more acquired a taste for culture and refined sensuality; generals and governors made spoil of the works of Greek art; schools of Greek philosophy and rhetoric were opened, and frequently again forbidden: men were afraid of the dissolving element in Greek culture, but were less and less able to resist its charms. Even old Cato himself learnt Greek; and when once the language and literature were known, the influence of philosophy could not remain inactive.

In the last days of the Republic this process had been so far completed that every educated Roman understood Greek, the young nobles pursued their studies in Greece, and the best minds endeavoured to form the national literature on Greek models.

At that time, among all the schools of Greek philosophy, there were two which especially captivated the Romansthe Stoic and the Epikurean: the first, with its blunt pride in virtue, naturally related to the Roman character; the second, more in accord with the spirit of the times and their state of progress, but both-and this marks the Roman character-of practical tendency and dogmatic form.

These schools, which, despite their sharp contrasts, had nevertheless so much in common, came into more friendly contact in Rome than in their native land. It is true that the unmeasured calumnies of the Epikureans, which since Chrysippos had been industriously disseminated by the Stoics, were speedily transplanted to Rome. There, too, the mass of men regarded an Epikurean as a slave of his lusts, and, with a double measure of superficiality, ventured to deny his philosophy of nature, because it was protected by no barrier of unintelligible phrases.

Cicero, too, unfortunately, popularised the Epikurean doctrine in the bad sense of the word, and so threw a ludicrous colour over many things which disappears when they are more seriously regarded. But for all that, the Romans were for the most part admirable dilettanti, who were not so deeply concerned for their own school but that

they were able to value opposing views. The security of their position in the world, the universality of their intercourse, kept them free from prejudice; and therefore we find expressions, even in Seneca, which gave Gassendi some authority for making him an Epikurean. Brutus the Stoic and Cassius the Epikurean together imbrue their hands in Cæsar's blood. But this same popular and superficial conception of the Epikurean doctrine, which in Cicero seems so detrimental to it, not only makes it possible for friendship to exist between Epikureanism and the most divergent schools, but it weakens the character of the greater number of the Roman Epikureans, and so gives a certain foundation in fact for the general reprobation. Even at a time when Greek culture was still quite foreign to them, the Romans had begun to exchange the rude austerity of primitive manners for an inclination to indulgence and wantonness, which, as we see so often in the case of individuals, was the more unrestrained in proportion to the novelty of the freer state of things. The change had become distinctly marked so early as the time of Marius and Sulla. The Romans had become practical Materialists, often in the very worst sense of the term, before they had yet learnt the theory.

The theory of Epikuros was, however, in every way purer and nobler than the practice of these Romans; and so now two courses were open to them-they either allowed themselves to be purified, and became modest and temperate, or they corrupted the theory, and so combined the conceptions of its friends and foes that they ended by having a theory of Epikureanism which corresponded to their habits. Even nobler natures and more thorough philosophers tended to hold by this more convenient form. So it was with Horace when he spoke of himself as a "hog of Epikuros's herd," obviously with tive irony, but not in the serious and sober sense of the old Epikureanism. And, in fact, Horace not unfrequently points to the Cyrenaic Aristippos as his model.

spor

A more serious attitude was that of Virgil, who also had an Epikurean teacher, but appropriated manifold elements of other systems. Amongst all these semi-philosophers stands a thorough and genuine Epikurean in Titus Lucretius, whose didactic poem, "De Rerum Natura," contributed more than anything else, when learning revived, to resuscitate the doctrines of Epikuros, and to set them in a more favourable light. The Materialists of the last century studied and loved Lucretius, and it is only in our own days that, for the first time, Materialism seems to have broken completely away from the old traditions.

T. Lucretius Carus was born in the year 99, and died in the year 55 B.C. Of his life scarcely anything is known. It appears that amidst the confusion of the civil war, he sought some stay for his inner life, and found it in the philosophy of Epikuros. His great poem was undertaken to make a convert to this school of his friend the poet Memmius. The enthusiasm with which he opposes the salvation to be found in his philosophy to the troubles and nihilism of the times, gives to his work an elevated tone, a fervour of belief and imagination which rises far above the innocent serenity of Epikurean life, and often assumes a Stoic impetus. And yet it is a mistake when Bernhardy maintains in his 'Roman Literature,' that "from Epikuros and his followers he took nothing but the skeleton of a philosophy of nature." This contains a misapprehension of Epikuros, which is still more conspicuous in the following expression of the eminent philologist:

"Lucretius builds indeed upon this foundation of mechanical Nature, but as he was concerned to save the right of personal freedom and of independence of all religious tradition, he seeks to introduce knowledge into practice, to free man, and to place him upon his own feet, by insight into the origin and the nature of things."

We have already seen that this striving after emancipation is the very marrow of the Epikurean system. In Cicero's superficial statement, this was indeed left in the

VOL. I.

I

background; but not in vain has Diogenes Laertius preserved for us in his best biography the very words of Epikuros, which are the basis of the view we have already given.61

But if there was anything that attracted Lucretius to Epikuros, and inspired him with this eager enthusiasm, it was just this boldness and moral vigour with which Epikuros robbed the theistic beliefs of their sting, in order to base morality upon an impregnable foundation. This is shown clearly enough by Lucretius, for immediately after the splendid poetical introduction to Memmius, he goes on:

"When human life to view lay foully prostrate upon earth, crushed down under the weight of religion, who showed her head from the quarters of heaven with hideous aspect lowering upon mortals, a man of Greece ventured first to lift up his mortal eyes to her face, and first to withstand her to her face. Him neither story of gods, nor thunderbolts, nor heaven with threatening roar, could quell, but only stirred up the more-the eager courage of his soul filling him with desire to be the first to burst the fast bars of Nature's portals.” *

That Lucretius had recourse to many additional sources, that he industriously studied Empedokles, and perhaps in

61 A refutation of the attempts of Ritter to distinguish between the theories of Lucretius and Epikuros may be found in Zeller, iii. 1, 2 Aufl. p. 499. Everything is to be said on the other hand for the emphasis laid upon his enthusiasm for ' deliverance from the darkness of superstition,' in Teuffel, Gesch. d. röm. Liter., p. 326 (2 Aufl. p. 371). We might say still more confidently, that the really original element in Lucretius is the burning hatred of a pure and noble character against the degrading and demoralising influence of religion, whilst in Epikuros deliverance from religion is indeed an essential aim of philosophy, but an aim which is pur

sued with dispassionate calmness. We may, of course, at the same time, attribute some part of this difference to the special hatefulness and harmfulness of Roman as compared with Greek religious systems; but yet there remains a kernel still, which may be regarded as a bitter condemnation of religion absolutely; and undoubtedly the importance which Lucretius has acquired in modern ages rests no less upon this special feature than upon his strict Epikureanism.

* Lib. i. 61 sqq. In this and other passages from Lucretius, I have availed myself of Mr. Munro's tran slation.-TR.

the scientific parts of his theory has added much from his own observation, we will not deny; yet we must here again remind ourselves that we do not know what treasures were contained in the lost books of Epikuros. Almost all judges assign to the poem of Lucretius a very high place among the productions of pre-Augustan times, in respect of its genius and vigour; and yet the didactic portions are often dry and careless, or connected by sudden transitions with the poetical pictures.

In point of language, Lucretius has an extreme degree of antique roughness and simplicity. The poets of the Augustan age, who felt themselves to be far above the rude art of their predecessors, had great reverence for Lucretius. Virgil has devoted to him the lines

"Felix qui potuit rerum cognoscere causas,

Atque metus omnes et inexorabile fatum

Subjecit pedibus strepitumque Acherontis avari."

Lucretius, then, without doubt had a powerful influence in the propagation of the Epikurean philosophy among the Romans. This reached its highest point under Augustus; for though it had then no such representative as Lucretius, yet all the gayer spirits of the band of poets who gathered around Maecenas and Augustus were inspired and guided by the spirit of this system.

When, however, under Tiberius and Nero, abominations. of all kinds made their appearance, and nearly all enjoyment was poisoned by danger or by shame, the Epikureans retired, and in this last period of heathen philosophy it was the Stoics especially who undertook the struggle against vice and cowardice, and with untroubled courage, as in the case of a Seneca or a Paetus Thrasea, fell a sacrifice to tyranny.

Doubtless the Epikurean philosophy also in its purity, and especially in the extension which had been given to it by the strong moral character of Lucretius, was quite fitted to afford such sublimity of sentiments, only that