De Natura Deorum

Last updated
De Natura Deorum
(On the Nature of the Gods)
Cicero, De natura deorum, BAV, Urb. lat. 319.jpg
15th-century manuscript, Vatican
Author Cicero
Country Roman Republic
Language Classical Latin
Subject Roman religion, Ancient Greek religion, problem of evil
Genre Theology, philosophy
Publication date
45 BC
292.07
Preceded by Tusculanae Disputationes  
Followed by De Divinatione  
Original text
De Natura Deorum
(On the Nature of the Gods)
at Latin Wikisource

De Natura Deorum (On the Nature of the Gods) is a philosophical dialogue by Roman Academic Skeptic philosopher Cicero written in 45 BC. It is laid out in three books that discuss the theological views of the Hellenistic philosophies of Epicureanism, Stoicism, and Academic Skepticism.

Contents

Writing

De Natura Deorum belongs to the group of philosophical works which Cicero wrote in the two years preceding his death in 43 BC. [1] He states near the beginning of De Natura Deorum that he wrote them both as a relief from the political inactivity to which he was reduced by the supremacy of Julius Caesar, and as a distraction from the grief caused by the death of his daughter Tullia. [1]

The dialogue is supposed to take place in Rome at the house of Gaius Aurelius Cotta. [2] In the dialogue he appears as pontiff, but not as consul. [2] He was made pontiff soon after 82 BC, and consul in 75 BC, and as Cicero, who is present at the dialogue as a listener, did not return from Athens till 77 BC, its fictional date can be set between the years 77 and 75 BC, when Cicero was about thirty years of age, and Cotta about forty-eight. [2]

The book contains various obscurities and inconsistencies which demonstrate that it was probably never revised by Cicero, nor published until after his death. [3] For the content, Cicero borrowed largely from earlier Greek sources. [3] However, the hasty arrangement by Cicero of authorities who themselves wrote independently of one another means that the work lacks cohesion, [4] and points raised by one speaker are sometimes not countered by subsequent speakers. [5]

Contents

The dialogue is on the whole narrated by Cicero himself, though he does not play an active part in the discussion. Gaius Velleius represents the Epicurean school, Quintus Lucilius Balbus argues for the Stoics, and Gaius Cotta speaks for Cicero's own Academic Skepticism. The first book of the dialogue contains Cicero's introduction, Velleius' case for the Epicurean theology and Cotta's criticism of Epicureanism. Book II focuses on Balbus' explanation and defense of Stoic theology. Book III lays out Cotta's criticism of Balbus' claims. Cicero's conclusions are ambivalent and muted, "a strategy of civilized openness"; [6] he does, however, conclude that Balbus' claims, in his mind, more nearly approximate the truth (3.95).

Book 1

In Book 1 Cicero visits the house of Cotta the Pontifex Maximus, where he finds Cotta with Velleius, who is a Senator and Epicurean, and Balbus, who is a supporter of the Stoics. Cotta himself is an Academic Skeptic, and he informs Cicero that they were discoursing on the nature of the gods. Velleius had been stating the sentiments of Epicurus upon the subject. [7] Velleius is requested to go on with his arguments after recapitulating what he had already said. [7] The discourse of Velleius consists of three parts: a general attack on Platonist and Stoic cosmology; a historical review of the earlier philosophers; and an exposition of Epicurean theology. [8] Velleius raises the difficulty of supposing the creation of the universe to have taken place at a particular period of time, and questions the possible motive of a God in undertaking the work. [5] The historical section (10–15), is full of inaccuracies and misstatements, of which it is likely that Cicero himself was ignorant, since he has Cotta later praise this account. [4] The purpose however is for Velleius to show that the Epicurean idea of God as a perfectly happy, eternal being, possessed of reason, and in human form, is the only tenable one, and the other differing opinions is regarded as proof of their worthlessness. [4] In the remainder of the book, Cotta attacks the positions of Velleius with regard to the form of the gods, and their exemption from creation and providence. [9]

Book 2

In Book 2, Balbus gives the Stoics' position on the subject of the gods. [9] He alludes to the magnificence of the world, and the prevalence of belief, and refers to the frequent appearance of the gods themselves in history. [9] After referring to the practice of divination, Balbus proceeds to the "four causes" of Cleanthes as to how the idea of the gods is implanted in the minds of people: (1) a pre-knowledge of future events; (2) the great advantages we enjoy from nature; (3) the terror with which the mind is affected by thunder, tempests, and the like; (4) and the order and regularity in the universe. Balbus further contends that the world, or universe itself, and its parts, are possessed of reason and wisdom. [10] He finally discusses the creation of the world, the providence of the gods, and denies "that a world, so beautifully adorned, could be formed by chance, or by a fortuitous concourse of atoms." [10] The problem of how to account for the presence of misery and disaster in a world providentially governed (the so-called "problem of evil") is only hurriedly touched upon at the end of the book. [11]

Book 3

In book 3 Cotta refutes the doctrines of Balbus. [12] A large portion of this book, probably more than one third, has been lost. [11] Cotta represents the appearances of gods as idle tales. [13] There follows a gap in the text, following which Cotta attacks the four causes of Cleanthes. [13] Cotta refutes the Stoic ideas on reason attributed to the universe and its parts. [14] Ten chapters (16–25) are devoted to a disproportionately lengthy discussion of mythology, with examples multiplied to an inordinate extent. [15] There follows another major gap in the text, at the end of which Cotta is seen attacking the doctrine of providential care for humans. [14] [15] Cicero states "The conversation ended here, and we parted. Velleius judged that the arguments of Cotta were the truest, but those of Balbus seemed to me to have the greater probability." [14]

Influence

The Christian writers Tertullian, Minucius Felix, Lactantius, and Augustine were acquainted with De Natura Deorum. [16]

This work, alongside De Officiis and De Divinatione , was highly influential on the philosophes of the 18th century. David Hume was familiar with the work and used it to style his own Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion . [17] Voltaire described De Natura Deorum and the Tusculan Disputations as "the two most beautiful books ever produced by the wisdom of humanity". [18]

In 1811 a fourth book was 'discovered' and published by one 'P. Seraphinus' in Bologna. [19] In this forgery Cicero asserts many points compatible with Christian and Catholic dogma, and even argues in favour of an authority equivalent to the Papacy. [19]

Scholarship

This text is an important source of Epicurean, Stoic, and Academic Skeptic views on religion and theology because it supplements the scant primary texts that remain on these topics.

In particular, heated scholarly debate has focused on this text's discussion at 1.43–44 of how the Epicurean gods may be said to "exist"; David Sedley, for example, holds that Epicureans, as represented in this text and elsewhere, think that "gods are our own graphic idealization of the life to which we aspire", [20] whereas David Konstan maintains that "the Epicurean gods are real, in the sense that they exist as atomic compounds and possess the properties that pertain to the concept, or prolēpsis, that people have of them." [21]

Quotations

Text

Latin text

Translations

Citations

  1. 1 2 Brooks 1896 , p. 1
  2. 1 2 3 Brooks 1896 , p. 4
  3. 1 2 Brooks 1896 , p. 5
  4. 1 2 3 Brooks 1896 , p. 7
  5. 1 2 Brooks 1896 , p. 6
  6. Stephen Greenblatt, The Swerve: How the World Became Modern , 2011:69ff.
  7. 1 2 Dunlop 1827 , p. 244
  8. Rackham, H. Cicero: De Natura Deorum; Academica. Loeb Classical Library. p. xvi.
  9. 1 2 3 Dunlop 1827 , p. 245
  10. 1 2 Dunlop 1827 , p. 246
  11. 1 2 Brooks 1896 , p. 8
  12. Dunlop 1827 , p. 247
  13. 1 2 Dunlop 1827 , p. 248
  14. 1 2 3 Dunlop 1827 , p. 249
  15. 1 2 Brooks 1896 , p. 9
  16. Brooks 1896 , p. 10
  17. Holden, Thomas (2010). Spectres of False Divinity: Hume's Moral Atheism. Oxford University Press. p. 28.
  18. 'Les deux plus beaux ouvrages qu’ait jamais écrits la sagesse qui n’est qu’humaine' [Voltaire, "Cicéron", Dictionnaire philosophique (1764); Œuvres complètes (Garnier) 18:181]
  19. 1 2 Farrer, James Anson (1907). Literary Forgeries. Longmans, Green & Co. pp. 10–12.
  20. David Sedley, Epicurus’ Theological Innatism. In Fish and Saunders 2011: 29–52
  21. David Konstan, Epicurus on the Gods. In Fish and Saunders 2011: 53–71
  22. Ballou, Maturin Murray (1871). Treasury of thought. Forming an encyclopædia of quotations from ancient and modern authors. Boston: J.R. Osgood and Co. p. 216.

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Epicureanism</span> Philosophical system

Epicureanism is a system of philosophy founded around 307 BCE based upon the teachings of Epicurus, an ancient Greek philosopher. Epicurus was an atomist and materialist, following in the steps of Democritus. His materialism led him to religious skepticism and a general attack on superstition and divine intervention. Originally a challenge to Platonism, its main opponent later became Stoicism. Although Epicureanism is a form of hedonism insofar as it declares pleasure to be its sole intrinsic goal, the concept that the absence of pain and fear constitutes the greatest pleasure, and its advocacy of a simple life, make it very different from hedonism as colloquially understood. Following the Cyrenaic philosopher Aristippus, Epicurus believed that the greatest good was to seek modest, sustainable pleasure in the form of a state of ataraxia and aponia through knowledge of the workings of the world and limiting desires. Correspondingly, Epicurus and his followers generally withdrew from politics because it could lead to frustrations and ambitions that would conflict with their pursuit of virtue and peace of mind.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Cleanthes</span> 3rd-century BC Greek philosopher

Cleanthes, of Assos, was a Greek Stoic philosopher and boxer who was the successor to Zeno of Citium as the second head (scholarch) of the Stoic school in Athens. Originally a boxer, he came to Athens where he took up philosophy, listening to Zeno's lectures. He supported himself by working as a water-carrier at night. After the death of Zeno, c. 262 BC, he became the head of the school, a post he held for the next 32 years. Cleanthes successfully preserved and developed Zeno's doctrines. He originated new ideas in Stoic physics, and developed Stoicism in accordance with the principles of materialism and pantheism. Among the fragments of Cleanthes' writings which have come down to us, the largest is a Hymn to Zeus. His pupil was Chrysippus who became one of the most important Stoic thinkers.

<i>De rerum natura</i> 1st-century BC didactic poem by Lucretius

De rerum natura is a first-century BC didactic poem by the Roman poet and philosopher Lucretius with the goal of explaining Epicurean philosophy to a Roman audience. The poem, written in some 7,400 dactylic hexameters, is divided into six untitled books, and explores Epicurean physics through poetic language and metaphors. Namely, Lucretius explores the principles of atomism; the nature of the mind and soul; explanations of sensation and thought; the development of the world and its phenomena; and explains a variety of celestial and terrestrial phenomena. The universe described in the poem operates according to these physical principles, guided by fortuna ("chance"), and not the divine intervention of the traditional Roman deities.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Lucilia gens</span> Ancient Roman family

The gens Lucilia was a plebeian family at ancient Rome. The most famous member of this gens was the poet Gaius Lucilius, who flourished during the latter part of the second century BC. Although many Lucilii appear in Roman history, the only one known to have obtained any of the higher offices of the Roman state was Lucilius Longus, consul suffectus in AD 7.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Metrodorus of Lampsacus (the younger)</span> 3rd-century BC Greek Epicurean philosopher

Metrodorus of Lampsacus was a Greek philosopher of the Epicurean school. Although one of the four major proponents of Epicureanism, only fragments of his works remain. A Metrodorus bust was found in Velia, slightly different modeled to depict Parmenides.

<i>De Divinatione</i> Work by Cicero

De Divinatione is a philosophical dialogue about ancient Roman divination written in 44 BC by Marcus Tullius Cicero.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Hermarchus</span>

Hermarchus or Hermarch, sometimes incorrectly written Hermachus, was an Epicurean philosopher. He was the disciple and successor of Epicurus as head of the school. None of his writings survives. He wrote works directed against Plato, Aristotle, and Empedocles. A fragment from his Against Empedocles, preserved by Porphyry, discusses the need for law in society. His views on the nature of the gods are quoted by Philodemus.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Diogenes of Babylon</span> Ancient Greek Stoic philosopher

Diogenes of Babylon was a Stoic philosopher. He was the head of the Stoic school in Athens, and he was one of three philosophers sent to Rome in 155 BC. He wrote many works, but none of his writings survived, except as quotations by later writers.

<i>Tusculanae Disputationes</i> Literary work by Cicero

The Tusculanae Disputationes is a series of five books written by Cicero, around 45 BC, attempting to popularise Greek philosophy in Ancient Rome, including Stoicism. It is so called as it was reportedly written at his villa in Tusculum. His daughter had recently died and in mourning Cicero devoted himself to philosophical studies. The Tusculan Disputations consist of five books, each on a particular theme: On the contempt of death; On pain; On grief; On emotional disturbances; and whether Virtue alone is sufficient for a happy life.

<i>Laelius de Amicitia</i>

Laelius de Amicitia is a treatise on friendship (amicitia) by the Roman statesman and author Marcus Tullius Cicero, written in 44 BC.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Leontion</span> Ancient greek philosopher

Leontion was a Greek Epicurean philosopher.

Hellenistic philosophy is Ancient Greek philosophy corresponding to the Hellenistic period in Ancient Greece, from the death of Alexander the Great in 323 BC to the Battle of Actium in 31 BC. The dominant schools of this period were the Stoics, the Epicureans and the Skeptics.

Diodotus was a Stoic philosopher, and was a friend of Cicero.

This page is a list of topics in ancient philosophy.

Phaedrus was an Epicurean philosopher. He was the head (scholarch) of the Epicurean school in Athens after the death of Zeno of Sidon around 75 BC, until his own death in 70 or 69 BC. He was a contemporary of Cicero, who became acquainted with him in his youth at Rome. During his residence in Athens Cicero renewed his acquaintance with him. Phaedrus was at that time an old man, and was already a leading figure of the Epicurean school. He was also on terms of friendship with Velleius, whom Cicero introduces as the defender of the Epicurean tenets in the De Natura Deorum, and especially with Atticus. Cicero especially praises his agreeable manners. He had a son named Lysiadas. Phaedrus was succeeded by Patro.

Quintus Lucilius Balbus was a Stoic philosopher and a pupil of Panaetius.

David Neil Sedley FBA is a British philosopher and historian of philosophy. He was the seventh Laurence Professor of Ancient Philosophy at Cambridge University.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Writings of Cicero</span> Historical Roman statesman, theorist, and philosopher

The writings of Marcus Tullius Cicero constitute one of the most renowned collections of historical and philosophical work in all of classical antiquity. Cicero was a Roman politician, lawyer, orator, political theorist, philosopher, and constitutionalist who lived during the years of 106–43 BC. He held the positions of Roman senator and Roman consul (chief-magistrate) and played a critical role in the transformation of the Roman Republic into the Roman Empire. He was extant during the rule of prominent Roman politicians, such as those of Julius Caesar, Pompey, and Marc Antony. Cicero is widely considered one of Rome's greatest orators and prose stylists.

<i>De fato</i> Philosophical treatise written by Cicero

De Fato is a partially lost philosophical treatise written by the Roman orator Cicero in 44 BC. Only two-thirds of the work exists; the beginning and ending are missing. It takes the form of a dialogue, although it reads more like an exposition, whose interlocutors are Cicero and his friend Aulus Hirtius.

The gens Laelia was a plebeian family at Rome. The first of the gens to obtain the consulship was Gaius Laelius in 190 BC.

References