This book review explores the academic advantages of reading a more populist translation of Heraclitus, comparing the main arguments against such an approach (i.e. retaining scholarly exploration of fragments within their original cited source) against that which may be gleaned from a more holistic perspective.

Heraclitus and his fragments

Series "The Word about Being" (Слово о сущем), 2014

This is full text of the first part of my monograph "The logos of Heraclitus", published by Academic publishers "Nauka" in Saint-Petersburg in 2014, in English translation which contains all five chapters of the Introduction on Heraclitus' life, work and philosophy, as well a reconstruction of his lost work, the Greek text of the fragments with apparatus criticus and English translation. The second part contains commentary on fragments and is available in the original Russian edition on this personal page. This edition contains 160 fragments in the main corpus and 15 "Probabilia", i.e. probable fragments that are quoted without explicit mention of Heraclitus' name, but supported verbal coincidences and by parallels. Most of "Probabilia", including anonymous quotations in Plato, are based on new attributions. More than 20 fragments of the main corpus are not included in Diels-Kranz and other editions. Some of these fragments are new, some have been known before, but their status of authenticity has been reassessed and upgraded, e.g. from a doxographicum to a paraphrase of a verbatim quotation that contains a unique authentic tenet. In some other cases fragments considered authentic in DK, have been downgraded to interpretive paraphrase (B7, partly B91 DK) or to spuria (e.g. B105, B115 DK). In this edition we understand «fragment» not in Diels' formal sense as a verbatim quotation distinguished from «doxography» (an ill-defined category that we have criticised on our article "The origin and transmiision of the doxographical tradition... 2016), but as any ancient text that contains a unique piece of information on the philosophical content of a lost Preplatonic work, that cannot be reduced to other texts, an elementary «atom» of information. The status of authenticity may be variable starting from a flawless verbatim quotation in Ionian dialect and descending down to a mixed verbatim quotation with paraphrase, to a good paraphrase close to original text, to a free paraphrase, to an interpretive paraphrase, to a polemical paraphrase that seriously distorts the original, to a mere reminiscence of term or a topos. We usually restrict the admission to the main corpus of fragments by first three categories. Some fragments in our edition are reconstructed on the ground of ancient summary that after quoting a verbatim fragment points to the existence of «other, similar» sayings of Heraclitus (such are 6 hypothetical fragments in 44A and 45A in our edition). Some «fragments» in our edition are «thought-fragments» rather than «text-fragments», i.e. a doctrinal (rather than lexical) convergence of several independent sources that does not allow to establish the exact wording of the lost original, but makes more ol less certain the existence of a certain analogy, idea or other tenet, since the name of Heraclitus appears in one or more contexts. Such cases are found especially in the reconstruction of the section on krafts (τέχναι) imitating nature, fr.106-124 Leb.

2014

This chapter sets Heraclitus and his work in the historical context of the Ionian revolt (499 - 494 B.C.).The combined external evidence and the ipsissima verba of Heraclitus lead to the conclusion that the book of Heraclitus was not only a philosophical treatise, but also a program of radical political and religious reforms whose aim was the creation of a federal state of Ionian Greeks (presumably with further expansion of it into a Panhellenic state) in order to match and to surpass the military might of the Persian empire. In religious sphere the Homeric anthropomorphic polytheism had to be replaced by a monotheistic cult of Apollo the Sun (being a visible manifestation of his Father Zeus, the imperceptible «ever-living fire» imbued with mind, the creator of the Universe) who would unite the Greeks as a «common» (ξυνός) patron of the unified mega-polis. Heraclitus was an ideologue of the Ionian revolt and probably was connected with the «party of war» in Ephesus, hence his glorification of the fallen in battle who would be awarded with a «better portion» in afterlife and become commensals of gods in the Sun region, according to the neglected verbatim fragment in Zenobius Sophista (fr. 159A Lebedev). Heraclitus intentional «obscurity» and metaphorical language can be explained both as imitation of the oracular language of Apollo (whose prophet he claims to be by the prophetic formula “listening not to my logos…”) and as a conspiratorial protection against the spies of the Great king. Heraclitus’ project probably failed because of the destruction of Miletus (494 B.C.), but his Panhellenic ideas may have influenced the founders of the Delian League who made the Delian Apollo the patron of the new confederation. And his dream was finally realised in full by Alexander the Great.

