{"title":"Venus as Epicurean Nature","authors":"Chris Eckerman","doi":"10.33063/er.v113i.207","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Scholars have long recognized that Lucretius alludes to Empedocles’ four-root theory at DRN 1.1–5 and 1.6–9. And they have suggested that he, in doing so, shows respect for Empedocles, either as a philosophical predecessor, as a literary predecessor, or as both. I argue that Lucretius, in alluding to Empedocles’ four-root theory, deprecates Empedocles’ four-root theory. I suggest that Lucretius, employing polemical allusion, makes the argument that Epicurean physical theory gets the constituents of nature correct and that four-root theory does not (1–5) and that Epicurean atomic theory worsts four-root theory as a philosophical competitor (6–9). Thus, Lucretius opens his poem with a fervent endorsement of Epicurean physiologia. Lucretius’ attack against four-root theory may be read not only as an attack against Empedocles but also as an attack against several prominent philosophical schools that promoted four-root theory. ","PeriodicalId":160536,"journal":{"name":"Eranos - Acta philologica Suecana","volume":"27 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Eranos - Acta philologica Suecana","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33063/er.v113i.207","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Scholars have long recognized that Lucretius alludes to Empedocles’ four-root theory at DRN 1.1–5 and 1.6–9. And they have suggested that he, in doing so, shows respect for Empedocles, either as a philosophical predecessor, as a literary predecessor, or as both. I argue that Lucretius, in alluding to Empedocles’ four-root theory, deprecates Empedocles’ four-root theory. I suggest that Lucretius, employing polemical allusion, makes the argument that Epicurean physical theory gets the constituents of nature correct and that four-root theory does not (1–5) and that Epicurean atomic theory worsts four-root theory as a philosophical competitor (6–9). Thus, Lucretius opens his poem with a fervent endorsement of Epicurean physiologia. Lucretius’ attack against four-root theory may be read not only as an attack against Empedocles but also as an attack against several prominent philosophical schools that promoted four-root theory.