Book contents
- The Cambridge Critical Guide to Latin Literature
- The Cambridge Critical Guide to Latin Literature
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Figures and Tables
- Contributors
- Preface
- Abbreviations
- Chapter 1 Introduction
- Chapter 2 Canons
- Chapter 3 Periodisations
- Chapter 4 Author and Identity
- Chapter 5 Intertextuality
- Chapter 6 Mediaeval Latin
- Chapter 7 Neo-Latin
- Chapter 8 Reception
- Chapter 9 National Traditions
- Chapter 10 Editing
- Chapter 11 Latin Literature and Linguistics
- Chapter 12 Latin Literature and Material Culture
- Chapter 13 Philosophy
- Chapter 14 Political Thought
- Chapter 15 Latin Literature and Roman History
- Chapter 16 Latin Literature and Greek
- Envoi
- Index Locorum
- General Index
- References
Chapter 13 - Philosophy
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 04 January 2024
Book contents
- The Cambridge Critical Guide to Latin Literature
- The Cambridge Critical Guide to Latin Literature
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Figures and Tables
- Contributors
- Preface
- Abbreviations
- Chapter 1 Introduction
- Chapter 2 Canons
- Chapter 3 Periodisations
- Chapter 4 Author and Identity
- Chapter 5 Intertextuality
- Chapter 6 Mediaeval Latin
- Chapter 7 Neo-Latin
- Chapter 8 Reception
- Chapter 9 National Traditions
- Chapter 10 Editing
- Chapter 11 Latin Literature and Linguistics
- Chapter 12 Latin Literature and Material Culture
- Chapter 13 Philosophy
- Chapter 14 Political Thought
- Chapter 15 Latin Literature and Roman History
- Chapter 16 Latin Literature and Greek
- Envoi
- Index Locorum
- General Index
- References
Summary
Often viewed as derivative, philosophy written in Latin has in recent years been enjoying a scholarly renaissance, as critics realise that philosophical thought does not develop in a vacuum but is intrinsically linked to the time, place and language in which it is expressed.This chapter brings a historicising approach to the phenomenon of Roman philosophy, combining a diachronic narrative with a focus on particular themes.After considering the Roman adoption of Greek philosophy in the second century BCE, I use Lucretius as a case study for the Latinisation of Greek thought and Cicero as an example of the political and cultural uses of philosophy in the late Republic.I explore some of the many appearances of philosophy in Latin poetry – evidence of the saturation of the Roman cultural imaginary with philosophical ideas and the fact that Latin philosophical writing was not restricted to genres viewed as philosophical.Moving into the Empire, I discuss Seneca as a proponent of philosophy as a way of life and consider the self-representation of philosophers, with a focus on Apuleius, before concluding with an exploration of the Christianisation of philosophy in late antiquity.
Keywords
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- The Cambridge Critical Guide to Latin Literature , pp. 700 - 752Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2024
References
Armisen-Marchetti, M. (1986) ‘Imagination et méditation chez Sénèque: l’example de la praemeditatio’, REL 64: 1985–95.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
Armstrong, D. (2011) ‘Epicurean virtues, Epicurean friendship: Cicero vs the Herculaneum Papyri’, in Fish and Sanders 2011, 105–28.Google Scholar
Armstrong, D. (2014) ‘Horace’s Epicurean voice in the Satires’, in Garani and Konstan 2014, 91–127.Google Scholar
Barnes, J. and Griffin, M., eds. (1997) Philosophia togata ii: Plato and Aristotle at Rome, Oxford.Google Scholar
