M. Tvlli Ciceronis De natvra deorvm. Volume I M. Tvlli Ciceronis De Natvra Deorvm, Volume I: Liber Primvs [Bimillennial ed. Reprint 2014] 9780674287969, 9780674287952

Citation preview

M. TVLLI CICERONIS DE NATVRA DEORVM LIBRI III

M. TVLLI C I C E R O N I S DE NATVRA DEORVM LIBER PRIMVS

EDITED BY

ARTHUR STANLEY PEASE

BIMILLENNIAL EDITION

CAMBRIDGE, MASSACHUSETTS

HARVARD UNIVERSITY PRESS 1955

DISTRIBUTED IN GREAT BRITAIN BY

Geoffrey Cumberlege OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS LONDON

Library of Congress Catalog Card Number 56-7217

PRINTED IN THE NETHERLANDS BY E. J . BRILL, LEIDEN

CONIVGIS CARISSIMAE MEMORIAE

PREFACE

completing an edition of Cicero's De Divinatìone11 have contem plated a similar treatment of the more significant De Natura Deorum, the two thousandth anniversary of which falls in this year 1955. To the useful edition by J. B. Mayor 2 many additions may be made and much subsequent scholarly publication calls for appraisal and use. From 1935 to 1942 my leisure was largely devoted to collecting materials,3 and since 1942 to sifting and arranging them. This process has followed the method already used in editing the De Divinatìone and Virgil's Fourth Aeneid, with the citation of many passages in extenso, and such arrangement of them that, by reading them as they stand, the user may reach for himself a logical conclusion, without needless editorial verbiage.4 Certain reviewers of the editions mentioned have objected that the editor's own views were not at all times clearly revealed, but they may be reminded of Cicero's own words in N.D. 1, 10: qui autem requirunt quid quoque de re ipsi sentiamus curiosius id faciunt quam necesse est; non enim tam auctoritatis in disputando quam rationis momenta quaerenda sunt. The present volume contains a general introduction to the three books, followed by text, apparatus, and notes for Book I. The second volume is to contain text, apparatus, and notes for Books II-III (already completed), and an index to both volumes. It is hoped that this may follow after not too long an interval, and that it may be possible to include the more important addenda which have come to my notice since the manuscript went to press. Though this edition owes much to those of Plasberg and Ax, it does not follow their texts throughout.61 have, moreover, constantly verified readings in the published facsimiles of codices Λ 6 and Η 7 or in photostats, which, through the generosity of the Humanities Fund of Harvard University and the kindly cooperation of the Harvard College SINCE

1920-1923. 1880-1885. 3 By a method well described by W . Headlam, Herodas (1922), ix: "There is only one w a y : learn your author by heart—every word, and then set t o w o r k to read. Many dull authors must be dredged," etc. 4 This purpose has apparently escaped 1

2

the critical scent of most reviewers, save only the late S. G . Owen in The Year's Work in Classical Studies, 29 (1936), 16. 5 E.g., in the first three sections o f Book I at eleven points it diverges f r o m Plasberg's readings. β Published by O. Plasberg in 1 9 1 5 . 7 Published by O. Plasberg in 1 9 1 2 .

Vili

PREFACE

Library 1 and of the authorities of several European libraries,2 have been available for codd. DP VNO TBFM.3 To scholars who have directly assisted or by helpful suggestions stimulated and encouraged me I am also deeply indebted, particularly to my colleagues, Professors H. Bloch, S. Dow, J. P. Elder, W. C. Greene, M. Hammond, W. H. P. Hatch, K. H. Jackson, W. W. Jaeger, f G. F. Moore, A. D. Nock, f E. K. Rand, and J. Whatmough, and to several former students, notably Messrs. W. D. Anderson, R. A. Brooks, M. L. Colker, J. K. Downing, L. H. Feldman, Ν. M. Getty, A. G. Gillingham, J. R. Grant, Κ. K. Hulley, P. Levine, P. L. McKendrick, A. E. Millward, H. E. Petersen, E. A. Robinson, S. Sinnreich, Ζ. Stewart, A. F. Stocker, Α. Η. Travis, F. R. Walton, and L. E. Woodbury. Bibliographical help has been furnished by Mr. E. W. Norris; Professors f C. H. Beeson and R. M. Grant of the University of Chicago, Dr. H. A. Thompson of the Institute for Advanced Studies, and Professor Brooks Otis of Hobart College have given me useful references ; and Professor J. P. Christopher of the Catholic University of America, Professor N. W. DeWitt of the University of Toronto, and Dr. E. A. Philippson of the University of Michigan have helped me to secure materials not easy of access. The Rev. A. J. Festugière of Paris and Professor J. H. Waszink of Leiden have given valued advice about publication. To the members of the Harvard Religions Club, whose wide learning and sympathetic patience have been often tested by me, and rarely in vain, I offer my grateful tribute—O noctes cenaeque deuml To the staff of the Harvard University Press, particularly Mr. T. J. Wilson, Director, Mr. W. W. Smith, Associate Director, Mrs. L. J. Kewer, and Mrs. M. L. Hawkes (for editorial help), and to that of the firm of E. J. Brill in Leiden I am repeatedly indebted. Finally, without the generous support of the Bollingen Foundation and its Vice President, Mr. J. D. Barrett, the publication of this volume would hardly have been possible. Harvard University ARTHUR STANLEY PEASE January 1955 1 To Miss Gertrude M. Sullivan of the Harvard College Library I am especially indebted for her efficient aid in securing these photostats ; to Mr. R. H. Haynes for helpful bibliographical assistance. 2 The Vatican Library in Vatican City, the Laurentian Library in Florence, the National Library in Vienna, the university libraries of Leiden and Munich, the

Bibliothèque Nationale in Paris, the British Museum in London, the library of Merton College, Oxford, and the library of the University of Edinburgh, to all which deep gratitude is here expressed. 3 These photostats will ultimately be deposited in the Harvard College Library.

INTRODUCTION

CONTENTS OF THE INTRODUCTION 1. Cicero's philosophic corpus 2. The place of the De Natura Deorum in this plan 3. The Roman religious background 4. Religious speculation in Cicero's day 5. Epicureans and Stoics 6. Cicero as a mediator 7. His philosophic qualifications 8. The date of composition of this work 9. The dedication 10. The type of dialogue 11. The scene 12. The dramatic date 13. Defects of composition 14. Characters in the dialogue 15. Prooemium 16. Doxographic summary 17. Epicurean doctrine and its criticism in Book I 18. Books II and III 19. Omissions 20. Conclusion of Book III 21. Sources: general 22. Sources of the Prooemium 23. Sources of the Doxography 24. Sources of the Epicurean doctrine 25. Sources of Cotta's criticism of the Epicureans 26-28. Sources of Book II 29-30. Sources of Book III 31. Cicero's own contributions 32. Results of the work 33. Publication 34. Subsequent influence 35. Manuscripts 36. Catalogue of manuscripts 37. Combinations with other works 38. Relation of the manuscripts

5 8 9 12 13 14 16 20 22 22 24 25 26 27 29 30 31 32 32 33 36 38 39 42 43 45 48 49 50 51 52 61 62 82 83

4 39. 40. 41. 42. 43.

CONTENTS

Testimonia Orthography Apparatus criticus Editions Translations

OF THE

INTRODUCTION

86 86 87 88 103

INTRODUCTION CICERO'S PHILOSOPHIC CORPUS

1. The formation1 in Latin of an encyclopaedic system of philosophical writings, including and extending the range of isolated works written by Cicero starting as early as the De República (begun in May, 54), 2 was clearly in his mind in 44 B.C., when he composed the famous catalogue of his theoretical writings which appears in the second book of the De Divinatione? How much earlier he had conceived an "architectonic awareness of the general plan" 4 is not entirely clear, 5 though in 45, in his picture of the manifold literary activity of Varrò,® he had ascribed to that scholar a somewhat similar design of wide scope (though perhaps inadequate depth),7 intended especially for readers who knew no Greek.8 The interrelation of the parts of philosophy—epistemology, logic, physics, ethics, politics, and even rhetoric 9—Cicero clearly recognizes,10 and it may well be that his exposition, when completed, would have found place for certain other subdivisions of the field which his extant works lack.11 Throughout the whole series his emphasis is 1 In this introduction I have drawn in parts upon that in my edition of the De Divinatione, 1 (1920), 9-28—a work long out of print and difficult to obtain. 2 Q. Fr. 2 , 1 2 , 1 ; M. Schanz-C. Hosius, Gesch. d. rom. Lit. I 4 (1927), 494495. 3 Div. 2, 1-4, especially 2, 4: adhuc haec erant ; ad reliqua alacri tendebamus animo, sic parati ut nisi quae causa gravior obstitisset nullum philosophiae locum esse pateremur qui non Latinis litteris inlustratus pateret. 4 To use the phrase of W. Jaeger, Paideia, 2 (Engl, tr., 1943), 96. 5 Cf. 1, 9, η. (totam pbilosophiam), below. S. Häfner, Die lit. Pläne Ciceros (1928), 100-102, collects passages to show his plan taking shape as early as 46 B.C.; cf. M. Pohlenz in Philologus, 93 (1938), 118. R. Philippson in P.-W. 7A (1939), 1123, similarly puts the date just before or just after the Orator

(46 B.C.); cf. Orai. 118. O. Piasberg (Cic. in sein. Werken ». Briefen (1926), 158-160) thinks it followed the death of Tullia. J. S. Reid, ed. of the Académica (1886), 47, thinks our work is foreshadowed in Ac. 2, 147. 6 Ac. 1, 3; 1, 8. 7 Cf. Ac. 1, 9: philosophiamque multis locis incohasti, ad impellendum satis, ad edocendum parum. 8 Ac. 1, 4-5; cf. N.D. 1, 7-8; J. S. Reid, ed. of Académica (1885), 20. 9 Div. 2, 4. 10 N.D. 1, 9: omnes autem eius partes atque omnia membra tum facillume noscuntur cum totae quaestiones scribendo explicantur ; est enim admirabilis quaedam continuano seriesque rerum, ut alia nexa et omnes inter se apta', conligataeque videantur. 11 E.g., metaphysics, perhaps to the Roman mind the least fruitful field of philosophy, fitted only for Greeks. Aesthetics was too undeveloped as yet to have been expected in the system,

6

INTRODUCTION

upon the patriotic service which he is rendering by making the results of Greek thought available to his countrymen,1 particularly since all the teachings of philosophy bear some relation to actual life.2 In his philosophic activity after the death of his beloved daughter Tullia, in February, 45 B.C.,3 he not only consoled his own mind 4 by intensive writing, 5 but also reached a circle of readers who to some extent compensated for those hearers whom he had orally influenced during his public career.6 As a highly practical man—not so much the scholar in politics as the public man in philosophy 7—he was primarily attracted to those fields of thought which attempt to guide men in their human relationships, individual, social, and political, and which were classed by Greek writers under the heads of ethics (ηθική) and politics (πολιτική). The great field of natural science (φυσική) as a whole had less interest for Cicero, yet within it the Greeks had included also theology, and he was quick to recognize the important effects upon men's relations to one another and upon their loyalty to the state which might result from right or mistaken theories concerning the existence, the form, and the functions of the gods.8 A few years before Gcero wrote the and psychology, though given no sep- great human interests of death, future arate work, is treated to some extent life, prophecy, duty, and deity as at both in the second book of our work no other time save ten years before (in the and in the Académica. Logic might De República) in another period of reperhaps have claimed a larger place than covery from misfortune and depression. Cicero gives it, especially in view of its P. Boyancé (Rev. des et. lat. 14 (1936), practical applications to rhetoric, yet it 296) observes that Cicero and Seneca is not unnoticed in the Topica. each philosophized, as a consolation, at 1 E.g., N.D. 1, 7: ipstus rei pubiicae the end of their lives. 4 causa philosophiam nostris hominibus exAtt. 12, 14, 3: quin etiam si feci quod plicandam putavi, magni existimans interesse prefecto ante me nemo, ut ipse me per litteras ad decus et ad laudem civitatis res tarn gravis consolarer. 5 tamque praeclaras Latinis etiam litteris Cf. Att. 12, 40, 2: legere isti laeti qui contineri (where see the note below on me reprehendunt tam multa non possunt rei pubiicae causa)·, Τ use. 1, 5: philosophia quam ego seripsi ; 13, 26, 2: equtdem credibile iacuit usque ad banc aetatem nec ullum non est quantum scribam, quin etiam noctibus; habuit lumen litterarum Latinorum; quae nihil enim somni. inlustranda et excitanda nobis est, ut si « N.D. 1, 6; Div. 2, 7: in libris enim occupati profuimus aliquid civibus nostris, sententiam dicebamus, contionabamur, phiprosimus etiam, si possimus, otiosi; Plut. losophiam nobis pro rei pubiicae procuratione Cic. 40, 2: αύτω δ' έργον μέν ήν τό substitutam putabamus. 7 τους φιλοσόφους συντελείν διαλόγους καί In more modem times such figures μεταφράζεις. as W. E. Gladstone and A. J. Balfour 2 N.D. 1, 7 : si omnia philosophiae prae- may be recalled. 8 cepta referuntur ad vitam. Cf. N.D. 1, 1; 1, 3-4, concluding: 3 Ac. 1,11 ; N.D. 1, 9; Fam. 12,14, 3; haut scio an pietate adversus deos sublata Plut. Cic. 41, 5. W. W. Fowler (Rom. fides etiam et societas generis humant et una Ideas of Deity (1914), 4) remarks that excellentissuma virtus iustitia tollatur. W. W. Cicero brings his mind to bear on the Fowler (Rom. Ideas of Deity (1914), 3)

INTRODUCTION

7

De Natura Deorum,1 Lucretius in his deeply thoughtful poem, had recognized the human misery arising f r o m incorrect concepts of deity, and had undertaken to remove these by a polemic in the characteristically dogmatic style of the Epicurean school. N o w Cicero, with an equally distinctive Academic rejection of dogmatism 2 —especially upon such difficult and controversial questions as theology—, tried to set forth, in a judicial as well as a descriptive spirit, 3 the views, not of a single philosophical sect, but of selected diverse schools, 4 f o r he believed it the function of philosophy to confront men, not with the voice of peris mistaken in supposing that Cicero did not believe this subject to be of vital interest to the state. For a like connection among the Greeks of piety and civic and political life cf. W. Jaeger, Paideia, 2 (Engl. tr. 1943), 95. Somewhat similar problems arise today in connection with oaths sworn by avowed atheists or agnostics. On the necessity of theology as a basis for Cicero's philosophic encyclopaedia cf. F. Guglielmino in Religio, 10 (1934), 121. 1 The date of Lucretius's poem seems to fall after 60 B.C. (cf. M. Schanz-C. Hosius, Gesch. d. röm. Lit. I 4 (1927), 274-275) and probably before 54 (cf. Q.Fr. 2, 9, 3). On the possible use of Lucretius by Cicero see the parallels collected by J. B. Mayor, ed. of N.D. 3 (1885), x-xiii; some of his likenesses seem exaggerated. 2 Cf. Cotta's words in N.D. 1,60: omnibus fere in rebus, sed maxime in physiris, quod non sit citius quam quid sit dixerim. I believe this distinction between the two works is fairer than that of E. Cocchia, Saggi filologici, 5 (1915), 317, who contrasts Lucretius as a destroyer with Cicero as a restorer of belief in the gods. J. B. Mayor, ed. of N.D. 3 (1885), x, thinks that our work was written with distinct reference to Lucretius. His chief parallels, however, are not between the De Natura Deorum and Lucretius but between Lucretius and the De Divinatione and other works of Cicero. After making all due allowance for natural coincidences in the expression of commonplaces (cf. Mayor, op. cit., 3, xi-xii) between two writers discussing in parts the same theme, I find no very notable

indication of the influence of Lucretian ideas upon our work, unless perhaps at 1, 86, where see my note on ea quae timenda esse negaret timeret. Again, while Cicero approves of the eradication of superstition and the establishment of a rational religion as a proper mean between the extremes of atheism and superstition, I doubt if these considerations are here his primary purpose, as Mayor (3, xiii) supposed, because the whole tone of the work is descriptive and scientific rather than sectarian and proselytizing (cf. A. S. Pease in Trans. Am. philol. Assoc. 44 (1913), 33; and section 20 below), its conclusion (3, 94-95)emphasizing the possible diversities of opinion and the resultant justification of honest doubt rather than the existence of only one right opinion which is to be dogmatically propagated. O. Plasberg (Cic. in seinen Werken ». Briefen (1926), 159-160) considers that Lucretius had too much on nature and not enough on ethics (i.e., on man) to appeal to Cicero. Might we compare the distinction between the Presocratics and Socrates? 3 Cf. N.D. 1, 17: libero iudicio, nulla eiusmodi adstrictum necessitate, ut mihi velim nolim sit certa quaedam tuenda sentential Tusc. 5, 82: te nulla vincula impediunt ullius certae disciplinae, libasque ex omnibus, quodcumque te maxime specie veritatis movet. On his didactic rather than polemic purpose cf. R. Hirzel, Der Dialog, 1 (1895), 533. 4 Cf. 1, 11 : si singulas disciplinas percipere magnum est quanto maius omnis; quod facere its necesse est quibus propositum est veri reperiendi causa et contra omnes philosophos et pro omnibus dicere.

8

INTRODUCTION

sonai authority 1 or with conveniently formulated creeds, like the κύριαι δόξαι. of Epicurus,2 but with the impulse to repeated and ceaseless search for the probable.3 There had already been many polemic works on the gods, setting forth the views of one school and lacking the advantages of a comparative study, and there were doxographic works, comparative in their nature but without the necessary element of criticism. Cicero in the present work attempts to combine the two principles, and here produces our earliest extant work on the comparative study of the philosophy of religion.4 THE PLACE OF THE 'DE NATURA DEORUM' IN THIS PLAN

2. Within the theological group of Cicero's writings fall three 5 works : the De Natura Deorum, in three books, and its two pendants, the De Divinatione, in two books, and the De Fato in one.6 To have included the two latter works in the De Natura Deorum, in which the subjects of divination and fate are superficially touched upon,7 would have required disproportionate space; in fact the Stoics themselves seem commonly to have treated these questions in separate works.8 Further, since one may logically believe in gods without accepting either divination 9 or a Stoic type of fatalism, it was in the interest of clear thinking to segregate these questions, and Cicero has deliberately 1

Cf. 1, 10: non enim tam auctor itat i s in disputando quam rationis momenta quaerenda sunt. 2 For criticism of this creed cf. 1, 85-86; on the blind acceptance of Epicurean dogmas 1, 66; 1, 113. 3 Cf. 3, 95 : ad veritatis similitudinem . . . esse propensior. M. Y. Henry (Relation of Dogmatism and Scepticism in the philos. Tractates of Cic.) 1925), 36) well describes this work as "a study in speculative philosophy, where no absolute certainty is attainable by the path of dialectic." 4 Cf. W. Jaeger, Theol. of the early Gr. Philosophers (1947), 192, n. 5: "The combination in it [the N.D.] of voluntaristic authoritarianism and metaphysical agnosticism is even more Roman than the patriotic conflict in Varro's heart." 6 A fourth, the De Auguriis, is by some scholars (e.g., M. Schanz-C. Hosius, Gesch. d. röm. Lit. I 4 (1927), 526), on the strength of a supposed promise in Div. 2, 75 : de hoc loco plura in aliis, considered to have been an appendix to the De Divina-

tione. The scanty fragments, however (in vol. 4, part 3, 312 of Miiller's edition), taken with Cicero's o w n pride in his augurship, suggest that it was rather a technical or antiquarian than a theoretical work; cf. R. Hirzel, Der Dialog, 1 (1895), 537, n. 3; Pease, ed. of Div. 1 (1920), 10, n. 13. 8 This has survived only in a much damaged form. ' E.g., 2, 7-12; 3, 14-15, for divination; 1, 55; 3, 14; 3, 19, for fate. 8 Cf. 3, 19: de divinatione, de fato, quibus de quaestionibus tu quidem strictim, nostri autem multa soient dicere, sed ab hoc ea quaestione quae nunc in manibus est separantur\Div. 1, 9 : sed quodpraetermissum est in Ulis libris (i.e., the N.D.), credo quìa commodius arbitratus es separatim id quaeri deque eo disseri, id est de divinatione . . . id, si placet, videamus; Pease, ed. of Div. 1 (1920), 10, n. 8. 9 Though the Stoics attempted to involve inextricably divination and a belief in the gods; cf. Div. 1, 82-83; 2,101-106.

INTRODUCTION

9

emphasized the separateness of the two latter treatises from the De Natura Deorum and from one another by giving to each its own scene and speakers. In the De Natura Deorum, which has been called "perhaps the most important contribution to theological thought which we have from classical antiquity," 1 may be seen a further step toward an historical and objective treatment, in that, by setting the dialogue back into the period of his youth and by making himself appear in a very minor rôle,2 he clearly differentiates opinions expressed by the principal disputants from his own personal beliefs.3 Again, in the introduction, speaking in his own character, he deplores the vulgar curiosity of readers about the author's individual views.4 Accordingly I am convinced that the puzzling last sentence of the whole work,5 in which the Academic Cicero casts his vote, so to speak, on the opposite side of the question from the Academic Cotta, indicates that the dialogue is intended to exemplify Academic methods of inquiry rather than Academic dogma, and to illustrate the freedom of the Academy from dogmatic bonds and the possibility of using such individual liberty for the acceptance of any practical working principle.6 THE ROMAN RELIGIOUS BACKGROUND

3. Though Cicero is concerned with the opinions of philosophers about religion (i.e., with the philosophy of religion) rather than with the beliefs or cults of different religions themselves,7 it is not inappropriate to glance briefly at the background of the Roman religion against which his treatise must be interpreted.8 The established religion of the 1 J. B. Mayor, ed. of N.D. 3 (1885), xviii, who remarks that though less inspired than Plato Cicero is wider in his range. 2 Though it should be noted that in the few. words which he puts into his own mouth (1, 17; cf. 3, 95) he stoutly defends his freedom from the restrictions of any creed and his right to make his decisions on the basis of probability. On this descriptive aim cf. A. S. Pease in Trans. Am. philol. Assoc. 44 (1913), 33. 3 But cf. η. 1, p. 34, below. 4 1, 6; 1, 10. Though he perhaps makes a shy concession to public curiosity by indicating in 3, 95, his support of the more probable views of Balbus; cf. R. Hirzel, Der Dialog, 1 (1895), 533. 5 3, 95. 6 Cf. A. S. Pease, op. cit., 44 (1913),

36-37; also η. 2, p. 36, below. 7 Cf. C. Thiaucourt, Essai sur les traités philos, de Cic. (1885), 250; W. W. Fowler, Rom. Ideas of Deity (1914), 10, who remarks that Cicero was hardly able to get back from theology to religion, and "thé real value of his work is in giving us the best speculative ideas of deity current in his time." The differences between the cults of the state and theologically ideal religious beliefs are discussed by G. Stoerling, Quaest. Cicerón. ad Relig. spectantes (1894), 10. Fowler {op. cit., 7) considers the whole age one of theological questioning as opposed to earlier religious acceptance of rites handed down. 8 In addition to works specifically on Roman religion there may here be mentioned W. Kroll, Die Kultur d. cicerón. Zeit, 2 (1933), 1-25; 151-157.

10

INTRODUCTION

state, always formal, legalistic,1 and thoroughly conservative, emphasizing correctness of ritual 2 rather than mystical union with or ethical imitation of its several colorless deities,3 and expecting in return for that meticulous correctness an almost contractual performance by the gods of their engagements with men,4 was gradually wearing out, like other human institutions.6 Though highly praised by Polybius,6 because of its cohesive and controlling effect upon the Roman populace, it had long and often been used by factions, particularly the patricians, for the purposes of party advancement or obstruction.7 Its highest priesthood, that of the pontifex maximus, had been gained in 63 B.C. by a man of such little piety and spiritual feeling as Julius Caesar,8 who, according to Suetonius,9 had acquired it by lavish bribery. In part because of the decline of the old nobility during the Civil Wars and in part because of burdensome ritual requirements,10 important priesthoods, such as that of the flamen Dialis, had become interrupted,11 while in the physical apparatus of religion so many shrines had during the latter part of the Republic fallen into neglect that Augustus found it necessary in 28 B.C. to restore eighty-two of them in the city of Rome alone.12 An antiquarian habit of mind, which regarded religion and its rites as a proper topic for critical research rather than as an aid to spiritual devotion, is well illustrated by Varrò, ubique expugnator religionist in his 1 Cf. the thoroughly legalistic details in connection with the consecration and deconsecration of the site of Cicero's house (Kroll, op. cit., 2, 8-12). 2 Cf. Fowler, op. cit., 11, for the Roman's interest in the cult rather than in the objects of it. On p. 83 he remarks: "the study of the Roman religion begins and ends with the cult." 3 Some of these were hardly personalized numina, and the more lively and colorful ones were often importations from abroad, Greek, Egyptian, Phrygian, Chaldaean, and Jewish, rather grudgingly, if at all, admitted into the state establishment. 4 On the business principle of do ut des-, cf. Kroll, op. cit., 14. 6 Fowler, op. cit., 18; 82; who points out that Varrò (ap. Aug. C.D. 6, 4) wrote on human antiquities prior to his work on divine antiquities, quod prius extiterint civitates, deinde ab eis haec instituto sint. ' 6, 56, 6-15. His remarks seem echoed

by Liv. 1, 19, 4; see also 1, 118, below. 7 On the connection between religion and politics cf. Kroll, op. cit., 2, 11. 8 Cf. the passages cited by P. Groebe in P.-W. 10 (1917), 192. But on Caesar as a type of unbeliever cf. Kroll, op. cit., 2, 19. » /«/. 13. 10 Cf. Tac. Ann. 4, 16, 2-4; Kroll, op. cit., 2, 18-19; 25. 11 The priesthood remained unfilled for 75 years after the suicide of C. Cornelius Merula in 87 B.C. ; cf. F. Münzer in P.-W. 4 (1901), 1408. The flamen Dialis was perhaps always more noteworthy for what he might not do (cf. Gell. 10, 15, for the taboos upon his actions) than for what he did do. 12 Res gestae Divi Aug. 20. 13 Serv. Aen. 11, 564. G. Boissier (La relig. rom. I 4 (1892), 48) remarks that when Stilo and Varrò attempted to arrest the decay of the old religion, they did so by research into its history, but without faith in its basis.

INTRODUCTION

11

Antiquifates divinae·,1 at another angle stood such representatives of occultism as Appius Claudius Pulcher 2 and the learned Neopythagorean, P. Nigidius Figulus, the latter of whom wrote works on the gods and on different sorts of divination.3 Still others resorted to astrology, against which Cicero stoutly protests in the De Divinatione,4 or to various kinds of magic, which find their reflection in Virgil's Eighth Eclogue. Numerous oriental immigrants brought with them their own native rites,6 including mysteries of different kinds,6 and into these rites Romans 1 On their content and tone see M. Schanz-C. Hosius, Gesch. d. röm. Lit. I 4 (1927), 565; also R. Hirzel, Der Dialog, 1 (1895), 531; 532, n. 1; C. Thiaucourt, op. cit., 247 ; and n. 6, p. 10, above. Augustine, who in C.D. books 6 and 7 draws much upon Varrò, speaks of books by him on the pontífices, augurs, and XVviri (C.D. 6, 3), and also (6, 5) of his discussion of natural, civil, and mythical gods. Concerning the natural ones multos libros philosophi reliquerunt ; in quibus est, di qui sint, ubi, quod genus, quale; a quodam tempore an a sempiterno fuerint di; ex igni sint, ut credit Heraclitus, an ex numeris, ut Pythagoras, an ex atomis, ut ait Epicurus; from which it would appear that Varrò touched upon many of the questions raised by Cicero in the present work. Varro's study is apparently earlier than the De Natura Deorum, since Cicero in Ac. 1, 9, speaks in general terms of it, and the Res divinae was dedicated to Julius Caesar as Pontifex Maximus in the autumn of 47 B.C. (cf. Lact. Inst. 1, 6, 7; Aug. C.D. 7, 35). The antiquarian point of view may also be seen in the Empire, e.g., in Festus and Gellius. 2 Cf. Pease, ed. of Div. 1 (1920), 12. 3 R. Hirzel, Der Dialog, 1 (1895), 538, n. 1 (on his relation to the De Divinatione')·, Pease, I.e. ; M. Schanz-C. Hosius, Gesch. d. röm. Lit. I 4 (1927), 552-553; W. Kroll, op. cit., 2, 25. Cic. Tim. 1, calls him an acer investigator et diligens earum rerum quae a natura involutae videntur, and a reviver of Pythagorean dogmas; cf. M. I. Rostovtzeff, Mystic Italy (1927), 14-15. Suet. Aug. 94, makes him acquainted with astrological calculations. For Cicero's intimacy with him see Plut. Cic. 20, 2; the views of

Figulus, however, seem to have had but little effect upon Cicero, unless after the death of Tullia; T. Frank, Lije and Lit. in the Rom. Rep. (1930), 219-222. Jerome (Chron. ann. Abr. 1972) says Figulus died in exile in this very year 45. For protests against divination see the De Divinatione, 2, passim. Hor. S. 1, 6,114 (seven or eight years after our work) speaks of the diviners who frequented the Forum in the evening. 4 2, 87-99. Cicero mentions by name (Div. 2, 98) his friend L. Tarutius Firmanus as in primis Chaldaicis rationibus eruditus. On the penetration of astrology into the higher circles cf. Kroll, op. cit., 2, 14; 2, 154, η. 38. 5 Cf. F. Cumont, Relig. orientales4 (1929), passim; Kroll, op. cit., 2, 156, n. 60. W. W. Fowler (Rom. Ideas of Deity (1914), 85-86) remarks that their devotees cared little for the gods of the state. 6 Cf. M. I. Rostovtzeff, Mystic Italy (1927); but also Kroll's wise dissent (I.e.) from associating Cicero as closely with such as Rostovtzeff (p. 17) would do. It may be that W. W. Fowler also goes too far (Rei. Exp. of the Rom. People (1911), 384-386; 389; cf. id., Rom. Ideas of Deity (1914), 3-4) in ascribing to Cicero after the death of Tullia a period of somewhat mystical religious feeling (cf. Ait. 12, 12-40); whether the mysteries could have prepared him for such an emergency is somewhat doubtful. I suspect that his Consolatio (based on Crantor, περί πένθους) and his desire to retain the memory of Tullia by means of a fanum—perhaps with a statue— are both rather conventional methods, as in the Wisdom of Solomon, 14, 15—perhaps written not very far from the date of

12

INTRODUCTION

also were inducted, either in Italy or in the East.1 The growing belief in the possibility of a man-god, produced by the deification of rulers and benefactors,2 the bringing of humanity and divinity into close relations, by a Euhemeristic explanation of the gods of the past, and the political importance of these beliefs in supporting the divinity of kings, 3 were, at the period when our work was being written, paving the way for the deification of Caesar.4 Simple piety, of a sort, still lingered, especially in the country, and seems, at times, as in Horace's charming picture of Phidyle,6 to have added to the popular religion both a mellowness and an ethical content which the established cult and even, perhaps, family worship too often lacked.® Yet what we think of as a religious consciousness was probably present to the minds of comparatively few. 7 RELIGIOUS SPECULATION IN CICERO'S DAY

4. Contrasted with these varieties of religious expression, whether established or dissenting, were the theological speculations of groups of more highly educated Romans, trained in some one of the Greek philosophical schools, of which Epicureanism and Stoicism were, at the time of Cicero, the most important.8 The ability of educated men the N.D.—which describes a mourning father as making an image of his dead child and honoring it as a god with ceremonies and sacrifices. 1 Cf. Kroll, op. cit., 2,24-25; 156, η. 63. 2 Cf. N.D. 1, 119, and nn. 3 W. W. Fowler, Rom. Ideas of Deity (1914), 101-104. 4 Id., 113-123. 6 C. 3, 23; cf. Cic. Legg. 2, 25; Plaut. Rud. 26-27; Sen. De Ben. 1, 6, 3; W. Kroll in Wiener Stud. 37 (1915), 229. M. P. Nilsson {Harv. theo!. Rev. 36 (1943), 257) emphasizes the renascence of rustic cults in the second century after Christ. 6 On the lack of connection between religion and morality cf. W. Kroll, Die Kultur d. cicerón. Zeit, 2, 23, who points out that it is incorrect to associate the decline of morality in the Ciceronian Age with the decline of religion, since the two were not intimately connected in theory or practice. 7 W. W. Fowler, op. cit., 25-26; also Kroll, op. cit., 2, 8; 153, η. 24, for the views of Zeller and others upon the essential childishness of the resultant

Roman religion; cf. M. I. RostovtzefF, Mystic Italy (1927), 14, who also observes (p. 7) : "the more skeptical and rationalistic the higher classes grew, the deeper and more firmly rooted became the religiosity of the masses, especially in the villages and the farms and in the slums, among the slaves and the wage earners of the growing factories." Ovid, some time later, writes ( A r s amat. 1, 637) : expedit esse deos, et, ut expedit, esse putemus. 8 The Academics—a group negligible in number (N.D. 1, 6; 1, 11) and undogmatic in their views—, the Peripatetics, who seemed to some hardly different from the Stoics (1, 16), and the Pythagoreans, as revived by Nigidius Figulus (cf. η. 3, p. 11, above) and others, are not given by Cicero any distinctive treatment in this work, save as they are touched upon in the doxographic sections of the speech of Velleius (1, 18-24; 1, 28; 1, 30-35). To have emphasized the distinction between the Stoics and the Peripatetics would have blurred the picture; the doxography in 1, 25-41, indicates to the reader a little of the large hinterland lying back of the coasts along

INTRODUCTION

13

to conform in public observances to the established cults of the state and yet in their private conversations with intimate friends to engage in the most untrammeled freedom of religious thought and expression has often been remarked,1 and in this Cicero was no exception.2 The settings of several of his philosophic dialogues in the seclusion of small house-parties of intimate friends during festivals or vacations give opportunity for free and confidential treatment of almost any nonpolitical subject. " T o write what you wish to have kept hidden is the mark of one lacking in self-restraint," Cicero makes Varrò say in the Académica,3 and it might cause surprise that Cicero saw fit to publish treatises as controversial and outspoken as the De Natura Deorum and

the De Divinatione. The fact that he did so seems to testify to the extent to which such discussions were taking place in his day. "These dialogues," remarks Cyril Bailey,4 "for all their literary shortcomings and their philosophical weakness, have for us the peculiar interest that they represent the thoughts of educated persons in a time of great religious upheaval and uncertainty." EPICUREANS AND STOICS

5. Between the Epicureans and the Stoics, the two schools which Cicero has singled out for especial notice, there were striking theological contrasts.6 The Epicureans seem more convinced of the form of their gods (as anthropomorphic) and of their eternal blessedness than of their reality, depending for their impressions on natural preconceptions ; which he cruises. Cicero's treatise is far f r o m perfect, but his method o f s u g g e s t i n g the many while he elaborates one or t w o typical instances is characteristic of the ancient fine arts and is to be seen in such a literary man as V i r g i l ; cf. A . S. Pease, ed. o f Aen. IV (1935), 31. T h e artist here prevails in Cicero over the methodical historian of philosophy. 1 N.B. 1, 6 1 ; 3, 5-6; 3, 4 3 ; Pease o n Div. 2, 148, n. (maiorum instituto inert); W. Kroll, Die Kultur d. cicerón. Zeit, 2 (1933), 17-18. T h e separation of religion and morality and a somewhat superficial philosophy doubtless made less difficult this divorce o f cult f r o m theory, yet, as C. Bailey remarks ( R e i i g . in Virgil (1935), 311), " t h e problem as regards the traditional religion and its theology is not what is their value, but how they

are to be fitted into a philosophical scheme o f the w o r l d . " 2 Cf. Pease, ed. of Div. 1 (1920), 11, n. 16. Cicero's pride in his position as a u g u r and in the augural art (e.g., Fam. 6, 6, 4) was considerable, though it would have been anachronistic t o have referred t o it in the present work. 3

1, 2.

Class. Rev. 37 (1923), 30. Bailey does not agree with W. W. Fowler that Cicero failed to relate his philosophic thinking t o the life around him. Possibly so, if it be to the ideas o f the man in the street, but he well represents the kind of discussion g o i n g on in learned and literary circles, m o r e interested in fundamental problems than in cult. 5 Cf. H . Jeanmaire in Rev. d'bist. de la philos., N . S . 1 (1933), 33. 4

14

INTRODUCTION

the Stoics, on the other hand, are more sure of the reality of the gods than of their actual form (since their gods include many quite diverse forms), proving their existence by a variety of syllogistic and other reasonings.1 The Epicurean gods are hedonistic, inactive, and selfcentred, excusing by their example similar hedonism and avoidance of public duties on the part of their devotees ; the Stoic gods, through the action of their providence, are the creators and the ceaseless maintainers of the universe, as well as of all its minutest parts, and their worshippers lay emphasis upon the due performance of civic and other responsibilities. The Epicurean adores in his mind and from afar the divine perfection, but though advancing this important step toward mysticism is yet forever, by his physical nature, cut off from encouragement or notice by his deity and from the possibility of communion with him; 2 the Stoic, however, finds his gods at times in corporeal theophanies and is at other times conscious of them as immanent even though intangible. Divergences between the two views which might otherwise have seemed somewhat theoretical and academic were reinforced not only by sectarian partisanship but by the effects of the two theologies upon the respective practices of their adherents. Both schools might include within them upright and high-minded men, though the one group might too often and too easily slip into libertinism, the other into a smug and apathetic Pharisaism—the two extremes which subsequent ages have constantly associated with the terms "Epicurean" and "Stoic." CICERO AS A MEDIATOR

6. Cicero himself, eclectic in tastes though nominally Academic in allegiance,3 was by disposition a middle-of-the-road man, in many respects exemplifying that characteristically Greek virtue of the mean which Aristotle so naturally made the basis of his ethical system and which reappears in persons, like Horace, who were far removed from 1 M. I. Rostovtzeff, Mystic Italy (1927), 14: "For the highest intellects there was the Stoic philosophy as remodelled by Posidonius, reconciling science and religion"; cf. id., 9, for Posidonius as "the first 'scientific' spiritualist of the world." a W. W. Fowler, The rei. Exp. of the Rom. People (1911), 468, remarks of the Romans more generally: "in the most emotional moments of the life of a

Roman of enlightenment like Cicero, when we can truly say of him that he was touched by true religious feeling, as well as by the spiritual aspirations of the nobler Greek philosophers, prayers find no place at all." 3 Cf. η. 1, p. 36, below; Tuse. 5, 82: quoniam te nulla vincula impediunt ullius certae disciplinae libasque ex omnibus quodcumque te maxime specie veritatis movet.

INTRODUCTION

15

any explicit avowal of Peripatetic doctrines. This principle of the mean may be seen in Cicero's attempts to harmonize 1 two conflicting political parties, to take a middle stylistic course between the extremes of Atticism and Asianism, to follow the best usage as an anomalist rather than the doctrinaire rules of analogy, and, not least, in his desire to steer a middle course between the religious extremes of atheistic negation on the one hand and superstition on the other.2 His friendships with philosophers of different schools 3 rendered him tolerant toward views unlike his own, and his Academic principles coupled with his experience as a lawyer led him to examine considerations both for and against different views,4 and to reject untenable arguments even when advanced in support of reasonable views.5 If this at times leads, from lack of opportunity for Epicurean and Stoic rebuttal of Cotta's attacks,6 to the impression of a purely negative attitude on Cicero's part 7 towards the gods, this view should be corrected from other passages in which he speaks quite definitely, especially near the end of the De Divinatione 8 and in several His critics would say "to straddle." Cf. Div. 2,149; F. Solmsen in Class. Weekly, 37 (1944), 159-160, who thinks that "for Cicero religio is a political, not a private problem." 3 N.D. 1, 7; cf. 1, 59, where Cotta may be representing Cicero himself. 4 N.D. 1, 11; 1, 57. 6 E.g., N.D. 1, 62; 1, 64; 3, 9-10; 3, 13; 3, 93-95; and in general in the speeches of Cotta. • N.D. 2, 1; 3, 94. 7 So T. Frank ( L i f e and Lit. in the Rom. Rep. (1930), 217) thinks Cicero privately an agnostic who accepted the state religion as useful for the maintenance of the social order. On Cicero's own religious views cf. also R. Kühner, M.T.C, in Philos, eiusdemque Partes Merita (1825), 198-200; F. Cumont, After Life in Rom. Paganism (1922), 31 (thinking him an agnostic for most of his life); L. Gueuning in Nova et Vetera, 7 (1925), 233-246 ; 324-343 ; 8 (1926), 1-22; 11 (1929), 24-38; M. J. Lagrange, La relig. de Cic. d'après le De N.D. in Ephem. theolog. Lovanienses, 5 (1928), 413-425; L. Laurand, Cicerón2 (1934), 351-357. 8 Div. 2, 148: nam et maiorum instituía tueri sacris caerimoniisque retinendis sapientis est, et esse praestantem aliquam aeternamque naturam et earn suspiciendam admirandamque 1 2

hominum generi pulchritudo mundi ordoque rerum caelestium cogit confiteri·, cf. Har. Resp. 19: etenim quis est tam vecors qui aut, cum suspexit in caelum, deos esse non sentiat, et ea quae tanta mente fiunt ut viχ quisquam arte ulla ordinem rerum et necessitudinem per sequi possit casu fieri putet, aut, cum deos esse intellexerit, non intellegat eorum numine hoc tantum imperium esse natum et auctum et retentum (though A. D. Nock, ed. of Sallustius (1926), lxviii, n. 133, thinks this passage and Pro Mil. 83, merely express rhetorical commonplaces). In Τ use. 1, 30, the doctrine of consensus is admitted without refutation; see further Τ use. 1, 62-63; and many passages in the Letters collected by L. Laurand, Cicerón2 (1934), 353-355, who corrects the often quoted statement of G. Boissier, La relig. rom. I 4 (1892), 58-59, that Cicero in his intimate correspondence shows little indication of interest in religious matters. Also we may perhaps cite Cotta's words in N.D. 3,10; 3, 93; 3, 95 (which, thinks R. Hirzel, Der Dialog, 1 (1895), 533, answers on Cicero's part the curiosity of his readers expressed in 1, 10); cf. too A. S. Pease in Trans. Am. philol. Assoc. 44 (1913), 27-37; M. Y. Henry, Rei. of Dogmatism and Scepticism in the philos. Treatises of Cic. (1925), 53-55; M. I. Rostovtzeff, Mystic Italy (1927), 5

16

INTRODUCTION

places in the Letters. That he is throughout our work primarily rational rather than emotional and that he shows little of the imagination of Plato's Republic or of the wistfulness of Virgil's Aeneid, with no attempt to transcend the limits of logical inference by a Myth of Er or a revelation by Anchises,1 may in part be due to his dependence upon technical and matter-of-fact Greek sources and in part to an unwillingness to confuse and weaken the cogency of logic by the introduction of mythological or legendary matter 2 or by appeals to the emotions. Further, agnosticism about the gods in the case of an Academic, who is on principle agnostic about everything else, is less significant than it would be in one normally dogmatic in his other beliefs. HIS PHILOSOPHIC QUALIFICATIONS

7. Granted, then, that Cicero is attempting to present in Latin for the benefit of his countrymen the typical philosophic views then current in Greece, the question may be asked whether he was by education, disposition, and "opportunity of leisure" competent for this task. (a) In general philosophic training, whether measured by formal attendance upon lectures3 or by his intimate acquaintance with leading philosophers of the day 4—even with those of schools to which he himself felt but little drawn, like Epicureanism 5—, he was perhaps as (who speaks of "the refined, utterly modern Cicero . . . with his vague deistic outlook"); T. Frank, op. cit., 221-222; W. Kroll, Die Kultur d. cicerón. Zeit, 2 (1933), 20-22 (giving many instances from the orations and letters of Cicero's religious expressions, which H. J. Haskell, This was Cicero (1942), 300, thinks are mere fossilized phrases, like those often used by an earlier American generation) ; C. Beukers, Cicero's Godsdienstigheid (1942), with a collection of the significant passages). Gueuning remarks {op. cit., 7, 329-330) that Cicero does not attempt a definite refutation of atheism. True, yet it should be noted that he speaks of it in his own words in N.D. 1, 3-4, as a politically and socially disintegrating influence. 1 The nearest approach, in N.D. 2, 95-97, is borrowed from Aristotle, with reworking and paraphrase of the theme by Cicero himself. In this respect the N.D. contrasts with the De República, where the Somnium Scipionis furnishes

an excellent example of the myth. 2 Cf. 3, 12: nonne mavis illud credere quod probari potest ... si hoc fieri potuisse diets, doceas oportet quo modo, nec fabellas añiles proferas·, 3,13: "rumoribus", inquit, "mecum pugnas, Balbe, ego autem a te rationes require." 3 E.g., 1, 6: principes Uli Diodotus, Philo, Antiochus, Posidonius, a quibus instituti sumus (P. Boyancé (Rev. des et. lat. 14 (1936), 294-295) thinks the influence of Diodotus was great; for Antiochus cf. id., 296, η. 1); 1, 58-59 (spoken by Cotta but surely based on Cicero's own experience). 4 E.g., 1, 6: doctissimorum hominum familiaritates, quibus semper domus nostra floruit. On his philosophic training cf. Plut. Cic. 3, 1; 4, 1-4; R. Philippson in P.-W. 7A (1939), 1173-1177. δ Cf. Fin. 1, 16, where he claims to have learned adequately from Phaedrus and Zeno the doctrines of Epicurus. In our work Cotta's treatment of both Epicureans and Stoics is personally

INTRODUCTION

17

well grounded as any native Roman of his day. 1 T o what extent in each case he drew directly upon the Presocratics, Plato, Aristotle, o r Theophrastus, and to what extent he used epitomes of their views it w o u l d be interesting, if w e could, to know, 2 but whether Cicero w o u l d appear more unfavorably under such scrutiny than many modern writers on similar topics may perhaps be queried. W i t h contemporary philosophical writers he seems to have been in touch, and if it be the case that these were, as M r . Warde Fowler supposes, 3 only modifying older systems o f philosophy to suit their o w n age and not producing, like the old Socratic school, a natural and organic growth f r o m the soil, the fault should not be entirely imputed to Cicero, w h o was himself attempting t o furnish what he thought would be of value to his contemporaries.

courteous, though not uniformly intellectually respectful, but it is clear that Cicero's sympathies lie more with the latter than with the former. Many have felt a certain lack of impartiality in his treatment of Epicureanism—perhaps because of its political quietism —, though it is surely going too far to say, with A. Momigliano (Journ. of Rom. Stud. 31 (1941), 150), that Cicero, by a taint of plebeianism, was inclined to discredit everything which he disliked. G. Behncke, De Cic. Epic. Philos. Existimatore et Indice (1879), thinks Cicero not entirely fair to Epicurus; H. Uri, Cic. u. d. epik. Philos. (1914), 116—a more thorough study—believes that the fundamental principles of Epicurus and Cicero were too different for the second to appreciate the former, but that it would be unfair to blame Cicero for that difference. T. Frank ( L i f e and Lit. in the Rom. Rep. (1930), 216-217) observes that Cicero selected, to paraphrase and expand, those doctrines which he considered significant, omitting those which met his disfavor, thus making a result which is in considerable measure his own. But while this is at times true it is also the case that in the first book of the N.D. his selections from Epicureanism are almost all of views which he does not approve. On his Epicurean friends cf. C. Vicol in Ephem. Dacoromana, 10 (1945), 171. 1 W. W. Fowler, Rom. Ideas of Deity (1914), 3, thinks Varrò was less of an amateur than Cicero. Yet Cicero, though

granting Varro's versatility (Ac. 1, 10), says : philosopbiamque multis locis incobasti, ad impellendum satis, ad edocendum parum. 2 J. B. Mayor, ed. of N.D. 3 (1885), xiv: "We must not wonder therefore if Cicero's wide scheme contracts itself to the paraphrase or adaptation of two or three contemporary writings and the exposition of the Epicurean and Stoic theologies"; cf. H. Usener, Epicurea (1887), lxv-lxviii ; H. Uri, Cic. ». d. epik. Philos. (1914), 4; 114 (who thinks that Cicero had no knowledge of Epicureanism as a whole, but a superficial acquaintance with its canon and its natural philosophy as well as a somewhat clearer understanding of its ethics). T. B. DeGraff (Class. Philol. 35 (1940), 143153) shows that he was essentially accurate in reproducing the views of Plato. For a decided inaccuracy in reporting Xenophon cf. 1, 31, η. (Xenophon), below. C. Giambelli (Riv. di filol. 17 (1889), 245) recognizes that Cicero, like other ancients, was not scientifically exact according to modern standards, but made a conscientious attempt to arrive at the truth. P. Boyancé (Rev. des ét. lat. 14 (1936), 288) well remarks upon the tendency of source-hunters to disparage Cicero. See also below, on the sources of the N.D. 3 Op. cit. 6. P. Shorey, Platonism anc. and mod. (1938), 17-18; 33-34, praises Cicero as "the best example of the transmission of Platonic thought by great Platonists." 2

18

INTRODUCTION

(b) By disposition Gcero was better qualified for a philosophical popularizer than for a pioneer in thought 1 or in religious experience. It is not unlikely that Vellerns is the mouthpiece of the author when he says to Cotta 2 that although he is not disturbed by a flow of empty words he also is not impressed by acuteness of thought accompanied by dryness of exposition. Many philosophic writers had made little concession to the reader; 3 Cicero had had too much practical experience as a public speaker and as a man of the world 4 to make him satisfied with an idea as such unless embodied in persuasive forms of expression,6 and even he finds it hard to incorporate in his flowing style the bony syllogisms of Zeno and Chrysippus in Book 2.6 But though he could not originate much in the way of ideas he rendered incomparable service in the formation of a Latin philosophic vocabulary,7 a task also 1 W. W. Fowler, Rom. Ideas of Deity (1914), 2-3, remarks: "The subject is one of enormous difficulty, far beyond Cicero's mental reach . . . Amateur's work will not find a path through subject-matter like this, and Cicero may fairly be described as an interested amateur." Plut. Cic. 32, 5, reveals Cicero's own ambition: πολλάκις αύτύς ήξίου τούς φίλους μή Ρήτορα καλεϊν αύτόν άλλά φιλόσοφον· φιλοσοφίαν γαρ ώς έργον ήρήσθαι, ρητορική δ1 ¿ργάνω χρήσθαι πολιτευόμενος έπΐ τάς χρείας. 2 Cf. 2, 1 : ñeque enim flamine conturbor inanium verborum nec subtilitate sententìarum si orationis est siccitas. 3 Cf. 1, 59, where Zeno of Sidon and Velleius, in contrast to plerique, are said to speak distincte, graviter, ornate·, Tuse. 1, 7: banc enim perfectam philosophiam semper iudicavi quae de maximis quaestionibus copiose posset ornateque dicere. « J. B. Mayor, ed. of N.D. 3 (1885), xiv: "considered as a philosopher, he has the misfortune to be at the same time a lawyer, an orator and a man of the world: in his philosophical treatises we are too often conscious of the author holding a brief, appealing to the populace, writing against time and amidst countless distractions, far removed from the whole-hearted concentration of a Plato or a Lucretius" ; H. Usener, Epicurea (1887), lxv: nego Ciceronem eum fuisse qui pbilosophum Graecum veritatem spinosa arte exputantem et in viscera rerum pene-

trantem sequi aut vellet aut posset, foro natum erat hoc ingenium, non scholae. 6 This notion is well illustrated in Parad. 1-3, where he undertakes, as a rhetorical exercise, to put into popularly convincing form the more difficult and repellent of the Stoic paradoxes. K. Reinhardt {Poseidonios (1921), 213) suggests that Cicero might in his youth, as a rhetorical task, have declaimed on the subject of the existence of the gods, and he compares Theon, Progymn. 12, on subjects for declamation, including εί θεοί είσι. At p. 261 he warns against identifying the scientific Weltanschauung of the scientist-philosopher Posidonius with the popularizations of a preacher like Cicero. « Cf. Κ. Reinhardt, op. cit., 209; also M. Pohlenz in Gotting. Nachrichten, Philol.-hist. Kl. N.F. 1 (1934), 37, for the way in which in the De Officiis Cicero filled out a skeleton sketch sent him by Athenodorus and converted the schematic argumentation into an artistic piece of work by the addition of Roman anecdotes and experiences of his own. This ability to expand a brief may well have been a by-product of his legal experience. 7 Cf. 1, 8, n. (diciposse), below; J. N. Madvig, ed. of De Fin. (1876), lxv, who thinks that because of the difficulty of writing in Latin on these themes Cicero sometimes produced words rather than thoughts.

INTRODUCTION

19

confronting Lucretius, but within the narrower limits of a single philosophic school. As to Cicero's accuracy in the use of his Greek sources opinions have differed widely, some thinking him careless and hurried throughout, 1 others believing that in the first book of the De Natura Deorum some of the inaccuracies "imagined by modern scholars are not there; many of them were the views of the earlier philosophers which were currently accepted in the schools of Cicero's time—very few anywhere can be proved to be Cicero's own errors. On. the whole Cicero's philosophical works are translations (as he himself often implies) and fairly faithful translations too." 2 The author himself, in a famous letter to Atticus,3 declares of his works that they are transcripts (άπόγραφα), produced with little labor, and that he himself furnishes only the words, of which he has plenty. While the latter element made possible a good deal of variation from—and probably often improvement upon— the form of his originals, the former part might have confined his thought within definite limits. Yet the tendency of modern scholars seems to be somewhat away from the assumption of single sources for Cicero, and more in the direction of supposing that he himself did a certain amount of compilation and digestion from many sources.4 (c) Cicero's opportunity for such writing arose from enforced retirement. In his earlier life the expression of his philosophic interests had been, save for the De República, somewhat incidental and mostly confined to flosculi in his orations,6 but his remarkable productivity in 45-44 B.C.,® though the product of oüum,7 was yet impaired by two considerations, first, his grief for Tullia, and, second, the expectation that he might at any moment be recalled from his temporary retirement to resume his services to the state.8 That such distractions, arising from both past 1 E.g., H. Usenet, quoted in n. 4, p. 18, above; J. N. Madvig, op. cit., lxiv-lxv; H. Diels, Doxogr. Gr.2 (1939), 122-125 (blaming Cicero and defending Philodemus); also A. Lörcher, in Burs. Jahresb. 200, 2 (1924), 106, who recognizes, however, that Cicero may at times have represented unfamiliar views more accurately than a more independent thinker might have done; R. Philippson in P.-W. 7A (1939), 1181: Das was ihn zum grössten Redner seiner Zeit und seines Volkes machte, stand ihm als Philosophen im Wege. 2 So J. S. Reid in litt. ap. J. W. Duff, A lit. Hist, of Rome (1909), 390, n. See also n. 4, p. 18, above. 8 Att. 12, 52, 3: απόγραφα sunt, minore

labore fiunt; verba tantum adfero, quibus abundo. 4 Cf. Α. Lörcher in Burs. Jahresb. 200,2 (1924), 145 (reviewing Κ. Reinhardts Poseidonios and H. Uri's Cic. u. d. epik. Philos.)·, cf. id., 105; 135. 6 Cf. 1, 6: cum minime videbamur tum maxime philosophabamur ; quod et orationes declarant, refertae philosophorum sententiis. ' Perhaps the reworking in part of earlier studies; cf. M. van den Bruwaene, La théologie de Cic. (1937), 38—influenced by R. Hirzel. 7 For passages describing his otium cf. M. Schanz-C.Hosius, Gesch. d. rom. Lit. I 4 (1927), 528-529. 8 Cf. Div. 2, 7: nunc quoniam de re publica consult coepti sumus, tribuenda est

20

INTRODUCTION

and future, could hardly conduce to the ataraxy needful for philosophic contemplation and expression needs no proof.1 We cannot, perhaps, do better than accept Madvig's sober judgment 2 that we should be grateful to Cicero for expounding philosophy in the Latin language and for preserving to us such important materials for the knowledge of the Greek philosophers, yet, over and above all this, recognize in him a skill in the art of clear popularization which remains unmatched.3 THE DATE OF COMPOSITION OF THIS WORK

8. The date of composition of our work is determined first by Div. 2, 3; quibus (i.e., the Tusculans) editis, tres libri perfecti sunt de natura deorum, in quibus omnis eius loci questio contineturï Since the Tusculans fall in the earlier part of 45 B.C. 6 and the De Divinatione was not completed till after the murder of Caesar,6 we have rather definite termini post and ante quem. Other indications are found in the letters to Atticus dating from this period, though some of these are doubtful and require caution in their use. Thus in Att. 13, 8 (8 June, 45) Cicero asks epitomen Bruti Coelianorum velim mihi mittas et a Philoxeno Παναιτίου περί προνοίας, and scholars have attempted, somewhat rashly, to tie these references down to N.D. 2, 8 (where Coelius is cited) and 2, 118 (where Panaetius is opera rei publicae, vel omnis potius in ea cogitatio et cura ponendo, tantum buie studio relinquendum quantum vacabit a publico o f f i c i o et muñere·, also Div. 1, 22 (and Pease's η. on quod patriae vacat); Rep. 1, 8; De Or. 1, 3; O f f . 2, 4; In Caecil. 41. 1 Cf. Madvig, op. cit., bri ν : fetreus sit, quem non moveat imago Ciceronis inter gravissimas curas, ex honestis causis ortas, de philosophia scribendo solatium capientis. sed tarnen non erat ea animi temporumque condicio aptissima ad banc materiam, ei praesertim, qui in hoc genere cogitandi, quo ipsae notiones omni detracto involucro artificiose tractantur, non esset exercitatissimus. itaque, nisi superstitiosi merito dici volumus, confitendum est aperte, acctdisse aliquotiens Ciceroni, quae in tali causa expectanda erant, etc., mentioning, in the De Finibus, examples of lack of clarity on difficult points, neglect of the trend of the discussion, carelessness in expressing the force of arguments, and one or two cases of confusion. 2 Op. cit., lxvii.

3 Cf. F. Altheim, Hist, of Rom. Relig. (Engl. tr. 1938), 373-374. For protests against underrating the philosophic thoughtfulness of Cicero see P. Boyancé in Rev. des ét. lat. 14 (1936), 288 ; 293; 309; M. van den Bruwaene, La théologie de Cic. (1937), viii. T. Zielinski (Cic. im Wandel d. fahrhunderte2 (1908), 10) well remarks : die Kulturgeschichte nicht viele Momente kennt, die an Bedeutung dem Aufenthalte Ciceros aus seinen Landgütern während der kurzen Alleinherrschaft Caesars gleichkämen. 4 Other references to the N.D. as completed are found in Div. 1, 7; 1, 9; 2, 148; Fat. 1. 6 M. Schanz-C. Hosius, Gesch. d. röm. Lit. I 4 (1927), 506, place the Tusculans between June and August, 45. On the many parallels between the Tusculans and the N.D.—implying a similar date—cf. T. W. Dougan, ed. of Tusc. 1-2 (1905), xvii. « Cf. Pease, ed. of Div. 1 (1920), 14, for references in the De Divinatione to the period after the Ides of March, 44.

INTRODUCTION

21

named). But Coelius is much more often used in the De Divinatione,1 and, as Philippson has noted,2 at N.D. 2, 118 Cicero clearly uses not Panaetius himself but what others have said about him. In Att. 13, 38, 1 (4 August, 45), when he says ante lucem cum scriberem contra Epicúreos, he seems to refer to the latter part of the first book of the N.D. The next day (Att. 13, 39, 2) he asks of Atticus libros mihi de quibus ad te antea scripú velim mihi mittas, et maxime Φαίδρου περί θεών et ΠΛΛΙΔΟΣ. 3 On 7 or 8 August (Att. 13, 40, 2): quid mihi auctor es? advolone an maneoi equidem et in libris haereo et ilium hie excipere nolo. On 11 August (Att. 13, 45, 2) he writes: quod me hortaris ut eos dies consumas in philosophia explicanda, currentem tu quidem ; and on 13 August (Att. 13, 47, 1): instituta omisi; ea quae in manibus habebam abieci, quod iusseras edolavi. The latest dates, then, which we seem able by this sort of evidence to associate with the composition of our work fall in August, 45. 4 A less certain method in support of a still later date is used by M. Pohlenz,5 who points out (1) that N.D. 3, 67-71 (through subesset) is more or less a doublet of 3, 71 (beginning with Medea)—78-—there are undoubtedly several parallels here—; (2) that we cannot suppose that Cicero wrote both at once and intended both to stand in the completed text; (3) that N.D. 3, 74, shows strong likenesses to Off. 3, 73 ; 6 and concludes that Cicero was by his work on the third book of the De Officiis inspired 1

Div. 1, 48-49; 1, 55; 1, 56; 1, 78. Cf. R. Philippson in P.-W. 7A (1930), 1151. 3 Variously emended; e.g., παντός Gurlitt, Παλλάδος Orelli (favored by H. Diels, Sitzb. Beri. Akad. 1893, 116, n. 2), seeing a reference to N.D. 1, 41 (where see n. on partum lovis), and 'Απολλοδώρου Hirzel. 4 Cf. the preface to Ax's edition (1933), iii-iv. We know of Cicero's presence at Tusculum as late as 24 August {Att. 13, 51). I cannot accept the elaborate theory of M. van den Bruwaene (La théologie de Cic. (1937), 144-153 (well criticized by O. Tescari {Boll, difilol. cl. 45 (1938), 22); P. Boyancé {Rev. des êt. anc. 41 (1939), 90-91); and W. Ax (Gotting, gel. Anχ. 201 (1939), 43)) that N.D. 3, 66-93, containing Roman exempla dating between 110 and 82 B.C., was written by Cicero at the age of twenty-four or twenty-five, and taken up by him into his latest work. Bruwaene's case is much weakened by the fact, which he has to admit, that the assumed 2

date of the dialogue rather than the date of composition is what determines the appropriateness or anachronism of its allusions. In keeping this assumed date Cicero has been pretty careful, even though it does —to Bruwaene's surprise —preclude any mention of his consulship. That our work came at a period when the deification of Caesar was becoming a live issue may perhaps be seen from 1,119, where see the n. on fortis . .. ciaros . . . potentis viros. 5 Gotting. Nachrichten, Philol.-hist. Kl. Ν.F. 1 (1934), 22, η. 1; id., Antikes Fährertum (1934), 8, n. 2. 8 Cf. N.D. 3, 74: sicae, venena, peculatus testamentorum with O f f . 3, 73: steariis, veneficis, testamentariis, furibus, peculatoribus\ N.D. 3, 74: lege

laetoria with O f f . 3, 61: lege Plaetoria-, N.D. 3, 74, on dolus malus, with O f f . 3, 61 (with the same idea); N.D. 3, 75; malitiam with O f f . 3, 71 : malitiam·, N.D. 3, 76: Sol and Phaëthon, Neptune, Theseus, and Hippolytus, with O f f . 3, 94 (the same figures).

22

INTRODUCTION

to fill out the still unpublished section of the N.D. 3, 67-71, with materials from Roman law, in other words, that the third book of the N.D. and the third book of the De Officiis were being worked on more or less simultaneously (perhaps also with the De Legibus), possibly at some time in December, 45, when we know that he had gone from Rome to Puteoli,1 Pompeii or Formiae,2 and Tusculum.3 The parallels are, indeed, striking, and there may have been use of some of the same materials, but it is not therefore necessary to suppose that Gcero was writing both books at the same time, but rather that he had twice used the same notes, as he inadvertently used the same prooemium for the De Gloria and for the third book of the Academical· THE DEDICATION

9. The dedication to M. Iunius Brutus is made in the simplest form,6 and he is not later referred to. To Brutus, at the time about forty years old,® Cicero had dedicated the Orator, the Paradoxa Stoicorum, the De Finibus, and the Tusculans·, he is also a speaker in the Brutus. His philosophic interests are discussed below; 7 at the end of the Tusculans 8 Gcero speaks of him as one a quo non modo inpulsi sumus ad philosophiae scriptiones verum etiam lacessiti. THE TYPE OF DIALOGUE

10. The type of dialogue 9 practiced by most members of the Platonic Academy, continuing the tradition of Socrates, was regarded by Plato's pupils as the established vehicle for bestowing living form upon esoteric philosophy,10 and involved real participation in the discussion by several of those present, with comparatively short speeches, frequent expressions of assent or dissent, and an attempt to make the emerging opinion so Att. 13, 52. Fam. 9, 12. 3 Att. 13, 42 (the end of December). 4 Att. 16, 6, 4 (24 July, 44). 5 N.D. 1, 1: tum perdifficilis, Brute, quod tu minime ignoras, et perobscura quaestio est de natura deorum. « M. Geizer in P.-W. 10 (1917), 973974. 7 1, 1, n. (Brute)·, Fin. 1, 8; 5, 1; Sen. Ep. 95, 45; Quintil. Inst. 10, 1, 123; M. Schanz-C. Hosius, Gesch. d. röm. Lit. I 4 (1927), 396. 8 5, 121. But Cicero writes (Att. 6, 1, 7) of Brutus : qui de me ad te humanissimas 1

2

litteras scripsit, ad me autem, etiam cum rogat aliquid, contumaciter, adroganter, άκοινονοήτως solet scribere. 8 On the dialogue as a literary type see especially R. Hirzel, Der Dialog, 1 (1895), in which pp. 457-552 deal with Cicero in general, and pp. 528-535 with our work. W. Kiaulehn, De scaenico Dialogorum Apparatu (in Diss, philol. Halenses, 23 (1914), 175-184—on Cicero) adds nothing important. So also H. Schlottmann, Ars Dialog, componendorum, etc. (1889), 38-48. 1 0 W. Jaeger, Aristotle (Engl. tr. 1934), 27.

INTRODUCTION

23

far as possible the accepted resultant of their common thought. This sort of dialogue, though involving less repetition than the type which Gcero here uses, was obviously better adapted to a protreptic, a maieutic, or a polemic work than to one of a descriptive or historical character.1 Aristotle, who had a powerful influence upon Cicero,1 thus began in his early works, following the Platonic tradition, but later invented a new kind of literary dialogue, namely the dialogue of scientific discourse,2 no longer satisfied with question and answer, but, by an inevitable transition to another stage,3 matching monologue against monologue. In this style the author states "fully from the standpoint of those who hold them views which are finally rejected." 4 In a very important letter 6 Gcero reviews his own practice in dialogues, saying that he had originally intended, like Heraclides Ponticus, to include in them only persons no longer living, but that at the desire of Varrò to receive notice from him he had decided to revise the Académica, giving a part to Varrò and answering it himself, so that he might not be a mere κωφον πρόσωπον, as he had been in the De Oratore, the scene of which was laid in his boyhood.® Hoc in antiquis personis suaviter fit, ut et Heraclides in multis et nos (in) vi De Re Publica libris jecimus.1 In his more recent writing, however, he had followed the custom of Aristotle, in which the speeches of others are brought in only in such a way as to keep the initiative in the discussion in the hands of Aristotle himself.8 If we examine Cicero's principal dialogues we shall find that the De Oratore (55 B.C.) has a scene 1 Cf. A. S. Pease in Trans. Am. philol. Assoc. 44 (1913), 34, n. 46. Even Plato's later dialogues tend to the perpetua oratio of the chief figure; cf. R. Philippson in P.-W. 7A (1939), 1186. 2 Jaeger, op. cit., 28; Philippson, op.

cit.,

1186-1188.

Jaeger, ibid. 4 Jaeger, op. cit., 29. C. Lamb, Ep. 86 (1801), remarks: "Many eloquent dialogues have been written (such as Bishop Berkeley's Minute Philosopher) but in all of them the Interlocutors are merely abstract arguments personify'd; not living dramatic characters, as in Walton." 6 A. D. Nock in Class. Rev. 57 (1943), 78, who compares with Cicero's method that employed in several of the works of Philo. Cf. also Fat. 1 : quod autem in aliis libris feci qui sunt de natura deorum ... ut in utramque partem perpetua explicaretur oratio, quo facilius id a quoque probaretur quod cuique maxime probabile videretur, id 3

in hoc distutatione de fato casus quidam ne facerem impedivit. • Att. 13, 19, 3-5 (30 June, 45); in sect. 3: sic enim constitueram neminem includere in diálogos eorum qui viverent. 7 Att. 13, 19, 4: puero me hie sermo inducitur, ut nullae esse passent partes meae. 8 Ibid. On the Heraclidean dialogue cf. Q.Fr. 3, 5, 1 : commovit me et eo magis quod máximos motus nostrae civitatis attingere non poteram quod erant inferiores quam iHorum aetas qui loquebantur; R. Hirzel, Der Dialog, 1 (1895), 321-331; 547-550. β Att. 13, 19, 4: quae autem his temporibus scripsi Άριστοτέλειον morem habent in quo ita sermo inducitur ceterorum ut penes ipsum sitprincipatus·, Fam. 1, 9, 23 (Dee., 54): scripsi igitur Aristotelio more, quem ad modum quidem volui, tris libros in disputatione ac dialogo De Oratore ... abhorrent enim a communibus praeceptis atque omnem antiquorum et Aristoteliam et Iso-

24

INTRODUCTION

laid in 91 ; 1 the DeRepublica (54) in 12 9 ; the Académicapriora (45) between 63 and 60; 2 the Hortensius (45) in 65-60; the De Finibus (45) has for its three dialogues the dates 50, 52, and 79; the De Senectute (44) is laid in 150; the De Amicitia (44) in 129. With settings essentially contemporaneous are the Brutus (46), the De Divinatione (44), and the De Fato (44).3 The De Natura Deorum stands somewhat between the historical setting of Heraclides and the contemporary one of Aristotle, in that Gcero is himself present in it, though the speaking parts are given to persons already dead. THE SCENE

11. The scene of the dialogue is laid at the house of C. Aurelius Cotta,4 possibly a villa in the country,5 though I have given some reasons below 6 for thinking that it may have been his town house. In determining the assumed date it must be remembered that the author is careful to avoid anachronisms,7 so that allusions to actual events may be given their full value. Cicero at the time is apparently a youngish man, not expected to take an active part in the dialogue.8 The date is set later than cratiam rationem oratoriam complectuntur (Cicero seems here not yet to have distinguished the Aristotelian from the Heraclidean type, as he later did in Att. 13, 19, 3; but cf. E. A. Robinson in Cl. Weekly, 39 (1936), 116). 1 The dates given I take—with one exception—from M. Schanz-C. Hosius, Gesch. d. röm. Lit. I 4 (1927). 2 Cf. J. S. Reid, ed. of Académica (1885), 41. 3 Uncertainty as to the date of the De Legibus makes pointless its citation here. The Tusculans are essentially timeless, with anonymous speakers and no developed setting. For a classification of Cicero's dialogues cf. R. Philippson mP.-W. 7A (1939), 1187. laFam. 9, 8,1, Cicero writes to Varrò : puto fore ut, cum legeris, mirere nos id locutos esse inter nos quod numquam locuti sumus; sed nosti morem dialogorum. 4 N.D. 1, 15. 6 As Wolf and Schömann suggest, in view of the holiday season. W. Kiaulehn, De scaenico Dialog. Apparatu (1915), 180181, thinks this uncertainty an indication of the unfinished character of the work.

• On 1, 15, n. (apud); cf. R. Hirzel, Der Dialog, 1 (1895), 529, n. 2. The work of E. Becker, Technik u. Szenerie d. cicerón. Dialogr (1938), has not been accessible to me. Noticeable is the casual way in which Cicero drops in at the start and that in which all disperse at the end, which seems more fitting for a city call than for a country houseparty. 7 Cf. Q.Fr. 3, 5, 2: commovit me, et eo magis quod máximos motus nostrae civitatis attingere non poteram, quod erant inferiores quam illorum aetas qui loquebantur-, also Brut. 218. On possible anachronisms in other dialogues cf. R. Hirzel, Der Dialog, 1 (1895), 511-512; 519-520; the examples he cites are not seriously conspicuous. When discussing temple-robbery (3, 8384) Cicero cannot mention Verres, but cites the other famous Sicilian case of Dionysius. 8 Almost a κωφον πρόσωπον; cf. η. 7, p. 23. Yet he was not so young as in the De Oratore, when he was but a lad, but rather old enough so that Velleius is apprehensive that he may support Cotta (1, 17).

INTRODUCTION

25

the visit of Posidonius to Rome in 86 B.C.,1 later than a series of events leading up to the death of Q. Scaevola in 82,2 at a time when Q. Catulus was already a pontifex,3 and after the passing of the lex Cornelia testamentorum (ca. 78 B.C.).4 Since Cotta is described merely as pontifex, it must be before his election to the consulship in 75. This space between 78 and 75 is further narrowed by the absence of Cicero himself in Greece and the East from 79 to 77, on his return from which journey and its philosophic studies he would have been a natural participant in such a conversation. Between 77, then, and his quaestorship in Sicily in 75 seems to lie the assumed date of the dialogue.5 Cicero would then have been from twenty-nine to thirty-one years of age, old enough and sufficiently trained to have reported accurately the discussions of his elders. THE DRAMATIC DATE

12. The advantages of throwing the dialogue back to such an early period were several, (a) References to embarrassing political questions associated with Pompey, Caesar, and others are thus largely avoided,® as are allusions to his own consulship 7 and to the speeches of the years 57-56, in which certain religious questions of a purely legalistic sort are prominent.8 (b) Necessity of alluding to or passing judgment upon the theological works of his friends Varrò and Nigidius Figulus is also removed. So likewise with the writing of Philodemus, close as is Cicero's treatment to his at various points,9 and, most strikingly of all, with Lucretius, whom it might have seemed hard to avoid mentioning in a dialogue set after his date.10 (c) By placing the discussion in the past Cf. 1, 123, η. ( f a m i l ì a r i s omnium nosPosidonius). 2 Cf. 3, 80. 3 He was probably made pontifex ca. 80 B.C.; cf. 1, 79, η. (huius collegae et familiaris nostri). 4 3, 74. 5 Somewhat later than the assumed date of the third dialogue in the De Finibus; cf. J. B. Mayor, ed. of N.D. I a (1891), xli; R. Hirzel, op. cit., 1, 528 and n. 4. Many of these evidences for the assumed date are stated by K. Baier in Jahrb. f . Philol. u. Paed. 1 (1826), 342. • Cf. η. 8, ρ. 23, above ; R. Philippson in P.-W. 7 A (1939), 1153. Guarded allusions to the dictatorship of Caesar (1, 7) fall, not in the dialogue, but in the prooemi1

trum

um. Marius is unfavorably mentioned in 3,80-81, but nothing is said of Sulla, who had died in 78, shortly before the assumed date. 7 How this fared in a dialogue with contemporaneous setting may be seen in the De Divinatione\ perhaps even Cicero felt that with its large part there it might well be avoided in the De Natura Deorum. 8 E.g., De Domo sua and De Η aruspi cum Responso. 9 Cf. R. Philippson in Symb. Osloenses, 19 (1939), 40, who observes that he mentions instead the older Zeno and Phaedrus. 10 Though it should be noted that we perhaps have a veiled allusion to him

26

INTRODUCTION

and its words in the mouths of others the author may secure himself against some part of the odium theologicum likely to be aroused by the controversial nature of the subject.1 The sceptical Cotta might then be, like some character in drama, the vehicle for Gcero's own ideas of a much later date.2 A comparison here with the Socratic dialogues of Plato might be suggested. DEFECTS OF COMPOSITION

13. In the hasty composition of these troubled years it is not surprising that defects in the structure of the dialogue have been noted. Most obvious is an inconsistency in time. There is no reason to doubt 3 that the author finally intended the discussions of the three books to be thought of as all occurring on one day, for (1) the second book follows immediately after the first and the third after the second with no sign of any intermission, and (2) there is but one prooemium to the whole work, as contrasted with the three which introduce the three separate dialogues of the De Finibus.i Yet in N.D. 2, 73, we read (with clear reference to 1, 8) : velut a te ipso hesterno die dictum est, and in 3,18 (referring to Book 2 in general): omniaque quae a te nudius tertius dicta sunt. These allusions can best be understood if we consider them as relics of an earlier plan for the whole work, 6 in which, in a series of four days, Book 1 fell on the first, Book 2 on the second, and Book 3 on the fourth, the third day being left unoccupied. That these are an indication, as (cf. η. 1, p. 7, above), and that in the other dialogues which do have contemporary setting he does not name Lucretius ; R. Hirzel, op. cit., 1, 531, η. 1, justly observes that Cicero's judgment of Lucretius was probably quite different from ours. D. van Berchem (Museum Helvet. 1946, 26-39) thinks that Lucretius's poem was not published till 43 B.C. 1 Cf. R. Hirzel, Der Dialog, 1 (1895), 532; A. S. Pease in Trans. Am. philol. Assoc. 44 (1913), 27-30; M. Y. Henry, Rei. of Dogmatism and Scepticism in the philos. Treatises of Cic. (1925), 38; R. Philippson in P.-W. 7A (1939), 1152; 1156; also W. W. Fenn (.Harv. theol. Rev. 4 (1911), 466) for a similar device by David Hume in his Dialogues concerning natural Religion, in which he conveniently escapes responsibility for views expressed by characters in the discussion. So too Jean Bodin in his dialogues; cf. G. H. Sabine in Essays in Honor of G. L.

Burr (1931), 290. 2 Cf. Pease, op. cit., 27, η. 13. 3 Though F. A. Wolf (Litter. Analekten, 1 (1817), 306) seems to think that the dialogue is really distributed over three days. 4 Cf. R. Hirzel, op. cit., 1, 529, η. 3; R. Philippson, op. cit., 1152. 5 F. Orsini (1581) seems first to have remarked upon this: credi potest Ciceronem in animo habuisse tribus libris trium dierum disputationem referre ... mox id mutasse, relictis prioris vestigiis; cf. also R. Hirzel, op. cit., 1, 529-530, η. 3; O. Piasberg, ed. maior. (1911), on 2, 73; R. Philippson, op. cit., 1152. I. Heinemann (Poseidonios' metaphys. Sehr. 2 (1928), 146-147) speculates what the original arrangement may have been. Plasberg thinks that bene paratum venire (3, 2) implies meeting again after an interval—another relic of the original plan.

INTRODUCTION

27

some have supposed, that the work was not completed for publication it would be rash to assert. For an anachronism in referring to the year of 365 1/4 days cf. the note on 2, 49 (àrcumitus .. . erbium); for another possible anachronism 3, 49, n. (publicani). Other slips in the dialogue form are the expressions in 2, 65 : ut supra dixi (where see the n.) ; 2, 166 : quales supra commemoravi·, and 3, 59: quam . . . supra diximus, the word supra obviously belonging to a written rather than to a conversational style. Yet the same mistake is to be found at several other places in Gcero's dialogues,1 and probably indicates a settled habit of mind rather than a temporary inadvertence, though his carelessness in other works has been remarked.2 A more serious defect is that some parts of the works, notably 3, 43-60, approach more nearly to the style of a mythological dictionary, like Hyginus, than to a conversation between friends, while the intrusion of long extracts from his Aratea into 2, 104-114, like the corresponding insertion from his De Consulatu in the De Divinatione, 1, 17-22, are a further strain upon the realism of the dialogue. Inconsistencies of subject matter, arising from the author's having employed a later and more up-to-date source for positive expositions than those used for their rebuttal,3 and errors of statement, from whatever cause, not directly affecting the form of the dialogue, will be discussed in the notes on the passages in which they occur.4

CHARACTERS IN THE DIALOGUE

14. The characters of the dialogue 6 are but four (Cicero himself, whose part is only trifling, C. Aurelius Cotta the host, C. Vellerns, and 1 Cf. Div. 1, 72; Rep. 2, 9; Τ use. 2, 53; 3, 52; 5, 67; Am. 15; 48. 2 For instances cf. Ait. 12, 6, 3; 16, 6, 4; Gell. 15, 6, 1-4; Pease, ed. of Div. 1 (1920), 28-29. 3 Cf. a similar situation between Div. 1,9 and 2,13 ; Pease, ed. of Div. 1,22-23 ; R. Philippson in P.-W. 7A (1939), 1156. J. B. Mayor (ed. of N.D. 3 (1885), xiv-xv) similarly objects to the doxographic sections in 1, 25-41. 4 E.g., 2, 45, where see n. on restai. Mayor (op. cit., 3, xiii-xiv) assembles a considerable number of slips, and remarks: "while allowing that we have in this treatise a great deal of excellent sense, admirably expressed, and that it

is hardly possible to exaggerate its historical importance as contributing to our knowledge of the religious philosophy of the ancients, yet, regarding it as a whole, it is impossible to call it a work of art, it is impossible to say that the due proportions of the subject have been observed." On p. xvi he thinks that the doxographic section "does not contain a single strictly accurate statement or a single intelligent criticism." For a more temperate criticism cf. J. S. Reid, quoted in n. 2, p. 19, above. 5 Cf. R. Hirzel, op. cit. 1, 528-530; W. Ax, ed. (1933), iv-v; also below, 1,15, nn. (C. Cottam; C. Velleio ; Q. Luctlius Bulbus).

28

INTRODUCTION

Q. Luçilius Balbus), and they are duly introduced to the reader at 1, 1 5 . 1 Against the charge that he ought not to bring into his dialogues the 3 figures of distinguished men 2 Cicero defends himself in the Académica·, 4 of his use of persons n o longer alive I have already spoken. Roman statesmen in his hands turn into Greek philosophers, as Hirzel has remarked, 5 but if he could take that liberty with them he could easily go one further step in characterizing the schools which he set them to represent rather than the beliefs held by individuals. 6 Whether, despite the v o t e cast by G c e r o in 3, 95, he intended to have Cotta regarded as the mouthpiece of his v i e w s has been much disputed; m y o w n view is set forth above. 7 In temperament the three speakers are well contrasted : 8 Velleius, impulsive, polemic, dogmatic, 9 and rather impatient; 1 0 Balbus, learned, professorial, discursive, leisurely, and rather dependent upon Stoic syllogistic arguments ; 1 1 and Cotta, courteous and complimentary in manner, 1 2 but, like a lawyer, keenly detecting the weak points in his adversary's armor, and, above all, well illustrating in his o w n person that segregation of traditional ideas f r o m the sceptical inquiries of 1 Most of what we know of Velleius and Balbus we owe to this work; Cotta is better known and had already appeared in the De Oratore, cf. A. S. Wilkins's ed. (1892), 20-21. Cotta was already dead when Cicero wrote, and perhaps Balbus and Velleius were also. 2 personas tarn graves. 3 2, 6. 4 Cf. Att. 13, 19, 3. 6 Op. cit., 1, 534. « Cf. F. A. Wolf, Litter. Analekten, 1 (1817), 292. On occasional lack of correspondence between the real and the assumed beliefs of Cicero's characters cf. Pease, ed. of Di». 1 (1920), 17, η. 74. A study of his accuracy in characterization has been made for six dialogues— not including ours—by R. E. Jones in Am.Journ. of Philo!. 60 (1939), 307-325, who finds him sometimes truthful, at other times distorted. 7 At n. 6, p. 9 ; cf. also Pease in Trans. Am.philol. Assoc. 44 (1913), 36-37 (especially 27, n. 13), to which add Mayor's n. on 1, 59 (cum Athenis esserti)·, M. Y. Henry, op. cit., 39, η. 329 (who does not believe that Cicero intended to have his views identified with those of Cotta); L. Gueuning in Nova et Vetera, 7 (1925), 329, who thinks that Cotta does repre-

sent Cicero as against the extremes of Epicurus and the Stoics (and cf. the works he cites); A. J. Festugière, La Révél. d'Hermès Trism. 2 (1949), 380381. 8 I. Heinemann, Poseidonios' metapbys. Sehr. 2 (1928), 145, gives a good characterization of the three. At p. 147 he thinks Cicero more interested in depicting Schultypen than in representing the systems of the different schools. 9 E.g., 1, 18. 10 At 1, 56, he apologizes for the length of his short speech; cf. 3, 2. Velleius is mentioned in De Or. 3, 78. 11 Balbus was also a speaker in the Hortensius, according to R. Hirzel, op. cit., 1, 529, but this statement seems due to a misunderstanding of Hertens. fr. 81 Müller ( = Aug. C. Iulian. Pelag. 4, 72), where the allusion to Balbus really refers to the second book of the N.D. Cicero's Brutus, 154, speaks of him : Balbi docti et eruditi hominis ... consideratam tarditatem·, Digest. 1, 2, 42, names him among the more influential pupils of Q. Mucius Scaevola. 12 1, 57-59; 3, 1; 3, 4; 3, 95. We need not press too far the questionable etiquette of having a host demolish the arguments of two of his guests.

INTRODUCTION

29

Greek philosophy1 which we have already remarked in the case of Cicero himself.2 No one of these would properly be called judicial in disposition,3 and Cicero's own function in the dialogue is little more than that of a senator pedarius in the senate,4 voting but not speaking. PROOEMIUM

15. The arrangement of the whole work is fairly simple.6 The first book starts with a prooemium (which I shall call A) by the author,® which serves, not for that book alone,7 but for the entire work. Of this prooemium the beginning and a later portion 8 are closely concerned with the difficulty of the study of theology and the importance of correct beliefs upon it for regulating man's secular life.9 In the middle of 1, 5, 1 Notably in 3, 5-6. Mayor, ed. of N.D. 3 (1885), xxiv-xxv, interestingly compares the figure of Cotta with that of Trajan and some other later statesmen. 2 Cf. nn. 1-2 p. 13; 6, p. 26, above. 3 Cf. 2, 1 : corona tibi et iudices defuerunt\ 3, 95 : disserere malui quam indicare (said by Cotta); Aug. Ep. 118, 16: reperies Epicúreos et Stoicos inter se acerrime dimicantes; eorum vero litem cortantes diiudicare Platonicos, occultantes sententiam veritatis, et illorum vanam in falsitate fiduciam convincentes et redarguentes. 4 His vote (3, 95) causes rather than breaks a tie, thereby illustrating not only the difficulty of the subject ( 1 , 1 ; 1, 60; 3, 93) but also the lack of an Academic dogma upon it; cf. A. S. Pease in Trans. Am. philol. Assoc. 44 (1913), 35-37; A. J. Festugière, La Révél. d'Hermès Trism. 2 (1949), 383-384. 6 The four-fold arrangement which R. Hoyer {Rh. Mus. 53 (1898), 40-51; 53-54) would find running through all three books (occurring twice in Book 1), though helpful and suggestive, cannot be taken too rigidly. He believes that there are four main divisions (which in Books 2 and 3 are obvious, but in Book 1 by no means so, without assuming many expansions and contractions): (1) esse deos = 1, 18-45 and 61-64; 2, 13-44; 3, 7-19; (2) quotes sint di = 1, 46-49 and 65-90; 2, 45-72; 3, 20-64; (3) mundum ab his administrari = 1, 49-52 and 90-

115; 2, 73-153; 3, 65-79; (4) consulere eos rebus humants = 1, 53-56 and 115-124; 2, 154-168; 3, 79-93. Hoyer's work suffers from assuming (from 2, 3) this four-fold division and then neglecting the effects of heterogeneous Greek sources upon Cicero's plan. He also assumes (p. 54) in each book a negative and a positive section, apparently cutting across the lines described above (negative: 1, 61-121 ; 2,1-72; 3, 7-64; positive: 1, 18-56; 2, 73-168 ; 3, 65-90), and believes that the negative sections deal predominatingly with dii, the positive with a deus. To justify this opinion Vellerns must appear (p. 48) in 1, 18-41 as a sceptic, in 1, 42-56 as a dogmatist, and Cotta as not being a sceptic in 1, 61-64; 1, 96; 1, 102; 1, 116; 1, 121; 1, 123. For criticism of Hoyer's view see also Gianola, op. cit. (1904), 10-11, η. 6. Uri, on the other hand {op. cit. (1914), 85) holds that the four-fold division is common to all theologies, and tries to find it in the positive Epicurean exposition of Book 1. 6 1, 1-17. Cf. the use of prooemia by Aristotle; R. Philippson in P.-W. 7A (1939), 1187-1188. 7 As he says {Att. 4, 16, 2) was the practice of Aristotle; cf. W. Jaeger, Aristotle (Engl. tr. 1934), 29, n. 2. 8 1, 1-5 (through vera sit) and 1, 13-14. 9 1, 3-4; 1, 14.

30

INTRODUCTION

this appropriate introduction is interrupted by a section 1 in defence of Cicero's philosophic studies, and, in particular, of his adherence to a school so neglected and outmoded as the Academy. This intrusion has little connection with theology, and we may easily guess that it was written by Gcero without particular reference to the present work and later taken by him from that volumen prooemiorum from which, as he wrote to Atticus,2 he was in the habit of drawing when composing some treatise. Finally three sections 3 give in brief form the setting of time, place, and characters, and an apology for not including with the three schools mentioned any spokesman for the Peripatetics.4 DOXOGRAPHIC SUMMARY

16. After this introduction Velleius, who had already started to discuss with Cotta the tenets of the Epicureans,® is induced to begin again, for the benefit of Cicero who has just entered.® Since his prospective adversaries are Academics or Stoics, he devotes seven sections 7 (which we may call part B) to a rather contemptuous attack 8 upon the doctrines of Plato and the Stoa. Next he presents, through the sections which follow 9 (part C), a doxographic account, in roughly chronological sequence, of the views of twenty-seven Greek philosophers, from Thaïes to the Stoics,10 upon the existence and the nature of the gods, 1 1, 5 (beginning qua quidem)A2. If this passage be omitted, 1, 13 follows very easily after 1, 5; cf. Piasberg, ed. maior. (1911), 203. A similar situation is found in O f f . 2, 2-8. 2 Att. 16, 6, 4: id eventi ob earn rem quod babeo volumen prooemiorum. ex eo eltgere soleo cum aliquod σύγγραμμα instituí. Cf. the collection of Demosthenic προοίμια δημηγορικά, for which see F. Blass, Die attische Beredsamkeit, 3, l 2 (1893), 322-328. It is natural that Cicero should have imitated in this respect his great Greek model. A. G. Gillingham, in an unpublished Harvard dissertation {The Prooemia in the Treatises of Cic. on Philos, and Oratory (1950)), compares the generalities in this prooemium with the very similar ones in O f f . 2, 2-8; id. in Harv. Stud, in cl. Philol. 60 (1951), 298. Cf. also below, 1, 1, n. (cum multae)·, 1, 5, n. {qua quidem, etc.). 3 1, 15-17; called by Plasberg the exordium as distinguished from the prooemium. 4

1, 16.

* 1, 17. 1, 15; 1, 17. 7 1, 18-24. 8 The injustice of Velleius's hasty criticisms is lessened by the fact that many of the views attacked were long since obsolete, and also by Cicero's initial warning (1, 18) - tum Velleius, fidenter sane, ut soient isti, nihil tarn verens quam ne dubitare aliqua de re videretur·, cf. 1, 94. » 1, 25-41. 10 Cf. the somewhat similar review of the physical opinions of philosophers in Ac. 2, 118, and the briefer doxography of divination in Div. 1, 5-6. Such passages are Cicero's substitute for a more formal history of Greek philosophy. Min. Fei. Oct. 19, has a similar catalogue of poets and philosophers ; cf. also below, 1, 25, n. {qualia, etc.). The attempt of R. Hoyer {op. cit., 49) to find a threefold division here—Presocratics, Academics, and Stoics—adds little to the understanding of the passage. 6

INTRODUCTION

31

after which, in very hurried manner, he touches on the erroneous mythology found in the Greek poets,1 the superstitious views of the adherents of the Oriental religions,2 and the ignorant opinions of the populace. EPICUREAN DOCTRINE AND ITS CRITICISM IN BOOK I

17. Continuing with high praise of Epicurus,3 Vellerns unfolds (part D), in a remarkably condensed fashion, the positive Epicurean doctrine concerning the existence and form of the gods, and of man's comprehension of them. This important division of the work covers but fourteen sections,4 as contrasted both with the sixty-eight sections used by Cotta (part E) for its refutation and with the one hundred and sixtyfive sections in the second book, 6 in which the positive dogmas of Stoicism are developed by Balbus. Such disproportion in space probably reflects, not so much Cicero's own likes and dislikes in relation to the Epicurean and Stoic schools respectively,6 as the use of diverse sources, themselves of differing conciseness or prolixity.7 The final section of the first book (part E) contains Cotta's attack upon the Epicurean doctrines, in which two typical feelings on Cicero's part toward Epicureanism are noticeable, as has been remarked by Uri 8 (a) a sarcastic contempt for its foolishness (as in sections 66, 69, 70, 72, 74, 84, 89, 1 The reasons for giving the doxographic section to Vellerns are these: (1) the use of an Epicurean source; (2) the fact that if this résumé had been put earlier, in the prooemium, in the mouth of Cicero himself, it would have been difficult for him to suspend his judgment sufficiently upon all the points involved; (3) had the doxography been taken away from Vellerns his part in the dialogue would have been absurdly short, so that, in the interest of padding out his part, he is assigned this portion which is of general importance to the whole work. Its position as it stands, a little after the beginning of the work, recalls the place of the Catalogue of the Ships in the second book of the Iliad. 2 1, 43. 8 Ibid. Cicero begins with Epicureanism as perhaps the easiest body of doctrine (cf. R. Hirzel, Der Dialog, 1 (1895), 533) and one well known to him {Fin. 1, 16). Also it should be observed that the chronological order

is Epicurean and Stoic rather than the reverse; cf. Ν. W. DeWitt in Trans. Royal Soc. of Canada, 3 ser., 2, 36 (1942), 34. 4 1, 43-56. s 2, 4-168. 6 Cf. η. 5, p. 16, above; A. S. Pease in Trans. Am. pbilol. Assoc. 44 (1913), 25. In the De Finibus the first two books devoted to the exposition of Epicureanism correspond to the third and fourth similarly concerned with Stoicism. It is true, however, that Cicero is less favorable to the Epicureans than to the Stoics; cf. F am. 7, 12, 1-2 (where he speaks disparagingly to the recent Epicurean convert Trebatius); Legg. 1, 39. C. Thiaucourt {Essai sur les traités philos, de Cic. (1885), 212) suggests that Cicero was afraid of giving too much space to the Epicurean views and ended by giving too little. ' The sources will be discussed below. 8 Op. cit., 112-113.

32

INTRODUCTION

97,104,107,108,109,123), and (b) an aversion to its theory of pleasures, which here become obscenae voluptates (1, 111). Of the religious revolution produced by Epicureanism as contrasted with the legalistic, contractual religion of the state (cf. C. Vicol in Ephem. Dacoromana, 10 (1945), 246) Cicero shows little conception. BOOKS II AND III

18. The second book (the most scientific part of the work, dealing with cosmology, astronomy, zoology, anatomy, physiology, psychology, etc.), after some transitional paragraphs 1 to carry over the setting of the dialogue from the first, is devoted to Balbus's exposition of the Stoic theology, divided into four heads set forth in 2, 3 ; cf. also 2, 35, n. {restât). Despite its length Balbus complains of lack of time to deal adequately with all questions (e.g., 2, 3; 3, 94), thus contrasting with the short speech of the Epicurean who had apologized for it because of its length (1, 56). The third book, after a similar transition from the second,2 contains Cotta's refutation of the Stoics, probably arranged in somewhat similar order to that used in the second book, though in the mutilated state in which the work has reached us much of the second, third, and fourth heads has been lost.3 The two final sections of the third book 4 complete the frame of the dialogue, which is brought to an end by the approach of evening.5 With conventional compliments and hopes of continuing the theme at a later date,6 the company disperse with an informal expression of sentiment in which they divide two against two, not, of course, on the subject of the existence or non-existence of the gods but upon the probability or improbability of the Stoic theology, 7 which has been the topic of two-thirds of the entire work. OMISSIONS

19. A modern writer dealing with the same theme would probably have emphasized certain aspects of theology which Cicero largely or completely neglects. Of syncretistic phenomena he has a good deal to say,8 but of the individual cults by which the gods are worshipped Lucian, Anacb. 40; and A. Gudeman on Tac. Dial. 42, 3, cites additional parallels including Min. Fei. 40, 2 (undoubtedly 7A influenced by our work) ; Philostr. Heroic, p. 219 Kayser; and many from 5 3, 94: quoniam advesperascit·, cf. the Augustine and later Fathers. 6 Cf. Hirzel and Gudeman ll.ee. similar device in Virg. Eel. 1, 82-83; 7 3, 95. 2, 66-67. R. Hirzel, Der Dialog, 1 (1895), 8 3, 42-60. 534-535, compares also Tac. Dial. 42, 1 ;

2, 1-3. 3, 1-4. 3 Cf. R. Philippson in P.-W. (1939), 1155. 4 3, 94-95. 1

a

INTRODUCTION

33

very little.1 Again, though the connection of the Roman religion with politics and the state is clearly noted, its relation, if any, to individual or social ethics is passed over in silence. The calamities endured by good men and the prosperity of the wicked are duly observed,2 but we find no indication that Cicero or those of whom he writes were conscious of any deeper problem of the origin of evil, or of any sense of personal sin and of attempts to free themselves from its stain. In the field of revealed religion the Eleusinian and Samothracian mysteries are mentioned,3 but no hint is given of any mystical experiences or communion with deity in connection with them.4 The soul and its immortality are admittedly related to the question of the nature of the gods,6 but the treatment ofthat theme had been dealt with in the Tusculans, and therefore is little considered here. Hence the picture of religion is, from the point of view of a modern, rather incomplete, even allowing for the slight chance that some of these gaps may have received negative attention in the large block of text lost in the lacuna at 3, 65. On the other hand, it should be stated that, despite the opportunities offered by the ample quotations from Aratus,9 Cicero keeps very free from allusions to astrology 7 and magic, doubtless because he included both those fields among the superstitiones which he is so careful to differentiate from true religion, and in spite of his omissions we can perhaps agree with the view of J. W. Duff; 8 "If in Cicero we discover no true feeling of 'piety' in a modern sense, no deep assurance of divine aid, no clear hope of immortality, we do find the inspiration of a noble and sincere ideal in his views of deity." CONCLUSION OF BOOK III

20. Why at the conclusion of the third book 9 Cicero states that the opinion of Balbus appeared to him the more probable has been much discussed, from antiquity to the present,10 and three principal types of 1 Thus the question of idolatry, so important in the Jewish-Christian tradition, is ignored. 2 2, 167; 3, 65-93. s 1, 119. 1 On the contrary, it is definitely stated (1, 119): quibus explicatis ad rationemque revocatis rerum tnagis natura cognoscitur quam deorum. 5 1 , 1 : ad cognitionem animi pulcberrima est. T. Frank, Life and Ut. in the Rom. Rep. (1930), 218, detects in Cicero an adaptation of Greek mystical views of

immortality by the use of the simple formula of gloria ( = the immortality of fame), and cites Pro Rab. 29-30; Pro Arch. 28-30; Pro Sest. 47; Att. 2, 5, 1; 10,8, 8; 12, 18, 1: longumque illud tempus cum non ero magis me movet quam hoc exiguum\ and his two books De Gloria. « 2, 104-114. 7 Discussed in Div. 2, 87-99. 8 Class. Rev. 52 (1938), 178. 8 3, 95. 10 Cf. the summary of views by A. S. Pease in Trans. Am. philol. Assoc. 44 3

34

INTRODUCTION

explanation have been advanced. A ) Cicero, though using Cotta as his mouthpiece, at this place, either from fear of charges of atheism 1 or from unwillingness to undermine the politically convenient state religion, 2 deliberately lies, in order to deceive his readers. The answer to this view, if we wish anything more than his own statement 3 in the De Divinatione, is that he need not have published at all, had he really felt these fears. Also, his books, though influencing some readers, 4 probably had no such wide circulation as his vanity would suppose, and so would hardly have started a religious revolution among the general public. If he had had such a fear he would hardly have revealed so clearly as he does the difference between exoteric and esoteric beliefs (1913), 27-37, which I here follow, in considerable part. The opinion of F. Guglielmino (Religio, 10 (1934), 142) that Cicero's inclination at the end to side with Balbus is one of the heart, not of the reason, appears unlikely, in view of his emphasis upon the importance of the weight of argument (1, 10). 1 So Aug. C.D. 5, 9: etiam illud tentavit quod scriptum est : Dixit insipiens in corde suo·. Non est Deus; sed non ex sua persona, vidit enim quam esset invidiosum et molestum; ideoque Cottam fecit disputantem de hoc re adversus Stoicos in libris de deorum natura, et pro Lucilio Balbo, cui Stoicorum partes defendendas dedit, maluit ferre sententiam quam pro Cotta, qui nullam divinam naturam esse contendit. in libris vero de divinatione ex se ipso apertissime obpugnat praescientiam futwrorum. ... aut enim esse Deum rtegat, quod quidem inducía alterius persona in libris de deorum natura facere molitus est; aut si esse confitetur Deum ... etiam sic nihil dicit aliud quam quod Ule dixit insipiens in corde suo·. Non est Deus (cf. 4, 30 : Cicero augur inridet auguria . . . nec quod in hac disputatione disertus insonat muttire auderet in populi contione). See also Lactantius, who, though at times praising the religious views of Cicero {Inst. 1,2,3 ; 1, 5, 24-25), elsewhere declares that this work would overthrow all religion ; (Inst. 1, 15, 16-27; 1, 17, 4: totus liber tertius de natura deorum omnes funditus religiones evertit ac delet ; 2, 3, 2-7 (2, 3, 5: nimirum Socratis carcerem times ideoque patrocinium veritatis susci pere non audes); 2, 8, 10-13, ending: nec enim potuti ab

ullo Cicero quam a Cicerone vehementius refutari·, 2, 8, 53-55; De Ira, 11, 9: Tullius tertio de natura deorum libro dissoluit publicas religiones. Arnobius (3, 6), however, from the point of view of one rejoicing in the discomfiture of the pagan gods, declares: Tullius Romani disertissimus generis nullam veri tus impietatis invidiam ingenue constante r et libere quid super tali opinatione sentirei pietate cum maiore monstravit. C. Thiaucourt, Essai sur les traités philos, de Cic. (1885), 248, gives another, rather doubtful, explanation: "pour être athée et s'avouer à soi-même son athéisme il faut une certaine fermeté d'intelligence dont Cicéron paraît avoir toujours manqué." 2 Lact. Inst. 2, 3, 2: intellegebat Cicero falsa esse quae homines adorarent. nam cum multa dixisset quae ad eversionem religionum valerent ait tamen non esse ilia vulgo disputando, ne susceptas publice religiones disputatio extinguat. 3 Div. 1, 8: per leg, inquit, tuum paulo ante tertium de natura deorum, in quo disputano Cottae quamquam labefactavit sententiam meam non funditus tamen sustulit. optime vero, inquam ; etenim ipse Cotta sie disputât ut Stoicorum magis argumenta confutet quam hominum deleat religionem. tum Quin tus: dicitur quidem istue, et vero saepius, credo, ne communia iura migrare videatur ; sed studio contra Stoicos disserendi mihi videtur funditus tollere. In Div. 2, 28, Cicero would retain haruspicine rei publicae causa communisque religionis. 4 1, 6; 1, 8; Div. 2, 5; O f f . 2, 2.

INTRODUCTION

35

among Roman statesmen,1 nor would he have supposed that the mere literary device of using Cotta as a character in the dialogue would completely relieve the author from responsibility. That Cotta's views were, in fact, often held to be Cicero's may be seen from Arnobius, Lactantius, and Augustine.2 B) Cicero is sincere, and though he does not accept all Stoic tenets, yet, as an eclectic with Stoic sympathies,3 he would feel that probability lay on the side of Balbus. The arguments of Cotta are sometimes frivolous, at other times less sound than they at first appear,4 and might easily have been answered in a Stoic rebuttal.5 Arguments against this view are : (1) that it is not the principles of the Stoics but the argument (disputatio) of Balbus which Cicero is said to consider the more probable; (2) while we have the arguments of Balbus in full, a considerable (and perhaps the most important) part of the reply of Cotta is lost in the lacuna at 3, 65, so that we are hardly in a position to appraise the results of the discussion; (3) Cicero takes especial pains to class himself as an Academic 6 and to praise Academic methods of arguing on both sides of a question; 7 and (4) the arrangement of the dialogue, with the Academic speaker having the final word, is an indication of the author's sympathies. C) The descriptive rather than polemic 8 aim, which I have already suggested, is well served by (1) Academic rebuttal to neutralize the partisan exposition of Epicurean or Stoic doctrines which Cicero doubtess found in his sources ; 9 (2) by the central connecting figure of Cotta ; 1

1, 61.

In η. 1, p. 34, above. 3 E.g., of the school of Antiochus. Cf. also A. S. Pease, op. cit., 30, η. 25; Α. Β. Drachmann, Atheism in pagan Antiq. (1922), 115; L. Gueuning in Nova et Vetera, 7 (1925), 331 ; F. Solmsen in CI. Weekly, 37 (1944), 159-160; Lact. Inst. 1, 2, 3; Marcus Tullius quamvis Academicae disciplinae defensor esset, de Providentia gubernatrice rerum et multa et saepe disseruit Stoicorum argumenta confirmans et nova ipsa adferens plurima; quod facit cum in omnibus philosophiae suae libris tum maxime in iis qui sunt de natura deorum. 4 Cf. W. G. Tennemann, Gesch. d. Philos. 5 (1805), 121; J. Β. Mayor, ed. of N.D. 3 (1885), xxiii-xxiv; also what Cicero himself says in 3, 65; Div. 1, 9. 6 Cf. 3, 94-95; J. B. Mayor, op. cit. 3, xxiv: "In some instances they may be 2

directly answered from the speech of Balbus." « 1, 17. 7 1, 1; 1, 11-14. 8 In this differing from Sextus Empiricus, who, however, contains some of the arguments appearing in Cicero (cf. Κ. Reinhardt, Poseidonios (1921), 209210); Sext. Pyrrhon. 3, 2: ούκοϋν έπεί θεόν είναι δραστικώτατον αίτιον οί πλείους άπεφήναντο, πρότερον περί θεοϋ σκοπήσωμεν, προειπόντες δτι τω μέΐ ßifp κατακολουθοϋντες άδοξάστως φαμέν είναι θεούς καΐ σέβομεν θεούς καν προνοειν αυτούς φαμέν, πρός δέ την προπέτειαν των δογματικών τάδε λέγομεν. 8 Cf. Div. 1, 7: faciendum videtur ut diligenter etiam atque etiam argumenta cum argumentis comparemus, ut fecimus in iis tribus libris quos de natura deorum scripsimus.

36

INTRODUCTION

and (3) by a recognition that, historically and objectively, the classic arguments against various theological views were as proper for study and enumeration as the views which they refuted.1 Cicero desires to give the impression of impartiality, which would not be produced by two Academics voting alike at the end. He also wishes to show to the reader an example of Academic method rather than of a dogma which might have been (even though wrongly) inferred from the consensus of two Academics, and to suggest that an Academic might use his individual liberty to select and accept any practical working principle, no matter from what school.2 SOURCES: GENERAL

21. Modern study of the De Natura Deorum has been rather more occupied with the detection of its sources than with interpretation of its contents or its purpose—a fact which itself bears significant testimony to the importance of Cicero as a transmitter of certain philosophic ideas not elsewhere well attested. Since few of the probable sources are named 3—save for some acknowledged quotations from Plato and Aristotle—the question of few or multiple sources is naturally important. In view of the haste with which Cicero was producing the series of works in 45-44 B.C., it might seem unlikely that he made careful comparison of many authorities, and more probable that he followed one source at a time,4 condensing, expanding, rearranging, adding remarks from 1 The pros and cons ate also in keeping not only with Cicero's Academic methods but also with his habit as a lawyer of seeing (and perhaps arguing to himself) both sides of a case ; cf. Fat. 3 : cum hoc genere philosophiae quod nos sequimur magnam habet orator societatem·, Att. 2, 3, 3; P. Boyancé in Rev. des ét. ¡at. 14 (1936), 290. The method is less appropriate in a judge whose duty it is to render a decision. 2 Cf. A. S. Pease, op. cit., 37, and works there cited in n. 56; also n. 6, p. 9, above. Richard Bentley acutely observed ( Works, 3 (1838), 420-421; called to my notice by Professor E. A. Robinson): "in all the disputes he [Cicero] introduces between the various sects, after the speeches are ended every man sticks where he was before; not one convert is made (as is common in modern dialogue), nor brought over in the smallest article.

For he avoided that violation of decorum·, he had observed, in common life, that all persevered in their sects, and maintained every nostrum without reserve." Minucius Felix, in a work relying largely on the De Natura Deorum, ends with the conversion of the pagan disputant. 3 Cf. W. W. Jaeger, Nemesios von Emesa (1914), 33: Es gehört zum Stil der Doxographie, den Namen zu nennen, zum Stil des Abschreibens, ihn zu verschweigen. 4 Cf. P. Boyancé in Rev. des ét. ¡at. 14 (1936), 291-292, for arguments pro and con. The criteria for determining whether Cicero used a single source H. Uri (CVV. u. d. epik. Philos. (1914), 3-5) would find in the presence or absence of an organic unity in the result. This somewhat subjective test needs great care in its application.

INTRODUCTION

37

his own reading or experience, and then shifting, when it seemed to him desirable, to some other source. 1 F r o m the comparatively small number o f Greek sources known to us by quotations in other authors or merely by name 2 scholars have ascribed t o Cicero nearly all possible combinations, but it should never be forgotten that these works are only a part of the handbooks which must have existed in his day, so that an Academic suspense o f judgment at certain points is probably the wisest course. I shall try, however, to deal with the more important suggestions which have been made, 3 and to do this most simply shall for the first book take up its main sections in order. 1 O. Piasberg, Cic. in seinen Werken ». (1880), xlii-liv (Book 1), with biblioBriefen (1926), 161, says that in the Cicegraphy at xlii, η. 1 ; 2 (1883), xvi-xxiii ronian studies of the last decades man das (Book 2); W. Scott, Frag. Herculan. sogenannten Einquellenprinzip fast (1885), 43-46 (Book 1); C. Thiaucourt, durchweg aufgegeben hat: d.h. Cicero Essai sur les traités philos, de Cic. (1885), folgt seinen Vorlagen immer nur eine 200-227 (Book 1); 228-239 (Book 2); Strecke weit, um dann Stücke anderer 239-250 (Book 3); H. Usener, Epicurea Herkunft damit zu verbinden oder darin(1887); lxv-lxviii ; P. Wendland in Arch, zuschieben; er konnte auch, wo ihm der f . Gesch. d. Philos. 1 (1888), 200-210 (Book Gegenstand geläufig war, den Vorlagen 2); L. Reinhardt in Bresl. philol. Abh. 3 , 2 entraten und mit den Erinnerungen aus (1888), 1-33 (Book 1); 33-55 (Book 2); seiner Studienzeit, aus Unterhaltungen 56-68 (Book 3); A. Schmekel, Die mit anderen, aus vielfacher Lektüre Philos, d. mittl. Stoa (1892), 85-104 schalten. Cf. H. Uri, op. cit., 4-5 for (Book 2) ; H. Sauppe, Ausgew. Sehr. Cicero's not following a single source in (1896), 387-403; W. Michaelis, De Origia slavish manner. For Cicero's own view nibus Indicis Deorum Cognominum (1898), of his liberty in rendering cf. Fin. 1, 6: 4-6; 29 (Book 3); R. Hoyer in Rhein. quid si nos non interpretum fungimur muñere, Mus. 53 (1898), 37-65; H. Diels, Elemensed tuemur ea quae dicta sunt ab eis quos tum (1899), 3, n. 0 (Book 2); C. Giamprobamus, eisque nostrum iudicium et nostrum belli in Boll, di filol. class. 6 (1900), 204scribendi ordinem adiungtmus? 205 (Book 2); C. H. Vick in Hermes, 37 2 Our knowledge of some of which (1902), 228-232 (Book 1); 232-248 (Book we do know rests upon only one or two 3); C. Giambelli in Riv. di filol. 31 (1903), chance allusions. 450-462 (Book 2); A. Gianola, De Com8 Among the more important treatpos. et Fontibus Ctc. Lib. qui sunt de N.D. ments (in addition to the introductions (1904); H. von Arnim, Stoic, vet. Frag. 1 of various editions) may be cited: A. B. (1905), XXX (Book 2); F. Zucker in Krische, Die theol. Lehre d. gr. Denker Philol. 64 (1905), 468-469 (on 1, 63; 1, (1840); Β. Lengnick, Ad emend, explic. 117-119); A. Goedeckemeyer, Gesch. d. Cic. Lib. de N.D. (1871), for Book 1; gr. Skeptizismus (1905), 67, n. 2; D. R. Hirzel, Untersuch. ζ· Cic. philos. Sehr. 1 Heeringa, Quaest. ad Cic. de Div. Lib. (1877), 1-45 (for Book 1); 191-244 (1906), 25-27 (Book 2); 37-38 (Book 3); (Book 2); H. Diels, Doxogr. Gr.1 W. Crönert, Kolotes u. Menedemos (1906), (1879; 2 ed. 1929), 119-132; 529-550; 176 (Book 1); P. Cropp, De Auetoribus P. Schwenke in Jahrb. f . cl. Philol. 119 quos secutus Cic. in Lib. de N.D. Acad. nov. Theologiam reddidit (1909)—and re(1879), 8, η. 4 (Book 2); 49-66 (Book 1); views by Α. Lörcher in Burs. Jahresb. 162 129-142 (Books 2-3); T. Schiche in (1913), 13; C. H. Vick in Beri, philol. fahresb. d. philol. Vereins Berlin, 6 IVoch. 32 (1912), 1217-1221—; E. Ka(1880), 362-383 (reviews of Hirzel and garow in Hermes (Russian), 11 (1912), Schwenke); J. B. Mayor, ed. of N.D. 1

38

INTRODUCTION SOURCES OF THE PROOEMIUM

22. That the first section (A), constituting the prooemium 1 of which I have spoken, 2 is the work of Cicero himself and not derived from some other source is clear from its highly personal character and its lack of learned materials lying outside the writer's o w n experience. The second part (B), 3 with attacks upon Platonic and Stoic tenets, seems not to be from the same source as the more systematic catalogue o f views of philosophers (part C) from Thaïes to Diogenes of Babylon, 4 the scale and plan of which are quite unlike it. 6 Further, part C itself contains a critique of the views of Plato 6 and the Stoics 7 which does not particularly resemble that in part B. It has been suggested by Krische 8 that Cicero himself composed part B, with a free use of Lucretius, 9 to w h o m it shows some likeness, 10 and L. Reinhardt 1 1 has in 309-312; W. W. Jaeger, Nemesios von Emesa (1914), 106, η. 3 (Book 2); Η. Uri, Cic. u. d. epik. Philos. (1914), 89-116 (Book 1); R. Philippson in Hermes, 51 (1916), 568-608; id., in Beri, philol. Woch. 36 (1916), 110; H. von Arnim in P.-W. 10 (1917), 1971-1973 (Book 3); K. Svoboda in Listy filol. 46 (1919), 3-13 (with bibliography); 153-161; R. Philippson in Hermes, 55 (1920), 230 (Book 1); K. Reinhardt, Poseidonios (1921), 215-262 (Book 2); H. von Arnim in P.-W. 11 (1922), 659 (Book 3); M. Pohlenz in Gotting, gel. Ληχ. 184 (1922), 126; 168-169 (cf. 188 (1926), 273-306 on Book 2); Α. Lörcher in Burs. Jabresb. 200 (1924), 112-120; 135137; P. Geissler in Gnomon, 1 (1925), 241 (Book 2) ; K. Reinhardt, Kosmos u. Sympathie (1926), 61-177 (Book 2); M. Schanz-C. Hosius, Gesch. d. röm. Lit. I 4 (1927), 510-511; I. Heinemann, Poseidonios' metaphys. Sehr. 2 (1928), 144162 (Book 1); 162-224 (Books 2 and 3)— and against him W. Theiler in Problemata, 1 (1930), 79, n. 3; 104; M. Pohlenz in Gotting, gel. Anz. 192 (1930), 138-156 (Book 2); A. Lörcher in Burs. Jahresb. 235 (1932), 39-53 (Book 2); L. Edelstein in Studi ital. di filol. cl. N.S. 11 (1934), 131-183 (Book 2); M. Pohlenz, Ant. Führertum (1934), 95, η. 1 (Book 1); id., in Gotting. Nachrichten, N.F. 1 (1934), 22, η. 1 (Book 3); E. von Ivanka in Egyetemes philol. Kö%löny, 59 (1935), 10-21 (Book 2); P. Boyancé in Rev. des

ét. lat. 14 (1936), 288-295; J. Haussleiter in Burs. Jahresb. 255 (1937), 24 (Books 2-3); M. van den Bruwaene, La théologie de Cic. (1937), passim-, R. Philippson in P.-W. 19 (1938), 2462 (Book 1); 7A (1939), 1153-1154 (Book 1); 1154-1155 (Book 2); 1155-1156 (Book 3); id., in Symb. Osloenses, 19 (1939), 15-40 (Book 1); 20 (1940), 21-44 (Book 1); W. Ax in Gotting, gel. Anz• 1939, n. 1, 41 (Book 2) ; F. Solmsen in Cl. Philol. 39 (1944), 46 (Book 3) ; R. Philippson in Symb. Osloenses, 24 (1945), 16-47; C. Vicol in Ephem. Dacoromana, 10 (1945), esp. 249-250; 265-266; A. J. Festugière, La Révlê. d'Herèsm Trism. 2 (1949), 366, η. 1; A. di Girolamo in Giorn. ital. di filol. 4 (1951), 43-58. 1 1, 1-17. 2 nn. 6-9, p. 29; 1-4, p. 30, above. 3 1, 18-24. 4 1, 25-41. 6 Cf. R. Hirzel, op. cit., 1 (1877), 17-19; P. Schwenke, op. cit., 49; C. Thiaucourt, op. cit., 210. R. Philippson in P.-W. 7A (1939), 1153, thinks that if Cicero here used Philodemus it was a different part of his work from that which parallels our section C. 6 1, 30; independent of the account in 1, 18-20. 7 1, 36-41. 8 Op. cit., 22. • 5, 110-234. 10 Cf. 1, 21-22, with Lucr. 5, 165-175; 1, 23, with Lucr. 5, 156-167. Hirzel,

INTRODUCTION

39

part adopted this assumption, without insisting, however, upon Lucretius as a source. T h i a u c o u r t 1 would assume Phaedrus, f o r whose books on the gods Cicero asked Atticus on 5 August, 45, 2 but there has been a greater inclination among modern scholars 3 to find the source in Zeno o f S i d o n , w h o m Cicero knew and considered the leading Epicurean of his age, 4 to w h o m Cotta compares Vellerns, 5 and whose violently pugnacious habits of debate fit much better than the milder manners of Phaedrus 6 with the contemptuous character of section B. 7 Others, perhaps more cautiously, w o u l d be contented to assume some unspecified Epicurean writer. 8 SOURCES OF THE DOXOGRAPHY

23. In part C

9

there is a doxographic account of the theological

op. cit., 1, 9-10 refutes the view that Cicero here borrows from Lucretius; R. Philippson (in Gotting, gel. Anz. 1937, 473; id., in Symb. Osloenses, 19 (1939), 18; id., in P.-W. 7A (1939), 1153) thinks that Lucretius, Aëtius, Plac. 1, 7, 5-10 (Doxogr. Gr. 2 299-301), and Cicero probably all derive from the same ultimate source, viz. Epicurus, De Natura, Book 12 (fr. 82-87 Usenet), but perhaps under the influence of criticisms by Cameades. 11 Op. cit., 7. 1 Op. cit., 213. While there may possibly have been reason for so supposing when it was thought that the work περί εύσεβείας was by Phaedrus (see J. Hayter's view, as explained by J. B. Mayor, ed. of N.D. 1 (1880), xliii-xlvi ; H. Diels, Doxogr. Cr.2 (1929), 530), there seems little when that work is ascribed to Philodemus (cf. R. Hirzel, op. cit., 1, 26-27). 2 Att. 13, 39, 2. But R. Philippson (Symb. Osloenses, 19 (1939), 15) remarks that in a letter of 4 August, 45 (Att. 13, 38, 1) he was already writing contra Epicúreos, and so had already passed to part E of our book. Further, just before the reference to Phaedrus in Att. 13, 39, 2, Cicero says: libros mihi de quibus ad te antea scripsi velim mit tas, which Philippson (in P.-(F. 7A (1939), 1153) thinks may have been theological works of Philodemus, since Atticus stood in intimate

relations with all the Epicureans in Italy. 3 E.g., C. Petersen, ed. of Phaedrus Epicureus (1833), 45; Hirzel, op. cit. 1, 27-32; Schwenke, op. cit., 56-57; Thiaucourt, op. cit., 214, who thinks Zeno was the source of both Philodemus and Cicero, the latter retaining the pugnacious quality of his original and the more polished Philodemus omitting it. 4 1, 59: Zenonem, quem Philo noster coryphaeum appellare Epicureorum solebat, cum Athenis essem audiebam frequenter (Cotta speaks, but apparently tells of Cicero's experience); Τ use. 3, 38: hoc ille acriculus me audiente Athenis senex Zeno, istorum acutissimus, contendere et magna voce dicere solebat. 6 1, 59. 8 1, 93; cf. Hirzel, op. cit. 1, 29. 7 In which sarcasm and a dozen or more indignant rhetorical questions are prominent. R. Hoyer (in Rhein. Mus. 53 (1898), 52) remarks that there are about 200 questions in this book, and points out their unsuitability for sceptical doctrine, and Mayor, ed. of N.D. 3 (1885), xvi, observes that the answers to them may often be distinctly given in the words of the treatise criticized. 8 R. Philippson (Symb. Osloenses, 19 (1939), 17) thinks perhaps from some Epicurean work on the origin of the world, this being the subject especially discussed in 1, 18-24. 9 1, 25-41.

40

INTRODUCTION

beliefs of philosophers from Thaïes to Diogenes of Babylon.1 That this is not compiled by Cicero himself but borrowed from some Greek source is universally admitted, and many scholars 2 have remarked upon its striking resemblances to Philodemus, De Pietät e,z the apposite parts of which are conveniently printed, in parallel columns with N.D. 1, 25-41, by H. Diels in his Doxographi Graed.4· While the fragmentary condition of the papyrus of Philodemus accounts for his not mentioning several philosophers in Cicero's list,5 and there are some slight divergences of order in the names of those who are selected,® yet the parallels in some of the philosophers 7 are noteworthy, as is the fact that the same works are often cited.8 The omission by Cicero of Heraclitus and Prodicus, who appear in Philodemus, is explained by Diels 9 as due to the likeness of their views to those of the Stoics and Persaeus, respectively.10 Other differences between Cicero and Philodemus are also enumerated by Schwenke.11 Philodemus may seem more courteous in tone than 1 Which Krieche, op. cit.,24; Lengnick, op. cit., 4-5; Hirzel, op. cit., 1, 22-23; Thiaucourt, op. cit., 209-213; and Gianola, op. cit., 8, consider to be an afterthought on Cicero's part, intruded between 1, 24 and 1, 42 (or possibly the second sentence of 1, 43) ; but cf. L. Reinhardt, op. cit., 5-6. Indeed in 1, 2, the words ut eorum infinitum sit enumerare sententias might suggest that when writing them Cicero did not intend to furnish a long doxography, and if 1, 25-41 were deleted the sense would continue unbroken. Yet, as pointed out by J. B. Mayor (CI. Rev. 3 (1889), 357) the historical summary is prepared for by phrases found in 1, 1; 1, 2; 1, 3; and it is clear that 1, 63; 1, 91-92; and 1, 94 regard part C as an essential portion of the whole work, while exposui (1, 42) naturally refers to part C, though Hirzel (p. 22) would relate it to 1, 24. The list is very similar, in form and content, to that in Ac. 2, 118, though each list has its own specialities. For a comparison of the two see A. J. Festugière, La Révél. d'Hermès Trism. 2 (1949), 366. s On the development of this fact cf. H. Sauppe, Ausgew. Sehr. (1896), 387-389 (reprinting a programme of 1864); R. Hirzel, op. cit., 1, 4-5 (refuting doubts of G. F. Schoemann) ; H. Diels, Doxogr. Gr.2 (1929), 121-122.

3

Pp. 65-84 Gomperz. 2 ed. (1929), 531-550. On the relations of the two works see also B. Lengnick, op. rit.j passim·, J. B. Mayor, ed. of N.D. 1, xlvi-1. 6 Thaies, Anaximander, Alcmaeon, Empedocles, Plato, Xenocrates, Heraclides Ponticus, Theophrastus, Strato, Aristón. β E. g., Protagoras. 7 H. Diels, op. cit., 122, cites as especially convincing those dealing with Aristotle, Persaeus, Chrysippus, and Diogenes of Babylon. Elsewhete (p. 126) he discusses Cicero's amplification of some passages. 8 So R. Hirzel, op. cit., 1, 5 (followed by C. Thiaucourt, op. cit., 206) calls attention to Antisthenes, Physicus (1, 32), the third book of Aristotle's De Philosophia (1, 33), the first book of Chrysippus, De Diis (not named in 1, 39, as it is in Philodemus, yet clearly used), and Diogenes, De Minerva (1, 41). Both also draw from Xenophon, Memorabilia (1, 31). » Op. cit., 125-126. 10 Heraclides is alluded to by Cicero in 1, 74 and 3, 35; Prodicus in 1, 118— all these, of course, outside the limits of the present passage. 11 Op. cit., 50-51. 4

INTRODUCTION

41

Cicero in part C, 1 and expresses rather little of criticism, 2 whereas the non-historical parts are strongly anti-Stoic, 3 but Philippson 4 suggests that Cicero has perhaps somewhat exaggerated the vituperative character o f his source in order to make it appear more typically Epicurean. 6 T o explain both the likenesses and the divergences of Cicero and Philodemus various theories have been advanced. G i v e n the friendly relations known to have existed between the two, it is v e r y improbable (1) that Philodemus copied Cicero; β possible (2) that Cicero copied Philodemus's De Pie tate,1 in which case there are a f e w discrepancies to be explained; 8 not unlikely (3), as Philippson 9 supposes, in view of Cicero's brevity, that he used an epitome of Philodemus, prepared f o r him either by an assistant (to w h o m some of the errors might then be ascribed) 1 0 or by Philodemus h i m s e l f ; 1 1 and entirely possible (4) that Cicero, Philodemus, and perhaps others, 1 2 derive f r o m some common source. This archetype 1 H. Diels, Doxogr. Cr.2 122-123. Yet cf. the impressive list of vituperative expressions collected by Philippson (Symb. Osloenses, 19 (1939), 28-30) from the writings of Philodemus. 2 Cf. H. Diels, op. cit., 123; Α. Lörcher, op. cit., 137. 8 Hirzel, op. cit., 1, 24. 4 In P.-W. 7A (1939), 1153. 5 Cf. 1, 18; 1, 93-94; 2, 73: vestra enim solum legitis, vestra amatis, ceteros causa incognita condemnatis; also Diels, op. cit., 123. • Cf. Thiaucourt, op. cit., 209; also R. Philippson in P.-W. 19 (1938), 2445-2446; P. H. and E. A. DeLacy, ed. of Philodemus, De Signis = Philol. Monographs, 10 (1941), 4-5, citing Fin. 2, 119; also Ascon. in Pison. 68: Philodemum significai, qui fuit Epicureus ilia aetate nobilissimus. There would be no obvious motive for Philodemus to borrow from Cicero, and if he did we should still have to explain either how Cicero was able in his hasty composition to compile such a doxography or from what other source he borrowed it. 7 Cf. R. Philippson in Symb. Osloenses 19 (1939), 31. * Cf. η. 1, p. 41, above. » In Hermes, 51 (1916), 568; Beri, philol. Woch. 36 (1916), 109; Symb. Osloenses, 19 (1939), 36-40; at 38-39 he gives the text of a fragment (Pap. Here. 168) which he attempts to identify with this epitome. Ambros. Ep. 63, 13

(Usener, Epicurea, 356, no. 385a) refers to Philominus ... in epitomis suis, where editors have emended to Philodemus. For Cicero's use of such epitomes Philippson (p. 36) compares H. Usener, Epicurea (1887), lxv. Cf. A, Lörcher in Burs. Jahresb. 200, 2 (1924), 124; 134. 10 L. Reinhardt, op. cit., 19; cf. Mayor, ed. of N.D. 3 (1885), lxx. 11 R. Philippson in Symb. Osloenses, 19 (1939), 37. Considerations of anachronism prevented citing Philodemus directly as a source (id., 40). 12 Cf. J. Β. Mayor in CI. Rev 3 (1889), 357; R. Philippson in Hermes, 55 (1920), 230 (citing J. Dietze in Jahrb. f . cl. Philol. 153 (1896), 223) for a common Epicurean source for these two works, the Epicurean Damon in Lucían, Iup. Trag., and various Christian apologists, particularly Clement's Protrepticus. This source would have fallen in the second century, and may have had two parts: (a) poets, mythologists, and the populace, and (b) the philosophers, this being the order in Philodemus, De Piet. pp. 5-65 Gomperz, which corresponds to N.D. 1, 42-43. The apologists, like Velleius in Cicero, object to the views of the philosophers as being inconsistent with one another and in some cases with themselves, and to the opinions of the poets (Homer, Hesiod, et al.) as unbecoming and leading men to vice under the pretext of imitating the gods.

42

INTRODUCTION

would be dated later than Diogenes of Babylon, the latest name in the doxography, who died about 150 B.C.,1 and Diels 2 suggested that it might well be Phaedrus's περί θεών, while Schwenke 3 and Crönert 4 hold to Zeno of Sidon.5 Mayor,® with good reason, inquires why the historical review stops at the middle of the second century B.C., and suggests that we may trace Zeno's criticisms back to his predecessor, Apollodorus, ó κηποτύραννος, who flourished in the late second century and was a voluminous writer; yet this is somewhat conjectural.' It is noteworthy, however, that this Epicurean source does not take the opportunity to criticize the theological arguments of that doughty opponent, Carneades. The theory of Gianola 8 that an Academic rather than an Epicurean source was used for both parts C and D is more ingenious than convincing. SOURCES OF THE EPICUREAN DOCTRINE

24. Part D, 9 the brief but abstruse exposition of positive Epicurean theological views, has been traced to quite diverse sources. Krische 10 and Lörcher11 think it made up by Cicero from his general knowledge of Epicurean tenets, Hoyer 1 2 further remarking that it contains only generalities for which no special source need be sought.13 On the other 1

M. Wellmann in P.-W. 5 (1905), 774. Doxogr. Gr,2 126-127. Mayor (ed. of N.D. 1, Iii, η. 1) dissents. 3 Op. cit., 56-57; so also Thiaucourt, op. cit., 214-216. 4 Op. cit., 176, -who thinks that Phaedrus, Philodemus, and Cicero derive from Zeno, the first two directly, Cicero through Phaedrus. 6 In whose time Philippson {op. cit. (1939), 27) would place it. He was a hearer of Carneades {Ac. 1, 46), with whom Diogenes, the last in the list, was contemporary ; cf. Festugière, op. cit., 366. « Ed. of N.D. 1 (1880), Iii. 7 Cf. Thiaucourt, op. cit., 215, η. 0. 8 Op. cit., 6-13. On p. 6 he holds that in 1, 29, an Epicurean would have been more respectful toward Democritus (yet cf. 1, 93); that in 1, 37, the expression deus Ule quem mente noscimus is inappropriate in the mouth of an Epicurean (yet cf. 1, 49: mente cernatur). » 1, 43-56. 10 Op. cit., 33. a

11 In Burs. Jahresb. 200, 2 (1924), 135136, who thinks that Cicero arranged the material as in Book 2 and took it from Epicurus himself rather than from a later Epicurean. 12 Op. cit., 50. 13 It is hard to see how 1, 49-50, which at their best may be a reasonably correct rendering of a highly technical passage and at their worst a complete misunderstanding by Cicero of the Epicurean position, can be thus explained. Hirzel {op. cit., 1, 12) remarks that Cicero must have studied Epicurus deeply in order to have been able to quote directly from three of his books (1, 43; 1, 45; 1, 49), which conflicts with his statement in Τ use. 2, 8: Epicurum autem et Metrodorum non fere praeter suos quisquam in manus sumit. Uri (op. cit., 86-88) thinks the unity of part D—which is superior to that of part E—is an indication that it is not from Cicero himself but from a Greek source.

INTRODUCTION

43

hand Hirzel, 1 Schwenke, 2 Thiaucourt, 3 L. Reinhardt, 4 and Uri 6 support Zeno of Sidon as the original, wh'le Philippson 6 has gradually developed the likely theory that, while the doctrine in 1, 50-56 is all teaching of Epicurus, yet it is also to be f o u n d in the writings of his followers, and most of it in Philodemus, so that although it is not probable that part D was f r o m Philodemus's De Pietate it may well have come f r o m his περί θεών or its supplementary books περί θεών διαγωγής, perhaps used by Cicero in the f o r m of epitomes (such as Pap. Here. 168?). SOURCES OF COTTA'S CRITICISM OF THE EPICUREANS

25. The final section (E), 7 with Cotta's disproportionately long refutation of Epicurean views, despite Schoemann's opinion 8 that it is, like Book 3, all f r o m Clitomachus, contains, as almost all students n o w recognize, an admixture of elements f r o m the Academy (Clitomachus reproducing the doctrines of Carneades) with others f r o m Posidonius. 9 Certain scholars 1 0 assume a single sectarian source, with infiltrations f r o m Cicero's o w n reading; others w o u l d discover t w o distinct sources. op. cit., 25-32. Op. cit., 56-57. 9 Op. cit., 214-216. * Op. cit., 42-56. 6 Op. cit., 84-89. So apparently also Mayor, ed. of N.D. 1, li-lii. * First in his dissertation De Philodemi Libro .. .περί σ η μ ε ί ω ν . . . et Epicureorum Doctrina logica (1881), 71 ; cf. id., in Hermes, 51 (1916), 607-608; id. in Beri, philol. Woch., 36 (1916), 110; id., in Symb. Osloenses, 19 (1939), 34-36; id., in P.-W. 7A (1939), 1153-1154. 7 1, 57-124. 8 Ed. 4 of N.D. (1876), 18. Carneades is, to be sure, named in 3, 29 and 3, 44, but never in part E. * Uri {op. cit., 89) remarks: sie beginnt echt akademisch, und der Schluss sieht ganz stoisch aus. Among the Stoic elements are: 1, 87 (the wonders of the universe); 1, 92 (traces of teleology in nihil supervacuaneum·, 1, 95-96 (the universe possibly divine); 1, 100 (a teleological passage, suggesting those in 2, 95; 2, 98-99); 1, 103 (aetheriis ignibus; cf. 2,101); 1,104 (naturae accommodatum)·, 1, 110 (virtus autem actuosa)·, 1,116 {pietas and sanctitas defined); 1, 121 (care of 1 2

the gods for men; cosmopolitanism of the sapientes). And even back in 1, 80, there is a jesting reference to the Academy, which, though not impossible for an Academic, comes more naturally from one of another school. Heinemann {op. cit., 2, 147-148) argues that in 1, 4, Carneades is called the opponent of the Stoics, so probably the criticism of the Epicureans is by someone else, like Philo; cf. 1, 17; 1, 59; 1, 113. 10 Heinemann {op. cit., 2, 147, n. 1) notes that Hirzel {op. cit., 1, 32-45) and Goedeckemeyer (op. cit., 67, n. 2) found the source in Clitomachus (cf. also H. von Arnim in P.-W. 10 (1917), 1971; P.-W. 11 (1922), 659, for Clitomachus), while Schwenke (op. cit., 57-66), Thiaucourt {op. cit., 219-220; 227), and Schmekel (op. cit., 85-104) decide upon Posidonius. Also P. Wendland (Beri, philol. Woch. 12 (1892), 841-842) favors Posidonius, as does C. H. Vick (op. cit., 228-232, who points out likenesses between Cicero and Sextus Empiricus, Adv. Phys. 1 (discussed also by R. Philippson in Symb. Osloenses, 20 (1940), 26-32), which Vick believes derive from Posidonius.

44

INTRODUCTION

Thus L. Reinhardt 1 assigns to Clitomachus 1, 57-102 2 and to Posidonius 1, 103-124; 3 Cropp 4 thinks that 1, 57-114 are by a Stoicizing Academic, 5 the remainder by Posidonius; Uri β that Cicero used mainly materials from a Stoic source, 7 probably one used by him in Book 2, 8 with a few distinctly Academic arguments taken from the source of Book 3 (Clitomachus), all of which material he attempted to work over, from his Academic standpoint, to answer the Epicurean doctrines set forth in part D, with some Academic phraseology added; 9 Heinemann, 10 maintaining that Cicero knew of no published Academic criticism specifically directed against Epicurean theology, and therefore fused together pieces from Philo's critique of the Epicurean system in general and a polemic by Posidonius against atomistic views on theology; and Philippson 11 that most is from Academic sources, but 1, 123-124 from Posidonius. An obstacle to the acceptance of a single source is the contradiction between 1, 85-86 (where see the notes on nonnullis videri and deos esse putaf)12 and 1, 123, for in the one case Epicurus is called a believer in gods—in fact, a very superstitious believer—, in the other, on the authority of the fifth book of Posidonius's work on the gods, he figures as an atheist under the garb of religious conformity. These can hardly derive from the same source, 13 though in Sextus Empiricus, who presents some parallels to our first book, a similar contradiction has been pointed out. 14 So varied and so inconsistent are 1

Op. cit., 20-33. With 1, 63-64 (on atheists) interpolated by Cicero from elsewhere; cf. Uri, op. cit., 109. 3 With 1, 106-108 (Roman and other illustrations) and 1, 117-120 (condemnation of apotheosis) similarly interpolated by Cicero from a source other than Posidonius. 4 Op. cit., 22-23. 6 So Hoyer {op. cit., 54) thought E derived from Antiochus, who wrote περί θεών (Plut. Luculi. 28, 7); but see the doubts of Gianola {op. cit., 10-13), who prefers to believe Philo the source ; cf. 1, 17; 1, 59; 1, 113; Farn. 9, 8, 1, on Philo as an adversary of the Epicureans; also Cropp, op. cit., 20-23; Heinemann, op. cit., 2, 147-153; and Philippson in P.-W. 7A (1939), 1154. Heinemann {op. cit., 151-153) observes that the whole Epicurean system is here attacked, while Book 3 criticizes only the theology of the Stoics. 2

« Op. cit., 89-113. 7 Cf. 1,100, η. {eos vituperabas), below. 8 At pp. 100-101 he compares 1, 77102 with 2, 45-72. See also the views of Hirzel {op. cit., 1, 33-34) and Philippson {op. cit., 39-41; 44). 9 E.g., 1, 66; 1, 84; 1, 94. 10 Op. cit., 2, 153-162 (especially 161162). 11 In Symb. Osloenses, 20 (1940), 25-26; 31; cf. P.-W. 7A (1939), 1154; C. Vicol in Ephem. Dacorom. 10 (1945), 265-266, who stresses the correspondence, point by point, of sections D and E, as against the separatist view of Uri. 12 Also Schmekel, op. cit., 101-102. 18 Cf. Hirzel, op. cit., 1, 35-36; Philippson, op. cit., 43. 14 Cf. Adv. Phys. 1, 58: καί Επίκουρος δέ κατ' ένίους ώς μέν πρός τούς πολλούς άπολείπει θεόν, ώς δέ πρός την φύσιν των πραγμάτων ούδαμώς;; 1, 64: τάχα δέ οι άπό των κήπων, ώς αί £ηταΙ τοϋ 'Επικούρου λέξεις μαρτυροϋσι, θεόν άπολείπουσιν ;

45

INTRODUCTION

the opinions of scholars on this question—to quote Cicero's own remarks 1—that it seems prudent to adopt a certain Academic suspense of judgment concerning them. One additional consideration, however, has been especially developed by R. Philippson,2 who observes that the original views of Epicurus were attacked by Carneades; then, to meet these criticisms, some modifications were made by Zeno and other later Epicureans, and these appear in Philodemus. For the positive Epicurean doctrine in part D Cicero has used this later material, but for the refutation of it by Cotta in part E he has employed, at least in considerable measure, an earlier argumentation deriving from Carneades, though perhaps through Philo, the pupil of Clitomachus.3 Hence the vulnerable points in D are not very effectively attacked in E, while E tries to refute arguments not advanced in D. 4 This inconcinnity between exposition and rebuttal may be paralleled in the De Divinatione, where the defense of divination in Book 1 is based on Posidonius and is more up-to-date in its arguments than the rebuttal in Book 2, which derives from earlier polemics of Carneades against the Stoic views. 6 SOURCES OF BOOK II

26. In studying the probable sources of Book 2 we may first segregate certain sections which are certainly or probably the work or the insertion of Cicero himself, such as the dialogue-framework (2, 1-3; 2, 168), the Roman illustrations and the conclusions drawn therefrom (2, 6-12; 2, 165; in 2, 8, Coelius is cited, doubtless through Brutus's epitome; cf. Att.

13, 8 (8 J u n e , 4 5 ) : epitomen Bruti

Coelianorum

velim mihi

mittas

et a Philoxeno Παναιτίου περί προνοίας). Ciceronian are probably the statements introduced by ut e patre audivi (2, 11; 2, 14); quotations from Aerius (2, 89-90), Pacuvius (2, 91-92), and the reference to the 21 letters of the Roman alphabet and the Annales of Ennius (2, 93-94) ; above all, the lengthy quotations from his own Aratea (2, 104-115). No Greek source would have included any of this matter, which amounts to about 30 of the 168 sections of the book. Though Cicero had read and studied many Greek authors, yet, considering the speed with which the present work was composed, it R. Philippson in P. W. 7A (1939), 1154. That Carneades at times used the arguments of one dogmatic school to refute those of another is well recognized; cf. W. C. Greene, Moira (1944), 348, η. 96. I N.D. 1, 1. II In P.-W. 7A (1939), 1154, and more particularly in Symb. Osloenses, 20 (1940),

31-41. 3

Op. cit., 41.

Philippson (op. cit., 41) cites as an illustration 1, 113. See also 1, 77, n. (poetae), below. 4

« Cf. Pease, ed. of Div. 1 (1920), 22-23; 28-29.

46

INTRODUCTION

is likely that he employed few rather than many sources, 1 and that allusions to Plato and Aristotle (from the latter of whom many of the biological data cited ultimately derive) as well as to Zeno, Cleanthes, and Chrysippus (all of whom are cited, the last named being often recognizable by the very syllogistic character of his argument) were made through the medium of a few later writers. P. Schwenke (Jahrb. f . Philol. 119 (1879), 129-140, especially 139-140), followed by P. Wendland (Arch. f . Gesch. d. Phil. 1 (1886), 206), J. B. Mayor (edition, 2 (1883), xvi-xxiii), A. Goethe (edition (1887), 17), H. Diels, Elementum (1889), 2; and C. Giambelli (Riv. di filol. 31 (1903), 450-463), would assert a single source for essentially the whole book, namely, Posidonius, περί θεών, a work in five books, to the first four of which Schwenke would relate the four-fold division in 2, 3. Especially favoring Posidonian authorship is K. Reinhardt, Poseidonios (1921), 224-239; id., Kosmos u. Sympathie (1926), 161-177, who ascribes to Posidonius rather than to Panaetius 2, 115-153 (but cf. I. Heinemann, Poseidonios' metapbys. Schriften, 2 (1928), 207-209). Arguments adduced in this connection include the admiration of Posidonius for Plato (2, 32), which is attested by Galen, Hipp, et Plat. Plac. 4, 7 (V, 421 K.), and for Aristotle (2, 42-44; 2, 95), which is noted by Strabo, 2, 3, 8—in each case in contrast with most other Stoics, so that allusions to these two philosophers may well come through Posidonius rather than directly (a point urged by I. Bywater in Journ. of Philol. 7 (1877), 76). Again, Posidonius is named in 2, 88 (though as inventor rather than as author), and many other passages in the second book agree with views ascribed to him by other writers; e.g., the vitalistic passage in 2, 82-85, for which cf. M. Pohlenz in Gotting, gel. An192 (1930), 145; W. Ax in the same, 201 (1939), 41-42; note also the allusion to Rhodes in 2, 165. A variant form of the belief in a single source is that of R. Philippson (in Philol. Woch. 54 (1934), 190; id., P.-W. 7A (1939), 1155), who, because of likenesses to Sextus Empiricus, Diogenes Laertius, Aëtius, Theon, and Arius Didymus, argues that Cicero here used a Stoic handbook which included materials from Panaetius and Posidonius, and therefore must have been by a contemporary of Cicero. M. Pohlenz (Gnomon, 21 (1949), 116) believes this view possible yet not necessarily exclusive of a direct use of Panaetius also. L. Edelstein (Stud. ital. di filol. cl. 11 (1934), 131-183) thinks inconsistencies and inconcinnity are due to Cicero himself and do not permit us to assume differing sources in this book. 1

Fot which reason I find it difficult to accept the mosaic of sources main-

tained by P. Finger in Rh. Mus. 80 (1931), 151-200 ; 310-320.

INTRODUCTION

47

27. Other scholars would detect in the Second Book more than one source. Its four main topical divisions (outlined in 2, 3) are : (A) 2, 3-44 (esse deos); (B) 2, 45-72 (guales sint); (C) 2, 73-153 (mundum ab his administrari)·, (D) 2, 153-167 (consulere eos rebus humants), but I. Heinemann, op. cit., 2, 167, points out that much in the book ill corresponds to these four headings. R. Hirzel (Untersuchungen Cic. phil. Sehr. 1 (1877), 191-244, especially 224) assigns A and D to Posidonius, περί θεών, Β to Apollodorus, περί θεών, and C to Panaetius, περί προνοίας, allowing for casual reference by Cicero to other works. H. Usener, Epicurea (1887), lxvii, thinks that for A Cicero stupidly mixed up excerpts from Poseidonius with remains of an Academic handbook of Carneadean tone, which he had perhaps used when a young student at Athens. Against this view cf. L. Reinhardt (in Bresl. philol. Abh. 3, 2 (1888), 54-55), who himself believes that A and Β derive from Chrysippus, C from Panaetius, and D from Posidonius. P. Finger (Rh. Mus. 80 (1931), 151-200; 310320) divides into much smaller units drawn from Posidonius, Panaetius, and Antiochus. Again, part C may be divided into parts, and M. Pohlenz (Gotting, gel. AnZ. 184 (1922), 168-170; 188 (1926), 279-288 (against Κ. Reinhardts Kosmos u.Symp athie)·, 192 (1930), 144-145; id., in Gnomon, 21 (1949), 116; W. Theiler in Gnomon, 23 (1951), 224, and I. Heinemann, op. cit., 2 (1928), 208-209) recognize 2, 115-153 as derived from Panaetius, περί προνοίας. Supporting this ascription are such arguments as: (1) Cicero's request for the loan of Panaetius's book (Att. 13, 18, quoted above); (2) the interest shown in comets, etc. (cf. Sen. N.Q. 7, 30, 2); (3) praise of the etesian winds (2, 31 ; cf. Anon, in Arat. p. 97 Maass) ; (4) belief in the permanence of the world and doubt about the orthodox Stoic view of a world-conflagration (much hinges upon whether nihil ut fere intereat aut admodum paululum (2, 118) represents a single, unified thought, as maintained by K. Reinhardt (Kosmos u. Sympathie (1926), 164, η. 1; cf. R. Philippson in Philol. Woch. 54 (1934), 189-190) or opposing alternatives of Panaetius on the one hand and the orthodox Stoics on the other, as argued by M. Pohlenz (Gotting, gel. An%. 188 (1926), 279-280; cf. I. Heinemann, op. cit., 2, 206); (5) likenesses between 2, 147-153 and O f f . 2, 9-20 (from Panaetius; cf. Heinemann, op. cit., 2, 211-212); (6) the derivation of the physiological matter beginning in 2, 135 from Erasistratus as an ultimate source, rather than from Praxagoras whom Posidonius followed (cf. M. Pohlenz in Gotting. gel. Anz. 188 (1926), 282-283). So also 2, 98-103 show Panaetian traits; cf. M. Pohlenz in Gotting, gel. An192 (1930), 145). The objections of K. Reinhardt (Kosmos u. Sympathie (1926), 161-177)

48

INTRODUCTION

seem less convincing than the arguments of Pohlenz and Heinemann. 28. Whether Book 3 should be (more logically) arranged to match the divisions in Book 2 or Book 2 so arranged as to be more conveniently refuted in Book 3 is the dilemma which apparently confronted Cicero; cf. I. Heinemann, op. cit., 2, 163-164; 219-220 (but see, in opposition, P. Finger in Rh. Mus. 80 (1931), 318-319; also 2,153 ,n. (quid, etc.), below). As the books stand, the arrangement, save for Ciceronian intrusions, like 2, 104-114, and the material in 3, 53-60, is essentially the same (cf. Heinemann, op. cit., 2, 220). SOURCES OF BOOK III

29. In Book 3 we may ascribe to Cicero himself the frame-work of the dialogue(3, 1-15; 3, 94-95), allusions to deified Roman heroes (3, 39) and abstracts (3, 63), to the capedunculae of Numa (3, 43), to Furina (3, 46), Circe and Circeii (3, 48), and to Roman tax-collectors (3, 49); also a personal observation at Athens (3, 49), the types of cases in Roman law-courts (3, 74), and the unmerited sufferings of certain Romans (3, 80-81; 3, 86). Obviously inserted by Cicero are quotations from Ennius (3, 24; 3, 40; 3, 65-67; 3, 75; 3, 79), Pacuvius (3,48), Caecilius (3, 72-73), Terence (3, 72), and Accius (3, 41 ; 3, 68; 3, 90). Some passages may contain his own independent and usually obvious answers to arguments advanced in Book 2, yet for the larger part of the rebuttal of Stoic arguments we may probably assume Carneades as an ultimate source, directly cited in 3, 29-34 and 3, 44-50, and often recalled by the likeness of Cicero's reasoning to that in Sext. Emp. Adv. Phys. 1 ; cf. in detail, Mayor's ed., 3 (1885), lxi-lxx; C. Vick in Hermes, 37 (1902), 228-248. This use of Carneades is recognized by most scholars; e.g., R. Hirzel, Untersuch, ¡ζ. Cic. phil. Sehr. 1 (1877), 243; P. Schwenke (Jahrb. f . cl. Philol. 119 (1879), 140); J. B. Mayor, I.e.-, L. Reinhardt (Bresl. philol. Abh. 3, 2 (1888), 56-68); D. Heeringa, Quaest. ad Cic. de Div. Lib. (1906), 37-38; M. Schanz-C. Hosius, Gesch. d. röm. Lit. I 4 (1927), 511; R. Philippson in P.-W. 7A (1939), 1155-1156; yet cf. also P. Cropp, De Auct. quos secutus Cic . . . Acad. Nov. Theol. reddidit (1909), 26-36. But since Carneades left no writings of his own (Diog. L. 4, 65) Cicero may have employed his arguments through the medium of his pupil, the Carthaginian Hasdrubal (commonly known as Clitomachus), to whom we may perhaps ascribe the allusion to Carthage in 3, 91. Yet, since Clitomachus seems to have attacked dogmatism generally rather than single philosophic schools, R. Philippson (P.-W. 7A (1939), 1155-1156) would derive his arguments from his pupil (Cicero's teacher),

INTRODUCTION

49

Philo, whom Gcero names in 1, 6; 1, 17; 1, 59; 1, 113; cf. 3, 29, η. (iCarneades), below. (In Ac. 2, 78, however, Cicero considers Clitomachus a better authority for the views of Carneades than either Philo or Metrodorus.) 30. An exception to Carneadean authorship is pretty certainly found in the sections on homonymous gods (3, 42; 3, 53-60), which are not paralleled in Sextus Empiricus and seem to form an intrusion in the discussion of Book 3 ; cf. 3, 60 : sed eo iam inde hue digressi sumus revertamur. That this material derives from some Alexandrian compilation (cf. 3, 60 : ex vetere Graeciae fama collecta sunt) is the view of L. Reinhardt, op. cit., 62-63; 68; cf. R. Hirzel, Ber. d. sächs. Ges. d. Wiss. 48 (1896), 303-304; W. Michaelis, De Orig. Indicts Deorum cognominum (1898), 4, who supposes the source to be a Rhodian Peripatetic of the second century, B.C. ; W. Bobeth, De Indicibus Deorum (1904), 24, who believes Varrò the source. CICERO'S OWN CONTRIBUTIONS

31. That, whatever his sources at any particular point of the work, and however he may have compressed or expanded his original,1 Cicero made additions of his own 2 is undeniable. As noted by Schanz,3 these occur especially in the form of moral commonplaces or of illustrative mythological or historical exempla.4 The latter are found in all three books, though perhaps most frequently, like the poetic quotations, in 1 On his methods of translating see what he says in Fin. 1, 6: quod si nos non interpretum fungimur muñere, sed tuemur ea quae dicta sunt ab eis quos probamus, eisque nostrum indicium et nostrum scribendi ordinem adiungimus; O f f . 1, 6: sequemur .. . Stoicos non ut interpretes sed, ut solemus, e fontibus eorum iudicio arbitrioque nostro, quantum quoque modo videbitur, hauriemus. 2 The programme of C. Crome, Quid Graecis Cic. in Philos., quid sibi debuerit, I have not seen. 3 M. Schanz-C. Hosius, Gesch. d. röm. Lit. I 4 (1927), 528. 4 O. Plasberg, Cic. in seinen Werken u. Briefen (1926), 161, remarks upon Cicero's custom of replacing Greek exempla by Roman in his philosophical works. The customary division of books of exempla, like Valerius Maximus, into domestica and externa is doubtless an indication that illustrations from one's own country

and its culture are more cogent than those drawn from a distant time or place, and H. V. Canter {CI. Journ. 32 (1936), 39-41), on Cicero's use of mythology, finds in him few myths about gods, more about heroes, used for illustration rather than for embellishment. They occur to some extent in the N.D., but most commonly in the Tusculans (I should also add the De Divinatione·, cf. Pease, ed. of Di». 1 (1920), 26-28; 135-136). On Cicero's use of historical exempla cf. H. Schoenberger, Beispiele aus der Gesch. in Cic. Reden (1910); H. W. Litchfield in Harv. Stud, in cl. Philo!. 25 (1914), 6; 27; 36-38; R. Helm in Hermes, 74 (1939), 133; also for the borrowing of such from Cicero by Valerius Maximus see M. Schanz-C. Hosius, op. cit., I 1 , 590. In 2, 8 certainly (and possibly throughout 2, 6-14) Cicero makes use of Coelius, and in Att. 13, 8 4

50

INTRODUCTION

Book 3, and lend a more distinctly Roman color to the whole work. 1 Typical instances are those drawn from the Gracchi, 2 from Roman priests and theologians, 3 the canon of Roman heroes and villains, 4 Roman legal cases,8 and distinctively Roman cults.® Also added from Cicero's own experience are illustrations from his travels in Greek lands,7 where his own observations corroborate statements made on the authority of others. If some of these illustrations at times seem to interrupt rather than forward the discussion, they at least help to maintain the atmosphere of a slightly rambling and reminiscent conversation as distinguished from a more systematic and formal treatise. His quotation of passages from the old Roman poets is quite in accordance with his practice in his other philosophical works, 8 and usually is fairly apposite,9 though the long passage from his Aratea,10 suggesting the large intrusion from the De Consulatu in the De Divinati one,11 must be considered as an artistic and a logical blemish. Again, the mythological section 12 is far too factual, not to say pedantic, to be in keeping with a dialogue such as this. RESULTS OF THE WORK

32. Altogether, then, irrespective of all attempts of scholars to discover (8 June, 45 B.C.) says: epitomen Bruti Coelianorum veiim mihi mittas. Might the use of this epitome in our work be a delicate compliment to Brutus, to whom the N.D. is dedicated? 1 Cf. R. Philippson in P.-W. 7A (1939), 1190. 2 1, 106; 2, 10-11; 2, 165. 3 1, 71; 1, 115; 1, 122; 3, 5; 3, 14-15; 3, 43. 4 2, 7-11 (where Greek instances are followed by Roman); 2, 165; 3, 11; 3, 80-81 (Roman cases followed by Greek in 3, 82-84); 3, 86 (Rutilius). 6 3, 74. • E.g., 1, 82; 1, 84; 2, 7-11; 2, 14; 2, 61-62; 2, 66-68; 3, 11; 3, 13; 3, 46-48; 3, 52; 3, 62; 3, 63; 3, 88. 7 E.g., 1, 59: cum Athenis essem; 3, 49: cuius Athenis et delubrum vidimus·, 3, 50 (Alabanda); also Pease, ed. of Div. 1 (1920), 28, n. 147, for similar cases. 8 Cf. Pease, ed. of Div. 1 (1920), 28, n. 148; also E. Schollmeyer, Quid Cic. de Poetií Rom. iudicaverit (1884); W. Zillinger, Cic. u. d. altröm. Dichter (1911); M. Schanz-C. Hosius, Gesch. d. röm. Lit. I 4 , 538; H. Hagendahl in Eranos, 45

(1947), 114-122. • Among the cases may be mentioned 1, 13 (Caecilius) ; 1, 63 (Lucilius); 1, 79 (Lutatius); 1, 97 (Ennius); 1,119 (Ennius and lines from an uncertain author); 2, 4 (Ennius); 2, 49 (Ennius); 2, 64-65 (Ennius ; Euripides translated) ; 2, 89 (Accius); 2, 91 (Pacuvius); 2, 159 (Cicero's Aratea); 3, 10 (Ennius); 3, 24 (Ennius); 3, 40 (Ennius); 3, 41 (Accius) J 3, 65-68 (Ennius; an unknown poet; Accius); 3, 72-73 (Terence; Caecilius; Terence) ; 3, 75 (Ennius) ; 3, 79 (Ennius) ; 3, 90 (Accius). A reference to Ennius also occurs in 2, 93. 10 2, 104-114. 11 1, 17-22; this passage is a little more successfully integrated with its context. Each of these quotations is put in the mouth of another speaker and is introduced by a fulsome compliment to Cicero the poet—a considerable portion of whose poetic fragments we owe to his having taken the precaution of embedding sections in the form of quotations in his prose works; cf. Pease on Div. 1, 17, n. (quo fiotius utar). 18 3, 42-60.

INTRODUCTION

51

few or many sources, the present work contains within it, at first or second-hand, ideas derived from a wide range of thinkers, and perhaps with more reason than any other extant work of Greek or Latin literature may claim attention from those modern students who approach the philosophy of religion by historical and comparative methods. The problems of the work, though perplexing and often exasperating, are seldom unworthy of the study which has been (and may yet be) devoted to them by keen minds, and the exposition, in spite of careless and hasty composition, raises philosophical writing from the dull level into which it seems to have fallen among the Greeks 1 to a literary form which may well arouse the admiration and challenge the imitation of modern popularizers in this field. PUBLICATION

33. For the publication of the De Natura Deorum the following facts are fundamental: (1) that in his famous catalogue of his own philosophical writings,2 after mentioning the Hortensias, the four books of Académica, the De Finibus, and the Tusculan Disputations, Cicero remarks: quibus rebus editis tres libri perfecti sunt de natura deorum, in quibus omnis eius loci quaestio continetur. quae ut plane esset cumulateque perfecta, de divinatione ingressi sumus his libris scribere ; quibus, ut est in animo, de fato si adiunxerimus erit abunde satis factum toti buie quaestioni; (2) that in Book 1 of the De Divinatione 3 Gcero makes his brother Quintus say: perlegi, inquit, tuum paulo ante tertium de natura deorum ; (3) that in Book 2 of the same work 4 he remarks : quod et in iis libris dictum est qui sunt de natura deorum et hac disputatione id maxime egimus; (4) that near the beginning of the extant part of the De Fato 5 he writes : quod autem in aliis libris feci, qui sunt de natura deorum, itemque in iis quos de divinatione edidi. J. B. Mayor 6 raised the question whether our work was published during Gcero's lifetime, emphasizing the traces of hasty and unrevised composition,7 and trying to distinguish between the words editis and perfecti in the first and between feci and edidi in the fourth. He thinks that editi means actually "published," perfecti and feci being used of works merely prepared for 1 Cf. R. Philippson in P.-W. 7A (1939), 1188. 2 Div. 2, 3. 8 1,8 (and Pease's n. onperlegi) ; cf. 1,9. 4 2, 148. 5 Fat. 1. • Ed. of N.D. 3 (1885), xxv-xxvi. The work of O. M. Müller, Cic. Libris de

N.D. non extremam Manum accestisse (1839), I know only from its rejection by P. Stamm, De M. T. Cic. Lib. de D. N. Interpolationibus (1873), 2, n. 2. 7 Especially the conflicting statements about the day or days on which the dialogue was held; cf. nn. 3-5, p. 26, above.

52

INTRODUCTION

publication. This v i e w has been followed by T. W . Dougan, 1 O. Plasberg, 2 and M. Pohlenz, 3 the third of w h o m tries to equate 4 some of the materials in Book 3 of the De Natura Deorum with similar themes in the third book of the De Of fiáis. The opposite view, however, has been ably supported by P. Schwenke 6 and R. Philippson, 6 the latter of w h o m points out that other Ciceronian dialogues contain similar blemishes, 7 and also that the different phraseology ( e d i t i and p e r f e c t ï ) is used merely f o r the sake of variety. 8 That the author should have intended the w o r k f o r posthumous publication seems improbable, in view of his references

to it in the De Divinatione and the De Fato.9 SUBSEQUENT INFLUENCE

34. The history of the De Natura Deorum subsequent to its publication is a complicated one, f o r which n o adequate study exists as a guide, 1 0 and which can here be only briefly sketched. A s with other ancient works, the later influence of this dialogue may be seen not only (1) in direct borrowing of its contents but also (2) in some larger imitations of its literary f o r m and (3) in excerpts made by lexicographers and grammarians. Many quotations which definitely cite Cicero as a source and some where identity of phraseology cannot result f r o m chance are Ed. of Tusc. 1-2 (1905), xvi-xvii. Ed. min. (1917), iv; id., Cic. in seinen Werken u. Briefen (1926), 168. 3 Ant. Führertum (1934), 8. 4 Op. cit., 8, η. 2. Pohlenz thinks that N.D. 3, 66-71, is followed by a variant on the same theme in 3, 72-79, and that 3, 74-76, uses the same materials as O f f . 3, 60-73; 3, 94. Granted the similarity, and even the use of the same source, in this latter case, it does not follow from this alone that Cicero might not have employed that same source at two different dates. 6 Burs. Jahresb. 47 (1888), 284. 9 Beri, philol. Woch. 38 (1918), 409; id., in P.-W. 7A (1939), 1151-1152. 7 E.g., Ac. 1. 8 Even of the Tusculans he says (Dip. 2, 3) : quibus rebus (not quibus libris) editis, so that Philippson thinks edere here perhaps = proponere. A similar problem arises in regard to the De Divinatione, which W. Sander (Quaest. de Cic. Lib. ...de Div. (1908), 1-6; answered by D. Heeringa in Philol. 68 1 2

(1909), 562-568; rejoinder by Sander in Philol. 75 (1918), 388-389), because of similar defects, supposed to have been posthumously published. 9 Cf. also Ac. 1, 2: intemperantis ... arbitrer esse scribere quod occultari velit (said by Varrò). Yet E. A. Robinson, Date of Cic. De Legibus (unpublished Harvard dissertation, 1950), 254, n. 36, suggests that the failure of Cicero in the De Officiis to mention the theological treatises might indicate that they had been withheld from publication till then (Nov., 44 B.C.). 10 P. Deschamps, Essai bibliogr. sur Cic. (1863), deals at length—but inconveniently and superficially—with mss, editions, etc. ; E. Norden, Die ant. Kunstprosa, 2 (1898), 708-710, η. 1 ; T. Zielinski, Cic. im Wandel der Jahrhunderte*· (1929), a useful book, but inadequate for the detailed study of the later history of any particular Ciceronian work; L. Laurand, Cicerón2 (1935), 203-217—a brief sketch; R. Philippson in P.-W. 7A (1939), 1190-1192—brief but excellent.

INTRODUCTION

53

easy to recognize, but other parallels in thought may indicate either borrowing from Cicero, the use of a common source,1 or—more rarely— independent inventions of different authors. Though many of the last type are cited in the commentary below, it has here seemed wisest to restrict the treatment to cases in which the nature of the indebtedness is reasonably clear. Of use in Cicero's own day there is little trace, though a fragment of Tiro, preserved by Gellius,2 seems to show the influence of N.D. 2, 111. More clear is a fragment of the Etyma of Cornificius Longus,3 preserved by Macrobius,4 which quotes from Cicero's etymology of Ianus in N.D. 2, 67, but the lack of extant works of analogous subject-matter prevents quotations of significance for the theological content of the work until we come to the Christian apologists,6 and it has been suggested that Stoic and Neoplatonic doctrines were more to the taste of the age than was Academic scepticism.® Yet Valerius Maximus finds several incidents to extract from the De Natura Deorumand Hyginus in two places in his De Astronomia8 employs lines from parts of the Aratea quoted by Cicero in our work ; a similar quotation in Fab. 14, p. 21 Rose, though it contains an entire line of the Aratea found in our second book,9 follows it by others which seem to indicate that he quoted directly from a complete ms of the poem. Pliny in his Natural History includes our work among those excerpted by him 10 for some information about animals; Quintilian's interest, on the other hand, as is not surprising, is in the coining of the words beatitas and beatitude.11 For Tertullian's borrowing cf. G. Lazzari in Atene e Roma, 8 (1939), 153-166. With Mi1 Thus are doubtless to be explained the striking likenesses to our second book which are found in Theon, Progymnas. 12, especially pp. 126-127 Spengel. 2 13, 9, 4. 3 Dated by F. Münzer in P.-W. 4 (1901), 1630, as later than our w o r k and before Verrius Flaccus. * Sat. 1, 9, 1 1 . s R. Philippson in P.-W. 7 A (1939), 1190-1191. • Id., 1190. 7 Thus 1, 1, 3 {N.D. 2, 1 0 - 1 1 ) ; 1, 1, ext. 3 (N.D. 3, 83-84); possibly 1, 1, ext. 7 (N.D. 1, 63); 1, 4, 3 (N.D. 2, 7); 1, 8, 1 (N.D. 2, 6); 1, 8, ext. 6 (N.D. 3, 7 0 ) ; 1, 8, ext. 1 8 (N.D. 2, 126); possibly 8, 15, ext. 1 (N.D. 1, 10). Cf. F. Zschech, De Cic. et Liv. Val.

Max. Fontibus (1865)—not seen by me; Β. Krieger, Quibus Fontibus Val. Max. usus sit (1888); W . Thormeyer, De Val. Max. et Cic. Quaest. crit. (1902), 72-75. 8 3, 29, p. 9 4 Bunte (N.D. 2, 1 1 1 ) ; 4, 3, p. 103 (N.D. 2,108); cf. F. Wieck in Beri, philol. Woch. 21 (1901), 1064. 9 N.D. 2, 1 1 4 . 1 0 Thus 2, 16 (N.D. 3, 63—where the passage in Pliny is indispensable in emending); 8, 1 1 2 (N.D. 2, 127); 10, 63 (N.D. 2, 125); 10, 1 1 5 (N.D. 2, 124); 10, 196 (N.D. 2, 122); 19, 247 (N.D. 2, 111). Pliny paraphrases so freely that in some instances certainty of borrowing is obscured, as in 10, 155 (cf. N.D. 2, 124). On Pliny's sources cf. M. SchanzC. Hosius, Gesch. d. röm. Lit. 24 (1935), 773-774. 11 Inst. 1, 5, 7 2 ; 8, 3, 32 (N.D. 1, 95).

54

INTRODUCTION

nucius Felix comes even more serious use of the De Natura Deorum, and, not forgetting the indebtedness of Ambrose to the De Officiis, of Lactantius to our work, and of Augustine to Varrò, it may fairly be questioned whether any single work of the Latin Fathers is under more obligation for thought and form to any single pagan work than is the Octavius to the De Natura Deorum?· Naturally Minucius, like subsequent apologists, uses particularly the positive theistic arguments of the second book rather than the sceptical portions of the work. The doxography in 1, 25-41 he employs 2 in the opposite sense from Cicero, since Velleius calls the theistic beliefs enumerated nonphilosopborum iudicia sed delirantium somnia,3 but Minucius concludes from the same data 4 that the testimony of all philosophers points to the belief that God exists and that he is a spirit, thus illustrating the fact that Octavius was in the habit of refuting the philosophers with their own weapons.6 Some likenesses in the Quod Idola Dii non sint of Cyprian probably derive from Minucius and Tertullian rather than directly from Cicero.6 Arnobius, who declares 7 that ante omnes Tullius disertissimus generis nullam veritus impietatis invidiam ingenue constanter et libere qui super tali opinatione sentiret pietate cum maiore monstravit, a little later 8 gives a revealing hint of the reason for the silence of the pagans toward our work: cum sciam esse non paucos qui aversentur et fugiant libros de hoc eius nec in aurem velint admitiere lectionem opinionum suarum praesumpta vincentem, cumque alios audiam mussitare indignanter et dicere oportere statui per senatum aboleantur ut baec scripta quibus Christiana religo comprobetur et vetustatis opprimatur auctoritas. quinimmo¿ si fiditis exploratum vos dicere quicquam de dits vestris, erroris convincite Ciceronem. Arnobius himself makes use of the De Natura Deorum at various 1 Parallels are given in many notes on the text and need not here be repeated, but in general cf. E. Behr, Der Octavius d. M. M. Felix in seinem Verhältnis zu Cic. Büch. d. N.D. (1870); A. Ebert, Abb. d. sächs. Ges. d. Wiss. 5 (1870), 328-329; 353-354; 365-368; K. J. Neumann in Rhein. Mus. 36 (1881), 155-157; P. Schwenke in Jahrb. f . prot. Theol. 9 (1883), 263-294; F. Wilhelm, De Min. Fei. Oct. et Tert. Apol. = Breslauer philol. Abb. 2, 1 (1887), 1-8 (with a good list of parallels to the N.D. on p. 4); F. Kotek, Anklänge Ciceros de N.D.bei Min. Fei. u. Tert. (1901); A. Beltrami in Atti della r. acc. d. sc. di Torino, 55 (1919), 179-187; R. Beutler, Phil. u. Apol. bei Min. Fei. (1936), especially

72-82; A. D. Simpson in Trans. Am. philol. Assoc. 72 (1941), 379, η. 50. Μ. Schanz (op. cit., 3 2 (1905), 273) thinks that a speech of Fronto to which Minucius (9, 6; 31, 2) refers may have used our work. 2 Oct. 19, 4-15. 3 N.D., 1, 42. 4 Oct. 19, 3. 6 Oct. 39. • Cf. M. Schanz, Gesch. d. röm. Lit. 3 s (1905), 375. F. Kotek (op. cit., 48) thinks Minucius and Tertullian used Cicero independently of each other, Minucius quoting verbally but Tertullian never verbatim. 7 3, 6; cf. η. 1, p. 34, above. 8 3, 7.

INTRODUCTION

55

points.1 Some seventeen lexicographic citations by Nonius are noted by W. M. Lindsay in his edition of that author,2 but whether the commentant by Marius Victorinus on the dialogues of Cicero 3 included our work there seems no evidence. Several definite citations, however, are made by Servius.4 Firmicus Maternus, in his De Errore profanarum Religionum, without naming Cicero as his source, has several passages which may well derive from him,® as also an allusion in the prooemium of the first book of his Mathesis.e But to no author should we be more grateful than to Lactantius, the "Christian Cicero," as he was called by Pico della Mirandola,7 for not only does he quote from the De Natura Deorum more than seventy-five times,8 but also—and far more important —it is to him that we owe the preservation of either the text or the substance of nearly all our fragments of the lost parts of the third book— incidentally an indication that the mutilation of that volume in our mss derives from an archetype later than his time.9 Though recognizing 10 that Cicero in his third book dissoluit publicas religiones, he remarks that

1

E.g., 2, 56-58 (N.D. 1, 1-5); 3, 6 (N.D. 3, 65 fr.); 4, 14-15 (N.D. 3, 53-59); 6, 21 (N.D. 3, 83); cf. A. Röhrich, Die Seelenlehre d. Arnob. nach ihren Quellen (1893), 25; O. Jiráni in Listy filol. 35 (1908), 83-88; W. Kroll in Rh. Mus. 72 (1917), 63-112. 2 3 (1903), 935; also possibly cf. p. 51 M. (p. 72 L.) with N.D. 2, 68. 3 Hier. Adv. Ruf. 1, 16. 4 E.g., Aen. 1, 270 (N.D. 2, 98); 1, 297 (N.D. 3, 56); 3, 284 (N.D. 2, 51); 3, 600 (N.D. 2, 18); 4, 379 (N.D. 1, 2; 1, 63); 4, 577 (N.D. 3, 56); 6, 893 (N.D. 2,142-144, inexactly reproduced) ; G. 1, 111 (N.D. 2, 110). There may be here noted a puzzling fragment of N.D. 3, preserved by the Schol. Veron. in Aen. 4, 95 (on Cleomenes). 5 E.g., 4, 1 (N.D. 2, 66); 14, 2 (N.D. 2, 68); 17, 1 (N.D. 2, 68); 17, 2 (N.D. 2, 69; 2, 66); 17, 3 (N.D. 2, 69). • 1, 3-4. 7 Cf. M. Schanz, Gesch. d. röm. Lit. 3 2 (1905), 474. Hier. Ep. 70, 5, 2, remarks, of the De Ira and the De Opificio Dei, quos si legere volueris, dialogorum Ciceronis έπιτομήν repperies; in fact, in De Opif. Dei, 1, 13-14, Lactantius says of his work that it is a supplement to Legg. 1 and N.D. 2.

8

See the index auctorum in S. Brandt's edition, 2, 2 (1897), 246-248. Additional allusions may be found in Inst. 1, 2, 3; 2, 8, 53-55; E pit. 4, 3. For general works see S. Brandt in Wiener Stud. 13 (1891), 255-292; B. Barthel, Ueber d. Benutzung d. philos. Sehr. Cic. durch Lactamç (1903), with very little on the N.D.; F. Fessier, Benutzung d. philos. Sehr. Cic. durch Lactam^ (1913), especially the lists of parallels on pp. 42-54; E. Laughton in Eranos, 49 (1951), 39-45 on the accuracy of Lactantius. 9 Whether before Augustine or not it is hard to say, though he seems to cite no fragments from the lost parts. From the confusion at 3, 8-9, of contuear and coniueam it might perhaps be argued that the archetype of our mss was written in rustic capitals (say, not much later than S. V), in which style such a confusion would be most easy palaeographically. 10 De Ira, 11, 9; cf. Inst. 1, 17, 4: to tus liber tertius de natura deorum omnes funditus religiones evertit ac delet ; 2, 3, 2: cum multa dixisset quae ad eversionem religionum valerent·, 2, 8, 53: cum enim suscepisset disputationem qua deorum naturam tolleret . .. omnem divinitatem ignorantia veri putavit esse tollendam.

56

INTRODUCTION

neither he nor any other was able to introduce the true religion, of which he was ignorant. Usually Lactantius praises Cicero as a frank adversary of the established polytheism, though in at least one place 1 he condemns what seems his apparent rejection of all providential care for men. It may be remarked that for the apologists in general Cicero was a valuable weapon against pagan polytheism, but one which had to be used with great caution, lest its arguments might weaken all theistic belief. By a careful selection, then, of some of his arguments and the suppression or refutation of others he became an extremely important factor in the Praeparatio evangelica.2 Ambrose, though drawing heavily upon the De Officiis,3 made definite but far less frequent use of the De Natura Deorumï Ammianus Marcellinus likewise cites him but rarely,® as do the grammarians Probus,® Charisius,7 and Diomedes.8 Macrobius makes Praetextatus, as a pious pagan, speak unfavorably of our work, 9 and elsewhere 10 seems to show some influence from it, though perhaps through Cornificius rather than directly.11 Jerome has a few allusions,12 but, as with the De Divinatione,13 the use made of the De Natura Deorum by Augustine is much more significant. His estimate of Cicero as a philo1 Inst. 2, 8, 10-13, concluding: nunc quasi proditor atiquis aut transfuga providentiam conatus est tollere ... nec enim poterit ab ullo Cicero quam a Cicerone vehementius refutari. 2 Cf. Mayor, ed. of N.D. 3 (1891), iv. Such a result, however, was surely rather far f r o m Cicero's o w n intentions! 3 See the works cited by M. Schanz, Gesch. d. röm. Lit. 4, 1 (1904), 310, to which add M. B. Emeneau in CI. Weekly, 2 4 (1930), 49-53. 4 De Cain et Abel, 1, 1 3 (N.D. 1, 77). « 20, 8 , 1 1 (N.D. 1 , 4 ) ; 2 1 , 1 , 1 4 (N.D. 2 , 1 2 ) ; some other, more doubtful, cases are cited by H. Michael, De Amm. Marc. Studiis Cicerón. (1874), 33-34; cf. G. Β. Α . Fletcher in Rev. de philol. 63 (1937), 377381. • Gram. Lat. 4, 2 1 2 K . (N.D. 2, 143); cf. also in w o r k s ascribed to Probus, such as De ult. Syll. in Gram. Lat. 4, 223 (N.D. 2, 1 1 2 ) ; in Virg. Bue. 6, 31, p. 334 Hagen (N.D. 2, 66); p. 339 (N.D. 2, 1 1 7 - 1 1 8 ) ; pp. 341-342 (N.D. 2, 9 1 ) ; pp. 342-343 (N.D. 2, 68-69); in Georg. 1 , 1 3 8 (possibly f r o m N.D. 2, 1 1 1 ) . 7 Inst. gram. 1, p. 137 K . (N.D. 2,157). 8 Art. gram. 1, p. 3 1 3 K . (N.D. 3, 65

—an otherwise unattested fragment). See also H. Karbaum, De Ori g. Exempt, quae ex Cic. Scriptis a Cbarisi ο, Diomede, Arusiano Messio, Prisciano ... aliis Gram. Lat. aliata sunt (1889). 9 Sat. 1, 24, 4 : cum ipse Tullius, qui non minus professus est philosophandi Studium quam loquendi, quotiens aut de natura deorum aut de fato aut de divinatione disputât, gloriam, quam oratione conflavit, incondita rerum relatione minuat. 10 E.g., Sat. 1, 9, 11 (N.D. 2, 67). 1 1 Cf. nn. 2-3, p. 53, above. On the sources of Macrobius cf. M. Schanz, Gesch. d. röm. Lit. 4, 2 (1920), 194-195. 1 2 Cf. E. Luebeck, Hier, quos noverit Scriptores, etc. (1872), 145-146—a very incomplete w o r k ; C. Kunst, De S. Hier. Studiis Cicerón, in Diss, phtloi. Vindob. 1 2 ( 1 9 1 8 ) , 109-219. The following instances may be noted : possibly Ep. 60, 5, 2 (N.D. 1, 120); 1 1 9 , 1 1 , 1, and Comm. in Galat. prol. pp. 367-368 Vail. (N.D. 1, 10); Comm. in Tit. p. 691 Vail. (N.D. 1, 2 1 ) ; Adv. Ruf. 1, 6, p. 462 Vail. (N.D. 1, 18); perhaps 1, 30, p. 487 Vail. (N.D. 1, 20). 1 3 Cf. A . S. Pease, ed. of Div. 1 (1920), 31.

INTRODUCTION

57

sopher is high, though he cannot approve of all his views, 1 and his opinion on our present work I have touched on above. 2 In many other places are found allusions of considerable value,3 sufficient in bulk to indicate—with the support of others in Minucius, Nonius, and Lactantius—that our texts of the work do not differ markedly from those employed by these writers. 4 The use of the work by Salvian may at times be through Lactantius as intermediary.5 References to single passages by scholiasts and grammarians include those by the PseudoAcro, 6 the Servian corpus, the scholiast on Juvenal, 7 possibly the First Vatican Mythographer, 8 and the Auetor De dubiis Nominibus,9 while in Priscian there are five definite citations 1 0 from the De Natura Deorum and of thirteen others noted by him as Cicero in Arato 1 1 six are wholly

or partly to be found in N.D. 2, 106-112. Since others, however, lie outside this work it is likely that Priscian took all directly from some then extant ms of the Aratea. The glosses of Placidus contain two quotations from the De Natura Deorum,12 and Isidore has occasional

citations ; 1 3 after him, for a time, there seems little trace of the influence of this work. 14 The formation by a West Frankish presbyter named 1 C. Acad. 1, 8; note also C. ltd. Pelag. 4, 72; 4, 76; 5, 33. 2 Note 1, p. 34, above. 3 E.g., Ep. 118 is a letter filled with many allusions to our work (especially sections 23-27, recalling N.D. 1, 26-29; 30 {N.D. 1, 109; 1, 114); 31 (N.D. 1, 110; 1, 65)); C.D. 2 , 2 3 (N.D. 3, 80-81); 4, 30 (N.D. 2, 70-72); 5, 9 (see n. 1, p. 34, above); 7, 27 (N.D. 1, 119); C. Acad. 2, 24 (N.D. 1 , 1 7 ; 1,16); C. ltd. Pelag. 4, 58 (N.D. 2, 128; 2, 136; 2, 138); 4, 72 (reference to Book 2) ; 4, 76 (N.D. 2,32) ; 5, 33 (N.D. 2, 141); 6, 44 (N.D. 1, 49); De Cons. Evang. 1,32 (N.D. 1,119) ; 1, 34 (N.D. 2, 64); Sert». 240-243 (many allusions). On Augustine's text of Cicero cf. A. Souter in CI. Rev. 14 (1900), 264. 4 A student of mine, Mr. J. R. Grant, in 1938, made a study of these testimonia, and found no evidence for a text differing essentially from the archetype of our mss, save, of course, for the lacunae in Book 3. Mayor (ed. of N.D. 3 (1891), xliii) thinks that Priscian and Probus may have possessed texts better than the archetype of our mss; yet cf. Plasberg-Ax, praef. xii-xiii. 5 E.g., Gub. 1, 1, 4 (N.D. 2, 77); 1, 2 (N.D. 1, 27); W. A. Zschimmer, Salvia-

nus d. Presbyt. von Massilia u. seine Sehr. (1875), 61-62. • In Hor. Epod. 3, 1 (N.D. 2, 101). 7 On 15, 3, he quotes N.D. 1, 101. 8 218 (N.D. 3, 83, though the borrowing is so free that it may not be direct). • Gram. Lat. 5, 575 K. (N.D. 3, 25). 10 Gram. Lat. 3, 533, for list. 11 Gram. Lat. 3, 531, for list. 12 P. 142, 46 Goetz (N.D. 2, 72); p. 154, 22 (N.D. 2, 72). 13 E.g., Etym. 371, 1-2 (N.D. 2, 68); 10, 234 (N.D. 2, 72); 10, 244 (N.D. 2, 72); 11, 1, 39 (N.D. 2, 143); De Nat. Rer. 14,1 (N.D. 1,18) ; 24,1 (N.D. 2,68). 14 Cf. M. Manitius, Gesch. d. lat. Lit. d. Mittelalters, 1 (1911), 481-483, on Cicero in authors of the seventh to the tenth century; T. Zielinski, op. cit., passim·, J. D. A. Ogilvy, Books known to Anglo-Latin Writers from Aldhelm to Alcuin (670-804) (1936), 26-28, who in discussing Cicero makes no reference to the N.D. A somewhat uncertain case of borrowing is by Remigius of Auxerre in his commentary on Sedulius (Corp. Scr. eccl. Lat. 10 (1885), 323, 31), suggesting N.D. 2, 68, but perhaps indirectly derived.

58

INTRODUCTION

Hadoardus from thirteen works of Cicero 1 of a collection of excerpts which appear in a ms of the tenth century 2 bears witness alike to the expensiveness of the works in question 3—which led to their being condensed in this way—and also to the desire to eliminate references to polytheism, Epicureanism, and other views undesirable from a Christian standpoint.4 It further suggests that the basis for these excerpts may have been a corpus of the philosophic writings of Cicero, and various writers consider that the corpus of eight works 5 of which traces are found in a goodly number of mss,e receives in these excerpts its oldest testimony. R. Mollweide, however,7 in view of the fluctuating number of works contained in different mss, believes that there were in the early Middle Ages at least two corpora, one of which, normally with eight component works, is represented by the Leyden corpus,8 the other, usually with twelve, by the excerpts of Hadoardus, both, to be sure, ultimately deriving from the same source. At any rate, by the ninth or tenth century we come to our oldest extant mss, which will be discussed below. Returning to citations, we find that Peter Abelard seems in one place to quote from the De Natura Deorum,9 as does Thomas Aquinas,10 that John of Salisbury clearly knew the work,11 and that Roger Bacon 1 Lucullus, Tusculans, De Natura Deorum, De Divinations, De Fato, De Senectute, De Amicitia, De Officiis, Paradoxa, De Legibus, Hortensius, Timaeus, De Oratore·, cf. M. Manitius, op. cit., 1, 478480. 2 Cod. Vat. Regin. 1762, discussed by P. Schwenke in Philol. 5 Supplbd. (1886), 397-588 (with collation of the excerpts from our work on pp. 540-547) ; cf. also E. Narducci in Atti d. r. acc. d. Lincei, 3 ser., 7 (1882-1883), 147; R. Mollweide in Wiener Stud. 33 (1911), 274-292; 34 (1912), 383-393; 35 (1913), 184-192; 36 (1914), 189-200; 37 (1915), 177-185; and, especially and most convincingly, C. H. Beeson in Ci. Philol. 40 (1945), 201-222, who shows (p. 222) that since Hadoardus derives from codex F (still extant) and it from two extant codices (A2!!*) the textual importance of the excerpts is almost negligible; cf. § 39 below. 3 A. Hortis, M. T. Cic. nelle opere del Petrarca e del Boccaccio (1878), 17, thinks that many of Cicero's works were not cited in the Middle Ages largely because

their number made it impossible to acquire so many. 4 The discussion, with bibliography, by A. S. Pease, ed. of Div. 1 (1920), 3233, is now superseded by that of Beeson cited above. 6 De Natura Deorum, De Divinatione, Timaeus, De Fato, Paradoxa, Lucullus, De Legibus, Topica. ® Most important are A (Leid. Voss. 84), Β (Leid. Voss. 86), F (Florent. Marc. 257) for all eight; M (Monac. 528) and V (Vindob. 189) for all but the Topica. Cf. A. C. Clark, The Descent of Manuscripts (1918), 325; M. Manitius, Handschr. ant. Autoren in mittelalt. Bibliothekskatalogen (1935), 19. ' Wiener Stud. 33 (1912), 278. 8 Codd. A, B, and F. » Theol. Christ. (Opera, 2 (1859 ed.), 385, referring to N.D. 2, 77). 10 Summa Theol. 1, 103, 1, 3 (N.D. 2, 15). 11 Polier. 2, 22, p. 449a; 5, 12, p. 571c (N.D. 1, 10); C. Schaarschmidt, Johannes Sarisb. (1862), 87; 92-93.

