I've been told to read Greenblatt's 'The Swerve' which was inspired by this. That sounds boring. This sounds interesting.
---
Found this on my newly re-opened new books display! How, ah..., enlightening!
---
Skimmed enough to know that I really want to find a way to actually read this... mind blown by all the misery that we humans could have skipped if we'd all listened to his advice from the beginning....

June 2021

This book was fascinating. In terms of science, it was interesting to see how much and how little people knew about the natural world. Some of what Lucretius believed was accurate, and some was highly inaccurate; but even when his facts are wrong, his way of seeing the world makes for a terrific reading experience. He states a few scientific principles, and then he ponders them deeply, looks at the same principle in several different examples, and then, often, draws moral or philosophical conclusions based on the science. While I don't agree with his philosophy, his dynamic style made for quite an enjoyable read. Moreover, it was fascinating to study Epicurean ideas and to read about the pursuit of pleasure. The six books deal with everything from atoms to the cosmos, from the human soul to the weather. Finally, A. E. Stallings' translation, with its meter and rhyme, makes the book a pleasure to read. ( )

This is Lucretius's presentation of the philosophy of the Greek Epicurus. The Latin original was destroyed as heretical by almost every monastery in Europe. ( )

The philosophy of Epicurus is not presented any better than in the classic poem, On the Nature of Things (De Rerum Natura) by Titus Lucretius Carus. We know little about his life. He was probably born in the early first century B.C. This meant that he lived during the turbulent era of the end of the Roman Republic and beginning of the Empire that saw the rise of Sulla and Pompey and, ultimately, Julius Caesar. On the Nature of Things, posthumously edited by Cicero, was his poetic plea to the Roman elite that they change course.

The poem by Lucretius has the goal of explaining Epicurean philosophy to a Roman audience. It was written in some 7,400 dactylic hexameters, divided into six untitled books, and explores Epicurean philosophy and physics through richly poetic language and metaphors. It is a rational and materialistic view of the world that presents the principles of atomism; the nature of the mind and soul; explanations of sensation and thought; the development of the world and its phenomena; and explains a variety of celestial and terrestrial phenomena. The universe described in the poem operates according to these physical principles, guided by fortuna, "chance", and not the divine intervention of the traditional Roman deities. He extols the life of contemplation as seen in these lines from the opening of Book Two:
"But nothing is sweeter than to dwell in the calm
Temples of truth, the strongholds of the wise." (II, 7-8)

Thankfully we can still enjoy the vision of the good life as presented in this beautiful poem. The basics of Lucretius' philosophy include acknowledging pleasure (or the absence of pain) as the highest good, basing ethics on the evidence of the senses, and extolling plain living and high thinking. He also is a committed atheist, denouncing the gods in Book I of the poem, advocating free will in Book II, and reassuring his readers that they have nothing to fear from death in Book III. This lucid translation by Anthony M. Esolen reminds me why Lucretius is still worth reading. ( )

Versified philosophy isn't poetry--it's versified philosophy. ( )

This is one of those classics that has always looked too hard even though it's widely quoted and I was a bit reluctant to start on 7000 lines plus of poetry. But finally made the effort...and it wasn't so difficult in this translation anyway. And it's certainly been an eye opener for me. As Richard Jenkyns says in the introduction ..it's a poem without a story, without people; instead it's a treatise on science and philosophy. And....amazingly modern.
Essentially, Lucretius sets out to explain the universe and we who live in it.
He was a convert to the philosophy of Epicurus who died in 270BC and Lucretius was writing about 40AD ...so a difference of about 300 years. And I find it remarkable that Lucretius was able to absorb and maybe transform the ideas of Epicurus into a major statement of how the world works. In many ways, he is amazingly modern...especially with his rejection of the gods and religion; "it is religion breeds wickedness and that has given rise to wrongful deeds".
Basically he espouses the atomic theory and explains how atoms can pretty much account for every phenomena that we observe in the world. Commencing with his evidence for the existence of particles which" ARE but cannot be seen"...as evidenced in the squalls and sweeping hurricanes.
And there is an amazing passage p43 explaining why "all things fall at equal speed through the still void. (although they fall at different speeds through water or thin air). It took another 1400 years for Galileo to show this.
From simple reasoning he claims that the atoms of things that flit about must come in many a shape.....and this is more or less what the periodic table combined with quantum theory tells us.Though he does suggest p55 that there is nothing that's composed of atoms of a single kind.....which seems to wipe out the chances of isolating the pure elements such as oxygen or gold.
It's a remarkable tour de force......not perfect: but given that nearly 2000 years have elapsed since he wrote the work it is astonishing to me how closely he was able to explain so much of the natural world. His explanation of magnetism p119 is rather fanciful but if you replace "seeds flowing out from the lodestone" by magnetic lines of force...you come fairly close to the truth.
I love his analysis of lightning....and his put-down of the superstitious: "If the gods can throw lightning bolts in whatever direction they like, why don't they smite the scoundrels ?...and why do they waste good throws on deserted places?...and why does Jupiter never hurl one of his blows in fine weather? And why does he smite the sea?.... what have the whitecaps ever done him? Great questions.
All in all, I was mightily impressed by his thoughtful rationality and his explanatory powers. Just amazing really. I'm surprised that it never really seemed to have more impact and we still have people today seeing God's justice in lightning bolts.
Oh, and I think the translator, A.E. Stallings, has done a great job. I'm not qualified to check his Latin but it certainly flows well. No mean feat translating poetry and keeping something of the metre etc.
Happy to give this book five stars. ( )

