{"id":29,"date":"2026-06-11T16:50:10","date_gmt":"2026-06-11T15:50:10","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/pressbooks.psgaesthetics.uk\/lucretius\/chapter\/pressbooks-oer-module-lucretius-de-rerum-natura-book-i-lines-418-1117\/"},"modified":"2026-06-17T14:34:27","modified_gmt":"2026-06-17T13:34:27","slug":"pressbooks-oer-module-lucretius-de-rerum-natura-book-i-lines-418-1117","status":"publish","type":"chapter","link":"https:\/\/pressbooks.psgaesthetics.uk\/lucretius\/chapter\/pressbooks-oer-module-lucretius-de-rerum-natura-book-i-lines-418-1117\/","title":{"raw":"Lucretius, De rerum natura, Book I (Lines 418\u20131117)","rendered":"Lucretius, De rerum natura, Book I (Lines 418\u20131117)"},"content":{"raw":"

1. Module Introduction and Historical Context<\/h3>\nWelcome to this Open Educational Resource (OER) module designed for the study of Lucretian physics and Epicurean philosophy. This module is built upon the landmark 1923\/24 edition by the German philologist Hermann Diels<\/b>. In the realm of classical scholarship, Diels is celebrated for a text that captures the \"natural verses\" of Lucretius, providing a rigorous yet fluid reading of the De rerum natura<\/i> that remains a standard in contemporary academia.\n\nModern Relevance: The Aldine Tradition<\/b> The physical preservation of Lucretius is as storied as his philosophy. The renowned naturalist and broadcaster David Attenborough<\/b> cites the 1515 Aldus Manutius edition of Lucretius as one of his most cherished possessions. Attenborough admires the \"wonderfully elegant italic script\" of this Venetian paperback, noting that such books are \"memes\"\u2014vessels where human experience is embedded and handed down outside the body, preserving scientific curiosity across six centuries.\n

Philosophical Foreword<\/h4>\nIn 1924, Albert Einstein<\/b> provided a foreword to the second volume of Diels' work. Einstein observed that for those who feel like spectators as the world passes them by, Lucretius\u2019 poem works a singular \"magic.\" He praised Lucretius\u2019 \"firm confidence\" in the intelligibility of the universe, rooted in what Einstein termed the \"casual connectedness\" of all natural phenomena.\n\nFor Lucretius, the objective was nothing less than the liberation of humanity from \"slavish fear\"\u2014the dread of the gods and the afterlife cultivated by religion and superstition. He sought to achieve this through a strict \"atomistic-mechanical worldview,\" demonstrating that the universe operates through the regular motion of immutable atoms defined solely by geometric-mechanical qualities.\n

2. Section I: The Dual Nature of Reality (Lines 418\u2013429)<\/h3>\n

CORPVS ET INANE ESSE NATVRAM RERVM<\/h4>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Latin Text (Diels 1923)<\/td>\nEnglish Translation (Philological Sense)<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Sed nunc ut repetam coeptum pertexere dictis:<\/td>\nBut now, to resume weaving the web of my discourse:<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
omnis ut est igitur per se natura duabus<\/td>\nAll nature then, as it exists by itself, is founded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
constitit in rebus; nam Corpora sunt et inane,<\/td>\nUpon two things: for there are bodies and there is void,<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
haec in quo sita sunt et qua diuersa mouentur.<\/td>\nIn which these bodies are placed and through which they move.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
corpus enim per se communis dedicat esse<\/td>\nFor the common sense of mankind declares that body<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
sensus; cui nisi prima fides fundata ualebit,<\/td>\nExists by itself; unless our faith in this sense is firm,<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
haut erit occultis de rebus quo referentes<\/td>\nThere will be no standard for hidden things to which<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
confirmare animi quicquam ratione queamus.<\/td>\nWe may refer and confirm anything by the reasoning of the mind.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
tum porro locus ac spatium, quod inane uocamus,<\/td>\nThen further, if there were no place and space, which we call void,<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
si nullum foret, haut usquam sita corpora possent<\/td>\nBodies could nowhere be situated<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
esse neque omnino quoquam diuersa meare;<\/td>\nNor could they move at all in any direction;<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
id quod iam supera tibi paulo ostendimus ante.<\/td>\nThis is what I have already demonstrated to you a little before.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

Scholarly Notes<\/h4>\n
    \n \t
  • Testimonia:<\/b> Ancient witnesses frequently appeal to this foundational division. Seneca (Ep.<\/i> 58, 12) utilizes the Lucretian framework of species and genera to illustrate ontological categories, citing Lucretius alongside Cato and Cicero as primary examples of human \"particulars.\"<\/li>\n \t
  • Codices (Apparatus):<\/b>\n
      \n \t
    • Line 429:<\/b> The primary manuscripts O<\/b> (Oblongus) and Q<\/b> (Quadratus) preserve the reading supera tibi<\/i>. The variant superat ibi<\/i> found in the G<\/b> fragments (Gottorpienses) is considered a scribal corruption. We maintain the Diels preference for the O\/Q tradition here to preserve Lucretian cross-referencing.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

