Empedocles' Oral Style Jackson P. Hershbell The Classical Journal, Vol. 63, No. 8. (May, 1968), pp. 351-357.

Stable URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0009-8353%28196805%2963%3A8%3C351%3AEOS%3E2.0.CO%3B2-W The Classical Journal is currently published by The Classical Association of the Middle West and South, Inc..

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/about/terms.html. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/journals/camws.html. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission.

The JSTOR Archive is a trusted digital repository providing for long-term preservation and access to leading academic journals and scholarly literature from around the world. The Archive is supported by libraries, scholarly societies, publishers, and foundations. It is an initiative of JSTOR, a not-for-profit organization with a mission to help the scholarly community take advantage of advances in technology. For more information regarding JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

http://www.jstor.org Thu Jan 3 08:40:28 2008

EMPEDOCLES' ORAL STYLE

ocles (Chicago 1908); E. Bignone, Empedocle (Turin 1916); and W. K. C. Guthrie, A history o f Greek philosophy, vo1.2 (Cambridge 1965). Each gives some preliminary and general attention to Empedocles' style. Their main concern, however, is with philosophical interpretation. * A s Bowra notes, this has led to speculation that the Greeks adopted hexametric verse from some other language, such as Minoan or Hittite. See M. Bowra, "Metre," in A companion t o Homer, ed. A. J . B. Wace and F. H. Stubbings (London 1962), 23. This was pointed out by Burnet and later reaffirmed by Millerd. See J. Burnet, Early Greek philosophy (repr. New York 1957) 203, and Millerd, Interpretation, 43 n.5.

Parmenides' poems, maintained that "it is convenient that such writings should be found in the fragments of his p0ems.l As both compact and easily committed to ~n short, the works were "first a result of this preoccupation with Emped- m e m ~ r y . " I ocles the philosopher, little attention has learnt by heart."5 I t is generally agreed that verse can be been given to the style and manner in which h i s poems were composed and orig- more readily memorized than prose, but if inally presented. This is especially curious Empedocles' poems were written, what since hexameters are not well suited for an need was there for memorizing them? Why easy use of Greek, and many words, were his writings not kept readily availbecause of their scansion, are e ~ c l u d e d . ~able? Cornford never really answered these Poetic form, moreover, is not the usual questions other than by vague reference to medium of philosophical discourse, and the "time necessary for assimilation," and Empedocles was the last significant Greek the gradual emergence of "hidden meanthinker to use it.3 At least two important i n g ~ . " ~ questions have not been answered satisMuch more recently W. K. C. Guthrie factorily. First, why did Empedocles com- has explained Empedocles' use of hexpose in the epic tradition, retaining epic ameter simply as "a medium that comes meter and language? And second, how naturally to him as the best vehicle for can the frequent repetition of lines, part his t h o ~ g h t . " ~ But why does verse come lines, and even single words in the poems naturally to Empedocles, and why is it the be explained? In view of these considerabest vehicle for his thought? Guthrie tions, the attempt to account for Empedleaves these questions unanswered. ocles' style is a serious one. In defense of Guthrie, it could be argued F. M. Cornford, while examining the that Empedocles wrote in verse because he "esoteric" character of Empedocles' and was brought up in the epic tradition. The argument implies, however, that the epic 1 Three of the most detailed over-all studies of Empedocles are: C. E. Millerd, On the interpretation of Empedtradition was either a written one or that
OST STUDIES OF
4 F. M. Cornford, From religion to philosophy (repr. New York 1957) 225. Italics mine. 5 Zbid. Zbid. Cornford's explanation of Empedocles' use of verse is based on Aristotle's account in the Nicomachean ethics (7.3:1147a): "For they being in states of drunkenness repeat the arguments (dao6ei&ts) and verses of Empedocles; and having just learned them, they reel them off. But they do not yet understand, since i t takes time for these verses to become part of their thinking." 7 Guthrie, History 2:135.

