Lucretius as a Student of Roman Religion Author(s): George Depue Hadzsits Source: Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological

Association, Vol. 49 (1918), pp. 145-160 Published by: The Johns Hopkins University Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/283000 . Accessed: 28/05/2013 16:12
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

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

The Johns Hopkins University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 93.38.142.82 on Tue, 28 May 2013 16:12:44 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

as a Student Vol. xlix] Lucretius of RomanReligion as a Student X. - Lucretius of RomanReligion

BY PROFESSOR GEORGEDEPUE HADZSITS
UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA

I45

LUCRETIUS,as a protestant against religious and ethical conditions in Rome, espoused a system of religious and ethical philosophy in which he doubtless thought there resided a universal validity. Preaching this philosophy with the earnest zeal of an evangelist,the dissenterbelieved that adoption of his highestideals of worshipand conduct would accomplish a revolutionin religious thoughtand a reformation in political and social life. Yet while the de Rerum Natura abounds in evidences of Ireaction to the poet's physical and ethical environment illustrations that illumine evidencesfoundin the innumerable a natural philosophy and exalt an ethical aspiration- still in matters of religionthe Lucretian exposition manifestsa haughty scorn of the phenomenologyof Roman life.2 No
I

E.g.

40-3,

103-45,

159-214, 920,

255,

455, 464, 494, 7i6, 739, 805, 896,

28I, 306, 312, 315, 3I6, 347, 360, 405, 935, 970, 985; II, i-6i, 80-14I, I84-215,

263, 37, 323, 349, 38I-97, 398-407, 408-43, 444-77, 478-52I, 522-68, 66i, 757, 766, 795, 825, 870, 927, 1030, 1150 f.; II, 48-93, 148, I52-60, I65-75,
i9i,

894,

912,

I96, 38I f., 384, 445-58, 459-525, 598, 685, 7I3-40, 776-829, 832, 870, 930, 978 f., 1024, 1053, 1077 f.; IV, 75 f., IIO-28, 176 f., i8o, 387, 391,

400, 404, 414, 420, 426, 443, 468, 514, 524, 577, 584, 683, 722 f., 777-8I7, 926V, 35, 43 f., 104-9, 208, 252, 282, 305, 311, 326, 397, 460, 478, I038, 1121-40; 507, 5I6, 521, 6o8, 622, 656, 663, 669, 68i, 727, 737, 804, 849, 862, 877

999 f., ioo8,I 063,

107I,

1073,

io8o,

1105

f., ii60 f., 1241,

128I

f., I302,

f., 900,
1339,

doubtless employed in Lucretius' literarysources; many on the other hand a personalexperience; theydeservespecial studywhich clearlyseem to reflect mightthrowlighton Lucretius'life.
2I,

I398, 1408, I410, 1423; VI, I09, 469, 470-8, 6oo, 617, 626, 639, 7I2, 738, 750, 848, 86o, 906, 936-58, IOIl, I044, IIOO. Many of these ilustrations were

1-43,

54, 69, IOO, I02, ii6,

120,

173, 199,

228, 250, 739, 925, 932, II17,

946,
1154,

970;

II, 352, 417, 439, 472, 58i-66o

I037

(637, 652),

705, 991, 998, 1iioi

ii68;
1007,

III, 25, 37, 22I, 327, 432, 628, 978 f.; IV, I, 7, 21, 38, I70, 58o f., 731 f;, f., I236; V, I4, 73, II2, II4, I17, 259, 308, 400, 52I, 655, 737, 793,
1091,

86, 94,

878, 897, 915, 949, 962, 980, 996,

154, 251, 293, 38I,

1126, 417,

I156, ii6o f., 1362,

750, 752, 759,

I402;

VI, 75,

387, 40I,

4I9,

762, 764, 1076,

This content downloaded from 93.38.142.82 on Tue, 28 May 2013 16:12:44 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

I46

Depue Hadzsits George

[i9i8

expositionof the Epicurean theoryof the nature of the gods, no Epicurean refutationof a supposedly false theological interpretationof nature, no definitionof the Epicurean conceptionsof worshipand prayerwere under any obligation to dwell upon the facts of orthodoxRoman beliefsand practices in these directions. But an undue concentrationof mind upon Greek literary sources of inspirationprevented an adequate appreciation,on Lucretius' part, of the Roman religionof his own day. of the true natureI of the gods rest Lucretius' descriptions absolutely upon his Greek originals,whom he followedwith exact fidelity. We are in a genuine Greek literaryatmosphere throughoutthese numerouspassages. There is (probably) not a quality attributedto the gods forwhich he did not find full authorityin Epicurus' own compositionsor in other Epicurean sources. The Lucretian account corresponds, point for point, with all known genuine Epicurean theology. Lucretius' detachment fromthe Roman religious environmentis almost complete. There is scarcely any of the many noble attributeswhich in time had recognition become associated with the Roman Pantheon and which were fullyrecognizedin Roman cult and ceremony.4 Jupiter figuresin two passages; but these are passages of intense, bitter irony,revealing a god of might and terror,guilty of cowardice, folly, and crime, blind to justice, and the irrato Greek rereferences I have included here, forcompleteness, 1272, 1276. of thesepassages is discussedlater. ligionalso; the significance 3 I, 1-43, 8o-ioi, IOI5; III, I8-25, 978 f.; iv, II, 434, 646-51, I090-II04;
580-94, 73 f-; 878 f., II6l-1240, I68, 172, 178, 195-234, 309-IO, Cf. Diog. L. x, 77, 379-422. Epicurea, pp. 59-60), passim; Diog. L. x, I39 (K6pLac A6atu,I); 123 (Usener, Gomperz (i866), pp. 85, 88, 122, I23, I27, I28, Philodemus,7repl Eo-ej#eias, Liv. xxviii, ii; Cic. Div. ii, i9, Usener,Ep. (I887), pp. 232-244; 136, I45; 45; Sen. N.Q. II, 46, Lact. Inst. iii, 17, 8; Cic. N.D. i, 8, i8-i, 20, 56. In these
82-90,

v, I-54,

146-55,

i65,

1387;

