[31] Parmenides, 128 A–D.
[32] This interpretation is combated by Milhaud, Les philosophes-géomètres de la Grèce, p. 140 n., but his reasons do not seem to me convincing. All the interpretations in what follows are open to question, but all have the support of reputable authorities.
[33] Physics, vi. 9. 2396 (R.P. 136–139).
[34] Cf. Gaston Milhaud, Les philosophes-géomètres de la Grèce, p. 140 n.; Paul Tannery, Pour l'histoire de la science hellène, p. 249; Burnet, op. cit., p. 362.
[35] Cf. R. K. Gaye, “On Aristotle, Physics, Z ix.” Journal of Philology, vol. xxxi., esp. p. 111. Also Moritz Cantor, Vorlesungen über Geschichte der Mathematik, 1st ed., vol. i., 1880, p. 168, who, however, subsequently adopted Paul Tannery's opinion, Vorlesungen, 3rd ed. (vol. i. p. 200).
[36] “Le mouvement et les partisans des indivisibles,” Revue de Métaphysique et de Morale, vol. i. pp. 382–395.
[37] “Le mouvement et les arguments de Zénon d'Élée,” Revue de Métaphysique et de Morale, vol. i. pp. 107–125.
[38] Cf. M. Brochard, “Les prétendus sophismes de Zénon d'Élée,” Revue de Métaphysique et de Morale, vol. i. pp. 209–215.
[39] Simplicius, Phys., 140, 28 D (R.P. 133); Burnet, op. cit., pp. 364–365.
[40] Op. cit., p. 367.