gr eat t hi nker s we have

j ust named, not one was born on t hi s peni nsul a, and perhaps notone i n f i ve ever set f oot upon i t . I n poi nt of f act , one Gr eekt hi nker of t he ver y f i r st r ank, and one onl y, was bor n i n Gr eecepr oper ; t hat one, however , was Pl ato, per haps t he gr eatest of t hem al l . Wi t h t hi s one br i l l i ant except i on ( and even he was bornof par ent s who came f r om t he pr ovi nces) , al l t he gr eat t hi nker sof Gr eece had t hei r ori gi n at t he ci r cumf er ence r at her t han t hecent r e of t he empi r e. And i f we r ef l ect t hat t hi s ci r cumf er enceof t he Gr eek wor l d was i n t he nature of t he case t he wi del yci r cl i ng r egi on i n whi ch t he Gr eek came i n cont act wi t h othernat i ons, we shal l see at once that t here coul d be no morestr i ki ng i l l ustr at i on i n al l hi story than t hat f urni shed us her eof t he val ue of r aci al mi ngl i ng as a st i mul us t o i nt el l ect ualpr ogr ess.

But t her e i s one ot her f eat ur e of t he mat t er t hat must not beover l ooked. Raci al mi ngl i ng gi ves vi t al i t y, but t o pr oduce t hebest ef f ect t he mi ngl i ng must be that of r aces al l of whi ch ar eat a r el at i vel y hi gh pl ane of ci vi l i zat i on. I n Asi a Mi nor t heGr eek mi ngl ed wi t h the Semi t e, who had t he heri t age of cent ur i esof cul t ur e; and i n I t al y wi t h the Umbr i ans, Oscans, andEt r uscans, who, l i t t l e as we know of t hei r ant ecedent s, have l ef tus monument s t o t est i f y t o thei r hi gh devel opment . The chi ef r eason why t he raci al mi ngl i ng of a l at er day di d not avai l atonce t o gi ve new l i f e to Roman t hought was t hat t he r aces whi ch



swept down f r om t he nort h were bar bari ans. I t was no morepossi bl e that t hey shoul d spr i ng t o the hei ght s of cl assi calcul t ur e t han i t woul d, f or exampl e, be possi bl e i n t wo or t hr eegener at i ons t o pr oduce a racer f r oma st ock of dr aught horses.Evol ut i on does not proceed by such vaul t s as t hi s woul d i mpl y.Cel t , Got h, Hun, and Sl av must under go progr essi ve devel opmentf or many generat i ons bef ore t he popul at i on of nor t hern Eur ope cancatch st ep wi t h t he cl assi cal Gr eek and pr epare t o march f orward.

That , perhaps, i s one r eason why we come t o a per i od of st asi s orr et r ogr essi on when t he t i me of cl assi cal act i vi t y i s over . But ,at best , i t i s onl y one r eason of sever al .

The i nf l uence of t he barbar i an nat i ons wi l l cl ai m f ur t herat t ent i on as we pr oceed. But now, f or t he moment , we must t urnour eyes i n t he ot her di r ect i on and gi ve at t ent i on t o cer t ai nphases of Gr eek and of Or i ent al t hought whi ch were dest i ned t opl ay a most i mpor t ant par t i n t he devel opment of t he West ernmi nd- - a more i mport ant part , i ndeed, i n t he earl y medi aevalper i od t han t hat pl ayed by those i mport ant i nduct i ons of sci encewhi ch have chi ef l y cl ai med our at t ent i on i n r ecent chapt er s. The

subj ect i n quest i on i s t he ol d f ami l i ar one of f al se i nduct i onsor pseudosci ence. I n deal i ng wi t h t he ear l y devel opment of t hought and wi t h Or i ent al sci ence, we had occasi on t o emphasi zet he f act t hat such f al se i nduct i ons l ed ever ywher e to t hepr eval ence of super st i t i on. I n deal i ng wi t h Gr eek sci ence, wehave l ar gel y i gnor ed t hi s subj ect, conf i ni ng at t ent i on chi ef l y tot he pr ogr essi ve phases of t hought ; but i t must not be i nf err edf r om t hi s t hat Gr eek sci ence, wi t h al l i t s secur e i nduct i ons, wasent i r el y f r ee f r om super st i t i on. On t he cont r ar y, t he most casualacquai nt ance wi t h Gr eek l i t er atur e woul d suf f i ce t o show t hei ncor r ect ness of such a supposi t i on. Tr ue, t he gr eat t hi nker s of Gr eece wer e pr obabl y f r eer f r omt hi s t hr al dom. of f al sei nduct i ons t han any of t hei r pr edecessor s. Even at a ver y ear l yday such men as Xenophanes, Empedocl es, Anaxagoras, and Pl at oat t ai ned t o a si ngul ar l y r at i onal i st i c concept i on of t heuni ver se.

We saw t hat " t he f at her of medi ci ne, " Hi ppocrat es, bani sheddemonol ogy and concei ved di sease as due t o natural causes. At asl i ght l y l at er day t he sophi st s chal l enged al l knowl edge, andPyr r honi sm became a synonymf or scept i ci sm i n r ecogni t i on of t hel eader shi p of a mast er doubt er . The ent i r e school of Al exandr i ansmust have been rel at i vel y f r ee f r om super st i t i on, el se they coul dnot have r easoned wi t h such ef f ect i ve l ogi cal i t y f r om t hei robser vat i ons of nat ur e. I t i s al most i nconcei vabl e t hat men l i keEucl i d and Ar chi medes, and Ar i st archus and Erat ost henes, andHi pparchus and Hero, coul d have been t he vi ct i ms of such

i l l usi ons r egar di ng occul t f or ces of nat ur e as wer e const ant l ypost ul at ed by Or i ent al sci ence. Her ophi l us and Er asi st r at us andGal en woul d hardl y have pur sued t hei r anatomi cal st udi es wi t hequani mi t y had t hey bel i eved t hat ghost l y appari t i ons watchedover l i vi ng and dead al i ke, and exer ci sed at wi l l a mal i gni nf l uence.

Doubt l ess t he Egypt i an of t he per i od consi dered t he work, of t hePtol emai c anat omi st s an unspeakabl e pr of anat i on, and, i ndeed, i twas not hi ng l ess t han r evol ut i onar y- - so revol ut i onar y t hat i t



coul d not be sust ai ned i n subsequent gener at i ons. We have seent hat t he gr eat Gal en, at Rome, f i ve cent ur i es af t er t he t i me of Her ophi l us, was prohi bi t ed f r omdi ssect i ng t he human subj ect . Thef act speaks vol umes f or t he at t i t ude of t he Roman mi nd t owardssci ence. Vast audi ences made up of ever y st r at um of soci et yt hr onged t he amphi t heatr e, and watched exul t i ngl y whi l e man sl ewhi s f el l ow- man i n si ngl e or i n mul t i pl e combat . Shout s of f r enzi ed j oy bur st f r oma hundr ed thousand thr oat s when t hedeat h- st r oke was gi ven t o a new vi ct i m. The bodi es of t he sl ai n,by scores, even by hundr eds, wer e dr agged rut hl essl y f r omt hearena and hur l ed i nt o a di t ch as cont empt uousl y as i f pi t y wer eyet unbor n and human l i f e the merest baubl e. Yet t he same eyest hat wi t nessed t hese scenes wi t h ecst at i c appr oval woul d havebeen aver t ed i n pi ous hor r or had an anat omi st dar ed t o appr oachone of t he mut i l at ed bodi es wi t h t he scal pel of sci ence. I t wasspor t t o see t he bl ade of t he gl adi at or ent er t he qui ver i ng,l i vi ng f l esh of hi s f el l ow- gl adi at or ; i t was j oy t o see t he war mbl ood spur t f or t h f r om t he wri t hi ng vi cti m whi l e he sti l l l i ved;but i t wer e sacr i l egi ous t o appr oach t hat body wi t h the kni f e of t he anat omi st , once i t had ceased t o pul sat e wi t h l i f e. Li f e

i t sel f was hel d ut t er l y i n cont empt , but about t he real m of deat hhover ed the t hr eat eni ng ghost s of super st i t i on. And such, be i tunders t ood, was t he at t i t ude of t he Roman popul ace i n the earl yand the most br i l l i ant epoch of t he empi r e, bef ore t he West er nworl d came under t he i nf l uence of t hat Or i ent al phi l osophy whi chwas pr esent l y t o encompass i t .

I n t hi s r egar d t he Al exandr i an wor l d was, as j ust i nt i mat ed, f armor e advanced t han t he Roman, yet even there we must suppose t hatt he l eader s of t hought were wi del y at var i ance wi t h the popul arconcept i ons. A f ew i l l ust r at i ons, dr awn f r om Gr eek l i t er at ur e atvar i ous ages, wi l l suggest t he popul ar at t i t ude. I n t he f i r sti nst ance, consi der t he poems of Homer and of Hesi od. For t hesewr i t er s, and doubt l ess f or t he vast maj or i t y of t hei r r eader s,not merel y of t hei r own but of many subsequent generat i ons, t hewor l d i s peopl ed wi t h a mul t i t ude of i nvi si bl e appar i t i ons,whi ch, under t i t l e of gods, ar e hel d t o domi nat e t he af f ai r s of man. I t i s somet i mes di f f i cul t t o di scr i mi nat e as t o wher e t heGr eek i magi nat i on dr ew t he l i ne between f act and al l egory; norneed we at t empt t o anal yse t he ear l y poet i c nar r at i ves t o thi send. I t wi l l bet t er ser ve our pr esent pur pose t o ci t e t hr ee orf our i nst ances whi ch i l l ust r at e t he t angi bi l i t y of bel i ef s basedupon pseudosci ent i f i c i nduct i ons.

Let us ci t e, f or exampl e, t he account whi ch Herodot us gi ves us of t he act i ons of t he Gr eeks at Pl at aea, when thei r ar my conf r ont edt he r emnant of t he army of Xerxes, i n the year 479 B. C. Here we

see each si de hesi t at i ng to at t ack t he ot her , mer el y because theoracl e had decl ar ed t hat whi chever si de st r uck t he f i r st bl owwoul d l ose t he conf l i ct . Even af t er t he Per si an sol di er s, whoseemi ngl y were a j ot l ess superst i t i ous or a shade more i mpat i entt han thei r opponent s, had begun the at t ack, we ar e tol d that t heGr eeks dar ed not r espond at f i r st , t hough t hey wer e f al l i ngbef or e t he j avel i ns of t he enemy, because, f or sooth, t he ent r ai l sof a f owl di d not pr esent an auspi ci ous appear ance. And t hesewere Gr eeks of t he same gener at i on wi t h Empedocl es and Anaxagor asand aeschyl us; of t he same epoch wi t h Per i cl es and Sophocl es and



Eur i pi des and Phi di as. Such was t he sci ent i f i c st at us of t heaverage mi nd- - nay, of t he best mi nds- - wi t h her e and t her e a r areexcept i on, i n t he gol den age of Gr eci an cul t ur e.