Enjoyed reading Ronald Melville’s verse translation of De rerum natura in a concentrated burst over the past week. Here are a couple of thoughts on the poem as a whole.

The two things that most impressed me were:
1. Lucretius’ bottom-up thinking: His general approach is to explain natural phenomena without recourse to outside agency and this method, allied with technological advances, has been essential to the progress of science. That Lucretius and the other atomists were read by so many of the greatest minds such as Newton, and may have been influential in his thinking about the laws of motion, is enough to secure him a valuable place in the history of western thought, in my eyes.
2. Lucretius’ poetry and spirit: There are so many wonderful passages, especially as the poem progresses, notably the lyrical codas to Books 3 and 5, the latter containing Lucretius’ potted history of the evolution of prehistoric man, probably my favourite section of the entire poem. I also enjoyed his irreverent spirit, notably the passage where he shamelessly advocates sexual permissiveness (“And by avoiding love you need not miss / The fruits that Venus offers, but instead / You may take the goods without the penalty”).

Only disappointment I had, apart from some of the comical explanations (i.e. a rough voice is caused by rough atoms, a smooth one by smooth atoms) and the occasional misogyny, was the way the poem ends abruptly, in an unsatisfying way. That said, I don’t feel that there’s enough in the text itself to suggest he was going mad; it’s fair to say that the first two books of the poem come across as more rigorous than the other four, but he seems lucid to me throughout and the greater freedom he enjoys in Books 3-6 is to the benefit of the poetry. ( )

Enjoyed reading Ronald Melville’s verse translation of De rerum natura in a concentrated burst over the past week. Here are a couple of thoughts on the poem as a whole.

The two things that most impressed me were:
1. Lucretius’ bottom-up thinking: His general approach is to explain natural phenomena without recourse to outside agency and this method, allied with technological advances, has been essential to the progress of science. That Lucretius and the other atomists were read by so many of the greatest minds such as Newton, and may have been influential in his thinking about the laws of motion, is enough to secure him a valuable place in the history of western thought, in my eyes.
2. Lucretius’ poetry and spirit: There are so many wonderful passages, especially as the poem progresses, notably the lyrical codas to Books 3 and 5, the latter containing Lucretius’ potted history of the evolution of prehistoric man, probably my favourite section of the entire poem. I also enjoyed his irreverent spirit, notably the passage where he shamelessly advocates sexual permissiveness (“And by avoiding love you need not miss / The fruits that Venus offers, but instead / You may take the goods without the penalty”).

Only disappointment I had, apart from some of the comical explanations (i.e. a rough voice is caused by rough atoms, a smooth one by smooth atoms) and the occasional misogyny, was the way the poem ends abruptly, in an unsatisfying way. That said, I don’t feel that there’s enough in the text itself to suggest he was going mad; it’s fair to say that the first two books of the poem come across as more rigorous than the other four, but he seems lucid to me throughout and the greater freedom he enjoys in Books 3-6 is to the benefit of the poetry. ( )

12/6/21

12/6/21

TThis great poem stands with Virgil's Aeneid as one of the vital and enduring achievements of Latin literature. Lost for more than a thousand years, its return to circulation in 1417 reintroduced dangerous ideas about the nature and meaning of existence and helped shape the modern world

Heavy going in places but interesting, nevertheless ( )

The philosophy of Epicurus is not presented any better than in the classic poem, On the Nature of Things (De Rerum Natura) by Titus Lucretius Carus. We know little about his life. He was probably born in the early first century B.C. This meant that he lived during the turbulent era of the end of the Roman Republic and beginning of the Empire that saw the rise of Sulla and Pompey and, ultimately, Julius Caesar. On the Nature of Things, posthumously edited by Cicero, was his poetic plea to the Roman elite that they change course.

