This is a “from the archives” type thing I pulled out after a discussion on LaShtAl suggesting the Osiris myth was the entirety of Egyptian myth. It’s from a (currently?) unfinished project on similarities between The Book of the Law (1904) and The Pyramid Texts of ancient Egypt (oldest religious scripture). Book of the Law verses are bolded, PT verses are not. I don’t really feel the need to add a lot of commentary, I think the similarities speak for themselves.
I,2: The unveiling of the company of heaven.
141: “There is no god, who has become a star, without a companion.” “Shall I be your companion?”
I,3: Every man and every woman is a star.
251: May you open your place in heaven amongst the stars of heaven! You are indeed the unique star, the comrade of Hu…
I,21: With the God & the Adorer I am nothing: they do not see me. They are as upon the earth; I am Heaven, and there is no other God… I,49: … and let Asar be with Isa, who also are one. But they are not of me… II,15: … The Empress and the King are not of me…
251: … May you look down on Osiris, when he gives orders to the spirits! You stand high up, far from him. You are not of them, you shall not be of them. 146: Osiris, you cannot have power over him, your son cannot have power over him. Horus, you cannot have power over him, your father cannot have power over him.
I,29: For I am divided for love’s sake, for the chance of union.
378: May Unas love you, O Gods! Love him, O Gods!
II,21 … Think not, o king, upon that lie: That Thou Must Die: verily thou shalt not die, but live.
180: He lives! This Unas lives! He is not dead, this Unas is not dead! He is not gone down, this Unas is not gone down! He has not been judged, this Unas has not been judged! He judges, this Unas judges!
III,17: Fear not at all; fear neither men nor Fates, nor gods, nor anything.
211: You have power over your body, there is no one to oppose you. You are born because of Horus (in you), you are conceived because of Seth (in you).
I,64: I am the blue-lidded daughter of Sunset; I am the naked brilliance of the voluptuous night-sky. III,70: I am the Hawk-Headed Lord of Silence & of Strength; my nemyss shrouds the night-blue sky.
132: Unas is conceived at night, Unas is born at night, for he belongs to the Followers of Re who are before the Morning Star. 34: May Re in heaven be pleased with you, may he appease for you the Two Lords, may the night be favorable to you. 515: Unas has regulated the night, Unas has sent the stars on their way.
I,36: My scribe Ankh-af-na-khonsu, the priest of the princes… III,51: With my Hawk’s head I peck at the eyes of Jesus as he hangs upon the cross. III,52: I flap my wings in the face of Mohammed & blind him. III,53: With my claws I tear out the flesh of the Indian and the Buddhist, Mongol and Din. III,54: Bahlasti! Ompehda! I spit on your crapulous creeds. III,55: Let Mary inviolate be torn upon wheels: for her sake let all chaste women be utterly despised among you!
402: Indeed, Khonsu (the Moon), who slaughters the lords, cuts their throats for Unas, and takes out for him what is in their bellies. He is the messenger whom he sends out to chastise.
I,18: Burn upon their brows, o splendrous serpent!
396: The Kas of Unas are behind him, his maidservants are under his feet, his (protector) gods are over him, his uraei are on his brow (wp.t), the guide-serpent of Unas is on his brow (Ha.t).
III,71: Hail! ye twin warriors about the pillars of the world! for your time is nigh at hand. III,72: I am the Lord of the Double Wand of Power; the wand of the Force of Coph Nia-but my left hand is empty, for I have crushed an Universe; & nought remains.
143: You are born, o Horus, as the one whose name is He-before-whom-the-earth-quakes; (you are conceived, Seth, as the one whose name is ) He before-whom-the-sky-shakes. Such a one has no mutilation (Horus), such a one has no injury (Seth), such a one has no injury, such a one has no mutilation, (so) you have no injury, you have no mutilation!
I,12: Come forth, o children, under the stars, & take your fill of love! I,13: I am above you and in you. My ecstasy is in yours. My joy is to see your joy. I,22: Now, therefore, I am known to ye by my name Nuit, and to him by a secret name which I will give him when at last he knoweth me. Since I am Infinite Space, and the Infinite Stars thereof…
208: You go up and open the way through the bones of Shu (air), the embrace of your mother Nut enfolds you, you purify yourself on the horizon and leave that which should be purified from you in the Lakes of Shu. 250: This Unas comes to you, O Nut, this Unas comes to you, O Nut! He has thrown his father down to earth he has left a Horus behind him. 374: Then this Unas leads to the Imperishable (Stars = Circumpolars), he crosses to the Fields of Rushes, those who are in the Horizon row for him, those who are in the Cool (Sky) Region (qbH.w) convey him.
