By what arguments we have preferred the philosophy of the Hebrews to that of the Greeks, and by what reasoning we accepted the sacred books belonging to these men, having previously determined this, and having then shown that the Greeks themselves were not ignorant of these men, but mentioned them by name and were amazed at their way of life, and gave much attention both to their royal capital and to the rest of their history -- come, let us now go on to consider how they deemed worthy of written record not only the memory of these men, but in some cases even became zealous emulators of a teaching and learning similar to theirs, in doctrines that tend toward the improvement of the soul.
How, then, the rest of the branches of learning were gathered by one or another of the admired Greeks, going about among the barbarians from different places -- geometry, arithmetic, music, astronomy, medicine, the very first elements of grammar, and countless other technical and life-useful pursuits -- this I shall demonstrate at once.
For just as our discourse has already shown, earlier on, that the opinion concerning a plurality of gods, the mysteries and initiation rites, and moreover the stories and mythical narratives about the gods, the allegorized natural explanations of the myths, and the rest of their superstitious error, had been taken over by them from the barbarians -- at which point we detected that the Greeks, having wandered over much land, not without toil, but by a contribution gathered from the learning of the barbarians, constructed their own theology --
so too it will be shown, before long, how the doctrines concerning piety toward the one God over all, and concerning those teachings most sought after for the benefit of the soul -- which would indeed be the most essential of the arguments in philosophy -- could have been procured from none other than the Hebrews alone.
Or if not this, but one might say that they happened upon the same things, having been moved by natural conceptions of their own -- even this would be in our favor, if we have chosen to emulate not only those things handed down from of old, from eternity, to the Hebrews alone by theologian-prophet men, but also those things examined by certain men -- even if not all -- yet by those among them of great renown throughout Greece, and by the schools of the philosophers.
And you would find these to be few in number -- for indeed they say that all noble things are difficult -- yet nonetheless they have been honored with the first rank among the philosophers of the Greeks, so that, on account of their great renown, they overshadow with their glory those like them.
And one ought not to be surprised if we say that it is possible that the doctrines found among the Hebrews were contrived by them as well, since it is evident that they have plundered not only the rest of the branches of learning from the Egyptians and Chaldeans and the other barbarian nations, but are even now caught depriving one another of the credit due to their own compositions.
At any rate, each one of them, having secretly stolen the expressions, together with the thoughts, and entire compositions of arguments belonging to his neighbors, has prided himself as though upon his own labors. And do not suppose this to be my own statement; for you will hear, again, the all-wise men themselves convicting one another of literary theft.
This very point, then, since we have once set out upon it, it is necessary above all to examine first, for the refutation of the manner of the men indicated. Now our own Clement, in the sixth book of the Stromateis, has directed his treatment of this subject at length. Take up his words first, then, and read the following statements.
Having shown that the manifestation of the Greek intelligence has been illumined from the truth given to us through the Scriptures, understanding, according to the sense in which we take it, that the theft of the truth extends to them -- if it is not too harsh to say so -- we have demonstrated this; come, let us now bring forward the Greeks themselves as witnesses against themselves to the theft.
For those who thus openly steal their own things from one another confirm indeed that they are thieves; yet they also show themselves, even unwillingly, secretly appropriating the truth from us for their own countrymen. For if they do not spare even their own, scarcely indeed will they keep away from ours.
And I shall pass over in silence the doctrines pertaining to philosophy, since those who have divided up the schools themselves confess in writing -- so as not to be found ungrateful -- that they received the most authoritative of their doctrines from Socrates. But making use of the testimonies of a few well-known and esteemed men among the Greeks, having convicted their thievish character, and employing men of different periods, I shall turn to what follows.
Having said these things as by way of preface, he next brings forward his refutations, employing proofs of every kind, and first of all he convicts the poets of having stolen from one another, by the juxtaposition of the words of each.
Then he goes on to add the following: 'Let us not overlook philosophy and history, nor indeed rhetoric, as being without a share in the same charge, and it is reasonable to cite a few examples of these as well.'
