According to the traditional view of Empedocles' cosmic cycle, there are two creations of plants and animals, one under the dominion of increasing Strife and one under the dominion of increasing Love. At the point at which Strife holds complete sway the four elements are completely separated and all life is destroyed; at the point at which Love is completely dominant there is also a destruction of the biological world, this time because the elements are blended into a perfectly homogeneous (...) mixture. This interpretation of the cosmic cycle, which has prevailed almost since it was developed by Friedrich Panzerbieter and seconded by authority of Eduard Zeller was challenged by Paul Tannery and then by H. von Arnim . Long after these essentially programmatic critiques, three independent studies published in 1965 by Jean Bollack, Uvo Hölscher and Friedrich Solmsen mounted a vigorous challenge to the received view. However, in a detailed monograph devoted to Empedocles' cosmic cycle, Denis O'Brien brought to bear an impressive array of scholarly evidence and critical acumen in support of the traditional view . Several challenges to the traditional view have appeared since O'Brien's book, of which the most significant is that of A. A. Long, who, while criticizing attempts of some opponents of the traditional view, produced some novel and interesting arguments against it. Although the traditional view continues to enjoy the support of authorities such as Jonathan Barnes and M. R. Wright, there is a decided shift in favour of revisionary views. Nevertheless recent advocates of a revisionary interpretation do not provide detailed refutations of the traditional view; Long's arguments remain the strongest objections to the traditional view, and they have never been refuted. Will they stand up to scrutiny? (shrink)

The studies of Empedocles have made headway in showing that Empedocles postulated a double zoogony. Whereas this has been traditionally related to the hypothesis of two worlds per cycle, some Empedoclean fragments provide evidence for a double zoogony in a cosmic cycle with one world. How can we reconcile the hypothesis of two zoogonies with the assumption of a unique world? Whereas there have been attempts to address this question by retaining the traditional idea of two opposite zoogonic periods or (...) phases, I contend that Empedocles’ fragments invite us to a reconsideration of his notion of a double birth and death of mortal beings. (shrink)

The presence of a theory of the transmigration of the soul or, according to Empedocles’ words, of the δαίμων is a controversial issue among scholars. A major difficulty arises when one tries to read the fragments of the Purifications – where this theme is particularly recurrent – in conjunction with those usually attributed to the poem On nature. The aim of this paper is to suggest a ‘method’ to analyse the extant fragments, and to offer a possible interpretation of the (...) nature of the so–called cycle of the δαίμων. On the one hand, I shall try to show that the two poems, if read together, can provide a ‘salvific’ message. As a matter of fact, the description of the cosmic order that emerges from the poem On nature might convey the same prescription as stated in the Purifications for following the universal laws, which would ultimately allow human beings to be happy even in an age of universal evil. On the other hand, I shall propose to identify the δαίμων with the roots, which can escape from the cycle – i.e. become happy – when they are shaped as human minds, thanks to the way in which the processes of knowledge work. (shrink)