Book contents
- Lucretius and the End of Masculinity
- Lucretius and the End of Masculinity
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Acknowledgments
- Abbreviations
- Chapter 1 Odd Men Out
- Chapter 2 Humbled Beginnings
- Chapter 3 Nature’s Assault upon the Senses
- Chapter 4 Death: The Hole That Gapes for All
- Chapter 5 The Ties That Bind
- Chapter 6 Vir Recreandus
- Bibliography
- Index
- Subject Index
- References
Bibliography
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 11 May 2023
Book contents
- Lucretius and the End of Masculinity
- Lucretius and the End of Masculinity
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Acknowledgments
- Abbreviations
- Chapter 1 Odd Men Out
- Chapter 2 Humbled Beginnings
- Chapter 3 Nature’s Assault upon the Senses
- Chapter 4 Death: The Hole That Gapes for All
- Chapter 5 The Ties That Bind
- Chapter 6 Vir Recreandus
- Bibliography
- Index
- Subject Index
- References
Summary
A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Lucretius and the End of Masculinity , pp. 194 - 216Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2023
References
Adkins, A. W. H. 1977. “Lucretius 1.136–39 and the Problems of Writing versus Latini.” Phoenix 31: 145–58.Google Scholar
Algra, K. 1997. “Lucretius and the Epicurean Other: On the Philosophical Background of DRN V.1011–1027.” In Algra, K. A., Koenen, M. H., and Schrijvers, P. H., eds. Lucretius and His Intellectual Background. Amsterdam. 141–50.Google Scholar
Algra, K., Barnes, J., Mansfeld, J., and Schofield, M., eds. 1999. The Cambridge History of Hellenistic Philosophy. Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Algra, K. A., Koenen, M. H., and Schrijvers, P. H., eds. 1997. Lucretius and His Intellectual Background. Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Arkins, B. 1984. “Epicurus and Lucretius on Sex, Love, and Marriage.” Apeiron 18: 141–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Asmis, E. 1970. “The Epicurean Theory of Free Will and Its Origins in Aristotle.” PhD Dissertation. Haven CT.Google Scholar
Asmis, E. 1991. “Philodemus’s Poetic Theory and On the Good King According to Homer.” ClAnt 10: 1–45.Google Scholar
Asmis, E. 1995. “Epicurean Poetics.” In Obbink, D., ed. Philodemus and Poetry: Poetic Theory and Practice in Lucretius, Philodemus, and Horace. Oxford. 15–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Asmis, E. 1996. “Lucretius on the Growth of Ideas.” In Giannantoni, G. and Gigante, M., eds. Epicureismo Greco e romano: Atti del Congresso Internazionale, Napoli 1–26 maggio 1993. Naples. 763–78.Google Scholar
Asmis, E. 2008. “Lucretius’ New World Order: Making a Pact with Nature.” CQ 58: 141–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Asmis, E. 2009. “Epicurean Empiricism.” In Warren, J., ed. The Cambridge Companion to Epicureanism. Cambridge. 84–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Asmis, E. 2020. “Psychology.” In Mitsis, P., ed. The Oxford Handbook of Epicurus and Epicureanism. Oxford. 189–220.Google Scholar
Asmis, E. 2022. “Love It or Leave It: Nature’s Ultimatum in Lucretius’ On the Nature of Things (3.931–962).” In Yona, S. and Davis, G., eds. Epicurus in Rome: Philosophical Perspectives in the Ciceronian Age. Cambridge. 111–28.Google Scholar
Austin, E. 2012. “Epicurus and the Politics of Fearing Death.” Apeiron 45: 109–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Auvray-Assayas, C. 2003. “Lucrèce et Cicéron sur la poétique de la traduction: note au De rerum natura I, 116–145/I, 921–950.” In Monet, A., ed. Le jardin romain, épicurisme et poésie à Rome: Mélanges offerts à Mayotte Bollack. Lille. 165–69.Google Scholar
Bailey, C. 1947. Lucretius: De Rerum Natura: Edited, with Prolegomena, Critical Apparatus, Translation and Commentary. 3 vols. Oxford.Google Scholar
Bartman, E. 2002. “Eros’s Flame: Images of Sexy Boys in Roman Ideal Sculpture.” In Gazda, E. K., ed. The Ancient Art of Emulation: Studies in Artistic Originality and Tradition from the Present to Classical Antiquity. Ann Arbor, MI. 249–71.Google Scholar
Barton, C. A. 1993. The Sorrows of the Ancient Romans: The Gladiator and the Monster. Princeton, NJ.Google Scholar
Barton, C. A. 2002. “Being in the Eyes: Shame and Sight in Ancient Rome.” In Fredrick, D., ed. The Roman Gaze: Vision, Power, and the Body. Baltimore, MD. 216–35.Google Scholar
Bartsch, S. 2006. The Mirror of the Self: Sexuality, Self-Knowledge, and the Gaze in the Early Roman Empire. Chicago, IL.Google Scholar
Bergren, A. L. T. 1983. “Language and the Female in Early Greek Thought.” Arethusa 16: 69–95.Google Scholar
Berryman, S. 2002. “Democritus and the Explanatory Power of the Void.” In Caston, V. and Graham, D., eds. Presocratic Philosophy: Essays in Honour of Alexander Mourelatos. London. 183–91.Google Scholar
Bettenworth, A. 2012. “Phaeacians at the Birthday Party: A. P. 11.44 (Philodemus) and Its Epic Background.” Aitia 2:1–11. http://journals.openedition.org/fitia/380. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4000/fitia.380.Google Scholar
Blayney, J. 1986. “Theories of Conception in the Ancient Roman World.” In Rawson, B. ed. The Family in Ancient Rome: New Perspectives. Sydney. 230–36.Google Scholar
Boylan, M. 1984. “The Galenic and Hippocratic Challenges to Aristotle’s Conception Theory.” JBH 17: 83–112.Google Scholar
Braund, D. 1996. “The Politics of Catullus 10: Memmius, Caesar, and the Bithynians.” Hermathena 160: 45–57.Google Scholar
Bright, D. F. 1971. “The Plague and the Structure of De rerum natura.” Latomus 30: 607–32.Google ScholarPubMed
Brown, R. D. 1987. Lucretius on Love and Sex: A Commentary on De Rerum Natura IV, 1030–1287 with Prolegomena, Text, and Translation. Leiden.Google Scholar
Brown, R. D. 2017. “Lucretius’ Malodorous Mistress (De Rerum Natura 4.1175).” CJ 113: 26–43.Google Scholar
Buchheit, V. 1984. “Lukrez über den Ursprung von Musik und Dichtung.” RhM 127: 141–58.Google Scholar
Butterfield, D. 2014. “Lucretius Auctus? The Question of Interpolation in De Rerum Natura.” In Martínez, J., ed. Fakes and Forgers of Classical Literature: Ergo decipiatur! Leiden. 15–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Butterfield, D. 2020. “Critical Responses to the Most Difficult Textual Problem in Lucretius.” In O’Rourke, D., ed. Approaches to Lucretius: Traditions and Innovations in Reading the De Natura Deorum. Cambridge. 19–39.Google Scholar
Cabisius, G. 1979. “Lucretius’ Statement of Poetic Intent.” In Deroux, C., ed. Studies in Latin Literature and Roman History. Brussels. 1: 239–48.Google Scholar
