Lucretius Epicurus and Prehistory

8/13/2019 Lucretius Epicurus and Prehistory

1/36

Department of the Classics, Harvard University

Lucretius, Epicurus, and PrehistoryAuthor(s): Daniel R. BlickmanSource: Harvard Studies in Classical Philology, Vol. 92 (1989), pp. 157-191Published by: Department of the Classics, Harvard UniversityStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/311357

Accessed: 27/10/2008 22:22

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless

you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you

may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=dchu.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed

page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit organization founded in 1995 to build trusted digital archives for scholarship. We work with the

scholarly community to preserve their work and the materials they rely upon, and to build a common research platform that

promotes the discovery and use of these resources. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Department of the Classics, Harvard Universityis collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend

access toHarvard Studies in Classical Philology.

http://www.jstor.org
http://www.jstor.org/stable/311357?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=dchuhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=dchuhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/311357?origin=JSTOR-pdf


2/36

LUCRETIUS, EPICURUS, AND PREHISTORYDANIELR. BLICKMAN

F the many topics treatedby Lucretius n his surveyof Epicureanphilosophy,one that has attracted onsiderableattention n recentdecades is his account of the originandprogressof humancivilizationat the end of the fifth book of the De RerumNatura. Two of the mostdifficult issues raisedby this accountof prehistoryare its structureandits relationto Epicurus'treatmentof the same topics.The first issue is whether there is an overall coherencein Lucretius5.925-1457. Certainmain divisions in the text are clearenough. Thereis the first stage of the most primitivehuman existence (925-1010), asecond stage markingthe formationof society and the appearanceoflanguage and fire (1011-1104), and a third stage begins at 1105 inwhich cities and political institutionsdevelop.1These three stages ofdevelopment were traditional in Greco-Roman reconstructions ofprehistory.2Up to 1160, the chronological progression is not prob-lematic. But the section on religion (1161-1240) is ambiguous. Thereader,havingno overtclue thatchronological sequenceis being inter-rupted,can easily upon first encounterthink of it as coming next intime.3 But a more careful reading will raise the question of whethersome of these phenomenashould not belong among the people of theIK. Barwick,"Kompositionsproblemem 5. Buch des Lucrez,"Philologus 95 (1943)193-211; B. Manuwald, Der Aufbau der lukrezischenKulturentstehungslehre,Mainz1980 (Akademieder Wissenschaftenund derLiteraturMainz,Abhandlungender Geistes-undSozialwissenschaftlichenKlasse 1980, Nr. 3) 15-18. Forthe text of LucretiusI have

used C. Bailey, Titi LucretiCari De RerumNatura (Oxford 1947), unless otherwise indi-cated.2 P. Rose, "Sophocles' Philoctetes and the Teaching of the Sophists," HSCP 80(1976) 51-54; T. Cole, Democritus and the Sources of GreekAnthropology,AmericanPhilological Association Monographs25 (1967) 25-46.3 Lucretius nvites us to read t this way by mentioningcities (urbis 1162).


3/36

Daniel R.Blickmanfirst two stages (925-1104). The earliest human beings ought to havebeen able to perceive the gods just as well as their descendants.4 Theexistence of a break in the chronological progression is confirmed by1241-1457. This section, with its concentration on the aetiology ofvarious arts, makes a number of clear references to primitive conditionswhich fit the first two stages (925-1104) but not the third(1105-1159).5 There is another perplexing feature of 1241-1457: theorder in which the various arts are discussed, and indeed the selectionof arts mentioned, have seemed unaccountable. The section beginswith metallurgy, particularly as applied to weapons (1241-1307), thenproceeds to the use of animals in war (1308-1349), weaving(1350-1360), arboriculture (1361-1378), and finally music(1379-1411). The last of these is neither the most recent discovery,being known, in fact, to the most primitive people (silvestre genus ter-rigenarum 1411), nor is it important for survival. Yet it is given atreatment far beyond its practical value. Any explanation of its role as

4 Scholars have suspected this idea for Epicurus as a naturaldeduction from histheories about the gods and perceptionand also because of fr. 84 Us. (= G. Arrighetti,Epicuro: Opere [Torino 1960, 19732] 27.1 [p. 252] = Philod. Piet. 113g), discussed inG. Arrighetti,"La struttura ell' epistola di Epicuroa Pitocle,"Studi Classici e Orientali16 (1967) 117-128, and cf. G. Muller, "Die fehlende Theologie im Lucreztext,"inMonumentumChiloniense. Kieler Festschrif fir E. Burck, ed. E. Lefevre (Amsterdam1975) 280; but the readingwas too doubtful for confidence (Manuwald[above, n. 1] 44n. 170). Now a new text being publishedby Dirk Obbink,to whom I am most gratefulfor makingit available,provides strongerevidence:Kalv TCi 5o ,1a?KT[oo]1Epi qp[6]I [E](o[; To]i); ipO)xou;I qnp[oiva]V9p(0,co,; Iei;v[oili]uaa (i]0( Ipa(


4/36

Lucretius,Epicurus,and Prehistoiythe climax of Lucretius' aetiology of the arts must account for thesefacts.6 The section on religion (1161-1240), therefore, may bedescribed as the centerpiece of the whole prehistory. On the one hand,it appears to be the climax of the chronological development, but at thesame time it serves to introduce the aetiological section (1241-1457) inwhich chronological sequence is quite neglected.The search for a coherence in this arrangement is linked to thesecond of our initial problems, the relation of De Rerum Natura5.925-1457 to the writings of Epicurus, or possibly of other Epicure-ans. If Lucretius is presenting the teachings of Epicurus, how does theevidence for the Master's views on prehistory throw light on the text ofLucretius? There is little direct evidence for Epicurus. But one suchtext, Ep. ad Hdt. 75-76, has been used by Manuwald as the basis for astudy of Lucretius.7 Epicurus distinguishes here between two periods ofdevelopment, one in which human beings are taught directly by cir-cumstances (Tiiv (p'Gtv [sc. Tzov&vOpcrCCOV]rokkaX Cai ravToiX ntobavTCOvTCOvpaycidaTv 8btaXZ0fvact t KCaiavayKaaOrfival) and asecond period characterized by the exercise of reason (Tov 6k X,oytoa6vTa nr6Tranric x7ap?yvrYveEovTaJoT?pov E?aKptpouv Kai Tcpoo?e?epi-aKeiv.8 Manuwald argues that 5.925-1104 in Lucretius corresponds tothe first of Epicurus' two periods and 1105-1457 to the second. Thus,in the earlier period, nature itself produces discoveries (e.g., At varioslinguae sonitus natura subegit / mittere 1028-1029), but in the secondperiod human reason plays a more important role (announced by1105-1107). Moreover, despite the clear references in 1241-1457back to the first period (925-1104), Manuwald maintains that the aetio-logical section (1241-1457) belongs essentially to the second period(1105 ff.) distinguished by the use of koyto(g6;. On his view, even thefinal verses 1448-1457 must be read as referring to 1105 ff. and not thewhole prehistory from 925 onwards.9 Though the limitations of our

6The latesteditor of Lucretius5, C. D. N. Costa (Oxford 1984) 147 (ad 1379-1435),finds the structureand logic loose- "perhapsL. was hurrying o get to the end of a longbook."7 (Above, n. 1)passim.8In order to avoid confusion, when discussing Manuwald I use "period" o describehis bipartiteanalysis and "stage" or my tripartitedivision. One may wonderwhether hetwo-stage theory about two periods of religious evolution which Henrichs(above, n. 4)107 ff. has ascribedto Prodicus inspiredEpicurus,since the second period for Prodicusseems to have involved the interventionof o6yo;.9 (Above, n. 1) 26-30. Emout and Robin ad 1452 ff., also compare Ep. ad Hdt.

159


5/36

Daniel R. Blickmanevidence should be admitted,Manuwald's central thesis about the fitbetween the two periods describedby Epicurusin Ep. ad Hdt. 75-76and the differentperiodswhich fall on each side of 5.1105 in Lucretiuswill generallybe acceptedhere. But it is on the puzzles of 1241-1457which have been mentioned abovethat Manuwald'sapproachhas leastto offer. There are otherEpicureantexts, however, not properlycon-sidered by Manuwald or other scholars, which illuminate Lucretius'account.10This paper will argue that Manuwald's analysis must be supple-mentedby considerationnot only of these texts, but of Lucretius'rhe-torical and poetic techniques. This evidence supports Farrington'stheory that the second stage of social development (1011-1104 inLucretius),in which society is formed but has not progressedbeyondthe simplestvillage, was the golden age for Epicurus."IModifying Far-ringtonI shall arguethatLucretiushas deliberatelyreducedthe primi-tivism of Epicurusabout this second stage and enhancedthroughhisown presentationthe primitivismof the first stage (925-1010). Thisreversal is part of a complex rhetorical structure which extendsthroughouthe prehistoryandconveys its moralsignificance. Lucretiussounds his strongest primitivisttones in 925-1010, and then mufflesthem in 1011-1104, in orderto increase the impressionof a declinewhen we come to the thirdstage (at 1105-1160), which is depictedasthe time when ambitionand fear of the laws emergedto plaguehumanlife. In the aetiological section 1241-1457, this dual perspective oftechnicaladvancewithout moralimprovements maintainedby Lucre-tius' careful deploymentof the morally significantmotifs of war andseafaring. In 1241-1457 he refers back not only to the music(1379-1411) but to the warfare(1245-1246, 1283-1285, 1416-1422)

75-76, but, unlike Manuwald, hink usus in 1452 and aetas in 1454 roughlycorrespondto the direct teachings of the environmentof Epicurus' first period, and only inlpigraeexperentiamentis(1452) and ratio (1455) correspond o Epicurus'Xoytoa6;.10See below on KD 39 and 40 andDiog. Oen. NF 21, publishedby M. F. Smith.Thir-teenNew Fragmentsof Diogenes of Oenoanda.in Ergianungsbdndezu den TituliAsiaeMinoris(Vienna 1974) 21-25.

1 "Second Thoughtson Epicurus,"Science and Society 17 (1953) 326-339 (Germantrans.)DeutscheZeitschriftfi-rPhilosophie 3 (1955) 214-224; "VitaPrior in Lucretius."Hermathena81 (1953) 59-62: "Lucretiusand Manilius on Friendship." bid. 83 (1954)10-16; "TheMeaningof Persona in De RerumNatura 3.58," ibid., 85 (1955) 3-12. Forcriticismof Farrington, ee note 33 below.