EMPEDOCLES have M focused on the philosophical problems

352

JACKSON

P. HERSHBELL

if originally oral, Empedocles was influenced by it only to the extent that he wrote in verse. This defense is weakened, however, by the fact that Empedocles' poems are characterized by a large number of seemingly unnecessary repetitions, a directness of address which seems odd to modern readers, and a lack of clarity or consistency, to the extent that Guthrie agrees with Millerd's assertion that "the important thing in understanding him is to stop thinking at the right m ~ m e n t . " ~Was Empedocles then writing in a deliberately obscure and repetitive style? Or was he somehow incapable of expressing himself clearly and economically in verse? But then why not write in prose? Was he unable to write in prose? The difficulty of writing in prose tends, in fact, to be underestimated in a literate society. One cannot write prose merely by conveying the spoken word to the page. Verse, on the other hand, can easily be composed without the aid of writing, especially in societies where literacy is not widespread, e.g. as with the Balkan oral epics. If, then, Empedocles was an oral poet who made little or no use of writing, his use of repetition and lack of clarity can be better understood, and attributed not so much to his mind but to his style. I n fact, his mental processes may well have been controlled by his medium o f expression. For a writer of prose can be held responsible for failure to treat his subject concisely and systema t i ~ a l l y but ; ~ a poet in an oral tradition,
8 Ibid. The observation that Empedocles' directness of address seems strange to modern readers is made by lIillerd, Interpretation 22. T h e inconsistency of Empedocles' thought has been noted by Aristotle, Gomperz, Jlillerd, and Guthrie. See, for example, lIillerd, Interpretation 16. Hazel E. Barnes, "Unity in the thought of Empedocles," C I 63 (1967) 18-23, has recently argued that Empedocles' thought is consistent. According to Barnes, the problem of consistency mainly concerns the apparent dichotomy between On nature and Purifications; in particular, "the problem of the relation of deity to the cosmic cycle and second that of mortal to deity," see p.18. Although the compatibility of the two poems is well argued, her somewhat restrictive notion of "consistency" seems to overlook other problems, e.g. Empedocles' apparent denial of empty space and his doctrine of pores and effluences, or the number and relationship of the cosmic cycles. 0 By conciseness I mean the absence of superfluous expressions. Owing to repetition, the fragments of Emped-

composing from memory in verse, a difficult medium for philosophical expression, cannot be judged by the same standards. Much has been written about Milman Parry's contributions to Homeric scholarship.1 Apart from seeing the relevance of modern oral Yugoslavian poetry, he demonstrated that Homer was an oral poet, depending on a gradually evolved store of fixed phrases or formulae.ll This formulaic character of Homeric language, and the nature of oral communication, have been examined in detail elsewhere.12 What importance, if any, do these findings have for understanding the style of Empedocles? That they are not without relevance is my hypothesis: Empedocles was an oral poet. Now, the true oral poet composes and transmits poetry without the aid of writing. He does not work from a fixed text, though the phrases and lines of his poetry are more or less constant. His poems are delivered orally to an audience. Hence poet and audience rely exclusively on memory for the preservation of the composition. Preservation in the memory can be guaranteed only, however, by rhythmic words organized in verbal and metrical patterns havocles' poems can hardly be described as concise. Granted, of course, that conciseness is not impossible in oral poetry, there is more reason to expect it in written prose. I t is easier to edit a written than a spoken work, and hence achieve a greater degree of thoroughness and methodicalness. I n short, writing and speech are not identical, and the rules or standards governing the one do not always apply to the other. ' 0 See, for example, D. Page, History and the Homeric Iliad (Berkeley 1959) 218ff.; A. B. Lord, "Homer and other epic poetry," in Wace and Stubbings, A companion to Homer, 179-211: G. S. Kirk, T h e songs of Homer (Cambridge 1962) 271ff. '1See 31. Parry, L'e'pithdte traditionelle dans H o m b e (Paris 1928) and Rf. Parry, "Studies in the epic technique of oral verse-makinn." HSCP 41 (1930) 73ff. and 43 (1932) Iff. 12 For a treatment of the formulaic character of Homeric language, see the studies of Parry (note 11 above) and 31. Bowra, "Style," in Wace and Stubbings, A companion to Homer, 2811. According to Parry, L'dpithdte, 16, a 'formula' is "une expression qui est reguli6rement employee, dans les mdmes conditions metriques, pour exprimer une certaine idbe essentielle." T h e nature of oral communication has been analyzed by A. B. Lord, A singer of tales (Cambridge, Rfass. 1960) and E . A. Havelock, Preface t o Plato (Cambridge, Rfass. 1963). For an interesting but general and nontechnical treatment of oral communication, see H. A. Innis, T h e bias of communicatioir (repr. Toronto 1964) 311.