Then, in turn, he sets forth passages from Orpheus, Heraclitus, Plato, Pythagoras, Herodotus, Theopompus, Thucydides, Demosthenes, Aeschines, Lysias, Isocrates, and countless others, whose statements it would be superfluous for me to list one by one, since the man's own writing lies before us, in which, after the refutations of the aforementioned, he says again the following.
Let the kinds of Greek theft in thought, then, being such as these, serve as a clear example for one able to discern them, and let this suffice. But already they have been caught not only stealing thoughts and expressions and paraphrasing them, as will be shown, but even taking over entire works of others outright and publishing them as their own, just as Eugammon of Cyrene took the whole book On the Thesprotians from Musaeus.
And having again brought forward very many proofs of his argument on these points, at the end he adds the following: 'Life would fail me, were I to attempt to go through every instance, convicting the self-loving theft of the Greeks, and how they appropriate to themselves the discovery of the finest doctrines among them, which they have received from us.'
And already they are convicted not only of stealing doctrines from the barbarians, but also, in addition, of imitating what is among us -- the things wrought marvelously from above, by divine power, through those who have lived holy lives, for our conversion -- dressing them up as prodigies in Greek mythology.
And indeed we shall inquire of them whether these things which they narrate are true or false. They would not say that they are false; for they would not willingly condemn themselves for the greatest folly, namely, writing falsehoods; so they would necessarily admit that they are true.
And how, then, do the things marvelously demonstrated through Moses and the other prophets still appear incredible to them? For God the Almighty, caring for all men, turns some to salvation by commandments, others by threats, some by prodigious signs, and others by gentle promises.
Nevertheless, the Greeks -- when once a drought had for a long time been ravaging Greece and a barrenness of the crops prevailed, those who survived, it is said, coming as suppliants to Delphi because of the famine, asked the Pythia how they might be delivered from the calamity. And she gave them a single oracle for deliverance from the misfortune: if they would make use of the prayer of Aeacus.
Aeacus, then, being persuaded by them, went up onto the Greek mountain, and stretching out his pure hands to heaven, calling upon God as the common father, prayed that he would have pity on Greece, which was worn out with affliction.
And even as he prayed, an extraordinary thunder crashed out, and the whole surrounding air grew cloudy; violent, continuous rains broke forth and filled the whole land. From this an abundant and rich fruitfulness came to completion, cultivated by the prayers of Aeacus.
'And Samuel,' he says, 'called upon the Lord, and the Lord gave forth voices and rain in the day of harvest.' Do you see that he who sends rain upon the just and the unjust through the powers subject to him is one God? And so on.
By joining countless other proofs to these, Clement convicted the Greeks of having become thieves by incontrovertible evidence. But if this witness is not trustworthy to you, since he too, like us, preferred the barbarian philosophy to the Greek, let him be set aside — even though he did not direct his argument in his own words, but in those of the Greeks themselves. But what would you say, if you should learn the same things from your own noble philosophers? Receive, then, their testimonies as well. From Porphyry's first book of Philological Lectures.
Longinus, giving a feast for the Platonea at Athens, invited us, along with many others — Nicagoras the sophist, and Maior, Apollonius the grammarian, and Demetrius the geometer, Prosenes the Peripatetic, and Calliétes the Stoic.
With them I myself reclined as the seventh; and as the dinner progressed, a certain dispute about Ephorus arose among the others. He said, 'Let us hear what this uproar about Ephorus is.' Now those disputing were Caustrius and Maximus; for the one preferred him even to Theopompus, while Caustrius called him a thief.
'For what,' he said, 'is peculiar to Ephorus, when he sometimes transposes whole three thousand lines, word for word, from Daimachus and Callisthenes and Anaximenes?'
To whom Apollonius the grammarian said, 'Did you not know that this same failing has overtaken Theopompus too, whom you prefer — in the eleventh book of his History of Philip, transcribing word for word from Isocrates' Areopagiticus that passage: that none of the good things or the bad comes to men by itself alone, and so on?'