Cabisius, G. 1984–85. “Social Metaphor and the Atomic Cycle in Lucretius.” CJ 80: 109–20.Google Scholar
Campbell, G. 1999. Review of Sedley 1998. BMCR 10.29. https://bmcr.brynmawr.edu/1999/1999.10.29/Google Scholar
Campbell, G. 2002. “Lucretius 5.1011–27: The Origins of Justice and the Prisoner’s Dilemma.” Leeds International Classical Studies 1: 1–12.Google Scholar
Campbell, G. 2003. Lucretius on Creation and Evolution: A Commentary on De Rerum Natura Book Five, Lines 722–1004. Oxford.Google Scholar
Campbell, G. 2008. “‘And Bright was the Flame of their Friendship’ (Empedocles B130): Humans, Animals, Justice, and Friendship, in Lucretius and Empedocles.” Leeds International Classical Studies 7: 1–23.Google Scholar
Carson, A. 1990. “Putting Her in Her Place: Woman, Dirt, and Desire.” In Halperin, D. M., Winkler, J. J., and Zeitlin, F. I., eds. 1990. Before Sexuality: The Construction of Erotic Experience in the Ancient Greek World. Princeton, NJ. 135–69.Google Scholar
Case, S. J. 1915. “The Religion of Lucretius.” American Journal of Theology 19: 92–107.Google Scholar
Caston, R. R. 2006. “Love as Illness: Poets and Philosophers on Romantic Love.” CJ 101: 271–98.Google Scholar
Catto, B. A. 1988–89. “Venus and Natura in Lucretius: De Rerum Natura 1. 1–23 and 2.167–74.” CJ 84: 97–104.Google Scholar
Charlier, P. 2008. “Review of Hillman 2008.” BMCR 12.29. https://bmcr.brynmawr.edu/2008/2008.12.29/.Google Scholar
Chilton, C. W. 1960. “Did Epicurus Approve of Marriage? A Study of Diogenes Laertius X, 119.” Phronesis 5: 71–74.Google Scholar
Cilliers, L. 2004. “Vindicianus’ Gynaecia and Theories on Generation and Embryology from the Babylonians up to Graeco-Roman Times.” In Horstmanshoff, M. and Stol, M., eds. Magic and Rationality in Ancient Near Eastern and Graeco-Roman Medicine. Leiden. 344–67.Google Scholar
Císař, K. 2001. Epicurean Epistemology in Lucretius’ “De rerum natura” IV 1–822. LF 124: 1–54.Google Scholar
Clarke, J. R. 2002 “Look Who’s Laughing at Sex: Men and Women Viewers at the Apodyterium of the Suburban Baths at Pompeii.” In Fredrick, D., ed. The Roman Gaze: Vision, Power, and the Body. Baltimore, MD. 149–82.Google Scholar
Clarke, M. T. 2014. “Doing Violence to the Roman Idea of Liberty? Freedom as Bodily Integrity in Roman Political Thought.” HPTh 35: 211–33.Google Scholar
Clay, D. 1969. “De Rerum Natura: Greek Physis and Epicurean Physiologia (Lucretius 1.1–148). TAPhA 100: 31–47.Google Scholar
Clay, D. 1976. “The Sources of Lucretius’ Inspiration.” In Bollack, J. and Laks, A., eds. Études sur l’épicurisme antique. Lille. 204–27.Google Scholar
Clay, D. 1996. “An Anatomy of Lucretian Metaphor.” In Giannantoni, G. and Gigante, M., eds. Epicureismo Greco e Romano: Atti del Congresso Internazionale, Napoli, 19–26 Maggia 1993. Naples. 779–93.Google Scholar
Clay, D. 1997. “Lucretius’ Gigantomachy.” In Algra, K. A., Koenen, M. H., and Schrijvers, P. H., eds. Lucretius and His Intellectual Background. Amsterdam. 187–92.Google Scholar
Clay, D. 2003. “Lucretius’ Honeyed Muse: The History and Meaning of a Simile.” In Monet, A., ed. Le jardin romain, épicurisme et poésie à Rome: Mélanges offerts à Mayotte Bollack. Lille. 183–96.Google Scholar
Clay, D. 2009. “The Athenian Garden.” In Warren, J., ed. The Cambridge Companion to Epicureanism. Cambridge. 9–29.Google Scholar
Clayton, B. 1999. “Lucretius’ Erotic Mother: Maternity as a Poetic Construct in De Rerum Natura.” Helios 26: 69–84.Google Scholar
Cole, T. 1998. “Venus and Mars (De Rerum Natura 1.31–40).” In Knox, P. and Foss, C., eds. Style and Tradition: Studies in Honor of Wendell Clausen. Stuttgart. 3–15.Google Scholar
Colish, M. L. 1990. The Stoic Tradition from Antiquity to the Early Middle Ages: I. Stoicism in Classical Latin Literature. Leiden.Google Scholar
Connell, S. M. 2000. “Aristotle and Galen on Sex Difference and Reproduction: A New Approach to an Ancient Rivalry.” SHPS 31: 405–27.Google Scholar
Copley, F. O. 1956. Exclusus Amator: A Study in Latin Love Poetry. Philological Monographs 17. Baltimore, MD.Google Scholar
Corbeill, A. 1996. Controlling Laughter: Political Humor in the Late Roman Republic. Princeton, NJ.Google Scholar
Corbeill, A. 2015. Sexing the World: Grammatical Gender and Biological Sex in Ancient Rome. Princeton, NJ.Google Scholar
Cowan, R. 2013. “Fear and Loathing in Lucretius: Latent Tragedy and Anti-Allusion in DRN 3.” In Papanghelis, T. D., Harrison, S. J., and Frangoulidis, S., eds. Generic Interfaces in Latin Literature: Encounters, Interactions and Transformations. Berlin. 113–33.Google Scholar
Cullingford, E. B. 1996. “British Romans and Irish Carthaginians: Anticolonial Metaphor in Heaney, Friel, and McGuinness.” PMLA 111: 222–39.Google Scholar
Dalzell, A. 1996. The Criticism of Didactic Poetry: Essays on Lucretius, Virgil, and Ovid. Toronto.Google Scholar
Davies, H. S. 1986. “Notes on Lucretius.” In Classen, C. J., ed. Probleme der Lukrezforschung. Hildesheim. 25–42.Google Scholar
Desmouliez, A. 1958. “Cupidité, ambition et crainte de la chez de la mort Lucrèce (de R. N. III, 59–93).” Latomus 17: 317–23.Google Scholar
Dionigi, I. 2003. “Lucrezio ovvero la grammatical del cosmo.” In Monet, A., ed. Le jardin romain, épicurisme et poésie à Rome: Mélanges offerts à Mayotte Bollack. Lille. 227–32.Google Scholar
Doherty, L. E. 1995. Siren Songs: Gender, Audiences, and Narrators in the Odyssey. Ann Arbor, MI.Google Scholar
Donahue, H. 1993. The Song of the Swan: Lucretius and the Influence of Callimachus. New York, NY.Google Scholar
Duban, J. M. 1982. “Venus, Epicurus, and Naturae Species Ratioque.” TAPhA 103: 165–77.Google Scholar
duBois, P. 1988. Sowing the Body: Psychoanalysis and Ancient Representations of Women. Chicago, IL.Google Scholar
Edmunds, L. 2002. “Mars As Hellenistic Lover: Lucretius, ‘De rerum natura’ 1. 29–40 and Its Subtexts.” IJCT 8: 343–58.Google Scholar
Edwards, M. J. 1993. “‘Aeternus Lepos’: Venus, Lucretius, and the Fear of Death.” G&R 40: 68–78.Google Scholar
Englert, W. 2020. “Voluntary Action and Responsibility.” In Mitsis, P., ed. The Oxford Handbook of Epicurus and Epicureanism. Oxford. 221–49.Google Scholar
Erler, M. 1997. “Physics and Therapy: Meditative Elements in Lucretius’ De rerum natura.” In Algra, K. A., Koenen, M. H., and Schrijvers, P. H., eds. Lucretius and His Intellectual Background. Amsterdam. 79–92.Google Scholar
Erler, M. 1999. “Epicurean Ethics.” In Algra, K., Barnes, J., Mansfeld, J., and Schofield, M., eds. The Cambridge History of Hellenistic Philosophy. Cambridge. 642–74.Google Scholar
