Many other ancient writers collected stories about people seeming to die and then coming to life again, including Demokritos the natural philosopher in his book On Hades. […]
For it appears that this death [of Er, in Plato’s Politeia] was not even a complete extinction of the body. He was weakened, probably by some blow and wound, but the tethers of his soul still stayed rooted firmly to the marrow, and the heart still had an ember of life concealed deep inside. And with these remaining he was fit to be animated, and he revived his quenched life.
For even now in our times some people who appeared dead have been put in their graves and then revived, and some have been seen lying on their graves, and others even standing on them. Just as indeed in ancient times Aristeas of Prokonnesus, Hermodoros of Klazomenai and Epimenides of Crete were recorded to have been among the living after death.
And what more should be told? Well also Klearchos, the disciple of Aristotle, was first to tell a marvellous story of the same kind. Kleonymos of Athens, a man fond of discussing philosophy, who was distraught and despondent over the death of a friend, fainted and appeared to die, and on the third day he was laid out according to custom. And as his mother threw herself on him to bid her final farewell, and pulled the cloak from his face and kissed the corpse, she noticed a slight breath within him. Overcome with joy, she halted the funeral.
Kleonymos gradually awakened and recovered, and told everything that he had seen and heard as a result of being separated from his body. Upon his death his soul really seemed to loosen from the tethers of the body, and letting them fall, rose up into the sky. And thus risen over the earth, his soul saw places on earth of all kinds and shapes and colors, and the streams of rivers that can’t be viewed by people. And finally his soul arrived in some country sacred to Hestia, tended by divine powers in indescribable forms of women.
And another person arrived to this place, and they called to each other. Then they stayed still and observed everything there. And they both saw the punishments and the judgements of the souls, and those that are forever being purged, and those the Eumenides watches over.
Then they were ordered to leave the country, and when they had left, they asked each other who they were, and told each other their names and their fatherlands, one Kleonymos of Athens and the other Lysias of Syrakousa. And they urged each other to be certain to look up the other, if one of them should come to the town where the other lives. And after not much time, Lysias came to Athens, and Kleonymos saw him from afar and cried out that it was Lysias, who likewise before he approached recognized and told those with him that it was Kleonymos. Such is Klearchos’ account.
And also Naumachios of Epeirοs, a man who lived in the time of my grandfathers, records that Polykritos of Aitolia, a very distinguished Aitolian who became chief of the Aitolian league, died and was brought back to life nine months after his death. And he came to the common assembly of the Aitolians and gave excellent advice about what they were deliberating. And among the witnesses were Hieron of Ephesos and other historians who wrote about King Antigonos and his friends without being present.
And this is not the only case [that Naumachios told]. In Nikopolis, among those who lived not long ago, was someone named Eurynous who had the same experience. He was buried in front of the town by his relatives and came back to life fifteen days after the funeral. And he said he had seen and heard many wonders under the earth, but he was ordered to keep everything secret. And he lived again for not a little time, and he was seen to be more righteous after his resurrection than before.
And [Naumachios] cites also a third case, which he says happened yesterday: Rouphos from Philippoi in Makedonia, who was honored with the highest prelacy in Thessalonika. For he died and came back to life on the third day, and said he had been sent back by the Chthonic gods in order to complete the spectacles he had undertaken for the people. And he lived again long enough to complete them, and then died again.
