Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-x24gv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-20T21:37:41.847Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Empedokles and his Klepsydra again

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 February 2009

Hugh Last
Hugh Last
Affiliation:
St. John's College, Oxford
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Mr. Powell's ingenious observations on The Simile of the Clepsydra in Empedocles raise afresh the problem of the precise form and construction of the instrument with whose aid Empedokles is said to have reached his memorable conclusion that air is a corporeal substance. That ‘klepsydra’ was the name of the instrument in question is shown by a comparison of Aristotle, Phys. 213a, 22 sqq. with Empedokles, fr. 100; but though so far the fragment is plain, in its detailed interpretation there arises a difficulty which is the subject of the present note. Empedokles is explaining his theory of respiration, and the theory is illustrated by the action of this apparatus. To make clear the general drift of the passage, it may be well to quote again so much of it as is relevant. ‘Thus do all things draw breath in and breathe it out again. All have bloodless tubes of flesh extended over the surface of their bodies; and at the mouths of these the outermost surface of the skin is perforated all over with pores closely packed together, so as to keep in the blood while a free passage is cut for the air to pass through. Then, when the thin blood recedes from these, the bubbling air rushes in with an impetuous surge; and when the blood rushes back it’ (i.e. the air) ‘is breathed out again.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Classical Quarterly , Volume 18 , Issue 3-4 , July 1924 , pp. 169 - 173
Copyright
Copyright © The Classical Association 1924

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

page 169 note 1 In Class. Quart., 1923, pp. 172 sqq.

page 169 note 2 The translation of the opening is Burnet's: vide E.G.P. (3), p. 219. The Greek text is that of Diels [Vors. I. (3), pp. 258–9], changed only by the omission of a comma at the end of line 18.

page 170 note 1 Antike Technik (2), pp. 192 sq.

page 170 note 2 The main paintings of this vessel have been omitted as irrelevant. For the preparation of figures I have to thank my colleague, Dr. C. G. Douglas, C.M.G., F.R.S.

page 170 note 3 [Ar.], Probl. 16, 8 passim.

page 170 note 4 Heron, , Pneum. I, 7Google Scholar; Simplikios, , De Caelo, p. 524, 27 sqqGoogle Scholar.

page 170 note 5 [Ar.], Probl. 914b, 32; Heron, l.c. (twice).

page 171 note 1 Vide Bulle, H. in Ath. Mitt. XXII. (1897), p. 387Google Scholar; and R. Zahn, ibid. XXIV. (1899), pp. 337 sqq.

page 171 note 2 Vide Pottier, E. in Rev. arch. XXXIV. (1899), p. 7Google Scholar; and Clermont Ganneau, ibid., pp. 323 sqq.

page 171 note 3 For these vide Pernice, E., Σϕων in Jahrb. d. k. k. arch. Inst.. VIII. (1893), pp. 180–4Google Scholar.

page 171 note 4 Vide De Ridder, Bronzes de la Soc. arch. d' Athènes, No. 114.

page 171 note 5 In Εϕ. ρϰ. (1902), col. 18.

page 171 note 6 Pneum. 1. 7.

page 171 note 7 De Ing. spir. II.

page 171 note 8 In Pauly-Wissowa-Kroll, R.E. XI., col. 809. Vide also Ardaillon in Daremberg-Saglio, D.A. III., p. 261.

page 172 note 1 Aristoph, . Ach. 692Google Scholar.

page 172 note 2 Keil, , Anonymus Argentinensis, pp. 254 sqqGoogle Scholar.

page 172 note 3 In 'Αθην XVI. (1904), p. 20.

page 172 note 4 Vide Aischines III. 197; [Ar.] 'Αθ. Πολ. 67, 2.