Commentary Inf XII 40-45

Virgil's explanation of what happened in the immediate aftermath of the Crucifixion shows a correct temporal and physical understanding (he, after all, actually witnessed these phenomena 53 years after he arrived in Limbo). However, his use of the Greek poet and philosopher Empedocles (ca. 492-430 B.C.) as authority shows his ingrained pagan way of accounting for one of Christianity's greatest miracles, Christ's ransoming of souls committed to hell. According to Empedocles (first referred to at [Inf IV 138]), in addition to the four elements (earth, water, air, fire) there were two others, and these governed the universe in alternating movements of love (concord) and hatred (chaos). As chaos moves toward concord, crowned by love, that very order, momentarily established, at once recedes and moves back toward chaos. This 'circular' theory of history is intrinsically opposed to the Christian view, in which Christ's establishment of love as a universal principle redeemed history once and for all. In Virgil's apparent understanding, the climactic event in Christian history marked only the beginning of a (final?) stage of chaos. For an appreciation of the importance of Virgil's misunderstanding of the meaning of the Crucifixion see Baldassaro (Bald.1978.1), p. 101. For Dante's knowledge of Empedocles' theories through Aristotle, Albertus Magnus, and St. Thomas see G. Stabile, 'Empedocle,' ED.1970.2, p. 667.