160


6/36

Lucretius,Epicurus,and Prehistoryof the first two stages (925-1104), only now giving a far bloodier pic-ture of primitive times. In this way the prehistory revises its earlierviews. At first, in 925-1104, the earliest human beings offer a primi-tivist contrast to later problems. But further on, in 1241-1457, they areincluded in the poet's powerful condemnation of all human history(1416-1435).As a preliminary, it is necessary to recall the key Epicurean tenetwhich Lucretius' account of prehistory is meant to establish, namely,that the gods must be excluded from participation in human history.Rather, usus et impigrae simul experientia mentis / paulatim docuitpedetemptim progredientis (1452-1453). The gradual nature of theprocess is stressed throughout.12 Yet clearly some of the texts whichconvey this rationalized view of the past (e.g., 1279, 1307, 1434) are atthe same time of serious moral import. A number of scholars havecommented on the moral implications of these and other passages, asthis century has seemed well placed to appreciate that Lucretius doesnot see moral progress as a concomitant of technological advance.13But there is still need for a more unified analysis of his moral concernsin the prehistory as a whole.

I. PRIMITIVISMAND THEGOLDENAGEThe first moral issue which the composer of a prehistory must faceis the relative worth and attractiveness of the different stages of

development. Was there a golden age in the distant past when indivi-duals lived in harmony among themselves and with their environment?It is possible, of course, to pursue a rationalized reconstruction ofprehistory, like that of the Epicureans, which excludes the gods and yet

12931-932, 1011 ff., in dies 1105, 1279, 1307, 1370, minutatim1293, 1384, 1434; cf.Diog. Oen. fr. 10, col. 0 [To 8 Xvoo npo | pfi]vovToS restoredon the basis of lines13-14 etla 5i npopaivcov6 xpovog and the Hermarchusragmentap. PorphyryDe abst.1.10.4 E,XO6vto;E ?ni TXiov Tzo Xp6vou. Diogenes explicitly denies the role of thegods (fr. 10, cols. 2-3). The text of Diogenes of Oenoanda s cited from C. W. Chilton'sTeubneredition (Leipzig 1967).13The best essay about this issue is J. C. Fredouille, "Lucrece et le 'double progrescontrastant,"'Pallas 19 (1972) 11-27; fullest discussion in L. Perelli, "La storia dell'umanitanel V libro di Lucrezio,"Attidella Accademiadelle Scienze di Torino. Classe diScienze Morali, Storiche e Filologiche 101, 1966-1967 (Torino 1967) 117-285. Biblio-graphy n Manuwald above, n. 1) 64-66.

161


7/36

Daniel R. Blickmanadmits the notion of a golden age. But it will be a golden age in aqualifiedform. We would not, for instance, expect an Epicureantobelieve in a completely idyllic or mythicalgolden age, such as Hesiodascribes to his golden generation(WD 109-126), partly because itsthoroughlybeneficentand peaceful workings of physical and humannature would appear unrealistic,and partly because there might beimplicit or explicit a notion that the gods favored this golden era.Nonetheless, in the presentcontext we may use "golden age" of Epi-curusor his followers to meana periodin humanhistorywhich appearsclose to ideal by comparisonwith the present or other points in thepast. One guise which this idea takes is primitivism,the presence ofwhich in Lucretiushas long been recognized.14 The problem s its loca-tion, strength,and source.The first task is to review the questionof primitivism n 925-1010.Furley has rightly rejectedthe exaggeratednotion which claims thatLucretiusadvocatesa return o the life of the earliest humanbeings.15 tis easy to see that this existence, without agriculture(933 f.), fire orclothing (953 f.), social bonds (958 f.), family (962 f.), and securityfrombeasts (982-998), is a sub-humanone that Lucretiuscould hardlypretendto extol to his readers. Yet the passage is still primitivisttosome extent. The issue is whetherLucretiushimself is responsibleforthe primitivism. We may notice first two instancesin which there areinsufficientgroundsfor such a view. The idea that the first men had atougher physical constitution and enjoyed a greater freedom fromdiscomfort and sickness than contemporaryRomans (925-930) mayseem to be primitivist,but is not, in fact, without a reasonablebasis.16Hence there is no warrant for invoking here Lucretianprimitivismgoing beyondEpicurean heory. Second, it is expresslydenied that theearliestmen were frightenedby the disappearanceof the sun at night(973-987). This idea too may appearprimitivist,since such an absenceof irrational ears about the heavens would contrastfavorablywith the

14L. Robin, "Sur la conception6picuriennedu progres,"Revue de metaphysiqueet demorale22 (1916) 697-719.15"Lucretius he Epicurean,"n Lucrece (Geneva 1978 [Entretiens ur l'antiquiteclas-sique 24]) 13-17.16Furley 15 ascribes this notion to "the historical imagination of Lucretius"who"couldhardlydo otherthangive primitivemen a stronger,hardierconstitutionthanmenof the RomanRepublic." His point is well taken,thoughthe originalityof Lucretiushereis unproven.

162


8/36

Lucretius,Epicurus,and Prehistorylater development of false beliefs.17 But given Grilli's plausible sugges-tion that Lucretius here reflects Epicurus' criticism of Aristotle, weshould refrain from attributing primitivist additions to Lucretius.18

Where, then, can we detect Lucretius augmenting the primitivisttone? Verses 937-952, describing the food and drink available to thefirst men and women, are the master strokes in his primitivist coloring.Without these lines, the whole description would lose its charm, andLucretius chooses his words carefully to leave the impression of mod-est desires that find abundant supplies without strenuous effort:19 satisid placabat pectora donum (938) sets this peaceable tone. Yet the cru-cial point is that the possibility of starvation is not mentioned here atall, but reserved for some moralizing later:

tum penuria deinde cibi languentia letomembra dabat, contra nunc rerum copia mersat. (1007-1008)20This separation of the problem of starvation from the earlier descriptionof the food supply is a telling example of how Lucretius' primitivsteffects are achieved. That Epicurus probably did not make this separa-tion is suggested by a passage in Diodorus describing the earliest men'signorance of food-gathering and their starvation in winter (1.8.6-7).21It would be typical of Epicurus to give a solution, or several of them,for this problem. Diogenes of Oenoanda (fr. 10, col. 1) knows of therigors of winter, too, but in his text, as in Diodorus, they provide theoccasion for invention (of shelter and clothing). Lucretius, on the otherhand, not only avoids the problem of starvation, but turns the tradi-tional discussion of winter to his own purposes. It is not even the causeof distress. Indeed we hardly see primitive man confronting it at all(note the oblique nunc hiberno tempore cernis, 940). The idea thatwinter berries were larger in primeval times, which one assumes wasproffered originally as an explanation for survival in winter, now is

17Robin(above, n. 14) 700.18"La posizione di Aristotele Epicuro e Posidonoi nei confronti della storia dellacivilta," Rendiconti dell' IstitutoLombardo,Classe di lettere, scienze morali e storiche86 (1953) 24-27; P. Boyance, Lucreceet 1'epicurisme(Paris 1963) 239.19Cf. D. J. Gillis, "PastoralPoetryin Lucretius,"Latomus26 (1967) 357.20Cf. T. Cole (above, n. 2) 27-28; Manuwald above, n. 1) 60-61.21On the motif of the difficulties of winter in prehistory, see Spoerri (above, n. 4)155-156; Eur.Suppl.207-208 with Collardad loc.

163


9/36

Daniel R. Blickmanused in a sentence thatsuggests that winterthen was less threateningthan now (940-942).22The following lovely descriptionof the watersupplywith its silvanhaunts of the nymphs is clearly primitivist(945-952). Here the com-parisonto beasts betokens simplicitymore than savagery.23Nature isseen as a nurturingagent in the slight personificationof vocabant andclaricitat (if that or citat is correct), and in nota and scibant, which areas close to a commendationof primitiveman's intelligent adaptabilityas one gets in this section, this friendly familiaritybetween man andnature is reciprocated. Moreover, the attractivenessof the scene isincreasedby the sound effects. The stream of liquids and sibilants,which reaches a climax in 949-951, partly through he soothingrepeti-tion of umidasaxa,24finds a beautifullysmoothrelease in 952, wherethe series of stoppedconsonantsis softenedby their combinationwithliquids. Thus the primitivist one seems to have been greatlyenhancedby Lucretius.The treatmentof the absenceof social bondsconfirms this interpre-tation,since in this case, too, the Lucretianoriginof the primitivism sbetrayed by the same techniqueof postponingto a later passage theharsheraspectsof primitivelife. The descriptionof mutual violence isthe bland and passive quod cuique obtulerat praedae fortuna(958-961). But Lucretiuswill later offer a far bloodierpictureof this:

sive quodinterse bellum silvestregerenteshostibusintulerantgnemformidinisergo (1245-1246)

armaantiquamanusunguesdentesquefuerunt22Munro noted that in Decemberlarge tracts of the Peloponnese are covered with thescarlet arbuteberries, and Giussani considered this an indication that this detail wasdrawnfrom Epicurus. The miseris in the superbphrasemiseris mortalibusampla (944),which forms the climax of the passage about the food supply, does not seem to undercutthe primitivisttone (cf. Boyance, above, n. 18) so much as to imparta normativeaspect

throughboth the conjunctionwith ampla and perhapsan echo of the Homeric5eLXoio(PpoToiot(one mightsuggest that miserismortalibusmaybe fromEnnius).23On the comparison o beasts in 932 vulgivago moreferarum, see Cole (above, n. 2)27-28. In neitherpassage does Lucretiusbringout the pejorativeforce which was gen-erallycarriedby the traditionalGreekdescriptionof primitivelife as OllptconJras felt inEur.Suppl.201-202; "Critias"DK 88 B25.2; Ditt. Syll. 704.12 [vol. 2.324]).24Costa (above, n. 6) observes (ad 950-951) that the repetitionof umida saxa "isuniquein theDRN."

164


10/36

Lucretius,Epicurus,andPrehistoryet lapides et item silvarum fragmina rami,et flamma atque ignes, postquam sunt cognita primum (1283-1285)sic odium coepit glandis, sic illa relictastrata cubilia sunt herbis et frondibus aucta.pellis item cecidit vestis contempta ferinae;quam reor invidia tali tunc esse repertam,ut letum insidiis qui gessit primus obiret,et tamen inter eos distractam sanguine multodisperiisse neque in fructum convertere quisse (1416-1422).25

The first of these texts ought to refer to the second stage of develop-ment in 1011-1104 because only then is fire acquired (1091-1104).However, the phrase bellum silvestre distinctly recalls the most primi-tive era (925-1010), since silvestre and other references to the forestare a constant feature of it, indeed its hallmark (silvestria templa tene-bant 948; silvasque colebant 955-957; Venus in silvis iungabat corporaamantum 962; consectabantur silvestria saecla ferarum 967; silvestriamembra / nuda dabant terrae 970-972; 987).26 In 1283-1285, how-ever, there does seem to be a conscious division between the earliestweapons (1283 f.), presumably belonging to the period described in925-1010 (cf. silvarum fragmina rami 1284, and manuum mira fretivirtute pedumque 966), and the fire acquired in the second stage (1285;1091-1104). In 1416-1422, the mention of acors and beds of leavesrecalls the first stage (glandes 965; nocturno tempore capti / circum se

foliis ac frondibus involventes 971-972; instrata cubilia fronda 987),though presumably the distaste for them brings us to the second stage.Certainly the violence over the newly discovered garment of skin(953-954; pellis pararunt 1011) marks the change to the second.