VI, 56, 64, 69, 7I-4,

passages Lucretius' opinion as to the nature of the gods is expressedeither and contrast. or by implication directly 4 The Venus invocationaffords a notable exception; yet even here thereis of Roman vs. Greekelements. no suggestion

This content downloaded from 93.38.142.82 on Tue, 28 May 2013 16:12:44 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Vol. xlix] Luc.vetius as a Student of RomanReligion

I47

of his own holy temples- a partial presentional destroyer tation of the case, surely, which did not later escape the ironicalobservationof Lactantius. The numerous eloquent passages that vehementlydeny a divine creation, condition,and control of the universeI are of Roman directassaults upon some of the veryfundamentals religious belief and organization, which needs must have passed away with the surrenderof an ancient theological interpretationof nature. Without minimizing the importance, to the advance of science, of the courage with which Lucretius releases nature fromthe controlof divine powers, it none the less is true that Lucretius' expositionis grounded, first and last, upon Greek sources, Epicurean, Stoic, and Peripatetic. It is not only from these that he derived his inspiration,but it is also to these that he virtually limited his attention. Lucretius' presentation of Epicurean arguments can be paralleled either in fragments of Epicurus or in Stoic-Epicurean controversy. I do not find a single original idea, unless Lucretius employs a novel one in the picture of the baby's utter helplessness at birth as proof that the world was so full of fault that thought of divine protectionwas excluded as utterlyincredibile. Epicurus was unalterably opposed to divination 6; Lucretius' mention of the Roman augural college is purely incidental.7 Mention of the Tuscan rolls8 merely betrays Lucretius' failure as a real student of Roman religious organization. Lucretius' referenceto the Fetial priestsI is
(prayer and symbolism),146-58; II, I67-83, 58I-660, I090-1104, 580-94, 731 f., 823-57, 1223-80; V, 55-90, 110-45, 146-94, 878 f., II6I-1240; I95-234, VI, 43-95, 379-422, 750 f. Cf. Diog. L. x, I42 (K6pLaL A6bu,XI, XII, xiii), passim; Usener,Ep., pp. 245-257; Diog. L. X, 76 (Usener,pp. 27-28), x, 96 (Usener, pp. 41-42); Cic. Acad. II, 38, 120 (with note in Reid's ed.); Plut. Mor. 923 A; Verg. Aen. iv, 205 f.; Sen. N.Q. II, 42. See G. F. Sch6mann, Opuscula academica ("De Epicuri theologia"),I871; Fr. Picavet,De Epicuro,novaereligionis auctore (i888); P. Decharme, La critique des traditions religieuses H. Schmidt,Veteres (I904); quomodo philosophi iudi.
5 I, I-43 II48-74; IV,

caverint deprecibus (I907).

6 Usener,Ep., pp. 261-262.

7 vi,

86.

8 VI, 38I.

9 I,

968 f.

This content downloaded from 93.38.142.82 on Tue, 28 May 2013 16:12:44 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

I48

George Depue Hadzsits

[I9I8

veiled in a poetic passage of great beauty. Pontiffsand haruspices, Vestal virgins and all the elaborate Roman machineryof worshipmight,for all of the Lucretian verses, never have existed. Festivals, too, are ignored unless one passage 10 conveys a concealed allusion to the Vinalia. Although this strikingavoidance of application of Epicurean theoryto Roman cults, which to the minds of Cicero 1] and Varro seemed central and of supreme importancein Roman religion,may have in part been dictated by discretion,it was, I believe, in large part due to a zealous exploitationof Greektheory. Lucretius' claim to originalityin this respect seems as slight as that of the Epicurean Torquatus.'2 Lucretius was obviously content with the iconoclast's greater prize of destroyingbelief in a Providentiaupon which the whole system of ius divinumwas built. Altars and altar and gifts,temples,shrines,and images fires, groves,sacrifices in the poem, but appear as a poor symbolof gods, all figure ism, all too feebleand frailto expressdivine immortality. The only gods appearingunder Roman names 13 are Venus, Neptune, Ceres, Liber, Summanus, Flora, Volturnus, Saturnus,Matuta, Faunus, and Iupiter. On the other hand, the Greek Acherusianquarters,the Pythia, Phoebus, Pallas, Bacchus, Magna Mater, the Nymphs, Satyrs, and Pan, Calliope, Greek myths of the Chimaera, Scylla, the Centaurs, Cerberus, the Giants, the Golden Age, and Phaethon part in explanationof the Epicurean play a farmoreimportant it is not the Italian Venus at all but the system.14 Besides, in the invocation, Greek Aphroditewho appears resplendent
10 II6 II6o

f.; cf. Ov. Fast. IV, 877 f. on the Vinalia, and goi f. on the Robi-

galia.

