View source for Philosophy:Astronomica (Manilius)

{{Short description|1st century AD Latin didactic poem about celestial phenomena}}
{{italic title}}
{{Infobox poem
|name                =Astronomica
|image               = Astronomica.png
|image_size          = <!-- custom size for image (defaults to 220px)   -->
|caption             = The first page of the ''Astronomica'', from a 1461 manuscript
|subtitle            = <!-- Subtitle or descriptor                      -->
|author              = Marcus Manilius
|original_title      = <!-- Original title, if not in English           -->
|original_title_lang = la
|translator          = Thomas Creech<br>Edward Sherburne<br>G. P. Goold
|written             = {{circa}} AD 30–40
|first               = <!-- First published in                          -->
|illustrator         = <!-- Illustrator used consistently throughout
                            (where illustrations are a major feature)   -->
|cover_artist        = <!-- Cover Artist                                -->
|country             =Roman Empire
|language            = [[Social:Latin|Latin]]
|series              = <!-- Series (if any)                             -->
|subject             = [[Astronomy:Astronomy|astronomy]], [[Unsolved:Astrology|astrology]]
|genre               = Didactic
|form                = <!-- Form (i.e. Sonnet, Quatrain, Ode...etc)     -->
|meter               = Hexameter
|rhyme               = <!-- Rhyme scheme: (i.e. ABBA CDDC EFFE GG)      -->
|publisher           = <!-- Publisher of main publication
                            (prefer 1st edition)                        -->
|publication_date    = <!-- Date published (1st edition). Use
                            {{Start date|YYYY|MM|DD|df=y}}, trimmed as needed. -->
|publication_date_en =1674/1697
|media_type          = manuscript
|lines               = 4,200
|pages               = <!-- Pages (prefer 1st edition)                  -->
|size_weight         = <!-- Size and Weight                             -->
|isbn                = <!-- [[International Standard Book Number|ISBN]] -->
|oclc                = <!-- [[Organization:OCLC|OCLC]]                                    -->
|preceded_by         = <!-- Preceded By
                            Title of prior poem in series               -->
|followed_by         = <!-- Followed By
                            Title of subsequent poem in series          -->
|wikisource          = <!-- Title of work if in the public domain and hosted at English Wikisource -->
}}
The '''''Astronomica''''' ({{IPA|la-x-classic|astrɔˈnɔmɪka|lang|link=yes}}), also known as the '''''Astronomicon''''', is a [[Social:Latin|Latin]] didactic poem{{#tag:ref|Though, as explained by Katharina Volk, "in histories of Latin literature, Manilius is typically treated under the rubric of didactic poetry",<ref>Volk (2009), p. 174.</ref> there has been much debate as to whether the ''Astronomica'' should be categorized as an "epic poem" or as a "didactic poem".<ref>Campbell (2004), p. 209.</ref> Several sources refer to this work simply as an epic; for instance, Alison Keith writes in her book ''A Latin Epic Reader: Selections from Ten Epics'', that "Manilius is the earliest exponent of imperial epic with his ''Astronomica''",<ref name="keithxix" /> and [[Biography:Anthony Grafton|Anthony Grafton]], Glenn W. Most, and Salvatore Settis note in ''The Classical Tradition'' that "the earliest complete astrological text we possess from antiquity is Manilius's Latin epic the ''Astronomica'' (ca. 25 CE)".<ref>Anthony, Most, & Settis (2010), p. 85.</ref> Other sources simply refer to the ''Astronomica'' as a "didactic poem", such as the Loeb Classical Library webpage for G. P. Goold's 1977 translation.<ref name="harvardloeb" /> According to Victoria Moul, "there is very little acknowledgement in either ancient or early modern criticism of didactic as a genre of its own, rather than a form of epic".<ref name="moul">Moul 2017.</ref> Volk likewise writes that "didactic poems [e.g. ''De natura rerum'' and ''Astronomica''] ... were often regarded as (some kind of) epic poetry".<ref name="voolk2009175">Volk (2009), p. 179.</ref> At the same time, Volk stresses that "there are ... such crucial differences between didactic poetry and narrative epic that it makes sense to consider the former a genre in its own right."<ref name="voolk2009175" />|group="nb"}} about celestial phenomena, written in hexameters and divided into five books. The ''Astronomica'' was written {{circa|AD 30{{en dash}}40}} by a Roman poet whose name was likely Marcus Manilius; little is known of Manilius, and although there is evidence that the ''Astronomica'' was probably read by many other Roman writers, no surviving works explicitly quote him.

The earliest work on astrology that is extensive, comprehensible, and mostly intact, the ''Astronomica'' describes celestial phenomena, and, in particular, the [[Astronomy:Zodiac|zodiac]] and [[Unsolved:Astrology|astrology]]. The poem{{em dash}}which seems to have been inspired by [[Biography:Lucretius|Lucretius]]'s Epicurean poem ''[[Philosophy:De rerum natura|De rerum natura]]''{{em dash}}espouses a [[Philosophy:Stoicism|Stoic]], [[Determinism|deterministic]] understanding of a universe overseen by a god and governed by reason. The fifth book contains a lacuna, which has led to debate about the original size of the poem; some scholars have argued that whole books have been lost over the years, whereas others believe only a small section of the work is missing.

The poem was rediscovered {{circa|lk=no}}{{nbsp}}1416{{en dash}}1417 by the Italian [[Philosophy:Renaissance humanism|humanist]] and scholar Poggio Bracciolini, who had a copy made from which the modern text derives. Upon its rediscovery, the ''Astronomica'' was read, commented upon, and edited by a number of scholars, most notably [[Biography:Joseph Justus Scaliger|Joseph Justus Scaliger]], Richard Bentley, and A. E. Housman. The poem was never as popular as other classical Latin poems and was neglected for centuries after its rediscovery. This started to change during the early 20th century when Housman published his critically acclaimed edition of the poem in five books (1903{{endash}}30). Housman's work was followed by G. P. Goold's lauded English translation in 1977. Today, scholars consider ''Astronomica '' to be highly technical, complicated, and occasionally contradictory. At the same time, many have praised Manilius's ability to translate heady astronomical concepts and complex mathematical computations into poetry.

==Authorship and date==

{{multiple image| total_width = 500|image2=Statue-Augustus.jpg|alt2=Statue of Caesar Augustus, outstretched arm pointing|image1=TiberiusLouvre.jpg|alt1=Bust of Tiverius, looking left|footer=Scholars have debated whether the "Caesar" referred to in the poem is Tiberius ''(left)'' or Augustus ''(right)''.}}

Because no contemporary Roman sources mention his name, the exact identity of the ''Astronomica''{{'}}s author is a tantalizing question, but his name was probably Marcus Manilius.<ref name="volk1">Volk (2009), p. 1.</ref><ref name="Chisholm" />{{#tag:ref|In the manuscript of the poem known as M, the author is identified three times in the genitive, as "M[arcus]. Manili", "M. Manlii", and "M. Milnili"; "Manlii" and "Milnili" are likely both corruptions of the nomen "Manlii", making the author's name "Marcus Manlius" ("Marci Manlii" in the genitive).<ref>Gain (1970), p. 130.</ref>|group="nb"}} This uncertainty has led to Marcus Manilius being confused over the years with Manilius Antiochus (fl.{{nbsp}}c.{{nbsp}}100{{nbsp}}BC, mentioned by Pliny the Elder in his ''Naturalis Historia''); Flavius Manlius Theodorus (fl.{{nbsp}}c.{{nbsp}}AD{{nbsp}}376{{en dash}}409, a consul in AD{{nbsp}}399) and [[Biography:Boethius|Boëthius]] (the sixth-century Roman senator and author of ''De consolatione philosophiae'', whose full name was Anicius Manlius Severinus Boëthius).<ref>Volk (2009), pp. 2, 4.</ref><ref name="m&gxi" /> Although the poem suggests that the writer was a citizen and resident of Rome, some have contended that Manilius was a non-Roman; according to Katharina Volk, a Latinist who specializes in Manilius, this belief is generally based on either "the poet's supposedly inferior Latinity" or "the wish to see Manilius as the member of a Greek intellectual milieu at Rome".<ref>Volk (2009), p. 162.</ref> The 19th-century classicist Fridericus Jacobs and the 19th- and 20th-century historian Paul Monceaux have argued that he was an African, based largely on his writing style, which they say resembles that of African authors.<ref name="Chisholm">Chisholm (1911), pp. 580{{en dash}}81.</ref><ref name="brock1911">Brock (1911), p. 180.</ref> Volk counters this view, arguing that Manilius writes "from ... a conventional Roman perspective" and "takes recourse to Roman history to illustrate the [[Unsolved:Astrology|astrological]] facts he discusses".<ref>Volk (2009), pp. 162{{en dash}}63.</ref>

