[711]. See above, p. 300, [n. 684].
[712]. Aet. ii. 1, 3. See above, Chap. I. p. [63].
[713]. Further, it can be proved that this passage (fr. [4]) occurred quite near the beginning of the work. Cf. Simpl. Phys. p. 34, 28, μετ’ ὀλίγα τῆς ἀρχῆς τοῦ πρώτου Περὶ φυσέως, p. 156, 1, καὶ μετ’ ὀλίγα (after fr. [2]), which itself occurred, μετ’ ὀλίγον (after fr. [1]), which was the beginning of the book. A reference to other “worlds” would be quite in place here, but not a reference to the moon.
[714]. Ref. i. 8, 3 (Dox. p. 562).
[715]. This is an addition to the older view occasioned by the Eleatic denial of the void.
[716]. The text here is very corrupt, but the general sense can be got from Aet. iii. 16. 2.
[717]. The MS. reading is ἐν τοῖς ἄρκτοις, for which Diels adopts Fredrichs’ ἐν τοῖς ἀνταρκτικοῖς. I have thought it safer to translate the ἐν τῇ Αἰθιοπίᾳ which Aetios gives (iv. 1, 3). This view is mentioned and rejected by Herodotos (ii. 22). Seneca (N. Q. iv. 2, 17) points out that it was adopted by Aischylos (Suppl. 559, fr. 300, Nauck), Sophokles (fr. 797), and Euripides (Hel. 3, fr. 228).
[718]. Arist. de Part. An. Δ, 10. 687 a 7 (R. P. 160 b).
[719]. [Arist.] de plant. Α, 1. 815 a 15 (R. P. 160).
[720]. Plut. Q.N. 1 (R. P. 160), ζῷον ... ἐγγεῖον.