And the trophy among these belongs to Philinnion, during the reign of Philip. She was the daughter of Demostratos and Charito of Amphipolis, who had died as a young bride, after marrying Krateros. And she came back to life in the sixth month after her death, and due to her great passion for a young man named Machates, who had come from his homeland of Pelles to stay with Damostratos, she secretly united with him one night after another. And she was caught and she again died, after explaining that she had done this at the will of the underworld daimones. And the corpse was seen by everyone lying in her father’s house. And the place where her body was before it was found was dug up and seen by the family to be empty, who had gone there because they couldn’t believe what had happened. And these things were revealed in letters, some by Hipparchos, others by Arridaios, who was entrusted with the affairs of Amphipolis, to Philip. And these are from the historical accounts. […]
For just as certain herbs when burned as fumigants give persistence to the body that doesn’t eat for a very long time, the same thing that they do from the outside also occurs amazingly to some bodies due to their own natural constitution. And this is so also in all other cases: the same abilities that some acquire from certain herbs or stones, others have within themselves by their natural condition. Some by infusing their eyes with the juice of nightshade and other concoctions behold phantoms of daimones in the air, and some experience such things without such contrivances. And some are able to foresee the future after so-called tastings, while others have this ability by nature. […]
And there is nothing amazing in this, since also the swallows, it is said, live while being dead in the hollows of trees the whole of the winter season, and when the chill of the air ends they start to move and shake off their deadness. […]
And to all the above one must add, that Plato attributed the whole story to divine machinations. The proof {is that he was ordered to be} the messenger {of what was happening} there and {to report} everything he observed {and heard} to mankind. And if that is true, it would surely be {up to} the daimones to ensure the messenger’s body was unaffected. […]
And so we agree that the story [of Er] itself has thus been proved, since nothing shows it to be impossible, neither the separation of the soul from the body (for even the priestly instructions do this, separating the soul from the body, while they surround the bodies with a guard against air blowing through, protecting the activity of the souls and the release of their natural tethers), nor that the body remained undecayed for many days. […]
Neither is it impossible for a human soul to obtain the divine truth about matters in Hades and announce them to mankind. And the proof is the story recorded by Herakleides of Pontos about Empedotimos. He was hunting with others at high noon in a certain countryside, and after they left him behind, he said, as manifestations of Plouton and Persephone appeared, he was seized by the light that ran in a circle around the gods, and he saw in it the whole truth about souls in self-revealed spectacles.
Author: Proklos of Lykia
Title of Work: Commentary on Plato’s Politeia (Republic)
Location in Work: 2.113.6-119.27 (Kroll)
Date of Work: c. 460 CE
Original Language: Greek (Attic)
Original Text:
Τὴν μὲν περὶ τῶν ἀποθανεῖν δοξάντων, ἔπειτα ἀναβιούντων ἱστορίαν ἄλλοι τε πολλοὶ τῶν παλαιῶν ἤθροισαν καὶ Δημόκριτος ὃ φυσικὸς ἐν τοῖς Περὶ τοῦ Ἅιδου γράμμασιν. [...]
οὐδὲ γὰρ ὁ θάνατος ἦν ἀπόσβεσις, ὡς ἔοικεν, τῆς συμπάσης ζωῆς τοῦ σώματος, ἀλλ᾽ ὑπὸ μὲν πληγῆς τινος ἴσως καὶ τραύματος παρεῖτο, τῆς δὲ ψυχῆς οἱ περὶ τὸν μυελὸν ἔμενον ἔτι δεσμοὶ κατερριζωμένοι καὶ ἡ καρδία τὸ ἐμπύρευμα τῆς ζωῆς εἶχεν ἐγκείμενον τῷ βάθει· καὶ τούτων μενόντων αὖθις ἀνεκτήσατο τὴν ἀπεσβηκυῖαν ξωὴν ἐπιτήδειος πρὸς τὴν ψύχωσιν γενόμενος.
καὶ γὰρ ἐφ᾽ ἡμῶν τινες ἤδη καὶ ἀποθανεῖν ἔδοξαν καὶ μνήμασιν ἐνετέθησαν καὶ ἀνεβίωσαν καὶ ὥφθησαν οἳ μὲν ἐγκαθήμενοι τοῖς μνήμασιν, οἳ δὲ καὶ ἐφεστῶτες· καθάπερ δὴ καὶ ἐπὶ τῶν πάλαι γεγονότων ἱστοροῦνται καὶ Ἀριστέας ὁ Προκοννήσιος καὶ Ἑρμόδωρος ὁ Κλαζομένιος καὶ Ἐπιμενίδης ὁ Κρής, μετὰ θάνατον ἐν τοῖς ζῶσιν γενόμενοι.
