D. Tonglet, "Just-so stories: Plants and Animals on two Early Attic Kyathoi by Theozotos", in C. Lang-Auinger and E. Trinkl (eds.), Φυτα και Ζωια. Pflanzen und Tiere auf griechischen Vasen. Internationales Symposion, Graz, 26.–28. September 2013, Vienna, 2015. [CVA Österreich Beih. 2] (original) (raw)
Empedocles on the Origin of Plants PStrasb. gr. inv. 16651666 Sections d b and f
‘Empedocles on the Origin of Plants: P. Strasb. gr. Inv. 1665-1666, sections d, b and f.’ In C. Vassalo, ed.’ Presocratics and Papyrological Tradition. Studia Praesocratica 10, De Gruyter, 271-298., 2019
This study aims to improve the text of section d of the Strasbourg Papyrus of Empedocles.1 In particular, I will test the reconstruction advanced by Janko (2004), who proposes attributing sections f and b to the same column as section d and argues that all three sections are from col. 12 of the ancient roll. I offer several new suggestions to improve the text and thereby reinforce Janko's reconstruction of the column. My main departure from Janko will be to argue that the unity of ll. d 11-18 plus sections b and f can be better shown if we assume that the subject of the passage is a description of the origins of plants alone, not of animals or of living things in general. This in turn provides a new reason for thinking that section b, a catalogue of animals with hard, earthy parts on the outside, belongs to the bottom of the same column as section d. The catalogue is offered to support an analogy in which trees, where hard, earthy bark is on the outside, are likened to animals with hard, earthy outsides, such as conches, turtles, and hedgehogs. The study is in four parts. Part 1 introduces the papyrus, part 2 is my edition of the unified sections d plus f and b, while parts 3 and 4 offer various arguments and exegetical comments to support the reconstruction.
The Geography of Theophrastus’ Life and of his Botanical Writings (ΠΕΡΙ ΦΥΤΩΝ)
THEOPHRASTUS of Eressus (371-286 BC) is widely recognised as the founder of Botany and the co-founder, together with Aristotle, of the science of Biology. Theophrastus studied at a young age in Plato's Academy in Athens where he was acquainted with Aristotle. It is suggested that since then (355 BC) the two friends and colleagues were never separated. They travelled to Assos, Lesbos, Macedonia (Pella, Mieza and Stagira) and returned to Athens in 335 BC, to found the Peripatetic School in the Lyceum. In his botanical writings (nEPI <PYTQN IETOPIAL, HISTORIA PLANTARUM, ENQUIRY INTO PLANTS, HP; JIEPI <PYTQN AITIQN DE CAUSIS PLANTA RUM, CAUSES OF PLANTS, CP), Theophrastus makes a total of 903 direct and distinct geographical citations, which correspond to a total of 314 different entries (geographical terms) that can be grouped further to
2005
Thanos, C. A. 2005: Theophrastus on Oaks. Bot. Chron. 18(1): 29-36. Theophrastus of Eressus (371-286 BC), the founder of Botany, has dealt extensively with oaks in his botanical writings (ΠΕΡΙ ΦΥΤΩΝ ΙΣΤΟΡΙΑΣ, History of Plants and ΠΕΡΙ ΦΥΤΩΝ ΑΙΤΙΩΝ, Causes of Plants). He described oaks in general and distinguished many different species (possibly as many as 11), most of them easily identifiable today; he also furnished significant information about the occurrence and distribution of various Quercus species throughout the ‘ancient’ world (eg. Mt Ida in Troad, Macedonia, Peloponnesus, Pontus, Thebaid, Crete, Latium). He also discussed various morphological, physiological and ecological traits of oaks: root habits, bark qualities, leaves and leaf shedding habits, time of budding and fruiting, seed germination and propagation; he even dealt with the ‘problem’ whether oaks produce flowers or not. He identified oaks (including kermes oak) as hosts of mistletoes and displayed a case of acc...
Eus. HE X 4,43 [.. .] ών ούδέ τό θείον λόγιον τήν μνήμην άπεσιώπησεν εύφρανθήσεται φάσκον τά ξύλα χοΰ κυρίου, και αί κέδροι τοΰ Λιβάνου ας έφύτευσεν (Ps. 104,16) All the recent reconstructions concerning the introduction of the alphabet to the Greeks assign a secondary place to the tale of Herodotus. 1 Even if they deal with it in some regard, they do not accept the details of the literary tradition as presented by Herodotus. It is significant that whenever the discussion focuses on the place where the transmission occurred, the only region not appearing among the possible candidates is Boeotia. 2 This is astonishing since Herodotus indicates that place as the point of the transfer of the alphabet from the Phoenicians to the Greeks. For once, we would like to examine 1 L. H. Jeffery, Greek Alphabetic Writing, in: CAH 2 III.l, 1990, 819-820; B.S.J. Isserlin, The transfer of the Alphabet to the Greeks. The state of documentation, in: Phoinikeia Grammata. Lire et ecrire en Mediterranee (Actes du Colloque du
Exemplaria Classica, 2021
There has been a long interval between the publication of the first and the second volume of the commentary by Peter Habermehl (hereafter PH) on the latter half of Petronius’ novel (i.e. the chapters subsequent to the Cena Trimalchionis). The first volume appeared in 2006 and the author’s original intention was to finalise his project in two instalments only, and to skip chapters 119-24.1 (the Bellum Civile). By now, however, the commentary has grown considerably: the current volume covers no more than eight chapters (instead of twenty-six, if we do not count Eumolpus’ poem), PH has changed his mind about the omission of the Bellum Civile, and it is likely that the commentary as a whole will consist of four volumes totalling at least some 1700 pages. Thus we are dealing here with a huge enterprise which, nowadays, is usually tackled by a team of scholars; PH himself (p. IX) refers to the Groningen Apuleius project (1977-2015, nine volumes). If, on the other hand, we are looking for an individual scholar’s work of comparable size and character, we may recall the commentary on Tacitus’ Annals by Erich Koestermann (1963-1968, four volumes), that on Thucydides by Simon Hornblower (1991-2008, three volumes) or that on Livy’s Books 6-10 by S.P. Oakley (1997-2005, four volumes).
A Lost Manuscript of Empedocles' Katharmoi
Mnemosyne, 1994
The title Ka9ap?,oi of Empedocles' religious poem is attested a number of times in our sources, just as the conventional title IIipl q)6aewq for the physical poem'). Diogenes Laertius VIII 772) mentions both titles and at VIII 54 states that the poet began the Katharmoi with Vorsokr. 31Bl12 (ev<xp?6{jt.evo<; TMV At VIII 63 he tells us that a rhapsode called Cleomenes recited the poem at Delphi according to Favorinus3) and others (aU',ro6q 8& Io6Iovq Tous Ka8apyolq [lv] 'ÜÀUfJ.7tLexO'? pex?<po1íO'ex? 7?€YEiav K?EO?A.EV1? IOV wç xon lv This is confirmed by Athenaeus, who Deipnos. XIV 620D (Vorsokr. 31A12) attributes this information to an early and presumably good source, Dicaearchus4) (TOUS 8' 'EfJ.7tEOoxÀiouç Ka6ap?.ouS 'ÜÀUfJ.7tLexO'? KX&0[JL&VT)? 6 CPTjO'tV A?xa(<xp)(0<; lv TM Theon Smyrnaeus mentions the title once, when paraphrasing something dealt with iv-ro7<; K<x9Kp[iO? (Expos. rer. math. p. 104.3 Hiller= Vorsokr. 31B153a); another time, introducing a quotation (Vorsokr. 31B143), he alludes to it Expos. p. 15.8). Herodianus of Alexandria attributes a fragment of two lines to the second book Hippolytus of Rome, criticizing Marcion for banning procreation and forbidding the consumption of meat, says at Elench. VII 30.3 'your teaching in fact is that of Empedocles' Katharmoi' 'EfJ.7tEOoxÀiouç 7?av8&vECS ata6caxcov This, as far as I know, is it7), though it should be acknowledged that O'Brien has drawn attention to what may be allusions to the title in Plut. De Isid. 316C and Celsus ap. Orig. C. Cels. VIII 538). The existence of two separate epics has occasionally been doubted arguments have been advanced in favour of the thesis that K<x6<xp[jt.OL and IIEpi cp6aecoq are alternative titles for one and the same epic9). These have failed to convince the present writer. An intriguing fact has escaped the students of Empedocles, at least as far as I know; I came across it quite by accident. In a letter to Traversari (the author of the humanist translation into Latin of Diogenes Laërtius)1°) written Bologna 27 August 142411), Giovanni Aurispa gives a list of the more rare ("quae rarissime inveniri solent") among the 238 manuscripts he says he has in his library in Venice12), mentioning authors as well as titles. Among these we find Ka0apyolq 'EfJ.7tEOoxÀiouç, in Greek (most titles are in Latin). Sabbadini comments: "Davanti a questo titolo si rimane veramente stupefatto, perch? i Ka0apyoi di Empedocle sono periti, salvo scarsi frammenti, e la gioia di sapere che un esemplare n'era giunto in Italia e amareggiata dal dolore d'averlo nuovamente perduto"13). One