[681]. Simplicius also speaks of βιβλία.
[682]. Simplicius tells us that this fragment was at the beginning of Book I. The familiar sentence quoted by Diog. ii. 6 (R. P. 153) is not a fragment of Anaxagoras, but a summary, like the πάντα ῥεῖ ascribed to Herakleitos (Chap. III. p. 162).
[683]. Zeller’s τομῇ still seems to me a convincing correction of the MS. τὸ μή, which Diels retains.
[684]. I had already pointed out in the first edition that Simplicius quotes this three times as a continuous fragment, and that we are not entitled to break it up. Diels now prints it as a single passage.
[685]. Simplicius gives fr. 14 thus (p. 157, 5): ὁ δὲ νοῦς ὅσα ἐστί τε κάρτα καὶ νῦν ἐστιν. Diels now reads ὁ δὲ νοῦς, ὃς ἀ<εί> ἐστί, τὸ κάρτα καὶ νῦν ἐστιν. The correspondence of ἀεὶ ... καὶ νῦν is strongly in favour of this.
[686]. On the text of fr. 15, see R. P. 156 a. I have followed Schorn in adding καὶ τὸ λαμπρόν from Hippolytos.
[687]. This is doubtless the meaning of the words τοῖς ἔργοις ὕστερος in Arist. Met. Α, 3. 984 a 12 (R. P. 150 a); though ἔργα certainly does not mean “writings” or opera omnia, but simply “achievements.” The other possible interpretations are “more advanced in his views” and “inferior in his teaching” (Zeller, p. 1023, n. 2).
[688]. Arist. Phys. Α, 4. 187 b 1 (R. P. 155 a).
[689]. Aet. i. 3, 5 (Dox. p. 279). See R. P. 155 f and n. 1. I read καρπὸν with Usener.
[690]. See Tannery, Science hellène, pp. 283 sqq. I still think that Tannery’s interpretation is substantially right, though his statement of it requires some modification.