5

to hear the Arabian swans and birds already prophesying, as many things as the oracles. And they understand the irrational creatures by eating of the dragons—some say the heart, others the liver.” Here, certainly, it was likely for the Pythagorean, who abstained from animate food and did not even dare to sacrifice to daemons, to have tasted of the hearts and livers of dragons, forsooth, so that he might also share in the wisdom among them. For while being taught by such people, how else could his pursuit be successful if he did not emulate the same things as his teachers? We have then, in addition to those enumerated, the wise men of Arabia as teachers of the man's knowledge of augury, drawing upon which it was likely that at a later time, having foretold that the sparrow also 379 wished to call the others to its food, he seemed to provide a very great wonder to those present. In this way indeed, having seen the lioness just slain along with her eight cubs on the road to the Assyrians, he immediately interpreted the sight and prophesied the length of time of the sojourn that would be his among the Persians. And the same writer records that, following his visit to the Arabians, he also undertook to go to the Persians; for having forbidden Damis, who was his only student and companion, to go to the magi, he himself alone, so that he might not, that is, learn the arts of magic with an uninitiated person, held his lectures with them at midday and around midnight. And furthermore, he sets him forth as having come into conversation with Vardanes, the Babylonian king, and speaking somehow thus: “And I have the wisdom of Pythagoras, a Samian man, who taught me to worship the gods in this way and to understand them, both when they are seen and not seen, and to attend the discourses of the gods.” But who would grant him these things, when no such writing has been left by Pythagoras, nor any secret treatises, so that one might even suppose he started from them, but his teacher of the Pythagorean philosophy has been attested by Philostratus himself to differ in no way from the Epicureans, who has spoken somehow thus: “His teacher of the doctrines of Pythagoras was not at all a serious one, nor one who used the philosophy in practice, but was a slave to his stomach and to sensual pleasures, and had fashioned himself after Epicurus. This was Euxenus of Heraclea in Pontus. But he knew the maxims of Pythagoras just as birds learn what they learn from men. “Alas for the absurdity, if one should say that from this man 380 he had received the understanding of intercourse with the gods. But let it be granted that he had heard other instructors, although the writer has by no means indicated this; which one of these, then, having learned, as if from Pythagoras, the understanding of and attendance at the discourses of the gods, both visible and invisible, did he himself both know and profess to teach to others? And yet not even the famous Plato, who had partaken of the Pythagorean philosophy more than all others, nor Archytas, nor that very man who handed down the discourses of Pythagoras in writing, Philolaus, nor any others who were acquaintances of the man, who handed down his opinions and maxims in writing to those after them, prided themselves on any such wisdom. Therefore, having learned such things from another source, and not from Pythagoras, speaking loftily under a pretext, he takes upon himself the title of the philosopher, and so that one might grant, however irrationally, that the lie was true, I know not how, saying that he had learned the things concerning these matters from that very Samian himself, who departed from men countless thousands of years ago. Therefore, in addition to the Arabians, this one must also be inscribed as his teacher of the so-called secret knowledge concerning the gods. If, then, he was of a divine nature, the account has falsified his teachers; but if this was true, the tale was false and the writing about his being divine was not true. It does not yet occur to me to investigate the phantom of Proteus and demand the proof concerning this, nor of the things with him

