PROCLUS, PORPHYRY, ATTICUS AND THE MAKER? REMARKS ON PROCLUS, IN TI. II, 1.393.31–394.5 DIEHL (ATTICUS, FR. 28)

IF 0.2 3区 历史学 Q1 Arts and Humanities CLASSICAL QUARTERLY Pub Date : 2018-12-01 DOI:10.1017/S0009838819000120
Gerd Van Riel
{"title":"PROCLUS, PORPHYRY, ATTICUS AND THE MAKER? REMARKS ON PROCLUS, IN TI. II, 1.393.31–394.5 DIEHL (ATTICUS, FR. 28)","authors":"Gerd Van Riel","doi":"10.1017/S0009838819000120","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"At In Platonis Timaeum Commentarii (= In Ti.) II, 1.393.31–394.5 Diehl (which is Atticus, fr. 28 in the edition of Des Places), Proclus follows Porphyry's inferences against the theory of Atticus, focussing more precisely on the fact that the latter's account of the principles does not correspond to the views expounded by Plato himself. In Diehl's text, based on a limited selection of primary manuscript-witnesses, the introductory phrase to this criticism contains a reference to the maker (ποιητής), which cannot easily be explained within the context. On the basis of a new examination of the manuscript tradition, and of the context of the passage, we will present a new conjecture that allows one to avoid the problems involved in Diehl's reading of the text.","PeriodicalId":47185,"journal":{"name":"CLASSICAL QUARTERLY","volume":"68 1","pages":"681 - 688"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2018-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1017/S0009838819000120","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"CLASSICAL QUARTERLY","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0009838819000120","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

At In Platonis Timaeum Commentarii (= In Ti.) II, 1.393.31–394.5 Diehl (which is Atticus, fr. 28 in the edition of Des Places), Proclus follows Porphyry's inferences against the theory of Atticus, focussing more precisely on the fact that the latter's account of the principles does not correspond to the views expounded by Plato himself. In Diehl's text, based on a limited selection of primary manuscript-witnesses, the introductory phrase to this criticism contains a reference to the maker (ποιητής), which cannot easily be explained within the context. On the basis of a new examination of the manuscript tradition, and of the context of the passage, we will present a new conjecture that allows one to avoid the problems involved in Diehl's reading of the text.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
普罗克罗斯,斑岩,阿提克斯和制造者?关于进程的评论。Ii, 1.393.31-394.5 diehl(植物学报,第28期)
在柏拉图的评论中(= In Ti.)II, 1.393.31-394.5 Diehl(即阿提库斯,Des Places,第28版),Proclus遵循波菲利的推论,反对阿提库斯的理论,更准确地集中在后者对原则的描述与柏拉图自己所阐述的观点不符这一事实上。在Diehl的文本中,基于有限的主要手稿证人的选择,这一批评的介绍性短语包含了对制造者(ποιητ ς)的参考,这在上下文中不容易解释。在对手稿传统的新检查的基础上,以及段落的上下文,我们将提出一个新的猜想,允许人们避免Diehl阅读文本所涉及的问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
39
期刊介绍: The Classical Quarterly has a reputation for publishing the highest quality classical scholarship for nearly 100 years. It publishes research papers and short notes in the fields of language, literature, history and philosophy. Two substantial issues (around 300 pages each) of The Classical Quarterly appear each year, in May and December. Given the quality and depth of the articles published in The Classical Quarterly, any serious classical library needs to have a copy on its shelves. Published for the The Classical Association
期刊最新文献
GREAT EXPECTATIONS: WORDPLAY AS WARFARE IN CAESAR'S BELLVM CIVILE HELLENISTIC WAR-ELEPHANTS AND THE USE OF ALCOHOL BEFORE BATTLE NE SPADONES FIANT: DOMITIAN'S EMASCULATION BAN THREE PASSAGES OF ANCIENT PROLEGOMENA TO ARATUS THE SUPPRESSION OF THE DRUIDS IN CAESAR'S GALLIC WAR
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1