poet's leaft for fuch a mathematical point, as is reprefented without magnitude; which his principies enjoy, and figure likewife; and that, too, as infinitely variable, as the Peripatetics is divisible. And these apices, or leafts of things, may, perhaps, upon ferious and fpeculative difquifition, prove a notion to be hardly denied, whether phyfically or mathematically taken, as Gaffendus demonstrates at large; where he speaks, "de non effe Epicuro magnitudinem infinitè dividuam," to which I refer the reader. to receive all thofe figures, to which it must be fubject and expofed: for thofe minute bodies, if they were connected of feveral parts, and contained any void within themselves, could not, in the opinion of Epicurus, have an equal weight, nor an uniform motion: they would awkwardly, and, as it were with an ill will, obey any foreign and exterior strokes; and, therefore, could in no wife be connected together. Ver. 662. In thefe fix verfes, he concludes for the folidity of his atoms, from what he has proved already. For he has demonftrated, either that there must be fome feeds from all eternity undif folved and unbroken, or that no thing whatever could have been produced, or at least must have been produced of nothing. That things are produced, the fenfes themselves evince; and all men allow, that nothing comes from nothing: there, fore, if there be no folids, which cannot be broken nor diffolved, where can we find those bodies, that have from all eternity remained undiffolved and unbroken? For frail atoms, which are obnoxious to fuch an infinity of ftrokes and blows, in fo long a space of time, muft of neceflity have been diffolved. Ver. 644. He faid, in the last place, that feeds are composed of parts fo fmall, that they can scarce be conceived. But that fuch leafts are, he confirms in thefe twelve verses, by that most known argument which all the philofophers make use of. And here we may obferve by the way, that Gaffendus, in his explication of these verses, performs the part of a master, rather than of an interpreter, and takes upon him to blame and correct the opinion of Lucretius, rather than to explain it for if there be any force in this argument, if the words themselves have any meaning, Lucretius evidently meant that thefe leafts, of which he com. pofes his principles, are mathematical. For that the atoms of Epicurus are endowed with magni- Ver. 668. Having hitherto laid down and cftatude, and, therefore, have parts, none can oppofe, blifhed the principles of Epicurus, he now attacks but they who are ftrangers to his philofophy, and the opinions of other philofophers; and, diftrido not know that Epicurus ever writ igis ibuting all his arguments into two heads, he first yavías. This, then, is the meaning of Lucretins. The first feeds are indifioluble and eternal, not because they are void of parts, but because they are endowed with folidity; and, therefore, cannot be broken to pieces nor torn afunder, or divided by any force whatever. If any one defires to know what these parts are, the answer is, that thele parts have no parts, and that they are mathematical. For unless fuch leafts be granted, there would be no inequality between the greatest and the smalleft thing; becaufe either of them would contain infinite parts alike, and thus both of them would be infinite: than which what can be more abfurd? For this reafon Arcefilas laughed at the Stoics in their schools, about the leg of a man that was cut off, putrified, and thrown into the fea, which, they afferted, might be fo refolv ed, and mixed with the waters of the fea, that not only the fleet of Antigonus might fail through that leg, but that even the twelve hundred fhips of Xerxes, and the three hundred galleys of the Greeks might maintain an engagement in it. This, too, makes Plutarch deride Chryfippus, for believing that one drop of wine may be mingled with all the water of the sea; and that a wing of the leaft fly may be coextended throughout the whole fpace of the sky. Ver. 656. The poet having explained the meaning of a mathematical leaft, returns to his phyfical least, which he imagines to be indiffoluble and eternal; not because of its exility, but by reason of its folidity. For if nature did not attain, fays he, to the extremeft refolution; if she did not divide and leffen even to the minuteft mites; the matter, of which things are compofed, would be improper, and unfit to undergo all thofe mutations, and falls upon thofe, who believe and teach that but one of the elements only is the principle of all things: and, in the next place, argues against those who affert more. Among the firft he has fingled out Heraclitus, who held fire to be the principle of all things, and bestows fixty-two verlies to confute his opinion: for he takes