Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-6bb9c88b65-9rk55 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-07-22T08:49:41.506Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Works Cited

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 July 2025

Ricardo Salles
Ricardo Salles
Affiliation:
Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
Get access

Information

Type
Chapter
Information
The Stoic Cosmos
Conflagration, Cosmogony, and Recurrence in Early Stoicism
 , pp. 263 - 283
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2025

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Primary Sources

Diels, H. 1879, Doxographi Graeci. Collegit Prolegomenis Indicibusque Instruxit. Berlin: Reimer.Google Scholar
Mansfeld, J., and Runia, D. 2020, Aëtiana V. 4 vols. Leiden: Brill.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bruns, I. 1892, Supplementum Aristotelicum (in Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca suppl. 2.2). Berlin: Reimer.Google Scholar
Hayduck, M. 1899, Alexandri Aphrodisiensis in Aristotelis meteorologicorum libros commentaria (in Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca 3.2). Berlin: Reimer.Google Scholar
Sharples, R. W. 1983, Alexander of Aphrodisias, On Fate. London: Duckworth.Google Scholar
Wallies, M. 1883, Alexandri in Aristotelis analyticorum priorum librum i commentarium (in Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca 2.1). Berlin: Reimer.Google Scholar
Brinkmann, A. 1895, Alexandri Lycopolitani contra Manichaei opiniones disputatio. Leipzig: Teubner.Google Scholar
Mansfeld, J., and van der Horst, P. W. 1974, An Alexandrian Platonist against Dualism. Alexander of Lycopoli’s Treatise ‘Critique of the Doctrines of Manichaeus.’ Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
Marshall, P. K. 1968, Aulus Gellius, Noctes Atticae. Oxford: Oxford Classical Texts.Google Scholar
Fobes, F. H. 1919, Aristotelis meteorologicorum libri quattuor. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Louis, P. 1964–1969, Aristote. Histoire des animaux. 3 vols. Paris: Les Belles Lettres.Google Scholar
Ross, W. D. 1924, Aristotle’s Metaphysics. 2 vols. Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ross, W. D. 1950, Aristotelis physica. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Ax, W. 1961, M. Tullius Cicero. De Natura Deorum. Stuttgart: Teubner.Google Scholar
Falconer, W. A. 1923, Cicero, De senectute De amicitia; De divinatione. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Mayor, J. B. 1883, M. Tullii Ciceronis De Natura Deorum. Libri Tres. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Pease, A. S. 1955–1968, M. Tulli Ciceronis De Natura Deorum. 3 vols. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Früchtel, L., Stählin, O., and Treu, U. 1960–1970, Clemens Alexandrinus, vols. 2–3 (Die griechischen christlichen Schriftsteller der Ersten Jahrhunderte 52.15, 52.17). Berlin: Akademie Verlag.Google Scholar
Todd, R. 1990, Cleomedis Caelestia. Leipzig: Teubner.Google Scholar
Ziegler, H. 1891, Cleomedis de motu circulari corporum caelestium libri duo. Leipzig: Teubner.Google Scholar
Torres, J. B. 2018, Lucius Annaeus Cornutus: Compendium de Graecae Theologiae Traditionibus. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Busse, A. 1888, Dexippi in Aristotelis categorias commentarium. Berlin: Reimer.Google Scholar
Dorandi, T. 2013, Diogenes Laertius: Lives of Eminent Philosophers (Cambridge Classical texts and Commentaries). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Long, H. S. 1964, Diogenes Laertius. Vitae philosophorum. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Marcovich, M. 1999–2002, Diogenis Laertii Vitae philosophorum. Stuttgart: Teubner.Google Scholar
Schenkl, H. 1916, Epicteti Dissertationes ab Arriano digestae, Fragmenta, Enchiridion ex recensione Schweighaeuseri, gnomologiorum Epicteteorum reliquiae. Leipzig: Teubner.Google Scholar
Mras, K. 1954–1956, Eusebius Werke, Band 8: Die Praeparatio evangelica (Die griechischen christlichen Schriftsteller 43.1, 43.2). Berlin: Akademie Verlag.Google Scholar
Kalbfleisch, K. 1904, Galenus de causis continentibus libellus a Nicolao Regino in sermonem Latinum translatus. Marburg: Koch.Google Scholar
Kollesch, J., Nickel, D., and Strohmaier, G. De Causis Contentiuis 1966, repr. in Lyons, M., Galen on the Parts of Medicine; on Cohesive Causes; on Regimen in Acute Diseases in Accordance with the Theories of Hippocrates. Berlin: Akademie Verlag, 1969.Google Scholar
Diels, H. 1879, Doxographi Graeci. Collegit Prolegomenis Indicibusque Instruxit. Berlin: Reimer.Google Scholar
West, M. L. 1966, Hesiod. Theogony. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1966.Google Scholar
Marcovich, M. 1986, Hippolytus. Refutatio omnium haeresium. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Monat, P. 1973–2007, Institutions divines. Introduction, texte critique, traduction et notes. Paris: Éditions du Cerf.Google Scholar
Dalfen, J. 1987, Marci Aurelii Antonini ad se ipsum libri XII. Leipzig: Teubner.Google Scholar
Morani, M. 1987, Nemesii Emeseni de natura hominis. Leipzig: Teubner.Google Scholar
Görgemanns, H., and Karpp, H. 1976, Origenes vier Bücher von den Prinzipien. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.Google Scholar
Kötschau, P. Origenes Werke: 2. & 5. Bd. Buch V–VIII Gegen Celsus. Die Schrift vom Gebet. Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1899.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohn, L., Reiter, S., and Wendland, P. 1896–1915, Philonis Alexandrini opera quae supersunt. Berlin: Reimer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vitelli, H. 1897, Ioannis Philoponi in Aristotelis libros de generatione et corruptione commentaria (in Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca 14.2). Berlin: Reimer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burnet, J. 1900–1907, Platonis Opera. 4 vols. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Cherniss, H., 1976, Plutarch. Moralia. Volume XIII, Part II. Cambridge, MA: Loeb Classical Library.Google Scholar
Sieveking, W. 1929, Plutarchi moralia, vol. 3. Leipzig: Teubner.Google Scholar
Pohlenz, M. 1958, Plutarchi moralia, vol. 6.2. Leipzig: Teubner.Google Scholar
Edelstein, L., and Kidd, I. G. 1989, Posidonius. The Fragments. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Theiler, W. 1982, Posidonios. Die Fragmente. Berlin: De Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kühn, C. G. 1827–1830, Claudii Galeni opera omnia, vols. 14, 16, and 19. Leipzig: Knobloch.Google Scholar
Otto, J. C. T. 1879, Corpus apologetarum Christianorum saeculi secundi, vol. 3. Jena: Mauke.Google Scholar
Di Gregorio, L. 1975, Scholia vetera in Hesiodi theogoniam. Milan: Società editrice Vita e pensiero.Google Scholar
Corcoran, T. H. 1971–1972, Seneca. Naturales Quaestiones. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Reynolds, L. D. 1965, L. Annaei Senecae Ad Lucilium epistulae morales. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Mutschmann, H., and Mau, J. 1914–1954, Sexti Empirici Opera, vols. 2–3. Leipzig: Teubner.Google Scholar
Diels, H. 1882–1895, Simplicii in Aristotelis physicorum libros octo commentaria. 2 vols. (in Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca 9–10). Berlin: Reimer.Google Scholar
Heiberg, J. L. 1894, Simplicii in Aristotelis de caelo commentaria (in Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca 7). Berlin: Reimer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kalbfleisch, K. 1907, Simplicii in Aristotelis categorias commentarium (in Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca 8). Berlin: Reimer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wachsmuth, C., Hense, O. 1884–1912, Ioannis Stobaei Anthologium. 5 vols. Berlin: Weidmann.Google Scholar
Goodspeed, E. J. 1915, Die ältesten Apologeten. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.Google Scholar
Coutant, V. 1971, Theophrastus. De igne: a post=Aristotelian view of the nature of fire. Assen: Royal Vangorcum.Google Scholar

Secondary Sources

Diels, H. 1879, Doxographi Graeci. Collegit Prolegomenis Indicibusque Instruxit. Berlin: Reimer.Google Scholar
Mansfeld, J., and Runia, D. 2020, Aëtiana V. 4 vols. Leiden: Brill.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bruns, I. 1892, Supplementum Aristotelicum (in Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca suppl. 2.2). Berlin: Reimer.Google Scholar
Hayduck, M. 1899, Alexandri Aphrodisiensis in Aristotelis meteorologicorum libros commentaria (in Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca 3.2). Berlin: Reimer.Google Scholar