Bartsch, S. (2006) The Mirror of the Self: Sexuality, Self-Knowledge, and the Gaze in the Early Roman Empire, Chicago.Google Scholar
Bartsch, S. (2012) ‘Persius, Juvenal, and Stoicism’, in Braund, S. and Osgood, J., eds., A Companion to Persius and Juvenal (Chichester), 217–38.Google Scholar
Bartsch, S. (2015b) ‘Senecan selves’, in Bartsch, S. and Schiesaro, A., eds., The Cambridge Companion to Seneca (Cambridge), 187–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beall, S. M. (2001) ‘Homo fandi dulcissimus: the role of Favorinus in the Attic Nights of Aulus Gellius’, AJPh 122: 87–106.Google Scholar
Benferhat, Y. (2005) Ciues Epicurei: les épicuriens et l’idée de la monarchie à Rome et en Italie de Sylla à Octave, Brussels.Google Scholar
Booth, J. (1997) ‘All in the mind: sickness in Catullus 76’, in Braund, S. M. and Gill, C., eds., The Passions in Roman Thought and Literature (Cambridge), 150–68.Google Scholar
Bowersock, G. W. (2002) ‘Philosophy in the Second Sophistic’, in Clark, G. and Rajak, T., eds., Philosophy and Power in the Graeco-Roman World: Essays in Honour of Miriam Griffin (Oxford), 157–70.Google Scholar
Boyancé, P. (1936) ‘Les méthodes de l’histoire littéraire: Cicéron et son œuvre philosophique’, REL 14: 288–309.Google Scholar
Brittain, C. (2016) ‘Cicero’s sceptical methods: the example of the De finibus’, in Annas, J. and Betegh, G., eds., Cicero’s De finibus: Philosophical Approaches (Cambridge), 12–40.Google Scholar
Burkert, W. (1961) ‘Hellenistische Pseudopythagorica’, Philologus 105: 16–43 and 226–46.Google Scholar
Campbell, G. L. (2003) Lucretius on Creation and Evolution: A Commentary on De rerum natura Book Five, Lines 772–1104 (Oxford).Google Scholar
Castner, C. J. (1988) Prosopography of Roman Epicureans from the Second Century B.C. to the Second Century A.D., Frankfurt.Google Scholar
Catana, L. (2016) ‘Intellectual history and the history of philosophy: their genesis and current relationship’, in Whatmore, R. and Young, B., eds., A Companion to Intellectual History (Chichester), 129–40.Google Scholar
Chase, M. (2013) ‘Observations on Pierre Hadot’s conception of philosophy as a way of life’, in Chase, M., Clark, S. R. L. and McGhee, M., eds., Philosophy as a Way of Life: Ancients and Moderns (Chichester), 262–86.Google Scholar
Clay, D. (2004) ‘Vergil’s farewell to education (Catalepton 5) and Epicurus’ Letter to Pythocles’, in Armstrong et al. 2004, 25–36.Google Scholar
Davis, G. and Yona, S., eds. (2022) Epicurus in Rome: Philosophical Perspectives in the Ciceronian Age, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Denecke, W. (2014) Classical World Literatures: Sino-Japanese and Greco-Roman Comparisons, Oxford.Google Scholar
Donohue, H. (1993) The Song of the Swan: Lucretius and the Influence of Callimachus, Lanham, MD.Google Scholar
Dutsch, D. (2014) ‘The beginnings: philosophy in Roman literature before 155 b.c.’, in Garani and Konstan 2014, 1–25.Google Scholar
Edwards, C. (1997) ‘Self-scrutiny and self-transformation in Seneca’s Letters’, G&R 44: 23–38.Google Scholar
Eshleman, K. (2012) The Social World of Intellectuals in the Roman Empire: Sophists, Philosophers, and Christians, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Feeney, D. (2016) Beyond Greek: The Beginnings of Latin Literature, Cambridge, MA.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fish, J. (2011) ‘Not all politicians are Sisyphus: what Roman Epicureans were taught about politics’, in Fish and Sanders 2011, 72–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fish, J. and Sanders, K. R., eds. (2011) Epicurus and the Epicurean Tradition, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fletcher, R. (2014) Apuleius’ Platonism: The Impersonation of Philosophy, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fögen, T. (2000) Patrii sermonis egestas: Einstellungen lateinischer Autoren zu ihrer Muttersprache, Munich.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foucault, M. (1986) The History of Sexuality 3: The Care of the Self, translated by R. Hurley, New York (French orig. 1984).Google Scholar