      3. Section II: The Rejection of a Third Nature (Lines 430\u2013651)<\/h3>\n

      TERTIAM NATVRAM NVLLAM ESSE RERVM<\/h4>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
      Latin Text (Diels 1923)<\/td>\nEnglish Translation (Philological Sense)<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      Praeterea nihil est quod possis dicere ab omni<\/td>\nFurthermore, there is nothing which you can say is<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      corpore seiunctum secretumque esse ab inani,<\/td>\nDistinct from all body and severed from the void,<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      quod quasi tertia sit numero natura reperta.<\/td>\nWhich might be discovered as a third nature in the count.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      nam quod cumque erit, esse aliquit debebit id ipsum,<\/td>\nFor whatever shall exist, must itself be something of a size,<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      cui si tactus erit quamuis leuis exiguusque,<\/td>\nWhich, if it possesses a touch however light and small,<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      augmine uel grandi uel paruo denique (dum sit)<\/td>\nBy an increase whether great or small (provided it exists)<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      corporis augebit numerum summamque sequetur:<\/td>\nIt will increase the count of body and join the sum:<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      sin intactile erit, nulla de parte quod ullam<\/td>\nBut if it be intangible, unable to prohibit<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      rem prohibere queat per se transeire meantem,<\/td>\nAny thing from passing through it in its course,<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      scilicet, hoc id erit, uacuum quod inane uocamus.<\/td>\nSurely, this will be that which we call empty void.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      praeterea per se quod cumque erit, aut faciet quid<\/td>\nFurthermore, whatever exists by itself must either act<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      aut aliis fungi debebit agentibus ipsum,<\/td>\nOr suffer other things to act upon it,<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      aut erit ut possint in eo res esse gerique;<\/td>\nOr be such that things can exist and happen within it;<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      at facere et fungi sine corpore nulla potest res,<\/td>\nBut nothing can act or suffer without a body,<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      nec praebere locum porro nisi inane uacansque.<\/td>\nNor can anything provide a place except the empty void.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      ergo praeter inane et corpora tertia per se<\/td>\nTherefore, beyond the void and bodies, no third nature<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      nulla potest rerum in numero natura relinqui,<\/td>\nCan be left remaining in the count of things,<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      nec quae sub sensus cadat ullo tempore nostros,<\/td>\nNone that can ever fall under our senses,<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      nec ratione animi quam quisquam possit apisci.<\/td>\nNor any that the mind's reason can grasp.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      Nam quae cumque cluent, aut his coniuncta duabus<\/td>\nFor whatever is said to exist is either a property<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      rebus ea inuenies aut horum euenta uidebis.<\/td>\nLinked to these two things, or an accident of them.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      coniunctum est id quod nusquam sine permitiali<\/td>\nA property is that which cannot be severed or parted<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      discidio potis est seiungi seque gregari;<\/td>\nWithout a fatal destruction of the thing;<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      pondus uti saaxis, calor ignist, liquor aquai,<\/td>\nAs weight to stones, heat to fire, fluidity to water,<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      tactus corporibus cunctis, intactus inani;<\/td>\nTouch to all bodies, and intangibility to the void.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      seruitium contra, paupertas, diuitiaeque,<\/td>\nBut slavery, poverty, and riches,<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      libertas, bellum, concordia, cetera quorum<\/td>\nLiberty, war, concord\u2014those things whose arrival<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      aduentu manet incolumis natura abituque,<\/td>\nAnd departure leave the nature of the thing intact,<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      haec soliti sumus, ut par est, euenta uocare.<\/td>\nThese we are accustomed, rightly, to call accidents.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      tempus item per se non est, sed rebus ab ipsis<\/td>\nTime likewise exists not by itself, but from things<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      consequitur sensus, transactum quid sit in aeuo,<\/td>\nThe sense follows what has passed in the age,<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      tum quae res instet, quid porro deinde sequatur;<\/td>\nWhat is present, and what follows thereafter;<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      nec per se quemquam tempus sentire faten dumst<\/td>\nNor must it be admitted that anyone feels time by itself<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      semotum ab rerum motu placidaque quiete.<\/td>\nSeparated from the movement or quiet rest of things.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      denique Tyndaridem raptam belloque subactas<\/td>\nFinally, when they say the daughter of Tyndareus was ravished<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      Troiiugenas gentis quom dicunt esse, uidendumst<\/td>\nAnd the Trojan race subdued in war, we must see<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      ne forte haec per se cogant nos esse fateri,<\/td>\nThat they do not force us to admit these events exist by themselves,<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      quando ea saecla hominum, quorum haec euenta fuerunt<\/td>\nSince those generations of men, of whom these were accidents,<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      inreuocabilis abstulerit iam praeterita aetas.<\/td>\nHave already been carried away by irrevocable past time.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      namque aliud terrast, aliud regionibus ipsis<\/td>\nFor one thing is the earth, another the regions themselves<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      euentum dici poterit quod cumque erit actum.<\/td>\nWhich may be called the accident of whatever was done.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      denique materies si rerum nulla fuisset,<\/td>\nFinally, if there had been no matter for things,<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      nec locus ac spatium, res in quo quaeque geruntur,<\/td>\nNor place and space, in which all things are carried out,<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      numquam Tyndaridis forma conflatus amoris<\/td>\nNever would the fire of love, kindled by the beauty of Helen,<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      ignis Alexandri Phrygio sub pectore gliscens<\/td>\nGlowing beneath the Phrygian breast of Alexander,<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      clara accendisset saeui certamina belli,<\/td>\nHave set ablaze the famous contests of cruel war,<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      nec clam durateus Troiianis Pergama partu<\/td>\nNor would the wooden horse, by its secret birth of Greeks,<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      inflammasset equos nocturno Graiiugenarum;<\/td>\nHave set fire to the Trojan Pergama by night;<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      perspicere ut possis res gestas funditus omnis<\/td>\nSo that you may see that all past actions<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      non ita ut corpus per se constare neque esse,<\/td>\nDo not exist or stand by themselves like a body,<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      nec ratione cluere eadem qua constet inane,<\/td>\nNor are they said to exist in the same way as the void,<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      sed magis ut merito possis euenta uocare<\/td>\nBut rather that you may rightly call them the accidents<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      corporis adqae loci, res in quo quaeque gerantur.<\/td>\nOf body and of place, in which all things are carried out.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      Corpora sunt porro partim primordia rerum<\/td>\nBodies, moreover, are partly the first-beginnings of things<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      partim concilio quae constant principiorum.<\/td>\nAnd partly those which consist of a union of first-beginnings.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      sed quae sunt rerum primordia, nulla potest uis<\/td>\nBut those which are the first-beginnings of things, no force<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      stinguere; nam solido uincunt ea corpore demum.<\/td>\nCan quench; for they prevail at last by their solid body.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      etsi difficile esse uidetur credere quicquam<\/td>\nAlthough it seems difficult to believe that anything<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      in rebus solido reperiri corpore posse.<\/td>\nCan be found in things with a solid body.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      transit enim fulmen caeli per saepta domorum,<\/td>\nFor the lightning of heaven passes through the walls of houses,<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      clamor ut ac uoces, ferrum candescit in igni,<\/td>\nAs do shouts and voices; iron glows white in the fire,<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      dissiliuntque fero feruenti saaxa uapore;<\/td>\nAnd rocks leap apart in the fierce, boiling heat;<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      cum labefactatus rigor auri soluitur aestu,<\/td>\nWhen the stiffness of gold is loosened and dissolved by heat,<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      tum glacies aeris flamma deuicta liquescit;<\/td>\nThen the ice of bronze, conquered by flame, melts down;<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      permanat calor argentum penetraleque frigus,<\/td>\nHeat and piercing cold permeate through silver,<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      quando utrumque manu retinentis pocula rite<\/td>\nSince we feel both when we duly hold our cups in hand<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      sensimus infuso lympharum rore superne.<\/td>\nAs the dew of water is poured in from above.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      usque adeo in rebus solidi nihil esse uidetur.<\/td>\nTo such a degree does it seem there is nothing solid in things.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      Sed quia uera tarnen ratio naturaque rerum<\/td>\nBut because true reason and the nature of things<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      cogit, ades, paucis dum uersibus expediamus<\/td>\nCompel us, attend, while in a few verses we explain<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      esse ea quae solido atque aeterno corpore constent,<\/td>\nThat there are those things which consist of a solid and eternal body,<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      semina quae rerum primordiaque esse docemus,<\/td>\nWhich we teach are the seeds and first-beginnings of things,<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
      unde omnis rerum nunc constet summa creata.<\/td>\nFrom which the whole sum of things now created is composed.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

