430. A father takes up his dear son who has changed his form and slays him with a prayer, so great is his folly! They are borne along beseeching the sacrificer; but he does not hear their cries of reproach, but slays them and makes ready the evil feast. Then in the same manner son takes father and daughters their mother, and devour the dear flesh when they have deprived them of life.

436. Alas that no ruthless day destroyed me before I devised base deeds of devouring with the lips!

438. Among beasts they become lions haunting the mountains, whose couch is the ground, and among fairfoliaged trees they become laurels.

440. Refrain entirely from laurel leaves.

441. Miserable men, wholly miserable, restrain your hands from beans.

442. Compounding the water from five springs in unyielding brass, cleanse the hands.

444. Fast from evil.

445. Accordingly ye are frantic with evils hard to bear, nor ever shall ye ease your soul from bitter woes.

447. But at last are they prophets and hymn-writers and physicians and chieftains among men dwelling on the earth; and from this they grow to be gods, receiving the greatest honours, sharing the same hearth with the other immortals, their table companions, free from human woes, beyond the power of death and harm.

420

445 τοιγάρτοι χαλεπῇσιν ἀλύοντες κακότησιν οὔποτε δειλαίων ἀχέων λωφήσετε θυμόν.

εἰς δὲ τελὸς μάντεις τε καὶ ὑμνοπόλοι καὶ ἰητροὶ 384 καὶ πρόμοι ἀνθρώποισιν ἐπιχθονίοισι πέλονται, ἔνθεν ἀναβλαστοῦσι θεοὶ τιμῇσι φέριστοι, 450 ἀθανάτοις ἄλλοισιν ὁμέστιοι, αὐτοτράπεζοι, εὔνιες ἀνδρείων ἀχέων, ἀπόκηροι, ἀτειρεῖς.

445–446. Clem. Al. Protr. p. 23. Cf. Carmen aureum v. 54 f. 447-449. Clem. Al. Strom. p. 632; Theod. Therap. viii. p. 599. 450-451. Clem. Al. Strom. p. 722; Euseb. Praep. evang. xiii. 13. MSS. ἐόντες α. Ἀχαιῶν ἀπόκληροι ἀπηρεῖς corr. Scaliger.

PASSAGES FROM PLATO RELATING TO EMPEDOKLES.

Phaed. 96 B. Is blood that with which we think, or air, or fire .?1

Gorg. 493 A. And perhaps we really are dead, as I once before heard one of the wise men say that now we are dead, and the body our tomb, and that that part of the soul, it so happens, in which desires are, is open to persuasion and moves upward and downward. And indeed a clever man-perhaps some inhabitant of Sicily or Italy-speaking allegorically, and taking the word from 'credible' (@avós) and 'persuadable' (TOTIKós), called it a jar (πíðos). And those without intelligence he called uninitiated, and that part of the soul of the uninitiated where the desires are, he called its intemperateness, and said it was not watertight, as a jar might be pierced with holes-using the simile because of its insatiate desires.

Meno 76 c. Do you say, with Empedokles, that there are certain effluences from things?-Certainly.

And pores, into which and through which the effluences go?—Yes indeed.

1 Cf. Cicero, Tusc. I. 9: 'Empedocles animum esse censet cordi suffusum sanguinem.'

And that some of the effluences match certain of the pores, and others are smaller or larger ?—It is true.

And there is such a thing as vision ?—Yes.

And . . . colour is the effluence of forms in agreement with vision and perceptible by that sense ?—It is.

Sophist. 242 D. And certain Ionian and Sicilian Muses agreed later that it is safest to weave together both opinions and to say that Being is many and one [πολλά τε καὶ ἕν], and that it is controlled by hate and love. Borne apart it is always borne together, say the more severe of the Muses. But the gentler concede that these things are always thus, and they say, in part, that sometimes all is one and rendered loving by Aphrodite, while at other times it is many and at enmity with itself by reason of a sort of strife.

PASSAGES IN ARISTOTLE REFERRING TO EMPEDOKLES.

Phys. i. 3; 187 a 20. And others say that the opposites existing in the unity are separated out of it, as Anaximandros says, and as those say who hold that things are both one and many, as Empedokles and Anaxagoras.

i. 4; 188 a 18. But it is better to assume elements fewer in number and limited, as Empedokles does.

ii. 4; 196 a 20. Empedokles says that the air is not always separated upwards, but as it happens.

viii. 1; 250 b 27. Empedokles says that things are in motion part of the time and again they are at rest; they are in motion when Love tends to make one out of many, or Strife tends to make many out of one, and in the intervening time they are at rest (Vv. 69-73).

viii. 1; 252 a 6. So it is necessary to consider this (motion) a first principle, which it seems Empedokles means in saying that of necessity Love and Strife control things and move them part of the time, and that they are at rest during the intervening time.

De Caelo 279 b 14. Some say that alternately at one time there is coming into being, at another time there is perishing, and that this always continues to be the case ; so say Empedokles of Agrigentum and Herakleitos of Ephesus.

ii. 1; 284 a 24. Neither can we assume that it is after this manner nor that, getting a slower motion than its own downward momentum on account of rotation, it still is preserved so long a time, as Empedokles says.

ii. 13; 295 a 15. But they seek the cause why it remains, and some say after this manner, that its breadth or size is the cause; but others, as Empedokles, that the movement of the heavens revolving in a circle and moving more slowly, hinders the motion of the earth, like water in vessels. .

iii. 2; 301 a 14. It is not right to make genesis take place out of what is separated and in motion. Wherefore Empedokles passes over genesis in the case of Love; for he could not put the heaven together preparing it out of parts that had been separated, and making the combination by means of Love; for the order of the elements has been established out of parts that had been separated, so that necessarily it arose out of what is one and compounded.

iii. 2; 302 a 28. Empedokles says that fire and earth and associated elements are the elements of bodies, and that all things are composed of these.

iii. 6; 305 a 1. But if separation shall in some way be stopped, either the body in which it is stopped will be indivisible, or being separable it is one that will never be divided, as Empedokles seems to mean.

iv. 2; 309 a 19. Some who deny that a void exists, do not define carefully light and heavy, as Anaxagoras and Empedokles.

Gen. corr. i. 1; 314 b 7. Wherefore Empedokles speaks after this manner, saying that nothing comes into being, but there is only mixture and separation of the mixed.

i. 1; 315 a 3. Empedokles seemed both to contradict things as they appear, and to contradict himself. For at one time he says that no one of the elements arises from another, but that all other things arise from these; and at another time he brings all of nature together into one, except Strife, and says that each thing arises from the one.

i. 8; 324 b 26. Some thought that each sense impression was received through certain pores from the last and strongest agent which entered, and they say that after this manner we see and hear and perceive by all the other senses, and further that we see through air and water and transparent substances because they have pores that are invisible by reason of their littleness, and are close together in series; and the more transparent substances have more pores. Many made definite statements after this manner in regard to certain things, as did Empedokles, not only in regard to active and passive bodies, but he also says that those bodies are mingled, the pores of which agree with each other. . .

i. 8; 325 a 34. From what is truly one multiplicity could not arise, nor yet could unity arise from what is truly manifold, for this is impossible; but as Empedokles and some others say, beings are affected through pores, so all change and all happening arises after this manner, separation and destruction taking place through the void, and in like manner growth, solid bodies coming in gradually. For it is almost necessary for Empedokles to say as Leukippos does; for there are some solid and indivisible bodies, unless pores are absolutely contiguous. 325 b 19. But as for Empedokles, it is evident that he