Bibliography

Chiara Ferella

doi:10.1017/9781009392600.010

Allen, R. E. and Furley, D. J. (eds.) 1975. Studies in Presocratic Philosophy, II. The Eleatics and Pluralists. London. Routledge.Google Scholar

Althoff, J. (ed.) 2007. Philosophie und Dichtung im antiken Griechenland. Festschrift für Wolfgang Kullmann. Karl und Gertrud Abel Stiftung, Bernkastel-Kues, 10–11. Oktober 2002. Stuttgart. Steiner.Google Scholar

Althoff, J., Foellinger, S. and Woehrle, G. (eds.) 2020. AKAN – Antike Naturwissenschaft und Ihre Rezeption 30. Trier. WVT.Google Scholar

Anton, J. P. and Preus, A. (eds.) 1983. Essays in Ancient Greek Philosophy, vol. 2. Albany, NY. SUNY Press.Google Scholar

Arrighetti, G. 1984. Esiodo, Teogonia. Milano. Rizzoli.Google Scholar

Arrighetti, G. 1987. Poeti, Eruditi e Biografi. Momenti della Riflessione dei Greci sulla Letteratura. Pisa. Giardini Editore.Google Scholar

Arrighetti, G. 1997. Esiodo, Le Opere e i Giorni; lo Scudo di Eracle. Milano. Rizzoli.Google Scholar

Arrighetti, G. and Tulli, M. (eds.) 2000. Letteratura e Riflessione sulla Letteratura nella Cultura Classica. Pisa. Giardini Editore.Google Scholar

Aubenque, P. (ed.) 1987. Études sur Parménide, vol. 2: Problèmes d’Interprétation. Paris. Vrin.Google Scholar

Aune, D. E. and Young, D. (eds.) 2007. Reading Religions in the Ancient World. Essays Presented to Robert McQueen Grant on his 90th Birthday. Leiden. Brill.Google Scholar

Barnes, J. 1979. ‘Parmenides and the Eleatic One’. Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 61: 1–21.CrossRef Google Scholar

Barnes, J. 1982. The Presocratic Philosophers. London. Routledge.Google Scholar

Barnes, J. 1984. The Complete Works of Aristotle, 2 vols. Princeton, NJ. Princeton University Press.Google Scholar

Bartoš, H. and King, C. K. (eds.) 2020. Heat, Pneuma, and Soul in Ancient Philosophy and Science. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Bassett, S. E. 1919. ‘Δαίμων in Homer’. Classical Review 33: 134–36.Google Scholar

Battezzato, L. 2005. ‘Le Vie dell’ Ade e le Vie di Parmenide. Filologia, Filosofia e Presenze Femminili nelle Lamine d’Oro “Orfiche”’. Seminari Romani 8: 67–99.Google Scholar

Becker, O. 1937. Das Bild des Weges und verwandte Vorstellungen im frühgriechischen Denken. Berlin. Weidmann.Google Scholar

Benzi, N. 2016. ‘Noos and Mortal Enquiry in the Poetry of Xenophanes and Parmenides’. Methodos 16: 1–19.Google Scholar

Bernabé, A. 2002a. ‘Orphisme et Présocratiques: Bilan et Perspectives d’un Dialogue Complexe’, in Laks, A. and Louguet, C. (eds.): 205–47.Google Scholar

Bernabé, A. 2002b. ‘La Toile de Pénélope: a-t-il Existé un Mythe Orphique sur Dionysos et les Titans?’ Revue de l’Histoire des Religions 219.4: 401–33.Google Scholar

Bernabé, A. 2003. Hieros Logos. Poesía Órfica sobre los Dioses, el Alma y el Más Allá. Madrid. Akal.Google Scholar

Bernabé, A. 2004. Textos Órficos y Filosofía Presocrática: Materiales para una Comparación. Madrid. Trotta.Google Scholar

Bernabé, A. 2004–2007. Poetae Epici Graeci: Testimonia et Fragmenta, München, Leipzig and Berlin. Teubner (Pars. II, Fasc. 1, München and Leipzig. Teubner 2004. Fasc. 2. München and Leipzig. Teubner 2005, Fasc. 3. Berlin. Teubner 2007).Google Scholar

Bernabé, A. 2011. ‘La Transmigración entre los Órficos’, in Bernabé, A., Kahle, M. and Santamaría, M. A. (eds.): 179–210.Google Scholar

Bernabé, A. and Casadesús, F. (eds.) 2008. Orfeo y la Tradición Órfica: Un Reencuentro. Madrid. Akal.Google Scholar

Bernabé, A., Casadesús, F. and Santamaría, M. A. (eds.) 2009. Orfeo y el Orfismo: Nuevas Perspectivas. Alicante. Biblioteca Virtual M. Cervantes.Google Scholar

Bernabé, A. and Jiménez, A. I. (eds.) 2008. Instructions for The Netherworld. The Orphic Gold Tablets. Leiden and Boston. Brill.Google Scholar

Bernabé, A., Kahle, M. and Santamaría, M. A. (eds.) 2011. Reencarnación: la Transmigración de las Almas entre Oriente y Occidente. Madrid. Abada Editores.Google Scholar

Berra, A. 2006. ‘Pythagoras’ Riddles. The Use of the Pythagorean Akousmata’, in Galewicz, C. (ed.): 259–72.Google Scholar

Beta, S. (ed.) 2006. I Poeti Credevano nelle loro Muse? Atti della Giornata di Studio, Siena 2 Aprile 2003. Fiesole. Cadmo: il Ramo d’Oro.Google Scholar

Betegh, G. 2001. ‘Empédocle, Orphée et le Papyrus de Derveni’, in Morel, P. M. and Pradeau, J.-F. (eds.): 45–70.Google Scholar

Betegh, G. 2004. The Derveni Papyrus: Cosmology, Theology and Interpretation. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press.CrossRef Google Scholar

Betegh, G. 2006. ‘Eschatology and Cosmology: Models and Problems’, in Sassi, M. M. (ed.): 27–50.Google Scholar

Betegh, G. 2007. ‘The Derveni Papyrus and Early Stoicism’. Rhizai 4.4: 133–52.Google Scholar

Betegh, G. 2009. ‘The Limits of the Soul: Heraclitus B45 DK. Its Text and Interpretation’, inHülsz, E. P.(ed.): 391–414.Google Scholar

Betegh, G. 2014a. ‘Pythagoreans and the Derveni Author’, in Sheffield, F. and Warren, J. (eds.): 79–93.Google Scholar

Betegh, G. 2014b. ‘Pythagoreans, Orphism and Greek Religion’, in Huffman, C. A. (ed.): 149–66.Google Scholar

Bidez, J. 1894. La Biographie d’Empédocle. Bd. 12. Gand. Clemm.Google Scholar

Bierl, A., Lämmle, R. and Wesselmann, K. (eds.) 2007. Literatur und Religion 1 und 2: Wege zu einer mythisch-rituellen Poetik bei den Griechen. Berlin. De Gruyter.Google Scholar

Bignone, E. 1916. Empedocle. Studio Critico, Traduzione e Commento delle Testimonianze e dei Frammenti. Torino. Fratelli Bocca.Google Scholar

Bodrero, E. 1904. Il Principio Fondamentale del Sistema di Empedocle. Roma. Forzani & C.Google Scholar

Boehm, F. 1905. De symbolis Pythagoreis. Diss. Berlin. Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität.Google Scholar

Bollack, J. 1965–1969. Empédocle, vols. I, II, III.1–2. (1965. Vol. I Introduction à l’Ancienne Physique; 1969. Vol. II Les Origins: Édition et Traduction des Fragments et des Témoignages; 1969. Vol. III Les Origines. Commentaire 1–2) Paris. Les Éditions de Minuit.Google Scholar

Bollack, J. 2003. Empédocle. Les Purifications: un Projet de Paix Universelle. Paris. Seuil.Google Scholar

Borgeaud, P. (ed.) 1991. Orphisme et Orphée: en l’Honneur de Jean Rudhardt. Genève. Librairie Droz.Google Scholar

Bowra, C. M. 1937. ‘The Proem of Parmenides’. Classical Philology 32.2: 97–112.Google Scholar

Bowra, C.M. 1952. ‘Orpheus and Eurydice’. Classical Quarterly 2: 113–26.Google Scholar

Brann, E. T. H. 2011. The Logos of Heraclitus: The First Philosopher of the West on Its Most Interesting Term. Philadelphia, PA. Paul Dry Books.Google Scholar

Bredlow, L. A. 2011. ‘Aristotle, Theophrastus and Parmenides’ Theory of Cognition (B 16)’. Apeiron 44: 219–63.Google Scholar

Bremer, D. and Dilcher, R. 2013. ‘Heraklit’, in Flashar, H., Bremer, D. and Rechenauer, G. (eds): 601–56.Google Scholar

Bremmer, J. 1983. The Early Greek Concept of the Soul. Princeton, NJ. Princeton University Press.Google Scholar

Bremmer, J. 2017. ‘Descents to the Underworld from Gilgamesh to Christian Late Antiquity’. Studia Religiologica 50.4: 291–309.Google Scholar

Brenk, F. E. 1973. ‘“A Most Strange Doctrine”. Daimon in Plutarch’. The Classical Journal 69.1: 1–11.Google Scholar

Brillante, C. 2006. ‘Le Muse tra Verità, Menzogna e Finzione’, in Beta, S. (ed.): 27–58.Google Scholar

Brillante, C. 2009. Il Cantore e la Musa: Poesia e Modelli Culturali nella Grecia Arcaica. Pisa. ETS.Google Scholar

Brisson, L. 2002. Sexual Ambivalence: Androgyny and Hermaphroditism in Graeco-Roman Antiquity. Berkeley, CA. University of California Press.Google Scholar

Brisson, L. 2009. ‘Zeus Did Not Commit Incest with His Mother. An Interpretation of Col. XXVI of the Derveni Papyrus’. Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik 168: 27–39.Google Scholar

Brunius Nilsson, E. 1955. Daimonie, an Inquiry into a Mode of Apostrophe in Old Greek Literature. Uppsala, Sweden. Almquist und Wiksell.Google Scholar

Bruschi, R. (ed.) 2007. Gli Irraggiungibili Confini. Percorsi della Psiche nell’età della Grecia Classica. Pisa. ETS.Google Scholar

Bryan, J. 2012. Likeness and Likelihood in the Presocratics and Plato. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Burkert, W. 1969. ‘Das Proömium des Parmenides und die Katabasis des Pythagoras’. Phronesis 14.1: 1–30.Google Scholar

Burkert, W. 1972. Lore and Science in Ancient Pythagoreanism. Cambridge, MA. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Burkert, W. 1985. Greek Religion. Cambridge, MA. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Burkert, W. 1999. Da Omero ai Magi. Venezia. Marsilio.Google Scholar

Burnet, J. 1930. Early Greek Philosophy, 4th edition. London. A & C. Black.Google Scholar

Bury, J. B., Cook, S. A. and Adcock, F. E. (eds.) 1926. Cambridge Ancient History, IV. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Calame, C. 1995. The Craft of Poetic Speech in Ancient Greece. Ithaca. Cornell University Press.Google Scholar

Calzolari, A. 1984. ‘Empedocle, Frr. 2 e 3 Diels-Kranz’. Studi Classici e Orientali 34: 71–81.Google Scholar

Campbell, G. 2000. ‘Zoogony and Evolution in Plato’s Timaeus. The Presocratics, Lucretius and Darwin’, in Wright, M. R. (ed.): 145–80.Google Scholar

Casabona, J. 1966. Recherches sur le Vocabulaire des Sacrifices en Grec, des Origines à la Fin de l’Époque Classique. Aix-en-Provence. Ophrys.Google Scholar

Casadesús, F. 2008. ‘El papiro de Derveni’, in Bernabé, A. and Casadesús, F. (eds.): 459–94.Google Scholar

Casadesús, F. 2010. ‘Similitudes entre el Papiro de Derveni y los Primeros Filósofos Estoicos’, in Bernabé, A., Casadesús, F. and Santamaría, M. A. (eds.): 192–239.Google Scholar

Casadesús, F. 2013. ‘On the Origin of the Orphic-Pythagorean Notion of the Immortality of the Soul’, inCornelli, , McKirahan, G., R. and Macris, C. (eds.): 153–76.Google Scholar

Casadio, G. 1991. ‘La Metempsicosi tra Orfeo e Pitagora’, in Borgeaud, P. (ed.): 119–55.Google Scholar

Casertano, G. 1978. Parmenide. Il Metodo, la Scienza, l’Esperienza. Napoli. Guida.Google Scholar

Castner, C. J. 1987. ‘De Rerum Natura 5. 101–103: Lucretius’ Application of Empedoclean Language to Epicurean Doctrine’. Phoenix 41.1: 40–49.Google Scholar

Caston, V. and Graham, D. W. (eds.) 2002. Presocratic Philosophy: Essays in Honour of Alexander Mourelatos. London. Routledge.Google Scholar

Centrone, B. 2007. ‘Il Ruolo di Eraclito nello Sviluppo della Concezione dell’Anima’, in Bruschi, E. (ed.): 131–49.Google Scholar

Cerri, G. 1995. ‘Cosmologia dell’Ade in Omero, Esiodo e Parmenide’. Parola del Passato. 50, fasc. III–IV: 437–67.Google Scholar

Cerri, G. 1999. Parmenide di Elea: Poema sulla Natura. Milano. Rizzoli.Google Scholar

Cerri, G. 2004. ‘Empedocle, Fr. 3 D.-K.: Saggio di Esegesi Letterale’, in Rossetti, L. and Santaniello, C. (eds.): 83–94.Google Scholar

Chantraine, P. 1953. Grammaire Homérique. Tome II: Syntaxe. Paris. Klincksieck.Google Scholar

Cherniss, H. 1935. Aristotle’s Criticism of Presocratic Philosophy. Baltimore, MD. Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar

Cherubin, R. 2005. ‘Light, Night and the Opinions of Mortals: Parmenides B 8.51–61 and B 9’. Ancient Philosophy 25: 1–23.Google Scholar

Chitwood, A. 1986. ‘The Death of Empedocles’. American Journal of Philology 107.2: 175–91.Google Scholar

Chitwood, A. 2004. Death by Philosophy. The Biographical Tradition in the Life and Death of the Archaic Philosophers Empedocles, Heraclitus, and Democritus. Ann Arbor. University of Michigan Press.CrossRef Google Scholar

Cienki, A. 2010. ‘Frames, Idealized Cognitive Models, and Domains’, in Geeraerts, D. and Cuyckens, H. (eds.): 170–87.Google Scholar

Claus, D. B. 1981. Toward the Soul. New Haven and London. Yale University Press.Google Scholar

Conche, M. 1996. Parménide. Le Poème. Fragments. Paris. Presses Universitaires de France.Google Scholar

Conger, G. P. 1922. Theories of Macrocosms and Microcosms in the History of Philosophy. New York, NY. Russell & Russell.Google Scholar

Cook, A. B. 1925. Zeus: A Study in Ancient Religion, 2 vols. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Cornelli, G., McKirahan, R. and Macris, C. (eds.) 2013. On Pythagoreanism. Berlin. De Gruyter.Google Scholar

Cornford, F. M. 1926. ‘Mystery Religions and Pre-Socratic Philosophy’, in Bury, J. B., Cook, S. A. and Adcock, F. E. (eds.): 522–78.Google Scholar

Cornford, F.M. 1937. Plato’s Cosmology. The Timaeus of Plato. New York, NY. Harcourt, Brace and Co.Google Scholar

Cornford, F.M. 1952. Principium Sapientiae. The Origins of Greek Philosophical Thought. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Cosenza, P. 1985. ‘Demone e Sorte nella Scuola Pitagorica’, in AA. VV. (ed.) Esistenza e Destino nel Pensiero Greco Arcaico. Napoli. Edizioni Scientifiche Italiane: 7–31.Google Scholar

Cosgrove, M. R. 2011. ‘The Unknown “Knowing Man”: Parmenides, B 1.3’. Classical Quarterly 61: 28–47.Google Scholar

Coxon, A. H. 2009. The Fragments of Parmenides. A Critical Text with Introduction, Translation, the Ancient Testimonia and a Commentary. Revised and expanded edition by R. McKirahan. Las Vegas, NV, Zurich and Athens. Parmenides Publishing.Google Scholar

Crisp, P. 2005. ‘Allegory, Blending, and Possible Situations’. Metaphor and Symbol 20.5: 115–31.Google Scholar

Curd, P. K. 1992. ‘Deception and Belief in Parmenides’ Doxa’. Apeiron 25.2: 109–33.CrossRef Google Scholar

Curd, P.K. 1998. The Legacy of Parmenides: Eleatic Monism and Later Presocratic Thought. Las Vegas, NV. Parmenides Publishing.Google Scholar

Curd, P.K. 2001. ‘A New Empedocles? Implications of the Strasbourg Fragments for Presocratic Philosophy’. Proceedings of the Boston Area Colloquium in Ancient Philosophy 17.1: 27–49.Google Scholar

Curd, P.K. 2002. ‘The Presocratics as Philosophers’, in Laks, A. and Loguet, C. (eds.): 115–38.Google Scholar

Curd, P.K. 2005. ‘On the Question of Religion and Natural Philosophy in Empedocles’, in Pierris, A. L. (ed.): 137–62.Google Scholar

Curd, P.K. 2016. ‘Powers, Structure and Thought in Empedocles’. Rhizomata 4 .1: 55–79.Google Scholar

Curd, P. K. and Graham, D. W. (eds.) 2008. The Oxford Handbook of Presocratic Philosophy. Oxford. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

D’Alessio, G. 1995. ‘Una Via Lontana dal Cammino degli Uomini (Parm. 28 B 1+6; Pind. Ol. VI 22–27; Pae. VIIb 10–20)’. Studi Italiani di Filologia Classica 88: 143–81.Google Scholar

Darcus, S. M. 1977. ‘Daimon Parallels the Holy Phren in Empedocles’. Phronesis 22.3: 175–90.Google Scholar

Deichgräber, K. 1958. Parmenides’ Auffahrt zur Göttin des Rechts. Untersuchungen zum Prooimion seines Lehrgedichts. Wiesbaden. Steiner.Google Scholar

Delatte, A. 1915. Études sur la Littérature Pythagoricienne. Paris. Champion.Google Scholar

Delatte, A. 1922. La vie de Pythagore de Diogène Laërte. Brussels. Lamertin.Google Scholar

Delatte, A. 1934. ‘Les Conceptions de l’Enthousiasme chez les Philosophes Présocratiques’. L’Antiquité Classique 3.1: 5–79.Google Scholar

Detienne, M. 1959. ‘La “Démonologie” d’Empédocle’. Revue des Études Grecques 72: 1–17.Google Scholar

Detienne, M. 1963. La Notion du Daïmôn dans le Pythagorisme Ancien. Paris. Les Belles Lettres.Google Scholar

Detienne, M. 1967. Les Maîtres de Vérité dans la Grèce Archaïque. Paris. François Maspero.Google Scholar

Di Donato, R. (ed.) 2013. Origini e Svolgimento del Pensiero Greco. Studi per Jean-Pierre Vernant. Pisa. RTS.Google Scholar

Diels, H. 1897. Parmenides. Lehrgedicht. Berlin. Reimer.Google Scholar

Diels, H. 1898. ‘Über die Gedichte des Empedokles’. Sitzungsberichte der Königlich Preußischen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin I: 396–415 (= 1969: 127–46).Google Scholar

Diels, H. 1901. Poetarum Philosophorum Fragmenta. Berlin. Weidmann.Google Scholar

Diels, H. 1903. Die Fragmente der Vorsokratiker. Griechisch und Deutsch. Berlin. Reimer.Google Scholar

Diels, H. 1969. Kleine Schriften zur Geschichte der antiken Philosophie. Darmstadt. Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.Google Scholar

Diels, H. and Kranz, W. 1951. Die Fragmente der Vorsokratiker, Griechisch und Deutsch, vol. I and II, 6th edition. Berlin. Weidmann.Google Scholar

Dilcher, R. 1995. Studies in Heraclitus. Hildesheim, Zurich and New York, NY. Olms.Google Scholar

Dillon, J. 1977. The Middle Platonist. London. Duckworth.Google Scholar

Dodds, E. R. 1951. The Greeks and the Irrational. Berkeley and London. University of California Press.Google Scholar

Drew Griffith, R. 1991. ‘Oedipus’s Bloodthirsty Sons: Love and Strife in Pindar’s Second “Olympian Ode”’. Classical Antiquity 10.1: 46–58.Google Scholar

Edmonds, R. G. III 1999. ‘Tearing Apart the Zagreus Myth: A Few Disparaging Remarks on Orphism and Original Sin’. Classical Antiquity 18.1: 35–73.Google Scholar

Edmonds, R.G. III 2004. Myths of the Underworld Journey: Plato, Aristophanes, and the ‘Orphic’ Gold Tablets. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Edmonds, R.G. III 2011. The ‘Orphic’ Gold Tablets and Greek Religion. Further along the Path. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Edwards, M. J. 1991. ‘Being and Seeming: Empedocles’ Reply’. Hermes 119.3: 282–93.Google Scholar

Elmer, D. F. 2010. ‘Kita and Kosmos: The Poetics of Ornamentation in Bosniac and Homeric Epic’. Journal of American Folklore 123: 276–303.Google Scholar

Everson, S. (ed.) 1990. Companions to Ancient Thought I: Epistemology. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Everson, S. (ed.) 1991. Companions to Ancient Thought II: Psychology. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Fattal, M. 2005. Ricerche sul Logos da Omero a Plotino (trans. R. Radice). Milano. Bompiani.Google Scholar

Ferella, C. 2013. ‘Il Giorno Spietato e l’Esilio dagli Dei: a Proposito di Alcuni Frammenti Demonologici’, in Di Donato, R. (ed.): 29–47.Google Scholar

Ferella, C. 2017. ‘Waking up Sleeping Metaphors: A Cognitive Approach to Parmenides’ two Ways of Enquiry’. eTopoi. Journal of Ancient Studies 6: 107–30.Google Scholar

Ferella, C. 2018a. ‘Introduction’, in Ferella, C. and Breytenbach, C. (eds.): 7–17.Google Scholar

Ferella, C. 2018b. ‘“A Path for Understanding”: Journey-Metaphors in (Three) Early Greek Philosophers’, in Ferella, C. and Breytenbach, C. (eds.): 45–71.Google Scholar