      Scholarly Notes<\/h4>\n
        \n \t
      • Orthography:<\/b> This section strictly adheres to the Diels 1923 apparatus and the \"De Orthographia\" principles. Note the usage of \"adqae\"<\/b> (line 444, 482) and \"quom\"<\/b> (line 465) as authentic ancient Latin variants preserved in the Diels tradition.<\/li>\n \t
      • Manuscript Variants:<\/b>\n
          \n \t
        • Line 434:<\/b> The variant augmine<\/i> is a critical preservation of the archetype.<\/li>\n \t
        • Line 446:<\/b> The codices O<\/b>, Q<\/b>, and G<\/b> read reliqui<\/i>. We follow the correction \"relinqui\"<\/b> to maintain the sense of a nature \"remaining\" in the count.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n \t
        • Wandering Readings (<\/b>uagantis lectionis<\/b><\/i>):<\/b> Diels warns of the uagantis lectionis<\/i> (wandering reading) where corrections in the archetype were misplaced by later scribes. For instance, in line 357, the corrector Os<\/b> restored fieri<\/i> where Q<\/b> and G<\/b> had interpolated ualerent<\/i> from an adjacent context.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

          4. Section III: Critique of the Monists (Lines 652\u2013704)<\/h3>\n

          CONTRA HERACLITVM<\/h4>\nSummary of Argument:<\/i> Following the proof of atoms, Lucretius launches a polemic against the Monists, specifically Heraclitus. He argues that the senses\u2014the very foundation of our knowledge\u2014contradict the reason of those who claim fire is the sole primary substance. If fire is the only reality, there can be no true diversity or change, only the thinning and thickening of a single element, which fails to account for the permanence required by nature.\n

          5. Section IV: Critique of the Pluralists (Lines 705\u2013920)<\/h3>\n

          CONTRA EMPEDOCLEN<\/h4>\nSummary of Argument:<\/i> Lucretius addresses the four-element theory. While he praises Empedocles as the greatest glory of Sicily, he refutes the notion that fire, air, earth, and water are the primary seeds. He argues that these elements are soft, perishable, and changeable; thus, they cannot serve as the eternal foundation of reality.\n

          CONTRA ANAXAGORAN<\/h4>\nSummary of Argument:<\/i> The critique shifts to the Homoeomeria<\/i> of Anaxagoras\u2014the theory that things are made of minute parts identical to the whole (e.g., bone made of tiny bones). Lucretius demonstrates that this leads to an infinite regress and the absurdity of perishable primary elements.\n

          Scholarly Notes<\/h4>\n
            \n \t
          • Testimonia:<\/b>\n
              \n \t
            • Seneca:<\/b> In Epistulae Morales<\/i> 58, 12, Seneca references this philosophical lineage, identifying Lucretius' role in explaining the nature of being.<\/li>\n \t
            • Lactantius:<\/b> In De Ira Dei<\/i> (10, 1), Lactantius acknowledges the weight of Lucretius' arguments even while dismissing them as \"the folly of Epicurus,\" providing a vital witness to the text's survival in the 4th century.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

              6. Section V: The Infinite Universe (Lines 921\u20131117)<\/h3>\n

              THE INFINITE ALL<\/h4>\nSummary of Argument:<\/i> Book I concludes with the proof that the universe has no limit. Lucretius employs the famous \"spear-thrower\" thought experiment: if one travels to the supposed edge of the universe and hurls a spear, the spear must either fly onward (revealing more space) or be blocked (revealing more matter). In either case, the boundary is proven non-existent. Matter and space are both infinite; otherwise, matter would have long ago settled in a heap at the bottom of the void.\n

              Scholarly Notes<\/h4>\n
                \n \t
              • Testimonia:<\/b> The enduring beauty of this vision is captured by Ovid<\/b> (Amor.<\/i> I 15, 22): \"Carmina sublimis tunc sunt peritura Lucreti, \/ exitio terras cum dabit una dies\"<\/i> (The verses of sublime Lucretius shall only perish on the day that gives the earth to destruction).<\/li>\n \t
              • Codices (Apparatus):<\/b> This section relies heavily on the Oblongus (O)<\/b> and Quadratus (Q)<\/b>. In the final reaches of Book I, the Schedae<\/b> (G and V) are essential for correcting the displaced readings in the Q tradition.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

                7. Technical Appendix: Textual Transmission & Pressbooks Usage<\/h3>\n

                Manuscript Guide<\/h4>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
                Siglum<\/td>\nName<\/td>\nDescription<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                O<\/b><\/td>\nOblongus<\/td>\n9th-century Leiden MS. Produced in Alcuin\u2019s school, likely at Fulda<\/b>, later held at St. Martin\u2019s in Mainz<\/b>. Features 20 lines per page.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                Q<\/b><\/td>\nQuadratus<\/td>\n9th-century Leiden MS. Features bipartite pages with 28 lines per column.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                G<\/b><\/td>\nGottorpienses<\/td>\n9th-century fragments (Schedae Haunienses). Part of the same manuscript as V<\/b>.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                V<\/b><\/td>\nVindobonenses<\/td>\n9th-century fragments (Schedae). Shares a common origin with G<\/b>.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n
                  \n \t
                1. <\/li>\n<\/ol>","rendered":"

                  1. Module Introduction and Historical Context<\/h3>\n

                  Welcome to this Open Educational Resource (OER) module designed for the study of Lucretian physics and Epicurean philosophy. This module is built upon the landmark 1923\/24 edition by the German philologist Hermann Diels<\/b>. In the realm of classical scholarship, Diels is celebrated for a text that captures the “natural verses” of Lucretius, providing a rigorous yet fluid reading of the De rerum natura<\/i> that remains a standard in contemporary academia.<\/p>\n

