A Dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology. By various writers. Ed. by William Smith. Illustrated by numerous engravings on wood.

ANAXIMANDER.
ANAXILA'US ('AvaiADos), a physician and
Pythagorean philosopher, was born at Larissa, but
at which city of that name is not certain. He was
banished by the Emperor Augustus from Rome
and Italy, B. c. 28, on account of his being accused of being a magician (Euseb. Chron. ad
Olymp. clxxxviii.), which charge, it appears, originated in his possessing superior skill in natural
philosophy, and thus performing by natural means
certain wonderful things, which by the ignorant
and credulous were ascribed to magic. These
tricks are mentioned by St. Irenaeus (i. 13. ~ 1,
p. 60, ed. Paris, 1710) and St. Epiphanius (Adv.
ITaeres. lib. i. torn. iii. Haer. 14, vol. i. p. 232. ed.
Colon. 1682), and several specimens are given by
Pliny (I1. N. xix. 4, xxv. 95, xxviii. 49, xxxii. 52,
xxxv. 50), which, however, need not be here mentioned, as some are quite incredible, and the others
may be easily explained. (Cagnati, Variae Observat.
iii. 10, p. 213, &c., ed. Rom. 1587.) [W. A. G.]
ANAXI'LIDES ('AzvathiXfs), a Greek writer,
of uncertain date, the author of a work upon philosophers. (Diog Laert. iii. 2; Hieron. c. Jovin. 1.)
ANAXIMANDER ('Avate'av3pos) of Miletus, the son of Praxiades, born B. c. 610 (Apollod.
ap. Diog. Laert. ii. 1, 2), was one of the earliest
philosophers of the Ionian school, and is commonly
said to have been instructed by his friend and
countryman Thales, its first founder. (Cic. Acad.
ii. 37; Simplic. in Aristot. Phys. lib. i. fol. 6, a,
ed. Ald.)
He was the first author of a philosophical
treatise in Greek prose, unless Pherecydes of Syros
be an exception. (Themist. Orat. xxvi.) His
work consisted, according to Diogenes, of summary
statements of his opinions (reroihlrat KEcaAchaluy
77jV Oce'iE), and was accidentally found by
Apollodorus. Suidas gives the titles of several
treatises supposed to have been written by him;
but they are evidently either invented, or derived
from a misunderstanding of the expressions of
earlier writers.
The early Ionian philosophy did not advance
beyond the contemplation of the sensible world.
But it was not in any proper sense experimental;
nor did it retain under the successors of Thales
the mathematical character which seems to have
belonged to him individually, and which so remarkably distinguished the contemporary Italian
or Pythagorean school. (Comp. Cousin, Hist. de la
Phil. Lee. vii.) The physiology of Anaximander
consisted chiefly of speculations concerning the
generation of the existing universe. He first used
the word dpX) to denote the origin of things, or
rather the material out of which they were formed:
he held that this dpys was the infinite (-rb crEpov),
everlasting, and divine (Arist. Phys. iii. 4), though
not attributing to it a spiritual or intelligent nature;
and that it was the substance into which all things
were resolved on their dissolution. (Simplic. 1. c.)
We have several more particular accounts of his
opinions on this point, but they differ materially
from each other.
According to some, the direipov was a single
determinate substance, having a middle nature
between water and air; so that Anaximander's
theory would hold a middle place between those of
Thales and Anaximenes, who deduced everything
from the two latter elements respectively; and the
three systems would exhibit a gradual progress
from the contemplation of the sensible towards

ANAXIMANDER.

I65

that of the intelligible (compare the doctrine of
Anaximenes concerning air, Plut. de Plac. Phil.
i. 3), the last step of which was afterwards to be
taken by Anaxagoras in the introduction of vovs.
But this opinion cannot be distinctly traced in any
author earlier than Alexander of Aphrodisias
(ap. Simpl. Phys. fol. 32, a.), though Aristotle
seems to allude to it (de Coel. iii. 5). Other accounts represent Anaximander as leaving the nature
of the d-areipov indeterminate. (Diog. Laert. 1. c.;
Simplic. Piys. fol. 6, a; Plut. Plac. Ph.. i. 3.)
But Aristotle in another place (Metaph. xi. 2), and
Theophrastus (ap. Simpl. Phys. fol. 6, b, 33, a),
who speaks very definitely and seems to refer to
Anaximander's own words, describe him as resembling Anaxagoras in making the direipov consist of
a mixture of simple unchangeable elements (the
dsozoIEPdj of Anaxagoras). Out of this material
all things were organized, not by any change in
its nature, but by the concurrence of homogeneous
particles already existing in it; a process which,
according to Anaxagoras, was effected by the
agency of intelligence (voss), whilst Anaximander
referred it to the conflict between heat and cold,
and to the affinities of the particles. (Plut. ap
Euseb. Praep. Evang. i. 8.) Thus the doctrines of
both philosophers would resemble the atomic
theory, and so be opposed to the opinions of
Thales, Anaximenes, and Diogenes of Apollonia,
who derived all substances from a single but
changeable principle. And as the elemental water
of Thales corresponded to the ocean, from which
Homer makes all things to have sprung, so the
drespov of Anaximander, including all in a confused unorganized state, would be the philosophical
expression of the Chaos of Hesiod. (Ritter, art.
Anaximander, in Ersch and Gruber's Encycl.)
In developing the consequences of his fundamental hypothesis, whatever that may really have
been, Anaximander did not escape the extravagances into which a merely speculative system of
physics is sure to fall. He held, that the earth
was of a cylindrical form, suspended in the middle
of the universe, and surrounded by water, air, and
fire, like the coats of an onion; but that the exterior stratum of fire was broken up and collected
into masses; whence the sun, moon, and stars;
which, moreover, were carried round by the three
spheres in which they were respectively fixed.
(Euseb. 1. c.; Plut. de Plac. ii. 15, 16; Arist. de
Coel. ii. 13.)
According to Diogenes, he thought that the
moon borrowed its light from the sun, and that
the latter body consisted of pure fire and was not
less than the earth; but the statements of Plutarch
(de Plac. ii. 20, 25) and Stobaeus (Eel. i. 26, 27)
are more worthy of credit; namely, that he made
the moon 19 and the sun 28 times as large as the
earth, and thought that the light of the sun issued
through an orifice as large as the earth; that the
moon possessed an intrinsic splendour, and that its
phases were caused by a motion of rotation.
For his theory of the original production of animals, including man, in water, and their gradual
progress to the condition of land animals, see
Plut. de Plac. v. 19; Euseb. I. c.; Plut. Symnpos.
viii. 8; Orig. Phil. c. 6; and compare Diod. i. 7.
He held a plurality of worlds, and of gods; but in
what sense is not clear. (Cic. de Nat. Deor. i. 10;
Plut. de Plac. i. 7.)
The use of the Gnomon was first introduced