Title: Lucrezio, De rerum natura 5, 1120–1135 : riflessioni e una nuova proposta di trasposizione
Variant title:
- Lucretius, De rerum natura 5, 1120–1135 : some thoughts and a new proposal of transposition
Source document: Graeco-Latina Brunensia. 2017, vol. 22, iss. 2, pp. 43-62
Extent
43-62
-
ISSN1803-7402 (print)2336-4424 (online)
Persistent identifier (DOI): https://doi.org/10.5817/GLB2017-2-3
Stable URL (handle): https://hdl.handle.net/11222.digilib/137623
Type: Article
Language
License: Not specified license
Notice: These citations are automatically created and might not follow citation rules properly.
Abstract(s)
In this paper, I provide an analysis of Lucr. 5, 1120–1135 and I propose a new attempt of transposition in Lucr. DRN 5, 1125–1135. The transmitted lines 5, 1125–1135 appear repetitive, inconsistent and overly varied: some intervention is inevitable. I follow Munro's transposition, shifting lines 1131–1132 in place of 1127–1128 with a clearer sense; additionally, I propose a new transposition of line 1135 in place of 1133. The reasons for my correction follow the argumentative logic of Lucretius' philosophical reasoning and argumentation. Consequently, I explain why I shift line 1135 to 1133, and I translate quandoquidem as "since", in order to provide a more linear and less apocalyptic explanation of the gnomic sentence in line 1133 nec magis ... fuit ante. My transposition agrees with Munro's correction: he proved that the entire section (1125–1135) was corrupt.
References
[1] Asmis, E. (1983). Rhetoric and reason in Lucretius. American Journal of Philology, 104, 36–66. | DOI 10.2307/293758
[2] Baran, N. V. (1983). Les caractéristiques essentielles du vocabulaire chromatique latin: Aspect général, étapes de développement, sens figurés, valeur stylistique, circulation. In W. Haase (Ed.), Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt (Vol. II, 29, 1; pp. 321–411). Berlin: De Gruyter.
[3] Blundell, S. (1986). The Origins of Civilization in Greek and Roman Thought. London: Routledge Revivals.
[4] Boerwinkel, E. J. (1956). Burgenschap en individuele autonomie. Epicurus en epicureisme in het oordeel van Lucretius en Cicero (PhD dissertation, Rijksuniversiteit te Utrecht). Paris – Amsterdam.
[5] Butterfield, D. J. (2014). Lucretius auctus? The question of interpolation in De rerum natura. In J. Martinez (Ed.), Fakes and Forgers of Classical Literature. Ergo decipiatur! Leiden: Brill.
[6] Camardese, D. (2008). Lucr. V 1302 e promemoria semantica di taeter. Paideia, 63, 83–105.
[7] Campbell, G. L. (2003). Lucretius on Creation and Evolution: A Commentary on De rerum natura 5. 772-1104. Oxford: University Press.
[8] Canfora, L. (1993). Vita di Lucrezio. Palermo: Sellerio.
[9] Canfora, L. (1993a). Lettura del quinto libro del De rerum natura. In Idem (Ed.), Studi di storia della storiografia romana (pp. 291–302). Bari: Edipuglia.
[10] Cartault, A. (1905). Notes critiques sur Lucrèce. Revue de Philologie, 29, 33–35.
[11] Cocatre-Zilgien, P. (2012). Lucrèce (De rerum natura 5. 1136–1160) et le progrès du droit. In E. Chevreau, D. Kremer, & A. Laquerrière-Lacroix (Eds.), Carmina Iuris. Mélanges en l'honneur de Michel Humbert (pp. 101–158). Paris: De Boccard.
[12] Cole, T. (1967). Democritus and the Sources of Greek Anthropology. Chapel Hill, NC: American Philological Association.
[13] De Vaan, M. (2008). Etymological Dictionary of Latin and the Other Italic Languages. Leiden – Boston: Brill.
[14] Deufert, M. (1996). Pseudo-Lukrezisches im Lukrez: Die unechten Verse in Lukrezens De rerum natura. Berlin: De Gruyter.