And yet he looks down on Isocrates, and says that his teacher was defeated by himself in the contest over Mausolus. But he has committed theft of material, transposing what belongs to one case onto another, so that in this way he is even caught out as a liar.
For when Andron, in his Tripod, had related concerning Pythagoras the philosopher the matters about his predictions — saying that once, being thirsty at Metapontum and having drawn water from a well and drunk it, he foretold that within three days there would be an earthquake — and adding certain other things of this kind, he goes on to say...
These things, then, which Andron had related concerning Pythagoras, Theopompus stole entirely. If he had spoken of Pythagoras, perhaps others too would have recognized these things about him, and would have said that he himself had also spoken thus; but as it is, the transposition of the name has made the theft plain. For he makes use of the same facts, but has substituted a different name — he has made Pherecydes the Syrian the one who utters these predictions.
And he conceals the theft not only by this change of name, but also by a transposition of places. For what Andron said was spoken at Metapontum concerning the prediction of the earthquake, Theopompus says was spoken in Syria; and as for the matter of the ship, he says it was observed not from Megara in Sicily, but from Samos; and he transferred the capture of Sybaris to Messene.
And so that he might seem to say something extra, he even added the name of the stranger, saying that he was called Perilaus. 'And I too,' says Nicagoras, 'in reading his Hellenica and that of Xenophon, have caught him transposing much of Xenophon — and the terrible thing is, for the worse.'
For instance, the account of the meeting of Pharnabazus with Agesilaus through the mediation of Apollophanes of Cyzicus, and the truce-negotiations between the two of them, which Xenophon recorded in his fourth book most gracefully and fittingly for both parties — Theopompus, transferring this into the eleventh book of his Hellenica, has rendered lifeless, motionless, and inert.
For, striving on account of his theft to inject elaboration and display into his style, he appears sluggish, hesitant, and like one who keeps putting things off — and thus he destroys the living, vigorous quality of Xenophon.
When Nicagoras had said this, Apollonius said, 'And why should we wonder if the disease of theft has taken hold of Theopompus and Ephorus — men so lacking in vigor — when even Menander was filled with this same weakness, whom Aristophanes the grammarian gently exposed, out of excessive fondness for him, in his parallel citations of Menander and of those from whom he stole; while Latinus, in the six books he entitled Concerning What Is Not Menander's Own, revealed the full extent of his thefts?'
Just as Phlostratus of Alexandria composed a treatise Concerning the Theft of Sophocles. And Caecilius, as though he had discovered something momentous, says that Menander transcribed the whole drama of Antiphanes, the Bird-Watcher, from beginning to end into his Superstitious Man.
'But since it has seemed good — I do not know why — to bring the thieves before you all,' he said, 'I too will point out that the noble Hyperides stole much from Demosthenes, both in his speech Against Diondas and in his On the Gifts of Eubulus.'
'That the one transposed material from the other is quite clear; but since they were contemporaries, it would be our task, Apollonius,' he says, 'to trace out the thief from the dates. I myself suspect that Hyperides is the one who took it; but since it is unclear which of the two it was, I admire Demosthenes if, having taken it from Hyperides, he corrected it for the better; but I blame Hyperides if, having taken it from Demosthenes, he twisted it for the worse.'
And shortly after he says: 'And why should I tell you how Hellanicus' Barbarian Customs was compiled from Herodotus and Damastes? Or how Herodotus, in his second book, transferred word for word much from the Periegesis of Hecataeus of Miletus, with only slight alterations — the material about the phoenix bird, and about the river-horse, and the hunting of crocodiles?'
Or how the statements about torture made by Isaeus in his speech On the Estate of Cylon are found also in Isocrates' Trapeziticus, and in Demosthenes' Against Onetor for Ejectment, expressed almost in the very same terms? Or how Dinarchus, in his first speech Against Cleomedon for Assault, transferred word for word much material from Demosthenes' Against Conon for Assault?