11N.D. I, 2, 3 f.; I, 44, 122 f. 12 Cic. Fin. I, 14, I6, 45, 6I, 64, 65, 7I, and especially28. 3 I, 1-43, 173, 228; II, 439, 472, 637, 652; III, 221; IV, 580 f., 737; V, 14, 52I, 655, 739 f.,897, 962; VI, 387, 40I, I076. 14 I, II5, III, 25, 22I, 624-34, 200, 739, 925, 946; ii, 6oo f.,705, II54; I20, 978 f.; IV, I, 2I, 138, I70, 58o f.,73I f.; V, I-40, II2, II7, 400, 793-82I, 878 f., 750, 762, 764. II26; VI, 94, I54, 25I, 292(?), 912, 915, 949, 996, I09I(?),

This content downloaded from 93.38.142.82 on Tue, 28 May 2013 16:12:44 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Vol.xlix] Lucretius as a Student of RomanReligion

I49

despite the Roman touch of Aeneadum genetrix. It is not the Roman Saturnus but the Greek Cronos whom Lucretius, despite the Latin name, had in mind. It is a Graeco-Roman pantheon that Lucretius recognized as regnant in Rome. Epicurus is the peer of Ceres, Liber, and Hercules; likewise, Neptune, Ceres, and Bacchus are associated without discrimination,as also Faunus with Greekgoat-footedSatyrs, Nymphs, and Pan, quite in the best fashion of Ovid or of Nigidius Figulus.'5 It is toward a Greek religious world that Lucretius, under the compellingspell of Epicurus, was turned,'6and it is slight wonder that he made no specific study of Roman religious conditions. Admiration for Epicurus resultedin adoration and deification; ardentproclamation of Epicurus' divinity17 introducedanother Greek factor, namely, that of apotheosis,into the religiousworld in which Lucretiuslived and thought. It is Athens,ratherthan Rome, a panegyricas the worthyhome of Epicurus,"8 that provoked. the true savior of suffering humanity. Lucretius' belief in Epicurus mounted into the realm of faith, and his unquesdevotionto Epicurus resulted,even,in some erroneous tioning conclusionsabout Roman religion. The brief Lucretian discussion of the origins of false
15 Cf. also Verg. Aen., and Nep. Hann. II: 'Pater meus,' inquit, 'Hamilcar . . . Carthaginelovi optimomaximohostias immolavit.' 16 I, ii8, 124, 464 f.; IV, 548, 903, II64, ii66; V, 326, 507, 6I5, 662, 866; The following are fromGreekliterary VI, 298, 424, 6o6, 750, 786, 908, iii6. sources(cf.notes in Munro,Merrill,and Giussani): I, I-43, 6ii, 635 f., 705 f., 830 f.; II, 6oo, 629, 635, 99I; III, I8-24, 44, 45, 37I, 629; iv, 823-57, I223-62; V, 226, 405, 622, 878-9I4, II94, I204; VI, I7, 26, 93, 392, 399, 754. These passages, in additionto those given in n. I4, on Greekgods and myths, clearly were: LucretiusknewHomer,Heraclitus, show how great the Greekinfluences Empedocles, Anaxagoras,Aristotle, Plato, Hippocrates, Euripides, the Stoics, and Thucydides,at least; Democritusand Epicurus werenot his sole sources. Cf. J. Woltjer,Lucretiiphilosophiacumfontibus comparata(I877); this book ought to be rewritten. 17 III, I-30 (I5); V, I-54 (6, 8, I3, I9, 5I); VI, I-42 (6, 8). Cf. I, 729-33, 736-39; II, 99I f.; m, I44, 307-22, 37I; v, 622; also praise of Epicurus, I, 62 f., III, I042. 18 VI,

init.

This content downloaded from 93.38.142.82 on Tue, 28 May 2013 16:12:44 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

I50

George Depue Uadzsits

[I9I8

religiousbeliefsfollowsthe text of Epicurus without dissent, for Epicurus had discussed the importantpart played by dreams in the genesis of religiousevolution19 and doubtless natural had also recognizedthe significance of awe-inspiring phenomena. Lucretius truly followsin the footstepsof his master, even in the enumerationof such phenomena as the regularsuccession of night and day, the wondersof the sun and moon, of meteors,clouds, rain, snow, hail, thunder,and lightning. His dependenceupon his predecessoris complete, but, more than that,the explanationas applied to the origins of Roman religion is, in part at least, incorrect. As all students of Roman religionknow, the numina were in the main suggestedby, associated with, and located near - not heavenly portentsat all - but those loci of home and field that were of most immediate importance to domestic and discussion on the part countrylife. The absence of further of Lucretius is all the more remarkable,in view of the fact that the Epicurean Philodemus and Velleius were aware of
19 V, II6I-I240. U eKTWY KaTa 7ovs Cf. Sext. adv. Math. IX, 25 f.,'E7rKOVpOS E'VOLav eaO7raKevaL 0eoi. Wya'XWv -yap v7rvovs OavTcaLwz' or'erua ToVS adv0pC6VrovS o-rvoUs 7pO7rLrT6VTwv 'rA\aov Kal adv9pw7rop6pqv, KaTa Tobs 0-0, eCowV,,
fVLOL U e' TrV TLVas TOLO0TOVS Oeois avOpwroL6poovs. Kai racs aX79eIaLS v&7r6apXeLv a7rcp3acroV Kal evJraKTOV TCV oOpcLJJL KaV10V rapaoyvoyevo bao T'V 7p7v 7ats TWV Oez' &7-LvolaLSah7r7aTr7s 7ye-yovgvaL prpTov; Cic. N.D. I, I4, 36, Cum

tollit id est originemdeorum, (Zeno) interpretatur, vero Hesiodi Oeo-yoviav, deorum; neque enim Jovem neque omninousitatas perceptasquecognitiones in deorumhabet neque Vestam neque quemquam, qui ita appelletur, Junonem haec docet atque mutisperquandam significationem sed rebusinanimis numero,
tributa nomina;
A7eTe(poLS cepcwVO's 7raO'/7aT Te Kal

Sextus, ib. 24,

ol o7TpwV raXaLoL oVV65ovs

'p.vTEs TrV 'XOV

-yIp,

q577ot [,A77A6KpL7OS],
apOVT-S eKhXetie (Kav Ka'l Xvb (V 5Lardrrovros X, KcL TeX'vfS

