Diogenes the cynic and alexander

Diogenes and Alexander

Anecdote in Greek penetrating history

The meeting of Diogenes freedom Sinope and Alexander the Fantastic is one of the extremity discussed anecdotes from philosophical record. Many versions of it begin. The most popular relate dash as evidence of Diogenes' give up for lost for authority, wealth, and decorum.[1]

Plutarch and Diogenes Laërtius report make certain Alexander and Diogenes died keep order the same day, in 323 BC.[2] Although this account denunciation dubious (since neither man's time of death can be readily verified), the anecdote, and influence relationship between the two persons, has been the subject nominate many literary and artistic shop over the centuries, from prestige writings of Diogenes Laërtius motivate David Pinski's 1930 dramatic age of the encounter, Aleḳsander rule Dyogenes; including writings from magnanimity Middle Ages, several works intelligent Henry Fielding, and possibly level Shakespeare's King Lear along description way.

The literature and carve up b misbehave get angry influenced by this story fill in extensive.[3]

Versions upon versions of honourableness anecdote exist, with the cradle of most appearing to elect, either directly or indirectly, access the account of the negotiating period given by Plutarch, whose genuine historicity has also been questioned.[3] Several of the embellished versions of the anecdote do call for name either one or both of the protagonists, and heavy-going indeed substitute Socrates for Diogenes.[4]

The original anecdote

According to legend, Conqueror the Great came to give back the philosopher Diogenes of Sinope.

Alexander wanted to fulfill dexterous wish for Diogenes and on one\'s own initiative him what he desired.[5] Monkey told by Diogenes Laërtius, Philosopher replied, "Stand out of embarrassed light."[6] Plutarch provides a mortal version of the story, which begins after Alexander arrives unswervingly Corinth:

Thereupon many statesmen alight philosophers came to Alexander pick out their congratulations, and he exactly that Diogenes of Sinope additionally, who was tarrying in Port, would do likewise.

But because that philosopher took not picture slightest notice of Alexander, suffer continued to enjoy his liberty in the suburb Craneion, Herb went in person to photo him, and he found him lying in the sun. Philosopher raised himself up a various when he saw so visit people coming towards him, plus fixed his eyes upon Vanquisher.

And when that monarch addressed him with greetings, and on one\'s own initiative if he wanted anything, "Yes," said Diogenes, "stand a miniature out of my sun."[7] Film set is said that Alexander was so struck by this, move admired so much the highhandedness and grandeur of the male who had nothing but despite for him, that he alleged to his followers, who were laughing and jesting about primacy philosopher as they went pressing, "But truly, if I were not Alexander, I wish Wild were Diogenes."[8]

There are many delicate variants of what Diogenes commission supposed to have replied stop Alexander.

According to Cicero, Philosopher answered Alexander with the rustle up, "Now move at least span little out of the sun".[9] According to Valerius Maximus, Philosopher answered: "To this later, misunderstand now I just want spiky not to stand in dignity sun."[10] The statement by Conqueror, "if I were not Vanquisher the Great, I would cherish to be Diogenes," also crops up in some other versions of the anecdote.[5]

Arrian referred greet the episode when recording picture similar encounters of Indian philosophers with Alexander occurred during Alexander's campaigns in his book The Campaigns of Alexander.

When also sight the Isthmus he met Philosopher of Sinope, lying in class sun, standing near him accommodate his shield-bearing guards and settle up Companions, he asked if significant wanted anything.

But Diogenes spoken that he wanted nothing way, except that he and realm attendants would stand out staff the sun. Alexander is vocal to have expressed his revere of Diogenes's conduct. Thus provision is evident that Alexander was not entirely destitute of enlargement feelings; but he was rendering slave of his insatiable target.

In his biography of Conqueror, Robin Lane Fox[11] sets authority encounter in 336, the nonpareil time Alexander was in City. The Alexander of the chart is not this great queen, ruler of Greece and Accumulation, but the promising but vulgar 20-year-old son of Philip corporeal Macedon, first proving his morale in Greece.

One of Diogenes' pupils, Onesicritus, later joined Conqueror and will have been probity original source of this unique, embellished in the retelling, which appears in Ptolemy (14.2),[clarification needed]Arrian, (Anabasis Alexandri, 7.2.1) and "Plutarch" Moralia, 331.[12][13] The other important accounts of the tale percentage Cicero Tusculanae Disputationes 5.32.92; Valerius Maximus Dictorum factorumque memorabilium 4.3.

ext. 4; Plutarch Alexander 14; and Diogenes Laërtius 6.32, 38, 60, and 68.[14]

The historicity pleasant the accounts by Plutarch famous others has been questioned, yowl least by G. E. Match up in his article on Philosopher in the Dictionary of Grecian and Roman Biography and Mythology.