[15] Dodds, E. R. (1951). The Greeks and the Irrational. Berkeley: University of California Press.
[16] Dodds, E. R. (1973). The Ancient Concept of Progress and Other Essays on Greek Literature and Belief. Oxford: University Press.
[17] Dorandi, T. (1982). Filodemo. Il buon re secondo Omero (ed. T. Dorandi). Napoli: Bibliopolis.
[18] Dyck, A. (1996). A Commentary on Cicero: De Officiis.Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
[19] Edelstein, L. (1967). The Idea of Progress in Classical Antiquity. Baltimore: The John Hopkins University Press.
[20] Ernout, A., & Meillet, A. (2001). Dictionnaire étymologique de la langue latine: Histoire des mots (4. ed.). Paris: Klincksieck.
[21] Farrell, J. (1994). The Structure of Lucretius' "Anthropology". Materiali e discussioni per l'analisi dei testi classici, 33, 81–95.
[22] Farrington, B. (1939). Science and Politics in the Ancient World. London: George Allen and Unwin.
[23] Fish, J. (2002). Philodemus' on the Good King according to Homer: Columns 21–31. Cronache Ercolanesi, 32, 187–232.
[24] Fish, J. (2011). Not all politicians are Sisyphus: What Roman Epicureans were taught about politics. In J. Fish, & K. R. Sanders (Eds.), Epicurus and the Epicurean Tradition (pp. 72–104). Cambridge: University Press.
[25] Fowler, D. P. (1989, 2007). Lucretius and Politics. In J. Barnes, & M. Griffin (Eds.), Philosophia Togata: Essays on Philosophy and Roman Society (pp. 120–150). Oxford: University Press. (2. ed. 2007. In M. R. Gale (Ed.), Oxford Readings in Lucretius (pp. 397–431). Oxford: Oxford University Press).
[26] Furley, D. (1966). Lucretius and the Stoics. Bulletin of the Institute of Classical Studies, 13, 13–33. | DOI 10.1111/j.2041-5370.1966.tb00027.x
[27] Furley, D. (1978). Lucretius the Epicurean: On the History of Man. In O. Gigon (ed.), Lucrèce: huit exposés suivis de discussions. Vandoeuvres-Genève, 22–27 août 1977 (Entretiens sur l'antiquité classique, 24; pp. 1-27). Genève: Entretiens sur l'Antiquité classique de la Fondation Hardt.
[28] Gale, M. (1994). Myth and Poetry in Lucretius. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[29] Gigante, M. (1987). La bibliothèque de Philodème et l'épicureisme romain. Paris: Les Belles Lettres.
[30] Held, K. (2007). Hedone und Ataraxia bei Epikur. Paderborn: Mentis.
[31] Hofmann, J. B., & Szantyr, A. (1965). Lateinische Syntax und Stilistik: mit dem allgemeinen Teil der lateinischen Grammatik (Handbuch der Altertumswissenschaft, II, 2, 2). München: Beck.
[32] Holmes, B. (2013). The Poetic Logic of Negative Exceptionalism in Lucretius, Book Five. In D. Lehoux, A.D. Morrison, A. Scharrock (Eds.), Lucretius: Poetry, Philosophy, Science (pp. 153-191). Oxford: University Press.
[33] Horsfall, N. (2013). Virgil, Aeneid 6. Volume 2: Commentary and Appendices. Berlin-Boston: De Gruyter.
[34] Hutchinson, G. O. (2001). The Date of De rerum natura. Classical Quarterly, 51 (1), 150–162. | DOI 10.1093/cq/51.1.150
[35] Kenney, E. J. (Ed.). (2014). Lucretius: De rerum natura. Book III (2. ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[36] Kleve, K. (1978). The Philosophical Polemics in Lucretius. A Study in the History of Epicurean Criticism. In O. Gigon (Ed.), Lucrèce: huit exposés suivis de discussions. Vandoeuvres-Genève, 22–27 août 1977 (Entretiens sur l'antiquité classique, 24; pp. 39–75). Genève: Entretiens sur l'Antiquité classique de la Fondation Hardt.