                  Modern Relevance: The Aldine Tradition<\/b> The physical preservation of Lucretius is as storied as his philosophy. The renowned naturalist and broadcaster David Attenborough<\/b> cites the 1515 Aldus Manutius edition of Lucretius as one of his most cherished possessions. Attenborough admires the “wonderfully elegant italic script” of this Venetian paperback, noting that such books are “memes”\u2014vessels where human experience is embedded and handed down outside the body, preserving scientific curiosity across six centuries.<\/p>\n

                  Philosophical Foreword<\/h4>\n

                  In 1924, Albert Einstein<\/b> provided a foreword to the second volume of Diels’ work. Einstein observed that for those who feel like spectators as the world passes them by, Lucretius\u2019 poem works a singular “magic.” He praised Lucretius\u2019 “firm confidence” in the intelligibility of the universe, rooted in what Einstein termed the “casual connectedness” of all natural phenomena.<\/p>\n

                  For Lucretius, the objective was nothing less than the liberation of humanity from “slavish fear”\u2014the dread of the gods and the afterlife cultivated by religion and superstition. He sought to achieve this through a strict “atomistic-mechanical worldview,” demonstrating that the universe operates through the regular motion of immutable atoms defined solely by geometric-mechanical qualities.<\/p>\n

                  2. Section I: The Dual Nature of Reality (Lines 418\u2013429)<\/h3>\n

                  CORPVS ET INANE ESSE NATVRAM RERVM<\/h4>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
                  Latin Text (Diels 1923)<\/td>\nEnglish Translation (Philological Sense)<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                  Sed nunc ut repetam coeptum pertexere dictis:<\/td>\nBut now, to resume weaving the web of my discourse:<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                  omnis ut est igitur per se natura duabus<\/td>\nAll nature then, as it exists by itself, is founded<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                  constitit in rebus; nam Corpora sunt et inane,<\/td>\nUpon two things: for there are bodies and there is void,<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                  haec in quo sita sunt et qua diuersa mouentur.<\/td>\nIn which these bodies are placed and through which they move.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                  corpus enim per se communis dedicat esse<\/td>\nFor the common sense of mankind declares that body<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                  sensus; cui nisi prima fides fundata ualebit,<\/td>\nExists by itself; unless our faith in this sense is firm,<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                  haut erit occultis de rebus quo referentes<\/td>\nThere will be no standard for hidden things to which<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                  confirmare animi quicquam ratione queamus.<\/td>\nWe may refer and confirm anything by the reasoning of the mind.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                  tum porro locus ac spatium, quod inane uocamus,<\/td>\nThen further, if there were no place and space, which we call void,<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                  si nullum foret, haut usquam sita corpora possent<\/td>\nBodies could nowhere be situated<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                  esse neque omnino quoquam diuersa meare;<\/td>\nNor could they move at all in any direction;<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                  id quod iam supera tibi paulo ostendimus ante.<\/td>\nThis is what I have already demonstrated to you a little before.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                  Scholarly Notes<\/h4>\n
                    \n
                  • Testimonia:<\/b> Ancient witnesses frequently appeal to this foundational division. Seneca (Ep.<\/i> 58, 12) utilizes the Lucretian framework of species and genera to illustrate ontological categories, citing Lucretius alongside Cato and Cicero as primary examples of human “particulars.”<\/li>\n
                  • Codices (Apparatus):<\/b>\n
                      \n
                    • Line 429:<\/b> The primary manuscripts O<\/b> (Oblongus) and Q<\/b> (Quadratus) preserve the reading supera tibi<\/i>. The variant superat ibi<\/i> found in the G<\/b> fragments (Gottorpienses) is considered a scribal corruption. We maintain the Diels preference for the O\/Q tradition here to preserve Lucretian cross-referencing.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