INTRODUCTION

59

makes intelligent use of it. 1 Petrarch, when speaking of the opinion held of Cicero in his own day, remarks: fama rerum celeberrima atque ingens et sonorum nomen, perrari autem studiosi,2 yet that he himself read our work is shown by his notes on various passages, as reported by P. de Nolhac 3 and A. Hortis.4 The same is true of Boccaccio, particularly in his De Genealogia Deorum.h Leonardo Bruni copies a statement of Aristotle about the poems of Orpheus, apparently through the medium of Cicero ; β William of Malmesbury wrote a paragraph in a Cambridge ms of the work of 1444,7 which also has annotations by an anonymous Englishman.8 In the same yearLucio Marineo cites the treatise.9 Erasmus10 cites Aristotle through the medium of Cicero, and Luther, in his Tischreden, 2873,11 remarks: "Denn Cicero hat die feinsten und bestenQuaestiones in der Philosophia gehandelt; ob ein Gott sei? Was Gott sei? Ob er sich auch menschlicher Händel annehme, oder nicht? und es müsse ein ewig Gemüthe sein, usw." In Montaigne's essays, P. Villey, Les sources ... des essais de Montaigne, 1 (1908), 101, finds 45 references to or borrowings from our work, especially in 2, 12. François Rabelais in his Pantagruel uses a passage from Cicero on the parentage of Pan;12 passages from our work and others were compounded into a spurious set of fragments of Galen published in 1562; 13 John Calvin14 singles out for quotation a small but characteristic phrase which he would hardly have picked up save by his own reading of the De Natura Deorum\ similarly 1 Op. maius, 1, 2 (N.D. 1, 83) ; Quaest. supra primum Metaphys. Aristot. fol. 57 b2, p. 185 Steele (N.D. 2, 87); Metaphysice, 8, fol. 109 a2, p. 294 Steele (N.D. 2, 32) ; also De Viciis contract, in Stud. Tbeol. fol. 26 b 1, p. 21 Steele: recurrendum est ad morales philosophos et libros eorum ; ut ad libros De Ofßciis ... in libro Divinacionum, in libris de Natura Deorum, in Thimaeo Ciceronis. 2 Ep. de Reb. fam. 24, 4 (which E. Norden, Die ant. Kunstprosa, 2 2 (1909), 710, n. 0, considers a Statement true for all the Middle Ages). 3 Pétrarque et Ρ humanisme, l 2 (1907), 156; 183, η. 7; 233, η. 1; 238-244 (241, η. 1, quotes Petrarch on Cicero's use of Balbus as a mouthpiece: vere autem tuum Ht quod, Platonicum secutus morem, alteri tribuere tuasque sententias proferre ficto alterius ore malueris)·, 2 (1907), 102, n. 3; 183; 185; 294. 4 M. T. Cic. nelle opere del Petrarca e del Boccaccio (1878), 46; 83-88; citations are

found especially in De sui ipsius et aliorum Ignorantia. s A. Hortis, op. cit., 73; 81-82. β N.D. 1, 107; cf. H. Baron, Leonardo Bruni Aretino, humanist, -philos. Sehr. (1928), 133, η. 1. 7 M. R. James, Two atte. English Scholars (1931), 21- 22; see Cod. Cantabr. Dd. XIII, 2. 8 Id., 24-25. 8 Cf. C. Lynn in Speculum, 6 (1931), 131. 10 Preface to the fourth volume of Jerome (cf. J. Jortin, Life of Erasmus, 3 (1808), 235), citing N.D. 1, 107. 11 Werke, 62 (1854 ed.), 341. 12 Pantagruel, 4, 28 (N.D. 3, 56). 13 Η. O. Schroeder, Galeni in Plat. Tim. Comm. Frag. (1934), append. 1 (cf. W. A. Heidel in Am. fourn. of Philol. 56 (1935), 424). 14 In Evang. Ioann. 15, 1 (Opera, 47, 339), quoting from N.D. 3, 86: siculi quum Cicero pauperum agellos et viticulas coniungit.

60

INTRODUCTION

Francis Bacon in the Advancement of Learning, at several points, is familiar with N.D. 1, 18; 1, 22; 2, 62; and 3, 89; and Milton in his Areopagitica quotes N.D. 1, 63. More and more, however, the work came to be the special pasture for philosophic writers, including such diverse names as Ralph Cudworth,1 Benedict de Spinoza,2 Sir Thomas Stanley,3 Pierre Bayle,4 Viscount Bolingbroke,5 Anthony Collins,6 and other English deists,7 David Hume, especially in his Dialogues concerning natural Religion 8 but also in other works.9 Voltaire speaks in high terms of this treatise of Cicero.10 Hegel occasionally11 cites it, though he speaks of Cicero's superficiality as a philosopher.12 Many later users of the work I need not here enumerate, save to mention the curious fact that in 1811 P. Seraphinus (a pseudonym for Hermann Heimark Cludius) published at Bologna a fourth book of the De Natura Deorum, purporting to be drawn from a very old ms, in which not only is anachronistic quotation made of the famous line primus in orbe deos fecit timor,13 but various doctrines of Judaism and Catholicism are discussed.14 Here this hasty and incomplete summary may close. Many more 1 True ititeli. Syst. of the Universe, 2 (1845 ed.), 121-129, and in many other places there are quotations from the N.D. 2 See various parallels cited by H. A. Wolfson, The Philos, of Spinoza, 2 (1934), 196. s In his History of Philos. ; cf. T. F. Mayo, Epicurus in England (1934), 52. 4 Dictionnaire, passim, e.g., s.v. Leucippe. 5 E.g., Works (1809 ed.), 3, 72 (N.D. 2, 5); 4, 191 (N.D. 1, 77); 5, 270 (N.D. 1, 29); 5, 405, n. (N.D. 2, 62). • T. Zielinski, Cic. im Wandel d. fahrhundertea (1908), 276-280. 7 Id., 260-287; A. S. Pease in Harv. theol. Rev. 34 (1941), 198-199. 8 E.g., Works, 2 (1854 ed.), 460 (N.D. 1, 19); cf. A. C. Clark, Engl. Lit. and the Classics (1912), 140. » E.g., Works, 4, 241 (N.D. 1, 116); 4, 469 (N.D. 1, 82). 10 Diet, philos. 18 (1879 ed.), 181 : "si vous faites réflexion que c'est là ce même Romain qui le premier introduisit la philosophie dans Rome, que ses Tusculanes et son livre de la Nature des dieux sont les deux plus beaux ouvrages qu'ait jamais écrits la sagesse qui n'est qu'humaine . . . il sera encore plus malaisé

de mépriser Cicéron"; id., 19 (1879 ed.), 142: "son livre de la Nature des dieux, le meilleure liure peut-être de toute l'antiquité, si ce n' est celui des devoirs de l'homme, appelé les Officej·"; cf. R. Philippson in P.-W. 7A (1939), 1192, for Voltaire and Frederick the Great. 11 E.g., Werke, 16 (1928 ed.), 401 (on Cicero's references to consensus gentium)', 17, 45 (on the doxography in Book 1); 17, 225 (N.D. 1, 25). 12 "Das schöne Latein des Cicero kann sich nicht in tiefe Spekulation einlassen." 13 Petron. fr. 27, 1; Stat. Theb. 3, 661. 14 Cf. also T. F. Dibdin, Intr. to the Knowl. of Edd. of the Classics, l 4 (1827), 462; J. W. Moss, Man. of cl. Bibliogr. I 2 (1837), 343; J. A. Farrer, Literary Forgeries (1907), 10-12. In a different category belongs the four-book division of the work made either by designating Div. 1, 1-106 as N.D. 4 (as in Cod. Merton. 311; cf. Pease, ed. of Div. 2 (1923), 607) or by dividing N.D. 1 into two books (1, 1-65, and 1, 65-124) as in the Ferrara Cod. 386; cf. F. Creuzer's ed. (1818), 93, η. 53, fin. ; the nature of the four books in the sixteenthcentury Rimini Cod. II, 11 I have not ascertained.

INTRODUCTION

61

illustrations might be adduced, yet from the data already presented we may fairly conclude, with Zielinski,1 that the period of the rise and spread of Christianity viewed Cicero primarily as a philosopher, and extracted from his philosophic works positive arguments, like the classic teleological discussions of Book 2, in support of Christian beliefs; that the Renaissance saw Cicero especially as an individual personality, most clearly portrayed in his Letters, and possessing a style to be admiringly imitated; and that the Age of Enlightenment adopted particularly the negative and sceptical elements in his writing—for example Book 3 of the De Natura Deorum—, as well as interesting itself in his political achievements, as shown in his orations and his political tractates. At all periods, however, the work might be used for other incidental purposes, lexicographical, grammatical, historical, or otherwise illustrative. MANUSCRIPTS

35. Further testimony to the presence, if not to the use, of the De Natura Deorum during the Middle Ages is found in the existence of mss written in that era and in mediaeval library-catalogues listing copies which in many cases are no longer extant. Many data relating to these catalogues have been conveniently compiled by Max Manitius,2 whose treatment, with a few additions, I shall here follow. In Italy, at Monte Cassino, a ms of the N.D. is attested in the eleventh century, and one of it and the De Divinatione in the fifteenth; 3 at Pavia, in 1426, 4 five different mss contained it, in one case alone, in the others combined with two or more additional works. At Urbino, before 1482,5 there were two copies, probably both identifiable with two Urbinates now in the Vatican; at Fiesole, in the fifteenth century, one; 6 while the libraries of Petrarch in 1337 7 and Eugene IV in 1445 8 each contained one, the library of Cosimo de'Medici (S. XV) four, 9 and that of Sixtus IV, in 1471, two. 10 1

Op. cit., 315. Gesch. d. lat. Ut. d. Mittelalters, 1 (1911), 480-481; but especially id., Handschriften ant. Autoren in mittelalt. Bibliothekskatalogen ( = 6 7 Beiheft χ. Zentralbl. f . Bibliothekswesen (1935), the part dealing with Cicero being pp. 19-39. 3 Manitius, op. cit., 33; also the note on Codex H, below. 4 Cf. the Indagini ... sulla Libreria Visconteo-sfon^esca del Castello di Pavia (1875), nos. 191, 206, 604, 617, 625 2

(repeated by Manitius, op. cit., 34-35, who gives the date as 1431) ; p. lxiv states that after the defeat of Ludovico Sforza at Novara most of the mss in this catalogue were taken to Paris, where some, at least, are probably now in the Bibliothèque Nationale. 5 Manitius, op. cit., 37-38. « Id., 38. ' Id., 34. 8 Id., 35-36. 9 Id., 36-37. 10 Id., 37.

62

INTRODUCTION

In France the books given by Philip, Bishop of Bayeux, to the church at Bee, in the twelfth century, contained 1 this work. The Biblionomia of Richard de Fournival (ca. 1250) mentions a codex of the De Natura Deorum alone,2 and another was in the Sorbonne in 1290,3 two at Avignon in 1311,4 and one at Reims in the fifteenth century.5 In Spain a fire at the Escorial in 1671 destroyed a ms containing this and several other philosophical treatises and orations.® In Germany the De Natura Deorum appears in catalogues of libraries at Lüttich in the eleventh century,7 Neumünster near Würzburg in 1233,8 Hamersleven in the thirteenth century,9 Amelungsborn in 1412,10 Chur in 1457,11 and Fulda in the sixteenth century,12 as well as two codices in a list by Amplonius of Ratinck in 1412.13 In England it is found in lists from Canterbury in the fifteenth century,14 and from the nunnery of Syon at Isleworth in Middlesex in the sixteenth century.15 In general, before the period of the Italian humanists the preservation of the work was more noteworthy in France and Germany than in Italy, Spain, or England.16 Identification of mss named in these catalogues with codices now extant is complicated by the fact that rather seldom has a library continued to exist on the same spot from the Middle Ages until the present,17 or has a large part of a mediaeval library been incorporated in a neighboring modern one.18 In the following list of mss, then, such identifications must be made with some reserve. CATALOGUE OF MANUSCRIPTS

36. The following list of mss, similar in arrangement to that in my edition of the De Divinatione, 2 (1923), 604-619—upon which, with some additions and corrections, I have here drawn—, is intended not so much for the foundation of a primarily critical edition as for a continuation 1 Id., 27; also J. G. Baiter, Cic. Op. 11 (1869), 56. 2 Id., 28; cf. L. Delisle, Cabinet des mss de la Bibl. Nat. 2 (1874), 529. 8 Id., 29; cf. Delisle, op. cit., 3 (1881), 87. • Id., 30. ' Id., 31. • P. G. Antolín, Cat. de los códices Lat. de la R. bibl. del Escorial, 5 (1923), 367. 7 Manitius, op. cit., 20-21. 8 Id., 22. • Ibid. 10 Id., 23. 11 Id., 24. 12 Id., 26. 18 Id., 24.

Id., 33. The catalogue is now in the library of Corpus Christi College, Cambridge (cf. M. Bateson, Cat. of the Lib. of Syon Monastery (1898), 20-21), and mentions a ms containing the De Natura Deorum, De Divinatione, De Legibus, Académica, De Finibus, De Petit. Cons., De Fato, Timaeus, Somnium Scipionis, and some nonclassical works. The book was given ca. 1510 by Dr. Richard Reynold, Fellow of Corpus Christi College. 18 Manitius, op. cit., 39. 17 As in the rare instance of St. Gallen. 18 Manitius {op. cit., 9) cites the case of the transfer of the books of Reichenau to Karlsruhe. 14

16

INTRODUCTION

63

and amplification of the preceding chapters on the history and later influence of the De Natura Deorum. It naturally suffers at various points f r o m the incomplete and unsatisfactory character of the sources from which it is compiled, and in view of the large number of mss of this w o r k and of the inadequacy of library catalogues it is not unlikely that others, especially of the fifteenth century, should remain still unlisted. In a f e w instances t w o separate items in the list should perhaps be considered as identical, but I have been cautious about such identifications. The codices are arranged by centuries, in each century definitely dated mss being followed by less definitely assigned codices, usually classified alphabetically by their towns. A t the end are some more poorly identified mss. Localities are those in which the mss were found before the Second W o r l d W a r ; their present situations it is not always easy to state. 189 S. IX. Vienna, Hofbibliothek φ

( = ^0· Parchment. Quarto. 128 folia pre-

served, the ms being mutilated at beginning and end. De Natura Deorum (ff. 1Γ-40Γ, including 2, 16, deum to 2, 86, quae ex; 2, 92, nocent to 3, 95), De Divinatione, Timaeus, De Fato, Paradoxa, Lucullus. In S. XV it belonged to the Falcontini monastery at Antwerp, then to Theodor Poelmann, "Crasnigensis," by who it was given in 1563 to Johannes Sambucus, "Tirnaviensis Pannonicus." To the kindness of Professor C. H. Beeson, of the University of Chicago, I owe the information that the corrections in this ms agree with those used by Lupus of Ferrières in S. IX; cf. Sister Luanne Meagher, The Gellius MS of Lupus of Ferrières (1936), especially 21-29; C. H. Beeson in CI. Philol. 43 (1948), 190-191; also M. L. W. Laistner, Thought and Letters in W. Europe (1931), 269, n. 1. S. Endlicher, Cat. Cod. philol. Lat. Bibl. Palat. Vindob. (1836), 26-27, n. LV; K. Halm, Zur Handschriftenkunde d. cicerón. Sehr. (1850), vii, and η. 9; D. Detlefsen in Sitzb. d. k. Akad. χ. Wien, Phil-.hist. Kl. 21 (1856), 110-129; J. G. Baiter, ed. of N.D. (1861), 370 (using the collation of C. Schenkl); Tab. Codd. mss. ... in Bibl. Palat. Vindob. asservatorum, 1 (1864), 26, no. 189; C. F. W. Müller in Neue Jahrb. 10 (1864), 144 (who thinks it our nearest approach to the archetype of existing mss); J. B. Mayor, ed. of N.D. 1 (1880), lxx; E. Chatelain, Paléogr. des class, lat. (1885), pl. XXXVIII, 1, and p. 10, with facsimile off. 24' (N.D. 2,1683, 4); P. Schwenke in Philol. Supplbd. 5 (1889), 524; id. in CI. Rev. 4 (1890), 349 (he collated it in 1887); F. Boesch in Schedae philol. H. Useñero ... oblatae (1891), 83; O. Plasberg, ed. min. of N.D. (1917), vi; id., ed. min. of Acad. (1922), xxi S. IX/X. Leyden, Vossianus 84 ( = A). Parchment. Folio. 120 folia. De Natura Deorum (ff. l r -36'), De Divinatione, Timaeus, De Fato, Topica, Paradoxa, Lucullus, De Legibus (the same list as Voss. 86 and Marcianus 257). Probably written in France by four copyists ; cf. O. Plasberg, Cicero : Op. philos. Cod. Leid. Voss. Lat. Fol. 84 phototypice editus (1915), lv, who states that W. Friedrich tried to distinguish five hands. According to a partly obliterated inscription on fol. l r , it was given by Bishop Rodulfus to some unknown recipient; L. Traube (Neues Archiv, d. Ges. f . ält. deut. Geschichtskunde, TI (1902), 269) emends a similar note in Voss. Q. 20, fol. 68r to read: de deno, but Plasberg (op. cit., ii) prefers: de deno, and thinks that it refers to the monastery of St. Maximinus Miciacensis (St. Mesmin, in Aube, France), a monastery destroyed in 1560, when many of its books were acquired

64

INTRODUCTION

by Alexander Petavius, to whom it is agreed that this ms belonged, since it appears in a catalogue of his books in Voss. Lat. Q. 76 (made between 1630 and 1640). Apparently in 1650 Petavius sold many of the books which he and his brother Paul had collected to Queen Christina of Sweden, and in May, 1651, this book went to Stockholm. At her abdication in July, 1654, Christina commissioned Isaac Voss to transport her books to Rome, but he appropriated many (cf. J. Arckenholtz, Mém. concernant Christine, Reine de Suède, 1 (1751), 272-273), including this one. After the death of Voss in 1689 his executors carried his 762 mss from Oxford to Holland (cf. J. E. Sandys, Hist, of class. Scholarship, 2 (1908), 322-323), where this and others came to the library of the University of Leyden. The date, erroneously placed by J. G. Baiter (ed. of N.D. (1861), 369) and J. B. Mayor (ed. of N.D. 1, lxx) as S. XI, is by Plasberg (op. cit., xi) set not later than S. X., and most probably at the end of S. IX or the beginning of S. X, as P. Schwenke (in Class. Rev. 4 (1890), 348) supposed. On the forms of letters, compendia, punctuation, and correctors cf. Plasberg, op. cit., v-xiv; also C. H. Beeson in CI. Philol. 40 (1945), 219-220, who thinks that as early as S. X it and Β were in the same library, where they were corrected prior to the copying of F, and that this library was probably at Tours. The ms has been used by many editors, and collated by G. H. Moser, Κ. Halm, Η. Deiter, et al., the best separate collation being by P. Schwenke (see below). It has been reproduced in full by Plasberg, op. cit., vol. 19 of the series Codices Graeci et Latini. Since Halm it has been commonly known as A. Baiter and J. Forchhammer (Nord, tidskr. / . filologi, N.S. 5 (1880), 31) think it the best representative of the archetype. Cat. Libr. Bibl. pubi. Univ. Lugd.-Batav. 2 (1716), 374; J. G. Baiter, ed. of N.D. (1861), 369; J. B. Mayor, ed. of N.D. 1 (1880), lxx; H. Deiter, De Cic. Codd. Voss. LXXXIV et LXXXVI derno excussis, 1 (1885), 1 ; 12-35 (collation of A and Β ; reviewed by W. Friedrich in Philol. Αηχ. 15 (1885), 515-519); E. Chatelain, Paléogr. des class, lat. (1885), pl. XXXVIII A and p. 29, with facsimile off. 27* (N.D. 2, 163-164); P. Schwenke in Philol. Supplbd. 5 (1889), 523-524; id., Cl. Rev. 4 (1890), 347-348 ; 400-404; 454-457 ; 5 (1891), 12-17; 143-146; 200-205; 302-305; 408-412 ; 458-461; L. Havet, Man. décrit, verbale (1911), 303 (on its transpositions); O. Plasberg, Cicero·. Op. philos. Cod. Leid. Voss. Lat. Fol. 84phototypice editus (1915) = Codd. Gr. et Lat. 19; id., ed. min. of N.D. (1917); repeated in ed. 2 by W. Αχ, 1933, vi. S. X. Leyden, Vossianus 86 ( = B). Parchment. Folio. 192 folia. De Natura Deorum (ff. l r -59 r ), De Divinatione, Timaeus, De Fato, Topica, Paradoxa, Lucullus, De Legibus (as in Voss. 84 and Marcianus 257). The history of this ms is not altogether certain, but it seems at one time to have belonged to Alexander Petavius. J. G. Baiter (ed. (1861), 369) and J. B. Mayor (ed. 1 (1880), lxx) wrongly date it as late as S. XII. It is commonly known as B, and has been used by many editors. O. Dieckhoff, De Cic. Libr. de N.D. recensendis (1895), 44-45, considers it, despite its inferior age, as a ms superior to A, because derived from an original earlier and nearer the archetype than was the common source of AHPV. Cat. Libr. Bibl. pubi. Univ. Lugd.-Batav. 2 (1716), 374; J. G. Baiter, ed. of N.D. (1861), 369; J. B. Mayor, ed. of N.D. 1 (1880), lxxi; H. Deiter in Rh. Mus. 37 (1882), 314-317; id., De Cic. Codd. Voss. LXXXIV et LXXXVI denuo excussis (1885), 12-35 (collation of A and Â; reviewed by W. Friedrich in Philol. Anz- 15 (1885), 515-519); R. Chatelain, Paléogr. des class, lat. (1885), pl. XXXIX, 1, and p. 11 (facsimile o f f . 44 = N.D. 2, 165-168); L. Havet in Rev. de philol. 10 (1886), 188 (criticizing the inadequacy of the collations by Baiter and Deiter); P. Schwenke in Philol. Supplbd. 5 (1889), 524; id., Cl. Rev. 4 (1890), 348 (and for other pages see under codd. A and H); O. Dieckhoff, De Cic. Lib. de N.D. recensendis (1895),

INTRODUCTION

65

22-55; O. Plasberg, ed. min. of N.D. (1917), vii-ix; id., ed. min. of Acad. (1922), xxi-xxìi; Α. Lörcher in Burs. Jahresb. 208 (1926), 23-25. S. X. Florence, Marcianus 257 ( = F). Parchment. Quarto. 90 folia. De Natura Deorum (ff. l-27 v ), De Divinatione, Timaeus, De Fato, Topica, Paradoxa, Lucullus, De Legibus (as in Voss. 84 and 86). A note on the first page reads: Werinharius eps. ded. see. Marie ; one on another leaf: côveius S. Marci de F loa. ordis. pdic. De hereditate Nicolai nicoli viri doctissimi florêtini. P. Schwenke thinks that this once belonged to the cathedral at Strassburg to which Bishop Werinharius (1001-1029) had given it, and that it was brought to Italy by Poggio in S. XV. He also recognized that the De Natura Deorum and De Divinatione in it were copied from Leid. Voss. 86 (Β). Α. Reifferscheid thought that it came to Italy through Poggio, was given by him to his friend Niccolò Niccoli, and at his death came to the library of S. Marco. B. de Montfaucon, Bib/. Bib/. 1 (1739), 426, no. 122; A. Reifferscheid in Rhein. Mus. 17 (1862), 295-296 (dating it in S. XI) ; H. Ebeling in Philo/. 43 (1884), 705-707 (dating in S. XI); P. Schwenke in Burs. Jahresb. 47 (1888), 271; id., in Philol. Supplbd. 5 (1889), 524; id., in CI. Rev. 4 (1890), 348-349; E. Chatelain, Palèogr. des class, lat. (1885), pl. XXXVII, and p. 10 (dating in S. IX; the plate shows f. 21 = N.D. 2, 161-3, 2); R. Mollweide in Wiener Stud. 33 (1911), 278-279; O. Plasberg, ed. min. of N.D. (1917), xi; id., ed. min. of Acad. (1922), xxiii; C. H. Beeson in CI. Philol. 40 (1945), 206, n. 19. A. C. Clark, The Descent of Manuscripts (1918), 8, emphasizes its descent from B, since it twice omits entire lines of B. Cf. η. 2, p. 58, above. S. X. Rome, Vat. Palatinus 1519 ( = P). Parchment. Oblong folio. 88 folia extant (once 126), containing 1, 27-1, 75. De Natura Deorum (ff. 1-40), De Divinatione, Walafrid Strabo, Carmina de Hortorum Cultura. The age of this codex, written by several copyists, has been variously assigned from S. IX to S. XI; E. Monaci (ap. Plasberg, ed. min. of N.D. (1917), ix) thought that it could not be later than the middle of S. X. Considerable parts are lost, by the disappearance of whole leaves {N.D. 1, 1-27; 1, 75-2, 16; 2, 59-63; 2, 68-111; 2, 156-162; 3, 1-6). K. Halm, Über d. HS S des Cic. (1849), 176; id., Zur Handschriftenkunde d. cicerón. Sehr. (1850), 17; J. G. Baiter, ed. of N.D. (1861), 369-370 (using the coUation of L. Schmidt); J. B. Mayor, ed. of N.D. 1 (1880), lxx; H. Ebeling in Philologus, 43 (1884), 702-705 (who remarks that the ms was used by P. Pithou and J. Gruter); E. Chatelain,Paléogr. des class, lat. (1885), pi. XL, 1, and p. 11 (who dates it in S. IX); P. Schwenke in Philol., Supplbd. 5 (1889), 540; id., in CI. Rev. 4 (1890), 349 (dating it S. XI, and believing it copied, for the N.D. and De Div., from Voss. 86 (5); O. Plasberg, ed. min. of N.D. (1917), ix (repeated by W. Ax, ed. min. (1933), ix); A. C. Clark, The Descent of MS S (1918), 324-325; 460 (following Schwenke in dating it in S. XI). S. XI. Leyden, Bibl. Pubi. Lat. 118 ( = H, i.e., Heinsianus). Parchment. Folio. 102 folia. De Natura Deorum (ff. l r -52 T ), De Divinatione, De Legibus. In Beneventan script, probably written at Monte Cassino, where Petrus Diaconus {Mon. Germ. Hist. Scriptores, 7, 747) says that Desiderius, abbot from 1058-1087, codices ... nonnullos in hoc loco describi praecepit, quorum nomina haec sunt, later mentioning Ciceronem de natura deorum. P. Schwenke (in CI. Rev. 4 (1890), 348) thought that this was probably our codex H ; if so it may also be the ms described in the index of books at Monte Cassino in 1532 (in Cod. Vat. 3961) : Lib. de natura deorum inc. Cum multae res. Divinationum (cf. Bibl. Casinensis, 1 (1873), lxxxv; n. 3, p. 61, above). As evidence that our ms once belonged to the library at Monte Cassino is a somewhat obscure inscription on f. 9 y , where, in letters of S. XIII/XIV, in the margin, 5

66

INTRODUCTION

we read: Siatis oJ j moñacos mö / .. casini q / ab heram9 / sii malus / homo, etc. This Heramus is unknown, unless it be a mistake for Herasmo, there having been at Cassino after 1240 a learned monk of that name. From Italy, perhaps in 1649 or 1654, it may have gone northward, and in some way not now clear have come into the possession of N. Heinsius, whose signature stands at the bottom of f. l r . In the catalogue of the Leyden library in 1674 it may appear as no. 170 of the Latin mss, but in the catalogue of 1716 it was numbered 118, as at present. By Plasberg in his editions of 1911 and 1917 it was called H, as here. The ms is in its text closely related to Codd. D (Harl. 2622) and G (Burneianus 148). Heinsius seems to have made little use of it, but after 1690 in the library at Leyden it is often named in connection with the Vossiani 84 (A) and 86 (B). G. H. Moser and F. Creuzer, ed. of N.D. (1818), xiii; J. G. Baiter, ed. of N.D. (1861), 369; J. B. Mayor, ed. oí N.D. 1 (1880), lxx; H. Deiter, De Cic. Cod. Leid, no. CXVIII denuo collato (1882), 3-7; E. Chatelain, Paléogr. des class, lat. (1885), pl. XXXVIII, 2, and p. 10 (facsimile o f f . 39' = N.D. 2 167-3, 4); P. Schwenke in CI. Rev. 4 (1890), 347-348; 400-404; 454-457; 5 (1891), 12-17; 143-146; 200-205; 302-305 ; 408-412 ; 458-461 ; O. Plasberg, Cicero : De Natura Deorum, De Divinatione, De Legibus Codex Heinsianus (Leidensis 118), phototypice editus (1912), in the series Codices Graeci et Latini, 17, with reproduction of the entire ms and description of hands, compendia, correctors, etc.; E. A. Loew, The Beneventan Script (1914), 17; O. Plasberg, ed. min. of N.D. (1917), ix; A. Lörcher in Burs. Jahresb. 208 (1926), 25-26. S. XI. London, British Museum, Harleianus 2622 ( = D). Parchment. Quarto. 27 folia. Paradoxa, De Natura Deorum (ff. 9Γ-27Τ, ending in 1, 114, after nee). Perhaps written in Flanders or Germany. Once the property of Robert Harley, Earl of Oxford (1661-1724). Cat. of the Harl. Coll. of MSS, 2 (1759), no. 2622; Cat. of the Harl. MSS in the Brit. Mus. 2 (1808), 704 (dating it in S. VIII!); H. Allen, ed. of N.D. (1836), vi (who dates it in S. X); J. H. Swainson ap. J. B. Mayor, ed. of N.D. 1 (1880), 46 (Swainson's collations are given by Mayor, who calls it K, and dates it S. XI ex.); O. Plasberg, ed. min. of N.D. (1917), ix (repeated by W. Ax, ed. min. (1933), ix), A. C. Clark, The Descent of MSS (1918), 458, who lists it as of S. XII. S. XI. Munich, Univ. Lib. 528 ( = M). Parchment. Quarto. 153 folia. De Natura Deorum (ff. l r -52 T ), De Divinatione, Timaeus, De Fato, Paradoxa, Lucullus, De Legibus. By two or three hands, with some corrections and notes by Iohannes Aventinus (J. Turmair). On the inner cover a note of S. XVI/XVII reads: fuit hic liber aut Aventini aut ad tempus monasterium Biburgense (in Lower Bavaria) Uli commodaret, dictiones enim in libri marginibus manu Aventini scriptae sunt. Later the ms belonged to the Jesuit college at Ingolstadt, then to the university library at Landshut, from which it finally came to Munich. F. Ast, Zeitschr. f . Wissenschaft u. Kunst, 3 (1811), 89-124 (with collation of the De Legibus)·, G. H. Moser and F. Creuzer, ed. of N.D. (1818), xv (calling it "Cod. Landeshut."); Κ. Halm, ed. of philosophical works (1861), praef. i; J. B. Mayor in fourn. of Philol. 12 (1883), 249; P. Schwenke in Ρhiloi. Supplbd. 5 (1889), 524; id., in CI. Rev. 4 (1890), 349 (he collated it in 1883); O. Dieckhoff, De Cic. Libr. de N.D. recensendis (1894), 73-78; O. Plasberg, ed. min. of N.D. (1917), xi; id., ed. min. of Acad. (1922), xxiv. S. XI/XIII. Oxford, Corpus Christi College, 283. Fragment De Numero, De D i f f . arithmet., geometr., et musicae Artis, De Solis Aquationibus, De Natura Deorum (ff. 6-30), Cic. ad Varronem aliosque Epistolae, and various works of other authors.

INTRODUCTION

67

A ms in several parts, of different dates. Once owned by Willelmus de S. Clara; then by St. Augustine's monastery at Canterbury; later, by the gift of Christopher Wase, Fellow of Corpus Christi College, it passed to the library of that institution. H. O. Coxe, Cat. Codd. mss qui in Coll. Aulisque Oxon. hodie adservantur, 2 (1852), 121-124. S. XII. Edinburgh, University Library D. b. IV, 6. Vellum. 83/„ X 57/„ inches. 243 folia. Biblia abbreviata, Liber Testimoniorum Ysidori contra Judeos, Chalcidius, tr. of Tim., Mart. Cap. 1-2, Macrob. Sotnn. Scip. (part), De Natura Deorum (ff. 180-192; from 1, 11), nam si, to 3, 95, propensior), excerpts, [Apul.] De Deo Socr., Chalcid. in Tim., Dicta Albumassar. An English ms. On f. 243» a S. XIII inscription reads : iste liber est fratris Clementis Rocha (?) ordinis praedicatorum. C. R. Borland, Descr. Cat. of the Western Mediaeval MSS in Edinb. Univ. Libr. (1916), 21-22. S. XII. Florence, Bibl. S. Marci Dominicanorum. Parchment. De Natura Deorum, De Legibus. P. Deschamps, Essai bibliogr. (1863), 136, who also mentions an undated ms of these same works in the same library; may they perhaps be identical? S. XII. Paris, Bibl. Nat. Nostradamensis 17812 (olim 178; = N). Parchment. Folio. 50 folia. Lucullus, De Natura Deorum (ff. 13 r -46 r ), De Fato, Epistles (8 books), Dares. From the library of Notre Dame. P. Deschamps, Essai bibliogr. (1863), 177 (who thinks it of S. XIII); L. Delisle, Invent, des mss lat. de Notre-Dame et d'autres fonds (1871), 69-70; O. Piasberg, ed. min. of N.D. (1917), vi (repeated in 2 ed. by W. Ax (1933), vi), who dates it S. XII. S. XII ex. Oxford, Merton. 311 (or H. 2. 11; = 0 ) . Parchment. Small folio. 134 folia. De Officiis, Epitaphia Ciceronis, De Natura Deorum (ff. 37'-69v), De Divinatione (incomplete and called the fourth book of the N.D.), Philippics, 1-3, and part of 4; then, in different hands of S. XIII, Palladius (which was originally in a separate Merton ms). E. M. Thompson (ap. J. B. Mayor, ed. of N.D. 3 (1885), xlv) thought this written in England. Thomas Trillek, Bishop of Rochester from 1364-1372, sold it to William Reade, Fellow of Merton and Bishop of Chichester (1368-1385), who gave it to Merton College, as stated in a note on the fly-leaf. J. S. Reid considered this the most important English ms of the philosophical works and the best of any of these works save ABV, being superior even to H. E. Bernard, Cat. Libr. mss Angl, et Hibern. 1, 2 (1697), 23, no. 778,311 ; J. Davies, 2 ed. of De Div. (1730), praef. ; H. O. Coxe, Cat. Codd. mss qui in Coll. Aulisque Oxon. hodie asservantur, 1 (1852), 123; J. B. Mayor in fourn. of Philol. 12 (1883), 248-255 (reprinted in his edition of the N.D. 3 (1885), xliv-liv, who calls it "Oxf.", His collations of it are given as follows: Book 1 in vol. 3, li-liv; Book 2 in vol. 2 295-319; Book 3 in vol. 3, 42-58); J. S. Reid in Journ. of Philol. 17 (1888), 294-302 (cf. P. Schwenke in Burs. Jahresb. 76 (1898), 228); P. Schwenke in CI. Rev. 4 (1890), 350; O. Plasberg, ed. min. of N.D. (1917), vi; F. M. Powicke, The medieval Books of Merton Coll. (1931), 180, no. 565. S. XII ex. Paris, Bibl. Nat. Fonds lat. 15085. Seneca, Ep. and some treatises, De Officiis, parts of De Natura Deorum (ff. 190-213). From the Abbey of St. Victor. L. Deslisle, Invent, des mss de l'abbaye de Saint-Victor (1869), 71.

68

INTRODUCTION

S. XII/XIII. Tours, 688 ( = Τ). Parchment. 38 X 27 cm. 63 folia. Fragments of Académica II, De Natura Deorum (ff. 9-26; giving 1, ch. 37 to 2, ch. 63 ; 3, ch. 33 to end), De Fato, part of Ad Familiares. A very mutilated ms. The date is determined by L. Deslisle. From the Abbey of Marmoutier, 110. I have collated photostats from 1, 102-2, 16, and find that it agrees very closely with Ν though occasionally with O against N. A. Dorange, Cat. des mss de la bibl. de Tours (1875), 341 ; Cat. gén. des mss des bibl. pubi, de France, 37, 1 (1900), 548. S. XIII. Escorial, Q.I. 21. Parchment. Folio. De Natura Deorum, De Divinatione, De Fato, De Officiis. G. Haenel, Cat. Libr. mss (1830), 942. Apparently not in G. Antolin, Cat. de los códices latinos de la R. bibl. del Escorial. S. XIII. Escorial, S. I. 18. Parchment. Folio. 190 folia. De Inventione, Ad Herennium, De Natura Deorum (ff. 73-104 r ; beginning with 1, 17, nichil scire didicistis), De Divinatione, De Fato, De Officiis, Macrob. Sat. 7. On f. 1 : emi hoc volumen apud librarium vesontinum qui una cum aliis .. . libris hunc quoque librum emerat ex vetere bibliotheca Stephani de Vasis. 1593./. Chiffletius medicus vesontinus. On f. 2: ex bibliotheca Jo. Jac. Chiffletii·, on f. 190: iste liber est carolo de Vasis burgundo. The ms comes from la biblioteca del Conde-Duque de Olivares. G. Antolin, Cat. de los códices latinos de la R. bibl. del Escorial, 4 (1916), 24. S. XIII. Florence, Bibl. Laurent. L. 27. Parchment. Large folio. 105 folia. De Inventione, De Officiis, Tusculans, De Natura Deorum (ff. 62v-73"), Quintil. Inst. Collated for Cicero by H. Lagomarsini, 9 July, 1740, and called no. 31. A. M. Bandini, Cat. Codd. Lat. Bibl. Med. Laur. 2 (1775), 514-515 (who thought that he saw in some of the marginal notes the hand of Petrarch) ; P. Deschamps, Essai bibliogr. (1863), 121. S. XIII. Paris, Bibl. Nat. Lat. 6339 (olim Mazarinaeus). Parchment. De Natura Deorum (the beginning lost), De Divinatione. Cat. Codd. mss Bibl. Reg. 3, 4 (1744), 231; G. H. Moser and F. Creuzer, ed. of N.D. (1818), xiii; P. Deschamps, Essai bibliogr. (1863), 153. S. XIII ex. Escorial, V. ΙΠ. 6. Parchment. Folio. 240 folia. Lucullus, De Natura Deorum (ff. 21v-59v), Tusculans, Timaeus, De Legibus, De Finibus, De Divinatione, De Fato, some orations, and some non-Ciceronian works. Formerly the property of D. Antonio Agustín, Archbishop of Tarragona. G. Haenel, Cat. Libr. mss (1830), 941 ; W. von Härtel, Bib/. Patrum Lat. Hispaniensis, 1 (1887), 252; G. Antolin, Cat. de los códices lat. de la R. bibl. del Escorial, 4 (1916), 181-182. S. XIII ex. London, Brit. Mus. Burneianus 148 ( = G). Parchment, Quarto. 84 folia. De Natura Deorum (ff. 3-57), De Legibus. H. Allen, ed. of N.D. (1836), vii; Cat. of MSS in the Brit. Mus., n.s., 1, 2 (1840), 51; J. H. Swainson ap. J. B. Mayor, ed. of N.D. 1 (1880), 45 (who called it "B", and thought it the best of the British Museum mss of our work; his collations are given in Mayor's edition); O. Plasberg, ed. min. of N.D. (1917), ix (repeated by W. Ax in 2 ed. (1933), ix). S. XIII/XIV. Paris, Bibl. Nat. 4588 (olim Colbertinus). Parchment. Non-classical works, followed by De Natura Deorum (beginning at 1, 17, nihil scire didicistis), Verrines, Apul. De Habit, et Doctr. Platonis. Apparently written partly in S. XIV, partly in S. XIII. Cat. Codd. mss Bibl. Reg. 3, 3 (1744), 611; G. H. Moser and F. Creuzer, ed. of N.D. (1818), xiii; P. Deschamps, Essai bibliogr. (1863), 149.

INTRODUCTION

69

S. XIV (1329). Verona, Capit. 168 (155). An anonymous florilegium, with extracts from several of the philosophical works, including the De Officiis, De Natura Deorum, Tusculans, De Divinations, De Legibus, De Finibus, De Senectute, De Amicitia, Paradoxa, Somnium Scipionis, Académica posteriora. R. Sabbadini, Le scoperte dei cod. lat. e gr. ne' secoli XIV e XV, 2 (1914), 90-97. S. XIV (1381). Rome, Vat. Lat. 1918 (olim 2178). Parchment. 266 Χ 180 mm. ix + 102 folia. Val. Max., Anon. De Praenominibus, and on f. 102T excerpts from De Natura Deorum, 2, 147; 2, 153. Β. Nogara, Bib/. Apost. Vat. Codd. mss" recensiti, 3 (1912), 353-354. S. XIV. Cambridge, St. John's College 97 (D. 32). Vellum. In Willie/mi Poliistor. Defloratio, on f. 164 excerpts from the rhetorical works and from De Natura Deorum, De Divinatione, and Académica. From St. Augustine's, Canterbury. M. R. James, Descr. Cat. of the MSS in the Libr. of St. John's Coll., Camb. (1913), 128.

S. XIV. Madrid, Bibl. Nac. Parchment. Folio. De Natura Deorum (ff. 75-128). H. H. Grubbs, Suppl. to the ms Book Coll. of Spain and Portugal (in E. C. Richardson, Union Cat. of ms Books, 5 (1935), 184). S. XIV med. Milan, Ambrosianus E. 14. inf. Parchment. De Officiis, Tusculans, De Natura Deorum, Timaeus, De Senectute, De Amicitia, De Divinatione, De Fato, De Legibus, De Finibus, Somnium Scipionis, several of the rhetorical works, orations, and books of the Letters. The first part is almost a twin of Ambros. E. 15. inf., written by the same person, Marcus de Raphanellis. Sabbadini thinks it probably written at Milan. R. Sabbadini in Athenaeum, 1 (1913), 13-16, reprinted in his Storia e crit. di testi lat. (1914), 93-94. S. XIV med. Milan, Ambrosianus E. 15 inf. Parchment. 198 folia. De Officiis, Tusculans, De Natura Deorum (ff. 73-102'), Timaeus, De Senectute, De Amicitia, De Divinatione, De Fato, De Legibus, De Finibus. A note reads : Marcus de Raphanellis scripsit, and R. Sabbadini thinks that it was probably written in Milan. In its contents and history almost a twin of Ambros. E. 14 inf. It at one time belonged to Francesco Cicereio. R. Sabbadini in Athenaeum, 1 (1913), 13-16 (repeated in his Storia e critica di testi lat. (1914), 93-94; 152). S. XIV. Paris, Bibl. Nat. Anc. Fonds Lat. 6283. Parchment. Folio. Chalcidius in Tim., De Natura Deorum, Timaeus, De Laude ac Defens. Philos. (= Acad.), De Divinatione, De Fato. Cat. Codd. mss Bibl. Reg. 3, 4 (1744), 224; G. H. Moser and F. Creuzer, ed. of N.D. (1818), xiv; P. Deschamps, Essai bibliogr. (1863), 152. S. XIV. Paris, Bibl. Nat. Lat. 6334. Parchment. Tusculans, De Natura Deorum, De Divinatione, Timaeus. Cat. Codd. mss Bibl. Reg. 3, 4 (1744), 231 ; G. H. Moser and F. Creuzer, ed. of N.D. (1818), xiv; P. Deschamps, Essai bibliogr. (1863), 152; T. W. Dougan, ed. of Tuse. 1-2 (1905), xxix. S. XIV. Paris, Bibl. Nat. Lat. 6340. Parchment. De Natura Deorum, De Divinatione (Book 1). Cat. Codd. mss Bibl. Reg. 3, 4 (1744), 231 ; G. H. Moser and F. Creuzer, ed. of N.D. (1818), xiv; P. Deschamps, Essai bibliogr. (1863), 153.

70

INTRODUCTION

S. XIV. Paris, Bibl. Nat. 6375. Parchment. De Laude ac Defens. Philos. (= Acad.), De Natura Deorum. De Fintbus. Written by more than one hand. Cat. Codd. mss Bibl. Reg. 3, 4 (1744), 235; G. H. Moser and F. Creuzer, ed. of N.D. (1818), xiv; P. Deschamps, Essai bibliogr. (1863), 156-157. S. XIV. Paris, Bibl. Nat. Lat. 7698. Parchment. De Inventione, Ad Herennium, De Officiis, De Amicitia, De Senectute, Tusculans, Paradoxa, De Natura Deorum, De Divinatione, De Fato, and some works of Seneca. This seems to match fairly well the volume in the Pavia list of 1426 (Indagini ... sulla libreria Visconteo-sfor^esca del Castello di Pavia (1875), 19, no. 191), numbered Sig. DCXXIII, which came from the Sforza library at Pavia to Paris in the reign of Louis XII. Cat. Codd. mss Bibl. Reg. 3, 4 (1744), 385; G. H. Moser and F. Creuzer, ed. of N.D. (1818), xiv; P. Deschamps, Essai bibliogr. (1863), 162; T. W. Dougan, ed. of Tusc. 1-2 (1905), XXX. S. XIV. Rome, Vat. 3242. Parchment. 77 folia. De Natura Deorum (ff. 1-43), De Divinatione. P. De Nolhac, La Bibl. de Fulvio Orsini in Bibl. de l'ëc. des hautes études, Philol.hist. ser., 74 (1887), 192 and n. 3; 366, no. 103. S. XIV. Rome, Vat. Chis. H. 7. 222. De Natura Deorum (alone?). I owe this reference to Dr. J. P. Elder. S. XIV. Troyes (Cod. Trecensis 552), Municipal Library QQ. III. 10. 335 folia. Hier, in lob and other works, De Officiis, Tusculans, De Natura Deorum (ff. 187210), "De Divinationibus" De Fato, De Amicitia, De Senectute, Paradoxa, Académica priora, De Legibus, De Oratore, et al. Two volumes bound in one, of which the Cat. gén. etc., 2, 239, thinks the first part of S. IX (!), while the second part—it is not stated where this begins—is in Italian minuscule of S. XIV. There are notes dating from after 1344 (P. De Nolhac, Pétrarque et l'humanisme, 1 (1907), 228) and others added by Petrarch himself (id., 196, η. 5 ; 197, η. 1). An inscription reads : Cod. oratorii Collegii Trecensis. G. H. Moser, ed. of De Div. (1828), xx, says that P. Pithou entered readings of a codex (of which he gives no account) in the margin of Lambinus's edition preserved in the library at Heidelberg (cf. W. Christ, ed. of De Div. (1861), 481). Since Pithou (1539-1596) was a native of Troyes, and since this ms is from the library of the college at Troyes, anc. fonds Pithou 1. E. 2, it would be of interest to learn whether this may have been the ms from which these readings were derived. P. J. Grosley, Vie de P. Pithou, 2 (1756), 281 ; G. Haenel, Cat. Libr. mss (1830), 489 ; Cat. gén. des mss des bibl. pubi, des départm. 2 (1855), 238-240; G. Valentinelli, Bibl. mss ad S. Marci Venetiarum (1868), 9, and n. 6; R. Sabbadini in Rendic. del r. istit. lomb. di sc. e lett. 39 (1906), 374-375; P. De Nolhac, I.e.; R. Sabbadini, Le scoperte dei cod. lat. e gr. ne' secoli XIV e XV, 2 (1914), 115-121. S. XIV. Venice, S. Marc. Χ. 2 (Ζ. L. CCCCLXIX). Paper. 287 Χ 221 mm. Tim. trans, by Chalcidius in Tim., "M. Tullii Ciceronis adBrutum de natura deorum, libri primi capitula duodecim non absoluta" (ff. 58-59), Apul. Apol.\ other works. Contains in two or more places the name of Antonius de Romagno de Feltro. On f. 144 are notes on his family, partly written at Tragurium in 1387-1400. G. Valentinelli, Bibl. mss ad S. Marci Venetiarum, 4 (1871), 1-2. 124 S. XIV. Vienna, Hofbibliothek φ Parchment. Folio. 227 folia. "o De Natura Deorum (ff. 1Γ-30Γ: De Natura Deorum Libri IV), De Divinatione, Timaeus, De Fato, De Officiis, Tusculans, Epitaphia, frag, of De República 3 ap. Lact.

INTRODUCTION

71

Inst. 6, 8, Somnium Scipionis, part of Ad Familiares 2, 2, Albertus Magnus, De Meteoris and De Mineralibus, Cic. Pro Marcello, Pro Ligario, Pro Deiotaro, Invectives, In Catilinam. Like Vienna 189 (K), this book once belonged to Iohannes Sambucus (15311584). S. Endlicher, Cat. Codd. philol. Lat. Bibl. Palat. Vindob. (1836), 27-28, n. LVI; Tabulae Codd. mss ... in Bibl. Palat. Vindob. asservatorum, 1 (1864), 18, no. 124. S. XIV. Wolfenbüttel, Guelferbytanus 4306 (Gudianus 2). Parchment. Folio. 256 folia. De Officiis, De Senectute, De Amicitia, In Catilinam, Tusculans, De Oratore, Orator, Rhetorica, Ad Herennium (part), Paradoxa, De Legibus, De Natura Deorum (ff. 113T133T), De Divinatione, De Fato, various orations and invectives, Synonyma Tulliana, Partitiones oratoriae, Timaeus, De Finibus, Académica IV, Philippics, 1-5, Boethius in Top., Macrob. Somn. Scip. Written in France, and thought by P. Schwenke (Class. Rev. 4 (1890), 350) to be probably derived from Vindob. 189 (K). On f. 1 a S. XVII hand has written: Derocbefor. The ms belonged to the library of M. Gude (1635-1689), and may also have been in the possession of F. A. Wolf (cf. G. H. Moser, ed. of De Div. (1828), xxii). G. H. Moser and F. Creuzer, ed. of N.D. (1818), xvi; G. H. Moser, ed. of De Div. (1828), xxii; A. O. L. Giese, ed. of De Div. (1829), viii; K. Halm, Zur Handschriftenkunde d. cicerón. Sehr. (1850), 7, no. 25; J. S. Reid, ed. of Acad. (1885), 66; P. Schwenke, I.e. ; T. W. Dougan, ed. of Tuse. 1-2 (1905), xxxiv; O. von Heinemann, Die HSS d. her^ogl. Bibl. Wolfenbüttel, 4 (1913), 78, no. 4306. S. XIV. London, Brit. Mus. Add. MSS 19586. Vellum. Folio. De Inventione, Ad Herennium, De Oratore, Orator, De optimo Genere Oratorum, Partitiones oratoriae, De Officiis, De Amicitia, De Senectute, Tusculans, Timaeus, "De Divinationibus", De Natura Deorum (ff. 221-251), orations. Finely written ; probably preserved in France in the same library as A (P. Schwenke in CI. Rev. 4 (1890), 347). Cat. of Add. to the MSS in the Brit. Mus. for 1848-1853 (1868), 256; J. B. Mayor, ed. of N.D. 1 (1880), 47 (who calls it O, and says that it was collated by Mr. Bickley of the British Museum and compared by himself); J. F. Lockwood in CI. Quart. 33 (1939), 153-154. S. XIV/XV. Leyden, Perizonianus 25. Parchment. Folio. 325 folia. De Officiis, De Finibus, Académica posteriora, Tusculans, De Natura Deorum (ff. 233r-267r), De Divinatione, De Fato, De Legibus, Prophetia de Carolo Magno, De Senectute, De Amicitia, Paradoxa. Handsomely written in Gothic characters. Geel and Boesch date it as S. XV, Piasberg as S. XIV/XV. Boesch states that in the De Natura Deorum, De Divinatione, De Fato, and De Legibus this ms closely agrees with Vindob. 189 (V), which Κ. Halm thought came from Holland to Austria. It once belonged to one Abbot Sellarius, then to the Bibliotheca Hulsiana. I. Geel, Cat. Libr. mss qui inde ab Anno 1741 Bibl. Lugd.-Batav. accesserunt (1852), 134-135, no. 445; F. Boesch in Schedae philol. H. Usenero .. . oblatae (1891) 76-87 (with a full description of the N.D. on pp. 82-83); T. W. Dougan, ed. of Tusc. 1-2 (1905), xxxix ; O. Plasberg, ed. min. of Acad. (1922), xvi-xvii. S. XV (1404). London, Brit. Mus. Harieianus 2511. Parchment. Quarto. 168 folia. De Natura Deorum, De Divinatione (Book 2 called De Fato, and dated 1404), Timaeus. A worthless ms, written in Italy by an ignorant scribe. Cat. of the Harl. Coll. of MSS, 2 (1759), no. 2511; Cat. of the Harl. MSS in the Brit. Mus. 2 (1808), 697; H. Allen, ed. of N.D. (1836), vii; J. H. Swainson ap.

72

INTRODUCTION

J. Β. Mayor, ed. of N.D. 1 (1880), 46 (his collations of it are given by Mayor, who calls it I). S. XV (1416). Breslau, IV. F. 180 (formerly at Glogau). Paper. Small folio. 244 folia. Part 1, Vitae Patrum (1420); Part 2, De Natura Deorum (ff. 1-59), De Finibus. The subscription to De Fin. 3 is dated 1416. Brought to the Breslau library by order of the King of Prussia ca. 1825 {Museum crit. 1 (1826), 277). This article thinks it not earlier than S. XII (!), and says that Professor Heiddemann of Breslau collated it for his pupils. "It is transcribed from an original much more perfect than any hitherto known to be in existence... The readings which it exhibits are excellent, and the lacunae are all supplied." Museum crit., I.e.·, L. F. Heindorf, ed. of N.D. (1815), v-vii (who rates it highly); T. F. Dibdin, Intr. to the KnowI. of Edd. of the Classics, l 4 (1827), 462-463; C. E. C. Schneider, Cod. Glogav. in Cic. de Fin. . .. Lectio (1841), iii-iv (the best description of the ms); J. G. Baiter, ed. of Fin. (1861), 75; id., ed. of Fin. (1863); ix; J. B. Mayor, ed. of N.D. 1 (1880), lxxi. S. XV (1426). Milan, Ambrosianus D. 113. Paper. 157 folia. Tusculans, De Natura Deorum (ff. 61r-109v), De Divinatione, De Fato·, interspersed with extracts from Suetonius (on ff. 61-64; 110-112). Three subscriptions show that the ms was written during June and July, 1426 (the N.D. in June) by Modesto Decembrio (died 1430; the oldest of the sons of Uberto Decembrio). His brother Pier Candido refers to this ms in a letter quoted by Sabbadini, p. 178. R. Sabbadini, Storia e critica di testi lat. (1914), 176-178. S. XV (1434). Faenza, Bibl. Comun. 30. Paper. 254 X 195 mm. Somnium Scipionis. De Natura Deorum (up to 3, 39, nihil sit quod). Dated on Non. Nov. A.D. 1434. A very corrupt and worthless ms. G. Mazzatinti, Invent, dei mssti delle bibl. d'Italia, 6 (1896), 243; A. Mancini in Studi ital. difilol. class. 19 (1912), 20-21 (who calls it liber nullius pretil)·, A. Sorbelli, Invent, dei mssti delle bibl. d'Italia, 26 (1918), 11, no. 30. S. XV. (1435). Rome, Vat. Chis. H. 6. 99. De Natura Deorum (alone?). Dr. J. P. Elder has told me of the existence of this ms. S. XV (1444). Cambridge, Univ. Lib. Dd. XIII. 2. Vellum. Large folio. 309 folia. De Senectute, De Natura Deorum (ff. 9V-51V), De Divinatione, De Fato, Lucullus, De República (fragment), Timaeus, Paradoxa, thirteen orations, invectives, Philippics, De Officits, Tusculans. Fol. 45 is followed, without loss of text, by fol. 50. A subscription reads: per manus Theodorici Nycolai Werken de Abbenbroeck (in South Holland) liber explicit anno domini MCCCCAA, alias 1444. The Dutch writer seems to have written in England. The ms was given to the library by Archbishop Rotherham nearly four centuries ago. On the margins are many notes ascribed to William of Malmesbury (died ca. 1142), nearly all in the first person, so that it appears that this ms is derived from one annotated by William himself. J. Davies, 1 ed. of De Div. (1721), praef.; 2 ed. (1730), praef.; J. O. HalliwellPhillips, The ms Rarities of the Univ. of Camb. (1841), 95; Cat. of MSS preserved in theLibr. of the Univ. of Camb. 1 (1856), 507; J. B. Mayor, ed. oí N.D. 1 (1880), 47; J. S. Reid, ed. of Acad. (1885), 66-68; T. W. Dougan, ed. of Tuse. 1-2 (1905), xl-xli. S. XV (1459). Oxford, Bodleian 2497. Parchment. De Officits, De Senectute, De Amicitia, Paradoxa, Somnium Scipionis, Tusculans, De Finibus, Académica I, De Natura Deorum, De Divinatione, De Fato, De Legibus, Timaeus.

INTRODUCTION

73

A note reads: istud volumen scriptum et compositum fuit opera Vespasiani librarij Fiorentini in civitate Florentia de anno 1459. E. Bernard, Cat. Libr. mss Angliae et Hibern. 1, 1 (1697), 129, no. 2497, 2; P. Deschampe, Essai bibliogr. (1863), 142; J. N. Madvig, 3 ed. of De Fin. (1876), xiv; J. B. Mayor, ed. of N.D. 1 (1880), lxxi; J. S. Reid, ed. of Acad. (1885), 65; T. W. Dougan, ed. of Tuse. 1-2 (1905), xlii; F. Madan and H. H. E. Craster, Summary Cat. o_f western MSS in the Bodl. Libr., Oxford, 2, 1 (1922), 397. S. XV (ca. 1460). Dresden, De. 106. Parchment. Folio. 342 folia. De Finibus, De Natura Deorum (ff. 59-103), De Divinatione, De Officiis, De Amicitia, De Senectute, Paradoxa, Tusculans, De Fato, De Legibus, Académica, De República (Book 4), Somnium Scipionis. Written in Italy. Inscribed: e bibl. Wertheriana. A. O. I.. Giese, ed. of De Div. (1829), ix; F. Schnorr von Carolsfeld, Ratal, d. HSS d. kgl. ¡¡genti. Bibl. Dresden, 1 (1882), 311. S. XV (1461). Rome, Vat. Ottobonianus 1242. Paper. De Natura Deorum (alone?). Dated at the end of Book 3. G. H. Moser and F. Creuzer, ed. of N.D. (1818), xvi; P. Deschamps, Essai bibliogr. (1863), 114, who mentions two S. XV Codices Ottoboniani of the N.D. S. XV (1463). Toledo (Spain), 100, 18. Parchment. Quarto. 156 folia. De Natura Deorum (fi'. 1Γ-90Γ), De Divinatione. At the end of the De Div. : per me P. Por. scriptus fuit. In Anno MCCCCLXIII die Villi septembris. Also inscribed: Equitis Antonij Mariae Boni% 3. 6. G. Haenel, Cat. Libr. mss (1830), 994; J. M. Octavio de Toledo, Cat. de la libr. del Cabildo Toledano, 1 (1903), 75, no. cxlii. S. XV (1465). Munich, I. 277. Folio. 193 folia. Epitapbia, Tusculans, "De Divinationibus", fragment of Macrob. Somn. Scip., De Natura Deorum (ff. 118-191; by another hand), Hor. Carm. 4, 7. Written at Padua in 1465. A note reads: liber H. Schedelii ex bibl. electorali. G. H. Moser and F. Creuzer, ed. of N.D. (1818), xvi; G. H. Moser, ed. of De Div. (1828), xx; Cat. Codd. Lat. Bibl. Reg. Monac. 1, I a (1892), 71; T. W. Dougan, ed. of Tusc. 1-2 (1905), xl. S. XV (1466). Erlangen, Univ. Lib. 847 (38). Paper. Folio. 467 pp. De Officiis, In Catilinam, In Pisonem, invectives, Timaeus, De Divinatione libri III (Book 3 = De Fato), De Natura Deorum (ff. lll v -153 r ), De Finibus, Lucullus, four orations; then, in another hand, De Amicitia, De Senectute, Paradoxa. In a Gothic hand. A note in the front reads : Liber beate marie virginis im haylsbrun, and one at the end : Liber S. marie in fonte salutis (a Cistercian abbey at Heilsbronn, 20 miles west of Nürnberg). On f. 35 is this note: expliciunt libri tres marci tulii ciceronis scripti per me bernhardum groschedel de remingen. Anno 1466 próxima feriali die post bartholomei·, on the last page: comparatus est hie praesens liber per fratrem conrad hamolt in studio heydelbergensi pro VI quasi fl. vel ultra anno 1466. Written at Heidelberg it agrees closely with Palat. 1525 in the Vatican. It was collated for the De Divinatione, De Natura Deorum, and De Fato by A. Fleckeisen. Baiter in his edition (1861), calls it E. G. H. Moser and F. Creuzer, ed. of N.D. (1818), xvi; K. Halm, Zur Handschriftenkunde d. cicerón. Sehr. (1850), 2-3, no. 8; J. C. Irmischer, HandschriftenKatalog d. kgl. Univ.-Bibl. z» Erlangen (1852), 219-220; J. G. Baiter, ed. of N.D. (1861), 369; J. N. Madvig, 3 ed. of De Fin. (1876), xv-xxi (who uses it as the basic ms for the De Finibus); J. B. Mayor, ed. of N.D. 1 (1880), lxx; J. S. Reid, ed. of Acad. (1885), 66.

74

INTRODUCTION

S. XV (1467). Florence, Bibl. Magliabechiana, VI. 27 (now in R. Bibl. Naz.). Parchment. Octavo. De Natura Deorum. At the end: M. T. Ciceronis, De Natura Deorum liber tertius et ultimus explicit felicit er. Sextius Nicolaus scripsit domi Canusianorum die 777* menàs martii ( M)CCCCL XVII. G. Mazzatinti and F. Pintor, Invent, dei mssti delle bibl. d'Italia, 12 (1902/3), 131 ; A. Galante, Index Codd. class. Latin, in Studi ital. di filol. class. 10 (1902), 330, n. 11 (in his catalogue of the Biblioteca Magliabechiana). S. XV (1467). Rome, Vat. Palat. 1525. Paper. Folio. 438 folia. De Officiis, De Finibus, De Inventione, De Natura Deorum, De Divinatione, De Fato, Timaeus, Lucullus, various orations, De Senectute, Paradoxa, Philippics, Tusculans. Dated on f. 215 as 1467. Chatelain calls it Italian writing, but in his addenda (p. 34) corrects this statement to German writing. K. Halm, Über d. HSS des Cic. (1849), 165-171 ; E. Chatelain, Paléogr. des class, lat. (1885), pl. XXV, and pp. 7; 34. S. XV (1467). Seville, Bibl. Columbina, 5. 5. 19 (olim BB. 150. 3). De Natura Deorum, De Officiis, De Senectute, followed by other miscellaneous items. Finished 25 May, 1467. L. Laurand in Rev. des ét. lat. 11 (1933), 109-110; id. Cicerón, 2 (1934), 261. S. XV (1469). Florence, Laurent. Medic. 83, 3. Paper. Large folio. 107 folia. De Natura Deorum (ff. 1Γ-24Γ), De Divinatione, De Finibus, Tusculans, Servius in Aen. A note at the end of the De Divinatione reads : Marci Tulli Cic. de divin, liber sec. explicit 18 Julii 1469 (wrongly given by B. de Montfaucon, Bibl. Bibl. 1 (1739), 401, as 15 Julii, 1596). A. M. Bandini, Cat. Codd. Lat. Bibl. Med. Laur. 3 (1776), 207-208 (dating it in S. XIV); P. Deschamps, Essai bibliogr. (1863), 130 (dating it in S. XIV). S. XV (1470). Kassel, Landesbibl. 4to, no. 6. De Natura Deorum (alone?). Dr. J. P. Elder tells me of the existence of this ms. It is not noted by W. Hopf, Die Landesbibl. Kassel, 1580-1930 (1930), though he lists other Cicero-mss. S. XV (1471). Private ownership. Paper. Quarto. 112 folia. Chalcid. Tim., Spera Apulei platonici, De Natura Deorum (ff. 41-104), Pro Marcello, works of other authors. Inscribed: Anno 1471 die Marcy ultima. E. Narducci, Cat. di mssti ora posseduti da D. Baldassare Boncompagni (1862), 133, no. 304. S. XV (ca. 1485). New York, Morgan Library, 497. Parchment. 32 χ 21 cm. 272 folia. De Natura Deorum (pp. 1-56), De Divinatione, De Officiis, De Amicitia, Paradoxa, De Senectute, Frag, of Académica I, Timaeus, Somnium Scipionis, De Legibus, De Fato, and an inventory of books by Niccolò Niccoli (this last by another hand). Probably written at Florence for King Matthias Corvinus of Hungary (died 1490), whose arms it bears ; later in the library of Cardinal York at Frascati, and then the property of the Collegio Romano at Rome. Obtained from Imbert in 1912; in Cat. 12 (1913) of T. de Marinis at Florence, 14, no. 10. R. P. Robinson in CI. Pbilol. 16 (1921), 251 ; S. De Ricci in Philol. Quart. 1 (1922), 102; S. De Ricci and W. J. Wilson, Census of med. and ren. MSS in the U.S. and Canada, 2 (1937), 1461-1462, no. 497 (with history and full bibliography).

INTRODUCTION

75

S. XV. Mt. Athos, Library of the Μόνη 'Ιβήρων, 4203. Paper. Octavo. 270 folia. A miscellaneous ras, mostly in Greek, in which, however, item 11 contains Latin excerpts from various authors, including (ff. 257v-262") the De Natura Deorum, Tusculans, and De Officiti, while later parts of the ms have similar excerpts from the De Legibus and the De Divinatione. S. P. Lampros, Cat. of the Greek MSS on Mt. Athos, 2 (1900), 11-12. S. XV. Bologna, Univ. Lib. 1096 (2228). Parchment. Folio. 370 folia. De Officiis, De Amicitia, De Senectute, Paradoxa, Tusculans, De Finibus, De Natura Deorum (ff. 215Γ-264Τ), De Divinatione, De Fato, De Legibus, frag, of Académica, Timaeus, Somntum Scipionis. Bought at Venice by P. Fabretti, 11 Jan., 1532. L. Frati, Indice dei codici lat. conservati nella R. bibl. univ. di Bologna in Studi i tal. di filol. class. 17 (1909), 11. S. XV. Breslau, Rehdigeranus 64 (XXXV = S. I. 4. 15). Paper. Folio. 187 folia. De Natura Deorum (ff. l r -28 T ), De Divinatione, De Fato, Timaeus, Somnium Scipionis, Tusculans. Perhaps written in Italy. Belonged in S. XVI to Thomas von Rehdiger. L. F. Heindorf, ed. of N.D. (1815), vii; T. F. Dibdin, Intr. to the Knot»!. of Edd. of the Classics, l 4 (1827), 462-463; G. H. Moser, ed. of De Diu. (1828), xx; J. Β. Mayor, ed. of N.D. 1 (1880), lxxi; K. Ziegler, Cat. Codd. Lat. class, qui in Bibl. urbica Wratislaviensi adservantur (1915), 29-30. S. XV. Cesena, XVIII. 1. Parchment. 334 folia. Tusculans, De Finibus, De Divinatione, De Natura Deorum, De Senectute, De Amicitia, De Officiis, Paradoxa. R. Zazzeri, Sui codici . .. della bibl. Malatestiana di Cesena (1887), 401. S. XV. Dublin (?), formerly the property of Samuel Allen. Parchment. Small quarto. De Natura Deorum (alone?). "Injured by late corrections, which often make it impossible to decipher the original reading." Collated by J. B. Mayor, who calls it Y. J. B. Mayor, ed. of N.D. 1 (1880), lxx. S. XV. Escorial, T. III. 17. Parchment. Quarto. 155 folia. De Natura Deorum (ff. 1-85), De Divinatione. Written in Italy. A note reads : Zanes Marcus clarissimi simulatque callidissimi scriptoris Petri Strocii discipulus Parmae oriundus velocissime celebrimeque ac etiam lubentissime Rainaldo scripsit. It belonged to D . Antonio Agustín, Archbishop of Tarragona. G. Haenel, Cat. Libr. mss (1830), 941 (who dates it in S. XIV); G. Antolin, Cat. de los códices latinos de la R. bibl. del Escorial, 4 (1916), 150. S. XV. Escorial, S. ΙΠ. 28. Folio. 72 folia. De Natura Deorum. From the library of the Conde-Duque de Olivares. G. Antolin, Cat. de los códices lat. de la R. bibl. del Escorial, 4 (1916), 79-80. S. XV. Ferrara, Bibl. Comunale, 386. Parchment. 32 Χ 23 cm. 40 folia (no. 40 empty). De Natura Deorum. In four books, the words (1,65) quae primum nullae sunt being called the beginning of the second book (cf. note 14, p. 60, above). G. Procacci in Studi ita!, di filol. class. 19 (1912), 47, no. 40. S. XV. Florence, Laurent. Medic. 83, 4. Parchment. Quarto. 126 folia. De Natura Deorum (ff. 1-64), De Divinatione, De Fato. Α. M. Bandini, Cat. Codd. Lat. Bibl. Med. Laur. 3 (1776), 208; P. Deschamps,

76

INTRODUCTION

Essai bibliogr. (1863), 131; perhaps also M. Manitius, HSS ant. Autoren in mittelälterl. Bibliothekskatalogen (1935), 36, no. 22: Tulio de natura deorum, de divinatione et fato in lettera antica (though this might equally well apply to Laur. Med. 83, 6). S. XV. Florence, Laurent. Medic. 83, 6. Parchment, Quarto. 126 folia. De Natura Deorum (ff. 1-66), De Divinatione, De Fato. A note at the end reads : Bernardo Portinario Iohannes Arretinus plurimam salutem dicit. Vale diu felixque sii. A. M. Bandini, Cat. Codd. Lat. Bibl. Med. Laur. 3 (1776), 208-209; P. Deschamps, Essai bibliogr. (1863), 131. S. XV. Florence, Laurent. Medic. 83, 7. Parchment. Quarto. 267 folia. De Natura Deorum (ff. 1-85), De Divinatione, De Fato, De Legibus, Somnium Scipionis, Académica. A. M. Bandini, Cat. Codd. Lat. Bibl. Med. Laur. 3 (1776), 209; P. Deschamps, Essai bibliogr. (1863), 131. S. XV. Florence, Laurent. Medic. Fesulanus 188. Parchment. Folio. 239 folia. De Natura Deorum (ff. 1-209'), De Divinatione. A. M. Bandini, Bibl. Leopoldina Laurentiana, 3 (1793), 129; possibly the same described by P. Deschamps, Essai bibliogr. (1863), 137. S. XV. Florence, Bibl. Gaddiana (in the Laurentian Library), LXXXX, 78. Paper. Folio. 214 folia. De Natura Deorum (ff. 1-71), De Divinatione, De Fato, De Legibus, Académica, Timaeus, Somnium Scipionis. A note on p. 1 says that it belonged to Bernardus de Puccinis. A. M. Bandini, Cat. Codd. Lat. Bibl. Med. Laur. 3 (1776), 662; P. Deschamps, Essai bibliogr. (1863), 132. S. XV. Florence, Bibl. Magliabechiana (now in R. Bibl. Naz.) XXI. 30. Paper. 29 X 20 cm. 162 folia. De Finibus, De Fato, Académica I, Timaeus, De Natura Deorum (ff. 102-162). Α. Galante in Studi ital. di filol. class. 15 (1907), 145, no. 82. S. XV. Florence, Bibl. S. Crucis XXIII Sin. Cod. 5. Parchment. Quarto. 166 folia. De Natura Deorum (ff. 1-115'), De Fato, De Divinatione (only Book 1). Collated by Girolamo Lagomarsini 27 Dec., 1740. A. M. Bandini, Cat. Codd. Lat. Bibl. Med. Laur. 4 (1777), 170; P. Deschamps, Essai bibliogr. (1863), 133, who dates it in S. XIV. S. XV. Florence, Laurent. Strozzianus XLV. Paper. Large octavo. 146 folia. De Natura Deorum (ff. l-83 v ), De Divinatione. A. M. Bandini, Bibl. Leopoldina Laurentiana, 2 (1792), 383. S. XV. Laon 454. Paper. Quarto. De Natura Deorum, De Divinatione, Timaeus. Cat. ge'n. des mss des bibl. pubi, des departm. A (1849), 240. S. XV. London, Brit. Mus. Harleianus 2465. Parchment for 21 folia, the rest paper. De Natura Deorum, Timaeus. Written in Italy. A leaf at the end (part of a legal instrument) is dated 1418. Cat. of the Harl. Coll. of MSS, 2 (1759), no. 2465; Cat. of the Harl. MSS in the Brit. Mus. 2 (1808), 694 (calling it a ms of S. XIV); H. Allen, ed. of N.D. (1836), vi-vii; J. H. Swainson in J. B. Mayor's ed. of N.D. 1 (1880), 45-46 (who calls it H, and whose collations of it are given by Mayor). S. XV med. London, Brit. Mus. Add. MSS 11932. Paper. Quarto. De Natura Deorum, De Divinatione, De Fato, Timaeus. Written in S. Germany or N. Italy. From the library of Bishop Butler.

77

INTRODUCTION

Cat. of Add. to the MSS in the Brit. Mus. 1841-1845 (1850), 19; J. H. Swainson ap. J. B. Mayor, ed. of N.D. 1 (1880). 46 (whose collations of it are given by Mayor and who calls it N); J. F. Lockwood in CI. Quart. 33 (1939), 153-154. S. XV. Naples, Bofbonicus IV. G. 3. Parchment. Quarto. De Natura Deorum, De Divinatione. C. Janelli, Cat. Bibl. Lat. . .. mss qui in R. Neapel. Mus. Borbon. (1827), 214, no. 311.

adservantur

S. XV. Oxford, Balliolensis CCXLVIH. Parchment. Contains nearly all Cicero's works. Beautifully written, in Italy, after 1450. J. Davies, edd. 1 and 2 of De Div. (1721, 1730), iii; J. J. Hottinger, ed. of De Div. (1793), xi; J. B. Mayor, ed. of N.D. 1 (1880), lxxi; J. S. Reid, ed. of Acad. (1885), 65; T. W. Dougan, ed. of Τ use. 1-2 (1905), xliii. S. XV. Oxford, Lincoln College, Lat. 38. Parchment. Folio. De Oratore, Tusculans, De Senectute, Paradoxa, Somnium Scipionis, Ad Q. Fratrem de Mag. ger., Académica, De Natura Deorum (ff. 81r-109r), De Divinatione, De Legibus, Topica, Synonyma, De Fato, Timaeus, De Harusp. Responso, De optimo Genere Oratorum, Partitiones oratoriae. Inscribed: ex dono R. Flemmyng·, Tusc. is dated 17 Oct., 1420. E. Bernard, Cat. Libr. mss Angl, et Hibern. 1, 2 (1697), 39, no. 1299, 12; H. O. Coxe, Cat. Codd. mss qui in Coll. Aulisque Oxon. hodie asservantur, 1 (1852), 30; J. B. Mayor, ed. of N.D. 1 (1880), lxxi; T. W. Dougan, ed. of Tusc. 1-2 (1905), xliii. S. XV. Paris, Bibl. Nat. Suppl. Lat. 9320. Parchment. Académica, De Natura Deorum (ff. 22-58), De Divinatione, translation of Aristotle's Ethics by Leonardo Arretino, etc. L. Delisle, Invent, des mss lat. (1863), 27 ; P. Deschamps, Essai bibliogr. (1863), 172. S. XV. Pavia, Univ. Library, 194. Paper. 240 χ 169 mm. 52 + 132 folia. De Natura Deorum (ff. 1-52), Macrob. Sat. With many marginal notes which may be by Guarino Veronese (1374-1460). L. de Marchi and G. Bertolini, Invent, dei mssti della R. bibl. Univ. di Pavia, 1 (1894), 108, no. 194. S. XV. Pistoia, Α. 14. Parchment. Quarto. 60 folia. De Natura Deorum. G. Mazzatinti, Invent, dei mssti delle bibl. d'Italia, 1 (1890), 242. S. XV. Rome, Vat. Lat. 1758 (olim 2018). Paper. 307 χ 211 mm. 108 folia. De Natura Deorum (ff. 1-71). De Legibus. Bears the arms of Paul V and of Scipio Borghesi. Β. Nogara, Bibl. Apostol. Vat. Codd. mss recensiti, 3 (1912), 223. S. XV. Rome, Vat. Lat. 1759. Parchment. 282 X 217 mm. 173 folia. De Natura Deorum (ff. l-49 r ), De Divinatione, Timaeus, De Fato, De Timaeus (again), Modestus, De Re militari. B. Nogara, Bibl. Apostol. Vat. Codd. mss recensiti, 3 (1912), 224. S. XV. Rome, Vat. Chis. H. 7. 221. De Natura Deorum, De Divinatione, De Fato, Académica, Dr. J. P. Elder has told me of the existence of this ms. S. XV. De In G.

Rome, Vat. Ottobonianus 1372. Paper. Natura Deorum, De Divinatione. a small hand, with many compendia. H. Moser and F. Creuzer, ed. of N.D. (1818), xvi.

Somnium

Finibus,

Scipionis.

78

INTRODUCTION

S. XV. Rome, Vat. Ottobonianus 1414. Parchment. Folio. De Natura Deorum, De Legibus, Académica, Topica, Somnium Scipionii, De natione. G. H. Moser and F. Creuzer, ed. of N.D. (1818), xv-xvi.

Divi-

S. XV. Rome, Vat. Ottobonianus 1622. Parchment. De Natura Deorum, De Divinatione. Either this or no. 1372 above may be the same as Cod. Petav. 468, noted by B. de Montfaucon (Bib/. Bib/. 1 (1739), 90) as containing these two works and being from the library of Alexander Petavius. The Codices Ottoboniani include some Reginenses and the latter some of the books of Petavius. Cf. also the Reginensis of the N.D., formerly owned by Petavius, which is noted by P. Deschamps, Essai bibliogr. (1863), 113. G. H. Moser and F. Creuzer, ed. of N.D. (1818), xvi. S. XV. Rome, Vat. Ottobonianus 1944. De Natura Deorum. G. H. Moser and F. Creuzer, ed. of N.D. (1818), xv; P. Deschamps, Essai bibliogr. (1863), 114, for Codd. Ottoboniani of S. XV. S. XV. Rome, Vat. Palatinus 1518. De Natura Deorum (ff. 1-71), De Divinatione, De Fato. Κ. Halm, Über d. HS S des Cic. (1849), 176. S. XV. Rome, Vat. Palatinus 1524. Parchment. Folio. 337 folia. De Amicitia, De Senectute, Paradoxa, De Finibus, De Officiis, Tusculans, Natura Deorum, De Divinatione, De Fato, De Legibus. K. Halm, Über d. HS S des Cic. (1849), 177.

De

S. XV. Rome, Vat. Urbinas Lat. 312 (olim 456). Parchment. 287 χ 187 mm. 60 folia. De Natura Deorum. This seems to match no. 437 in an Urbino catalogue before 1482 (M. Manitius, HSS ant. Autoren in mitte/alter!. Bibliothekskatalogen (1935), 38): M. Tulli de natura deorum iterum. C. Stornajolo, Codd. Urbinates Latini, 1 (1902), 274. S. XV. Rome, Vat. Urbinas Lat. 319 (olim 594). Parchment. 326 X 205 mm. 207 folia. De Natura Deorum (ff. 2-59 r ), De Divinatione, De Legibus, Académica, Timaeus, De Fato. A note on the margin of f. 53 reads : hic deficit in vetustissimo codice. This ms somewhat suggests no. 425 in an Urbino catalogue before 1482 (M. Manitius, op. cit., 37): M. Tullius de natura deorum. De fato seu divinatione. De legibus. De Academicis. De caelo et mundo. But Stornajolo would identify it with no. 444 of (perhaps another) old Urbino catalogue. C. Stornajolo, Codd. Urbinates Latini, 1 (1902), 277-278. S. XV. Rouen, O. 47. Paper. 216 X 140 mm. 199 folia. Philippics, De Legibus, miscellany, Topica, De Natura Deorum (ff. 140-199; Book 3 ending at 3, 14, a philosophis debeo discere). From St. Ouen de Rouen (O. 19). Cat. gén. des mss des bibl. pubi, de France, 1 (1886), 261-262. S. XV. St. Gallen, 850. Parchment. Folio. 420 folia. Tusculans, De Finibus, De Natura Deorum, De Divinatione. Handsome Italian writing. Once the property of E. Tschudy. G. Haenel, Cat. Libr. mss (1830), 713; G. Scherrer, Verzeichnis d. HSS d. Stiftsbibl. von St. Gallen (1875), 288, no. 850.

INTRODUCTION

79

S. XV. Saint Omer, 652. Paper. Quarto. Fragments of Hier, in Galat., Tusculans, De Natura Deorum, De Divinatione, De Fato, Lucullus, Timaeus, Philippics, [Apul.] Asclep. In Gothic cursive. From the abbey of St. Bertin. Cat. gên. des mss des bibl. pubi, des départm. 3 (1861), 283. S. XV. Sandaniele del Friuli, Bibl. Común. 62. Paper. Folio. De Natura Deorum, De Divinatione, De Fato, De Legibus, De Partitione oratoria, In Catilinam, invectives, Epitaphia Ciceronis. G. Ma2zatinti, Invent, dei mss delle bibl. d'Italia, 3 (1893), 119. S. XV. Siena, Bibl. Pubi. H. VI. 14. Paper. 294 χ 216 mm. iii + 145 folia. Excerpts from De Natura Deorum, 1-2 (f. l r ), Anon. De Cic. Orationibus, De Finibus, Philippics, 12-13. From the monastery of Monte Oliveto Maggiore. Ν. Terzaghi in Studi ¡tal. di filol. class. 11 (1903), 413. S. XV. Toledo (Ohio), Museum of Art. Vellum. 26 Χ 18 cm. 170 folia. De Natura Deorum (pp. 1-188), De Divinatione. Beautifully written ms by an Italian scribe; complete, but with a few leaves transposed. The former owners are noted by De Ricci in order: Dr. Anthony Askew (sale 7 Mar., 1785); Lowes; added by Sotheby to Jonathan Toup Sale (10 May, 1786); bought by Michael Wodhull; J. E. Severne sale (11 Jan., 1886); B. Quaritch (noted in several of his catalogues); sold by Sotheby to B. Quaritch (24 June, 1907); sold by Sotheby to Alfred Bull (9 Dec., 1909); Cat. 25 of A. Bull (1915), no. 322; Cat. 13 of J. Martin (1917); Bought by Edward Duff Balken, of Pittsburg, Pa.; Maggs cat. 542 (1930), no. 141; Toledo Museum of Art. B. Quaritch, Cat. 138 (1893), 49, no. 101; and other catalogues noted above; B. L. Ullman in Piniol. Quart. 5 (1926), 153; S. De Ricci and W. J. Wilson, Census of med. and ren. MSS in the U.S. and Canada, 2 (1937), 1976, no. 33. S. XV. Venice, S. Marc. X. 118 (Z.L. CCCCXIV). Parchment. De Natura Deorum (ff. 1-70), De Officiis. A pretty but inaccurate codex. Formerly owned by Cardinal Bessarion and given by him in 1468 to St. Mark's. G. Valentineiii, Bibl. mss ad S. Marci Venetiarum, 4 (1871), 80; H. Omont, Invent, des mss gr. et lat. donnés à Saint-Marc de Venise par le Cardinal Bessarion en 1468 (1894), 50, no. 235. S. XV. Venice, S. Marc. X. 148. Paper. A miscellaneous ms having on f. 10 "Notanda in libris M. T. C. Philippicarum, De Natura Deorum, De Divinatione." G. Valentinelli, Bibl. mss. ad Marci Venetiarum, 4 (1871), 102. 163 S. XV. Vienna, φ Parchment. Quarto. 130 folia. 146 De Natura Deorum (ff. 1-87), De Legibus. Once owned by Iohannes Sambucus (1531-1584). S. Endlicher, Cat. Codd. philol. Lat. Bibl. Palat. Vindob. (1836), 30, no. Ix. S. XV. Washington, Folger Shakespeare Library, SM 9. Parchment. 23 X 17 cm. 156 folia. De Legibus, De Natura Deorum, De Divinatione, De Fato, Timaeus, Somnium Scipionis, Académica I. An elegant and well-preserved ms, written in Italy, probably about 1460, and sent from Rome in 1715 by J. F. von Uffenbach to Zach. Conrad von Uffenbach, whose bookplate it bears (cf. A. Mai, Cat. Bibl. Uffenbachianae [at Frankfurt] (1720), 222, no. IV. 161). It came into the possession of Henry Allen (Alanus), of Dublin, probably after 1839 (since it is not used in his ed. of the De Div. in that year),

80

INTRODUCTION

and from him to his son, Capt. Samuel Allen. It was sold (30 Jan., 1920) to T. Thorpe, who sold it (March, 1920) to W. T. Smedley of London. From his collection it was bought about 1924 by Henry Clay Folger, and by him was left to the Folger Shakespeare Library. It has been collated by J. S. Reid and J. B. Mayor (cf. Mayor, ed. of N.D. 1 (1880), lxx; he calls it U). Probably not identical with the S. XIV parchment quarto Cod. Uffenbachianus which belonged to Hartmann and F. Creuzer (who used it in his ed. of the N.D. (1818), calling it G ; see pp. xiv-xv) and which was collated for editions by Goerenz and Moser, though it contains the same works which that ms did. K. Halm, ed. of Acad. (1862), 56; J. B. Mayor, I.e.·, J. S. Reid, ed. of Acad. (1885), 64; O. Plasberg, ed. min. of Acad. (1922), xvii, n. 6; S. De Ricci and W. J. Wilson, Census of med. and reti. MSS in the U.S. and Canada, 1 (1935), 443. S. XV. Wolfenbüttel, Cod. Augusteius 22,7. Parchment. 21 χ 13.5 cm. 124 folia. De Natura Deorum (ff. l r -112'), De Fato. Given by Carolo Dati to Ν. Heinsius. O. von Heinemann, Die HSS d. her^ogl. Bibl. zu Wolfenbüttel, 2, 4, (1900), 312, no. 3261. S. XV ex. London, Brit. Mus. Harleianus 4662. Parchment. 173 folia. De Natura Deorum (ff. 1-106), De Divinatione, fragment of Macrob. Sat., Paradoxa. Written in Italy. It contains an argument to the N.D. and a fragment of an argument to the De Div. not found in the editions. Cat. of the Harl. Coll. of MSS ... in the Brit. Mus. 2 (1759), no. 4662; Cat. of the Harl. MSS in the Brit. Mus. 3 (1808), 186-187; H. Allen, ed. of N.D. (1836), vii; J. H. Swainson ap. J. B. Mayor, ed. of N.D. 1 (1880), 46 (who calls it L, and whose collations of it are given by Mayor); J. F. Lockwood in CI. Quart. 33 (1939), 153-154. S. XV ex. London, Brit. Mus. Harleianus 5114. Parchment. Folio. De Legibus, Lucullus, De Natura Deorum, De Divinatione, De Officiis. Written in Italy. Cat. of the Harl. Coll. of MSS ... in the Brit. Mus., 2 (1759), no. 5114; Cat. of the Harl. MSS in the Brit. Mus. 3 (1808), 247; H. Allen, ed. of N.D. (1836), vii: "facile crediderim, hunc etiam ex impresso libro descriptum esse"', J. H. Swainson ap. J. B. Mayor, ed. of N.D. 1 (1880), 46 (who calls it M, and whose collations of it are given by Mayor). S. XV ex. Rome, Bibl. Angelica 1511 (V. 3. 18). Paper. Quarto. Ff. 1-101 contain excerpts from the orations, De Natura Deorum, De Divinatione, De Fato, Académica. E. Narducci, Cat. Codd. mss in Bibl. Angelica (olim Coenobii S. Augustini in Urbe), 1 (1893), 652. S. XV/XVI. Paris, Bibl. Nat. Lat. 2243 (de la Vallière). De Natura Deorum (alone?). Handsomely written, but with many errors. G. H. Moser and F. Creuzer, ed. of N.D. (1818), xiv. S. XVI. Rimini, D. Π. 11. "De Natura Deorum Libri IV". G. Mazzatinti, Invent, dei mssti delle bibl. d'Italia,

2 (1892), 144.

S. XVII. London, Brit. Mus. Sloane 3861. De Natura Deorum, excerpts (ff. 26Τ-29Γ). E. J. L. Scott, Index to the Sloane MSS in the Brit. Mus. (1904), 111.

INTRODUCTION

81

For the following mss I lack precise information as to date. Cambridge, Bibl. pubi. 93. De Senectute, De Natura Deorum, De Divinatione, De Fato, Académica. E. Bernard, Cat. Libr. mss Angl, et Hibern. 1, 3 (1697), 167, n. 2273, 93; P. Deschamps, Essai bibliogr. (1863), 145. Florence, Bibl. Fratrum Minorum Cesenae (olim Malatestinus). De Natura Deorum. P. Deschamps, Essai bibliogr. (1863), 137. Florence, Bibl. S. Mariae. De Natura Deorum. Written at Naples by Marino Tomacello. P. Deschamps, Essai bibliogr. (1863), 135. Milan, Ambrosianus 0.209. sup. Paper. De Natura Deorum, De Fato. I owe this reference to Dr. J. P. Elder. P. Deschamps, Essai bibliogr. (1863), 140, states that there are five codices of the N.D. in the Ambrosian Library. Milan, Ambrosianus. Parchment. Quarto. De Natura Deorum. In the Index Libr. Bibl. B. Caroli (in Cod. Ambros. I. 112. inf.) it is noted as among the books of S. Carlo Borromeo : "De Natura Deorum ex pergamene. Vol. I in 4° ". A. Saba, La bibl. di S. Carlo Borromeo = Fontes Ambrosianae, 12 (1936), 58. Naples, Bibl. Olivetanorum. De Natura Deorum. P. Deschamps, Essai bibliogr. (1863), 114. Rome, Vat. Palatinus 1900. De Natura Deorum (alone?). Dr. J. P. Elder writes (1939): "undated; and cannot locate the item in Invent. Cat.—did not try to examine." Rome, Vat. Reginensis Lat. 1473. De Natura Deorum (alone?). Dr. J. P. Elder has told me of the existence of this ms. Rome, Vat. Reginensis Lat. 1481. De Natura Deorum (alone?). Dr. J. P. Elder has told me of the existence of this ms. The following mss are cited by older editors. „Codices Elienses." J. Davies (3 ed. of N.D. (1733), iv-v) observes that John Moore, late Bishop of Ely, had given him the use of a copy of the edition of Stephanus (1539) with marginal collations of two mss which he cites as Eliensis primus and Eliensis secundus. On the history of these (and of an Eliensis tertius which Davies used for the Tusculans) cf. J. H. Swainson in Journ. of Philol. 5 (1873), 152; J. B. Mayor in Academy, 17 (1880), 86-87 (and ed. of N.D. 1 (1880), lxvii-lxix); A. S. Pease, ed. of Div. 2 (1923), 619. These mss are not in the remains of Bishop Moore's library, which came to the University of Cambridge in 1715. One or more of them Davies cites for the De Natura Deorum, De Divinatione, Tusculans, and De Legibus. „Codex Meadianus," a parchment ms lent to J. Davies by Dr. Richard Mead; cf. Davies's 2 ed. of De Div. (1730), iv; id., 3 ed. oí N.D. (1733), v. Davies considered the ms to be about 300 years old, and used it for the De Natura Deorum, De Divinatione, Tusculans, and De Legibus. Cf. J. Β. Mayor, ed. of N.D. 1 (1880), lxvii; lxx; A. S. Pease, ed. of Div. 2 (1923), 614. 6

82

INTRODUCTION

London, Cod. Regius, belonging to St. James's. Parchment. The order of the works is uncertain, but it contained at least De Natura Deorum, De Legibus (to the middle of Book 2), Académica, De Divinatione, De Fato. R. Bentley, in April, 1694, offered to send to J. G. Graevius variant readings ex duobus vetustissimis codicibus ex Bibliotheca Regia Sancti Jacobi, but whether they were sent is uncertain. J. Davies (3 ed. of N.D. (1733), v) says that Bentley mihi copiant fecit. These mss seem not to be in D. Casley's Cat. of the MSS of the King's Library (1734), and when the King's Library was moved to the British Museum in 1752 they apparently did not go with it. It has been suggested that they may have been injured or destroyed by fire at Abingdon House in 1731 (cf. J. H. Monk, Life of Bentley, 2 (1830), 308); see J. B. Mayor in Academy, 17 (1880), 87 (and his ed. of N.D. 1 (1880), lxix; on p. lxxi he speaks of one such codex as now lost). „Cod. Norimbergensis prior." With all the De Natura

Deorum.

„Cod. Norimbergensis alter." The De Natura Deorum in fragmentary form. These two were used by G. H. Moser and F. Creuzer in their ed. of the N.D. (1818), XV, with the collations of K. F. Rinck. A "perantiquus Sigonii liber" is occasionally cited by Manutius; cf. Piasberg-Ax, ed.2 (1933), xi. COMBINATIONS WITH OTHER WORKS

37. If we summarize the results of the preceding list, omitting mere collections of excerpts and also mss for the complete contents of which we lack adequate data, it will be seen that the De Natura Deorum does not appear alone until S. X I V (one case) and S. X V (seven cases), while later mss and those of uncertain date account f o r four more cases. Philosophical works appearing with this naturally most often include its pendants, the De Divinatione and the De Fato, the former in 65 mss (43 in S. X V alone), the latter in 46 (28 in S. X V ) . These are followed, in order of frequency, by the Académica (or parts), Timaeus, and De Legibus (each in 30 mss), the De Officiti (26), Tusculans (25), Paradoxa (20), De Senectute (18), De Finibus (17), De Amicitia and Somnium Scipionis (each 14), and Topica (6). The De Divinatione, De Fato, Académica, Timaeus, De Legibus, Paradoxa, and Topica are found in combination with the De Natura Deorum f r o m the time of our earliest extant mss, these eight appearing in Codd. Voss. 84 ( A ) , Voss. 86 (Β), and Marcianus 257 (F), but not again recurring complete in this precise combination, though sometimes approximating it. 1 The De Finibus and Tusculans seem not to combine with the De Natura Deorum until S. XIII, and the De Amicitia, De Senectute, and Somnium Scipionis not before S. X I V . 1 Cf. p. 58, above, for of an eight-treatise corpus. study of the combinations nian works—philosophic,

the theory A detailed of Cicerooratorical,

rhetorical, and epistolary—in extant mss might throw sòme useful light upon the use and vogue of the different works at various dates.

INTRODUCTION

83

RELATION OF THE MANUSCRIPTS

38. However far removed these mss may be from Cicero's autograph copy, their close resemblance to one another is observable in their common errors, in certain transpositions—especially in the second book—, and particularly in their common lacunae, such as those at 1, 25; 1, 65; 1, 85; 2, 118; 2, 123; 2, 137; 3, 13; 3, 42; 3, 63; 3, 65. Under errors may be mentioned, from Book 1 alone, some 27 points at which it has seemed necessary to replace the readings of these mss by those of deteriores1 employed by earlier—usually sixteenth century—editors, and 34 more at which readings attested by no mss at all must be admitted by emendation. Among the lacunae particularly notable is that at 3, 65, commonly suspected of being the work of a Christian reader of the archetype, who tore out quaternions containing the more destructive parts of the sceptic criticism of the theistic arguments of Balbus, which perhaps supplied the basis for Augustine's view of Cicero as atheistic; cf. C.D. 4, 30; 5, 9. Since this lacuna begins and ends in the middle of sentences, it is likely that quaternions were torn out of an already completed text rather than that the copyist, in writing it, omitted distasteful portions. That the archetype of our mss may have been written in rustic capitals is suggested by such a passage as 1, 59, where ACPNO read acciderat but Β has accidebat, a confusion of b and r less likely to occur in minuscules.2 Further, since Arnobius, Lactantius,3 and the Verona Scholia to Virgil (S. IV?) evidently possessed intact copies—for it is to them that we owe our scanty remains of the contents of the great lacuna at 3, 65—it is clear that mutilation could not have occurred earlier than the fourth century. At some time between that date and our earliest mss in the ninth or tenth century the hitherto rather unified tradition diverges somewhat into groups, the earliest representatives of which are A (S. IX-X), V (S. IX), and Β (S. X). These hardly differ sufficiently in their readings to be considered as separate families, yet they contain various transpositions due to external accidents which put into one column the groups headed by A and V and into another that headed by 1

E.g., in 1, 68, where these mss read quia, though quod is plainly demanded by the sense and has been employed by the Roman and Venice editions from corrected deteriores, the error probably arose from confusion of very similar abbreviations for quod and quia ; cf. A. Cappelli, Dizionario di abbrev. lat. ed ital. (1929), 302.

2

Cf., however, O. Plasberg, ed. mitt. of Cic. Acad. (1922), xxiv; also P. Schwenke [Class. Rev. 4 (1890), 347), who thinks that the archetype was written in a minuscule hand, probably in Gaul, with which some of its best descendants {ABF) are definitely associated. But see also n. 9, p. 55, above. 3 Cf. p. 55, above.

84

INTRODUCTION

Β.1 The agreement of AVB 2 —and where V fails, as in all of Book 1, of its descendants Ν and O—furnishes our most probable approach to the reading of the archetype (Q).3 When the large groups differ, it seems likely that the tradition of A and V (with such others as conform to them) is generally superior to that of B, and both C. F. W. Müller 4 and A. Lörcher5 would go farther and recognize V as our best ms in respect of age and worth (save for its large lacunae), rather than B, to which O. Dieckhoffβ and O. Plasberg 7 attach superior importance. Also notable are the close affinities of a group designated by Plasberg as C,s the members of which are Η and D of the eleventh and G of the thirteenth century, all deriving, as Plasberg 9 observes, from the same copy of the archetype as AV, but showing less reliability than those mss. The same is true of Ρ (S. X), a codex (copied from B, according to P. Schwenke in CI. Rev. 4 (1890), 349), which has suffered many accidents, and rarely 10 is our sole evidence for an obviously correct reading. ACPNO are often closely related; cf. the omission of quasi corpus aut quid sit at 1, 71. Ν and O, of the twelfth century, are closely related 11 descendants of V, after it had undergone the corrections of V2, but 0 1 2 is much more inaccurate in all respects than Ν. Τ (S. XII-XIII) is very closely related to Ν and slightly less so to O. F {S. X) is a carefully written copy of B,13 after thatms had been corrected by 2?2,14 and from B, 1 A. Lörcher {Burs. Jahresb. 208 (1926), 37) finds in these transpositions no convincing evidence that Β belongs to a different family from AV, and thinks (p. 34) that Plasberg was unjustified in equating it in value with A + V. 2 Cf. Lörcher, op. cit., 38. 3 Called ¡¿ by A. C. Clark, The Descent of Manuscripts (1918), 341-355. 1 Neue Jahrb. 10 (1864), 144. 6 Op. cit., 34; cf. Müller, op. cit., 145; J. S. Reid in Journ. of Philol. 17 (1888), 295; 302. 8 De Cic. Lib. de N.D. recensendis (1895), who remarks (p. 45): puto, etsi B1 paulo inferioris quam A aetatis sit, tarnen ß, unde originem duxit, vetustiorem priusque ex archetype codicum nostrorum omnium derivatum esse quam α, ex quo ACPV fluxerunt. 7 Ed. min. of Académica (1922), xxiv. 8 To be distinguished from the codex which Mayor et al. call C, which is Heins. 118 (Plasberg's H). • Ed. min. χ.

E.g., 1, 65: doce-, 3, 90: λ mpotibus— both rather obvious corrections demanded by the readings of the other mss at these points. 11 For VO cf. P. Schwenke in Burs. Jahresb. 76 (1898), 228. Yet the blocks omitted by Ν iti 1, 34; 1, 85; 1,105-106 (of 46, 93, and 65 letters, respectively) bear little relation to those omitted by O at 1,29 (59 letters) and 1, 70 (32 letters) as evidence for Ν and O having derived from a common immediate source. 12 Though responsible for the accepted reading varietasque at 2, 158. 13 I.e., for the N.D. 14 Out of many examples cf. 1, 1, where BZFM insert ut\ in 1, 12, F omits a whole line of Β (so at 2, 81 ; cf. C. H. Beeson in CI. Philol. 40 (1945), 215); in 1, 58, FM agree with B2 in reading crasso and dilucide; at 1, 62, where Bi adds deorum above F copies it but in the wrong order. Beeson (op. cit., 206) thinks A and Β were in the same library and were corrected by the same hand ( A W ) before the copying of F.

85

INTRODUCTION

with intermixtures from other sources, is descended M. 1 Since Β is at most points available, the importance of F and M is correspondingly diminished. The calculations of A. C. Clark,2 on the basis of omitted or transferred units, as to the length of lines, number of lines in a column, and number of columns on a page in the originals of our mss and in their archetype, j2, lead him to suggest 3 that Q had the equivalent of 13 1/2 lines of Teubner text to a column, and hence 27 to a page, about 54 to a folium, and about 430 to a quaternion. On the possible date of jg see n. 9, p. 55, above. Most editors have not attempted to publish a stemma of the mss above noted, but Mayor in his edition 4 provides one which is somewhat inadequate for our purposes, since it omits several codices, adds several unimportant fifteenth-century ones, and employs sigla conflicting with those in modern use. With much hesitation I subjoin a stemma modified in these (and some other) respects from that of Mayor.

V (ix)

B(x)

A (ix-x)

P(x) Γ D (xi) Ν (xii)

I H (xi) M (xi)

πρ(χ) Hadoardus (x)

O (xii)

(xii-xiii)

G (xiii)

1 In 1, 51, Β omits nearly a line of text, which Β 2 adds in the margin and which F incorporates in its text, but which M omits, indicating that it may derive from a ms copied from Β at an earlier date than F. So in 1, 52, W read gubernat, B*F gubernet. Yet in 1, 57, B1F have dicam, B2M ducam. Dieckhoff (op. cit., 55) thinks many of the changes in

B 2 are by the corrector himself. Cf. also J. S. Reid, op. cit., 302; Piasberg, ed. min. xi; A. Lörcher in Burs. Jahresb. 208 (1926), 35. 2 The Descent of Manuscripts (1918), 324-363. 3 P. 328. 4 3 (1885), xliii.

86

INTRODUCTION TESTIMONIA

39. Testimonia—chiefly patristic 1—quoted in the apparatus and notes, at times are helpful as supporting one or another reading, yet play no large part in reconstructing the text, because, like many prose works, the N.D. was more often quoted freely than verbatim. On the excerpts of Hadoardus cf. pp. 57-58, above; Plasberg (ed. min. xi), following Schwenke (CI. Rev. (1890), 349), would derive these from the text of codex F. ORTHOGRAPHY

40. Since the purpose of this edition is primarily exegetical rather than textual, and since ample materials upon ms readings are furnished by Plasberg, very fully in his editto maior (1911), more crisply in his editto minor (1917) and its revision by Ax (1933), it seems needless to burden the apparatus criticus with a terminal moraine of rejected and often meaningless variants and inept or superfluous conjectures. I have, accordingly, omitted the readings amply furnished by J. H. Swainson in J. B. Mayor's edition from the mss in British libraries, since they have little importance for the establishment of the text, and not a few of the variants of Plasberg and Ax, admitting, however, some voces rtihili and other unacceptable readings which yet seem to offer possible evidence in regard to the independence or the relations of the mss here employed. Omitted, moreover, are the common confusions of e, ae, and oe (save where -que has been deliberately corrected to quae or quae to -que), those of ci and ti followed by a vowel, of -i and -ti in the genitive singular of the second declension,2 of -es and -is in accusatives of the third declension, of final d and t (e.g., baud, haut, hau), most cases of the presence or absence of an initial aspirate (e.g., (h)arena), variants in the superlative (e.g., -issumus, -issimus),3 in the dative and ablative plural of hie, is,4 idem, and deus, and, finally, in a few other words of notorious orthographic instability, such as intellego (-¿go) and ret(t)ulit. Confronted 1 A . Souter {CI. Rev. 14 (1900), 264) compares the quotations of N.D. in A u g . Ep. 1 1 8 with Mullet's text, but comes to no definite conclusion about the type of Ciceronian text used by Augustine. 2 Cf. R. Kühner-F. Holzweissig, Ausf. Gram. d. lot. Spr. I 2 (1912), 452-453. 3 Note the conflicting evidence, for

example, of Varrò ap . Isid. Etym. 1, 27, 1 5 ; Quintil. Inst. 1, 7, 2 1 ; Vel. Long. De Orthogr. {Gram. Lot. 7, 49 K.). 4 Cf. H. Ziegel, De is et hic Pronom, quatenus confusa sint apud Antiques (1897). T. Birt {Beri, philol. Wocb. 38 (1918), 547-548) disagrees—rightly, I think— with Plasberg on the datives and ablatives plural of hie and is.

INTRODUCTION

87

by that bite noire of editors, the assimilation or non-assimilation of prepositional prefixes,11 have perhaps fallen back too much, where codices differ, upon a rule of thumb, but have comforted myself with the counsel of Lucilius,2 atque accurrere scribas dne an c non est quod quaeras eque labores. Greek words I have regularly printed in the Greek alphabet, though the mss as regularly write them in Latin letters.3 For the spelling of foreign proper names I have given what some readers will consider an unnecessary fulness of variants,4 for it is not always clear how they should be Latinized. APPARATUS CRITICUS

41. To preserve by quotation or reference a farrago of needless and often ill-considered conjectural emendations has seemed neither a kindness to the reader nor a discriminating compliment to their authors. Let it not be supposed, however, from the silence of the apparatus criticus that the editor has not weighed, before rejecting, a large and painful number of such solutions for difficulties real or imaginary. Not a few, in fact, will be found discussed in the exegetical notes. Of the 113 definitely identified and the 17 additional uncertain mss noted in section 36 above those selected for particular consideration in this edition are the following: A (IX-X), V (IX), Β (X), F (Χ), Ρ (Χ), Η (XI), D (XI), M (XI), Ν (XII), O (XII), occasionally Τ (ΧΙΙ-ΧΙΙΙ), and G (XIII), all which save G I have examined in photographic reproductions, Λ and Η in the complete facsimiles published 1 As has been done by Plasberg; cf. his ed. min., xiii. In Schwenke's collation {CI. Rev. 4 (1890), 351-355) are good remarks on the spelling of the mss he has examined. Mayor's view (vol. 1, lxiii) preferring the spelling "which is least of a novelty to English readers" is artlessly frank 1 2 375-376 Marx (393-395 Warmington). Cic. Orat. 158 testifies to the use of both assimilated and unassimilated forms; the Lex Iulia Municipalis of 45 B.C. (C.I.L. 1, 206 = Dessau 6085) shows such collocations as commutatae conrectaeque, and tuendam and tuemdam in the same line, yet, in general, prefers unassimilated forms, e.g., adtributionem,

inmortalium, conmode, etc. The anonymous poem De Aug. Be!!. Aegypt. (P.L.M. 1, 214-220) exhibits in the papyrus adsidu-, opsessus and opsidione, exsgus, inlta, effondere, and nridns. L. A. Constans, in his edition of Cicero's Epp. 1 (1934), 43, well remarks: "La notion d'une règle rigide de l'orthographie est une notion moderne." 3 On this subject cf. W. Nieschmidt, Quatenus in Scriptura Romani Litteris Graecis usi sunt (1913). 4 P. Salmon, La révision de la Vulgate (1937), 14, states that the Biblical revisers have found as many as 29 ms spellings for a single proper name!

88

INTRODUCTION

by O. Piasberg, the others in photostats secured through a grant from the Humanities Fund of Harvard University, and eventually to be deposited in the Harvard College Library. Though copies naturally do not permit such detailed discrimination of different hands as is attempted by Plasberg after his scrutiny of the actual mss, this loss is offset, to some degree, by their greater availability for repeated consultation and verification, and it has in this way been possible to correct various omissions and errors in the apparatuses of Plasberg and Ax and in the collations of other scholars. That additional errors, however, have not during the process crept into my own apparatus is more than human pride has a right to expect. A noteworthy collation of ABFHMPV has been made by P. Schwenke,1 and one of the British mss—mostly late, but including D and O—by J. H. Swainson.2 Other late mss may, of course, derive from originals earlier than those listed above, and almost as exciting as the discovery of a lost decade of Livy would be that of a codex with authentic material from the great lacuna in N.D. 3, 65. Till such is found, however, the mss just noted will necessarily form the basis of our texts,3 and philologists' next step is to trace their probable relations to one another and to their archetype. EDITIONS

42. The difficulties in compiling an accurate list of editions and translations of the De Natura Deorum are considerable, since it usually appears, either in editions of the complete works or, less often, with one or more of the other philosophical works, and in the case of complete editions our various bibliographical helps 4 are often incomplete and frequently 1 Class. Rev. 4 (1890), 347-355; 401404 ; 454-457; 5 (1891), 12-17; 143-146; 200-205 ; 302-305; 408-412; 458-461. a In the three volumes of Mayor's edition (1880-1885): 1, 49-64; 2, 293319; 3, 41-58. 3 O. Plasberg (ed. min. (1917), xi) states that he has examined a large part of the mss of S. XIII-XV, and has learned of others from editors. 1 There may be here noted—to be cited hereinafter merely by the names of the authors—E. Harwood, Λ View of the various Edd. of the Gr. and Rom. Classics* (1790); L. F. T. Hain, Repertorium bihliographicum (1826-1838); T. F. Dibdin, Intr. to the Know!, of Edd. of the Classics1 (1827); J. W. Moss, Man. of cl.

Bibliogr. I a (1837); J. C. Brunet, Man. du libraire, 25 (1861); W. Engelmann-E. Preuss, Bibl. Script, cl? (1880-1882); M. Pellechet, Cat. ge'n. des ineunab. des bibl. pubi, de France (1897-1909); R. Proctor, Index to the early printed Books in the Brit. Mus. (1898) and suppl. (18991902); W. A. Copinger, Suppl. to Hain's Repertorium bibliogr. (1895-1902); R. Klussmann, Bibl. Script, cl. (1903-1913); Cat. of Books printed in the XV Cent, now in the Brit. Mus. (1908-1935); Gesamtkat. d. Wiegendrucke (1925-1938); A. C. Klebs, Ineunab. scient, et med. (1938); M. Β. Stillwell, Ineunab. in Am. Libraries (1940). More specifically devoted to Cicero is P. Deschamps, Essai bibl. sur M. T. Cic. (1863)—a careless and exasperating

INTRODUCTION

89

conflicting in statements, especially in regard to dates and to the number of volumes. 1 The following catalogue, therefore, can by no means be considered as proof against error. Editions here cited without qualification are to be understood as containing the complete works. Mere chrestomathies are disregarded. Editions and translations marked with an asterisk (*) I have used or inspected. 1471. Rome. Conrad Sweynheym and Arnold Pannartz. Folio. 2 v. (sometimes bound as one), vol. 1 of 27 April, vol. 2 of 20 Sept. The editio princeps of the whole body of Cicero's philosophical works. The De Natura Deorum is in 2, ff. l r -48\ Cf. Hain, 5231; Dibdin, I 4 , 447; Moss, l 2 , 335-336; Brunei, 25, 14; Pellechet, 3766; Proctor, 3320; Brit. Mus. Cat. 4, 13; Gesamtkat. 6883; StillwelJ, 144. 1471. Venice. Vindelinus de Spira. Published by Gaignat and Duc de la Valière (according to Harwood, 212). Quarto. One vol. 186 folia. Contains the De Natura Deorum (ff. 5r-65v), De Divinatione, De Fato, De Legibus, Académica·, Laetus, De Re militari-, and a life of Cicero. Additions by Raphael Iovenzonius. P. Deschamps, Essai bibliogr. 95-96, says: "Ce fut sur les manuscrits retrouvés et transcrits par Nicolas Niccoli qu'elle fut exécutée par l'imprimeur allemand, sous la direction de Raphael Jovenzonius, et non pas, comme on aurait pu le supposer, d'après l'édition collective des Opera philosophica, imprimée à Rome la même année." Hain, 5334; Moss, l 2 , 336-337; Brunet, 2 5 , 24; Copinger, Suppl. 1, 5334; Klebs, 276, 1; Pellechet, 3671; Proctor, 4030; Brit. Mus. Cat. 5, 138; Gesamtkat. 6902; Stillwell, 147. (Cf. 1499). 1475? Without indication of place, printer, or date, but supposed to date about 1475 (Dibdin, l 4 , 451, η.). 144 folia. Listed by Hain (1, 5230) as containing Académica, De Legibus, De Officiis, De Senectute, De Amicitia, Paradoxa, De Fintbus, Tusculans, De Natura Deorum, De Divinatione, De Fato, Timaeus·, Arati, Phaenom. 1490. Milan. Folio. A collection of the rhetorical and philosophical works, according to Hain (1, 5095), who does not make clear whether our work is included. 1494 (18 Mar.). Venice. Cristofer de Pensis de Mandello (Cristoforo Pincio). Folio. De legibus, Académica, De Divinatione, De Natura Deorum (ff. 57Γ-86Τ), De Finibus, De Petitione Consulatus, De Fato, Timaeus, Somnium Scipionis. Hain, 5340; Pellechet, 3791; Brit. Mus. Cat. 5, 469; Gesamtkat. 6904; Stillwell, 147. work; also the bibliography repeated by the Delphin edition (1819-1830) from the Bipontine edition of 1780-1787 (vol. 1 (1780), pp. lxxxi-ci enlarged from J. A. Fabricius, Bibl. Lat., as revised by J. A. Ernesti in 1773, and listing 83 previous editions). Various library catalogues and numerous European lists of secondhand books have also been scrutinized, as well as the bibliographies in the Bibliotbeca philol. class., and J. Marouzeau's L'année philologique. The bibliography in

my edition of the De Divinatione, 2 (1923), 620-634, has been closely followed at many points. 1 Peculiar methods of binding have often gained an apparent but fictitious bibliographic importance. Further, the dates of reprints, especially of stereotyped editions, are subject to great irregularity, since the different volumes of a set, because of varying demands for different parts, pass out of print (and so require reprinting) at very unequal intervals.

90

INTRODUCTION

*1494 (10 Dec.). Bologna. At the press of Benedictus Hector (Faelli) of Bologna. Folio. De Natura Deorum (ff. 5Γ-38ν), De Finibus, De Legibus. Hain, 5335; Pellechet, 3672; Proctor, 6628; Copinger, 5335; Brit. Mus. Cat. 6, 842; Gesamtkat. 6906; Stillwell, 147. A handsomely printed edition. 1495. Reggio d'Emilia. Bazalerius de Bazaleriis. Folio. De Natura Deorum. Hain, 5332. (Cf. 1498). 1496 (18 Sept.). Venice. Per Symonem Papiensem dictum Biuilaqua. FolioContains De Finibus, De Natura Deorum (ff. 101Γ-130Τ), De Divinatione, De Legibus» Académica, De Fato, Timaeus, Somnium Scipionis. Hain, 1, 5232; Proctor, 5399; Copinger, 5232; Brit. Mus. Cat. 5, 521; Gesamtkat. 6905; Stillwell, 147. •1498. Reggio d'Emilia. Bazalerius de Bazaleriis (also spelled Bazelerius de bazeleriis), of Bologna. Folio. Part I with the N.D. (ff. 3r-32r—not numbered) in 1498; other parts with De Divinatione, De Fato, De Legibus, Académica, De Disciplina militari, in 1499; Part 5, with the De Finibus, etc., by Caligula de Bazaleriis at Bologna, 1499. Hain, 5336; Proctor, 7258 A; 6619 A; Brit. Mus. Cat. 6, 837; 7, 1092; Gesamtkat. 6903; Klebs, 276, 2; Stillwell, 148. (Cf. 1495). 1498-1499. Milan. Alexander Manutianus. Folio. 4 vols. The etlitio princeps of Cicero's complete works. Vol. 4, containing the philosophical works and the fragments, appeared in 1499, with 8 + 172 folia. Harwood, 161; Hain, 5056; Dibdin, l 4 , 389-391; Moss, l 2 , 285-288; Brunet, 26, 6; Deschamps, 49; Cat. gén. des incun. des bibl. pubi, de France, 2 (1905), 3583. (1521-1525). 1499. Place, editor, and publisher not stated. Folio. Contains De Natura Deorum, De Divinatione, De Fato, De Legibus, De Disciplina militari. Perhaps a reprint of the 1471 Venice edition? Or of 1498? Hain, 5336. •(After 1500? Magdeburg?). Folio. 61 folia. De Natura Deorum only. Black letter, with occasional variants printed in the margin. One word (άσοματον (sic) in 1, 30) in Greek letters, possibly inserted by hand. Title-page with arms ofPfalz-Sachsen on shield quartered with arms of Sachsen, Thüringen, Pfalz-Sachsen, and Meissen. *1502-1503. Venice. Aldus. Octavo. 9 vols. The philosophical works occupy vols. 8-9, and date from 1523. After the death of Aldus in 1515, when only the libri oratorii had been completed, the remainder was published by his father-in-law, Franciscus Asulanus, who employed Andreas Naugerius to superintend a great part of it. Contains De Natura Deorum (vol. 9, ff. 2r-79T—Aug., 1523), De Divinatione, De Fato, Somnium Scipionis, De Legibus, Timaeus, De Petitione Consulatus. Dibdin, l 4 , 392; Moss, l 2 , 289; Brunet, 25, 16. (Cf. 1523; 1540-1546). 1507. Paris. Io. Badius Ascensius. Octavo. The Cat. of Books concerning the Gr. and La t. Classics in the central pub. libraries, Newcastle-upon-Tyne (1912), 99, cites this edition of the complete works, cum explanation J. Badii Ascensit. (Cf. 1510-1511). 1508. Venice. Petrus Marsus. Printed by Lazarus Soardus. Folio. De Natura Deorum and De Divinatione. Plasberg and Ax date this 1507; Orelli and the cat. 50 of R. Atkinson (1922) date it 1508. 1510-1511. Paris. Io. Badius Ascensius. Folio. 4 vols, the philosophical works in vol. 4, dating 1511. It seems to reproduce the 1498-1499 Milan edition (Moss, l 2 , 288; Brunet, 2\ 6; Deschamps, 50). Dibdin (l 4 , 391), in dating this 15111522, apparently confuses the Ascensiana prima and Ascensiana secunda·, the Newcastle-upon-Tyne catalogue cites a 1507 octavo edition. (1507; 1521-1525). 1520. Leipzig. Jacobus Thanner. De Natura Deorum. Moser and Creuzer's edition of N.D. (1818), xvii. 1521-1525. Paris. Io. Badius Ascensius. Published by Jehan Petit. Folio. 4 vols. The volume containing the philosophical works and based on the Aldine editions dates from 1521 (according to Moser's ed. of De Div., xxiii, and the cat. of R. C. Macmahon (1920), no. 56). Moss, l 2 , 288-289; Brunet, 25, 6. (1507; 1510-1511).

INTRODUCTION

91

•1523. See 1502-1523. 1528. Basel. Michael Bentinus. Published by A. Cratander. Folio. 3 vols. Dibdin, l 4 , 393; Moss, l 2 , 289-290; Deschamps, 51. 1534. Basel. J. Camerarius. Published by Johann Herwagen (Herwagius). Folio. 2 vols. (Moss, l 2 , 290) or 4 torn, in 2 vols. (Bipont. index), or 4 vols. (Dibdin, l 4 , 393). (1540). *1534-1537. Venice. Petrus Victorius (Vettori). Published by L. A. Junta. Folio. 4 vols., the De Natura Deorum in 4 (1536), pp. 235-307. In S. XVI several times reprinted (Deschamps, 51). The orations are in the recension of Naugerius, the other three volumes by Victorius. Graevius said that Cicero owed more to Victorius than to all later editors combined. Dibdin, l 4 , 394, n.; Brunet, 2 6 , 6. (Cf. 1538-1539; 1540; 1541; 1543-1544; 1546-1551; 1550; 1555; 1559; 1570 ff.; 1578; 1585-1587). *1538-1539. Paris. Petrus Victorius. Published by R. Stephanus (Étienne). Folio. 4 vols, (the De Natura Deorum in 4 (1538), pp. 184-240); also ia 6 torn, in 2 vols. (Brunet, 25, 7), 4 torn, in 2 vols. (Deschamps, 51), and 3 vols. (Cat. 118 of Hoepli (1898), no. 1560). A copy of the Juntine edition of 1534-1537. (Cf. 1534-1537; 1543-1544). *1540. Basel. J. Camerarius. Published by Johann Herwagen (Herwagius). Folio. 4 vols. (Moss, I a , 290) or 5 vols, in 2 (the University of Illinois copy). (Cf. 1534). 1540. Lyons. J. M. Brutus. Published by S. Gryphius (Greiff). Octavo. 9 vols. Reproduces the edition of Victorius (1534-1537). Frequently reprinted; cf. 1546-1551; 1550; 1555; 1559; 1570 ff.; 1574; 1585-1587. Dibdin, l 4 , 395. *1540-1546. Venice. P. Manutius. Octavo. 10 vols. The two volumes of philosophical works (the De Natura Deorum in vol. 2, ff. 2r-79v) were published in 1541, and (according to Brunet, 26, 16) republished in 1546, 1552, 1555-1556, 1562, 1565, each time in 2 vols, octavo, with the De Natura Deorum in vol. 2. Dibdin (l 4 , 396) also mentions a reprint of the entire work in 1569-1570. The text reproduces that of the Aldine edition of 1502-1523. (Cf. 1578-1583; 1582). 1541. Strassburg. Johann Sturm. Published by Wendelin. Octavo. ? vols. Vol. 2 contains the De Natura Deorum, De Divmatione, De Fato, Somnium Scipionis, De Le ff bus, Timaeus, De Petitione Consulatus. Based on the edition of Victorius (15341537). Later reprints in 1548, 1557, 1571, 1574, and 1578. 1543-1544. Paris. R. Stephanus (Étienne). Octavo, 9 vols, or 13 vols. (Brunet, 2\ 7, and Deschamps, 50), or 12mo, 8 vols. (Dibdin, l 4 , 397; Moss, I a , 292; Deschamps, 50). A copy of the 1538-1539 reproduction of the Juntine edition (1534-1537). The first work in which Stephanus used the Italic letter (Dibdin, I.e.-, cf. Brunet, 2 5 , 7). (Cf. 1546-1547; 1554-1555). 1543-1547. Paris. Colinaeus (Simon de Colines). 16mo. 10 vols. Brunet, 25, 7, and Deschamps, 51, date this edition 1543-1547, but Dibdin, l 4 , 397, 1543-1545. *1546. Venice. P. Manutius. Octavo. 2 vols, of the philosophical works, the De Natura Deorum in 2, ff. 2r-79v. 1546-1547. Paris. R. Stephanus. 16mo. 10 vols. (Cf. 1543-1544). 1546-1551. Lyons. J. M. Brutus. Published by S. Gryphius. 16mo. 9 vols. Brunet, 25, 7. (Cf. 1540). 1548. Strassburg. Johann Sturm. (Cf. 1541). 1550. Lyons. J. M. Brutus. Published by S. Gryphius. 12mo. 10 vols, (according to Harwood, 202). (Cf. 1540).

92

INTRODUCTION

1551. Basel. Octavo. 10 vols, (according to the Bipontine index). Mayor (ed. of N.D. 3 (1885), lxxi, mentions the Basel commentaries of Marsus and Betuleius in 1550. *1552. Venice. P. Manutius. Octavo. 2 vols., containing the philosophical works (N.D. in 2, ff. 2r-79v). (Cf. 1540-1546; 1565). 1554-1555. Carolus Stephanus. Folio. 4 torn, in 2 vols. Dibdin, l 4 , 397; Brunet, 2 s , 7; Deschamps, 50. Based on P. Manutius (1540-1546). 1555. Lyons. J. M. Brutus. Published by S. Gryphius (cf. Moss, I a , 291). (Cf. 1540). •1555-1556. Venice. P. Manutius. Octavo. 2 vols, of the philosophical works (De Natura Deorum in 2 (1555), 2r-79T). Harwood, 202, mentions a 12mo, 11-volume edition of the complete works as published by Aldus at Venice in 1555. (Cf. 1540-1546). 1557. Strassburg. Johann Sturm. (Cf. 1541). 1559. Lyons. J. M. Brutus. Published by S. Gryphius. (Cf. 1540). 1560-1568. Lyons. J. Boulierius. Apud J. Frellonium (cf. Moser's ed. of the De Div.\ Bipontine index). •1560-1562. Venice. P. Manutius. 10 vols. (2 vols, of the philosophical works with De Natura Deorum (1562), in 2, 2'-79*). (Cf. 1540-1546). •1565. Venice. P. Manutius. Octavo. 2 vols, of the philosophical works (the De Natura Deorum in 2, ff. 4'-91')· (Cf. 1540-1546; 1552). •1565-1566. Paris. Dionysius Lambinus (Denys Lambin). Published by J. de Puteo (J. du Puys), Bernard Turrisanus, and P. G. Rouille (Brunet, 2δ, 8). 4 vols. (De Natura Deorum in 4 (1565), pp. 195-254. The first of the numerous Lambinus impressions of Cicero, in spite of some bold alterations the standard sixteenthcentury edition. Brunet (25, 7) states that this contained 4 torn, in 2 vols. (cf. Moss, l 2 , 294), and was dated 1565-1566 (Deschamps, 52, says 1565-1567). (Cf. 1572-1573; 1577-1578; 1580; 1581; 1585; 1588, and the n. on that edition). 1566. Antwerp. Ioannes Loeus. 12mo. De Natura Deorum and De Divinatìone (Cat. 103 of Brentano (Chicago, 1945), 10, no. 102). 1569-1570. Venice. P. Manutius. Octavo. 10 vols. (2 vols, of the philosophical works, with the annotations of Lambinus, according to Dibdin, l 4 , 396). The Bipontine index gives this edition 9 vols. (Cf. 1540-1546). 1570 ff. Lyons. J. M. Brutus. Published by A. Gryphius. 16mo. 11 torn, in 9 vols, (cat. 50 of Burgersdijk & Niermans (1914), 6033). Doubtless the same as the Brutina editio which G. H. Moser (ed. of De Div. xxiii) dates in 1571 and Moss (I a , 291) in 1575. (Cf. 1540; 1578). 1571. Strassburg. Johann Sturm. (Cf. 1541). 1571. Florence. Victorius ed. (according to Bipontine index). 1572-1573. Paris. Lambinus. Published "apud Benenatum." Octavo. 8 torn, in 9 or 10 vols. Brunet, 2 6 , 8, states that the notes of Lambinus have been retained, but a poorer text substituted for that found in his first edition. Upon this edition, however, the later impressions of the Lambinus Cicero are based. It was superintended by the sons of Lambinus after he himself had died (Dibdin, l 4 , 398, n.). The Bipontine index lists a folio form (1573) and an octavo in 9 vols. (15731580). (Cf. 1565-1566). 1574. Strassburg. Johann Sturm. Published by J. Rihel. 2 torn, in 1 vol. contain the philosophic works (cat. 253 of Zahn & Jaensch (1913), no. 540). (Cf. 1541). •1574. Lyons. J. M. Brutus. Published by A. Gryphius. Octavo. 2 vols, of the philosophical works (the De Natura Deorum in 2, 3-143). (Cf. 1540).

INTRODUCTION

93

1577-1578. I.yons. Lambinus edition. Published by P. Santandreanus. Folio. 4 torn, in 2 vols. (cat. 50 of Burgersdijk & Niermans (1914), no. 6034). (Cf. 15651566). •1578-1583. Venice. Aldus (nepos). Folio. 10 vols. {De Natura Deorum in 9 (1583), pp. 1-90. The text is based on that of P. Manutius, but with many errors. Deschampe, 53, says that the 10 tomi were usually bound in 4 or 6 vols.; Brunet, 26, 8 says 4 or 5; the Bipontine index and Cat. 602 of J. Baer, no. 668, describe one bound in 5 vols. Brunet states that this complete edition of Cicero is merely the union of several volumes published from 1578 to 1583, and now appearing with more general title-pages; cf. Dibdin, l 4 , 398-399; S. F. W. Hoffmann, Handb. ζ• Bücherkunde (1838), 115. The edition is accompanied by a good commentary; cf. Deschamps, 53. (Cf. 1540-1546; 1582?). 1578. Lyons. J. M. Brutus. Published by A. Gryphius. Octavo. Deschamps, 51, speaks of a 1579 edition, which is perhaps a part of this. (Cf. 1670 ff.). 1578. Strassburg. Johann Sturm. Published by J. Rihel. (Cf. 1541). 1580. Paris. Lambinus edition. Dibdin, l 4 , 397. (Cf. 1565-1566). 1580. Lyons. Lambinus edition. Dibdin, l 4 , 398. (Cf. 1565-1566). *1581. Strassburg. Lambinus edition. Published by Jos. Rihel & Jac. Dupuys. Octavo. 9 vols., the De Natura Deorum in the second volume of the philosophical works, ff. 2 r -79'. Dibdin, l 4 , 398; Moser's ed. of De Div. xxiii. (Cf. 1565-1566). 1582. Venice. Manutius edition. Aldus. Folio. 4 vols. (Harwood, 202). (Cf. 15401546; 1578-1583). 1584. Geneva. Fulvius Ursinus (Fulvio Orsini). Folio. 2 vols, of the complete works (the copy in the library of the University of Illinois has 4 vols., as in the 1565-1566 edition). Notes by Lambinus and Ursinus. The Bipontine index and Dibdin, l 4 , 399, say that the notes had been published at Antwerp, and J. E. Sandys, Hist, of class. Schol. 2 (1908), 154, dates the notes of Ursinus on Cicero in 1579 f. 1584. Paris. Lambinus edition. Folio. 2 vols. (Cf. 1565-1566). 1585. London. Lambinus edition. Published by J. Jackson & E. Carpenter. Octavo. 9 vols. (Cf. 1565-1566). 1585-1587. Lyons. J. M. Brutus. Published by [A. Gryphius. Octavo. 9 vols. Deschamps, 51. (Cf. 1540). *1588. Lyons. Lambinus edition, with notes of Gothofredus (Denis Godefroy). "Sumptibus Sybillae à Porta." Quarto. 4 vols, or 4 torn, in 1 or 2 vols. De Natura Deorum in vol. 4, columns 171 (sic; it should be 271)-350. Careless in numbering of pages, etc. This reediting of Lambinus by Gothofredus had several impressions (1594; 1596; 1606; 1608; 1616; 1617; 1624; 1633; 1646; 1659-1660). (Cf. 15651566). 1588. Lyons. Folio. 2 vols. (Dibdin, l 4 , 399). With notes of former commentators, especially Lambinus. 1588. Lyons. Alexander Scot. Published by J. Pillepotte. 12mo. An edition of this date is noted by the Bipontine index and Sandys, op. cit., 2 (1908), 146. •1590. Frankfurt. Published by the heirs of Andreas Wechel. Octavo. 10 vols, in 9 (9 vols, in 8, according to cat. 50 of Burgersdijk & Niermans (1914), 6035). The De Natura Deorum is in the second volume of the philosophical works, pp. 1-111. Based on the edition of Manutius (1540-1546), "with learned notes and commentaries" (Dibdin, l 4 , 400). Reprinted in 1603; 1606; 1609. 1594. (the Bipontine index and Moss, l 2 , 294 say Geneva). Lambinus edition reedited by Gothofredus. Cat. 221 of Liebisch (1914), no. 33. (Cf. 1588).

94

INTRODUCTION

1596. Geneva. Lambinus-Gothofredus edition. Quarto. 1 vol. (cat. 358 of Basier Buch- u. Antiquariatshandlung, no. 1264), or 2 vols. (Bipontine index). (Cf. 1588). 1603. Hannover. Reprint of the Wechel edition of 1590. 12mo. *1606. Hannover. Wechel. Philosophical works. 12mo. 2 vols. "Ad Mtnutianam et Brutinam conformata". The De Natura Deorum is in vol. 2, pp. 3-179. 1606. . Lambinus-Gothofredus edition. Published by S. Chouet. Quarto. Cat. 379 of Kerler, no. 10023. (Cf. 1588). 1606. . Lambinus-Gothofredus edition. Published by P. de la Rouière. Quarto. 4 torn, in 1 vol., according to Cat. 50 of Burgersdijk & Niermans (1914), no. 6036, or folio, 4 torn, in 2 vols., according to the Bipontine index. (Cf. 1588). 1606. Frankfurt. Wechel edition. Octavo. 5 vols, according to Cat. 19 of R. Atkinson (1916), no. 332, or 10 vols., according to the Bipontine index. (Cf. 1590). 1608. Geneva. Lambinus-Gothofredus edition. Octavo. 2 vols. Cat. 42 of Bangel & Schmitt (1919), no. 2035. (Cf. 1588). 1609. Frankfurt. Wechel edition. Octavo. 8 vols. (cf. Bipontine index). (Cf. 1590). 1612. Cologne. A. Scot edition (cf. Bipontine index). (Cf. 1588). 1615-1616. Geneva. Lambinus-Gothofredus edition. Cat. 50 of Burgersdijk & Niermans (1914), no. 6037. (Cf. 1588). *1616. Cologne. Lambinus-Gothofredus edition. Published by P. de la Rouière. Folio. 4 torn, in 2 vols. (Cf. 1588). 1616. Lyons. Lambinus-Gothofredus edition. Octavo. 2 vols. (Bipontine index). (Cf. 1588). *1617. Cologne. Lambinus-Gothofredus edition. Published by P. & J. Chouet. De Natura Deorum vol. 4, cols. 271-350. Bipontine index; Cat. 358 of Basier Buch- u. Antiquariatshandlung, no. 1266, describe it as published at Geneva. (Cf. 1588). 1618. Hamburg. J. Wilhelm and J. Gruter. Published by Frobenius. Folio. 4 torn, in 2 vols. Brunet, 2 5 , 8, dates it 1618-1619. The text of Victorius corrected and annotated with the posthumous notes of Guilielmus (Wilhelm), who died in 1584, and the notes of Gruter, and "with unjustifiable strictures on the text of Lambinus" (J. E. Sandys, Hist, of class. Schol. 2 (1908), 361). Brunet, 2 5 , 8 and Deschamps, 53, think this the first edition in which the Ciceronian text was divided into chapters (yet in the 1617 Geneva edition such are found, though not in accord with our modern notation), and it served as the basis of almost all the editions of S. XVII and early S. XVIII; e.g., 1642; 1661; 1665; 1677 ff.; 16801681; 1687; 1692; 1724; 1747. 1620. Basel. 12mo. 9 vols. Bipontine index. 1624. Geneva. Lambinus-Gothofredus edition. Octavo. 1 vol. (according to cat. of Hoepli (1898), no. 1562), but 2 tomi (Bipontine index). (Cf. 1588). 1624. Paris. A. Scot edition (Bipontine index). (Cf. 1588). 1626. Geneva (?). Lambinus-Gothofredus edition. Published by H. Fetherson (Bipontine index). Octavo. 2 vols. 1627. Geneva. A. Scot edition (Bipontine index). (Cf. 1588). *1633. Geneva. Lambinus-Gothofredus edition. Published by P. & J. Chouet. Quarto. 4 torn, in 1 or 2 vols. De Natura Deorum in 4, col. 271-350. The sectionnumbers correspond to those now in use, i.e., 124 for Book 1, 168 for Book 2, and 95 for Book 3. May this be the same as the edition dated 1632 in Cat. 50 of Burgersdijk & Niermans (1914), no. 6038? (Cf. 1588).

INTRODUCTION

95

•1642. Leyden. Published by Elzevir. 12mo. 10 vols, in 9 (the De Natura Deorum in torn. 8, pp. 5-155. Based on Gruter (1618-1619), according to Brunet (25, 8). Reprinted in 1665. (Cf. 1658-1659). 1646. Geneva. Lambinus-Gothofredus edition. Published by S. Chouet. Quarto. 1 vol. (cat. 358 of Basler Buch- u. Antiquariatshandlung, no. 1265), or 4 torn, in 2 vols. (Bipontine index). Is this the same as the Lambinus-Gothofredus edition of 1646, quarto, 4 vols., , noted in cat. 379 of Kerler, no. 10024; cat. 221 of Liebisch (1914), p. 68, no. 35? (Cf. 1588). *1658-1659. Amsterdam. Published by J. Blaeu. 24mo. 10 torn, in 9 vols, (the De Natura Deorum in vol. 8, pp. 3-167). Based on the Elzevir edition of 1642? 1659-1660. Geneva. Lambinus-Gothofredus edition. Published by S. Choüet. Quarto (cat. 221 of Liebisch (1914), no. 36 also mentions an octavo Geneva edition of 1660). (Cf. 1588). 1659. Basel. Quarto edition (Bipontine index). *1660. Paris. Petrus Lescaloperius, S. J. Humanitas theologica. Published by S. Cramoisy. Folio. 712 pp. An edition of the De Natura Deorum, with prolix and often inapposite notes. See J. B. Mayor, ed. of the N.D. 3 (1885), lxxi, for judgments of this curious work. *1661. Amsterdam and Leyden. Cornelius Schrevelius (K. Schrevel). Elzevir press. Quarto. Opera omnia in 1 vol. (of 1339 pages + indexes; sometimes (as by Brunet, 2 5 , 9) counted as two, but with continuous pagination; cf. Dibdin, l 4 , 401-402. The De Natura Deorum on pp. 1111-1149. Based on Gruter's edition (16181619), with notes of Gruter and Schrevelius. Reprinted in 1687. 1661. Basel. The same, published by L. Choüet and J. A. Cramer (Bipontine index). 1665. Amsterdam. Published by L. & D. Elzevir. Quarto. 2 vols. Brunet, Suppl. 265. (Cf. 1642). 1677-1761. Amsterdam, the Hague, Oxford, and Cambridge. Variorum edition. Octavo. 21 vols. Begun in 1677 but not finished till S. XVIII. The original plan of Graevius was continued by Burman and Pearce and completed by Davies. The text is largely that of Gruter (1618-1619). Brunet, 2, 9-10; Deschamps, 54. (Cf. 1718; which may be considered a part of this work). •1680-1681. London. Thomas Gale. Published by Dunmore, Dring, Tooke, Sawbridge, and Mearne. Folio. 4 torn, in 2 vols. {De Natura Deorum in 2 (1680), pp. 404-439. According to Brunet, 2 5 , 10, a less correct impression of the Wilhelm and Gruter edition of 1618; cf. Dibdin, l 4 , 400. (Cf. 1757). *1687. Basel. C. Schrevelius. Published by L. Choüet {sic) and J. A. Cramer. Quarto. 4 vols., paged continuously, De Natura Deorum on pp. 1165-1203. (Cf. 1661). 1687. Venice. C. Schrevelius. Quarto. 4 vols. (Bipontine index). (Cf. 1661). 1689. Paris. Delphin edition. Published by C. Thiboust. Quarto. Moss, l 2 , 337338, distinguishes a genuine and a pirated form, the former (by F. Honoré) containing the Académica (86 pp.), De Finibus (172 pp.), Tusculans (196 pp.), De Natura Deorum (160 pp.), and De Officiis (55 + 32 pp.), the whole being indicated on the title-page as vol. 1; the second volume never appeared. The latter edition has the Académica (86 pp.), De Finibus (171 pp.), Tusculans (195 pp.), De Natura Deorum (59 pp.—sic; should it not be 159 pp.?); the De Of finis is missing. The former edition has each work separately paged; the second has continuous pagination. Bipontine index; Brunet, 26, 16. •1692. Leyden (Harwood, 162, says Amsterdam). After Wilhelm and Gruter (1618) by J. Gronovius. Published by P. van der Aa. Quarto. 4 torn, in 2 vols. {De Natura Deorum in 2, 1204-1246), though the Cat. 163 of W. Heffer (1917), says 11 vols.; Harwood, 202, says 12mo. in 11 vols.

96

INTRODUCTION

*1718. Cambridge (England). John Davies. University Press. Octavo. De Natura Deorum. With variorum notes and emendations by John Walker. Later editions at Cambridge in 1723; 1733; 1744; and at Oxford in 1805; 1807. (Cf. 1677-1761). •1721. Paris. L'Abbé Le Masson. Pubi, by C. Jambert. N.B. Latin with French tr. and notes. *1723. Cambridge (England). University Press. Second printing of Davies's edition. (Cf. 1718). *1724. Amsterdam. Isaac Verburgius. Published by R. & G. Wetsten. In several forms: folio, 2 vols.; quarto, 4 vols.; octavo, 11 vols., 11 vols, in 12, 12 vols., or 12 vols, in 16 (De Natura Deorum in vol. 9, pp. 2879-3107). A variorum edition, the text based on that of Gruter (1618), with notes by Victorius, Camerarius, Ursinus, Manutius, Lambinus, Guilielmus (Wilhelm), Gruter, J. F. and J. Gronovius, Graevius, et al. (Cf. 1731). 1731. Venice. Verburgius edition. Octavo. 12 vols. Bipontine index; EngelmannPreuss, 127. (Cf. 1724). 1733. Cambridge (England). Third printing of Davies's edition of 1718. University Press. Octavo. 1736 ff. Cambridge (England). John Davies. Edition of the philosophical works, Octavo. 6 vols. Not completed because of Davies's death. Cf. S. F. W. Hoffmann. Handb. χ. Bücherkunde (1838), 126-127. 1737-1739. Leipzig. J. A. Ernesti. Octavo. 6 vols, (according to Dibdin, l 4 , 403; Moss, l 2 , 296) or 5 vols, (according to others, but perhaps not reckoning the C lavis Ciceroniana). An important edition, often republished, though in less satisfactory form; cf. 1756-1757; 1774-1777; 1776-1777; 1804; 1810; 1814-1821; 1815-1817; 1816; 1819; 1820; 1820-1824; 1827. •1740-1742. Paris. Josephus Olivetus (P. J. de Thoulié, S.J.). Published by Coignard, Guérin, Desaint, & Guérin. Quarto. 9 vols. (De Natura Deorum in 2, pp. 495-651). Based on Victorius, Manutius, Lambinus, and Graevius, from whom Olivetus chose the readings which he preferred (Brunet, 2 6 , 11). The edition became more popular than it perhaps deserved, with many reprints; e.g., 1743-1746; 1745-1747; 1748-1749; 1753; 1758; 1772; 1773; 1783; 1787; 1797; 1820. Of the first edition 650 copies were printed (Brunet, 2 6 , 11; Deschamps, 55). *1741. Glasgow. R. Foulis press. 12mo. De Natura Deorum. With readings and conjectures of Boherius (J. Bouhier) and Davies. Dibdin, l 4 , 457; Moss, l 2 , 342. 1742. Padua. J. Facciolati. Octavo. 11 vols. (Cf. 1753; 1772). 1743-1746. Geneva. Olivetus edition. Published by the Cramer heirs and F. Philibert. Quarto. 9 vols. (Cf. 1740-1742). •1744. Cambridge (England). Fourth printing of Davies's edition of the De Natura Deorum of 1718. University Press. Octavo. 1744. Berlin. J. Wippel. De Natura Deorum. 12mo. 1745. London. I. P. Miller. Octavo. 4 vols, of the philosophical works. EngelmannPreuss, 151. (Cf. 1772). 1745. Cambridge (England). Zachary Pearce. De Officits and De Natura Deorum, with notes (Bipontine index). •1745-1747. Amsterdam. J. Wetsten. Olivetus edition. Quarto. 9 vols. (De Natura Deorum in 2 (1745), pp. 495-651). (Cf. 1740-1742). 1746 ff. Oxford and Cambridge. Rhetorical and philosophical works. Octavo. 9 vols, in 8. 1747. Berlin. Gruter edition. Octavo. Bipontine index; Dibdin, l 4 , 400.

INTRODUCTION

97

*1748-1749. Glasgow. Olivetus edition. Published by R. and A. Foulis. 12mo. 20 vols. (De Natura Deorum in 14 (1748), pp. 3-245). Brunei, 2 5 , 12. (Cf. 17401742). 1753. Padua. J. Facciolati. Quarto. 9 vols. Based on the Olivetus edition. Brunet, 2 5 , 11. (Cf. 1740-1742; 1742; 1772). 1756-1757. Halle. Ernesti edition. Octavo. 4 vols, in 5 or 6 parts. Dibdin, l 4 , 403, and Moss, l 2 , 296-297, date it in 1758; Brunet, 2 5 , 12, in 1757. (Cf. 1737-1739). 1757. Berlin. Copy of 1680-1681 edition (according to Bipontine index). Octavo. *1758. Geneva. Third Olivetus edition (according to title-page). Delphin edition (Engelmann-Preuss, 127). Published by Cramer Bros, (yet cf. Brunet, 2, 12). Quarto. 9 vols. De Natura Deorum in vol. 2, pp. 495-651). (Cf. 1740-1742). *1768. Paris. J. N. Lallemand. Published by Saillant, Desaint, & Barbou. 12mo. 14 vols. (De Natura Deorum in 9, pp. 129-344). The text is that of Olivetus (1740-1742), with some variants and corrections (Deschamps, 57). 1772. Berlin. Published by Haude & Spener. 4 vols, of the philosophical works, following Miller's edition (1745). Octavo. 1772. Halle. Ernesti edition. Octavo. 9 vols. (Cf. 1737-1739). 1772. Venice. J. Facciolati. Published by A. Graziosi. Quarto. 9 vols. Reproduces the Olivetus edition (1740-1742; cf. 1742). Brunet, 25, 11. *1773. Padua. Olivetus edition. Published by J. Manfrè. Octavo. 16 vols. (De Natura Deorum in vol. 5, pp. 1-196). Harwood, 203, dates this 1772. (Cf. 17401742). *1774-1777. (Leipzig and) Halle. Ernesti edition. Published "In Orphanotropheo." Octavo. 4 or 5 vols, in 5, 6, 7, or 8 parts. (De Natura Deorum in vol. 4, pt. 1, pp. 468-609). Brunet, 2 5 , 12. (Cf. 1737-1739). 1776. Padua. Olivetus edition. Octavo. 16 vols. (Cf. 1740-1742). 1776. Würzburg. Published by J. J. Stahel. Octavo. 8 vols. An inaccurate text (Bipontine index). Dibdin, l 4 , 405. (Cf. 1740-1742). 1776-1777. Leipzig. Ernesti edition. Editio minor. 5 vols. Engelmann-Preuss, 128. (Cf. 1737-1739). *1780-1787. Zweibrücken. Societas Bipontina; cf. J. E. Sandys, Hist, of class. Schol. 2 (1908), 397. Octavo. 13 vols. De Natura Deorum in vol. 11 (1781), pp. 3-170. Dibdin, l 4 , 407; Moss, I a , 299 (who dates it 1780-1791). (Vol. 1, lxxxi-ci contains a valuable catalogue of editions, referred to in this list as the "Bipontine index.") *1783. Oxford. Clarendon Press. Quarto. 10 vols., with an eleventh containing notes from the Paris edition of Olivetus. De Natura Deorum in vol. 2, pp. 397-519. Brunet, 2 5 , 12, says that this edition lacks many important features of the Olivetus edition. There are added collations of 24 Oxford and 2 York mss. Vol. 10 contains Ernesti's Clavis. (Cf. 1740-1742). 1783-1787. Leipzig. 20 torn, in 10 vols. Cat. 405 of Fock, no. 1934. 1783-1823. Mannheim. Published by Löffler. Octavo. 20 vols. (5 vols, dating from 1823, according to Engelmann-Preuss, 152). The volume containing the De Natura Deorum, De Dìvìnatione, and De Fato dates from 1823 (EngelmannPreuss, 158). 1783-1821. Paris. Olivetus edition. Quarto. 9 vols. (Cf. 1740-1742). 1787. Padua. Olivetus edition. Octavo. 16 vols. Poorly printed, according to Brunet, 25, 11. (Cf. 1740-1742). 7

98

INTRODUCTION

1790. Vienna. An edition of the philosophical works "in us. iuventut. Acad." Octavo. 2 vols. Cat. of Klincksieck (1910), no. 773; Engelmann-Preuss, 151. (Cf. 18001803). *1796. Leipzig. Etnesti edition of the De Natura Deorum, with notes by C. V. Kindervater (who in 1790 had published some German notes on our work, parts of which are here Latinized). Published by C. Fritsch. Octavo. Dibdin, 1', 459. 1797. Madrid. Olivetus edition, "operas dirigente P. I. Pereyra." Royal Press. Quarto. 14 vols. Contains also Ernesti's Clavis. Brunet, 26, 12. 1799. Braunschweig. J. C. F. Wetzel. Annotated edition of the De Natura Deorum. Octavo. 2 vols. 1800-1803. Vienna. Published by Beck. The philosophical works. Octavo. 2 vols. Engelmann-Preuss, 151. A reprint of the 1790 edition. 1802. Vienna. 16 vols. Text and German translation. Engelmann-Preuss, 127. *1804. Rotterdam. Ernesti edition. Published by Looy & van Spaan. 12mo. 3 vols. The De Natura Deorum in vol. 3, pp. 1-166. (Cf. 1737-1739). 1804. Leyden and Amsterdam. Ernesti edition. Published by Luchtmans & P. den Hengst. 12mo. 3 vols., containing the philosophical works. EngelmannPreuss, 151. (Cf. 1737-1739). •1804-1820. Halle. The philosophical works edited by R. G. Rath, reedited after his death by C. G. Schütz. Published by C. A. Kümmel. Octavo. 6 vols. The De Natura Deorum in vol. 6 (1820), pp. 3-454, with critical notes on pp. 455-550. Brunet, 2 5 , 16 (dating it 1804-1818). 1805. Oxford. John Davies. Reprinting of his edition. Dibdin, l 4 , 456; Brunet, 2 s , 10. (Cf. 1718). 1806. Magdeburg. Hulsemann. De Natura Deorum. Dibdin, l 4 , 460-461. 1807. Oxford. John Davies. Octavo. Reprinting of his edition. (Cf. 1718). 1807. Nürnberg. Riegel & Wiessner. 12mo. Edition of the De Natura Deorum. *1810. Oxford. Ernesti edition. Published by Collingwood & Co. Octavo. 4 torn, in 7 vols., with the Clavis in an eighth volume. De Natura Deorum in vol. 6, pp. 396-514. Brunet, 2\ 13. (Cf. 1737-1739). 1811. Helmstadt. Ernesti edition, edited for schools by F. A. Wiedeburg. Edition of De Natura Deorum. Octavo. Dibdin, l 4 , 462; Moss, l 2 , 343. •1811. Bologna. P. Seraphinus ( = Hermann Heimark Cludius). De Natura Deorum (a pretended fourth book only; cf. section 29 above). Octavo. Dibdin, l 4 , 462: "an edition to be shunned, as the editor boasted to have found a fourth book") ; Moss, I a , 343. According to Brunet, 26, 25, reprinted in London, 1813. 1813. London. Seraphinus ed. (Cf. 1811). 1814-1821. Leipzig. Ernesti edition. Published by Tauchnitz. 12mo. 12 vols. (Cat. 42 of Bangel & Schmitt (1919), 2040; is this perhaps the same as the 12mo 11-volume edition of 1814-1821 noted in cat. 405 of Fock, or as the Tauchnitz 12mo 12-volume edition of 1815 if. listed by Engelmann-Preuss, or as the 24mo 13-volume edition of 1816-1822(?), with the philosophical works (1820) in vols. 10-13, of the Harvard College Library?) (Cf. 1737-1739). »1814-1823. Leipzig. C. G. Schütz. Published by G. Fleischer, Jr. Octavo. 20 torn, in 16, 20, or 28 vols. {De Natura Deorum in vol. 15 (1816), pp. 3-268). EngelmannPreuss, 128. J. E. Sandys, Hist, of cl. Schol. 3 (1908), 46, n. 4, dates this edition in 1814-1821, as does Cat. 602 of J. Baer, no. 675a; Dibdin, l 4 , 408, says 18141818; Brunet, 2 6 , 13, and the catalogue of the Harvard College Library give 1814-1823. The elaborate index extends through four volumes. Brunet considers this an ill-printed edition, marred by many conjectures.

INTRODUCTION

99

•1815-1817. Boston. Ernesti edition, published by Wells & Lilly. Octavo. 20 vols. (De Natura Deorum in vol. 15, pp. 267-460); 12mo, 32 vols, (according to Engelmann-Preuss, 128; Deschamps, 57, who dates it 1818); octavo, 16 vols. (Dibdin, l 4 , 404). On the title page: "Editto prima Americana." Erroneously thought by Dibdin (I.e.) to be the first ancient classic printed in the New World, for an edition of the De Officiti appeared at Philadelphia in 1793. (Cf. 1737-1739). »1815. Leipzig. L. F. Heindorf. Published by J. A. G. Weigel. Octavo. De Natura Deorum. J. B. Mayor, ed. of N.D. 3, lxxii, who dates this in 1817, considers this the first important edition after that of Davies. 1815 ff. Leipzig, Ernesti edition revised by C. F. A. Nobbe. Published by Tauchnitz. 16mo. 10 vols. (De Natura Deorum in vol. 9, part 28). (Cf. 1737-1739). 1816. Oxford. Ernesti edition. Octavo. 8 vols. Moss, I a , 300. (Cf. 1737-1739). •1816-1822. Leipzig. Tauchnitz. 24mo. 13 vols. (De Natura Deorum in vol. 11 (1820), pp. 113-250). 1816-1818. Paris. French translation with Latin text. Published by Fournier. Octavo. 29 vols. (Engelmann-Preuss, 128); Moss, l 2 , 361, says 26 vols, in 1818. •1818. Leipzig. G. H. Moser & F. Creuzer. Published by Hahn. Octavo. Editto maior·, after Ernesti. With variorum notes. The De Natura Deorum. 1819. London. Ernesti edition. Published by Dove (apud R. Priestley). Octavo. 8 vols. An elegant but incorrect text, according to Brunei. Moss, l 2 , 301 ; Brunet, 2 5 , 12. (Cf. 1737-1739). 1819-1830. London. Valpy's Delphin Classics. Octavo. 12 parts in 17 vols, (the philosophical works in vols. 14-16). •1820. Cf. 1804-1820. •1820. London. After Olivetus and Ernesti. Published by Rodwell & Martin. 24mo. 12 vols. (De Natura Deorum in vol. 3, pp. 204-435). "The Regent's Classics." (Cf. 1737-1739; 1740-1742). 1820-1824. Leipzig and Halle. Ernesti edition. Octavo. 5 torn, in 8 vols. Is this the same as the octavo, 10-volume 1820 edition of Halle and Berlin, mentioned by Dibdin, l 4 , 403? (Cf. 1737-1739). •1821. Leipzig. G. H. Moser, editto minor, with exegetical notes but with the textual notes largely omitted. Published by Hahn. Octavo. The De Natura Deorum only. 1821-1825. Paris. J. V. LeClerc. Published by Lefèvre. Octavo. 30 vols. Latin text and French translation. Deschamps, 106; Engelmann-Preuss, 128. (Cf. 1823-1825; 1823-1827). 1823. Mannheim. See 1783-1823. 1823-1824. Turin. Octavo. 16 vols. Cat. 602 of Baer, no. 677. 1823-1825. Paris. J. V. LeClerc (text and notes) and J. A. Amar (arguments, etc.). Published by Lefèvre. 12mo. 18 vols. Latin text and French translation. (Cf. 1821-1825; 1823-1827). 1823-1827. Paris. LeClerc edition, reprinted by A. Lequien. 12mo. 35 vols, in 36. Latin text and French translation. Engelmann-Preuss, 128. (Cf. 1823-1825). 1826-1829. Milan. F. Bentivoglio, continued by P. Marotti. Octavo. 10 vols. 1826-1838. Zürich. J. C. Orelli. Published by Fuesslin & Co. Octavo. 4 torn, in 7 or 8 vols. (De Natura Deorum in vol. 4). Later volumes (with J. G. Baiter) contained the scholiasts (1833), the Onomasticon (1833-1838), etc. A n important critical edition, using a dozen of the more valuable earlier editions. Brunet, 2®, 13-14. (Cf. 1845-1862; 1851-1858).

100

INTRODUCTION

1826 ff. Milan. Published by Bettoni. Octavo. 40 vols. Latin text and Italian translation, with notes. Engelmann-Preuss, 128. *1827. Leipzig. C. F. A. Nobbe. Published by Tauchnitz. Quarto. One vol. of the complete works (De Natura Deorum pp. 976-1011). Also 24mo. 10 vols. (De Natura Deorum in 9, pp. 1-148). (Cf. 1815 ff.). •1827-1832. Paris. J. W. Rinn, J. V. LeClerc, and N. Bouillet. Published by Ν. E. Lemaire. Octavo. 20 vols. De Natura Deorum (edited, according to EngelmannPreuss and Brunet, 2B, 13, by Bouillet), in 12 (1831), pp. 7-384. Cf. Deschamps, 57-58, who reckons 19 vols, in 5 parts. 1828. C. F. A. Nobbe. Published by Tauchnitz. 16mo. 33 vols. S. F. W. Hoffmann, Handb. ç. Bücherkunde (1838), 116. 1829. Brussels. L. Tencé. 12mo. The first three volumes of an edition of the complete works (Engelmann-Preuss, 128), but whether these included our work I have not ascertained. 1829. Munich. F. Ast. Octavo. De Natura Deorum 1, ch. 1 to 2, ch. 41. Engelmann, 431; J. Β. Mayor, ed. of N.D. 3 (1885), lxxii. 1830-1837. Paris. Panckoucke series. Octavo. 36 vols. Latin text and French translation by various hands. (Cf. 1840; 1866-1874; 1872-1892). *1830. London. Valpy. After Ernesti, with Delphin notes. Octavo. 12 vols. (De Natura Deorum in 9, pp. 795-1064) or in 17 vols. (De Natura Deorum in 15, pp. 795-994, and 16, pp. 995-1064. Brunet, 2 5 , 13. 1834. Prag. Ign. Seibt. Published by Eggenberger. Octavo. School edition of De Natura Deorum. W. Engelmann, Bib/. Scr. class. (1858), 431; J. B. Mayor, ed. of N.D. 3 (1885), lxxii. •London. Henry Allen (Alanus). Published by B. Fellowes. De Natura Deorum, with collations of six British Museum mss. 1840. Paris. Panckoucke series. Octavo. 36 vols. Latin text and French translation. (Cf. 1830-1837). 1840-1841. Paris. D. Nisard series. Dubouchet & Cie. (Didot). Octavo. 5 vols. Latin text and French translation by various hands. (Cf. 1852; 1859). *1845-1862 (1863). Zürich. J. C. Orelli, J. G. Baiter, and K. Halm. Published by Fuesslin & Co. Octavo. 4 torn, in 6 vols. De Natura Deorum (after the death of Orelli in 1849 edited by Baiter) in vol. 4, pp. 369-479, and dated on the titlepage in 1861, though the preface is dated 1862. With a useful apparatus. (Cf. 1826-1838). •1846. Philadelphia and Boston. C. K. Dillaway. Published by Perkins & Purves (Philadelphia) and B. Perkins (Boston). 12mo. 2 vols. The De Natura Deorum. With rather elementary notes. 1848-1863. Venice. Antonelli. Quarto. 9 vols. A. Pagliaini, Cat. gen. della Libreria Ital. 1 (1901), 550; cat. 421 of Fock, n. 2293. *1849-1850. Leipzig. C. F. A. Nobbe. Tauchnitz. 24mo. 11 vols, in 19 (the De Natura Deorum in vol. 9, pp. 1-159) or in 35 fascicles (the De Natura Deorum in fase. 30). (Cf. 1827). 1850. Leipzig. C. F. A. Nobbe. Tauchnitz. Quarto. 1 vol. Brunet, 2 5 , 14. (Cf. 1827; 1849-1850). *1850. Leipzig. G. F. Schoemann. Published by Weidmann. Octavo. The De Natura Deorum. An influential edition, thrice reprinted (1857; 1865; 1876). *1851-1858. Leipzig. R. Klotz. Teubner. Octavo. 6 torn, in 11 vols. The De Natura Deorum in Part 4, vol. 2 (1855), pp. 1-126. The text based chiefly on Orelli (18261838). Various reprints, e.g., 1859-1886; 1868-1872; 1879.

INTRODUCTION

101

1852. Paris. Nisard series. Octavo. 5 vols. Latin text and French translation. (Cf. 1840-1841). *1857. Leipzig. G. F. Schoemann, second edition. Weidmann. Octavo. The De Natura Deorum. (Cf. 1850). 1859. Paris. Nisard series. Published by Didot. Octavo. 5 vols. Latin text and French translation. (Cf. 1840-1841). »1859-1886. Leipzig. R. Klotz. Published by B. G. Teubner. Octavo. 5 torn, in 11 vols. (De Natura Deorum in part 4, vol. 2 (1859), pp. 1-126. (Cf. 1851-1858). •1860-1869. Leipzig. J. G. Baiter and C. L. Kayser. Published by Tauchnitz. Octavo. 11 vols. (De Natura Deorum, edited by Baiter, in 7 (1864), pp. vii-xiii; 1-122). A well-known critical edition. 1863. Naples. Octavo. Opera omnia with an Italian translation (A. Pagliaini, op. cit., 1 (1901), 550). 1864-1882. Paris. Nisard series. Published by Didot. Quarto. 5 vols. Latin and French translation (De Natura Deorum in 4 (1875), 79-177). 1865. Leipzig. G. F. Schoemann, third edition. Weidmann. Octavo. De Natura Deorum alone. (Cf. 1850). 1866-1873. Leipzig. C. F. A. Nobbe. Published by Holtze. 16mo. 11 vols. (De Natura Deorum in 9 (1866-1869)). (Cf. 1827). *1866-1874. Paris. J. V. LeClerc and L. Crouslé. Published by Gamier frères. 12mo. 20 vols. Latin text and French translation by several hands. De Natura Deorum in vol. 18, pp. 277-518. Later impressions, e.g., 1891. (Cf. 1830-1837). 1868-1872. Leipzig. R. Klotz. Teubner. Octavo. 5 torn, in 10 vols. (EngelmannPreuss, 131, say 11 vols., 1869-1874). 1869. Leipzig. C. F. A. Nobbe. Tauchnitz. Quarto. 1 vol. (Cf. 1827). 1876. Berlin. G. F. Schoemann, fourth edition. Weidmann. Octavo. De Natura Deorum. (Cf. 1850; 1881). »1878-1898. Leipzig. C. F. W. Müller. Teubner. Octavo. 4 torn, in 10 vols, (the De Natura Deorum in Part 4, vol. 2 (1878), pp. iii-xiv; 1-412). Long a standard edition; stereotyped and bearing many dates according to the various reimpressions, e.g., 1890; 1898; 1903; 1905; 1915. *1879. New York. R. Klotz. Published by Harpers. 12mo. One volume, with the De Natura Deorum (pp. 1-143), De Divinatione, and De Fato. (Cf. 1882). *1879. Berlin and Leipzig. H. Diels, Doxographi Graeci, containing on pp. 529-550 a text of N.D. 1, 25-41, printed in parallel columns with Philodem. De Pietate. (Cf. 1929). *1880-1885. Cambridge (England). J. B. Mayor. Cambridge University Press. Octavo. 3 vols. De Natura Deorum. With J. H. Swainson's collations of mss in Great Britain. Mayor's commentary has remained up to now the standard. A reimpression in 1891. *1881. Paris. Nisard series. Didot. 5 vols. (De Natura Deorum in 4, pp. 79-177). Latin text and French translation. (Cf. 1840-1841). *1881. Boston. A. Stickney. Published by Ginn & Heath. Octavo. Translation and editing of G. F. Schoemann's fourth edition (1876). (Cf. 1885). *1882. New York. R. Klotz. Harpers. 12mo. 1 vol. containing De Natura Deorum (pp. 1:143), De Divinatione, and De Fato. (Cf. 1879). 1885. Paris. E. Maillet. Published by Belin. 12mo. De Natura Deorum, Book 2, with introduction, text, and notes.

102

INTRODUCTION

•1885. Boston. Α. Stickney. Published by Ginn & Heath. Reprint of 1881 ed. 1886. Paris. C. Thiaucourt. Published by Hachette. 16mo. De Natura Deorum, Book 2. Cf. H. Deiter in Beri, philol. Woch. 6 (1886), 1018; J. Β. Mayor in Cl. Rev. 3 (1889), 163-164. Reprinted in 1897. 1886. Paris. F. Picavet. Published by F. Alean. 12mo. De Natura Deorum, Book 2. Cf. H. Deiter in Beri, philol. Woch. 6 (1886), 1017-1018. 1886. Paris. L'Abbé Rodillon. Published by Poussielgue. De Natura Deorum, Book 2, with text, philosophic notes, and introduction. 1886. Paris. M. Joly. Published by Delalain. 12mo. Latin text and French translation of Oli ve tus. *1887. Leipzig. A. Goethe, Teubner. Octavo. De Natura Deorum. A very sensible school edition. 1890. Leipzig. Müller edition. (Cf. 1878-1898). 1891. See 1866-1874. 1892. Leipzig. Müller edition. (Cf. 1878-1898). 1896-1904. Turin. C. Giambelli. Loescher. Octavo (?) De Natura Deorum (Book 1, 1896; Books 2-3, 1904). A school edition; very unfavorably reviewed by O. Plasberg in Woch. f . kl. Philol. 1905, 823-826. 1897. Paris. Thiaucourt edition. (Cf. 1886). 1898. Leipzig. Müller edition. (Cf. 1878-1898). 1903. Leipzig. Müller edition. (Cf. 1878-1898). •1905. Leipzig. Müller edition. (Cf. 1878-1898). *1911. Leipzig. O. Plasberg. Teubner. Octavo. Editio maior of the De Natura Deorum, with full critical apparatus (up to now the standard). (Cf. 1917; 1933). 1911. Leipzig. Müller edition. (Cf. 1878-1898). *1912. Leyden. O. Plasberg. Published by Sijthoff. Large folio. In the series Codices Graeci et Latini, a facsimile of Cod. Leid. Heinsianus 118, with introduction on the history and palaeography of the ms. *1915. Leyden. O. Plasberg. In the same series a facsimile of Cod. Leid. Voss. 84, with similar introduction. 1915. Leipzig. Müller edition. (Cf. 1878-1898). *1917. Leipzig. O. Plasberg. Teubner. Editio minor of the De Natura Deorum. (Cf. 1911; 1933). *1929. Berlin and Leipzig. H. Diels, Doxographi Graeci2 (see 1879). *1933. Leipzig. W. Ax. Teubner. Second edition of 1917 with exegetical app. *1933. London and New York. H. Rackham. Loeb Classical Library. Octavo. De Natura Deorum (pp. 1-409), Académica. Text and English translation. 1937. Turin. M. S. Zanetti. Soc. ed. intern. De Natura Deorum, Book 3. A school edition. *. Paris. C. Appuhn. Garnier frères. Octavo. De Natura Deorum. Text, French translation, and notes. 1936. Milan. A. M. Pizzagalli. Published by Signorelli. De Natura Deorum, Book 2. A school edition based on Plasberg-Ax; cf. S. Oddo in II mondo classico (1936), 265. On the edition of Freund, Schüler-Bibliothek, cited by J. B. Mayor, edition of N.D. 3, lxxii-lxxiii, I have no further data.

INTRODUCTION

103

Judgments of the more important editions are expressed in the Bipontine edition, 1 (1780), lxxxi-ci, and by J . B. Mayor, edition o f the N.D. 3 (1885), lxx-lxxiii. From an inspection of the list given above it will be seen that f o r f o u r and a half centuries there has seldom been a decade (and f o r the last century and a half seldom a half-decade) without the publication either of a specialized volume containing the De Natura Deorum or of a complete edition of Cicero containing it. Though among so many it is inevitable that some have been overlooked, especially among reimpressions of earlier editions, correction of the error would increase rather than diminish the number and the frequency. TRANSLATIONS

43. Translations of the De Natura Deorum are as follows : 1581. Paris. G. de la Boderie. French translation of the De Natura Deorum. F. Hennebert, Hist, des traducteurs franç. d'auteurs gr. et lat. (1858), 75, n. 2. 1670. Paris. P. du Ryer. 12mo. 12 vols. French translation of the complete works. Moss, I a , 361; cat. 50 of Burgersdijk & Niermans (1914), no. 6074. *1683. London. Anon. Published by Joseph Hindmarsh. English translation of the De Natura Deorum. 12mo. With a preface of 141 pages. (S. XVII. London. Brit. Mus. Add. MSS 21456. Paper. Quarto. Ms English translation of N.D. 1, ch. 6 to 3, ch. 7. Presented by the Rt. Hon. J. W. Croker.) 1721. (Bologna. "Trattenimenti di Cicerone sopra la natura degli Dei." A paper folio ms of 177 folia in the Bibl. comun. dell' archiginnasio at Bologna, no. A 2810. 2 vols, with dedication to the king of France, dated 30 March, 1721. With preface, table of Greek philosophers, etc. A. Sorbelli, Invent, dei mssti delle bibl. d'Italia, 47 (1931), 186.) *1721. Paris. L'Abbé Le Masson. Published by C. Jombert. Octavo. 3 vols. De Natura Deorum. Text and French translation. 1721. Paris. J. Olivetus (P. J. de Thoulié, S.J.). French translation. J. B. Mayor, ed. of N.D. 3 (1885), lxxi. (1732; 1749). 1732. Paris. J. Olivetus (see 1721). •1741. London. Printed for R. Francklin. English translation of the De Natura Deorum. A tendentious work by a follower of Shaftesbury (J. B. Mayor, ed. of N.D. 3 (1885), lxxiii). (1775; 1829). 1749. Paris. Olivetus edition. (1721). 1775. London. Thomas Francklin. English translation of the De Natura Deorum. (1741). 1783-1799. Paris. French translation of all Cicero. 8 vols. Cat. 405 of Fock, no. 1947. •1787. Zürich. . Published by Orell, Gessner, Füssli, & Co. Octavo. German translation of the De Natura Deorum. Pp. vi + 272. 1802. Vienna. Text and German translation of the complete works. 16 vols. Engelmann-Preuss, 127. 1806. Frankfurt. J. F. von Meyer. Published by J. C. Hermann. German translation of the De Natura Deorum, with notes. Octavo. (1832).

104

INTRODUCTION

1816-1818. Paris. Published by Fournier. Octavo. 29 vols. (Moss, 1», 361, says 26 vols., 1818; A. Yon, ed. of De Fato (1933), lxiii, says 31 vols.). Text and French translation. Engelmann-Preuss, 128. 1821-1825. Paris. J. V. LeClerc. Published by Lefèvre. Octavo. 30 vols. Text and French translation by various hands. Deschamps, 106; Engelmann-Preuss, 128; A. Yon, ed. of De Fato (1933), lxiii. (1823-1825; 1823-1827). 1823-1825. Paris. J. V. LeClerc and J. A. Amar. Published by Lefèvre. 12mo. 18 vols. Text and French translation of the complete works. (1821-1825.) 1823-1827. Paris. LeClerc translation of the complete works, reprinted by Lequien. 12mo. 35 vols, in 36. (1821-1825). 1826 fF. Milan. Published by Bettoni. Octavo. 40 vols. Latin text and Italian translation. Engelmann-Preuss, 128. 1827-1830. Prenzlau. E. W. Eckermann et al. Published by Ragorczy. 12mo. 18 vols. German translation of the complete works, that of the De Natura Deorum by E. W. Eckermann. *1827-1843. Stuttgart. Published by J. B. Metzler. 16mo. 19 vols, in 79 fascicles. German translation of the complete works, that of the De Natura Deorum, G. H. Moser, in vol. 1 (1829), 1418-1727. (1855). *1829. London. Thomas Francklin, D.D. Published by William Pickering. Octavo. De Natura Deorum. (1741). 1829. Munich. C. F. Michaelis. 12mo. Translation of the De Natura Deorum. With notes. 1830-1837. Paris. Panckoucke series. Octavo. 36 vols. Text and French translation of the complete works by several hands. (1840). *1832. Frankfurt. J. F. von Meyer. Published by F. Barrentrapp. Octavo. German translation of the De Natura Deorum, with notes. (1806). Pp. viii + 238. 1840-1841. Leipzig. Edited by R. Klotz. Octavo. 2 vols, in 6 parts. German translation of the philosophical works, the De Natura Deorum by J. F. Schroeder being in vol. 1 (1839). J. B. Mayor, ed. of N.D. 3 (1885), lxxiii, who dates it 1841. 1840-1841. Paris. D. Nisard series. Dubochet & Cie. (Didot) Octavo. 5 vols. Text and French translation of complete works; by various hands. (1852; 1859). 1848-1863. Venice. Antonelli. Quarto. Text and Italian translation of the complete works (cat. 421 of Fock, no. 2293). Note also the octavo 2-volume translation of the philosophical works by several hands published at Venice by Antonelli in 1856-1857 (A. P. Pagliaini, Cat. gen. della libreria ¡tal. 1 (1901), 550). 1852. Paris. D. Nisard series. Octavo. 5 vols. Text and French translation. (18401841). *1853. London. C. D. Yonge (and F. Barham). H. G. Bohn. Octavo. English translation of the De Natura Deorum (pp. 1-140), De Divinatione, De Fato, De República, De Legibus, and De Petitime Consulatus. The De Natura Deorum a revision of Francklin's translation (1741). (1872; 1878; 1887; 1907). 1855. Stuttgart. Published by J. Β. Metzler. 16mo. 4 vols. German translation of the complete works, the De Natura Deorum by G. H. Moser in vol. 4, pp. 323531. (1827-1843). 1859. Paris. D. Nisard series. Didot. Octavo. Text and French translation of the complete works. (1840-1841). 1863. Naples. Octavo. Text and Italian translation of the complete works (A. P. Pagliaini, op. cit. 1 (1901), 550).

INTRODUCTION

105

1863. Stuttgart. See 1868. 1863. Berlin. R. Kühner. Langenscheidt series. German translation of the De Natura Deorum (see 1868). •1864-1882. Paris. D. Nisard series. Octavo. 5 vols. Text and French translation of all Cicero, by various hands (De Natura Deorum in 4 (1875), 79-178). (18401841). •1866-1874. Paris. Published by Gamier frères. 12mo. 20 vols. (De Natura Deorum in 18, pp. 277-518). Text with French translation by various hands. Several reprints, e.g., 1891 (revised by J. V. LeClerc and L. Crouslé). 1868. Stuttgart. Published by C. Hoffmann. 16mo. German translation of Cicero, the De Natura Deorum by R. Kühner in fascicles 53-58. Possibly also at Stuttgart in 1863. 1869. Stuttgart. Published by J. B. Metzler. 16mo. 19 vols. German translation of the complete works; the De Natura Deorum by G. H. Moser in fascicles 12-13. (1827-1843). •1872. London. C. D. Yonge. Published by G. Bell. Octavo. English translation of the De Natura Deorum (pp. 1-140), De Divinatione, De Fato, De República, De Legibus, and De Petitione Consulatus. (1853). 1872-1892. Paris. Garnier edition. 12mo. 20 vols. The complete works. Text with French translation by various hands (De Natura Deorum in vol. 18 (1891), pp 279-518, by J. Olivetus, revised by J. V. LeClerc and L. Crouslé). (1866-1874)] •1874. Poznán. E. Rykaczewski. Published by Nakladem Biblioteki Kornickiej. Octavo. Polish translation of Cicero (De Natura Deorum in vol. 7 (1874), pp. 487-630). A few footnotes. •1874. Leipzig. J. H. von Kirchmann. Published by Dürr. German translation of the De Natura Deorum. In the Philos. Bibliothek, vol. 23, pp. xxii + 240. Bibl. philol. el. 1 (1874), 117; J. B. Mayor, ed. of N.D. 3 (1885), lxxiii, who calls it very ignorant and unscholarly. 1875. See 1864-1882. •1878. London. C. D. Yonge translation (see 1853). G. Bell & Sons. 1881. Paris. D. Nisard series. Didot. Octavo. 5 vols. (De Natura Deorum in vol. 4, pp. 79-178). Text and translation by various hands. (1840-1841). 1884 (?) London. H. Owgan. Published by Cornish. 12mo. English translation of the De Natura Deorum. 1885. Paris. E. Maillet. Published by Belin. 12mo. French translation of Book 2 of the De Natura Deorum. Bibl. philol. el. 14 (1887), 57. 1886. Paris. L'Abbé Rodillon. Published by Poussielgue. 18mo. French translation of Book 2 of the De Natura Deorum. 1887. Boston. C. D. Yonge translation (see 1853). Published by Little, Brown & Co. Octavo. 1890 (?) Naples. T. C. Malvezzi. Published by Chiurazzi. 16mo. Italian translation of the De Natura Deorum. Bibl. philol. el. 17 (1890), 180. •1891. See 1866-1874. French translation and Latin text in vol. 18, pp. 277-503. •1896. London, F. Brooks. Methuen & Co. Octavo. English translation of the De Natura Deorum. •1907. London. C. D. Yonge translation. G. Bell & Son. Octavo. (1853). 1908. Berlin. R. Kühner. Published by Langenscheidt. Fascicle 56 of the complete works, pp. 177-224. German translation. Bibl. philol. el. 35 (1908), 104. (1868).

106

INTRODUCTION

*1933. London and New York. H. Rackham. Loeb cl. Library. Octavo. Text and English translation of the De Natura Deorum (pp. vii-xix; 1-396) and Académica. 1935. Milan. A. De Zuccoli. Published by Signorelli. Italian translation of the De Natura Deorum, Book 1, with introduction and notes. *(1935). Paris. C. Appuhn. Garnier frères. Octavo. Text and French translation of the De Natura Deorum, with notes. *1950. Chicago. H. M. Poteat. University of Chicago Press. Octavo. English translation of the Brutus, De Natura Deorum (pp. 175-333), De Divinatione, and De Officiis.

BOOK ONE Ei δέ έστιν, ώσπερ δή και ίστι, τό θείον άπάντων τιμιώτατον, ομοίως και ή θεολογική των άλλων έστί τιμιωτάτη έπιστημών, περί τό θείον γένος εσται ή τιμιωτάτη περί τό τιμιώτατον. Alex. Aphiod. in Metaph. 5,2, p. 447, 5-7 Hayduck.

SIGLA codicum qui ad librum primum recensendum adhibentur A (s. ix-x) Leidensis Vossianus 84 I D (s. xi) Londiniensis Harleianus 2622 (deficit ~ ,. post prius nec (1, 114)) C = consensus codicum D H G j H ( s ^ ^ ¿ ^ H e insianus 118 ( G (s. xiii ex.) Londiniensis Burneianus 148 Ρ (s. χ) Vaticanus Palatinus 1519 (deficit usque ad censuit (1, 27) et post species (1, 75) [V (s. ix) Vindobonensis 189 (deficit usque ad deum (2, 16)] Ν (s. xii) Parisinus Nostradamensis 17812 O (s. xii) Oxoniensis Mertonianus 311 Τ (s. xii-xiii) Turonensis 688 Β (s. χ) Leidensis Vossianus 86 F (s. χ) Florentinus Marcianus 257 M (s. xi) Monacensis 528 dett. = deteriores Had. = Hadoardi excerpta

EDITIONVM SIGLA Ald(ina) 1523 Ascens(iana) 1507, 1511 Dav(ies) 1718 Ern(esti) 1737

Heind(orf) 1815 Lam(binus) 1565-1566 Man(utius) 1541 Mar(sus) 1508

Pl(asberg) 1911, 1917 Rom(ana) 1471 Ven(eta) 1471 Vict(orius) 1538-1539

M. TVLLI CICERONIS

DE NATVRA DEORVM 1 LIBER PRIMVS

1 1 CVM multae res in philosophia nequaquam satis adhuc 1

de natura deorum Ρ {m. rec.)NO etCicero ipse, e.g. Div. 1, 7; 1, 8; 2, 3; 2, 148; Fat. 1, de deorum natura ADHBFM et testimonia pleraque. 1. D E N A T V R A DEORVM: should the title appear in this form, or as De Deorum Naturai In favor of d.n. is the common practice of placing the genitive first, as in Lucretius, De Rerum Natura, Cato, De Agri Cultura, and Cicero, De Haruspicum Responses; yet contrast De Finibus Bonorum et Malorum and De optimo Genere Oratorum. Supporting n.d. is euphony, which avoids the repetition dë de- (although T. Birt (Kritik u. Hermen. (1913), 154; id., Beri, philol. Woch. 38 (1918), 545-546) thinks euphony is not always sought in titles). The more important evidence may be summarized as follows: (1) Among the best mss ADFGH read d.n., B1M1 have d.n., though page-headings and in Β a later initial title read n.d. ; V in the explicits of Books 2 and 3 has d.n. ; PO (apparently by later hands)iV read n.d. The best ms evidence, then, is strongly for d.n. (2) Earlier citations, especially S. IV-V: Nonius 17 times (see Lindsay's ed., 3, 935), all d.n.·, Charisius twice (pp. 117; 137 K.), both d.n.·, Diomedes (p. 313 K.), d.n. ; Lactantius once {Inst. 1, 11, 48) d.n., but 6 times {Inst. 1, 5, 24; 1, 12, 3; 1, 15, 5; 2, 8, 10; 4, 28, 3; De Opif. 1, 13) n.d. ; Servius 7 times {Aen. 1, 270; 1, 297; 3, 284; 3, 600; 4, 379; 4, 577; 6, 893) all d.n.·, Probus in Eel. 6, 31 (pp. 334; 339-342 Hägen) d.n.; Schol. Veron. Aen. 5, 95, n.d.; Augustine, C.D. 5, 9, d.n. ; Priscian 4 times {Inst. 3, p. 105 K.; 7, p. 299; 8, p. 432; 9. p. 456) n.d., but in Inst.

