Ackrill, J. L. (trans.) (1963) Aristotle, Categories and De Interpretatione, with comm. Oxford.Google Scholar

Adorno, T. (1973) Negative Dialectic (1966), trans. Ashton, E. B.. New York.Google Scholar

Adorno, T. and Horkheimer, M. (2002) Dialectic of Enlightenment: Philosophical Fragments (1947), ed. Noerr, G. S., trans. Jephcott, E.. Stanford.Google Scholar

Ahl, F. (1984) ‘The art of safe criticism in Greece and Rome’, AJPh 105: 174–208.Google Scholar

Alessandrelli, M. (2013) Il problema del λεκτόν nello Stoicismo antico. Florence.Google Scholar

Alessandrelli, M. and Ranocchia, G. (2017) Scrittore stoico anonimo: opera incerta. PHerc. 1020, coll. 104–112, ILIESI digitale. Testi e tradizioni 1: 44–59. Last accessed 16 December 2017, www.iliesi.cnr.it/pubblicazioni/Testi-01-Alessandrelli_Ranocchia.pdf.Google Scholar

Algra, K. (1997) ‘Chrysippus, Carneades, Cicero: the ethical divisiones in Cicero’s Lucullus’, in Inwood and Mansfeld (1997): 107–139.Google Scholar

Algra, K. (forthcoming) ‘Cosmology and mathematics in Stoicism’.Google Scholar

Allen, J. (1994) ‘Academic probabilism and Stoic epistemology’, CQ 44: 85–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Allen, J. (1997) ‘Carneadean argument in Cicero’s Academic books’, in Inwood and Mansfeld (1997): 217–256.Google Scholar

Allen, J. (2001) Inferences from Signs: Ancient Debates about the Nature of Evidence. Oxford.Google Scholar

Allen, J. (2007) ‘Aristotle on the disciplines of argument’, Rhetorica 25: 87–108.Google Scholar

Allen, J. (2014) ‘Aristotle on the value of “probability,” persuasiveness, and verisimilitude, in rhetorical argument’, in Probabilities, Hypotheticals, and Counterfactuals in Ancient Greek Thought, ed. Wohl, V.. Cambridge: 47–64.Google Scholar

Annas, J. (1988) ‘The heirs of Socrates’, Phronesis 33: 100–12.Google Scholar

Annas, J. (1989) ‘Cicero on Stoic moral philosophy and private property’, in Philosophia Togata I: Essays on Philosophy and Roman Society, eds. Griffin, M. T. and Barnes, J.. Oxford: 151–173.Google Scholar

Annas, J. (1990) ‘Stoic epistemology’, in Epistemology: Cambridge Companions to Ancient Thought I, ed. Everson, S.. Cambridge: 184–203.Google Scholar

Annas, J. (1992) ‘Plato the sceptic’, OSAPh supp. vol. 3: 43–72.Google Scholar

Annas, J. (2007) ‘Carneades’ classification of ethical theories’, in Pyrrhonists, Patricians, Platonizers: Hellenistic Philosophy in the Period 155–8, eds. Ioppolo, A. M. and Sedley, D. N.. Naples: 189–223.Google Scholar

Annas, J. and Barnes, J. (1985) The Modes of Scepticism: Ancient Texts and Modern Interpretations. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Annas, J. and Barnes, J. (trans.) (2000) Sextus Empiricus: The Outlines of Scepticism, 2nd edn. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Armisen-Marchetti, M. (1989) Sapientiae facies: étude sur les images de Sénèque. Paris.Google Scholar

Arnim, H. von (1898) Leben und Werke des Dio von Prusa mit einer Einleitung: Sophistik, Rhetorik Philosophie in ihrem Kampf um die Jugendbildung. Berlin.Google Scholar

Arnim, H. (1903) ‘Dionysius von Herakleia’, RE V 1: 973–974.Google Scholar

Arnim, H. (ed.) (1903–1924) Stoicorum Veterum Fragmenta. (4 vols.). Leipzig.Google Scholar

Asmis, E. (1984) Epicurus’ Scientific Method. Ithaca and London.Google Scholar

Atherton, C. (1988) ‘Hand over fist: the failure of Stoic rhetoric’, CQ 38: 392–427.Google Scholar

Aubert-Baillot, S. (2006) Per dumeta: recherches sur la rhétorique des Stoïciens à Rome, de ses origines grecques jusqu’à la fin de la République, PhD thesis under the supervision of Professor Carlos Lévy, University Paris IV–Sorbonne. Paris.Google Scholar

Aubert-Baillot, S. (2008) ‘Cicéron et la parole stoïcienne: polémique autour de la dialectique’, RMM 1: 61–91.Google Scholar

Auvray-Assayas, C. (2009) ‘Les Topica de Cicéron et Aristote: réévaluation d’un projet philosophique’, in Les lieux de l’argumentation: histoire du syllogisme topique d’Aristote à Leibniz, eds. Biard, J. and Zini, F. Mariani. Turnhout: 53–64.Google Scholar

Babut, D. (2005) ‘Sur les polémiques des anciens Stoïciens’, PhilosAnt 5: 65–91.Google Scholar

Badawi, A. (1968) La transmission de la Philosophie grecque au monde arabe. Paris.Google Scholar

Baltes, M. (1976) Die Weltentstehung des platonischen Timaios nach den antiken Interpreten, vol. I. Leiden.Google Scholar

Baltes, M. (1993) Der Platonismus in der Antike, vol. III (§73–100). Stuttgart and Bad Cannstatt.Google Scholar

Baltes, M. (1998) Der Platonismus in der Antike, vol. V (§125–150). Stuttgart and Bad Cannstatt.Google Scholar

Baltes, M. (2002) Der Platonismus in der Antike, vol. VI (§151–181). Stuttgart and Bad Cannstatt.Google Scholar

Baltussen, H. (2000) Theophrastus against the Presocratics and Plato: Peripatetic Dialectic in the De Sensibus. Leiden, Boston and Cologne.Google Scholar

Barnes, J. (1982) ‘Medicine, experience and logic’, in Science and Speculation, eds. Barnes, J., Brunschwig, J., Burnyeat, M. F. and Schofield, M.. Cambridge: 24–68. Reprinted in Barnes (2012): 538–581.Google Scholar

Barnes, J. (1985a) ‘Theophrastus and Stoic logic’, in Aristoteles Werk und Wirkung: Paul Moraux gewidmet I, ed. Wiesner, J.. Berlin: 557–576. Reprinted in Barnes (2012), 413‒432.Google Scholar

Barnes, J. (1985b) ‘ΠΙΘΑΝΑ ΣΥΝΗΜΜΕΝΑ’, Elenchos 2: 454–467.Google Scholar

Barnes, J. (1988) ‘Is rhetoric an art?’, University of Calgary DARG Newsletter 2: 2–22.Google Scholar

Barnes, J. (1990a) ‘Logical form and logical matter’, in Logica, mente e persona, ed. Alberti, A.. Florence: 7–119. Revised edn. in Barnes (2012): 43–146.Google Scholar

Barnes, J. (1990b) The Toils of Scepticism. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Barnes, J. (1991) ‘Galen on logic and therapy’, in Galen’s Method of Healing, eds. Kudlien, F. and Durling, R. J.. Leiden: 50–102.Google Scholar

Barnes, J. (1993a) ‘Galen and the utility of logic’, in Galen und das hellenistische Erbe, ed. Nickel, D.. Stuttgart: 33–51.Google Scholar

Barnes, J. (1993b) ‘A big, big D?’, CR 43: 304–306. Reprinted in Barnes (2012): 479–484.Google Scholar

Barnes, J. (1996a) ‘Epicurus: meaning and thinking’, in Epicureismo greco e romano, eds. Giannantoni, G. and Gigante, M.. Naples: 197–220.Google Scholar

Barnes, J. (1996b) ‘The catalogue of Chrysippus’ logical works’, in Polyhistor: Studies in the History and Historiography of Ancient Philosophy Presented to Jaap Mansfeld on his Sixtieth Birthday, eds. Algra, K. et al. Leiden: 169–184.Google Scholar

Barnes, J. (1997a) ‘Logic in Academica I and the Lucullus’, in Inwood and Mansfeld (1997): 140–160.Google Scholar

Barnes, J. (1997b) ‘The beliefs of a Pyrrhonist’, in Burnyeat, and Frede, (1997): 58–91. First published in (1982) Proceedings of the Cambridge Philological Society, 28:1–29.Google Scholar

Barnes, J. (1999) ‘Aristotle and Stoic logic’, in Topics in Stoic Philosophy, ed. Ierodiakonou, K.. Oxford: 23–53.Google Scholar

Barnes, J. (2007) Truth, etc. Oxford.Google Scholar

Barnes, J. (2011) ‘Reading the hypotheticals’, in Arguments from Hypothesis in Ancient Philosophy, ed. Longo, A.. Naples: 187–280.Google Scholar

Barnes, J. (2012) Logical Matters: Essays in Ancient Philosophy II, ed. by Bonelli, M.. Oxford.Google Scholar

Bastianini, G. and Sedley, D. (ed.) (1995) ‘Commentarium in Platonis Theaetetum (P. Berol. inv. 9782)’, in Corpus dei papiri filosofici greci e latini. Parte III: Commentari, with trans. and comm. Florence: 227–562.Google Scholar

Bénatouïl, T. (2006) Faire usage: la pratique du Stoïcisme. Paris.Google Scholar

Bénatouïl, T. (2007) ‘Le débat entre platonisme et stoïcisme sur la vie scolastique: Chrysippe, la Nouvelle Académie et Antiochus’, in Platonic Stoicism – Stoic Platonism: The Dialogue between Platonism and Stoicism in Antiquity, eds. Bonazzi, M. and Helmig, Ch.. Leuven: 1–21.Google Scholar

Bénatouïl, T. (2010) ‘Les critiques épicuriennes de la géometrie’, in Construction: Festschrift for Gerhard Heinzmann. Eds. Bour, P.-E., Rebuschi, M. and Rollet, L.. London: 151–162.Google Scholar

Bénatouïl, T. (forthcoming) ‘Epictetus and the early imperial epistemological debate: his strategy against scepticism and his targets’.Google Scholar

Bénatouïl, T. and El Murr, D. (2010) ‘L’Académie et les géomètres: usages et limites de la géométrie de Platon à Carnéade’, PhilosAnt 10: 41–80.Google Scholar

Berner, C. (1996) ‘Polémique, conflit, contradiction: notes sur la fondation dialectique de la philosophie chez Schlegel, Schleiermarcher et Hegel’, Philosophie 51: 47–58.Google Scholar

Berra, A. (2008) Théorie et pratique de l’énigme en Grèce ancienne, doctoral thesis, Paris. http://tel.archives-ouvertes.fr/tel-00674183/. Last accessed 15 January 2018.Google Scholar

Besnier, B. (1994) ‘Epicure et la définition’, in Ainsi parlaient les anciens, eds. Jerphagnon, L., Lagrée, J. and Delattre, D.. Lille: 117–30.Google Scholar

Beta, S. (2012) ‘Gli enigmi simposiali dagli indovinelli scherzosi ai problemi filosofici’, in Ainigma e griphos: gli antichi e l’oscurità della parola, ed. Monda, S.. Florence: 69–80.Google Scholar

Betegh, G. (2006) ‘Epicurus’ argument for atomism’, OSAPh 30: 261–284.Google Scholar

Bett, R. (1989) ‘Carneades’ pithanon: a reappraisal of its role and status’, OSAPh 7: 59–94.Google Scholar

Bett, R. (1999) ‘Reactions to Aristotle in the Greek sceptical tradition’, Methexis 12: 17–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bett, R. (2000) Pyrrho, His Antecedents and His Legacy. Oxford.Google Scholar

Bett, R. (trans.) (2005) Sextus Empiricus: Against the Logicians. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Bignone, E. (1920) Epicuro. Bari.Google Scholar

Bignone, E. (1936) L’Aristotele perduto a la formazione filosofica di Epicuro. Florence.Google Scholar

Black, D. (1990) Logic and Aristotle’s Rhetoric and Poetics in Medieval Arabic Philosophy. Leiden.Google Scholar

Bobzien, S. (1993) ‘Chrysippus modal logic and its relation to Philo and Diodorus’, in Döring and Ebert (1993): 63–84.Google Scholar

Bobzien, S. (1996) ‘Stoic syllogistic’, OSAPh 14: 133–192.Google Scholar

Bobzien, S. (1998) Determinism and Freedom in Stoic Philosophy. Oxford.Google Scholar

Bobzien, S. (1999) ‘Logic: the Stoics (part 2)’, in The Cambridge History of Hellenistic Philosophy, eds. Algra, K., Barnes, J., Mansfeld, J. and Schofield, M.. Cambridge: 106–108.Google Scholar

Bobzien, S. (2002a) ‘Pre-Stoic hypothetical syllogistic in Galen’s Institutio Logica’, in The Unknown Galen, BICS vol. 77, ed. Nutton, V.. London: 57–72.Google Scholar

Bobzien, S. (2002b) ‘The development of modus ponens in antiquity: from Aristotle to the 2nd century AD’, Phronesis 47: 359‒394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bobzien, S. (2002c) ‘Chrysippus and the epistemic theory of vagueness’, PAS 102: 217–238.Google Scholar

Bobzien, S. (2003) ‘Logic’ in The Cambridge Companion to the Stoics, ed. Inwood, B.. Cambridge: 85–123.Google Scholar

Bobzien, S. (2011) ‘Dialectical school’, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2011 Edition), ed. Zalta, E. N.. http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2011/entries/dialectical-school/.Google Scholar

Bocheński, I. M. (1947) La logique de Théophraste. Fribourg.Google Scholar

Bonazzi, M. (2003a) Academici e Platonici: il dibattito antico sullo scetticismo di Platone. Milan.Google Scholar

Bonazzi, M. (2003b) ‘Un dibattito tra academici e platonici sull’eredità di Platone: la testimonianza del commentario anonimo al Teeteto’, in Papiri filosofici: Miscellanea di studi IV. Florence: 41–74.Google Scholar

Bonazzi, M. (2012) ‘Plutarch on the difference between the Pyrrhonists and the Academics’, OSAPh 43: 271–298.Google Scholar

Bonazzi, M. (2015) À la recherche des idées: Platonisme et philosophie hellénistique d’Antiochus à Plotin, Paris.Google Scholar

Bonazzi, M. (2017) ‘The Platonist appropriation of Stoic epistemology’, in From Stoicism to Platonism: The Development of Philosophy, 100 BCE–100 CE, ed. Engberg-Pedersen, T.. Cambridge: 120–141.Google Scholar

Bonhöffer, A. (1890) Epictet und die Stoa. Stuttgart 1890. Reprinted Stuttgart and Bad Cannstatt 1968.Google Scholar

Bonitz, H. (1870) Index Aristotelicus. Reprinted Graz 1955.Google Scholar

Boudon, V. (ed.) (2007) Galien: introduction générale. Sur l’ordre de ses propres livres. Sur ses propres livres. Que l’excellent médecin est aussi philosophe, with trans. and comm. Paris.Google Scholar

Bowie, E. (2005) ‘Panarces’, in Brill’s New Pauly. DOI= http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/1574–9347_bnp_e905410. Last accessed 15 December 2017.Google Scholar

Boyancé, P. (1964) ‘Le stoïcisme à Rome’, in Actes du VII^e Congrès de l’Association G. Budé, Aix-en-Provence, 1–6 avril 1963. Paris: 218–254.Google Scholar

Boys-Stones, G. (2018) Platonist Philosophy 80BC to AD250, with trans. and comm. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Brandis, C. A. (1827) ‘Über die Schicksale der Aristotelischen Bücher, und einige Kriterien ihrer Ächtheit’, RhM 1: 236–286.Google Scholar

Brandis, C. A. (1860) Handbuch der Geschichte der Griechisch-Römischen Philosophie, vol. III.1. Berlin.Google Scholar

Bréhier, É. (1971) Chrysippe et l’ancien stoïcisme, 2nd edn. Paris.Google Scholar

Brennan, T. (1996) ‘Reasonable impressions in Stoicism’, Phronesis 41: 318–334.Google Scholar

Brennan, T. (2005) The Stoic Life: Emotions, Duty, and Fate. Oxford.Google Scholar

Brittain, C. (2001) Philo of Larissa: The Last of the Academic Sceptics. Oxford.Google Scholar

Brittain, C. (2005a) ‘Arcesilaus’, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2008 Edition), ed. Zalta, E. N.. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2008/entries/arcesilaus/.Google Scholar

Brittain, C. (2005b) ‘Common sense: concepts, definition and meaning in and out of the Stoa’, in Language and Learning, eds. Frede, D. and Inwood, B.. Cambridge: 164–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Brittain, C. (2006) Cicero: On Academic Scepticism. Indianapolis and Cambridge.Google Scholar

Brittain, C. (2008) ‘Philo of Larissa’, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2008 Edition), ed. Zalta, E. N.. http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2008/entries/philo-larissa/.Google Scholar

Brittain, C. (2014) ‘The compulsion of Stoic assent’, in Strategies of Argument: Essays in Ancient Ethics, Epistemology, and Logic, ed. Lee, Mi-Kyoung. New York: 332–355.Google Scholar

Brittain, C. and Palmer, J. (2001) ‘The New Academy’s appeals to the Presocratics’, Phronesis 46: 38–72.Google Scholar

Broadie, S. (2009) ‘The possibilities of being and not-being in De caelo I.12’, in New Perspectives on Aristotle’s De caelo, eds. Bowen, A. C. and Wildberg, Ch.. Leiden: 29–50.Google Scholar

Brouwer, R. (2002) ‘Sagehood and the Stoics’, OSAPh 23: 181–224.Google Scholar

Brouwer, R. (2007) ‘The early Stoic doctrine of the change to wisdom’, OSAPh 33: 285–315.Google Scholar

Brunschwig, J. (ed. and trans.) (1967–2007) Aristote: Topiques. (2 vols.). Paris.Google Scholar

Brunschwig, J. (ed.) (1978) Les Stoïciens et leur logique. Paris. 2nd edn. 2006.Google Scholar

Brunschwig, J. (1980) ‘Proof defined’, in Doubt and Dogmatism: Studies in Hellenistic Epistemology, eds. Schofield, M., Burnyeat, M. and Barnes, J.. Oxford: 125–160.Google Scholar

Brunschwig, J. (1984) ‘Remarques sur la théorie stoïcienne du nom propre’, Histoire Epistémologie Langage 6: 3–19. Reprinted in Brunschwig (1995), 116–139.Google Scholar

Brunschwig, J. (1988) ‘La théorie stoïcienne du genre suprême et l’ ontologie platonicienne’, in Matter and Metaphysics, eds. Barnes, J. and Mignucci, M.. Naples: 19–127.Google Scholar

Brunschwig, J. (1991) ‘On a book-title by Chrysippus: “On the fact that the ancients admitted dialectic along with demonstrations”’, OSAPh supp. vol.: 81–95.Google Scholar

Brunschwig, J. (1994) ‘Rhétorique et dialectique. Rhétorique et topiques’, in Aristotle’s Rhetoric: Philosophical Essays, eds. Furley, D. J. and Nehamas, A.. Princeton: 57–96.Google Scholar

Brunschwig, J. (1995) Études sur les philosophies hellénistiques. ParisGoogle Scholar

Brunschwig, J. (1996) ‘Aristotle’s rhetoric as a “counterpart” to dialectic’, in Essays in Aristotle’s Rhetoric, ed. Rorty, A. Oksenberg, Berkeley: 34–55.Google Scholar

Brunt, P. A. (1986) ‘Cicero’s officium in the civil war’, JRS 76: 12–32.Google Scholar

Burnyeat, M. F. (1976) ‘Protagoras and self-refutation in later Greek philosophy’, Philosophical Review 85: 44–69.Google Scholar

Burnyeat, M. F. (1982a) ‘Gods and heaps’, in Language and Logos: Studies in Ancient Greek Philosophy, eds. Schofield, M. and Nussbaum, M.. Cambridge: 315–338.Google Scholar

Burnyeat, M. F. (1982b) ‘Idealism and Greek philosophy: what Descartes saw and Berkeley missed’, PhR 91: 3–40.Google Scholar

Burnyeat, M. F. (1994) ‘Enthymeme: Aristotle on the logic of persuasion’, in Aristotle’s Rhetoric: Philosophical Essays, eds. Furley, D. J. and Nehamas, A.. Princeton: 3–55.Google Scholar

Burnyeat, M. F. (1997) ‘Antipater and self-refutation: elusive arguments in Cicero’s Academica’, in Inwood and Mansfeld (1997): 277–310.Google Scholar

Burnyeat, M. F. (2012) ‘Gods and heaps’, in Explorations in Ancient and Modern Philosophy, vol. I. Cambridge: 90–111.Google Scholar

Burnyeat, M. F. (unpublished) ‘Carneades was no probabilist’. Unpublished paper, s.l.Google Scholar

Burnyeat, M. et al. (1984) Notes on Eta and Theta of Aristotle’s Metaphysics. Oxford.Google Scholar

Burnyeat, M. and Frede, M. (eds.) (1997) The Original Sceptics: A Controversy. Indianapolis.Google Scholar

Bury, R. G. (trans.) (1935) Sextus Empiricus: Against the Logicians. Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar

Bury, R. G. (1949) (trans.) Sextus Empiricus: Against the Professors. Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar

Cambiano, G. (1977) ‘Il problema dell’ esistenza di una scuola Megarica’, in Scuole socratiche minori e filosofia ellenistica, ed. Giannantoni, G.. Bologna: 25–53.Google Scholar

Castagnoli, L. (2004) ‘Il condizionale crisippeo e le sue interpretazioni moderne’, Elenchos 25: 353–395.Google Scholar

Castagnoli, L. (2010a) Ancient Self-Refutation. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Castagnoli, L. (2010b) ‘How dialectical was Stoic dialectic?’, in Ancient Models of Mind: Studies in Human and Divine Rationality, eds. Nightingale, A. and Sedley, D.. Cambridge: 153–179.Google Scholar

Caston, V. (1999) ‘Something and nothing: the Stoics on concepts and universals’, OSAPh 17: 145–213.Google Scholar

Cavini, W. (1993) ‘Chrysippus on speaking truly and the liar’, in Dialektiker und Stoiker: Zur Logik der Stoa and ihrer Vorläufer, eds. Döring, K. and Ebert, T.. Stuttgart: 85–109.Google Scholar

Chaumartin, F.-R. (1985) Le De beneficiis de Sénèque, sa signification philosophique, politique et sociale. Paris.Google Scholar

Cherniss, H. (1935) Aristotle’s Criticism of Presocratic Philosophy. Baltimore.Google Scholar

Chiaradonna, R. (1995) ‘La nascita della logica proposizionale’, Elenchos 16: 387–400.Google Scholar

Chiaradonna, R. (2009a) ‘Galen and Middle Platonism’, in Galen and the World of Knowledge, eds. Gill, Ch., Whitmarsh, T. and Wilkins, J.. Cambridge: 243–260.Google Scholar

Chiaradonna, R. (2009b) ‘Le traité de Galien: sur la démonstration et sa postérité tardo-antique’, in Physics and Philosophy of Nature in Greek Neoplatonism, eds. Chiaradonna, R. and Trabattoni, F.. Leiden: 43–77.Google Scholar

Chiaradonna, R. (2013) ‘Universals in ancient medicine’, in Universals in Ancient Philosophy, eds. Chiaradonna, R. and Galluzzo, G.. Pisa: 381–423.Google Scholar

Chiaradonna, R. (2014) ‘Galen on what is persuasive (pithanon) and what approximates to truth’, in Philosophical Themes in Galen, eds. Adamson, P., Hansberger, R. and Wilberding, J.. London: 61–88.Google Scholar

Chiesara, M. L. (2003) Storia dello scetticismo greco. Torino.Google Scholar

Christensen, J. (2012) An Essay of the Unity of Stoic Philosophy. Copenhagen. 1st edn. 1962.Google Scholar

Clayman, D. L. (2009) Timon of Phlius. Berlin and New York.Google Scholar

Coda, E. (2015) ‘Un fragment du commentaire perdu au De Caelo d’ Alexandre d’ Aphrodise sur les différents sens des termes “engendré” et “inengendré” (Themistius, in De Caelo, p. 43.16–44.20 Heiberg)’, Studia graeco-arabica 5:13–26.Google Scholar

Cooper, J. (2004) ‘Arcesilaus: Socratic and sceptic’, in Knowledge, Nature and the Good. Princeton: 81–103. Reprinted in (2006) Remembering Socrates, eds. L. Judson and V. Karasmanis. Oxford.Google Scholar

Couissin, P. (1983) ‘The Stoicism of the New Academy’, in The Skeptical Tradition, ed. Burnyeat, M.. Berkeley and Los Angeles: 31–63. First published as Couissin, P. (1929) ‘Le Stoïcisme de la Nouvelle Académie’, Revue d’histoire de la philosophie 3: 241–276.Google Scholar

Crivelli, P. (2010) ‘The Stoics on definition’, in Definition in Greek Philosophy, ed. Charles, D.. Oxford: 359–423.Google Scholar

Croissant, J. (1984) ‘Autour de la quatrième formule d’implication dans Sextus Empiricus, Hyp. Pyrrh., II, 112’, RPhA 2: 73–120.Google Scholar

Daube, D. (1956) Forms of Roman Legislation. Oxford.Google Scholar

De Harven, V. (2012) The Coherence of Stoic Ontology, doctoral thesis, University of California Berkeley.Google Scholar

De Lacy, P. (ed.) (1977–1984) Galen: De Placitis Hippocratis et Platonis, with trans. and comm. (3 vols.). Berlin.Google Scholar

De Meo, C. (1983) Lingue techniche del Latino. Bologna.Google Scholar

De Pater, W. A. (1968) ‘La fonction du lieu et de l’instrument dans les Topiques’, in Aristotle on Dialectic: The Topics, ed. Owen, G. E. L.. Oxford: 164‒188.Google Scholar

Decleva Caizzi, F. (1981) Pirrone: testimonianze. Naples.Google Scholar

Denyer, N. (1991) Language, Thought and Falsehood in Ancient Greek Philosophy. London.Google Scholar

Denyer, N. (2002) ‘Neglected evidence for Diodorus Cronus’, CQ 52: 597–600.Google Scholar

Des Places, É. (ed.) (1977) Atticus: Fragments, with trans. and comm. Paris.Google Scholar

Détienne, M. and Vernant, J.-P. (1974) Les ruses de l’intelligence: la mètis des Grecs. Paris.Google Scholar

Diehl, E. (1936) Anthologia Lyrica Graeca 1, 2nd edn. Leipzig.Google Scholar

Dixsaut, M. (2001) Métamorphoses de la dialectique dans les dialogues de Platon. Paris.Google Scholar

Donini, P. L. (1990) ‘Medioplatonismo e filosofi medioplatonici: una raccolta di studi’, Elenchos 11: 79–93.Google Scholar

Dorandi, T. (ed.) (1994) Filodemo Storia de Filosofi La Stoá da Zenone a Panezio (PHerc. 1018). LeidenGoogle Scholar

Döring, K. (ed.) (1972) Die Megariker: Kommentierte Sammlung der Testimonien. Amsterdam.Google Scholar

Döring, K. (1989) ‘Gab es eine Dialektische Schule?’, Phronesis 34: 293–310.Google Scholar

Döring, K. (1998) ‘Sokrates, die Sokratiker und die von ihnen begründeten Traditionen’, in Grundriss der Geschichte der Philosophie, Bd. 2/1. ed. H. Flashar: 139–364.Google Scholar

Döring, K. and Ebert, T., T. (eds.) (1993) Dialektiker und Stoiker: Zur Logik der Stoa und ihrer Vorläufer. Stuttgart.Google Scholar

Dorion, L.-A. (trans.) (1995) Aristote: les Réfutations sophistiques. Paris.Google Scholar

Dorion, L.-A. (2002) ‘Aristote et l’invention de la Dialectique’, in Le style de la pensée: recueil de textes en hommage à Jacques Brunschwig, eds. Canto-Sperber, M. and Pellegrin, P.. Paris: 182–220.Google Scholar

Dumont, J.-P. (2006) ‘Mos geometricus, mos physicus’, in Les Stoiciens et leur logique, ed. Brunschwig, J.. Paris: 121–134. Reprinted Paris 2006: 389–404.Google Scholar

Düring, I. (1957) Aristotle in the Ancient Biographical Tradition. Gothenburg.Google Scholar

Dyck, E. F. (2002) ‘Topos and enthymeme’, Rhetorica 20: 105–117.Google Scholar

Dyson, H. (2009) Prolepsis and Ennoia in the Early Stoa. Berlin and New York.Google Scholar

Ebert, T. (1991) Dialektiker und frühe Stoiker bei Sextus Empiricus: Untersuchungen zur Entstehung der Aussagenlogik. Göttingen.Google Scholar

Ebert, T. (2008) ‘In defence of the Dialectical school’, in Anthropine Sophia, eds. Alesse, F. et al. Naples: 275–293.Google Scholar

Ernout, A. and Meillet, A. (1959) Dictionnaire étymologique de la langue latine: histoire des mots. 4th edn. Paris.Google Scholar

Essler, H. (2011) Glückselig und unsterblich: epikureische Theologie bei Cicero und Philodem. Basle.Google Scholar

Fait, P. (1996) ‘Il linguaggio e l’abaco (Arist., Soph. El. 1, 165a16–17)’, in Hodoi Dizesios/Le vie della ricerca. Studi in onore di Francesco Adorno, ed. Funghi, M. S.. Florence: 181–191.Google Scholar

Fine, G. (2003) ‘Sextus and external world scepticism’, OSAPh 23: 341–385.Google Scholar

Fine, G. (2008) ‘Does Socrates claim to know that he knows nothing?’, OSAPh 35: 49–88.Google Scholar

Fine, G. (2014) The Possibility of Inquiry. Oxford.Google Scholar

Fink, J. L. (ed.) (2012) The Development of Dialectic from Plato to Aristotle. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Fortenbaugh, W. W. (2000) ‘Teofrasto di Ereso: argomentazione retorica e sillogistica ipotetica’, Aevum 74: 65‒79.Google Scholar

Fortenbaugh, W. W., Huby, P. M., Sharples, R. W. and Gutas, D. (eds.) (1993) Theophrastus of Eresus: Sources for His Life, Writings, Thought and Influence, with trans. (2 vols.). Leiden, New York and Cologne.Google Scholar

Frede, D. (1990) ‘Fatalism and future truth’, Proceedings of the Boston Area Colloquium in Ancient Philosophy, 6: 195–227.Google Scholar

Frede, M. (1974) Die stoische Logik. Göttingen.Google Scholar

Frede, M. (1981) ‘On Galen’s epistemology’, in Galen: Problems and Prospects, ed. Nutton, V.. Cambridge: 65–86. Reprinted in Frede (1987a), 278–298.Google Scholar

Frede, M. (1983a) ‘The title, unity, and authenticity of the Aristotelian Categories’, originally appeared as ‘Titel, Einheit und Echtheit der aristotelischen Kategorienschrift’, in Zweifelhaftes im Corpus Aristotelicum, eds. Moraux, P. and Wiesner, J.. Berlin: 1–20. Trans. W. Mann and reprinted in Frede (1987a): 11–28 and 363–367.Google Scholar

Frede, M. (1983b) ‘Stoics and skeptics on clear and distinct impressions’, in The Skeptical Tradition, ed. Burnyeat, M.. Berkeley and Los Angeles: 65–93. Reprinted in Frede (1987a): 151–176.Google Scholar

Frede, M. (1984) ‘The skeptic’s two kinds of assent and the question of the possibility of knowledge’, in Philosophy in History, eds. Rorty, R., Schneewind, J. and Skinner, Q.. Cambridge: 255–278. Reprinted in Frede (1987a): 201–222 and in Burnyeat and Frede (1997): 127–155.Google Scholar

Frede, M. (1987a) Essays in Ancient Philosophy. Oxford.Google Scholar

Frede, M. (1987b) ‘Numenios’, ANRW 2.36.2 Berlin and New York: 1034–1075.Google Scholar

Frede, M. (1987c) ‘The original notion of cause’, in Frede (1987a): 125–150.Google Scholar

Frede, M. (1987d) ‘Stoics and skeptics on clear and distinct impressions’, in Frede (1987a): 151–176.Google Scholar

Frede, M. (1987e) ‘The skeptic’s beliefs’, in Frede (1987a): 179–200. Reprinted in Burnyeat and Frede (1997): 1–24.Google Scholar

Frede, M. (1987f) ‘Principles of Stoic grammar’, in Frede (1987a): 301–337.Google Scholar

Frede, M. (1988) ‘A medieval source of modern scepticism’, in Gedankenzeichen. Festschrift für Klaus Oehler, eds. Claussen, R. and Daube-Schackat, R.. Tübingen: 65–70.Google Scholar

Frede, M. (1994a) ‘The Stoic notion of a lekton’, in Language: Companions to Ancient Thought, vol. III, ed. Everson, S.. Cambridge: 109–128.Google Scholar

Frede, M. (1994b) ‘The Stoic notion of a grammatical case’, BICS 39: 13–24.Google Scholar

Frede, M. (2003) ‘Galen’s theology’, in Galien et la philosophie, eds. Barnes, J. and Jouanna, J.. Geneva: 73–126 (‘Discussion’: 126–129).Google Scholar

Frisk, H. (1966) ‘Über den Gebrauch des Privativpräfixes’, in Kleine Schriften zur Indogermanistik und zur griechischen Wortkunde. Göteborg: 183–229.Google Scholar

Fritz, K. von (1931) ‘Megariker’, RE supp. vol.: 707–724.Google Scholar

Gabriel, G. Hülser, K. and Schlotter, S. (2009) ‘Zur Miete bei Frege: Rudolf Hirzel und die Rezeption der stoischen Logik und Semantik in Jena’, History and Philosophy of Logic 30: 369–388.Google Scholar

Gaines, R. N. (2002) ‘Cicero’s Partitiones Oratoriae and Topica: rhetorical philosophy and philosophical rhetoric’, in Brill’s Companion to Cicero. Oratory and Rhetoric, ed. May, J. M.. Leiden, Boston and Cologne: 445–480.Google Scholar

Gallo, I. (1980) Frammenti biografi da papiri. Rome.Google Scholar

Garcea, A. (2002) ‘L’interaction épistolaire entre dialogue in absentia et in praesentia chez Cicéron’, in Theory and Description in Latin Linguistics: Selected Papers from the XIth International Colloquium on Latin Linguistics. Amsterdam, June 24–29, 2001, eds. Bolkestein, A. Machtelt et al. Amsterdam: 123–138.Google Scholar

Gavoille, É. (2000) ‘La relation à l’absent dans les Lettres de Cicéron à Atticus’, in Epistulae antiquae: actes du Ier colloque ‘Le genre épistolaire antique et ses prolongements’ (Université François–Rabelais, Tours, 18–19 septembre 1998), eds. Nadjo, L. and Gavoille, É.. Leuven and Paris: 153–176.Google Scholar

Gavoille, É. (2004) ‘Lettre et sermo’, in Epistulae antiquae. 3: actes du III^e colloque international ‘L’épistolaire antique et ses prolongements européens’ (Université François–Rabelais, Tours, 25–27 septembre 2002), eds. Nadjo, L. and Gavoille, É.. Leuven and Paris: 33–52.Google Scholar

Geach, P. (1972) ‘A history of the corruptions of logic: an inaugural lecture’, in Logic Matters. Oxford: 44–61. 1st edn. Leeds 1968.Google Scholar

Giannantoni, G. (ed.) (1983–1990) Socratis et socraticorum reliquiae. 4 vols. Naples.Google Scholar

Giannantoni, G. (1993) ‘Die Philosophenschule der Megariker und Aristoteles’, in Döring and Ebert (1993), 155–165.Google Scholar

Gifford, E. H. (1903) Eusebii Evangelicae Praeparationis Libri XV ad codices denuo collatos recensuit, anglice nunc primum reddidit, notis et indicibus instruxit. Oxford.Google Scholar

Gigante, M. (1999) Kepos e Peripatos. Naples.Google Scholar

Giovacchini, J. (2003) ‘Le refus épicurien de la définition’, Les Cahiers Philosophiques de Strasbourg 15: 71–89.Google Scholar

Glucker, J. (1995) ‘Probabile, veri simile and related terms’, in Cicero the Philosopher, ed. Powell, J. G. F.. Oxford: 115–143.Google Scholar

Glucker, J. (1997) ‘Socrates in the Academic books and other Ciceronian works’, in Inwood and Mansfeld (1997): 58–88.Google Scholar

Goldschmidt, V. (1972) ‘Ὑπάρχειν et ὑφιστάναι dans la philosophie stoïcienne’, REG, 85: 331–344.Google Scholar

Görler, W. (1994) ‘Älterer Pyrrhonismus: Jüngere Akademie. Antiochos aus Askalon’, in Grundriss der Geschichte der Philosophie: Begründet von Friedrich Überweg, völlig neubearb. Ausgabe. Die Philosophie der Antike, Bd. 4: Die hellenistische Philosophie. Basle: 717–989.Google Scholar

Görler, W. (2004) ‘Ein sprachlicher Zufall und seine Folgen: “Wahrscheinliches” bei Karneades und Cicero’, in Kleine Schriften zur hellenistisch-römischen Philosophie. Leiden: 60–75.Google Scholar

Gorman, R. J. (2005) The Socratic Method in the Dialogues of Cicero. Stuttgart.Google Scholar

Gosling, J. C. B. (1960) ‘Republic Book V: ta polla kala etc.᾽, Phronesis 5: 116–128.Google Scholar

Gottschalk, H. B. (1987) ‘Did Theophrastus write a Categories?’, Philologus 131: 245–253.Google Scholar

Goulet-Cazé, M.-O. et al. (trans.) (1999) Diogène Laërce: vies et doctrines des philosophes illustres. Paris.Google Scholar

Gourinat, J.-B. (2000) La dialectique des stoïciens. Paris.Google Scholar

Gourinat, J.-B. (2013) ‘La postérité de la classification aristotélicienne des syllogismes aux IIe-IIIe s.: vers un Organon long?’, in Ad notitiam ignoti: l’Organon dans la translatio studiorum à l’époque d’Albert le Grand, ed. Brumberg-Chaumont, J.. Turnhout: 63–114.Google Scholar

Gourinat, J.-B. (2014) ‘“Les causes sont causes de prédicats”: sur un aspect de la théorie stoïcienne de la cause’, in Aitia II, avec ou sans Aristote, le débat sur les causes à l’âge hellénistique et impérial, eds. Natali, C. and Viano, C.. Louvain-la-Neuve: 65–93.Google Scholar

Gourinat, J.-B. (trans.) (2016) Plotin: Traité 20: ‘Qu’est-ce que la dialectique?’, with comm. Paris.Google Scholar

Gourinat, J.-B. and Lemaire, J. (eds) (2016) Logique et dialectique dans l’Antiquité, Paris.Google Scholar

Graeser, A. (ed.) (1973) Die logischen Fragmente des Theophrast, with comm. Berlin and New York.Google Scholar

Graeser, A. (1978) ‘The Stoic categories’, in Brunschwig (1978): 199–222.Google Scholar

Graeser, A. and Hadot, P. (1969) ‘Zur Vorgeschichte des Begriffs “Existenz”: ὑπάρχειν bei den Stoikern’, ABG 13: 115–127.Google Scholar

Greene, W. C. (1938) Scholia Platonica. Haverford.Google Scholar

Griffin, M. T. (1995) ‘Philosophical badinage in Cicero’s letters to his friends’, in Cicero the Philosopher: Twelve Papers, ed. Powell, J. G. F.. Oxford: 325–346.Google Scholar