VDI, 2013

We conclude that the edition under review is incompetent; its author does not have a professional knowledge of Greek, nay he repeatedly demonstrates his ignorance of the elementary Greek grammar. From the hermeneutical point of view, he shows a clear tendency towards turning Heraclitus’ sayings into unphilosophical platitudes or absurdities like “Heraclitus in the toilet”, “barking children” an “meat by chance”. And the collection itself demonstrates a total lack of critical judgment. Anything goes for SM as Heraclitus: astrology (F 139), skeptical epistemology ( R 90), a christological text of Hippolytus (F 50), a iambic verse from Epicharmus (F 156) etc. The edition under review is not only useless for a specialist (first of all because it is unreliable and falsifies the fontes), it is also dangerous for students and non specialists who may easily mistake Mr. Mouraviev’s fiction for genuine Heraclitus. In our view, Mr. Mouraviev is more than editor of Heraclitus. Rather he is a co author of the Greek texts or he invents an unknown Greek author. It would be more appropriate to call this unknown author Mouraclitus rather than Heraclitus... We do not recommend this book to academic libraries, scholars, students or general public. Its proper place is in the recycle bin.

Ancient Philosophy, 1984

Page 1. The art and thought of Heraclitus An edition of thefragments with ... Preface Bibliography and abbreviations General introduction 1 The man, the time and the place 2 The book 3 The doctrine: Heraclitus and his predecessors Introductory note to text and translation ...

Ancient Philosophy, 1984

2014

A study of peculiar features of Heraclitus' language and style that combines formal analysis with a special emphasis on their philosophical implications relating to the philosophy of language, metaphysics and epistemology. The following 10 topics are discussed: 1. Anсient critics on the "obscurity" and "ambiguity" of Heraclitus' style……….43 2. Syntactic polysemy. Asyndeton………………………………………………..44 3. The omission of the conjunction καί ‘and’ between the opposites……………49 4. The use of connective particles………………………………………………...51 5. Ellipsis of copula: the omission of the verb ἐστίν in certain contexts…………51 6. The use of the article……………………………………………………………53 7. Pluralis poeticus (or philosophicus?)…………………………………………...54 8. Folklore elements. Proverb, parable, riddle……………………………………54 9. Fränkel's “proportion”………………………………………………………….55 10. Chiasmus……………………………………………………………………….57 It is argued that in most cases the peculiarities at issue cannot be reduced to rhetorical or stylistic devices, but are grounded in a serious philosophical work and experimental attempt to reform the ordinary language, i.e. to bring it in line with physis, the objective order of things. The regular omissiοn of the verb "to be" (ἐστί), of the conjunction καί ῾and῾ between the opposites, and of articles in the "cosmic" fragments relating to the cyclic interchange of opposites, is a linguistic implementation of the metaphysical doctrines of identity (and lack οf substantiality) of opposites and of Universal flux in the phenomenal world of plurality.This fact proves once again that the doctrine of the Universal Flux is a genuine doctrine of Heraclitus and not Plato's invention. In the last section several types of chiasmus in Heraclitus are distinguished and compared with the ring-composition in Homer and archaic Greek culture.

Scholia, vol. 7, 1998

History and Xenophon' s Memorabilia. The first part treats the personification of war in Thucydides 3.82.2 as an inexact and somewhat polemical reminiscence ofHeraclitus, fragment 53. The second part views the words of Socrates in Xenophon, Memorabilia 1.2.4 not as a precept on athletics but as an echo ofHeraclitus fragment 29.

E. Hülsz (ed.), Nuevos ensayos sobre Heráclito, Mexico City, 2009, 391-414.