The Rhetoric of Explanation in Lucretius' De Rerum Natura
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
2008032. (Brill: 21427) Markovic. Prelims. Proef 3. 6-5-2008:14.39, page -1. The Rhetoric of Explanation in Lucretius’ De rerum natura 2008032. (Brill: 21427) Markovic. Prelims. Proef 5. 8-5-2008:15.24, page -2. Mnemosyne Supplements Monographs on Greek and Roman Language and Literature Editorial Board G.J. Boter A. Chaniotis K. Coleman I.J.F. de Jong P.H. Schrijvers VOLUME 294 2008032. (Brill: 21427) Markovic. Prelims. Proef 3. 6-5-2008:14.39, page -3. TheRhetoricofExplanation in Lucretius’ De rerum natura By Daniel Markovic´ LEIDEN • BOSTON 2008 2008032. (Brill: 21427) Markovic. Prelims. Proef 3. 6-5-2008:14.39, page -4. This book is printed on acid-free paper. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Markovic,´ Daniel. The rhetoric of explanation in Lucretius’ De rerum natura / by Daniel Markovic.´ p. cm. -- (Mnemosyne : bibliotheca classica Batava monographs on Greek and Roman language and literature) Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-90-04-16796-4 (hardback : alk. paper) 1. Lucretius Carus, Titus. De rerum natura. 2. Lucretius Carus, Titus. De rerum natura--Criticism, Textual. 3. Rhetoric, Ancient--History and criticism. 4. Didactic poetry, Latin--History and criticism. 5. Philosophy, Ancient, in literature. I. Title. II. Series. PA6495.M37 2008 871’.01--dc22 2008014326 ISSN: 0169-8958 ISBN: 978 90 04 16796 4 Copyright 2008 by Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, The Netherlands. Koninklijke Brill NV incorporates the imprints Brill, Hotei Publishing, IDC Publishers, Martinus Nijhoff Publishers and VSP. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, translated, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without prior written permission from the publisher. Authorization to photocopy items for internal or personal use is granted by Koninklijke Brill NV provided that the appropriate fees are paid directly to The Copyright Clearance Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Suite 910, Danvers, MA 01923, USA. Fees are subject to change. printed in the netherlands 2008032. Markovic. 00_Prelims. Proef 4. 7-5-2008:11.24, page -5. C’est une grande erreur de croire que les vérités scientifiques diffèrent essen- tiellement des vérités vulgaires. Elles n’en diffèrent que par l’étendue et la précision. Au point de vue pratique, c’est là une différence considérable. Mais il ne faut pas oublier que l’observation du savant s’arrête à l’apparence et au phénomène, sans jamais povoir pénétrer la substance ni rien savoir de la véri- table nature des choses. It is a great mistake to believe that scientific truths are fundamentally different from the truths of every day. They are not, except for their extension and precision. From the point of view of practice, this is an important difference. But we must not forget that the observation of savant stops at the level of appearances and phenomena, without ever being able to penetrate the substance or know anything of the true nature of things. Anatole France, Le jardin d’Épicure 2008032. Markovic. 00_Prelims. Proef 4. 7-5-2008:11.24, page -6. 2008032. Markovic. 00_Prelims. Proef 4. 7-5-2008:11.24, page -7. CONTENTS PrefaceandAcknowledgments........................................ ix Abbreviations .......................................................... xi Introduction. From Epicurus To Lucretius ........................... 1 Chapter One. Epos and Physis ......................................... 15 Epicurean Education and Traditional Education ................. 18 Hellenistic Literary Education .................................. 19 Epicurean Education ............................................ 24 Lucretiusasa Teacher.............................................. 29 DRN as an Educational Poem ..................................... 34 The Aim of DRN ................................................... 46 ChapterTwo.A LinearUniverse..................................... 51 ThePoem........................................................... 54 Individual Books .................................................... 58 Argumentative Sections ............................................ 70 The Organizational Principles of DRN ............................ 79 ChapterThree.ArgumentsandOrnaments......................... 83 ArgumentsfromAnalogy .......................................... 90 Arguments from Contradiction .................................... 100 ArgumentsfromEtymology........................................ 110 ArgumentsfromDefinition......................................... 122 Arguments from Cause and Effect................................. 129 Arguments from Comparison ...................................... 136 Loci and the Composition of DRN ................................. 