Sharples, R. W. 1983, Alexander of Aphrodisias, On Fate. London: Duckworth.Google Scholar
Wallies, M. 1883, Alexandri in Aristotelis analyticorum priorum librum i commentarium (in Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca 2.1). Berlin: Reimer.Google Scholar
Brinkmann, A. 1895, Alexandri Lycopolitani contra Manichaei opiniones disputatio. Leipzig: Teubner.Google Scholar
Mansfeld, J., and van der Horst, P. W. 1974, An Alexandrian Platonist against Dualism. Alexander of Lycopoli’s Treatise ‘Critique of the Doctrines of Manichaeus.’ Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
Marshall, P. K. 1968, Aulus Gellius, Noctes Atticae. Oxford: Oxford Classical Texts.Google Scholar
Fobes, F. H. 1919, Aristotelis meteorologicorum libri quattuor. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Louis, P. 1964–1969, Aristote. Histoire des animaux. 3 vols. Paris: Les Belles Lettres.Google Scholar
Ross, W. D. 1924, Aristotle’s Metaphysics. 2 vols. Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ross, W. D. 1950, Aristotelis physica. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Ax, W. 1961, M. Tullius Cicero. De Natura Deorum. Stuttgart: Teubner.Google Scholar
Falconer, W. A. 1923, Cicero, De senectute De amicitia; De divinatione. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Mayor, J. B. 1883, M. Tullii Ciceronis De Natura Deorum. Libri Tres. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Pease, A. S. 1955–1968, M. Tulli Ciceronis De Natura Deorum. 3 vols. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Früchtel, L., Stählin, O., and Treu, U. 1960–1970, Clemens Alexandrinus, vols. 2–3 (Die griechischen christlichen Schriftsteller der Ersten Jahrhunderte 52.15, 52.17). Berlin: Akademie Verlag.Google Scholar
Todd, R. 1990, Cleomedis Caelestia. Leipzig: Teubner.Google Scholar
Ziegler, H. 1891, Cleomedis de motu circulari corporum caelestium libri duo. Leipzig: Teubner.Google Scholar
Torres, J. B. 2018, Lucius Annaeus Cornutus: Compendium de Graecae Theologiae Traditionibus. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Busse, A. 1888, Dexippi in Aristotelis categorias commentarium. Berlin: Reimer.Google Scholar
Dorandi, T. 2013, Diogenes Laertius: Lives of Eminent Philosophers (Cambridge Classical texts and Commentaries). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Long, H. S. 1964, Diogenes Laertius. Vitae philosophorum. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Marcovich, M. 1999–2002, Diogenis Laertii Vitae philosophorum. Stuttgart: Teubner.Google Scholar
Schenkl, H. 1916, Epicteti Dissertationes ab Arriano digestae, Fragmenta, Enchiridion ex recensione Schweighaeuseri, gnomologiorum Epicteteorum reliquiae. Leipzig: Teubner.Google Scholar
Mras, K. 1954–1956, Eusebius Werke, Band 8: Die Praeparatio evangelica (Die griechischen christlichen Schriftsteller 43.1, 43.2). Berlin: Akademie Verlag.Google Scholar
Kalbfleisch, K. 1904, Galenus de causis continentibus libellus a Nicolao Regino in sermonem Latinum translatus. Marburg: Koch.Google Scholar
Kollesch, J., Nickel, D., and Strohmaier, G. De Causis Contentiuis 1966, repr. in Lyons, M., Galen on the Parts of Medicine; on Cohesive Causes; on Regimen in Acute Diseases in Accordance with the Theories of Hippocrates. Berlin: Akademie Verlag, 1969.Google Scholar
Diels, H. 1879, Doxographi Graeci. Collegit Prolegomenis Indicibusque Instruxit. Berlin: Reimer.Google Scholar
West, M. L. 1966, Hesiod. Theogony. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1966.Google Scholar
Marcovich, M. 1986, Hippolytus. Refutatio omnium haeresium. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Monat, P. 1973–2007, Institutions divines. Introduction, texte critique, traduction et notes. Paris: Éditions du Cerf.Google Scholar
Dalfen, J. 1987, Marci Aurelii Antonini ad se ipsum libri XII. Leipzig: Teubner.Google Scholar
Morani, M. 1987, Nemesii Emeseni de natura hominis. Leipzig: Teubner.Google Scholar
Görgemanns, H., and Karpp, H. 1976, Origenes vier Bücher von den Prinzipien. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.Google Scholar
Kötschau, P. Origenes Werke: 2. & 5. Bd. Buch V–VIII Gegen Celsus. Die Schrift vom Gebet. Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1899.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohn, L., Reiter, S., and Wendland, P. 1896–1915, Philonis Alexandrini opera quae supersunt. Berlin: Reimer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vitelli, H. 1897, Ioannis Philoponi in Aristotelis libros de generatione et corruptione commentaria (in Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca 14.2). Berlin: Reimer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burnet, J. 1900–1907, Platonis Opera. 4 vols. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Cherniss, H., 1976, Plutarch. Moralia. Volume XIII, Part II. Cambridge, MA: Loeb Classical Library.Google Scholar
Sieveking, W. 1929, Plutarchi moralia, vol. 3. Leipzig: Teubner.Google Scholar
Pohlenz, M. 1958, Plutarchi moralia, vol. 6.2. Leipzig: Teubner.Google Scholar
Edelstein, L., and Kidd, I. G. 1989, Posidonius. The Fragments. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Theiler, W. 1982, Posidonios. Die Fragmente. Berlin: De Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kühn, C. G. 1827–1830, Claudii Galeni opera omnia, vols. 14, 16, and 19. Leipzig: Knobloch.Google Scholar
Otto, J. C. T. 1879, Corpus apologetarum Christianorum saeculi secundi, vol. 3. Jena: Mauke.Google Scholar
Di Gregorio, L. 1975, Scholia vetera in Hesiodi theogoniam. Milan: Società editrice Vita e pensiero.Google Scholar
Corcoran, T. H. 1971–1972, Seneca. Naturales Quaestiones. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Reynolds, L. D. 1965, L. Annaei Senecae Ad Lucilium epistulae morales. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Mutschmann, H., and Mau, J. 1914–1954, Sexti Empirici Opera, vols. 2–3. Leipzig: Teubner.Google Scholar
Diels, H. 1882–1895, Simplicii in Aristotelis physicorum libros octo commentaria. 2 vols. (in Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca 9–10). Berlin: Reimer.Google Scholar
Heiberg, J. L. 1894, Simplicii in Aristotelis de caelo commentaria (in Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca 7). Berlin: Reimer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kalbfleisch, K. 1907, Simplicii in Aristotelis categorias commentarium (in Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca 8). Berlin: Reimer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wachsmuth, C., Hense, O. 1884–1912, Ioannis Stobaei Anthologium. 5 vols. Berlin: Weidmann.Google Scholar
Goodspeed, E. J. 1915, Die ältesten Apologeten. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.Google Scholar
Coutant, V. 1971, Theophrastus. De igne: a post=Aristotelian view of the nature of fire. Assen: Royal Vangorcum.Google Scholar
Ademollo, F. 2012, ‘The Platonic origins of Stoic theology.’ Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 43: 17–43.Google Scholar
Ademollo, F. 2020, ‘Cosmic and individual soul in Stoicism.’ In Body and Soul in Hellenistic Philosophy. Proceedings of the 14th Symposium Hellenisticum, ed. Inwood, B. and Warren, J.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 113–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alesse, F. 1997, Panezio di Rodi. Testimonianze. Napoli: Bibliopolis.Google Scholar
Alesse, F. 2011, ‘Dio, anima e intelligibili nella Stoa.’ Χώρα: Revue d’Études Anciennes et Médiévales 9–10: 365–381.Google Scholar
Algra, K. 1995, Concepts of Space in Greek Thought. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
Algra, K. 2001, ‘Comments or commentary? Zeno of Citium and Hesiod’s Theogonia.’ Mnemosyne 54: 562–581.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Algra, K. 2002, ‘Zeno of Citium and Stoic cosmology: Some notes and two case studies.’ In The Philosophy of Zeno, ed. Scaltsas, T. and Mason, A. S.. Larnaca: Demetriades, 157–183.Google Scholar
Arnim, H. von 1903, Stoicorum Veterum Fragmenta. 3 vols. (with a fourth volume with indexes by M. Adler). Leipzig: Teubner.Google Scholar
Baltes, M. 1976, Die Weltentstehung Des Platonischen Timaios Nach Den Antiken Interpreten. Teil 1. Leiden: Brill.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baltzly, D. 2003, ‘Stoic pantheism.’ Sophia 42: 3–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barnes, J. 1978 [2011] ‘La Doctrine du Retour Éternel.’ Rev. and trans. into English as ‘The same again: The Stoics on eternal recurrence.’ In Method and Metaphysics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 412–428.Google Scholar
Barnes, J. 1982, The Presocratic Philosophers. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Barnes, J. 1984, The Complete Works of Aristotle: The Revised Oxford Translation. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Barnes, J. 1988, ‘Bits and pieces.’ In Matter and Metaphysics: Fourth Symposium Hellenisticum, ed. Barnes, J. and Mignucci, M.. Napoli: Bibliopolis, 225–294.Google Scholar
Barnes, J. 1997, ‘Roman Aristotle.’ In Philosophia Togata II, ed. Barnes, J. and Griffin, M.. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barney, R. 2003, ‘A puzzle in Stoic ethics.’ Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 24: 303–340.Google Scholar
Barney, R. 2010, ‘On Hippo of (possibly) Rhegium.’ Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1607792 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1607792.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barney, R. 2012, ‘“The next Principle” (Metaphysics A3–4, 984b8–985b22).’ In Aristotle’s Metaphysics Alpha, ed. Steel, C.. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bénatouïl, T. 2002, ‘Logos et scala naturae dans le stoïcisme de Zénon et Cléanthe.’ Elenchos 23: 297–331.Google Scholar
Bénatouïl, T. 2009, ‘How industrious can Zeus be? The extent and objects of divine activity in Stoicism.’ In God and Cosmos in Stoicism, ed. Salles, R.. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 23–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bénatouïl, T. 2014, ‘L’aponia divine entre physique, éthique et théologie chez Aristote et dans le Lycée.’ In Nature et Sagesse. Les rapports entre physique et métaphysique dans la tradition aristotélicienne, ed. Cerami, C.. Louvain-la-Neuve: Peeters.Google Scholar
Besnier, B. 1996, ‘La Nature dans le livre II du De Natura Deorum de Cicéron.’ In Le Concept de Nature à Rome: la Physique, ed. Lévy, C.. Paris: Presses de l’École Normale Supérieure, 153–164.Google Scholar
Betegh, G. 2002, ‘Cosmological ethics in the Timaeus and early Stoicism.’ Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 24: 273–302.Google Scholar
Betegh, G. 2007, ‘On the physical aspect of Heraclitus’ psychology.’ Phronesis 52: 3–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Betegh, G. 2019, ‘Fire, heat, and motive force in early Greek philosophy and medicine.’ In Heat, Pneuma, and Soul in Ancient Philosophy and Science, ed. Bartos, H. and King, C. G.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 35–60.Google Scholar
Bobzien, S. 1998, Determinism and Freedom in Stoic Philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bobzien, S. 2002, ‘Chrysippus’ theory of causes.’ In Topics in Stoic Philosophy, ed. Ierodiakonou, K.. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 196–242.Google Scholar
Bobzien, S., and Shogry, S. 2020, ‘Stoic logic and multiple generality.’ Philosophers’ Imprint 20: 1–36.Google Scholar
Boechat, E. 2017, ‘The Concept of the sun as Hegemonikon in the stoa and in Manilius’ Astronomica.’ Archai 21: 79–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boeri, M. D. 2000, ‘El determinismo estoico y los argumentos compatibilistas de Crisipo.’ Cuadernos del Sur – Filosofía 29: 11–47.Google Scholar
Boeri, M. D., and Salles, R. 2014, Los Filósofos Estoicos. Ontología, Lógica, Física y Ética. Traducción, Comentario Filosófico y Edición Anotada de los Principales Textos Griegos y Latinos. Sankt Augustin: Academia Verlag.Google Scholar
Bonitz, H. 1870 [1955], Index Aristotelicus. Berlin: G. Reimer (repr. Graz: Akademische Druck- U. Verlagsanstalt).Google Scholar
Borges, J. L. 1943 [1999], ‘Circular time.’ In Jorge Luis Borges, Selected Non-Fiction, ed. and trans. from the Spanish by Weinberger, Eliot. Harmondsworth: Penguin, 225–228.Google Scholar
Botros, S. 1995, ‘Freedom, causality, fatalism and early Stoic philosophy.’ Phronesis 30: 274–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bowen, A. C., and Todd, R. B. 2004, Cleomedes. Lectures on Astronomy. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Boyancé, P. 1962, ‘Les preuves stoïciennes de l’existence des dieux d’après Cicéron.’ Hermes 90: 45–71.Google Scholar
Boys-Stones, G. 2021, ‘The Stoics’ empiricist model of divine thought.’ In Biology and Cosmology in Ancient Philosophy: From Thales to Avicenna,ed. Salles, R.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 152–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bréhier, E. 1910, Chrysippe et l’Ancien Stoïcisme. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France. 2nd ed. 1951, to which references are made.Google Scholar
Bronowski, A. 2019, The Stoics on Lekta: All There Is to Say. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brouwer, R. 2014, The Stoic Sage: The Early Stoics on Wisdom, Sagehood and Socrates. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brunschwig, J. 1988, ‘Le théorie stoïcienne du genre suprême et l’ontologie platonicienne.’ Rev. and trans. into English as ‘The Stoic theory of the supreme genus and Platonic ontology.’ In Papers in Hellenistic Philosophy, ed. Brunschwig, J.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 1994, 92–157.Google Scholar
Brunschwig, J. 1994, ‘Did Diogenes of Babylon invent the ontological argument?’ In Papers in Hellenistic Philosophy, ed. Brunschwig, J.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 170–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brunschwig, J. 2003, ‘Stoic metaphysics.’ In The Cambridge Companion to the Stoics ed. Inwood, B.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 206–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bryan, J. 2013, ‘Chrysippus and Plato on the fragility of the head.’ In Plato and the Stoics, ed. Long, A. G.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 59–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bury, R. G. 1961, Sextus, Empiricus. 4 vols. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Caston, V. 1999, ‘Something and nothing: The Stoics on concepts and universals.’ Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 1999: 145–213.Google Scholar
Cavadini, J. C. 2017, ‘Creatio ex nihilo in the thought of Saint Augustine.’ In Creation Ex Nihilo: Origins, Development, Contemporary Challenges, ed. Anderson, G. A. and Bockmuehl, M., South Bend: University of Notre Dame Press, 151–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Celkyte, A. 2021, The Stoic Theory of Beauty. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Chase, M. 2003, Simplicius, On Aristotle Categories 1–4. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Cherniss, H. 1976, Plutarch. Moralia. Volume XIII, Part II. Cambridge, MA: Loeb Classical Library.Google Scholar
Chiaradonna, R., and Rashed, M., eds. 2020, Boéthos de Sidon – Exégète d’Aristote et philosophe. Berlin: De Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chroust, A.-H. 1977, ‘Some observations on Aristotle’s doctrine of the uncreatedness and indestructibility of the universe.’ Rivista critica di storia della filosofia 32: 123–143.Google Scholar
Clay, D., and Hammond, M. 2006, Marcus Aurelius. Meditations. Penguin: London.Google Scholar
Cohn, L., and Wendland, P. 1915, Philonis Alexandrini Opera Quae Supersunt, vol. 6. Berlin: Reimer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohoon, J., and Crosby, H. 1932, Dio Chrysostom. Discourses. 5 vols. Cambridge, MA: Loeb Classical Library.Google Scholar
Collette-Dučić, B. 2010, ‘On the Chrysippean thesis that the virtues are poia.’ Proceedings of the Boston Area Colloquium in Ancient Philosophy 25: 193–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Colson, F. 1941, Philo, vol. IX. Cambridge, MA: Loeb Classical Library.Google Scholar
Colvin, M. 2005, ‘Heraclitus and material flux in Stoic psychology.’ Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 28: 257–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Conche, M. 1991, Anaximandre. Fragments et Témoignages. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.Google Scholar
Coope, U., 2005, Time for Aristotle. Physics IV.10–14. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cooper, J. 1985, ‘Hypothetical necessity.’ In Aristotle on Nature and Living Things, ed. Gotthelf, A.. Bristol: Bristol Classical Press.Google Scholar
Cooper, J. 1987, ‘Hypothetical necessity and natural teleology.’ In Philosophical Issues in Aristotle’s Biology, ed. Gotthelf, A. and Lennox, J. G.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Cooper, J. 1997, Plato. Complete Works. Hackett : Indianapolis.Google Scholar
Cooper, J. 2003, ‘Stoic autonomy.’ Repr. in Cooper, J., Knowledge, Nature and the Good. Essays on Ancient Philosophy. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 204–244, to which references are made.Google Scholar
