1
20
6
-
https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/sjcdigitalarchives/original/50e88d199c529ac41487bf8d699c11e1.mp3
aaa30ff6feb7f52b3200cacf8a1a071a
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Description
An account of the resource
Items in this collection are part of a series of lectures given every year at St. John's College. During the Fall and Spring semesters, lectures are given on Friday nights. Items include audio and video recordings and typescripts.<br /><br />For more information, and for a schedule of upcoming lectures, please visit the <strong><a href="http://www.sjc.edu/programs-and-events/annapolis/formal-lecture-series/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">St. John's College website</a></strong>. <br /><br />Click on <strong><a title="Formal Lecture Series" href="http://digitalarchives.sjc.edu/items/browse?collection=5">Items in the St. John's College Formal Lecture Series—Annapolis Collection</a></strong> to view and sort all items in the collection.<br /><br />A growing number of lecture recordings are also available on the St. John's College (Annapolis) Lectures podcast. Visit <a href="https://anchor.fm/greenfieldlibrary" title="Anchor.fm">Anchor.fm</a>, <a href="https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/st-johns-college-annapolis-lectures/id1695157772">Apple Podcasts</a>, <a href="https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9hbmNob3IuZm0vcy84Yzk5MzdhYy9wb2RjYXN0L3Jzcw" title="Google Podcasts">Google Podcasts</a>, or <a href="https://open.spotify.com/show/6GDsIRqC8SWZ28AY72BsYM?si=f2ecfa9e247a456f" title="Spotify">Spotify</a> to listen and subscribe.
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
St. John's College Greenfield Library
Title
A name given to the resource
St. John's College Formal Lecture Series—Annapolis
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
formallectureseriesannapolis
Sound
A resource primarily intended to be heard. Examples include a music playback file format, an audio compact disc, and recorded speech or sounds.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
cassette tape
Duration
Length of time involved (seconds, minutes, hours, days, class periods, etc.)
00:54:21
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Berns, Gisela N.
Title
A name given to the resource
Time and nature in Lucretius' De rerum natura
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1974-03-08
Description
An account of the resource
Audio recording of a lecture delivered on March 8, 1974 by Gisela Berns as part of the Formal Lecture Series.
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
Bib # 10010
Subject
The topic of the resource
Lucretius Carus, Titus. De rerum natura
Philosophy, Ancient
Coverage
The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant
Annapolis, MD
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
St. John's College
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
sound
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
St. John's College has been given permission to make this item available online.
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
mp3
Relation
A related resource
<a href="http://digitalarchives.sjc.edu/items/show/1088" title="Typescript">Typsecript</a>
Friday night lecture
Tutors
-
https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/sjcdigitalarchives/original/5a000f7802f4341cb5b151e0cfd5e5c5.pdf
0209ceed633dacf966acfee5cfc02c77
PDF Text
Text
't'!MF. AMP NATURE
IN LlTCRET!US
1
"DE RERUM NATUR!\ 11
GiselA. B�rns ·
· St.
·r
John's ColJP�e
...
Annapolis,
MarylRn�
�Revised version of R lecture,
�1ven
at
March
1974.
St.
John's College,
Translations of the Latin quotes
appended
at
the end.
�1
I:
In bno'k one of •n�
a.
niscnssion or
.
'T'hemP.
r e ru m
.
n.'l tnr::t" , · 1 n th� context of
thin.rr:�, Lucre-
properti�s ann accinents of
tius �ef1 nes time as a�ciitent
of
motion ( 1., IJ,t;Q-82):
tempus item pe:r- se non est,
serl rebus ah fpt=;iS
con'3equitnr sP.nsus, transactum qntd s1. t in n0vo,
tnm qu�e res 1..nstet, quid porro deind� sequrttur;
nee ner se quAmquam temptl's sentir� f'at�ndumst
��r.1otum ab rernm motu placid::1que qulete.
{1, 459-63)
'rh� ttoro distinguishable aspects of time are:
net'cn,�nce on motion a'ld rest of
thin�s, aml
�P.n'"'n�ence on human perception.
Epicurus
fh I
�, u G �
w
.
S
,
.a
A
han {1e fi nfht time as
s/s K«-T�7:e1·r:ll<-?.
::tn:v
mot.ion"2.
"�n'1�1t�" f.ln.d
as
·�
J
1) its
2)
. �c<.'ll"z;"o(. 6'c...dll(.
I
tn t.ucretius• df"fi.n1t.ton,
1. ts
in his l'TOrl{
cert::tin mea!-':!lrinf""
.1
I
rLS
.
·
.
Tte�
I
I
l.(.tv·"t�·f.l-()5 ""'
n�rc�rtton of
.
hm-mv0r,
l•rh�rn
"s�ntire"• l'ther� "fe�l:tnr:.. "ta.'kes·the place of
,
or
11 a c�rtnt�
1m11� tl;rr-P. t�rm�:
"tf'":'mnnG11, •aetnl=l", 118.P,rum", 1V"'0M to lJr
.
1Yl �t��h n Nrty t:hat 11tP.mpuR" t1enot0� th .... r.ost Flht::t:"'JC:t,
11RP'VI�m11 t'l-10 mo�t concr�t.; !'l�pe�t of ti.11e, while· "nt=-t.""r;" �rw('rs
r- ..1th, !ll,rd:rnct arid concrete mc1ni n.n;.
n ... .... f'l
?p�n. H�rc. 1413, Pr. 55, A. BA'PI('-.\'?.7,1, eel. and. c0rnm. , T1
concPtto del tempo nella fisj ca r1tom:t�t icll, Epimn ,.n. i.n !!!P.M.
..
u. T>11'1'V')()'m�, Genova, 1959, 25-59, p.
JR.
��t')mp'1�t.l�! tn
r.t')mmntnt
(l�(�):
l1l1f"' Of h001{ r1Vf"'
A.
t.r.mrortl
rot:"
rum�" "t�un
"�tc ,T01V�l1'h. 'lr>t�.R
roll tn� t imP. rh'ln.r-:r:r: thr> t 1 m"!1
· n r ·:th1Yif':�."
Tn th�
·
1)
thr:-�"
P.r.tm.sr, two
of thi.s
<1our��
·
r,p�ce,
t1.m�
of time, ·h�bmrm
'
afl motion and.
for
common .r:rourH1
·Lncret inA 1
-
\•- .
-�
�
�nd thC' phi l.o.r.:o
...,
The
Aef!m�
.
·'
their youth,
.
.
be
transformed
bP.h·u�en sp:r:ttially extenncd
phor1cA.11y as spnce of time
as sp.-"l.ce,
1;.
of time
"-
,.,
.. .
·"·
depf')rHi.ence
to
'
..
A
.
of time
their mn.turity and
on bottle:=:
1 nto
a
tn motion
corre!1ponot:mce
motion a.nd tim0. 1 expressed. meta(cf.
w�th
6, JOO-J; 11 326-?).
most p.'lra
doxlclllly from the 't>�holc of time t o the point of time,
th11r: mtrrorr; thr'l �urn
of thinr;£ 1
Th(>.
mere_ qm1ntitative meani:n�,
a
·l"Fll1f':E'!!l from infinitely r;reat to infinitely :-::mall,
r:nm(>.,
1� thP.
in mnn.ller or 1:-trr;l')r nmo1mts of t l rr.r:-,
or.thinr;s hi:\ve-their times,
space
l-Jhn.t
2)
spn.ce rnnl"('r. from .r:rm�rfil
A.s
;.
...
0
thro1ir:h
ar;
from quantitative to qualitative mnrm\n�:
th1 nt:1'r.: h'O'!pp(-)n in time,
th�ir old F.l'(e.
And
timP.
!lccirt.ent of motion?3
f!s
of t 1me
accm\nt
A.niJ
to p'1T't1cu1A.r,.
force?
time ns
this poetic v1.el'r of timP.
nh1. en) .rtofini tion or 1 t
notion
1.n 'th� conncct1 on hetw��m
Nha.t
thra� . d1f.ferent"mP.t:'lphors
�
r�lntPd -quf'stlonr.: Nil.J.
.
nhl?YS
th�
same
nnd not
and.
th0
1..nf1.n1.te mnttcr .1nfin1.tely in motion throutr,h i'nf1 n1tc
JTi'or
a moT'e extensive study of the eptcurean <1oncept of time,
my Diss., G. NECK, Das Problem n11r Zeit im Epikuretsmus,
Heinelber�, 1 964, ch. 1, �eitbe��iff. pp._ 14-?4.
r.f.
·
�J
��
r:natHL.
n
Time
as
Gpnee-,
is mor:tly conr.�1.vr!d 1r1tth
how�ver,
q1inltt�t1.ve n.r; well as qnn'rltitative mcan1n�.
only hapr.>en in time, in
smaller or lnrr:er nmmmts
t.h�'>Y n.lso hAve theiJ;" times,.their
and th�lr
old a�c.
The
youth,
not
of timn,
their maturity
most strlkin� example
is th(' account of the birth
for
this u�ar:e
'
(2, 1105-6), p-rowth (2, 110.5-30,
1120-1, 1123, 112?), maturity (2, 1130), decay (2, 1131-
esp.
71�, esp.
l�)
Th1nr:n
11'31-?,
of our worl�;
nl'3.tnro;..
If
\'7e
111�5), and death
at the end.
or the
(2, 1.1.50, 1166, 11()9, 11?2second book of
.•ne
rerum
keep in mind that time had been defined ns
accident. of motiot:L and that,
in the expression space of timr-:,
1 t hA(1. be en substituted metaphortcally for the spnco measured
th:roup;}1 by .m ot ion ,
..
.
tative .. meanin�
lienee
ann
.
. .
the coincidence of quantitative and qua1i-
of time has to be understood a s
between·a phase in
th e
but now
.
'"
.
-r :•
this
pha�e of the motion,
expresse� as phase of the movlnr;
accin.ent time for
the
p
corres on-
the mot i on of a body through space,
space of time,depending on
The safeguardin�
a
•
condition
body
for this
in motion :l.s
body
itself.
suhs.t1tut1on of the
the
occurrence
of'
.
�In thA eni curenn 1.mder-standinr; of tnfini te matt�r infini.tely
in motion throup:h inf i nit e spacA, t.tme, be1.nr; an act:!id.0l'Jt of
motion, 1s ::tlso inf1nit�.
The p."lrarlox 11t.rhole of t ime" han to
hA tF.�1u�n as a con���ston to man • s d e s i re to compreh�nd the
object of his thoua;ht and �peAch (cf. my Diss., op. cit.,
pp� 17-lJ.O; for the t h n m e of infinity in all 1 ts differ-ent
.'l.�n�cts '\ cf. R. 1-TONDOT...FO,. I�' 1.nfini to n8l pensiP.rO dell 1
nnt:ich1tA. clnssic:::t, Fi.rem>:e 1956).
The other Jk'lradox "point
nf. t:l ml'.'11 has to n.o with the connection of continuity and
infinitP. divisibility of time (cf. my Diss., op. cit.,
pp. 10-20, 39-L�O; cf. J. MAtT, Zum Problem des InfinitesimaL"'n
bel den antiken Atomlsten, Berlin 19.54).
l
�4
mot J.on
lnN�:
1n accorflnncP 1'11. th fi x:eo
rloceo rHct1.s, '1.i.tn quRequ0 cre_.'lta.
1'n0'l0l"f:' �tnt., 1.n eo qun.m �it nul"rll"A :n���ssnm
nee vnlidnn alennt aevi·rccctnltct"c le_n;0n.
v
(5� 56-A,
'rh�se 1m'1s,
th0 1:1t'1S Of time,
of
determine
lie of a body
f
phases, within
phnSP.S
the
in moion.t
bony, at
motion
example
time a.ppen.rs most
The perception of differ
natl.Jrally
where
o the
t
in connection l'TJ.th
,qt .times the hoavenly
other times the time d.etermineit -by it, is seen in
(�,
692;
1,
31 1 ;
.5t 1183-.5).
::�b�ms from the account of
orce:
f
11sic
The.other most striking
man
nnd combines all three m(,'!taphors of
1 s·
c u l t :ura. l development,
t ime,
time as space,
volvend.a a e tas commutat tempera rermn,"
rolling time changes the times of thinGs�
The naturn.l or cnltur,:1l
1)
thr�o aspects:
change of things
the different
the
nynnmic
be t;r-1-spcd
cau_o;ht,
A.r:
"rollin,:, time,"
in
the nature of
tiMe,
and J)
of the development
phases
t h ings ,
is
cause of
as
different phnscs
1'volvendn n�tas, 11
chanr;e,
inherent
times
of
things."
in
inthc metaphor force
reco!VliZerl,
as 11volv(mda af!tas commuta.t tempera rcrttm,"
time chan,n;es the
the meta-
-"tlr.-tcs of thinr:s,"
motion of time,
the
•
1172
tn
of the succession of
the metaphor
ts
''thu�
2,
can
"tempora. rerum," ets
character
motton
(5, 1276; cf.
determined quantitativoly and qualitatively by
phor spaceof t me 'as
i
?.)
sp.,.ces
to time a.s not only space for motion,·
he motiOVl. of heavenly bOdies,
t
are
d 1. fferent
Also motion it se l f .
Motion of
R:nn.
Of
r:ometimes
lietie of a movinrr body,· leads
f
m
he
t
s�?.nond metaphor or t:\me,
but
the
of natur0,
2,302)
time, \'lhich·quantitatively and qualitatively dintinr;uishnhle
mnke up the
ent
called the laws
soetieFl
m
m
cf.
as
''
of
rollinr;
This me ns that the Nhole
a
�5
. phcnomP.non chiln.oop,
hoin�,
nnn
�tme
irt 1. ts
�rrnct,
��
mirrored
is
f or c e
thrPo n spccts:
as
ti�e.
to bo th� one metnphor most
sncms
from the epicurean understanding of time
Tt., nevertheless,
Lucretius'
"Ne
then 11time,
,
utterly destroys,
sir;ht"
( 1, 225).
first,
from
that
shows
a1..ray,
caused
as it l'lere,
as ar;e td thdraNs them from our
(2,69�70} a:nd "if time
q·notes
Chant:,e appears to be
pe�ceive all th1.nr,s flat�
it takes
accidr-mt of motion.
inherent in thln.rr.s and c.'J.used hy the force o�
lnn� lRnse of time,
a�e,
As
remote
the one which occurs most frequently in
"De rerum natura."
both by forces
time:
is
mone of
�aur:n,
11a�e,
in
seems
to effect
throup.;h a.�e"
•
in the
st{';ht"
whatsoever, throut;h
The con)parison of th� two
the
lon� lapse
chanrr,e
of t ime11 ,
in thin:';s.
'f'hP space of tirrie wh ich has to be measured throw;h by thir.r;s
subject to
chan�e is �onceived as having chAnging influence on
them:
omnta enim debet, mortal! corpore quaA sunt,
tnflnita aetas consumpse ante acta dicsque.
quon si in eo �patio atque ante a�ta netate fuere
e qutbus haec rerum consistit.snmma refectn,
1.mrnortali sunt n atu ra praedita certe.
(1, 2J2-6; cf.
551-64)
This po�erful influerice, �ometimes called "the forces of
rneA.s1a"eless time"
( 5, 377-9),
irnnf-l�t on thin�s,
as
also as R. particular
time as
"ante
force of time,
to
ls
not only seen as a r;enerc:tl
11infinita aetas,"
as
impact,
in successive
,.;raspable
"infinite time,"
acta dies,''" as "the r;one by da:,r.
11
but
moments of
The destructive
appears t o be so st ron � that th in �s are imagi neo
suffer under· the "torments o f ·time":
Denique non lapides quoque vincl cernis ab aevo,
non altas turris ruere et put e j cer e saxa,
r
�OP.lHhl":t nP.Hm �imu}:l.Cl":lf}ll�- fA:=:8:::t fntj :1Ci
nrotollP.l"e firiis
por-:t-:e nnqu0 a(lverims natur.'lP. foeclP.l".'l· nit1?
c'l0'111.Clu,.. non monimenta virum rliln:rsa. vi<icmu�,
(quaerP.re pronorro, s ihi cumque scnescere credas,
non ruere avolr,o� silices a montibus altis
nee va.l ioas aevi v ires perferre p!l t iq1te
fini ti ?
ncqw:- enim cn.d.erent avolsa repente,
ex inf1n1to quae tempore pertolerassent
omnia tormenta aeta.tis, privata fra�ore.
.
.
- nrm
._
�Ac sRnctum numen fati
:
)
( 5, )06•17)
l'f'lhe force. of rollinp.;- time chang1rp::· the. times of thinp;s .
( _t;, 1 ?7i1)
is
finRlly spoken -of as chan�inp; the nature of
the WOl"lC'l:
1"111tnt . en1.rn munni nc'lt1.1ram tot ius aetas .•
ex nliC''lH� nl.ius status exci.pore 0mni11 c'l.eb0t
omnir-t mi�rant,
nee ma-n c t nlla sui sim\.lis rAs:
omnln commut::tt natura 8t vertere �Or,'it.
n�mque a1iun. rmtrcsc it et n evo nobile lal'l,cr,net,
norro al1un (sue) crescit et (P.) contempti�'o exit.
�tc lt";'i tur muncH naturam tot ius n.et�s
mut � t , et ex aliO terrnm s tatu s CXCipit altAr,
quod potu it nequeat, posstt quod non tulit nntc.
(5, 82A-36)
II:
In
· · ·· .
order to
1)
Devel opment
clarify the con·nection beb1een the
thr�e different metaphors. of time'
ann
discover tht� �om
2)
mon r:round for the poetic view of time and the philosophinnl
�efinition of it ,
we will have to consider the relation of
t ime to nature , the key · te rm in Lucr et i us
'
"De
rerum
natura."
Inextricably connected with change of thin�s,
ti�� .1n motion of time throur:h·
s
lite
or
a_p;ainst n.nture
( 2,
space
297-307;
of thin.�;s, whether �rm.,.th or decay,
both:
t i me and nature:
.•
force of
of time cannot act out
cf.
5, )06-10).
- ·
occurs under the
Chanr:e
laws
of
�7
rloc�o diet i n, quo '1Ut'li1C1U0 cre�.tn
sint, in eo qunm sit r h r rr.t re n�n/3ssum
nee val1das valeant nevi rescindere lP.�en.
foec
h'!rA
·
(5, 56-8; cf. 2, )02)
Hhnt.rloes it mean to speak of time, ch�n�in� the nrltur� of
the
whole world.,
of time,
chanp:inp:
:8ptcurus,
anct to
.
1-torld
of nature,
darinr; to rr,o heyond
break open
to be, what
c om e
thinr:s,
all
t.he nature of the whole world
(1, l,f..-77), cttme h::tck
Crln
�lterinr:,
the·
t ir;ht
locks of the r;n. t e n
out of
bei.nr:,
of
victoriously Nith th� kno'tiTlP.nr:e of
cannot,
.
finally how each thine has
totality of be in� and non-beinc.;,
f';'Oinr;
(5, 828-36)?
the flam inc; Nails of the
.
pm1er c:lefined and. it s deep-set boundary mnrk."
.the
n..rr:.�in,
and,
rm.tur-e
11\•rhn.t
it::::
�ratnr�,5 ns
of comin� into bein�,
is matter in motion throur;h SIJc'lCe
21), which hrinr.; s forth hirth ann death
( 1, hl9-·
of thin,o;s: .. .
Nnn� nr,-e 1 quo motu ,cr,enitalia m:1teriaL
corporA. r�r: vt:t.roiaf: P:1 ,ry.ant: f:eni tnr:qne resol vnnt
0t f111:1. vi facerc id �op:anh1r
r.tt ol_l i s
r���ibi mobilitFt� map.-nnn per in::l'Y'\h rrten.nd1. •
PX'f'Ptliam:
tu te nJr.t1.r: prn.ehr.rp mP.m""nto.
n::tm r.r>rte non 1nt�r :1e �t l rn.tn r.0hn�1"et
T:'l."'lh')riP.s, q110n1Am mlnnt rP.m q,,·:rnq'lf" v1t1P.mns 1
f't. f11Jfi.Rl lonr:inqvo fln�r"' OIT!nir-1 CP.rni!T!\1� n.r>vo
P.X
CUlisquf' Vetl.lStr-ttP.!Tl �ubti,_lCPT'e Tl0'itr1.� 1
r.nrr t��P.'Y'\ 1.ncolumts vtt10.atur spmmn. mn,,er0
l"):r-')nt,.,.,..oa qn 1.8, quae �.ecedunt cor1)or� en jrpH� 1
,, ..... ,c r�.br.nnt Mi nnnnt, ·CP.l,., veY!er� :111ro:n:l TIP t'!onn�t.
11.1.., ��:rv��f'.�rP J A.t
fl1'1rf'C'f'cn.,.,. co�mt,
,.,�r. l"P'110rnntur ibi.
slc r e rn M �nnm�. novntm-
quilf'qur>
O
haP� co'Yltrn
1 ntPr �e m0rt<=�.les Mlltn:=� \·i.vFnt.
i. r�.e ��ntes, n 1 iae m1 n'.ll1Yl b.J r •
j "11jll0 hrovi. rmnt io mutnntur s��cl.n a rd. nnntl :rr:
,..t 111l�.st cnrsores vita.P. 1c=tmpnnn. tr::�r'!,1r1t-..
.
�..-�mn,.,,..,
"�
et
, , r�P :-:c11n t
a1
(?, �?-70)
0n
t"lc hn.�is of thls creattve. . and n.ostructive form�,
.
�nd
nr:1t11r0.
('P0"' n �"'0mn.,..,...henr:i.vP. stuny of the 00!1C'f'nt nf ,,...,t:n:rn. 111
V1��nt.i11!i 1 "D') rcrnm nn.t.J,r-r-�:,11 �f. Y . • sllj,L'!"'/'.�PT, St-.�1dirm ::":1Jr.1
nl-. � 1 1'1ronh l �r.h�n N� tnrhen-,:ri ff der P.grner- rni t hC!r>onderr.r
I>
h
�
Pf."!T"l�lrr:i.chtlr:un� (ler, T.ukrez, Archiv fur Re�ifff1f;€'!SchichtP.,
7, 1Q(?, 140-284
�H
thi�
llf..
..
1mr:rr t:>��'ion m L n;h t he,
of tho truth
thnt, nn.tltrr- only expl io:ttcs th0 hi flo on oh�rr-:��
t0r'i�ttr.� of mAtter.
hnNe,r'"'r,
Lucr�tiw� nev0r tire� of rr:-m1rHnn.•--:
tn rl�fin.i te
or "n:"lrt� f'l.�blr'�e,"
··Matter in m ot inn thl"Ollrrh �p1r.�
wnys
"p::tcts
of
r,rooNth
llnr'l ·decay
t
a
resul f:s,
fact whi0h
or nf!.turc":
.I"J. U.'l !'r'onter quo nun� in motu r>rtn�i pi(lrum
onrpora ::;1_mt, in eodem ante a�tn aetntr· fuere
r--t nm:t hn.l"'c n0mper stmtli ration" fP'Y'rntur
pf: qn!:i� �onsuerint r:1r;n1 ..;ir;nenh1r er'!nf'm
r.onr'licione et erurtt et cret.:c.ent: vlr:tuo vGlohunt,
qnn.nt11m cuique datum est per focclera :nnturni.
( 2. 297-302)
't'hP. _pr"oblcmatic
w::ty"
and
t1,e
er
of expressions
"such .·things as have been wont
be bron.�ht
that·
c ha ra ct
to birth under
"honds of
experi.mentation of
nature"
likn
to
"in
a
come to
the same condition"
similar
being,
ind.icates,
will
hO\ITcver,
provid.e no More than a 'framework for
matter in
m ot i on . through spa.ce:
cert e neque consilio primordia rerum ,
oroine se r.uo quaequ� sa�n�i mente 1ocarunt
·
rH',� quos lJ..ltA.P.qne (darf:mt rnotvs pepir:ere profecto)
sP.d quia mnlta modis muJ.tts mutn.t<:!. pe� omne
�x i11fini to v�xa.ntur -perci ta plne;is,
onme C'l'enu.s JT!otus et coetus exncri11nd.o
tannem del.reniunt in tal:l.s c:UspositurR.f.:,
qualibus haec rerum consistit summa creatn,
et mn l t os etiam magnos servata per. :-:tnnor'lt F:0.mel in motus coniectast convl':'_ntf?ntls' J
.
effictt ut largis . avidum mare fluminis tmn 1 s. . .
