m esset num tantulum (quasi pedalem 82) solem esse putaret,
Epic. non praecise definit (tantum enim esse censebat quantus videretur vel
paulo aut maiorem aut minorem) sed latius circumscribit, ne bis quidem
tantum esse, sed inter pedalem magnitudinem et bipedalem_". (_D.F._ I. 20)
This explanation though not quite satisfactory is the best yet given.
Epicurus' absurdity is by Cic. brought into strong relief by stating the
outside limit to which Epic. was prepared to go in estimating the sun's
size, i.e. twice the apparent size. _Ne ... quidem_ may possibly appear
strange, cf. however _ne maiorem quidem_ in 82. _Aristo Chius_: for this
doctrine of his see R. and P. 358.

Sec.124. _Quid sit animus_: an enumeration of the different ancient theories
is given in _T.D._ I. 18--22, and by Sext. _A.M._ VII. 113, who also speaks
in _P.H._ II. 31 of the [Greek: polle kai anenytos mache] concerning the
soul. In _P.H._ II. 57 he says [Greek: Gorgias oude dianoian einai phesi].
_Dicaearcho_: _T.D._ I. 21. _Tres partis_: in Plato's _Republic_. _Ignis_:
Zeno's opinion, _T.D._ I. 19. _Animam_: _ib._ I. 19. _Sanguis_: Empodocles,
as in _T.D._ I. 19 where his famous line [Greek: haima gar anthropois
perikardion esti noema] is translated, see R. and P. 124. _Ut Xenocrates_:
some edd. read _Xenocrati_, but cf. I. 44, _D.F._ II. 18, _T.D._ III. 76.
_Numerus_: so Bentl. for _mens_ of MSS., cf. I. 39, _T.D._ I. 20, 41. An
explanation of this Pythagorean doctrine of Xenocrates is given in R. and
P. 244. _Quod intellegi_ etc.: so in _T.D._ I. 41 _quod subtiliter magis
quam dilucide dicitur_. _Momenta_ n. on I. 45.

Sec.125. _Verecundius_: cf. 114 _subadroganter_. _Vincam animum_: a common
phrase in Cic., cf. _Philipp._ XII. 21. _Queru potissimum? quem?_: In
repeated questions of this kind Cic. usually puts the corresponding case of
_quisnam_, not _quis_, in the second question, as in _Verr._ IV. 5. The
mutation of Augustine _Contra Ac._ III. 33 makes it probable that _quemnam_
was the original reading here. Zumpt on _Verr._ qu. Quint. IX. 2, 61, Plin.
_Epist._ I. 20, who both mention this trick of style, and laud it for its
likeness to impromptu. _Nobilitatis_: this is to be explained by referring
to 73--75 (_imitari numquam nisi clarum, nisi nobilem_), where Cic.
protests against being compared to a demagogue, and claims to follow the
aristocracy of philosophy. The attempts of the commentators to show that
Democr. was literally an aristocrat hav