Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-17T00:14:46.376Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

FOOLS RUSH IN: SEX, ‘THE MEAN’ AND EPICUREANISM IN HORACE, SATIRES 1.2

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 August 2016

Jerome Kemp
Jerome Kemp*
Affiliation:
University College London, UK
*
*E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper concerns Horace's treatment of ‘the mean’ in Satires 1.2: his ironic demonstration of its elusiveness and changeability in the first part of the satire; and how this leads to the alignment of Epicurean moderation with a framework most associated with Aristotle. I argue that the irony in the sometimes apparently illogical, humorous expression of Peripatetic and Hellenistic ethics complements the satire's other ironic inconsistencies, while nevertheless serving a serious underlying philosophical purpose which some recent scholarship has denied.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Cambridge Classical Journal , Volume 62 , December 2016 , pp. 130 - 146
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s) 2016. Published by Cambridge University Press 

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

Works cited

Annas, J. (1993) The morality of happiness, Oxford.Google Scholar
Armstrong, D. (1989) Horace, New Haven.Google Scholar
Armstrong, D. (2004) ‘Horace Epistles 1 ’, in Armstrong, D., Fish, J. and Johnstone, P. (eds.), Vergil, Philodemus and the Augustans, Austin, Texas, 267–98.Google Scholar
Barnes, J. (1997) ‘Roman Aristotle’, in Griffin, M. and Barnes, J. (eds.), Philosophia togata ii , Oxford, 1–69.Google Scholar
Bosworth, A., Nicholas, T. and Treggiari, S. M. (2003) ‘Adultery’, in Hornblower, S. and Spawforth, A. (eds.), The Oxford classical dictionary, 3rd edn Oxford, 14–15.Google Scholar
Broadie, S. (1991) Ethics with Aristotle, Oxford.Google Scholar
Brown, P. M. (1993) Horace, Satires i . Warminster.Google Scholar
Brown, R. D. (1987) Lucretius on love and sex: a commentary on De rerum natura 4.1030–1247, Leiden.Google Scholar
Burnet, J. (1900) The Ethics of Aristotle, London.Google Scholar
Bushala, E. W. (1971) ‘The motif of sexual choice in Horace, Satires 1.2’, CJ 66, 312–15.Google Scholar
Coulter, J. A. (1967) ‘An unnoted allusion to Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics in Horace's Sermones 2.2’, CPh 62, 39–41.Google Scholar
Curran, L. (1970) ‘Nature, convention and obscenity in Horace, Satires 1.2’, Arion 3, 86–96.Google Scholar
Curzer, H. (1996) ‘A defense of Aristotle's doctrine that virtue is a mean’, AncPhil 16, 129–38.Google Scholar
Dessen, C. (1968) ‘The sexual and financial mean in Horace's Serm. 1.2’, AJPh 89, 200–8.Google Scholar
Dorandi, T. (2013) Diogenes Laertius: Lives of eminent philosophers, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Dufallo, B. (2000) ‘ Satis/satura: reconsidering the programmatic intent of Horace's Satires 1.1’, CW 93, 579–90.Google Scholar
Fantham, E. (2004) The Roman world of Cicero's De oratore, Oxford.Google Scholar
Fiske, G. C. (1920) Lucilius and Horace, Madison.Google Scholar
Fowler, D. (2008) ‘Lectures on Horace's Epistles’, CCJ 54, 80–114.Google Scholar
Fraenkel, E. (1957) Horace, Oxford.Google Scholar
Freudenburg, K. (2001) Satires of Rome: threatening poses from Lucilius to Juvenal, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Gibson, R. (2007) Excess and restraint: Propertius, Horace and Ovid's Ars Amatoria, London.Google Scholar
Gigante, M. (1993) Orazio: una misura per l'amore. Lettura della satira seconda del primo libro, Venosa.Google Scholar
Gigante, M. (1995) Philodemus in Italy: the books from Herculaneum, Ann Arbor.Google Scholar