I,49:… Ra-Hoor-Khuit hath taken his seat in the East at the Equinox of the Gods…
325: Unas stands on the East side of the vault of heaven and what rises to the road (of heaven) is brought to him. It is Unas, the message of the Storm.
I,9: Worship then the Khabs, and behold my light shed over you! II,14: … now let the light devour men and eat them up with blindness! II,21: …The Sun, Strength & Sight, Light; these are for the servants of the Star & the Snake.
336: The People of Light (Hnmm.tjw) bore witness for him. The hail showers of the sky took hold of him. They let Unas ascend to Re.” 476: “How beautiful is indeed the sight, how good indeed to see, so say they, so say the gods, (when) this god ascends to heaven, (when) Unas ascends to heaven
II,22:… It is a lie, this folly against self. The exposure of innocence is a lie. Be strong, o man! lust, enjoy all things of sense and rapture: fear not that any God shall deny thee for this. II,74: The length of thy longing shall be the strength of its glory.
204: You have adorned yourself as Great-of-Magic, He-in-Ombos. It will not be lost for you, it will not cease for you. Lo, you are full of glory, powerful one, more than the gods of the South, together with their spirits! 206: You have adorned yourself as Horus with the two pupils (?). It will not be lost for you, it will not cease for you. Lo, you are full of glory, powerful one, more than the gods of the North, together with their spirits!
I,41: The word of Sin is Restriction. O man! refuse not thy wife, if she will! O lover, if thou wilt, depart!
397: Unas is the Bull of Heaven, who (once) suffered want, and who has decided to live on the essence of every god… 510: Unas is the lord of seed, he who takes the women from their husbands, wherever Unas wants, according to the desire of his heart.
@set-tetu-ra Hm, Maybe my English isn't good enough or I am too rigid to grasp it. Apart from very few instances I think the similarities don't speak at all. The last example is the best in my eyes and that's it to me. Sorry. Thanks for the effort. I might learn something when others reply.
Maybe I'm overly familiar with Egyptian themes, but the two books seem very very similar. Becoming one with Nuit, the king rising up and living on, the worship of the sun, the twin brothers, the general imagery, the opposition to Osiris and the old aeon, and so forth.
RTC has accused you of this very thing. Now you are discouraging Frater Set-T-R from discussing the "Book," which may save him from dire repercussions, if he stops in time, but you will be judged the censer (sic) of wisdom.
Anyway, those chips will fall where they may, but I compared certain undiscussable lines of AL with these ancient funerary texti. textuses?
I can see how Set-T-R saw some similarities. Any similarities will probably not sink Crowley's boat (I didn't know he had one) or move Thelema into the headlines.
Posted by: @set-tetu-ra
the king rising up and living on, the worship of the sun, the twin brothers, the general imagery
These are also found in the Bible and other artifacts from other civilizations. These are universal archetypes.
Yes, maybe I am too much looking for actual text similarities. And maybe you are overly familiar.
You, Sleuth Iff, are not willing to go along with other people's fantasies, and your personal acquaintances have probably noted this in you and have mentioned how you "cannot be fooled."
Set-T-R is finding meaningful coincidences in comparative literature. He is sharing these synchronicities with us because this is what people do when they see twinkles or solve a problem. The only problem is that meaningful synchronicity is acausal ("no connection"), and other people, such as some of us, fail to see the synchronicity, which is common, and then people (in general) start to giggle or throw stones.
Well, today, being bi-sickle day, I'm not up to throwing stones. I may have a chuckle or two.
No connection cannot be seen by the thinking mind. Therefore, it cannot connect effect to cause. Of course there's a connection (between any one thing and any other), it's just that the link is obscure (occult), and it surely must be in some circuit or dimension that remains unrecognized by scientists, docs, editors, and presidents ... but we (the "occult nut jobs," as so eloquently and recently applied) know better.
This is a “from the archives” type thing I pulled out after a discussion on LaShtAl suggesting the Osiris myth was the entirety of Egyptian myth. It’s from a (currently?) unfinished project on similarities between The Book of the Law (1904) and The Pyramid Texts of ancient Egypt (oldest religious scripture). Book of the Law verses are bolded, PT verses are not. I don’t really feel the need to add a lot of commentary, I think the similarities speak for themselves.
