Lucretius 3.

978-1023 and the Hellenistic Philosophical Polemics against the Grammarians

Author(s): Daniel Markovi
Source: Illinois Classical Studies, No. 35-36 (2010-2011), pp. 143-153
Published by: University of Illinois Press
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.5406/illiclasstud.35-36.0143
Accessed: 24-12-2015 17:08 UTC

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/
info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content
in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

University of Illinois Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Illinois Classical Studies.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 192.54.242.155 on Thu, 24 Dec 2015 17:08:33 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 Lucretius 3.9781023 and the Hellenistic
Philosophical Polemics against the Grammarians

Daniel Markovi

The paper examines closely the technique of recontextualization in Lucretius

3.9781023 and sheds further light on the problems of its source and complex
rhetorical goals. In order to prove erroneous the belief in the Underworld
punishments described in Homer, which according to Epicurean teaching
exist in real life, Lucretius uses a technique of careful selection and repetition
of keywords in two different, juxtaposed contexts. The same technique is
found in Senecas Letter 88, where Seneca seeks to show that typical school
questions are worthless in comparison with their philosophical counterparts,
oriented toward the realm of real life. The similarity is not only formal: both
Seneca and Lucretius believe that the study of traditional poetry cannot offer
adequate guidance for living. Seneca borrows his technique from the Hel-
lenistic philosophical polemics against the grammarians, and Lucretiuss
passage was most likely modeled after a similar one in Epicurus.1

In his comments on Lucretiuss treatment of the fear of death in book 3, the aging
Bailey confirmed his position on the question that troubled Lucretian scholars at
the beginning of the 20th century: On the whole I remain of the opinion, which
I previously expressed,2 that the fear of punishment in death was more prevalent
in Epicuruss Greek world than in the Roman world of the 1st century B.C., and
agree with Sellar3 and Regenbogen4 that Lucretius, taking over the Epicurean
tradition, has to some extent exaggerated the fears of his contemporaries.5 De-
spite its modern guise, this critical observation goes back to antiquity. Cicero and
Seneca regard Epicuruss campaign against the stories about the Underworld as
mere shadowboxing: Cicero points out that not even an old wife would be sense-
less enough to believe in these stories; Seneca dismisses them as simply childish.6
1.I would like to thank the anonymous referee, Antony Augoustakis, and Charles Campbell
and Marcus Heckenkamp for their helpful suggestions in revising the first draft of this paper. Any
remaining errors are mine alone.
2.Bailey (1932) 220.
3.Sellar (1881) 272.
4.Regenbogen (1932) 4977.
5.Bailey (1950) 2.995.
6.Cf. Cic. Tusc. 1.10, 48; N.D. 1.86; 2.5; Sen. Ep. 24.18. Seneca, who objects that the fear is
too childish, nevertheless explains in one of his later letters that the fear of darkness is one of the
main psychological reasons why death appears to us as an evil (Ep. 82.1516).

143

This content downloaded from 192.54.242.155 on Thu, 24 Dec 2015 17:08:33 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
144 Illinois Classical Studies 3536 (20102011)