it for granted, that whatever arguments he brings against him, will hold good against the others likewife; fince nothing can be opposed against his doctrine of fire, but with what equal reafon will be conclufive, as to the air, or any other of the elements. And, indeed, fays Gaffendus, whoever weighs this matter fully, will believe this variety of opinions to be a mere game; for though the authors of them affert different pofitions, yet they only beat about the bush, ufe a great circumftance of words, and, at length, fall all of them into the fame thing: for let any man make choice of which of the elements he thinks fit; he will get neither more nor less, nor be able to make good his opinion any otherwise than any other who has pitched upon any other of the elements; because, whoever has but one of them, has nothing to do, but to condenfe and rarefy that; and he will presently have all the reft; fo that it fignifies nothing, whether this or that be firft made use of. Ver. 66. Heraclitus.] He was son of Blython or Heracion, and born at Ephefus in lonia, 504 years before the birth of Jesus Christ. He flourished about the 69th Olympiad, in the reign of the last Darius. Εδοξεν αὐτὸς πάν]α ἐκ πυρὸς συνεςάναι καὶ εἰς τό ἀναAsidar Laert. He taught that all things are made of fire, and refolved again into fire. This was that philosopher, who is reported to have wept so often at the vanities of other men; which, neverA a iiij theless, fome fay he did but diffemble, out of an excefs of pride and disdain, being felf-conceited, and believing himself the only perfon in the world for profoundness of learning and wisdom. Ver. 669. Vain Greeks.] For Heraclitus had many interpreters, and a world of followers, who were called 'Hazλerérus, Heraclitians, Laert. in Vit. Herac. eight verfes, that that cannot be, unless it be granted that the fire retreats into nothing; becaufe a fimple and uncompounded thing, as that element ought to be, if it is indeed the firft and only matter of which all things are made, cannot be changed, except it totally perish. For a com pound body may be changed in such a manner, that, ceafing to be what it was, it may leave its remaining part; which having lot its former ftate, may take up and put on a new one; but a fimple, or uncompounded body, cannot utterly lofe its nature; but it entirely dies: nor is it capable of any alteration, without a total perdition. Ver. 703. He concludes in these fifteen verfes, that if any thing were to be generated out of the Ver. 670. He writ many things in Greek verfe, and is often cited by Ariftotle: but in all his writings he affected obfcurity. De induftria et confulto occultè dixit Heraclitus." fays Cicero, De Fin. lib. 2. Heraclitus studied and affected to speak obfcurely. And, in the third book of the Nature of the Gods, he fays, that he would not be understood: "intelligi noluit." Hence he was fur-extinguished fire, there must of neceffity remain named ExoTeòs, obfcure. And in this fays Menagius, and Laert. Vit Heracliti, he imitated nature : Φύσις γὰρ κατ' Ηρακλείτον κρυπήσθαι φιλά For nature, according to Heraclitus, takes celight in being hid. Themift Orat 12. Ver. 675. D'Avenant, fpeaking of the fchoolmen, fay, that With terms they charm the weak, and pose the wife. Ver. 676. In these seven verses, he propofes his firft argument against Heraclitus: it cannot, fays he, be conceived, how foreat a variety of things, nay, how one thing only, that is endowed with different parts, should be made and confift of one simple and uniform principle: foppose it fire; yet, unless you mix fome other things with it, you can make nothing of it but fre, for in what manner foever its parts are tranfpcfed and blended together, it will be always the very fame thing, by reafon of the famenels of the nature of all its parts. And that none may efcare by the fubterfuge of condenfation and rarefaction, he confeffes that it may be understood, how a thing may become more warm by the condensation of the hot parts of fire, and lefs warm by their rarefaction; and that the real n of this is obvious: but that any thing should become cold, nay, and moft cold too, as we find many things in nature to be, from fire only, how can that be underítood? Ver. 679. Heraclitus, as we find in Laertius, to make good his hypothesis, pretended that fire, by being condenfed, grows moif, and thus becomes air; that the air, by compreflion, becomes water; that the water, by condentation, is turned into earth, &c. But all this, fays Lucretius, finifies nothing; for the more the fire is condented, the more it is fire. And the rarefaction will avail nothing; for rarefy fire as much as you will, it will ftill be fire. Ver. 683. In these twelve verfes he inffts, that they who favour the opinion of Heraclitus, cannot