Yeah they're going to be similar if you want. Now do the same with different chapters from The Old Testament and christian New Testament.
You can try but it wouldn't work at all. One God, no becoming divine, no becoming a king, no commanding the gods or gods shaking before you, etc.
No I meant via confirmation bias I could take the novel Moby Dick and piece passages together with some other famous novel and claim there was a connection. Don't get me wrong I like hearing about pattern-finding. I'm open to the Terence McKenna Timewave Zero theory which holds that different peaks and troughs of novelty are relived centuries later in some other place. James Joyce sort of touched on this in the structure of his Ulysses novel. In that novel the setting is an ass-backward mundane sectarian place ie Dublin in the early 20th century yet the characters are living through very similar events that occurred in Greek mythology and Homer's epic.
Of course there's a connection (between any one thing and any other), it's just that the link is obscure (occult), and it surely must be in some circuit or dimension that remains unrecognized
So, just what the "hell" makes you think that, then?
the same old philosophical chestnuts speculations going up & down (instead of, for a change, just around & round)?
Do i win some sort of prize for being "Lashtal Poster Least Likely To Recognize A Joni Michell Allusion But Did Anyway"? (had hippie GFs back in the day)
Well, then, you, JB win the "Lashtal Prize For Practically Quoting A Joni Mitchell Song You Have Never Heard".
Making the meta-point- "There is nothing new in this world", see also the works of C.G. Jung; Joseph Campbell, The hero with a thousand faces, et al.; Robert Graves The white goddess; Sir J. G. Frazer The golden bough.
So, just what the "hell" makes you think that [there's a connection between any one thing and any other], then?
I don't have a good description for this but you can imagine a block of cheese, every point of cheese is connected to the rest of the block of cheese, through cheese. Its kind of what I think smart-asses like Plato are talking about (world of forms) but they can put it into better words, probably.
Thanks for reminding me of those, they're probably better descriptions than what I was going for
Good old Indra's Net. I guess everyone interprets these things in their own way so we may or may not be talking about the same thing. For me Indra's Net hints at the kind of thing I talk about sometimes: "extradimensional perception".
I occasionally get a glimpse of this and it kind of changes things because I wouldn't exactly call it "enlightenment", its something else. Of course I may just be a unique sort of loon, but I like to think there is something to this.
So I may have a different way of looking at things that are discussed here and hope I don't seem too annoying by going on about it. 😊
Its kind of what I think smart-asses like Plato are talking about (world of forms) but they can put it into better words, probably.
Plato's bifurcated conception of reality likely precludes everything's being "connected". But then what is intended by the term "connected" in that vague and unhelpful platitude is multiply ambiguous.
So I may have a different way of looking at things that are discussed here and hope I don't seem too annoying by going on about it.
As long as you are seeking, and not razzing (a CapitOl Effence), many of us are willing to go to the mat, virtually - not literally, I'm passed that age, and "go on about it."
Indra's Net is composed of an infinite number of sparkling jewels, and each jewel has a strand of light running to each of the other jewels.
Crowley's Star-Sponge is composed of an infinite number of stars, and each star has a strand of light running to each of the otherstars.
They are the same thing, and that thing is attributed to da'ath. It is the final realization of the thinking mind before it blacks out: There is no difference. As the mysterious Mr White put it: "I Am All in All."
If you're referring to him "making the meta-point", that's good then, dom, although I should point out that I wasn't actually querying your point about Greek mythology there, as using it in support of my reply to Shiva at the time.
I don't have a good description for this but you can imagine a block of cheese, every point of cheese is connected to the rest of the block of cheese, through cheese.
So that'd be cheese; the whole cheese & nothing but the cheese then? Cheese, cheese, cheese - "all the way down"?
Plato's bifurcated conception of reality likely precludes everything's being "connected".
I thought about sperging out over this post, but will, for the commonweal of LAShTAL, simply direct any knowingly benighted reader to the Parmenides, that he may read it comprehensively and thereby be illuminated, and also see any accusation of 'bifurcation' refuted save for the lowest level of interpretation. He may also come to understand more roundly the neglected doctrine that every kether exists in a malkuth, ad infinitum.
As to the topic of this thread altogether, I will point out in no uncertain terms what many posters have hinted at: that this entire exercise of interpolating 'Set' into Thelema feels like a pussyfooted retreading of Kenneth Grant's work. Here is [Moderator's Note: Link to copyright-infringing material deleted], to begin the Typhonian trilogies; with deepest apologies to @michael-staley if that's some unauthorized upload and I'm snatching bread from his mouth by posting it.
