Artfully False Duals in Empedocles’ Painters Simile (fr. 23 DK) and the Hexameter Tradition

References

• Allen, T. W., and E. E. Sikes. 1904. The Homeric Hymns. New York: Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Andolfi, I. 2022. “Designing a Cosmic Architecture: Craftsmanship in Empedocles’ Poetry.” In Teaching through Images: Imagery in Greco-Roman Didactic Poetry, edited by J. Strauss Clay and A. Vergados, 63–81. Leiden: Brill.
   Google Scholar
• Benaissa, A. 2018. Dionysius: The Epic Fragments. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bergk, T. 1839. Commentatio de Prooemio Empedoclis. Berlin: Druckerei der Königlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften.
   Google Scholar
• Bignone, E. 1916. Empedocle. Turin: Fratelli Bocca.
   Google Scholar
• Boarman, W. I., and B. Heinrich. 1999. Common Raven: Corvus Corax. Philadelphia: Birds of North America.
   Google Scholar
• Bollack, J. 1969. Empédocle, vols. 2, 3: édition critique, commentaire. Paris: Les Éditions de Minuit.
   Google Scholar
• Bolling, G. M. 1933. “On the Dual in Homer.” Language 9: 298–308.
   Google Scholar
• Buchheim, T. 1985. “Maler, Sprachbildner: Zur Verwandtschaft des Gorgias mit Empedokles.” Hermes 113: 417–429.
   Google Scholar
• Buhl, M. S. 1956. Untersuchungen zu Sprache und Stil des Empedokles. PhD diss., Heidelberg.
   Google Scholar
• Buttmann, P. 1830–39. Ausführliche griechische Sprachlehre. 2nd ed. 2 vols. Berlin: Mylius.
   Google Scholar
• Campbell, M. 1994. A Commentary on Apollonius Rhodius Argonautica III 1–471. Leiden: Brill.
   Google Scholar
• Cataldi Palau, A. 2002. “Gian Francesco Torresani of Asola and the Aldine printing press: A new chapter in intellectual and printing history.” Intellectual News 10 (1): 28–44.
   Google Scholar
• Chantraine, P. 1999. Dictionnaire étymologique de la langue grecque. Paris: Klincksieck.
   Google Scholar
• Chantraine, P. 1953. Grammaire homérique, vol. 2 : Syntaxe. Paris: C. Klincksieck.
   Google Scholar
• Cosattini, A. 1909. “Nota ad Ippocrate Πϵρὶ ἀρχαίης ἰητρικῆς c. XX.” Rivista di filologia e di istruzione classica 37: 161–166.
   Google Scholar
• Coxon, A. H. 2009. The Fragments of Parmenides. Rev. ed. Las Vegas: Parmenides Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Coxon, A. H. 1986. “The Manuscript Tradition of Simplicius’ Commentary on Aristotle’s Physics i–iv.” Classical Quarterly 18 (1): 70–75.
   Google Scholar
• Cuny, A. 1906. Le nombre duel en grec. Paris: C. Klincksieck.
   Google Scholar
• Curd, P. 2016. “Empedocles on Sensation, Perception, and Thought.” History of Philosophy & Logical Analysis 19 (1): 38–57.
   Google Scholar
• Curtius, E. R. 2013 [1948]. European Literature and the Latin Middle Ages. Transl. by W. R. Trask. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Debrunner, A. 1926. “Zum erweiterten Gebrauch des Duals.” Glotta 15: 14–25.
   Google Scholar
• De Rubeis, G. M. 1991. “Ripetizioni nel ‘Πϵρὶ Φύσϵως’ di Empedocle.” Studi classici e orientali 41: 87–93.
   Google Scholar
• Detienne, M. 1996. The Masters of Truth in Archaic Greece. Transl. by J. Lloyd. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Diels, H. 1903. Die Fragmente der Vorsokratiker. Berlin: Weidmann.
   Google Scholar
• Diels, H. 1901. Poetarum Philosophorum Fragmenta. Berlin: Weidmann.
   Google Scholar
• Diels, H. 1882. Simplicii in Aristotelis Physicorum Libros Quattuor Priores Commentaria. Berlin: G. Reimer.
   Google Scholar
• Diels, H., and W. Kranz. 1951. Die Fragmente der Vorsokratiker, vol. 1. 6th ed. Berlin: Weidmann.
   Google Scholar
• Dumont, J.-P. 1988. Les Présocratiques. Paris: Gallimard.
   Google Scholar
• Fornara, S. 2007. “Oppianus.” In Brill’s New Pauly, edited by H. Cancik and H. Schneider, vol. 10, 163–165. Leiden: Brill.
   Google Scholar
• Fränkel, H. 1973. Early Greek Poetry and Philosophy. Transl. by M. Hadas and J. Willis. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
   Google Scholar
• Fränkel, H. 1961. Apollonii Rhodii Argonautica. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
   Google Scholar
• Freidenberg, O. M. 1997. Image and Concept: Mythopoetic Roots of Literature. Transl. by K. Moss. Amsterdam: Harwood Academic.
   Google Scholar
• Fritz, M. A. 2011. Der Dual im Indogermanischen: Genealogischer und typologischer Vergleich einer grammatischen Kategorie im Wandel. Heidelberg: Winter Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Furley, D. 1987. The Greek Cosmologists. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gallavotti, C. 1975. Empedocle. Milan: Fondazione Lorenzo Valla.
   Google Scholar
• Gallavotti, C. 1946. Theocritus quique feruntur bucolici Graeci. Rome: Typis Officinae Polygraphicae.
   Google Scholar
• Garani, M. 2007. Empedocles Redivivus: Poetry and Analogy in Lucretius. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Gemelli Marciano, M. L. 2013. Die Vorsokratiker, vol. 2. 3rd ed. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• Gemelli Marciano, M. L. 1990. La metamorfosi della tradizione: Mutamenti di significato e neologismi nel Peri Physeos di Empedocle. Bari: Levante.
   Google Scholar
• Gheerbrant, X. 2018. “Ritornell and Episodic Composition in Empedocles.” Yearbook of Ancient Greek Epic Online 2: 40–77. doi: https://doi.org/10.1163/24688487-00201002
   Google Scholar
• Gheerbrant, X. 2017. Empédocle : une poétique philosophique. Paris: Classiques Garnier.
   Google Scholar
• Gildersleeve, B. L. 1890. Pindar: The Olympian and Pythian Odes. 2nd ed. New York: Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Gow, A. S. F. 1952. Theocritus. 2nd ed. 2 vols. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Graham, D. W. 2010. The texts of early Greek philosophy, Part I. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hadot, P. 2008. The Veil of Isis: An Essay on the History of the Idea of Nature. Transl. by M. Chase. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hadot, P. 1990. “Remarques sur les notions de phusis et de nature.” In Herméneutique et ontologie, edited by R. Brague and J.-F. Courtine, 1–15. Paris: Presses universitaires de France.
   Google Scholar
• Ham, C. T. 2013. Empedoclean Elegy: Love, Strife and the Four Elements in Ovid’s Amores, Ars Amatoria and Fasti. PhD diss., University of Pennsylvania.
   Google Scholar
• Haug, D. T. T. 2011. “Dual.” In The Homer Encyclopedia, edited by M. Finkelberg, vol. 1, 223. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Hiersche, R. 1970. Grundzüge der griechischen Sprachgeschichte. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.
   Google Scholar
• Hillyard, N. 2006. “The Typology of the Dual in Homer.” Oxford Working Papers in Linguistics, Philology & Phonetics 11: 62–76.
   Google Scholar
• Hoekstra, A. 1969. The Sub-epic Stage of the Formulaic Tradition. Amsterdam: North Holland.
   Google Scholar
• Hoekstra, A. 1965. Homeric Modifications of Formulaic Prototypes. Amsterdam: North Holland.
   Google Scholar
• Ierodiakonou, K. 2005. “Empedocles on Colour and Colour Vision.” Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 29: 1–37.
   Google Scholar
• Ierodiakonou, K. 2004. “Empedocles and the Ancient Painters.” In Colour in the Ancient Mediterranean World, edited by L. Cleland and K. Stears, 91–95. Oxford: Alden.
   Google Scholar
• Inwood, B. 2001. The Poem of Empedocles. Rev. ed. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
   Google Scholar
• Iribarren, L. 2018. Fabriquer le monde : technique et cosmogonie dans la poésie grecque archaïque. Paris : Classiques Garnier.
   Google Scholar
• Iribarren, L. 2013. “Les peintres d’Empédocle (DK 31 B23) : enjeux et portée d’une analogie préplatonicienne.” Philosophie antique 13: 83–115.
   Google Scholar
• Janko, R. 2017. “Empedocles’ On Nature frr. B 8–9 in the context of Plutarch’s Against Colotes.” Classical Quarterly 67 (1): 1–6.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Janko, R. 1991. The Iliad: A commentary, vol. 4: Books 13–16. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Janko, R. 1982. Homer, Hesiod, and the Hymns. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Jouanna, J. 1990. Hippocrate : De l’ancienne médecine. Paris: Les Belles Lettres.
   Google Scholar
• Karsten, S. 1838. Empedoclis Agrigentini Carminum Reliquiae. Amsterdam: J. Müller.
   Google Scholar
• Kidd, D. 1997. Aratus: Phaenomena. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kirk, G. S. 1990. The Iliad: A commentary, vol. 2: Books 5–8. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kirkwood, G. M. 1981. “Pindar’s Ravens (Olymp. 2. 87).” Classical Quarterly 31: 240–243.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kühner, R., and B. Gerth. 1898–1904. Ausführliche Grammatik der griechischen Sprache, 2. Teil: Satzlehre. 3rd ed. 2 vols. Hannover and Leipzig: Hahnsche Buchhandlung.
   Google Scholar
• Laks, A., and G. Most. 2016. Early Greek Philosophy, vol. 5. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Livrea, H. 1973. Dionysii Bassaricon et Gigantiadis Fragmenta. Rome: In Aedibus Athenaei.
   Google Scholar
• Mackenzie, T. 2021. Poetry and Poetics in the Presocratic Philosophers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Mansfeld, J., and O. Primavesi. 2011. Die Vorsokratiker. Stuttgart: Philipp Reclam.
   Google Scholar
• Martin, A., and O. Primavesi. 1999. L’Empédocle de Strasbourg (P. Strasb. gr. Inv. 1665–1666). Berlin: De Gruyter.
   Google Scholar
• Marzillo, P. 2010. “Scaliger als Gräzist und Forscher antiker Philosophie.” Mitteilungen des SFB 573, Pluralisierung & Autorität in der Frühen Neuzeit 2, 35–43.
   Google Scholar
• Maslov, B. 2015. Pindar and the Emergence of Literature. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Matthaios, S. 2018. “Eratosthenes, Crates and Aristarchus on the Homeric dual. Rethinking the origins of the ‘analogy vs. anomaly controversy.’” In Approaches to Greek Poetry, edited by M. Ercoles et al., 25–49. Berlin: De Gruyter.
   Google Scholar
• McKirahan, R. D. 2010. Philosophy before Socrates. 2nd ed. Indianapolis: Hackett.
   Google Scholar
• Meillet, A. 1921. “L’emploi du duel chez Homère et l’élimination du duel.” Mémoires de la Société de linguistique de Paris 22: 145–164.
   Google Scholar
• Meister, K. 1921. Die homerische Kunstsprache. Leipzig: Teubner.
   Google Scholar
• Menn, S., trans. 2022. Simplicius: On Aristotle Physics 1.1–2. London: Bloomsbury.
   Google Scholar
• Merkel, R. 1854. Apollonii Argonautica. Leipzig: Teubner.
   Google Scholar
• Mooney, G. W. 1912. The Argonautica of Apollonius Rhodius. London: Longmans.