Erler, M. 2011. “Autodidact and Student: On the Relationship of Authority and Autonomy in Epicurus and the Epicurean tradition.” In Fish, J. and Sanders, K. R., eds. Epicurus and the Epicurean Tradition. Cambridge. 9–28.Google Scholar
Ernout, A. and Robin, L., eds. 1962. Lucrèce, De Rervm Natvra: Commentaire exégétique et critique, précédé d’une introduction sur l’art de Lucrèce et d’une traduction des lettres et pensées d’Épicure. 3 vols. Paris.Google Scholar
Esolen, A. M., ed. and trans. 1995. Lucretius: On the Nature of Things: De Rerum Natura. Baltimore, MD.Google Scholar
Everson, S. 1990. “Epicurus on the Truth of the Senses.” In Everson, S., ed. Epistemology. Cambridge. 161–83.Google Scholar
Farrell, J. 2001. Latin Language and Latin Culture from Ancient to Modern Times. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Farrell, J. 2022. “Was Memmius a Good King?” In O’Rourke, D., ed. Approaches to Lucretius: Traditions and Innovations in Reading the De Natura Deorum. Cambridge. 219–40.Google Scholar
Fish, J. 2011. “Not All Politicians Are Sisyphus: What Roman Epicureans Were Taught about Politics.” In Fish, J. and Sanders, K. R., eds. Epicurus and the Epicurean Tradition. Cambridge. 72–104.Google Scholar
Fish, J. and Sanders, K. R., eds. 2011. Epicurus and the Epicurean Tradition. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Fitzgerald, W. 1995. Catullan Provocations: Lyric Poetry and the Drama of Position. Berkeley, CA.Google Scholar
Fletcher, J. 2008. “Women’s Space and Wingless Words in the Odyssey.” Phoenix 62: 77–91.Google Scholar
Fögen, T. 2009. “Sermo corporis: Ancient Reflections on gestus, vultus and vox.” In Thorsten Fögen, T. and Lee, M. M., eds. Bodies and Boundaries in Graeco-Roman Antiquity. Berlin. 15–43.Google Scholar
Fowler, D. P. 1983. “Lucretius on the Clinamen and ‘Free Will’ (II 251–93.” In Συζήτησις: studi sull’epicureismo greco e romano offerti a Marcello Gigante. 2 vols. Naples. 1.329–52.Google Scholar
Fowler, D. P. 1989. “Lucretius and Politics.” In Griffin, M. and Barnes, J., eds. Philosophia Togata: Essays on Philosophy and Roman Society. Oxford. 120–50.Google Scholar
Fowler, D. P. 1996. “The Feminine Principal: Gender in the De Rerum Natura.” In Giannantoni, G. and Gigante, M., eds. Epicureismo Greco e romano: Atti del Congresso Internazionale, Napoli 1–26 maggio 1993. Naples. 813–22.Google Scholar
Fowler, D. P. 2000a. “The Didactic Plot.” In Depew, M. and Obbink, D., eds. Matrices of Genre: Authors, Canons, and Society. Cambridge, MA. 205–19.Google Scholar
Fowler, D. P. 2000b. “Philosophy and Literature in Lucretian Intertextuality.” In Fowler, D. P., ed. Roman Constructions: Readings in Postmodern Latin. Oxford. 138–55.Google Scholar
Fowler, D. P. 2002a. Lucretius on Atomic Motion: A Commentary on De Rerum Natura Book Two, Lines 1–332. Oxford.Google Scholar
Fowler, D. P. 2002b. “Masculinity under Threat? The Poetics and Politics of Inspiration in Latin Poetry.” In Spentzou, E. and Fowler, D., eds. Cultivating the Muse: Struggles for Power and Inspiration in Classical Literature. Oxford. 141–59.Google Scholar
Fowler, P. G. 1997. “Lucretian Conclusions.” In Roberts, D. H., Dunn, F. M., and Fowler, D. P., eds. Classical Closure: Reading the End in Greek and Latin Literature. Princeton, NJ. 112–38.Google Scholar
Fredrick, D. 2002a. “Introduction: Invisible Rome.” In Fredrick, D., ed. The Roman Gaze: Vision, Power, and the Body. Baltimore, MD. 1–30.Google Scholar
Fredrick, D. 2002b. “Mapping Penetrability in Late Republican and Early Imperial Rome.” In Fredrick, D., ed. The Roman Gaze: Vision, Power, and the Body. Baltimore, MD. 236–64.Google Scholar
Friedländer, P. 1941. “Pattern of Sound and Atomistic Theory in Lucretius.” AJPh 62: 16–34.Google Scholar
Frischer, B. 1982. The Sculpted Word: Epicureanism and Philosophical Recruitment in Ancient Greece. Berkeley, CA.Google Scholar
Furley, D. J. 1971. “Knowledge of Atoms and Void in Epicureanism.” In Anton, J. P. and Kustas, G. L., eds. Essays in Ancient Greek Philosophy. Albany, NY. 607–19.Google Scholar
Furley, D. J. 1978. “Lucretius the Epicurean: On the History of Man.” In Gigon, O., ed. Lucrèce: Huit exposés suivis de discussion. Geneva. 1–27.Google Scholar
Furley, D. J. 1986. “Nothing to Us?” In Schofield, M. and Striker, G., eds. The Norms of Nature: Studies in Hellenistic Ethics. Cambridge. 75–91.Google Scholar
Furley, D. J. 1993. “Democritus and Epicurus on Sensible Qualities.” In Passions and Perceptions. 72–94.Google Scholar
Furley, D. J. 1999. “Cosmology.” In Algra, K., Barnes, J., Mansfeld, J., and Schofield, M., eds. The Cambridge History of Hellenistic Philosophy. 412–51.Google Scholar
Gale, M. R. 1994a. “Lucretius 4. 1–25 and the Proems of the De Rerum Natura. PCPhS 40: 1–17.Google Scholar
Gale, M. R. 2007a. “Lucretius and Previous Poetic Traditions.” In Gillespie, S. and Hardie, P., eds. The Cambridge Companion to Lucretius. Cambridge. 59–75.Google Scholar
Gale, M. R. 2013. “Piety, Labour, and Justice in Lucretius and Hesiod.” In Lehoux, D., Morrison, A. D., and Sharrock, A., eds. Lucretius: Poetry, Philosophy, Science. Oxford. 25–50.Google Scholar
Gale, M. R. 2018. “Contemplating Violence: Lucretius’ De rerum natura.” In Gale, M. R. and Scourfield, J. H. D., eds. Texts and Violence in the Roman World. Cambridge. 63–86.Google Scholar
Gale, M. R. 2020. “Lucretius.” In Mitsis, P., ed. The Oxford Handbook of Epicurus and Epicureanism. Oxford. 430–55.Google Scholar
Gale, M. R. 2022. “Otium and Voluptas: Catullus and Roman Epicureanism.” In Yona, S. and Davis, G., eds. Epicurus in Rome: Philosophical Perspectives in the Ciceronian Age. Cambridge. 87–108.Google Scholar
Gale, M. R. and Scourfield, J. H. D., eds. 2018. Texts and Violence in the Roman World. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Galzerano, M. 2017. “Ending with World Destruction: A Closural Device in Lucretius’ De Rerum Natura and Its Influence on Later Latin Poetry.” Graeco-Latina Brunensi 22: 43–55.Google Scholar
Gee, E. 2020. “The Rising and Setting Soul in Lucretius, De Rerum Natura 3.” In O’Rourke, D., ed. Approaches to Lucretius: Traditions and Innovations in Reading the De Natura Deorum. Cambridge. 195–215.Google Scholar
Gellar-Goad, T. H. M. 2018. “Lucretius’ Personified Natura Rerum, Satire, and Ennius’ Saturae.” Phoenix 72: 143–60.Google Scholar
Gellar-Goad, T. H. M. 2020. Laughing Atoms, Laughing Matter: Lucretius’ De Rerum Natura and Satire. Ann Arbor, MI.Google Scholar
Gellar-Goad, T. H. M. 2022. “Lucretius on the Size of the Sun.” In Yona, S. and Davis, G., eds. Epicurus in Rome: Philosophical Perspectives in the Ciceronian Age. Cambridge. 168–85.Google Scholar