[37] Leumann, M. (1977). Lateinische Laut- und Formenlehre. In M. Leumann, J. B. Hofmann, & A. Szantyr (Eds.), Lateinische Grammatik (Vol. I). München: C. H. Beck.
[38] Lloyd-Jones, H. (1971). The Justice of Zeus. Berkeley: University of California Press.
[39] Lovejoy, A. O., & Boas, G. (1935). Primitivism and Related Ideas in Antiquity. Baltimore: The John Hopkins University Press.
[40] Lyne, R.O.A.M. (1994), Subversion and intertextuality: Catullus 66. 39-40 and other examples. Greece & Rome. 41, 187-203. | DOI 10.1017/S0017383500023408
[41] Markovic, D. (2008). The Rhetoric of Explanation in Lucretius' De rerum natura. Leiden – Boston: Brill.
[42] McConnell, S. (2010). Epicureans on kingship. Cambridge Classical Journal, 56, 178–198. | DOI 10.1017/S1750270500000312
[43] McConnell, S. (2012). Lucretius and civil strife. Phoenix, 66, 97–121. | DOI 10.7834/phoenix.66.1-2.0097
[44] Merlan, P. H. (1950). Lucretius, Primitivist or Progressivist? Journal of the History of Ideas, 11, 364–368. | DOI 10.2307/2707737
[45] Minyard, J. D. (1985). Lucretius and the Late Republic: An Essay in Roman Intellectual History. Leiden: Brill.
[46] Mitsis, P. (1988). Epicurus' Ethical Theory. The Pleasures of Invulnerability. Ithaca – London: Cornell University Press.
[47] Momigliano, A. (1941). Review of Science and Politics in the Ancient World by Benjamin Farrington (London 1939). Journal of Roman Studies, 31, 149–57.
[48] Nichols, J. H. (1976). Epicurean Political Philosophy: The De Rerum Natura of Lucretius. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
[49] O'Hara, J. (2007). Inconsistency in Roman Epic: Studies in Catullus, Lucretius, Vergil, Ovid and Lucan. Cambridge: University Press.
[50] Penwill, J. L. (2009). Lucretius and the First Triumvirate. In W. J. Dominik, J. Garthwaite, & P. A. Roche (Eds.), Writing Politics in Imperial Rome (pp. 63–87). Leiden – Boston: Brill.
[51] Reinhardt, K. (1921). Posidonios. München: C. H. Beck.
[52] Reinhardt, T. (2004). Readers in the Underworld: Lucretius, De Rerum Natura 3.912 – 1075. Journal of Roman Studies, 94, 27–46.
[53] Sasso, G. (1979). Il progresso e la morte: saggi su Lucrezio. Bologna: Il Mulino.
[54] Saunders, T. J. (2001). Dicaearchus' Historical Anthropology. In W. W. Fortenbaugh, & E. Schütrumpf (Eds.), Dicaearchus of Messana. Text, Translation, and Discussion (pp. 237–254). New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Studies in Classical Humanities.
[55] Schiesaro, A. (2007). Lucretius and Roman Politics and History. In P. R. Hardie, & S. Gillespie (Eds.), The Cambridge Companion to Lucretius (pp. 41–58). Cambridge: University Press.
[56] Schrijvers, P. H. (1970). Horror ac divina voluptas: études sur la poétique et la poésie de Lucrèce. Amsterdam: A. M. Hakkert.
[57] Sedley, D. (1998). Lucretius and the Transformation of Greek Wisdom. Cambridge: University Press.
[58] Segal, C. P. (1990). Lucretius on Death and Anxiety: Poetry and Philosophy in De rerum natura. Princeton: University Press.
[59] Solaro, G. (2004). Lucrezio abiura Epicuro: Voltaire e il dialogo "Lucrèce et Posidonius". Quaderni di Storia, 59, 157–165.
[60] Spoerri, W. (1959). Späthellenistische Berichte über Welt, Kultur und Götter. Untersuchungen zu Diodor von Sizilien. Basel: Reinhardt.