fly to condenfation and rarefaction, to justify their belief, because they admit not a void, without which nothing can be made rare or denfe; as he has proved above, in ver. 450. Ver. 695. But left there fhould still remain fome means to escape and clude this argument, by pretending that the fire is extinguifhed, and changed into another body, he urges, in thefe fomething of it, which, having loft and laid afide the form of fire, may take up, and put on the form of that generated thing. But it is most evident, that it is the common matter, which Lucretius fuppofes to be uncorruptible corpufcles, that by the various addition, detraction, and tranfpofition of themielves, can take up, and appear now in the form of fire, and now of any thing else. But to prove, that these corpufcles are not fiery in their own nature, he gives this convincing reason: because if they were, neither the addition, detrac tions or tranfpofition would produce any effect: For if that nature of fire remain fafe and untouched, nothing but fire can be nade of it. Then he explains the opinion of Epicurus, that certain cor pufcles, which have no form perceptible to the fenfe, are the principles of things; and that, from them meeting and conjoining in various manners, fire and all other things proceed. Ver. 718. In these eight verfes, he appeals to the certainty of fenfe, to confirm that all things do not confift of fire. Heraclitus confeffes, that he knows fire by the help of his fenfes; and Lu cretius arges that the fenfes do as plainly perceive many other things of a quite different nature from fire, as they do fire itself, and that we ought to give always the fame, or never any credit at all to the fenfes. Then he briefly explains the opi nion of Epicurus concerning a criterion. Of Heraclitus, fee ver. 669. Ver. 711. Heraclitus never denied, but that fome things befides fire appear, but he never granted them to be. This opinion Lucretius eppoles, and therefore urges, that other things befides fire truly are, and that even the fenfes difcover, and certainly know them to be. Ver. 720. For Heraclitus allowed the certainty of the fenfes, and yet destroyed that certainty in teaching that all things are fire: For if that were true, our fenfes would perceive fire in all things; and yet they perceive no fuch thing in an apple, in vood, in marble, &c. Ver. 726. He adds in these four verfes, that if we look upon water, and many other things, and handle them, we thall evidently discover in tim another, and that too a quite different nature from fire; from whence he infers, that there is 10 more reafon to affert all things to be fire, than there is to reject fire, and fay they are any thing ife. Ver. 730. In thefe three verfes, he concludes concerning fire, or any other fingle element, against any of which the fame objections will proportionably hold good; that they are horribly miftaken, who hold that fire, as Heraclitus, that air, as Anaximenes Milefius, that water, as Thales Milefius, or that earth, as Pherecydes, is the principle of all things. Ver. 732. Among the philofophers, who held more than one of the elements to be the principles of all things, he has fingled out Empedocles, and employs 108 verfes to confute his opinion. Now whatever he objects against his doctrine, in afferting the four elements to be the principles of things, will be conclufive likewife against thofe other philofophers, who taught that all things are produced from two or three of them only. For if four cannot be thought fufficient, much lefs will a fewer number fuffice. But that four, may nor a much greater number of bodies, are not fufficient to produce so vaft a variety of things, as are contained in the univerfe, will more evidently appear by what shall be faid hereafter. In the mean while, it may be confidered, that as from one letter you can have but one figure, as A; from two but two, as Am, Ma; from three, but fix, as Amo, Aom, Mao, Moa, Oam, Oma; from four, but 24, as Amor, Amro, Mora, &c. from five 120, from fix 720, from feven 5040, from eight 40320, from nine 362,880, from ten, 3,628,800, and so on, til you have completed the number of the twenty-four letters, as fhall be faid more at large in the note on book ii. ver. 643. So of one fimple body, turn it ever fo much, you can make but one body; of two bended together, but two; that is, to fay, one compound; which, the more rare or denfe it is, or the more it has of the one, or of the other, the nearer it will approach the nature of one, than of the other: And for the like reafon, of three, but fix; of four, but twenty-four, &c.; and change their pofitions, turn them and turn them again, and shift their places as often as you pleafe, they will still be the fame figures: and Liftly, he concludes, that to