ing a degree of regularity.13 Other ingredients of oral composition are a somewhat restricted and standardized vocabulary, and frequent repetition of phrases extending in length from a word or two to several complete lines, as in the formulae of Homeric epic. Metrical regularity and repetition, then, are essential for learning and composing long oral poems. That ancient Greece had an oral culture is unquestionable, though there seems no unanimous agreement upon when literacy became widespread.14 Havelock asserted that Homer's "poet successors were writers.l113 But he also set out to prove that the culture of Plato's time was predominantly oral.l"mpedocles (492-432 B.c.) was part of Greek oral culture as described by Havelock.li His poetry should thus display characteristics of Greek oral culture. Since it has been disputed that Homer himself was a true oral poet who made no use of writing,lx the hypothesis that Empedocles was an oral poet does not rule out the possibility that his poems were composed with some aid from writing; that is, he may not have been a true oral poet. Empedocles' poems, however, have metrical regularity and repetitions, two essential characteristics of oral poetry.''
13 For a discussion of memorization and its role in oral communication, see Havelock, Preface 145ff. 14 This question is examined in some detail by Havelock, especially 49-56. ' 5 Ibid 46. ' 0 Havelock, Preface 38, writes: "It is fair to conclude that the cultural situation described by Plato is one in which oral communication still dominates all the important relationships and valid transactions of life. Books of course there were, and the alphabet had been in use for over three centuries, hut the question is: used by how many? and used for what purposes? Up to this point its introduction had made little practical difference to the educational system or to the intellectual life of adults. This is a hard conclusion to accept, not least in the eyes of scholars of the written word." On Empedocles' dates, see Guthrie, History 2:128. 1s For a well-balanced discussion of this problem, see Kirk, Songs 98ff. Kirk believes that the hypothesis of some kind of written text of the Homeric epics is unnecessary. 19 Parmenides' poem is also characterized by metrical regularity and what seems to be the repetition of ideas. I n the extant fragments, however, there is no repetition of identical or very similar lines, and Parmenides does not address his audience directly. On the contrary, it is he who is addressed by a goddess. Nonetheless, the possibility exists that he, too, was an oral poet.

The evidence that Empedocles' poems were a t least delivered orally is found in the remaining fragments. For example, the first fragment of the Diels-Kranz arrangement indicates that Empedocles' poems were designed for listening and recitayou must listen, son of t i ~ n "Pausanias, : ~ ~ wise Anchites! " The imperative Kh981 ('hear' or 'listen') is used in two other lines of the fragments, B17,14 and B62,3; in B112,ll the infinitive occurs.21 The ('hear') ~ also appears twice, imperative ~ K O U B6,l and B17,26. Other forms of & K O ~ C L V , the infinitive and the aorist participle, are used in B3,4 and B23,ll respectively. I n addition to these verbs suggesting auditory response from an audience, there are verbs indicating that Empedocles first made his poems known by reciting them. For example, the Homeric formula, dhho 6 C 701 ipCw, in B 8 , l ; the repeated 6kh' ipCw of B17,l and B17,16; ei 6' dye TOL hllw in B38,l; and iy; i6eplw in B114,2. Throughout the fragments, then, verbs occur which strongly suggest that Empedocles' poems, if not composed orally, were a t least intended for recitation. But apart from this, there is other evidence of oral performance. I n B3,l-2 the poet invokes the gods: "But, ye gods, avert from my tongue their madness, and guide forth a pure stream (of speech) from reverent lips!" Granted that even in written prose the gods can be addressed directly, this passage still makes little sense if it was intended to be read; and to argue that it is in some sense merely decorative or figurative would violate the obvious meaning of the language: the poet is addressing
20 H . S. Long, "On the unity of Empedocles," A I P 70 (1949) 142-58, points out that the arrangement of fragments by modern editors has been, to some extent, their own reconstruction. Specifically, the assignment of fragments either to On nature or to the Purifications has been somewhat arbitrary. For the purpose of this study, however, I have accepted the Diels-Kranz arrangement. I n the remaining notes D K = H . Diels and W. Kranz, Fragmente der Vorsokratike$ (Berlin 1952). Guthrie is correct in pointing out that B1 ("Pausanias, you must listen . . ") with its address by name to a single person, puts the poem On nature in the tradition of admonitory poetry. But this does not fully explain the use of terms suggesting an oral situation! Guthrie, Ilistory 2:137.