TJ

eV TOLS

VOpUS7rVW, KaOd7rep
7Te

dorpa7r&s

Kal

Oeobs ol'6teVOL roi5rwv alTrovs

/ieTe($bpoLS CavroS Kal TcrdLS Kal /Opa'V Kal TpO7r'V raiav rep /7'Te 7o1TOVOLS XELTOvpyoVVTos

eTvaL ;
Kal

Diog. L. x, 76,
oe

56 EL1IaaToUvro, T'V> Oi7 0V'LTTOLXXa

E'KXeLl/LV Kat dVacTO7vX V Kai -yevegoOac Kal

5OLV KaiL Ta

T7LVOS VOtdeCLV /aKapL6rT7Ta fVLCa Kal Atq5aA,) 's KaOd raap'

X 6LCaT-

&/Ca r' v KacOd

fXOVTOs

/eTr& doftap0ias;

97,

ETL TE

repLMov,

'LV

V TUXvVTX6vV
rpaXO'eTacL, 9'y9vero

-yVvTrat, Xatq3cavgo-Ow onar'peioO &7 a

i Odea e60S
7rV T&a

7rpos TcaVTa /laKapt6T'7TL. -raL,

rpoaazy0W,cXX' A'

aXenroip'y'qoS a

Ical {V

el 7oiro

1 TC

/eTeLp'V 0a4/a-

aclTLOXo'yca

caused false notionsof God. fromthe beginning

tgvots. Epicurus doubtless supposed that the theoryof divine controlhad

AaraTaIC

rV XOv rrepTr

oU Ovarov

Tp67rov

This content downloaded from 93.38.142.82 on Tue, 28 May 2013 16:12:44 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

as a Student Vol. xlix] Lucretius of RomanReligion

i5i

the theoriesof Prodicus and Persaeus,20who actually came much closer to a correct explanation of the problem, as it for applied to Roman experience. But it was sufficient Lucretius to have learnedfromEpicurus that,false knowledge of the gods had come to man froma fearful, ignorantobservaand terrorizing tion of awe-inspiring natural phenomena,confirmedby the falsity of misleading dreams. At the same time this at once constitutedfor him a sweepingcondemnation of the Roman religioussystemas being foundedon error and perpetuatedby superstition. Lucretius' statementabout the birth of the Magna Mater 21 concept betrays no independent investigationbeyond the Epicurean limitations, and fails to reveal any real knowledgeof the developmentof the god-idea in Rome. Nor does he even mentionthe important ontologicalargumentwhich appea'rsin the letterof Epicurus to Menoeceus, and which is repeated in Cicero's de Natura Deorum.22 This was the fundamental Epicurean argument
20 Cic. N.D. I, 42, ii8: Quid? Prodicus Cius, qui ea, quae prodessent hominumvitae, deorumin numerohabita esse dixit,quam tandemreligionem reliquit? Sext. adv. Math. ix, i8: lp659KO9 O6 Kedos iXt60 077 Kal a2ex'vP-v Kal

7roTrajLoS Kal 7raXaLol

KppVag Kal KaO6XOv 7rdVTa Tr& WeXoUVTa TOV gloV '/iCiV ol Oeovs ev6Uo-av o& Tr'V acr avcTov CbXePav, KaOd7rep AL-Y67rrTLOL TOV NeXov - Kal MIL TOVJTO TOV /L&V dpTOV A7'7iL'TpaV KX'q0jvaL, TOV U OlVOVAL6vo-oV, U wp
gKaco-ToV. fOO-eL50ca,

TOb
TwV

TO 7repZ

Philod.

76, II2. Cic. N.D. I, I5, 38: At Persaeus, eiusdem Zenonis auditor eos dicit esse habitos deos, a quibus magna utilitas ad vitae cultum esset inventa, ipsasque res utiles et salutares deorum esse vocabulis nuncupatas, ut ne hoc quidem diceret, illa inventa esse deorum, sed ipsa
divina.
Ta

KacL X77 TrY e6Xp77OTo6V7Jp HoaLoTOV, Evioe/3eias, Gomperz (i866), pp. 71, 75,

Philod. pp. 75-76:

)'LVC50KWPV

llepoaios deois

/7Oev v7rap a6VToO t

TprpovTa Kal HpOUiKOV

U 57M6s eGT-.L . . acOav1wPv TO 8at16vLov, 8raV eV TrJ repl TpV Oe2v X9y rLveoa Ta 7rep

cbeXoGvTa eTw r

pains to analyze this or discover its bearingsupon Roman religion. 21 II, 58i-66o. Lucretiusdoes not engage in controversy, eitherhere or in v, ii6i f.; he is entirely satisfied withEpicureanism; Greeksourcesare before him. 22 Diog. L. x, 123: 7rp&Top AtV TOV Oeov P4ov &0OapTov Kal taKdptov voziodwv, &)S i KOLVP TOU Oeov v6oqts 7reeypd6. Cic. N.D. I, i6, 43: Solus enim vidit

Terxpas, 6s AtArTpa Kai At6vvooov-a Stoic argument(Cic. N.D. ii, 60-62, III, 4I, Leg. ir, 23), which of course Epicureanismrejected; Lucretius took no

ye'ypaAeva,a

vevopioOca Kal TeTrL/770OaL7rp&TOV, KaclT Tr V7rO TaJTa TObs e'p6OVTas ? TpO/AS ? 0 iKras T&S &rXxas

This content downloaded from 93.38.142.82 on Tue, 28 May 2013 16:12:44 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

