A Dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology

(Παρμενίδης), a distinguished Greek philosopher, the son of Pyrrhes. He was born in the Greek colony of Elea in Italy, which had probably been founded not long before (Ol. 61 ), and was descended from a wealthy and illustrious family (D. L. 9.21_25, with Sim. Karsten's emendation in Parmenidis Eleatae carminis Reliquiae, Amstelodami, 1835, p. 3, note). According to the statement of Plato, Parmenides, at the age of 65, came to Athens to the Panathenaea, accompanied by Zeno, then 40 years old, and became acquainted with Socrates, who at that time was quite young. This statement, which is designedly repeated by Plato (Plat. Parm. p. 127b., Soph. p. 217c. Theaetet. p. 183e), may very well be reconciled with the apparently discrepant chronology in Diogenes Laertius (9.23), and has without reason been assailed by Athenaeus (11.15, p. 505f., comp. Macrobius, Saturn. 1.1). According to the chronology of Plato the journey of Parmenides would fall in the 80th or 81st Olympiad (Socrates was born in the 4th year of the 77th Olymp.), his birth in the 65th Olympiad, and the period when he flourished would only be set down by Diogenes Laertius a few Olympiads too soon (Ol. 69). Eusebius gives the fourth year of the 80th Olympiad as the period when he flourished, connecting him very accurately with Empedocles, Zeno, and Heracleitus; whereas Theophrastus is stated to have set him down as a hearer of Anaximander (D. L. 9.21). The former statements, considering the indenniteness of the expression

flourish, may at any rate be referred to Parmenides'residence in Athens; the latter must be entirely rejected, whether it be that Theophrastus made a mistake, or, what is much more likely, that Diogenes copied the statement carelessly. The same Theophrastus had spoken of him as a disciple of Xenophanes, with whom Aristotle, with a cautious it is said, connects him (Metaph. 1.5, p. 986b, 1. 22. Theophrastus, according to Alexander: see Schol. on Aristotle, p. 536. 8; comp. Sext. Empir. ad v. Math. 7.111; Clemens Alex. Strom. 1.301; D. L. 9.21); and it is impossible not to see that the Colophonian did open that path of investigation which we see our Eleatic pursuing, whether the former influenced the latter through personal intercourse, or only by the written exposition of his doctrine. Considerably more doubt rests upon the relation in which Parmenides stood to the Pythagoreans, of whom two, entirely unknown to us, Ameinias and Diochaetes, are spoken of as his instructors (Sotion, in Diogenes Laert. 9.21). Others content themselves with reckoning Parmenides as well as Zeno as belonging to the Pythagorean school (Callimachus ap. Procl. in Parmenid. iv. p. 51, comp. Strab. vi. init.; Iambl. Vit. Pythag. § 166, &c. with others), or with speaking of a Parmenidean life, in the same way as a Pythagorean life is spoken of (Cebet. Tabul. 100.2); and even the censorious Timon (in D. L. 9.23) allows Parmenides to have been a high-minded man; while Plato speaks of him with veneration, and Aristotle and others give him an unqualified preference over the rest of the Eleatics (Plat. Theaet. p. 183e.; Soph. p. 237, comp. Aristot. Metaph. A, 5. p. 986b. 50.25; Phys. Auscult. 1.23; Clem. Al. Strom. v. p. 603). His fellow-citizens, the inhabitants of Elea, must have been penetrated by similar feelings with regard to him, if they every year bound their magistrates to render obedience to the laws laid down by him (Speusippus in D. L. 9.23, comp. Strab. vi. p.252; Plut. ad v. Colot. p. 1126).

[CH.A.B]