Or take Hesiod's line, 'For a man wins no better prize than a good wife, nor anything more chilling than a bad one' — this thought Simonides, in his eleventh book, took over and transferred thus: 'A man wins no better possession than a good wife, nor anything more chilling than a bad one.' And Euripides, in his Melanippe Bound, says: 'Nothing is worse than a bad woman, and nothing by far is naturally better than a good one' — though the phrasing differs.
And when Euripides said, 'We women are the most wretched growth,' Theodectes, in his Alcmaeon, says: 'A clear saying is celebrated among mortals, that there is no growth more wretched than woman.' This man not only took the conception from there, but even used the very same words; and he craftily wished it to seem rather a proverbial saying, used as by many, than to appear to have taken it from the one who begot it.
And Antimachus, stealing from Homer, makes slight corrections. For where Homer said, 'And Ideus, who became the mightiest of men upon the earth,' Antimachus says, 'And Ideus, who was the mightiest of men upon the earth.' And Lycophron praises this transposition, as though the line were made firmer by it.
As for the phrase 'And answering him spoke mighty Diomedes,' I say nothing of it — Homer having been mocked by Cratinus for excessive repetition in his use of 'answering him'; yet Antimachus, though it was so worn out by common use, did not hesitate to transpose it.
And whereas 'the peoples over whom he ruled, and he was gentle as a father' is Homeric, and again elsewhere it is said, 'and when both sides had strengthened their ranks,' Antimachus, by transposing the half-lines, has made it: 'the peoples over whom they ruled were strengthening their ranks.'
But lest I myself, in accusing others of theft, be caught as a thief, I will point out those who have treated of these matters. There are two books by Lysimachus On the Theft of Ephorus; Alcaeus, the poet of abusive iambics and epigrams, wrote a parody exposing the thefts of Ephorus; there is a letter of Pollio to Soteridas On the Theft of Ctesias, and by the same author a book On the Theft of Herodotus; and in the work entitled The Trackers, much is said about Theopompus; and there is a treatise by Aretades On Coincidence, from which many such things may be learned.
And after other remarks: And Prosenes said, 'You have exposed the other thieves; but that this very hero Plato himself, whose festival we are celebrating today under his name, makes free use of much material from those before him — for I am ashamed to use the name of theft in his case — this you have not yet perceived.'
'What do you mean?' said Calliétes. 'I do not merely assert it,' he replied, 'but I also furnish proof for my claim. The books of those who lived before Plato are scarce, since perhaps one might otherwise have detected more thefts of the philosopher. As for myself, then, having by chance come upon Protagoras' treatise On Being, in reading it, I find him using, against those who introduce Being as one, replies of just this kind — for I took pains to remember what was said in the very words.' And having said this, he sets forth the proofs at greater length.
But as to what kind of character the Greek writers had, and that they did not even spare themselves the exposure — I think what has been said out of countless examples suffices. Moreover, as a preparation for showing the benefit that has flowed to the Greeks from Hebrew teachings, it seems to me good and necessary to demonstrate comprehensively the whole of the celebrated Greek learning and philosophy — both their first branches of study and the venerable achievements of their science of reasoning — as having been gathered together for them from the barbarians, so that no one may any longer reproach us for having preferred the piety and philosophy found among the barbarians to the venerable things found among themselves.
That it was not without sound reason that we, placing the philosophy of the Greeks second, have preferred the theology found among the Hebrews, you might recognize by learning that even among the Greeks themselves, those who laid hold of philosophy in the more correct manner, and who conceived something greater and higher than the common report about the gods, discovered no true doctrines apart from those already ratified beforehand among the Hebrews.
For some, being led astray one way or another by various false opinions, were overturned into a depth of idle babbling; while others, who employed at least somewhat sound reasoning, in whatever points they laid hold of true apprehension, in these very points have proven to be sharers in the teaching of the Hebrews.
It is likely, then, that having become widely learned, and having examined with considerable diligence the customs and teachings of the nations, they were not ignorant of the philosophy of those aforementioned — men who arose, so to speak, later in time than all of them: not only than the Hebrews, nor even than the Phoenicians and Egyptians, but also than the ancient Greeks themselves.
