mSTOBT OF THE ATOMIC THEORT. 95 



had fallen in a right line, there " would have been no contact 

 produced, and no collision generated among the primary 

 elements." 



He gives a limited number of shapes to the atoms, but sees 

 no need of hooks to keep them together. This variation in 

 shape leadft also to a variation in size, but the atoms them- 

 selves are infinitely numerous. 



Primordial atoms are not sentient, or they would " produce 

 nothing but a crowd and multitude of animals."* 



So far Lucretius. This theory of the constitution of mate- 

 rial substances requires us only to conceive of one class of 

 substances : for although some are larger than others and dif- 

 ferently shaped, that is not a necessary supposition. It is the 

 atomic theory properly so called. Forces are as much left out 

 as possible. 



One of the most complete atomic systems seems to have 

 been produced in Hindostan. There it is said matter consists 

 of the smallest possible bodies which are indivisible. We must 

 at last arrive at something limited, otherwise the smallest, as 

 well as the greatest, would be infinite. The first compound 

 is binary, the union of two being the simplest, then there is 

 a formation of three binary atoms, and a new compound of 

 four quaternary atoms, and so on. The atom is equal in size 

 to the sixth part of a particle seen by the sun's rays. A 

 superior force draws the atoms to each other. The union is 

 not a mere juxta-position, but one drawn by a particular 

 afl&nity. 



This is a peculiar mode of combining the atoms, we have 

 not three or four simple as we might expect. It is interesting 

 to find exactly the same course of reasoning about natural 

 things among the Hindoos as in Greece, although Mill, in his 

 history of India, ridicules it as the wanderings of the mind ; 

 the same might be said of the Greek ideas. We find there, 



• Book II., 1. 917. 



