No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 23 December 2013
In a highly speculative article in the last issue of this Journal, D. O'Brien takes me to task for ‘thoughtless simplification of Kahn, Anaximander and the Origins of Greek Cosmology 88 n. 2, cf. 68’, and for saying (JHS lxxxvi [1966] 36), in relation to the figures used by Tannery in his hypothetical reconstruction of Anaximander's astronomical system, that ‘only 27 in the series has any textual authority’ (O'Brien, op. cit. 120 n. 44). O'Brien does this in such a way as to suggest that I am unaware that the figures 28 and 19 are also recorded in the doxographical tradition, and to infer that my ‘judgment has perhaps been coloured’ by this.
1 JHS lxxxviii (1968) 114–27. The article contains some curious language (e.g. ‘break the assumption’, mid-p. 121 and top p. 122), and some even more curious statements (e.g. p. 124 n. 62, ‘Galen's statement, that the sun is larger than the earth, Hist. philos. 63 [Dox. Gr. 626], although it may be true in substance, is probably in Galen simply a random error’), but this is not the place to demonstrate its eccentricities.