Geschichte u. Kultur Roms im Spiegel d. neueren Forschung ;2. Principat. Bd. Bd. 36. Philosophie, Wissenschaften, Technik [Reprint 2014 ed.] 3110124416, 9783110124415

Table of contents :
Vorwort
Inhalt
Philosophie; Wissenschaften; Technik: Philosophie (Epikureismus, Skeptizismus, Kynismus, Orphica; Doxographica)
Epikureismus, Skeptizismus, Kynismus, Orphica
Epicureanism under the Roman Empire
Filodemo: gli orientamenti della ricerca attuale
Philodemus’ Epicureanism
Filodemo storico del pensiero antico
Diogeniano, gli epicurei e la τύχη
The Philosophical Inscription of Diogenes of Oenoanda: New Discoveries 1969–1983
Die Atomistik in römischer Zeit: Rezeption und Verdrängung
The Skepticism of Sextus Empiricus
Pyrrhonism, Belief and Causation. Observations on the Scepticism of Sextus Empiricus
Il programma dello scettico: struttura e forme di argomentazione del primo libro delle ‘Ipotiposi pirroniche’ di Sesto Empirico
Le cynisme à l'époque impériale
Der Kyniker Oenomaus von Gadara
Orphée et l’Orphisme à l’époque impériale. Témoignages et interprétations philosophiques, de Plutarque à Jamblique
Doxographica: Arius Didymus, Aetius
The Ethical Doxography of Arius Didymus
Doxography and Dialectic. The Sitz im Leben of the ‘Placita’
The Philosophical Inscription of Diogenes of Oenoanda: New Discoveries 1969–1983
Index

Citation preview

AUFSTIEG U N D N I E D E R G A N G DER R Ö M I S C H E N

WELT

BAND II. 36.4

RISE A N D DECLINE OF T H E R O M A N VOLUME II. 36.4

WORLD

AUFSTIEG UND NIEDERGANG DER R Ö M I S C H E N WELT (ANRW) RISE AND DECLINE OF T H E R O M A N W O R L D H E R A U S G E G E B E N V O N / E D I T E D BY

WOLFGANG

HAASE

UND / AND

HILDEGARD

TEMPORINI

T E I L II: P R I N C I P A T BAND 36.4 P A R T II: P R I N C I P A T E VOLUME 36.4

W DE G WALTER DE G R U Y T E R • BERLIN • NEW Y O R K 1990

AUFSTIEG U N D N I E D E R G A N G DER R Ö M I S C H E N WELT (ANRW) GESCHICHTE U N D KULTUR ROMS IM SPIEGEL D E R N E U E R E N

FORSCHUNG

TEIL II: P R I N C I P A T BAND 36: PHILOSOPHIE, WISSENSCHAFTEN, TECHNIK

4. TEILBAND: PHILOSOPHIE (EPI KUREIS MUS, S K E P T I Z I S M U S , KYNISMUS, ORPHICA; DOXOGRAPHICA) HERAUSGEGEBEN VON

W O L F G A N G HAASE

W DE

G

WALTER DE G R U Y T E R • B E R L I N

N E W Y O R K 1990

© Gedruckt auf säurefreiem Papier, das die US-ANSI-Norm über Haltbarkeit erfüllt. © Printed on acid-free paper which falls within the guidelines of the ANSI to ensure permanence and durability. Library

of Congress

Cdtaloging-in-PubltiUtion

Djtti

Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt: Geschichte und Kultur Roms im Spiegel der neueren Forschung. English, French, German, Italian and Spanish. Later volumes have English parallel title: Rise and decline of the Roman world. The volumes of Teil II have separate titles: Politische Geschichte, Künste, Recht, Religion, Sprache und Literatur, Philosophie, Wissenschaften, Technik. Teil II edited by Hildegard Temporini and Wolfgang Haase. „Joseph Vogt zum 23. 6. 1970" (28p.) in pocket of vol. I, 1. Includes bibliographies. Contents: T. I. Von den Anfängen Roms bis zum Ausgang der Republik (5 v.) - T. II. Principar. 1. Rome — Civilization - Collected works. I. Vogt, Joseph, 1 8 9 5 - 1 9 8 6 . II. Temporini, Hildegard. III. Haase, Wolfgang. IV. Title: Rise and decline of the Roman world. DG209.T36 937 72-83058 ISBN 3-11-001885-3 (I, 1)

CIP-Titelaufnahme

der Deutschen

Bibliothek

Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt : (ANRW) ; Geschichte u. Kultur Roms im Spiegel d. neueren Forschung / hrsg. von Wolfgang Haase. — Berlin ; New York : de Gruyter. Teilweise hrsg. von Hildegard Temporini u. Wolfgang Haase. Teilw. mit Parallelt.: Rise and decline of the Roman world ISBN 3-11-005837-5 NE: Haase, Wolfgang [Hrsg.]; Temporini, Hildegard [Hrsg.]; ANRW; PT Teil 2. Principat. Bd. 36. Philosophie, Wissenschaften, Technik / hrsg. von Wolfgang Haase. Teilbd. 4. Philosophie (F.pikurcismus, Skeptizismus, Kynismus, Orphica ; Doxographica). - 1990 ISBN 3-11-012441-6

© Copyright 1990 by Walter de Gruyter & Co., D-1000 Berlin 30. Dieses Werk einschließlich aller seiner Teile ist urheberrechtlich geschützt. Jede Verwertung außerhalb der engen Grenzen des Urheberrechtsgesetzes ist ohne Zustimmung des Verlages unzulässig und strafbar. Das gilt insbesondere für Vervielfältigungen, Übersetzungen, Mikroverfilmungen und die Einspeicherung und Verarbeitung in elektronischen Systemen. Printed in Gcrmany Satz und Druck: Arthur Collignon GmbH, Berlin 30 Lithos: Terra-Klischce, Berlin Buchbinderische Verarbeitung: Lüderitz & Bauer, Berlin 61 Einbandgestaltung und Schutzumschlag: Rudolf Hüblcr

Vorwort Mir dem hier vorliegenden Teilband II 36,4 wird innerhalb des II. Teils fPrincipat") von ANRW die Publikation des philosophiegeschichtlichen Bandes II 36 der Rubrik 'Philosophie, Wissenschaften, Technik' ( = Bde. II 36 und II 37) weiter fortgesetzt. Dieser Teilband enthält die Beiträge zu den philosophischen Schulen oder Richtungen des Epikureismus, des Skeptizismus und des Kynismus, nachdem der Piatonismus und der Aristotelismus in den Teilbänden II 36,1 und 2 (Berlin —New York 1987) und der Stoizismus in Teilband II 36,3 (ebd. 1989) behandelt worden sind. Außerdem erscheint hier ein Beitrag über Orphica in philosophischer Überlieferung und Deutung. Darauf folgen Beiträge zu zwei wichtigen Vertretern der doxographischen Tradition, zu Areios Didymos und Aetios oder den 'Placita philosophorum'. Die den philosophiegeschichtlichen Band abschließenden Teilbände II 36,5 und 6 mit Beiträgen zu einzelnen Denkern, zu weiteren doxographischen Quellen und zu allgemeinen historischen und systematischen Themen aus dem Bereich der kaiserzeitlichen Philosophie werden in Kürze (im Laufe des Jahres 1991) folgen. W. H.

Tübingen — Boston, Mass., im August 1990

Inhalt Vorwort

V

PHILOSOPHIE, WISSENSCHAFTEN, T E C H N I K

Band II. 36.4: Philosophie (Epikureismus, Skeptizismus, K y n i s m u s , Orphica; D o x o g r a p h i c a ) Epikureismus, Skeptizismus, Kynismus, Orphica FERGUSON, J . F

(Birmingham)

Epicureanism under the R o m a n E m p i r e (revised and supplemented by J . P. HERSHBELL [Minneapolis, Minnesota]) . . 2257 - 2327 DORANDI, T.

(Napoli)

Filodemo: gli orientamenti della ricerca attuale ASMIS, E. (Chicago, Illinois) Philodemus' Epicureanism DORANDI, T .

2328 — 2368 2369 - 2406

(Napoli)

Filodemo storico del pensiero antico ISNARDI P A R E N T E , M .

2407 - 2423

(Roma)

Diogeniano, gli epicurei e la TÌ>XT|

2424 - 2445

CLAY, D. (Baltimore, M a r y l a n d ) T h e Philosophical Inscription of Diogenes of O e n o a n d a : N e w Discoveries 1 9 6 9 - 1 9 8 3 2446-2559 [Index of Diogenes fragments discussed: infra, pp. 3231 — 3232]

STÜCKELBERGER, A .

(Bern)

Die Atomistik in römischer Zeit: Rezeption und Verdrängung 2561-2580

VIII

INHALT

ALLEN, J. (Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania) The Skepticism of Sextus Empiricus

2582 - 2607

(Oxford) Pyrrhonism, Belief and Causation. Observations on the Scepticism of Sextus Empiricus 2608 - 2695

BARNES, J .

G. (Torino) Il programma dello scettico: struttura e forme di argumentazione del primo libro delle 'Ipotiposi pirroniche' di Sesto Empirico 2696-2718

CORTASSA,

M . - 0 . (Paris) Le cynisme à l'époque impériale

2720 - 2833

(Köln) Der Kyniker Oenomaus von Gadara

2834 - 2865

GOULET-CAZÉ,

HAMMERSTAEDT, J .

L. (Paris) Orphée et l'Orphisme à l'époque impériale. Témoignages et interprétations philosophiques, de Plutarque à Jamblique . 2 8 6 7 - 2 9 3 1

BRISSON,

Doxographica: Arius Didymus, Aetius (Columbus, Ohio) The Ethical Doxography of Arius Didymus [Indices: infra, pp. 3234 - 3243]

HAHM, D . E.

2935 - 3055

(Utrecht) Doxography and Dialectic. T h e Sitz im Leben of the 'Placita' 3056 - 3229

MANSFELD, J.

CLAY, D. (Baltimore, Maryland) The Philosophical Inscription of Diogenes of Oenoanda: New Discoveries 1969 - 1 9 8 3 Index of Diogenes fragments discussed 3231 - 3 2 3 2 (Columbus, Ohio) The Ethical Doxography of Arius Didymus Indices

HAHM, D. E.

3234 - 3 2 4 3

INHALT

IX

Band II. 36.1: Vorwort

V - VII Philosophie (Historische Einleitung; Piatonismus) Historische Einleitung

ANDRÉ, J . - M . (Dijon) Les ecoles p h i l o s o p h i q u e s aux deux premiers siècles de l'Empire

5 — 77

Platonismus WHITTAKER, J . (St. J o h n ' s , N e w f o u n d l a n d , C a n a d a ) Platonic Philosophy in the Early Centuries of the E m p i r e

.

81 — 123

B i b l i o g r a p h i e du p l a t o n i s m e impérial antérieur à Plotin: 1926-1986

124-182

DEITZ, L .

(Konstanz)

FROIDEFOND, C H .

(Aix-en-Provence)

P l u t a r q u e et le p l a t o n i s m e

184-233

HERSHBELL, J . P. (Minneapolis, M i n n e s o t a ) Plutarch's ' D e a n i m a e procreatione in T i m a e o ' : An Analysis of S t r u c t u r e and Content

234 - 247

BRENK, F. E . , S. J . (Rome) An Imperial Heritage: T h e Religious Spirit of Plutarch of Chaironeia

248-349

BIANCHI, U .

(Rom)

Plutarch und der D u a l i s m u s TSEKOURAKIS, D .

(Thessaloniki)

P y t h a g o r e a n i s m or Platonism and Ancient M e d i c i n e ? T h e R e a s o n s for Vegetarianism in Plutarch's ' M o r a l i a '

HIJMANS J R . , B . L .

366-393

(Groningen)

A p u l e i u s , Philosophus Platonicus MORESCHINI, C .

350 — 365

395 — 475

(Pisa)

Attico: una figura singolare del m e d i o p l a t o n i s m o

477 — 491

X

INHALT

SCHROEDER, F. M . (Kingston, O n t a r i o , C a n a d a ) Ammonius Saccas

BLUMENTHAL, H . J .

493 - 526

(Liverpool)

Plotinus in the Light o f Twenty Years' Scholarship, 1951 — 1971

528-570

CoRRiGAN, K. ( S a s k a t o o n , S a s k a t c h e w a n , Canada) - O'CLEIRIGH, P. (Guelph, O n t a r i o , C a n a d a ) T h e C o u r s e of Plotinian Scholarship from 1971 to 1986 . .

571-623

HADOT,

P.

