r. a. prier - sema and the symbolic nature of pre-socratic thought

8/22/2019 R. A. Prier - SEMA and the Symbolic Nature of Pre-Socratic Thought

1/12

Accademia Editorale

and the Symbolic Nature of Pre-Socratic ThoughtAuthor(s): Raymond Adolph PrierSource: Quaderni Urbinati di Cultura Classica, No. 29 (1978), pp. 91-101Published by: Fabrizio Serra editoreStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20538552 .

Accessed: 30/03/2013 05:29

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Fabrizio Serra editore andAccademia Editorale are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend

access to Quaderni Urbinati di Cultura Classica.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 128.206.9.138 on Sat, 30 Mar 2013 05:29:22 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=fabserhttp://www.jstor.org/stable/20538552?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/20538552?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=fabser


2/12

2f)[xa and the Symbolic Nature ofPre-Socratic Thoughtby Raymond Adolph Prier

? S' apa acpi Xeov y?vzT svSo?h vtjo?Sslvo? stc' ?xpOT


3/12

92 R.A. Prier

oqx?pocjfo) * vocutoc? Se racpo? Xa?s 7uavTa? ?S?vxac.aurixa S' ?xp?Taxov 7iap? Icraov I^stocvugS-y)afJUisXo? ?v?-a xal ?'vfra, xaTSxpyj|jiv


4/12

Pre-Socratic Thought 93

day be shown clearly that archaic symbols actually structure andmake whole the literature in which they appear. But for the present,I wish only to develop the definition of o9)(xa, to relate certain of itsattributes to other phenomena that are obviously cry)?jiaTaby theirdescription, to indicate that a similar use of language exists in thepre-Socratics, and finally to suggest that from the very earliest periodin the Greek language there existed a critical awareness of the necessary symbolic qualities of word and experience ?qualities that inno way become dim in the cognitive processes of the pre-Socratics.In Homer the definition of cnjôcand its derivatives extends from"tomb" to "hidden tokens" or "signs of recognition". Inthe majority of cases " symbol " is a possible translation of these

phenomena. Unquestionably the most common usage of oTjjxa isto mean " tomb " or " burial mound " ?an indication or symbol,I could argue, of the hidden mythical force of the dead or perhapssome contro] of a negative power emanating from them. As forthe verb gyôc?vco, it almost uniformly indicates the giving of ordersor commands. There are two partial exceptions that might givea clue to its deeper meaning. At 77. 11,788-789, we learn that Peleus placed upon Patroclus the command to speak to Achilles shrewd

word, to advise, and to " point out " or " educate " the hero (?XX5s5 o? cp?a-9-atm>xiv?v ?ro? v)S5?7ro&?a#m / xa? o? ay)[xa?v?iv). Patroclus,being older (7ip?a?UT?poc7. 11,787), obviously is being instructedto lead Achilles along the correct path or, as Homer puts it here,"into that which is really noble " (etc ?ya&ovwp //. 11,789). Asimilar condition exists at Od. 12,25-26: Circe declares that she willshow Odysseus the ?S?c and "point out" each thing (atk?p ?y?S?t?co ?Sov 7)S? Ixaaxa / crvâveco Od. 12,25-26). Her words are

much more than a mere command; they are intended to indicateto her " pupil " the correct path in his v?cjtoc or return home. Both

Achilles and Odysseus seem to be expected to experience an improvement of person as they have revealed before them the signs orsymbols of the way they are supposed to act. As far as the herois concerned, the ar?\i(x. has both an inward and outward correspondence. Parmenides adopts the same matrix of language when hedraws for us his ?S?c to Being and the ot)[x


5/12

94 R. A. Prier

bol, some revelation of a hidden quality or experience, a writtenword or token. Odysseus at one point tells us of a terrifying snakethat appeared in the midst of Calchas' sacrifices on Aulis: o&svp?sv ?yXaov oScop * / ev-9-' ?c?vv) [xsya aYJ[jia ("whence flowed the brightwater thence appeared a great symbol ", //. 2,307-308). This " symbol " is, of course, the snake from whose actions Calchas wouldbe able to foretell the future of the Achaeans at Troy. Note the closecoupling of GYJfjiawith uSop, a word not only of possible symbolicsignificance itself because of its place in the ritual action of sacrifice,but also an element we know will take a major place in several preSocratics and in Pindar. In several instances the lightning or thundering of Zeus represents a divine sign or symbol of what is to take

place. These are powerfully emotive symbols of light that revealthe future, affective flashes that are surely linked to the brilliantmalevolence of the star named the Dog of Orion ([ ?cnryjp] 6v ts x?v5

'Qpwovo? ?7?xXy)(Ti.vxaX?oucn. / Xafi/rcpOTaxo? jilv o y' eax?, xax?v S? t?


