Page:Ferrier Works vol 2 1888 LECTURES IN GREEK PHILOSOPHY.pdf/167

112 Fire, it is said, is the element which he regarded as primary. Much stress, however, is not to be laid on this circumstance; and it affords no good reason for classing him with his Ionic predecessors, or for placing him before Parmenides and Zeno. For the fire of which Heraclitus speaks is not to be regarded as itself his principle, but merely as a symbol of his principle, merely as a physical emblem or illustration of that unceasing motion or change which he holds to be the very essence of the universe. Notwithstanding these considerations, therefore, I have thought it right to place him after the Eleatics, for the chronological difference between him and them is but slight. The three philosophers, Parmenides, Zeno, and Heraclitus, were contemporaries during a part, at least, of their lives; and therefore, although the latter may have been rather the oldest of the three, still, as his speculations appear to stand in the order of thought subsequent to those of the Eleatic school, I have thought this consideration a sufficient justification of the arrangement which I have adopted in reference to the philosopher of Ephesus. We hear that, although sprung from a family of repute, and entitled to aspire to the highest offices in the state, Heraclitus refused to have anything to do with the affairs of government. His pride or his patriotism equally prevented him from accepting favours offered by foreign despots. In privacy and independence, prizing his own thoughts above all other possessions, Heraclitus lived and died, the deepest,