NUMBERS OF THE LIVING AGE WANTED. The publishers are in want of Nos. 1179 and 1180 (dated respectively Jan. 5th and Jan. 12th, 1867) of THE LIVING AGE. To subscribers, or others, who will do us the favor to send us either or both of those numbers, we will return an equivalent, either in our publications or in cash, until our wants are supplied.

PUBLISHED EVERY SATURDAY BY

LITTELL & GAY, BOSTON.

FOR EIGHT DOLLARS, remitted directly to the Publishers. the LIVING AGE will be punctually forwarded for a year, free of postage. But we do not prepay postage on less than a year, nor where we have to pay commission for forwarding the money.

Price of the First Series, in Cloth, 36 volumes, 90 dollars.

Second "
Third

The Complete Work,

Any Volume Bound, 3 dollars; Unbound, 2 dollars. The sets, or volumes, will be sent at the expense of the publishers.

PREMIUMS FOR CLUBS.

For 5 new sub-cribers ($40.), a sixth copy; or a set of HORNE'S INTRODUCTION TO THE BIBLE. unabridged, in 4 large volumes, cloth, price $10; or any 5 of the back volumes of the LIVING AGE, in numbers, price $10.

EPICUREANISM, ANCIENT AND MODERN.

BY FRANCIS W. NEWMAN.

From Fraser's Magazine. the contradictory theories hence arising, which led Socrates to renounce all physical research, one man of genius, Democritus WITHOUT accumulated and transmitted of Abdera, developed a doctrine of Atoms, thought Science has never arisen. To founded on large conceptions of the unitrim and hand down the lamp of Knowl- verse, and on the universality of mechaniedge has long been a favourite motto. cal law. Pythagoras also maintained the Our modern material sciences are new, sun to be the centre round which the earth and even the sciences of Space and Bal- and planets 'move: but neither of these anced Force are easily traceable to their great men rested on arguments convincing sources; for we find no need of going to the majority of their contemporaries; higher than Euclid and Archimedes. But indeed, the arguments attributed to Pywho shall trace Morals to their origin? thagoras are moral and fanciful. On the Until moral principles are held in common other hand the moral system of Pythagoby a whole community, political cohesion ras was didactic, or rather dogmatic, being is scarcely possible: therefore any long taught without reasons, like a religious or continuance in political union insures the ceremonial law. In the celebrated Ipse development of a moral system, and, if dixit, Ipse meant "the master himself," any portion of freedom is attained, leads Pythagoras. Morals, as a science, or as a to different schools of morality. It would system which aimed to be scientific, is not not then be wonderful if, in the complete traced by us higher than Socrates. Thencemental freedom enjoyed by old Greece, all forth there were two parallel streams of that the moderns can think concerning Greek philosophy - the older that of morals had been anticipated; nor if, in Physical Speculation, the latter that of consequence, we made no progress or dis-Morals derived from Socrates; and each coveries in this line of thought. On a ran in many channels. superficial view such is the fact. We have contrasts of opinion now, very similar to the contrasts observed among the old Greeks, of which the extremes were held by Epicureans and Stoics. Nevertheless, it is my persuasion that our modern controversies are less chaotic, and that argument between adversaries is by no means so hopeless as in antiquity it seems to have been. Each school has at least unlearnt some of its errors, under the attacks of its opponents, and all hold in common that man ought not to live for his individual selfishness, but for the common good.