I52

George Depue Hadzsits

[I9I8

which recognized the universal element of the-religiousinstinct in all mankind23; but this Lucretius,ignored in favor of the two more special and particularexplanations,satisfied with these because they bore the stamp of his great predecessor's approval. As Plutarch pointed out,24the supreme end of Epicurus' argumentationabout religionwas to dispel the fear which he evidentlyregarded as a veritable laceratingirony innate in orthodox religion's brutal fact. The same passion possessed Lucretius, whose keen insight cut throughsham and conventionality. The theme is one that recurs constantly in all Epicurean literature. No expositionof Epicurus made a more profoundappeal to the sensitivemind of Lucretius.25 It was fear that begot religion,and fear pervaded the whole historyof cults, ritual, ceremonies,and prayers. Fear that power, fear of their cruelty and the gods possessed infinite and ubiquiwrath,continuedfearof an omnipresent vengeful tous exerciseof theircontrolover all the forcesof nature had
ipsa impressisset primumesse deos, quod in omnium animis eorumnotionem quod non habeat sine natura. quae est enimgens aut quod genus hominum, quandam deorum? quam appellat 7rp6Xo/a Epicurus, doctrinaanticipationem sine qua nec intellegi id est anteceptam animo rei quandam informationem, vim atque utilitatem quicquam nec quaeri nec disputaripotest. cuius rationis ex illo caelesti Epicuri de regula et iudicio volumineaccepimus. 23 Lucretiusmay have plannedto elaborateon thisas wellas on otherthemes But Stoics also held the view that universalbeliefwas the strongest (V, I55). proofof the existenceof gods; cf. note in Mayor's ed. of Cic. N.D. I, i6, 43, and passages quoted there; also N.D. II, 5, I2. TOr # B: erel U T7-OS zv ToOVwepl Oe6iVX67ov ['ErLKoVPY] 24 Mor. I092
TOLS
o0vo

/oo3eZoOaL o6Pv dXXI& ra6oaoOaL ' V TOLP PO vOOOOVL 5XWS

e1

TraparTTOIdVOvsi, VOE V PP17

3e/367epov

ollauL

73O0'

3XabrrovTpra /Le/LacO7K6oCV. Kal rapdirreofat

Ib.

Vi7rdpXCeV I09I

TO

dX7yev

KaL

fooeZfOat

r& Oea

ro?s epVAtoV KaK6V, II, 44, 59,

E: 77

TO6TwV pd7rof5v7' /laK&pLOV KacLt7Xwr-6V. 25 I, 52-3, 62-79, 8o-ioi, I02-35, I46-58, I040, 33-4I, I090-II04, 365, VI, II50-74; 43-95, III, 379-422, I-30, I223-80; 750 3I-93, 734, 73I

932,

945;

58i-660,
I9-20,

622-34,

978-I023; I95-234,

IV,

Cf. the passages on the f., I2I2. fromfear. Cf. freedom and explicit the implied with the gods, of truenature also Cic. N.D. I, 20, 54, Acad. II, 38, I2I, T.D. I, 48, Fin. I, 5, I4; Liv. XXI, 4, 9 (on Hannibal); Liv. I, I9, 5 and Ov. Fast. III, 278 (on Numa); Diog. L. x,
II6I-I240;
I42

f. (760),

V, 55-90,

IIO-45,

878

f.,

(K6ptat A6at),

78-79-

This content downloaded from 93.38.142.82 on Tue, 28 May 2013 16:12:44 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

vol. xlix] Lucretius as a Studentof Roman Religion

I53

crushed mankind to a conditionof intolerableservitudeand of base humility. Constant fear of punishmentskept the gods in power as harsh taskmasterstoward whom the only recognized sentimentwas that of dread. This fear of the gods - the themeof wonderful poetry,charged with deepest Lucretian passion - represents,however, an elaboration of the thesis of Epicurus, of whom Cotta said 26 that he knew no one who himselfshowed a greaterdread of death and of the gods. However that may be, it was our emotionstoward death and the gods which Epicureanism particularlymaintained must be freeof fear. ThseLucretian developmentof the theme far exceeds the originalin violence, but is written without due recognitionof the truth of religious conditions in Rome in the firstcenturyB.C. Lucretius' explanation of conventionalRoman pietas27 is quite correctin its insistence of details of cult. A real Roman upon proper performance political and religious, incidentally appears background,28 throughthe veil of his fiercetirades, as allusions to groves, shrines,festivals,the veiled head of the priest,vows, Roman consuls,legions,fasces,and references to numina and augural divisions show; but these are all of minor importance and quite negligible in a picture of a terror-ridden religious community. Lucretius did not distinguish, as did Cicero,betweenreligio and superstitio 29; to the latter of these concepts there con26 Cic. N.D. I, 3I, 86: Ille vero deos esse putat, nec quemquam vidi, qui magis ea, quae timenda esse negaret,timeret, mortem dico et deos. quibus mediocres hominesnon ita valde moventur, his ille clamat omniummortalium mentesesse perterritas. 27 V, II98-I
28

203.

See references in n. 2 (on Roman background). 29 Cic. N.D. I, I 7, 45: Si nihilaliud quaereremus, nisi ut deos pie coleremus et ut superstitione satis erat dictum (speech of Velleius). lb. 1, liberaremur, 20, 55: Sequitur .aUUTLCrK vestra, quae Latine divinatio dicitur, qua tanta imbueremursuperstitione, si vos audire vellemus,ut haruspices, augures,harioli, vates, conjectoresnobis essent colendi (Velleius). Cf. ib. I, 42, II7: Nam superstitione, quod gloriari soletis, facile est liberari,cum sustulerisomnem vim deorum (Cotta's reply); ib. II, 28, 71, Cultus autem deorumest optimus

This content downloaded from 93.38.142.82 on Tue, 28 May 2013 16:12:44 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