5

τῶνἈραβίων κύκνων ηδη καὶ ὀρνίθων μαντευομένων ἀκούειν, ὁπόσα οἱ χρησμοί. ξυμβάλλονται δὲ τῶν ἀλόγων σιτούμενοι τῶν δρακόντων οἱ μὲν καρδίαν φασίν, οἱ δὲ ἧπαρ.» ἐνταῦθα πάντως που δρακόντων καρδίας δήπου καὶ ἥπατος τὸν Πυθαγόρειον ἐμψύχων τε τροφῆς ἀπεχόμενον καὶ μηδὲ θύειν δαίμοσιν ἐπιτολμῶντα εἰκὸς ην ἀπογεύσασθαι, ὡς ἂν καὶ τῆς παρὰ τούτοις κοινωνήσοι σοφίας. πρὸς γὰρ τοιῶνδε διδασκομένῳ πῶς αν αλλως μὴ οὐχὶ τὰ ομοια τοῖς διδασκάλοις ζηλώσαντι κατωρθοῦτο τὸ ἐπιτήδευμα; ἔχομεν δὴ οὖν πρὸς τοῖς καταλελεγμένοις καὶ τοὺςἈραβίων σοφοὺς διδασκάλους τῆς κατὰ τὴν οἰωνιστικὴν τἀνδρὸς ἐπιστήμης, ἐφ' ἧς εἰκότως ὁρμώμενος υστερόν ποτε τὸν στρουθόν, οτι καὶ 379 βούλοιτο συγκαλῶν τοὺς ἑτέρους ἐπὶ τροφήν, προειπὼν θαῦμα μέγιστον παρέχειν ἔδοξε τοῖς παροῦσι. ταύτῃ δὴ καὶ τὴν ἀπεσφαγμένην οσον οὔπω λέαιναν ἅμα τοῖς ὀκτὼ σκύμνοις κατὰ τὴν εἰςἈσσυρίους ὁδὸν θεασάμενος αὐτίκα τῷ θεάματι συμβαλὼν τῆς ἐσομένης αὐτῷ παρὰ Πέρσαις διατριβῆς τὸν χρόνον ἐμαντεύσατο. ἀκόλουθα δὲ τῇ παρὰ τοῖςἈραβίοις φοιτήσει ἐγχειρεῖν αὐτὸν καὶ παρὰ Πέρσαις ὁ αὐτὸς συγγραφεὺς ἱστορεῖ· τῷ γάρ τοι ∆άμιδι, ος μόνος φοιτητὴς ην αὐτῷ καὶ ἑταῖρος, ἀπαγορεύσας παρὰ τοὺς μάγους ἰέναι μόνος αὐτός, ὡς αν μὴ μετ' ἀγνώμονος δηλαδὴ τὰ τῆς μαγείας μανθάνοι, μεσημβρίας τε καὶ ἀμφὶ μέσας νύκτας τὰς μετ' αὐτῶν ἐποιεῖτο σχολάς. ετι δὲ Οὐαρδάνῃ Βαβυλωνίῳ εἰς λόγους ἐλθόντα βασιλεῖ ὧδέ πως λέγειν αὐτὸν παρατίθεται· «σοφία δέ μοι Πυθαγόρου Σαμίου ἀνδρός, ὃς θεούς τε θεραπεύειν ωδέ με ἐδιδάξατο καὶ ξυνιέναι σφῶν ὁρωμένων τε καὶ οὐχ ὁρωμένων φοιτᾶν τε ἐς διαλέξεις θεῶν.» τίς δ' αὐτῷ ταῦτα συγχωρήσειεν, ὅτε Πυθαγόρᾳ μὲν οὐδεμία τις τοιαύτη καταλέλειπται γραφή, οὐδ' ἀπόρρητα τινα συγγράμματα, ὡς καν ὑπονοῆσαι αὐτὸν ἐξ ἐκείνων ὁρμᾶσθαι, ὁ δέ γε διδάσκαλος αὐτῷ τῆς κατὰ Πυθαγόραν φιλοσοφίας οὐδέν τι διαφέρειν τῶνἘπικουρείων πρὸς αὐτοῦ μεμαρτύρηται τοῦ Φιλοστράτου ωδέ πως εἰρηκότος «διδάσκαλος μὲν ἦν αὐτῷ τῶν Πυθαγόρου λόγων οὐ πάνυ σπουδαῖος, οὐδ' ἐνεργῷ τῇ φιλοσοφίᾳ χρώμενος, γαστρός τε ἥττων καὶ ἀφροδισίων καὶ κατὰ τὸνἘπίκουρον ἐσχημάτιστο. ην δὲ οὗτος Εὔξενος ὁ ἐξἩρακλείας τοῦ Πόντου. τὰς δὲ Πυθαγόρου γνώμας ἐγίγνωσκεν, ωσπερ οἱ ορνιθες αμανθάνουσι παρὰ τῶν ἀνθρώπων. «φεῦ τῆς ἀτοπίας, εἰ παρὰ 380 τούτου λέγοι τις τῆς πρὸς τοὺς θεοὺς διαλέξεως τὴν σύνεσιν αὐτὸν εἰληφέναι. ἀλλὰ δὴ συγκεχωρήσθω καὶ ἑτέρων ὑφηγητῶν αὐτὸν ἀκηκοέναι καίτοι γε τοῦ συγγραφέως τοῦτο μηδαμῶς ἐπισημηναμένου· τίς δὴ ουν τούτων σύνεσίν τε καὶ φοίτησιν εἰς διαλέξεις θεῶν ὁρωμένων καὶ οὐχ ὁρωμένων αὐτός τε ὡς ἀπὸ Πυθαγόρου μαθὼν εἰδέναι διδάσκεσθαί τε ἑτέρους ἐπηγγέλλετο; καὶ μὴν οὐδ' ὁ περιβόητος Πλάτων πάντων γε μᾶλλον τῆς Πυθαγόρου κεκοινωνηκὼς φιλοσοφίας, οὔτ'Ἀρχύτας, ου τ' αὐτὸς ἐκεῖνος ὁ τὰς Πυθαγόρου γραφῇ παραδοὺς ὁμιλίας Φιλόλαος, οὐδ' εἴ τινες ἄλλοι γνώριμοι τἀνδρὸς γεγονότες, οι δόξας τε αὐτοῦ καὶ γνώμας γραφῇ τοῖς μετ' αὐτὸν παραδεδώκασιν, ἐπὶ τοιαύτῃ τινὶ ἐσεμνύναντο σοφίᾳ. οὐκοῦν ἑτέρωθεν, ἀλλ' οὐκ ἀπὸ Πυθαγόρου τὰ τοιαδὶ μαθὼν προσχήματι σεμνολογῶν ἐπιγράφεται τὴν τοῦ φιλοσόφου πρόσρησιν, ινα δὲ καὶ παραλογώτατα τὸ ψεῦδος ὡς ἀληθές τις γεγονέναι συγχωρήσειεν, οὐκ οἶδ' οπως ἐξ αὐτοῦ λέγων ἐκείνου τοῦ Σαμίου πρὸ μυρίων ὅσων ἐτῶν ἐξ ἀνθρώπων γενομένου τὰ περὶ τούτων αὐτὸν μεμαθηκέναι. οὐκοῦν πρὸς τοῖςἈραβίοις καὶ τοῦτον διδάσκαλον αὐτοῦ τῆς δὴ νομιζομένης ἀπορρήτου περὶ θεῶν ἐπιστήμης ἐπιγραπτέον. εἰ δὴ ουν θείας ην φύσεως, κατέψευσται αὐτοῦ τοὺς διδασκάλους ὁ λόγος, εἰ δ' ἀληθὴς ην ουτος, ψευδὴς ἦν ὁ μῦθος καὶ οὐκ ἀληθὴς ἡ περὶ τοῦ θεῖον γεγονέναι αὐτὸν γραφή. οὔπω μοι τοῦ Πρωτέως τὸ φάσμα πολυπραγμονεῖν ἔπεισι καὶ τὴν περὶ τούτου πίστιν αἰτεῖν, οὐδὲ τῶν παρ' αὐτῷ