6, p. 259, d.n. These citations, then, favor d.n. by about three to one. (3) If we pass to Cicero's own use of the phrase, outside the title of this work— disregarding the case of natura, the presence or absence of prepositions, and those instances, as in N.D. 1, 17, where the two words are separated by others— we find the following situation (the figures based on H. Merguet, Lex. Z- d. philos. Sehr. 1 (1887), 668-669) for combinations of natura and deorum·. d.n., 6 cases {N.D. 1, 45; 1, 63; 1, 91; 2, 12; 2, 33; Tim. 8); n.d., 23 cases (1, 1; 1, 13; 1, 29; 1, 32; 1, 34—of the work of Xenocrates—; 1, 49; 1, 57; 1, 61; 1, 71; 1, 94; 1, 120; 1, 122; 2, 60; 2, 77 {bis) ; 2, 168; 3, 93; 3, 95; Div. 1, 5; 1, 110; 1, 117; Tuse. 5, 70; Off 3, 52; cf. also De Or. 2, 71). Cicero evidently preferred, for reasons of euphony or emphasis or both, the order n.d. (cf. J. Tolkiehn in Beri, philol. Woch. 42 (1922), 479). (4) Most convincing of all are Cicero's own citations of titles. The works of Chrysippus {N.D. 1, 41) and Posidonius (1, 123) περί θεών are rendered by him de natura deorum, and in the 5 places (in Div. 1, 7; 1, 8; 2,3; 2, 148; Fat. 1) in which he alludes to his own recently written work he consistently calls it de natura deorum. No other evidence, however impressive, can stand against the testimony of the author, though it must be granted that the order d.n. in the title of this work probably stood in the archetype of our mss, and

110 was well established as early as our fourth-century testimonia. On the whole question see J. Vahlen in Zeitschr. f . ist. Gymn. 24 (1873), 241-242, n. ( = Ges. philo!. Sehr. 1 (1911), 566, η.); T. Birt, ll.ee.; W. Kroll in Giotto, 11 (1921), 137; 13 (1924), 160, who notes that the clausula produced by n.d. is better than that with d.n. ; J. Tolkiehn in Beri, philol. Woch. 42 (1922), 477-479; M. Schanz, Gesch. d. röm. Lit. I 4 (1927), 510; H. Diels, Doxogr. Gr? (1929), 121, η. 3; R. Philippson in P.-W. 7A (1939), 1152. DE: common in the pattern of Cicero's titles, especially for the ethical and theological works : De Finibus Bonorum et Malorum, De Officiis, De Senectute, De Amicitia, De Gloria, De Virtutibus, De Divinatione, De Fato, De Auguriis. N A T V R A D E O R V M : Greek writers usually entitled works of this sort simply περί θεών ; e.g., Protagoras, Cleanthes, Persaeus, Chrysippus, Metrodorus (cf. Α. Körte in fahrb. f . Philol. Supplb. 17 (1890), 541), Theodorus of Cyrene (Diog. L. 2, 97), Apollodorus, the Athenian grammarian (Macrob. 1, 17, 19), Antiochus (Plut. Lucull. 28, 7), Phaedrus ( A t t . 13, 39, 2), Nicolaus of Damascus (Simplic. Phys. 1, 4, p. 151, 21, 22 Diels), and Posidonius (yet cf. F. A. Wolf, Kl. Sehr. 1 (1869), 500). The title of Cornutus is given by codd. GW as θεωρία περί της των θεών φύσεως, but that is not the best attested form. Such a title, for which De D(e)is would be the natural Latin equivalent, gave little clue to the contents, and might logically, though not in general practice, include (1) a theogony, like Hesiod's— but despite the etymology of natura and passages like N.D. 3, 42; 3, 53-63 Cicero's work is not that; (2) a mythological account of deeds of the gods, as in the Homeric Hymns—but our work has almost nothing of that sort; (3) an explanation of cults and ceremonies, like Ovid's Fasti—these, again, are scarcely noticed; or (4) theories as to the divine existence, form, and characteristics (cf. N.D. 1, 2; 1, 46; 1, 50; 2, 3; etc.). This last is what

Cicero undertakes to treat, and what he regards (1, 3) as the primary inquiry of theology. In the catalogue of 66 uses of φύσις and natura by A. O. Lovejoy and G. Boas, Primitivism and related Ideas in Antiquity (1935), 447-456, the following categories (pp. 447-448) seem to approximate the meaning intended by this title: (3) "any distinguishing characteristic of anyone or anything"; (8) "the permanent and fundamental character (of a person), in contrast with transient manifestations or superficial appearances"; (9) " . . .the intrinsic and permanent quality . . . of (physical) things, 'what things really are' ". Mart. Cap. 5, 512, says : catachresim etiam Graeci, quam nos abusionem, ut cum perhibemus 'naturam deorum' pro 'substantia' ; cf. Aët. Ρlac. 1, 6 {S.V.F. 2, 1009—a passage thought by Von Arnim to derive from Posidonius) : ορίζονται 8έ τήν τοϋ θεοϋ ούσίαν οί Στωικοί οδτως, κτλ. Allowing for this meaning it is true that the phrase at times fades into a periphrasis for di, so that M. van den Bruwaene, La théologie de Cic. (1937), 179, citing as an example N.D. 2, 77, where natura deorum and deus seem synonymous, would make this equation: dei = deus = natura deorum = natura. It should be observed that a similar fading of natura occurs in the phrases mundi .. . natura (N.D. 2, 58), animi natura (N.D. 1, 23), and especially hominis natura, which occurs 26 times in the philosophical works (Merguet, op. cit. 2 (1892), 173), apposite passages being N.D. 1, 112; loeupletior ... hominum natura ad beate vivendum quam deorum", 2, 14; 2, 39; 2, 153: docuisse videor hominis natura quanto omnis anteiret animantes·, cf. O f f . 1, 96; 1,105, and especially Fin. 5, 33 : hoc intellegant, si quando naturam hominis dicam, hominem dicere me; nihil enim hoc d i f f e r ì . The view of E. V. Arnold, Rom. Stoicism (1911), 218, that "the 'gods,' according to the Stoics, form a natura, a department of the universe, a category including one or more individuals, hence the title of Cicero's work de natura deorum, that is, 'of the class of beings called gods,' seems unlikely. c u m multae: Cicero speaks (Att. 16,

1,1

111

explicatae sint,1 tum perdifficilis, Brute, quod tu minime ignoras, et perobscura quaestio est de natura deorum, quae et ad 2 cogni1

sunt DN

2

ad om. A1Ml

6, 4; July, 44) of having a volumen prooemiorum. ex eo eligere soleo cum aliquid σύγγραμμα instituí, and says that he had just carelessly used for the De Gloria the same prooemium as for Académica 3. It is tempting to assign to this volumen some general material in the present introduction, e.g., the second and third sentences of this section and especially 1, 5 (beginning at qua quidem)-\,V2. Further, the likeness between the present introduction (especially 1,5-1,12) and that of De Officiis 2 is striking; e.g., satis explicatae (1, 1) cf. O f f . 2, 1; libris nostris quos compluris (1, 6) cf. O f f . 2, 2; non modo discendi sed etiam scribendi studia (1, 8) cf. O f f . 2, 2; admirantium unde hoc philosophandi Studium extitisset (1, 6) cf. O f f . 2, 2; cum otto langueremus (1, 7) cf. O f f . 2, 2; unius Consilio atque cura gubernari (1, 7) cf. O f f . 2, 2 ; a primo tempore aetatis (1, 6) cf. O f f . 2, 4 ; ut haec tam sero litteris mandaremus (1, 7) cf. O f f . 2, 5; ad banc potissimum confugissem (1, 9) cf. O f f . 2, 6; admirantur nos banc potissimum disciplinam secutos (1, 11) cf. O f f . 2, 7; nec tamen fieri potest ut nihil habeant quod sequantur (1, 12) cf. O f f . 2, 7; probabilia, etc. (1, 12) cf. O f f . 2, 7-8; temeritate (1, 1) cf. O f f . 2, 8; contra omnes philosophos et pro omnibus dicere (1, 11) cf. O f f . 2, 8; his quattuor Academicis libris satis responsum videtur (1, 11) cf. O f f . 2, 8; cf. A. G. Gillingham, The Prooemia in Cicero's Works on Philosophy, Politics, and Riet. (unpubl. Harvard doctoral dissertation (1949), 71-77). See also 1, 5, n. (qua quidem, etc.); introd. 15. J. S. Reid (in Mayor's ed. ad loc.) remarks that "in nearly all the passages where cum ... tum is used by Cicero there is a contrast between a general statement and a particular case, whether the clause with cum contains an indicative (as in Div. 1, 7) or a subjunctive" (as here). For the subjunctive in such clauses cf. Fin. 1, 19 (and Madvig's n.);

Tusc. 5, 113; O f f . 3, 5. With the phraseology especially cf. O f f . 1, 4: cum multa sint in philosophia ... accurate copioseque a philosophis disputata. philosophia: freely used in this treatise, without the apology thought necessary in De Or. 1, 9: earn, quam φιλοσοφίαν Graeci vocant; cf. N. Stang in Symb. Osloenses, 11 (1932), 82-93, for Cicero's use of philosophia and philosophus. nequaquam satis adhuc: the heaping up of adverbs is noteworthy. With satis ... explicatae cf. O f f . 2, 1. perdifficilis . . . et perobscura: cf. Fin. 3, 36: perfacilis et perexpedita·, Div. 2, 40: perlucidos et perflabilis\ Rep. 1, 18: periucundus et pergratus. With perobscura cf. 1, 17. Brute: for M. Iunius Brutus Cicero had named his dialogue the Brutus, and to him he dedicated the Orator, the Paradoxa Stoicorum, the De Finibus, and the Tusculans. Brutus, a man well educated in philosophy (cf. Plut. Brut. 24, 1) and of serious theoretical interests (cf. H. Geizer in P.-W. 10 (1919), 974; Plut. Brut. 40,1), had dedicated to Cicero a treatise De Virtute {Fin. 1, 8; Tusc. 5, 1). For his literary influence on Cicero cf. D. M. Schullian, External Stimuli to literary Production in Rome (1932), 49. On such dedications cf. R. Graefenhain, De More Libros dedicandi apud Scriptores Graecos et Romanos obvio (1892), especially 42-44; W. W. Jaeger, Aristotle (Engl, tr., 1934), 56: "The dedication of dialogues and treatises belongs to the literary custom of Hellenistic courtesy ; no such artificial usage was known to the better period. With Aristotle [Protrepticus] the address to a particular person is still the living expression of the mood of earnest ethical exhortation. It is organic to the protreptic style as such." ad cognitionem animi: the less well attested variant agnitionem, though accepted by various editors and defended

112

1,1

tionem 1 animi pulcherrima est et ad moderandam religionem 1

agnitionem A*DHNOM

by G. F. Schoemann {Opuse, acad. 3 (1858), 292-294), occurs nowhere else in Cicero, and, in this meaning ( = cognitionem, though Schoemann dissents; often confused in mss with cognitionem, according to F. A. Wolf, Litter. Analekten, 1 (1817), 280), not before Quintil. Inst. 1, 1, 25 (cf. Ties. Ling. Lat. 1 (1900), 1351), whereas cognitio is not only frequent in Cicero (cf. Merguet, op. cit. 1 (1887), 440-441 ; A. Pittet, Vocab. philos, de Sénèque, 1 (1937), 183-184, who quotes Ciceronian passages neatly equating it with κατάληψις), but is also used by him with animi {Fin. 4, 36; Tuse. 1, 71). T. Birt's explanation {Bert, phiI. Woch. 38 (1918), 547) of animi as a subjective genitive seems improbable. Plasberg (ed. maior.) suggests emending to ad cognoscendam [or agnoscendam·, cf. 1, 91: deorum cognationem agnoscerem] cognationem [or agnationem·, cf. Legg. 1, 23: ut homines deorum agnatione et gente teneantur·, 1, 24: agnatio nobis cum caelestibus]. Though this idea is appropriate enough for Cicero, it seems unnecessary to emend cognitionem. For the thought cf. Fin. 2, 114; 5, 57; Tusc. 1, 65: animus ... divinus est ... si deus aut anima aut ignis est, idem est animus hominis·, 1, 70: ut deum adgnoscis ex operibus eius, sic ex memoria rerum et inventione et celeritate motus omnique pulchritudine virtutis vim divinam mentis adgnoscito·, 5, 38: humanus autem animus decerptus ex mente divina cum alio nullo nisi cum ipso deo, si hoc fas est dictu, comparan potest·, 5, 70: ut ipse se mens agnoscat coniunctamque cum divina mente se sentiat·, Rep. 6, 26: deum te igitur scito esse ... et ut mundum ex quadam parte mortalem ipse deus aeternus, sic fragile corpus animus sempi ternus movet ; Legg. 1, 24: generis humani, quod sparsum in terras atque satum divino auctum sit animorum muñere . . . animum esse ingeneratum a deo; Div. 1, 110: naturam deorum, a qua, ut doctissimis sapientissimisque placuit, haustos ánimos et libatos habemus·, 2, 26: ex divinitate unde omnes ánimos haustos aut acceptes aut libatos

haberemus·, Aristot. ft. 10 Rose (ap. Sext. Emp. Adv. Phys. 1, 21) : ύπενόησαν ot άνθρωποι είναι τε θείον, τό καθ' έαυτό έοικός τη ψυχή; Sail. Cat. 1, 2; Min. Fei. 17, 2: ut nisi divinitatis rationem diligenter excusseris, nescias humanitatis·, Hippol. Philosophum. 10, 34; Melet. De Nat. Horn. (Cramer, Anecd. Oxon. 3, 143); J. Calvin, Inst. 1, 1; and many other passages cited by Pease on Div. 1,110; also M. Y. Henry, Rei. of Dogmatism and Scepticism in the philos. Treatises of Cic. (1925), 9, who remarks that our passage implies a divine quality in the soul, either as being divinae partícula aurae (Stoic) or in the Platonic όμοίωσις τω θεω, capability of attaining likeness to God. With the construction ad cognitionem cf. 2, 87: ad speciem pulchriores; also 1, 97: ad figuram quae vastior·, 2, 151 : ad ornatum decoras·, 2, 155: nulla ... ad rationem ... praestantior·, Thes. Ling. Lat. 1 (1900), 541-543. With the thought cf. Top. 81 : quaestionum ... duo genera sunt ; unum cognitionis, alterum actionis (the latter here corresponding to ad moderandam religionem)·, also De Or. 3, 111. pulcherrima: cf. Aristot. Metaph. 10, 1064 b 1 : τρία γένη των θεωρητικών έπιστημών έστι, φυσική, μαθηματική, θεολογική. βέλτιστον μέν οδν τό των θεωρητικών έπιστημών γένος, τούτων δ' αυτών ή τελευταία λεχθεϊσα· περί τό τιμιώτατον γάρ έστι τών όντων; id., De An. 1, 402 a 3: τήν της ψυχής ίστορίαν εύλόγως αν έν πρώτοις τιθείημεν. δοκεϊ δέ και πρός άλήθειαν άπασαν ή γνώσις αύτης μεγάλα συμβάλλεσθαι, μάλιστα δέ προς τήν φύσιν; 1, 402 b 16; Alex. Aphrod. in Metaph. 5, 2, p. 447, 5-7 Hayduck (quoted above as the motto for this book); also the Christian view of theology as the "queen of sciences." On pulcher for other than physical beauty cf. R. Fischer, De Usu Vocab. ap. Cic. et Senecam (1914), 11-12. In Ac. 2, 66 and O f f . 1, 18 it is offset to turpis. moderandam religionem: since it is

113

1,1

necessaria. De qua tam 1 variae sunt 2 doctissimorum hominum 1

quod tam NO, tam Bait.

from cognitio deorum that pietas and its connected virtues are derived; cf. 2, 153. True knowledge of the gods permits a proper mean between neglect or contempt and superstition; cf. 1, 45; 1, 77; 1, 117; 2, 63; 2, 71; Div. 2, 149. Religio seems here used in the meaning of "attention to religious observances." necessaria: Lucian, De Hist, conscr. 63, speaks of the importance of conciliating the listener by explaining the size, necessity, appropriateness, or utility of the subject to be treated; cf. Inv. 1, 23: si demonstrabimus ea quae dicturi erimus magna, nova, incredibilia esse ... aut ad deos immortalis aut ad summum rei publicae pertinere·, De Or. 1, 30; Brut. 25. de qua: might grammatically refer either to quaestio, natura deorum, cognitionem, or religionem ; Schoemann and Mayor think quaestio, but as good a case could be made for natura deorum, since that phrase is more significant than quaestio, and is the subject of the whole work; Goethe explains it as quaestio de natura deorum. tam variae sunt: so DH2B2; the better attested subjunctive seems difficult without the addition made by Baiter of cum (which might also soften the omission of ut before magno argumento), though T. Birt CBeri. philol. Woch. 38 (1915), 546) tries to justify it as in a causal relative clause. But sint may have arisen through the influence of sint in the previous sentence, and if cum be added here, then the first two sentences begin a little monotonously with cum ... sint. The emendation by M. L. Earle (CI. Papers (1912), 203) to tam variae sunt seems unnecessary, as do the conjectures of R. Philippson (Philol. Woch. 54 (1934), 187) and M. Atzert (Gotting, gel. AnZ. 197 (1935), 276-277). The disagreement of philosophers is often mentioned or charged against them; e.g. 1, 5; 1, 13-14; Fin. 1, 11: cum sit inter doctissimos summa dissensio·, Ac. 2, 116-146; 2, 147: de dissensionibus tantis summorum virorum·, Philod. περί ήθών καΐ βίων, col. 4 (Hercul. Voll. 5, 1,

s

sint AG Η1NOB M

p. 7): διοίσουσιν (sc. φιλόσοφοι) άλλήλν τε καΐ έαυτών νϋν ή νϋν . . .; Philo, De Ebriet. 199-205; Diod. 2, 29, 6; Sen. Ερ. 88, 45-46; Quintil. Deci, min. 268, p. 94 Ritter; Sext. Emp. Pyrrhon. 1, 87 : εί δέ τά αύτά διαφόρως κινεί παρά τήν διαφοράν των άνθρώπων, είσάγοιτ' äv είκότως καί κατά τοϋτο ή έποχή; 1, 88: καί οδτως άνεπικρίτως στασιάζοντες αδθις ημάς εις τήν έποχήν περιστήσουσιν ; 3, 3; 3, 30: δτι τοίνυν αεταί είσιν άκατάληπτοι £άδιον συνιδεϊν έκ της περί αύτών γεγενημένης διαφωνίας παρά τοις δογματικοΐς; Adv. Phys. 1, 29; 1, 191-192: έφ" οΐς ή των σκεπτικών έποχή συνεισάγεται, καί μάλιστα προσγενομένης αύτοϊς καί της άπό τοϋ κοινοϋ βίου περί θεών ανωμαλίας, κτλ. ; Adv. Math. 9; Lucian, I up. Trag. 42: συνίδοι τις äv ώς ούδέν βέβαιον ó περί θεών λόγος έχει, κτλ.; Icarom. 5; Diog. L. 7, 129; Censorin. 19, 4; Tat. Ad Gr. 3; Just. Mart. Cohort, ad Gr. 5 et al.; 2 Apol. 13; Tert. De An. 2; Arnob. 2, 10; 3, 37; Lact. Inst. 1, 1, 18; 3, 4, 3: in multas sectas philosophia divisa est et omnes varia sentiunt. in qua ponimus ventatemi in omnibus certe non potest·, 3, 15, 2; 5, 3, 1; Ambr. Exam. 1, 1, 4; Euseb. Pr. Εν. 14, 16, 11; Firm. Math. 1, 1, 3; Alex. Aphrod. De Fato, 2; Aug. Ep. 118, 11 : non opus est ei cognitione dialogorum Ciceronis, et collectione emendicatarum discordantium sententiarum alienarum procurari auditores·, 118, 16: reperies Epicúreos et Stoicos inter se acerrime dimicantes; eorum vero litem conantes diiudicare Platonicos, occultantes sententiam veritatis, et illorum Panam in falsitate fiduciam convincentes et redarguentes·, C.D. 18, 41; loan. Chrys. Hom. 3 in Rom. 3 (Patr. Gr. 60, 414); loan. Damasc. Parallela Rupef. 4 (Patr. Gr. 96, 472); Aen. Gaz. p. 9 Boiss. The Gentilium Philosophorum Irrisio of Hermias is largely concerned with such conflicts of opinion. J. B. Mayor (CI. Rev. 3 (1889), 357) observes that this passage, 1, 2 (tanta sunt in varietate, etc.), and 1, 13 (ponam in medio, etc.) prepare the way for an historical summary of views. 8

114

1,1

tamque discrepantes sententiae magno 1 argumento esse 2 debeat [causa]3 principium philosophiae esse scientiam, 4 pruden1 ut magno B2FM 2 esse . . . sententias (1,2) om. ACNO (H add. m. ree.) esse]se Β1 ' causa del. Bait., Forchhammer, causa principium B1F, causa et principium Βa, causam et principium H(m. ree. in mg.), causam id est principium M, alti alia * esse inscientiam dett. Man., Dav., ad hoc scientiam B1, ad hanc scientiam B2, esse scientiam HM, scientiam F

magno argumento: one might have expected an ut introducing this clause, and B2FM and various editors insert one. Yet examples are not wanting in Latin, as in English, of a coordinated clause replacing a subordinated member introduced by ut and expressing result; e.g., Hor. S. 1, 1, 13-14: cetera de genere hoc adeo sunt multa loquacem / delassare valent Fabium·, and other cases cited by G. M. Lane, Latin Grammar (1899), § 1700. With the phrase cf. Fin. 2, 29: máximo argumento esse·, Div. 1, 119: máximo est argumento, quod·, Sen. 78: magno . .. esse argumento·, and the similar phrases satis argumenti est, maximum argumentum est, etc. [Merguet, Lex. d. philos. Sehr. 1 (1887), 235]. esse, etc.: the words esse debeat ... sententias (in 1, 2) are omitted by ACN, and A. C. Clark, The Descent of Manuscripts (1918), 328; 341, maintains that this omitted unit was one column of the archetype of our mss. debeat: for the subjunctive in a guarded statement, less common with verbs of obligation, yet not lacking, cf. 1, 43: ea qui consideret . .. debeat·, Tuse. 2, 66; debeas existimare-, In Catil. 1, 19: nonne impetrare debeat·, F am. 3, 11, 3; and other cases in R. Kiihner-C. Stegmann, Ausf. Gram. d. lat. Spr. 2, l 2 (1912), 174. principium: our only important mss here are BFM, of which B1 reads causa principium, B2 causa et principium, M causam id est principium, and F causa principium. Of possible combinations there are several, such as (1) to keep both causa and principium, either (a) making causa look backward, perhaps inserting an ea before it with Plasberg, and interpreting "that reason should be a strong argument that the foundation

of philosophy," etc. (cf. H. Deiter in Neue Jahrb. 133 (1886), 780-781), or (b) reading causam et principium, with Β2 and C. G. Schuetz, Opuse. (1830), 223, and understanding the two words as nearly synonymous (against this view cf. G. F. Schoemann, Opuse, aead. 3 (1858), 295, on the ground that it is an unwarranted identification of αιτία and άρχή); or (2) to regard one of the two nouns as a gloss upon the other; thus (c) causam [id est principium\, with I. J. G. Scheller, Observ. in prise. Script. (1785), 207, R. Mollweide in Wien. Stud. 36 (1914), 193, et al., and with L. F. Heindorf {Bibl. crit. 2, 1 (1780), ix), followed by Mayor, considering id est principium philosophiae as a gloss upon Académicos adsensionem cohibuisse·, or (d) [causa] principium philosophiae esse inscientiam, with J. Forchhammer in Ν or disk Tidskrift for Filologi, 5 (1880), 31-33, who thinks causa was in the archetype a gloss on principium, but not put into its syntactical construction (cf. J. N. Madvig, Adv. critica, 1 (1871), 62); or (e) the reading of an unidentified ms cited by F. Orsini, which omits causam through scientiam, continuing prudenter Académicos, etc.—an easy reading if it could be attested and if the critical reputation of Orsini were not so dubious (cf. Mayor, ed., 1, 67, n. 1); or (f) other rather arbitrary emendations, especially by older scholars, which do not merit perpetuation; or (g) the frank obelizing of some part of the sentence, as by Lambinus, Plasberg, Ax, and others. A further complication immediately appears: between philosophiae and scientiam B1, in a space suitable for four letters, reads ad h or ad hoc, changed by B2 to ad hanc; M reads esse, but F has no intervening word. May the archetype

115

1,1

terque Académicos 1 a rebus 2 incertis adsensionem cohibuisse. 1 achademicos H (m. ree. in mg.) M, achademici B\?)F, rebus H (m. ree. in mg.)

of these mss perhaps have contained philosophiae esse * scientiami This meaning, however, seems unlikely, for scientia is properly the goal (τέλος) rather than the beginning (άρχή) or the cause (αιτία) of philosophy, which naturally starts from consciousness of and dissatisfaction with ignorance; cf. Plat. Theaet. 155d: μάλα γάρ φιλοσόφου τοϋτο το πάθος, τό θαυμάξειν· ού γάρ άλλη άρχή φιλοσοφίας ή αίίτη ; Aristot. Metaph. 1, 982 b 19: εϊπερ διά τό φεύγειν τήν άγνοιαν έφιλοσόφησαν φανερόν δτι διά τό είδέναι τό έπίστασθαι έδίωκον. From these passages one might naturally desire to read here not scientiam but inscientiam, and this reading was printed by Manutius, supported by Davies from a codex Eliensis, and adopted by some later editors, e.g., Schoemann and Mayor; for the omission of in- cf. L. Havet, Manuel de crit. verbale (1911), 255, § 1067). Mayor argues (1) there is no reason for any reference here to the origin of philosophy; (2) present discrepancy of opinion is no argument as to the origin of philosophy; (3) the origin of philosophy is unconnected with Academic suspense of judgment; (4) inscientia could not mean τό φεύγειν τήν όέγνοιαν ; and (5) prineipium philosophandi would have been a more suitable phrase (cf. 1, 6: philosophandi .. . Studium). F. A. Wolf, Litter. Analekten, 1 (1817), 282, and in his Kl. Sehr. 1 (1869), 502503, distinguishes inscientia {= nihil scire, as in 1, 17; Ac. 1, 16; 2, 74 of Academic scepticism (έποχή); cf. also Sen. Ep. 88, 46; Min. Fei. 13, 2) from inscitia (mere ignorance, e.g., Ac. 1, 41), in which he is followed, more or less independently, by J. S. Reid (in Mayor's ed., ad loc.), who explains that "the true theory of philosophy is that which denies έπιστήμη, in other words that which the Academics oppose to the Stoics," and by J. A. Kleist {Cl. Journ. 8 (1912), 81-83), who believes that Cicero urges the acceptance of mere probability as the basis of any system of philosophy,

achademia B2

a

de

inscientia meaning "lack of certainty," as opposed to scientia (cf. Ac. 1, 41-42, where the term is used for sensations not subject to the Stoic καταληπτική φαντασία). J. Jortin's emendation {Misc. Observ. upon Authors anc. and mod. 2 (1732), 68-70) of prineipium philosophiae inscientiae scientiam, and Plasberg's suggestion (ed. maior.), prineipium philosophiae sciendi nihil scientiam, aim at the same idea by different phraseologies. The assumption of a longer lacuna is made by P. Petit {Misc. Observ. 1 (1682), 17), who emends to prineipium philosophiae scientiam; Plasberg, by a combination of phrases from Legg. 1, 37; Ac. 2, 7; and De Or. 2, 30, would emend: adh scientiam—a suppletion which he wisely did not print in his text; T. Birt {Beri, phil. IVoch. 38 (1918), 546-547) emends: esse dubitationem causam et prineipium philosophiae, baud scientiam. I somewhat hesitantly read [causam id est] prineipium philosophiae esse [or possibly philosophiae adhuc esse] scientiam, prudenterque Académicos, translating : "On this matter so varied and so irreconcilable are the views of the most learned men, it should probably {debeat) be an important argument that the very foundation of philosophy is (up to the present) only uncertainty, and that the Academics have wisely refrained from assent to things which are uncertain." This explanation fits neatly with the first part of the sentence, the lack of a generally accepted doctrine being due to the uncertainty of the premisses upon which such might rest. The stages of corruption of the text may have been (1) causa as a gloss on prineipium ; (2) eausa prineipium·, (3) causa et prineipium (inB 2 ) and causa id est prineipium (in M). Académicos: the keynote of the

116

1,1

Quid est enim temeritate turpius 1 aut quid tam temerarium 1

turpius H (m. ru. in mg.), Iuntìna, forcius BF, fortius M

whole work is here suggested in its first paragraph, and the vote taken at its end (3, 95), with Academics on two sides of the question, indicates that the antidogmatic principles of that school have been well maintained. rebus incertis: cf. Div. 2, 43: quid igitur minus a physicis dici debet quam quicquam certi significari rebus incertis·, Sen. 68: quid enim est stultius quam incerta pro certis habere, falsa pro veris? M. Aurel. 8, 7: φύσις δέ λογική εύοδεΐ, έν μέν φαντασίαις μήτε ψευδεϊ μήτε άδήλω συγκατατιθεμένη ; Aug. C. Acad. 1, 7: si incertis rebus esset assensus (cf. Plasberg's ed. of Cic. Ac. (1908), p. 59); 2, 11: ex quo confici ut nulli etiam rei sapiens assentiatur ; erret enim necesse est, quod sapienti nefas est, si assentiatur rebus incertis. adsensionem cohibuisse: the term έποχή, for Academic suspension of judgment, was apparently introduced from the scepticism of Socrates (7'use. 1, 99; al.) by Pyrrho; cf. Diog. L. 9, 61: δθεν γενναιότητα δοκεϊ φιλοσοφήσαι, τό της άκαταληψίας καΐ έποχής είδος είσαγαγών (see Suid. s . w . έποχή, Πυρρώνειοι) ; 9, 76: ή δέ "παντί λόγω" καΐ αύτη συνάγει τήν έποχήν· των μέν γάρ πραγμάτων διαφωνούντων, των δέ λόγων ίσοσθενούντων άγνωσία της άληθείας έπακολουθεϊ [see Sext. Emp. Pyrrhon. 1, 10; Adv. Math. 6; Adv. Phys. 1, 29: τό γάρ πολύτροπον της άποφάσεως τήν άγνωσίαν τοϋ [παντός] άληθοϋς έπισφραγίζεται, πολλών μέν δυναμένων είναι τρόπων της τοϋ θεοϋ νοήσεως, τοϋ δέ έν αύτοϊς άληθοΰς μή καταλαμβανομένου ; Phot. Bibl. p. 169 Bekk.l, and continued by Arcesilas (Sext. Emp. Pyrrhon. 1, 232, says he asserted τέλος μέν είναι τήν έποχήν). Important for the origins of scepsis is R. Hirzel, Untersuch. Cicero's philos. Sehr. 3 (1883), 22-39. The idea occurs in Chrysippus (S.V.F. 2, 36, 29; 2, 39, 3), and various later writers (e.g., Arr. Epici. 1, 4, 11; Galen, I, 40 K.), and is in Latin first defined by Cic. Ac. 2, 59:

ex his ilia necessario nata est έποχή, id est adsensionis retention cf. Plut. Cic. 40, 2: έκεΐνος γάρ έστιν . . . δ καΐ τήν φαντασίαν . . . καΐ τήν έποχήν καΐ τήν κατάληψιν . . . άλλα τε πολλά των τοιούτων έξονομάσας πρώτος ή μάλιστα 'Ρωμαίοις; Lact. Inst. 3, 29,7: is qui dicit adsensus esse retinendos, quod stulti sit hominis rebus incognitis temere assentire. For the idea cf. Att. 6, 6, 3 (έπέχειν, έποχή) 6, 9, 3 (έπέχειν, έποχή); 13,21,3 (έποχή); 15, 21, 2 (έποχή); Fin. 3, 31: summum munus sapientis obsistere visisadsensusquefirme sustinere; Ac. 1, 45: ñeque adsensione approbare ... ab utraque parte adsensio sustineretur-, 2 48:, sustinere se ab omni adsensu·, 2, 53; 2, 57: retenturum adsensum ñeque umquam ulli viso adsensurum; 2, 62: sublata ... adsensione·, 2, 68: sustinenda est potius omnis adsensio·, 2, 78: omnium adsensionum retentio·, 2, 94: cohibes adsensum·, 2, 98: quattuor eius [se. Clitomachí\ libri sunt de sustinendis adsensionibus; 2, 104: dupliciter dici adsensus sustinere sapiente m ; 2, 108; 2, 148: έποχήν illam omnium rerum comprobans\ Div. 2, 150; Philo, De Ebriet. 205: άαφαλέστατον τό έπέχειν είναι ; Sen. Ep. 108, 21 : iudicium quidem bonum sustinere·, J. S. Reid on Ac. 2, 59; P. Couissin, L'origine et révolution de /' ΕΠΟΧΗ (in Rev. des ét. gr. 42 (1929), 373-397); A. Pittet, Vocab. philos, de Sénèque, 1 (1937), 119; R. Philippson in Symb. Osloenses, 20 (1940), 35 (for later Epicurean attacks on έποχή). adsensionem: cf. Ac. 2, 37: nunc de adsensione atque adprobatione, quam Graeci συνκατάθεσιν vocant (and Reid ad loc.). temeritate turpius: turpius is the reading only of certain deteriores and of the Juntine ed., while Β reads forcius. Emendations are various. Nearest palaeographically is fortius, which F. A. Wolf (Kl. Sehr. 1 (1869), 504-505) very unconvincingly defends; cf. G. F. Schoemann, Opuse, acad. 3 (1858), 296-297. Next closest seems foedius of P. Manutius, followed by Lambinus, and we may cite

1,1

117

tamque indignum sapientis gravitate atque constantia quam aut as parallels Τ use. 4, 35 : quid autem est non miserius solum sed foedius etiam et deformius quam aegritudine quis adflictus, debilitatus, iacens ; 4, 52: quid Achille Homérico foedius, quid Agamemnone in iurgto ; 5, 80 : quid enim ea [sc. vita beata] foedius, quid deformius sola relicta·, Legg. 1, 51: quid enim foedius avaritia; O f f . 1, 159; 3, 36: quibus nihil tiec taetrius nec foedius excogitar i potest', 3, 115: flagitiosa, foeda, turpia. C. G. Schuetz {Opuse. (1830), 227) emends to futilius, with which may be compared Ac. 2, 59: quid enim est tarn futtile quam quicquam adprobare non cognitum? Η. Deiter (Philol. 58 (1899), 303) suggests refertius, comparing 2 Verr. 3, 202 : iam refertius erit aerarium — no close parallel. F. Walter (Wien. Stud. 48 (1930), 77-78) proposes formius, and cites Tusc. 4, 35 (see above; and add 5, 80); Rep. 1, 51 : nec ulla deformier species est civitatis. T. Birt (Beri. phil. Woeh. 38 (1918), 547) emends: importmius. The favorite reading with editors has been turpius, conjectured by Lambinus and later found in several deteriores, for this adjective is often used by Cicero in such connections; e.g., 1, 70: hoc dicere turpius est quam, etc.·, Ac. 1, 45: neque hoc quidquam esse turpius quam cognitioni et perceptioni adsensionem adprobationemque praecurrere ; 2, 66: pro veris probare falsa turpissimum est·, 2, 114: cum me incognito adsentiri vetes idque turpissimum esse dicas et plenissimum temeritatis ; Div. 1, 7: temeri tas in adsentiendo errorque turpis est·, O f f . 1, 18: labi autem, errare, nescire, decipi et malum et turpe duci mus; Inv. 2, 9: in parum cognito stuìte et diu perseverasse turpe est; Orat. 120: quid est enim turpius quam ... controverHarumpatrocinia suscipere cum sis legum et civilis iuris ignarus ; Phil. 7,9; other examples in Merguet, Lex. χ. d. philos. Sehr. 3 (1894), 715-716. Turpis is in the ethical works constantly contrasted by Cicero with honestus, and Plato (Phaedr. 277 d-e) describes ignorance as a disgrace (cf. Theaet. 194c: τό 8έ ψεύδεσθαι αίσχρόν) while in the Minos, 318e, the impiety of wrong notions of the gods is stressed; cf. Legg. 10, 888b; Orig. C. Cels. 4, 65 : έν κακοϊς

γοϋν οίίσης καΐ της περί θεοϋ άγνοιας, δντος δέ μεγίστου κακοϋ καΐ τοϋ μή είδέναι τόν τρόπον της τοϋ θεοϋ θεραπείας καΐ της είς αύτόν εύσεβείας; Arnob. 2, 57: inattissima igitur res est ... aeeeptare pro vero id quod for sitan non sit; Aug. De Trin. 10, 11: erroris dedecus. Of these various readings foedius is attractive, but, as Schoemann (op. cit., 3, 358) remarks, unduly strong, while turpius has so evident an affinity for the faults of ignorance and temeritas that the chances seem to favor it here. Temeritas (and the adverb temere) are frequently used by Cicero of rash, unconsidered action, especially of youths, as opposed to mature prudentia (Sen. 20) or sapientia ( O f f . 2, 8). 3, 61 infra associates it with inconstantia; for other cases cf. Ac. 1, 42; 2, 66 (and n. of Reid, who equates it with προπέτεια); 2, 68; 2, 108; 2, 120; Fin. 3, 72; Tusc. 4, 80; O f f . 1, 18; Q. Cic. Comm. Petit. 39: Έπιχάρμειον illud teneto, ñervos atque artus sapientiae non temere credere [for the Greek of this cf. At t. 1,19, 8] ; Sen. N.Q. 7, 30,1 ; Galen, III, 74 K. : διά προπετη συνκατάθεσιν. In O f f . 1, 94, Cicero remarks: falli, errare, labi, decipi tarn dedecet quam delirare et mente esse captum; in Ac. 2, 29, he says that one of the two chief matters in philosophy is iudicium veri. sapientis gravitate: cf. O f f . 1, 67: ut nihil . .. discedas ... a dignitate sapientis robusti animi est magnaeque constantiae; Ac. 2, 66 : nihil est ab ea cogitatione quam habemus de gravitate sapientis, errore, levitate, temeritate diiunctius. Cicero frequently couples gravitas and constantìa (e.g., Fin. 3, 1; Tusc. 4, 57; 4, 60; 5, 13; Ac. 2, 53; O f f . 1, 72; 1, 112; Hortens. fr. 64 Müller), and, though appropriate for all Romans, these qualities especially befit the philosopher; cf. Ac. 2, 53; Fin. 2, 100; 5, 13: ea quae desideratur a magno philosopho gravitas; 5, 14; Tusc. 5, 46; E. Remy, Le concept eie. de la 'gravitas? in Nova et Vetera, 1 (1921), 5-14; W. Kroll, Die Kultur d. cic. Zeit, 1 (1933), 27 (who considers gravitas nearly synonymous with constantia and opposed to the levitas Graecorum); M. Hadas in

118

1,2

falsum sentire aut quod non satis explorate perceptum sit et cognitum sine ulla dubitatione defendere? 2 Velut in hac quaestione plerique, quod maxime veri simile est et quo omnes [sese]1 1

sese del. M2, om. H (m. ree. in mg.)

Cl. Journ. 31 (1935), 17-24; H. Wagenvoort, Imperium (1941), 103-125 (on gravitas and maiestas). falsum: assent should be withheld from falsa and incognita (non satis cognita) ; cf. Div. 1, 7; Ac. 1, 45; 2, 29; 2, 59; 2, 68; Fin. 3, 72. explótate: cf. Farn. 6, 1, 5: exploratius . .. promittere·, 10, 8, 6: explorate indicare. 16, 8, 1;j2· Fr. 2, 14, 3; At t. 14, 14, 6. Mayor {ad loc.) thinks the adverb here has a half-technical sense, and compares Ac. 2, 129. Such phrases as habere exploratum (1, 51; Div. 2, 60; O f f . 3, 75; Parad. 17; Am. 97) and esse exploratum (Ac. 2, 54; Sen. 67; Fin. 2, 92; Tusc. 2, 17; Div. 1, 117) are favorites with Cicero; cf. also 2, 64: explorata ratio (as in 2 Verr. 1, 15). See A. Cuny in Met. o f f e r t s à L. Havet (1909), 85-106, especially 90-91. perceptum . . . et cognitum: elsewhere coupled; e.g. Ac. 2, 18; 2, 23; 2, 103; 2, 109; Fin. 5, 76; Legg. 1, 60. sine ulla dubitatione: cf. Tusc. 3, 5; Fam. 1, 5b, 2; Att. 14, 13b, 5; 16, 7, 1; 16, 16a, 6; 16, 16b, 9; also Augustine's ridicule (C.D. 6, 2) of Cicero's description (Ac. (1932 ed.) p. 25, 9 Plasberg) of Varrò as sine ulla dubitatione doctissimo, though writing in the Académica, ubi cuncta dubitando esse contenda. 2 velut: often employed in passing from a general statement to a particular illustration; e.g., 1, 69; 1, 101; 2, 73; 2, 124; Tusc. 5, 28; 5, 34; Legg. 2, 47. On the following three-fold division of believers, agnostics, and atheists cf. Sext. Emp. Adv. Pbys. 1, 50: των οδν περί ύπάρξεως θεοϋ σκεψαμένων ol μέν είναι φασι θεόν, οί δέ μή είναι, οί δέ μή μάλλον είναι ή μή εϊναι; Firm. Math. 1, 1, 3-4 (a passage strongly recalling the present: cum sciamus inter ipsos quanta sit ipsa deorum natura dissensio [N.D. 1, 2] quantisque disputationum argumentis vim totam divinitatis conantur

evertere, cum alii deos esse dicant [N.D. 1, 2), alii esse quidem sed nihil procurare definiant [N.D. 1, 2-3], alii et esse et rerum nostrarum curam procurationemque suscipere, et tanta sint hi omnes in varietate et dissensione versati (N.D. 1, 2] ut longum et alienum sit [N.D. 1, 2] . . . singulorum enumerare sententias [N.D. 1, 2], nam alii et figuras his pro arbitrio suo tribuunt, et loca adsignant [N.D. 1, 2], sedes etiam constituunt et multa de actibus eorum vitaque describmt [N.D. 1, 2] et omnia quae facta et constituía sunt [N.D. 1, 2] ipsorum arbitrio regi gubernarique pronuntiant [N.D. 1, 2]; alii nihil moliri, nihil curare [N.D. 1, 2] et ab omni administrattonis cura vacuos esse dixerunt [N.D. 1, 2], Others divided believers into two classes, those who recognized divine intervention in the world and those who, like the Epicureans, did not; cf. 2, 3; 2, 164-165. plerique: Cicero as an Academic makes a more modest claim than the dogmatist Velleius (1, 43: in omnium animis eorum [sc. deorum] notionem imprests set ipsa natura, etc.·, 1, 44; 1, 46; answered by Cotta in 1, 62, who himself uses the softened phrase omnibus fere) and the dogmatist Balbus (2, 4: adsensu omnium·, 2, 12: omnibus enim innatum est ... esse deos·, cf. Cotta's objections in 3, 8; 3, 11, 3, 17; also Div. 2, 106: adsumunt "sunt autem di" quod ipsum non ab omnibus conceditur), both of whom rely upon an assumed consensus gentium (a method of argument found in Plat. Legg. 10, 886a; cf. L. Gueuning in Nova et Vetera, 7 (1925), 326, n. 7; H. Pinard de la Boullaye, L'ét. comp, des relig. 1® (1929), 20), for which see Pease on Div. 1, 1. Cicero, like his fellow Academic Cotta and like Sextus Empiricus (Adv. Phys. 1, 50-51 : είναι μέν [sc. θεόν] oí πλείους των δογματικών και ή κοινή του βίου πρόληψις, κτλ.), makes assertions, not about all men, but only about the majority. Just below, (quo

1,2

119

duce natura venimus, deos esse dixetunt, dubitare se Protagoras, omnes ... venimus), however, he speaks more boldly; cf. Tuse. 1, 30: nemo omnium tarn sit inmanis cuius mentem non imbuerit deorum opinio ... omnes tarnen esse vim et naturam divinum arbitrantur·, Legg. 1, 24: in hominibus nulla gens est tarn mansueta ñeque tarn jera quae non, etiamsi ignoret qualem habere deum deceat, tamen habendum sciât·, cf. Aristot. De Cáelo, 1, 3, 270 b 5: πάντες γαρ άνθρωποι περί θεών ϊχουσιν ύπόληψιν. In De Div. per Somn. 1, 462 b 14 Aristotle uses a modified form of the argument from consensus : τό μέν γαρ πάντας ή πολλούς ύπολαμβάνειν ϊχειν τι σημειώδες τά ένύπνια, κτλ. Gueuning {op. cit., 327) suggests that Cicero here seems to admit that one might, to gain an idea of the origins of religion, study the religious state of foreign (especially primitive) peoples, and thinks that Plato {Legg. 10, 886a) was the first to grasp the importance of this and build upon it the doctrine of consensus. veri simile : it is appropriate that this work, strongly illustrative of Academic method, should start with recognition of the probability of the existence of the gods, just as in its last sentence (3, 95) Cicero considers the Stoic defence of them as ad veritatis similitudinem ... propensior. omnes: BFM1 read omnes sese {sese deleted by M2), and Piasberg {ed. maior) suggests emending either to omnes sese < vertere invenimus>, or, better, omnes fere [cf. 1,44 : fere constat inter omnes·, 1, 62 : placet enim omnibus fere ... deos esse]. In the philosophical works fere 31 times modifies omnis (26 times in the order omnis fere) ; further, the confusion in half-uncials or minuscules between r and s is by no means impossible. T. Birt {Beri. phi!. Woch. 38 (1918), 547) supports this emendation. M. Atzert {Gotting, gel. Anz. 197 (1935), 277), comparing Fin. 5, 41, would emend sese to sensim. A. C. Clark {The Descent of Manuscripts (1918), 356-357) assumes, however, that sese may be a variant for esse, and thinks the ancestor of Β may have read quo emnes / duce natura venimus deos esse [in

marg. sese] / dixerunt (assuming narrow columns with about 25 letters to the line). The gloss sese is inappropriate as a variant for esse, but Clark has not noticed that it is very apt as a variant for se in the line below those which he quotes (cf. R. Philippson in Philol. Woch. 54 (1934), 188), and if written marginally half-way between the two lines its proximity to a terminal esse might easily have suggested to a copyist that it was a correction for that word of somewhat similar sound. Its mere presence in the margin is insufficient evidence for considering it superior to se, but since it appears merely a variant on that word we may delete it. duce natura: a favorite phrase, either in the ablative absolute as here (cf. 2, 128; Fin. 1, 71; 2, 32; 2, 109; 5, 69; Τ use. 1, 30; 3, 2; Legg. 1, 20 {bis); O f f . 1, 129; 2, 73; Pro Rab. Post. 4; Varr. L.L. 8, 10; Fest. p. 372 M. (510 L.); Plin. N.H. 10, 155; Apul. De Plat. 2, 2; De Mundo, 28; Arnob. 1, 33; lui. Sever. Praecept. 5 {Rhet. Lat. 357 Halm): natura duce ... pervenitur) or with the two words otherwise combined {Fin. 4, 10; 5, 42; O f f . 1, 22; 1, 100; Am. 19; Sen. 5; Brut. 204; Orat. 58; Varr. L.L. 6, 3; Sen. Phaedr. 481; Dial. 7, 8, 1; possibly Ep. 90, 4; Stat. Theb. 12, 645; Quintil. Inst. 4, 5, 3). The words duce natura probably render φύσει, since there seems no common Greek phrase which is translated by duce, though άκολούθως τη φύσει {secundum naturam) occurs. H. Leisegang {Phil. Woch. 58 (1938), 1309) finds in this and similar expressions a strongly monistic metaphysics, like that of Panaetius, Antiochus, and Posidonius; man, if he does not resist, is led by nature to his destiny. On natura duce cf. M. van den Bruwaene, La thiol, de Cic. (1937), 222-230. With the thought cf. also Tert. De Spect. 2: nemo negat, quia nemo ignorât, quod ultro natura suggerit, deum esse universitatis conditorem. venimus: we need not prefer vehimur (with the figure of a ship) of the deteriores or trahimur of C. G. Cobet {Var. Led.

120

1,2

(1873), 460), who compares O f f . 1, 18. The tense is probably present, of a general truth. esse, etc.: cf. Serv. Aen. 4, 379: Cicero in libris de deorum natura triplicem de dits dicit esse opinionem : deos non esse ... ; esse et nihil curare, ut Epicurei ; esse et curare, ut Stoici. dubitare: cf. Philo, De Opif. Mundi, 170: πρώτον μέν 8τι ίστι τό θείον καΐ ύπάρχει, δια τούς άθέους, ών οί μέν ένεδοίασαν έπαμφοτερίσαντες περί της ύπάρξεως αύτοϋ, οί 8è τολμηρότεροι καΐ κατεθρασύναντο φάμενοι μηδ' δλως εϊναι ; Sext. Emp. Adv. Phys. 1, 59: ού μάλλον δέ είναι ή μή είναι θεούς διά τήν των άντικειμένων λόγων ίσοσθένειαν έλεξαν οι άπό της σκέψεως. Protagoras: these three philosophers are again cited by Cotta in 1, 63 to disprove consensus of belief in the gods. The selection of one agnostic and two atheists out of a larger number who might have been named may be due to two considerations: (1) that these are stock examples of the two types; and (2) that Cicero thus secures a rhetorical group of three illustrations (see Pease on Div. 1, 3). Compare the triads of atheists in Philodem. De Piet. p. 112 Gomperz = Usener, Epicurea, 127, 27 (Prodicus, Diagoras, Critias); Plut. De comm. Notit. 31 (Theodoras, Diagoras, Hippo); Ρlac. Philos. 1, 7 = Doxogr. Gr.% 297, repeated by Theodoret, Gr. A f f . Cur. 2, 112; 3, 4 (Diagoras, Theodoras, Euhemeras); [Galen,] De Phil. Hist. 8 (Protagoras, Theodoras, Euhemeras); Ael. Hist. An. 6, 40 (Hippo, Diagoras, Herostratus) ; Min. Fei. 8, 2-3 (who copies the three here named by Cicero but in the order Theodoras, Diagoras, Protagoras) ; loan. Chrys. In 1 Cor. Homil. 4, 5 (Protagoras, Diagoras, Theodoras); Liban. Deel. 1, 153-154 (Anaxagoras, Protagoras, Diagoras). On the history of atheism cf. A. B. Drachmann, Atheism in pagan Antiquity (1922). Charges of atheism might be based upon various grounds: (1) absolute theoretical denial of the existence of any gods; (2) denial of the accepted popular gods in the interest of foreign

cults; a charge made by pagans against Jews, as in Ptol. Tetrab. 2, 3, and more often against Christians; e.g., Julian, Ep. 22, 429d—though Julian was himself considered by the Christians as an atheist: Suid. s.w.'Ιουλιανός, Μάρις—; Athenag. Suppl. pro Christ. 3; Just. Martyr, 1 Apol. 5-6; 2 Apol. 3; Eus. H.E. 4, 15, 19; 4, 16, 3; 5, 1, 9; Arnob. I, 29; A. Harnack in Texte u. Untersuch. N.F. 13, 4 (1905), 8-16 (important for the first three centuries) ; (3) denial of the accepted gods as morally unworthy of worship (1, 42-43) and the substitution of purer conceptions, such as of aniconic for anthropomorphic gods, of monotheism for polytheism, and of spiritual for material deities (cf. Eus. Pr. Εν. 10, 4, 32; Clem. Protr. 2, 24, 2, who says that clear-minded men, like Euhemeras, Nicanor, Diagoras, Hippo, and Theodorus, were charged with atheism because they realized popular errors about the gods, whereas the real atheists are those ignorant of the true god (id., 2, 23, 1 ; cf. Just. Martyr, 2 Apol. 3)); (4) as an inaccurate slogan, appearing as early as Eur. Hel. 1148, raised against any who differed from the accuser, and among the Christians applied with freedom both to pagans (Harnack, op. cit., 3-7) and to heretics (id., 7-8; also Greg. Naz. Or. 2, 37 (Sabellius) ; Hier. C. loan. Hieras. 9 ; Suid. s.v. Άέτιος (Aerius)). Atheism as a criminal offence in the eyes of the law seems limited to Athens (cf. E. Derenne, Les procès d'impiété (1930), 265) from about the beginning of the Peloponnesian War to the close of the fourth century B.C. (Drachmann, op. cit., 6-7; cf. C. M. Bowra in Cl. Phil. 33 (1938), 367). Among those philosophers accused, in their own day or later, of denial of the gods Drachmann (op. cit., 13; cf. T. Thalheim in P.-W. 2 (1896), 1529; F. Zucker in Phi loi. 64 (1905), 468-469) lists as a canon Xenophanes, Anaxagoras, Diogenes of Apollonia, Hippo of Rhegium, Protagoras, Prodicus, Critias, Diagoras of Melos, Socrates, Antisthenes, Plato, Aristotle, Theophrastus, Stilpo, Theodorus, Bion, Epicurus, and Euhemerus (those italicized being denoted as άθεοι.

1,2 To these may be added Aeschylus (Ael. V.H. 5, 19; cf. Drachmann, op. cit., 54), Euripides (Ar. Thesm. 450-451; Satyrus, Vit. Ettrip. in Pap. Oxyrh. 1176, frg. 39, col. χ, pp. 153; 177; [Galen], De Hist. Phil. 8; E. Müller, Eurip. Deorum pop. Contemtor (1826)), Leucippus and Democritus (Apul. Apol. 27), Herostratus (Ael. Hist. An. 6, 40), Aristarchus of Samos (Plut. De Facie, 6), Philippus (no. 44 in P.-W.\ Philodem. De Piet. p. 86 Gomperz), Damis the Epicurean (Lucían, Iup. Trag. 4; 17), Nicanor of Cyprus (Clem. Protr. 2, 24, 2; Arnob. 4, 29), and miscellaneous Epicureans (Suid. s.v. Επίκουρος).). For ancient lists see Ael. V.H. 2, 31; Sext. Emp. Pyrrbon. 3, 218; Adv. Phys. 1, 51-59; Eustath. in Od. 3, 381. Maximus of Tyre, 11, 5, emphasizes the comparative rarity of atheists. At Rome criminal action against them seems unknown, because of Roman indifference to theoretical inquiry in cases where established cults were not disturbed. Among the Jews Josephus (C. Ap. 2, 180) says atheists were not found—Ps. 14, 1 should probably not be urged against him. A few Ethiopian atheists, however, are recognized by Diod. 3, 9, 2 (but cf. Strab. 17, 2, 3); for those in Egypt cf. F. Cumont, UÉgypte des astrologues (1937), 135. Accusations of atheism were brought especially against philosophers; cf. Inv. 1, 46: huius modi sunt probabilia ... eos qui philosophiae dent operata non arbitrari deos esse ; also perhaps Dion. Hal. Ant. 2, 68, 2; Just. Martyr, 1 Apol. 4; Arnob. 1, 31: audimus enim quosdam pbilosophandi studio deditos partim ullam negare vim esse divinam partim an sit cotidie quaerere. The populace were prone to accept religious customs without question, and the physical, often esoteric, inquiries of the philosophers were supposed, by outsiders, to lead to more or less illicit results ; cf. Apul. Apol. 27 : haec ferme communi quodam errore imperitorum philosophis obiectantur, ut partim eorum qui corporum causas meras et simplicis rimantur irreligiosos putent eoque aiant deos abnuere, ut Anaxagoram et Leucippum et Democritum et Epicurum ceterosque rerum naturae patronos, partim

121

autem qui providentiam mundi curiosius vestigant et impensius deos celebrant eos vero vulgo magos nominent. At other times religious heretics were accused of atheism; e.g., Asclep. in Aristot. Metaph. p. 285, 18-19 (of the Manichaeans). It would appear that Protagoras was the first to treat the existence of the gods as a debatable problem which might (on purely rational grounds ; cf. T. Gomperz, Gr. Denker, l 1 (1922), 493, quoting C. A. Lobeck) conceivably be solved in the negative (Drachmann, op. cit. 42), but the statement at the beginning of his περί, θεών (1, 63 infra·, Euseb. Pr. Εν. 14, 3, 7): περί, μέν θεών ούκ έχω εΐδέναι οδθ' ώς είσίν, ουθ' ώς ούκ είσίν, οΰθ' όποιοι τίνες ίδέαν. πολλά γάρ τά κωλύοντα είδέναι, ή τ' άδηλότης καί βραχύς ών ó βίος του άνθρώπου [cf. 14, 19, 10; Diog. L. 9, 51] makes, as T. Gomperz (op. cit., I 1 (1922), 371), points out, a clear distinction between belief and knowledge—note the repeated use of είδέναι—, and there is little evidence that Protagoras failed to conform to the externals of the state religion (cf. Drachmann, op. cit., 41-42; Derenne, op. cit., 45-46). As our accounts become more distant chronologically from his time and reflect the outcome of his trial rather than the evidence presented at it, writers become more severe in condemning his views. On the whole subject cf. 1, 63 nn.; Plat. Theaet. 162d: θεούς . . . οός έγώ τε τοΰ λέγειν καΐ τοϋ γράφειν περί αύτών, ώς είσίν ή ώς ούκ είσίν, έξαιρώ; Eupol. frg. 146 Kock: Πρωταγόρας . . . / δς άλαζονεύεται μέν άλιτήριος περί τών μετεώρων; Diog. Oenoand. p. 19 W. : Πρωταγόρας δέ o Άβδηρείτης τη μέν δυνάμει τήν αύτήν ήνενκε Διαγόρα δόξαν, ταϊς λέξεσιν δέ έτέραις έχρήσατο, ώς τό λείαν ΐταμόν αύτης έκφευξούμενος; Max. Tyr. 11, 5: καν μή είναι φής (sc. τό θείον), ώς Διαγόρας, καν άγνοεϊν τι φης, ώς Πρωταγόρας; Philostr. Vit. Soph. 1, 10: τό δέ άπορεϊν φάσκειν, είτε είσί, θεοί, είτε ούκ είσί, δοκεΐ μοι Πρωταγόρας έκ της Περσικής παιδεύσεως παρανομήσαι; Liban. Deel. 1, 154: Πρωταγόραν έξεκηρύζατε καλώς καΐ προσηκόντως ζητοϋντα περί θεών εϊτ' είσίν είτ' ούκ είσί; Epiphan.

122

1,2

nullos esse omnino Diagoras Melius et Theodoras Cyrenaicus Adv. Haer. 3, 2, 9 (Doxogr. Gr? 591): Πρωταγόρας ó τοϋ Μενάνδρου 'Αβδηρίτης £φη μή θεούς είναι μηδέ όλως ύπάρχειν; Lact. Inst. 1, 2, 2: Protagoras qui deos in dubium vocavit et postea Diagoras qui exclusif et alii nonnulli qui non putaverunt deos esse; De Ira, 9, 1 : cum sententiae phtlosophorum prioris temporis de Providentia consensissent ... primus omnium Protagoras extitit temporibus Socratis qui sibi diceret non liquere utrum esset aliqua divinitas necne ... de cuius sententia non est opus disputare, quia nihil certi pronuntiavit; Theodoret, Gr. A f f . 2, 13: περί μέν οδν των θεών ούκ οΐδα οΰτε ει είσίν, οΰθ' ώς ούκ είσίν, ο8θ' όποιοι τίνες τήν ίδέαν είσίν; 6, 6; Schol. Plat. Rep. 1, 600c (p. 273 Greene): είπε γάρ περί θεών ούκ εχω είδέναι ουτε ώς είσιν ούτε ώς οΰκ είσίν ; Suid. s.v. Πρωταγόρας; Ρ. Decharme, La critique des trad, relig. chez les Grecs (1904), 120; Drachmann, op. cit., 39-42; Derenne, op. cit., 45-55; W. C. Greene, Moira (1944), 249, who thinks that Protagoras, as a humanist and relativist, did not intend to deal with theology, and that the omission of it is not inconsistent with orthodoxy in matters of cult. nullos esse omnino: cf. 1, 117: omnino deos esse negabant. Diagoras Melius: more than any other proverbial as an atheist; cf. 1, 63; 1, 117; 3, 89; Ar. Ran. 318-320 and schol.; Aves, 1071-1075 and schol.; Nub. 828-830 and schol.; [Lys.] 6, 17; Epic. De Natura, 14, frg. 87 Us. (ap. Philodem. De Piet. p. 112 Gomperz); Diod. 13, 6, 7; Joseph. C. Ap. 2, 266; Plut. Ρlac. 1, 7, 1 {Doxogr. Gr2 297); De Superst. 13; Ael. V.H. 2, 23; 2, 31; Hist. An. 6, 40; frg. 33 H. (ap. Suid. s.v. ίρρε); Athen. 13, 611b; Diog. Oenoand. p. 19 W.; Max. Tyr. 11, 5; Aristid. Or. 45, 60; Sext. Emp. Pyrrhon. 3, 218; Adv. Phys. 1, 51-53; Tatian, Ad Gr. 27; Athenag. Supplie. 4; Clem. Protr. 2, 24, 2 and schol.; Lact. Inst. 1, 2, 2; De Ira, 9, 7; 10, 47; Amob. 4, 29; Aug. C. Litt. Petti. 3, 25; Theodoret, Gr. A f f . Cur. praef. 9; 6, 6; Liban. Deel. 1, 153-154; loan. Chrys. in 1 Cor.

Homil. 4, 5 {Pair. Gr. 61, 36); Cyril. Alex. C. Iulian. 6, p. 190 {Pair. Gr. 76, 789); Suid. s . w . άποπυργίζοντας, Διαγόρας, ϊακχος, πυργίσκοι, Σωκράτης è Μήλιος; Eustath. Comment. 530 (Geogr. Gr. min. 2, 320); Apostol. 6, 4 (Paroem. Gr. 2, 365; but E. Derenne, Les procès d'impiété (1930), 64, n. 3, does not believe that the name Diagoras was ever used as generic term for "atheist"). Diagoras was a poet (Sext. Emp. Adv. Phys. 9, 53; Steph. Byz. p. 450 M.; fragments quoted by Philodem. De Piet. p. 85 Gomperz). According to some accounts (Aristoxenus ap. Philodem. I.e.) he was originally a pious believer, but lost his faith in the gods because of the betrayal of a trust by a friend and the failure of the gods to punish the perjury (Schol. Ar. Nub. 830; Schol. Clem. Protr. 2, 24, 2; Suid. s.v. Διαγόρας), wrote a recantation of his religious beliefs called the άποπυργίζοντες λόγοι; (Suid. s . w . άποπυργίζοντας, Διαγόρας, πυργίσκοι; E. Derenne, op. cit., 59-61), perhaps to be identified with a work called Φρύγιοι λόγοι, mocked at the mysteries ([Lys.] 6, 17; Joseph. C. Ap. 2, 266; Schol. Ar. Aves, 1072; Tatian, I.e. ; Athenag. I.e.; Suid. s.v. Διαγόρας), burned a statue of Heracles for firewood (passages collected by L. Sternbach in Wien. Stud. 10 (1888), 236; cf. Β. Keil in Hermes, 55 (1920), 63-67), was condemned to death for impiety about 415 B.C. (Diod. 13, 6, 7), and fled from Athens to Pellene, with a price on his head (Ar. Aves, 1072-1075 and schol.; Joseph. I.e.; Ammon. D i f f . 56; Liban. Deel. 1, 15A). His άκμή, given by Eus. Chron. Ol. 78 as ca. 466 B.C., is hard to reconcile with the date given by Diodorus, and other parts of the story are doubted by various scholars. Cf. further T. Münchenberg, De Diagora Melio (1877), 25-30; U. v. WilamowitzMoellendorfF, Die Textgesch. d. gr. Lyriker (1900), 80-84 (who on pp. 83-84 reconstructs his life and activities) ; P. Decharme, La critique des trad, relig. chez les Grecs (1904), 131-135; E. Wellmann in P.-W. 5 (1905), 310-311;

1,2

123

putaverunt. Qui vero deos esse dixerunt tanta sunt in varietate H. W. Smyth, Gr. melic Poets (1906), 345-346; B. Keil in Hermes, 55 (1920), 63-67 (with an important scholium to Aristides bearing on Diagoras); T. Gomperz, Gr. Denker, l 4 (1922), 482; A. B. Drachmann, Atheism in pagan Antiq. (1922), 31-34; 155-156; E. Detenne, Les procès d'impiété (1930), 57-70. For Diagoras's nickname άθεος cf. I, 63, η. (atóeos). Theodorus: of Cyrene, to be distinguished from another Theodorus of Cyrene, the geometrician (P.-W. 5A (1934), 1811-1825), was chiefly notorious as an atheist; cf. 1, 63; 1, 117; Philo, Quod omn. Prob. lib. 127: Θ. . . . τον έπικληθέντα άθεον; Plut. Phoc. 38, 2: θ . τω άθέω ; De Tranq. 5: Θ . . . . ó κληθείς άθεος; [Galen], De Phil. Hist. 8 (XIX, 250 Κ.); Athen. 13, 611b; Min. Fei. 8, 2; Clem. Protr. 2, 24, 2; Lact. De Ira, 9, 7; 10, 47; Sext. Emp. Pyrrhon. 3, 218; Adv. Phys. 1, 51; 1, 55; Diog. L. 2, 85 (listing him as the head of the Theodorean branch of the Cyrenaic school; cf. Suid. s.v. Θεόδωρος) ; 2, 97-103 (our fullest account); 2, 116; 4, 52; 4, 54; 6, 42; 6, 80 (Diogenes the Cynic wrote a dialogue called Θεόδωρος) ; 6, 97: Θ. τον έπίκλην άθεον; Arnob. 4, 29; Hier. Chron. ann. 1697; 1708; Epiphan. Adv. Haer. 3, 2, 9, 24 (Doxogr. Gr.1 591): Θεόδωρος ό άθεος έπικληθείς ίφη λήρον είναι τούς περί τοϋ θεοϋ λόγους, ώετο γάρ μή είναι θείον καΐ τούτου ενεκεν προύτρέπετο πάντας κλέπτειν έπιορκεΐν άρπάζειν καΐ μή ύπεραποθνήσκειν πατρίδος, κτλ. ; loan. Chrys. in 1 Cor. Homi!. 4, 5 (Patr. Gr. 61, 36): ό λεγόμενος άθεος. Theodorus was probably born before 340 (Κ. v. Fritz in P.-W. 5A (1934), 1825), was a pupil of Aristippus (Diog. L. 2, 86) and Anniceris (Diog. L. 2, 98), and the teacher of Euhemerus; left Cyrene for political reasons (E. Derenne, Les prods d'impiété (1930), 206), and came to Athens (Diog. L. 2, 103), but for his religious and moral views (Diog. L. 2, 99: κλέψειν τε καΐ μοιχεύσειν καΐ ίεροσυλήσειν έν καιρώ [sc. τόν σοφόν]· μηδέν γάρ τούτων φύσει αίσχρόν

εϊναι) was forced to leave Athens (Diog. L. 2, 102; Philo, I.e.—the statement of Athen. 13, 611a that he was executed seems incorrect), and stayed at the court of Ptolemy, by whom he was sent as ambassador to Lysimachus (Diog. L. 2, 102). Stories are told of his bold and outspoken expressions {Tusc. 1, 102; 5, 117; Philo, op. cit., 127-130; Val. Max. 6, 2, ext. 3; Sen. Dial. 9, 14, 3; Plut. An Vitiositas, 3; De Exil. 16; Stob. 3, 2, 32, p. 185 H.; Gnomol. Vat. 352 (in Wien. Stud. 11 (1889), 46)). His περί θεών was said to be the source of much of Epicurus's writing on the subject (Diog. L. 2, 97). See further P. Decharme, La critique des trad, relig. chez les Grecs (1904), 173-174; Α. Β. Drachmann, Atheism in pagan Antiq. (1922), 75-76; E. Derenne, op. cit.·, 206-214; Κ. v. Fritz in P.-W. 5A (1934), 1825-1831 (and works cited). Cyrenaicus : three Latin adjectives are derived from Cyrene·. Cyrenaeus, Cyrenaicus, and Cyrenensis, the first two being borrowed from the Greek. All three are used by Cicero, but the form here attested by the best mss is that particularly employed—as adjective or substantive—for members of the philosophic school of Cyrene; e.g., De Or. 3,62; Off. 3, 116; Ac. 2, 20; 2, 131; 2, 142; Fin. 1, 23; 1, 39; 2, 39; 2, 114; Tusc. 1, 83; 3, 28; 3, 31; 3, 52; 5, 112. For Cyrenaeus cf. Tusc. 1, 102: Cyrenaeum Theodorum·, 4, 5 (of Carneades); Ac. 2, 76—respectable evidence but insufficient to lead us to adopt here Cyrenaeus of the deteriores. in varietate: cf. 1, 29 in máximo errore versatur; 1, 31: sunt isdem in erratis; 1, 37: magno in errore sententia est; 1, 43: in maxima inconstantia .. . versantur; Firm. Math. 1, 1, 3: tanta sunt hi omnes in varietate et dissensione versati ut longum ... sit ... enumerare sententias. dissensione: the repetition of this word twice below in this section is not without parallel in Cicero's somewhat hasty writing; cf. 2, 98 (repetition of altitudines); Pease on Div. 1, 3; also

124

1,2

et dissensione ut eorum molestum 1 sit enumerare 2 sententias. Nam et de figuris deorum et de locis atque sedibus et de actione 3 1 molestum B2H (m. ree. in mg.), tum Β1 1 enumerare de/i. Dav., innumerare 3 de actione] actione B1, dinumerare B2FH (m. ree. in mg.) ACNOM

Β. L. Ullman in Am. J. Philol. 81 (1950), 408-409). molestum: tum of Bl makes no sense, but the correction molestum of Β 2 gives a phrase frequent in Cicero (e.g., 1, 17; 1, 24) and sometimes found with a subject infinitive as here: 1, 99; Am. 45: alienti nimis implicare molestum esse·, Sen. 47: molestum est carere; Fin. 4, 52: asperum esse dolere, molestum, odiosum·, 2 Verr. 3, 155: molestum est ... suadere·, Imp. Pomp. 46: erat molestum ... esse missum; Har. Resp. 41; F am. 2, 1, 1; Att. 5, 9, 1; 8, 3, 5; 11, 6, 2; 11, 22, 1. Plasberg's tum (suggested in the apparatus of his ed. maior and adopted in the text of his ed. min.) finds possible parallels (2 Verr. 3, 53; Pro Cluent. 148; Legg. 2, 18; Fam. 1, 9, 23 : quos erat infinitum ... omnis nominare), but hardly seems preferable to molestum, especially in view of the occurrence of infinitum just below. For the meaning of molestum cf. G. Maresch {Mitt. d. Vereines kl. Philol. in Wien, 5 (1928), 27-28), who suggests a derivation from mola. Similar in expression is Tusc. 1, 116: quos enumerare magnum est. enumerare: innumerare of B ì introduces a verb not known to Cicero or to classical Latin; dinumerare of B 2 occurs twice (and dinumeratio once) in the philosophical works, and is defended by G. F. Schoemann (Opuse, acad. 3 (1858), 359), in the sense of "reckoning up in groups"; adnumerare (cf. Div. 2, 3), meaning "reckon along with," seems inappropriate here; enumerare occurs 13 times (and enumeratio four) in the philosophical works, befitting the sense here as well as being supported by the reminiscence in Firmicus Maternus quoted above (n. on in varietate). A good parallel is 1, 91 : enumerasti ... philosophorum sententias.

de: the fourfold use of de has been questioned, and ACN omit it before actione. Such an omission, however, would injure the symmetry of a rhetorical group of three members, each distinct in meaning (locis atque sedibus forming a natural unit; cf. 1, 45, η. (formam, etc.); also the instances in Ties. Ling. Lat. 2 (1906), 1054, 48 ff., where diversity of conjunctions corresponds to a diversity of relations, so that atque may unite two members more closely joined than the others), and would produce two poorly balanced groups: (1) forms; (2) places, abodes, and activities. H. Sjögren, Comment. Tullianae (1910), 140, compares the ms readings of three analogous cases ( O f f . 2, 56: pel in re quaerenda vel augenda·, 2 Verr. 4, 1, 1: neque in ... neque·, Q. Fr. 3, 1, 4: neque per ... neque), and favors supporting the mss in each case. In the present passage, however, ms support for the more logical and regular form is not lacking. figuris: cf. 1, 45: formam et vitam et actionem mentis; 1, 46 (on the forma or species of the gods); 1, 50: quae vita deorum sit·, 1, 65: unde sint, ubi sint, quales sint corpore, animo, vita·, 1, 103: quod eius est domicilium, quae sedes, qui locus, quae deinde actio vitae·, 1, 111 : quae ergo vita? locis atque sedibus : combined in 1, 103; Tuse. 1, 19; 4, 38; Fin. 5, 4. For such partly redundant pairs cf. L. Laurand, Étude sur le style des discours de de. (1907), 337, n. 3, and works there cited; E. Norden, Die ant. Kunstprosa, I a (1909), 167, η. 1. Of this very characteristic feature of Cicero's style the present section shows varietate et dissensione, locis atque sedibus, rem causamque, nihil agant, nihil moliantur, curatione et administratione, facta et constituta, and regantur atque moveantur. The present ex-

1,3

125

vitae multa dicuntur, deque his summa philosophorum dissensione ceftatur; quod vero maxime rem causamque continet, utrum nihil agant, nihil moliantur, omni 1 curatione et administratione rerum vacent, an contra ab iis et a principio omnia facta et constituía sint et ad infinitum tempus regantur atque moveantur in primis [quae] 2 magna dissensio est, eaque nisi diiudicatur 3 in summo errore necesse est homines atque in maximarum rerum ignoratione 4 versari. 2 3 Sunt enim philosophi et fuerunt qui omnino nullam habere censerent rerum humanarum procuratio1

£2F

2 quae om. dett. Matt., que DHNFM an ab omni A2F 4 ignorantia OM, ignorantiae N^-F

pression may mean "the places of their abode." actione vitae: cf. 1, 45 η. {formant, etc.)·, 1, 103; Reid on Ac. 2, 62. his: the least objectionable choice of readings; Plasberg's deque is rests on the first hand of no major ms and introduces an unlikely divergence of form from ab its just below. For a severe criticism of Plasberg's varied spellings of is and hie in the dative and ablative plural see T. Birt in Beri. phil. Woch. 38 (1918), 547-548. quod: for de eo quod, depending upon dissensio est. rem causamque: cf. F am. 2, 6, 5: rem atque causam·, 12, 4, 2. Res is the fact, causa the point of dispute; cf. Tuse. 4, 65: una res videtur causam confiriere·, Pro Caec. 11: multa enim quae sunt in re, quia remota sunt a causa, praetermittam. Curatione et administratione: cf. Rep. 1, 35; also 1, 3, below. [quae] : this word interrupts the syntax of the clause (despite the attempt of T. Birt in Beri. phil. Woch. 38 (1918), 548-549 to retain it by changes in punctuation and by understanding in sense a second certatur before utrum), and its presence is plausibly explained by A. C. Clark, The Descent of Manuscripts (1918), 357, as a variant for -que added in the margin but intended to apply to eaque just below. magna dissensio: cf. 1, 16; Tuse. 1, 18: magna dissensio est; Fin. 2, 49; 3, 44;

3

diiudicetur

5, 16: magna dissensio est·, 5, 76; Legg. 2, 32. In O f f . 3, 56 the mention of a dissensio is followed by the words quae diudicanda sunt. in summo errore, etc.: cf. 1, 29: non in máximo errore versatur·, 3, 25: in eodem ... errore versantur·, Ac. 2, 34: simili in errore versantur·, Τ use. 1, 107; 5, 43; O f f . 1, 91; Parad. 50. Error here probably means "uncertainty" rather than "mistake"; cf. 2, 2: non errantem et vagam ... sententiam; O f f . 2, 7: non enim sumus it quorum vagetur animus errore-, Plaut. M.G. 793: erro quam insistas viam\ Liv. 1, 24, 1 : nominum error manet, utrius populi Horatii, utrius Curiatii fuerint; Sen. Agam. 144: ubi animus errat optimum est casum sequi. 3 sunt . . . fuerunt . . . censerent: on the sequence of tenses cf. H. Lieven, Die Consecutio Temporum des Cic. (1872), 45 (cited by Mayor ad loc. but not seen by me); G. S. Sale in CI. Rev. 3 (1889), 7; F. E. A. Trayes in Greece and Rome, 5 (1936), 99. The imperfect here represents an action partly past, partly continuing. Of such expressions as sunt . . . et fuerunt P. Parzinger, Beitr. Kenntn. d. cicerón. Stils (1910), 27, collects many examples. nullam habere: the philosophers here in question would include, of course, all atheists (Dion. Hal. Antiq. 2, 68, 2) and the consistent atomists, but in Cicero's day were chiefly the Epicureans, whose beliefs were based upon the first of Epicurus's κύριαι

126

1,3

nem deos. Quorum si vera sententia est, quae potest esse pietas,1 quae sanctitas, quae religio? Haec enim omnia pure atque caste 1

pietas] uirtus A

δόξαι (cf. 1, 45; 1, 85; also 1, 51; 1, 56; 1, 102; 1, 115-116; 1, 123; 3, 3; 3, 79; Div. 2, 40 (and Pease ad loc.)·, Legg. 1, 21 ; O f f . 3, 102; Pro Mil. 83; H. Usener, Epicurea (1887), 241-257 ; Yirg. Eel. 8,35 ; Aen. 4, 319 (and Servius; also Pease ad loc.)·, Lucan, 7, 454-455: mortalia nulli I sunt curata deo [and schol.] ; Quintil. Inst. 5, 6, 3: cum etiam philosophi quidam sint reperti qui deos agere rerum humanarum curam negarent\ Tac. Ann. 6, 22, 2 (contrasting Epicureans and Stoics, as here); Ael. frg. 11 H.; [Aero] in Hor. Carm. 1, 34, 2; 3, 3, 35; Ambros. De Noe, 100: philosophorum quorundam opiniones qui negent deum curam habere super homines·, Donat. in Aen. prooem. p. 6 Georgii; Greg. Naz. Or. 4, 44; Hier. In Is. 14, 18, p. 285 Vail.; In Εχ. 3, 9, p. 99 Vail.; Tract, de Ps. 93 (Anecd. Mareds. 3, 2, 83) : qui cum Epicuro ab humanis rebus Dei curam dicitis separatam ; Tract, in Is. 6 CAnecd. Mareds. 3, 2, 110); lui. Vict. Ars rhet. 6 (Rhet. Lat. 405 Halm); id., p. 406: inter Stoico s et Epicúreos solet rogari providentiane mundus gubernetur·, also Stob. Eel. 1, ch. 2. Among the Jews similar beliefs of the Sadducees are noted by Joseph. Bell. lud. 2, 164; Antiq. 13, 5, 9; Hippol. Philosophum. 9, 24. procurationem: cf. 1, 2: curatione·, 2, 44; 2, 130 (of the analogous care of man for cultivated plants and domesticated animals). quae potest: cf. 1, 123: quae potest esse sanctitas si dii humana non curanti pietas . . . sanctitas . . . religio : combined in 1, 14 and the first two again discussed in 1, 115-116 (see M. Kobbert in P.-W. 1A (1920), 574, 16); cf. also 1, 56: pie sancteque·, 2, 71; O f f . 2, 11; Aug. De catechiz• Rudibus, 29. The first two correspond to εύσέβεια and όσιότης, and are often closely linked, like pietv and holiness today; cf. J. C. Bolkestein, όσιος en ευσεβής

(1936), 210, who thinks the terms almost synonymous, and finds that each has an underlying moral content as well as a religious significance, though these are not easily separable. M. Y. Henry, Rei. of Dogmatism and Scepticism in the philos. Treatises of Cic. (1925), 38, compares 1, 4: fides ... societas ... justifia. Pietas is defined in 1, 116: est enim pietas iustitia adver sum deos·, cf. 1, 117: religionem, quae deorum cui tu pio continetur; 2, 153: cognitionem deorum e qua oritur pietas·, Inv. 2, 66: pietatem, quae erga patriam aut parentes aut alios sanguine coniunctos officium conservare moneat\ Top. 90: aequitas tripartita dicitur esse: una ad supero* deos, altera ad manes, tertia ad homines pertinere. prima pietas, secunda sanctitas, tertia iustitia et aequitas nominatur ; Fin. 3, 73: pietas adversus deos; also [Plat.] Définit. 412e: εύσέβεια δικαιοσύνη περί θεούς; 415a: οσιον θεράπευμα θεοϋ· άρεστόν θεώ ; Pease on Virg. Aen. 4, 393 and works there cited. The fundamental notion seems to be that of devotion, "man's reverent attachment to the sources of his being and the steadying of his life by that attachment," as defined by G. Santayana {The Life of Reason, 3 (1928), 179; cf. Aristot. Eth. Nie. 8, 12, 1162 a 4-9; 9, 2, 1165 a 21-24), and it is naturally directed towards parents and kinsmen, fatherland, and gods, e.g., C. Michel, Ree. d'inscr. grecques (1900), no. 735, 213-214: τύπον δέ εύσεβείας ήν θεοϊς καί προγόνοις είσφέρειν δσιον; id., no. 731 : πρός τε τούς θεούς όσίως καί εύσς προφέρεται; also id., no. 689 (= I.G. II, 477 b): εύσεβείας ένεκα καί φιλοτιμίας ήν ϊχων διατελεί προς τούς θεούς. Sanctitas is defined in 1, 116 as seientia colendorum deorum·, cf. 2, 5: deorum cultus religionumque sanctitas·, also the passages collected by W. Link in P.-W. 1A (1920), 2248. In Plat. Euthyphr. 6e

1,3

127

tribuenda deorum numini ita sunt si animadvertuntur ab iis et si est aliquid a deis inmortalibus hominum 1 generi tributum; sin autem dei ñeque possunt 2 nos iuvare nec volunt, nec omnino curant, nec quid agamus animadvertunt, nec est quod ab iis ad 1

hominum om. B1, humano Β2

2

Euthyphro attempts to define δσιον as what is τοις θεοϊς προσφιλές, or θεοφιλές. Cf. also G. D. Hadzsits in Trans. Am. philol. Assoc. 39 (1908), 82, η. 1 ; W. W. Fowler, Rei. Exp. of the Rom. People (1911), 463-464 ; 470, n. 27. Religio·, on the etymology and use of this word cf. Pease on Div. 2,148, and works there cited. Like the two previous words this much discussed term may describe both our obligations to the gods and those to our fellows (cf. Fest, ρ. 278 M. ( = 348 L.): religiosas est non modo deorum sanctitatem magni aestimans sed etiam officiosus adversus homines), and 1, 4 infra shows that Cicero is awake to the unhappy social implications of a general abandonment of theistic beliefs. In view of the allusion in 1, 4 to Carneades and the likeness of this passage to the argument in 1, 115, R. Philippson (Symb. Osloenses, 20 (1940), 24) supposes Cicero to have drawn all this information, more or less indirectly, from Carneades. pure atque caste: cf. Div. 1, 121: castus animus purusque-, frg. IX, 12 Müller (ap. Lact. Inst. 3, 19, 6): castos autem [ánimos], puros, integras, incorruptos ... ad déos . .. pervolare·, A. Pittet, Vocab. philos, de Séneque, 1 (1937), 159-160. Cf. Legg. 2, 24: caste iubet lex adire ad déos, animo videlicet, in quo sunt omnia. tribuenda: the reciprocal expression, emphasizing the contractual relation between gods and men, should be noted : tribuenda deorum numini ... a deis ... hominum generi tributum·, cf. 1, 115: cur deos ab hominibus colendos dicas cum dei . . . homines non colant-, G. D. Hadzsits in Trans. Am. philol. Assoc. 39 (1908), 8183; L. Gueuning in Nova et Vetera, 7 (1925), 338, n. 2.

possint A deorum numini: a frequent phrase; e.g., 2, 7; 2, 95; 3, 92; Div. 2, 29; 2, 35; 2, 47; 2, 124; Fin. 3, 64; Rep. 1, 12; Legg. 2, 15; Har. Resp. 19; Phil. 11, 28. For the longer form deorum immortalium numen see the passages cited by F. Pfister in P.-W. 17 (1937), 1274, who discusses Cicero's use of the term numen, always in the sense of a property of the deities (especially their might) rather than of deity itself or of a particular deity. For the word in other authors see Pfister's treatment; also H. Wagenvoort, Imperium (1941), 73-85. H. J. Rose, Prim. Culture in Italy (1926), 7 (cf. id. in Harv. theol. Rev. 28 (1935), 237) has compared numen with the Melanesian mana, which does not, however, seem to apply closely to the present passage. With the general thought cf. Sisenna, fr. 125 Peter (ap. Non. p. 133 M. = 192 L.): utrumne divi cultu erga se mortalium laetiscant an superna agentes humana neglegant. ita sunt si: "only if," as in O f f . 1, 28: hoc ipsum ita iustum est ... si est voluntarium. neque possunt . . . nec volunt: cf. in the eighth fragment of this work, quoted by Lact. De Ira, 13, 20-21, the repeated antithesis of vult and potest·, also Min. Fei. 12, 2: deus ... non vult aut non potest opitulari suis·, Julian, Orat. 4, 142d : πάντα γάρ άπερ βούλεται ταϋτα έστι και δύναται καΐ ένεργεϊ· οΰτε γάρ δ μή ίστι βούλεται ουτε δ βούλεται δράν ού σθένει oü6' δ μή δύναται ένεργεΐν έθέλει ; Max. Tyr. 38, 6d. The climax in these five clauses introduced by nec should not be overlooked, the justification for man's neglect of the gods being in inverse proportion to their attention to him and his interests.

128

1,3

hominum vitam permanare1 possit, quid est quod ullos deis inmortalibus cultus, honores, preces adhibeamus? In specie autem fictae simulationis sicut reliquae virtutes item 2 pietas inesse non 1

permanere A1DGB1,

permane

N1

2

item (m in ras.) Β, ita Ν

permanare: from the Epicurean in- γοϋν τά τοιαύτα έρωτώσιν ύπ' άσεβείας, termundia to the earth, as Mayor suggests. άποτρέποντες καΐ τούς άλλους θύειν quid est quod: cf. 1, 16: nihil est καΐ εΰχεσθαι ώς είκαϊον 6ν;; Iup. Trag. quod ... desideres·, 1, 22: quid autem erat 18: εί δ'ούτοι πεισθεϊεν ή μηδέ δλως quod concupiscent·, 1, 115: quid est enitn ή μας [sc. θεούς] είναι ή 8ντας άπρονοήcur; 1, 117:. quid est autem quod deos τους είναι σφών αυτών, άθυτα καΐ άγέveneremur; 3, 7: quid est ... cur. ραστα καΐ ατίμητα ήμϊν Ισται τάκ γης; Since primus est deorum cultus deos credere Bis accus. 2; [Clem.] Recogn. 8, 12: quid [Sen. Ep. 95, 50; cf. Hebr. 11, 61, the enim colas eos a qmbus promereri nihil uselessness of worship on the part of possis; Lact. De Ira, 6, 2: ñeque horns unbelievers is often stressed; e.g., ullus deberi potest deo si nihil praestat colenti·, 1, 116; 1, 123; 1, 124; Legg. 1, 43: 8, 2 : si enim deus nihil cuiquam boni tribuit ... quid tarn vanum, tarn stultum quam atque si natura confirmatura ius non erit, tollentur·, ubi enim templa aedificare, sacrificia facere, dona liberalitas, ubi patriae caritas, ubi pietas, conferre ... ut nihil adsequamur ... quis ubi aut bene merendi de altero aut referendae honos deberi potest nihil curanti et ingrato·, gratiae voluntas poterit esistere? ... non Eus. Pr. Εν. 6, 2, 2: τί δέ χρή λοιπόν solum in homines obsequia sed etiam in deos εύσεβεϊν καΐ τούς θεούς προσκυνεϊν καί caerimoniae religionesque tolluntur, quas non θεραπεύειν, μηδέν οίους τε καθόλου metu sed ea coniunctione quae est homini cum μηδέ έαυτοις έπαρκεϊν; 6, 3, 3: τ£ δέ deo conservandas puto\ F am. 7, 12, 2: δει λοιβής τε κνίσης τε καί τά έκ τούquo modo autem tibi placebit Iovem lapidem των γέρας τοις μηδέ τούτων άξίοις άποturare cum scias Iovem iratum esse nemini νέμειν, εί κατ' ούδέν ή μ ας ώφελεΐν δύνανται; 14, 27, 9. The question here posse·, Sen. De Ben. 4, 4, 1-3; also Plat. Legg. 10, 887b-c; Ov. Ex P. 2, 9, 23- raised is answered, from the Epicurean standpoint, in 1, 45; 1, 116; cf. G. D. 24 : numquid erit quare solito dignemur honorejnumina si demas velie turare deos-, Hadzsits in Trans. Am. philol. Assoc. 39 (1908), 73-88, especially 82-83. Arr. Epict. 1, 12, 5-6 : εί γαρ μή είσΐν θεοί, πώς έστι τέλος Ιπεσθαι θεοΐς; εί cultus, honores, preces: F. A. Wolf δ'είσίν μέν, μηδενός δ' έπιμελούμενοι, (KL Sehr. 1 (1869), 508) would refer καΐ οι"»τως πώς υγιές Ισται, κτλ. ; Μ. Aurel. these three to sanctitas, religio, and pietas 6,44: εί 8'δρα περί μηδενός βουλεύrespectively, but there seems little indiονται (πιστεύειν μέν ούχ δσιον), ή cation that Cicero here intended more μηδέ θύωμεν, μηδέ εύχώμεθα, μηδέ όμthan a rhetorical group of three. For the νύωμεν, κτλ.; Hierocl. Comm. in Aur. term preces cf. G. Appel, De Precationum Carm. {Fr. Phil. Gr. 1, 442 Mullach): Romanarum Sermone (1908), 69. L. Gueuπώς γάρ οΐόν τε ταϊς ίεραϊς ίκετείαις ning (in Nova et Vetera, 7 (1925), 234, θεοπρεπώς χρήσασθαι, μή πρόνοιαν καΐ n. 7) suggests that cultus ("religious δίκην έφοραν τά άνθρώπινα τιθεμένους; practices") is here explained by honores Apul. De Deo Socr. 5: nullus, inquis, deus and preces, as colere in 1, 119, by precari humants rebus interventi; cui igitur preces venerarique. adlegabo? cui votum nuncupabo? cui victimam specie . . . fictae simulationis: an caedam? ... quem denique ... turi turando illogical but effective pleonasm, with arbitrum adhibebo·, Lucian, Iup. confut. 6: which cf. Leg. agr. 2, 10: aliud spe ac σοφιστών, ot μηδέ προνοεΐν ή μας [sc. specie simulationis ostentante Pro Cael. 14: θεούς] τών άνθρώπων φασίν· έκεΐνοι specie quadam virtutis adsimulatae; O f f .

1,3

129

p o t e s t c u m qua simul sanctitatem et religionem tolli necesse est, quibus sublatis perturbatio vitae sequitur et magna con1

poterunt A

3, 39: fictam et commenticiam fabulam·, Ac. 2, 140: fallax imitatio simulatioque virtutis; Ter. Eun. 200: neque me finxisse falsi quicquam [Donat. ad loc. : aut "dixisse" debuit dicere aut abundat "falà"\ ; Petron. 3, 3: ficti adulatores [where Bücheler brackets ficti] ; Tac. ^4«». 6, 45, 5 : simulationum ... falsa·, Herodian, Hist. 1, 4, 5: κολακείας προσποιήτου ; [Hier.] Ep. 148, 30, 2: ficta adulatione decipere; Cod. Iustin. 5, 12, 30: ficti divortii falsa simulatone ·, E. Löfstedt, Syntactica, 2 (1933), 176-177 (comparing Maximinus, C. Ambros. 10 : sub specie falsae voluntatis) ; P. Burmann on Quintil. Inst. 8, 2, 10; J. K. Schönberger in Phil. IVoch. 55 (1935), 1242. The attempt of H. Kraffert (Beitr. z- Krit. u. Erkl. lat. Autoren, 3 (1883), 123) to delete simulationis, and that of [G. H.?] Heidtmann (Beitr. Krit. u. Int. d. Sehr de Nat. D. (1858), 16) to emend to venerationis (comparing 1, 45) are both unnecessary. With the thought cf. Arr. Epict. 2, 20, 23: ότι θεοί ούτ' είσίν, εϊ τε καΐ είσίν, ουκ έπιμελοϋνται άνθρώπων ούδέ κοινόν τι ήμΐν έστι πρός αύτούς τό τ' εύσεβές τοϋτο καί δσιον παρά τοις πολλοίς άνθρώποις λαλούμενον κατάψευσμά έστιν αλαζόνων άνθρώπων καί σοφιστών; Sext. Emp. Adv. Phys. 1, 123: εί γάρ μή είσΐ θεοί, ούκ Ιστιν εύσέβεια. In F am. 1, 4, 2, Cicero refers to a nomen inductum fictae religionis·, in Har. Resp. 8-9 (cf. De Domo 107) he attacks those who pretend to defend a religion whose principles they themselves outrage; cf. L. Gueuning in Nova et Vetera, 7 (1925), 242. In O f f . 2, 43, he is similarly opposed to insincerity. M. Y. Henry (op. cit., 38) remarks that Cicero here "detaches himself from his Academic spokesman, Cotta, who later in the dialogue expresses his entire satisfaction with the mere forms of religion." sicut . . . item: for the correlation of ut and item cf. 1, 28; 1, 96; 2, 38; 3, 30;

3, 45; and nine other cases noted by Merguet, Lex. ç. d. phil. Sehr. 2 (1892), 405; for similar phrases cf. Madvig on Fin. 3, 48. reliquae virtutes: cf. Phot. BibI. cod. 243, p. 356a Bekk. : οϊχεται μέν άρετή πάσα τοις 'Επικούρου λόγοις καί 8όγ· μασιν. quibus sublatis: the phrase quibus .. . confusio might fit well at the end of the sentence, after tollatur, to which position it was transferred by [G. H. ?] Heidtmann (Zur Krit. v. Interp. d. Sehr. desCic.de Nat. D. (1858), 16), J. Forchhammer (Nordisk tidskrift f . filologi, Ν. S. 5 (1880), 37), and M. L. Earle (Proc. Am. philo!. Assoc. 33 (1902), lxx = C¡. Papers (1912), 203), but this disagrees with the quotation by Lact. De Ira, 8, 6, and hardly improves the sentence as a whole. For the repetition (tolli ... sublatis ... sublata . .. tollatur) cf. P. Stamm, De M.T.C. Libr. de Deor. Nat. Interp. (1873), 4; Pease on Div. 2, 123; with the structure of the sentence cf. O f f . 3, 28. perturbatio vitae: cf. Tuse. 3, 73: perturbatio vitae ... consequatur·, Fin. 1, 25: totam rationem everti, si ita res se habeat; 2, 117: quanta perturbatio rerum omnium consequatur, quanta confusio·, 3, 50: confunderetur omnis vita·, 5, 15; 5, 28: vitae est eversio; Ac. 2, 99: sequitur omnis vitae ... eversio [cf. 2, 31] ; Legg. 3, 3; Plat. Rep. 4, 442b: ξύμπαντα τόν βίον πάντων άνατρέψη; Gorg. 481c: άλλο τι ή ήμών ó βίος άνατετραμμένος αν εϊη των άνθρώπων ; Sext. Emp. Adv. Log. 1, 369: άνέστραπται τά πράγματα; Diog. L. 9, 104: oí δογματικοί φασιν καί τόν βίον αύτης άναιρεϊν; Lact. De Ira, 8, 6: qua sublata [sc. religione] confusio ac perturbatio vitae sequetur·, Aug. C.D. 5, 9; L. R. Farnell, Higher Aspects of Gr. Relig. (1912), 107-108. Perturbatio is considered by G. Kilb, Ethische Grundbegriffe der alten Stoa, u.s.w. (1939)—known to me 9

130

1,4

fusio. 4 Atque haut scio an pietate adversus deos sublata fides edam et societas generis humani et una excellentissuma virtus only from a review in CI. Weekly, 34 (1941), 160—as a translation of πάθος. 4 haut: on this form cf. F. Leo, Plaut. Forschungen2 (1912), 249-251; R. Kühner-F. Holzweissig, Ausf. Gr. d. lat. Spr. I a (1912) 35; Ties. Ling. Lat. 6 (1938), 2558. pietate adversus deos: cf. 1, 115; 1, 116: est enim pietas iustitia adversum deos-, Fin. 3, 73; Part. orat. 78; L. Gueuning in Nova et Vetera, 1 (1925), 237, η. 4. sublata: cf. At t. 7, 2, 4: st haec [i.e., parental affection] non est nulla potest homini esse ad hominem naturae adiunctio, qua sublata vitae societas tollitur. fides: cf. 2, 153: cognitionem deorum, e qua oritur pietas, cui coniuncta iustitia est reliquaeque virtutes. The social and political importance of religion as a guarantee of the sacredness of oaths (cf. 1, 14) is discussed in Legg. 2, 16: utilis esse autem has opiniones quis neget, cum intellegat quam multa firmentur iure turando, quantae saluti sint foederum religiones, quam multos divini supplicii metus a scelere revocarti, quamque sancta sit societas civium inter ipsos diis inmortalibus interpositis tum iudicibus, tum testibus-, cf. Plat. Legg. 10, 885b: θεούς ήγούμενος είναι κατά νόμους ούδείς πώποτε οΰτε Ιργον άσεβές είργάσατο έκών οΰτε λόγον άφήκεν άνομον, άλλά êv δή τι των τριών πάσχων, ή τοϋτο δπερ εΤπον ούχ ήγούμενος, ή τό δεύτερον 8ντας ού φροντίζειν άνθρώπων, ή τρίτον εύπαραμυθήτους είναι θυσίαις τε καΐ εύχαϊς παραγομένους [see F. Solmsen, Plato's Theology (1942), 28; 132]; Plut. Adv. Colot. 31 : πόλις äv μοι δοκεϊ μάλλον έδάφους χωρίς ή πολιτεία της περί θεών δόξης ύφαιρεθείσης παντάπασι σύστασιν λαβείν ή λαβοΰσα τηρήσαι. τοϋτο μέντοι τό συνεκτικόν άπάσης κοινωνίας καΐ νομοθεσίας έρεισμα και, βάθρον. Atheism, however, destroys the foundation of oaths; cf. Philo, De Decalogo, 91 : εί μέν οδν άγνοών, ίίθεός τις εί, πηγή δέ πάντων άδικη μάτων άθεότης· πρός δέ τω άθέω καΐ καταστρατηγείς

τόν δρκον, δμνύς κατά του μη προσέχοντος ώς έπιμελουμένου των άνθρωπείων πραγμάτων; Quintil. Inst. 5, 6, 3; Schol. Aristoph. Nub. 1235 : οδτω καταφρονώ τούς δρκους• θεοί γάρ ούκ είσίν; J. C. Bolkestein, δσιος en εύσεβής (1936), 203; Α. J. Festugière, La Révélation d'Hermès Trism. 2 (1949), 378, who remarks that the falsity of the conclusion indicates the falsity of the thesis. societas generis humani: "human society"; cf. Fin. 3, 62; 4, 4; 5, 65; O f f . 1, 50; 1, 53; 1, 153; 1, 157; 3, 21; 3, 28 (where the reasoning is the reverse of that here expressed: if society is overthrown the virtues, including justice, are destroyed, and those who destroy them are to be judged as impious towards the gods); 3, 118; Τ use. 1, 64; Am. 20. See also Aristot. Rhet. 1, 15, 1376 b 11-14, on the importance of law (νόμος) and contracts (συνθήκαι), ώστε άκύρων γιγνομένων άναιρεϊται ή πρός άλλήλους χρεία τών άνθρώπων. excellentissuma . . . iustitia: for the praise of justice cf. O f f . 1, 20: iustitia, in qua virtutis est splendor maximus; 1, 62: nihil enim honestum esse potest quod iustitia vacat\ 2, 38: iustitia ex qua una virtute viri boni appellantur; 3, 28: haec [sc. iustitia] enim una virtus omnium est domina et regina virtutum·, Rep. 6, 16; Aristot. Eth. Nie. 5, 3, 1129 b 25: αΰτη μέν οδν ή δικαιοσύνη άρετή μέν έστι τελεία . . . πολλάκις κρατίστη τών άρετών είναι δοκεϊ ή δικαιοσύνη . . . καΐ τελεία μάλιστα άρετή [sc. δικαιοσύνη] ; Pol. 3, 13, 1283 a 38: κοινωνικήν γάρ άρετήν είναί φαμεν την δικαιοσύνην, ή πάσας άναγκαϊον άκολουθεϊν τάς δλλας. For the danger to justice from atheistic views cf. Sext. Emp. Adv. Phys. 1, 126: καΐ μην εϊπερ καΐ ή δικαιοσύνη κατά τήν έπιπλοκήν τών άνθρώπων πρός τε άλλήλους καΐ πρός θεούς είσηκται, εί μή είσΐ θεοί ούδέ δικαιοσύνη συστήσεται · δπερ άτοπον ; 1, 131 : δεήσει μή 8ντων θεών μηδέ δικαιοσύνην ύπαρκτήν εΤναι. ύπαρκτή Sé έστιν ή δικαιοσύνη · ρητέον άρα καΐ

1,4

131

iustitia tollatur. Sunt autem alii philosophi, et hi quidem magni atque nobiles, qui deorum mente atque ratione 1 omnem mundum administran et regi censeant, ñeque vero 2 id solum, sed etiam ab isdem hominum vitae consuli et provideri; nam et fruges et reliqua quae terra pariat et tempestates 3 ac temporum varietates 1

oratione ANOB1

2

uerum B1

θεούς ύπάρχειν; Ambros. De Parad. 18: nulla enim abundantiores videtur fructus habere virtus quam aequitas atque iustitia·, Amm. Marc. 20, 8, 11: excellentissimam virtutum omnium adverte iustitiam·, Hierocl. in Aur. Carm. 10 {Frag. Philos. Gr. 1, 433 Mullach): δικαιοσύνης . . . τελειοτάτης οΰσης πασών άρετών καΐ περιεκτικής των άλλων, ώς οικείων μερών. The phrase una excellentissima virtus may be added here for emphasis (J. B. Hofmann, Lat. Synt. u. Stilistik (1928), 618) or to improve the clausula (Ax, appendix, 161). sunt autem alii: the Stoics are here, as repeatedly by Cicero and others, contrasted with the Epicureans (1, 3: sunt enim philosophi) ; cf. Pacuv. 372 Ribb. : sunt autem alii philosophi qui, etc. et hi quidem: cf. O f f . 1, 43: sunt autem multi, et quidem cupidi splendoris ... qui, etc. magni atque nobiles: cf. Ac. 2, 17: quidam e philosophis, et ii quidem non mediocres·, 2, 76: Cirenaici .. . minime contempti philosophi·, Div. 2, 150: philosophi [se. Stoici\ ... nec ii quidem contemptissimi·, Aug. C.D. 11, 5: isti philosophos ceteros nobilitate atque auctoritate vicerunt. On Cicero's regard for the Stoics, whose lofty utterances on morality attracted him more than their barren dialectic repelled him, cf. J. S. Reid, ed. of the Académica (1885), 17. Offset to them are the philosophers of the non-Socratic tradition, whom in Tuse. 1, 55 he calls plebeii. mente atque ratione: for the coupling of these words (including 1, 98; 1, 104; 2, 38; 2, 46; 2, 88; 2, 115), which in Tusc. 5, 39, seem completely equated, cf. T. Wopkens, Advers. crit. 1 (1828), 77 ; A. Yon, Ratio et les mots de la famille

3

tempestas A1 H1 G, tempestatem H2\ de reor (1933), 233-234. This idea seems not unlike that of Providentia deorum in 2, 73-75; cf. Fin. 4, 12: divina mente atque natura mundum universum atque eius maximas partis administrari·, Diog. L. 7, 138: τόν δη κόσμον διοικεΐσθαι κατά νουν καί πρόνοιαν, καθά φησι Χρύσιππός τ' έν τ ω πέμπτω Περί προνοίας καί Ποσειδώνιος έν τ ώ τρίτω Περί θεών; Arr. Epict. 2, 14, 11: λέγουσιν oí φιλόσοφοι ότι μαθεϊν δει πρώτον τοϋτο, ότι εστί θεός καί προνοεί τών δλων. Arnobius, 2, 56, notes four shades in the spectrum of belief: deos nonnulli esse abnegant; prorsus dubitare se alii an sint uspiam dicunt ; alii vero existere ñeque humana curare ; immo alii perhibent et rebus interesse mortalium et terrenas administrare rationes. Theon, Progymnasm. 12 (Rhet. Gr. 2, 121 Spengel) cites as an example of a theme for discussion, εί θεοί προνοούνται τοϋ κόσμου. The general subject is that of the third division of the Stoic theodicy (2, 3; 2, 73-132), and the next point here mentioned (hominum vitae consuli et provideri) is at 2, 3, its fourth division, which is elaborated in 2, 132-167. For the combination of the two cf. 2, 65. consuli et provideri: cf. 2, 164: nec vero universo generi hominum solum sed etiam singulis a dis inmortalibus consuli et provideri solet\ also 2, 58: consultrix et provida. quae terra pariat: Latin lacks a single word for vegetable life—a striking example of the undeveloped state of the Latin philosophic and scientific vocabulary; cf. 1, 8. In Greek, despite the common use of φυτά, periphrases are frequent, e.g., Hippocr. De prise. Med. (XXI, 26 Κ.): τά έκ της γης φυόμενα [cf. De Nat. Pueri (XXI, 405 ; 414 Κ.]; Plat. Symp. 186a; Epin. 981d; Xen. Symp. 2, 25; Aristot. De An. 3, 12,

132

1,4

caelique mutationes, quibus omnia quae terra gignat maturata pubescant, a dis inmortalibus tribui generi humano putant, multaque quae dicentur in his libris colligunt, quae talia sunt ut ea ipsa 1 dei inmortales ad usum hominum fabricati paene videantur. 1

ei ipsi EPF

434 a 26: πάσι τοις φυομένοις [cf. Hist. An. 5, 11, 543 b 24, and H. Bonitz's index, 833 a 2]; E pis t. 1 {Epist. Gr. 172 Hercher): των έκ γης φυομένων; Muson. fr. 18a, p. 95 Hense: έκ των φυομένων έκ γης; Simplic. in Epictet. p. 37 Diibner: κατερριζομένα [Proci, in Tim. p. 281A (p. 135 Diehl)]. In Latin herbae do not include arbores, arborum et stirpium {Phil. 2, 55), and stirpes alone (as in 2, 36; 2, 130) is infrequent in this sense; sata = cultivated plants (cf. A. S. Pease in CI. Weekly, 21 (1928), 127), and planta means a "slip" rather than a "plant"; cf. Madvig on Fin. 4, 13. Consequently many periphrases are employed, e.g., 1, 4 (just below): quae terra gignat [cf. 2, 130; Fin. 5, 33; 5, 39] ; 2, 26 : quae terra ... ipsa ex se generata stirpibus infixa contineat\ 2, 28: ea quorum stirpes terra continentur·, 2, 83: quae a terra stirpibus continentur [cf. 2,127] ; 2, 29: earum rerum quae gignuntur e terra [cf. 2, 33; 2,120; Fin. 4, 13; 5,10; 5, 26; O f f . 2, 11 ; Ac. 1, 26] ; 2, 50: quae oriuntur e terra·, Sen. 52: quae generantur e terra·, O f f . 1, 22: quae in terris gignantur·, Τ use. 5, 37 : quod ita ortum esset e terra ut stirpibus suis niteretur·, Div. 2, 30: earum rerum quas terra procreet·, F am. 7, 26, 2: terra nata. Other writers have the same difficulty, e.g., Lucr. 2, 940: terraque creatis; Plin. N.H. 12, 1: terra edita-, 13, 31 : arboribus, immo potius omnibus quae terra gignat·, Gell. 2, 24, 7: quidquid esset natum e terra·, Censorin. 4, 9; [Apul.] Asci. 1, 4; [Aug.] XXI Sentent. 16 (p. 730 Migne); Boeth. in I sag. Porphyr, ed. 2, 1, 1 {C.S.E.L. 48, 136): herbarum atque arborum et quicquid terrae radicitus adfixum tenetur·, Isid. Etym. 17, 6, 1. Seneca {N.Q. 2, 1, 2) says that the jurisconsults used the expression de omnibus quae solo continentur. See also below 1, 99, n. {homine . .. arbore).

tempestates: cf. 3, 16: ex perturbationibus tempestatum·, Div. 2, 89: cum tempore anni tempestatumque caeli conversiones commutationesque tantae fiant-, Parad. 51 : nec tempestatum nec temporum perturbatione mutatur. Tempestas usually applies to smaller units, like changes of weather, and tempus to larger and more regular ones, like seasonal variations (as in 1, 100; 2, 155; Tuse. 1, 68; Hier. Ep. 100, 10, 2; Aug. C.D. 5, 6). In 3, 16-17 the perturbationes tempestatum seem to be contrasted with the temporum ordo. caeli mutationes: cf. 2, 13: caeli temperatione·, Div. 2, 89; 2, 94; Τ use. 1, 68 ; the expression probably refers to the clear, cloudy, or rainy phases of the sky. maturata pubescant: cf. 2, 50: pubescant maturitatemque adsequantur·, Sen. 53: dein maturata dulcescit·, Pease on Virg. Aen. 4, 514. It is unnecessary to suppose with W. Friedrich {Jahrb. f . cl. Phìlol. 127 (1883), 422) that emendation is needed, or with Goethe {ad loc.) that the present phrase is a case of hysteron proteron. a dis: cf. 2, 13, where these blessings are considered an argument for the existence of deity. in his libris: 2, 154-162. colligunt: cf. Div. 1, 39: Chrysippus multis et minutis somniis colligendis·, 2, 33: multa enim Stoici colligunt·, and for the interest of the Stoics in the accumulation of arguments Pease on Div. 1, 6 {Posidonius). ea ipsa: the reading ea ipsi was favored by Ernesti, Heindorf, and Forchhammer {Nordisk tidskrift f . filol. 6 (1880), 33), and were it attested by mss would without question be retained, but the principle of the lectio difficilior supports ipsa. fabricati paene: cf. 1, 20: non modo natum mundum ... sed etiam manu paene factum·, Ac. 2, 87: esse aliquam vim ...

1,5

133

Contra quos Carneades ita multa disseruit ut excitaret homines non socordes ad veri investigandi cupiditatem. 5 Res enim nulla est de qua tantopere non solum indocti sed etiam docti dissentiant; quorum opiniones cum tarn variae sint tamque inter se dissidentes, alterum fieri1 profecto potest 2 ut 1 aliorum fieri Bx, aliutrum [fieri D1Bì, alterum nemo fieri Ν profecto Η

quae finxerit vel, ut tuo verbo utar, quae fabricata sit hominem, qualis ¡sta fabrica est-, 2, 119; 2, 121; Tuse. 1, 47; 1, 62; also the verb machinor (2, 128; 2, 149; Tim. 9). God is the fabricator (Ac. 2, 120; Tim. 6, rendering ó τεκταινόμενος ; Manil. 5, 31; Quintil. Inst. 2, 16, 12; Chalcid. in Tim. 29; Firm. Mat. Math. 7, 1, 2; 8, 1, 3), opifex (1, 18 = δημιουργός; 2, 142), or artifex (2, 58; Tim. 6 = δημιουργός); his workmanship and its product are called fabrica (1, 19; 1, 47; 1, 53; 2, 121; 2, 138; O f f . 1, 127), fabricatio (2, 133), or constructio (Ac. 2, 86). Carneades: cf. 1, 11, n. (Cameade)·, 2, 162: Carneades lubenter in Stoicos invehebatur·, 3, 44; Τ use. 4, 53: licet insectemur istos [sc. Stoicos], ut Carneades solebat·, 5, 83: is [i.e... Carneades] ut contra Stoicos quos studiosissime semper refellebat·, 5, 84 : ut Carneades contra Stoicos disserebat. His attitude was doubtless prompted by a feeling that the Stoics were the keenest opponents of Academic scepsis ; A. Goedeckemeyer, Gesch. d. gr. Skeptizismus (1905), 66. Cf. also Diog. L. 4, 62: τά των Στωικών βιβλία άναγνούς έπιμελώς τά Χρυσίππου, έπιεικώς αύτοΐς άντέλεγε καΐ εΰημέρει τοσούτον ώστε έκεϊνο έπιλέγειν· ει μη γάρ ήν Χρύσιππος, ούκ äv ήν έγώ. Other accounts make Carneades take doses of hellebore before replying to the works of the Stoics (Val. Max. 8, 7, ext. 5; Plin. N.H. 25, 52; Gell. 17, 15, 1-2). The results of his negative criticism are to be seen in our third book, of which he —through the agency of his pupil, the recorder of his doctrines, Clitomachus— is in large measure the ultimate source. ita multa disseruit: ita seems to modify disseruit rather than multa·, cf. 1,

2

potest

23: ita multa sunt incommoda in vita ut [though Mayor there equates ita multa with tot\\ 1, 54: ita late longeque peregrinata ut\ Sen. 12: cuius sermone ita cupide fruebar quasi·, Att. 6, 2, 8 : inclusum in curia senatum habuerunt Salaminium ita multo s dies ut interierint nonnulli fame·, 2 Verr. 2, 8 : magistratuum ... iniurias ita multorum tulerunt ut numquam ... ad aram legum ... confugerint-, Tac. Germ. 16: quaedam loca ... illinunt terra ita pura ac splendente ut picturam ... imitetur. socordes: here probably "stupid" rather than "lazy"; yet cf. Brut. 239: secors ipsius natura neglegensque. veri investigandi: cf. Tuse. 5, 68: ad investigandam veri tat em studio incitato·, Fin. 1, 3: nec modus est ullus investigandi veri·, 4, 20: veri investigandi cupidus·, Hortens. fr. 32 Müller: amor iste investigandae veritatis. On the discovery of truth as an aim of the Academics cf. 1,11 ; Fin. 1,13 -.verum enim invenire volumus [and Reid's n.]; Rep. 3, 8; O f f . 2, 7-8. 5 tantopere . . . dissentiant: cf. Ac. 2, 132; 2, 147; elsewhere tantum dissentio (Fin. 1, 5; Pro Font. 30). indocti . . . docti: Cicero frequently thus contrasts men on the basis of their possession or lack of an education; e.g. 3, 5: oratio aut docti aut indocti·, Ac. 1, 4; Fin. 5, 89: docti et indocti·, Tusc. 2, 43: inter omnis igitur hoc constat, nec doctos homines solum sed etiam indoctos·, Sen. 75; Rep. 1, 56. The language of 1, 44 infra (constat inter omnis non philosophos solum sed etiam indoctos) indicates that docti here probably = philosophi·, cf. N. Stang in Symb. Osloenses, 11 (1932), 91. tam variae: cf. 1, 1, n. (tam variae sunt). alterum fieri, etc. : for this common-

134

1,5

earum 1 nulla, alterum certe non potest ut plus una vera 2 sit. 3 Qua quidem in causa et benivolos obiurgatores placare 3 et invidos vituperatores confutare possumus, ut alteros reprehen1

uetearum B\ et earum A

1

uera add. A

place—naturally most appropriate in the mouth of an Academic—cf. Ae. 2, 115: nostra, inquies, sola vera sunt, certe sola, si vera; plura enim vera discrepantia esse non pos sunt", 2, 117: quem unum e physicis potissimum probabit? nec plus uno poterti ; 2, 147 : philosophorum qui ... tanto opere discrepant ut, cum plus uno verum esse non possit, iacere necesse sit tot tam nobilis sententias·, De Or. 2, 30: ut uterque nostrum eadem de re alias aliud defendat, cum plus uno verum esse non possit·, Plut. Platon. Quaest. 1, 2: ώς μαρτυρεί των αιρέσεων τό πλήθος, ών αν άριστα πράττη φιλοσοφία, μίαν έχει κατορθοϋσαν, οίόμενος δέ τάς άλλας άπάσας καΐ μαχομένας προς τήν άλήθειαν; Sen. Ερ. 102, 13: Hit placet verum, veritatis una vis, una factes est, etc.·, Lucian, Hermot. 14: τό δέ γε άληθές, οΐμαι, πάντως που Sv ήν αύτών [the philosophers] άλλ' ού πάντα διάφορά γε οντα; 65: τό δ' άληθές άλλο τι είναι πρός μηδενός αύτών πω εύρημένον; Galen, De Cuiusque An. Pece. Dignot. 1 (V, 60-61 Κ.): και των άποφηναμένων φιλοσόφων ύπέρ άγαθών τε καΐ κακών άλλήλαις μαχομένας δόξας ούκ έγχωρεϊ, φασίν, άπάσας άληθεϊς εϊναι, δύνασθαί γε μήν ίσως είναι ψευδείς άπάσας; Arnob. 3, 40: ita enim labant sententiae alteraque opinione ab altera convellitur ut aut nihil ex omnibus verum sit aut si ab aliquo dicitur, tot rerum diversitatibus nesciatur·, Aug. C.D. 19, 2: non enim veram plus quam unam vera ratio esse permittit. More appreciation for the "broken lights" of truth is to be found in the passages cited by Mayor from Legg. 1, 47; Philodem, De Piet. p. 109 Gomperz; Lact. Inst. 7, 7, 2-4. qua quidem, etc.: Mayor's transposition of this sentence to the middle of 1, 6, after susceptum, has rightly been rejected by subsequent editors, for it is more logical where it stands. Yet even at best the sections from this point through 1, 12 form a kind of

3

piacere A1

intrusion of Cicero's own experiences and beliefs into the course of an argument which in 1, 4-5 emphasized the wisdom of Academic suspense of judgment, in view of the disagreement of other philosophic schools, and at 1, 13 he returns to the same topic, suggesting the use in this intrusion of his volumen prooemiorum (cf. introd. 15; 1, 1, n. {cum multae), above). benivolos obiurgatores: cf. Am. 88: et monendi amici saepe sunt et obiurgandi, et haec accipienda amice, cum benevole fiunt-, O f f . 1, 58; Div. 1, 111 \ ut obiurgatores suo s convincerei-, Fin. 1, 2: philosophiae vituperatoribus [cf. Tuse. 2, 4], The rhyming balance between benivolos obiurgatores placare and invidos vituperatores confutare should be noted. C. V. Kindervater (Anmerk. u. Abh. ... ü. Cic. Büchern v. d. Nat. d. Götter 1, (1790), 57-58), followed by F. A. Wolf (Kl. Sehr. 1 (1869), 509-510), identifies the benivolos with the Stoics and the invidos with the Epicureans, and Heindorf (ad loc.) with Balbus and Velleius, but this seems unduly precise; cf. A. S. Pease in Trans. Am. philol. Assoc. 44 (1913), 37, n. 57. Other passages in which Cicero classifies different types of critics are Ac. 2, 5-8; Fin. 1, 1 (cf. Reid's n.); O f f . 2, 1-8. His own method (Tuse. 2, 5) professes refellere sine pertinacia et refelli sine iracundia. alteros, etc.: cf. Isoer. Paneg. 130: χρή δέ κατηγορειν μέν ήγεϊσθαι τούς έπί βλάβη τοιαύτα λέγοντας, νουθετεΐν δέ τούς έπ' ωφελεία λοιδοροϋντας; Joseph. C. Ap. 1, 3: περί τούτων άπάντων φήθην δεϊν γράψαι συντόμως, των μέν λοιδορούντων την δυσμένειαν καΐ τήν έκούσιον έλέγξαι ψευδολογίαν, των δέ τήν άγνοιαν έπανορθώσασθαι, διδάξαι δέ πάντας δσοι τάληθές είδέναι βούλονται; Gnom. Vat. 361 (Wien. Stud. 11 (1889), 50): Ισοκράτης άκρόασιν ποιούμενος είπε τριών έστοχάσθαι· τούς

1,6

135

disse paeniteat, alteri didicisse se 1 gaudeant; nam qui admonent amice docendi sunt, qui inimice2 insectantur repellendi. 6 Multum autem fluxisse video de libris nostris, quos compluris 3 brevi tempore edidimus, variumque sermonem partim admirantium 1

se add. Β

2

inimici A1

3

Cum pluris ANB, cum plures CO

συνετούς ώφελήσαι, τούς άπειρους διδάξαι, τούς φθονερούς λυπησαι ; Clem. Paedag. 1, 66, 1: άμφω μέν γαρ δνειδίζετον, καΐ ό φίλος καί ό μή, άλλ* ó μέν έχθρύς έπιγελών, ό δέ φίλος εύνοών; Aug. De An. 2, 1 : didicisse te quod ignorabas grattas egeris; C. Acad. 2, 12: homini enim homo falsus docendus, fallax cavendus debet videri; quorum prius magistrum bonum, posterius discipulum cautum desideraf, Themist. Or. 22, p. 277a Hardouin (p. 336 Dind.). repellendi: cf. De Or. 2, 72: armatus adversarias qui sit et feriendus et repellendus. 6 multum: continued by variumque below. Varius is by Cicero often combined with another adjective, especially with multus·, e.g., Ac. 2, 41; Fin. 1, 65 (cf. 4, 13); Tuse. 1, 47; 5, 1; 5, 111; O f f . 1, 67; Rep. 3, 14. fluxisse: commonly explained of the spreading of rumors ; Francklin renders : " . . . t h e several books which I have lately published have occasioned much noise." The nearest parallel appears in Tusc. 4, 2: Pythagorae autem doctrina cum longe lateque flueret, permanavisse mihi videtur in banc civitatem. On the influence of his philosophical works cf. 1, 8; Div. 2, 5; O f f . 2, 2; A. S. Pease in Trans. Am. pbilol. Assoc. 44 (1913), 29, n. 22. nostris: for nos and noster in the sense of ego and meus cf. R. S. Conway in Trans. Camb. philol. Soc. 5 (1899), 1-79 (nos in Cicero's Letters)·, R. Kühner and C. Stegmann, Ausf. Gram. d. lat. Spr. 2, l 2 (1912), 87-88; F. Slotty in Indog. Forsch. 44 (1926), 264-305; W. S. Maguinness in Mnemos. 3 ser., 7 (1938), 148-156 (nos in Catullus); id. in CI. Quart. 35 (1941), 127-135, who, discussing nos in Virgil, classifies into plurals of (1) proprietorship, (2) social and domestic use, (3) authorship—to which

the present seems to belong—, (4) modesty, (5) pleading, and (6) pathos, self-pity, or complaint. compluris : cf. Div. 2, 1 : quod compluribus iam libris me arbitror consecutum·, O f f . 2, 2: libri nostri complures non modo ad legendi sed etiam ad scribendi Studium excitaverunt. In the famous list of his philosophic works (Div. 2, 1-4) he mentions certain (De República, De Oratore, Brutus, and Orator) which date before the death of Tullia (February, 45), and then names the Hortensius (1), Académica (4), De Finibus (5), Tusculans (5), De Natura Deorum (3), Consolatio (1), De Senectute (1), and De Divinatione (2), or a total of 22 books, falling between February, 45 and March, 44. To these should probably be added the Paradoxa (1), Timaeus (1), De Fato (1), De Amicitia (1), De Officiis (3), De Gloria (2), De Virtutibus (1), and possibly the De Legibus (3?), to make at least 35 philosophical books composed between February, 45 and December, 43, during the latter part of which time he was much occupied with public duties and oratory (e.g., the Philippics). In O f f . 1, 3, he says that his philosophical writings were nearly as numerous as his orations ; cf. also Fin. 1, 11; Top. 1; Sen. 3; O f f . 3, 4. varium . . . sermonem: cf. Fin. 5, 1: vario sermone sex ... stadia confecimus·, Sen. 46: noctem vario sermone produximus\ Ac. 2, 41: varia oratione defendant·, also especially Fin. 2, 10: varietas enim Latinum verbum est, idque proprie quidem in disparibus coloribus dicitur, sed transfertur in multa disparia : vartum poema, varia oratio, varii mores, varia fortuna, voluptas etiam varia dici solet. partim: T. Birt (Beri, philol. Woch 38 (1918), 5491 points out that three

136

1,6

unde hoc philosophandi nobis subito Studium extitisset, partim quid quaque de re certi haberemus scire cupientium. Multis etiam sensi mirabile videri earn nobis potissimum probatam esse philosophiam 1 quae lucem eriperet et quasi noctem quandam rebus offunderet,2 desertaeque disciplinae et iam pridem relictae 1

philosophie Β1

2

effunderet DO

questions are raised by critics: (1) why των καταχέας ούδέν έά προφαίνεσθαι; he should study philosophy at all; Sext. Emp. Pyrrhon. 1, 20: εί γάρ τοιούτος άπατεών έστιν ό λόγος ώστε καΐ τά (2) what his philosophic opinions are; φαινόμενα μόνον ούχί των οφθαλμών and (3) why he should select the Acadeήμών ύφαρπάζειν; Lact. Inst. 3, 15, 3 ; mic school. These three points are Hier. Adv. Rufin. 2, 10 : Uli enim omnium treated in sections 6-9, 10, and 11-12 philosophorum invidiam non ferentes quod respectively. veritatem e vita tollerent, verisimilia repereadmirantium: cf. 1, 11; Off. 2, 2: runt, ut ignorantiam rerum probabili assermirenturque in ea [sc. philosophia] tantum itone temperarent·, Aug. C. Acad. 2, 29: me operae et temporis ponere. antequam stilum nostrum tenebrae occupent subito: this point is answered in the quae patronae Academicorum soient esse; next sentence. De Op. Monach. 3: conantur et sibi et quid . . . certi: answered in 1, 10. ceteris caliginem obducere. For the phrase With the phrase cf. 1, 14: aliquid certi·, cf. Pro Rose. Am. 150: lucem ... eripere Div. 2, 8. The inquisitive public cannot cupiat-, Liv. 10, 32, 6; Tib. 1, 9, 35-36. realize that Cicero has not, despite his U. Nottola (La similitudine in Cicerone sceptical principles, some private dog(1896), 16 — known to me only through matic beliefs. Cf. also Div. 1, 11: aveo the review of A. Cima in Boll, di filol. audire de divinatione quid sentías. class. 3 (1897), 102-105) finds in the potissimum: cf. 1, 9: banc potissimum philosophic works one simile in every (so 1, 11); 2, 58; Juv. 1, 19: cur tamen ten pages, in the rhetorical works one hoc potius libeat decurrere campo. Excuses in sixteen, in the orations one in forty, are more often made for entering fields and in the letters one in one hundred already crowded (e.g., Virg. G. 3, 2-9) pages. than for attempting unpopular subjects. lucem eriperet : this accusation, doubtnoctem . . . offunderet: cf. Tuse. 5, less deriving in part from the state6 : haec indoctorum animis offusa caligo ment of Socrates that the one thing est\ Pro Rose. Am. 91 : si offusa rei which he knew was that he knew publicae sempiterna nox esset. Theodoret, nothing (Plat. Apol. 21d\ was frequently Gr. Äff. 8, 7: τήν της άπιστίας καταmade against philosophers, particularly κεχυμένην έχων άχλύν. Neopythagoreanthe sceptics; cf. Ac. 2, 16: posteaquam ism claimed to do the opposite ; Iambi. Arcesilas, Zenoni . .. obtrectans ... dum De comm. Math. Scient. 34, p. 96 Festa: huius definitiones labefactare volt, conatus πασαν άφελεϊν τήν άχλύν τήν έπισκοest clarissimis rebus tenebras obducere ; τοΰσαν τοις πράγμασιν, ώστε είλικρινώς 2, 30: quid enim facturum putem ... qui τήν άλήθειαν αύτήν θεασθαι; and cf. lucem eripere conetur·, 2, 61 : isti autem quos the claims of Gnostic and other types tu probas tantis offusis tenebris ne scintillam of revelation. quidem ullam nobis ad dispiciendum reliquedesertae . . . e t . . . relictae: cf. 1, 11 : runt\ 2, 105: non enim lucem eripimus·, desertarum relictarumque rerum patrocinium·, Philo, De Poster. Caini, 58 : τόν νουν . . . Mayor remarks : "desertae refers to deserδς έν άνθρώπω τω βραχεί κόσμω μή tion by an adherent, such as Antiochus. άνατείλας . . . πολύ σκότος των 8νrelictae to general neglect." For the lack

1,6

137

patrocinium necopinatum a nobis esse susceptum. Nos autem nee subito coepimus philosophari nec mediocrem a 1 primo tempore aetatis in eo studio operam curamque consumpsimus, et cum minime videbamur tum maxime philosophabamur; quod et orationes declarant, refertae philosophorum sententiis, et doctissi1

a om. Β

of contemporary interest in the Academy cf. Ac. 1, 13: retíctam a te veterem illam, inquit, tractari autem novam ; 2, 11 : Philonem . . . homo sane in ista philosophia quae nunc prope dimissa revocatur, probatus et nobilis; 2, 129: omitto ilia quae relicta iam videntur, ut Erillum·, Fin. 2, 35: nam Pyrrho, Aristo, Erillus iam diu abiecti [cf. 2, 43]; 5, 23: iam explosae eiectaeque sententiae Pyrrhonis, Aristonis, Ertili [cf. O f f . 1, 6]; Legg. 1, 38: iam tarnen fractam et convictam sectam secuti sunt·, Τ use. 5 87: qui desertum il lud Carneadeum curent defendere·, Sen. N.Q. 7, 32, 2 : Academici et veteres et minores nullum antistitem reliquerunt ; quis est qui tradal praecepta Pyrrhonis·, Aug. C. Acad. 3, 41 : Antiochus ... auditis Philone Académico et Mnesarcho Stoico, in Academiam veterem, quasi vacuam defensoribus . . . velut adiutor et civis irrepserat ... post ilia tempora non longo intervallo omni pervicacia pertinaciaque demortua, os illud Piatonis ... dimotis nubibus erroris emicuit, maxime in Plotino·, J. S. Reid, ed. of Académica (1885), 15-16; R. Hoyer, Die Heilslehre (1897), 57. Cicero {Tim. 1) and Seneca (N.Q. 7, 32, 2) similarly note the eclipse of the Pythagorean school. patrocinium: cf. 1, 11; Fin. 2, 67; Ac. 2, 17; 2, 105; Div. 2, 150; Rep. 3, 8; Parad. 15; 2 Verr. 4, 81; Phil. 1, 3—in some of these cases the word is used with suscipio. a primo tempore aetatis: cf. O f f . 2, 4: in his studiis ab initio versatus aetatis·, Tusc. 5, 5: cuius [sc. philosophiae] in sinum cum a primis temporibus aetatis nostra voluntas studiumque nos compulisset\ Rep. 1, 7 : studiorum in quibus a pueritia vixeram [cf. Fat. 2]; De Or. 1, 2: eas artis quibus a pueris dediti fuimus·, Brut. 315: Studium

. . . philosophiae numquam intermissum a primaque adulescentia cultum et semper auctum\ De Consul, ap. Div. 1, 22: e quibus [the studies of the Academy and the Lyceum] ereptum primo iam a flore iuventae / te patria in media virtutum mole locavit·, F am. 4, 4, 4: etsi a prima aetate me omnis ars et doctrina liberalis et maxime philosophia delectavit, tamen hoc Studium cotidie ingravescit, credo et aetatis maturitate ad prudentiam et his temporum vitiis ut nulla res alia levare animum molestiis possit. On Cicero's early philosophic studies, first as a boy, probably before 90 B.C., under the Epicurean Phaedrus, see Fam. 13, 1, 2. Also as a boy he siudied under the Stoic Diodotus (Ac. 2, 115: Diodoto . . . quem a puero audivi, qui mecum vivit tot annos, qui habitat apud me, quem et admiror et diligo), then, cum princeps Academiae Philo cum Atheniensium optimatibus Mithridatico bello domo profugisset Romamque venisset totum ei me tradidi admirabili quodam ad philosophiam studio concitatus [Brut. 306; cf. Tac. Dial. 30]; later (79 B.C.) at Athens he heard Antiochus, who had brought the Academy back to a more dogmatic form (Brut. 315; Fin. 5, 1; Tusc. 5, 22; Plut. Cic. 4, 1-2), and, finally, at Rhodes in 77 or perhaps at Rome even earlier, he had become acquainted with Posidonius (Plut. Cic. 4, 4). For this succession of his teachers, to each of whom he seems to have continued personally attached, cf. R. Philippson, in P.-W. 7A (1939), 1174-1177. operam curamque: coupled in O f f . 1, 19; 1, 141; 3, 4; Tusc. 5, 2; Hertens. fr. 97 Müller. For operam consumo cf. Fin. 1, 1; Tusc. 1, 103; 4, 23; Rep. 1, 35. refertae philosophorum sententiis: as in Div. 2, 4, he reckons his writings

138

1,6

morum hominum familiaritates, quibus semper domus nostra floruit, et principes illi, Diodotus, Philo,1 Antiochus, Posidonius, 1

philo H, pililo ANO, Β in mg., phililo F in mg.

on rhetoric as appropriate parts of his philosophic corpus, so he here and in O f f . 1, 155 emphasizes the philosophic elements in his orations, though, as Mayor remarks, he may mean little more than the use of ethical commonplaces. Cf. Orai. 12; Att. 15, 13, 6: nos hic φιλοσοφοΰμεν—quid enim aliudì—et τά περί του καθήκοντος magnifici explicamus προσφωνοϋμεν^«« Ciceroni. Passages of somewhat philosophic character are listed by Reid in his edition of the Académica (1885), 9, n. 6; id. in Mayor's ed. ad loc. (to which add Pro Mil. 83-84); H. Ranft, Quaest. philos, ad Orat. Cic. pertinentes (1912). When in exile Cicero asked his friends to call him not an orator but a philosopher (Plut. Cic. 32, 5). In De Or. 1, 83 he says that qui esset eloquens eum virtutes omnes habere atque esse sapientem·, but in O f f . 1, 3, he thinks that no Greek, save perhaps Demetrius of Phalerum, has won distinction both as an orator and as a philosopher. Mayor remarks that "Cicero was one of those who led the way in bringing about that transfusion of Roman technicalities by the spirit of Greek philosophy which made Roman law so important a factor in our modern civilization." R. Philippson (in P.-W. 7A (1939), 1177) comments upon the frequency with which such philosophic thoughts appear in his letters, though Cicero naturally does not here allude to those, since they were neither published nor intended to be published. With the form of expression cf. Brut. 65 [of Cato] : refertae sunt orationes amplius centum quinquaginta ... et verbis et rebus inlustribus. familiaritates : Cicero clearly recognized his own debt to his teachers; cf. O f f . 1, 155: nosque ipsi, quicquid ad rem publicam attulimus, si modo aliquid attulimus, a doctoribus et doctrina instructi ad earn et ornati accessimus. On his patronage

of philosophers cf. Ac. 2, 115: Epicúreos totmeos familiares·, Tuse. 3, 22: Peripatetici, familiares nostri-, W. Allen and P. H. DeLacy in Class. Philol. 34 (1939), 61-63. Other philosophers whom Cicero describes as familiares include the Academic Cotta (1, 15), Cratippus the Peripatetic (Dip. 1, 5; 2, 107), Siro and Philodemus the Epicureans (Fin. 2, 119), Antiochus (Ac. 1, 13; 1, 43; 2, 137; Fin. 5, 75; Legg. 1, 54), and Posidonius (1, 123; 2, 88; Fin. 1, 6). The noun and adjective indicate a considerable degree of intimacy, and some of the persons in question—notably Diodotus—had actually lived as members of Cicero's household; cf. E. Bignone, Storia della lett. latina, 2 (1945), 167. domus . . . floruit: cf. Orat. 142: hominumque clarissimorum discipulis floruerunt domus\ Phil. 9, 4: earn familiam quae postea viris fortissimis floruit·, Pro Rose. Am. 15. principes: i.e., scholarchs; a term naturally not applicable to all his philosophic friends. Diodotus: the chief passages relating to him are: Ac. 2, 115 (quoted in note on a primo tempore aetatis above), for Cicero's study of rhetoric under him (cf. Tac. Dial. 30); Tuse. 5, 113: Diodotus Stoieus caecus multos annos nostrae domi vixit ... cum fidibus Pythagoreorum more uteretur cumque ei libri noctes et dies legerentur ... geometriae munus tuebatur verbis praecipiens discentibus unde quo quamque lineam scriberent·, Brut. 309: eram cum Stoico Diodoto, qui cum habitavisset apud me mecumque vixisset, nuper est domi meae mortuus .. . huic ego doctori et eius artibus variis atque multis ita eram deditus ut ab exercitationibus oratoriis nullus dies vacuus esset-, Fam. 9, 4; 13, 16, 4: domi meae cum Diodoto Stoico, homine meo iudicio eruditissimo, multum a puero fuit [sc. P. Crassus]; Att. 2, 20, 6 [July, 59 B . C . ] : Diodotus mortuus est; reliquit nobis HS for tasse

1,6 centiens. For the extent of his influence on Cicero cf. P. Boyancé in Rev. des it. lat. 14 (1936), 294-295. Philo: cf. 1, 17; 1, 59; 1, 113 (all these in the mouth of Cotta). This Academic, a native of Larissa, came as an exile to Rome in 88 B.C., and his influence there was strong, especially upon Cicero, who several times refers to him by name; e.g., 1, 17; Brut. 306 (quoted in note on a primo tempore aetatis above); Ac. 2, 11-12; 2, 17: Clitomacho Philo vester operam multos annos dedit. Philone autem vivo patrocinium Academiae non defuit·, 2, 18; 2, 69: Antiocho qui haec ipsa quae a me defenduntur et didicit apud Philonem tarn diu et constaret diutius didicisse neminem·. Tuse. 2, 9: Philo, quem nos frequenter audivimus, institua alio tempore rhetorum praecepta tradere, alio philosophorum·, 2, 26; Acad. Philos. Ind. Herculan. p. 16 Mekler: Φίλων 8' ó διαδεξάνο[ι]ς Κλειμαχ ; Plut. Cic. 3, 1 : άπαλλαγείς δέ των έν παισΐ διατριβών Φίλωνος ήκουσε τοϋ εξ Άκαδημείας, 6ν μάλιστα 'Ρωμαίοι των Κλειτομάχου συνήθων (cf. Eus. Pr. Εν. 14, 9, 1) καΐ διά τον λόγον έθαύμασαν καί διά τον τρόπον ήγάπησαν; Luculi. 42, 3: Άσκαλωνίτην Ά ν τίοχον, δν πάση σπουδή ποιησάμενος φίλον ό Λούκουλλος καί συμβιωτήν άντέταττε τοις Φίλωνος άκροαταϊς, ών καί Κικέρων ήν. Some considered his school the "Fourth Academy" and that of Antiochus the "Fifth Academy" (Eus. Pr. Ev. 14, 4, 16). For further information cf. Κ. v. Fritz in P.-W. 19 (1938), 2535-2544 (with bibliography on 2542-2544); R. Philippson in Riv. di filol. 66 (1938), 248. Antiochus: of Ascalon (which he early left and never revisited; Τ use. 5, 107), was a pupil at Athens of Philo {Ac. 2, 4; 2, 11; 2, 69; Eus. Pr. Ev. 14, 9, 3; Aug. C. Acad. 3, 41), and later his successor as head of the Academic school, in which capacity he became the friend and for six months the teacher of Cicero (Brut. 315; Ac. 2, 113; Plut. Cic. 4, 1; Anon. De Vir. ill. 81, 2), as well as the friend of Lucullus ( Ac. 2, 4; Plut. Lucull. 42, 3), Atticus (Legg. 1, 54), and M. Brutus (Brut. 315). Reacting

139

against the scepsis of Philo, ostensibly in the direction of the Old Academy (Ac. 1, 13), he adopted many of the tenets of the Stoics (Ac. 2, 67; 2, 132: Antiochum, qui appellabatur Academicus, erat quidem, si perpauca mutavisset, germanissimus Stoicus; 2, 133 : ipse Antiochus dissentit quibusdam in rebus ab his quos amat Stoicis; Plut. Cic. 4, 1 : φιλοτιμία τινί καί διαφορά πρός τούς Κλειτομάχου καί Φίλωνος συνήθεις [cf. Ac. 2, 69-70] τόν Στωϊκόν έκμεταβολής θεραπεύων λόγον έν τοις πλείστοις). His influence upon Cicero is to be seen at various points; H. v. Arnim in P.-W. 1 (1894), 2494, mentions especially the fifth book of the De Finibus; Top. 6-78; Ac. 2, 17-60. For a bibliography cf. v. Arnim, op. cit., 2493. Posidonius: of Apamea in Syria. In 77 Cicero had heard him lecture on philosophy at Rhodes (Plut. Cic. 4, 4), and later speaks of him as his teacher (here and in Fin. 1, 6; Fat. 5: magistri) and intimate friend (1, 123; 2, 88—in these two cases Cotta speaks but indicates that the intimacy includes those present—; Div. 2, 47; Fin. 1, 6; Τ use. 2, 61 : noster Posidonius, quem et ipse saepe vidi). He was a pupil of Panaetius (Div. I, 6; Suid. s.v. Ποσειδώνιος), from whom, however, he reverted in the direction of greater orthodoxy, and was a man of wide and varied information, whom Galen calls the most learned of the Stoics (Quod Animi Mores, 11, vol. 4, 819 K. ; De Hipp, et Plat. Plac. 8, 1, vol. 5, 652 K.), and in whom many modern scholars have tried, often by subtle methods of source-analysis, to discover the origin of many philosophical doctrines expounded not merely by Cicero but also by subsequent writers; cf. R. Philippson in P.-W. 7 A (1939), 1176, who points out, however, Cicero's own lack of acceptance of some of Posidonius's views. A brief factual account of his life and work is found in A. Schmekel, Die Philos, d. mittl. Stoa (1892), 9-14; an old and conservative collection of his fragments was published by J. Bake (1810); to the works noted in F. Liibker, Reallexikon d. kl. Alt? (1914), 847-848, many others may

140

1,7

a quibus instituti sumus. 7 Et si omnia philosophiae praecepta referuntur ad vitam, arbitramur nos et publicis et privatis in rebus ea praestitisse quae ratio et doctrina praescripserit. 4 Sin autem quis requirit quae causa nos inpulerit ut haec tam sero litteris mandaremus, nihil est quod expedire tam facile possimus.1 Nam cum otio 2 langueremus et is esset 3 rei publicae status ut earn 1

possumus Bx

2

otio] oratione NO

now be added, notably K. Gronau, Pos. ». d. jiidisch-christl. Genesisexegese (1914); W. W. Jaeger, Nemesios von Emesa (1914); Κ. Reinhardt, Poseidonios (1921); id., Kosmos u. Sympathie (1926); id., Poseidonios über Ursprung u. Entstehung (1928); J. Heinemann, Poseidonios' metaphys. Sehr. (1921-1928). For protests against the exaggeration of his influence cf. J. F. Dobson in CI. Quart. 12 (1918), 179-195; R. M. Jones in CI. Philol. 27 (1932), 113-135. In the universality of his interests some have compared him to Aristotle; cf. E. Oder in Philologus, 7 Supplbd. (1898), 330; W. Capelle in Mus. Helvet. 6 (1949), 82. 7 referuntur ad vitam: it was to be expected that Cicero, or any Roman, would be little interested in any part of philosophy not more or less directly applicable to practical life, hence his particular concern with political philosophy, ethics, and the philosophy of religion, and his neglect of metaphysics, aesthetics, and the more theoretical parts of logic. As remarked by J. S. Reid (on Ac. 2, 23), such statements as follow are especially characteristic of post-Aristotelian philosophy, when interest in pure speculation had languished. On this subject cf. Fin. 1, 42: sapientia, quae ars vivendi putanda est [see the notes of Madvig and Reid ad loc.]·, 3, 4: ars est enim philosophia vitae ; 5, 16: vivendi ars est prudentia·, 5, 18; Τ use. 1 , 1 : cum omnium artium quae ad rectam vivendi viam pertinerent ratio et disciplina studio sapientiae quae philosophia dicitur contineretur·, 2, 11: quotus enim quisque philosophorum invenitur qui . .. disciplinam suam non ostentationem scientiae sed legem vitae putet·, 2, 12: artemque vitae·, 4, 5: banc

3

esse A1 GB1

[i.e., philosophiam] amplissimam omnium artium, bene vivendi disciplinam·, 5, 5: o vitae philosophia dux·, Ac. 2, 23: sapient iam, artem vivendi-, O f f . 1, 153; Rep. 1, 30: quod si studia Graecorum vos tanto opere delectant, sunt alia liberiora et transfusa latius, quae vel ad usum vitae vel etiam ad ipsam rem publicam conferre possumus·, N. Stang in Symb. Osloenses, 11 (1932), 87. In Fam. 15, 4, 16, Cicero boasts nos philosophiam veram ... in forum atque in rem p. ... paene deduximus. praestitisse: cf. O f f . 1, 121: ilia tamen praestare debebit quae erunt in ipsius potestate, iustitiam, fidem, etc. ratio et doctrina: here perhaps standing for philosophia·, cf. Ν. Stang op. cit., 84; also Fam. 15, 4, 13: si quisquam fuit umquam remotus et natura et magis etiam . .. rattorte atque doctrina ab inani laude et sermonibus volgi. Ratio and doctrina comprise the two parts of education, what man reasons out for himself and what he necessarily accepts on the authority of others; cf. the contrast in 1, 10 between ratio and auctori tas. tam sero: Cicero was now over sixty, yet he had engaged in such studies from his early youth. litteris mandaremus: "commit to writing"; cf. Fin. 1, 1; 1, 11; Tuse. 1, 6; 2, 8; 4, 5; O f f . 2, 5; 3, 4; Div. 2, 50; Pro Plane. 74; 2 Verr. 3, 73; Fam. 13, 16, 4; and similar phrases in Ac. 1, 3; Pro Arch. 20; Phil. 2, 105. otio langueremus: cf. Div. 2, 6; Ac. 1, 11: nunc vero et fortunae gravissimo percussus vulnere et administratione rei publicae liberatus doloris medicinam a philosophia peto et otti oblectationem hanc honestissimam iudico\ 2, 6: quis reprendet otium nostrum, qui in eo non modo nosmetipsos

1,7

141

unius Consilio atque cura 1 gubernari necesse esset, primum ipsius 1

cura] iura Β 1

hebeseere et languere nolumus sed etiam ut viderim, omnem meam curam atque operam plurimis prosimus enitimur·, Τ use. 1, 1: ad philosophiam contulisse\ 4, 9, 2: omnia cum defensionum laboribus senatoriisque mu-enim delata ad unum sunt, is utitur Consilio neribus ... liberatus rettuli me ... ad ea ne suorum quidem sed suo-, 7, 28, 3: nec studia·, 2, 1; 5, 121: ubi enim melius uti vero nunc quidem culpa in eo est in cuius possumus hoc cuicmmodi est otio\ Div. 1,11; potestate omnia sunt·, Att. 8, 3, 2: si marno O f f . 2, 4; 3, 1-4; Att. 1, 17, 5; 1, 20, 7; et illum comitatum optimorum et clarissimo4,10,1 ; Fam. 9,6, 5 ; also Polyb. 3, 59,4 : rum civium deserò cadendum est in unius άπολελυμένων δέ και των πρακτικών potestatem; Tac. Ann. 4, 33, 2; Memnon, άνδρών της περί τάς πολεμικάς καΐ πο60, 4: της 'Ρωμαίων ηγεμονίας εις ένα λιτικάς πράξεις φιλοτιμίας, έκ δέ τούπεριισταμένης άνδρα, Γάϊον Ίούλιον των πολλάς και μεγάλας άφορμάς είληΚαίσαρα; Dio Cass. 43, 45, 2 ; 44, 8, 4; φότων εις τό πολυπραγμονειν καί φιλοKrzanic, op. cit., 37-38; M. Gelzer in μαθεϊν.. On the idea of otium cf. I. Krzanic, P.-W. 7 A (1939), 1030, 30, who notes De M. T. Cic. Philosophiae Studio (1897), a greater resignation on Cicero's part especially 36-57; W. Kroll, Die Kultur d. in the present passage. F. A. Wolf, cicerón. Zeit, 1 (1933), 5-6; M. Kretsch- Litter. Analekten, 1 (1817), 296, conmar, Otium, Studia Litterarum, Philosophie, trasts his guarded language here with u. βίος θεωρητικός im Leben u. Denken that used after Caesar's death. With the Ciceros (1938)—not seen by me. expression cf. Rep. 1, 43: cum regeretur On the phrase otio langueremus cf. 1, 67 : unius nutu ac modo. nisi plane otiolangueat[sc. deus]; O f f . 3, 1: gubernari: a frequent metaphor; duae res quae languorem adferunt ceteris e.g., Rep. 1, 2; 1, 45; 1, 52; 2, 51; 3, 47; ilium acuebant, otium et solitude. Legg. 3, 28; O f f . 2, 2; 2, 74; 2, 77; Inv. rei publicae status : a frequent phrase ; 1, 4 ; De Or. 1, 8; 1, 46; Pro Rose. Am. cf. H. Merguet, Lex. d. philos. Sehr. 51; Pro Mur. 74; De Domo, 24; Har. Cic. 3 (1894), 418. Resp. 41, Pro Sest. 20; 46; 99; Phil. 1, 35 ; unius Consilio: the only reference in 2, 113; 7, 7; Fam. 9, 2, 5; Lucr. 1, 21; this work to Caesar. The first fourteen Liv. 24, 8,13; Val. Max. 7, 6 , 1 ; 9,15, 5; sections would be the only place where Victorin. in Riet. 1, 3 {Rhet. Lat. 167 he could be introduced without anaHalm—on the figure) ; Lucian, I up. Trag. chronism, and the circumspectness with 46; Mart. Cap. 5, 512; Eumen. Or. 5, 3 which Cicero here writes places the date (Panegyr. Lat. 251 Baehrens); Ennod. of the work before the Ides of March, 44 Ep. 2, 13; C.I.L. XII, 103 (Dessau (contrast Div. 2, 7). Caesar's dictatorship 3528). Elsewhere (e.g., 1, 52, and n. left no place in public life for Cicero, as (gubernet); 2, 15) it is used of the divine is indicated by several passages : Div. 2,6 : governance of the universe, like κυβερmihi quidem explicandae philosophiae causam νάν in Proclus and Simplicius. For such adtulit casus gravis civitatis, cum in armis expressions in Greek (perhaps beginning civilibus nec tueri meo more rem publicam with Parmenides Β 12, 3 Diels: δαίμων nec nihil agere poteram ... cum esset in ή πάντα κυβερνά) cf. Pind. Pyth. 5, 122; unius potestate res publica ñeque ego me Eur. Suppl. 880; [Aristot.] De Mundo, abdidi ñeque deserui-, O f f . 2, 2: cum autem6, 400 b 7; Demetr. De Eloc. 78: dominatu unius omnia tenerentur neque esset άσφαλώς οδν έρεϊ καΐ ó τον στρατηγόν usquam Consilio aut auctoritati locus·, Τ use. κυβερνήτην λέγων της πόλεως ; Theo5, 5 : hisgravissimis easibus in eundem portum d o r a , De Prov. Or. 2 (Patr. Gr. 83, ex quo eramus egressi ... confugimus·, F am. 576 Α-C); Gr. Ä f f . 4, 65; 4, 71; 6, 2; 4, 3, 4: posteaquam Uli arti cui studueram Ammon. in Aristot. De Interpr. 9, p. 131, nihil esse loci neque in curia neque in foro 5-6 Busse; Liban. Or. 18, 158; 52, 26;

142

1,7

rei publicae causa 1 philosophiam nostris hominibus explicandam putavi, magni existimans interesse2 ad decus et ad laudem civitatis res tarn gravis tamque praeclaras Latinis etiam litteris contineri. 1

causam Β1

2

interesse om. M

Choric. 6, 1 (C. Graux, Les textes grecs (1886), 20); Instτ. Lat. sel. 8845 Dessau; on God as helmsman J. Geffcken, Zwei gr. Apologeten (1907), 210, η. 9. necesse esset: a cacophony by no means avoided by Cicero; e.g., O f f . 3, 22; 3, 49; 3, 112; Rep. 1, 11; Fat. 32; 33; also with esse: Ac. 2, 24; 2, 120; Fin. 4, 46; Τ use. 2, 1; 3, 32; 3, 55; Legg. 2, 23; Div. 2, 92. primum: the second clause is in 1, 9: hortata etiam est. Goethe compares 1, 43; 2, 140; see also A. Romizi in Riv. di Filai. 18 (1890), 243-245. rei publicae causa: on Cicero's patriotic and altruistic motives—a favorite theme in his prefaces—cf. Div. 2, 1: quaerenti mihi .. . qtianam re possem prodesse quam plurimis, ne quando intermitterem consulere rei publicae, nulla maior occurrebat quam si optimarum artium vías traderem mets civibus ; 2, 4: quod enim munus ret publicae adferre mains meliusve possumus quam ή docemus atque erudimus iuventutem\ 2, 7: haec studia renovare coepimus, ut et animus molestiis bac potissimum re levaretur et prodessemus civibus nostris qua re cumque possemus·, 2, 148; Ac. 2, 6: ut plurimis prosimus enitimur·, Legg. 1, 5: non solum mihi videris eorum studiis qui tuis litteris delectantur sed etiam patriae debere hoc munus, ut ea quae salva per te est per te eundem sit ornata·, Fin. 1, 10: quoniam forensibus operis . .. non deseruisse mihi videor praesidium in quo a populo Romano locatus sum, debeo prefecto ... in eo quoque elaborare ut sint opera, studio, labore meo doctiores cives mei-, Tuse. 1, 5: philosophia .. . inlustranda et excitando nobis est, ut si occupati profuimus altquid civibus nostris, prosimus etiam, si possumus, otiosi-, O f f . 1 , 1 : magnum attulimus adiumentum hominibus nostris, ut non modo Graecarum litterarum rudes sed etiam doc ti aliquantum se arbitrentur adeptos et ad dicendum et ad iudicandum·, 1, 22; 1, 52; 2, 5; Div. in Caecil. 7;

Phil. 2, 20; Fam. 9, 2, 5; Att. 14, 13, 4 ; the view of Cicero's friend Athenodorus quoted in Sen. Dial. 9, 3, 3; Pease on Div. 2, 1 ; and, for Cicero's view of such study as a substitute for his previous public life, Ac. 1, 11; De Or. 1, 2; R. Philippson in P.-W. 7A (1939), 1183, 44. Cicero shrewdly offsets patriotic motives against that common Roman suspicion of philosophy which may be seen in O f f . 2, 2: quibusdam bonis viris philosophiae nomen sit invisum·, cf. Tac. Agr. 4, 4; Suet. Nero, 52. Boethius (in Categ. 2, init. {Patr. Lat. 64, 201)) somewhat similarly views the reponsibility of teaching his countrymen Greek philosophy. philosophiam . . . explicandam: cf. Div. 2, 6: explicandae philosophiae causam ; Ac. 1, 4: cum philosophiam viderem diligentissime Graecis litteris explicatam·, Att. 13, 45, 2 : ut eos dies consumam in philosophia explicanda. nostris hominibus: often of Romans; e.g., 1, 15; 2, 74; Fin. 2, 116; Tusc. 4, 1; 4,2; Off 1, 1; 2, 55; Legg. 1, 6. decus et . . . laudem: cf. Fin. 5, 63: ad laudem et ad decus nati-, Tusc. 3, 18; Rep. 5, 6; also O f f . 3, 101; Tusc. 2, 46. Latinis . . . litteris: cf. Tusc. 1, 1: hoc mihi Latinis litteris inlustrandum putavi·, Div. 2, 5 : magnificum illud etiam Romanisque hominibus gloriosum ut Graecis de philosophia litteris non e géant·, Ac. 1, 12: Brutus ... sic philosophiam Latinis litteris persequitur nihil ut iisdem de rebus Graeca desideres. Some of Cicero's readers, however, distrusted and disliked all Greek literature and philosophy; others, trained in Greek philosophy, preferred not to study it at second hand in Latin; cf. Ac. 1, 4: existimavi si qui de nostris eius studio tenerentur, si essent Graecis doctrinis eruditi, Graeca potius quam nostra lecturos ; sin a Graecorum artibus et disciplinis abhorrerent, ne haec quidem curaturos,

143

1,8

8 Eoque me minus instituti mei paenitet, quod facile sentio quam multorum non modo discendi 1 sed etiam scribendi studia commoverim. Complures enim Graecis institutionibus eruditi ea quae 2 didicerant cum civibus suis communicare non poterant, quod illa quae a Graecis accepissent Latine dici posse diffiderent; quo 1

discendisset Β1F2, descendi sed F1

quae sine eruditione Graeca intellegi non possunt·, 1, 5; 1, 8; 1, 10; 2, 5: sunt enim multi qui omnino Graecas non anient litteras, plures qui philosophiam, reliqui, etiam si baec non improbent, tarnen earum rerum disputationem principibus civitatis non ita decor am putent\ Fin. 1, 1 : erunt etiam, et hi quidem eruditi Graecis litteris, contemnentes Latinas, qui se dicant in Graecis legendis operam malle consumere. 8 instituti mei: cf. Att. 4, 17, 1: oblitum . . . instituti mei. quam multorum: cf. O f f . 2, 2: quamquam enim libri nostri complures non modo ad legendi sed etiam ad scribendi Studium excitaverunt, tamen interdum vereor ne quibusdam bonis viris philosophiae nomen sit invisum mirenturque in ea tantum me operae et temporis ponere. It seems difficult to identify precisely any of those who Cicero says were stimulated by him, though Mayor would guess Brutus (cf. Ac. 1, 12; Quintil. 10, 1, 123), and Reid, who thinks Brutus had the start of Cicero in writing, suggests Varrò (cf. Ac. 1, 9: philosophiam ... inchoasti ad impellendum satis, ad edocendum parum). commoverim: cf. Tuse. 4, 6: cuius libris editis commota multitudo·, Fin. 1, 2: veritus ne movere hominum studia viderer, retiñere non posse. Graecis . . . eruditi: cf. Ac. 1, 4: Graecis doctrinis eruditi. cum civibus . . . communicare: cf. Am. 70: impertiant ea suis commmicentque cum proximis. accepissent: meaning didicissent·, the converse of trado (as in 1, 70). dici posse: the creation of a philosophic vocabulary is difficult in any language, particularly in one so resistent to new abstract nouns and new compound words as was classical Latin. Even in

2

et quae Β 1

Greek complaints of such difficulties are not lacking; cf. Plato's apology in Theaet. 182a for coining ποιότης, and Galen's for the necessity of making new technical terms ; De Sympt. D i f f . 1, VII, 45-46. Κ. Κ. von Fritz (Philosophie u. sprachl. Ausdruck bei Demokrit, Plato, u. Aristoteles (1938), 9) observes that the Greeks are the only European people to draw their philosophic and scientific vocabulary from their own language. In Latin the difficulties involved were clearly recognized by Lucretius; cf. 1, 136-139: nec me animi fallit Graiorum obscura reperta / d i f f i c i l e inlustrare Latinis versibus esse, ¡ multa novis verbis praesertim cum sit agendum ¡propter egestatem linguae et rerum novitatem·, 1, 830-832: homoeomerian / quam Grai memorant nec nostra dicere lingua / concedit nobis patrii sermonis e gestas ; 3, 258-260: nunc ea quo pacto inter sese mixta quibusque / compta modis vigeant rationem redder e aventem¡ abs trahit invi tum patrii sermonis egestas; 5, 336-337. Cicero refers to this matter at many points; e.g., 1, 91: aer—Graecum illud quidem sed perceptum iam tamen usu a nostris; tri tum est enim pro Latino; Ac. 1, 4 [in the mouth of Varrò] : ne haec quidem curaturos quae sine eruditione Graeca intellegi non possunt·, 1, 14: satisne ea commode dici possint Latine·, 1, 24; 1, 25: Graecis licebit utare, cum voles, si te Latina forte deficient·, 1, 26; Fin. 1, 4; 2, 12; 2, 13: saepe quaerimus verbum Latinum par Graeco et quod idem valeat·, 3, 40; 3, 51 : quod nobis in hac inopi lingua non conceditur·, 5, 96 : quae enim diet Latine posse non arbitrabar, ea dicta sunt a te, nec minus plane quam dicuntur a Graecis·, Tusc. 2, 35: haec duo Graeci Uli, quorum copiosior est lingua quam nostra, uno nomine appellant [sc. laborem et dolorem] ... o verborum

144

1,8

inops interdum, quibus abundare te semper Cicero) in naturalizing Greek thought putas, Graecia·, Fat. 1; Tim. 13; Rep. 1, at Rome; e.g., Div. 1, 1 : nos melius multa 65 ; De Or. 3, 95 : non haec ita statuo atque quam Graeci, where see the various paraldecerno ut desperem Latine ea ... tradì lels to Cicero's somewhat chauvinistic ac perpoliri posse, patitur enim et lìngua expression collected by Pease, to which nostra et natura rerum veterem illam ... add: Ac. 1, 12; Fin. 1, 10: Latinam linprudentìam Graecorum ad nostrum usum guam non modo non inopem, ut vulgo putarent, moremque transferri, sed hominibus opus est sed locupletiorem etiam esse quam Graecam·, eruditis, qui adhuc in hoc quidem genere nulli 3, 5 : nos non modo non vinci a Graecis verfuerunt; sin quando exstiterint etiam Graecis borum copia sed esse in ea etiam superiores·, erunt anteponendi·, Pro Caecin. 51: nostra Tuse. 1, 5; 2, 5-6; Legg. 1, 5: ut in hoc lingua quae dicitur esse inops. etiam genere Graeciae nihil cedamus·, Div. For apologies by other Latin writers 2, 5: magnificum illud etiam Romanisque for new coinings or allusions to the hominibus gloriosum, ut Graecis de philosophia poverty of their native vocabulary see litteris non egeant, quod adsequar profecto si Pease on Div. 2, 11 (si necesse sit, etc.), to instituta perfecero\ Brut. 254; Cic. ap. which add : Sen. Rhet. Controv. 7, prooem. Dion. Cass. 44, 26, 2; Sen. Rhet. Suas. 3; 7, 1, 27; Manil. 2, 694; Quintil. Inst. 7, 10 : iniuriam ilium [se. Ciceronem\ fac2, 14, 1; Plin. N.H. 29, 1; Apul. De turum populo Romano cuius linguam principem extulisset ut insolentis 26, 5: earn vocum inopiam in lingua magis Graeciae studia tanto antecederei eloquentia Latina video quam in Graeca·, 12, 1, 24; quanto fortuna·, Plut. Cic. 40, 2; Hier. 16, 8, 5; 18, 13, 5; 18, 14, 1; Rufin. In Galat. 1, p. 387 Vail.; Aug. C. Acad. Praef. Orig. De Princip. (Hier. Ep. 80, 1, 8, for Cicero's achievement in forming 1, 2): inopia sermonis nostri·, Hier. Ep. a philosophic vocabulary, Augustine 106, 3, 3: nec ex eo quis Latinam linguam remarking Cicero ... a quo in Latina angustissimam putet, quod non possit verbum lingua philosophia et incohata est et perfecta. transferre de verbo, cum etiam Graeci ple- On this question cf. A. Kraemer, Quid raque nostra circuì tu transférant·, Adv. Cic. senserit de Lingua Graeca (1893) ; M. A. Iovin. 1, 13; In Galat. 1, p. 387 Vali.; Trouard, Cicero's Attitude towards the In Ephes. 1, p. 561 Vail.; Aug. C.D. Greeks (1942), 52-59; H. Herter in Am. 7, 1 ; 10, 1 : quoniam mihi satis ideoneum non Journ. of Philol. 69 (1948), 148 and n. 88. occurrit Latinum, Graeco ubi necesse est For similar remarks in other authors cf. insinuo quid velim dicere·, 11, 25; 14, 9; Sen. Rhet. Controv. 10, 4, 23; 10, 5, 28; C. Acad. 2, 26; C. Cresco». 1, 17; Enarr. Boeth. In I sag. Porphyr., ed. 2, 1, 1 in Ps. 104, 14; Locut. in Hept. 3 (Pair. (C.S.E.L. 48, 135); also the collections Lat. 34, 518); De Util. Cred. 5 (Pair. Lat. of G. A. S. Snijder in Mnemosyne, 3 ser., 42, 68); Mart. Cap. 4, 334: quamquam 4 (1937), 251-254. J. S. Reid (on Fin. parum digne Latine loqui posse crederetur·, 1, 10) well remarks that Cicero's claim 5, 512; Sidon. Carm. 14, praef. 2-4; for the Latin language is not so absurd Boeth. In I sag. Porphyr., ed. 1, 1, 24 if the rivalry be restricted to the con(C.S.E.L. 48, 74); id., C. Eutych. 3; temporary Greek writings; in this conJ. Bernays, Ges. Abbondi. 2 (1885), nection cf. H. A. J. Munro, edition of 14-15. As pointed out by A. Ernout Lucretius, 24 (1886), 11. (Rev. des ét. lat. 16 (1938), 36), the On Cicero's formation of Latin philoChurch Fathers, in coining new philo- sophic terms cf. C. M. Bernhardt, De sophic terms, were but encountering Cic. Gr. Philos. Interprete (1865); V. the same difficulties which Cicero had Clavel, De M. T. Cic. Graecorum Interfaced, and following his example in prete (1868); F. O. Weise, Die gr. Wörter dealing with them. im Latein (1882), 239-243; R. Boitzenthal, In some of the passages quoted above De Gr. Serm. Propriet. quae in Cic. Ep. there is recognition not only of the inveniuntur (1884); A. Font, De Cic. difficulties involved but also of the Graeca Vocabula usurpante (1894); R. B. success of the Romans (especially of Steele in Am. fourn. Philol. 21 (1900),

1,9

145

in genere tantum profecisse videmur ut a Graecis ne verborum quidem copia vinceremur. 9 Hortata edam est ut me ad haec conferrem 1 animi aegritudo, fortunae magna et gravi commota 1

conferam NO

387-400; L. Laurand, Ét. sur le style des discours de Cic. (1907), 61-62; 71-76; Κ. C. Reiley, Studies in the philosophic Terminology of Lucr. and Cic. (1909); R. Fischer, De Usu Vocab. ap. Cic. et Sen. Graecae Philos. Interpretes (1914); E. Cocchia, Introd. stor. allo studio d. lett. Lat. (1915), 322329; W. Kroll, Stud. χ. Verständnis d. rom. Lit. (1924), 4, η. 0; J. S. Reid on De Fin. 1, 10 (1925); E. Norden in Neue Jahrb. f . Wissensch, u. Jugendbildung, 1 (1925), 35-46; F. Peters, T. Lucr. et M. Cic. quomodo Vocab. Gr. Epicuri Disciplinae propria Latine verterint (1926); Μ. O. Liçcu, Étude sur la langue de la philos, morale de Cic. (1930), with bibliography on pp. 299-304; J. F. D'Alton, Rom. lit. Theory and Crit. (1931), 203-207 (especially 203, η. 2); A. Yon, Ratio et les mots de la famille de reor (1933), 219; N. Stang in Symb. Osloenses, 13 (1934), 93-102; F. Gaffiot in Rev. des ét. gr. 47 (1934), 21-25; A. Pittet, Vocab. philos, de Sénèque, 1 (1937), 1-2; M. O. Liçcu, L'expression des idées philos. che% Cic. (1937); G. Kilb, Eth. Grundbegriffe d. ait. Stoa u. ihre Übertragung durch Cic. im dritten Buch De Fin. (1939)—this last not seen by me. diíRderent: the subjunctive expresses the reason alleged by the objectors (Atticus? cf. Fin. 5, 96) rather than by the author. tantum profecisse: cf. O f f . 1, 3: quantum in utroque profecerimus aliorum sit iudicium\ Att. 5, 11, 5: proficimus aliquantum. In O f f . 1, 1, he notes that even Greekless readers may now be skilled in philosophy. verborum . . . copia: cf. Ac. 1, 26; Fin. 3, 5 ; Tusc. 2, 3 ; 2, 30 ; Pro Caecin. 51 ; Auct. Ad Herenn. 3, 38; Quintil. Inst. 2, 7, 4; 10, 1, 5; 10,1, 61; M. Wiegandt, De Metaphorarum Usu quodam Ciceroniano (1910), 41-45, who cites Plat. Parm. 137a: πλήθος λόγων.

vinceremur: the sequence not from videmur but from the intervening profecisse; cf. F. A. Wolf, Kl. Sehr. 1 (1869), 512-513; R. Kühner and C. Stegmann, Ausf. Gram. d. lat. Spr. 2, 2 S (1914), 183-184. H. Lieven, Die Consecutio Temporum des Cic. (1872), as quoted by J. S. Reid ap. Mayor ad loc., cites 22 cases of this construction from the present work, so that the suggestion of Ax (appendix, 161) that this form is chosen ob clausulam seems unlikely. 9 etiam: cf. 1, 7, η. ( p r i m u m ) . animi aegritudo . . . commota: for the rather poetic hypallage, by which commota is transferred from its logical agreement with animi to a grammatical agreement with aegritudo, cf. 1, 119: gentes orarum ultimae\ 2, 113: posteriore ... vi corporis·, Tusc. 2, 21: vim coruscam fulminis·, Div. 1, 62: tranquillitati mentis quaerenti vera·, Fat. 42: adsensio non possit fieri nisi commota viso; Legg. 1, 8: occupata opera·, De Imp. Cn. Pomp. 22: eorum [sc. membrorum] collectio dispersa·, R. KiihnerC. Stegmann, Ausf. Gram. d. lat. Spr. 2, I a (1912), 220-221. The third book of the Tusculans is on the theme de aegritudine lenienda (cf. Div. 2, 2). fortunae . . . iniuria: the death of Tullia in childbirth in February, 45 greatly affected Cicero, since this daughter was apparently the dearest and most congenial to him of all his family. Other references to his loss are : the Consolatio (cf. W. W. Fowler, Rei. Exp. of the Rom. People (1911), 388); Ac. 1, 11 : fortunae gravissimo percussus vulnere ; et administratione rei publicae liberatus medicinam a philosophia peto et otii oblectationem hanc honestissimam iudico·, Tusc. 5, 5: his gravissimis casibus\ 5, 121 : nostris quidem acerbissimis doloribus variisque et undique circumfusis molestiis alia nulla potuit inveniri levatio·, Div. 2, 7: ut animus molestiis hac potissimum re levaretur ; io

146

1,9

iniuria; cuius si maiorem aliquam levationem reperire potuissem, non ad hanc potissimum confugissem. Ea vero ipsa nulla ratione melius frui potui quam si me non modo ad legendos libros sed etiam ad totam philosophiam pertractandam dedissem. Omnes 1 autem eius partes atque omnia membra tum 2 facillume noscuntur cum 3 totae quaestiones scribendo explicantur; est enim admirabilis 1

omnis AHNB1

2

membra tunc Ν, membrorum Β1

O f f . 2, 4: existimavi honestissime molestias posse deponi si me ad philosophiam rettulissem; F am. 4, 6, 2 [April, 45]: hoc tarn gravi volnere etiam ilia quae consanuisse videbantur recrudescmt ; non enim ut tum me a re publica maestum domus excipiebat quae levaret, sic nunc domo maerens ad rem publicam confugere possum et in eius bonis adquiescam·, 12, 23, 4: ut philosophiae magnam habeam gratiam, quae me non modo ab sollicitudine abducit sed etiam contra omnis fortunae impetus armat\ Att. 12, 14, 3 [March, 45]—too long to quote in full, yet note the words totos dies scribo, non quo proficiam quid, sed tantisper impedior-, 12, 15; 12, 18, 1; 12, 20, 2; 12, 21, 5; 12, 38a, 1: hanc aberrationem a dolore delegerim quae maxime liberalis sit doctoque homine degnissima-, Plut. Cic. 41, 5. On Tullia cf. L. Maurin, Études antiques (1884), 37-205; and for Cicero's methods of work in this period of his grief Pease, ed. of De Div. 1 (1920), 9, n. 2. levationem : applied to aegritudo in Τ use. 1, 119: agamus haec et ea potissimum quae levationem habeant aegritudinum·, 3, 33: levationem autem aegritudinis in duabus rebus ponit, avocatione a cogitanda molestia et revocatione ad contemplandas voluptates·, 5, 121 (quoted above); cf. Fam. 4, 4, 4: nulla res alia levare animum molestiis possit. potissimum confugissem: cf. O f f . 2, 6: declarandum fuit cur orbati rei publicae muneribus ad hoc nos Studium potissimum contulissemus·, Tusc. 5, 5: in eundem por tum ... confugimus-, Fam. 4, 6, 2: maerens ad rem publicam confugere possum·, 6, 12, 5: est unum perfugium doctrina ac litterae quibus semper usi sumus. non modo ad legendos: cf. Pro Arch. 14: quam multas nobis imagines, non

3

cum] tum Β1

solum ad intuendum verum etiam ad imitandum·, O f f . 2, 2: libri nostri complures non modo ad legendi sed etiam ad scribendi Studium excitaverunt. totam philosophiam: just how early the thought came to Cicero of supplementing his hitherto scattered writings on philosophic subjects to make a comprehensive encyclopaedia covering the whole field is not altogether clear, but not long after this time, in Div. 2, 4, after enumerating his philosophic treatises so far written, he remarks: adhuc haec erant ; ad reliqua alacri tendebamus animo sic parati ut, nisi quae causa gravior obstitisset, nullum philosophiae locum esse pateremur qui non Latinis litteris inlustratus pateref, cf. Reid, ed. of Académica (1885), 23-24; S. Häfner, Die lit. Pläne Ciceros (1928). partes . . . membra : Mayor observes that Cicero accepted the three-fold division of post-Aristotelian philosophy into ήΟική, διαλεκτική (with which the rhetorical treatises may be classed; cf. Ac. 1, 32), and φυσική (to which belong the De Natura Deorum, De Divinatione, and De Fato)·, cf. Ac. 1, 19: fuit ergo iam accepta a Platone philosophandi ratio triplex, una de vita et moribus, altera de natura et rebus occultis, tertia de disserendo [where see Reid's note] ; 2,114; 2,116; Fin. 4, 4: totam philosophiam tris in partis diviserunt·, De Or. 1, 68: philosophia in tris partis est tributa, in naturae obscuritatem, in disserendi subtilitatem, in vitam atque mores-, also 1, 20, n. (physiologiam), below. With membra cf. De Or. 2, 79 : quinqué . .. quasi membra eloquentiae-, Fam. 5, 13, 3: membra rei publicae; Amm. Marc. 16, 5, 6: omnia philosophiae membra. totae quaestiones: as he has just

147 quaedam continuado seriesque rerum, ut alia ex alia 1 nexa 2 et omnes inter se aptae conligataeque videantur. 5 10 Qui autem requirunt quid quaque 3 de re ipsi sentiamus, curiosius id faciunt 8

1 alia ex aliis (olim alias?) B, alie ex aliis NO quod queque H

spoken of totam philosophiam so now he speaks of comprehensive treatments of the parts of that whole, perhaps of such large philosophic problems as those discussed in the Académica, the De Finibus, and the present work, each of which might be considered as a σύνταξις (R. Hirzel, Der Dialog, 1 (1895), 514, η. 1). Thus cf. At I. 13, 19, 3: confeci et absolví . . . Academicam omnem quaesiionem libris quattuor·, Fin. 1, 12: banc omnem quaestionem de finibus bonorum et malorum·, Ac. 2, 10: ut tota fere quaestio tract ata videatw, Div. 2, 3 : tres libri perfecti sunt de natura deorum in quibus omnis eius loci quaestio continetur ... quibus [i.e., the books on divination] ... de fato si adiunxerimus, erit abunde satis factum toti buie quaestioni. explicantur: used of the discussion of a locus (2, 63; Tuse. 1, 57; Legg. 2, 69; 3, 13), a quaestio (Fin. 1, 12; Τ use. 1, 23), or of philosophy itself (1, 7; Div. 2, 6; Ac. 1, 4; An. 13, 45, 2). continuatio seriesque: Cicero here describes philosophy in terms suggestive of those elsewhere used for the Stoic concept of fatum·. Div. 1, 125: fatum autem id appello quod Graeci ειμαρμένην, id est, ordinem seriemque causarum, cum causae causa nexa rem ex se gignat [cf. N.D. 1, 55]; 1, 127: conligationem causarum omnium·, Top. 59; Fin. 3, 74: quid non sic aliud ex alio nectitur ut si ullam litteram moveris labent omnia·, Tusc. 5, 70: rerum causas alias ex aliis aptas et necessitate nexas·, Fat. 20; 38; Legg. 1, 52: quanta series rerum sententiarumque sit, atque ut ex alio alia nectantur·, Inv. 2, 110: aptas inter se omnis et aliam in alia implicatam. So also the virtues inter se nexae et iugatae sunt (Tusc. 3, 17). Continuatio suggests the impossibility of sharply separating the different parts of the subject, while series emphasizes their sequential, and alia ex alia their reciprocal, relationships.

2

nexe NO, nexa ratione A3

In Tusc. 2, 1, Cicero remarks: d i f f i c i l e est enim philosophia pauca esse ei nota cui non sint aut pleraque aut omnia. 10 qui autem requirunt: offset to sin autem quis requirit (1, 7); the first question appears a legitimate one, which might lead others in periods of public or private distress to find a similar relief in philosophical study ; the second shows mere inquisitiveness, leading, not to the discovery of truth, but to unthinking acceptance of opinion—an act particularly distasteful in the eyes of Academic scepsis (cf. 1, 1). The writings of the doxographi, unadorned recitals of opinions without the framework of argument supporting them, might answer the desire here expressed. Was Cicero perhaps also conscious that his own views were not only tentative but also too much derived from the thoughts of others to justify him in ex cathedra pronouncements? M. van den Bruwaene, La thiol, de Cic. (1937), 245, thinks Cicero had sincerity and religious conviction but no mentalité religieuse (cf. W. Ax in Gotting, gel. Αηχ. 201 (1939), 45). curiosius: here in a bad sense, not of "careful" or "inquiring" (as in 1, 97; Tusc. 1, 108; Fam. 3, 1, 1), or even of "gossipy" (as in Fam. 8, 1, 1; Att. 4, 11, 2; 5, 14, 3; 6, 1, 25; 15, 26, 5), but of "prying" or "inquisitive" questioning ; cf. 1, 54: omnia ad se pertinere putantem curiosum et plenum negotii deum\ Fin. 2, 28: multos .. . non tam curiosos nec tam molestos quam vos estis; 5, 6: ista studia, si ad imitandos summos viros spectant, ingeniosorum sunt; sin tantum modo ad indicia veteris memoriae cognoscenda curiosorum-, 5, 49: omnia quidem scire, cuiuscumque modi sint, cupere curiosorum·, O f f . 1, 125: peregrini ... officium est nihil praeter suum negotium agere ... minimeque esse in aliena re publica

148

quam necesse est; non enim tarn auctoritatis 1 in disputando quam rationis momenta quaerenda sunt. Quin etiam obest plerumque iis qui discere volunt auctoritas eorum qui se docere profitentur; desinunt enim suum iudicium adhibere, id 2 habent ratum quod ab eo quem probant iudicatum vident. Nec vero 1

auctoritas Had., auctore A1, auctores A2CNOM

a

idque O

curio sum ; At t. 2, 4, 4; Quintil. Inst. 8, 3, Pomp. 51 : omissis auctoritatibus ipsa re 55 : ut a diligenti curiosus et a religione super- ac ratione exquirere possumus veritatem ; stitio distai·, Suet. Aug. 27, 3. The type but in Ac. 1, 34 the two words are comof such a busybody (περίεργος, πολυ- bined: Platonis rationem auctoritatemque. πράγμων) is seen in Chremes in Terence's On the meaning of auctoritas cf. F. TeichHautontimorumenos (cf. Fin. 1, 3). In müller, Grundbegriff u. Gebrauch von Τ use. 5, 11, Cicero says ut nostram ipsi auetor u. auctoritas (1898); R. Heinze sententiam tegeremus, errore alios levaremus-, in Hermes, 60 (1925), 348-366, especially and in 2,2, below, Cotta rebuffs the clum- 362; id., Von Geist d. Römertums (1938), sy attempt of Balbus to discover his 278-284; F. Fürst, Die Bedeutung d. opinions; cf. Hor. Ep. 1, 1, 13-14; auctoritas (1934), 28-29; J. C. Plumpe, Hier. In Is. 11, prol., pp. 451-452 Vail.: Wesen u. Wirkung d. Auctoritas Maiorum quibusdam forte non placeat qui non anti- bet Cic. (1935). For the preference of quorum opiniones sed nostram sententiam reason to personal influence cf. Rep. scire desiderant·, A. S. Pease in Trans. 1, 59: apud me, ut apud bonum iudicem, Am. philol. Assoc. 44 (1913), 35, n. 49. argumenta plus quam testes valent-, Plat. But R. Hirzel suggests (Der Dialog, 1 Charm. 161c: ού τοϋτο σκεπτέον, δστις (1895), 533) that by siding with Balbus αυτό είπεν, άλλα πότερον αληθές λέat 3, 95, Cicero answers these queries γεται ή οΰ ; Varr. Sentent. 22 ( M e n i p p . of his readers. ed. Riese, p. 266); Min. Fei. 16, 6: cum auctoritatis: three readings are here non disputantis auctoritas sed disputationis found, each perfectly intelligible: (1) ipsius veritas requiratur-, Aug. C.D. 19, 3: auctoritatis of BF (depending upon quid ad nos, qui potius de rebus ipsis iudicare momenta), (2) auctoritas (of the excerpts debemus quam pro magno de hominibus quid of Hadoardus ; cf. R. Mollweide in Wien. quisque senserit scire-, Auct. Imit. Christi, Stud. 35 (1913), 316-317), and (3) auctores 1, 5: non quaeras quis hoc dixerit sed quid of A2CNOM, followed by various dicatur attende-, also 1, 7, n. (ratio et editors, to which may be added (4) doctrina), above. Heindorf's emendation auctoritates (quite rationis momenta: "weight of arunnecessary). Auctoritas and ratio are gument"; cf. Ac. 1, 45: paria contrarits similarly contrasted at the end of 1, 10, in partibus momenta rationum-, 2, 1, 4: but in a way which proves nothing for contrariarum rationum paria momenta·, the present passage, where it seems Orat. 47 : argumentorum momenta ; Rep. advisible to follow BF, thus securing 3, 12: verborum momentis·, Liv. 3, 12, 6; a neat balance of auctoritatis and rationis. Arnob. 4, 31 : rerum momenta. obest . . . auctoritas : cf. Ac. 2, 60 : The same contrast between ratio and auctoritas is expressed in Tusc. 1, 49: an in eo auctoritas nihil obest? ut enim rationem Plato nullam adferret ... docere profitentur: the word proipsa auctoritate me frangerei-, Ac. 2, 60: fessor being post-Augustan. cur celatis ... sententiam vestramì ut qui desinunt: cf. Legg. 1, 36: aut tu is es audient, inquit, ratione potius quam aucto- qui in disputando non tuum iudicium sequare ritate ducantur·, Div. 1, 62: ut rationem sed auctoritati aliorum pareas. non redderent, auctoritate tamen bos minutos id habent ratum: cf. the charge philosophos vincerent\ Legg. 1, 36; De Imp. brought by Cotta (1, 66) that Vellerns

149

probare soleo id quod de Pythagoreis accepimus, quos ferunt, 1 si quid adfirmarent in disputando, cum ex iis quaereretur quare ita esset, respondere solitos 'Ipse dixit' ; ipse autem erat Pythago1

fuerunt Β 1

relies on the auctoritas of Epicurus, whom he has elected to follow. On this use of ratum cf. A. Yon, Ratio et les mots de la famille de reor (1933), 78. With the thought cf. Ac. 1, 9: nam quod dicunt omnia se credere ei quem iudicent fuisse saptentem, probarem si id ipsum rudes et indocti iudicare potuissent (statuere enim qui sit sapiens vel maxime videtur esse sapientis), eo quem probant: cf. Fin. 1, 6: tuemur ea quae dicta sunt ab eis quos probamus. ipse dixit: cf. Val. Max. 8, 15, ext. 1: Pythagorae tanta veneratio ab auditoribus tributa est ut quae ab eo acceperant in disputationem deducere nefas existimarent. quin etiam interpellati ad reddendam causam hoc solum respondebant, ipsum dixisse·, Quintil. Inst. 11, 1, 27: nec hoc oratori contingere inter adversarios quod Pythagorae inter discípulos potest, "ipse dixit"·, Ael. V.H. 4, 17; Clem. Strom. 2, 24, 3: τούς μέν Πυθαγόρου του Σαμίου ζηλωτάς των ζητουμένων τάς αποδείξεις παραιτουμένου? το αύτός ΐψα πίστιν ήγεϊσθαι καί ταύτη άρκεϊσθαι μόνη τη φωνη πρός την βεβαίωσιν ών άκηκόασι; Orig. C. Cels. 1, 7: καί τίνες μέν άκούοντες Πυθαγόρα ώς αύτός ϊφα; Diog. L. 8, 46: τέταρτος . . . έφ' οδ καί τό αΰτός £φα παροιμιακόν εις τόν βίον ήλθεν; Schol. Aristoph. Nub. 195; Chalcid. in Plat. Tim. 126 (Fr. Phil. Gr. 2, 210): denique non frustra de Pythagora dictum "ipsum dicere," proptereaque ultra quaeri non oportere; Julian, Ep. 20, 452 b; Iambi. Vit. Pyth. 82: 'έατι δέ ή μέν των άκουσματικών φιλοσοφία ακούσματα άναπόδεικτα καί άνευ λόγου, δτι ούτως πρακτέον, καί τάλλα δσα παρ' έκείνου έρρέθη, ταϋτα πειρώνται διαφυλάττειν ώς θεία δόγματα ; Porphyr, ap. Eus. Pr. Εν. 10, 3, 7: îheodoret, Gr. Ä f f . 1, 56: καί oí έκεινον διαδεξάμενοι, εϊ τις άπήτησε των λεγομένων άπόδειξιν, αύ-

τός ίφα λέγειν είώθησαν, πάσης αποδείξεως ίσχυροτέραν καί είναι νομίζοντες καί £χειν κελεύοντες την Πυθαγόρου φωνήν ; Amm. Marc. 22, 16, 21 : quicquid dixit [sc. Pythagoras] aut voluit auctoritatem esse instituit ratam ; Hier. Ep. 119, 11 [cf. In Galat. p. 367 Vail.]; Hermias, Irrisio, 8 (Pair. Gr. 6, 1177a = Doxogr. Gr* 655, 16): Πυθαγόρας καί oí τούτου συμφυλέται, σεμνοί καί σιωπηλοί, παραδιδόασιν άλλα μοι δόγματα, ώσπερ μυστήρια, καί τούτο δη τό μέγα καί άπόρρητον τό αύτός ίφη; Greg. Naz. Or. 4, 102 (Patr. Gr. 35, 637a): οΐ παρ' ύμΐν τά Πυθαγόρου φιλοσοφοϋντες, οίς το αύτός ίφα. τό πρώτον καί, μέγιστόν έστι των δογμάτων; 27, 10 (Patr. Gr. 36, 24b): βάλλε μοι Πυθαγόρου . . . την περί τό αύτός &ρα καινοτέραν άλαζονείαν; Cyril. Alex. Comm. in Is. 32 (Patr. Gr. 70, 708a): φασί γοϋν δτι τοις Πυθαγόρου μαθηταϊς λαλοϋσιν £σθ' δτε ψυχρά τε καί καταγέλαστα . . . εθος ήν λέγειν τούτο, αύτός ϊφατο, τοϋτ' ίστι, σίγα, καί διδοϋ τω τοϋ δόγματος εύρετη καί άβασανίστως την πίστιν; Cod. Coislin. 387, 9 (Anecd. Paris. 4, 414 Cramer = Elias, Proleg. Phil. 9, p. 23, 31-33 Busse): άλλ' έπειδή ούτε Πυθαγόρας έρωτώμενος αποκρίνεται οϋτε οί μαθηταΐ αύτοϋ άλλο τι αποκρίνονται ή δτι αύτός ίφα, τήν άπόφασιν τοϋ διδασκάλου ύπέρ άπόδειξιν ηγούμενοι; Hierocl. in Aur. Carm. 20 (Fr. Phil. Gr. 1, 464); Olympiod. Vit. Plat, fin., (p. 387, 62 Westermann); Boeth. De Mus. 1, 33: nunc vero quod erat Pythagoricis in morem ut cum quid a magistro Pythagora diceretur, hinc nullus rationes petere audebat, sed erat ei ratio docentis auctoritas·, Diogenian. 3, 19 (Paroem. Gr. 1, 216): αύτός lepa· έπί των άναφερόντων ά λέγουσιν έπί τινας; Apostol. 4, 39 (Paroem. Gr. 2, 318); Suid. s.v. αύτός έφα· τοϋτο παροιμιακόν έπί Πυθαγόρου τοϋ φιλοσό-

150

ras; tantum opinio praeiudicata poterai ut etiam sine ratione φου είσηλθεν εις τον βίον. ούτος γάρ άποσεμνύνων τον έαυτοϋ λόγον καΐ βίον έν ταϊς όμιλίαις ίλεγεν αύτός έφα άντί του εϊπεν. ούκ έμός ó λόγος, φησίν, άλλα του θεοϋ; id., s.v. εκείνος· . . . καΐ τό αύτός ϊφα παρά τοις Πυθαγορείοις; ; Eustath, in II. 1, 43, p. 37. 35; 5, 604, p. 586, 26; in Od. 2, 174; 3, 203; Michael Acominat. Monod. in Eustath. {Pair. Gr. 140, 347e); Ioann. Saresb. Polier. 5, 12, 571c: tantum namque opinio praeiudicata poterai ut nichil convalescent ab opposite, dum hoc ipse dixisse diceretur, et ex usu adquiescentium vox ipsa pronominis Pitagoram indicabat. cum enim simpliciter dicebatur "ipse hoc dixit," ex praecepta auctoritate, teste Tullio, Pitagoram intelligi oportebat; Arsen. Violet, p. 85 Walz; A. Delatte, Ét. sur la litt, pythag. (1915), 279, n. 2; id. in Mém. de l'Acad. roy. de Belg. 17 (1922), 142, n. 9. May τί φης, ώ Πυθαγόρα ( É t y m . Gud. s.v. φής) be an allusion to this saying? Aristippus ap. Diog. L. 8, 21, says that Pythagoras was so named because he uttered the truth as infallibly as did the Pythian oracle, and Philostratus (Vit. Apoll. 1, 1; repeated in Suid. s.v. Πυθαγόρας) says δ τι άποφήναιτο ó Πυθαγόρας νόμον τοΰτο oí όμιληταί ήγοϋντο καΐ έτίμων αύτόν ώς έκ Διός ήκοντα. For the essential deification of Pythagoras cf. Sext. Emp. Adv. Arithm. 2; Philostr. in Epist. Gr. p. 602 Hercher; Iambi. Vit. Pyth. 6, 23; 19, 78. It should be observed that the earliest of these references is that in Cicero, who may have learned of the tradition from his erudite friend, P. Nigidius Figulus, of whose revival of Pythagoreanism he speaks in Tim. 1. Later, perhaps through the general interest in a more developed Neopythagoreanism, allusions become more frequent. Ipse, like the Greek αύτός, was used by slaves of their masters (e.g., Ter. Andr. 360), and αύτός, or more rarely έκεϊνος, by students of their teachers or the heads of their schools; cf. also Eustath. ad II. 5, 604, p. 586, 26: ώς περ ή αύτός άντωνυμία δήλοι 2στιν δτε ύπεροχήν τινα, ώς τό αύτός ϊφατο ;

Philostr. Vit. Apollon. 3, 12. Thus Pythagoras was called not only αύτός, as in this phrase, but also έκεΐνος (Iambi. Vit. Pyth. 53; 88: είναι 8è πάντα έκείνου τοϋ ανδρός • προσαγορεύουσι γάρ οΰτω τόν Πυθαγόραν και ού καλοϋσιν ονόματι; id., 255; De comm. Math. Sc. 25, p. 77 Festa; cf. Theodoret. Gr. Ä f f . 8, 1), and αύτός is used of Protagoras (Plat. Prot. 314d), Socrates (Aristoph. Nub. 219; in 195 he is called 'κείνος, which the scholia say is a term applied κατ' έξοχήν; compare its use for Jesus in 1 John, 2, 6; 3, 3; 3, 5; 3, 7; 3, 16; 4, 17), Aristotle (Alex. Aphrod. in Top. p. 80 = Arist. fr. 51 Rose), while Origen {C. Cels. 4, 9) applies the phrase αύτός £φα to the utterance of deity. Dixit renders the original Doric form ίφα, attested by nearly all the Greek passages, though Hermias reads ίφ·η, Cyril the Homeric form ίφατο, and Eusebius (rather freely) renders ειπών. Jeremy Bentham (Deontology, 1 (1834), XX, 321) coined the words "ipsedixitism" and "ipsedixitist." Against such blind reliance on the authority of another see the Academic protests, as in 1, 17; 1, 67; Ac. 2, 8 (and Reid's n.); 2, 9: quod dicunt omnia se credere ei quem iudicent fuisse sapientem, probarem si id ipsum rudes et indocti iudicare potuissent—statuere enim qui sit sapiens vel maxime videtur esse sapientis ; Τ use. 1, 38; 5, 83; Rep. 1, 70; also the natural instincts of Hor. Ep. 1, 1, 14: nullius addictus iurare in verba magistri·, Quintil. Inst. 3,1,22; Sen. Ep. 33,4; Dial. 7,1, 4; 8, 3, 1; 9, 1, 16. The dogmatic methods of Pythagoras in dealing with incompletely educated and immature pupils are defended by S. Centofanti {Opere, 1 (1870), 405), as quoted by A. Gianola, La fortuna di Pitagora presso i Romani (1921), 207. ipse autem erat Pythagoras : a phrase suspected by Walker (in the appendix to Schuetz's edition (1816), 457) and [G. H.(?)] Heidtmann {Zur Krit. u. Interp. d. Sehr. d. Cic. de Nat. Deor. (1858), 19) as being too obvious to be necessary. One might perhaps compare the language

1,11

151

valeret auctoritas. 11 Qui 1 autem admirantur 2 nos hanc potissimum disciplinam secutos, his quattuor Academicis libris satis responsum videtur. Nec vero desertarum relictarumque rerum patrocinium suscepimus; non enim hominum interitu sententiae quoque occidunt, sed lucem auctoris fortasse desiderant. Ut haec 1

quia ut A 1

2

admiratur Ν

of Schol. Aristoph. Nub. 195: [καΐ other descriptive expressions (Reid, op. παρά Πυθαγορείοις τό αύτός έφα, του- cit., 37; Schanz-Hosius, op. cit., 1, 501). τέστιν ό Πυθαγόρας]. Yet it is unsafe satis responsum: cf. Fin. 1, 2; 2, 82; to delete from the text all such explana- Rep. 2, 65. tory phrases; cf. P. Stamm, De M. T. C. desertarum relictarumque: cf. 1, 6, Libr. de Deor. Nat. Interpolationibus η. {desertae ... et reiictae). (1873), 5. patrocinium: cf. 1, 6, η. {patrocinium). opinio praeiudicata: cf. Hier. Ep. In Fin. 5, 21, Cicero mentions sex ... 119, 11, 1 : nec iuxta Pythagorae discípulos sententiae, duae sine patrono, quattuor defensae. praeiudicata doctoris opinio sed doctrinae non . . . sententiae . . . occidunt: ratio ponderando est·, In Galat. prol. pp. cf. M. Aurel. 7, 2: τά δόγματα πώς άλ367-368 Vali.: ñeque vero more Pythagorico λως δύναται νεκρωθήναι, έάν μή αί καquidquid responderam rectum putabat ; nec τάλληλοι αύτοϊς φαντασίαι σβεσθώσιν; sine ratione praeiudicata apud eum valebat Arnob. 1, 40, who compares the persisauctoritas. tence of Christ's doctrines after his death 11 admirantur: cf. 1, 6, η. {admi- with the survival of the teachings of Pythagoras and Socrates. It was, in ran tium). hanc potissimum: cf. 1, 6, η. (patissi- fact, not even necessary that a philosophical theory should ever have been mum). quattuor Academicis libris: the first expounded, and Varrò (ap. Aug. C.D. 19, 1) listed 288 philosophical sects, edition, in two books, the Catulus and the Lucullus, was completed as early as non quae iam essent sed quae esse possent. 13 May, 45 (.Att. 12, 45, 1; Reid, ed. of These philosophical doctrines perhaps Acad., 30). Cicero was dissatisfied, how- possessed, in the eyes of Cicero, someever, with various details, and during thing of the indestructibility of the a stay at Arpinum, beginning in late Platonic ideas; cf. Philo, Quod Deterius June, reëdited the work in four books, Potiori, 75: ώσπερ γάρ μουσικού τινός with a dedication to Varrò, and completed ή γραμματικού τελευτήσαντος ή μέν it by July {Att. 13, 23, 2; cf. Reid, op. έν τοις άνδράσι μουσική καΐ γραμματιcit. 32-37; the testimonia collected by κή συνέφθαρται, αί δέ τούτων ίδέαι Plasberg, editio maior (1908), 28-33; μένουσι καΐ τρόπον τινά βιοϋσιν ίσοM. Schanz-C. Hosius, Gesch. d. röm. Lit. χρόνιοι τω κόσμω, κτλ. Augustine 1 4 (1927), 501-502, and works there ci- {C. Acad. 2, 1) remarks, oninis profecto ted). Probably in part to honor Varrò Academicorum vel calumnia, vel pertinacia, and yet more to draw attention to the vel pervicacia, vel, ut ego interdum arbitror, improved edition, Cicero thereafter congrua Uli tempori ratio, simul cum ipsius sepulta cited the four-book edition {Tuse. 2, 4; Carneadis Ciceronisque corporibus Div. 2, 1 ; Att. 16, 6, 4), of which the foret. formal title was Académica {Off. 2, 8; lucem auctoris : not necessarily of the Tim. 1 ; Att. 1 3 , 1 3 , 1 ; 13,19, 5), though original formulator, but of some living he sometimes refers to the work as expositor; cf. O f f . 2, 8: in antiquissima Academici libri (as here and in Τ use. 2, nobilissimaque philosophia Cratippo auctore 4; Div. 2, 1; cf. Att. 16, 6, 4), or by versaris.

152

1,11

in philosophia ratio contra omnia disserendi nullamque rem contra omnia disserendi: expanded below as contra omnes philosophes et pro omnibus dicere·, an Academic practice to which Cicero makes frequent allusion; e.g., O f f . 2, 8: contra autem omnia disputatur a nostris, quod hoc ipsius probabile elucere non posset nisi ex utraque parte causarum essetfacta contentio ; 3, 89 : in utramque partem disputât·, Ac. 1, 7; 1, 16; 1, 45; 2, 7: neque nostrae disputationes quidquam aliud agunt nisi ut in utramque partem dicendo et audiendo eliciant .. . aliquid quod aut verum sit aut ad id quam proxime accedat·, 2, 60; Fin. 2, 2; 5, 10: ab Aristoteleque principe de singulis rebus in utramque partem dicendi exercitatio est instituto, ut non contra omnia semper, sicut Arcesilas, diceret·, Tusc. 2, 9: Peripateticorum Academiaeque consuetude de omnibus rebus in contrarias partis disserendi [which pleases Cicero both as a means of discovering truth and as a good exercise in speaking]; 5, 11; Div. 2, 150: cum autem proprium sit Academiae .. . quid in quamque sententiam dici possit expromere, nulla adtributa sua auctoritate, iudicium audientium relinquere integrum ac liberum-, Fat. 1: quod autem in aliis libris feci qui sunt de natura deorum itemque in its quos de divinatione edidi, ut in utramque partem perpetua explicaretur oratio quo facilius id a quoque probaretur quid cuique maxime probabile ridere tur-, 4; De Or. 1, 84: hic enim mos erat patrius Academiae adversari semper omnibus in disputando-, 3, 67; 3, 80: qui Aristotelio more de omnibus rebus in utramque partem possit dicere·, 3,107. Cicero here connects this method especially with Socrates and the Academics, and with that school it is by others most frequently associated; e.g., Acad. Philos. Ind. Here., col. 20, p. 72 Mekler: ποφαινό ab amico amante argentum accipere meretrix nevolt. (4) T. Birt (Beri, philol. Woch. 38 (1918), 550): in civitate fieri facinora capitalia ! / ab amico amante argentum accipere meretrix noluit. For the form of sentence Birt compares Plaut. Cure. 694: bocine pacto

160 'pro deum, popularium omnium, < omnium adulescentium clamo, postulo, obsecro, oro, ploro, atque inploro fidem,' non levissuma de re, ut queritur ille in civitate fieri facinora capitalia : 'ab amico amante argentum accipere meretrix non vult,' (14) sed ut adsint, cognoscant, animadvertant, quid de religione, pietate, sanctitate, caerimoniis, fide, iure iurando, quid de templis, 1

add. Man.

indemnatum atque intestatum me abripi! Whatever may have been the reading of Caecilius, it seems unsafe to change Cicero's text for the last two lines, for he was probably here giving a free paraphrase rather than a careful quotation. pro deum . . . fidem: for a variety of similar expressions cf. Plaut. Amph. 455: di inmortales, obsecro vostram fidem; 1130: di, obsecro vostram fidem [= Truc. 805]; Capt. 418: di, vostram fidem [ = Trin. 591]; Epid. 580: pro deum atque hominum fidem [= Cure. 694]; Men. 999: opsecro vostram fidem·, Most. 77: pro di inmortales, obsecro vostram fidem [ = 530; Poen. 967]; Enn. Sat. 18 Vahlen: pro divum fidem-, Ter. Andr. 237: pro deum fidem·, 246: pro deum atque hominum fidem [= Haut. 61]; Phorm. 351: pro deum inmortalium ; Eun. 943: pro deum fidem·, Hec. 198: pro deum fidem atque hominum·, Ad. 746: pro deorum fidem·, Cic. Tuse. 5, 48: pro deorum atque hominum fidem; Am. 52: pro deorum fidem atque hominum·, Oecon. fr. 8 Müller: pro deum inmortalium·, Pro Font. 4: deorum hominumque fidem; Pro Q. Rose. 23: pro deum hominumque fidem [ = 5 0 ; Div. in Caec. 7]; 2 Verr. 1, 25: deum atque hominum fidem implorabis; Q. Fr. 2, 10, 3: ne imploret fidem Iovis; Sail. Cat. 20, 10: pro deum atque hominum fidem; Liv. 3, 67, 7: pro deum fidem [= 44, 38, 10]; Quintil. Deci, maior. 16, 9, 1: fidem deorum hominumque; 17, 18: fidem deorum; 18, 11: fidem hominum deorumque; Boeth. in Cic. Top. 2, p. 292 Orelli: pro divinam atque humanam fidem. Fides, as noted by Mayor, is the good faith or common bond of fellowship uniting

men together and to the gods; on this use of it in appeals for help cf. E. Fraenkel in Rh. Mus. 71 (1916), 193-194; R. Heinze, Vom Geist des Rämertums (1938), 42-47; 284. popularium: cf. Ter. Ad. 155: obsecro, populares, f erte ... auxilium, where Donatus remarks: popularitas in omnis rei consortium sumitur; nunc autem 'populares' cives dicit. amico amante: on the hiatus cf. T. Birt in Beri, philol. Woch. 38 (1918), 550; W. Ax, De Hiatu qui in Frag, prise. Poesis Rom. invenitur (1917), 38; for the phrase cf. Naev. 90 Ribb.: amico amanti amica. 14 ut adsint cognoscant animadvertant: clearly not part of the quotation from Caecilius (as was thought by J. J. Schlueter, De Caecilii Statii Frag. (1884), 20—a work not accessible to me—; refuted by W. Zillinger, op. cit. 148, η. 3), but resuming Cicero's own thought in convocandi omrtes above. With the asyndeton Goethe compares Pro Quint. 75: adsunt, defendunt; Div. in Caec. 11: adsunt, queruntur; 2 Verr. 1, 3: adsit, respondeat; also Pro Sull. 4: qui adsunt, qui laborant. religione, pietate, sanctitate: cf. 1, 3, η. (pietas ... sanctitas . .. religio); 1, 115: de sanctitate, de pietate. fide: cf. 1, 4, η. (fides). templis: cf. 3, 94, η. (templis atque delubris); Varr. L.L. 7, 6: templum tribus modis dicitur : ab natura, ab auspicando, a similitudine; natura in caelo, ab auspiciis in terra, a similitudine sub terra; 7, 8 : in terris dictum templum locus augurii aut auspicii causa quibusdam conceptis verbis

161 delubris, sacrificiisque sollemnibus, quid de ipsis auspiciis, quibus nos praesumus, existimandum sit, haec enim omnia ad hanc de dis inmortalibus quaestionem referenda sunt. Profecto eos ipsos, qui se aliquid certi 1 habere arbitrantur, addubitare2 coget doctissimorum hominum de maxuma re tanta dissensio. 15 Quod cum saepe alias tum maxime animadvert! cum apud 1

certe H

2

at dubitare ADB1

fini tus \ Gell. 14, 7, 7: templa esse per augures constituía ut in its senatusconsulta more maiorum iusta fieri possent. inter quae id quoque scriptum reliquit [se. Varrò] non omnes aedes sacras templa esse ac ne aedem quidem Vestae templum esse·, E. Norden, Aus altröm. Priesterbüchern (1939), 16; 27-31 (on the connection with τέμενος, as something marked off). delubris: cf. Schol. Dan. Aen. 2, 225: Varrò autem rerum divinarum libro \XIX delubrum esse dicit aut ubi plura numina sub uno tecto sunt, ut Capitotium, aut ubi praeter aedem area sit adsumpta deum causa, ut in Circo Flaminio Iovi Statori, aut in quo loco dei dicatum sit simulacrum ... Masurius Sabinus delubrum, e f f i g i e s ... alii delubrum dicunt templum ab eo quod nulli iunctum aedificio pluvia diluatur·, Serv. Aen. 2, 225: delubrum dicitur quod uno tecto plura complectitur numina, quia uno tecto diluitur, ut est Capitolium, in quo est Minerva, Iuppiter, Iuno. alii, ut Cincius, dicunt delubrum esse locum ante templum ubi aqua currit, a diluendo. The earliest occurrence seems that in the Argeiorum Sacrificia ap. Varr. L.L. 5, 52, where it appears to mean a portion (a chapel?) of the temple of Deus Fidius. A. WaldeJ. B. Hofmann, Lai. etym. Wörterb s.v., derive the word from deluo, "wash away" (comparing pollubrum), and think it originally was a place with running water near a shrine, where the necessary ablutions might take place before sacrifices; cf. G. Wissowa in P.-W. 4 (1901), 2702-2703; id., Rei. u. Kultus d. Römer2 (1912), 469. sacrificiisque sollemnibus: cf. Tuse. 1, 113: ad sollemne et statum sacrificium; Legg. 2, 35: sollemni sacrificio ac publico. quibus nos praesumus: with the

form of personal allusion cf. Div. 1, 2: quibus nationibus praefuimus ipsi. After ambitions to enter the augural college (Att. 2, 5, 2) and nominated by Pompey and Hortensius {Phil. 2, 4; cf. 13, 2), Cicero was coöpted as an augur in 53 B.C., succeeding the younger Crassus after his death at Carrhae (Plut. Cic. 36). He not infrequently refers to this office (e.g., Div. 1, 25; 1, 30; 1, 72; 1, 105; Brut. 1; Phil. 14, 14), and his researches (Fam. 3, 9, 3) and proficiency in the art are attested both by himself (e.g., Fam. 6, 6, 3-12) and by his friend Nepos (Nep. Att. 16), as well as by his work De Auguriis (the fragments in C. F. W. Müller's edition, 4, 3, 312), though this in no way prevented his attack upon all divination, augury included, in the second book of the De Divinatione. For the tolerance of Roman priests toward sceptical theological discussions cf. 1, 61, infra. referenda sunt: cf. 1, 3-4. aliquid certi: cf. 1, 6, η. (quid ... certî)\ Sext. Emp. Pyrrhon. 1, 3: εύρηκέναι μέν δοκοϋσιν oí ιδίως καλούμενοι δογματικοί. addubitare: "to be inclined toward doubt," i.e., to be weakened in their own dogmatic convictions, as contrasted with the Academics, whose attitude would be better represented by the simple verb dubitare. doctissimorum . . . maxuma . . . tanta: a characteristically Ciceronian expression; cf. Div. 1, 59: magnificentissimum ... optumo et clarissumo ... frequentissimo ... incredibili clamore et plausu. dissensio: cf. 1, 1, n. (tarn variae sunt). 15 cum saepe alias: cf. 1, 57: idque II

162

C . 1 Cottam familiarem meum accurate sane et diligente! de dis 1

C.] g

ACNBM

cum saepe tum cum te audirem paulo ante contigìt; Div. 1 , 8 : quibus de rebus et alias saepe et paulo accuratius nuper·, Ac. 2, 9: quibus de rebus et alias saepe nobis multa quaesita et disputata sunt et quondam in Hortensi villa; Τ use. 4, 7: quod cum saepe alias tum nuper in Tusculano egimus\ 5, 11 : facimus et alias saepe et nuper in Tusculano·, Am. 2: cum saepe multa, tum memini domi . .. sedentem·, Fat. 2: et saepe alias et quondam liberiore quam solebat et magis vacuo ab interventoribus die cum ad me ille venisset; O f f . 3, 86: cum saepe alias·, Tim. 1 : multa sunt a nobis et in Academicis conscripta contra physicos et saepe P. Nigidio . . . disputata·, Brut. 144: idque cum saepe alias tum apud centumviros ... cognitum est. The sentence makes, as in the similar cases cited, an easy transition from a general truth to a specific discussion of it by characters in a dialogue. apud: this might refer either to his town house or to a villa in the country. In view of the holiday season F. A. Wolf (AT/. Sehr. 1 (1869), 519) and Schoemann (ed., p. 21) suggest that this dialogue was probably placed in the country, and the former thinks that an exedra would have been more appropriate in the greater space of a country house. The evidence seems hardly adequate to determine the question, but the manner in which Cicero arrives (though by invitation) in the midst of the discussion and that in which the company disperses at the end (3, 95: discessimus) seem to favor a town house rather than anything like a house-party in the country; cf. R. Hirzel, Der Dialog, 1 (1895), n. 2. Videmus and vides in 2, 61, are probably figurative. C. Cottam: C. Aurelius Cotta, M.f., one of three famous brothers, C., L., and M.; cf. Ascon. p. 59. For his life cf. Mayor, ed. of N.D. 1, xl-xli; E. Klebs in P.-W. 2 (1896), 2482-2484; for his pedigree and his relationship to Julius Caesar F. Münzer, Rom. Adels-

parteien (1920), 312-313, and especially 326-327. He was the nephew of P. Rutilius Rufus (3, 80; De Or. 1, 229; cf. Att. 12, 20, 2), and was born about 120 B.C. {Brut. 301), so that at the time of this dialogue he would have been in the forties and Cicero about twenty-nine or thirty. He is thought of by Cicero as not yet consul (an office he held in 75 B.c.; see the evidence in Klebs, op. cit. 2483), but as already a pontifex (1, 61; 2,168; 3, 6; 3, 43; cf. also Veil. 2, 43,1). His official cursus (cf. Klebs, op. cit., 2483) need not here concern us; as a lawyer he was often paired with P. Sulpicius as one of the most distinguished of his generation {De Or. 1, 25 ; 3, 31 ; Brut. 183; 201-204; Ascon. p. 13; Veil. 2, 36, 2), being described by Cicero {De Or. 2, 98) as acutissimum et subtilissimum dicendi genus . .. consecutus·, cf. De Or. 3, 31 : limatus ... et subtilis, rem explicans propriis aptisque verbis·, haeret in causa semper et quid iudici probandum sit acutissime vidit, omissis ceteris in eo mentem orationemque defigit·, cf. 3, 9, infra. No speeches of his were published, though in the fragments of Sallust's Historiae there is one put by Sallust into his mouth. Cotta was also given a part in the De Oratore {De Or. 1, 25, and passim.·, Att. 13, 19, 4), and Atticus later hinted {Att. 13, 19, 5) that Cicero match off Cotta and Varrò in the second edition of the Académica·, cf. Hirzel, op. cit., 532. This Cicero rejected for the Académica, because it would make the author himself a κωφόν πρόσωπον—essentially the rôle which he plays in the De Natura Deorum. As for his philosophical interests, Cicero {De Or. 3, 145) makes him say me quidem in Academiam totum compulisti, and, again, numquam conquiescam neque defatigabor antequam illorum ancipitis vias rationesque et pro omnibus et contra omnia disputandi percepero. Hirzel (op. cit., 1, 534) well remarks that in Cicero's hands Roman statesmen tended more and more to turn into philosophizing Greeks.

163

inmortalibus disputatum est.1 Nam cum feriis 2 Latinis ad eum ipsius rogato arcessituque venissem, offendi eum sedentem in exedra et cum C. 3 Velleio 4 senatore disputantem, ad quem tum 1 disputatum sit ACNOB2M, 4 uellelo AH AC Ν

disputatumst PI.

accurate sane: cf. Div. 1, 8 (quoted above); Fin. 1, 13: accurate autem ... defensa est Epicuri sententia de voluptate·, O f f . 1, 4: accurate copioseque a philosophis disputata·, 2, 6: accuratius disputari soient·, 3, 7: Panaetius ... de o f f i c i i s accuratissime disputavit. With the meaning of sane cf. 1, 18: fidenter sane\ 1, 57: nihil sane·, elsewhere it often has a slightly concessive force; cf. 1, 68; 1, 103; 1, 109; 3, 26 ; M. van den Bruwaene, La théologie de Cíe. (1937), 134-135. dis inmortalibus: T. Birt (Beri, philol. Woch. 38 (1918), 550) thinks the adjective is here conveniently inserted by Cicero to avoid juxtaposing dis and disputatum. feriis Latinis : on this movable holiday period, gradually increased to four days (Plut. Camill. 42, 5), which occurred, coincidently with rites on the Alban Mount, in various parts of the year but with a tendency toward May, June, and July, cf. C. Werner, De Feriis Latinis (1888); E. Samter in P.-W. 6 (1909), 2213-2216; Pease on Div. 1, 18, n. (Albano in monte). A festival period gave an opportunity for that otium (2, 3) which busy lawyers and statesmen lacked in their daily life ; hence the De República is represented (Rep. 1, 14; 1, 33) as a dialogue taking place during these same holidays (cf. Plato's Republic as laid on a holiday; 1, 327a), the De Oratore finds its occasion on the days of the Ludi Romani (De Or. 1, 24), the Octavius of Minucius Felix is laid during a harvest festival (Oct. 2, 3), and the Saturnalia of Macrobius shows by its title (as well as by 1, 1, 1-3) its supposed occasion. A discussion of religious or theological questions on such an occasion seems particularly appropriate. ad eum: cf. apud C. Cottam above, arcessitu: a rare word (only in

2

feris A\ ferus B1

3

C.] g

Plaut. Stich. 327; Amm. Marc. 31, 10, 3; and here), used only in the ablative; cf. our expression "by invitation." exedra: this word and its diminutive exedrium (Fam. 7,23,3) are well discussed by Tyrrell and Purser, ed. of Cic. Ep. 2 a (1906), 272-273 ; and by A. Mau in P.-W. 6 (1909), 1581-1583, who mentions some at Pompeii. It is defined by the Thes. Ling. Lat., s.v., 1318, 73, as an extensive room, especially of semicircular shape, provided with seats, which was, for conversations or discussions, built in houses beside the portico of the peristyle. Vitruvius mentions it in several passages, especially 5, 11, 2 [describing, to be sure, exedrae in the palaestra\ : constituantur autem in tribus porticibus exhedrae spatiosae, habentes sedes in quibus philosophi, rhetores, reliquique qui studiis delectantur sedentes disputare possint. in duplici autem porticu conlocentur haec membra, ephebeum in medio, hoc autem est exhedra amplissima cum sedibus, quae tertia parte longior sit quam lata [on the proportions cf. also Vitr. 6, 3, 8; Inscr. Lat. sel. 4621 Dessau for one 30 X 25 feet]. Cicero elsewhere speaks of exedrae in private houses ; cf. De Or. 3, 17: in earn exedram venisse in qua Crassus posito lectulo recubuisset ; Fin. 5, 4 [at Athens] : ego ilia moveor exedra, modo enim fuit Carneadis. As the derivation shows, these rooms were primarily for sitting (notice sedentem in this passage) rather than for reclining, and were built out from some main building. Tyrrell and Purser (I.e.) point out that they at times corresponded to university class-rooms (citing Strabo, 17, 1, 8; Cod. Theod. 15, 1, 53); in fact, T. Francklin in his translation of our passage quaintly renders exedra as "study." A hemicyclion might be similarly used for conversations; cf. Am. 2 (perhaps sug-

164

Epicurei 1 primas ex 2 nostris hominibus deferebant. Aderat etiam Q. 3 Lucilius 4 Balbus, qui tantos progressus habebat in 1

epicuri ACNBM

2

ex] et

H

gested by Plat. Rep. 1, 328c); Plat. Protag. 317d-e; Porphyr. Vit. Pyth. 9. In Greece έξέδραα might be in the schools of the philosophers {Acad. Philos. Ind. Here. 100, col. 29, 41. as emended by S. Mekler; cf. pp. 103-104), or, as here, in private houses (Galen, De Antid. 1, 3 (14, 18 K.)). It is perhaps not intentional, yet not altogether inappropriate, that a dialogue based so largely on Greek doctrines should be given this Greek element in its scene. C. Velleio: a native of Lanuvium (1, 82: illam vestram Sospitam, who was there worshipped), was a friend of L. Crassus, the orator (1, 58), though himself not a finished speaker ; De Or. 3, 78 : hoc dicendi exercitatione, in qua Vellerns est rudis [yet cf. 1, 58, below]. F. Préchac {Rev. de philol. 37 (1913), 121-131), by a variety of evidence, tries to show that it was Velleius who converted C. Trebatius Testa to Epicureanism (Fam. 7, 12, 2). tum: at the time of Cicero's writing there might have been other claimants for this honor, such as Lucretius and several others named as important Epicureans by P. H. and E. A. De Lacy, Pbilodemus on Methods of Inference (1941), 4, n. 16. primas . . . deferebant: sc. partes·, cf. Ac. fr. 20 Müller (ap. Aug. C. Acad. 3, 15): Académico sapienti ab omnibus ceterarum sectarum, qui sibi sapientes videntur, secundas partes dari, cum primas sibi quemque vindicare necesse sit ; Brut. 183 : ex his Cotta et Suipicius . .. facile primas tulerunt·, Orat. 18: M. Antonius, cut vel prima eloquentiae patrum nostrorum tribuebat aetas·, 29 : Pericles ... cui primae sine controversia deferebantur·, Div. in Caec. 49: si Alienus .. . sibi primas in dicendo partis concesserit·, Aug. C.D. 9, 5: Zenonis et Chrysippi, qui huius sectae primas habuerunt; cf. the Greek πρωτεία (e.g., Philod. De Stoicis, in W. Crönert, Kolotes u. Menedemus

3

quintus ADHNBM

4

lucius H

(1906), 58: οϊ τε Στωικοί πάντες ώς ειπείν τά πρωτεία της άγωγης άπονέμουσκν αύ>τώι. nostris hominibus: cf. 1, 7, n. (nostris hominibus). Q. Lucilius Balbus: one of two often confused Balbi described in De Or. 3, 78 as Roman Stoics. This one was intimate with Posidonius (2, 88), and was either a correspondent of Antiochus or the recipient of a dedication from him (1, 16). Two references to his father (2,11 ; 2,14) tell us little. The assumption of C. F. A. Nobbe (ed. of Cic. 10 (1849), 369, followed by J. G. Baiter and C. Halm (ed. of Cic. 4 (1861), 980) and by R. Hirzel {Der Dialog, 1 (1895), 499), that Balbus was a speaker in the Hortensius rests upon a misunderstanding of Aug. C. Iulian. Pelag. 4, 72, as had been well shown by A. B. Krische, Gotting. Stud. 1, 2 (1845), 128, n. 1. Mayor's account is superseded by F. Münzer in P.-W. 13 (1927), 1640. progressus: cf. 1, 12, n. {consecutum . .. secutum)·, Ac. 1, 20: progressio quaedam ad virtutem [and Reid's n.]; Fin. 3, 6: cum haec ad te scribam qui cum in philosophia tum in optimo genere philosophiae tantum processeris; 3, 48 : qui processif aliquantum ad virtutis habitum·, 4, 17; 4, 66: habent ad virtutem progressionis aliquantum·, 4, 67: vestri autem progressionem ad virtutem fieri aiunt\ Tusc. 4, 1; 4, 44: philosophiae denique ipsius principes numquam in suis studiis tantos progressus sine flagranti cupiditate facere pofuissent·, 4, 44; O f f . 3, 14: progressione discendi-, 3, 17: si qua ad virtutem est facta progressio·, E. V. Arnold, Rom. Stoicism (1911), 326-327, for the Stoic notion of προκοπή, or progress toward virtue, though the use of προκοπή and προκόπτω also occurs among the Epicureans ; cf. Philodem. De Gratia, col. 16, 5 {Here. Voll. Coll. prior, 10, 31) for προκοπήν ποιεΐν; Gnom. Vat. 408 {Wiener Stud. 11 (1889), 64). For ¡ts

165 Stoicis ut cum excellentibus in eo genere Graecis compararetur.1 Tum, ut me Cotta vidit, "Peroportune," inquit, "venis; oritur enim mihi magna de re altercatio cum Velleio,2 cui 3 pro tuo studio non est alienum 4 te interesse." 7 16 "Atqui 5 mihi quoque videor," inquam, "venisse, ut dicis, oportune. Tres enim trium disciplinarum principes con1

A1

compareietur NM1, comparetur H 6 adqui A, atque D1HG

appearance among the Peripatetics cf. Suid. s.v. άρετή. excellentibus . . . Graecis: cf. 1, 8, n. {dici posse). With Cicero's fulsome judgment of the philosophical attainments of a friend cf. Div. 1 , 5 : Cratippus ... familiaris nosier, quem ego parem summis Peripateticis iudico. Aug. C.D. 4, 30, is less complimentary toward Balbus: iste Balbus velut balbutiens. in Stoicis: probably neuter here and in Brut. 114: propsperfectus in Stoicis·, but Reid (on Fin. 2, 39) would hold our case to be in the masculine. ut me . . . vidit: for the resumption of a dialogue interrupted by a fresh arrival cf. Rep. 1, 17. peroportune: a rather rare adverb, occurring in 2 Verr. 5, 39: cum te peroportune fortuna attulisset-, De Or. 2,15; Liv. 1, 42, 2, and resumed in 1, 16 by the simple oportune. Cf. Macrob. Sat. 1, 2, 16: quos adventsse peroportune vides. Cicero's late arrival allows the dialogue to start with less of unnecessary preliminary. altercatio : of a dispute or controversy, and, in law, of the part of the argument immediately before the decision. In the philosophical works it is found only here, but cf. F am. 1, 2, 1; At t. 1, 16, 8; 1, 16, 10; 4, 13, 1; A. Pittet, Vocab. philos, de Se'nèque, 1 (1937), 80. Cf. also the phrase in Legg. 1, 55: inter eos de re maxima ... dissensio. pro tuo studio: cf. 1, 6, n. {a primo tempore aetatis)·, Cicero was already, in spite of his youth, recognized as one

2

uellelo AH

3

qui B1

4

alunum

who, even if he did not act as the spokesman for any philosophic view, yet was interested and intelligent enough to appreciate the discussion. 16 inquam: this verb appears seven times in 1, 15-17, and with comparable frequency in 2, 1-4 and 3, 1-5; cf. also Tusc. 3, 12. For its equivalent in modern quotation marks cf. A. S. Pease in Italica, 15 (1938), 129. trium disciplinarum: the addition of the Peripatetics—here omitted to avoid duplication, since Cicero, like Antiochus, probably considered their theological views akin to those of the Stoics (yet cf. R. Hirzel, Der Dialog, 1 (1895), 543, n. 1)—would furnish the four standard schools, for the time of the dialogue, though by the date of writing the Academy had declined and the Pythagoreans had gained P. Nigidius Figulus as a notable representative (cf. Tim. 1). For the four cf. Ciris, 14-15 : si me iam summa sapientia pangeret arce, / quattuor antiquis heredibus edita censors·, Sen. Ep. 88, 5; Lucían, Hermot. 16; Greg. Naz. Or. 25, 6 (Pair. Gr. 33,1205a). Philostr. Vit. Soph. 566 says that Marcus Aurelius assigned to Herodes Atticus the selection of four Regius Professors at Athens representing these four schools. principes: prominent representatives, though not formal heads of their schools; cf. 3, 5: quemquam principem Stoicorum; Hobein in P.-W. 4A (1931), 43, 10. In Fin. 5, 7, however, it is used for Plato and Aristotle.

166

venistis. M . 1 enim Piso si adesset, nullius 2 philosophiae, earum 3 quidem quae 4 in honore 5 sunt, vacaret 6 locus." Tum 7 Cotta: "Si," inquit, "liber Antiochi nostri, qui ab eo 1 m.] g C a nullus Β 4 honorem Β1 DH{?)

3 6

earum] qui earum (qui del.) Β, erum A1 7 tunc Β uaret Β1

M. enim Piso: for the repetition of enim after its use in the preceding section cf. Pro Mil. 12; also the occasional repetition of adversative conjunctions in cuccessive clauses; e.g., Hor. Serm. 1, 3, 32-33. F. A. Wolf, Litt. Analekten, 1 (1817), 307, detects an ellipsis here, and explains : trium dico, non omnium quattuor qui nunc sunt in honore, M. enim Piso. With the word-order cf. De Or. 1,40: C. ipsum Carbonem;2, 263: Servius ille Galba. M. Pupius Piso Frugi, son of a Calpurnius, and adopted by M. Pupius, at the date of this dialogue had been a quaestor of L. Scipio (consul in 83 B.C.). His other offices and services—praetor, proconsul in Spain, triumphator in 69 {In Pis. 62), service against the pirates and Mithridates, consulship (61)—are briefly discussed by F. Lübker-J. Geffcken-E. Ziebarth, Reallexikon d. kl. Alt* (1914), 873. Asconius, p. 14, says: fuit ... Pupius Piso eisdem temporibus quibus Cicero, sed tanto aetate maior ut adulescentulum Ciceronem pater ad eum deduceret, quod in eo et antiquae vitae similitude et multae erant litterae ; orator quoque melior quam frequentior habitus est. Brut. 236 gives a full appraisal of his oratorical ability. The Peripatetic Staseas of Neapolis lived with and doubtless influenced him {De Or. 1, 104), and in the fifth book of the De Finibus Piso (already dead, before that book and the present were written, as is clear from Att. 13, 19, 4) is the spokesman for the Peripatetics (cf. Fin. 4, 73). Cicero appears to have forgiven a sharp difference between him and Piso over the latter's attitude in his consulship toward Clodius. in honore sunt: with the expression cf. Fin. 3, 52; Τ use. 1, 5; 2, 4; O f f . 2, 65; F. Klose, Die Bedeutung von bonos u. honestus (1933), 55; 85; with the thought

4

qua

cf. 1, 6, η. {desertae ... et relictaé). liber Antiochi: Ae. 2, 12, in speaking of Antiochus, says: nec se tenuit quin contra suum doctorem librum etiam ederet qui Sosus inscribitur, and some scholars have tried to identify that with the book here mentioned; thus A. B. Krische in Gotting. Stud. 1, 2 (1845), 168; E. Zeller, Die Philos, d. Griechen, 3, l 6 (1923), 619, n. 2. But that the book here mentioned does not fit the descriptions of the Sosus has been more convincingly maintained by F. A. Wolf, Kl. Sehr. 1 (1869), 520; R. Hirzel, Untersuch. Cicero's philos. Sehr. 3 (1883), 273-274 (who thinks the book mentioned in our passage was probably the source used by Cicero in Books 4-5 of the De Finibus), and A. Loercher, De Compos, et Fonte Lib. Cic. qui est De Fato (1907), 44, η. 2, who believes it the source of only Book 4 of the De Finibus. Still another, though less likely, explanation might identify the books with Antiochus's περί θεών, mentioned by Plut. Lucull. 28, 7. In that case Antiochus might be maintaining the kinship of the Stoic and Peripatetic theologies, while Balbus would be insisting on the dissimilarity of the Stoic and Peripatetic ethics. Antiochus of Ascalon, founder of the so-called "Fifth Academy," was born in the latter part of the second century B.C., and studied at Athens under Philo of Larisa, whom he followed to Rome in 88 B.C. Later he reverted from the scepticism of Philo to views which purported to be those of the Old Academy {Ac. 2, 11-12), and still later became the head of the Academic school in Athens, where Cicero for six months attended his lectures in 79-78 {Brut. 315; Fin. 5, 1). He died about 68 or 67; cf. Ac. 2, 61 : haec Antiochus . .. multo etiam adséverantius, in Syria cum esset mecum,

167

nuper ad hune Balbum missus est, vera loquitur, nihil est quod Pisonem, familiarem tuum, desideres ; Antiocho enim Stoici 1 cum 1

stoicum D

paulo ante quam est mortuus·, H. von Arnim in P.-W. 1 (1894), 2493-2494, who remarks that his return to the Old Academy is in reality a transition to a dogmatic eclecticism, in which Antiochus sought to combine in a new system Academic, Peripatetic, and Stoic teachings which met his approval. ad hunc Balbum: possibly merely of a book sent as a present, but more likely of one addressed or dedicated to Balbus ; cf. Div. 2, 3: liber is quem ad nostrum Atticum de senectute misimus·, Sen. 3: hunc librum ad te de senectute misimus ; Am. 4: in Catone malore, qui est scriptus ad te de senectute ; Ac. 1, 2: habeo opus magnum in manibus ... ad hunc enim ipsum ... quaedam institut·, Fin. 1, 8: libro quem ad me de virtute misisti·, Att. 8, 12, 6: Derne tri i Magnetis librum quem ad te misit de concordia-, 14, 20, 3 [of the Orator ad M. Brutum]: scripsissem ad eum de optima genere dicendi. Such a work, attempting to bridge the gaps between different schools of Socratic derivation, might well be addressed by a non-sceptical Academic to a Stoic. nihil est quod: cf. 1, 3, η. (quid est quod). desideres: cf. Ac. 1, 12: sic philosophiam Latinis litteris persequitur nihil ut eisdem de rebus desideres·, Tusc. 1, 24: amplius quod desideres nihil erit. Stoici cum Peripateticis : most of the later schools derived from Socrates; cf. De Or. 3, 61 : proseminatae sunt quasi familiae dissentientes inter se et multum disiunctae et dispares, cum tarnen omnes se philosophi Socráticos et dici vellent et esse arbitrarentur·, O f f . 1, 2; Fin. 5, 7. It is not surprising, if one may reason from the history of religious sects, that at certain times doctrinal lines should be sharply drawn, while at other times and by other philosophers rapprochements between two or more schools should be attempted. On the essential

agreement of Stoics—especially of so scientifically minded a man as Posidonius—and Peripatetics cf. Fin. 3, 10: vide, ne magis, inquam, tuum fuerit, cum re idem tibi quod mihi videretur, non nova te rebus nomina imponen·, 3, 41 : Carneades ... pugttare non destitit in omni bac quaestione quae de bonis et malts appelletur non esse rerum Stoicis cum Peripateticis controversiam sed nominum·, 4, 78: re eadem defendunt [sc. Stoici] quae Peripatetici, verba tenent mordicus-, 5, 74: Stoici restant ... totam ad se nostrum philosophiam transtulerunt, atque ut reliqui fures earum rerum quas ceperunt signa commutant, sic Uli, ut sententiis nostris pro suis uterentur, nomina tamquam rerum notas mutaverunt-, 5, 75 (where Piso is clearly following the view of Antiochus); Tusc. 5, 32: inter Zenonem et Peripatéticos nihil praeter verborum novitatem interesse-, 5, 120; Galen, De Libr. propr. 11 (19, 41 Κ.): μικρά μέν δή πώς εστίν ή παρά τοις Περιπατητικούς διαφωνία, μεγάλη δέ παρά τοις Στωικοϊς και Πλατωνικοϊς; Julian, Ep. 4, 385d; also Reid on Ac. 1, 37. For the denial of the likeness of these two schools see note on interesse plurimum, below. Such likenesses were at times found between Academics and Peripatetics (e.g., Ac. 1, 17: Academicorum et Peripateticorum, qui rebus congruentes nominibus differebant-, 1, 18; 2, 15; Peripatéticos et Académicos, nominibus différentes, re congruentes, a quibus Stoici ipsi verbis magis quam sententiis dissenserunt; Fin. 4, 5; O f f . 1, 2; 3, 20; Legg. 1, 38; Clem. Strom. 6, 27, 3; Porphyry (Suid. s.v. Πορφύριος) wrote a book περί του μίαν είναι τήν Πλάτωνος καί 'Αριστοτέλους α'ίρεσιν), and between the nonsceptical branch of the Academy and the Stoa (Ac. 2, 132: per ipsum Antiochum, qui appellabatur Academicus, erat quidem, si perpauca mutavisset, germanissimus Stoicus; Legg. 1, 53-54; also Aenesidemus ap. Phot. Bibl. 213, p. 170a Bekker).

168

Peripateticis re concinere videntur, verbis discrepare; quo de libro, Balbe, velim scire quid sentías." "Egone," inquit ille, "miror Antiochum, hominem in primis acutum, non vidisse interesse 1 plurimum inter Stoicos, qui honesta a commodis non nomine sed genere toto diiungerent,2 et 1

interesse om. H

2

disiungerent

re . . . verbis: the overfamiliar Greek antithesis of έργω and λόγω, rendered by Cicero in various ways, e.g., re ... verbo {Tuse. 2, 29; O f f . 3, 83; Parad. 7; De Consul, ap. Div. 1, 17; Phil. 2, 11; 7, 9), re ... verbis (1, 85; Fin. 4 , 2; 4, 60; 4, 72; Fat. 22; 44; Legg. i, 54; F am. 13, 6a, 4; Pro Ses/. 86; Mani/. 52; cf. Fin. 4, 78), rebus ... verbis {Pro Scaur. 3, 3; cf. Legg. 1, 55), re vera ... verbo (2 Verr. 1, 72; Pro Cluent. 54), re ... oratione (1, 124; Ait. 4, 16, 1), re ... vocabulo (J'use. 1, 62), re ... vocabulis {Fin. 4, 5), rebus . .. vocabulis {Ac. 1, 37), re ... nomen {Div. 1, 28), re ... nominibus {Ac. 2,15), rebus ... nominibus {Ac. 1,17; cf. Fin. 3, 41), reapse ... speciem {Div. 1, 81). For the musical metaphor in concinere ... discrepare see Reid, edition of the Académica, p. 161, to which add O f f . 1, 145: ne forte quid discrepet ... quo maior ... concentus est; 3, 83: verbo inter se discrepare, re unum sonare [where Holden compares Plat. Phaedo, 92c: οδτος . . . δ λόγος έκείνω πώς ξυνάσεται ;] ; Fin. 4, 60: re concinebat, verbis discrepare. egone: cf. 3, 8; Fin. 3, 11 ; Legg. 1,14; 2, 32. This use of -ne expresses surprise at being suddenly asked a question, or at times a reluctance to answer; cf. R. Kiihner-C. Stegmann, Aus f . Gram. d. ¡at. Spr. 2, 2 1 (1914), 508. hominem . . . acutum: cf. 3, 83: bomo acutus·, and 13 other cases in the philosophical works (H. Merguet, Lex. χ. d. philos. Sehr. Cic. 1 (1887), 36; Phil. 2, 28). interesse plurimum: insistence on the differences between these two schools occurs in several places; e.g., Fin. 2, 68 : pugnant Stoici cum Peripateticis. alteri negant quicquam esse bonum nisi quod honestum sit, alteri plurimum se et longe

D2OB2FM longeque plurimum tribuere honestati, sed tarnen et in corpore et extra esse quaedam bona·, 4, 2: an parum disserui non verbis Stoicos a Peripateticis sed universa re et tota sententia dissidere; 4, 49; Tusc. 5, 119: alii tantam praestantiam in bonis animi esse dicunt ut ab his corporis et externa obscurentur ; alti autem haec ne bona quidem ducunt, in animo reponunt omnia·, Geli. 18, 1, 5; Aug. C.D. 9, 4. But it should be observed that the sectarian differences fall in the field of ethics rather than in that of physics, with which the present work is concerned, and Balbus does not here attempt a theological differentiation of the two sects. honesta a commodis: virtues and material goods are, for the stricter Stoics, incommensurables, so that no increase in one can produce any increase in the other, and they differ, not in degree, as the Peripatetics held, but in kind (not magnitudine et quasi gradibus but genere·, J. S. Reid ap. Mayor, ad loc. notes that similar phrases are found in Fin. 3, 45-50). As opposed to the common classification of things into mala, neutra, and bona, the Stoics insisted on a five-fold division into mala (also called foeda, turpia, or inhonesta = κακά), incommoda (also called remota or reiecta = άποπροηγμένα), neutra ( = άδιάφορα), commoda (also called producta, promota, praecipua, praelata, praeposita, or sumenda = προηγμένα), and bona (also called pulchra or honesta — καλά), of which only the first and the last named have moral significance. Yet Diog. L. 7, 103 ; 7, 128 asserts that Panaetius and Posidonius admitted health and wealth among goods; cf. M. Pohlenz in Gotting. Nachr. Phil-hist. Kl., N.F. 1 (1934), 4. For the various terms here used cf.

169 Peripatéticos, qui honesta commiscerent cum commodis, ut ea inter se magnitudine et quasi gradibus, non genere, differrent. Haec enim est non verborum parva sed rerum permagna dissensio. 17 Verum hoc alias; nunc quod coepimus, si videtur." "Mihi vero," inquit Cotta, "videtur. Sed ut hic qui intervenit," me intuens, "ne ignoret quae res agatur, de natura agebamus deorum, quae cum mihi videretur 1 perobscura, ut semper videri 1

uiderentur M, uidetur DGB1

Fin. 3, 14; Reid on Ac. 1, 36-37; E. V. Arnold, Rom. Stoicism (1911), 290; for honesta in particular M. O. Liçcu, Étude sur la langue de la philos, morale cheζ Cic. (1930), 150-152; F. Klose, Die Bedeutung von bonos u. honestus (1933), 104-108; for commoda cf. A. Pittet, Vocab. philos, de Sénèque (1937), 196-197. honesta commiscerent: the emendations of Heindorf to honesta sic, and M. L. Earle {Proc. Am. philol. Assoc. 33 (1902), lxxi; reprinted in his CI. Papers (1912), 2Ö4) to honesta ita are unnecessary, for the result-clause may follow easily after the verb without any such preparatory adverb. gradibus . . . genere: cf. De opt. Gen. Or. 4 : id fit non genere sed gradu. non verborum: cf. Aug. C. Acad. 2, 24: non est ista, inquam, mihi crede, verborum sed rerum ipsarum magna controversia. This subject is discussed at length in Books 3-4 of the De Finibus. 17 hoc alias: sc. tractabimus or some similar verb. For the ellipsis cf. 1, 19: longum est ad omnia·, 1, 47: Cotta meus modo hoc modo illud·, 1, 121: quanto Stoici melius; 2, 1: sed ad ista alias-, 3, 5: pauca de me ; Tuse. 1, 23: nunc, si videtur, hoc, illud alias·, 3, 10: sed id alias, nunc quod instai·, 3, 25: sed cetera alias, nunc ... depellamus; 3, 73: sed de hoc alias, nunc illud satis est·, Div. 2, 7: sed haec alias plurtbus, nunc ... revertamur; 2, 19: de quo alias, nunc quod necesse est·, 2, 20: si omnia fato, quid mihi divinatio prodest ... vultis autem omnia fato·, Am. 1: sed de hoc alias, nunc redeo ad augurem·, Brut. 292: quorsus, inquam, istuci These ellipses are especially common with such verbs as dicere,

facere, agere, iudicare, etc. ; cf. R. Kühnerem. Stegmann, Ausf. Gram. d. lat. Spr. 2, 22 (1914), 551-553. si videtur: cf. Ac. 1, 14; Fin. 4, 21. mihi vero: cf. repetam vero below; 2, 4; 2, 27; 3, 65: mihi vero, inquit Vellerns, valde videtur-, Div. 2, 100: mihi vero, inquit,placet·, Fat. 3: tu vero, inquam-, Am. 16: mihi vero erit gratum·, Ac. 1, 14: mihi vero, Ule. intervenit: of a caller or of one who drops in on a conversation ; cf. Rep. 1,18: intervenit vir prudens ... M'.Manilius; Att. 16, 4, 1: Libo intervenit·, also Fat. 2: vacuo ab interventoribus die. u t . . . ne: in a final clause with words separating the connective and negative parts of the conjunction; cf. Madvig on Fin. 2, 15; Kühner-Stegmann, op. cit. 2, 2« (1914), 209. me intuens: cf. 2, 104: hoc loco me intuens, utar, inquit, carminibus Ar atéis-, Brut. 253: cum ad te ipsum, inquit, in me intuens-, 300: sed tu, inquit, in me intuens. With this type of parenthesis cf. Ac. 1,2: me autem dicebat [and parallels in Reid's note]; Isocr. Panathen. 215: σύ μέν πεποίησαι τούς λόγους (έμέ λέγων). neignoret: cf. Macrob. Sat. 1, 2, 19: atqui scias oportet eum inter nos sermonem fuisse. quae res agatur: a legal expression; cf. Fin. 2, 3: praescribere . .. quibusdam in formulis EA RES AGETVR, ut inter quos disseritur conveniat quid sit id de quo disseratur-, 5, 78: qui acute in causis videre soleat quae res agatur·, Tuse. 1, 10. perobscura: cf. 1, 1, n. ( p e r d i f f i c i l i s ... et perobscura)·, 1, 60.

170

solet, Epicuri ex 1 Velleio sciscitabar 2 sententiam. Quam ob rem," inquit, "Vellei, nisi 3 molestum est, repete quae coeperas." "Repetam vero, quamquam non mihi sed tibi hic venit adiutor; ambo enim," inquit adridens, "ab eodem Philone nihil scire didicistis." Tum ego 4 : "Quid didicerimus Cotta viderit 5 ; tu 6 autem nolo existimes me adiutorem huic venisse sed auditorem,7 et quidem 1 6

2 sciscitabor A1 3 nisi] nihil Ν e Ν 7 auditorem] adiutorem CB1 tu] tum DG

nisi molestum est: a frequent expression of politeness and of delicacy in intruding one's own interests or requests into the conversation of others; cf. Ac. 1, 14; Fin. 1, 28; 2, 5; Τ use. 1, 26 (cf. 5, 82); Rep. 1, 46; Sen. 6; Pro Cluent. 168; Phil. 2, 41; Brut. 20: qua re, si tibi est commodum, ede ilia quae coeperas et Bruto et mihi; also Plaut. Pers. 599; Poen. 50; Rud. 120; Ter. Ad. 806; C.I.L. X, 5371 ( = Dessau 7734); Arnob. 4, 4; Hier. Vita Pauli, 12. Similar expressions are si tibi non est molestum {Fat. 4; F am. 5, 12, 10; cf. Plaut. Epid. 461; Mart. 1, 96, 1), si forte non molestum est (Catull. 55, 1), numquidnam tibi molestumst ... si (Plaut. Asin. 830; cf. Hier. In Eph. 2, p. 622 Vali.), ne ... vobis molestus sim {Fin. 5, 8), ne ... molestum me ... putares (Hier. Ep. 49, 1, 1), ubi molestum non erit (Ter. Eun. 484), nisi forte molesti intervenimus {De Or. 2, 14), si tibi est commodum {Brut. 20), si ita vobis est commodum {De Or. 2, 367), nisi tibist incommodum (Plaut. Most. 807), si grave non est {Att. 13, 42, 1 ; Hor. Serm. 2, 8, 4), si videtur (see above; Fin. 4, 2), nisi quid . . . videtur secus {Legg. 1, 17), si vacas animo {Div. 1, 10), si forte vacas (Hor. Ep. 2, 2, 95), nid quid te detinet (Hor. Ep. 1, 2, 5). Similar phrases occur in Greek, e.g., Plat. Tim. 17b: εΕ μή τί σοι χαλεπόν; Phaedo, 96a: έγώ ουν σοι δίειμι . . . έάν βούλη ; Prot. 310a: εί μή σέ τι κωλύει; Philostr. Nero, p. 220 Kayser: εί μή τι σπουδάσαι διανοή έτερον. ab eodem Philone: cf. 1, 6, n. {Philo). Even at this early date in Cicero's life he is represented as being already rec-

4

ego om. D

6

uideret A1

ognized as an adherent of the sceptic Academy—an anachronism discussed by R. Hirzel, Untersuch. ζ· Cicero's philos. Sehr. 3 (1883), 488-489; n. 1; id., Der Dialog, 1 (1895), 511-512; 534, n. 1. nihil scire: cf. 1, 1, n. {principium)·, Ac. 1, 16 ; 2, 74; Fin. 5, 76: an eum discere ea mavis quae, cum plane perdidicerit, nihil sciât-, Lucr. 4, 469-470; Sen. Ep. 88, 44: Academici qui novam induxerunt scientiam, nihil scire·, Lact. Inst. 3, 14, 15; De Ira, 1, 6. Cotta viderit: with this use of the future perfect cf. 3, 9: quam simile istud sit, inquit, tu videris·, Ac. 2, 19; Fin. 1, 35: quae fuerit causa mox videro ; Tuse. 1, 23 ; 5, 34; 5, 120; Am. 10: viderint sapientes-, De Or. 1, 246: Uli viderint [where Wilkins remarks that this is "a formula by which the solution of a difficult problem is passed on to someone else"]; 2, 235: viderit Democritus; 2, 351; Brut. 297; Orator, 152; Phil. 2, 118; 3, 17; 5, 33; F am. 8, 13, 2; R. Kiihner-C. Stegmann, Ausf. Gram. d. lat. Spr. 2, l 2 (1912), 149. nolo . . . auditorem: the logical meaning is nolo existimes me adiutorem huic venisse sed existimes me auditorem venisse, an affirmative verb being, by brachylogy, supplied from the preceding negative one. This is due to the fact that Latin often expresses a negative idea in the main verb. Cf. 1, 71 : negat esse corpus deorum sed [sc. dicit esse} tamquam corpus-, Madvig on Fin. 2, 25; and numerous other cases collected by Kühner-Stegmann, op. cit.,2, 2 2 (1914), 563. adiutorem . . . auditorem: with the paronomasia cf. 3, 64: sentiam ... ad-

171 aequum,1 libero iudicio, nulla eius modi adstrictum necessitate ut mihi velim nolim sit certa quaedam tuenda sententia." 1

aecum A, cum M, fretum C

sentiar·, Div. 2, 34: concentu atque consensu·, Brut. 38: suavis ... videri maluit quam gravis ; and what Cicero says in Orator, 38 : et ut pariter extrema [sc. verba] terminentur eundemque référant in cadendo sonum. The custom becomes all too frequent in some later authors, such as Augustine, who seems (C. Acad. 2, 24) at one place actually to have had our passage in mind : video enim te non tarn accusatorem quam adiutorem fore. et quidem: the phrase carries the original meaning further, in either a serious or, sometimes, an ironical spirit; cf. 1, 55; 1, 59; 1, 78; 1, 82; 1, 83; 1, 89; 1, 100; also in Greek καΐ ταΰτα. libero iudicio: cf. Div. 2, 150: cum autem proprium sit Academiae nulla adhibita sua auctoritate indicium audientium relinquere integrum ac liberum·, Tuse. 4, 7: sunt enim iudicia libera. In other terms the Academics praise their own freedom, e.g., Ac. 2, 8: hoc autem liberiores et solutiores sumus, quod integra nobis est iudicandi potestas·, 2, 9; O f f . 3, 20: nobis autem nostra Academia magnam licentiam dat ut quodcumque maxime probabile occurrat id nostro iure liceat defendere·, Tuse. 4, 47. This freedom contrasts with the credal restraints of some other schools, particularly the Epicureans (1, 66; Fin. 2, 20: quis enim vestrum non edidicit Epicuri κυρίας δόξας), over whom even Stoics might boast (cf. Sen. Ep. 33, 4), but also as compared with the Stoics (Ac. 2, 120; Tusc. 5, 33: cum aliis isto modo qui legibus impositis disputant ; nos in diem vivimus ; quodcumque nostros ánimos probabili tate percussit id dicimus, itaque soli sumus liberi), Pythagoreans (1,10), and even the followers of Antiochus (Ac. 2, 137). nulla . . . adstrictum necessitate: cf. Ac. 2, 8: nec ut omnia, quae praescripta a quibusdam et quasi imperata sint defendamus necessitate ulla cogimur·, 2, 137; Tusc. 2, 5: quod ii ferunt animo iniquo, qui certis quibusdam destinatisque sententiis quad addicti et consecrati sunt eaque necessitate con-

stricti ut etiam quae non probare soleant ea cogantur constantiae, causa defendere·, 4, 7 : nos institutum tenebimus nullisque unius disciplinae legibus adstricti quibus in philosophia necessario pareamus, quid sit in quoque re maxime probabile semper requiremus·, 4, 47; 5, 82; Hor. Ep. 1, 1, 14-15: nullius addict us iurare in verba magistri, / quo me cumque rapit tempestas deferor hospes; Galen, De propr. An. 8 (V, p. 42 K.) : τό μή προπετώς άπό μιας αίρέσεως άναγορεύσας σαυτόν, άλλά έν χρόνω παμπόλλω μανθάνων τε καΐ κρίνων αύτάς, οΰτως πρός άπάντων μέν άνθρώπων έπαινεΐται. Cicero's statement of the freedom of individual judgment on the part of the Academics serves as a preparation for 3, 95, where the two members of the school, Cotta and Cicero, vote on opposite sides of the question; cf. R. Hirzel, Der Dialog, 2 (1895), 1516; A. S. Pease in Trans. Am. philol. Assoc. 44 (1913), 35. velim nolim: Cicero is apparently the earliest extant user of this form of a common proverbial phrase, which occurs in various tenses, persons, and numbers (the form in Ter. Pborm. 950 is rather different in meaning). For variations cf. velim nolim (Sen. Rhet. Controv. 9, 3, 8; Querolus, p. 21 Peip.; Hier. Ep. 130, 19, 1 ; In EKech. 1, prol. pp. 777-778 Vail.), velis nolis (Mart. 8, 44, 16 ; Incert. Panegyr. Maxim, et Constant. 1,1, p. 220 Baehrens; Querolus, p. 20 Peip.; Donat. in Ter. Andr. 214: proverbiale hoc est, qualia sunt fas nefas, velis nolis ; Hier. Ep. 118, 5, 5; Adv. Iovin. 2, 21; Aug. De An. 4, 32; C. Iulian. Pelag. 2, 33 ; C. Iulian. Op. imp. 3, 138; 4, 122; Salvian, De Gub. Dei, 5, 59 (bis)·, Greg. Mag. Horn, in E^ech. 1, 9, 34), velit nolit (Q. Fr. 3, 8, 4; Petron. 71, 11; Sen. Dial. 7, 4, 4; Apocol. 1, 2; Donat. in Ter. Ad. 839; in Eun. 1058; Hier. Ep. 45, 7, 1; Auson. Comm. Prof. Burdig. 19, 14, p. 66 Peip.; Cent. nupt. p. 219 Peip.; Dionys. Exig. De Creat. Horn. 23 (Patr. Lat. 67, 385); Collect.

172 8 18 Tum Vellerns, fidenter sane, ut soient isti, nihil tarn Avellati, p. 433, 7 ; 434, 9), velimus nolimus (Paul. Noi. Ep. 16, 5; Hier. Ep. 54,14, 2; 60,14, 3; Tract, in Ps. 133 {Anecd. Mareds. 3, 2, 255); Aug. Serm. 128, 11; De Nat. et Grat. 57; Salvian, De Eccl. 1, 26), velitis nolitis (Hier. Ep. 49, 11, 3; In Hierem. 5, 29, 2 ; Aug. C. Iulian. Op. imp. 3, 19), velini nolint (Sen. Ep. 117, 4; Plin. Panegyr. 20; Arnob. 1, 43; Lact. Inst. 5, 20, 9; Sulp. Sev. Dial. 2, 1, 9; Hier. Ep. 49, 19, 3; 57, 9, 1; Adv. Iovin. 2, 17; Aug. Serm. 1, 2; 9, 3; De unico Bapt. 10 ; In Ioann. Ev. 9, 13 ; Remig. in Sedul. Pasch. Carm. 5 (C.S.E.L. 10,352); Collect. Avellati, p. 397, 17), vellet nollet (Sen. Ep. 53, 3); in neo-Latin writers nolens volens was so used. Variants of the thought but without asyndeton are: velirn nolimve (Val. Max. 3, 7, 3), velis nolisve (Aug. C.D. 6, 6), sive velit sive nolit (Gaius, Inst. 2, 153), nolis velisne (Prud. Peristeph. 10, 170), veli ine annon (Ter. Hec. 509; 558), velit an non velit (Plaut. Merc. 452), velis ac nolis (Tert. De An. 58), velini nolintque {Collect. Avellan. p. 380, 15), volentes nolentesque (Greg. Mag. Horn, in Evang. 15, 2), quid velint, quid non velint (Plaut. Merc. 7), neque quid velim neque nolim (Plaut. Asin. 214), invita volensque (Dracont. Romul. 5, 117), dum volo dum nolo {Anth. Lot. no. 279, 19 Riese). Corresponding Greek expressions are: θέλεος άθέλεος (Aesch. Suppl. 862), θέλεις ού θέλεις (Arr. Epic t. 3, 9, 16), θέλει ού θέλει (Arr. Epict. 3, 3, 3; Μ. Aurel. 11, 15), ούχ έκών έκών (Eur. Ι.Τ. 512, but in a somewhat different sense), εΐθ' έκών εϊτ* δκων (Liban. Or. 54, 14), άκων έκών (Liban. Deel. 36, 9), καν θέλης κδν μή θέλης ([Lucían,] Ocypus, 133; Pap. Gr. magic. 1 (1928), no. 4, 2324 Preisendanz), ού θέλων τε καί θέλων (Eur. Hec. 566), έάν τε θέλωμεν έάν τε μή θέλωμεν (Sext. Emp. Adv. Arithm. 47) ; in English "will you nill you" (Shakesp. Τ am. of the Shrew, 2, 1, 273), "will he nill he," etc. For the formation of the phrase cf. the English "willy-nilly" and "shillyshally." For its appearance and different forms in Latin see also E. Wölffiin, in

Rhein. Mus. 37 (1882), 87-89; A. Otto, Die Sprichwörter ... d. Römer (1890), 362; A. Sonny, in Archiv f . lat. Lex. 9 (1894), 78-79; C. Weyman in Archiv f . lat. Lex. 13 (1903), 402; J. Marouzeau, Traité de stylistique (1935), 233, who lists parallels in form, such as par impar, hue illuc, ultro citro, etc. 18 tum Vellerns: after the general introduction there begins here the discussion of Vellerns, directed first (1, 181, 24) against Platonic and Stoic theories of the gods and of creation; second (1, 25-1, 41) against philosophers in general, arranged in doxographic fashion ; thirdly (1, 42-1, 43) against various literary, barbarous, and popular misconceptions; after which (1, 43-1, 56) the views of the Epicureans are set forth, to be followed (1, 57-1, 124) by the destructive criticisms of Cotta. Mayor remarks that Cicero "commences with the Epicureans as being the easiest to deal with, so as to leave the ground clear for the more serious struggle between the Porch and the Academy," and compares Fin. 1, 13 : ut autem a facillimis ordiamur, prima veniat in medium Epicuri ratio, quae pierisque notissima est. Note also Fin. 1, 27: ilia per discere ludus esset·, Ac. 1, 6; Tuie. 4, 6: Ulis silentibus C. Amafinius extitit dicens, cuius libris editis commota multitudo contulit se ad earn potissimum disciplinant sive quod erat cognitu perfacilis, sive, etc. fidenter sane: for sane cf. 1, 15, n. (accurate sane)·, with the phrase cf. Fin. 2, 21 : ille [sc. Torquatus, the Epicurean] non pertimuit, saneque fidenter . .. inquit. The cock-sure beginning of Velleius's speech contrasts with the more mellow and dispassionate introduction of Cotta's in 1, 57, and conveys the impression of a one-sided and enthusiastic devotee (cf. 1, 56: elatus studio) of Epicureanism, possibly even the zeal of a convert (cf. 1, 66). This contrast of speakers symbolizes the deeper contrast between dogmatism and scepsis, the former a characteristic of the Epicureans, Epicurus himself having said (Diog. L. 10, 120): τί>ν σοφόν . . . δογματιεΐν τε καί ούκ άπορήσειν, though others than

173

verens quam ne dubitare aliqua de re videretur,1 tamquam modo ex deorum concilio et ex Epicuri 2 intermundiis 3 descendisse^4 1 uidetur H 2 epicurei D 3 inter mundus C, intemuntiis B2F, 4 descendisset sed D, descendis sed A, descendens sed C nunciis M

the philosopher might not enjoy this privilege (Plut. Adv. Colot. 19: £v γάρ έστι των 'Επικούρου δογμάτων, τί> μηδέν άμεταπείστως πεπεϊσθαι μηδένα πλήν τόν σοφόν. Again, we may see here the contrast between a somewhat narrow adherent of a materialistic philosophy (cf. Dip. 2, 29 : Democritus ... ut physicus, quo genere nihil est adrogantius·, and Pease's note), and a shrewd but broad-minded lawyer, -whose conclusions concerning science were largely negative (1, 60: maxime in physicis quid non sit citius quam quid sit dixerim). The dogmatism of the Stoics, as represented by Balbus in Book 2, is strikingly set forth, but as Balbus shows greater courtesy and less of sarcasm toward his opponent, so his views are treated with more consideration, even while they are being refuted. In the phraseology of Vellerns Cicero tries to show his general tone of pitying contempt for others: (18) futtilis commenticiasque ; opificem·, anum fatidicam·, rotundum, ardentem, volubilem·, portenta et miracula·, somniantium [this section sets the tone of the discussion in an exaggerated form]; (19) optata magis quam inventa-, illa palmaris\ (20) manu paene factum·, primis . . . labris gustasse·, (22) Pronoea vestra cessaverit·, deus ... tamquam aedilis\ gurgustio; (24) eorum tarditatem·, (28) multa eiusdem monstra·, (29) turpissime labitur·, (30) inconstantia (cf. 1, 35; 1, 43); falsa perspicue-, (31) eadem fere peccat·, (34) puerilibus fabulis refer sit libros-, (37) quasi delirans-, (38) quo quid absurdius·, (39) Stoicorum somniorum ... interpres·, tamquam turbam ... deorum·, (41) ut veterrimi poetae ... Stoici fuisse videantw, (42) delirantium somnia·, absurdiora·, (43) poetarum .. . errore·, portenta magorum·, Aegyptiorum . . . dementiam. These phrases occur in the introductory and doxographic parts of Vellerns's speech; in the positive exposition of Epicurean beliefs they are much rarer: (47) Cotta

inter-

meus modo hoc modo illud·, (54) curiosum deum\ (55) aniculis et his quidem indoctis\ tanta inbueremur superstitione. This contemptuous attitude is clearly recognized by Cotta at 1, 94: tu ipse .. . cum tamquam senatum philosophorum recitares, summos viros desipere, delirare, dementis esse dicebas·, and in 1, 93 Cotta cites examples of other Epicureans (Epicurus himself, Metrodorus, Hermarchus, Leontium, Zeno, Albucius, and Phaedrus) distinguished for their sarcasm or their rudeness in debate; cf. also 2, 162: nihil tam inridet Epicurus quam praedictionem rerum futurarum\ Lucian, Alex. 25: 'Επίκουρος . . . πάντα ταϋτα èv γέλωτι καΐ παιδιά τιθέμενος. R. Philippson (Symb. Osloenses, 19 (1939), 29) cites a list of contemptuous expressions from a couple of books by Philodemus which interestingly parallel those I have given from the following sections, and show convincingly that Philodemus was quite in the tradition of the arrogant and abusive language which Cicero here represents as an Epicurean characteristic, and the existence of which makes it needless to suppose, with Mayor, that Cicero is here imitating the figure of Thrasymachus in Plato's Republic. On the quarrels of Epicureans with Platonists and Stoics cf. R. Helm, Lucian u. Menipp (1906), 149-150, who notes Varro's Menippean satire named Λογομαχία, which is perhaps a travesty of such. ne dubitare . . . videretur: cf. Sil. Ital. 7, 471 : metuit dubitasse videri·, also the quotation of our passage by F. Bacon, Adv. of Learning, 1 (1826 ed.), 38. Ne ... aliqua is a little more emphatic than ne . . . qua. ex deorum concìlio: a frequent literary conceit ; cf. P. Moeller, Deos constliantes qua Ratione Lucilius ... aliique effinxerint (1912); M. Hammond, on concilia deorum from Homer to Dante {Stud, in Philol. 30 (1933), 1-16); also

174 O f f . 3, 25 : Herculem ilium quern hominum fama ... in concilio caelestium collocavit·, Div. 1, 49: Hannibalem ... visum esse in somnis a love in deorum concilium vocari; Quintil. Inst. 11, 1, 24: in carminibus utinam pepercisset [sc. Cicero] quae non desierunt carpere maligni ... Iovem ilium a quo in concilium deorum advocatur ... quae sibi ille secutus quaedam Graecorum exempla permiserat. The idea of heaven-descended informants occurs in other forms; e.g., Har. Resp. 62 : nolite enim id putare accidere posse ... ut deus aliqui delapsus de cáelo coetus hominum adeat ; De Imp. Cn. Pomp. 41 : Pompeium sicut aliquem ... de cáelo delapsum intuentur-, Q. Fr. 1, 1, 7; Plut. Quaest. conv. 8, 9, 2: μή καινόν άέρα καΐ ξένον υδωρ . . . έξ έτέρων τινών κόσμων ή μετακοσμίων άποφήναντι δεΰρο νϋν πρώτον έπιρρεούσας; Plin. Ν.Η. 26, 13 [of Asclepiades] : non alio modo quam si cáelo demissus advenisset·, Lucían, Iup. Trag. 45; Icarom. 2: Μένιππος ήμϊν διοπετής πάρεστιν έξ ούρανοϋ; 6: ώσπερ έκ των άστέρων καταπεσόντες μεγέθη τε αύτών καί σχήματα διεξήεσαν ; Nazar. Paneg. 14,5, p. 167 Baehrens : Uli cáelo lapsi, Uli divini tus missi; Incert. Paneg. Constant. 19, 1, p. 246 Baehrens: te ipsum ... quem ut cáelo delapsum intuebantur; Eus. Pr. Ev. 14, 27; Just. Mart. Cohort, ad Gr. 5: Πλάτων μέν γάρ, ώς άνωθεν κατεληλυθώς, καΐ τά έν ούρανοις άπαντα ακριβώς μεμαθηκώς καί έωρακώς . . . λέγοι; Hier. Ερ. 60, 19, 1: quasi e cáelo descendentes paulisper nostra videamus; also many additional cases cited by A. Otto, Die Sprichwörter ... der Römer (1890), 62. In Fin. 1, 63 the regula (κανών) of Epicurus is described as quasi delapsa de cáelo [cf. Plut. Adv. Colot. 19: τούς διοπετεΐς . . . κανόνας]; also in 2, 20 below (of the κύριαι δόξαι) : in quo . . . quasi oracula edidisse sapientiae dicitur·, Lucr. 5, 110-112. The humor of the situation is increased by the fact that, according to the teachings of Epicurus, no one either from among the gods or from the intermundia could have penetrated into a human discussion like this. Epicuri intermundiis : for the phrase cf. Hier. Adv. Rufin. 1, 6: de ... intermundiis Epicuri. On the intermundia (μετακόσμια), or spaces between the

different Epicurean mundi, cf. Epic. Ep. 2 (ap. Diog. L. 10, 88-89): κόσμος έστί περιοχή τις ούρανοϋ, δστρα τε καί γην καί πάντα τά φαινόμενα περιέχουσα . . . δτι δέ καΐ τοιούτοι κόσμοι είσΐν άπειροι (N.D. 1, 53) τό πλήθος &στι καταλαβεϊν, καΐ δτι καΐ ό τοιούτος δύναται κόσμος γίνεσθαι καΐ έν κόσμω καΐ μετακοσμίφ, Ô λέγομεν μεταξύ κόσμων διάστημα, έν πολυκένω τόπω καΐ ούκ. έν μεγάλω είλικρινεϊ και κενω, καθάπερ τινές φασιν; Philodem. De Morte, 4 (Wien. Sit^ungsb. 110 (1886), 8-9): την μετακόσ; 323, 24: μετακοσμ; Div. 2, 40: deos enim ipsos iocandi causa induxit Epicurus . . . habitantis tamquam inter duos lucos sic inter duos mundos propter metum ruinarum [but cf. A. Manzoni in Boll, di filol. class. 27 (1921), 186-189, for other reasons for so placing the gods] ; Fin. 2, 75 : individua cum dicitis et intermundia, quae nec sunt ulla nec possunt esse intellegimus\ Lucr. 3, 1824; 5, 146-147; Philo, De Somn. 1, 84: τών μέν λεγόντων δτι παν τό ύφεστώς χώραν τινά κατείληφε, καΐ άλλων itkλην άπονεμόντων, ή έντός του κόσμου ή έκτος αύτοϋ μετακόσμιόν τινα ; Sen. De Ben. 4, 19, 2: in medio intervallo huius et alterius caeli desertus, sine homine, sine re, ruinas mundorum supra se circaque se cadentium evitai [se. deus]; 7, 31, 3: alius tilos [sc. deos] extra mundum suum proicit; Quintil. Inst. 7, 3, 5: Epicurus, qui humanam ei formam locumque inter mundos dédit·, Plut.Quaest. conv. 8, 2, 731d: έξ έτέρων τινών κόσμων ή μετακοσμίων; 734c; Atticus ap. Eus. Pr. Εν. 15, 5, 800b: ϊ ξ ω που του κόσμου καθίδρυσε [sc. τούς θεούς]; Dionys. Alex, ap. Eus. Pr. Εν. 14, 27, 782d-783a; Hippol. Philosophum. 22, 3 (Doxogr. Gr.2 572): καθήσθαι γάρ τόν θεόν έν τοις μετακοσμίοις ύπ' αύτοϋ· εξω γάρ τι τοΰ κόσμου οίκητήριον τοΰ θεοϋ εθετο είναι λεγόμενον τά μετακόσμια; Achill. Isagog. 9 {Comm. in Arat. 39 Maass): οί δέ 'Επικούρειοι φασι μένειν τον κόσμον άνακοπτόμενον ύπό τοΰ άέρος τοϋ έν τοις μετακοσμίοις. μετακόσμια δέ έστι τά μεταξύ τών κόσμων διαστήματα; Alex. Aphrod. De Fat. 37: εί καΐ συγχωρηθείη τοΰτό τε καΐ τύ κόσμος είναι καί κόσμου δντος θεούς, καίτοι

175

"Audite," inquit, "non futtilis 1 commenticiasque sententias, non opificem aedificatoremque2 mundi, Platonis de Timaeo deum, 1

fuit tilis B\ futtiles DB2, futilis HOM, facilis G

κατ' Έπίκουρον έκτός βντας αύτούς; Aug. Ep. 118, 28: Epicurus ... ponti .. . déos quos humana forma non in aliquo mundo sed extra mundos atque inter mundos constituit ; Cedren. p. 161 P. {Corp. Script. Hist. BjZ- 33, 283): τό δέ οίκητήριον τοϋ θεοϋ έξω τοϋ κόσμου είναι λέγει, έν τοις μετακοσμίοις ουτω καλουμένοις τόποις. Mayor would trace a development from the Homeric Olympus, rationalized by Aristotle (De Cael. 2, 1, 284 a 12-13), and forced into the system of Epicurus ; perhaps a place should also be found for the thought of Aristoph. Pax, 207-209: αύτοί δ' άνωκίσανθ' δπως άνωτάτω, / ίνα μή βλέποιεν μαχομένους ύμας έτι / μηδ' άντιβολούντων μηδέν αίσθανοίατο; C. Bailey, The Gr. Atomists and Epic. (1928), 467-468. On the formation of the words μετακόσμιον and intermundium cf. J. Wackernagel, Vöries, ü. Syntax, 2 (1924), 241; on Greek and Latin allusions to them cf. F. Peters, T. Lucr. et M. Cic. quo modo Vocab. Gr. Epic. Discipl. propria Latine verterint (1926), 17. For the likeness of the intermundia and their tranquillity to the Garden of Epicurus and the "ivory tower" which he aimed to inhabit cf. P. E. More, Hellenistic Philosophies (1923), 42-44. futtilis: the spelling tt seems from ms evidence the more likely; cf. the verb effuttio (1, 84; 2, 94). The adjective is several times used by Cicero; e.g., Ac. 2, 59; Div. 1, 36; Fin. 3, 38; Tuse. 4, 37; 5, 16; cf. also Gell. 11, 13, 10; 12, 2, title ; 13, 25,19 ; 16,12,1 ; J. Whatmough in CI. Philol. 33 (1938), 321, who remarks that this is "a racy, conversational word, if any ever was." commenticias: "imaginary"; cf. 1, 94: sunt tota commenticia; 2, 70: commenticios et fictos-, 3, 63: commenticiarum fabularum\ Div. 1, 68: commenticiam rem·, 2, 27; 2, 113; Reid on Ac. 2, 125, on its use for philosophical theories; also the use of commenta (2, 5; Rep. 6, 3).

2

aedificaremque A1

R. Philippson (Sjmb. Osloenses, 19 (1939), 29) compares the use in Philodem. De Poem. col. 25, 29 of διεψευσμένα. opificem: a word related to artificem somewhat as "artisan" or "mechanic" is to "artist," and used chiefly of banausic occupations; e.g. 2, 150; Ac. 2, 144; Fin. 3, 4; 5, 52; Tusc. 1, 34; 5, 34: Zeno ... ignobilis verborum opifex·, O f f . 1, 150: opifices .. . omnes in sordida arte versantur [cf. Plut. Ρlac. Phil. 1, 7 (Doxogr. Gr.2 300): κακοδαίμων δ' αν εϊη (sc. ό θεός) έργάτου δίκην καΐ τέκτονος άχθοφορών καΐ μερίμνων είς τήν τοϋ κόσμου κατασκευήν]. Hence, some editors think, Vellerns uses the word to describe the less dignified rôle of the demiurge or creator, whom Cicero in Tim. 6 translates artifex [cf. 7: aedificatore\. Yet in some other passages opifex contains no slur; e.g. 1, 77: pictores, poetae, opifices·, 2, 81; 2, 142: quid opifex praeter naturam\ O v. Met. 1, 79: ilie opifex rerum·, Chalcid. in Tim. 26 (Frag. Phil. Gr. 2, 186); 138 (Frag. Phil. Gr. 2, 212): quid ergo dicit deus? dit deorum, quorum idem opifex paterque ego·, 265; 271; Lact. Inst. 2, 8, 48; and the title of his De Opificio Dei-, Auson. Ephem. 55, p. 7 Peip.: ipse opifex rerum-, Prud. Hamart. 116: ipse, opifex mundi-, Avit. Poem. 1, 76 [where God is compared to an opifex]; J. J. Wetstein on Hebr. 11, 10. aedificatorem: cf. 1, 21: mundi aedificatores·, Tim. 7; Ac. 2, 126: ne exaedificatum quidem hunc mundum divino Consilio existimo. Elsewhere God is called a machinator (Min. Fei. 5, 7) or a fabricator (Hier. In Dan. p. 624 Vail. : apud Platonem fabricatorem mundi deum\ Aug. Serm. 241, 8; invenimus eundem Platonem ... in libro quodam suo quem scripsit ele constitutione mundi inducere deum fabricatorem deorum, facìentem scilicet deos caelestes, stellas omnes, solem et lunam·, Isid. De Nat. Rerum, 12, 5: rationabile Plato fabricatorem mundi opus insinuât). On the Epicurean denial and Stoic acceptance

176

nec anum fatidicam, Stoicorum Pronoeam, quam Latine licet of a divine builder cf. Proci, in Tim. p. 81 f. (p. 266 Diehl). mundi: regularly used for the Greek κόσμος. The Greek term, meaning primarily "order" or "decoration" (especially of women's ornaments), was apparently first used in a metaphorical manner by Pythagoras to mean an allinclusive universe (Aët., Plac. 2, 1, 1 (Doxogr. Gr.2 327); cf. [Galen,] Hist. Phil. 44 (Doxogr. Gr.2 621); Iambi. Vit. Pyth. 138), though Diog. L. 8, 48 (cf. Phot. Bibl. 249, p. 440 Bekk.) says that Pythagoras called the heaven the universe (cf. also [Philo,] De Aetern. Mundi, 3-4; Hygin. Astron. 1, 1, p. 22 Bunte; Serv. G. 1, 240). Yet Aëtius admits that Theophrastus ascribed this terminology to Parmenides and Zeno to Hesiod. Its meanings become rather varied, including the firmament, the earth, some region in the universe, the sphere centred in the earth and including the sun, and that which contains the fixed stars. The Stoics recognized a three-fold use of the term (Diog. L. 7, 138; Suid. s.v. κόσμος): (1) God; (2) the orderly arrangement of the heavens ; (3) the whole of which 1 and 2 are parts. Later uses applying to the inhabitants of the cosmos (Aug. In Ep. Ioann. ad Parth. 2, 12), to the οικουμένη, and to the world as opposed to heaven or to the church do not here concern us. W. Kranz (Philo!. 93 (1939), 430-448), in a study of the history of κόσμος as a philosophic concept, thinks (p. 433) Anaximander (fr. 9, 10, and 11 Diels) the first to use it for parts of the whole. Latin mundus shows many of the same meanings. It is connected by A. Walde, Lat. etym. Wort erb.1 (1906), 399, with the adjective mundus, "neat," and passes from the sense of "decoration" to most of the meanings noted above, as well as to a peculiar one applied to the underworld, as in the phrase mundus patet. The view of V. Pisani (in Rendic. d. r. acc. dei Lincei, Sci. mor., 6 ser., 4 (1928), 353-355) that the Latín word developed in the reverse direction, from "heavens" (cf. W. Kroll in Festschrift f . ... P. Kretschmer (1926),

125-127) to "feminine decorations," seems unlikely. Velleius here uses it either as a technical term quoted from the Stoics, for which he feels no responsibility, or, as in 1, 53, in the Epicurean sense of a universe resulting from chance rather than from purposeful ordering; cf. C. Bailey, The Gr. Atomisti and Epic. (1928), 359. Piatonis de Timaeo: cf. Plat. Tim. 28b-29c, especially the phrases τόν . . . ποιητήν καΐ πατέρα τοϋδε του παντός . . . ó τεκταινόμενος αύτόν άπειργάζετο . . . δ τε δημιουργός καλός. This work, of Cicero's translation of which we possess a large fragment, was well known to our author, though Jerome (In Amos, 2, p. 283 Vail., perhaps recalling Fin. 2, 15) remarks: obscurissimus Platonis Timaeus liber est, qui ne Ciceronis quidem aureo ore fit planior. Though in Τ use. 1, 63 Cicero says: ilk qui in Timaeo mundum aedificavit, Platonis deus, yet the phrase de Timaeo need not here be suspected; cf. Tuse. 3, 53: hi poterant omnes eadem illa de Andromacha deplorare : "haec omnia vidi"·, O f f . 3, 82: in ore semper Graecos versus de Phoenissis habebat·, Rep. 1, 30: in ore semper erat Ule de I phi genia Achilles·, Legg. 1, 1: ut ait Scaevola de fratris mei Mario. It should be noted that Velleius here, as in 1, 21 (ab utroque), combines Platonists and Stoics as the objects of his attack; cf. E. Bignone in Ann. d. r. scuola norm. sup. di Pisa, ser. 2, 2 (1933), 350, n. 84; id., L'Aristotele perduto, 2 (1936), 430. anum fatidicam: cf. 1, 55: aniculis·, 2, 73 (answering our passage); 3, 92: aniliter·, Div. 2, 19: anile sane et plenum superstitionis fati nomen ipsum (where see Pease's note) ; Plut. Non posse suaviter, 21 : διαβάλλοντες τήν πρόνοιαν, ώσπερ παισίν "Εμπουσαν ή ποινήν άλιτηριώδη καΐ τραγικήν έπιτετραμμένην ; Pro Nobilit. 12: οδτοι oí τήν πρόνοιαν τήν άχγίνουν μάλα γραϋν μητέρα καλούντες τούτου του παντός; 13: έκείνη υμετέρα πρόνοια χρησμολόγος γραϋς; De Def. Orac. 19: 'Επικούρειων δέ χλευασμούς καΐ γέλωτας οΰτι φοβητέον, οΐς τολμώσι χρη-

177

Providentiam dicere, ñeque vero mundum ipsum, animo et sensibus praeditum,1 rotundum,2 ardentem, volubilem deum, portenta 1

praedictum M1

2

rutundum Bx

σθαι καΐ κατά της προνοίας μϋθον αύτήν συναποκαλοϋντες ; Lucían, Iup. conf. 10: ήδέως 8' αν καΐ τοϋτο έροίμην σε, τις ή πρόνοια ύμϊν αΰτη εστί, μοϊρά τις ή καΐ υπέρ ταύτην θεός ώσπερ άρχουσα καΐ αύτών έκείνων ; Orig. C. Ce/s. 1, 8; 1, 13: πρός Έπικουρείους δεισιδαιμονίαν έγκαλοϋντας τοις είσάγουσι πρόνοιαν, καΐ θεόν έφιστασι τοις ολοις ; Mart. Cap. 2, 213: Zeno ducebat feminam providente»! ; Maximin. Taurin. C. Paganos,, p. 723 (Patr. Lat. 57, 783a): fato diets omnia fieriÌ sed stultus stulta loquitur et cor eius vana intelligit, et sicut ille aiebat Tullius in Hortensie dicetis : "avia mea dicebat hoc quod diets, fato omnia fieri ; mater autem, mulier sapiens, non existimavit." For fatidicam cf. Varr. L.L. 6, 52: qui futura praedivinando soleant fari fatidici [se. dicti\. In 2, 73 Balbus replies that Pronoea is not quasi quaedam dea singularis, but is used as an abbreviation for Providentia deoruw, cf. 2, 80. Pronoeam: cf. 1, 20; 1, 22; 2, 58; 2, 73; 2, 161; H. J. Rose in fourn. Hell. Stud. 41 (1921), 108. In Greek it is used for divine providence as early as Hdt. 3, 108: τοϋ θείου ή προνοίη [cf. Soph. O.C. 1180], and the name became attached in a quasi-adjectival sense to Athena (like Athena Nike and Athena Peitho), probably, however, through confusion with Athena Προναία ("before the shrine") at Thebes ; cf. L. R. Farnell, Cults of the Gr. States, 1 (1896), 306-307. This fact perhaps made easier and more plausible the jibe of the Epicureans, whose objections both to fate and to divination (as implying fate) were well known (2, 162; also the passages cited by Ritter and Preller, Hist. Philos. Gr.10 (1934), 469c). l i c e t . . . dicere: a phrase used in apologizing for Latin translations of Greek terms;-e.g., Fin. 3, 15; 3, 26. neque vero: in the sense of multo minus, emphasizing a previous negative clause; cf. Tuse. 5, 93; Inv. 1, 4; Orator,

71; Pro Mur. 74; Pro Sest. 36; Pro Cael. 72; F. Hand, Tursellinus, 4 (1845), 141; J. B. Hofmann, Lat. Synt. u. Stilistik (1928), 663. animo et sensibus praeditum: the idea of an animate world was widely held among ancient philosophers, except, of course, the atomiste (Aët. Plac. 2, 3, 1-2 (Doxogr. Gr.* 329-330 = [Galen,] De Hist. Phil. 19, 264 K.): οί μέν άλλοι πάντες £μψυχον τόν κόσμον . . . Δημόκριτος δέ καΐ 'Επίκουρος καΐ δσοι τά άτομα είσηγοϋνται . . . οΰτ' Ιμψυχον οΰτε προνοίη διοικεϊσθαι; also W. Crönert, Kolotes ». Menedemos (1906), 130; Lucr. 5, 65; 5, 114-125). If we concede that divinity implies consciousness, then in the following catalogue (1, 25-42) a belief in the consciousness of the mundus or mundi is attested for Anaximander (1, 25: deos ... innumerabilis esse mundos), Alcmaeon (1, 27: soli et lunae reliquisque sideribus .. . divinitatem dedit), Plato (1, 30: mundum deum esse et ... astra), Xenophon (1, 31 : solem . . . deum dicere), Aristotle (1, 33: mundum ipsum deum esse), Xenocrates (1, 34: deos ... eos qui in stellis vagis nominantur ... septimum solem adiungit octavamque lunam), Heraclides Ponticus (1, 34: errantibus ... stellis divinitatem tribuit), Theophrastus (1, 35: divinum tribuit principatum ... sideribus ... caelestibus), Zeno (1, 36: astris hoc idem tribuit), Cleanthes (1, 37: ipsum mundum deum dicit esse . .. divinitatem omnem tribuit astris), and Chrysippus (1, 39: ipsumque mundum deum dicit esse .. . solem, lunam, sidera). Not all the others named opposed the view of a conscious mundus, though the agnostic Protagoras (1, 29), the atomiste Democritus (1, 29) and Epicurus (not named), Strato (1, 35: vim divinam ... careat omni et sensu et figura), and Aristo (1, 37: neque in dis sensum esse dicat dubitetque omnino deus animons necne sit) seem pretty clearly opposed. Significant among other pas12

178

et miracula non disserentium philosophorum sed somniantium. sages defending the consciousness of the mundus are: (1) in general, Doxogr. Gr,2 301-306; (2) for the Platonists: Rep. 6, 15: quae globosae et rotmdae, divini s animatae mentibus, circuios suos orbesque conficiunt·, Plat. Tim. 30b: δει λέγειν τόνδε τόν κόσμον ζωον ίμψυχον ϊννουν τε τη άληθεία διά τήν τοϋ θεοΰ γενέσθαι πρόνοιαν (cf. Proci, in Tim. proem, p. 2a (p. 4 Diehl); p. 112b (p. 368 Diehl); p. 125c (p. 413 Diehl); p. 139d (p. 1 Diehl); [Galen,] De Hist. Phil. 35 (19, 336 K.); (3) for Aristotle: [Galen,] De Hist. Phil. 19, 336 K.; (4) for the Stoics: 2, 21-22 (Zeno); 2, 39 (Chrysippus); 2, 45-49; Sext. Emp. Adv. Phys. 1, 104; 1, 107; Lact. Inst. 2, 5, 28; and other cases in H. von Arnim, Stoic, vet. Frag. 2 (1903), 168169 (nos. 527-528); 191-194 (nos. 633636 ; 638); Manil. 1, 484-485 ; 2, 63-64; [Apul.] Asel. 29; M. Aurel. 4, 40; Dio Chrys. 36, 30; Chalcid. in Tim. 92; 112; Solin. 23, 20; Achill. Isagog. 5 {Comm. in Arat. Reliq. p. 35 Maass); Boeth. in Isagog. Porphyr., ed. 2, 5, 3 (C.S.E.L. 48 293); Suid. s.v. κόσμος. Objections to assuming an animate universe are also found on the part of the Stoic Boethus (Diog. L. 7, 143) and especially among the Christians; thus Diodorus of Tarsus •wrote a work κατά των λεγόντων ζωον τόν ούρανόν (Suid. s.v. Διόδωρος μονάζων). rotundum: cf. 2, 24: quae vero vita tribuitur isti rotundo deo\ 2, 46: dicat [sc. Epicurus] se non posse intellegere qualis sit volubilis et rotundus deus-, 2, 47 (a Stoic defense of the sphere as the most perfect solid form) ; 2, 49. The spelling rutundus, printed here and elsewhere by Plasberg (after B 1 ) and found in some other writers (e.g., Non. p. 164 M. = 241 L.) conflicts with its derivation from rota (A. Walde, Lat. etym. Wörterb.1 (1906), 530). See also W. M. Lindsay, Lat. Lang. (1894), 201; 545, on the frequent tendency to assimilate the vowel in an initial syllable to that in a following one. With our passage cf. Ambr. Exam. 1, 1, 4: siquidem mundi aestimatione volubilem, rotundum, ardentem, quibusdam iticitat um

molibus, sine sensu deum conveniat intellegi, qui alieno, non suo, motu feratur-. Proci, in Tim. p. 178e (p. 127 Diehl); Isid. Etym. 3, 31, 1 : caelum philosophi rotundum, volubile, atque ardens esse dixerunt; id., De Nat. Rerum, 14, 1 : dicentes rotundum ac volubilem adque ardentem esse orbem caeli—passages perhaps supporting the remark of F. A. Wolf (Kl. Sehr. 1 (1869), 522) that one would logically expect that order of adjectives rather than the one in our text, unless the confused arrangement be an attempt by Cicero to show the excitement and the almost contemptuous incoherence of Velleius. Spherical heavenly bodies, some of which might be worshipped as gods, will be discussed at 2, 49, n. ( g l o bosa forma). For the sphere as the perfect form for a god cf. 2, 46-49 (Stoics); Aristot. De Cáelo, 2, 3, 286 b 10-11; [Aristot.] De Meliss. Xenoph. Gorg. 3, 977 b 1-20; 4, 978 a 7-9 (Xenophanes; 11 A 28 Diels) ; 4, 978 b 8-10 (Parmenides; Diels, ibid.) ; Hippol. Philosophum. 1, 14 (Xenophanes; Doxogr. Gr565); Plat. Tim. 33b. Pap. Here. 1055, col. 21 (W. Scott, Frag. Hercul. 251) says that other philosophers did not hold this view, and Aug. Enarr. in Ps. 113, 2, 5, asserts one could more easily believe in divine anthropomorphism than think God in the form of a spherical sun. ardentem: not Platonic, as observed by Mayor, but taken by the Stoics from Heraclitus; cf. 2, 23; 2, 35, and notes; also the ardor caelestis (1, 37; 2, 30-32; 2, 41). volubilem: cf. 1, 24: quae vero vita tribuitur isti rotundo deo? nempe ut ea celeritate contorqueatur cui par nulla ne cogitari quidem possit. Cicero here refers to the common belief in a geocentric system; cf. Philodem. De Deis, 10, 7 : ουτε γάρ οίητέον 8ργον μηθέν έτερον ίχειν αύτούς ή διά της άπειρίας ών όδώιιόως· ού εύτυχής ό μβονώμος άπαν τόν βίον. Isid. De Nat. Rerum, 14, 1, combines these three epithets: rotundum . .. volubilem ... ardentem. portenta et miracula: R. Philippson

179

19 Quibus enim oculis [animi]1 intueri potuit 2 vester Plato 1

del. Ven. et al., animum Ν

2

poftuit Β1

(Symb. Osloenses, 19 (1939), 29) aptly simile est Uli, quod mente videmus / atque compares Philodem. De Piet. 27, 9 oculis; Cic. frag. ap. Quintil. Inst. 9, 2, 41 : (T. Gomperz, Her cui. Stud. 2 (1866), 147) : quae non vidistis oculis animis cernere poί δέ μύθους μέν είσήγον άμέλει καΐ testis; Philo, De special. Leg. 3, 194: τερατείας; see also 1, 43, below; 3, 91: δοκεϊ γάρ μοι μηδέν οΰτως ό θεός έμportenta enim ab utrisque et flagitia di- φανές άφανοϋς άπεργάσασθαι μίμημα ώς cuntur·, Ac. 2, 123: portenta videntur; δψιν λογισμού; De Opif. Mundi, 53: Fin. 4, 70: portenta haec esse dicit\ Att. 14, δπερ γάρ νους έν ψυχή τοΰτ' όφθαλμός 21, 1 ; Juv. 15, 1-2: qrnlia demens / Aegyp- έν σώματι; De Virtut. 11-12; De Prov. tus portenta colat\ Min. Fei. 25, 19; 2, p. 53 Aucher; De Animal, p. 136 monstra is also thus used, as in 1, 28; Aucher; Frag. pp. 635-636 Mangey; Tusc. 4, 54; Att. 4, 7, 1; 9, 11, 4; Plat. Plut. De Soll. Anim. 3: λέλεκται "νους Hipp, maior, 283c: τέρας λέγεις καΐ όρη καί νους άκούει· τάλλα κωφά καί θαυμαστόν. τυφλά" ( = Epicharm. fr. 17 Diels; cf. somniantium: cf. 1, 39, n. (Stoico- Aristot. Probi. 1133, 903 a 20-21 ; Julian, rum somniorum). Our passage was Orat. 8, 247a; Basii, Ep. 366 fin.; and perhaps in the mind of Favon. ad Somn. many other quotations and allusions Scip. p. 401 Orelli: significans haec quae de collected by A. O. F. Lorenz, lieben u. animae inmortalitate dicerentur caeloque som- Sehr. d. Koers Epicharmos (1864), 256); Orig. De Princip. 1, 1, 9: frequenter enim niantium philosophorum esse commenta. 19. quibus . . . oculis: cf. Max. Tyr. sensibilium membrorum nomina ad animam 38, 3: ού γάρ πω σαφώς ήπίσταντο oí άν- referuntur, ita ut oculis cordis videre dicatur, θρωποι τήν ψυχής περιπόλησιν, ούδέ id est, virtute intelligentiae aliquid intellectuοίστισιν όφθαλμοϊς έκαστα όραν; Liban. ale coniicere. Declam. 6, 57: ποίοις δμμασιν ϊδω; 14, This metaphorical use is widespread; 35: τίσιν όφθαλμοϊς ταϋτα βψομαι; 21, cf. 2, 45: aciem mentis (cf. Div. 1, 61; 13; Aug. C. Iulian. Pelag. 1, 12: quibus eos Tusc. 1, 45; 1, 73; Hortens. fr. 97 Müller); oculis intueberis? Also C.D. 8, 7: multum Phil. 12, 3: aciem animi·, Fin. 4, 37: mirari soleo cum pulchros dicunt non esse aciem animorum·, Orat. 101: mentis oculis nisi sapientes, quibus sensibus corporis istam (cf. De Or. 3, 163; Sen. 42). In other pulchritudinem viderint, qualibus oculis carnis writers: Empedocles (B, 17, 21 Diels): for mam sapientiae decusque conspexerint ; την σύ vótp δέρκευ, μηδ' ομμασιν ή σο Liban. Deci. 40, 40 ; 46, 38: τίσιν όφ- τεθηπώς ; more definite are Aesch. Eum. θαλμοϊς ; 49, 18; Etbop. 3, 4, p. 380 104: εΰδουσα γάρ φρήν δμμασιν λαμFoerster. Diogenes Laertius (6, 53) πρύνεται; Plat. Rep. 7, 519b: τήν της records Plato's reply to a sceptical youth: ψυχής 6ψιν [and Shorey's n.]; 7, 533d: οΐς μέν γάρ κύαθος καί τράπεζα θεω- τό της ψυχής 8μμα; Symp. 219a: ή τοι ρείται δφθαλμούς έχεις· φ δέ τραπε- της διανοίας 8ψις; Sophist. 254a: τά γάρ ζότης καί κυαθότης βλέπεται νοϋν ούκ τής των πολλών δμματα; [Hipp.] Ars, έχεις. The Epicureans naturally depend 11: δσα γάρ τήν των δμμάτων 0ψιν έκheavily upon physical eyesight; cf. φεύγει, ταϋτα τή τής γνώμης 8ψει κεLucr. 3, 359-369. κράτηται [cf. T. Gomperz in Wien. oculis [animi]: the metaphor of the Sitzungsb. 120 (1890), 9, 166-167]; eye of the mind (heart, or soul) is an Aristot. Eth. Nie. 6, 13, 1144 a 30 (cf. easy corollary of the use of όράω or [De Mundo], 1, 1); [Aristot.] Rhet. ad video in the sense of "understand"; cf. Alex. 1, 1421 a 21-23; Lucr. 4, 750; pectoris·, Aristot. Top. 17, 108 a 11: ώς δψις έν Ov. Met. 15, 64: oculis ... Colum. 3, 8, 1 : mentis oculis·, Philo, De όφθαλμω νους έν ψυχή; Εth. Nie. 1,4, 1096 b 28; Lucr. 4, 750-751 : quatenus hoc Opif Mundi, 71: τό τής διανοίας δμμα;

180 Quod Deus immut. 46 ; De Congress. 143 : Exam. 1,17; 4 , 1 ; 4, 27; 5, 86; De Iacob. ή ψυχή . . . έστίν οφθαλμός μέν δφθαλ2,3; De Parad. 58 ; Hier. Tract, in Ps. 145 μών; De Somniis, 1, 164; 1, 199; De {Anecd. Mareds. 3, 2, 291); In Eccl. p. Mutât. Nom. 5; De Abrah. 57; 70; De 395 Vail.; In Is. p. 580 Vail.; In EZech. Conf. Ling. 92; 100; De Sacr. Ab. et pp. 468 ; 513; 591 Vail.; In Dan. p. Caini, 36; 69; De Poster. Caini, 118; 626 Vail.; In Ioel, p. 173 Vail.; In Eph. Quod De t. Potiori, 22; De special. Leg. 1, I, p. 563 Vali.; Aug. De Ord. 2, 11; 49: τήν τοϋ κόσμου . . . θέαν, ήν ού De vera Rei. 37; 60; 61; De Trin. 9, 11; σώματος όφθαλμοΐς άλλα τοις διανοίας I I , 7; 11, 12; 11, 15; De Grat. Chr. 1, 8; άκοιμήτοις δμμασι συμβαίνει καταλαμDe Pecc. Merit. 1, 38; 2, 5; De An. 4, 39; βάνεσθαι ; 3, 4; 3, 6; 4, 191; De Decaí. C. Mendac. 36; C. Faust. 22, 54; C. 68; Quod omnis Probus, 5; De Provid. 9; Iulian. Op. imp. 3, 119; 3, 121; 6, 17; Hierocl. in Carm. aur. {Frag. Phil. Gr. 1, C. Ep. Parm. 3, 9; 3, 23; De Bapt. c. 480); Plut. Quaest. conv. 8, 2, 1: τό μυρί- Don. 2, 12; C. Adimant. 28, 2; Mar. ων άντάξιον ομμάτων [Plat. Rep. 7, Merc. tr. of Nestorius {Patr. Lat. 48, 527e] δργανον ψυχής καΐ φέγγος άπόλ944c); Claud. Mamert. De Stat. An. λυσιν, φ μόνω θεατόν έστι το θείον; 1, 23 {C.S.E.L. 11, 83); Proci, in Tim. De sera Num. Vind. 22; Manil. 4, 195; p. 63a (p. 204 Diehl); p. 63e (p. 206 Theophil. Ad Autol. 1, 2: M. Aurel. Diehl); in Alcib. pr. 12, p. 37 Creuzer; 4, 29; Just. Mart. Dial. c. Tryph. 4; 67, p. 194 Creuzer; in Parmen. 1, p. 617 Lucían, Vit. Auct. 18; Sext. Emp. Cousin; in prim. Euclid. Lib. prol. 1, Adv. Gram. 306; Clem. Protr. 6, 68, 4; p. 46 Friedlein; Syrianus in Metaph. 12, Paedag. 2, 1, 1, 3; Strom. 1, 28, 178, 1; 3, p. 96, 13 Kroll; Simplic. in Categ. p. Apul. De Plat. 1, 9; 2, 11; 2, 22; De 8, 5 Kalbfleisch; David, Prolegom. Philos. Mundo, 30: rex omnium et pater quem 24, p. 79, 14-15 Busse; Stob. Anth. 3, 1, tantummodo animae oculis nostrae cogitationes p. 83 Hense; Boeth. Cons. 5, pros. 4; vident·, Flor. 2; Corp. Hermet. 10, 4b; 13, Cassiod. Inst. 1, 24, 3: oculis interioribus; 14; 13, 18; Porphyr. Vit. Pyth. 47; Orion, p. 173 Sturz; Isid. Etym. 11,1,12; Novatian, De Trin. 3 (Patr. Lat. 3, 892); Barlaam et Ioasaph, 121; Eustrat. in Orig. C. Cels. 3, 14; 4, 31; 7, 33; 7, 39: Eth. Nie. 1, 1, p. 26, 15-16 Heylbut; σαρκός άποστραφέντες όφθαλμόν τόν 6, 5, p. 311, 34-35; 6, 9, p. 345, 4-5; τής ψυχής εγείρετε, μόνως οΰτω τόν 6,12, p. 382, 22-23 ; 6,13, p. 393, 23 ; al. ; θεόν δψεσθε ; 7, 44; In Ερ. ad Rom. 9, 3 : G. Kaibel, Epigr. Gr. no. 853, line 4; menti, quae est interior oculus; [Clem.] Shakesp. Hamlet, 1, 2, 185; Much Ado Recogn. 3, 30; Homil. 3, 3; Chalcid. in about Nothing, 4, 1, 230; cf. also below, Tim. 336 {Frag. Phil. Gr. 2, 253); 1, 49, n. {non sensu sed mente)·, W. Jaeger, Arnob. 4, 23; Alex. Aphrod. in Metaph. Paideìa, 2 (Engl. tr. 1943), 283-285. 12, 9, p. 784, 32-33 Hayduck; Lact. Similarly we have allusions to blindInst. 2, 3, 9; 3, 27; 14; 7, 9, 4: deus non ness of heart (soul, mind); e.g., Democr. aspectu nobis . .. comprehendendus est sed 175 Diels ; Plat. Phaedo, 99e; Lucr. 2, 14 mentis oculis intuendus cum opera eius ... (and note of Ernout and Robin); Eph. videamus·, 7, 13, 11; De Opif. Dei, 1, 7; 4, 18; Lact. Inst. 3, 18, 14; Aug. De Iambi. Vit. Pyth. 31 ; 70; Julian, Ep. 62; Nat. et Grat. 24; C. Iulian. Pelag. 5, 8; Epiphan. Adv. Haeres. 1, 2, 33, 3 {Patr. 5, 9; 5, 10; 5, 12; C. Iulian. Op. imp. Gr. 41, 557d) ; Cassian. Conlat. 14, 9 , 7 1,47; 4,112; 4, 125; 5, 56. The frequency {C.S.E.L. 13, 409): cordis oculo ; Euseb. of this metaphor is perhaps due to the Pr. Ευ. 3, 11, 111b; 14, 27, 11; H.E. fact that the phrase expresses what we 2,14, 4; Rufin. Apol. 1, 4; Basil, Horn, in mean by the "imagination." Ps. 1,5 {Patr. Gr. 29, 224a); Greg. Nyss. In the present passage animi was De Horn. Opif. 6 {Patr. Gr. 44, 140a); omitted by the Venice edition of 1471, Greg. Naz. Carm. mor. 34, 27 {Patr. Gr. and has been by many scholars considered 37, 947a): νοϋς 8' Ιστιν δψις ëvSov, où a marginal remark added by some deπερίγραφος; Synes. Ep. 153 {Pair. Gr. 66, fender of Plato as a literal answer to 1556d); Mart. Cap. 2, 203; Ambros. the rhetorical question of Vellerns. Cf.

181 fabricam illam tanti operis, qua 1 construí a deo 2 atque aedificari mundum facit? Quae molitio, quae ferramenta, qui vectes, quae 1

qua] quam Ν

2

déos Β1, deis Β (m. ree.)

Heindorf's edition (1815); Κ. W. Dietrich, Comm. crit. (1850), 10; [G. H.(?)] Heidtmann, Ζ. Krit. u. Interp. d. Sehr, d. Cic. de Nat. Deorum (1858), 31-32; P. Stamm, De M.T.C. Lib. de D.N. Interpolationibus (1873), 10-11; T. Birt, Krit. u. Herrn. (1913), 157. With the intrusion of such marginal remarks cf. 2, 131: [et tarnen multa dicuntur]; 3, 40: [mihi quidem sane multi videntur]; Div. 2, 21: [certe potuit]; O f f . 3, 29: [minime vero ... gratta]. Animi has also been defended by various scholars; e.g., F. A. Wolf, Kl. Sehr. 1 (1869), 522; Piasberg, ed. maior. Objections to the word are of several sorts: (1) it seems, as Goethe remarks, to be insufficiently motivated by anything in the previous discussion ; (2) by qualification it weakens the force of the interrogative quihus; (3) if oculis animi be taken as a single idea, meaning "imagination," Velleius makes no effective attack upon any improper use of that intuitional method ; in fact, one who in 1, 49 declares that the true nature of the gods non sensu sed mente cernatur was hardly in a position to object to the use by opponents of a similar method. intueri . . . fabricam: the Platonic deity is supposed to have in his mind a model by which he frames the world (Plat. Tim. 28 a; Cic. Tim. 4); but cf. Aët. Ρlac. 1, 7, 4 (Doxogr. Gr? 299): Πλάτων . . . ειπών "ò θεός έπλασε τόν κόσμον προς έαυτοϋ υπόδειγμα" δζει λήρου βεκκεσελήνου ; and Lucr. 5, 181183 asks, as Velleius does here, exemplum porro gignendi rebus et ipsa j notities divis hominum unde est insita primum, / quid vellent facere ut scirent animoque viderent\ cf. R. Philippson in Symb. Osloenses, 19 (1939), 18; 20. vester Plato: vester rather than turn, since he regards both the Stoic Balbus— who in 2, 32 calls Plato quasi quendam deum philosophorum—and the Academics

Cotta and Cicero as inheritors of the Platonic tradition. fabricam: cf. 1, 4, n. (Jabricatipaene); 1, 47; 1, 53; 2, 121; 2, 138; O f f . 1, 127; Ac. 2, 87: qualis ista fabrica est? ubi adhibita? quando? cur? quo modo? For the construction fabricam ... qua construí ... facit cf. Vitruv. 1,1,1: fabrica est continuata ac trita usus meditatio, qua manibus conficitur e materia cuiuscumque generis opus est ad propositum deformationis. On facto meaning "represent" cf. 3, 41: quem tarnen Homerus apud inferos conveniri facit ab Ulixe·, Tuse. 4, 35: poetae impendere apud inferos saxum Tantalo faciunt·, De opt. Gen. Orat. 17: Isocratem, quem ... Plato laudari fecit ab Socrate-, Virg. Aen. 8, 630-631; Ov. Met. 6, 108-109. quae . . . quae . . . qui . . . quae . . . qui: on such repetitions as characteristic of the style of Epicurus himself cf. H. Diels in Beri. Sit^ungsb. 1916, 2, 890; also, for repeated interrogative clauses, A. G. Lange, Vermischte Sehr. u. Reden (1832). 95-96. With the thought cf. Philo Byz. De septem Orbis SpectacA, p. 14 Orelli; [in looking at the Colossus of Rhodes] : έπαπορεΐ γάρ ó θαυμαστής των θεωρούντων, ποίαις πυράγραις ή πηλίκαις ύποστάσεσιν άκμόνων, ή ποταπαϊς ύπηρετών ρώμαις τά τηλικαϋτα βάρη των οβελίσκων έχαλκεύθη ; Our passage is imitated by Lact. Inst. 2, 8, 60: idem quotiens Epicureus est ac non vult a deo factum esse mundum, quaerere solet quibus manibus, quibus machinis, quibus vectibus, qua molitione tantum hoc opus fecerit; 2, 8, 66: idem profecto de domo quaerens quod nunc de mundo requiris, quibus manibus, quibus ferramentis homo tanta esset opera molitus·, cf. Chalcid. in Tim. 26 {Frag. Phil. Gr. 2, 186): quorum animis sic institutis d i f f i c i l e persuadeatur mundi esse auctorem Deum, nisi eum tamquam opifex aliquis manibus ceterarumque artium molitione construxerit. molitio: cf. 1, 23; 2, 133. Plato is na-

182 machinae, qui ministri tanti muneris 1 fuerunt? Quem ad modum autem oboedire et parere voluntati architecti aer, ignis, aqua, terra potuerunt? Unde vero ortae 2 illae quinqué formae, ex 3 quibus reliqua formantur, apte cadentes ad animum efficiendum 4 pariendosque sensus? Longum est ad omnia, quae talia sunt ut 1 muneri B1 2 ortae om. Ν afficiendum Schoemann

3

turally imaginative tathet than literal in his picture of the process which Velleius here describes as so laborious, agreeing in this respect with the Jewish and Christian view of creation, as in Gen. 1, 3-27; Ps. 33, 9; Ambros. Exam. 1, 3, 8. Mayor suggests for this and the following terms: "his mode of building, tools, levers, scaffolding." tanti muneris: of a public building or work (as in Tim. 4; Veil. Pat. 2, 48, 2; 2,130,1) ; cf. 2, 90 : architectum tanti operis tantique muneris·, Τ use. 1, 70: moderator tanti operis et muneris; Orig. De Princip. 2, 1, 4: ad tanti operis molem ; Lact. Inst. 7, 3, 12: quae ratio fuerit tanti operis fabricandi. oboedire et parere: two verbs combined also in Fin. 3, 75; Τ use. 5, 36. architecti: on God or nature as an architect cf. 2, 90; 2,141 ; Vitruv. 9,1, 2; Chalcid. in Tim. {Frag. Phil. Gr. 2, 212); Lact. De Opif. 6, 5-6. In Greek the architect of the universe (άρχιτέκτων) seems to be usually replaced by the δημιουργός. afer, ignis, aqua, terra: for the four elements cf. 1,29, n. (quattuor ... naturas). illae quinqué formae: false explanations were discarded and clarity brought to this passage by G. F. Schoemann, Opuse, aead. 3 (1858), 280-281, who compared Plat. Tim. 53c-56c (a part not included in Cicero's translation), where it is argued that of the first five regular polyhedrons—the "Platonic solids"—, the tetrahedron or pyramid (representing the molecule of fire), cube (earth), octahedron (air), and icosahedron (water) furnish the basis for the four elements, while the dodecahedron God "used up" (κατεχρήσατο) in his decoration of the

e DNOBFM,

ae A

4

efficiundum M,

universe, perhaps in the twelve signs of the Zodiac. In the Epinomis (981c) a fifth element, ether, appears, corresponding to the dodecahedron. By this explanation formae, as applied to the elemental units, receives an appropriate significance in its emphasis upon shape as well as substance (note the figura etymologica in formae . .. formantur), God having generated all these solids from two types of rightangled triangles {Tim. 63d). Goethe compares similar classifications in modern crystallography, and T. Gomperz (Zeitschr. f . öst. Gymn. 18 (1867), 213) thinks that in Pap. Hercul. 1148 (id., 211-212, cols. 3-6) Epicurus argued against Plato's view of different elements as related to different polyhedrons. reliqua: from these forms the elements themselves are produced. apte cadentes: cf. Div. 1, 34; 2, 83; also cadere in 1, 23; 1, 95, below. efficiendum: the mss read efficiendum, and this is defended by R. Philippson (Philol. Woch. 54 (1934), 188) and M. Atzert (Gotting, gel. An197 (1935), 277) ; cf. pariendos immediately following. Others would explain that the mind is not by Plato thought of as composed of five parts, and Schoemann (op. cit., 281-282), by emending to afficiendum, brings the passages into harmony with Plat. Tim. 64a-68c. pariendos: cf. Fin. 1, 49: dolorem pariant-, Plin. Ν.H. 19, 126: somnum parere. longum est: cf. 1, 30; 1, 45, n. (satis erat dictum)·, 1, 56, n. (longior); 2, 159; Ac. 2, 117; Fin. 4, 73; Pro Cluent. 107; Phil. 2, 27; not to speak of many passages in other authors. The indicative is

1,20

183

optata magis quam inventa videantur; (20) sed illa palmaris, quod, qui non modo natum mundum introduxerit sed etiam manu paene factum, is eum dixerit fore sempiternum. Hunc censes analogous to that employed with verbs of the copula in such short phrases where of duty, necessity, propriety, possibility, emphasis is thrown upon the pronoun etc., in the apodoses of conditions ordi- cf. 1, 25: haec quidem vestra; 2, 115: nec narily requiring the subjunctive; cf. vero haec solum admirabilia·, 2, 126: ilia possum in 1, 101; 2, 121; 2, 126; 2, 131; etiam notiora ... atque ilia mirabilia·, also 1, 84: bellum erat-, 1, 89: opus erat. 3, 80: sed haec Vetera et alia permulta·, For Greek expressions cf. Liban. Or. and many other cases collected by Reid 16, 48: τί δεϊ μακρολογεΐν; 18, 172: on Ac. 2, 86. Palmaris is, of course, μακρόν αν εϊη λέγειν; Deel. 50, 14: τί ironical as in its only other Ciceronian δει τό πολλά λέγειν; On the ellipsis of occurrence in Phil. 6, 15. the verb of saying cf. 1, 17, η. (verum quod . . . dixerit: instead of quod ... hoc alias)·, Am. 32; R. Kiihner-C. Steg- dixit, the verb being probably attracted mann, Ausf. Gram. d. lat. Spr. 2, 2 2 to the mood of the intervening intro(1914), 552-553; E. Löfstedt, Syntactica, duxerit·, cf. Rep. 1, 11: mirum videri solet quod, qui tranquillo mari gubernare 2 (1933), 246, η. 1. ad omnia: ad of speaking against, as se negent posse ... iidem ad gubernacula se maxime in 2,1 ; Div. 2, 8; Ac. 2,17; Pro Tuli. 37. accessuros profiteantur excitatis optata .. . inventa: with this as an fluctibus. On the illogicality of drawing expression for wishful thinking cf. Ac. the verb of statement into the construc2,121 : nondocentissedoptantis\ Tusc. 2,30: tion of oratio obliqua cf. Reid on Fin. 1, 24. optare hoc quidem est, non decere; Fat. 46: manu paene factum: cf. 1, 4: fabrioptare hoc quidem est, non disputare·, Am. cati paene (and note). Plato represents 18: non ea quaefinguntur aut optantur ; Leg. Zeus as saying {Tim. 41a-b) : α δι' έμοϋ agr. 1, 1 : utrum cogitata sapientium an γενόμενα άλυτα έμοϋ γε μή έθέλονoptata furiosorum videntur·, Plat. Rep. 6, τος. τό μέν ούν δή δεθέν παν λυτόν, τό 499c: εύχαϊς δμοια λέγοντες; 7, 540d; γε μήν καλώς άρμοσθέν και έχον εδ Aristot. Pol. 4, 12, 1331b 35-36: τό λύειν έθέλειν κακοϋ· δι' & καΐ έπείπερ μέν γάρ λέγειν εύχής έργον έστί, τό γεγένησθε, άθάνατοι μέν ούκ έστέ ούδ* 8è συμβήναι τύχης; Sext. Emp. Adv. άλυτοι τό πάμπαν, ου τι μέν δή λυθήEth. 208; Pyrrhon. 3, 244: εύχομένων σεσθέ γε ούδέ τεύξεσθε θανάτου μοίμάλλον ή τάληθή λεγόντων. ρας, της έμής βουλήσεως μείζονος έτι 20. illa palmaris: emended by Da vies δεσμού καΐ κυριωτέρου λαχόντες έκείin his first edition to illa palmaria (an νων οίς δτ' έγίγνεσθε ξυνεδεϊσθε. awkward phrase, in view of the single The Stoics, of course, took no such reason adduced, though defensible on literal view; cf. Galen, Quod Qualit. the analogy of 2, 126: ilia mirabilia quod·, incorp. 6 (19, 478 K. = S.V.F., 2, 323a): 2, 147: quanto ... illa sunt quod·, Ac. 2, οΰτε γάρ ποιητήν είναι φασι καθάπερ 86; ilia praeclara quanto-, 2, 102 [and τινά χειροτέχνην τόν Δία, άλλ' δλον Reid's n.]; Phil. 5, 17; J. N. Madvig, δι' δλης της ΰλης διεληλυθότα πάντων Opuse, acad.2 (1887), 292, n.). In his δημιουργόν γεγονέναι; and for the second edition Da vies substituted the thought cf. 2 Cor. 5, 1 : οίκοδομήν έκ emendation illud palmare est, and T. Birt θεοϋ έχομεν, οΐκίαν άχειροποίητον αίώ{Beri, philol. Woch. 38 (1918), 551) has νιον έν τοις ούρανοϊς (contrasted with proposed res ilia palmaris est. It seems the ναοί . . . χειροποίητοι of Mark, 14, 58; Acts, 7, 48; 17, 24; 2 Cor. 5, 1); safer to retain the ms reading ilia palmaris, and to understand setitentia as [Clem.] Homil. 16, 12: ή δέ σοφία . . . being somewhat loosely suggested by ήνωται μέν ώς ψυχή τω Θεω, έκτείνεται sententias in 1, 18; cf. F. A. Wolf, Kl. δέ απ* αύτοϋ, ώς χείρ, δημιουργούσα τό Sehr. 1 (1869), 521-522. For the omission παν; also Aristot. fr. 18 Rose.

184

1,20

primis,1 ut dicitur, labris2 gustasse physiologiam,3 id 4 est naturae 1 primus Β1 2 libris O 4 idem A logiam O

3

phisiologiam AN M, fysiologiam BF, philio-

primis . . . labris gustasse: cf. De Or. 1, 87: quae isti rbetores ne primoribus quidem ¡abris attigissent·, Pro Cael. 28: qui primoribus labris gustassent genus hoc vitae; Hortens. fr. 93 Müller: in primoribus ...ut aiunt, labris-, Virg. Aen. 1, 737: summo tenus attigit ore; Quintil. Inst. 12, 2, 4: qui litteras primis, ut aiunt, labris degustarit·, Fronto, p. 62 Naber ( = p. 2 Haines) : primoribus, ut dicitur, labiis delibasse-, Apul. Met. 9, 23: utprimum .. . inchoatum gustum extremis labiis contingebat\ Hier. Adv. Rufin. 1, 30, p. 487 Vali.: qui oratoriam vix primis labris ... degustasti ; Aug. Conf. 9, 18 (literally); C. Faust. 32, 7 : liquorem vix summis, ut aiunt, labris attingas·, Cassiod. Var. 2 , 3 , 3 : non primis, ut aiunt, labris eloquentiam consecutus; Ennod. p. 7, 11 Vogel: quibus scientiam non primoribus labris ipsa contulerint; p. 76, 12: qui doctorum epistulas . .. summis labiis vix libabat\ p. 133, 15: saporem vitae labris primoribus contingenti. Similarly in Greek: Philo, De Virtut. 99: τις ούκ άν εϊποι των μή χείλεσιν όίκροις άπογευσαμένων της νομοθεσίας; 188: των ή μή γευσαμένων σοφίας ή χείλεσιν όίκροις ; De special. Leg. 1, 37: oí μή χείλεσιν άκροις γευσάμενοι φιλοσοφίας [ = 4, 92]; Lucían, Apol. 6: άπ' άκρου χείλους φιλοσοφών; Babr. 107, 6-7; Anth. Pal. 15, 13, 1-2: βί δέ γε Μούσης / δακτύλω άκροτάτω άπεγεύσαο [and David, Prolegom. Philos. 1, p. 1, 4, Busse; Paroem. Gr. 2, 5, no. 29 and note of v. Leutsch]; also the proverb πολλά μεταξύ πέλει κύλικος καί χείλεος δκρου (Paroem. Gr. 2, 84, no. 95; 2, 617, no. 46, and notes of v. Leutsch). See H. Genthe, De Proverb, a Cic. adhibitis {Comm. philol. in Hon. T. Mommseni (1877), 269); A. Otto, Die Sprichwörter ... der Römer (1890), 181-182; and, for this use of primis, Tyrrell and Purser on F am. 3, 6, 2.

physiologiam: philosophy was commonly divided by the older Academics into three major parts {Fin. 4, 4), and

this division was retained by the Stoics (Diog. L. 7, 39-40) under the titles of τό φυσικόν, τό λογικόν, and τό ήθικόν; cf. 1, 9, n. (_partes ... membra), above. The first of these, physiologia, or natural philosophy, for both Stoics and Epicureans included theology (cf. the δμνοι φυσιολογικοί of Empedocles), though Aristotle, Metaph. 10, 7, 1064 b 2-3, separates φυσική, μαθηματική, and θεολογική; cf. 1, 32, n. (physicus), below; Aristot. Metaph. 11, 6, 1071 b 26-27; 11, 10, 1075 b 26-27; Ammon. in Porphyr. Isag. p. 12, 8-9 Busse; in Cat eg. p. 5, 4-5 Busse; cf. p. 6, 18-20. For others who differentiated theology and physics cf. Iambi. Vit. Pjth. 90; Cedren. p. 94b {Corp. Script. Hist. Byz- 33, 165b); and physiologia seems to have been a favorite term with the Epicureans (A. A. Scotti in Hercui. Voll. 4 (1832), 12, n.; R. Hirzel, Untersuch. ζ· Cicero's philos. Sehr. 1 (1877), 155-160); e.g., 1, 41; Epic, κύριαι δόξαι, 11, 12; Philodem. De Deis, 1, col. 2, 5 ( p . 10 Diels); 1, col. 8, 25 (p. 15 Diels); 1, col. 17, 24 (p. 30 Diels); W. Scott, Frag. Herculan. (1885), 208; 210; 222; F. Peters, T. Lucr. et M. Cic. quo modo Vocab. Gr. Epic. Discipl. propria Latine vertermi (1926), 23. On Cicero's use of Greek words cf. A. Font, De Cic. Graeca Verba usurpante (1894); J. Marouzeau, Traité de stylistique (1935), 161-162; on their rendering in the Greek or the Latin alphabet cf. W. Nieschmidt, Quatenus in Scriptura Romani Litteris Graecis usi sunt (1913), 40-42. In the mss the words are regularly in the Latin alphabet. id est naturae rationem: cf. Dip. 1, 90: naturae rationem, quam φυσιολογίαν Graeci appellant·, 1, 130: banc quidem rationem naturae·, 2, 37: physiologiam totam pervertitisi Vitruv. 1, 1, 7: de rerum natura quae Graece φυσιολογία dicitur philosophia explicat·, also below, 2, 23: rationibus physicis, id est naturalibus. Manutius, Heindorf, and others have

185

rationem, qui quicquam quod ortum sit putet 1 aeternum esse 1

putat F

omitted this clause as a gloss upon physiologiam ; unjustifiably, since some of the passages cited above support it, as well as similar definitions of Greek words elsewhere; e.g., 1, 36 {theogoniam); 1, 43 (πρόληψις); 1, 50 (Ισονομία; cf. 1,109); 1,55 (ειμαρμένη); 1, 55 (μαντική; cf. Div. 1, 1); 1, 83 (phyiicus); 1, 85 (κυρίας δόξας; cf. Fin. 2, 20); 2, 47 (σφαϊραν and κύκλος); 2, 58 and 2, 73 (Pronoea); 2, 94 (ποιότης); 2, 111 {Hyadas) ; 2, 114 {Procyori)\ 3, 15 (στρατήγημα); 3, 28 (συμπάθειαν). On such explanatory phrases in Cicero cf. R. Klotz, Adnot. crit. ad M.T. Cic. Lib. de Nat. Deor. I, 4 (1868), 5-9 (pp. 9-12 contain many examples from other philosophical works); Reid on Ac. 1, 32, who observes that Cicero seldom, save in the Letters, introduces a Greek word without comment on its meaning, unless the word has been thoroughly naturalized. ortum . . . aeternum: cf. 1, 68: sì ortus est deorum interitus sit necesse est, ut tu paulo ante de Piatonis mundo disputabas-, Proci, in Tim. p. 90a (p. 243 Diehl) : εί γάρ το γενητόν φθαρτόν, κτλ. On the various logical possibilities here involved cf. Schol. Od. 1, 263: δόξαι φέρονται περί του κόσμου, ών ή μέν γενητόν καί φθαρτόν τοϋτον υποτίθεται., ή δέ γενητόν μέν, άφθαρτον δέ· ή δέ άγένητον μέν, φθαρτόν δέ· ή δέ άγένητον καί άφθαρτον, ής δόξης φαίνεται είναι καί Όμηρος ; Schol. Dan. Georg. 2, 336: secutus Epicurum qui ait omnia quae orta occidunt et aucta senescunt. Varrò autem in satura quae inscribitur eie salute [fr. 84 Bücheler] sic: mundum baud natum esse neque mori; Plato autem non natum aut mori ; Metrodorus autem, neque natum neque mori ; Zenon ex hoc mundo quamvis aliqua intereant tamen ipsum perpetuo manere ; Aug. C. Acad. 3, 23: scio mundum ... aut semper fuisse et fore; aut coepisse esse minime desiturum ; aut ortum ex tempore non habere sed habiturum esse finem ; aut et manere coepisse et non perpetuo esse mansurum; Tzetz. Chil. 10, 527-533: περί

του κόσμου τέσσαρες δόξαι των φιλοσόφων· / ή μέν αύτόν άγένητον, άφθορον δογματίζει· / άλλη δέ λέγει, γενητόν φθαρτόν τε πεφυκέναι· / ή δέ πάλιν άγένητον πλήν των φθαρησομένων· / άλλη δέ πάλιν γενητόν, άλλά θεοϋ προνοία / άφθαρτον γενησόμενον, ώς πάν των άϊδίων· / αΰτη του Πλάτωνός έστι δοκώ καί Πυθαγόρου. See also Nock's edition of Sallustius, De Diis (1926), lx-lxii. Aëtius, Ρlac. 2, 4, 1-14 (Doxogr. Gr.2 330-331) discusses at length the views of different philosophers on this question ; for modern studies cf. J. Baudry, Le probi, de l'origine et de Ρ éternité du monde dans la philos, gr. de Platon à l'ère chrétienne (1931), with bibliography on pp. 308-322. G. Santayana, The Life of Reason, 3 (1928), 240, remarks: "The Greek gods . . . continued to have genealogies, and the fact of having been born is a bad augury for immortality, but other religions, and finally the Greek philosophers themselves, conceived unbegotten gods, in whom the human rebellion against mutability was expressed absolutely." Plato's view, which chiefly here concerns us, finds an exception to the principle that what is born or created must eventually perish by assuming that the Creator wills to keep his created universe in existence and that his will prevails; cf. Plat. Tim. 32c: ώστε . . . άλυτον ύπό του άλλου πλήν υπό του ξυνδήσαντος γενέσθαι; 33a; 41a-b: θεοί θεών, ών έγώ δημιουργός πατήρ τε έργων, άλυτα έμοϋ γε μή έθέλοντος. το μέν οδν δή δεθέν παν λυτόν, τό γε μήν καλώς άρμοσθέν καί έχον εδ λύειν έθέλειν κάκου. δι' ά καί έπείπερ γεγένησθε, άθάνατοι μέν ούκ έστέ ούδ' άλυτοι το πάμπαν, οΰ τι μέν δή λυθήσεσθέ γε ούδέ τεύξεσθε θανάτου μοίρας, της έμής βουλήσεως μείζονος έτι δεσμού καί κυριωτέρου λαχόντες έκείνων οίς 8τ' έγίγνεσθε ξυνεδεϊσθε; Rep. 8, 546a: γενομένω παντί φθορά έστιν; Arist. De Cáelo, 1, 10, 280 a 28-32: είσί γάρ τίνες οίς ένδέχεσθαι δοκεΐ καί άγέ-

186

1,20

posse? Quae est enim coagmentatio 1 non dissolubilis, aut quid est cuius 2 principium aliquod 3 sit, nihil sit extremum? Pronoea vero si vestra est, Lucili, eadem, requiro quae paulo ante, ministros, 1

coacmentatio ACM, coaugmentatio B*F

νητόν τι δν φθαρήναι καΐ γενόμενον ¿ίφθαρτον διατελειν, ώσπερ έν τω Τιμαίω· έκεϊ γάρ φησι τόν ούρανόν γενέσθαι μέν, ού μήν άλλ' έσεσθαί γε τόν λοιπόν άεΐ χρόνον; Tuse. 1, 79: volt enim [sc. Plato], quod nemo negat, quicquid natum sit inferire·, Pro Marceli. 11 : nihil est enim opere et manu factum quod non conficiat et consumât vetustas-, Ac. 2, 119; Philo, De Aetern. Mundi, 17: πατέρα δέ τοϋ Πλατωνείου δόγματος êvioi νομίζουσι τον ποιητήν Ήσίοδον, γενητόν καΐ άφθαρτον οίόμενοι τόν κόσμον ύπ' έκείνου Νέγεσθαι; Sen. Dial. 11, 1, 1; Aët. Plac. 2, 4, 2 {Doxogr. Gr* 330-331): Πλάτων φθαρτόν μέν τόν κόσμον φύσει, αίσθητόν γάρ είναι, διότι καΐ σωματικόν· ού μήν φθαρησόμενόν γε προνοία καΐ συνοχή θεοϋ ; [Galen,] De Hist. Phil. 11, p. 265 Κ., who says that this is the view of Pythagoras and Plato; Just. Mart. Cohort, ad Graecos, 23; Min. Fei. 21, 10: moritur omne quod nasci tur·, Atticus ap. Eus. Pr. Ev. 15, 6, 8-15, 802b-803d ; Chalcid. in Tim. 26 {Frag. Phil. Gr. 2, 186): cuneta quae gignuntur pereunt·, Sallustius, De Diis, 7: παν τό γιγνόμενον φθείρεται [cf. 2]; Comment. Lucani, 8, 459, p. 274 Usener ( = S. V.F. 2, no. 587) : initium enim habere non potest quod non habet finem-, Lact. Inst. 1,1, 6: Plato, qui de mundi fabricatione disieruit ... in perpetuum dixit esse fabricatum-, 7, 3, 17: quodsi ei (se. Plafoni) ratio quadraret, intellegeret periturum esse quia factus est; Ambros. Exam. 1, 3; Mar. Merc. tr. of Nestorius, Serm. 1, 8 (Patr. Lat. 48, 761): incarnatus est quidem deus sed non est mortuus·, Proci, in Tim. p. 90a (p. 243 Diehl) : τό γενητόν φθαρτόν ; Boeth. Consol. 2, poet. 3, 17-18: constat aeterna positumque lege est / ut constet genitum nihil. T. Gomperz, Greek Thinkers (Engl, tr.), 1 (1901), 534, points out that Buddhism recognizes the possibility of perishable gods. coagmentatio non dissolubilis: cf.

2

cuius] cui ΒM

3

aliquid O

Sen. 72: opus ipsa suum eadem quae coagmentavit natura dissolvit; Plat. Tim. 41a: τό μέν οδν δή δεθέν παν λυτόν; Aristot. De Cáelo, 1, 10, 279 b 29: συνεστώτα διαλυθήσεται; Ocell. Lucan. 3: τό γενέσεως άρχήν είληφός καΐ διαλύσεως ¿φεΐλον κοινωνήσαι; Sen. Ερ. 30, 11: quicquid composuit resolvit·, Diog. L. 4, 65 (quoting Carneades) : ή συστήσασα φύσις και διαλύσει (cf. 4, 66); Athen. 15, 670b: λύεται πάν τό δεδεμένον ; Tert. De An. 9: dissolubile autem omne compositicium et structile·, Anth. Lat. no. 785b, 3 Riese: dissolvit tempus quidquid producit adesse·, Prudent. Cathem. 10, 13-16; Proci, in Tim. p. 116d (pp. 382-383 Diehl): σύνθετόν έστι παν τό γενητόν. Uncompounded things, on the contrary, are unchanging and indestructible; cf. Plat. Phaedo, 78a. Coagmentatio is a word used by Cicero at 2, 119 and Tim. 17; dissolubilis appears again in 3, 29; for the latter cf. Ν. Stang in Symb. Osloenses, 17 (1937), 71, who collects Cicero's different methods of rendering the Greek alpha privative. principium aliquod sit, nihil sit extremum: for the adversative asyndeton, which, as Mayor says, is equivalent to clauses introduced by μέν and δέ, cf. below, mortalem ... mundum, non .. . sempiternum; 1, 21: exstiterint, innumerabilia saecla dormierint·, 1, 23: sapientes .. . leniant, stul ti nec ... possint; Ac. 1, 16; Parad. 2. Pronoea . . . vestra: in contrast to Plato vester in 1, 19, the vocative Lucili seems to narrow the application of vester to the Stoics alone; cf. 1, 19: Stoicorum Pronoeam. Lucili: he is sometimes addressed by his nomen (cf. 1, 25; 1, 47) and sometimes by his cognomen (1, 16; 1, 22; 1, 36; 1, 50; 3, 1 ; 3, 5), and is referred to in the third person in both ways; cf. H. L. Axteil in Cl. Phil. 10 (1915), 403, n. 2. eadem: the attempts of Heindorf,

187

machinas, omnem 1 totius operis dissignationem2 atqueapparatum; sin alia est, cut mortalem fecerit3 mundum, non, quem ad modum Platonicus deus, sempiternum. 9 21 Ab utroque autem4 scisci1 omnem om. D enim O

2

designationem

Schoemann, and others to add another eadem (which might have been omitted by haplography) or to change the order of words in this clause seem unnecessary, the sentence as it stands being both grammatical and clear. This may possibly be a case in which eadem does double duty, as nom. sing. fem. and as acc. pi. neut. dissignationem: cf.l , 26: dissignari; 3, 85. This word, in the sense of "disposition" or "arrangement," and the verb dissigno are in mss often confused with designatio, "description," and designo, but the compound with disexpresses more accurately the distribution of parts and functions. cur mortalem: since the Stoic mundus is periodically terminated by a conflagratio·, cf. 2, 118. 21. ab utroque: cf. 1, 18, η. (Piatonis de Timaeo). With the grouping of two opponents, here Plato and Lucilius, R. Philippson (Symb. Osloenses, 19 (1939), 20) compares Aët. Ρlac. 1, 7, 7 (Doxogr. Gr.s 300): κοινώς ουν άμαρτάνουσιν άμφότεροι. sciscitor: cf. 1, 17: sciscitabar. cur: cf. Ac. 2, 87: qualis ista fabrica est? quando? cur? quo modo? 2, 119: nulla fuerit novo Consilio inito tam praeclari operis inceptio. How and why God should ever have begun to create the universe is a question associated by W. A. Heidel {Proc. Am. Acad. Arts and Sci. 48 (1913), 722) with that of Parmenides (fr. 8, 9-10 Diels): τί 8' äv μLV καΐ χρέος ώρσεν / ύστερον ή πρόσθεν, του μηδενός άρξάμενον φϋν; Plat. Tim. 29d-30b [followed by Aug. C.D. 11, 21] asserts as the reason for creation that God desired the cosmos to be good and like himself, though this does not explain why the process began rather than having always existed—a question which sug-

HNOM

* fecit A1

4

autem]

gests Epicurean or Sceptic criticisms of the Platonic tradition, and which appears strikingly in Lucr. 5, 168-175: quidve novi potuit tanto post ante quietos / inlicere ut cuperent vitam mutare priore m? / . . . / . . . sed cui nil accidit aegri / tempore in anteacto, cum pulchre degeret aevom, / quid potuit novitatis amorem accendere tali? / at, credo, in tenebris [cf. N.D. 1, 22] vita ac maerore iacebat, / donee diluxit rerum genitalis origo. That either Cicero or Lucretius here borrowed from the other is unlikely; probably both drew either from Philodemus or from Epicurean commonplaces which he also used; cf. R. Hirzel, Untersuch, χ. Cicero's philos. Sehr. 1 (1877), 9-11; A. Ernout and L. Robin on Lucr. 5, 156 ff. (pp. 25-26). Cf. also Aristot. De Cáelo, 1, 12, 283 a 11-12: τί μάλλον έπΐ τφδε τω σημείω άεί δν πρότερον έφθάρη ή μή Ôv άπειρον έγένετο; Philo, De Abrahame, 163: εί δè δή καί. γέγονεν ό κόσμος, ύπό τίνος γέγονε και τίς ό δημιουργός κατ' ούσίαν ή ποιότητα καΐ τί διανοηθείς έποίει και τί νϋν πράττει, κτλ; Aët. Ρlac. 1, 7, 8-9 {Doxogr. Gr.* 300-301); [Clem.], Recogn. 8, 34: sed dices·, "quando mundus factus est, et quare tam tarde?" hoc possis obtendere etiamsi ante factus fuisset; díceres enim, "cur non et ante hoc?" et ita immensa saecula transcendens semper possis requirere, "cur non et ante hoc?"·, Aug. Conf. 11, 10; 11, 12: nonne ecce pieni sunt vetustatis suae qui nobis dicunt·. "quid faciebat deus, antequam faceret caelum et terram? si enim vacabat" inquiunt, "et non operabatur aliquid, cur non sic semper et deinceps, quemadmodum retro semper cessavit ab opere? [cf. N.D. 1, 22] si enim ullus motus in deo novus extitit et voluntas nova ut creaturam conderst, quomodo iam vera aeternitas ubi oritur voluntas quae non erat? C.D. 11, 4; De divers. Quaest. 28, on the topic quare Deus mundum facere voluerit·,

188

tor cur mundi aedificatores repente exstiterint, innumerabilia saecla dormierint; non enim 1 si mundus nullus erat saecla non erant. Saecla nunc dico non ea quae 2 dierum noctiumque numero 1

nunc enim H

2

qua A1

De Gen. c. Manich. 1, 3: dicunt [se. Manichaei]: si in principio aliquo temporìs fecit Deus caelum et terram, quid agebat antequam facer et caelum et terramì et quid ei subito placuit facere quod nunquam antea fecerat per tempora aeterna? also Theodoret, Gr. A f f . 7, 48. It may be replied that for God there is no past or future, all being equally present; cf. Greg. Naz. Poem, dogmat. 4, 71-73; F. E. Robbins, The Hexaemeral Literature (1912), 40. With the question here raised cf. the complementary one noted by Philo, De Aetern. Mundi, 39 : πυνθάνονται γάρ · τίνος ένεκα τόν κόσμον φθερεϊ ό θεός; aedificatores: cf. 1, 18: opificem aedificatoremque mundi. The shift to the plural here expresses an ostentatious ignorance of the identity of the supposed divine source of creation, and the following phrase, repente exstiterint, seems to describe an almost indecently sudden appearance; with it cf. Div. 1, 58; 2, 50. exstiterint . . . dormierint: an adversative asyndeton. innumerabilia saecla: cf. Div. 1, 2; 2, 147; Legg. 1, 1. The word saeculum (or saeclum·, Cicero uses both forms) is defined by Varr. L.L. 6, 11, as a period of a hundred years, dictum a sene [!], quod longissimum spatium senescendorum hominum id putarunf, cf. Censorin. 17, 2: saeculum est spatium vitae humanae longissimum partu et morte definitum, quare qui annos triginta saeculum putarunt multum videntur errasse-, 17, 4 says that Epigenes set the longest human life at 112 years, Berosus at 116, others at 120. Cicero here, however, lays no emphasis on any exact number. The etymology of saeculum is too uncertain to form a sound basis of argument. Just below the word is used, not so much with reference to human life, as to the motions of the heavenly bodies. dormierint: on sleeping gods cf. Aët.

Plac. 1, 7, 8 (Doxogr. Gr.1 300): ό θεός, δν λέγουσιν, ήτοι τόν έμπροσθεν αΐώνα ούκ ήν δτε ήν άκίνητα τά σώματα ή άτάκτως έκινεϊτο ή έκοιματο ή έγρη γόρει ή ούδέτερον τούτων . . . εί γάρ έκοιματο έξ αιώνος ό θεός, έτεθνήκει, αιώνιος γάρ ΰπνος θάνατός έστιν ; Athen. 6, 253c; Arnob. 4 , 4 : ubi, quaeso, iamdudum Pellonia haec fuit cum apud furculas Caudinas decus publicum subiugatum est ... ? dormiebat, stertebat? Aug. C.D. 2, 22: haec numinum turba ubi erat cum ... a Gallis Roma capta et incensa est? an praesentes forte dormiebantì ... nisi saltern anseres dis dormientibus vigilarent·, In Ioann. Evang. 20, 2 : tilt enim carnaliter accipientes sabbati observationem putabant Deum post laborem fabricati mundi usque ad hunc diem quasi dormire·, also 1 Kings, 18, 27: "peradventure he sleepeth and must be awakened" ; contrast Ps. 121, 3-4. saecla nunc dico: here apparently of time in general rather than of measured units of time, as Goethe well recognizes. non ea quae: the obvious fact that our units of time—years, months, days, and, by implication, fractions or multiples of them—are ultimately based upon recurrent positions of the heavenly bodies, and therefore are dependent upon (and hence must be subsequent to) the motions of those bodies is remarked by many ancient writers, e.g., Gen. 1, 14: "And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven, to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years"; Heraclit. ap. Plut. Quaest. Plat. 8, 4, 1007d (100 Diels): ούτως οδν άναγκαίαν προς τόν ούρανόν ίχων συμπλοκήν καΐ συναρμογήν ό χρόνος ούχ απλώς έστι κίνησις, άλλ' ώσπερ εϊρηται κίνησις έν τάξει μέτρον έχούση καΐ πέρατα καί περιόδους· ών ό ήλιος έπιστάτης ών καί σκοπός όρίζειν καί βραβεύειν καί άναδεικνύναι καί άνα-

189 φαίνειν μεταβολάς καΐ ώρας, aî πάντα φέρουσι, καθ' Ήράκλειτον, ουδέ φαύλων ούδέ μικρών άλλά των μεγίστων καί κυριωτάτων τ ω ήγεμόνι καΐ πρώτω θεω γίγνεται συνεργός; Plat. Tim. 37e: ήμέρας γαρ και νύκτας καΐ μήνας καί ένιαυτούς ούκ δντας πριν ούρανόν γενέσθαι, τότε άμα έκείνψ ξυνισταμένω τήν γένεσιν αύτών μηχαναται. ταΰτα δέ πάντα μέρη χρόνου, και τό τ' ήν τό τ ίστα,ι, χρόνου γεγονότα εϊδη [cf. Philo, De Aetern. Mundi, 52]; 38b: χρόνος S' ούν μετ' ούρανοϋ γέγονεν, ίνα άμα γεννηθέντες άμα καί λυθώσιν; 38c: έξ ούν λόγου και διανοίας θεοϋ τοιαύτης πρός χρόνου γένεσιν, ίνα γεννηθή χρόνος, ήλιος καί σελήνη καί πέντε άλλα άστρα, έπίκλην έχοντα πλανητά, είς διορισμόν καί φυλακήν άριθμών χρόνου γέγονε; 47a: νϋν δ' ήμέρα τε καί νύξ όφθεϊσαι μήνές τε καί ένιαυτών περίοδοι μεμηχάνηνται μέν άριθμόν, χρόνου δέ έννοιαν . . . εδοσαν ; [Plat.], Définit. 411b: χρόνος ήλιου κίνησις, μέτρον φοράς; Aristot. De Gett. et Corr. 2, 10, 337a 23-24: άδύνατον χρόνον χωρίς κινήσεως είναι, συνεχούς άρα τινός άριθμός ó χρόνος; De Cáelo, 1, 9, 279a 11-12: ούδέ τόπος ούδέ κενόν ούδέ χρόνος έστίν έξω του ούρανοϋ; Phys. 4, 11, 219 a 1: .ουτε κίνησις οΰτ' άνευ κινήσεως ό χρόνος; 4, 11, 219 b 1-2: τοϋτο γάρ έστιν ó χρόνος, άριθμός κινήσεως κατά τό πρότερον καί ύστερον [cf. Stob. 1, 8, 40, p. 103 Wachsm. = Doxogr. Gr.* 449]; 4, 11, 219 b 5-8: άριθμός άρα τις è χρόνος, έπεί δ' άριθμός έστι διχώς (καί γάρ τό άριθμούμενον καί τό άριθμητόν άριθμόν λέγομεν, καί φ άριθμοϋμεν), ό δέ χρόνος έστί τό άριθμούμενον καί ούχ ω άριθμοϋμεν; 4, 11, 219 b 15-16: άκολουθεΐ . . . τ ω μέν μεγέθει ή κίνησις, ταύτη δ' ό χρόνος [cf. 4, 12, 220 b 25-26]; 8, 251 b 28 : χρόνος πάθος τι κινήσεως ; also several related passages in the Physics and the comments of Simplicius ; Zeno ap. Stob. 1, 8, 40e, p. 104 Wachsm. (= Doxogr. Gr.* 461 = S.V.F. 1, no. 93): Ζήνων έφησε χρόνον είναι κινήσεως διάστημα. Cleanthes wrote a work περί χρόνου (Diog. L. 7, 174); further, in Stob. 1, 8, 42, pp. 105-106 Wachsm. similar definitions are ascribed t o Chry-

sippus ( = S.V.F. 2, no. 509) and Posidonius, and Apollodorus (J1. V.F. 3, 260, no. 8) expands to χρόνος δ' έστί της τοΰ κόσμου κινήσεως διάστημα; cf. Varr. L.L. 6, 3 : tempus esse dicunt in vallum mundi motus; [Galen,] Hist. Phil. 10 ( X I X , 259 Κ.) — ascribing this definition to Plato — ; Stephan, in Dionys. Thr. (Bekk. Anecd. 2, 889, 12); Suid. s.v. χρόνος; W. Cronert, Kolotes u. Menedemos (1906), 113, n. 512 (for a papyrus fragment) ; W. Gent, Die Philos, d. Raumes ». d. Zeit (1926), 26. Cf. also Lucr. 1, 459-463: tempus item per se non est, sed rebus ab i psis / consequitur sensus, transactum quid sit in aevo, / tum quae res instet, quid porro deinde sequatur. / nec per se quemquam tempus sentire fatendumst j semotum ab rerum motu placidaque quiete-, Varr. L.L. 5, 12: neque umquam tempus quin fuerit motus\ 6, 3: tempus . .. divisum in partes aliquot maxime ab solis et lunae cursu \ Philo, De Opif. Mundi, 26 {S.V.F. 2, no. 511): χρόνος γάρ ούκ ήν πρό κόσμου, άλλ' ή σύν αύτω γέγονεν ή μετ' αύτόν· έπεί γάρ διάστημα της τοΰ κόσμου κινήσεώς έστιν ό χρόνος, πρότερα δέ τοΰ κινουμένου κίνησις ούκ αν γένοιτο, άλλ' άναγκαϊον αύτήν ή ύστερον ή άμα συνίστασθαι, άναγκαϊον άρα καί τόν χρόνον ή ίσήλικα κόσμου γεγονέναι ή νεώτερον έκείνου· πρεσβύτερου δ' άποφαίνεσθαι τολμαν άφιλόσοφον; id., 60; Legg. Alleg. 1, 2; Plut. Plat. Quaest. 8, 1006f-1007e (an important collection of statements too long t o quote here); Sext. E m p . Pyrrhon. 3, 140: έπεί ούκ άνευ κινήσεως 9¡ καί μονής ό χρόνος ύφεστάναι δοκεϊ, της κινήσεως άναιρουμένης, ομοίως δέ καί της μονής, άναιρεΐται ό χρόνος; Adv. Music. 62: εί γάρ 2στι τι χρόνος, ήτοι πεπέρασται ή άπειρόν έστιν· οΰτε δέ πεπέρασται, έπεί έροΰμέν ποτε γεγονέναι χρόνον δτε χρόνος ούκ ήν καί ϊσεσθαί ποτε χρόνον δτε χρόνος ούκ έσται; Tert. Adv. Marc. 2, 3 : ergo nec tempus habuit ante tempus, quae fecit tempus·, Clem. Protr. 4, 63, 1: ήλιόν τε καί σελήνην καί τόν άλλον των άστέρων χορόν . . . τά δργανα τοΰ χρόνου; Diog. L. 3, 73: άνευ της τοΰ κόσμου φύσεως ούκ εΤναι χρόνον· άμα γάρ ύπάρχειν αύτφ καί χρόνον είναι; Chalcid. in Tim. 274:

190

annuls cursibusconficiuntur; nam1 fateor ea sine2 mundi conversione 3 effici non potuisse; sed fuit quaedam4 ab infinito tempore aeternitas, quam nulla circumscriptio temporummetiebatur,5 spatio 1 nan Λa, non A1 • metiebantur O

2

sine] si A1

ñeque ettim ullum tempus fuisse ante mundi exornationem dieique et nocturnas vices quibus temporis spatia dimensa sunt; [Clem.], Recogn. 1, 28; Cels. ap. Orig. C. Cels. 6, 60: μακρώ 8' εύηθέστερον τό καΐ ήμέρας τινάς έπιδιανεϊμαι τη κοσμογενία πρίν εϊναι ήμέρας" ούρανοϋ γάρ οΰπω γεγονότος ούδέ γης πω έρηρεισμένης ούδ' ήλιου ποϋ τη δε φερομένου πώς ήμέραι ήσαν; [Apul.], Asel. 30: terrenum autem tempus aeris qualitate, aestuum frigorisque varietate dinoscitur, caeleste vero reversionibus siderum ad eadem loca temporaria conversione currentium\ Eus. Pr. Εν. 3, 10, 25: είτε γάρ χρόνος τις εϊη ό Κρόνος Ούρανοϋ πεφυκώς γέννημα, εϊτε δή άμα ούρανω συνυπέστη χρόνος, είη τε αυτός ó Κρόνου πατήρ Ούρανός καί χρόνος μετά τοϋτον; Ambi. Exam. 1, 16; 1, 20: tempus enim ab hoc mundo, non ante mundum ; Basil, Adv. Eunom. 1, 21, 557c-560a: χρόνον τοίνυν εΐναί φησι ποιάν τινα κίνησιν άστέρων, ήλίου δηλονότι καί σελήνης και των λοιπών [the argument continuing like that of Celsus above]; Hier. In Titum, p. 691 Vail. ; ante haec igitur mundi tempora aeternitatem quondam saeculorum fuisse credendum est\ Aug. De Gen. c. Manicb. 1, 3: etsi in principio temporis Deum fecisse caelum et terram credamus, debemus utique intellegere quod ante principium temporis noti erat tempus. Deus enim fecit et tempora ; et ideo antequam faceret tempora non erant tempora·, De Gen. ad Litt. Lib. imperf. 8 : quomodo potuerunt dies esse antequam tempus esset, si a cursu luminarium tempus exorsum est quae quarto die dicuntur esse facta·, Macrob. Sat. 1, 8, 7: ex quo intellegi volunt cum chaos esset tempora non fuisse, siquidem tempus est certa dimensio quae ex caeli conversione colligitur·, Somn. 2, 10, 9: mundum quidem fuisse semper philosophia auctor est conditore quidem deo, sed non ex tempore, siquidem tempus ante

3

conuenientia O

4

quidam Β 1

mundum esse non potuit, cum nihil aliud tempora nisi cursus solis affidai [which R. Philippson in Symb. Osloenses, 19 (1939), 26, believes derived from Posidonius] ; Proci, in Tim. p. 85a (p. 277 Diehl) ; p. 170a (p. 100 Diehl); p. 242b244d (pp. 13-20 Diehl); Nonn. 38, 250-251 [of the sun]: άτέρμονα κύκλον όδεύω, / τίκτων μέτρα χρόνοιο ; Anon. Hermippus, 1, 42; Lyd. De Mens. 3, 15: ό γάρ χρόνος έκ τών τοϋ ούρανοϋ κινήσεων πρόεισιν; 4, 154: έκ της ούρανοϋ ως ό χρόνος; Ioann. Philop. De Opif. 1, 3: ούκ ήν άρα χρόνος πρίν ούρανόν ύποστηναι; Schol. Od. 19, 306: ό ήλιακός δρόμος τό τοϋ χρόνου συμπερά διάστημα; F. Ε. Robbins, The Hexaemeral Literature (1912), 44; W. Gent, Die Philos, d. Raumes u. d. Zeit (1926), 1-9 (through Aristotle); id., Das Problem d. Zeit (1934)—an historical survey; not seen by me; H. Cherniss, Aristotle's Crit. of presocrat. Philos. (1935), 215-217. dierum noctiumque: cf. Epic. Ep. 1, 72-73: μόνον φ συμπλέκομεν τό ίδιον τοϋτο καί παραμετροΰμεν μάλιστα έπιλογιστέον . . . δτι ταΐς ήμέραις καί ταϊς νυξΐ συμπλέκομεν· καί τοις τούτων μέρεσιν ; E. Bignone, Epicuro (1920), 104, n. 1; C. Bailey, Epicurus (1926), 241-243. Did the books of Varro's Antiquitates with the subtitle De Temporibus (cf. H. Dahlmann in P.-W. 6 Supplbd. (1935), 1233) perhaps treat this same question? annuis cursibus: cf. 1, 87; 2, 50; and, in another sense, Legg. 2, 20. mundi: as noted by Mayor, here used in the narrower sense of "the heavens" ; cf. Alex. Aphrod. in Metaph. 2, 2, p. 196, 33 Hayduck. For its conversio cf. Tuse. 5, 69; Rep. 6, 19. ab infinito . . . aeternitas : prior to all things eternal there exists eternity

191

tarnen qualis ea fuerit intellegi potest,1 quod ne in cogitationem 2 quidem cadit ut fuerit tempus aliquod nullum cum tempus esset. 1

non potest NO

2

cogitatione Ν

(αιών), and prior to all things temporal there exists time (χρόνος), according to Proclus, Inst, theol. 53; 200. Cf. Mar. Victorin. in Cic. Inv. 1, p. 79 Orelli: tempus semper fuerit necesse est sive ante mundum sive post mundum sive cum mundo .. . hoc tempus generale, quia nec initium nec finem habet, aeternitas est quam Graeci αιώνα appellant. Plut. Sept. Sap. Conv. 8, p. 153a, says that time is the oldest thing, and in view of the confusion of Κρόνος and χρόνος (2, 64 infra) the proverb πρεσβύτερος Κρόνου {Com. Att. Frag. 3, 563, no. 895 Kock) may carry the same implication. Cf. the note on tempus ... cum nullum tempus esset below. circumscriptio temporum: cf. Arnob. 2, 62 : nullius temporis circumscriptione finitus\ 3, 29: quis enim annum ignorât temporis esse circumscriptionem statam. intellegi potest: the insertion of non between these words, as found in NO and adopted by Heindorf, Schömann {Opuse, acad. 3 (1858), 299-301, and in his edition), Birt {Beri, philol. Woch. 38 (1918), 551), and others, abandons the best mss and entirely changes the meaning (cf. A. Goethe in fahrb. f . cl. Philol. 129 (1884), 30-31). Retaining the standard ms reading we may explain that by saecla Vellerns does not mean definite measures of time, ultimately derived from days and nights, which could not have existed before the creation of the heavenly bodies, but rather that there must have been an eternity from infinite past time, even without units to measure it. Even without these {tarnen) we can form some concept of its nature, because we cannot even conceive how (or that; see note on ut fuerit below) there could have been any period {tempus) when there was no such thing as time, either in the sense of extension or, at least, in that of order of succession; see note on tempus ... cum nullum tempus esset below. The arguments against the

use of non have been well set forth by Mayor: the inappropriateness of having an Epicurean stress the inconceivability of infinite time prior to creation, and the infelicity of both tamen and igitur if non be inserted. It is not necessary, however, with [G. H.(?)] Heidtmann {Beitr. Krit. u. Interpr. d. Sehr, des Cic. de Nat. Deorum (1858), 36-38), followed by Mayor in his notes (though in vol. 3, lxxviii, he, like D. Wyttenbach in the appendix to Creuzer's ed. (1818), 723, would transpose the phrase to a place after non potuisse), to consider the words quod ne ... tempus esset as a marginal gloss, added by a Platonist or Aristotelian to refute the Epicurean doctrine expressed in the words quam nulla temporum circumscriptio metiebatur. Elsewhere {Cl. Rev. 3 (1889), 358) Mayor thinks the awkwardness of this phrase suggests "an ill-understood Greek original, say, by Phaedrus." P. Stamm {De M.T. Cic. Lib. de Deor. Nat. Interpolationibus (1873), 15, n. 1) holds it to be spurious. The sense, however, as I have indicated it above, seems consistent and adequate, and these proposals, like the extensive changes in word-order suggested by F. A. Wolf {Kl. Sehr. 1 (1869), 524-526), need not here detain us. On the passage cf. also A. Eussner in Bl.f. d. bayer. Gymnasialschulwesen, 24 (1888), 77-78. For intellego meaning "conceive" Heidtmann {op. cit., 36-37, η. 4) compares 1, 73; 2, 54; 3, 38; Fin. 1, 17; 4, 38; 5, 33. in cogitationem . . . cadit: cf. 2, 77: minime cadit in maiestatem deorum·, O f f . 1, 9; 3, 17: honestum quod in nostram intellegentiam cadit·, and other parallels in Thes. Ling. Lat. 3 (1906), 31, 17-72. ut fuerit: this may retain its sense of a question ("how there could have been"), or it may perhaps better be regarded as an example of the brachylogical use of ut with a verb of saying or thinking omitted. Thus R. Kühner

192

22 Isto igitur tam immenso spatio quaero, Balbe, cur Pronoea vestra cessaverit. Laboremne fugiebat? At iste 1 nec attingit 2 1

ista NO

2

ne attingit Ν

and C. Stegmann, Ausf. Gram. d. lat. Spr. 2, 2 2 (1914), 246-247, n. 6, explain the phrase as equivalent to fuisse tempus existìmemus, and compare, among many other illustrations, 1, 75: pugnare te species ut quaedam sit deorum [ = ut species quaedam esse existimetur\, 1, 95: retinendum hoc esse deus ut beatus sit [= ut deum beatum esse credamus\. tempus . . . nullum cum tempus esset: cf. η. on intellegi potest above. Desire for an effective oxymoron of the χρόνω άχρόνω type has here led Vellerns (or rather Cicero) into a confusing use of tempus in two different meanings ("period" or "occasion," and "duration"). Time is to most philosophers— Platonists excepted—άγένητος (Aët. Ρ lac. 1, 22, 8-9, in Doxogr. Gr,2 318); cf. Aristot. Phjs. 3, 6, 206 a 9-11; 8, 1, 252 a 19-23 (concluding άνάγκη άεΐ είναι, χρόνον); Metaph. 11, 6, 1071 b 7-10; Sext. Emp. Pyrrhon. 3, 141 : διά δέ τοΰτο ήν ποτέ χρόνος δτε ούκ ήν χρόνος, προ τοϋ άρξασθαι αύτόν, καΐ ίσται ποτέ χρόνος δτε ούκ ε στα ι χρόνος, μετά τό λήξαι αύτόν, όπερ άτοπον [cf. Adv. Phys. 2, 189-190]; Philo, De Aetern. Mundi, 53: πάντων δ' άτοπώτατον ύπονοεΐν ότι ήν ποτε χρόνος ήνίκα ούκ ήν χρόνος [codd. : κόσμος]; Aug. C.D. 11, 5; 12, 16: nam si non omni tempore fuit tempus erat ergo tempus quando nullum erat tempus . . . erat tempus quando nullum erat tempus quis vel insipientissimus dixerit [cf. 11, 5-7]; De Trinit. 5, 17: non enim erat tempus antequam inciperent tempora·, Themist. in Aristot. Phys. 3, p. 91, 11-14 Schenkl: τοϋ τε γάρ χρόνου ίσται τις άρχή καΐ τελευτή, πράγμα των πάντων άμηχανώτατον · τό γάρ λέγειν ώς ήρξατό ποτε γίνεσθαι χρόνος ούδέν άλλο έστίν ή ότι χρόνος ήν δτε χρόνος ούκ ήν [cf. 8, ρ. 211, 24-26 Schenkl] ; Simplic. in Phys. 3, 5, p. 491, 15-18 Diels: εί γάρ μή έστιν άπειρος ό χρόνος, 2σται τις άρχή χρόνου καί τελευτή, εί δέ τοΰτο, ήν δτε ούκ ήν χρόνος καί 2σται δτε ούκ

έσται· τό δέ ήν και 2σται χρόνου μόρια, ώστε ήν χρόνος δτε ούκ ήν χρόνος καί ίσται δτε ουκ εσται ; 4,10, ρ. 703,4-6 ; 4, 10, ρ. 704, 10-11; 8, 1, ρ. 1158,32; ρ. 1163,25 ;ρ. 1183,9-13 ; Zacharias, Scholas t. pp. 106-107 Boissonade. Cf. also A. Covotti in Ann. d. r. scuola norm. sup. di Pisa, 12 (1897), no. 4,153-217, on theories of time up to and including Aristotle; P. Tillich in fourn. of the Hist, of Ideas, 5 (1944), 61. J. B. Mayor {CI. Rev. 3 (1889), 163) agrees with A. Goethe in thinking the phrase to mean "that there could have been a time when there was no (previous) time", comparing the argument in Aristot. Phys. 8, 1, 251 b 19-27. But this seems too much to read into our passage. K. Mras (in Abh. Beri. Akad. 1933, VI, 40-41) supposes the concept to be perhaps derived from Posidonius. Rev. 10, 6, looks in the other direction to a time when χρόνος ούκέτι εσται. 22. spatio: of time within which, as tempore infinito below or hoc interim spatio in De Or. 2, 353; cf. also Div. 2, 147: innumerabilibus paene saeculis. All these are distinguished from continuous duration, as in 1, 21 : innumerabilia saecla dormierint. Pronoea vestra: cf. 1, 20. cessaverit: applied, like άργία, both to absolute loafing and to holiday enjoyments; cf. 1, 102: pueri etiam cum cessant exercitatione aliqua ludiera delectantur ; deum sic feriatum volumus cessatione torpere ut si se commoverit vereamur ne beatus esse non possit\ 2, 59: nec cessantium deorum nec ea quae agant molientium cum labore·, 3, 93: cur tam multos deos nihil agere et cessare patitur·, Orig. De Princip. 3, 5, 3: soient nobis obiicere dicentes, "si coepit mundus ex tempore, quid ante faciebat Deus quam mundus inciperet ? otiosam enim et immobilem dicere naturam Dei impium est simul et absurdum"·, Aug. Conf. 11, 12: si enim vacabat, inquiunt. et non operabatur aliquid, cur non sic semper et deinceps, quemadmodum retro semper cessaverit ab opera·,

1,22

193

deum nec erat ullus,1 cum omnes naturae numini2 divino, caelum, ignes, terrae, maria, parerent. Quid autem erat quod concupisceret deus mundum signis et luminibus tamquam aedilis ornare? Si 1

nullus AT

2

nomini Β 1

C.D. 11, 5: cur in eis ab opere Deus cessavent·, 12, 18: cuius retro fuerit aeterno cessatio. laborem: cf. 1, 52, where Vellerns considers the god of the Stoics as laboriosissimum, for which 2, 133 (jtantum Iaborasse) might give some support, though the language there may be largely rhetorical rather than exact. attingit: for parallels in the sense of "affect" or "apply to" cf. 3, 38: quorum deum nihil attingit·, Holden on Off. 1, 18; Ties. Ling. Lat. 2 (1906), 1146, 27-55. nec erat ullus: cf. Sallustius, De Diis, 9: τήν δέ τοιαύτην περί τόν κόσμον έπιμέλειαν ούδέν βουλευομένους ούδέ πονοϋντας τούς θεούς ήγητέον ποιεΐσθαι, άλλ' ώσπερ των σωμάτων τά δύναμιν ίχοντα αύτω τω είναι ποιεί & ποιεϊ . . . οΰτω πολύ μάλλον ή των θεών πρόνοια αύτη τε άπόνως καΐ τοις προνοουμένοις έπ' άγαθω γίνεται; Aug. Enarr. 1 in Ps. 103, 7 {Patr. Lat. 37, 1340-1341); Ioann. Philop. De Opif. Mundi, 3, 17: δυνατόν μέν οδν ύπηρχεν ώς άπειροδυνάμω τω θεω όμοϋ πάντα παραγαγεϊν μόνω βουλήματι; also Ps. 33, 9, and similar passages. naturae: elements or στοιχεία, as in 1, 29 (where cf. n. on quattuor . .. naturas); 1, 103; 2, 28; 2, 83; 2, 84; 3, 34; 3, 36; Ac. 1, 39; Τ use. 1, 66; cf. also 1, 19, n. (illae quinqué formae) above. Mayor suggests that the singular caelum is of the simple element; the plurals, in a more grandiose, half-ironic, style, of the lands and seas which constitute our globe. There appears to be no standard order for citing the elements. On caelum = aer cf. Lucr. 4, 132; Plin. N.H. 2, 102. On the four elements in general cf. J. Laminne in Mëm. de l'acad. r. ...de Belgique, 65, 2 (1904), 1-194. numini divino: F. Pfister (in P.-W. 17 (1937), 1274,37) compares for this phrase Ac. 2,121 ; Fin. 1, 41 ; 5, 49 ; Pro Mil. 83 ;

De Prov. cons. 34; De Domo, 140; cf. also Div. 1, 106. With numini ... parerent cf. Div. 1, 120: quanto id deo est facilius, cuius numini parent omnia·, 2, 36: deorum enim numini parere omnia. signis et luminibus: as suggested by Ernesti, there is probably a facetious allusion here in the comparison of the constellations {signa, as in 1, 35; 2, 52 (cf. 2, 53); Lucr. 1, 2 (cf. 5, 691)) to statues and the luminibus of the stars to illuminations put up by aediles on Roman public buildings on festival days. J. M. Miller, Die Beleuchtung im Alterthum, 2 (1886), 48, compares with our passage 2 Verr. 1, 58 [where see Asconius]; 1, 141. For such adornment by the aediles (as superintendents of buildings) cf. Liv. 9, 40, 16: inde natum initium dicitur fori ornandi ab aedilibus cum tensae ducerentur·, Suet. Iul. 10; also Cic. De Domo, 111; and for the illumination of public buildings or the stage of the theatre Lucil. 146 Marx ( = 1 4 8 Warmington): Romanis ludis forus olim ornatus lucernis; Cic. Orat. 134, where the lumina of speech are said to be similia Ulis quae in ampio ornatu scaenae aut fori appellantur insignia [where cf. Sandys's n.]; Marx on Lucil. 146. Cf. Philo, De special. Leg. 1, 66: τύ μέν άνωτάτω . . . ιερόν θεοΰ νομί ζειν τόνσύμπαντα χρή κόσμον είναι, νεώ μέν ϊχοντα τό άγιώτατον της των όντων ούσίας μέρος, ούρανόν, αναθήματα δέ τούς άστέρας. On lumina and sigilla in private houses cf. Dig. 7, 1, 13, 7. P. Boyancé (Ét. sur le songe de Scipion (1936), 117) would here detect Epicurean ridicule of Plato's notion {Tim. 37c) of the cosmos as των άΐδίων θεών γεγονός άγαλμα. While the stars are sometimes viewed as intended to give light to the world (e.g., Ov. fr. ap. Lact. Inst. 2, 5, 24; Lact. op. cit., 7, 5, 12), they also often appear as primarily decorative (hence the 13

194

1,22

u t 1 deus ipse melius habitaret, antea videlicet tempore infinito ι ut] id Ν use of the terms κόσμος and mundus), e.g., Plat. Rep. 7, 529c: τα έν τω ούρανω ποικίλματα; Tim. 40a: νείμας περί πάντα κύκλω τόν ούρανόν, κόσμον άληθιvòv αύτω πεποικιλμένον είναι καθ' δλον; Lys. 201a; Eur. Hei. 1095-1096: πρός ούρανόν / . . . ÍV οικείς άστέρων ποικίλματα; Critias, Sisyph. ap. Sext. Emp. Adv. Pbys. 1, 54 ( = Β 25, lines 33-34 Diels): τό τ' άστερωπόν ούρανοϋ δέμας, / Χρόνου καλόν ποίκιλμα; [Hippocr.] περί έβδομ. (cf. Ε. Pfeiffer in ΣΤΟΙΧΕΙΑ, 2 (1916), 31, η. 2); Εηη. Ann. 29 : qui caelum versât stellis fulgentibus aptum·, 339: hinc Nox processif stellis ardentibus apta·, cf. Lucr. 5, 1205; 6, 357-358; Virg. Aen. 4, 482; 6, 797; 11, 201-202); Sen. De Ben. 4, 23, 4: in decorem sparsa·, Plut. De Is. et Os. 47, p. 370a: Ώρομάζης . . . τόν ούρανόν άστροις έκόσμησεν; Athenag. Leg. pro Christ. 23; Lact. Inst. 2, 9, 3: suum vero babitaculum distinxit claris luminibus et implevit, sole scilicet et lunae orbe fulgenti et astrorum micantium splendentibus signis adornavit [repeated by Isid. Etym. 3, 31, 2]; [Clem.] Homil. 5, 22: ούκοϋν προ τούτου ούκ ήσαν άστέρες μέχρις δτε άσελγείας προφάσει ύπό μοιχών ό ούρανός άστροις έκοσμήθη ; Recogn. 1, 28; Chalcid. in Tim. 119: eumque [sc. globum] omnem huiusmodi luminibus exornasse (cf. 129); Ambros. Exam. 2, 4, 15: caelum, quod ουρανός Graece dicitur, Latine, quia impressa stellarum lumina velut signa babeat, tanquam caelatum appellatur·, Greg. Naz. Poem, dogmat. 4, 62 (Patr. Gr. 37, 420): εϊδεσι κοσμηθήναι; Cosmas Indie. 3, p. 143D. Also cf. 2, 58, below: ut in eo [sc. mundo] eximia pulcbritudo sit atque omnis ornatus. aedilis: E. Bignone, L'Aristotele perduto, 2 (1936), 375, n. 6, remarks that the divine care of the cosmos is compared to a λειτουργία, which is quite contrary to Epicurus's own notions of the deity; cf. Epic. Ep. 1, 76: μήτε λειτουργούντος τινός νομίζειν δει γενέσθαι; 2, 97: και ή θεία φύσις πρός

ταϋτα μηδαμη προσαγέσθω, άλλ* άλειτούργητος διατηρείσθω καΐ έν τη πάσγ) μακαριότητι; Dionys. Alex. ap. Eus. Pr. Εν. 7, 19, p. 334b: τοϋτό γε άτοπον ομοίως άνθρώποις χρυσοχοεϊν και. λιθουργεΐν καί κατά τάς άλλας τέχνας . . . χειροκμητεΐν τόν θεόν; F. Peters, T. Lucr. et Μ. Cic. quo modo Vocab. Gr. Epic. Discipl. propria Latine vertermi (1926), 16. For the duties of the aediles in the cura urbis cf. J. W. Kubitschek in P.-W. 1 (1894), 454; 462. Cicero himself had held the aedileship in 69 B.C.; cf. M. Geizer in P.-W. 7A (1939), 846; 852-853; L. R. Taylor in Am. Journ. Philol. 60 (1939), 194-202. For a similar figure cf. Philo, De Prov. 2, p. 80 Aucher. si ut: an ellipsis for si ornavi t ut; cf. 1, 99: si [sc. redmdat] ut; 3, 81: si [sc. periit] quia; Div. 2, 55: si enim [sc. tam obscura fuerunt] ut. deus: the repetition of deus has disturbed some scholars and led to its deletion by Ernesti, Schuetz, H. Schwarz (Misc. philologica (1878), 28), and M. L. Earle (CI. Papers (1912), 204). But such repetitions are not rare in Cicero; e.g., 2, 75 (partes); 2, 133 (mundum); 3, 64 (dis inmortalibus); 3, 71 (opinio); Ac. 1, 46 (Arcesila) ; Tim. 37 (deorum ... deos) ; Div. 1, 129 (animi); Fin. 1, 3 (and Madvig's note); Tusc. 4, 64 (metus); Legg. 2, 60 (lege); 3, 41 (rempublicam . .. res publica). tempore infinito: time during which, and hence differing from ab infinito tempore in 1, 21. ut . . . melius habitaret: a contradiction to the often expressed notion that God enjoys perfect happiness and has no wants ; e.g., Xen. Mem. 1, 6,10; Philo, De Virtut. 9 : εστι γάρ ó μέν θεός άνεπιδεής, ούδενός χρεϊος ών, άλλ' αύτός αύταρκέστατος έαυτω; De Plantat. 33: τίνος γάρ ένεκα, εϊποι τις áv; 'ίνα ένδιαιτήσεις εύαγώγους εχη [sc. ό θεός] ; Plut. Comp. Aristid. et Cat A, 2: άπροσδεής μέν γάρ άπλώς ό θεός; Zencb. 1,17: άνενδεής ό θεός· παροιμία (cf. C. Graux,

1,23

195

in tenebris tamquam in gurgustio habitaverat. Post autem variatatene eum delectari putamus, qua caelum e t 1 tetras exornatas videmus? Quae ista potest esse oblectatio deo? Quae si esset, non ea tarn diu carere potuisset. 23 A n 2 haec, ut fere dicitis,3 1

et om. Ν

2

an] nam B1

8

dicis F

Textes grecs inédits (1886), 129, no. 45); Apul. De Deo Socr. 12: qui potest videri perfectas fuisse qui a priore statu ad alium rectiorem statum migrât·, Athenag. Leg. pro Christ. 16; 29; Lact. Inst. 7, 5, 3: mundum non propter se deus fecit quia commodis eius non indiget, sed propter hominem qui eo utitur·, also Acts, 17, 25 ; Zacharias, Scholast. p. 115 Boissonade: εί δ' άγαθός ών έβουλήθη είναι τά 8ντα, ού δεόμενος αύτών προς τί> είναι (ήν γάρ προ τούτων ώς τέλειος και ούθενός δεόμενος), κτλ. in tenebris: cf. Catull. 55, 2: demonstres ubi sint tuae tenebrae·, Varr. Metti pp. 435: in tenebris ac suili vivunt\ Lucr. 5, 174-175: at, credo, in tenebris vita ac maerore iacebat, / donec diluxit rerum genitalis origo ; Apul. Met. 6, 5 ; Aug. De Gen. c. Manich. 1, 6: in tenebris ergo erat deus antequam faceret lucem\ T. Birt in Beri, philol. Woch. 38 (1918), 552. gurgustio: a word of uncertain etymology (cf. A. Walde-J. Β. Hofmann, Lat. etym. Worterb. I 1 (1938), 628-629), used for a small, dark, dirty, or disreputable hut; e.g., Paul, ex Fest. p. 99 M. (p. 88 L.) : gurgustium genus habitationis angustum, a gurgulione dictum·, Gl. Ansil. GV 37 : gurgustia : loca tabernarum tenebrosa ubi convivía turpia fiunt\ GV 38 : gurgustium : cellula modica-, GV 39: domus pauperis·, Gl. Λα, G 224: gurgitium [sic]: alii pupinam [i.e. popinam] sordidam, alii ubi includuntur porciputant·, Gl. Sangall. G 99 (M. Warren in Trans. Am. pbilol. Assoc. 15 (1885), 160) : gurgustium : tegurium umile et tenebroso. Cf. In Pisón. 13: meministine, caenum, cum ad te quarta fere hora cum C. Pisene venissem, nescio quo e gurgustio te prodire involuto capite soleatum, et, cum isto ore foetido taeterrimam nobis popinam inhalasses, excusatione te uti valetudinis·, Suet. De Gram. 11 : P. Valerius Cato ... vixit ad extremam senectam, sed in summa

pauperie et paene inopia, abditus modico gurgustio-, Apul. Met. 1, 23: brevitatem gurgustioli nostri ne spernas peto. The use of such a word, of low associations, continues the ironic tone already noted. varietatene: cf. 2, 17: tantam varie tatem pulchritudinemque rerum caelestium ; 2, 98; also the note on signis et luminibus above. In Tim. 35 Cicero translates πεποικιλμένον by varietate distinctum. For -ne postponed in its clause cf. Legg. 2, 12: id estne numerandum·, for -ne following a short e cf. 3, 4: responderene-, also the examples cited by A. Harant in Rev. de philol. 4 (1880), 25-29; E. Thomas in Rev. de philol. 8 (1884), 134; "T." in Rev. de philol. 9 (1885), 151; O. J. Todd in CI. Quart. 36 (1942), 30, n. 2. quae si esset, non ea: for qua, si esset, non. P. Mihaileanu, De Comprehensionibus relativis apud Cic. (1907), 90, compares 1, 12: quae quamquam ... his ... vita regere tur-, Pro Cluent. 33: quae cum se esse respondisset ab ea petivit [for a qua cum j-e] ; Phil. 1, 38: quae potestas, si ... fiet, utar [for qua potestate, si ... fiet, utar] ; Part. orat. 69: quod cum latum genus esse potest .. . unum ex eo delegimus [for ex quo cum id, etc.]. 23 ut fere dicitis: cf. Fin. 1, 14: ut fere faciunt qui ab eo dissentimi; Tuse. 1, 19: animum autem alii animam, ut fere nostri-, 5, 85: quod fere faciunt. With this Stoic view of the universe as made for the sake of man cf. 2,133; 2, 154-162. This theory was especially attacked by the Epicureans; cf. Lucr. 5, 156-167: dicere porro hominum causa voluisse parare / praeclaram mundi naturam ... / ... / ... / ... / ... / ... I ... / cetera de genere hoc adfingere et addere, Memmi, / desiperest. quid enim inmortalibus atque beatis j gratia nostra queat largirier emolumenti, j ut nostra quicquam causa gerere adgrediantur·, Aet. Plac. 1, 7, 7 {Doxogr. Gr,2 300) κοινώς

196

1,23

hominum causa a deo constituta sunt? Sapientiumne? Propter paucos igitur 1 tanta est rerum facta molitio. An stultorum? At 1

agitur B 1

ouv άμαρτάνουσιν αμφότεροι δτι τόν θεόν έποίησαν έπιστρεφόμενον των άνθρωπίνων καί τούτου χάριν τόν κόσμον κατασκευάζονται ; R. Hirzel, Untersuch. Ζ. Cicero's philos. Sehr. 1 (1877), 10, n. 1 ; P. Shorey in Cl. Philol. 18 (1923), 91-92. sapientiumne : the early Stoics divided mankind into the two classes of sages and fools, largely synonymous with the good and the evil. Sages were so highly idealized as to be rarely, if ever, found in the actual world (Sen. Ep. 42, 1 and Alex. Aphrod. De Fato, 28 compare their infrequency to that of the phoenix) ; cf. 3, 70: si mens voluntasque divina idcirco consuiuit hominibus quod its est largita rationem, its so/is consuiuit quos bona ratione donavit, quos videmus si modo ulli sint esse perpaucos·, 3, 79: sapientiam autem nemo adsequitur·, Div. 2, 61: si quod raro fit id portentum putandum est, sapientem esse portentum est; saepius enim mulam peperisse arbitrer quam sapientem fuisse-, Tuse. 2, 51: in quo veri erit perfecta sapientia (quem adhuc nos quidem vidimus neminem)·, O f f . 3, 16; Fin. 4, 65 : nec tamen tile erat sapiens (quis enim hoc aut quando aut ubi aut unde?)·, Ac. 2, 145: scientiam talem esse dicebat, cuius compotem nisi sapientem esse neminem, sed qui sapiens sit aut fuerit ne ipsi quidem soient dicere·, Sen. Dial. 9, 7, 4: ubi enim istum [i.e., the sapiens] inventes, quem tot saeculis quaerimus·, Plut. De comm. Not. 33, p. 1076b: £στι 8' ούτος [sc. ό σοφός] ούδαμοϋ γης ουτε γέγονεν· άπλετοι 8έ μυριάδες άνθρώπων κακοδαιμονοϋντες ίπ' άκρον έν τη τοϋ Διός πολιτεία καί άρχή την άρίστην έχούση διοίκησιν; Quintil. Inst. 1, praef. 19; Juv. 13, 26 [and Mayor's n.] ; Sext. Emp. Pyrrh. 1, 91 : τοϋ παρ' αύτοϊς όνειροπολουμένου σοφού; 3, 240: έπεί γάρ φρόνησίς έστιν άρετή, τήν δέ άρετήν μόνος είχεν ό σοφός, οί Στωικοί μη δντες σοφοί ούχ έξουσι τήν περί τόν βίον τέχνην [cf. Adv. Eth. 181]; Adv. Log. 1, 432: μέχρι δεϋρο άνευρέτου καθεστώτος τοϋ σοφοϋ; 1, 433: έπεί γάρ τοις φαύλοις κατ' αύτούς έγκαταριθ-

μοϋνται Ζήνων τε καΐ Κλεάνθης καί Χρύσιππος καΐ οί λοιποί των άπό της αίρέσεως, πας δέ φαύλος áyvoíqc κρατείται, κτλ. ; Lucían, Timon, 25 ; Porphyr. De Abst. 3, 2 : σοφός μέν γάρ ή είς ή καί δύο κατ' αύτούς γεγόνασιν, έν οίς μόνοις ό λόγος κατώρθωται, οί δέ άλλοι φαύλοι πάντες; R. Hirzel, Untersuch, χ. Cicero's philos. Sehr. 2 (1882), 279-298 (who notes the gradual softening of these views in the middle Stoa and the acceptance of the notion of προκύπτοντες, or persons progressing toward virtue, even though they may not have attained it); J. Heinemann (Poseidonios' metaphys. Sehr. 2 (1928), 75) and C. Blum {Studies in the Dream-book of Artemidorus (1936), 61-62) consider as a Posidonian trait the strong contrast of the few philosophers and the many common people. Others are even more pessimistic; cf. Bias 73a: οί πλείστοι άνθρωποι κακοί; Heraclit. Β 104 Diels: oí πολλοί κακοί, ολίγοι δέ άγαθοί (cf. Proci, in Alcib. prim. p. 525 Cousin). While the Epicureans emphasized the importance of the προλήψεις of all men, learned and unlearned alike (1, 43-45), the more aristocratic Stoics, whose opinions seem here to be ironically assumed by Vellerns, were not pleased that tantas res opinione stultorum iudicari (3, 11); cf. Lact. Inst. 2,19, 4: quis autem nesciat plus esse momenti in paucioribus doctis quam in pluribus inperitis (a view not far distant from Stoic belief)· rerum . . . molitio: cf. 1, 19: quae molitio·, 2, 133: tantarum rerum molitio facta sit. an stultorum: Mayor remarks upon the "absence of compassion, contempt for ignorance and weakness, despair of reformation" which characterized the old aristocratic philosophies, Epicurean and Stoic alike, in contrast to the teachings of Christianity [e.g., 1 Cor. 1, 27]. In the case of paucos above and of miserrimi here, ideas in this book put

1,23

197

piimum causa non fuit cur de inprobis bene mereretur; deinde quid est adsecutus, cum omnes stulti sint sine dubio miserrimi, maxime quod stulti sunt (miserius enim stultitia quid possumus dicere?), deinde quod ita 1 multa sunt incommoda in vita ut ea sapientes commodorum conpensatione leniant, stulti nec vitare venientia2 possint 3 nec ferre praesentia. 10 Qui vero mundum ipsum 4 animantem sapientemque6 esse dixerunt, nullo modo vide1 ita om. O om. M

2

lenientia O 1

3

possunt M1

into the mouth of the Epicurean Vellerns reappear in 3, 70 and 3, 79, respectively, as spoken by the Academic Cotta, from which we might perhaps assume that they are Ciceros' own contribution as author, rather than being drawn from a particular source. deinde . . . deinde: an awkward repetition, the first instance continuing primum and the second giving an additional argument after that introduced by maxime. omnes stulti . . . miserrimi: to the important passages collected in S. V.F. 3, nos. 671-676, add: Fin. 1, 59: nemo igitur non miser·, 3, 60: apparet ... officium .. . stulti manere in vita, cum sit miser [cf. 3, 61]; Plat. Symp. 204a: αύτό γάρ τοΰτό έστι χαλεπόν άμαθία, τό μή 0ντα καλόν κάγαθόν μηδέ φρόνιμον δοκεϊν αύτω είναι ίκανόν ; Aug. C.D. 9, 15: si autem ... omnes homines, quamdiu mortales sunt, etiam miseri sint necesse est·, 21, 14: non enim parva poena est ipsa insipientia vel imperitia·, also Fin. 4, 64: nihil igitur adiuvat procedere et progredì in virtute quo minus miserrimus sit. i n c o m m o d a : whether the Epicurean speaker is here using a technical term of Stoicism (άποπροηγμένα ; cf. A. Pittet, Vocab. philos, de Sénèque, 1 (1937), 196197) because speaking to a Stoic, or whether the word is here used in a more popular sense (cf. Ac. 1, 23: multis vitae commodis, and Reid's n.), is not clear. R. Philippson (in Sjmb. Osloenses, 19 (1939), 18) would compare Lucr. 5, 199: tanta stat praedita culpa. conpensatione: cf. Tuse. 5, 95: hoc

4

ipsum om. M

5

que

usurum compensatione sapientem ut et voluptatem fugiat, si ea maiorem dolorem effectura sit, et dolorem suscipiat maiorem efficientem voluptatem·, also Epic. ap. Fin. 2, 96 : compensabatur ... tarnen cum his omnibus animi laetitia quam capiebam memoria rationum inventorumque nostrorum. leniant . . . possint: Da vies, Ernesti, Walker, and some other editors have been troubled by the somewhat awkward parataxis, and have emended in various ways. But the meaning seems to be, as translated by H. Rackham, "there are so many troubles in life that, though wise men can assuage them by balancing against them life's advantages, fools can neither avoid their approach nor endure their presence." Cf. 1, 20: cuiusprincipium aliquod sit, nihil sit extremum·, 1, 74; 1, 86; 2, 87; 3, 32; Fin. 1, 15 (and Madvig's note for other parallels) ; Virg. Aen. 6, 324: di cuius turare et fallere numen. F. A. Wolf (Kl. Sehr. 1 (1869), 527-528) defends our text and cites Greek parallels; G. F. Schoemann (ad loc.) remarks that concessions or assumptions are often introduced, without the conjunctions natural to them, before clauses containing the essential fact of the sentence. vitare . . . ferre: cf. Virg. Aen. 6, 892: quo quemque modo fugiatque feratque laborem. mundum ipsum animantem: cf. 1, 18, n. (animo et sensibus praeditum). sapientemque: on the mundus as sapiens cf. 2, 21 ; 2, 22 ; 2, 30 ; 2, 32 ; 2, 36 ; 2, 39; 2, 46; 3, 21; Ac. 2, 119; S.V.F. 2, nos. 633-645.