To whom Cadmus the son of Agenor brought things from Phoenicia, and others brought from Egypt matters concerning the gods, or perhaps from some other source — mysteries and rites of initiation, the setting up of carved images, and hymns, songs and incantations — either Orpheus the Thracian, or some other, whether he too was a barbarian, having become the originators of this error, gathered these things together; for the Greeks themselves would admit that they know none older than these men.
They say, at any rate, that Orpheus was first of all, then Linus, and after him Musaeus, flourishing about the time of the Trojan events, or a little earlier. But in their time nothing more than the much-erring theology of the Phoenicians and Egyptians was current among the Greeks.
And indeed among the other nations too, throughout every land and city, in their temples and mysteries, these very same things, and whatever was similar to them, were carefully preserved. This same discourse about the gods prevailed widely among all peoples; beautiful temples, adorned with images and votive offerings of every kind, were everywhere elaborately built; and moreover, carved images of every kind of material, fashioned skillfully into the shape of every kind of mortal creature, were wrought with love of beauty.
Moreover, there was among all peoples a most abundant and unstinting supply of oracles. Indeed, some venerable and great god was at that time flourishing especially among the Greeks — the Pythian, the Clarian, and the Dodonaean; then Amphiaraus and Amphilochus, and besides these a countless crowd streaming in, more of oracle-chanters than of poets and rhapsodes.
Of these, philosophy, which came upon the Greeks a long time afterward, finding nothing of what belonged to itself among their forefathers, judged the venerable and ancient elements of the theology that had come down to them from their fathers — those very marvels celebrated by all, the divine things and the oracles — to be in fact superfluous and useless.
Therefore it set these things aside for a later time, since they could be of no use to it in the discovery of necessary and true things; and thereafter, being as it were naked and destitute of teachings and learning of its own, it went about examining foreign and barbarian things, procuring for itself from every quarter whatever was useful, gathering and collecting it as though begging alms — whatever it might find among each of the nations.
For it did not learn from the Greeks only those elements of true theology which were lacking to them, but also the most beneficial of the other arts and sciences. The Greeks themselves indeed agree that, after Orpheus, Linus, and Musaeus — who, being the oldest and first of all theologians, initiated them into the error of polytheism — the seven men among them were admired for wisdom, whom they also named the Sages. These flourished about the time of Cyrus, king of the Persians.
And this was the very time in which the last of all the prophets among the Hebrews were prophesying — coming more than six hundred years after the Trojan events, and not less than one thousand five hundred years after the age of Moses. This will become clear to you a little later, when you go through the chronological records.
It is at about this point, then, that the seven who became Sages — men late in time — are remembered for their achievement in the more ethical way of life, of whom nothing more is remembered than their celebrated maxims. And it is only late, and being still further behind in time, that the philosophers among the Greeks are remembered as having distinguished themselves.
Of these, Pythagoras, first the disciple of Pherecydes, who discovered the very name 'philosophy,' was, according to some, a Samian; but according to others, a Tyrrhenian; and some say he was a Syrian or a Tyrian — so that you must admit that the first of the philosophers, sung on the lips of all the Greeks, was a barbarian and not a Greek at all.
And they record Pherecydes too as a Syrian, under whom they say Pythagoras studied. But Pythagoras is said to have associated not with him alone; he is also said to have spent time among the magi of the Persians, and to have studied under the prophets of the Egyptians — at the very time when, of the Hebrews, some evidently had made their migration to Egypt, and others to Babylon.
So then, this man who is described, in his eager inquiry into the wisdom found among each people, traveled through Babylon and Egypt and the whole land of the Persians, becoming a disciple of both their magi and their priests; and besides these, he is recorded to have listened also to the Brahmans — these being the philosophers of the Indians. And gathering astrology from some, geometry from others, arithmetic from others still, and music from others, and other things from others, from the wise men of Greece alone he obtained nothing — since they dwelt together with poverty and want of wisdom.