The work's date has been debated. The only historical event to which there is a clear reference is the [[History:Battle of the Teutoburg Forest|Battle of the Teutoburg Forest]]{{em dash}}a decisive loss for Rome that forced the empire to withdraw from Magna Germania{{em dash}}in AD{{nbsp}}9.<ref name="Volk 2009 p. 138">Volk (2009), p. 138.</ref> In considering the poem's date, scholars have proposed three hypotheses: that it was written entirely under Augustus (who ruled from 27 BC until AD 14), under the reigns of both Augustus and Tiberius (who ruled from AD 14{{en dash}}37), or entirely under Tiberius. The first conjecture was favored primarily from the [[Philosophy:Renaissance|Renaissance]] until the 19th century, when Karl Lachmann argued that references to the emperor in the poem made more sense if they were referring to Tiberius.<ref name="Volk 2009 p. 138" /> At the turn of the 20th century, scholars such as A. E. Housman began favoring the idea that the first two books were written under Augustus, the last two under Tiberius, and that the third was "undatable".<ref>Volk (2009), pp. 138{{en dash}}39.</ref>{{#tag:ref|This is based on the facts that the first book mentions the Battle of the Teutoburg Forest (suggesting an Augustan date), the second claims that [[Unsolved:Capricorn (astrology)|Capricorn]] is the Emperor's natal sign (indicating this book was written under Augustus), and the fourth describes [[Unsolved:Libra (astrology)|Libra]] as the natal sign of the leader (suggesting that this book was written under Tiberius). Books three and five are difficult to date, but book five is assumed to have been written under Tiberius because it followed the (Tiberian) book four.<ref name="m&gxi">Goold (1997) [1977], p. xii.</ref>|group="nb"}} This debate has not been settled,<ref name="Volk 2009 p. 139">Volk (2009), p. 139.</ref> although Volk has argued that the poem should be dated to c. AD 10{{en dash}}20.<ref name="volk1" />

==Contents==

[[File:Cellarius ptolemaic system c2.jpg|thumb|alt=17th-century chart of the universe, with zodiac signs and the earth at the center|The universe, as described by Manilius, is made up of two spheres: one solid (Earth) and the other hollow (the firmament), resembling this 17th-century depiction in Andreas Cellarius's ''Harmonia Macrocosmica''.]]
According to Volk, Manilius's ''Astronomica'' is the earliest work on astrology that is extensive, comprehensible, and mostly extant.<ref name="volk5" /> Volk wrote that since he dedicates the poem to stellar phenomena, it is "indicative of the great fascination&nbsp;... that the stars held for the Romans of Manilius' period".<ref>Volk (2011), p. 6.</ref>

===Summary===

The ''Astronomica'', which is written in hexameters, opens with Manilius contending that he is the "first to sing of astrology".<ref name="gooldxvii" /> He also claims that the god Mercury engendered his interest in celestial bodies.<ref name="gooldxvii">Goold (1997) [1977], p. xvii.</ref>

In the first book he ponders the origin of the universe, considering the theories of [[Biography:Xenophanes|Xenophanes]], [[Biography:Hesiod|Hesiod]], [[Biography:Leucippus|Leucippus]], [[Biography:Heraclitus|Heraclitus]], Thales, and [[Biography:Empedocles|Empedocles]] before arguing that the universe was created from [[Philosophy:Classical element#Greece|the four elements]] and is governed by a divine spirit.<ref>Manilius, ''Astronomica'', 1.118{{en dash}}254.</ref><ref>Goold (1997) [1977], pp. xviii, xx.</ref><ref name="book1_volk" /> According to Manilius, the universe is composed of two spheres: one (the Earth) is solid and the other (the "sphere of stars", often called the [[Astronomy:Firmament|firmament]]) is hollow. The constellations are fixed in the firmament; the Earth is stationary and the firmament revolves around it, explaining the movements of the stars. The planets, the Moon, and the Sun also revolve around the Earth in the vast space between its surface and the edge of the firmament.<ref>Volk (2009), p. 25.</ref> Because the Earth is [[Geocentric model|in the center]] of the universe, it is equidistant from the firmament and is thus not compelled to "fall" in any specific direction.<ref>Volk (2009), p. 31.</ref> According to Manilius, the universe is ruled by a god (''conspirat deus'') and is governed by reason (''ratione gubernat'').<ref>Manilius, ''Astronomica'', 1.251.</ref><ref name="godreasonuniverse" />{{#tag:ref|Volk writes that Manilius is unclear as to how the deity, the universe, and reason are all connected to one another.<ref name="godreasonuniverse">Volk (2009), p. 34.</ref> Manilius occasionally treats these key terms as distinct concepts and at other times like synonyms for one another, further complicating the meaning of their use.<ref>Volk (2009), p. 61, note 8.</ref>|group="nb"}} Manilius next discusses the constellations and stars<ref name="book1_volk" /><ref>Manilius, ''Astronomica'', 1.255{{en dash}}560.</ref> and the [[Astronomy:Celestial spheres|celestial circles]].<ref name="book1_volk" /><ref>Manilius, ''Astronomica'', 1.561{{en dash}}804.</ref> In this section, the poet spends considerable time contemplating the [[Astronomy:Milky Way|Milky Way]] band,<ref name="book1_volk" /><ref>Manilius, ''Astronomica'', 1.684{{en dash}}804.</ref> which, after exploring several hypotheses as to its existence,{{#tag:ref|Including that the Milky Way band is: the place in the sky where the two hemispheres are merging or diverging; a path the Sun once took; the route Phaethon took when he drove [[Religion:Helios|Helios]]'s sun chariot; milk from Juno's breast; or a cluster of small stars.<ref name="marmanmilky">Manilius, ''Astronomica'', 1.718{{en dash}}761.</ref><ref name="gooldxxxv">Goold (1997) [1977], p. xxxv.</ref> |group="nb"}} he concludes is likely to be the celestial abode for dead heroes.<ref name="book1_volk">Volk (2009), p. 266.</ref><ref name="marmanmilky" /><ref name="gooldxxxv" /><ref name="book1summary">Manilius & Goold (1997) [1977], p. 3.</ref> The first book ends with an exploration of comets, which Manilius sees as harbingers of calamity or great disaster.<ref>Heilen (2011), p. 282.</ref><ref>Volk (2009), pp. 266{{en dash}}67.</ref>

[[File:Zodiac Horologiographia Munster.tif|thumb|left|400px|alt=Illustration of the signs of the zodiac|Book three discusses the signs of the zodiac, which are depicted in this 16th-century manuscript.]]

Books two and three deal mainly with the finer details of the zodiac.<ref name="book23">Volk (2014), p. 95.</ref> Book two opens with a preface in which Manilius presents a brief history of hexameter poetry, singling out [[Biography:Homer|Homer]] and Hesiod. The purpose, Volk argues, is to emphasize the uniqueness of his poem in comparison to others rather than to insert himself into this poetic tradition. According to Manilius, "Every path that leads to [[Social:Mount Helicon|Helicon]] has been trodden" (''omnis ad accessus Heliconos semita trita est''; all other topics have been covered) and he must find "untouched meadows and water" (''integra'' ... ''prata'' ... ''undamque'') for his poetry: astrology.<ref>Manilius, ''Astronomica'', 2.50, 2.53{{en dash}}54.</ref><ref>Volk (2010), pp. 187{{en dash}}88.</ref> Manilius ends the book's preface by saying "that the divine cosmos is voluntarily revealing itself both to mankind as a whole and to the poet in particular", and that he is set apart from the crowd because his poetic mission has been sanctioned by fate.<ref>Volk (2003), p. 628.</ref><ref>Manilius, ''Astronomica'', 2.60{{en dash}}149.</ref><ref name="book2summary" /> The poet then begins his explanation of the first astrologically significant circle: the zodiac itself.{{efn|'''The Zodiac''': "an imagined band on the sphere of fixed stars 23.5 degree angle to the celestial equator, which forms the backdrop of the seven planets' orbits around the earth."<ref name="volk274">Volk (2009), p. 274.</ref>}}<ref name="book2summary" /><ref name="threecircles">{{cite book|title=Rules of Fate|pages=58–126|publisher=[[Organization:Oxford University Press|Oxford University Press]]|doi=10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199265220.003.0003|year=2009|last1=Volk|first1=Katharina|isbn=978-0199265220}}</ref> He first considers the [[Unsolved:Astrological sign|signs of the zodiac]] (viz. [[Unsolved:Aries (astrology)|Aries]], [[Unsolved:Taurus (astrology)|Taurus]], [[Unsolved:Gemini (astrology)|Gemini]], [[Unsolved:Cancer (astrology)|Cancer]], [[Unsolved:Leo (astrology)|Leo]], [[Unsolved:Virgo (astrology)|Virgo]], [[Unsolved:Libra (astrology)|Libra]], [[Unsolved:Scorpio (astrology)|Scorpio]], [[Unsolved:Sagittarius (astrology)|Sagittarius]], [[Unsolved:Capricorn (astrology)|Capricorn]], [[Unsolved:Aquarius (astrology)|Aquarius]], and [[Unsolved:Pisces (astrology)|Pisces]]),<ref name="book2summary" /><ref>Manilius, ''Astronomica'', 2.150{{en dash}}269.</ref> before discussing the aspects and relationships between the signs and other objects.<ref name="book2summary" /><ref>Manilius, ''Astronomica'', 2.270{{en dash}}692.</ref> In this section, the poet briefly discusses the zodiac signs, the Olympian gods who serve as their protectors, and the relationship between the signs and the parts of the human body.<ref name="book2summary" /><ref>Manilius, ''Astronomica'', 2.433{{en dash}}65.</ref> The ''Astronomica'' then considers ''[[Astronomy:Dodecatemoria|dodecatemoria]]''{{efn|'''''Dodecatemoria''''': the division of each zodiacal sign into twelve segments.<ref>Goold (1997) [1977], p. li.</ref>}}<ref name="book2summary" /><ref>Manilius, ''Astronomica'', 2.693{{en dash}}749.</ref><ref name="mg1977">Goold (1997) [1977], pp. xxxviii{{en dash}}liv.</ref> before he deviates from the zodiac and begins to discuss the didactic method.<ref name="book2summary" /><ref>Manilius, ''Astronomica'', 2.750{{en dash}}87.</ref> The book concludes with a consideration of the second astrologically significant circle, that of the fixed circle of the observer.{{efn|'''Fixed circle of the observer''': the "imagined circle around the observer, defined by the four cardinal points, through which the zodiac and the planets turn".<ref name="volk272">Volk (2003), p. 272.</ref>}}<ref name="book2summary">Volk (2009), pp. 267{{en dash}}68.</ref><ref name="threecircles" /><ref>Manilius, ''Astronomica'', 2.788{{en dash}}970.</ref> The last few lines are dedicated to an overview of the [[Unsolved:House (astrology)|''dodecatropos'']].{{efn|'''''Dodecatropos''''': "'(System of) twelve units': the division of the ''fixed circle of the observer'' into twelve places [i.e. houses] ... each of which governs a particular aspect of life."<ref name="volk272" />}}<ref name="volk268" /><ref>Manilius, ''Astronomica'', 2.856{{en dash}}970.</ref>

The third book – which focuses mainly on "determin[ing] the degree of the [[Astronomy:Ecliptic|ecliptic]] which is rising about the horizon at the moment" of a person's birth – opens with Manilius's reiteration that his work is original.<ref name="book3summary" /><ref name="ennius">Goold (1997) [1977], p. lxii.</ref> Because his topic is complex and difficult, the poet tells his audience they can "expect truth but not beauty".<ref name="volk268" /> He then discusses the third astrologically significant circle, the [[Unsolved:Arabic parts|lots]],{{efn|'''Lots''': "Points on the birth chart that carry special significance. In Manilius['s poem], the lots ... are 30° divisions of the ''zodiac'', whose position on the ''zodiac'' change with time according to the position of the [Sun and Moon]."<ref name="volk272" />}}<ref name="threecircles" /><ref>Manilius, ''Astronomica'', 3.43{{en dash}}202.</ref> which are points on a birth chart{{efn|'''Birth chart''': the specific arrangement of celestial bodies that occur the moment that a person is born. The terms "nativity" and "[[Unsolved:Horoscope|horoscope]]" are sometimes used in place of "birth chart".<ref name="volk271" />}} that carry special significance.<ref name="volk272" /> Subsequent verses explain how to calculate the [[Unsolved:Ascendant|ascendant]],{{efn|'''Ascendant''': the "point of the zodiac that is rising over the horizon in the east".<ref name="volk271" /> It is also sometimes called the ''horoscopus''.<ref name="volk271" />}} the [[Unsolved:Horoscope|horoscope]],{{#tag:ref|At lines 218{{en dash}}24, Manilius describes a "vulgar" method for calculating the ascendant, which{{emdash}}according to Pierre Brind'Amour{{emdash}}he calls a "dubious computation" (''dubia'' ... ''ratione'').<ref>Manilius, ''Astronomica'', 3.389.</ref><ref>Brind'Amour (1983), p. 144.</ref> In lines 225–482 feature Manilius objects to the vulgar method, explaining "how latitude affects the length of the days in the various seasons and the rising time of the signs", provides a proper scheme to calculate the ascendant, and explains "a method by which the length of the days throughout the year can be computed for any specific location".<ref name="ba198314445">Brind'Amour (1983), pp. 144{{en dash}}45.</ref> Starting at line 483 and ending at line 509, "something very peculiar happens. The poet suddenly announces another method for computing the Ascendant, and what he proceeds to expound&nbsp;... is exactly the same vulgar method which he had previously described and condemned."<ref name="ba1983148" /> Some scholars, like A. E. Housman, G. P. Goold, and Auguste Bouché-Leclercq say Manilius simply made an error, whereas Pierre Brind'Amour says lines 483{{en dash}}509 are spurious.<ref name="ba1983148">Brind'Amour (1983), p. 148.</ref>|group="nb"}}<ref>Manilius, ''Astronomica'', 3.203{{en dash}}509.</ref> and chronocrators;{{efn|'''Chronocrators''': the "celestial features ... that govern individual sections of a person's life".<ref name="volk271">Volk (2009), p. 271.</ref> }}<ref>Manilius, ''Astronomica'', 3.510{{en dash}}59.</ref> and how to determine the projected length of one's life.<ref>Manilius, ''Astronomica'', 3.560{{en dash}}617.</ref> The third book concludes with a discussion about the tropic signs,{{efn|'''Tropic signs''': Cancer, Capricorn, Aries and Libra; they "house the solstices and equinoxes".<ref name="tropic">Volk (2009), p. 94.</ref> They are called "tropic signs" because "they (or at any rate Cancer and Capricorn) constitute the turning points of the sun's annual course".<ref name="tropic" />}}<ref name="volk268">Volk (2009), p. 268.</ref><ref>Manilius, ''Astronomica'', 3.618{{en dash}}82.</ref> which, while not particularly pertinent to the astrological content of the book, allows Manilius to end the book on a "poetic note".<ref name="book3summary" /> Most scholars consider the third book to be highly technical; according to Goold it "is the least poetical of the five, exemplifying for the most part Manilius's skill in rendering numbers and arithmetical calculations in hexameters".<ref name="book3summary">Manilius & Goold (1997) [1977], p. 161.</ref> A similar but less favorable sentiment is expressed by Green, who writes that in this book, "the disjuncture between instruction and medium is most obviously felt [because] complex mathematical calculations are confined to hexameter and obscured behind poetic periphrasis".<ref>Green (2014), p. 57.</ref>

[[File:Persus_and_Andromeda_by_Joachim_Wtewael.jpg|thumb|alt=16th-century painting of a soldier on a flying horse rescuing a chained woman|Most of the work's fifth book deals with the myth of Andromeda (''left''), Perseus (''upper right''), and a sea monster (''lower right'').]]

Books four and five are largely about "the effects of particular celestial phenomena on the native".<ref name="book23" /> Book four covers many topics that originated in Egypt, leading Goold to write that Manilius based his work on an Egyptian source.<ref>Goold (1997) [1977], p. lxxxiv.</ref> Much of the first portion of this book deals with decans{{efn|'''Decans''': divisions of the zodiac that measure ten degrees; each zodiac sign is composed of and governs three decans.<ref name="volk272" />}}<ref name="Astronomica 4.294">Manilius, ''Astronomica'', 4.294{{en dash}}386.</ref> and the ''partes damnandae'',{{efn|'''''Partes damnandae''''': Latin for the "degrees to be rejected"; this phrase represents certain degrees of the zodiac signs that are considered harmful or bad.<ref>Volk (2009), p. 273.</ref>|name=|group=}}<ref>Manilius, ''Astronomica'', 4.308{{en dash}}501.</ref> both of which allow Manilius another chance to convert mathematical and astrological tables into verse.<ref name="book4summary">Manilius & Goold (1997) [1977], p. 221.</ref> A short description of the rising of individual zodiacal degrees is followed by a more comprehensive survey of zodiacal geography.{{efn|'''Zodiacal geography''': the allotment of specific countries, regions, or division of lands to the rule of specific zodiac signs.<ref name="volk274" />}}<ref>Manilius, ''Astronomica'', 4.502{{en dash}}817.</ref><ref name="book4summary" /> Near the end of the book, Manilius writes about the ecliptic signs.{{efn|'''Ecliptic signs''': signs of the zodiac in which either the sun or the moon is to be found during an eclipse.<ref name="volk272" />}}<ref>Manilius, ''Astronomica'', 4.818{{en dash}}65.</ref><ref name="volk269" /> The book is punctuated at lines 4.387{{en dash}}407 and 4.866{{en dash}}935 by "exhortation[s] of the frustrated student", where complaints that astrology is difficult and nature is hidden are countered by statements that "the object of study is nothing less than (union with) god" and "the universe (microcosm) wishes to reveal itself to man".<ref name="volk269">Volk (2009), p. 269.</ref>

Most of the fifth (and final) book is a discussion of ''[[Astronomy:Stars in astrology#Use|paranatellonta]]''{{efn|'''''Paranatellonta''''': "constellations, parts thereof&nbsp;... or especially bright individual stars, which become visible or invisible at the same time as certain degrees or decanal sections&nbsp;... of the ecliptic".<ref>Hübner (2006).</ref>}} via the myth of Andromeda and [[Social:Perseus|Perseus]].<ref name="digression_p_a">Manilius, ''Astronomica'', 5.538{{en dash}}618.</ref> Manilius recalls how Andromeda was chosen to be sacrificed to a sea monster by her parents; Cepheus and Cassiopeia. Andromeda was chained to a cliff but before the creature could consume her, Perseus (who had just vanquished [[Unsolved:Medusa|Medusa]]) arrived. He instantly fell in love with Andromeda, killed the sea monster, and saved the young woman's life.<ref name="green46" /><ref name="digression_p_a" /> According to Green, the digression, which is by far the longest in the poem, "is very well chosen, in as much as no other mythological episode involves so many future constellations interacting at the same time; Andromeda (e.g.{{nbsp}}5.544), Perseus (e.g.{{nbsp}}5.67), the Sea Monster – strictly, [[Astronomy:Cetus|Cetus]] (cf.{{nbsp}}5.600), but often referred to in more generic terms during this story as ''belua'' (5.544, 608) and ''monstrum'' (5.581){{em dash}}Medusa's head (e.g.{{nbsp}}5.567), and Andromeda's parents, Cepheus and Cassiopeia".<ref name="green46" /> Green says the story is perfect for Manilius; he is able to use it to justify the constellations' proximity to one another and their eternal arrangement, as he had previously argued in 1.354{{en dash}}360.<ref name="green46">Green (2014), p. 46.</ref> Conversely, Housman compared it unfavorably to Ovid's version of the story and called Manilius's retelling "a sewn-on patch of far from the best purple" (''purpurae non sane splendidissimae adsutus pannus'').<ref>Manilius & Housman (1930), p. 70.</ref> A similar sentiment was expressed by the [[Organization:University of Cambridge|Cambridge]] classicist [[Biography:Arthur Woollgar Verrall|Arthur Woollgar Verrall]], who wrote that while the episode was meant to be a "show piece", it comes across as "a poor mixture of childish rhetoric and utter commonplace".<ref name="verrall1913">Verrall (1913), p. 630.</ref> Between lines 5.709–10, there is a large lacuna, meaning that at least some of the work is missing,<ref name="volk5" /> and then the last few lines of the book concern stars and other stellar phenomena. The book ends with a simile about the "''res publica'' of stars".<ref name="Astronomica 4.294" /><ref>Volk (2009), pp. 109{{en dash}}10.</ref><ref>Volk (2009), p. 270.</ref> This section – in which Manilius proposes that the stars constitute an elaborate and organized system, defined by a hierarchy that prevents "cosmic disaster" – seems to Volk to be a way for Manilius to assert the legitimacy of the Roman state through analogy.<ref>Volk (2009), p. 110.</ref>

===Worldview===

According to Volk, "The basic tenet of what we might call Manilius' natural philosophy is the idea that the universe is divine".<ref name="volk217" /> She writes that Manilius is inconsistent about the location of this divinity. For instance, in his first book, Manilius claims the perfectly regular movement of the sun, moon, planets, and stars is proof that the universe is [[Astronomy:Teleological argument#Roman era|the product of a god]]; he also says the universe itself is a god (''mundum ... ipsum esse deum'').<ref name="volk217">Volk (2009), p. 217.</ref><ref>Manilius, ''Astronomica'', 1.484{{endash}}85.</ref> Later in the same book, Manilius again says the universe is the "work of a great divinity" (''magni ... numinis ordo'').<ref name="volk217" /><ref>Manilius, ''Astronomica'', 1.531.</ref> Concerning this vacillation, Volk writes; "It is clear that there is a certain elasticity to Manilius' concept of the divinity of the universe&nbsp;... Is the world simply ruled by a ''diuinum numen'' (cf. 1.484) or is it a ''deus'' (cf 1.485) itself?"<ref name="volk218">Volk (2009), p. 218.</ref> Volk answers that in the cosmology of the ''Astronomica'', "God can be understood as the soul or breath&nbsp;... present within the world [and] since this divine entity completely pervades the cosmos, it makes equally much sense to call the cosmos itself a god".<ref name="volk219">Volk (2009), p. 219.</ref> According to Volk, this interpretation of the universe, which states that it has a sense of intellect and that it operates in an orderly way, thus allows Manilius to contend both that there is an unbroken chain of cause and effect affecting everything within the cosmos and that fate rules all.<ref name="volk220">Volk (2009), p. 220.</ref>

Volk points out the poem borrows or alludes to a number of philosophical traditions, including [[Philosophy:Hermeticism|Hermeticism]], [[Philosophy:Platonism|Platonism]], and [[Philosophy:Pythagoreanism|Pythagoreanism]]<ref>Volk (2009), pp. 234{{en dash}}51.</ref> but the prevailing belief of commentators is that Manilius espouses a [[Philosophy:Stoicism|Stoic]] worldview in the ''Astronomica''.<ref name="volk226first">Volk (2009), p. 226.</ref> A comparison between Manilius's beliefs and those of other Stoics reveals parallels that according to Volk "are immediately obvious".<ref name="volk227">Volk (2009), p. 227.</ref> For instance, Stoics and Manilius agree on the divinity of the universe, the argument from design, the assumption that the supreme god is both the creator of the universe and the active force within it, the interconnectedness of everything, the understanding that humans are intimately connected to the cosmos, the importance of considering the heavens, and the belief in an inescapable fate that rules over all.<ref>Volk (2009), p. 227{{endash}}30.</ref> The agreement on this latter point is of special importance because, according to Volk, belief in fate is "one of the most notorious aspects of the Stoic system".<ref name="volk228">Volk (2009), p. 228.</ref>

The identification of the poem as Stoic, however, is not unanimous.<ref name="MacGregor 2005 p. 41">MacGregor (2005), p. 41.</ref><ref name="volk226">Volk (2009), p. 226, note 13.</ref> In 1887, against the common opinion of contemporaneous scholars, Gustave Lanson contested the idea that the poem is Stoic.<ref name="volk226" /> In 2005, Alexander MacGregor said that while contemporary scholars such as Goold and Volk read Manilius as a Stoic,<ref name="MacGregor 2005 p. 41" /> the ''Astronomica'' actually breaks with or contradicts Stoic tradition in a number of places.<ref name="MacGregor 2005 p. 65">MacGregor (2005), p. 65.</ref> Manilius exalts [[Biography:Plato|Plato]], [[Biography:Socrates|Socrates]], and [[Biography:Pythagoras|Pythagoras]];<ref>MacGregor (2005), pp. 47{{en dash}}49.</ref><ref>MacGregor (2005), p. 51.</ref> proposes a Platonic proof for the existence of God,<ref>MacGregor 2005, p. 52.</ref> denies the [[Philosophy:Ekpyrosis|ekpyrosis]] (a key Stoic belief in the periodic destruction of the cosmos by an immense conflagration every [[Astronomy:Great Year|Great Year]] followed by a cosmic [[Philosophy:Palingenesis|recreation]]),<ref>MacGregor (2005), p. 53.</ref> never discusses the [[Philosophy:Paradoxa Stoicorum|six Stoic paradoxes as discussed by Cicero]],<ref name="macg54">MacGregor (2005), p. 54.</ref> and ignores the importance of controlling the soul.<ref name="macg54" /> Manilius also focuses on a number of Pythagorean tenets; the Pythagorean order of the planets,<ref name="macg56">MacGregor (2005), p. 56.</ref> the importance of geometry and numbers,<ref name="macg56" /><ref>MacGregor (2005), p. 57{{en dash}}59.</ref> and the significance of tetraktys ([[Triangular number|triangular figures]] made up of ten points arranged in four rows).<ref>MacGregor (2005), p. 59{{en dash}}65.</ref> In key places, Manilius also makes use of non-Stoics like [[Biography:Eudoxus of Cnidus|Eudoxus of Cnidus]] and Cicero.<ref>MacGregor (2005), p. 57.</ref> Given these factors, MacGregor concludes that Manilius should be classified as an [[Philosophy:Idealism|idealistic]] Pythagorean or a Platonist rather than a Stoic.<ref name="MacGregor 2005 p. 65" />

===Style===

Many consider the ''Astronomica'' to be a work of erudition, elegance, and passion.<ref name="harvardloeb" /> Scaliger and Bentley praised Manilius's handling of numbers in verse,<ref>Manilius & Housman (1920), p. 51.</ref> and the Harvard University Press later echoed this commendation, writing that he "exhibit[s] great virtuosity in rendering mathematical tables and diagrams in verse form",<ref name="harvardloeb" /> and that the poet "writes with some passion about his Stoic beliefs and shows much wit and humour in his character sketches of persons born under particular stars".<ref name="harvardloeb">{{cite web|title=Astronomica {{en dash}} Manilius|url=http://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674995161|publisher=Harvard University Press|access-date=May 17, 2016}}</ref> Housman calls him "facile and frivolous" but also describes him as "the one Latin poet who excelled even Ovid in verbal point and smartness".<ref>Housman (1916), p. xix.</ref><ref>Housman (1903), p. xxi.</ref> The poem, while metrically correct, has been noted for its technical language and unusual word choices.<ref name="Chisholm" /><ref>Hatch (2007), p. 735.</ref> The classicist [[Biography:Arthur Woollgar Verrall|Arthur Woollgar Verrall]] says that while "at his best, Manilius may remind us of [[Biography:Lucretius|Lucretius]]", the "metre [that he uses] has the regular and monotonous flow of the age".<ref name="verrall1913" /> Jacobs, Monceaux, and others have attributed the ''Astronomica''{{'s}} idiosyncrasies to Manilius's reported African origin; they suggest he wrote and spoke a form of ''Africitas'' – a putative African dialect of Latin "with strongly marked peculiarities of vocabulary, syntax, sentence-structure, and style" – thus explaining the poem's quirks.<ref name="brock1911" /><ref>Wilfrid (1928), p. 73.</ref> Aside from the dubiously hypothesized presence of ''Africitas'' in the poem, however, M. Dorothy Brock argues there is very little evidence that Manilius was from Africa.<ref name="brock1911" />

In addition to its stylistic oddities, the ''Astronomica'' includes inconsistencies. According to Green, it is "riddled with confusion and contradiction"; he cites its "presentation of incompatible systems of astrological calculation, information overload, deferral of meaning and contradictory instruction".<ref name="green56" /> At the same time, Green notes that similar issues exist in other first-to-third-century astrological works.<ref name="green56">Green (2014), p. 56.</ref> According to Caroline Stark, Manilius paradoxically claims astrological knowledge may be acquired by individuals and that it is only granted by divine favor.<ref name="g&v267">Stark (2011), p. 267.</ref> T. Barton says Manilius may have included these contradictions and complexities so he would be regarded as "a figure of unreachable knowledge for the novice student-reader".<ref name="green56" /> Green, while not ruling out this hypothesis, says Manilius was probably not motivated by a "desire to carve out for himself a position of power in the new imperial world of experts" as Barton says.<ref name="green56" /> Rather, Green says Manilius – due to his "pride in poetic innovation" and his "deference&nbsp;... to the Emperor" – sought to present "himself as a compliant imperial agent, intent on producing a creative poetic enterprise that plots its own way through the levels of acceptable stellar discourse in the early empire".<ref name="green56" /> [[Biography:David Pingree|David Pingree]] concludes that the poem's "principal purpose seems to have been to delight its audience with poetry and to arouse admiration for the poet by its cleverness".<ref>Pingree (1980), p. 263.</ref>

==={{anchor|Completeness of work}}Completeness===

It is unknown whether the ''Astronomica'' is a finished work; a large lacuna between lines 5.709 and 5.710 presents a problem with this discussion.<ref name="volk5" /> According to Housman, based strictly on the contents of the ''Astronomica'', one cannot cast a full horoscope because necessary information – such as an in-depth survey of the planets and the effects constellations both inside and outside the zodiac produce upon their setting – is missing.<ref name="volk5" /><ref name="mhlxxii">Housman (1903), p. lxxii.</ref> According to Volk, the lack of a lengthy consideration of the planets is rather puzzling because Manilius claims several times that he will examine their zodiacal nature.<ref name="volk5">Volk (2009), p. 5.</ref> Goold writes that "a didactic poem is seldom an exhaustive treatise" and argues that Manilius likely gave a "perfunctory account of the planets' natures in the great lacuna [and then] considered his obligations duly discharged".<ref>Goold (1997) [1977], p. xiv.</ref>

Others have argued the work was originally longer and some hypothesize it comprised eight books.<ref name="mhlxxii" /><ref name="goold5not8" /> These writers base their assertion on a letter sent in AD 983 by [[Biography:Pope Sylvester II|Gerbertus Aureliacensis]] (later Pope Sylvester{{nbsp}}II) to the Archbishop of Rheims, in which the former reports he had recently located "eight volumes about astrology by Boethius" (''viii volumina Boetii de astrologia'') at the abbey at Bobbio.<ref name="goold5not8" /> Boethius was often confused with Manilius because one of the former's names was "Manlius".<ref>Goold (1997) [1977], p. xi.</ref> Those who favor the idea the poem was once longer argue the manuscript at Bobbio was a misattributed eight-book version of the ''Astronomica''. Goold repudiates this hypothesis, noting the catalogue at Bobbio lists the work Gerbertus was likely referring to as composed of "three books by Boethius about arithmetic, and the rest [i.e. five] about astronomy" (''libros Boetii iii de aritmetica {{sic}} et alterum de astronomia'').<ref name="goold5not8" /> This, according to Goold, is evidence Gerbertus found one manuscript that contained both Boethius's ''De arithmetica'' and Manilius's ''Astronomica'' rather than an eight-book version of the latter.<ref name="goold5not8">Goold (1997) [1977], p. cviii.</ref>

Volk, when considering the problem of completeness, proposed several hypotheses: the work is mostly complete but internally inconsistent about which topics it will and will not consider; the lacuna in book five may have originally contained the missing information; the lacuna may be relatively small and the work is unfinished; or entire books may have originally existed but were lost over time through the "hazardous process of textual transmission".<ref name="volk5" />

==Influences==

[[File:Lucretius drawn by Michael Burghers.png|thumb|left|alt=Engraving of the Roman poet and philosopher Lucretius|Although it was inspired by the Epicurean poem ''De rerum natura'' by Lucretius (''pictured''), the ''Astronomica'' embraces Stoicism.]]

Manilius frequently imitates Lucretius, who wrote the didactic poem ''[[Philosophy:De rerum natura|De rerum natura]]''. Some classicists have suggested that Manilius may have sought to emulate Lucretius by writing six books, but evidence for this hypothesis is scarce, and it remains mostly speculative.<ref>Volk (2009), p. 120, note 138.</ref> While Lucretius's work espouses Epicureanism (a philosophy that emphasizes [[Philosophy:Materialism|materialism]] and [[Philosophy:Religious skepticism|skepticism of superstition and divine intervention]]), Manilius's work is largely Stoic, and promotes a Greco-Roman understanding of creationism as well as [[Philosophy:Fatalism|fatalistic]] [[Determinism|determinism]].<ref name="keithxix">Keith (2013), p. xix.</ref><ref name="volk192" /><ref name="steele325" /> Both Volk and the Lucretian scholar David Butterfield have argued that Manilius is in many ways, an "anti-Lucretius", with the former arguing that "his presentation in the ''Astronomica'' of an orderly cosmos ruled by fate is a direct attack on the random universe depicted by his predecessor".<ref name="volk192">Volk (2009), p. 192.</ref><ref>Butterfield (2013), p. 48, note 9.</ref> Manilius sometimes conveys his philosophical stance via grammatical voice: unlike Lucretius, who often uses a passive construction to convey his understanding of nature, Manilius uses active grammatical constructions to convey the intentionality he sees in creation (e.g. "God and reason, which rules all things, guide earthly animals by heavenly signs", ''deus et ratio quae cuncta gubernat ducit ab aeternis terrena animalia signis'').<ref>Steele (1932), p. 326.</ref><ref>Manilius, ''Astronomica'', 2.107{{endash}}08.</ref> Furthermore, while Lucretius used ''De rerum natura'' to present a non-theistic account of creation, Manilius "was a creationist rather than a materialistic evolutionist", and he consequently refers to "one spirit" (''unus spiritus'', 2.64), a "divine power" (''divina potentia'', 3.90), a "creator" (''auctor'', 3.681), and a "god" (''deus'', 2.475) throughout his poem.<ref name="steele325">Steele (1932), p. 325.</ref>

The ''Astronomica'' is influenced by Ovid's ''Metamorphoses'', Virgil's ''Aeneid'', Ennius's ''Annales'', and the Greek didactic poet [[Biography:Aratus|Aratus]].<ref name="keithxix" /><ref name="ennius" /><ref>Volk (2009), p. 184.</ref> Aratus's influence s especially noticeable, and it seems likely that Manilius based much of his first book on portions of Aratus's ''Phaenomena''.<ref name="godreasonuniverse" /><ref>Volk (2014), p. 106.</ref> Despite his debt to Aratus, Manilius diverges from his understanding of the cosmos; Aratus focuses on mythology and "graphic description", whereas Manilius emphasizes the scientific aspects of his work.<ref>Abry (2007), pp. 1, 8{{en dash}}9.</ref> It is uncertain if Manilius had direct knowledge of Aratus's poem or if he used a translation by [[Biography:Cicero|Cicero]], Ovid, or Germanicus.<ref>Abry (2007), p. 2, note 5.</ref><ref name="volknote">Volk (2009), p. 189, note 29.</ref> The latter position is favored by several 21st-century scholars, such as Dora Liuzzi and Emma Gee.<ref name="volknote" /><ref>Gee (2013), p. 117.</ref> In regards to the poet's relationship with Germanicus, Wolfgang Hübner writes: "The few echoes of Germanicus' translation of Aratus are insufficient for us to establish which of the two drew on the other, or whether the two were composed independently of each other."<ref name="Hubner2" />

The ''Astronomica'' directly refers to Homer (as the "greatest poet", ''maximus vates'') as well as Hesiod (calling him "nearest to [Homer]", ''proximus illi''),<ref>Manilius, ''Astronomica'', 2.1, 2.11.</ref><ref>Steele (1932), p. 320.</ref> and alludes to numerous other Greek poets and writers such as Apollonius Rhodius, Choerilus of Iasus, Choerilus of Samos, and [[Biography:Aeschylus|Aeschylus]].<ref>Goold (1997) [1977], pp. 366, 369, 434.</ref> The poem also contains a direct allusion to Ennius's ''Annales'', which, according to Goold, is the ''Astronomica''{{'}}s "one solitary notice of Latin literature."<ref name="ennius" />

=={{anchor|Textual history}}Textual history==

[[File:Gianfrancesco Poggio Bracciolini - Imagines philologorum.jpg|thumb|left|alt=Engraving of Poggio Bracciolini in middle age|The ''Astronomica'' was rediscovered by Poggio Bracciolini c.{{nbsp}}1416{{en dash}}17.]]

Although there are over thirty existing manuscript copies of the ''Astronomica'', the text as it is known today is derived from three key manuscripts: ''Codex Gemblacensis'' (G), ''Codex Lipsiensis'' (L), and ''Codex Matritensis'' (M).{{#tag:ref|In 1903, Housman said that the modern version of the ''Astronomica'' depended on four manuscripts: G, L, M, and V.<ref name="m&hviiviii" /> He originally proposed that V{{emdash}}much like M{{emdash}}was a descendant of manuscript β (the manuscript first discovered by the Italian [[Philosophy:Renaissance humanism|humanist]] and scholar Poggio Bracciolini in the early fifteenth century), but in 1930 he redacted this hypothesis, calling V instead one of the many "scions of M".<ref name="m&hviiviii" /><ref name="astrofivehous" />|group="nb"}} These in turn belong to two separate manuscript families: "α" (which includes G and L), and "β" (which includes M).<ref name="astrofivehous" /><ref name="cvi">Goold (1997) [1977], p. cvi.</ref> Of the two families, Robinson Ellis wrote: "[α] represents a text more correct, but worse interpolated; [β], a text which is fuller of copyists' errors, but less interpolated."<ref>Ellis (1904), p. 5.</ref>

The first family, "α", takes its name from a now-lost source and includes manuscripts G and L.<ref name="astrofivehous" /><ref name="cvi" /> G, dating from the late 10th to the 11th century, was found at the monastery of Gembloux in Brabant, in modern-day Belgium; L, from the library of Leipzig, was probably written around the mid-11th century and has many corrections made by a scribe.<ref name="m&hviiviii" /> Housman argues that L is the superior of the two, as it was probably copied straight from α, whereas G was probably derived from a copy of a copy.<ref>Housman (1930), pp. v{{en dash}}vi.</ref>

The second family, "β", takes its name from the now-lost archetype and includes manuscript M,<ref name="astrofivehous">Housman (1930), p. v.</ref><ref name="cvi" /> which itself is a direct descendant of the manuscript that Poggio Bracciolini rediscovered (i.e. the aforementioned manuscript β) near Konstanz during a break in the Council of Constance c.{{nbsp}}1416{{en dash}}17.<ref name="m&hviiviii" /><ref name="astrofivehous" /><ref>Housman (1930), p. xi.</ref> M had been transcribed by a German amanuensis on Bracciolini's request, but due to the scribe's incompetence{{#tag:ref|Bracciolini wrote that the scribe was ''ignorantissimus omnium viventium'' ("the most ignorant thing alive").<ref name="m&hviiviii" />|group="nb"}} the resultant manuscript was riddled with mistakes, prompting Bracciolini to sarcastically remark that the new copy had to be "divined rather than read" (''divinare oportet non legere'').<ref name="m&hviiviii">Housman (1903), pp. vii{{en dash}}viii.</ref><ref>Asso 2003.</ref> Although poorly written, M has been singled out as possibly the most important surviving manuscript, because it was a direct copy of the archetype (β), whereas G and L are derived from a less "faithful" copy (that is, α) of the archetype.<ref name="cvi" />

Following the invention of the printing press, the ''editio princeps'' of the ''Astronomica'' was published in Nuremberg around 1473 by the astronomer [[Biography:Regiomontanus|Regiomontanus]] from an error-riddled Italian copy.<ref>Volk (2009), p. 2.</ref><ref name="m&hxii">Housman (1903), p. xii.</ref><ref name="introduction_rob_2">Ellis (1904), p. 2.</ref> The text was critically edited by [[Biography:Joseph Justus Scaliger|Joseph Justus Scaliger]], whose first edition was published in Paris in 1579; a second and improved edition, collated at least partially from the ''Codex Gemblacensis'', was published in Leiden in 1599{{en dash}}1600, and a third edition was published in 1655 after Scaliger's death by Johann Heinrich Boeckler.<ref name="volk3" /><ref name="m&hxiii">Housman (1903), p. xiii.</ref><ref name="introduction_rob_2" /> An edition with many corrections was published by Richard Bentley in 1739.<ref name="introduction_rob_3">Ellis (1904), p. 3.</ref> Then, in five volumes between 1903 and 1930, Housman published what is considered by many scholars the authoritative edition of the poem (with a single-volume ''editio minor'' published in 1932).<ref name="volk3" /><ref>Garrod (1933), p. 26.</ref> According to Volk, "[Housman's] work is famous{{em dash}}some might say notorious{{em dash}}for its bold handling of the text, its incisive commentary, and its merciless ... invective against other scholars."<ref name="volk3">Volk (2009), p. 3.</ref> In 1977, G. P. Goold published a Loeb English translation, with substantial introductory notes and diagrams.<ref>Goold (1997) [1977], p. cx.</ref> This was the first translation of the poem into English prose (Book I had been translated into English verse by Edward Sherburne in 1674, and the entire poem by Thomas Creech in 1697).<ref name="harvardloeb" /><ref>Bailey (1979), p. 158.</ref><ref>Goold (1997) [1977], p. cxv.</ref> Goold's translation was called "masterly" by Volk and Steven Green.<ref>Green & Volk (2011), p. viii.</ref> It was reprinted in 1992, and Goold issued a corrected edition in 1997 that took into account, among other things, W. S. Watt's article "Maniliana".<ref>Goold (1997) [1977], pp. ix{{en dash}}x.</ref>

=={{anchor|Impact and scholarship}}Impact and scholarship==


While Manilius is not quoted by any extant Roman author, many scholars argue that he is alluded to by a number of authors, including: Ausonius, Claudian, Commodian, Dracontius, Juvenal, Lucan, Manetho, [[Biography:Martianus Capella|Martianus Capella]], Nemesianus, Orientius, [[Religion:Pseudepigrapha|Pseudo-]]Empedocles, [[Biography:Seneca the Younger|Seneca]], Sidonius Apollinaris, Tertullian, Titus Calpurnius Siculus, and Venantius Fortunatus.<ref name="volk1" /><ref name="Hubner2" /><ref>Volk (2011), p. 9.</ref> With this said, Hübner cautions that such assumptions should be considered carefully (or downright rejected, in the cases of Manetho and Pseudo-Empedocles), as the similarities may be due to a lost ancient epic precursor that Manilius and the others were all alluding to or borrowing from.<ref name="Hubner2">Hübner (2012).</ref> The work of Julius Firmicus Maternus (who wrote in the time of Constantine about astrology and other subjects) resembles Manilius's work in many ways; for instance, in his ''Matheseos libri octo'' (composed c.{{nbsp}}334{{en dash}}37), Firmicus follows Manilius's method of instruction closely and analyzes the poet's astrological fundamentals.<ref name="volk1" /><ref name="Chisholm" /><ref>Volk (2009), p. 124.</ref> This suggests that Firmicus almost certainly used Manilius (or someone inspired by him) as a guide.<ref name="volk1" /><ref name="Chisholm" /> But despite the similarity between Firmicus's work and Manilius's, Firmicus neither mentions Manilius by name nor lists him as among the few Romans (viz. Germanicus, Cicero, and Fronto) who wrote about astrology.<ref name="Chisholm" />

Volk notes that the earliest references to ''Astronomica''{{em dash}}aside from literary allusions{{em dash}}may be found in two Roman funerary inscriptions, both of which bear the line, "We are born to die, and our end hangs from the beginning" (''nascentes morimur finisque ab origine pendet'') from the poem's fourth book.<ref name="inscriptions" /><ref>Volk (2009), p. 1, note 1.</ref><ref>Manilius, ''Astronomica'', 4.16.</ref> This theory is not without its detractors, and scholars such as A. Maranini and Gómez Pallarès have suggested that these two inscriptions are forgeries dating from the Renaissance.<ref name="inscriptions">Volk (2009), p. 62, note 10.</ref>

Few copies of the ''Astronomica'' survived into the medieval period, and consequently Manilius seems to have been little read during this period. However, there are a few exceptions to this dearth of attention. Hübner, for instance, writes that Manilius may have inspired some of the writings of Columbanus.<ref name="Hubner2" /> Additionally, an AD 988 letter from Gerbertus Aureliacensis to the abbey at Bobbio in which a request is made for a work "by M.{{nbsp}}Manilius (or possibly Manlius) about astrology" (''M.{{nbsp}}Manilius'' (''v.l. Manlius'') ''de astrologica'') is evidence that a copy of the ''Astronomica'' was probably kept in the library at Bobbio.<ref name="goold5not8" /><ref>Volk (2009), pp. 1{{en dash}}2.</ref>

Although it was largely ignored during [[History:Ancient history|antiquity]] and the Middle Ages, the poem generated scholarly interest upon its 15th-century rediscovery. The Italian humanist Lorenzo Bonincontri delivered lectures on the ''Astronomica'' to large audiences and compiled his lecture notes into the work's first commentary.<ref>Heilen (2011), p. 278.</ref> Bonincontri was apparently interested in Manilius's treatment of the nature of comets in the first book of the ''Astronomica'', and, according to Stephan Heilen, portions of Bonincontri's ''De rebus naturalibus et divinis'' are based on Manilius's work.<ref>Heilen (2011), pp. 278{{en dash}}310.</ref>

Despite the attention it received after its rediscovery, the ''Astronomica'' has never been as widely studied as other classical Latin poems. Nonetheless, interest in the poem developed in the second half of the 20th century when scholars began to study Manilius's philosophical and scientific ideas.<ref name="g&v1">Volk (2011), p. 1.</ref> The first full-length English [[Monograph|monograph]] on Manilius and the ''Astronomica'' was Volk's ''Manilius and His Intellectual Background'', which was published in 2009.<ref>Volk (2009), p. vii.</ref> Two years later, Volk and Green edited ''Forgotten Stars: Rediscovering Manilius' Astronomica'' with essays from scholars worldwide. The book's purpose was to "encourage readers to discover Manilius" and expand scholarly interest in the ''Astronomica'', since previous research of the work's poetic, scientific, and philosophical themes had been primarily limited to Germany, France, and Italy.<ref name="g&v1" /><ref>Volk (2002), p. 197.</ref> And while Manilius and his poem have been analyzed by scholars, many lay readers find the ''Astronomica'' confusing and overly technical. According to Kristine Louise Haugen, "The ambiguous phrases and extravagant circumlocutions necessitated by Manilius's hexameter verse must often have made the ''Astronomica'' seem, as it does today, rather like a [[Trigonometry|trigonometry]] textbook rendered as a Saturday ''{{wipe|The New York Times}}'' crossword."<ref>Haugen (2011), p. 213.</ref>

Scholars have noted the irony of Manilius's relative obscurity, because he wrote the ''Astronomica'' in the hope of attaining literary immortality. Housman voiced this sentiment in a dedicatory Latin poem written for the first volume of his edition that contrasted the movement of celestial objects with [[Biology:Death|mortality]] and the fate of Manilius's work.<ref name="volk3" /> He compared the ''Astronomica'' to a shipwreck (''carmina'' ... ''naufraga''), arguing that it was incomplete and imperfect, having barely survived textual transmission; Housman mused that because Manilius's ambitions of literary fame and immortality had been almost entirely dashed, his work should serve as an example of why "no man ever ought to trust the gods" (''ne quis forte deis fidere vellet homo'').<ref name="volk3" />