198

1,24

runt animi natura 1 intellegentis2 in quam figuram cadere posset.3 De quo dicam equidem paulo post. 24 Nunc autem hactenus: admirabor eorum tarditatem 4 qui animantem 6 inmortalem et 1 naturam CNOB2FM 2 intellegentes ASNOFM, intellegenter Β 3 possit Η 5 animantem mundum (mundum del.) M, animant (del.) enim tarditate A mortalem D1, autumant eum D (m. ree.)

4

natura: naturam, found in CNBS, might be explained as a case of prolepsis (cf. Div. 2, 103; and Pease's note), but natura is better attested. Animi natura seems a periphrasis for animus·, cf. above, title, NATVRA DEORVM; 1, 44: omnium natura·, 2, 24: coloris naturam·, 2, 60: aliae naturae deorum·, 2, 133: humanae naturae figura·, 2, 136: alvi natura·, Fin. 5, 33: intellegant si quando naturam hominis dicam hominem dicere me\ also 58 Lucretian passages [cf. Merrill on Lucr. 3, 43]; Plat. Phaedo, 87e: τήν φύσιν της άσθενείας; Plut. Adv. Colot. 11, p. 1112d: Κωλώτου φύσις αύτός ό Κωλώτης ίστιν άλλο δ' ούδέν ; C. Bailey, ed. of Lucr. 1 (1947), 142-143. On the emphatic position of natura, standing before the phrase in quam figuram, see J. B. Hofmann, La t. Umgangssprache (1926), 105. in quam figuram: cf. Lucr. 5, 126127: quippe etenim non est, cum quovis corpore ut esse / posse animi natura putetur constliumque ; 5, 132-133: sic animi natura nequit sine corpore oriri / sola ñeque a nervis et sanguine longiter esse. Vellerns naturally here anticipates the Epicurean views on divine anthropomorphism, to be set forth at 1, 46-48; cf. 1, 76-102. One may also compare [Plat.] Définit. 415a: άνθρωπος ζωον άπτερον, δίπουν, πλατυώνυχον· δ μόνον των δντων επιστήμης της κατά λόγους δεκτικών έστιν; Anon. Vit. Homert (in T. Gale, Opuse, myth., phys. et eth. (1688), 336): ούδέν δέ άλλο σώματος είδος [for the gods] ή τοϋ άνθρώπου δεκτικόν έστιν έπιστήμης καΐ λόγου, προσεικάσας έκαστον των θεών. cadere posset: cf. Div. 2, 93: confitendum sit Ulis eos qui nascuntur eodem tempore posse in dissimilis incidere naturas·, also 1, 19, n. (apte cadentes), below; G. P. Shipp in CI. Rev. 51 (1937), 209-212. 24 nunc autem hactenus: such phrases, abruptly closing a discussion

or passing to a new topic, are frequent in Cicero; e.g., Div. 2, 53: sed haec hactenus; nunc ad ostenta veniamus; 2, 76: sed de hoc loco plura in aliis, nunc hactenus·, Fat. 20: sed haec hactenus; alia videamus; Ac. 2, 36; Fin. 4, 14: sed haec hactenus; nunc videamus", 4, 80: quoniam .. . advesperascit ... nunc quidem hactenus·, Τ use. 3, 84: haec quidem hactenus; cetera quotienscumque voletis·, 4, 65: de malorum opinione hactenus; videamus nunc·, O f f . 1, 92: sed haec quidem hactenus. illud autem ; 1, 140: sed haec hactenus·, 1, 160: haec quidem hactenus. patefactus enim locus est; 3, 6: sed haec hactenus; multa enim saepe ... scripsimus·, Parad. 41: sed haec hactenus. ille videat·, Am. 24: hactenus mihi videor de amicitia ... dicere ; si quae praeferita sunt; 55: sed haec hactenus·, Brut. 52; Att. 6, 2, 1. In the present passage, as noted by [G. H.(?)] Heidtmann (Beitr. zKrit. u. Interp. d. Sehr. d. Cic. de Nat. Deorum (1858), 44), nunc is needed with admirabor, to make that word refer to the immediate present, as contrasted with dicam ... paulo post (C. L. Kayser, in the Baiter-Kayser edition (1864), emended to admiror), and so, if we retain hactenus (which Heidtmann thought might have originated from the marginal note of one who had read up to that point—a use which Mayor says actually occurs in a Harleian ms—, and which T. Birt (in Beri, philol. Woch. 38 (1918), 552) improbably explains as a dittography of auteni), the phrase must look forward rather than back. For the future admirabor where one might expect a present cf. Div. 1, 132: testabor·, De Or. 3, 148: censebo; Fam. 11, 7, 2: volam·, Att. 12, 32, 2: praestabo ; Q. Fr. 3, 1, 3: praestabo·, H. Sjögren, Comment. Tullianae (1910), 150-153. tarditatem: cf. 1, 11, n. (tarditate hominum).

1,24

199

eundem beatum rotun dum 1 esse velini, quod ea fotma neget 1

rutundum A1Bi, rudum Bl

animantem: here a substantive. The two qualities predicated by Velleius of this animate god of the Platonists and Stoics (1, 18)—whom he here, either sarcastically and for the sake of argument, or sincerely (cf. 1, 36) accepts-— are the two fundamentals assumed by the Epicureans in 1, 45: ut eos aeternos et beatos haberemus, which Velleius finds incompatible with the spherical form which he here derides; cf. Sen. Apocol. 8, 1 : Επικούρειος θεός non potest esse ... Stoicusì quomodo potest rotundus esse, ut ait Varrò, sine capite, sine praeputio? Ambr. Exam. 1, 1, 4 (quoted on quae vita, below). Lact. De Opif. 5,1, remarks that when God made the animals noluit ea in rotundum formae speciem conglobare atque colligere. E. V. Arnold, Rom. Stoicism (1911), 222, n. 36, observes that "in connexion with the association of God with the universe we may say (but only in a secondary sense) that God has spherical form," and compares Pap. Hercul. 1055, col. 16, in S.V.F. 2, no. 1060 {Frag. Hercul. p. 250 Scott): κόσμου θεόν ούδ' ήέλιον τ' άκάμαντα σελήνην τε πλήθουσαν [II. 18, 484] Στωικώ δέ και Περιπατητική τοϋτ' ϊξεστιν λέγειν . . . πώς γαρ Εδίαν έχει μορφήν τό σφαιροειδές; άλλως θ' οί τοϋτο λέγοντες ού βλέπουσιν διότι της φύσεως . . . neget . . . Plato : cf. Tim. 33b : τω δέ [sc. τω κόσμω] τά πάντ' έν αύτω ζωα περιέχειν μέλλοντι ζώω πρέπον αν εϊη σχήμα τό περιειληφός έν αύτω πάντα όπόσα σχήματα, διό καΐ σφαιροειδές, έκ μέσου πάντη προς τάς τελευτάς ίσον άπέχον, κυκλοτερές αύτό έτορνεύσατο, πάντων τελεώτατον όμοιότατόν τε αύτό έαυτφ σχημάτων, νομίσας μυρίω κάλλιον δμοιον άνομοίου; 34a-b: ούτος δή πας δντος άεΐ λογισμός θεοϋ περί τον ποτέ έσόμενον θεόν λογισθείς λεΐον καΐ όμαλδν πανταχή τε έκ μέσου ϊσον καΐ δλον και τέλεον έκ τελέων σωμάτων σώμα έποίησε; 40a: τοϋ μέν οδν θείου την πλείστην Εδέαν έκ πυρός άπειργάζετο, δπως δ τι λαμπρότατον ίδεϊν τε κάλλι-

στον εϊη, τώ δέ παντί προσεικάζων ευκυκλον έποίει (the idea was parodied in Old Comedy, according to Aët. Ρ lac. 1, 7, 4 {Doxogr. Gr.2 299). For other expressions of this thought cf. Diog. L. 8, 35: καΐ των σχημάτων τό κάλλιστον σφαϊραν είναι τών στερεών, τών δ' έπιπέδων κύκλον [the view of Pythagoras] ; Parmen. 8, 42-44 Diels: αύτάρ έπεί πείρας πύματον, τετελεσμένον έστί / πάντοθεν, εύκύκλου σφαίρης έναλίγκιον 0γκθήσεως. Ρ. Stamm, De M.T. Cic. Lib. de Deor. Nat. Interpolationibus (1873), 16-21, discusses at length various previous emendations, and himself emends to si dii possunt esse sine sensu et corpore, mentem cur aquae adiunxit? et mentem: J. van Wageningen (.Mnemosyne, 39 (1911), 135-136) rather temptingly emends to sed (i.e., et) mentem; but et may be used here of an indignant question. mentem cur aquae adiunxit: mentem of Β2 is to be preferred to mente of B 1 and the other mss, and it seems unnecessary to insert after adiunxit some additional phrase, such as menti autem cur aquam adiunxit, with Baiter and Mayor. "If intelligence," says Vellerns, "can exist incorporeally, why did Thaïes fasten it down to water?" This sentence seems perfectly plain without the insertion of a parallel phrase. As A. Stickney says in his edition (1881), 185, the two suppositions si dei possunt esse sine

208 constare potest vacans corpore? Anaximandri autem opinio est 1 nativos esse déos longis intervallis orientis occidentisque, eosque 2 1

opinio est] opinione Ν

2

occidentis eosque O2

sensu and si ipsa mens constare potest vacans corpore are the same in substance, with the conclusion drawn in the question ment em cur aquae adiunxit? The form adiuncxit, found also in Ambr. De Iacob, 1, 1, 4, was retained by Plasberg in his ed. maior, and has been defended by T. Birt {Beri, philol. Woch. 38 (1918), 571) on the basis of epigraphical examples of cx listed in C.I.L. VIII, p. 1111. ipsa mens: the mind alone; Goethe compares 2, 122: dentibus ipsis; 2, 138: ipso ab spiri tu; 3, 92: mente ipsa. constare: ύπάρχειν. vacans corpore: cf. 1, 65; Div. 1,129; Tuse. 1, 50; 1, 78; also the adjective άσώματος (1, 30). Anaximandri: of Miletus, friend, hearer, and successor of Thaïes (Ac. 2, 118; Agathem. 1, 1 (Geogr. Gr. min. 2, 471); Strab. 1, 1, 11; Hippol. Philosophum. 1, 6, 1 (Doxogr. Gr.2 559); Clem. Strom. 1, 14, 63, 2; Eus. Pr. Ev. 10, 14, 11; Simplic. Phys. 24, 13 (Vorsokrat. no. 2, 9); De Cael. 615, 13 (Vorsokrat. no. 2, 17); Eustath. Comm. {Geogr. Gr. min. 2, 208); Suid. s.v. Αναξίμανδρος). His dates are 610 to shortly after 547 (E. Wellmann in P.-(Τ. 1 (1894), 2085). Of his work περί φύσεως (Themist. Or. 26, p. 317c; Suid. I.e.) little is known. His initial principle (άρχή) was an eternal άπειρον; cf. Ac. 2, 118: is enim infinitatem naturae dixit esse, e qua omnia gignerentur. Out of the infinite all things are born and into it all are again resolved. According to Aristotle {Phys. 3, 4, 203 b 13), this άπειρον was what Anaximander really considered τί> θείον, rather than the heavenly bodies, which are born and perish (orientis occidentisque). But cf. Aët. Plac. 1, 3, 3 {Doxogr. Gr,2 277): 'Αναξίμανδρος 8έ ó Μιλήσιός φησι των όντων την άρχήν είναι τό άπειρον· έκ γάρ τούτου πάντα γίνεσθαι καΐ είς τούτο πάντα φθείρεσθαι· διό καΐ γεννάσθαι

άπειρους κόσμους καΐ πάλιν φθείρεσθαι; 1, 4, 6 {Doxogr. Gr,2 331); 1, 7, 12 (Doxogr. Gr,2 302) :'Αναξίμανδρος άπεφήνατο τούς άπειρους ούρανούς θεούς; 2, 1, 3 (Doxogr. Gr,2 327); 2, 1, 8 (id., 329); Plut. Strom, ap. Eus. Pr. Εν. 1, 8, 2 (Doxogr. Gr,2 579); Tert. Adv. Marc. 1, 13; Justin, Cohort, ad Gr. 3; [Galen,] Hist. Philos. 35 (Doxogr. Gr2 618): 'Αναξίμανδρος 8è τούς άπειρους ούρανούς θεούς είναι νομίζει; cf. 18 = Doxogr. Gr.2 610; Diog. L. 2, 1; Hippol. Philosophum. 1, 6, 1 (Doxogr. Gr.2 559): ούτος άρχήν έφη των δντων φύσιν τινά του άπειρου, έξ ής γίνεσθαι τούς ούρανούς καΐ τούς έν αύτοΐς κόσμους; Cyril. Alex. C. Iulian. 1 (Pair. Gr. 76, 545a-b): 'Αναξίμανδρος θεόν διορίζεται είναι τούς άπείρους κόσμους; Theodoret, Gr. Ä f f . 2, 9; Aug. C.D. 8, 2: quae rerum principia singularum esse credidit infinita, et innumerabiles mundos gfgnere et quaecumque in eis oriuntur ; eosque mundos modo dissolvi, modo iterum gigni existimavit ... nec ipse aliquid divinae menti in his rerum operibus tribuens\ Simplic. in Phys. 1, 2, p. 24, 13-18 Diels; 3, 4, p. 452, 30-31; p. 458, 25; De Cael. p. 615, 13 (no. 2, 17)—all important but too long to quote here; Cedren. p. 157 P. (Corp. Script. Hist. Byz. 33, 276). F. M. Cornford (CI. Quart. 28 (1934), 1-16) points out that it is improbable that Anaximander in the middle of the sixth century stated a doctrine of innumerable worlds which does not reappear till the latter half of the fifth century, and which would not be suggested by a view of nature, but only by a priori argument, as by the atomists, and he thinks (p. 11) that Cicero's source misunderstood άπείρους ούρανούς (or κόσμους) of coexistent worlds in the Epicurean sense; yet cf. R. Mondolfo, L'infinito nel pensiero dei Greci (1934), 138. longis intervallis: διαστήμασιν; cf. T. L. Heath, Aristarchus of Samos (1913), 28, who thinks them intervals of space rather than of time, while the opposite

209 innumerabilis esse mundos.1 26 Sed nos deum nisi sempiternum intellegere qui 2 possumus? Post 3 Anaximenes aera deum 1

mundus H2

2

quid D

3

sed post O

is maintained by E. Pfeiffer, Stud, z- ant. 19-20 Diels; Suid. s.v. Άναξιμένης), Sternglauben (ΣΤΟΙΧΕΙΑ, 2 (1916), 84), flourished ca. 546 and died ca. 528-524 in his account of Anaximander's cosB.C. (E. Wellmann in P.-W. 1 (1894), mology; but cf. Cornford, op. cit., 12 2086; Eus. and Hier. Chron. place his (against J. Burnet). M. L. Earle's emen- floruit ca. 560; cf. Suid. I.e.). Keeping dation (CI. Papers (1912), 204) deos Anaximander's idea of the infinite, he eosque innumerabilis esse mundos longis inapplied it more specifically to the element tervallis orientis occidentisque is unnecessary. of air, boundless and ever in motion; Cf. also 1, 29, n. (nasci et extinguí). cf. Ac. 2, 118: Anaximenes infinitum aera, orientis occidentisque: E. Rohde sed ea quae ex ea orerentur definita; gigni autem terram, aquam, ignem, tum ex his (Psyche, 2 2 (1907), 187, η. 2) observes omnia·, also [Aristot.] De Meliss. 2, that both Anaximander and Anaximenes 975 b 24; Aët. Ρlac. 1, 3, 4: Άναξιμένης admitted the perishability of the gods δέ ό Μιλήσιος άρχήν των δντων άέρα but not of το θείον; most philosophers, άπεφήνατο, έκ γάρ τούτου πάντα γ£νεhowever, demanded, as did the Epicureσθαι καί εις αυτόν πάλιν άναλύεσθαι (cf. ans (1, 45), that the gods should be Justin, Cohort, ad Gr. 3); 1, 7, 13; Plut. eternal; cf. Suid. s.v. άνάγκη: ομοίως Strom, ap. Eus. Pr. Ev. 1, 8, 3 ( = άναγκαΐον και τό τόν θεόν άφθαρτον είDoxogr. Gr.2 579-580): Άναξιμένην δέ ναι. If the gods were thought of by Velleiφασι την των όλων άρχήν τον άέρα ειπείν, us as identified with heavenly bodies or καί τούτον είναι τω μέν γένει άπειρον, systems, these participles, of course, ταϊς δέ περί αυτόν ποιότησιν ώρισμέwould have especial fitness. νον, κτλ. [cf. Eus. Pr. Εν. 7,12,1] ; Diog. innumerabilis . . . mundos: whether Oenoand. p. 10 W. ; Galen, In Hipp, de there existed one or many universes was a typical subject for learned discussion; Nat. Horn. 1 (XV, 25 Κ.);2 [Galen,] Hist. cf. 1, 53, n. (innumerabiles ... mundos), Philos. 18 (Doxogr. Gr. 610 = XIX, below. On Anaximander as the first to 243 Κ.); Diog. L. 2, 3: ούτος άρχήν άέρα είπεν καί τό άπειρον; Clem. Protr. use κόσμος of the entire universe cf. W. 5, 64, 2: καί Άναξιμένης ό καί αύτός Kranz in Philologus, 93 (1938), 433-435. sempiternum: cf. n. on qualia, etc., Μιλήσιος τόν άέρα, φ Διογένης ό Άπολλωνιάτης κατηκολούθησεν ; Tert. Adv. above; also 1, 45. Marc. 1, 13; Hippol. Philosophum. 1, 7 intellegere: cf. 1, 27: intellegentiae. 2 A. J. Festugière, La Révélation d'Hermès (Doxogr. Gr. 560): Άναξιμένης δέ καί αύτός ών Μιλήσιος, υιός δ' ΕύρυστράTrism. 2 (1949), 366, n. 1 (after A. του, άέρα άπειρον £φη τήν άρχήν είναι, Lörcher in Burs. Jabresb. 162 (1913), έξ οδ τά γινόμενα καί τά γεγονότα καί 28-29) remarks that the historical réτά έσόμενα καί θεούς καί θεία γίνεσθαι, sumé of Sext. Emp. Adv. Phys. 1, 12, al. is set by the problem of the knowledge τά δέ λοιπά έκ των τούτου άπογόνων [followed by Cedren. p. 158 P., in Corp. of God (πώς ευθύς ίννοιαν έλάβομεν Script. Hist. Byz- 33, 277]; Hermias, θεοϋ . . . πώς νόησιν θεών ϊσχον άνθρωIrrisio, 1 (Doxogr. Gr.2 653); Min. Fei. ποι), and thinks that here, as at 1, 57 19, 5: Anaximenes deinceps et post Apollobelow, Cicero, like Philodemus, emniates Diogenes aera deum statuunt infinitum ployed Clitomachus as a source. 26 Anaximenes: of Miletus, the et inmensum ; horum quoque similis de divinitate consensio est; Chalcid. in Tim. 323 hearer and successor of Anaximander (Fr. Philos. Gr. 2, 249); Lact. Inst. 1, 5, (Ac. 2, 118; Plin. N.H. 2, 187; Diog. L. 19: Cleanthes et Anaximenes aethera esse 2, 3; Aug. C.D. 8, 2; Theodoret, Gr. A f f . 2, 9; Simplic. in Phys. 1, 2, p. 41, dicunt summum deum·, Alex. Aphrod. in

14

210

statuii, eumque gigni esseque inmensum et infinitum et semper in motu; quasi aut aer sine ulla forma 1 deus esse possit, cum 1

forma] fortuna add. O

Metaph. 1, 3, p. 26, 22 Hayduck; p. 27, 6-7; 1, 5, p. 45,16-18; 2, 4, p. 224,12; 9, 2, p. 612, 15; Themist. in De An. 1, p. 8, 23-24 Heinze; Asclep. in Metaph. p. 25, 19 Hayduck; p. 54, 1; p. 58, 26; p. 148, 20; p. 204, 14; Olympiod. De Arte sacr. Lapid. Philos. 25 ( Vorsokrat. no. 3 Β 3 Diels): μίαν 8έ κινουμένην άπειρον άρχήν πάντων των βντων δοξάζει Άναξιμένης τόν άέρα; Nemes. De Nat. Horn. 5, 45; Prob, in Eel. 6, 31, p. 344 Hägen; Aug. C.D. 8, 2: iste Anaximenem discipulum et successorem reliquit, qui omnes rerum causas aeri infinito dédit, nec deos negavit aut tacuit; non tamen ab ipsis aerem factum sed ipsos ex aere ortos credidit·, Ep. 118, 23 [with extended reminiscences of our passage; cf. Κ. Svoboda in Op. Fac. philos. Univ. Masaryk Brunensis, 35 (1933), 144] : utrum refellendi causa ... Anaximeni Cicero obiecerit formam et pulchritudinem deum habere oportere ... verissime dixerit quod deum pulcherrima specie deceat esse ... ait ille gigni aerem quem tamen deum esse censebat ... cum autem dicitur aer esse semper in motu·, Theodoret, Gr. A f f . 2, 9: Άναξιμένης . . . και Διογένης ό Άπολλωνιάτης τον άέρα συμφώνως άρχήν προσηγορευσάτην ; Simplic. in Phys. 1, 4, p. 149, 7-8 Diels; p. 149, 30; p. 151, 20-21; 1, 6, p. 203, 2 ; 2, 1, p. 274, 23 ; 3, 4, p. 452, 30-31; 458, 25. Other allusions to air as a god, without mention of Anaximenes, are found in Philemon, 91, 4 (2, 505 Kock); Enn. Epicharmus, 54-58 Vahlen ; Lucr. 1, 707-708; Filastr. Haeres. 70 (C.S.E.L. 38, 57-58). For the source of our passage cf. Philod. De Piet. p. 65 Gomperz {Doxogr. Gr.2 531-532): οϊετθήσεως τά γενόμ γινόμενα καί, καί . . . ; or, as R. Philippson {Symb. Osloenses, 19(1939), 30—replacing an earlier restoration by him in Hermes, 55 (1920), 366—restores: ώς

θεωρεί τς [Anaximenes's air] έστερημθήσεως πάντα τά γενόμ γινόμενα καί όμενα καί . On the theology of Anaximenes cf. Pfeiffer, op. cit., 41-43. The word aer Ennius {Ann. 148; cf. Epicharm. 54-55) finds it necessary to explain, but by Cicero's time its use in Latin is common. eumque gigni: this statement that air had a beginning in time seems in conflict with other reports of the views of Anaximenes, and Diels (Doxogr. Gr,2 123) thinks that Cicero, quae ipse melius sciebat, simulata ignoratione ea Velleium falso explicantem induxit·, A. B. Krische, Die theol. Lehren d. gr. Denker (1840), 55, that there was a confusion between the divine air and the subordinate gods produced from it ; Mayor {ad loc.) that the difficulty is due to "a misunderstanding of the Greek άήρ πάντα γίγνεται, "passes into all forms;" T. Birt {Beri, philol. Woch. 38 (1918), 571) suggests that in the source of Hippol. Philosophum. 1, 7 (quoted above) Cicero had wrongly construed γίγνεσθαι as the predicate of άέρα. Birt also suggests that Cicero may have written not eumque gigni but deumque gigni (θεούς καί θεία γίνεσθαι), yet the repetition of deum after such a short interval would seem rather harsh. In any case, the error is most probably due to Cicero's hasty composition. inmensum et infinitum: coupled in 2, 15; Div. 2, 91; cf. also 1, 54: inmensam et interminatam. The two words are not precisely synonymous, since one means "unmeasured," the other (and stronger) "without end." [Plat.] Sisyph. p. 389a says: ούκοϋν καί περί τοϋ άέρος Ά ν α ξαγόραν τε καί Έμπεδοκλέα καί τους άλλους τούς μεταρσιολέσχας άπαντας οίσθα ζητοϋντας πότερον άπειρος έστιν ή πέρας έχων; semper in motu: cf. Tuse. 1, 53: ex

211

praesertim deum non modo aliqua sed pulcherrima specie deceat esse, aut non omne quod ortum sit mortalitas1 consequatur. 11 Inde Anaxagoras, qui accepit ab Anaximene disciplinam, 1

mortalis A1

quo ilia ratio nata est Platonis, quae a Socrate est in Phaedro [245c-246a] explicata, a me autem posita est in sexto libro de república [6, 27]: "quod semper movetur aeternum est, etc." Mayor compares Simplic. in Pbys. 1, 2, pp. 24, 31-25, 1 Diels: κίνησιν δέ καΐ οδτος άΐδιον ποιεί δι' ήν καί την μεταβολήν γίνεσθαι. quasi: sarcastic, as in 3, 86; Div. 2,45; 2, 46; 2, 48; 2, 56; 2, 59; 2, 81; 2 Verr. 5, 169; Pro Plane. 62; H. C. Nutting in Univ. of Calif. Pubi, in el. Philol. 5 (1922), 217. cum praesertim: cf. 2, 88: praesertim cum. Mayor points out the logical ellipsis in the preceding clause: "as if we could possibly believe air to be a god." For what follows cf. Aug. 1Bp. 118, 23 (quoted above in note on Anaximenes). mortalitas: in Cicero used only here. For the thought cf. 1, 20, n. (ortum ... aeternum). Anaxagoras : cf. Clazomenae, pupil of Anaximenes (Strab. 14, 1, 36; Harpocr. s.v. 'Αναξαγόρας; [Galen,] Hist. Phil. 3 (.Doxogr. Gr? 599 = XIX, 225 Κ.); Diog. L. 2, 6; Hippol. Philosophum. 1, 8,1 {Doxogr. Gr.2 561); Clem. Strom. 1, 14, 63, 2; Aug. C.D. 8, 2; Simplic. Phys. 1, 2, p. 27, 1-2 Diels (Doxogr. Gr.» 478)), the last great philosopher of the Ionic school, a friend of Pericles (cf. Brut. 44) and Euripides, was forced to leave Athens on the charge of atheism (Diod. 12, 39, 2; Joseph. C. Ap. 2, 265; Plut. Nie. 23, 3; Quomodo quis suos, 15; De Superstit. 10; Diog. L. 2, 12; 2, 15; Lucían, Timon. 10; Aug. C.D. 18, 41; Olympiod. in Meteor. 1, 3, p. 17, 19-23 Stüve ( Vorsokrat. 46 A 19); Anth. Pal. 7, 95, 1-4; Suid. s.v.'Αναξαγόρας; A. B. Drachmann, Atheism in pagan Antiq. (1922), 155; W. Jaeger, Paideia 1 (Engl, tr. 1939), 336; F. Solmsen, Plato's Theology (1942), 37, n. 29. L. R. Farnell, Higher Aspects of Gr. Relig. (1912),

121, calls this the isolated case in Greek history of the persecution of science. Iren. C. Haeres. 2 , 1 4 , 2 says Anaxagoras was called the atheist. In his exile he went to Lampsacus, where he died ca. 428 B.C. (E. Wellmann in P.-W. 1 (1894), 2076). To mere matter, as postulated by his predecessors, he added a second, spiritual, principle, νους, as the cause of order in the universe, and thus he became the founder of a philosophic dualism later developed by Plato and Aristotle. From his insistence on the importance in the world of a directive intelligence he was himself nicknamed Νοϋς; cf. Plut. Perici. 4, 4: 'Αναξαγόρας . . . ό Κλαζομένιος, δν οί τότ' άνθρωποι Νουν προσηγόρευον, εϊτε τήν σύνεσιν αύτοϋ μεγάλην εις φυσιολογίαν καί περιττήν διαφανεϊσαν θαυμάσαντες, εΐ'θ' 8τι τοις δλοις πρώτος ού τύχη ν ούδ' άνάγκην διακοσμήσεως άρχήν, άλλά νοϋν επέστησε καθ αρά ν καί ιίκρατον έν μεμιγμένοις πασι τοις άλλοις, άποκρίνοντα τάς όμοιομερείας; Harpocr. s.v. 'Αναξαγόρας· Νοϋς δ' έπεκαλεϊτο, έπεί ΰλην τε καί νοϋν πάντων φρουρόν είπεν; Diog. L. 2, 6 [quoting Timon]: κα£ που Άναξαγόρην φάσ' έμμεναι, άλκιμον ήρω, / Νοϋν, ότι δή νόος αύτω, δς έξαπίνης έπεγείρας / πάντα συνεσφήκωσεν όμοΰ τεταραγμένα πρόσθεν; Ael. V.H. 8, 19: δτι καί βωμός αύτω ϊσταται καί έπιγέγραπται ot μέν Νοΰ οί δέ 'Αληθείας; Schol. Plat. Alcib. 118c; Cedren. p. 158 P. {Corp. Script. Hist. Byz- 33, 278); Suid. I.e. In De Or. 3,138, he is highly praised: non declamator aliqui ... sed, ut accepimus, Cla^pmenius Ule Anaxagoras vir summus in maximarum rerum scientia. a c c e p i t . . . disciplinam: cf. Div. 2,9 : ab haruspicibus accipiunt earum tractationem\ De Or. 1, 114: qui haec put et arte acci pi posse. J. Burnet (Early Gr. Philos.2 (1920), 253, n. 1) compares διήκουσε, but observes that Anaximenes probably

212

primus omnium rerum discriptionem1 et modum2 mentis infinitae 1

descriptionem NO, Aug. Ep. 118, 24, discreptionem H

died before the birth of Anaxagoras, who would, in that case, have continued the tradition of his school. primus: consistent with the best evidence, yet in contradiction, as Mayor observes, to what Velleius has in 1, 25 said of Thaïes. Omnium probably modifies rerum rather than being connected with primus, and omnium rerum refers to the universe. discriptionem: NO read descriptionem·, Min. Fei. 19, 6: Anaxagorae vero descriptio et motus [so Meursius and Rigaltius; metus P, modus ed. princ.] infinitae mentis deus dici tur; Aug. Ep. 118, 24 : manifestum est enim omnium rerum descriptionem et modum ab illa fieri eamque non incongrue dici infinitam. But discriptio better agrees with the idea of distribution or arrangement (διακόσμησις, or, as Goethe thinks, διάταξις, comparing 1, 92; 2, 110; 2, 115 infra); cf. F. Bücheler in Rhein. Mus. 13 (1858), 599-600). See also Philod. De Piet. p. 66 Gomperz {Doxogr. Gr.2 532): καΐ ϋν όίπειρα 8ντα τά μείγμ[εν]ατα σύμπαντα διακόσμ η σ α ν . This doctrine was expressed at the beginning of Anaxagoras's Περί φύσεως, as quoted by Diog. L. 2, 6: πάντα χρήματα ήν όμοϋ. είτα νους έλθών αύτά διεκόσμησεν [cf. Sext. Emp. Adv. Phys. 1, 6], For other expressions of this view cf. Plat. Phaedo, 97b-c: άλλ* άκούσας μέν ποτε έκ βιβλίου τινός, ώς £ μεσαίτατον πασών περί δ πάλιν πυρώδης· των δέ συμμιγών τήν μεσαιτάτην άπάσαις τοκέα πάσης κινήσεως καί γενέσεως ΰπάρχειν, ήντινα και δαίμονα κυβερνήτιν καί κληδοϋχον έπονομάζει δίκην τε καί άνάγκην [Η. Richardson, in Cl. Quart. 20 (1926), 125, thinks this quite consistent with Vorsokrat. no. 18 Β 10, 6-7 and with the view of άνάγκη ascribed by Aët. Ρlac. 1, 25, 2, to Pythagoras]; [Galen,] Hist. Phil. 50 {Doxogr. Gr 2 622 = XIX, 267 Κ.): Παρμενίδης στεφάνους είναι πεπλεγμένους πρός άλλήλους τόν μέν έκ του άραιοΰ τον δέ έκ του πυκνοϋ· καί τό περιέχον δέ τό παν στοιχεϊον δίκην στεφάνου στερεού είναι, πρώτον πυρ, είτα αιθέρα, μεθ' δν άέρα, μεθ' δν ΰδωρ. Cf. Η. Diels, Parmenides (1897), 104-105, who discusses the two types of στεφάναι in the cosmos: (1) those of pure elements of fire and earth; (2) between the centre and the circumference a second zone with strata not separated but mixed, where are the sun, moon, and planets. T. Heath, Aristarehus of Samos (1913), who thinks (p. 66) these "wreaths" are borrowed from Anaximander's "hoops," discusses (68-69) their shape, and suggests that they are "not cylinders, but zones of a sphere bisected by a great circle parallel to the bounding circles." As Mayor observes, Cicero seems mistaken in making Parmenides ascribe divinity to the orbem qui cingit caelum·, it is rather the innermost fiery circle around the globe of the earth which is divine.

223 [lucis]1 orbem, qui cingit caelum, quem appellai deum; in quo ñeque figuram divinam neque sensum quisquam suspicari potest. Multaque eiusdem monstra, quippe qui bellum, qui discordiam, qui cupiditatem, ceteraque generis eiusdem 2 ad deum revocai,3 1

lucis delevi

2

eius D1

3

revocai codd. (Ρ evanidum), reuocet Orelli

στεφάνην: cf. H. J. Rose in Journ. of Hellen. Stud. 41 (1921), 110, for the use of the Greek term; also W. Nieschmidt, Quatenus in Scriptura Romani Litteris Graecis usi sint (1913), 40-42. ardorum [lucis] orbem: ardorum is the reading of-S 1 , ardoremof ACNB2. Davies emended to continente ardore lucis orbem, in which he has been followed by various editors, including Diels in Doxogr. Gr.3 534 and Mayor, though in CI. Rev. 3 (1889), 163, Mayor agrees with H. Deiter (Rhein. Mus. 37 (1882), 314) and Goethe in reading continentem ardorum lucis orbem, which is also the reading of Plasberg and of Ax, and translates "an unbroken ring of shining flames." Rackham renders : "an unbroken ring of glowing lights." That ardor may be used with little or no implication of heat and chief emphasis upon light would appear from Div. 1, 18: concursusque gravis stellarum ardore micantii ... claro trémulos ardore cometas·, In Catti. 3, 18: faces ardoremque caeli·, Catull. 62, 29; for other cases cf. Ties. Ling. Lat. 2 (1900), 490, 18-22; id. 482,87-483,48 for corresponding uses of ardere. But since this meaning of light without heat is a secondary and much less frequent use than that which involves heat or even combustion, it seems likely that Cicero wrote merely continentem ardorum orbem, and that lucis is a gloss to explain in what sense ardorum is used. I have therefore bracketed lucis, rather than accepting Plasberg's suggestion (ed. maior.) of ardorum lucis (which involves an awkward shift from the plural to the singular), or Diels's view (Doxogr. Gr,2 534) that orbem qui cingit caelum is interpolated from 2, 101 (although not there so phrased). With the thought R. Mondolfo, Uinfinito nel pensiero dei Greci

(1934), 218; 261, compares the notion of a θείον περιέχον. cingit: there is no need to assume oratio obliqua and change to cingat, with Ernesti and others. quem appellat deum: a view not otherwise attested for Parmenides, and, as Schoemann suggests, perhaps confused with the Stoic theories set forth in 1, 37. neque sensum: R. Philippson (Symb. Osloenses, 19 (1939), 30) would equate with this the words εόν ίίψυχον ποκε>ϊν in Philod. De Piet. p. 68 Gomperz (see note on Parmenides, above). eiusdem: referring to Parmenides; cf. the use of idem for the authors of views in 1, 29; 1, 30; 1, 36; 1, 38 (eiusdem Zenonis) ; 1, 40. The term emphasizes more strikingly the inconsistency of different tenets held by the same philosopher. The emendation by Heindorf of eiusdem , though accepted by Diels (Doxogr. Gr.2 534), is needless and makes awkward the following quippe qui. Moreover, bellum, discordia, and cupiditas, though of the same class (eiusdem generis) with one another, are not in the same category as the corona described above. monstra: cf. Philod. De Piet. p. 147 Gomperz: ί δέ μύθους μέν είσήγον άμέλει καΐ τερατείας. For this use of monstra cf. 3, 44; also 1, 18, n. (portento et miracula). bellum . . . discordiam . . . cupiditatem: Πόλεμος . .'. Νεϊκος . . . "Ερως, referred to in Philodemus, I.e., as τά μέν αύτά τοις πάθεσιν τοις περί &νθρω. It is tempting to ascribe these views to Empedocles, who is next mentioned in our passage and whose well-known antithesis of Νεικος and Φιλία (or Φιλότης) as describing forces of repulsion

224 quae vel morbo vel somno vel oblivione vel vetustate delentur; eademque de 1 sideribus, quae reprehensa in alio 2 iam in hoc omittantur.3 12 29 Empedocles autem multa alia peccans in 1 de om. F, e {del.) M tantur OB1

2

alia Ν

and attraction (cf. Vorsokrat. no. 21 Β 16-22; 26-27; 30; 35-36) might seem to suggest these words. Yet Empedocles may have borrowed the idea from Parmenides, whom he had heard (Suid. s.v. Εμπεδοκλής) and emulated (Simplic. Phys. 1, 2, p. 25, 20 Diels = Vorsokrat. no. 21 A 7). And for this doctrine in Parmenides cf. Aristot. Metaph. 1, 4, 984 b 23-27: ύποπτεύσειε δ' άν τις Ήσίοδον πρώτον ζητησαι τό τοιούτον, καν ει τις άλλος έρωτα ή έπιθυμίαν έν τοις οδσιν ϊθηκεν ώς άρχήν, οίον καΐ Παρμενίδης · οδτος γάρ κατασκευάζων τήν τοϋ παντός γένεσιν, "πρώτιστον μέν," φησιν, "έρωτα θεών μητίσατο πάντων" (= Vorsokrat. no. 18 Β 13; also ascribed to Parmenides by Plut. Amat. 13, 756 f; Sext. Emp. Adv. Phys. 1, 9; Asclep. Metaph. p. 29, 12-14 Hayduck; Simplic. Phys. 1, 2, p. 39, 18 Diels); Cramer, Anecd. Paris. 1, 388: Παρμενίδης γάρ φησι τόν έρωτα τόν θείον δημιουργήσαι τό παν. That Parmenides in this matter imitates Hesiod's Theogony is shown by W. Jaeger, Theol. of the early Gr. Philosophers (1947), 93. ceteraque: Mayor suggests δίκη and άνάγκη, found in passages from Aëtius quoted in the note on coronae similem, above. revocat: so ACNB (P is here illegible), kept by Plasberg in both his editions, but corrected to the more normal revocet by Orelli and most editors, including Mayor, Diels, and Ax.Quippe qui with the indicative occurs in Plautus, Lucretius, Sallust, Nepos, frequently in Livy, and occasionally elsewhere in the Empire, but in Cicero only here (R. KühnerC. Stegmann, Ausf. Gram. d. lat. Spr. 2 2 (1914), 294). The ms evidence, however, and the principle of the lectio difficilior favor retaining the indicative, and Cicero has as much right as other writers to

3

omitantur Bi, omittatur P 1 , comi-

occasional άπαξ λεγόμενα; cf. W. G. Hale, Die Cum-Konstruktionen (1891), 133-134, and n. 1. With the phrase ad ... revocat cf. 1, 119; Div. 2, 66; Fin. 2, 43; O f f . 3, 84; De Domo, 15. vel . . . vel: with the fourfold repetition cf. 1, 24; 3, 34; and four other cases in the philosophical works; H. Merguet, Lex. ç. d. philos. Sehr. 3 (1894), 738. In Rep. 1, 6, there is an eightfold occurrence of this conjunction. eademque: sc. dicit; cf. 1, 17, n. {verum hoc alias). The identity would seem to mean that rìderà ad deum revocat, though we have no other indication that he did so. in alio: Alcmeaon (1, 27). 29 Empedocles: of Acragas (Lucr. 1, 716; Aët. Ρlac. 1, 3, 20 {Doxogr. Gr? 286); Plut. Strom, ap. Eus. Pr. Ev. 1, 8, 10; Gell. 17, 21, 14; Diog. L. 8, 51; 8, 54; 8, 62-63; 8, 67; 8, 72; Ael. V.H. 12, 32; Athen. 1, 3e; Clem. Strom. 6, 3, 30, 1; Iambi. Vit. Pyth. 135; Simplic. Phys. 1, 2, p. 25, 19 Diels {Doxogr. Gr,2 477); Suid. s.v. Εμπεδοκλής), often called ó φυσικός (e.g., De Or. 1, 217: Empedocles physicus·, Lydus, De Mens. 1, 34; Suid. I.e.), was a pupil of Pythagoras, Anaxagoras, or Parmenides (Diog. L. 8, 54-56; Simplic. I.e.; Suid. I.e.). For conflicting evidence for his date cf. E. Wellmann in P.-W. 5 (1905), 2507, 56-2508, 16, who decides on ca. 494-434 B.C. On his traditional death in the crater of Etna cf. A. S. Pease in Harv. Stud, in cl. Philol. 53 (1942), 19-20, and nn. 147-155. Of his works that which chiefly here concerns us is the two-book poem περί φύσεως the fragments of which, amounting to over 150 lines—Wellmann, op. cit. 2508, 56, for some reason estimates ca. 340— are collected in Vorsokrat. no. 18 Β 1-19.

225

deorum opinione turpissime labitur. Quattuor enim naturas, ex The accusation of teaching atheism, made against him by Theophil. Ad Autol. 3, 2, seems unfounded. alia peccane: perhaps teferting to his famous doctrine of the conflicting forces of attraction and repulsion ("Ερως or Φιλότης and Νεΐκος), to which several of his fragments (16-22; 26-27; 30; 35-36 Diels) and various testimonia allude; e.g., Sext. Emp. Adv. Phys. 1, 10: σύν γάρ τοις τέσσαρσι στοιχείοις τό Νεΐκος καΐ την Φιλίαν καταριθμείται, την μέν Φιλίαν ώς συναγωγόν αίτίαν, τό δέ Νεΐκος ώς διαλυτικήν; Diog. L. 8, 76: έδόκει δ' αύτω τάδε • στοιχεία μέν είναι τέτταρα, πϋρ, ΰδωρ, γήν, άέρα· φιλίαν θ' fi συγκρίνεται καΐ Νεΐκος ω διακρίνεται; Hippol. Philosophum. 1, 3, 1. For the possible relation of that doctrine to the teaching of Parmenides cf. 1,28, n. (bellum ... discordiam ... cupiditatem), above. deorum opinione: cf. below, opinionem eius\ Div. 2, 75: divinationis opinione·, 2 Verr. 3, 121 : coniecturam totius provinciae\ Pro Caecin. 9: iuris dubitatio. But in 3, 11, below: opinio de dis. labitur: cf. O f f . 1, 18: labi ... errare, nescire, deci pi·, 1, 94: falli, errare, labi, deeipi·, also the use of peccat in 1, 31. quattuor . . . naturas : naturae here = ούσίαι; or στοιχεία; cf. 1, 19, n. {illae quinqué formae)·, 1, 22, n. (naturae); Ac. 1, 26; 1, 40; 1, 42. From the single element postulated by some Ionian philosophers (1, 25-26, above; [Galen,] Hist. Philos. 18 (Doxogr. Gr.* 610 = XIX, 243 Κ.)), or the two elements of Xenophanes, Hippo, and Oenopides ([Galen,] I.e. and Alcmaeon {Isocr. Antid. 268)), to the three of Ion (Isocr. I.e. ; Philop. De Gen. etCorr. p. 207, 18 Vitelli), Heraclitus, and Onomacritus ([Galen,] I.e.), we pass to four (earth, water, air, and fire) in Empedocles; cf. W. Jaeger, Theol. of the early Gr. Philosophers (1947), 137-143. W. A. Heidel (.Am.fourn. Philol. 61 (1940), 2) observes that Diog. L. 8, 19, is incorrect in ascribing four to Xenophanes. The article of R. Lenoir in Rev. des ét. gr. 40 (1927), 17-50 on the doctrine of the four ele-

ments and Ionian philosophy appears somewhat superficial). Vitruv. 2, 2, 1; 8, praef. 1; Diog. L. 8, 25; and Hippol. Philosophum. 6, 18, claim four for Pythagoras, and Clem. Strom. 6, 2, 17, 3-4, says that Athamas the Pythagorean was in this doctrine imitated by Empedocles. On the four elements in Egypt cf. R. Lepsius in Abh. d. k. Akad. d. Wiss. Berlin, Phil.-hist. Kl. 1856, 181-234. The Hindus recognized five elements (O. Böhtlingk in Ber. sächs. Ges. d. Wiss., phil.-hist. Kl. 52 (1900), 149-151; yet for a four-fold Hindu classification cf. W. Kranz in Philol. 93 (1939), 443444), and among the Greeks a fifth, ether, was added by Aristotle; cf. [De Mundo}, 2, 392 a 8-9; 3, 392 b 35; Cic. Tusc. 1, 22; 1, 65; Galen, Introd. 9 (XIV,, 698 K.); also [Plat.] Epinom. 981 b-c; Plut. De E ap. Delpb. 11; [Clem.] Recogn. 8, 15; Orig. C. Cels. 4, 56; De Princ. 3, 6, 6; Achill. I sag. 3, p. 31 Maass; Philostr. Vit. Apoll. 3, 34; Theodoret, Gr. Ä f f . 4, 11; 5, 21; Simplic. in Phys. 8, 1, p. 1164, 14-15 Diels; Stob. vol. 1, p. 18 Wachs.; Olympiod. in Meteor. 1, 1, p. 2, 13-21; 1, 1, p. 14, 25-28 Stüve; W. Jaeger, Aristoteles (1923), 142, who thinks this was discussed as early as the De Philosopha. Beyond these in number lie the homoeomeriae of Anaxagoras and the limitless atoms of the atomists. For the four elements of Empedocles {haec pervolgata et nota quattuor, as Cic. Ac. 2, 118, calls them), cf. fr. 6 Diels (Vorsokr. no. 21 Β 6, ap. Aët. Plac. 1,3,20 = Doxogr. Gr.1286-287 ; Hippol. Philosophum. 10, 3; Prob, in Eel. 6, 31): τέσσαρα γάρ πάντων Ριζώματα πρώτον άκουε· / Ζεύς άργής "Ηρη τε φερέσβιος ήδ' Άιδωνεύς / Νήστίς θ', ή δακρύοις τέγγει κρούνωμα βρότειον; Isocr. Antid. 268: 'Εμπεδοκλής δέ τέτταρα, καΐ Νεΐκος καΐ Φιλίαν έν αύτοΐς; Aristot. Top. 1, 14, 105 b 16-17; Phys. 1, 4, 187 a 27; De Gen. et Corr. 1, 1, 314 a 16; 28-29 ; 2, 3, 330 a 30; b 19-21; De An. 1, 2, 404b 11-15; Metaph. 1, 3, 984a 8-9; 1, 4, 985 a 32; 1, 7, 988 a 27-28; Lucr. 1, 714-716 ; Aët. Plac. 1,3,20 (see above) ;

15

226 quibus omnia constare censet,1 divinas esse vult; quas et nasci et extinguí 2 perspicuum est et sensu omni 3 carere. Nec vero 1

cesset Β1

2

quas nasci extinguique H

1, 7, 28 {Doxogr. Gr.2 303—the name of Empedocles has dropped out); 1, 13, 1 (Doxogr. Gr.2 312); 2, 6, 3 (Doxogr. Gr. 2 334); 5, 22, 1 {Doxogr. Gr. 2 434); Plut. Quomodo Adulât. 22; Strom. 10, ap. Eus. Pr. Ev. (Doxogr. Gr. 2 582); Heraclit. Quaest. Horn. 24; Galen, De Sübst. Fac. natural. (IV, 762 Κ.); De Constit. Art. med. 7 (I, 248 Κ.); 8 (I, 253 Κ.): 'έατι δέ ταϋτα γη καί ΰδωρ καί άήρ καΐ πυρ, απερ άπαντες οί μη φεύγοντες άπόδειξιν φιλόσοφοι στοιχεία των γεννωμένων τε καί φθειρομένων έφασαν είναι; In Hipp. De Nat. Horn. 1, 2 (XV, 32 Κ.); [Galen,] Hist. Phil. 126 (Doxogr. Gr. 2 645 = XIX, 337 Κ.); Diog. Oenoand. p. 10 W.; Sext. Emp. Adv. Phys. 1, 10; Diog. L. 8, 76 (these two quoted on alia peccans, above) ; Justin, Cohort, ad Gr. 4; [Clem.] Recogn. 8, 15; Hippol. Philosophum. 7, 17; Achill, hag. 3, p. 31 Maass; Clem. Protr. 5, 64, 2; Chalcid. in Tim. 216 (Fr. Phil. Gr. 2, 226); 280 (2, 241); Lact. Inst. 2, 12, 4: Empedocles .. . quattuor elementa constituit, tgnem, aerem, aquam, terram, fortasse Trismegistum secutas, qui nostra corpora ex his quattuor elementis constituta esse dixit a deo [cf. Stob. vol. 3, p. 437 Hense] ; Eus. Pr. Ev. 7, 12, 1; Serv. Eel. 6, 31; Alex. Aphrod. in Metaph. 1, 3, p. 27, 11-12 Hayduck; Themist. in Aristot. Phys. 1, p. 13, 23 Schenkl; Theodotet, Gr. A f f . 2, 10; Philop. De Gen. et Corr. p. 207,18 Vitelli; Asclep. in Metaph. p. 25, 21 Hayduck; Simplic. in Phys. 1, 2, p. 25, 20-22; p. 31, 20-21; 1, 8, p. 239, 33-34; et al. Diels. After Empedocles the notion of four elements becomes more or less common property for all philosophers save the atomists, being especially adopted by the Stoics (e.g., 2, 25-27; 2, 66; 3, 30; 3, 34; 3, 65; Fin. 4, 12; S.V.F. 2, nos. 412-438; L. Stein in Beri. Stud. f . cl. Philol. 3, 1 (1886), 29, n. 33), and it becomes associated with the theory of four bodily humors (for which cf. Hippocr. De Nat. Horn. 5

3

omni om. O

(p. 352 Kühn) al. ; Ammon. in Porphyr. Isag. p. 8, 3-4 Busse; in Anal. pr. 1, proem, p. 5, 19 Wallies; Olympiod. in Categ. 7, p. 108, 37-109, 2 Busse; J. van Wageningen in Mnemosyne, 46 (1918), 374-382), etc. ; cf. W. Jaeger, Paideia, 3 (Engl. tr. 1944), 16. omnia constare: cf. Tuse. 1, 42: horum quattuor generum, ex quibus omnia constare diemtur. divinas esse: Empedocles, in his deification of the four elements (unless, as Schoemann suggests, this be mere poetic personification, such as Lucretius uses), called fire Zeus or Hephaestus and water Nestis. Whether Hera = air and Aidoneus = earth (as Theophrastus supposed), or, as Crates of Mallus and others interpreted, Aidoneus = air and Hera = earth, was disputed; cf. Heraclit.Quaest. Horn. 24; Aët. Ρlac. 1, 7, 28 (Doxogr. Gr.2 305); E. Wellmann in P.-W. 5 (1905), 2509-2510. In addition to the elements he deified the two active principles Νεϊκος and Φιλότης = 'Αφροδίτη in fr. 17; 22; 86; 87; cf. Aristot. De Gen. et Corr. 2, 6, 333 b 20-22: θεοί δέ καί ταϋτα), the all-including sphere (Σφαϊρος; fr. 27-28), and Necessity (Ανάγκη). Jewish and Christian writers, of course, later vigorously attack the deification of physical elements; e.g., Philo, De Decaí. 53; Tert. Ad Nat. 2, 3; Adv. Marc. 5, 4; Aristid. Apol. 3-5; Lact. Inst. 2, 5, 4; 2, 6, 2; Ioann. Damasc. Barlaam et Ioasaph, 27. Another, more plausible, explanation (cf. V. E. Alfieri, Gli atomisti (1936), 110, n. 270) is that Cicero (or his source) confused in such cases the by no means synonymous words θείος and θεός. To the four divine elements are related the four forms of divination noted by Varrò ap. Schol. Dan. Aen. 3, 359: geomantis, aeromantis, pyromantis, hydromantis\ cf. Isid. Etym. 8, 9, 13; T. Hopfner in P.-W. 14 (1925), 1265, 63. nasci et extinguí: cf. Aristot. De

227 Protagoras, qui sese negat omnino de deis habere 1 quod liqueat,2 sint, non sint,3 qualesve sint, quicquam videtur 4 de natura 4

1 habere om.1 ACPN uideatur Bx

2

liqueat scire NO, liquea A

Caelo, 2, 3, 286 a 32; 3, 6, 304 b 26; Lucr. 1, 753-758: hue accedit item, quoniam primordia rerum / mollia constituunt, quae nos nativa videmus / esse et mortali cum corpore funditus, utque / debeat ad nilum iam rerum summa revertí / de niloque renata vigescere copia rerum; / quorum utrumque quid a vero iam distet babebis; 1, 782-797; 5, 235-243; Aristid. Apol. 3-5; Hippol. Philosophum. 7, 17. But Empedocles, in opposition to this difficulty, asserts (fr. 8): φύσις ούδενός έστιν απάντων / θνητών, ουδέ τις ούλομένου θανάτοιο τελευτή, / άλλα μόνον μίξις τε διάλλαξίς τε μιγέντων / έστί, φύσις δ* έπί τοις ονομάζεται άνθρώποισιν; cf. fr. 12. Extinguí is here perhaps middle, ~ "go out of existence" ; cf. E. F. Claflin in Am. Journ. Philol. 67 (1946), 217. On the long-lived (δολιχαίωνες) but not immortal gods of Empedocles cf. W. Jaeger, Theol. of the early Gr. Philosophers (1947), 33; 206-207. perspicuum est: a frequent phrase in the philosophical works; e.g., 2, 23; 2, 44; 2, 146; 3, 8; 3, 9; 3, 11. sensu omni carere: and hence are without intelligence or the requisites for happiness. Protagoras: cf. 1, 2, n. {Protagoras)·, 1, 63; 1, 117. sese: since ACPN omit habere, J. Forchhammer (Nordisk tidskr. f . filologi, n.s., 5 (1880), 27) emends to esse; but the reading of Β here seems preferable. Habere literally renders Ιχω in the Greek of several passages quoted in the note on sint non sint, below. liqueat: cf. 1, 117: cui neutrum licuerit; 2, 3: si haberem aliquid quod liqueat·, Div. 1, 6: de quo Panaetio non liquet·, Ac. 2, 94: si habes quod liqueat·, Pro Cluent. 76 [for the legal phrase NON LIQUET] ; also 3, 64, below: habeo ipse quid sentiam. sint non sint: two forms of this famous statement of Protagoras are noted by Diels (Doxogr. Gr.2 535):

3

si sint non sint D1

(1) a shorter form, as in 1, 63, below: de divis neque ut sint neque ut non sint habeo dicere·, 1, 117: Protagoram ... cui neutrum licuerit, nec esse deos nec non esse; also Plat. Theaet. 162d: έρεϊ Πρωταγόρας . . . δημηγορεΐτε συγκαθεζόμενοι, θεούς τε εις τό μέσον άγοντες, οδς έγώ τε του λέγειν καΐ του γράφειν περί αύτών, ως είσίν ή ώς ούκ είσίν, έξαιρώ; Diog. L. 9, 51 : περί μέν θεών ούκ εχω είδέναι οΰθ' ώς είσίν οΰθ' ώς ούκ είσίν; Philostr. Vit. Soph. 1, 10: τό δέ άπορεϊν φάσκειν εί'τε είσΐ θεοί είτε ούκ είσί, δοκεϊ μοι Πρωταγόρας έκ της Περσικής παιδεύσεως παρανομήσαι ; Hesych. ap. Schol. Plat. Rep. 600c: είπε γάρ· περί θεών ούκ έχω είδέναι οΰτε ώς είσιν οΰτε ώς οΰκ είσιν; Theodoret, Gr. Ä f f . 6, 6: φάναι γάρ αύτόν είρήκασιν ούκ είδέναι οΰτε εϊπερ είσί θεοί οΰτε εί παντάπασιν ούκ είσίν; Suid. s.v. Πρωταγόρας· λόγον ποτέ είπεν οΰτως άρξάμενος· περί θεών ούκ έχω είδέναι οΰτε ώς είσίν οΰτε ώς ούκ είσί; and (2) a form expanded, as here, by the phrase qualesve sint or an equivalent, which corresponds to the second part of the Stoic discussion in our work; cf. 2, 3: deinde quales sint. Of this longer form examples are : Timon, Siili, fr. 5, 3-6 (Diels, Poet. Philos. Fr. (1901), 186; from Sext. Emp. Adv. Phys. 1, 57): Ιθελον δέ τέφρην συγγράμματα θειναι, / δττι θεούς κατέγραψ' οΰτ' είδέναι οΰτε δύνασθαι / όπποΐοί τινές είσι καί οΐ τίνες άθρήσασθαι, / πασαν 2χων φυλακήν έπιεικείης [cf. Τ. Gomperz in Wien. Stud. 32 (1910), 4-6, who defends against Diels this phraseology] ; Philodem. De Piet. p. 89 Gomperz (Doxogr. Gr.2 535): ή τούς ιΐίγνωστον τίνες είσί θε λέγτας ή ποϊοί τινές εσιν (the fragment in p. 69 Gomperz, which R. Philippson {Hermes, 55 (1920), 368) thinks refers to Protagoras requires too much emendation for any certainty); Val. Max. 1, 1, ext. 7 : Protagoras philosophus .. . scripserat

228

1,29

deorum suspicari. Quid? Democritus, qui tum 1 imagines eorum1

qui cum Β 2

ignorari an di essent, ac si eisen/ quales esseni non posse sari; Theophil. Ad Autol. 3, 7: Πρωταγόρας ó 'Αβδηρίτης λέγων· εϊτε γάρ είσι θεοί ού δύναμαι περί αύτών λέγειν, οΰτε έποϊοί είσι δηλώσαι· πολλά γάρ έστι τά κωλύοντα; Sext. Emp. Adv. Pbys. 1, 5 6: ó δέ Πρωταγόρας ρητώς που γράψας· περί δέ θεών οΰτε ει είσίν οΰθ' όποιοι τινές είσι δύναμαι λέγειν· πολλά γάρ έστι τά κωλύοντά με; Eus. Pr. Εν. 14, 3, 7: λέγεται γοϋν τοιαδε κεχρήσθαι εισβολή έν τω Περί θεών συγγράμματι [cf. Vorsokrat. no. 74 Β 4] : περί μέν θεών ούκ οίδα οΰθ' ώς είσίν ο(ίθ' ώς ούκ είσίν οΰθ1 όποιοι τίνες ίδέαν [cf. Theodoret, Gr. Ä f f . 2, 113]; 14, 19, 10: περί, μέν οδν θεών ούκ οίδα 00Θ* ώς είσίν οΰθ' όποΐοί τίνες ίδέαν· πολλά γάρ έστι τά κωλύοντά με έκαστον τούτων είδέναι. Diog. Oenoand. p. 19 W. grossly misrepofts the saying: ίφησε γάρ μη είδέναι εί Θεοί είσιν. τούτο δ' έστίν τό αύτό τω λέγειν είδέναι ότι μήείσιν; cf. loan. Chrys. in 1 Cor. Homil. 4, 5 (Patr. Gr. 61, 36): Πρωταγόρας . . . έπειδή έτόλμησεν είπεϊν δτι ούκ οίδα θεούς, ού τήν οίκουμένην περιιώνκαΐ κηρύττων, άλλ' έν μια πόλει περί τών εσχάτων έκινδύνευσε. And Ael. V.H. 2, 31, remarks that barbarians do not inquire περί θεών άρά γέ είσιν ή οΰκ είσιν, καί άρά γε ήμών φροντίζουσιν ή οΰ. The agnostic attitude of Protagoras is not, of course, limited to opinions about the gods, but is explained by his general feeling toward certain and objective truth; cf. Sen. Ep. 88, 43: Protagoras ait de omni re in utramque partem disputari posse ex aequo et de hac ipsa, an omnis res in utramque partem disputabilis sit. Democritus: of Abdera; cf. 1, 120; also Aristot. Meteor. 2, 7, 365 a 18-19; De Gen. An. 4, 1, 764 a 6-7; Laberius ap. Gell. 10, 17, 4; Aët. Ρlac. 1, 3, 16 (ap. Theodoret, Gr. A f f . 4, 9 = Doxogr. Gr.2 285) ; Plut. Strom. 7, ap. Eus. Pr. Ev. 1, 8, 7 (Doxogr. Gr.2 581); Hippol. Pbilosophum. 1, 13 {Doxogr. Gr.2 565);

Ael. V.H. 4, 20; Ptolem. Apparii, p. 13, 19 Wachsmuth 2 ; Diog. L. 9, 34 (who says that some also thought him a native of Miletus); [Lucían,] Maerob. 18 (who says that he died at the age of 104); Censorin. 4, 9; 15, 3; Schol. Juv. 10, 50; Athen. 2, p. 46e; 4, p. 168 b; Epiphan. Adv. Haeres. 3, 2, 9 (Doxogr. Gr.2 590); Cyril. Alex. C. Iulian. 1, p. 13 ( Vorsokrat. 1, no. 55, A 4 = Patr. Gr. 76, 522); Julian, Ep. 69, p. 413 a; [Synes.] Ad Dioscor. ( Vorsokrat. no. 55 Β17) ; Simplic. Pbys. 1, 2, p. 28, 15-16 Diels ( Vorsokrat. no. 55 A 38); Suid. s . w . Δημόκριτος, Διαγόρας, Τηλεκλείδου, "Ιπποκράτης (Hippocrates his pupil). Philostr. Vit. Soph. 10, says that Protagoras was his pupil; cf. [Galen,] Hist. Phil. 3 (Doxogr. Gr.2 601 = XIX, 229 Κ.). His birth is variously placed from 470/469 to 460/ 456 B.C. (cf. E. Wellmann in P.-W. 5 (1905), 135, 49-58). Why Cicero here omits Democritus's older friend (and perhaps fellow-townsman) Leucippus (cf. 1, 66) is discussed by R. Hirzel, Untersuch. ζ· Cic. philos. Sehr. 1 (1877), 184, n. 1, who thinks that Leucippus may have given only an outline of the atomistic system which Democritus more thoroughly developed ; cf. Ac. 2, 118.

Philodem. De Piet. p. 69 Gomperz, which probably parallels our passage, is unfortunately mutilated: ού φαίνεται δ' έμοί Δημόκριτος ώσπερ ϊνιοι τόν—. Some of the views here expressed, however, Cicero reports below in 1, 120; cf. also Min. Fei. 19, 8: Democritus, quamvis atomorum primus inventor, nonne plerumque naturam quae imagines fundat et intellegentiam deum loquitur·, Aug. Ep. 118, 27: Democritus .. . qui deos esse arbitraretur imagines, quae de solidis corporibus fluerent, solidaeque ipsae non essent [cf. 1, 49, below], easque hac atque hac motu proprio circumeundo atque illabendo in ánimos hominum [cf. 1, 105, below] facere ut vis divina cogitetur [cf. 1, 49, below]; cum prefecto illud corpus, unde imago flueret,

229 que circumitus in deorum numero refert, tum illam naturam quae imagines fundat ac mittat, tum sententiam 1 intellegentiamque 1

scientiam O

quanto solidius est, tanto praestantius quoque esse iudicetur. imagines eorumque circumitus: only deteriores read earumque, and Cicero is probably here loosely thinking of the gender of εϊδωλα (cf. Fin. 1, 21 : imagines quae εϊδωλα nominant). Piasberg and Ax compare similar grammatical lapses, e.g., 2, 92: hi tanti ignes ... si mota loco sint [as though he had written sidera]; 2, 128 [where panca refers to fetus] ; Rep. 1, 46: ex tribus isti s modis rerum publìcarum velim scire quod optimum iudices [where quod might refer to a generibus in the writer's mind] 1, 53-54 [where quod resumes formae]·, Att. 9, 7B, 1: epistulam ... ex quibus [where his thought shifts from epistulam to litteras\ ; Luc. 2, 164-167 [where artus probably suggests membra and is taken up by confusa]; C.I.L. VIII, 18214 ( = Dessau 6847): flaminat perpet quod [probably thinking of flamonium]; Plat. Rep. 2, 358c [where δικαιοσύνην (suggesting το δίκαιον) is resumed by αυτό]. It is hardly necessary, with T. Birt (Beri, philo!. Woch. 38 (1918), 573) to insert before imagines. Imagines eorumque circumitus is probably by hendiadys for imagines circumeuntes, perhaps with a somewhat burlesque flavor; cf. Tuse. 1, 42: individuorum corporum . .. concursionem fortuitam. V. E. Alfieri, however (Gli atomisti (1936), 110, η. 268), thinks that circumitus means mere linear outlines without extent; cf. 2, 59: monogrammes deos. On the identification of imagines with deity cf. Sext. Emp. Adv. Phys. 1, 19: Δημόκριτος δέ εϊδωλά τινά φησιν έμπελάζειν τοις άνθρώποις, καΐ τούτων τά μέν είναι δγαθοποιά τά δέ κακοποιά . . . είναι δέ ταϋτα μεγάλα τε καί ύπερφυή, καΐ δύσφθαρτα μέν, ούκ άφθαρτα δέ, προσημαίνειν τε τά μέλλοντα τοις άνθρώποις, θεωρούμενα καί φωνάς άφιέντα. δθεν τούτων αύτών φαντασίαν λαβόντες οί παλαιοί ύπενόη-

σαν είναι θεόν, μηδενός άλλου παρά ταΰτα βντος θεοϋ [τοϋ] άφθαρτον φύσις έχοντος. in deorum numero: Lambinus, followed by later editors, emended numero to numerum\ cf. 1, 34: refert in deos·, Div. 2, 4: in ... numerum referendi. Yet the ms reading seems admissible; cf. Pro Rose. Com. 5: in codice ... relatum·, Catull. 17, 5-6: in palimpsesto relata·, Hygin. Fab. 177: in stellarum numero rettulit·, and with repono in the ablative is more frequent; cf. 1,37; 2,54;3,23; 3, 51. quae imagines fundat: cf. Clem. Strom. 5, 12, 87, 3: καθόλου γοϋν την περί τοϋ θείου ëvvoiav Ξενοκράτης h Καλχηδόνιος ούκ άπελπίζεί και έν τοις άλόγοις ζώοις, Δημόκριτος δέ, καν μη θέλη, ομολογήσει διά τήν άκολουθίαν των δογμάτων· τά γάρ αύτά πεποίηκεν εϊδωλα τοις άνθρώποις προσπίπτοντα καί τοις άλόγοις ζφοις άπί> της θείας ουσίας. Velleius, of course, as an Epicurean, should not object to identifying with deity the source of (at least some of) the imagines (cf. 1, 49), but his criticism here is apparently of the inconsistency of classing as gods both the imagines themselves and also their divine source though perhaps he may not be justified in ascribing to Democritus such an inconsistency. sententiam intellegentiamque: AC PNB read sententiam, some deteriores (and O), followed by some editors, approve scientiam·, Plasberg (ed. maior·, in ed. min. he returns to sententiam) emends to sensum, comparing the combination of sensus and intellegentia in 2, 42 and 2, 43 ; also Aristot. Metaph. 3, 5, 1009 b 13 [of Democritus]: διά τό ύπολαμβάνειν φρόνησιν μέν τήν αϊσθησιν; Aët. Plac. 4, 8, 5 (Doxogr. Gr.a 394): Λεύκιππος Δημόκριτος τάς αισθήσεις καί τάς νοήσεις έτεροιώσεις είναι τοϋ σώματος. One must admit that sententiam appears here in an unusual sense, and that the abstract

230 nostram, nonne i n 1 máximo errore 2 versatur? Cum idem omnino, quia nihil semper suo statu maneat, neget 3 esse quicquam sempiternum, nonne deum omnino ita tollit 4 ut nullam opinionem eius reliquam faciat? Quid? Aer, 5 quo 6 Diogenes 7 Apolloniates 1 in add. H 2 errore om. D 3 negat B1 4 tollat A1, tollit omnino 6 aer] ait(?) D qua nihil semper Ν1, tollit omnino ut nullam opinionem N2 • quo] qui O ' diogenes DF\ diogenis AHPNOBF2M

sententiam intellegentiamque is used for a concrete animum sentìentem et intelligentem, yet perhaps Cicero felt that sententia·. sentio = intelhgentia·. intellego, and it seems here safer to hold to the definite ms tradition, rather than admit emendation. With the thought cf. Aët. Ρlac. 1, 7, 16 (Doxogr. Gr.2 302): Δημόκριτος νουν τον θεόν έν πυρί σφαιροειδεϊ; [Galen,] Hist. Pbil. 35 (Doxogr. Gr.2 618 = XIX, 251 Κ.) : Δημόκριτος δέ νοϋν έν πυρί σφαιροειδεϊ τήν του κόσμου ψυχήν ύπολαμβάνει; Min. Fei. 19, 8: intellegentiam deum loquitur·, V. E. Alfieri, op. cit., 110, n. 270 (after F.. Zeller, Die Philos, d. Gr. I 2 (1919), 1120, n. 7) suggests that Cicero and his Epicurean source perhaps considered among the gods of any philosopher all that he had, even broadly, designated as divine; cf. Vorsokrat. 1, no. 55 Β 112, where Democritus uses the phrase θείου νοϋ. in . . . errore versatur: cf. 1, 2, n. {in summo errore .. . versari) ; 3, 25 ; Ac. 2, 34. omnino: cf. 1, 117. neget: so the mss except Β a , which has negat—a reading adopted by Plasberg. The causal notion here seems to justify the subjunctive. Cf. J. Lebreton, Études sur la langue ... de Cic. (1901), 328. sempiternum: Democritus's gods are of imperishable atoms, but are themselves liable to destruction by the reassortment of those atoms, since he had not, like Epicurus, placed them in intermundia, apart from disintegrating influences ; hence they are, as Sextus Empiricus {Adv. Phys. 1, 19) says, δύσφθαρτα μέν, ούκ άφθαρτα δέ. Diogenes: of Apollonia, probably in Crete (Steph. Byz. p. 106 Meinecke), though Ael. V.H. 2, 31, thinks him a

Phrygian. For his connection with Apollonia cf. Aët. Ρlac. 1, 3, 26 {Doxogr. Gr2 289); Plut. Strom. 12, ap. Eus. Pr. Εν. 1, 8, 12 {Doxogr. Gr.2 583); Sen. N.Q. 2, 20; 4, 2, 28; Galen, Comm. in Hipp. Epid. 2, 49 (XVII A, 1006 K.); [Galen,] Hist. Philos. 18 {Doxogr. Gr,2 610 = XIX, 243 K.); Diog. L. 6, 81; 9, 57; Diog. Oenoand. p. 10 W.; Herodian, περί μον. λέξ. 1, p. 7 {Vorsokrat. 1, no. 51 Β 10); Censorin. 6, 1; 9, 2; Min. Fel. 19, 5; Clem. Protr. 5, 64, 2; Paedag. 1, 6, 48, 3; Strom. 1, 11, 52, 4; Schol. Ap. Rhod. 4, 269, p. 277 Wendel; Theodoret, Gr. A f f . 4, 12; [Clem.] Recogn. 8, 15; Alex. Quaest. 2, 23 ( Vorsokrat. 1, no. 51 A 33); Simplic. Phys. 2 5 , 1 {Doxogr. Gr.2 477 = Vorsokrat. 1, no. 51 A 5); 151, 20 {Vorsokrat. 1, no. 51 A 4). Of his exact dates we know nothing, save that he may be placed in the fifth century (cf. E. Wellmann in P.-W. 5 (1905), 764). In many of the passages just cited he is mentioned—sometimes as a follower of Anaximenes ; cf. 1, 26, n. {Anaximenes)—as one of those who postulated air as the primal element; cf. also Aristot. De An. 1, 2, 405 a 21-25; Metaph. 1. 3, 984 a 5-7; Theophr. fr. 41 Wimm. ; cf. De Sens. 39 and 46 {Doxogr. Gr2 510 and 512); Alex. Aphrod. in Metaph. 1, 3, p. 26, 22 Hayduck; p. 27, 6-7; 1, 5, p. 45,16-18; Asclep. in Metaph. p. 25,19 Hayduck; Simplic. in Phys. 1, 2, p. 25, 1-8; 1, 4, p. 149, 8; p. 151, 20-21; 151, 28-29; 3, 4, p. 452, 30-31; 458, 25; 3, 5, p. 475, 7-8 Diels. His doctrines he set forth in his work περί φύσεως, still extant in the time of Simplicius (in Phys. 1, 2, p. 25, 1-8; 1, 4, p. 151, 28-29 Diels), for the fragments of which see Vorsokrat. 1, no. 51 Β 1-10. Further, that Diogenes considered air

231

utitur deo, quem sensum habere potest aut quam formam dei? 30 lam de Piatonis inconstantia longum est dicere, qui in Timaeo as divine may be seen in his fifth fragment (Vorsokrat. 1, no. 51 Β 5): καί μοι δοκεΐ τό τήν νόησιν ίχον εϊναι ό άήρ καλούμενος ύπό των άνθρώπων, καί ύπό τούτου πάντας καί κυβερνασθαι καί πάντων κρατεΐν· αύτό γάρ μοι τοϋτο θεός δοκει είναι· καί έπΐ παν άφϊχθαι καί πάντα διατιθέναι καί έν παντί ένειναι . . . καί πάντων των ζφων δέ ή ψυχή τό αύτό έστιν, άήρ θερμότερος, κτλ. (W. Jaeger, Theol. of the early Gr. Philosophers (1947), 165-166; 204 ; 243-244); cf. also Philemon, fr. 91 (2, 505 Kock = Vorsokrat. 1, no. 51 C 4), in which Diogenes is not named but άήρ is identified with Zeus (for Diogenes's relation to Ar. Nubes cf. W. Theiler, Zur Gesch. d. teleol. Naturbetrachtung bis auf Aristot. (1925), 8), also his allusion (Theophr. De Sens. 42 = Doxogr. Gr.2 511) to ó έντός άήρ as μικρόν ών μόριο ν του θεοϋ Philodem. De Piet. p. 70 Gomperz (Doxogr. Gr.* 536): Διονης έπαι τόν "Ομηρον, ώς μυθικ άλλ' άληθώς πέρ τ θείου διειλεμένον. τόν άέρα γάρ αύτόν Δία νομίζειν φησίν, επειδή παν είδέναι τόν Δία λέγει καί—; Aët. Plac. 1, 7, 17 {Doxogr. Gr.* 302, on God): Διογένης καί Κλεάνθης καί Οίνοπίδης τήν τοϋ κόσμου ψυχήν; Min. Fei. 19, 5: Anaximenes deinceps et post Apolloniates Diogenes aera deum statuunt infinitum et inmensum ; horum quoque similis de divini tate constnsio est; Clem. Strom. 1, 11, 52, 4: στοιχεία δέ σέβουσι, Διογένης μέν τόν άέρα, Θαλής δέ τό ΰδωρ, κτλ.; Aug. C.D. 8, 2: Diogenes quoque Anaximenis alter auditor aerem quidem dixit rerum esse materiam, de qua omnia fierent; sed eum esse compotem divinae rationis, sine qua nihil ex eo fieri posset·, Sidon. Carm. 15, 91-93: iunior huic iunctus residet collega, sed idem / materiam cunctis creaturis aera credens / iudicat inde deum, faceret quo cuncta, tulisse. For the use made by the Stoics of these views cf. W. Theiler, op. cit., 59-60; also for Diogenes as a very significant figure in early teleological theistic beliefs id., 13-16; A. S. Pease in Harv. theol. Rev. 34 (1941), 164-166.

quem sensum: cf. 1, 28 (for Parmenides); 1, 29 (for Empedocles). quam formam: cf. 1, 26 (for Anaximenes); 1, 28 (for Parmenides). 30 iam: transitional, and used in a series of illustrations, nearly in the sense of deinde·, cf. 2, 50; 2, 67; 2, 68; 2, 127; 2, 129; 2, 132; 2, 141; 3, 52; 3, 54; Seyffert on Am. 45; J. B. Hofmann in Thes. Ling. Lat. 7 (1934), 121, 64-65, for other Ciceronian examples. Platonis inconstantia: the present criticism of Plato forgets entirely that by Vellerns in 1, 18-20, and derives from a different source; cf. A. B. Krische, Die theol. Lehren (1840), 23; R. Hirzel, Untersuch, χ. Cic. phil. Sehr. 1 (1877), 18. In the former passage it is the incredibility rather than the inconsistency of Plato which is uppermost, this same inconstantia being also charged against Theophrastus (1, 35) and against all popular theology (1, 43). The present passage may be related to Philodem. De Pietate, but that work is not preserved at this point. For Plato's inconsistency cf. also Justin, Cohort, ad Gr. 7 : ó γοϋν Πλάτων ποτέ μέν τρεις άρχάς τοϋ παντός είναι λέγει . . . ποτέ δέ τέσσαρας . . . καί αδθις τήν ΰλην άγέννητον πρότερον είρηκώς ΰστερον γεννητήν αύτήν είναι λέγει. After other examples he continues: τί τοίνυν αϊτιον τοϋ μή πρός άλλήλους μόνον άλλά καί πρός έαυτούς στασιάζειν τούς παρ' ΰμϊν νομισθέντας γεγενήσθαι σοφούς; Min. Fei. 19, 14: Piatoni apertior de deo et rebus ipsis et nominibus oratio est et quae tota esset caelestis, nisi persuasionis civilis nonnumquam admixtione sordesceret·, Hippol. Philosophum. 1, 19, 6-7 (Doxogr. Gr.* 567-568), citing Platonic utterances both in favor of monotheism and in support of polytheism; Clem. ap. Eus. Pr. Ev. 2, 6, 2324; Eus. Pr. Ev. 13, 14, 6: διά δήταΰτα άπολειπτέος ήμΐν ó φιλόσοφος, ού κατά φιλόσοφον, ούδ' αύτός αΰτω συμφώνως, τάς μυθικάς των ποιητών γενεαλογίας καθυποκρινάμενος ; Phot. Bibl. 48, p. 11 b 18 Bekker: δείκνυσι δέ έν αύτοϊς πρός έαυτόν στασιάζοντα Πλάτωνα. A summary of Plato's various views about

232 pattern huius mundi nominari neget posse, in Legum autem 1 libris quid sit omnino deus anquiri 2 oportere non 3 censeat. 1

autem om. D

2

inquirí M2, an queri O

God is given by Aët. Ρlac. 1, 7, 31 (Doxogr. Gr? 304-305); cf. the study by F. Solmsen in Cornell Stud, in el. Philo!. 27 (1941). Stobaeus (vol. 2, 55 Wachsmuth) defends Plato against similar charges of inconsistency in other fields by saying Πλάτων πολύφωνος ών, ούχ ώς τίνες οϊονται πολύδοξος; cf. Proci, in Tim. p. 297c (p. 190 Diehl); W. Jaeger, Paideia, 2 (Engl. tr. 1943), 415, n. 39b: "It was the diversity of aspects and forms of the Divine in Plato's philosophy that bewildered the Hellenistic critics—not only these, but modern scholars even more, who expected to find one God in Plato, and not πάντα πλήρη θεών. It was the same with Aristotle's lost dialogue On Philosophy, which obviously resembled Plato's theology in this respect." For various estimates held by later philosophers of Plato's theology cf. R. E. Witt, Albinus and the Hist, of middle Platonism (Camb. class. Stud. 7 (1937)), 69, n. 5. longum est: cf. 1, 19, n. (longum est). in Timaeo: 28c: τον μέν οδν ποιητή ν καΐ πατέρα τοϋδε τοϋ παντός εύρεϊν τε έργον καί εύρόντα εις πάντας αδύνατον λέγειν; translated by Cic. Tim. 6: atque ilium quidem quasi parentem huius universitatis invenire d i f f i c i l e , et cum iam invenerit indicare in vulgus nefas·, Joseph. C. Ap. 2, 224: αύτός δέ Πλάτων ώμολόγηκεν δτι τήν άληθή περί θεοϋ δόξαν εις τήν των δχλων άγνοιαν ούκ ήν άσφαλές έξενεγκεϊν ; Apul. De Plat. 1, 5: quem quidem caelestem pronuntiat, indictum, innominabilem, et, ut ait ipse, άόρατον, άδάμαστον, cuius naturam invenire d i f ficile est, si inventa sit, in multos eam enuntiare non posse-, Min. Fel. 19, 14: Plafoni itaque in Timaeo deus est ipso suo nomine mundi parens ... quem et invenire d i f f i c i l e prae nimia et incredibili potestate, et cum inveneris in publicum dicere inpossibile praefatur; Tert. Apol. 46: licet Plato adfirmet factitatorem universitatis ncque inveniri faci lem et inventum enarrari in omnes

3

non] nos C

difficilem·, Orig. C. Cels. 7, 42 [too long to quote]; Lact. De Ira, 11, 11: sicut Plato in Timaeo et sensit et docuit ; cuius maiestatem tantam esse declarat ut nec mente conprehendi nec lingua exprimi possit [cf. Inst. 2, 16, 6: deus ... ñeque nomine, cum solus sit, eget]; Lact. Plac. in Stat. Τ heb. 4, 516: dum δημιουργών, cuius scire nomen non licet-, Clem. Strom. 5, 12, 82, 1: καν όνομάζωμεν αύτό ποτε, ού κυρίως καλούντες ήτοι êv ή τάγαθδν ή νουν ή αύτό τό δν ή πατέρα ή θεόν ή δημιουργόν ή κύριον, ούχ ώς δνομα αύτοΰ προφερόμενοι λέγομεν, ύπό δέ άπορίας όνόμασι καλοϊς προσχρώμεθα, Sv' ή διάνοια, μή περί άλλα πλανωμένη, έπερείδεσθαι τούτοις; Cyril. Alex. C. Iulian. 1, pp. 30-31 (Patr. Gr. 76, 548d); Corp. Herrn. 5, 10: ό θεός δνόματος κρείττων. Η. Chadwick {Cl. Rev. 63 (1949), 24) well points out that our passage refutes the claim of H. A. Wolfson that Philo first enunciated this doctrine; cf. R. Marcus in Rev. of Relig. (1949), 378. Plato says that to discover God is a hard task and to show him to all men is impossible; Cicero says that God cannot be named—a rather different assertion. nominari: T. Birt (Beri, philol. Woch. 38 (1918), 574), to heighten the contrast between these two clauses and to bring the passage into closer likeness to that in Plato's Timaeus, emends to patrem huius mundi nominari neget posse, but this change seems risky. in Legum . . . libris: 7, 821a (spoken by the Athenian stranger) : τόν μέγιστον θεόν καί δλον τόν κόσμον φαμέν ουτε ζητεϊν δεϊν οΰτε πολυπραγμονεΐν τάς αίτιας ερευνώντας· ού γάρ ούδ' δσιον είναι, τό δέ έοικε παν τούτου τούναντ£ον γιγνόμενον ορθώς αν γίγνεσθαι, where Cicero confuses the views of the public (φαμέν) with those of Plato himself, who states exactly the opposite, both here and in Legg. 12, 966e. Not only

233 Quod vero sine corpore ullo deum vult esse (ut Graeci dicunt, is the statement reversed but its form has suffered other gradual changes, as is indicated by H. Diels (Doxogr. Gr? 124), from Xen. Mem. 4, 3, 13 to Philod. De Piet. p. 71 Gomperz (these two passages quoted on 1, 31, n. {Xenopbon), below), and from it to Cicero's formant dei quaeri non oportere (1, 31), where Cicero has added the idea of non oportere, probably to make that passage agree with anquiri oportere non censeat here asserted of Plato, since in 1, 31, he considers Xenophon's views isdem in erratis fere quibus ea quae de Platone dicimus. Closer to the thought of Cicero is [Xen.] Ep. 1 (Epistoi. Gr. 788 Hercher): ότι μέν γάρ τα θεια ύπέρ ή μας παντί δήλον· άπόχρη δέ τω κρείττονι της διανοίας αύτούς σέβειν· οίοι δέ είσιν ουτε εύρεΐν ραδιον οΰτε ζητεϊν θεμιτόν; with which cf. Eus. ap. Stob. vol. 2, 8 Wachsmuth: θεοί οίοι έασιν ού χρή δίζεσθαι· αύτόθεν δέ άριστον πεπιστευκέναι ; Lact. De Ira, 11, 13: apud Xenophontem Socrates disputons ait formam dei non oportere conquiri, et Plato in Legum libris, quid omnino sit deus non esse quaerendum, quia nec inveniri possit nec enarrari [where Lactantius has reversed the order of his citations from our passage]. The general thought is a commonplace; cf. fob, 11, 37: "Canst thou by searching find out God?" F. Guglielmino (Religio, 10 (1934), 130, n. 1) thinks that in our passage Cicero is not deliberately representing Velleius as misquoting Plato, but that the blunders are due to Cicero's unverified recollections and his hasty methods of composition. anquiri: cf. 1, 45. non censeat: cf. Div. 1, 82: non censent; O f f . 1, 39: non censuit ; 3, 101; the phrase may be compared with οΰ φημι and with the colloquial English "doesn't think." quod vero: this sentence, through conprehendimus, J. Forchhammer (Nordisk tidskrift f . filol. N.S. 5 (1880), 34-37) considers an interruption of the thought, and hence would either transpose it to the end of this section, after repugnantia (as Mayor, without naming him,

and so perhaps independently, does), or else would delete it altogether. Mayor feels that the change of order would more effectively juxtapose the inconsistent statements of the first and third sentences (of the ms order), the first asserting that God cannot be named and should not be sought, and the third— introduced by idem, which, as in 1, 31 (eundem); 1, 121, and O f f . 1, 84, emphasizes the inconsistencies of one and the same philosopher—frankly identifying various tangible and intangible objects with deity. Goethe feels the same temptation to transpose the two sentences as does Mayor, but more prudently resists it, pointing out that in 1, 97 {an quicquam ... vidimus) a clause similarly interrupts the course of the thought. But, such changes as Mayor's bring the need for further adjustments, and, as Plasberg remarks, quite as striking would seem to be the inconsistency between the second sentence, with its assertion of the incorporeal character of God, and the third, which assigns to him definitely physical types of existence; cf. Iambi. De Myst. 1, 17: πώς γάρ δή ήλιός τε και σελήνη κατά τον σόν λόγον καΐ τί έν οΰρανω έμφανεις έσονται θεοί, εί άσώματοί εΕσι μόνως οί θεοί; it may be granted that this contrast is somewhat blurred by the gloss-like parenthesis ut Graeci dicunt άσώματον, and by the reassertion of the Epicurean objection that what lacks sensation must lack prudentia and hence lack pleasure, and hence cannot satisfy the prerequisites for deity. But such awkwardness of expression is not unparalleled in Cicero, and is by no means an adequate reason for transposition. sine corpore: translating άσώματος, since the word incorporalis does not occur until Seneca and Quintilian, and incorporeus is found first in Gell. 5, 15, 1 : incorporeum. hoc enim vocabulum quidam finxerunt proinde quod Graece dici tur άσώματον. In Ac. 1, 39, Cicero renders the idea by ea quae expers esset corporis and by non corpus·, in Tuse. 1, 50 he speaks of animus ... vacans corpore, but more

234 άσώματον),1 id quale esse possit intellegi non potest; careat enim 2 sensu necesse est,3 careat etiam 4 prudentia, careat voluptate; quae omnia una cum deorum notione conprehendimus. Idem 5 et in Timaeo 6 dicit et in Legibus et mundum deum esse et caelum 1

2 3 asomaton ACNBFM, asamathon O, auxosomaton Ρ enim add. O est] 1 4 2 6 1 6 et A etiam] et tam B , enim NO, quare D item A timaeo eo (eo del.) Β

often he employs sine corpore·, e.g. 1, 33; Τ use. 1, 37: quae sine corporibus nec fieri possent nec intellegi·, Legg. ft. 1 (ap. Lact. Inst. 3, 19, 2); cf. Sen. ap. Aug. C.D. 6, 10; Tert. Apol. 47; Min. Fei. 11, 7; also Ν. Stang in Symb. Osloenses, 17 (1937), 69, for Cicero's translations of alpha privative. Proci, in Tim. p. 24 f (p. 77 Diehl) contrasts ασώματος with σωματικός. Plato does not himself in the Timaeus say that God is άσώματος (cf. Diels in Doxogr. Gr.* 128; 537), though others recounting his opinions attribute that view to him; Diels (op. cit. 537) cites Diog. L. 3, 77; 5, 32; Hippol. Philosophum. 19, 3 (Doxogr. Gr.2 567); Eus. Pr. Εν. 15, 14, 1; [Galen,] Hist. Phil. 16 (Doxogr. Gr.* 608 = XIX, 241 Κ.): άλλ' ó μέν Πλάτων θεόν άσώματον, Ζήνων δέ σώμα; Sen. ap. Aug. C.D. 6, 10: Platonem aut ... Stratonem, quorum alter fecit deum sine corpore, alter sine animo·, Apul. De Plat. 1, 5: incorpoream . . . sine corpore. Plato uses the adjective άσώματος in other connections; e.g., Phaedo, 85e. The term is applied to God by various otherphilosophers;e.g.,[Aristot.] De Zenone, 979 a 4-9: Ζήνων . . . σώμα λέγει είναι τον θεόν . . . άσώματος γάρ ών πώς αν σφαιροειδής είη έπιμόνως . . . έπεί δέ σώμά έστι, τί äv αύτό κωλύοι κινεΐσθαι ώς έλέχθη; Sext. Emp. Pyrrhon. 3, 3 : των δογματικών oí μέν σώμά φασιν είναι τον θεόν, οί δέ άσώματον; Orig. De Princip. 1, praef. 8-9; 4, 1,27;Plotin. 6, 1, 26; Iambi. Protr. 21, p. 120 Pistelli: φιλοσόφει και άσωμάτους πρό παντός ήγοϋ θεούς ύπάρχειν; Julian, Ερ. ad Sacerd. 293b: άσώματοι δέ είσιν αύτοί; Corp. Herrn. 5, 10: οδτος ό άσώματος, ó πολυσώματος, μάλλον δέ παντοσώματος; cf. Proci.

in Cratyl. 63 (p. 35 Pasquali); Steph. in Arist. Rhet. 3, 2, p. 314, 12 Rabe. Porphyry wrote a work called περί άσωμάτων (Suid. s.v. Πορφύριος). Η. Gomperz (Hermes, 67 (1932), 155-167) emphasizes the connection between the incorporeal and the infinite. ut Graeci dicunt άσώματον : a gloss might easily take this form, and some editors, from Heindorf on, have deleted the phrase. But Cicero often gives the Greek original for a Latin term or a Latin translation of a Greek one, so that there seems no good reason for denying him that privilege here; cf. 1, 20, n. (id est naturae rationem). For his use of such Greek words cf. H. J. Rose in Journ. Hell. Stud. 41 (1921), 96. intellegi non potest: cf. 1, 25: intellegere qui possumus; 3, 34: quod quale sit ne intellegi quidem potest·, Ac. 2, 124: numerus nullo corpore, quod intellegi quale sit vix potest. For similar trains of argument cf. 1, 33: cum autem sine corpore idem vult deum omni ilium sensu privat, etiam prudentia·, 1, 48 [human sense organs conduce to reason, reason to virtue, virtue to happiness]. careat . . . sensu: cf. Porphyr, ap. Stob. vol. 1, p. 344 Wachsmuth: άπαθή ρητέον παντελώς τά άσώματα. deorum notione: cf. 1, 43; 2, 13; 3, 16. conprehendimus: καταλαμβάνομεν ; cf. A. Pittet, Vocab. philos, de Sénèque, 1 (1937), 211. in Timaeo: 34b: δια πάντα δή ταϋτα εύδαίμονα θεόν αύτόν έγεννήσατο; 40a: ούράνιον θεών γένος; 40d; 41a; 92c: δδε δ κόσμος . . . ζφον όρατόν τά όρατά περιέχον. in Legibus: 7, 821b: μεγάλων θεών, ήλιου τε άμα καΐ σελήνης; 7, 821c:

235 et astra et terram et ánimos 1 et eos 2 quos maiorum 3 institutis 1

animus A1

2

eos add. D1

3

maiorum

περί θεών των κατ' ούρανόν; 10, 886d: ταΰτα αύτά προφέροντες, ήλιόν τε καΐ σελήνην καΐ άστρα καί γην ώς θεούς καί θεία δντα; 10, 89%; 12, 950d. mundum deum esse : part of Plato's alleged inconsistency lies in making one god (the universe) include within himself other gods (caelum, astra, terra, animi, etc.); cf. 1, 33, n. (caelum mundi .. . partem), below ; also the objections raised by Eus. Pr. Ev. 3, 9, 12: Αιγυπτίων 8è ό λόγος, παρ* ών και Όρφεύς τήν θεολογίαν έκλαβών τόν κόσμον είναι τόν θεόν ώετο, έκ πλειόνων θεών τών αύτοΰ μερών (δτι καί τά μέρη του κόσμου θεολογοΰντες έν τοις πρόσθεν άπεδείχθησαν) ; Aug. C.D. 1, 6: de opinione Varronis, qua arbitratus est deum animam esse mundi, qui tarnen in partibus suis habeat animas multas quarum divina natura sit. Elsewhere through the Timaeus Plato adopts the view of a world-soul, and Aët. Ρlac. 1, 3, 21 {Doxogr. Gr,2 288) summarizes this by saying όδέ θεός νοΰς έστι τοϋ κόσμου [cf. Ac. 1, 29, and the view of Chrysippus in 1, 39, below; Proci, in Tim. p. 289e (p. 164 Diehl): τόν κόσμον τότε θεόν αυτός έκάλεσεν δτε ψυχήν αύτω πρώτον έπέστησεν] — a theory attacked by Aristot. De Cáelo, 2, 1, 284 a 27-35. Macrob. Sat. 1, 18, 17 says mundi autem mentem solem esse opinantur auctores. caelum et astra: cf. 1, 18; 1, 27, n. isoli et lunae). M. P. Nilsson (in Harv. tbeol. Rev. 33 (1940), 4-5, discussing the origin of the Greek belief in the divinity of the heavenly bodies) remarks that those bodies were themselves divine according to Plato (whether the Epinomis be authentic or not Nilsson holds that it represents Plato's thought; cf. pp. 983c; 983e; 984d: θεούς δέ δή τούς ορατούς, μέγιστους καί τιμιωτάτους . . . τούς πρώτους τήν τών άστρων φύσιν λεκτέον; 986b-c ; 987b; also Apol. 26d; Ρhileb. 28e; Rep. 6, 508a and Shorey's note; Cratyl. 397c-d), for they well satisfied the demand for order and law (Nilsson,

AÎH(?)PBF

op. cit. 3), and the popular and philosophical beliefs paved the way for a later astrological doctrine of their divine powers. "The divinity of the stars was an article of the Platonic faith which it could never occur to Aristotle to doubt," remarks W. K. C. Guthrie (intr. to his ed. of Aristot. De Cáelo (1939), xxxiv). Other authors attesting Plato's view of the divinity of these bodies are Aët. Plac. 1, 7, 31 (Doxogr. Gr.2 305): αισθητά δέ τοϋ πρώτου θεοϋ έκγονα ήλιος, σελήνη, αστέρες, γη, καί ό περιέχων πάντα κόσμος ; Athenag. Leg. pro Christ. 6 : εί δ' οΐδεν (sc. ό Πλάτων) καί άλλους, οίον ήλιον καί σελήνην καί άστέρας, άλλ' ώς γεννητούς οΐδεν αυτούς; Tert. Adv. Marc. 1, 13: déos pronuntiaverunt ... ut Plato sidera, quae genus deorum igneum appellai, cum de mundo. ánimos: cf. Plat. Legg. 10, 897b: οΐς ψυχή χρωμένη, νουν μέν προσλαβοΰσα άεί, οίον ορθώς θεός; 10, 899b: έπειδή ψυχή μέν ή ψυχαΐ πάντων τούτων αϊτιαι έφάνησαν, άγαθαί δέ πάσαν άρετήν, θεούς αύτάς είναι φήσομεν, είτε έν σώμασιν ένοϋσαι, ζώα 8ντα, κοσμοϋσι πάντα ούρανόν εϊτε δπη τε καί δπως; 12, 959b: άθάνατον . . . ψυχήν . . . παρά θεούς άλλους άπιέναι; Tim. 41c, where the soul is called θειος rather than θεός; Cic. Rep. 6, 15: Usque [sc. hominibus\ animus datus est ex Ulis sempitemis ignibus quae sidera et stellas vocatis·, Philo, De O p i f . 73: oí αστέρες· ούτοι γάρ ζωά τε είναι λέγονται καί ζώα νοερά, μάλλον δέ νοϋς αύτός έκαστος; De Gigant. 8: καί γάρ ούτοι [se. oí άστέρες] ψυχαΐ δλαι δι' δλων άκήρατοί τε καί θεΐαι, παρό καί κύκλω κινοΰνται την συγγενεστάτην νω κίνησιν; Tert. Apol. 47; De An. 12. maiorum institutis: for the phrase cf. 2, 79; Div. 2, 148 (and Pease's note); Tuse. 1,2; 4,1 ; Rep. 3, 6; 5,1 ; O f f . 1,116; and for the thought J. C. Plumpe, Wesen ». Wirkung der Auctoritas Maiorum bei Cic. (1935); H. Roloff, Maiores bei Cic. (1938). In several of the philosophies criticized for inconsistency, notably in

236 accepimus. Quae et per se sunt falsa perspicue et inter se 1 vehementer repugnantia. 31 Atque etiam Xenophon paucioribus 1

se add. D2

Stoicism, it is the attempt to reconcile popular gods with philosophically defensible deities which leads to most of the confusion. Thus Plato remarks {Tim. 40d): περί δέ τών άλλων δαιμόνων ειπείν καί γνώναι την γένεσιν μείζον ή καθ' ήμδς, πειστέον δέ τοις είρηκόσιν ϊμπροσθεν, έκγόνοις μέν θεών οδσιν, ώς ϊφασαν, σαφώς 8έ που τούς γε αύτών προγόνους είδόσιν, κτλ. accepimus: cf. 3, 5: opiniones quas a maioribus accepimus de dis inmortalibus ... opinione quam a maioribus accept de cultu deorum inmortalium·, 3, 47: quos colimus et accepimus·, Legg. 2, 26: patribus acceptes deos [also 2, 19, by emendation] ; Div. 1, 86: divinatione quam ... a patribus accepimus·, O f f . 3, 44: praeclarum a maioribus accepimus morem. falsa perspicue: cf. Ac. 2, 60; Pro CaeI. 26. vehementer repugnantia: for the phrase cf. Ac. 2, 44; Fin. 5, 77. 31 Xenophon: Mem. 4, 3, 13-14: ότι δέ άληθή λέγω καΐ σύ γνώση, äv μή αναμένης έως αν τάς μορφάς τών θεών ϊδης άλλ' έξαρκη σοι τά £ργα αύτών όρώντι σέβεσθαι και τιμαν τούς θεούς . . . έννόει δ' δτι καΐ ό πασι φανερός δοκών είναι ήλιος ούκ έπιτρέπει τοις άνθρώποις έαυτόν άκριβώς όραν . . . άλλά μην καί ανθρώπου γε ψυχή, ή εϊπερ τι καΐ άλλο τών ανθρωπίνων του θείου μετέχει, ότι μέν βασιλεύει έν ήμΐν φανερόν, όρδται δέ ούδ' αύτή [a passage cited also by Clem. Protr. 6, 71, 3; Strom. 5, 14, 108, 5; Eus. Pr. Ev. 13, 13, 35; Cyril. Alex. C. Iulian. 1, p. 32 (Pair. Gr. 76, 552a); Stob. vol. 2, p. 15 Wachsmuth]; Philodem. De Piet. p. 71 Gomperz (Doxogr. Gr.* 537-538): ενοφώμονεα[ι] όρδσθ φη θεοϋ ν άλλά τάργα . . . δμως είναι [Ε. Norden, Agnostos Theos (1923), 25, n., would insert between τάργα and δμως the word ορατά]; Min. Fei. 19, 13: nam Socraticus Xenophon formam dei veri negat

videri posse et ideo quaeri non oportere·, Lact. De Ira, 11, 13: apud Xenophontem Socrates disputons ait formam dei non oportere conquiri [these last two writers evidently copy Cicero at this point]. It will be observed that Xenophon does not say what Cicero represents him as saying (cf. H. Sauppe, Ausgew. Sehr. (1896), 391-392), for he makes no assertion that Socrates discouraged the search for God but merely that he advised men to infer the existence of God from his works rather than to wait, perhaps vainly, for a theophany. Nor does Xenophon say that the sun and the soul are gods, but rather he compares man's inability to gaze upon them with his similar inability to look upon God. Whether this misrepresentation is due to Cicero or to his Epicurean source may appear obscure. Yet the parallel passage in Philodemus, so far as it extends, is much closer than Cicero to Xenophon, and contains the idea—lacking in Cicero—that if we cannot see God's form we can at least see his works. Had the Epicurean been attempting to misrepresent Xenophon he would hardly have conceded to him so respectable an argument as this. Diels (Doxogr. Gr.% 124) believes that the fault is wholly Cicero's, and that when he speaks of paucioribus verbis he is not excerpting but amputating his original, for in Philodem. p. 72 Gomperz, Diels thinks it possible to detect a further remnant of the doctrine of Xenophon, in words which he emends to read: φαν . . . κερααΙ πνεύματ, with which cf. Xen. Mem. 4, 3, 14: καί τούς ύπερέτας δέ τών θεών εύρήσεις άφανεϊς οντάς· κεραυνός τε γαρ δτι μέν άνωθεν άφίεται δηλον . . . όραται δ' οίίτ' έπιών οΰτε κατασκήψας οΰτε άπιών· καί άνεμοι αύτοί μέν ούχ όρώνται. Apparently, then, Philodemus reproduced both more fully and more accurately the words of Xenophon, Cicero, on the other hand, labors to produce more or

237

verbis eadem fere peccat; facit enim in his quae a Socrate dicta rettulit Socratem disputantem formarti dei quaeri 1 non oportere, eundemque et solem et animum deum 2 dicere, et modo unum, tum autem plures deos; quae sunt isdem in erratis fere quibus ea quae de Platone dicimus.3 13 32 Atque etiam Antisthenes,4 in 1

quaere F1

2

deum add. A

3

diximus dett.

less exact agreement between Plato and Xenophon, as in the words quaeri non oportere, below. On the religious views of Xenophon see also R. Walzer in Ann. d. r. scuola norm. sup. di Pisa, Lett., Stor. e Philos. 2 ser. 5 (1936), 17-32. eadem fere peccat: cf. 1,29 : multa alia peccans. For the thought see below : isdem in erratis. disputantem . . . dicere: both dependent on facit, as in Tuse. 5,115, where the two constructions are again combined: Polyphemum Homerus cum ariete conloquentem facit eiusque laudare fortunas [and Dougan and Henry's n.]. quaeri non oportere: cf. 1, 30, η. {in Legum .. . libris). P. Schwenke's emendation {Beri, philol. Woch. 8 (1888), 1308) to for mam dei quaeri seems interesting but hardly necessary, despite the phraseology in Minucius, on which he relies. With the thought cf. Philemon, fr. 166 Kock: τί έστιν δ θεός ού θέλει σε μανθάνειν· / άσεβεϊς τόν ού θέλοντα μανθάνειν θέλων. eundemque: cf. the use of idem in 1, 30, where see the note on quod vero. solem et animum: cf. note on Xenophon, above. modo . . . tum: cf. 1, 33; 1, 34; 1, 35; 2, 102; E. WölfHin in Arch. f . lat. Lex. 2 (1885), 240. unum . . . plures deos: in Mem. 4, 3, 13, Xenophon speaks of è τόν δλον κόσμον συντάττων τε καΐ συνέχων, just before which he had spoken of oí. . . άλλοι (sc. θεοί). But the shift of number is easy (cf. 1, 25), since even by a polytheist the singular might be used for the supreme god as contrasted with lesser deities, or also at times for deity in the abstract, isolated, for purposes of discussion, from the personalities of parti-

4

antisthenis AD HP

cular gods. Variation in such usage is by no means peculiar to Xenophon, for occasional traces of this sort appear all through Greek literature (cf. H. Haas in Archiv f . Religionswiss. 2 (1900), 52-78; 153-183, for Homer, Hesiod, Pindar, and Aeschylus ; E. V. Arnold, Roman Stoicism (1911), 220, and the numerous works cited by E. Peterson, Der Monotheismus als politisches Problem (1935)), particularly among the more thoughtful; cf. Oros. Adv. Pag. 6, 1, 3: unde etiam nunc pagani ... non se plures deos sequi sed sub uno deo magno plures ministros vener ari fateantur·, also [Plat.] Ep. 13, 363b: της μέν γάρ σπουδαίας έπιστολής θεός άρχει, θεοί δέ της ήττον. Cicero himself has been charged with similar inconsistency; cf. L. Laurand, Cicerón, I a (1935), 127-129. sunt isdem in erratis: cf. 1, 2: in summo errore ... versari·, 1, 37: magno in errore sententia est·, Ac. 2, 34: simili in errore versantur; also for such phrases with in see 1, 2: tanta sunt in varietate et dissensione-, 1, 36: in optatis·, Madvig on Fin. 2, 47; Reid on Ac. 2, 45; id., on Fin. 2, 47. quibus: for the omission of in cf. 3, 25, n. {quo)·, Tusc. 1, 94: in eadem propemodum brevitate qua illae bestiolae reperiemur, and many other illustrations in R. Kiihner-C. Stegmann, Ausf. Gram, d. lat. Spr. 2, l 2 (1912), 581. dicimus: diximus of certain deteriores would be a trifle more natural, but dicimus—"those about which we are speaking" — is well attested by the mss and supported by the principle of the lectio difficilior. 32 Antisthenes: of Athens (Diog. L. 6, 1; Suid. s.v. Αντισθένης), a follower of Socrates (Xen. Mem. 3, 11, 17; Symp. 4, 43-44; 8, 4-5; Diog. L. 6, 2),

238

1,32

eo libro qui Physicus inscribitur, popularis deos multos, naturaand the founder of the Cynic school (Diog. L. 6, 2: κατηρξε πρώτος τοϋ κυνισμού) was mentioned by Plato (P. Natorp in P.-W. 1 (1894), 2543, 222544, 31), and is alluded to by Cicero (Att. 12, 38a, 2), who had read his Cyrus and other works, and calls him hominis acuti (cf. 1, 16, η. (hominem ... acutum), above) maps quam eruditi. For his life and work cf. especially Diog. L. 6, 1-19; 6, 15-18 lists his writings. With the present passage cf. Philodem. De Piet. p. 72 Gomperz (Doxogr. Gr.2 538): αρ' Άντισθένει 8' έν μέν ώ Φυσικω λέγεται τό κατά νόμον είναι πολλούς θεούς, κατά δέ φύσιν εν ; Min. Fei. 19, 7: notum est ... Antisthenen populares deos multos sed naturalem unum ; Lact. Inst. 1, 5, 18: Antisthenes multos quidem esse populares deos, mum tarnen naturalem, id est, summae totius artificem\ Epit. 4, 2: Antisthenes unum esse dixit naturalem deum, totius summae gubernatorem·, De Ira, 11, 14: Antisthenes autem in Physico unum esse naturalem deum dixit, quamvis gentes et urbes suos habent populares deos. libro qui . . . inscribitur: with this phrase introducing the title of a book cf. 1, 41 ; Div. 2 , 1 ; Ac. 2,12; Tusc. 1, 57; O f f . 2, 31; 2, 87; Sen. 13; 59. physicus: the title is attested by Philodemus, just quoted, but does not appear in this form in the list of the ten rolls of his works in Diog. L. 6, 15-18, though one of the titles in the second roll is περί ζφων φύσεως, and two in the seventh roll are περί φύσεως α' β' and έρώτημα περί φύσεως β'. Aristotle (according to Simplic. in Phys. 3, 4, p. 458, 19-20 Diels; cf. 1, 2, p. 40,30-41,1) limited the use of φυσικός to such men as Thaïes and Hippo (cf. Themist. in Aristot. De An. 1, p. 8, 4-7 Heinze), and Cicero uses the term for a philosopher concerned with the first of the three major divisions of philosophy (φυσικόν, ήθικόν, λογικόν; cf. 1, 20, n. (physiologiam); S.V.F. 2, nos. 35-44), e.g., 1, 35; 1, 66; 1, 77; 1, 83; 2,48; 3), 18). But whether in this title of Antisthenes we are to explain φυσικός as an adjective modifying λόγος under-

stood or as a substantive, i.e., "the scientist" (cf. the μαθηματικός of Speusippus (Diog. L. 4, 5), the νομοθέτης, διδάσκαλος, and μαιευτικός of Herillus (Diog. L. 7, 156), and Pliny the Elder's Studiosi tres (Plin. Ep. 3, 5, 5; Gell. 9, 16, 2)) is not clear; for the work itself cf. Natorp, op. cit. 1, 2543, 11-17. Theology belonged in the province of τό φυσικόν; cf. Plut. De Stoic. Repugn. 9, p. 1035b: των δέ φυσικών έσχατος είναι ό περί τών θεών λόγος; Sext. Emp. Adv. Logic. 1, 23: τελευταίαν δέ έπάγειν την φυσικήν θεωρίαν · θειοτέρα γάρ έστι; Victorin. in Cic. Riet. 1, 2 {Rhet. Lat. min. 160 Halm) : physica est quae de divinis agit, ethica quae de humants disserit ; yet cf. opposing views quoted at 1, 20, n. (physiologiam), above. Among those called φυσικός were Heraclitus ([Apoll. Tyan.,] Ep. 18 in Epistologr. Gr. 113 Hercher), Parmenides (Isag. bis excerpta 14, p. 318 Maass), Empedocles (Lyd. De Mens. 1, 34; Schol. Eur. Phoen. 18), and Archelaus (Stob. vol. 3, p. 429 Wachsmuth) ; for more general references cf. Varr. L.L. 10, 55 ; Galen in Hippocr. De Nat. Horn. 1, 9 (XV, 44 K.); De Humor. 1, 1 (XVI, 37 K.); 3, 17 (XVI, 423 K.); [Justin Mart.] De Resurr. 6: oí τοϋ κόσμου φυσικοί σοφοί λεγόμενοι Lyd. De Mens. 4,64 ; 4, 94; Brev. Exp. in Virg. G. 1, 396; 1, 498; Isid. Etym. 8, 6, 18: theologi autem idem sunt qui et physici. popularis . . . naturalem: see note on Antisthenes, above. Other philosophers, in their distinction between exoteric and esoteric doctrines, doubtless stressed this same point; cf. 1, 61, below. Thus Aug. C.D. 4, 27: relatum est in litteras doctissimum pontificem Scaevolam disputasse tria genera deorum: unum a poetis, alterum a philosophis, tertium a principibus civitatis. As befitted his position he considered the first type nugatorium, and the second either superfluous or subversive. Again, in C.D. 6, 5, Augustine quotes Varrò as making a three-fold division of types of philosophy: mythicon appellant quo maxime utuntur poetae, physicon quo philosophi, civile quo populi. The first of these Varrò condemns, the second he tole-

1,32

239

lem unum 1 esse dicens tollit vim et naturarti deorum. Nec multo secus Speusippus, Platonem avunculum subsequens, et vim quandam dicens, qua omnia regantur, eamque animalem, evellere ex 1

unum om. O

rates, removit tarnen hoc genus a foro, id est, a populis ; scholis vero et parietibus clamit. On the whole subject cf. Lact. Inst. 1, 11, 37: hoc errore decepti etiam philosophi, quod ea quae de love feruntur minime convenire in deum videbantur, duos loves fecerunt, unum naturalem, alterum fabulosum. That the mysteries further emphasized the difference between exoteric and esoteric teachings may be seen in 1, 119, below. tollit vim: i.e., of the anthropomorphic gods of Epicurus and of the people, as Mayor observes. vim et naturam: cf. Pease on Div. 1,1 {ad deorum vim). nec multo secus: for the phrase cf. Ac. 2, 138; Fin. 5, 38; Τ use. 5, 85; Legg. 2, 5; F am. 4, 9, 2; Att. 9, 9, 3; Q. Fr. 1, 1,13. Speusippus: of Athens, son of Potone the sister of Plato (Ac. 1, 17; De Or. 3, 67; et al.), pupil of Plato (Alex. Aphrod. in Metaph. 6, 2, p. 462, 34 Hayduck), and, as successor of Plato, the head of the Academy for eight years, beginning in Ol. 108 (348-344 B.C.), as Diog. L. 4, 1, states (see also the next note). In Fin. 5, 2; 5, 7 (cf. 4, 3; Suid. s.v. Πλάτων) he is mentioned in the succession to Plato as followed by Xenocrates, Polemo, and others. A list of his works is given by Diog. L. 4, 4-5; of the titles that which most suggests the doctrines here mentioned is his περί θεών. Philodem. De Piet. p. 72 Gomperz (Doxogr. Gr.* 538-539) says of Speusippus: ψυχάς των καν γαθών θείας λέω δυνάμεις, πολύ ταδεεστέρας καΐ έλλειπούσα, which, though δυνάμεις and vim quandam may be related, does not seem very close to the Latin, and suggests that Philodemus was a good deal more full in his treatment than Cicero.

Platonem avunculum subsequens: cf. Ac. 1, 17: cum Speusippum, sororis filium, Plato philosophiae quasi heredem reliquisset·, Diog. L. 3, 4; 4, 1; Ammon. Vit. Aristot. (Βιογράφοι, p. 400 Westermann): μετά δέ τήν τοϋ Πλάτωνος τελευτήν διαδέχεται τήν τούτου σχολήν Σπεύσιππος ó άδελφιδοϋς αύτοϋ· υιός γάρ ήν ούτος Ποτώνης της τούτου αδελφής (cf. Vit. Aristot. in Rose's fragments, pp. 429 ; 435); Numenius ap. Eus. Pr. Ev. 14, 5, 1 : Σπεύσιππον τον Πλάτωνος μέν άδελφιδοϋν; Iambi. Theologum. Arithm. p. 82, 10 De Falco; Suid. s.v. Σπεύσιππος Εύρυμέδοντος · άδελφιδοϋς Πλάτωνος τοϋ φιλοσόφου άπό Ποτώνης της αύτοϋ άδελφής, ακουστής αύτοϋ Πλάτωνος καΐ διάδοχος γενόμενος της Άκαδημείας έπί της ρή όλυμπιάδος; Anth. Pal. 1, 101, speaks of his suicide, in spite of his kinship to Plato. Cf. also Hier. Chron. ann. Abr. 1672 (Ol. 108, 4): Plato moritur, post quem Academiam Speusippus tenuit [cf. ann. Abr. 1621; 1678], subsequens: of a succeeding head of a school; cf. Div. 1, 6; also consequens in 1, 41, below. vim quandam dicens: sc. deum·, cf. Min. Fei. 19, 7: Speusippum iam [naturalemI animalem, qua omnia regantur, deum nosse. Stob. v o l . l , p . 35Wachsmuthstates: Σπεύσιππος τόν νοΰν οΰτε τω ένΐ ουτε τω άγαθφ τόν αύτόν, ιδιοφυή δέ; and Aristot. Metaph. 11, 7, 1072 b 30-34 refutes the views of the Pythagoreans and Speusippus that supreme beauty and goodness are not present at the beginning, but only at a higher stage of development. This might perhaps not leave a place for a supreme and perfect intelligence, creative from the very outset. But to what extent these allusions can be connected with our passage is not entirely clear. animalem: here = animantem, but in

1,33

240

animis conatur cognitionem deorum. 33 Aristotelesque1 in tertio de philosophia libro multa turbat a magistro suo 2 Platone 1

que del. H

2

suo dutt. Dav., uno ACPNOBF,

2, 91; 2, 136; 3, 34, it = jpirabilem, and has reference to the element of air. evellere ex animis: cf. Pro Cluent. 4: evellam ex animis homtnum tantam opinionem; De Domo, 34; Pers. 5, 92. cognitionem deorum: cf. 1, 36: usitatas perceptasque cognitiones deorum·, 1, 44: eorum [sc. deorum] ... innatas eognitiones habemus·, 2, 140: ut deorum cognitionem ... capere possint; 2, 153: animus accedit ad cognitionem deorum; also many patristic cases in Ties. Ling. Lat. 3 (1912), 1484, 79-1485, 34. Of the Ciceronian instances E. Norden (Agnostos Theos (1923), 93-95) believes that in 1, 36 and 1, 44 cognitio surely corresponds to έννοια; whether our instance, along with 2, 140 and 2, 153, translates Ιννοια or γνώσις is uncertain; For γνώσις cf. Epic. Ep. 3 (p. 60, 4-5 Usener) ; Varr. Men. p. 210 Bücheler: Pseudulus Apollo περί θεών διαγνώσεως; [Apoll. Tyan.] Ep. 52 {Epistolog. Gr. 119 Hercher): γνώσιν θεών, ού δόξαν. 33 Aristoteles: whom Cicero describes (Tuse. 1, 7) as vir summus ingenio, scientia, copia, and (Tuse. 1,22) longe omnibus (Platonem semper excipio) praestans et ingenio et diligentia. For other summaries of the views of Aristotle about the gods cf. Aët. Ρlac. 1, 7, 32 (Doxogr. Gr.* 305); [Galen,] Hist. Phil. 36 (Doxogr. Gr.2 618 = XIX, 251 Κ.). tertio de Philosophia: cf. Philodem. De Piet. p. 72 Gomperz (Doxogr. Gr.1 539): παρ' Άριστοτέλει δ' έν τω τρίτω ΓΙερί. φιλοσοφίας [at which point the fragment ends]. What follows in Cicero = fr. 26 Rose. This lost dialogue contained three books (Diog. L. 5, 22), the fragments of which are collected by V. Rose (1886), nos. 1-26; also by R. Walzer, Aristotelis Dialogorum Frag. (1934) pp. 92-93. These include, from Book 1 (on early speculations of the Orient and of Greece) N.D. 1, 107; from Book 2 (on early Greek philosophy, including Plato) perhaps Tusc. 3, 69;

post Platone M

and from Book 3 (his own views) N.D. 2, 42; 2, 44; 2, 95; and perhaps 2, 51 and Ac. 2, 119; cf. J. Bernays, Die Dialoge des Aristot. (1863), 95-115; W. Jaeger, Aristoteles (1923), 125-170 (who on p. 129 points out that the dialogue stands midway between the Platonizing works of his youth and his maturar treatises, and that it remained for antiquity, particularly for Stoics and Epicureans, a main source for Aristotle's Weltanschauung, even though in an undeveloped rather than a matured form; cf. p. 140); E. Bignone, L'Aristotele perduto, 2 (1936), 507 and elsewhere. For the later use of our passage cf. Min. Fei. 19,9 : Aristoteles variai et adsignat tarnen unam potestatem ; nam interim mentem, mundum interim deum dicit, interim mundo deum praeficit·, Lact. Inst. 1, 5, 22: Aristoteles quamvis secum ipse dissideat ac repugnantia sibi et dicat et sentiat, in summum tarnen unam mentem mundo praeesse testatur·, De Ira, 11, 15: eadem [i.e., as Antisthenes] fere Aristoteles cum suis Peripateticis. multa turbat: but E. Bignone (op. cit. 2, 361, η. 0) considers that the contradiction is only apparent, since belief in a God who is pure intelligence does not exclude that in the existence of minor gods in the form of stars, as Plato and the Academics thought. He compares Aristot. fr. 49 Rose (quoted in note on menti, below) and [Plat.] Epinom. 984d-e (for apparent genera and ranks among the gods). magistro suo Platone: three questions arise here: (1) should we, with certain deteriores (such as cod. Rehdigeranus, used by Heindorf), read suo rather than the uno of ACPNB; (2) should we omit Platone as a gloss upon magistro; and (3) should we insert non before dissentiens? But (1) uno gives no satisfactory sense here (cf. Muretus, Variae Lectiones, 2 (1791), 202), while suo as applied to one's teacher or philosophic model is appropriate and idiomatic;

241

dissentiens; modo enim menti tribuit omnem divinitatem, modo mundum ipsum deum dicit esse,1 modo alium quendam praeficit 2 1

esse dixit O

2

proficit B 1

cf. 1, 93: Nausiphanem magistrum suum\ Τ use. 1, 79: Panaetìo a Platone suo dissentiente. (2) The omission of Platone (by Diels, Doxogr. Gr.2 539; A. J. Festugière, La Révél. d'Hermès Trism. 2 (1949), 243, η. 1, and Mayor) is unnecessary in view of certain passages cited by Plasberg: Ac. 2, 143: Cleanthe doctore suo; De Fato, 14: Chrysippo placet dissentienti a maestro Cleanthe; Tuse. 1, 41: magistro concédât Aristoteli·, 1, 79 [quoted above]; Orai. 151: magister eius Isocrates; Eus. Pr. Ev. 14, 9, 3: έναντία Φίλωνι τω καθηγητη έφρόνησε. (3) Το insert non with the participle, as P. Manutius conjectured and as was done by Lambinus and many subsequent editors (e.g., Davies, Heindorf, Orelli, Baiter, Schoemann, Diels, Mayor, Rose (in the fragments of Aristotle), and Müller) appears hazardous, if one recalls that the views of the De Philosophia, even as here set forth, do represent a movement by Aristotle away from strict conformity to Platonic doctrines. To be sure, Cicero in Ac. 1,17, speaks of Academics and Peripatetics qui rebus congruentes nominibus differebant; cf. Fin. 4, 5: Peripateticis Academicisque, qui re consentientes vocabulis differebant·, Legg. 1, 38; yet Plut. Adv. Colot. 14, p. 1115a-c, attacks Colotes for suggesting any such identity of views. Further, in the present passage we have not merely to consider Cicero's own views as elsewhere expressed, but also whether his Epicurean source probably agreed with those expressions. Like many modern scholars, then, such as Plasberg and Ax, W. Jaeger (Aristoteles (1923), 142, n. 2), and E. Bignone (in Ann. d. r. Schola norm. sup. di Pisa, Lett., Stor. e Philos. 2 ser. 2 (1933), 282-283; id., VAristotele perduto, 2 (1936), 350, n. 1), I should decline to insert non. modo . . . tum: cf. 1, 31, n. (modo ... tum). menti: cf. Aristot. Metaph. 11, 7, 1072 b 26-29: ή γάρ νοϋ ένέργεια ζωή,

έκεΐνος [i.e.,ó θεάς] δέ ή ένέργεια . . . φαμέν δέ τόν θεόν είναι ζωον άΐδιον άριστον; 11, 9, 1074 b 33-35: αυτόν άρα νοεί, εϊπερ έστί τό κράτιστον, καΐ ίστιν ή νόησις νοήσεως νόησις [cf. Hippol. Philosophum. 7, 7]; Eth. Eudem. 7, 14, 1248 a 24-27: τό δέ ζητούμενον τοΰτ' έστί, τίς ή της κινήσεως άρχή έν τή ψυχή. δήλον δή, ώσπερ έν τω δλω θεός, καΐ παν έκείνω. κινεί γάρ πως πάντα τό έν ήμϊν θείον, κτλ. ; and, more precisely, fr. 49 Rose (ap. Simplic. in 2 De Caelo, p. 218, 20 Karsten): ότι γάρ έννοεϊ τι καΐ ύπέρ τόν νουν καΐ τήν ουσίαν ό 'Αριστοτέλης, δηλός έστι πρός τοις πέρασι του περί. εύχής βιβλίου σαφώς ειπών δτι ό θεός ή νους έστίν ή έπέκεινά τι τοϋ νοϋ [cf. Α. Kail in Diss, philol. Vindob. 11 (1913), 88]; Cic. Consol, ap. Tuse. 1, 66: nec vero deus qui intellegitur a nobis alio modo intellegi potest nisi mens soluta quaedam et libera, segregata ab omni concretione mortali, omnia sentiens et movens ipsaque praedita motu sempiterno-, Min. Fei. 19, 9 (quoted on tertio de Philosophia, above); Clem. Protr. 5, 66, 4: καΐ δ γε της αίρέσεως πατήρ [i.e., Aristotle] των δλων ού νοήσας τόν πατέρα, τόν καλούμενον ΰπατον ψυχήν είναι τοϋ παντός οϊεται· τουτέστι τοϋ κόσμου τήν ψυχήν θεόν ύπολαμβάνων αύτός αύτω περιπείρεται. W. Theiler, Zur Gesch. d. teleol. Naturbetrachtung bis auf Aristot. (1925), 83, compares with this allusion to mens that in Plat. Legg. 12, 966e. tribuit . . . divinitatem: for the phrase cf. 1, 34; 1, 37; 2, 39. mundum ipsum deum: cf. Aristot. De Caelo, 2,1, 284 a 2-8 : καλώς ίχει συμπείθειν έαυτόν τούς άρχαίους καΐ μάλιστα πατρίους ήμών άληθεϊς εϊναι λόγους, ώς έστιν άθάνατόν τι καΐ θείον των έχόντων μέν κίνησιν, έχόντων δέ τοιαύτην ώστε μηθέν είναι πέρας αύτης, άλλά μάλλον ταύτην τών άλλων πέρας· τό τε γάρ πέρας τών περιεχόντων έστί, καΐ αΰτη ή κυκλοφορία τέλειος οδσα περιέχει τάς άτελεϊς καΐ τάς έχούσας πέρας ι6

242 mundo eique eas partis tribuit ut replicatione quadam mundi motora regat atque tueatur, tum caeli ardorem deum dicit esse, non καΐ παϋλαν ; 2, 3, 286 a 9-12: θεοϋ δ' ένέργεια άθανασία· τοϋτο 8' έστί ζωή άΐδιος. ώστ' άνάγκη τ ω θείω κίνησιν άΐδιον ύπάρχειν. έπεί δ' ó ουρανός τοιούτος (σώμα γάρ τι θείον), διά τοϋτο έχει τό έγκύκλιον σώμα, δ φύσει κινείται κύκλω άεί; Metaph. 11, 8, 1074 a 3 8 - b 3 : παραδέδοται δέ παρά τών άρχαίων και, παμπαλαίων èv μύθου σχήματι καταλελειμμένα τοις ύστερον ότι θεοί τέ είσιν ούτοι [i.e., the heavenly bodies] καΐ περιέχει τό θείον την δλην φύσιν; Aët. Ρlac. 5, 20, 1 (Doxogr. Gr.2 432): Πλάτων και 'Αριστοτέλης . . . τά άστρα ζωα λέγεσθαι f τόν κόσμον καΐ τον f ενθεον, ζωον λογικόν άθάνατον [where Diels emends: τόν κόσμον καύτόν ϊνθεον]; Clem. Protr. 5,66, 4: τόν κόσμον θεόν ήγούμενος περιτρέπεται, τόν ¿ίμοιρον τοϋ θεοϋ θεόν δογματίζων. So [Plat.] Epinom. 977a-b identifies God with the ούρανός. alium . . . praeficit mundo: probably not the ether or fifth element, since that seems to be the caeli ardor of the next clause; possibly, as J. Degenhart (Krit.-exeg. Bemerk. ζ· Cicero's Sehr, de Nat. Deor. (1881), 57) and Mayor would hold, the same as the mens just mentioned, viewed as the First Mover; cf. Aristot. Pbys. 8, 5, 256 b 24-27; Metaph. 11, 7, 1072 b 1-4; also see H. Bonitz, Index Aristotélicas, 390b, s.v. τό πρώτον κινοΰν άκίνητον; Aët. Ρlac. 1, 7, 32 {Doxogr. Gr.* 305) : 'Αριστοτέλης τόν μέν άνωτάτω θεόν είδος , ομοίως Πλάτωνι, έπιβεβηκότα τη σφαίρα τοϋ παντός, ήτις έστίν αίθέριον σώμα, το πέμπτον ΰπ' αύτοΰ καλούμενον. replicatione quadam: quadam, as frequently, apologizes for a word used in an unfamiliar sense, and replicatione here renders άνείλιξις, used by Plat. Polit. 270d; 286b, of the counter-rotation of the κόσμος. For Aristotle cf. Metaph. 11, 8, 1074 a 2: καθ' ίκαστον τών πλανωμένων έτέρας σφαίρας μιηί έλάττονας είναι τάς άνελιττούσας καΐ είς τό αύτό άποκοθιστάσας τη θέσει την πρώτην σφαΐραν άεί. That Cicero had here any

very clear sense of the meaning of this word and of its applicability in the present passage seems somewhat doubtful; probably he had found the Greek term in his Epicurean source. That the motion of the cosmos should depend upon this subordinate movement of a part is thought by Mayor absurd ; yet cf. J. Degenhart, op. cit. 58; H. von Arnim, Die Entstehung d. Gotteslehre des Aristoteles (1931), 4-7; W. K. C. Guthrie in Cl. Quart. 27 (1933), 164-165; E. Bignone in Ann. d. r. scuola norm. sup. di Pisa, Lett. Stor. e Filos. 2 Ser. 2 (1933), 296; id., L'Aristotele perduto, 2 (1936), 378380. See also A. J. Festugière, La Révélation d'Hermès Trism. 2 (1949), 245. regat atque tueatur: cf. Sen. 81 : pulchritudinem tuentur et regunt·, Legg. 2, 9: tuentis et regentis dei. caeli ardorem: cf. 1, 36, n. (aethera); 1, 37: Cleanthes ... undique circumfusum et extremum omnia cingentem atque complexum ardorem qui aether nominetur certissimum deum iudicat·, 2, 41 : astra quae oriantur in ardore cadesti qui aether vel caelum nominatur·, 2, 64; 2, 91; 2, 92; Ac. 2, 26 and Τ use. 1, 65 [on Aristotle's quintum genus]. For Aristotle's own view cf. De Cáelo, 1, 2, 269 a 30-32: φανερών 8τι πέφυκέ τις ουσία σώματος άλλη παρά τάς ένταΰθα συστάσεις, θειοτέρα καΐ προτέρα τούτων άπάντων; 1, 3, 270 b 22-25: αιθέρα προσωνόμασαν τόν άνωτάτω τόπον, άπό τοϋ θειν άεί τόν άΐδιον χρόνον θέμενοι την έπωνυμίαν αύτω. 'Αναξαγόρας δέ κατακέχρηται τω δνόματι τούτφ ού καλώς· όνομάζει γάρ αιθέρα άντί πυρός [this view is not infrequently found; e.g., Schol. Arat. p. 512 Maass: ό αίθήρ σφόδρα έστί διάπυρος, δθεν και ώνόμασται παρά τό αϊθω ; Serv. Aen. 4, 201: aether ignis est·, Steph. Byz. s.v. αίθήρ· ό ύπέρ τόν άέρα πεπυρωμένος τόπος]. In Alex. Aphrod. in Meteor. 1, 3, p. 24-25 Hayduck ether is so called άπό τοϋ αϊθειν τε καΐ καίειν, ως πϋρ άν τόν ούρανόν. Aristotle does not say that the ether is itself God (as Euripides, fr. 941 Nauck, translated in 2, 65, below,

243 intellegens caelum mundi esse partem, quern alio loco ipse désignant 1 deum. Quo modo autem caeli divinus ille sensus 2 in celeritate tanta conservan potest? Ubi deinde 3 illi 4 tot 5 dii, si numeramus etiam caelum deum? Cum autem sine corpore idem vult esse deum, omni ilium sensu privat, etiam prudentia. Quo porro 1

8

designaret O deinde] demum O

2

sensus celeritate conseruari potest ubi 4 6 illi om. Ν tot om. Ρ

deinde

add.

Ν

maintained), but merely that it is divine ; mentioned, who are reducible to the cf. W. Jaeger, Aristoteles (1923), 141, mover and the moved, but the Olymwho further observes that mundus does pians and other gods of popular belief, not here mean the all-embracing cosmos, localized in the heavens, who would as the Epicurean thinks, but the periphery by the reasoning here refuted become of the heavens, as the Academy had used gods within gods. G. F. Schoemann the term and as it appears in the Epino(Opuse. 3 (1858), 311; also in his edition) mis (but cf. J. Moreau, L'âme du monde would, less plausibly, explain illi ... dii (1939), 117, η. 2). The first publication as the astra within the mundus (cf. J. of Aristotle's fifth element (cf. 1, 29, η. Degenhart, op. cit., 59; also Lact. Inst. (quattuor ... naturai), above) is probably 2, 5, 39-40, quoted on caelum mundi ... to be assigned to the De Philosophia partem, above). (Jaeger, op. cit. 141, η. 1). Justin Martyr numeramus: cf. 3, 40; 3, 43; Pro (iCohort. ad Gr. 5 ; 36) ascribes to Aristotle Mur. 49; At t. 7, 1, 3; also N.D. 1, 29; the view that God exists, not in fire, but 3, 45 : in deorum numero. in the fifth element; cf. 2, 42, below. cum . . . vult: on ««»-clauses of equicaelum mundi . . . partem: cf. 1, 30, valence in Cicero cf. J. Lebreton in Rev. η. (mundum deum esse); Lact. Inst. 2, 5, 38; de philol. 26 (1902), 182-194, including 2, 5, 39-40: si astra dii sunt, mundus ergo 1, 101: cum ... interficiunt; 1, 122: non deus sed domicilium deorum est. si vero cum ... ponitis·, 3, 63: cum ... facitis·, 3, 90: cum dicitis. mundus deus est, ergo ilia omnia quae sunt in eo non dii sunt sed dei membra, quae utique sine corpore: cf. 1, 30, nn. (sine sola dei nomen accipere non possunt. nec enim corpore-, intellegi non potest) for this objection in the case of other philosophers. rede quis dixerit membra hominis unius multos homines esse·, Ambr. Exam. 1, 1, 4: See also Sext. Emp. Pyrrh. 3, 218: inter has dissensiones eorum quae potest veri 'Αριστοτέλης μέν άσώματον είπεν είesse aestimatio, cum alii mundum ipsum deum ναι τόν θεδν καΐ πέρας του ούρανοϋ— esse dicant .. . alii partes eius, alii utrumque\ a definition not found in the extant Aug. C.D. 4, 20: sic ergo posset et unus works of Aristotle; yet cf. De Cáelo, Deus colt cuius partes ceteri di putantur·, 1, 9, 278 b 14-15: είώθαμεν γαρ τό ίσχατον καΐ τό &νω μάλιστα καλεϊν ούρα7, 9: si ergo lanus est mundus et deus est Ianus, numquid Iovem, ut deus esse possit, νόν, έν φ καΐ τό θείον παν Ιδρϋσθαί φαμεν. aliquam partem Iani esse dieturi sunt? sensu privat: cf. 1, 25; 1, 27; 1, 34; celeritate tanta: cf. 1, 24 and n. (celeΑ. J. Festugière, La Révélation d'Hermès ritate), above; 1, 52; Philodem. De Trism. 2 (1949), 244, n. 2 (with other Deis, 3, col. 10, 7-11 ( p . 30 Diels): parallels). In his ed. min. Piasberg sug00τε γαρ οίητέον ίργον μηθέν έτερον gests—but does not admit into the έχειν αύτούς ή διά της απειρίας ών text—a repetition of privat, so as to read : όδώιιόως· ού εύτυχής ó μβονώgraphy might account for the omission, μος άπαν τόν βίον. yet the addition seems unnecessary, illi tot dii: probably not the gods just

244 modo 1 mundus moveri carens corpore aut quo modo semper se 2 movens esse quietus et beatus potest? 34 Nec vero eius 3 1

modo add. Β

2

se om. Ρ

3

though it might easily be paralleled; e.g., 1, 24 (pars est); 3, 5 (semper); 3, 61 (video); etc. etiam prudentia: cf. 1, 30: careat etiam prudentia. quo porro modo: with the hyperbaton cf. De Or. 1, 32: quid tam porro regium·, also below, 1, 59: quam illa bene refellerentur·, 1, 74: nullo prorsus modo·, 2, 147: quo enim tu illa modo·, 2, 155: hominum facta esse causa·, 3, 19: ab hac ea quaestione·, Ac. 2, 83: quam in parvo lis sit [and many parallels in Reid's n.]; Am. 10: quid id recte faciam; Pro Cael. 16: tam Caelius amens. mundus moveri: mundus has been deleted by Heindorf, Orelli, Baiter, and Goethe (explaining it as a gloss), and deus inserted in its place by Schuetz, followed by Müller and Mayor (against these emendations cf. J. Degenhart, op. cit., 55-57). Ernesti, Schoemann, and Degenhart (op. cit., 59) change mundus moveri to mundum movere. But that all these devices are unnecessary has been well shown by Piasberg (ed. maior), who finds Velleius intentionally confusing all points and explaining the course of the argument thus: Aristotle says that the mundus is moved, that the mundus is God, and that God is incorporeal; he would have it, then, that the mundus is moved sine corpore, which is impossible. semper se movens: Aristotle repeatedly speaks of the unmoved Mover; cf. the passages cited in the note on alium . .. praeficit mundo, above; also De Cáelo, 2, 12, 292 a 22-23: Ιοικε γάρ τω μέν δριστα ίχοντί ύπάρχειν τό εδ άνευ πράξεως . . . (292 b 4-5) τ ω 8' ως δριστα έχοντι ούθέν δει πράξεως· ϊστι γάρ αύτό τό οδ ένεκα. Scholars have therefore attempted in various ways to reconcile Aristotle and this passage in Cicero, e.g., by deleting se before movens (as was done by Wyttenbach in Creuzer's edition (1818), 727), understanding mun-

eius om. Η dum as the object of movens; or by reading semper se movens (so J. Degenhart, op. cit., 60, assuming haplography of the syllable per, and explaining that God's action upon the mundus is directed immediately rather than through intermediate agents); or by inserting deus before semper (so R. Reitzenstein ap. Ax, p. 166). W. Jaeger (Aristoteles (1923), 141) believes that the concept of the unmoved Mover is to be found as early as the De Philosophia, but H. von Arnim (Die Entstehung d. Gotteslehre (1931), 4-7), W. K. C. Guthrie {CI. Quart. 27 (1933), 165; id., introd. to his edition of the De Cáelo (1939), xxvii), and W. D. Ross, ed. of Aristot. Physics (1936), 95-96) are not convinced of this, and find no evidence for it in the present passage unless in the words modo alium quendam praeficit ... mundi motum regat atque tueatur, which might perhaps be otherwise explained. If there is no certain allusion here to the unmoved Mover then there probably is none to be found in Aristotle earlier than the De Cáelo·, cf. Guthrie, edition of the De Cáelo, xxvii. It seems likely that Cicero here means that Aristotle understood by mundus the outermost, revolving, heaven, which includes within its motion all lesser motions; cf. De Cáelo, 2, 1, 284 a 2-8 (quoted on mundum ipsum deum, above). Its motion involves no effort (άπονος in 284 a 15), and is contrasted by Aristotle in the context which follows with unnatural and constrained motions. Hence Guthrie (op. cit., 134-135, η. 5) would find in the De Cáelo "a refinement on the theology of the dialogue De Philosophia, from which Cicero got his knowledge of Aristotle," precisely so as to avoid the kind of criticism here brought by Velleius. quietus et beatus: Epicurean ideals for a god as also for a human being; cf. 1, 24 (and note on mens constans)·, 1, 52; Aristot. De Cáelo, 2, 1, 284 a 35,

245

1,34

condiscipulus Xenocrates in hoc genere prudentior,1 cuius 2 in libris qui sunt de 3 natura deorum nulla species divina describitur; deos enim octo esse dicit, quinqué eos qui in stellis vagis nominan1 prudentior est AiD ACPNO

2

in cuius P, cuius iis N, cytus B1

where the life of a deity subject to eternal enforced motion is compared to the fate of Ixion. 34 nec vero: cf. 1, 29; 1, 35. condiscipulus Xenocrates: a native of Chalcedon {Ac. 1, 17; Diog. L. 3, 46; 4, 6; Athen. 12, 530d; Stob. vol. 1, p. 36 Wachsmuth; Clem. Proir. 5, 66, 2; Suid. s.v. Ξενοκράτης), a pupil of Plato {De Or. 3, 67; Tusc. 1, 20; Ac. 1, 17: cum Speusippum, sororis filium, Plato philosopbiae quasi heredem reliquisset, duo autem praestantissimos studio atque doctrina, Xenocratem Chalcedonium et Aristotelem Stagiritem, qui erant cum Aristotele Peripatetici dieti sunt [cf. Legg. 1, 55]; 1, 34; Val. Max. 4, 1, ext. 2; Diog. L. 3, 46; 4, 6; Galen, De Meth. Medendi, 1, 2 (X, 9 K.); Ael. V.H. 3, 19 (who says that Plato preferred him to Aristotle), and the successor of Speusippus as head of the Academy (cf. Fin. 5, 2; 5, 7; Diog. L. 4,14: διεδέξατο δέ Σπεύσιππον καΐ άφηγήσατο της σχολής πέντε καΐ εϊκοσιν ϊτη ; [Galen,] Hist. Phil. 3 {Doxogr. Gr.2 599 = XIX, 226 Κ.); Eus. Pr. Εν. 14, 5, 1; Theodoret, Gr. Ä f f . 5, 19; Anon. Vit. Aristot. {Aristot. Frag. ed. Rose, pp. 431; 440); Hier. Chron. ann. Abr. 1678; Suid. s.w. Ξενοκράτης, Πλάτων), dying at the age of 82 (Diog. L. 4,14; cf. Cic. Sen. 23; Censorin. 15,2). Victorinus (in Cic. Met. 2, 2, p. 258 Halm) remarks: gloria Xenocratis philosophi motus Aristoteles philosophiam exercuit. His character and self-restraint are mentioned with respect in various places ; e.g., 1, 72; Rep. 1, 3; Att. 1, 16, 4 (cf. Pro Balb. 12); Hor. S. 2, 3, 254-257 (and scholiasts); Val. Max. 2, 10, ext. 2; Acad. Phil. Ind. Here. p. 39 Mekler; Diog. L. 4, 6-11; Stob. vol. 3, pp. 495496 Wachsmuth; Suid. s.v. Ξενοκράτης. Some thought him austere or morose {Off. 1, 109; Plut. Mar. 2, 3; De vit.

9

de] in

Pudore, 11, p. 533c; Hier. In Osee, p. 5 Vallarsi; also Hor. S. 2, 3, 254 and parallels in L. Miiller's note). The omission of est in nearly all our mss might be paralleled by 1, 35: nec audiendus ... Strato·, cf. also T. Birt in Beri, philol. Woch. 38 (1918), 575. de natura deorum: in the long list of his works given by Diog. L. 4, 11-14 appears the two-volume περί θεών (4, 13), to which reference is here made. A fuller account of his views is given by Aët. Plac. 1, 7, 30 {Doxogr. Gr.2 304), of which a portion resembling Cicero's account is quoted in the note on deos ... odo, below. For a systematic account of the teachings of Xenocrates and a collection of his fragments (among which this is no. 17) see R. Heinze, Xenokrates (1892). species: though in Ac. 1, 30 Cicero equates this with ιδέα, yet here the notion is merely that of a divine aspect, perhaps—since it is an Epicurean speaking—of anthropomorphic character. deos . . . octo: cf. Aët. Plac. 1, 7, 30 {Doxogr. Gr.2 304): θεόν δ' εΐναι καΐτόν ούρανόν καΐ τούς αστέρας πυρώδεις 'Ολυμπίους θεούς, και έτέρους ύποσελήνους δαίμονας άοράτους; Clem. Protr. 5, 66, 2: Ξενοκράτης (Καλχηδόνιος οδτος) έπτά μέν θεούς τούς πλανήτας, δγδοον δέ τόν έκ πάντων των άπλανών [so Davies on our passage; αύτών Ρ, δστρων Diels, Doxogr. Gr.2 130, n. 1] συνεστώτα κόσμον αίνίττεται; Theophr. Metaph. 12 (p. 12 Ross and Fobes): Ξενοκράτης . . . άπαντα πως περιτίθησιν περί τόν κόσμον, ομοίως αισθητά καΐ νοητά καΐ μαθηματικά καΐ έτι δη τά θεία. For other instances of an ogdoas of gods cf. S. Weinstock in Journ. Rom. Stud. 36 (1946), 118, n. 102. in: for similar—often causal—uses of in (cf. Gr. έν) see J. Β. Hofmann, Lat.

1,34

246

tur, unum qui ex omnibus sideribus quae infixa cáelo sint ex dispersis quasi 1 membris simplex sit putandus deus, septimum solem adiungit octavamque lunam; qui quo sensu beati esse possint 2 intellegi 3 non potest. Ex eadem Platonis schola Ponticus 1

quasi] qua A1

2

possunt NF1

Gram. (1928), 438; but also R. Philippson in Philo!. Woch. 54 (1934), 188. stellis vagis: cf. 2, 80; 2, 103; elsewhere called vagantes (2, 68; Div. 1, 17), errantes (1, 34; 2, 51; 2, 119; 3, 51; Rep. 1, 23: errantes et quasi vagae), erraticae or errones (Gell. 3, 10, 2; 14, 1, 11); cf. Mar. Victorin. in Gram. Lat. 6, 60 Keil) ; also cf. Tim. 36 : quae ... vaga et mutabili errattone labuntur·, C. M. Bernhardt, De Cic. Graecae Philos. Interprete (1865), 12. All these render the Greek πλανηται (cf. other parallels in Pease's n. on Div. 1,17. The emendation of Manutius and of P. P. Dobree {Adversaria, 5 (1874), 4) to vagi, which would refer to the planetary gods themselves, seems unnecessary. M. P. Nilsson (Harv. theol. Rev. 33 (1940), 1-8) discusses the origin of Greek beliefs in the divinity of the heavenly bodies. nominantur: Piasberg {ed. maior.) suggests that this represents τούς òvoμαζομένους επί τοις πλανήταις, and it seems unnecessary to emend to numerantur with Lambinus or to moventur with J. S. Reid (in the appendix to the third volume of Mayor's edition). unum . . . ex omnibus: cf. [Plat.] Epinom. 987b: ένα δέ τόν δγδοον χρή λέγειν, δν μάλιστά τις αν κόσμον προσαγορεύοι, δς έναντίος έκείνοις σύμπασι πορεύεται. We may perhaps see a polemic against this view of a composite god in Philodem. De Deis, 3, Col. 10, 36-40 (p. 31 Diels) : êv γάρ είναι δει τό κινούμενον, άλλ' οΰ πολλ έπΐ των έξης τόπων, καί το ζών άεΐ ταύτόν άλλ' ούχ δμοια πολλά, ού μήν άλλά τόν εημένον τρ ό τοιούτος αμείβει θεός 6κ των αυτών συνεστηκώς μεταλαμβάνεών—. The expression ex omnibus as offset on the one side to unum and on the other to simplex makes a strong contrast. infixa cáelo: Ciceronian expressions

3

intelli A1 for the fixed astra or sidera (corresponding to (αστέρες) έμπεπηγότες τω ούρανω (Achill. I sag. ρ. 39, 14 Maass) or to ένδεδεμένοι ; cf. F. Boll in P.-W. 6 (1909), 2407) include Tuse. 1, 62: astra . .. quae sunt infixa certis locis ; 5, 69: sidera . .. caelo inhaerentia ... certis infixa sedibus; Tim. 36: sidera quae infixa cáelo non moventur loco·, Rep. 6, 17: in quo sunt infixi Uli qui volvuntur stellarum cursus", for phrases in other Latin authors cf. Boll, op. cit., 6, 2407, 45-59, to which add Macrob. Somn. 1, 18, 5-6. sint: the more usual sunt of the deteriores is read by various editors (e.g., Orelli, Baiter, Müller, Diels {Doxogr. Gr.2 540), Mayor, and Goethe. But for similar subjunctives Plasberg compares 1, 37: qui aether nomine tur; 1, 92; 1, 96; 2, 23; Div. 2, 89: vocentur; Brut. 57: tulerit .. . sit·, 79: acceperit·, in most of which cases there are variant indicative readings or emendations. Cf. also H. Sjögren, Comment. Tullianae (1910), 148; R. Kühner-C. Stegmann, Ausf. Gram. d. lat. Spr. 2, 2 2 (1914), 173-174; and below, 1, 36, n. {appellefur); J. B. Hofmann, Synt. u. Stilistik (1928), 708-709. dispersis quasi membris: cf. 3, 67: membra ... dividit ... passim dispergit corpus. In 1, 100 below is an allusion to the membra of the mundus. beati: the same objection raised by Vellerns at 1, 24 (Plato); 1, 27 (Pythagoras); 1, 30 (Plato); 1, 33 (Aristotle); and by implication at other places. E. Bignone {JJAristotele perduto, 1 (1936), 193-194 and n. 2) believes that here Cicero is not speaking carelessly, but is preserving valuable evidence that the rigorous denial of plaesure to the gods continued in the Academy. intellegi non potest: cf. 1, 30, n. {intellegi non potest).

1,34

247

Heraclides puerilibus fabulis 1 refersit libros, et tarnen modo 2 1

famulis O

2

mundo Ν 1

ex eadem Piatonis schola: cf. Legg. 3, 14: Heraclidesque Ponticus profectus ab eodem Piatone·, Tusc. 5, 8: auditor Piatonis Ponticus Heraclides, vir doctus in primis·, Div. 1, 46: Ponticus Heraclides, doctus vir, auditor et discipulus Piatonis·, Acad. Philos. Ind. Herculan. col. 6, p. 33 Mekler [cf. col. 7, p. 39] and Diog. L. 3, 46 [in each of these is a list of the pupils of Plato]; 5, 86: Ηρακλείδης Εΰθύφρονος Ήρακλεώτης του Πόντου [cf. Strab. 12, 3, 1], άνήρ πλούσιος. Άθήνησι δέ παρέλαβε πρώτον μέν Σπευσίππω· άλλά καί των Πυθαγορείων διήκουσε καί τά Πλάτωνος έζηλώκει· καί ύστερον ήκουσεν 'Αριστοτέλους, ώς φησι Σωτίων έν Διαδοχαϊς ; Simplic. Pbys. 3, 4, p. 453, 28-29 Diels; Suid. s.v. Ηρακλείδης T. L. Heath, Aristarchi of Samos (1913), 252; but see Proci, in Tim. p. 281e (p. 138 Diehl): 'Ηρακλείδης μέν οδν ó Ποντικός, ού Πλάτωνος ών άκουστής. For the differentiation of various persons named Heraclides cf. Diog. L. 5, 93-94; P.-W. 8 (1913), 457-499 (ours is no. 45, and is treated by R. Däbritz on Sp. 472484); H. Bloch in Trans. Am. philo!. Assoc. 71 (1940), 31-33. The works of Heraclides Ponticus are listed by Diog. L. 5, 86-88, the titles which seem most apposite to the present discussion being those under the head of φυσικά (5, 87), particularly the περί φύσεως and the περί των έν ούρανω. Cf. the collection by O. Voss, De Heraclidis Pontici Vita et Scriptis (1896), 20-34, and the treatment by Däbritz, op. cit. 8, 474-482, especially 478, 44-52. See also Aët. Plac. 2, 13, 15 (Doxogr. Gr343): Ηρακλείδης καί οί Πυθαγόρειοι ίκαστον των αστέρων κόσμον ύπάρχειν γην περιέχοντα άέρα τε καί αιθέρα έν τ ω άπείρω αίθέρι. ταϋτα δέ τά δόγματα έν τοις Όρφικοϊς φέρεται· κοσμοποιοϋσι γάρ έκαστον των άστέρων. For a free paraphrase of our passage cf. Min. Fei. 19, 9 (I quote the very perplexed passage as restored by Piasberg (ed. maior.)): [Aristoteles] Ponticus variai alias mundo alias menti divinae [or divinum?]

tribuens principatum [Heraclides Ponticus quoque de deò\; divinam mentem quamvis varie adserit [adscribit codd.]. Theophrastus et Zenon et Cleanthes sunt et ipsi multiformes, etc. puerilibus fabulis: R. Philippson (Symb. Osloenses, 19 (1939), 29) compares the vilifications expressed by Philodemus; e.g., De Piet. p. 118, 1-3 Gomperz [as restored by Philippson in Hermes, 56 (1921), 381]: δ' ώς ήβασ όνειρώτ καταφρονώ; id., Rhet. 1, 356, 7 Sudhaus: παιδαιωδώς; and other types to be discussed at 1, 37, n. (delirans). Yet it must be admitted that Cicero himself sometimes uses similar phraseology; e.g., 1, 97: an quicquam tam puerile dici potest; Ac. 2, 33: faciunt puerili ter·, 2, 54: similitudines ... puerili ter consectantur·, Fin. 1, 19: cum res tota ficta sit pueriliter·, 1, 72: puerili s est delect atto ·, 3, 19: dicere ornate velie puerile est·, Legg. 1, 7: in historia puerile quiddam consectatur·, F am. 3, 10, 5: sermo stultus et puerilis·, Att. 14, 21, 3: Consilio puerili-, 15, 4, 2: consiliis ... puerilibus·, 16, 8, 1. Similarly disparaged are old wives' tales ; cf. 1, 55, n. (aniculis). That Heraclides tended towards the marvellous or fanciful may be seen from Plut. Camill. 22, 3 : μυθώδη καί πλασματίαν οντα τόν Ήρακλείδην; cf. Diog. L. 8, 72: δια παντός έστιν Ηρακλείδης τοιούτος παραδοξολόγος ; also note his novelistic work, the Aborts, for which see U. von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff, Aristoteles ». Athen, 2 (1893), 14; Däbritz, op. cit. 8, 476. Epicurean attacks upon him are discussed by Däbritz op. cit. 8, 483, 33-37. refersit: cf. 2, 63; Tusc. 2, 6. et tarnen: Piasberg in his editto maior places a dash after this word and with the aposiopesis compares 1, 93: sed tarnen, but in his editto minor he connects tamen more closely with what follows. T. Birt (Beri, philol. Woch. 38 (1918), 575) explains tamen by saying that it is strange that an author who defended such childish fabulae should also re-

248 mundum tum mentem divinam esse putat, errantibus etiam 1 stellis divinitatem tribuit sensuque deum privat et eius formam mutabilem esse vult, 2 eodemque in libro rursus terram et caelum refert in deos. 35 Nec vero Theophrasti inconstantia ferenda est; modo 1

etiam add. A

2

vult] tulit O1

cognize the divinity of astral bodies. modo . . . tum: cf. 1, 31, η. (modo .. . tum). The views of Heraclides seem no more childish than others here related, and E. Bignone ( J J Aristotele perduto, 1 (1936), 191-192) remarks that they are common to Aristotle in his Platonizing period, to Plato's Laws, and to the Epinomis. mundum: which Heraclides declared infinite in extent; cf. Aët. Ρlac. 2, 1, 5, in Doxogr. Gr.2 328. To this word deum has been added by various scholars, being placed by Davies before modo·, by J. Walker (in the edition of Davies), followed by Diels (Doxogr. Gr.2 541), after mundum; and by P. Manutius and Lambinus after mentem and in place of divinam·, cf. 1, 37: tum tpsum mundum deum dicit esse. But while the presence of deum would not be objectionable if it were attested by the mss, it is hardly needed, and the adjective divinam with mentem makes its absence less felt. sensu . . . privat: with the implication, as usual (cf. 1, 30), that the god is thereby also deprived of prudentia and voluptas. formam mutabilem: especially in the case of the changing phases of the moon and the planets. Mayor compares Plat. Rep. 2, 381b: άλλά μήν ó θεός γε καΐ τά τοϋ θεοϋ πάντη δριστα 2χει. πώς 8* oö; ταύτη μέν δή ήκιστα äv πολλάς μορφάς ϊσχοι ó θεός. ήκιστα δήτα; James, 1, 17: τοϋ πατρός των φώτων, παρ' φ ούκ £νι παραλλαγή ή τροπής άποσκίασμα. refert in deos: cf. 1, 29, n. (in deorum numero). 35 nec vero: cf. 1, 29; 1, 34. Theophrasti: of Eresus in Lesbos (Diog. L. 5, 36; Steph. Byz. s.v. "Ερεσός; Suid. s.v. Θεόφραστος), originally named Tyrtamus, and renamed Theophrastus

by Aristotle because of his graceful style (Diog. L. 5, 38; Steph. Byz. I.e.·, Hier. Chron. ann. Abr. 1697; Suid. I.e.). He was a pupil of Aristotle (cf. Fin. 4, 3; Diog. L. 5, 36; Suid. I.e.) and his successor, and was the author of very numerous books (Suid. I.e. : βιβλία δέ αύτοϋ πάμπλειστα; a list in Diog. L. 5, 42-50), among which were works (5, 43) περί τοϋ διακόσμου (one book), (5, 47) έγκώμια θεών (one book ; perhaps noted by Philodem. De Piet. p. 73 Gomperz), (5, 48) τών περί τό θείον Ιστορίας (six books), περί θεών (three books), and (5, 49), περί της θείας εύδαιμονίας (one book), in addition to various works on φύσις (5, 46) and περί ούρανοϋ (5, 50). He is highly praised in Ac. 1, 33. inconstantia: for the accusation cf. 1, 30, n. (Platonis inconstantia)·, 1, 43; T. Gomperz, Greek Thinkers (Engl, tr.), 4 (1912), 579); for the thought, Min. Fei. 19, 10, which, as commonly edited, reads, Theophrastus etiam variat, alias mundo, alias menti divinae tribuens principatum·, for a reconstruction of the passage cf. 1, 34, n. (ex eadem Platonis schola), above; also Clem. Protr. 5, 66, 5: δ δε Έρέσιος έκεϊνος Θεόφραστος ό 'Αριστοτέλους γνώριμος πή μέν (= modo) ούρανόν, πή δέ ( = tum) πνεϋμα τόν θεόν ύπονοεϊ. W. D. Ross and F. Η. Fobes (ed. of Theophr. Metaph. (1929), xxvxxvi) consider these statements in harmony with the assumption that Theophrastus supposed (1) that there was no need to seek for an explanation of movement (as by an unmoved Mover), since movement belongs to the essence of things that possess it; and (2) that many features in the universe are to be explained not ideologically but as the inevitable result of movements of the heavenly bodies.

249

enim menti divinum tribuit principatum, modo caelo, tum autem 1 signis sideribusque caelestibus.2 Nec audiendus 3 eius auditor Strato,4 is 5 qui physicus appellatur, qui omnem vim divinam in 1 modo autem (tum add. m.1) D, autem add. Β 4 stratonis N1 * audiendus est M*, audendus D

modo . . . tum: cf. 1, 31, η. (modo ... tum) ; also the passage from Clement quoted in the previous note. menti: cf. Clem. Protr. 5, 66, 5 (just quoted). divinum: Minucius here reads divinae, modifying menti, and with this reading certain deteriores as well as J. Walker and Heindorf agree. The variations of Minucius, however, in his paraphrasing of Cicero are numerous enough so that we need not accept them against the evidence of the best mss. principatum: ήγεμονικόν;; cf. 2, 29. signis sideribusque: pleonastic; cf. 1, 22: signis et lumintbus. E. Bignone {L'Aristotele perduto, 2 (1936), 486, n. 2), comparing Porphyr. De Abstin. 2, 5, remarks that Theophrastus, in his work περί εύσεβείας, followed the astral theology of Aristotle in the De Philosophia rather than that of his later works. nec audiendus: with the thought cf. Ac. 2, 121 : nec Stratoni tarnen adsentior·, with the phraseology Fin. 2, 41: nec vero audiendus Hieronymus-, O f f . 1, 88: nec vero audiendi qui·, Quintil. Inst. 10, 3, 22: non tarnen protinus audiendi qui\ Aug. C.D. 12, 4: nec audiendi sunt qui·, and with the omission of est 1, 34, n. (condiscipulus Xenocrates)·, Reid on Fin. 2, 41. eius auditor Strato: cf. Ac. 1, 34: nam Strato, eius [sc. Theophrasti] auditor·, 1, 121; Lampsacenus Strato·, Fin. 5, 13; Sen. N.Q. 6, 13, 2: Straton ex eadem schola est, qui banc partem philosophiae maxime coluit et rerum naturae inquisitor fuit·, Suid. s.v. Στράτων· Λαμψακηνός φιλόσοφος, Θεοφράστου γνώριμος καΐ διάδοχος; also Diog. L. 5, 53; 5, 56; 5, 58: διεδέξατο δ' αύτοΰ τήν σχολήν Στράτων Άρκεσιλάου Λαμψακηνός. His eminence is attested by Plut. Adv. Colot. 14, 1115b: των ¿ίλλων Περιπατητικών ó κο-

2

que caelestibus om. BF 5 is] his Η1E1, del.H3

ρυφαιότατος Στράτων. He was head of the Peripatetic school from 288/7 or 287/6 to 270/69 or 269/8 B.C. (W. Capelle in P.-W. 4A (1931), 278, 62-63). On his system cf. H. Diels in Sit^b. d. Beri. Akad. d. Wiss. 1893, part 1,101-127. physicus appellatur: cf. 1, 32, n. physicus)·, for the term as applied to Strato cf. Ac. 1, 34: Strato ... cum maxime necessariam partem philosophiae quae posita est in virtute et moribus reliquisset totumque se ad investigationem naturae contulisset in ea ipsa plurimum dissedit a suis·, Fin. 5, 13: primum Theophrasti, Strato, physicum se voluit\ Polyb. 12, 25c, 3: Στράτωνι τω φυσικφ [a good expositor of others' views, but unoriginal and dull himself]; Plut. De Soll. Anim. 3, 961a; Galen, De Tremore, 6 (VII, 616 Κ.); [Galen,] Hist. Phil. 18 (Doxogr. Gr.2 611 = XIX, 244 Κ.; cf. id., 3, p. 601 = XIX, 227 Κ.); Diog. L. 5, 58: φυσικός έπικληθείς άπό του περί τήν θεωρίαν ταύτην παρ' όντινοϋν έπιμελέστατα διατετριφέναι ; 5, 64: Στράτων . . . διαπρέψας έν παντί λόγων είδει καΐ μάλιστά γε έν τω καλουμένω φυσικφ, όπερ είδος άρχαιότερόν τε καΐ σπουδαιότερον ; Porphyr. De Abstin. 3, 21 ; Simplic. in Phys. 5, 6, p. 916, 12 Diels; Suid. s.v. Στράτων; Proci, in Tim. p. 242 f (p. 15 Diehl). The epithet is particularly appropriate here in view of the following statement vim divinam in natura sitam esse censet; cf. Ac. 2, 121; T. Gomperz, Greek Thinkers (Engl, tr.), 4 (1912), 503. From the views of Aristotle Strato turned to doctrines variously designated as pantheistic, or positivistic (cf. G. Rodier, La physique de Straton de Lampsaque (1890)), substituting φύσις for deity; cf. W. Theiler, Zur Gesch. d. teleolog. Naturbetrachtung (1925), 103. He wrote, among other works, three books

250

1,36

natura 1 sitam esse censet, quae causas gignendi, augendi, minuendi habeat sed careat omni et sensu 2 et figura. 14 36 Zeno autem, ut iam 3 ad vestros, Balbe, veniam, naturalem legem divinam esse 1

naturam Ν

2

omni sensu Ν

3

περί θεών (Diog. L. 5, 59). On his physical system see H. Diels in Sit^b. d. Beri. Akad. 1893, 1, 101-127. Cicero states in Ac. 1, 25 that such words as physica are already treated as though Latin. in natura: with the view here expressed cf. Ac. 2, 121 : Lampsacenus Strato ... negat opera deorum se uti ad fabricandum mundum. quaecumque sint docet omnia e f f e c t a esse natura; Plut. Adv. Colot. 14, p. 1115b: Στράτων οϋτ' Άριστοτέλει κατά πολλά συμφέρεται καΐ Πλάτωνι τάς έναντίας ϊσχηκε δόξας περί κινήσεως περί νου και περί ψυχής και περί γενέσεως· καΐ τελευτών τόν κόσμον αύτόν ού ζφον είναί φησι, το δέ κατά φύσιν επεσθαι τω κατά τύχην· άρχήν γάρ ένδιδόναι τό αύτόματον, εϊθ' ουτω περαίνεσθαι των φυσικών παθών έκαστον; Min. Fei. 19, 8: Straton quoque et ipse naturam [sc. nonne deum loquitur] ; Lact. De Ira, 10, 1 : naturam vero, ut Straton ait, habere in se vim gignendi et minuendi, sed earn nec sensum habere ullum nec figuram, ut intellegamus omnia quasi sua sponte esse generata, nullo artifice nec auctore [a theory which Mayor compares to that of evolution]; 10, 34: at enim, sicut alti dicunt, natura mundus e f fectus est, quae sensu et figura caret, hoc vero multo est absurdius. si natura mundum fecit, Consilio et ratione fecerit necesse est ; is enim facit aliquid qui aut voluntatem faciendi habet aut scientiam. si caret sensu ac figura, quomodo potest ab ea fieri quod et sensum habeat et figuram·, Max. Tyr. 11, 5: κάν ύπαλλάξγ)ς την φύσιν, ως Στράτων. Tert. Adv. Marc. 1, 13, however, remarks: ut Strato caelum et terram (sc. deos pronuntiavit) ; cf. Capelle, op. cit. 4A, 291, 64-292, 2, who takes the expression figuratively rather than literally. It seems clear that Strato definitely rejected anthropomorphic and teleological views of nature; cf. Capelle, op. cit. 4A, 291, 30-44. Other writers maintain that "nature" is in

utinam Ρ such cases as this but another name for "God"; cf. Sen. De Ben. 4, 7, 1: "natura" inquit, "haec mihi praestat" non intellegis te, cum hoc dicis, mutare nomen deo? quid enim aliud est natura quam deus et divina ratio toti mundo partibusque eius insertai But for natura as a blind force cf. 2, 81, below; Sen. N.Q. 1, praef. 15: natura nesciente quid faciat. gignendi, augendi, minuendi: for such asyndeta cf. R. Kühner-C. Stegmann, Aus f . Gram. d. lat. Spr. 2, 2 2 (1914), 152-153. careat . . . sensu et figura: cf. Sen. ap. Aug. C.D. 6, 10: ego feram aut Platonem aut Peripateticum Stratonem, quorum alter fecit deum sine corpore, alter sine animo? 36 Zeno: whose views are also noted in 1, 70; 2, 20-22; 2, 57-58; 2, 63; 3, 18; 3, 22-23; 3, 63. ut ad vestros . . . veniam: R. Hirzel (Untersuch. Cicero's philos. Sehr. 1 (1877), 18), L. Reinhardt {Die Quellen von Cic. Sehr, de Deor. Nat. (1888), 4-5), and R. Philippson (Symb. Osloenses, 19 (1939), 16) note the similar language with which in 1, 25 (haec quidem vestra, Lucili) Vellerns closes his introductory remarks against Platonists and Stoics, and believe that Cicero has used two different sources, without in his haste attempting to bring them into any mutual relation. naturalem legem divinam: φύσις and νόμος were often contrasted by rhetoricians and ethical writers; cf. P. Shorey on Plat. Rep. 2, 359c and references there cited. But by Heraclitus natural law and divine will are identified (cf. frags. 2, 32, and 113-114 Diels), and the doctrine was adopted by the Stoics, to whom the idea of law was very important (cf. G. H. Sabine and S. Β. Smith, edition of Cic. De República (1929), 22, n. 38). Cf. Min. Fei. 19, 10: Zenon ... naturalem legem atque divinam et aethera interim interdumque

1,36

251

censet, eamque vim obtinere recta 1 imperantem prohibentemque contraria. Quam legem quo modo efficiat animantem intellegere non possumus; deum autem animantem certe volumus esse. Atque hie idem alio loco aethera deum dicit; si intellegi potest 1

rectam Ν

rationem vult omnium esse principium; Lact. Inst. 1, 5, 20: item Zenon naturalem divinamque legem [sc. deum nuncupate ; Diog. L. 7, 88 : άπαγορεύειν εϊωθεν ó νόμος ó κοινός, δπερ έστίν ό ορθός λόγος, διά πάντων έρχόμενος, ό αύτός ών τω Δ li ; Schol. Lucan. 2, 9 (S.V.F. 1, no. 162): hoc secundum Stoicos dicit qw adfirmant mundum prudentia ac lege firmatum, ipsumque deum esse sibi legem·, Cleanthes, Hymn, 34-35 (S.V.F. 1, no. 537): έπεί ούτε βροτοις γέρας άλλο τι μείζον / οΰτε θεοϊς ή κοινόν άεΐ νόμον έν δίκη ΰμνεϊν; 1, 40, below: legisperpetuae et aeternae vim; 2, 79 ; Legg. 1,18: lex est ratio summa insita in natura, quae iubet ea quae facienda sunt prohibetque contraria; 1, 42; 2, 8: banc igitur video sapientissimorum fuisse sententiam legem neque hominum ingeniis exeogitatam nec scitum aliquod esse populorum, sed aeternum quiddam quod universum mundum regeret imperandi prohibendique sapientia. ita prineipem legem illam et ultimam mentem esse dicebant omnia ratione aut cogentis aut vetantis dei; 2, 10: erat enimprofecta a rerum natura et ad rede faciendum inpellens et a delicto avocans, quae non tum denique incipit lex esse cum scripta est sed tum cum orta est; orta autem est simul cum mente divina; quam ob rem lex vera ... ratio est recta summi Iovis; Arius Didymus ap. Stob, vol. 2, p. 102 Wachsmuth: του δέ νόμου βντος σπουδαίου . . . έπειδή λόγος ορθός έστι προστακτικός μέν ών ποιητέον, άπαγορευτικός δέ ών ού ποιητέον [cf. vol. 2, p. 96]; Apul. De Plat. 2, 20: naturae lege; Clem. Strom. 7, 3, 16, 5: ό πάντων ήγεμών θνητών τε καΐ άθανάτων . . . νόμος ών δντως καΐ θεσμός καΐ λόγος αιώνιος; Schol. Lucan. 2, 9 (S.V.F. 1, no. 162); J. Kaerst, Die ant. Idee d. Oekumene (1903), 32, n. 27; Ε. V. Arnold, Rom. Stoicism (1911), 220; 328 (quoting Wordsworth, Ode to Duty). Zeno wrote a work περί νόμου (Diog. L. 7, 4), in

which this doctrine may have been expressed. On the Stoic attitude toward the law of nature and the laws of man cf. A. Bill, La morale et la loi dans la philos, antique (1928), especially 160-179; 230233. esse censet: awkwardly repeated after its use in the previous sentence. vim obtinere: cf. Legg. 2, 9: et hoc et alia iussa ac vetita populorum vim habere ad recte facta vocandi et a peccatis avocandi, quae vis non modo senior est quam aetas populorum et civitatium sed aequalis illius caelum terras tuentis et regentis dei. prohibentemque contraria : cf. 2, 79 : lex quae est recte praeceptio pravique depulsio; Legg. 1, 18; 2, 10 (both quoted in the note on naturalem legem divinam, above). animantem intellegere non possumus: a misunderstanding by Vellerns of the view of Zeno, who did not hold the law to be God but rather God to be the law, i.e., the controlling principle of the universe. Schoemann, Mayor, and Goethe compare his similar misunderstandings of πρόνοια in 1, 18, with which cf. 2, 73-74. animantem certe: that God should be animate even the Stoics themselves required; cf. 2, 45. hic idem: cf. 1, 30; 1, 33; also below, idem astris hoc idem tribuit. The awkward repetition of idem may be noted. alio loco: in which of the works mentioned by Diog. L. 7, 4 this view appeared is uncertain; the only title which especially suggests it is περί, τοϋ δλου. aethera: cf. 1, 40, n. (aethera esse . . . Iovem); Ac. 2, 126: Zenoni et reliquis fere Stoicis aether videtur summus deus, mente praeditus, qua omnia regantur; Tert. Adv. Marc. 1, 13: ut Zeno aerem et aetherem [sc. deum pronuntiavit; A. C. Pearson, Frag, of Zeno and Cleanthes (1891), 91,

252

1,36

nihil sentiens deus, qui numquam nobis occurrit neque in ptecibus neque in optatis neque in votis. Aliis autem libris rationem quandam per omnium naturam rerum pertinentem 1 v i 2 divina 3 esse 1 pertingentem C D2NOBFM

2

ui dett. Man. Dav., ut ceti.

thinks aerem here a blunder, unless with L. Stein {Beri. Stud. f . el. Philol. u. Arcb. 3, 1 (1886), 58, n. 80) we read aut in place of et]; Min. Fei. 19, 10: aetbera interditι omnium esse principium; Diog. L. 7, 147: Άθηναν δέ κατά τήν εις αιθέρα διάτασιν του ήγεμονικοϋ αύτοϋ. Euripides had spoken {Hei. 1013-1016) of men's souls as merging after death into the ether (cf. Pacuv. 90-93 Ribbeck, quoted in 2, 91, below); for other views of the ether as divine cf. 1, 33, n. {caeli ardorem); Tusc. 1, 65: quinta quaedam natura ... haec et deorum est et animorum ; Aesch. fr. 70 Nauck (ap. Clem. Strom. 5, 114, 4; Eus. Pr. Ev. 13, 13, 41 (cf. Philodem, p. 22 Gomperz); Pherecydes ap. Prob, in Virg. Eel. 6, 31, p. 343 Hagen; Lact. Inst. 1, 1, 62 (Enn. Eubem. 104 Vahlen): idque Iuppiter quod aether; Hermias, Irrido, 12 (Doxogr. Gr.2 654); also among the Stoics, Cleanthes (1, 37; Lact. Inst. 1, 5, 19: Cleanthes et Anaximenes aetbera esse dicunt summum deum), Chrysippus (1, 39-40; Aët. Plac. 1, 7, 33, in Doxogr. Gr. 306 = i". V.F. 2, no. 1027 : άνωτάτω δέ πάντων νοϋν έναιθέριον [Plut. : έν αίθέρι] είναι θεόν ; Philodem. De Piet. p. 79 Gomperz {Doxogr. Gr.2 546): Δία δέ τόν αιθέρα), Boëthus (Aët. Plac. 1, 7, 25, in Doxogr. Gr,2 303 = S. V.F. 3, p. 265 : Βόηθος τόν αιθέρα θεόν άπεφήνατο), Arius Didymus (ap. Eus. Pr. Εν. 15, 20, 4: είναι δέ ψυχήν έν τω δλω φασίν, δ καλοϋσιν αιθέρα), and Artemidorus {Onirocr. 2, 34 and 2, 35— among θεοί αιθέριοι—: πυρ τό αΐθέριον). Of probably Stoic origin are [Clem.] Recogn. 10, 34, and two glosses of loan. Diac. on Hes. Theog. 453 (p. 331 Flach): Ζήνα τόν αιθέρα οίητέον; 583 (ρ. 337 Flach): τω Διί, τουτέστι τω αίθέρι. Cf. also Eustath. in II. 1, 569. In general cf. O. Gruppe, Gr. Myth. u. Rei. 2 (1906), 1114, n. 3; Α. Β. Cook, Zeus, 1 (1914), 29, and n. 4.