The poem by Lucretius has the goal of explaining Epicurean philosophy to a Roman audience. It was written in some 7,400 dactylic hexameters, divided into six untitled books, and explores Epicurean philosophy and physics through richly poetic language and metaphors. It is a rational and materialistic view of the world that presents the principles of atomism; the nature of the mind and soul; explanations of sensation and thought; the development of the world and its phenomena; and explains a variety of celestial and terrestrial phenomena. The universe described in the poem operates according to these physical principles, guided by fortuna, "chance", and not the divine intervention of the traditional Roman deities. He extols the life of contemplation as seen in these lines from the opening of Book Two:
"But nothing is sweeter than to dwell in the calm
Temples of truth, the strongholds of the wise." (II, 7-8)

Thankfully we can still enjoy the vision of the good life as presented in this beautiful poem. The basics of Lucretius' philosophy include acknowledging pleasure (or the absence of pain) as the highest good, basing ethics on the evidence of the senses, and extolling plain living and high thinking. He also is a committed atheist, denouncing the gods in Book I of the poem, advocating free will in Book II, and reassuring his readers that they have nothing to fear from death in Book III. This lucid translation by Anthony M. Esolen reminds me why Lucretius is still worth reading. ( )

I read the Frank Copley translation, and found his notes and introduction quite useful. The poem itself is exceedingly strange and seems surprisingly modern in certain places (though decidedly less so in others). Glad to have finally read it, though; I can see why it's stood the test of time. ( )

Philosophy is Supposed to be Fun!

Cicero, because of his personal aversion to the Epicurean philosophy, didn't quite do it justice in his book [b:The Nature of the Gods|84603|The Nature of the Gods|Marcus Tullius Cicero|http://d.gr-assets.com/books/1171056392s/84603.jpg|81664], which introduced the Greek philosophical schools to the Romans (He all but made the Epicurean the laughing-stock of all the other philosophers). However, he also prepared and edited the transcript of this book by Lucretius, arguably the best exposition of Epicureanism, as a counterpoint.

Lucretius made a strong case for Epicureanism with epic poetry and systematic reasoning. His thoughts and presentation with creative use of analogies are eminently clear and logical to a modern reader, in spite of his relative lack of scientific knowledge. In this book, he sought to dispel the notion of gods governing the universe, and demonstrate the natural causes of all things based on a few premises, from thunderbolts to earthquakes, from the nature of disease to the nature of the mind, from the beginning of the earth to the development of society.

Highly recommended for its epic scope, clarity of thought, beauty of narrative, richness of humor and compassion.
( )

I don't have the background for deep analysis of classical writing, but from a novice's perspective:

Lucretius says that his purpose is to explain the work of Epicurus in an entertaining manner, and I was mostly entertained. Some of the highlights (SPOILERS?):

1) Earth is not made up of teeny tiny little Earths put together to form one big earth. Instead, it is made of particles that are in themselves different from what they can produce when combined.

2) Understanding the world using the senses is more accurate than relying on the stories of the gods

3) Maggots and worms grow from dead flesh on the ground, as can clearly be observed with the senses.

4) Latin does not contain some of the needed words to directly express concepts translated from the Greek of Epicurus, which is a challenge for Lucretius.

This was an enjoyable reading experience and did provide some small insight into the time period for me. ( )

Read this in preparation for reading "The Swerve" about the discovery of Lucretius' poem. Have to say that it is a difficult read. The translation is not "modern" in any sense. That said, the ingeniousness of Lucretius is evident: very nearly explaining the true scientific nature of the world at a time when humankind ascribed everything to "the gods".

My recommendation is to find a different (better) translation (although I don't know if one exists). ( )

A present-day-English translation, of the 7400-line Latin didactic poem _De Rerum Natura_, that's not only metrical (iambic heptameter) but also in rhyming couplets (which I just love). A delight to read, especially after plowing through the old prose translation by John Selby Watson.
To choose a good translation of Lucretius, I would say,
One ought to pick a version in the English of today.
And metered verse is called for too -- a poem needs to chime.
The bill was filled when Stallings crafted pairs of lines that rhyme.

Philosophy, poetry, ancient physics all in one work. A very fine translation of an Epicurean classic. ( )

This verse translation works well. One might anticipate that the rhyming couplets would become tiresome. Stallings has, however, arranged her syntax so that most of the time phrases and clauses carry past the line breaks and so the text reads much like prose. At the end of paragraphs and sections, Stallings does align the syntax with the rhyme with the result that these breaks are emphasized.