Griffin, M. T. (1997) ‘The composition of the Academica: motives and versions’, in Inwood and Mansfeld (1997): 1–35.Google Scholar

Grimal, P. (1986) Cicéron. Paris.Google Scholar

Guérin, Ch. (2011) Persona: l’élaboration d’une notion rhétorique au I^er siècle av. J.-C. Volume II: Théorisation cicéronienne de la persona oratoire. Paris.Google Scholar

Hacking, I. (1975) The Emergence of Probability. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Hadot, I. (1970) ‘Tradition stoïcienne et idées politiques au temps des Gracques’, REL 48: 133–179.Google Scholar

Hadot, I. (2005) Arts libéraux et philosophie dans la pensée antique, Paris. 1st edn. 1984.Google Scholar

Hadot, I. et al. (1990) Simplicius: Commentaire sur les Catégories. Leiden.Google Scholar

Hadot, P. (1969) ‘Zur Vorgeschichte des Begriffs “Existenz”: ὑπάρχειν bei den Stoikern’, Archiv für Begriffsgeschichte, 13: 115–127.Google Scholar

Hadot, P. (1979) ‘Les divisions des parties de la philosophie dans l’Antiquité’, MH 36: 201–33. Reprinted in Hadot (1998): 125–158.Google Scholar

Hadot, P. (1980a) ‘Sur divers sens du mot pragma dans la tradition philosophique grecque’, in Concepts et catégories dans la pensée antique, ed. Aubenque, P.. Paris: 309–319. Reprinted in Hadot (1998): 61–76.Google Scholar

Hadot, P. (1980b) ‘Philosophie, dialectique, rhétorique dans l’Antiquité’, Studia Philosophica 39: 139–166. Reprinted in Hadot (1998): 159–193.Google Scholar

Hadot, P. (1990) ‘La logique, partie ou instrument de la philosophie?’, in Simplicius, Commentaire aux Catégories d’Aristote, fasc. 1.1, ed. Hadot, I.. Leiden: 183–188.Google Scholar

Hadot, P. (1991) ‘Philosophie, discours philosophique et divisions de la philosophie chez les stoïciens’, Revue internationale de philosophie 45: 205–219.Google Scholar

Hadot, P. (1998) Études de philosophie ancienne. Paris.Google Scholar

Hahm, D. (1992) ‘Diogenes Laertius VII: On the Stoics’, ANRW II, 36–6, ed. Haase, W.. Berlin and New York: 4076–4182.Google Scholar

Halbach, V. (2010) The Logic Manual. Oxford.Google Scholar

Hankinson, R. J. (ed.) (1991) Galen: On the Therapeutic Method: Books 1 and 2, with trans. and comm. Oxford.Google Scholar

Hankinson, R. J. (1994) ‘Usage and abusage: Galen on language’, in Companions to Ancient Thought 3: Language, ed. Everson, S.. Cambridge: 166–187.Google Scholar

Hankinson, R. J. (1995) The Sceptics. London and New York.Google Scholar

Hankinson, R. J. (1997) ‘Natural criteria and the transparency of judgement: Antiochus, Philo and Galen on epistemological justification’, in Inwood and Mansfeld (1997): 161–216.Google Scholar

Hankinson, R. J. (2007) ‘Self-refutation and the sorites’, in Maieusis: Essays in Ancient Philosophy in Honour of Myles Burnyeat, ed. Scott, D.. Oxford: 351–373.Google Scholar

Hankinson, R. J. (ed.) (2008) The Cambridge Companion to Galen. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Hankinson, R. J. (2009) ‘Galen on the limitations of knowledge’, in Galen and the World of Knowledge, eds. Gill, Ch., Whitmarsh, T. and Wilkins, J.. Cambridge: 206–242.Google Scholar

Havrda, M. (2011) ‘Galenus Christianus? The doctrine of demonstration in Stromata VIII and the question of its source’, VChr 75: 343–375.Google Scholar

Havrda, M. (2015) ‘The purpose of Galen’s treatise On Demonstration’, Early Science and Medicine 20: 265–287.Google Scholar

Havrda, M. (2017) The So-Called Eighth Stromateus by Clement of Alexandria: Early Christian Reception of Greek Scientific Methodology, Leiden and Boston.Google Scholar

Helmig, Ch. (2012) Forms and Concepts: Concept Formation in the Platonic Tradition. Berlin and Boston.Google Scholar

Hirzel, R. (1883) Untersuchungen zu Cicero’s philosophischen Schriften: III. Theil Academica Priora. Tusculanae Disputationes. Leipzig.Google Scholar

Hodges, W. (2001) Logic: An Introduction to Elementary Logic, 2nd edn. London.Google Scholar

Hofmann, J. B. and Szantyr, A. (1972) Lateinische Syntax und Stilistik. Munich.Google Scholar

Hohmann, H. (2000) ‘Rhetoric and dialectic: some historical and legal perspectives’, Argumentation 14: 223–234.Google Scholar

Hood, J. (2010) ‘Galen’s Aristotelian definitions’, in Definition in Greek Philosophy, ed. Charles, D.. Oxford: 450–466.Google Scholar

Huby, P. M. (1989) ‘Cicero’s Topics and its Peripatetic sources’, in Cicero’s Knowledge of the Peripatos, eds. Fortenbaugh, W. W. and Steinmetz, P.. New Brunswick and London: 61–76.Google Scholar

Huby, P. M. and Gutas, D. (2007) Theophrastus of Eresus: Sources for His Life, Writings, Thought and Influence, Commentary Volume 2: Logic. Leiden and Boston.Google Scholar

Hülser, K. (ed.) (1987–1988) Die Fragmente zur Dialektik der Stoiker. (4 vols.). Stuttgart.Google Scholar

Ierodiakonou, K. (1993) ‘The Stoic division of philosophy’, Phronesis 38: 57–74.Google Scholar

Ierodiakonou, K. (1998) ‘Aristotle’s logic: an instrument, not a part of philosophy’, in Aristotle: Logic, Language and Science, eds. Avgelis, N. and Peonidis, F., Thessaloniki: 33–53.Google Scholar

Ierodiakonou, K. (2002) ‘Zeno’s arguments’, in Zeno of Citium and His Legacy: The Philosophy of Zeno, eds. Scaltsas, T. and Mason, A. S.. Larnaca,: 81–112.Google Scholar

Ierodiakonou, K. (2012) ‘The notion of enargeia in Hellenistic philosophy’, in Episteme, etc.: Essays in Honour of Jonathan Barnes, eds. Morison, B. and Ierodiakonou, K.. Oxford: 60–73.Google Scholar

Ildefonse, F. (1997) La naissance de la grammaire dans l’Antiquité grecque. Paris.Google Scholar

Inwood, B. (1985) Ethics and Human Action in Early Stoicism. Oxford.Google Scholar

Inwood, B. (1999) ‘Rules and reasoning in Stoic ethics’, in Topics in Stoic Philosophy, ed. Ierodiakonou, K.. Oxford: 95–127.Google Scholar

Inwood, B. (2007) Seneca, Selected Philosophical Letters. Oxford.Google Scholar

Inwood, B. and Mansfeld, J. (eds.) (1997) Assent and Argument: Studies in Cicero’s Academic Books. Leiden, New York and Cologne.Google Scholar

Ioppolo, A. M. (1986) Opinione e scienza: il dibattito tra Stoici e Accademici nel III e nel II secolo a. C. Naples.Google Scholar

Ioppolo, A. M. (2007) ‘L’assenso nella filosofia di Clitomaco: un problema di linguaggio?’, in Pyrrhonists, Patricians, Platonizers: Hellenistic Philosophy in the Period 155–86 BC, eds. Ioppolo, A. M. and Sedley, D. N.. Naples: 225–267.Google Scholar

Ioppolo, A. M. (2009) La testimonianza di Sesto Empirico sull’Accademia scettica. Naples.Google Scholar

Irwin, T. (1989) Aristotle’s First Principles. Oxford.Google Scholar

Janko, R. (1984) Aristotle on Comedy: Towards a Reconstruction of Poetics II. London.Google Scholar

Johnston, I. and Horsley, G. H. R. (eds.) (2011) Galen: Method of Medicine, with trans. and comm. (3 vols.). Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar

Jones, A. (2004) ‘The Stoics and the astronomical sciences’, in The Cambridge Companion to the Stoics, ed. Inwood, B.. Cambridge: 328–344.Google Scholar

Jones, R. E. (2010) ‘Truth and contradiction in Aristotle’s De interpretatione 6–9’, Phronesis 55: 26–67.Google Scholar

Ju, A. E. (2009) ‘The Stoic ontology of geometrical limits’, Phronesis 54: 371–389.Google Scholar

Kalligas, P. (ed.) (2006) Πλωτίνου Ἐννεάς Πρώτη, with trans. and comm. Athens.Google Scholar

Kany-Turpin, J. (trans.) (2010) Cicéron. Académiques. Paris.Google Scholar

Kapp, E. (1942) Greek Foundations of Traditional Logic. New York.Google Scholar

Karamanolis, G. (2006) Plato and Aristotle in Agreement. Oxford.Google Scholar

Kechagia, E. (2011) Plutarch against Colotes: A Lesson in History of Philosophy. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Kidd, I. (1978) ‘Philosophy and science in Posidonius’, Antike und Abendland 24: 7–15.Google Scholar

Kidd, I. (1988) Posidonius II: The Commentary. (i) Testimonia and Fragments 1–149. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Kneale, W. and Kneale, M. (1962) The Development of Logic. Oxford.Google Scholar

Knoepfler, D. (1991) La Vie de Ménédème d’Éretrie de Diogène Laërce: contribution à l’histoire et à la critique du texte des Vies des Philosophes. Basle.Google Scholar

Koetschet, P. (2015) ‘Galien, al-Râzî, et l’éternité du monde: les fragments du traité Sur la démonstration, IV, dans les Doutes sur Galien’, Arabic Sciences and Philosophy 25: 167–198.Google Scholar

Kotzia-Panteli, P. (2000) ‘ΕΝΝΟΗΜΑΤΙΚΟΣ und ΟΥΣΙΩΔΗΣ ΛΟΓΟΣ als exegetisches Begriffspaar’, Philologus 144: 45–61.Google Scholar

Kunkel, W. (1952) Herkunft und soziale Stellung der römischen Juristen. Weimar.Google Scholar

Kustas, G. L. (1973) Studies in Byzantine Rhetoric. Thessalonica.Google Scholar

Latte, K. (1968) ‘Augur und Templum in der varronischen Auguralformel’, in Kleine Schriften. Munich: 91–105.Google Scholar

Lebrun, G. (1970) Kant et la fin de la métaphysique. Paris.Google Scholar

Lee, T.-S. (1984) Die Griechische Tradition der aristotelischen Syllogistik in der Spätantike. Göttingen.Google Scholar

Leroux, G. (1974) ‘Logique et dialectique chez Plotin: Ennéade 1.3(20)’, Phoenix 28: 180–192.Google Scholar

Lévy, C. (1980) ‘Media Academia (Part. Or., XL,139)’, AC 49: 260–264.Google Scholar

Lévy, C. (1992) Cicero Academicus: recherches sur les Académiques et sur la philosophie cicéronienne. Rome.Google Scholar

Lévy, C. (1993) ‘La conversation à Rome à la fin de la République: des pratiques sans théorie’, Rhetorica 11: 399–420.Google Scholar

Lévy, C. (2000) ‘Cicéron critique de l’éloquence stoïcienne’, in Papers on Rhetoric, vol. III, ed. Montefusco, L. Calboli. Bologna: 127–144.Google Scholar

Lévy, C. (2002) ‘Les Tusculanes et le dialogue cicéronien: exemple ou exception?’, VL 166: 23–31.Google Scholar

Linderski, J. (1986) ‘The augural law’, ANRW II.16.3: 2146–2312.Google Scholar

Lloyd, A. C. (1990) The Anatomy of Neoplatonism. Oxford.Google Scholar

Lloyd, G. E. R. (1996) ‘Theories and practices of demonstration in Galen’, in Rationality in Greek Thought, eds. Frede, M. and Striker, G.. Oxford: 255–277.Google Scholar

Long, A. A. (1978) ‘Dialectic and the Stoic sage’, in The Stoics, ed. Rist, J.. Berkeley: 101–124. Reprinted in Long (1996): 85–106.Google Scholar

Long, A. A. (1986) ‘Diogenes Laertius: life of Arcesilaus’, Elenchos 7: 429–249.Google Scholar

Long, A. A. (1988a) ‘Socrates in Hellenistic philosophy’, CQ 38: 150–171.Google Scholar

Long, A. A. (1988b) ‘Ptolemy on the Criterion: an epistemology for the practicing scientist’, in The Question of ‘Eclecticism’: Studies in Later Greek Philosophy, eds. Dillon, J. M. and Long, A. A.. Berkeley, Los Angeles and London: 176–207.Google Scholar

Long, A. A. (1995) ‘Cicero’s Plato and Aristotle’, in Cicero The Philosopher: Twelve Papers, ed. Powell, J. G. F.. Oxford: 37–61.Google Scholar

Long, A. A. (1996) Stoic Studies. New York.Google Scholar

Long, A. A. (2002) Epictetus: A Stoic and Socratic Guide to Life. Oxford.Google Scholar

Long, A. A. (2006a) ‘Timon of Phlius: Pyrrhonist and satirist’, in From Epicurus to Epictetus. Oxford: 70–95.Google Scholar

Long, A. A. (2006b) ‘Arcesilaus in his time and place’, in From Epicurus to Epictetus. Oxford: 96–114.Google Scholar

Long, A. and Sedley, D. (1987) The Hellenistic Philosophers. (2 vols.). Cambridge.Google Scholar

Long, A. G. (2013) Conversation and Self-Sufficiency in Plato. Oxford.Google Scholar

Longo Auricchio, F. (ed. and trans.) (1977) Philodemi De Rhetorica Libri Primus et Secundus. Naples.Google Scholar

Machuca, D. (2011) ‘Ancient Skepticism: the Skeptical Academy’, Philosophy Compass 6: 259–266.Google Scholar

Maconi, H. (1988) ‘Nova non philosophandi philosophia: a review of Anna Maria Ioppolo, Opinione e scienza’, OSAPh 6: 231–253.Google Scholar

Madden, E. H. (1952) ‘The enthymeme: crossroads of logic, rhetoric and metaphysics’, PhR 61: 368–373.Google Scholar

Makin, S. (1996) ‘Megarian possibilities’, Philosophical Studies 83: 253–276.Google Scholar

Mansfeld, J. (1978) ‘Zeno of Citium: critical observations on a recent study’, Mnemosyne 31: 134–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Mansfeld, J. (1983) ‘Intuitionism and formalism: Zeno’s definition of geometry in a fragment of L. Calvenus Taurus’, Phronesis 28: 59–74.Google Scholar

Mansfeld, J. (1994) ‘Epicurus Peripateticus’, in Realtà e ragione, ed. Alberti, A.. Florence: 29–47. Reprinted in Mansfeld and Runia (2010): 237–254.Google Scholar

Mansfeld, J. and Runia, D. (2010) Aëtiana, vol. 3, Leiden.Google Scholar

Manuwald, A. (1973) Die Prolepsislehre Epikurs. Bonn.Google Scholar

Marrou, H.-I. (1969) ‘Les arts libéraux dans l’Antiquité classique’, in Arts libéraux et philosophie au Moyen-Âge: actes du Quatrième Congrès International de Philosophie Médiévale, 27 août-2 sept. 1967. Montréal and Paris: 5–33.Google Scholar

Mates, B. (1953) Stoic Logic. Berkeley.Google Scholar

McAdon, B. (2001) ‘Rhetoric is a counterpart to dialectic’, Ph&Rh 34: 113–150.Google Scholar

McGinnis, J. and Reisman, D. C. (eds.) (2007) Classical Arabic Philosophy: An Anthology of Sources. Indianapolis.Google Scholar

Meinwald, C. (2005) ‘Ignorance and opinion in Stoic epistemology’, Phronesis 50: 215–231.Google Scholar

Menn, S. (1995) ‘Metaphysics, dialectic and the Categories’, RMM 3: 311–337.Google Scholar

Michel, A. (2003) Rhétorique et philosophie chez Cicéron: essai sur les fondements philosophiques de l’art de persuader, 2nd edn. Leuven.Google Scholar

Mignucci, M. (1993) ‘The Stoic analysis of the sorites’, Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 93: 231–245.Google Scholar

Mignucci, M. (1998) ‘Theophrastus’ logic’, in Theophrastus: Reappraising the Sources, eds. van Ophuijsen, J. M. and van Raalte, M.. New Brunswick: 39‒66.Google Scholar

Mignucci, M. (1999a) ‘Paradoxes’, in The Cambridge History of Hellenistic Philosophy, eds. Algra, K., Barnes, J., Mansfeld, J. and Schofield, M.. Cambridge: 157–176.Google Scholar

Mignucci, M. (1999b) ‘The liar paradox and the Stoics’, in Topics in Stoic Philosophy, ed. Ierodiakonou, K.. Oxford: 54–70.Google Scholar

Moraux, P. (1951) Les listes anciennes des ouvrages d’ Aristote. Louvain.Google Scholar

Moraux, P. (1968) ‘La joute dialectique d’après le huitième livre des Topiques’, in Aristotle on Dialectic: The Topics, Proceedings of the Third Symposium Aristotelicum, ed. Owen, G. E. L.. Oxford: 277–311.Google Scholar

Moretti, G. (1995) Acutum dicendi genus: brevità, oscurità, sottigliezze e paradossi nelle tradizioni retoriche degli Stoici. Bologna.Google Scholar

Morison, B. (2008a) ‘Language’, in The Cambridge Companion to Galen, ed. Hankinson, R. J.. Cambridge: 116–156.Google Scholar

Morison, B. (2008b) ‘Logic’, in The Cambridge Companion to Galen, ed. Hankinson, R. J.. Cambridge: 66–115.Google Scholar

Morison, B. (2011) ‘The logical structure of the sceptic’s opposition’, OSAPh 40: 265–296.Google Scholar

Morison, B. (2013) ‘Aristotle on primary time in Physics 6’, OSAPh 35: 149–193.Google Scholar

Morison, B. (2014) ‘Sextus Empiricus’, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2014 Edition), ed. E. N. Zalta. http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2014/entries/sextus-empiricus/.Google Scholar

Mueller, I. (1974) ‘Greek mathematics and Greek logic’, in Ancient Logic and Its Modern Interpretations, ed. Corcoran, J.. Dordrecht: 35–70.Google Scholar

Mueller, I. (2004) ‘Remarks on physics and mathematical astronomy and optics in Epicurus, Sextus Empiricus and some Stoics’, Apeiron 37: 57–87.Google Scholar

Müller, I. von (1895) ‘Über Galens Werk vom Wissenschaftlichen Beweis’, Abh. Bayer. Ak. d. Wiss. München 20: 403–478.Google Scholar

Muller, R. (trans.) (1985). Les Mégariques. Fragments et témoignages, with comm. ParisGoogle Scholar

Muller, R. (1988) Introduction à la pensée des Mégariques. Paris and Brussels.Google Scholar

Mutschmann, H. (1911) ‘Die Stufen der Wahrscheinlichkeit bei Karneades’, RhM 66: 190–198.Google Scholar

Müri, W. (1944) ‘Das Wort Dialektik bei Platon ‘, MH 1: 152–168.Google Scholar

Neri, C. (2003) Erinna: testimonianze e frammenti. Bologna.Google Scholar

Nesselrath, H.-G. (1990) Die attische mittlere Komödie: Ihre Stellung in der antiken Literaturkritik und Literaturgeschichte. Berlin and New York.Google Scholar

Netz, R. (1999) The Shaping of Deduction in Greek Mathematics. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Nietzsche, F. (1868) ‘De Laertii Diogenis Fontibus’, RhM 23: 632–653. Reprinted in Nietzsche Werke, ed. Colli–Montinari, vol. II.1, eds. F. Bornmann and M. Carpitella (1982). Berlin and New York: 75–167.Google Scholar

Nock, A. D. (1933) Conversion. Oxford.Google Scholar

Nuchelmans, G. (1973) Theories of the Proposition: Ancient and Medieval Bearers of Truth and Falsity. Amsterdam and London.Google Scholar

Obbink, D. (1992) ‘“What all men believe must be true”: common conceptions and consensio omnium in Aristotle and Hellenistic philosophy’, OSAPh 10: 193–231.Google Scholar

Obdrzalek, S. (2006) ‘Living in doubt: Carneades’ pithanon reconsidered’, OSAPh 31: 243–279.Google Scholar

Opsomer, J. (1998) In Search of the Truth: Academic Tendencies in Middle Platonism. Brussels.Google Scholar

Opsomer, J. (2013) ‘The lives and opinions of Socrates and Stilpo as defended by Plutarch against the insidious yet ignorant attacks of Colotes’, Aitia 3. Last accessed 15 December 2017 DOI 10.4000/aitia.677. =http://journals.openedition.org/aitia/677.Google Scholar

Pagès, C. (2015) Qu’est-ce que la dialectique? Paris.Google Scholar

Pârvulescu, A. (1980) ‘Latin considerare et desiderare’, Zeitschrift für vergleichende Sprachforschung 94: 159–165.Google Scholar

Perin, C. (2005) ‘Stoic epistemology and the limits of externalism’, AncPhil 25: 383–401.Google Scholar

Perin, C. (2010) ‘Scepticism and belief’, in The Cambridge Companion to Ancient Scepticism, ed. Bett, R.. Cambridge: 145–164.Google Scholar

Perin, C. (2013) ‘Making sense of Arcesilaus’, OSAPh 45: 313–340.Google Scholar

Petrucci, F. (2014) ‘Le témoignage du deuxième livre du “Commentaire au Timée” de Proclus sur la forme des arguments médio-platoniciens au sujet de la genèse du monde’, Revue des études grecques 127: 331–75.Google Scholar

Pépin, J. (1972) ‘La vraie dialectique selon Clément d’Alexandrie’, in Epektasis: mélanges patristiques offerts au Cardinal Jean Daniélou, eds Fontaine, J. and Kannengiesser, C.. Paris: 375–384.Google Scholar

Pietrobelli, A. (2013) ‘Galien agnostique: un texte caviardé par la tradition’, REG 126: 103–135.Google Scholar

Pohlenz, P. (1965) ‘Cicero De officiis III’, in Kleine Schriften vol. I, ed. Dörrie, H.. Hildesheim: 253–291.Google Scholar

Pollock, J. L. (1986) Contemporary Theories of Knowledge. Totowa.Google Scholar

Primavesi, O. (1996) Die Aristotelische Topik: Ein Interpretationsmodell und seine Erprobung am Beispiel von Topik B. Munich.Google Scholar

Radermacher, L. (1951) Artium Scriptores (Reste der voraristotelischen Rhetorik). Vienna.Google Scholar

Rapp, C. (trans.) (2002) Aristoteles: Rhetorik. (2 vols). Berlin.Google Scholar

Reid, J. S. (1885) M. Tulli Ciceronis Academica. London.Google Scholar

Reinhardt, T. (2000a) Das Buch E der Aristotelischen Topik: Untersuchungen zur Echtheitsfrage. Göttingen.Google Scholar

Reinhardt, T. (2000b) ‘Rhetoric in the Fourth Academy’, CQ 50: 531–547.Google Scholar

Reinhardt, T. (ed.) (2003) Cicero’s Topica. Oxford.Google Scholar

Reinhardt, T. (2011) ‘Galen on unsayable properties’, OSAPh 40: 297–317.Google Scholar

Reinhardt, T. (2015) ‘On endoxa in Aristotle’s Topics’, RhM 158: 225–246.Google Scholar

Repici, L. (1993) ‘The Stoics and the elenchos’, in Dialektiker und Stoiker, eds. Döring, K. and Ebert, T.. Stuttgart: 253–269.Google Scholar

Riesenweber, T. (2009) ‘Eine stoische Tugenddefinition: zur Überlieferung von Cic. Inv. 2, 159–167’, RhM 152: 265–291.Google Scholar

Riposati, B. (1947) Studi sui Topica di Cicerone. Milan.Google Scholar

Robertson, D. (2004) ‘Chrysippus on mathematical objects’, Ancient Philosophy 24: 169–191.Google Scholar

Robinson, R. (1953) Plato’s Earlier Dialectic, Oxford. 2nd edn.Google Scholar

Sambursky, S. (1959) Physics of the Stoics. London.Google Scholar

Scade, P. (2013) ‘Plato and the Stoics on limits, parts and wholes’, in Plato and the Stoics, ed. Long, A. G.. Cambridge: 80–105.Google Scholar

Schäublin, C. (1995) Akademische Abhandlungen: Lucullus. Text und Übersetzung von Christoph Schäublin. Einleitung von Andreas Graeser und Christoph Schäublin. Anmerkungen von Andreas Bächli und Andreas Graeser. Stuttgart.Google Scholar

Schiaparelli, A. (2003), ‘Aristotle on the fallacies of combination and division in Sophistici Elenchi 4’, History and Philosophy of Logic 24: 111–129.Google Scholar

Schneider, J.-P. (1994) ‘Cléarque de Soles’, in Dictionnaire des philosophes antiques 2, ed. Goulet, R.. Paris: 415–420.Google Scholar

Schofield, M. (1983) ‘The syllogisms of Zeno of Citium’, Phronesis 28: 31–58.Google Scholar

Schofield, M. (1996) ‘Epilogismos: an appraisal’, in Rationality in Greek Thought, eds. Frede, M. and Striker, G.. Oxford: 221–237.Google Scholar

Schofield, M. (1999a) Saving the City: Philosopher-Kings and Other Classical Paradigms. London and New York.Google Scholar

Schofield, M. (1999b) ‘Academic epistemology’, in The Cambridge History of Hellenistic Philosophy, eds. Algra, K., Barnes, J., Mansfeld, J. and Schofield, M.. Cambridge: 323–351.Google Scholar

Schofield, M. (2012) ‘The neutralizing argument: Carneades, Antiochus, Cicero’, in The Philosophy of Antiochus, ed. Sedley, D. N.. Cambridge: 337–349.Google Scholar

Schrenk, L. P. (1994) ‘Proof and discovery in Aristotle and the later Greek tradition: a prolegomenon to a study on analysis and synthesis’, in Aristotle in Late Antiquity, ed. Schrenk, L. P.. Washington, DC: 92–108.Google Scholar

Schwyzer, E. (1953) Griechische Grammatik: Erster Band: Allgemeiner Teil, Lautlehre, Wortbildung, Flexion. Munich.Google Scholar

Sedley, D. (1973), ‘Epicurus, On Nature Book XXVIII’, Cronache Ercolanesi 3: 5–83.Google Scholar

Sedley, D. (1976) ‘Epicurus and the mathematicians of Cyzicus’, Cronache Ercolanesi 6: 23–54.Google Scholar

Sedley, D. (1977) ‘Diodorus Cronus and Hellenistic philosophy’ PCPS 23: 74–120.Google Scholar

Sedley, D. (1982) ‘On signs’, in Science and Speculation: Studies in Hellenistic Theory and Practice, eds. Barnes, J., Brunschwig, J., Burnyeat, M. and Schofield, M.. Cambridge: 239–272.Google Scholar

Sedley, D. (1983) ‘The motivation of Greek scepticism’, in The Skeptical Tradition, ed. Burnyeat, M.. Berkeley and Los Angeles: 9–29.Google Scholar

Sedley, D. (1988) ‘Epicurean anti-reductionism’, in Matter and Metaphysics, eds. Barnes, J. and Mignucci, M.. Naples: 297–325.Google Scholar

Sedley, D. (1989) ‘Philosophical allegiance in the Greco-Roman world’, in Philosophia Togata: Essays on Philosophy and Roman Society, eds. Griffin, M. T. and Barnes, J.. Oxford: 97–119.Google Scholar

Sedley, D. (1992) ‘Sextus Empiricus and the atomist criteria of truth’, Elenchos 13: 19–56.Google Scholar

Sedley, D. (1998) ‘Theophrastus and Epicurean physics’, in Theophrastus: Reappraising the Sources, eds. van Ophuisen, J.M. and van Raalte, M.. New Brunswick: 331–354.Google Scholar

Sedley, D. (1999) ‘Hellenistic physics and metaphysics’, in The Cambridge History of Hellenistic Philosophy, eds. Algra, K., Barnes, J., Brunschwig, J., Burnyeat, M. and Schofield, M.. Cambridge: 355–411.Google Scholar

Sedley, D. (2002) ‘Zeno’s definition of phantasia kataleptike’, in The Philosophy of Zeno, eds. Scaltsas, T. and Mason, A. S.. Larnaka: 135–154.Google Scholar

Sedley, D. (2004) ‘Aristote et la signification’, Philosophie Antique 4: 5–25.Google Scholar

Sedley, D. (2005) ‘Verità futura e causalità nel De fato di Cicerone’, in La catena delle cause: determinismo e antideterminismo nel pensiero antico e in quello contemporaneo, eds. Natali, C. and Maso, S.. Amsterdam: 241–254.Google Scholar

Sedley, D. (2007) Creationism and Its Critics in Antiquity. Berkeley and London.Google Scholar

Sedley, D. (ed.) (2012) The Philosophy of Antiochus. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Sedley, D. (2013) ‘Diodorus Cronus’, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2013 Edition), ed. E. N. Zalta. http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2013/entries/diodorus-cronus/.Google Scholar

Sedley, D. (forthcoming) ‘Carneades’ theological arguments’, in Balla, C., Baziotopoulou, E., Kalligas, P. and Karasmanis, V. (eds.), Plato’s Academy: A History. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Shearin, W. (2015) The Language of Atoms. New York.Google Scholar

Shields, C. (1993) ‘The truth evaluability of Stoic phantasiai: Adversus Mathematicos VII’, JHPh 31: 325–347.Google Scholar

Shorey, P. (trans.) (1930) The Republic of Plato, with an English Translation. Cambridge, MA and London.Google Scholar

Sichirollo, L. (1966) Διαλέγεσθαι. Dialektik von Homer bis Aristoteles. Hildesheim.Google Scholar

Sim, M. (ed.) (1999) From Puzzles to Principles: Essays on Aristotle’s Dialectic. Lanham.Google Scholar

Slomkowski, P. (1997) Aristotle’s Topics. Leiden, New York and Cologne.Google Scholar

Smith, R. (trans.) (1989) Aristotle, Prior Analytics. Indianapolis and Cambridge.Google Scholar

Smith, R. (trans.) (1997) Aristotle, Topics: Books I and VIII, with comm. Oxford.Google Scholar

Snyder, C. E. (2014) ‘The Socratic benevolence of Arcesilaus’ dialectic’, AncPhil 34: 341–363.Google Scholar

Solmsen, F. (1929) Die Entwicklung der aristotelischen Logik und Rhetorik. Berlin.Google Scholar

Sorabji, R. (2005) The Philosophy of the Commentators (200–600 AD): A Sourcebook, vol. I. Ithaca.Google Scholar

Speca, A. (2001) Hypothetical Syllogistic and Stoic Logic. Leiden, Boston and Cologne.Google Scholar

Spinelli, E. (2008) ‘Sextus Empiricus, l’expérience sceptique et l’horizon de l’éthique’, Cahiers Philosophiques 115: 29–45.Google Scholar

Staden, H. von (1989) Herophilus: The Art of Medicine in Early Alexandria. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Stenzel, J. (1940) Plato’s Method of Dialectic, trans. Allan, D. J.. Oxford.Google Scholar

Stopper, M. R. (1983) ‘Schizzi pirroniani’, Phronesis 28: 265–297.Google Scholar

Striker, G. (1980) ‘Sceptical strategies’, in Doubt and Dogmatism: Studies in Hellenistic Epistemology, eds. Schofield, M., Burnyeat, M. and Barnes, J.. Oxford: 54–83.Google Scholar

Striker, G. (1983) ‘The ten tropes of Aenesidemus’, in The Skeptical Tradition, ed. Burnyeat, M.. Berkeley: 95–115. Reprinted in G. Striker (1996), Essays on Hellenistic Epistemology and Ethics. Cambridge: 116–134.Google Scholar

Striker, G. (1996) ‘Κριτήριον τῆς ἀληθείας’, in Essays on Hellenistic Epistemology and Ethics. Cambridge: 22–76. (English rev. version of original 1974 German text).Google Scholar

Striker, G. (1997) ‘Academics fighting Academics’, in Inwood and Mansfeld (1997): 257–276.Google Scholar

Striker, G. (2004) ‘Historical reflections on classical Pyrrhonism and neo-Pyrrhonism’, in Pyrrhonian Skepticism, ed. Sinott-Armstrong, W.. Oxford: 13–24.Google Scholar

Stump, E. (1989) Dialectic and Its Place in the Development of Medieval Logic. Ithaca.Google Scholar

Svavarsson, S. H. (2014) ‘Sextus Empiricus on persuasiveness and equipollence’, in Strategies of Argument: Essays in Ancient Ethics, Epistemology, and Logic, ed. Lee, Mi-Kyoung. New York: 356–374.Google Scholar

Swain, S. C. R. (2002) ‘Bilingualism in Cicero? The evidence of code-switching’, in Bilingualism in Ancient Society: Language Contact and the Written Text, eds. Adams, J. N., Janse, M. and Swain, S. C. R.. Oxford and New York: 128–167.Google Scholar

Taylor, B. (2016) ‘Definition and ordinary language in Cicero, De finibus 2’, CPh 111: 54–73.Google Scholar

Thomas, R. F. (2000) ‘A trope by any other name: “polysemy”, ambiguity and significatio in Virgil’, HSPh 100: 381–407.Google Scholar

Thorsrud, H. (2002) ‘Cicero on his Academic predecessors: the fallibilism of Arcesilaus and Carneades’, JHPh 40: 1–18.Google Scholar

Thorsrud, H. (2010) ‘Arcesilaus and Carneades’, in The Cambridge Companion to Ancient Scepticism, ed. Bett, R.. Cambridge: 58–80.Google Scholar

Thurneysen, R. (1906) ‘Senium und desiderium’, Archiv für Lateinische Lexikographie und Grammatik 14: 179–184.Google Scholar

Tieleman, T. (1996a) Galen and Chrysippus on the Soul: Argument and Refutation in the De Placitis Books II–III. Leiden.Google Scholar

Tieleman, T. (1996b) ‘The argument of PHP Book II’, in Studi di storia della medicina antica e medievale in memoria di Paola Manuli, eds. Vegetti, M. and Gastaldi, S.. Florence: 49–65.Google Scholar

Tsouna, V. (2007) ‘Philodemus and the Epicurean tradition’, in Pyrrhonists, Patricians, Platonizers: Hellenistic Philosophy in the Period 155–86 BC, eds. Ioppolo, A.-M. and Sedley, D.N.. Naples: 339–397.Google Scholar

Usener, H. (1858) Analecta Theophrastea, diss. University of Bonn. Leipzig.Google Scholar

Usener, H. (1887) Epicurea. Stuttgart.Google Scholar

Valente, P. M. (1956) L’éthique stoïcienne chez Cicéron. Paris and Porto Alegre.Google Scholar

Van der Eijk, Ph. J. (1997) ‘Galen’s use of the concept of “qualified experience” in his dietetic and pharmacological works’, in Galen on Pharmacology, ed. Debru, A.. Leiden: 35–57. Reprinted in Van der Eijk (2005), 279–298.Google Scholar

Van der Eijk, Ph. J. (2005) Medicine and Philosophy in Classical Antiquity. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Van Ophuijsen, J. M. (1994) ‘Where have the topics gone?’, in Peripatetic Rhetoric after Aristotle, eds. Fortenbaugh, W. W. and Mirhady, D. C.. New Brunswick and London: 131‒173.Google Scholar

Vander Waerdt, P. A. (1989) ‘Colotes and the Epicurean refutation of skepticism’, GRBS 30: 225–267.Google Scholar

Vegetti, M. (1994) ‘L’immagine del medico e lo statuto epistemologico della medicina in Galeno’, ANRW 2.37.2. Berlin and New York: 1672–1717.Google Scholar

Vegetti, M. (ed.) (2013) Galeno. Nuovi scritti autobiografici, with trans. and comm. Rome.Google Scholar

Vegetti, M. (2015) ‘Galeno, il “divinissimo” Platone e i platonici’, RSF 70: 447–471.Google Scholar

Verde, F. (forthcoming) ‘Two concepts of sleep: Clearchus of Soli and Strato of Lampsacus’.Google Scholar

Vlastos, G. (1993) Socratic Studies, ed. Burnyeat, M., Cambridge.Google Scholar

Vogt, K. (2010) ‘Scepticism and action’, in The Cambridge Companion to Ancient Scepticism, ed. Bett, R.. Cambridge: 165–180.Google Scholar

Wackernagel, J. (2008) Lectures on Syntax: With Special Reference to Greek, Latin, and Germanic, (ed.) with notes and bibliography Langslow, D.. Oxford.Google Scholar

Waitz, T. (ed.) (1844‒6) Aristotelis Organon Graece, with comm. (2 vols.). Leipzig.Google Scholar

Walde, A. and Hofmann, J. B. (1938 ³) Lateinisches etymologisches Wörterbuch. (3 vols.). Heidelberg.Google Scholar

Wallies, M. (ed.) (1891) Alexandri Aphrodisiensis in Aristotelis Topicorum libros octo commentaria. Berlin.Google Scholar

Walz, C. (1834) Rhetores Graeci VI. Stuttgart.Google Scholar

Walzer, R. (1934) ‘Zur Traditionsgeschichte der aristotelischen Poetik’, Studi Italiani di filologia classica 11: 5–14.Google Scholar

Ward, J. K. (2008) On Homonymy: Dialectic and Science. Cambridge.Google Scholar

Warren, J. (2006) ‘Psychic disharmony: Philoponus and Epicurus on Plato’s Phaedo’, OSAPh 30: 235–259.Google Scholar

Wehrli, F. (ed.) (1955) Die Schule des Aristoteles, Heft 8: Eudemus von Rhodos. Basle.Google Scholar

Wehrli, F. (ed.) (1969) Die Schule des Aristoteles, Heft 3: Klearchos, 2nd edn. Basle.Google Scholar

Wehrli, F. (1983) ‘Der Peripatos bis zum Beginn der römischen Kaiserzeit’, in Die Philosophie der Antike vol. III, ed. Flashar, H.. Basle: 461‒599.Google Scholar

West, M. L. (ed.) (1992) Iambi et Elegi Graeci, 2nd edn. Oxford.Google Scholar

Whitaker, C. W. A. (1996) Aristotle’s De Interpretatione: Contradiction and Dialectic. Oxford.Google Scholar

White, M. J. (1982) ‘Zeno’s arrow, divisible infinitesimals and Chrysippus’, Phronesis 27: 239–254.Google Scholar

Wilberding, J. (ed.) (2006) Philoponus: Against Proclus’ On the Eternity of the World 12–18, with trans. and comm. London.Google Scholar

Wilkerson, K. E. (1988) ‘Carneades at Rome: a problem of sceptical rhetoric’, Ph&Rh 21: 131–144.Google Scholar

Wynne, J. P. F. (2014) ‘Learned and wise: Cotta the sceptic in Cicero’s On the Nature of the Gods’, OSAPh 47: 245–273.Google Scholar

Zeller, E. (1922) Die Philosophie der Griechen in ihrer geschichtlichen Entwicklung, 2nd edn. Leipzig.Google Scholar

Zimmermann, R. (1996) The Law of Obligations: Roman Foundations of the Civilian Tradition. Oxford.Google Scholar