Aldo Brancacci* Il Teeteto e il suo rapporto con il Cratilo https://doi.org/10.1515/elen-2020-0002 Abstract: With the use of a particular metaphor, which appears at the end of the Cratylus and is taken up with perfect symmetry at the beginning of the Theaetetus, Plato certainly wanted to indicate the succession of Cratylus–Theaetetus as an order for reading the two dialogues, which Trasillus faithfully reproduced in structuring the second tetralogy of Platonic dialogues. The claim of the theory of ideas, with which the Cratylus ends, must therefore be considered the background in which to place not only the analysis of the name carried out in the Cratylus, but also the discussion and criticism of the epistemological theories examined and refuted in the Theaetetus. The transition from the discussion of the name to that of the logos is another important theoretical element that connects the two dialogues. Another one is the theory of knowledge, already precisely elaborated in the Cra- tylus, and taken up and deepened in the Theaetetus. Finally, the theme of false and error is a third theoretical element common to the two dialogues, which, starting from Euthydemus, finds its solution in the Sophist. Keywords: countryside metaphor, false/error, knowledge, logos, reading order Cratylus/Theaetetus Il Teeteto ` e contenuto nella seconda tetralogia delle opere di Platone, che si struttura sulla successione Cratilo–Teeteto–Sofista–Politico. Ci si deve domandare quale sia il significato di questa successione, che non credo casuale, n´ e dovuta all’arbitrio degli antichi editori, tanto più che ` e opinione accreditata presso gli studiosi che questi ultimi procedettero nel loro lavoro editoriale sulla base di una riflessione accorta, e giovandosi anche di indicazioni di provenienza almeno *Corresponding author: Aldo Brancacci, Università di Roma Tor Vergata, Rome, Italy, E-mail: aldobrancacci@yahoo.it Elenchos 2020; 41(1): 27–48