726 PROCEEDINGS OF THE AMERICAN ACADEMY. 



and quotes fr. 109 to prove it. So far as I can recall, all scholars 

 have been content to accept this deduction of Aristotle, although 

 the words quoted offer not the slightest confirmation of it ancj the 

 doctrine thus ascribed to Empedocles is diametrically opposed to his 

 conception of ypvxv in matters of religion. This conflict has been 

 often noted, but no one seems to have seen that the solution of the 

 difficulty lies in the simple fact that Empedocles did not connect 

 these functions with the \pvxv, which he, like many other early 

 Greeks, thought of as the entity only which escapes from man at the 

 moment of death and survives the body. Fr. 110, 10, 



TvavTO. yap tadi (fypovrjcnv exetJ' ko.1 fco/xaros alaau, 



shows what language Empedocles used: everything has cf)p6pr]cns and 

 voriixa, but not \pvxv- See my remarks in Amer. Journ. of Philol., 

 33, p. 94 sq., and Journ. of Philos., Psychol, and Scient. Methods, 

 10, p. 107. 



V2 203, 34. Fr. 110, 



el yap Kev acf)' adLvrjaLV vtto TrpaTvlbeaaLV epeiaas 

 ev/jLCpecos KadapfjaiV eiroTrrevaris /JLeXeTTjatv, 

 TavTo, re aoL juaXa iravTa 8l' aluivos Trapkaovrai, 

 dX\a re ttoXX' ciTro toov8' eKTTjcreaL • aurd yap av^ec 

 5 raOr' els rjdos eKacxrov, ovrj (f)vais earlv eKacTW. 

 el be av y' oKKomp evrope^eat, ola Kar' ixvopas 

 fivpla 5etXd ireXovTaL d r' afxjSXvvouai pepi/jLPas, 

 rj a' a4>ap eK\ei\f/ovac TepnrXopepoLO xpovoLo 

 a(J3(t}v avTUiv Trodeovra 4>l\r]U ewl y'evvav LKeadat ' 

 10 iravTa yap 'iadt (f>p6vy]aLV ex'^iv /cat vdcjiaTOs alcav. 



The text of this fragment as given by Hippolytus is extremely 

 corrupt; but I accept the text given by Diels everywhere except in 

 verses 4 and 5. Here the MSS. read aii^et and Wos: Diels retains the 

 former and adopts Miller's suggestion of ridos for the latter. This 

 text I think is clearly wrong, as the difficulties experienced by Diels 

 in rendering the passage ought to convince any reader. But v. 8 sq. 

 seem to me to show what we require; for they obviously contain the 

 converse of the statement which the poet made in the sentence we 

 are considering. lam convinced that Empedocles wrote ct^et, not 

 aii^et; with regard to Wos, one may hesitate before deciding between the 

 claims of edvos and rjdos. In favor of e^^ws one may quote Hippocr. 

 Ilepi TOTTOiv Tcbv Kara aydpuirov, 1 (6, 278 L.), tovto 8' biroiov av n iradri, 