3 54

JACKSON P. HERSHBELL

or about to speak to an audience ("guide forth a pure stream [of speech] from reverent lips"). The somewhat enigmatic injunction of B5, crrcy&uai + p e v 6 ~ i h h o ~ o c l a w , might simply command the response of a listener: remember what you are told ! I n the fragments considered thus far, Empedocles seems always to assume a listener-poet relationship. His presentation is essentially oral, not written; and it is made to an audience, not to readers. Does the character of his language also indicate oral composition? T h e evidence is somewhat more involved. I t could be argued, of course, that if the Homeric epic is oral poetry-and this can be demonstrated by the formulaic character of its language-then, since a similar formulaic character is evident in Empedocles' language, his poetry, too, must be oral. The argument, however, cannot be presented so simply, for how can we be certain that the oral characteristics of Empedocles' poems were not, in fact, merely borrowings or imitations of the Homeric style? Now a hypothesis by its very nature cannot be proved conclusively; it is simply designed to account satisfactorily for certain phenomena. Hence we cannot be sure that Empedocles was not imitating Homer. On the other hand, if the oral characteristics are borrowings, it is necessary to account for their presence. Was Empedocles merely imitating Homer for the sake of imitation? What purpose would he have had for doing this? Did he perhaps admire Homer? There is no evidence. Or was his imitation functional, that is, necessary for composing in a predominantly oral situation? Even if his poems were recited from a written text, it is difficult to show that their original composition was not oral. For in order to do this, it is necessary to determine how writing could have helped Empedocles, especially since his poems are
~ ' E A X o ? r o s can be either nominative or genitive. I n either case, the one addressed is asked to keep silent. See D K , 311, note 13. 2 ~ e y d a a rprobably means 'to hold' or 'to retain.'

not so long that their composition would be beyond the powers of an oral poet. I n short, the contention for a written text ~ seems gratuitous, and does not account for Empedocles' formulaic repetitive style. Since only 450 of about 5,000 lines of it is difEmpedocles' poems are ficult to know how r~ervasivehis use of repetition was. Moreover, because of the relatively small number of extant fragments, it is not easy to determine what is formulaic except when a given set of words recurs. Nonetheless. about one tenth of the extant fragments consist of lines repeated. Now the repetitive nature of Empedocles' style has been noted by others, such as Bignone and G ~ t h r i e . ~In ' fact, several of the poet's sayings, notably B25, "for what is right may well be told twice," have usually been interpreted as showing the poet's awareness of his device of repetition. Commenting on the long B17, where the repetition is obvious, Guthrie remarks that "it is an unusually clever and effective method of impressing upon a reader the unity and interdependence of all parts of the cosmic scheme."25 Guthrie seems, therefore, to assume a writer-reader relationship. The repetition, however, does not always seem to emphasize the unity of Empedocles' cosmology. For example, the expression Oeoi ~ t p i j l + ~ i I P appears ~ ~ three ~ ~ ~ times with some variation, in B21,12, B23, 8, and B 146,3. The line Z+aipoq ~ v ~ h o r e ~ ~ s ~ O V m ~ P i~r I L Y d ~y a l w v appears in both B27 and B28. In none of these examples is it clear that the unity of Empedocles' thought is especially emphasized. Moreover, what need was there for repetition a t all? Why was the coherence of the system, assuming there was one, not otherwise impressed, e.g. in a carefully written treatise?
23 See Guthrie, History 2 : 135. Diogenes Laertius estimated that the poem amounted to 5,000 lines. Guthrie thinks the number was probably smaller. 24See Bignone, Empedocle 220-21, 602-3, especially notes 3 and 4, where Bignone gives examples of repetitions. H e does not discuss them in any detail, and his examples are whole-line repetitions. See also Guthrie, History 2:137. S G u t h r i e , History 2:155. Italics mine.