There is no reason to doubt that Ciceros and Senecas observations about

the beliefs of their contemporaries are true. But their criticism of Epicurean
interest in the stories about the sinners in the Underworld clearly missed the
point. According to Lucretius, the fear of eternal divine punishment is connected
with the stories told by the poets, such as Ennius and Homer.7 Lucretius gives
no indication that these authors and their audiences believed literally in the
fictitious stories, and it would be nave to suppose that this was the case. It is
unlikely that Ennius, the translator of Euhemerus, thought that his Dichterweihe
would be read literally any more than Hesiod and Callimachus did: its fictitious
setting was only a veil for a higher truth. But this is not all. It would be nave
and misleading to read even Homers account of the sinners in the Underworld
in Od. 11 as a set of stories meant to be taken on the literal level. The account
is only a literary device. Its function is to support the main theme, announced
in the speech of Zeus in the opening lines of the poem: men blame gods as the
source of their own evils, but they themselves incur their punishments by their
reckless behavior and neglect of divine warnings.8 Odysseuss visit to the Un-
derworld occurs approximately at the end of the first half of the poem, and the
description of the punishments of mythical sinners9 is certainly meant to bring
to mind the punishment that awaits the reckless suitors. Toward the end of the
poem the poet returns to the Underworld, this time to follow the souls of the
dead suitors.10 The symmetry is hardly a coincidence: the Underworld scenes
cannot be read independently from the main theme, and their fictitious setting
is meant to convey a general truth.
As P. Veyne showed in his monograph Did the Greeks Believe in Their Myths?,
the Greeks paradoxically at the same time believed and did not believe in the
stories told by their poets. Consequently, criticism of myth in antiquity was never
a matter of rejecting a myth altogether, but rather of finding its truthful basis.
Beliefs can sometimes be found in their pure form, for example in proverbs or
maxims,11 but most often they are embedded in fiction. Unlike an authoritative
account, a fictitious story allows one to maintain a certain skeptical distance
while still accepting its core proposition; in other words, what makes a ficti-
tious story attractive is not its literal meaning, but the feeling that it adequately
conveys a more general truth. In fact we have no evidence that literal reading of
fiction, typical of modern religious fundamentalism, was practiced in antiquity.
7.Lucr. 1.11035.
8.Hom. Od. 1.3243.
9.Od. 11.576600. For Odyssean imagery in Lucretius, see Reinhardt (2004) 34.
10.Od. 24.1202.
11.Burke (1973).

This content downloaded from 192.54.242.155 on Thu, 24 Dec 2015 17:08:33 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 Daniel Markovi 145

M. Gale applied these principles to DRN 3.9781023 and showed convinc-

ingly that Lucretius, who knew very well that his educated, upper-class reader
did not believe in the existence of the scenes from the Underworld on the literal
level, did not target the literal meaning of the traditional stories, but rather the
general beliefs they imply, namely that the gods have an interest in human af-
fairs and that eventually they will always inflict punishment on wrongdoers.12
The Elder Pliny makes the point clear: uerum in his deos agere curam rerum
humanarum credi ex usu uitae est poenasque maleficiis aliquando seras, oc-
cupato deo in tanta mole, numquam autem inritas esse nec ideo proximum illi
genitum hominem, ut uilitate iuxta beluas esset (it is indeed in accordance with
lifes experience to believe that the gods are concerned with human affairs, and
that punishments for crimes, although sometimes slow, since god is engaged in
such a vast undertaking, are never ineffective, and that humans were not born
closest to gods to be side by side with beasts in their baseness, NH 2.26).13 Gale
observed that this fear of punishment was fostered by mystery religions, a point
further developed by T. Reinhardt, who suggested that Epicurus and Lucretius
were targeting above all the intellectualized versions of the stories connected
with mystery initiations, such as those of Plato.14
The questions of the urgency and psychological basis of fear of death have to
a certain extent diverted modern scholarly work from exploring further the con-
nection between the manner of composition and the matter of DRN 3.9781023.
As the following pages will show, more can be gained from this approach, par-
ticularly in terms of identifying accurately the background against which this
passage must be read. The problem is certainly difficult and complex. On one
hand, appropriation of concrete poetic images to express a general belief is a
poets stock-in-trade. On the other, Lucretius rationalizes the stories about mythi-
cal sinners in the Underworld in a way that qualifies, according to Epicuruss
epistemological standards, as a valid philosophical explanation: his method is
essentially empirical, and his theory grounded in sense perception.15 The ques-
tion of the connection between poetry and philosophical prose is at the heart of
DRN 3.9781023, and Lucretiuss rhetorical goals cannot be discussed apart
from it.With this in mind, I would now like to look closely at the technique that
Lucretius employs to transfer the significance of the stories found in authors
such as Ennius and Homer to this life and to the present moment.

12.Gale (1994) 9394.

13.Text is taken from Mayhoff (1906); translation is mine.
14.Reinhardt (2004) 45.
15.For the main principles of Epicurean epistemology, see Asmis (1999).

This content downloaded from 192.54.242.155 on Thu, 24 Dec 2015 17:08:33 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
146 Illinois Classical Studies 3536 (20102011)

As the following analysis will show, the process consists of a careful selection
and recontextualizing of certain keywords:16
atque ea nimirum quaecumque Acherunte profundo
prodita sunt esse, in uita sunt omnia nobis.
nec miser inpendens magnum timet aere saxum
Tantalus, ut famast, cassa formidine torpens;
sed magis in uita diuom metus urget inanis
mortalis, casumque timent quem cuique ferat fors.
nec Tityon uolucres ineunt Acherunte iacentem
nec quod sub magno scrutentur pectore quicquam
perpetuam aetatem possunt reperire profecto.
quamlibet immani proiectu corporis exstet,
qui non sola nouem dispessis iugera membris
obtineat, sed qui terrai totius orbem,
non tamen aeternum poterit perferre dolorem
nec praebere cibum proprio de corpore semper.
sed Tityos nobis hic est, in amore iacentem
quem uolucres lacerant atque exest anxius angor
aut alia quauis scindunt cuppedine curae. (Lucr. 3.97894)
And surely whatsoever things are fabled to exist in deep Acheron, these
all exist for us in this life. Wretched Tantalus does not, as the story goes,
fear the great rock that hangs over him in the air, frozen with vain terror;
rather it is in this life that the futile fear of gods oppresses mortals without
cause, and the fall they fear is any that chance may bring. Nor is Tityos
lying in Acheron rummaged by winged creatures, nor can they actually
find in eternity anything at all to dig for deep in that vast breast. Wide as
you will, let that huge body be spread forth, enough to cover not nine acres
only with the outstretched limbs, but the whole globe of earth; yet he will
not be able to bear pain forever, nor to provide food from his own body
always. But our Tityos is here, the man who, as he lies in love, is torn by
winged creatures and devoured by agonizing anguish or rent by anxieties
through some other passion.

The first two lines establish the connection between Acheruns and our life and
prepare the ground for the transfer of the images of mythical sinners from one
realm to another. The next two segments are diptychs. They display the same
image against two different backgrounds, that of the fictitious Underworld on
one hand and that of real life on the other. In the first segment the transfer from
16.More comprehensive accounts of the fireworks in this section can be found in West (1969)
97103 and Kenney (1971) 22232. Text and translation are taken from Smith (1992), both slightly
revised.

This content downloaded from 192.54.242.155 on Thu, 24 Dec 2015 17:08:33 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 Daniel Markovi 147

the first, fictitious setting to reality is established through the idea of falling; the
casus implied in the image of the inpendens saxum over the head of Tantalus is
in the second part of the diptych interpreted as the casus of chance in real life.
The central ideas in the second segment are those of lying supine and suffering:
the diptych juxtaposes the image of Tityos, iacens in the Underworld, his liver
eaten by winged birds, with the image of our Tityos, a lover, also iacensas the
tradition of amatory poetry has ithis emotions stirred by the winged Erotes.
Sisyphus in uita quoque nobis ante oculos est,
qui petere a populo fasces saeuasque secures
imbibit et semper uictus tristisque recedit.
nam petere imperium quod inanest nec datur umquam,
atque in eo semper durum sufferre laborem,
hoc est aduerso nixantem trudere monte
saxum quod tamen e summo iam uertice rursum
uoluitur et plani raptim petit aequora campi.
deinde animi ingratam naturam pascere semper
atque explere bonis rebus satiareque numquam
quod faciunt nobis annorum tempora, circum
cum redeunt fetusque ferunt uariosque lepores,
nec tamen explemur uitai fructibus umquam
hoc, ut opinor, id est, aeuo florente puellas
quod memorant laticem pertusum congerere in uas,
quod tamen expleri nulla ratione potestur. (Lucr. 3.9951010)
Sisyphus also appears in this life before our eyes, athirst to solicit from the
people the lictors rods and cruel axes, and always retiring defeated and
full of gloom: for to solicit power, an empty thing, which is never granted,
and always to endure hard toil in the pursuit of it, this is to push labori-
ously up a hill the rock that still rolls down again from the very top, and in
a rush recovers the levels of the open plain. Then to be always feeding an
ungrateful mind, yet never able to fill and satisfy it with good thingsas
the seasons of the year do for us when they come round bringing their fruits
and manifold charms, yet we are never filled with the fruits of lifethis,
I think, is meant by the tale of damsels in the flower of their age pouring
water into a riddled urn, which, for all their trying, can never be filled.

In these two segments the order Acheruns-uita is chiastically reversed, so that

the first part of each diptych represents the image in real life, while the second
part shows the corresponding reflection of this image in the Underworld. In
our life, Sisyphus petit fasces et imperium in the political arena. In the Under-
world, he pushes his rock that never reaches the top, but, rolling down, always
petit campumthe transfer of imagery is facilitated not only by the political

This content downloaded from 192.54.242.155 on Thu, 24 Dec 2015 17:08:33 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
148 Illinois Classical Studies 3536 (20102011)

connotations of the phrases containing the verb petere, but also by the political
connotations of the word campus. Trying to fill, explere, an ungrateful mind in
vain in this life, a thing that we are not able to do, nec ... explemur, is mirrored
in the Underworld by the futile labor of the Danaids who fetch water with jars
that cannot be filled (expleri).
Cerberus et Furiae iam uero et lucis egestas,
Tartarus horriferos eructans faucibus aestus
qui neque sunt usquam nec possunt esse profecto.
sed metus in uita poenarum pro male factis
est insignibus insignis scelerisque luella
carcer et horribilis de saxo iactu deorsum,
uerbera carnificis17 robur pix lammina taedae;
quae tamen etsi absunt, at mens sibi conscia factis
praemetuens adhibet stimulos torretque flagellis,
nec uidet interea qui terminus esse malorum
possit nec quae sit poenarum denique finis,
atque eadem metuit magis haec ne in morte grauescant.
hic Acherusia fit stultorum denique uita. (Lucr. 3.101123)
Cerberus also and the Furies and the withholding of light, and Tartarus
belching horrible fires from his throatthese neither exist anywhere nor in
truth can exist. But in this life there is fear of punishment for evil deeds, fear
as notorious as the deeds are notorious, and atonement for crimeprison,
and the horrible casting down from the Rock, lashing, the executioners
cross, pitch, red-hot plates, firebrands; and even if these are absent, yet the
guilty conscience, terrified before anything can come to pass, applies the
goad and scorches itself with whips, and meanwhile does not see where
can be the end to its miseries or the final limit to its punishment, and fears
that these same affections may become heavier after death. Hell for the
fools at the end exists on earth.

In the last segmentthoroughly adapted to Lucretiuss Roman context18the

darkness and punishments of Acheruns are interpreted as mirror images of the
punishments and human blindness in real life. The change of the background
brings each mythical example from the darkness of the Underworld to the light
of day, until in the last line the two realms entirely collapse together in the
concluding phrase Acherusia ... uita.
The visual analogies of diptych, background, and image make clear the fact
that Lucretiuss main concern in each segment was not to discard traditional

17.Preferable to the carnifices of Oblongus. See Jocelyn (1986) 4647.

18.See Jocelyn (1986) 4446.

This content downloaded from 192.54.242.155 on Thu, 24 Dec 2015 17:08:33 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 Daniel Markovi 149

images, but to recontextualize and thus appropriate them for his own purposes.19
He accomplished this goal through skillful exploitation of the double mean-
ing of the selected keywords, reinforced by repeated emphasis on the meaning
they have for us. The closest parallel I could find to Lucretiuss technique of
recontextualization of selected words comes from the writings of Senecaone
of the critics of the Epicurea cantilena (Epicurean refrain). In his Letter 88,
attempting to reverse the principle of non uitae sed scholae discimus (we do not
acquire knowledge for life, but for the classroom),20 Seneca converts a series
of questions typical of the grammarians school into their philosophical coun-
terparts. Each step in his revision is based on recontextualization of a selected
keyword, in some cases enhanced by the shift of focus to the first-person and to
this life. Here are the examples:
quaeris Vlixes ubi errauerit potius quam efficias ne nos semper erremus?
(Ep. 88.7)
Do you raise the question, Through what regions did Ulysses stray?
instead of trying to prevent ourselves from going astray at all times?21
doces me quomodo inter se acutae ac graues consonent, quomodo neruorum
disparem reddentium sonum fiat concordia: fac potius quomodo animus
secum meus consonet nec consilia mea discrepent. monstras mihi qui sint
modi flebiles: monstra potius quomodo inter aduersa non emittam flebilem
uocem. (Ep. 88.9)
You teach me how high- and low-pitched sounds are in accord with one
another, and how, though the strings produce different notes, the result is
a harmony; rather bring my soul into harmony with itself, and let not my
purposes be out of tune. You are showing me what the mournful keys are;
show me rather how, in the midst of adversity, I may keep from uttering
a mournful voice.
metiri me geometres docet latifundia potius quam doceat quomodo metiar
quantum homini satis sit. ... scis rotunda metiri, in quadratum redigis
quamcumque acceperis formam, interualla siderum dicis, nihil est quod in
mensuram tuam non cadat: si artifex es, metire hominis animum, dic quam
magnus sit, dic quam pusillus sit. scis quae recta sit linea: quid tibi prodest,
si quid in uita rectum sit ignoras? (Ep. 88.1013)

19.Cf. Gigandet (1998) 37385, who identifies three different levels of displacement or transfer
of meaning in this passage: (1) from the space of the Underworld to the space of this world; (2)
from the realm of physical to the realm of moral distress; and (3) from the external to self-imposed
punishments.
20.Sen. Ep. 106.12.
21.Text is taken from Reynolds (1965); translation is slightly revised from Gummere (1925).

This content downloaded from 192.54.242.155 on Thu, 24 Dec 2015 17:08:33 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
150 Illinois Classical Studies 3536 (20102011)

The mathematician teaches me how to measure the dimensions of my estates;

but I should rather be taught how to measure how much is enough for a man
to own. ... You know how to measure the circle; you find the square of any
shape which is set before you; you compute the distances between the stars;
there is nothing which does not come within the scope of your measuring.
But if you are a real master of your profession, measure me the mind of
man, tell me how great it is, or how puny. You know what a straight line is;
but how does it benefit you if you do not know what is straight in this life?

These passages from Seneca echo the line of criticism against traditional
education typical of Hellenistic popular philosophy, or, to use the traditional
term, diatribe.22 Recontextualization or transfer of a keyword from the realm of
schola to that of uita is a common feature in these passages. A sentence from
Bion of Borysthenes, quoted by Stobaeus, provides a good example:23


. (Stob. 3.4.52 = Kindstrand 5a)
Bion said that grammarians who inquire into the wanderings of Odysseus do
not examine their own, nor do they discern that they are themselves wander-
ing astray on this very point, viz., that they are following useless pursuits.