Foucault, M. (1988) ‘Technologies of the self’, in Martin, L. H., Gutman, H. and Hutton, P. H., eds., Technologies of the Self: A Seminar with Michel Foucault (Amherst), 16–49.Google Scholar
Fuhrer, T. (2017) ‘Erzählte Philosophie: Augustin und das Konzept der “Philosophie als Lebensform”’, in Riedwed, C., ed., Philosophia in der Konkurrenz von Schulen, Wissenschaften und Religionen: Zur Pluralisierung des Philosophiebegriffs in Kaiserzeit und Spätantike (Berlin), 301–17.Google Scholar
Gale, M. R. (2022) ‘Otium and voluptas: Catullus and Roman Epicureanism’, in Davis and Yona 2022, 87–108.Google Scholar
Garani, M. and Konstan, D., eds. (2014) The Philosophizing Muse: The Influence of Greek Philosophy on Roman Poetry, Newcastle.Google Scholar
Garani, M., Konstan, D. and Reydams-Schils, G., eds. (2023) The Oxford Handbook of Roman Philosophy, Oxford.Google Scholar
Garbarino, G. (1973) Roma e la filosofia greca dalle origini alla fine del II secolo a. C., 2 vols., Turin.Google Scholar
Garbarino, G. (2003) Philosophorum Romanorum fragmenta usque ad L. Annaei Senecae aetatem, Bologna.Google Scholar
Gawlik, G. and Görler, W. (1994) ‘Cicero’, in Flashar, H., ed., Die Philosophie der Antike, Band 4: Die Hellenistische Philosophie (Basel), 991–1168.Google Scholar
Gilbert, N. (2015) ‘Among friends: Cicero and the Epicureans’, unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Toronto.Google Scholar
Gilbert, N. (2022) ‘Was Atticus an Epicurean?’, in Davis and Yona 2022, 55–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gildenhard, I. (2006) ‘Reckoning with tyranny: Greek thoughts on Caesar in Cicero’s Letters to Atticus in early 49’, in Lewis, S., ed., Ancient Tyranny (Edinburgh), 197–209.Google Scholar
Gillespie, S. and Hardie, P., eds. (2007) The Cambridge Companion to Lucretius, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Görler, W. (1984) ‘Zum virtus-Fragment des Lucilius (1326–1338 Marx) und zur Geschichte der stoischen Güterlehre’, Hermes 112: 445–68.Google Scholar
Griffin, M. T. (1986) ‘Philosophy, Cato, and Roman suicide’, G&R 33: 64–77 and 192–202.Google Scholar
Griffin, M. T. (1995) ‘Philosophical badinage in Cicero’s letters to his friends’, in Powell, J. G. F., ed., Cicero the Philosopher: Twelve Papers (Oxford), 325–46.Google Scholar
Griffin, M. T. (1997) ‘From Aristotle to Atticus: Cicero and Matius on friendship’, in Barnes and Griffin 1997, 86–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Habinek, T. (1994) ‘Ideology for an empire in the prefaces to Cicero’s dialogues’, Ramus 23: 55–67.Google Scholar
Habinek, T. (2017) ‘Was there a Latin Second Sophistic?’ in Richter, D. S. and Johnson, W. A., eds., The Oxford Handbook of The Second Sophistic (Oxford), 25–37.Google Scholar
Hadot, I. (1969) Seneca und die griechisch-römische Tradition der Seelenleitung, Berlin.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hadot, I. (2007) ‘Versuch einer doktrinalen Neueinordnung der Schule der Sextier’, RhM 150: 179–210.Google Scholar
