Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Which lost work would you like to have restored?

Expand Messages
  • vaeringjar
    Perhaps a bit of a silly question, but still: of all the lost Neoplatonic works, or any work of ancient philosophy for that matter, would you like to have
    Message 1 of 8 , May 12, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      Perhaps a bit of a silly question, but still: of all the lost
      Neoplatonic works, or any work of ancient philosophy for that matter,
      would you like to have restored? Or which ones, if more than one?

      For my own part, I am rather tempted to say all of the Commentary on
      the Parmenides just so we could finally find out who is right about the
      authorship, but then on the other hand we would get a nice dividend
      with Proclus' Commentary on the Chaldaean Oracles because he must have
      quoted Iamblichus et al in the process, so one work would likely yield
      a nice gratis bonus of more texts in addition.

      Though knowing Proclus, we might have to accept that he perhaps would
      just not bother to identify his sources. And I suppose some people - a
      lot maybe? - would say, oh, do we really need more of his prose anyway,
      regardless of the usefulness of the text?!?

      Dennis Clark
    • James Atkins Pritchard
      Perhaps the dialogues of Aristotle. ... [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      Message 2 of 8 , May 12, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        Perhaps the dialogues of Aristotle.

        2008/5/12 vaeringjar <vaeringjar@...>:

        > Perhaps a bit of a silly question, but still: of all the lost
        > Neoplatonic works, or any work of ancient philosophy for that matter,
        > would you like to have restored? Or which ones, if more than one?
        >
        > For my own part, I am rather tempted to say all of the Commentary on
        > the Parmenides just so we could finally find out who is right about the
        > authorship, but then on the other hand we would get a nice dividend
        > with Proclus' Commentary on the Chaldaean Oracles because he must have
        > quoted Iamblichus et al in the process, so one work would likely yield
        > a nice gratis bonus of more texts in addition.
        >
        > Though knowing Proclus, we might have to accept that he perhaps would
        > just not bother to identify his sources. And I suppose some people - a
        > lot maybe? - would say, oh, do we really need more of his prose anyway,
        > regardless of the usefulness of the text?!?
        >
        > Dennis Clark
        >
        >
        >


        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • José Carllos Baracat Júnior
        The works of Numenius.
        Message 3 of 8 , May 13, 2008
        • 0 Attachment
          The works of Numenius.
        • vaeringjar
          ... I meant to add regarding Proclus Commentary on the Chaldaean Oracles that even more of a value add would likely be the retrieval of at least a working
          Message 4 of 8 , May 13, 2008
          • 0 Attachment
            --- In neoplatonism@yahoogroups.com, José Carllos Baracat Júnior
            <baracatjr@...> wrote:
            >
            > The works of Numenius.
            >

            I meant to add regarding Proclus' Commentary on the Chaldaean Oracles
            that even more of a value add would likely be the retrieval of at least
            a working text of the Oracles themselves, you would at least hope.

            Yes, at least the rest of Numenius' On the Good, and apropos the
            previous posting, Aristotle's On the Good. Though the both likely would
            raise as many more questions as they settle, but that is a problem we
            could certainly live with I think.

            Dennis Clark
          • John Dilon
            ... Well, I would certainly like to have Damascius¹ Life of Isidore / Philosophic History in full, but not for any very serious philosophical reason! JMD
            Message 5 of 8 , May 17, 2008
            • 0 Attachment
              >
              >
              >
              > Perhaps a bit of a silly question, but still: of all the lost
              > Neoplatonic works, or any work of ancient philosophy for that matter,
              > would you like to have restored? Or which ones, if more than one?
              >
              > For my own part, I am rather tempted to say all of the Commentary on
              > the Parmenides just so we could finally find out who is right about the
              > authorship, but then on the other hand we would get a nice dividend
              > with Proclus' Commentary on the Chaldaean Oracles because he must have
              > quoted Iamblichus et al in the process, so one work would likely yield
              > a nice gratis bonus of more texts in addition.
              >
              > Though knowing Proclus, we might have to accept that he perhaps would
              > just not bother to identify his sources. And I suppose some people - a
              > lot maybe? - would say, oh, do we really need more of his prose anyway,
              > regardless of the usefulness of the text?!?
              >
              > Dennis Clark
              >
              >
              >