==Zodiacal definitions==
{{notelist|30em}}

==Notes==
{{reflist | group="nb"|30em}}

==References==
{{Reflist|20em}}

==Bibliography==

{{Refbegin|30em}}
* {{Cite journal| issn = 1477-3643| volume = 6| pages = 1{{en dash}}18| last = Abry| ref = Abry| first = Josèphe-Henriette| title = Manilius and Aratus: Two Stoic Poets on Stars| journal = Leeds International Classical Studies| date = 2007| url = http://arts.leeds.ac.uk/lics/2007/200701.pdf| url-status = dead| archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20160913071926/http://arts.leeds.ac.uk/lics/2007/200701.pdf| archive-date = 2016-09-13}}
* {{cite journal|last1=Asso|first1=Paolo|date=October 5, 2003|access-date=February 16, 2017|title=D.R. Shackleton Bailey, ''Statius. Silvae. Loeb Classical Library, 206''|url=http://bmcr.brynmawr.edu/2003/2003-10-05.html|journal=Bryn Mawr Classical Review|issn=1055-7660|ref=Asso}}
* {{cite book|last1=Brock|ref=Brock|first1=M. Dorothy|title=Studies in Fronto and His Age|url=https://archive.org/details/studiesinfrontoh00broc|date=1911|publisher=Northwestern University Press|location=Evanston, IL|oclc=983331173}}
* {{cite book|author=Butterfield, David|ref=Butterfield|title=The Early Textual History of Lucertius' ''De rerum natura''|date=2013|publisher={{wipe|Cambridge University Press}}|location=Cambridge|isbn=978-1107037458}}
* {{cite journal|author=Ellis, Robinson|title=A New Edition of Manilius, Book I|journal=Hermathena|date=1904|via=The [[Internet Archive]]|volume=XIII|number=XXX|ref=Ellis|url=https://archive.org/details/neweditionofmani00ellirich|access-date=July 3, 2017}}
* {{cite journal|author= Gain, D. B.|year=1970|title=Gerber and Manilius|journal=Latomus|volume=29|issue=1|pages=128–32|ref=Gain}}
* {{cite journal|author=Garrod, H.|year=1933|title=Housman's Manilius (Editio Minor) {{en dash}} M. Manilii Astronomica. Recensuit Housman A. E.. Editio minor. pp. xvi, 181. Cambridge: University Press, 1932|journal=The Classical Review|volume=47|number=1|pages=26{{en dash}}27|doi=10.1017/S0009840X00061060|s2cid=163304549|ref=Garrod}}
* {{Cite book|location=Oxford| publisher = [[Organization:Oxford University Press|Oxford University Press]]| isbn = 978-0199781782| last = Gee|ref=Gee| first = Emma| title = Aratus and the Astronomical Tradition| date = 2013}}
* {{cite book |ref=Goold|editor=Goold, G. P. |title=Astronomica|orig-year=1977|date=1997|publisher=Harvard University Press| location=Cambridge, MA|isbn=978-0674995161|chapter=Introduction|pages=xi{{en dash}}cxxiii|edition=3}}
* {{Cite book| location=Cambridge, MA|publisher = Harvard University Press| isbn = 978-0674035720| last1 = Grafton| first1 = Anthony| last2 = Most| first2 = Glenn W.| last3 = Settis| first3 = Salvatore| title = The Classical Tradition| date = 2010|ref=AnthonyMostSettis 2010}}
* {{cite book|last1=Green|ref=Green|first1=Steven|title=Disclosure and Discretion in Roman Astrology|date=2014|publisher=[[Organization:Oxford University Press|Oxford University Press]]|location=Oxford|isbn=978-0199646807}}
* {{cite book|last1=Green|first1=Steven|last2=Volk|first2=Katharina|editor1=Green, Steven|editor2=Volk, Katharina|title=Forgotten Stars: Rediscovering Manilius' Astronomica|date=2011|publisher=[[Organization:Oxford University Press|Oxford University Press]]|location=Oxford|isbn=978-0199586462|chapter=Preface|pages=vii{{en dash}}ix|ref=Green & Volk}}
* {{cite book|last1=Hatch|first1=Robert A.|editor1=Hockey, Thomas|editor2=Trimble, Virginia|editor3=Williams, Thomas|editor4=Bracher, Katherine|editor5=Jarrell, Richard|editor6=Marché II, Jordan|editor7=Ragep, F. Jamil|editor8=Palmeri, JoAnn|editor9=Bolt, Marvin|title=Biographical Encyclopedia of Astronomers|date=2007|publisher=Springer Science & Business Media|location=Berlin|isbn=978-0387304007|ref=Hatch}}
* {{Cite book| location=Cambridge, MA| publisher = Harvard University Press| isbn = 978-0674058712| last = Haugen| first = Kristine Louise| title = Richard Bentley| date = 2011|ref=Haugen}}
* {{cite book|author=Heilen, Stephan|chapter=Lorenzo Bonincontri's Reception of Manilius' Chapter on Comets (''Astr.'' 1.809{{en dash}}926) |editor1=Green, Steven|editor2=Volk, Katharina|title=Forgotten Stars: Rediscovering Manilius' Astronomica|date=2011|publisher=[[Organization:Oxford University Press|Oxford University Press]]|place=Oxford|isbn=978-0199586462|pages=278{{en dash}}310|ref=Heilen}}
* {{cite book|ref=Housman Vol. 1 |editor=Housman, A. E. |title=M. Manilii Astronomicon Liber 1 |date=1903 |publisher={{wipe|Cambridge University Press}} |place=Cambridge |chapter-url=http://www.hellenisticastrology.com/critical%20editions/Housman-Manilius-volume-1.pdf |chapter=Introduction|pages=vii{{en dash}}lxxv|oclc=946500303}}
* {{cite book|ref=Housman Vol. 3 |editor=Housman, A. E. |title=M. Manilii Astronomicon Liber 3 |date=1916 |publisher={{wipe|Cambridge University Press}} |place=Cambridge |chapter-url=http://www.hellenisticastrology.com/critical%20editions/Housman-Manilius-volume-3.pdf |chapter=Introduction|pages=v{{en dash}}xxx|oclc=831157576}}
* {{cite book |ref=Housman Vol. 5 |editor=Housman, A. E. |title=M. Manilii Astronomicon Liber 5|date=1930|publisher={{wipe|Cambridge University Press}}|place=Cambridge|chapter-url=http://www.hellenisticastrology.com/critical%20editions/Housman-Manilius-volume-5.pdf|chapter=Introduction|pages=v{{en dash}}xlvi|oclc=889948016}}
* {{Cite encyclopedia|author=Hübner, Wolfgang|year=2006|title=Paranatellonta |editor1=Canicik, Hubert |editor2=Schneider, Helmuth |encyclopedia=[[Company:Brill Publishers|Brill's New Pauly]]|location=Leiden, Netherlands|publisher=[[Company:Brill Publishers|Brill]]|doi=10.1163/1574-9347_bnp_e907920|via=BrillOnline Reference Works|ref=Hübner}}
* {{Cite encyclopedia|author=Hübner, Wolfgang|year=2012|title=Manilius, Astronomica |editor1=Walde, Christine |editor2=Egger, Brigitte |encyclopedia=[[Company:Brill Publishers|Brill's New Pauly Supplements I {{en dash}} Volume 5: The Reception of Classical Literature]]|location=Leiden, Netherlands|publisher=[[Company:Brill Publishers|Brill]]|doi=10.1163/2214-8647_bnps5_e720840|via=BrillOnline Reference Works|ref=Hübner2}}
* {{cite book|last1=Keith|ref=Keith|first1=Alison|title=A Latin Epic Reader: Selections from Ten Epics|date=2013|publisher=Bolchazy-Carducci|place=Mundelein, IL|isbn=978-1610411103}}
* {{Cite journal| issn = 0363-1923| volume = 30| pages = 41{{en dash}}65| last = MacGregor| first = Alexander| title = Was Manilius really a Stoic?| journal = Illinois Classical Studies| date = 2005| jstor = 23065297|ref=MacGregor}}
* {{cite book |ref=Housman Vol. 4 |author=Manilius|editor1-last=Housman|editor1-first=A. E.|title=M. Manilii Astronomicon Liber 4|date=1920|publisher={{wipe|Cambridge University Press}}|place=Cambridge|url=http://www.hellenisticastrology.com/critical%20editions/Housman-Manilius-volume-4.pdf|oclc=889946457}}
* {{cite book |last1=Manilius |ref=Manilius & Housman Vol. 5|editor1-last=Housman|editor1-first=A. E.|title=M. Manilii Astronomicon Liber 5|date=1930|publisher={{wipe|Cambridge University Press}}|place=Cambridge|url=http://www.hellenisticastrology.com/critical%20editions/Housman-Manilius-volume-5.pdf|oclc=889948016}}
* {{cite book |ref=Manilius & Goold|last1=Manilius|translator-last=Goold|translator-first=G. P. |title=Astronomica|orig-year=1977|date=1992|publisher=Harvard University Press| location=Cambridge, MA|isbn=978-0674995161|edition=2}}
* {{Cite book|location=Cambridge| publisher = {{wipe|Cambridge University Press}}| isbn = 978-1316849040| editor-last = Moul| editor-first = Victoria| title = A Guide to Neo-Latin Literature| date = 2017|ref=Moul 2017}}
* {{cite book|author=Stark, Caroline |editor1=Green, Steven|editor2=Volk, Katharina|title=Forgotten Stars: Rediscovering Manilius' Astronomica|date=2011|publisher=[[Organization:Oxford University Press|Oxford University Press]]|place=Oxford|isbn=978-0199586462|chapter=Renaissance Receptions of Manilius' Anthropology|pages=261{{en dash}}77|ref=Stark}}
* {{cite book|author=Verrall, Arthur Woollgar|chapter=Poetry to the End of the Augustan Age|title=A Companion to Latin Studies|url=https://archive.org/details/b24750694|year=1913|publisher={{wipe|Cambridge University Press}}|location=Cambridge|pages=602{{en dash}}46|edition=2|editor=Sandys, John Edwyn|ref=Verrall|oclc=922009237}}
* {{Cite book| publisher = [[Organization:Oxford University Press|Oxford University Press]]|place=Oxford| isbn = 978-0199245505| last = Volk|ref=Volk 2002| first = Katharina| title = The Poetics of Latin Didactic: Lucretius, Vergil, Ovid, Manilius| date =2002}}
* {{cite book|ref=Volk 2009| last = Volk| first = Katharina|title=Manilius and His Intellectual Background|date=2009|publisher=[[Organization:Oxford University Press|Oxford University Press]]|place=Oxford|isbn= 978-0199265220}}
* {{cite book |editor1=Green, Steven|editor2=Volk, Katharina|author=Volk, Katharina|title=Forgotten Stars: Rediscovering Manilius' Astronomica|date=2011|publisher=[[Organization:Oxford University Press|Oxford University Press]]|place=Oxford|isbn=978-0199586462|chapter=Introduction: A Century of Manilian Scholarship|pages=1{{en dash}}12|ref=Volk2011}}
* {{Cite book|location=Abingdon-on-Thames, UK|publisher = Routledge| isbn = 978-1317547143 |chapter=Manilius' Cosmos of the Senses |author=Volk, Katharina|editor1=Butler, Shane|editor2=Purves, Alex|title = Synaesthesia and the Ancient Senses| date = 2014|ref=Volk 2014}}
{{refend}}

==External links==
{{Library resources box
|by=no |onlinebooksabout=yes
|label=Astronomica (Manilius)
}}

;Latin copies
* [http://www.thelatinlibrary.com/manilius.html Full text of the ''Astronomica''] via The Latin Library

;Translations
* [https://books.google.com/books?id=KGFDAAAAcAAJ&dq= Thomas Creech's 1697 English verse translation] via [[Google Books]]
* [https://book.douban.com/subject/36084826/ Chinese in Simplified Characters translation] via douban.com

;Secondary material
* [https://archive.org/details/bub_gb_xMw-AAAAcAAJ Richard Bentley's 1739 commentary] via [[Internet Archive|The Internet Archive]]
* [http://www.hellenisticastrology.com/critical%20editions/ Index of critical editions] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171022084814/http://www.hellenisticastrology.com/critical%20editions/ |date=October 22, 2017}} via Hellenistic Astrology

[[Category:Astrological texts]]
[[Category:Stoicism]]

{{Sourceattribution|Astronomica (Manilius)}}