(PHILOSOPHER of the Ionian school, called Physicus
from having been the first to teach at Athens the physical doctrines of that philosophy. This
statement, which is that of Laertius (2.16), is contradicted by the assertion of Clemens
Alexandrinus (Strom. i. p. 30), that Anaxagoras F. H. ii. p. 51), that Archelaus
was the first Athenian who did so. For the fact that he was a native of
Athens, is considered by Ritter as nearly established on the authority of Simplicius (in Phys. Aristot. fol. 6, b.), as it was probably obtained by him from
Theophrastus ; and we therefore reject the statement of other writers, that Archelaus was a
Milesian. He was the son of Apollodorus, or as some say, of Mydon, Midon, (Suid.) or Myson,
and is said to have taught at Lampsacus before he established himself at Athens. He is
commonly reported to have numbered Socrates and Euripides among his pupils. If he was the
instructor of the former, it is strange that he is never mentioned by Xenophon, Plato, or
Aristotle; and the tradition which connects him with Euripides may have arisen from a
confusion with his namesake Archelaus, king of Macedonia, the well-known patron of that
poet.
The doctrine of Archelaus is remarkable, as Plac. Phil. 1.3)
supposes that he meant infinite air; and we are told, that by this statement he intended to
exclude the operations of mind from the creation of the world. (l.c.)
and as Anaxagoras himself did not accurately distinguish between mind and the animal soul,
this confusion may have given rise to his pupil's doctrine. Archelaus deduced motion from the
opposition of heat and cold, caused of course, if we adopt the above hypothesis, by the will
of the material mind. This opposition separated fire and water, and produced a slimy mass of
earth. While the earth was hardening, the action of heat upon its moisture gave birth to
animals, which at first were nourished by the mud from which they sprang, and gradually
acquired the power of propagating their species. All these animals were endowed with mind, but
man separated from the others, and established laws and societies. It was just from this point
of his physical theory that he seems to have passed into ethical speculation, by the
proposition, that right and wrong are form at
least, by the contemporary Sophists. But when we consider the purely mechanical and
materialistic character of his physics, which make every thing arise from the separation or
distribution of the primary elements, we shall see that nothing, except
the original chaotic mass, is strictly by nature (
Of the other doctrines of Archelaus we need only mention, that he asserted the earth to have
the forin of an egg, the sun being the largest of the stars; and that he correctly accounted
for speech by the motion of the air. For this, according to Plutarch (Plac.
Phil. 4.19), he was indebted to Anaxagorans.
Archelaus flourished l.c.)
To the authorities given above add Brucker, Hist. Crit. Phil. 2.2, 1;
Ritter, Geschichte der Phil. 3.9; Tennemann, Grundriss
der Gesch. der Phil. § 107.