In the retrospect, we see not how anything else could have occurred but enormous presumptuousness, enormous error, and enormous diversity of opinion. Alike in politics, in religion, in morals, terribly difficult is the transition from the puerile to the adult stage from the state of bondage to that of freedom. In political and religious struggles convulsions often occur too violent to be composed by any mediator, or softened by moral principle; nay, morality itself, and whatever passes for science, are then apt to be embroiled in the general chaos. What of this kind may have happened in far-off Asia conGreek efforts at scientific thought began cerns us the less because it is hopeless to from the material world, with all the pre- get any continuous record; but the very sumptuousness of inexperienced youth. fact makes us more value our knowledge They undertook with light confidence to of Greek opinion, which we see spread out resolve the highest problems of Astron- before us with real continuity. The huomy, Geology, and Cosmogony, while ig-man mind, aspiring to truth and freedom, norant of the surface of our own globe asked the reason why in all these high and of the very elements of Chemistry-spheres at once. Why is a king or a pola science which had then no name. At ity to be obeyed? Why is a religion to be the same time they were most rudely fur- believed, or the existence of any Gods? nished with instruments for measuring Why is a certain course of action called and weighing, and had scarcely even an moral and good? Why are certain docidea of their importance. In the midst of trines, in this or that art or system, held

to be true and proved? Also, when Soc-| Epicurus is not here named, he is certainly rates despaired altogether of Physics, and intended. The poet opens his fifth book devoted his life to ground Morals more with a still grander eulogy: "Who is able deeply, his method was that of interro- from weighty heart to compose a song gating everything, and pretending to know worthy of the majesty of our topic and of nothing. Who could then wonder if he its discoveries? or who is so effective in established nothing? Of course he aimed diction, that he can pour forth praises due to get rid of rubbish, and clear a good to the merits of Him who bequeathed to foundation for a new building. He really us such treasures, won and earned by his did preach and teach, alternately with his own bosom? No one will be able, as I scepticism, very much of definite morals; think, who is sprung of mortal body. For yet, inevitably, men widely diverse one if we must so speak, as the notorious from another believed themselves his dis- majesty of the subject demands, he was a ciples, alike dogmatic Stoics and Acade- God, O illustrious Memmius-a God, who micians despairing of truth. All who first entered that course of life, which now were between these extremes were es- is called WISDOM, &c. &c." teemed Socratic, and certainly had common principles and common cultivation. They could learn of one another, and esteem one another, as do the sects of a common religion. But the system of Epicurus, which arose in the break-up of Greek freedom and Greek patriotism, was in entire contrast to all Socratic ideas.

er.

It would seem that Lucretius learned his philosophy wholly from within the Epicurean school, and knew no more of the history of thought, than his teachers were pleased to tell him. But this idolatry of their master was shared by the whole sect. Pomponius Atticus, in many respects a learned man-indeed a multiplier of erudite books—according to Cicero (De Fin.

rus, if he wished; for his intimate friends
have Epicurus's effigy, not only in pictures,
but on cups and rings. Pliny attests that
this sect carried about with them like-
nesses of Epicurus, and set them up in
their bedchambers. The mischief done by
this idolatry to the progress of their phi-
losophy is visible in Lucretius himself, who
has no desire to improve on his master,
but simply to inculcate his lessons, as if
from a sacred book, which may not be
taken from nor added to. To this prob-
ably the true key is found in the fact, that
Lucretius is careless to learn any of the
secrets of Nature, except in so far as they
aid him to explode the popular belief in
Gods. He will give contradictory explan-
ations of the same fact; and though quite
aware that one or other is certainly false,
and therefore possibly both
are false
yet, believing that one or other still suffi es
to supersede the theory of Divine action,
he is satisfied.

If we are to believe the Epicureans their master was indeed the divine teach-v. 1, 3) says, that he cannot forget EpicuThe Roman poet Lucretius, a man of unquestioned genius, was not aware that Epicurus owed anything to those who preceded him. Familiar as are his panegyrics to every scholar, it may not be amiss here to present two eminent passages. In the opening of his poem, he says: "When human life was foully prostrate over the lands in open view, crushed under grievous Religion, who displayed her head from heaven, bending over mortals with horrible aspect; a man of the Greeks first dared to lift mortal eyes against her, and was first to withstand her; one whom neither the report of Gods, nor lightnings, nor heaven with its threatening murmurs, repressed, but so much the more excited the ardent valour of his soul; so that he was the first who longed to shatter the close barriers of Nature's portals. Therefore the vivid force of his soul overcame, and went forward far beyond the flaming walls of the World, and surveyed the entire of Immensity; whence he reports to us what can arise, what can not; and how possibilities are limited to everything. Wherefore, in turn, Religion is now trampled under foot, and us Victory lifts to heaven." Though