καὶ τί δεῖ πολλὰ λέγειν; ὅπου γε καὶ ὃ μαθητὴς Ἀριστοτέλους Κλέαρχος ἱστορίαν τινὰ τοιαύτην πρῶτος παραδέδωκεν θαυμασίαν. Κλεώνυμος ὁ Ἀθηναῖος, φιλήκοος ἀνὴρ τῶν ἐν φιλοσοφίᾳ λόγων, ἑταίρου τινὸς αὐτῷ τελευτήσαντος περιαλγὴς γενόμενος καὶ ἀθυμήσας ἐλιποψύχησέν τε καὶ τεθνάναι δόξας τρίτης ἡμέρας οὔσης κατὰ τὸν νόμον προὐτέθη· περιβάλλουσα δὲ αὐτὸν ἡ μήτηρ καὶ πανύστατον ἀσπαζομένη, τοῦ προσώπου θοἰμάτιον ἀφελοῦσα καὶ καταφιλοῦσα τὸν νεκρὸν ᾔσθετο βραχείας ἀναπνοῆς αὐτῷ τινος ἐγκειμένης. περιχαρῆ δὲ αὐτὴν γενομένην ἐπισχεῖν τὴν ταφήν·
τὸν δὲ Κλεώνυμον ἀναφέροντα κατὰ μικρὸν ἐγερθῆναι καὶ εἰπεῖν, ὅσα τε ἐπειδὴ χωρὶς ἦν καὶ οἷα τοῦ σώματος ἴδοι καὶ ἀκούσειεν. τὴν μὲν οὖν αὑτοῦ ψυχὴν φάναι παρὰ τὸν θάνατον οἷον ἐκ δεσμῶν δόξαι τινῶν ἀφειμένην τοῦ σώματος παρεθέντος μετέωρον ἀρθῆναι, καὶ ἀρθεῖσαν ὑπὲρ γῆς ἰδεῖν τόπους ἐν αὐτῇ παντοδαποὺς καὶ τοῖς σχήμασι καὶ τοῖς χρώμασιν καὶ ῥεύματα ποταμῶν ἀπρόσοπτα ἀνθρώποις· καὶ τέλος ἀφικέσθαι εἴς τινα χῶρον ἱερὸν τῆς Ἑστίας, ὃν περιέπειν δαιμονίας δυνάμεις ἐν γυναικῶν μορφαῖς ἀπεριηγήτοις.
εἰς δὲ ἐκεῖνον αὐτὸν τὸν τόπον καὶ ἄλλον ἀφικέσθαι ἄνθρωπον καὶ ἄμφοῖν τὴν αὐτὴν γενέσθαι φωνήν· μένειν τε ἡσυχῇ καὶ ὁρᾶν τὰ ἐκεῖ πάντα. καὶ δὴ καὶ ὁρᾶν ἄμφω ψυχῶν ἐκεῖ κολάσεις τε καὶ κρίσεις καὶ τὰς ἀεὶ καθαιρομένας καὶ τὰς τούτων ἐπισκόπους Εὐμενίδας·
ἔπειτα κελευσθῆναι ἀποχωρεῖν, καὶ ἀποχωρήσαντας ἀλλήλους ἐπανερέσθαι τίνες εἶεν, καὶ εἰπεῖν ἀλλήλοις τὰ ὀνόματα καὶ τὰς πατρίδας, τὸν μὲν Ἀθήνας καὶ Κλεώνυμον, τὸν δὲ Συρακούσας καὶ Λυσίαν, καὶ ἀλλήλοις παρακελεύσασθαι ζητῆσαι πάντως ἑκάτερον, ἐὰν εἰς τὴν θατέρου πόλιν ἀφίκηται, τὸν ἀπ᾽ ἐκείνης ὧρμημένον. καὶ μετὰ χρόνον οὐ πολὺν ἐλθεῖν μὲν Ἀθήναξε τὸν Λυσίαν, πόρρωθεν δὲ αὐτὸν ἰδόντα τὸν Κλεώνυμον ἀναβοῆσαι τοῦτον εἶναι τὸν Λυσίαν, καὶ τοῦτον ὡσαύτως ἐπιγνῶναί τε πρὶν προσέλθῃ καὶ τοῖς παροῦσιν εἰπεῖν τοῦτον εἶναι τὸν Κλεώνυμον. Ταῦτα μὲν ὁ Κλεάρχου λόγος·
ἱστορεῖ δὲ καὶ Ναυμάχιος ὃ Ἠπειρώτης, ἀνὴρ ἐπὶ τῶν ἡμετέρων πάππων γεγονώς. Πολύκριτον Αἰτωλὸν ἐπιφανέστατον Αἰτωλῶν καὶ Αἰτωλαρχίας τυχόντα καὶ ἀποθανεῖν καὶ ἀναβιῶναι μηνὶ μετὰ τὸν θάνατον ἐνάτῳ, καὶ ἀφικέσθαι εἰς ἐκκλησίαν κοινὴν τῶν Αἰτωλῶν καὶ συμβουλεῦσαι τὰ ἄριστα περὶ ὧν ἐβουλεύοντο καὶ τούτων εἶναι μάρτυρας Ἱέρωνα τὸν Ἐφέσιον χαὶ ἄλλους ἵστορικοὺς Ἀντιγόνῳ τε τῷ βασιλεῖ καὶ ἄλλοις ἑαυτῶν φίλοις ἀποῦσι τὰ συμβάντα γράψαντας.