.
(1, 102i- :n; of. 5,
nam
·
�·lhat
can
be
the
too faulty t o
criterion for
abl�
to
in a
"convenient mov�ments"
world
be crea ted. by r;ods (5, 1B7-2J4) and continually
P-nrrar:ed in a l'lar' between
r0neated
ln_6,1�2)
l ife and death
The
( 2, 569-80)?
example o� nat ure trying (5, 837-924), but
bei�� nn
cre at e monsters (1, 199-2QL�; -2, 700-29) suggests
"conVP-l"lient movements"
.
must mean stability of growth,
that
.
maturity
�9
n.n�
�r-�r1.y.
'•rhat.
The formuln for nn.tnro:
not,
c:::m
finR.11y how
ann
it� <'!cep.;..Get boundary
thf>
account of
"certain matter,"
1 nto be1 nr: and. n:oint';
214-).
out of
1s
�1ost. compactly. it
motus, ordo,
cnch thi nr: hns
mark''
positura,
position and shapes of
is explicaten ln
"certain times"
as
as
matter" (2,
realfty
min� uncovers
Olll"'
in
ve ·the
"meetinp:s,
1020-2;
cf.
1,
ordr=>r,
675-8}.
process
The
of rr;co(�-
our
Bf')nr.c-s
of motion and ref:t of thinr;s; · this rP.'1] i ty,
ntoms censr;J.ess1y
as
as deceptive appearance,
an� e�tahlishing the conditions
venien.t
·
motions,
simple stability:
The true res t however,
motion.
( 1, 159-
"materia! concursus,
orn0r of these terms follows the ord.er of tho
-ncr�ci
to bn,
responsible for thinr:s cominr.
stated
nition from complex mobility to
r.rmn
its pm-11er dnfinl"!d
(1, 75-7)
beinf: at
fi�;ttrae,"
cnn
11Nhnt
underlyin� that restlesGness
for the
achievement of
"con-
movements" is to be found in the "shBpe" of atoms.
That
"shape" of atoms bears special importanne for the ::nnture
of
thinp; can be
a
seen from 1 ts central
the hook about motion and rest:
motirm and. rest in
trc:1.tm0.nt
terms of
turn
p:ivcs Nay to
in atom�
body and minc'l
{ 2,
a
11
shape"
730-1361-J., 856-990).
of atoms
nyi:n.r;
1").-"J.l rs
(21
but noN not
(motion ann.
rme bP-in� "shape"
(2, 6?.-JJ?) leacln
( 2,
333-729),
Hhich
•
•
ln tei'ms of atoms,
COrro"'!SpOndil1[':
but,
in terms of compounds,
991-117L�)
a po::;iti·t,rc
The Fir.ale describes the ::urn
1 n the three main pa rt s Of the bOOl< 1
tothA Pl"'ooemium,
n nn
(2, 1-61),
ne.1;ative treatment of colour and fcclin/3'
of t'-lin,r,;r, in motion and rest,
rl.�.
After the Prooemi mn about
of motion and rest in termr: of a.to�s
over into the dJ r;cussion of
in
position in boo k t\.'10,
of
worlds bcin0 born
Thus, hool< hro s hol'l s
rest), gronped. around
•
of atoms,
a
one
a
syr:1mctry of
{rest):
the
the pairs b ei n� motion and r e s t
in
�10
terms of compounds b1.
ro�t:
th e
in terms
of atoms· in the first and_
The special importance of
book.
·nature
Prooemtuni nnd Ffria le,
birth
�escrintion of the
·
third
shape
of
of a thing is shown in a·quote
and mot.i.on :md
mr-:tin part::; of
ofatoms forth�
book five,
from thn
bur world:
of
�"d·nova temnost:1.s '}naedam mol�sque coorta.
d 1 ff,t("ere inde lo�i partes coepcre :nnr·esqun
'"�tlm nnri bus ·hmf""i r
'
e
s l":t cliscludere muYlnmn
mr.mhrnl']ue divldere
magna s disponerc pnrtes.
omnir;enis e.'prlncipiis, discordia qnorum
lntr.rvalla vias conc xu s poniiera. plap;as
r.oncursus ·motus
ia mfsc�ns
propter d.lssimilis formas varin�qne fir;urns,
quod non omnia sic· potcrant �onhmct�- rn::mere
nee motus inter sese dare convenir.ntiG, ...
-·
r:!f.
·
9t
·
tnrha.bat proel
·
(5, 4J6-h5;
.
Diffnrently from platonic or aristotelian
Nhr.rc shape
for-
.q,
< ELcfos
thin,;,
"mnt0:ri.a:t
ln
the
concur,,�,
>J/IX.
�
li ' (..
.·
J
Or
I
motui,
ordo;
The inquiry
of Lucretius•
shape ()�
or
a.ll the factor:-;,
positura, fic;urnc,"
their p.:'l.rt in determininr.; ·the appearance
III.
uiace thour,h,
mcn:r.c
f'-Oe 'f ?') )
cpiCUI'(!rtfl contPxt,
Lnt1-lt-2)
of
a
plny
thin�.
Recapitutation
into the· mean in�
"De rerum natura",
of
"nature,"
the key t��=r
aim�d at clarifying th� r0ln
tion of nature and time,
and consequently the relation of the
philosophtcR-1 definitlon.
and
the poetic
met11_phorn of tim0.
The relation of nature and time be com e s espe�ially poi�
n.'lnt
in a passar,e from book o:r: e, i>Thcre both con�epts, tim� and
nature,
are. coupled
into one: .
Postremo quae cumque dies naturaque rebus
paulatim tribuit moderatim crescere cogens,
�l1
ocu l o ru m a c i e r. c ont r:;n t a t u 0 r1. ,
porro qune . cumqn e a evo mA. c i equ 0 r; �;1 r:. s cunt ;
n e e , m:lre qu� e impend ent , v e r: c o s ::rl 0 saxa p� r c s a
qn :t t:l C'pl oqu e a m t t t:1nt i n tempore c crnc r c po s s i s ,
c orpor i bu s cne cis i r; i tur natur.:1 p;er i.t r e s .
( 1 , 322-8 ; c f . 628- )1�)
· m 1 l ln !)o t e c t
nee
·
·
If
ment ,
at
c on s i de r s ;
one
" �rhat ever
be,T, inn i n s and end of th i s
first ,
day and na t ur e adds
i s r � s tated in ·
11 by bod i e s
( cf . 2 , 127..;:B ;
129 ; · 132 -llH ) .
nat nrc "
r o rcc ,
t o t h i n ,n; s
.
Th€7 double forc c;
" natu re , 11
us
'' boi! i e s uns e en , '' · in ord e r t o effect
t i me ••. · and " thr ough
pre s en t s
" n a;r and
inr: the o t h e r
C hanr_�e of
chanrr,e .
t ime ::mn_ o c cay , "
" D ay ,
both f rom l'li th i n and from '\'T i t h out .
ccmt " clay and nature , "
l it t le by l i t t l e "
un s e en t h en natt.1 re t reat s t h i n rr,f-l "
c orres pond s t o one force ,
th in r:Y.s occurs " in
i t s elf
11
n�.ture ,
s ince
it
is
ch ang e
the
of
be f o!' e
" nature ,
appearances
us r e f l e ct about the permanen c e of be inr;·.
impiyinr:
a s ma l l ,
un i t of t ime ,
o c curs
in sma l l · s t eps ,
sum of t h in�s .
by t h e
in ' th� s u m of t h inr;s ,
s c;:�. l e
is
of nature ,
erni.nr� t he world ,
th� world ,
a n a c c lc'l. e nt
t o the
t h e same truth :
defineo
di es
,
11
i s h e ld
of
the
in ba lanc e
re f l e c t inr.: chanr;e w i t h
As
such ,
creat lve and d e s truc t ive powe r ,
law s of
therefore ,
"
the part s
o f mot i on .
grm'lt h and d e cay ,
der ived from t h e movement s
" rh1.;r ann. nature , "
the forc e '
it
s inc e nature c ompreh enn s the Nhole
the.
of me�nings from
T i me ,
s in c e
chanr;e of th ines
cont in1,1al l y a l t e ri n g
laws o f nature .
c on-
The t erm " d:1y , "
The sum of . things , h owever ,
permanent
i s P.n �. c c i d�nt
o f t h e fac t that
11
1 :::; ,
wh i ch make s
quant itat i ve ly and. qua l i tat i v e ly
rem incl s us
t h at
in the double
l t i s t he force o f t ime wh i ch make s u s r e f l e c t about
of
� t , te
of at om s .
repre s ent s
" day , 11
s tand :J
two
gov
d e t er m t n inrr,
u n i e s natura qu e ,
a s pe c t s o f' one and
f or the
changeable a spe ct
�12
of appearan c e s , · the m ea su rahl e actual i zat.ion of · in fin.i te
.
.
·
m:'l. t t � r in i n f i n t t e mot on throt�eh inf ini t e s p. � ;
'lc
i
" n:itnre , "
· fj rm laNs
infin i t e
s tands. for the un ch�n�eable a spect
nat1i ra : "
be i n
r;
t
,
he
i
s pace . 6
three a spec t s
The three met aphors - of t im e :
of nat ure :
i :n t er�hAn,�l'!ab i l i
An� Rcc 1.1lcnt ,
cnrno� wt th
�Y
mat t·e r ,
between
explA ins
mot i on ,
of
corre s pond t o the
- The
and s p.-=tc e .
natur e and t ime ,
chnn�e than w1 th pcrmnn�nce ,
·
·
cay and deat h ,
_
force
betwenn suhs tanc�
i t s e l f throu �h mnn 1 s bP. 1 nr: mor�
t irne , than with nature
with
"
of in f i n te mat te}" in in f in i te mot t on throu�h
mot i on of t ime • and r:: pa. ce of · tlme ,
t i me ,
of
.
.
m,orc
and thA-refore
S i m i larly , ·_ b i rth ann
con -
r;r owt h ,
de
a r e not pre s ented equa l ly und er . the influen c e
o f nature and t ime , but bi rth and growth more under t h e 1. n
f1uence of nature ,
of
time .
its
with
de cay and
neat h
more unde r-
the influenoe
· Once 1 1. f e . has be� , man s eems to be m o s t c oncerned
·mean in·r.:ful compl e t ion and therefore with t ime effe c t in,
chan e t oward s ·that end. .
�
The, re lat i on of t i m e and nature ,
ph i cal poem ,
t erms ,
can be gra sped
in Lucret i u s •
ph i l os o
:ln . another c omparabl e pa i r of
in the re l at i on of . 11 fortune " · and 11 nature . •
· Subs equent
�A'qX , i.n h i s n i ss .. , D tfferen ?. . fl.er d emol � r 1. t l s c h<"n u n d
1..., , "� 1 � ch cm N�t,.tr.nh i l o s onh t � ( M�rrA 1 , 1 , F'ran trf'prt · a . M .
1 0 -:::! 7 ,- 1 ..:.. ')? ) , T"!1 t. h �r. htwi l 1 innt:1y port. .,..a .y� th i � � nnn0c t 1 o"' of
"1 � t1 l r'0 rmrl t 1 mP. : 11 n t e � l l S:\J"11 � fY!1fH� i: ?. tl'Ylf': . i st 0 ie hl n � � ;'1., :"' � 1 ,,.rT.'o"T"' . ii t:"-r Jl':r:ml<'ret �n 1Tatm · • -· di e Z ei t ihre ald:u o � e Fo'Y"m
Di �
": 0 1 t r'f...... rr:� f";�n i st. n a s Fen·� r r'f e s He r: rms , n�f' i U e F.rsche innn.�
0•·r i � VPl"� ehr-t un� i h r n 0n S tenmel iter Abhti.n n:j ":k8 i t tmd H e
·
� 0"1 l0 si l!k�i t
aufclr1'fckt . 11 ( n:o . · 1�2- 3 )
tti\R:X i n · c �ptn re of th o;
0 r- � t'l!n t: l ."l.l:1 ; thou�h , lacks s upnort from \<Tork l:�r: l·Ti th t: h e t. P. xt s
N"'l i r. l't Nnn l n. h ave prev!"lnten h i m from i d cnt i fy1 np: 'Rp i cnru n 1 '1 nd
L1 1 �r,.t:l n s ' . not i on of time , ann led h i m t o i" oticP. t he , · crHci n l
c o -0:v:t st�nce o f n.e f ini t i on and metaph qrs of t i me i n Lucrct t u s >
t-rorl-:- .
4v .
en�
•
•
•
·
•
•
�RR
the
�overn in�
( 5 , 77 ) , t h �n
f i r r-: t na t u r e
rp t o t e � dl"'� cr ihe ,
T he � on t e xt ,
world .
an
t h:'\t
prov i o e s
fortune " :
nnture det erm tne s
S i m i ln.rly �
the
� l �nr
it
t h e een err.t.l laws · of
the
No.rln ,
po s s ibl e w i th i n t h o s e
relat i on of nature and. t i me ,
aml r�.c c i n ent , was s h own t o c on s i s t i n the re l ::tt
.
1 on of
t hrou Fr,h
The conn ect i on bctl·reen the t h re e
of na tu r e ,
pe ct s
behmen
d ence
forc e ,
fo!'ce
the
unde!" the
expl icat es
r;round for
a.e f i n i t i on ,
metaphors of
three
under . the
is
t i me R S f orce ,
ln mot i on of . t i Me
fo�
there f ore , . bec omes t h e key
the three
of
mat t e r ,
m on
t ime .
of
the
i ndi c at e s
pa i r s
aspect . of nature ,
a s pe c t of
mat, e r ,
t
t ime ,
the
spe c lal
chan{!e<'lble .
a
nd
t he common
m o t i on , and
of
�
groun
space ,
t i me
of
The fa ct t hrt t
a s t im e expl i c,a t e s na t u r e
the po e t i c viel-t
c orre s pon
impo rt anc e of
the pe r�anent ,
the
,
is
the
c om
and i t s ph i lo s oph i cal
.
for the m e taph o r i c a l use
and
as
conne ct i on ·
one t o one
The
t ime .
·
mnt' t � r·
and f o r c e
of t i me
l:nm .
of sub s tan c e
in m o t i on throur;h space
space
h1.t t
to nnt11ri"'l ,
framework for " �ovcrn i n �
the
only t h e part i cular move s ,
f ortur P.
��k c �
however ,
equa} n o r r i va l forc e
thr:� t; f ortune is n f) i t h c r
" �overnin� nnt u re "
fortun� ( 5 , J O? ) ,
de f in i t i on as
its
of
ac c i
den t o f mot i on .
'T"hP-mA ,
Dev e l opment ,
ann.
.to lm� erRt:=m rl h ow t tme ,
ac c i d ent ,
�"11 th l'l � tnre ,
of t h e world ,
th�
�s
th8 subs tance
be c omn s
d oe s
not ,
h m'l�ver ,
vThi ch
th i. s subs t i tut i on takes place ,
c on � i n �rtn.�T,
the
d e p�l"ln en c e
s e c on d.
aspect
mean to
e s R::ty t r i. ed
intt"?. rchnnr:eab l c
�1.1h s t i tu t i on of th e o.ef i n it i on by m e·taphors
1 m n ers tanrl " h ow "
its
of th i s
Recapi tulat i on
also
of
e n ta i l e d
t ime .
under stand
To
11 Nh�.r "
a que s t i on t o be ansi'mred by
of Lu c re t i u s
on human percept i on .
1
d e f i n i t i on of t ime ,
�r u m�>�t of T.l l �rr.t 1 u s ' f1 P.f 1 n l t i on
"''-1 n f i r r. t
��n�n� Pn c P
on
mot t on ami
r� r: t
Ntl f.l
t l r:'l'� ' r.
of t h j nt,_;!C :
t. � mpns i t �m p�r ::: 0. n on � s t , r. r n rP.hu n ah i p� :t �
c nn r: � q, t i tiu• s �'l"l stt s , trrmsac t n m qq i.� s i t i n :v: v o ,
tnm q1 1ae ros 1 nf1 t �t , 'l.U io. porro n P- lnn c r-:cqu-:1. tu r ;
n r- c !)�r s e quer!'iquam · tempus s r-mt l rc · fl'lt endum s t
� em otum ab rerum motu plac id.aque qu i At P. .
·
-
'T'he S t:! c on d as pe ct .
( 1 , h.59 - fl ) }
t i me ' s d�pe!lden c e on hum�n pr:!rcept i on ,
imnl t e s both man ' s awarene s s and. man ' s- ""v�lua t i on of t t rne .
M::l.n 1 s
of t i me , . com inP-:
::\Narfm� s s
� t �mr-: . from
hetl'leen
rea lms i s iTIA.n 1 s d1 f ferent
1
·
, 1 0 08;,.9 ; 2 , '3 07 ) ,
(5,
R2B - J 6 ) ,· and
t'lrilln�
TT1 0 re
-
th rough
{ 2 , 5fl9 - 8 0 ) , i s
n e::t th
a lways
h�mG\n nnt u r � .
t ou�h c on
�
of t i m e ,
wh r! t h e r
7.
c on s tant cyc l e of
the
( 2 , JOJ ,
lt fe
and
�:'!me and always not the
wh ere deve lopment
R ame
in time eventual l y mean s
t i me s e ems t o he c om e more a nrl
the more . one m oves
from t h e part s t o thq
8
?r. f . P . n�JA. GY , Proc c R s ann Value :
rr � Ph " , A A , 1957 , l�L�-2t1 .
0
, "
, where the, sum .. of .thinp.:s
the
back t o the he r;inninp; ,
ne_p;l i ,cr.ibl e ,
l•Th o l e .
wh o l e
the s e tlfro ,
evaluat i on
· nature or human nature · t s · concernen .
· ,
- · 1\fi t h in nat u rP , :1s a
trwm s e l V P- �
well a s · t h i nrrs of
th in�s of nature n s
'T'hP. rPa s on for d i s t fngu i s h inp;
"'V>. c tert ,
from · 11 t h in�s
An epi cur0an d i l emma ,
J,�OP.'\ RDI , TJA. p: ine R t ra , 11 . 292-? :
" c o s i 0 () 1 1 1 -u omo
i l"l"l"' fl. l""::l. , e d P. l l 1 etad:t ch 1 e i ch lnma ant i ch e , e fiel seguir che
f�.YJ.V1.o f! r.mo r;l i avi 1 ne not i , sta n11tura oenor vert:'te , anz l
p�occ n � p�r s i lun�o cammino , che s emhrn a tar " . cf . S . BORRA ,
� n1 r i t i e f orme affini in Luc rez i o e Leopa rd i � Bol ogna ,
· ·r f .
19 )4 .
11 .
'
1
�1.·ii t.h :l t1 t. h n
At
c on t � xt
of nn.tur� :
qun r. i · 1. nn � :l.nqn o · f 1 u e r e
omn i !"t
�ern t mu r.
n.ev o
o�•J l i s qn c v e t u s t a t e rr. subd u c t:: re n o r. t r i s .
c1 i in tnmen incolum i s v i dr"at 1 1 r s u r'Hna man e re pronte :rr-m qu i a , qw1e d e c� rl u n t cor�or!:l cn l qu e ,
1 mn i-1 n h0.1 m t m innunt , quo vennre anr:m i n e (lon�nt .
· i l lr:t r-; en e- s c ore , at ha e c c on t rn. flor� r: c e r e cor,unt ,
n.ric remoran t i t r i b l ; s i c r e rum summa novatur
s emper , et . . i n t er se mo rta l e s mu tu� v i �Jnt .
m.t r;e s cnn t a l i a e p:ent e s , al i ae m i nuun t u r ,
i nrtu n brevi s pnt i o mut an tu r n r-� e c l a rm i mnntum
et q11a s i cu r s o r e s v i t a l 1ampaci::.t t rnd unt .
ex
·
( � , 69 -79 ;
Th i s i na t ff erence · df 'tlme and. nature ,
man c ont ent of l i fe ,
.of . 1 1. fe :
cf .
w i t h re s pe c t
) , 9 71 )
t o any hu
move s man t o re s i s t nature for the
sake
9
Qu od ( s i
i am rerum i F.;n orem pr i mord i a quae s int ,
h oc tame,., ex i ns i s ca e l i rat i on i bu s rm s l m
conf i rmare a l i i sque e x rebus redCi e re mn l t i s ,
nflCJl l P. quam nob i s ci i v i n i tn s e s s e r.mratam
t ant a s tat prae d i ta cu l pa .
na t u rn m rerum :
pr inc i ni o qw = tn t u m cae l i t e ,:;i t i mnetus i np;en s ,
inn � av i d a m JX rtcm mont e s s i lvneque ferarum
'l
:r}o ss fl dere , t �nent rU TIA S · va s t :18qu e palude s
et mar0 , quon l �t e t err�rum cl l. s t :i. net orn s .
1 n c'i n n u :1. s porro nrope pn rt i s - fArv i 0 u s nrd or
n.c'i s i nuus que r:e l i casus morta l i hu s a u f e rt .
quod super e s t :=t.rv i , tamen id na tnra sua · v i
s ent i.bus obducat , n i v l s . humana rc s i s tat
vi t n i cau sa. va l id ·o c onsue.t a b i nenti
in�emere et- t e rram pre s s i s pro s c ind ere rtra t r i s .
.
)
·.
( 5 :;
The d i f f e r ence betwe en the de s cript i on of
cry i np.: in 1 t s he l ple s sne s s
la.r�e ly t a ken care
mAan
(5,
of by na t u re
re s i �at i on be fore nat ure
f o r ilevel opment
.
t o �ff l rm
..
•
.
.
:
222-7 ) ,
,
195- 109 )
the newborn c h i
ld ,
and t he youn� ani mR �_ s ,
hers e l f ( 5 ,
2 2 8-34 ) ,
does not
but rec ov1i t i on of t he ne�d
i n t h e ca ? e of man :
" One
s o small are t he trace s
..
th int; I fe e l abl e
of nature
left ,
wh i ch
9"'or a more extens i v e s tudy of the e p i curean v i eN of man t s
e xne r i ence of t ime , cf . my D i s s . , op . c i t . , ch . 3 , Z e i t e r.
fahrun� , pp . 140-9 .
�t
rr>rt. � n..,., �on J r! n ot di�pe l for u n ,
f"rom l i v 1 n o:
m !'l.n
a
th�t. n ot h tnr; n tn t'J �rs
l i fe l•rorthy of �od � "
{ J , 3 19-22 ) .
t o ov e rc ome . tbe 1.no i ff e rence of
on� 1
man 1 s
�
· the
l i. fP.t ime ,
t n :-r l.t: of"
t hourrh r e. latcrl ,
rorm s :
detachment from t �mpor3.l th ings t•ri th in h i s ol'm
o t h er
man
1 i f� by s e e int-:. h i ms elf
of h i r- 01'1!1 nat ure
IT'-'ln .
Th i s ·
t i me nnd nn.t u re , l'T i t h
.
takes on two ,
t o human- l i fe ,
r � � pP.ct
1H l
a. �
1 s o.vP.rconi inr: t hP. t f'mpora l i ty of h t s
as
p.: rt or mn.!lk ind , a11n. the o evcl opm0.nt
"l
fi vP of " ne rernm
·
of
part of th e d evel opment of the natur�
_d e s cript i on of the dev e l opment . o f
Lu cre t iu s '
n P. t u ra "
c omr>l t cat ed. s tate � �nt of
.
m·m
end s Joti t h
( 5 , 92.5-lh57 ) ,
th�
man ,
a
in
bo 9�
rather
'princj.:Ole� nf chrmee : 1 0 .
.
.
c t i mpin;rn.e s i mu l e xperiP.n t i n m ent. 1 :=:
'f'rt.n lrl t 1 m docu i t p�o .e t empt i m :prC"'jl"efJ :\. P.nt t r.-; .
s i c nnnm · qu i cqu i ft paula t im prot. r:1 h i t
rat i oque in lu m ini s eri;'3i t ora � ;
, , r;u s
n.P.tl'l.s
in : mcd.ium
.
.
1\ r:-
rt.
f 1. r R t
.
.
qu ote from book fou r shm·rs
. ..-.
1.mpP. J.1. inr:
force . t ol'mrd-s
h"! t:11 � � f'r u': e 'of both ,
Rlt.l , R J)2 ) .
