Further Reading

References in this bibliography to items prior to 1980 are more selective than those to more recent items. For a nearly exhaustive and annotated listing of Zenonian scholarship down to 1980, consult L. Paquet, M. Roussel, and Y. Lafrance, Les Présocratiques: Bibliographie analytique (1879–1980), Volume 2, Montreal: Bellarmin/Paris: Les Belles Lettres, 1989, pp. 105–32.

Comprehensive accounts of Zeno and his arguments may be found in:

• Barnes, J., The Presocratic Philosophers, 2nd edition, London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1982. Chapters 12 and 13. (Scholar)
• Caveing, M., Zénon d’Élée: Prolégomènes aux doctrines du continu. Étude historique et critique des fragments et témoignages, Paris: J. Vrin, 1982. (Scholar)
• Ferber, R., Zenons Paradoxien der Bewegung und die Struktur von Raum und Zeit, 2nd edition, Stuttgart: Franz Steiner, 1995.
• Guthrie, W. K. C., A History of Greek Philosophy, vol. 2: The Presocratic Tradition from Parmenides to Democritus, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1965, Part I.B. (Scholar)
• Kirk, G. S., J. E. Raven, and M. Schofield, The Presocratic Philosophers, 2nd edition, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983, Chapter 9. (Scholar)
• Makin, S., “Zeno of Elea,” in E. Craig (ed.), Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Volume 9, London and New York: Routledge, 1998, pp. 843–53. (Scholar)
• McKirahan, R. D., Jr., “Zeno,” in A. A. Long, ed., The Cambridge Companion to Early Greek Philosophy, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999, pp. 134–58. (Scholar)
• Sainsbury, R. M., Paradoxes, 2nd edition, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995, Chapter 1. (Scholar)
• Vlastos, G., “Zeno of Elea,” in P. Edwards (ed.), The Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Volume 8, New York and London: Macmillan, 1967, pp. 369–79. Reprinted in G. Vlastos, Studies in Greek Philosophy (Volume 1: The Presocratics), D. W. Graham (ed.), Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1993, pp. 241–63. (Scholar)
• Waterfield, R., The First Philosophers: The Presocratics and Sophists, Oxford: Oxford World’s Classics, 2000, pp. 69–81. (Scholar)

Primary Sources

The long standard collection of the fragments of the Presocratics and sophists, together with testimonia pertaining to their lives and thought, has been:

• Diels, H., and W. Kranz, Die Fragmente der Vorsokratiker [DK], 6th edition, Berlin: Weidmann, 1951–52.

For the English reader, the fragments and testimonia of the Presocratics and sophists are now most usefully presented in:

• Laks, A., and Most, G. W., 2016, Early Greek Philosophy, 9 vols., Cambridge, MA, and London: Harvard University Press. (Texts pertaining to Zeno in vol. 5, pt. 2, §20.) (Scholar)

See also:

• Gemelli Marciano, M. L., Die Vorsokratiker, 3 vols., Berlin: De Gruyter, 2011–13. (Texts pertaining to Zeno in Volume 2, pp. 96–137). (Scholar)
• Graham, D. W., The Texts of Early Greek Philosophy, 2 vols., Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010. (Texts pertaining to Zeno in Part I, Chapter 7.)

The following works also remain useful, despite some outmoded interpretations:

• Lee, H. D. P., Zeno of Elea: A Text with Translation and Notes, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1936. Reprinted, Amsterdam: Hakkert, 1967. (Scholar)
• Untersteiner, M. Zenone. Testimonianze e frammenti, Florence: La Nuova Italia, 1963.

Texts of the ancient authors other than Zeno referred to in the article:

• Aristotle, Physica, W. D. Ross (ed.), Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1950.
• –––, Metaphysica, W. Jaeger (ed.), Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1957.
• –––, Topica et Sophistici Elenchi, W. D. Ross (ed.), Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1958.
• Ps.-Aristotle, De Melisso Xenophane Gorgia, H. Diels (ed.), Berlin: Königliche Akademie der Wissenschaften, 1900.
• Diogenes Laertius, Vitae Philosophorum, M. Marcovich (ed.), Stuttgart and Leipzig: B. G. Teubner, 1999.
• Eudemus, Eudemos von Rhodos, F. Wehrli (ed.), Basel: Schwabe, 1969.
• Isocrates, Opera Omnia, B. G. Mandilaras (ed.), Munich and Leipzig: K.G. Saur, 2003.
• Plato, Alcibiades, N. Denyer (ed.), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001.
• –––, Parmenides and Phaedrus, in Platonis Opera (Volume 2), J. Burnet (ed.), Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1901.
• –––, Sophistes, in Platonis Opera (Volume 1), E. A. Duke, et al. (eds.), Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1995.
• Plutarch, Vita Periclis, in Plutarchi Vitae parallelae, C. Lindskog and K. Ziegler (ed.), Leipzig: B. G. Teubner, 1957–1980.
• Proclus, In Platonis Parmenidem Commentaria (Volume 1), C. Steel (ed.), Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2007.
• Sextus Empiricus, Adversus Mathematicos, in Sexti Empirici Opera (Volumes 2–3), H. Mutschmann and J. Mau (eds.), Leipzig: B. G. Teubner, 1914.
• Simplicius, In Aristotelis Physicorum Commentaria, H. Diels (ed.), Berlin: G. Reimer, 1882 and 1895.