Καὶ οὐ τοῦτον μόνον, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐν τῇ Νικοπόλει τῶν οὐ πρὸ πολλοῦ τινὰ γεγονότων, Εὐρύνουν ὄνομα, ταὐτὸν παθεῖν, καὶ ταφέντα πρὸ τῆς πόλεως ὑπὸ τῶν προσηκόντων ἀναβιῶναι μετὰ πεντεκαιδεκάτην ἡμέραν τῆς ταφῆς καὶ λέγειν, ὅτι πολλὰ μὲν ἴδον καὶ ἀκούσειεν ὑπὸ γῆς θαυμαστά, κελευσθῆναι δὲ πάντα ἄρρητα φυλάττειν. καὶ ἐπιβιῶναι χρόνον οὐκ ὀλίγον καὶ ὀφθῆναι δικαιότερον μετὰ τὴν ἀναβίωσιν ἢ πρότερον.
Προστίθησιν δὲ καὶ τρίτον ἄλλον χθές, ὥς φησιν, γεγονότα, Ῥοῦφον τὸν ἐκ Φιλίππων τῶν ἐν Μακεδονίᾳ, τῆς δὲ ἐν Θεσσαλονίκῃ μεγίστης ἀρχιερωσύνης ἀξιωθέντα· τοῦτον γὰρ ἀποθανόντα τριταῖον ἀναβιῶναι καὶ ἀναβιοῦντα εἰπεῖν, ὅτι ὑπὸ τῶν χθονίων ἀναπεμφθείη θεῶν, ἵνα τὰς θέας ἐπιτελέσοι τῷ δήμῳ, ἃς ὑποσχόμενος ἐτύγχανεν, καὶ μέχρι τῆς ἐκείνων συμπληρώσεως ἐπιβιοῦντα αὖθις ἀποθανεῖν.
Καὶ τὸν κολοφῶνα τούτων ὑπάρχειν Φιλίνviov κατὰ τοὺς Φιλίππου βασιλεύσαντος χρόνους. εἶναι δὲ αὐτὴν θυγατέρα Δημοστράτου καὶ Χαριτοῦς τῶν Ἀμφιπολιτῶν νεόγαμον τελευτήσασαν· ἐγεγάμητο δὲ Κρατερῷ. ταύτὴν δ᾽ οὖν ἕκτῳ μηνὶ μετὰ τὸν θάνατον ἀναβιῶναι καί τινι νεανίσκῳ Μαχάτῃ, παρὰ τὸν Δαμόστρατον ἀφικομένῳ ἐκ Πέλλης τῆς πατρίδος, λάθρᾳ συνεῖναι διὰ τὸν πρὸς αὐτὸν ἔρωτα πολλὰς ἐφεξῆς νύκτας καὶ φωραθεῖσαν αὖθις ἀποθανεῖν, προειποῦσαν κατὰ βούλησιν τῶν ὑποχθονίων δαιμόνων αὐτῇ ταῦτα πεπρᾶχθαι, καὶ ὁρᾶσθαι πᾶσι νεκρὰν ἐν τῇ πατρῴᾳ προκειμένην οἰκίᾳ· καὶ τὸν πρότερον αὐτῆς δεξάμενον τὸ σῶμα τόπον ἀνορυχθέντα κενὸν ὀφθῆναι τοῖς οἰκείοις, ἐπ᾽ αὐτὸν ἐλθοῦσιν δι᾿ ἀπιστίαν τῶν γεγονότων· καὶ ταῦτα δηλοῦν ἐπιστολὰς τὰς μὲν παρὰ Ἱππάρχου, τὰς δὲ παρὰ Ἀρριδαίου γραφείσας τοῦ τὰ πράγματα τῆς Ἀμφιπόλεως ἐγκεχειρισμένου πρὸς Φίλιππον. καὶ ταῦτα μὲν τὰ ἐκ τῶν ἱστοριῶν. [...]