. ( 5 , 1 1-1-52 -.5 )
('4., 822-5-? L
pro�r.r"' B S ,
" u s �J s " ,
" pr::J.ct i c e "
mer-t n s
�ot i on and !'"--'-'!. �t t on
1-t- , R ) l , R 3 5 ,
( cf .
" i mni r;rn� e x:nnri ent i a nent l s "
� im:l. lnrly ,
th�
rn e n 11 �
: �·: .
t: '1 Yl c � of h.n man rea s on - in the pro cP � t: o f ch�n.� e .
1 h 1 o r of
t h i A s t n.tcment
t h � r i. r !1 t t\·10 l i n e s :
-� ,.,n " ,
!l.r�
" aeta s " and
re p�nt
" r�t 1 o " ,
" reas on "
the p:J tt ern o f
" t ime " ana
coupleO. .a s . f orc c � t m;1ard s pro�:re s s ,
nJ. n c � of · " p:l'a.ct i �c , "
1 0 ::-' or
of prin c i.pl 0 s
Th e las t t'·ro
in t h e place of
" t j me "
" r�n
i n thr!
" the experien c e
more ext ens ivP s twly o f the eni eurcan unfl crs tann 1 n f" of
'· '
t i m e :1. !1 f orce of o.eve l opmcnt , iri .natuPo - or h i s t ory ., c f � . my
f) f � s- � , op . c it . , ch . 2 , Z e i t funkt i on , pp . 75-139 .
n.
�'
I'
of t!-1 � c."'l. r;rn"'
m inr! . "
" rr-� l � f:' S u p , "
s upp l an t ,
t h e ore t i. �.'!:\ 1 verb ,
Two prr:I c t i cn. J. v e rh s ,
in the
" t au �ht , 11
las t
nu t 11
l ines , th e
two
" b ri n?.: r:
m o re
f i rs t
f r om the
t No l i n e s
,
r�.nd
and
thw :; e ffe c t · A balance _o f the ory and pra c t i c e
in b o t h prirt � .
ThP. c omna r i s on b e t l>re e n t h e t wo
t h e i n t e rc hn.n ge
part s
nhl l i t y between na t u r e and. t i me
� P�t ,
d i s m1 s s ed �a�l i er
· of t h e deve l opment of
l•rh 1 ch
is s e en ,
human nature ,
onc e unde r the
H e re ,
t o t h e role of t i m e ,
inf lu ence
nnrsues
of change ,
of hum9:n a ct i on
has an ad ned i n i t i at ive
t h e worln
lies
i n the c on t e xt
the p r o c e s s
human m ind or human re::1 s on .
the l'TOrld of nature and
s on •
be tween sub s t an c e anfl a c c i
( 5 , 828-36 ) .
1 mrler the i n f lu ence of t ime ,
ca s e s :
,
r e ca l l s
,
one�
in b o t h
The d i ffe ren ce be tween
of human nature ,
wi t h re s p e c t
in that man , on a c c ount of h i s rea-
end. s and make s
c h o t c e s wi t h a v i m'l to ends :
s i c v o lvend.a aetas commv tat t e mnora rer,l m .
in pr et i o , f i t nul l o d.eni.qu e honore ;
"90rro a l iud s u c c ed i t e t ( e ) cont empt 1 bu s e x it
inque (U e s maf;i s adpe t i tur f l oretque repertum
laud ibus et m i ro e s t mort al i s int er h onore .
( 5 ' 1276-8 0 )
f'l1 1 od fu i t
I n a d d i t i on t o the blind mechani sm of atoms , wh i ch ,
realm of natur e ,
effect s change ,
The
the
s tA.tement of princ i p l e s ,
n ev e l opment ,
u s u s et
end.s
in the
man ' s cho i c e , e xpre s s ed in
appre c iat i on or c ontempt , ' be c ome s
mP.l"l t .
.
rnain fac tor of develo!l
i n the d e s c r ipt i on of rJ:::-.n 1 s
with a ra t h e r amb t r:u ou s c l i max :
imni grae s irnu l e xperi ent in ment i s
p8_,, lat im doCl.l i t pe<'ietempt i m proF;re d i ent i s .
s i c unum qu i cqu id. priu l at im protrah j t aeta s
in m e d i u m rat i oque in lum in i s e r i. �i t ora s ;
nrtmque a l id e x a l i o c lare s c e re cord e v i debant ,
a. r t i bu s a.d s u m mum don e e venere cacumen .
( 5 , 1452-7 )
The d i ff i cu l t y of h ow to int erpret
t l v e ly ,
a s hi s t or i cal ful f ilment of
11 cacumen11 ,
t he
e i t h e r pos i
m
deve lop ent o f human
�lA
nature
( cf .
J , 3 1 9 - ?. 2) , or ne�n t lvn ly , as
noint b �twAen p.;rowt h anit decay •
.
natural tu rn i nr.:
inrt i c at e s the ii i fferenc�
in evaluat i on of t i m e , wh ethe r nature as a wh ole ,
wi thin natur� iR concerned .
nature
t i on of a
r;:tther lat e stage in the
t n�r l l i c l i fe . ( 5 ,
1 379- 1415 ) ,
t i on s from the d e s cript ion
1 1 fe
The fact tha t
( 2 , 1 -hl )
'·
surr.�ests
development
or hum;1n
.thf) des crip
of man , . th�
contai n s word for �orord
rep� t i
of the ep! curel\11. att i tu d e t ol-mrd s
how important t i me and · h i s t o r i ca l
o eve lopment of. hu mnn nat ure are for th� . ach i evP.ment of t h e
T h e - wi s dom ,
h i c!:he � t · w1srl.om .
acqui red ove r a lon� s pac e of
time , from pr1m1 t i ve man t o �pi curu n ( .5 ,
t o cons i s t in a more and.
natu re and.
human
na t ur e
cosmns ,
as world ,
la'<T nnd
randomnes s .
�rtf.lbles
him
1 1-fA "
w i th in nature :
int e l l i p: i ble
Rhown
as
With the pas sin!'_; of
chaoti c environment , bu t
in c au s e ::: ann
eff e c t s ,
in
Man 1 s experience w i t h nat u re not only
to cont rol ann
( cf . 5 , 19 5-234 ) , but
�t !!tnff inl': of h imself and
on h i s cont rol
is
more art i ctJlat e un<'l erf}t;andinp; of
t im e , nature appears not any more
A.s
92 5-:-1L�57) �
change na tu r e " for the sn ke
of.
als o re f l e c t s btick on h :\. s unn er
h i s rel::tt l on
to other
men ,
that t s ,
a.nn chan�e of human nnt u re . wi t h in nn.ture . ll
. ..
.
.
.
r. ontr-ol �n� chnn o:-e of nat 1 1 re an, human natur� l'li t h 'i :n nA.tl l re
1 � � · h ol'r�v�r- , not thP. �a.m0. tl s t}le mnre. rnon ern. 11 0.on'}u e s t o r
n nt:m"e 11 •
� onqu 0 s t of :n.1lb.tl)'e , a s , for i n r.: tnnc e , P . B�.�o:n en.
vi � i ons i t , . � �pe!1.fk:: on the 11 closer and purer l e�r:ue betHP en
th e s r:> tNo f:=tcu lt.i� s , the �x-perl ment�.l 11nn the ra t. i o:nn.l ( �nch
rH" h�.s r.. � ver- ye t ber-m mn.cte ' � ( Nov . Orp; . ,, . 1 , !\ph . 9 5 ) ; " For
thP m"'.t t. Ar i:n hn-no. l s no m(!re . f� l :t c i ty of f:: peou l r-1 t t on ; hnt
t.,P r"I"}A 1 hn s i r.. � � � o:n o fortunes · of the hvmA.n ra ce , Rnt1. :1. 1 1.
nnw�r of opel"::l.t i on .
For mA.n 1 ::: hut the ::l � rvRnt .9.nc' t int ·'! r -
pr-�t.P.T' ' or nature : \'lhat he <'t oe s and wh at he 1qlows i s . on l y
'IITl-t � t h e hns obs erved o.f n�ture 1 s ord e r i n fl)ct o r i n th nn,o;h t ;
.
11
·
�l <)
1,
( cr.
rf:'ll i": on ,
n
P.mnh � � t s· on
reveal s
n:tb t�A
in the i r
mot 1 (\n
t h r m H th
of P;rmr t h ,
ha s
or
" hum:tn
ra l l s
the diffe renc� bo tNe en nature and h u man
re spec� ive
t h f.'
s t ab i l i t y
In hnman natu't"e , man , hnv l n r::
law s of a l l compound bod i e s ,
On the
only ha s t o c h oo s e the
mnt t n r in
" conveni ent m ovemen t s , "
mAtnr it;y anrl d e cay .
under
In nature ,
d e v e l opment :
space effects
l aws o f. p:rowth and d e cay .
h f'.'! not
" human minrl "
in an.<'U t i on t o hl l m:tn ac t i on an d t i me , a s prin c l pl � �
o f ch �.l, r�o ,
hot1 :v ,
The
119-22 ) .
o t h e r hann .
s t eps
that i s
the
hav i ng rea s on ,
of h i s growth , but he
t o f ind l i m i t s , . f o r bod. i ly as 't're l l a s
a
s p i. r i t ual need s ,
i t s whi ch w i l l ke e p h im w i t h i n " c onveni en t �ovement s , "
al�y
l i m
that i s
b0.yont1. th 1 � h e knows not h ing ann can d o not h i n.� .
For the chn in
of f'!:l 1 J s e s cB.nn ot. hy any f o r c e he l o o s en or hrol�cn , nor c:tn
nR: t H re be c omman cl ed excn pt by be inr,: obeyed .
fl.nd s o t h o s e tl;Tin
oh j r> ct. � , hu man l<nowl ed �e and humR-n '!'JOWe r , n o rea l ly meet in one ;
nnn i t i s froM i .o:n oran c e of c:J.u s e s that opern t i on fai l s " ( �rov .
Or� . , D i s t r i b . Op . , s ect . 6 ) .
n r mean i t t o be a h i s t ory not
on l �r of' n FJ.ture f'ree and at larr,e ( t'lhen she i s left to h r� r mm
cour � e and n oe s h e r wo rk her own Nay ) . .
hut much more o f n2.
tnrP. 1. m n er con s t ra int ancl v e xed ; that i s t o say , �rh en hy r-trt
r-tno t ho hnnil. o f man she i s forced out o f her natura.l s t a t � ,
A.nrl s qu l". ezen a11d. m oulr'l en: " Orov . Orp: . , D i s tr th . Op . , s e c t . 3 ,
c f . 1 , A nh ' s • 1 -11- ) ; " On a r: i v en horly , to g-enP-ra t e and s n ne -r i n
d H ce. ::t n eN nature or ne1'1 natu.res · l s t he Nork R-nd n. i m of h' lfTl"l.n
'V'�'""' r .
O f r3. rd ven nat1 1 re t o n t ::>r�over t h e f o rm , t h e tru " � m� c i
f i c r'l t -r r " rcn c e , or n1ltnre - en�en n e r ing n n t u re , o r � O'Jrc0 of
P.JT!:).n�.t. l on , . . . is t h e work ann a i m of humf.J.n 1m<nT l e n p.:c '' ( N ov . Orr; .
?. , A nl-l . l ) .
T h ou ,�h BA con qu ot A s Lucre t :t u s ' pra i s e of Epi <'l l T'U S a s
rl:l � cove re r o f t h e n�. tu re of t h i n�:1 ( N ov . Orr; . , 1 , A ph . 1 ?. 9 ) ,
ann t hour:h Lu c re t in s speaks , in t h e Rccotm t of mr:tn 1 s d evf'lop
mcn t. , of t h 0 co opera t t o:n of 11 p�a c t i c e anrl th e oxne r t en c r.l of t: h e
�n rrPr m i nr:'! 11 ( 5 , l?ln-AO ; anrt m y Dis s . , op . c i t . , pp . 111�- R ) �
h e l'TOn l n never , l i. ke Ba con , s p�ak o f man ' s " end cnvor t o " S t n-hl i sh
�net exb�11n t h � pm-;cr f\nd dom i. n i. on o f the humnn r.1. c e 1. t s b 1 f over
th� nn j vr> r :< r " ( il ov . Or.r; . , . 1 , A :oh . 1 ?9 ) .
i
Bn. � on • s v 1 G i on of t h P.
11 f" r.'ln 1 'Y'� of ma 1 1 ov e r thinr;r: " ( Nov . Orr: . � T , 1\ nh . 1 2 9 ) rr s t � m:
t r. r-- �nnnor d. t i on that he hil s 11 ri s tn.b l i. :.hen forever a t ru e · .<: n•l
ln.,·r fn l Pl.., rr i F! p;r:> br> bm en the emp l r t c::J. l 1lnd t h e ra t 1 ona l fn c. 1 .1 1 ty ,
t: h 0 1 m 1 d nil nnd i 11-s tn.rred c'U vorc e and S "'! TJ."l. r(l t i on of '•Th i ch h : � �
t h rrwm tnto c on f1 1 R i on :o�. lJ. t h e affn. i P :_:! o f th8 h1.lm� n fa1'1 i. 1;r " ..
( �! rw . Oro; . , In s t �n t . r1ar;nn. , PrP. f :; ; cf . 1 , .ll. ph .· 9 5 ; cf L . �,-;:P.P') ,
.'�. n i. � t rorlu ct l on t o the pol i t i cn. l pl1 i l o s ophy of F . Bacon , D t � r: . �
C11 1 c-=trr,o 1957 , ch � 7 , The C on que s t of •Nn.tu re ) .
·
.
.
�,., ; t'1 i n
{ cf .
th� frrmc1-ror.-k o f
hu mn.n
· 5 , J.ltJ0- 5 ; 2 , 1 -6-1 ) �
�ur·u � ,
ove r the o l ii
i.tr,
fn l f 1 1rrtc.n t
t h e pr:J z c l>Th i ch e l cvat n s !\pi
is
( r!f . - 1 , 6 ?. -?9 ; 3 ,
t h e new r:od of culture
ft , 1. -lr.? ) ,
in
Th i s wi sdom ' t o lmm-1 t h n. l i m i t :.
nnt\1rc
!lnpropr l ::t t � for · man 1 r.
ri.ntnro
r:o<'l s , C�res �
on l �,r d cn.lt w i t h bod i ly nn cd s
( 5,
Rncchu8 rmrl
1�3 0 ; 5 , 1-90 ;
Pcrculc � ,
Nh o
To l�ON t h e l l m :t t �
· 1- 51� ) .
annrorrr :J n. t P. f or humn.n nat u re m ean� t o know the 1 i m t t s for c on
t r o l l tr1 � rino
�1-,n.nr:inp;
l'lA. ture and nn.ture as
.
pro s pe c t
The
?4 ;
2,
. e sn .
in book
re s pe c t
sake o f 1 1 fe , "
both
hu man
a : l>lh.o l e . ·
..
of the death
of human nat u re
refle c t
than w i th
" f or the
ll J l -2 ), wh i.ch will
d eve l opment
mak� man
nature
,
Of
t
our na u ral world
set an
en
d
( 2 , 1105-
t o nny h i s t o r i c<t l
whether pos i t i �e or ner;at i vc , l 2
on t i me more w i t h respect. · t o
to the l i fe o f . mank i nd .
his
ot-m l i fe
A s Lucre t ius
c la i ms
t hree :
i l lud. in h i s rebu s v i de o f irrriare pot e s se ,
usqw� a<'leo naturarum ve s t i p;ia l inqu i
nP.rvola , quae nequ eHt rat j_ o dene ll e re n ob i. s ,
l � t n ih i l i npf'?rl_ i at d i p:na m n. i s n e r;ere v i tam .
( J ; 3 19 -22 )
1? � �1-- olarr-: wi cl e l y d t. s a.c:r:rne about the po� t t i v e
0 1� rt e ,n:n t i v 0.
evn. l n at i on o f man ' s h i � t or i c a l d ev P. l opmr.m t hy t; h 0 F:})lc11 rr�an s .
l!f" l th (:' J"' t h e s i mply
n iUJi'FB TDA , I l f i!Ja] e 0 0 ]
V l ihro el i J,l l cr�z l o , F.pi cu ren in mP m . H . B i P'norJn , GP.novn. 1 0 .� 9 ,
1 ?�"Ll r)5 ; 'P . I<'LT�Tf1.'Jt;;R , Ph i l o s onh :l P. und J) i c h t Jmn s t �.m !�nn e 0 P. s 2 .
P.u ch � s n � s
80 , J 9 52 , J�Jl ; I. .,R 0'!3 TN , S u r ln
c ol1.c0'!"lt 1
e p1.curvmn� nn
R evue d e m�Jtap�y s iqu P. � t
�o��l e , 2 1 , 1 9 16 ,
n o� t h e �imply
r'r'T�;\l T . T.<1. m orale n 1 'En i cure et s e s r.q nnort s n.ve c . l e s r! oc t r i ne s
�O.Ylt 0l"lnQrninc s , Par i s 192 7 )
v i eN
fi o j'u s t :t c e t o t h e
e n 1 �nrean al>rarene s s .of th e prqbl emat i c char::1.c i;( er o f humar-.
11 T) r- n n-re r.; s " .
A.nprecJat i on or both a s pe ct s , pe s s i m i s t i c nr.n
ont 1 m i s i t c ( F . f1. IAfi.! COTT I , L 1 ott im1 s mo re la.t t v o ne l 11 l)e re rum
natura '' rl.i Ln �rez i o , Tortno 1960 ; R . MONDOL:PO , La c omprens i on e
<h� l s ol"p:e t t o umano nell 1 ant i chita c la s s i ca , Fi renz e , 19 58 ; my
D i s s . , on . c it . , pp . l Jl-9 ) , s e em s to c om e closest to the t ruth .
p� ss l m ir: t i c ( P.
on
�u;rez ! Hermes ,
.
pror:r??� ,
6�7-719 ) ,
opt 1 m i st i c ( � . � .
seems t o
An
�.
Tn �
on�
nP!"l.th .
t h in:� t h �
Th e
·
r:.oo :::
.
ano
at om s ,
bool< �
cosm of worlds ,
.
fou �,
i�
t i mo ::m �
th e books n.hou t
t wo , the boolm ab ou t thA m i r, ro�o�m
one ann.
f i ve nnd s i x ,
t he books ahou t
the
s h O\'l'S mn.n ' s s pe c ial po $ i t i n w i h in
o
t
mR.r.�o
thP.:
sum
be in� i n t h e c n e r betwe en m i cro c os m and macroco s m ,
e t
o f th in�s :
h P.
are n ot conc nrn cd. abou t
por, i t i on o b oo k s three and
f
T.0-n , hP-b·mcn b oks
o
of
'
i s :::tt t h e same t i m e part
of the cyc l e of t i me and nature and.
Mf!:tt 1 s
able t o detach h i m s e l f from i t o acc unt of h i s ' rea s on .
n
o
m i nd and. s ou l enable h i m t o be a
ware of t i me ,
tl.:l e mAa su rable as p c o nature .
e t
f
.
.
role wi tl1 in tJ aturA ,
A \'r.;lre
t o be awa re of
of nature and t 1me 1 s
man becom e s aware of death ,
more so t h :1.n
sJn,ce . the end t o t h e fulfi lment of hum�n nat u re
of ; pir .tl ,
t
m ore s i � i f i cant than the beginning of i t s prom i s e .
is
The ex
hortat i on o person i f i ed nat u r e t
f
o overc m t he fear of de a t h ,
oe
in t h e Fin l o h ok three ,
ae
f o
in mo re gen r l t e rms ,
e a
f
ea of t h e
r
e xh rtat i n t ov e rcome t h
o
o
o
e
the P.n�. o . mo i on .
f
t
pl i c i tly ,
means ,
book abou t m t i n and r s ,
o o
e t
end of t ime ,
The Proo m ium of b o t w ,
e
ok
o
im
the
pra i s ed the task of the epi curean
ph i l osohe r to gain res o er m t i on t h roug
p
t
v
o
h
enabl in� h i m
and ,
the power of � ind ,
t o evaluat e t h e needs of body and m ind ,
an d . t here
fore t
o set
l i m i t s for h i m s e l f in a cr. ord ance wi th human nature
( 2 , 1-61 ) .
Th e f ct t ha
a
t b ok thr
o
ee e xpla in st h e na ure
t
mind and
one , at
s oul
in
in mot i on th rour,h
t e rm s of bod i e s
lea� , wond r abmlt
t
e
r:a i.n r e s t o e r m ot i on and t
v
the
chance s
h e l"e fore
tm•rard s t im e w i c h w uld rend.e r i
h
o
t
l i fe RS · i t appears t o be ' � 6r ihe
the � 1 nale of b o t re e, nat u re ,
ok h
t h e nnc han�eab le aspect o f
v oid ,
of t h e m i nd ,
tot ake on
make s
ever t o
an at t i tude
as ne,g l i t�ible for one
i i fe
o f
'3 1_nr:le
of t he sum of t h i � g s .
In
a lways pre s ent and repre s �n t i n
being , t r i e s · t o
c onvince man ,
that
�t lM� ,
n l1 r
1
n�vel"' pre s ent , n e t ther a s
wholP.
n6t- i n i t r::
r�:nrP- s �n t inr: th� c han,n;enbl� aspe c t of.
n � .�u. �i.bl� a.s fl\r
as
humAn life i s .
ncc io.ent of mat ter .
a c'c l �.ent
of
in
fo rc e of t i me ,
t i. m e :
man
means that
the poet i c me taphors
and. s pa c e. of t tme ,
m ot i on of. t i m e ,
chan �in� th e nature of the wh ol e · 1'10rld 11
a l t erin[",' a l l thi ngs "
on
are there fore not
the same leve l , but one ,
,
An
.1 n
or fina l ly •
to he reihtcP.d t o i t s ph i l o s oph ical d efini t 1 on .
"'T'imP.
In oth ':! r \•roro r-:
t hRt t i me i s on ly
mot i on throu r:h space ;
Thi s
nature .
ap:oearnnc e s , i r:
c.onc o rn ed .
p(!T'S On i f i. � d nn.t u rc tr1. e s t o C OnV 1. riCC
p:1.r t � ,
of
are
( 1 , 1�59 - 6 ) ) .
r.m d " nature
int erchan �eable
terms
subsumed under t h e o t h e r ,
t ime ,
n.:
"l.ture .
rm tnt en i m mund i nnttir::t!'l t ot iu s a r:> t n s
�l i oque n l i u s st�tus exc i n�re omn ia d ehf:'t
" "=' � !TI�ne t ulla s11 i s im tl i s r0 � :
omn i a n i rrr�nt ,
ornni � c o!"!m1.1 tr:1.t nat u r-A- ,_t vert ,qyoe C O '"': i.t .
n ,.rnqn e A.l. 1 uo pn t rP,:;ctt et nevn �.e'!J i l e l:1r:�uet ,
110""1"'0 �.l i n n ( mw ) c r0 � c i t e t ( f) ) cont 0mpt i.bu s e xi t .
s i c i r: i tnr mnnn. i n a tu rn.m t ot i u � a.ot �. s
� , tRt , et e x al to t nrram statu s c xc 1 p i t n lt e r ,
r:J.n on . notn i t :n equeat , po s s tt quod n on t n J ; t :1.n t e .
��
( 5 , 82A-Jh )
� tm n �.rl. �r
to
th� s;rmme t-r-y of
it 1. r. cn s s :J. on About
a1
s hane of at oms \Ora �
t. Ari n � al l th 1 nr:;s "
�'1 , ' "· 1 1 �r
�ff�cted. hy
n n"'l�n t rl. t nn.tu r� "
111"! -r . p . 9 above .
book b-To 13
i � framed by
both .
( 831
in
,
Nhel"A
th e c �� t :r."1 l
rmrroundnd
by t h e d i t:l -
f':hf' ll � c ount of " t i m f' ehn.n-
'T'he c �ntr::t l pos i t i o� of " om11 l::1
R?.8-36 )
..
.
.
.
ann. the comprehr-m s i ve
-
ch.'!racte
�' '1
nn '!':nr1 r1 t ot 1 n � "
·.
