Search

The couplet vv. 177-178 of her. 20 is particularly problematic. In this paper I retrace the various attempts to amend the couplet and propose a solution: to recover the long-ignored Palmer’s conjecture based on the Greek translation of Maximus Planudes. For the first time, Palmer’s conjecture on v. 178 is joined with Thompson’s proposal to accept the reading of ms. H (13th century) for the v. 177. The proof that the text obtained from Planudes’ translation is the authentic one allows us to consider worthy of esteem, at least for this last part of the Heroides, the lost Latin ms. from which Planudes translated, although the overall value of Planudes’ translation for the reconstruction of Ovid’s text is still a matter of debate. more...

This article analyses the role of Euclid’s fifth postulate (also known as the “Parallel Postulate”) in Proclus’ Commentary on the first book of the Elements. Since Euclid included it among the postulates, he considered it indemonstrable; other ancient geometricians, though, disagreed with him and tried to find a proof of this fundamental principle. Proclus also thought so: in his Commentary, he reports various opinions on the postulate, together with Ptolemy’s attempt at proof, which he refutes, a paradoxical opinion of anonymous authors who even deny the fifth postulate, and his own attempt at proof. The analysis of these attempts at proof was made by Heath; the aim of this paper is to extend the study to all the parts of Proclus’ Commentary relating to the fifth postulate. A textual note on the term λημμάτιον used in reference to the fifth postulate closes the article. The distinction between axioms and postulates and the “squares of propositions” are dealt with in two final appendices. more...