摘要：In his discussion of the famous double makarismos of Georgics 2.490-4, Philip Hardie writes: « one wonders whether Virgil is deliberately exploiting an Empedoclean passage »2. More recently, again in relation to the closing section of the second book of the Georgics, Alex Hardie has written that « the possibility arises that Vergil too is indebted to an Empedoclean hinterland. »3 One of the main issues in discussion of the closing section of the second book of the Georgics has been the identities masked behind the words felix qui and fortunatus et ille. Some argue that the felix qui must refer to Lucretius. Others disagree and see no specific reference to an individual. Richard Thomas, for example, argues forcefully against those who emphasize the influence of the De Rerum Natura here,4 whereas Monica Gale sees in these lines a specific contrast between « archaic, Hesiodic piety and Lucretian science ».5 The purpose of this paper is not to attempt to resolve this contentious issue, but to follow up the suggestion of both Philip and Alex Hardie and to argue that Empedocles is an important model for the whole closing section of Georgics 2. Indeed, both Thomas and Gale may believe that my argument (if they allow it any credence whatsoever) lends support to their view. The former may suggest that if there is significant Empedoclean influence on the passage, then he is correct in minimizing Lucretian elements in order to focus on the tradition of scientific didactic as a whole. The latter could respond that given the direct and pervasive influence of Empedocles on the De Rerum Natura,6 she is correct to promote the role of Lucretius as Vergil’s primary source. I have argued elsewhere that in these lines Vergil draws attention to the issue of the wider literary traditions within which the Georgics may be read and to the place of the Georgics in his literary career as a whole.7 This paper represents a further attempt to make some sense of the dense and complicated passage which brings book 2 to a close.