·R 1·l ,... '"" '"' f-! t
" mntat rm 1. m mnnrH nA.t1 1 r'1.m t ot i u r: n e t :"l � "
1.n
hm·rP.v0.Y. , thn.t t t m e :t s on ly
1
the appn.rrmt ,
!' 1 '11"l. l l;r �11 rn·m ln the c ent er of Ln oret :i.ur: 1
of
nn.turc ,
t;h l') :ro�t .
t. r.inmph of Prooerr: ium fou r
t � felt e1ven r.torc i f -one i s aNa.re of i t s
H i T.lDO l :Jrto:::
( 73-87 ) .
th e po s s e s s i on of
th!'YJ
There ,
H t ppol�r t o s ,
fi"UJ 'feo 5'0 v'?
by t each inP;:l. l-1- , . reveled
f l m·rers
to Artemi s ,
v i oJ..qt e TTlead.m'l ,
snr i :n o:t i me
wat e red
bee . l5
hy·
A ! dos
F:u r i p i d e t 1
fancJ'i n,o;
h i mGe l f in
vers i on of the
and 1 ov.c s
own brow .
Ln cre t ius and t h e Mu s e s ,
na ture ra ther
a
l<Treath of
or ,
been
2 1 -7 ) .
an
i. n
i ma�c ,
the
poet ,
l ov e s t o approac:h rm<t
to
pluck fl ovre rs and
to
Th e re lat i on of H i p:pol;rt o s
a l t ered t o
th e re lat i on o f
more poignant ly ,
of t 'l1 e poet and ,;enu s , . the eond.e s s over h i s
l h'P or
_by
and v :l. s i ted only by the
of t h e Hus e � ,
nnd h i s �odd e s s A rt em i s h a s
( 1,
9 2 1 � 50 )
s ou rce ,
a pos s e s s ion
In Lucre t ius '
wreath for h i s
of th in rr,s "
] ,
( cf.
in h i s ded.:i. cat i on of
t o o r inl{ from virr; i n s prin�s ,
::\
,
t: h 0. d� t fj cn.t i on
fl m-rers wh ich were plu cked from
t ravers ing path le s s f l e ld s
B e ek
t h P. pP.r::: nn i. f t r:�
aYJn. t h � Pro o�?.mium of book fon r ,
'J'hP.
hu t. t h.1. t
11 ])0 rern m n"'.t u r.., " ,
tn th e h'1 lancr> of the Ti' i n:l] e of book t h rP. e ,
t i on of'
1
The fa ct that
t o t h e re lat i on
poem 11 0n the nature
th e wrent h ,
h mt�ever ,
is
tud�r o f t h P. ph i l o s op'-1 ical i mpJ. i cat i ons of t h i s key
c f . m;r '' N ..,mos n.:n rl Phys i s " , An tnt: erpretnt i on of
l\u r i nide s 1 H i nnolyt os , HerM e s , · 1 0 1 , 1973 , 16 5-87 .
n
nrt� s 8. �('} ,
�
1 .5Por
n · c omprehens l ve int e rpretat i on of th i s pa s sa .o;e , 0 s pe c i a l l �
1.t � s�rmhol ,_ oal mean in� , cf . C . S EGA L , T h e Tra.n:P.n y o f th e H inno
lyt os ; 'l"he \>Ta t ers of Ocean and the Unt ou ch ed M eati m'l , HS C P , 70 ,
196 5 ; 11 7-69 .
�ne i ther ror th� Mn � � � n or VP.nu s ,
has � miv�th in� t o · <lo ·
ldth
bn t for- tt:te poe t h i m!=:elf ,
·
h i s pos s e s s i on of a t cach in�: , . a
tea�li 1. n.rr, n ot only about Venus ,· but about Venu s _ and Mars ,
two -rm-rers repre s entat ive of creat i on and d e s t ru c t i on ,
t or;eth<"r ,
forin the wh o l e of " the nature of" th ingr-f. "
0mpnas t � on
t eac h inP," as r e a s on for
1. J ln� tri ou s wreat h
that
csw 'f_eoGJ v-, ,
t i on i s evem s tronp;e:r s i pc e Lucret iu s •
.. '
" th e whole natu�e of · th inn;-s • .
i s a r:ift by
. Th i s oppos i
t eac}'l ing cla i ms t o be
The
i mar;e of_ th e
v is i t ed by the sprinp;t im� bee ,
lat e meaclo1>r ,
The
_
seekinr: thn
nat u re ra t he r thA.n A.n Ftch i eventent by t each l ne .
a.bont
the noet speaks of h i m s e l f and h i s l i s t eners as
·; ·
There ,
" be e s
flmt�ery �lade s , feedirtg on · all thy gold�n l'IOrds " ,
( 3 , 9-1 7 ) .
pas sar�e s ,
Hlppo l y t o s and the
r,uc:re t i u s 1
" De rerum natura " ,
in th�
a t eachine ,
cons idered worthy of eternal · l i fe
one from Eu r ipide s '
inv i o-
in the
i s u s ed
_
Pro oemlnm of book three l�i th reference to Epicuru s .
the
\·rh i ch ,
1 s d iamet r i cally oppos ed. to the Eu:r t p i rl ean
v i el..r t hat v i rtue ,
H ippoly t os '
the po e t ' s
the
Thour:h the tNo
one
from
s eem t o s tat e oppo s i t e vi et'ls ,
the
out c ome of the Euripidean play pro ve s H ippolyt os ' v i ew to be
at leA.st insuff i c i ent , if not fal s e .
The s t ronr;es t conclu s i on
t o he d ral'm from ·the play would. he that man can hav e no meaning·
ful relat i on wi t h · the divine ,
a conclu s i on wh ich l eads more or
l e s s d i rec t ly t o Lucre t iu� •· pr id e in
from t h P. t i r:h t knot s of ro l i p; i on"
T n the
o f " D� rP.rum
Prooemium . �'f
nat ur� "
as
b oo k . one ,
well
fr e e .i np; the minds of men
6-7).
t h e ber;innin� of · the 1>1h o l e
a s t he bep;i nn ing· o f i ts first .
half , V�nus was ha. f ed as r.;odd.e s s
i
(4,
"
f"OVerninr; nature , ·
( orit.P.rinr: the sacri f i ce of Iph igene i� oy Agamemnon )
P.xampl� for re l igi on and i t s act s aga in s t na ture
whi l e
Di <lha
s t ood a s
( 1 , 62-79 ) .
�Jn
t h � P1"" o oem i u m
hn l f of
of hpok
r mir ,
"De r�rum n n t. n rn " ,
D i ann ;
t. n f" pn. r; s .<:t p:P. f r om Eu r 1 p i r=J e s '
ani'. v t rtne , as a r: i ft ,
�:n n.chi nvement ,
( 3 , 1 '3 )
t in s ,
is
by n.a t u re ,
s e c on r'!
.
in t h e trrln s f ormnt ton of
H i p:polyt o s ,
b y t ea c h i n r,- .
t. h ou r:h t o f Ji:pi curu s 1
t h 0 bc n: inn tnp: o f t h e
is r8 j e c t c n.
for V nn,,H3 ,
i s ne � l e c t c d f or v i r tue ,. · R. s
Th i s ,
.i n turn ,
mean s that
t e a c h i n r: be tnr: w o r t hy o f e t ern a l
of fame
c ont i nu e r'!. by the . e xpec tR.t i on
of h oney . l 6
surround inp.;-
Th e pra i s e
of
the cu:r
l i fe
for Lu cre
\'rho t rans f orm ed th� ph i l o s oph i ca l t e a ch i n � in t o
n o P t i c t eRchinp; ,
the
a
wormwood vrit h a t ou c h
of
t eachin,o; r.:lt h e r than
riF.t t u r e
as
s ou rcP. of v irtue l 0. ave s on e l'li t h t h e qu e s t i on whe t her nat u re ,
i n� i f fe ren t
to
he
t oward s man and t he fulf i l lment of h i s l i fe , i s
m e r e l y s tud i e·rt. or whe ther man
nn � 1 re f or the sake of l i fe "
is
suppos ed
( 5 , 206 -9 ) .
t o " re s i s t
The Prooemium
of
book tNo , t h e book about m ot i on a.nd. r e s t , bef, l n s \'Ti t h a c on .:.
s i d e rat i on of the
life
S l•Te etn e s s . o f · wa t c h i n� the r� s t le s sne s s
cau s ed by e lemen t s
of nature ( th e
s h i pNre c k )
of
and h umo!ln
l f'1tn th r0 s pe c t t o t h e re lat i on b e h 1ceri t h e p.'ls sar:,e of Eu r- i p j de s I
H inno1yt os ( 73 - 8 7 ) a nd t h e two oc currence s of t h e s n m e t h nmn
' " D e rn :rum na t urrt11 { 1
9 2 1 - 50 ; h , 1 - 2 5 ) , I \-;ouJ/l
· i n I.n0r e t iu s
SUf"!"'0 S t th.<tt t h e f i r r: t h R l f .( 7 3 - 8 1 � of tho Eur i pi n E"'an pa � s n r,A
i s t r0.n t 0t1 i n the f i r s t Luc r e t ian ver r; i o·n ( 1 , 9 2 1 - 5 0 ) , ��h U 0
t 'I1 P. s 0 c ond ha l f ( 82 - 7 ) of i t i s fl ea 1 t \·r i t h , '11-Tl11:�:n i t o c cu r s t h e
r: '::' c onr'i t i me ( 1�- , 1 - ? 5 ) .
The re<t s on for t h i s dJ s t r l bu t l on c n n
he fonnfl t n the m o r e t h e ore t i c:l l a s pe c t of Eu :r i p i d A S ' H i pp o l y
t, , s , 7 J - R 1 r-t�1r. T..ucr0 t iu s 1 " De re rum nat1 1 rn." ; 1 , 9? 1 - ) 0 ( " :1 u �
TJP. l" :-: n � � i s or.Jn P m l1 n t u rr:tm rr:•rnm ft1 18. c on s t n t �� omptn f i r:urn " ,
1 , Ohf1-_50 ) , .'1 nrl t r e m o r e p�act t c:'l. l a s pe c t o f Eu r i 1) i o e s 1 H i p:;o 1 y
t 0� , P2 - 7 , ann. Lucre t i u s ' " D n rerum nat u ra " , 1r. , 1 - 2 5 ( " d urn }!Pr
.
s '8 i ci s omnr>m nn t nrnm r.e r1.1 m a c percn t i s u t i l i tn. t em " , l� , ? lt - 5 ) .
('. f . my " �J o n o s and Phys i s " , o:p . c1 t . , 165-9 : for t h e s i r;n i. f t �.'"l n c c
o f t'l1r-- c on t o x t f or the d l f f e renc e o f t h e . tNo Lu c rc t i an p:1. ::: ; :1.r/� S ,
c f . r. . S TRAUSS , tT o t e s on Lu c r e t i u s , Liberal i sm Anc i ent and JV' nf!. .
. .
� rn . rr��·T York , 196 8 , p .
113 .
�?. (
nn tnr0.
( �h � ·nn t t l� ) ,
''lh i l e <me n e l f
'T'h c � n t r:h t of swcetne � s ,
t P. � ch 1 n� of Fp i curn s
t"J ou�h ,
rA �t ( ? , 1 - f> ) .
i r: a t
i s :l�h i �v0.r'!. t 1-tr 0n rrh th �
( ?. , 7 - 19 ) , throu r-:h t h e t � <t �h i n;"': "l.hnn t::
t h e nrtturo of t h i n.n:r: , wh i ch wl l l re � cu0 on� fr0m thP. r � :� t
l � r: s n ('> s s of hum:::tn
l i fe
in :::t l l i t r: v :.\r i ou s wny r. .
whnther nA.ture i s
only t o he c6nt empln t e r1 or fo1 1 rr,h t fir;n. t n � t
for t he s ::tke o f l i fe i s never openly answered
" De rl"rum n!itnra " . ·
T he fact
to a c1 tp of wormwood whi ch
rv aronnci
t he
.
.
The
·.
f':Oes throu�h
On a. smaller s oa l e ,
s c riJ')t i on o f l i fe ,
n
�rt
of first
the des cript i on of
the
.
work .
l i fe ,
' bookn ,
has
eve ryt h i n� wort h l iv ing for ,
of
it .
and th e swe et Prooem iw
has
in
i t s c nunt er
the d e s cr i pt i on of the
fr om _ me re l i f e to thn h i r;l"
T h e fact that the c enter of the s i x
t h e t op;et h e rne s s of the F i nale of book three and t h e
l..e t s
R. r t e l' t h � h i t t er wormwood ,
o f cleath ,
thre e ,
c ount er�
i t s coun t e rpa.r t i n the bi t t e r F ina le
d e s cript i on of the h i ghfl st ach i evem ent
Pr ooP.miurn o f book four ,
sweP-t .
has i t s
sw� P.t
the sweet Prooemium of book one , . the rl e
i n the b i t ter F inale of book s i x ,
. est 'rle vel opment
The
of book s i x , . th e de s cr i pt i on of o. cath
the t ea ch in� about t h e nature o f t h in�s ,
ru in of
l i k cn�o
honey and t h en
whol e of Lu cre t iu s •
the d e s c r i pt i on of d ea th ,
of book three ,
l i fe ,
i�
'
Finale
in the b i t t e r
of book fou r ,
t h e t ea chinr,-
Sl-Te et ened. hy th e honey of pn� t .,
s equence
the
:Prooemium of book ona ,
Pr- �t
'l
is
i n Lu crct i n n 1
cup ' s r i m ·ve i l s t he anst'ler even more t han t h e ;
T>ros e t each inp- �. id .
wormwooo
that
Thf"! rtn , � t t nn
u s tas t e ,
fo.r once ,
m i �h t mean tha t even the hi t t n rn c s s
i f und e r s t ooci i n epi curean: t e rm s ,
The
t h e sNect h on ;::
can b e c ons i n ered
:·
themat.-ic ... ; s.equence of death , _ in the. F i nale o f book
�.
.
.
.
and fam e ,
•'
-��
.�
in the P·rooerpium of .book four ,
s e em s
to ref l e
�nnt. onl y th� n e c � s n r-try c m1n n c t 1 on of nnt u re nncl t 1.me ,
wh t �h
1 � a lwtys thP. . same
wh t ch i s al\.,a.y s d i fferent
th e
importan� � of
of t i me ,
ne R s
( anr't r� fers t o the p::t. s t ) ,
( and
r e fe r s
nnrl
t o t h e .future ) ,
t ime . oyer aml aga in s t na tu re .
of trH 1 t
t h n t.
bu t a l s o
Mnn • s awlr P-
w t t h ont t h e awarene s s . of nature , . d. 1 s t ort s h l s
v i eN of t h e r e lat i on o f m o t i on and re s t wi t h in t h e sum of
th in�s .
hr-mo ,
Mnn ' s awarene s s anci eva luat i on of t i m e ,
c on s t i t ut e s his
cruc 1.al n ot
the wh o l e ,
ano
m-1arene s s
on t h e other
o f natur.e , · and i s t h ere fore
only for h i s und e rs t and int:r, of h i m s e l f a s part
but a l s o o f t h e wh o l e
the poet ' s v o i c e
mark ' the
i t s elf .
T h e fa ct
c ent er of Lu c re t i u s '
of
that na t u re ' s
work ,
bears
out the everlas t inp.: t en� i on between nat ure , . encompa s s in."; al l ,
and man ,
s t riving t o encompas s nature .
�2A
A pn�mc H x
rr rn'1. s lnt: t on s
�-
1:
p.
4:
p.
nn .
5:
5-6 :
1,
of the La-t 1. n
quotes :
4 59 - � 3 : -
'Rvr:m s o t i mP e x i s t s not by t t s e l f , hu t from .
t'h \n",s t 'l1 am s e lv � � come s a fe � 1 1 n f\ , '"hat w:1 s
hr-on r;ht t o a c l o:=:1 A i n t j me p� s t , then 't'rhat i. s
nr0f-l �nt · n m'l , a:n.n fu rther �rhat i s r,oi nr: t o be
And :\ t mn s t b e av owed. t ha t n o man
h �rPnft � r .
f � e l s t im� by 1t s P. l f n.p:1 rt from t he mot i on
an d qu i �t re s t. of t h i nr;s .
.'5 , .56-R :
I tPnch , hy \'rha.t ] �N all t h 1.np:s are cr()a. t A<'l ,
nnd how t he�,. mu s t n � �c1 s Abi fl.e by 1 t , ann how
th e;v are not s tron� e:non�h t o break t h rour:h
th� powerfu l st�tut A $ o� t i me .
1 , �32-��
Por inf in ite . t-i me :and . the day that has p;one by
f1l1J � t neefl s have d ev oured r-t l l t h i n.�s · that are of
mortal body . . . Bttt \'lhab:�ver ha s been i n .that s pace
::md r:on e by t i me , out of Nh 1. ch th i s sum of
th i. nr:s c on s i n t s anr'f. 1 s repl r.n i shed , is c ertainly
�n.fl owP-d w i th i mmortal natu l"t! .
5 , 306-17 :
o\ cr�.in , fl.o y ou not beh olfl s t rme s t o o vanqu i nh�fl
�;... t i me , h i .�h t ol'm rs fall in;:. in ru i n s , n.nfl rc ckn
crumhl tnr; m·m�"., �hri nes nn� i mn,-:e s of the [':O� s
�rm'li'1r.t; l'1'0nry rmfl. l-torn , \>Th i l e the i r s� crP d pr� s 0:n� r-
�.�.vm ot f'!'OJ o�.n:- t h P bou.nn a.Y"i. P. s o f fn.t: P. n or s t ru :r.c). t:
::�.�� l n � t +: r.e l m·m of nnt urP. ?
.1\ f"'r-t i n , n o 1·YA.
n0t � � n.
!1 t on � � t 0r-n • 1 p from h i r:;h mo� mt.ains ru � h 1 n,cr h�ac l on c: ,
1u1 .,ble t o br ook or b"'ar t h � s t ern s t.renr:th of a
J. i m l t: e� t l me ?
For· infl��rt t h ey l·:ou l C! n o t - b�r �urld �n l y
t 0Y"TJ n -p n11 r'f fa. l l h P. :J r'fJ on.� , i f frorn t i m e �ver1 a s t. i nr�
f:'he�,. h rvl he1 fl. 011t n;:n. i n s t a l l the t orm �nt s of" t i ��
Ni. th ou t l)r�"lkin� .
•
n.
h�
5 , R?.� -3� �
•
•
t. t m � ch�.n r:e s the n n t. n rf'! of t h e \'t]'lole l>�Ol"1 d
� ,... � on "' r. t::t t e � f t E' r :.:n nther m, , �t ,., r: � rl r. nvert.nlrP.
� 1 1 thin�!1 , nor fl. o� � a.n�rth tno: tlh i c1 P. l i 1rP. i t r- � l r :
n l 1 th i n r;s chn;n p-r t �1 .." i."r n h.':' � r> , '"t:t.tnre a 1 t o r rl f\ 1 1
·
th tnr':s r-tnn r.:rms t"rn tn � t h �:-:1 t o h.trn .
For on0 tl" � '\"":
�ob=: m·ray an" r:roNR f:=t. 1. , t r.Jna fe�ble ,,Ft th ::t.�� �
t herA on anoth �r .r;rm·rs up Rnrt i nsuC's f�orn :l. t p1n �c
of s c orn .
So th�n t j me chn� p:e !:l the nature of th e
r:- ."1 ,..
��··n o1 0 . ,.•n-r-1cl ,
n.n � . on 0 F: b") t. n. n f t. r .... f11"1 0t h � r rw ,- rtal-:· r> �
t. h (' r:-n.rth , r. o t.h. 'l t 1. t c q,.n1. ot h P � r nlv-. t i t ;, hl ,
hn t. c n n h�:lr Nh :1.t t t d i. cl n ot o f oln .
p.
5,
7:
5h-R :
J t: R !"! �h , h�r '!Arhn t 1 a.w { t h r.: };'3.\'T of nn.tn :r-0 ) � 1 1
+: h l n r-:s nrr� r.rr.::1te� , �ml h oN t h r.:y mu� t n r.r.: rl �
:'1h 1.� f." h�, i t , nn d h oN t h A y o.re n ot r-: t T' on r� r.non�h
t o hret:tk t l'rrov r:h t.h r JV'I�·rr.:rfn l r. tnb 1.t r r. o f t 1 :n e .
n.
?,
7:
� ? - 7� :
C i"'f.'� nr.M , T \'r 1 1 1 un f o 1 rl hy l!T}! n t r:l 0Vf"' Jnl"'rt t tr n
�"' r f."� t. 1 v � h o� 1 f"' r. of m�t t n T' hP�('t. � i v r r s R t h 1 n�r ,
n 11 r1 - hrenk u n t. h o !"l r- t h:1.t � r-e hr.[':ot t rm , h �.r N'l-) � t fnrr. r
t. h "" Y 'lrr (� m1 s t rr.1 i nf'� t o � o t h i s , rnvl \·rh nt '7 0 1 oc 1 t.:{
l s nn:no :i :ntP.n t h P m fm• mnv h 1,i; t h ron rr:h t h f' rn l r;n ty
vo1 � :
0 o �rou rcmn.rr:bnr t o ;r.l vr. yonr rrd.. n� t o my word r. .
Ti'C'r i n v�T'Y t ruth , mn.t t e r d. o e s not c 1 r�avl?' r. l 0s r.:
!')n.. �ln�d t o i t se l f , s in('r.: w� s c r. 0ach ' t h tn.r:. ):reM 1 P r.: s ,
nnn · l're pr:o:rce :\ ve a l l th il'l[':G f 1 oN n �·�':"l �r , n � i t l!TP. r c. , i n
t.h c l ontr lap n P. o f t. 1 me , a s a r:c N i. thil r:nrs th�=>m
from our s i r:h t :
rmn yet th� 1.m i vr;rsr: i!'l ::; r �?n t o
rAmA. in uml i m i n t s he n , j_ m.-l S Ml.t ch · o.n a l 1 hod i e s that
� Pprt.rt from Anyth inr; 1 f' P. S f'm t1·1a t f rom wh i ch t h �y
:pn � s ::n'lay , ann b1 e s r-: 1111 th tl'l.cre:l ci e t hat t o wh 1 ch
thP.y have come ; they c ons t ra i n t h A former t o �rmor
olCl. and t h e J at t er nr:a i n t o f l ourt s h , and yet th ey
nh i d e :n o t with i t .
Thus th e sum rif th i n �s i s �ver
be in!"'; repleni s h ed. , n.nn. m ortn 1 s l i ve on e and al1 bJr
r:o;ive- and tal::e .
S orne rac e s wax and others wane , and i n
n s h or t spa c e the t ri b e s of · l i v :t n � th inr:� are chan sed ;
�.nrl 1 i ke runners hanrt on the t orch of 1 i fe .
p.
n.
A:
2 , 297- 3 02 :
The hof! t e s of the f i rs t -be�inn :i.n?:s in t h e rJ.r,o s
prt s t mo\red Ni th the same mot i. on <i s noN , and h e re:tftP.r
't1i l l he borne for ever in a s i m t 1ar 't'lay ; such things
�s have berm l.'Tn!'lt to c ome t o be in.r.; td l 1 be hroup;h t to
b i rth u ncler the same cond i t i on , 1d ll exi s t and grow
ann be s tronr; , inasmuch as i s gran t ed t o each by t he
bond.s of nB. ture .
B:
1,
·
10?1-31 : .
'F'or in very t ru t h , not by d.e n 1 r;n o i n t h e f i r s t
h0.rr1 nn i n �� of th 'i 'Ylf: S place t h � m s 0 lv e s ench in
th e i r orrl.er wi th for� s e e inr; mi nn , nor ind e ed. d i d
t n �;r make r.om1x1 ct wha t . moveml3nt e a. ch � h ou l d
r> t n rt , hnt becau s e · m;:my of them s h i ft inr,: i n
mari.y way s thron.�;h ov t t h e v.rorld a re harri ed and
bu ffet ed by b 1 m·rs from l t mf t 1 e s s t ime ; by t ry ing
movements and un i ons - of every k ind , at las t
th e y fal l int o s uch d i spos i t ons a s thos e ,
�') 0
Nh�rP-hy ou r wor ld o f t h i nr:n i s � rcnt cn n. n � hoJ.d rr
. t o'"':�th �r .
Ann i t t o o , prc � c rven from hnrrn th rour;h
m.·1 ny ,. a m t n:hty cyc l e of yen ros , whrm on c P. i t h :'l s
hr!rm n<'lf:t i n t o. con vcn i rmt movernrm t ::t , hr 1 n�s 1 t
·"l ho1 t t thnt :rivers replen l sh the !';reP.it y s e a
-�
•
p.