English translations of these works may be found in:

• The Complete Works of Aristotle: The Revised Oxford Translation, J. Barnes (eds.), 2 volumes, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1984.
• Diogenes Laertius, Lives of Eminent Philosophers, edited and with an introduction by T. Dorandi, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013; see also Lives of Eminent Philosophers, R.D. Hicks (trans.), 2 volumes, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1925. (Scholar)
• Isocrates, III, Evagoras, Helen, et al., L. R. Van Hook (trans.), Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1945.
• Plato, Complete Works. J. M. Cooper (ed.), Indianapolis: Hackett, 1997.
• Plutarch, The Rise and Fall of Athens: Nine Greek Lives by Plutarch, I. Scott-Kilvert (trans.), Harmondsworth, UK: Penguin, 1975.
• Morrow, G. R., and J. Dillon, Proclus’ Commentary on Plato’s Parmenides, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1987. (Scholar)
• Sextus Empiricus, Against the Logicians (Volume I), R.G. Bury (trans.), Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1935.
• Simplicius, On Aristotle’s Physics 4.1–5, 10–14, J. O. Urmson (trans.), London: Duckworth, and Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1992.
• Simplicius, On Aristotle Physics 6, D. Konstan (trans.), London: Duckworth, and Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1989.
• Simplicius, On Aristotle’s Physics 7, C. Hagen (trans.), London: Duckworth, and Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1994.

Aristotle discusses Zeno’s paradoxes at some length in Physics VI. His treatment may be usefully approached with the aid of Simplicius’s commentary and that in:

• Ross, W. D. (ed.), Aristotle: Physics, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1936.

A plate of the red-figure drinking cup, Mus. Villa Giulia inv. 3591, accompanies:

• Hoffman, H., 2004, “Zeno’s tortoise,” Antike Kunst, 47: 5–9. (Scholar)

Secondary Literature

Studies of particular paradoxes and of issues bearing upon Zeno’s broader purposes and influence on ancient philosophy include:

• Abraham, W. E., 1972, “The nature of Zeno’s argument against plurality in DK 29 B 1,” Phronesis, 17: 40–53. (Scholar)
• Arsenijevic, M., Scepanovic, S, and G.J. Massey, 2008, “A new reconstruction of Zeno’s ‘Flying Arrow’,” Apeiron, 41: 1–43. (Scholar)
• Barnes, J. [O. Testudo, pseud.], 1981, “Space for Zeno,” Deucalion, 33/34: 131–45. (Scholar)
• Barnes, J., et al., 2011, Eleatica 2008: Zenone e l’infinito (Volume 2: Eleatica), L. Rossetti and M. Pulpito (eds.), Sankt Augustin: Academia Verlag, 2011. (Scholar)
• Berti, E., 1988, “Zenone di Elea, inventore della dialectica?” La Parola del Passato, 43: 19–41. (Scholar)
• Bolotin, D., 1993, “Continuity and infinite divisibility in Aristotle’s physics,” Ancient Philosophy, 13: 323–40. (Scholar)
• Booth, N. B., 1957, “Were Zeno’s arguments directed against the Pythagoreans?” Phronesis, 1: 90–103. (Scholar)
• Booth, N. B., 1957, “Were Zeno’s arguments a reply to attacks upon Parmenides?” Phronesis, 1: 1–9. (Scholar)
• Bostock, D., 1972, “Aristotle, Zeno and the potential infinite,” Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 73: 37–53. (Scholar)
• Cataldi, S., 2005, “Filosofi e politici nell’Atene del V secolo a.C,” in L. Breglia and M. Lupi (eds.), Da Elea a Samo: Filosofi e politici di fronte all’impero ateniese, Naples: Arte Tipografice Editrice, pp. 95–150. (Scholar)
• Centrone, B., 1981, “Un’indiretta confutazione aristotelica dell’ ‘Achille’ di Zenone,” Elenchos, 2: 273–89. (Scholar)
• Cohoe, C., 2018, “Why continuous motions cannot be composed of sub-motions: Aristotle on change, rest, and actual and potential middles,” Apeiron, 51: 37–71. (Scholar)
• Corbett, S. M., 1988, “Zeno’s ‘Achilles’: A reply to John McKie,” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 49: 325–31. (Scholar)
• Cordero, N.-L., 1988, “Zénon d’Élée, moniste ou nihiliste?” La Parola del Passato, 43: 100–26.
• Curd, P. K., 1993, “Eleatic monism in Zeno and Melissus,” Ancient Philosophy, 13: 1–22. (Scholar)
• Davey, K., 2007, “Aristotle, Zeno, and the stadium paradox,” History of Philosophy Quarterly, 24: 127–46. (Scholar)
• Dillon, J., 1986, “Proclus and the forty logoi of Zeno,” Illinois Classical Studies, 11: 35–41. (Scholar)
• Eberle, S., 1998, “Das Zeit-Raum-Kontinuum bei Zenon von Elea,” Philosophisches Jahrbuch, 105: 85–99. (Scholar)
• Ebert, T., 2001, “Why is Evenus called a philosopher at Phaedo 61c?” The Classical Quarterly, 51: 423–34. (Scholar)
• Faris, J. A., 1996, The Paradoxes of Zeno, Aldershot: Avebury. (Scholar)
• Feyerabend, P., 1983, “Some observations on Aristotle’s theory of mathematics and of the continuum,” Midwest Studies in Philosophy, 8: 67–88. (Scholar)
• Fränkel, H., 1942, “Zeno of Elea’s attacks on plurality,” American Journal of Philology 63: 1–25, 193–206. (Scholar)
• Furley, D. J., 1967, Two Studies in the Greek Atomists, Princeton: Princeton University Press. (Scholar)
• Glazebrook, T., 2001, “Zeno against mathematical physics,” Journal of the History of Ideas, 62: 193–210. (Scholar)
• Hasper, P. S., 2006, “Zeno unlimited,” Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy, 30: 49–85. (Scholar)
• Kerferd, G., 1981, The Sophistic Movement, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. (Scholar)
• Knorr, W., 1983, “Zeno’s paradoxes still in motion,” Ancient Philosophy, 3: 55–66. (Scholar)
• Köhler, G., 2014, Zenon von Elea: Studien zu den ‘Argumenten gegen die Vielheit’ und zum sogenannten ‘Argument des Orts’, Berlin/Munich/Boston: Walter De Gruyter. (Scholar)
• Lear, J., 1981, “A note on Zeno’s arrow,” Phronesis, 26: 91–104. (Scholar)
• Lewis, E., 1999, “The dogmas of indivisibility: On the origins of ancient atomism,” Proceedings of the Boston Area Colloquium in Ancient Philosophy,15: 1–21. (Scholar)
• Magidor, O., 2008, “Another note on Zeno’s paradox,” Phronesis, 53: 359–72. (Scholar)
• Makin, S., 1982, “Zeno on plurality,” Phronesis, 27: 223–38. (Scholar)
• Mansfeld, Jaap, 1982, “Digging up a paradox: A philological note on Zeno’s stadium,” Rheinisches Museum für Philologie, 125: 1–24; reprinted in Mansfeld’s Studies in the Historiography of Greek Philosophy, Assen: Van Gorcum, 1990, pp. 319–42. (Scholar)
• Marion, M., 2014, “Les arguments de Zénon d’après le Parménide de Platon,” Dialogue, 53: 393–434. (Scholar)
• Matson, W. T., 1988, “The Zeno of Plato and Tannery vindicated,” La Parola del Passato, 43: 312–36. (Scholar)
• McKie, John R., 1987, “The persuasiveness of Zeno’s paradoxes,” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 47: 631–9. (Scholar)