25Cf. 4.843-847. 1308-1349 is omitted herebecause its temporalsetting is uncertain,but see below. Perelli (above, n. 13) 164 thinks Lucretiussilent on violence among prim-itive men and that strife follows only when the state of nature s left behind by makingclothing, for which he cites 1418-1422. This is a good (andvery typical) example of themisinterpretationswhich result from consideringone or two passages in isolation, apartboth fromother relevanttexts (e.g., 1245-1246, 1283-1285) andan adequateview of theprehistory'swhole structure.26The clearing of land described in 1247-1248 is precisely the action which wouldtransform he huntersand gatherersof 925-1010 into the settlers of 1011-1104; cf. note30 below.

165


11/36

Daniel R. BlickmanThese passages will receive further discussion later. Here the impor-tant point is that the dramaticchange in 1241-1457 in the represen-tation of bloodshed in the first two stages surely proves that theabbreviatedcomments at 958-961 are a deliberate whitewash of theearliest violence. The quaintline (965) about acorns, arbuteberries,and choice pears as gifts to women is partof this implicit moralizing.It, too, is given a new, decidedlynegativeturn in 1416.27Discussion ofthe importantprimitivist ines about the absence of armies and seafar-ing (999-1006) must also be deferred,since they are partof a largertheme. As will be seen, the handlingof the motifs of war andseafaringby Lucretius s a key to the rhetoricalstructure f his prehistory.If Lucretius' nitialpresentation nhancesthe primitivismof the firststage of prehistory 925-1010), he can also be detectedreducingsomeof the favorabledescriptionwhich Epicurusgave to the second stage(1011-1104 in Lucretius). Lucretius offers, in fact, only a briefaccount of its moral and social characteristics 1011-1027), with theoriginsof languageand firereceiving far more attention(1028-1104).Epicuruswould not, of course,have depictedhis golden age in mythi-cal terms, but rather as relatively blessed in comparisonwith whatprecededor followed. It would be naive to assume thatsharingin theeternalnostalgiafor the simple village life is somehow too romanticorirrational or Epicurus.28Clearlythe second stage is such a life, even ifLucretius ends to make it appearsomewhat moreprimitiveby concen-trating on its initial development.29 Among the arts, language(1028-1090) and fire (1091-1104) receive all the attention,but others,especially agriculture,were available.30Farrington, n proposing the

27Althoughthe sufferingof primitiveman in the cold (1426-1427) is not a revision ofthe earliest mores (as is 1416-1422), K. Westphalen,Die Kulturentstehungslehre esLukrez (diss. Munich 1957) 126 is correct to observe that the milder account of theweather n 956-957 (cf. 818 f.) is partof Lucretius'primitivism n 925-1010.28 This tradition,which in modem termsrefersto the neolithicvillage, is alive andwellin the most sophisticatedhands:cf. Octavio Paz, Claude Levi-Strauss:An Introduction(London 1970) 68-76. In William Golding's The Inheritors there is an even moreremarkable vocation, touched by primitivism,of humanlife in a prehistoricconditionsimilarto the most primitiveone in Lucretius 5.925-1010). Rather t is Aristotle's beliefin the theoryof recurrent ataclysms (De philosophia, fr. 8 Ross) which is trulydistantfrom modem thought.29 See the discussion below.30 The Greeks and Romans always associated a settled life with agriculture.1361-1378 is concerned with the more advancedarboriculture, nd basic agriculture spresumedby the beginningof the thirdstage at 1105 (agros divisere atquededere 1110);

166


12/36

Lucretius, Epicurus, and Prehistorylife beforethe rise of cities as anEpicureangolden age, hadas his mostimportantpiece of evidence therepetitionof 2.29-33 at 5.1392-1396.31In these passages this idyllic ruralpicnic is, respectively,an Epicureanmoral ideal and an image of primitive life which corresponds to1011-1027.32 The identity between these two conceptions remains asolid foundation for Farrington's hesis, whatever the weakness of hisother argumentswhich, as R. Miller has shown, exaggerateEpicurus'supposed hostility to the state and its laws.33 But Miller's attempttodismiss the distinctlyattractive mpressionof 5.1024-1025 is, in turn,an overstatement.34 Moreover, there are texts which supportFarrington'sheory:

'O (aC EauTroi itpo;) 'T6gin Oappoiv a&ob eovt@V v aptaraouoxTrlcTagevo;,oxoS; ta iv 86varx 6o160pvxaaKaTeoKeudaT0o,ta &8eui 8ovatx oicK&XX6(pdqdye' "oa 8E grt5 eoito u8,varb;iv, avengeirKTOg;EyveTo Kair ipeiaaTo 6a (


13/36

Daniel R.Blickman"Ooo TiV vv?6vacgtV oXOV TO TO Oappeiv LdaXitoTa ?K T&V

6goppovaTcov tapaoKed aoG0a, oto io pio0oav gei' a& ri-kXov fii(toca TOPEpatoTaTov cUToTo)La EXOVTE;,Kal 7rxrp?aTdTrlvoilK?E6TTrTa7oa3ap6vT?e i)Kc86pavTo rbqnpbo6eeov TfivTroTeX?'TiloavToq; oOcaTaOTpoq(plvKD40)35He who best knew how to meet fear of externalfoes made intoone family all the creatureshe could;and those he could not, he atany rate did not treat as aliens; and where he found even thisimpossible, he avoided all intercourse, and, so far as wasexpedient,keptthem at a distance.Those who were best able to providethemselves withthe meansof security againsttheirneighbours,being thusin possessionof thesurest guarantee, passed the most agreeable life in each other'ssociety; and theirenjoymentof the fullest intimacywas such that,if one of them died before his time, the survivors did not lamenthis death as if it called for commiseration trans.R. D. Hicks).

In Kyriai Doxai 40, his final saying, Epicurusdescribes what cer-tainly appearsto be a golden age. MullerinterpretedKD 39 as refer-ring to prehistoryandKD 40 as referringto an Epicurean deal.36But40 shouldbe considered to have a historical reference as well.37 Con-secutiveKyriaiDoxai arerepeatedlypairedin a way thatdemandstheybe readtogether,andKD 3940 fit this pattern.38 he argument hattheaorists of 40 are not historical s vitiatedby the aoristsin 39 (wheretheimperfect v makes the historicalsense clear).39

35For theKyriaiDoxai I quotethe text of G. Arrighetti,Epicuro:Opere(Torino 1960,19732).36Gesellschaftstheorie above,n. 33) 124, 126-127.37Grilli (above, n. 18) 21 n. 3.38KD 3-4, 6-7, 10-11, 12-13, 19-20, 23-24, 27-28, 29-30, 31-33, 34-35, 36-38.39KD 6-7 presentan instructiveparallelto KD 39-40. Their adaptation nto Lucre-tius' historical narativeat 5.1108-1130 (see Grilli [above, n. 18] 23-24) proves that theideas of KD 39-40 could be expected to appear n Lucretius 5. It also gives some sup-port, thoughnot proof, to the view that the uncertain ext of KD 6 includes an imperfectreferring o the past. In otherwords, the KyriaiDoxai appear o mingle the historicalandexemplaryas Lucretiusdoes in 2.29-33 and 5.1392-1396, 5.1108-1135, 5.1273-1280,andelsewhere (on which techniquesee C. Segal, "War,Death,andSavageryin Lucretius:The Beasts of Battle in 5.1308-49," Ramus 15 [1986] 1-34).

168


14/36

Lucretius,Epicurus,and PrehistoryThe language of KD 40 is unexpectedly strong.40 These people hadno irrational fear of death.41 If the passage is to be set into a period ofprehistory, it must precede the final stage (at 1105 ff. in Lucretius),since by that time, as we shall see, the irrational fear of death is in evi-

dence; and it will not be easy to find a place for this happiness in5.1105-1160. The second stage of Lucretius (1011-1104) is the onlypossible setting for the gathering of the small groups described in KD39 and 40.42 Even without the clue furnished by these texts of Epicurus,several scholars have been struck by the attractive aspects of5.1011-1027 in Lucretius. Erout and Robin, in their note on5.1019-1023, observe the emphasis on the compassionate feelingsdeveloped for women and children and the role of this sentiment as amotive for the formation of the social compact.43 But they are wrong toassume that in this idea Lucretius is necessarily departing from Epi-curus.44 Rather we should combine Epicurus and Lucretius here. InLucretius affection for one's family leads to a grouping of several fam-ilies (1019-1023; KD 39), among whom the bonds of affection like-wise take hold (1024-1027; KD 40). Not surprisingly, the first book ofAristotle's Politics (1252a24-1252b27) proves to be interesting

40 Forthis reason too KD 40 reads ratheroddly on its own, since the basis of its extra-vagant claims is then even more obscure than when it is pairedwith 39. Contrastthesimilar but less extreme KD 14.

41 There appearsto be an interestingparadoxif Epicurus' language means that pre-cisely because of their close bonds death did not bring undue grief. The lack of suchintimacy in a political and urbansociety (1105 ff.) would then be a factor in producingafear of death. Cf. KD 27-28, J. M. Rist, "Epicuruson Friendship,"CP 75 (1980)121-129.42B. Frischer,The SculptedWord(Berkeley and Los Angeles 1982) 39-41, althoughtaking KD 39 and 40 as concerning the Epicureanschool, does link them to the pre-political stage of prehistory n Lucretius. Despite his citation of Lucr. 5.1105-1109 as

corresponding o KD 40, it is to thefoedera in 5.1025 thathe rightlycompares lrciTozLain KD 40.43Cf. G. Boas and A. O Lovejoy, Primitivism and Related Ideas in Antiquity(Bal-timore 1935) 239; K. Biichner,"Die Kulturgeschichtedes Lukrez,"WSBeiheft 8 (1977)49; Hermarchus n PorphyryDe abstinentia 1.7.1 on the natural eeling of kinshipamonghumans. On the importanceof affection within Epicureangroups and their concern (cf.KD 39) aboutoutsiders' attitudes owardthemselves, see now D. Clay, "TheCultsof Epi-curus,"CronacheErcolanesi 16 (1986) 11-28.44Unfortunately,V. Goldschmidt,"La theorie epicurienne du droit," in Science andSpeculation,ed. J. Barneset al. (Cambridge1982) 315, acceptstheiridea andproceedstomakeeven greaterassumptionsabout the departures f Lucretius romEpicurus.

169


15/36

Daniel R. Blickmanbackground. In Aristotle, the establishment of the household (oitia)and combination of several of these into a village (K(icLq) correspond tothe events in KD 39 and 40 and Lucr. 5.1011-1027. The kinship whichcharacterizes the village is mentioned by both Aristotle (6ouoydXaKcTa;,ta5d(;, e xai aiox&v7caT6a; cayy?vetav, 1252b16-27) and Epicurus(6d6uopvka,KD 39).45 The difference, of course, is that for Aristotle thepolis is the highest form of human community (1252b27-1253a), whilefor Epicurus the polis (5.1105 ff. in Lucretius, about which morebelow) is accompanied by significant problems.46 The evidence of KD40, then, suggests that Epicurus regarded the second stage as the bestcandidate for a golden age and in describing it displayed a strongerprimitivism than Lucretius does for this phase of prehistory, or indeedfor any other. Farrington observed about 5.1024-1027 that the goodbehavior is not depicted as without exception,47 and likewise KD 39and 40 include careful and realistic qualifications about the extent ofthis secure felicity. KD 39 mentions the limits of the size of the groupand its capacity to isolate and secure itself; KD 40 accords the greatesthappiness only to those who were best able to achieve this security.But unlike Lucretius, Epicurus ventures as well a thoroughly idealizedportrait of these groups' life together. It lacks nothing in security orfriendship.A fragment of Diogenes of Oenoanda published in 1974 by M. F.Smith describes a future golden age presumably based on the

45Plato and Aristotle, who are interested n political forms, do not differentiatecon-sistentlybetweena stage of individualfamilies and thatof their union in a village. PlatoLaws 680D7-E4 speaksof those who lived scattered KaTza iav oi'icrlv KaiKaTa yEvo;.The latterphraseindicates more than one household. However, Homer's descriptionofthe Cyclopes (0?gE TEo?AE? ?KC(XOSKI aiSov i16'd&X6oov), hichmightseem appropri-ate only to a single family, is quoted (690B-C) as suitable for the larger group (Kara?yvoS) as well. Likewise Aristotle Politics 1252b20-24 combines the idea of "kinglyrule"(paotxAeu0o)n theoiKta andKCO)LTrnd cites Homer on the Cyclopes as an example.Hence the apparent ailure of KD 39 to mention clearly the initial establishmentof anindividual oiKta is insignificant. A text of Philodemus, apparently following thelanguageof Epicurus,describesEpicurus'associates as KaraTTrv oliKav, in contrasttoT&vigo{ev (PHerc. 1232 fr. 8 col. I 8-10, cited from Clay [above, n. 43] 13). On theCyclopes' association with a golden age see the lucid analysis of R. Mondi, "TheHomericCyclopes:Folktale, Tradition,andTheme,"TAPA113 (1983) 17-38.46Cf. the firm remarksof Frischer above,n. 42) on theEpicurean ejectionof thepolisas Aristotleconceived it.47"We are not in the realm of myth"("Lucretius ndManilius" above,n. 11] 13).

170


16/36

Lucretius, Epicurus, and Prehistory

philosophyof Epicuruswhich, I would suggest, complementsthe evi-dence of KD 39-40.48

[o0 - - - - ]-Col. I oOigev,?itei iaVT?e; t86vavTat, 8uvaTOv 68avLTv avvono1..g. 0,T6e, db; X1nO&;Tov5 E0?v Pio; eiS;avOpn6ovg;lEapi7o?Etalt. 8tiKao-oCTVqnap oat lg (leoadvta Kai (ptXakXrliaS,Kai o)Oviloe?Tait t?etX10 i' vOlOv Xpeia Kai Tndv-TC cvoa 8t' axkiXovgacKe0C)opol6e0a.E?pi&T&v to6yeopy{ia; avav-Xaicov, tbxrO1oKaoe-

Col. II vov fi[ [ervyri; pyaT&v]-Kalyap a[p6ooevcLvTe;]Kai oCKa[oIev, icai Tpopd]-T(OVm?elX[1arlo6,Oa],5 KairioxaTao[s;:aparxpE]-VOg?VKai Ta[ECTnpnO[IjEV -- - - -?geva [ThTx&[?vot KapOp6[v10 Kai8taKov6t?iei; Tb]8EovT o6ve[ XC;qpl]-Xooo0pev otoa[i ta-Xa]yap yeopyi[wuaTa wvi](p6aot;p,?E[tIRijelV a p5eti

48Text and translationof Smith (above, n. 10); other restorations n A. Casanova,Iframmentidi Diogene d'Enoanda(Florence 1984) 276-279.

171


17/36

DanielR. BlickmanLine 15 [nCavco)]ovo j6voaTa OruvOinlvnoterao0t 1nc&poV gjPPX3d~TEWvr18e pXRTnzeoOaoTranslationCol. I [When we are living ...... ], since all have no powerand it is possible ... it ..., thentrulythe life of the gods will passto men. For all things will be full of justice and mutuallove, andtherewill come to be no need of fortificationsor laws and all the

things which we contrive on account of one another. And withregard o the necessariesderived fromagriculture,Col. Ii as we shall have no [farm-labourers- for indeed we allshall plough and dig and mind flocks and divertrivers and watch... ..... And such activitieswill interrupthe continuousstudyof philosophyfor needfulpurposes; or the farmingoperationswillprovideus with the thingswhich our naturewants.]Line 15 [Everyanimal]is not able [to make] a compact [not toharmor be harmed.]

Although the ideal society of Diogenes is an enlightened Epicureansociety of the future and that of Lucretius is in the past, this type ofutopianthinkingmoves easily between past and future, since its realinterest s in the natureof the ideal society, withprojection nto the pastserving as a blueprintfor the future. The evidence of Diogenes thusdeserves to be consideredfor its descriptionof the ideal social condi-tions for Epicureans,who enjoy righteousnesswithin, and hence needno laws, nor walls againstoutsiders-the latterfor reasons which arenot clear in Diogenes, unless perhapsthe utopiais world-wide?49ThisEpicureanfuture recalls Vergil's "Satumian"golden age in ancientItaly:neve ignorateLatinos / Saturnigentem haud vinclo nec legibusaequam, I sponte sua veterisque dei se more tenentem (Aen.7.202-204).50 Fortificationsand laws come in the thirdstage of Lucre-tius (5.1108-1109, cf. 232-233; 1136-1160). It is importantto note

49The apparentlyclose link between tiKalooSvnr and agriculturalwork in the frag-ment is an old one in Greek culture. Despite some exaggerations,see J.-P. Verant, Mythand Thoughtamong the Greeks (London 1983) 248-270 = Mythe et pensee chez lesGrecs (Paris 1965) 16-36.50"Latinusmeans that the way of life of the Saturniaregna, the Golden Age of primi-tive innocence, still has force in his kingdom"(Fordycead loc.); cf. Ovid Met. 1.89 ff.aurea prima sata est aetas quae vindice nullo I sponte sua sine lege fidem rectumquecolebat. / poena metusqueaherant,etc.

172


18/36

Lucretius,Epicurus,andPrehistorythat again an Epicurean text offers a far more idealized vision of agolden age than does Lucretius. The text, as restored, gives an almostJeffersonian picture of farming philosophers (Jefferson would have hadphilosophical farmers) and social equality, particularly if slavery is tobe abolished.51 Naturally friendship and security loom large in this Epi-curean golden age, as in KD 3940.52

II. THE EMERGENCE OF IRRATIONAL FEARS AND DESIRESThe interest of Epicurus in a golden age becomes clearer in light ofthe developments in the third stage of prehistory (described by Lucre-tius at 5.1105-1160). In this period cities, kings, and laws arise, that is,the characteristic institutions of the Greco-Roman world. According to

Manuwald, for Epicurus it is also the period in which the exercise ofreason begins to make major contributions. But there is another featureof this third stage which seems even more distinctly Epicurean: only inthis era do the irrational fears and other evils emerge which plaguehuman life and to the eradication of which Epicureanism is specificallydedicated.53 This Epicurean view reveals a reason why both Epicurusand Lucretius would postulate an earlier golden age.54 If irrational fears

51The absence of slavery was a radical idea even in ancient utopias:J. Vogt, AncientSlaveryand the Ideal of Man (Oxford 1974) 26-38; M. I. Finley, The Use and Abuse ofHistory (London 1975) 178-192. Slaves are not clearly mentioned in Plato's "city ofpigs" (Rep.369C-372E), but will exist in the moreluxurious, deal state: G. Vlastos, Pla-tonic Studies(Princeton 1973) 140-146 = CP 63 (1968) 291-295.52The concern in KD 39-40 to specify to what extent security could be achieved issuggestive for what lies behind the fragmentarybeginning of col. 1 in the fragmentofDiogenes, since here too there seems to be an attempt o set out the necessaryconditionsbefore depicting its felicity (oT6T.. ) in relatively unrestrained erms. If so, Lucretiusappearsto have reversedthe order of these topoi: 1011-1023 are the more idyllic lines;1024-1027 hedge in the positive statementof the general uprightness 1025) with a real-istic qualification 1024) and an anticlimacticutilitarianexplanationfor the extent of thisgoodness (1026-1027). The initial friendship (1019) and consequently any notion offindingin this stage inspiration orcontemporaryife are thussubtlyeclipsed.53For what follows I am indebted to D. Konstan,SomeAspects of Epicurean Psycho-logy (Leiden 1973) 35-58.54Epicurus s not, of course, to be thoughtof as simply advocatinga return o primitivelife in toto, since that would deprive us not only of some useful arts, the discovery ofwhich is hence a good, but indeed his own philosophy. It is impossible to thinkof Epi-curus as regrettingthe development of koytoiCt;. In 4.572-594 Lucretiusexplains theorigins of religious superstitionsamong simple shepherdsas arisingfrom theirperplexityat the phenomenonof echo, andM. Taylor, "ProgressandPrimitivismin Lucretius,"AJP