畢達哥拉斯的情形便是如此。從他的傳承而形成的第一個學派，稱為義大利學派，這名稱是因其在義大利活動而得；其後是由七賢之一的泰勒斯（Thales）而來、稱為愛奧尼亞學派的一派；再其後是伊利亞學派，奉科洛豐人色諾芬尼（Xenophanes of Colophon）為其始祖。
Such, then, was Pythagoras. And from his succession the first philosophy to be formed was that called the Italian, deemed worthy of this name from its activity in Italy; after this came the one called Ionian, from Thales, one of the seven Sages; and then the Eleatic, which inscribed Xenophanes of Colophon as its father.
But Thales too, as some record, was a Phoenician, though others have supposed him to be a Milesian; and he too is said to have conferred with the prophets of the Egyptians.
As for Solon himself too, one of the seven Sages, of whom it is said that he legislated for the Athenians — Plato likewise says that he attended upon the Egyptians, at the time when the Hebrews were again dwelling in Egypt. At any rate, in the Timaeus he brings him in as being instructed by the barbarian, in a passage where the Egyptian says to him: 'O Solon, Solon, you Greeks are always children, and there is not an old man among the Greeks' — nor is there among you any learning grown grey with time.
And Plato himself, having studied under the Pythagoreans in Italy, was not content with that instruction alone, but is said to have set out for Egypt and to have devoted a very great deal of time to the philosophy found there. This indeed he himself testifies in many places of his own writings, giving credit to the barbarians — and, in my judgment, doing well — not denying, out of a grateful mind, that he had gained the finest merchandise for philosophy from the barbarians.
One may indeed hear him in many places, but also in particular in the Epinomis, where he speaks in this way of the Syrians together with the Egyptians: 'The one responsible for this was the first who perceived these things, being a barbarian; for an ancient region nurtured those who first conceived these ideas, on account of the beauty of the summer season, which Egypt and Syria possess in abundance. From there it has come forth everywhere, even to us here, having been tested through a countless and boundless span of time.'
These are the words of Plato. And Democritus too, even earlier, is said to have made ethical the discourses of the Babylonians. And boasting somewhere about himself, he says: 'Of the men of my own time, I wandered over the largest extent of land, inquiring into the most far-reaching things, and I saw the most skies and lands, and I heard the greatest number of learned men; and in the composition of lines with demonstration, no one has yet surpassed me — not even the Egyptians who are called the Rope-stretchers, among whom, above all, I spent eighty years in a foreign land.'
But what if I were to list for you Heraclitus and the other Greeks, through whom it is proven that the civic life among the Greeks was, for the long ages, impoverished and left bare of all learning?
Greece, then, was adorned with the temples of the gods, with statues and shrines, with oracles and prophecies, and with the great vanity of the demons who deceive nations, but it was utterly bereft of true wisdom and of learning profitable for life.
Nor did their useless oracles contribute anything to the discovery of good doctrines; indeed, not even the marvelous Pythian himself was of the least help to them toward philosophy, nor did any other god cooperate with them in the pursuit of anything necessary. But wandering hither and thither and running about their whole life long, they adorned themselves with borrowed feathers, as in the fable, so that their entire philosophy came to be pieced together from a collection gathered from others.
For, gleaning different branches of learning from different peoples, they obtained geometry from the Egyptians, astrology from the Chaldeans, and yet other things again from others; but from none of these others did any of them find so good a thing as that which is found among the Hebrews.
And this good thing was the knowledge of the God of all things, and the condemnation of their own national gods—a matter which the discourse, proceeding a little further, will demonstrate.
For the present it may be pointed out to the readers this much: that the ancient Greeks were deprived not only of true theology, but also of the branches of learning useful for philosophy, and not of these alone, but also of the common and civic pursuits of life.
And I consider that this observation will contribute to the demonstration of the purpose now before us, if indeed it is our task to give an account of why we have not unreasonably preferred the theology found among the Hebrews—and that 'barbarian' philosophy, as they themselves would call it—to Greek philosophy.