Gill, C. (2012) ‘The transformation of Aristotle's ethics in Roman philosophy’, in J. Miller (ed.), The reception of Aristotle's ethics, Cambridge, 31–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glad, C. E. (1995) Paul and Philodemus: adaptability in Epicurean and early Christian psychagogy, Leiden.Google Scholar
Gowers, E. (2012) Horace: Satires Book i , Cambridge.Google Scholar
Hense, O. (1909) Teletis reliquiae, Tubingen.Google Scholar
Hooley, D. (1999) ‘Horace's rud(e)-imentary muse: Sat. 1.2’, ElectronAnt 5.2, https://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ejournals/ElAnt/V5N2/hooley.html (accessed 15/6/16).Google Scholar
Hunter, R. L. (2006) The shadow of Callimachus, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Hursthouse, R. (1980) ‘A false doctrine of the mean’, PAS 81, 57–72.Google Scholar
Hursthouse, R. (2006) ‘The central doctrine of the mean’, in Kraut, R. (ed.), The Blackwell guide to Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics, Oxford, 96–115.Google Scholar
Inwood, B. (2014) Ethics after Aristotle, Oxford.Google Scholar
Kemp, J. E. (2009) ‘Irony and aequabilitas: Horace, Satires 1.3’, Dictynna 6, 84–107.Google Scholar
Kemp, J. E. (2010) ‘Flattery and frankness in Horace and Philodemus’, G&R 57, 65–76.Google Scholar
Kiessling, A. (1957) Q. Horatius Flaccus Satiren, rev. R. Heinze, 7th edn, Leipzig.Google Scholar
Konstan, D., Clay, D. and Glad, C. (1998) Philodemus: On frank criticism, Atlanta.Google Scholar
Krueger, D. (1996) ‘The bawdy and society’, in Branham, R. and Goulet-Cazé, M.-O. (eds.), The Cynics, California, 222–39.Google Scholar
Macleod, C. W. (1983) ‘The poetry of ethics: Horace Epistles 1’, in id., Collected essays, Oxford, 280–91.Google Scholar
Marshall, T. (1906) Aristotle's theory of conduct, London.Google Scholar
Maurenbrecher, B. (1891) Sallustius Crispus: Historiarum reliquiae, Leipzig.Google Scholar
Mayer, R. G. (2005) ‘Sleeping with the enemy: philosophy and satire’, in Freudenburg, K. (ed.), The Cambridge companion to Roman satire, Cambridge, 146–59.Google Scholar
Mintoff, J. (2013) ‘On the quantitative doctrine of the mean’, The Southern Journal of Philosophy 51, 445–64.Google Scholar
Moles, J. (1985) ‘Cynicism in Horace Epistles I’, Proceedings of the Liverpool Latin Seminar 5, 33–60.Google Scholar
Moles, J. (2002) ‘Poetry, philosophy, politics and play: Epistles i ’, in Woodman, A. and Feeney, D. (eds.), Traditions and contexts in the poetry of Horace, Cambridge, 141–57.Google Scholar
Moles, J. (2003) ‘Diatribe’, in Hornblower, S. and Spawforth, A. (eds.), The Oxford classical dictionary, 3rd edn, Oxford, 446–7.Google Scholar
Moles, J. (2007) ‘Philosophy and ethics’, in Harrison, S. (ed.), The Cambridge companion to Horace, Cambridge, 165–80.Google Scholar
Nisbet, R. G. M. and Hubbard, M. (1978) A commentary on Horace, Odes Book ii , Oxford.Google Scholar
Page, T. E. (1895) Q. Horatii Flacci Carminum libri iv, Epodon liber, London.Google Scholar
Palmer, A. (1883) The Satires of Horace, London.Google Scholar
Quinn, K. (1980) Horace: the Odes, London.Google Scholar
Rudd, N. (1966) The Satires of Horace, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Rudd, N. (1993) ‘Horace as moralist’, in id. (ed.), Horace 2000: a celebration. Essays for the Bimillenium, London, 64–88.Google Scholar
Shackleton Bailey, D. R. (1982) Profile of Horace, London.Google Scholar
Turpin, W. (1998) ‘The Epicurean parasite: Horace, Satires 1.1–3’, Ramus 27.2, 127–40.Google Scholar
Urmson, J. O. (1973) ‘Aristotle's doctrine of the mean’, APhQ, 223–30.Google Scholar
Wachsmuth, C. and Hense, O. (1884) Ioannis Stobaei Anthologium. Volume ii , Berlin.Google Scholar
Woodman, A. J. (2009) ‘Horace and historians’, CCJ 55, 161–6.Google Scholar
Zetzel, J. (1980) ‘Horace's Liber sermonum: the structure of ambiguity’, Arethusa 13, 59–77.Google Scholar