Gigandet, A. 1996. “Natura gubernans (Lucrèce, V, 77).” In Lévy, C., ed. Le Concept de nature à Rome: la physique. Paris. 213–25.Google Scholar
Gigandet, A. 1997. “L’interprétation des mythes comme lieu et enjeu de la polémique philosophique dans le De rerum natura.” In Algra, K. A., Koenen, M. H., and Schrijvers, P. H. eds. Lucretius and His Intellectual Background. Amsterdam. 209–13.Google Scholar
Gigandet, A. 1999. “De l’amour: Vénus de Lucrèce & Érôs platonicien.” In Présence de Lucrèce. 77–85.Google Scholar
Gillespie, S. and Hardie, P., eds. 2007. The Cambridge Companion to Lucretius. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Gladman, K. R. and Mitsis, P. 1997. “Lucretius and the Unconscious.” In Algra, K. A., Koenen, M. H., and Schrijvers, P. H. eds. Lucretius and His Intellectual Background. Amsterdam. 215–24.Google Scholar
Gleason, M. W. 1995. Making Men: Sophist and Self-Presentation in Ancient Rome. Princeton, NJ.Google Scholar
Glidden, D. K. 1979a. “Sensus and Sense Perception in the De Rerum natura.” ClAnt 12: 155–81.Google Scholar
Goldhill, S. 2002. “The Erotic Experience of Looking: Cultural Conflict and the Gaze in Empire Culture.” In Nussbaum, M. C. and Sihvola, J., eds. The Sleep of Reason: Erotic Experience and Sexual Ethics in Ancient Rome and Greece. Chicago, IL. 374–99.Google Scholar
Goldschmidt, N. 2020. “Reading the ‘Implied Author’ in Lucretius’ De Rerum Natura.” In O’Rourke, D., ed. Approaches to Lucretius: Traditions and Innovations in Reading the De Natura Deorum. Cambridge. 43–58.Google Scholar
Gordon, P. 1996. Epicurus in Lycia: The Second-Century World of Diogenes of Oinoanda. Ann Arbor, MI.Google Scholar
Gordon, P. 2002. “Some Unseen Monster: Rereading Lucretius on Sex.” In Fredrick, D., ed. The Roman Gaze: Vision, Power, and the Body. Baltimore, MD. 86–109.Google Scholar
Gordon, P. 2022. “Kitsch, Death and the Epicurean.” In Yona, S. and Davis, G., eds. Epicurus in Rome: Philosophical Perspectives in the Ciceronian Age. Cambridge. 129–46.Google Scholar
Görler, W. 1997. “Storing Up Past Pleasures: The Soul-Vessel-Metaphor in Lucretius and his Greek Models.” In Algra, K. A., Koenen, M. H., and Schrijvers, P. H., eds. Lucretius and His Intellectual Background. Amsterdam. 193–207.Google Scholar
Graver, M. 1990. “The Eye of the Beholder: Perceptual Relativity in Lucretius.” Apeiron 23: 91–116.Google Scholar
Griffin, M. and Barnes, J., eds. 1989a. Philosophia Togata: Essays on Philosophy and Roman Society. Oxford.Google Scholar
Griffin, M. T. 1989b. “Philosophy, Politics, and Politicians at Rome.” In Griffin, M. and Barnes, J., eds. Philosophia Togata: Essays on Philosophy and Roman Society. Oxford. 1–37.Google Scholar
Grimal, P. 1978. “La poème de Lucrèce en son temps.” In Gigon, O., ed. Lucrèce: Huit exposés suivis de discussion. Geneva. 233–62.Google Scholar
Gruber, G. M. 2009. “Medium and Message in Lucretius’ ‘Honey’ Analogy.” PhD Dissertation. University of Iowa.Google Scholar
Gunderson, E. 2000. Staging Masculinity: The Rhetoric of Performance in the Roman World. Ann Arbor, MI.Google Scholar
Halliwell, S. 2009. “Odysseus’s Request and the Need for Song.” Anais de Filosofia Clássica 3: 1–14.Google Scholar
Halperin, D. M., Winkler, J. J., and Zeitlin, F. I., eds. 1990. Before Sexuality: The Construction of Erotic Experience in the Ancient Greek World. Princeton, NJ.Google Scholar
Hanchey, D. 2022. “Cicero’s Rhetoric of Anti-Epicureanism: Anonymity as Critique.” In Yona, S. and Davis, G., eds. Epicurus in Rome: Philosophical Perspectives in the Ciceronian Age. Cambridge. 37–54.Google Scholar
Hankinson, R. J. 1999 “Explanation and Causation.” In Algra, K., Barnes, J., Mansfeld, J., and Schofield, M., eds. The Cambridge History of Hellenistic Philosophy. 479–512.Google Scholar
Hanses, M. 2022. “Page, Stage, Image: Confronting Ennius with Lucretius’ On the Nature of Things.” In Yona, S. and Davis, G., eds. Epicurus in Rome: Philosophical Perspectives in the Ciceronian Age. Cambridge. 147–67.Google Scholar
Hanson, A. E. 1990. “The Medical Writers’ Woman.” In Halperin, D. M., Winkler, J. J., and Zeitlin, F. I., eds. 1990. Before Sexuality: The Construction of Erotic Experience in the Ancient Greek World. Princeton, NJ. 309–38.Google Scholar
Hardie, P. R. 2008. “Lucretian Multiple Explanations and their Reception in Latin Didactic and Epic.” In Beretta, M. and Citti, F., eds. Lucrezio, la natura e la scienza. Florence. 69–96.Google Scholar
Harrison, S. J. 1990. “Lucretius, Euripides and the Philosophers: De Rerum Natura 5.13–21.” CQ 40: 195–98.Google Scholar
Herchenroeder, L. 2008. “Τί γὰρ τοῦτο πρὸς τὸν λόγον; Plutarch’s Gryllus and the So-Called Grylloi.” AJPh 129: 347–79.Google Scholar
Hill, T. 2004. Ambitiosa Mors: Suicide and Self in Roman Thought and Literature. New York, NY.Google Scholar
Hillman, D. C. A. 2008. The Chemical Muse: Drug Use and the Roots of Western Civilization. New York, NY.Google Scholar
Holm, S. 2013. “The Specter of Tantalus: Didactic Latency in De Rerum Natura. TAPhA 143: 385–403.Google Scholar
Holmes, B. 2005b. “Daedala Lingua: Crafted Speech in De Rerum Natura.” AJPh 126: 527–85.Google Scholar
Holmes, B. 2013. “The Poetic Logic of Negative Exceptionalism in Lucretius, Book Five.” In Lehoux, D., Morrison, A. D., and Sharrock, A., eds. Lucretius: Poetry, Philosophy, Science. Oxford. 153–91.Google Scholar
Holmes, B. 2014. “The Poetics of Anthropogony: Men, Women, and Children in Lucretius Book Five.’ EuGeSta 4: 135–74.Google Scholar
van Hoorn, W. 1972. As Images Unwind: Ancient and Modern Theories of Visual Perception. Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Humphries, R. 1968. Lucretius: The Way Things Are: The De Rerum Natura of Titus Lucretius Carus. Bloomington, IN.Google Scholar
Johncock, M. S. P. 2016. “Metaphor and Argumentation in Lucretius.” PhD Dissertation. Royal Holloway, University of London.Google Scholar
Kany-Turpin, J. 1997. “Cosmos ouvert et épidémies mortelles dans le De rerum natura.” In Algra, K. A., Koenen, M. H., and Schrijvers, P. H., eds. Lucretius and His Intellectual Background. Amsterdam. 179–85.Google Scholar
Kennedy, D. F. 2002. Rethinking Reality: Lucretius and the Textualization of Nature. Ann Arbor, MI.Google Scholar
Kennedy, D. 2006. “Atoms, Individuals, and Myths.” In Zajko, V. and Leonard, M., eds. Laughing with Medusa: Classical Myth and Feminist Thought. Oxford. 233–52.Google Scholar
Kennedy, D. 2013. “The Political Epistemology of Infinity.” In Lehoux, D., Morrison, A. D., and Sharrock, A., eds. Lucretius: Poetry, Philosophy, Science. Oxford. 51–67.Google Scholar
