Hera

Use in the book

Hera's place in the four-root list is secure; her physical assignment is not. The introduction reports that Aëtius makes Hera air, while the other ancient accounts discussed there make her earth. These are rival interpretations of the name, not two different Greek readings of B 6 supplied by this book. The epithet can be brought into either account, since earth nourishes living things and air also belongs to their life, but that interpretive plausibility is not an independent proof.

For a reader moving through the physical fragments, the consequence is practical. One may compare Hera's life-bearing epithet with earth's productive and bodily roles, or with the air needed in breathing, while keeping both comparisons provisional. The detailed mixtures in B 96 and B 98 do not use Hera's name and therefore cannot simply settle the mapping by substitution.

Hera also illustrates why the divine-root language is not best treated as a code to be discarded after decoding. The poem explicitly asks its listener to hear divine names. Their epithets are part of the explanation's poetic force, even while the surrounding corpus independently identifies four familiar physical constituents.

Places to read

1. B 6.2The sole printed root-name occurrence gives Hera the life-bearing epithet.
2. Introduction V (editorial discussion)The modern introduction reports conflicting ancient assignments of Hera to air or earth.

Translation in this edition

The English retains “Hera” and “life-bearing.” No editorial note attached to B 6 gives a secure mapping. The introduction's reported count of witnesses should not be mistaken for a demonstration that a majority establishes Empedocles' intended sense.

Use in the book

Aëtius assigns Hera to air. The Homeric Allegories, Hippolytus and Diogenes assign her to earth. Hippolytus explicitly motivates the latter interpretation: earth bears the fruits by which living creatures are sustained. The surviving notice consequently gives both an identification and its supporting explanation, while the Aëtius excerpt does not explain its contrary choice in comparable detail.

These witnesses establish an ancient disagreement rather than a modern uncertainty imposed on a previously unanimous text. Nevertheless, the edition’s numerical “three to one” should not be treated as a critical verdict. Doxographic notices can share sources, and this file does not establish that all four interpretations are independent. Nor does the seemingly attractive connection between life-bearing and earth prove that the epithet could have had no other application.

Hera is therefore a particularly clear case for separating the poetic name, the semantic possibilities of its epithet, and the allegorical map imposed by a reporter. An entry or index that labels Hera simply “air” or simply “earth” would hide the most important fact preserved about the name in this volume.

Places to read

1. A 33 (testimony)2Aëtius I 3,20. Assigns life-bearing Hera to air.
2. A 33 (testimony)2Homeric Allegories, in Stobaeus; Hippolytus, Refutatio VII 29. Assigns Hera to earth; Hippolytus explains this through the production of sustaining fruits.
3. A 1 §§ 76–77 (testimony)Diogenes Laertius VIII 76. Supplies a further Hera–earth interpretation alongside an abbreviated B6 quotation.
4. A 22–A 23 (reception)Menander Rhetor. Gives Hera-as-air in a generic explanation of natural hymns associated with Parmenides and Empedocles; this is not necessarily a direct key to B6.

Translation in this edition

Keep both identifications in view. The witnesses’ relative number and the edition’s assessment of the better argument do not establish which mapping Empedocles intended.