The moving posset once again: Heraclitus fr. B 125 in context

Classical Quarterly

Volumn 46, Issue 1, 1996, Pages 34-43

  Mouraviev, Serge N ^a  

^a SORBONNE UNIVERSITÉ   (France)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 61949320796     PISSN: 00098388     EISSN: 14716844     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/cq/46.1.34     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. M. M. Mackenzie, 'The Moving Posset Stands Still: Heraclitus Fr. 125', AJPh 107 (1986), 542-51
2. N. van der Ben, 'Theophrastus, De vertigine, Ch. 9, and Heraclitus Fr. 125', AJPh 109 (1988), 397-401
3. Having been strongly advised to give up the initial goal of this paper - to pinpoint some rather typical logical flaws in both former and present day textual criticism of our Heraclitean sources - I cannot but refer the interested reader to my earlier publications on the subject: S. N. Mouraviev,' Comment interpréter Héraclite: vers une méthodologie scientifique des études héraclitéennes', Ionian Philosophy (Athens, 1989), 270-79
4. id., 'Comprendre Héraclite. [Réflexions sur la méthode des études héraclitéennes suggérées par deux éditions françaises des fragments de l'Ephésien],' Âge de la Science 3 (La philosophic et son histoire) (Paris, 1990), 181-232. It is a pleasure to acknowledge here my debt to an anonymous referee [Rec. an.] of an earlier version of this paper whose remarks and queries helped me to get rid of some blunders and omissions (the blame for the remaining still lies on me of course)
5. See S. N. Mouraviev (Murav'ëv), 'Traditio Heraclitea (A). Corpus fontium veterum de Heraclito', Vetnik Drevnej Istorii (1984) no. 171, 31-44; (1985) no. 173, 16-28; no. 174,30-5; no. 175, 35-42; (1986) no. 178, 33-67; (1990) no. 193, 41-60; (1992) no. 200, 36-52. These sections contain the whole of the Heraclitean direct tradition (without the uncertain allusions and reminiscences) from Epicharmus to Aristotle (full texts, with relevant context, full apparatus, and Russian translation). An improved and enlarged edition with French translation and commentary of the whole of Heraclitus' tradition is now underway
6. See: S. N. Mouraviev (ed.), Heraclitea, Édition critique complète des témoignages sur la vie et l'œuvre d'Héraclite d' Ephèse et les vestiges de son livre, II, La Tradition antique et médiévale, A. Témoignages et citations, 1. D' Épicharme à Platon et Héraclide le Pontique (Moscow, Paris, Myrmekia, 1993)
7. J. Bernays, Heraclitea. Diss. (Bonn, 1848), 6-7
8. = id., Gesammelte Abhandlungen, I (1885), 6
9. F. Lassalle, Die Philosophic des Herakleitos des Dunklen von Ephesus (Berlin, 1858), 75ff.
10. W. Schultz, 'Die Kosmologie des Rauchopfers nach Heraklits Fragm. 67', Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophic 22 (1909), 202-3, n. 15
11. J. Bollack-H. Wismann, Héraclite ou la Séparation (Paris, 1972), 340f
12. E. S. Forster, 'Further Emendations in the Fragments of Theophrastus', CQ (1933), 140-41
13. 21962), 255. Before Bernays the reading (with an additional before) was already used by Heinse - whose other emendation for had an effect somewhat similar to that of Bernays'
14. Taking this text by itself does not imply neglecting the fact that it is a paraphrase of another text, the one we just examined, but only considering it for its own sake. The disastrous effects of such a neglect are well illustrated by Emminger who believed he had discovered an unknown fragment! (See A. Emminger, Die vorsokratischen Philosophe nnach den Berichten des Aristoteles [Würzburg, 1883], 148
15. and H. Diels, rev. of Emminger, Jenaer Literaturzeitung 5 [1878], 9). More astounding and absolutely untenable is the attitude of Bollack-Wismann, op. cit. [n. 6], 340 who, while knowing (?) that it is a paraphrase, still retain the corrupt reading and translate '(l'animal) qui tourne (l'âne?), s'il n'y a personne pour l'exciter, il s'arrête'. Unless the French scholars are just pulling our leg to show what 'animaux qui tournent' we also are, they are defying any logic. Logically much sounder is Forster's reverse procedure: he emends in Theophrastus into according to the Probl. (and then into) - 'the man who whirls round stands still while moving' - but it fails to cope with two facts: the opposite roles played by the quotation in these texts (see below in the text) and the existence of a number of other testimonia showing that Heraclitus did indeed use the kykeon simile (see n. 13 and the corresponding text)
16. I.e. at the philological stage as opposed to the hermeneutical (for this distinction and the problem of the relation between textual criticism and philosophical interpretation, see Mouraviev, 'Comment interpréter Héraclite ...' [n. 1], 273-7)