Cooper, J. 2009, ‘Chrysippus on physical elements.’ In God and Cosmos in Stoicism, ed. Salles, R.. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 93–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cornford, F. M. 1935, Plato’s Cosmology: The Timaeus of Plato. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Cowan, T. M. 1971, ‘Megalithic Lunar Observatories,’ by Alexander Thom (Book Review).’ Journal for the History of Astronomy 2: 201.Google Scholar
Crivelli, P. 2010, ‘The Stoics on definitions.’ In Definition in Greek Philosophy, ed. Charles, D., Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Craig, W. L. 2000, The Tensed Theory of Time: A Critical Examination, Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dancy, R. 2021, ‘Xenocrates.’ In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, ed. Zalta, E. N.. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2021/entries/xenocrates.Google Scholar
De Callatay, G. 1996, Annus Platonicus: A Study of World Cycles in Greek, Latin and Arabic sources. Louvain-la-Neuve: Institut Orientaliste de l’Université Catholique de Louvain.Google Scholar
De Callatay, G. 2016, ‘Eternity and world-cycles.’ In Eternity. A History, ed. Melamed, Y. Y.. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 64–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Harven, V. 2015, ‘How nothing can be something: The Stoic theory of void.’ Ancient Philosophy 35: 405–429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Harven, V. 2022, ‘The metaphysics of Stoic corporealism.’ Apeiron 55: 219–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Lacy, P. 1978–1984, Galen, on the Doctrines of Hippocrates and Plato. 3 vols. Berlin: Akademie-Verlag.Google Scholar
Diels, H. 1879, Doxographi Graeci. Collegit Prolegomenis Indicibusque Instruxit. Berlin: Reimer.Google Scholar
Diels, H., and Kranz, W. 1903, Die Fragmente der Vorsokratiker. 3 vols. 6th ed. revised by Walther Kranz. Berlin: Weidmann, 1951–1952.Google Scholar
Dorandi, T. 2013, Diogenes Laertius: Lives of Eminent Philosophers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Douven, I. 2006, ‘Abduction.’ In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, ed. Zalta, E. N.. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2017/entries/abduction.Google Scholar
Duhot, J. J. 1989, La Conception stoïcienne de la causalité. Paris: Vrin.Google Scholar
Duncombre, M. 2020, Ancient Relativity: Plato, Aristotle, Stoics, and Sceptics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dyke, H. 2011, ‘The metaphysics of time.’ In Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy. doi:10.4324/9780415249126-N123-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dyke, H. 2002, ‘McTaggart and the truth about time.’ In Time, Reality and Experience, ed. Callender, C.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 137–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Falcon, A. 2012, Aristotelianism in the First Century BCE: Xenarchus of Seleucia. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Fazzo, S. 2023, ‘A hypothetical premise about eternal cosmic motion in Physics viii 1.250b13.’ Aristotelica 3. https://doi.org/10.17454/ARIST03.03.Google Scholar
Festugière, A. J. 1949, La Révélation d’Hermès Trimégiste. II. Le Dieu Cosmique. Paris: Lecoffre.Google Scholar
Finkelberg, A. 1998a, ‘On the history of the Greek cosmos.’ Harvard Studies in Classical Philology 98: 103–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Finkelberg, A. 1998b, ‘On cosmogony and Ecpyrosis in Heraclitus.’ The American Journal of Philology 119.2: 195–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forman, D. 2018, ‘Leibniz on human finitude, progress, and eternal recurrence: The argument of the “apokatastasis” essay drafts and related texts.’ Oxford Studies in Early Modern Philosophy 8: 225–270.Google Scholar
Forrest, Peter, 2020, ‘The identity of indiscernibles.’ In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, ed. Zalta, E. N.. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2020/entries/identity-indiscernible.Google Scholar
Frede, D. 2003, ‘Stoic determinism.’ In The Cambridge Companion to the Stoics, ed. Inwood, B.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 179–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frede, M. 1983, ‘Stoics and sceptics on clear and distinct impressions.’ Repr. in Frede, M., Essays in Ancient Philosophy. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1987, 151–176, to which references are made.Google Scholar
Frede, M. 1985, ‘The original notion of cause.’ In Doubt and Dogmatism: Studies in Hellenistic Epistemology, ed. Schofield, M., Burnyeat, M., and Barnes, J.. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 217–249.Google Scholar
Frede, M. 1994, ‘The Stoic notion of a lekton.’ In Companions to Ancient Thought 3: Language, ed. Everson, S.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 109–128.Google Scholar
Frede, M. 1999a, ‘Epilogue.’ in The Cambridge History of Hellenistic Philosophy, ed. Algra, Keimpe, Barnes, Jonathan, Mansfeld, Jaap, and Schofield, Malcolm. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 771–797.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frede, M. 1999b, ‘Monotheism and pagan philosophy in later antiquity.’ In Pagan Monotheism in Late Antiquity, ed. Frede, M. and Athanassiadi, P.. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 41–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frede, M. 2005, ‘Sur la Théologie stoïcienne.’ In Les Stoïciens, ed. Gourinat, J.-B. and Dherbey, G.. Paris: Vrin, 213–232.Google Scholar
Frede, M. 2021, ‘Diogenes Laertius 7.134.’ Phronesis 66: 227–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Furley, D. 1999, ‘Cosmology.’ In The Cambridge History of Hellenistic Philosophy, ed. Algra, K., Barnes, J., Mansfeld, J., and Schofield, M.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 412–451.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gaskin, R. 2013, Simplicius. On Aristotle’s Categories 9–15. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Gavrilyuk, P. 2013, ‘Creation in early Christian polemical literature: Irenaeus against the Gnostics and Athanasius against the Arians.’ Modern Theology 29: 22–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilbert, O. 1907, Die Meteorologischen Theorien des Griechischen Altertums. Teubner: Leipzig (repr. Hildesheim: Georg Olms, 1967).Google Scholar
Gill, C. 2013, Marcus Aurelius. Meditations. Books 1–6. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Gill, C. 2022, Learning to Live Naturally: Stoic Ethics and Its Modern Significance. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldschmidt, V. 1972, ‘Huparchein et huphestanai dans la philosophie stoïcienne.’ Revue des Études Grecques, 85: 332–344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gottschalk, H. B. 1986, ‘Boethus’ psychology and the Neoplatonists.’ Phronesis 31: 243–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gould, J. B. 1970, The Philosophy of Chrysippus. Leiden: Brill.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gourinat, J. B. 2002, ‘Éternel retour et temps périodique dans la philosophie stoïcienne.’ Revue philosophique de la France et de l’étranger 127: 213–227.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gourinat, J. B. 2009, ‘The Stoics on matter and primer matter: “Corporealism” and the imprint of Plato’s Timaeus.’ In God and Cosmos in Stoicism, ed. Salles, R.. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 46–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gourinat, J. B. 2014, ‘Les causes sont causes de prédicats: sur un aspect de la théorie stoïcienne de la cause.’ In Aitia II, Avec ou Sans Aristote: Le débat sur les causes à l’âge hellénistique et impérial, ed. Natali, C. and Viano, C.. Louvain-la-Neuve: Peeters, 65–93.Google Scholar
Gourinat, J. B., 2018, ‘The ontology and syntax of Stoic causes and effects.’ Rhizomata 61: 87–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Graham, D. 2010, The Texts of Early Greek Philosophy. Part 1. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Gregory, A. 2016, Anaximander: A Re-assessment. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Gregorić, P. 2021, ‘The eternity of the cosmos.’ In Pseudo-Aristotle, De Mundo (On the Cosmos): A Commentary, ed. Gregorić, P. and Karamanolis, G.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 149–175.Google Scholar
Gregorić, P., and Karamanolis, G. 2021, eds., Pseudo-Aristotle, De Mundo (On the Cosmos): A Commentary. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Groisard, J. 2013, Alexandre d’Aphrodise. Sur la Mixtion et la Croissance. Paris: Les Belles Lettres.Google Scholar