• McKirahan, R., 2001, “Zeno’s dichotomy in Aristotle,” Philosophical Inquiry, 23: 1–24. (Scholar)
• Osborne, C., 2001, “Comment mesurer le mouvement dans le vide?: Quelques remarques sur deux paradoxes de Zénon d’Élée,” in P.-M. Morel and J.-F. Pradeau (eds.), Les anciens savants: Études sur les philosophies préplatoniciennes, Paris: Vrin, 2001, pp. 157–165. (Scholar)
• Owen, G. E. L., 1958, “Zeno and the mathematicians,” Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 58: 199–222. (Scholar)
• Palmer, J., 1999, Plato’s Reception of Parmenides, Oxford: Clarendon Press, Chapter 5. (Scholar)
• –––, 2009, Parmenides and Presocratic Philosophy, Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, Chapter 5. (Scholar)
• Papa-Grimaldi, A., 1996, “Why mathematical solutions of Zeno’s paradoxes miss the point: Zeno’s one and many relation and Parmenides’ prohibition,” Review of Metaphysics, 50: 299–314. (Scholar)
• Peterson, S., 1978, “Zeno’s second argument against plurality,” Journal of the History of Philosophy, 16: 261–70. (Scholar)
• Pickering, F. R., 1978, “Aristotle on Zeno on the now,” Phronesis, 23: 253–7. (Scholar)
• Prior, W. J., 1978, “Zeno’s first argument concerning plurality,” Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie, 60: 247–56. (Scholar)
• Rapp, C., 2005, “Eleatischer Monismus,” In G. Rechenauer (ed.), Fruhgriechisches Denken, Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, pp. 290–315. (Scholar)
• –––, 2006, “Zeno and the Eleatic anti-pluralism,” in M. M. Sassi (ed.), La costruzione del discorso filosofico nell’età dei Presocratici, Pisa: Ed. della Normale, pp. 161–82. (Scholar)
• Russell, B., 1914, “The problem of infinity considered historically,” in B. Russell, Our Knowledge of the External World, London: Open Court, pp. 159–88. (Scholar)
• Ryle, G., 1954, “Achilles and the tortoise,” in G. Ryle, Dilemmas, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1954, pp. 36–53. (Scholar)
• Sattler, B., 2015, “Time is double the trouble: Zeno’s moving rows,” Ancient Philosophy, 35: 1–22. (Scholar)
• Sedley, D., 1977, “Diodorus Cronus and Hellenistic philosophy,” The Cambridge Classical Journal (Proceedings of the Cambridge Philological Society – New Series), 23: 74–120. (Scholar)
• –––, 2008, “Atomism’s Eleatic roots,” in P. Curd and D. W. Graham, The Oxford Handbook of Presocratic Philosophy, Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 305–32. (Scholar)
• –––, 2017, “Zenonian strategies,” Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy, 53: 1–32. (Scholar)
• Shamsi, F. A., 1994, “A note on Aristotle, Physics 239b5–7: What exactly was Zeno’s argument of the arrow?” Ancient Philosophy, 14: 51–72. (Scholar)
• Solmsen, F., 1971, “The tradition about Zeno of Elea re-examined,” Phronesis, 16: 116–41. (Scholar)
• Sorabji, R., 1983, Time, Creation, and the Continuum: Theories in Antiquity and the Early Middle Ages, London: Duckworth. (Scholar)
• Tarrant, H., 1990, “More on Zeno’s Forty Logoi,” Illinois Classical Studies, 15: 23–37. (Scholar)
• Tusi, J., 2018, “Strategies of exegesis of Zeno’s works in Plato and Aristotle,” Freiburger Zeitschrift für Philosophie und Theologie, 65: 7–24. (Scholar)
• Vlastos, G., 1965, “Zeno’s race course. With an appendix on the Achilles,”  Journal of the History of Philosophy, 4: 95–108. (Scholar)
• –––, 1966, “A note on Zeno’s arrow,” Phronesis, 11: 3–18. (Scholar)
• –––, 1971, “A Zenonian argument against plurality,” in J. P. Anton and G. L. Kustas (eds.), Essays in Ancient Greek Philosophy, Albany: SUNY Press, pp. 119–44. (Scholar)
• –––, 1975, “Plato’s testimony concerning Zeno of Elea,” Journal of Hellenic Studies, 95: 136–62. (Scholar)
• Von Fritz, K., 1974, “Zeno of Elea in Plato’s Parmenides,” in J. L. Heller and J. K. Newman (eds.), Serta Turyniana: Studies in Greek literature and palaeography in honour of A. Turyn, Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press, pp. 329–41. (Scholar)
• Waterlow, S., 1983, “Instants of motion in Aristotle’s Physics VI,” Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie, 65: 128–146. (Scholar)
• Wheeler, S. C., 1983, “Megarian paradoxes as Eleatic arguments,” American Philosophical Quarterly, 20: 287–96. (Scholar)
• White, M. J., 1982, “Zeno’s arrow, divisible infinitesimals, and Chrysippus,” Phronesis, 27: 239–54. (Scholar)
• –––, 1992, The Continuous and the Discrete: Ancient Physical Theories from a Contemporary Perspective, Oxford: Clarendon Press. (Scholar)