Kenney, E. J. 1974. “Vivida vis: Polemic and Pathos in Lucretius 1.62–101.” In Woodman, T. and West, D. eds. Quality and Pleasure in Latin Poetry. Cambridge. 18–30.Google Scholar
Kenney, E. J. 2007. “Lucretian Texture: Style, Metre and Rhetoric in the De Rerum Natura.” In Gillespie, S. and Hardie, P., eds. The Cambridge Companion to Lucretius. Cambridge. 92–110.Google Scholar
Kleve, K. 1978. “The Philosophical Polemics in Lucretius: A Study in the History of Epicurean Criticism.” In Gigon, O., ed. Lucrèce: Huit exposés suivis de discussion. Geneva. 39–71.Google Scholar
Koenen, M. H. 1997. “Lucretius’ Olfactory Theory in ‘De rerum natura’ IV.” In Algra, K. A., Koenen, M. H., and Schrijvers, P. H., eds. Lucretius and His Intellectual Background. Amsterdam. 163–77.Google Scholar
Koenen, M. H. 1999. “Lucretius’ Explanation of Hearing in “De rerum natura” IV 524–562.” Mnemosyne 52: 434–63.Google Scholar
Konstan, D. 2010–11. “A Pig Convicts Itself of Unreason: The Implicit Argument of Plutarch’s Gryllus.” Hyperboreus 16–17: 371–85.Google Scholar
Konstan, D. 2012. “Epicurean Happiness: A Pig’s Life?” Journal of Ancient Philosophy 6: 1–24.Google Scholar
Konstan, D. 2020. “Atomism.” In Mitsis, P., ed. The Oxford Handbook of Epicurus and Epicureanism. Oxford. 59–80.Google Scholar
Kyriakidis, S. 2004. “Middles in Lucretius’ DRN: The Poet and His Work.” In Kyriakidis, S. and de Martino, F., eds. Middles in Latin Poetry. Bari. 27–49.Google Scholar
Landolfi, L. 2006. “Patologia dell’eros e metaforesi in Lucrezio De rer. Nat. 4, 1058–1090.” PP 46: 87–109.Google Scholar
Lee, E. N. 1978. “The Sense of an Object: Epicurus on Seeing and Hearing.” In Machamer, P. K. and Turnbull, R. G., eds. Studies in Perception: Interrelations in the History of Philosophy and Science. Columbus, OH. 27–59.Google Scholar
Lehoux, D. 2013. “Seeing and Unseeing, Seen and Unseen.” In Lehoux, D., Morrison, A. D., and Sharrock, A., eds. Lucretius: Poetry, Philosophy, Science. Oxford. 131–51.Google Scholar
Lehoux, D., Morrison, A. D., and Sharrock, A., eds. 2013. Lucretius: Poetry, Philosophy, Science. Oxford.Google Scholar
Lenz, J. R. 2011. “How Epicurean Science Saves Humanity in Lucretius.” In Suits, D. B. and Madigan, T. J., eds. Lucretius: His Continuing Influence and Contemporary Relevance. Rochester, NY. 89–106.Google Scholar
Leonard, W. E. and Smith, S. B., eds. 1942. Lucretius, “De Rerum Natura” libri sex. Milwaukee, WI.Google Scholar
Long, A. A. 1986b. “Pleasure and Social Utility: The Virtues of Being Epicurean.” In Flashar, H. and Gigon, O., eds. Aspects de la Philosophie Hellénistique. Geneva. 283–316.Google Scholar
Long, A. A. 1997. “Lucretius on Nature and the Epicurean Self.” In Algra, K. A., Koenen, M. H., and Schrijvers, P. H., eds. Lucretius and His Intellectual Background. Amsterdam. 128–32.Google Scholar
Long, A. A. 1999. “The Socratic Legacy.” In Algra, K., Barnes, J., Mansfeld, J., and Schofield, M., eds. The Cambridge History of Hellenistic Philosophy. 617–41.Google Scholar
Long, A. A. 2006. From Epicurus to Epictetus: Studies in Hellenistic and Roman Philosophy. Oxford.Google Scholar
Long, A. A. 2008. “The Concept of the Cosmopolitan in Greek and Roman Thought.” Daedalus 137: 50–58.Google Scholar
Long, A. A. and Sedley, D. N., eds. 1987. The Hellenistic Philosophers. 2 vols. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Lonie, I. M. 1981. The Hippocratic Treatises, “On Generation,” “On the Nature of the Child,” “Diseases IV.” Berlin.Google Scholar
Lowe, D. 2016. “Suspending Disbelief: Magnetic and Miraculous Levitation from Antiquity to the Middle Ages.” ClAnt 35: 247–78.Google Scholar
Luciani, S. 1999. “Philosophie et Esthétique du Mouvement dans le De Rerum Natura.” In Poignault, R., ed. Présence de Lucrèce: Actes du colloque tenu à Tours (3–5 décembre 1998). Tours. 65–76.Google Scholar
Ludwig, P. 2018. “Lucretius on Rebelling Against the ‘Laws’ of Nature.” In Minkov, S. Y. and Trout, B. L., eds. Mastery of Nature: Promises and Prospects. Philadelphia, PA. 122–34.Google Scholar
Maguinness, W. S. 1965. “The Language of Lucretius.” In Dudley, D. R., ed. Lucretius. London. 69–93.Google Scholar
Marković, D. 2010–11. “Lucretius 3.978–1023 and the Hellenistic Philosophical Polemics against the Grammarians.” ICS 35–36: 143–53.Google Scholar
Massaro, A. 2014. “The Living in Lucretius’ De rerum natura: Animals’ ataraxia and Humans’ Distress.” Relations: Beyond Anthropocentrism 2: 45–58.Google Scholar
Masterson, M., Rabinowitz, N. S., and Robson, J., eds. 2014. Sex in Antiquity: Exploring Gender and Sexuality in the Ancient World. London.Google Scholar
Mayer, R. 1990. “The Epic of Lucretius.” Papers of the Leeds International Latin Seminar 6: 35–43.Google Scholar
McConnell, S. 2015. “Epicurean Education and the Rhetoric of Concern.” AClass 58: 111–45.Google Scholar
McOsker, M. 2020. “Poetics.” In Mitsis, P., ed. The Oxford Handbook of Epicurus and Epicureanism. Oxford. 347–76.Google Scholar
Meijer, P. A. 2007. Stoic Theology: Proofs for the Existence of the Cosmic God and the Traditional Gods: Including a Commentary on Cleanthes’ Hymn on Zeus. Delft.Google Scholar
Merrill, W. A. 1891. “The Signification and Use of the Word Natura by Lucretius.” TAPhA 22: xxxii–xxxv.Google Scholar
Minyard, J. D. 1985. Lucretius and the Late Republic: An Essay in Roman Intellectual History. Leiden.Google Scholar
Mitsis, P. 1988. Epicurus’ Ethical Theory: The Pleasures of Invulnerability. Ithaca, NY.Google Scholar
Mitsis, P. 1993. “Committing Philosophy on the Reader: Didactic Coercion and Reader Autonomy in De Rerum Natura.” MD 31: 111–28.Google Scholar
Mitsis, P. 2020b. “Friendship.” In Mitsis, P., ed. The Oxford Handbook of Epicurus and Epicureanism. Oxford. 250–83.Google Scholar
Mitsis, P. 2021. “Did Ancient Greek Philosophers Have a Concept of Free Will? (and Other Improper Questions).” In Mitsis, P. and Reid, H. L., eds. The Poetry of Philosophy. Sioux City, IA. 243–82.Google Scholar
Monet, A., ed. 2003. Le jardin romain, épicurisme et poésie à Rome: Mélanges offerts à Mayotte Bollack. Lille.Google Scholar
Montarese, F. 2012. Lucretius and His Sources: A Study of Lucretius, “De rerum natura” I 635–920. Berlin.Google Scholar
Monti, R. C. 1981. “Lucretius on Greed, Political Ambition and Society: de rer. Nat. 3. 69–86.” Latomus 40: 48–66.Google Scholar
Morrison, A. D. 2020. “Arguing over Text(s): Master-Texts vs. Intertexts in the Criticism of Lucretius.” In O’Rourke, D., ed. Approaches to Lucretius: Traditions and Innovations in Reading the De Natura Deorum. Cambridge. 157–76.Google Scholar
