Lucretious, in his poem de rerum natura had atoms moving through the void. It seems at least from a modern perspective that his void is what we would call space.
The interesting question, which I have asked here is did anyone in antiquity discover or intuit that space itself must be something.
Now, Parmenides denied the reality of void. This leads one to suppose that he would have discounted Lucretious' void as a true void. It certainly is. Hence, one is led to the thought, that space is not a nothing but a something.
Obviously, this thought is retrospective. It takes Parmenidian ideas and applies it to concepts which have only been elucidated now. In particular, it is only since Einstein that space has been taken for a thing and not a stage, though in actual fact the thought can be traced earlier to Clifford after Riemanns ideas on space & geometry was elucidated. Of course, Einsteins description is quantitative, following the tradition laid down by Galileo; and Milesian science is purely qualitative.
Still, it seems Parmenides was concerned with a very basic analysis of what it means to be and to be not, with motion, and thus space.
Is there any evidence in Platos Parmenides that backs at least some of this up; or elsewhere?