Hadot, P. (1995) Philosophy as a Way of Life: Spiritual Exercises from Socrates to Foucault, trans. M. Chase, Oxford (French orig. 1987, 2nd edn).Google Scholar
Hadot, P. (1998) The Inner Citadel: The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius, trans. M. Chase, Cambridge, MA (French orig. 1992).Google Scholar
Hadot, P. (2002) What Is Ancient Philosophy?, translated by M. Chase, Cambridge, MA (French orig. 1995).Google Scholar
Hagendahl, H. (1958) Latin Fathers and the Classics: A Study of the Apologists, Jerome and Other Christian Writers, Gothenburg.Google Scholar
Hahn, J. (1989) Der Philosoph und die Gesellschaft: Selbstverständnis, öffentliches Auftreten und populäre Erwartungen in der hohen Kaiserzeit, Stuttgart.Google Scholar
Hardie, P. R. (1995) ‘The speech of Pythagoras in Ovid Metamorphoses 15: Empedoclean epos’, CQ 45: 204–14.Google Scholar
Helm, R. (1955) ‘Apuleius’ Apologie, ein Meisterwerk der zweiten Sophistik’, Altertum 1: 86–108.Google Scholar
Hill, T. D. (2004) Ambitiosa mors: Suicide and Self in Roman Thought and Literature, New York.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hine, H. (2016) ‘Philosophy and philosophi: from Cicero to Apuleius’, in Williams and Volk 2016, 13–29.Google Scholar
Holford-Strevens, L. (2003) Aulus Gellius: An Antonine Scholar and His Achievement, rev. edn, Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holford-Strevens, L. and Vardi, A., eds. (2004) The Worlds of Aulus Gellius, Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Howley, J. A. (2018) Aulus Gellius and Roman Reading Culture: Text, Presence, and Imperial Knowledge in the Noctes Atticae, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Keith, A. (2018). ‘Epicurean philosophical perspectives in (and on) [Vergil] Catalepton 5’, in Frangoulidis, S. and Harrison, S., eds., Life, Love and Death in Latin Poetry: Studies in Honor of Theodore D. Papanghelis (Berlin), 189–203.Google Scholar
Kennedy, D. F. (2002) Rethinking Reality: Lucretius and the Textualization of Nature, Ann Arbor, MI.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kenney, E. J. (1970) ‘Doctus Lucretius’, Mnemosyne 23: 366–92. Reprinted in Gale 2007, 300–27.Google Scholar
Kent, B. (2001) ‘Augustine’s ethics’, in Stump, E. and Kretzmann, N., eds., The Cambridge Companion to Augustine (Cambridge), 205–33.Google Scholar
Ker, J. (2009) ‘Seneca on self-examination: rereading On Anger 3.36’, in Bartsch and Wray 2009, 160–87.Google Scholar
Keulen, W. (2004) ‘Gellius, Apuleius, and satire on the intellectual’, in Holford-Strevens and Vardi 2004, 223–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keulen, W. (2009) Gellius the Satirist: Roman Cultural Authority in Attic Nights, Leiden.Google Scholar
Krenkel, W. A. (2002) Marcus Terentius Varro: Saturae Menippeae, 4 vols., St. Katharinen.Google Scholar
Kruschwitz, P. and Schumacher, M. (2005) Das vorklassische Lehrgedicht der Römer, Heidelberg.Google Scholar
Kurczyk, S. (2006) Cicero und die Inszenierung der eigenen Vergangenheit: Autobiographisches Schreiben in der späten Republik, Cologne.Google Scholar
Lefèvre, E. (1997) ‘Senecas Atreus – die Negation des stoischen Weisen?’, in Zimmermann, B., ed., Griechisch-römische Komödie und Tragödie II (Stuttgart), 119–34.Google Scholar
Leonhardt, J. (1995) ‘Theorie und Praxis der deliberatio bei Cicero: Der Briefwechsel mit Atticus aus dem Jahre 49’, ACD 31: 153–71.Google Scholar
Lévy, C. (2017) ‘Lucilius et la fondation de la culture philosophique romaine’, in Vesperini 2017, 183–209.Google Scholar