173


19/36

Daniel R. Blickmanhad not yet developed, at least into their full form, it would follow thata previous era was one of relative felicity.55The first bad element which enters human life in the third stage isambition and the struggles which it brings (1120-1142). These linesecho KD 6-7. In both Epicurus and Lucretius the goal of the ambitiousis the proper Epicurean ideal of a secure life (6 Pitog acpakXi; is thenatural good, TOTfig 9qo6aeow;yaeOv KD 7; placidam degere vitam1122). In both, however, the search for security through wealth andpower proves illusory.56 Moreover, Lucretius 5.1120-1142 suggestshow Epicurus' pre-political golden age as described in KD 40 differsfrom the following period. The absence of the fear of death isexpressly remarked in KD 40. In Lucretius the fear of death, which liesbehind the dread of poverty, is a principal cause of great and misguidedambitions for wealth and status:57

denique avarities et honorum caeca cupidoquae miseros homines cogunt transcendere finisiuris et interdum socios scelerum atque ministrosnoctes atque dies niti praestante laboread summas emergere opes, haec vulnera vitaenon minimam partem mortis formidine aluntur.turpis enim ferme contemptus et acris egestassemota ab dulci vita stabilique videturet quasi iam leti portas cunctarier ante. (3.59-67)58

As in 5.1120-1142, this idea of foolish ambition is conveyed throughthe image of the incessant, but vain, struggle to reach the heights. Theword summum is the leitmotif in the later passage (1123, 1125, 1127)68 (1947) 192-193 interprets his scene historically as an example of how "the muchextolled simple life of the shepherdand farmer,"which succeeded the first stage of925-1010, was yet inadequatewithout Epicurean philosophy. Cf. Buchheit (above,n. 31) 141-147.55Similarreasoning inspiresmore recent versions of primitivism. If modem industri-alizationand the breakdownof religious faith have resultedin a new and greateraliena-tion from our social, physical, and metaphysicalsurroundings, time andplace innocentof thesedevelopments s supposedlymoreattractive.56Pace the special pleadingof Miiller (Gesellschaftstheorie above, n. 33] 68-69) onbehalf of these ambitions. He fails to mention the explicit condemnation in Lucr.5.1117-1119.57Cf. below on 2.39-61, Farrington "TheMeaningof Persona"[above,n. 11]).58 Cf. 2.7-13.

174


20/36

Lucretius,Epicurus,and Prehistoryandis brought o a climax at 1141-1142:

res itaquead summamfaecem turbasque edibatimperiumsibi cum ac summatumquisque petebat.Thus the casting of the greatest into Tartarataetra (1126) recalls theproemto the third book with fine irony. The ambitionwhich is spurredby the fear of death actually results in the very thing that it fears.59Clearly,therefore,Epicurusin KD 40 is describingthe time before theappearanceof a fear of deathwhich does harmby nourishingthe irra-tional desirefor wealthand status.60

The second example of a fear only fully developed into its contem-porary ormin the thirdstage is that of punishment or breakingthe law(1151-1160). Miller, with reference to 1130-1150, argues fairly thatthe laws are not considered an evil in and of themselves.6l But thenegative nature of the resultingfear in Epicureanterms is obvious.62The passage begins: inde metus maculat poenarum praemia vitae(1151). The wrongdoercannoteasily lead a peaceful life (1154-1155,cf. 1122). Avoidance of the fear of punishmentwhich results fromdoing injustice was one of the major goals of Epicurus' philosophy(Lucr. 3.1011-1123; KD 5, 17, 34, 35; fr. 532 Us.; Gnom. Vat. 70).The importance or Epicureansof the initial appearanceof this fear inprehistorichuman ife is vividly confirmedby Hermarchus'attention oit (PorphyryAbst. 1.7.3-4, 8.2-5, cf. 9.4). Likewise, the new goldenage fragment of Diogenes of Oenoanda, which was unknown toMiller, indicates that the ideal Epicureancommunitycould dispensewith laws.63

59This interpretations supportedby the similar idea at 3.79-86, especially 79-82; cf.3.978-1023.60The earliest humanbeings and presumablyeven some animals fear injuryor death(cf. paventes 986), but only in the thirdstage does the fear of deathcontribute o some-thing aXoyoq. Konstan (above, n. 56) 41-42 invokes here the distinction made inDiogenes of Oenoanda(fr. 29, col. 2) between "clearlyperceived (xETpavCog&voS)"nd"obscure &aTp(voTxo;)"ears.61 "LukrezV.101 ff." (above, n. 33) 64-67.62Cf. Emout and Robin ad 1151-1160. Recognition of this fact does not demandacceptance of Konstan's argument([above, n. 56] 52-58) that the Epicureansdid notapproveof the social use of the fear of punishment.

63 A discrepancywith Lucretiusarises if the account of Hermarchus n PorphyryAbst.1.7-12 is interpetedas implying that the fear of punishmentwas presentfrom the begin-ning of the social compact, that is, in the second stage of prehistory(at 5.1011-1104 inLucretius),since Lucretiusclearlyrepresents his fearas a phenomenonof the thirdstage

175


21/36

Daniel R. BlickmanNext Lucretius explains the origins of irrational religious fears

(1161-1240). As with fear of punishment for breaking the laws, thereis reason to think that such fears might have appeared before the thirdand final stage of prehistory, and we noted at the outset that the chrono-logical references in this section are vague. On the other hand, it is atleast clear that Lucretius' rhetorical strategy is to present them as thethird evil which appears in a developed urban life. This effect isachieved by the placement of the section on religion (1161-1240),which associates its subject with the birth of ambitions (1120-1135)and fear of punishment (1151-1160).64 Moreover, one needs to distin-guish between the origins of religion, which probably belong amongthe earliest men,65 and the origins of misguided religious fears. Therhetoric of Lucretius is in harmony with the ideas of Epicurus if thelatter described these fears as having become fully noxious only in thethird stage of prehistory, even if their initial appearance was earlier.There is, in fact, some evidence for this view. One item is5.973-987, which has been held to show that Epicurus thought at leastsome later superstitions did not exist in the earliest times.66 The peopleof that era were too preoccupied with their struggle against wildanimals. Lucretius first mentions religious misconceptions at1183-1193.67 Could these belong to the second stage or only the

(1105-1160). Indeed,logic demands thatthere must have been some fear of sanctions,ifthey existed (deniedby Perelli [above,n. 13] 192), for violating thefoedera (1025) of theinitial social compact. Hence it would not be surprising f Hermarchus ad discussed theorigins of such fears in a prehistoric setting earlier than that of Lucr. 5.1151-1160, ortreated he second and thirdstages as one, at least in thatfor the purposesof his topic hehad no occasion to remark on the greatersocial and political complexity of the latter.There is a comment in Porphyry (1.10.4) about the advent of kt)oytioaytq whichManuwald (above, n. 1) 21-22 interprets as corresponding to the development ofkoytago6; n Ep. ad Hdt. 75-76. But in the Hermarchus ragmentas a whole I cannotidentify two distinctive stages, whether one draws a line at 1.10.4 or elsewhere, whichwould correspond o those in Lucretiusat 5.1011-1104 and 1105 ff. Cf. R. Philippson,"Die Rechtsphilosophie der Epikureer,"Archiv fir Philosophie 23 (1910) 313-319;M. Boyd, "Porphyry,De abstinentia 1.7-12," CQ 30 (1936) 188-191; Cole (above, n. 2)70-79; PorphyreDe L'AbstinenceLivre I, ed. J. Bouffartique,M. Patillon (Paris 1977)15-18.64 Above, n. 3.65Above, n. 4.66Above, n. 18.67 On these lines see Henrichs above, n. 4) 104.

176


22/36

Lucretius,Epicurus,and Prehistorythird?68An answer is perhaps to be sought in the criterion of the use ofreason. Insofar as these lines are interpreted as implying the exerciseof Xoytot6S;, there would be a basis for assigning these false beliefs tothe third stage of 1105 ff. But reason is not explicitly mentioned.Lucretius first explicitly mentions the problems of religion in themuch-discussed verses beginning at 5.1194.69 Here lies the rhetoricalweight of the passage, and here the explanation of religious fearsthrough the idea that reason tries and fails to explain the workings ofnature seems to point clearly to the final stage of prehistory, which,according to Ep. ad Hdt. 75-76, is essentially defined for Epicurus bythe use of reason:70 temptat enim dubiam mentem rationis egestas,ecquaenam fuerit mundi genitalis origo . . . (1211-1212).71

Despite the uncertainties, some conclusions emerge. Lucretiusdepicts the third stage of prehistory as the period in which our presentafflictions reached their mature form, and the evidence indicates that inthis he is following Epicurus. Moreover, this view of the third stageconfirms our hypothesis about an earlier golden age, since in thepreceding era of the simple village life these irrational fears had not yetstained human existence.On another level, if the historicism in Lucretius derives from Epi-curus, the philosophical point that deserves emphasis is how histori-cally minded Epicurus was in explaining the origins of the problemswhich it was the central goal of his philosophy to solve. KD 10 speaksof the fears in the mind (Tie; 8tavoria;) of ,ueLctopa, 0ctvacoS, anddX,yrioveq. This set of fears is echoed in Diog. Oen. fr. 28, col. 6-7:the (p6pot which vex the WuXi are of the 0?oi, 0cvaCoSC, and&XyriAveg. (Fears of giectcopa and the 0eoi overlap.) These threefears correspond well to those reflected in Lucretius' account of prehis-tory: the origins of fear of the gods are explained in 1161-1240, thebeginnings of the misguided ambitions arising from the fear of death in

68 1183-1193 should be considered in relation to 1436-1439, and Schrijvers (inLucrece [above,n. 15]) 32 suggests thatthe latterpassage is connected with the originsofagriculture cf. 1.174-183), which would putthem in the second stage.69 Barwick(above, n. 1) 203-204.70 See Manuwald(above, n. 1) 46; Furley's lucid remarks above, n. 15) 17-22; Grilli(above, n. 18) 24-27; Ep. ad Hdt. 79.71Perhaps Epicurussaw as one of the marks of the transition rom the second to thethird social stages (family/village to political/urban) he gradual intensification of theexercise of koyaito6;;see Konstan(above, n. 53) 44-50, Taylor(above, n. 54).

177


23/36

Daniel R. Blickman1120-1135 (with 3.59-67; cf. KD 40), and the origins of the fear ofpain in 1151-1160.72 The links between the writing of prehistory andphilosophy here are significantly closer than in Plato or Aristotle. Forthis approach Epicurus is likely to be indebted to a fifth-century thinkersuch as Protagoras, Democritus, or Prodicus.73Lucretius may follow established Epicurean ideas in his descriptionof the birth of these irrational fears and their effects in the third stage,but why has he departed from Epicurus by enhancing the primitivismof the first stage (925-1010) and reducing that of the second one(1011-1104)? The answer, it was suggested, is that he does so for rhe-torical purposes which must be understood as encompassing 925-1457as a unity. We can now develop the claim that the poet reverses theprimitivist emphasis of Epicurus about the first two stages of humanevolution in order to increase the impression that history, at least froma moral perspective, has been continuously downhill.

III. WAR AND SEAFARING

The key to understanding the relationship between 925-1240 and1241-1457 in this regard lies in the motifs of war and seafaring. Thepassages from 1241-1457 cited above which look back to the violenceof earlier times (925-1104) and also 999-1006 are part of this moraltheme, which associates the motifs of war and seafaring or shipwreck

72The correspondenceis most extensive if the "fear of pains" in KD 10 and theDiogenes fragment(28) is fear of the pain of punishment. The alternative,I suppose,would be to interpret t as fear of bodily wants which are not satisfied. Fear of bodilypains would issue in excessive desire (cf. KD 14). But perhaps his interpretationmakesthe texts repeatthemselves, for afterlisting the threefears, they both speak"in addition"of excessive desires. It is also possible that both types of painare meant. In any case, thecorrelationbetween these canonical lists of fears in KD 10 and Diogenes and thoseexplainedin Lucretius'prehistory s noteworthy.73Cf. E. A. Havelock, The Liberal Temper in Greek Politics (New Haven 1967)Chapter4 for the subversion n Plato and Aristotle of the historicalapproach;Chapters6and 7 on Democritus and Protagorasare more speculative,but the evidence about themand other fifth-century hinkers makes it clear that a historical approachwas current;W. K. C. Guthrie,In the Beginning (above, n. 30) 99-101; Henrichs(above, n. 4); Rose(above, n. 2). On the other hand, K. Reinhardt,Posidonios (Munich 1921) 399 wouldstill find Epicurusa less empiricalhistorianthanPosidonius, since the latter used ethno-graphyfor historicalreconstruction,while Epicurus s moreof a rationalistwhose methodis basedin the Democriteanandsophistictraditionof arguing n accordancewithEiKo;.

178


24/36

Lucretius,Epicurus,and Prehistorywith the misery that results from an ignoranceof the properaims oflife. Introducedin Book 1, these ideas are developed systematicallyuntil they reach their climax in the latter half of the prehistory. Athorough study of this theme is beyond the scope of this paper,but asurvey of its continuitythroughthe prooemiaof the earlier books andthe prehistorywill help to show that in Book 5 Lucretiusis indeed incontrolof his materialand that 1241-1457, far from being a confusedandbadlyfinishedcomposition,is skilfullyconstructed.The motifs of warandseafaringcome to the fore in the latterhalf ofthe prehistory,but are introducedearly in the poem. The firstglimpseof them is provided by the descriptionof the sacrifice of Iphigeneia(1.84-101). In this episode, however, religionand the slaughterof thegirl are the targets. The launchingof the fleet provides the ominoussetting, but is not itself impugned. It is the prooemiumof the secondbook which links war andshipwreckto the ignoranceof the proper im-its of pleasure and desire. Indeed, this whole prooemium stronglyforeshadowsthe otherimages and themesof the prehistoryas well.74Itbegins with the pleasurethatresults from being free from the dangersof shipwreckand war (2.1-6). But the greatest pleasureis to be firmlyensconced on the heights by the teachingof the wise, whence one canlook down on the ignorantwho striveto rise to the heightof power andgain possession of the world (7-13). The folly of the ambitiouscon-sists in not knowing that naturedemands a life of simple pleasure,notluxury(14-39).Lucretius thenposes the possibility that the objects of ambition,anarmyand fleet,banishreligiousfears andanxietyover death(39-61).75The passage looks both backwardandforward. The insistence on reli-gious fears amidst armies and kings recalls Agamemnonat Aulis. Buttherehas been added to the fear of the gods that of death(44-46). Indenying that these disappear among political and military leaders(47-53), Lucretius would seem to be refuting an implied argumentwhich supported he pursuitof greatcommands. But no one, of course,is actually making such an argument. Instead, in 39-61 Lucretiusisrestatingthe idea of 7-38 thatthese pursuitsresultfrom ignorance. In

74Cf. the similarity of 2.7-13 to 5.1120-1142 and 2.29-33 to 5.1392-1396. P. DeLacy, "DistantViews: The Imageryof Lucretius2," CJ 60 (1964) 50-53 traces the mili-taryimagesof the prooemium hrough he rest of Book 2.75Line 43a, cited by Nonius, gives us a most suitablereference o a fleet.

179


25/36

Daniel R. Blickmanthis case, however, he concentrates not on the ignorance of the properaims of life (14-19), but on the lack of understanding of the workingsof nature (54-61). The implication of 39-61 is that ignorance of natureproduces the fears of the gods and death (44-46) and that the latter are,in fact, the causes of great ambitions. The last point, as we have seen,is then made explicit in the next prooemium (3.3 ff., especially 59-67).The development of these ideas and motifs through the first threeprooemia finds extensive echoes in the prehistory. So far we havenoticed them mainly in the case of 3.59-67 and 5.1120-1142. But themotifs of war and seafaring enter the prehistory dramatically near theend of the section on primitive man (999-1006; cf. 2.551-559). Thesea and seafaring are here described in terms appropriate to a courtesanenticing one beyond the proper limits of pleasure, and these lines arepart of Lucretius' enhancement of the primitivism of 925-1010. Thesubsidiary and less explicit association of war and sailing with religionappears in 1218-1240. Not only are religious fears not absent frommilitary leaders (2.39-61), but now, in a brilliant passage, anendangered commander serves as the example of how they arise in theface of storms. Indeed, there is an almost savage irony about1218-1240, as if the generals are finally receiving their just deserts.Their ambitions, we have been told repeatedly, are wrong and due toignorance and fear. Now these ambitions unravel, and there is a fulland humiliating revelation of ignorance and fear.76 This passage marksa climax in the development of these motifs, but only a preliminaryone.

In the finale of Book 5 (1241-1457) they become even more impor-tant, and an understanding of them can resolve some of the puzzles inthis aetiological section. The selection and arrangement of material in

76 One thinksagain of Agamemnonand the similar reversalof 5.1120-1142. Thus, ifthe fate of war-fleets n Lucretius s consideredas a whole, one discovers (not for the firsttime) thata Greekphilosophicalsystem expressesa truthof Greekmyth, in this case, thedivine retributionon the Greek fleets which sailed to Troy, in a new form. The connec-tion of 5.1218-1240 to the theme of war-fleetsand the ignoranceof their commanderselsewhere in the poem is ignored by G. Miiller (above, n. 4) 277-295, who thinks5.1218-1240 refers to backsliding from Epicureanphilosophy, and by Gillis (above,n. 19) 355-356, who sees mainly sympathyfor the admiral. Miiller 288 says that theadmiral'sprayer(1229) is absurdfor an Epicurean,but surely being an admiralat all isalreadyso in De RerumNatura. Miiller's idea that the admiralcould be identifiedwithMemmiusmust also be rejected.

180


26/36

Lucretius,Epicurus,andPrehistorythese two hundred ines is bizarre when consideredfrom the perspec-tive of the historian. Despite a number of detailed discussions, thecompositionhas not been satisfactorilyexplained. A fullerrecognitionis needed of how the moral interests of Lucretius here push aside theexposition of scientific doctrines about the past. My suggestedapproach s to consider all the passages in this section that involve war,seafaring, and the idea of changing tastes. That is, each section of1241-1457 will be readin terms of the moralsignificanceimparted oit by these motifs, takinginto accountother relevantfeatures as well.In the beginning of the section, at 1241-1280, Lucretius re-introduces,as it were, his leadingmotifs (cf. below on 1245-1246 and1275-1280) and then carefully manipulates them in an alternatingrhythm. To a largeextent, therefore,the compositionof 1241-1457 isdetermined by the need to build to an initial negative climax(1305-1307), and then to work back toward a positive one(1379-1411), all for the purposeof preparingLucretius'dramaticcon-clusion (1412-1435). Our first task, then, is to follow the poem as itleads us through an aetiology of the arts which at the same timedescribesalternating ortunesof war andpeaceful felicity. At the end,the final verses of Book 5 give us the opportunity o contemplatetheprehistory as a whole and to consider how the poet's moral andscientificconcerns have fashioned hisnarrative.The opening discussion of metallurgyfalls into two halves.77Thefirst deals with the origins of the art and the earliest uses of bronze,gold, and silver (1241-1280), while the second is mainly concernedwith how iron replacedbronze (1281-1307). The difference betweenthe two parts,however, lies not only in content,but involves a contrastin moralperspectiveas well, since the firsthalf is much less negativethan the second. Warfare in primeval times is introduced early(1245-1246) and, as we saw, is to be developed further(1283-1285,1416-1422). But the poet concentrateson moldingthe firstpartto leadto its moralconclusion on change of tastes (1275-1280). The firsttela(1266) that these men made were usedto cut down forests,hew timber,plane beams smooth, to bore, punch,and drill holes. Thereis no men-tion of war. These simple carpenters ried to use silver and gold too,but scorned their softness, obviously indifferent to any other

77On metallurgy n the Greco-Roman raditionaboutprehistory,see Cole (above, n. 2)Index s.v. "metallurgy."

181


27/36

DanielR. Blickmanexploitationof them. So copperwas then of more value, thoughnowthe reverse is true. Here the idea of the change of tastes is expresslyintroduced 1275-1280):

nunc iacetaes, aurum n summumsuccessit honorem.sic volvendaaetas commutat emporarerum:quodfuit in pretio,fit nullo deniquehonore;porroaliudsucceditet e contemptibusexitinquedies magis appetitur loretquerepertumlaudibuset miro est mortalis nter honore.The truth,by contrast, s constant,andthe descriptionat 1108-1142 ofthe instability of irrational ambitions, based on mere opinion(1133-1135), is given a slight reprisehere: terriblestrugglesfor wealthand position followed this discovery of gold (posterius res inventastaurumque repertum ... 1113-1142).78 Despite these echoes, it isnecessary to emphasizethe restraintof 1275-1280. The parallelwith1245-1246 is exact. Just as these two lines introduce hetopic of prim-itive warfare,so 1275-1280 lay the foundationfor the latertreatmentof the topic of changingtastes in 1412-1435, where we shall see thetwo finallyinterwoven.In the meantime,Lucretiusreverts to his "proper" ubjectof metal-lurgy in order to explain how the natureof iron (ferri natura) wasdiscovered(1281-1282). But the discussionis immediatelytaken over(1283 ff.) by a descriptionof the advancein weaponry. When we getto 1289, the newly foundbronzeis now mainly used for mixing up thewaves of war (note the sea imagery,belli fluctus 1289-1290), sowingwounds, and seizing flocks and fields, not chopping wood. Thisdevelopmentbuildsto a crescendoat 1305-1307:

Sic alid ex alio peperitdiscordiatristis,horribilehumanisquodgentibusesset in armis,inquedies belli terroribus ddiditaugmen.78With the shift from the past tenses of 1273-1274 (namfuit in pretio magis aes

aurumque acebat ... ) to the presentand perfect tenses of 1275 (nunc iacet aes, suc-cedit)Lucretiusdeploys the sametechniqueas in 1108-1142 (wherevolueruntandfecereconnect past and present). The two texts also sharevocabulary(ad summum uccederehonorem1123; in summum uccessit honorem 1275; cf. honor, 1114, 1139; 1277, 1280)and the vivid imageof rise andfall (cf. iaceo, 1136; 1273, 1275).

182


28/36

Lucretius,Epicurus,andPrehistoryThe firstthreedactylsof 1305 help to summarizeandconvey the rapidadvancejust narrated. 1305-1307 is one of the passagesconveying thebasic scientificpointaboutgradualness,and the alid ex alio is repeatedin 1456 (namque alid ex alio clarescere corde videbant), the "scientificconclusion," a repetition which shows how the moral and scientificconcernsare merged.79Progressseems to be of that which is horriblehumanis gentibus in armis.The next section (1308-1349) is the most notoriouspassage in thewhole poem. Forthe presentargument, he essentialpointis thateither1305-1307 (if 1308-1347 are excised) or 1308-1349 itself forms theinitial climax of the theme of war; the latter interpretationhas nowbeen impressivelyarguedby Segal.80Afterwards,Lucretiusshifts awayin a masterly fashion to arrive at some of his most charmingscenes(1361-1411).81How does he do it?From 1350 Lucretius writes in increasingly attractive tones. Hecontinues to supplysome links in contentbetweentopics to smooth thecourse of his discussion. Thus the invention of weaving is linked to thediscovery of iron (1351). But in terms of its moral significance1350-1360 at last deals with peace, honest work, and offers a hint ofwholesome domesticity. The mention of farming(1357) points to thesubject of arboriculture1361-1378). The plantingof trees is hardlythe fundamental echnology which the growing of crops is, but Lucre-tius is less interestedhere in reconstructionof the past than in fashion-ing his moralcommentaryon the historyof humanculture. Thus, thehardagriculturalabor of 1359-1360 is now transformed nto a gentle,nurturingprocess (1365-1369), and then, the groundprepared,so tospeak,the poet can develop his unsurpasseddescriptionof the country-side (1370-1378).82 The attractiveness of the charming picture so

79The phrase is used in these two passages for the only times after Book 3. Cf.Fredouille (above, n. 13) 19, but his explanation of the link between paragraphs n1241-1457 is vague.80 Segal (above, n. 39). His idea that the advancein weaponry(up to 1307) leads to areversal in 1308-1349, since the mauling by beasts constitutes a reversion to primevalconditions (990-998), fits other such ironies, as at 1108 ff., and in general complementsthe presentargument.81One effect of 1341-1349, with its unexpected break in the narrativeto discusswhether such things ever really took place, is to disengage us from the wild scenes ofbattlein preparationorpeacefulones.82Above, n. 30.

183


29/36

Daniel R. Blickmanvividly painted in these verses is at the opposite extreme from thescenes of war and violence at 1283ff., and we have traced the gradualsteps by which Lucretiusmoves us from one to the other. Thereis noexplicit moral commentaryin 1361-1378, but that comes in the nextsection on music (1379-1411) which forms the climax of this shiftfrom the negative to the positive. If there is a link in contentbetweenarboriculturend music, it would be the fact that each refersto a ruralsetting. A more accurate accountof the transition,however, would bethat it is the idyllic tone of 1370-1378 that carriesus effortlessly overto the topic of music. That is the reason for 1370-1378 appearingwhere it does, andonly an overly positivist readingof the poetrycouldcomplain of this construction. By this point, the experience of thecountryside makes us fully ready for singing, playing music(1379-1391), andenjoyinga ruralpicnic (1392-1396).ButLucretiusnow shifts the tone once again,this time morerapidly.Towardthe end of the section on music, the comment(1409-1411) thatwatchmennow gain no more pleasurefrom music than did the wood-land race of earthbornmen bringson Lucretius' terribleindictmentofhumanhistory,in which the change of tastes, the ignoranceof the truelimits of pleasure,and navigationand war (see 1434-1435) unite in apowerfulclimax (1412-1435).83In his valuable discussion of the end of the book, Furley hasemphasized that 1379-1435 are most appropriatelyconcerned withassessing humanity'sachievementof "the goal of all moral endeavoraccordingto Epicurean philosophy: pleasure."84Furley contraststhismoralfinale with 1448-1457 which he findsto be "a totallynon-moralconclusion"(his italics), an overstatementwhich should be correctedby considering the moral implications of 1440-1457.85 Overtly1440-1447 makes the point that this prehistory must be inferredthrough he exercise of ratio. The idea is an old one, as we know fromthe firstchapterof Thucydides. Diodorusinserts it between the end ofhis prehistoryand the beginningof his accountof Egypt(1.8.10-1.9.4).As in Lucretius,the problemin Diodorusis the lack of writtenrecords

83 I follow MunroandMerrill n takingin altum(1434) as meaning"into the deep sea"against Bailey, whose attemptto limit the referencehere to war, not navigation, ignorestheir repeatedassociation and the sea imageryof 1435, where his own note cites 1289belli miscebantfluctus.84(Above, n. 15) 22-27; quotation s from 24.85(Above, n. 15) 23.

184


30/36

Lucretius,Epicurus,and Prehistoryfor the earliest polities. Thus these verses have a good scientific pur-pose. Nevertheless, the erection of citadels and the divison of landremind us that struggles for power soon followed (1440-1444,1108-1142), and the seafaring and allied armies carry strongly negativeassociations (1442-1443). The manuscript reading propter odores in1442, understood as a reference to the popular trade in perfumes andthus to unnecessary luxuries and, by association, to erotic life, makesgood sense in terms of these motifs. Lucretius has already mentionedthe implied erotic allurements of the sea (in 999-1006, where they areagain linked to armies; cf. 2.551-559), and the reference to seafaringshould be seen as an example of the topos in Latin poetry that "theinvention of ships marks the beginning of moral decay."86 Indeed, it ishard to avoid the impression that there is a critical glance at Homer(1444-1445), who now appears to have celebrated the wrong achieve-ments.87 He bore a heavy responsibility for the establishment of the resgestae (1444) of Agamemnon and the Greeks in pursuit of Helen as acultural ideal.88

The final verses (1448-1457) contain similar ambiguities. There isa mixture of good and bad arts listed at the outset, though navigia andarma are still prominent:

Navigia atque agri culturas moenia legesarma vias vestis et cetera de genere horum,86Mondi (above, n. 45) 27 n. 36 citing Horace Carm. 1.3.17 ff., Ovid Met. 1.94-96,Am. 3.8.43-44, Tibullus 1.3.35-40, Vergil Ecl. 4.37-39; cf. Hesiod WD 236-237. Writ-

ing of the Augustan age, J. Griffin,"Augustan Poetry and the Life of Luxury,"JRS 66(1976) 93 observes, "In the poets perfumes altogether loom much larger than therestrained aste of our own society would lead us to expect; in this they exactly reflecttheir own society." On fragrancesanderos, M. Detienne, The Gardensof Adonis (Sussex1977). Retainingpropter odores, we could read mare velivolum,cf. V. Aen. 1.224 withAustin ad loc.). Otherwise M. F. Smith's propterea quod is tempting ("Lucretius,dererumnatura,v.1440-7," Hermathena98 [1984] 45-52).87Costa (above, n. 6) 153 (ad 1446-1447): "From 326-7 above it is clear thatL. regardedHomer and the Thebaisas the earliestsurvivingpoetic records."88The complaint againstHomer, then, is moral,not factual,pace G. Miiller(in Lucrece[above, n. 15] 215; cf. Manuwald above,n. 1) 13 n. 41. Lucretius, ike Thucydides(1.9),seems content to follow the tradition hatHelen was the reason for the war. At least soone could interpret1442-1443, where Lucretius s again merging smoothly the past andpresent. The use of the Roman military terms auxilia ac socios points the moral forLucretius'contemporaries.

185


31/36

DanielR. Blickmanpraemia,deliciasquoquevitae funditusomnis,carminapicturas,et daedalasignapolire ... (1448-1451)

But the artsof 1450-1451 have not appeared n the prehistory. Somebackground s requiredin order to evaluate them. Barwick observesthat the text of Lucretius,with its division of the politicalandtechnicalarts(1448-1449) from those which make life pleasurable 1450-1451),reflects a traditional distinction between necessary and unnecessaryarts.89Democritus,for instance,said that music was a relativelyrecent(veo-repav) invention and did not answer to a need (tll aoroKcpivattavayKatov DK 68 B144). Of course given the arguably Epicureanconceptionof a golden age in a small farmingcommunitywhich willsupplyall needs (Diog. Oen. NF 21 Smith,col. 2, lines 12-14), it is notsurprising o find that some of the arts traditionally houghtnecessaryare not so regardedby Epicureans.90The independenceof Lucretiusfrom this traditioncan be seen in the fact that he takes one traditionallyunnecessaryart, music, and,in an effective twist on the implicationthatsuch an art is a luxury,turns t to his primitivistpurposes,while severalothers,the plastic arts of 1450-1451, are given quitedifferent associa-tions. They echo the luxuryof the prooemiumto Book 2 (20-28), andthe explicit and repeatedrecollections of the latter in the prehistorymake the connectioncertain. The scene in 2.20-28 is contrastedwiththe ruralpicnic of 2.29-33, repeated,of course, at 5.1392-1396, andthe strongwordsof 5.1418-1429 on the uselessness of luxuriouscloth-ing renew the lesson of 2.34-36. So the daedala signa polita andotherdecorationsof 5.1450-1451 recall the impressive descriptionof theaurea simulacrain 2.24-26, includinga hintof the decadencewhich isthe whole pointof the earlierpassage.91Finally,the last line, artibus adsummumdonec venere cacumen, is remarkable. Giussani, observingthat artes refers to the form of inquiryas well as the product,takesartibus as ablative, "by the arts." Bailey thinks this leaves cacumenawkwardlyalone and interprets t as a "Lucretian"dative in place ofthe unmetricalartium,"thehighest pinnacleof the arts." In eithercase,

89Barwick(above,n. 1) 208-209.90Thus the moenia and leges of 1448 are not needed in the golden age fragmentofDiogenes (col. 1, lines 9-12).91The significanceof statues is also establishedby 3.78, cf. scholion on KD 29. Theonly other use of pictura besides 1451 is 2.35; cf. delicias quoquemultas 2.22 and deli-cias quoqueomnis5.1450.

186


32/36

Lucretius,Epicurus,and Prehistorythoughmore so on Giussani's interpretation,he line containsa delicateambiguity. On the one hand,Lucretiusfosters the impressionthat he isdescribingthe attainmentaftera long and slow advanceof high civili-zation (Athens follows in Book 6.1 f.). But again it is as if a shadowflickers across the page as the image of rising to the heights in thisscientific conclusion recalls not so much the distant prooemium ofBook 2 (7-13) but the ugly strugglesof 5.1120-1142.92In 1241-1457 as a whole, then, the deep and systematicinterweav-ing of the primarymoral and scientific ideas is clear. Its compositionand content, while thoroughly chaotic from the perspective of ascientific aetiology of the arts, are far more satisfactorywhen read intermsof its moral concerns. The poet enhancesthe primitivismof thefirststage of humanlife (925-1010) in orderto create the impressionofa deteriorationin our moral situation from this initial condition, inwhich, whateverits problems,thousandswere not killed in war or atsea (999-1006; cf. 1007-1010), to our current state, in which thisdisaster is well known (1226-1240) and caused by our ignorantandexcessive desires, moreculpablethanany known to the earliesthumanbeings (1416-1435). The use of the motifs of war and seafaring in999-1006 for primitivistpurposes strengthensthe likelihood that thereversal of Epicurusin the first two stages (in 925-1104) is linked tothe deploymentof the same motifs in 1241-1457. Hence there can belittle doubt thatin 1241-1457 Lucretius is responsiblefor the invasionof the scientificaetiologyof the artsby these morally significantmotifs.Some final detailsreveal how the whole structurebeginningwith theenhancedprimitivismof 925-1010 is a unity. At 1379-1411, Lucretiusattributesthe earliest enjoyment of music to the "woodland race ofearthborn men" (silvestre genus terrigenarum 1411; Bailey's transla-tion). As noted earlier, silvestre recalls 925-1010, as does terri-genarum. But of course this first stage is too primitivefor the scenedescribed in 1379-1404.93 This ruralpicnic properly belongs to the

92 believe that Lucretius has insisted upon this imagery in 1120-1142 (cf.1275-1280) partly in order to achieve this effect at 1457. On the image of the heights,Fredouille (above, n. 13) 19-20 cites earlierviews; cf. also D. Clay, Lucretiusand Epi-curus (Ithaca 1983) 258. For a more pessimistic reading of the final verses, seeP. Giuffrida, "II finale (vv. 1440-1457) del V libro di Lucrezio," in Epicurea inMemoriamHectorisBignone, Genova 1959 (Publicazionidell' Istituto di Filologia Clas-sica, Facoltd di Lettere,Universitddi Genova2) 129-165.93Manuwald(above, n. 1) 32 n. 129; Cole (above, n. 2) 43; Costa (above, n. 6) ad1379-1435.

187


33/36

Daniel R. Blickmansecond stage of 1011-1027 (and would be fully at home in the settingof KD 40). Lucretius effects the sleight of hand of implying that itbelongs to the earliest period both by the primitivism of 925-1010,where 937-952 describes nearly the same rural picnic, and by dwellingon the relatively primitive aspects of the second stage.94 This artfuldesign allows him to recall implicitly in 1379-1411 the relativesuperiority of the earlier stages of human existence, in preparation forthe explicit statement of the same point in 1425-1429. The other sideof the proposition, the idea that people have not changed, rather thattastes change and people compete to satisfy them, is in the end thedominant notion (1412-1424, 1430-1435). But the primitivism ofLucretius, which is displayed so effectively one last time in 1379-1411and 1425-1429, helps him to express concisely and powerfully theincreasingly irrational sweep of history in verses (1430-1435) that inour own age become ever more prophetic and terrifying.95

IV. EPICURUSAND HISTORYOne reason that Lucretius fashions his account of prehistory in thismanner is his desire to glorify the position of Epicurus in the history ofcivilization. The subtlety with which the prooemia of Books 5 and 6achieve this effect has not been fully appreciated. Both 5.1-54 and6.1-42 are concerned with the historic significance of Epicurus' philo-

sophy. The first of these passages prepares the ground for the prehis-tory, the second builds upon it. At the beginning of Book 5, in a neatand unexpected turning of the tables on euhemerist views, Lucretiussays that Epicurus should be considered a god (deus illefuit 8) becausehe who found that principle of life which is now called sapientia hasconferred greater benefits than Ceres or Liber, whose gifts it is evenpossible to live without (6-17).96 Nor do Hercules' beneficia outweighthose of Epicurus (22-2). But it was not possible to live well "till our

94The blending of the first two stages at 1245-1249, discussed above, may bemotivated n part o prepare or the sametechniqueat 1379-1404.95Hence,pace Costa(above, n. 6), 1379-1435 is tightlyconceived.96Frischer above,n. 42) 209-231, 246-261 arguesthat the portraitof Epicurusshowshim as culture-heroand god; see also Smith (above, n. 10) 13-14 on Epicurus as anoracle.

188


34/36

Lucretius,Epicurus,and Prehistorybreastswere swept clean" (18).97Lucretius has mentionedbefore thatin expoundingthe truthEpicuruswas primus (1.67, 71; 3.2), but onlynow is this accomplishmentcomparedto the gifts of others,thus open-ing up a truly historical perspective: confer enim divina aliorumantiqua reperta (5.13). Yet the other benefactors are still those oflegend, as befits this prooemium'srhetoricalapotheosis. The focus ofthe passage is the greatnessof Epicurus' gifts, while theirchronologi-cal positionremains mplicit.But in the prooemiumto Book 6 after the accountof civilization'srise, the historical position of Epicuruscomes into focus, althoughthecontent is otherwisebasically the same. PrimaeAthenaegave to menthe fruits that bear corn, fashioned life afresh, and enacted laws(6.1-3). Agricultureand laws, of course, are the gifts of Ceres (cf.5.14-15) or Demeter, and the reference is to the Eleusinian myth.Nevertheless, the realm of legend has in a sense been left behind, foralthough Lucretius has explained the developmentof agricultureandlaws without implying that Athens was responsiblefor them, the con-ception of Athens as the bringerof civilization would evoke for hisreadersher fifth- andfourth-century chievements. Thatis, both 5.1 ff.and 6.1 ff. compare Epicurusto otherdivine or heroic benefactors,butin the second case Lucretius' use of legend places Epicurus in aspecific (and glamorous)historicalcontext. By referringto Demeter,Lucretiuscan allude to the glory of Athenswithoutmentioningthe pol-itical or cultural achievementson which it was based. The clevernessof the conceit lies not least in its historicalaccuracyabout the place andtime of Epicurus. In this manner,the achievement of his discoveries(the divina reperta,6.7, 5.13) is now placed explicitly in its historicalposition,the peakof civilization,anddescribedin relation to the condi-tion of life as he had found it (6.9-16, which summarizethe centralscientific and moral theses of the prehistory). Thus the moral commen-taryin 5.925-1457, which conveys the sense of ever morecomplicateddiscoveries withoutany improvement n human wisdom in using them,is turned n Book 6 to the historicalglory of Epicurus,

cuius et extinctipropterdivinarepertadivulgatavetus iam adcaelumgloriafertur. (6.7-8)97 Translationof puro pectore by R. E. Latham in the Penguin edition; cf. Costa(above, n. 6) ad loc.

189


35/36

Daniel R. BlickmanIs it possible that Epicurushimself saw his historical position asLucretius presents it? The significant point is not in the disputedquestion of Epicurus'attitudetowardhis predecessorsin philosophy,especially since Sedley has exoneratedhim from the excesses of thetraditionalaccusations of dishonesty and ingratitudetoward them.98But Epicuruscertainlydid consider himself to have establishedcertainfundamentalprinciplesabout naturewhich would not be refuted andwhich providedthe basis for leadingthe good life.99As we have seen,he systematicallywrote his own problems ntohistoryinsofar as he wasparticularly oncerned to analyzethe originsof our irrational ears anddesires. This approach o the pastdefinitelyimpliesthat his philosophyshouldbe considereda piece of good news, andwe may retain the pos-sibility that he wrote a discussion of his solutions into the same his-tory.'1 Just as significantly,in forming Epicureancommunities whichwere alternatives o traditional ociety Epicurusand his followersactedas if he were the saviorin historywhich Lucretiuspresentshim as, andcurrentwork on Epicureansocial practice is most suggestive here.101His famous last words, as reportedby Hermarchus,were an injunction

to remember his teachings (D.L. 10.16).102This conviction about thevalue of his own teachingsand the natureof the communities whichheorganizedon the basis of his principlesmust make us cautious aboutgiving Lucretiusall the creditfor highlightingthe historicalpositionof98"Epicurus and his Professional Rivals," in Etudes sur 1' Epicurisme antique,J. Bollack, A. Laks eds. (Cahiersde Philologie 1) 121-159.99See the challenging, if possibly overdrawn,essay of M. Nussbaum, "Therapeutic

Arguments," in The Norms of Nature: Studies in Hellenistic Ethics, M. Schofield,G. Strikereds. (Cambridge1986).100Pace Furley(above,n. 15) 6-7, a living individual,suchas the founderof a religiousmovement,can claim to be an evangelium. The issue of Epicurus' philosophicalprede-cessors is largely irrelevanthere, since such assertions are not based on "sufficientrea-son"in any case. If any earlierGreekphilosopher,such as Pythagoras,was consideredanevangelium or humanculture,this fact is not an argumentagainstthe possibility of Epi-curus'havingthoughtof himself as such.101J. M. Rist, Epicurus (Cambridge1972) 9-13; Clay (above, n. 43); Frischer(above,n. 42) 52-66, cf. 231-240 (cf. 78-79) for the idea that the portraitof Epicurusreferstothat of Asklepios becauseEpicurus, ike Asklepios, is a savior.

102Cf. his advice to learnthe fundamentalsof his philosophyin orderto attainpeace ofmind(yakrivioaoS,Ep. ad Hdt. 82-83; cf. 36; D.L. 10.12). A. S. Cox, "Lucretius ndhisMessage,"G&RN.S.18 (1971) 6 n. 1 links this descriptionof the idealEpicureanpeace ofmindas a "sea-calm"with the imageryof stormsat sea in Lucretius.

190


36/36

Lucretius,Epicurus,andPrehistoryEpicurus. ThusLucretiushadgood reason,if not an explicitmodel, forshapinghis prehistoryaround he comingof Epicurus n Book 6.BRIGHAMYOUNGUNIVERSITY

I would like to thank Diskin Clay, WalterEnglert,Dirk Obbink,Zeph Stewart,andMichael Wigodsky for theircriticismsof earlier drafts of this paperand BrighamYoungUniversity for a grantto complete this research; am particularlygratefulto R. J. Tarrantfor his patientworkin the final stages.

191

Documents

Lucretius Epicurus and Prehistory