8

diuina PDxBl, diuinam

si intellegi potest: cf. 1, 30, n. {intellegi non potest); a conditional clause is sometimes used in a doubting, sometimes in a scornful sense; cf. 1, 104: si modo movetur; Div. 2, 33: si est ars ulla rerum incognitarum; Pro Lig. 3: si illud imperium esse potest; F am. 9, 17, 2: si aut hoc lucrum est aut haec vita; 11, 8, 2: si hie dilectus appellandus est; Juv. 3, 289: si rixa est; T. Wopkens, Advers. crit. 1 (1828), 69. nihil sentiens deus: another Epicurean misunderstanding of Zeno's views. occurrit: cf. 1, 46; 1, 61; 1, 76; 1, 81; probably here used not of a concept occurring to our minds but of a theophany presenting itself to our senses. neque . . . neque . . . neque: with this triple polysyndeton cf. 3, 86 ; Fat. 34; Rep. 3, 45; a fourfold one is found in Paradoxa, 21. precibus . . . optatis . . . votis: cf. 1, 122: quod ni ita sit, quid veneramur, quid precamur deos ... quid optamus a deis inmortalihus, quid vovemus; Div. 1, 129: etiam cum taciti optent quid aut voveant, non dubitent quin di illud exaudiant; also the phrases in votis (Hor. S. 2, 6, 1) and in voto (Pers. 3, 49). It might be supposed that prayers, wishes, and vows would mean little to an Epicurean, yet cf. 1, 45: ut deos pie coleremus ... habet enim venerationem iustam quicquid excellit; also G. D. Hadzsits, on worship and prayer among the Epicureans {Trans. Am. philol. Assoc. 39 (1908), 73-88; C. Bailey, Proc. Class. Assoc. 19 (1922), 19-25; N. W. De Witt in Trans. Royal Soc. of Canada, sect. 2, 1944, 79-88. rationemquandam... pertinentem: λόγον τινά . . . διήκοντα; cf. 2, 24: vim ... per omnem mundumpertinentem; 2, 71 : deus pertinens per naturam cuiusque rei; Ac. 2, 119; Philodem. De Piet. p. 74 Gomperz {Doxogr. Gr.2 542): δει τήν

1,36

253

adfectam 1 putat. Idem astris hoc idem ttibuit, turn annis, mensi1

esse ac perfectam O

ύναμιν, οδσαν συνατικήν οίκεως των μερώ πρόλληλα καΐ έκ—; Heraclit. ap. Aët. Ρlac. 1, 28, 1 {Doxogr. Gr.2 323): Ηράκλειτος ούσίαν ειμαρμένης άπεφαίνετο λόγον τόν διά ουσίας τοϋ παντός διήκοντα; Virg. G. 4, 221222: deum namque ire per omnis / terrasque tractusque maris caelumque profmdum; Aen. 6, 724-727 : principio caelum ac terram camposque liquentis / lucentemque globum lunae Titaniaque astra j spiritus inius alit, totamque infusa per artus / mens agitat molem et magno se corpore miscet [cf. Lact. De Ira, 11, 5]; Sen. Dial. 12, 8, 3: id actum est ... ab ilio quisquís formator universi fuit, sive ille deus est potens omnium, sive incorporalis ratio ingentium operum artifex, she divinus spiritus per omnia maxima et minima aequali intentione d i f fusus-, N.Q. 2, 9, 4; Aët. Ρlac. 1, 7, 33 (Doxogr. Gr.2 306, of the Stoics): καί πνεύμα μέν ένδιήκον δι' δλου τοϋ κόσμου; Μ. Aurel. 5, 32: τόν δι* δλης της ούσίας διήκοντα λόγον; Μ. Aurel. 8, 54; Diog. L. 7, 134 [Zeno's views]: τό μέν οδν πάσχον είναι την άποιον ούσίαν τήν ΰλην, τό δέ ποιούν τόν έν αύτη λόγον τόν θεόν; 7, 138 [Chrysippus and Posidonius]: είς άπαν αύτοϋ [sc. τοϋ κόσμου] μέρος διήκοντος τοϋ νοΰ, καθάπερ έφ' ήμών της ψυχής; 7, 140; Athenag. Leg. pro Christ. 6 (Pair. Gr. 6, 904a): oí δέ άπό της Στοάς, καν ταΐς προσηγορίαις κατά τάς παραλλάξεις της δλης, δί ής φασι τό πνεϋμα χωρεϊν τοϋ θεοϋ; Tert. Apol. 21 [after the views of Zeno] : haec Cleanthes in spiritum congerit, quem permeatorem universitatis adfirmat-, Min. Fei. 19, 10: interdumque rationem vult omnium esse principium-, Hippol. Philosophum. 1, 21, 1 [of Chrysippus and Zeno]: διά πάντων δέ διήκειν τήν πρόνοιαν αύτοϋ [sc. τοϋ θεοϋ]; Clem. Protr. 5, 66, 3: ούδέ μήν τούς άπό της Στοάς παρελεύσομαι διά πάσης ύλης, καΐ διά της άτιμοτάτης, τό θείον διήκειν λέγοντας [cf. Tatian, Ad Gr. 3]; Sext. Emp. Pyrrhon. 3, 218: Στωικοί δέ πνεϋμα διήκον καΐ διά των είδεχθων; Themist. in Aristot. De

An. 2, p. 35, 32-33 Heinze: τοϊς άπό Ζήνωνος σύμφωνος ή δόξα, διά πάσης ούσίας πεφοιτηκέναι τόν θεόν τιθεμένοις; Lact. Inst. 4, 9, 2: Zenon rerum naturae dispositorem atque opificem universitatis λόγον praedicat·, Firm. Mat. Math. 1, 5, 10: mens enim ilia divina animusque caelestis per omne mundi corpus in modum circuii collocatus·, Epiphan. Adv. Haeres. 3, 36 {Doxogr. Gr.2 592) : Ζήνων . . . έλεγε δέ πάντα διήκειν τό θείον; L. Stein in Beri. Stud. f . cl. Philol. u. Arch. 3, 1 (1886), 35, n. 0; E. V. Arnold, Rom. Stoicism (1911), 71 ; 219, n. 9; also below, 1, 37, n. (ipsum mundum deum)·, and fohn, 1, 1 : καί ó λόγος ήν πρός τόν θεόν, καΐ θεός ήν ό λόγος. omnium naturam rerum: certain deteriores and some editors read omnem. Both expressions occur elsewhere in Cicero, e.g., with omnium·. 2, 36; Ac. 2, 114; Fin. 1, 61; 2, 16; De Or. 2, 317; with the adjective modifying natura (in various orders): 1, 27; 3, 35; Legg. 3, 3. For the difference in meaning of the two expressions, one signifying the mundus, the other referring to all its parts, cf. J. Bake on Legg-1. 61, p. 451 (1843); G. F. Schoemann, Opuse, acad. 3 (1858), 361. vi divina . . . adfectam: though vi is poorly attested (iV(?) and dett.), it seems necessary here. For the phrase vis divina cf. 1, 35; 1, 39; 1, 40; 2, 14; 2, 55; and often in Cicero's other works. With this use of adfectam cf, 1, 38: deorum honore adficere·, 2, 41: sensuque adficit·, and other examples in Thes. Ling. Lat. 1 (1900), 1209-1211, which seem to dispel the doubts expressed by G. F. Schoemann, op. cit., 3, 313, of the propriety of this phrase when used for a natural attribute. idem astris hoc idem: an awkward repetition, especially when the same form is used for both subject and object of the verb; cf. Pease on Div. 1, 3 (videretur)·, and the excellent treatment by A. B. Cook {CI. Rev. 16 (1902), 155-156) of such repetitions in Cicero.

254 bus, annorumque mutationibus. Cum vero Hesiodi Theogoniam,1 id est, originem deorum, interpretatur, tollit omnino usitatas 1

theogeniam Β M

astris: cf. 2 , 1 5 ; 2, 39-44; Arius Didymus ap. Stob. vol. 1, p. 213 Wachsmuth (= S.V.F. 1, no. 120) : Ζήνων τόν ήλιόν φησι καί τήν σελήνην καί των άλλων άστρων Ικαστον είναι νοερόν καΐ φρόνιμον; for this view in other Stoics: 1, 37: Cleanthes ... divinitatem omnem iribuit astris\ 1, 39: Chrysippus . .. solem lunam rìderà [sc. deum dicitesse] ; Aët. Ρlac. 1,6,11 {Doxogr. Gr.2 296 = S.V.F. 2, no. 1009): βλέποντες 8è τούς άστέρας άεί θέοντας αιτίους τε τοϋ θεωρεϊν ήμδς ήλιον καΐ σελήνην θεούς προσηγόρευσαν ; 1, 7, 33 (Doxogr. Gr.2 306): Στωικοί . . . θεούς δέ καΐ τόν κόσμον καί τούς άστέρας καί τήν γήν (cf. [Galen,] Hist. Phil. 35 (Doxogr. Gr,2 618 = XIX, 252 Κ.)); Orig. C. CeIs. 5, 7: έπεί το δλον ó κόσμος θεός έστιν· ήδη καί τά μέρη αύτοϋ θεία [these μέρη he has just mentioned as the sun, moon, and stars]; Achill. I sag. 10, p. 39 Maass: άστήρ έστι κατά Διόδωρον σώμα θείον ούράνιον [cf. 11, ρ. 40]; Lact. Inst. 2, 5, 38: cum caelestes ignés ceteraque mundi elementa déos esse adfirment. annis, mensibus, annorumque mutationibus: unnecessary are the conjectures by which Plasberg would read annuisque and R. Reitzenstein (in a letter to Plasberg (1910), comparing 1, 52: mutationem temporum·, 2, 49: temporum mutationibus) proposes temporumque. On such deification cf. Plat. Legg. 10, 899 b: ¿ίστρων δέ δή πέρι πάντων καί σελήνης ένιαυτών τε καί μηνών καί πασών ωρών πέρι τίνα άλλον λόγον έροϋμεν ή τόν αύτόν τοΰτον, ώς έπειδή ψυχή μέν ή ψυχαΐ πάντων τούτων αϊτιαι έφάνησαν, άγαθαί δέ πασαν άρετην, θεούς αύτάς είναι φήσομεν, εϊτε έν σώμασιν ένοϋσαι, ζωα δντα, κοσμοϋσι πάντα ούρανόν εϊτε δπη τε καί όπως ; Sext. Emp. Adv. Phys. 1, 184 [a reductio ad absurdum by Carneades]: εί ó ήλιος θεός έστιν καί ή ήμέρα άν εϊη θεός· ού γάρ άλλο τι ήν ή ήμέρα ή ήλιος ύπέρ γης. εί δ' ή ήμέρα έστί θεός, καί ó μήν ίσται θεός· σύστημα γάρ έστιν έξ ήμερών. εί

δέ è μήν θεός έστι, καί ó ένιαυτός άν εϊη θεός. σύστημα γάρ έστιν έκ μηνών ό ένιαυτός· ούχΐ δέ γε τοϋτο· τοίνυν ούδέ το έξ άρχής. σύν τω άτοπον είναι, φασί, τήν μέν ήμέραν θεόν είναι λέγειν, τήν δέ ί ω καί τήν μεσημβρίαν καί τήν δείλην μηκέτι. Material of this sort for the Hellenistic period is collected by R. Reitzenstein, Poimandres (1904), 257-291. Cf. also Galat. 4, 10: ήμέρας παρατηρεϊσθε καί μήνας καί καιρούς καί. ένιαυτούς [on which see Wetstein's note] ; SimpMc. Coroll. de Tempore, p. 785, 8-9 Diels: δήλον ότι ούτος άν εϊη ό χρόνος ó ώς θεός ύπό τε Χαλδαίων καί της άλλης ιεράς άγιστείας τιμηθείς; ρ. 795, 6; 795, 19 (time deified by Proclus); W. Drexler in W. H. Roscher, Aus f . Lexikon, 1, 2 (1890), 2742-2743 (on Horogeneis Theoi); F. Boll in P.-W. 7 (1912), 2571, and works there cited; E. Norden, Die Geburt des Kindes (1924), 31; and, in addition, Lydus, De Mens. 3, 20: δτι δέ τόν ένιαυτόν ώς θεόν άτίμησαν δήλον έξ αύτής της Λυδών βασιλίδος πόλεως, κτλ. In Philodem. De Piet. p. 74 Gomperz (Doxogr. Gr,2 542) Diels would detect a likeness to this subject and would read: τήν S' άναν ήου καί κύ ή περίοδ, but von Arnim (S.V.F. 1, no. 168) explains the passage very differently, with reference to allegoric interpretations (see the following note). E. Zeller (Stoics, Epicureans, and Sceptics (Engl, tr., 1870), 125-126) sees in this deification of times and seasons a form of the Stoic materialization of concepts usually considered as abstract; cf. Plut. De comm. Notit. 45, p. 1084d [the view of Chrysippus]: ούχ ή μέν νύξ σώμ' έστίν, ή δ* έσπέρα καί ό δρθρος καί τό μέσον της νυκτός σώματ' ούκ έστιν· ούδ' ή μέν ήμέρα σώμ' έστίν ούχί δέ καί ή νουμηνία σώμα καί ή δεκάτη καί πεντεκαιδεκάτη καί ή τριακάς καί è μήν σώμ' έστί καί τό θέρος καί τό φθινόπωρον καί ό ένιαυτός. Theogoniam . . . interpretatur:

1,36

255

perceptasque cognitiones deorum; ñeque enim Iovem neque Iunonem neque Vestam neque quemquam qui ita appelletur 1 1

apelletur OB, appellatur H

whether Zeno wrote a commentary specifically upon the Theogony has sometimes been doubted (e.g., by A. B. Krieche, Forsch, auf d. Gebiete d. alten Philos. (1840), 367; G. F. Schoemann, Opuse, acad. 2 (1857), 529), yet that the extant scholia to the Theogony show a very definite Stoic influence is indisputable (cf. the abundant material collected by H. Flach, Glossen u. Scholien hesiodischen Theogonie (1876), 29-96), and Zeno is mentioned in them by name at lines 117, 134, and 139, as is Chrysippus on lines 135 and 459. Von Arnim (S. V.F. 1 (1905), 71) would derive these and similar passages from a work entitled προκαταρχόμενον των κινήσεων, ούδέν δέ δυνατόν είναι τοιούτον ή την των δντων φύσιν, ήτις θεός έστιν. έστιν άρα θεός; R. Hirzel, op. cit., 2, 205; G. P. Conger Theories of Macrocosm and Microcosm in the Hist, of Philos. (1922), 12-13; W. Theiler Zur Gesch. d. teleol. Naturbetrachtung bis auf Aristot. (1925), 22; J. Moreau, L'âme du monde (1939), especially 178, n. 0. ultimum et altissimum: cf. 2, 91: hune rursus amplectitur inmensus aether, qui constat ex altissimis ignibus\ 2, 101: ultimus et a domiciliis nostris altissimus omnia cingens et coercens caeli complexus, qui idem aether vocatur, extrema ora et determinatio mundi ; Div. 2, 91: caelum ipsum quod extremum atque ultimum mundi est-, Rep. 6, 17: novem tibi orbibus .. . conexa sunt omnia, quorum unus est caelestis, extumus, qui reliquos omnes complectitur, summus ipse deus arcens et continens ceteros-, Aët. Plac. 1, 7, 33 (Doxogr. Gr.a 306): άνωτάτω δέ πάντων νουν έναιθέριον είναι θεόν; Plin. Ν. Η. 2, 1 : mundum et hoc quocumque nomine alio caelum appellare libet, cuius circumflexu tegmtur cunda numen esse credi par est", Diog. L. 7,137 (quoted in note on nominetur, below); Lact. Inst. 1, 5, 19: Cleanthes et Anaximenes aethera esse dicunt summum deum-, Clem. Strom. 7, 5, 28, 2:

8

deliberane DO

4

quasi? 1

ουχί άμείνους τούτων ot τόν άέρα καί τό περιέχον, μάλλον δέ τόν δλον κόσμον καί τό σύμπαν άξιον ήγησάμενοι τής τοϋ θεοϋ υπεροχής. As noted by Α. C. Pearson {Frag, of Zeno and Cleanthes (1891), 247), ultimum is the part furthest removed from the earth at the centre of the universe. undique circumfusum: cf. 2, 91 : circumfusa undique·, Tusc. 5, 121. conplexum: cf. 2, 117: quem complexa summa pars caeli, quae aetheria dicitur ... cum aeris extremitate coniungitw, Rep. 6, 17: [sc. orbis] summus ipse deus, arcens et continens ceteros. ardorem: cf. 1, 33, n. (caeli ardorem). nominetur: for the subjunctive cf. 1, 34, n. (sint) ; Lambinus, Heindorf, and M. L. Earle {Cl. Papers (1912), 204) emend to the indicative. Cf. also Diog. L. 7, 137 [the view of Zeno] : άνωτάτω μέν οδν είναι το πυρ, δ δή αιθέρα καλεΐσθαι, έν φ πρώτην τήν των άπλανών σφαϊραν γεννασθαι, είτα τήν των πλανωμένων. certissimum deum: cf. Thes. Ling. Lat. 3 (1912), 918, 8-11, citing Tert. Adv. Marc. 2, 2: deum certum et indubitatum\ [Thom.] Evang. 8, 2 [Cod. Paris.]: vere certissimus deus est-, also Virg. Aen. 1, 328 : o dea certe. quasi: apologetic; cf. Ac. 2, 14: quasi mente incitati. quasi delirans: this verb and its derivatives, despite occasional similarities in meaning, are not cognate with λήρος and ληρεϊν (A. Walde-J. B. Hofmann, Lat. etym. Wörterb. I 2 (1938), 338), but are taken from the language of ploughing, and derived from lira, "furrow"; hence delirare — "to stray from the furrow"; cf. Vel. Long. De Orthogr. in G.L.K. 7, 73: non enim, ut quidem existimant, a Graeco tracta vox est, παρά τό ληρεϊν, sed a lira, id est sulco. ita sicuti boves,

259 voluptatem,1 tum fingit formam quandam et speciem deorum, tum divinitatem omnem tribuit astris, turn nihil 2 ratione censet 1

voluptatem A3, uoluntatem cett.

cum se a recto actu operis detorserint, delirare dicuntur, sic qui a recta via vitae ad pravam déclinant ... delirare existimantur-, also Plin. Ν. H. 18, 180; Non. p. 17 M. (p. 26 L.); Beda, De Orthogr. {G.L.K. 7, 270). The literal sense has been completely supplanted by the figurative, in the meaning "to be in one's dotage" (cf. 1, 34, η. (puertlibus fabulis); 1, 55, n. {aniculis) ; Sen. 36: ista senilis stultitia quae deliratio appellari solet senum levium est, non omnium·, De Or. 2, 75) or "to be mad", and then, very commonly, in the weakened meaning, "to talk foolishly" or simply "to be mistaken" (used especially of philosophical or theological adversaries); cf. many examples in Ties. Ling. Lat. 5 (1910), 465-466 (to which add Hier. Ep. 102, 3, 1 ; C. Ioann. Hierosol. 11 ; 7» Hierem. 6,13, 3). Cicero makes his characters use the verb in 1, 42; 1, 92; 1, 94; cf. also Ac. frg. 20 Müller (p. 61 Plasberg) : roga nunc Stoicum qui sit melior, Epicurusne qui delirare ilium clamat an Academicus qui sibi adhuc de re tanta deliberandum esse pronuntiat·, Τ use. 1, 10; Div. 1, 35; 1, 53; O f f . 1, 94. See also the use of deliramentum (frequent in ecclesiastical writers and often applied to the tenets of Epicureans), deliratio {Div. 2, 90), and delirus {Div. 2, 141; Τ use. 1, 48; often in Lactantius, who in Inst. 2, 8, 49 applies it to Epicurus); cf. Ties. Ling. Lat. 5, 464-467. A large additional stock of vituperatives may be found in amens, demens, desipere, furere, insania, and their derivatives, as in Greek with λήρος (Galen, De Usu Part. 1, 21 ( = III, 76 K.) describes the views of Epicurus as λήρος μακρός), άνοια, μανία, and παράκοπος). That such expressions were especial favorites with the Epicureans may be judged both from 1, 93-94 below and from a selection of phrases culled from Philodemus by R. Philippson in Sjmb. Osloenses, 19 (1939), 28-29; cf. Κ. Ziegler {Hermes, 71 (1936), 428-430) for such

2

cum nihil O in Lactantius; also Reid on Ac. 2, 14; Diog. L. 9, 64. That the Stoics did not lack such expressions may be seen from their famous paradox, πας άφρων μαίνεται. libris . . . contra voluptatem: Diog. L. 7, 87; 7, 175; and Clem. Strom. 2, 22, 131, 3, mention his περί ήδονής, to which von Arnim in S.V.F Λ assigns nos. 552 and 558. formam quandam: probably in his anthropomorphic personifications of natural powers. Mayor compares in the Hymn to Zeus {S.V.F. 1, no. 537) lines 9-10: τοϊον 2χεις ύποεργόν άνικήτοις ύπό χερσίν / άμφήκη, πυρόεντα, άειζώοντα κεραυνόν. speciem: cf. 1, 34: nulla species divina. divinitatem omnem: Mayor explains omnem as qualitative ("complete") rather than quantitative ("all '). astris: cf. Zeno's view (1, 36), which he doubtless followed; also 2, 40-44. One of the four reasons for man's conception of the gods is due to the astrorum ordine caelique constantia (3, 16; cf. 2, 15). The statement here alluded to was probably in his περί θεών (Diog. L. 7, 175) or possibly in his two books περί της Ζήνωνος φυσιολογίας (Diog. L. 7, 174). Cleanthes differed from Zeno in usually placing the ήγεμονικόν in the sun (Arius Didymus ap. Eus. Pr. Ev. 15, 15, 7: ήγεμονικόν δ è τοϋ κόσμου Κλεάνθει μέν ήρεσε τον ήλιον είναι, διά τό μέγιστον των άστρων ύπάρχεtv ; Censorin. fr. 1, 4: cuius principalem solem quidam putant, ut Cleanthes·, E. Pfeiffer in ΣΤΟΙΧΕΙΑ, 2 (1916), 121, n. 0). Yet he did not accept a heliocentric theory of the universe; cf. Plut. De Fac. in Lun. 6, p. 923. nihil ratione . . . divinius : cf. his hymn to Zeus {S. V.F. 1, no. 537), 12-13 : φ σύ κατευθύνεις κοινόν λόγον, 6ς διά πάντων / φοιτά, μιγνύμενος μεγάλοις μικροϊς τε φάεσσι ; 21 : ώσθ' ένα γίγνεσθαι πάντων λόγον αίέν έόντα; Philodem. De

260

1,38

esse divinius.1 Ita fit2 ut deus ille, quem mente noscimus atque in animi notione tamquam in vestigio volumus 3 reponere, nusquam 4 prorsus appareat. 15 38 At Persaeus, eiusdem Zenonis 1 diuinius esse O, esse diuinis A1 quam om. Ν

2 £ t ***

Pie t. p. 75 Gomperz (Doxogr. Gr.2 544 = S.V.F. 1, no. 531): λόγον ήγούμ έν ω κόσ ; L. Stein in Berlin. Stud. f . cl. Philol. u. Arch. 3, 1 (1886), 97, n. 0. As noted by A. C. Pearson {Frag, of Zeno and Cleanthes (1891), 247), this view is in opposition to that of Epicurus and the other atomists of the universe as φύσει . . . άλόγω έκ των άτόμων συνεστώτα. With the expression cf. Le gg. 1, 22: quid ... in omni cáelo atque terra ratione divinius. mente noscimus: cf. 1, 43; 1, 49; E. Norden, Agnostos Theos (1913), 90, n. 5, thinks this renders τη διανοία προλαμβάνομεν. animi notione: "preconceived idea"; cf. 1, 43: in omnium animis eorum notionem inpressi sset ipsa natura·, 2, 13: in animis hominum informatas deorum esse notiones·, 2, 45: certa notione animi-, 3, 16: in animis hominum ... deorum .. . notiones·, also Τ use. 1, 57: Ínsitas et quasi conrìgnatas in animis notiones quas έννοιας vocant·, Ac. 1, 32; 1, 42; 2, 30; Fin. 1, 31: naturalem atque insitam in animis nostris inesse notionem·, 3, 33; O f f . 3, 76; Top. 31: notionem appello quod Graeci tum gvvoiav, tum πρόληψιν (on which Boeth. in Top. 3, p. 332 Orelli, remarks: natio est insita et ante percepta cuiusque formae cognitio enodationis indi gens). Such a notio probably hardly differs from the praenotio which Vellerns in 1, 44 equates with πρόληψις; cf. also 1, 43; 1, 46. Epicurus thought that repeated sensations fix in the mind a πρόληψις or type by which we measure any new sensation. For Epicurean προλήψεις about the gods see 1, 44-45, below; and for έννοια and πρόληψις in the Stoic theory of knowledge F. H. Sandbach in CI. Quart. 24 (1930), 44-51. tamquam in vestigio: the expression is approximate rather than precise, yet to accept a god as real we must fit him

ut

Λ

3

uoluminis O

4

nus-

into the footprints or mould of our preconceived notion of God. With the phrase cf. Div. 2, 140: inerant enim in utriusque nostrum animis vigilantium cogitationum vestigia·, Tuse. 1, 61: an inprimi quasi ceram animum putamus, et esse memoriam Signatar um rerum in mente vestigia? quae possunt verborum, quae rerum ipsarum esse vestigia·, Orator, 19; 133; Plat. Rep. 5, 462a: άρα â νΰν δή διήλθομεν εις μέν τό του άγαθοϋ ϊχνος ήμϊν άρμόττει. With in vestigio .. . reponere cf. 1, 29, n. (in deorum numero). nusquam . . . appareat: Cf. Div. 1, 58; Tusc. 2, 66; 3, 2. Similar expressions are often used for the vanishing of gods after a theophany; cf. L. Deubner, De Incuhatione (1900), 13; A. S. Pease in Harv. Stud, in cl. Philol. 53 (1942), 10, n. 72. Prorsus modifies, not the verb, but the negation; cf. 3, 21; Am. 57. 38 Persaeus: of Citium (Diog. L. 7, 6; 7, 36; Athen. 4, 162a; 13, 607a and e; Themist. Or. 32, p. 358a Hardouin; Suid. s.v. Περσαϊος), according to some a pupil, according to others a slave, of Zeno {Ind. Stoic. Herculan. 13, 3 {S.V.F. 1, no. 437); Gell. 2, 18, 8; Dio Chrys. 53, 5; Athen. 4, 162d-e; 13, 607e; Paus. 2, 8, 4; Diog. L. 7, 36; Orig. C. Cels. 3, 54; Themist. I.e. ; Suid. I.e.), was born ca. 307/6 and died in 243 B.C. (K. Deichgräber in P.-W. 19 (1937), 927). Diog. L. 7, 36 lists his works, to which should be added his περϊ θεών, known only from Philodem. De Piet. p. 75 Gomperz {Doxogr. Gr.2 544), and possibly to be considered a part of his άπομνημονεύματα, as R. Hirzel thinks {Untersuch. Cicero's philos. Sehr. 2 (1882), 76, n. 2), but surely the place where he set forth the views here mentioned, in which he was under the influence of Prodicus; cf. Philodem. De Piet. pp. 75-77 Gomperz {Doxogr. Gr.2

261 544-545) : Περσα δήλός έστιν of both, so that he would become, not . . . ον . . . ζω τό αιμόνι- the first author to seek the origin of ο ή μηθέέρ αύτοϋ γινώσκων, religion (as did Xenophanes and others) 8ταν έν τω Περί θεών μή θανα λέγη but the first to observe its evolutionary (ρ. 76) φαίνεσθαι τά περί τά τρέ- development. It must be admitted, howφοντα καί ώφελοϋνα θεούς νενομί- ever, that the related passages (Sext. σι καί τετειμήσθ πρώτν ύπό Emp. Adv. Phys. 1, 18; 1, 52; Themist. δίκου γεγραμμένα [cf. 1, 118, be- Or. 30, p. 349a-b Hardouin) collected low], μτά δέ ταϋτα τούόντας in Vorsokrat. 2, no. 77 B, 5 do not carry ή τροφάς ή κέπας ή τάς άλλας τέχνας Prodicus beyond the recognition of the ήμητρα αΙ Δκόνυσ ον> καί first stage ; in that event Persaeus would τού—ϊν (?) εις τήν προεδρίαν, seem to be the first to recognize such a οΰτως έπε πααδέδονταί τίνες έ religious evolution. The doctrines upheld ά>γαθοΙ καί εύεργετκ£, κελεύ- by Prodicus and Persaeus resemble those σειν αν ατούς θσί άέχοντες ήν [i.e., the Stoics], ώς άσεβη καΙφορα τοις άνποις δογματιτων; cf. id., περί σημειώσεων, 38, 8-17; Ρ. Η . and Ε. Α. D e Lacy, Philodemus On Methods of Inference (1941), 110; o n the accord in this respect between Plato and Epicurus N . W. D e Witt in Trans. Roy. Soc. Canada, Sect. 2 (1944), 85. In Cicero cf. Tuse. 1 , 1 1 : quid negotii est baec poetarum etpictorumportento convincere-, 1, 36: magni errores ... quos auxerunt poetae\ 1, 65: fingebat haec Homerus et humana ad déos transferebat; divina mallem ad nos [cf. Aug. C.D. 4, 26]. Later writers dealing with this theme include Diod. 6, 1, 3 : των Sè μυθολόγων Ό μ η ρ ο ς καί Ησίοδος καί Ό ρ φεύς καί έτεροι τοιούτοι τερατοδεστέρους μύθους περί θεών πεπλάκασιν ; Aetna, 29-93 (29: ne quem capiat fallacia vatum·, 40: turpe est sine pignere carmen·, 42: im pia ... fabula; 74-76: haec est mendosae vulgata licentia famae. / vatibus ingenium est; bine audit nobile carmen. / plurima pars scaenae rerum est fallacia ; 87-88: norunt bella deum normt abscondita nobis j coniugio)·, Sen. Dial. 6, 19, 4 : 7 , 26, 6; Plut. Perici. 39, 3; De Is. et Os. 25, p. 360e-f; Min. Fei. 23, 1; Heraclit. Quaest. Horn. 1: πάντη γαρ ήσέβησε / [sc. "Ομηρος] εί μηδέν ήλληγόρησεν ; Hermog. περί ιδεών, 2, 10 (Rhet. Gr. 2, 407 Spengel); Lucian, De Sacrif. 5; Philops. 2; Sext. E m p . Adv. Phys. 1, 192-193; Pyrrhon. 1, 154; Aristid. Or. 3, 26, p. 43 D i n d o r f ; Dio Chrys. Or. 12, 62; Themist. Or. 32, p. 363b-c H a r d o u i n ; Julian, Adv. Golii. 44a-b; 75a-b; 86a; 94a [defending allegorical interpretation and criticizing the mythology of the O.T.]; Or. 4, p. 137c; Schol. II. 5, 563; 13, 521; Schol. Dan. Aen. 10, 117: poetice mores hominum ad deos refert·, Olympiod. Prolegom. p. 11, 39-12, 4 Busse: άλλά καί ποιηταί, μή πασι βουλόμενοι σαφή καταστήσαι τα περί τών θείων, μύθοις άπέκρυπτον τά

περί τών θείων δογμάτων λεγόμενα; Suid. s.v. Πυθαγόρας· φασί δ' αυτόν κατελθόντα εις "Αιδου τήν μέν 'Ησιόδου ψυχήν ίδεϊν πρός κίονι χαλκω δεδεμένην καί τρίζουσαν, τήν δέ 'Ομήρου κρεμαμένην άπό δένδρου καί δφεις περί αύτήν άνθ' ών είπον περί θεών; id., s.v. Πρόκλος, says that Proclus wrote o n Orphic theology and περί τών παρ' Ό μ ή ρ ω θεών. Jewish and Christian writers made much of this congenial topic; e.g., Philo, De Opif. 157; De Plantat. 35; De Decaí. 55-56; Joseph. C. Αρ. 2, 239-249; Antiq. 1, 22; [Justin.] Cohort, ad Gr. 3; Tert. Ad Nat. 1 , 1 0 ; 2 , 1 ; De Test. An. 1 ; Clem. Protr. 2, 32, 1 : άκούετε δή οδν τών παρ' ύμϊν θεών τούς έρωτας καί τάς παραδόξους της άκρασίας μυθολογίας καί τραύματα αύτών καί δεσμά καί γέλωτας καί μάχας δουλείας τε ίτι καί συμπόσια συμπλοκάς τ' αυ καί δάκρυα καί πάθη καί μαχλώσας ήδονάς; 4, 58, 3-4, 59, 2 ; 7, 73, 1; Strom. 5, 14, 116, 4; Arnob. 4, 28; 5, 1; Orig. C. Cels. 1, 16-17; 7, 54; [Clem.] Recogn. 10, 26; 10, 37-38; Homil. 4, 15; Lact. Inst. 1, 9, 8-11; 1, 11, 17; 1,16, 4-6; Eus. Pr. Ev. 1,10, 40; Filastr. Haeres. 125; Theodoret, Gr. A f f . 3, 84; Hier. Adv. Ruf. 1, 30, p. 486 Vali.: iuxta fabulas poetarum [similarly In Is. p. 159 Vail.; In Ez. pp. 17; 89; 197-198; 599; In Dan. p. 652; In Os. pp. 53-54; In Amos, p. 288; In Ionam, p. 406; In Naum, p. 549]; Aug. C.D. 4, 17 [also see the index to Hoffmann's edition p. 722, s.v. poetae]·, Oros. 6, 17, 8; Synes. Calvit. Encom. 9; 20; Basil, Serm. de legend. Lib. Gentil. 3 (Patr. Gr. 31, 569a-b); loan. Chrys. Horn. 3 in Rom. 3 (Patr. Gr. 60, 414); Epiphan. Adv. Haeres. 1, 2, 33, 8 (Patr. Gr. 41, 569b); Tsid. Etym. 8, 11, 29; Suid. s.v. 'Αδάμ. In general cf. C. L. Brownson, Reasons for Plato's Hostility to the Poets (Trans. Am. philol. Assoc. 28 (1897), 5-41); O . Gruppe, Gr. Myth. u. Rei. 2 (1906), 999-1004; J. Adam, Relig. Teachers of Greece (1908), 34; L. R. Farnell, Higher Aspects of Gr. Relig. (1912), 6; F. Solmsen in Trans. Am. philol. Assoc. 67 (1936), 212 (and Plato's Theology (1942), 15-35); A. C. Schlesinger in Cl. Journ. 32 (1936), 19-26 (on the literary necessity of anthropomorphism) ; G. M. Calhoun in

283 vocibus fusa ipsa suavitate nocuerunt, qui et ira inflammatos Trans. Am. philol. Assoc. 68 (1937), 16-22 (who distinguishes between the gods of Homer's own religious belief and the ancient gods of the mythology which he took over; an idea further developed by Calhoun in Am. Journ. of Philol. 60 (1939), 1-28); L. A. Post in Trans. Am. philol. Assoc. 70 (1939), 169, n. 10; A. D. Nock in Proc. Am. philos. Soc. 85 (1942), 480. It is noteworthy that though Philo (De Decaí. 156) links the making of idols and the acceptance of scandalous literary legends, and Macrobius (Sat. 5, 13, 23) asserts that Phidias got the conception of his statue of Olympian Zeus from II. 1, 528-530, Cicero here passes over the influence of artists in leading to idolatry, a point constantly emphasized in the Jewish-Christian tradition; yet cf. 1, 77 below, and I. Heinemann, Poseidonios' metaphys. Sehr. 1 (1921), 149, η. 4, finds in Posidonius the source of several such criticisms of artists. suavitate: cf. Pind. Nem. 7, 23: σοφία 8è κλέπτει παράγοισα μύθοις; Aug. C.D. 6, 6: physicos dixit [sc. Varrò] utilitatis causa scripsisse, poetas delectationis. nocuerunt: since Homer had been largely used in all stages of education, the effects of his teachings upon impressionable minds might be perilous. Further, many who wished to sin apparently justified their actions by divine precedents. In addition to passages cited in the note on poetarum, above, cf. 1, 102: haec oratio ... homines inertis e f f i c i t , si quidem agens aliquid ne deus quidem esse beatuspotest·, Plat. Rep. 2,378b: ούδέ λεκτέον νέω άκούοντι ώς άδικων τά ϊσχατα ουδέν αν θαυμαστόν ποιοι, ούδ* αδ άδικουντα πατέρα κολάζων παντί τρόπω, άλλα δρφη αν όπερ θεών οί πρώτοι τε και μέγιστοι; 3, 391e: οΰθ' όσια ταϋτα οΰτ' άληθη . . . και μήν τοις γε άκούουσι βλαβερά· πας γαρ έαυτώ ξυγγνώμην εξει κακω δντι, πεισθείς ώς άρα τοιαύτα πράττουσί τε και έπρατταν και οί θεών άγχίσποροι, Ζηνός έγγύς; Legg. 1, 636d: τοϋτον τόν μϋθον προτεθεικέναι κατά του Διός, ϊνα έπόμενοι δή τω θεώ καρπώνται καΐ ταύτην την ήδονήν; 12, 941b:

μηδείς ούν ύπό ποιητών . . . έξαπατώμενος άναπειθέσθω, καΐ κλέπτων ή βιαζόμενος οίέσθω μηδέν αίσχρόν ποιεΐν άλλ' άπερ αύτοί θεοί δρώσιν; Euthyphr. 6a; Ar. Nub. 1079-1082: μοιχός γάρ ήν τύχης άλούς, τάδ' άντερεϊς πρός αυτόν, / ώς ούδέν ήδίκηκας· εϊτ' είς τόν Δί' έπανενεγκεϊν, / κάκεϊνος ώς ήττων Τρωτός έστι καί γυναικών · / καίτοι σύ θνητός ων θεοϋ πώς μείζον άν δύναιο; Eur. Ion, 449-451 : ούκέτ άνθρώπους κακώς / λέγειν δίκαιον, εί τά τών θεών καλά / μιμούμεθ', άλλά τούς διδάσκοντας τάδε; Troad. 981-982; Ter. Eun. 583-591 ; Dion. Hal. Ant. 2, 20, 2; Sen. Dial. 7, 26, 6: quibus nihil aliud actum est quam ut pudor hominibus peccandi demeretur si tales deos crediderunt·, 10, 16, 5: quid aliud est vitia nostra incendere quam auctores Ulis inscribere deos et dare morbo exemple divinitatis excusatam licentiam·, Joseph. Antiq. 1, 22; Heraclit. Quaest. Horn. 69; Justin, De Monarch. Dei, 6; 1 Apol. 21; Lucian, Menipp. 3; Min. Fei. 23, 1: has fabulas et errores et ab imperitis parentibus disetmus et ... ipsi studiis et diseiplinis elaboramus, carminibus praeeipue poetarum, qui plurimum quantum veritati ipsi sua auetoritate nocuerunt·, 23, 7: quae omnia in hoc prodita ut vitiis hominum quaedam auctori tas par are tur·, Arnob. 5, 29; [Clem.] Recogn. 10, 28; 10, 35; Homil. 4, 16; 5, 16; 5, 29; 6, 18; Cypr. Ep. 1, 8; Clem. Protr. 2, 33, 6; Firm. De Errore, 12, 2: adulterio delectatur aliquis ; Iovem respicit et inde cupiditatis suae fomenta conquirit·, 12, 4; Lact. Inst. 5, 10, 15-18; Aug. Ep. 91, 4-5; C.D. 2, 7; 2, 12; Achill. Tat. 1, 5, 6-7; Ioann. Damasc. Barlaam et Ioasaph, 200; 244; 248. ira inflammatos: cf. Tuse. 4, 50: iracundia ... inflammatum. The use of both ira and libidine is taken by R. Philippson (in P.-W. 19 (1938), 2472; id., in Symb. Osloenses, 19 (1939), 32, n. 1) to point toward Philodemus, the only Greek philosopher who did not consider οργή as an έπιθυμία. Anger by itself is less often mentioned as a divine vice than are its manifestations in the forms about to be mentioned. Yet cf. such cases as Eur. Bacch. 1348: όργάς πρέπει θεούς ούχ

284 et libidine furentis induxerunt déos 1 feceruntque ut eorum bella, proelia, pugnas, vulnera, videremus, odia praeterea, discidia, 1

in déos O

όμοιοϋσθαι βροτοις; Virg. Aen. 1, 11: tantaene animi s caelestibus irae; Eus. Pr. Ev. 15, praef. 2: τώνδέ [sc. θεών] οργάς; Hier. In Malach. p. 946 Vali.: odisse autem Deus άνθρωποπαθώς dicitur, ut fiere, dolere, ut irasci·, also the O.T. references to the anger of God (but there toward guilty men). libidine furentis: a striking case is II. 14, 294-351, and note Plato's comment in Rep. 3, 390c; cf. Xen. Cyrop. 6,1, 36; probably something in Philodem. De Piet. (cf. R. Philippson in Hermes, 55 (1920), 232; 245-249); Cic. Tusc. 4, 70: sed poetas ludere sinamus, quorum fabulis in hoc flagitio versari ipsum videmus Iovem ; Dion. Hal. Ant. 1, 77, 3; Joseph. C. Ap. 2, 244-245; Lucian, Iup. Trag. 20: 8ταν μεν γαρ πάλιν των ραψωδών άκούσωσιν, οτι καί έρώμεν καί τιτρωσκόμεθα καί δεσμούμεθα καί δουλεύομεν καί στασιάζομεν καί μυρία όσα πράγματα ë/ομ,εν καί ταϋτα μακάριοι καί άφθαρτοι άξιοϋντες είναι; Athenag. Leg. pro Christ. 21 [with many Homeric illustrations]; Arnob. 4, 26; 4, 28; [Clem.] Recogn. 10, 21-23 and Homil. 5, 12-14 [both with striking lists of the amours of Zeus]; Clem. Protr. 2, 32, 2: κάλει μοι τόν Ποσειδώ καί τον χορόν των διεφθαρμένων ύπ' αύτοϋ [followed by a list; cf. A. S. Pease in Harv. Stud, in cl. Pbilol. 54 (1943), 77-82); 2, 32, 3 for a similar list of the loves of Apollo ; also the cases of divine incest cited by [Clem.] Recogn. 10, 20]; Tert. Apol. 11 [numerous parallels in J. Ε. B. Mayor ad loc. and also on § 21]; Theodoret, Gr. A f f . 3, 37: ού γάρ δή μόνην τήν άδελφήν άλλά καί την μητέρα καί τήν θυγατέρα γαμετάς έποιήσατο [se. ό Ζεύς], καί πρός ταύταις ¿ίλλαις καί θεαϊς καί γυναιξί ξυνεμίγη μυρίαις; G. Μ. Calhoun in Am.Journ. of Pbilol. 60 (1939), 18. induxerunt: used of introducing a character on the stage, as in Hor. S. 1, 2, 22; the Greek is είσάγειν; cf. Eus. Pr. Εν. 13, 13, 43; Theodoret, Gr. A f f .

3, 36; Schol. II. 5, 563; Philostr. Imag. proem. bella, proelia, pugnas: the indignity increases as the thought passes from the more general and organized to the more invidual and hand-to-hand type of fighting. Such divine wars are often, of course, the result of hostile tribes or warriors each invoking the support of his protecting deity; at other times they may arise without much reference to human passions and, as Lact. Inst. 1, 3, 17-19, recognizes, as the corollary of polytheism. Among instances may be mentioned the theomachy in II. 21, 385513 (adversely criticized by Dio Chrys. Or. 11, 106), but also II. 5, 593-400 (and schol. on 5, 392); 15,174-183; 16, 93-94; 20, 54-55; 20, 67-74; 20, 134; Hes. Theog. 630-735; Eoeae, 68B, 2-3, p. 198 Evelyn-White; Batrachom. 168-176; Xenophanes, fr. 1, 21-23 Diels (ap. Athen. 11, 462 f ) : οΰτι μάχας διέπειν Τιτήνων ούδέ Γιγάντων / ουδέ Κενταύρων, πλάσματα των προτέρων, / ή στάσιας σφεδανάς, τοις ούδέν χρηστόν ενεστι ; Pind. Ol. 9, 40-41 : ëa πόλεμον μάχαν τε πασαν χωρίς άθανάτων; Plat. Rep. 2, 378b-c; Euthyphr. 6b-c; Philodem. De Piet. p. 26; p. 28 Gomperz: ολεμήντεϋν πολλάκις πλήλους; ρ. 32; Diod. 3,71,3-3, 72, 8; Dion. Hal. Ant. 2, 19, 1 ; Virg. Aen. 8, 698-705 [and Serv. on 699]; Philo, De Prov. 2, p. 73 Aucher; Aetna, 87-88; Joseph. C. Ap. 2, 243; Sil. Ital. 9, 290-303; Paus. 8,10, 9; Lucian, Iup. Trag. 20; Menipp. 3; Tatian, Ad Gr. 1; 8; Dio Chrys. Or. 36, 22; Arnob. 4, 33; Clem. Protr. 2, 32, 1; Lact. Inst. 1, 19, 6; Liban. Or. 11, 67; Philostr. Imag. 1, 1 ; Heroic, p. 162 Kayser; Theodoret, Gr. A f f . 3, 40; Aug. C.D. 2, 25; Proci, in Tim. p. 53c (p. 172 Diehl) ; p. 119a (p. 390 Diehl); Nonn. 36, 3-132. Sometimes these fightings were allegorized away; e.g., Heraclit. Quaest. Horn. 52-53 (explained

285 discordias, ortus, interitus, querellas,1 lamentationes, effusas in 1

querelas HOM, quaere las NBF

as την των έπτά πλανήτων άστέρων έν ένί ζωδίω σύνοδον) ; 58; Schol. II. 20, 67: φυσικήν στοιχείων προς στοιχεία άντίταξιν, κακιών πρός άρετάς; Celsus in Orig. C. Cels. 6, 42; the work of Cleanthes called θεομαχία (Plut. De Fluv. 5, 3) was doubtless of this sort. Ε. E. Sikes {CI. Rev. 54 (1940), 123-124) thinks the divine wars and other human traits are humorous elements in Homer, not recognized by later writers as such. vulnera: a natural corollary of anthropomorphism and theomachy. In addition to the passages cited in the preceding note cf. II. 5, 335-354 [the wounding of Aphrodite by Diomedes] ; 5, 416-417; 5, 855-863 [of Ares by Diomedes and Athena]; 21, 400-408 [of Ares by Athena] ; Philodem. De Piet. p. 9: τρωθέν ¿ίσοφος. The contrast here is much like that between "educated" and "uneducated." fatemur: "we Epicureans admit," though B, followed by various editors, including Plasberg in his editio maior, reads fateamur, "let us disputants admit." Cotta's reply in 1, 62 {satis magnum argumentum esse dixisti cur esse deos confiteremur) points toward the latter meaning. praenotionem: cf. 1, 37, n. {animi notione). novis nova: for the polyptoton cf. 2 Verr. 5, 178: lege nova novi iudices·, and other cases cited by P. Parzinger, Beitr. Z- Kenntn. d. Entwickl. d. eie. Stils (1910), 44-48. With the thought cf. 1, 8, n. {dici posse)·, Fin. 3, 3: imponendaque nova rebus novis nomina-, 3, 5; 3, 15; Ac. 1, 41

300

1,45

nomina,1 ut Epicurus ipse prolempsin 2 appellavit, quam 3 antea nemo eo 4 verbo nominarat). 45 Hanc igitur habemus ut deos beatos et inmortales 5 putemus. Quae enim nobis natura informationem ipsorum deorum dedit, eadem insculpsit in mentibus ut eos aeternos et beatos haberemus. Quod si ita est, vere expósita illa sententia est ab Epicuro, quod beatum aeternumque sit id 1 2 nomina om. O, pomina D1 pro*plebsin (b add.) B, proplebsin {alt. ρ del.) F.prolembsin M, problepsin DH2, problebsin AGHprolemsin O, prolensim Ν 3 4 6 quem BFM nemo eo] eo add. A, ñemeo M1 inmontales B1

(see note on antea nemo, below); with ponendo for the more frequent imponendo, Tuse. 3, 10. appellavit: cf. Ac. 1, 25: ut philosophiam aut rhetoricam aut physicam aut dialectam appellem·, and parallels in Reid's note on appellem in the sense of "employ the word"; Thes. Ling. Lat. 2 (1900), 274, 51. antea nemo: cf. Ac. 1, 42: cum eo verbo antea nemo tali in re usus esset, plurimisque idem novis verbis—nova enim dicebat—usus est. nominarat: cf. the syncopated form nominarmi in O f f . 1, 108. 45 hanc igitur: the complicated sentence is resolved by anacoluthon. Mayor points out the resumptive use of igitur after a parenthesis, and compares Fin. 2, 74: quid enim mereri velis ... quid merearis igitur. For similar instances of anacoluthon, especially frequent after a long parenthesis, cf. 2, 95 ; 2,133 ; 3,77 ; and other Ciceronian cases noted by R. Kiihner-C. Stegmann, Aus/. Gram. d. ¡at. Spr. 2, 2 2 (1914), 587. As Mayor notes, hanc here has the force of talem ; cf. 1, 55: illa fat alis nécessitas ... ut. beatos et inmortales: varied below by the expressions aeternos et beatos-, beatum aeternumque·, aeterna ... et beatissima; beata inmortalique ; beata . . . sempiterna (1, 47); beata ... et aeterna (1, 49). informationem: cf. 1, 43. insculpsit: cf. 2, 12: in animo quasi insculptum esse deos\ Ac. 2, 2: in animo res insculptas habebat·, Apul. De Plat. 2, 20: in animo eius sculptum sit quod·, Philo, De Vita contempi, p. 117 Conybeare: έγ-

χαράττων ταΐς ψυχαϊς τά νοήματα [and parallels in Conybeare's n.]. illa sententia: illa, because the statement was perhaps the most often quoted of all the words of Epicurus, being the first of his κύριαιδόξαι —cf. 1, 85, below —, as found in Diog. L. 10, 139: τό μακάριον καΐ άφθαρτον ούτε αύτό πράγματα έχει ουτε άλλω παρέχει, ώστε οϋτε δργαΐς ουτε χάρισι συνέχεται· έν άσθενεΐ γαρ πάν τό τοιούτον [some forty other quotations of or allusions to this sentence are collected by H. Usener, Epicurea (1887), 394; to which add: 1, 68; Fin. 2, 88; [Galen,] Hist. Phil. 5 (Doxogr. Gr.2 609 = XIX, 241 Κ.); Diog. L. 10, 76; 10, 123; Sext. Emp. Pyrrhon. 3, 4; Adv. Phys. 1, 33; 1, 44; Gnomol. Vat. Epic. 1 (see P. von der Mühll, Epic. Epist. (1922), 60); Lact. Inst. 3, 12, 15; Sallustius, De Diis, 9; Theodoret, Gr. A ff. 6, 6; also Diels's restoration of Philodem. De Diis, 1, col. 2, 9-17, beginning φησόν θεόν ζωον τον καΐ συμπεπλη8αιμ ; Joseph. Ant. 10, 278; Eustath. in II. 24, 526]. For similar ideas of the combination of divine happiness and immortality (without especial reference to Epicurean beliefs) cf. Ar. Aves, 702: πάντων τε θεών μακάρων γένος άφθιτον; [Plat.] Définit. 411a: θεός ζωον άθάνατον, αΰταρκες πρός εύδαιμονίαν; Ter. Andr. 959-960; Antipater ap. Plut. De Stoic. Repugn. 38, p. 1051 f.: θεόν τοίνυν νοοϋμεν ζφον μακάριον καί όίφθαρτον καί εΰποιητικόν άνθρώπων; Dion. Hal. Ant. 1, 77, 3; Juncus, De Senect. ap. Stob.

1,45

301

nec habere ipsum negotii quicquam nec exhibere 1 alteri, itaque 1

ne exhibere H

vol. 5, 1108 Hense; Aët. Plac. 1, 7, 7 (.Doxogr. Gr.1 300); Plut. De comm. Notìt. 31, p. 1075a-b [Chrysippus and Cleanthes considered Zeus as the only imperishable god, into whom all others are resolved] ; Lucian, Iup. Trag. 20 [satirically]; Serv. Am. 6, 134; 6, 324; Suid. s.v. θεόν; F. Peters, T. Ltwr. et M. Cic. quo modo Vocab. Gr. Epic. Discipl. propria Latine vertermi (1926), 16. References to divine happiness, without allusion to the eternity of the gods are often found in Epicurean writings (cf. H. Usener, Epicurea (1887), 241-244; C. Bailey, The Greek Atomists and Epic. (1928), 469-475), but also are proverbial, from as early as Homer (e.g., II. 6, 138; Od. 5, 7; 6, 42-46 ; 9, 276; 9, 521; Plat. Sympos. 202c; Plut. Perici. 39, 3; Quomodo Adúlese. 4, p. 20e-f; Pearson on Soph. fr. 946), as are references to their immortality (e.g., II. 7, 53; 7, 102; Od. 3, 147; al.; Sallustius, De Diis, 1-2), which is emphasized by Christian as well as pagan authors; e.g., Tert. Adv. Nat. 2, 3 ; Arnob. 7, 2 : seqmtur ut geniti numquam perpetuique ut debeant esse, extrinsecus adpetentes nihil nec carpentes aliquas terrenae ex materiae opibus voluptates; Suid. s.v. ροπή· θεοϋ μέν Ιδιον αθανασία. It may be observed that by his two epithets for deity Epicurus separates it on the one hand from atoms, which are eternal but devoid of happiness, and on the other from man, who may be happy but not eternal. nec habere . . . nec exhibere: the divine άταραξία must not be disturbed by the inflicting or receiving of trouble (Diog. L. 10, 150 : μή βλάπτειν άλλήλους μηδέ βλάπτεσθαι), in the one case due to anger towards sinners, in the other to the conferring of favor in return for benefits received from man's worship. So even the wise man enjoys tranquility; Epic. fr. 79 (p. 118 Bailey): ό άτάραχος έαυτω καΐ έτέρω άόχλητος

[cf. Plat. Legg. 8, 829a; M. Aurel. 2, 5]. The expression (habere . .. exhibere) corresponds to the language of Epicurus (κύριαι δόξαι, 1 : έχει . . . παρέχει). With the thought cf. 1, 51 ; 1, 56; 1, 85; 1, 102; 1, 121-123; 3, 79, and n. {nam si curent); Div. 2, 40: illius enim deus nihil habens nec sui nec alieni negoti [and Pease's n.] ; Legg. 1, 21 ; O f f . 2, 36 : contemnuntur ii qui "nec sibi nec alteri," ut dicitur; 3, 102: qui deum nihil habere ipsum negoti dicunt, nihil exhibere alteri·, Philodem. De Piet. pp. 86; 112 Gomperz: ή πράγμα θείον; Tert. Ad Nat. 2, 2; Lact. De Ira, 4, 2: "ex hoc," inquìt, "beatus est et incorruptus, quia nihil curat neque ipse habet negotium neque alteri exhibet\" 17, 1; Sallustius, De Diis, 9: τό γάρ θεΐόν φασιν [sc. the Epicureans] ούδέ αύτό πράγματα 8χειν ούδέ άλλοις παρέχειν; Mart. Cap. 2, 150; Eus. Vit. Constant. 1, 17; Isid. Etym. 8, 6, 16; 8, 6, 20; Eustath. in II. 24, 526; Pease on Virg. Aen. 4, 379. A. H. Krappe (Rev. des ét. gr. 39 (1926), 351-354) would find a parallel in Job, 22, 2-4 and 12-16, as S. Reinach {Rev. des ét. gr. 29 (1916), 238-244) in Philipp. 2, 6 (by emendation to άπραγμον).

302

1,45

ñeque 1 ira ñeque gratia teneri, quod quae 2 talia essent 3 inbecilla 1

ita ñeque Ν

2

quaeque O

3

neque ira neque gratia: cf. the preceding note; 1, 121; In Pison. 59: di ... qui, ut nosier divinus ille dixit Epicurus, neque propitii cuiquam esse soient neque irati·, F am. 7, 12, 2: scias Iovem iratum esse nemini posse·, Plat. Phileb. 33b: ούκοϋν εικός γε οΰτε χαίρειν θεούς οΰτε τό έναντίον; Philodem. De Piet. pp. 86; 87; 97 Gomperz; Lucr. 2, 650-651: ipsa suis pollens opibus, nil indiga nostri, j nec bene promeritis capitur neque tangitur ira [quoted by Serv. Aen. 6, 376]; Oxyrh. Pap. 2, no. 215 [an Epicurean fragment], col. 2, 8-9; Plut. Non posse suaviter, 20, p. 1101 b: ούχ ήττόν έστι κακόν άθεότης ώμότητος καί δοξοκοπίας, είς ήν όίγουσιν ήμδς οί τήν χάριν έκ τοϋ θεοϋ μετά της όργής άναιροΰντες; Pyrrhus, 20, 3: το δέ θείον άπωτάτω χάριτος καΐ όργης καί τοϋ μέλειν ήμών είς άπράγμονα βίον καί μεστόν εύπαθειών άποικίζοντες ; Apul. De Deo Socr. 12 : debet deus... ab omnibus animi passionibus liber nec dolere umquam nec aliquando laetari·, [Clem.] Recogn. 5, 26; Porphyr. Ad Marc. 18: όργή γάρ θεών άλλοτρία; Arnob. 4, 37; 6, 2; Lact. Inst. 2, 17, 4: quidam putant ne irasci quidem deum omnino . . . quae persuasio veritatem ac religionem funditus tollit [cf. De Ira, 1, 1; 5, 8-9]; 3, 17, 37 [of Epicurus]: si quis in caelo deus est non irascitur cuiquam. aeque stulti est bene facere, quia sicut ira non commovetur ita nec gratia tangitur·, 5, 10, 12: Epicuri . .. censentis nec gratia eos tangi nec ira moveri; 5, 20, 14; De Ira, 2, 9; 3, 1; 5, 1: Stoici et alii nonnulli ... aiunt gratiam in deo esse, iram non esse·, 11, 16; 15, 6: sed occurrit nobis Epicurus ac dicit : "si est in deo laetitiae adfectus ad gratiam et odii ad tram, necesse est habeat et timorem et libidinem et cupiditatem ceterosque adfectus qui sunt inbecillitatis humanae" ; [Auson.] Append. 5, 16, p. 256 Schenkl; also Job, 35, 6-8. Others than Epicureans, of course, might hold the deity to be free from anger and pain; Alex. Aphrod. in Top. 2, 2, p. 144, 10-11 Wallies. The whole subject, particularly for the patristic authors, is discussed by

talia sunt F, et alia essent D M. Pohlenz, Vom Zorne Gottes (Forsch. ζ . Rei. u. Lit. d. Alt. u. Neu. Test. 12 (1909), 1-156); cf. Ν. W. De Witt in Trans. Roy. Soc. of Canada, sect. 2 (1944), 83-84. gratia teneri: because the god, overflowing with all goods (1, 51), needs no human contribution to his happiness; cf. Aristot. Eth. Eud. 7, 12, 1244 b 8-9: δήλον γάρ ώς ούδενός προσδεόμενος ούδέ φίλου δεήσεται; 7, 15, 1249 b 16: έκεΐνός γε [se. ó θεός] οΰθενός δεϊται; [Apollon. Tyan.] Ep. 26 (Epistologr. Gr. 114 Hercher): θεοί θυσιών ού δέονται. τί οδν δν τις πράττων χαρίζοιτο αύτοϊς; Philodem. De Diis, 3, col. 7, 15-17: τοις δέ θεδέν αγαθόν περιγί διά των τοιούτων· καί χωρίς αύών άπαντ' έχουσιν έν έξουσία πάση τά πρός αύτούς; De Musica, 4, col. 4, p. 66 Kemke: τό δαιμόνιον μέν ού προσδεϊταί τίνος τιμής, ήμϊν δέ φυσικόν έστιν αύτό τιμαν, μάλιστα μέ όσίαις πολήψεσιν, ϊπειτα δέ καί τοις κατά τό πάτριον παραδεδομένοις; Lucr. 5, 165-167: quid enim immortalibus atque beatis / gratia nostra queat largirier emolumenti, / ut nostra quicquam causa gerere adgrediantur·, Joseph. Ant. 8, 111: άπροσδεές γάρ τό θείον άπάντων; [Lucían,] Philops. 9: τουτί μ' έλάνθανέ ποτε τό καλόν, ώς άνθρώπων θεοί ένδεεϊς είσι; Apul. De Deo Socr. 3: nullius extrarii boni participatione sed ex sese bonas et ad omnia conpetentia sibi promptu facili·, Aristid. Apol. 13; Lact. Inst. 2, 6, 5; 6, 1, 6: nec intellegunt terrenis opibus deum non indigere; 7, 5, 4: "quae utilitas deo in homine," inquit Epicurus, "ut eum propter se faceret" ; Julian, Ep. ad Sacerd. 293c; Porphyr. De Abst. 2, 33: οΰτε γάρ χείρους ήμών ot θεοί, 'ίνα τούτων [sc. θυσιών] αύτοί δέωνται, ήμών μή δεομένων; Ad Marc. 18: δστις δέ τιμά τόν θεόν ώς προσδεόμενον, οδτος λέληθεν εαυτόν δοξάζων τοϋ θεοϋ κρείττων είναι; Sallustius, De Diis, 15: αύτό μέν γάρ τό θείον άνενδεές· αί δέ τιμαΐ της ήμετέρας ωφελείας ϊνεκα γίνονται [cf. Nock's edition,

1,45

303

essent omnia. Si nihil aliud quaereremus 1 nisi ut deos pie coleremus 2 et ut superstitione liberaremur, satis erat dictum; nam et praestans 1

quaerimus ACP,

quaererimus B1

lxxxv and n. 199]; Hierocles 1, 1, p. 420 Mullach; Stob. vol. 3, 266 Hense: Σωκράτης έλεγεν θεοϋ μέν είναι 'τό μηδενός δεϊσθαι, τό δ' ώς έλαχίστων έγγυτάτω θεοϋ; vol. 5, pp. 908-909; 914; 3 Maccab. 2, 9; Suid. s.v. κονισμός. Acts, 17, 25 is perhaps the most famous Biblical expression of this idea; others are collected by Iren. C. Haeres. 4,17,1-5. Yet, on the other hand, the do ut des theory of sacrifice (on which cf. G. van Leeuw in Arch.f. Religionswiss. 20 (1921), 241-253) rests upon belief in divine gratitude; cf. also J. W. Hewitt in CI. Weekly, 18 (1925), 148-151. essent.. . essent: not only the somewhat awkward repetition should be observed but also the shift of tense from sit just above (in a general proposition not peculiar to Epicurus) to a statement in oratio obliqua on the authority of Epicurus. inbecilla: έν άσθενεϊ of Epicurus; cf. 1, 122: quid mali datis cum inbecillitate gratificationem et benivolentiam ponitis ; 1, 124: quoniam ut dici tis omni s in inbectlittate est et gratia et caritas; Epic. ap. Diog. L. 10, 77: ού γάρ συμφωνοΰσιν πραγματεΐαι κ od φροντίδες καΐ όργαΐ καΐ χάριτες μακαριότητα, |άλλ' έν άσθενεία και φόβω και προσδεήσει των πλησίον ταϋτα γίγνεται ; Oxyrh. Pap. 2, no. 215, col. 2, 1-8: τί γάρ . . . δδοικας; πότερα άδικεϊ έκείνους νομίζων; ούκοϋν δήλον ώς έλάττουν; πώς οδ ού ταπεινόν τι τό δαιμνιον δοξάζες εϊπερ έτοται πρός σε; Arnob. 7, 14: ita perducitur res eo ut inferior deus sit qui honoribus mactatur humanis, homo vero sublimior qui auget potentiam numinis·, Lact. De Ira, 15, 6 (quoted in the note on ñeque ira ñeque gratia, above) ; Proci. Inst, theol. Prop. 90 : παν τό αδταρκες ή κατ' ούσίαν ή κατ' ένέργειαν κρεϊττόν έστι τοϋ μη αυτάρκους άλλ' είς ιϊλλην ούσίαν άνηρτημένου τήν της τε-

* toleremus Α λειότητος αίτίαν. The weakness here noted lies not merely in that the gods would then be subject, like men, to overmastering passions (cf. Sen. Dial. 3, 20, 3 : ira muliebre maxime ac puerile vitium est·, Tert. Test. Anim. 2; Lact. De Ira, 15, 6, quoted in the note on ñeque ira ñeque gratia, above), but also in that the occasions for such feelings of anger or gratitude would be furnished and controlled by human beings, to whom the gods would thus become, in a degree, subordinated. Cf. also Anselm, Proslogion, 8. si nihil aliud: for the simple piety necessary for worship and for freedom from superstition the first sentence of the κύριαι δόξαι would suffice; since, however, Velleius is speaking among philosophically minded friends, they may well inquire about the form and activities of the deity. pie : cf.pietate, below ; 1,56 : pie sancteque colimus naturam excellentem atque praestantem. On the various meanings of pius and pietas cf. Pease on Virg. Aen. 4, 393 ; the type directed toward the gods is defined in 1, 116, below: est enim pietas iustitia adversum deos; cf. 1, 117; 2, 153; Top. 90: aequitas triper tita dici tur esse : una ad superas deos, altera ad manes, tertia ad homines pertinere. prima pietas, secunda sanctitas, tertia iustitia aut aequitas nominatur·, Fin. 3, 73; O f f . 2, 11; Aug. C.D. 10, 1: pietas quoque proprie Dei cultus intelligi solet, quam Gratet εύσέβειαν vocant. superstitione: cf. Pease on Div. 2, 148, n. (superstitione); to which add W. Otto in Archiv f . Rei. 12 (1909), 533-554; S. W. F. Margadant in Indog. Forsch. 48 (1930), 284; E. Müller-Graupa in Glotta, 19 (1931), 62-64; E. Linkomies in Arktos, 2 (1931), 73-88; J. Pfaff in P.-W. 4A (1931), 937-939; F. Solmsen in CI. Weekly, 37 (1944), 159-160. For its differentiation from religion cf.

304

1,45

deorum natura hominum pietate coleretur, cum e t 1 aeterna esset et beatissima (habet enim venerationem iustam quicquid excellit), 1

c u m et (et add.)

Λ

που>μένων (?) των εί μ ή ποιή άλλά κατά τήν έπίνοιαν των αλλουσών μει καί, σπουsatis erat dictum: for the indicative ητι φύσεων; De Diis, 3, fr. 86a cf. 1, 19, η. (longum est)·, R . Kühner(p. 18 Diels): τμασθαι δ τούς em. Stegmann, Aus f . Gram. d. lat. Spr. θεού . . . τό γάρ θαυμάζειν το μέ2 , 1 2 (1912), 171, b. Where n o such condiγθπλήξεως καί μακαρισμοϋ tional idea is involved, the perfect is reguκαί ποικειώσεως δραστ λέlar (satis dictum est); cf. 2, 2 ; 2, 8 0 ; γτα· θαυμάζει δέ καί καταπλήτ2, 167. τε μαάρ ουδέν οΰpraestans . . . natura: cf. 1, 47; 1, 56; τως ώς θε; 3, col. 1 : τοις θεοϊς, 1, 9 6 ; 1, 100; 1, 116; 1, 121 (bis); 2, 4 6 ; κ θαυμάζει τήν φύσιν 1 τήν διάDiv. 2, 148. θεσιν, καί πειράται συνεγγίν αύτη; a e t e r n a e s s e t : the tense shows clearly that this is part of the Epicurean doc3, Col. 1 0 ; Oxyrh. Pap. 2 (1899), no. 215, trine, not necessarily the opinion o f all col. 1, 16-23 [an Epicurean fragment]: men, which would here demand sit. σύ . The whole topic suggests various Christian distinctions, such as that between the σώμα ψυχικύν and the σώμα πνευματικόν

312

1,49

Haec quamquam et inventa 1 sunt 2 acutius 3 et dicta subtilius 4 ab Epicuro quam ut quivis ea 5 possit agnoscere, tarnen fretus intellegentia vestra 6 dissero brevius quam causa 7 desiderai. Epicurus autem, qui res occultas et penitus abditas non modo 8 5

1 et inventa] inuenta D 2 sint B2 3 et acutius Ν 6 intelligentiae uestrae A 7 causam O quivis ea] qui iusta D

(2 Cor. 15, 44), that of the Marcionite idea of Christ (e.g., Hippol. Philosophum. 10, 15), and the homoeousian controversy. quasi sanguinem: an idea somewhat more familiar, not only from the ichor of the gods {II. 5, 339-342; Zwicker in P.-W. 9 (1916), 830)—a term used also in a purely medical sense, as in Hipp. De Capit. Vuln. 19—but also from the observation of analogies to blood in other animals; e.g., Aristot. De Part. An. 1, 5, 645 b 8-10; 2, 2, 648 a 2-5; De Gen. An. 4, 1, 765 b 34-35; 766 a 33-34. Similarly in lower animals Aristotle recognizes analogies to flesh; e.g., De Part. An. 2, 5, 651 b 4-5; 3, 5, 668 a 2627; Probi. 13, 4, 908 a 4-5. subtilius: often used by Cicero with verbs of saying. quivis . . . possit agnoscere: cf. Epic. Sent. Vat. 29, p. 110 Bailey: παρρησία γαρ εγωγε χρώμενος φυσιολογών χρησμωδεΐν τά συμφέροντα πασιν άνθρώποις μάλλον άν βουλοίμην καν μηδείς μέλλγ) συνήσειν, ή συγκατατιθέμενος ταϊς δόξαις καρποϋσθαι τόν πυκνόν παραπίπτοντα παρά των πολλών έπα Lvov ; Ep. fr. 43, ρ. 130 Bailey: ούδέποτε ώρέχθην τοις πολλοίς άρέσκειν. α μέν γάρ έκείνοις ήρεσκεν ούκ Ιμαθον4 â 8' $δειν έγώ, μακράν ήν της έκείνων αίσθήσεως. Doubtless the distinction made by other philosophers—e.g., Pythagoras and Aristotle—between esoteric and exoteric teachings was largely based on the same feeling. But that a philosopher, even of another school, could not be expected to understand these ideas when duly explained to him is resented (1, 74) by the Academic, whose training led him (1,11) et contra omnes philosophes et pro omnibus dicere, and who accordingly

1 8

subtilitis Bl nomodo A1

expresses doubts (1, 109) whether even the Epicureans themselves understand all the views which they champion. That the obscurity here described applies not merely to the preceding quasi corpus but also to the ideas in the sentence which begins Epicurus autem is remarked by P. Schwenke (in Jahrb. f . cl. Philol. 125 (1882), 618). agnoscere: "appreciate"; "feel the force of"·; cf. Tuse. 1, 58. fretus intellegentia vestra: cf. Pro Cael. 19: fretus vestra prudentia·, Al·: fretus vestra sapientia·, 45: quae vestra prudentia est; Fam. 9, 9, 2: pro tua prudentia·, 10, 27, 2; 11, 13, 1 : qua enim prudentia es. brevius : cf. Parad. 6 : dicam brevius quam res tanta dici potest. The brevity of Velleius's account is indeed noteworthy, whether compared with the Stoic prolixity of the second book or with the Epicurean scale used by Philodemus, and R. Philippson (in Hermes, 51 (1916), 607; id., in Symb. Osloenses, 19 (1939), 36-38) suggests that Cicero here used as a source not Philodemus in full but epitomes of his theological works, such as are alluded to by Ambr. Ep. 63, 13: sicut Philominus [an error for Philodemus] eius sectator in epitomis suis disputât. H. Usener (Epicurea (1887), lxvi) thought that this epitomizing was the work of a Graeculus officiosus, but Philippson (op. cit., 37) thinks that it may have been done by Philodemus himself. Epicurus, etc.: Schoemann here suspects a hidden iambic tetrameter: Epicúrus autem qui res occultas et penitus dbditas. This sentence is the most difficult and disputed in the whole work, if not in all the works of Cicero, despite the fact that the text is not notably corrupt. In its interpretation scholars have fol-

1,49 lowed one of three assumptions: (1) that Cicero, though usually a very lucid writer, is here, in order to discredit a theology to him distasteful, putting illogical nonsense into the mouth of an Epicurean spokesman, so that Cotta may the more contemptuously refute it in 1, 105-110. In keeping with this theory would be such expressions as 1, 105: hoe per ipsos deos de quibus loquimttr quale tandem est·, 1, 107: totaque res vacillai et claudicat·, 1, 109: at quam licenter·, but against it would be the fact that such failure to treat fairly one of the two most important theological doctrines of his day would frustrate to a large extent the purpose of the whole work. (2) The second theory would be that Cicero, either through hasty composition or from lack of thorough understanding, has unintentionally misrepresented a perfectly sober and logical Greek Epicurean source. This situation would be not unparalleled elsewhere in his philosophic works; cf. Hier. In Is. 12, p. 492 Vallarsi : Timaeum .., ipse qui interpretatus est Tullius se non intellegere confitetur. It is hardly necessary to assume this here, though C. Bailey (The Gr. Atomists and Epic. (1928), 443-444; cf. his ed. of Lucr. 1 (1947), 68, n. 6) declares that most commentators think so. Among such critics of Cicero cf. G. F. Schoemann, Opuse, acad. 4 (1871), 351; R. Hirzel, Untersuch. Cicero's philos. Sehr. 1 (1877), 76-77; W. Scott in Journ. ofPhilol. 12 (1883), 212-213; in reply O. Plasberg, id. maior, ad loc.-, C. Vicol in Ephem. Dacoromana, 10 (1945), 249. (3) The third possibility is that Cicero does, in general, understand his source and renders it with reasonable fidelity, and that 1, 105-110 derives from an entirely different source, which Cicero in his version has to some extent related in phraseology to 1, 49-50; cf. R. Philippson in Hermes, 51 (1916), 584. Cotta's answer in 1, 105 is by Hirzel, op. cit., 49, considered close and exact, but has been shown by G. F. Schoemann (Opuse, acad. 4 (1871), 350) and P. Schwenke (Jahrb. f . el. Philol. 125 (1882), 616) to be distinctly divergent at several points, such as vim et naturam deorum cn speciem dei and

313

simillimarum imaginum species similium accessio. Schwenke (p. 617) pertinently remarks that if Cicero in 1, 105-109 has combined with the words here spoken by Velleius the criticisms of opponents of Epicureanism then the later passage cannot authoritatively be used to explain doubtful points in 1, 49-50. Each of these three assumptions has had some support ; the two former make easier the work of exegesis, but the third seems the most reasonable. a u t e m : continuative, where one might have expected igitur, rather than even mildly adversative; cf. 1, 121: censent autem·, 3, 37: ali autem solem; 3, 71: iniustitiae autem. This use is especially common with a word which has been repeated; cf. Thes. Ling. Lat. 2 (1906), 1591, 57—1592, 57. occultas e t . . . abditas: physical phenomena are frequently so described; e.g., Ac. 1, 15: a rebus occultis et ab ipsa natura involutis·, 1, 19: de natura et rebus occultis [where see Reid's η.]; 2, 30: de abditis rebus et obscuris; 2, 127; Fin. 1, 30: occulta quaedam et quasi involuta·, 1, 64: rerum occultarum ignoratione-, 3, 37: illa quae occulta nobis sunt·, 4, 18: contemplation rerum occultarum, 5, 9-10; 5, 51: rerum caelestium eorumque omnium quae naturae obscuritate occultantur·, Tim. 1 : earum rerum quae a natura involutae videntur·, Brut. 44: reconditis abstrusisque rebus·, Lucr. 1, 136: Graiorum obscura reperto·, 1, 145: res quibus occultas penitus convisere possis. Lucretius praises highly the discoveries of Epicurus: 1, 74-77; 3, 9: tu, pater, es rerum inventor·, 3, 29-30: quod sic natura tua vi / tam manifesta patens ex omni parte retecta est-, 5, 1-54, especially 52-54: cum bene praesertim multa ac divinitus ipsis / immortalibus de divis dare dieta suerit / atque omnem rerum naturam pandere dictis·, cf. Philo's praise of Moses (De Opif. Mundi, 131). R. Philippson (Hermes, 51 (1916), 599), F. Peters (T. Lucr. et M. Cic. quo modo Vocab. Gr. Epic. Discipl. propria Latine verterint (1926), 7), and N. Stang (Symb. Osloenses, 17 (1937), 68) would equate these adjectives with άδηλος. With penitus abditas—completely latent rather than superficial—cf. 2, 151 :

314

1,49

videat 1 animo sed etiam sic tractet 2 ut manu, docet 3 earn esse vim et naturam deorum ut primum non sensu 4 sed mente cerna1 uideat B, uiderat AGP NOM, uiderit DH 4 sensus BeMan., doceat ceti.

verns penitus abditas; O f f . 2,13: ferrum ... penitus abditum. videat animo: though in 1, 19 Vellerns had contemptuously inquired quibus enim oculis [attimi] intueri potuit vester Plato fabricant illam tanti operisi The subjunctive here is perhaps causal. tractet ut manu: cf. Rep. 1, 15: qui [sc. Panaetius] quae viχ coniectura qualia sint possumus suspicari, sic adfirmat ut oculis ea cernere videatur aut tractare plane manu; Brut. 277: se comperisse manifesto et manu tenere diceret ; Arnob. 2, 71 : et contrectare, quemadmodum dicitur, manibus-, also Plat. Theaet. 155e: άπρίξτοϊν χεροΐν λαβέσθαι; A. Otto, Die Sprichwörter ... d. Römer (1890), 211. O. Gifanius (ιCollectanea in Lucret. (1595 ed.), 372) suggested that Cicero here renders χειραγωγεί. docet: the indicative seems necessary here, the subjunctive of A B being apparently due to the influence upon the scribe of videat just above. earn esse . . . naturam . . . ut: cf. 1, 50: earn esse naturam ut. vim et naturam deorum: cf. 1, 122; Div. 1, 12: vis et natura quaedam; 1, 13; 1, 15; 2, 94; 2, 139; Fat. 11; Fin. 3, 54; 5, 60; Sen. 51; Tusc. 1, 30; 1, 66; 5, 70: de vi et natura deorum-, al. P. Schwenke {Jahrb. f . cl. Philol. 125 (1882), 619) thinks the original here had φύσις, and that the expression is not a mere periphrasis for θεοί as Brieger had supposed. primum: the first reason is left hanging, with no deinde to introduce a second, which might perhaps be considered as beginning with 1, 50: summa vero, etc. non sensu sed mente: cf. 1, 19, η. (quibus ... oculis); 1, 46, η. {natura ... ratio)·, 1, 105: sic enim dicebas speciem dei percipi cogitatione non sensu; Philodem. De Signis, 22, p. 74 De Lacy [the supputions by R. Philippson]: . . . ούδέν έν άνθω τόν θεόν

!

tractat Μ1

3

docet

dett.

ύπρχ δνθρωπον φρονσε παρ' ήμϊν ζων δενήσεως δέ χωρίς μ δέ έν άλλοις καΐ όίλλ άλλω καΐ λλων τ γινομένων ορατών λόγω θεωρουμέ αιτίων Ιτερα καθ' 2καστον σθητόν τό γεγεννημένον ούχ v καΐ ταύτό κα μόνον καί vó θεωρατός [the idea is of course common among Jews and Christians; e.g., Philo, De Mut. Nom. 6; Tat. Adv. Gr. 4; Justin, Dial. 3; Theoph. Ad Autol. 1, 3]. From these passages it is clear that this part of Epicurus's doctrine, "that reason and intuition are the avenues of knowledge to a world of higher certainties than the world of sense-perception" (N. W. De Witt in Cl. Philol. 36 (1941), 370), is by no means peculiar to him, and C. Bailey (The Gr. Atomists and Epic. (1928), 592) well recognizes the phrase λόγφ θεωρητός as one traditional in Greek philosophy for what is mentally conceived as opposed to what is perceived through the senses. For the contrast cf. also Orat. 8 : quod neque oculis ñeque auribus neque ullo sensu percipi potest cogitatione tantum et mente complectimur·, Ammon. in Anal, pr. 1, 1, p. 25, 14-16 Wallies: ού γάρ ó θεολόγος δύναται διά τών συλλογισμών τά νοητά δεικνύναι, άλλ' αναλογία κέχρηται. _ soliditate quadam: quadam indicates that Cicero is rendering a Greek technical term by a Latin expression not yet technical. R. Philippson (Symb. Osloenses, 19 (1939), 33) thinks the Greek here was πυκνότης, and compares Philodem. De Diis, 3, col. 11, 19: πυκνότητα νοητήν. The construction, as R. Hirzel (Untersuch. χ. Cicero's philos. Sehr. 1 (1877), 49) and R. Philippson (Hermes, 51 (1916), 600) have interpreted it, is a predicate ablative of quality, as in 1, 12: tanta similitudine·, 1, 81: ea facie novimus\ 1, 83: his vocabulis esse deos facimus·, 1, 107: imagines ea forma-, its use with cernatur, however, is somewhat harsh, and C. Bailey {op. cit., 445, n. 2), while considering it an ablative of quality would construe it with earn esse vim et naturam. Others hold it an ablative of means, or, as J. S. Reid (ap. Mayor ad loc.), perhaps

316

1,49

correctly, thinks, of cause. As remarked, however, by J. Degenhart (Krit.-exeg. Bemerk. Cic. Sehr, de Nat. Dear. (1881), 7), to assume a piling-up of different kinds of ablatives (sensu, mente, soliditate) would be unparalleled in Cicero. For the thought cf. 1, 75; 1, 98; 1, 105: nec esse in ea ullam soliditatem ; 1, 123; and what Balbus says in 2, 59. nec ad numerum: cf. 1, 105: ñeque eandem ad numerum permanere. The phrase is not an idiomatic Latin one but a translation of κατ' άριθμόν, which is used by Philodem. De Piet. p. 134 Gomperz [as restored by R. Philippson in Hermes, 51 (1916), 583]: ή κατ' άριθμόν ρισιν δτε μέν αυτών καλεν, έ τήν έκ των καΐ τήάξιν ούτων, ώσ το ραχθέν άσταθέ; ρ. 138: κρισιν των ριθμόν προς τόν αιώνα; cf. also Aristot. Metaph. 4, 6, 1016 b 31-35: frri δέ τά μέν κατ* άριθμόν έστιν êv, τά 8έ κατ' είδος, τά δέ κατά γένος, τά Sè κατ' άναλογίαν, άριθμω μέν ών ή ΰλη μία, είδει δ' ών ό λόγος εις, γένει δ' ών τό αύτό σχήμα της κατηγορίας, κατ' άναλογίαν δέ δσα έχει ώς άλλο προς άλλο [cf. 8, 9, 1051 a 32-33] ; Anal. post. 1, 5, 74 a 31 ; De An. 2, 415 b 4-5; Schol. Diog. L. 10, 139: έν άλλοις δέ φησι τούς θεούς . . . ούς μέν κατ' άριθμόν ύφεστώτας, ούς δέ καθ' όμοείδειαν, κτλ. [The passage last cited has often been brought into close connection with ours in Cicero. As it stands in the mss it indicates two kinds of gods as recognized by Epicurus, and these Mayor (ad loc., 147, n. 2) thinks may have been the esoteric and the popular. Some scholars frankly accept two types of gods, despite Cicero's silence on the subject; cf. G. F. Schoemann, Opuse, acad. 4 (1871), 352-355 (with mention of the older discussions); H. Diels, ed. of Philodemus, De Dits, 3, part 2 (1917), 29-32; C. Bailey, The Gr. Atomists and Epic. (1928), 459-461 (review of others' opinions); P. Merlan in Hermes, 68 (1933), 196-204; in refutation see R. Philippson in Hermes, 53 (1918), 359-360. Other scholars would escape from the

two-fold deity by emending the scholium to ού μέν . . . ως Sk [so P. Gassendi] or in other ways (e.g., G. F. Schoemann, op. cit. 356), or else by explaining the phrase to mean, not two kinds of gods but two forms of our knowledge of them; thus R. Philippson in Hermes, 51 (1916), 580 explains the passage as signifying "in part . . . in part", comparing Plat. Phaedr. 255c : ή μέν . . . ή δέ. P. Schwenke (in Jahrb. f . cl. Philol. 125 (1882), 617; 628-629), while admitting some likeness in the scholium to the Ciceronian passage, yet considers its readings too uncertain if not too corrupt to help in Ciceronian exegesis; cf. J. Degenhart, op. cit., 43. It is certainly strange, as Schoemann (op. cit., 352) remarks, that, if there were two types of Epicurean gods, Cicero should make no mention of the fact, and further that the opponents of Epicureanism (including Cicero's souice for 1, 105-110) should have overlooked such an opening for attack, as is remarked by P. Schwenke (op. cit., 628). Again, how could Velleius have inveighed against the inconsistent and heterogeneous gods of other philosophers, in his doxographic review, if the Epicureans themselves had recognized two distinct classes of gods, as J. Degenhart (op. cit. 42) pertinently inquires? The Ciceronian passage, then, should be considered as basic, rather than the anonymous and much later scholium to Diogenes; cf. P. Schwenke, op. cit., 629.] Continuing examples of κατ' άριθμόν, cf. Galen, De Meth. Med. 2, 7 (Χ, 135 Κ.): τοσούτον . . . δέον τούς παλαιούς φιλοσόφους έπαινεϊν ώς μέγα τι καΐ σοφδν έξευρόντας, ότι τό ταύτόν καΐ το έτερον και τό £ν και τό ούχ 8ν ού μόνον κατ' άριθμόν, άλλά καΐ κατ' είδος χρή νοεϊν ; Alex. Aphrod. in Anal. pr. p. 180, 33-35 Wallies : άρέσκει γάρ αύτοϊς τό μετά τήν έκπύρωσιν πάλιν πάντα ταύτά έν τω κόσμω γίνεσθαι κατ' άριθμόν, ώς καΐ τον ιδίως ποιόν πάλιν τόν αυτόν τω πρόσθεν εϊναί τι καΐ γίνεσθαι έν έκείνω τω κόσμω ; Suid. s.v. ταύτόν ; Τ. Waitz, Aristotele Organon, 1 (1844), 276-277, for such phrases; W. Scott in Journ. of Philol. 12 (1883), 215-217; R. Philippson in Hermes, 53 (1918), 370-381. Cf. also

1,49

317

propter firmitatem στερέμνια 1 appellai, sed imaginibus similitudine et transitione 2 perceptis, cum infinita simillumarum imaginum 1

steremnia ACPOFM,

sterem*nia B, strenuia Ν

the use of ad in 1, 61 : ad veritatem ; 3, 27 : ad harmonium. The expression, then, seems to refer to individual identity, and the Epicureans accordingly would obtain, not a knowledge of individual gods —if man could know them how could they be ignorant and careless of him?— but of a blessed eternal genus of beings ; cf. 1, 109: fluenti um frequenter transitio fit visionum, ut e multis una videatur-, also Cotta's contemptuous remarks in 1, 80; R. Philippson (in Hermes, 51 (1916), 581; for a somewhat ineffective protest against this view cf. A. Krokiewicz in Eos, 32 (1929), 97, n. 1). C. Bailey {The Gr. Atomists and Epic. (1928), 148) would compare with our passage Simplic. De Cael. p. 310, 5 (Vorsokrat. 1, no. 55 A 82): οι 8è Δημοκρίτου κόσμοι εις έτέρους κόσμους μεταβάλλοντες έκ των αύτών άτόμων δντας οί αύτοί τω είδε ι γίνονται, εί καί μή τω άριθμω. Hort and Mayor (ed. of Clem. Strom. 7 (1902), 273) note a similar contrast of κατά την δύναμιν and κατά τον άριθμόν. firmitatem: = στερεότης; cf. Epic, ap. Diog. L. 10, 44; also the view of Democritus in Diog. L. 9, 44. It denotes not merely material hardness but also comparative durability, as contrasted with the relatively perishable separate imagines. Cf. the terms concreti (1, 75) and habitu solido (1, 123). στερέμνια: the solid objects from which imagines (είδωλα) are given off; cf. Epic. ap. Diog. L. 10, 46: τύποι όμοιοσχήμονες τοις στερεμνίοις είσί, λεπτότησιν απέχοντες μακράν των φαινομένων; 10, 48: καί γάρ ρεϋσις άπό των σωμάτων του έπιπολής συνεχής . . . σώζουσα την έπΐ του στερεμνίου θέσιν καί τάξιν των άτόμων έπΐ πολύν χρόνον; 10, 50: μορφή έστιν αΰτη τοϋ στερεμνίου; Philodem. De Diis, 3, col. 11, 8-16 [4 occurrences]; fr. 30c. Others had already used the term; cf. Aët. Ρlac. 2, 11, 2: "Εμπεδοκλής στερέμνιον είναι τόν ού-

2

transititne A1

ρανόν [cf. Schol. II. 2, 458; 4, 2; 8, 393; 14, 288] έξ άέρος συμπαγέντος ΰπό πυρός κρυσταλλοειδώς ; 4, 19, 5: 'Αναξαγόρας την φωνήν γίνεσθαι πνεύματος άντιπεσόντος μεν στερεμνίω άέρι, κτλ. ; cf. also Schol. Theoer. 2, 33-34: στερεμνιώτερον . . . τοϋ έν "Αιδου άδάμαντος; Hesych. and Suid. s.v. στερέμνιον· στερεόν, ίσχυρότατον. Eustath. in II. 16, 682, contrasts στερεμνίοις προσώποις with άνυποστάτοις πάθεσιν. The atom itself was defined by Epicurus as a σώμα στερεόν (which is used by Proci, in Tim. p. 24d (p. 77Diehl);cf. Schol. Dionys. Thr. Gram, in Bekk. Anecd. 2, 660. On the use of the Greek technical term here cf. H. J. Rose in Journ. Hell. Stud. 41 (1921), 110. sed . . . intellegentiam capere: instead of continuing the construction ut primum . . . cernatur Cicero makes this an indirect discourse clause dependent upon docet, and sed contrasts, as Mayor observes, the following positive with the preceding negative description of the divine nature. similitudine et transitione: cf. 1, 105 : eamque esse eius visionem ut similitudine et transitione cernatur·, 1, 109: fluentium frequenter transitio fit visionum, ut e multis una videatur [this second instance is less in point than the first, as is recognized by A. Brieger, Beitr. Krit. einiger philos. Sehr. d. Cic. (1873), 12]; Schol. Diog. L. 10, 139 (quoted in note on cum infinita, etc., below). The proper understanding of these two ablatives of means (cf. R. Philippson in Hermes, 51 (1916), 602) is fundamental for the comprehension of this passage. They undoubtedly render two Greek terms, and Philodemus is the natural place to search for such. Similitude is often identified with όμοιότης, as incorrectly by J. Masson, Lucretius (1909), 149, who thinks αί ομοιότητες means much the same as imagines, then "the divine likenesses," and finally

318

1,49

the gods themselves. R. Philippson {Hermes, 51 (1916), 602; id., Symb. Osloenses, 19 (1939), 33; 20 (1940), 33), perhaps correctly, renders transitio et similitude—reversing the order—as hendiadys for the technical expression μετάβασις καθ' ομοιότητα. Ν. W. De Witt (Trans. Roy. Soc. of Canada, 3 ser., sect. 2, vol. 36 (1942), 46) identifies similitudo with αναλογία, used by Epicurus three times in five lines when speaking (ap. Diog. L. 10, 58-59) of the atoms and also of thoughts (Diog. L. 10, 32): έπίνοιαι πδσαι άπό των αισθήσεων γεγόνασι κατά τε περίπτωσιν και άναλογίαν καί ομοιότητα καΐ σύνθεσιν, συμβαλλομένου τι καί του λογισμού; also by Philodemus in Voll. Herculan1, 126 [as corrected by W. Crönert; cf. C. Bailey, Epicurus (1926), 132, no. 49] : των άνθρώπων δσοι μήτε τήν άναλογίαν τήν κατά τά φαινόμενα έ>ν τοις άοράτοις ον ήδύναντο συνιδειν μήτε τήν συμφωνίαν τήν ταϊς αίσθήσεσιν ύπάρχουσαν πρός τά άόρατα; De Signis, 11, 17; 37, 14: μοιότης ή άναλοία ; frg. 3, 1-5; while άναλογέω, άναλογίζομαι, άναλογισμός, and ανάλογος are used in nine additional cases [cf. the index to De Lacy's edition, 188], DeWitt well remarks {op. cit. 46): "This method of reasoning by analogy is inseparably connected with what Epicurus called ισονομία, an essential part of his physical theory" (cf. 1, 50, below). Transitio R. Hirzel (Untersuch. χ. Cicero's philos. Sehr. 1 (1877), 58-59; cf. J. Degenhart, Krit.-exeg. Bemerk. Cic. Sehr, de Nat. Deor. (1881), 15-17; A. Koenig, Lucretii de Simulacr. et de Visu Doctr. cum Fontibus comparata (1915), 25) considers to be the άνταναπλήρωσις by which Epicurus (ap. Diog. L. 10,48) says that the loss of particles streaming off as imagines from the surface of bodies is constantly offset. W. Scott (in Journ. of Philol. 12 (1883), 219) believes transitio is the "passage or flux of matter (in the form of a series of images) which is the distinctive mark of the divine beings"; Mayor (ad loc.) thinks it = φορά, and translates it "the passing before the eyes," as in Ov. Rem. Am. 616: multaque corporibus transitione nocent—a mean-

ing ill agreeing with non sensu sed mente, and not explaining how this passage before the eyes is produced. Mayor further thinks that the word is here inaccurately used. J. Masson (in CI. Rev. 16 (1902), 278, n. 4; id., Lucretius (1909), 142, n. 3( conjectured continuation, comparing Lucr. 4, 87-89; 4, 104-109; 4, 256-268. C. Bailey (The Gr. Atomisti and Epic. (1928), 448-449; cf. H. Diels, ed. of Philodem. De Dits, 3, part 2, 28, n. 1) somewhat hesitantly suggests ύπέρβασις, comparing Philodem. De Dits, 3, col. 9, 20, where the atoms seem to have the power of passing over intervening space between the intermundia and the human mind. He also, however, admits (p. 448) that the Greek word may be μετάβασις [i.e., before man's mind], translating "by images apprehended by their similarity and succession," or "apprehended by the succession of similars"; Schoemann and Brieger had also understood transitio of the passages of images from the gods to us. H. Diels (ed. of Philodem. De Diis, 3, part 2 (1917), 28, n. 1) accepts μετάβασις, but supposes that Cicero misunderstood the term. More probable than any of these views, however, is the assumption that, while μετάβασις is the corresponding Greek word, transitio is here used with no reference to vision of the imagines or to their motion from the gods to us. Rather the whole phrase means, as R. Philippson in several articles (De Philodemi Libro qui est περί σημείων, etc. (1881), 34; Rhein. Mus. 64 (1909), 16; Hermes, 51 (1916), 601-603; Hermes, 83 (1934), 171-175; Symb. Osloenses, 19 (1939), 35-36; 20 (1940), 30) and P. Schwenke (in fahrb. f . cl. Philol. 125 (1882), 613-633, especiaUy 623-624) have shown,and as N. W. De Witt (op. cit., 46) renders it: "shapes apprehended by the method of analogy and inference by induction," or, as he translates it in Trans. Am. philoi. Assoc. 70 (1939), 425: "by analogy and transfer." (C. Bailey's refutation of this interpretation in his Gr. Atomists and Epic. (1928), 593-594 appears unconvincing.) The analogy, as Schwenke (op. cit., 624) points out, is

1,49 between the στερέμνια, known to us by the senses, and die Bilder, durch welche die Götter wahrgenommen werden, erst durch einen Analogieschluß begriffen, and he returns to the notion of quasi corpus as contrasted with the corpus of the στερέμνια. How far the Epicureans went in their use of these analogies is shown in their doctrine of divine anthropomorphism. This use of μετάβασις, a "stepping over" from the known to the unknown (just as μεταφορά is a "carrying over" from a familiar to an unfamiliar field) is not found in Epicurus himself, but seems to come from the later Epicureans, particularly, as R. Philippson {De Philodemi Libro qui est περί σημείων καΐ σημειώσεων et Epicureorum Doctrina logica (1881), 34 (not seen by me); id., Hermes, 51 (1916), 574; id., Symb. Osloenses, 19 (1939), 35; 20 (1940), 32-33) and P. Schwenke (op. cit., 627) hold (though the view is attacked by A. Lörcher in Burs. Jahresb. 200 (1924), 127; 136), from Zeno of Sidon, who may have borrowed it from the empirical physicians. The term is very frequent in Philodem. De Signis, De Lacy's index ( p. 190) noting 36 cases of μετάβασις and μεταβαίνειν; especially noteworthy are 22, 15-21 [as emended by R. Philippson in Rhein. Mus. 64 (1909), 30]: οίον 6τ μέν άνθρώποις μ, τινά δέ κα θειν· εύστόχωή έ ζφαβάσει χ ν ούδέν έν άνθω τόν θεόν ύπάρχειν, κτλ. ; fr. 8 [as emended by R. Philippson in Rhein. Mus. 64 (1909), 16-17] : ν δεϊν έπανάγεριληπτικώς τη μενα κατεαρή τ ζητήτ ώς σω εί έκ τοϋ σώμαφερόμεν, ούκ άθ μεγίστη γινόμά μορφής καί συμ ήδονη; έκ της τ' αναλογ£ας άπολήψη την έκ των είδών ήδονήν ο προς ά δν δήλον ώς ού πρός πασαν μορφή τοιούτω [dual?] προσπ ούδέ προς την έπ' ϊια το κατηναγκασμένον *** κατ' έπιπλο - νεσθαι τόν είρμόν ; Iambi, ap. Stob. vol. 1, κήν μερών συνηρτημένην; 1, 27, 4 (Doxo- pp. 80-81, nos. 17-18 Wachsmuth; Aug. C.D. 5, 8: omnium conexionem seriemque gr. Gr.* 322 = S.V.F. 2, no. 976): τήν δέ είμαρμένην συμπλοκήν αίτιων τεταγ- causarum ... fati nomine appellant; 5, 9: st certus est ordo rerum certus est ordo cauμένην ; 1, 28, 4 (Doxogr. Gr.2 324 = S.V.F. 2, no. 917): oí Στωικοί είρμόν sarum; Theodoret, Gr. A f f . 6,14 {S.V.F. αίτιων, τουτέστι τάξιν καί έπισύνδεσιν 2, no. 916): καί Χρύσιππος . . . μηδέν άπαράβατον; Curt. 5, 11, 10 [as emended διαφέρειν είπε τοϋ είμαρμένου τό κατby j . S. Reid on Ac. 1, 29]: nexuque νην κίνησιν άίδιον συνεχή καί τεταγcausarum latentium; Sen. Ep. 16, 6: μένην ; Nemes. De Nat. Horn. 37 (S. V.F. fatorum series inligatos·, 19, 6: quale m 2, no. 918): ή είμαρμένη ειρμός τις ούσα dicimus seriem esse causarum ex quibus αιτιών άπαράβατος; Proci, in Plat. Rep. nectitur fatum·, 77, 12; 88, 15: continuus {Anecd. Gr. et Lat. 2 (1886), 126-127 ordo fatorum; N.Q. 1, 1, 4; 2, 32, 1: Schoell and Studemund) ; Boeth. in Cic. longum fatorum sequentium ordinem; Dial. Top. 5, p. 367 Orelli: fatum enim dicunt

341

fluxisse dicatis. Quanti autem haec philosophia aestimanda est 1 cui, tamquam aniculis, et his quidem indoctis, fato fieri videantur omnia? Sequitur μαντική 2 vestra, quae Latine 3 divinatio dicitur, qua tanta inbueremur superstitione, si vos audire 4 vellemus, ut 3

1 aestimanda est B, aestimanda sit cett., aestimandast Pl. 4 latina BF audiremus ut O

[sc. Stoici] esse praecedentìum causarum subsequentiumque rerum perplexionem quandam atque catenae more continentiam\ Lyd. De Mens. 4, 7: ειμαρμένη oíovei είρομένη διά τό χρόνου δεϊσθαι καί διαστάσεως ίνα ό είρμός των υποκειμένων σώζηται; 4, 81 : τήν δέ είμαρμένην φασί συμπλοκήν είναι αίτιων τεταγμένων; Phot. Bib/, cod. 249, p. 440 a 4-5 Bekker: διαφέρει δε της τύχης ότι ή μέν είρμόν ?χει και τάξιν και άκολουθίαν; Suid. s.v. ειμαρμένη; Eustath. in II. 15, 190; W. Gundel in P.-W. 7 (1912), 2629. fluxisse: the verb emphasizes not so much motion as continuity between past, present, and future; cf. Div. 1, 125: ex omni aeternitate fluens Veritas

sempiterna;

Tuse. 5, 70 [quoted in the preceding note] ; Sen. N.Q. 2, 35, 2 : fata . . . cursum irrevocabilem ingressa ex destinato fluunt.

2

mantice codd.

Plat. Gorg. 512e: πιστεύσαντα ταΐς γυναιξίν δτι τήν είμαρμένην ούδ' αν εις έκφύγοι [cf. Μ. Aurel. 7, 46]; Sen. Ep. 94, 2: anilia ... praecepta·, Min. Fei. 13, 5: anilis .. . superstitio-, Lact. Inst. 1, 17, 3: superstitiones paene añiles·, 2, 4, 4: aniliter desipuit-, 5, 2, 7: anili superstitione·, Firm. De Errore, 17, 4: superstitionibus anilibus·, lambì. Vit. Pyth. 183; Hier. Adv. Rufin. 3, 22: anilium iurgiorum deliramento·, Aug. C.D. 10, 11: quaelibet anicula Christiana-, C. Faust. 13, 6: anieulare deliramentum-, Enarr. in Ps. 38: anicularia ... verba; Amm. Marc. 16, 8, 2: anile incantamentum [cf. 29, 2, 3] ; 21,16,18 : anili superstitione·, Claud. Mamert. 2, 8: anilium opinionum·, Ennod. {Ep. 1,9, p. 19 Härtel): anilium commenta poetarum·, also the etymology in Paul, ex Fest. p. 6 Müller (p. 5 Lindsay) : anus .. . quod iam sit sine sensu, quod Graece dicitur άνους; A. Otto, Die Sprichwörter ... d. Römer (1890), 28; W. Aly in P.-W. 14 (1928), 254. sequitur: resuming primum above, μαντική . . . Latine divinatio : cf. Div. 1, 1 : divinationem quam Graeci μαντικήν appellant (= Legg. 2, 32). μαντική was originally an adjective modifying έπιστήμη; cf. A. Bouché-Leclercq, Hist, de la Div. 1 (1879), 3, n. 1. Divination, which presupposes some sort of predestination, was naturally rejected by Epicurus; cf. Div. 1, 5: Xenophanes unus qui deos esse diceret divinationem funditus sustulit ; reliqui vero omnes praeter Epicurum balbutientem de natura deorum divinationem probaverunt, sed non uno modo-, [Galen,] Hist. Phil. 105 (Doxogr. Gr.2 639 = XIX, 320 Κ.): Πλάτων καί oí Στωικοί τήν μαντικήν είσάγουσι . . . Ξενοφάνης καί 'Επίκουρος άναιροΰσι τήν μαντικήν.

quanti: = quantuti, "of how little worth"; cf. Tuse. 5, 109; Rep. 6, 25; Reid on Ae. 2,120. aniculis: because of their somewhat sheltered and irresponsible lives as well as of their failing mental powers typical of credulous gossip—3, 12, and n. (fabellas añiles), with which cf. 1, 34: puerilibus fabulis—and superstition: cf. 1, 18, n. (anum fatidicam); 2, 70: superstitiones paene añiles·, 2, 73: anum fatidicam·, 3, 92: superstitiose atque aniliter·, Div. 1, 7: anili superstitione·, 2, 19: anile sane et plenum superstitionis fati nomen ipsum·, 2, 36: haec ... ne aniculae quidem existiment·, 2, 125: inbecilli animi atque anilis·, 2, 141: an tu censes ullam anum tam deliram futuram fuisse ut somniis crederei ; Tuse. 1, 48: quae est anus tam delira quae timeat ista·, 1, 93: ineptiae paene añiles-, 1, 94: vix digna lucubratione anicularum·, 2, 5: quaeve anus tam excors inveniri potest quae ... exinbueremur superstitione: cf. Fin. itmescat; De Domo, 105: anili superstitione·, 1, 60: superstitio qua qui est imbutus·,

342 haruspices, augures,1 harioli, vates, coniectores2 nobis essent colendi. 56 His terroribus 3 ab Epicuro soluti et in libertatem 4 vindicati nec metuimus 5 eos quos intellegimus nec sibi fingere ullam molestiam nec alteri quaerere, et pie sancteque colimus 1

mus

augeres B 1 A2CPB1

2

coniectores Ρ

3

Div. 1,93 : religione inbutì. On the meaning of superstitio cf. 1, 45, η. (superstitione); Pease on Div. 2, 148, η. (superstitione). si vos audire vellemus: for the Stoics asserted the reality of divination, and then held it to be an argument to prove the existence of gods, since (2, 12) quorum ... interpretes sunt eos ipsos esse certe necesse est. haruspices, etc.: cf. Div. 1, 132, where Quintus protests—perhaps in answer to the present passage— that the Stoics do not attempt to defend all types of divination, but discriminate between the higher and approved forms and the lower types practiced by charlatans, the line of demarcation apparently being based upon (1) state recognition or social standing of the respective types ; (2) civil measures to protect citizens against the mercenary impositions of quacks ; (3) the professional jealousies and competition between different classes of diviners; cf. Pease on Div. 1, 132, n. {non me, etc.). The Epicurean philosophy, of course, made no distinction between different forms of an art which it considered to be non-existent and for which it expressed repeated contempt; cf. 3, 95; Div. 1, 5; 1, 87; 1, 109; 2, 39-40; 2, 51; also the passages collected by H. Usener, Epicurea (1887), 261-263, no. 395. Such lists of different kinds of diviners are not rare; e.g., Div. 1, 132: non babeo denique nauci Marsum augurem, non vicanos haruspices, non de circo astrólogos, non Isiacos coniectores, non interpretes somniorum ; Philo, De spec. Legg. 1, 60: πάντας δέ τούς κολακεύοντας αυτήν έλαύνει της ίδιου πολιτείας, θύτας, καθαρτάς, οίωνοσκόπους, τερατοσκόπους, έπάδοντας, κληδόσιν έπανέχοντας; Amob. 1, 24.

erroribus O

4

libertate O

5

metue-

On the different types here named see, for haruspices, Pease on Div. 1, 3, n. {haruspicum disciplina) ; for augures, Pease, op. cit., 1, 3, nn. {augur; auguribus)·, for harioli, Div. 1, 4, n. (hariolorum); for coniectores, id., 1, 132, n. {Isiacos coniectores). 56 terroribus ab Epicuro soluti: cf. 1, 43, n. {venerari Epicurum)·, 1, 54, n. {quis enim non timeat); 1, 86: nec quemquam vidi qui magis ea quae timenda esse negaret timeret, mortem dico et deos; Diog. L. 10, 81. Some editors have proposed in Fin. 1, 14, by emendation, to read: Epicurum ... ego arbitrer unum vidisse verum maximisque terroribus [codd. erroribus} ánimos hominum liberavisse et omnia tradidisse quae pertinerent ad bene beateque vivendum. Cf. also Fin. 1, 63; 1, 71; Voll. Herculan. 4, 13, line 14 - 15 line 8; Lucr. 5, 49-51 : haec [sc. timorés, etc.] igitur qui cuncta subegerit ex animoque / expulerit dictis, non armis, nonne decebit / hunc hominem numero divom dignarier esse; Plut. Non posse suaviter, 8, p. 1091e; 21, p. 1101c. R. Philippson {Symb. Osloenses, 19 (1939), 36) points out the resemblance of our passage to parts of the first book of Philodemus, De Dits. Cotta's reply to this sentence comes in 1, 117. in libertatem vindicati: cf. Li v. 3, 45, 11 : me vindicantem sponsam in libertatem. On the use of the staff called vindicta in the ceremony of manumission of slaves cf. E. Weiss in P.-W. 14 (1930), 1366-1371. nec sibi fingere, etc.: cf. 1, 45, n. {nec habere ... nec exhibere). pie sancteque: cf. 1, 3, n. {pietas ... sanetitas ... religio)·, 1, 45: ut deos pie coleremus [and n. on pie} ; Philodem. De Piet. 76, p. 106 Gomperz: πάντα γάρ σ, S δέ άπό τύχης, & δέ παρ' ή μας διά τό τήν μέν άνάγκην άνυπεύθυνον είναι, τήν δέ τύχην ¿ίστατον όραν, τό δέ παρ' ήμδς άδέσποτον, ώ καί τό μεμπτόν καί τό έναντίον παρακολουθεΐν πέφυκεν (έπεί κρεϊττον ήν τω περί θεών μύθω κατακολουθεϊν ή τη τών φυσικών ειμαρμένη δουλεύειν· 6 μέν γάρ έλπίδα παραιτήσεως ύπογράφει θεών διά τιμής, ή δέ

371

motus certus et necessarius, invenit quo modo necessitatem effugeret, quod videlicet Democritum fugerat; 1 ait atomum, cum pondere et gravitate directo 2 deorsus 3 feratur, declinare pau1

fugaret D1

2

directa NO

3

deorsum C

άπαραίτητον έχει τήν άνάγκην). Philodemus, De Sign. 36 (p. 106 De Lacy), however, remarks: ού γάρ ίκανόν εις τό προσδέξασθαι τάς έπ' έλώχιστον παρεγκλίσεις των άτόμων διά τό τυχηρόν καΐ τό παρ' ή μας, άλλά δε προσεπιδεϊξααΙ τ μηδαμς ω μάχεσθ των ένα, and therefore an additional reason for the swerve was advanced: Fin. 1, 19: deinde ibidem homo acutus, cum illud occurreret, si omnia deorsum e regione ferrentur et, ut dixi, ad lineam, numquam fore ut atomus altera alteram posset attingere .. . declinare dixit atomum perpaulum\ Epic. ap. Diog. L. 10, 61: οΰτε γάρ τά βαρέα θαττον οίσθήσεται των μικρών καί κούφων; Lucr. 2, 216-293, who combines as reasons for the swerve both this and the necessity of providing for freedom of the will (2, 251-271); "the act of volition is neither more nor less than the 'swerve' of the fine atoms which compose the mind" (C. Bailey, The Gr. Atomists and Epic. (1928), 320); Plut. Aquat. an terrestr. 1, p. 964c; R. Hirzel, Untersuch, χ. Cic. philos. Sehr. 1 (1877), 163-165. On Cicero's own defence of freedom of the will cf. M. Y. Henry in Trans. Am. philol. Assoc. 58 (1937), 32-42. motus . . . necessarius : cf. 2, 81 : naturarti ... cientem motus ... necessarios. quo modo necessitatem effugeret: cf. 3, 29: quod effugiat ... jerendi et patiendi necessitatem·, Fat. 22; 41: Chrysippus ... ut et necessitatem effugiat et r".tineat fatum\ 46. The somewhat awkward repetition (effugeret ... fugeraf) is probably accidental. quod . . . Democritum fugerat: in Fat. 23, Democritus is praised for his honest acceptance of nécessitas; cf. 1, 66, n. {nulla cogente natura). Yet cf. Diog. Oenoand. fr. 33, p. 41 William: Sv γά τω Δημοκρίτου τι χήσηται λόγω, μηδεμίαν μέν έλευθέραν

άσκων ταΐς άτόμις κείνησιν είναι δι«χ> τήν προς άλλήλας σκρουσιν αύτών, 8νν δέ φαίνεσθαι κατνανκασμένως πα κεινεΐσθαι, φήν πρός αύτόν· οίδας, δστις ποτέ εΐ, καί έλευθέραν τινά έν ταΐς άτόμοις κείνησιν είναι, ή Δημόκριτος μέν ούχ εύρεν, 'Επίκουρος δέ είς φώ ήγαγεν, παρενκλιτικήν ύπάρχουσαν, ώς έκ των φαινομένων δείκνυσιν ; also the criticisms in Plut. De Soll. An. 7, p. 964e. With the expression cf. Fin. 4, 63: Stoici hoc videlicet viderunt, illos autem id fugerat superiores. directo deorsus: "straight downward"; cf. Caes. B.C. 2, 9, 2: derecto transversas trabes. On the spelling derecto (mss here support directo) cf. G. Dittmann in Thes. Ling. Lat. 5 (1910), 1232-1233, especially 1233, 33-42, who finds, on the evidence of inscriptions and the oldest mss, that der- is the earlier form. For deorsus the Thes. Ling. Lat. 5 (1910, 559, 20-21, cites only Cicero (here and 2, 84; Fin. 1, 19) and Apuleius, all other authors reading deorsum. With the thought cf. Fin. 1, 20: atomis ... quae recte ... ferantur·, De Fato, 22: si gravitate feruntur ad perpendiculum corpora individua rectis lineis. declinare: for passages dealing with the atomic swerve (παρέγκλισις, tnclinatio (1, 73), and, in Lucretius, clinamen·, cf. W. Crönert, Kolotes ». Menedemos (1906), 23 (for Philodemus's allusion to Zeno's work περί έγκλίσεως); 176; F. Peters, T. Lucr. et M. Cic. quo modo Vocab. Gr. Epic. Discipl. propria Latine verterint (1926), 17; C. Bailey, The Gr. Atomists and Epic. (1928), 317, n. 0) see H. Usener, Epicurea (1887), 199-201, who cites Fin. 1, 18-20 (add 1, 28); Fat. 18; 22-23; Plut. De An. Procr. in Tim. 6, p. 1015c (add De Soll. An. Ί, p. 964c) ; Aug. C. Acad. 3, 23 ; to which add Lucr. 2, 216-293; Philodem. De

372

lulum. 70 Hoc dicere turpius 1 est 2 quam illud quod vult 3 non posse defendere. Idem facit contra dialécticos ; a quibus cum 3

1 diceretur pius P1M1, diceretur plus ABÍF1, diceretur prius O quod uult om. D, uul A1, uut B1

Signis, 36, 11-17; Aët. Plac. 1, 12, 5 {Doxogr. Gr* 311) ; 1,23,4 (Doxogr. Gr* 319-320) ; Diog. Oenoand. I.e. For general treatments cf. A. Ernout and L. Robin on Lucr. 2, 216 ff.; C. Bailey, op. cit. 316-327 ; E. Bignone in Atene e Roma, 18 (1940), 159-198 (and works noted in his bibliography on 161, n. 2); C. Vicol in Ephem. Dacoromana, 10 (1945), 202204; also G. D. Hadzsits, Lucr. and his Influence (1935), 76-77, comparing the 'jump' of an electron into a new orbit; W. C. Greene, Moira (1944), 423, η. 56. paululum : the slightness of the swerve required is several times mentioned; e.g., Fin. 1,19: declinare dixit atomum perpaulum·, Fat. 22: déclinât atomus intervallo minimo {id appellai έλάχιστον); 46: cur minimo declinent intervallo, motore non? aut cur declinent uno minimo, non declinent duobus aut tribus-, Philodem. De Sign. 36 (p. 106 De Lacy): τάς έπ' έλάχιστον παρεγκλίσεις ; Lucr. 2, 219-220: incertisque loris spatio depellere [jî pellere Housman] paulum, / tantum quod momen mutatum dicere possis; 2, 243-245: paulum inclinare necessest / corpora; nec plus quam minimum, ne fingere motus / obliques videamur et id res vera refutet. 70 turpius est: cf. 1, 1: quid est enim temeritate turpius·, Div. 1, 87: quid vero hoc turpius quam·, Fin. 1, 19: ait enim declinare atomum sine causa, quo nihil turpius physico quam fieri quicquam sine causa dicere", Ac. 1, 45: ñeque hoc quicquam esse turpius quam·, 2, 66: pro veris probare falsa turpissimum est; De Or. 1, 169: quid ergo hoc fieri turpius aut dici potest quam\ 2, 302: quo quidem mihi turpius videre nihil solet. In thought this constitutes an important breach in the philosophic principles of Epicurus, who seems, in assuming a clinaman for which no physical cause is assignable, to give away his whole case by admitting "that a universe based on material causes alone is inconceivable"

a

estjesse O

(W. H. D. Rouse on Lucr. 2, 224); cf. C. Bailey, The Gr. Atomists and Epic. (1928), 317. In Div. 2, 60, Cicero remarks : illud tamen exploratum habeto, nihil fieripotuisse sine causa-, cf. Fat. 18 (quoted on pertimuit, below); 23: ex quo efficitur etiamsi sit atomus eaque declinet, declinare sine causa. But cf. further E. Bignone in Atene e Roma, 18 (1940), 197. dialécticos: not so much a particular sect as a method of philosophizing, changing somewhat in its application from time to time. Thus it was used by Plato for those of his school who had been trained in argumentative discussion by question and answer; later it was commonly applied to the Megarian school (e.g., Diog. L. 2, 106), a possible member of which was Epicurus's adversary, Heraclides of Bargylia; cf. Diog. L. 5, 94: έβδομος [sc. Ηρακλείδης] Βεργυληίτης, κατ' 'Επικούρου γεγραφώς; Ρ. Natorp in P.-W. 5 (1905), 321. Epicurus called τούς διαλεκτικούς πολυφθάρους (Diog. L. 10, 8), and Metrodorus wrote a book πρός τούς διαλεκτικούς {id., 10, 24). Still later the term was applied either to the Stoics who practiced the logical system of Chrysippus (thus usually in Cicero and Sextus Empiricus) or to the members of the Middle and New Academy (Natorp, I.e.), and διαλεκτική came to be used like λογική ; cf. De Or. 2, 157: Diogenem [the Stoic] . . . qui diceret artem se tradere bene disserendi et vera acfalsa diiudicandi, quam verbo Graeco διαλεκτικήν appellant·, in Fin. 2, 17, the dialectici are contrasted with the rhetores·, in Div. 2, 11, with the physici. Such logical studies were despised by Epicurus; cf. 1, 89; non vestro more sed dialecticorum, quae funditus gens vestra non novit·, Ac. 2, 97: Epicuro qui totam dialecticam et contemnit et inridet·, Fin. 1, 22: in altera philosophiae parte, quae est quaerendi ac disserendi, quae λογική dici tur, iste ves ter

373

traditum sit in omnibus diiunctionibus,1 in quibus 2 'aut etiam 2

1 disiunctionibus M2, deiunctionibus ADP^N&FM1, in quibus add. A

plane ... inermi s ac nudus est·, 1, 63: in dialéctica autem vestra nullam existimavit esse nec ad melius vivendum nec ad commodius disserendum vim·, 2,18: dum dialecticam ... contennit Epicurus .. . ruit in dicendo·, C. M. Bernhardt, De Cic. Graecae Philos. Interprete (1865), 14. traditum sit: cf. Tuse. 1, 14: an tu dialecticis ne imbutus quidem es? in primis enim hoc traditur: omne pronuntiatum (sic enim mihi in praesentia occurrit ut appellarem άξίωμα; utar post alio, si invenero melius)— id ergo est pronuntiatum quod est verum aut falsum. diiunctionibus : this term corresponds to διαζεύξεις (cf. Plut. Plat. Quaest. 10,4, p. 1011a) or άξίωμα διεζευγμένον (Diog. L. 7, 72). First used, though in a different sense, by the Auct. Ad Herenn. 4, 38 (with which cf. De Or. 3, 207; Quintil. 9, 1, 35), it was several times employed by Cicero to signify a disjunctive proposition (by the principle of the excluded middle); cf. Ac. 2, 91: quae coniunetio, quae diiunctio vera sit·, 2, 95 : nempe fundamentum dialecticae est, quidquid enuntietur—id autem appellant άξίωμα, quod est quasi effatum—aut verum esse aut falsum ; 2, 97: etenim cum ab Epicuro, qui totam dialecticam et contemnit et inridet, non impetrent ut verum esse concédât, quod ita effabimur: "aut vivet eras Hermarchus aut non vivet" cum dialectici sic statuant, omne, quod ita diiunctum sit, quasi "aut etiam aut non," non modo verum esse sed etiam necessarium, vide quam sit cautus [catus Lambinus] is quem isti tardum putant. si enim, inquit, alterutrum concessero necessarium esse, necesse erit eras Hermarchum aut vivere aut non vivere; nulla autem est in natura rerum talis nécessitas, cum hoc igitur dialectici pugnent, id est, Antiochus et Stoici; totam enim evertit dialecticam. nam si e contrariis diiunctio (contraria autem ea dico, cum alterum aiat, alterum neget), si talis diiunctio falsa potest esse, nulla vera est·, Top. 56: reliqui diabeticorum modi plures sunt, qui ex diiunctionibus constant: "aut hoc aut illud; hoc autem ; non

deuinctionibus HP2OBx

igitur illud." itemque: "aut hoc aut illud; non autem hoc; illud igitur" ; quae conclusiones idcirco ratae sunt quod in diiunctione plus uno verum esse non potest·, Fat. 20-21 [to be discussed below]; 37: necesse est enim in rebus contrariis duabus (contraria autem hoc loco ea dico quorum alterum ait quid, alterum negat), ex iis igitur necesse est invito Epicuro alterum verum esse, alterum falsum, ut "sauciabitur Philocteta" omnibus ante saeculis verum fuit, "non sauciabitur" falsum; nisi forte volumus Epicureorum opinionem sequi, qui tales enuntiationes nec veras nec falsas esse dicunt, aut, cum id pudet, illud tamen dicunt, quod est inpudentius, veras esse ex contrariis diiunctiones, sed quae in his enuntiata essent eorum neutrum esse verum·, Phil. 2, 18: non modo non cohaerentia inter se dicens sed maxime diiuncta atque contraria; Aristot. Metaph. 3, 7, 1011 b 23-24: άλλά μήν ούδέ μεταξύ άντιφάσεως ενδέχεται είναι ούθέν, άλλ' άνάγκη ή φάναι ή άποφάναι 'έν καθ' ένός ότιοϋν; Diog. L. 7, 72: διεζευγμένον δέ έστιν δ ύπό τοΰ "ήτοι" διαζευκτικού συνδέσμου διέζευκται, οίον "ήτοι ήμερα έστιν ή νύξ έστιν." έπαγγέλλεται δ' ό σύνδεσμος ούτος τό έτερον των άξιωμάτων ψεύδος είναι; Gell. 16, 8, 12-13: est etiam aliud quod Graeci διεζευγμένον αξίωμα, nos "disiunctum" dicimus .. . omnia autem quae disiunguntur pugnantia esse inter se oportet ... ex omnibus quae disiunguntur unum esse verum debet, falsa cetera·, S.V.F. 2, nos. 952-955. In somewhat the same category belong the following passages : Fat. 28; 37-38; Aristot. De Interpr. 9, 18 a 28-29: έπι μέν οδν των δντων και γενομένων άνάγκη την κατάφασιν ή τήν άπόφασιν άληθή ή ψευδή είναι ; Dion. Hal. De Comp. Verb. 4: Χρύσιππος καταλέλοιπε συντάξεις . . . ού ρητορικήν θεωρίαν έχούσας άλλά διαλεκτικήν . . . ύπέρ άξιωμάτων συντάξεως άληθών τε καΐ ψευδών; Arr. Epict. 2, 19, 1-3; Plut. De Stoic. Repugn. 46, p. 1055e-f; Diog. L. 2, 135 [the objection of Menedemus to yes-or-no answers] ; [Apul.] Hermen. 5 ;

374

1,70

aut non' poneretur,1 alterum utrum 2 esse 3 verum, 4 pertimuit ne, 8

1 poneretur in ras. A esse dett. Ven., esset cet t.

alterum utrum AHPF1, uerum . . . esset om. O

2 4

Mart. Cap. 4, 385: sciendum tarnen est quaedam contraria medium habere, quaedam non habere, nam quae sunt talia ut in ea re in qua esse possunt alterutra vice necessario insint medio carent, ut sanitas et imbecillitas. But while such true-or-false statements may hold for the present or the past they were early recognized as not applicable to the future; cf. Aristot. De Interpr. 9, 18 a 33-39: έπί δέ των καθ' έκαστα καΐ μελλόντων ούχ ομοίως· εί γάρ πάσα κατάφασης καί άπόφασις αληθής ή ψευδής, καί παν άνάγκη ύπάρχειν ή μή ύπάρχειν, ώστε εί è μέν φήσει έσεσθαί τι ó δέ μή φήσει τό αυτό τοϋτο, δήλον ότι άνάγκη άληθεύειν τόν έτερον αύτών, εί πάσα κατάφασις καί άπόφασις άληθής ή ψευδής, άμφω γάρ ούχ υπάρξει άμα έπΐ τοις τοιούτοις; 9, 19 a 28-32: είναι μέν ή μή είναι άπαν άνάγκη, και ϊσεσθαί γε ή μή· ού μέντοι διελόντα γε είπεΐν θάτερον άναγκαϊον [as Mayor remarks, "the necessity belongs to the compound judgment, not to its parts taken separately"]. λέγω δέ οίον άνάγκη μέν Ισεσθαι ναυμαχίαν αΰριον ή μή έσεσθαι, ού μέντοι έσεσθαί γε αΰριον ναυμαχίαν άναγκαϊον ούδέ μή γενέσθαι [cf. Alex. Aphrod. De Fato, 10]; Metaph. 5, 3, 1027 b 1-11 and Sen. N.Q. 2, 37 ,3 (who allow for modification of determinism by varying contributory elements) ; Cic. Fat. 12: illud "morietur in mari Fabius" ex eo genere est quod fieri non potest, omne ergo quodfalsum dicitur in futuro id fieri non potest [contrast 14: omnia enim vera in praeteritis necessaria sunt\ ; Simplic. in Categ. 10, p. 406, 34-407, 5 Kalbfleisch {S.V.F. 2, no. 198): περί δέ των εις τόν μέλλοντα χρόνον άντιφάσεων οί μέν Στωικοί τά αύτά δοκιμάζουσιν, άπερ καί έπί των άλλων, ώς γάρ τά περί των παρόντων και παρεληλυθότων άντικείμενα, ούτως καί τά μέλλοντα αύτά τέ φασι καί τά μόρια αύτών. ή γάρ τό άσται άληθές έστιν ή τό ούκ ϊσται, εί δει ήτοι ψευδή ή άληθή είναι, ώρίσθαι γάρ κατ' αύτά τά μέλλοντα, καί εί μέν £σται

alterutrum

NOF2M

ναυμαχία αΰριον, άληθές είπεΐν δτι ίσται· εί δέ μή έσται ψεϋδος τό είπεΐν δτι έσται. ήτοι 2σται ή ούκ έσται, ήτοι άρα άληθές ή ψεϋδος θάτερον; Steph. De Interpr. p. 39, 3-7 Hayduck: τό μέν γάρ δλον τοϋτο γίνεσθαι ναυμαχίαν αΰριον ή μή γίνεσθαι πάντως άναγκαϊον· καί γάρ ή έσται τη ώρα ή ούκ έσται, κτλ. ; Ioannes Siculus ad Hermog. Rhet. 6, 202 Walz ( = Usener, Epicurea, 348, no. 244a); Κ. Prantl. Gesch. d. Logik im Abendlande, 1 (1885), 143; 403; 449-453; 521-522; E. V. Arnold, Rom. Stoicism (1911), 201-202; W. D. Ross, Aristotle2 (1930), 80, who, after asserting on the basis of the De Interpretation that Aristotle is not an absolute determinist, declares, in regard to future statements: "it is necessarily true of anything that it either will or will not be, but it is not true either that it will or that it will not be." aut etiam aut non: the repeated aut emphasizes the mutually exclusive character of the two statements. For etiam in an affirmative sense cf. R. KiihnerC. Stegmann, Ausf. Gr. d. lat. Spr. 2, 2 2 (1914), 531; J. Friedrich in Thes. Ling. Lat. 5 (1936), 931, especially 52-58; for its combination with non in a yes-or-no statement cf. Ac. 2, 97 (quoted in the preceding note); 2, 104: aut "etiam'' aut "non" respondere possit; Pro Q. Rose. 9: si non ... si etiam ; Itala, Matt. 5, 37 (Iren. 4, 13, 1): etiam etiam, non non·, Auson. p. 91 Peip. ( = [Virg.] Est et Non), especially lines 8-9; p. 287, 1. 41: "est" respondebat vel "noti'; Aug. De Doctr. Christ. 3, 6: ad percontationem multa responden possunt; ad interrogationem vero aut "non" aut "etiam." alterum utrum: preferred in Cicero to alterutrum·, cf. Fat. 21; F am. 4, 4, 5; 6, 1, 5; 6, 3, 2; but in Ac. 2, 134, alterutrum, and in the present section both forms occur. esse verum: cf. 1, 55, n. (ex aeterna veritate).

1,70

375

si concessum esset huius modi aliquid 'aut vivet eras aut non vivet Epicurus,' alterutrum 1 fieret2 necessarium, totum hoc 'aut etiam aut non' negavit 3 esse necessarium; quo quid 4 dici 6 potuit 6 obtusius? Urguebat 7 Arcesilas 8 Zenonem, cum ipse falsa omnia 1 epicurus alterutrum] epicu urum (?)A1 2 fieret Aid., fieri codd. 3 aut negauit aut non negauit O 4 quod quid D, quod qui Ν 5 dicit Ν * putuit A1 7 urgebat NOFM 8 arcessilas F, archesilas PaM, arcophilaus (u del.) O

pertimuit: cf. timuit Epicurus, just below. On Epicurus's fear of admitting the existence of fate cf. Fat. 18: nec magis erat verum "morietur Scipio" quam "morietur ilio modo," nec magis necesse mori Scipioni quam ilio modo mori, nec magis inmutabile ex vero in falsum "necatus est Scipio" quam "necabitur Scipio" ; nec, cum haec ita sint, est causa cur Epicurus fatum extimescat et ab atomis petat praesidium easque de via deducat et uno tempore suscipiat res dua» inenodabiles, unam ut sine causa fiat aliquid . .. alteram ut cum duo individua per inamtatem ferantur alterum e regione moveatur, alterum declinef, 19: ita et semper verum fuit "morietur Epicurus, cum duo et septuaginta annos vixerit, archonte Pytharato," ncque tamen erant causae fatales cur ita accident, sed quod ita cecidit certa causarum sicut cecidit fuit·, 21 (quoted on diiunctionibus, above); 23: banc Epicurus rationem induxit ob earn rem quod veritus est ne, si semper atomus gravitate ferretur naturali ac necessaria, nihil liberum nobis esset; 37 (quoted on diiunctionibus, above); Ac. 2, 79; 2, 83; 2, 101; Epic. ap. Diog. L. 10,127: μνημονευτέον δέ ώς τό μέλλον οΰτε ήμέτερον οΰτε πάντως ούχ ήμέτερον, ίνα μήτε πάντως προσμένωμεν ώς έσόμενον μήτε άπελπίζωμεν ώς πάντως ούκ έσόμενον; Ac. 2, 97 (quoted on diiunctionibus, above). The Stoics, however, believing in series of causes and effects, might hold that nihil est futurum cuius non causas id ipsum efficientes natura contineat (Div. 1, 125, where see Pease's n.); cf. also Sext. Emp. Adv. Logic. 2, 255: Iv τε τω "εί καρδίαν τέτρωται οδτος άποθανεϊται ούτος" ό μέν θάνατος μέλλει, τό δέ άποθανεΐσθαι τούτον άξίωμα ένέστηκεν, περί μέλλοντος λεγόμενον, παρό δέ καΐ νϋν έστίν άλη-

θές; at other times, by the doctrine of fata condicionalia (e.g., Schol. Dan. Aen. 4, 696), the Stoics try to escape from their own absolute determinism as Epicurus did from that of the unswerving atoms of Democritus. vivet: with the form of example cf. Plut. De comm. Notit. 42, p. 1082c. necessarium: άναγκαΐον, as frequently in S.V.F. 2, nos. 960-986; Plut. De Repugn. Stoic. 46, p. 1055e; Arr. Epict. 2, 19, 2-3; etc. totum: with the asyndeton Mayor compares the next sentence: urguebat Arcesilas ... timuit Epicurus ... dixit; also 1, 126: ne gat . .. tollit; the effect is to add rapidity to the style and to heighten the antitheses. obtusius: the opposite of a favorite Ciceronian adverb, acutius (cf. 1, 49; Div. 1, 7; Fat. 23; Ac. 2, 28; Τ use. 5,11). So obtuse is by Aug. De Doctr. Christ. 4,7, contrasted with acute. Arcesilas: cf. 1, 11, n. {Arcesila). On his controversy with Zeno cf. Ac. 2, 16: Arcesilas Ζ enoni ut putatur ob tree tans; 2, 76: Arcesilan vero non obtrectandi causa cum Zenone pugnavisse sed verum invenire voluisse sic intellegitur; 2, 77; S.V.F. 1, no. 24; Lact. Inst. 3, 6, 7: Arcedlas ignorantiae magister cum Zenoni obtrectaret principi Stoicorum, ut totam dialecticam everteret, auctore Socrate suscepit banc sententiam ut adfirmaret sciri nihil posse ; A. Goedeckemeyer, Gesch. d. gr. Skeptizismus (1905), 40, n. 5. With Cleanthes the relations of Arcesilas seem to have been more friendly; cf. S.V.F. 1, nos. 471-472; Diog. L. 7, 171. For the Academic and Stoic theories of perception cf. 1, 12; Ac. passim, especially 1, 40-42 ; 2, 79-101; on Arcesilas in

1,70

376

diceret quae sensibus viderentur, Zenon autem non nulla 1 visa esse falsa, non omnia; timuit Epicurus ne, si unum visum esset falsum, nullum esset verum; omnes sensus veri nuntios dixit esse. 1

non ulla H

particular Eus. Pr. Ev. 14, 4, 15. falsa omnia: though falsus and ver us, like ψευδής and άληθής, are constantly contrasted (e.g., 1, 57; 1, 66; below in 1, 70; 3, 71; Ac. 2, 77), yet not even a sceptic would declare that all sense presentations are contrary to fact ; rather he would view all as deceptive and unreliable, without any clear indication whether each is true or untrue, and it is doubtless in this sense that falsa is here to be understood ; cf. 2, 56 : ementita et falsa plenaque erroris; Ac. 2, 36: aut falsum sit aut nihil sit omnino ; 2, 68: adsentiri quicquam aut falsum aut incognitum. The unreliability of the senses had been asserted by various philosophers; cf. Philodem. Rhet. fr. inc. 3 (2, 169 Sudhaus): κατά ΠαρεναΙ Μέλισσον êv τό πατας είναι καί διά τό αίσεις ψευδε ; also the chapter in Aët. Ρlac. 4, 9 {Doxogr. Gr.2 396-398) on the topic εί άληθεϊς ai αισθήσεις καί φαντασίαι, in which (4, 9, 1) we read: Πυθαγόρας 'Εμπεδοκλής Ξενοφάνης Παρμενίδης Ζήνων Μέλισσος 'Αναξαγόρας Δημόκριτος Μητρόδωρος Πρωταγόρας Πλάτων ψευδείς είναι τάς αισθήσεις. sensibus viderentur: the literal meaning of the verb is, by an easy shift, extended to other senses than sight; cf. Ac. 2, 101, quoted just below. Zenon: cf. Ac. 2, 101 : ñeque nos contra sensus aliter dicimus ac Stoici, qui multa falsa esse dicunt, longeque aliter se habere ac sensibus videantur·, Aët. Ρlac. 4, 9, 4 (Doxogr. Gr.2 396): oí Στωικοί τάς μέν αισθήσεις άληθεϊς, των δέ φαντασιών τάς μέν άληθεΐς, τάς δέ ψευδείς. Important for Zeno's criterion of true and false is Ac. 1, 41 : visis non omnibus adiungebat fidem, sed its solum quae propriam quondam haberent declarationem earum rerum quae viderentur; id autem visum cum ipsum per se cerneretur, comprehendibile—-feretis

hoc? nos vero, inquam; quonam enim alio modo καταληπτόν díceres?—sed cum acceptum iam et approbatum esset, comprehensionem appellabat·, Diog. L. 7, 54: κριτή ριον δέ της αληθείας φασί τυγχάνειν τήν καταληπτικήν φαντασίαν, τουτέστι την άπό ύπάρχοντος; Tert. De An. 17: Stoici non omnem sensum nec semper de mendacio onerant·, Eus. Pr. Ev. 14, 8, 7; S.V.F. 1, nos. 52-73; Reid on Ac. 2, 79; E. V. Arnold, Rom. Stoicism (1911), 68; also L. Stein, Die Erkenntnistheorie d. Stoa (1888), 309, n. 701. visa: φαντασίαι; cf. Ac. 1, 40: quam Ule φαντασίαν nos visum appellemus licet. The term is very frequently used by Cicero in the Académica·, cf. H. Merguet, Lex. χ. d. philos. Sehr. Cic. 2 (1892), 27. si unum . . . falsum, nullum . . . verum: cf. Ac. 2, 79: veraces suos esse sensus dicit ; igitur semper auctorem habes eum qui magno suo periculo causam agat ; eo enim rem demittit Epicurus, si unus sensus semel in vita mentitus sit, nulli umquam esse credendum·, 2, 101: quod est caput Epicuri? "si ullum sensus visum falsum est, nihil percipi potest" ; Fin. 1, 22: iste vester [sc. Epicurus] ... iudicia rerum in sensibus ponit, quibus si semel aliquid falsi pro vero probatum sit, sublatum esse omne iudicium veri et falsi putat\ Epic. ap. Diog. L. 10, 38; 10, 51-52; Lucr. 1, 699-708; Aristocles ap. Eus. Pr. Ev. 14, 20, 9: έπεί δ' 'έτι νυν είσί τίνες ol πασαν αϊσθησιν καί πασαν φαντασίαν αληθή λέγοντες είναι, μικρά κ od περί τούτων ε ι πω μεν, έοίκασι γάρ οδτοί γε δεδοικέναι μήποτε, εί ψευδείς εϊποιεν αισθήσεις εΐναί τινας, ούκ άν σχοϊεν τό κριτήριον καί τόν κανόνα βέβαιον ούδ' έχέγγυον ; also C. Bailey, The Gr. Atomists and Epicurus (1928), 253; but cf. Ν. W. De Witt in Trans. Am. philol. Assoc. 74 (1943), 29, who raises several doubts. omnes sensus veri nuntios : in addi-

1. 70

377

Nihil horum nisi f valde; 1 graviorem enim plagam accipiebat ut leviorem repelleret. 1

nisi callide C

tion to the passages in the preceding note cf. Ac. 2, 19; 2, 83: esse aliquod visum falsum .. . Epicurus non dat\ Epic. ap. Diog. L. 10, 146-147: εί μάχη πάσαις ταϊς αίσθήσεσιν, ούχ έξεις ού8' ας αν φής αύτών διεψεΰσθαι πρός τι ποιούμενος τήν άναγωγήν κρίνης. εϊ τιν' έκβαλεΐς άπλώς αϊσθησιν καί μή διαιρήσεις τό δοξαζόμενον κατά τό προσμένον και το παρόν ήδη κατά τήν αϊσθησιν καΐ τά πάθη και πάσαν φανταστικήν έπιβολήν της διανοίας, συνταράξεις και τάς λοιπάς αισθήσεις τη ματαί(ύ δόξη, ώστε τό κριτήριον άπαν έκβαλεϊς; Philodem. De Signis, 7, p. 38 De Lacy: [Dionysius charges that the Epicureans] νάργειαν και τήν καν άναγκαίαν είναι νο; Lucr. 1, 699-700: quid nobis certius ipsis j sensibus esse potest, qui vera ac falsa notemus\ 4, 478-479: inventes primis ab sensibus esse creatam / notitiem veri ñeque sensusposse refelli·, 4, 483485 : an ab sensu falso ratio orta valebit / dicere eos contra, quae tota ab sensibus orta est? I qui nisi sunt veri, ratio quoque falsa fit omnis·, 4, 507-508: non modo enim ratio ruat omnis, vita quoque ipsa / concidat extemplo, nisi credere sensibus ausis; Plut. Adv. Colot. 4, p. 1109a-b: 'Επικουρείς δόγματι κέχρηται, τω "πάσας είναι τάς δι' αίσθήσεως φαντασίας άληθεϊς;" Aët. Ρlac. 4, 9, 5 (Doxogr. Gr,2 396): 'Επίκουρος πασαν αϊσθησιν καί πασαν φαντασίαν άληθή, των δέ δοξών τάς μέν άληθεϊς, τάς δέ ψευδείς; Sext. Emp. Adv. Logic. 1, 203 ; 2, 9; 2, 63: ê δέ 'Επίκουρος έλεγε μέν πάντα τά αισθητά είναι άληθή;2, 185; Diog. L. 10, 31-32; Tert. De An. 17: Epicurei constantius parem omnibus [se. sensibus] atque perpetuam defendunt veritatem, sed alia via. non enim sensum mentiri sed opinionem [thus Epicurus ap. Diog. L. 10, 50]; but, for certain qualifications as to the truth of the visa, N. W. DeWitt in Trans. Am. philol. Assoc. 70 (1939), 416, and

n. 6; 74 (1943), 19-32. Cf. also the remarks of Aristot. De An. 3, 3, 427 b 1113: ή μέν γάρ αϊσθησις των Ιδίων άεΐ άληθής, καί πάσιν υπάρχει τοις ζφοις, διανοεΐσθαι δ' ένδέχεται καί ψευδώς ; 3, 3, 428 a 11-12: αΐ μέν [sc. αισθήσεις] άληθεις αίεί, αί δέ φαντασίαι γίνονται αί πλείους ψευδείς. fnisi valde: so most mss, though in C we read nisi callide, which C. G. Schuetz (Opuse, philol. et philos. (1830), 233) defends as a case of irony (cf. Div. 2, 47; 2, 110). Many have been the emendations, e.g., (1) nisi valde suggested by Plasberg, comparing Ac. 2, 132: nihil potest dici inconsideratius; Fat. 31: nimis inconsiderate·, but valde in the philosophical works everywhere else (save in Ac. 1, 35: valde subtiliter) modifies a verb or an adjective rather than another adverb; (2) Ernesti suggested [nisi] callide·, (3) nimis callide was proposed by H. E. Allen; cf. G. F. Schoemann, Opuse, acad. 3 (1858), 317, who thinks that nimis = valde or admodum·, for its confusion palaeographically with nisi cf. Plaut. M.G. 377; for the expression see Ac. 2, 146: nec tamen nimis eloquenter·, Tuse. 5, 93: non nimis fortasse subtiliter·, Orat. 82: nihil horum parum audacter·, In Caecil. 71 : non nimis severe, non nimis accurate, non nimis diligenfer·, (4) nisi calide is suggested by Davies, who understands it in the sense of temere, comparing O f f . 1, 82: periculosa et calida condita (cf. Liv. 22, 24, 2) ; Ter. Eun. 380 : vide ne nimium calidum hoc sit; Gell. 6, 3, 10: confidenter nimis et calide·, Non. p. 263 M. (= p. 402 L.): calidum: fero χ et inconsultum; also the use of θερμός = άβουλος ; or (5) viri valde callidi of Heindorf, in part suggested by the reading of the Cod. Glog. : nihil horum viri, graviorem valde enim plagam. It is probably wisest, with Plasberg and Ax, to obelize the passage. plagam accipiebat: cf. Fat. 21: earn plagam potius accipiam quam fato omnia

378

71 Idem facit in natura deorum; dum individuorum corporum concretionem fugit, ne interims et dissipatio consequatur,1 negat esse corpus deorum sed tamquam corpus, nec sanguinem sed 1

consequantur M

fieri conprobem ; Τ use. 2, 41: accipere plagam malunt quam turpiter vitare-, F am. 16, 12, 4: maximam autem plagam accepit quod, etc.-, Att. 1, 16, 9; 5, 20, 5; Petron. 28, 7. With the thought cf. also Themist. in Aristot. Phys. 6, p. 184, 9-10 Schenkl: ό σοφώτατος ήμϊν 'Επίκουρος ούκ αίσχύνεται χρήσθαι φαρμάκω της νόσου χαλεπωτέρω, κτλ. 71 idem facit: somewhat awkwardly used again after its recent appearance in 1, 70; for the phrase cf. Fin. 2, 19 and frequent other cases. The discussion is here resumed from the end of 1, 68, where quasi corpus had been mentioned, only to be followed by a digression upon instances of the illogical methods of the Epicureans (1, 69-70). dum individuorum: cf. 1, 49 for the quasi corpus and quasi sanguis of the gods. Mayor thinks that the introduction of the notion there was to explain why the gods were perceptible only to the mind, but that here it is to explain how they are able to be immortal. It would seem, however, that in 1, 49, the underlying purpose of the reference may be to caution against supposing that gods, though in human form, are, like men, endowed with purely physical bodies, and hence subject, like other atomic products, to eventual destruction. concretionem: cf. Tuse. 1, 66 [quoted also by Lact. Inst. 1, 5, 25]: nec vero deus ipse ... alio modo intellegi potest nisi mens soluta quaedam et libera, segregata ab omni concretione mortali; Min. Fei. 5, 8: homo et animal omne quod nascitur, inspiratur, attollitur, elementorum ut voluntaria concretio est, in quae rursum homo et animal omne dividitur, solvitur, dtssipatur·, Chalcid. in Tim. 201 : invtsibiles porro coniunctiones gomphos appellai ; vel minorum corpusculorum coacervationem, ut Diodorus, vel eorundem similium inter se conglobationem formabilem, ut Anaxagoras, vel superdictorum

multiformem implicationem [συμπλοκήν], ut Democritus et Leucippus, vel interdum concretionem interdum discretionem, ut Empedocles; concretionem quidem amicitiam, discretionem porro et separationem inimicitiam vocans. vel, ut Stoici, corporum diversorum usquequaque concretionem. Among various possibilities it is hard to select the Greek equivalent for concretio. In Diog. L. 10, 106, Epicurus contrasts σύνωσις and διάρρηξις, but for concretio σύστασις has also been proposed by F. Peters, T. Lucr. et M. Cic. quo modo Vocab. Gr. Epic. Discipl. propria Latine verterint (1926), 22. The term probably refers to the process (elsewhere called συμπλοκή) by which separate atoms (corpuscula) are combined into corpora, its opposite being dissipatio, or the resolution of the corpora into their constituent atoms. Had Epicurus admitted that this applied to the gods, then they would not have been eternal and hence would have differed in no marked respect from any happy human being. It is to provide against this that he resorts to the remarkable divine constitution set forth in 1, 49-50. Accordingly the gods are described in 1, 75 as having nihil concreti, nihil solidi. Mayor quotes Metrod. De Sensionibus, col. 18 {Voll. Herculan. 6, part 2, 35): δια τοϋτο γάρ ουδέν αΐσθητόν άθάνατον, ή πυκνότης γάρ άντεικόπτει πρός τοϋτο, δεχομένη πληγάς ίσχυράς. Our passage was perhaps in the mind of Lact. De Ira, 10, 28: déos aiunt incorruptos, aeternos, beatos esse solisque dant inmunitatem, ne concursu atomorum concreti esse videantur. n e g a t . . . sed: with the second clause a positive verb (dicit) is to be supplied from the preceding negative (negat); cf. 1, 17, n. (nolo ... auditorem); Fin. 5, 88: Metelli vitam negat beatiorem quam Reguli, praeponendam tarnen. tamquam corpus: cf. 1, 49; 1, 68.

379

1,71

tamquam sanguinerei. 26 Mirabile videtur quod non rideat haruspex cum haruspicem viderit; hoc mirabilius quam 1 v o s 2 inter v o s 3 risum tenere possitis? 'Non est corpus sed quasi corpus.' Hoc intellegerem quale esset, si in ceris 4 fingeretur aut 1 quam] quod F 2 2 quam uos] uos add. M codd. plerique, cereis dett. Aid., ceteris Ν

mirabile videtur: cf. Div. 2, 51: vetus autem illud Catonis admodum scitum est, qui mirari se aiebat quod non riderei haruspex haruspicem cum vidisset [where see Pease's η.]. The lack of ascription here to Cato may indicate that the remark had become proverbial; in any event, the phrase as used here reflects Cicero's low estimate of the haruspices (cf. 2, 11: Τ usci ac barbari), as rivals of the more recognized and respected rites of the college of augurs, to which he belonged. mirabilius quam: J. Forchhammer (.Nordisk Tidskrift f . Filol. 2 ser. 5 (1880), 38-40) emends to quam and Plasberg (in both his editions) to quam . Various editors read simply quod (omitting quam), which, as Plasberg remarks, leaves the syntax of the subjunctive unsatisfactory, and, as Forchhammer observes, hoc should refer to what has already been mentioned and illud to what is to be discussed (cf. 1, 70; 2, 150; Sen. 72; etc.). But that quam may be at times used by brachylogy for quam ut, quam si, or quam cum is remarked by E. Löfstedt, Philol. Komm. Peregrinatio Aetheriae (1911), 132, and n. 1, who cites quam = quam cum in At t. 1, 16, 11; cf. also examples from many other authors cited in the following: T. Stangl in Philologus, 54 (1895), 346; id., Pseudoasconiana (1909), 40 ; 77; W. A. Baehrens in Philologus, Supplbd. 12 (1912), 375-377; T. Stangl in Beri, philol. Wocb. 32 (1912), 1267 ; id., in Woch.f. kl. Philol. 30 (1913), 756-757; J. H. Schmalz in Beri, philol. Wocb. 33 (1913), 692; T. Stangl in Rhein. Mus. 70 (1915), 236-237; J. Β. Hofmann, Lat. Synt. u. Stilistik (1928), 732; 844. In most of these cases some editors have emended to produce regularity of construction.

B

inter uos om. O

4

ceris

vos inter vos: cf. Div. 1, 58: nosque inter nos; Att. 10, 4, 10: nos inter nos locutos. risum tenere: cf. Fin. 4, 71: risum contine, si potes; Plaut. Asín. 582: nimis aegre risum continui·, Hör. A.P. 5: risum teneatis, amici·, Arnob. 4, 13: risum tenere non possunt·, Hier. Adv. Iovin. 2, 28; Aug. C. Julian. Op. imperf. 6, 27: risum tenere d i f f i c i l e est. si in ceris : so the better mss ; cereis of the deteriores is adopted by Plasberg and Ax, and would be intelligible as an adjective modifying figuris—the substantive cereus is used only of wax candles; cf. Thes. Ling. Lat. 3 (1912), 862. Cera, however, is used not only of wax as a substance but also of wax tablets, seals, etc., and may indicate figures fashioned out of wax, in particular the imagines·, cf. Sail. Jug. 4, 6; Ov. Am. 1, 8, 65: veteres circum atria cerae \ F. 1, 59: perlege dispositas generosa per atria ceras [and Frazer's n.]; Stat. Silv. 4, 6, 20-22: mille ibi tunc species aerisque eborisque vetusti / atque locuturas mentito corpore ceras / edidici\ and perhaps 5, 1, 1 : si manus aut similes docilis mihi fingere ceras·, Juv. 8, 19-20: tota licet veteres exornent undique cerae / atria ; Justin, 4, 1, 4: aerariae artis fabricae se tradit, cerisque fingendis et aere fundendo procudendoque oblectatur. Such imagines are described by Plin. N.H. 35, 6: expressi cera voltus singulis disponebantur armariis·, cf. H. Blümner, Rom. Privataltertümer (1911), 36. The objection of O. Dieckhoff {De Cic. Lib. de N.D.recensendis (1895), 13, n. 1) that this use of cerae is poetic fails in the face of Cicero and Justin. fingeretur: for its application to wax figures cf. De Or. 3, 177: mollissimam ceram . .. formamus et fingfmus·, Justin, I.e. Mayor's emendation à in ceris diceretur

380 fictilibus figuris; in deo quid sit quasi corpus aut quid sit 1 quasi sanguis intellegere non possum,2 ne tu quidem, Vellei, sed non vis fateri. 72 Ista enim a vobis quasi dictata redduntur, quae Epicurus oscitans halucinatus 3 est, cum quidem gloriaretur, ut videmus 1 quasi corpus aut quid sit om. ACPNO HxNOFM, aluncinatus Ρ

aut fictilibus [on the analogy of 1, 75: dicemus .. . quod itt Venere Coa] seems unnecessary, as does the omission of si .. . fingeretur as a gloss (so J. Jortin, Observ. upon Authors anc. and mod. 2 (1732), 72; cf. C. G. Schuetz, Opuse, philol. et philos. (1830), 234). Indeed, the triple figura etymologica produced by fingeretur . .. fictilibus figuris seems intentionally to emphasize the obvious unreality, in the one case of the imagines, in the other of terra-cotta busts or figurines, as artificial rather than natural objects, though readily intelligible to us. With the general thought cf. Aristot. De An. 2,1, 412b 20-22: ó δ' οφθαλμός ΰλη δψεως, ής άπολειπούσης ουκ έστιν οφθαλμός, πλήν όμωνύμως, καθάπερ ó λίθινος καί ó γεγραμμένος; Orig. Horn. 6 in Exod. 5: verbi causa, ut si dicamus picturam similem esse ei cuius imago in pictura videtur expressa ; quantum ad gratiam pertinet visus similis dici tur, quantum ad substantiam longe dissimilis. illa enim species carnis est et decor corporis vivi ; ista colorumfucus est et cera tabulis sensu carentibussuperposita ; Boeth. in hag. Porphyr, ed. 2, 3, 7 (C.S.E.L. 48, 223). quasi corpus aut quid sit: these words are omitted by ACPN but are restored by Goethe. They evidently constituted a line in the archetype of these codices, and since the line before must have ended with in deo quid sit and the line after must have begun with quasi the opportunity for haplography was very considerable. The 21 letters of the omitted element—not allowing for the use of compendia—agree not too badly with the seventeen-to-twenty-letter lines of the ancestor of our mss as described by A. C. Clark, The Descent of Manuscripts (1918), 360-361.

2

possumus NO

3

alucinatus

72 quasi dictata redduntur: for dictata = "lessons" cf. Fin. 2, 95: nam ista vestra: "si gravis, brevis: si longus levis" dictata sunt·, 4, 10: isdem de rebus semper quasi dictata decantare ñeque a commentariolis suis discedere·, Tuse. 2, 26: quasi dictata, nullo dilectu ... adiungebat·, Q. Fr. 3, 1, 11: meam in ilium pueri omnes tamquam dictata perdiscant·, Hor. Ep. 1, 1, 55: haec recinunt iuvenes dictata senesque; 1, 18, 13-14: ut puerum saevo credas dictata magistro / reddere; 2, 1, 70-71: memini quae plago sum Orbilium dictare·, Pers. 1, 29: cirratorum centum dictata·, Petron. 45, 12: Thraex qui et ipse ad dictata pugnavit·, Juv. 5, 122-123: peragat dictata magistri / omnia·, Suet. Iul. 26, 3: ipsique dictata exercentibus darent. That Epicurus wished to have his followers learn his teachings by heart is clear from Diog. L. 10, 1, 2; also from Epic. ap. Diog. L. 10, 35: τον τύπον της δλης πραγματείας τον κατεστοιχειωμένον δει μνημονεύειν; Fin. 1, 27: quid enim me prohiberet Epicureum esse si probarem quae Ule dicer et? cum praesertim illa perdiscere ludus esset·, 2, 20: quis enim vestrum non edidicit Epicuri κυρίας δόξας; Ac. 2, 8: nec ut omnia quae praescripta et quasi imperata sunt defendamus necessitate ulla cogimur. oscitans: cf. De Or. 2, 144: islam oscitantem et dormitantem sapientiam Scaevolarum et ceterorum beatorum otio concedamus·, Hier. Ep. 69, 2, 7: oscitabat tantum et quasi per mentis crapulam ructans et nausians evomebat·, also the criticism of Epicurus in Div. 1, 5, where he is described as balbutientem de natura deorum [parallels in Pease's n.]. halucinatus: a word of variable spelling (aluc-, ailuc-, halluc-) and somewhat uncertain etymology (yet cf. άλύω)

381

in scriptis, se magistrum habuisse nullum. Quod e t 1 non praedi1

et om. Ν

which denotes idle and rambling talk (cf. Gell. 4,20, 8), and which occurs in no extant author before Cicero (here and Att. 15, 29, 2; Q. Fr. 2, 9, 1), though Non. p. 121 M. (p. 175 L.) says it was used by the veteres, quoting a passage (cf. Gell. 8, 3) which combines the noun alucinatioms with the participle oscitantem : et adsiduo oscitantem vidit atque illius quidem delicatissimas mentis et corporis alucinationes. Might Cicero perhaps have had this passage in mind when he here joined the two words? cum quidem gloriaretur: Mayor renders "boasting all the time." ut videmus in scriptis: cf. Div. 1, 31 : ut scriptum videmus ; 1, 72: ut in Sullae scriptum historia videmus·, 1, 89: scriptum videmus·, Ac. 2, 129: ut scriptum video·, Fin. 4, 15: ut ab ipsis Stoicis scriptum videmus·, O f f . 2, 25: ut scriptum legimw, Tuse. 3, 59 : ut video nostrum scribere Antiocbum\ Sen. 69: ut scriptum video. The work in which Epicurus wrote this was his letter to Eurylochus (Diog. L. 10, 13; quoted in the next note). magistrum habuisse nullum: i.e., that he was αυτοδίδακτος; cf. Diog. L. 10, 2-3: μέχρι μέν τίνος κατ' έπιμιξίαν τοις άλλοις φιλοσοφείν, έπειτα ιδία άπο τήν απ' αύτοϋ κληθεϊσαν αίρεσιν συστήσαντα. έφάψασθαι δέ φιλοσοφίας αύτός φησιν έτη γεγονώς τετταρεσκαίδεκα. 'Απολλόδωρος δ' ó 'Επικούρειος έν τω πρώτω περί τοϋ 'Επικούρου βίου φησίν έλθεϊν αύτόν επί, φιλοσοφίαν καταγνόντα των γραμματιστών, έπειδή μή έδυνήθησαν έρμηνεΰσαι αύτφ τά περί τοϋ παρ' Ήσιόδω χάους . . . τον Τίμωνα φάσκειν περί αύτοΰ · ύστατος αυ φυσικών καί κύντατος, έκ Σάμου έλθών / γραμμαδιδασκαλίδης, άναγωγότατος ζωόντων [cf. Athen. 13, 588b]; 10, 13: τούτον 'Απολλόδωρος έν Χρονικοϊς Ναυσιφάνους άκοϋσαί φησι καΐ Πραξιφάνους· αύτός δέ ου φησιν, αλλ' έαυτοϋ, έν τη πρός Εύρύλοχον έπιστολή. From Epicurus himself Diog. L. 10, 6, quotes the words : παιδείαν δέ πδσαν,

μακάριε, φεϋγε τάκάτιον άράμενος [quoted by Schol. Iambi. De comm. Math. Sc., p. 79, 2 (p. 103 Festa), and parodied by Lact. Inst. 3, 17, 3; Orig. C. Cels. 3, 75; was Epicurus disparaging, as sons often do, his father's profession?]; cf. also Epic. ap. Athen. 13, 588a: μακαρίζω σε, & οδτος, δτι καθαρός πάσης αΐκίας [so Diels ; αιτίας mss, παιδείας Schweighäuser] irci φιλοσοφίαν δρμησαι. Note also the references to his ignorance: 1, 85 [on his inscitia plane loquendi] ; 2, 49 : quae si bis bina quot essent didicisset Epicurus certe non diceret·, Div. 2, 102: Epicurum quem hebetem et rudem dicere soient Stoici·, Ac. 2, 106: Polyaenus ... Epicuro adsentiens totam geometriam falsam esse credidit', Fin. 1, 26; 2, 27: contemnit enim disserendi elegantiam·, Tusc. 5, 93; Plut. Non posse suaviter, 18, p. 1100a: τί δ' ούκ Ιμελλεν αύτ&ς οΰτω σπαργών περιμανώς και σφαδάζων πρός δόξαν ώστε μή μόνον άπολέγεσθαι τούς καθηγητάς μηδέ Δημοκρίτω τω τά δόγματα ρήμασιν αύτοϊς άφαιρουμένφ ζυγομαχεΐν περί συλλαβών καΐ κεραιών, σοφόν δέ μηδένα φάναι πλήν αύτοϋ γεγονέναι καΐ τών μαθητών ; Heraclit. Quaest. Horn. 79 [referring to his άμαθία]; Quintil. Inst. 2, 17, 15: de Epicuro qui disciplinas omnesfugt·, Sext. Emp. Adv. M. 1,1 ; 1, 3 : γενόμενος οδν τούτου [sc. Ναυσιφάνους] μαθητής ó 'Επίκουρος, ύπέρ τοϋ δοκεϊν αυτοδίδακτος είναι καΐ αυτοφυής φιλόσοφος ήρνεϊτο έκ παντός τρόπου, τήν τε περί αύτοΰ φήμην έξαλείφειν έσπευδε πολύς τε έγίνετο τών μαθημάτων κατήγορος έν οΐς έκεϊνος έσεμνύετο; Adv. Gram. 49; Eus. Pr. Εν. 14, 20, 14: λέγεται δ' ó 'Επίκουρος ύπό μέν τίνων μηδενός άκηκοέναι, έντυχεϊν δέ τοις τών παλαιών συγγράμμασιν ; Himer, ap. Phot. Bibl. cod. 243, p. 356a Bekker: ήσχύνθη τοις άρχαίοις έμμεϊναι φιλοσοφίας δροις 'Επίκουρος, καΐ τήν αύτήν όδόν έλθεϊν τοις πρότερον φιλοσοφήσασιν ώκνησε. μάλλον Si μικροψυχίαν καταγνούς τών 6σοι παρ' ήμϊν έπΐ πονηροΐς δόγμασι πλημμελοΰντες έκολάσθησαν, έγνω πάντας άθρόως ύπερβαλέ-

382 σθαι τοις άδικήμασιν; Amm. Marc. 30, 4, 3: professionem forensium ... Epicurus . . . κακοτεχνίαν nominans, inter artes numerai malas·, Hier. Ep. 62, 8, 3; 70, 6, 1 : omnes paene omnium libri, exceptis hit qui cum Epicuro litteras non didicerunt, eruditionis doctrinaeque pienissimi sunt; Aug. C. Iulian. Pelag. 3, 48: hoc enim tu satis eloquenter facts quod inerudite atque impolite faciebat Epicurus. From Proel, in prim. Euclid. Lib., prop. 1, probi. 1, p. 216 Friedlein, it may be gathered that Posidonius made charges against τόν δριμύν Έπίκουρον ώς ού συνειδότα, κτλ.; cf. prop. 20, theor. 13, p. 322. Against this charge Torquatus makes a defence in Fin. 1, 71-72: qui quod tibi parum videtur eruditus, ea causa est quod nullam eruditionem esse duxit nisi qme beatae vitae disciplinam imiaret ... non ergo Epicurus ineruditus sed it indocti qui, quae pueros non didicisse turpe est, ea putant usque ad senectutem esse discenda; cf. also Ac. 2, 97. It may be admitted that Epicurus had perhaps some justification for protesting against much of the formalized and sterile education of his day and for feeling that his different premises rendered not a little of it obsolete. Added to that, however, was probably some desire for originality; cf. 1, 73. On this subject see also E. Bignone, L'Aristotele perduto, 2 (1936), 51, n. Epicurus's followers continued the tradition of neglect of conventional education; cf. 1, 58, n. {quam soient vestri); In Pi son. 70: non philosophia solum sed etiam ceteris studiis quae fere Epicúreos negligere dicunt perpolitus; Quintil. Inst. 12, 2, 24; Dion. Hal. De Comp. Verb. 24: Έπικουρείων δέ χορόν, οίς ούδέν μέλει τούτων, παραιτούμαι ; Orig. C. Cels. 3, 49: συνεργεί τό πεπαιδεϋσθαι καί λόγων άριστων έπιμεμελήσθαι καί φρόνιμον είναι, καί, ήμΐν μάλλον πρέπει τοϋτο λέγειν ή Κέλσω· καί μάλιστα έάν 'Επικούρειος ων έλέγχηταα; Aug. C. Crescon. 1, 16: quamvis et i psi Epicurei, quos imperitia liberalium disciplinarum non solum non pudebat verum etiam delectabat. Trimalchio's boast (Petron. 71, 12) that nec umquam philosophum audivit might be a parody of the same idea; cf. also P. H. De Lacy in Trans. Am. philol. Assoc. 72

(1941), 50-51. For Epicurean theories of education cf. J. Balabuszyúski, Epicureorum Doctrina de Pueris educandis et instruendis (1937), reprinted from Eos, 37 (1936), 274-283 ; 391-424; 38 (1937), 1-9; 192-200. Ν. W. De Witt (Cl. Philol. 31 (1936), 206) notes the use in Philodemus of καθηγητής and similar words in preference to words for schoolmaster; were the Epicureans perhaps the "progressive" educationists of antiquity? Yet Socrates himself did not speak of his "pupils," and refused to be called anyone's teacher; cf. W. Jaeger, Paideia, 2 (Engl. tr. 1943), 58-59; 380, n. 141, contrasted with the Sophists (id., 2, 388, n. 94). Epicurus was not the only philosopher who claimed to be self-taught. Diogenes Laertius usually assigns one or more teachers to each philosopher (as Clem. Strom. 6, 7, 57, 3, gives a series of teachers and pupils), yet N. W. DeWitt (in a letter of 9 Jan., 1939) calls to my attention how many are described by him as having rebelled against the traditional education of their times. The minstrel Phemius is said by Homer (Od. 22, 347) to have been αύτοδίδακτος (cf. Aristot. Riet. 17, 1365 a 30), and Pythagoras (Suid. s.v. Φερεκύδης), Heraclitus (Diog. L. 9, 5; Tatian, Ad Graecos, 3; Vorsokrat. 1, no. 12 Β 40; cf. Julian, Or. 6, 187d), Xenophanes (Diog. L. 9, 18), Socrates (Xen. Mem. 4, 2, 4; Plat. Laches, 186b-c; in Apol. 33a he claims to have been no one's teacher), and Demades (Stob. vol. 3, 655 Hense) are among those who disclaimed having received formal instruction; note also other cases cited by A. D. Nock in Harv. theol. Rev. 33 (1940), 308; to which add Ael. V.H. 12, 50 (the Spartans); Dio Cass. 78, 11, 2 (Caracalla); Suid. s.v. Πόπλιος Ούαλέριος. Others recognized the weaknesses of such lack of schooling; cf. Aristot. fr. 57 Rose: τίκτει γάρ, ώσπερ φησίν ή παροιμία, κόρος μέν ΰβριν, άπαιδευσία δέ μετ' εξουσίας ávoiav; Hier. De Vir. ill. prol. : Pessimum, ut dicitur, magistrum memet ipsum habeo; In Ephes. prol. pp. 539-540 Vali, me ipsum tantum, ut plerìque, habuerim magistrum. et non praedicanti: Klotz's emenda-

383

canti 1 tarnen fädle equidem 2 crederem,3 sicut mali aedificii domino 4 glorianti se architectum non habuisse; nihil enim olet 5 ex Academia, nihil [ne] 6 ex Lycio,7 nihil ne e puerilibus quidem 8 disciplinis. Xenocraten audite potuit (quem 9 virum, dii inmor1 2 praecanti Ρ equidem dett. Lamb., quidem ACPNBM, quidam O 4 6 credam PNO, credem A1B1, credemus C domo Ρ olet BFM, 8 7 floret cett. [ne] om. dett. Ven., ex lycio nihilne om. A1, nihilne cett. leutio 8 DGNF, leucio HPB*M, lecio B\ leutico 0, add. A2 quidem add. D 9 quem del. D 3

tion (cf. J. B. Hofmann in Philologus, 91 (1936), 454) to et, on the supposition that Cicero does not use et = etiam, is refuted by such passages as 1, 83; 2, 63; Ac. 2, 99; Τ use. 3, 28; Fin. 3, 27; Legg. 1, 33; Att. 11, 23, 3; Q. Fr. 2, 4, 3; Pro Q. Rose. 32; and perhaps Div. 1, 34; but cf. J. B. Hofmann, Lat. Gram. (1928), 661. With the thought cf. Hier. Adv. Rufin. 1, 17 : nisi forte se litteris non didicisse iurabit ; quod nos Uli et absque iuramento perfacile credimus·, also Plut. De Lib. educ. 9, pp. 6f-7a: ζωγράφος φασίν άθλιος 'Απελλή δείξας εικόνα, "ταύτην," £φη, "νΰν γέγραφα," ό δέ "καΐ ήν μή λέγης," εΤπεν, "οίδ' ότι ταχύ γέγραπται· θαυμάζω δέ πώς ούχΐ τοιαύτας πλείους γέγραφας." architectum non habuisse: Vitr. 6, prol. 7, complains: ¡taque nemo artem ullam aliam conatur domi facere, uti sutrinam, fullonicam, aut ex ceteris quae sunt faciliores, nisi architecturam·, cf. loan. Chrys. De Sacerd. 4 , 1 (Patr. Gr. 48, 663). olet: with this use of oleo (and its compound redoled) cf. De Or. 2, 109: doctrinam redolet exercitationemque paene puerilem·, 3, 44: nihil sonare aut olere peregrinum; Brut. 82: orationes . .. redolentes ... antiquitatem; Pro Cael. 47: nihilne igitur ilia vicinitas redolet·, Pro Q. Rose. 20: olere malitiam·, Att. 2, 1, 1: nihil olebant; Plaut. Truc. 131; Quintil. Inst. 8, 1, 3. The reading olet of Β seems more appropriate here than floret of ACPN. Academia . . . Lycio: the schools in which he might have studied. Cicero combines the two in his De Consul, ap. Div. 1, 22. The form Lycio has a long penult (from Λυκεΐον ; for which cf. W. Kroll in P.-W. 13 (1927), 2267-2268),

but in the various passages in Cicero in which it appears {Div. 1, 8; 1, 22; 2, 8; Ac. 1, 17; De Or. 1, 98) its spelling varies between Lyceum and Lyeium. nihil [ne] ex: the ne has crept in from the following nihil ne e puerilibus quidem, where ne is properly in place. puerilibus . . . disciplinis: cf. Rep. 4, 3 : disciplinam puerilem ingenuis .. . nullam certam ... aut unam omnium esse voluerunt. Athen. 13, p. 588a remarks of Epicurus: έγκυκλίου παιδείας αμύητος ων ¿μακάριζε καΐ τούς ομοίως αύτω έπί φιλοσοφίαν παρερχομένους ; cf. Fin. 1, 26 : vellem equidem aut ipse doctrinis fuisset instruetior {est enim ... non satis politus iis artibus quas qui tenent eruditi appellantur) aut ne deterruisset alios a studiis. Mayor well remarks, however, upon the various treatises upon the liberal arts found among the Herculanean papyri; in fact, Philodemus alone wrote works on music, poetry, rhetoric, and logic, as well as on various moral questions. On the term cf. O. Mauch, Der lat. Begriff Disciplina (1941), 32-38. Xenocraten audire potuit: for Xenocrates cf. 1, 34; for this statement see Diog. L. 10, 1, where Heraclides and others say that Epicurus όκτωκαιδεκέτη . . . έλθειν εις 'Αθήνας, Ξενοκράτους μέν έν Άκαδημεία, 'Αριστοτέλους δ' έν Χαλκίδι διατρίβοντος ; Eus. Pr. Εν. 14, 20, 14: λέγεται δέ ó 'Επίκουρος ύπό μέν τίνων μηδενός άκηκοέναι . . . ύπό τίνων δ' δτι ήκουσε Ξενοκράτους, ύστερον δέ καΐ Ναυσιφάνους τοϋ Πύρρωνος γενομένου γνωρίμου. quem virum: on his character cf. 34, n. (condiscipulus Xenocrates); on the form of expression Legg. 3, 20: D. Brutum et

384 tales!), et sunt qui putent audisse; ipse non vult; credo plus nemini.1 Pamphilum quendam Platonis auditorem ait a 2 se Sami auditum, ibi enim adulescens 3 habitabat cum pâtre et fratribus, quod in earn pater eius Neocles 4 agripeta 5 venerai, sed cum agel1 6

2 a]ei H memini D agripetta N, agrepeta A1

3

adolescens D2NOF1

P. Scipionem cónsules {quos et quantos virosi). dii inmortales: many cases of this parenthetic asseveration are collected by H. Merguet, Lex. d. philos. Sehr. Cic. 1 (1887), 662. qui putent audisse: cf. the note on magistrum habuisse nullum, above. The omission of eum as the subject of audisse may be remarked; cf. 1, 84: confiteri nescire [sc. te] ; 1, 109: puderet me dicere non intellegere [sc. me], credo plus nemini: for plus = magis cf. Legg. 2, 3 : plus ... delectet·, Phil. 2, 38 : plus dilexit ; Madvig on Fin. 1, 5; also the adverbial use of magnum instead of magnopere. Pamphilum... Platonis auditorem: cf. Diog. L. 10, 14: Αρίστων δέ φησιν έν τω 'Επικούρου βίω τόν Κανόνα γράψαι αύτόν έκ τοϋ Ναυσιφάνους Τρίποδος, ού καΐ άκοΰσαί φησιν αύτόν, άλλά καί Παμφίλου τοϋ Πλατωνικού έν Σάμω ; Suid. s.v. 'Επίκουρος· . . . πρώτον μέν έν Σάμω διατρίψας σύν τοις γονεΰσιν, είτα σχολαρχήσας έν Μιτυλήνη ένιαυτών ών ήν, είτα έν Λαμψάκω, καί οΰτως έν 'Αθήναις έν ίδίφ κήπω, άκούσας δέ Ναυσιφάνους τοϋ Δημοκρίτειου καί Παμφίλου τοϋ Πλάτωνος μαθητοΰ. The epithet quendam indicates that Cicero does not consider Pamphilus one of the wellknown Platonists, and R. Hirzel, Untersuch. ζ- Cic. philos. Sehr. 1 (1877), 108, well remarks that his lectures seem to have had no influence upon the form of Epicurus's philosophy. Sami: cf. Diog. L. 10, 1: τοΰτόν φασιν άλλοι τε καί Ηρακλείδης έν τη Σωτίωνος έπιτομη κληρουχησάντων 'Αθηναίων την Σάμον έκεϊθι τραφήναι· όκτωκαιδεκέτη δ' έλθεϊν είς 'Αθήνας· . . . τελευτήσαντος δέ 'Αλεξάνδρου τοϋ Μακεδόνας καί των 'Αθηναίων έκπεσόντων

4

neocle P, neodes NO

ύπό Περδίκκου μετελθεΐν εις Κολοφώνα πρός τόν πατέρα; 10, 3 [from verses of Timon]: έκ Σάμου έλθών; 10, 14 (quoted in the previous note); Suid. s.v. 'Επίκουρος (quoted in the previous note). That he was actually born at Samos is perhaps indicated by the charge (Diog. L. 10, 4) that he was not a genuine Athenian citizen; cf. R. Philippson in P.-W. 16 (1935), 2414-2415. cum patre: for his identification as Neocles, in addition to the present passage, cf. Strab. 14, 1, 18; Plut. Strom, ap. Eus. Pr. Εν. 1, 8, 8: Aët. Plac. 1, 3, 18 (Doxogr. Gr.* 285); Diog. L. 10,1 ; 10,12; Themist. Or. 23, p. 287a; 26, p. 324a; Theodoret, Gr. A f f . 2, 11; 4, 9; 5, 18; 6, 6; Steph. Byz. s.v. Γαργηττός; Anth. Pal. 7, 72; Suid. s.v. 'Επίκουρος. For his life cf. R. Philippson in P.-W. 16 (1935), 2414-2416. fratribus: three in number (Diog. L. 10, 3; Suid. s.v. Επίκουρος), Epicurus perhaps being the eldest, and the others being named Neocles (cf. R. Philippson in P.-W. 16 (1935), 2416), Chaeredemus, and Aristobulus (or, as Suidas says, Aristodemus). They joined in Epicurus's philosophical interests (Diog. L. 10, 3: συνεφιλοσόφουν δ' αύτω προτρεψαμένφ καί oí άδελφοί τρεις οντες . . . καθά φησι Φιλόδημος ό 'Επικούρειος έν τω δεκάτη της των φιλοσόφων συντάξεως) and were the objects of his generosity (Diog. L. 10, 10); cf. H. von Arnim in P.-W. 6 (1909), 133; R. Philippson in P.-W. 16 (1935), 2415. agripeta: a word confined to Cicero (used also in Att. 15, 29, 3; 16, 1, 2 (where Tyrrell and Purser translate it "land-grabbers"); 16, 4, 3—all three cases in connection with Roman settlers at Buthrotum; in the orations Cicero

1,73

385

lus eum non satis alerei, ut opinor, ludi magister fuit. 73 Sed hune Platonicum 1 mirifice contemnit Epicurus ; ita metuit ne 1

platoni B l

uses the more familiar agrarii), and ren- αύτών έργασίας, αίς ούδέν άτοπον πρόσdering the Greek κληροΰχος. Neocles εστιν άλλά καΐ των γονέων, άν τίνος was one of 2000 colonists sent by the έριθος ή μήτηρ ή . . . ή ó πατήρ διδάξη Athenians in 365, 361, and 352/1 B.C. to γράμματα ή παιδαγωγήση. Epicurus Samos (Diog. L. 10, 1; Strab. 14, 1, 18: himself had used it against Protagoras 'Αθηναίοι δέ πρότερον μέν πέμψαντες (Diog. L. 10, 8). For statements that στρατηγόν Περικλέα καΐ σύν αύτω Σο- Neocles became a schoolmaster see φοκλέα τον ποιητή ν πολιορκία κακώς Strab. 14, 1, 18: Νεοκλής, ό 'Επικούρου διέθηκαν άπειθοΰντας τούς Σαμίους, του φιλοσόφου πατήρ, γραμματοδιδάσΰστερον δέ καΐ κληρούχους έπεμψαν καλος, ώς φασι; Diog. L. 10, 3-4. In δισχιλίους έξ έαυτών, ών ήν Νεοκλής, ó Diog. L. 10, 4, Stoic opponents charge Επικούρου του φιλοσόφου πατήρ, γραμ- against Epicurus that σύν τή μητρί πεματοδιδάσκαλος, ώς φασι· καΐ δή και ριιόντα αυτόν ές τά οίκίδια καθαρμούς τραφήναί φασιν ένθάδε και έν Τέω, καΐ άναγινώσκειν καΐ σύν τω πατρί γράμέφηβεϋσαι Άθήνησι; Dion. Hal. De ματα διδάσκειν λυπροϋ τίνος μισθαρίου Dinarch. 13, p. 665; E. L. Hicks and (but as noted by H. Usener, Epicurea G. F. Hill, Man. of Gr. hist. Insert (1901), (1887), 414, this repeats a similar charge 225-227). made by Demosthenes (De Cor. 258-259) agellus . . . non . . . aleret: this noun against Aeschines and his parents). Diog. is often used in an apologetic, here L. 10, 8, says that Nausiphanes in abuse probably in a disparaging, sense ; the called Epicurus a διδάσκαλος, and in allotment was apparently inadequate to 10, 2 (cf. Poet. Philos. Frag. 197, no. 51 support the growing family of Neocles. Diels, in lines of Timon calling him a With the expression cf. Nep. Phoc. 1, 4: γραμμοδιδασκαλίδης) reports that Herhis ilk "si mei similes erunt, idem hie" mippus said he started out as a γραμinquit, "agellus illos alei qui me ad banc ματοδιδάσκαλος; cf. also Suid. s.v. 'Επίκουρος (quoted in the note on Pamdignitatem perduxit" ut opinor: this qualification prob- philum . . . Platonis audi torem, above). ably applies to what precedes rather than On the whole subject of these abusive to what follows; cf. R. Philippson in charges brought by adversaries against P.-W. 16 (1935), 2415. For such phrases, Epicurus—and it may be that none of corresponding to ώς (έγώ) οϊμαι, cf. them is true—cf. R. Hirfcel, Untersuch, F. Sommer in ΑΝΤΙΔΩΡΟΝ . . . J . χ. Cic. philos. Sehr. 1 (1877), 108-110, n. 2 Wackernagel (1923), 22-27; also below, (with his correction on p. 244). Epicurus himself was an adept in the abuse of 1, 85; 2, 53; 2, 57; 3, 35. ludi magister: probably "school- others, if we may believe 1, 93; also master" (of an elementary school) is here Athen. 8, 354b-c. used in a disparaging sense; cf. Justin, fuit: = "became"—a rather rare use, 21, 5, 8 [of the tyrant Dionysius]: no- with which cf. 2,167 : nemo .. . magnus . .. vissime ludi magistrum professas pueros in umquam fuit\ Sen. S: nec tu ... clarus umtrivio docebat, ut aut a timentibus semper in quam fuisses; Att. 10, 16, 1 : commodum ad publico videretur aut a non timentibus facilius te dederam litteras de pluribus rebus cum contemneretur [cf. Val. Max. 6, 9, ext. 6]; ad me bene mane Dionysius fuit [where, Mart. 10, 62,1 : ludi magister, parce simplici however, some editors bracket fuit] ; Sail. turbae. For this type of reproach cf. Dio Cat. 20, 7: ceteri omnes .. . volgus fuimus·, Chrys. Or. 7, 114: των άλλως τά τοιαύτα Liv. 34, 21, 8: locupletior in dies provincia προφερόντων, οίον είώθασι λοιδο- fuit. ρούμενοι προφέρειν πολλάκις ού μόνον τάς 73 mirifice contemnit: this adverb 25

386

quid umquam didicisse videatur. In Nausiphane 1 Democriteo tenetur; quem 2 cum a se non neget auditum vexat tarnen omnibus contumeliis. Atqui si haec3 Democritea non audisset,4 quid audierat ? Quid est in physicis Epicuri non a Democrito? Nam etsi quaedam 1

nausifane codd.

2

que Ν

3

haec] lex O

is much used by Cicero (especially in the Letters) with verbs of liking, loving (1, 58), and their opposites. Nausiphane Democriteo: cf. 1, 93: Nausiphanem magistrum suum, a quo nihil didicerat, tam male acceperit. For his life and work cf. Κ. von Fritz in P.-W. 16 (1935), 2021-2027 (based on the materials in Vorsokrat. 1, no. 62; the fragments are chiefly preserved in Philodem. Rhetorics). Several passages describe him as a pupil of Pyrrho of Elis ; cf. Diog. L. 9, 64: και Ναυσιφάνην ήδη νεανίσκον δντα θηραθήναι . . . ελεγέ τε πολλάκις καΐ Έπίκουρον θαυμάζοντα τήν Πύρρωνος άναστροφήν συνεχές αύτοϋ πυνθάνεσθαι περί, αύτοϋ; 9, 69: διήκουε τοϋ Πύρρωνος . . . Ναυσιφάνης Τήιος, ου φασί τίνες άκοΰσαί Έπίκουρον; 9, 102; Clem. Strom. 1, 14, 64, 4: Δημοκρίτου δέ άκουσταί Πρωταγόρας ó 'Αβδηρίτης καί Μητρόδωρος ό Χίος. οδ Δ ό γένης ό Σμυρναίος, οδ Άνάξαρχος, τούτου δέ Πύρρων, οδ Ναυσιφάνης. τούτου φασίν ένιοι μαθητήν Επικούρου γενέσθαι; Sext. Emp. Adv. Math. 2: ούκ άπέοικε δέ καί διά τήν προς Ναυσιφάνην τόν Πύρρωνος άκουστήν, έχθραν; Eus. Pr. Εν. 14, 20, 14: λέγεται δέ ό 'Επίκουρος . . . άκηκοέναι . . . Ναυσιφάνους τοϋ Πύρρωνος γενομένου γνωρίμου; F. Sbordone, ed. of Philodem. Adv. Soph. (1947), 78; 128. His school was in Teos, where Epicurus had lived in his youth (Strab. 14,1, 18), and where Nausiphanes had doubtless given lectures attended by Epicurus ; cf. Diog. L. 1, prol. 15: οδ Δημόκριτος, οδ πολλοί μέν, έπ' ονόματος δέ Ναυσιφάνης . . . ών Επίκουρος; 10, 8: καί αυτόν Έ π ί κουρον έν ταϊς έπιστολαΐς περί Ναυσιφάνους λέγειν· "ταΰτα ήγαγεν αυτόν εις Ικστασιν τοιαύτην ώστε μοι λοιδορεϊσθαι καί άποκαλεϊν διδάσκαλον." πλεύ-

4

audisse Ρ

μονά τε αυτόν έκάλει καί άγράμματον καί άπατεώνα καί πόρνην; 10, 13: τοΰτον 'Απολλόδωρος έν Χρονικοΐς Ναυσιφάνους άκοΰσαί φησι; Sext. Emp. Adv. Math. 4: φησί γοϋν έν τη πρός τούς έν Μυτιλήνη φιλοσόφους έπιστολη· "οίμαι δέ έγωγε τούς βαρυστόνους καί μαθητήν με δόξειν τοϋ πλεύμονος είναι, μετά μειρακίων τινών κραιπαλώντων άκούσαντα," νΰν πλεύμονα καλών τόν Ναυσιφάνην, ώς άναίσθητον; Suid. s.v. Ε π ί κουρος· . . . άκούσας δέ Ναυσιφάνους τοϋ Δημοκρίτειου. For Epicurus's opposition to him cf. also Diog. L. 10, 7;who hints at its cause (10,14): 'Αρίστων δέ φησιν έν τώ Επικούρου βίω τόν Κανόνα γράψαι αύτόν έκ τοϋ Ναυσιφάνους Τρίποδος, οδ καί άκοΰσαί φησιν αύτόν. On this subject cf. also W. Crönert, Kolotes ». Menedemos (1906), 21. From our passage and 1, 93, R. Philippson (Gotting. Nachr. 1930, 12-15) would infer that Nausiphanes was a possible opponent of Epicurus. tenetur: cf. 3, 74: tum teneri putat\ In Catti. 2, 13: cum haesitaret, cum tenere tur, quaesivi-, Pro Caecin. 4: facile honestissimis testibus in re perspicua tenerentur\ 2 λ/err. 3, 178: tenetur igitur aliquando et in rebus cum maximis tum manifestos tenetur; also the use of haereo, as in Suet. Aug. 71, 1. non neget auditum: cf. Sext. Emp. Adv. Math. 4 (quoted on Nausiphane Democriteo, above). vexat . . . contumeliis: cf. Diog. L. 10, 7-8; Sext. Emp. Adv. Math. 4. quid audierat: cf. Diog. L. 10, 2: φησί δ' "Ερμιππος γραμματοδιδάσκαλον αύτόν γεγενήσθαι, έπειτα μέντοι περιτυχόντα τοις Δημοκρίτου βιβλίοις έπί φιλοσοφίαν άξαι. quid . . . non a Democrito: cf. 1, 66, n. (Democriti); 1, 120: Democritus .. . cuius fontibus Epicurus hortulos suos irri-

1,74

387

commutavit, ut quod paulo ante de inclinatione atomorum 1 dixi,2 tamen pleraque dicit eadem, átomos, inane,3 imagines, infinitatem4 locorum, innumerabilitatemque 5 mundofum, eorum 6 ortus, interitus,7 omnia fere quibus naturae ratio continetur. Nunc istuc 8 quasi corpus et quasi sanguinem quid intellegis ? 74 Ego enim te scire ista melius quam me non fateor solum sed etiam facile patior; cum quidem semel dicta sunt, quid est quod 4 8

1 animorum D infirmitatem (J)A1 istud D

2

3 inane Aid., inanes ADPNOBFM, dixit D1 incines H 6 que om.D β eorumque O ' interius A1

gavit·, Ac. 1, 5: iam vero physica, si Epicurum, id est, si Democritum probarem; Fin. 1, 17: in physicis, quibus maxime ¿loriatur, primum totus est alienus; Democritea dicit perpauca mutans, sed ita ut ea quae corrigere vult mihi quidem depravare videatur-, 1, 18: Epicurus autem in quibus sequitur Democritum non fere labitur·, 1, 21: quae mutât ea corrumpit, quae sequitur sunt tota Democriti, atomi, inane, imagines ... infinitio ipsa . . . tota ab ilio est, tum innumerabiles mundi, qui et oriantur et intereant cotidie. quae etsi mihi nullo modo probantur, tamen Democritum, laudatum a ceteris, ab hoc qui eum unum secutus esset nollem vituperatum-, 4, 13: equidem etiam Epicurum, in physicis quidem, Democriteum puto, pauca mutai, vel plura sane; at cum de plurimis eadem dicit tum certe de maximis·, Plut .Quaest. conv. 8, 10, 2, p. 735a: ώς 'Επίκουρος οίεται μέχρι τούτου Δημοκρίτω συνεπόμενος; Diog. L. 10, 4: τά δέ Δημοκρίτου περί των άτόμων καί Άριστίππου περί της ήδονής ώς ϊδια λέγειν. For the dependence of Epicurus on Democritus cf. also R. Hirzel, Untersuch. Cic. philos. Sehr. 1 (1877), 154-160. Asclep. in Metaph. p. 44, 8-16 Hayduck similarly ascribes Plato's views to the Pythagoreans. paulo ante de inclinatione: cf. 1, 69; also, for inclinatione, Lucr. 2, 243-244: inclinare necessest j corpora·, Plut. De An. Procréât, in Tim. 6, p. 1015c: έγκλϊναι τήν όίτομον συγχωροϋσιν. Ax (appendix, 173) thinks that Cicero here avoids the slight cacophony of de declinatione. átomos, inane, imagines: cf. Fin. 1,

21 (quoted on quid ... non a Democrito, above); 1, 107; Fam. 15, 16, 1: Catius Insuber, 'Επικούρειος, . . . quae ille Gargettius et iam ante Democritus εϊδωλα, hic spectra nominai·, Alex. Aphrod. De Sens. ρ. 56, 12 Wendland: είδωλα γάρ τινα ομοιόμορφα άπό των όρωμένων συνεχώς άπορρέοντα καί έμπίπτοντα τη οψει τοϋ όραν ήτιώντο. τοιούτο δέ ήσαν οί τε περί Λεύκιππον καί Δημόκριτον, οΐ καί έκ της των αοράτων διά μικρότητα παραθέσεως την των μεταξύ χρωμάτων φαντασίαν έποίουν. For inane = κενόν cf. F. Peters, T. Lucr. et M. Cic. quo modo Vocab. Gr. Epic. Discipl. propria Latine verterint (1926), 8. infinitatem locorum: cf. 1, 55. innumerabilitatem . . . mundorum: cf. 1,25, n. {innumerabilis ... mundos). oftus interitus: cf. 1, 25, n. (orientis occidentisque). naturae ratio: i. e., physiologia·, cf. 1, 20, n. (id est naturae rationem). quasi corpus: at 1, 68, he started to discuss this; digressed in 1, 69-70; started again at 1, 71; digressed in 1, 72-73; and now resumes (notice nunc at the beginning of the sentence). quid intellegis: "what do you understand by the phrase" (Mayor); cf. Fin. 2, 50: quid ergo hoc loco intellegit honestum·, Parad. 42: quem enim intellegimus divitem? 74 ista: those tenets peculiar to your school. facile patior: cf. Fin. 2, 20: idfacilius paterer·, 5, 54; 5, 56; Tusc. 1, 55; 1, 81; 1, 88; 5, 15: facile patior te isto modo agere·, Rep. 2, 29; Legg. 1, 28: facile pattar te hune

388

1,74

Velleius 1 intellegere possit, Cotta 2 non possit? 3 Ita que corpus 4 quid sit, sanguis quid sit intellego ; quasi corpus 5 et quasi sanguis quid sit nullo prorsus modo intellego. Ñeque tu me celas ut Pythagoras solebat alíenos, nec 6 consulto 7 dicis occulte tamquam 1 uelletius A 2 cotta] quottan A 3 posset H1 4 corpos A1 5 quasi 7 consulto dei t. Rom., consulta ceti. corpus . . . intellego om.O * nec om. Ν

diem ... consumere·, O f f . 2, 73; 2, 75; Orat. 41 : vel reprehendí me a ceteris facile patiebar. quid est quod: cf. 1, 3; 1, 117. quod Velleius . . . possit, Cotta non: cf. Fin. 2, 12: egone non intellego quid sit ηδονή Graece, Latine voluptas? utram tandem linguam nescio ? deinde qui fit ut ego nesciam, sciunt omnes quicumquè Epicurei esse voluerunt-, 2, 13: ergo Uli intellegunt quid Epicurus dicat, ego non intellego·, 2, 15; 2, 75: individua cum dicitis et intermundia, quae nec sunt ulla nec possunt esse, intellegimus ; voluptas, quae passeribus nota est omnibus, a nobis intellegi non potest·, Tuse. 3, 37: soient enim isti negare nos intellegere quid dicat Epicurus·, Isoer. 18,15 : θαυμάζω 8' εί αυτόν μέν ίκανόν γνώναι νομίζει . . . έμέ δ' ούκ αν οϊεται τοϋτ' έξευρεϊν [and Aristot. Riet. 2, 19, 1392 b 11-13]; Aug. C. Iulian. Op. imp e r f . 2, 4: quodque ait in Epicurum Tullius, manifesto argumento non dici illa subtiliter, quod cuiuscemodi homines passim sibi ea profitentur piacere·, also fob. 15, 8-9: "Hast thou heard the secret of God, and dost thou restrain wisdom to thyself? What knowest thou that we know not, what understandest thou which is not in us?" On Cicero's view of the ease of learning the Epicurean doctrines cf. 1, 18, n. {tum Velleius)·, Fin. 1, 27; Reid on Fin. 1, 13. On the asyndeton cf. 1, 20, and n. ( p r i n c i p i u m aliquod sit, nihil sit extremum)·, Fin. 2 , 12; 2, 13 (both quoted above). For the opposition of possit and non possit Mayor compares Plin. Ep. 3, 16, 11. nullo prorsus modo: cf. 1, 33, n. (ιquo porro modo). ñeque tu me celas: cf. Fin. 1, 16: omnes mihi Epicuri sententias satis notae sunt\ 2, 15 : vide ne, si ego non intellegam quid Epicurus loquatur, cum Graece, ut videor,

luculenter sciam, sit aliqua culpa eius qui ita loquatur ut non intellegatur. quodduobus modis sine reprehensione fit, si aut de industria facias, ut Heraclitus, cognomento qui σκοτεινός perhibetur, quia de natura nimis obscure memoravit, aut cum rerum obscuritas, non verborum facit ut non intellegatur oratio, qualis est in Timaeo Platonis. Epicurus autem, ut opinor, nec non vult, si possit, piane et aperte loqui, nec de re obscura ... loquitur·, 4, 2. R. Hirzel (Untersuch. ζ- Cie. philos. Sehr. 1 (1877), 189-190) and W. Scott (fourn. of Philol. 12 (1883), 221, n. 1) think that the only ascription of esoteric doctrines to Epicurus is by Clem. Strom. 5, 9, 58, 1 : ού μόνοι άρα oí Πυθαγόρειοι καΐ Πλάτων τά πολλά έκρύπτοντο, άλλά καί οί 'Επικούρειοι φασί τινα καΐ παρ' αύτοΰ άπόρρητα είναι καί μή πασιν έπιτρέπειν έντυγχάνειν τούτοις τοις γράμμασιν. ut Pythagoras: cf. Tuse. 4, 3: cum carminibus soliti illi esse dicantur et praecepta quaedam occultius tradere-, Rep. 1, 16: leporem Socraticum subtilitatemque sermonis cum obscuritate Pythagorae . .. contexuit [se. Plato]; Diog. L. 8, 15: ϊλεγόν τε καί oí άλλοι Πυθαγόρειοι μή είναι πρός πάντας πάντα ρητά ; Hippol. Philosophum. 1, 2, 4 (Doxogr. Gr.3 556): ούτος τούς μαθητάς διεΐλε καί τούς μέν έσωτερικούς, τούς δέ έξωτερικούς έκάλεσεν· τοις μέν γάρ τά τελεώτερα μαθήματα έπίστευσε, τοις δέ τά μετριώτερα; Iambi. Vit. Pyth. 103-104; Proci, in Tim. p. 92e (pp. 302-303 Diehl): των Πυθαγορείων . . . ot τούς περί των θείων λόγους απορρήτους είχον καί ού προς πάντας διελέγοντο περί αύτών ; cf. id. in prim. Euclid. Lib., prol. 1, p. 22 Friedlein: ή των Πυθαγορείων φιλοσοφία . . . τήν μυσταγωγίαν κατακρύπτει των θείων δογμάτων; Schol. Plat. Phaedo, 61d [of Philolaus]: δς καί δι' αινιγμάτων έδί-

389

Heraclitus, sed, quod inter nos liceat,1 ne tu quidem intellegis. 1

liceat Vict., liqueat codd.