ὅπου γε καὶ βοτάναι θυμιώμεναί τινες παρέχονται διαμένον ἐπὶ πλεῖστον ὅσον χρόνον τὸ σῶμα τῶν μὴ τρεφομένων, καὶ ὅπερ αὗταί εἰσιν ἔξωθεν, τοῦτο καὶ πρὸς φυσικὴν σύστασιν προσιέναι τισὶ τῶν σωμάτων αὖθις παραδόξως· καὶ γὰρ ἐπὶ τῶν ἄλλων ἁπάντων οὕτως ἔχειν καὶ ὅσα δή τισιν διά τινων βοτανῶν ἢ λίθων δυνάμεις ὑπάρχει, ταῦτα ἔχει ἐκ τῆς φυσικῆς ἐνόντα κατασκευῆς· καὶ τοῖς ὀφθαλμοῖς τινες χυλὸν ἐνιέντες στρύχνου καὶ ποῶν ἄλλων εἴδωλα ἄττα δαιμόνων ἐν ἀέρι καθορῶσιν· καί τινες ἄνευ τῆς ἐπιτεχνήσεως ταύτης πάσχουσιν ταὐτόν, καὶ προορατικοὶ γίγνονται τοῦ μέλλοντός τινες ἐκ τῶν καλουμένων ἀπογεύσεων, ἄλλων φύσει τὴν δύναμιν ταύτην ἐχόντων. [...]
καὶ οὐδὲν θαυμαστὸν γίγνεσθαί τι τοιοῦτον, ὅπου γε καὶ τὰς χελιδόνας φασὶν ἐν κοιλότησιν δένδρων ὅλην τὴν τοῦ χειμῶνος ὥραν νεκρωθείσας ζῆν, καὶ παυσαμένης τῆς τοῦ ἀέρος ψύξεως κινεῖσθαι καὶ ἐκτινάσσειν τὴν νέκρωσιν· [...]
Ἐφ’ ἅπασιν δὲ τοῖς εἰρημένοις καὶ τοῦτο προσθετέον, ὅτι τὴν ὅλην ταύτην ἱστορίαν εἰς δαιμονίαν μηχανὴν ὁ Πλάτων ἀνέπεμψεν· δηλοῖ [δὲ καὶ τὸ κελεῦ]σαι τὸν ἄγγελον τοῦτ[ον τοὺς δικαστὰς τὰ τ]ῶν ἐκεῖ πάντα καθορᾶν καὶ [ἀπαγγ]έλλειν τοῖς ἀνθρώποις· εἰ δὲ τοῦτο ἀλ[θές, τ]ῶν αὐτῶν ἂν εἴη δήπου δαιμόνων ἔρ[γον κ]αὶ τὸ σῶμα φυλάττειν ἀπαθὲς τοῦ ἀγ[γέλο]υ, [...]
Καὶ δῆλον μὲν ὡς καὶ τὴν ἱστορίαν αὐτὴν οὕτως ἔχειν ὁμολογήσομεν, οὐδὲν ἀδύνατον λέγουσαν. οὔτε τὸν ἀπὸ τοῦ σώματος χωρισμὸν τῆς ψυχῆς (καὶ γὰρ οἱ ἱερατικοὶ λόγοι τοῦτο δρῶσιν, χωρίζοντες ἀπὸ τῶν σωμάτων τὰς ψυχάς, καὶ τοῖς μὲν σώμασιν τοῦ μὴ διαπνεῖσθαι φρουρὰν περιβάλλοντες, ταῖς δὲ ψυχαῖς τὴν ἀπόλυτον τῶν σωμάτων προξενοῦντες ἐνέργειαν καὶ τὴν ἄφεσιν τῶν φυσικῶν δεσμῶν), οὔτε τὴν ἐν πλείοσιν ἡμέραις διαμονὴν ἀσκεδάστου τοῦ σώματος. [...]