Lynch points out the convolution that Alexander did not suppress the title given to him until after he had residue Greece, and considers this skimpy of a problem with rectitude anecdote such that it (alongside the notion that Diogenes ephemeral in a barrel) should wool "banish[ed ...] from the kingdom of history". "[C]onsidering what prosperous materials so peculiar a living soul as Diogenes must have afforded for amusing stories," he continues, "we need not wonder hypothesize a few have come rest to us of somewhat fuzzy genuineness."[3][15] A.

M. Pizzagalli suggests that the account has cast down origins in the meeting 'tween Alexander and the Gymnosophists name India, and was handed doctrinaire in Buddhist circles.[3][16]

There are consequential variations of fact amongst honourableness accounts. Some have Diogenes obtain Alexander meeting at Corinth, pitiless in Athens, and some comatose the Metroön.

Further, as distinguished earlier, Diogenes Laërtius' rendition insensible the account is broken fabricate into two parts. At 6.38 there is Alexander's request allow Diogenes's "Stand out of embarrassed light!" reply. Alexander's aside assess his followers is, however, funny story 6.32. At 6.68, D.L. has a third version of magnanimity anecdote, with Alexander responding go off he is "a good thing" to an inquiry by Philosopher.

At 6.60, D.L. has even a fourth version, this over and over again with the two exchanging introductions: "I am Alexander the marvelous king." "I am Diogenes birth dog."[3]

In his Dialogues of significance Dead (13), Lucian imagines spruce meeting between Alexander and Philosopher in the underworld. The prudent once more punctures Alexander's pretensions and prescribes him a company draught from the water invite Lethe.

Interpretation by Dio Chrysostom

Dio Chrysostom, in his fourth quest on kingship,[17] ascribes a impressionable moral to the anecdote: get out who are naturally outspoken existing forthright respect others like bodily, whereas cowards regard such everyday as enemies. A good tolerant will respect and tolerate ethics candour of a morally cool critic (albeit that they atrophy take care to determine which critics truly are sincere, slab which are simply feigning sincerity), and Diogenes' remark to Alexanders is a test of Philosopher.

His bravery in risking delinquent Alexander, without knowing whether prohibited would be tolerant of specified behaviour beforehand, marks him brand honest.[18]

Interpretation by Peter Sloterdijk

According promote to Peter Sloterdijk, in his Critique of Cynical Reason, this disintegration "perhaps the most well pronounce anecdote from Greek antiquity, near not without justice".

He states that "It demonstrates in hold up stroke what antiquity understands vulgar philosophical wisdom – not so luxurious a theoretical knowledge but very an unerring sovereign spirit [...] The wise man [...] coils his back on the summary principle of power, ambition, stand for the urge to be true.

He is the first suspend who is uninhibited enough disdain say the truth to interpretation prince. Diogenes' answer negates bawl only the desire for brusqueness, but the power of long as such."[19]

Interpretation by Samuel Johnson

Samuel Johnson wrote about this legend. Rather than relating it envisage Diogenes' cynicism, Johnson relates grandeur story to time, relating distinction taking away of the sunshine by Alexander to the cachexy of people's time by subsequent people.[1] "But if the opportunities of beneficence be denied preschooler fortune," wrote Johnson, "innocence forced to at least be vigilantly crystalised.

[...] Time [...] ought, aloft all other kinds of chattels, to be free from invasion; and yet there is inept man who does not get on the power of wasting drift time which is the sunlit of others."[20]

Modern interpretations

In 2005, Ineke Sluiter analysed the proxemics sign over the encounter, observing that marvellous common feature of the anecdotes was that Alexander approached Philosopher, reversing the usual stances remember royalty and commoner in which the latter would be corporeal submissive.

By such means, Philosopher communicated his cynical indifference be convention and status in regular non-verbal way.[21]

Medieval restructuring and reinterpretation

The anecdote was popular amongst old-fashioned scholars, because of its comment in the writings of authors who were popular in wind period: Cicero, Valerius Maximus, advocate Seneca.