I54

GeorgeDepue Hadzsits

[1918

tinued to cling all the evil associations of a remote past, which even an enlightenedand sophisticatedcivilization did not whollydiscard. But while religio,as Petroniuscorrectly thought,30 originatedin fear, the long history of organized Roman religionhad determinedthe relations between gods and men by means of which each was reasonablysecure. It was not only the Epicurean gods who were withoutanger,it was not only the Epicurean worshiperwho obtained high rewards of peace.3" Lucretius evoked the powers of evil existingin superstitio and dormant in the sub-consciousness of Roman society where, doubtless, there continued to survive the hobgoblinsof an ancient instinctand the spectreof
fear.32

But not the slightestsuggestionof the affection and love that many a cult and festivalcalled forth, appears in the de Rerum Natura.33 The Lares and Penates, the Genius, the Vesta worshipof home and state are not so much as mentioned; the cult of gods such as Saturn, Castor, and Jupiter Optimus Maximus, of goddesses such as Minerva and Diana, festivalslike the Terminalia, the Parilia, the Saturnalia, are absolutely ignored, although the finer and more inspiring
pietatis,ut cos semper plenissimusque idemque castissimusatque sanctissimus pura, integra,incorruptaet mente et voce veneremur. non enim philosophi etc. a religione separaverunt, solum,verumetiammajoresnostrisuperstitionem 30 Fr. 27 Buecheler: ardua caelo Primusin orbe deos fecittimor, Fulmina,cum caderentdiscussaque moeniaflammis Athos.... Atque ictus flagraret Profecit vitiumiamque erroriussitinanis AgricolasprimosCereridare messishonores, Palemque Palmitibusplenis Bacchum vincire, Pastorumgaudere manu.

Cf.e.g.Liv. I,

of theRoman People, 240). case of Scipio (Fowler, ReligiousExperience this. 32 The Lemuria,e.g., illustrate 33The Venus invocationremainsthe exception.

31See the finechaptersin Plut. Mor. iioi C ff., on joy in worship; cf. the

I9,

Aen.VIII, 347f.(andServ.). 5; Ov. Fast.III, 278; Verg.

This content downloaded from 93.38.142.82 on Tue, 28 May 2013 16:12:44 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Vol.xlix] Luoretius as a Student of RomanReligion

I55

aspects of these cults and festivals entered into the life of the people in many a way to win deep regardand esteem.34 To be sure the divinationidea penetratedthe whole fabric of the Roman state and society, and crises in the national life broughtto the surfaceevidences of religiousalarm. But "in the fashionable and artificiallife of Rome of the first centuryB.C. disbeliefwas natural" 35and the ancient disaster that had befallen M. Claudius Marcellus 36 was not credited by the thinkingRoman to offendedgods. Lucretius does not condemn priesthoods that were corrupt, for their corruption37; neglect of many Roman deities and festivals is not mentioned with approval or rejoicing; the neglect of prodigies, auspices, and priesthoods is not recorded with satisfaction. The glimpse we have of a flourishingstate 38 is not in accord with our knowledgeof crumbling religion temples and abandoned sacrifices. It is just in a period of decline,whenVarro fearedthat the gods mightperishthrough
34Lares and Penates: Fest. p. 253, Cic. Leg. II, 27, A. De Marchi, II culto privatodi Roma antica, I, 27 f. and 55 f. Genius: Censor. 3, i-S, Serv. ad Geor. III, 4I 7, Hor. Epist.II, I, I44, II, 2, I87 f.,De Marchi, op. cit.I, 69 f. Vesta: Fowler,op. cit. 92, Ov. Fast. vi (on the Vestalia),etc. Saturn and the Saturnalia: Macr. Sat. I, 7, 26, I, IO, i8; Liv. xxii, I, I9; Mart. XIV, 70, I; Plin. Ep. II, I7, 24. Castor, patron of the equites: Helbig, Herm. XL, IOI f., Dion. H. VI, I3,4. Jupiter OptimusMaximus and theLudi Romani,triumphi, the togavirilis ceremony: Ov. Trist.I, 3, 29 f. Minerva: Ov. Fast. III, 82I f., Fest. p. 333. Diana: Varro,L.L. v, 43, Hor. C.S. Terminalia: Ov. Fast. ii, 639 f. (Fowler, Roman Festivals). Parilia: Ov. Fast. IV, 720 f. (Fowvler, op. cit.). See Wissowa, Rel. u. Kult. der Rdmer(I9I2), p. 57, on the relation of templesto the people and theirorganizations: Ceres,Liber,and Libera, and the plebs; the AventineMinerva and the artifices; the AventineDiana and slaves; the Dioscuri and the equites; Mercuryand the mercatores;Jupiter, Juno,Minerva, and the wholepeople. 35 Jno. Masson, Lucretius, Epicurean and Poet (I907), 40I. 36 V, I233 and Munro's note. 37 Fowler, Rel. Exp. of theRom. People, ch. xv and xvI, Wissowa, op. cit. pp. 70-72, Carter, The Religionof Numa (I906), ch. iv. Cf. e.g. Dio, LIV, 36, !; Tac. Ann. III, 58; Suet. Aug. 3I (flamen); Cic. Div. I, 25 (auspicia), N.D. II, 3, 9; Liv. XLIII, I3, I; Cic. Leg. I, I2, 29 (pontifices); Varro, L.L. V, 84, VI, I9 (Falacer and Furrina); Hor. Carm. III, 6, I-4 (templa); Cic. Mur.27, Leg.II, 46 f. (sacraprivata). 38 V, ii6o f. (308 is an interesting contrast).

