archus as an influence, although Cicero has taken the austere line even farther. On the
high opinion of Dicaearchus among Cicero and his contemporaries (Varro and Atti-
cus), see Rawson 1991, 60 – 61. It is not easy to discriminate Dicaearchus’s own posi-
tions from the reports of Varro and of Porphyry (Abst.4.2.1 – 9 = fr. 56A Mirhady
2001). Saunders (2001) argues strongly that Dicaearchus was not a “primitivist,” but
rather an “ironicprogressivist” (254); cf. Schütrumpf 2001, 257 – 58, on the question of
whether the “falling-off” model is Varronian or already present in Dicaearchus.
For conflicting claims over the status of oldest city (the top candidates are usu-
ally Athens, Argos, Sicyon), see Pliny HN7.194: the Egyptians win, with Diospolis.
In Latin the point is reinforced by the fact that antiquusin the comparative can
anyway mean “better, preferable, more desirable” (OLDs.v. §10): see Bettini 1991,
117 – 19, for the fundamental sense of “coming before,” “out in front.”
Schütrumpf 2001, 258 – 59.
North 1995 on the Roman version of this perspective.
R. Williams 1973; note the reassessments offered in MacLean, Landry, and
Ward 1999.
Della Corte 1976.
Versnel 1994, 190. See Della Corte 1976, 130, for the coexistence in Varro’s Res
Rusticaeof the two ideas of progress and decadence. For an interesting discussion of
Greek theories of language within this framework, see Gera 2003, which focuses on
language as either a trace of a lost form of communication between humans and ani-
mals and gods or else one of civilization’s appurtenances.
Herman 1997, 13; I am much indebted to his discussion.
Farrell 1995. Lucretius thus anticipates the insight of Horden and Purcell 2000,
303: “Things have always got worse as well as better.”
On the Lucretian dimension, see Gale 2000, 38 – 43, 63 – 66. The bibliography
on the Golden and Iron ages in Virgil is colossal: a recent overview in Perkell 2002 pro-
vides very helpful orientation.
Kubusch 1986, 94 – 98; R. F. Thomas 1988, 1:16 – 17, 87.
On the close links here to Varro’s reworking of Dicaearchus’s third stage, see
Kubusch 1986, 100 – 103. Varro likewise speaks of farmers being regarded by the
Romans as “the only ones left from the stock of King Saturn” (solos reliquos esse ex
stirpe Saturni regis, Rust.3.1.5).
So Zetzel 1994, 21; cf. 1997, 190 – 95; Horsfall 1981, 146 – 48; O’Hara 1994;
O’Hara (forthcoming), chap. 4; R. F. Thomas 2004.
My translation is based on the commentary of Woodman and Martin (1996),
ad loc.
On this crucial shift, see Baldry 1952; Gatz 1967, 205 – 6; Blundell 1986, 136,
156 – 57. As Gatz acutely observes, and as we shall see further below, the shift from
notes to pages 113 – 115