The fragments of the pre-Socratics

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The fragments of the pre-Socratics are a collection of the doctrines of Greek philosophers up to (essentially) the end of the 5th century BC. According to the editors, the work is mainly cited as Diels / Kranz or Diels-Kranz , abbreviated DK (rarer pre-Socratic or VS ).

content

Hermann Diels had already dealt with the topic of ancient doxographies in his dissertation and later published the series of ancient Aristotle commentaries. This laid the foundation for publishing the teachings of the philosophers before (and in some cases after) Socrates in a clear form. This was preceded as early as 1901 by a collection of fragments from authors who presented their teaching in bound language. Of course there had been editions of fragments before, but in a form that hardly allowed a real distinction between the teaching of the original philosophers and the ingredients of the narrators; moreover, this whole complex was once again overlaid by the editors' comments. Understanding was generally made more difficult by the attempt, which in itself was justified, to bring the fragments into a systematic context.

It is true that Diels stuck to the structure principle of his predecessors, first of all to reproduce the biographical and doxographical testimonies to a philosopher, and then to allow the actual fragments to follow. But he gave up the attempt to order them systematically by simply printing the texts in the alphabetical order of the sources. Another most remarkable innovation was that he not only gave the fragments a translation, but that it was even German (but this only applies to the original fragments); This can partly be explained by the fact that the collection (as noted in the preface to the first edition) was primarily intended as a basis for philosophical lectures. But not only in this task, but as an important research tool, it "practically relegated its predecessors to the dusty shelves of the history of philosophy in one fell swoop".

It contains more than 400 authors, not only philosophers in the strict sense, but also representatives of the exact sciences, especially mathematics, in keeping with the Greek understanding of the time, even beyond the end of Socrates' life. Although the title is not to be taken literally, it was actually what first coined the term “ pre-Socratics ”, or at least established it. Since then, the work of Hermann Diels has been one of the most important works of classical philology of the 20th century.

construction

In part A the early poems and the seven wise men are compiled, in part B the philosophers in the narrower sense. The authors are numbered, as are the individual related text passages. The treatment of the individual authors is divided into three sections:

  • A: ancient accounts of life and teaching
  • B: literal quotations - the actual fragments (these can also be found in German translations)
  • C: spurious or incorrectly attributed fragments

Accordingly, the respective author , section and fragment number are given in the usual citation style . For example, when specifying "DK 13 B 2"

  • "13" on Anaximenes
  • "B" on the character as a literal quote
  • "2" on the number of the fragment

expenditure

The edition first appeared in 1903, then in one volume, and was reprinted surprisingly often.

When the importance of the collection was recognized not only for academic teaching but also for science, an index was planned from 1906 onwards. The editor of the word and subject index, which then appeared in 1910, was found in the young scientist Walther Kranz , who did his doctorate under Wilamowitz . From the 3rd edition, a critical apparatus has also been added, in which text-critical and exegetical details are mixed. Kranz also worked on the subsequent editions, and after Diel's death in 1922 it was obvious that he would oversee the sequel. The new 5th edition appeared in deliveries from 1934–1937, more than a new edition, rather a profound reworking, recognizable from the outside by the changed structure, which made it necessary to number the authors again. The citation as Diels / Kranz is fully justified. Apart from supplements published by Kranz in 1952, the work was then no longer edited. After the 6th edition, the publisher stopped counting the various prints, but kept it always available.

The fragments of the pre-Socratics. Greek and German by Hermann Diels. Published by Walther Kranz.
Hildesheim: Weidmann
ISBN 3-615-12200-3
Vol. 1. With addendum by Walther Kranz. Unchanged new edition 2004. (= 6th edition 1951). XII, 504 pp. ISBN 3-615-12201-1
Vol. 2. With addendum by Walther Kranz. Unchanged new edition 2005. (= 6th edition 1952). 428 pp. ISBN 3-615-12202-X
Vol. 3. Word index by Walther Kranz, name and position index by Hermann Diels, supplemented by Walther Kranz. Unchanged new edition 2005. (= 6th edition 1952). 660 pp. ISBN 3-615-12203-8

There are a number of other editions ( a new three-volume edition was published in the " Tusculum Collection " in 2007 ff.). They are all based on the work of Hermann Diels and the “Fragments of the Pre-Socratics”. The editions are clearly arranged in the source collections on the pre-Socratics .

literature

  • Walter Burkert : Diels' pre-Socratics. Review and outlook . In: William M. Calder III (Ed.): Hermann Diels (1848-1922) et la science de l'antiquité: huit exposés suivis de discussions . Fondation Hardt, Genève 1999. ISBN 2-600-00745-8 (Entretiens sur l'antiquité classique 45), pp. 169–197 (with the contributions to the discussion up to p. 206)
  • Glenn W. Most : Πόλεμος πάντων πατήρ. The pre-Socratics in research in the twenties . In: Hellmut Flashar (Ed.): Ancient Studies in the 20s . Steiner, Stuttgart 1995. ISBN 3-515-06569-5 . Pp. 87-114, spec. Pp. 87-93

Web links

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ Poetarum philosophorum fragmenta . Weidmann, Berlin 1901 (reprint 2000) (Poetarum Graecorum fragmenta 3,1). ISBN 3-615-00221-0 . - According to Walter Burkert, this collection is more important to the specialist than that of the pre-Socratics
  2. ↑ Glenn W. Most p. 88
  3. ↑ See the academic report of the Classical Philological Seminar at the University of Zurich, 2005