698 PROCEEDINGS OF THE AMERICAN ACADEMY. 



the philosopher's scornful permission to hold an opinion. If SoKeovrcov 

 has that meaning, it is transitive as in Herod. 9. 65, So/ccw 5e, el tl 

 Trepl T(hv deloop Trpy]'ynaT(j)v SoKeeiv del. Whether we shall read 6 for 6 

 or assume that o was omitted by haplography before 6 SoKt/iwraros 

 is difficult to decide; for, as Diels has remarked, Heraclitus is spar- 

 ing in the use of the article. I incline to insert <6>, or possibly <d>, 

 the only change I consider necessary in the text. Critics appear to 

 consider jLVcoaKeL cfivXaaaeLV impossible or unintelligible. It is well 

 known, however, that ol8a and eirlaTaiJ.aL are used with the infinitive 

 in the sense of "knowing how" to do anything, and in some cases the 

 nuance given by these verbs is so slight as to be best disregarded 

 in translating the thought into English. It is difficult to see why 

 'YLv6:aK(ji should not be used in the same construction as olba and 

 kTrlaranaL. In fact we have two passages which are calculated to 

 support the assumption that it was so used. Sophocl. Ant. 1087, 



, Lva 



TOP dvfxop ovTOS es veo)Tepovs 6.4>fi 



Kol 7J^(3 Tpk4>eLV TTjv yXoJcraav riavxooTepav. 



Eurip. Bacch. 1341, 



el 8e awcfjpopelv 

 eypud', 6t' ovk rjdeXeTe, top Atos yopop 

 evbaLixoPtlr' ap avfiixaxop KeKTr]p.'epoL. 



Goodwin, Greek Moods and Tenses, 915, 3 (c), mentions the first 

 passage only and takes yc-ypo^aKOi (eypoop) in the sense of "learning." 

 The ingressive aorist naturally bears this sense; but it does not ex- 

 clude the same construction with the present, as may be seen by 

 comparison with kTriaTafiaL, which shows the same meaning in the 

 ingressive aorist, Herod. 3. 15, el 8e Kai ^Trtcrriy^rj jxij TTo\vTrpayp.opeeLP. 

 This line of argument would perhaps not suffice to justify a conjec- 

 tural introduction of yiPcoaKei into the text, but it is an adequate 

 defense of a MS. reading. We have then to consider the meaning of 

 (f)v\a(7aeLP. Here we are thrown upon the fragment itself as our only 

 resource, since the verb has a great variety of meanings. There seems 

 to be a slight clue in the last clause. Diels appears to be right in 

 assuming that Homer, Hesiod, and the like, are the \pevboop reKTOPes 

 Kal ixapTvpes. If this conjecture be true, it is not difficult to see that 

 \pev8oJp TeKTOPas characterizes them as inventors of lies, and that 

 \pev8u}p ixapTvpas can hardly mean those Avho commit perjury, but 

 must rather refer to the witness they bear to falsehoods by recording 