Littlewood, C. A. J. (2004) Self-Representation and Illusion in Senecan Tragedy, Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Long, A. A. (1995) ‘Cicero’s politics in De officiis’, in Laks, A. and Schofield, M., eds., Justice and Generosity: Studies in Hellenistic Social and Political Philosophy (Cambridge), 213–40.Google Scholar
MacCormack, S. (2013) ‘Cicero in late antiquity’, in Steel, C., ed., The Cambridge Companion to Cicero (Cambridge), 251–305.Google Scholar
Mann, W.-R. (2016) ‘“You’re playing you now”: Helvidius Priscus as a Stoic hero’, in Williams and Volk 2016, 213–37.Google Scholar
Marenbon, J. (2018) ‘Why we need a real history of philosophy’, in van Ackeren, M., ed., Philosophy and the Historical Perspective (Oxford), 36–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maso, S. (2012) Filosofia a Roma: dalla riflessione sui principi all’arte della vita, Rome.Google Scholar
Mayer, R. (2005) ‘Sleeping with the enemy: satire and philosophy’, in Freudenburg, K., ed., The Cambridge Companion to Roman Satire (Cambridge), 146–59.Google Scholar
Mendelson, M. (2018) ‘Saint Augustine’, in E. N. Zalta, ed., The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2016/entries/augustine/.Google Scholar
Michel, A. (1977) ‘Cicéron, Pompée et la guerre civile: rhétorique et philosophie dans la “Correspondance”’, AAntHung 25: 393–403.Google Scholar
Morford, M. (2002) The Roman Philosophers: From the Time of Cato the Censor to the Death of Marcus Aurelius, London.Google Scholar
Müller, G. M. (2015) ‘Transfer und Überbietung im Gespräch: Zur Konstruktion einer römischen Philosophie in den Dialogen Ciceros’, Gymnasium 122: 275–301.Google Scholar
Müller, G. M. and Mariani Zini, F., eds. (2018) Philosophie in Rom – Römische Philosophie? Kultur-, literatur- und philosophiegeschichtliche Perspektiven, Berlin.Google Scholar
Newman, R. J. (1989) ‘Cotidie meditari: theory and practice of the meditatio in imperial Stoicism’, ANRW ii.36.3: 1473–517.Google Scholar
Powell, J. G. F. (2013) ‘The embassy of the three philosophers in 155 bc’, in Kremmydas, C. and Tempest, K., eds., Hellenistic Oratory: Continuity and Change (Oxford), 219–47.Google Scholar
Rabbow, P. (1954) Antike Seelenführung: Methodik der Exerzitien in der Antike, Munich.Google Scholar
Rauh, S. H. (2018) ‘Cato at Utica: the emergence of a Roman suicide tradition’, AJPh 139: 59–91.Google Scholar
Reinhardt, T. (2016) ‘To see and to be seen: on vision and perception in Lucretius and Cicero’, in Williams and Volk 2016, 63–90.Google Scholar
Reydams-Schils, G. (2005) The Roman Stoics: Self, Responsibility, and Affection, Chicago.Google Scholar
Riess, W. (2008a) ‘Apuleius Socrates Africanus? Apuleius’ defensive play’, in Riess 2008b, 51–73.Google Scholar
Rives, J. B. (2008) ‘Legal strategy and learned display in Apuleius’ Apology’, in Riess 2008b, 17–49.Google Scholar
Rolle, A. (2017) Dall’Oriente a Roma: Cibele, Iside e Serapide nell’opera di Varrone, Pisa.Google Scholar
Rorty, R., Schneewind, J. B. and Skinner, Q. (1984) ‘Introduction’, in Rorty, R., Schneewind, J. B. and Skinner, Q., eds., Philosophy in History: Essays on the Historiography of Philosophy (Cambridge), 1–14.Google Scholar
Roskam, G. (2007) Live Unnoticed (Λάθε βιώσας): On the Vicissitudes of an Epicurean Doctrine, Leiden.Google Scholar
Sandy, G. (1997) The Greek World of Apuleius: Apuleius and the Second Sophistic, Leiden.Google Scholar
Schafer, J. (2011) ‘Seneca’s Epistulae morales as dramatized education’, CPh 106: 35–52.Google Scholar
Schindel, U. (2000) ‘Apuleius – Africanus Socrates? Beobachtungen zu den Verteidigungsreden des Apuleius und des platonischen Sokrates’, Hermes 128: 443–56.Google Scholar