10 :
•
•
5 , 43�-45 :
the b i rt h of thP. t•rorlcl } n s o rt of
fr� sh�form�d . � t orm , a ma � n r:at he re_d to�ethcr of
f t :r s t -be,..;i nninr:s of every ldnd , . wh oso d i s cord
\·1.1- n wn.r;tn.� ,.,�:r ani'! confound. i np; i nt e r - s pac e s , path s ,
tnterlr-t.c in.o;s , wP- i r:h t s , bl mu:: , mc e t inr;n , n'Yl.rl mo t i ons ,
hPcnn s e mdnr: to th e i r un1 1 ke forms A.nd varl ous
�hn.nP.s , al l thinp:s \'U�re unable to remain � n un i on ,
R � they do n ow , and t o �1ve an d rc ce ivP.· c onven i en t
movem�nt s .
'T'h'm ( at
pn .
10-11 :
p.
' 14 :
p.
'15 :
1. ,
' 322.;.8 :
IA � t-ly ,
whatevm" day Find n�ture -a � d � - t o th ings
1 :\ tt-le :by l i t tle , impe ll i nP: t h em _ t o P.;row. in
nn e proporti on , the s t ra inin � . s i eh t of the eye
c�Yl. never behold , nor a�a i n wh erever thin�s
f"'rO't� old. t hrou�h t ime and d.e cay .
N o r where rocks
OVP.r-hang.. the sea , devou red by th� th in �R.lt
spray , c
�u ld you see t..rhat they lose in t i me .
By
bod i e s uns een then nature t reats th inp.:s .
1 , 459-6 3 :
;F.ven s o t j_me . e xi s t s not by 1 t s e l f , · bu t
from th 1n�s themA elves co me s a fee ling ,
l>�hrtt llfa s brour;:ht to a c l o s e in t i.rn e pa s t ,
then what i s pre s ent now , and furt her what
Ana i t mu s t be
i s p;oinr: to be hereafter .
avo�red t hat no\'r mr.'ln fe e l s t l me by i t s e l f a
part from the m o t i on ann qu i et re s t of th ings .
2,
fi9�79 :
nerce i ve al l th in�s f l ol'r a1-1R y ,
1 n the l on .n: l�pse of t i me , <:'. S ar;e
'ole
t:t �
it
vrA re ,
tfi thn rr::n·r s t h eM
fr>om our a i 0:h t : · and y e t the univerAe i � s e en t o
rcm:::t in · ·und1 m i n.is'hP.n , inasmuch a s a l l bod i e s that
n �na:rt from A.nyth inr: , l e s �en that from Wh i ch t h r.>y
p.'-l s � aNay , ann ble s s ' w i th increase that t o wh i ch
t h ey have come ; t h ey cons t rn i. n the f o rm e r t o gr"0\'1
oln anfl th� l at t e r._ a�a in to flouri Ah , and �ret the�,r
::t h i_d e _ n ot wi th i t..
Thu� the m.tm of th ing-s i s p·1.r-�r
b0 1 n r: rcpl <m i shen anQ. mortal s l i ve one .nnd. all by
S om � - rac e s W<:tX and o t hers wane , and
�:tve anri _ take .
j_n a sh ort space the t ribe s of" l i v inr: thi ner; a.re
chan.r:;ed , anii l i ke runne-rs }land on the
t orch of- l ife .
_
�'3 1
p.
15 :
5 , 1� � - 1 00 :
B n t 0v �11 ,.r.'lrl t. h 1!": thn t: T V.n.:\•T n n t 1'Tl,.t t n rc
t � !" f l r� t. -1)�",f"': 1 '1n t n :'"':� of t h t n ,rr r: , t.h1.1 r: n1 .1 � 11 n t
l r·H:: t T \<'Y 01 1 1 r'f rlrl rr t o r� ff t rm fr0m t h 0. ,, r. r-:r
wn ',' S of h rnvnn , _ :'1n n t o shm·r from m�n�r o t h t"! r fnct �
th:'1t th(' \·mrl t'l ,m � T1 c v 0 r nn n f' f o r 1 1 r: h�r r.l i v 1 nc
n cn,r r. r :
!1 0 ·fT' rr>rtt hrc t h ,.. fan l t s Nh .: rnw i. t h
i. t r: t ::m r'l. r: f'nr'J motcl't .
T n t. h 0 f i rr: t !'l1 rt r. 0 , of
n 1 1 thf.lt the s l{y eovorc in j tr: mJ r:ht�r
m mr r. m Pn t , a f!T'Nlt P""-rt ts pos :1 e r: fl en by r;rc cdy
monnt a i n s n ncl fore s t s fu l l of \•t i l d bc::u� t s ,
-rn rt rocks and vns ty mn r s h c G hol n , nnd t h 0
s r-- ::t thn.t k0 c n s t h e sh nrc s o f i t s l nnn s f n. r
ap::t rt .
He l l - n i p.:h hto part s of t h e s e land s are
r obbed from m o rta l s by s c orch i nf.i heat , and
c on r: t r.m t l y- fal l inr, fro s t .
Ev en t h e lanr'l t hat
is l e ft , nn ture wou l d s t i l l cover wi t h brambl e s
by h er m•m pm>te r , bu t t ha t man • r: power r e s i s t s
fo r t h e s ake o f l i fe .
p.
16 :
5,
,
1 45 2 - 5 :
'Pra c t i � e and. th erewi th t h e e xpor1 cncP. of t h e
e:1r.;er m i nc'J taur:ht t h e m l i t t l e b y l t t t l e , a s th�y
went forNard s t ep hy s t e p .
S o , l i t t l e by l i t t le ,
t !. me brirf(i:s � out each -s�everaT -thi'h� lrit o · v l ew , a·nd.
r�a s on rat s e s i t up int o the c oa s t s of 1 1 e;ht .
-
p.
17 :
5,
127� - 80 :
5,
1452-7 :
Thu s ro l l i n� t ime chan�c s t h e t i m e s o f t h i n�s .
':That l'Ta s of . value , be c ome s i n t u rn . of n o 'IIT Orth ;
R.nr! t h en another t h 1 nr: ri s e s up r:md l eave s i t s
pl�ce of s corn , and i s s ow;ht m ore and more .
ea ch day , and when f ound bl os s om s i n t o fame ,
A!l.ri i s of wondrous h on ou r amon g men .
p.
17 :
'Prnct i ce rmd th erew i t h t h e 0.xpe r i en 0 e o f t h e
ea n;er m i nd t au �h t them l i tt l e by 1 i t t le , a s t h ey
l'Te'!1 t forwA-rd s t ep by s t e p .
S o , l i t t l e by l i t t l e ,
t :t mr?. br in!Ys out each s ev e ral th tne int o v i ew and
r�a. s on ra i s e s i_t up 1 n t o the c oFt s t s of l i.r:h t
For
t h e y saw one t h i nf{ a f t e r ano t h e r grow c l E!ar i n
t he l r h eart , unt i l by their art s t hey rea ched t he
.
h i g:he s t point .
p.
20 :
3,
3 19 -22 :
On e th in,:; I feel able t o aff i rm
s o sma l l rtre the
t ra c � s of d i fferent nature s l e ft , wh i ch r e as on c ou ld
not di s pel for u s , t ha t not h i ng h inders u s from
l i v in� a l i f e worthy of god s .
.
•
.
�)2
p.
22 :
5 , 826�36
For t 1!11 P- chnnr;o s t h n nnture of the t'lh olc l·mrlr'L
ann .one s t.'lte · a f t " r ; m other mn s t needs ov� r tnkP.
nl l th in�s . nor d o c s anyth in� ah idn l ike i t s e l f :
a l l th inr:s c han rt:e thc i. r n.bon.c , nnt urP. a l t e r 5 a l l
th 1 n �s ann constl"a inn t h�m t o tu rn .
Ti'or 011 0 th in�
rnt: s al'l:J.Y and ,;rows faint and . feebl� ltTi t h ar;� ,
thet'eon n.nother �r ow s up and- i s sues from i t plane
of � corn�
S o t hen t i me chari�e s the nature or the
wh ole w or ld , and one s tate after another overtake s
the eartl1 , s o that i t Qannot bear what it d id ,
bu t can bear what it did not of old .
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Description
An account of the resource
Items in this collection are part of a series of lectures given every year at St. John's College. During the Fall and Spring semesters, lectures are given on Friday nights. Items include audio and video recordings and typescripts.<br /><br />For more information, and for a schedule of upcoming lectures, please visit the <strong><a href="http://www.sjc.edu/programs-and-events/annapolis/formal-lecture-series/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">St. John's College website</a></strong>. <br /><br />Click on <strong><a title="Formal Lecture Series" href="http://digitalarchives.sjc.edu/items/browse?collection=5">Items in the St. John's College Formal Lecture Series—Annapolis Collection</a></strong> to view and sort all items in the collection.<br /><br />A growing number of lecture recordings are also available on the St. John's College (Annapolis) Lectures podcast. Visit <a href="https://anchor.fm/greenfieldlibrary" title="Anchor.fm">Anchor.fm</a>, <a href="https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/st-johns-college-annapolis-lectures/id1695157772">Apple Podcasts</a>, <a href="https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9hbmNob3IuZm0vcy84Yzk5MzdhYy9wb2RjYXN0L3Jzcw" title="Google Podcasts">Google Podcasts</a>, or <a href="https://open.spotify.com/show/6GDsIRqC8SWZ28AY72BsYM?si=f2ecfa9e247a456f" title="Spotify">Spotify</a> to listen and subscribe.
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
St. John's College Greenfield Library
Title
A name given to the resource
St. John's College Formal Lecture Series—Annapolis
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
formallectureseriesannapolis
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Page numeration
Number of pages in the original item.
16 pages
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
paper
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Berns, Gisela N.
Title
A name given to the resource
Time and nature in Lucretius' De rerum natura
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1974-03-08
Description
An account of the resource
Typescript of a lecture delivered on March 8, 1974 by Gisela Berns as part of the Formal Lecture Series.
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
Bib # 57328
Subject
The topic of the resource
Lucretius Carus, Titus. De rerum natura
Philosophy, Ancient
Coverage
The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant
Annapolis, MD
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
St. John's College
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
text
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
St. John's College has been given permission to make this item available online.
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
pdf
Relation
A related resource
<a href="http://digitalarchives.sjc.edu/items/show/1082" title="Sound recording">Sound recording</a>
Friday night lecture
Tutors
-
https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/sjcdigitalarchives/original/ba2bc785b0a995b680980df021d34237.pdf
7c0ab2a96ae4c9b41ec80f642e04f742
PDF Text
Text
Lucretius on the Nature of Things
by
Margaret Kirby
A lecture given at St. John’s College in Annapolis on the 13th of April 2012.
[This title page was supplied by the St. John’s College Catalog Librarian.]
�Lucretius on the Nature of Things
De rerum natura or On the Nature of Things presents itself as a project to convert a
Roman citizen named Memmius from his faith in the civic religion of Rome to the “true
reasoning” (vera ratio) embodied in the teachings of the Greek philosopher Epicurus.1 This civic
religion, Lucretius maintains, and especially the fears it inculcates in the minds of its adherents,
are responsible for the unhappy condition of late Republican Rome: the urgent prayer for peace
with which the work opens and its reference to “our country’s time of trouble” locate the poem
amidst the civil disturbances and foreign wars of conquest that characterize the last years of
the Republic.2 Lucretius fully acknowledges the difficulty of the project: his fundamental tenet
that the universe consists of nothing but “body and void,” his central precept of the soul’s
mortality, and his ongoing insistence on the utter indifference of the gods to all human affairs,
constitute a bold attack on those religious convictions, on which, according to Polybius, the
enduring strength of the Roman commonwealth depended.3 The character of Lucretius’ pupil
only exacerbates the problem: Memmius is portrayed as a recalcitrant student, likely to reject
with disdain any teaching he does not immediately understand,4 and prone to bouts of
inattentiveness—although the length of Lucretius’ lecture no doubt invites such lapses.
Moreover, Lucretius foresees that Memmius, “overcome by the fear-inspiring words of priests
and poets,” will try to cut himself off from Epicurean reasoning and revert to his former
beliefs.5 The fears instilled by priests and poets, Lucretius suggests, derive overwhelming
power from a deeper and more fundamental human fear, which is rooted deep in the mind
itself and in our very sense of causality. The eradication of this primary fear thus becomes key
to the conversion of Memmius:
1
�Therefore this terror of mind and these shadows must be dispelled, not by rays of sun or
bright shafts of day, but by nature’s aspect and reason.6
Read actively, the phrase nātūrae spĕcĭēs rătĭōque refers to our “looking at and reasoning about
nature.” 7 At the same time it invites a less conventional reading, which suggests that it is not so
much our observation and reasoning about nature, but nature’s own visible and invisible
processes— its “aspect and reason”—that will ultimately dispel the shadows and terror of the
mind.
Fear is not by any means a human prerogative. Lucretius notes that animals utter
distinct sounds of alarm “when they are in fear or pain.”8 Nevertheless, he claims that humans
know—or are afflicted by—a peculiar kind of fear, which he calls “terror of mind” (terror animi;
1.146).9 Such fear is unknown, however, to the first humans: “They did not seek the day and the
sun all over the land with great outcry, nor wander frightened in the shadows of night…”10 Early
man has “cares” (curae; 5.982), but they are of a different—and more immediate—order: “They
would flee their rocky shelters at the approach of a foaming boar or mighty lion and at dead of
night would yield their leaf-strewn beds in fright to the savage guests.”11 At the same time
Lucretius hints that these first humans are not, in fact, distinctly human at all. They pass their
days in “the wide-wandering fashion of wild beasts,”12 while their nocturnal ritual of “lay[ing]
their wild limbs naked on the ground, [and] rolling themselves in leaves and boughs,” makes
them “the equals of bristly hogs.”13 It seems that only in becoming fully human does man
become infected with the darker terrors of the mind, or perhaps rather that man becomes truly
human precisely by acquiring these dark fears:
For when we look up at the celestial regions of the great world, at the ether set with
glittering stars, and it comes to our mind [to think] of the paths of the sun and moon,
then, into breasts bent down by other evils that care also begins to raise its wakened
2
�head, whether by any chance we have to do with some immeasurable power of the
gods, able to make the bright stars revolve…14
The imagery of this passage is telling.15 Into breasts bent down by “other evils” a new kind of
care is said to make its restless way: this care is depicted as “erecting” or “raising” a head that
has been “wakened” or “made erect.”16 The image of a personified care raising its head and
rising from sleep suggests that as soon as humans, in Ovid’s words, “raise erected faces to the
stars,” that is, as soon as they begin to stand upright and quite literally raise their heads from
the ground, they awake to a new kind of concern.17 Although an animal instinct for survival may
initially position humans in the world, Lucretius suggests that it is man’s question about the
causes of celestial phenomena that gives rise to the first fully human fear, or again, that such
fear is what first gives birth to a distinctly human kind.
But what exactly is this fear? The “mind’s terror” has its origin in a fundamental human
desire to discern the causes of things: “…they observed how the sky’s array and the various
seasons of the year come round in due order, and were not able to discover (cognoscere) by
what causes all that came about.”18 We experience things as effects, as caused. We see “many
things” and immediately try to see causes of the things we perceive. The problem is that causes
generally don’t appear ante oculos, “before our eyes.”19 The absence of any visible cause of the
regular motions of the heavens or the recurrent pattern of the seasons thus fills humans with a
kind of awe:
In this way, certainly, dread holds all mortals in bond, because they behold many things
happening on earth and in the sky, the causes of whose workings they can by no means
see, and they think them to be done by divine power.20
Thus the celestial phenomena raise questions of causality and, as a result, the notion of a
powerful agency comes to form part of man’s very experience of the revolving “moon and day
3
�and night and solemn stars.”21 As a result, the question, “whether by any chance we have to do
with some immeasurable power of the gods, able to make the bright stars revolve,” can only be
framed as a rhetorical question. Incapable of experiencing the celestial motions except as
effects, except as caused, humans immediately posit occult agents: “their refuge was to leave
all in the hands of the gods, and to suppose that by their nod all things were done.” 22 Having
created gods more or less in their own image, humans also attribute passions resembling their
own to the gods, and interpret destructive natural phenomena as effects of divine anger: “Oh
unhappy race of mankind, to ascribe such doings to the gods and to attribute to them bitter
wrath as well!”23 However regrettable such a response may be, it is, apparently, an altogether
human reaction:
Whose mind does not shrink with dread of the gods, whose limbs do not crawl with
fright, when the scorched earth trembles at the thunderbolt’s terrible blow? […] when
the whole earth sways under our feet, and shaken cities fall and threaten to fall as they
waver, what wonder if mortals feel contempt for themselves and acknowledge in these
things the gods’ great powers and wondrous strength, which govern all things?24
The visceral quaking25 that makes men flee wild boars and lions thus comes to be
replaced by less instinctive and more complex fears. The belief that divinities govern the world
and the religion to which this belief gives rise are the origin of the deepest fear that “assails”
men.26 This is “the sharp fear of death;”27 it is
that fear of Acheron…which troubles the life of man from its deepest depths, suffuses all
with the blackness of death, and leaves no delight clean and pure.28
This new fear, fueled by the “immortal verse” of poets,29 is not so much a fear of death itself,
as the fear of an imagined afterlife and an illusory future beyond death.30 Paradoxically, this
fear is associated with a profound failure to grasp the full extent and significance of human
4
�mortality. Men mistakenly imagine that the soul is immortal and in doing so fail to distinguish
properly between mortal and immortal:
…to join mortal with eternal, and think that they can feel as one and suffer in common is
madness. For what can be thought more at variance, or more disjoined in their relation
and inconsistent, than what is mortal joined in union with immortal and everlasting, to
weather furious storms!31
The same logical error gives rise to the misguided notion that the gods are involved in human
affairs. To suppose that immortal beings concern themselves with the doings of mortals is to
overlook the essential distinction between temporal and eternal: “for the very nature of divinity
must necessarily enjoy immortal life in the deepest peace, far removed and separated from our
affairs.”32 Ultimately, then, the fear of death stems from a failure to grasp the essential finitude
of all things and a failure to observe “how the power of each [thing] is limited and in what way
its boundary stone is deep-fixed.”33
Under the shadow of this new fear of death, humans invent elaborate religious rituals,
which, ironically, cause them to turn their eyes away from the celestial motions that first
aroused their wonder and “turn towards stones and altars.”34 They abandon their distinctly
human, vertical posture and “fall prostrate upon the ground” in worship.35 It is in fact in this
attitude that Epicurus is said to have found them:
…human life lay groveling on the earth, bent down (oppressa) under the weight of
religion, which stretched out its head from the regions of the sky, standing over
(super…instans) mortals with terrible aspect…36
Humans have themselves personified the “regions of the sky,” so that these now appear not as
the orderly array which first aroused men’s wonder, but as the locus of divine powers; the sky
acquires the frightening “aspect” or “look” of gods who must be propitiated.37
5
�Indeed Lucretius observes that his Roman contemporaries seldom raise their heads to
the sky at all. Preoccupied as they are with mundane affairs, they are more likely to catch a
glimpse of the sky’s reflection in a shallow puddle between the paving stones at their feet, “so
that [they] seem to look down on (despicere) clouds and sky,” than they are to gaze up in
wonder at the source of this image.38 He asks Memmius to imagine how “wonderful” the
“sight” or species of the stars and sky must appear to those seeing them for the first time,
although “no one now, wearied with satiety of seeing, deigns to look up (suspicere) at the
bright regions of the sky.”39 As humans lose sight of the original cause of the mind’s terror, this
terror too loses its focus on externals and becomes a permanent inner condition, characterized
as “anxiety of heart.”40 This anxiety expresses itself as a profound restlessness: “each seeks
always to change his place, as if he could put down his burden.”41 The more men attain the
public success they think will free them care, the more oppressed they in fact become: “so
great a mass of ill lies heavy on their breast.”42 For all their sophistication, the citizens of Rome
are so bent by onerous cares that, metaphorically at least, their very ability to stand erect is
threatened.
We have already noted that contemporary Roman religious practices present a more
literal threat to man’s ability to stand “erect and tall,” to use Milton’s phrase.43 In contrast to a
religion (religio) that only inculcates false fears, Lucretius advocates an attitude of piety (pietas)
which he explicitly distinguishes from prevailing Roman notions of piety:
It is no piety at all to be seen often with covered head, to turn towards a stone and to
approach every altar, nor to fall prostrate upon the ground and to spread palms open
before the shrines of the gods, nor to sprinkle altars with the streaming blood of fourfooted animals (quadrupedum), nor to link vow to vow; but rather to be able to look on
all with a mind at peace.44
6
�But how is such Lucretian piety, or tranquility of mind, to be attained? How is man to recover
his proper attitude? Lucretius suggests that it is, once again, a question of etiology: “He is sick
because he does not grasp the cause of his disease; if he could see that well, at once each, his
affairs abandoned, would first strive to discover (cognoscere) the nature of things.”45
De rerum natura thus associates the ethical ills and political turmoil of Rome’s “time of
trouble” with a profound ignorance about “the nature of things.” Both the fear of death and
the civic vices generated by this fear ultimately spring from misconceptions about the nature of
body, misconceptions the poem proposes to correct. In addition to presenting the Epicurean
teaching that nothing exists apart from body and void, the first book of the poem refutes the
views of a number of Greek natural philosophers and, in particular, their accounts of the
constitution of bodies. Although the three accounts that are rejected differ significantly from
one another, all three are presented as assuming that the constitution of the physical world is
more or less faithfully reflected by our experience of that world. According to this view, the first
principles or ultimate constituents of the physical world resemble substances with which we
are familiar. The physics of De rerum natura, by contrast, emphasizes a radical discontinuity
between the world we perceive and the basic composition of that world.46 The phenomena we
experience, it turns out, do not simply mirror or mimic an underlying “reality,” but conceal its
immutable nature beneath their own ever-shifting “look” or species. There is, in other words, a
profound gap between the world of our experience and its underlying principles. Yet although
the phenomena are not literal translations of nature’s constitutive principles, Lucretius
nevertheless insists—in marked contrast to the early Greek atomists Democritus and
Leucippus—that, the phenomena are not simply false or specious,47 and do in fact provide
7
�“traces” by which the “keen-scented mind” can “come to know” (cognoscere; 1.403) the truth
of things (verum; 1.409). It is important, however, that we first consider this fundamental
disparity between the world of our experience and its eternal elements.
The realm of human experience is a strange blend of chaos and order, of change and
permanence. On the one hand, everything we experience continually alters: “nothing remains
like itself; all things move; nature changes all, compels all to alter.”48 Indeed our very
perceptions of things arise from their relentless disintegration, as all sensation depends on the
incessant streaming of matter from things: “from all things each thing is carried off in a stream
[…], and no delay or respite is granted in this flux, since we have sensation unceasingly.”49 On
the other hand, Lucretius is adamant that this fluidity is not the end of the matter and sharply
criticizes the Heracliteans for failing to see that “something must remain safe and sound in
those fires of theirs.”50 Things also exhibit remarkable regularity: “all things are so constant that
from generation to generation all the variegated birds display on their bodies the markings of
their kind.”51 Our very notion of a thing involves membership in a kind: “no thing (res nulla) is
single (una)… so as not to belong to some kind and to be one of many like it.”52 Thus, although
no one kind is permanent, generic identity belongs to our experience of things. Our ability to
perceive kinds, to see pigeons and peacocks,53 is the result of certain unchanging “ordinances
of nature (foedera naturae).”54 These governing principles are not the work of a provident
legislator, but are embedded in the unchanging structure of matter itself.55 Because it belongs
to the very nature of a thing to exhibit generic constancy, such constancy must somehow be a
constitutive part of things themselves: “they must also have beyond a doubt a body of
immutable matter.”56 This insight underlies Lucretius’ central claim that both the things we
8
�experience and the principles that constitute those things must be corporeal: “Bodies are partly
the primordia of things, partly those which are formed by the union of primordia.”57
At the same time Lucretius draws a sharp distinction between the world we experience
and the immutable first principles that underlie this world. A thing is always a possible object of
experience, while the unchanging first principles, on which the existence of things depends, are
never themselves objects of sensation or experience. There are, then, two very distinct sorts of
bodies. The “bodies” which constitute the elements or primordia of things are not the bodies of
our experience; primordia are not things but rather “beginnings” or “first bodies” of things.