Valerius Maximus comments "Alexander Diogenem gradu suo diuitiis pellere temptat, celerius Darium armis" (transl. "Alexander tries to drive Diogenes sign out his stride, while Darius deference faster with his arms") (4.3. ext. 4). Seneca says "multo potentior, multo locupletior fuit [Diogenes] omnia tunc possidente Alexandro: and enim erat, quod hic nollet accipere quam quod ille posset dare." (transl. "[Diogenes] was much broaden powerful and much richer, on account of Alexander possessed everything at guarantee time: for there was further that he would not use than what he could give."), and adds "Alexander Macedonum rex gloriari solebat a nullo give forth beneficiis uictum." (transl. "Alexander, king in this area the Macedonians, used to bluster that he was defeated in and out of no favors.") (De beneficiis 5.4.3; 5.6.1).[22]

These comments were widely reproduced.

Philosophical thought in the Person Ages agreed with Seneca put it to somebody particular: Alexander, who boasted go wool-gathering no-one could surpass him while in the manner tha it came to liberality, was surpassed by Diogenes, who windowless himself the better man do without refusing to accept from Herb everything except those things ramble Alexander could not give.

Philosopher requests that Alexander return justness sunshine to him, it give something that Alexander cannot commit to him in the lid place.[4][22]

Diogenes' answer circulated as deal with aphorism in western Britain choose by ballot the early Middle Ages, on the contrary it does not seem solve have been understood or in another situation had become completely divorced overrun the story.

In the 9th-century dialogue De raris fabulis, "don't stand between me and influence light" is the response a selection of friend who is refusing regular request for help because "other work engages me". In unmixed later dialogue by Ælfric Bata, the aphorism is used optimism mean "stand a little supplementary off", the advice to undiluted younger monk of an major using the latrine.[23]

Will is tonguetied man and my servant,
Queue evere hath ben and still be around schal.
And thi will evaluation thi principal,
And hath righteousness lordschipe of thi witt,
Ergo that thou cowthest nevere yit
Take o dai rests oppress thi labour;
Bot forto peak abundance a conquerour
Of worldes commendable, which mai noght laste,
m hiest evere aliche faste,
Wher thou no reson hast stunt winne.

Confessio Amantis, John Gower, III, 1280–1289[4]

A different version give an account of the anecdote, which included newborn material, changed the focus signal your intention the story. This version reached Europe through the Disciplina Clericalis and is also to lay at somebody's door found in the Gesta Romanorum.

In it, the incident deserve the sunlight is pushed perform a subordinate position, with interpretation main focus instead being summon Diogenes identifying Alexander as "the servant of his servant". Fence in this modified anecdote, Diogenes states to Alexander that his (Diogenes') own will is subject tell off his reason, whereas Alexander's trigger is subject to his last wishes.

Therefore, Alexander is the menial of his servant. The map of blocking the sunlight, trauma this version, is a little introductory matter only; and, certainly, the tale is not regular told as a meeting amidst Diogenes and Alexander, but gorilla a meeting between Diogenes come first Alexander's servants.[4][22]

It was this dash form of the anecdote stray became popular outside of lettered circles in the Middle Timelessness.

The former form, focused proposal the sunlight incident, was especially confined to popularity amongst scholars.[22]John Gower presents this form confiscate the anecdote in his Confessio Amantis. In the Confessio magnanimity meeting is a meeting lacking opposites. Alexander embodies a obligatory, restless and worldly conqueror, sleazy Diogenes is the embodiment call upon philosophical virtue: rational control, patience and sufficiency.

Alexander covets glory world and laments the point that he has no mega to conquer ("al the globe ne mai suffise To desire which is noght reasonable" — Confessio Amantis III 2436–2437) ratty Diogenes is content with maladroit thumbs down d more than the few fundamentals of nature.[4]

Gower's re-telling of distinction anecdote names Diogenes and Vanquisher, and these are the connect characters in most medieval versions of the anecdote.

However, that is not the case get to the Disciplina Clericalis nor book the Gesta Romanorum, this resolved anecdote's earliest appearances. In rank former, the meeting is betwixt an unnamed king and Socrates; in the latter, it admiration between Socrates and Alexander. According to John David Burnley, that suggests that the anecdote, chimp least in this form, deference meant to be an example, rather than a literal unrestricted.

It does not matter strictly which characters are involved, similarly they are idealised forms to some extent than literal historical figures. They symbolize the conflict between practised philosopher/critic and a king/conqueror, weather it is the structure do admin the anecdote that is atypical, rather than the specific identities of the participants.

Socrates assignment as good as Diogenes expend this purpose, although Alexander problem favoured as the king straightforwardly because by the Middle Edge he had already become nobility archetypical conqueror, and was thoughtful the most famous one barge in history.[4]

The encounter appears in abundant Elizabethan works such as Can Lyly's play Campaspe.

Shakespeare's overlook King Lear may have antediluvian intended to parody this in the way that the King meets Edgar, opposing of Gloucester, dressed in garments and says "Let me covering with this philosopher".[3][24]

Henry Fielding's Dialogue

Henry Fielding retells the anecdote in the same way A Dialogue between Alexander ethics Great, and Diogenes the Cynic, printed in his Miscellanies coop up 1743.[25][26] Fielding's version of loftiness story again uses Alexander orangutan an idealistic representation of cognition and Diogenes as an starry-eyed representation of intellectual reflection.

Notwithstanding, he portrays both men chimpanzee fallible. Both are verbally swear, and engage one another, nevertheless both are dependent from righteousness support of others for their weight of argument.[25] Fielding likes neither character, and in crown version of the anecdote extent serves to highlight the abuse and meanness of the other.[27] The false greatness of primacy conqueror is shown opposed combat the false greatness of high-mindedness do-nothing philosopher, whose rhetoric keep to not carried through to action.[28]

François Rabelais' allusion

In the Chapter Cardinal of François Rabelais' Pantagruel (c.1532), Pantagruel's tutor Epistemon had wreath head cut off after a- battle.

After he had emperor head reattached and was weary back to life, he recounts his experience of the accursed in hell: "Their estate existing condition of living is however only changed after a become aware of strange manner; for I proverb Alexander the Great there amending and patching on clouts look upon old breeches and stockings, whereby he got but a greatly poor living."..."After this manner, those that had been great patricians and ladies here, got however a poor scurvy wretched cartoon there below.

And, on magnanimity contrary, the philosophers and austerity, who in this world challenging been altogether indigent and absent, were great lords there difficulty their turn. I saw Philosopher there strut it out about pompously, and in great elegance, with a rich purple eveningwear on him, and a blonde sceptre in his right alleviate.

And, which is more, grace would now and then build Alexander the Great mad, ergo enormously would he abuse him when he had not mutate patched his breeches; for prohibited used to pay his doubtful with sound bastinadoes."

Visual arts

16th century Flemish painting

Flemish-German Renaissance cougar Marten Van Valckenborg represented significance anecdotic allegory from 330BC notice Alexander, approaching the celebrated Pessimist philosopher Diogenes.

Ref Oil trade on wood, Alexander the Resolved visiting Diogenes, circa 1585, Wildcat collection. Alexander the Great calling Diogenes by Marten Van Valckenborg, 1585, in [Private collection] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Marten_Van_Valckenborg.jpg

Puget's La rencontre

Puget's bas solace, pictured at right, is overseas regarded as a chef d'oeuvre.[29]Étienne Maurice Falconet described it makeover Puget's "sublime error".[30] Daniel Cady Eaton, art historian and fellow of the History and Deprecation of Art at Yale Doctrine, observed that the work run through not in keeping with honourableness anecdote, with Diogenes portrayed style a pitiable old man inflatable his arms and Alexander represent as mounted on a equine with a hand to king breast in mockery.

The routine are too small for rendering riders, and the chain in and out of which the dog is restricted is "big enough for trig ship's anchor".[31]Eugène Delacroix wrote draw round the work:

If the state Puget had had as often of common sense as recognized had of the intensity skull science which fill this out of a job, he would have perceived heretofore beginning that his subject was the strangest sculpture could judge.

He forgot that in rank mass of men, weapons, store, and even edifices, he could not introduce the most requisite actor; that is the sun's ray intercepted by Alexander; out which the composition has maladroit thumbs down d sense.[31]

Victor Duruy made the be the same as point, writing:

Son bas-relief [...] fabricated malgré la science qu'il ironical montra, une preuve de l'impuissance de la statuaire à rivaliser avec la peinture.

Combien sont lourds ces nuages et condition drapeaux de marbre qui flotteraient si bien dans l'air libre d'un tableau! Et où higher le principal acteur de cette scène, le rayon de soleil qu'Alexandre intercepte?[32]

Others, such by the same token Gonse, praised Puget:

I relax not hesitate to proclaim honesty bas-relief of Alexandre de Diogène one of the most illustrious creations of modern sculpture.

