The term “doxography” is derived from two Greek words, doxa (tenet, view, opinion) and graphein (to write). Literally, therefore, it means “the writing of tenets, views or opinions.” Such opinions are also called in Greek areskonta and in Latin placita (literally “what is pleases one (to think).” The term “doxography” itself has its origin in the study of ancient philosophy, but it was not used in the ancient world. It is a product of modern scholarship. It is now often used very broadly to denote any description of philosophical views or doctrines ascribed to a particular philosopher or school of philosophers. In this bibliography, however, the term will refer to its use in the context of the study of ancient philosophy. Here too it has broader and narrower usages. The narrower usage refers especially to what might be called the tradition of the Placita, works or sections of works in which opinions of philosophers are briefly formulated and organized in order to show how philosophical questions or topics have been dealt with. The emphasis generally falls more on the topic than on the philosopher, but there are also doxographies in which the views of a particular author are gathered together, for example in Diogenes Laertius. The broader usage refers to the many passages by ancient authors in which the views of predecessors are set out and evaluated (a method that is most strongly associated with the treatises of Aristotle). In this bibliography, the emphasis will lie on the former (i.e., narrower) usage. The importance of doxography lies above all in the fact that the documents covered by the term contain a vast amount of information based on earlier sources that have been irrevocably lost, particularly in the period from 600 to 100 bce. This information is packaged in particular and often idiosyncratic ways that need to be understood if it is to be properly appreciated and utilized. The study of doxography in the sense indicated above was initiated by the 19th-century scholar Hermann Diels, who coined the term (see Historical Background, the Contribution of Hermann Diels). For a hundred years, his authority carried the day. In more recent decades, interest in the ancient doxographical traditions has revived, particularly through the research carried out by the “Utrecht school.” The cumulative effect of this new phase has been a much richer understanding of doxography’s contribution to ancient philosophy and its dissemination in the ancient world. This bibliography commences with general views of the subject, followed by the achievement and legacy of Hermann Diels. It then focuses on the “Placita” attributed to Aëtius, the chief collection of views in the domain of physics or natural philosophy edited by Diels. Sections on doxography on other kinds of philosophy (and also medicine) and other kinds of doxographical texts follow. A large section of the bibliography is then devoted to a historical overview of authors who contributed to the doxographical tradition or, in later times, utilized it and assisted in its preservation. The bibliography’s final sections are devoted to the importance of doxographical texts for collections of the fragments of the Presocratics.
External syntax and the Cumulative Effect in subject sub-extraction: An experimental evaluation