The opposite view taken of Epicurus by Cicero and probably by all Socratics is very curious. According to Cicero (Fin. 16) Epicurus took up the physics of Democritus only to spoil them: while his

moral system was borrowed from Aristip-| rus, were they not so thoroughly borne pus of Cyrene. What is there, he asks out by Lucretius, where we can compare (De N, D.), in the physics of Epicurus the two: a fact which makes Cicero's eruwhich does not come from Democritus? dition and great perspicuity highly valuTrue; he changed a few matters. When able to us. His intimate friendship with he saw, that if atoms were carried down- Pomponius Atticus, a veteran Epicurean, ward by their own weight [in parallel gave him great advantage. The two lines], their motion would be certain and friends sat side by side listening to sysnecessary to avoid the idea of Necessity, tematic courses of lectures from two celehe said that the atoms deviate a little! It brated Epicurean teachers; and in the rewould have been less disgraceful to confess sult, Atticus, while lamenting that Cicero himself ignorant. Elsewhere (Fin. 1, 6) was not convinced, confessed that he unCicero adds another reason why "devia- derstood them perfectly. tion at uncertain time and place" must be admitted in the atoms, viz. that otherwise they would move on without collision, and nothing could be created; and in both statements he is confirmed by Lucretius (2, 216, 290). Thus Epicurus surrendered entirely Democritus's main doctrine, that the atoms moved by Law. he made them out to be lawless, yet undertook to lay down concerning them, what are the limits of possibility.

we

The very first step of Epicurean logic, was, to assume that the bodily senses are perfect, and are alone trustworthy, in the decision of truth. Lucretius carries this out to such a pitch of absurdity, as to insist, that a distant object (as a heavenly body) is no larger than it looks. A modern student, who has not read him, may be slow to believe the statement, and may think that it is our misconception; but it is quite beyond doubt: his phrases are unIndeed Cicero, though highly latitudin- mistakable. He says (5,565): "The disk arian in his belief, towards Epicurus alone and heat of the sun can not be much shows unconcealed aversion and high con- greater or smaller than it seems to our tempt. He makes Cotta (the Academician senses: for . . . (So again, 5,575). And sceptic) say to Velleius (the Epicurean) whether the moon illumines us with spuri"You would rather give up your whole ous light, or flings her own light from status in life than the authority which has her proper body, in either case she is in sanctioned the doctrine of atoms: for you no respect of larger form than the disk made up your mind to be an Epicurean, which we discern with our own eyes seems before you had learned the doctrine. to be for . . . . Nevertheless, as Hence you had either to take in all these here see fires to twinkle irregularly, it absurdities, or to lay down the name of may be admitted that a distant object the school which you had already em- possibly is a very little either greater or braced."... "These blunders, which Epi- less than it appears. Nor need we woncurus made while half asleep, are repro- der that so little a sun (tantulus Sol) is duced by you as by his dictation, while he, able to send us so great a light. . . . as we see in his writings, boasted that he Do you not-see how widely a small founhad had no teacher; a thing which I should tain sometimes waters the meadows, &c. believe without his avowal, as easily as I . . . ." It is clear by this passage, that believe the owner of an ill-built house, neither Lucretius nor Epicurus underwho boasts that he employed no archi- stood the first elements of geometrical tect." On every side of Epicurus Cicero optics- - did not know that the visible found something to repel him. The size of a distant object is nothing but the moral system seemed to him base or silly, the logic absurd; the very style of fended him by its negligence or want of form, though he will not allow that his taste affects his judgments of truth (Fin. 1, 5). Nevertheless, we might hesitate to receive Cicero's representations of Epicu- small body. . . .

angle which it subtends to the eye, and has no linear magnitude at all. Moreover, while he knew that the sun is vastly more distant than the moon, and ought to have inferred that it is prodigiously greater, he actually pronounces that the sun is a

To Democritus (says