Were we t o f ol l ow down the pages of Gr eek hi st ory, we shoul d butr epeat t he same st ory over and over . We shoul d, f or exampl e, seeAl exander t he Gr eat bal ked at t he banks of t he Hyphasi s, andf orced t o tur n back because of i nauspi ci ous augur i es based asbef or e upon t he di ssect i on of a f owl . Al exander hi msel f , t o besur e, woul d have scor ned t he augur y; had he been t he prey of suchpet t y superst i t i ons he woul d never have conquered Asi a. We knowhow he compel l ed t he or acl e at Del phi t o yi el d t o hi s wi shes; howhe cut t he Gordi an knot ; how he made hi s domi nat i ng per sonal i t yf el t at t he t empl e of Ammon i n Egypt . We know, i n a word, t hat heyi el ded t o super st i t i ons onl y i n so f ar as t hey ser ved hi spur pose. Lef t t o hi s own devi ces, he woul d not have consul t ed anoracl e at t he banks of t he Hyphasi s; or, consul t i ng, woul d havef or ced f r omt he or acl e a f avor abl e answer . But hi s subor di nat eswere mut i nous and he had no choi ce. Suf f i ce i t f or our pr esentpur pose t hat t he or acl e was consul t ed, and that i t s answer t ur ned

t he conqueror back.

One or t wo i nst ances f r om Roman hi st ory may compl ete t he pi ct ure.Passi ng over al l t hose mythi cal nar r at i ves whi ch vi r t ual l yconst i t ut e the ear l y hi st ory of Rome, as pr eser ved t o us by suchhi st or i ans as Li vy and Di onysi us, we f i nd so l ogi cal an hi st or i anas Taci t us r ecor di ng a mi r acul ous achi evement of Vespasi anwi t hout adver se comment . "Dur i ng t he mont hs when Vespasi an waswai t i ng at Al exandr i a f or t he per i odi cal season of t he summerwi nds, and a saf e navi gat i on, many mi r acl es occur r ed by whi ch thef avor of Heaven and a sort of bi as i n t he powers above t owardsVespasi an wer e mani f est ed. " Taci t us t hen descr i bes i n det ai l t hecur e of var i ous mal adi es by the emper or, and rel ates t hat t heemper or on vi si t i ng a t empl e was met t her e, i n t he spi r i t , by apromi nent Egypt i an who was pr oved to be at t he same t i me someei ght y mi l es di st ant f r om Al exandr i a.

I t must be admi t t ed t hat Taci t us, i n r el at i ng t hat Vespasi ancaused t he bl i nd t o see and t he l ame t o wal k, qual i f i es hi snar r at i ve by asser t i ng t hat "per sons who ar e pr esent at t est t het r ut h of t he t r ansact i on when t her e i s not hi ng t o be gai ned byf al sehood. " Nor must we over l ook t he f act t hat a si mi l ar bel i ef i n t he power of r oyal t y has persi st ed al most t o our own day. Butno such savor of scept i ci sm at t aches t o a nar r at i ve whi ch Di onCassi us gi ves us of an i nci dent i n t he l i f e of Mar cusAur el i us- - an i nci dent t hat has become f amous as t he epi sode of

The Thunder i ng Legi on. Xi phi l i nus has preser ved t he account of

Di on, addi ng cer t ai n pi ct ur esque i nt er pr et at i ons of hi s own. Theor i gi nal nar r at i ve, as ci t ed, asser t s t hat dur i ng one of t henor t her n campai gns of Marcus Aurel i us, t he emper or and hi s ar mywere sur r ounded by t he host i l e Quadi , who had every advantage of posi t i on and who pr esent l y ceased host i l i t i es i n the hope thatheat and t hi r st woul d del i ver t hei r adver sar i es i nt o t hei r handswi t hout t he t r oubl e of f ur t her f i ght i ng. "Now, " says Di on, "whi l et he Romans, unabl e ei t her t o combat or t o ret r eat , and reduced t ot he l ast extr emi t y by wounds, f at i gue, heat , and t hi r st , wer est andi ng hel pl essl y at t hei r post s, cl ouds suddenl y gat her ed i n



gr eat number and r ai n descended i n f l oods- - cer t ai nl y not wi t houtdi vi ne i nt er vent i on, si nce t he Egypt i an Maege Ar nul phi s, who waswi t h Mar cus Ant oni nus, i s sai d t o have i nvoked sever al geni i byt he aer i al mercury by enchant ment , and t hus t hrough t hem hadbrought down rai n. "

Her e, i t wi l l be obser ved, a super nat ur al expl anat i on i s gi ven of a natural phenomenon. But t he narr ator does not st op wi t h t hi s.I f we ar e t o accept t he account of Xi phi l i nus, Di on br i ngsf or war d some st r i ki ng pr oof s of di vi ne i nt er f er ence. Xi phi l i nusgi ves t hese pr oof s i n t he f ol l owi ng r emar kabl e paragr aph:

"Di on adds t hat when t he r ai n began t o f al l ever y sol di er l i f t edhi s head t owards heaven t o recei ve the water i n hi s mout h; butaf t er war ds other s hol d out t hei r shi el ds or t hei r hel met s t ocat ch t he wat er f or t hemsel ves and f or t hei r horses. Bei ng setupon by the bar bar i ans . . . whi l e occupi ed i n dr i nki ng, t heywoul d have been ser i ousl y i ncommoded had not heavy hai l andnumer ous t hunderbol t s t hr own const er nat i on i nt o t he ranks of t heenemy. Fi r e and water were seen t o mi ngl e as t hey l ef t t he

heavens. The f i r e, however , di d not r each t he Romans, but i f i tdi d by chance touch one of t hemi t was i mmedi atel y ext i ngui shed,whi l e at t he same t i me t he r ai n, i nst ead of comf ort i ng t hebar bar i ans, seemed mer el y to exci t e l i ke oi l t he f i r e wi t h whi cht hey were bei ng consumed. Some bar bar i ans i nf l i ct ed wounds upont hemsel ves as t hough thei r bl ood had power t o ext i ngui sh f l ames,whi l e many r ushed over t o t he si de of t he Romans, hopi ng t hatt her e water mi ght save them. "

We cannot bet t er compl et e t hese i l l ust r at i ons of pagan cr edul i t yt han by addi ng t he comment of Xi phi l i nus hi msel f . That wr i t er wasa Chr i st i an, l i vi ng some gener at i ons l ater t han Di on. He nevert hought of quest i oni ng t he f act s, but he f el t t hat Di on' si nt er pr et at i on of t hese f act s must not go unchal l enged. As hei nt erpr ets t he matt er , i t was no pagan magi ci an t hat wr ought t hemi r acl e. He even i ncl i nes t o the bel i ef t hat Di on hi msel f wasawar e t hat Chr i st i an i nt er f er ence, and not t hat of an Egypt i an,saved the day. "Di on knew, " he decl ar es, " t hat t her e exi st ed al egi on cal l ed The Thunder i ng Legi on, whi ch name was gi ven i t f orno other r eason t han f or what came t o pass i n thi s war , " and thatt hi s l egi on was composed of sol di ers f r omMi l i t ene who wer e al lpr of essed Chr i st i ans. "Dur i ng t he bat t l e, " cont i nues Xi phi l i nus," t he chi ef of t he Pret oni ans , had set at Marcus Ant oni nus, whowas i n gr eat perpl exi t y at t he tur n event s wer e t aki ng,r epr esent i ng t o hi m t hat t her e was not hi ng t he peopl e cal l edChr i st i ans coul d not obt ai n by thei r pr ayer s, and t hat among hi sf or ces was a t r oop composed whol l y of f ol l ower s of t hat r el i gi on.

Rej oi ced at t hi s news, Marcus Antoni nus demanded of t hesesol di er s t hat t hey shoul d pr ay t o t hei r god, who gr ant ed t hei rpet i t i on on t he i nst ant , sent l i ghtni ng among t he enemy andconsol ed t he Romans wi t h r ai n. St r uck by thi s wonderf ul success,t he emperor honored t he Chr i st i ans i n an edi ct and named t hei rl egi on The Thunder i ng. I t i s even asser t ed t hat a l et t er exi st edby Marcus Antoni nus on t hi s subj ect . The pagans wel l knew t hatt he company was cal l ed The Thunder ers, havi ng at t est ed t he f actt hemsel ves, but t hey r eveal ed nothi ng of t he occasi on on whi cht he l eader r ecei ved t he name. " [ 1]



Pecul i ar i nt er est att aches to thi s nar r at i ve as i l l ust r at i ng bot hcr edul ousness as to mat t er s of f act and pseudosci ent i f i cexpl anat i on of al l eged f acts. The modern i nt erpr eter may supposet hat a vi ol ent t hunder st orm came up dur i ng t he cour se of a bat t l ebet ween t he Romans and t he so- cal l ed bar bar i ans, and t hat owi ngt o t he l ocal char act er of t he st orm, or a chance di schar ge of l i ght ni ng, t he bar bari ans suf f er ed more t han t hei r opponent s. Wemay wel l quest i on whet her t he phi l osophi cal emperor hi msel f putany ot her i nt er pr et at i on t han t hi s upon t he i nci dent . But , on t heother hand, we need not doubt t hat t he maj or par t of hi s sol di erswoul d ver y readi l y accept such an expl anat i on as t hat gi ven byDi on Cassi us, j ust as most r eader s of a f ew cent ur i es l at er woul daccept t he expl anat i on of Xi phi l i nus. I t i s wel l t o bear t hi st hought i n mi nd i n consi der i ng the st at i c per i od of sci ence uponwhi ch we ar e enteri ng. We shal l perhaps best underst and thi sper i od, and i t s seemi ng r et r ogr essi ons, i f we suppose that t heaverage man of t he Mi ddl e Ages was no mor e cr edul ous, no mor esuper st i t i ous, t han t he aver age Roman of an ear l i er peri od ort han t he aver age Gr eek; t hough the pr eci se compl exi on of hi s

cr edul i t y had changed under t he i nf l uence of Or i ent al i deas, aswe have j ust seen i l l ust r at ed by t he nar r at i ve of Xi phi l i nus.

APPENDI X

REFERENCE LI ST, NOTES, AND BI BLI OGRAPHI ES

CHAPTER I . PREHI STORI C SCI ENCE

Lengt h of t he Pr ehi st or i c Per i od. - - I t i s of cour se qui t ei mpossi bl e to r educe t he pr ehi st or i c per i od to any def i ni t enumber of years. There are, however , numerous bi t s of evi dencet hat enabl e an ant hr opol ogi st t o make rough est i mates as t o ther el at i ve l engt hs of t he di f f er ent per i ods i nt o whi ch pr ehi st or i ct i me i s di vi ded. Gabr i el de Mort i l l et , one of t he mosti ndust r i ous st udent s of pr ehi st or i c ar chaeol ogy, vent ur ed t o gi vea t ent at i ve est i mat e as t o t he number s of year s i nvol ved i n eachper i od. He of cour se cl ai med f or t hi s not hi ng more t han t he val ueof a sci ent i f i c guess. I t i s, however , a guess based on a ver ycar ef ul st udy of al l dat a at pr esent avai l abl e. Mor t i l l et di vi dest he pr ehi st or i c per i od, as a whol e, i nt o f our epochs. The f i r stof t hese i s t he pr egl aci al , whi ch he est i mat es as compr i si ngsevent y- ei ght t housand year s; t he second i s t he gl aci al , cover i ng

one hundred t housand years; t hen f ol l ows what he t erms t heSol ut r een, whi ch number s el even t housand years; and, f i nal l y, t heMagdal eni en, compr i si ng t hi r t y- t hr ee t housand years. Thi s gi ves,f or t he pr ehi st or i c per i od pr oper , a t er m of about t wo hundr edand twent y- t wo t housand year s. Add t o t hi s per haps t wel vet housand year s usher i ng i n t he ci vi l i zat i on of Egypt , and t he si xt housand year s of st abl e, sur e chr onol ogy of t he hi st ori calper i od, and we have somet hi ng l i ke t wo hundred and t hi r t yt housand or t wo hundr ed and f or t y t housand years as t he age of man.



"These f i gur es, " says Mor t i l l et , "are cer t ai nl y not exagger at ed.I t i s even pr obabl e t hat t hey ar e bel ow t he t r ut h. Const ant l y newdi scover i es ar e bei ng made that t end to remove f art her back thedat e of man' s appear ance. " We see, t hen, accor di ng t o thi sest i mate, t hat about a quar t er of a mi l l i on year s have el apsedsi nce man evol ved to a st ate t hat coul d pr operl y be cal l ed human.

Thi s guess i s as good as anot her , and i t may advant ageousl y bekept i n mi nd, as i t wi l l enabl e us al l al ong t o under st and bet t ert han we mi ght ot her wi se be abl e t o do t he t r emendous f orce of cer t ai n pr ej udi ces and pr econcept i ons whi ch recent man i nher i t edf r om hi s pr ehi st or i c ancest or . I deas whi ch had passed cur r ent asunquest i oned t r ut hs f or one hundr ed t housand years or so are noteasi l y cast asi de.

I n goi ng back, i n i magi nat i on, t o the begi nni ng of t hepr ehi st or i c per i od, we must of cour se r ef l ect , i n accor dance wi t hmodern i deas on the subj ect , t hat t here was no year , nomi l l enni um even, when i t coul d be sai d expr essl y: "Thi s bei ng washi t hert o a pr i mate, he i s now a man. " The t r ansi t i on per i od must

have been enormousl y l ong, and t he changes f r om gener at i on t ogenerat i on, even f r om cent ur y to cent ur y, must have been ver ysl i ght . I n speaki ng of t he ext ent of t he age of man t hi s must beborne i n mi nd: i t must be r ecal l ed t hat , even i f t he per i od wer enot vague f or ot her r easons, t he vagueness of i t s begi nni ng mustmake i t i ndetermi nate.

Bi bl i ogr aphi cal Not es. - - A gr eat mass of l i t er at ur e has beenpr oduced i n r ecent year s deal i ng wi t h var i ous phases of t hehi st ory of pr ehi st ori c man. No si ngl e work known t o t he wr i t erdeal s compr ehensi vel y wi t h t he sci ent i f i c at t ai nment s of ear l yman; i ndeed, t he subj ect i s usual l y i gnored, except wher epr act i cal phases of t he mechani cal ar t s are i n quest i on. But of cour se any at t empt t o consi der t he condi t i on of pr i mi t i ve mant al i es i nt o account , by i nf er ence at l east , hi s knowl edge andat t ai nment s. Theref ore, most works on ant hr opol ogy, ethnol ogy,and pr i mi t i ve cul t ure may be expect ed t o throw some l i ght on ourpresent subj ect . Works deal i ng wi t h t he soci al and ment alcondi t i ons of exi st i ng savages ar e al so of i mpor t ance, si nce i ti s now an accept ed bel i ef t hat t he ancest or s of ci vi l i zed r acesevol ved al ong si mi l ar l i nes and passed t hr ough cor r espondi ngst ages of nascent cul t ur e. Her ber t Spencer ' s Descr i pt i veSoci ol ogy pr esent s an unequal l ed mass of f act s r egar di ng exi st i ngpr i mi t i ve r aces, but , unf or t unat el y, i t s i nar t i st i c met hod of arr angement makes i t r epel l ent t o t he gener al r eader . E. B.

Tyl er ' s Pr i mi t i ve Cul t ure and Ant hropol ogy; Lor d Avebur y' sPr ehi st or i c Ti mes, The Or i gi n of Ci vi l i zat i on, and The Pr i mi t i ve

Condi t i on of Man; W. Boyd Dawki n' s Cave- Hunt i ng and Ear l y Man i nBr i t ai n; and Edward Cl odd' s Chi l dhood of t he Wor l d and St ory of Pri mi t i ve Man ar e deser vedl y popul ar . Paul Topi nard' s El ement sd' Anthropol ogi e General e i s one of t he best - known and mostcomprehensi ve French works on t he t echni cal phases of ant hr opol ogy; but Mort i l l et ' s Le Pr ehi st or i que has a mor e popul ari nt er est , owi ng t o i t s chapt er s on pr i mi t i ve i ndust r i es, t hought hi s work al so cont ai ns much t hat i s r ather t echni cal . Amongper i odi cal s, t he Revue de l ' Ecol e d' Ant hr opol ogi e de Par i s,publ i shed by t he pr of essors, t r eat s of al l phases of



ant hr opol ogy, and t he Amer i can Ant hr opol ogi st , edi t ed by F. W.Hodge f or t he Amer i can Ant hr opol ogi cal Associ at i on, and i nt endedas "a medi umof communi cat i on bet ween st udent s of al l branches of ant hr opol ogy, " cont ai ns much t hat i s of i nt er est f r om t he pr esentst andpoi nt . The l ast - named j our nal devot es a good deal of spacet o I ndi an l anguages.

CHAPTER I I . EGYPTI AN SCI ENCE

1 (p. 34) . Si r J . Norman Lockyer , The Dawn of Ast r onomy; a st udyof t he t empl e worshi p and myt hol ogy of t he anci ent Egypt i ans,London, 1894.

2 (p. 43) . G. Masper o, Hi st oi r e Anci e- nne des Peupl es de l ' Or i entCl assi que, Par i s, 1895. Transl at ed as ( 1) The Dawn of Ci vi l i zat i on, ( 2) The St r uggl e of t he Nat i ons, ( 3) The Passi ng of t he Empi r es, 3 vol s. , London and New Yor k, 1894- 1900. Prof essorMasper o i s one of t he most f amous of l i vi ng Or i ent al i st s. Hi smost i mpor t ant speci al st udi es have t o do wi t h Egypt ol ogy, but

hi s wr i t i ngs cover t he ent i r e f i el d of Or i ent al ant i qui t y. He i sa notabl e st yl i st , and hi s works are at once r eadabl e andaut hor i t at i ve.

3 ( p. 44) . Adol f Er man, Li f e i n Anci ent Egypt , London, 1894, p.352. ( Transl at ed f r omt he ori gi nal Ger man work ent i t l ed Aegypt enund aegypt i sches Leben i n Al t ert hum, Ti l bi gen, 1887. ) Anal t oget her admi r abl e wor k, f ul l of i nt er est f or t he gener alr eader , t hough based on the most erudi t e st udi es.

4 ( p. 47) . Er man, op. ci t . , pp. 356, 357.

5 ( p. 48) . Er man, op. ci t . , p. 357. The work on Egypt i an medi ci neher e ref er r ed t o i s Georg Eber s' edi t i on of an Egypt i an documentdi scover ed by t he expl orer whose name i t bear s. I t r emai ns t hemost i mpor t ant source of our knowl edge of Egypt i an medi ci ne. Asment i oned i n t he t ext , t hi s document dates f r omt he ei ght eent hdynast y- - t hat i s t o say, f r om about t he f i f t eent h or si xt eent hcent ur y, B. C. , a r el at i vel y l at e per i od of Egypt i an hi st or y.

6 ( p. 49) . Er man, op. ci t . , p. 357.

7 (p. 50) . The Hi st ory of Her odot us, pp. 85- 90. Ther e ar enumerous t r ansl at i ons of t he f amous work of t he " f ather of hi st or y, " one of t he most r ecent and aut hor i t at i ve bei ng t hat of G. C. Macaul ay, M. A. , i n t wo vol umes, Macmi l l an & Co. , London andNew Yor k, 1890.

8 ( p. 50) . The Hi st or i cal Li br ar y of Di odor us t he Si ci l i an,London, 1700. Thi s most f amous of anci ent worl d hi st ori es i sdi f f i cul t t o obt ai n i n an Engl i sh ver si on. The most r ecent l ypubl i shed t r ansl at i on known t o the wr i t er i s t hat of G. Boot h,London, 1814.

9 ( p. 51) . Er man, op. ci t . , p. 357.

10 ( p. 52) . The Papyrus Rhi nd i s a sort of mathemat i cal hand- book



of t he anci ent Egypt i ans; i t was made i n t he t i me of t he HyksosKi ngs ( about 2000 B. C. ) , but i s a copy of an ol der book. I t i snow preserved i n t he Br i t i sh Museum.

The most accessi bl e r ecent sour ces of i nf or mat i on as t o t hesoci al condi t i ons of t he anci ent Egypt i ans are t he wor ks of Maspero and Erman, above ment i oned; and t he var i ous publ i cat i onsof W. M. Fl i nders Pet r i e, The Pyrami ds and Templ es of Gi zeh,London, 1883; Tani s I . , London, 1885; Tani s H. , Nebesheh, andDef e- nnel , London, 1887; Ten Year s' Di ggi ngs, London, 1892; Syr i aand Egypt f r om t he Tel - el - Amar - na Let t er s, London, 1898, et c. Thevar i ous wor ks of Pr of essor Pet r i e, r ecor di ng hi s expl or at i onsf romyear t o year, gi ve t he f ul l est avai l abl e i nsi ght i nt oEgypt i an archaeol ogy.

CHAPTER I I I . SCI ENCE OF BABYLONI A AND ASSYRI A

1 (p. 57) . The Medes. Some di f f erence of opi ni on exi st s amonghi st or i ans as t o t he exact et hni c rel at i ons of t he conquer or s;t he pr eci se dat e of t he f al l of Ni neveh i s al so i n doubt .

2 ( p. 57) . Dar i us. The f ami l i ar Hebr ew nar r at i ve ascr i bes t hef i r st Per si an conquest of Babyl on t o Dar i us, but i nscri pt i ons of Cyrus and of Naboni dus, t he Babyl oni an ki ng, make i t cert ai n t hatCyrus was t he real conqueror . These i nscr i pt i ons are pr eserved oncyl i nder s of baked cl ay, of t he t ype made f ami l i ar by t heexcavat i on of t he past f i f t y year s, and t hey ar e i nval uabl ehi st or i cal document s.

3 ( p. 58) . Berosus. The f r agment s of Berosus have been t r ansl atedby L. P. Cory, and i ncl uded i n hi s Anci ent Fragment s of Pheni ci an, Chal dean, Egypt i an, and Ot her Wr i t ers , London, 1826,second edi t i on, 1832.

4 (p. 58) . Chal dean l ear ni ng. Recent wr i t er s r eserve t he nameChal dean f or t he l at er per i od of Babyl oni an hi st ory- - t he t i mewhen t he Gr eeks came i n cont act wi t h the Mesopot ami ans- - i ncont r adi st i nct i on t o t he ear l i er per i ods whi ch ar e reveal ed t o usby t he ar chaeol ogi cal r ecords.

5 ( p. 59) Ki ng Sar gon of Agade. The dat e gi ven f or t hi s ear l yki ng must not be accept ed as absol ut e; but i t i s probabl yappr oxi mat el y corr ect .

6 (p. 59) . Ni ppur . See the account of t he ear l y expedi t i ons asr ecor ded by t he di r ect or , Dr . J ohn P. Pet er s, Ni ppur , orexpl orat i ons and advent ur es, etc. , New Yor k and London, 1897.

7 ( p. 62) . Fr i t z Hommel , Geschi cht e Babyl oni ens und Assyr i ens,Ber l i n, 1885.

8 ( p. 63) . R. Campbel l Thompson, Report s of t he Magi ci ans andAst r ol ogers of Ni neveh and Babyl on, London, 1900, p. xi x.

9 (p. 64) . Geor ge Smi t h, The Assyr i an Canon, p. 21.

10 ( p. 64) . Thompson, op. ci t . , p. xi x.



11 ( p. 65) . Thompson, op. ci t . , p. 2.

12 ( p. 67) . Thompson, op. ci t . , p. xvi .

13 ( p. 68) . Sext us Empi r i cus, aut hor of Adver sus Mathemat i cos,l i ved about 200 A. D.

14 ( p. 68) . R. Campbel l Thompson, op. ci t . , p. xxi v.

15 ( p. 72) . Recor ds of t he Past ( edi t or , Samuel Bi r ch) , Vol .I I I . , p. 139.

16 ( p. 72) . I bi d. , Vol . V. , p. 16.

17 ( p. 72) . Quot ed i n Recor ds of t he Past , Vol . I I I . , p. 143,f r om t he Tr ansl at i ons of t he Soci et y of Bi bl i cal Ar cheol ogy, vol .I I . , p. 58.

18 ( p. 73) . Recor ds of t he Past , vol . L, p. 131.

19 ( p. 73) . I bi d. , vol . V. , p. 171.

20 ( p. 74) . I bi d. , vol . V. , p. 169.

21 ( p. 74) . J oachi m Menant , La Bi bl i ot heque du Pal ai s de Ni ni ve,Par i s, 188o.

22 ( p. 76) . Code of Khamur abi . Thi s f amous i nscr i pt i on i s on abl ock of bl ack di or i t e near l y ei ght f eet i n hei ght . I t wasdi scovered at Susa by the Fr ench expedi t i on under M. de Morgan,i n December, 1902. We quot e t he t r ansl at i on gi ven i n TheHi st or i ans' Hi st or y of t he Wor l d, edi t ed by Henr y Smi t h Wi l l i ams,London and New Yor k, 1904, Vol . I , p. 510.

23 ( p. 77) . The Hi st or i cal Li br ar y of Di odor us Si cul us, p. 519.

24 ( p. 82) . George S. Goodspeed, Ph. D. , Hi st ory of t heBabyl oni ans and Assyr i ans, New Yor k, 1902.

25 (p. 82) . George Rawl i nson, Gr eat Or i ent al Monarchi es, ( secondedi t i on, London, 1871) , Vol . I I I . , pp. 75 f f .

Of t he books ment i oned above, t hat of Hommel i s par t i cul ar l y f ul li n r ef erence t o cul t ur e devel opment ; Goodspeed' s smal l vol umegi ves an excel l ent condensed account ; t he or i gi nal document s ast r ansl at ed i n t he var i ous vol umes of Recor ds of t he Past ar e f ul l

of i nt er est ; and Menant ' s l i t t l e book i s al t oget her admi r abl e. The wor k of excavat i on i s st i l l goi ng on i n ol d Babyl oni a, andnewl y di scover ed t ext s add f r om t i me t o t i me to our knowl edge,but A. H. Layar d' s Ni neveh and i t s Remai ns ( London, 1849) st i l lhas i mport ance as a r ecor d of t he most i mpor t ant ear l ydi scover i es. The gener al hi st or i es of Ant i qui t y of Duncker ,Lenormant , Maspero, and Meyer gi ve f ul l t r eat ment of Babyl oni anand Assyr i an devel opment . Speci al hi st ori es of Babyl oni a andAssyri a, i n addi t i on to t hese named above, ar e Ti el e' sBabyl oni sch- Assyr i sche Geschi cht e ( Zwei Ti el e, Gotha, 1886- 1888) ;



Wi nckl er ' s Geschi cht e Babyl oni ens und Assyr i ens ( Ber l i n,1885- 1888) , and Rogers' Hi st ory of Babyl oni a and Assyr i a, New

Yor k and London, 1900, t he l ast of whi ch, however , deal s al mostexcl usi vel y wi t h pol i t i cal hi st or y. Cer t ai n phases of sci ence,par t i cul ar l y wi t h r ef er ence t o chr onol ogy and cosmol ogy, aret r eat ed by Edward Meyer ( Geschi cht e des Al t ert hum, Vol . I . ,St ut t gar t , 1884) , and by P. J ensen ( Di e Kosmol ogi e derBabyl oni er , St r assbur g, 1890) , but no compr ehensi ve speci f i ct r eat ment of t he subj ect i n i t s ent i r et y has yet been at t empt ed.

CHAPTER I V. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE ALPHABET

1 (p. 87) . Vi comt e E. de Rouge, Memoi r e sur l ' Or i gi ne Egypt i ennede l ' Al phabet Phi ni ci en, Par i s, 1874.

2 ( p. 88) . See the var i ous publ i cat i ons of Mr . Ar t hur Evans.

3 ( p. 80) . Azt ec and Maya wr i t i ng. These pi ct ogr aphs ar e st i l l i nt he mai n undeci pher abl e, and opi ni ons di f f er as t o the exactst age of devel opment whi ch they repr esent .

4 (p. 90) . E. A. Wal l ace Budge' s Fi r st St eps i n Egypt i an, London,1895, i s an excel l ent el ement ary work on the Egypt i an wr i t i ng.Prof essor Erman' s Egypt i an Gr ammar , London, 1894, i s t he work of per haps t he f or emost l i vi ng Egypt ol ogi st .

5 ( P. 93) . Extant exampl es of Babyl oni an and Assyr i an wr i t i nggi ve opport uni t y to compare earl i er and l at er syst ems, so thef act of evol ut i on f r om t he pi ctori al t o t he phonet i c syst em r est son somet hi ng mor e t han mer e t heory.

6 (p. 96) . Fri edr i ch Del i t zsch, Assyr i schc Lesest ucke mi tgr ammat i schen Tabel l en und vol l st dndi gemGl ossar ei nf i i hr ung i ndi e assyr i sche und babyl oni sche Kei l schr i f t - l i t t er at ur bi s hi nauf zu Hammurabi , Lei pzi g, 1900.

7 (p. 97) . I t does not appear t hat t he Babyl oni ans t hcmsel vesever gave up t he ol d syst em of wr i t i ng, so l ong as t hey ret ai nedpol i t i cal aut onomy.

8 ( p. 101) . See I saac Tayl or ' s Hi st or y of t he Al phabet ; anAccount of t he or i gi n and Devel opment of Let t er s, new edi t i on, 2vol s. , London, 1899.

For f acsi mi l es of t he var i ous scr i pt s, see Henr y Smi t h Wi l l i ams'Hi st ory of t he Ar t Of Wr i t i ng, 4 vol s, New Yor k and London,1902- 1903.

CHAPTER V. THE BEGI NNI NGS OF GREEK SCI ENCE

1 ( p. I I I ) . Anaxi mander , as r ecor ded by Pl ut ar ch, vol . VI I I - . SeeAr t hur Fai r banks' Fi r st Phi l osopher s of Gr eece: an Edi t i on and

Tr ansl at i on of t he Remai ni ng Fr agments of t he Pr e- Socr at i cPhi l osophers, t oget her wi t h a Transl at i on of t he more I mport antAccount s of t hei r Opi ni ons Cont ai ned i n the Ear l y Epi t omcs of t hei r Works, London, 1898. Thi s hi ghl y schol ar l y and ext r emel yusef ul book cont ai ns t he Gr eek t ext as wel l as t r ansl at i ons.



CHAPTER VI . THE EARLY GREEK PHI LOSOPHERS I N I TALY

1 ( p. 117) . Geor ge Henr y Lewes, A Bi ogr aphi cal Hi st ory of Phi l osophy f r om i t s Or i gi n i n Gr eece down t o the Pr esent Day,enl ar ged edi t i on, New Yor k, 1888, p. 17.

2 ( p. 121) . Di ogenes Laert i us, The Li ves and Opi ni ons of Emi nentPhi l osopher s, C. D. Yonge' s t r ansl at i on, London, 1853, VI I I . , p.153.

3 (p. 121) . Al exander , Successi ons of Phi l osopher s.

4 ( p. 122) . "Al l over i t s cent r e. " Presumabl y t hi s i s i nt ended t or ef er t o t he ent i r e equat or i al r egi on.

5 ( p. 125) . Laer t i us, op. ci t . , pp. 348- 351.

6 ( p. 128) . Ar t hur Fai r banks, The Fi r st Phi l osopher s of Gr eeceLondon, 1898, pp. 67- 717.

7 ( p. 129) . I bi d. , p. 838.

8 ( p. 130) . I bi d. , p. 109.

9 ( p. 130) . Hei nr i ch Ri t t er , The Hi st or y of Anci ent Phi l osophy,t r ansl at ed f r omt he Ger man by A. J . W. Morr i son, 4 vol s. , London,1838, vol , I . , p. 463.

10 ( p. 131) . I bi d. , p. 465.

11 ( p. 132) . Geor ge Henr y Lewes, op. ci t . , p. 81.

12 ( p. 135) . Fai r banks, op. ci t . , p. 201.

13 ( p. 136) . I bi d. , P. 234.

14 ( p. 137) . I bi d. , p. 189.

15 ( p. 137) . I bi d. , P. 220.

16 ( p. 138) . I bi d. , p. 189.

17 ( p. 138) . I bi d. , p. 191.

CHAPTER VI I . GREEK SCI ENCE I N THE EARLY ATTI C PERI OD

1 ( p. 150) . Theodor Gomperz, Gr eek Thi nkers : a Hi st ory of Anci entPhi l osophy ( t r ansl ated f r omt he German by Laur i e Magnes) , New

Yor k, 190 1, pp. 220, 221.

2 ( p. 153) . Ar i stotl e' s Treat i se on Respi rati on, ch. i i .

3 ( p. 159) . Fai r banks' t r ansl at i on of t he f r agment s of Anaxagoras, i n The Fi r st Phi l osopher s of Gr eece, pp. 239- 243.

CHAPTER VI I I . POST- SOCRATI C SCI ENCE AT ATHENS



1 ( p. 180) . Al f r ed Wi l l i am Ber n, The Phi l osophy of Gr eeceConsi der ed i n Rel at i on t o the Char act er and Hi st ory of i t sPeopl e, London, 1898, p. 186.

2 ( p. 183) . Ar i st ot l e, quot ed i n Wi l l i am Whewel l ' s Hi st or y of t heI nduct i ve Sci ences ( second edi t i on, London, 1847) , Vol . I I . , p.161.

CHAPTER I X. GREEK SCI ENCE OF THE ALEXANDRI AN OR HELLENI STI CPERI OD

1 ( p. 195) . Ter t ul l i an' s Apol oget i cus.

2 ( p. 205) . We quot e t he quai nt ol d t r ansl at i on of Nor t h, pr i nt edi n 1657.

CHAPTER X. SCI ENCE OF THE ROMAN PERI OD

1 (p. 258) . The Geogr aphy of St r abo, t r ansl ated by H. C. Hami l t on

and W. Fal coner , 3 vol s. , London, 1857, Vol . I , pp. 19, 20.

2 ( p. 260) . I bi d. , p. 154.

3 ( p. 263) . I bi d. , pp. 169, 170.

4 ( p. 264) I bi d. , pp. 166, 167.

5 ( p. 271) . K. 0. Mi l l er and J ohn W. Donal dson, The Hi st ory of t he Li t er at ur e of Gr eece, 3 vol s. , London, Vol . I I I . , p. 268.

7207962 stephen hawking a history of science

Documents