.png)
.png)
Email this article 
Some philosophical ideas in Virgil’s “Georgics”
https://doi.org/10.28995/2686-7249-2023-3-254-262
Abstract
The article considers how Virgil relates to some Epicurean ideas, drawing on the descriptions of passion and illness in Book III of the Georgics and in Lucretius’ On the Nature of Things. The fact is that it is those episodes in Virgil that are called some of the most consistent imitations of Lucretius, and so here one can trace Virgil’s attitude to Lucretius’ views, and by extension to those of Epicureanism. The author also considers the attitude of Virgil (on the example of Book III of the Georgics) and Lucretius to religion. In addition, the paper briefly reviews some of the Stoic principles expressed in the Georgics. While Virgil definitely problematises some epicurean ideals, he does not seem to offer stoic priciples instead. But stoic ideas are definitely expressed in some other parts of the Georgics. The paper suggests that Virgil was selective in his approach to philosophical concepts because he had no goal of laying down a coherent doctrine. It may also be related to the development of Virgil’s personal views, who probably at the time of writing the Georgics did not take a clear position in the confrontation between the Epicureans and the Stoics.
About the Author
O. V. SharshukovaRussian Federation
Ol’ga V. Sharshukova, postgraduate student
bld. 6, Miusskaya Square, Moscow, 125047
References
1. Asmis, E. (1982), “Lucretius’ Venus and Stoic Zeus”, Hermes, no 4, pp. 458–470.
2. Betensky, A. (1980), “Lucretius and Love”, The Classical World, no 5, pp. 291–299.
3. Bright, D. F. (1971), “The Plague and the Structure of ‘De Rerum Natura’”, Latomus, no 3, pp. 607–632.
4. Brown, R. D. (1987), Lucretius on Love and Sex. A Commentary on De Rerum Natura IV, 1030–1287 with Prolegomena, Text, and Translation, Brill, New York, USA.
5. Campbell, J. S. (1996), “Labor Improbus and Orpheus’ Furor: Hubris in the Georgics”, L’Antiquité Classique, no 65, pp. 231–238.
6. Clare, R.J. (1995), “Chiron, Melampus, and Tisiphone: Myth and Meaning in Virgil’s Plague of Noricum”, Hermathena, no158, pp. 99–108.
7. Davisson, M. (1993), “The Treatment of Festering Sores in Vergil”, The Classical World, no 6, pp. 487–492.
8. Freudenburg, K. (1987), “Lucretius, Vergil, and the Causa Morbi”, Vergilius, no. 33, pp. 59–74.
9. Gale, M. (1991). “Man and Beast in Lucretius and the Georgics”, The Classical Quaterly, no№2, pp. 414–426.
10. Gale, M. (2000), Virgil on the Nature of Things: The Georgics, Lucretius and the Didactic Tradition, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
11. De Lacy, P.H. (1948), “Lucretius and the History of Epicureanism”, Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, no 79, pp. 12–23.
12. Mansfeld, J. (1999), Theology. The Cambridge History of Hellinistic Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, UK, pp. 452–478.
13. Perkell, C. (2002), “The Golden Age and Its Contradictions in the Poetry of Virgil”, Vergilius, no 48, pp. 3–39.
14. Sellar, W.Y. (1877), The Roman Poets of the Augustan Age: Virgil, Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.
15. Thomas, R.F. (1986), “Virgil’s Georgics and the Art of Reference”, Harvard Studies in Classical Philology, no 90, pp. 171–178.
16. Thomas, R.F. (ed.) (1988), Virgil. Georgics, vol. II, Cambridge Unversity Press, Cambridge, UK.
17. Wilkinson, L. P. (1963), “Virgil’s Theodicy”, The Classical Quaterly, no 13, pp. 75–84.
Supplementary files
For citation: Sharshukova O.V. Some philosophical ideas in Virgil’s “Georgics”. RSUH/RGGU Bulletin: “Literary Teory. Linguistics. Cultural Studies”, Series. 2023;(3(2)):254-262. https://doi.org/10.28995/2686-7249-2023-3-254-262
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
