Cleinias of Tarentum
Pythagorean philosopher
Cleinias of Tarentum (Ancient Greek: Κλεινίας; fl. 4th century BCE), Magna Graecia, was a Pythagorean philosopher, and a contemporary and friend of Plato, as appears from the story (perhaps otherwise worthless) which Diogenes Laërtius gives on the authority of Aristoxenus, to the effect that Plato wished to burn all the writings of Democritus which he could collect, but was prevented by Cleinias and Amyclus of Heraclea. In his practice, Cleinias was a true Pythagorean. Thus, we hear that he used to assuage his anger by playing on his harp, and when Prorus of Cyrene had lost all his fortune through a political revolution, Cleinias, who knew nothing of him except that he was a Pythagorean, assumed the risk of a voyage to Cyrene, and supplied him with money to the full extent of his loss.
Two fragments of Pythagorean pseudepigrapha are attributed to Cleinias, one preserved by Stobaeus, the other in the Theology of Arithmetic attributed to Iamblichus.
Notes
References
This article incorporates text from a publication now in the public domain: Smith, William, ed. (1870). "Cleinias". Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology.
Thesleff, Holger (1961).
The public source identifies “Cleinias of Tarentum” as pythagorean philosopher. This brief keeps that definition visible, then builds a research path around Cleinias, Tarentum and Pythagorean.
Why this record matters
A short description can identify a subject without explaining its stakes. For “Cleinias of Tarentum”, the useful work is to connect “pythagorean philosopher” to the records capable of establishing context and consequence.
Biographical claims are most persuasive when dates, appointments and relationships can be traced to records created close to the events described. The source revision retrieved here is dated Jul 18, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q1400157. VIAF identifies the subject as 27455232. 2 of 2 selected statements include explicit references; 0 carry qualifiers and 0 use preferred rank. The first chronological checks are 1870 and 1961.
Later biographies can compress uncertainty and repeat inherited reputations, so apparently settled claims may still require comparison. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Read biographical claims against dates, named institutions and the cited references. Distinguish a subject’s later reputation from evidence produced during their lifetime.
- Establishing names and roles
- Building a first chronology
- Locating cited institutions
Personal papers, civil or court records, institutional files and the scholarship cited by the source.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Cleinias of Tarentum”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Cleinias of Tarentum primary sources, Cleinias of Tarentum archive and Cleinias research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Cleinias of Tarentum”?
- How has the subject’s reputation changed across later accounts?
- Which claims depend on a single source or contested interpretation?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Cleinias of Tarentum” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.