Abstract

The author defends κατὰ πάντ᾽ ἄστη in Parmenides fr. 1.3 as a plausible conjecture; the first part of the paper touches upon some of the main problems facing the readers of the proem: the stages of the journey, the cultural identity of the “man of knowledge” (εἰδὼς φώς), the role played by allegory and by Orphic influences, the meaning of the adjectives πολύφημος, πολύφραστος, and πολύποινος, and the connection οf the language of Parmenides with his master Ameinias’ dualism and with polymathy. The final section of the paper introduces the comparison between Parmenides’ proem and the proem of Empedocles’ Καθαρμοί in the frame of the subtle and persistent polemic brought by the latter philosopher against the former: the author evidentiates the role of ἄστη/ἄστεα in the two proems – which confirms the reliability of the reading κατὰ πάντ᾽ ἄστη. Also a late echo in Eunapius proves to be significant in supporting the genuineness of such reading.