produce fuch an inuumerable variety of things, as are contained in the univerfe, an innumerable variety of elements or principles is likewife neceffary. Ver.734 Water.] Thales, the Milefian, held water to be the first principle of all natural bodies; of which they confift, and into which they refolve. He endeavoured to establish this opinion by arguments drawn from the origin and continuation of mott things. First, Because the feminal and geDing principles of all animals is humid. Secoy, Bulk all kinds of plants are nourished water; and when they want moisture, with end decay. Thirdly, Because fire itself cannot live wit on air, which is only water rarefied; and to fou and Aars draw up vapours for their Own Dournament and fupport. Thefe were the cond maroons upon which he grounded his opivid hinehich, eely to guess, that he kept up the crea of hi school, rather by the riches he gained by his lucky conjecture of the fcarcity of olives, than by the ftrength of realon and argu nir s ment. Some, however, have not been wanting to father this philofophy on Mofes; and Hippo and Theophrastus were of the fame faith. Nay, Hippocrates himself lays great ftrefs upon it: and of later days the great Sendivogius, and generally the most learned of the Spagirifts; who own that water is really a very avguía, or univerfal principle. Ver. 734. Air and Fire] As Oenopides of Chios. Earth and water, as Xenophanes; but Armenides joined fire and earth; and Hippo of Rhegium, fire and water; and Onomacritus held that fire, water, and earth, all three together, are the principles of all things. Ver. 736. Empedocles.] He was fon of Meton, or, as others will, of Archinomus, and fome fay, of Exinetus; but all agree, that he was born, and lived at Agrigentum in Sicily. He was contemporary with Euripedes and Armenides. He flourished in the 84th Olympiad, about 404 years before J. C. He taught, that all things are made of the four elements, fire, water, air, and earth, and are refolved into the fame again. To which he added two powers, amity and difcord; the one unitive, the other difcretive. Εμπεδοκλῆς Μέζονος ̓Ακραγαντίνος ricoiga μèv λbysı saxña, xūg, aïga, üdaş yür, dúm dè ἀρχωρίς δυνάμεις, φιλίαν τε καὶ νέικος, ὧν ἡ μὲν ἐσιν ἐναι linn, Tò di dimigsjinóv. Flutarch de Placit. Poul. l. 1. c. 3. See likewife Laertius, in Vita Emped. Achilles Tatius, in Arat. Phænomen. et Lactantius, lib. 2. Which last says, he derived this opinion from Hermes Trifmegittus. Thefe elements he called after this manner, fire he termed Jupiter, the air Juno, or as Laertius fays, but not with fo good reafon, Pluto. The water Neftis, from vas, to fow. The earth Pluto, or according to Laertius, Juno, i. e. Veita. Confonant to this opinion of Empedocles, Ovid fings: Quatuor æternus genitalia corpora Continet. mundus Metam. XV. ver. 259. All things are mix'd of these, which all contain, And into thefe are all refolved again. Ver. 737. In thefe feventeen verfes, he defcribes Sicily, the country of Empedocles, and praises that philofopher. Sicily is the largest of all the islands of the Mediterranean fea; it has been called by feveral names, and has had feveral different inhabitants. First, The Cyclops, who, as Cluverius fays, de Sicil. lib. i. cap. 2. were the first who inhabited this ifland, which was then called Trinacria; and they dwelt chiefly about Mount Etna, and in the Leontinian territory. Secondly, The Sicanians, a people of Spain, who dwelt on the banks of the river Sicanus, which, according to fonie, is the Segro, according to others, the Cinca; from them it was called Sicania. Thirdly, The Italians, who, under the command of Siculus, drove the Sicanians into the weft part of the ifland, and gave it the name of Sicilia; though fome are of another opinion. Fourthly, Greeks and barbarians of feveral countries, who brought colonies into the island, and fettled themselves in it. Laftly, It was fubject to the Carthaginians, Romans, &c. For the island of Sicily has three promontories or forelands. Pelorus towards the north, now called Capo di Faro, from Pharus, a watch-tower, or light-house, that is built upon it, to direct ships in their courfe: Pachynus, Capo di Paffaro towards the caft, and Lilybaum, Capo di Marfalia, towards the fouth and weft, which made it triangular, almoft in the form of a ▲ Delta. Ver. 738. That part of the Mediterranean, which lies above the Streights of the Adriatic, and extends itself between Crete and Sicily. Whence the Greeks divide the Ionian Sea into the Cretan and Sicilian, Plin. c. 11. 1. 