δασκεν, καθάπερ ήν εθος αύτοϊς ; Simplic. in Pbys. 1, proem, p. 7, 1-3 Diels: Ξενοφάνης 8è . . . και oí Πυθαγόρειοι . . . αίνιγματώδη τήν έαυτών φιλοσοφίαν παραδεδώκασιν; also ρ. 8, 10-11 ; 8, 21-30; 1, 2, ρ. 21,17-19; 4, 6, ρ. 652, 7; Asclep. in Metaph. p. 18, 33-19, 1 Hayduck; p. 34, 6-7; p. 43, 9-10; p. 44, 13-17; Alex. Aphrod. in Metaph. 1, 5, p. 46, 24-29 Hayduck; T. C. Heath, Aristarchus of Samos (1913), 47, who suggests that the theory of Pythagorean secrecy may have been invented to explain the absence of any Pythagorean documents earlier than Philolaus. consulto dicis occulte: cf. 1, 49, n. {quivis ... possit agnoseer e) ; 1, 85: sunt qui existiment quod ille inscitia plane !oquendi fecerit fecisse consulto; de homine minime vafro male existimant\ Fin. 2, 15 (quoted in n. on ñeque tu me celas, above ; observe in it the phrase de industria corresponding to consulto). For various allusions to the intentionally enigmatic language of philosophers cf. Tert. Adv. Valent. 1; Atticus ap. Eus. Pr. Ev. 15, 9, 13; Porphyr, ap. Stob. vol. 2, 14 Wachsmuth; Julian, Or. 5, 170b-c; 7, 217a-c; Eunap. Vit. Philos, p. 456; Hier. Adv. Pelag. 2, 20 ; Boeth. Quomodo Subst. prol. ; Simplic. Phys. 1, 2, p. 36, 25-32 Diels (Vorsokrat. 1, no. 18A 19); Elias in Categ. proem, p. 126, 28 Busse; W. H. S. Jones, ed. of Heraclitus (1931), ix-xii (on intentional obscurity in ancient writings). In the Hippocratic Oath the swearer agrees to impart instruction to his sons, the sons of his teacher, and to pupils who have taken the oath, but to no one else. Heraclitus: cf. 3, 35: Heraclitus ... quid diceret quod intellegi noluit\ Fin. 2, 15 (quoted on ñeque tu me celas, above). For numerous Greek and Latin references to his obscurity (perhaps first in [Aristot.] De Mundo, 5, 396b 20) cf. Pease on Div. 2, 133, n. (Heraclitus obscurus), to which add: Timon ap. Diog. L. 9, 6; Vitr. 2, 2, 1; Sen. Ep. 12, 7; Theon, Progvmn.

(Rhet. Gr. 2, 82 Spengel); Tatian, Or. ad Gr. 3 ; Sext. Emp. Adv. Gram. 301 ; Philostr. Vit. Apoll. 1, 9; Hippol. Philosophum. 9, 3; 9, 5; Solin. 40, 6; Tert. De An. 2; Chalcid. in Tim. 320; Eus. Pr. Ev. 10, 14, 15; Chron. Ol. 81, 1-3 (Vorsokrat. 1, no. 19, A 3; cf. no. 46 A 4); Themist. Or. 12, p. 159b; Cyril. Alex. C. Iulian. 1, p. 13 (Patr. Gr. 76, 522); Hier. Adv. lovin. 1, 1; Adv. Ruf. 1, 30; Chron. ann. Abr. 1561; Prob, in Virg. Eel. 6, 31, p. 344 Hägen; Proci, in Tim. 2, p. 106d (p. 351 Diehl); Simplic. in Phys. 1, 2, p. 50, 23 Diels; p. 77, 31-32; 3, 4, p. 453, 28-30; Elias in Porphyr. I sag. 16, p. 42, 2 Busse; David in Porphyr. Isag. 3, p. 105, 12-13 Busse; Stob. vol. 3, 151 Hense; Etym. M. s.v. βιός; Eustath. in II. 1, 49; in Od. 4, 450; J. Bernays, Ges. Abbondi. 1 (1885), 48, n. 2; J. Adam, Relig. Teachers of Greece (1908), 214-215; E. Wellmann in P.-IF. 8 (1913), 505. H. Diels, Herakleitos von Ephesos (1901), iii, finds his obscurity one of form rather then of matter, and Demetrius, De Eloc. 192, thinks it largely due to the loose structure of his sentences: άδηλος γαρ ή έκαστου κώλου άρχή διά τήν λύσιν, ώσπερ τό Ηρακλείτου· καί γαρ ταύτα σκοτεινά ποιεί τό πλείστον ή λύσις. Yet at times his oracular style seems the cause; cf. Plut. De Pyth. Orac. 6, p. 397a; Diog. L. 9, 6 (of his Περί φύσεως): άνέθηκε δ' αύτό εις το της 'Αρτέμιδος ιερόν, ώς μέν τίνες, έπιτηδεύσας άσαφέστερον γράψαι, δπως οί δυνάμενοι προσίοιεν αύτω καί μή έκ του δημώδους εύκαταφρόνητον ή. His proverbial title of ó σκοτεινός was applied also to a later namesake; cf. P.-W. 4 Supplbd. (1924), 730-731. quod inter nos liceat: cf. 1, 79: pace mihi liceat, caelestes, dicere vestra\ Att. 2, 4, 1 : quod inter nos liceat dicere·, Plaut. Poen. 440: quod hie inter nos liceat·, also 1, 59, n. (bona venia me audies). The mss here read liqueat {liceat being an emendation of Victorius), which R. Klotz {Adnot. crit. ad M.T.C.Lib. de N.D. 1, 2

390 27 75 Ulud video 1 pugnare te, species 2 ut quaedam sit deorum, quae nihil concreti habeat, nihil solidi, nihil expressi, nihil eminentis, sitque pura, levis, perlucida. Dicemus igitur idem quod in Venere Coa; 3 corpus illud 4 non est sed simile corporis,5 nec ille 4

1 uide A1 illud om. F

2 5

species] Hie deficit Ρ corporis] corpori BiFM,

(1868), 8) and J. S. Reid (ap. Mayor, ad loc.) would retain, in contrast to the preceding celas and occulte. The passages above cited, however, support the emendation, which makes much better sense. 75 illud . . . pugnare . . . ut: cf. 1, 62 : non pugno ; 3, 3 : Epicurus ... de dis ... non magnopere pugnare·, Pro Sex. Rose. 8 : hoc solum ... pugnatur ut; Pro Lig. 13: id ne impetremus pugnabis·, Fam. 3, 10, 3: illud pugna et enitere ne; Lucr. 5, 729: quod pugnat uterque. ut quaedam sit: a brachylogy for ut species quaedam esse existimetur; cf. 1, 21, η. {ut fuerit). nihil . . . nihil nihil . . . nihil: Cicero likes repetitions of nihil ; for cases of its use twice see 1, 51 ; 2, 39; 2, 104; 3, 30; thrice: 1, 92; 2, 18; 3, 23; four times (as here): Τ use. 4, 61; O f f . 1, 151; six times: 2, 47. J. Degenhart (Krit.exeg. Bemerk, χ. Cíe. Sehr, de Nat. Deor. (1881), 37-38) notes that the Epicureans, following the example of Epicurus himself (Diog. L. 10, 123), describe God largely in negative terms. concreti: cf. 1, 71, η. (concretionem). The word probably does not contrast strongly with solidi (G. F. Schoemann, Opuse, acad. 4 (1871), 342), but both denote bodies in three dimensions as opposed to drawings or paintings, and both emphasize the substance of στερέμνια (1, 49), as opposed to mere surfaces which the words expressi and eminentis describe. Cicero (Div. 2, 40) mentions these gods as being perlucidos et perflabilis [see Pease's n. for parallels]. Cf. Tuse. 3, 3: consectaturque nullam eminentem effigiem virtutis, sed adumbratam imaginem gloriae; O f f . 3, 69: iustitiae solidam et expressam effigiem nullam tenemus, umbra et imaginibus utimur. expressi . . . eminentis: the one used

3 coa del. D, choa O, om. corpore Β1

NBFM

of incised or stamped forms (cf. Pro Cael. 12: non expressa signa sed adumbrata), the other of objects standing out in relief and breaking a general line of surface, as in 2, 47: nihil eminens, nihil lacunosum\ cf. είσοχαί and έξοχαί, as in Strab. 2, 5, 22; or intaglio and cameo. The contrast of eminentia and umbrae— foreground and background painting, as in Ac. 2, 20, which Reid (on that passage and also ap. Mayor on our passage) suggests, seems hardly in place here as applied to solid objects. With the general thought cf. also 1, 105: nec habent ullam soliditatem nec eminentiam. On the genitive eminentis cf. H. Sjögren, Comment. Tullían. (1910), 147. sitque: -que is here adversative; cf. 2, 56: contraque·, also atque in 3, 84. pura levis perlucida: "unmixed, volatile, transparent;" cf. Div. 2, 40: perlucidos et perflabilis. dicemus . . . idem quod in: cf. De Or. 2, 248 : quod idem in bono servo dici solet. in Venere: cf. Tuse. 1, 88: dici autem hoc in te satis subtiliter non potest. Somewhat analogous uses of in are cited by Goethe in 1, 71 (1, 120) : in natura deorum; 2, 67 : in ea dea; 2,123 : in araneolis; 2,124: admiratio ... in bestiis; 3, 18: in domo pulchra; 3, 83: in eo etiam cavillatus est; 3, 87: in virtute recte gloriamur. Venere Coa: cf. Div. 1, 23: aspersa temere pigmenta in tabula oris liniamenta e f ficere possunt ; num etiam Veneris Coae pulchritudinem e f f i c i posse aspersione fortuita putas; Orat. 5: non potuerunt ... Coae Veneris pulchritudinem imi tari; 2 Verr. 4, 135 : quid arbitramini Reginos ... merere velie ut ab iis marmorea Venus illa auferaturì ... quid ut pictam Coos; O f f . 3, 10: ut nemo pictor esset inventus qui in Coa Venere earn partem quam Apelles incohatam reliquisset ahsolveret—oris enim pulchritudo

391

fusus et candore mixtus rubor sanguis est 1 sed quaedam sanguinis 2 1

sanguis non est O

2

sanguinis] sanguis H 1

reliqui corporis imitandi spem auferebat— sic, etc.·, Fam. 1, 9, 15: Apelles Veneris caput et summa pectoris politissima arte perfecit, reliquam partem corporis incohatam reliquit·, Att. 2, 21, 4; Strab. 14, 2, 19: έν τω προαστείω [at Cos] το 'Ασκληπιέ ιόν έστι . . . πολλών άναθημάτων μεστόν, έν οίς έστί καΐ ó Άπελλοΰ 'Αντίγονος. ήν δέ καΐ ή άναδυομένη 'Αφροδίτη, ή νϋν άνάκειται τφ θεω Καίσαρι έν "Ρώμη, τοϋ Σεβαστού άναθέντος τω πατρί τήν άρχηγέτιν τοϋ γένους αύτοϋ· φασί δέ τοις Κψοις άντί της γραφής έκατόν ταλάντων άφεσιν γενέσθαι τοϋ προσταχθέντος φόρου; Aetna, 593; Prop. 3, 9, 11 : in Veneris tabula summam sibi poscit Apelles-, Ον. Am. 1, 14, 33-34; Ars am. 3, 401-402 : si Venerem Cous nusquam posuisset Apelles, / mersa sub aequoreis ilia lateret aquis; Tr. 2, 527-528; Ex Pont. 4, 1, 29-30: ut Venus artificis labor est et gloria Coi, / aequoreo madidas quae premit imbre comas·, Plin. N.H. 35, 9192 : Venerem exeuntem e mari divus Augustus dicavit in delubro patris Caesaris, quae anadyomene vacatur, versibus Graecis tali opere dum laudatur victo sed inlustrato, cuius inferiorem partem corruptam qui reficeret non potuit reperiri verum ipsa iniuria cessit in gloriam artificis. consenuit haec tabula carie, aliamque pro ea substituit Nero principato suo Dorothei manu. Apelles incohaverat et aliam Venerem Coi, superaturusfamam illam suam priorem ; invidit mors peracta parte nec qui succederei operi ad praescripta liniamenta inventus est-, Suet. Vesp. 18; also several epigrams describing the picture in Append. Planud. nos. 178-182 (with which cf. [Auson.] Epigr. 8, p. 423 Peiper); Choric. Gaz. p. 130 Boissonade; A. Rei nach, Recueil Milliet: Textes gr. et lat. relatifs à Γhist, de la peinture anc. 1 (1921), 332-339, who at 339, n. 0 gives some additional less certain references; cf. E. Pfuhl, Malerei u. Zeichnung der Gr. 2 (1923), 744-745. This painting was not brought to Rome till about 30 B.C. (Reinach, op. cit., 333, n. 2), and we have no definite allusion to any visit of Cicero to Cos. Yet in 50 B.C., as he was return-

ing from Cilicia, he intended {Att. 6, 7, 2) to visit Rhodes and go as directly as possible from there to Athens. The etesian winds, however, long delayed him, as he says (Att. 6, 8, 4) in a letter written from Ephesus. On the way from Rhodes to Ephesus he could hardly have failed to pass directly by Cos, and thus it seems likely that he may have seen the famous picture, which he here and in the De Divinatione takes as a type of the art of painting. Yet as early as the Verrines (see above) he had known of its reputation, and he may also have heard of it through P. Rutilius Rufus (cf. O f f . 3 , 1 0 ; Reinach, op. cit. 341, n. 2). Vellerns had said nothing corresponding to expressi, eminentis, pura, levis, perlucida, or the Coan Venus, and Cicero here probably follows the criticisms of Carneades; cf. R. Philippson in Sjmb. Osloenses, 20 (1940), 29-30. simile corporis: cf. Aristot. Categ. 1, la 1-3: ομώνυμα λέγεται ών δνομα μόνον κοινόν, ό δέ κατά τοΰνομα λόγος της ούσίας έτερος, οίον ζωον δ τε άνθρωπος και το γεγραμμένον; Firm. Mathes. 3, 6, 26: sicut enim in imaginibus artifex liniamenta membrorum ex varia mixturarum diversitate persignat et temperatis coloribus certam corporis formam imitatione facit similitudinis corporalis, sic, etc. ; Sulp. Sev. Chron. 2, 40, 2 [distinguishing όμοούσιον and όμοιούσιον] : ut verbi gratia pictura humant corporis esset homini similis, nec tarnen haberet hominis veritatem; Porphyr, in Categ. p. 66, 26-28 Busse; Ammon. in Categ. 1, p. 21, 5-7 Busse; Themist. in Parva Natur, p. 6, 10 Wendland: οίον γαρ το έν πίνακι γεγραμμένον ζωον καΐ ζφόν έστι και είκών ; Simplic.in Categ. 1, p. 34, 8 Kalbfleisch : τό γαρ γεγραμμένον ζφον ζωον καί ού ζωόν έστιν. candore mixtus rubor: a description of the method of securing flesh color. Older classical painting—and this includes Apelles—employed four principal colors (black, white, red, and yellow) and mixtures of these ; cf. G. Lippold in P.-W. 14 (1928), 892-893. For passages

392

simiütudo; sic 1 in Epicureo 2 deo non rem sed similitudinem esse rerum. Fac id, 3 quod ne intellegi quidem potest, mihi esse persuasum; cedo mihi istorum adumbratorum deorum liniamenta atque 1

sic] si M1

2

epicuro D

3

fac id] fac O, facio B1F, facito M

in Latin poets describing the mixture of white and red in the human complexion—chiefly in that of young women—, cf. H. Blümner in Beri. Stud. f . cl. Philol. 13, 3 (1892), 160. sic, etc.: Mayor well remarks that the shift from direct to indirect discourse marks the difference between the actual description of the Coan Venus and the imaginary description of the Epicurean God. rem: "reality." similitudines: R. Philippson (in Hermes, 51 (1916), 592, n. 1) suggests that this term may render the Epicurean όμοια; but it hardly seems necessary to assume more than an expression of unreality, contrasting with res. fac: "suppose," i.e., for the sake of argument; for this use with an accusative and infinitive cf. 1, 107: fac imagines esse·, 3, 93: fac in puero re ferre·, Div. 2, 99; 2, 106; Ac. fr. 20; Fin. 2, 85; Τ use. 1, 82 (bis); 2, 52; 3, 40; O f f . 2, 71; 3, 117. cedo: cf. Div. 2, 146; Fin. 2, 25; Rep. 1, 58; Sen. 20; and 18 times in the orations, more often in the earlier than in the later (L. Laurand, Études sur le style des discours de Cic. (1907), 279); in the Letters only Fam. 4, 5, 3 (and there by emendation). In such a challenge for the furnishing of evidence it is found in 2 Verr. 1, 109; Pro Sest. 108; Brut. 295. adumbratorum: the reference above to the mixture of red and white pigments might suggest that this word is here used of shading (σκιαγραφία), introduced in the fifth century B.C. by Apollodorus (cf. O. Rossbach in P.-W. 1 (1899), 2897; G. Lippold in P.-W. 5 Supplbd. (1930), 980), for which see Plut. De Glor. Athen. 2: 'Απολλόδωρος ó ζωγράφος, άνθρώπων πρώτος έξευρών φθοράν καΐ άπόχρωσιν σκιάς, 'Αθηναίος ήν. Yet the general sense of this passage

and of 1, 123, which seem to refer to sketchy and incomplete rather than finished treatments, and the reference in 2, 59, to Epicurus's monogrammes deos (and n. on monogrammes; with which cf. Non. ρ. 37 M. ( p. 53 L.) : monogrammi dicti sunt homines macie pertenues ac decolores ; tractum a pictura, quae priusquam coloribus corporatur, umbrafingitur; Lucilius lib. II: vix vivo homim ac monogrammo ; et XXVI: quae pietas? monogrammi quinqué adducti pietatem vocant-, Dio Chrys. Or. 12, 44; Iambi. Protr. 8; 13; Philostr. Vit. Soph. 2, 11; Method. Sim. et Ann. 5; Liban. Or. 18, 122; Eus. Pr. Εν. 14, 27: κενάς αύτοΐς άνυποστάτων θεών τερατευσάμενος έζωγράφησε σκιάς [sc. Επίκουρος]; also the use of περιγραφή in Plat. Polit. 277b; Athenag. Leg. pro Christ. 14; H. Blümner, Technol. u. Termino!, d. Gewerbe u. Künste bei Gr. ». Römern, 4 (1887), 421) fit better with the notion of a silhouette or a sketch in outline, for which cf. Plin. N.H. 35, 15: Graeci autem alii Sicyone, alii apud Corinthios repertam [sc. picturam esse adfirmant], omnes umbra hominis lineis circumducta; itaque primam talem, secundam singulis coloribus et monochromaton dictam, etc. ; Quintil. Inst. 10, 2, 7: non esset pictura, nisi quae lineas modo extremas umbrae, quam corpora in sole fecissent, circumscriberet·, 7, 10, 9: quis pictor omnia quae in rerum natura sunt adumbrare didicit; Val. Max. 8, 11, ext. 7: quod ars adumbrare non valuit casus imitatus est-, Hier. In Zach. 1, pp. 817-818 Vail.: haec quasi umbras quasdam et lineas futurae imaginis duximus, ut quod reliquum est suis coloribus impleamus·, though Blümner {op. cit., 424, n. 3), while granting that adumbrare may express the notion of incompleteness, does not think it merely an outlining, but believes that it implies some shading as well. From the artistic uses the expressions adumbratio, σκια-

393 formas. 76 Non deest hoc loco copia rationum quibus docere 1 velitis 2 humanas 3 esse formas 4 deorum; primum quod ita sit informatum 5 anticipatimi < que > 6 mentibus nostris ut homini, cum de deo cogitet, forma occurrat 7 humana; deinde cum,8 quoniam rebus omnibus excellât natura divina, forma quoque esse pulcherrima debeat, nec esse 9 humana ullam pulchriorem; tertiam rationem adfertis,10 quod nulla in 11 alia figura domicilium mentis 1 dicere M 2 uellitis A 3 humana H 2 8 dett. Rom. deorum patrum mentibus Ν Pl., ut ACNOBFM, quod dett. Walk., Hein. 11 in om. possit AC NOB2 ACNO

γράφημα, etc., come to be used metaphorically, as here, of things partially or vaguely sketched in the mind or in discourse; e.g., Tusc. 3, 3: est enim gloria solida quaedam res et expressa, non adumbrata-, Legg. 1, 59: quasi adumbratas intellegentias animo ac mente conceperit·, Fin. 5, 61; 5, 69; Am. 97: rebus fictis et adumbratis·, De Or. 2, 194; 3, 16; Orat. 43; 103: si non perfectio, at conatus tarnen atque adumbratio\ 2 Verr. 3, 77: Aeschrio, Pipae vir adumbratus·, Lucr. 4, 362-363: non tarnen ut coram quae sunt vereque rotunda, / sed quasi adumbratim paulum simulata videntur·, Plut. Pomp. 31,6; Diog. Oenoand. p. 12 William: κενά μέν ούν κιαγραφήματα της διανοίας ουκ έστι τά φάσματα, ώς άξιουσιν οί Στωικοί; Marin. Vit. Proci. 22, p. 53 Fabric. : μυθικοΐς πλάσμασιν έπισκιαζομένην ; Hier. Ερ. 60, 7, 3 : cernas adumbrata, non expressa, signa virtutum\ Amnion. in Porphyr. I sag. p. 55, 3-5 Busse; Olympiod. in Meteor. 1, 1, p. 13, 22 Stiive: μη έν σκιαγραφία. liniamenta: cf. 1, 47: quae conformatio liniamentorum·, 1, 80: num etiam una est omnium facies·, 1, 98: modo liniamenta maneant·, 1, 123: ut homunculi similem deum fingeret, liniamentis dumtaxat extremis non habitu solido. formas: of the human shape of the gods, while liniamenta applies only to their facial features. 76 non deest: sections 76-102 refute the Epicurean doctrine of divine anthropomorphism as set forth by Velleius

4 9

6 informata forma H 1 7 occurret BF1 8 cum 10 adfertis necesse DB

in 1, 46-48; Balbus in 2, 45 recognizes the refutation as adequate. hoc loco: cf. 1, 13: quo ... loco. primum quod: cf. 1, 46: a natura habemus omnes ... speciem nullam aliam nisi bumanam deorum ; quae enim forma occurrit umquam aut vigilanti cuiquam aut dormienti? anticipatum: cf. 1, 43: anteceptam animo rei quandam informationem. deinde cum: cf. 1, 47: cum praestantissumam naturam ... convenire videatur eandem esse pulcherrimam·, Plasberg has on the strength of this passage proposed cum in the present sentence for ut of AB and quod of the deteriores. nec esse . . . pulchriorem: a loosely parenthetic infinitive clause: " there is no form handsomer than the human." Goethe remarks that making this clause independent of the causal conjunction gives it greater weight. tertiam rationem: cf. 1, 48: nec ratio usquam inesse nisi in hominis figura. The variation of introductory expressions is to be noted : primum quod . .. deinde cum ... tertiam rationem adfertis. adfertis: i.e., you Epicureans adduce; cf. vestro in 1, 77. nulla in a l i a . . . domicilium: ACNO and some editors omit in, but Plasberg well compares Post Red. in Sen. 17: in qua urbe domicilium·, In Pison. 76: domicilium in auribus; Rep. 1, 47: nulla alia in civitate ... domicilium libertas habet-, Fam. 16,17,1 : domicilium ... est in officio. domicilium mentis: cf. 1, 99: haec sunt domicilia vitae.

394 esse possit.1 77 Primum igitur quidque considera 2 quale sit; ampere enim mihi videmini 3 quasi vestro iure rem nullo modo probabilem. [omnium]4 Quis tam caecus in contemplandis rebus umquam fuit ut non videret species istas hominum conlatas in deos5 aut Consilio quodam sapientium, quo facilius ánimos impe3

1 possit om. ACNO uidemini mihi M

4

2 quicquid consideras CNO, quidquid consideras A 5 deo O [omnium] del. Clark, Desc. of Manuscr. 361-362

77 primum igitur quidque: AC here read quidquid (by an archaic use several times found in Lucretius; cf. Munro on Lucr. 1, 389), but the phrase primum quidque ("each in turn" or "each as it comes to the front") is well defended by Madvig on Fin. 2, 105; cf. 3, 7, below: primum quidque videamus·, Div. 1, 127; Ac. 2, 49 (and Reid's note); F am. 10, 12a, 3; 12, 1, 1: primum quidque explicemus. considera quale sit: cf. 2, 45: restât ut qualis eorum natura sit consideremus. arripere: of hasty or violent seizure, and stronger than sumpsisti (1, 89); cf. 2, 18: arripuit (and 3, 27); 2, 162: quod uterque vestrum arripiet fartasse ad reprehendendum·, 3, 89; Fin. 3, 14: aliquid ... ex mea brevi responsione arripere cupienti non respondebo·, Pro Mur. 13; 62: hoc homo ingeniosissimus . . . adripuit, neque disputandi causa ; De Or. 2,214: argumentum simul atque positum est adripitur\ 2, 255: in altercatione adripitur ab adversario verbum et ... in eum ipsum aliquid qui lacessivit infligitur. So corripere (e.g., Lucr. 5, 247), and, in Greek, συναρπάζειν, as in Sext. Emp. Pyrrhon. 1, 90 [of begging the question]; Adv. Log. 2, 364. videmini: you Epicureans; cf. adfertis in 1, 76. vestro iure: cf. De Or. 1, 41 : quasi tuo iure sumpsisti ; O f f . 1, 2: videor id meo iure . .. vindicare ; Phil. 8, 20 : iure hoc meo dico. On the arrogance of the Epicureans cf. 1, 18. [omnium]: this word is here very awkward, and though Davi es retains it, comparing Pro Cluent. 55; Orat. 172; and Sail. Jug. 4, 7, yet the order there is not omnium quis but quis omnium. Plasberg and Ax insert primum before it (com-

paring In Catil. 2, 19), but this creates the new difficulty of two successive sentences beginning with primum, which is both clumsy and confusing. It is somewhat easier, with Baiter and various subsequent editors, to emend omnium to omnino, which results in reasonable sense; for the initial position of omnino cf. 2, 3; Div. 1, 89; Fat. 45; and many other Ciceronian instances. But the most probable view seems that of A. C. Clark, The Descent of Manuscripts (1918), 361-362, who considers omnium as a wrongly inserted variant for hominum, just below. I have therefore bracketed it. Consilio quodam sapientium: cf. 1, 118: qui dixerunt to tam de dis inmortalibus opinionem fictam esse ab hominibus sapientibus rei publicae causa ut quos ratio non posset eos ad officium religio ducerei ; Div. 1, 105: sapienter aiebant ad opinionem imperitorum esse fictas religiones·, 1, 107; 2, 70 : retinetur autem et ad opinionem vulgi et ad magnas utilitates rei publicae mos, religio, disciplina, tus augurium, collegii auctoritas; Plat. Legg. 10, 889e: θεούς . . . είναι πρώτόν φασιν ούτοι τέχνη, ού φύσει άλλά τισι νόμοις ; Aristot. Metaph. 11, 8, 1074 b 3-7: τά δέ λοιπά μυθικώς ήδη προσήκται πρός τήν πειθώ των πολλών καί προς τήν εις τους νόμους καΐ τό συμφέρον χρήσιν · άνθρωποειδεϊς τε γάρ τούτους καί των άλλων ζφων ομοίους τισΐ λέγουσι; Ον. Ars am. 1, 637: expedit esse deos, et, ut expedit, esse putemus·, Philo, De Somniis, 1, 237: άγαπητόν γάρ, έάν τω διά τούτων έπικρεμασθέντι φόßcp σωφρονισθήναι δυνηθώσι; Dio Chrys. Or. 12, 40: λέγω δέ τοϋ μέν έκουσίου καί παραμυθίας έχομένην τήν των ποιητών, τοϋ δέ αναγκαίου καί προτάξεως τήν των νομοθετών; 12, 43; 12, 44: τριών δή

395 ritorum 1 ad deorum cultum a 2 yitae pravitate converterent,3 aut superstitione, ut essent simulacra quae venerantes deos ipsos se adire4 crederent. Auxerunt autem 5 haec eadem poetae, pictores, 1 imperatorum OB1 2 a om. D 6 autem om. D audire H

προεκκειμένων γενέσεων της δαιμονίου παρ' άνθρώποις ύπολήψεως, έμφύτου, ποιητικής, νομικής, τετάρτην φώμεν τήν πλαστικήν τε καΐ δημιουργικήν των περί τά θεία αγάλματα καΐ τάς εικόνας; Max. Tyr. 2, 2: δοκοϋσιν δή μοι καί οί νομοθέται, καθάπερ τινί παίδων άγέλη, έξευρεϊν τοις άνθρώποις ταυτί τά άγάλματα, σημεία της πρός τό θείον τιμής, καί ώσπερ χειραγωγίαν τινά καί όδόν πρός άνάμνησιν; Min. Fei. 23, 9; Alex. Aphrod. in Metaph. a 3, p. 167, 15-19 Hayduck. quo . . . ánimos . . . converterent: for convertere animum cf. De Or. 1, 8; 2, 200; Brut. 321; Orai. 138; Pro Mil. 34; Catull. 62, 17; for the idea, cf. CritiaS, Sisypbus, fr. 1, 12-15 Nauck (ap. Sext. Emp. Adv. Phys. 1, 54): πυκνός τις καί σοφός γνώμην άνήρ / γνώναι θεούς θνητοισιν έξευρεϊν, 8πως / εϊη τι δεϊμα τοις κακοισι, καν λάθρα / πράσσωσιν ή λέγωσιν ή φρονώσί ; id., 37-40: τοίους πέριξ ^στησεν άνθρώποις φόβους / δεινούς καλώς τε τω λόγω κατφκισεν / τόν δαίμονα καί έν πρέποντι χωρίω, / τήν άνομίαν τε τοις φόβοις κατέσβεσεν; Polyb. 16, 12, 9: όσα μέν οδν συντείνει πρός το διασφζειν τήν του πλήθους εΰσέβειαν προς τό θείον, δοτέον έστί συγγνώμην ένίοις των συγγραφέων τερατευομένοις καί λογοποιοΰσι περί τά τοιαύτα; Liv. 1, 19, 4:] ne luxuriarent otio animi omnium primum rem ad multitudinem imperitam et illis saeculis rudem efficacissimam, deorum metum iniciendum ratus est [se. Numa] ; 6,1,10: quae autem ad sacra pertinebant, a pontificibus maxime, ut religione obstrictos haberent multitudinis ánimos, suppressa; Dion. Hal. Antiq. 2, 61, 1: φασίν ύπό τοϋ Νόμα τόν περί τής 'Ηγερίας λόγον, ϊνα ραον αύτω προσέχωσιν οί τά θεια δεδιότες καί προθύμως δέχωνται τούς ύπ' αΰτοϋ τιθεμένους νόμους, ώς παρά θεών κομιζομένους; Sen. N.Q.

3

cum uerterent Β 1

1

ad id re A 1 ,

2, 42, 3 : ad coercendos imperitorum ánimos sapientissimi viri iudicaverunt inevitabilem metum, ut aliquid supra nos timeremus; utile erat in tanta audacia scelerum esse adversus quod nemo sibi satis potens videre tur ; ad conterrendos itaque eos quibus innocentia nisi metu non placet, posuerunt supra caput vindicem et quidem armatum ; Petron. fr. 27 Bücheler ( = Anth. Lat. 1, no. 466, 1 Riese; the phrase repeated by Stat. Theb. 3, 661; cf. Quintil. Inst. 12, 7, 2; Arr. Epict. 2, 20, 22: IV οί πολϊται ήμών έπιστραφέντες τιμώσι τό θείον καί παύσωνταί ποτε ¡ίιαθυμοϋντες περί τά μέγιστα ;Serv. Aen. 2, 715): primus in orbe deos fecit timor·, Oxyrh. Pap. 2, no. 215, col. II, 25-28: κ1 γαρ οϊται δεϊν α δεδοικέναι τιμαν τ ϊνα κατεχόοι τω φ μή έπίθται αύτοϊς; Athenag. Leg. pro Christ. 1 : τό δέ οίς έκαστος βούλεται χρήσθαι ώς θεοϊς, άναγκαϊον ϊνα τω πρός τό θείον δέει άπέχωνται τοϋ άδικεϊν; A . D . Nock in Pisciculi F. J. Dölger dargeboten (1939), 175, n. 57. In some of the passages cited above fear may have been originally instinctive, but later it is (perhaps less probably) thought of as adapted by statesmen to insure social order and justice. In many instances it means an anxiety for correct dealings with the gods; cf. L. Gueuning in Nova et Vetera, 7 (1925), 235 and nn. 5 and 8. On the whole subject of fear as the origin of belief in the gods cf. G. Heuten in Latomus, 1 (1937), 3-8. ut essent simulacra: but the existence oftheriolatry,asinEgypt, makes against this argument. deos ipsos se adire: cf. Legg. 2, 26: est enim quaedam opinione species deorum in oculis, non solum in mentibus; In Caecil. 3: aiebant ... sese iam ne deos quidem in suis urbibus ad quos confugerent habere, quod eorum simulacra sanctissima C. Verres ex

396

opifices ; erat enim non facile agentis aliquid et molientis deos in aliarum formarum imitatione servare. delubris religiosissimis sustulisset; 2 1/err. 4, 108: tanta enim erat auctoritas et vetustas illius religionis ut, cum illuc irent, non ad aedem Cereris sed ad ipsam Cererem proficisci viderentur·, Plat. Legg. 11, 931a: τούς μέν γάρ των θεών όρώντες σαφώς τιμώμεν, τών 8' εικόνας άγάλματα 18ρυσάμενοι, ούς ήμΐν άγάλλουσι καίπερ άψύχους οντάς έκείνους ήγούμεθα τούς έμψύχους θεούς πολλήν 8là ταϋτ' ευνοιαν και χάριν Ιχειν ; Dio Chrys. Or. 12, 60: ταϋτα μέν γάρ ξύμπαντα δ γε νουν £χων σέβει, θεούς ήγούμενος μακαρίους μακρόθεν όρών· διά 8έ την προς τό δαιμόνιον γνώμην [όρμήν Wilamowitz] ισχυρός έρως πασιν άνθρώποις έγγύθεν τιμαν καΐ θεραπεύειν τδ θείον, προσιόντας και άπτομένους μετά πειθούς, θύοντας καΐ στεφανοϋντας ; Max. Tyr. 2, 2: ούτως άμέλει καΐ τη τοϋ θείου φύσει δει μέν ούδέν άγαλμάτων ούδέ ιδρυμάτων, άλλά άσθενές 6ν κομιδη τό άνθρώπειον, καί διεστός του θείου δσον ούρανός γης, σημεία ταϋτα έμηχανήσατο, έν οΐς άποθήσεται τά τών θεών ονόματα καί τάς φήμας αύτών, κτλ. ; Athenag. Leg. pro Christ. 18; Orig. C. Cels. 7, 44: τίς γάρ νοΰν εχων ού καταγελάσεται του μετά τούς τηλικούτους καί τοσούτους έν φιλοσοφία περί θεοϋ ή θεών λόγους, ένορώντος τοις άγάλμασι καί ήτοι αύτοϊς άναπέμποντος την εύχήν, ή διά της τούτων 8ψεως, έφ' δν φαντάζεται δεϊν άναβαίνειν άπό του βλεπομένου καί συμβόλου οντος, άναφέροντός τε έπί τον νοούμενον ; Arnob. 6, 4: sed non, inquit, idcirco adtribuimus dits templa tamquam umidos ab his imbres ventos pluvias arceamus aut soles, sed ut eos possimus coram et comminus contueri, adfari de proximo et cum praesentibus quodammodo venerationum conloquia miscere·, 6, 24: dicere simulacrorum adsertores soient non ignorasse antiques nihil habere numinis signa ñeque ullum omnino inesse his sensum, sed propter indomitum atque inperitum vulgus ... salutariter ea consilioque formasse ut velut quadam specie obiecta his numinum abicerent asperitatem metu arbitratique praesentibus sese sub dis agere facta impia deputarent et ad

humana of fida morum immutatione transirent·, Julian, Ad Sacerd. 293a-b: μετά τίνος άποβλέπων είς τά ιερά τών θεών καί τά άγάλματα τιμής καί όσιότητος, σεβόμενος ώσπερ αν εί παρόντας έώρα τούς θεούς, άγάλματα γάρ καί βωμούς . . . καί πάντα άπλώς τά τοιαύτα σύμβολα οί πατέρες εθεντο της παρουσίας τών θεών, ούχ ϊνα έκεϊνα θεούς νομίσωμεν άλλ' 'ίνα δι' αύτών τούς θεούς θεραπεύσωμεν; Anth. Pal. 1, 33, 1-2; 1, 34, 3-4 [of a Christian image]: βροτός εικόνα λεύσσων / θυμόν άπιθύνει κρέσσονι φαντασίη; Α. Β. Cook, Zeus, 3, part 1 (1940), 831 ; 962. Protests against the idolatrous use of images were naturally made, both by pagans and by Jews or Christians, sometimes in sarcastic or cynical form (e.g., Hor. S. 1, 8, 2-3; with which cf. Wisdom of Solomon, 15, 4-8; 15, 16-17), sometimes in more philosophic terms; e.g., by Zeno, in S.V.F. 1, no. 264; Varrò ap. Aug. C.D. 4, 31 [in praise of early Roman aniconic worship]; Plut. De Superst. 6, p. 167d; De Is. et Os. 71, p. 379c: Ελλήνων ot τά χαλκά καί τά γραπτά καί λίθινα μή μαθόντες μηδ' έθισθέντες άγάλματα καί τιμάς θεών άλλά θεούς καλεϊν. Max. Tyr. 2 is on the topic εί θεοΐς άγάλματα ίδρυτέον. On the whole subject cf. W. W. Fowler, Rei. Exp. of the Rom. People (1911), 354-355, n. 12; B. yon Borries, Quid veteres Philosophi de Idololatria senserint (1918); E. Bevan, Holy Images (1940). poetae: their influence had been already discussed by Velleius in 1, 42, to which Cotta here makes no reference —probably an indication of the use of a different source incompletely assimilated by Cicero with that of 1, 42. pictores, opifices: cf. Philo, De special. Leg. 1, 29: ού μην άλλά καί πλαστικήν καί ζωγραφίαν συνεργούς της άπάτης προσπαρέλαβον, ϊνα χρωμάτων καί σχημάτων καί ποιοτήτων εύ δεδημιουργημέναις ίδέαις ύπαγάγωνται τούς ορώντας, κτλ.; Quintil. Inst. 12, 10, 9 [of Phidias's Olympian Zeus] : cuius pulchritudo adiecisse aliquid etiam receptae re-

397

Accessit etiam ista opinio fortasse, quod homini homine pulchrius nihil 1 videatur. Sed tu 2 hoc, physice, non vides, quam blanda 3 conciliatrix et quasi 4 sui sit lena 5 natura? An putas 1 nihil] mihi A 1 2 tu] in Ό 6 lenis a F, lenis B'M ACNBM

ligioni vide tur; adeo maies tas operis deum aequavit; Joseph. C. Ap. 2, 252: πολλής δέ καΐ ζωγράφοι καΐ πλάσται της είς τούτο παρά των Ελλήνων άπέλαυσαν έξουσίας, αύτός έκαστος τινα μορφήν έπινοών, ό μέν έκ πηλοϋ πλάττων, 6 δέ γράφων; Wisdom of Solomon, 14, 18-21 (18: "Also the singular diligence of the artificer did help to set forward the ignorant to more superstition"); Clem. Protr. 4, 47, 1; Arnob. 6, 12: ut in deorum corporibus lasciviae artificum luderent darentque his formas quae cuilibet tristi possent esse derisui-, Lact. Inst. 1, 11, 5; 1, 11, 26: nisi forte non tantum poetae sed pictores etiam fictoresque imaginum mentiuntur·, Philostr. Vit. Apoll. 8, 7, 7: φησί μέν οδν καΐ τό είδος αύτό θεω έοικέναι, ώς άγαλματοποιία ερμηνεύει καΐ χρώματα ; Ο. Gruppe, Gr. Myth. u. Relig. 2 (1906), 972-978. J. G. Frazer (iGolden Bough3,5 (1914), 54, n. 1) speculates upon the effects of music and other arts upon ideas of the gods. erat enim non facile: cf. Philo, De Somniis, 1, 236: είσΐ γάρ τίνες άμβλεΐς πάνυ τάς φύσεις, ώς μή δύνασθαι θεόν άνευ σώματος έπινοήσαι τό παράπαν; Α. C. Schlesinger in Cl. Journ. 32 (1936), 19-20, on Homer's inability to make the gods act unless they possessed human forms. Cf. men's feeling toward the spirits of the dead, in Tuse. 1, 37: ánimos enim per se ipsos viventis non poterant mente complecti ; formam aliquam figuramque quaerebant. inde Homeri tota νέκυια, etc.·, 1, 50-51; also what Prudent. Apoth. 863-866 says of ascribing human form to God. agentis . . . et molientis: cf. 1, 2: nihil agant, nihil moliantur·, 2, 59: ea quae agant molientium. The two verbs seem here nearly synonymous. accessit: the refutation of the second argument for anthropomorphism, based on human beauty, extends from here through 1, 80.

3

blande A

1

quasi dett. Aid., quam

homini homine pulchrius nihil: with the polyptoton of homo cf. 3, 11: homines homine·, Rep. 3, 23; Fin. 2, 45 (and Reid's note) ; 3, 68 ; O f f . 2,11 ; 2, 21 ; 3, 21 ; 3, 27 ; 3, 28 ; Pro Mil. 68 ; G. Landgraf in Archiv f . lat. Lex. 5 (1888), 161191; P. Parzinger, Beitr. Kenntn. u. Entwiekl. d. eie. Stils (1910), 41 ; also our proverbial use of "man to man." Aristot. Pol. 1, 2, 1252 b 26-27, remarks that men compare not only the appearance but also the activities of the gods to their own; Aët. Ρlac. 1, 6, 16: άνθρωποειδεΐς δ' αύτούς ίφασαν είναι διότι των μέν άπάντων τό θείον κυριώτατον, των δέ ζώων άνθρωπος κάλλιστον. videatur: both the mood and the tense have troubled scholars, and G. F. Schoemann (Opuse, aead. 3 (1858), 309) emended to videtur or videbatur. But the subjunctive appears to make the statement more cautious and the present tense to make its application in time more general than videretur would have suggested. physice: the ironical reproaches of unscientific procedure (cf. Pease on Div. 2, 27, n. (philosophi, etc.)) made by Vellerns in 1, 20 (hunc censes primis ut dicitur labris gustasse physiologiam) are here returned upon him; cf. 1, 83: non pudet igitur physicum ; 2, 48 : ne hoc quidem physici intellegere potuistis\ Fin. 2, 102: sapientis nullo modo, physici, praesertim, quem se Ule esse volt [and Reid's n.] ; also Metrodorus ap. Athen. 7, 280a [ = 12, 546 f ] : περί γαστέρα, ώ φυσιολόγε, Τιμόκρατες. Timon (ap. Diog. L. 10, 3) called Epicurus ύστατος αδ φυσικών καΐ κύντατος, and Mayor remarks that the Epicureans prided themselves on their physics as the Stoics upon their ethics ; cf. Fin. 1,17: in physicis, quibus maxime gloriatur·, 1, 63: in physicis plurimum posuit [sc. Epicurus]; Plut. De Def. Orac. 45, p. 434d. blanda conciliatrix: the phrase is

398

1, 77

ullam esse terra 1

terrae D

2

1

marique beluam quae non sui generis belua 2

beluam F

echoed—with a variation—by Ambros. De Cain et Abel, 1, 13: blanda conrìliatrix gratiae quae vocatur voluptas·, cf. Lact. Inst. 5, 17, 30: in omnibus enim videmus animalibus ... conciliatricem sui esse naturarti. In Cicero cf. Pro Sest. 21 : nobilitate ipsa, blanda conciliatricula·, Pro Cael. 41: multa enim nobis blandimento natura ipsa genuit·, Ac. 2, 139: video quant suaviter voluptas sensibusnostrisblandiatur·, Rep. 1,1: omnia blandimento voluptatis·, O f f . 2, 37: voluptates, blandissimae dominae·, Hier. Ep. 40, 1, 1 : ita se natura habet ut ... blanda vitia aestimentur·, 94, 2, 1 : ne simplicum mentes sub umbra scientiae blandís eius capiantur inlecebris; 100, 3, 2: blandientes corporis voluptates·, 128, 2, 3; A. Pittet, Vocab. philos, de Sénèque (1937), 140-141. With conciliatrix cf. Legg. 1, 27: orationis vim, quae conciliatrix est humanae maxime societatis·, Am. 37: conciliatrix amicitiae virtutis opinio; with the form of expression Tert. De Sped. 2: quam sapiens argumentatrix sibi videtur ignorantia humana. Though these two Ciceronian passages are used in a good sense, various others (see Thes. Ling. Lat. 4 (1909), 40) use conciliator and conciliatrix of panders, which, in view of the following lena, seems to be the sense here. On this word see also R. Fischer, De Usu Vocab. apud Cic. et Sen. (1914), 65; M. O. Liçcu, Étude sur la langue de la philos, morale che% Cic. (1930), 75-76. In Fin. 4, 16, nature vult esse conservatrix sui. quasi . . . lena: cf. 2, 146: corporum lenocinia\ in a figurative sense in Ac. fr. 20: quasi lenocinante mercede·, Ον. Ars am. 3, 315-316: res est blanda canor ; discant cantare puellae / {pro facie multis vox sua lena fuit). With the reflexive (sui ... lena) cf. Xen. Symp. 8, 5: σύ, μαστροπέ σαυτου. an putas: cf. Div. 2, 141, and Pease's note {an tu censes). terra marique: κατά γήν καΐ κατά θάλασσαν; on the phrase cf. A. Momigliano in fourn. of Rom. Stud. 32 (1942), 5364, especially 62-64.

sui generis belua: for this argument against divine anthropomorphism, based upon the admiration of each animal for its own kind—the refutation perhaps invented by Xenophanes—cf. 1, 28, η. {Xenophanes)·, Xenophanes fr. 15 Diels: άλλ' εί χείρας έχον βόες < ίππο ι τ'> ήέ λέοντες, / ή γράψαι χείρεσσι καί έργα τελεΐν άπερ άνδρες, / 'ίπποι μέν θ' ίπποισι βόες δέ τε βουσίν όμοιας / και θεών ιδέας έγραφον καί σώματ' έποίουν / τοιαϋθ' οΐόν περ καύτοί δέμας είχον ; id., fr. 16: Αίθίοπές τε σιμούς μέλανάς τε / Θρήικές τε γλαυκούς καί πυρρούς [cf. Theodoret, Gr. Ä f f . 3, 73]; Epicharmus ap. Diog. L. 3, 16: θαυμαστόν ούδέ άμέ ταϋθ' οΰτω λέγειν / καί άνδάνειν αύτοΐσιν αύτούς καί δοκεϊν / καλώς πεφύκειν· καί γάρ ά κύων κυνί / κάλλιστον εϊμεν φαίνεται καί βοϋς βοί, / δνος δ' δνιρ κάλλιστον, ύς δέ θην ύί; Xen. Oec. 10, 7: ώσπερ oí θεοί εποίησαν ίπποις μέν ίππους, βουσΐ δέ βοϋς ήδιστον, προβάτοις δέ πρόβατα, οΰτω καί οί άνθρωποι άνθρώπου σώμα καθαρόν οϊονται ήδιστον είναι ; Aristot. Eth. Eud. 7, 1, 1235 a 7-8: εϊρηται "ώς αίεί τον δμοιον άγει θεός ώς τον δμοιον" [cf. Paroem. Gr. 1, 350, no. 15, and von Leutsch and Schneide win's note], καί γάρ "κολοιος παρά κολοιόν;" Riet. 1, 11, 1371 b 12-17: έπεί τό κατά φύσιν ήδύ, τά συγγενή δέ κατά φύσιν άλλήλοις έστίν, πάντα τά συγγενή καί δμοια ήδέα ώς έπί τό πολύ, οϊον άνθρωπος άνθρώπω καί ίππος 'ίππ(>> καί νέος νέω. δθεν καί αί παροιμίαι εϊρηνται, "ώς ήλιξ ήλικα τέρπει" [cf. Paroem. Gr. 1, 253, no. 16, and note; 2, 33, no. 88, and note; Eustath. in Od. 2, 283], καί "ώς αίεί τόν δμοιον," καί "έγνω δέ θήρ θήρα," καί "άεΐ κολοιός παρά κολοιόν," καί δσα άλλα τοιαύτα; Probi. 10, 52, 896 b 10, on the topic: διά τί ίππος ΐππω χαίρει καί έπιθυμεϊ, άνθρωπος δέ άνθρώπω, καί δλως δέ τά συγγενή τοις συγγενέσι καί όμοίοις; Theoer. 9, 31-32: τέττιξ μέν τέττιγι φίλος, μύρμακι δέ μύρμαξ, / ϊρη-

399

maxime delectetur? Quod 1 n i 2 ita esset, cur non gestirei taurus equae contrectatione,3 equus vaccae? An tu aquilani4 aut leonem aut delphinum ullam anteferre censes 5 figurarti suae? Quid igitur mirum si hoc eodem modo homini 6 natura praescripsit, u t 7 nihil pulchrius quam hominem putaret, eam esse causam cur déos hominum 8 similis putaremus? 78 (Quid censes, si ratio esset in 1

2 quod B, quid M1 nisi Ν 2 6 add. O homini] hominum Η

3 7

contractione D ut add. A

κες δ' ί'ρηξιν ; Plut. Bruta Rattorte uti, 5, 988f-989a: ούδε γάρ έκεΐνα [sc. τά θηρία] τοις κρείττοσιν επιθυμεί πλησιάζειν, άλλά καΐ τάς ήδονάς καί τους έρωτας πρός τά ομόφυλα ποιείται ; Avian. Fab. 14, 13-14 [cf. Synes. Ep. 1]; Schol. Plat. Phaedr. 240c: ήλιξ ήλικα τέρπε, γέρων δέ τε τέρπε γέροντα [cf. Michael. Ephes. in Eth. Nie. 9, 9, p. 519, 13 Heylbut], On this doctrine of οίκείωσις cf. M. H. Fisch in Am. Journ. of Philol. 58 (1937), 149-150 (with bibliography). Belm here = bestia ; cf. 1, 97; 1, 101; 3, 40; often it is employed by Cicero of sea animals; e.g., 1, 78; 1, 97; 2, 100. q u o d n i ita esset: cf. 2, 4, and many similar cases in H. Merguet, Lex. d. philos. Sehr. Cié. 2 (1892), 695. contrectatione: cf. Rep. 4, 4: quam contreetationes et amores soluti et liberi. Aside from these two passages in Cicero the word is not found before Apuleius. a q u i l a m . . . l e o n e m . . . delphinum : an animal of the air, one of the land, and one of the sea are chosen to illustrate the universality of the principle described. With the thought cf. Arnob. 3, 16 : si aselluli, eanes, porci humattum altquid saperent fingendique haberent artes idemque nos vellent cultu aliquo persequi et statuarum consecrationibus honorare, quantas nobis irarum flammas, indignationum quos turbines eoncitarent, si suorum corporum formas nostra vellent portare atque obtinere simulacra ? quid . . . m i r u m : Plasberg would omit punctuation after mirum ¡ as in Div. 2, 81; 2, 114; Am. 29; but see the note on eam . .. putaremus, below. eam . . . p u t a r e m u s : Madvig (followed by several editors) and by G. F.

4

8

aliquam O similes esse O

6

censes

Schoemann, Opuse, acad. 3 (1858), 317318; P. Stamm, De M.T.C.Lib. de D.N. Interpolationibus (1873), 23-24) recommended the deletion of this phrase, because the words addita sunt cum magno sententiae detrimento, cum non intellegeretur usus formulae "quid igitur mirum, si," etc. [cf. the preceding note]. Plasberg, however, supposes that after putaret there has fallen out some such expression as ; Ax (appendix, 174), very properly remarking that what is here in question is not the argument about reason but that about beauty, proposes

eam esse, etc. But these scholars have been misled by supposing that the construction was quid igitur mirum si. Rather the words si hoc ... putaret constitute the protasis of a condition of which quid igitur mirum esse .. . eam esse causam is the apodosis. For mirum {est) with an accusative and infinitive cf. 3, 93: quid mirum est ... genus humanum esse eontemptum, and similar cases in Ac. 2, 102; Fin. 3, 23; 5, 49; Div. 2, 69; Fat. 6; 8. This construction yields a clear and appropriate sense: "What wonder, then, if in this same fashion nature has ordained for man that he should consider nothing more beautiful than man, that this is the reason why we considered the gods to be like men?" Without this clause its substance would logically have to be understood in order to complete the earlier part of the sentence. The tense of putaremus is explained by Goethe as a past potential (comparing Pro Sex.

400

beluis, non suo quasque generi plurimum 1 tributaras fuisse?) 28 At mehercule 2 ego (dicam enim u t 3 sentio) quamvis amem ipse me tamen non audeo dicere pulchriorem esse me quam ille fuerit taurus qui vexit 4 Europam; non enim hoc loco de ingeniis 1 primum F 2 mehercle M, me ercule H, hercule D * uexit A?C, uex id A1, uexet B1, uexat NO

Rose. 92; 2 Verr. 4, 11); more likely it is attracted from a logical present into a somewhat illogical imperfect through the influence of the intervening imperfect putaret; Mayor compares a similar case in Am. 2 : meministi ... cum is ... dissideret ... quanta esset hominum . .. admiratio. It is hardly necessary to resort to Mayor's other explanation of an anacoluthon, like those after facit in 1, 31; after dicemus in 1, 75; or after docere in 1, 76. For the defence of the text as it stands cf. also R. Klotz, Adnot. crit. ad M.T.C.Lib. de N.D.I, part 3 (1868), 7-8; R. Philippson in Phil. Woch. 54 (1934), 189. earn esse causam: attracted from id

3

ut add. Β

ζώα μορφήν τοιαύτην έχει καΐ τόν θεόν είναι δει τοιούτον. non: = nonne-, cf. R. Kiihner-C. Stegmann, Ausf. Gram: d. lat. Spr. 2, 2 2 (1914), 503. quasque: i.e., quodque genus (J. S. Reid ap. Mayor, ad loc.). plurimum tributaras: for the phrase cf. Ac. 2, 12; Fin. 2, 68; O f f . 1, 47; for the syntax O. Riemann in Rev. de philol. 15 (1891), 37; R. Philippson, in Philol. Woch. 54 (1934), 189 (tribuissent of direct discourse). at: Mayor thinks et more suitable here. But Cicero is by the use of at sharply distinguishing between man's natural self-conceit, which he has just esse causam·, cf. 1, 6 7 : ist a ... est Veritas·, described, and his more sober judgment, based upon logical reflection. 1 , 1 2 2 : non erit ista amicitia. 78 quid censes: cf. 1, 77: an putas quamvis amem ipse me: cf. Tuse. (and note); 1, 82: quid igitur censes; Rep. 1, 111: ne nosmet ipsos amare videa1, 56; 2 Verr. 3, 25; 5, 10; Phil. 12, 22; mur\ O f f . 1, 29: nisi nosmet ipsos valde amabimus. Sex. Rose. Am. 49; etc. si ratio esset: A. du Mesnil (in taurus qui vexit Europam: the Jahrb. f . cl. Phi loi. 115 (1877), 759-760) story of the rape of Europa by Zeus in objects that this is contradictory to the the form of a bull was a favorite with whole argument, for it is not the pos- artists for two thousand years (A. B. session of reason but the absence of it Cook, Zeus, 3, 1 (1940), 623-624); cf. which leads to this sort of self-conceit; Theodoret, Gr. A f f . 3, 80: καί τήν Εύρώaccordingly he would emend ratio to πην δέ έπί τοϋ ταύρου καθημένην καί οί oratio, or else omit the clause quid censes ζωγράφοι γράφουσι [cf. Achill. Tat. 1 , 1 , ... fuisse. But it is not so much logical 2; 1,1, 9; 1,1, 13; 1, 4, 3; 2,15, 4; 2, 37, thought, or even the power of speech, 2; S. Reinach, Rép. de peintures gr. et rom. among the brutes which is here in (1922), 10-14; id., Rép. des vases peints question as their reflecting at all—even gr. et étr. 2 (1900), 400, index, s.v. Europe], illogically—upon this subject, and if καί oí χαλκοτύποι διαπλάττουσι καί διαnature did allow them to reflect they γλύφουσιν οί των άγαλμάτων δημιουργοί would probably reach a similar thought. [cf. S. Reinach, Rép. de reliefs gr. et rom. 3 It seems better, then, to explain the (1912), 549, index, s.v. Europe·, O. Jahn words quid censes .. . fuisse as an explana- in mener Denkschr. Phil.-hist. Kl. 19 tory parenthesis. With the thought Mayor (1870), 1-54; J. Overbeck in Ber. sächs. compares Metrod. De Sensionibus {Voll. Ges. d. Wiss. Phil.-hist. Kl. 22 (1871), Here. 6, part 2, col. 13): δθεν ουκ εϊ τι 98-108; W. Heibig in Roscher, Ausf.

401 Lex. 1 (1886), 1412-1418; J. Escher in P.-W. 6 (1909), 1296-1298 (and works there mentioned) ; Α. Β. Cook, Zeus, 3, 1 (1940), 615-628, with descriptions and plates of terra-cottas, vases, reliefs, bronzes, coins (cf. Lucían, De Syria Dea, 4, and Harmon's note), mosaics, and wall-paintings depicting the scene]. 2 Verr. 4, 135; Varr. L.L. 5, 31; and Tat. Ad Gr. 33, mention a famous bronze group of Europa and the Bull made by the sculptor Pythagoras and located at Tarentum. The scene may also have been known to Cicero from a famous painting (or possibly, thinks A. Reinach in Neapolis, 2 (1915), 237-242, a sculptured group) in the Porticus Europae, near the Saepta, in Rome; cf. Mart. 2, 14, 3-5; 2,14,15; 3, 20,14; 7,32,11-12; 11,1,11. The story was also a favorite with poets and imaginative writers; for the Greek poets treating it see Cook, op. cit., 3, 1, 627-628, η. 1, to which add Stesichorus (Schol. Eur. Phoen. 670); Simonides (fr. 18 Edmonds); Aesch. Cares seu Europa·, Bacchylides (Schol. II. 12, 292); Eurip. Phrixus (Aratus Latinus, p. 211 Maass), Hypsipyle, 70-79 (D. L. Page, Gr. lit. Papyri, 1 (1942), 86-88); Plato comicus, who wrote an Εύρώπη {Com. Attic. Fr. 1, 610-612 Kock); Theocritus, Syrinx, 9-10; Nicander (Schol. Apoll. Rh. 4, 57, p. 264 Wendel); Moschus, 2; Dioscurus Aphroditopolitanus, Epithal. 11-14 (H. J. M. Milne, Cat. of lit. Papyri in the Brit. Mus. (1927), 71); Nonn, (in addition to passages cited by Cook), 1,404-409; 3,114; 3,323-324; 4,297-302; 7, 118; 8, 141-142; 8, 253-256; 8, 291; 8, 302; 8, 363-364; 11, 152-154; 16, 53; 16, 89-90; 23, 304-307 ; 31, 215-216; 33, 287; 38, 393-397; 41, 239-246; 46, 31-32; Antb. Pal. 9, 453-454; Eustath. in II. 7, 86. To his list of Latin poets treating the theme may be added: Manil. ap. Yarr. L.L. 5, 31; Aetna, 89; Lydia, 26; Ον. Ars am. 1, 323-324; 3, 252; Her. 4, 55-56; Manil. 2, 489-491; Sil. Ital. 14, 568-569; 15, 62; Stat. Silv. 3, 2, 88-89; Τ heb. 9, 334; 11, 212-214; Achill. 2, 73-75; Juv. 8, 33-34; Mart. 11, 1, 11; Anth. Lat. 1, nos. 143-144 Riese. Other writers—mythographers, historians, and Church Fathers—need not here be noted,

save that to those listed by Cook (op. cit., 3,1,628, η. 1) there may be added Hygin. Fab. 178; loan. Damasc. Barlaam et Ioasaph, 245. Palaephatus, De Incredib. 15, rationalizes the story. For Europa as originally a Cretan earth-deity, becoming later, in Phoenicia, a moon-goddess, cf. Cook, op. cit., 1 (1914), 524-541, who connects her name with εδ + ¿ώπες (willow-withes) ; W. H. Roscher, Über Selene u. Verwandtes (1890), 128-130; J. G. Frazer, Golden Bought, 4 (1914), 73; yet see the different etymologies proposed by W. Aly (Glotta, 5 (1913), 63-74) and G. Bonfante (CI. Philol. 36 (1941), 14). On the story, in addition to the works already cited, cf. J. Vuertheim im Meded. kgl. Akad. van Wet. 57, Ser. A, no. 16 (1924), 103-115; L. de Brauw, Europe en de Stier (1940)— not seen by me. On Zeus as a bull or ox see Cook, op. cit., 3, 1, 605-655; A. H. Krappe in CI. Philol. 37 (1942), 362: "According to the well-known law first promulgated, I believe, by Salomon Reinach, the shape assumed by a god in a metamorphosis story is merely the former animal shape of the same god, and the myths of Zeus as a bull (in the rape of Europa), of Io as a cow, and of Artemis as a she-bear will readily come to mind." Later rationalizings made the Bull into a ship shaped like or named for a bull (Lycophr. 1296-1301; Poll. 1, 83; Hier. Chron. ann. Abr. 693; Nonn. 8,256; Fulg. Myth. 1,20), and catasterism turned it into the sign of Taurus (for which see 2,110, below) ; e.g., [Eratosth.] Catast. 14; Manil. 2, 489-491; Schol. Arat. 167, p. 368 Maass; Nonn. 23, 304-307; 33, 287 ; 38, 393-397; 41, 239-246; Lyd. De Ost. 24. The beauty of this bull, which Cotta's remarks imply, is noted by Moschus, 2, 77-88; 2, 91; 2, 106-108; Ον. M. 2, 858-859: miratur Agenore nata, / quod tarn formosus, quod proelia nulla minatur; Lucían, Dial, marin. 15,2: ο Ζεύς δέ ταύpc¡> είκάσας έαυτόν συνέπαιζεν αύταϊς κάλλιστος φαινόμενος ; cf. Liban. Laudai. 8, 4. Arnob. 4, 23, however, asks in humanis vero corporibus quidnam, quae so, tnerat pulchritudinis, quid decoris, quod flectere oculos posset in se Iovis? 26

402 aut de orationibus nostris sed de specie figuraque quaeritur. Quod si fingere 1 nobis et iungere formas velimus,2 qualis ille maritimus Triton pingitur, natantibus invehens beluis adiunctis humano corpore,3 nolis esse. Difficili 4 in loco versor; est enim vis tanta naturae ut homo nemo 5 velit 6 nisi hominis 7 similis 4

1 finge A1 difficilis Η

2 6

3 corpore AC Β2, corporee Β1, corpori uellimus A Ν β uellit A1 7 homini homo nemini D ACNOM

ingeniis . . . orationibus: possibly plural to express the diversity of man's mental endowments and his varied powers of speech (cf. O f f . 1, 50: ferarum ... sunt enim rationis et orationis expertes), as contrasted with the relative uniformity of his physical form, as compared with the different brutes. For such plural uses of ingenia cf. 2, 17; 2, 42; 2, 126; Div. 2, 55 [and Pease's n.] ; Fin. 4, 62 [where, as here, singular and plural are contrasted : tantis ingeniis homines tantaque auctoritate]; Pro Arch. 17; De Or. 1, 6; 1, 106 [and Wilkins's n.]; 1, 115: ingeniis atque arte valeant·, Orat. 48. quaeritur: "is the subject of inquiry"; cf. Ac. 1, 46; Fin. 2, 80; 4, 33; 4, 35; Rep. 1, 38; 3, 26; Legg. 1, 24; 3, 13. quod si: continuative rather than adversative. fingere nobis: cf. Aristot. Poi. 1, 2, 1252 b 26-27: ώσπερ 8έ καΐ τά είδη έαυτοϊς άφομοιοϋσιν οί άνθρωποι, οΰτω καΐ τούς βίους των θεών. iungere formas: i.e., to imagine composite forms, like centaurs (1, 105), Scyllas, Chimaeras (1, 108), τραγέλαφοι, etc. ; cf. Plat. Rep. 6,488a [and Shorey's n.]. ille maritimus Triton: for elaborate treatments of this deity, half fish and half man (like the Phoenician Derceto and Dagon), cf. E. Fehrle in Roscher, Ausf. Lex. 5 (1924), 1150-1207; H. Herter in P.-W. 7A (1939), 245-304; each treating the artistic representations in great detail. So many were these that we probably cannot determine whether what Cicero had in mind was what Paus. 9, 21,1, mentions: εΐδον 8è καΐ άλλον Τρίτωνα έν τοις 'Ρωμαίων θαύμασι, μεγέθει τοϋ παρά Ταναγραίοις άποδέοντα. invehens: intransitive; cf. Pacuv. ap.

Rep. 3, 14: invehens alitum anguium curru; Brut. 331: quasi quadrigis vehentem·, Gell. 2, 2, 13: in equo vehens venit; 5, 6, 27: equo vehentem·, Apul. M. 1, 2: equo indigena peralbo vehens-, elsewhere it is used reflexively or in the passive. beluis: cf. 1, 77, n. (sui generis belua). corpore: so ACB, which Plasberg justifies by the precedent of 2, 109: temone adiunctam \ for the ablative with iungo cf. R. Kühner-C. Stegmann Ausf. Gr. d. lat. Spr. 2, l 2 (1912), 318. nolis esse: Schoemann (followed by Mayor) understands this as interrogative, but I think wrongly. The sense seems to be that even though we may like to imagine such creatures as Triton yet you would not wish to be one yourself (or to be of such a form—with tali forma understood with esse). difficili in loco versor: cf. Legg. 3, 33: versabor in re difficili', In Caecil. 36: intellego quam scopuloso difficilique in loco verser·, also Div. 2, 70: difficilis auguri locus ad contra dicendum. vis tanta naturae: cf. similar phrases in 2, 81: seminis ... vim esse tantam·, Ac. 2, 3; Tuse. 1, 60; 2, 57; 3, 26; 4, 79; Fat. 17; O f f . 1, 144. homo nemo: cf. 2, 96: nemo hominem homo agnosceret-, Τ use. 1, 99; 1 Verr. 15: hominem esse ... neminem-, 2 Verr. 5, 65: hominem ... neminem-, Pro Sulla, 25: homini nemini-, De Domo, 107: hominem ... neminem-, F am. 13, 55, 1 : hominem neminem-, Att. 4, 1, 5: nemo ullius ordinis homo-, also frequently in Plautus and Terence. In these cases nemo has an adjectival force, like nullus (cf. 2, 81 : nemo opifex), and is joined with homo either without consideration of the fact that it is itself derived from it (i.e., from *ne-homo), or,

403

esse.1 79 Et quidem formica2 formicae. Sed tarnen cuius hominis? Quotus enim quisque formonsus 3 est? 4 Athenis cum essem, e gregibus epheborum5 vix singuli reperiebantur6—video quid 1

2 esset Β1 formica om. ACNO 6 om. O epheborum O, efeborum cett.

3

more likely, in emphatic recognition of that connection; cf. 1, 77 η. (hominì homine), above ; Clark on Pro Mil. 68. For somewhat analogous repetitions cf. the use of nisi si (Enn. Sat. 64) and τόν θάτερον (Chrysippus ap. Eustath. in Od. 7, 124). 79 et quidem: "Yes, and"; used, as Mayor remarks, "in ironical acceptance of an opponent's argument, professing to carry it further but really showing that it is applicable in an opposite sense to that intended by the user"; cf. 1, 100: habebam ... informationem quondam dei. et barbati quidem Iovis . .. num igitur esse talis putas·, Div. 2, 114: remex ille ... nonne ea praedixit quae facta sunt? ille vero et ea quidem quae omnes eo tempore ... timebamus; Fin. 1, 35: torquem detraxit hosti. et quidem se texit ne interiret [and Reid's n.]; also et alone in 3, 82, below: et praedones. formica: used for illustrative purposes also in 2, 157; 3, 21; Ac. 2, 120: cuius [i.e., dei] quidem vos maiestatem deducitis usque ad apium formicarumque perfectionem·, Fin. 3, 63; often appearing, in Latin as in other languages, in proverbial expressions based either upon its small size or upon its provident thrift (cf. Thes. Ling. Lat. 6 (1921), 1091-1092), and compared in its habits and social organization with man; e.g., Orig. C. Cels. 4, 77; 4, 81: ούδέν μυρμήκων ή μελισσών διαφέρει ό άνθρωπος παρά τω Οεω ; 4, 83; 4, 85; note also the Renaissance encomia of the ant, collected by C. Dornavius, Amphitheatrum Sapientiae Socraticae ioco-seriae (1619), 80-110. The attempts of Heindorf, A. B. Becker {Comm. crit. adCic. Lib. Ide N.D. (1865), 39, and A. Goethe {Jahrb. f . cl. Philol. 129 (1884), 32-33, who would detect a marginal gloss) to delete the words et quidem formica formicae seem unnecessary,

and, as Plasberg well remarks, sed tarnen which follows dismisses this objection as a passing jest. For the polyptoton cf. P. Parzinger, Beitr. Kenntn. d. Entwickl. d. cic. Stils (1910), 41; also Nicetas Eugenianus, 5, 209-210: τέττιξ φίλος τέττιξι, ποιμήν ποιμέσι, / μύρμηξι μύρμηξ · άλλ' έμοί σύ, καΐ μόνος. sed tamen: "But yet—jesting aside." cuius hominis: Cotta does not develop, as he might have done, the question which racial group among men the gods most resemble, since he is more concerned with the possibilities of resemblances to individuals. In this connection cf. Plin. N.H. 2, 17 : credi ... alios esse ... semper canos ... alios ... atricolores ... puerilium prope deliramentorum est·, Xenophanes, fr. 16 Diels: Αίθίοπές τε < θεούς σφετέρους> σιμούς μέλανας τε / Θρήκές τε γλαυκούς και πυρρούς «ρασι πέλεσθαι> [cf. Theodoret, Gr. Ä f f . 3, 73]; Aug. De Trin. 1, 1: qui enim opinatur Deum, verbi gratia, candidum vel rutilum, fallitur ; sed tamen haec inveniuntur in corpore. quotus enim quisque: "one out of how many," or "what percentage of," as in O f f . 3, 72 : quotus enim quisque reperiatur qui. Athenis cum essem: on Cicero as perhaps here ascribing his own experiences of 79 B.C. to Cotta, cf. 1, 59, n. {cum Athenis essem); 1, 93; 3, 49. e gregibus epheborum: for the epbebia at Athens cf. T. Thalheim in P.- W. 5 (1905), 2737-2741. Their training originally began at 18 years (Aristot. Resp. Athen. 42, 1 ; yet cf. Thalheim, op. cit., 2737, 46-53) and lasted for two years, after which they returned to their regular civic activities, but after the loss of Greek independence their number fluctuated much, and the age requirements were apparently modified. Their division

formonsus A, formosus celt. 9 repperiebantur O

4

est

404

adriseris, sed ita tarnen se res habet. Deinde nobis, qui concedentibus philosophis antiquis adulescentulis 1 delectamur, etiam vitia saepe iucunda 2 sunt. Naevos in articulo 3 pueri delectat Alcaeum; 1

adulescentulus B1, adolescentibus D2

into συστρέμματα, of from 13 to 55 each, seems to be later than Hadrian's time (Thalheim, op. cit., 2740, 20-25), but doubtless Cicero's greges represent some earlier grouping corresponding to this (Mayor compares the Cretan άγέλη). Of the habits of the youths in the gymnasia Cicero speaks disapprovingly in Τ use. 4, 70 : ad magistros virtutis philosophos veniamus, qui amorem negant stupri esse ... quis est ettim iste amor amicitiae? cur ñeque deformem adulescentem quisqmm amat neque formosum senem? mihi quidem haec in Graecorum gymnasiis nata consuetudo videtur, in quibus isti liberi et concessi sunt amores·, cf. Rep. 4, 4: iuventutis vero exercitatio quam absurda in gymnasiis! quam levis epheborum illa militia 1 quam contrectationes et amores soluti et liberi, etc. ; Pro Fiacco, 51 : Lysaniam ... quem tu cum ephebum Temni cognosses, quia tum te nudus delectarat semper nudum voluisti. With gregibus cf. De Or. 1, 42: phìlosophorum greges; Fin. 1, 65: amicorum greges. video quid adriseris: i.e., at the admission that Cotta was an observer of and susceptible to the charms of the ephebi. ita . . . se res habet: "it's a fact"; cf. 3, 89, n. {sic ... res se habet). concedentibus philosophis : cf. Tuse. 4, 71-72 : philosophi sumus exorti, et auctore quidem nostro Platone . .. qui amori auctoritatem tribueremus. Stoici vero et sapientem amaturum esse dicunt et amorem ipsum "conatum amicitiae faciendae ex pulchritudinis specie" definiunt·, Fin. 3, 68: ne amores quidem sanctos a sapiente alíenos esse arbitrantur [sc. Stoici]. For philosophic discussions of paederasty cf. W. Kroll in P.-W. 11 (1922), 904-905. These probably began with the sophists (cf. Lysias's 'Ερωτικοί, mentioned in Plut. X Orat. Vit. 3, p. 836b), are noticed at various places by Plato in connection with So-

2

iocunda A2 H

3

hasti***culo O

crates {Phaedr. 238e-241d; 251a; 256a257a; Protag. 309a-b; Charm. 153d-155d; Meno, 76b-c; Lysis, 204e-205e; Symp. 178c-180b; 181c-185c; 192a-e; 211b; 217a-219d; Legg. 8, 836d-837d; 841d), and also by Xenophon {Symp. 1, 8-10; 4, 53; 8, 1-2), and are mentioned by many later writers; e.g., Heraclit.Quaest. Horn. 76-77; Plut. Amat. passim; Fronto, Bp. Gr. 8, pp. 20-30 Haines; Galen, De Usu Part. 1, 9 (III, 25 Κ.); Lucian, Symp. 339; Dial. Mort. 20, 6, where Menippus says: εδ γε, ώ Σώκρατες, δτι κάνταϋθα μέτει τήν σαυτοϋ τέχνην καί ούκ ολιγωρείς των καλών; [Lucían,] Amores, 23-24; 31; 49; 51; 54: έρωτικός γάρ ήν, εϊπερ τις, καί ό Σωκράτης; Max. Tyr. nos. 18-21 Hobein; Diog. L. 7,129: καί έρασθήσεσθαι δέ τόν σοφόν των νέων των έμφαινόντων διά τοϋ είδους τήν πρός άρετήν εύφυΐαν, ώς φησι Ζήνων έν τή Πολιτεία καί Χρύσιππος έν τω πρώτω Περί βίων καί 'Απολλόδωρος έν τη 'Ηθική [cf. S.V.F. 1, nos. 247-255; Sen. Ep. 123, 15; Cercidas in Oxyrh. Pap. no. 1082, fr. 4, lines 13-14 (and A. S. Hunt's n. on p. 57); Sext. Emp. Adv. Log. 1, 239; Stob. vol. 2, p. 115 Wachsmuth]; Philodem. De Mus. 13, p. 78,10 Kemke; Anth. Pal. book 12; and other cases cited by Kroll, op. cit. 904-905, who on pp. 897-904 discusses the evidence for this custom among the Greeks (here note the numerous καλός-inscriptions, for which cf. D. M. Robinson and E. J. Fluck, A Study of the Gr. Love-Names (1937)), and on pp. 905-906 its presence among the Romans, for which see also W. Kroll in P.-W. 11 (1921), 905-906. etiam vitia . . . iucunda: apologies for another's physical defects and even praise of them (especially by parents or lovers) are discussed by many authors; cf. Plat. Rep. 5, 474d-475a [with which cf. Plut. De recta Rat. Aud. 13, p. 44f-

405 at est corporis macula naevos ; illi tamen hoc 1 lumen videbatur. Q . 2 Catulus,3 huius collegae et familiaris nostri pater, dilexit 1 hie A2 tullus N 2

2

quintus CNOB (in ras.) FM: quentus A1, quaentus Aa

3

ca-

45a; Quomodo Adul. 12, p. 56d]: è μέν, identity of Alcaeus. Without further δτι σιμός, έπίχαρις κληθείς έπαινεθή- qualification he would naturally be σεται ύφ' ύμών, τοϋ 8έ τό γρυπόν βα- taken for Alcaeus of Mytilene, in which σιλικόν φατε είναι, τόν δέ δη 8ιά μέσου case the puer may possibly be identified τούτων έμμετρότατα 2χειν, μέλανας δέ with Lycum nigris oculis nigroque / crine ανδρικούς ίδεΐν, λευκούς δέ θεών παϊδας decorum, of whom Horace (C. 1, 32, εϊναι· μελιχλώρους 8έ καΐ τοΰνομα 11-12) says that Alcaeus wrote; cf. also οϊει τινός άλλου ποίημα εϊναι ή έραστοϋ the fragment of Alcaeus preserved by ύποκοριζομένου τε καΐ ευχερώς φέρον- Schol. Pind. Ol. 11, 15, which mentions τος τήν ώχρότητα, έάν έπΐ ώρα ή ; καί Lycus. Further Cicero remarks (J'use. ένΐ λόγω πάσας προφάσεις προφασίζεσθέ 4, 71) : fortis vir in sua re publica cognitus τε καί πάσας φωνάς άφίετε, ώστε μηδένα quae de itwenum amore scribi t Alcaeus ! άποβάλλειν τών άνθούντων έν ώρα [and The possibility must not be overlooked, Shorey's n.]; Theoer. 10, 26-27: Σύραν however, in view of the immediately καλέοντί τυ πάντες, / ίσχνάν άλιόκαυ- preceding references to philosophers, στον, έγώ δέ μόνος μελίχλωρον; Lucr. that this man might be the Epicurean 4, 1151-1170 (1151-1154: pretermitías philosopher Alcaeus, who was banished animi vitia omnia primum / aut quae cor- from Rome in the consulship of L. pori' sunt eius quam praepetis ac vis. / nam Postumius (173 or 155 B.C.), according faeiunt homines plerumque cupidine caeci / to Athen. 12, 547a and Ael. V.H. 9, 12, et tribuunt ea quae non sunt bis commoda because of his demoralizing influence vere·, Hot. S. 1, 3, 38-54 (38-40: amatorem upon the youth (cf. also Polyb. 32, 2, 5). quod amicae / turpia decipiunt caecum vitia, The partial line is probably a quotation aut etiam ipsa haec / delectant, veluti Bal- rather than an accident, for Cicero binum polypus Hagnae [and Lejay's n. disapproved the introduction of verseon pp. 64-65]; Ον. Am. 2, 4, passim-, rhythms into prose; cf. De Or. 3, 175 Ars am. 2, 657-662 (657 : nominibus mollire [and Wilkins's n.]; Reid on Ac. 2, 30. licet mala)·, Sen. Rhet. Controv. 2, 2, 12: lumen: cf. Ac. 2, 107: ilia sunt lumina aiebat [se. Ovidius] interim decentiorem fa- duo·, Fin. 2, 70: hoc enim vestrum lumen est·, ciem esse in qua aliquis naevos fui sset-, Plut. Sen. 35: lumen civitatis·, Am. 27: quasi Quomodo quis suos, 15, p. 84f: ώσπερ oi lumen aliquod probitatis·, In Catil. 3, 24: έρώντες καί τραυλότητας άσπάζονται lumina civitatis exstincta sunt', Post Red. τών έν ώρo¡. καί ωχρότητας; Basil. in Sen. 8: hoc lumen consulatus sui fore Horn, in Ps. 61, 3 (Patr. Gr. 29, 476a-b, putavit·, Q.Fr. 2, 8, 3: illorum praediorum chiefly of mental defects): άπαξαπλώς scito mihi vicinum Marium lumen esse; πάσαν κακίαν έκ της παρακειμένης άρε- C.I.L. XI, 5265 (Dessau 705): urbes quas της ύποκορίζονται; Molière, Le Misan- in luminibus provinciarum . .. species et thrope, Act 2, Sc. 5. forma distinguit[ur]. naevos in articulo pueri delectat: an Q. Catulus . . . pater: Q. Lutatius incomplete hexameter line, which Mayor Q. f. Catulus ; on his life cf. Reid, edition suggests might befinishedby substituting of the Académica, introd. 41-42; E. Groag amantem for Alcaeum (the latter word in P.-W. 13 (1927), 2072-2082, who might then be explained as a marginal places his birth about 150. He was the gloss upon amantem which had been father-in-law of Q. Hortensius (De Or. inserted in place of it). The question 3, 228), and is often referred to as pater is complicated by uncertainty as to the to distinguish him from his well-known

406 municipem tuum Roscium, in quem etiam illud son of the same name (e.g., 2 Verr. 3, 209 ; Pro Rab. 26: Q. vero Catulum, patrem hutus; De Domo, 113; Ac. 2, 12; 2, 18; 2, 148; O f f . 1, 133; Brut. 134). He was consul in 102 (Groag, op. cit., 2074, 44), and took a prominent part with his colleague Marius against the Cimbri and Teutones. About this consulship he later wrote a memoir (Brut. 132). From the spoils of the war he built a handsome house and a public portico on the north part of the Palatine Hill, adjacent to the house of Cicero (Groag, op .cit., 2077, 37-56). In 87 he sided with Octavius against Cinna and Marius ; later appealed to Marius for mercy, but was told that he must die (cf. 3, 80 : cur ... C. Marius Q. Catulum, praestantissimum dignitate virum, mori potuit tuberei), and committed suicide by charcoal fumes (Groag, op. cit., 2079, 31-37). He was a man of high character (see the testimonia collected by Groag, op. cit., 2079-2080; but cf. A. Rostagni, Storia d. lett. lat. 1 (1949), 313-315), intimate with cultivated Romans, and appears as a speaker in the De Oratore. He is mentioned by Plin. Ep. 5, 3, 5, as a writer of verses, and in addition to the present epigram another erotic one, of six lines, is preserved by Gell. 19, 9, 14 [cf. Callim. Epigr. 42 = Anth. Pal. 12, 73]: aufugit mi animus; credo, ut solet, ad Theotimum / devenit. sic est; perjugium illud habet. / quid, si non interdixem, ne illune fugitivum / mitteret ad se intra, sed magis eiceret? / ibimus quaesitum. verum, ne ipsi teneamur, / formido. quid ago? da, Venus, consilium. Our present epigram is imitated by Petrarch, Sonetto 164. huius collegae et familiaris nostri: Q. Lutatius Q. f. Q. n. Catulus (as given in C.I.L. I, 591-592 = VI, 13131314 = Dessau 35a; 35), the son of the preceding, was born about 121 B.C. (E. Groag in P.-W. 13 (1927), 2082), and was consul in 78 with his political enemy, M. Aemilius Lepidus. It seems likely that about 80 B.C. he had been made a member of the pontifical college, so that the pontifex Cotta can here speak of him as a colleague (cf. Groag, op. cit.,

est eius:

2087,13-29), and was in 64 a prominent candidate for the position of Pontifex Maximus, but was defeated by the young Julius Caesar (Sail. Catil. 49, 2; Veil. 2, 43, 3; Plut. Caes. 7, 1-3; Reg. Apophth. Caesar, 2; Dio Cass. 37, 37, 1-2; cf. Suet. lui. 13). He supported Cicero in the Catiline incident, and was the first to salute him as pater patriae (Pro Sest. 121 ; In Pison. 6). About 60 he died, and after his death was by Cicero introduced as a speaker in the Hortensius (cf. fragments 14 and 19 Müller). Book 1 of the Académica priora was named the Catulus because he was the chief speaker in it, and the scene was laid at his villa at Cumae (Ac. 2, 9; cf. 2, 80), but in the second edition of the Académica he and Lucullus were replaced by Cato and Brutus as more appropriate for such discussions (cf. Att. 13, 12, 3; 13, 16, 1; 13, 19, 5; 13, 32, 3). The term huius is used to distinguish one who is alive (here contrasted with his father, who was dead at the time of the dialogue) ; cf. 2, 6 : P. enim Vatinius avus huius adulescentis·, O f f . 3, 66: M. Cato . . . huius nostri Catonis pater·, Sen. 50: de P. Licini Crassi ... studio ... aut de huius P. Scipionis; De Or. 2, 270: Africanum hunc Aemilianum. municipem tuum Roscium: both were townsmen of Lanuvium; for Vellerns cf. the references in 1, 82 to illam vestram Sospitam and Lanuvinis·, for Roscius the story of his childhood told in Div. 1, 79; 2, 66. Q. Roscius Gallus— his full name attested by Diomed. Ars gram. 3 (Gram. Lat. 1, 489 Keil = Suet. De Poetis, p. 11 Reifferscheid)—who was perhaps born ca. 130 B.C. (G. K. G. Henry in Univ. of N.C.Stud. in Philol. 16 (1919), 345), was defended by Cicero against C. Fannius Chaerea in 67 or 66 B.C. (cf. M. Schanz-C. Hosius, Gesch. d. rom. Lit. 1« (1927), 415-416) in the speech Pro Q. Roscio Comoedo; for other judgments about him cf. Pro Quinct. 78: cum artifex eiusmodi sit ut solus videatur dignus esse qui in scaena spectetur, tum vir eiusmodi est ut solus dignus videatur

407 'Constiteram exorientem 1 Auroram forte 2 salutans, 1

exoriente CN, exurgentem A

2

qui eo non accedat-, Pro Arcb. 17: propter excellente»! artem et venustatem videbatur omnino mori non debutsse; De Or. 1, 129132; Legg. 1,11. Cf. also Hor. Ep. 2,1, 82 [and Porphyrio ad loc.y. doctus Roscius; Val. Max. 8, 10, 2; Plut. Cic. 5, 3; Paul, ex Fest. p. 288 M. (p. 367 L.): Rosei appellabantur in omnibus perfecti artibus, quod Roscius quidam perfectus mus in arte sua, id est, comoedia, iudicatus sit. In Div. 1, 79, he is called Cicero's amores ac deliciae, and Macrob. Sat. 3, 14, 11-14 speaks of the regard of Cicero and Sulla for him. For his life cf. G. Κ. G. Henry op. cit., 343-352; P. Von der Mühll in P.-W. ΙΑ (1920), 1123-1125; for his grace and attractive bearing Henry, 348-349; Von der Mühll, 1123-1124. in quem: cf. Tuse. 1, 101: in quos Simonides·, Sen. 61 : in quem illud elogium. constiteram . . . salutans : the form of worship here described is apparently veneratio (προσκύνησις; cf. Nep. Conon, 3, 3), rather than precatio, or petition (cf. E. Voulliéme, Quomodo Veteres adoraverint (1887), 6), though for prayer at sunrise cf. Virg. Aen. 8, 68-69; 12, 172-173. The terms venerari deos (e.g., 1, 117; 1, 122; 3, 53; Tuse. 1, 114; Fam. 6, 7, 2; and cases from other authors cited by G. Appel, De Rom. Preeationibus (1909), 67) and salutare deos (Pro Sex. Rose. 56; cases from other authors cited by Appel, op. cit., 66-67; cf. Sen. Ep. 95, 47) may designate the preliminaries to a petition from the gods (precatio) or may denote simple adoration, as here. Constiteram describes the standing attitude common—though not universal —in ancient prayers, pagan and Christian. Salutans may suggests the utterance of the word salve (cf. Appel, op. cit., 109-110) or it may here more probably refer to the throwing of kisses (basia ¡aetata; c f . Job, 31, 26-27: "If I beheld the sun when it shined, or the moon walking in brightness, And my heart hath been secretly enticed, or my mouth has kissed my hand"; Plin. N.H. 28, 25; Apul.

sorte Β1 Apol. 56; Min. Fei. 2, 4; Voulliéme, op. cit., 9-11; Appel, op. cit., 199; J. A. Scott in Cl. Journ. 17 (1922), 403-404; X. F. M. Wolters, Notes on antique Folklore (1935), 71-77), which was done especially in the salutation of sun, moon, stars, wind-gods, Nemesis (C. Sittl, Die Gebärden d. Gr. ». Römer (1890), 181 ; M. Desport in Rev. d. ét. anc. 49 (1947), 124, n. 3), or other deities (cf. Min. Fei. 2, 4). Morning prayers are noted by Appel, op. cit., 60, but here there appears more definitely the worship of the rising sun itself. Among instances of the adoration of the sun, usually at sunrise, may be cited: Ar. Plut. 771 (also quoted by Steph. Byz. p. 34 Meineke): καΐ προσκυνώ γε πρώτα μέν τόν ήλιον ; Soph. fr. 738 Pearson: πας προσκυνεί δέ τόν στρέφοντα κύκλον ηλίου; Plat. Symp. 220d: έφύλαττον αύτόν εί καί την νύκτα έστήξοι. ó δέ είστήκει μέχρι £ως έγένετο καΐ ήλιος άνέσχεν · έπειτα φχετ' άπιών προσευξάμενος τω ήλίω ; Legg. 10, 887d-e: ώς δτι μάλιστα οδσι θεοϊς εύχαϊς προσδιαλεγομένους καί ίκετείαις, άνατέλλοντός τε ήλιου καΐ σελήνης και προς δυσμάς ιόντων προσκυλίσεις άμα και προσκυνήσεις άκούοντές τε καί όρώντες Ελλήνων τε καΐ βαρβάρων πάντων έν συμφοραϊς παντοίαις έχομένων καί έν εύπραγίαις, ούχ ώς ούκ 6ντων άλλ' ώς δτι μάλιστα δντων [cf. J. Α. Notopoulos in Cl. Journ. 37 (1942), 271]; Xen. Cyrop. 8, 1, 23 [of Cyrus]: ύμνεΐν τε άεΐ άμα τη ή μέρα τούς θεούς καί θύειν άν' έκάστην ήμέραν οίς οί μάγοι θεοϊς εϊποιεν; Philo, De Vita contempi. 89 [of the Essenes]: έπάν θεάσωνται τόν ήλιον άνίσχοντα, τάς χείρας άνατείναντες εις ούρανόν εύημερίαν καί άλήθειαν έπεύχονται [cf. 27]; Epictet. ap. Stob. vol. 4, 226, no. 88 Hense: ώσπερ ó ήλιος ού περιμένει λιτάς καί γοητείας ίνα άνατείλη, άλλ' ευθύς λάμπει καί πρός απάντων άσπάζεται; Joseph. Bell. lud. 2,128 [of the Essenes] ; Plut. Pomp. 14, 3: ó δέ Πομπήιος . . .

408 έννοεΐν έκέλευσε τόν Σύλλαν 8τι τόν ήλιον άνατέλλοντα πλείονες ή δυόμενον προσκυνοΰσιν ; Marceil. 6, 6: περιστρέψας τόν ίππον έναντίον τοις πολεμίους τόν ήλιον αυτός προσεκύνησεν, ώς δή μή κατά τύχην άλλ' ένεκα τούτου τη περιαγωγή χρησάμενος· οΰτω γάρ ίθος έστί 'Ρωμαίοις προσκυνεΐν τούς θεούς περιστρεφομένους ; Dion, 27, 3 : έσφαγιάζετο πρός τόν ποταμόν, άνατέλλοντι τω ήλίω προσευξάμενος ; Adv. Colot. 27, p. 1123a; Tac. Hist. 3, 24: orientent solerti (ita in Syria mos est) tertiani salutavere·, Ael. V.H. 5, 6[of Calanus]: καΐ ó μέν ήλιος αύτόν προσέβαλεν, è δέ αύτόν προσεκύνει· Dio Chrys. ap. Synes. Calv. Encom. 3; Apul. M. 2, 28: tune orientent obversus incrementa solis augusti tacitus imprecates venerabtlis scaenae facie studia praesentium ad miraculum tantum certatim arrexit; Lucían, De Salt. 17: ΊνδοΙ έπειδάν Ιωθεν άναστάντες προσεύχωνται τόν ήλιον, ούχ ώσπερ ήμεΐς τήν χείρα κύσαντες ήγούμεθα έντελή ήμών είναι τήν εύχήν, άλλ' έκεΐνοι πρός τήν άνατολήν στάντες όρχήσει τόν ήλιον άσπάζονται σχηματίζοντες έαυτούς σιωπή καΐ μιμούμενοι τήν χορείαν τοϋ θεοΰ· καΐ τοϋτό έστιν 'Ινδών καί εύχή καί χοροί καί θυσία; De Mort. Peregr. 39: καί γάρ τόδε τη προτεραία διεδέδοτο, ώς πρός άνίσχοντα τόν ήλιον άσπασάμενος—ώσπερ άμέλει καί τούς Βραχμανάς φασι ποιεϊν—έπιβήσεσθαι της πύρας; Dio Cass. 64, 14, 3: άνατείλαντος δέ τοϋ ήλίου, καί των στρατιωτών έκ τοϋ τρίτου στρατοπέδου τοϋ Γαλατικοΰ καλουμένου καί έν τη Συρία χειμάζοντος, τότε δέ κατά τύχην έν τη τοϋ Ούεσπασιανοϋ μερίδι δντος, άσπασαμένων αύτόν έξαίφνης ώσπερ εΐώθεσαν; Herodian, 4, 15, 1: άσπασάμενοι δέ τόν ήλιον, ώς έθος αύτοΐς, οί βάρβαροι; Tert. Ad Nat. 1, 13: non phrique affecfattone adorandi aliquando etiam caelestia ad solis initium labra vibratis [cf. Apol. 16] ; [Lact.] De Ave Phoenice, 71-82; Julian, Orat. 3, p. 107c [of Alexander the Great]: καί άνίσχοντα πρώτος άνθρώπων τόν ήλιον προσεκύνει; lambì. Vit. Pyth. 256; Macrob. Sat. 1, 17, 49: 'Απόλλων Φιλήσιος, quod lumen eius exoriens amabile amicissima veneratione consalutamus; Filasti. De Haeres. 10: Heliognosti ... solem

adorantes·, Marin. Vit. Proci. 22, p. 55: μετά τύ προσκυνήσαι ήλιον άνίσχοντα; Procop. 1, 3, 20-21 : είναι γάρ αύτοις νόμον τάς τοϋ ήλίου άνατολάς προσκυνεΐν ήμέρ$ έκάστη. δεήσειν οδν αύτόν τηρήσαντα ές τό άκριβές τόν καιρόν ξυγγενέσθαι μέν άμα ήμ-épqc τω τών Έ φ θαλιτών άρχοντι, τετραμμένον δέ που πρός άνίσχοντα ήλιον προσκυνεΐν ; Anon, ap. Suid. s.v. προσκυνεί· καί σέ προσκυνεΐν τον ήλιον της δικαιοσύνης [cf. Μαlachi, 4, 2]; Vienna Physiologus (cf. J. Hubaux and M. Leroy, Le Mythe du Phénix (1939), xxxiv): κατά άνατολήν τηροΰντα, ώσπερ τινά τρόπον εύχόμενον καί. έκδεχόμενον τήν τοϋ ήλίου ίξοδον; also certain magical uses cited by S. Eitrem in Pap. Osloenses, 1 (1925), 85; 93; cf. A. J. Festugière, La Réve'l. d'Hermès Trismeg. I 2 (1950), 292. To various brutes similar adoration of the sun, moon, or stars was ascribed; Plin. N.H. 2, 107 [gazelles seeming to worship the rising dog-star] ; 8, 2 [elephants saluting the new moon]; 8, 15 [monkeys worshipping the new moon]; Plut. De Soll. An. 17, p. 972b: ιστορεί δέ καί εύχή χρήσθαι θεών τούς έλέφαντας άδιδάκτως . . . τόν ήλιον έκφανέντα προσκυνοΰντας ώσπερ χειρός άνασχέσει της προβοσκίδος; [Lact.] De Ave Phoenice, 5154 [the phoenix saluting the rising sun]. The orientation of temples further recognized the custom (cf. Vitruv. 4, 5, 1), and prayers to the gods were thought to be fittingly directed toward the east (e.g., Schol. Pind. Isthm. 4, 110; Schol. Dan. Aen. 12, 172). On the Christians facing east in prayer cf. Tert. Apol. and the many cases cited by J. Ε. B. Mayor ad loc., to which add Ioann. Damasc. Barlaam et Ioasáph, 345; Leo, Serm. in Nativ. Dom. 7, 4 {Pair. Lat. 54, 218-219). Some Ethiopians, on the other hand, cursed the sun when it rose (Strab. 17, 2, 3; Diod. 3, 9, 2; Mela, 1, 43). For salutations of the rising moon see also Marin. Vit. Prod. 1111, p. 26. On appeals to the all-seeing sun cf. F. Cumont in Atti d. pontif. Accad. Rom. d. Arch. Ser. 3, vol. 1, pt. 1 (1923), 65-80. C. Koch (Gestirnverehrung i. alt. Ital. (1933), 14) supposed that our passage indicated the existence of a regular

409 cum subito a laeva Roscius exoritur. Pace mihi liceat, caelestes, dicere vestra; 1 mortalis visus pulchrior esse deo.' Huic deo pulchrior; at erat,2 sicuti hodie est, perversissimis 3 oculis. Quid refert, si hoc ipsum salsum 4 illi et venustum videbatur?

4

1 uera O 2 at erat DH, aderat cett. falsum DHNO

Roman custom of greeting the sun every morning, but A. D. Nock (CI. Rev. 25 (1935), 109, n. 2) doubts this, in view of the adverb forte (though this may mean that on this occasion the two different things coincided). Auroram: here apparently of the sun itself; cf. Serv. Aen. 6, 535: Donatus tarnen dicit Auroram cum quadrigis positam Solem significare. Davies compares also Val. Fl. 1, 283-284, where Aurora is contrasted with Luna. a laeva: from the favorable quarter; cf. Pease on Div. 1, 12 (a laeva)', also Div. 2, 82 : nobis sinistra videntur, Gratis et barbaris dextra meHora; Pease on Div. 2, 82 (laevum). exoritur: with play upon exorientem; Roscius too rises like the sun-god. Cf. the verses of H. D. Thoreau in love with Ellen Sewall (H. S. Canby, Thoreau (1939), 112): "Nature doth have her dawn each day, / But mine are far between; / Content, I cry, for, sooth to say, / Mine brightest are, I ween." pace . . . vestra: cf. Fat. 5; Legg. 3,29; 3, 35; O f f . 3, 41; 1, 59, n. (bona venia me audies) above; J. B. Hofmann, La t. Umgangssprache (1926), 131. liceat . . . dicere: cf. 1, 74: quod inter nos liceat. visus: for visus est; Plasberg compares Enn. Ann. 6 : visus Homerus adesse; 39-40 : me visus homo pulcher ... / ... raptare; T. Winter, De Ellipsi Verbi Esse (1907), 31-33. pulchrior . . . deo: J. Hubaux (Mém. de Pacad. roy. de Belg. 29, 1 (1930), 28, compares certain erotic verses of Meleager, in which the καλός is described

' peruersissimus O, peruersis B1

as fairer than a god: Anth. Pal. 12, 54, 3-4: ή γάρ ό κούρος / εΰρηται κρείσσων ούτος Έρωτος Έρως ; 12, 76, 3-4: οΰποτ' άν έγνως / έκ μορφας τις 2φυ Ζωίλος ή τις Έρως; 12, 78, 3-4: Άντίοχος μέν / ήν άν "Ερως, ó S' Έρως τάμπαλιν 'Αντίο χος; also Damoxenus ap. Athen. 1, 15b (of a καλός): Κωος· θεούς γάρ φαίνεθ' ή νήσος φέρειν. perversissimis oculis: cf. Diomedes, Ars gram. 3 {Gram. Lat. 1, 489 Keil): personis uti primus coepit Roscius Gallus, praecipuus histrio, quod oculis perversis erat nec satis decorus in personis nisi parasitus pronuntiabat; but cf. A. S. F. Gow in Journ. of Rom. Stud. 2 (1912), 66, for doubts as to this story; F. W. Wright in Smith Coll. cl. Stud. 11 (1901), 18. salsum: "piquant" (Mayor); cf. At t. 16, 12; De Ήρακλειδείω Varronis negotia salsa, me quidem nihil umquam sic delectavit. The participle, like the noun sal (as in Catull. 86, 4; Lucr. 4, 1162), commonly has the notion of wit, as in F am. 9, 15, 2: non Attici sed salsiores quam illi Atticorum Romani veteres atque urbani sales; Hor. S. 1, 9, 65. Parallel is the use of άλμυρός in Vhit.Quaest. conv. 5, 10, 4, p. 685e: εικός δέ μάλλον έμποιειν την άλμυρίδα· τοις μορίοις όδαξησμούς και συνεξορμαν τά ζωα πρός τούς συνδυασμούς, διά τοϋτο δ' ίσως καΐ κάλλος γυναικός τό μήτ' άργόν μήτ' άπίθανον, άλλά μεμιγμένον χάριτι καΐ κινητικόν, άλμυρόν καΐ δριμύ καλοϋσιν. It should be noted that this epigram does not necessarily imply any close relations between Catulus and Roscius, but perhaps only the fascination produced by a popular actor.

410 Redeo ad déos. 29 80 Ecquos 1 si non tam strabones 2 at 3 paetulos esse arbitramur, ecquos 4 naevum habere, ecquos 5 silos,® flaccos, frontones,7 capitones, quae sunt 8 in nobis, an omnia emendata in illis ? Detur id vobis ; num etiam una 9 est omnium 1 ecquos B2, et quos ACNOBxM 2 stabones Bl 5 ecquos B2, et quos cett. Β2, et quos CNOB1 8 sunt] qunt D1 9 u*na AI1 B1

redeo ad: a favorite phrase with Cicero; cf. 2, 92; 3, 88; and many other cases in H. Merguet, Lex. d. philos. Sehr. Cic. 1 (1887), 48. 80 ecquos: the reading et quos of our oldest mss is defended by other instances by T. Birt in Arch.f. lat. Lex. 15 (1908), 78. tam: quam est Roscius (Plasberg, ed. maior). strabones . . . paetulos : all the defects here noted are recognized in Roman names—Strabo, Paetus [cf. Plin. Ν. H. 11, 150: uni animali um homini depravantur, unde cognomina Strabonum et Ρae tor um], Situs, Flaccus, and Fronto among cognomina, and Naevius among nomina. Paetus is used of a lesser degree of squint than strabo·, cf. Varr. Men. 344 Bücheler: non haec res de Venere poeta strabam facit; Hör. 1, 3, 44-45; strabonem / appellai paetum pater [cf. Porphyr, ad loc.·. strabo detortis qui est oculis dicitur, paetus leniter declinatis·, Comm. Cruq. ad loc.]; also OY. Ars am. 2, 659: si paetast, Veneris similis; Petron. 68, 8: nam quod strabonus est non curo; sicut Venus spectat. Arnob. 7, 34, charges quodsi passent adscribere valetudines aegritudines et corporales diis morbos, non dubitarent eos líenosos, lippulos, atque enterocelicos dicere. Cf. Xenophanes (Vorsokrat. A, no. 11 Β 16): Αίθίοπές τε σιμούς μέλανάς τε / Θρήικές τε γλαυκούς καΐ πυρρούς «ρασι πέλεσθαι> ; and Metrodorus (De Sens. in Voll. Herculan. 7, 27) rejects such arguments: εί γάρ άνθρώπου, φσίν, μορφήν £ξε, δήλον ώς £ξει καΐ όφαλμούς, οΰτως και όφθαλμιάσει. το δ' αυτό καΐ έπί. των λοιπών αισθήσεων πείσεται. τοϋτο δέ καΐ αύτό λήρον χζί

β

3 ac NO silios O1

7

4 ecquos frontenes

πραπσιον. Further cf. (Scaevola ap.?) Aug. C.D. 4, 21: verus Deus nec sexum habeat nec aetatem nec definita corporis membra. arbitramur: with the indicative— here more vivid than the deliberative subjunctive—cf. 1, 83: facimus; 1, 91: putamus; 1, 102: volumus; Legg. 1, 56: dicimus; Am. 14: censemus; 24: quid arbitramur; Fin. 5, 63: quid loquor; also Tyrrell and Purser's edition of the Letters, 2 2 (1906), lxvii. naevum habere: suggested by 1, 79: naevos in articulo; cf. Arnob. 3, 14 (quoted on frontones, below). silos: as a common adjective perhaps only here. The four words here grouped are rare in Latin, and seem an attempt by Cicero to give a racy character to his style, well rendered by an anonymous English translator (London, 1683), 44: "Shooing-horn-nos'd, Bangle-ear'd, Jobber-nol'd, or Bittle-brow'd." flaccos: cf. Varr. R.R. 2, 9, 4 (of dogs): auriculis magnis et flaccis. frontones: "high-brows," and capitones, "big-heads"; rare words, and in Cicero only here; cf. Arnob. 3, 14: ergo esse dicendum est quosdam [sc. déos] capitones, cilunculos, frontones, labeones, simos, alios mentones, naevios, atque nasicas, hos displosis naribus, illos resimis, etc. On the Roman distaste for high foreheads cf. Hor. C. 1, 33, 5: tenui fronte Lycorida. quae sunt: a very loose use of the relative; cf. 1, 89: diabeticorum quae; also 2, 21 : omnia enim haec. detur: common of concessions for the sake of argument; e.g., 1, 89: id quoque damus ... quem tibi hoc daturum putas?

411 facies? Nam si 1 plures, aliam 2 esse alia pulchriorem necesse est, igitur aliquis non pulcherrimus deus 3 ; si una omnium facies est, florere incaelo Academiamnecesse est; si enim 4 nihil 5 inter deum et deum differì, nulla est apud deos β cognitio, nulla perceptio. 5

1 etsi ΒFM nihil om. Ο

2 6

aliam esse pulchriorem aliam Ν deos] deum D1

una . . . omnium facies: Epicurean concepts of the gods as set forth by Velleius had assumed anthropomorphic, happy, and eternal beings, but had not provided them with individual physiognomies; cf. 1, 49, η. (nee ad numerum)·, G. D. Hadzsits (Am. Journ. of Philol. 37 (1916), 317-326) compares these nebulous Epicurean gods to the numina of the old Roman religion. If, as Ac. 2, 83, asserts, nullum esse visum verum a sensu profectum cui non appositum sit visum aliud, quod ab eo nihil intersit quodque percipi noη possit [cf. 1, 12, above], then the means of differentiating between gods would be lacking even to those gods themselves. Cf. also Ac. 2, 54-55, and arguments drawn from the indistinguishable likenesses of eggs, bees, or twins, to others of the same kind. Yet bees and twins recognize one another, though to us they may appear identical; foreigners of one race often appear alike to those of a different race, though not to one another; similarly it might be argued that, while to us the gods are not clearly differentiated, to one another, within their own intermundia, they would be perfectly recognizable. Arnob. 3, 14 remarks of the gods: si enim par cunctis atque una est omnibus similitudinis species, non absurdum est credere errare eos fallique cogmtionis in mutuae comprebensione. sin autem gerunt discrimen in vultibus, sequitur ut intellegi debeat non alia de causa dissimilitudines his datas nisi ut singuli se possent differentium signorum proprietatibus noscitare. In this, as Mayor remarks, he falls into the error of supposing that perfection can be of only one type, and that variety can arise only by way of defect. Yet has not Arnobius merely taken over this difficulty from Cicero? In 4, 8, he inquires

3

deos B1

4

enim add.D

if there were gods indistinguishable until men had given them names. aliam . . . alia pulchriorem: polytheism has little escape from this dilemma, save (1) in assuming perfection in different fields, or (2) in supposing an unattractive uniformity among the gods ; if for pulchriorem we substitute potentiorem (or the more indefinite meliorem) we approach at once to one of the fundamental reasons supporting monotheism; cf. Boeth. De Trin. 3 : deus vero a eleo nullo d i f f e r ì , ne vel accidentibus vel substantialibus differentiis in subiecto positis distent, ubi vero nulla est differentia nulla est omnino plurali tasy quare nee numerus; igitur unitas tantum. igitur: initial in its clause, as often in the conclusion of a syllogism. non pulcherrimus: J. van Wageningen (Mnemosyne, 39 (1911), 137) wrongly understands this as = nonne. florere in caelo Academiam: cf. note on una .. . omnium facies, above. A heaven in which deities practiced Academic έποχή would be a reductio ad absurdum, and would run counter to both philosophic and popular beliefs in divine omniscience ; cf. 3, 90 : dea ne excusatio quidem est inscientiae·, upon the popular belief is founded all mythology, from as early as Od. 5, 79-80: ού γάρ τ' άγνώτες θεοί. άλλήλοισι πέλονται / αθάνατοι, ούδ' εϊ τις άπόπροθι δώματα ναίει. Is the facetious picture of a flourishing heavenly Academy perhaps here to be contrasted with the neglected state of that school upon earth (1, 11)? inter deum et deum differt: cf. Fat. 7 : inter locum et locum . .. différant. cognitio . . . perceptio: synonymous; cf. Ac. 2, 17: nec definiri aiebant necesse esse quid esset cognitio aut perceptio aut,

412 81 Quod 1 si etiam, Vellei, falsum illud omnino est, nullam aliam nobis 2 de deo cogitantibus speciem nisi hominis occurrere, tamenne ista 3 tam absurda defendes? 4 Nobis fortasse sic 5 occurrit ut dicis; a parvis 6 enim Iovem, Iunonem,' Minervam, Neptunum, Vulcanum, Apollinem, reliquos 8 deos ea facie 9 novimus qua pictores fictoresque voluerunt, neque solum facie sed etiam ornatu, aetate,10 vestitu. At non Aegyptii nec Syri nec fere 1 quod ACN, quo ΒFM1, quid dett. Aid. 2 uobis// 3 iste O 6 si ACNOM dett. Ascens., defendens ACNOBFM1, defenderis M2 7 iunonem om. H enim Klotz, Neue Jabrb. 71, 202, apparaisse codd. 9 facie* (e in ras.) Β 10 estate Ν que AB2FM

si verbum e verbo volumus, comprehensio, quam κατάληψιν illi vocant\ 2, 31; Fin. 3, 17: rerum autem cognitiones, quas ve! comprehensiones vel perceptiones, ve/, si haec verba aut minus placent aut minus intellegantur, καταλήψεις appellemus licet·, 5, 76: an ... quisquam potest probare quod perceptum, quod comprehensum, quod cognitum non habet? For cognitio cf. also 1, 43, n. (ínsitas vel potius innatas). 81 quod si: the deteriores and editors rather generally read quid, si, but quod si is the reading of ACN, and quosi of Β evidently derives from it rather than from quid si. By proper punctuation quod si may be retained, with the meaning: "But if also, Velleius, that other statement is wholly false, that no other form save the human comes to our minds when we think about God, will you all the same defend such absurd views?" With the structure of the sentence cf. 2, 3 : quod si haberem ... tamen . .. audire Vellern \Q. Fr. 1,1,37 : quod si te sors ... praefecisset .. . tamen esset humanitatis tuae consulere\ and especially Ac. 2, 26, where quid, quod si as the protasis is followed by an apodosis consisting of a rhetorical question: tamenne in ista pravitate perstabitis? In Pro Flacc. 21, we have quid? si ... tamenne. nullam aliam: with the thought here refuted cf. 1, 46; 1, 76. sic . . . ut: cf. 1, 49: sic troctet ut manu. a parvis enim: the brilliant and convincing emendation of R. Klotz (Neue Jahrb. 71 (1855), 202; id., De Emendatio-

4

defendes aparuis 8 reliquos β

nibus quae per Coniecturam fiunt (1857), 7) for the meaningless apparuisse of the mss. With the phrase cf. Legg. 2, 9 : a parvis enim, Quinte, didicimus\ and on youthful impressions of Cicero see G. Ammon in Festschr. 25-jähr. Stiftungsfest d. hist.-philol. Vereins d. Univ. München (1905), 26. Iovem, etc.: the list starts with the Capitoline triad; the other three are in the order found in Enn. Ann. 63, though this is possibly fortuitous. ea facie novimus: sc. esse. With the predicate ablative of quality cf. 2, 70: perturbatis animis inducuntur. pictores fictoresque: cf. 1, 77; Max. Tyr. 8, 6, quoted in 1, 82, n. (inon est talis Argia). ornatu: perhaps referring to the symbols—thunderbolt, trident, aegis, caduceus, etc.-—by which they are most easily recognized; cf. 2, 70 : et formae enim nobis deorum et aetates et vestitus ornatusque noti sunt. aetate: while birth-stories of the gods were often told, popular interest tended to crystallize the thought about each of them around some particular age; cf. 1, 83: Iovem semper barbatum, Apollinem semper imberbem (cf. note on Iovem . .. barbatum) ; 3, 83 : neque enim convenire barbatum esse filium [i.e., Aesculapium] cum in omnibus fanis pater imberbis esset·, and especially Artemid. Onirocr. 2, 44 [too long to quote]. Is this crystallization perhaps akin to that by which ghos t commonly assumed the appearance

413

cuncta barbaria; firmiores enim videas apud eos 1 opiniones esse de bestiis quibusdam quam apud nos de sanctissimis templis et simulacris deorum. 82 Etenim fana multa spollaia 2 et simulacra deorum de locis sanctissimis ablata videmus a nostris, at yero ne fando 3 quidem auditum 4 est crocodilum 5 aut ibin 6 aut faelem 7 1 eas BFM, eos opiniones . . . quam apud om. H 2 et spoliata O 3 nefandum 1 auditum HN, auditu ADB2FM 6 crocodillum H2M, (um in ras. ree.) A β ibim CNOBFM 7 paelem F corcodrillum F, cocodrillum Ο

which the deceased had at death, rather than that of some earlier period of his life (cf. Lact. Inst. 1, 17, 5: clarum est igitur homines fuisse illos qui dii putantur et eorum memoriam post mortem consecratam. ideo et aetates diversae sunt et certae imagines singulorum, quod in eo habitu et aetate simulacra eorum configurata sunt in qua quemque mors deprehendit). Commodianus inquires (Instruct. 1, 4, 1): Saturnusque senex si deus, deus quando senescit. The fine arts are in this respect more hampered than literature, and Dio Chrys. Or. 12,70, complains: πρός 8k αδ τούτοις êv σχήμα έκάστης εικόνος ανάγκη είργάσθαι, καΐ τοϋτο άκίνητον καΐ μένον, ώστε την πασαν έν αύτω του θεοϋ ξυλλοφεϊν φύσιν καΐ δύναμιν. vestitu: not only differences between the sexes and different ages but also between deities habitually represented as draped and others shown undraped. Aegyptii: on the Egyptian theriolatry in'general cf. 1, 43, n. ( A e g y p t i o r u m ) ; individual animals will be discussed in the next section. The effect of different customs upon different peoples is described at length by Sext. Emp. Pyrrhon. 3, 198-234 (cf. especially 219). Syri: cf. 3, 39: pi seem Syri venerantur, omne fere genus bestiarum Aegyptii consecraverunt [and the note on piscem Syri~\·, 3, 47. barbaria: somewhat like "heathendom"; used of regions or peoples outside Greece and Italy; cf. 2, 88; 2, 126; Fin. 2, 49 : non solum Graecia et Italia sed etiam omnis barbaria·, 5, 11; Tuse. 5, 77; Rep. 1, 5; De Domo, 60: omnemque barbariam·, J. Jüthner, Hellenen u. Barbaren (1923), who points out (p. 60) that in

early Roman usage barbarus may be applied to Romans, but also (p. 62 and p. 151) that from Cicero on we find a triple division: Greeks, Romans, barbarians (cf. Rep. 1, 58 : si, ut Graeri dicunt, omnis aut Graios esse aut barbaros, vereor ne barbarorum rex fuerit [sc. Romulus] ; sin id nomen moribus dandum est, non Unguis, non Graecos minus barbaros quam Romanos puto)·, T. J. Haarhoff, The Stranger at the Gate (1938), 221, n. Cf. also M. Hammond in Harv. Stud, in cl. Philol. 58/9 (1948), 138. firmiores . . . opiniones: cf. Tim. 28: opiniones adsensionesque firmae. sanctissimis: cf. G. Link, De Voce "sanctus" Usu pagano (1910). The word is awkwardly repeated just below, as simulacris deorum is also immediately repeated in 1, 82; cf. also 2, 79: eorum augusta et sancta simulacra. 82 fana . . . spoliata: on sacrilegium, or the stealing of holy objects from temples, cf. 3, 83-84, and notes. With the decay of Roman religion during the civil wars many temples fell into disrepair (cf. Augustus's boast in Res gestae, 20, of restoring 82 temples in his sixth consulship), and became subject to pillage; cf. 2 Verr. 4, passim·, Sail. Cat. 11, 6 [of the time of Sulla]: ibi primum insuevit exercitus populi Romani ... signa, tabulas pietas, vasa caelata mirari, ea privatim et publice rapere, delubra spoliare, sacra profanaque omnia polluere·, W. W. Fowler, Social Life at Rome in the Age of Cic. (1915), 321-322. simulacra deorum . . . sanctissimis: phrases repeated from the previous sentence. fando . . . auditum est: "no one

414 has ever heard tell"; cf. Pro Quinct. 71: ne fando quidem audita·, Plaut. Amph. 588: nec jando umquam accepit qwsquam·, Epid. 496 : fando ego istuc nomen numquam audivi·, Cato, Or. ap. Gell. 18, 9, 1 : ñeque fando ñeque legendo audivimus; Liv. 4, 3, 10: en umquam creditis fando auditurn esse·, 10, 8, 10: en umquam fando audistis·, 28, 40, 10: quod fando numquam ante auditum erat; 35, 48, 5: vixfando auditis·, 45, 26, 8: saepe fando audivi ; Sil. Ital. 10, 483-484: si Porsena fando / auditus tibi·, Plin. Paneg. 86, 2: fando inauditum·, Fronto, 1, p. 178 Haines (p. 68 Naber): apros captos esse fando audiimus·, Apul. Flor. 3, init.: ut fando accepimus·, Met. 6, 15: fando comperisti·, Apol. 9: quis umquam fando audivit [cf. 42] ; 81 : multa fando ... audisti ; Sulp. Sev. Dial. 1, 3, 4: ne quando [lege fandó\ quidem auditum est·, Macrob. Sat. 3,17,12 : nemo ... velfando compererit·, Symm. Ep. 1, 64, 1 : fando acceperas; 4, 29: fando didici·, Relat. 47, 1: fando acceperat·, Prud. C. Symm. 5, 256: nec fando compertam\ Aug. C. Iulian. Op. imperf. 4, 75: fando accepimus·, also Virg. Aen. 2, 81 : fando aliquod si forte tuas pervertit ad auris. Fari is an infrequent verb in Cicero; cf. L. Laurand, Ét. sur le tyle des discours de Cic. (1907), 85. J. P. Waltzing {Mus. belge, 4 (1900), 124-125) thinks this an archaism preserved in the language of the people; as here used it gives a familiar tone. crocodilum: on the form of this much misspelled word cf. Anon. De dub. Nomin. {Gram. hat. 5, 575 Keil); F. Ritsehl, Opuse. 2 (1868), 536-541. Cicero mentions crocodiles at 1, 101; 2, 124; 3, 47; Tuse. 5, 78: Aegyptiorum morem quis ignorati quorum inbutae mentes pravitatis erroribus quamvis carnificinam prius subierint quam ibim aut aspidem aut faelem aut canem aut crocodilum violent, quorum etiamsi inprudentes quippiam fecerint, poenam nullam recusent. On Egyptian theriolatry in general cf. 1, 43, η. {Aegyptiorum), above; for the worship of crocodiles in particular cf. Hdt. 2, 69 : τοϊσι μέν δή των Αιγυπτίων ίροί είσι οί κροκόδειλοι, τοΐσι δέ oö, άλλ' άτε πολεμίους περιέπουσι· οί δέ περί τε Θήβας καΐ τήν Μοίριος λίμνην οίκέοντες καί κάρτα ήγηνται αύτούς είναι ίρούς

. . . περιέποντες ώς κάλλιστα ζώντας· άποθανόντας δέ θάπτουσι ταριχεύοντες έν Ιρησι θήκησι, οί δέ περί Έλεφαντίνην πόλιν οίκέοντες καί έσθίουσι αύτούς ούκ ήγεόμενοι ίρούς είναι; 2, 90; 2, 148; Aristot. Oec. 2, 1352 a 23-24: τον νόμον ού έστί θεός ό κροκόδειλος; Diod. 1, 35, 6: των μέν γάρ έγχωρίων τοις πλείστοις νόμιμόν έστιν ώς θεόν σέβεσθαι τόν κροκόδειλον; 1, 83, 1; Strab. 17, 1, 38: 'Αρσινόη Κροκοδείλων δέ πόλις έκαλεϊτο πρότερον· σφόδρα γάρ έν τω νόμω τούτω τιμώσι τόν κροκόδειλον; 17, ί, 47; Joseph. C. Αρ. 1, 254; 2, 86; Philo, De Vita contempi. 8; Legat, ad Gaium, 139; De Decal. 78 [the Egyptians have chosen for worship not only useful animals but also the most savage, like crocodiles and asps] ; id., ap. Eus. Pr. Ev. 8, 14, 65; Plut. Quaest. corn. 4, 5, 2, p. 670a; 7, 4, 3, p. 703a; De Soll. An. 23, p. 976b; De Is. et Os. 75 [reasons for its worship] ; Max. Tyr. 2, 5 ; Just. Mart. 1 Apol. 24; Ael. N.A. 10, 21; Sext. Emp. Pyrrhon. 3, 219; Artemid. Onirocr. 3, 11 [perhaps implied]; Lucian, De Sacrif. 14; Iup. Trag. 42; Juv. 15, 2-3 [and Mayor's n.] ; Athenag. Leg. pro Christ. 1; Min. Fei. 28, 8; Aristid. Apol. 12; Tert. Adv. Marc. 2, 14; Ad Nat. 2, 8; Clem. Paedag. 3, 2, 4, 4; Porphyr. De Abstin. 4, 9; Cypr. Ad Demetr. 12; Orig. C. Cels. 3, 17; 3, 21; 5, 27; 5, 34; 5, 39; 5, 51; 6, 80; Alex. Lycopol. De Manich. 14; Eus. Pr. Ev. 3, 4, 14; Epiphan. Ancyr. 103; Rufin. Hist. Monach. 7, p. 148 [oxen worshipped by the Egyptians because of their utility]; Hier. In Ioel, 3, p. 207 Vail.; Theodoret, Gr. A f f . 3, 85; Prud. C. Symm. 2, 870; Peristeph. 10, 258; Mart. Cap. 2, 183; Nonnus Abbas, Collectio {Pair. Gr. 36, 1072d); Steph. Byz. pp. 385-386 Meineke ; loan. Damasc. Barlaam et Ioasaph, 250; Anecd. Oxon. 4, 245 Cramer; A. Wiedemann, Relig. of the anc. Egyptians (Engl. tr. 1897), 191 ; H. Gossen-Steier in P.-W. 11 (1922), 19521954 (on the domestication and worship of the crocodile); T. Hopfner in P.-W. 14 (1928), 316 (on its magical association with the god Sebak (Σοϋχος of Strab. 17, 1, 38)); and, in general, the bibliography given above at 1, 43, n. {Aegyp-

415 tiorum), particularly F. Zimmermann, Die ägypt. Relig. (1912), 105-108; T. Hopfner, in Denkschr. d. k. Akad. d. Wiss. in Wien, 57, 2 (1915), 125-135; id., Fontes Hist. Relig. Aegypt. 5 (1925), 830-831. On the towns where it was honored see J. G. Wilkinson, The anc. Egyptians, 3 2 (1883), 329; for those in which it was execrated, id., 332; for mummified crocodiles id., 329; on crocodile-worship in central Africa today cf. J. G. Frazer, Golden Bough, 8 3 (1914), 213-214. ibin: cf. 1, 101 [with an account of its usefulness]; 3, 47. Aristotle (Hist. An. 9, 27, 617 b 28-31) says that there are two kinds, the white (Ibis aethiopica Latham; sometimes called Ibis religiosa Cuv.) and the black (Ibis falcinellus Temm.); cf. D. W. Thompson ad loc. Other writers dealing with their sanctity include Hdt. 2, 65: δς 8' αν Ιβιν ή Ιρηκα άποκτείνη, ήν τε έκών ήν τε άέκων, τεθνάναι άνάγκη ; Plat. Phaedr. 274c: ήκουσα τοίνυν περί Ναύκρατιν . . . γενέσθαι των έκεϊ παλαιών τινά θεών, οδ και το ορνεον το ιερόν, δ δή καλοϋσιν Ιβιν· αύτω δέ δνομα τω δαίμονι είναι Θεύθ; cf. Horapollo, 1, 10; 1, 36; J. G. Wilkinson, The anc. Egyptians, 3 2 (1883), 166-167; 324-325; but especially G. Roeder in P.-W. 9 (1916), 814-815); Timocles ap. Athen. 7, 300b; Diod. 1,83,1 ; 1, 83, 6; 1, 87,6; Strab. 17,1, 40; Philo, De Decaí. 79; De Vita contempi. 8; Macer ap. Charis. Inst. 1 (Gram. Lat. 1, 133 Keil) : auxilium sacrae veniunt cultoribus ibes-, Plin. N.H. 10, 75; Juv. 15, 3 [and Mayor's n.]; Plut. De Is. et Os. 72, p. 379f; 73, p. 380e; Max. Tyr. 2, 5; Polyaen. Strat. 7, 9 ; Lucian, Deor. Cone. 10; De Sacrif. 14; Iup. Trag. 42; Aristid. Apol. 12; Tert. Adv. Marc. 2, 14; Ad Nat. 2, 8; Solin. 32, 33; Porphyr. De Abstin. 4, 9; [Clem.] Recogn. 5, 20; Clem. Protr. 5, 65, 2; Philostr. Vita Apoll. 6, 19; Eus. Pr. Εν. 3, 4, 14; Epiphan. Ancyr. 103; Hier. In loe/, 3, p. 207 Vail.; Amm. Marc. 22, 15, 25; Theodoret, Gr. A f f . 3, 85; Prud. Peristeph. 10, 258; Mart. Cap. 2, 175-178; Nonnus Abbas, Co/lectio (Patr. Gr. 36, 1072d) ; Lyd. De Mens. 3, 11: καΐ την Ιβιν δέ καΐ τόν κέρκωπα Αίγυπτίοις έδό-

κει τ ι μ α ν άμφότερα γάρ τά ζώα σελήνη συμπαθή είναι προσείκασται . . . 6τε γάρ ούρανός άσέληνος ούδέ (βίδες όρώσι [cf. 4, 76]; Schol. II. 17, 98; Eustath. in II. 22, 69. Endowments were appointed for their support (cf. T. Hopfner, Der Tierwelt d. alt. Ägypter (1913), 15-16), and their corpses were mummified and deposited in special cemeteries (G. Roeder in P.-W. 9 (1916), 811-812), being taken especially to Hermupolis (Hdt. 2, 67; Ael. N . A . 10, 29; for an illustration of an underground chapel of the ibis and Theuth there see Illustr. London News, 2 July, 1928, 7). The ibis is today found from S. Nubia to the Congo and Senegal, in summer ranging northward to upper Egypt (Roeder, op. cit., 808). As in some other cases, so with the ibis, sanctity was accompanied by rather dirty and scavenging habits (Roeder, op. cit., 809), hence the title of the abusive poems of this name by Callimachus and Ovid; cf. Roeder, op. cit., 809-810; W. von Christ-W. SchmidO. Stählin, Gesch. d. gr. Lit. 2, 1« (1920), 130-131, n. 12. On the ibis in general see also J. G. Wilkinson, op. cit., 3 2 , 321-326; A. Deiber in Mem. ...de Γ inst, f r . d'arch. orient, du Caire, 10 (1904), 103105; F. Zimmermann, op. cit., 116-118; T. Hopfner, in Denkschr. d. k. Akad. d. Wiss. in Wien, 57, 2 (1915), 117-121; id., Fontes Hist. Relig. Aegypt. 5 (1925), 849; D. W. Thompson, Glossary of Greek Birds2 (1936), 106-114. Hygin. Astron. 2, 28, gives another explanation of the relation of this and other sacred animals to their respective gods : Aegyptii sacerdotes et nonnulli poetae dicunt, cum complures dii in Aegyptum convertissent, repente pervenisse eodem Typhona, acerrimum giganta, et maxime deorum hostem. quo timore permotos in alias figuras se convertisse; Mer curium factum esse ibi m, Apollinem autem quae Threicia avis vocatur, Dianam aeluro similatam. quibus de causis Aegyptios ea genera violare non sinere demonstrant, quod deorum imagines dicantur-, cf. Nicand. ap. Ant. Liber. 28, 3; Ov. M. 5, 321-331 (330-331 \fele soror Phoebi ... ¡ pisce Venus latuit, Cyllenius ibidis ali s). faelem: in Latin the spelling is usually feles, but in Cicero (1, 101; 3, 47; Tusc.

416

violatumab Aegyptio.1 Quid igitur censes? Apimilium 2 sanctum 3 8

1 aegyptio H2 dett. sanctissimum D

Rom.,

egypto cett.

5, 78; Legg. 1, 32) and Varrò (R.R. 3,11, 2; 3, 12, 3) the best ms evidence supports faeles—catta first appears in Mart. 13, 69; cattus in Pallad. 4, 9, 4. On the presence of the cat in Egypt from the early dynasties—P. le P. Renouf (Academy, 43 (1893), 107 mentions pictures from the Twelfth Dynasty—, its late introduction into S. Europe (from the second to the fifth century after Christ, no traces of it being found at Pompeii or Herculaneum, according to O. Keller, Die ant. Tierwelt, 1 (1909), 79), and the probable early taming and hybridizing of two species, Felis maniculata Rüppel and F. chaus. Giild. to produce the domestic cat, see E. Orth in P.- W. 11 (1922), 52-54, and the works cited by him on Sp. 57. But E. Naville, Bubastis (1891), 53, found that most of the skeletons examined at Bubastis were of F. maniculata, a native of Ethiopia and the upper Nile valley. The Egyptian worship of the cat, beginning ca. 2000 B.C. (Keller, op. cit., 1, 68; Zimmermann, op. cit., 113), is mentioned by many authors, including : Anaxandrides ap. Athen. 7, 300a; Timocles ap. Philodem. De Piet. pp. 87-88 Gomperz = Athen. 7, 300b; Cic. Τ use. 5, 78 (quoted in note on crocodilum, above); Legg. 1, 32: si opiniones aliae sunt apud alios, idcirco, qui canem et faelem ut deos colunt\ Diod. 1, 83, 1; 1, 83, 3 [the slayer of a cat was put to death]; Strab. 17, 1, 40; Philo, De Decaí. 79; id., ap. Eus. Pr. Εν. 9, 27, 4; Joseph. C. Ap. 2, 81 [if, with Thackeray ad loc. we so explain the otherwise unknown word furonibus] ; Plut. Quaest. corn. 4, 5, 2, p. 670a; De Is. et Os. 63, p. 376e-f; Ptol. Tetrab. 3, 8; possibly Ael. V.H. 6, 8; Just. Mart. 1 Apol. 24; Polyaen. S trat. 7, 9; Lucían, Iup. Trag. 42; Imag. 11; Athenag. Leg. pro Christ. 1; Aristid. Apol. 12; Orac. ap. Theophil. Ad Autol. 2, 36; [Clem.] Recogn. 5, 20; Horn. 10, 16; Tert. Ad Nat. 2, 8; Clem. Protr. 2, 41, 4; Paedag. 3, 2, 4, 4; Orig. C. Cels. 3, 17; 3, 21; 5, 51; Arnob. 1, 28; Eus. Pr. Ev.

2

apimulum D, apud nullum H

6, 10, 46; Epiphan. Ancyr. 103; Cyril. Hierosol. Catech. 6,10 ; 13,40 ; Horapollo, 1, 10; Diod. Tars. ap. Phot. Bibl. cod. 223, p. 218b Bekker; Mart. Cap. 2, 183; Nonnus Abbas, Collectio (Patr. Gr. 36, 1072d); loan. Damasc. Barlaam et Ioasaph, 250; Anecd. Oxon. 4, 245 Cramer; J. E. B. Mayor on Juv. 15, 7; A. Wiedemann, Relig. of the anc. Egyptians (Engl. tr. 1897), 186, who remarks upon the especial fondness shown toward cats in Egypt today; A. Deiber, op. cit., 105-108; O. Keller in Rom. Mitteil. 23 (1908), 40-70 (on the cat in antiquity); F. Zimmermann, Die ägypt. Relig. (1912), 112-113; E. Orth in P.-W. 11 (1922), 55-57 ; T. Hopfner, Denkschr. d. k. Akad. d. Wiss. in Wien, 57, 2 (1915), 35-40; id., Fontes Hist. Relig. Aegypt. 5 (1925), 839 (index). N. and B. Langton, The Cat in anc. Egypt (1940), has not been accessible to me. Cf. also R. Engelmann in Jahrb. d. k. d. arch. Inst. 14 (1899), 136-143. The corpses of cats were conveyed for cremation, rather than mummification (E. Naville, Bubastis (1891), 54), and for preservation to the town of Bubastis (Hdt. 2, 67; cf. Steph. Byz. p. 179 Meineke: oí S' Αιγύπτιοι βούβαστον τόν αίλουρόν φασι); see Naville, op. cit., 52-55, who points out (p. 53) that the cat-cemetery there was started as early as the Twenty-second Dynasty, and who indicates its size by the fact that a single pit alone contained over 720 cubic feet of cat-bones, with a few ichneumons intermixed; E. Sethe in P.-W. 3 (1899), 931-932; for other cat-cemeteries cf. Zimmermann, op. cit., 112. Bubastis is itself the name of a goddess equated by the Greeks with Artemis (Sethe, op. cit., 930), with whom the cat is associated (Ον. M. 5, 330), though also with the sun-god, Rä (Zimmermann, op. cit., 112-113). Hdt. 2, 60, says that as many as 700,000 pilgrims at a time would assemble at Bubastis for her rites. violatum: since ibiti and faehm are

417 both normally feminine it appears that the gender of the participle is determined by the more distant crocodilum·, cf. 2, 156: vitibus olivetisque ... quarum\ O f f . 1, 14: pulchritudinem, constantiam, ordinem ... conservandam·, Fin. 5, 71: motus fortume mutationesque rerum . .. imbecillos fore; Div. 2, 66 : tritici grana ... aut apes ... non tam mirabilia sint; Legg. 1, 1 : lucus quidem ille et haec Arpinatium quercus agnoscitur saepe a me lectus\ Pro Font. 44: Macedonia ... quae cum se ac suas urbis ... conservât am esse dicat\ Pro Sest. 113: animum ... et fidem ac fortitudinem ... gratum fuisse·, De Or. 3, 185: membra et pedes ... sunt . .. diffusa·, AdFam. 10, 21, 5 : non modo honorem sed misericordiam quoque defuturum·, 10, 24, 1 : amor ... et iudicium . . . adlaturus; 10, 25, 1 : operam tuam, navitatem, animum ... anteponendam; and many cases from other authors cited by R. Kiihner-C. Stegmann, Aus f . Gram, d. lat. Spr. 2, l 2 (1912), 53. quid . . . censes: cf. 1, 78; and for other cases in which the grammatical form of a preceding sentence is continued without regard to the construction which the sense would naturally require see Reid on Fin. 2, 88. A p i m : cf. Rep. 3, 14: bovem quendam putari deum, quem Apim Aegyptii nominant. This sacred bull, the Egyptian Hapi (cf. R. Pietschmann in P.-W. 1 (1894), 2807), is well described by Hdt. 3, 28: ό δέ τ Απις οΰτος è Έπαφος [cf. 2, 153: Τ Απις κατά τήν 'Ελλήνων γλώσσαν έστί Έπαφος; Aesch. P.V. 851 makes him the son of Io; cf. Oxyrh. Pap. no. 1241, col. 3, line 31; A. B. Cook, Zeus, 1 (1914), 437-441; but Ael. N . A . 11, 10, says the Egyptians deny this identification; cf. I. M. Linforth in Univ. of Calif. Pubi, in class. Philol. 2 (1910), 81-92] γίνεται μόσχος έκ βοός ήτις οΰκέτι οΐη τε γίνεται ές γαστέρα όίλλον βάλλεσθαι γόνο ν. Αιγύπτιοι δέ λέγουσι σέλας έπΐ τήν βοϋν έκ του ούρανοϋ κατίσχειν και μιν έκ τούτου τίκτειν τόν Τ Απιν [cf. Mela, 1, 58; Ael. N . A . 11, 10; but Plut. De Is. et Os. 43, p. 368c; Quaest. conv. 8, 1, 3, p. 718b; Porphyr, ap. Eus. Pr. Ev. 3, 13, 2; Suid. s.v. "Απιδες, make the impregnating force a moonbeam; on Io impregnated by a

touch see the passages cited by Cook, op. cit., 1, 438, n. 10]. ϊχει δέ 6 μόσχος οδτος δ Τ Απις καλεόμενος σημήια τοιάδε έών μέλας, έπΐ μέν τ ω μετώπω λευκόν τι τρίγωνον, έπΐ δέ τοϋ νώτου αίετόν είκασμένον, έν δέ τη ούρη τάς τρίχας δίπλας, ύπό δέ τη γλώσση κάνθαρον; but cf. Pietschmann, I.e., for divergent accounts of the distinguishing marks (variisque coloribus Apis, says Ον. M. 9, 691 ; Ael. N . A . 11,10, says there were 29 marks necessary for his identification). Hdt. 2, 153, describes a court built by Psammetichus I beside the temple of Ptah (Hephaestus) at Memphis, in which Apis, whenever he appeared, was kept and fed. A. Mariette (Le Sérapéum de Memphis (1857-1866)) in 1851 excavated the Serapeum, finding the tombs of over sixty bulls, with sarcophagi averaging 58 tons each in weight (cf. A. Wiedemann, Relig. of the anc. Egyptians (Engl. tr. 1897), 190), some still containing the mummified bulls. The cult included the taking of prognostications from Apis's licking or receiving food from a consultant, or occasionally from his bellowing (cf. Plin. N.H. 8,185; Dio Chrys. Or. 32,13; Diog. L. 8, 909 (cf. Ant h. Pal. 1, 744); Paus. 7, 22, 4; Ael. N.A. 11, 10; Solin. 32, 19; Xen. Ephes. 5, 4; A m a . Marc. 22, 14, 8; Claud. De IV Cons. Hon. 576; Lact. Plac. in Theb. 3, 478; Isid. Etym. 8, 11, 86), celebrations of his birthday (Plin. N.H. 8, 186; Solin. 32, 21), remembrance of his death brought about after 25 years by drowning in a sacred fountain (Plin. N.H. 8, 184; Plut. De Is. et Os. 56, p. 374a; Stat. Silv. 3, 2, 115-116; Solin. 32, 18; Amm. Marc. 22, 14, 7; J. G. Frazer, Golden Bough, 8 3 (1934), 36), ritual mourning (Tib. 1, 7, 28 [and K. F. Smith ad loc.] ; Lucían, De Sacrif. 15 ; De Syr. Dea, 6 ; Polyaen. S trat. 7, 11, 7; Liban. Or. 61, 20), a costly burial (Diod. 1, 84, 8), search for a successor, and rejoicing at the discovery of a new Apis. After death and mummification (cf. C. Cornevin in Mém. de Ρ Acad. ...de Lyon, 3 ser., 4 (1896), 320, fig. 1) Apis was worshipped as Sorapis and then Serapis (or Sarapis); cf. Nymphodorus ap. Clem. Strom. 1, 21, 106, 6; 27

418

Aegyptiorum bovem nonne deum videri Aegyptiis ? Tarn hercle 1 quam tibi illam vestram Sospitam.2 Quam tu numquam ne in 1

ercle N, erde H

2

sopitam Ν

Athenodorus ap. Clem. Protr. 4, 48, 6; those noted in Hopfner, Denkschr. d. k. Rufìn. Hist. eccl. 2, 23, fin.; Cyril. Alex. Akad. d. Wiss. in Wien, 57, 2 (1915), 19; C. Iulian. 1, p. 13; Isid. Etym. 8, 11, 76-86; id., Fontes Hist. Relig. Aegypt. 5 85-86; Suid s.v. Σάραπις; O. Gruppe, (1925), 813-815 (index) may be added: Gr. Myth. u. Rei. 2 (1906), 1576, η. 1; 3, 47, infra; Aristot. Eth. Eud. 1, 5, 1216 a l ; Manetho, fr. 8 (in Syncell. p. Nock and Festugière, ed. of Hermes 101); fr. 9 (in Syncell. p. 103; cf. fr. 10 Trism. 2 (1945), 395-396. Divergent accounts derive Sarapis from a man ap. Eus. Chron. 1, p. 96 in the Armenian); named Apis rather than from a bull. For Suet. Aug. 93; Orig. Horn. 4 in Exod.·, an identification of Osiris with the two [Clem.] Horn. 10, 16; Diod. Tars. ap. bulls, Apis of Memphis and Mnevis of Phot. Bibl. cod. 223, p. 218 b 19-20 Heliopolis, cf. J. G. Frazer, Golden Bekker; Theodoret, Gr. A f f . 3, 26; Bough, 8 3 (1914), 34, n. 4. The cult of Schol. Lucan. 8, 479 ; 9, 160; Ioann. Apis extends from the Fourth Dynasty Damasc. Barlaam et Ioasaph, 250; Anecd. (A. Wiedemann, op. cit., 188, though Oxon. 4, 244 Cramer. Among modern Ael. N.A. 11, 10, ascribes its foundation works: A. H. Sayce on Hdt. 2, 153; A. to Menes, first king of the First Dynasty) Wiedemann, op. cit., 187-191 ; A. Deiber to the latter half of the fourth century in Mem. ... de Γinst. f r . d'arch. orient, du after Christ (J. Toutain in Le Muséon, Caire, 10 (1904), 91-99; A. Erman, 3 ser. 1, 2 (1916), 193-202, especially Handbook of Egypt. Relig. (Engl. tr. 1907), 22-24; F. Zimmermann, op. cit., 199). The worship of golden calves by the 94-98; L. Malten, Der Stier i. Kult(fahrb. Israelites (Exod. 32, 1-8; Ps. 106, 19; d. deutsch, arch. Inst. 43 (1928), 92-98). Acts, 7, 41, for that erected by Aaron; tarn: Moser, as quoted by Mayor, 1 Kings, 12, 28-30; 2 Kings, 10, 29; notes the occurrence of endings in -am 2 Chron. 13, 8-9; Hosea, 13, 2; Joseph. seven times in ten words: tarn ... quam .. . illam vestram Sospitam. quam ... Bell. lud. 4, 3; Ant. 8, 226-228, for the two erected by Jeroboam) may perhaps numquam. be derived from that of Apis, as was hercle: Cicero uses the forms hercle thought by Philo (De Post. Caini, 158 (Tusc. 2, 26; Legg. 2, 8; 2, 34; 3,1), hercule (cf. 165); De Ehrtet. 95; De Vita Mosis, (often, though not in this work,) mehercle 2,162 ; 2,270 ; De spec. Legg. 1, 79 ; 3,125) (2, 74), and mehercule (often, including and by several Church Fathers ([Clem.] 1, 78; 3, 3; 3, 23). Recogn. 1, 35; Lact. Inst. 4, 10, 12; Hier. vestram: for Velleius as a townsman In Osee, 1, p. 44 Vail.; 2, p. 79; [Rufin.] of Lanuvium cf. 1, 79, η. (municipem In Amos, 1, p. 535; Hegemonius, Distuum Rosei um). putât io, 31; Philop. De Opif. 4, 1), as Sospitam: Fest. p. 343 M. (p. 462 L.): also by the First Vatican Mythographer, Sispitem Iunonem, quem vulgo Sospitam 79. But in any event it falls in the wider appellant, antiqui usurpabant, cum ea vox category of the cult of cattle, which ex Graeco videatur sumpta, quod est σώζειν; belongs to a society in the pastoral cf. the Lanuvian inscriptions : C.I.L. stage ; cf. Prob, in Virg. G. 1, 19; I, 2, 1430 = XIV, 2090 = Dessau 3097: Frazer, op. cit., 8 3 , 35. For the influence Q. Caecilius Cn. A. Q. Flamini leibertus of the Apis-cult itself upon foreign Iunone Seispitei matri regime·, Not. d. Sc. cattle-cults cf. A. B. Cook, Zeus, 1 1907, 657 = Ephem. epigr. 9 (1910), no. (1914), 635'639. 605 = Dessau 9246 : Herculi San To the passages already cited and et Iunoni Sispit ; C.I.L. XIV, 2091 :

1, 82

419

somnis quidem vides nisi cum pelle caprina, cum hasta, cum lutto S.M.R. [i.e., lutto Sospita Mater Regina]; XIV, 2088; 2089 ; 2121: I.S.M. R. Coins consistently call her Sispita, according to J. B. Carter, De Deor. Rom. Cognom. (1898), 56, and A. Zimmermann (Philol. Woch. 41 (1921), 1056) would derive this from se + spes (" Wunschlose"). E. M. Douglas (Mrs. A. W. Van Buren) in Journ. of Rom. Stud. 3 (1913), 60-72, in a study of this deity, observes that Sospes, Seispes, and Sispes are the older, but Sospita and Sispita the commoner forms. Her oldest temple was at Lanuvium, where the inscriptions just mentioned were found (for the remains cf. G. Β. Colburn in Am. Journ. of Arch. 18 (1914), 185-198; A. Galieti in Bull. d. Comm. arch. com. di Roma, 44 (1916), 3-36, especially 3, η. 1), in which, in 338 B.C., the Romans also asserted joint privileges (Liv. 8, 14, 2), to which gifts of value were offered (Liv. 21, 62, 8; 22, 1, 17), and at which portents were often observed (Liv. 23, 31, 15; 24, 10, 6; 29, 14, 3; 31, 12, 5; 40, 19, 2; Jul. Obseq. 6; 12; 20; 46). There was also in Juno's grove at Lanuvium a cave or hole with a sacred serpent to which maidens came for a test of their virginity, Juno herself being a goddess of marriage ; cf. E. Rein in Comm. in Hon. Fr. Gustafsson (1921), no. 3, 1-38; J. G. Frazer on Ov. F. 2, 55 (pp. 296-297, stressing the supposed connection between sexual impurity and the blighting of agricultural crops). Although Sospita also had a temple at Rome in the Forum Olitorium, vowed by the consul C. Cornelius Cethegus in the war with the Insubres in 197 B.C. (Liv. 32, 30, 10) and dedicated by him as censor in 194 B.C. (Liv. 34, 53, 3, where Livy confuses her with Iuno Matuta), which was restored during the Marsic War in 90 B.C., by the consul P. Rutilius, because of a dream of Caecilia Metella (Di». 1, 4, and Pease's n.; 1, 99; Jul. Obseq. 55), and another on the Palatine (known only from Ov. F. 2,55-56, where see Frazer's n.), it seems likely, in view of the phrases vestram Sospitam and alia

Lanuinis, that the cult-image here mentioned was that at Lanuvium, where Cicero says (Pro Mur. 90) that all the consuls had to perform annual sacrifices (yet cf. the n. on calceolis répandis, below). Cicero's description of this statue is compared by Miss Douglas (op. cit., 60-72; cf. J. G. Frazer on Ov. F. 2, 55) with the rather small number of extant works of art representing it, the best being a statue in the Vatican (cf. S. Reinach, Ré p. de la statuaire gr. et rom. 1 (1906), 200, no. 731) and one in Rome in the Coll. Vescovali (Reinach, op. cit., 1, 201, no. 733), though noteworthy is a series of coins (listed by Miss Douglas, op. cit., 63, η. 3; cf. H. Philipp in P.- W. 12 (1924), 695), in which her head is regularly covered by the conventional goatskin. On the whole subject, in addition to the works mentioned, cf. W. H. Roscher in his Ausf. Lex. 2 (1890), 595-596; C. O. Thulin in P.-W. 10 (1917), 1120-1121 ; J. Carcopino, Virgile et les origines d'Ostie (1919), 75; E. L. Shields in Smith Coli. ci. Stud. 7 (1926), 67-70; A. E. Gordon, "The Cults of Lanuvium" (Univ. of Calif. Pubi, in ci. Arch. 2 (1938)), 23-37, especially the works noted at 23, n. 20. With the accusative construction of illam vestram Sospitam cf. 1, 86: non animadvertunt hic eum ambigue locutum esse sed multis aliis locis et illum et Metrodorum tam aperte quam paulo ante te; 2, 29: ut in homine mentem; Div. 2, 51: si deum [se. dicam exaratum esse] ; Fin. 2, 88 : ne dolorem quidem [and Madvig's n.]. in somnis: cf. Ac. 2, 47; 2, 52 [and Reid's η.]; and 19 times in the De Divinatione. Is Cicero possibly here hinting at the Epicurean notion that our conceptions of the gods are in part suggested by dreams (cf. Lucr. 5, 11691182)? pelle caprina: see the note on Sospitam, above. On the goat in the cult of Juno, Juno's epithet Caprotina (C. O. Thulin in P.-W. 11 (1917), 1117), and the goat as the emblem of fertility among women (Plin. N . H . 28, 255; Plut.

420 scutulo, cum calceolis répandis. At non est talis Argia 1 nec 1

argiua dett. Mars.

Rom. 21, 4-5, on their part at the Lupercalta; J. G. Frazer, Golden Bough, 23 (1917) 316-319), see L. R. Taylor, Local Cults in Etruria (1923), 70, n. 38. Miss Douglas {op. cit., 69), in discussing the part played by goat-sacrifices in the worship of Hera in Greece, argues from the statement of Ovid {Am. 3, 13, 31: Argivast pompae fades) about the festival of Juno at Falerii that those rites included the sacrifice of a goat to Juno, and that "the goatskin, originally dedicated as a perpetual remembrance of the sacrifice performed, became a distinctive mark of her apparel. Quite possibly it was at Falerii, a city of much culture, that the art type originated; that type which, once created as the anthropomorphic form of Juno Sospita, prevailed as long as the cult endured." On this goatskin cf. also A.B. Cook in Journ. of Hell. Stud. 14 (1894), 151. hasta: with the shield typifying offensive and defensive equipment. On these arms cf. J. Bayet, Les origines de l'Hercule romain (1926), 75, η. 6, emphasizing the rôle of Juno as a warriorgoddess. An inscription {C.I.L. XIV, *100), sometimes cited as an apt parallel to our passage, has been convincingly shown by T. Mommsen {Bull, dell' Inst. 1853, 173 n.; Rhein. Mus. 9 (1854), 456, η. 1) to be a forgery, based largely upon the words of Cicero. Several other falsified inscriptions of Juno Sospita will be found in the beginning of C.I.L. XIV. scutulo: in its literal sense only here. calceolis répandis: I find no evidence for Mayor's belief that calceolis has here lost its strictly diminutive sense (applying, perhaps, to something worn by a female), and merely means a "low shoe." The presence of another diminutive {scutulo) just before makes one here the more natural. The Greek ύποδημάτιον gives us little help, however. Répandis means turned up at the tip; cf. Jerome's translation of 1 Kings, 7, 26: labiumque

eius quasi labium calicis et folium repandi ititi \ also the adjective repandirostrum used by Pacuvius (ap. Quintil. Inst. 1, 5, 67) of the upturned snouts of dolphins. See E. Wölfflin in Arch. lat. Lex. 1 (1884), 333-334, on pandus, pando, and cognates. Such turned-up shoes are seen in the Vatican statue already mentioned (cf. Α. Mau in P.-W. 3 (1899), 1345), but Miss Douglas points out that its feet are due to restoration. Of one of the coins shown by her on p. 63, fig. 2, no. 1, however, the turned-up toes are clearly to be seen, as are also the shield and spear. One might query whether, after all, Cicero may here be deriving his description of Sospita from familiar coins, and, if so, whether this fact may explain the two diminutives, scutulo and calceolis. Miss Douglas (p. 67) thinks the soft pointed shoes in conformity with the Etruscan fashion of the sixth and fifth centuries B.C., and notes that they are found also in archaic Ionic works. non est talis Argia: with the form Argia cf. Tuse. 1, 113; Plin. Ν.H. 3, 70 (where some read Argivae) ; C.I.L. XIV, 3556 = Dessau 3098 (from Tibur) : Iunoni Argeiae·, other cases in Thes. Ling. Lat. 2 (1900), 533, 30-37. Plasberg observes that Cicero does not contrast Sospita with all Greek Heras, but only with the Argive type, which, as Plin. I.e. and C.I.L. XIV, 3556, make clear, was also worshipped at places in Italy; cf. G. Wissowa, Rei. u. Kult. d. Römer2 (1912), 273, n. 1. With the general thought cf. Max. Tyr. 8, 6: μή με οίου πυνθάνεσθαι εί τοιαύτην ήγεϊ τήν Ά θ η ναν, ο'ίαν Φειδίας έδημιούγησεν, ουδέν των 'Ομήρου έπων φαυλοτέραν, παρθένον καλήν, γλαυκώπιν, ύψηλήν, αιγίδα άνεζωσμένην, κόρυν φέρουσαν, δόρυ ϊχουσαν, ασπίδα ίχουσαν· μηδέ αύ τήν "Ηραν, οίαν Πολύκλειτος Ά ρ γείοις ίδειξεν, λευκώλενον, έλεφαντόπηχυν, εύώπιν, εύείμονα, βασιλικήν, ίδρυμένην επί χρυσού θρόνου, κτλ. On the various Junos see also Min. Fei.

421

Romana Iuno. Ergo alia species Iunonis Argivis, alia Lanuinis.1 Et quidem 2 alia nobis Capitolini, alia Afris 3 Hammonis 4 Io vis. 1

lauinis O, latinis D2

2

equidem M

25, 9: Iuno nunc Argiva, nunc Samia, nunc Poena·, Cypr. De Idol. Van. 4. According to II. 4, 51-52, Argos, Sparta, and Mycenae were Hera's dearest cities, and about five miles north of Argos was the Heraeum, perhaps the most noted centre of the worship of Hera in the ancient world; cf. Mela, 2, 41 : templum Iunonis vetustate et religione percelebre·, on the excavations there see C. Waldstein, The Argive Heraeum (19021905). This temple contained the famous chryselephantine statue of the goddess by Polyclitus, described by Paus. 2, 17, 4, as huge, seated on a throne, wearing a crown with Graces and Seasons worked upon it, and carrying in one hand a sceptre surmounted by a cuckoo, in the other a pomegranate. By its side was an older image of Hera upon a pillar, but the statue by Polyclitus is doubtless what Cicero had in mind; for probable representations of this cf. S. Eitrem in P.-W. 8 (1913), 389-390. The description of Hera by [Liban.] Descript. 16 (8, 502-504 Foerster) is probably imaginary. Doubtless Cicero pictured the features of the different Junos as being as diverse as their cultemblems, as in 1, 83, he speaks of personal characteristics, like the color of the eyes, presence or absence of beards, and lameness as distinguishing marks. Romana Iuno: i.e., Iuno Regina on the Capitoline, whose cult-image had been brought from Veii by Camillus (C. O. Thulin in P.-W. 10 (1917), 11191120). Lanuinis: on the form of the adjective cf. H. Dessau in C.I.L. XIV (1887), 191, n. 2; H. Philipp in P.-W. 12 (1924), 694. After this word many editors add alia nobis, which is lacking in our mss, but which was found by Ursinus in a vetustissimus liber. The preceding sentence states that the Argive Juno and the Roman Juno both differ

8

fris M

4

ammonis

DOxBF

in aspect from Juno Sospita at Lanuvium, hence there is one concept of Juno in the minds of the people of Argos, another in those of the inhabitants of Lanuvium. It is not, however, strictly necessary to add a different concept in the minds of the Romans {nobis), because (1) they were familiar with the Lanuvian form of the goddess, from coins, if not otherwise, as indicated above, and (2) the contrast between Roman and foreign concepts is sufficiently shown in the sentence which follows, which differentiates Jupiter Capitolinus from Jupiter Hammon. Further, if alia nobis was found in the ms used by Ursinus it is easily to be explained there as due to the influence of alia nobis Capitolini. Again, the climax for which et quidem in the next line prepares us (cf. 1, 83; 1, 89; P. Stamm, Die Partikelverbindung 'et quidem' ... bei Cic. (1885), 9-11—though Stamm on p. 11 lists our example under a different heading = "moreover") is not weakened but rather enhanced if alia nobis is not repeated by it but introduced for the first time. There seems every reason, then, for reading alia nobis only once in the present passage. Capitolini: on Jupiter Optimus Maximus on the Capitol at Rome cf. C. O. Thulin in P.-W. 10 (1917), 11351136. The temple was begun by the Tarquins but dedicated by the consul M. Horatius in 509 B.C. (Liv. 2, 8, 6). Of the original cult-image Pliny says (N.H. 35, 157) : Vulcam Veiis accitum, cui locaret Tarquinius Priscus Iovis effigiem in Capitolio dicandam ; fictilem eum ferisse et ideo miniari solitum·, cf. Plut. Public. 13, 1-3. In 83 B.C. the first temple was burned (In Catil. 3, 9; Tac. H. 3, 72), but was immediately rebuilt in greater magnificence, and the old terra-cotta statue was replaced by a chryselephantine one by Apollonius of Athens (cf. Cha cid. in Tim. 336 : ut enim in simulacro Capitolini

422

30 83 Non pudet igitur physicum,1 id est speculatorem venatoremque 2 naturae, ab animis consuetudine inbutis petere testi1

fuscum O

2

uentiktoreœque NO, ueneratoremque B

Iovis est una species eboris; est item alia quam Apollonius artifex auxit animo ad quam directa mentis acte speciem eboris poliebat ; harum autem duarum specierum altera erit antiquior·, C. Robert in P.-W. 2 (1896), 162, 31-39), probably imitating that of Zeus at Olympia; cf. S. Β. Platner, Topogr. and Mon. of anc. Rome (1904), 283. Hammonis Iovis: cf. Lucan, 9, 513514: Iuppiter ... non aut fulmina vibrans j aut similis nostro, sed tortis cornibus Hammon. Usually this god is traced to Amen-Râ of Egyptian Thebes, who, as king of the gods, was easily identified with Zeus and Jupiter (cf. Hdt. 2, 42; F. Ritter, De Deorum barb. Interpret. Rom. (1906), 17-18), but the aspirate, which is usual in the Latin form, is apparently due to confusion with Ba'al chammän, the fiery Baal, much worshipped in N. Africa; cf. A. B. Cook, Zeus, 1 (1914), 353-354, who remarks (354), "If Ba'al hammân lent his initial H to Zeus Ammon, Zeus Ámmon lent his horns to Ba'al hammân;" cf. also R. Peitschmann in P.-W. 1 (1894), 1853-1854; F. Cumont in P.-W. 7 (1910), 2310-2311; Pease on Div. 1, 3, n. (Hammonis), and works there cited. Amen-Rä was a ram-god and a sun-god, and the Greeks hinted at the animal conception by adding to the head of Zeus the ears and horns of a ram (Cook, op. cit., 1, 350), as in the famous Naples bust (id., 349, fig. 271). For literary references to the ram-like head cf. Pietschmann, op. cit., 18551857, to which add: Hygin. Astron. 2, 20; Porphyr. De Abstin. 3, 16; Orig. Horn. 4 in Exod. 6; I Myth. Vat. 121; II, 80; Schol. Lucan. 3, 292; Lact, in Theb. 3,476. His form might also have been known to Cicero from the coins of Cyrene ; cf. Suid. s.v. Βάττου σίλφιον; for a modern archaeological discussion E. Vassel in Rev. arch. 5 ser. 13, 2 (1921), 79-107. 83 non pudet . . . physicum: cf.

Div. 2, 33 : nonne pudet physicos haec dicere ; Fin. 1, 20; and for physicum see 1, 77, n. (physice); Wilkins on De Or. 1, 217. This passage is used by Roger Bacon, Op. maius, 1, 2. id est: often introducing a gloss, and therefore by J. Walker (in the appendix to Davies's third edition (1733), 411) deleted. But Cicero has a good right to use such phrases, especially in making clear the meaning of a Greek word, as here; cf. 1, 20: physiologiam, id est, naturae rationem. speculatorem venatoremque: metaphors taken from war and hunting, or perhaps both from hunting alone; for similar cases in Plato cf. Shorey on Rep. 4, 432b; Stob. 2,118, vol. 2, 6-7 Wachsmuth: ή μέν γάρ φιλοσοφία θήρα της άληθείας έστί και ορεξις. των 8è φιλοσοφησάντων ëvioi εΰρεΐν φασι τδ θήραμα, ώς Επίκουρος καί at Στωικοί; also such verbs as, θηραν, θηρεύειν and indagare, and Dougan and Henry on Tuse. 5, 5. Cf. D. Hume, Of the Passions, 1854 ed., 2, 208: "There cannot be two passions more nearly resembling each other than those of hunting and philosophy." The reading veneratoremque found in B, though defensible (cf. R. Philippson in Beri, philol. Woch. 38 (1918), 412), fits less appropriately with the noun speculatorem. consuetudine: συνήθεια; (Reid on Ac. 2, 87); cf. 2, 45: nihil est d i f f i c i l e s quam a consuetudine oculorum aciem mentis abducere·, Tusc. 1, 30: multi de diis prava sentiunt—id enim vitioso more e f f i c i solet-, 1, 38: magni autem est ingenii ... cogitationem ab consuetudine abducere·, Mayor compares F. Bacon's idola tribus. P. Shorey (on Plat. Rep. 5, 452a) remarks that "there was a literature for and against custom . . . of which there are echoes in Cicero's use of consuetude," in Ac. 2, 75; O f f . 1, 148; and the present passage. In Fin. 5, 74. Cicero declares consue-

423 monium veritatis ? Isto enim modo dicere licebit Iovem semper barbatum, Apollinem semper inberbem, caesios 1 oculos Minervae, 1

casios B1, celsos O

tudine quasi alteram quondam naturam e f f i c i . isto enim modo: = Am. 74; cf. Tuse. 4, 52 = Legg. 3, 23 : nam isto quidem modo. Iovem . . . barbatum: cf. 1, 81, η. (aetate), especially Lact. Inst. 1, 17, 5, there quoted, on the reasons for depicting different gods at conventionalized ages; 1, 101: barbati quidem Iovis·, A. D. Nock in CI. Rev. 38 (1924), 152-155 (on the boy Cupid). The images of Zeus and Jupiter are even from the earliest period usually bearded; cf. Arnob. 6, 25: riciniatus Iuppiter atque barbatus·, Aug. C.D. 6, 1: numquid barbatum Iovem, imberbe/» Mercurium poetae habent, pontífices non habent·, Cornut. N.D. 9: παρεισάγουσι 8' αύτόν τελείου άνδρός ήλικίαν έχοντα. Note also the plant called Διός πώγων or Iovis barba (Plin. IV.M. 16, 76; Dioscur. 4, 55). Despite Cicero's expression semper, we occasionally find references to a beardless Jupiter: Juv. 6, 15-16: love nondum / barbato-, [Acro] in Hor. S. 1, 5, 26: Anxur autem dictum quia ibi inberbis Iuppiter colitur; cf. L. R. Farnell, Cults of the Greek States, 1 (1896), 124-125. For certain gods represented, now as bearded, now as beardless, cf. Joseph. C. Ap. 2, 242: καταγελώσιν εί των θεών τούς μέν άγενείους καί μειράκια, τούς 8έ πρεσβυτέρους και γενειώντας είναι χρή δοκειν ; Arnob. 6, 10: potest enim fieri ut barbatus in cáelo sit qui esse a vobis effingitur levis. Thus Dionysus is sometimes shown as beardless, sometimes as bearded: Diod. 4, 5, 2; Cornut. N.D. 30, p. 60 Lang; see also Serv. Aen. 2, 632, for a bearded Venus in Cyprus! Apollinem . . . inberbem: cf. 3, 83: ñeque enim convenire barbatum esse filium [sc. Aesculapium] cum in omnibus fanis pater [sc. Apollo] imberbis esset·, Callim. Hymn. 2, 36-37; Philodem. De Piet. p. 26 Gomperz ; Hor. C. 1, 21, 2; Min. Fei. 22, 5 : Vulcanus claudus deus et

debilis, Apollo tot aetatibus levis, Aesculapius bene barbatus, etsi semper adulescentis Apollinis filius, Neptunus glaucis oculis, Minerva caesiis, bubulis Iuno ; Lucian, De Sacr. 11; Tert. Ad Nat. 1, 10: imberbis de Apolline ... figuratur·, Lact. Plac. in Theb. 1, 699; 1, 704: Apollinem imberbem philosophi tradunt eo quod ipse sit sol. sol autem ignis est, qui nunquam senescit·, Iambi. Vit. Pyth. 10, 39; K. Wernicke in P.-W. 2 (1896), 86, 19-25 (recognizing in the older archaic art two types, one of the nude, beardless, youth; the other of a draped, sometimes bearded, man—the second almost exclusively in vase-paintings); 90, 48-50 (for the disappearance in the later period of the bearded type). Fulg. Mith. 1, p. 645, asks why he is beardless when he is called pater. Also, for such differences in the appearance of gods, cf. Philostr. Ep. 16: τιμώσι καΐ σοφοί . . . των θεών άλλον άλλως, τον Ποσειδώνα ώς κυανοχαίτην, τόν 'Απόλλωνα ώς άκειρεκόμην. caesios oculos Minervae: cf. the Homeric γλαυκώπις Άθήνη {II. 1, 206, and 76 other cases cited by H. Ebeling, Lex. Homer. 1 (1885), 36) ; Gell. 2, 26,19 : nostris autem veteribus "caesia" dicta est quae a Graecis γλαυκώπις, ut Nigidius [fr. 72 Swoboda] ait, "de colore caeli quasi caelia·" Fest. p. 174 M. (178 L.): Noctua . . . ώπις appellatur lis est caecis (where it is tempting to emend the last phrase to ); so Ter. Haut. 1061-1062: rufamne illam virginem, / caesiam, sparso ore, adunco naso? non possum, pater·, Hec. 440, where Donatus says glaucis oculis·, Lucr. 4, 1161 : caesia Palladium·, Min. Fei. 22, 5 (quoted in the preceding note); Paus. 1, 14, 6: τό δέ άγαλμα όρών της 'Αθηνάς γλαυκούς εχον τούς οφθαλμούς Λιβύων τόν μϋθον δντα εΰρισκον· τούτοις γάρ έστιν είρημένον Ποσειδώνος καί λίμνης Τριτωνίδος θυγατέρα είναι καί δια τοϋ-

424 caeiuleos esse 1 Neptuni.2 Et quidem laudamus [esse] 3 Athenis Volcanum eumquem fecit Alcamenes,4 in quo stante atque vestito 1 esse om.O 2 nuptini D 3 [esse] om. dett. Aid. maenes M 2 , alcmenes C, alcimenes O, alcinenes Ν

το γλαυκός είναι ώσπερ κ od τώ Ποσειδών!. τους οφθαλμούς; cf. the note of Frazer, who thinks that Pausanias would hardly have noticed the colot of the eyes of the image had they been of a neutral gray, and hence supposes that Pausanias means them to be blue. Yet in our passage it seems clear that Cicero intends a distinction between caesios and caeruleos, just as between barbatus and inberbis; J. André, Ét. sur les termes de couleur dans la langue lat. (1949), 165-166. Cornut. N.D. 20, p. 36 Lang, tries to explain the cause of the color of her eyes: καί γάρ των θηρίων τά άλκιμώτατα, οίον αί παρδάλεις καί οί λέοντες, γλαυκά εΐαι, δυσαντίβλεπτον στίλβοντα άπό των ομμάτων· êvioi δέ φασι τοιαύτη ν αύτήν παρεισάγεσθαι διά το τόν αιθέρα γλαυκόν είναι. L. R. Farnell Cults of the Gr. States, 1 (1896), 279, notes other epithets of Athena connected with the eye (οξυδερκής and οφθαλμΐτις), and thinks that "the light-blue flashing eye seemed to Cicero to belong to the artistic ideal of Minerva"—this seems to read a good deal into the adjective. For other cases of caesius applied to eyes see Thes. Ling. Lat. 3 (1906), 109-110. The Schol. Γ on Hor. Epod. 16, 7 [defining caerulea] say: a caesio colore oculorum, id est cattino. Perhaps, on the whole, "bluish-gray" might best express this somewhat uncertain color; cf. also M. Niedermann in Mus. Helvet. 7 (1950), 151. As his standard Cicero may have been thinking of the cult-image in the cella of Minerva on the Capitoline, where he had himself, before going into exile, dedicated a small image of the goddess (Dio Cass. 38, 17, 5; lui. Obseq. 68). caeruleos . . . Neptuni: cf. Ον. M. 1, 275: [Iovis\ caeruleus frater·, Min. Fei. 22, 5: Neptunus glaucis oculis; the appropriateness of the color seems obvious in the case of a sea-god.

4

alcamanes M1, alca-

et quidem: as in the preceding section this probably leads to a climax; not only do the gods differ in their natural, congenital attributes, but even, in some cases, like that of Vulcan, in accidental, acquired characteristics or deformities. laudamus [esse]: though esse appears in the·best mss (being omitted only by some deteriores and several editors), it seems difficult to retain it, since what we praise is obviously not the existence at Athens of such a statue but rather the statue itself; cf. Plin. N.H. 36, 34: eodem loco Liber pater Eutychidis laudatur. In an ancestor of our mss containing about 23 or 24 letters to the line (cf. A. C. Clark, The Descent of Manuscripts (1918), 353) the esse belonging after caeruleos just before may have crept into the text at this point. For Cicero's own attitude toward works of art cf. W. Göhling, De Cic. Artis Aestimatore (1877). Volcanum . . . Alcamenes: for Alcamenes cf. C. Robert in P.-W. 1 (1894), 1507-1508; and especially C. Walston, Alcamenes (1926); there were many religious statues by him at Athens (Plin. N.H. 36, 16), and he was ranked along with Phidias (Plin. N.H. 34, 49; Lucian Imag. 3; 4; 6; Dio Chrys. Or. 12, 45), whose pupil he was (Plin. N.H. 34, 72). Based on our passage, though, as Plasberg remarks, not helpful for establishing the exact form of this sentence, is Val. Max. 8, 11, ext. 3: tenet visentis Athenis Volcanus Alcamenis manibus fabricatus; praeter cetera enim perfectissimae artis in eo procurrentia indicia etiam illud miratur, quod stat dissimulatae claudicationis sub veste leviter vestigium repraesentans, ut non exprobratum tamquam vitium ita tamquam certam propriamque dei notam decore significatam. A convincing statue of a lame man (Philoctetes ?) by the sculptor Pythagoras of Rhegium is mentioned by Plin. N.H. 34, 59; cf. C. Walston, op. cit., 25,

425 and such representations of cripples may perhaps be classed with genre-paintings (Plin. N.H. 35, 112; F. P. Chambers, Cycles of Taste (1928), 93). Aristophanes ridiculed Euripides for depicting lame persons {Acharn. 411; Pax, 146-148 and schol.; Thesmoph. 22-24), yet ancient taste, from the Homeric story of the fall and crippling of Hephaestus himself, in sharp contrast with modern more sympathetic feeling, found great amusement in physical deformity (cf. De Or. 2, 249; Hor. S. 1, 5, 56-70; Ε. E. Sikes in CI. Rev. 54 (1940), 122), At Athens in the Hephaesteum (which H. A. Thompson in Hesperia, 6 (1937), 65, would identify with the building which has commonly been called the "Theseum"; cf. Paus. 1, 14, 6) there seems to have been a colossal bronze group of Athena and Hephaestus by Alcamenes, set up about 421/420 B.C. (Walston, op. cit., 179-181) or 417/416 (L. Malten in P.-W. 8 (1913), 364), some idea of which may perhaps be derived from a relief at Epidaurus (Walston, 181, fig. 155), showing the lame Hephaestus leaning on a staff and presenting a helmet to Athena, the lameness of the god being rather delicately and subtly suggested. For a reconstruction of the Alcamenes group see B. Sauer, Das sogenannten Theseion (1899), 250, figure (reproduced by A. B. Cook, Zeus, 3, 1 (1940), 214, fig. 136). The lameness of Hephaestus (Κυλλοποδίων of II. 18, 371; 20, 270; Philo, De Prov. 2, p. l'i Aucher; Athen. 5, p. 192e; and possibly the frequent epithet άμφιγυήεις, though this has been otherwise explained), which was either the cause or the effect of his being thrown from heaven to earth, is mentioned by many writers : II. 1, 590-600; 18, 394-411 ; Od. 8, 332; Horn. Hymn. 3, 316-320; Plat. Rep. 2, 378d [censuring such tales] ; Antig. Mirab. 45; Philodem. Horn. col. 19, p. 56 Olivieri; Varr. L.L. 7, 11; Sen. Apocol. 11; Cornut. N.D. 19; Plin. N.H. 2, 17 [claudos; probably thinking of Vulcan]; Val. Fl. 2, 87-93; Apollod. Bibl. 1, 3, 5 [and Frazer's n.]; Lucian, Iup. confut. 8; De Sacrif. 6; Charon, 1; Dial. Deor. 16,1; Paus. 1, 20, 3; 3, 17, 3;

Aristid. Apol. 8; 10; Sext. Emp. Adv. Gram. 291; Tatian, Ad Graec. 8; Hygin. Fab. 166; Clem. Protr. 2, 29, 5; 7, 76, 1 ; Arnob. 4, 24; Lact. Inst. 1, 17, 12; έργων αυτών εκεται πάσαις ταΐς πατρίοις έορταΐς καΐ θυσίαις κερμένος ; Diog. L. 10, 10. nonnullis videri: cf. 1, 123: Posidonius disseruit in libro quinto de natura deorum nulles esse deos Epicuro videri, quaeque is de deis inmortalibus dixerit invidiae detestandae gratia dixisse—since the view of Posidonius is not here accepted it suggests that the source of this section differs from that of 1, 123; cf. R. Hirzel, Untersuch. ζ· Cic. philos. Sehr. 1 (1877), 36; A. Schmekel, Die Philos, d. mittl. Stoa (1892), 101; P. Cropp, De Auetoribus quos secutusCic.inLib.de N.D. (1909), 11; R. Philippson in Symb. Osloenses, 20 (1940), 42, thinking our passage to be from an Academic source—; Plut. De Stoic. Repugn. 6, p. 1034c; Non posse suaviter, 21, p. 1102b: υποκρίνεται, γάρ εύχάς καΐ προσκυνήσεις, ούδέν δεόμε-

430

Atheniensium caderet, verbis reliquisse 1 deos, r e 2 sustulisse.3 Itaque in illis selectis 4 eius 5 brevibusque sententiis, quas appellatis κυρίας δόξας,® haec, ut opinor, prima sententia est: 'Quod 7 1 reliquisse* eos corr. ex reliquisses & eos Β 2 re add. M, res A1 s sus4 selectus A1, electis A2 5 eius om. M tulisset B1 * cyrias doxas ACNOBFM, gr DH ' id quod H1

νος, διά τόν φόβον των πολλών καί φθέγγεται φωνάς έναντίας οίς φιλοσοφεί . . . οΰτω γάρ 'Επίκουρος οϊεται δεΐν σχηματίζεσθαι καΐ μή φθονεΐν μηδ' άπεχθάνεσθαι τοις πολλοίς; Adv. Colot. 11, p. 1112c: ρήματι καΐ λόγφ καΐ τφ φάναι καί προσποιεΐσθαι καί όνομάζειν α ταΐς άρχαϊς καί τοις δόγμασιν άναιροϋσιν; Eus. Pr. Εν. 14,27, 10; 15, 5, 12: όθεν εΐκότως αν καί αύτός ούδ' εκείνο τό έγκλημα έκφύγοι δ κατ' 'Επικούρου τινές μαντεύονται, ώς άρα μή κατά γνώμην άλλά διά τό πρός άνθρώπων δέος τοις θεοϊς κατένειμεν έν τω παντί χώραν ώσπερ έν θεάτρω θέαν. The word nonnullis suggests that the similar passage in Sext. Emp. Adv. Phys. 1, 58, may derive from the same source: καί 'Επίκουρος δέ κατ' ένίους ώς μέν πρός τούς πολλούς απολείπει θεόν, ώς δέ πρός την φύσιν των πραγμάτων ούδαμώς [cf. 1, 64; Hirzel, l.c.\. Lact. De Ira, 4, 7, seems to draw rather freely upon our passage and 1,123 : Marcus Tullius a Posidonio dictum refert id Epicurum semine, nullos deos esse, sed ea quae de dis locutus sit depellendae invidiae causa dixisse; itaque verbis ilium deos relinquere, re autem ipsa tollere·, Inst. Epit. 31, 3: nunc eum [sc. deum] verbo reliquisti, re sustulisti. in offensionem . . . caderet: cf. 1 Verr. 35: in odium offensionemque populi Romani inruere. verbis . . . re: λόγω . . . 2ργω; cf. 1, 16, n. (re ... verbis). reliquisse . . . sustulisse: cf. άπολείπειν and άναιρεϊν; the two verbs are often contrasted; e.g., 1, 123: Epicurus re tollit oratione relinquit deos; Div. 1, 5; Hor. S. 1, 10, 51. For deos sustulisse cf. Div. 2, 40: deos tollens. itaque: logically applying not to the next clause but to in hac ita expósita sententia. Mayor compares, for other

examples of making two separate and independent sentences out of the protasis and apodosis of a compound sentence, yet leaving the original introductory particle in the protasis, 1, 91: etenim·, 1, 93: nam Phaedro·, Τ use. 2, 62: itaque; De Or. 2, 217: itaque; and other cases cited by Madvig on Fin. 1, 18. illis . . . sententiis: cf. 1, 45, n. (ilia sententia)·, Fin. 2, 20: quis enim vestrum non edidicit Epicuri κυρίας δόξας, id est quasi maxime ratas, quia gravissimae sint ad beate vivendum breviter enuntiatae sententiae? The forty κύριαι δόξαι are given by Diog. L. 10, 139-154 (cf. 10, 27). For other testimonia as to the title cf. H. Usener, Epicurea (1887), 68-70, to which add Suid. s.v. 'Επίκουρος; the present passage seems the only one which calls them "selected." Alexander of Abonuteichus burnt these writings in the market-place, probably because he considered them atheistic (Lucían, Alex. 47). appellatis: i.e., you Epicureans, κυρίας δόξας: on the Greek term see H. J. Rose in Journ. of Hell. Stud. 41 (1921), 98; 104; also A. C. Clark, The Descent of Manuscripts (1918), 199. ut opinor: cf. 1, 72, n. (ut opinor). Cotta—not to say Cicero—, though well aware that this is the corner-stone of the Epicurean theology, does not wish to appear too familiar with the Epicurean creed, just as Cicero in the Fourth Verrine dissembles his knowledge of Greek art. prima sententia: for the Greek of this maxim cf. 1, 45, n. (ilia sententia). Slight divergences of rendering occur between 1, 45 and this section; e.g., aeternum and inmortale, alteri and cmpiam, negotii quicquam (cf. 1, 102: nihil negotii) and negotium.