Although both the primordia and the unions of primordia are bodies or corpora, the primordia
are not things or res. 58 Indeed, Memmius is instructed particularly to keep in mind that a thing
cannot consist of a single kind of atom: “Of things whose nature is plainly seen, there is none
that consists of only one kind of element, nothing that does not consist of thoroughly mixed
seed.”59 While everything we perceive is an unstable composite of matter and void, of
primordia and empty space, the primordia themselves constitute the “immortal foundations” of
this world. Every edifice constructed of matter and void lacks stability—every compound is by
nature transient—but the building stones themselves are indestructible. Unlike the prime
matter of Aristotelian physics, which eludes our knowledge as it hovers between being and
non-being,60 the Lucretian primordia, solid, simple, and “strong by their eternal simplicity,”61
are clearly distinguished from non-being, which presents itself alongside them as void.
Unfortunately, the very immutability that gives the atoms such an ontological advantage
calls their epistemic status into question. Although it is a central tenet of Epicurean philosophy
9
�that all knowledge is grounded in sensation,62 the primordia are never objects of sensation. Like
Epicurus, Lucretius stresses the necessary primacy of sense perception:
…unless our belief (fides) in sensation is first firmly founded and strong, there will be no
principle of appeal in hidden matters, according to which we may make anything firm by
reasoning of the mind.63
Sense-certainty seems axiomatic; we cannot, for example, deny our perception of body: “for
that body in itself exists, sensation, common to all, declares.”64 Indeed, to demand grounds for
the certainty of sense perception is simply misguided: “For to what shall we appeal? What can
we find more certain than the senses themselves, with which we can distinguish true things
from false ones?”65 Sense-certainty, however, is founded on “belief” rather than knowledge.66
While this might lead us to conclude that sense-perception is a doubtful starting point for one
who seeks “to know the nature of things,” we are strongly cautioned against falling into such
skepticism:
For not only would all reasoning fall to ruin; our life and safety too would immediately
collapse, unless you dare to trust the senses… 67
Yet despite insisting on the authority of sensation and asserting that the concept of truth is
itself empirical in origin, Lucretius repeatedly affirms that the atoms are imperceptible: “the
primordia cannot be discerned with the eyes”; they “cannot be seen.” 68 At times it seems as if
the problem is simply that the primordia are too small for our senses to detect: “the primordia
are so far below our senses and so much smaller than the point at which our eyes begin not to
be able to see.”69 Nonetheless, although the primordia are certainly far smaller than anything
our eyes can discern, our inability to perceive them does not stem, or at least does not stem
primarily, from the weakness of our vision. Rather, invisibility belongs to the very nature of the
primordia:
10
�The primordia ought in begetting things to bring with them a nature hidden and unseen,
that nothing stand out which might fight against and bar whatever is being made from
existing with its own proper being. 70
The claim that the primordia must have a hidden nature forms the core of Lucretius’
criticism of Empedocles and Anaxagoras. If the primordia have sensible natures, he argues, they
will not unite as things, but simply mix in “variegated heap[s]”:
If by chance you think that the body of fire and the body of earth and the breezes of the
air and the dewy moisture so combine, that in union no one of them changes its nature,
you will see that no thing can be created out of them, no, not a living thing, nor one
with lifeless body [...]. Each element in the mingling of this variegated heap will show its
own nature, and air will be seen mixed together with earth, heat abiding with
moisture.71
The reality and integrity of composite bodies can only be secured if we begin by distinguishing
clearly between things and their underlying principles. Memmius must understand that the
primordia are necessarily devoid of all accidental qualities:
Come then, listen to words sought with sweet labor, lest by chance you suppose these
white things which you see bright before your eyes to be made of white beginnings, or
those that are black to be born of seed that is black, or that they are imbued with any
other color you will because the bodies of matter are dyed with like color. For there is
no color at all in the bodies of matter, neither like [the color of] things nor again
unlike.72
Because the things we perceive are both relatively stable (as genera or kinds) and mutable (as
particulars), they must be composites of primary and secondary qualities. Yet this stability (and
the truth of our experience) can only be guaranteed if things are constituted of elements
completely distinct from the particular objects of our experience. To constitute fire, air, water,
and earth as the elements of things, as Empedocles did, is to fail to grasp the need for such a
distinction.73 Anaxagoras falls into a similar but even more egregious error in proposing
principles that simply mimic things themselves:
11
�…he clearly holds that bones are made of very small and minute bones, flesh of very
small and minute particles of flesh, and that blood is composed by the coming together
of many drops of blood, and he thinks gold can consist of tiny bits of gold, that earth
grows together from little earths, that fire is made of fires, water of waters; he fancies
and imagines the rest in the same way.74
In other words, Anaxagoras “imagines” first principles that are essentially derivative and thus
simply too weak—too mutable—to sustain the structure of our experience:
Add that he imagines primordia which are too weak, if indeed those are primordia which
are endowed with a nature similar to the things themselves, and equally suffer and pass
away...75
Lucretius notes that although his own argument focuses on the sense of sight, we are to
understand that the primordia equally elude our other senses:
…the primordia of things must not contribute any odor of their own to the making of
things, nor any sound, since they can emit nothing from themselves, and similarly no
taste at all, nor cold, nor heat again and moderate warmth, and the rest: all these […]
must be kept apart from the beginnings, if we wish to lay an imperishable foundation
for things upon which the sum of existence may rest. 76
The relation of the primordia to our sense of touch, however, is somewhat more
ambiguous. Tangibility is identified an inseparable property of body itself: “An inseparable
property (coniunctum) is that which without destructive dissolution can never be disjoined and
disengaged (seque gregari), as weight is to stone, heat to fire, liquidity to water, touch to all
bodies, intangibility to void.” 77 At the same time, tangibility is the basis of all sense perception:
“For touch, so help me the holy power of the gods, it is touch that is the bodily sense…” 78
Although, as we’ve seen, Lucretius emphatically rejects the pre-Socratic endeavor to associate
the first principles with any objects of sense experience, we’ve also seen that his first principles
do nevertheless bear an important resemblance to the things we experience: the primordia are
bodies.79 On the one hand, then, as part of his effort to distinguish the primordia from the
12
�particular, mutable objects we experience, Lucretius devotes considerable time and effort to
demonstrating that the primordia are devoid of all secondary qualities. On the other hand, to
ensure that they can adequately account for our experience of the physical world, he insists
that the primordia must possess the essential properties of body and ascribes to them size,
shape, and weight, in addition to duration, unity, and impermeability. To some extent, then, the
primordia do resemble the bodies we experience. Nonetheless, despite having posited
tangibility as an essential attribute of body, Lucretius contends that the primordia themselves
do not affect our sense of touch. They are, first of all, simply too small to affect our sense of
touch: the particles that constitute the soul or anima are said to be too far apart to be moved
by bodies as minute as the primordia.80 Yet the intangibility of the primordia does not seem to
be simply an effect of size. In rejecting the Heraclitean theory that fire is the primary substance,
Lucretius expressly states that the “first bodies” are not like anything “that is able to send
bodies to our senses and by throwing something toward it to touch our touch.”81 Moreover,
qualities that seem fundamental to our sense of touch—heat and cold—are expressly listed as
accidental qualities that cannot be predicated of the “first bodies:” “they are also altogether
destitute of warmth and cold and strong heat...”82 Thus the primordia elude even our sense of
touch. While the constant streaming of primordia from composite bodies creates a kind of field
effect which causes sensation, the primordia are never themselves objects of perception. The
perception of things depends entirely on the motion of the primordia.
The claim that the constitutive principles of things are not simply minute sensible bodies
promises to grant compound bodies an integrity they lack in the pre-Socratic accounts Lucretius
criticizes. Paradoxically, however, this difference between composite bodies and their
13
�constituent elements threatens the very existence of compound bodies. It does not seem
possible to claim both that the primordia are self-subsisting realities and that compound bodies
are real substances, rather than mere mixtures or even illusory appearances. As Aristotle puts
it, “A substance cannot consist of substances present in it in complete reality; for things that
are thus in complete reality two are never in complete reality one.”83 Unless we can
demonstrate how independent atomic substances unite to form real substances rather than
mere mixtures, we seem to face yet again precisely the problem atomism aimed to address.
The primordia are, after all, completely devoid of any relation to one another—there are
neither attractive nor repulsive forces in a Lucretian cosmos. Although it is said to be a basic
property of all bodies, a “duty” (officium) of body, as Lucretius puts it, to “press down,” this
motion is not the result of attractive forces.84 Moreover, while the primordia relentlessly carry
out this task, it is not at all clear what all this activity means. By asserting that the primordia
have weight in addition to size and shape, Lucretius proposes that motion belongs to the very
nature of the primordia: “For first the primordia of things move of themselves.”85 This would
seem to contradict his earlier insistence on the utter immutability of the primordia—change of
place is, after all, a change—but it turns out that this innate primordial motion does not in fact
constitute change: it is, as it were, an unmoving motion. Anticipating Galileo, Lucretius
maintains that the primordia all fall at the same speed: “through the motionless void they must,
with weights not equal, all be carried with equal motion.”86 We are invited to envision a sort of
primal rain, as the primordia fall through the void in parallel lines at constant and equal
speeds.87 As far as their innate downward tendency is concerned, the primordia have no
motion whatsoever in relation to one another. Thus weight can never account for collisions, let
14
�alone conjunctions, of atoms. The infinity of space guarantees their rectilinear motion
throughout infinite time—“remember that there is no bottom in the sum of things and the first
bodies have nowhere to rest, since space is without end or limit.”88 Nor do the primordia move
in relation to the whole: no matter how far they travel, the primordia cannot change location
with respect to the infinite “sum of things.” Such motion, in other words, differs little from rest
and hardly explains how things arise from their atomic foundations. Given eternal primordia
moved by weight alone, Lucretius acknowledges, “nature would never have produced
anything.”89
This difficulty gives rise to the famous—or indeed infamous—doctrine of the swerve. In
light of the poem’s emphasis on nature’s rationality and intrinsic lawfulness, it is startling
suddenly to discover that nature in fact brings things into being90 by means of what one might
call a principle of uncertainty:
While the first bodies are being carried downwards by their own weights in a straight
line through the void, at some quite indefinite time and in indefinite places, they swerve
(depellere) a little from their course, just so much as you might call a change of
motion.91
There simply seems to be no rational explanation that can “save the appearances.” The
primordia can only unite and function as causes of things if they are allowed to deviate invisibly
and ever so slightly from their eternal immutability—“just so much as you might call a change
of motion.” No matter how foreign it may at first seem to “definite reasoning (certa ratio)” and
to our understanding of Euclid’s fifth postulate, the “reason of nature” (naturae ratio) seems to
include a kind of esprit de finesse that circumvents the esprit de géométrie to which strict logic
would confine it.92 The perpetual downward tendency of the primordia cannot by itself
adequately account for things, which are unions (concilia) of atoms. Yet the notion that things
15
�ultimately arise from and depend on random and completely invisible atomic digressions
undermines the very “ordinances of nature” on which Lucretius promised to build his structure;
the swerve seems to belong neither to the “aspect” nor to the “reason of nature.” Insofar as
our world of things depends entirely on this unaccountable ability of the primordia to sidestep
the paths ordained by their weights, it seems that we cannot really give an account of this
world—“for this we see to be plain and evident, that weights, as far as in them lies, cannot
travel obliquely.”93 We seem to have overthrown the tyranny of divine masters only to replace
it by the dictates of an inexplicable “inclination” or swerve, to have been freed from the
dominion of capricious deities only to come under the governance of a random swerve.
Lucretius prefaces his presentation of the swerve by urging Memmius to envision the
primordia as pugnacious dust motes, “struggling, fighting, battling in troops without any
pause.”94 He exhorts Memmius to “turn [his] mind” particularly to this example.95 If Memmius
will but consider the endless “meetings and partings” of these dusty squadrons, he will be able
“to conjecture from this what it is for the primordia always to be thrown about in the great
void.”96 Here, as so often, Lucretius engages, or perhaps indulges, in a revealing word-play. He
frequently uses the verb conicere—“conjecture”—in its literal sense of “throw together.”97 His
use of a cognate form of the verb iacere—“to throw”—in this sentence clearly recalls this literal
meaning. If Memmius—or the reader—is sufficiently attentive, he will grasp that the mental
action involved in drawing analogies between dust motes, military squadrons, and primordia
has much in common with the oblique motions that cause dust motes to collide. The
movement of reason in drawing such analogies—and it is by means of such correspondences
that we have access to the imperceptible primordia—seems to involve a kind of mental swerve
16
�that deviates from the rectilinear paths strict logic demands. Not only, then, does the reason of
nature (naturae ratio) demand that nature’s constituent particles constantly be “thrown
together,” but the nature of our reason likewise involves “throwing together” notions that
would not otherwise meet. Reason itself, that is, occasionally employs unpredictable and
unorthodox motions.
It is important to remember that most collisions are no more productive than the
comings and goings of so many dust motes. The swerve (coupled with the infinite supply of
primordia) ensures that some atoms will collide, but collision alone does not account for the
genesis of things. Whether or not the colliding primordia cohere depends on fixed laws of
nature:
It must not be thought that all can be conjoined in all ways, for then you would
commonly see monstrosities come into being […] But that none of these things happen
is manifest, since we see that all things bred from definite seeds by a definite mother
are able to conserve their kind as they grow. Assuredly this must come about by a
definite reason.98
A thing is not merely a mix, but above all an arrangement or configuration that depends on the
shapes and motions of its constituent parts: “when the combinations of matter, when its
motions, order, position, shapes are changed, the thing also must be changed.”99 Things can
only incorporate those atomic particles that, in addition to having conformable shapes, are also
able to coordinate their motions with the motions of the other constituent particles. The
principles of compatible shape and motion constitute the fundamental laws that govern both
living and non-living things: “But do not by chance think that living things alone are held by
these laws, for the same reason limits all things.”100
17
�Although they form the ground of our changing phenomenal world and have all the
conceptual rudiments of body, the primordia, as we have seen, are not phenomena in their
own right. The primordia do possess size, shape, and weight. They also possess some sort of
resistance: body is said to have a “duty” not only to press downward, but also to “work against
and obstruct”—it is essentially tangible, although, as we’ve seen, a primordium is never itself
the object of our sense of touch.101 Finally, if we follow the arguments about the “extreme
points” of the primordia, in turns out that they even have parts of a sort, albeit inseparable
parts.102 At the same time, the primordia remain as remote from the phenomena of our
experience as immortal from mortal, as solid from soluble, as simple from complex. Are we not
then back with just the problem we began with, namely the problem of occult causes? If so,
there would seem to be little to recommend Epicurean lectures over priestly pronouncements.
Anticipating this objection, Lucretius insists that imperceptible as they are, the primordia are
nevertheless objects of thought:
But if by chance you think that the mind cannot project itself into these bodies, you are
wandering far astray. For since those born blind, who have never perceived the sun’s
light, nevertheless come to know (cognoscant) by touch bodies which they have not
associated with any color since the day of their birth, you may be sure that bodies not
painted about with any hue can be turned into a concept (notitia) of our mind.103
You may be sure that certain things exist as much deprived of color as without any smell
and empty of sound, and that the keen mind can come to know (cognoscere) these no
less than it can conceive (notare) things that are devoid of other qualities.104
It is not through sensation, but through “the reason of mind” (ratio animi) that we have access
to the primordia: “eyes cannot recognize the nature of things.”105 The “first bodies” are thus
intelligible, rather than sensible bodies; we cannot conceive of body without size, shape, and
18
�weight, nor, as Leibniz so clearly saw, without a power of resistance or impenetrability.106 But
this mental concept (menti notitia) of body is not itself an object of sensation.
It has been suggested that “the fundamental difficulty of the whole Epicurean position”
is that it demands, on the one hand, an “absolute trust in the evidence of the senses as the
primary criterion of truth,” while insisting, on the other hand, that the physical foundation of
things consists of imperceptible primordia.107 Although Lucretius draws the sharpest of
distinctions between the eternal primordia and the transient things of our experience, he must
nevertheless bridge the gap between the two realms, if his project of conversion is to succeed.
The government of divine “masters” can only be overthrown,108 and the atomic foundations of
things only secured, if these invisible foundations are made objects of sense experience. In
other words, unless the Epicurean doctrine of the atoms is translated into a more visible idiom,
it must remain literally obscure, or shrouded in darkness. The corporeality of the primordia can
be guaranteed only by bringing them “out into the shining borders of light”—to use a Latin
idiom Lucretius is fond of. 109 Again and again Lucretius represents his work as an endeavor to
make things visible. He describes it as an attempt to “illuminate with Latin verses the dark
discoveries of the Greeks”110 and portrays his entire project as one of enabling Memmius to see
the inner workings of things:
Your merit and the expected delight of your sweet friendship, […] induces me to stay
awake in quiet nights, seeking by what words and what poetry I can at last display
before your mind bright lights, by which you may be able to see into the very depths of
hidden things.111
One way of spanning the gap between the imperceptible primordia and the visible
world is through language, especially through various forms of figurative language. It is surely
significant that language itself features as a dominant image in De rerum natura. Again and
19
�again the poem compares the structure of language to the structure of the world: as variations
in the order of letters or sounds give rise to a great variety of words and verses, so too,
variations in the “conjunctions, motions, order, position, and shape” of the primordia give rise
to the even greater variety of things. Moreover, the poem makes this analogy between letters
and atoms a fundamental feature of its own language: arguing, for example, that Anaxagoras
should have seen that wood is not flammable because it contains fire particles, but because
both wood—lignis (in the ablative plural)—and fire—ignis—contain many of the same letters or
elements.112
Figurative speech is so deeply imbedded in De rerum natura that it is not possible to
separate philosophical terminology from poetic vocabulary. Consider, for example, the Latin
rendering of the Epicurean term άτομοι, atoms or, literally, “uncuttables.” Lucretius never uses
the technical term ătŏmus, which his contemporary Cicero does use.113 Nor does he substitute
a single Latin term for the Greek word άτομος.114 He uses instead a variety of names that
present the atoms as generative bodies of things. Some of these words are clearly metaphorical
in character. Explicitly biological terms such as “seeds of things” and “generative bodies” have a
rhetorical function, inviting Memmius to regard the atomic particles as familiar objects of
experience, especially when these expressions are used, as they are early in book 1, in the
context of agricultural examples.115 Even language that seems literal, however, terms like
principia, corpora prima, and prima elementa, by evoking the notion of a beginning, present
eternal entities in terms of a temporal metaphor.116 The text itself, ever alert to etymologies,
reminds us that the predominant term primordium refers literally to a “first-rising”: “in the
earth there are primordia of things, which we, when we turn fruitful clods with the plough […],
20
�bring to a rising (ortus).”117 Thus this word too suggests a beginning. Of course, as becomes
abundantly clear in Book 3, the “first-bodies” are equally “last bodies,” but the vocabulary of De
rerum natura carefully avoids this association. Furthermore, although the term corpus or
“body” accurately translates the Greek—and Epicurean—term σωμα, we have already seen
that the poem’s “first bodies” or “generative bodies” are not bodies in the conventional sense;
they are not the “mortal bodies” or “visible bodies” of everyday experience, but “eternal” and
“invisible” bodies.118 Finally, the word materia or “‘matter’ in the collective sense,”119 which
may sound more technical to our modern English ears, is deprived of its technical sense by
means of a series of puns that serve to remind us that materia is derived from mater or
‘mother.’120 Here the metaphorical reading turns out to be the literal reading: etymologically, at
least, matter is a “mother” of things. Similarly, verbal play draws attention to the fact that
natura is cognate with the verb nascor “to be born,” so that a literal reading of the word natura
produces a metaphor of nature itself as mother.121
The primordia are presented not only in distinctly temporal and biological terms, but
also in distinctly human terms. This personification frequently takes the form of military
metaphors: “So, in the balanced strife of the beginnings, war waged from time everlasting is
carried on.”122 We may recall here the image of the battling dust motes:
you will see many minute motes mingling in many ways through the void […] and, as it
were, in everlasting strife, struggling, fighting, battling in troops without any pause,
driven about with frequent meetings and partings.123
Here the heavy-handed alliterative effects Lucretius is so fond of—multă mĭnūtă mŏdīs mūltīs
[…] miscēri—neatly illustrate, both audibly and visibly, how one tiny particle, in this case the
letter m, “mingles” with others “in many ways.” Moreover, the primordia exhibit not only a
21
�“propensity to military action,” but also a marked inclination to political life: they join in
“councils,” “assemblies,” “meetings,” and “contracts” (concilia, congressūs, coetūs, nexūs); they
are governed by “treaties” and “laws” (foedera and leges).”124 Once again, it is neither possible,
nor particularly helpful, to distinguish clearly between a technical language and a poetic
language. Insofar as Lucretius himself repeatedly remarks on what he calls “the poverty of [his]
native tongue,” he invites his audience to hear the metaphors simply as translations of
established Greek philosophical terms. Nonetheless, such frequent, if veiled, personifications
of the primordia may gradually persuade Memmius to regard human affairs from a new—and
very distant—vantage. From this viewpoint the battles and struggles of great armies are seen to
be no more than the contentions of dust motes; the great deliberations and treaties of state no
more than temporary and accidental combinations of atoms. The very metaphors that bring the
primordia directly before our eyes, out of obscurity into the bright light of day, also compel us
to “see” the things that formerly occupied our sight and seemed most real as distant and
inconsequential. Phenomena formerly perceived as significant—the motions of the sun and
stars, great storms, and perhaps even terrible plagues—become insignificant, insofar as they
too are little more than the concurrences of dust motes. Things that previously seemed
substantial—city walls, gold and silver vessels, our own bodies—are seen, from this new
vantage, in all their penetrability: “nothing [nil] exists that is not a texture with porous body.”125
In many ways the conversion of Memmius seems complete at this point. The aspect of
nature—its species—is radically altered as he focuses his sight on the invisible primordia and
the things he formerly regarded as substantial recede into a distant haze. A more radical
project, however, remains to be effected if “the dominion of gods”126 is truly to be overthrown
22
�and a more republican—or more human—view of things is to be reinstated. The ignorance of
causes,127 which first induced us to throw ourselves at the feet of tyrannical deities, turns out to
be a more radical tyranny than we realized. Our very notion of causality involves a kind of
tyranny of the one over the many.
For which of these causes it is in this world is difficult to determine; but what is possible
and may come to be through the whole universe in diverse worlds diversely (varia
ratione) fashioned, that is what I teach, and I proceed to set forth several causes which
may exist for the movements of the stars throughout the whole; one of which, however,
must be that which gives force to the movement of the signs in this world too; but
which of these it is, is by no means his to lay down who treads forward step by step.128
Particularly in the case of phenomena, “whose causes we can by no means see,”129 there is a
danger that not only in the absence of an explanation, but also in the presence of competing
accounts, we will “revert again to old religions and adopt harsh masters.”130 Such relapses occur
when we are “driven astray by blind reasoning”131 and are as much a result of a failure to
understand the nature of reason, as of a failure to perceive the reason of nature. In our
endeavors to explain natural phenomena we often mistakenly assume that it is sufficient “to
indicate a single cause.”132 Lucretius interrupts his explanation of Etna’s eruptions and the
flooding of the Nile to offer a rather curious illustration of his own etiological principles:
Just as if you should yourself see some man’s body lying lifeless at a distance, you may
perhaps think proper to name all the causes of death in order that the one true cause of
the man’s death may be named. For you could not prove that steel or cold had been
the death of him, or disease, or it may be poison, but we know that what has happened
to him is something of this sort. Even so in many cases we have the like to say.133
If we would truly liberate nature—and ourselves—from the oppressive might of “overweening
masters”134 and recognize nature’s capacity for self-governance,135 we must above all, it is
suggested, free ourselves from a misguided attachment to singularity. Habituated as we are to
the sight of a single sun, a single moon, one earth, one sky, we mistakenly suppose that such
23
�singleness belongs to the nature of things. This parochial worldview affects—or infects, to
borrow Lucretius’ own vocabulary of disease—all aspects of human existence. In this we
resemble nothing so much as the lover who sighs foolishly for the sole object of his affections,
ignoring the fact that “to be sure there are other women; to be sure [he] has lived so far
without this one”136 and failing to recognize that his attachment is merely the effect of habit:
It is habit that produces love; for that which is frequently struck by a blow, however
light, is still vanquished in the long run and totters. Do you not see that even drops of
water falling upon a stone in the long run beat a way through the stone?137
We have likewise grown attached to simple notions of causality, which blind us not only
to the reality of infinite atoms in an infinite void, but also to the ontological consequences of
this reality: “nothing is single, nothing born unique and growing unique and alone.” 138 In this we
may even resemble the inhabitants of the diseased city of Athens, who in their city’s “time of
trouble” cling so fiercely to what they imagine to be their own, “often brawling with much
blood”139 to secure a funeral pyre for “those of their own blood,”140 “rather than that the
bodies be deserted.” Although Memmius may well have lost interest by now, the reader who
has attended to the poem’s teaching may notice that its last line—rīxantes pŏtĭus quam corpŏră
dēsĕrĕrentur—conceals yet another play on meaning. The last phrase, which, if we read it in the
customary way, means “rather than abandon the bodies,” invites the reader to recollect that
“bodies are partly the primordia of things, partly those which are formed by the union of
primordia.” (1.483) We may also recollect that the primary sense of the verb dēsĕro is “untie”
or “sever” and notice that it appears here in the passive voice. Thus we may hear, in addition to
the more obvious sense of the phrase, something like, “rather than that the primordia be
severed.”141 We may also hear in the participle rixantes, “brawling,” its roots in the verb
24
�“ringo”—“bare the teeth” or “snarl,” and thus the suggestion that a failure to recognize the
inevitable dissolution of all things is somehow less than human.
