IlEIDEL. — ON FRAGMKNTS OF THE PRE-SOCRATICS. 717 



oi TrXeToTot, 5teXe76ro (tkottC^v, ottcos 6 KaXovfievos viro Tix)u (jo<f)i(TTC}V 

 Koaidos tXf'< ^fi^ riaLU auayKaL<: tKaara yiuerai TOiv ovpaUoou kt\. Here 

 the Mss. are divided between ex^L and e0ii, and the editors fintl it dif- 

 ficult to decide. I beheve that ex^t, which has the better credentials, 

 is the true reading, though one ma^^ question whether the unfamiliar 

 force of exft or the sinu'larity of sound led to the substitution of ecpv. 

 As I pointed out in my study Ilept ^vcnus, the same duplicity as 

 appears in the force of cos exei occurs also in the use of 4>v(ji.s, which 

 predominantly signifies that which a thing is, but, pursuant to a 

 constant habit of the human mind, is most frecjuently and naturally 

 defined by recounting the story of its birth. 



c. 18. Parmenides. 



V 105, 34. Diog. L. 9. 22, ykveGiv avdpuTcov e^ rjXiou irpCiTOv ye.vk- 

 aOaf avTOv 8e hir apx^i-v to depnov Kai to \pvxpov, e^ S:v to. 

 iravTa avveaTavaL. 



Various proposals have been made for the emendation of rjXiov, of 

 which tXi'os is the most probable. It is obvious, however, that e^ 

 57X101;, or whate\er we may substitute for it, was not intended to 

 denote the elemental constituents of man, since they are expressly 

 mentioned later in the sentence. If the writer had in mind merely 

 the source of the force w'hich led to the origin of man, k^ 17X101;, 

 however singular, may be allowed to stand. But Diels is quite right 

 in regarding avTov as corrupt. The language of Aristotle and his 

 commentators suggests the obvious correction, avToXs 8' evvTapx^iv, 

 referring to the aTOLX^Ia hvirapxoPTa. 



V2 115, 10. Fr. 1, 2S, 



Xpeo) 8e ae irduTa irvOeadaL 

 rjiJLev 'X\T]deir]s evKVKXeos OLTpefxes rJTop 

 rjSe jSpoTCOv do^as, tols ouk tVL tticttlz aXrjdrjs. 



Something depends upon the precise meaning of tcIcjtl^ aXrjdrjs ; for it 

 must to a considerable extent determine our conception of the attitude 

 of Parmenides toward the (SpoTuip do^at., which seem to have occu- 

 pied his thought in much the larger part of his philosophical poem. 

 The phrase recurs, fr. S, 26 sq., 



avTOip aKiPrjTOV /ley a.\o:v ev irnpaai deafxojv 

 eaTLV avapxov awavcTTOv, exet jeveaLs Kai oXeOpos 

 TTJXe paX' eirXaxOrjcrav, airu)ae oe iriaTLS dXriOrjs. 