[61] Taylor, M. (1947). Progress and Primitivism in Lucretius. American Journal of Philology, 68, 180–197. | DOI 10.2307/290952
[62] Warren, J. (2002). Epicurus and Democritean Ethics: An Archeology of Ataraxia. Cambridge: University Press.
[63] Warren, J. (2007). Lucretius and Greek Philosophy. In P. Hardie, & S. Gillespie (Eds.), The Cambridge Companion to Lucretius (pp. 19–32). Cambridge: University Press.
[64] Wolfdorf, D. (2013). Epicurus and the Cyrenaics on Katastematic and Kinetic Pleasures. In D. Wolfdorf (Ed.), Pleasure in Ancient Greek Philosophy (pp. 144–181). Cambridge: University Press.
[65] Zago, G. (2012). Sapienza filosofica e cultura materiale. Posidonio e le altre fonti dell'Epistola 90 di Seneca. Bologna: Il Mulino.
[2] Baran, N. V. (1983). Les caractéristiques essentielles du vocabulaire chromatique latin: Aspect général, étapes de développement, sens figurés, valeur stylistique, circulation. In W. Haase (Ed.), Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt (Vol. II, 29, 1; pp. 321–411). Berlin: De Gruyter.
[3] Blundell, S. (1986). The Origins of Civilization in Greek and Roman Thought. London: Routledge Revivals.
[4] Boerwinkel, E. J. (1956). Burgenschap en individuele autonomie. Epicurus en epicureisme in het oordeel van Lucretius en Cicero (PhD dissertation, Rijksuniversiteit te Utrecht). Paris – Amsterdam.
[5] Butterfield, D. J. (2014). Lucretius auctus? The question of interpolation in De rerum natura. In J. Martinez (Ed.), Fakes and Forgers of Classical Literature. Ergo decipiatur! Leiden: Brill.
[6] Camardese, D. (2008). Lucr. V 1302 e promemoria semantica di taeter. Paideia, 63, 83–105.
[7] Campbell, G. L. (2003). Lucretius on Creation and Evolution: A Commentary on De rerum natura 5. 772-1104. Oxford: University Press.
[8] Canfora, L. (1993). Vita di Lucrezio. Palermo: Sellerio.
[9] Canfora, L. (1993a). Lettura del quinto libro del De rerum natura. In Idem (Ed.), Studi di storia della storiografia romana (pp. 291–302). Bari: Edipuglia.
[10] Cartault, A. (1905). Notes critiques sur Lucrèce. Revue de Philologie, 29, 33–35.
[11] Cocatre-Zilgien, P. (2012). Lucrèce (De rerum natura 5. 1136–1160) et le progrès du droit. In E. Chevreau, D. Kremer, & A. Laquerrière-Lacroix (Eds.), Carmina Iuris. Mélanges en l'honneur de Michel Humbert (pp. 101–158). Paris: De Boccard.
[12] Cole, T. (1967). Democritus and the Sources of Greek Anthropology. Chapel Hill, NC: American Philological Association.
[13] De Vaan, M. (2008). Etymological Dictionary of Latin and the Other Italic Languages. Leiden – Boston: Brill.
[14] Deufert, M. (1996). Pseudo-Lukrezisches im Lukrez: Die unechten Verse in Lukrezens De rerum natura. Berlin: De Gruyter.
[15] Dodds, E. R. (1951). The Greeks and the Irrational. Berkeley: University of California Press.
[16] Dodds, E. R. (1973). The Ancient Concept of Progress and Other Essays on Greek Literature and Belief. Oxford: University Press.
[17] Dorandi, T. (1982). Filodemo. Il buon re secondo Omero (ed. T. Dorandi). Napoli: Bibliopolis.
[18] Dyck, A. (1996). A Commentary on Cicero: De Officiis.Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
[19] Edelstein, L. (1967). The Idea of Progress in Classical Antiquity. Baltimore: The John Hopkins University Press.
[20] Ernout, A., & Meillet, A. (2001). Dictionnaire étymologique de la langue latine: Histoire des mots (4. ed.). Paris: Klincksieck.
[21] Farrell, J. (1994). The Structure of Lucretius' "Anthropology". Materiali e discussioni per l'analisi dei testi classici, 33, 81–95.