In the battle of the gods and giants, the friends of the primordia occupy a curious
position.142 Their assault on Olympus aims to drag all things down to earth: heaven is reduced
to a reflection in a puddle, while Jove’s thunder—the quintessential symbol of divinity—
becomes no more than the flapping of laundry on a clothesline, the fluttering of papers in a
breeze, the bursting of a bladder of air. At the same time, however, the friends of the primordia
suggest that in our attachment to the ground beneath our feet we have in fact lost sight of the
nature of material things, supposing that this nature is illuminated by the “rays of the sun and
bright shafts of day” rather than by “nature’s aspect and reason.” They ask that we rethink our
understanding of materiality, distinguishing clearly between the phenomena or composite
things and the principles constitutive of those things. These principles are not, as we have
seen, bodily in the conventional sense of the term: the primordia will forever elude the hands
of the giants, although a poet may persuade them to think that the “first bodies” are within
easy reach, and so entice them to abandon their fealty to “the rule and kingship of gods.” 143 To
this extent, perhaps even Memmius may be persuaded to look at the world with new eyes.
1
On the Nature of Things (cited hereafter as DRN), 1.51. “Memmius” was traditionally identified as Caius
Memmius, son of Lucius, who was praetor in 58 BC. This Memmius stood for the consulship in 54 BC, but went into
exile in Athens after being prosecuted for bribery. See Cyril Bailey, ed., Titi Lucreti Cari De Rerum Natura (Oxford:
The Clarendon Press, 1947 [rpt.1998]), 597-8, note on 1.26. In recent years, as a result of questions concerning the
traditional dating of De Rerum Natura to 54 BC, this identification has been called into question. See G.O.
Hutchinson, “The Date of De Rerum Natura,” The Classical Quarterly, 51.1 (2001), 158-9 and, more recently,
Katharina Volk, “Lucretius’ Prayer for Peace and the Date of De Rerum Natura,” The Classical Quarterly 60.1 (2010),
127-131.
2
There has been much speculation about what precisely is meant by the expression, “in our country’s time of
trouble (hoc patriai tempore iniquo)” (1.41). Among the poem’s various references to civil bloodshed see, for
25
�example, 3.70: “men amass property by civil bloodshed” (homines… /sanguine civili rem conflant). For an allusion
to foreign wars of expansion see the image of a Roman fetial hurling his spear over the enemy’s border in
declaration of war at 1.968-973. See also Monica Gale, Virgil on the Nature of Things: the Georgics, Lucretius and
the Didactic Tradition (Cambridge: CUP, 2000), 238: “the phrase patriai tempus iniquum […] in v.41 presumably
refers to the series of civil wars which raged intermittently throughout Lucretius’ lifetime, but no real distinction is
drawn between civil and foreign wars.”
3
E.g., nam corpora sunt et inane(1.420); nil est quod possis dicere ab omni corpore seiunctum secretumque esse ab
inani (1.430-1); praeter inane et corpora, tertia per se/ nulla potest rerum in numero natura relinqui (1.445-6). See
Polybius, Histories 6.56: “But the most important difference for the better which the Roman commonwealth seems
to me to display is in their religious beliefs. For it seems to me that what in other nations is looked upon as a
reproach, I mean a scrupulous fear of the gods (την δεισιδαιμονίαν), is the very thing which keeps the Roman
commonwealth together.” Polybius explains that such “invisible terrors” are politically expedient and concludes, “I
think, not that the ancients acted rashly and at haphazard in introducing among the people notions concerning the
gods and beliefs in the terrors of hell, but that the moderns are most rash and foolish in banishing such beliefs.”
4
Already at 1.52-53, Lucretius voices a concern that his verses will be “contemptuously discarded before they have
been apprehended (intellecta prius quam sint, contempta relinquas).” At 2.1041 Lucretius suggests that
“frightened by the very novelty” of the Epicurean teachings Memmius may “spew out reason from [his] mind”; at
4. 914 he worries that Memmius may simply “depart with a breast that repels words of truth.” See Katharina Volk,
The Poetics of Latin Didactic: Lucretius, Vergil, Ovid, Manilius (Oxford: OUP, 2002), 80: “The way in which
[Lucretius] presents his student is rather interesting and, perhaps, somewhat surprising… Memmius appears
remarkably unsympathetic, unwilling to learn, and even plain stupid. The speaker continually anticipates his
addressee’s lagging attention and utterly misguided views.”
5
vatum/ terriloquis victus dictis, desciscere quaeres, 1.102-3
6
Hunc igitur terrorem animi tenebrasque necessest/ non radii solis neque lucida tela diei/ discutiant, sed naturae
species ratioque. (1.146-148; 2.59-61; 3.91-3; 6.39-41)
7
David Sedley, Lucretius and the Transformation of Greek Wisdom (Cambridge: CUP, 1998), 37
8
cum metus aut dolor est (5.1061)
9
= 2.59, 3.91, and 6.39. At 3.16 it appears in the plural (animi terrores). 3.152-160 offers an analysis of the physical
effects of mental terror: “we often see men fall to the ground for mental terror” (concidere ex animi terrore
videmus/ saepe homines; 3.157-8)
10
nec plangore diem magno solemque per agros/ quaerebant pavidi palantes noctis in umbris (5.973-5)
11
fugiebant saxea tecta/ spumigeri suis adventu validique leonis,/ atque intempesta cedebant nocte paventes/
hospitibus saevis instrata cubilia fronde (5.984-987)
12
volgivago more ferarum (5.932)
13
saetigerisque pares subus silvestria membra/ nuda dabant terrae nocturne tempore capti,/ circum se foliis ac
frondibus involventes. (5.970-2)
14
Nam cum suspicimus magni caelestia mundi/ templa super stellisque micantibus aethera fixum,/ tunc aliis
oppressa malis in pectora cura/ illa quoque expergefactum caput erigere infit…(5.1204-1208) Or: “that care, as yet
bent down (oppressa fem. sing. modifying cura rather than neut.pl. modifying pectora) by other evils”
15
See Bailey, p.1517, note on ll.1207-8: “a strange picture, but not impossible, if the imagery is not pressed too
literally.” It seems, however, that the image becomes revealing precisely when pressed literally. For more general
studies of the uses of personification in DRN see Myrto Garani, Empedocles redivivus: Poetry and Analogy in
Lucretius (London and New York: Routledge, 2007, chapter 1, and Monica Gale, Myth and Poetry in Lucretius
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994), pp.39-45 and 122f.
26
�16
Both the participle expergefactum—“wakened”—and the verb erigere—“raise” or “straighten out”—share the
root rego--from Greek ορεγω = “reach”—which has as its basic meaning the notion of making (or keeping)
something straight. (erigo, erexi, erectum = ex+rego; expergo = ex+pergo, and pergo, perrexi, perrectum =
per+rego; see Lewis and Short)
17
caelumque videre/ iussit et erectos ad sidera tollere vultus: see Ovid, Metamorphoses, 1.84-88: “he granted man
a raised face and commanded him to look at the sky and to raise erected faces to the stars.” Ovid’s account is in
turn echoed by Milton in Paradise Lost, 4.288-90: “Two of far nobler shape erect and tall,/ Godlike erect, with
native honor clad/ In naked majesty seemed lords of all.”
18
Praeterea caeli rationes ordine certo/ et varia annorum cernebant tempora verti,/ nec poterant quibus id fieret
cognoscere causis. (5.1183-5)
19
E.g. 1.62; 1.342; 1.998; 2.732; 3.185; 3.995. See Bailey, p.608, note on 1.62.
20
Quippe ita formido mortalis continent omnis,/ quod multa in terris fieri caeloque tuentur/ quorum operum
causas nulla ratione videre/ possunt, ac fieri divino numine rentur. (1.151-154) Lewis and Short: formido is from
the same Sanskrit root (dhar-) as the word firmus and means “properly the fear that makes rigid.” Lewis and Short
claims the word also has the sense “awe, reverence” and refers to Virgil’s famous description of “the twin gates of
war”: “There are twin gates of war (so they are named), sanctified by religion and by the dread of fierce Mars”
(Sunt geminae belli portae (sic nomine dicunt)/ religione sacrae et saevi formidine Martis; Aeneid, 7.607-8
21
“and they placed the gods’ habitation and abode in the sky, because through the sky the night and the moon are
seen to revolve, moon, day, and night and the solemn stars of night, heaven’s night-wandering torches and flying
flames, clouds, sun, rains, snow, winds, lightnings, hail, and rapid roarings and mighty menacing rumblings.” in
caeloque deum sedes et templa locarunt,/ per caelum volvi quia nox et luna videtur,/ luna dies et nox et noctis
signa severa/ noctivagaeque faces caeli flammaeque volantes,/ nubile sol imbres nix venti fulmina grando/ et
rapidi fremitus et murmura magna minarum. (5.1188-93)
22
ergo perfugium sibi habebant omnia divis/ tradere et illorum nutu facere omnia flecti. (5.1186-7)
23
O genus infelix humanum, talia divis/ cum tribuit facta atque iras adiunxit acerbas! (5.1194-5)
24
cui non animus formidine divum/ contrahitur, cui non correpunt membra pavore,/ fulminis horribili cum plaga
torrida tellus/ contremit…? denique sub pedibus tellus cum tota vacillat/ concussaeque cadunt urbes dubiaeque
minantur/ quid mirum si se temnunt mortalia saecla/ atque potestates magnas mirasque relinquunt/ in rebus viris
divum, quae cuncta gubernent? (5.1218-1221 and 1236-1240)
25
The primary meaning of the verb paveo is “to be struck with fear or terror, to tremble or quake with fear.”
(Lewis and Short)
26
incesserat (6.1212)
27
mortis mĕtŭs … ācer (6.1212)
28
metus ille … Acheruntis…,/ funditus humanam qui vitam turbat ab imo/ omnia suffundens mortis nigrore neque
ullam/ esse voluptatem liquidam puramque relinquit. (3.37-40) Lewis and Short suggest that metus, at least in its
verbal form metuo, refers especially to fear “as the effect of the idea of threatening evil (whereas timor usually
denotes the effect of some external cause of terror) [my italics].” On Lucretius’ use of metus see Monica Gale,
Virgil on the Nature of Things: the Georgics, Lucretius, and the Didactic Tradition (Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 2000), chapter 5: “Labor improbus.” It should be remembered, however, that on one occasion, Lucretius
uses the word metus to refer to the fear an animal experiences—see note viii above.
29
“Ennius sets forth in the discourse of his immortal verse that there is besides a realm of Acheron, where neither
our souls nor bodies endure, but as it were images pale in wondrous wise (etsi praeterea tamen esse Acherusia
templa/ Ennius aeternis exponit versibus edens,/ quo neque permaneant animae neque corpora nostra,/ sed
quaedam simulacra modis pallentia miris)” (1.120-123)
27
�30
It is worth noting that fear (metus)—along with care and toil—is one of the “demonic personifications which
haunt the entrance to the underworld” in Book 6 of Virgil’s Aeneid. Monica Gale, Virgil on the Nature of Things,
146
31
Quippe etenim mortale aeterno iungere et una/ consentire putare et fungi mutual posse/ desiperest; quid enim
diversius esse putandumst/ aut magis inter se disiunctum discrepitansque,/ quam mortale quod est inmortali atque
perenni/ iunctum in concilio saevas tolerare procellas? (3.800-805)See Bailey, 1128, note on 3.803: “mortal and
immortal in a concilium could not harmonize or really form one thing.”
32
omnis enim per se divom natura necessest/ inmortali aevo summa cum pace fruatur/ semota ab nostris rebus
seiunctaque longe; 1.44-6 = 2.646-8)
33
finita potestas denique cuique/ quanam sit ratione atque alte terminus haerens (1.76-7). The lines are repeated
at 1.595-6, 5.89-90, and 6.65-66. Cp. also 2.1087: “there is a deepset limit of life equally awaiting them [‘sky, earth,
sun, moon, sea and all else that exists’] (vitae depactus terminus alte tam manet haec).”
34
vertier ad lapidem atque omnis accedere ad aras (5.1199)
35
procumbere humi prostratum (5.1200) See Bailey, p.1516, note on 5.1200: “the attitude of worship in
prostration after prayer.”
36
Humana ante oculos foede cum vita iaceret/ in terris oppressa gravi sub religione,/ quae caput a caeli regionibus
ostendebat/ horribili super aspectu mortalibus instans (1.62-5)
37
Nor is the sky inhabited by gods alone: when dark thunderclouds mass overhead, humans imagine that all the
shades of the infernal caverns loom above them, turning horrific faces toward the living, “to such a degree […]
does the face of black terror hang over us.” (usque adeo taetra nimborum nocte coorta/ inpendent atrae formidinis
ora superne; 6.253-4)
38
nubila despicere et caelum ut videare (4.418)
39
Ita haec species miranda fuisset./ quam tibi iam nemo, fessus satiate videndi,/ suspicere in caeli dignatur lucida
templa! (2.1037-1039)
40
Reading anxia cordi (6.14). The emendation anxia corda has the same sense.
41
quaerere semper/ commutare locum, quasi onus deponere possit (3. 1058-9)
42
tanta mali tamquam moles in pectore constet (3.1056) See also 3.1054: “there is a weight on their minds which
wearies with its oppression” (pondus inesse animo quod se gravitate fatiget)
43
Two of far nobler shape erect and tall,/ Godlike erect, with native Honour clad/ In naked Majestie seemd Lords
of all (Milton, Paradise Lost, 4.288-90)
44
Nec pietas ullast velatum saepe videri/ vertier ad lapidem atque omnis accedere ad aras,/ nec procumbere humi
prostratum et pandere palmas/ ante deum delubra, nec aras sanguine multo/ ( spargere quadrupedum, nec votis
nectere vota,/ sed mage placata posse omnia mente tueri. (5. 1198-1203)
45
…morbi quia causam non tenet aeger;/ quam bene si videat, iam rebus quisque relictis/ naturam primum studeat
cognoscere rerum (3.1070-72) Or, in the words of Virgil’s famous homage to Lucretius, “Happy is he who was able
to know the causes of things, and cast all fears and inexorable fate under his feet, and the roaring of greedy
Acheron.”(felix, qui potuit rerum cognoscere causas,/ atque metus omnis et inexorabile fatum/subiecit pedibus
strepitumque Acherontis avari.” Virgil,Georgics 2.490-492) Virgil is here echoing Lucretius’ own eulogy of Epicurus,
on account of whose philosophical heroism and “virtue of mind” (animi virtutem; 2.70), “religion in turn is cast
down under [our] feet and trampled, and we by the victory are made level with heaven.” (quare religio pedibus
subiecta vicissim/ obteritur, nos exaequat victoria caelo; 1.78-9)
46
See Robert Wardy, “Lucretius on What Atoms Are Not,” Classical Philology, 83.2 (1988), 112-128
28
�47
Pierre-Marie Morel, “Epicurean Atomism,” in The Cambridge Companion to Epicureanism (Cambridge: CUP,
2009), 65-83, claims that the wish “to ensure the cohesion of composite bodies and, in this way, [to] retain the
phenomena” represents a fundamental difference between Epicurean atomism and early Greek atomism.
48
nec manet ulla sui similis res: omnia migrant, omnia commutat natura et vertere cogit (5.830-1) See also 5.828835: “For time changes the nature of the whole world and one state of things must pass into another, and nothing
remains as it was: all things move, all are changed by nature and compelled to alter. For one thing crumbles and
grow faint and weak with age; another grows up and comes forth from contempt. So therefore time changes the
nature of the whole world, and one state of the earth gives place to another,…”
49
usque adeo omnibus ab rebus res quaeque fluenter/ fertur […]/ nec mora nec requies interdatur ulla fluendi,/
perpetuo quoniam sentimus, […] (4.225-228)
50
aliquid supereare necesse est incolumne ollis (1.672)
51
omnia constant/ usque adeo variae volucres ut in ordine cunctae/ ostendant maculas generalis corpore inesse
(1.588-590)
52
res nulla sit una,/ […]/ quin aliquoiu siet saecli permultaque eodem/ sint genere. (2. 1077-80)
53
The two species are mentioned in connection with the phenomenon of iridescence in 2.799-809.
54
1.586. The phrase occurs a number of times; see, for example, 2.302; 5.310; 5.924; 6.906.
55
See Alessandro Schiesaro, “Lucretius and Roman Politics and History,” in The Cambridge Companion to Lucretius,
48: “Lucretius’ laws of nature do not exist outside and above the physicality of atoms, do not answer an
inscrutable teleological project and have not been promoted by a provident lawgiver.”
56
inmutabili’ materiae quoque corpus habere/ debent nimirum (1.591-2) Newton, a careful reader of Lucretius,
summarizes this argument at the end of the second edition of the Optics: “While the Particles continue entire, they
may compose Bodies of one and the same Nature and Texture in all Ages; But should they wear away or break in
pieces, the Nature of Things depending on them would be changed.” Optics (1718), query 31. The connection is
noted by Bailey, 698 and by Monte Johnson and Catherine Wilson, “Lucretius and the History of Science,” in The
Cambridge Companion to Lucretius, 140-141.
57
Corpora sunt porro partim primordia rerum,/ partim concilio quae constant principiorum. (1.483) See Epicurus,
Letter to Herodotus, 40-41: “And truly, of bodies some are compounds (συνκρίσεις), and others those of which
compounds are made (πεποιήται).”
58
See Bailey, note on 1.21 (p.596): “res in Lucr. are strictly speaking compound things, made of the mixture of
atoms and void.”
59
Nil esse, in promptu quorum natura videtur,/ quod genere ex uno consistat principiorum,/ nec quicquam quod
non permixto semine constet. (2.583-5) Lucretius clearly lays considerable weight on this teaching; he prefaces it
by cautioning Memmius to “guard it sealed and treasured in the mind’s memory” (obsignatum […] habere/ […] et
memori mandatum mente tenere; 2.581-2)
60
See for example, Metaphysics 1050a15: “matter exists in a potential state.” As pure potentiality, matter itself is
never an object of knowledge: “matter is unknowable in itself” (Metaphysics 1036a9). In book one of the Physics,
Aristotle allows, however, that matter can be an object of knowledge by way of analogy: “For as the bronze is to
the statue, the wood to the bed, or the matter and the formless before receiving form to anything which has form,
so is the underlying nature to substance, i.e. the ‘this’ or existent.” (Physics 191a8-12)
61
“therefore the primordia exist by a solid singleness” (sunt igitur solida primordia simplicitate; 1.609); “strong
rather by their eternal singleness” (magis aeterna pollentia simplicitate: 1.612). At 2.87 Lucretius also claims that
the primordia are “perfectly hard” (durissima).
62
“We must keep all our investigations in accord with our sensations” (έτι τε κατα τας αισθησεις δει πάντα τηρειν;
Epicurus, Letter to Herodotus, 38); “in accordance with the evidence of sense we must of necessity judge of the
29
�imperceptible by reasoning” (καθ’ ην αναγκαιον το άδηλον τωι λογισμωι τεκμαίρεσθαι; Letter to
Herodotus, 39)
63
[…]nisi prima fides fundata valebit,/ haud erit occultis de rebus quo referentes/ confirmare animi quicquam
ratione queamus (1.423-5) see also 4. 478-79: “You will find that it is from the senses in the first instance that the
concept of truth has come, and that the senses cannot be refuted.” (invenies primis ab sensibus esse creatam/
notitiem veri neque sensus posse refelli.)
64
corpus enim per se communis dedicat esse/ sensus (1.422-3) Epicurus, Letter to Herodotus, 39: “for that bodies
exist, sensation itself, common to all, bears witness (σωματα μεν γαρ ως εστιν, αυτη η αισθσις επι παντων
μαρτυρει) In the context of the passage, as well as in light of Lucretius’ general usage of per se to mean “selfsubsistent,” it seems better to take per se with corpus than with sensus. Cp. also Aristotle, Physics I.2, 185a12: “We
physicists, on the other hand, must take for granted that the things that exist by nature are, either all or some of
them, in motion—which is indeed made plain by induction.”
65
quo referemus enim? Quid nobis certius ipsis/ sensibus esse potest, qui vera ac falsa notemus? (1. 699-700)
66
See for example 4.478-481: “You will find that it is from the senses in the first instance that the concept of truth
has come, and that the senses cannot be refuted. For some standard must be found of greater credit (maiore fide),
which can of itself (sponte sua) refute false things by true. What, moreover, must be held to be of greater credit
(maiore fide) than the senses?”
67
non modo enim ratio ruat omnis, vita quoque ipsa/ concidat extemplo, nisis credere sensibus ausis (4.507-508)
68
neqeunt oculis rerum primordia cerni,/ accipe praeterea quae corpora tute necessest/ confiteare esse in rebus
nec posse videri. (1.269-270)
69
primordia tantum/ sunt infra nostros sensus tantoque minora/ quam quae primum oculi coeptant non posse tueri
(4.111-113) See also 2.312-3: “all the nature of first-bodies lies far from our senses, below them (omnis enim longe
nostris ab sensibus infra/ primorum natura iacet). In yet another passage Lucretius refers to the primordium as
“that body which our senses are no longer able to perceive.” (corp[us] ill[ud] quod nostri cernere sensus/ iam
nequeunt; 1.600)
70
at primordia gignundis in rebus oportet/ naturam clandestinam caecamque adhibere,/ emineat nequid quod
contra pugnet et obstet/ quominus esse queat proprie quodcumque creatur(1.778-81). For the same phrase and
argument applied specifically to the question whether the primordia have color, see 2.794, quoted below.
71
sin ita forte putas ignis terraeque coire/ corpus et aerias auras roremque liquoris,/ nil in concilio naturam ut
mutet eorum,/ nulla tibi ex illis poterit res esse creata,/ non animans, non exanimo cum corpore, ut arbos;/ quippe
suam quidque in coetu variantis acervi/ naturam ostendet mixtusque videbitur aer/ cum terra simul atque ardor
cum rore manere (1.770-777). At 2.920, Lucretius employs the same logic to make his case that sentient beings
must be composed of non-sentient atoms: “it cannot be that parts have independent sensation […] supposing
they did, yet by combination and union they will produce nothing but a throng and crowd (vulgum turbamque) of
living things, exactly as men, cattle, and wild beasts could not produce anything (ullam rem) amongst themselves
by coming together.” (2.910 and 920-923)
72
Nunc age dicta meo dulci quaesita labore/ percipe, ne forte haec albis ex alba rearis/ principiis esse, ante oculos
quae candida cernis,/ aut ea quae nigrant nigro de semine nata;/ nive alium quemvis quae sunt imbuta colorem,/
propterea gerere hunc credas, quod materiae/ corpora consimili sint eius tincta colore./ nullus enim color est
omnino materiai/ corporibus, neque par rebus neque denique dispar.(2.730-738) At 2.755-6 Lucretius again
cautions Memmius directly on this point: “Take care not to steep in color the seeds of things, lest for you all things
altogether pass away to nought (colore cave contingas semina rerum/ ne tibi res redeant ad nilum funditus
omnes).”