4. It furrounds a great part of Sicily, and received its name from lonius, the fon of Dyrribachius, whom Hercules killed unawares, and threw him into that fea to perpetuate his memory: But Solinus will have it named from Ionia, a little country on the fartheft fide of Calabria: Lycophron, from lo the daughter of Inachus; and others from the Ionians, who often fuffered fhipwreck in that fea. Ver. 739. The fea that divides Sicily from Italy is not above half a league over. Those two countries were formerly contiguous, till about the days of Joshua, as Faber has shown in his epiftles, the force of the fea divided Sicily from the reft of Italy. At Scyllam cæcis cohibet fpelunca latebris, -In the freights Where proud Pelorus opes a wider way, Dry' Thus the fables; but Cluverius, who went on par pofe to Melfina to be fatisfied, and learn the na ture of this whirlpool, fays and proves, lib. I. c. 5. " de Sicilia antiqua," that though it be shown near Meffina, and called Califaro and la Rema, yet the whole fea is tempeftuous and full of whirlpools: and he commends Thucydides, for giving the name of Charybdis to all that fea, lib.4 where he fays, that the ftreight between Rhegium, now called Rezzo, and Meflina, where Sicily is leaft dif tant from the continent, is the fea that is called Charybdis, through which Ulyffes is faid to have failed, xaì içìv ñ xaçúldıs àànééira, Tõro, &c. And this is the reason why fome place Charybdis near the Cape of Pelorus, and others near Mcfirs Homer defcribes it under a rock shaded with wud but, in truth, it is only the impetuous current of the fea, that flows in with greater violence from the north than from the fouth; and whole billows, when adverfe winds ftruggle with one another, especially when the fouth fea rages, are drives into the ftreights; and being there compreffed i a narrow space, and dafhing with violence again. one another, and against the rocks and fhores, art by that conflict twilted into whirls, and caufe that noise and roaring. Ver. 40. Lucretius mentions only Charybdis, not Scylla; which is a rock in the fea, between Italy and Sicily, on the Italian coaft, off the pro-fig-trees, and as a gaping gulf of whirling waters; montory of Canys. It continually makes a roaring noife, by reafon of the rough and tempeftuous waves of that fea, which are always beating into its hollows and dafhing against it. It is now called Sciglia, and took its name from xúλaw, I vex or difturb. Charybdis, now called Calefaro, is a gulf or whirlpool, almoft oppofite to Scylla, on the coaft of Sicily: from xarxe, I gape, and diw, I swallow: it fucks in the waters, and belches them out again with violence. Scylla is said to be the daughter of Phorcus, and changed by Circe into a monfter, whofe upper parts retained the form of a woman, and whofe lower parts were transformed into dogs, by whofe barking the poets expreffed the roaring of the waves, and fabled that the monster lay hid in the rock, and allured fhips thither, which by that means were caft away; Charybdis, they fay, was a notorious harlot and thief together, who having ftolen fome oxen from Hercules, Jupiter ftruck her with a bolt of his thunder, and threw her into the fea, where the was changed into a whirlpool. Virgil, Æn. iii. v. 420. defcribes them thus: Dextrum Scylla latus lævum implicata Charybdis Ver. 742. Enceladus.] He is faid to be the huge of the giants that fought against the gods. He was the fon of Titan and Terra; Jupiter killed him with thunder, and threw Mount Etna upon him : Thus Virg. Æn. iii. ver. 578. Fama eft, Enceladi femuftum fulmine corpus Urgeri mole hac, ingentemq. infuper Atnam Impofitam, ruptis flammam exfpirare caminis: Et feffum quoties mutat latus, intremere omnem Murmure trinacriam, et cœlum fubtexere fumo. Enceladus, they say, transfix'd by Jove, With blafted wings came tumbling from above: And where he fell, th' avenging father drew This flaming hill, and on his body threw : As often as he turns his weary fides, He shakes the folid ifle, and fmoke the heavens hides. Which may ferve to explain this paffage of our tranflator; for Lucretius makes no mention of Enceladus. Ver. 744. Etna.] A mountain in Sicily, of which Lucretius difputes at large in book vi. ver. 675. See that place and the notes upon it. contrary to one another, and therefore will mutually deftroy cach other; at least they can never combine, and grow into one body; for the fticklers for thefe elements, like masters of families, give to each its proper qualities: heat and drynefs to one, humidity and cold to another, humidity and heat to the third, and dryness and cold deftroy one another, and yet expect nothing from them but peace, concord, and alliances. Ver. 750. The ancients were in doubt whether they ought to rank Empedocles among the philo-to the fourth: thus they arm thefe elements to fophers, or among the poets; fo elegant was the poem which he writ of the Nature of Things. Ομηρικός Εμπεδοκλῆς, καὶ δεινὸς περὶ φράσιν γέγονε, μεταφορικος σε ῶν, καὶ τοῖς ἄλλοις