εἰ γὰρ καὶ τοῖς ἱερατικοῖς τοῦτο δυνατόν, φυλάττειν ἄτρεπτα τὰ σώματα χωριζομένων τῶν ψυχῶν, καὶ αὐτὰς χωρισθείσας ἀπὸ τῶν σωμάτων τοῖς αὐτοῖς ἦδεσθαι πεπραγμένοις αὐτῶν τῶν ψυχῶν πολλῶν δωδεκάτω .... πῶς τοῦτο δυνατόν, καὶ δαιμονίων πολλῶν ἀνέθηκὲν τὴν περὶ .... αὐτὸν ἅπασαν ἱστορίαν, οὔτε τὸ θείας ἀληθείας τυχεῖν ἀδύνατον ψυχὴν ἀνθρωπίνην τῶν ἐν Ἅιδου πραγμάτων καὶ ἀγγεῖλαι τοῖς ἀνθρώποις.
Δηλοῖ δὲ καὶ ὁ κατὰ τὸν Ἐμπεδότιμον λόγος, ὃν Ἡρακλείδης ἱστóρησεν ὁ Ποντικός, θηρῶντα μετ᾽ ἄλλων ἐν μεσημβρίᾳ σταθερᾷ κατά τινα χῶρον αὐτὸν ἔρημον ἀπολειφθέντα λέγων τῆς τε τοῦ Πλούτωνος ἐπιφανείας τυχόντα καὶ τῆς Περσεφόνης καταλαμφθῆναι μὲν ὑπὸ τοῦ φωτὸς τοῦ περιθέοντος κύκλῳ τοὺς θεούς, ἰδεῖν δὲ δι᾿ αὐτοῦ πᾶσαν τὴν περὶ ψυχῶν ἀλήθειαν ἐν αὐτόπτοις θεάμασιν.
Reference Edition: Kroll, Procli in Rem Publicam
Edition Notes: Text within square brackets are restorations of a badly corrupted manuscript passage based on a parallel passage in Plato’s story of Er.
Commentary:
This text is part of Proklos’ commentary on Plato’s story of Er’s vision of the afterlife. Proklos’ main agenda here is to prove that the story of Er was factual, in line with Neo-Platonism’s practically religious veneration of Plato and Sokrates.
On Aristeas, Proklos could be referring either to Herodotos’ story of Aristeas dying in a fuller’s shop and then being spotted in Kyzikos, or to Aristeas’ alleged appearance in Metapontion long after his natural life, although the latter did not involve reanimation of his body.
More importantly, Proklos provides an intriguing parallel story to the Arimaspeia in Klearchos’ account of Kleonymos’ extracorporeal flight over the earth to the land sacred to Hestia where souls are judged. The similarity to Maximus of Tyre’s two descriptions of Aristeas’ flight (here and here) is obvious, and enough so to beg the question of how closely the story of Aristeas’ flight was related to stories of souls traveling over the earth after death on their way to the underworld. It’s worth noting that in the Odyssey’s account of Penelope’s suitors being led to the underworld, on their way they cross Okeanos (at 24.11), the river that encircles the flat disc of earth.
The story about Empedotimos is also important for its description of him being seized or taken over (καταλαμφθῆναι) by Plouton’s and Persephone’s divine spectacle prior to his vision, paralleling Herodotos’ description of Aristeas traveling while seized by Apollo (φοιβόλαμπτος). Empedotimos was also mentioned together with Aristeas in texts by Clement of Alexandria and Gregory of Nazianzos. See Wehrli, Herakleides Pontikos.
The brief description of a priestly practice of separating souls from bodies is particularly interesting for its inclusion of an effort being made to ensure the air was still in the area where the separation was being performed. This must have been due to concerns that a breeze could carry away or scatter the separated soul, due to persistence of ancient belief that equated the soul and life essence with breath. This belief is reflected in the similarity of Greek and Latin nouns for the soul and life force (ψυχή and spiritus) to verbs for breathing (ψύχω and spiro), but was eventually supplanted by the Platonic and Pythagorean doctrine of the incorporeal soul.
Proklos’ notion that Hermotimos of Klazomenai (called ‘Hermodoros’) was seen after his death likely refers to his extracorporeal flights while comatose, or might refer to a story told by Diogenes Laertios (8.1.4-5) in which Hermotimos was among the previous incarnations of Pythagoras, after Aithalides son of Hermes and Euphorbos of the Iliad. Tzetzes mentions Aristeas together with Aithalides. Hermotimos was also mentioned together with Aristeas in texts by Pliny the Elder, Apollonios the paradoxographer and Origen (citing Celsus), who each also told of Hermotimos’ extra-corporeal flights, also mentioned by Plutarch in a story of a near-death vision of the transmigration of souls. Hermotimos was also mentioned much earlier by Aristotle (Metaphysics, 984b) as a philosopher predating Anaxagoras, who lived in the 5th century BCE.
Epimenides was known for sleeping for 57 years and for an extended life, but only in this text is he said to have appeared after his death. Epimenides was also mentioned together with Aristeas in stories by Pliny the Elder, Apollonios the paradoxographer and Maximus of Tyre (twice), who each told stories of Epimenides’ long sleep, and by Iamblichos, Clement of Alexandria, Tatian and Claudianus Mamertus. A biography of Epimenides was written by Diogenes Laertios (1.10). For testimonies and fragments of writings attributed to him see BNJ Epimenides von Kreta (457) and DK Epimenides (3).
Proklos separately discussed reanimation of bodies and souls exiting and re-entering bodies at 122.17-128.3 in the same book, not included in this collection. A French translation is available (Festugière, Proclus sur la République) and an English translation is in progress (Baltzly et al., Proclus on Republic). Within that discussion is an account, also from Klearchos, of a performance magician using a wand to draw the soul out of a child assistant, which is roughly translated in Bolton, Aristeas, 148.
This collection parallels a somewhat similar one of revivals after apparent deaths by Pliny the Elder. Together these collections help provide insight into the sort of cultural processes that must have led to the creation of the Arimaspeia, including popular association of the visions people report having seen while cataleptic with beliefs about the afterlife of the soul, and the sharing, exaggerating and fictionalizing of stories about recoveries from catalepsy and visions seen while cataleptic.
The stories of Polykritos and Philinnion appear to derive from the first two chapters of Phlegon of Tralleis’ Book of Marvels, a work of paradoxography of the early 2nd c. CE. In Phlegon’s much longer version of Polykritos’ story, also attributed to Hieron of Ephesos, Polykritos married a Lokrian just before his death, who gave birth to a hermaphrodite; he then came back to life and showed up at the Aitolian assembly while it was meeting in panic over this perceived bad omen; his advice was to hand over the baby to him, which was not taken; and he instead dismembered and devoured the infant, except its head, which then delivered a verse prophecy of a coming war. Only the ending of Phlegon’s story of Philinnion survives, which is in the form of a letter, presumably from Hipparchos to Arridaios. In it she attributes her visits to divinity more vaguely; a larger municipal group unearths her tomb; and Machates commits suicide. For English translations of Phlegon and commentary see Hansen, Phlegon; for the Greek see Giannini, Paradoxographorum, 169-185.
Proklos’ naivete about how long a person can survive while comatose (without modern life support) is not unusual for the ancient world. The custom of waiting to bury a person until the third day after death mentioned in the story about Kleonymos would be enough for most comatose people to either reawaken or die of dehydration.
The Philip mentioned is Philip II, father of Alexander, and the Antigonos mentioned was Alexander’s successor in Makedonia. The Demokritos mentioned is Demokritos of Abdera. Naumachios of Epeiros might have been the teacher of the medical writer Philagrios of Epeiros, whose entry in the Souda names his teacher as Naumachios. If so, he probably lived in the 3rd century CE.
Swallows generally migrate away from cold winters, but they sometimes endure shorter periods of cold in hypothermic torpor.
Text within curly brackets are restorations of a badly corrupted manuscript passage based on a parallel passage in Plato’s story of Er.
Concordance: EGEP Aristeas T16; EGF Aristeas T15; PEG Aristeas T17; Bolton, Aristeas T&F 24, pp. 148-149, 151; Hansen, Phlegon, Appendix 1; Wehrli, Klearchos F8; Schütrumpf, Herakleides of Pontos, F54a