We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected]
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
In Book 1 of Cicero’s On the nature of the gods, Velleius argues for an Epicurean theology and view of religion. Cotta, an Academic skeptic, argues against him. I argue that when we see Cicero’s creative hand adapting Epicurean texts like the On Piety found at Herculaneum and attributed to Philodemus, we find that Velleius’ speech may be understood as proceeding from our allegedly natural concept that the gods are eternal and happy. Velleius’ seemingly intemperate criticism of his opponents, that they are crazy, follows from his position that they have somehow gone against this natural concept. His positive view, which proceeds from the happiness or blessedness (beatitudo, beatitas, eudaimonia) of the gods, is that Roman religion may be reinterpreted as worship of gods who do not care about us at all, and thus are ideals for us of the hedonist life free from pain. Despite Cicero’s habitual contempt for Epicureanism, he paints an attractive picture of Velleius’ spirituality. But Cotta argues that by making the gods not care for us, Epicurus has torn out the heart from religion, since he has made gods who are (so Cotta argues) selfish and not worthy of worship or imitation.
Several major historians, including Aufidius, Servilius, and Pliny, flourished in the century between Livy and Tacitus. Of the historical writing of this period only two representatives survive, Curtius and Velleius. Velleius is much indebted to Livy and Sallust, more to the former, though he sets great store by brevity. Curtius writes volubly, almost precipitately, as if embarrassed by a surplus of material, but he is never in real difficulties. Tacitus never became a classic or school-book in antiquity, for he arrived too late to enter a limited repertoire. As a traditionalist in an age of declining standards he was averse from outline history and scandalous biography, and his brevity defied the tribe of excerptors and abbreviators. In the Agricola, his earliest work, Tacitus amalgamates biography and historical monograph. Tacitus' historical style is a masterful and strange creation, difficult to characterize.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.