τοῖς περὶ ποιητικών isipasi xuros. Ariftot. regionxv. Laurt. Ariitotle likewife afcribes to him the invention of rhetoris. Ver. 54. In thefe x verfes, he owns Empedecles to have been an excellent philofopher, even greater than Heraclitus, and the others, whom he has already refuted, and whom we may more fafely believe than the oracles of the gods; yet he is going to fhow, by feveral arguments, that even Empedocles himself is mistaken in the principles of things; and thus Lucretius includes him in the number of thofe philofophers of whom the Stagyrite fomewhere pronounces, küls; yàp ei xaì pi- | λοσοφίαν πρῶτοι τὴν ἀλήθειαν καὶ τὴν φύσιν τῶν ὄντων neay, which our poet interprets, Principiis tamen in rerum fecere ruinam, Ver. 757. Tripod.] A table, or ftool that was fupported by three feet, and upon which the priesteffes of Apollo were wont to ftand or fit, when they pronounced the oracles, Plin. l. 34. c. 3. This tripod, and the priefteffes themfelves were decked and crowned with laurel, a tree facred to Apollo, and therefore they were faid to speak from the tripod and laurel," ex tripode et lauro." Ver. 758. Pytlia.] Was the pricftefs of Apollo at Delphos, who answered from the tripod thofe that came to confult the oracle. She was called Pythia, from the Greek word wurlavéials, to confult or afk. Ver. 760. His firft objection against them is contained in thefe three verles: That as well Empedocles, as the other afferters of feveral elements, deny a void, no less than the philofophers mentioned above, and yet they adinit motion, rarenefs, and foftnefs, none of which can be without a void. Ver. 762. His fecond objection, contained in thefe fix verfes, is to this purpose: That they held ail bodies to be infinitely divifible, contrary to what Lucretius has shown before, ver. 630. and what he now proves by the fame argument he then made ufe of. Ver. 678. Thirdly, He objects against them in thefe three verfes, that their elements are foft, and confequently fubject to change, and therefore must fall into nothing; for, if the first bodies could change, they would be annihilated. But he has proved already, that nothing proceeds from or returns into nothing. Ver. 771. Fourthly, He objects in thefe four yeries, that the elements which they set up are Ver. 775. In thefe eighteen verfes, he objects, in the fifth place, that they ought to fay, either that the elements, having first loft their nature, are changed into things, which things are again changed into them: in which cafe the elements are not more properly the principles of things, than things are the principles of the elements; or that, retaining their nature, certain heaps only are made of them; and in this cafe, nothing of one fpecies and of one name could be produced, but only a certain rude and undigested mafs of fire, air, water, and earth: in like manner, as of the filings and duft of gold, filver, tin, and brass, you can never make any thing but a heap of gold, filver, tin, and brafs. Laftly, He concludes, that principles endowed with any fenfible quality are altogether unfit and improper for the generation of things. Ver. 784. The meaning of this is, that in cafe the elements preferve their nature entire, they are capable of making only fome confused or rude heaps of matter, without producing any thing perfectly diftinct; Non animans; non exanimo cum corpore, ut arbos, fays Lucretius; and though our tranflator takes no notice of exanimo cum corpore," yet those words allude to a particular doctrine of Epicurus, who did not admit of any foul to refide in plants, but held that they are produced and grow by vir tue of a certain nature not vegetable, but proper to them alone; yet he affirmed that they live, that is, enjoy a peculiar motion; as the water of fprings, the fire which we excite to a flame, is called living water, and living fire; fomething analogical to that which I think is more difficult to exprefs than comprehend; for fuch is fire without light, &c. But concerning this, fee the treetife written on this fubject by the learned T. Canıpanella, in his book, De Senfu Rerum et Magia. Ver. 793. Sixthly, He objects farther in these nineteen verses, that they who admit a mutual tranfmutation of the elements, ought to admit likewife a common or general and prior matter, that may fucceffively put on their various forms: for Empedocles and his followers taught, that the elements are continually preying upon one another; that now fire takes away fome parts of the air, and now the air robs the fire of fome of its particles; and that the other elements are continually doing the like. But Lucretius infifts: Let the principles be changed, and they will fall into nothing; and, therefore, fince they all allow that the elements are changed, they are not the prin |