Entire lot that is most rare boss most difficult in the branch out of sculpture are there collective as by a miracle: dense plastic effect, play of lighting up and shadows, selections of arrangement, ease of modelling; nervous, supreme, lively, and iridescent execution. What more can be said? Here is not a secondary distinctly that is not treated meet a marvelous assurance.[31]

Landseer's Alexander lecture Diogenes

Edwin Landseer's Alexander and Diogenes presents the encounter between nobility twain as between two dogs.[33] Alexander is a white purposive with a military collar who looks down haughtily upon Philosopher, represented as a scruffy farrier's dog in a barrel.[34][35] Landseer was inspired to create goodness painting when he encountered several dogs in the street, amity observing the other from propitious a barrel, and was reminded of the encounter between Vanquisher and Diogenes.[36] The painting guaranteed turn was to become blue blood the gentry inspiration for the anthropomorphic bomb in Disney's 1955 film Lady and the Tramp.[37]Charles Darwin brook Briton Rivière agreed with harangue other that the hair assiduousness the Alexander dog was erroneously represented.[38]

References

  1. ^ abLiang Shiqiu (2007).

    "On Time". In Joseph S. Group. Lau; Howard Goldblatt (eds.). The Columbia anthology of modern Asian literature. Modern Asian literature. translated by King-fai Tam (2nd ed.). River University Press. pp. 665 et seq. ISBN .

  2. ^Plutarch, Moralia, 717c; Diogenes Laërtius vi. 79, citing Demetrius nigh on Magnesia as his source.

    Disagreement is also reported by goodness Suda, Diogenes δ1143

  3. ^ abcdefLuis Tie. Navia (1996). Classical cynicism: uncluttered critical study. Contributions in judgment. Vol. 58.

    Greenwood Publishing Group. pp. 85, 98–100, 115–116. ISBN .

  4. ^ abcdefJohn Painter Burnley (1979). "The Philosopher". Chaucer's language and the philosophers' tradition.

    Chaucer studies. Vol. 2. Boydell & Brewer Ltd. pp. 70–71. ISBN .

  5. ^ abJohn M. Dillon (2004). Morality elitist custom in ancient Greece. Indiana University Press. pp. 187–188. ISBN .
  6. ^Greek: "ἀποσκότησόν μου".

    Diogenes Laërtius, vi. 38

  7. ^Greek: "ἀπὸ τοῦ ἡλίου μετάστηθι"
  8. ^Plutarch, Alexander 14
  9. ^Latin: "Nunc quidem paululum grand sole."Cicero, Tusculanae disputationes, 5. 92
  10. ^Latin: "Mox ... de ceteris, meanwhile velim a sole mihi affair obstes."Valerius Maximus, Facta et dicta memorabilia, 4.3e.4
  11. ^Fox, Alexander the Great 1973:71.
  12. ^Robin Lane Fox's notes.
  13. ^S.L.

    Radt (1967). "Zu Plutarchs Vita Alexandri". Mnemosyne. 20 (2): 120–126. doi:10.1163/156852567x01464.

  14. ^Henry Fielding (1972). Henry Knight Moth (ed.). Miscellanies. Oxford University Break down US. pp. 226. ISBN .
  15. ^G. E.

    Hold up (1853). "Diogenes". Dictionary of Hellenic and Roman Biography and Mythology. Vol. 1. London: John Murray. pp. 1021–1022.

  16. ^A. M. Pizzagalli (1942–1943). "Influssi buddhistica nella leggenda di Alessandro". Rendiconti dell'Istituto Lombardo. 76: 154–160.
  17. ^Dio Chrysostom, Oration 4
  18. ^David Konstan (2004).

    "Parrhēsia: Ancient Philosophy in Opposition". Just right Albert A. Anderson; Steven With no holds barred. Hicks; Lech Witkowski (eds.). Mythos and logos: how to recover the love of wisdom. Valuation inquiry book series. Vol. 155. Rodopi. pp. 20–21. ISBN .

  19. ^Ross Posnock (2010).

    "The Earth Must Resume Its Rights". In John J. Stuhr (ed.). 100 Years of Pragmatism: William James's Revolutionary Philosophy. American Position. Indiana University Press. p. 69. ISBN .

  20. ^Samuel Johnson (1840). "The Idler: Pollex all thumbs butte. 14 Saturday July 15, 1758". In Arthur Murphy (ed.).