Gysembergh, V. 2013, ‘Aristotle on the great tear, Eudoxus, and Mesopotamian goal year astronomy.’ Annali – Istituto universitario orientale. Sezione germanica 35: 111–124.Google Scholar
Hager, P. 1982, ‘Chrysippus’ theory of pneuma.’ Prudentia 14: 97–108.Google Scholar
Hahm, D. 1977, The Origins of Stoic Cosmology. Columbus: Ohio State University Press.Google Scholar
Hahm, D. 1985, ‘The Stoic theory of change.’ In Recovering the Stoics, ed. Epp, R., Southern Journal of Philosophy, suppl. vol. 23: 39–56.Google Scholar
Hahm, D. 1991, ‘Aristotle and the Stoics: A methodological crux.’ Archiv Für Geschichte Der Philosophie, 73: 297–311.Google Scholar
Hahm, D. 1992, ‘A neglected Stoic argument for human responsibility.’ Illinois Classical Studies 17: 23–48.Google Scholar
Hahm, D. 2006, ‘The foundations of Stoic physics.’ Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
Hahm, D. 2007, ‘Critolaus and late Hellenistic Peripatetic philosophy.’ In Pyrrhonists, Patricians, Platonizers. Hellenistic Philosophy in the Period 155–86 BC, ed. Ioppollo, A. M. and Sedley, D.. Naples: Bibliopolis, 84–87.Google Scholar
Hammond, C. 2016, Augustine. Confessions: Books 9–13. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Harriman, B. 2020a, ‘A note on Cleanthes and early Stoic cosmogony.’ Mnemosyne 74: 533–552.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harriman, B. 2020b, ‘Disjunctions and natural philosophy in Marcus Aurelius.’ Classical Quarterly 69: 858–879.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Helle, R. 2018, ‘Hierocles and the Stoic theory of blending.’ Phronesis, 63: 87–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Helle, R. 2021, ‘Self-causation and unity in Stoicism.’ Phronesis 66: 178–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Helle, R. 2022, ‘Colocation and the Stoic definition of blending.’ Phronesis 67: 462–497.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hensley, I. 2017, ‘Chrysippus’ elemental theory.’ Ancient Philosophy 37: 361–385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hensley, I. 2018, ‘On the separability and inseparability of the Stoic principles.’ Journal of the History of Philosophy 56: 187–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hensley, I. 2019, ‘The physics of Stoic cosmogony.’ Apeiron 52.4: 1–27.Google Scholar
Hensley, I. 2020, ‘The physics of pneuma in early Stoicism.’ In The Concept of Pneuma after Aristotle, ed. Coughlin, S., Lewis, O., and Leith, D.. Berlin: Berlin Studies of the Ancient World, 171–201.Google Scholar
Hensley, 2023, ‘Elements and matter in Diogenes Laertius 7.134.’ Classical Philology 118: 273–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Higginbotham, C. 2021, Introductory Organic Chemistry. Mountain View, CA: Creative Commons.Google Scholar
Hine, H. M. 2010, Seneca: Natural Questions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Holmes, B. 2019 ‘On Stoic sympathy.’ In Antiquities Beyond Humanism, ed. Bianchi, E., Brill, S., and Holmes, B.. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 239–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horky, P. S., ed. 2019a, Cosmos in the Ancient World, New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horky, P. S., ed. 2019b, ‘When did kosmos become the kosmos?’ In Cosmos in the Ancient World, ed. Horky, P. S., New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horky, P. S. 2019c, ‘Cosmic spiritualism in the Pythagoreans, Stoics, Jews and early Christians.’ In Cosmos in the Ancient World, ed. Horky, P. S.. New York: Cambridge University Press, 270–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hulsz, E. 2012, ‘Heraclitus and the sun.’ In Presocratics and Plato. Festschrift at Delphi in Honor Charles Kahn, ed. Patterson, R., Karasmanis, V., and Hermann, A.. Las Vegas-Zurich-Athens: Parmenides.Google Scholar
Hunt, H. 1976, A Physical Interpretation of the Universe: The Doctrines of Zeno the Stoic. Carlton: Melbourne University Press.Google Scholar
Ijjas, A. 2013, ‘Christian cosmology.’ In Encyclopedia of Sciences and Religions, ed. Runehov, A. L. C. and Oviedo, L.. Dordrecht: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-8265-8_1486.Google Scholar
Inwood, B. 1991, ‘Chrysippus on extension and the void.’ Revue Internationale de Philosophie 3: 245–266.Google Scholar
Inwood, B. 2000, ‘Susanne Bobzien: Determinism and freedom in Stoic philosophy.’ Classical Review 50: 495–497.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Inwood, B. 2005, Reading Seneca: Stoic Philosophy at Rome. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Inwood, B. 2022, Later Stoicism 155 BC to AD 200: An Introduction and Collection of Sources in Translation. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Irwin, T. H. 1996, ‘Stoic individuals.’ Noûs 30: 459–480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johansen, T. K. 2014, ‘Why the Cosmos Needs a Craftsman: Plato, Timaeus 27d5–29b1.’ Phronesis 59: 297–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, M. R. 2022, ‘Aristotle on kosmos and kosmoi.’ In Cosmos in the Ancient World, ed. Horky, P. S., New York: Cambridge University Press, 74–107.Google Scholar
Jones, A. 2003, ‘The Stoics and the astronomical sciences.’ In The Cambridge Companion to the Stoics, ed. Inwood, B.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 328–344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ju, A. E. 2009, ‘The Stoic ontology of geometrical limits.’ Phronesis 54: 371–389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kahn, C. 1960, Anaximander and the Origins of Greek Cosmology. New York: Columbia University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kalbfleisch, K. 1904, Galenus de causis continentibus libellus a Nicolao Regino in sermonem Latinum translatus. Marburg: Koch.Google Scholar
Keble, J. 1872, Five books of S. Irenaeus, Against Heresies. Oxford: J. Parker.Google Scholar
Kerschensteiner, J. 1962, Kosmos. Quellenkritische Untersuchungen zu den Vorsokratikern. Munich: Beck.Google Scholar
Kidd, I. G. 1988, Posidonius: The Commentary. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kim, J. 1966, ‘On the psycho-physical identity theory.’ American Philosophical Quarterly 3: 277–285.Google Scholar
Kim, J. 1973, ‘Causation, nomic subsumption and the concept of event.’ Repr. in Kim, J., Supervenience and Mind: Selected Philosophical Essays. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993, 3–21, to which references are made.Google Scholar
Kim, J. 1976, ‘Events as property exemplifications.’ Repr. in Kim, J., Supervenience and Mind: Selected Philosophical Essays. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993, 33–52, to which references are made.Google Scholar
Kirk, G. 1954, Heraclitus: The Cosmic Fragments. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kirk, G, Raven, J. E., and Schofield, M. 1983, The Presocratic Philosophers. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klein, J. 2015, ‘Making sense of Stoic indifferents.’ Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 49: 227–281.Google Scholar
Kleywegt, A. J. 1961, Ciceros Arbeitsweise in zweiten und dritten Buch der Schrift De Natura Deorum. Leiden: Universiteit Leiden.Google Scholar
Kleywegt, A.J. 1984, ‘Cleanthes and the Vital Heat.’ Mnemosyne 37: 94–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koetschau, P. 1913, Origenes Werke, Fünfter Band. De Principiis. Leipzig, J. C. Hinrichs.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kupreeva, I. 2009, ‘Stoic themes in Peripatetic physics?’ In God and Cosmos in Stoicism, ed. Salles, R.. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 135–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laks, A. 1983, Diogène dApollonie. La dernière cosmologie présocratique. 2nd ed. Sankt Augustin: Academia Verlag, 2008, to which references are made.Google Scholar
Laks, A. 2017, ‘What is pre-Socratic ethics?’ In Cambridge Companion to Ancient Ethics, ed. Bobonich, C.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Laks, A. 2018, The Concept of Presocratic Philosophy: Its Origin, Development and Significance. Trans. from the French original: Most, G. W., Introduction a la ‘Philosophie Présocratique.’ Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2004.Google Scholar
Laks, A., and Most, G. 2016, Les Débuts de la Philosophie. Paris: Fayard (also published in English as Early Greek philosophy. 9 vols. Cambridge, MA: Loeb Classical Library, 2016).Google Scholar
Laks, A. 2021, ‘Schleiermacher et Héraclite.’ In Historiographies de la Philosophie Ancienne. Paris, Les Belles Lettres, 79–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lapidge, M. 1973, ‘Archai and stoicheia: A problem in Stoic cosmology.’ Phronesis 18: 240–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lapidge, M. 1978, ‘Stoic cosmology.’ In The Stoics, ed. Rist, J.. Berkeley: University of California Press, 161–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laurand, V. 2005, ‘La Sympathie universelle: Union et séparation.’ Revue de Métaphysique et de Morale 4: 517–535.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lefebvre, D. 2016. ‘Aristotle and the Hellenistic peripatos: From Theophrastus to Critolaus.’ In Brill’s Companion to the Reception of Aristotle in Antiquity, ed. Falcon, A.. Leiden: Brill, 13–34.Google Scholar
Lee, H. 1952, Aristotle: Meteorologica. Cambridge, MA: Loeb Classical Library.Google Scholar
Leibniz, G. W. 1714–1716, Monadologie – Streitschriften zwischen Leibniz und Clarke 1715–1716. In Die philosophischen Schriften von Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz, vols. 6–7, ed. Gerhardt, C. I.. Berlin: Weidmann, 1890.Google Scholar
Leibniz, G. W. 1710, Theodicy: Essays on the Goodness of God, the Freedom of Man, and the Origin of Evil. Translated by E. M. Huggard. La Salle: Open Court, 1985.Google Scholar
Lesher, 1992: Xenophanes of Colophon: Fragments. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewis, E., 1995, ‘The Stoics on identity and individuation.’ Phronesis 40.1: 89–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewis, C. T., and Short, C. 1900, A Latin Dictionary Founded on Andrews’ Edition of Freund’s Latin Dictionary, Revised, Enlarged, and in Great Part Rewritten. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Lewis, O. 2020, ‘De spiritu on heat and its roles in the formation, composition, and activities of animals.’ In Heat, Pneuma, and Soul in Ancient Philosophy and Science, ed. Bartoš, H. and Guthrie King, C.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 140–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liddell, H., Scott, R., Jones, H., and McKenzie, R. 1940, A Greek-English Lexicon. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Lloyd, A. C. 1970, ‘Activity and description in Aristotle and the stoa.’ Proceedings of the British Academy, 56: 227–240.Google Scholar
Loeb, P. S. 2018, ‘The colossal moment in Nietzsche’s gay science § 341.’ In The Nietzschean Mind, ed. Katsafanas, P.. London: Routledge, 428–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Loeb, P. S. 2021, ‘Nietzsche’s Heraclitean doctrine of the eternal recurrence of the same.’ Nietzsche-Studien 50: 70–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Long, A. A. 1971, ‘Language and thought in Stoicism.’ In Problems in Stoicism, ed. Long, A. A.. London: Athlone Press, 75–113.Google Scholar
Long, A. A: 1971, ‘Freedom and determinism in the Stoic theory of human action.’ In Problems in Stoicism, ed. Long, A. A.. London: Athlone Press, 172–199.Google Scholar
Long, A. A. 1975, ‘Heraclitus and Stoicism.’ Repr. in Long, A. A., Stoic Studies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999, 35–57, to which references are made.Google Scholar
Long, A. A. 1982, ‘Astrology: Arguments pro and contra.’ Rev. in Long, A. A., From Epicurus to Epictetus: Studies in Hellenistic and Roman Philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006: 128–153, to which references are made.Google Scholar
Long, A. A. 1984, ‘The Stoics on world-conflagration and everlasting recurrence.’ Rev. in Long, A. A., From Epicurus to Epictetus: Studies in Hellenistic and Roman Philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006: 256–282, to which references are made.Google Scholar
Long, A. A. 1986, Hellenistic Philosophy: Stoics, Epicureans, Sceptics (1st ed. 1974). London: Duckworth.Google Scholar
Long, A. A. 1999, ‘The scope of early Greek philosophy.’ In Cambridge Companion to Early Greek Philosophy, ed. Long, A. A.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Long, A. A. 2002, Epictetus: A Stoic and Socratic Guide to Life. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Long, A. A. 2010, ‘Cosmic craftmanship in Plato and Stoicism.’ In One Book, the Whole Universe: Plato’s Timaeus Today, ed. Mohr, R. and Sattler, B.. Las Vegas: Parmenides, 37–53.Google Scholar
Long, A. A., and Sedley, D. N. 1987, The Hellenistic Philosophers. 2 vols. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Mansfeld, J. 1971, The Pseudo-Hippocratic Tract Peri Hebdomadon and Greek Philosophy. Assen: Van Gorcum.Google Scholar
Mansfeld, J. 1978, ‘Zeno of Citium.’ Mnemosyne 31: 134–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mansfeld, J. 1979, ‘Providence and the destruction of the universe in early Stoic thought: With some remarks on the mysteries of philosophy.’ In Studies in Hellenistic Religions, ed. Vermaseren, M. J.. Leiden: Brill: 129–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mansfeld, J. 1981, ‘Bad world and demiurge: A “Gnostic” motif from Parmenides and Empedocles to Lucretius and Philo.’ In Studies in Gnosticism and Hellenistic Religions, ed. van den Broek, R. and Vermaseren, M. J.. Leiden: Brill, 261–314.Google Scholar
Mansfeld, J. 1982, ‘The Cleanthes fragment in Cicero, de Natura Deorum II 24.’ Repr. in Studies in Later Greek Philosophy and Gnosticism, ed. Mansfeld, J.. London: Variorum Reprints, 1989, 203–210.Google Scholar
Mansfeld, J. 1983, ‘Resurrection added: The Interpretatio Christiana of a Stoic Doctrine.’ Vigiliae Christianae 37: 218–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mansfeld, J. 1999, ‘Theology.’ In The Cambridge History of Hellenistic Philosophy, ed. Algra, K., Barnes, J., Mansfeld, J., and Schofield, M.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 452–478.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mansfeld, J. 2011, ‘Anaximander’s fragment: Another attempt.’ Phronesis 56: 1–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mansfeld, J., and Horst, P. van der 1974, An Alexandrian Platonist against Dualism: Alexander of Lycopolis’ Treatise ‘Critique of the doctrines of Manichaeus.’ Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
Mansfeld, J., and Runia, D. T. 2020, Aëtiana V: An Edition of the Reconstructed Text of the Placita with a Commentary and a Collection of Related Texts. Leiden: Brill.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marmodoro, A. 2017. Everything in Everything: Anaxagoras’s Metaphysics. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayor, J. B. 1880–1885. Cicero: De Natura Deorum Libri Tres. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
McKirahan, R. 2001, ‘Anaximander infinite worlds.’ In Essays in Ancient Greek Philosophy VI: Before Plato, ed. Preus, A.. Albany: State of New York University Press: 49–65.Google Scholar
McTaggart, J. M. E. 1908, ‘The unreality of time.’ Mind 17: 457–474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McTaggart, J. M. E. 1927, The Nature of Existence, vol. 2, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Meerwaldt, J. 1951. ‘Cleanthea I.’ Mnemosyne 4: 40–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Melamed, Y. Y., and Lin, M. 2023, ‘Principle of sufficient reason.’ In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, ed. Zalta, E. N. and Nodelman, U.. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2023/entries/sufficient-reason.Google Scholar
Mellor, D. H. 1998, Real Time II. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Menn, S., 1999, ‘The Stoic theory of categories.’ Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy, 17: 215–247.Google Scholar
Menn, S. 2006, ‘Physics and religion in Heraclitus.’ Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
Meyer, S. 2003, ‘Susanne Bobzien: Determinism and freedom in Stoic philosophy.’ The Philosophical Review 112: 405–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyer, S. 2009, ‘Chain of causes: What is Stoic fate?’ In God and Cosmos in Stoicism, ed. Salles, R.. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 71–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nietzsche, F. W. 1881, The Joyful Science, Idylls from Messina, Unpublished Fragments from the Period of the Joyful Science (Spring 1881–Summer 1882), ed. del Caro, A.. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2022.Google Scholar
Morocho Gayo, G., and Cerro Calderón, G. 1997, Dión de Prusa. Discursos. 4 vols. Madrid: Editorial Gredos.Google Scholar
Most, G. 2018, Hesiod. 2 vols. Cambridg, MA: Loeb Classical Library.Google Scholar