The same feature is preserved in another version of the sentence, from the Gno-
mologium Parisinum (320 = Kindstrand 6a). The thought has also been attributed
to Diogenes the Cynic, who might have been Bions model (D.L. 6.2728).
Of course the technique of recontextualization of the same word is too ubiqui-
tous to make any particular instance necessarily relevant for DRN 3.9781023.24
But the conjunction of the technique and content in Seneca and his Hellenistic
models suggests a deeper connection. The example of the wanderings of Odys-
seus and the transfer of its significance from the school of grammarian to real
life has, mutatis mutandis, a close parallel in Lucretiuss treatment of the poetic
accounts about the sinners of the Underworld. Both authors promote the idea
that a cure for the true anxieties of human lifesuch as Lucretiuss reversals of
fortune, passion of love, political ambition, dissatisfied mind, or greedcannot
be found in the study of poetry, but only in the study of philosophy. Seneca makes
the point explicit; Lucretius implies it by the choice of material and manner
of interpretation, leaving the conclusion to the reader. The formal similarity
22.The influence of Hellenistic diatribe on Lucretius 3 is discussed by Wallach (1976) 8391,
but the passages from Seneca are not mentioned.
23.This and the following parallel are adduced by Stckelberger (1965) ad Sen. Ep. 88.7. Bions
fragments and translation are taken from Kindstrand (1976).
24.We should note that recontextualization of keywords occurs naturally in rationalizing inter-
pretations of myth. Cf. for example Palaephatus, passim.

This content downloaded from 192.54.242.155 on Thu, 24 Dec 2015 17:08:33 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 Daniel Markovi 151

between the two sets of passages is not a coincidence. Both advance the same
argument, originally developed in the context of the philosophical critique of
traditional education.
It is well known that Epicurus was one of the leading figures in the campaign
against traditional literary education, based on study of poetry.25 But it should be
noted that he did not altogether avoid references to authors such as Homer. In
the spirit typical of Hellenistic literature in general Epicurus sought to redefine
and revive Greek culture through a polemic dialogue with the classical literary
tradition:26 even in his famous exhortation to Pythocles ,
, (hoist your sail, dear boy, and run away
from all culture)Epicurus warned against the maelstrom of traditional poetry
alluding to Homer and Odysseuss encounter with the Sirens.27 Our evidence sug-
gests that Epicurus discussed the punishments of the sinners in the Underworld in
one of his works,28 and we also know that he was criticized for using Od. 9.511
in order to promote pleasure as the philosophical .29 In Letter 88.5, Senecas
claim that some make Homer an Epicurean most likely alludes to these passages.
Such interpretations were certainly not included in Epicuruss technical works such
as , but rather in his exoteric writing. Likewise, Lucretius placed his
interpretation of the myths in the nontechnical, closing part of book 3.
Lucretiuss elaborate reworking of the stories found in Ennius and Homer
turns out to be a more complex matter than it seemed before. In light of the
comparison made above, the poets rhetorical goals in DRN 3.9781023 can be
described as twofold. His first, apotreptic goal30 was to remove the erroneous
general belief implied in the mythical punishments described by the poets (as
expressed by Pliny the Elder). In order to achieve this goal, the poet admirably
manipulated the language of his vivid visual descriptions to turn the traditional
poetic tableaux into icons of the new, Epicurean belief.31 His second, ultimate

25.D.L. 10.6 and Athen. 588a = Arrighetti 43. For a list of known Epicurean works against
, see Blank (1998) xxxxxxi.
26.For a recent discussion of Epicuruss work in the context of the Hellenistic literary milieu,
see Erler (2011) 1014.
27.D.L. 10.6. Cf. Plut. Mor. 15d and 1092e1096c.
28.Besides Sen. Ep. 24.18, cf. Cic. Fin. 1.60 and Lact. Inst. 3.17.4142; 7.7.13.
29.This was demonstrated by Bignone (1936) 1.29193. For further evidence and discussion
see Asmis (1995) and Beer (2009) 7577.
30.Kenney (1971) 222 notes that a denial of the torments of hell is appropriate to a consola-
tioan apotreptic genre par excellence.
31.The procedure is typically Lucretian, according to Hardie (1986) 18: Lucretius is an efficient
predator, who digests those parts of his victim which are beneficial to his system and ostentatiously
rejects the indigestible.

