The Question of Mens in Lucretius 2.289

Classical Quarterly 29 (1):95-100 (1979)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

One of the most widely accepted emendations in Lucretius has been the change by Lambinus in 2.289 of the manuscript reading res to mens. For instance, of the major editors since Lachmann only Bockemüller, Merrill in his 1917 edition, and Martin in his Teubner editions have printed res. Also, few emendations in Lucretius are of equal significance for Epicurean doctrine because, as will be shown, some conclusions of important recent scholarship depend on the acceptance of the reading mens.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 93,098

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

The Question of Mens in Lucretius 2.289.I. Avotins - 1979 - Classical Quarterly 29 (01):95-.
A Note On Lucretius, De Rerum Natura 3.361.Abigail Buglass - 2014 - Classical Quarterly 64 (1):413-417.
Lucretius 3.1–3.M. L. Clarke - 1977 - Classical Quarterly 27 (02):354-.
Lucretius 3.1–3.M. L. Clarke - 1977 - Classical Quarterly 27 (2):354-355.
Emendations of Lucretius.Robinson Ellis - 1897 - The Classical Review 11 (04):204-205.
Emendations of Lucretius. [REVIEW]D. W. Lucas - 1947 - The Classical Review 61 (2):66-66.
Retire with thanks: Rethinking lucretius 3.962.Tetsufumi Takeshita - 2021 - Classical Quarterly 71 (2):895-897.
The Text of Lucretius 2.1174.Mark Possanza - 1990 - Classical Quarterly 40 (2):459-464.
The Text of Lucretius 2.1174.Mark Possanza - 1990 - Classical Quarterly 40 (02):459-.
Propertius 1.9.30.Allan Kershaw - 1992 - Classical Quarterly 42 (01):282-.

Analytics

Added to PP
2017-02-20

Downloads
5 (#1,562,871)

6 months
1 (#1,516,603)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?