Mouraviev, S. 2005, ‘Zeno’s cosmology and the presumption of innocence: Interpretations and vindications.’ Phronesis 50: 232–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mouraviev, S. 2008, ‘Doctrina Heraclitea I et II: Âme du monde et embrasement universel.’ Phronesis 53: 315–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mouroutsou, G. 2020, ‘The plasticity of the present moment in Marcus Aurelius.’ Meditations.’ Ancient Philosophy 40: 411–434.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murray, M. J., Greenberg, S., and Feeney, T. 2016, ‘Leibniz on the problem of evil.’ In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, ed. Zalta, E. N.. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2016/entries/leibniz-evil.Google Scholar
Nawar, T. 2017, ‘The Stoics on identity, identification and peculiar qualities.’ Proceedings of the Boston Area Colloquium in Ancient Philosophy 32: 113–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nolan, D. 2006, ‘Stoic gunk.’ Phronesis 51: 162–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Norman, K. 1977, ‘Ex nihilo: The development of the doctrines of god and creation in early Christianity.’ Brigham Young University Studies 17: 291–318.Google Scholar
Nova, A. B. 2006, La apagoge en Aristóteles. PhD dissertation. Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México.Google Scholar
O’Brien, D. 1969, Empedocles’ Cosmic Cycle: A Reconstruction from the Fragments and Secondary Sources. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
O’Daly, G. 1981, ‘Augustine on the measurement of time: Some comparisons with Aristotelian and Stoic yexts.’ In Neoplatonism and Early Christian Thought, ed. Blumenthal, H. J. and Markus, R. A.. London: Variorum: 171–179.Google Scholar
Pakaluk, M. 2001, ‘Review of David Sedley (ed.), Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy, 17 (1999).’ Bryn Mawr Classical Review.Google Scholar
Pease, A. S. 1955–1968, M. Tulli Ciceronis De Natura Deorum. 3 vols. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Ponce, J. L. 2017, ‘La perspectiva cósmica en Marco Aurelio y su relación con el valor de las cosas.’ MPhil dissertation, UNAM.Google Scholar
Powers, N. 2012, ‘The Stoic argument for the rationality of the cosmos.’ Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 43: 245–269.Google Scholar
Primavesi, O. 2016, ‘Empedocles’ cosmic cycle and the Pythagorean tetractys.’ Rhizomata 4: 5–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rackham, H. 1933. Cicero. De Natura Deorum. Academica. Cambridge, MA: Loeb Classical Library.Google Scholar
Rashed, M. 2009, ‘Chrysippe et la division à l’infini (DL VII 150–151).’ Acta Antiqua Hungarica 49: 345–351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reesor, M. 1954, ‘The Stoic concept of quality.’ The American Journal of Philology 75: 40–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reesor, M. 1957, ‘The Stoic categories.’ The American Journal of Philology 78: 63–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reesor, M., 1972 ‘Poion and poiotes in Stoic philosophy.’ Phronesis 17: 279–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reinhardt, K. 1921, Poseidonios. München: C. H. Beck.Google Scholar
Reydams-Schils, G. 2006, ‘The Roman Stoics on divine thinking and human knowledge.’ In Eriugena, Berkeley, and the Idealist Tradition, ed. Gersh, S. and Moran, D.. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 81–94.Google Scholar
Reydams-Schils, G. 2020, Calcidius on Plato’s Timaeus: Greek Philosophy, Latin Reception, and Christian Contexts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rist, J. M. 1969, Stoic Philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Rist, J. M. 1971, ‘Categories and their uses.’ In Problems in Stoicism, ed. Long, A. A.. London: Athlone Press, 41–57.Google Scholar
Rodríguez, T., and Salles, R. 2025. ‘Borges, Plato and the unknown astrologer from El tiempo circular.’ In Jorge Luis Borges and Greek Philosophy: In Praise of the Ancients, ed. Stamatellos, G. and Martino, G..Google Scholar
Rowe, C. 1993, Plato: Phaedo. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Runia, D. T. 1986, Philo of Alexandria and the Timaeus of Plato. Leiden: Brill.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salles, R. 2003, ‘Determinism and recurrence in early Stoic thought.’ Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 24: 253–272.Google Scholar
Salles, R. 2005a, The Stoics on Determinism and Compatibilism. Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Salles, R. 2005b, ‘On the individuation of times and events in orthodox Stoicism.’ In Metaphysics, Soul and Ethics in Ancient Thought: Themes from the Work of Richard Sorabji, ed. Salles, R.. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 95–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salles, R. 2005c, ‘Ekpurosis and the goodness of god in Cleanthes.’ Phronesis 50: 56–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salles, R. 2009, ‘Chrysippus on conflagration and the indestructibility of the cosmos.’ In God and Cosmos in Stoicism, ed. Salles, R.. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 118–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salles, R. 2015a, ‘Two early Stoic theories of cosmogony.’ In Causation and Creation in Late Antiquity, ed. Marmodoro, A. and Prince, B.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 11–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salles, R. 2015b, ‘La doctrina de los cuatro elementos de Crisipo: Su lugar en la teoría estoica de la conflagración y sus orígenes en Anaxímenes.’ Azafea. Revista de la Facultad de Filosofía de la Universidad de Salamanca 17: 33–50.Google Scholar
Salles, R. 2015c, ‘¿Qué tan elementales son los cuatro elementos? Una lectura de Ario Dídimo fr. 21 Diels.’ Journal of Ancient Philosophy 9: 1–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salles, R. 2016: ‘The matter of combustion in the physics of Chrysippus.’ In Materia e causa materiale in Aristotele e oltre, ed. Viano, C.. Roma: Edizioni di Storia e Letteratura, 123–147.Google Scholar
Salles, R. 2017a: ‘Soul as harmony in Phaedo 85D–86E and Stoic pneumatic theory.’ In Rereading Ancient Philosophy: Old Chestnuts and Sacred Cows, ed. Harte, V. and Woolf, R.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 221–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salles, R. 2017b: ‘Bonté, rationalité et impuissance chez le démiurge Stoïcien.’ Chora. Revue d’Études Anciennes et Médievale 15: 93–101.Google Scholar
Salles, R. 2018a, ‘Why is the cosmos intelligent? (1) Stoic cosmology and Plato, Philebus 29a9–30a8.’ Rhizomata 6: 40–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salles, R. 2018b, ‘Two classic problems in the Stoic theory of time.’ Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy 55: 133–183.Google Scholar
Salles, R. 2020: ‘Stoic and Presocratic materialists.’ In The Routledge Handbook of Hellenistic Philosophy, ed. Arenson, K.. New York and London: Routledge, 82–93.Google Scholar
Salles, R. 2021a, ‘The Stoic cosmic soul and the theory of seminal principles.’ In The World Soul: The History of a Concept, ed. Wilberding, J.. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 44–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salles, R. 2021b, ‘Why is the cosmos intelligent? (2) Stoic cosmology and Plato, Timaeus 30a2–c1.’ In Biology and Cosmology in Ancient Philosophy: From Thales to Avicenna, ed. Salles, R.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 172–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salles, R. 2025a, ‘Chrysippus on cosmogony and conflagration.’ In The Philosophy of Chrysippus, ed. Ierodiakonou, K. and Crivelli, P.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press (forthcoming).Google Scholar
Salles, R. 2025b, ‘The Stoic cosmos, from end to beginning.’ In The Oxford Handbook of Hellenistic Philosophy, ed. Klein, J. and Powers, N.. Oxford: Oxford University Press (forthcoming).Google Scholar
Salles, R. 2025c, ‘Dio Chrysostom Or. 36.55 and the Stoic conflagration.’ Mnemosyne (forthcoming).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salles, R., and Molina, J. 2020, Alejandro de Afrodia, De la Mixtura y el Crecimiento. Ciudad de México: Bibliotheca Scriptorum Graecorum et Romanorum Mexicana – Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México.Google Scholar
Sandbach, F. H. 1985, Aristotle and the Stoics. Cambridge: Cambridge Philological Society.Google Scholar
Sandbach, F. H. 1989, The Stoics. Bristol: Bristol University Press.Google Scholar
Savitt, S. F. 2000, ‘A limited defence of passage.’ American Philosophical Quarterly 38: 261–270.Google Scholar
Scade, P. 2013, ‘Plato and the Stoics on limits, parts and wholes.’ In Plato and the Stoics, ed. Long, A. G.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Schofield, M. 1983, ‘The syllogisms of Zeno of Citium.’ Phronesis 28: 31–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schofield, M., 1988, ‘The retrenchable present.’ In Matter and Metaphysics, ed. Barnes, J. and Mignucci, M.. Naples: Bibliopolis: 330–374.Google Scholar
Schleiermacher, F. 1808. ‘Heraklit der Dunkle von Ephesos.’ Museum der Altertumswissenschaft 1: 313–533.Google Scholar
Schmitt, F. S. 1946, Anselmi Opera Omnia, vol. 1. Edinburgh: Thomas Nelson and Sons.Google Scholar
Sedley, D. 1982, ‘The Stoic criterion of identity.’ Phronesis 27: 255–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sedley, D. 1998, Lucretius and the Transformation of Greek Wisdom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sedley, D. 2002, ‘The origins of Stoic god.’ In Traditions of theology: Studies in Hellenistic Theology, Its Background and Aftermath, ed. Frede, D. and Laks, A.. Leiden: Brill, 41–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sedley, D. 2003, ‘The school from Zeno to Arius Didymus.’ In The Cambridge Companion to the Stoics, ed. Inwood, B.. Cambridge: Cambridge University, 7–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sedley, D. 2004, ‘On generation and corruption I.2.’ In Aristotle: On Generation and Corruption, Book I, ed. de Haas, F. and Mansfeld, J.. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 65–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sedley, D. N. 2007, Creationism and Its Critics in Antiquity. Berkeley: University of California Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sedley, D. 2011, ‘Matter in Hellenistic philosophy.’ In Materia, ed. Giovannozzi, D. and Veneziani, M.. Florence: L. S. Olschki, 53–66.Google Scholar
Sedley, D. 2012, ‘Marcus Aurelius on physics.’ In A Companion to Marcus Aurelius, ed. van Ackeren, M.. Chichester-Malden: Wiley-Blackwell, 396–407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sedley, D. 2018, ‘Stoics and their critics on diachronic identity.’ Rhizomata 6: 24–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sedley, D. 2019, ‘Self-sufficiency as a divine attribute in Greek philosophy.’ In Ecology and Theology in the Ancient World: Cross-disciplinary Perspectives, ed. Hunt, A. and Marlow, H. F.. London: Bloomsbury, 41–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sellars, J. 2014, ‘Stoic fate in Justus Lipsius’s De Constantia and Physiologia Stoicorum.’ Journal of the History of Philosophy 52: 653–674.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sharples, R. W. 1981, ‘Necessity in the stoic doctrine of fate.’ Symbolae Osloenses 56: 81–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sharples, R. W. 1983a, ‘Nemesius of Emesa and some theories of divine providence.’ Vigiliae Christianae 37: 141–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sharples, R. W. 1983b, Alexander of Aphrodisias: On Fate. London: Duckworth.Google Scholar
Sharples, R. W. 2003, ‘Threefold providence: The history and background of a Stoic doctrine.’ In Ancient approaches to Plato’s Timaeus, ed. Sharples, R. W. and Sheppard, A.. London: Institute of Classical Studies, 101–127.Google Scholar
Sharples, R. W. 2006, ‘Ricardo Salles: The Stoics on Determinism and Compatibilism.’ Mind 115: 1171–1174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sharples, R. W., and van der Eijk, P. 2008, Nemesius on the Nature of Man. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sider, D., and McVaugh, M. 1979, ‘Galen on tremor, palpitation, spasm, and rigor.’ Transactions and Studies of the College of Physicians of Philadelphia 1: 183–210.Google ScholarPubMed
Sider, T. 2001, Four–dimensionalism: An Ontology of Persistence and Time. Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sims, L. 2009, ‘Ethnographic correlates of one type of soli-lunar alignment: The doubling of winter solstice sunset with the southern (minor or major) standstill moonsets.’ In Time and Astronomy in Past Cultures, ed. Sołtysiak, A.. New Jersey: Gorgias Press, 117–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, Q. 1993, Language and Time. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Solmsen, F. 1961, Cleanthes or Posidonius? The Basis of Stoic Physics. Amsterdam: Noord-Hollandsche Uitg. Mij.Google Scholar
Sorabji, R. 1983, Time, Creation and the Continuum: Theories in Antiquity and the Early Middle Ages. London: Duckworth.Google Scholar
Sorabji, R. 1988, Matter, Space, and Motion: Theories in Antiquity and Their Sequel. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Sorabji, R. 2005, The Philosophy of the Commentators, 200–600 AD: A Sourcebook. 3 vols. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Steel, C. 2001, ‘The moral purpose of the human body. A reading of Timaeus 69–72.’ Phronesis 46: 105–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taub, L. 2003, Ancient Meteorology. Oxford: Routledge.Google Scholar
Taylor, A. 1928, A Commentary on Plato’s Timaeus. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Thom, A. 1971, Megalithic Lunar Observatories. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Tieleman, T. 1991, ‘Diogenes of Babylon and Stoic embryology.’ Mnemosyne, 44: 106–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tieleman, T. 2007, ‘Panaetius’ place in the history of stoicism.’ In Pyrrhonists, Patricians, Platonizers: Hellenistic Philosophy in the Period 155–86 BC, ed. Ioppolo, A. M. and Sedley, D.. Naples: Bibliopolis, 103–142.Google Scholar
Todd, R., 1976, Alexander of Aphrodisias on Stoic Physics: A Study of the De mixtione with Preliminary Essays, Text, Translation and Commentary. Leiden: Brill.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vassallo, C. 2023, ‘Measuring the end: Heraclitus and Diogenes of Babylon on the great tear and ekpyrosis.’ Apeiron 56: 643–671.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vázquez, D. 2022, ‘Introduction.’ In Time and Cosmology in Plato and the Platonic Tradition, ed. Vázquez, D. and Ross, A.. Leiden: Brill, 1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vimercati, E. 2021, ‘Cardiology and cosmology in post-Chrysippean Stoicism.’ In Biology and Cosmology in Ancient Philosophy: From Thales to Avicenna, ed. Salles, R.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 190–207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Visser, S., and Williams, T. 2009, Anselm. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Waerden, B. L. van der, 1952 ‘Das grosse Jahr und die ewige Wiederkehr.’ Hermes 80: 129–157.Google Scholar
Wawrykow, , ‘Aquinas and Bonaventure on creation.’ In Creation Ex Nihilo: Origins, Development, Contemporary Challenges, ed. by Anderson, G. A. and Bockmuehl, M., South Bend: University of Notre Dame Press, 173–193.Google Scholar
White, S. A. 2020, Diogenes Laertius: Lives of Eminent Philosophers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Williams, G. D., 2012, The Cosmic Viewpoint: A Study of Seneca’s Natural Questions. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, M. 2013, Structure and Method in Aristotle’s Meteorologica. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Winston, D. 1971, ‘The Book of Wisdom’s theory of cosmogony.’ History of Religions 11: 185–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wynne, J. 2012, ‘God’s indifferents: Why Cicero’s Stoic Jupiter made the world.’ Apeiron 45: 354–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wynne, J. P. F. 2019, Cicero on the Philosophy of Religion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zeller, E. 1856, Die Philosophie der Griechen 1.2.2.6 (repr. in Leipzig: Riesland, 1920).Google Scholar

Accessibility standard: Unknown

Accessibility compliance for the PDF of this book is currently unknown and may be updated in the future.

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge-org.demo.remotlog.com is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

  • Works Cited
  • Ricardo Salles, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
  • Book: The Stoic Cosmos
  • Online publication: 08 July 2025
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009422819.012
Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

  • Works Cited
  • Ricardo Salles, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
  • Book: The Stoic Cosmos
  • Online publication: 08 July 2025
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009422819.012
Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

  • Works Cited
  • Ricardo Salles, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
  • Book: The Stoic Cosmos
  • Online publication: 08 July 2025
  • Chapter DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009422819.012
Available formats
×