[22] Farrington, B. (1939). Science and Politics in the Ancient World. London: George Allen and Unwin.
[23] Fish, J. (2002). Philodemus' on the Good King according to Homer: Columns 21–31. Cronache Ercolanesi, 32, 187–232.
[24] Fish, J. (2011). Not all politicians are Sisyphus: What Roman Epicureans were taught about politics. In J. Fish, & K. R. Sanders (Eds.), Epicurus and the Epicurean Tradition (pp. 72–104). Cambridge: University Press.
[25] Fowler, D. P. (1989, 2007). Lucretius and Politics. In J. Barnes, & M. Griffin (Eds.), Philosophia Togata: Essays on Philosophy and Roman Society (pp. 120–150). Oxford: University Press. (2. ed. 2007. In M. R. Gale (Ed.), Oxford Readings in Lucretius (pp. 397–431). Oxford: Oxford University Press).
[26] Furley, D. (1966). Lucretius and the Stoics. Bulletin of the Institute of Classical Studies, 13, 13–33. | DOI 10.1111/j.2041-5370.1966.tb00027.x
[27] Furley, D. (1978). Lucretius the Epicurean: On the History of Man. In O. Gigon (ed.), Lucrèce: huit exposés suivis de discussions. Vandoeuvres-Genève, 22–27 août 1977 (Entretiens sur l'antiquité classique, 24; pp. 1-27). Genève: Entretiens sur l'Antiquité classique de la Fondation Hardt.
[28] Gale, M. (1994). Myth and Poetry in Lucretius. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[29] Gigante, M. (1987). La bibliothèque de Philodème et l'épicureisme romain. Paris: Les Belles Lettres.
[30] Held, K. (2007). Hedone und Ataraxia bei Epikur. Paderborn: Mentis.
[31] Hofmann, J. B., & Szantyr, A. (1965). Lateinische Syntax und Stilistik: mit dem allgemeinen Teil der lateinischen Grammatik (Handbuch der Altertumswissenschaft, II, 2, 2). München: Beck.
[32] Holmes, B. (2013). The Poetic Logic of Negative Exceptionalism in Lucretius, Book Five. In D. Lehoux, A.D. Morrison, A. Scharrock (Eds.), Lucretius: Poetry, Philosophy, Science (pp. 153-191). Oxford: University Press.
[33] Horsfall, N. (2013). Virgil, Aeneid 6. Volume 2: Commentary and Appendices. Berlin-Boston: De Gruyter.
[34] Hutchinson, G. O. (2001). The Date of De rerum natura. Classical Quarterly, 51 (1), 150–162. | DOI 10.1093/cq/51.1.150
[35] Kenney, E. J. (Ed.). (2014). Lucretius: De rerum natura. Book III (2. ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[36] Kleve, K. (1978). The Philosophical Polemics in Lucretius. A Study in the History of Epicurean Criticism. In O. Gigon (Ed.), Lucrèce: huit exposés suivis de discussions. Vandoeuvres-Genève, 22–27 août 1977 (Entretiens sur l'antiquité classique, 24; pp. 39–75). Genève: Entretiens sur l'Antiquité classique de la Fondation Hardt.
[37] Leumann, M. (1977). Lateinische Laut- und Formenlehre. In M. Leumann, J. B. Hofmann, & A. Szantyr (Eds.), Lateinische Grammatik (Vol. I). München: C. H. Beck.
[38] Lloyd-Jones, H. (1971). The Justice of Zeus. Berkeley: University of California Press.
[39] Lovejoy, A. O., & Boas, G. (1935). Primitivism and Related Ideas in Antiquity. Baltimore: The John Hopkins University Press.
[40] Lyne, R.O.A.M. (1994), Subversion and intertextuality: Catullus 66. 39-40 and other examples. Greece & Rome. 41, 187-203. | DOI 10.1017/S0017383500023408
[41] Markovic, D. (2008). The Rhetoric of Explanation in Lucretius' De rerum natura. Leiden – Boston: Brill.
