{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.017223910840932118, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0010131712259371835, 'mean_word_length': 4.594900849858357, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Lucretius and Epicurus

The study of Lucretius' De Rerum Natura is in important respects similar to that of Roman comedy: in both we are concerned with the relationship of a Latin text to a Greek background, and in both we are regularly in the illogical position of having to reconstruct that background from the Latin text. One is tempted to add that in both areas dogmatic assertion, a lack of humility in the face of uncertainty and a patronising unwillingness to concede sophistication to anything Latin have too long held the day. Clay's book is an attempt to redress the balance for Lucretius and his Epicurean background. Its message is that the De Rerum Natura is an Epicurean work, but one which fully recasts and refashions the Epicurean system for the Roman audience; its structure and approach are Lucretius' own, the re-presentation of a deep knowledge of the philosophy rather than the copying of a single source. Since the rest of this review will concentrate on disagreements and criticisms, we should say right away that this is a proposition with which we are in complete agreement. Anyone who reads C.'s book will come away with a picture of the De Rerum Natura as a sophisticated philosophical poem; which it is. The experience of reading will not be an easy one however. C. writes elegantly and precisely in the rather full 18th century style which is typical of American academic prose, but he is extremely allusive. On the surface he assumes no deep acquaintance with Lucretius or Epicurus in his reader, but to take only one instance, the reader who comes upon 'physiology' used casually in the sense of physiologia will be puzzled if he has not read his Letter to Herodotus. Rather complexity than banality, but it will take a determined student to persevere with the reading, particularly as the book is not one which lends itself to being read piecemeal. This is unfortunate, as in many ways it is an excellent introduction to the De Rerum Natura.