                      3. Section II: The Rejection of a Third Nature (Lines 430\u2013651)<\/h3>\n

                      TERTIAM NATVRAM NVLLAM ESSE RERVM<\/h4>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
                      Latin Text (Diels 1923)<\/td>\nEnglish Translation (Philological Sense)<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                      Praeterea nihil est quod possis dicere ab omni<\/td>\nFurthermore, there is nothing which you can say is<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                      corpore seiunctum secretumque esse ab inani,<\/td>\nDistinct from all body and severed from the void,<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                      quod quasi tertia sit numero natura reperta.<\/td>\nWhich might be discovered as a third nature in the count.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                      nam quod cumque erit, esse aliquit debebit id ipsum,<\/td>\nFor whatever shall exist, must itself be something of a size,<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                      cui si tactus erit quamuis leuis exiguusque,<\/td>\nWhich, if it possesses a touch however light and small,<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                      augmine uel grandi uel paruo denique (dum sit)<\/td>\nBy an increase whether great or small (provided it exists)<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                      corporis augebit numerum summamque sequetur:<\/td>\nIt will increase the count of body and join the sum:<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                      sin intactile erit, nulla de parte quod ullam<\/td>\nBut if it be intangible, unable to prohibit<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                      rem prohibere queat per se transeire meantem,<\/td>\nAny thing from passing through it in its course,<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                      scilicet, hoc id erit, uacuum quod inane uocamus.<\/td>\nSurely, this will be that which we call empty void.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                      praeterea per se quod cumque erit, aut faciet quid<\/td>\nFurthermore, whatever exists by itself must either act<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                      aut aliis fungi debebit agentibus ipsum,<\/td>\nOr suffer other things to act upon it,<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                      aut erit ut possint in eo res esse gerique;<\/td>\nOr be such that things can exist and happen within it;<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                      at facere et fungi sine corpore nulla potest res,<\/td>\nBut nothing can act or suffer without a body,<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                      nec praebere locum porro nisi inane uacansque.<\/td>\nNor can anything provide a place except the empty void.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                      ergo praeter inane et corpora tertia per se<\/td>\nTherefore, beyond the void and bodies, no third nature<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                      nulla potest rerum in numero natura relinqui,<\/td>\nCan be left remaining in the count of things,<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                      nec quae sub sensus cadat ullo tempore nostros,<\/td>\nNone that can ever fall under our senses,<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                      nec ratione animi quam quisquam possit apisci.<\/td>\nNor any that the mind’s reason can grasp.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                      Nam quae cumque cluent, aut his coniuncta duabus<\/td>\nFor whatever is said to exist is either a property<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                      rebus ea inuenies aut horum euenta uidebis.<\/td>\nLinked to these two things, or an accident of them.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                      coniunctum est id quod nusquam sine permitiali<\/td>\nA property is that which cannot be severed or parted<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                      discidio potis est seiungi seque gregari;<\/td>\nWithout a fatal destruction of the thing;<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                      pondus uti saaxis, calor ignist, liquor aquai,<\/td>\nAs weight to stones, heat to fire, fluidity to water,<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                      tactus corporibus cunctis, intactus inani;<\/td>\nTouch to all bodies, and intangibility to the void.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                      seruitium contra, paupertas, diuitiaeque,<\/td>\nBut slavery, poverty, and riches,<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                      libertas, bellum, concordia, cetera quorum<\/td>\nLiberty, war, concord\u2014those things whose arrival<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                      aduentu manet incolumis natura abituque,<\/td>\nAnd departure leave the nature of the thing intact,<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                      haec soliti sumus, ut par est, euenta uocare.<\/td>\nThese we are accustomed, rightly, to call accidents.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                      tempus item per se non est, sed rebus ab ipsis<\/td>\nTime likewise exists not by itself, but from things<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                      consequitur sensus, transactum quid sit in aeuo,<\/td>\nThe sense follows what has passed in the age,<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                      tum quae res instet, quid porro deinde sequatur;<\/td>\nWhat is present, and what follows thereafter;<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                      nec per se quemquam tempus sentire faten dumst<\/td>\nNor must it be admitted that anyone feels time by itself<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                      semotum ab rerum motu placidaque quiete.<\/td>\nSeparated from the movement or quiet rest of things.