Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T19:47:23.780Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Somnia Ficta In Lucretius And Lucilius

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 February 2009

James J. O′hara
James J. O′hara
Affiliation:
Wesley an University, Connecticut
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In CQ n.s 32 (1982), 237, Howard Jacobson comments on Lucretius' expression fingere somnia, for which he can find only two parallels, both later than Lucretius. He suggests that the phrase can best be understood as a reference to the actual practice of dream control, or oneiropompeia, for which he provides several useful references. A fragment of Luciiius, however, provides not only a parallel, but perhaps even a model, for Lucretius' phrase, and for his criticism in 1.102–35 of the lies or fictions of both religious figures and poets.

Type
Shorter Notes
Information
The Classical Quarterly , Volume 37 , Issue 2 , December 1987 , pp. 517 - 519
Copyright
Copyright © The Classical Association 1987

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Verg. Ecl. 8.108 an qui amant, ipsi sib isomnia fingunt?, and Claudian, Eutrop. 1.170 fingere somnia possunt, where somnia is subject rather than object.

2 F. Marx, C. Lucili Carminum Reliquiae (2 vols.; Leipzig, 1905) = fragments 490–5 and 482–5 in W. Krenkel, Luciiius Satiren (2 vols.; Leiden, 1970) = 520–9 in E. H. Warmington, Remains of Old Latin, vol. Ill, Luciiius. Laws of the XII Tables (Cambridge, MA, and London, Loeb Classical Library, 19672) = xv, 18–19 in F. Charpin, Luciiius Satires (2 vols.; Paris, Bude, 1978).Google Scholar

3 Cf. Marx ad 515 (ii.192), who notes that fragments attributed to Book 15 could describe philosophy′s ability to free one from superstitio (480–9), avaritia (492–503) and iracundia (506–14), and also Warmington and Krenkel ad locc.Google Scholar

4 Mueller, L. suggested istic omnia, which is possible but not attractive. Marx ad 484 M (ii. 81) notes‘ “omnia” pro “somnia” mendose praebuit Palatinorum archetypus Plaut. Rud. 594.’Google Scholar

5 I have checked Bailey, Munro, Merrill, Leonard and Smith, Guissani, Lachmann (his 1850 Lucretius; his Luciiius dates from 1876), Paratore and Pizzani, and Ernout and Robin. Some of these, as Jacobson reports, have been troubled by the phrase. Bailey, C., Titi Lucreti Cari De Rerum Natura Libri Sex (Oxford, 1947), says ad Lucretius 1.105, ‘though you can be said to “fashion a dream for yourself”, it is not easy to see how you can do it for someone else.’ Luciiius has somnia ficta with no agent expressed, though one is implied by the previous sentence: auni Pompiliique Numae. Lucretius puts the phrase in the active voice, with an explicit subject. The oddity of letting someone else fashion dreams for you remains, but that this is both odd and undesirable is Lucretius′ point.Google Scholar

6 These lines recur at 3.87–90 and 6.35–8. On the resemblance here, which was first noted by Lachmann, see Murley, C., ‘Lucretius and the History of Satire’, TAPA 70 (1939), 382. Speaking more generally of Lucilius 484ffGoogle Scholar. KrenkelM, W. M, W., ‘Zur literarischen Kritik bei Lucilius’, in Die romische Satire (Wege der Forschung 238, ed. D. Korzeniewski; Darmstadt, 1970), 188 n. 129, says, ‘in Lucrez fand Lucilius einen Nachfolger’.Google Scholar

7 Clay, D., Lucretius and Epicurus (Ithaca, NY, and London, 1983), 222Google Scholar. That the word can mean ‘poet’ at this date is not always acknowledged (for references see Nisbet and Hubbard on Horace C. 1.1.35), but acceptance of this point is not crucial to my argument. On this passage see too Hardie, P. R., Virgil′s Aeneid. Cosmos and Imperium (Oxford, 1986), 170–18Google Scholar, following Paratore, E., ‘Spunti lucreziani nelle “Georgiche”’, Atene e Roma 37 (1939), 197.Google Scholar

8 For interpretation of 480–1, cf. Charpin (‘Les hommes pensent que beaucoup de prodiges rapportes dans les vers d′Homere, sont des monstres veritables’) and Warmington (‘People think that in the poetry of Homer there are many prodigies which are make-believe monstrosities’). I favour Charpin; see his note, ii.245. I thank David Konstan and Diane Juffras for comments on a draft of this note.