As to the topic of this thread altogether, I will point out in no uncertain terms what many posters have hinted at: that this entire exercise of interpolating 'Set' into Thelema feels like a pussyfooted retreading of Kenneth Grant's work.
I have told the same to the OP on reddit. The reply was that they found Grant "unintelligible". So much so that all of this is basically Grant's ideas rehashed...
Here is [Moderator's Note: Link to copyright-infringing material deleted], to begin the Typhonian trilogies; with deepest apologies to @michael-staley if that's some unauthorized upload and I'm snatching bread from his mouth by posting it.
This is a pirated edition, and thus breaches copyright. I'll pursue the matter with the "internet.archive", but it's not helpful to post links like this.
Plato's bifurcated conception of reality likely precludes everything's being "connected".
I thought about sperging out over this post, but will, for the commonweal of LAShTAL, simply direct any knowingly benighted reader to the Parmenides, that he may read it comprehensively and thereby be illuminated, and also see any accusation of 'bifurcation' refuted save for the lowest level of interpretation. He may also come to understand more roundly the neglected doctrine that every kether exists in a malkuth, ad infinitum.
In Plato's Timaeus a Divine Craftsman took the primordial chaos and with an eye toward the Forms and gave matter order and purpose i.e. making the Cosmos a whole. This of course implies inherent connectivity.
Michael, I have wanted to ask you something in ages, but only now have been reminded. Mr.Grant mentions "an unpublished manuscript entitled Origins," (bolt type mine), in the Chapter 5, "Drugs and the Occult" in The Magical Revival.
Does the said manuscript Origins has been published somewhere?
Greetings and Health, and thank you for your time.
Has the said manuscript Origins has been published somewhere?
If it has been published, I've not come across it. If it is unpublished, then it may well have been amongst the material of Crowley's which Kenneth Grant and Gerald Yorke copied before it was shipped to Germer in accordance with Crowley's Will. However, Yorke continued to buy diaries and papers of Crowley's that came on the market after the initial period of retyping, and passed copies to Grant.
I've not seen it listed in the Gerald Yorke Collection at the Warburg Institute, but then again I've not studied the listings of the Coillection exhaustively.
What I'm talking about may not be far off from what you mean by the "8th circuit" ("quantum"). I had to look up "razzing", I may do a bit of that but I hope there is a point to it, I don't want to give the game away too easily. 🙂
If I do ever manage to figure this out and put it into words, I believe you will like it.
Yes, that's the kind of thing I'm thinking of and that's the kind of thing I'm trying to do with all the "numbers and shapes stuff" that I post here. 🙂
that's the kind of thing I'm trying to do with all the "numbers and shapes stuff" that I post here.
The picture I posted is symmetrical, due to someone's symmetry. The actual vision is non-symmetrical, like the nighttime sky. There are patterns seen in the stars, but not symmetry> But they are all connected to every other one.
Your pic is of "Metatron's Cube" / "The Flower of Life" which seems to be popular with some new age folks. This kind of thing is known as "Sacred Geometry", its interesting to apply this to Liber AL as I haven't seen it applied to it before. Metatron could well be Thoth or Aiwass under a different name.
Plato's bifurcated conception of reality likely precludes everything's being "connected".
I thought about sperging out over this post, but will, for the commonweal of LAShTAL, simply direct any knowingly benighted reader to the Parmenides, that he may read it comprehensively and thereby be illuminated, and also see any accusation of 'bifurcation' refuted save for the lowest level of interpretation. He may also come to understand more roundly the neglected doctrine that every kether exists in a malkuth, ad infinitum.
In Plato's Timaeus a Divine Craftsman took the primordial chaos and with an eye toward the Forms and gave matter order and purpose i.e. making the Cosmos a whole. This of course implies inherent connectivity.
Yes, David, I am more than passingly familiar with Plato's works. The episode in the Timaeus to which you appeal does not imply that everything is connected, whatever you may mean by that. Despite djedi's suggestion to the contrary, Plato does conceive of reality as bifurcated. At least, a bifurcated conception of reality is readily apparent in the episode of the Timeaus you refer to. The very first thing Timeaus does in that section of the dialogue is to insist that we make a distinction between "that which always is and has no becoming" and "that which is always becoming and never is". The distinction is ontological. He then recognizes an epistemological distinction: the former alone can be the objects of understanding and of reason, the latter alone the objects of opinion. This distinction -- that between intelligible entities and sensible particulars -- is not unique to the Timaeus; it's present in nearly every one of his major works.* In any case, Timaeus is in this section of the dialogue concerned to provide some account whereby the the things that never are and are always becoming are caused. Necessarily, he says, whatever becomes has a cause.
You know the story from there. The demiurgos, his nature good, looks to the ordered structure of the forms (the things which always are and have no becoming) and makes an image of them using the primordial chaos as his materials.
I'm speaking loosely now, of course, but my point can be made without technical exegesis -- and in much less space.
That everything has a cause reaching back to the demiurgos' creation of the sensible world, does not entail that everything is connected. Not on what I take to be your suggested interpretation of it anyway. I suppose that we generally take that phrase to mean that every thing is connected to every other thing. Taking that as our base interpretation and try to apply your implicit suggestion in your response to me above: everything is causally connected. That does not follow at all from Timaeus' account of the cause of the sensible world. It would follow that every sensible particular has a cause going back to the demiurgos' creation of the sensible world. It does not entail that every sensible particular has a causal relation with every other sensible particular. Moreover, if by "everything" you mean literally everything, then there would have to be causal connections between the forms as well. That is obviously not the case. There can be no causation where there is no change or time in which change could occur.
It's uncommon, putting it lightly, that when someone says, "everything is connected," that they specify what they mean by "everything" and what the "connection" is that is supposed to connect every thing to every other thing. Upon a little reflection, it's generally easy to figure out what is implicit in the utterance given the context. It is usually, if not always, unsatisfying.
*Even supposing there were evidence to the contrary, very little determination could be made about Plato's metaphysics by appeal to the Parmenides alone. In the second part of that dialogue, which is the most sensible part to look for positive metaphysical theses, none exist. Every argument in the second part of the Parmenides is hypothetical -- a method introduced by Plato in the Meno and the Phaedo. Hypothetical arguments only establish on what assumptions a given conclusion is possible.
It's worth also pointing out that Plato never systematically expresses his metaphysics. Determining what view/s he held is a difficult interpretative problem.
In the second part of that dialogue, which is the most sensible part to look for positive metaphysical theses, none exist.
My intention was that anyone might read the first half, actually, and see Plato's geometer's metaphors about the pythagorean monad, which an astute Crowleyan McMagickian might further research and realize to have been irreverently reduced by the first jewish cabalists into kether and the negative veils, and come to see that bifurcation is pursuant only to a lower emanation thereof, and that Platonism is much more nuanced for its simplicity than some of us would like to think.
Also, before this argument goes any further (for me, it certainly won't), I would suggest that when speaking in terms of 'becoming,' we should not use the past tense. Dom's question is then not, "Is everything connected?" but, "Is everything connecting?"
It's worth also pointing out that Plato never systematically expresses his metaphysics. Determining what view/s he held is a difficult interpretative problem.
This is intentional. Like any good teacher, he gives you the puzzle pieces then expects you to put yourself together. Luckily, Platonism did not truly begin and definitely did not end with Plato, so we can get a few extra instructions if we look hard. It isn't the path I took but if anyone reading should be interested in learning more, I would direct them to the works of Kenneth Sylvan Guthrie.
Indra's Net is composed of an infinite number of sparkling jewels, and each jewel has a strand of light running to each of the other jewels.
I was browsing over this thread again and now I remember a different description of Indra's Net that's worth mentioning: each jewel reflects every other one (and the reflections of every other one etc etc ad infinitum).
now I remember a different description of Indra's Net that's worth mentioning: each jewel reflects every other one (and the reflections of every other one etc etc ad infinitum).
You may be aware of this already ducky (incidentally, do you have, or do, a "duckface"? 🤤), but in case not: this is exactly the same perception (=as in the interconnectedness of rays of light) that A.C. had in his "Star Sponge Vision" (q.v.), which he held to have been one of the most profound revelations/ epiphanies experienced in his lifetime.
My intention was that anyone might read the first half, actually, and see Plato's geometer's metaphors about the pythagorean monad, which an astute Crowleyan McMagickian might further research and realize to have been irreverently reduced by the first jewish cabalists into kether and the negative veils, and come to see that bifurcation is pursuant only to a lower emanation thereof, and that Platonism is much more nuanced for its simplicity than some of us would like to think.
