395 pretation of individual passages. This is all the more regrettable since many of B.'s observations deserve our attention. AMSTERDAM, Klassiek Seminarium, Oude Turfmarkt 129 IRENE J. F. DE JONG 1) H. Fränkel, Die homerischen Gleichnisse (Göttingen 1977 = 1921), 91. 2) W. C. Scott, The oral nature of the Homericsimile (Leiden 1974), 78. 3) C. Moulton, Similesin the HomericPoems (Göttingen 1977), 102. 4) H. Bannert, Zur Vogelgestalt der Götter bei Homer, WS NF 12 (1978), 29-42; H. Erbse, Homerische Götterin Vogelgestalt, Hermes 108 (1980), 259-74. S.-T. TEODORSSON, Anaxagoras' Theory of Matter (Studia graeca et latina gothoburgensia, XLIII). Göteborg, Acta universitatis gothoburgensis, 1982. 108 p. Pr. SKr 80,- (cloth), 65,- (paper). T(eodorsson) sets out a useful critical overview of what he deems to be the most representative scholarly attempts to make sense of what, according to Anaxag., is constitutive of the world (Noûs ex- cepted). He is rightly critical of those who, on the not unambiguous authority of Aristotle, try to attribute to Anaxag. a universal princi- ple of cosmic homoeomereity. He also is correct in pointing out that to credit Anaxag. with the view that things consist of particles some among which are, ultimately, pure minima, conflicts with the prin- ciple that `all things are in each thing' or that 'there is a portion of everything in each thing'. The mass of things before cosmogony is a wholly homogeneous blend (75; in my view, this entails that the principle of homoeomereity is valid for the pre-cosmogonical stage). Now, the main problem as formulated by T. and as encountered, in various forms, in previous scholarship is how we have to interpret the items which according to the fragments are present in this primordial blend, viz. (1) the physical opposites (hot- cold etc.), (2) the elemental masses (aether, air, earth; I do not know that T.'s addition of water is prudent), and (3) the mysterious O'1tÉPIlCX"tCX Travel only found in 59B4, where Anaxag. also speaks of O'1tEPllcX"twV &1teLPWV 7?f)9o<; ou8ev ioix6<mv Or, more particularly, what are these 'seeds', how do they relate to the opposites and to the elemental masses, and what, again, is the relation between elemental masses and opposites?