The Theology of Heraclitus: a Presocratic Pantheism

additton of the \rord ln the other two authors lrou1d be muchharder to explain. Ilence Btost editors slnce Bywa!er p!lnt the!!!4q as a verbatin part of the fi. However a notable exceptlonis Kahn (44n., 312n.l2l) lrho rej ects this rrord partly on theSrounds tharrh is rphl lo sophica 1 senseeading tends to elininate the prlnaty p!dofkoslros. As we shaIl see, !his neednot be true.The rords !on auton hapao!an, "the same for a11",65 onthe other hand, appea! only !D Clenenr. The authentlcity ofthese words has cauEed no 11tt1e controversy. Relnhardt andhis followers (Kirk, Sne11, FrUnkel, stokes) rej ect then asan interpolati.on (not all that rar:e alr occurrence 1n Clementtsquo!es), nhile early edl!ors as !re11 as Glgon, VIastos, Cherniss(4. RaEnouxr,4l3), Cuthrie, Kerschensteiner, llarcovlch,Wesl and Kahn defend them. Baslcally the debate centers a-rourid lrhether or no! the nords can be proved to be lnfluencedby a Sioi.c source or by Clenentts context and whelher or notthe sentillen! expressed by then can be sho\t !o make acceptableHeraelitean sense, As for the fLrst poln!, even though Kirkhas argued that the lnterpolation wes lvery 6trongly motlva!ed"(KR,l99 n.1) on the grounds that Clemert has alralrn a Stolcdistillction of two types of cosmoi, Marcovlch has poln!ed outthat this phrase, lf Clenentrs, would then have to lrean rrofb\lastos' ieco nendatioo that we observe the genitive case of!glg!!oL nore strictly jn our translations by saying "the sane of all"seerns i; r. to obscure wtlal ls belng said in the Greek. see his "On H."'346 n.21, :tore recently Vlaslos seenrs to have rejoined the ranks whotranslare "for all" in hi-s ?lators Unlverse, (seatt1e,l975),pp.4' 8'