Müller, G. 1978. Die Finalia der sechs Bücher des Lucrez. In Gigon, O., ed. Lucrèce: Huit exposés suivis de discussion. Geneva. 197–221.Google Scholar
Müller, K. 1974. Review of Lucretius, “De Rerum Natura Book” III, by E. J. Kenney. Gnomon 46: 756–64.Google Scholar
Munro, H. A. J. 1864–66. T. Lucreti Cari De rerum natura libri sex. 2 vols. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Nagler, M. N. 1996. “Dread Goddess Revisited.” In Schein, S. L., ed. Reading the Odyssey: Selected Interpretive Essays. Princeton, NJ. 140–61.Google Scholar
Nethercut, J. S. 2017. “Empedocles’ ‘Roots’ in Lucretius’ De Rerum Natura.” AJPh 138: 85–105.Google Scholar
Nethercut, J. S. 2018. “Provisional Argumentation and Lucretius’ Honeyed Cup.” CQ 68: 523–33.Google Scholar
Nicgorski, W. 2002. “Cicero, Citizenship, and the Epicurean Temptation.” In Allman, D. D. and Beaty, M. D., eds. Cultivating Citizens: Soulcraft and Citizenship in Contemporary America. Oxford. 3–28.Google Scholar
Nichols, J. H. 1976. Epicurean Political Philosophy: The De rerum natura of Lucretius. Ithaca, NY.Google Scholar
Nugent, B. P. 2008. “The Sounds of Sirens; Odyssey 12.184–91.” College Literature 35: 45–54.Google Scholar
Nugent, S. G. 1994. “Mater Matters: The Female in Lucretius’ De Rerum Natura.” ColbyQ 30: 179–205.Google Scholar
Nussbaum, M. C. 1986. “Therapeutic Arguments: Epicurus and Aristotle.” In Schofield, M. and Striker, G., eds. The Norms of Nature: Studies in Hellenistic Ethics. Cambridge. 31–74.Google Scholar
Nussbaum, M. C. 1989a. “Mortal Immortals: Lucretius on Death and the Voice of Nature.” Ph&PhenR 1: 303–51.Google Scholar
Nussbaum, M. C. 1989b. “Beyond Obsession and Disgust: Lucretius’ Genealogy of Love.” Apeiron 22: 1–59.Google Scholar
Nussbaum, M. C. 1990. “By Words Not Arms: Lucretius on Gentleness in an Unsafe World.” Apeiron 23: 41–90.Google Scholar
Nussbaum, M. C. 1994. The Therapy of Desire: Theory and Practice in Hellenistic Ethics. Princeton, NJ.Google Scholar
Nussbaum, M. C. 2002. “Erōs and Ethical Norms: Philosophers Respond to a Cultural Dilemma.” In Nussbaum, M. C. and Sihvola, J., eds. The Sleep of Reason: Erotic Experience and Sexual Ethics in Ancient Rome and Greece. Chicago, IL. 55–94.Google Scholar
Nussbaum, M. C. and Sihvola, J., eds. 2002. The Sleep of Reason: Erotic Experience and Sexual Ethics in Ancient Rome and Greece. Chicago, IL.Google Scholar
Obbink, D., ed. 1995. Philodemus and Poetry: Poetic Theory and Practice in Lucretius, Philodemus, and Horace. Oxford.Google Scholar
O’Hara, J. 2007. Inconsistency in Roman Epic: Studies in Catullus, Lucretius, Vergil, Ovid and Lucan. Cambridge.Google Scholar
O’Keefe, T. 1997. “The Ontological Status of Sensible Qualities for Democritus and Epicurus.” AncPhil 17: 119–34.Google Scholar
O’Keefe, T. 2003. “Lucretius on the Cycle of Life and the Fear of Death.” Apeiron 36: 43–65.Google Scholar
O’Keefe, T. 2020. “Lucretius and the Philosophical Use of Literary Persuasion.” In O’Rourke, D., ed. Approaches to Lucretius: Traditions and Innovations in Reading the De Natura Deorum. Cambridge. 177–94.Google Scholar
Oliensis, E. 1997. “The Erotics of Amicitia: Readings in Tibullus, Propertius, and Horace.” In Hallett, J. P. and Skinner, M. B., eds. Roman Sexualities. Princeton, NJ. 151–71.Google Scholar
Olson, K. 2014. “Masculinity, Appearance, and Sexuality: Dandies in Roman Antiquity.” JHSex 23: 182–205.Google Scholar
O’Rourke, D. 2014. “Lovers in Arms: Empedoclean Love and Strife in Lucretius and the Elegists.” Dictynna 11: 1–21.Google Scholar
O’Rourke, D. 2018. “Make War Not Love: Militia amoris and Domestic Violence in Roman Elegy.” In Gale, M. R. and Scourfield, J. H. D., eds. Texts and Violence in the Roman World. Cambridge. 110–39.Google Scholar
O’Rourke, D., ed. 2020a. Approaches to Lucretius: Traditions and Innovations in Reading the De Natura Deorum. Cambridge.Google Scholar
O’Rourke, D. 2020b. “Infinity, Enclosure and False Closure in Lucretius’ De Rerum Natura.” In O’Rourke, D., ed. Approaches to Lucretius: Traditions and Innovations in Reading the De Natura Deorum. Cambridge. 103–23.Google Scholar
Owen, W. H. 1969a. “Structural Patterns in Lucretius’ De Rerum Natura.” CW 62: 121–27.Google Scholar
Owen, W. H. 1969b. “Structural Patterns in Lucretius’ De Rerum Natura (Continued).” CW 62: 166–72.Google Scholar
Packman, Z. M. 1976. “Ethics and Allegory in the Proem of the Fifth Book of Lucretius’ De Rerum Natura. CJ 71: 206–212.Google Scholar
Pantelia, M. C. 1993. “Spinning and Weaving: Ideas of Domestic Order in Homer.” AJPh 114: 493–501.Google Scholar
Park, D. 1997. The Fire within the Eye: A Historical Essay on the Nature and Meaning of Light. Princeton, NJ.Google Scholar
Pentassuglio, F. 2018. “Socrates Erotikos: Mutuality, Role Reversal, and Erotic Paideia in Xenophon’s and Plato’s Symposia.” In Danzig, G., Johnson, D., and Morrison, D., eds. Plato and Xenophon: Comparative Studies. Leiden. 365–90.Google Scholar
Penwill, J. L. 1994. “Image, Ideology and Action in Cicero and Lucretius.” Ramus 23: 68–91.Google Scholar
Penwill, J. L. 1996. “The Ending of Sense: Death as Closure in Lucretius Book 6.” Ramus 25: 146–69.Google Scholar
Piergiacomi, E. 2020. “Language.” In Mitsis, P., ed. The Oxford Handbook of Epicurus and Epicureanism. Oxford. 308–32.Google Scholar
Pope, M. 2016. “Sweating with Blood and Civil Conflict in De Rerum Natura.” CJ 112: 41–55.Google Scholar
Pope, M. 2018a. “Ocular Penetration, Grammatical Objectivity, and an Indecent Proposal in De Rerum Natura. CPh 113: 206–12.Google Scholar
Pope, M. 2018b. “Seminal Verse: Atomic Orality and Aurality in De Rerum Natura.” Eugesta 8: 108–30.Google Scholar
Pope, M. 2019. “Embryology, Female Semina and Male Vincibility in Lucretius, De Rerum Natura.” CQ 69: 229–45.Google Scholar
Pope, M. 2020. “Bodies Piled High: Lucretius, Lucan, and the Un/Natural Costs of Civil War.” CPh 115: 209–26.Google Scholar
Pope, M. 2022a. “A Brief Note on religio and the Ending of De Rerum Natura.” Philologus 166: 150–55.Google Scholar
Porter, J. I. 1995. “Content and Form in Philodemus: The History of an Evasion.” In Obbink, D., ed. Philodemus and Poetry: Poetic Theory and Practice in Lucretius, Philodemus, and Horace. Oxford. 97–147.Google Scholar
Porter, J. I. 2003. “Lucretius and the Poetics of Void.” In Monet, A., ed. Le jardin romain, épicurisme et poésie à Rome: Mélanges offerts à Mayotte Bollack. Lille. 197–226.Google Scholar
Porter, J. I. 2007. “Lucretius and the Sublime.” In Gillespie, S. and Hardie, P., eds. The Cambridge Companion to Lucretius. Cambridge. 167–84.Google Scholar
Porter, J. I. 2011. “Making and Unmaking: The Achaean Wall and the Limits of Fictionality in Homeric Criticism.” TAPhA 141: 1–36.Google Scholar
Reinhardt, T. 2002. “The Speech of Nature in Lucretius’ De Rerum Natura 3.931–71.” CQ 52: 291–304.Google Scholar
Reinhardt, T. 2004. “Readers in the Underworld, De Rerum Natura 3.912–1075.” JRS 94: 27–46.Google Scholar
Renehan, R. 1980. “On the Greek Origins of the Concepts Incorporeality and Immateriality.” GRBS 21: 105–38.Google Scholar
Reydams-Schils, G. 2005. The Roman Stoics: Self, Responsibility, and Affection. Chicago, IL.Google Scholar
Richlin, A. 1992. The Garden of Priapus: Sexuality and Aggression in Roman Humor. Rev. ed. Oxford.Google Scholar
Richlin, A. 1993. “Not Before Homosexuality: The Materiality of the Cinaedus and the Roman Law against Love between Men.” JHSex 3: 522–73.Google Scholar
Rider, B. 2014. “Epicurus on the Fear of Death and the Relative Value of Lives.” Apeiron 47: 461–84.Google Scholar
Rosenbaum, S. 1986. “How to Be Dead and Not Care: A Defense of Epicurus.” APhQ 23: 217–25.Google Scholar
Rosenbaum, S. 1989b. “The Symmetry Argument: Lucretius Against the Fear of Death.” Ph&PhenR 50: 353–73.Google Scholar
Rosenbaum, S. 2020. “Death.” In Mitsis, P., ed. The Oxford Handbook of Epicurus and Epicureanism. Oxford. 118–40.Google Scholar
Roskam, G. 2007b. Live Unnoticed (Λάθε βιώσας): On the Vicissitudes of an Epicurean Doctrine. Leiden.Google Scholar
Roskam, G. 2020. “Politics and Society.” In Mitsis, P., ed. The Oxford Handbook of Epicurus and Epicureanism. Oxford. 284–307.Google Scholar
Roskam, G. 2022. “Sint Ista Graecorum: How to be an Epicurean in Late Republican Rome – Evidence from Cicero’s On Ends 1–2.” In Yona, S. and Davis, G., eds. Epicurus in Rome: Philosophical Perspectives in the Ciceronian Age. Cambridge. 11–36.Google Scholar
Rouse, W. H. D. and Smith, M. F., eds. 1992. Lucretius, “De Rerum Natura.” Rev. ed. Loeb 181. Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
Roy, S. 2013. “Homeric Concerns: A Metapoetic Reading of Lucretius, De Rerum Natura 2.1–19.” CQ 63: 780–84.Google Scholar
Santoro L’hoir, F. 1992. The Rhetoric of Gender Terms: “Man”, “Woman”, and the Portrayal of Character in Latin Prose. Leiden.Google Scholar
Santos, G. H. 2000. “Chest Trauma during the Battle of Troy: Ancient Warfare and Chest Trauma.” Annals of Thoracic Surgery 69: 1285–87.Google Scholar
Scarborough, J. 1991. “The Pharmacology of Sacred Plants, Herbs, and Roots.” In Faraone, C. A. and Obbink, D., eds. Magika Hiera: Ancient Greek Magic and Religion. Oxford. 138–74.Google Scholar
Schiesaro, A. 2003. “Rhétorique, Politique et Didaxis chez Lucrèce.” In Monet, A., ed. Le jardin romain, épicurisme et poésie à Rome: Mélanges offerts à Mayotte Bollack. Lille. 57–75.Google Scholar
Schiesaro, A. 2007a. “Lucretius and Roman Politics and History.” In Gillespie, S. and Hardie, P., eds. The Cambridge Companion to Lucretius. Cambridge. 41–58.Google Scholar
Schiesaro, A. 2007b. “Didaxis, Rhetoric, and the Law in Lucretius.” In Heyworth, S. J., Fowler, P. G., and Harrison, S. J., eds. Classical Constructions: Papers in Memory of Don Fowler, Classicist and Epicurean. Oxford. 63–90.Google Scholar
Schofield, M. and Striker, G., eds. 1986. The Norms of Nature: Studies in Hellenistic Ethics. Cambridge.Google Scholar
van Schoor, D. 2011. “Nec me mea fallit imago: Ovid’s Poetics of Irony and Reflections of Lucretius and Pythagoras in the Metamorphoses.” AClass 54: 125–47.Google Scholar
Schrijvers, P. H. 1970. Horror ac Divina Voluptas: Études sur la poésie de Lucrèce. Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Schrijvers, P. H. 1996. “Lucretius on the Origin and Development of Political Life (De Rerum Natura 5.1105–1160).” In Algra, K. A., van der Horst, P. W., and Runia, D. T., eds. Polyhistor: Studies in the History and Historiography of Ancient Philosophy: Presented to Jaap Mansfeld on his Sixtieth Birthday. Leiden. 220–30.Google Scholar
Schrijvers, P. H. 1997. “L’homme et l’animal dans le De rerum natura: Lucrèce et la science de la vie.” In Algra, K. A., Koenen, M. H., and Schrijvers, P. H., eds. Lucretius and His Intellectual Background. Amsterdam. 151–61.Google Scholar
Schrijvers, P. H. 2007a. “Seeing the Invisible: A Study of Lucretius’ Use of Analogy in the De rerum natura.” In Gale, M. R., ed. Oxford Readings in Classical Studies: Lucretius. Oxford. 255–88.Google Scholar
Schrijvers, P. H. 2007b. “Propagandistic Strategies in Lucretius’ De Rerum Natura.” In Harder, A., MacDonald, A. A., and Reinink, G. J., eds. Calliope’s Classroom: Studies in Didactic Poetry from Antiquity to the Renaissance. Leuven. 49–70.Google Scholar
Sedley, D. 1988. “Epicurean Anti-reductionism.” In Barnes, J. and Mignucci, M., eds. Matter and Metaphysics. Naples. 295–327.Google Scholar
Sedley, D. 1989. “Epicurus on the Common Sensibles.” In Huby, P. and Neal, G., eds. The Criterion of Truth: Essays Written in Honour of George Kerferd, Together with a Text and Translation (with Annotations) of Ptolemy’s On the Kriterion and Hegemonikon. Liverpool. 123–136.Google Scholar
Sedley, D. 1997. “How Lucretius Composed the De Rerum Natura.” In Algra, K. A., Koenen, M. H., and Schrijvers, P. H., eds. Lucretius and His Intellectual Background. Amsterdam. 1–19.Google Scholar
Sedley, D. 2003. “Lucretius and the New Empedocles.” Leeds International Classical Studies 2: 1–12.Google 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. 2018. “Epicurean Theories of Knowledge from Hermarchus to Lucretius and Philodemus.” Lexicon Philosophicum: International Journal for the History of Texts and Ideas 6: 106–21.Google Scholar
Segal, C. 1989. “Poetic Immortality and the Fear of Death: The Second Proem of the De Rerum Natura.” HSPh 92: 193–212.Google Scholar
Segal, C. 1990. Lucretius on Death and Anxiety: Poetry and Philosophy in De Rerum Natura. Princeton, NJ.Google Scholar
Sharples, R. W. 1980. “Lucretius’ Account of the Composition of the Soul (3.231ff.).” LCM 5: 117–20.Google Scholar
Sharrock, A. 2006. “The Philosopher and the Mother Cow: Towards a Gendered Reading of Lucretius, De Rerum Natura.” In Zajko, V. and Leonard, M., eds. Laughing with Medusa: Classical Myth and Feminist Thought. Oxford. 253–74.Google Scholar
Shearin, W. H. 2015. The Language of the Atoms: Performativity and Politics in Lucretius’ De Rerum Natura. Oxford.Google Scholar
Shearin, W. H. 2020. “Saussure’s cahiers and Lucretius’ elementa: A Reconsideration of the Letters-Atoms Analogy.” In O’Rourke, D., ed. Approaches to Lucretius: Traditions and Innovations in Reading the De Natura Deorum. Cambridge. 140–53.Google Scholar
Shelton, J.-A. 1995. “Contracts with Animals: Lucretius, De Rerum Natura.” Between the Species 11:115–21.Google Scholar
Shildrick, M. 1997. Leaky Bodies and Boundaries: Feminism, Postmodernism and (Bio)Ethics. London.Google Scholar
Sider, D. 1995. “Epicurean Poetics: Response and Dialogue.” In Obbink, D., ed. Philodemus and Poetry: Poetic Theory and Practice in Lucretius, Philodemus, and Horace. Oxford. 35–41.Google Scholar
Sider, D. 1997. The Epigrams of Philodemos: Introduction, Text, and Commentary. Oxford.Google Scholar
Sinisgalli, R. 2012. Perspective in the Visual Culture of Classical Antiquity. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Smith, W. S. 2005. “The Cold Cares of Venus: Lucretius and Anti-marriage Literature.” In Smith, W. S., ed. Satiric Advice on Women and Marriage: From Plautus to Chaucer. Ann Arbor, MI. 71–91.Google Scholar
Snyder, J. M. 1981. “The Web of Song: Weaving Imagery in Homer and the Lyric Poets.” CJ 76: 193–96.Google Scholar
Snyder, J. M. 1983. “The Warp and the Woof of the Universe in Lucretius’ De Rerum Natura.” ICS 8: 37–43.Google Scholar
Solmsen, F. 1977. “Epicurus on Void, Matter and Genesis: Some Historical Observations.” Phronesis 22: 263–81.Google Scholar
Solomon, D. 2004. “Lucretius’ Progressive Revelation of Nature in DRN 1.149–502.” Phoenix 58: 260–83.Google Scholar
Stoddard, K. 1996. “Thucydides, Lucretius, and the End of the De Rerum Natura.” Maia 48: 107–28.Google Scholar
Stokes, M. C. 1995. “Cicero on Epicurean Pleasures.” In Powell, J. G. F. ed. Cicero the Philosopher: Twelve Papers. Oxford. 145–70.Google Scholar
Striker, G. 1993. “Epicurean Hedonism.” In Brunschwig, J. and Nussbaum, M. C., eds. Passions and Perceptions: Studies in Hellenistic Philosophy of Mind: Proceedings of the Fifth Symposium Hellenisticum. Cambridge. 3–17.Google Scholar
Striker, G. 1996. “Epicurus on the Truth of the Sense Perceptions.” In Striker, G., ed. Essays on Hellenistic Epistemology and Ethics. Cambridge. 77–91.Google Scholar
Struck, P. T. 2004. Birth of the Symbol: Ancient Readers at the Limits of Their Texts. Princeton, NJ.Google Scholar
Taylor, B. 2020b. “Common Ground in Lucretius’ De Rerum Natura.” In O’Rourke, D., ed. Approaches to Lucretius: Traditions and Innovations in Reading the De Natura Deorum. Cambridge. 59–79.Google Scholar
Taylor, C. C. W. 1980. “‘All Perceptions Are True.’” In Schofield, M., Burnyeat, M., and Barnes, J., eds. Doubt and Dogmatism: Studies in Hellenistic Epistemology. Oxford. 105–24.Google Scholar
Thong, Denise. 2017. “Minimalism – The Long Forgotten Virtue of Temperance.” Medium, September 18. https://medium.com/@denisethong/minimalism-the-long-forgotten-virtue-of-temperance-67c3ecca5add.Google Scholar
Thury, E. M. 1987. “Lucretius’ Poem as a Simulacrum of the Rerum Natura.” AJPh 108: 270–94.Google Scholar
Townend, G. B. 1979. “The Original Plan of Lucretius’ De Rerum Natura.” CQ 29: 101–11.Google Scholar
Tsouna, V. 2009. “Epicurean Therapeutic Strategies.” In Warren, J., ed. The Cambridge Companion to Epicureanism. Cambridge. 249–65.Google Scholar
Tsouna, V. 2020. “Hedonism.” In Mitsis, P., ed. The Oxford Handbook of Epicurus and Epicureanism. Oxford. 141–88.Google Scholar
de Vaan, M. 2008. Etymological Dictionary of Latin and the Other Italic Languages. Leiden.Google Scholar
Vieron, M. P. 2013. “Poetic Voice and Readership in Lucretius’ De Rerum Natura.” PhD Dissertation. University of Wisconsin–Madison.Google Scholar
Volk, K. 2002. The Poetics of Latin Didactic: Lucretius, Vergil, Ovid, Manilius. Oxford.Google Scholar
Volk, K. 2010. “Lucretius’ Prayer for Peace and the Date of De Rerum Natura.” CQ 60: 127–31.Google Scholar
Volk, K. 2022. “Caesar the Epicurean? A Matter of Life and Death.” In Yona, S. and Davis, G., eds. Epicurus in Rome: Philosophical Perspectives in the Ciceronian Age. Cambridge. 72–86.Google Scholar
Wainwright, E. M. 2006. Women Healing/Healing Women: The Genderization of Healing in Early Christianity. London.Google Scholar
Wallach, B. P. 1976. Lucretius and the Diatribe against the Fear of Death: De Rerum Natura III 830–1094. Leiden.Google Scholar
Walters, J. 1997. “Invading the Roman Body: Manliness and Impenetrability in Roman Thought.” In Hallett, J. P. and Skinner, M. B., eds. Roman Sexualities. Princeton, NJ. 29–43.Google Scholar
Warren, J. 2007. “Lucretius and Greek Philosophy.” In Gillespie, S. and Hardie, P., eds. The Cambridge Companion to Lucretius. Cambridge. 19–32.Google Scholar
Warren, J. 2019. “Epicurus on the False Belief That Sense-Impressions Conflict.” Philosophie antique 19: 7–28.Google Scholar
Waszink, J. H. 1954. “Lucretius and Poetry.” Mededelingen der koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschappen, Afdeling Letterkunde 17: 243–57.Google Scholar
Whitlatch, L. 2014. “Empiricist Dogs and the Superiority of Philosophy in Lucretius’ De Rerum Natura.” CW 108: 45–66.Google Scholar
Wider, K. 1986. “Women Philosophers in the Ancient Greek World: Donning the Mantle.” Hypatia 1: 21–62.Google Scholar
Williams, C. A. 1998. Review of Roman Sexualities. BMCR. https://bmcr.brynmawr.edu/1998/1998.10.16/.Google Scholar
Wiseman, T. P. 1974. “The Two Worlds of Titus Lucretius.” In Wiseman, T. P., ed. Cinna the Poet and Other Roman Essays. Leicester. 11–43.Google Scholar
Wohl, V. J. 1993. “Standing by Stathmos: The Creation of Sexual Ideology in the Odyssey.” Arethusa 26: 19–50.Google Scholar
Woolerton, E. 2010. “The Roots of Lucretius’ Tree-Men, De Rerum Natura 2.701–3.” CQ 60: 255–57.Google Scholar
Wormell, D. E. W. 1965. “The Personal World of Lucretius.” In Dudley, D. R., ed. Lucretius. London. 35–67.Google Scholar
Wyke, M. 1994. “Woman in the Mirror: The Rhetoric of Adornment in the Roman World.” In Archer, L. J., Fishler, S., and Wyke, M., eds. Women in Ancient Societies: An Illusion of Night. London.Google Scholar
Yona, S. and Davis, G., eds. 2022. Epicurus in Rome: Philosophical Perspectives in the Ciceronian Age. Cambridge.Google Scholar
Zajko, V. and Leonard, M., eds. 2006. Laughing with Medusa: Classical Myth and Feminist Thought. Oxford.Google Scholar
Zetzel, J. E. G. 1998. “De re publica and De rerum natura.” In Knox, P. and Foss, C., eds. Style and Tradition: Studies in Honor of Wendell Clausen. Stuttgart. 230–47.Google Scholar
Ziolkowski, J. 1985. Alan of Lille’s Grammar of Sex: The Meaning of Grammar to a Twelfth-Century Intellectual. Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar