Scolî medievali e tradizione antica

Studia Graeco-Arabica 1:5-22 (2011)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This paper examines the relationship between some scholia to the IIId book of Plato’s Republic, Proclus’ commentary on it, and the so-called Chrestomathia, a work that the manuscripts attribute to the Neoplatonic philosopher himself. The conclusion is that the relationship between the three texts is highly problematic, and that we cannot think of a simple and direct derivation from one another. The author of the scholia probably made use of texts different from those that have come down to us, or alternatively he has reworked his sources in a personal way.

Links

PhilArchive

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Scholia Graeca in Platonem.Domenico Cufalo - 2007 - Rome, Italy: Edizioni di Storia e Letteratura.
Scholia in scholia: su una nuova edizione di Hermias di Alessandria.Domenico Cufalo - 2017 - Exemplaria Classica. Journal of Classical Philology 21:227–242.
Byzantine Perspectives on Neoplatonism.Mariev Sergei (ed.) - 2017 - Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter.
A Chapter In The History of Scholia.N. G. Wilson - 1967 - Classical Quarterly 17 (2):244-256.
Interpreting Proclus: From Antiquity to the Renaissance.Stephen Gersh (ed.) - 2014 - New York: Cambridge University Press.
‘Marginalia’ by die teologie van Natie van Wyk.Wim A. Dreyer - 2018 - HTS Theological Studies 74 (4):1-7.

Analytics

Added to PP
2020-08-25

Downloads
254 (#80,566)

6 months
74 (#66,205)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Domenico Cufalo
Liceo Classico "G. Galilei", Pisa

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Platone e i suoi commentatori.Domenico Cufalo - 2006 - Memorie dell'Accademia Roveretana Degli Agiati 256 (A.A. 2006, ser. II, vol. X):121-137.

Add more references