6/12


The symbol, because of its power, is in Homer a cognitive phenomenon. It is recognized, and it is recognized clearly. It is inmany instances a gyjiaoc ?pi9paS?c. In the Odyssey, for example,ayjfjia is commonly linked to this adjective ?pKppaSyjc (" clear ", "manifest ", from 9pa?o[Aou, "to perceive", "to observe", "to consider ", or "to ponder "). Odysseus' scar is such a o%afor Eu

maeus, for Philoetius, for Eurycleia, and for Laertes (Od. 21,217;23,73 and 24,329). It is a " symbol " of the man himself. Itreveals or shows his true worth?hence the long"

digression"

describing how it was obtained in Book 19. Yet, the scar is not theonly cFYJjAocpL9paS??. Penelope speaks of gt\[lolto? ?p^paS?oc to whichonly Odysseus and she are privy ? a^axa hidden from others (sT^afr',? S?) xa? v


7/12

96 R.A. Prier

of semi-hidden, personal, bright, powerfully cognitive experiences.I should argue that the very force of the contexts in which oTjjxa sused demands a need for extraordinary words or actions ?that is,symbolic phenomena in themselves that divorce cognition from nonrecognition. The extraordinary might well appear in words thatengender the urge for extraordinary action. Take, for example,the cnjpiaTa written (ypdapa?) for Bellerophon's death (II. 6,168-169,176 and 178). It makes little difference whether these aâTa were

written words or signs of some other type. What is important isthat they were the symbols that moved the king, once cognizant,to action. There can be little doubt inmy own mind that Homerwas well aware of the experiential, cognitive value in words, actions,a boar's scar, a star, or phenomena written in a folded tablet.

SvjfAaTa, then, can obviously be many things, but how, one mustask, do these elements find their way into pre-Socratic thought?While Hesiod speaks of only one o%a of note: the rock belchedup by Cronos and lodged at Delphi as a ftaofia &vt)tcho*i ?porownv ?"a wonder-symbol for mortal men" (Th. 500), the real clue liesfirst, I think, in the Homeric Hymns and afterwards in Hesiod'sTheogony in another context.I introduced this short study with the affective symbols ofgodhead in the Hymn to Dionysus, the ?'pya of the grapevine.A parallel immediately at hand is the amazing growth of the vinein the Hymn to Hermes which Apollo uses in his attempt to bindhis fellow god:

(lacuna)ayvou * Tai ?' \>tzo tzoggi xax? ôvo? a?â ?oi>X9jcri xXsipi?povo? * a?x?p 'AtcOXXov

S-a?[JLacr?v?&pYjcra?.[ ] of willow. These on the ground beneath their feet

began to growFrom thence, intertwined, fit-in with one anotherEven easily over all the cattle dwelling in the fieldBy the counsel of dissembling Hermes. Still ApolloHaving seen was filled with wonder.

(h.h. Her. 410-414)

This content downloaded from 128.206.9.138 on Sat, 30 Mar 2013 05:29:22 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


8/12


Symbols of godhead do indeed fill the one who sees with wonder(8-a?[xac?v), even a god himself. In this hymn both Hermes' sacrificeof the oxen and the gift of the lyre to Apollo are designated asaviara ?that is, as symbols of Hermes' power as a god (h.h. Her.136and 509). Activities and objects no longer are set in an ordinarycontext but assume meaning on a powerful, cognitive, anti-materialistic level. In the Hymn to the Dioscuri, for instance, the demigods become beacons of light?that is, stars which are beautifulcr7)|xaTa that deliver men from toil (?YjpiaTa xaX? tc?vou anovOGyiGw ?h.h. Dios. 16, Bury's reading). Here again are the astral symbolsof the Iliad (23,454-455), and it is these phenomena of fight with allof their cognitive connotations and, especially in the case of the

Hymn to the Dioscuri, with their connotations of recognition of theproper or best " way " that should influence strongly our considerations of the pre-Socratics.

Now, in terms of " symbolic light ", what word might be selected in the corpus of the hymns as characteristic? Either 9X0? or7iupmight be chosen.

I wish to investigate the lattermore

closelybecause of its later use in the pre-Socratics. It also possesses a setof unusual connotations that surround gt^ol-zol of all kinds. In the

Hymn to Hermes we find the god's eyes twinkling fire (rcup a^apucrawv h.h. Her. 415). This fire is in no way a material phenomenon.It is not combustion. Nor is there any evidence I can find thatwould force me to label it mere metaphor. Hermes, for instancefirst gave up to men ftresticks and fire OEppj? toi 7ipc!maTa uupyj?a7tup t ?v?Scoxs h.h. Her. 111). One does not endow men with a

metaphor at this stage of myth in Greek. Fire is that mythical baptismal into which Demeter places the infant Demopho?n, creatinga great frauda for his parents:V?XTOCC? Xp?TCT?CX?TCUpO? (X?V?L"/JUTEocX?vX?&poc 9tX


9/12

98 R. A. Prier

inHesiod's Theogony (692, 694, and 697) 9X0^and p of synonymous importance here I think ?are symbol-elements which inconjunction with lightning (?cnrspo7tY)h. 691) fill the universe whenZeus struggles most fiercely in his battle for supremacy. In primal,affective experiences of chaos or creation, the defining characteristic,then, according to Hesiod is light, and this light is, among otherphenomena, also 7rup.