This content downloaded from 192.54.242.155 on Thu, 24 Dec 2015 17:08:33 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
152 Illinois Classical Studies 3536 (20102011)

goal, can be defined as protreptic: to suggest that the only adequate guide for
living is Epicurean philosophy.
University of Cincinnati markovdl@ucmail.uc.edu
Works Cited
Asmis, E. 1995. Epicurean Poetics. In D. Obbink, ed., Philodemus and Poetry: Poetic
Theory and Practice in Lucretius, Philodemus, and Horace, 1534. Oxford: Oxford
University Press. Repr. in A. Laird, ed., Oxford Readings in Ancient Literary Criticism,
23866. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006.
. 1999. Epicurean Epistemology. In K. Algra et al., eds., The Cambridge His-
tory of Hellenistic Philosophy, 26094. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bailey, C. 1932. Phases in the Religion of Ancient Rome. Berkeley: University of Cali-
fornia Press.
. 1950. Titi Lucreti Cari De Rerum Natura Libri Sex. Oxford: Clarendon.
Beer, B. 2009. Lukrez und Philodem: Poetische Argumentation und poetologischer Dis-
kurs. Basel: Schwabe.
Bignone, E. 1936. LAristotele perduto e la formazione filosofica di Epicuro. Firenze:
La Nuova Italia.
Blank, D. L. 1998. Sextus Empiricus against the Grammarians I. Oxford: Clarendon.
Burke, K. 1973. Literature as Equipment for Living. In Philosophy of Literary Form:
Studies in Symbolic Action, 293304. 3rd ed. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Erler, M. 2011. Autodidact and Student: On the Relationship of Authority and Autonomy
in Epicurus and the Epicurean Tradition. In J. Fish and K. R. Sanders, eds., Epicurus
and the Epicurean Tradition, 928. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Gale, M. R. 1994. Myth and Poetry in Lucretius. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Gigandet, A. 1998. Fama deum: Lucrce et les raisons du mythe. Paris: Vrin.
Gummere, R. M. trans. 1925. Seneca: Epistles. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University
Press.
Hardie, P. R. 1986. Vergils Aeneid: Cosmos and Imperium. Oxford: Clarendon.
Jocelyn, H. D. 1986. Lucretius, His Copyists, and the Horrors of the Underworld: De
Rerum Natura 3.9781023. AClass 29: 4356.
Kenney, E. J., ed. 1971. De Rerum Natura III. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kindstrand, J. F., ed. 1976. Bion of Borysthenes: A Collection of the Fragments with
Introduction and Commentary. Uppsala: Almqvist & Wiksell.
Mayhoff, C., ed. 1906. C. Plini Secundi Naturalis Historiae Libri XXXVII. Leipzig:
Teubner.
Regenbogen, O. 1932. Lukrez, seine Gestalt in seinem Gedicht. Leipzig: Teubner.
Reinhardt, T. 2004. Readers in the Underworld. JRS 94: 2746.
Reynolds, L. D., ed. 1965. L. Annaei Senecae Ad Lucilium Epistulae Morales. Oxford:
Clarendon.
Sellar, W. Y. 1881. Roman Poets of the Republic. Oxford: Clarendon.

This content downloaded from 192.54.242.155 on Thu, 24 Dec 2015 17:08:33 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 Daniel Markovi 153

Smith, M. F., and W. H. D. Rouse, trans. 1992. Lucretius: De Rerum Natura. 2nd ed.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Stckelberger, A. 1965. Senecas 88. Brief: ber Wert und Unwert der freien Knste.
Heidelberg: Winter.
Veyne, P. 1988. Did the Greeks Believe in Their Myths? An Essay on the Constitutive
Imagination. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Wallach, B. P. 1976. Lucretius and the Diatribe against the Fear of Death: De Rerum
Natura III 8301094. Leiden: Brill.
West, D. A. 1969. The Imagery and Poetry of Lucretius. Edinburgh: Edinburgh Uni-
versity Press.

This content downloaded from 192.54.242.155 on Thu, 24 Dec 2015 17:08:33 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions