Historical Dissertation on Abaris

Regarding this Seuthes, one may consult Xenophon (ρ), Diodorus Siculus (σ), and Eduardus Simsonius (τ). Athenaeus also, as well as Plutarch in the Banquet of the Seven Wise Men, makes mention of a certain Seuthes, one from the number of those far wisest men. But since we are very uncertain about the time in which Abaris lived, it would be very dangerous to affirm which of these was the father of Abaris. Therefore, just as we know equally with the most ignorant about what parents Abaris was born, so also we cannot define what tutors he used and other things that pertain no less to his education than to the deeds done before his arrival in Greece. That he was of an entirely excellent nature, which he had conceded to himself by the benefit of most benign nature, and that he cultivated his talent with outstanding learning immediately from early age, is clear from the singular erudition with which we read he was endowed (which I judge to be worthy of the greater admiration because we find few indeed among the Scythians who applied themselves to the study of wisdom with such diligence as Abaris) and from the most excellent signs of that erudition which Abaris wished to exist after his death, and about which I must speak more prolixly at the end of this Disputation.

(ξ) In the entry "Abaris."
(ο) Among Photius in the Bibliotheca, Cod. XCII, p. 218, ed. Andr. Schottus, Rouen 1653, fol.
(π) In the entry "Xenophon."
(ρ) Hellenica, Book III, p. 284, ed. H. Stephanus 1561, fol.
(σ) Bibliotheca Historica, Book XVIII, p. 597, and Book XIX, p. 714, ed. Laur. Rhodomannus, Hanover 1604, fol.
(τ) Chronicon Catholicum, Ol. XCV, ed. Oxford 1652, fol.

§. XII.

Regarding the initial education of our philosopher, as has just been said, it is certain that absolutely nothing exists in any writer. But everyone affirms that he dedicated his work especially to the study of wisdom. For thus does Apollonius Dyscolus (υ) describe him to us: "Abaris," he says, "was from the Hyperboreans, himself one of the theologians." For in this place it should be known that the word "theologian" original: "θεολόγου" can obtain not the common meaning, by which it denotes him who possesses the logos peri tou theou discourse about God, in which sense this word is used by Lactantius (φ) and Augustine (χ); but here by "theologian" is especially understood he who dedicated his mind to philosophy and wrote tēn physikēn teteologēmenēn the theology of nature. For they say there were three kinds of theology among the pagans, of which they report the first to have been called mythikon mythical, or that of the poets; the second politikon political, or that of the priests; the third physikon natural, or that of the philosophers. Therefore, if I weigh the studies of Abaris more accurately with myself, I see that he applied himself to mythical as well as political theology, but especially to natural theology. For it is evident that he did not neglect the study of poetry from the various books which they say Abaris wrote in verse. But both those who establish that he was a priest of Apollo (as Jamblichus (ψ) and the Greek interpreter of Aristophanes (ω)) and those who call him a fortune-teller and prophet (as Eusebius (α) and Jerome (β)) seem to attribute the study of political theology to Abaris. Nor is the aforementioned Jamblichus (γ) contrary to these when he says: "Since Abaris continued in the sacred rites customary to him, and procured the foreknowledge studied by all the barbarian race by means of sacrifices, especially those of birds." Finally, the same Jamblichus (δ) reports that Abaris was instructed in natural theology by Pythagoras. And thus, according to Jamblichus, it is certain that Abaris was a disciple of Pythagoras. Suidas (ε), however, affirms that he was a tutor to Pythagoras: "He" (namely Pythagoras), he says, "listened first to Pherecydes of Syros, then to Hermodamas in that same Samos, who was a descendant of Creophylus, then to Abaris the Hyperborean, and Zaratus the Magus." Who, therefore, erred? Whether Suidas? Or Jamblichus? I do not think that either Jamblichus or Suidas erred. For it could have happened that in some matters Abaris was instructed by Pythagoras, but in others Pythagoras was instructed by Abaris. The reason,