73
There has been considerable debate about Lucretius’ relation to Empedocles, and especially about is meant by
the praeclara reperta attributed to Empedocles at DRN 1.736. See, for example, David Sedley, “Lucretius and the
New Empedocles,” Leeds International Classical Studies 2.4 (2003), 1-12: “In Book 1, Lucretius criticizes
Empedocles’ theory of the four elements, but in the same breath concedes that Empedocles did make some great
30
�discoveries (praeclara reperta, 1.736). An important question to pursue is: what discoveries? I remain resistant to
one particular proposal, that the Empedoclean features in Lucretius’ proem signal his recognition of Empedocles as
a major philosophical forerunner. In response, I have argued that the debt acknowledged here is a literary one, to
the founder of his genre, and that Lucretius would not want to allow Empedocles much credit on the two central
philosophical issues that have been suggested as common ground: the need to posit enduring elements, and the
denial of natural teleology.” (p.2) The opposite view is articulated very clearly by David Furley: “Lucretius had every
reason to pay tribute to Empedocles as the inventor of elements, even though he could not accept the
Empedoclean theory in detail.” David Furley, Cosmic Problems: Essays on Greek and Roman Philosophy of Nature,
(Cambridge: CUP, 1989), 178.
74
ossa videlicet e pauxillis atque minutis/ ossibus hic et de pauxillis atque minutis/ visceribus viscus gigni
sanguenque creari/ sanguinis inter se multis coeuntibu’ guttis/ ex aurique putat micis consistere posse/ aurum et
de terris terram concrescere parvis,/ ignibus ex ignis, umorem umoribus esse, cetera consimili fingit ratione
putatque.(1.835-842) At 1.915-920, Lucretius resorts to ridicule: “Lastly, if you think that whatever you see
amongst visible things cannot be brought about without imagining (fingas) that the elements of matter are
endowed with a like nature, on this reasoning there is an end of your first-beginnings of things: it will follow that
they guffaw shaken with quivering laughter, and bedew face and cheeks with salt tears.”
75
adde quod inbecilla nimis primordia fingit,/ si primordia sunt, simili quae praedita constant/ natura atque ipsae
res sunt, aequeque laborant/ et pereunt (1.847-850)
76
debent primordia rerum/ non adhibere suum gignundis rebus odorem/ nec sonitum, quoniam nil ab se mittere
possunt,/ nec simili ratione saporem denique quemquam/ nec frigus neque item calidum tepidumque vaporem,/
cetera; quae […] omnia sint a principiis seiuncta necessest,/ inmortalia si volumus subiungere rebus/fundamenta
quibus nitatur summa salutis (2. 854-863). Among the objections to the Epicurean account that are voiced in
Cicero’s De natura deorum, is an objection to the Epicurean claim that “out of particles of matter not endowed
with heat, nor with any ‘quality’ (that which the Greeks call ποιότητα)…the world has emerged complete…”
(Cicero, De natura deorum, 2.37)
77
coniunctum est id quod nusquam sine permitiali/ discidio potis est seiungi seque gregari,/ pondus uti saxis, calor
igni, liquor aquai,/ tactus corporibus cunctis, intactus inani (1.451-454). On the illustrative role of the tmesis in the
phrase seque gregari, see Stephen Hinds, “Language at the Breaking Point: Lucretius 1.452,” The Classical
Quarterly, 37.2 (1987), 451: “”If segregari suffers the threatened loss of its conjoined se, it will become a
mutilated, senseless fragment. segregari, aggregari and congregari all mean something; but as a simple verb
gregari is utterly without existence in the lexicon of republican Latin.” At 1.334, void is in fact distinguished from
body precisely as the intangible from the tangible: “Therefore there is intangible space, void, emptiness
(quapropter locus est intactus inane vacansque).”
78
tactus enim , tactus, pro divum numina sancta,/ corporis est sensus (2.434-5)
79
Lucretius refers to the primordia as “generative bodies” (genitalia corpora; e.g. 1.58), “first bodies” (corpora
prima (e.g. 1.61) and “bodies of matter” (materiae corpora, e.g. 2.142f.).
80
“You may safely say that the first-beginnings of spirit lie at such intervals apart as equal the smallest things which
falling upon us are able to awaken sense-bringing motions in our body.” dumtaxat ut hoc promittere possis,/
quantula prima queant nobis iniecta ciere/ corpora sensiferos motus in corpore, tanta intervalla tenere exordia
prima animai. (3.377-380)
81
…quae corpora mittere possit/ sensibus et nostros adiectu tangere tactus.(1.684-689)
82
sed ne forte putes solo spoliata colore/ corpora prima manere, etiam secreta teporis/ sunt ac frigoris omnino
calidique vaporis,/ et sonitu sterila et suco ieiuna feruntur, nec iaciunt ullum proprium de corpore odorem. (2.842846)
ἀδύνατον γὰρ οὐσίαν ἐξ οὐσιῶν εἶναι ἐνυπαρχουσῶν ὡς ἐντελεχείᾳ: τὰ γὰρ δύο [5] οὕτως ἐντελεχείᾳ οὐδέποτε
ἓν ἐντελεχείᾳ (Metaphysics, 1039a2-5)
83
31
�84
See Morel, “Epicurean atomism,” 75: “The existence of movement is an axiom in the whole atomist tradition:
the reality of motion is an immediate given.”
85
prima moventur enim per se primordia rerum (2.133)
86
Or: “equally moved.” Omnia quapropter debent per inane quietum/ aeque ponderibus non aequis concita ferri.
(2.238-9)
87
“like drops of rain” imbris uti guttae (2.222)
88
reminiscere totius imum/ nil esse in summa, neque habere ubi corpora prima/consistant, quoniam spatium sine
fine modoquest (2.90-92)
89
ita nil umquam natura creasset; 2.224)
90
natura gerat res (2.242)
91
corpora cum deorsum rectum per inane feruntur/ ponderibus propriis, incerto tempore ferme/ incertisque locis
spatio depellere paulum,/ tantum quod momen mutatum dicere possis. (2.217-220)
92
On the notion of l’esprit de finesse, see Pascal, Pensées, trans. A.J.Krailsheimer (Penguin Books, 1966), 211, #512:
“The thing must be seen all at once, at a glance, and not as a result of progressive reasoning, at least up to a
point.” It is worth noting that Pascal does regard l’esprit de finesse as a rational faculty; he refers, for example, to
“this kind of reasoning.” See also Nicholas Hammond, The Cambridge Companion to Pascal (Cambridge: CUP,
2003), 246: “He goes to great lengths to distinguish between these two ‘minds,’ both of which are related to
reasoning, but in very different ways.”
93
namque hoc in promptu manifestumque esse videmus,/ pondera, quantum in sest, non posse oblique meare
(2.246-7)
94
certamine proelia pugnas/ edere turmatim certantia nec dare pausam,/ conciliis et discidiis exercita crebris
(2.116-120)
95
animum te advertere (2.125)
96
conicere ut possis ex hoc, primordia rerum/ quale sit in magno iactari semper inani (2.121-2)
E.g., 2.1061; 2.1073-4
97
98
Nec tamen omnimodis conecti posse putandum est/ omnia; nam volgo fieri portent videres,/ […]/quorum nil fiere
manifestum est, omnia quando/ seminibus certis certa genetrice creata/ conservare genus crescentia posse
videmus./ scilicet id certa fieri ratione necessust. (2.700-710)
99
materiai/ concursus motus ordo positura figurae cum permutantur, mutari res quoque debent (2.1019-1022) See
also 1.685-687: “there are certain bodies which by their concurrences, motions, order, positions, shapes, produce
fire, and which when their order is changed, change the nature of the thing” and 2.725-727: “Since the seeds are
different, different must be their intervals, passages, connections, weights, blows, meetings, motions…”
100
sed ne forte putes animalia sola teneri/ legibus hisce, eadem ratio disterminat omnia.(2.718-9) Lucretius uses
both the terms lex and foedus in reference to nature’s laws. See Bailey, 699, note on 1.586: “it must be
remembered that the meaning is different from that of the modern expression. Lucretius is not thinking of an
observed uniformity in nature, but rather of the limits which nature imposes on the growth, life, powers, etc., of
things.”
101
102
officium quod corporis exstat,/ officere atque obstare (1.336-7)
On the notion of the cacumen, see 1.599-614.
103
in quae corpora si nullus tibi forte videtur/ posse animi iniectus fieri, procul avius erras./ nam cum caecigeni,
solis qui lumina numquam/ dispexere, tamen cognoscant corpora tactu/ ex ineunte aevo nullo coniuncta colore,/
scire licet nostrae quoque menti corpora posse/ vorti in notitiam nullo circumlita fuco. (2.739-745)
32
�104
scire licet quaedam tam constare orba colore/ quam sine odore ullo quaedam sonituque remota,/ nec minus
haec animum cognoscere posse sagacem/ quam quae sunt aliis rebus private notare. (2.837-841)
105
hoc animi demum ratio discernere debet,/ nec possunt oculi naturam noscere rerum; 4.384-5)
106
See Leibniz’ essay “On Body and Force, Against the Cartesians,” Philosophical Essays, trans. Roger Ariew and
Daniel Garber (Indianapolis: Hackett, 1989), 250: “against Descartes, I think that there is something passive in body
over and above extension, namely, that by which body resists penetration.” For the phrases animi ratio and mentis
ratio see for example 1.425, 1.448, 2.381, 2.677, and 4. 384.
107
Bailey, 644 (introduction to 1.265-328)
108
At 2.1091, the gods are referred to as domini superbi and at 6.63 as domini acres.
109
1.22-3: “without you nothing comes forth into the shining borders of light” (nec sine te quicquam dias in luminis
oras/ exoritur). Bailey, 597, note on 1.22, points out that the phrase luminis oras was already used by Ennius, but is
clearly a favorite with Lucretius, who uses it nine times, and probably understands it literally, “luminis oras being
the borderline between the light of life and previous darkness.” See also 1.179: “the lively earth safely brings out
things young and tender into the borders of light For a more general discussion of Lucretius’ employment of
images of light (and dark) see D. West, The Imagery and Poetry of Lucretius (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press,
1969), chapter 7, “Light and Fire and Fluidity of Imagery,” 79-93.
110
Graiorum obscura reperta/[…] inlustrare Latinis versibus (1.136-7)
111
sed tua me virtus tamen et sperata voluptas/ suavis amicitiae quemvis efferre laborem / suadet, et inducit
noctes vigilare serenas/ quaerentem dictis quibus et quo carmine demum/ clara tuae possim praepandere lumina
menti,/ res quibus occultas penitus convisere possis.res quibus occultas penitus convisere possis. (1.140-145) See
also the closing lines of book 1: “nor will blind night rob snatch the path away from you and prevent you from
seeing through to the ultimate [recesses] of nature: thus things will kindle lights for things” (nec tibi caeca/ nox iter
eripiet quin ultima naturai/ pervideas: ita res accendent lumina rebus; 1.1115-1117).
112
Lucretius makes use of the fact that the Latin noun elementa refers both to letters and to physical elements.
113
See especially De natura deorum, 1.24 (65): “you make great play with the lawless dominion of the atoms”
(abuteris ad omnia atomorum regno et licentia)
114
See Bailey, 606, note on 1.55: “primordia is Lucr.’s favourite word for the ‘atoms’, … it occurs 72 times in the
poem… principia corresponds to Epicurus’ αρχαί; primordia does not exactly represent any word in Epicurus’
terminology, and conversely his technical term άτομοι is not reproduced by Lucretius.”
115
semina rerum (e.g., 1.59); genitalia corpora (e.g., 1.58). P.H. Schrijvers, “Seeing the Invisible: a Study of
Lucretius’ Use of Analogy in De rerum natura,” in Oxford Readings in Classical Studies, 258, proposes that the term
“first bodies” (corpora prima) ranks among “the neutral or semi-technical terms […] belonging to the domain of the
illustrandum,” whereas terms such as “generative bodies” (genitalia corpora) and “seeds of things” (semina rerum)
“are derived instead from the specific field of biology” and function as analogies. On the other hand Duncan
Kennedy, “Making a Text of the Universe,” in Oxford Readings, 386, suggests that the very use of the term corpus
in this context is already metaphorical: it “pictures them in anthropomorphic terms (they are ‘bodies’, corpora).”
116
principia (e.g., 1.198); corpora prima (e.g., 1.61); prima elementa (e.g., 6.1009). Kennedy, 386, points out that
even the apparently neutral phrase rerum primordia has rhetorical implications: it “emphasizes the notion of
beginning,” whereas the “atoms individually are eternal.”
117
esse videlicet in terris primordia rerum/ quae nos, fecundas vertentes vomere glebas […], cimus ad ortus (1.210212
118
mortalia corpora (1.232); aperta corpora (1.297); aeterna corpora (1.242); corpora caeca (1.277)
119
Bailey, 607.
120
E.g., 1.168 and 171
33
�121
E.g., 1.112-3: ignoratur enim quae sit natura animai,/ nata sit an contra nascentibus insinuetur (“for there is
ignorance what is the nature of soul, whether it be born or on the contrary inserted into those being born”)
122
sic aequo geritur certamine principiorum/ ex infinito contractum tempore bellum. (2. 573)
123
multa minuta modis multis per inane videbis/ […]/ et velut aeterno certamine proelia pugnas/ edere turmatim
certantia nec dare pausam,/ conciliis et discidiis exercita crebris (2.116-120)
124
Monica Gale, Myth and Poetry in Lucretius, 123
125
nil est nisi raro corpore nexum (6. 958). See also the beginning of this paragraph: “Now I will recollect
once more of how porous a body all things are.” (nunc omnis repetam quam raro corpore sint res/
commemorare; 6.936-7)
126
deorum … imperium (6.54-5). See note 126 below.
127
ignorantia causarum (6.54)
128
nam quid in hoc mundo sit eorum ponere certum/ difficile est; sed quid possit fiatque per omne/ in variis mundis
varia ratione creatis,/ id doceo, plurisque sequor disponere causas/ motibus astrorum quae possint esse per omne;/
e quibus una tamen siet hic quoque causa necessest/ quae vegeat motum signis; sed quae sit earum/ praecipere
haudquaquamst pedetemptim progredientis. (5.526-533) Cp. Epicurus, “Letter to Herodotus,” §§79-80; “Letter to
Pythocles,” §§85-88. See Bailey, 1398: “Lucretius makes the important addition, to which he frequently recurs, that
if any one of the supposed causes does not hold good in our world, yet it will in some other world.”
129
quorum […] causas nulla ratione videre (1.153-4 is repeated both at 6.56-57 and at 6.90-91.)
130
rursus in antiquas referuntur religiones,/ et dominos acris adsciscunt (5.86-87 and again at 6. 62-63)
131
errantes caeca ratione (6.67)
132
ūnam dīcere causam (6.704)
133
corpus ut exanimum siquod procul ipse iacere/ conspicias hominis, fit ut omnis dicere causas/ conveniat leti,
dicatur ut illius una;/ nam neque eum ferro nec frigore vincere possis/ interiisse neque a morbo neque forte
veneno,/ verum aliquid genere esse ex hoc quod contigit ei/ scimus. item in multis hoc rebus dicere habemus.(6.
705-711)
134
dominis…superbis (2.1091)
135
ipsă suā per se sponte omnia dis agere expers (2. 1092)
136
nempe aliae quoque sunt; nempe hac sine viximus ante (4.1173)
137
consuetudo concinnat amorem;/ nam leviter quamvis quod crebro tunditur ictu,/ vincitur in longo spatio tamen
atque labascit./ nonne vides etiam guttas in saxa cadentis/ umoris longo in spatio pertundere saxa? (4.1283-1287)
138
2.1077-78. Note the growing rhetoric of singularity in these lines: “una, unica…unica solaque” Cp. also 2. 10531060: “Now since there is illimitable space empty in every direction, and since seeds innumerable in number in the
unfathomable universe are flying about in many ways driven in everlasting movement, it cannot by any means be
thought likely that this is the only round earth and sky that has been made…especially since this world was made
by nature, and the seeds of things themselves of their own accord, knocking together by chance, clashed in all
sorts of ways, darkly, aimlessly, without intention…”
139
multo cum sanguine saepe/ rixantes (6.1285-6)
140
suos consanguineous (6.1283)
141
I wish to thank my colleague Brendon Lasell for pointing out the possible verbal play on corpora.
The Gigantomachy is referred to at 5.110-25 as well as at 4.136-42. Although Epicurus is associated with the
Giants (the clause “those who with their reasoning [ratione sua] shake the walls of the world,” 5.119 echoes the
142
34
�encomium of Epicurus at 1.73), it is important to note that this identification is said to occur in the minds of those
who “bitted and bridled by superstition […] think that earth and sun and sky, sea, stars, and moon are of divine
body.” (5.114-6) Such individuals can see only a crass materialism in the doctrine of the primordia. I have tried to
show, however, that it is an oversimplification to suppose, as Monica Gale does, that Lucretius subscribes to a
simple division between Epicurean materialism and Platonic idealism. See Gale, Myth and Poetry in Lucretius, 44,
note 162: “the Epicureans would be on the side of the materialist ‘Giants’ against the ‘friends of the Forms.’”
143
deorum […] imperium […] regnum(6.54-55)
35
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Description
An account of the resource
Items in this collection are part of a series of lectures given every year at St. John's College. During the Fall and Spring semesters, lectures are given on Friday nights. Items include audio and video recordings and typescripts.<br /><br />For more information, and for a schedule of upcoming lectures, please visit the <strong><a href="http://www.sjc.edu/programs-and-events/annapolis/formal-lecture-series/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">St. John's College website</a></strong>. <br /><br />Click on <strong><a title="Formal Lecture Series" href="http://digitalarchives.sjc.edu/items/browse?collection=5">Items in the St. John's College Formal Lecture Series—Annapolis Collection</a></strong> to view and sort all items in the collection.<br /><br />A growing number of lecture recordings are also available on the St. John's College (Annapolis) Lectures podcast. Visit <a href="https://anchor.fm/greenfieldlibrary" title="Anchor.fm">Anchor.fm</a>, <a href="https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/st-johns-college-annapolis-lectures/id1695157772">Apple Podcasts</a>, <a href="https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9hbmNob3IuZm0vcy84Yzk5MzdhYy9wb2RjYXN0L3Jzcw" title="Google Podcasts">Google Podcasts</a>, or <a href="https://open.spotify.com/show/6GDsIRqC8SWZ28AY72BsYM?si=f2ecfa9e247a456f" title="Spotify">Spotify</a> to listen and subscribe.
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
St. John's College Greenfield Library
Title
A name given to the resource
St. John's College Formal Lecture Series—Annapolis
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
formallectureseriesannapolis
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
paper
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Kirby, Margaret Anne, 1956-
Title
A name given to the resource
Lucretius on the Nature of Things
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2012-04-13
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
pdf
Description
An account of the resource
Typescript of a lecture delivered on April 13, 2012, by Margaret Kirby as part of the Formal Lecture Series.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
St. John's College
Coverage
The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant
Annapolis, MD
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
A signed permission form has been received stating, "I hereby grant St. John's College permission to: Make an audio recording of my lecture, and retain copies for circulation and archival preservation in the St. John's College Greenfield Library. Make an audio recording of my lecture available online. Make a typescript copy of my lecture available for circulation and archival preservation in the St. John's College Greenfield Library. Make a copy of my typescript available online."
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
text
Subject
The topic of the resource
Lucretius Carus, Titus. De rerum natura
Language
A language of the resource
English
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
Bib # 80130
Relation
A related resource
<a title="Audio recording" href="http://digitalarchives.sjc.edu/items/show/60">Audio recording</a>
Friday night lecture
Tutors
-
https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/sjcdigitalarchives/original/b5562b510a3c8b9abe85507676a7f7c5.mp3
f27f132b272bfd29851a3c3ccd518644
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Description
An account of the resource
Items in this collection are part of a series of lectures given every year at St. John's College. During the Fall and Spring semesters, lectures are given on Friday nights. Items include audio and video recordings and typescripts.<br /><br />For more information, and for a schedule of upcoming lectures, please visit the <strong><a href="http://www.sjc.edu/programs-and-events/annapolis/formal-lecture-series/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">St. John's College website</a></strong>. <br /><br />Click on <strong><a title="Formal Lecture Series" href="http://digitalarchives.sjc.edu/items/browse?collection=5">Items in the St. John's College Formal Lecture Series—Annapolis Collection</a></strong> to view and sort all items in the collection.<br /><br />A growing number of lecture recordings are also available on the St. John's College (Annapolis) Lectures podcast. Visit <a href="https://anchor.fm/greenfieldlibrary" title="Anchor.fm">Anchor.fm</a>, <a href="https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/st-johns-college-annapolis-lectures/id1695157772">Apple Podcasts</a>, <a href="https://podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0cHM6Ly9hbmNob3IuZm0vcy84Yzk5MzdhYy9wb2RjYXN0L3Jzcw" title="Google Podcasts">Google Podcasts</a>, or <a href="https://open.spotify.com/show/6GDsIRqC8SWZ28AY72BsYM?si=f2ecfa9e247a456f" title="Spotify">Spotify</a> to listen and subscribe.
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
St. John's College Greenfield Library
Title
A name given to the resource
St. John's College Formal Lecture Series—Annapolis
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
formallectureseriesannapolis
Sound
A resource primarily intended to be heard. Examples include a music playback file format, an audio compact disc, and recorded speech or sounds.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
CD
Duration
Length of time involved (seconds, minutes, hours, days, class periods, etc.)
01:00:40
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Lucretius on the Nature of Things
Description
An account of the resource
Audio recording of a lecture delivered on April 13, 2012, by Margaret Kirby as part of the Formal Lecture Series.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Kirby, Margaret Anne, 1956-
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
St. John's College
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2012-04-13
Coverage
The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant
Annapolis, MD
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
A signed permission form has been received stating, "I hereby grant St. John's College permission: To make an audio recording of my lecture, and retain copies for circulation and archival preservation in the St. John's College Greenfield Library. To make a typescript copy of my lecture available for circulation and archival preservation in the St. John's College Greenfield Library. To make an audio recording of my lecture available on the St. John's College web site. To make a copy of my typescript available online."
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
sound
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
mp3
Subject
The topic of the resource
Lucretius Carus, Titus. De rerum natura
Language
A language of the resource
English
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
LEC_Kirby_Margaret_2012-04-13_ac
Relation
A related resource
<a title="Typescript" href="http://digitalarchives.sjc.edu/items/show/38">Typescript</a>
Friday night lecture
Tutors
-
https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/sjcdigitalarchives/original/f048ccde0439e0563e1a51fe38024b86.mp3
61bf49d02ddddd8ecce6a6cf6b9aae8d
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
St. John's College Lecture Recordings—Santa Fe
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
St. John's College Meem Library
Coverage
The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant
Santa Fe, NM
Sound
A resource primarily intended to be heard. Examples include a music playback file format, an audio compact disc, and recorded speech or sounds.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
wav
Duration
Length of time involved (seconds, minutes, hours, days, class periods, etc.)
01:02:01
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Returning to Lucretius
Description
An account of the resource
Audio recording of a lecture given on April 5, 2019 by Thomas Nail as part of the Dean's Lecture and Concert Series.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Nail, Thomas
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
St. John's College
Coverage
The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant
Santa Fe, NM
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2019-04-05
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
Meem Library has been given permission to make this item available online.
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
sound
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
mp3
Subject
The topic of the resource
Lucretius Carus, Titus. De rerum natura
Language
A language of the resource
English
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
Nail, 4-19
Friday night lecture
-
https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/sjcdigitalarchives/original/9c1e2036770a1a9771b0b823f521e9fd.pdf
2e2ae007786f133a92d9a83db7df4495
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
St. John's College Lecture Transcripts—Santa Fe
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
St. John's College Meem Library
Coverage
The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant
Santa Fe, NM
Description
An account of the resource
Items in this collection are part of a series of lectures given every year at St. John's College at the Santa Fe, NM campus.
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
paper
Page numeration
Number of pages in the original item.
11 pages
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Returning to Lucretius
Description
An account of the resource
Transcript of a lecture given on April 5, 2019 by Thomas Nail as part of the Dean's Lecture and Concert Series.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Nail, Thomas
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
St. John's College
Coverage
The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant
Santa Fe, NM
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2019-04-05
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
Meem Library has been given permission to make this item available online.
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
text
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
pdf
Subject
The topic of the resource
Lucretius Carus, Titus. De rerum natura
Language
A language of the resource
English
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
Nail, LecN2
Friday night lecture
Deprecated: Directive 'allow_url_include' is deprecated in Unknown on line 0