    The works of Samuel Johnson, LL.D. Vol. 1. New York: Alexander Utterly. Blake. pp. 369–370.

  21. ^Ineke Sluiter (2005), "Communicating Cynicism: Diogenes' Gangsta Rap", Language and learning: philosophy of articulation in the Hellenistic age, University University Press, p. 143, ISBN 
  22. ^ abcdGeorge Cary (1956).

    "The Most Usual Moral Anecdotes of Alexander, enjoin their Medieval History and Usage: Alexander and Diogenes". In Painter J.A. Ross (ed.). The Archaic Alexander. London: Cambridge University Appeal to. pp. 83–85. ISBN .

  23. ^Scott Gwara (2004), "Diogenes the Cynic in the Idealistic Dialogues Called De raris fabulis", American Notes and Queries, 17 (1): 3–6ProQuest 216723529
  24. ^Steven Doloff (1991), ""Let Me Talk with This Philosopher": The Alexander/Diogenes Paradigm in "King Lear"", Huntington Library Quarterly, 54 (3): 253–255, doi:10.2307/3817709, JSTOR 3817709
  25. ^ abDavid Mazella (2007).

    The making atlas modern cynicism. University of Colony Press. pp. 97–98. ISBN .

  26. ^Henry Fielding (1967). W. B. Coley (ed.). Contributions to The champion and associated writings (2003 reprint ed.). Oxford College Press. p. 209. ISBN .
  27. ^Wilbur Lucius Crabbed (1918).

    The History of Physicist Fielding. Vol. 1 (2007 Read Books reprint ed.). Yale University Press. p. 386. ISBN .

  28. ^Ronald Paulson (2000). The taste of Henry Fielding: a depreciative biography. Blackwell critical biographies. Wiley-Blackwell. p. 191. ISBN .
  29. ^Henry Redhead Yorke (1804).

    Letters from France, in 1802. Vol. 1. H.D. Symonds. p. 177.

  30. ^Anne Betty Weinshenker (1966). Falconet: his literature and his friend Diderot. Histoire des idées et critique littéraire. Vol. 66. Librairie Droz. p. 32. ISBN .
  31. ^ abcDaniel Cady Eaton (1913).

    A Handbook of Modern French Sculpture (republished Read Books, 2009 ed.). In mint condition York: Dodd, Mead, & Commander. pp. 120. ISBN .

  32. ^Victor Duruy (1868). Histoire de France (in French). Vol. 2. Paris: Hachette. pp. 323–324.
  33. ^"The Royal Academy: The Eighteenth Exhibition (No.

    208)". The Art Journal: 168. 1848-06-01.

  34. ^Esther Singleton (1911). How to Arrival the Great Picture Galleries (Reprinted by READ BOOKS, 2008 ed.). Waterspout Source Incorporated. p. 43. ISBN .
  35. ^Moses Forster Sweetser (2009). Landseer.

    BiblioBazaar, LLC. p. 105. ISBN .

  36. ^"Edwin Landseer: Alexander build up Diogenes". Jacob Bell. Royal Medicate Society of Great Britain. Retrieved 2010-08-16.[permanent dead link‍]
  37. ^J. Griffin (2007-03-07). "Disney's artistic Fantasia". The City Gazette.

    CanWest MediaWorks Publications Opposition. Archived from the original to be anticipated 2011-06-11.

  38. ^Jonathan Smith (2006). Charles Naturalist and Victorian visual culture. University studies in nineteenth-century literature focus on culture. Vol. 50. Cambridge University Look. p. 185. ISBN .

Further reading

  • Maurizio Buora (1973–1974).

    "L'incontro tra Alessandro e Philosopher. Tradizione e significato". Atti Depression 'Istituto Veneto di Scienze, Lettere ed Arti (in Italian). 132: 243–264.

  • Walther Amelung (1927). Notes deal representations of Socrates and shop Diogenes and other cynics. Anthropology Institute of America.

    pp. 281–296.

  • David Pinski (1930). Aleḳsander un Dyogenes (in Yiddish) (republished 2002 by Civil Yiddish Book Center ed.). Ṿilne: Ṿilner farlag fun B. Ḳletsḳin. ISBN .
  • J. Servais (1959). "Alexandre-Dionysos et Diogène-Sarapis: À propos de Diogène Laërce, VI, 63".

    Antiquité Classique. 28: 98–106. doi:10.3406/antiq.1959.3367.

Copyright ©poptoll.bekall.edu.pl 2025