This content downloaded from 93.38.142.82 on Tue, 28 May 2013 16:12:44 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

I56

Depue Hadzsits George

[I9I8

protestant that the voice of the indignant man's indifference,39 of lowerreligio a spectre was raised against fancied frightful ing with dreadful mien from above upon mortals below.40 If Lucretius h.ad lived during the Augustan revival, his dog- to his mind wholly matic indictment of an institution wrong- would seem to us more reasonable. Howsoever valuable a clear enunciationof natural laws may be at any - to a contemporary educated time against a false theology, Roman the exalted praise of Epicurus for his conquest over religiomust have seemed somewhatbelated, to say the least, and appeared somewhatout of harmonywith the tendencies of the age. Lucretius' paradoxically exquisite account of the sacrifice of lphigenia,4' by which he undoubtedlymeant to satirize the religionof his own day, is as eloquent a passage as is to be found in the entirede Rerum Natura, closing with a line that expressesburningindignationand contempt. Yet if we reflectthat human sacrificein the name of religionwas unknown under the ancient Roman religiousor civil law,42the stingis somehowtaken out of a passage of intensebitterness. broughtabout many another It was not until Greekinfluences and degradation of Roman religiousinstitutransformation tions that human sacrificeswere allowed under the Roman ius divinum. Under the stressof the Punic wars 43this most un-Romanritewas carriedout. That thepracticelasted into but the rare and sporadic attested,44 the Empire is sufficiently to call forthsuch an extreme instances were not sufficient praccondemnationof Roman religionas would have befitted
39Aug. Civ. Dei, VI, 2: (Varro) dicit se timerene pereant(di) non incursu hostilised civiumneglegentia. 40 I, 62 f. versionof the 41 i, 8o-ioi. Cf. Jno. Masson, op. cit. 434 f., fora different Iphigeniaepisode. 42 owler,op. cit. pp. 33, 44, n. 28, pp. 107, 112, n. 30 (exceptionmade of a who was sacerto a god), n. 31; Wissowa,op. cit. p. 420 f. criminal 43 Liv. xxII, 57, 6;- Cic. Font. 31. 44 Fowler, op. cit. 320. Cf. Dio, XLIII, 24, 4; Plin. N.H. xxvin, 12-13; Plut. Marcell.3; Plin. N.H. xxx, I2.

This content downloaded from 93.38.142.82 on Tue, 28 May 2013 16:12:44 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Vol. xlixj Lucretius as a Student of RomanReligion

157

tices among the Taurians, the Britons, the Gauls, or the Carthaginians. Howsoever cruel the practice inherently was and howsoever repellant to an Epicurean, whose gods under no circumstancescould condone such an act, Lucretius was, models than by religious I believe,moreinfluenced by literary him the theme,45 if he did practice. Greek tragedyfurnished not find the suggestionin Epicurus. The latter we cannot prove, though we may surmiseit. There is 'deep irony' in the use of the Roman formula felix faustusque,46 but this was not sufficient to make the myth of past ages applicable in any real sense or degree to the present. If Lucretius had been a real student of Roman religion,perse, we mighthave expected allusion at least to the ceremonyof devotio, to the or to Aricia. I doubt festival of the sacrariaArgeorum, whetherthe religiousrealitiesof his own day came sufficiently under his observation to provoke this satire of unparalleled fierceness.47It is a literary tourde forcethat was quite harmless with all of its lack of moderation. It provoked no known response. choice of the cult of Magna Mater to serve The surprising as the basis of an analysis for demonstrating the essentially natureof Roman cults and theology48 also seems to erroneous illustrateLucretius' dependence upon Epicurus and his lack of a' thorough acquaintance with Roman religion. Why avoid the whole body of genuine Roman cults and ceremonies,if Lucretius was interestedin disprovingthe validity of the religionof his own day? Such an avoidance is, to say the least, striking; the seeming consistencyof such a procedure gives weight to the belief that it was intentional. If Lucretius thought of the Magna Mater cult as typical of Rome, he was extraordinarily wide of the mark. We need
45 Eur. I.A. iIoO f.,Aesch.Ag. I98 f. See also Merrill's note on Lucr. i, 84 fordiscussionof paintings(cf. Lucr. III, 629, on paintings). 46 Cic. Div. I,'45, 102; Liv. x, 8, 12; Ov. Fast. II, 27. 47 It is to be taken as evidenceno more than such passages as Ov. Fast. m,

342, 857. 48 II, 58I-660.

This content downloaded from 93.38.142.82 on Tue, 28 May 2013 16:12:44 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

I58

GeorgeDepue Hadzsits

[I9I8

not attributesuch a grossblunder to him; but other reasons are deducible which may explain his choice of the Cybele cult. Lucretius accepted the Graeco-Romanreligion of his day as the established religionof Rome, and made no effort to distinguish the genuine Roman element. It was the Graeco-Romancharacterover against which he set the whole systemof his Epicurean philosophyof religion. The Romans characterof this took particularcare to keep up the foreign cult.49 Lucretius probably had personal knowledge of the Megalesia,50 and he acknowledges his Greek sources of informationfor explanation of all of the details of worship.5" "In Greece she (Cybele) early became all but completely blended with Rhea, and is not clearly distinguishablefrom the GreekMother exceptwhen she is designatedby an Asiatic name or mentionedin connectionwith Attis." 52 That there should appear, in the de Rerum Natura, an atomic explanation of the Earth as the mother of human and animal life, as the source of all vegetation,was almost inevitable.53 In religion,the goddess Magna Mater repreof sented,betterthan any otherdivinity,the false deification the Earth as the source of manifold bounteous products. Magna Mater's cult, togetherwith that of the god of the was the most complete illustration heavens and lightnings, of a false theological doctrine. But the Great Mother's identificationwith Aphrodite was a furtherGreek recommendation,while her kinshipwith the Roman Ceres, Tellus, and Ops 54 indicates the opportunitiesthat existed for Lucretiusto make anotherchoice,whichhe sedulouslyavoided. Even so, the orgiasticcharacterof the cult must have been
70. (I908), Festivals Roman 49Fowler, 50 I.e., if he lived in Rome (cf. Duff,Literary of Rome[1909], 279). History 51 U, 6oo; cf. Ellis on Cat. 63 (also Merrill'sedition). 52 Showerman, oftheGods (1901), 297. The GreatMother 63 I, 250, 629; II, 991 f., 1117 (natura creatrix); V, 259-60, 795-6, 821, 1362, 1402 (terrammatrem). These passages clearly show how stronga hold the seealsoI, 21, 328, V, 77, 107, VI, 31. imagination; ideahadon Lucretius' 54 Showerman, op. cit. 297.

