Diogenous Laertiou Peri biōn, dogmatōn kai apophthegmatōn tōn en philosophia eudokimēsantōn biblia 10

But in Antisthenes, p. 372, where we read τῷ γε σοφῷ ξένον οὐδέν, οὐδ’ ἄπο to the wise man nothing is foreign, nor away, I suspect that ἄπορον impracticable/poverty-stricken should be written in place of ἄπο.

I have others which I could add to these, conjectural emendations, but I will reserve them for that place where they can be joined with the autographic ones (for it pleases me to oppose the autographic to the conjectural), just as now in those annotations of mine annexed to the previous edition some conjectures are also found. Since, however, we see that Laertius has many new things in his speech, and indeed perhaps some such that they could be called not only strange but even monstrous, I thought you should be warned that some things are also found that might be suspicious, and in which the blame might seem to be thrown back on the copyists. I will bring an example from the beginning of the life of Thales, p. 15: μετὰ δὲ τὰ πολιτικὰ τῆς φυσικῆς ἐγένετο θεωρίας after political matters, he came to physical contemplation. For I do not doubt that he wrote ἐγένετο he came to be, not ἐλύετο he was dissolved (just as both ἄπεσθαι and other things are said by him and by others with a similar metaphor). I seem to have observed a certain use of this verb γίνεσθαι, or the verb ἦν, with the genitive likewise in Xenophon, almost peculiar to him: but which, however, was such that from it (unless my memory fails me) it could not be defended here.

Furthermore, some things can be amended by you from the interpreter himself. About whose interpretation, and at the same time about his reviser Brognolus (some of whose things are added to the end of this work), I will speak in those annotations on Diogenes himself. Farewell.