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                      denique Tyndaridem raptam belloque subactas<\/td>\nFinally, when they say the daughter of Tyndareus was ravished<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                      Troiiugenas gentis quom dicunt esse, uidendumst<\/td>\nAnd the Trojan race subdued in war, we must see<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                      ne forte haec per se cogant nos esse fateri,<\/td>\nThat they do not force us to admit these events exist by themselves,<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                      quando ea saecla hominum, quorum haec euenta fuerunt<\/td>\nSince those generations of men, of whom these were accidents,<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                      inreuocabilis abstulerit iam praeterita aetas.<\/td>\nHave already been carried away by irrevocable past time.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                      namque aliud terrast, aliud regionibus ipsis<\/td>\nFor one thing is the earth, another the regions themselves<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                      euentum dici poterit quod cumque erit actum.<\/td>\nWhich may be called the accident of whatever was done.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                      denique materies si rerum nulla fuisset,<\/td>\nFinally, if there had been no matter for things,<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                      nec locus ac spatium, res in quo quaeque geruntur,<\/td>\nNor place and space, in which all things are carried out,<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                      numquam Tyndaridis forma conflatus amoris<\/td>\nNever would the fire of love, kindled by the beauty of Helen,<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                      ignis Alexandri Phrygio sub pectore gliscens<\/td>\nGlowing beneath the Phrygian breast of Alexander,<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                      clara accendisset saeui certamina belli,<\/td>\nHave set ablaze the famous contests of cruel war,<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                      nec clam durateus Troiianis Pergama partu<\/td>\nNor would the wooden horse, by its secret birth of Greeks,<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                      inflammasset equos nocturno Graiiugenarum;<\/td>\nHave set fire to the Trojan Pergama by night;<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                      perspicere ut possis res gestas funditus omnis<\/td>\nSo that you may see that all past actions<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                      non ita ut corpus per se constare neque esse,<\/td>\nDo not exist or stand by themselves like a body,<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                      nec ratione cluere eadem qua constet inane,<\/td>\nNor are they said to exist in the same way as the void,<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                      sed magis ut merito possis euenta uocare<\/td>\nBut rather that you may rightly call them the accidents<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                      corporis adqae loci, res in quo quaeque gerantur.<\/td>\nOf body and of place, in which all things are carried out.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                      Corpora sunt porro partim primordia rerum<\/td>\nBodies, moreover, are partly the first-beginnings of things<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                      partim concilio quae constant principiorum.<\/td>\nAnd partly those which consist of a union of first-beginnings.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                      sed quae sunt rerum primordia, nulla potest uis<\/td>\nBut those which are the first-beginnings of things, no force<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                      stinguere; nam solido uincunt ea corpore demum.<\/td>\nCan quench; for they prevail at last by their solid body.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                      etsi difficile esse uidetur credere quicquam<\/td>\nAlthough it seems difficult to believe that anything<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                      in rebus solido reperiri corpore posse.<\/td>\nCan be found in things with a solid body.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                      transit enim fulmen caeli per saepta domorum,<\/td>\nFor the lightning of heaven passes through the walls of houses,<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                      clamor ut ac uoces, ferrum candescit in igni,<\/td>\nAs do shouts and voices; iron glows white in the fire,<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                      dissiliuntque fero feruenti saaxa uapore;<\/td>\nAnd rocks leap apart in the fierce, boiling heat;<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                      cum labefactatus rigor auri soluitur aestu,<\/td>\nWhen the stiffness of gold is loosened and dissolved by heat,<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                      tum glacies aeris flamma deuicta liquescit;<\/td>\nThen the ice of bronze, conquered by flame, melts down;<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                      permanat calor argentum penetraleque frigus,<\/td>\nHeat and piercing cold permeate through silver,<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                      quando utrumque manu retinentis pocula rite<\/td>\nSince we feel both when we duly hold our cups in hand<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                      sensimus infuso lympharum rore superne.<\/td>\nAs the dew of water is poured in from above.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                      usque adeo in rebus solidi nihil esse uidetur.<\/td>\nTo such a degree does it seem there is nothing solid in things.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                      Sed quia uera tarnen ratio naturaque rerum<\/td>\nBut because true reason and the nature of things<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                      cogit, ades, paucis dum uersibus expediamus<\/td>\nCompel us, attend, while in a few verses we explain<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                      esse ea quae solido atque aeterno corpore constent,<\/td>\nThat there are those things which consist of a solid and eternal body,<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                      semina quae rerum primordiaque esse docemus,<\/td>\nWhich we teach are the seeds and first-beginnings of things,<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                      unde omnis rerum nunc constet summa creata.<\/td>\nFrom which the whole sum of things now created is composed.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

