From the book
Stobaeus, Volume I
John Stobaeus · Diotimos Editions · 2026
Browse this book’s lexicon →Spine
ῥάχις
rhachisRhachis is the spine or backbone.
Orientation
At a Glance
- The wordRhachis is the spine or backbone.
- In StobaeusThe Timaeus describes marrow as continuous from the head through the neck and spine.
- In this edition“Spine” preserves the anatomical distinction between supporting structure and its contents.
- A place to beginMarrow extends through the spine toward the reproductive connection.
- English renderings
- spine; backbone
Meaning
Rhachis is the spine or backbone. The form used here locates an internal course through the body.
Use in the book
The Timaeus describes marrow as continuous from the head through the neck and spine. A connection with the reproductive outlet then explains generative desire in the narrative. The spine is the bodily route containing this marrow, not another word for the marrow itself.
Places to read
- I.47.1.3Marrow extends through the spine toward the reproductive connection.
Translation in this edition
“Spine” preserves the anatomical distinction between supporting structure and its contents.
Source note
Wachsmuth, volume I, printed pp. 298–299. The sentence’s explanation of breath and desire is compressed and uncertain; the stated course through the spine is clear.
From the book
Empedocles’ Complete Fragments, Volume I
Empedocles of Acragas · Diotimos Editions · 2026
Browse this book’s lexicon →Backbone
ῥάχιν (rhachin)
Ῥάχιν is the inflected word rendered “the backbone.”
Orientation
At a Glance
- The wordῬάχιν is the inflected word rendered “the backbone.”
- In EmpedoclesThe survival of this anatomical item is a reminder that the evidence is uneven.
- In this editionDo not quote B97 as though the book supplied a complete sentence about the spine.
- A place to readThe edition prints only the word for backbone, citing Aristotle, Parts of Animals I.1.
Meaning
Ῥάχιν is the inflected word rendered “the backbone.” B97 preserves no accompanying verb, adjective, or numerical account. The original sentence is not available in the supplied fragment.
Use in the book
The survival of this anatomical item is a reminder that the evidence is uneven. Bone receives a full four-line account of its proportional mixture; the backbone survives here as one word. It is tempting to connect the two, since a spine is a particular organization of bone, but that reasonable anatomical association does not recover the lost Empedoclean explanation.
The witness is Aristotle’s Parts of Animals, an appropriate setting for discussion of bodily structures. Without the surrounding argument printed in the book, however, the citation does not entitle the lexicon to attribute a specific developmental mechanism, purpose, or critique to this word alone. The distinction between the ancient author’s larger discussion and the text actually reproduced is crucial.
The entry is therefore a reliable point of lookup rather than a reconstructed theory of vertebrae. It directs the reader toward bone for the securely preserved compositional account, joint for the language of binding parts, and isolated limbs for the question of bodily articulation. Those comparisons define a field of interpretation while leaving this fragment’s lost proposition open.
Places to read
Translation in this edition
Do not quote B97 as though the book supplied a complete sentence about the spine. Its brevity is part of the evidence and should remain visible even in a comprehensive lexicon.