IIKIDEL. — ON FRAGMENTS OF THE PRE-SOCRATICS. 729 



iKTTjaeai, a reference to tokos, usury; for, as one may perceive by 

 Aesc'hin. 8. 35, davdanaTa ovk dXiya, 6.4)' Siv eKelvos tokovs (Xdn^ave, the 

 phraseology suggests it. .Vneient writers, howexer, were fully aware 

 of the metaphor, which was still alive, and played on the word, 

 as Ar. Thesmoph. 842 sq., Plato, Repub. 555 E, Arist. Pol. 1.10. 1258*' 

 5 sq.. This metaphor would well lead up to that of rjdos, as the lair 

 of M'ild beasts. From this too, it would be easy to explain the figure 

 of Lucretius, who substitutes mountain-ranging hounds tracking the 

 beasts to their lairs [quictcs, 1, 405, and caccas latchras, 408). Indeed, 

 it is possible that Empedocles may have used the simile of the hound 

 in this very connection, fr. 101, 



Kepiuara Orjpeicjv ixekkoiv fxvKTrjpaLV tptwdv 

 Koapad'^ 6(T(t' aireXecTre irodoju aTraXrj wepi Trolr). 



But the context in which the fragment is quoted by our ancient 

 authorities, as well as Lucret. 4, 680 sq., suggest rather that Empedocles 

 was there illustrating his doctrine of universal dwoppoLai. I find it 

 difficult, therefore, to decide between the claims of Wvos and ^dos; but 

 incline on the whole to faxor the former because of v. 9, 



TTodkovTa (f}i\r}v kiri ykvvau LKecxdai. 



I may add that Mr. Cornford, From Religion to Philosophy, p. 64, 

 makes an interesting suggestion in regard to Emped. fr. 17, 28, 



TLprjs 8' aXXrjs aWo pedeL, irapd 8' rfdos tKacFTCo, 



where he renders Trapd . . . eKacfTw, 'each has its wonted range.' See 

 ibid., p. 34. 



Now that the general sense of Emped. fr. 110 is clear, there can 

 be no doubt about the meaning of v. 5, ottt; 0u(ns karlv tKaaTCo. It is 

 'prout cuique natura est, "each after its kind." 



c. 32. Philolaus. 

 V^ 239, 31. Fr. 1, d cpvaLs 8' h tc3 Kocrpf^o. 



In V^ Diels adopts certain suggestions made in my Notes on Philo- 

 latis, Amer. Journ. of Philol., 28, p. 79, to which he refers, but rightly 

 retains 5' kv to) KoapLco instead of 8e tu) Koapct), which I formerly pro- 

 posed; but in sense tco Koapo) was more nearly right than his rendering 

 "bei der Wcltordnung." In the notes he now cites parallels, which 

 I furnished, for (^i/crts ev t<2 Koapco. They sufficiently explain the 