                      Scholarly Notes<\/h4>\n
                        \n
                      • Orthography:<\/b> This section strictly adheres to the Diels 1923 apparatus and the “De Orthographia” principles. Note the usage of “adqae”<\/b> (line 444, 482) and “quom”<\/b> (line 465) as authentic ancient Latin variants preserved in the Diels tradition.<\/li>\n
                      • Manuscript Variants:<\/b>\n
                          \n
                        • Line 434:<\/b> The variant augmine<\/i> is a critical preservation of the archetype.<\/li>\n
                        • Line 446:<\/b> The codices O<\/b>, Q<\/b>, and G<\/b> read reliqui<\/i>. We follow the correction “relinqui”<\/b> to maintain the sense of a nature “remaining” in the count.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n
                        • Wandering Readings (<\/b>uagantis lectionis<\/b><\/i>):<\/b> Diels warns of the uagantis lectionis<\/i> (wandering reading) where corrections in the archetype were misplaced by later scribes. For instance, in line 357, the corrector Os<\/b> restored fieri<\/i> where Q<\/b> and G<\/b> had interpolated ualerent<\/i> from an adjacent context.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

                          4. Section III: Critique of the Monists (Lines 652\u2013704)<\/h3>\n

                          CONTRA HERACLITVM<\/h4>\n

                          Summary of Argument:<\/i> Following the proof of atoms, Lucretius launches a polemic against the Monists, specifically Heraclitus. He argues that the senses\u2014the very foundation of our knowledge\u2014contradict the reason of those who claim fire is the sole primary substance. If fire is the only reality, there can be no true diversity or change, only the thinning and thickening of a single element, which fails to account for the permanence required by nature.<\/p>\n