This suggestion of yours is interesting. I admit I know next to nothing about the relationship between Pythagoreanism and cabalism.
Posted by: @djedi
Also, before this argument goes any further (for me, it certainly won't), I would suggest that when speaking in terms of 'becoming,' we should not use the past tense.
My apologies if I misunderstood your comment. For what it's worth, I didn't take us to be engaged in an argument. I'm not sure I understand the injunction here.
Posted by: @djedi
Dom's question is then not, "Is everything connected?" but, "Is everything connecting?"
It might have been, had he asked a question.
Posted by: @djedi
This is intentional.
Maybe. It's certainly not an uncommon take on Plato's corpus.
Posted by: @djedi
It isn't the path I took but if anyone reading should be interested in learning more, I would direct them to the works of Kenneth Sylvan Guthrie.
An excellent suggestion. Another Guthrie worth recommending to our brethren here is W.K.C Guthrie. His book Orpheus and Greek Religion is fantastic. Chapter V in particular struck me as brilliant and impressive when I read it. He has a massive six volume history of Greek philosophy that begins with the early Presocratics and the Pythagoreans. I admit I have not read it, but it is as far as I know very well regarded among classicists and philosophers. If his Orpheus is any indicator of the quality, it is no doubt excellent.
A legal, free copy of his work The Greeks and Their Godscan be found by following the link. The sections on Witchcraft, curses and ghosts might be of especial interest to those who haunt this forum.
I agree, but I was (parenthetically) idly and curiously wondering if he has, or ever does, a "duckface" (still unresolved, further incidentally), as in
Duck faceis a photographic pose, which is well known on profile pictures insocial networks. Lips are pressed together as in a pout and often with simultaneously sucked in cheeks. The pose is most often seen as an attempt to appear alluring, but also as aself-deprecating, ironic gesture making fun of the pose. It may be associated withsympathy,attractiveness,friendlinessorstupidity.
My intention was that anyone might read the first half, actually, and see Plato's geometer's metaphors about the pythagorean monad, which an astute Crowleyan McMagickian might further research and realize to have been irreverently reduced by the first jewish cabalists into kether and the negative veils, and come to see that bifurcation is pursuant only to a lower emanation thereof, and that Platonism is much more nuanced for its simplicity than some of us would like to think.
I looked into this and referred to Regardie's A Garden of Pomegranates. See if this makes sense as Regardie's accounts seem confused to me. In Chapter One 'A Historical Survey' he states that the history of the Quabalah is vague. Some historians claim that it is a derivative from NeoPlatonic, Pythagorean and Gnostic sources (Mr. Christian D. Ginsburg being one). One view is it actually first appeared in 12th century Spain!
However Regardie claims that Mr. Phineas Mordell (in an essay called The Origin of Letters and Numerals According to the Sepher Yetzirah that "the Pythagorean Number Philosophy is identical with that of the Sepher Yetzirah and that it's (? ~ my question mark) philosophy apparently emanated from one of the Hebrew prophetic schools." In fact Mordell says that The Sepher Yetzirah represents the genuine fragments of Philolaus (470-380 BC) , who was the first to publish Pythagorean philosophy and that Philolaus seems to correspond very curiously to Joseph ben Uziel who wrote down the Sepher Yetzirah. If that is the case, he (Regardie says) then TheSepher Yetzirah was probably produced in 2 B.C.
According to Regardie, Joseph ben Uziel was apparently a disciple of the prophet Jeremiah. I'm assuming he means he wasn't a literal disciple alive at the time of Jeremiah. In
Thanks for the mention of the work of W.K.C Guthrie and the Archive link to one of his books...I am reminded of how i appreciate good university libraries, being able to just browse about and find works of this kind. I have appreciated your comments.
Thanks for the mention of the work of W.K.C Guthrie and the Archive link to one of his books...I am reminded of how i appreciate good university libraries, being able to just browse about and find works of this kind. I have appreciated your comments.
Happy to make the recommendation. There were two recommendations: I recommended W.K.C Guthrie and djedi recommended K.S. Guthrie. K.S. Guthrie's works can also be found on archive.org. He did a lot of early 20th century work on the Pythagoreans -- and probably other things besides. Djedi can likely tell you more about his output than I can.
I'm blessed enough to be able to spend a great deal of time in a university library. Well, when it reopens that will be true again. While it's not the same thing as being in a library and trawling through the collections there, google scholar provides a fairly good means of tracking down works on subjects of interest. University library search engines can also be a great deal of fun.
