doc.pdf

simplifies the wording of his source, as he does, for example, in (le) and (2b),
and occasionally substitutes different words, as he does in (lg) by replacing the
verb "pass upwards" ('bar l'el) by "rise" (sleq).
On the whole, however, hs remains faithful to the wording of his source and
there is little in the above passage of Cand. which is not taken from the passages
of Nic. used as its source, as we may see from the high proportion of underlined
words in the translation of the passage of Cand. The accounts of the theories of
Democritus and Anaximenes are copied almost verbatim from Nic. and in clauses
(2c-f), for example, we see that every wort in the passage of Cand. matches that
in Nic. and the word order, too, is the same, except for the transfer of the verb
'iibdn to the end of the sentence, an alteration he also makes in (3d). One major
alteration he makes in Anaximenes' theory is the transfer of the verb niiplin
[(3c)]; this serves to make the sense clearer, since in Nic. the two verbs mneshtr@n
and metparkkin appear at first sight to be parallel, rather than subordinate, to
ruiplin.20
Restoration of text of Nicolaus (i): Cand. 123.5-8
The text of Nic. we have in the Cambridge manuscript, as has been said, is
incomplete. Occasionally,
-
Cand. allows us to restore lost passages of Nic.
Cand. 123.5-8:
am (U- +3 sib * u3 run, A e -49e3 +* +3 r ~pr\A (1)
. r