[42] McConnell, S. (2010). Epicureans on kingship. Cambridge Classical Journal, 56, 178–198. | DOI 10.1017/S1750270500000312
[43] McConnell, S. (2012). Lucretius and civil strife. Phoenix, 66, 97–121. | DOI 10.7834/phoenix.66.1-2.0097
[44] Merlan, P. H. (1950). Lucretius, Primitivist or Progressivist? Journal of the History of Ideas, 11, 364–368. | DOI 10.2307/2707737
[45] Minyard, J. D. (1985). Lucretius and the Late Republic: An Essay in Roman Intellectual History. Leiden: Brill.
[46] Mitsis, P. (1988). Epicurus' Ethical Theory. The Pleasures of Invulnerability. Ithaca – London: Cornell University Press.
[47] Momigliano, A. (1941). Review of Science and Politics in the Ancient World by Benjamin Farrington (London 1939). Journal of Roman Studies, 31, 149–57.
[48] Nichols, J. H. (1976). Epicurean Political Philosophy: The De Rerum Natura of Lucretius. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
[49] O'Hara, J. (2007). Inconsistency in Roman Epic: Studies in Catullus, Lucretius, Vergil, Ovid and Lucan. Cambridge: University Press.
[50] Penwill, J. L. (2009). Lucretius and the First Triumvirate. In W. J. Dominik, J. Garthwaite, & P. A. Roche (Eds.), Writing Politics in Imperial Rome (pp. 63–87). Leiden – Boston: Brill.
[51] Reinhardt, K. (1921). Posidonios. München: C. H. Beck.
[52] Reinhardt, T. (2004). Readers in the Underworld: Lucretius, De Rerum Natura 3.912 – 1075. Journal of Roman Studies, 94, 27–46.
[53] Sasso, G. (1979). Il progresso e la morte: saggi su Lucrezio. Bologna: Il Mulino.
[54] Saunders, T. J. (2001). Dicaearchus' Historical Anthropology. In W. W. Fortenbaugh, & E. Schütrumpf (Eds.), Dicaearchus of Messana. Text, Translation, and Discussion (pp. 237–254). New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Studies in Classical Humanities.
[55] Schiesaro, A. (2007). Lucretius and Roman Politics and History. In P. R. Hardie, & S. Gillespie (Eds.), The Cambridge Companion to Lucretius (pp. 41–58). Cambridge: University Press.
[56] Schrijvers, P. H. (1970). Horror ac divina voluptas: études sur la poétique et la poésie de Lucrèce. Amsterdam: A. M. Hakkert.
[57] Sedley, D. (1998). Lucretius and the Transformation of Greek Wisdom. Cambridge: University Press.
[58] Segal, C. P. (1990). Lucretius on Death and Anxiety: Poetry and Philosophy in De rerum natura. Princeton: University Press.
[59] Solaro, G. (2004). Lucrezio abiura Epicuro: Voltaire e il dialogo "Lucrèce et Posidonius". Quaderni di Storia, 59, 157–165.
[60] Spoerri, W. (1959). Späthellenistische Berichte über Welt, Kultur und Götter. Untersuchungen zu Diodor von Sizilien. Basel: Reinhardt.
[61] Taylor, M. (1947). Progress and Primitivism in Lucretius. American Journal of Philology, 68, 180–197. | DOI 10.2307/290952
[62] Warren, J. (2002). Epicurus and Democritean Ethics: An Archeology of Ataraxia. Cambridge: University Press.
[63] Warren, J. (2007). Lucretius and Greek Philosophy. In P. Hardie, & S. Gillespie (Eds.), The Cambridge Companion to Lucretius (pp. 19–32). Cambridge: University Press.
[64] Wolfdorf, D. (2013). Epicurus and the Cyrenaics on Katastematic and Kinetic Pleasures. In D. Wolfdorf (Ed.), Pleasure in Ancient Greek Philosophy (pp. 144–181). Cambridge: University Press.
[65] Zago, G. (2012). Sapienza filosofica e cultura materiale. Posidonio e le altre fonti dell'Epistola 90 di Seneca. Bologna: Il Mulino.