The translation does not attempt to capture the deliberately archaic language that Lucretius wrote in. I was skeptical at first of some of Stallings' more modern and colloquial word choices, but a check with the Latin showed that these still stayed close to the original meaning.

This is an accessible and recommendable translation of an important work. ( )

This is both poetry and philosophical treatise proposing to explain the views of the Epicurean school. Physics written by a poet, for here Lucretius goes into physics as well as metaphysics explaining everything from the theory of the universe being composed of atoms, to the nature of the soul--and without resorting to God or Gods for an explanation. It's not atheist so much as theist. There are Gods, but we need not fear them since they're far removed from human affairs. The world's creation and operation can all be explained by natural law and there is no afterlife. Death is just an ending, and we should no more fear it than fear the eons before our beginning. In its arguments it is often strikingly modern, this poem written in the first century. Certainly aspects of the science presented is dated (there are references to the idea of spontaneous generation and the sun goes around the earth), but the spirit of the ideas is timeless--and the poetry beautiful--that comes through even in translation. This is the opening, a hymn to Venus:

First, goddess, the birds of the air, pierced to the heart with your powerful shafts, signal your entry. Next wild creatures and cattle bound over rich pastures and swim rushing rivers: so surely are they all captivated by your charm and eagerly follow your lead. Then you inject seductive love into the heart of every creature that lives in the seas and mountains and river torrents and bird-haunted thickets, implanting in it the passionate urge to reproduce its kind.

This is not dry stuff, although it is dense--packing a lot of complex ideas in verse. It's not always easy reading no. Philosophy and physics don't make for page turners or escapist reading. But it often has a lyrical beauty and intensity, one devoted to this Earth and the world of the senses and its pleasures and the wonders of science in a way at times inspired and inspiring. ( )

Finally finished this! This was my January poetry read, but just a bit too dense to read all in one month. It's poetry, but it's not poetry as I've ever seen it before; it's not about love, it's not an epic, doesn't tell a story, really.

It's a physics/philosophy (they didn't really draw lines between these things back then) textbook written in verse by an Epicurean Roman two thousand years ago. And frequently, decoding the verse to figure out what worldview created it, what assumptions he's making about the nature of the universe, and from there to what his point is... well, it was heavy lifting. And I complained often.

But now that I've gotten through it once, I can fairly easily see myself dipping back in occasionally. And now, I can read The Swerve about how this book influenced the Renaissance! ( )

Philosophy is Supposed to be Fun!

Cicero, because of his personal aversion to the Epicurean philosophy, didn't quite do it justice in his book The Nature of the Gods, which introduced the Greek philosophical schools to the Romans (He all but made the Epicurean the laughing-stock of all the other philosophers). However, he also prepared and edited the transcript of this book by Lucretius, arguably the best exposition of Epicureanism, as a counterpoint.

Lucretius made a strong case for Epicureanism with epic poetry and systematic reasoning. His thoughts and presentation with creative use of analogies are eminently clear and logical to a modern reader, in spite of his relative lack of scientific knowledge. In this book, he sought to dispel the notion of gods governing the universe, and demonstrate the natural causes of all things based on a few premises, from thunderbolts to earthquakes, from the nature of disease to the nature of the mind, from the beginning of the earth to the development of society.

Highly recommended for its epic scope, clarity of thought, beauty of narrative, richness of humor and compassion.
( )

I wish I had read this book when I was younger. Heretical and scandalous, it should be required reading across the educational spectrum. It’s brilliant and beautiful and wise.

From Wikipedia: “De rerum natura (On the Nature of Things) is a 1st century BC didactic poem by the Roman poet and philosopher Lucretius with the goal of explaining Epicurean philosophy to a Roman audience. The poem, written in some 7,400 dactylic hexameters, is divided into six untitled books, and explores Epicurean physics through richly poetic language and metaphors. Lucretius presents the principles of atomism; the nature of the mind and soul; explanations of sensation and thought; the development of the world and its phenomena; and explains a variety of celestial and terrestrial phenomena. The universe described in the poem operates according to these physical principles, guided by fortuna, "chance", and not the divine intervention of the traditional Roman deities.” ( )

Not unexpectedly, a philosophical treatise in the form of a poem is not an easy read. But it easy to see how Lucretius' exposition of the Epicurean theories about the nature of the universe would have contributed to the growth of modern science once rediscovered by Renaissance Europe. Just the idea of deriving information from the evidence of the senses rather than from preconceived theory or authority entailed a new way of approaching knowledge.

I am rather struck by Lucretius insistence on the mortality of the soul; his preoccupation with the subject seems obsessive.