Ferella, C. 2019a. ‘Empedocles and the Birth of Trees: Reconstructing PStrasb. gr. inv. 1665–6, ens. d-f 10b-18’. Classical Quarterly 69.1: 75–86.Google Scholar

Ferella, C. 2019b. ‘Zeus’ μοῦνος and Parmenides’ what-is’, in Santamaría, M. A. (ed.): 65–74.Google Scholar

Ferella, C. 2020. ‘War Steers the World: The Metaphor Domain of Conflict in Heraclitus’ and Empedocles’ Representations of the Cosmos’, in Althoff, J., Foellinger, S. and Woehrle, G. (eds.): 9–34.Google Scholar

Ferella, C. 2021. ‘The Zoogonies of Empedocles Reconsidered’. Rhizomata 9.1: 1–26.Google Scholar

Ferella, C. and Breytenbach, C. (eds.) 2018. Paths of Knowledge. Interconnection(s) between Knowledge and Journey in the Graeco-Roman World. Berlin Studies of the Ancient World 60. Berlin. Edition Topoi.Google Scholar

Ferrari, F. 1998. Pindaro. Olimpiche. Milano. Rizzoli.Google Scholar

Ferrari, F. .2005. ‘L’Officina Epica di Parmenide: Due Sondaggi’. Seminari Romani 8: 113–29.Google Scholar

Ferrari, F. 2007. La Fonte del Cipresso Bianco. Torino. UTET.Google Scholar

Ferrari, F. 2010. Il Migliore dei Mondi Impossibili: Parmenide e il Cosmo dei Presocratici. Roma. Aracne.Google Scholar

Ferrari, F. 2011. ‘Frustoli Erranti: per una Ricostruzione delle Colonne I-III del Papiro di Derveni’, in Funghi, M. S. (ed.): 39–54.Google Scholar

Feyerabend, B. 1984. ‘Zur Wegmetaphorik beim Goldblättchen aus Hipponion und dem Proömium des Parmenides’. Rheinisches Museum 127: 1–22.Google Scholar

Fillmore, C. J. 1982. ‘Frame Semantics’, in Linguistic Society of Korea (ed.) Linguistics in the Morning Calm: Selected Papers from SICOL-1981 (p. 111). Seoul. Hanshin Pub. Co. 111–37.Google Scholar

Finkelberg, A. 1997. ‘Xenophanes’ Physics, Parmenides’ Doxa and Empedocles’ Theory of Cosmogonical Mixture’. Hermes 125.1: 1–16.Google Scholar

Finkelberg, A. 1999. ‘Being, Truth and Opinion in Parmenides’. Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 81.3: 233–48.Google Scholar

Finkelberg, A. .2013. ‘Heraclitus, the Rival of Pythagoras’, in Sider, D. and Obbink, D. (eds.): 147–62.Google Scholar

Flashar, H., Bremer, D. and Rechenauer, G. (eds.) 2013. Die Philosophie der Antike. Band I: Frühgriechische Philosophie. Basel. Schwabe.Google Scholar

Föllinger, S. 2007. ‘Die Funktion von Nicht-Wissen in der Frühgriechischen Literatur’, in Althoff, J. (ed.): 53–65.Google Scholar

Ford, A. L. 1992. Homer. The Poetry of the Past. Ithaca. Cornell University Press.Google Scholar

Fortenbaugh, W. and Gutas, D. (eds.) 1992. Theophrastus. His Psychological, Doxographical, and Scientific Writings. London. Routledge.Google Scholar

Fränkel, H. 1955. Wege und Formen frühgriechischen Denkens. Literarische und Philosophiegeschichtliche Studien. München. Beck.Google Scholar

Frede, D. and Reis, B. (eds.) 2009. Body and Soul in Ancient Philosophy. Berlin and New York, NY. De Gruyter.Google Scholar

Funghi, M. S. (ed.) 2011. Papiri filosofici. Miscellanea di Studi 6. Firenze. Olschki.Google Scholar

Furley, D. J. 1956. ‘The Early History of the Concept of Soul’. Bulletin of the Institute of Classical Studies 3.1: 1–18.Google Scholar

Furley, D.J. 1970. ‘Variation on Themes from Empedocles in Lucretius’ Proem’. Bulletin of the Institute of Classical Studies 17: 55–64. (= reprinted in Furley 1989a: 172–82).Google Scholar

Furley, D.J. 1989a. Cosmic Problems: Essays on Greeks and Roman Philosophy of Nature. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Furley, D.J. 1989b. ‘Truth as What Survives the Elenchos: An Idea in Parmenides’, in Huby, P. and Neal, G. (eds.) The Criterion of Truth. Liverpool. Liverpool University Press: 1–12.Google Scholar

Furley, D. J. and Allen, R. E. (eds.) 1970. Studies in Presocratic Philosophy. The Beginnings. London. Routledge.Google Scholar

Furley, D.J. and Allen, R.E. .(eds.) 1974. Studies in Presocratic Philosophy. The Eleatics and Pluralists. London. Routledge.Google Scholar

Furley, W. D. and Bremer, J. M. 2001. Greek Hymns. Selected Cult Songs from the Archaic to the Hellenistic Period, I–II. Tübingen. Mohr Siebeck.Google Scholar

Gale, M. R. 2000. Virgil on the Nature of Things. The Georgics, Lucretius and Didactic Tradition. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Galewicz, C. (ed.) 2006. Texts of Power, the Power of the Text. Readings in Textual Authority across History and Cultures. Kraków. Homini.Google Scholar

Gallavotti, C. 1975. Empedocle. Poema Fisico e Lustrale. Milano. Mondadori.Google Scholar

Gallo, I. (ed.) 1996. Plutarco e la Religione, Atti del VI Convegno Plutarcheo (Ravello, 29–31 maggio 1995). Napoli. D’Auria.Google Scholar

Gallop, D. 1975. Plato, Phaedo. Oxford. Clarendon Press.Google Scholar

Garani, M. 2007. Empedocles Redivivus: Poetry and Analogy in Lucretius. New York, NY and London. Routledge.Google Scholar

Geeraerts, D. and Cuyckens, H. (eds.) 2010. The Oxford Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics. Oxford. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Gemelli Marciano, M. L. 2001. ‘Le “Demonologie” Empedoclee: Problemi di Metodo e Altro’. Aevum Antiquum N. S. 1: 205–35.Google Scholar

Gemelli Marciano, M.L. 2002. ‘Le Contexte Culturel des Présocratiques: Adversaires et Destinataires’, in Laks, A. and Louguet, C. (eds.): 85–114.Google Scholar

Gemelli Marciano, M.L. 2005. ‘Empedocles’ Zoogony and Embryology’, in Pierris, A. L. (ed.): 373–404.Google Scholar

Gemelli Marciano, M.L. 2007a. ‘Lire du Début. Quelques Observations sur les Incipit des Présocratiques’. Philosophie Antique 7: 7–37.Google Scholar

Gemelli Marciano, M.L. 2007b. Die Vorsokratiker I. Thales, Anaximander, Anaximenes, Pythagoras und die Pythagoreer, Xenophanes, Heraklit. Auswahl der Fragmente und Zeugnisse, Übersetzung und Erläuterungen. Düsseldorf. Artemis & Winkler.Google Scholar

Gemelli Marciano, M.L. 2009. Die Vorsokratiker II. Parmenides, Zenon, Empedokles. Auswahl der Fragmente und Zeugnisse, Übersetzung und Erläuterungen. Düsseldorf. Artemis & Winkler.Google Scholar

Gemelli Marciano, M.L. 2014. ‘The Pythagorean Way of Life and Pythagorean Ethics’, in Huffman, C. A. (ed.): 131–48.Google Scholar

Gentili, B. 2013. Pindaro, Le Olimpiche. Milano. Fondazione Lorenzo Valla.Google Scholar

Gheerbrandt, X. 2017. Empédocle: une Poétique Philosophique. Paris. Classiques Garnier.Google Scholar

Gianotti, G. F. 1971. ‘Sull’ Olimpica Seconda di Pindaro’. Rivista di Filologia e di Istruzione Classica 99: 26–52.Google Scholar

Gianvittorio, L. 2010. Il Discorso di Eraclito. Un Modello Semantico nel Passaggio dall’Oralità alla Scrittura. Hildesheim, Zurich and New York, NY. Olms.Google Scholar

Gigon, O. 1935. Untersuchungen zu Heraklit. Diss. Basel. Leipzig. Dieterich.Google Scholar

Gnoli, G. and Sfameni Gasparro, G. (eds.) 2009. Potere e Religione nel Mondo Indo-Mediterraneo tra Ellenismo e Tarda-antichità. Roma. ISIAO.Google Scholar

Goedde, S. 2007. ‘Ou moi hosion esti legein: zur Poetik der Leerstelle in Herodots Aegypten-Logos’, in Bierl, A., Lämmle, R. and Wesselmann, K. (eds.): 40–83.Google Scholar

Goergemanns, H. and Schmidt, E. (eds.) 1976. Studien zum Antiken Epos. Meisenhaim Am Glan. Hain.Google Scholar

Gomperz, T. 1906. Greek Thinkers: A History of Ancient Philosophy, vol. 1 (trans. by L. Magnus). London. Murray.Google Scholar

Gomperz, T. 1924. Psychologische Beobachtungen an griechischen Philosophen. Leipzig. Internationaler Psychoanalytischer Verlag.Google Scholar

Graf, F. and Johnston, S. I. 2013. Ritual Texts for the Afterlife. Orpheus and the Bacchic Gold Tablets, 2nd edition. Abingdon and New York, NY. Routledge.Google Scholar

Graham, D. W. 1988. ‘Symmetry in the Empedoclean Cycle’. Classical Quarterly 38.2: 297–312.Google Scholar

Graham, D.W. 1999. ‘Empedocles and Anaxagoras: Responses to Parmenides’, in Long, A. A. (ed.): 159–80.Google Scholar

Graham, D.W. 2005. ‘The Topology and Dynamics of Empedocles’ Cycle’, in Pierris, A. L. (ed.): 225–44.Google Scholar

Graham, D.W. 2008. Explaining the Cosmos. The Ionian Tradition of Scientific Philosophy. Princeton, NJ. Princeton University Press.Google Scholar

Graham, D.W. 2010. The Texts of Early Greek Philosophy: The Complete Fragments and Selected Testimonies of the Major Presocratics. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Granger, H. 2013. ‘Xenophanes’ Positive Theology and His Criticism of Greek Popular Religion’. Ancient Philosophy 33: 235–71.Google Scholar

Grube, G. M. A. 1935. Plato’s Thought. London. Athlone.Google Scholar

Grube, G.M.A. 1965. The Greek and Roman Critics. Toronto. University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar

Guthrie, W. K. C. 1955. The Greeks and Their Gods. Boston, MA. Beacon Press.Google Scholar

Guthrie, W.K.C. 1957. In the Beginning: Some Greek Views on the Origins of Life and the Early State of Man. London. Methuen.Google Scholar

Guthrie, W.K.C. 1962. A History of Greek Philosophy, vol. I. The Earlier Presocratics and the Pythagoreans. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Guthrie, W.K.C. 1965. A History of Greek Philosophy, vol. II. The Presocratic Tradition from Parmenides to Democritus. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Hampe, R. 1952. ‘Zur Eschatologie in Pindars zweiter Olympischer Ode’. ERMHNEIA. Festschrift für O. Regenbogen. Heidelberg: 46–55.Google Scholar

Hardie, P. 1995. ‘The Speech of Pythagoras in Ovid Metamorphoses 15: Empedoclean Epos’. Classical Quarterly 45: 204–14.Google Scholar

Havelock, E. A. 1958. ‘Parmenides and Odysseus’. Harvard Studies in Classical Philology 63: 133–43.Google Scholar

Heidel, W. A. 1912–1913. ‘On Certain Fragments of the Pre-Socratics: Critical Notes and Elucidations’. Proceedings of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences 48: 681–734.Google Scholar

Heinrichs, A. 2011. ‘Dionysos Dismembered and Restored to Life. The Earliest Evidence (OF 59 I-II)’, in Herrero De Jáuregui, M., Jiménez San Cristóbal, A. I., Luján Martínez, E. R., Hernández, R. M., Santamaría, M. A. and Torallas Tovar, S. (eds.): 61–68.Google Scholar

Herrero De Jáuregui, M., Jiménez San Cristóbal, A. I., Luján Martínez, E. R., Hernández, R. M., Santamaría, M. A. and Torallas Tovar, S. (eds.) 2011. Tracing Orpheus. Studies of Orphic Fragments. Berlin. De Gruyter.Google Scholar

Hershbell, J. P. 1974. ‘Empedoclean Influences on the Timaeus’. Phoenix 28.2: 145–66.Google Scholar

Hladký, V. 2015. ‘Empedocles’ Sphairos and Its Interpretations in Antiquity, II: Plato’s Timaeus and Statesman’. Eirene. Studia Greca et Latina 51: 71–98.Google Scholar

2017. ‘Empedocles’ Sphairos’. Rhizomata 5.1: 1–24.Google Scholar

Hölscher, U. 1965. ‘Weltzeiten und Lebenszyklus: eine Nachprüfung der Empedokles-Doxographie’. Hermes 93.1: 7–33.Google Scholar

Holton, G. 1995. ‘Metaphors in Science and Education’, in Radman, Z. (ed.): 259–88.Google Scholar

Horn, F. 2015. ‘Sleeping the Brazen Slumber: A Cognitive Approach to Hom. Il. 11.241’. Philologus 159.2: 197–206.Google Scholar

Huby, P. and Neal, G. (eds.) 1989. The Criterion of Truth: Essays Written in Honor of George Kerferd, together with a Text and Translation (With Annotations) of Ptolemy’s On the Kriterion and Hegemonikon. Liverpool. Liverpool University Press.Google Scholar

Huffman, C. A. 1999. ‘The Pythagorean Tradition’. In Long, A. A. (ed.): 66–87.Google Scholar

Huffman, C.A. 2008. ‘Heraclitus’ Critique of Pythagoras’ Enquiry in Fragment 129’. Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 35: 19–47. 2009. ‘The Pythagorean Conception of the Soul from Pythagoras to Philolaus’, in Frede, D. and Reis, B. (eds.): 21–43.Google Scholar

Huffman, C.A. 2011. ‘Pythagoras’. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Zalta, E. N. (ed.), Online Resource. Available at: http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2014/entries/pythagoras/ [last accessed 7 August 2023].Google Scholar

Huffman, C.A. .(ed.) 2014. A History of Pythagoreanism. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Hüffmeier, A. 2001. Die pythagoreischen Sprüche in Porphyrios’ Vita Pythagorae Kapitel 36 (Ende) bis 45. Diss. Münster.Google Scholar

Hülsz, E. P. (ed.) 2009. Nuevos ensayos sobre Heráclito: Actas del Segundo Symposium Heracliteum, Mexico City. Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México.Google Scholar

Hussey, E. 1990. ‘The Beginning of Epistemology: From Homer to Philolaus’, in Everson, S. (ed.): 11–38.Google Scholar

1999. ‘Heraclitus’, in Long, A. A. (ed.): 88–112.Google Scholar

Hussey, E. 2006. ‘Parmenides on Thinking’, in King, R. A. H. (ed.): 13–30.Google Scholar

Ierodiakonou, K. 2005. ‘Empedocles on Colour and Colour Vision’. Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 29: 1–37.Google Scholar

Inwood, B. 2001. The Poem of Empedocles. A Text and Translation with an Introduction, Revised Edition. Toronto, Buffalo and London. University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar

Inwood, B. 2007. ‘Who Do We Think We Are?’, in Reis, B. (ed.): 230–43.Google Scholar

Inwood, B. 2009. ‘Empedocles and Metempsychosis: The Critique of Diogenes of Oenoanda’, in Frede, D. and Reis, B. (eds.): 71–86.Google Scholar

Iribarren Baralt, L. and Koning, H. H. (eds.) 2022. Hesiod and the Beginnings of Greek Philosophy. Leiden and Boston, MA. Brill.Google Scholar

Jaeger, W. 1947. The Theology of the Early Greek Philosophers. Oxford. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Jameson, M. H. 1988. ‘Sacrifice and Animal Husbandry in Classical Greece’. Pastoral Economies in Classical Antiquity. Cambridge Philological Society, Supplementary Vol. 14: 87–119.Google Scholar

Janko, R. 2004. ‘Empedocles, On Nature I 233–364: A New Reconstruction of P. Strasb. Gr. Inv. 1665–6’. Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik 150: 1–26.Google Scholar

Janko, R. 2005. ‘Empedocles’ Physika Book I: A New Reconstruction’. In Pierris, A. L. (ed.): 93–135.Google Scholar

Jarcho, V. N. 1968. ‘Zum Menschenbild der nachhomerischen Dichtung’. Philologus 112: 147–72.Google Scholar

Johnson, M. 1987. The Body in the Mind: The Bodily Basis of Meaning, Imagination, and Reason. Chicago, IL. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Johnston, S. I. 1999. Restless Dead. Berkeley, Los Angeles, CA and London. University of California Press.Google Scholar

Jourdan, F. 2003. Le papyrus de Derveni: Texte Présenté, Traduit et Annoté. Paris. Les Belles Lettres.Google Scholar

Kahn, C. H. 1960. ‘Religion and Natural Philosophy in Empedocles’ Doctrine of the Soul’. Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 42: 3–35 (= Reprinted in Mourelatos, A. P. D. [ed.]: 426–56).Google Scholar

Kahn, C.H. 1979. The Art and Thought of Heraclitus. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Kahn, C.H. 2009. Essays on Being. Oxford. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Kamtekar, R. 2009. ‘Knowing by Likeness in Empedocles’. Phronesis 54.3: 215–38.Google Scholar

Karsten, S. 1838. Empedoclis Agrigentini Carminum Reliquiae. De vita Eius et Studiis Disseruit, Fragmenta Explicuit, Philosophiam Illustravit. Amsterdam. Mueller.Google Scholar

Katz, A. and Taylor, T. E. 2008. ‘The Journeys of Life: Examining a Conceptual Metaphor with Semantic and Episodic Memory Recall’. Metaphor and Symbol 23: 148–73.Google Scholar

Kerényi, K. 1940. Pythagoras und Orpheus, 2nd edition. Amsterdam. Pantheon.Google Scholar

Kerferd, G. B. 1965. ‘ΔΑΙΜΩΝ in Pythagorean Thought’. Classical Review 15.1: 77–9.Google Scholar

King, R. A. H. (ed.) 2006. Common to Body and Soul: Philosophical Approaches to Explaining Living Behaviour in Greco-Roman Antiquity. Berlin and New York, NY. De Gruyter.Google Scholar

Kingsley, P. 1995. Ancient Philosophy, Mystery, and Magic. Empedocles and Pythagorean Tradition. Oxford. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Kingsley, P. 1996. ‘Empedocles’ Two Poems’. Hermes 124: 108–11.Google Scholar

Kingsley, P. 1999. In the Dark Places of Wisdom. Shaftesbury. Element.Google Scholar

Kingsley, P. 2002. ‘Empedocles for the New Millennium’. Ancient Philosophy 11.2 333–413.Google Scholar

Kirk, G. S. 1954. Heraclitus: The Cosmic Fragments. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Kirk, G. S., Raven, J. E. and Schofield, M. 1983. The Presocratic Philosophers. A Critical History with a Selection of Texts, 2nd edition. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Knatz, F. 1891. ‘Empedoclea’. Schedae Philologae Hermanno Usener a Sodalibus Seminarii Regii Bonnensis Oblatae. Bonn: 1–9.Google Scholar

Kotwick, M. E. 2017. Der Papyrus von Derveni. Griechisch-Deutsch. Berlin and Boston, MA. De Gruyter.Google Scholar

Kouremenos, T., Parássoglou, G. M. and Tsantsanoglou, K. 2006. The Derveni Papyrus, Firenze. Olschki.Google Scholar

Kövecses, Z. 2002. Metaphor. A Practical Introduction. Oxford. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Kranz, W. 1916. Über Aufbau und Bedeutung des Parmenideischen Gedichtes. Berlin. Verlag der Akademie der Wissenschaften.Google Scholar

Kranz, W. 1935. ‘Vorsokratisches III: Die Katharmoi und die Physika des Empedokles’. Hermes 70.1: 111–19.Google Scholar

Kranz, W. 1944. ‘Lukrez und Empedokles’. Philologus 96: 68–107.Google Scholar

Kranz, W. 1949. Empedokles. Antike Gestalt und romantische Neuschöpfung. Zürich. Artemis.Google Scholar

Kraus, M. 2013. ‘Parmenides’, in Flashar, H., Bremer, D. and Rechenauer, G. (eds.): 441–530.Google Scholar

Lakoff, G. 1987. Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things. Chicago, IL. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Lakoff, G. and Johnson, M. 1980. Metaphor We Live By. Chicago, IL. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Lakoff, G. and Turner, M. 1989. More than Cool Reason: A Field Guide to Poetic Metaphor. Chicago, IL. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar

Laks, A. 1999. ‘Soul, Sensation, and Thought’, in Long, A. A. (ed.): 250–70.Google Scholar

Laks, A. 2004. La Vide et la Haine. Éléments pour une histoire archaïque de la négativité. Paris. Presses Universitaires de France.Google Scholar

Laks, A. 2005. ‘Some Thoughts about Empedoclean Cosmic and Demonic Cycles’, in Pierris, A. L. (ed.): 265–82.Google Scholar

Laks, A. 2018. The Concept of Presocratic Philosophy. Its Origin, Development and Significance. Transl. by G. W. Most. Princeton, NJ and Oxford. Princeton University Press.Google Scholar

Laks, A. and Louguet, C. (eds.) 2002. Qu’est-ce que la Philosophie Présocratique?/What Is Presocratic Philosophy? Lille. Presses Universitaires du Septentrion.Google Scholar

Laks, A. and Most, G. W. 2016. Early Greek Philosophy, 9 vols. Cambridge, MA. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Lanata, G. 1963. Poetica Pre-platonica: Testimonianze e Frammenti. Firenze. La Nuova Italia.Google Scholar

Latte, K. 1946. ‘Hesiods Dichterweihe’. Antike und Abendland 2: 152–63 (= 1968. Kleine Schriften. München. Beck: 60–75).Google Scholar

Leclerc, M. C. 1993. La Parole chez Hésiode. Paris. Les Belles Lettres.Google Scholar

Lefkowitz, M. R. 1981. The Lives of the Greek Poets. Baltimore, MD. Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar

Lesher, J. H. 1981. ‘Perceiving and Knowing in the Iliad and Odyssey’. Phronesis 26.1: 2–24.Google Scholar

Lesher, J.H. 1983. ‘Xenphanes’ Scepticism’, in Anton, J. P. and Preus, A. (eds.): 20–40.Google Scholar

Lesher, J.H. 1984. ‘Parmenides’ Critique of Thinking: The Poludēris Elenchos of Fragment 7’. Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 2: 1–30.Google Scholar

Lesher, J.H. 1991. ‘Xenophanes on Inquiry and Discovery: An Alternative to the “Hymn to Progress” Reading of fr. 18’. Ancient Philosophy 2.2: 229–48.Google Scholar

Lesher, J.H. 1992. Xenophanes of Colophon. Fragments. Toronto, Buffalo and London. University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar

Lesher, J.H. 1994. ‘The Emergence of Philosophical Interest in Cognition’. Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 12: 1–34.Google Scholar

Lesher, J.H. 1999. ‘Early Interest in Knowledge’, in Long, A. A. (ed.): 225–49.Google Scholar

Lesher, J.H. 2008. ‘The Humanizing of Knowledge in Presocratic Thought’, in Curd, P. K. and Graham, D. W. (eds.): 458–84.Google Scholar

Lesher, J.H. 2013. ‘A systematic Xenophanes?’, in McCoy, , J. (ed.), Early Greek Philosophy: The Presocratics and the Emergence of Reason. Washington, D.C. Catholic University of America Press: 77–90.Google Scholar

Lloyd, G. E. R. 1963. ‘Who Is Attacked in “On Ancient Medicine”?’ Phronesis 8: 108–26.Google Scholar

Lloyd, G.E.R. 1964. ‘The Hot and the Cold, the Dry and the Wet in Greek Philosophy’. Journal of Hellenic Studies 84: 92–106.Google Scholar

Lloyd, G.E.R. 1966. Polarity and Analogy. Two Types of Argumentation in Early Greek Thought. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Lloyd, G.E.R. 1975. ‘Alcmaeon and the Early History of Dissection’. Sudhoffs Archiv 59.2: 113–47.Google Scholar

Lloyd, G.E.R. 2015. Analogical Investigations. Historical and Cross-Cultural Perspectives on Human Reasoning. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Lloyd-Jones, H. 1963. ‘The Seal of Posidippus’. Journal of Hellenic Studies 83: 75–99.Google Scholar

Lloyd-Jones, H. 1985. ‘Pindar and the After-Life’. Entretiens sur l’Antiquité Classique 31, Pindare: 245–83.Google Scholar

Long, Alex 2017. ‘Immortality in Empedocles’. Apeiron 50.1: 1–20.Google Scholar

Long, Alex 2019. Death and Immortality in Ancient Philosophy. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Long, Anthony A. 1963. ‘The Principles of Parmenides’ Cosmogony’. Phronesis 8.2: 90–107.Google Scholar

Long, Anthony A. 1966. ‘Thinking and Sense Perception in Empedocles: Mysticism or Materialism?’ Classical Quarterly 16.2: 256–76.Google Scholar

Long, Anthony A. 1974. ‘Empedocles’ Cosmic Cycle in the Sixties’, in Mourelatos, A. P. D. (ed.): 397–425.Google Scholar

Long, Anthony A. (ed.) 1999. The Cambridge Companion to Early Greek Philosophy. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Long, Anthony A. 2005. ‘Platonic Souls as Persons’, in Salles, R. (ed.): 173–91.Google Scholar

Long, Anthony A. 2015. Greek Models of Mind and Self. Cambridge, MA. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Long, H. S. 1948. A Study of The Doctrine of Metempsychosis in Greece from Pythagoras to Plato. Princeton, NJ. Princeton University Press.Google Scholar

Longrigg, J. 1993. Greek Rational Medicine: Philosophy and Medicine from Alcmaeon to the Alexandrians. London and New York, NY. Routledge.Google Scholar

Lonie, I. M. 1981. The Hippocratic Treatises On Generation, On the Nature of the Child, Diseases IV. A Commentary. Berlin and New York, NY. De Gruyter.Google Scholar

Luther, W. 1935. ‘Wahrheit’ und ‘Lüge’ im ältesten Griechentum. Borna and Leipzig. R. Noske.Google Scholar

Mackenzie, T. 2021. Poetry and Poetics in the Presocratic Philosophers: Reading Xenophanes, Parmenides and Empedocles as Literature. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Mackie, H. S. 2003. Graceful Errors: Pindar and the Performance of Praise. Ann Arbor. University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar

Macris, C. and Skarsouli, P. 2012. ‘Knowledge and Powers of the Mysterious τις in Empedocles’ Fragment 129’. Revue de Métaphysique et de Morale 75.3: 357–77.Google Scholar

Maddalena, A. 1954. I Pitagorici. Bari. Laterza.Google Scholar

Mansfeld, J. 1972. ‘Ambiguity in Empedocles B17, 3–5: A Suggestion’. Phronesis 17.1: 17–39.Google Scholar

Mansfeld, J. 1992. Heresiography in Context: Hippolytus’ Elenchos as a Source for Greek Philosophy. Leiden. Brill.Google Scholar

Mansfeld, J. 1995. ‘Insight by Hindsight. Intentional Unclarity in Presocratic Proems’. Bulletin of the Institute of Classical Studies of the University of London 40: 225–32.Google Scholar

Mansfeld, J. 1996. ‘Aristote et la Structure du De Sensibus de Théophraste’. Phronesis 41: 158–88.Google Scholar

Mansfeld, J. 2018. ‘A Discussion of a New Edition of the Early Greek Philosophers’. Mnemosyne 71: 515–36.Google Scholar

Mansfeld, J. and Primavesi, O. 2021. Die Vorsokratiker, Griechisch/Deusch. Ausgewählt, übersetzt und erläutert, 2nd edition (1st edition 2011). Stuttgart. Reclam.Google Scholar

Mansfeld, J. and Runia, D. 2020. Aëtiana. An Edition of the Reconstructed Text of the Placita with a Commentary and a Collection of Related Texts, vol. 5.3. Leiden. Brill.Google Scholar

Marcovich, M. 1967. Heraclitus. Greek Text with a Short Commentary. Editio Maior. Merida. Los Andes University Press.Google Scholar

Martin, A. and Primavesi, O. 1999. L’Empédocle de Strasbourg (P. Strasb. Gr. Inv. 1665–1666). Introduction, Édition et Commentaire. With an English Summary. Strasbourg, Berlin and New York, NY. De Gruyter.Google Scholar

McKirahan, R. D. 2010. Philosophy before Socrates: An Introduction with Texts and Commentary, 2nd edition. Indianapolis, IN. Hackett.Google Scholar

Megino Rodríguez, C. 2005. Orfeo y el Orfismo en la Poesía de Empédocles. Madrid. UAM.Google Scholar

Megino Rodríguez, C. 2019. ‘Daimons in the Derveni Papyrus and Early Stoicism’, in Santamaría, M. A. (ed.): 30–44.Google Scholar

Messina, G. 2002. ‘Empedocle “Rivisitato”: Testo, Traduzione e Commento dei Frammenti di Strasburgo (P. Strasb. Gr. Inv. 1665–1666)’. Giornale di Metafisica, N.S. 24: 5–69.Google Scholar

Minar, E. L. Jr. 1949. ‘Parmenides and the World of Seeming’. American Journal of Philology 70.1: 41–55.Google Scholar

Minar, E.L. 1963. ‘Cosmic Periods in the Philosophy of Empedocles’. Phronesis 8.2: 127–45.Google Scholar

Minton, W. W. 1960. ‘Homer’s Invocations of the Muses: Traditional Patterns’. Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association 91: 292–309.Google Scholar

Mogyoródi, E. 2006. ‘Xenophanes’ Epistemology and Parmenides’ Quest for Knowledge’, in Sassi, M. M. (ed.): 123–60.Google Scholar

Montevecchi, F. 2010. Empedocle d’Agrigento. Napoli. Liguori.Google Scholar

Morel, P. M. and Pradeau, J.-F. (eds.) 2001. Les Anciens Savants. Études sur les Philosophies Préplatoniciennes. Les Cahiers Philosophiques de Strasbourg n.12/2001. Strasbourg. Presses Universitaires de Strasbourg.Google Scholar

Morrison, A. D. 2007. The Narrator in Archaic Greek and Hellenistic Poetry. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Morrison, J. S. 1955. ‘Parmenides and Er’. Journal of Hellenic Studies 75: 59–68.Google Scholar

Most, G. W. 1997. ‘Hesiod’s Myth of the Five (or Three or Four) Races’. Proceedings of the Cambridge Philological Society 43: 104–27.Google Scholar

Most, G.W. 1999. ‘The Poetics of Early Greek Philosophy’, in Long, A. A. (ed.): 332–62.Google Scholar

Most, G.W. 2005. ‘The Stillbirth of a Tragedy: Nietzsche and Empedocles’, in Pierris, A. L. (ed.): 31–44.Google Scholar

Most, G.W. 2006. Hesiod. Theogony, Works and Days, Testimonia. Cambridge, MA and London. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Most, G.W. 2007. ‘ἄλλος δ’ ἐξ ἄλλου δέχεται: Presocratic Philosophy and Traditional Greek Epic’, in Bierl, A., Lämmle, R. and Wesselmann, K. (eds.): 271–302.Google Scholar

Mourelatos, A. P. D. (ed.) 1974. The Pre-Socratics. A Collection of Critical Essays. Garden City and New York, NY. Anchor Press.Google Scholar

Mourelatos, A.P.D. 2008. The Route of Parmenides. Revised and expanded edition. Las Vegas, NV. Parmenides Publishing.Google Scholar

Nagy, G. 1990. ‘Hesiod and the Poetics of Pan-Hellenism’. Greek Mythology and Poetics. Chapter 3. Ithaca and London: 36–82. Available at: https://chs.harvard.edu/read/nagy-gregory-greek-mythology-and-poetics/ [last accessed 7 August 2023].Google Scholar

Nagy, G. 1996. ‘Autorité et Auteur dans la Théogonie Hésiodique’, in Blaise, F., Judet de La Combe, P. and Rousseau, P. (eds.), Le Métier du Mythe. Lectures d’Hésiode. Lille. Presses Universitaires du Septentrion: 41–52.Google Scholar

Nehamas, A. 1981. ‘On Parmenides’ Three Ways of Inquiry’. Deucalion 33.4: 97–111.Google Scholar

Nehamas, A. 2002. ‘Parmenidean Being/Heraclitean Fire’, in Caston, V. and Graham, D. W. (eds.): 45–64.Google Scholar

Neitzel, H. 1980. ‘Hesiod und die lügenden Musen’. Hermes 108: 387–401.Google Scholar

Nestle, W. 1906. ‘Der Dualismus des Empedokles’. Philologus 65: 545–57.Google Scholar

Nethercut, J. S. 2017. ‘Empedocles’ “Roots” in Lucretius’ De Rerum Natura’. American Journal of Philosophy 138.1: 85–105.Google Scholar

Nilsson, M. P. 1967. Geschichte der griechischen Religion. Vol. 1. 3rd edition. München. Beck.Google Scholar

Nisetich, F. J. 1988. ‘Immortality in Acragas: Poetry and Religion in Pindar’s Second Olympian’. Classical Philology 8.1: 1–19.Google Scholar

Nucci, M. 2005. ‘L’Empedocle di Strasburgo. La Questione delle tre Theta’. Elenchos 26.2: 379–401.Google Scholar

Nussbaum, M. C. 1972a. ‘ΨΥΧΗ in Heraclitus, I’. Phronesis 17: 1–16.Google Scholar

Nussbaum, M.C. 1972b. ‘ΨΥΧΗ in Heraclitus, II’. Phronesis 17: 153–70.Google Scholar

Obbink, D. 1988. ‘Hermarchus, Against Empedocles’. Classical Quarterly 38.2: 428–35.Google Scholar

Obbink, D. 1993. ‘The Addressees of Empedocles’. Materiali e Discussioni 31: 51–98.Google Scholar

O’Brien, D. 1965. ‘Empedocles fr. 35.14–15’. Classical Review 15.1: 1–4.Google Scholar

O’Brien, D. 1969. Empedocles’ Cosmic Cycle. A Reconstruction from the Fragments and Secondary Sources. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

O’Brien, D. 1970. ‘Empedocles’ Theory of Seeing and Breathing: The Effect of a Simile’. Journal of Hellenic Studies 90: 140–79.Google Scholar

O’Brien, D. 1981. Pour interpréter Empédocle. Paris and Leiden. Brill.Google Scholar

O’Brien, D. 1995. ‘Empedocles Revisited’. Ancient Philosophy 15: 403–70.Google Scholar

O’Brien, D. 2001. ‘Empedocles, the Wandering Daimon and the Two Poems’. Aevum Antiquum, N. S. 1: 79–179.Google Scholar

O’Brien, D. 2002. ‘Die Aristophanes-Rede im Symposium: der Empedokleische Hintergrund und seine philosophische Bedeutung’, in Janka, M. and Schäfer, C. (eds.), Platon als Mythologe, Neue Interpretationen zu den Mythen in Platons Dialogen. Darmstadt. WBG: 176–93.Google Scholar

O’Brien, D. 2006. ‘Life Beyond the Stars: Aristotle, Plato and Empedocles – (De Caelo 1.9 279a11-22)’, in King, R. A. H. (ed.): 49–102.Google Scholar

O’Brien, J. V. 1993. The Transformation of Hera: A Study of Ritual, Hero, and the Goddess in the Iliad. Lanham, MD. Rowman and Littlefield.Google Scholar

Owen, G. E. L. 1960. ‘Eleatic Questions’, in Allen, R. E. and Furley, D. J. (eds.): 48–81.Google Scholar

Paley, F. A. 1883. The Epic of Hesiod. Revised edition. London. Whittaker.Google Scholar

Palmer, J. A. 2009. Parmenides and Presocratic Philosophy. Oxford. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Palmer, J. A. 2016. ‘Elemental Change in Empedocles’. Rhizomata 4.1: 30–54.Google Scholar

Palmer, J. A. 2018. ‘Presocratic Interest in the Soul’s Persistence after Death’, in Sisko, J. E. (ed.): 23–43.Google Scholar

Palmer, J. A. 2020. ‘Ethics and Natural Philosophy in Empedocles’, in Wolfsdorf, D. C. (ed.): 54–73.Google Scholar

Panagiotou, S. 1983. ‘Empedocles on His Own Divinity’. Mnemosyne 36.3–4: 276–85.Google Scholar

Panzerbieter, F. 1844. ‘Beiträge zur Kritik und Erklärung des Empedokles’, in Einladungs-Programm des Gymnasium Bernhardinum in Meiningen zu der öffentlichen Prüfung. Meiningen: 1–35.Google Scholar

Parker, R. 1983. Miasma. Pollution and Purification in Early Greek Religion. Oxford. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Patroni, G. 1940. ‘La Voce DAIMΩN In Omero’. Reale Accademia d’Italia, classe di Scienze Morali e Storiche 7.1., Fasc. 7–9: 99–104.Google Scholar

Pellikaan Engel, M. E. 1978. Hesiod and Parmenides. A New View on Their Cosmologies and on Parmenides’ Proem. Amsterdam. Hakkert.Google Scholar

Pérez Jiménez, A. and Casadesús, F. (eds.) 2001. Estudio sobre Plutarco. Misticismo y Religiones Mistéricas en la Obra de Plutarco (Actas del VII Simposio Español sobre Plutarco, Palma de Mallorca, 2–4 Nov. 2000). Madrid and Málaga. Ediciones Clásicas.Google Scholar

Perilli, L. 1996. La Teoria del Vortice nel Pensiero Antico. Pisa. Pacini.Google Scholar

Piano, V. 2016. Il Papiro di Derveni tra Religione e Filosofia. Firenze. Olschki.Google Scholar

Picot, J.-C. 2004. ‘Les Cinq Sources dont Parle Empédocle’. Revue des Études Grecques 117.2: 393–446.Google Scholar

Picot, J.-C. 2006. ‘Aristote, Poétique 1457 b 13–14 : la Métaphore d’Espèce à Espèce’. Revue des Études Grecques 119.2: 532–51.Google Scholar

Picot, J.-C. 2007. ‘Empedocles, Fragment 115.3: Can One of the Blessed Pollute His Limbs with Blood?’, in Gillet, S. S. and Corrigan, K. (eds.), Reading Ancient Texts, I: Presocratics and Plato, Essays in Honour of Denis O’Brien. Leiden-Boston. Brill: 41–56.Google Scholar

Picot, J.-C. 2008. ‘La Brillance de Nestis (Empédocle, Fr. 96)’. Revue de Philosophie Ancienne 26.1: 75–100.Google Scholar

Picot, J.-C. 2012. ‘Apollon et la φρὴν ἱερὴ καὶ ἀθέσφατος (Empédocle, fr. 134 DK)’. Anais de Filosofia Clássica 6.11: 1–31.Google Scholar

Picot, J.-C. 2014. ‘Un Nom Énigmatique de l’Air chez Empédocle (fr. 21.4 DK)’. Les Études Philosophiques 3: 343–73.Google Scholar

Picot, J.-C. 2018. ‘Penser le Bien et le Mal avec Empédocle’. Chôra. Revue d’Études Anciennes et Médiévales 15–16: 381–414.Google Scholar

Pierris, A. L. (eds.) 2005. The Empedoclean Κόσμος: Structure, Process and the Question of Cyclicity, Part 1: Papers. Patras. Institute for Philosophical Research.Google Scholar

Popper, K. R. 1992. ‘How the Moon Might Shed Some of Her Light upon the Two Ways of Parmenides’. Classical Quarterly 42: 12–19.Google Scholar

Pratt, L. H. 1993. Lying and Poetry from Homer to Pindar. Ann Arbor. University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar

Primavesi, O. 2001. ‘La Daimonologia della Fisica Empedoclea’. Aevum Antiquum, N.S. I: 3–68.Google Scholar

Primavesi, O. 2005. ‘The Structure of Empedocles’ Cosmic Cycle: Aristotle and the Byzantine Anonymous’, in Pierris, A. L. (ed.): 245–64.Google Scholar

Primavesi, O. 2006a. ‘Apollo and Other Gods in Empedocles’, in Sassi, M. M. (ed.): 51–77.Google Scholar

Primavesi, O. 2006b. ‘Die Suda über die Werke des Empedokles’. Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik 158: 61–75.Google Scholar

Primavesi, O. 2007. ‘Zur Überlieferung und Bedeutung des Empedokleischen Titel “Καθαρμοί”’, in Vöhler, M. and Seidensticker, B. (eds.), Katharsiskonzeptionen vor Aristoteles. Zum kulturellen Hintergrund des Tragödiensatzes. Berlin. De Gruyter: 183–225.Google Scholar

Primavesi, O. 2008a. Empedokles Physika I: eine Rekonstruktion des zentralen Gedankengangs. Berlin. De Gruyter.Google Scholar

Primavesi, O. 2008b. ‘Empedocles: Physical and Mythical Divinity’, in Curd, P. K. and Graham, D. W. (eds.): 250–83.Google Scholar

Primavesi, O. 2013. ‘Empedokles’, in Flashar, H., Bremer, D. and Rechenauer, G. (eds.): 667–739.Google Scholar

Primavesi, O. 2014. ‘Empedokleisches im Tod des Empedokles: Ein neuentdeckter Text des Vorsokratikers und Hölderlins Trauerspiel’, in Vollhardt, F. (ed.), Hölderlin in der Moderne. Kolloquium für Dieter Henrich zum 85. Geburtstag. Stuttgart. Erich Schmidt Verlag: 13–41.Google Scholar

Primavesi, O. 2016. ‘Empedocles’ Cosmic Cycle and the Pythagorean Tetractys’. Rhizomata 4: 5–29.Google Scholar

Pucci, P. 1977. Hesiod and the Language of Poetry. Baltimore, MD. Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar

Pucci, P. 2007. Inno Alle Muse (Esiodo, Teogonia, 1–115). Testo, Introduzione, Traduzione e Commento. Pisa and Roma. Enrico Serra Editori.Google Scholar

Pugliese Carratelli, G. 1988. ‘La ΘΕΑ di Parmenide’. Parola del Passato 43: 337–46.Google Scholar

Pugliese Carratelli, G. 2001. Le Lamine d’Oro Orfiche: Istruzioni per il Viaggio Oltremondano degli Iniziati Greci. Milano. Adelphi.Google Scholar

Radman, Z. (ed.) 1995. From a Metaphorical Point of View. A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Cognitive Content of Metaphor. Berlin and New York, NY. De Gruyter.Google Scholar

Ramnoux, C. 1986. La Nuit et les Enfants de la Nuit, 2nd edition. Paris. Flammarion.Google Scholar

Rangos, S. 2012. ‘Empedocles on Divine Nature’. Revue de Métaphysique et de Morale. 75.3: 315–38Google Scholar

Ranzato, S. 2015. Il Kouros e la Verità. Polivalenza delle Immagini nel Poema di Parmenide. Pisa. RTS.Google Scholar

Rapp, C. 2011. ‘Friedrich Nietzsche and Preplatonic Philosophy’, in Primavesi, O. and Luchner, K. (ed.), The Presocratics from Latin Middle Ages to Hermann Diels. Akten der 9. Tagung der Karl und Gertrud Abel-Stiftung vom 5. –7. Oktober 2006 in München. Stuttgart. Steiner: 335–57.Google Scholar

Rashed, M. 2001. ‘La Chronographie du Système d’Empédocle: Documents Byzantins Inédits’. Aevum Antiquum N.S. I: 237–59.Google Scholar

Rashed, M. 2008. ‘Le Proème des Catharmes d’Empédocle. Reconstitution et Commentaire’. Elenchos 29.1: 7–37.Google Scholar

Rashed, M. 2011. ‘La Zoogonie de la Haine selon Empédocle: Retour sur l’ensemble « d » du papyrus d’Akhmim’. Phronesis 56: 33–57.Google Scholar

Rashed, M. 2014. ‘La Chronographie du Système d’Empédocle: Addenda et Corrigenda’. Les Études Philosophiques 110: 315–42.Google Scholar

Rashed, M. 2018. La Jeune Fille et la Sphère. Études sur Empédocle. Paris. Presses Universitaires de la Sorbonne.Google Scholar

Rathmann, W. 1933. Quaestiones Pythagoreae Orphicae Empedoclae. Diss. Halle.Google Scholar

Raven, J. E. 1948. Pythagoreans and Eleatics. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Reale, G. and Ruggiu, L. 2003. Parmenide. Poema sulla Natura. Milano. Bompiani.Google Scholar

Reid, H. L., Tanasi, D. and Kimbell, S. (eds.) 2016. Politics and Performance in Western Greece. Essays on the Hellenic Heritage of Sicily and Southern Italy. Sioux City, Iowa. Parnassos Press – Fonte Aretusa.Google Scholar

Reinhardt, K. 1974. ‘Parmenides und die Geschichte der griechischen Philosophie’, in Mourelatos, A. P. D. (ed.): 293–311 (= 1916. Bonn. Friedrich Cohen Verlag).Google Scholar

Reis, B. (ed.) 2007. The Virtuous Life in Greek Ethics. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Rexine, J. E. 1985. ‘Daimon in Classical Greek Literature’. Platon 37: 29–52.Google Scholar

Riedweg, C. 1995. ‘Orphisches bei Empedokles’. Antike und Abendland 41: 34–59.Google Scholar

Riedweg, C. 2002. Pythagoras: Leben, Lehre, Nachwirkung. Eine Einführung. München. Beck.Google Scholar

Ritchie, D. L. 2008. ‘X Is a Journey: Embodied Simulation in Metaphor Interpretation’. Metaphor and Symbol 23: 174–99.Google Scholar

Roberts, E. M. 2020. Underworld Gods in Ancient Greek Religion: Death and Reciprocity. London and New York, NY. Routledge.Google Scholar

Robinson, T. M. 1987. Heraclitus, Fragments. Toronto, Buffalo and London. University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar

Robinson, T.M. 1995. Plato’s Psychology, 2nd edition. Toronto, Buffalo and London. University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar

Robinson, T.M. 2008. ‘Presocratic Theology’, in Curd, P. K. and Graham, D. W. (eds.): 485–98.Google Scholar

Rocca Serra, G. 1987. ‘Parménide chez Diogène Laërce’, in Aubenque, P. (ed.), Études sur Parménide, vol. 2: Problèmes d’Interprétation. Paris. Vrin: 254–73.Google Scholar

Rohde, E. 2006. Psyche. The Cult of Souls and Belief in Immortality among the Greeks. 2 vols, 2nd edition. London. Routledge.Google Scholar

Rosivach, V. J. 1994. The System of Public Sacrifice in Fourth Century Athens. Atlanta, GA. Scholars Press.Google Scholar

Ross, W. D. 1955. Aristotelis Fragmenta Selecta. Oxford. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Rossetti, L. and Santaniello, C. (eds.) 2004. Studi sul Pensiero e sulla Lingua di Empedocle. Bari. Levante.Google Scholar

Rouse, W. H. D. 1975. Lucretius, De Rerum Natura. Cambridge, MA. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Rowett, , C. 1987a (writing under the name Osborne). ‘Empedocles Recycled’. Classical Quarterly 37.1: 24–50.Google Scholar

Rowett, 1987b (writing under the name Osborne). Rethinking Early Greek Philosophy. Hippolytus of Rome and the Presocratics. Ithaca and New York, NY. Cornell University Press.Google Scholar

Rowett, 2000. (writing under the name Osborne). ‘Rummaging in the Recycling Bins of Upper Egypt: A Discussion of A. Martin and O. Primavesi, “L’Empédocle de Strasbourg”’. Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 18: 329–56.Google Scholar

Rowett, 2005. (writing under the name Osborne). ‘Sin and Moral Responsibility in Empedocles’ Cosmic Cycle’, in Pierris, A. L. (eds.): 283–308.Google Scholar

Rowett, 2016. ‘Love, Sex and the Gods: Why Things Have Divine Names in Empedocles’ Poem, and Why They Come in Pairs’. Rhizomata 4.1: 80–110.Google Scholar

Rundin, J. 1998. ‘The Vegetarianism of Empedocles in Its Historical Context’. The Ancient World 29.1: 19–36.Google Scholar

Salles, R. (ed.) 2005. Metaphysics, Soul, and Ethics in Ancient Thought. Themes from the Work of Richard Sorabji. Oxford. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Santamaría, M. A. 2016. ‘La Catábasis de Pitágoras’. Emerita, Revista de Lingüística y Filología Clásica 84.1: 31–50.Google Scholar

Santamaria, M.A. (ed.) 2019. The Derveni Papyrus. Unearthing Ancient Mysteries. Leiden. Brill.CrossRef Google Scholar

Santamaria, M.A. 2022. ‘Divine Crime and Punishment: Breaking the Cosmic Law in Hesiod’s Theogony 783–806 and Empedocles’ Fragment DK B115’, in Iribarren Baralt, L. and Koning, H. H. (eds.): 294–312.Google Scholar

Santaniello, C. 1996. ‘Aspetti della Demonologia Plutarchea: tra il De defectu oraculorum e Altri Scritti del Corpus’, in Gallo, I. (ed.): 357–71.Google Scholar

Santaniello, C. 2001. ‘Faults Committed beyond This Life: Pindar and Empedocles in Plutarch’s Demonology’, in Pérez Jiménez, A. and Casadesús, F. (eds.): 255–68.Google Scholar

Santaniello, C. 2004. ‘Empedocle: Uno o Due Cosmi, Una o Due Zoogonie?’, in Rossetti, L. and Santaniello, C. (eds.): 23–81.Google Scholar

Santaniello, C. 2009. ‘Il Demone in Empedocle’, in Gnoli, G. and Sfameni Gasparro, G. (eds.): 329–361.Google Scholar

Sassi, M. M. 1978. Le Teorie della Percezione in Democrito. Firenze. La Nuova Italia.Google Scholar

Sassi, M.M. 1988. ‘Parmenide al Bivio. Per un’ Interpretazione del Proemio’. Parola del Passato 43: 383–96.Google Scholar

Sassi, M.M. (ed.) 2006. La Costruzione del Discorso Filosofico nell’Età dei Presocratici/The Construction of Philosophical Discourse in the Age of the Presocratics [Secondo Symposium Praesocraticum, Pisa, Scuola Normale Superiore, 16–18 Settembre 2004]. Pisa. Edizioni della Normale.Google Scholar

Sassi, M.M. 2009. Gli Inizi Della Filosofia: in Grecia. Torino. Bollati Boringhieri.Google Scholar

Sassi, M.M. 2015. ‘Parmenides and Empedocles on Krasis and Knowledge’. Apeiron 49.4: 451–69.Google Scholar

Scapin, N. 2020. The Flower of Suffering. Theology, Justice, and the Cosmos in Aeschylus’ Oresteia and Presocratic Thought. Berlin and Boston, MA. De Gruyter.Google Scholar

Schäfer, C. 2009. ‘Das Pythagorasfragment des Xenophanes und die Frage nach der Kritik der Metempsychosenlehre’, in Frede, D. and Reis, B. (eds.): 45–69.Google Scholar

Schibli, H. S. 1990. Pherekydes of Syros. Oxford. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Schibli, H.S. 1993. ‘Xenocrates’ Daemons and the Irrational Soul’. Classical Quarterly 43.1: 143–67.CrossRef Google Scholar

Schofield, M. 1991. ‘Heraclitus’ Theory of Soul and Its Antecedents’, in Everson, S. (ed.): 13–34.Google Scholar

Schwabl, H. 1956. ‘Empedokles fr. B 110’. Wiener Studien 69: 49–56.Google Scholar

Schwabl, H. 1966. Hesiods Theogonie. Eine unitarische Analyse. Wien. Böhlau.Google Scholar

Seaford, R. 1986. ‘Immortality, Salvation, and the Elements’. Harvard Studies in Classical Philology 90: 1–26.Google Scholar

Sedley, D. N. 1989. ‘The Proems of Empedocles and Lucretius’. Greek Roman and Byzantine Studies 30: 269–96.Google Scholar

Sedley, D.N. 1992. ‘Empedocles’ Theory of Vision and Theophrastus’ De Sensibus’, in Fortenbaugh, W. and Gutas, D. (eds.): 20–31.Google Scholar

Sedley, D.N. 1998. Lucretius and the Transformation of Greek Wisdom. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Sedley, D.N. 1999. ‘Parmenides and Melissus’, in Long, A. A. (ed.): 113–33.Google Scholar

Sedley, D.N. 2003. ‘Lucretius and the New Empedocles’. Leeds International Classical Studies 2.4: 1–12.Google Scholar

Sedley, D.N. 2005. ‘Empedocles’ Life Cycles’, in Pierris, A. L. (ed.): 331–71.Google Scholar

Sedley, D.N. 2007. Creationism and Its Critics in Antiquity. Berkeley-Los Angeles, CA. University of California Press.Google Scholar

Sedley, D.N. 2016. ‘Empedoclean Superorganisms’. Rhizomata 4.1: 111–25.Google Scholar

Sheffield, F. and Warren, J. (eds.) 2014. The Routledge Companion to Ancient Philosophy. London and New York, NY. Routledge.Google Scholar

Sider, D. 2005. The Fragments of Anaxagoras. Introduction, Text, and Commentary, 2nd edition. Sankt Augustin. Academia Verlag.Google Scholar

Sider, D. and Obbink, D. (eds.) 2013. Doctrine and Doxography. Studies on Heraclitus and Pythagoras. Berlin and Boston, MA. De Gruyter.Google Scholar

Sisko, J. E. (ed.) 2019. Philosophy of Mind in Antiquity. New York, NY and London. Routledge.Google Scholar

Snell, B. 1924. Die Ausdrücke für den Begriff des Wissens in der vorplatonischen Philosophie. Berlin. Weidmann.Google Scholar

Snell, B. 1946. Die Entdeckung des Geistes. Studien zur Entstehung des europäischen Denkens bei den Griechen. Hamburg. Claassen & Goverts.Google Scholar

Solmsen, F. 1950. ‘Tissues and Soul. Philosophical Contribution to Physiology’. Philosophical Review 59: 435–68.Google Scholar

Solmsen, F. 1963. ‘Nature as Craftsman in Greek Thought’. Journal of the History of Ideas 24.4: 473–96.Google Scholar

Solmsen, F. 1965. ‘Love and Strife in Empedocles’ Cosmology’. Phronesis 10.2: 109–48 (= 1982. Kleine Schriften I. Hildesheim. Olms: 274–313).Google Scholar

Solmsen, F. 1975. ‘Eternal and Temporary Beings in Empedocles’ Physical Poem’. Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 57.2: 123–45 (= 1982. Kleine Schriften III, Hildesheim, Zürich and New York, NY. Olms: 176–98).Google Scholar

Soury, G. 1942. La Démonologie de Plutarque. Paris. Les Belles Lettres.Google Scholar

Stein, H. 1852. Empedocles Agrigentius. Fragmenta Disposuit, Recensuit, Adnotavit. Bonn. Friedrich Cohen Verlag.Google Scholar

