Leonid Zhmud The Origin of the History of Science in Classical Antiquity

Physiko¯n doxai, let alone to Oenopides’
own work.
141
Thus, the reliable doxographical tradition remains silent on his
136
Where Pythagoras and Parmenides have competing claims for discoveries in astron-
omy, Theophrastus sides with the latter (cf. D. L. VIII, 14 and 48; IX, 23 and
Dox.,
345b 14). In Aëtius the division of the heavenly sphere into zones is connected with
Thales, Pythagoras, and oî @p’ aÿtoñ (Dox., 345.7f.).
137
The first to have mentioned Oenopides along with Pythagoras was a historian He-
cataeus of Abdera (ca. 300 BC) in his work on Egypt (
FGrHist 264 F 25, 96f. =
Diod. I,96.2, cf. I,98.3). Revealingly, they are not yet connected with each other:
Pythagoras borrows from Egypt geometry and arithmetic, and Oenopides the idea
of the obliquity of the zodiac. See also the pseudo-Platonic
Rivals (Erast. 132a =
41 A 2).
138
In fact, it belonged to Philolaus (44 A 22; Burkert.
L & S, 314 n. 79) and not to Py-
thagoras.
139
Sext.
Pyrrh. hyp. III, 30 = 41 A 5, Adv. Math. IX, 361; Ps.-Galen. Hist. phil.
18 =
Dox., 610.15. Section 18 of Ps.-Galen follows a source common with Sextus
(
Dox., 246f., 249) and does not belong to the part of the compilation borrowed from
Ps.-Plutarch (sections 25–133).
140
Named here along with the early physicists are the theologian Pherecydes, the Or-
phic Onomacritus, Strato of Lampsacus, and the physician Asclepiades of Bithynia
(ca. 100 BC).
141
Fire and air make a highly unusual pair of principles, not being contrary to each

---

Chapter 7: The history of astronomy
262
natural philosophy; even the cases cited above concern astronomy, not physics.
As follows from Eudemus, Oenopides took up mathematics and astronomy; his
writing was related to these subjects and has little in common with a doctrine of
principles.
142
The only reliable fact testifying to Oenopides’ interest in physical
problems is his attempt to explain the floods of the Nile.
143
Yet it is this famous
discussion, opened by Thales, that involved – along with physicists proper – the
historians Herodotus and Ephorus, the author of the Periplus Euthymenes of
Massalia, the typical mathematician Eudoxus, and even Euripides.
144
Hence, the sum total of available evidence on Oenopides suggests that Eude-
mus and Theophrastus classified him as a
mathe¯matikos, whose doctrines did
not need to be treated in the
Physiko¯n doxai. This does not imply, of course, that
Oenopides and other mathematicians could not take an interest in physical
problems.
145
Rather, it is in the person of Oenopides, or more precisely, in his
generation, that specialization in science (which naturally accompanies its
rapid progress) was first becoming manifest. In the following generations, the
results of this growing specialization are evident in the activities of such math-
ematicians as Hippocrates, Theodorus, Meton, Euctemon, Archytas, Leoda-
mas, Theaetetus, and Eudoxus and his numerous pupils: philosophy lay either
on the periphery of their interests (as with Archytas and even more so with Eu-
doxus) or beyond its horizon.
It is worth noting that Oenopides was among the few mathematicians men-
tioned in both the
History of Astronomy and the History of Geometry. Eudemus,
referring to Oenopides’ own words, points out the connection between his geo-
metrical and astronomical studies.
146
To all appearances, Eudemus was quite
familiar with Oenopides’ treatise on mathematical astronomy, whose traces
disappear soon after the fourth century BC. Apart from the tradition concerning
other. None of the Presocratics ever suggested such a combination. The principles of
the Stoics were the four elements, active fire and air and passive water and earth.
142
To believe Achilles, whose information goes back to Posidonius (
Dox., 230), the ex-
planation of the Milky Way as the former path of the sun was one of such subjects
(41 A 10).
143
Oenopides’ theory is mentioned (without reference to his name) in Aristotle’s