                          5. Section IV: Critique of the Pluralists (Lines 705\u2013920)<\/h3>\n

                          CONTRA EMPEDOCLEN<\/h4>\n

                          Summary of Argument:<\/i> Lucretius addresses the four-element theory. While he praises Empedocles as the greatest glory of Sicily, he refutes the notion that fire, air, earth, and water are the primary seeds. He argues that these elements are soft, perishable, and changeable; thus, they cannot serve as the eternal foundation of reality.<\/p>\n

                          CONTRA ANAXAGORAN<\/h4>\n

                          Summary of Argument:<\/i> The critique shifts to the Homoeomeria<\/i> of Anaxagoras\u2014the theory that things are made of minute parts identical to the whole (e.g., bone made of tiny bones). Lucretius demonstrates that this leads to an infinite regress and the absurdity of perishable primary elements.<\/p>\n

                          Scholarly Notes<\/h4>\n
                            \n
                          • Testimonia:<\/b>\n
                              \n
                            • Seneca:<\/b> In Epistulae Morales<\/i> 58, 12, Seneca references this philosophical lineage, identifying Lucretius’ role in explaining the nature of being.<\/li>\n
                            • Lactantius:<\/b> In De Ira Dei<\/i> (10, 1), Lactantius acknowledges the weight of Lucretius’ arguments even while dismissing them as “the folly of Epicurus,” providing a vital witness to the text’s survival in the 4th century.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

                              6. Section V: The Infinite Universe (Lines 921\u20131117)<\/h3>\n

                              THE INFINITE ALL<\/h4>\n

                              Summary of Argument:<\/i> Book I concludes with the proof that the universe has no limit. Lucretius employs the famous “spear-thrower” thought experiment: if one travels to the supposed edge of the universe and hurls a spear, the spear must either fly onward (revealing more space) or be blocked (revealing more matter). In either case, the boundary is proven non-existent. Matter and space are both infinite; otherwise, matter would have long ago settled in a heap at the bottom of the void.<\/p>\n

                              Scholarly Notes<\/h4>\n
                                \n
                              • Testimonia:<\/b> The enduring beauty of this vision is captured by Ovid<\/b> (Amor.<\/i> I 15, 22): “Carmina sublimis tunc sunt peritura Lucreti, \/ exitio terras cum dabit una dies”<\/i> (The verses of sublime Lucretius shall only perish on the day that gives the earth to destruction).<\/li>\n
                              • Codices (Apparatus):<\/b> This section relies heavily on the Oblongus (O)<\/b> and Quadratus (Q)<\/b>. In the final reaches of Book I, the Schedae<\/b> (G and V) are essential for correcting the displaced readings in the Q tradition.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n

                                7. Technical Appendix: Textual Transmission & Pressbooks Usage<\/h3>\n

                                Manuscript Guide<\/h4>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
                                Siglum<\/td>\nName<\/td>\nDescription<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                                O<\/b><\/td>\nOblongus<\/td>\n9th-century Leiden MS. Produced in Alcuin\u2019s school, likely at Fulda<\/b>, later held at St. Martin\u2019s in Mainz<\/b>. Features 20 lines per page.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                                Q<\/b><\/td>\nQuadratus<\/td>\n9th-century Leiden MS. Features bipartite pages with 28 lines per column.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                                G<\/b><\/td>\nGottorpienses<\/td>\n9th-century fragments (Schedae Haunienses). Part of the same manuscript as V<\/b>.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
                                V<\/b><\/td>\nVindobonenses<\/td>\n9th-century fragments (Schedae). Shares a common origin with G<\/b>.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n
                                  \n
                                1. <\/li>\n<\/ol>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"menu_order":6,"template":"","meta":{"pb_show_title":"on","pb_short_title":"","pb_subtitle":"","pb_authors":[],"pb_section_license":""},"chapter-type":[],"contributor":[],"license":[],"class_list":["post-29","chapter","type-chapter","status-publish","hentry"],"part":18,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.psgaesthetics.uk\/lucretius\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/29","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.psgaesthetics.uk\/lucretius\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.psgaesthetics.uk\/lucretius\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/chapter"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.psgaesthetics.uk\/lucretius\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.psgaesthetics.uk\/lucretius\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/29\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":30,"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.psgaesthetics.uk\/lucretius\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/29\/revisions\/30"}],"part":[{"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.psgaesthetics.uk\/lucretius\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/parts\/18"}],"metadata":[{"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.psgaesthetics.uk\/lucretius\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/29\/metadata\/"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.psgaesthetics.uk\/lucretius\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=29"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"chapter-type","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.psgaesthetics.uk\/lucretius\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapter-type?post=29"},{"taxonomy":"contributor","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.psgaesthetics.uk\/lucretius\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/contributor?post=29"},{"taxonomy":"license","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.psgaesthetics.uk\/lucretius\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/license?post=29"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}