              Well, I would certainly like to have Damascius¹ Life of Isidore /
              Philosophic History in full, but not for any very serious philosophical
              reason! JMD


              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            • vaeringjar
              ... philosophical ... C est vrai! I am surprised in a way that we have as much of it as we do - can we assume the juicier bits survived and the cattiness
              Message 6 of 8 , May 23, 2008
              • 0 Attachment
                > >
                > >
                > >
                >
                > Well, I would certainly like to have Damascius¹ Life of Isidore /
                > Philosophic History in full, but not for any very serious
                philosophical
                > reason! JMD
                >
                >

                C'est vrai! I am surprised in a way that we have as much of it as we
                do - can we assume the "juicier" bits survived and the cattiness
                promoted its survival, especially because of criticism of pagans? But
                Photius normally wasn't all that drawn to the salacious, etc., was
                he?

                I was just reading Robert Lamberton's review of the new edition by
                Athanassiadi at BMCR,

                http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/bmcr/2000/2000-01-23.html

                (How did he make that mistake about the destruction of the Serapeum
                in Alexandria happening in 491 instead of a hundred years earlier?!?)

                Dennis Clark
              • John Dilon
                ... Well, perhaps a confusion with the looting of the shrine of Isis at Menuthis? JMD [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                Message 7 of 8 , May 23, 2008
                • 0 Attachment
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >>> > >
                  >>> > >
                  >>> > >
                  >> >
                  >> > Well, I would certainly like to have Damascius¹ Life of Isidore /
                  >> > Philosophic History in full, but not for any very serious
                  > philosophical
                  >> > reason! JMD
                  >> >
                  >> >
                  >
                  > C'est vrai! I am surprised in a way that we have as much of it as we
                  > do - can we assume the "juicier" bits survived and the cattiness
                  > promoted its survival, especially because of criticism of pagans? But
                  > Photius normally wasn't all that drawn to the salacious, etc., was
                  > he?
                  >
                  > I was just reading Robert Lamberton's review of the new edition by
                  > Athanassiadi at BMCR,
                  >
                  > http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/bmcr/2000/2000-01-23.html
                  >
                  > (How did he make that mistake about the destruction of the Serapeum
                  > in Alexandria happening in 491 instead of a hundred years earlier?!?)
                  >
                  > Dennis Clark
                  >
                  >
                  >

                  Well, perhaps a confusion with the looting of the shrine of Isis at
                  Menuthis? JMD


                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                • vaeringjar
                  ... Isidore / ... we ... But ... Serapeum ... earlier?!?) ... Yes - I was being a bit impertinent to bring it up at all, as it s a fine review and I really
                  Message 8 of 8 , May 27, 2008
                  • 0 Attachment
                    --- In neoplatonism@yahoogroups.com, John Dilon <jmdillon@...> wrote:
                    >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >>> > >
                    > >>> > >
                    > >>> > >
                    > >> >
                    > >> > Well, I would certainly like to have Damascius¹ Life of
                    Isidore /
                    > >> > Philosophic History in full, but not for any very serious
                    > > philosophical
                    > >> > reason! JMD
                    > >> >
                    > >> >
                    > >
                    > > C'est vrai! I am surprised in a way that we have as much of it as
                    we
                    > > do - can we assume the "juicier" bits survived and the cattiness
                    > > promoted its survival, especially because of criticism of pagans?
                    But
                    > > Photius normally wasn't all that drawn to the salacious, etc., was
                    > > he?
                    > >
                    > > I was just reading Robert Lamberton's review of the new edition by
                    > > Athanassiadi at BMCR,
                    > >
                    > > http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/bmcr/2000/2000-01-23.html
                    > >
                    > > (How did he make that mistake about the destruction of the
                    Serapeum
                    > > in Alexandria happening in 491 instead of a hundred years
                    earlier?!?)
                    > >
                    > > Dennis Clark
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    >
                    > Well, perhaps a confusion with the looting of the shrine of Isis at
                    > Menuthis? JMD
                    >
                    >

                    Yes - I was being a bit impertinent to bring it up at all, as it's a
                    fine review and I really like his book on Neoplatonist allegory.

                    For that reason I will resist then referring to his oversight as a
                    case of "Homer nodding"...

                    Dennis Clark
                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.