142 Outlook. The Rhetoric of Explanation in DRN ..................... 145 Bibliography ........................................................... 149 Texts, Translations and Commentaries ............................ 149 OtherWorks ........................................................ 154 2008032. Markovic. 00_Prelims. Proef 4. 7-5-2008:11.24, page -8. viii contents Indices.................................................................. 163 Indexlocorum ...................................................... 163 Indexrerum......................................................... 173 2008032. Markovic. 00_Prelims. Proef 4. 7-5-2008:11.24, page -9. PREFACE AND ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The overall rhetorical feel of De rerum natura continues to impress read- ers and scholars for more than one hundred years. Already J.W. von Goethe described Lucretius as a poet-orator (ein dichterischer Redner), and in his Marburg dissertation of 1881, K.H.J. Spangenberg wrote: “all rhetorical procedures that we find in the poets of later times already exist in Lucretius” (omnes artes rhetoricae, quas apud posterioris temporis poetas inuenimus, iam apud Lucretium extant). But this particular quality of Lu- cretius’ masterpiece is commonly perceived with unease. The majority of modern interpreters consider the rhetorical character of the poem to be one of its problematic features, comparable to Lucretius’ heretic treatment of Epicurean physics in the form of an epic poem. Alleged incompatibility of Epicurus’ philosophy with rhetoric has led modern scholars to isolate rhetorical elements in the poem and regard them as non-Epicurean, accessory features. This book approaches the question from a different point of view, based on a wider understanding of the term rhetoric. Its core consists of a fresh analysis of the process of the composition of De rerum natura intended to show that, instead of inject- ing rhetorical strategies from non-Epicurean sources, Lucretius in fact intensified rhetorical elements already present in the work of Epicurus, systematically returning them to their ancestral forms found in the lan- guage of epic poetry. An earlier version of the book was submitted as a part of the require- ment for the doctoral degree of the University of Illinois at Urbana- Champaign in October 2006. For the core of this book I owe lasting debt of gratitude to my advisor, Howard Jacobson, and to my readers, William M. Calder III, Thomas M. Conley, Kirk R. Sanders, and Danuta R. Shanzer. Their comments and suggestions have improved the initial drafts of the text to a great extent. My gratitude to Marcus Heckenkamp is immense: his most generous help and our invaluable discussions have had great influence on the outcome of this project. Another close friend, Philip A. Wattles, has carefully read the final version of the manuscript and improved the present text in a countless number of places. Last but 2008032. Markovic. 00_Prelims. Proef 4. 7-5-2008:11.24, page -10. x preface and acknowledgments not least, I am deeply grateful to my wife Junko for her prudence and essential emotional support. Although this research project occasionally involved other libraries in the United States, its vital stages were conducted using the marvelous resources of the Classics Library of the University of Illinois at Urbana- Champaign. I would like to express here my sincere thanks to two superb professionals at the head of this Library, Bruce W. Swann and Karen M. Dudas. Philadelphia, February 2008 2008032. Markovic. 00_Prelims. Proef 4. 7-5-2008:11.24, page -11. ABBREVIATIONS The references to Greek works follow the abbreviations of Liddell- Scott-Jones’ Greek-English Lexicon (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1996), ex- cept for the works of Epicurus: Her. Epistula ad Herodotum Men. Epistula ad Menoeceum Pyth. Epistula ad Pythoclem S Sententiae SV Sententiae Vaticanae The references to Latin works follow the abbreviations of Thesaurus linguae Latinae (Leipzig: B.G. Teubner, 1900–). 2008032. Markovic. 00_Prelims. Proef 4. 7-5-2008:11.24, page -12. 2008032. Markovic. 00b_Introduction. Proef 4. 7-5-2008:11.24, page 1. introduction FROM EPICURUS TO LUCRETIUS One of the passages on which recent Lucretian scholarship has shed much light is the ριστεα of Epicurus in Book One of De rerum natura.1 The passage fashions Epicurus as an epic hero who engages religion in a Homeric duel on behalf of all humanity. His battle has a successful outcome—the reversal of the initial situation, in which human life was lying on the ground, oppressed by religion. Humana ante oculos foede cum uita iaceret in terris oppressa graui sub religione, quae caput a caeli regionibus ostendebat horribili super aspectu mortalibus instans, primum Graius homo mortalis tollere contra est oculos ausus primusque