Other fragments, especially in view of the repetitive character of the poems, further suggest Empedocles' awareness of his use of oral techniques. For example, B24: "Fitting the heads of my tale into one another, not to traverse a sole and single path."26 I n other words, his treatment will be disconnected. I s this sheer perversity because the poet does not want to write a coherent treatise? Or is it his awareness that in oral presentation and composition (for example, the academic lecture) a subject cannot always be treated in a wellordered, closely connected fashion? Also the opening lines of B21, "Come now, observe this witness to my previous songs (dcipwv), lest anything in them be lacking in form . . . " make more sense if the poet presented his thoughts orally. The term o"apoi, for example, used once in the Theogony, suggests verbal communication, and if the "songs" were orally presented, there is likelihood that something could be missing or accidentally omitted.27 If Empedocles' poems were composed orally, then they could be preserved and transmitted only insofar as they could be memorized. Hence repetition was necessary for the retention bf the poems in the minds both of the ~ o e and t of his audience. The repetitions are largely formulaic in character; that is, they often have the same metrical value, express the same ideas, and can readily replace one another.2s Most of these formulae seem to originate with Empedocles, though several are traditional or inherited from the Homeric epic. For example, vrlhr& ijpap in B139,l is found in 11. 11.484; aCp &t677hov in B 109,2 in 11. 2.455 ; d u ~ k a hcv~k in B96,3 in Od. 1.161 et passim. The phrase ai6Cpa
translation: ibid. 136. '25'Hes. T h . 205: lrapOevlous r ' 66pous per8fifia~ar' t [ a l r d ~ a s T E . The verb 6api(erv seems to mean 'to converse' or 'to chat.' See 11. 6.516. 2 s J, B. Hainsworth, "Structure and content in epic formulae: the question of the unique expression," 14 (1964) 155-64, cites several definitions of "formul:.Q H e himself maintains that the "essence of a formula is its repetition; hut the repetition can be in form (as in mathematics) or in content (as in ceremonial language)." See p.155.

6;ov in B109,2 is reminiscent of ai8Cpo~i~ 8 l r l ~ in 11. 16.365. T h e recurrent a r p i a h o p b o i o X p 6 of ~ B17,29 ~ ~ ~ and B 110,8

(with variants in B26,l and B30,2) are more generalized or abstract versions of aepiirhopE'vov 6' i v i a v ~ o iin Od. 11.248 (see also irepi~hoplvwv iviavrSv in Od. 1.16 and Hes. T h . 184). The use of &~;popoi to describe mortals in B2,4 may be intended to recall the epithet applied to Achilleus in the Iliad, or to the suitors of Penelope in the Odyssey. The use of the Homeric formula dhho 6C TOL ipCw has also been noted.29 In addition to these formulae inherited from the epic tradition, Empedocles uses what seem to be the formulae of Parmenides; for example, & X X d ~ ~ i o+& v in B45 is taken directly from Parmenides' B14, which, in turn, is a playful imitation of 11. 5.214.30 The phrase 6adurll. ~ 6 ~ i 0 u~ s l vorjuai in B3,12 recalls Parmenides' 6601 . . . clui vo?juai of B2,2. Empedocles' B28,1, &AX ii y r aclv~o6cv Iuos (ioi) ~ a a&,uaav i &aclpwv, is similar to Parmenides' B8,49,
o E y&p aciv~o6rvEuov, dpCs iv aclpaui ~ L p r i .

" Guthrie's

Though often taken as attacks on Parmenidesj31 it is possible that these reminiscences are functional. They recall the work of Parmenides, and a t the same time enable Empedocles to compose his own poetry. I n general, the repetitions could fall into four classifications: ( 1) repetition of nouns plus adjectives (similar to the noun-epithet formulae of the Homeric epics) ; ( 2 ) repetition of part-lines; (3) repetition of whole lines, singly or in blocks; ( 4 ) repetition of theme or concepts, i.e, when the ideas are similar, though expressed in different language. These classifications are artificial since there are also examples of noun-adjective repetitions within passages lines are where
28 Diels noted that lihho 86 T O [ Qpdw was 'homerisch': DK 312, note 7. Solbid. 243: "dAA6rprov $fis spielende Imitation von Hom. E 214, aufgenommen v. Emped. B45." See, for example, Burnet, Greek philosophy 227 and G. S. Kirk and J. E . Raven, T h e Presocratic philosophers (Cambridge 1957) 325. Sa For example, B21,lO-12 and B23,6-8.
Q

JACKSON P. HERSHBELL

( 1 ) Most of the noun-adjective repetitions seem purely functional, and add little or no meaning to a line or passage. For example, fish are twice described as in B21,ll and B23,7 in the irSa~o0~~ppovrs, nominative and accusative respectively. I n B20,6 fish are .j8poPlha8po~, and in B117,2 If the complete the fish is i'[ahos i'hXo~o~. lines containing these noun-adjectives are also considered, it is obvious how similar, if not formulaic, they are in character:

later use does not establish the claim that Empedocles, too, was a writer of verse. (2) Examples of part-line repetition show somewhat more variation than the noun-adjective type, and usually involve the change of a word or two to fit the metrical line. For example, G~ahXd[av~a ~rhc680vs in B35,15, but pr~ahhdauov~a K E ~ E ~ ~ O in V S B 1 15,8 ; dhXcluuov~a81ap?r~~is oiGay& X?jyr~in B17,6, but G~ahXduuovra G ~ a p a a p i s oCGap& X?jyr~ i n B 1 7 , 1 2 ; uvvappou8~v~' ' A + ~ O ~ in / TB ~7 L 1, but ~ ~ O L W ' au"rws Bdyvocur ~ a l i~ B 6 u r v B20,6: (5s 6 O ~ V T '' A + ~ O ~ L in TB2 ~L 2,s ; dhX' ; I yc ~dvro8rv JGpoyeh~Bpors B117,2: Bayvos 7' oiwv6s r e ~ a %[ahos i Ehho~os Iuos (ioi) in B28,1, but ~ a (~clv~o0cv) l Euos ixB6s iav~h in~ B29,3 ; cis b ;I?rav~a in B17,7 and i B21,ll: O?jpCs r' oiwvoi r e ~ a JGaro6'pkyyoves B20,2, but cis Zva K~U,I.LOV in B26,S. Some ixBiis part-lines are also identical repetitions. B21,ll is repeated with slight variation in For example, T' dp~h6vovu~ ycplyvas in B23,7 (this being accusative). These B2,2 and B110,7; 61' dhhrjhwv 8 2 0Cov~ain whole-line repetitions occur also in blocks B17,34, B21,13, and B26,3. Again the of almost identical lines, namely, B2 1,lO-12 nature of these part-line repetitions is and B23,6-8: "And trees sprang up, and formulaic, which is suggestive of an oral men and women, beasts and birds and style. water-nurtured fish, and even the long(3) Most numerous are the repetitions lived gods highest in honor." ( I n B23,6-8 of identical or very similar whole lines, these nouns are the objects of KT~[OVT.) either singly or in groups. Examples of B21,lO-12 occurs in a context where the these are i v G i p l PK~ ~ ~ ~ T ~ O VT U~ L ~ L T ~ ~ ~ ~ V O harmonious influence of Love is described. X p d in ~ B17,29 ~ ~ ~(with the variant K ~ K ~ O L O B23,6-9 is used in a simile: the harmony for X p d in ~ B26,l). ~ ~ ~ B29,l-2 is repeated resulting from the influence of Love is like in B134,2-3, where d ~ is d to be read instead the result when painters have mixed their of and 'shaggy' (haXv?jrvra) is a pigments harmoniously. In B 100,15 and variant for 'reproductive' (yrvvljrv~a) : "For 21 the noun-adjective aZu~pov5Gwp occurs two limbs do not shoot forth from his in lines describing the egress and regress back; no feet, no nimble knees, no reof air in a water-catcher. " E ~ T C ~ O Sis productive organs." B17,l-2 is repeated in ai&v used twice, in B17,ll and B26,10, again B 17,16-17, and is obviously formulaic, in identical verbal contexts. Once ai&v is since in oral presentation it would serve qualified by dusr~osin B16,2. Trees are the purpose both of emphasizing a previous twice qualified with the adjective pa~pcl,in point, and of introducing a new one. B72 and B79; also ~ v ~ d p o ~in u ~B127. v The somewhat long passage B17,7-13 is and 6pr~hr~lrs Beasts are &ypd~cpo~ in B9,2 repeated in B26,S-13 though line B26,7, and B20,7. ciud~rv2v uvp+dv~aT; ?r&v h?r~vcP8~ Y ~ V ~ ~ T ~ L , The previous examples of noun-adjective is not found in the passage from B17. Also combinations are suggestive of a poet's hhhciuoov~a in B26,ll is a variant for in B 17,12. formulaic language; their use enables him 6~ahhdauov~a (4) Empedocles uses lines which, though to compose orally without interrupting the presentation of his thought. To be sure, not verbally identical, express similar ideas similar repetitions appear in later written or themes. Cornford notices one of these poetry, such as that of Theocritus. But a "cross-references," the oath set for banish-

L O

ment from the realm of the blessed.33 The former occurs in B30,3 of On nature: "which (time) is fixed in turn for them by a firm-based oath"; mention of the same oath occurs in B 115 of the Purifications: "sealed with firm-based oaths." Other examples of repetition of thought, reminiscent of Parmenides, are:
B13: Neither is there any part of the all (roc r a v ~ 6 s ) empty nor overfull. B14: Xothing of the all is empty; whence

could anything enter into i t ?

B17,32-3: And what could increase the all?

And whence could it come? And how could it perish since nothing is empty of these?

From the examples of the repetitions or formulae presented above, it cannot be concluded with certainty that Empedocles composed orally, that he made no use of a written text, and that each performance of his poems was a somewhat new composition. The possibility remains that he and his students simply memorized a manuscript. But that some oral techniques played a role in the composition and preservation of the poems cannot be easily denied.

The hypothesis that Empedocles was an oral poet accounts reasonably well for his use of verse (he was the last important Greek thinker to use it) and his continuance in the epic tradition. Evidence of oral delivery is found in the poet's use of verbs for hearing and speaking. His poems seem designed for recitation, and his language has a formulaic character not unlike that of the Homeric epics, a strong indication of oral composition. The lack of conciseness and clarity in Empedocles' thought can also be attributed to an oral style. The hypothesis that Empedocles had an oral style does not mean that his ideas must have been presented without forethought before an audience. He seems to have made some use of inherited formulae, a procedure not inconsistent with techniques of oral verse-making. In view of the repetitiousness, direct address, and lack of clarity of the fragments, there is less justification for the belief of the literate scholar that Empedocles' poems were originally written. JACKSON P. HERSHBELL University of North Dakota

* Cornford,

Religion to philosophy 237.

http://www.jstor.org

LINKED CITATIONS
- Page 1 of 1 -

You have printed the following article: Empedocles' Oral Style Jackson P. Hershbell The Classical Journal, Vol. 63, No. 8. (May, 1968), pp. 351-357.
Stable URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0009-8353%28196805%2963%3A8%3C351%3AEOS%3E2.0.CO%3B2-W

This article references the following linked citations. If you are trying to access articles from an off-campus location, you may be required to first logon via your library web site to access JSTOR. Please visit your library's website or contact a librarian to learn about options for remote access to JSTOR.

[Footnotes]
8

Unity in the Thought of Empedocles Hazel E. Barnes The Classical Journal, Vol. 63, No. 1. (Oct., 1967), pp. 18-23.
Stable URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0009-8353%28196710%2963%3A1%3C18%3AUITTOE%3E2.0.CO%3B2-M
11

Studies in the Epic Technique of Oral Verse-Making. I. Homer and Homeric Style Milman Parry Harvard Studies in Classical Philology, Vol. 41. (1930), pp. 73-147.
Stable URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0073-0688%281930%2941%3C73%3ASITETO%3E2.0.CO%3B2-G
20

The Unity of Empedocles' Thought Herbert S. Long The American Journal of Philology, Vol. 70, No. 2. (1949), pp. 142-158.
Stable URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0002-9475%281949%2970%3A2%3C142%3ATUOET%3E2.0.CO%3B2-1
28

Structure and Content in Epic Formulae: The Question of the Unique Expression J. B. Hainsworth The Classical Quarterly, New Series, Vol. 14, No. 2. (Nov., 1964), pp. 155-164.
Stable URL:
http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0009-8388%28196411%292%3A14%3A2%3C155%3ASACIEF%3E2.0.CO%3B2-8

NOTE: The reference numbering from the original has been maintained in this citation list.