Schmidt, P. L. (1978–9) ‘Cicero’s place in Roman philosophy: a study of his prefaces’, CJ 74: 115–27.Google Scholar
Schofield, M. (2008) ‘Ciceronian dialogue’, in Goldhill, S., ed., The End of Dialogue in Antiquity (Cambridge), 63–84.Google Scholar
Scholz, U. W. (2003) ‘Varros Menippeische Satiren’, in Haltenhoff, A., Heil, A. and Mutschler, F. H., eds., O tempora o mores! Römische Werte und römische Literatur in den letzten Jahrzehnten der Republik (Munich), 165–85.Google Scholar
Schrijvers, P. H. (1978) ‘Le regard sur l’invisible: étude sur l’emploi de l’analogie dans l’œuvre de Lucrèce’, in Gigon, O., ed., Lucrèce (Vandœuvres), 77–114. English version in Gale 2007, 255–88.Google Scholar
Sedley, D. (1998) Lucretius and the Transformation of Greek Wisdom, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sedley, D. (2009) ‘Epicureanism in the Roman Republic’, in Warren, J., ed., The Cambridge Companion to Epicureanism (Cambridge), 29–45.Google Scholar
Sedley, D. (2010) ‘Philosophy’, in Barchiesi, A. and Scheidel, W., eds., The Oxford Handbook of Roman Studies (New York), 701–12.Google Scholar
Sellars, J. (2012) ‘The Meditations and the ancient art of living’, in van Ackeren, M., ed., A Companion to Marcus Aurelius (Chichester), 453–64.Google Scholar
Shanzer, D. (2012) ‘Augustine and the Latin classics’, in Vessey, M., ed., A Companion to Augustine (Chichester), 161–74.Google Scholar
Strasburger, H. (1990) Ciceros politisches Spätwerk als Aufruf gegen die Herrschaft Caesars, Hildesheim.Google Scholar
Swain, S. (2006) ‘Bilingualism and biculturalism in Antonine Rome: Apuleius, Fronto, and Gellius’, in Holford-Strevens and Vardi 2006, 3–40.Google Scholar
Trapp, M. B. (2007) Philosophy in the Roman Empire: Ethics, Politics and Society, Aldershot.Google Scholar
Trapp, M. B. (2017a) ‘Philosophical authority in the imperial period’, in König, J. and Woolf, G., eds., Authority and Expertise in Ancient Scientific Culture (Cambridge), 27–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trapp, M. B. (2017b) ‘Visibly different? Looking at philosophi in the Roman imperial period’, in Vesperini 2017, 353–69.Google Scholar
Uden, J. (2021) ‘Egnatius the Epicurean: the banalization of philosophy in Catullus’, Antichthon 55: 94–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vesperini, P., ed. (2017) Philosophari: usages romains des savoirs grecs sous la République et sous l’Empire, Paris.Google Scholar
Volk, K. (2002) The Poetics of Latin Didactic: Lucretius, Vergil, Ovid, Manilius, Oxford.Google Scholar
Volk, K. (2011) ‘Manilian self-contradiction’, in Green, S. J. and Volk, K., eds., Forgotten Stars: Rediscovering Manilius’ Astronomica (Oxford), 104–19.Google Scholar
Volk, K. (2021) The Roman Republic of Letters: Scholarship, Philosophy, and Politics in the Age of Cicero and Caesar, Princeton.Google Scholar
Volk, K. and Williams, G. D., eds. (2022) Philosophy in Ovid, Ovid as Philosopher, New York.Google Scholar
Wassmann, H. (1996) Ciceros Widerstand gegen Caesars Tyrannis: Untersuchungen zur politischen Bedeutung der philosophischen Spätschriften, Bonn.Google Scholar
Wiener, C. (2014) ‘“Stoic tragedy”: a contradiction in terms?’, in Garani and Konstan 2014, 187–217.Google Scholar
Williams, G. D. and Volk, K., eds. (2016) Roman Reflections: Studies in Latin Philosophy, New York.Google Scholar
Zanker, P. (1995) Die Maske des Sokrates: Das Bild des Intellektuellen in der antiken Kunst, Munich.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zetzel, J. E. G. (2016) ‘Philosophy is in the streets’, in Williams and Volk 2016, 50–62.Google Scholar