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

CQ 28 (1978) 202–222 (= Lloyd, G. E. R.
Methods and problems in Greek science, Cambridge 1991, 248ff.).
21
In Cael. comm., 488.18–24 = Eud. fr. 148; cf. below, 273 n. 199.
22
Mittelstraß, J.
Die Rettung der Phänomene, Berlin 1963, 149ff. See also Krafft, F.
Der Mathematikos und der Physikos. Bemerkungen zu der angeblichen Plato-
nischen Aufgabe, die Phänomene zu retten,
BGWT 5 (1965) 5–24; Knorr, W.R. Plato
and Eudoxus on the planetary motions,
JHA 21 (1990) 313–329. On Sosigenes, see
below, 231f.

---

1. Plato as architect of mathematical sciences?
87
characteristic pedantry, Simplicius noted that both Eudemus and Sosigenes
(who relied on Eudemus) mention Eudoxus, whereas the words concerning
Plato belong to Sosigenes only. Thus Simplicius, to whom Eudemus’
History of
Astronomy was still available, could not find in it anything relating to Plato.
23
If
Eudemus did in fact mention Plato in the context of posing such an important
problem, Sosigenes would surely not be our only source on this. Meanwhile,
Theon, Sosigenes’ older contemporary, in a special treatise devoted to
ma-
the¯mata in Plato, does not mention this story, though both the principle of ‘sav-
ing the phenomena’ and Eudemus’
History of Astronomy do appear in this work
(
Exp., 180.9, 198.14). Plutarch, who lived earlier than Theon, also mentions the
principle of ‘saving the phenomena’ without connecting it with Plato (
De facie
923 A). Geminus, a still earlier author, ascribed the principle of ordered and cir-
cular movement of heavenly bodies not to Plato, but to the Pythagoreans
(
Eisag. I, 19–20). Thus, Sosigenes seems to be the first author to connect Plato
with this principle. Sosigenes could have known the legend of the Delian prob-
lem, where Plato figures as a methodologist of mathematics, since Plutarch and
Theon wrote about it. It is this legend that could have encouraged Sosigenes to
ascribe to Plato the most important principle of astronomy. However, Sosigenes
could have relied on much earlier sources.
Recent publications of the Herculanum papyrus 1021, which preserved for
us the working text of Philodemus’
History of the Academy,
24
support the sug-
gestion that Plato’s image as ‘architect of science’ goes back to the early Acad-
emy. In column Y of the papyrus, which is a quotation from an early and well-
informed author, we read the following:
He says that at this time
mathe¯mata were also greatly advanced, with Plato being
the architect of this development; he set problems to the mathematicians, who in
turn eagerly studied them. In this way, the general theory of proportions (metro-
logía) and research on definitions reached their peak, as Eudoxus and his stu-
dents completely revised the old theory of Hippocrates of Chios. Especially great
progress was made in geometry, as (at that time) the methods of analysis and of
23
Von Fritz.
Grundprobleme, 179 n. 375, pointed out that the repetition of Sosigenes’
name might mean either: 1) that the words about Plato do not belong to Eudemus; or
2) that Simplicius knew about Eudemus’ opinion only through Sosigenes, and was
not sure exactly where the quotation from Eudemus ends. Since von Fritz did not see
any evidence that Eudemus’
History of Astronomy was available to Simplicius, he
was inclined to the second variant. Yet such evidence does exist (7.1), which makes
the first suggestion much more plausible. Krafft. Mathematikos, 16, on the other
hand, believes that Simplicius knew Eudemus’ work only through Sosigenes, but
that the latter made it clear that the reference to Plato was his own. Cf. Knorr. Plato
and Eudoxus, 319f.
24
The Epicurean Philodemus (mid-first century BC) wrote Súntaxi~ tõn filo-
sófwn in 10 books (D. L. X, 3). His History of the Academy might have been the
division of this work (Erler, M. Philodem aus Gadara,