A Dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology

(Πρωταγόρας), was born at Abdera, according to the concurrent testimony of Plato and several other writers. (Protag. p. 309c., De Rep. x. p. 606c.; Heracleides Pont. apud Diog. Laört. 9.55; Cicero, de Nit. Deor. 1.23, &c.) By the comic poet Eupolis (apud Diog. Laert. 9.50), he is called a Teian (Τήϊος), probably with reference to tle Teian origin of that city (Hdt. 1.168, &c.), just as Hecatacus the Abderite is by Strabo. (See Ed. Geist in a programme of the Paedaigogium at Giessen, 1827; comp. Fr. Hermann in the Schulzeitung, 1830, ii. p. 509.) In the manifestly corrupted text of the Pseudo-Galenus (de Philos. Hist. 100.8), he is termed an Elean (compare J. Frei, Quaestiones Protagoreae, Bonnae, 1845, p. 5). By the one his father is called Artemon, by the others Maeandrius or Maeander (D. L. 9.50, ib. Interp.), whom Philostratus (p. 494), probably confounding him with te father of Democritus, describes as very rich; Diogenes Laertius (ib. 53) as miserably poor. The well-known story, however, that Protagoras was once a poor porter, and that the skill with which he had fastened together, and poised upon his shoulders, a large bundle of wood, attracted the attention of Democritus, who conceived a liking for him, took him under his care and instructed him (Epicurus in Diog. Laert. 10.8, 9.53; Aul.

Gellius, N. A. 5.3; comp. Ath. 8.13, p. 354c.),--appears to have arisen out of the statement of Aristotle, that Protagoras invented a sort of porter's knot (τύλη) for the more convenient carrying of burdens (D. L. 9.53; comp. Frei, l.c. p. 6, &c.). Moreover, whether Protagoras was, as later ancient authorities assumed (D. L. 9.50; Clem. Alex. Strom. i. p. 301d., &c.), a disciple of Democritus, with whom in point of doctrine he had absolutely nothing in common, is very doubtful, and Frei (l.c. p. 24, &c.) has undertaken to show that Protagoras was some twenty years older than Democritus. If, in fact, Anaxagoras, as is confirmed in various ways, was born about B. C. 500, and was forty years older than Democritus, according to the latter's own statement (D. L. 9.41; comp. 34), Protagoras must have been older than Democritus, as it is certain that Protagoras was older than Socrates, who was born B. C. 468 (Plat. Protag. p. 317c., 314, b., 361, e.; comp. D. L. 9.42, 56), and died before him at the age of nearly seventy (Plat. Meno, p. 91e.; comp. Theaet. p. 171d., 164, e., Euthlyd. p. 286c.; the assumption of others, that he reached the age of ninety years, D. L. 9.55, Schol. in Plat. de Rep. x. p. 600, is of no weight), after he had practised the sophistic art for forty years, and had by flight withdrawn himself from the accusation of Pythodorus, one of the Four Hundred, who governed Athens in B. C. 411 (D. L. 9.54 ; comp. Philostratus, l.c. Aristotle mentioned Euathlus, the disciple of Protagoras, as his accuser, Diog. Laert. l.c.). Apollodorus, therefore, might very well assign the 84th Olympiad (B. C. 444) as the period when he flourished (D. L. 9.54, 56). A more accurate determination of the date of his death, and thence of his birth, cannot be extracted from a fragment of the Silli of Timon (in Sext. Emp. ad v. Math. 9.57), and a passage of Plato (Theaet. p. 171d.), as the placing together of Protagoras and Socrates in them does not presuppose that their deaths were contemporaneous. Nor are we justified in concluding from the boastful expression of the sophist (Plat. Prot. p. 317c.), that he was twenty years older than Socrates. On the other hand, if Euripides alluded to his death in the Ixion (according to Philochorus in D. L. 9.55), he must have died before B. C. 406 or 407, i. e. before the death of Euripides. With preponderating probability, therefore, Frei places the death of Protagoras in B. C. 411, assuming that Pythodorus accused him during the government of the Four Hundred (Quaest. Protey. p. 64), and accordingly assigns about B. C. 480 as the date of his birth.

That Protagoras had already acquired fame during his residence in Abdera cannot be inferred from the doubtful statement, that he was termed by the Abderites λόγος, and Democritus φιλοσοφία or σοφία. (Ael. VH 4.20; comp. Suid. s. vv. Πρωταγ. Δημόκρ., &c. Phavorinus, in D. L. 9.50, gives to Protagoras the designation of τοφία). He was the first who called himself a sophist, and taught for pay (Plat. Protag. p. 349a.; D. L. 9.52). He must have come to Athens before B. C. 445, since, according to the statement of Heracleides Ponticus (D. L. 9.50), he gave laws to the Thurians, or, what is more probable, adapted for the use of the new coloists, who left Athens for the first time in that year, the laws which had been drawn up at an earlier period by Charondas, for the use of the Chalcidic colonies (for according to Diod. 12.1. 3, and others, these laws were in force at Thurii likewise). Whether he himself removed to Thurii, we do not learn, but at the time of the plague we find him again in Athens, as he could scarcely have mentioned the strength of mind displayed by Pericles at the death of his sons, in the way he does (in a fragment still extant, Plut. de Consol, ad Apoll. 100.33, p. 118d.), had he not been an eye-witness. He had also, as it appears, returned to Athens after a long absence (Plat. Prot. p. 301c.), at a time when the sons of Pericles were still alive (ibid. p. 314e., 329, a.) A somewhat intimate relation between Protagoras and Pericles is intimated also elsewhere. (Plut. Per. 100.36. p. 172a.) His activity, however, was by no means restricted to Athens. He had spent some time in Sicily, and acquired fame there (Plat. Hipp. Maj. p. 282d.), and brought with him to Athens many admirers out of other Greek cities through which he had passed (Plat. Prot. p. 315a.). The impeachment of Protagoras had been founded on his book on the gods, which began with the statement: "Respecting the gods, I am unable to know whether they exist or do not exist." (D. L. 9.51, &c.) The impeachment was followed by his banishment (D. L. 9.52; Cic. de Nat. Deor. 1.23; Euseb. Praep. Evang. 14.19, &c.), or, as others affirm, only by the burning of his book. (Philost. Vit. Soph. l.c.; Joseph. c. Apion. 2.37; Sext. Emp. ad v. Math. 9.56; Cic. Diog. Laert. II. cc.)

[Ch. A. B.]