Stein, H. 1857. Symbola Philologorum Bonnensium in Honorem Friderici Ritschelii Collecta. Fasciculus Posterior. Leipzig. Teubner.Google Scholar

Stokes, M. C. 1971. One and Many in Presocratic Philosophy. Cambridge, MA. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Strauss Clay, J. 2003. Hesiod’s Cosmos. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Stroh, W. 1976. ‘Hesiod’s Lügende Musen’, in Goergemanns, H. and Schmidt, E. (eds.): 85–112.Google Scholar

Struck, P. T. 2004. Birth of the Symbol. Ancient Readers and the Limits of Their Texts. Princeton, NJ and Oxford. Princeton University Press.Google Scholar

Sturz, M. F. G. 1805. Empedocles Agrigentinus, de Vita et Philosophia eius Exposuit, Carmina Reliquias ex Antiquis Scriptoribus Collegit, Recensuit, 2 vols. Leipzig. Teubner.Google Scholar

Svenbro, J. 1976. La parole et le Marbre. Aux Origines de la Poétique Grecque. Lund.Klassiska Institutionen.Google Scholar

Tabor, J. D. 2007. ‘Death as Life and Life as Death: Revisiting Rohde’, in Aune, D. E. and Young, D. (eds.): 27–38.Google Scholar

Tannery, P. 1930. Pour l’Histoire de la Science Hèllene, de Thalès à Empédocle, 2nd edition by Auguste Diès avec une Préface de M. Federigo Enriques. Paris. Gauthier-Villars.Google Scholar

Tarán, L. 1965. Parmenides. A Text with Translation, Commentary, and Critical Essays. Princeton, NJ. Princeton University Press.Google Scholar

Taylor, A. E. 1928. A Commentary on Plato’s Timaeus. Oxford. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Thanassas, P. 2006. ‘How Many Doxai Are There in Parmenides?’ Rhizai 3.2: 199–218.Google Scholar

Thibodeau, P. 2019. The Chronology of the Early Greek Natural Philosophers. North Haven, CT. Cosmographia.net.Google Scholar

Thiele, G. 1897. ‘Zu den vier Elementen des Empedokles’. Hermes 32.1: 68–78.Google Scholar

Thom, J. C. 1994. ‘“Don’t Walk on the Highway”: The Pythagorean Akousmata and Early Christian Literature’. Journal of Biblical Literature 113.1: 93–112.CrossRef Google Scholar

Thom, J.C. 2013. ‘The Pythagorean Akousmata and Early Pythagoreanism’, in Cornelli, G., McKirahan, R. and Macris, C. (eds.): 77–101.Google Scholar

Timpanaro Cardini, M. 1958. Pitagorici, Testimonianze e Frammenti. Fascicolo primo. Firenze. La Nuova Italia.Google Scholar

Tonelli, A. 2002. Empedocle. Testimonianze e Frammenti. Milano. Bompiani.Google Scholar

Tor, S. 2017. Mortal and Divine in Early Greek Epistemology. A Study of Hesiod, Xenophanes and Parmenides. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Tor, S. 2020. ‘Parmenides on the Soul’, in Bartoš, H. and King, C. K. (eds.): 61–79.Google Scholar

Tortorelli Ghidini, M. 2006. Figli della Terra e del Cielo Stellato: Testi Orfici con Traduzione e Commento. Napoli. M. D’Auria.Google Scholar

Traglia, A. 1952. Studi sulla Lingua di Empedocle. Bari. Adriatica Editrice.Google Scholar

Trépanier, S. 2003a. ‘Empedocles on the Ultimate Symmetry of the World’. Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 24: 1–57.Google Scholar

Trépanier, S. 2003b. ‘“We” and Empedocles’ Cosmic Lottery: P. Strasb. Gr. Inv. 1665–1666, ensemble a’. Mnemosyne 56.4: 385–419.Google Scholar

Trépanier, S. 2004. Empedocles. An Interpretation. New York, NY and London. Routledge.Google Scholar

Trépanier, S. 2014. ‘From Wandering Limbs to Limbless Gods: δαίμων as Substance in Empedocles’. Apeiron 47.2: 172–210.Google Scholar

Trépanier, S. 2017a. ‘From Hades to the Stars: Empedocles on the Cosmic Habitats of Soul’. Classical Antiquity 36.1: 130–82.Google Scholar

Trépanier, S. 2017b. ‘Empedocles, On Nature 1.273–287. Place, the Elements and Still No “We”’. Mnemosyne 70: 562–84.Google Scholar

Trépanier, S. 2020. ‘The Spirit in the Flesh: Empedocles on Embodied Soul’, in Bartoš, H. and King, C. K. (eds.): 80–105.Google Scholar

Tulli, M. 2000. ‘Esiodo nella Memoria di Parmenide’, in Arrighetti, G. and Tulli, M. (eds.): 5–23.Google Scholar

Untersteiner, M. 1939. ‘Il Concetto di DAIMΩN in Omero’. Atene e Roma 17: 93–134.Google Scholar

Untersteiner, M. 1958. Parmenide, Testimonianze e Frammenti. Introduzione, Traduzione e Commento. Firenze. La Nuova Italia.Google Scholar

Ustinova, Y. 2009. Caves and the Ancient Greek Mind: Descending Underground in the Search for Ultimate Truth. Oxford. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Van der Ben, N. 1975. The Proem of Empedocles’ Peri Physios. Towards a New Edition of All the Fragments. Amsterdam. Grüner.Google Scholar

Van Groningen, B. A. 1956. ‘Le Fragment 111 d’Empédocle’. Classica et Mediaevalia 17: 47–61.Google Scholar

Van Noorden, H. 2014. Playing Hesiod. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Vasta, E. 2004. Esiodo, Teogonia. Milano. Mondadori.Google Scholar

Vegetti, M. 1998. ‘Empedocle. Medico e Sofista’. Elenchos 19.2: 347–59.Google Scholar

Verdenius, W. J. 1948. ‘Notes on the Presocratics’. Mnemosyne 1.1: 8–14.Google Scholar

Verdenius, W.J. 1949. ‘Parmenides’ Conception of Light’. Mnemosyne 2.2: 116–31.Google Scholar

Verdenius, W.J. 1955. ‘Xenophanes Fr. 18’. Mnemosyne 4.8: 221.Google Scholar

Vernant, J.-P. 1983. ‘Hesiod’s Myth of the Races: An Essay in Structural Analysis’, in Vernant, J.-P. (ed.), Myth and Thought among the Greeks. London and Boston, MA. Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar

Vítek, T. 2001, 2006. Empedoklés, vol. I, II, III. (2001. Vol. I: Studie [Study]; 2006. Vol. II: Zlomky [Fragments], vol. III: Komentář [Commentary]). Praha. Herrmann & Synové.Google Scholar

Vítek, T. 2009. ‘The Origins of the Pythagorean Symbola’. Parola del Passato 64.4: 241–70.Google Scholar

Vlastos, G. 1952. ‘Theology and Philosophy in Early Greek Thought’. Philosophical Quarterly 2.7: 97–123Google Scholar

Von Arnim, H. 1902. ‘Die Weltperioden bei Empedokles’. Festschrift Theodor Gomperz dargebracht zum siebzigsten Geburtstage. Aalen. Scientia Verlag: 16–27.Google Scholar

Von Fritz, K. 1945–1946. ‘Νοῦς, νοεῖν, and their Derivatives in pre-Socratic Philosophy (Excluding Anaxagoras)’. Classical Philology 40.4 (1945): 223–42, and 41.1 (1946): 12–34 (= reprinted in Mourelatos, A. P. D. [ed.] 1974: 23–85).Google Scholar

von Fritz, K. 1957. ‘Estris hekaterōthi in Pindar’s Second Olympian and Pythagoras’ Theory of Metempsychosis’. Phronesis 2.2: 85–89.Google Scholar

Von Wilamowitz, U. 1929. ‘Die Καθαρμοί des Empedokles’. Sitzungsberichte der Preußischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. 27: 626–61 (= 1935. Kleine Schriften I, Berlin. De Gruyter: 473–521).Google Scholar

von Wilamowitz, U. 1930. ‘Lesefrüchte’. Hermes 65: 245–50.Google Scholar

Walker Bynum, C. 2001. Metamorphosis and Identity. New York, NY. Zone Books.Google Scholar

Warren, J. 2007. Presocratics. Stocksfield. Acumen.Google Scholar

Waszink, J. H. 1962. Plato Latinus IV. Leiden. Brill.Google Scholar

Wellmann, T. 2021. Die Entstehung der Welt. Berlin and New York, NY. De Gruyter.Google Scholar

West, M. L. 1966a. Hesiod. Theogony. Oxford. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

West, M.L. 1966b. ‘ζωρός in Empedocles’. Classical Review 16.2: 135–36.Google Scholar

West, M.L. 1971. Early Greek Philosophy and the Orient. Oxford. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

West, M.L. 1978. Hesiod. Works and Days. Oxford. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

West, M.L. 1983. The Orphic Poems. Oxford. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Wheeler, G. 2002. ‘Sing, Muse …: The Introit from Homer to Apollonius’. Classical Quarterly 52.1: 33–49.Google Scholar

Willi, A. 2008. Sikelismos. Sprache, Literatur und Gesellschaft im Griechischen Sizilien (8.-5. Jh. v. Chr.). Basel. Schwabe.Google Scholar

Wolfsdorf, D. C. (ed.) 2020. Early Greek Ethics. Oxford. Oxford University Press.CrossRef Google Scholar

Woodbury, L. 1958. ‘Parmenides on Names’. Harvard Studies in Classical Philology 63: 145–60.Google Scholar

Wright, M. R. 1962 (writing under the name Arundel). ‘Empedocles, fr. 35.12–15’. Classical Review 12.2: 109–11.Google Scholar

Wright, M.R. 1995. Empedocles. The Extant Fragments. Edited with an Introduction, Commentary, and Concordance, 2nd edition. New Haven and London. Yale University Press.Google Scholar

Wright, M.R. (ed.) 2000. Reason and Necessity. Essays on Plato’s Timaeus. London. Duckworth.Google Scholar

Zeller, E. 1844. Die Philosophie der Griechen, vol. I. 5th edition. Leipzig. Reisland.Google Scholar

Zeller, E. 1920. Die Philosophie der Griechen, 6th edition by Nestle, W.. Leipzig. Reisland.Google Scholar

Zhmud, L. 2014. ‘Sixth-, Fifth- and Fourth-Century Pythagoreans’, in Huffman, C. A. (ed.): 88–111.Google Scholar

Zovko, M.-É. 2017. ‘Of Caves, Lines, and Sea Travels: Plato’s Syracusan Voyages and the Central Analogies of the Republic’, in Reid, H. L, Tanasi, D. and Kimbell, S. (eds.): 319–55.Google Scholar

Zuntz, G. 1965. ‘De Empedoclis Librorum Numero Coniectura’. Mnemosyne 18.4: 365.Google Scholar

Zuntz, G. 1971. Persephone. Three Essays on Religion and Thought in Magna Graecia. Oxford. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Book contents

Bibliography

Summary

Access options

References

Book contents

Bibliography

Summary

Access options

References

Save book to Kindle

Save book to Dropbox

Save book to Google Drive