One might not think that Lucretius would have much interest in the concept of ‘Order’. The philosophical system given poetic expression in the De rerum natura, after all, emphasises both the haphazard and random process of atomic creation and the inevitable destruction of all compounds that have been created. Order is for the Stoics, not the Epicureans. In her monograph devoted to Order in the DRN, however, N. makes a detailed and convincing case that Lucretius regularly trains his focus on the process of Order emerging out of randomness and that this process informs his articulation of the Epicurean system in fundamental ways. This is a good book that will need to be consulted by those working not only on Lucretius and Epicureanism, but also on the intellectual history of Order as a physical (and metaphysical) principle.

After an introduction that establishes the philosophical and scholarly background to her study, N. approaches her topic in five chapters that focus on: the atoms-letters analogies (Chapter 2), the basic dualism of matter and void (Chapter 3), the clinamen as mechanism of Order (Chapter 4), the intrinsic qualities of atoms that make them agents of Order in the universe (Chapter 5) and the external dynamics of atomic configuration that produce Order in the universe (Chapter 6). Purposefully (p. 54), N. focuses only on the first two books of the DRN, both because these books are chronically understudied and because she is most interested in providing a detailed analysis of how Order works in Lucretius’ version of Epicureanism. She does, however, provide, by way of her conclusion, a brief overview of the way in which Order figures in various topics in DRN 3–6.

N.’s study begins with a detailed reading of the famous (and repeated) atoms-letter analogy. Scholars have often pointed to these passages to make all manner of arguments, from P. Friedländer's ‘atomology’ to D. Armstrong's theories that Lucretius endorses Philodemus’ ideas about poetic metathesis to the conceit that Lucretius presents his poem as a sort of microcosm or imago mundi. Uninterested in the metaliterary valences of these analogies, N. shows that every aspect of Order encountered in the DRN is contained in these analogies in nuce. Chapter 3 offers an overview of the major discussion in DRN 1 of body and void, arguing that Lucretius’ discursive procedure represents its own kind of Emergence and Order: he first introduces his two principles in isolation from each other, then articulates the relationship between body and void as depending on boundaries and distinction, and finally, at the end of DRN 1, Lucretius describes the universe itself, in which body and void, no longer abstractions, each have a function in context. In Chapter 4 N. provides an overview of the clinamen, arguing finally that this phenomenon manifests itself as the immediate beginning of Order in the Epicurean system.

Chapter 5 has a good section on the doctrine of minimae partes and the Lucretian doxography of pre-Socratic physics. Here N. makes the arresting (and undoubtedly correct) claim that the entire critique of other philosophical models in the DRN is essentially an examination of different models of universal Order. Chapter 6 finally turns to the dynamics of atomic configuration and the way in which Order is achieved through this process. N. argues that atomic compounds are analogous to the atoms themselves; in a compound each atom functions like a minima pars in a single atom. In the final analysis, Order becomes both Dynamic by the compounding of atomic bodes and also Static once the compound has been formed. This interplay between dynamic and static Order necessarily obtains from the invisible activity beneath our ken all the way up to what is perceptible (here N. uses A. Schiesaro's arguments about analogy to good effect). N. concludes her study with general observations about the role of Order in Epicureanism and a brief overview of how Order manifests itself in Books 3–6 of the DRN.

This book is not free of typos, but these should not be overly distracting for readers. As already mentioned, this is a good book that scholars of Lucretius and Epicureanism will want to assimilate into their work. Not only does it fill a gap in the scholarly conversation, but the close readings of important passages in DRN 1–2 represent, in many cases, the only available synthetic discussions (and, sometimes, the only discussions at all) since C. Bailey's commentary. This fact alone makes N.’s book mandatory reading for Lucretian scholars. The fact that her analysis is generally sound means that readers’ time will not be wasted.

It should be noted that this book does not make its case as efficiently as it could have done. The introduction and each chapter spend unnecessary space devoted to comprehensive doxographical overviews; the final upshot for N.’s thesis often gets lost in these weeds. It may be unfair also to point out that, for all the good work that N. does in analysing the concept of Order in the DRN, she does not adequately triangulate the new insights she brings with the basic reality of disorder and destruction in the Epicurean system. Any form of Order that Lucretius describes in the DRN is necessarily temporary, so it does not seem like Order can finally be a fundamentally significant concept for Lucretius compared to dissolution into disorder. Yet, N. shows that Order is important not just in Lucretius’ account of Epicurean physics but also in his self-referential assessment of his poem, especially in the atoms-letters analogies. How do we account for this paradox? Should we account for this paradox? This tension, of course, lies at the heart of the (perhaps) most widely-discussed passage in Lucretius: the metaphor of the honeyed cup. As I said, it may be unfair to lay all this at N.’s feet, because she argues adequately what she sets out to argue. Perhaps a better way to articulate my concern is to say that this book implicitly engages with one of the most vexing issues in Lucretian scholarship: the relationship between the poetic form of the DRN and its Epicurean content. Lucretian scholars can learn much from N. as they continue to sort out this issue in the future.