IIup is, of course, one of the primary "elements " in so-calledpre-Socratic literature, placed in conjunction with uScop (water),a&Y)p,or ?vjp (air), and yvj (earth). The instances of all five wordsin the ipsissima verba are many indeed, and there is little doubt in

my mind that they all should be reviewed along with their contextsin order to reestablish their cosmological definitions from a symbolicpoint of view. But for the present I believe that an examinationof 7cupwill prove my point nicely and provide us with a clear progression between the Homeric and Hesiodic works and those of the preSocratics. I wish in this case to restrict myself even further ?na

mely to 7Tupand related words of light in Heraclitus and Paimenides.In Heraclitus m>p occurs in the ipsissima verba five or, withemendation, six times. Without exception it is connected with thestructural properties of the cosmos. It ?5 the cosmos itself?thecosmos that is the same for all things, that is created by neither godsnor men, "but was always, is and will be everlasting fire (x?ajxovTOV??, TOV aUTOV a7??vT6>V, O?T? TLC 0*?c5v OUT? ?vfrp(?>7?C?V ?7TO?7)a?V, ?XX' 9]V?el xa? ?gtlv xa? ?cvoLi 7iup dcE??oov ... 30). It is the primary activesymbol underlying or exchanging itself for all things, just as goods forgold and gold for goods (rcup?c T? avxa[jioi?Y) xa Tc?vxa xa? 7cup??r?vrcovoK??anep XPuo?u XPW** xo" XP7?(JL^T0>vPu


10/12


them (toxvtoc yap to mip IroX&?v xpive? xocl xocTaX^eToci 66). It isthe sign or symbol of an active, logical principle. IIup on a secondary level is one of the four " elements " that comprise the cosmos;it is, within an overriding structure, equivalent to ayjp, ?Scop, and y??and may be used to reveal the oppositional metrics of the cosmos.The relationship of these four primary elements or symbols represents the active logicalmovement and total penetration of the Logositself into the cosmos: ?vj mip t?v y?j? ft?vocTov xal ?yjp ?vj t?v rcupo?-9-?vaTov, ?Scop ?yj t6v ??po? 9-?vaxov, yvj tov oSocto? (" Fire lives thedeath of earth, and air lives the death of fire; water lives the death

of air, earth that of water " 76). IIup can also form a logicalmovement that overrides all other " elemental " symbolic phenomena: "the changes of fire (nvpbc, Tpo^?t) are first sea which ishalf earth (y9j) and half fiery-waterspout (nc>r?Grr?c>).r? is cut up[using the Homeric definition of St,


11/12

100 R. A. Prier

In the poem itself 7rup ismentioned twice. One involved instanceoccurs in 12, that powerfully archetypal description of the circles ofunmixed light and night (ai yep arsiv?Tepai -tuXtjvtom>po? ?xpv)Tot.o, /a? Sy ?tc? Tcd? vuxTO? 12,1-2). This usage forms, I think, a clear indication that at least one construction of the cosmos ?it is, of course,difficult to state with certainty whether Parmenides is totally rejecting this construction or not ?was in a comprehensive sense" symbolic " ? that is, composed of symbols. His poem betraysa greater interest and dependence upon such phenomena than Isuspect some would like to admit. Parmenides also denies a puredivision of Night and nup in 8,53-56. His opponents have wronglynamed two forms. They have judged them as opposite in formand have established av^aTa totally divorced from one another;one is dark Night, the other is


12/12


One may discern such phenomena in both the proem and the poemitself. The poet-philosopher is simply using symbolic language forhis own symbolic ends.

Therefore, whether in agreement or not, whether in hot denialor in the calm presentation of the evidence of Being, Parmenides,as Heraclitus, as Homer, recognized clearly the importance of cn)fAocTa,and because these ancients fashioned the elements ?thatisa^aTa ?so carefully into their representations of the cosmos, I must arguethat their recognition and awareness was to some major degreeconscious. It is not Aristotle who must give us the clue to what thepre-Socratics meant by the elements, fire, water, air, and earth, butHomer and Hesiod. It was the poet-philosophers and the poetsthat maintained the archaic force of the phenomena that were indeeda frauda ISstv. Think but a moment on the opening of Olympian 1:

"ApiGTOV JJL?VStOp, ? Se %p\)GO? GU&?[Jl?VOVTOpocT?SLaTcp?7T?t.uxxi [X?yocvopo? i^oycn 7tXo?touBest is water, but gold like gleaming fireBy night outshines far above all pride of wealth

(Olympian 1,1-2).In the affective use of elemental symbols Pindar and the pre-Socraticscould be argued to be rather much the same. In both cases theyrepresent a sure link between seeing and knowing 3.

San BernardinoState College

31 should like to acknowledge the penetrating aid of Professors Thomas Coleand Jaan Puhvel in the last stages of this paper ? men whose sense of good argu

ment and etymology have always been thankfully received.

r. a. prier - sema and the symbolic nature of pre-socratic thought

Documents