This content downloaded from 93.38.142.82 on Tue, 28 May 2013 16:12:44 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Vol. xlix]

as a Student Lucretius of RomanReligion

I59

particularlyrevoltingto an Epicurean whose chief concern in life and in religionwas a placid and serene freedomfrom disturbance. Roman cults offeredat least that character of dignityand reposeforwhichEpicurean philosophystrove.55 Nevertheless,in the choice of Magna Mater Lucretius was influenced, despite seemingappearances, by trulyEpicurean ethical considerations. Magna Mater appeared genial and benignant56 to the Roman imagination, and her cult, in spite of its violentfeatures, led to a state of repose that must have commendeditselfto Epicurean ways of thinking. The means were of less importancethan the end,57 and the "majestic description of the Cybele cult - beneet eximiedisposta -reveals the profoundinfluenceof the nobler elements of the ceremonialupon the aestheticnature of Lucretius." We find Lucretius followingEpicurus so closely in other religiouspassages that we wonder whether.even in this particular, too, the great master was not exerting a special influenceupon his disciple. In his will Epicurus stated 58 that his deed of giftswas deposited in the temple of Cybele, which is too extraordinary a statement to pass over unobserved,and may suggestan interestin the cult that we have not properlyappreciated. "Without conscious deviation from the teaching of his
66 Cf. " Significance ofWorshipand PrayeramongtheEpicureans,"T.A.P.A. xxxix (I908), 73 f56 Showerman, op.cit. 323-328; Verg.,Aen. IX, 77-122 (especially); Claud. XV, 120, 128, XX, 279-303; even Ov. Fast. iv, 179 f. I draw a distinction betweenMagna Mater herself and the Attisstory. 57 See the articlereferred to in n. 55, and, in particular,the mentalreservations Epicureans made in participating in establishedritual. We cannot, of course,tell how far Lucretius was a participantor merelyan observer. Cf. Sen. Ep. 66, i8: Poteram respondere: Epicurus quoque ait sapientem,si in Phalaridos tauro peruratur, exclamaturum: 'dulce est et ad me nil pertinet': quid miraris, si ego paria bona dico unius in convivio iacentis,alterius inter tormentafortissime stantis? cum quod incredibilius est, dicat Epicurus, dulce esse torreri. 58 Diog. L. x, I6-17: Kar&c Tr8c 8313W,U T&r 4wTroO irdzra 4'LXo3A,wvou4dXV BarTOev Ka't TL/LOKpdTeL AnJLflTpIOV IIOToraqy
36a0v

KpdTOVs

KaT&

Trv'

bv Tq,

'ye-ypa,ugvv

eICTKaripy

(Usener, Ep. p. i65).

MIrTp

J dva-

This content downloaded from 93.38.142.82 on Tue, 28 May 2013 16:12:44 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

i6o

George Depue Hadzsits

[I9I8

master," 59 Lucretius, the dissenter, applied the religious philosophyof Epicurus, with all of its explicit and implicit condemnations,to the religious conditions of his own day, study of the evolutionof religion withoutmakingany further or of religious psychology. His inflexible,intolerant dogmatism brooked no such curb as might have been imposed by a sympatheticstudy of Roman gods and Roman ceremonial. The finalityof his master's ipse dixitilluminated his life and possessed his imaginationbeyond the possibility of recall. But in so far as the Lucretian philosophy of religion was a reproductionof an older inspiration derived fromearlierspringsand forcesof life,the attack upon Roman religious conditions became indirect and incorrect. If "preaching apathy with fervor"60 was not the greatest paradox in the life of Lucretius,'neitherwas the least the assurance that he spoke with more sanctity and with more certainty than the Pythia of Phoebus.6" The flaw in his with all of its mightypower and tremendous performance, was the inevitable result of a blind devotion to significance, the supposed perfectionof his master's philosophy of religion.62
59 Duff, op. cit. 275-302.
KaLXCWS 5o XOrV
a6iT7&

60 Ib. 302. 6I, 739; V, II2. 62Cf. Diog. L. x, 84 (Usener, Ep. p. 35), Epicurus' advice to Pythocles:
5L4XaXL3E, Kac

CV eV 7O T( /Kpi
TalTa

'' Kat PVK7JT6. We might pas aOcavJT6v a rpbs of a FriedrichNietzscheunder the contry to fancy the iconoclastic frenzy straintof the religiousspeculation of a Martin Luther as a partial parallel to the case of Lucretiusand Epicurus. ODV KaL T& TO7iTOL67OLS y-V4Y /YEX{Tc

55):

5i1 7rcTc

CTL T7v r 5L& 'A/A71S f 62X 6 U T&Sa 7T TEpLd5EVE p. T HPOOLTOVAj eoTELXc/aAEv; x, ii6 (Usener, 7rp6 IHp650Tov UOKXELS, yv ovevoov; X, I35 (Usener, p. 66): TOaTa

This content downloaded from 93.38.142.82 on Tue, 28 May 2013 16:12:44 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions