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

part at least, to go back to Theodorus’ book.
33
If the evidence that Theodorus
executed a sculptural ‘self-portrait’ (
HN 34, 83) is true, we are justified in com-
paring this remarkable artist of the archaic epoch with the masters of the Re-
naissance, who were well aware of the value of their artistic genius. Thus, we
see that by personifying the anonymous discoverers of the past, heurema-
tography was reproducing an attitude already predominant in the contempor-
ary society.
34
29
Zaicev. Griechisches Wunder, ch. 4.
30
“Literary works from the ancient Middle East are generally completely anonymous,
but sometimes the attempt is made to attribute them to some authoritative thinker or
other. ” (ibid., 128 n. 96). A few names of the Babylonian authors adduced by M. L.
West (
The east face of Helicon. West Asiatic elements in Greek poetry and myth, Ox-
ford 1997, 63, 65, 68, 81) confirm the general rule. The only exception seems to be
the Jewish prophetic literature.
31
Philipp,
op. cit., 77, stresses the kinship of motives that were at work in poetry and in
the visual arts.
32
Vitr. VII, praef. 12; X,2.11–12; Fabricius, K. Chersiphron,
RE 3 (1899) 2241–2242.
33
Svenson-Evers,
op. cit., 40f.
34
“The already established practice of claiming the authorship and, accordingly, ac-
knowledging it with regard to a large variety of cultural products was projected into

---

2. Heurematography and the ‘Greek miracle’
31
The same claims to authorship and the fame that goes with it, the same con-
tention for priority, mark the beginnings of Greek science and philosophy. It is
no wonder that Thales, their common founder, was credited with a dictum that
the best reward for his mathematical discovery would be to link it permanently
with his name (11 A 19). Apocryphal as this saying is, there is no doubt that the
problem of authorship was a matter of serious concern for both Thales and his
contemporaries. Otherwise, his theorems would not have reached us under his
name, for Thales himself did not write anything. Criticism of predecessors for
their poor understanding of the subject is a constant motif in most branches of
learning from history and geography to medicine and philosophy, a motif de-
signed to set off the remarkable novelty of one’s own theories and achieve-
ments.
35
Accusations of plagiarism, aimed at undermining others’ claims to
priority, are also a very early phenomenon.
36
Hence, it seems fair to say that the
sharpened interest in priority and consequently in the authorship of
any
achievements in
every kind of creative activity, being the motive behind the
search for first discoverers, was in turn itself the product of forces that created
Greek literature, art, philosophy, and science.
In his pithy article on the
pro¯toi heuretai, Thraede names some of the “so-
ciological conditions” under which this tradition emerged.
37
Yet the majority of
the factors he adduces – colonization, “genetic world outlook”, the prolifer-
ation of real discoveries and the growing importance of personality in culture –
belong rather to the historico-cultural prerequisites than to sociological condi-
tions. When considering the history of discoveries from a contemporary rather
than an ancient point of view, the theory of the Greek ‘cultural upheaval’ de-
veloped by A. Zaicev seems to be the most fruitful attempt to answer the ques-
tion of the sociological components of the ‘Greek miracle’.
It has been repeatedly noted that the behavior of a Greek of that epoch was
regulated to a large extent by the appraisal of his or her social group.
38
The
orientation toward the approval of others, toward public acknowledgement of
one’s merits, and the aspiration to fame and honors were among the most im-
portant motives for individual behavior. This attitude, by no means unique in a
socio-psychological typology of societies, was strengthened by an additional
tendency. The early Greek polis was a highly competitive society. The orien-
tation toward success, toward surpassing others in the achievement of one’s life
goals, played a tremendous role. Especially important is that the competitive
spirit animated not only such spheres of conflicting practical interests as econ-
the past: one tried to find an inventor, often a mythical one, for nearly every achieve-
ment of human civilization.” (