431

beatum et inmortale est, id nec habet nec exhibet cuiquam negotium.' 31 In hac ita expósita sententia sunt qui existiment 1 quod ille inscitia 2 piane 3 loquendi fecerit 4 fecisse consulto; de homine minime vafro male existimant.5 86 Dubium est enim 6 4

2 incitia E1, inscita H, inscientia D 3 piene B1 i ex ***istiment Β 5 exestimant F1 8 enim add. Β fecerit] fecerat A2, fecerim (?) G

inscitia plane loquendi: cf. 1, 123: ludìmur ab homine non tam faceto quam ad scribendi licentiam libero-, Div. 2, 103: Epicurum hebetem et rudem dicere soient Stoici; Fin. 2, 15: Epicurus autem, ut opinor, nec non vult, si possit, piane et aperte loqui, nec de re obscura, ut physici, aut artificiosa, ut mathematici, sed de illustri et facili et iam in vulgus pervagata loquitur. Epicurus is considered by Cicero and others as self-taught and poorly educated (1, 72, n. (magistrum habuisse nullum)·, 2, 49), and he and his school were looked upon as despising and lacking rhetorical skill and finish of form ; cf. 1, 58; Tuse. 2, 7-8; Dion. Hal. De Comp. Verb. 24 fin. ; Amm. Marc. 30, 4,3 : banc professionem oratorum forensium . .. Epicurus . . . κακοτεχνίαν nominans inter artes numerat malas·, for an illustration cf. also W. Crönert in Gnomon, 6 (1930), 145, n. 1. Yet in defence of Epicurus cf. Fin. 1, 14-15; Sen. Ep. 21, 8: et apertior ista sententia [sc. Epicuri\ est quam ut interpretanda sit, et disertior quam ut adiuvanda-, Gell. 2, 9,1-2; Diog. L. 10,13: σαφής S' ήν οΰτως ώς καί έν τω Περί ρητορικής άξιοι μηδέν αλλο ή σαφήνειαν άπαιτεΐν.. In fact, Theon, Progymn. p. 71 Spengel, blames his style as too rhythmical and Asianic. For other passages see H. Usener, Epicurea (1887), 88-90. Epicurus's ambiguity here arises from the fact that the sentence may, as Cotta says in 1, 86, be taken conditionally. In Fin. 1, 22, Epicurus is described as inermis ac nudus in logic; but for the opposite cf. Ν. W. DeWitt in Trans. Am. philol. Assoc. 74 (1943), 26-27. fecerit: for the subjunctive cf. 1, 41, and n. (suspicati ... sint); 1, 53: negetis; Div. 2, 94: valeat; Brut. 27: fuerit. homine minime vafro: slightly cacophonous. With the thought cf. Tuse.

2, 44: venit Epicurus, homo minime malus vel potius vir optimus; tantum monet quantum intellegit·, 3, 50: Epicurei, viri optimi {nam nullum genus est minus malitiosum)·, Rep. 3, 26 : lis qui minime sunt in disserendo mali, qui ... non sunt in disputando vafri, non veteratores, non malitiosi. 86 dubium, etc.: the forms which this sentence exhibits in manuscripts and editions are numerous. Certain deteriores, along with J. Walker (in the appendix of Davies's edition), for iste beatum of ACNB read esse beatum, and this change from the meaningless to the appropriate has been rather generally adopted by editors. In the rest of the passage Cicero's thought appears to be: "it is doubtful whether he means that something is happy and eternal, or if anything is"—a protasis with some such suppressed apodosis as is suggested by Orelli: id nec habere nec exhiber e cuiquam negotium. This not too difficult ellipsis has been misunderstood by scribes and some editors, hence various unnecessary suppletions : id esse immortale of NO [which misses Cicero's meaning and results in a pointless tautology]; id esse mortale of AHB2 [equally mistaken and in addition self-contradictory]; and id esse tale of Heindorf [correct enough in meaning (and adopted by L. Havet, Man. de crit. verbale (1911), 297, § 1207) but very flat in expression]. The preferable course is, with Orelli, Schoemann {Opuse. 3 (1858), 318), and P. Stamm {De M.T.C.Lib. de D.N. Interpolât. (1873), 26), to end the sentence with si quod sit. With the form of the sentence Plasberg compares Sext. Emp. Adv. Eth. 8-13. Stamm {I.e.) also remarks that the order of clauses is not strictly logical, since the sentences de homine ... existimant and

432

utrum dicat aliquid esse 1 beatum et inmortale an si quod sit [id esse mortale].2 Non 3 anímadvertunt hic eum 4 ambigue locutum 5 esse, sed multis aliis locis et illum et Metrodorum tam aperte quam paulo 6 ante te.7 Ule vero déos esse putat, nec quemquam 8 vidi qui magis ea quae timenda esse negaret timeret, 1 esse dett. Walk., iste ceti. 2 an si . . . mortale om.B\ [id esse mortale] del. 4 eum] 3 non enim HF1 Or., [esse] est O, [mortale] ADHIPFM, immortale NO 5 loculu Β1 β palo Λ1 7 te om. C 8 quamquam B2F1, enim F quamqua B 1

non anímadvertunt . .. locutum esse, which are closely related and of which the second gives the cause for the first, are awkwardly separated by dubium est ... an si quod sit. This may be granted, yet the thought is intelligible as it stands, and Cicero in his hasty composition was not free from occasional logical looseness ; further, no preferable arrangement of clauses appears obvious. Metrodorum: one of two philosophers at Lampsacus bearing this name, the other being a pupil of Anaxagoras, while this was a pupil and intimate friend of Epicurus; cf. W. Kroll in P.-W. 15 (1932), 1477. He and Epicurus are often mentioned together: 1, 93: sodalis sui; 1, 113: qui est Epicuri collega sapientiae·, Fin. 1, 25; 2, 92: Metrodorus paene alter Epicurus·, Tusc. 5, 109; Strab. 13, 1, 19; Sen. Ep. 14, 17: Epicuri est aut Metrodori aut alicuius ex ilia officina·, Plut. Non posse suaviter, 15, p. 1097b; Tac. Dial. 31, 10; Cels. 3, 21, 4; Diog. L. 10, 18; 10, 22; Suid. s.v. 'Επίκουρος; see also the double Herm of Epicurus and Metrodorus in the Capitoline Museum (A. Hekler, Gr. and Rom. Portraits (1912), no. 100). R. Philippson (Gotting. Nachr. 1930, 6) argues that Epicurus and Metrodorus were fellow-pupils under Nausiphanes at Teos ca. 310 B.C. It may be surmised that the views of Metrodorus here cited were expressed in his περί θεών, the fragments of which are collected by Η. H. A. Duening, De Metrodori Epicurei Vita et Scriptis (1870), 26-28; and by A. Koerte in Jahrb. /. Philol. Supplbd. 17 (1890), 541-542. quam paulo ante te: with the attrac-

tion into the accusative construction of what should logically be quam paulo ante tu locutus es cf. 1, 82, η. (Sospitam); Reid on Fin. 1, 14, who cites other Ciceronian parallels. The slightly cacophonous ending of the sentence (ante te) is palliated by the emphasis which the comparison throws upon the final monosyllable. To omit te (with C) would damage this emphasis. deos esse putat: through this part of the argument it is not asserted that the Epicureans are in effect atheists, though that was charged by Posidonius in the fifth book of his περί θεών (see 1, 123, and note (nulles, etc.), below). This inconsistency is another indication of Cicero's having put into the mouth of Cotta arguments derived, here from Carneades, who accepts the sincerity of Epicurus's statement (cf. Diog. L. 10, 123; F. Bacon, Essays, no. 15), but in 1,123 from Posidonius; cf. R. Philippson in P.-W. IK (1939), 1154, 34-43; id., Symb. Osloenses, 20 (1940), 27, who compares Sext. Emp. Adv. Phys. 1, 58: καί 'Επίκουρος δέ κατ' ένίους ώς μέν πρός τούς πολλούς απολείπει θεόν, ώς δέ πρός τήν φύσιν των πραγμάτων ουδαμώς; 1, 64: τάχα δέ οί άπό των κήπων, ώς αί ρηταΐ του 'Επικούρου λέξεις μαρτυροϋσι, θεόν άπολείπουσιν ; Α. J. Festugière, Epicure (1946), 86-91. ea quae timenda esse negaret timeret: Epicurus "doth protest too much." Plut. Non posse suaviter, 8, p. 1092b, remarks : έπεί δέ τέλος ήν του περί θεών λόγου τό μή φοβεϊσθαι θεόν άλλά παύσασθαι ταραττομένους, βεβαιότερον οΖμαι τοϋθ' ύπάρχειν τοις δλως μή νο-

433

mortem dico et déos; quibus mediocres homines non ita valde moventur, his ille clamai omnium mortalium mentes esse perterritas. Tot milia latrocinantur morte proposita, alii omnia quae possunt fana conpilant; credo aut 1 illos 2 mortis timor 3 terrei aut hos religionis.4 1 aut add. H 2 illos] alios H religiones AC NOB1

3

timor om. F, add. M

οϋσι θεόν ή τοις [i.e., the Epicureans] νοείν μή βλάπτοντα μεμαθηκόσιν· ού γάρ άπήλλακται δεισιδαιμονίας άλλ' ούδέ περιπέπτωκεν, ούδ' άποτέθειται τήν ταράττουσαν ëvvoiav περί των θεών άλλ' ούδ' εϊληφε; 20, p. 1101b; C. Bailey (Phases in the Relig. of anc. Rome (1932), 220) thinks that the mental abnormalities of Lucretius made the fear of death an obsession with him, and that Cicero may here be making a covert thrust at his views. Possibly; though this morbid fear perhaps characterized other Epicureans besides Lucretius; cf. Tuse. 1, 48: liberates enim se per eum dicunt gravissimis dominis, terrore sempiterno et diurno ac nocturno metu. quo terrore? quo metuì quae est anus tam delira quae timeat ista quae vos videlicet, si physica non didicissetis, timeretis, "Acherunsia tempia alta Orci, pallida Leti, obnubila tenebris locai" In fact, J. F. D'Alton {Horace and his Age (1917), 237) finds Horace's thoughts of death uppermost in those passages where he is most Epicurean in tone, and Epicurus's own preoccupations with death are betrayed by nos. 10-12 of the κύριαι δόξαι (Diog. L. 10, 142-143); cf. also Diog. Oenoand. fr. 1, col. 3, p. 4 William; fr. 2, col. 6, p. 7; fr. 29, col. 2, p. 38; fr. 30, p. 39. Others suppose that from such early fears Epicurus had been freed by his Epicurean faith; cf. T. Frank, Life and Lit. in the Rom. Rep. (1930), 235; G. F. Else in CI. Weekly, 37 (1944), 137 and n. 7. mortem . . . et deos: T. Frank ( L i f e and Lit. in the Rom. Rep. (1930), 234) asks how Lucretius could suppose that fear of punishment after death was a determining factor in social ethics, when the Romans of this period had not as

4

religionis B2FM,

yet developed any clearly accepted eschatology. mediocres homines: "average men," "men in the street"; cf. Div. 2,113; Rep. 3, 19; O f f . 2, 30; De Prov. cons. 38; Pro Balb. 14. With the thought also cf. Fin. 2, 22; Lact. Inst. 7, 12, 27: equidem numquam vidi qui se querer e tur in morte dissolvi ; sed ille fortasse Epicureum aliquem viderai etiam dum moritur philosophantem ac de sui dissolutione in extremo spiritu disserentem·, Sen. Ep. 24, 18. non ita valde: for such expressions cf. Madvig on Fin. 1,1; Reid on Ac. 2, 5 ; Holden on O f f . 3, 81. clamat: cf. 1, 95: clamare non desinitis; Fin. 1, 57 and 2, 23: clamat Epicurus·, 2, 51: cum díceres clamare Epicurum-, 2, 65: clamat virtus·, 5, 93: nonne clamant·, Ac. fr. 20 Müller : clamat Zeno ; so also voeiferor in Lucr. 1, 732; 3,14 [where see Heinze's n.] ; al. ; and in Greek Plut. Adv. Colot. 2, p. 1108c: βοώντες; Athen. 7, 278f: ούκ έγκαλυπτόμενος δ 'Επίκουρος λέγει άλλά μεγάλη τη φωνή; 7, 280a: 'Επίκουρος . . . βοών ίλεγεν; Diog. L. 8, 6: 'Ηράκλειτος . . . μονονουχί κέκραγε καί φησι; Themist. in Aristot. De An. 6, p. 102, 34 Heinze: έμβοώντος άκούουσι του φιλοσόφου; R. Helm, Lukian u. Menipp. (1906), 149; E. Löfstedt in Acta Univ. Lund. N.S. 16 (1920), 79; F. Peters, T. Lucr. et M. Cic. quo modo Vocab. Gr. Epic. Discipl. propria Latine verterint (1926), 12. fana conpilant: on temple-robbery cf. 1, 63: sacrilegis·, 1, 82: simulacra deorum de loeii sanctissimis ablata; 3, 83-84; Hor. C. 1, 35, 36-38: unde manum iuventus metu deorum continuiti quibus / peperei! arisi credo: ironical as in 1, 67; 1, 111. religionis: religiones of most mss 28

434 87 Sed quoniam non audes (iam enim cum ipso Epicuro loquar) 1 negare esse déos, quid est 2 quod te inpediat aut solem aut mundum 3 aut mentem aliquam sempiternam in deorum numero 4 ponere? 'Numquam vidi', inquit,5 'animam6 rationis 1 loqu H1 2 quod est B1, quidem F1 6 inquis dett. Hein. Walk., natura codd.

may be correct, but a better balance of the two terms seems gained by making religionis correspond to mortis depending upon timor ; cf. Fin. 1, 64: fortitude sumitur contra mortis timorem et constantia contra metum religionis·, 4, 11: ut pellatur mortis et religionis metus. 87 non audes: reverting to 1, 85: quid dubitas negare deos esse? non audes. cum ipso Epicuro loquar: cf. 1, 61 : Epicurus vero tuus (nam cum ilio malo disserere quam tecum)·, Div. 1, 62: Epicurum igitur audiemus potius·, 2, 109: si tua ¡sta conclusio, Cratippe, vera est (tecum enim mihi res est)·, Plin. N.H. 28, 5-6: quis isla invent t, Osthane? tecum enim res erit\ Hier. Ep. 53, 7, 3: immo, ut cum Clitomacho loquar·, also the note on Epicure, below. solem . . . mundum . . . mentem: as believed by various philosophers in the Platonic and Stoic tradition, particularly Chrysippus (cf. 1, 39) above, whom Velleius had attacked. Cotta does not really advocate their views, which, in fact, he himself attacks in the third book, but here introduces them merely for the sake of argument, and H. Uri (Cic. u. d. epik. Philos. (1914), 99-100) thinks that Cicero has here modified a Stoic source to fit this particular passage. in deorum numero ponere: cf. 1, 29: in deorum numero refert. In our passage the mss read in deorum natura, but J. Walker (in the appendix of Davies's edition) emended to in deorum numero, and J. S. Reid (in Mayor's edition) explained the corruption as due to the confusion of nò (numero) and nä (natura). The emendation has been widely accepted (Schoemann half-heartedly retaining natura, but thinking it hardly justifiable and probably a mistake for numero), though in view of 1, 23: animi

3

solem aut lunam M β animo Β1

4

numero

natura intellegentis·, and 1, 44: omnium natura it might perhaps be possible here to defend the ms reading. numquam . . . figura: cf. 1, 48; 1, 76, for Velleius's statements of this belief. Mayor points out that Cicero (in the mouth of Cotta) has here confused the argument, for the senses tell Epicurus of the existence of the sun but do not tell anything about the existence of incorporeal reason. Mayor compares Philodem. De Signis, 14 (p. 19 Gomperz = p. 56 De Lacy): αΙ γάρ ήλιος είς έστιν έν τω κμφ καί, σελήνη καί πλήθοθών ύπάρχον Ιδιοτήτων καθ' εκαστον γένος οϊαν των άλλων ού έν ; ; 30 (ρ. 37 Gomperz = ρ. 92 De Lacy) : καί δταν, ώς παρ' ήμϊν έστίν τινα μοναχά, μηδέν είναι λέγωσ θαυμαστόν εί κάν τοις άδήλοις έστίν τις φύσις των οίς ένεκυρσαμν διαλλάττουσα, την μετάβν άπό των όμοιων φαίνοντ ποιούενοι· παραπλησίως δέ καί έπΐ των άλλων, ώστε τ περικατωτρον έχουσιν άκλουθοϋσαν. Mayor concludes that the anti-Epicurean argument was originally of this sort: "there may be rational beings without human shape, though our experience presents no parallel, for many things in our experience are unparalleled, and, on this principle, would have been incredible prior to experience." Cf. also A. Goedeckemeyer, Gesch. d. gr. Skeptizismus (1905), 88, n. 7, on the attack of Carneades on Epicurean induction. inquit: though he has just addressed Epicurus in the second person (audes) to which he returns below (vidisti . .. numquid tale, Epicure, vidisti?), he here shifts to the third person in reporting the views of Epicurus to the others of

435

consilique 1 participem in ulla 2 alia nisi humana 3 figura.' Quid? 4 Solis numquidnam aut lunae aut quinqué errantium siderum simile vidisti? Sol duabus unius orbis ultimis partibus definiens motum cursus annuos 8 conficit; huius hanc lustrationem 6 eiusdem incensa radiís menstruo spatio luna complet; quinqué autem stellae eundem orbem tenentes, aliae propius a terris, aliae remo1 consiliique NFM, consilii O 2 in ulla] nulla O 3 Post humana Ν del. 6 annuls A1 forma sed nostra diuina 4 quod A1 " lustrationem dett. Mars., inlustrationem CNOBFM, inlustratationem A

the company—perhaps of necessity when the apostrophized person is not present to answer for himself, but also suggesting that he was like a small child for whom others must make answer. For similar cases of inquit cf. Piasberg, ed. maior., on our passage; 1,109; 1, 114 (inquiunt); 3, 90; Div. 2, 72, and Pease's n. (quae . .. ubi)·, 2, 109, and n. (inquit); 2, 137, and n. {inquit)·, Parad. 23; 32; 37 {bis); Ac. 2, 60; 2, 94; 2, 101; 2, 109; Legg. 2, 59; 2, 60; 2, 64; F am. 9, 22, 4; Bentley on Hor. S. 1, 4, 79; Reid on Ac. 2, 79; J. Forchhammer in Nordisk tidskrift f . f i l o l . 5 (1880), 47-51 ; in all which cases the words of a hypothetical adversary or interlocutor are taken from his mouth and reported to the audience; cf. the contemptuous use of "quotha." consilique participem: cf. the phrase in Polystratus {Hermes, 11 (1876), 404): 8l& τό μή κοι,νωνεΐν λογισμού. in ulla alia nisi humana: on the failure to repeat the preposition before humana cf. Reid on Ac. 1, 19; also cases in Τ use. 2, 11: num censes apud eos ipsos valere nisi admodum paucos·, Pro Sest. 128: cuius umquam propter salutem nisi meam. quinqué errantium siderum: cf. 1, 34, and n. {stellis vagis)·, 2, 51: earum quinqué stellarum quae falso vocantur errantes-, 2, 119; 3, 51. sol, etc.: its orbit, confined within the limits of the ecliptic or apparent path described by the sun around the celestial sphere as the earth performs its annual revolution {duabus unius orbis ultimis partibus definiens motum), is further described in 2, 49; 2, 101; cf. De Or. 3, 178 : videmus hunc statum esse ... sol ut

circumferatur, ut accedat ad brumale signum et inde sensi m ascendat in diversam partem; ut luna accessu et recessu [suo] solis lumen accipiat ; ut eadem spatia quinqué stellae dispari motu cursuque confidant. The ultimis partibus represent the position of the sun at its solstices. huius hanc lustrationem: for the intentional juxtaposition of two pronouns Goethe compares 2, 147: quo enim tu illa modo díceres-, 3, 19: ab hac ea quaestione. Hanc Mayor explains as "under similar limitations." Most mss read in before lustrationem, but the sense demands the idea of traversing rather than of illuminating, and most editors have wisely accepted lustrationem of certain deteriores and the Veneta of 1507. Lustratio is used in Τ use. 5, 79, for the roaming of wild beasts; here it = circumitus. For a similar meaning in the verb lustro cf. 2, 53 : eundem lustrat orbem·, 2, 106: eundem caeli verticem lustrat ... Cynosura·, O v. Met. 6, 571: signa deus bis sex acto lustraverat anno·, Lact. Inst. 2, 12, 22: luna quae orbem ilium signiferum triginta dierum spatio lustrat·, Macrob. Sat. 1, 14, 6: sol lustrat ^pdiacum ; Somn. Scip. 2, 11, 6: mensis lunae annus est, intra quem caeli ambitum lustrat. eiusdem incensa radiis: on the history of the discovery that the moon's light is borrowed from the sun see Pease on Div. 2, 10, n. {lunaque suo lumine)·, cf. also below, 2, 50; 2,103, and n. {lucem . .. a sole accepit). menstruo spatio: cf. 2, 50: iam solis annuos cursus spatiis menstruis luna consequitur. orbem tenentes: cf. 2, 53: orbem tenet.

436

tius, ab isdem 1 principiis disparibus temporibus 2 eadem spatia conficiunt. Numquid 3 tale, Epicure,4 vidisti? 88 Ne sit igitur sol, ne luna, ne stellae, quoniam nihil esse potest nisi quod attigimus 5 aut 6 vidimus. Quid? Deum ipsum numne 7 vidisti? Cur igitur credis esse? Omnia tollamus ergo quae aut historia nobis aut ratio nova adfert. Ita fit8 ut mediterranei 9 mare esse non cre1 hisdem DOM attingimus DHNO 8 fiet dett. Rom., sit C meditare mei Ν 6

2

3 nunc quid CNB1 4 epicurei B1 temporisZ) 7 numme B, nonne NM, nunquid O * aut]uel D 9 mediterranei CO, mediterranii A3, mediterrani ΑλΒΜ,

aliae propius . . . aliae remotius: for their order and the duration of their orbits cf. 2, 52-53. a terris: one might expect terra, but cf. 2, 49 : sol ... cum terras large luce compleverit easdem ... opacet·, 2, 95 : cum autem terras no χ opacasset ; Mayor compares Leg. agr. 2, 62: in terris (of the whole world). ab isdem principiis: the figure is that of race-horses starting from the carceres but running at different speeds; cf. 2, 51 : quorum ex disparibus motionibus magnum annum mathematici nominaverunt. Epicure: cf. 1, 61, η. {Epicurus vero tuus); 1, 112; also the note on cum ipso Epicuro loquar, above. Apostrophe of a philosopher regarded as inspiring one's opponent is frequent, especially with the name of Epicurus; e.g., Fat. 46; Ac. 2, 123; Fin. 2, 22; 2, 98; Tuse. 3, 37; 3, 41 ; Sen. Ep. 20,11 ; 97; 15, De Ben. 4,19,1; Plut. De latenter vivendo, 3, p. 1128f; Ael. fr. 11, p. 193 Hercher ( = Suid. s.v. Φιλήμων); Max. Tyr. 4, 9 (bis); Lact. De Opif. 6, 10; Hermias, Irris. 1. Other philosophers or historians apostrophized include Carneades (Div. 1, 23), Cratippus (Div. 2, 108; 2, 109), Zeno (Tuse. 2, 29), Pythagoras (Etym. Gud. s.v. φής); Anaxagoras (Asclep. in Metaph. p. 61, 12 Hayduck), Democritus (Olympiod. in Meteor. 2, 2, p. 143 Stüve (ter)), Protagoras (Asclep. in Metaph. p. 270, 22-23 Hayduck), Plato (Aristid. Or. 45, p. 32 Dind. ; Olympiod. in Meteor. 2, 2, p. 142 Stüve), Aristotle (Galen, De Usu Part. 8, 3 (III, 623 K.); Olympiod. in Meteor. 2, 2, p. 144, 11-12 Stüve; in Categ. 5,

p. 67, 21 Busse; Asclep. in Metaph. p. 44, 35-36 Hayduck; p. 45, 13), Metrodorus (J'use. 5, 27), Chrysippus (Fin. 5, 89; Fat. 12-13; Galen, De Plac. Hipp. 4, 2 (V, 374 K.), and 14 other cases), and Justin (Joseph. Vita, 340). Prudent. Apoth. 178, apostrophizes Sabellius, and Diogenes of Oenoanda is fond of the figure (cf. fr. 5, col. 3, p. 11 William; fr. 6, col. 2, p. 12; fr. 35, col. 2, p. 43), which is, of course, common in the orators and poets. For the views of Greek and Latin rhetoricians upon it see G. Curcio, L'apostrophe nella poesia lat. (1903), 1-7. 88 igitur . : . igitur ergo: these words make the reductio ad absurdum as logically convincing as possible. nisi quod attigimus: cf. Tuse. 1, 51: nisi enim quod numquam vidimus id quale sit intellegere non possumus·, Plat. Theaet. p. 155e: είσΐν δέ ούτοι [i.e., οί άμύητοι] oí ούδέν άλλο οίόμενοι είναι ή ού αν δύνονται. άπρίξ τοΐν χεροΐν λαβέσθαι, πράξεις δέ καΐ γενέσεις καΐ παν τύ άόρατον ούκ άποδεχόμενοι ώς έν ουσίας μέρει. numne: a rare phrase, found also in Am. 36; cf. R. Kühner-C. Stegmann, Ausf. Gr. d. lat. Spr. 2, 2 2 (1914), 513514, who finds no other certain cases in this sense ("doch nicht etwa"); but Ε. Β. Lease (Cl. Rev. 11 (1897), 348-349) cites also Plaut. Truc. 546; Afran. 29 Ribbeck; Laberius 22 Ribbeck; Prud. C. Symm. 1, 322; 2, 940; Hamartig. 871. Ax (appendix) compares 1, 96: umquamne vidisti? nova: probably modifying ratio rather than a predicate adjective with omnia

437

dant. Quae sunt tantae 1 animi angustiae? 2 Ut, si Seriphi natus 1

tantae add. A

2

angustiaes B1

(though Plasberg thinks the latter). ita fit: deteriores and the Roman edition of 1471 read fiet, which is attractive (cf. Phil. 12,16 : ita fiet ut), yet in 1,37 ; 1,121 ; and Τ use. 2, 16, we have ita fit ut, so that this reading should probably be retained here; cf. also T. Wopkens, Advers. crit. 1 (1828), 75. mediterranei: cf. 2 Verr. 3, 192: Henna mediterranea est maxime·, 5, 70: homines marítimos ... Centuripinos, homines maxime mediterráneos. Is there perhaps in our passage a little of the disparaging American slang sense of "fresh-water" attaching to the adjective? So Max. Tyr. 30, 3, who cites Od. 11, 122-123: ot ού ϊσασι θάλασσαν / άνέρες. mare esse non credant : cf. Aug. De Trin. 15, 21 : absit etiam ut scire non negemus quae testimonio didicimus aliorum; alioquin esse nescimus oceanum; nescimus esse terras atque urbes quas celeberrimafama commendai ; nescimus fuisse homines et opera eorum quae histórica leetiene didicimus; nescimus quae quotidie undecumque nuntiantur et indiciis consonis contestantibusque firmantur ; postremo nescimus in quibus locis vel ex quibus hominibus fuerimus exorti ; quia haec omnia testimoniis credidimus aliorum. For parallels in different fields cf. Philodem. De Signis, 32, p. 98 De Lacy: ίρ' ούχί τω Κρήτοϊναι κακελίαν άπτοσ οί μή παργενηθέντες ; Philo, Quod omnis Probus, 5 : καθάπερ έν νυκτΐ διάγοντες άπιστοϋσι τοις έν ήμέρα ζώσι καί δσ' αν αύγαϊς άκράτοις των ήλιακών άκτίνων ειλικρινέστατα περιαθρήσαντες διηγώνται τεράστια νομίζουσι φάσμασιν έοικότα, των έν τοις θαύμασιν ού διαφέροντα; Lucían, Hermot. 31 : εϊ τις Αίθίοψ μηδεπώποτε δλλους άνθρώπους Ιδών, οίοι ήμεϊς έσμεν, διά τό μή άποδεδημηκέναι τό παράπαν, τινι συλλόγω των Αιθιόπων διισχυρίζοιτο καί λέγοι μηδαμόθι της γης άνθρώπους είναι λευκούς ή ξανθούς μηδέ όίλλο τι ή μέλανας, δρα πιστεύοιτ' αν ύπ' αύτών, κτλ.

quae sunt, etc.: exclamatory rather than relative; Mayor compares 1, 91: quis iste tantus casus·, Virg. G. 4, 495: quis tantus furor? ut: here equivalent to valut, "as for example"; cf. 2, 86; Div. 1, 86; Fin. 4, 30 [and Madvig's n.]; Ac. 2, 33 (and Reid's n.]. Seriphi: a small island in the Cyclades (Ον. M. 5, 242: parvae ... Seriphi·, Juv. 6, 563 : parva ... Seripho ; 10, 70), twelve miles in circumference (Plin. N.H. 4, 66), low-lying (Ον. M. 7, 464; Stat. Achill. 1, 205; yet L. Biirchner (in P.-W. 2A (1923), 1729) says that it reaches a height of 483 metres), and barren (Strab. 10, 5, 10; Sen. Dial. 12, 6, 4; Tac. Ann. 4, 21; saxo Seripho·, Eustath. ad Dion. Perieg. 525 (Geogr. Gr. min. 2 , 319); also Hesych. s.v. Σέριφος), is described as the most worthless island belonging to the Athenians (Schol. Ar. Acharn. 541 ; 542; Orig. C. Cels. 1, 29: έλαχίστης καί άσημοτάτης νήσου), and hence was used during the Empire as a place of exile (Tac. Ann. 2, 85; 4, 21; Juv. ll.ee.·, Sen. I.e.·, Plut. De Exil. 7, p. 602a). Famous as the landing-place of Danaë's chest (J. Escher in P.-W. 4 (1901), 2085), its insignificance otherwise appears in the well-known story of Themistocles and the man from Seriphus (Sen. 8 ; Plat. Rep. 1, 329e-330a; Plut. Them. 18, 3; Reg. et Imp. Apophth. p. 185c; Orig. C. Cels. 1, 29; Stob. vol. 3, p. 728 Hense; 5, p. 1035), and it was perhaps the butt of comedians (cf. Strab. 10, 5, 10; Ar. fr. 705 Kock; Cratinus wrote a play called Σερίφιοι; cf. Kock, 1, pp. 75-79). It is mentioned with contempt by Isocr. Aeginet. 9 and Liban. Declam. 24, 9. With the scanty vegetation (Biirchner, op. cit., 1731), the fauna was also small, a noiseless flog being most often mentioned and becoming proverbial (ibid.). The narrowly provincial residents of such an island could hardly be expected to know much of natural history beyond its limits.

438

esses nec umquam egressus ex insula,1 in qua lepusculos vulpeculasque 2 saepe vidisses, non crederes leones et 3 pantheras esse, cum tibi quales essent 4 dicerentur; 5 si vero de elephanto 6 quis diceret, etiam rideri te putares. 89 E t 7 tu, quidem, Vellei, non vestro more sed dialecticorum, 1 ex insula om. D 2 uulpiculasque A 3 et] e M1 4 esse D1 retur dett. Ven., crederentur M1 ' elefanto AHFM, elephante O ras.ree. Λ

lepusculos vulpeculasque: the diminutives are noteworthy; the smallness of the island seems reflected in its fauna. Also Cotta is fond of diminutives; cf. 1, 93; 1, 120, 3, 43 ; 3, 73; 3, 76; 3, 86. In O f f . 1, 41, the vulpécula is contrasted to the lion, somewhat as here. Xen. Cyneg. 5, 24, says that hares are found in most of the islands more plentifully than on the mainland, since they are less troubled by foxes and eagles. That Ithaca lacked hares was remarked by Antig. Mirab. 11; Schol. Β Od. 17, 294; Eustath. in Od. 17, 295. Poll. 5, 75, describes their importation into Sicily, which previously lacked them; when imported into Leros they became a nuisance (Hygin. Astron. pp. 71-72 Bunte), and similarly in Astypalaea (Eustath. in II. 1, 39), and in the Balearic Islands (Plin. N . H . 8, 217-218; 8, 226), but the most famous example of their annoying fecundity—for which cf. Ambros. De Tobia, 43—was in Carpathus, where, after their introduction, they became a proverbial plague (Archil, fr. 152 Edmonds ap. Hesych. s.v. Κάρπαθος τόν μάρτυρα; Poll. 5, 75; Zenob. 4, 48 {Paroem. Gr. 1, 98); Macar. 4, 94 (Paroem. Gr. 2, 176); Suppl. to Paroem. Gr. no. 31 (C. Graux, Les textes gr. (1886), 126); Μ. E. Müller, Mèi. de litt, gr. (1868), 358; 376; Eustath. in II. 2, 676; in Od. 17, 295; id., ad Dion. Perieg. 498 (Geogr. Gr. min. 2, 311); Anon. in Aristot. Rhet. 3, 11, p. 218, 5-14 Rabe; Suid. s . w . λαγώς; è Καρπάθιος τόν λαγωόν). In view of these facts we need not assume that Cicero—or his source— was precisely acquainted with the fauna of Seriphus, but rather that he ascribed

5 7

diceet in

to it the characteristic animal of whose depredations in the islands he had heard reports. Plin. N . H . 8, 228, speaks of the lack of foxes in Crete, and Xen. Cyneg. 5, 24, says of the islands ού γάρ είσιν 00τ' άλώπεκες έν ταϊς πολλαϊς αύτών. leones et pantheras: for their range cf. A. Steier in P.-W. 13 (1927), 969-971 —at 970, 51, he states that the panther was never a European animal. Cicero is here, as in the case of the elephant, naturally not limited to animals with which he was personally familiar. Popular disbelief in unfamiliar animals is further illustrated by 1, 97: an qtàcquam ... quia numquam vidimus—a passage which J. Bake (followed by Mayor) has unnecessarily transposed to follow rideri te putares in the present section; Max. Tyr. 8, 4: οίον εί και νησιώτης άνήρ, άθέατος τοϋ ίππων γένους καΐ άμαθέστατος, άκούων δτι ήν Μακεδόνι βασιλεϊ κτήμα ό Βουκεφάλας, κτλ. Marvellous tales of travelers and the creations of mythology made credence even less easy, and Strato wrote a book περί των άπορουμένων ζώων [Diog. L. 5, 59], 89 non vestro more: yet for the increasing interest of the Epicureans in logical problems cf. 1, 46, n. (natura ... ratio)·, P. H. and E. A. De Lacy, Philodemus: On Methods of Inference (1941), 138-156. As noted by R. Philippson (Symb. Osloenses, 20 (1940), 22, n. 1) it is only here that the third argument—that ratio is found only in human form—begins to be seriously discussed, since before this the discussion has centred about beauty (especially 1, 78-80).

439 quae funditus 1 gens vestra non novit, argumenti sententiam2 conclusisti. Beatos esse deos sumpsisti; concedimus. Beatum 1

quo effunditus Ν

2

sententia

dialecticorum quae: is diabeticorum masculine, as often in Cicero (e.g., 1, 70), or neuter (as in Fin. 3, 41; Τ use. 1, 14; O f f . 1, 19)? If neuter, as Mayor holds, quae is an appropriate relative, but the contrast with the more personal vestro is impaired; if masculine, some scholars would emend quae to quos (so the J untine edition of 1516) or quem—referring to more (so Manutius, Lambinus, and others). Roby (ap. Mayor) would read below argumentis, and refer quae to it. But Schoemann would better explain quae as a construction according to sense, comparing Τ use. 1, 4: musici floruerunt discebantque id omnes ; to which Mayor and others add: N.D. 1, 80: eequos silos, flaccos, frontones, capitones, quae sunt in nobis·, Fin. 1, 17: Democritea dicit ... ille·, 5, 16: Carneadia ... divisio est ... ille·, Tusc. 4, 48 : gladiatorium id quidem quamquam in eis ipsis videmus; Brut. 112, senatoriam ... sententiam cuius erat ille princeps-, Sail. Cat. 18, 1: coniuravere pauci ... in quibus Catilina fuit, de qua dicam. Cf. Reid on Ac. 2, 103; E. Löfstedt, Syntactica, 2 (1933), 145-146, n. 3, who thinks that the harshness of the construction is mitigated by putting into a parenthesis the words quae funditus gens vestra non novit. gens vestra: cf. the use of genus (as in Brut. 131), natio (2, 74, below, where see the note), and familia (as in Dip. 2, 3, and parallels cited by Pease. non novit: cf. 1, 70: idem facit contra dialécticos; Ac. 2, 97: Epicuro, qui totam dialecticam et contemnit et irridet [and Reid's n.]; Fin. 1, 22: tollit definitiones, nihil de dividendo ac partiendo docet, non quo modo efficiatur concludaturque ratio tradit, etc.-, 2, 18: dum dialecticam ... contemnit Epicurus·, 2, 27; Diog. L. 10, 31: τήν διαλεκτικήν ώς παρέλκουσαν άποδοκιμάζουσιν. R. Hirzel {Untersuch, ΐζ. Cic. philos. Sehr. 1 (1877), 179-180) thinks that Zeno the Epicurean, influenced by the attacks of Carneades,

expanded the Epicurean use of dialectic and otherwise refined the original íawness of the older Epicureanism. argumenti sententiam conclusisti: a perplexing passage in which, though with some hesitation, I follow the reading of AB, which Madvig (on Fin. 1, 30) considers impossible, remarking: Latine rationem, argumentum concludere dicimur ... sententiam, rem non magis concludere dicimur quam . . . rem negare aut veritatem rei. But C. F. W. Müller {ad loc.) well defends the mss, citing Brut. 34 : eoncluditque sententiam·, Ac. 32: orationis ratione conclusas, Orat. 20: oratione ñeque perfecta ñeque conclusa·, 230: eoncluditque sententias; and other cases. See also Reid on Ac. 2, 26; and on Fin. 1, 30. Among other readings are (1) argumentis sententiam conc. of the Roman edition of 1471 (followed by Mayor), (2) argumento sententiam conc. of certain deteriores (followed by Müller and Goethe), (3) argumenta sententiae conc. of deteriores (followed by Schoemann and Baiter), and (4) argumenti sententiam conc. (of Pksberg and Ax, comparing 2, 20: angustia autem conclusele rationis). Of these 1 is nearest to AB (which might have diverged by haplography of J·), and 1 and 2 are alike in construction and general meaning. The passage means, I think, "not in your own characteristic manner but in that of the logicians you have rounded out the thought of your argument." Rackham, who retains argumenti sententiam cone., more freely renders : "expressed the doctrine in the form of a syllogism." The passage to which Cotta here refers is in 1, 48, above. beatos esse, etc.: what follows is the type of chain-syllogism which in Fin. 4, 50, Cicero calls a sorites·, iam ille sorites, quo nihil putatis esse vitiosius; quod bonum sit id esse optabile ; quod optabile id expetendum; quod expetendum id laudabile; dein reliqui gradus. Elsewhere, however, he applies this term to the sophism of the

440 autem esse 1 sine virtute neminem 2 posse; 3 id quoque damus, et libenter quidem. 32 Virtutem autem sine ratione constare non posse ; conveniat id quoque necesse est. Adiungis nec 4 rationem esse nisi in 5 hominis figura. Quem tibi hoc daturum putas? Si enim ita esset, quid opus erat te gradatim istuc 6 pervenire? Sumpsisses 7 tuo iure. Quid 8 autem est istuc gradatim? 1 esse om.ACN 2 meminemi? 3 esse posse D3NO 4 nec om. A 5 in 6 ista Η 7 sumpsisses . . . iure . quid . . . gradatim ita add. M transp. I. Facciolati, De Inexplìcabilibus, 2, 28, quod autem est istuc gradatim. sumsisses tuo iure AH (est add.) NFM, quod autem est istud gradatim, sumpsisses tuo iure D20 8 quid dett. Rom., quod ceti.

acervus; cf. Ac. 2,49 : cum aliquid minutati m et gradatim additur aut demitur, saritas hoc vocant, quia acervum efficiunt uno addito grano [and cf. Pease on Div. 2, 11]. Chain-syllogisms were especially used by the Stoics (e.g., 2, 164, below; cf. E. Zeller, Stoics, Epicureans, and Sceptics, Engl, trans.2 (1880), 216, n. 1), but they might also be employed by their opponents (e.g., 3, 93). Mayor resolves the present series into simple syllogisms : (1) all that are blessed are virtuous, but the gods are blessed therefore the gods are virtuous ; (2) all that are virtuous are rational, but the gods are virtuous, therefore they are rational; (3) all that are rational are in human form, but the gods are rational, therefore they are in human form. et libenter quidem: cf. Div. 1, 17; Rep. 1, 30; 2, 64; Τ use. 2, 26. virtutem . . . sine ratione: cf. Philo, De Opif. Mundi, 73: κακίας δέ καί άρετης ώς αν οίκος νους καί λόγος. quem tibi hoc daturum putas: cf. Ac. 2, 50 : quis enim tibi dederit-, Fin. 4, 48 : quis enim tibi primum il lud concesserit; 4, 49 : quis igitur tibi istud dabit? Also Pease on Div. 2, 1, n. (minime adrogans) on the excessive assumptions of the Epicureans. opus erat: for the indicative cf. 1, 19, n. (longum est). gradatim: for the use of this word in describing the method of the sorites cf. 2, 164; Ac. 2, 49; 2, 93; Τ use. 1, 57; O f f . 1, 160; Hier. Ep. 69, 2, 5. pervenire: of arriving at a conclusion

through a train of reasoning, as in Ac. 2, 49; 2, 93; Tuse. 1, 57. sumpsisses: with this subjunctive— probably jussive—cf. 3, 76: dedisses; and other Ciceronian examples collected by R. Kiihner-C. Stegmann, Aus f . Gr. d. lat. Spr. 2, l 2 (1912), 187; H. Blase in Giotto, 10 (1920), 30-38, especially 31; R. Methner in Gioita, 11 (1921), 204. On the meaning of sumptum in logic cf. Mart. Cap. 4, 404: plenam sententiam cum proposuerimus aliquid ex ea volentes efficere, cum concessa fuerit, sumptum dicitur. huic etiam uni sententiae alia certa ratione debet innecti et utique propter id quod inferre volumus concedendo, et haec cum concessa fuerit sumptum dicitur. tuo iure: cf. 1, 77: arripere ... quasi vestro iure. quid . . . gradatim: this clause the mss place before sumpsisses tuo iure, but it was very properly transposed by J. Facciolati {De Inexplìcabilibus, 2 (1725), 28) to its present position, where most editors recognize that it belongs; cf. also A. C. Clark, The Descent of Manuscripts (1918), 357. J. Walker, however, followed by Davies and Ernesti bracket quod autem est istuc gradatim as the marginal inquiry of a bewildered copyist. But, as Mayor notes, gradatim is not a word hard to understand. Further, without this sentence nam in the next loses most of its point, but as here arranged the sentence nam .. . accedis analyzes what is meant by gradatim. The introductory word of the sentence

441

Nam a beatis 1 ad virtutem, a virtute ad rationem video te venisse gradibus; a ratione ad humanam figurarti quo modo accedis? Praecipitare istuc quidem est, non descendere. 90 Nec vero intellego cur maluerit Epicurus deos hominum 1

habeatis ΑλΝ

appears in AB as quod, which Plasberg and Ax retain, somewhat unconvincingly explaining it as = quale ; Schoemann emends to qui·, "how about your 'step by step'?" (i.e., not what is it but what about the propriety of using it?). But quid of the deteriores seems more in line with 3, 21 : quid diets ''melius' ? venisse . . . accedis . . . praecipitare . . . descendere: different phases of logical progression, all legitimate save the third, which is a logical saltus in demonstrando; cf. 1, 98: hoc est non considerare sed quasi sortiri quid loquare. For praecipitare cf. Ac. 2, 68 : sustinenda est ... adsensio, ne praecipitet si temere processerit. With the form of the clause cf. Fat. 46 : optare hoc quidem est, non disputare-, Fin. 2, 26: hoc est non dividere sed frangere-, Tuse. 2, 30: optare hoc quidem est, non docere. istuc quidem : istuc is here the neuter pronoun, frequent in Cicero; above {istic pervenire) the adverb, rare in Cicero. 90 cur maluerit Epicurus: cf. Tuse. 1, 65: fingebat haec Homerus et humana ad deos transferebat ; divina mallem ad nos. quae autem divina? vigere, sapere, invenire, meminisse; Aug. Conf. 1, 25. It was but natural, however, that early men should have compared the less familiar and more distant gods with the nearer and more familiar—themselves and their fellows—rather than making the reverse comparison, and once made the similitude naturally persisted, despite such philosophic doubts as are here expressed. The likeness of man and God was a commonplace, both pagan and Christian ; e.g., Legg. 1, 25: virtus eadem in homine ac deo neque alio in genere ... est igitur homini cum deo similitudo\ also it is found in Pythagoras (Themist. Or. 15, p. 194b: καί γαρ 2φη Πυθαγόρας ó Σάμιος εικόνα

πρός θεόν είναι άνθρώπους; Suid. s.v. άγαθοεργία· όπερ £φη ό Πυθαγόρας όμοιότατον έχειν τω θεω τόν άνθρωπον), Pindar (Nem. 6, 4-5: άλλά τι. προσφέρομεν ϊμπαν ή μέγαν / νόον ήτοι φύσιν άνθρώποις), Plato {Rep. 6, 501b: ξυμμιγνύντες τε καί κεραννύντες έκ των έπιτηδευμάτων το άνδρείκελον, άπ έκείνου τεκμαιρόμενοι, ό δή καί "Ομηρος έκάλεσεν έν τοϊς άνθρώποις έγγιγνόμενον θεοειδές τε καί θεοείκελον ; cf. Lact. Inst. 2, 10, 4), Diogenes the Cynic (Diog. L. 6, 51 : τούς άγαθούς άνδρας θεών εικόνας είναι), Musonius (fr. 17, p. 90 Hense: καθόλον δέ άνθρωπος, μίμημα μέν θεοϋ μόνον των επιγείων έστίν), Galen {De Usu Part. 1, 2 (III, 3 Κ.): άνθρώπω δέ, σοφόν γάρ τούτο τό ζώον καί μόνον των έπΐ γης θείον), Lucian {Pro Imag. 13: ωσαύτως δέ καί έν ταΐς τοιαύταις είκόσιν ούχ ούτως άνθρωπος μείζων γίγνεται ήν τις αυτόν θεφ άπεικάζη ώς το θείον άνάγκη έλαττοϋσθαι προς τό ένδέον έπικλώμενον ), Nonnus (41, 65-66: άλλά θεών ίνδαλμα γονής αύτόχθονι ρίζη / πρωτοφανής χρύσειος έμαιώθη στάχυς άνδρών) and Simρlicius (in Categ. 7, p. 201, 24-27 Kalbfleisch: εί δέ άνθρωπος δμοιος θεώ λέγεται καί δλως είκών παραδείγματι, δρα καί τά τοιαύτα πρός τί έστιν της σχέσεως ούκ άντιστρεφούσης ; ού γάρ δή καί ό θεός όμοιος άνθρώπω ή τό παράδειγμα τη εΐκόνι) — not a complete list, but one illustrative of various authors in whom the idea appears, though there seems lacking in paganism the Hebrew concept of God as having created man in his own image (Gen. 1,26-27 ; Ps. 8,5 ; Ecclus. 17, 3; Ephes. 4, 24; Coloss. 3, 10). Objections similar to that here raised by Cotta are found in Tert. Adv. Marc. 2, 16 : porro cum pariter agnoscas hominem a Deo inflatum in animam vivam, non Deum ab

442 similes dicere quam homines deorum. Quaeres quid intersit; si enim hoc illi 1 simile sit, 2 esse illud huic. Video ; sed hoc dico, non ab hominibus formae figurarti venisse ad déos; 3 di enim semper 4 fuerunt, nati numquam sunt, si quidem aeterni sunt 5 futuri; at homines nati; ante igitur humana forma quam homines 1 illis Β si semper BF aeterni sunt Η 4

2

3 et dii B, dii NF, dum M simile est sit (est del.) Η 6 si quidem aeterni sunt add. Β, quia aeterni sunt siquidem

homine, satis perversum est ut in Deo potius humana constituas quam in homine divina; in hominis imagine Deum imbuas potius quam Dei hominem, et haec ergo imago censenda est Dei in homine, quod eosdem motus et sensus habeat humanus animus quos et Deus, licet non tales quales Deus·, Orig. Comm. in Ep. ad Roman. 1, 19: et Anthropomorphitas intellegendus est confutare, qui in ecclesia positi imaginem corpoream hominis Dei esse imaginem dicunt, ignorantes illud quod in Genesi scriptum est ad imaginem Dei factum esse hominem. The well-known remark of Voltaire that God created man in his own image and man returned the compliment is in part anticipated by Antonius, Adv. Gentes, 29-30 {Pair. Lat. 5, 262-263) : cum Deus omnipotens hominem formaverit olim j audet homo formare deum. hoc illi . . . illud huic: cf. Ac. 2, 49: ut nihil inter hoc et illud intersit. On the shift from similis + gen. to similis + dat. cf. R. Kiihner-C. Stegmann, Ausf. Gr. d. lat. Spr. 2, l 2 (1912), 449-450. video: "I see your point" (Mayor). formae figuram: cf. 1, 48: animantium formam vincit hominis figura·, 1, 54, η. { formae etfigurae)·, 2, 117: forma ipsa figuraque·, Τ use. 1, 37: formam aliquam figuramque·, O f f . 1, 126: formam nostram reliquamquefiguram·, De Or. 2, 98; 3, 179: formam et figuram·, Orat. 9: formis et figuris·, Accius 254 Ribb. : formae figurae·, Lucr. 4, 69: formai servare figuram·, Tac. Agr. 46, 3; Plin. Paneg. 55. The two words perhaps represent μορφή and σχήμα; cf. Philippians, 2, 7-8. Mayor thinks the precision is intended to prevent the misunderstanding of formam

merely in the sense of "beauty." di enim semper fuerunt: probably the view of the philosophically minded of Cotta's day, but by no means an essential part of early popular belief, according to which, as seen in the poets, gods had been very definitely born, at particular times and places. By the time of Plutarch, however, the statement can be ventured {Stoic. Repugn. 38, p. 1051e-f) : φθαρτόν δέ καί γενητόν ούδείς ώς ίποζ είπεΐν διανοεισθαι θεόν; cf. the oracle of Dodona in Paus. 10, 12, 10: Ζεύς ήν, Ζεύς έστίν, Ζεύς ίσσεται · ώ μεγάλε Ζεϋ. With the argument drawn from the relative ages of gods and men, cf. Arnob. 4, 8 : quaero et rogito utrumne videantur antiquiores dii esse natura, tempore, vetustatean homines, an apes, fruges, vir guita, et ceteraÌ dubitabit hominum nemo quin in numeris dicatis déos aetatibus saeculis cuncta quaecumque sunt anteire. quod si habet se ita, qui fieri per rerum naturam potest ut ex rebus postea procreatis acciperent nomina ea quae sunt priora temporibus? si quidem aeterni sunt futuri: as Vellerns has so often emphasized; e.g., 1, 25; 1, 26; 1, 27; 1, 29; 1, 45; 1, 49; cf. 1, 107; 1, 109. With sunt futuri cf. 1, 103: qui beatus futurus est·, Fin. 2, 85: si veri amici futuri sumus. Mayor remarks that the future participle "is used because the question whether the gods are in future to be called aeterni would be decided by the fact of their having been born in the past." ante igitur humana forma quam homines: an example of Platonic idealism which the materialistic Vellerns could hardly be expected to acceptl

443 ea qua 1 erant forma dii inmortales ; non ergo illorum humana forma sed nostra divina dicenda est. Verum hoc 2 quidem ut voletis ; illud quaero, quae fuerit tanta fortuna (nihil enim ratione in rerum natura factum esse 3 vultis)— (91) sed tarnen quis 4 iste tantus casus, unde tam felix concursus atomorum ut repente6 homines deorum forma nascerentur? Seminane 6 deorum decidisse de cáelo putamus in terras 7 et sic 1 eaque dett. Ald.,H\?) « ne om. ACNOM

7

2 hocom.H terram A1

ea qua erant: two principal readings are here found, that of ACNB: ante igitur humana forma quam homines ea, qua erant forma dii inmortales, "so the human form existed before men existed in that form [abl. of quality] in which the immortal gods were," and that of deteriores and the Aldine edition of 1523: ante igitur humana forma quam homines, eaque erant forma dii inmortales, "therefore the human form existed before mankind, and it was the form of the immortal gods" (Rackham). Desire to follow the best mss and the principle of the lectio difficilior lead me to accept the former reading, despite a certain clumsiness in its style and despite the satisfactory sense and form of the latter reading. But with the awkward repetition of forma Schoemann compares that of causa in Rep. 1, 41 ; of helium in Catil. 3, 25 ; of lex in Pro Cluent. 148 and 156; and of locus in Caes. B.G. 1, 49, 1. hoc quidem: sc. esto. ut voletis: cf. Phil. 2, 118: ut voles. illud: of a following point, nihil enim ratione: the mechanistic views of Vellerns allow foi chance but not for purpose.

3

est O

* qui B 1

5

repente* Β

fortuito); 2, 94: concursus atomorum·, Quintil. Inst. 1,2,2 : an atomorum concursu mundus sit effectus; Lact. De Ira, 10, 27: id concursu atomorum .. . perfici potuisse; 10, 28; 10, 39: si concursus atomorum ... ea quae videmus effecit·, Ambr. Exam. 1, 7: ut atomorum concursione mundus coiret. seminane deorum decidisse: cf. the passages cited at 1, 1, n. (ad cognitionem animi)·, also Sen. 77: sed credo déos inmortales sparsisse ánimos in corpora humana·, Legg. 1, 24: disputari solet ... extitisse quandam maturitatem serendi generis humant, quod sparsum in terras atque satum divino auctum sit animorum muñere, cumque alia quibus cohaererent homines e mortali genere sumpserunt, quae fragilia essent et caduca animum esse ingeneratum a deo. ex quo vere vel agnatio nobis cum caelestibus vet genus vel stirps appellari potest·, Anaxagoras ap. Iren. C. Haeres. ( Vorsokrat. 1, no. 46 A 113): Anaxagoras autem ... dogmati^avit facta ammalia decidentibus e cáelo in terram seminibus; Vitruv. 8, praef. 1 : Euripides auditor Anaxagorae ... aera et terram eamque e caelestium imbrium conceptionibus inseminatam fetus gentium et omnium animalium in mundo procreavisse·, Eur. Chrysipp. 839, 1-5 Nauck: Γαία μεγίστη καΐ Διός Αίθήρ, / ó μέν άνθρώπων καΐ θεών 91 sed tarnen: resumptive, after the γενέτωρ, / ή θ' ύγροβόλους στάγονας νοdigression of the thought of 1, 84; cf. τιάς / παραδεξαμένη τίκτει θνητούς, / 2, 61; 2, 71; De Or. 2, 365; Hor. S. τίκτει βοτάνην φυλά τε θηρών; this in 1, 1, 27 (and Lejay's n.). turn influencing Pacuv. Chrys. 90-94 quis iste tantus casus: cf. 1, 88: quae sunt tantae animi angustiae·, Tusc. 4, 40: Ribbeck (cf. 2, 91, below), and especially Lucr. 2, 991-995: denique caelesti sumus etenim quis erit tandem modus iste; 4, 70: omnes semine oriundi; / omnibus ille idem quis est enim iste amor amicitiae? concursus atomorum: cf. 1, 66: pater est, unde alma liquentis / umoris concursu quodam fortuito and n. (concursu ... guttas mater cum terra recepii, / feta parit

444

homines 1 patrum similes extitisse? Vellern diceretis; deorum cognationem agnoscerem non invitus. Nihil tale dicitis, sed casu 1

homines deorum forma (deorum forma ώί.) Ν

nítidas fruges arbustaque laeta / et genus humanum, parit omnia saecla ferarum [cf. the note at 2, 66, below, on the ιερός γάμος]; Ον. Met. 1, 78-83: natus homo est ; sive hunc divino semine fecit / Ule opifex rerum, mundi melioris origo, / sive recens tellus seductaque nuper ab alto / aethere cognati retinebat semina caeli, / quam satus Iapeto mixtum fluvialibus undis / finxit in ejfigiem moderantum cuneta deorum ; Manli. 4, 886-887 : an dubium est habitare deum sub pectore nostro / in caelumque redire animas caeloque venire·, Sen. Ep. 73, 16: semina in corporibus humanis divina dispersa sunt; Dial. 8, 5, 5: an illud verum sit, quo maxime probatur homines divini esse spiritus partem ac velut scintillas quasdam astrorum in terram desiluisse atque alieno loco haesisse·, Arr. Epict. 1, 9, 4: άπ' έκείνου [sc. θεοϋ] δέ τά σπέρματα καταπέπτωκεν ούκ εις τόν πατέρα τόν έμδν μόνον ούδ' εις τον πάππον, άλλ' εις άπαντα μέν τα έπΐ γης γεννώμενά τε καΐ φυόμενα; 1, 13, 3: έκ των αύτών σπερμάτων γένονεν και της αύτης άνωθεν καταβολής 1, 14, 6; Amm. Marc. 25, 3, 17: tamquam a cognatione caelitum deflumtem ; Hier. Ep. 51, 4, 4: iuxta aliam proprietatem, "cadaver" dici quia animae de caelo ruerint-, 120, 10, 2: ne iuxta Pythagoram et Platonem et discípulos eorum ... dicamus animas lapsas esse de caelo·, 126, 1, 2: utrum lapsa de caelo sit, ut Pythagoras philosophus omnesque Platonici et Originesputant, an άπόρροια dei substantiae, ut Stoici, Manicheus et Hispana Priscilliani haeresis suspicantur [cf. Adv. Rufin. 2, 10] ; Macrob. Somn. Scip. 1, 9, 1: animarum originem manare de caelo inter rede philosophantes indubitatae constat esse sententiae·, also cf. the concepts of (1) man as a fallen god (the passages collected by A. D. Nock, edition of Sallustius (1926), liii-liv, nn. 66-67); (2) life as originating from the sky (Bailey on Lucr. 2, 1154). Mayor remarks that -ne, when not attached to the principal verb, often, as here, expresses surprise and expects

a negative answer; cf. 1, 92: omnesne. R. Kiihner-C. Stegmann, Ausf. Gr. d. lat. Spr. 2, 2 2 (1914), 504, well observe that -ne is usually attached to the emphatic word in its clause; for parallels in which a negative answer is expected see their citations on pp. 505-506. deorum decidiese de: unintentional alliteration. putamus: for the indicative cf. 1, 80, n. (arbitramur); 1, 83: facimus. patrum similes: cf. Virg. Eel. 1, 22-23; Stob. vol. 1, 295-296 Wachsmuth on likenesses of children to their parents. vellem diceretis: cf. Tuse. 5, 20: vellem praemio elicere possemus \ R. KühnerC. Stegmann, op. cit., 2, 2 2 (1914), 179180. deorum cognationem: in addition to the passages cited above in the note on seminane deorum decidisse, cf. E. Pfeiffer in ΣΤΟΙΧΕΙΑ, 2 (1916), 116, n. 0; Pease on Div. 1, 64, n. {deorum cognatione)·, 1, 110, n. (haustos ánimos et libatos), to which add: Plat. Prot. 322a: έπειδή δέ, ó άνθρωπος θείας μετέσχε μοίρας, πρώτον μέν διά την του θεοΰ συγγένειαν ; Hör. ¿·. 2, 2, 79; Μ. Aurel. 5, 27; Muson. fr. 18a, p. 96 Hense: τόν ανθρωπον, ώσπερ συγγενέστατον τοις θεοΐς των έπιγείων; Arr. Epict. 1, 1, 12; 1, 9, 1; 1, 9, 11: έπιγνόντες την πρός τούς θεούς συγγένειαν; 1, 9, 22; 1, 14, 6; 1, 17, 27; 2, 8, 11; [Apul.] Asel. 22: homo diis cognatione coniunctus; Julian, Ad Sacerd. p. 292b : έκ των θεών πάντες γεγονότες; Vett. Val. Anth. 9, proem, p. 330, 17 Kroll; Aug. C.D. 3, 4: de sententia Varronis qua utile esse dixit ut se homines dis geni tos mentiantur·, Proel, in Tim. p. 310a (p. 231 Diehl): τούς Πλατωνικούς, δσοι την ήμετέραν ψυχήν ίσοστάσιόν τε άποφαίνουσι τοις θεοϊς καΐ όμοούσιον ταΐς θείαις ψυχαΐς ; Schol. Pind. Nem. 6, 14; S. A. Cook in W. R. Smith, Relig. of the Semites3 (1927), 509512; M. van den Bruwaene, La théologie de Cic. (1937), 200, n. 1; A. Giblet in

445 esse factum ut essemus similes deorum. Et nunc argumenta quaerenda sunt quibus hoc refellatur. Utinam tarn facile vera invenire 1 possim 2 quam falsa convincere. 33 Etenim enumerasti memoriter et copiose, ut mihi quidem admirari luberet 3 in homine esse Romano tantam scientiam, 1 ueramuenire A1 DF\ iuberet NO

2

possem D, Lact. Inst. 2, 3, 24 ; De Ira, 11, 10

Stud. Hellenist. 5 (1948), 100, n. 1. non invitus: cf. Fin. 1, 4; Tuse. 1, 40; Legg. 1, 57; Am. 25; Att. 8,10; 11,16,4; for the litotes P. Parzinger, Beitr. χ. Kenntn. d. Entwìckl. d. eie. Stils (1910), 16. casu: the explanation used by the Epicureans for any concomitant variations which might seem the result of intention. et nunc: "and after all this"; what Mayor calls the "exclamatory, or pathetic use of et (=είτα)," with examples in 1, 93: et soletis queri; 1, 100: et eos vituperabas·, Div. 2, 69: et negant historiei; 2, 121 : et miramur aliquando; Tuse. 1, 92: et dubitas; 3, 35: et tu oblivisci iubes·, Pro Tuli. 42: et miramini; De Imp. Cn. Pomp. 42: et quisquam dubitavit [so 45,; Phil. 1, 19: et vos acta Caesaris defenditis·, Virg. G. 2, 433: et dubitant homines serere ; Aen. 1, 48: et quisquam numen Iunonis adorat·, 6, 806: et dubitamus adhue virtutem extendere factis·, Liv. 2, 38, 5: et hanc urbem vos non bostium ducitis·, 3, 19, 7 : et vos ... signa intulistis·, Plin. Paneg. 14: et needum imperator ... eras·, 46; 56: et quanto plura adhue restant·, Tac. Agr. 15, 4: et ftumine non oceano defendi; Juv. 7, 124-125: et melius nos / egimus. utinam . . . convincere: cf. Lact. Inst. 2, 3, 24: nota Ciceronis vox est: utinam tam facile vera invenire possem [sic] quam falsa convincere; De Ira, 11, 10: adeo et ipse testatus est falsum quidem apparere, veritatem tamen latere, utinam, inquit, tam facile vera invenire possem [sic] quam falsa convincere, quod quidem non dissimulanter, ut Academicus, sed vere atque ex animi sententia proclamavit, quia Veritas humants sensibus erui numquam potest. With the thought cf. 1, 57: mihi enim non tam facile

3

liberet

in mentem venire solet quare verum sit aliquid quam quare falsum; 1, 60: quid non sit citius quam quid sit dixerim. Davies compares Athenag. De Resurr. 10: έλαττον γάρ τό ψευδός έλέγχειν τοϋ τήν άλήθειαν κρατύνειν. possim: D and Lactantius in both quotations here read possem, but the present subjunctive is attested by the best mss, is perfectly grammatical, and makes Cotta less despairing in the search for truth than if he had used the contrary to fact implications of the imperfect. etenim: beginning the refutation of the false arguments just alluded to. enumerasti: in 1, 25-41. memoriter: "with accurate memory"; cf. 1, 113: summa enim memoria pronuntiabat. Mayor compares Plat. Polit. 257b: καΐ δικαίως και πάνυ μεν οδν μνημονικώς έπέπληξάς μοι τό περί τούς λογισμούς αμάρτημα. Cf. the notes of Madvig and of Reid on Fin. 1, 34, showing that in Latin the word regularly means "with a good memory" rather than simply "without notes." Cf. also the praise of Vellerns by Cotta in 1, 58; and see Div. 2, 35 : tui quidem cuius etiam memoriam admiror. luberet: Heindorf and others have objected that wonder is involuntary, not a matter of choice, and various emendations have been suggested. But, as Mayor suggests, admirari here means "to express my wonder." homine . . . Romano: cf. 1, 58. Such knowledge in a Greek, trained in detail in the philosophy of his own land and language, would be noteworthy, yet less of an achievement than in a Roman, with his natural handicaps in the study,

446 usque 1 a Thaïe 2 Milesio de deorum natura philosophorum sententias. 92 Omnesne tibi illi delirare 3 visi sunt qui sine manibus et 4 pedibus constare deum posse decreverint? 5 Ne hoc quidem vos movet considerantis, quae sit utilitas quaeque 6 oportunitas in 7 homi ne membrorum, ut iudicetis membris humanis deos non egere? Quid enim pedibus opus est sine ingressu, quid manibus si nihil conprehendendum8 est, quid reliqua 9 discriptione 10 1 usque] ut quae B1, aisque Z)1 2 tale NO 3 delilare A^Bl· 1 ex add. Β 4 quaeque] quae O 7 in add. A 8 comprehendum D decreuerunt NO 10 descriptione * de reliqua D DNOM2

5

both linguistic and social (cf. the apologies by Cicero in 1, 1-14). Thale: on the declension of this name in Latin cf. R. Kiihner-F. Holzweissig, Ausf. Gr. d. lat. Spr. I a (1912), 492. The ablative form Thalete occurs only in Rep. 1, 22; Thale only here. Yet Cicero also varies between Thaletem {Rep. 1, 25), Thalem (Div. 1,111, where see Pease's n.), and Thalen {Div. 2, 58; De Or. 3, 137), so that there seems no good reason for change here. Cf. also Prob. Cathol. 1 {Gram. Lat. 4, 23, 17-19 Keil). de deorum natura : cf. the note on the title. 92 omnesne: cf. 1, 91, η. {seminane deorum decidisse). delirare: cf. 1, 37, η. {quasi delirans). decreverint: for the subjunctive cf. 1, 34, η. (sint). quae sit utilitas: cf. 1, 99, and η. {capite collo .. . cruribus); 1, 123: membris hominum praeditum omnibus usu membrorum ne minimo quidem ; 3, 3 : deos . .. membris . . . humanis praeditos sed eorum membrorum ttsum nullam habere·, Div. 2, 40: deos ... Epicurus ... habere putat eadem membra quae nos nec usum ullum habere membrorum ; Plat. Tim. 33c-34a [and Cicero's translation in Tim. 18-19]: ομμάτων τε γάρ έπεδεΐτο ούδέν, όρατόν γάρ ούδέν ύπελείπετο έξωθεν, ούδ' ακοής, ουδέ γάρ άκουστόν. πνεϋμά τε ούκ ήν περιεστός δεόμενον αναπνοής, ούδ' αδ τινός έπιδεές ήν οργάνου σχεϊν φ τήν μέν εις έαυτό τροφήν δέξοιτο, τήν δέ πρότερον έξικμασμένην άποπέμψοι πάλιν . . . χειρών δέ, αΐς οΰτε λαβείν ουτε αδ τινά

άμύνασθαι χρεία τις ήν, μάτην ούκ φετο δεϊν αύτω προσάπτειν, ούδέ ποδών ούδέ δλως της περί τήν βάσιν ύπηρεσίας . . . έπί δέ τήν περίοδον ταύτην &τ ούδέν ποδών δέον άσκελές καί ίίπουν αύτί> έγέννησεν ; Philo, Quod Deus immutabilis, 56-59 (57: εί κέχρηται τοις όργανικοϊς μέρεσι, βάσεις μέν έχει τοϋ προέρχεσθαι χάριν—βαδιεΐται δέ ποΐ πεπληρωκώς τά πάντα . . . καί χείρας μέντοι πρός τό λαβείν τε καί δοϋναι· λαμβάνει μέν δή παρ' ούδενός ούδέν—πρός γάρ τό άνεπιδεεΐ καί τά σύμπαντα έχει κτήματα— . . . οφθαλμών γε μην ούκ έδεϊτο, οΐς άνευ φωτός αισθητού κατάληψις ού γίνεται· τό δέ αισθητών φως γενητόν, έώρα δέ ó θεός καί προ γενέσεως φωτί χρώμενος έαυτώ. τί δέ δή λέγειν περί τών της τροφής οργάνων; εί γάρ ταϋτ' εχει, καί τρέφεται καί πληρωθείς μέν άποπαύεται, παυσάμενος δέ δειται πάλιν, καί τάλλα δσα τούτοις άκόλουθα ούκ αν εϊποιμι); Iambi. De Myst. 1, 10: ού περιειργομένη που δειται δι' οργάνων σωματικών, έτέρων τινών σωμάτων εκτός όντων άντιλαμβάνεσθαι. Cf. R. Philippson in Symb. Osloenses, 20 (1940), 35; also what Tert. De Resurr. Cam. 60; Orig. De Resurr. (17, 61 Lommatzsch); and Aug. Serm. 143, 3, say about the needs of risen souls for organs of the human body for which they will have no use. ingressu: walking; as in 1, 94; cf. O f f . 1, 128: incessus. discriptione: cf. 1, 26: omnium rerum discriptionem·, 2, 121: subtilisque descriptio (or discriptio) partium.

447 omnium corporis partium, in qua nihil inane, nihil sine causa, nihil supervacuaneum 1 est,2 itaque nulla ars imitari sollertiam u naturae potest. Habebit igitur linguam deus et non loquetur,4 1

supervacaneum HNOM

2

es*t Β

nihil inane . . . nihil supervacuaneum: cf. 1, 99; 2, 121: ut nihil eorum supervacuaneum sit; Leucipp. fr. 2 Diels (ap. Aët. 1, 25, 4 = Doxogr. Gr.2 321): ούδέν χρήμα μάτην γίνεται, άλλά πάντα έκ λόγου τε καΐ ύπ' άνάγκης ; Aristot. passim (e.g., De An. 2, 4, 415 b 16; 3, 9, 432 b 21; 3, 12, 434 a 31; De Gen. An. 2, 4, 739 b 20; 2, 6, 741 b 4; 2, 6, 744 a 36-37; 2, 6, 744 b 16; 5, 8, 788 b 22-23; De Part. An. 1, 1, 641 b 12; 1, 5, 645 a 23; 2, 13, 658 a 8; 3, 1, 661b 24; 4, 11, 691b 4; 4, 12, 694 a 15; 4, 13, 695 b 18; De Respir. 16, 476 a 13; De Incess. An. 2, 704 b 15; 12, 711 a 18; De Cael. 1, 4, 271 a 24; 2, 11, 291 b 13; Polit. 1, 2, 1253 a 8; 1, 8, 739 b 20; frg. 230 Rose); Theophr. C.P. 1, 1, 1; Plin. N.H. 11, 4: in contemplatione naturae nihilpossit videri supervacmm ; 22, 1 ; Plut. De Def. Orac. 24, p. 423 d; De Am. Prelis, 3, 495 c; Basil. Hexaem. 5, 4, p. 101c; 9, 5, p. 200b-201b; Ambr. Exam. 6, 35: quod nihil superfluum sit creatum. itaque . . . potest: P. Stamm, De M.T.C. Lib. de D.N. Interpolationibus (1873), 27-29, thinks that this sentence interrupts the course of the thought and is an interpolation added by someone from the commonplace found in 2, 81 : cuius sollertiam nulla ars, nulla manus, nemo opifex consequi possit imitando·, and 2, 142: quis vero opifex praeter naturam, qua nihil potest esse callidius, tantam sollertiam persegui potuisset in sensibus? Hence h e followed by Mayor—brackets the sentence. Heindorf had proposed ut nulla ars imitari sollertiam naturae possit·, A. C. Paterson (in CI. Weekly, 22 (1929), 214205) would read ita for itaque, and translates: "what need is there of all the other parts of the bodily system, that system in which there is nothing without purpose or design, nothing superfluous; (for) the knowingness of nature no art

3

solertiam F

4

loqueretur O

can rival." The difficulties with the clause seem to arise when it is not connected closely enough with what precedes, and I incline to indicate it as parenthetical and hence closely attached to the words before it. imitari: not merely to imitate, but, as in 2, 81, consequi ... imitando·, cf. 2, 24; Brut. 70. With the thought cf. Sen. Ep. 65, 3 : omnis ars naturae imitatio est·, Galen, De Usu Part. 10, 10 (III, 809 Κ.): είς τοσούτον ήκει σοφίας ή τέχνη της φύσεως, ώς μή πασαν αυτήν εύρήσθαι τοσούτφ χρόνφ ζητουμένην υπό τηλικούτων άνδρών ; Iambi. Protr. 9, pp. 49-50 : μιμείται γάρ ού την τέχνην ή φύσις άλλά αύτη την φύσιν. Mayor quotes F. Bacon, Nov. Org., 1, 10: subtilitas naturae subtilitatem sensus et intellectus multis partibus superat. habebit... linguam deus et non loquetur: Cicero's source evidently assumes that the gods have no language. Further Sext. Emp. Adv. Phys. 1, 178-179, raises this dilemma: και ίτι, εί έστιν, ήτοι φωνάέν έστιν ή άφωνον. το μέν οδν λέγειν άφωνον τόν θεόν τελέως άτοπον και ταΐς κοιναΐς έννοίαις μαχόμενον. εί δέ φωνδεν έστί, φωνή χρήται και ϋχει φωνητικά όργανα, καθάπερ πνεύματα καΐ τραχεΐαν άρτηρίαν γλώσσάν τε καΐ στόμα. τοϋτο δέ άτοπον και έγγύς της 'Επικούρου μυθολογίας, τοίνυν ρητέον μή ύπάρχειν τόν θεόν. καΐ γάρ δή εί φωνή χρήται, ομιλεί, εί δέ όμιλει, πάντως κατά τινα διάλεκτον ομιλεί, εί δέ τοϋτο, τί μάλλον τή Έλληνίδι ή τή βαρβάρω χρήται γλώσση; καΐ εί τή Έλληνίδι, τί μάλλον τή Ίάδι ή τή Αίολίδι ή τινι των άλλων; καί μήν ούδέ πάσαις. ουδεμία τοίνυν . . . ρητέον τοίνυν μή χρήσθαι φωνή το θείον, διά δέ τοϋτο καΐ άνύπαρκτον είναι. This passage surely derives from Carneades (through Clitomachus) ; cf. H. Diels in Abh. d. kgl. preuss. Akad. d. Wiss. 1916, no. 6, 52 (correcting R.

448 dentes, palatum, fauces nullum ad usum, quaeque procreationis causa natura corpori adfinxit ea frustra habebit deus; nec externa magis quam interiora,1 cor, pulmones, iecur, cetera, quae 2 de1

quam interiora om.O

2

quae om. Λ

Hirzel, Untersuch. ζ· Cic. philos. Sehr. 1 (1877), 172-174), who thinks that Cicero may wrongly have inferred that the Epicureans ascribed no language to the gods. But Philodem. De Dits, 3, coll. 13-14, says: κ (αϊ) φωνή Sè χρήσθαι καΐ όμειλίθ£ τη προς άλλήλους ρητέον · ού γάρ μάλλον εύδαίμονας κ (αϊ) άδιαλύτους νοήσομεν, φησί, μή φωνοϋντας μηδ' άλλήλοις διαλεγομένους, άλλά τοις ένεοϊς άνθρώποις ομοίους · . . . καί νή Δία γε τήν 'Ελληνίδα νομιστέον έχειν αύτούς διάλεκτον, ή μή πόρρω, τάς φως δέ σύν γω κ(αΐ) τνεσρχός γε . . . 1 τιμής θεγραψεν . . . ρΙ γάρ Έπιυ λλά λέων τω τελευταίοι ών πρόμπεδοέα; 82, ρ. 112 Gomperz: καί τοϋθ' Έα έν τω τελευτών πρός Έμπεδοκλέα; and Porphyr. De Abst. 1, 26, speaks of a treatise by him against Pythagorean vegetarianism. Cf. also H. Diels in Abh. d. kgl. preuss. Akad. d. Wiss. 1916, no. 6, 49. With Metrodorus he is mentioned by Sen. Ep. 6, 6: Metrodorum et Hermarchum et Polyaenum magnos viros non schola Epicuri sed contubernium fecit·, 33, 4: apud istos quicquid Hermarchus dixit, quicquid Metrodorus, ad unum refertur·, 52, 3-4; [Galen,] Hist. Phil2 (XIX, 228 Κ.): τούτου δέ Μητρόδωρος ήκροατο καί "Ερμαρχος ó αύτόν ' Ε π ί . κουρον διαδεξάμενος ; ; Alciphron, 2, 2, 9. For statues of Epicurus, Hermarchus, and Zeno of Sidon found in the villa of Piso at Herculaneum cf. H. Bloch in Am. Journ. of Arcb. 44 (1940), 491, and works there cited. contra . . . dixerunt: the vituperative disposition of Epicurus and his followers is often mentioned; e.g., Philodem. De Piet. 82, p. 112 Gomperz; Plut. Adv. Colot. 1, p. 1107e; 24, p. 1120c; Non posse suaviter, 2, p. 1086e-1087a; Diog. L. 10, 8: πλεϋμονά τε αύτόν [i.e. Nausiphanes] έκάλεικαΐ άγράμματον καί άπατεώνα καί πόρνην· τούς τε περί Πλάτωνα Διονυσοκόλακας καί αύτόν Πλάτωνα χρυσοϋν, καί 'Αριστοτέλη όίσωτον . . . φορμοφόρον τε Πρωταγόραν καί γραφέα Δημοκρίτου καί έν κώμαις γράμματα διδάσκειν Ήράκλειτόν τε

29

450 κυκητήν καΐ Δημόκριτον Ληρόκριτον καΐ Άντίδωρον Σασσίδωρον· τούς τε Κυνικούς έχθρούς της 'Ελλάδος καΐ τούς διαλεκτικούς πολυφθόρους, Πύρρωνα δ' άμαθη καΐ άπαίδευτον; W. Crönert, Kolotes u. Menedemos (1906), 17-18; 22; Η. von Arnim in P.-.W 6 (1909), 137 (who observes that his attacks were more unbridled than witty); E. Bignone, L'Aristotele perduto, 2 (1936), 533, n. 1 ; R. Philippson in Gotting. Nachr. 1929, 139; P. H. De Lacy in Am. Journ. of Philol. 60 (1939), 91, nn. 35-36; R. Philippson in Symb. Osloenses, 19 (1939), 28-29 (on the vituperative language of Philodemus). On works of Metrodorus against certain dialogues of Plato cf. Philodem. Adv. Soph. p. 95 Sbordone: των είς Μητρόδωρον άναφερομένων υποθηκών καΐ των μαρτυριών καΐ μάλλον v 2χειν έπιθυ, but the passage is too fragmentary to be very helpful. denique . . . postremo: so 3, 23; In Catil. 2, 25; Leg. agr. 2, 62; in Ac. 2, 136, the order of these words is reversed. motu mentis: cf. 3, 69: motum istum celerem cogitationis, acumen, sollertiam quam rationem vocamus·, 3, 71: sine animi motu et cogitatione, id est, ratione, perficitur·, Ac. 2, 48 : cum mens moveatur ipsa per se .. . vel ipsi per se motu mentis aliquo ; Lact. Inst. 6, 17, 22 : vis et ratio eius in motu est ... cum cogitatio ipsa nihil aliud sit quam mentis agitatio. mentis ac rationis: cf. 1, 4, n. {mente atque ratione). quo modo beatus: cf. 1, 114: ita nec beatus est vester deus nec aeternus.

1, 105

481

enim horum attigeris 1 ulcus est; ita 2 male instituía ratio exitum 3 reperire 4 non potest. 105 Sic enim dicebas, speciem dei percipi cogitatione non sensu, nec esse in ea ullam soliditatem, neque eandem 5 ad numerum permanere,6 eamque esse eius visionem ut similitudine 7 et trans1 attigeris dett. Man., attigerit cett. 2 ita in ras. A 3 exitium H1 * reppe6 tandem O 7 similitudine CN, si multitudine rire DNM · permanare NO AB2FîM2

ulcus: "a sore spot"; cf. De Domo, 12 : ut ... tu in hoc ulcere ; Ter. Phorm. 690 : quid minus utibile fuit quam hoc ulcus tangere [where Donatus remarks: proverbiale] ; also [Plat.] Axioch. 368c: ούχ όλον, ώς φασιν, έλκος. ita male institute, etc.: cf. Chalcid. in Tim. 215: ita male fundata sententia honestum invenire non potest exitum·, and with exitum reperire cf. 1, 53, η. (explicare argument i exitum) ; 1, 107: nec vos exitum reperitisi Fin. 1, 54; Pro Cael. 64: nullum invenire exitum potest. 105 dicebas: in 1, 49, where see the notes. Those remarks which follow will deal only with certain new phrases first introduced here. This passage does not, however, render 1, 49 verbatim; in fact nearly every significant phrase is more or less modified, sometimes so as to be less rather than more intelligible (cf. P. Schwenke in Jahrb. f . cl. Philol. 125 (1882), 629-633). Cf. vim et naturam deorum with speciem dei·, non sensu sed mente with cogitatione non sensu·, nec solidi tate quadam with nec esse in ea ullam soliditatem·, nec ad numerum with neque eandem ad numerum permanere·, imaginibus similitudine et transitione perceptis with eamque eius visionem ut similitudine et tranHtione cernatur ; cum infinita simillumarum imaginum species ex innumerabilibus individuis existât with neque deficiat umquam ex infinitis corporibus similium accessio·, cum maximis voluptatibus in eas imagines mentem intentam infixamque nostram with in haec intenta mens nostra·, intellegentiam capere quae sit et beata natura et aeterna with beatam Ulani naturam et sempiternam putet. Moreover this passage omits any reference to two important phrases : ut ea quae ille propter firmitatem στερέμνια appellai and et ad déos adfluat.

1, 105-110 criticizes a theory of knowledge (according to R. Philippson in Symb. Osloenses, 20 (1940), 25) which does not yet show traces of the inductive logic of the later Epicureans, of which indications may be found in 1, 49. Again, 1, 49-50, is not intended as proof of the eternal blessedness of the gods, and therefore Cicero seems to misunderstand his source in giving here the impression that that is its purpose (cf. H. Uri, Cic. u. d. epik. Philos. (1914), 86-88), which may be taken as evidence that in 1, 4656, he borrowed rather than himself wrote the account of the Epicurean theology; J. Degenhart, Krit.-exeg. Bemerk. ζ- Cic. Sehr, de N.D. (1881), 24, somewhat questionably, I think, considers Cicero here much nearer to the Greek original than in 1, 49. Cotta's reply rests chiefly upon two grounds: (1) the unreality of such Epicurean gods ; (2) their uselessness to mankind if they did exist—a typically Roman view, where religion is still hard to dissociate from the idea of barter. speciem dei: R. Philippson (op. cit., 30) understands this of the Gestalt of the god rather than of his theophany (which is just below called visionem) ; probably rightly, though in Tusc. 2, 42, visione et specie seem to form a pair of synonyms. cogitatione: by διάνοια; cf. R. Philippson in Hermes, 51 (1916), 599; id., in Gnomon, 6 (1930), 471-472, comparing Lucr. 4, 780: mens cogitet. eandem: probably subject rather than predicate; cf. J. Degenhart, op. cit., 25; P. Schwenke in Jahrb. f . cl. Philol. 125 (1882), 616, η. 13. visionem: cf. η. on speciem dei, above. 3i

482

1, 105

itione 1 cernatur ñeque deficiat umquam 2 ex infinitis corporibus similium accessio, ex eoque 3 fieri ut in haec intenta mens nostra beatam illam naturam et 4 sempiternam putet. 38 Hoc, per ipsos deos de quibus loquimur, quale tandem est? Nam si tantum modo ad cogitationem valent nec habent ullam soliditatem nec eminentiam, quid interest utrum de hippocentauro an de deo cogitemus? 1

transitone Β1

a

numquam A1

3

cernatur: R. Philippson (in Hermes, 51 (1916), 601-602) thinks that Cicero has here wrongly shifted from percipio as used in 1, 49: imaginibus . .. perceptis. But, as may also be seen in 1, 49 (non sensu sed mente cernatur), cerno may be used in the sense of inner vision or of purely mental action (cf. 1, 49, η. {perceptis)), so that it here may be strictly synonymous with percipiatur. With the shift of sequence of tenses (idicebas . .. cernatur . .. deficiat . .. putet), which easily occurs in longer passages of oratio obliqua, particularly when statements involved are true in present as well as in past time, cf. R. Kiihner-C. Stegmann, Ausf. Gr. d. lat. Spr. 2, 2 2 (1914), 194-195. Cf. also 3, 10, below: fuit ... negantur. similium: A. Goethe {Jahrb. f cl. Philol. 129 (1884), 33) inserts after this the word imaginum·, probably unnecessarily. per ipsos deos de quibus loquimur: cf. 1, 43, η. {in eorum ipsorum numerò). tantum modo ad cogitationem: as Sext. Emp. Pyrrhon. 2, 10, remarks: ού γάρ μόνον τά ύπάρχοντα νοοϋμεν, ώς φασιν, άλλ' ήδη καί τά άνύπαρκτα; Adv. Phys. 1,49 : δύναται τι έπινοεισθαι μέν, μή ύπάρχειν Sé, καθάπερ ίπποκένταυρος και Σκύλλα; Adv. Log. 1, 79-80; cf. Zeno ap. Stob. vol. 1, pp. 136-137 Wachsmuth ( = S.V.F. 1, no. 65): των γάρ κατά τά έννοήματα ύποπιπτόντων είναι τάς ιδέας, οίον άνθρώπων, ίππων, κοινότερον ειπείν πάντων των ζώων και των άλλων όπόσων λέγουσιν ιδέας είναι, ταύτας δέ ol Στωικοί φιλόσοφοι φασιν άνυπάρκτους είναι. Cotta perhaps thinks of the Epicurean gods as hypostatiza-

eoque] eo quidem Ol

1

et om. O

tions of human concepts of perfect happiness and eternal duration·; cf. Sext. Emp. Adv. Phys. 1, 45: ώς γάρ τόν κοιvòv άνθρωπον αύξήσαντες τη φαντασία νόησιν έσχομεν Κύκλωπος . . . οΰτως ¿ίνθρωπον εύδαίμονα νοήσαντες καί μακάριον καί συμπεπληρωμένον πασι τοις άγαθοϊς, είτα ταϋτα έπιτείναντες τόν έν αύτοΐς έκείνοις άκρον ένοήσαμεν θεόν—somewhat the procedure of modern theological "humanists." W. Scott in Journ. of Philol. 12 (1883), 230, n. 2, cites the opinion of Hegel that Epicurean gods were like Platonic ideas personified and embodied in a material quasi-corpus. soliditatem . . . eminentiam: cf. 1, 75, n. {expressi .. . eminentis). quid interest: cf. R. Philippson in Hermes, 51 (1916), 579. C. Bailey, Gr. Atomists and Epic. (1928), 440, thinks that Epicurus's answer to this rhetorical question "would have been that the frequency and universality of the visions of the gods [cf. 1, 106 : deo cuius crebra facie pellantur animi] was cogent proof of an objective reality corresponding to them; the sporadic vision of an individual may be due to a spontaneously formed 'idol,' but a vision that comes constantly to all men cannot be produced by chance on separate occasions, but must be caused by 'idols' flowing from a concrete reality." hippocentauro : though centaurus (used in 3, 70) without other specification means a composite of horse and man, the compound hippocentaurus is often used in distinction from other types such as onocentaurs (cf. W. H. Roscher, Ausf. Lex. 2 (1897), 1068; K. Preisendanz in P.-W. 18 (1939), 487-491; also Pease

1, 105 on Div. 2, 49, η. (bippocentauri)), ichthyocentaurs (cf. H. Lamer in P.-W. 9 (1916), 830-843), and the satirically fabulous nephelocentaurs (Lucían, V.H. 1, 16; 1, 18; 1, 28) and aeolocentaurs (Lucían, V.H. 1, 42). The term "bucentaur" is not classical, but G. Alessio (in Riv. di filai, cl. 65 (1937), 366-367) would derive it from hippocentaurus. Diod. 4, 70, 1, thinks hippocentaurs the result of the mating of centaurs with mares. On the mythology and probable signification of the centaurs cf. Pease on Div. 2, 49, η. (ibippocentauri) and works there cited; their cloud-born pedigree probably did not diminish the haziness of their existence, despite the centaurs described as having actually been seen by men (Plin. N.H. 7, 35: Claudius Caesar scribit hippocentaurum in Thessalia naturn eodem die inferisse, et nos principatu eius a!latum Uli ex Aegypto i» melle vidimus·, cf. Phlegon, Mirab. 34-35; also the case cited by Hier. Vita Pauli, 7, of one seen by a hermit.) To rationalize the origins of centaurs would take much leisure, Plato feels {Phaedr. 229d), yet various writers explained them as due (1) to hybridizing of man and horse (cf. Diod. 4, 70, 1; Lucian, Bis accus. 33; Fugit. 10; Schol. Eur. Phoen. 1185; Schol. Apollon. Rh. 1, 554; Hier. Vita Pauli, 7; Append. Planud. 116); (2) to the combining of thoughts or images of men and horses (so Zeno; cf. Diog. L. 7, 53; see also Plat. Rep. 9, 588c; Lucr. 4, 732-743; Sext. Emp. Adv. Geom. 41 ; 47 ; Adv. Log. 2, 60; Adv. Eth. 251; Boeth. in I sag. Porphyr. 1 ed., 1, 10 {C.S.E.L. 48, 25); 2 ed. 1, 11 (νοιαν έντεϋθεν είς άνθρώπους έλθεϊν καί πασαν εύσέβειαν . . . έγγυώμενος; E. Cougny, De Prodico Ceto (1857), 54-58. It has been suggested (e.g., by J. Tate in CI. Quart. 23 (1929), 143, n. 5) that Prodicus as an etymologist (Plat. Charm. 163d; Crat. 384b) "used his etymologies to support his rationalistic views concerning the gods." As a result of these views he came to be regarded as an atheist; cf. Ar. Nub. 361 [and Suid. s.v. Πρόδικος]; [Plat.] Eryx. 397c-399a; Sext. Emp. Adv. Phys. 1, 51: οί έπικληθέντες άθεοι, καθάπερ Εύήμερος . . . καί Διαγόρας ό Μήλιος καί Πρόδικος h Κεϊος καί Θεόδωρος καί άλλοι παμπληθεΐς ; Ρ. Decharme, La crit. des trad, relig. chez ¡es Grecs (1904), 121; E. Rohde, Psyche, l 8 (1921), 291, n. 1; Α. Β. Drachmann, Atheism in pagan Antiq. (1922), 104; W. C. Greene, Moira (1944), 243244. habita esse: W. Jaeger, Theol. of the early Gr. Philosophers (1947), 251, n. 68, remarks that this concept of deity rests upon νόμος rather than upon φύσις; cf. Philodem. De Piet. 10, p. 76 (quoted inthe previous note). 119 f o r t i s . . . c l a r o s . . . potentis viros:

516

1, 119

21, 3; Aug. De Consensu Evang. 1, 33]; in 1, 38, Persaeus is said to have held Isid. Etym. 8, 11, 1: quos pagani deos that eos esse hábitos deos a quibus aliqua ma^ta utilitas ad vitae cultum esset inventa·, asserunt homines olim fuisse produntur, et in 1, 39, Chrysippus included among his pro uniuscuiusque vita vel meritis coli apttd different kinds of gods homines eos qui suos post mortem coeperunt [=11 Myth. Vat. proem]; Arnob. 3, 39; Eus. Pr. inmortalitatem essent consecuti·, and the Εν. 2, 6, 13: ταύτη δέ κατά τά προειρηsame doctrine is maintained by the Stoic μένα τούς τών νενομισμένων τοΰ σώBalbus in 2, 62: suscepit autem vita hominum consuetudoque communis ut beneficiis ex- ματος καλών καί χρησίμων εύρετάς, ή cellente viros in caelum fama ac volúntate καί δυνάστας τινάς καί τυράννους, ή καί γόητας καί φαρμακέας άνδρας, τήν φύtollerent·, hence this must be considered σιν θνητούς καί άνθρωπίναις κεχρημέas a characteristically Stoic tenet, and νους συμφοραϊς, ώς άγαθών χορηγούς, such a rejection of it as is here found σωτήρας καί θεούς άναγορεύειν, τήν indicates that this part of the speech of σεβάσμιον έννοιαν φυσικώς αύτοΐς ένυπCotta, like the last sentence of this section, άρχουσαν έφ' ούς ένόμιζον εύεργέτας is not based on Stoic sources; cf. L. Reinhardt, Die Quellen v. Cic. Sehr, de D. μετατεθεικότες ; Aug. Serm. 273, 3: Uli Ν. (1888), 28; also P. Hirzel, Untersuch. ergo homines beneßeiis quihusdam temporalibus res humanas sibi conciliaverunt et ab hominiΖ- Cic. Philos. Sehr. 1 (1877), 41. For the bus vanis et vana sectantibus ita coli coeperunt Stoics, however, this form of worship would have been a posthumous one; ut dii vocarentur, dii haberentur ; tanquam diis templa aedificarentur, tanquam diis Sext. Emp. Adv. Phys. 1, 17, says that Euhemerus extended deification to the supplicaretur, tanquam diis arae construerentur, tanquam diis sacerdotes ordinarenlifetimes of great men: Εύήμερος δέ ó tur, tanquam diis victimae immolarentur. έπικληθείς άθεος φησίν "δτ' ήν άτακτος In making Cotta protest against this άνθρώπων βίος, οί περιγενόμενοι των custom, so common in Greek and άλλων ίσχύΐ τε καί συνέσει ώστε πρός Roman legend (cf. W. W. Fowler, Rom. τά ύπ' αύτών κελευόμενα πάντας βιοϋν, Ideas of Deity (1914), 99-100 for Greek σπουδάζοντες μείζονος θαυμασμοϋ καί instances) and already familiar in the σεμνότητος τυχεΐν, άνέπλασαν περί αύdeification of Hellenistic rulers, Cicero τούς ύπερβάλλουσάν τινα καί θείαν δύmay have had in mind the attempts of ναμιν, 2νθεν καί τοις πολλοίς ένομέσθηJulius Caesar to attain similar deification. σαν θεοί"; 1, 34; 1, 51: Εΰήμερος μέν L. R. Taylor, The Divinity of the Rom. 2λεγε τους νομιζομένους θεούς δυναEmperor (1931), 65, remarks that "it τούς τινας γεγονέναι ανθρώπους καί διά was after the victory of Munda in April τοϋτο ύπό των άλλων θεοποιηθέντας δόξαι θεούς ; Max. Tyr. 2, 5 : καί "Ελληνες of 45 that the distinctions of Caesar were more closely related to the honors μέν θύουσιν καί άνθρώποις άγαθοϊς καί of the gods," and in pp. 65-77 she deτιμώνται μέν αύτών αί άρεταί, άμνημοvelops that idea in detail; cf. H. Jeanmaire νοϋνται δέ αί συμφοραί· παρά δέ Αίγυπin Rev. d'hist. de la philos., etc., N.S. 1 τίοις ίσοτιμίαν έχει τό θείον τιμής καί (1933), 17. Now the De Natura Deorum. δακρύων; Paus. 8, 2, 4: oí γάρ δή τότε was being written in August, 45 (cf. άνθρωποι ξένοι καί ομοτράπεζοι θεοϊς Att. 13, 38, 1—about 4 August, 45—: ήσαν ύπό δικαιοσύνης καί εύσεβείας . . . ante lucem cum scriberem contra Epicúreos-, έπεί τοι καί θεοί τότε έγίνοντο έξ άνθρώalso 13, 39, 2—5 August, 45— : libros mihi πων oî γέρα καί ές τόδε έτι έχουσιν, ώς ' Αρισταϊος, κτλ. ; Cypr. De Idol. Vanit. 1 : de quibus ad te ante scripsi velim mittas et maxime Φαιδρού περί θεών et f Παλιδος), Alexander magnus insigni volumine ad matrem suani scribit metu suae potestatis and though there might seem an anaproditum sibi de diis hominibus a sacerdote chronism in putting such words in the mouth of Cotta, a kinsman of Caesar, secretum, quod maiorum et regum memoria servata sit, inde colendi et sacrificandi ritus at the assumed date of the dialogue, it is inoleverit, si autem aliquando dit nati sunt, much less glaring than some other incur non hodieque nascuntur [cf. Min. Fel. consistencies in the work. Moreover,

1, 119

517

pervenisse, eosque esse ipsos 1 quos nos colere, precari, venerarique soleamus,2 nonne expertes sunt religionum omnium? Quae ratio maxime tractata ab Euhemero 3 est, quem 4 noster et inter1 ipsus A1 2 solemus Ν 8 euhemero H, heuhemero A2NB\ 4 quam E1, que A hornero -S2, heumero A1, hemero F1

Euhemerus in his work mentioned below has been thought by O. Gruppe, Gr. Myth. u. Rei. 2 (1906), 1515, to have been satirizing the pretensions to deification put forward in behalf of Alexander the Great; cf. Seneca's satire in the Apocolocyntosis of the apotheosis of rulers. colere, precari, venerarique: cf. 1, 3: cultus, honores, preces-, 1, 122: quid veneramur, quid precamur déos; Liv. 39, 15, 2: déos quos colere, vener ari, precarique maiores vestri instifuissent. religionum: in the plural of rites or beliefs; cf. 1, 61, and η. (religiones); 2, 5; 3, 5 (bis) ; 3, 60 ; and frequently elsewhere, especially in the De Legibus, which is much concerned with ritual uses. Euhemero: cf. 1, 38, η. (Persaeus); Callim. Iamb. 1, 191, 10-11, p. 162 Pfeiffer: ές το πρό τείχευς ipòv αλέες δεΰτε, / πάλαι Πάγχαιο / λαλώζων άδκκα βιβλία ψήχει> [with which cf. Sext. Emp. Adv. Phys. 1, 51; Schol. Clem. Protr. 18, 8, p. 304 Stählin; but W. W. Tarn (Proc. Brit. Acad. 19 (1933), 164) denies that Callimachus is here referring to Euhemerus]; Diod.6, 1, 1-11 (ap. Eus. Pr. Ev. 2, 2, 52-62): άπό της Εύημέρου τοϋ Μεσσηνίου γραφής έπικυροΐ τήν αύτήν θεολογίαν . . . περί θεών . . . έτέρους δέ λέγουσιν έπιγείους γενέσθαι θεούς, διά δέ της εις άνθρώπους ευεργεσίας άθανάτου τετυχότας τιμής τε καΐ δόξης, οίον Ήρακλέα, Διόνυσον, Άρισταΐον, καΐ τούς άλλους τούς τούτοις ομοίους, περί δέ των έπιγείων θεών . . . καΐ τών μέν ιστορικών Εύήμερος ό τήν ίεράν άναγραφήν ποιησάμενος Ιδίως άναγέγραφεν . . . Εύήμερος μέν οδν, φίλος γεγονώς Κασάνδρου τοϋ βασιλέως, . . . φησίν έκτοπισθήναι κατά τήν μεσημβρίαν είς τόν ώκεανόν· έκπλεύσαντα δέ αύτόν έκ τής Εύδαίμονος 'Αραβίας ποιήσασθαι τόν πλουν δι' ώκεανοϋ πλείους ήμέρας. He came to the island of Panchaea, which is sacred to the gods. On

heu (del.)

a hill is a shrine of Zeus Triphylius, established by him when he was a human being and king of the inhabited world, έν τούτω τω ίερω στήλην είναι χρυσήν, έν ή τοις Παγχαίοις γράμμασιν ύπάρχειν γεγραμμένας τάς τε Ούρανοϋ καΐ Κρόνου καΐ Διός πράξεις κεφαλαιωδώς [cf. 5, 46, 7, which says that the inscription was in Egyptian hieroglyphics]. There follows an account of the pedigrees and deeds of these beings, the victories of Zeus, and his public recognition as a god ; Strab. 2, 4, 2, who says that Euhemerus the Messenian sailed to Panchaea (in 1, 3, 1, he speaks of him as ridiculed by Eratosthenes); Plut. De Is. et Os. 23, p. 360a-b : λαμπρόν δέ τοις Εύημέρου τοϋ Μεσσηνίου φενακισμοΐς παρρησίαν διδόντας, δς αύτός άντίγραφα συνθείς απίστου καΐ άνυπάρκτου μυθολογίας πασαν άθεότητα κατασκεδάννυσι τής otκουμένης, τούς νομιζομένους θεούς πάντας όμαλώς διαγράφων είς όνόματα στρατηγών καΐ ναυάρχων καΐ βασιλέων ώς δή πάλαι γεγονότων, έν δέ Πάγχοντι γράμμασι χρυσοΐς άναγεγραμμένων, οίς οδτε βάρβαρος ουδείς οΰθ' Έλλην, άλλά μόνος Εύήμερος, ώς έοικε, πλεύσας είς τούς μηδαμόθι γής γεγονότας μηδ' δντας Παγχώους καΐ Τριφύλλους έντετυχήκει; Ael. V.H. 2, 31: no barbarian ϊννοιαν έλαβε τοιαύτην οϊαν Εύήμερος è Μεσσήνιος ή Διογένης ό Φρύξ ή "Ιππων ή Διαγόρας ή Σωσίας ή 'Επίκουρος ; Sext. Emp. Adv. Phys. 1, 17 and 1, 51 (quoted on fortis ... claros . .. potentis viros, above); Theophil. Ad Autol. 3, 7 [who calls him the most atheistic of philosophers]; Athen. 14, 658e-f [who thinks him a Coan] ; Min. Fei. 21, 1 : ob merita virtutis aut muneris déos hábitos Euhemerus exsequitur, et eorum natales, patrias, sepulcro dinumerat et per provincias monstrat, etc. ; Clem. Protr. 2, 24, 2 [praising Euhemerus, Diagoras, and others as not atheists but discerning men] ; Arnob. 4, 29 : possumus quidem .. .

518

1, 119

pretatus est et secutus 1 praeter ceteros Ennius. Ab Euhemero 2 1 est et secutus PL, est et secutus est B1, et secutus est A2HNOB2FM, 2 euhemero A*H, heuhemero A GB2F, heumero Ν secutus A1

istos nobis quos ìnducitis atque appellatis deos homines fuisse monstrare pel Agragantino Euhemero replicato, cuius libellum Ennius, clarum ut fieret cunctis, sermonem in Italum transtulit, etc. ; Lact. Inst. 1,11, 8: praecipue Euhemerus ac noster Ennius, qui eorum omnium natales, coniugio, progenies, imperia, res gestas, obitus, sepulcro demonstrante 1, 11, 33-34: antiquus auctor Euhemerus, qui fuit ex civitate Messene, res gestas Iovis et ceterorum qui dit putantur historiamque contexuit ex titulis et inscriptionibus sacris quae in antiquissimis templis habebantur, maximeque in fano Iovis Triphylii, ubi auream columnam positam esse ab ipso love titulus indicabat, in qua columna sua gesta perscripsit, ut monumentum posteris esset rerum suarum. hanc historiam et interpretatus est Ennius et secutus·, Aug. C.D. 6, 7: nonne adtestatisunt Euemero qui omnes tales deos non fabulosa garrulitate sed histórica diligentia homines fuisse mortalesque conscripsit\ 7, 27: totani de hoc Euhemerus pandit historiam quam Ennius in Latinum vertit eloquium ; De Consensu Evang. 1, 32: quamvis et ipsum Euhemerum ab Ennio poeta in Latinam linguam esse conversum Cicero commemoret. numquid et ipse Cicero poeta fuit qui eum cum quo in Tusculanis disputât, tamquam secretorum conscium admonet dicens [Tusc. 1, 29]; "si vero scrutari Vetera ... ipsi Uli maiorum gentium dii qui habentur hinc a nobis profecti in caelum reperientur. quaere quorum demonstrentur sepulcro in Graecia; reminiscere, quoniam es initiatus, quae tradantur mysteriis; tum denique quam hoc late pateat intelleges." hie certe istorum deos homines fuisse satis confitetur, in caelum autem pervenisse benevole suspicatur-, Lyd. De Mens. 4, 154, p. 170 Wünsch; mediaeval cases are collected by J. D. Cooke in Speculum, 2 (1927), 403-410. For Euhemerus's work, the ίερά άναγραφή (the title is by K. Rupprecht in Philologus, 80 (1924), 352, compared to διαθήκη (testamentum) ; in Latin it is rendered by Sacra Historia), cf. F. Jacoby in P.-W. 6 (1909), 953-972 (with bibliography at 972) ; the fragments

est

have been collected by G. Némethy, Euhemeri Reliquiae (1889); but especially by F. Jacoby, Frag. d. gr. Hist. 1 (1923), 300-313; also cf. F. Pfister, Der Reliquienkult im Altertum, 1 (1909), 381-382; H. F. van der Meer, Euhemerus van Messene (1949) rev. by A. D. Nock in Cl. Weekly 44 (1951), 88. The work was a kind of philosophic romance (R. de Block, Euhémère (1876), 52-56; Jacoby, in P.-W. 6, 957); its doctrines were developed from the easy deification of rulers by their flatterers (W. W. Fowler, Rom. Ideas of Deity (1914), 99-100, who cites the honors paid to Brasidas, Lysander, Agesilaus, Alexander, Demetrius, Flamininus, et al., also what Leo, an Egyptian priest, told Alexander about the origin of the gods (Aug. C.D. 8, 5 ; 8, 27); H. J. Rose, Mod. Methods in cl. Myth. (1930), 20), and may be paralleled in other cultures; e.g., the Wisdom of Solomon, 14, 14-20, for the Hebrews; M. Bloomfield in Stud, in Honor of B. L. Gildersleeve (1902), 37, for a similar Hindu treatment of the Açvins; and, from another aspect, the canonization of saints in the Christian Church and in the Positivist calendar of August Comte; cf. F. Harrison, New Calendar of great Men (1892). That Cicero was himself Euhemeristically inclined in his proposal to deify Tullia after her death {Att. 12, 18, 1) has been suggested by A. B. Drachmann, Atheism in pagan Antiq. (1922), 116-117; yet notice his contemptuous question in Tusc. 1, 28: quid? totum prope caelum, ne pluris persequar, nonne humano genere compie tum est? Also cf. Aug. Ep. 17, 3: Tullius . .. qui hoc idem [i.e., deos homines fuisse] in dialogis plus quam postulare auderemus commémorât, et per ducere in hominum notitiam quantum illa tempora patiebantur, molitur. On Christian use of Euhemeristic arguments against pagan gods cf. R. Hirzel in Ber. d. sächs. Ges. d. Wiss. 48 (1896), 282, n. 3. quem noster . . . Ennius : for testimonia see the preceding note; for the

1, 119

519

autem et mortes et sepulturae demonstrantur 1 deorum; utrum igitur hic confirmasse videtur religionem an penitus totam sustulisse? 2 Omitto 3 Eleusinem 4 sanctam illam et augustam, 'ubi 1 demonstratur A sinam BF

2

substulisse H1

extant fragments, mostly preserved in Lactantius, J. Vahlen's second edition of Ennius (1903), 223-229; also F. Skutsch in P.-W. 5 (1905), 2600-2601; M. Schanz-C. Hosius, Gesch. d. röm. Lit. I 1 (1927), 94-95. On the quotation of Ennius by Cicero cf. Vahlen, op. cit. xxxix-lv. In our passage Vahlen (p. liii), believes that Cicero used Euhetnerus directly rather than through Ennius. interpretatus est et secutus: this expression would allow both for translation and for adaptation of Euhemerus in Ennius's work of that name, but also for his influence upon other parts of Ennius's writings, in which rationalism is to be noted. E. Norden (Agnostos Theos (1923), 575) surmises that Ennius may easily have reproduced the archaistic style of Euhemerus's Reiseroman. E. Laughton (Eranos, 49 (1951), 35) thinks our Euhemerus fragments in Ennius our earliest extant Latin prose. For the phrases cf. O f f . 2, 60: Panaetius quem multum in his libris secutus sum, non interpretatus. praeter ceteros: ambiguous; did Ennius more than any other Roman follow Euhemerus or did he follow Euhemerus more than he did any other one of his Greek philosophical sources ? Vahlen (op. cit., ccxxi) thinks the latter. et mortes et sepulturae: cf. Enn. Euhem. 62 Vahlen: CaeIo avo, quem dicit Euhemerus in Oceania mortuum et in oppido Aulacia sepultum·, 72: tum Saturno filius qui primus natus est cum necaverunt ; 80: dein Glauca parva emoritur·, 136-141: [Iuppiter] aetate pessum acta in Creta vitam commutavit et ad deos abiit eumque Curetes filii sui curaverunt decoraveruntque eum ; et sepulcrum eius est in Creta in oppido Gnosso ... inque sepulcro eius est inscriptum antiquis litteris Graecis Ζ AN KRONOY, id est, Latine Iuppiter Saturni·, cf. Min.

3

omito A

4

eleusinen O, eleu-

Fei. 21, 1 ; E. Rohde, Psyche, l 4 (1907), 130, n. 1 ; also Aug. De Consensu Evang. 1, 32: videant ergo ne forte histórica veri tas sepulcra falsorum deorum ostendat in terra·, 1, 33: sed fuerit et Cicero Academicus incertior quam poetae, qui sepulcra deorum commemorare ausus est litterisque mandare ; quamvis hoc non ex opinione propria praesumpserit sed ex ipsorum sacrorum traditione commemoraverit. On the death of Zeus and on mortal gods in general cf. 3, 53, η. {sepulcrum ostenditur), below. penitus . . . sustulisse: cf. 1, 115; 1, 118; W. W. Fowler, Roman Ideas of Deity (1914), 101: "He means that it cleared the ground for Epicureanism, with its gods indifferent to human life; he might also have said that by bringing humanity and divinity into the closest relation to each other, it also confirmed the growing desire to see divinity in great men [for a different view see the note on Euhemero, above] . . . the Euhemerus of Ennius helped to make ready for a time when such a desire might arise, by squeezing the life out of the gods of the State, and substituting nothing for them." But though Euhemerus is sometimes charged with atheism (e.g., Plut. De Is. et Os. 23, p. 360a; Sext. Emp. Adv. Phys. 1, 17; Theophil. Ad Autol. 3, 7), he at times, as Mayor observes, admits the existence of elemental gods ; cf. Lact. Inst. 1,11, 63; Eus. Pr. Ευ. 2,2, 53. omitto . . . praetereo : cases of praeteritio-, cf. 2, 131: multa praetereunda sunt; Fin. 2, 107; 5, 14; Τ use. 4, 4; 5, 46: omitto ... omitto·, Rep. 1, 1; Legg. 1, 27. Eleusinem: on the form cf. R. Ktihner-F. Holzweissig, Ausf. Gr. d. lat. Spr. I a (1912), 499. Codex Β here reads Eleusinam·, the reading of the text is a lectio difficilior. On the initiation of Cicero and Atticus cf. Legg. 2, 35-36 : CIC. quid ergo aget lac chus Eumolpidaeque vostri et

520

1, 119

initiantur gentes orarum 1 ultimae'; praetereo2 1

horarum AI-P-GNOM

2

Samothraciam

praetereo] transeo add. A2

augusta illa mysteria, siquidem sacra nocturnaAug. 7]; Tac. Dial. 4. The terms are tollimus? non enim populo Romano sed often applied to sacred places or temomnibus bonisfirmisquepopulis leges damus. ples; e.g., Liv. 1, 29, 5; 45, 5, 3. ATT. excipis, credo, ilia quibus ipsi inifiati ubi initiantur, etc.: = Trag. Rom. sumus. CIC. ego vero excipiam; nam mihi Frag.3 (1897), 279, 43 Ribbeck (p. 614, cum multa eximia divinaque videntur Athenae 92 Warmington), from an undetermined tuae peperisse atque in vitam hominum attu- author and tragedy; Ribbeck suggests tisse, tum nihil melius Ulis mysteriis quibus the prologue of the Erechtheus of Ennius. ex agresti immanique vita exculti ad humagentes orarum ultimae: probably nitatem et mitigati sumus, initiaque ut orarum is a partitive genitive; cf. ubi appellantur ita re vera principia vitae cog- gentium·, also such cases as Aesch. P. V. novimus ; neque solum cum laetitia vivendi 846: £στιν πόλις Κάνωβος έσχάτη χθοrationem accepimus sed etiam cum spe meliore νός; Hör. C. 1, 35, 29-30: in últimos / moriendi; Τ use. 1, 29 [M. speaking]: orbis Britannos; Tac. Agr. 30: nos terquaere quorum demonstrentur sepulcro in rarum ac libertatis extremos-, Amm. Marc. Graecia, reminiscere, quoniam es initiatus, 17, 4, 6: apud extremos orbis Íncolas. quae tradantur mysteriis·, L. Gueuning, Others have interpreted it as a case of L'initiation de Cic. aux mystères d'Éleusis hypallage; cf. 1, 9, n. (animi aegritudo in Paginae bibliographicae (1927), I have ... commota) ; 2, 98 : fontium gélidas penot seen. To argue from Legg. 2, 36, rennitates. As to the facts stated Isocr. that Cicero had been initiated, as Bigno- Paneg. 157, declares: Εύμ,ολπίδαι Sk καΐ ne, Storia della left. lat. 1 (1946), 112, does, Κήρυκες έν τη τελετή των μυστηρίων appears unsafe; cf. also O. Kern in διά τό τούτων [sc. the Persians] μίσος P.-W. 16 (1935), 1255. The Eleusinian καί τοις άλλοις βαρβάροις εϊργεσθαι των mysteries in general need not be here Ιερών ώσπερ τοις άνδροφόνοις προαγοdiscussed; note, among others, the ρεύουσιν; cf. Lucían, Scytb. 8: έμυήθη 4 treatments by E. Rohde, Psyche, l μόνος βαρβάρων Άνάχαρσις, δημοποίη(1907), 278-300, and P. Foucart, Les τος γενόμενος, εί χρή Θεοξένω πιστεύmystères d'Éleusis (1914). The Eleusinia ειν καί τοϋτο ίστοροϋντι περί αύτοϋ; yet are frequently coupled, as here, with see Aristid. Or. 19, p. 415 Dindorf: the rites at Samothrace, which were, τίς γάρ Ελλήνων ή τίς βαρβάρων . . . in the Hellenistic period and later, per- οΰτω σφόδρα 2ξω της γης ή θεών, ή συλhaps influenced in some details by them; λήβδην ειπείν καλών άναίσθητος . . . cf. Galen, De Usu Part. 7,14 (III, 576 K.) ; δστις ού κοινόν τι της γης τέμενος τήν 17, 1 (IV, 361 K.); A. D. Nock in Am. 'Ελευσίνα ήγεϊτο; and many Romans Journ. Arch. 45 (1941), 577. seem to have been admitted to initiation; 4 sanctam: cf. σεμνήν; G. Link, De cf. E. Rohde, Psyche, l (1907), 295; O. Kern in P.-W. 16 (1935), 1255. Vocis 'Sanctus' Usu pagano (1910); J. E. Harry in Rev. de philol. 65 (1939), 8-10. Samothraciam: the most important For the combination of these two ad- centre of the rites of the Cabiri, where jectives cf. 2, 79: augusta et sancta simu- they were reputed to have been establacra·, Tuse. 5, 36; Ον. F. 1, 609-610: lished by Eetion (Clem. Protr. 2, 13, 3; sancta vocant augusta patres; augusta vo- repeated by Eus. Pr. Ev. 2, 3, 11); cf. cantur / templa sacerdotum rite dicata manu-, O. Kern in P.-W. 10 (1917), 1423-1437 also the adverbs auguste sancteque in (with bibliography at 1449-1450, and 2, 62 (where see n. on these words); addenda in 16 (1935), 1276-1278); F. J. 3, 53. For augustus see Paul. ex. Fest. p. 1 Dölger, Ι Χ Θ Υ Σ , 2 (1922), 410-420; Müller: augustus locus sanctus ab avium A. B. Cook, Zeus, 2 (1925), 313-316; F. Chapouthier, Les Dioscures au service gestu ... sive ab avium gustatu [cf. Suet.

1, 119 d'une déesse (1935), 153-184; R. Pettazzoni in Harv. iheol. Rev. 20 (1937), 11-14; Κ . Lehmann-Hartleben in Am. Journ. Arch. 43 (1939), 133-145; 44 (1940), 328-358, for the American excavations at Samothrace, in which there was found the lex sacra (43, 139, fig. 6): DEORVM SACRA QVI NON ACCEPERVNT NON INTRANT. A M T H T O N ΜΗ Ε Ι Σ Ι Ε Ν A I ; A. D . Nock in Am. Journ. Arch. 45 (1941), 577-581; Β. Hemberg, Die Kabiren (1950). These mysterious deities, the Cabiri, appear now as two—a father and a son—, again as a trinity, of mother, father, and son, Άξιοκέρσα, Άξιοκέρσος, and Ά ξ ί ε ρος, respectively (cf. O. Kern in P.-W. 10 (1917), 1446-1447, adducing two conflicting fragments from Varrò; J . R. Harris, Cult of the heavenly Twins (1906), 143-144; A. B. Cook, Zeus, 2 (1925), 314; Chapouthier, op. cit., 153-180), or, still again, as four (Schol. Apoll. Rhod. 1, 916-918, pp. 77-78 Wendel). On etymologies for their name cf. Chapouthier, op. cit., 160-162. Their origin has been traced by some to Phrygia, by others to Thrace, by O. Gruppe, Gr. Myth. ». Rei. 1 (1906), 228, to Boeotia. Cook (op. cit., 2, 313-314), agreeing more or less with R. Pettazzoni, L. R. Farnell, and Miss J . Harrison, thinks them Thracian deities who were called ΚΑΒΕΙΡΟΙ by Phoenician traders and θεοί δυνατοί (Varr. L.L. 5, 58) or μεγάλοι θεοί (cf. Varr. ap. Schol. Dan. Aen. 1, 378, and ap. Prob, in Eel. 6, 31, p. 344 Hägen) by Greek settlers. They were perhaps originally chthonic, and hence associated with fertility, being represented with phallic symbols, and were often equated with the Dioscuri, Corybantes (A. B. Cook, Zeus, 1 (1914), 109), Curetes, Idaean Dactyls, or the Penates (cf. E . Romagnoli in Ausonia, 2 (1907), 141-185, especially 179; J . Poerner, De Curetibus et Corybantibus (1913), 385-391 ; R. Texier in Rev. arch. 6 ser. 14 (1939), 20; A. D . Nock in Am. Journ. Arch. 45 (1941) 580, nn. 20-21; K . LehmannHartleben in Hesperia, 12 (1943), 130; 134; Β. Hemberg, Die Kabiren (1950), our most important treatment. In 3, 58,

521

below, one Dionysus is the son of Cabirus. Hdt. 2, 51, probably after some source, is the first author to mention the Samothracian mysteries, and claims for them a Pelasgian origin. In Hellenistic times (Kern, op. cit., 1445), on Samothrace and other islands, they developed into sea-divinities, worshipped by sailors for their aid in storms (cf. 3, 89, below; also Diod. 4, 43, 1; Pap. Gr. e Latini, 10 (1932), no. 1176, 15 = D . L . Page, Gr. lit. Papyri, 1 (1942), 278), and their shrine, as shown by inscriptions, was frequented for initiations by heroes like Agamemnon (Schol. Apoll. Rhod. 1, 916-918, p. 77 Wendel), Jason, the Dioscuri, Cadmus, Heracles, Orpheus (Diod. 5, 48, 4-5; 5, 49, 6), and persons of note, including Philip and Olympias (Plut. Alex. 2, 1; Phot. Bibl. no. 243, p. 367a Bekker), Antalcidas (Plut. Apophth. Lac. p. 217c), Voconius (Plut. Lucull. 13, 2), and perhaps Varrò (cf. Aug. C.D. 7, 28; H. Bloch in Am. Journ. Arch. 44 (1940), 489), as well as by many members of Roman gentes during the late Republic and early Empire (C. Fredrich in I . G . X I I , 8 (1909), pp. 37-39; 47—on the théorie inscriptions with a list of μύσται — ; Lehmann-Hartleben, op. cit., 44, 358; Bloch, op. cit., 44, 488 and n. 17; cf. Nock, op. cit., 577), possibly in part because of a supposed connection of the Cabiri with the Aeneas legend (Texier, op. cit., 12-21). Attempts to connect their worship with cults in Babylonia, Germany, Ireland, etc., need not here detain us. Among other passages of significance for this cult are Ar. Pax, 277-279 and schol.; Apoll. Rhod. 1, 915-921, and schol.; Diod. 3, 55, 8-9; 5, 48, 4-5, 49, 6: γίνεσθαι Sé φασι καΐ εύσεβεστέρους καΐ κατά παν βελτίονας έαυτών τούς των μυστηρίων κοινωνήσαντας; 5, 77, 3; Dion. Hal. 1, 68, 3I , 69, 4 ; 2, 66, 5; Nie. Damasc. 54 (Frag. Hist. Gr. 3, 388); Strab. 10, 3, 19-21; Val. Fl. 2, 431-440; Ampel. 2, 3 ; J u v . 3, 144; Paus. 9, 25, 5-10; 10, 38, 7 ; Hippol. Philosophum. 5, 3 [important]; Eus. Pr. Εν. 1, 10, 14; Nonn. 3, 63; 3, 72-74; 3, 194; 14, 17-19; 24, 93; 27, 120-121; 27, 327-329; 29, 193-195;

522

1, 119

eaque quae Lemni 'nocturno aditu occulta coluntur silvestribus saepibus 1 densa' ; quibus explicatis ad rationemque revocatis 1

saepibus om. H

43, 311; Steph. Byz. p. 345 Meineke; Phot. Bibl. no. 242, p. 352b Bekker; Lex. p. 120 Porson; Suid. s.v. Σαμοθράκη. Lemni: another centre of Cabiric worship; cf. C. Fredrich in Athen. Mittb. 31 (1906), 60-86 (especially 7784); O. Kern in P.-W. 10 (1917), 14201423 (bibliography on 1449-1450; addenda in P.-W. 16 (1935), 1276); P. Lemerle in Bull. Corr. Hell. 61 (1937), 468-472, on the Italian excavations of the Cabirion there. The oldest literary reference is in the Κάβειροι of Aeschylus (Trag. Gr. Frag.2 31-32 Nauck); cf. also Hippol. Philosophum. 5, 6: Λήμνος καλλίπαιδα Κάβιρον άρρήτω έτέκνωσεν όργιασμώ [see U. von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff in Hermes, 37 (1902), 331] ; Hesych. s.v. Κάβειροι· καρκίνοι· πάνυ δέ τιμώνται ούτοι έν Λήμνω ώς θεοί- λέγονται δέ είναι 'Ηφαίστου παίδες. nocturno, etc.: the most important extant Latin passage on the Lemnian Cabiri is from Accius, Philoct. 525-536 Ribbeck (527-540 Warmington), with the two anapaestic lines here quoted and others preserved in Tusc. 2, 23 and Varr. L.L. 7, 11, which, after the suggestion of G. Hermann (Opuse. 3 (1828), 120; cf. F. Leo, Gesch. d. röm. Lit. 1 (1913), 396, n. 2), may be arranged as follows: Lemnia praesto / litora rara et eelsa Cabirum / delubro tenes, mysteria quae / pristina casti s concepta sacris / nocturno aditu occulta coluntur / silvestribus saepibus densa; / Volcan! a templa sub ipsis / collibus, in quos delatus locos / dicitur alto ab limine caeli, et / nemus expirante vapore vides, / unde ignis cluet mortalibus clam / divisus, eum doctus Prometheus / clepsisse dolo poenasque Iovi / fato expendisse supremo. The Greek source of the passage is disputed; cf. Leo, I.e. On the nocturnal worship of the Cabiri cf. Nonn. 4, 183-185: χαίροις, Ήμαθίων καΐ πας δόμος· άντρα Καβείρων, / χαίρετε, καΐ σκοπιαΐ Κορυβαντί-

δες · ούκέτι λεύσσω / μητρώης Εκάτης νυχίην θιασώδεα πεύκην. In other rites nocturnal features often appear; e.g., at Eleusis (Ar. Ran. 371; 446: ού παννυχιάζουσιν θεά; Eur. Hei. 1365; Clem. Protr. 2, 22, 1, repeated by Eus. Pr. Ev. 2, 3, 35: άξια μέν οΰν νυκτός τά τελέσματα καΐ πυρός; Herodian, 3, 8, 10), in the worship of Cybele (Hdt. 4, 76) and in that of Bacchus (Eur. Bacch. 485-486: τά δ' ιερά νύκτωρ ή μεθ' ήμέραν τελείς; / νύκτωρ τά πολλά· σεμνότητ' έχει σκότος; Diod. 4, 4, 1: Διόνυσον γενέσθαι τόν ύπό τίνων Σαβάζιον όνομαζόμενον, οδ την τε γένεσιν και τάς θυσίας καΐ τιμάς νυκτερινάς και κρυφίους παρεισάγουσι δια την αίσχύνην τήν έκ της συνουσίας έπακολουθοϋσαν; Lucian, Cataplus, 22; Clem. Protr. 2, 22, 7: έπιτρέψον άποκρύψαι τή νυκτΐ τά μυστήρια· σκότει τετιμήσθω τά 8ργια· τό πυρ ούχ υποκρίνεται; Schol. Soph. Ant. 1147; Liv. 39, 8, 4: oceultorum et nocturnorum antistes sacrorum·, Eustath. in Dion. Perieg. 566 (Geogr. Gr. min. 2, 328)), in certain Egyptian mysteries (Hdt. 2, 171), in the teaching of some heresiarchs (Hippol. Philosophum. 4, 42); also as a charge against the Christians, says Min. Fei. 9, 4. General expressions of the reasons for such rites are found in Clem. Strom. 4, 22, 140, 1-2: ή μοι δοκοϋσιν εύφρόνην κεκληκέναι τήν νύκτα, έπειδή τηνικάδε ή ψυχή πεπαυμένη των αισθήσεων συννεύει πρός αυτήν καΐ μάλλον μετέχει της φρονήσεως. διά ταϋτ' οδν καΐ αί τελεταί γίνονται νυκτός μάλιστα, σημαίνουσαι. τήν έν νυκτΐ της ψυχής συστολήν άπό του σώματος; Synes. De Prov. 2, 5: άγνωσία σεμνότης έστίν έπΐ τελετών, καί νύξ διά τοϋτο πιστεύεται τά μυστήρια, καί άβατα σπήλαια διά τοϋτο όρύττέται, καιροί καί τόποι, κρύπτειν είδότες άρρητουργίαν 2νθεον. Cf. Hemberg, op. cit., 167, n. 6. silvestribus saepibus: for saepes in the sense of "hedge" or "palisade" cf. Pease on Div. 1, 13, n. (mentis)·, on the

1, 119

523

rerum magis natura cognoscitur quam deorum. failure of final j· in silvestribus and saepibus to make position Orat. 161 and Sandys's note. Anacharsis, imitating the rites of Cybele, according to Hdt. 4, 76, ώς δ' άπίκετο ές την Σκυθική ν, καταδύς ές τήν καλουμένην Ύλαίην (ή 8' 2στι μέν παρά τόν Άχιλλήιον δρόμον, τυγχάνει δέ πάσα έοϋσα δενδρέων παντοίων πλέη ), ές ταύτην δή καταδύς ό Άνάχαρσις τήν όρτήν έπετέλεε πασαν τη θεω ; thus Druids (Mela, 3, 19) taught their pupils aut in specu aut in abditis saltibus. For the wooded character of Samothrace cf. II. 13, 12-13; 13, 18. C. Fredrich (Athen. Mitth. 31 (1906), 77, n. 1) suggests that the 150-pillared Lemnian labyrinth (Plin. N.H. 36, 90), resembling the Eleusinian Hall of the Mysteries, may have been the site of some of these rites. ad rationem . . . revocatis: cf. 1, 28: cupiditate m ceteraque generis eiusdem ad deum revocet·, 3, 63: commenticiarum fabularum reddere rationem·, Pease on Div. 2, 66, n. (ad .. . revocantur). Does the ablative absolute here mean "when they have been referred" or "if they should be referred"? P. Cropp, De Auctoribus quos secutus Cic. in Lib. de N.D. (1909), 15, thinks the latter, in which case the words would be consistent with a Stoic source for this passage; those not admitting a Stoic origin are free to accept the former rendering. rerum . . . natura: cf. 3, 62: eos enim qui di appellantur rerum naturas esse non figuras deorum·, Plut. De Is. et Os. 67-68, p. 378a: ενιοι γάρ άποσφαλέντες παντάπασιν είς δεισιδαιμονίαν ώλισθον, οί δέ φεύγοντες ώσπερ έλος τήν δεισιδαιμονίαν ίλαθον αύθις ώσπερ είς κρημνόν έμπεσόντες τήν άθεότητα. διό δει μάλιστα προς ταϋτα λόγον έκ φιλοσοφίας μυσταγωγόν άναλαβόντας όσίως διανοεϊσθαι των λεγομένων καί δρωμένων έκαστον. With Cicero's statement cf. Varr. L.L. 5, 58: Terra enim et Caelum, ut Samothracum initia docent, sunt dei magni, et hi quos dixi multis nominibus; Varr. ap. Aug. C.D. 7, 20: Eleusinia ... de quibus iste [se. Varrò] nihil interpretatur nisi quod attinet ad frumentum, quod Ceres invenit, et ad Proserpinam, quam rapiente Orco perdidit ; et hanc ipsam dicit

significare fecunditatem seminum, quae cum defuisset quodam tempore eademque sterilitate terra maereret, exortam esse opinionem quod filiam Cereris, id est, fecunditatem, quae a proserpendo Proserpina dicta esset, Orcus abstulerat et apud inferos detinuerat; 7, 28: hinc etiam Samothracum nobilia mysteria in superiore libro sic interpretatur [se. Varrò] .. . dicit enim se ibi multis indiciis collegisse in simulacris aliud significare caelum, aliud terram, aliud exempta rerum, quas Plato appellai ideas; caelum Iovem, terram Iunonem, ideas Minervam vult intellegì; Strab. 10, 3, 23 : πας δέ ό περί των θεών λόγος άρχαίας έξετάζει δόξας καί μύθους, αίνιττομένων των παλαιών ας εΐχον έννοιας φυσικάς περί τών πραγμάτων καί προστιθέντων άεί τοις λόγοις τόν μϋθον ; Sen. N.Q. 7, 30, 6 : Eleusin servat quod ostendat revisentibus. rerum natura sacra sua non semel tradii; initiatos nos credimus; in vestíbulo eius haeremus; ilia arcana non promiscue nec omnibus patent; reducta et interiore sacrario clausa sunt, ex quibus aliud haec aetas, aliud quae post nos subibit aspiciet·, Cornut. N.D. 28: περί Δήμητρος καί 'Εστίας, ώ παϊ, λεκτέον έκατέρα δ' εοικεν ούχ έτέρα της γης είναι, κτλ. ; Galen, De Usu Part. 17, 1 (IV, 361 Κ.): άπαντες γάρ,ώς οΐμαι . . . δσοι τιμώσι θεούς, ούδέν δμοιον έχουσιν Έλευσινίοις τε καί Σαμοθρακίοις όργίοις, άμυδρά μέν γάρ εκείνα πρός £νδειξιν ών σπεύδει διδάσκειν· εναργή δέ τά της φύσεώς έστι κατά πάντα τά ζω α ; Clem. Strom. 5, 11, 71, 1: μετά ταϋτα δ' έστί τά μικρά μυστήρια διδασκαλίας τινά ύπόθεσιν ϊχοντα καί προπαρασκευής τών μελλόντων, τά δέ μεγάλα περί τών συμπάντων, οδ μανθάνειν έτι υπολείπεται, έποπτεύειν δέ καί περινοεϊν τήν τε φύσιν καί τά πράγματα. The idea that a physical explanation of the mysteries is tantamount to a denial of gods (R. Hirzel, Untersuch. Cic. philos. Sehr. 1 (1877), 41-42; R. Philippson in Symb. Osloenses, 20 (1940), 34-35) could hardly have derived from a Stoic source. I. Heinemann, Poseid. metaph. Sehr. 2 (1928), 153, n. 4, thinks that Cicero considered the mystery religions, if rightly understood, as true religion,

524

1, 120

43 120 Mihi quidem etiam Democritus, vir magnus in primis, cuius fontibus 1 Epicurus 2 hortulos suos inrigavit, nutare3 videtur in 4 natura deorum. Tum enim censet5 imagines divinitate praedi1

6

frontibus O censit A 1

2

epicurius A\

epycurus H

but this passage rather poorly illustrates that view. 120 mihi quidem: the abrupt transition leads R. Hirzel (Untersuch. ζ· de. pbilos. Sehr. 1 (1877), 43-44) to think that Cicero here shifts back to another, probably Stoic, source. Democritus: cf. 1,29, η. (Democritus); 2, 76. vir magnus in primis: Cicero tends to praise Democritus in order by comparison to disparage Epicurus; cf. Fin. 1, 20: homini erudito in geometriaque perfecto [and Madvig's n.] ; Ac. 2, 14, speaks of Democriti verecundia [see Reid's n.] ; cf. 2, 73: quid loquar de Democrito? quem cum eo conferre possumus non modo ingeni magnitudine sed etiam animi ... quis hune philosophum non anteponit Cleanthi, Chrysippo, reitquis inferioris aetatis; Tusc. 1, 22: Democritum enim, magnum ilium quidem virum ; also Pease on Div. 2, 30, η. (ut physicus). cuius fontibus: on Epicurus's indebtedness to Democritus cf. 1, 66, η. (Democriti); 1, 73, η. (quid ... non a Democrito)·, Reid on Fin. 1, 17; 1, 21. The water of ideas is thought of as coming from springs through rivuli (cf. Ac. 1 , 8 ·. ut ea a fontibus potius hauriant quam rivulos consectentur [and Reid's n.]; Synes. Orat. de Regno, 4, p. 1065a Migne : άπό τούτων ρύακες φιλοσοφίας έρρύησαν) to the gardens to be irrigated; cf. also Hier. Ep. 60, 5, 2: de Worum posset fontibus inrigari. hortulos: cf. 1, 93, and n. (Epicuri hortus)\ Legg. 1, 39; 1, 54, where Atticus the Epicurean says: me ex nostris paene convellit hortulis deduxitque in Academiam·, cf. Hier. Adv. Iovin. 2, 36: Epicurum nostrum [i.e., Jovinian] . . . in hortulis suis inter adulescentulos et mulierculas. The diminutive probably indicates disparagement, yet cf. Fin. 1, 65, where

3

notare Β1

4

in add. Β

Epicurus's house is literally described as angusta, and Diog. L. 10, 10, which says that his garden was purchased for 80 minae. May there also possibly be a suggestion of the sequestered "ivory tower" of the hedonistic philosopher? In Fin. 5, 2, however, we find the hortuli of Plato. nutare: cf. Fin. 2, 6: dico ipsum Epicurum nescire et in eo nutare·, Ov. M. 10, 375-376: sic animus vario labefactus vulnere nutat / hue levis atque illuc\ Stat. Τ heb. 4, 197; 8, 614: nutat utroque timor·, Min. Fei. 16, 1 : errantem vagam lubrieam nutasse sententiam; Aug. Ep. 118, 27: ideoque fluctuavit, sicut isti dicunt, nutavitque sententia. in natura: in — "in the case of " ; cf. 1, 75: in Venere Coa. tum . . . tum . . . tum . . . tum: cf. 1,29 : Democritus, qui tum imagines eorumque circumitus in deorum numero refert, tum illam naturam quae imagines fundat ac mittat, tum sententiam intellegentiamque nostram, nonne in máximo errore versaturì Cicero's purpose seems to be to show that Democritus had no clear and consistent idea of the gods ; cf. V. E. Alfieri, Gli atomisti (1936), 110, η. 268; C. Bailey, The Gr. Atomists and Epic. (1928), 177: "we do not know enough of Democritus' theory to explain or criticize it . . . he probably differed from Epicurus in thinking that these 'idols' were themselves 'divine' and that there were no 'divine beings' from which they came." With the thought cf. Sext. Emp. Adv. Phys. 1, 19: Δημόκριτος Sè εϊδωλά τινά φησιν έμπελάζειν τοις άνθρώποις, καί. τούτων τά μέν είναι άγαθοποιά τά δέ κακοποιά (ϊνθεν καί είίχετο εύλόγχων τυχεϊν ειδώλων), είναι δέ ταϋτα μεγάλα τε καί ύπερφυη, καί δύσφθαρτα μέν, ούκ άφθαρτα δέ, προσημαίνειν τε τά μέλλοντα τοις άνθρώποις, θεωρούμενα καί φωνάς

1, 120

525

tas inesse in universitate 1 rerum, tum principia mentis quae 2 sunt in eodem universo 3 deos esse 4 dicit, tum animantes imagines quae vel prodesse nobis soient 5 vel nocere, tum ingentes quasdam imagines tantasque ut universum mundum 6 conplectantur extrinsecus. Quae quidem 7 omnia 8 sunt patria 9 Democriti 10 quam 1 inesse uniuersitate NO, in uniuersi sunt (sunt del.) in eodem A1, in mg. add. 2 mentesque ABM, A? : tate rerum tum principia mentes quae sunt mentesque 3 uniuersos Η 4 Post esse A del. in uniuersitate 6 sollent quae HNO 6 mudum A1 7 quaedem A1 8 omnia] annua O e p*atria N, soleant dett. 10 democriti] democrito H1 A, paria Η

άφιέντα; 1, 42: εις μέν γάρ τό πώς νόησιν θεών έσχον άνθρωποι πολλάς καΐ ποικίλας ή φύσις δίδωσιν άφορμάς· τό δέ είδωλα είναι έν τω περιέχοντι ύπερφυή καΐ άνθρωποειδεϊς έχοντα μορφάς καΐ καθόλου τοιαύτα όποια βούλεται αύτω άναπλάττειν Δημόκριτος, παντελώς έστί δυσπαράδεκτον; Aug. Ep. 118, 28-29: Democritus etiam hoc distare in naturalibus quaestionibus ab Epicuro dicitur, quod iste sentit inesse concursioni atomorum vim quondam animalem et spirabilem [Τ use. 1, 42], qua vi eum credo et imagines ipsas divinitate praeditas dicere, non omnes omnium rerum sed deorum et principia mentis esse in universis, quibus divinitatem tribuit, et animantes imagines quae vel prodesse nobis soleant vel nocere. Epicurus vero ñeque aliquid in principiis rerum ponit praeter átomos ... nam et videndi causam banc esse dicit, ingentes quasdam imagines, ita ut universum mundum complectantur extrinsecus. intellegis autem iam, ut arbitrar, quas isti opinentur imagines, miror non admonuisse Democritum vel hoc ipso falsa esse quae dicit, quia venientes tam magnae imagines in tam brevem animum nostrum, si corporeus, ut Uli volunt, tam parvo corpore includitur totae ilium tangere non possunt. a magno enim corpore cum parvum corpus attingitur a toto simul attingi nullo pacto potest ... de visu certe oculorum ambo pariter redarguuntur ; tam enim breves oculos tam grandia imaginum corpora tota attingere nullo modo possunt. Mayor compares Plut. De Is. et Os. 26, p. 361b, for the demons of Xenocrates. universitate rerum: cf. 1, 39: universitatemque rerum. principia: άρχαί; cf. 2, 75; M. O. Liçcu, Étude sur la langue de la philos.

morale chez Cic. (1930), 77-84. sunt . . . soient: the reading of the mss, supported by the indicative cingit in 1, 28, and unnecessarily emended to the subjunctive by Heindorf and other editors, following Augustine, who, however, has somewhat modified the wording of the whole passage. animantes: adjectival, as in 1, 23; 1, 123; 2, 22; 3, 11; cf. έμψυχα. prodesse . . . nocere: a frequent antithesis in Cicero; e.g., 2, 92; 3, 69; Fin. 3, 69; O f f . 3, 64; 3, 76. ingentes . . . imagines: cf. Sext. Emp. Adv. Phys. 1, 19 and Aug. Ep. 118, 28 (both quoted on tum ... tum ... tum ... tum, above) ; also Aët. Ρlac. 1,12, 6 [the view of Democritus]: δυνατόν ύκ έοίκαμέ τά τοιαύτα τήν φι έρειν, κτλ. With neminem ... hominem cf. 2, 96 : nemo hominem homo. amari . . . diligi: of the feeling and the judgment respectively, as Mayor observes. T. Wopkens, Advers. crit. 1 (1828), 80, compares Fin. 3, 66: ut dis

3

ateis A1

immortalibus cari simus et ab its diligamur·, 5, 29: qui sibi cari sunt seseque diligunt. inter se ab aliis alii: such pleonasm is frequent in expressions of reciprocal relations. C. G. Cobet ( Var. Lect. (1873), 461-462) deletes ab aliis alii, but O f f . 1, 22 [part of which he would also delete] has : ut ipsi inter se aliis alii prodesse possunt, and Rep. 6, 20 : ut nihil inter ipsos ab aliis ad alios manare possit, support the text here. As observed by Goethe, ab aliis alii unaccompanied by inter se would imply action in one direction but not in both mutually; the two expressions together correspond to άλλήλων (cf. P. Thielmann in Archiv f . lat. Lex. 7 (1890), 354). With the thought cf. 2, 78: necesse est cum sint di ... animantis esse ... inter seque quasi civili conciliatione et societate coniunctos, unum mundum ut communem rem publicam atque urbem aliquam regen fis; 2, 133; Sext. Emp. Adv. Phys. 1, 131: τί οδν φασιν oí Στωικοί δικαιοσύνην τινά καΐ έπιπλοκήν ίχειν τούς άνθρώπους πρός άλλήλους καΐ τούς θεούς; . . . έπεί λόγον ϊχομεν τόν έπ' άλλήλοις τε καΐ θεούς διατείνοντα . . . ώστε εΐ ή δικαιοσύνη κατά τινα κοινωνίαν άνθρώπων προς άλλήλους καΐ άνθρώπων πρός θεούς νενόηται, δεήσει μή δντων θεών μηδέ δικαιοσύνην ύπαρκτήν είναι [R. Hirzel, Untersuch. ζ· Cic. philos. Sehr. 1 (1877), 44]. But even the Epicurean contemporaries of Cicero assumed friendships among the gods; cf. Philodem. De Dits, 3, col. 13: κ φωνη δέ χρήσαι καΐ όμειλία τη πρός άλλήλους ρητέον· ού γάρ μάλλον εύδαίμονας κ άδιαλύτους νοήσομεν, φησί, μή φωνοϋντας μηδ' άλλήλοις διαλεγομένους, άλλά τοις ένεοΐς άνθρώποις ομοίους, κτλ. ; R. Philippson in Symb. Osloenses, 20 (1940), 38, compares Philolodem. op. cit., 3, cols, a-c (pp. 14-18 Diels), and thinks that these are attempts of younger Epicureans to meet Academic criticisms (cf. Fin. 1, 69).

1, 121

529

Stoici melius, qui a vobis reprehenduntur ! Censent 1 autem sapientes sapientibus etiam ignotis 2 esse amicos. Nihil est enim 3 1

censet M1

2

notis N1

8

enim add. Β

quanto Stoici melius: on Cotta's use here of a Stoic source cf. 1, 100, η. (eos vituperabas) ; for the Academic method of playing off one philosophic school against another Hirzel, I.e. ; Philippson, op. cit., 40. For the omission of a verb see 1, 17, n. (verum hoc alias)·, 1, 101 : quanto melius haec vulgus. autem: this use seems explanatory rather than adversative, and Mayor compares occasional cases of δέ where γάρ would have been expected. Goethe finds other examples in 1, 49: Epicurus autem·, 3, 37 : alt autem solem, but these seem not perfectly parallel; Plasberg refers to Tbes. Ling. Lat. 2 (1906), 1590, 581591, 17; cf. E. Löfstedt, Philo!. Komm. Ζ. Peregrin. Aetheriae (1911), 33. sapientes . . . amicos: after the Homeric notion of Zeus as the common father of gods and men (cf. 2, 64, below : pater divomque hominumque ; L. R. Farnell, Higher Aspects of Gr. Rei. (1912), 92-93), with its implications of a universal religion, we may notice Pindar's declaration (Nem. 6, 1): ëv ανδρών, ëv θεών γένος; the words of the sophist Antiphon, De Verit. {Pap. Oxyrh. 11 (1915), no. 1364, especially lines 289-292), who asserts: ουτε βρος άφώρι [δ]ήμών ο οΰτε Έλλην [which J. Mewaldt in Die Antike, 2 (1926), 180, considers the foundation for the idea of the universality of law for Greeks and barbarians alike], and those of the sophist Hippias in Plat. Protag. 337c: ήγοϋμαι έγώ ΰμάς συγγενείς τε καΐ οικείους καΐ πολίτας άπαντας είναι φύσει, ού νόμω [cf. W. Jaeger, Paideia, 1 (Engl. tr. 1939), 324], Plato, Aristotle, and Isocrates seem not to adopt the idea; cf. Mewaldt, op. cit., 181. Cosmopolitanism of a sort, however, appears in Eur. ft. 777 Nauck 2 : ώς πανταχού γε πατρίς ή βόσκουσα γή; cf. fr. 1047: άπας μέν άήρ αίετώ περάσιμος, / άπασα δέ χθών άνδρΐ γενναίω πατρίς [see Ον. F. 1, 493-494], and in

an anonymous tragic fragment (p. 899 Nauck, no. 318): τω γαρ καλώς πράσσοντι πάσα γή πατρίς [cf. Ar. Plut. 1151; Tuse. 5, 108: patria est ubicumque est bene·, Paroem. Gr. 2, 194, no. 45; and other parallels in Nauck's note], as also in a shorter form, often ascribed to Diogenes the Cynic, πάσα γη πατρίς [Arr. Epict. 3, 24, 66; 4, 1, 154; Julian, Or. 7, p. 238c; Liban. Ep. 1296, 2; Paroem. Gr. 1, 149, no. 74 (and v. Leutsch and Schneidewin's note); 2, 201, no. 1; Suid. s.v. πάσα γη πατρίς], Theophrastus (ap. Vitruv. 6, proem. 2) maintained doctum ... in omni civitate esse civem, and ap. Porphyr. De Abst. 3, 25, asserted that those born of common ancestors were akin, οΰτω δέ, οϊμαι, καΐ τόν "Ελληνα μέν τω Έλληνι, τον δέ βάρβαρον τω βαρβάρφ, πάντας δέ τούς άνθρώπους άλλήλοις φαμέν οικείους τε και συγγενείς είναι, δυοΐν θάτερον, ή τω προγόνων είναι των αύτών, ή τω τροφής καΐ ήθών καΐ ταύτοϋ γένους κοινωνεΐν. οΰτως δέ καΐ τούς πάντας άνθρώπους άλλήλοις τίθεμεν καΐ συγγενείς, καΐ μήν πασι τοις ζφοις. Theophrastus is thus perhaps the first philosopher (Mewaldt, op. cit., 182) to profit by the broadening of outlook and the breaking down of political barriers which followed the conquests of Alexander. He is followed by Zeno and other Stoics (cf. Plut. De Alex. Fort. 1, 6, p. 329a-b = S.V.F. 1, no. 262; W. W. Tarn in Proc. Brit. Acad. 19 (1933), 123-146; at 148 he thinks Alexander the first man known to us who contemplated the brotherhood of man and the unity of mankind; yet cf. M. H. Fisch in Am. Journ. Philo!. 58 (1936), 59-82; 129-151). Cf. M. Pohlenz, Die Stoa, 1 (1948), 137-141. The Stoics founded their doctrines upon concepts of natural law coextensive with the cosmos ; cf. Fin. 4, 7 : mundum hunc omnem op~ pidum esse nostrum·, Parad. 18: its qui omnem orbem terrarum unam urbem esse 34

530

1, 121

dicunt·, Legg. 1, 61 : civem totius mundi quasi unius urbis; Tusc. 5, 108: Socrates quidem cum rogaretur cuiatem se esse dicere/, "mundanum," inquit ; totius ertim mundi se incolam et civem arbitrabatur. For such a citizen of the world (or, more accurately, of the cosmos) the term κοσμοπολίτης was first used by Diogenes the Cynic (Diog. L. 6,63; Arr. Epict. 3, 24, 66; Lucian, Vit. Auct. 8; Arsen. Violet, p. 202 Walz ; the Gnomo/. Vat. no. 559 {Wiener Stud. 11 (1889), 237) ascribes a similar remark to Chabrias; [Heraclit.] Ep. 9—in Epistol. Gr. 287 Hercher—to Heraclitus). Diogenes's title "cosmopolite" perhaps means no more than "an individual who lives where he likes without civic responsibilities and without a feeling for the growth of a tradition" (T. J. Haarhoff, The Stranger at the Gate (1938), 98). The term is later a favorite with Philo (e.g., De Opif. 3: τοϋ νομίμου ανδρός ευθύς οντος κοσμοπολίτου ; 142; De Somniis, 1, 243; for other cases cf. I. Heinemann in P.-W. 5 Supplbd. (1931), 308; in De Iosepho, 29, he says: ή μέν γάρ μεγαλόπολις δδε ó κόσμος εστί [cf. Μ. Aurel. 12, 36: άνθρωπε, έπολιτεύσω έν τη μεγάλη ταύτη πάλει] ; see also Constit. Apost. 8, 12 (Pair. Gr. 1, 1097); Ambr. Ep. 45, 16. Other forms of the same idea are numerous; e.g., Democrit. fr. (1Vorsokrat. 1, no. 55 Β 247); [Anadiarais,] Ep. 5 (Epistol. Gr. 103 Hercher); Varr. Sentent. 36 Riese; Philo, De Prov. 1, pp. 33; 42 Aucher; Sen. Ep. 4, 31, 7; 7, 20, 3; 7, 20, 5; 8, 4,1 ; 109; Arr. Epict. 1, 9, 1 ; 1, 9, 6; Plut. De Exil. 5, p. 600f; M. Aurel. 6, 44; 9, 9; 10, 15; Diog. Oenoand. fr. 24, p. 30 William; Tert. Apol. 38 (and Mayor's note) ; Basil. Ep. 9, p. 98 Deferrari; Julian, Or. 8, p. 246a; Epiphan. Adv. Hares. 3, 24; Philostr. Ep. Apollon. 44; Paul. Noi. Carm. 17, 321-323; Anth. Pal. 7, 417, 5-6; Lact. Plac. in Τ heb. 8, 320; Paroem. Gr. 2, 732, 55a; [Pubiii. Syr.] app. 281, p. 130 WölfHin (cf. p. 140, no. 43) ; Epigr. Gr. no. 1084, 7 Kaibel; Dante, De vulg. Eloq. 1, 6. The Stoic idea gradually developed in Christianity into the concept of the Civitas Dei, and perhaps, as suggested by C. Appuhn (p. 369, n. 169 of his translation), into that of the com-

munion of the saints. On the whole subject, in addition to the excellent sketch by J. Mewaldt in Die Antike, 2 (1926), 177-189, see also R. D. Hicks, Stoic and Epic. (1910), 140-143; H. Uri, Cic. u. d. epik. Philos. (1914), 30; J. Jiithner, Hellenen u. Barbaren (1923), 4459; M. Mühl, Die ant. Menschheitsidee (in Das Erbe d. Alten, 2 ser. 14 (1928)), especially (for the Stoics and Cicero), 59-78; S. B. Kougeas, Ή ιδέα της κοινωνίας των έθνών παρά τοις Έλλησι (1928; reviewed in By^.-neugr. Jahrb. 7 (1930), 190-198); V. Engelhardt, Weltbürgertum u. Friedensbewegung in Vergangenheit u. Gegenwart (1930); E. L. Hettich, A Stud, in anc. Nationalism (1933); W. Jaeger, Paideia, 1 (Engl. tr. 1939), 323324; M. B. Ogle in Trans. Am. philol. Assoc. 74 (1943), 8; A. J. Festugière, Épicure (1946), 122, n. 1 (citing Diog. Oenoand. fr. 24, col. 1 William: καθ' έκάστην . . . εις 6 κόσμος οίκος). From the beliefs expressed above that (a) there is but one, world-wide, nationality, and (b) that the brave, wise, or virtuous man finds himself at home wherever he may be—doubtless because his merit is sure to be appreciated—there derives the corollary (if not possibly the substitute) here asserted, namely, that the wise man is the potential friend of like-minded men wherever they may be, whether known or unknown to him; cf. Anaxagoras ap. Diog. L. 2, 7 (W. Jaeger, Theol. of the early Gr. Philosophers (1947), 155); Eur. fr. 902 Nauck 2 : τόν έσθλόν άνδρα, καν έκάς ναίη χθονός, / καν μήποτ' 8σσοις είσίδω, κρίνω φίλον [quoted by Procop. Ep. 154] ; Philo, De spec. Legg. 2, 45: οία χρή τούς τ φ οντι κοσμοπολίτας γενομένους, oî τόν μέν κόσμον ένόμισαν είναι πόλιν, πολίτας δέ τούς σοφίας όμιλητάς, άρετης έγγραφούσης, ή πεπίστευται τό κοινόν πολίτευμα πρυτανεύειν; Plut. De comm. Notit. 22, p. 1069a: έλήρει δ' 'Αριστοτέλης, έλήρει δέ Ξενοκράτης . . . τήν . . . θαυμαστήν άγνοοϋντες ώφέλειαν ήν οί σοφοί κινουμένων κατ' άρετήν άλλήλων ωφελούνται, καν μή συνώσι μηδέ γιγνώσκοντες τυγχάνωσι; Μ. Aurel. 9, 9: έπΐ δέ των έτι κρειττόνων καΐ διεστηκότων τρόπον τινά ένωσις ύπέστη, οϊα έπΐ

1, 122

531

virtute amabilius,1 quam qui 2 adeptus 3 erit ubicumque 4 erit gentium a nobis diligetur. 122 Vos autem quid mali datis, cum 1 amabilis AxBl gentium Η

2

qui] quia (ί')Α1

τών άστρων [cf. I. Heinemann, Poseidonios' metaphys. Sehr. 2 (1928), 156]; Apul. De Plat. 2, 22 : bonos omnes oportet inter se amicos esse, etsi sunt minus noti; Min. Fei. 9, 2 [of Christians] : occultis se notis et insignibus noscunt et amant mutuo paene antequam noverint-, Clem. Strom. 5, 14, 95, 2: Ζήνων 8è ó Στωικός παρά Πλάτωνος λαβών, ó δέ άπο της βαρβάρου φιλοσοφίας, τούς άγαθούς πάντας άλλήλων είναι φίλους λέγει; Iambi. Vit. Pyth. 229: φίλίαν δέ διαφανέστατα πάντων πρός όίπαντας Πυθαγόρας παρέδωκε, θεών μέν πρός άνθρώπους δι' εύσεβείας . . . άνθρώπων δέ πρός άλλήλους, πολιτών μέν διά νομιμότατος ύγιοϋς, έτεροφύλων δέ διά φυσιολογίας ορθής; 237: λέγεται δέ ώς καί άγνοοϋντες άλλήλους οί ΠυθαγορικοΙ έπειρώντο φιλικά ϊργα διαπράττεσθαι ύπέρ των είς ίίψιν μηδέποτε άφιγμένων, ήνίκα τεκμήριόν τι λάβοιεν του μετέχειν των αύτών λόγων, ώστ' έκ τών τοιώνδε ίργων μηδ' έκεϊνον τόν λόγον άπιστεΐσθαι, ώς άρ' οί σπουδαίοι άνδρες καί προσωτάτω γης οίκοϋντες φίλοι είσίν άλλήλοις πρίν ή γνώριμοι τε καί προσήγοροι γενέσθαι; Liban. Ερ. 11, 1296, 15-16; Themist. Or. 22, p. 275b Hardouin: ο μέν οδν τραγικός ποιητής καί τόν άγνώτα μέν άγαθόν δέ έπαινεϊ καί φίλον ήγεϊται; C.I.L. VI, 1779 (= 1259 Dessau), 32 (of the wife of Praetextatus] : ignota noscor omnibus·, Stob. vol. 2, p. 94, 1-6 Wachsmuth; 2, p. 101, 24-102, 2 (= S.V.F. 3, no. 626): πάντες δέ τούς σπουδαίους ώφελεΐν άλλήλοις, ουτε φίλους δντας άλλήλων πάντως ουτε εΰνους εύδοκίμους ουτε άποδεχομένους παρά τό μήτε καταλαμβάνεσθαι μήτ' έν ταύτω κατοικεΐν τόπω, εύνοητικώς μέντοι γε πρός άλλήλους διακεΐσθαι καί φιλικώς καί δοκιμαστικώς καί άποδεκτικώς ; Zenob. 5, 74 (and von Leutsch's n.); and othet cases cited in S.V.F. 3, nos. 625-636. Among early Christian passages note especially Ep. ad Diognet. 5, 1-5;

3

adeptus fuerit Ν

4

ubicumque

5, 9. One may also appropriately compare the modern conceptions of the international character of science and scholarship. The Stoic argument is attacked by Philodem. De Diis, 3, p. 16 Diels: ύ μήν άπαντα άτων οίητέον ους, ή κατά τό συνθές γε φίλοι καλούνται· τούς γά άπειρους ύ δυνατόν άλλήλος γνώσιν άφικνεΐσθαι. διόπερ ού ά τών έ τη φών φλους όίν τις εϊποι ύ άώ; cf. Aristot. Eth. Nie. 8, 2, 1155 b 341156 a 3; 8, 7, 1159 a 2-3: ούδέ τοις άρίστοις ή σοφωτάτοις οί μηδενός άξιοι [sc. άξιοϋσιν εϊναι φίλοι] ; cf. also Mencius, 4,2,1,1-4 (The Chinese Classics, tr. J. Legge, 2 (1870), 110-111). sapientes sapientibus: on the polyptoton cf. Pease on Div. 1, 6, n. {Stoicis Stoico). nihil est: cf. Am. 28: nihil est enim virtute amabilius, nihil quod magis adliciat ad diligendum, quippe cum propter virtutem et probitatem etiam eos quos numquam vidimus quodam modo diligamus·, O f f . 1, 56: nihil autem est amabilius ... quam morum similitude bonorum·, Clem. Strom. 2, 19, 101, 3: τριττά δέ εϊδη φιλίας διδασκόμεθα, καί τούτων τό μέν πρώτον καί άριστον τό κατ' άρετήν.. The Stoic flavor of the passage is clear, and Ax believes it to derive from Posidonius. quam qui: cf. P. Mihaileanu, De Comprehensionibus relativis apud Cic. (1907), 132. adeptus: cf. Tuse. 3, 47. 122 quid mali datis: cf. Tuse. 1, 82: mali vero quid adfert ista sententia·, 2, 27: videsne poetae quid mali adferant-, Härtens. fr. 39 Müller: plus enim mali pravitas voluntatis adfert quam fortuna cuiquam boni-, Thes. Ling. Lat. 5 (1934), 1674, 7-53. cum . . . ponitis: cf. 1, 33, n. {cum ... vult).

532

1, 122

< i n > 1 inbecillitate2 gratificationem et benevolentiam 3 ponitis. Ut enim omittam vim et naturam deorum, ne homines quidem censetis, nisi inbecilli essent, futuros beneficos 4 et benignos fuisse? Nulla est 5 caritas naturalis inter bonos? Carum ipsum verbum® est amoris, ex quo amicitiae nomen est ductum; 7 quam si ad fructum nostrum referemus,8 non ad illius commoda quem 9 diligemus,10 non erit 11 istaamicitia sed mercatura quaedam utilita2 inbecillitate Lamb., inbecillitatem codd. 8 beniguo1 < i n > dett. Lamb. 4 beneficios Β1 5 est om. Ο 8 ipsu lenciam N, beni uolenti am Β 7 dictum HM1 8 referrimus B1, referremus A2 9 quam uerbu A ABF1 10 diligimus HM1 11 eritis amicitia A1

< i n > inbecillitate: the obvious Sen. (1914), 67; A. Pittet, Vocab. philos, emendation by Lambimis cotrects a case de Sénèque, 1 (1937), 156-157. of haplography. With the thought cf. ex quo . . . nomen: cf. Fin. 2, 78: 1, 45: ñeque ira ñeque gratia teneri, quod quid autem est amare, e quo nomen ductum quae talia essent inbecilla essent omnia amicitiae est; Am. 26: amor enim, ex quo [and n. on inbecilla]·, 1, 124. The single amicitia nominata est·, 100: amor sive amiword gratia of the earlier passage is here citia, utrumque enim dictum est ab amando. ad fructum nostrum referemus: cf. expanded into the two elements of return of favors ( g r a t i f i c a t i o n e m ) and feeling of Am. 26 : nam utilitates quidem etiam ab iis gratitude (benevolentiam); cf. also Am. percipiuntur saepe qui simulatione amicitiae 29: benevolentiae ... quam si qui putant ab coluntur ... in amicitia autem nihil fictum imbecillitate proficisci, ut sit per quem ad- est, nihil simulatum·, Aristot. Eth. Nie. 8, 2, 1155 b 18-20: δοκεϊ γάρ ού παν sequatur quod quisque desideret, humilem φιλεϊσθαι άλλά το φιλητόν, τοΰτο δ' είναι sane relinquunt et minime generosum ... ortum amicitiae, quam ex inopia atque άγαθόν ή ήδύ ή χρήσιμον; 8, 3, 1156 a indigentia natam volunt·, Diog. L. 10, 77: 10-12: oí μέν ούν διά τό χρήσιμον φιού γάρ συμφωνοΰσιν πραγματεΐαι καΐ λοϋντες άλλήλους ού καθ' αυτούς φιφροντίδες καΐ όργαΐ καί χάριτες μακα- λοϋσιν, άλλ* fi γίγνεταί τι αύτοϊς παρ' άλριότητι, άλλ' έν άσθενεία καί φόβω καΐ λήλων άγαθόν; Sen. Ερ. 9, 17: ad amiciπροσδεήσει των πλησίον ταϋτα γίγνεται. tiam fert ilium nulla utili tas sua sed naturalis vim et naturam: cf. 1, 49, n. (vim inritatio·, Max. Tyr. 14, 6a: τόν κόλακα διαφέρειν του φίλου . . . τη χρεία καΐ τ ω et naturam deorum). ne homines quidem: on interrogative τέλει, καί τη διαθέσει της ψυχής; 35, apodoses in the form of clauses con- 7a: ούχ ΰπ' εύνοιας άγομένων άλλ' ύπό taining ne ... quidem cf. J. N. Madvig, της χρείας ήναγκασμένων · καί μισθοφόρων, άλλά ού φίλων. The original reading Opuse, acad. (1887), 530. futuros . . . fuisse: cf. A. Zimmer- of Β seems to be referimus, which would mann in Philologus, 48 (1889), 377; O. be perfectly defensible here ; cf. Piasberg Riemann in Rev. de philol. 15 (1891), 38. ad loc. and Ax, appendix, 178, for innulla est caritas: cf. Fin. 2, 83: si stances of such a use of the present tense. nulla caritas erit quae faciat amicitiam ipsam ista amicitia: the logical istud is atsua sponte ; Am. 52: haec enim est tyran- tracted to the gender of the predicate; norum vita nimirum, in qua nulla fides, nulla cf. 1, 67: ista igitur est Veritas·, 1, 77, n. caritas, nulla stabilis benevolentiae potest esse (earn esse causam). fiducia·, 102: caritate enim benevolentiaque mercatura . . . utilitatum: beside the sublata omnis est e vita sublata iucunditas·, passages cited on ad fructum nostrum reR. Fischer, De Usu Vocab. apud Cic. et feremus, above, cf. Fin. 2, 78: "at enim

1, 123

533

tum suarum. Prata et arva et pecudum greges diliguntur isto modo, quod fructus ex his capiuntur, hominum 1 caritas et amicitia gratuita est. Quanto igitur magis deorum, qui nulla 2 r e 3 egentes 4 et inter se diligunt et hominibus consulunt! Quod n i 5 ita sit, quid veneramur,® quid precamur deos, cur sacris pontífices, cur auspiciis augures praesunt, quid optamus a deis inmortalibus, quid vovemus? 7 ' A t 8 etiam liber est Epicuri de sanctitate.' 123 Lu1 hominum animum (animum del.) Β a nulla Η, in ulla A, in nulla GNO, 8 re om. O, rem A1 4 egentes sunt Ν 6 ne AB1 innula Β1 * ueneremus 7 uouemus] monemus G, mouemus (?)A1, 8 at] ad B1 H1 mouemur B2FM

sequor utili totem." manebit ergo amicitia tarn diu quam diu sequetur utìlitas, et si utilitàs constituet amicitiam tollet eadem·, 2, 117: nec enim cum tua causa cui commodes beneficium illud habendum est, sed feneratio; Am. 31 : ut enim benefici liberalesque sumus, «o» ut exigamus gratiam {fleque enim beneficium feneramur sed natura propensi ad liberalitatem sumus), sic amicitiam non spe mer cedi s adducti sed quod omnis eius fructus in ipso amore inest expetendam putamus-, 32: sic et utilitates ex amicitia maximae capientur et erit eius ortus a natura quam ab imbecillitate gravior et verier, nam si utìlitas amicitias conglutinaret eadem commutata dissolverei·, Aristot. Eth. Nie. 8, 7, 1158 a 21: ή δέ [sc. φιλία] διά τό χρήσιμον άγοραίων ; Sen. Bp. 9, 9 : qui utilitatis causa adsumptus est tamdiu placebit quamdiu utili s fuerit·, 9, 10: ista quam tu describís negotiatio est, non amicitia, quae ad commodum accedit, quae quid consecutura sit spectat·, Diog. L. 10, 120 [the view of Epicurus] : και τήν φιλίαν δια τάς χρείας · δεΐν μέντοι προκατάρχεσθαι . . . συνίστασθαι δέ αύτήν κατά κοινωνίαν τοις ταϊς ήδοναϊς έκπεπληρωμ. With this meaning of mercatura cf. O f f . 3, 6: tamquam ad mercaturam bonarum artium\ also perhaps the Greek καπηλεία. suarum: on the shift of gender from the first to the third person cf. 1, 84, n. (sibi displicere) ; R. Kiihner-C. Stegmann, Ausf. Gram. d. lat. Sehr. 2, l 2 (1912), 603. prata . . . arva . . . pecudum: cf. Am. 79 : sed plerique neque in rebus humanis quicquam bonum normt nisi quod fructuosum sit, et amicos tamquam pecudeseos potissimum

diligunt ex quibus sperant se maximum fructum esse capturas. gratuita: "disinterested"; cf. Ac. 2 140: vir tutes quarum esse nulla potest nisi erit gratuita·, Fin. 2, 99: probitatem gratuitam, non . .. praemiorum mercedibus evocatam·, Div. 1, 87: nullam censet gratuitam esse virtutem\ Legg. 1, 48: liberalitas gratuitane est an mercennaria? hominibus consulunt: cf. 2, 165; 2, 166; 3, 70; Div. 2, 40; 2, 125. quid veneramur: cf. 1, 117, n. {deos veneremur); 1, 118, n. {quid ... quid .. . quid). sacris pontífices : on sacra cf. F. Geiger in P.-W. 1A (1920), 1656-1664; W. W. Fowler, Rei. Exp. of the Rom. People (1911), 270-291; Z. ZmigryderKonopka in Eos, 34 (1933), 361-372; G. Rohde, Die Kult Satzungen d. röm. Pontífices (1936), 95-145. Sacra were either publica or privata, and the supervision of the former in general fell to the pontífices (cf. 3, 5), while fiamines cared for the rites of many individual deities; cf. Legg. 2, 20; Liv. 1, 20, 6: cetera quoque omnia publica privataque sacra pontificis scitis subiecit [sc. Numa]. See also W. Rowoldt, Librorum pontificiorum Rom. de Caerimoniis Sacrificiorum Reliquiae (1906). auspiciis augures: cf. G. Wissowa in P.-W. 2 (1896), 2330. at etiam liber . . . de sanctitate: cf. 1, 115: at etiam de sanctitate, de pietate adver sus deos scripsit Epicurus. The repetition of the clause here is intentional, rather than caused by Cicero's forgetfulness

534

1, 123

dimur ab homine non tam faceto quam ad scribendi 1 licentiam libero. Quae enim potest esse sanctitas si dii humana non curant,8 quae autem animans natura nihil curans ? Verius est igitur nimirum illud quod familiaris 3 omnium 4 nostrum Posidonius disseruit in libro quinto de natura deorum, nullos 5 esse deos Epicuro 3

1 scribendi scientiam libero licentiam O, asscribendi M 4 5 familiares A 1Β 1 omnium est O nullus A 1

2

currant

Β1

quae . . . sanctitas: cf. 1, 3: quorum (as supposed by R. Philippson in P.-W. 7A (1939), 1154). Mayor (ed., 3, xviii) si vera sententia est, quae potest esse pietas, would explain it as caused by different quae sanctitas, quae religio·, 1, 116. humana non curant: in contrast to sources, such as Philo and Posidonius, but the likeness of expression seems the gods of the Stoics, one of whose chief points in discussing the gods was to make that improbable. 123 ludimur: cf. 1, 113: quo usque to show that consulere eos rebus humanis ludis ; 2, 46 : hie quam volet Epicurus iocetur·, (2, 3; 2, 154-167); cf. 3, 3: nihil agere, 2, 74 : ita salem istum, quo caret vestra natio nihil curare confirmât. animans natura: cf. 2, 36; 3, 34. [i.e., the Epicureans] in inridendis nobis nolitote consumere-, 3, 3: Epicurus vester de verius est: cf. Gaius, 3, 193; 3, 194. familiaris . . . Posidonius: cf. 1, 6: dis immortalibus . .. ludere videtur-, Div. 2, 40: deos enim istos iocandi causa induxit Diodotus, Philo, Antiochus, Posidonius, a Epicurus perlucidos et perflabilis tamquam quibus instituti sumus [cf. η. on Posidonius] ; inter duos lucos sic inter duos mundos propter 2, 88 : sphaeram ... banc quam nuper metum ruinarum·, Tusc. 2, 45: nos ab eo familiarisnoster effecitPosidonius·, Div. 1, 6: derideri puto. For the passive use of quinqué noster Posidonius [and Pease's n.]; ludo cf. Pro Flacc. 76: tu ludi te non in- 2, 47: noster etiam Posidonius·, Fin. 1, 6: in primisque familiar em nostrum Posidonium·, tellegebas? Tusc. 2, 61 : at non noster Posidonius·, R. This section and the next seem Stoic rather than Academic, though we have Philippson in P.-W. 7A (1939), 1176, no Academic work specifically directed 38-58. Cicero had known Posidonius against the Epicureans and have to in Rhodes but they all might have depend on Sextus Empiricus against seen him at Rome in 86 B.C. (cf. Plut. dogmatism in general; cf. R. Philippson Mar. 45, 4), a few years before the asin Symb. Osloenses, 20 (1940), 26, who sumed date of this dialogue. also {P.-W. 7A (1939), 1154) thinks that libra quinto de natura deorum: his this passage, with its reference to Posi- work περί θεών is also attested by donius, may derive from the same Stoic Diog. L. 7, 138; 7, 148; and probably source as that used in Book 2. R. Hirzel, by Lyd. De Mens. 4, 71; cf. J. Bake, on the other hand (Untersuch. Cic. Posidonii Rhodii Reliquiae (1810), 44-45. philos. Sehr. 1 (1877), 33) supposes that nullos, etc.: cf. 1, 85: video nonnullis Posidonius himself, in his work περί videri Epicurum, ne in offensionem Atheθεών, is the source of much of the pole- niensium caderet, verbis reliquisse deos, re mic against the Epicureans, and hence sustulisse; 1, 86, n. (deos esseputat), where is here named at the end of that polemic. it appears that Cicero's source is other non tam faceto: cf. 1, 85: de homine than Posidonius, since it admits that minime vafro·, 2, 46: homo non aptissimus Epicurus did believe in and fear the gods ad iocandum minimeque resipiens patriam. (cf. L. Reinhardt, Die Quellen v. Cic. Sehr, scribendi licentiam: cf. Tusc. 1, 6: de D.N. (1888), 29; R. Philippson in qui eandem licentiam scribendi sibi permitti Symb. Osloenses, 20 (1940), 42) ; Philodem. volunt. De Piet. p. 94 Gomperz: και φασι τόν

1, 123

535

videri, quaeque is 1 de deis inmortalibus dixerit invidiae detestandae gratia dixisse.2 Neque enim tam 3 desipiens fuisset 4 ut homunculi 5 similem deum fingeret,6 liniamenta dumtaxat extremis non habitu 7 solido,8 membris hominis praeditum omnibus, usu 9 membrorum ne minimo quidem, exilem quendam atque 1 his AO tam add. A • fingere A1 3

2

Post dixisse del. A : neque dixerit inuidie detestande gratia dixisse 4 fuissent Β1 6 homunculi dett. Rom., homunculis cett. 7 habito A1 8 solo sed NO 9 usum BF1

Έπίκουρον έκπεφευαι τόν Άττκμον ούχ ότι Έκουος τωτον άσεβεΐς ε!χ υπολήψεις άλ διαλεληθέναλούς άνθώπουν φιλοσοφίν αοϋ; Plut. Non posse suaviter, 21, p. 1102b: ύποκρίνεται γάρ εύχάς καΐ προσκυνήσεις, ούδέν δεό μένος, 8ιά τόν φόβον των πολλών και φθέγγεται φωνάς εναντίας οϊς φιλοσοφεί . . . οΰτω γάρ 'Επίκουρος ο?εται δεϊν σχηματίζεσθαι καί μή φθονεΐν μηδ' άπεχθάνεσθαι τοις πολλοίς ; Adv. Colot. 22, p. 1119d-e; 27, p. 1123a; 30, p. 1124e; Dionys. Alex. ap. Eus. Pr. Ev. 14, 27, 11: άλλά τοϋτο μέν πρόδηλον δτι μετά τόν Σωκράτους θάνατον κατεπτηχώς 'Αθηναίους ώς μή δοκοίη τοϋθ' δπερ ήν άθεος εϊναι, κενάς αύτοΐς άνυποστάτων θεών τερατευσάμενος έζωγράφησε σκιάς, κτλ. ; Att. ap. Eus. Pr. Εν. 15, 5, 12: δθεν είκότως άνκαΐαύτός ούδ' έκεϊνο τό έγκλημα έκφύγοι, ó κατ' 'Επικούρου τινές μαντεύονται, ώς δρα μή κατά γνώμην άλλά διά τό πρός άνθρώπων δέος τοις θεοϊς κατένειμεν έν τω παντί χώραν ώσπερ έν θεάτρω θέαν; Tert. Ad Nat. 2, 2: Epicurei [sc. deum putant] otiosum et inexercitum et, ut ita dixerim, neminem·, Lact. De Ira, 4, 7: denique Marcus Tullius a Posidonio dictum refert id Epicurum sensisse, nullos deos esse, sed ea quae de dis locutus sit depellendae invidiae causa dixisse; itaque verbis ilium deos relinquere, re autem ipsa tollere, quibus nullum motum, nullum tribuit officium. In defence of Epicurus, however, it has been remarked that he was protesting against the crude theological concepts of the multitude; cf. F. Bacon, Essays (1597), no. 16; C. Bailey, The Gr. Atomists and Epic. (1928), 438-439; 478-479; L. Robin on Lucr. 5,

146-155 (1928), p. 23, who calls his view a reaction against the anthropomorphism of the popular religion— though he seems to forget that Epicurus is himself the especial champion of divine anthropomorphism. Philodemus's De Pietate may also be considered as a defence of Epicurus on this head. individiae detestandae gratia: cf. the previous note ; also 3, 3 : tantum modo negare deos esse non audet, ne quid invidiae subeat aut criminis. For invidia in this sense cf. 1, 13, n. {invidia)·, for detestor cf. In Catti. 1, 27 : ut a me ... patriae querimoniam detester ac deprecer·, Phil. 4, 9: detestamini ... hoc omen. desipiens fuisset: this should logically have been in the infinitive as a part of the argument of Posidonius ; cf. Madvig on Fin. 3, 50, p. 429. homunculi: so some deteriores, while the better mss read homunculis (the j· by dittography of the first letter of similem). Either is grammatically possible, but the comparison of a single god to a single man seems more natural than that to men in the plural. Cf. also 3, 76, n. (homunculi . .. ridiculi). liniamentis: cf. 1, 75: adumbratorum deorum liniamenta·, 1, 98: modo liniamenta maneant·, Eus. Pr. Ev. 14, 27, 11: κενάς αύτοϊς άνυποστάτων θεών τερατευσάμενος έζωγράφησε σκιάς (sc. Επίκουρος) ; R. Philippson in Sjmb. Osloenses, 20 (1940), 30. Also for the phrase cf. Orator, 186: extrema liniamenta orationi adtulit·, Aug. C.D. 2, 21. habitu: εξει; cf. 1, 99: oris ... habitus. usu membrorum ne minimo quidem: cf. 1, 92, and n. {quae sit utilitas)·, 3, 3: membrisque humanis esse praeditos sed

536

1, 124

perlucidum,1 nihil cuiquam tribuentem, nihil gratificantem, omnino nihil curantem, nihil agentem. Quae natura primum nulla esse potest, idque videns Epicurus re 2 tollit, oratione relinquit deos. 124 Deinde si maxime talis est deus ut nulla gratia, nulla hominum caritate teneatur, valeat 3 —quid enim 4 dicam 5 'pro1 per luci di dum Β1 add. A

2

te add. Β

eorum membrorum usum nullum habere·, Dip. 2,40 : eosque habereputat eadem membra quae nos nec usum ullum habere membrorum. exilem quendam atque perlucidum: cf. 1, 75: cedo mihi istorum adumbraforum deorum liniamenta atque formas-, 2, 59: Epicurus monogrammos deos commentus est\ Div. 2, 40: deos ... induxit Epicurus per lucidos et perflabilis·, Lucr. 5, 148: tenvis enim natura deum\ Philodem. De Diis, 3, col. 13: τοις δέ θεοΐς το πρλαμβανόμενον κ λεπτομερές έπινοοϋντας; Aët. Ρlac. 1, 7, 34: 'Επίκουρος ανθρωποειδείς μέν τούς θεούς, λόγω δέ πάντας θεωρητούς διά τό λεπτόμέρειαν της των ειδώλων φύσεως; R. Philippson in Symb. Osloenses, 20 (1940), 43. Quendam makes the whole picture even more unsubstantial and ghost- like : "an emaciated and transparent sort of being." tribuentem: cf. 1, 4: a dis inmortalibus tribut generi humano putant. gratificantem: cf. 1, 122: gratificattonem. nihil curantem, nihil agentem: cf. 1, 101, n. (nihilagentem ... deum); 1, 115: omnino nihil curent, nihil agant\ 3, 3: nihil agere, nihil curare confirmât. re tollit, oratione relinquit deos : cf. 1, 16, n. (re ... verbis)·, 1, 85: verbis reliquisse deos, re sustulisse; W. Schmidt in Rhein. Mus. 94 (1951), 124, n. 81. 124 deinde: i.e., granted for the sake of argument that the god is ever so much (maxime) of the sort that Epicurus describes, then good-bye to him. With the whole passage cf. 1, 3; Plat. Rep. 2, 365d-e: οΰκουν, εί μέν μή είσίν ή μηδέν αύτοϊς των ανθρωπίνων μέλει, ούδ' ήμϊν μελητέον του λανθάνειν; Eur. I.A. 1034-1035: εί δ' είσΐ θεοί, δίκαιος ων

3

ueleat B2F

4

enim add. Η

5

dicam

άνήρ, θεών / έσθλών κυρήσεις· εί δέ μή, τί δει πονειν; Lact. De Ira, 8, 3: "deus," inquit Cicero, "si talis est ut nulla gratia, nulla hominum caritate teneatur, valeat. quid enim dicam lpropitius sit V esse enimpropitiuspotest nemini·" A. Tennvson, Lucretius·, "he that holds / The goas are careless, wherefore need he care / Greatly for them?" Also cf. C. Bailey, The Gr. Atomists and Epic. (1928), 438481; W. C. Greene, Moira (1944), 334, n. 20. For this use of maxime cf. Apul. Apol. 28: dein etsi maxime magus forem, tarnen ostendam·, also Plat. Charm. 172e: ώς άληθώς γάρ, εί δτι μάλιστα τοιοϋτόν έστιν ή σωφροσύνη. teneatur: "that he is bound by." valeat: the notion of farewell is here combined with dismissing a person or subject as a "good riddance"; cf. Att. 16, 15, 5: qua re ista valeant; me res familiaris movet\ Ter. Andr. 696-697: valeant / qui inter nos discidium volunt [on which Donatus says: velpotius τω εύφημισμφ; cum male optaturus esset, considerato pâtre παραδόξως locutus est et non dixit quod intenderai, "pereant" .. . valeant·. renuntiationis et imprecationis est verbum\ and Serv. Aen. 11, 97: ut etiam maledicti significationem interdum "vale" obtineat, ut Terentius, 'valeant ... volunt,' hoc est, ita a nobis discedant ut numquam ad nostrum revertantur aspectum\ ; Andr. 889 ; Hor. Ep. 2, 1, 180: valeat res ludiera; Fronto, Ep. 5, 59, p. 54 Haines (p. 93 Naber) : valeant omnes Porcii et Tullii et Crispi dum tu valeas; Gell. 2, 29, 14: valeant ... amici cum propinquis-, also somewhat similar uses: Att. 8, 8, 2: ilk tibi πολλά χαίρειν τω καλω dicens pergit Brundisium·, F am. 7, 33, 2: multam salutem et foro dicam et curiae·, Hdt. 4, 96: εϊτε δέ έγένετό τις

1, 124

537

pitius sit'; esse enim propitius potest nemini,1 quoniam, ut dicitis, omnis i n 2 inbecillitate est et gratia et caritas." 1

homini potest M\ nemini potest M2

Σάλμοξις άνθρωπος εϊτ' έστί δαίμων . . . χαιρέτω; Plat. Protag. 347e: τάς μέν τοιαύτας συνουσίας έώσι χαίρειν; Eur. Med. 1044-1045: χαιρέτω βουλεύματα / τά πρόσθεν; and other examples cited by Davies, ad loc., and in Liddell-ScottJones, Greek-English Lex., p. 1970. Mayor here suggests that since valeat is used particularly for farewells to mortals and propitius sit for deities, the use of valeat in this passage is appropriate as denying the divinity of the Epicurean gods. propitius sit : a Roman ritual phrase ; cf. At t. 2 , 9 , 3 : patria propitia sit ; 8,16,2 : hune propitium sperant, ilium iratum putant; Div. in Caecil. 41 : ita mihi déos velim propitios; Plaut. Cure. 557; Merc. 678; Cato, R.R. 134, 2; 141, 2: Mars pater, te precor quaesoque uti sies volens propitius mihi domo familiaeque nostrae·, Liv. 1, 16, 3: ut volens propitius suam semper sospite t progeniem·, 7, 26, 4; 22, 37, 12; 24, 21, 10; 24, 38, 8; 29, 14, 13; Val. Max. 1, 6, 13; Petron. 60, 8; Arnob. 2, 8: veneramini deos et colitis non credentes illos esse et propitias aures vestris supplicationibus accommodare (cf. Hebrews, 11, 6); Macrob. Sat. 3, 9, 8; Amm. Marc. 19, 6, 7; Serv. Aen. 1, 733: secundum Etruscam disciplinam locutus est·, sic enim dicunt "volens propitiusque sis"; Schol. Dan. Aen. 3, 457; C.I.L. VI, 32328; 32329; XII, 4333; B. Brissonius, De Formulis (1731), 1, 100. § 184; also many Greek passages in which propitius is represented by εύήκοος, ευμενής, ευ-

2

in add. A

φρων, ίλεως, πρευμενής, πρόφρων, and similar words ; cf. G. Appel, De Romanorum Precationibus (1909), 123, n. 1; for the whole matter see Appel, 122-123. ut dicitis: cf. 1, 45 and n. (inbecilla); 1, 122. in inbecillitate: cf. 1, 2: tanta sunt in varietate. caritas: A. Schmekel, Die Philos, d. mittl. Stoa (1892), 99, n. 1, remarks that caritas here represents benevolentia in a very similar phrase in 1, 122. From the lack of any peroration and the way in which 2, 1 begins {quae cum Cotta dixisset, tum Vellerns, with which cf. 3, 1 : quae cum Balbus dixisset, tum adridens Cotta), it is evident that the conversation is thought of as continuous, rather than as one divided between three days (despite two careless lapses of Cicero's; cf. 2, 73, n. (hesterno die)·, 3, 18, n. (nudius tertius), below; R. Hirzel, Der Dialog, 1 (1895), 529, n. 3). Nor is the continuity interrupted, as in the case of the second book of the De Divinatione, by the insertion of a preface not closely related to the subject under discussion, though doubtless prompted by recent events (cf. Div. 2, 7). These considerations explain the rather abrupt ending of this book, in contrast to most of the books of Cicero's dialogues, yet paralleled by the third book of the De Finibus, the fourth of the Tusculans, and the first of the De Legibus.