Lucretius 3. 492–3

Classical Quarterly 23 (02):293- (1973)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

His translation is, ‘obviously because the violence of the disease is dispersed throughout the body and as it forces out breath stirs up foam…’ The difficulty is that nowhere else does ‘distracta’ mean ‘dispersed’. Moreover, in vv. 501 and 507, in the same sequence of argument, the meaning is clearly ‘torn apart’, as usual. One way of meeting this difficulty is to read ‘anima’ in 493, as proposed by Tohte. However, this gives the barely defensible ‘anima spumas’ and is unsatisfactory in another respect. Lines 499–501, in which ‘ut docui’ must refer back to 492–3, imply that the ‘animus’ as well as the ‘anima’ was mentioned there and that the effect of epilepsy is to upset the relation between the two

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 101,597

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

ΦAnta∑ia In Aristotle, De Anima 3. 3.Gerard Watson - 1982 - Classical Quarterly 32 (1):100-113.
Philo, Lucretius, and Anima.Howard Jacobson - 2004 - Classical Quarterly 54 (2):635-636.
Aristotle's de Anima in Focus.Michael Durrant (ed.) - 1993 - New York: Routledge.
Der Kommentar des Radulphus Brito zu Buch III De anima.Radulphus Brito - 1974 - Münster,: Aschendorff. Edited by Fauser, Winfried & [From Old Catalog].
The Nous-Body Problem in Aristotle.Deborah K. W. Modrak - 1991 - Review of Metaphysics 44 (4):755 - 774.

Analytics

Added to PP
2010-12-09

Downloads
43 (#521,582)

6 months
12 (#304,424)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references