   Google Scholar
• Most, G. 1986. “Pindar, O. 2.83–90.” Classical Quarterly 36: 304–316.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mourelatos, A. P. D. 1986. “Quality, Structure, and Emergence in Later Pre-Socratic Philosophy.” Proceedings of the Boston Area Colloquium in Ancient Philosophy 2: 127–194.
   Google Scholar
• Nagy, G. 2003. Homeric Responses. Austin: University of Texas Press.
   Google Scholar
• Nauck, A. 1848. Aristophanis Byzantii Grammatica Alexandrini Fragmenta. 2nd ed. Halle: Lippert & Schmidt.
   Google Scholar
• Newman, J. K., and F. S. Newman. 1984. Pindar’s Art. Hildesheim: Weidmann.
   Google Scholar
• O’Brien, D. 1969. Empedocles’ Cosmic Cycle. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Panofsky, E. 1968 [1924]. Idea: A Concept in Art Theory. Transl. by J. J. S. Peake. Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina Press.
   Google Scholar
• Panzerbieter, F. 1844. Bieträge zur Kritik und Erklärung des Empedokles. Meiningen.
   Google Scholar
• Picot, J.-C. 2017–2018. “Penser le Bien et le Mal avec Empédocle.” χώρα – Revue d'études anciennes et médiévales 15–16: 381–414.
   Google Scholar
• Picot, J.-C. 2009. “Water and Bronze in the Hands of Empedocles’ Muse.” Organon 41: 59–84.
   Google Scholar
• Pieri, S. N. 2007. “Empedocle: una struttura di duplicità.” In Empedocle tra poesia, medicina, filosofia e politica, edited by G. Casertano, 157–178. Naples: Loffredo.
   Google Scholar
• Prier, A. 1976. Archaic Logic. The Hague: Mouton.
   Google Scholar
• Reece, S. 2009. Homer’s Winged Words. Leiden: Brill.
   Google Scholar
• Rengakos, A. 1993. Der Homertext und die hellenistischen Dichter. Stuttgart: F. Steiner Wiesbaden.
   Google Scholar
• Richardson, N. 2010. Three Homeric Hymns. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ronconi, A. 1937. “Arato Interprete di Omero.” Studi italiani di filologia classica 14: 167–202.
   Google Scholar
• Sassi, M. M. 2020. “The Indiscreet Charm of Brightness: From Early Greek Thought to Plato.” In Colour Psychology in the Graeco-Roman World, edited by K. Ierodiakonou, 5­–36. Vandœuvres: Fondation Hardt.
   Google Scholar
• Schironi, F. 2018. The Best of the Grammarians. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan.
   Google Scholar
• Schmitt, R. 1967. Dichtung und Dichtersprache in indogermanischer Zeit. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.
   Google Scholar
• Schwyzer, E., and A. Debrunner. 1950. Griechische Grammatik, vol. 2: Syntax und syntaktische Stilistik. München: C. H. Beck.
   Google Scholar
• Sedley, D. N. 2007. Creationism and its Critics in Antiquity. Berkeley: University of California Press.
   Google Scholar
• Segal, C. 1968. “The Embassy and the Duals of Iliad 9.182–98.” Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 9: 101–114.
   Google Scholar
• Sider, D. 1984. “Empedocles B 96 (462 Bollack) and the Poetry of Adhesion.” Mnemosyne 37: 14–24.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shipp, G. P. 1972. Studies in the Language of Homer. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Slack, E. 1893. Essays. London: T. Eddington.
   Google Scholar
• Smyth, H. W. 1897. “Mute and Liquid in Greek Melic Poetry.” Transactions of the American Philological Association 28: 111–143.
   Google Scholar
• Solmsen, F. 1963. “Nature as Craftsman in Greek Thought.” Journal of the History of Ideas 24: 473–496.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stein, H. 1852. Empedoclis Agrigentini Fragmenta. Bonn: Adolph Marcus.
   Google Scholar
• Stephanus (Estienne), H. 1573. Ποίησις Φιλόσοφος. Poesis Philosophica. Geneva: H. Stephanus.
   Google Scholar
• Sturz, F. W. 1805. Empedocles Agrigentinus. 2 vols. Leipzig: Göschen.
   Google Scholar
• Symonds, J. A. 1877–1879. Studies of the Greek Poets. 2nd ed. 2 vols. London: Smith, Elder & Co.
   Google Scholar
• Tarán, L. 1987. “The Text of Simplicius’ Commentary on Aristotle’s Physics.” In Simplicius, sa vie, son oeuvre, sa survie, edited by I. Hadot, 246–266. Berlin: De Gruyter.
   Google Scholar
• Thornton, A. 1978. “Once again, the Duals in Book 9 of the Iliad.” Glotta 56: 1–4.
   Google Scholar
• Tichy, E. 1990. “Zum homerischen Dual.” In Sprachwissenschaft und Philologie, edited by H. Eichner and H. Rix, 170–187. Wiesbaden: Reichert.
   Google Scholar
• Trépanier, S. 2004. Empedocles: An Interpretation. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Trépanier, S. 2003. “Empedocles on the Ultimate Symmetry of the World.” Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 24: 1–57.
   Google Scholar
• Troxler, H. 1964. Sprache und Wortschatz Hesiods. Zürich: Juris Verlag.
   Google Scholar
• van der Ben, N. 2019. Empedocles’ Poem on natural philosophy, Book I: A radical edition. Edited by J.-C. Picot and K. and S. van der Ben. Published online at: http://sites.google.com/site/empedoclesacragas/nicolaas-van-der-ben.
   Google Scholar
• van der Ben, N. 1975. The Proem of Empedocles’ Peri Physios. Amsterdam: Grüner.
   Google Scholar
• van der Valk, M. 1964. Researches on the Text and Scholia of the Iliad. Leiden: Brill.
   Google Scholar
• Verrall, A. W. 1880. “Korax and Tisias.” Journal of Philology 9: 197–210.
   Google Scholar
• Vian, F. 1987. Argonautiques Orphiques. Paris: Les Belles Lettres.
   Google Scholar
• Vian, F. 1974–1980. Apollonios de Rhodes: Argonautiques. 2 vols. Paris: Les Belles Lettres.
   Google Scholar
• Vian, F. 1963. Quintus de Smyrne: La suite d’Homère. Paris: Les Belles Lettres.
   Google Scholar
• Vítek, T. 2006. Empedoklés, vols. 2, 3: Zlomky, Kommentář. Praha: Herrmann & synové.
   Google Scholar
• Wackernagel, J. 2009 [1920]. Lectures on Syntax. Transl. by D. Langslow. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Waterfield, R. 2000. The First Philosophers. New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• West, M. L. 2001. Studies in the Text and Transmission of the Iliad. Munich: K. G. Saur.
   Google Scholar
• West, M. L. 1983. The Orphic Poems. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
   Google Scholar
• West, M. L. 1978. Hesiod, Works and Days. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wilamowitz-Moellendorff, U. von. 1935. “Die Καθαρμοί des Empedokles.” Kleine Schriften, vol. 1, 473–521. Berlin: Weidmann.
   Google Scholar
• Wilamowitz-Moellendorff, U. von. 1905. Bucolici Graeci. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
   Google Scholar
• Willi, A. 2011. “Language, Homeric.” In The Homer Encyclopedia, edited by M. Finkelberg, vol. 2, 458–464. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Willi, A. 2008. Sikelismos. Basel: Schwabe.
   Google Scholar
• Wolf, F. A. 1985 [1795]. Prolegomena to Homer. Transl. by A. Grafton, G. W. Most, and J. E. G. Zetzel. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Workman, A. J. 1951. An Inquiry into Sources of Aesthetic in Pre-Socratic Philosophy. PhD diss., University of Southern California.
   Google Scholar
• Wright, M. R. 1981. Empedocles. New Haven: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wyatt, W. F. 1985. “The Embassy and the Duals in Iliad 9.” American Journal of Philology 106: 399–408.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar