D. R. Dicks published "Thales" in The Classical Quarterly in 1959, a close critical examination of everything later Greek and Roman writers credited to Thales of Miletus, including the geometry, the water doctrine and the celebrated prediction of a solar eclipse that Herodotus reports stopped a battle between the Lydians and the Medes. Dicks's central argument is methodological: the ascriptions to Thales survive only in sources written centuries after his death, and the astronomical knowledge needed to predict the exact local visibility of a specific eclipse, as opposed to the general chance of one occurring somewhere in a given period, was not available anywhere in the sixth century BCE, the Babylonian Saros cycle included. The article remains the standard citation for scholarly caution about the eclipse story specifically, without denying that Thales was a real and significant early Greek thinker.
Facts
Assessment
Reliability Tier1
The founding modern critical study of what can and cannot be verified about Thales; still the anchor citation for skepticism about the eclipse prediction specifically. NotesArgues that almost nothing credited to Thales rests on testimony contemporary with him, most of it ascribed by writers seven hundred to a thousand years after his death, and that no method available in the sixth century BCE could have predicted the LOCAL VISIBILITY of a specific solar eclipse from a specific place, as opposed to the general possibility of an eclipse occurring somewhere.
Citation
AuthorD. R. Dicks
PublisherThe Classical Quarterly, new series, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 294-309
Publication Year1959
Source TypeJournal article
Cross-Tradition Connections
Associated With
This source names Babylonians directly: "D. R. Dicks published "Thales" in The Classical Quarterly in 1959, a close critical examination of everything later Greek and Roman writers credited to Thales of Miletus, including the geometry, the..."
Claims Backed By This Source (10 claims)
This source backs 10 claims across the atlas. As facts: 7 well-attested, 1 scholarly debate. As cited relationships: 1 holds. Plus 1 entities citing it as a general reference with no single fact or relationship attached.
Disposition By Topic
- Sources, 8 claims: 7 well-attested, 1 holds.
- Prophecies, 2 claims: 1 scholarly debate, 1 general references.
Reader Challenges (0 open reader challenges)
No disputes yet. Spotted an error or a better source? Open the first one.
Sign in to dispute this or suggest a correction.
View At A Past Year
The atlas records no dated fact of its own for this entry, so there is no other year to choose.