(Paris)

Structure et thèmes du Traité 38 (VI, 7) de Plotin SCHROEDER, F. M . ( K i n g s t o n , O n t a r i o , C a n a d a ) Synousia, Synaisthaesis and Synesis: Presence and Dependence in the Plotinian Philosophy o f Consciousness BUSSANICH, J . ( A l b u q u e r q u e , N e w

677 - 699

Mexico)

M y s t i c a l E l e m e n t s in Plotinus' T h o u g h t [Hinweis a u f den N a c h t r a g in Bd. II. 36.6] DOMBROWSKI, D . A. ( O m a h a ,

624-676

700

Nebraska)

Asceticism as Athletic Training in Plotinus

701 - 7 1 2

Band II. 3 6 . 2 : Philosophie (Piatonismus [Forts.]; Aristotelismus) Platonismus [Forts, j SMITH, A .

(Dublin)

Porphyrian Studies since 1913 DOMBROWSKI, D . A. ( O m a h a ,

Nebraska)

Porphyry and Vegetarianism: A C o n t e m p o r a r y Philosophical Approach

BRISSON, L.

774 - 7 9 1

(Paris)

Amélius: Sa vie, son œuvre, sa doctrine, son style

DILLON, J .

717-773

793 - 860

(Dublin)

Iamblichus o f Chalcis (c. 2 4 0 - 3 2 5 A . D . )

862-909

INHALT

WALLIS, R. T. f (Norman, Oklahoma) Scepticism and Neoplatonism

XI

911 — 954

K. (Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania) Plotinus, Porphyry and the Neoplatonic Interpretation of the 'Categories'

955 - 974

CORRIGAN, K. (Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada) Amelius, Plotinus and Porphyry on Being, Intellect and the One. A Reappraisal

975-993

STRANGE, S.

KRF.MF.R, K .

(Trier)

Bonum est diffusivum sui. Ein Beitrag zum Verhältnis von Neuplatonismus und Christentum

(Princeton, New Jersey) Numenius

994-1032

FREDE, M .

1034 - 1075

Aristotelismus GOTTSCHALK, H . B .

(Leeds)

Aristotelian Philosophy in the Roman World from the Time of Cicero to the End of the Second Century AD 1 0 7 9 - 1174

SHARPLES, R . W .

(London)

Alexander of Aphrodisias: Scholasticism and Innovation . . 1 1 7 6 - 1 2 4 3 D O N I N I , P. L .

(Torino)

I l ' D e fato'di Alessandro. Questioni di coerenza

1244 — 1259

MADIGAN, A., S. J . (Chestnut Hill, Massachusetts) Alexander of Aphrodisias: the Book of Ethical Problems . . 1 2 6 0 - 1279

N A C H T R Ä G E Z U B A N D II. 16.3 U N D B A N D II. 3 6 . 1 : B R E N K , F. E . , S . J .

(Rome)

Index to Contribution on In the Light of the Moon: Demonology in the Early Imperial Period

B R E N K , F. E . , S . J .

(Rome)

1283-1299

Index to Contribution on An Imperial Heritage: The Religious Spirit of Plutarch of Chaironeia 1300-1322

XII

INHALT

Band II. 36.3: Philosophie (Stoizismus) E. (Columbus, Ohio) Posidonius's Theory of Historical Causation

HAHM, D .

1 3 2 5 - 1363

TODD, R. B. (Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada) The Stoics and their Cosmology in the first and second centuries A. D 1365 - 1378 (Cambridge) Stoic Cosmology and Roman Literature, First to Third Centuries A. D

1379-1429

(Toulouse-Le Mirail) Stoïcisme et Hypothèse géocentrique

1430 - 1453

(Mannheim) Stoische Symmetrie und Theorie des Schönen in der Kaiserzeit

1454-1472

(Honolulu, Hawaii) Cotidie meditare. Theory and Practice of the meditatio Imperial Stoicism

1473-1517

LAPIDGE, M .

AUJAC, G .

HORN, H.-J.

NEWMAN, R . J.

in

MANNING, C. E. (Christchurch, New Zealand) Stoicism and Slavery in the Roman Empire

(Paris) Quarante ans de recherche sur les œuvres philosophiques de Sénèque (Bibliographie 1 9 4 5 - 1 9 8 5 )

1 5 1 8 - 1543

CHAUMARTIN, F . - R .

1545-1605

J. (Paris) La production littéraire de Sénèque sous les règnes de Caligula et de Claude, sens philosophique et portée politique: les 'Consolationes' et le 'De ira' 1 6 0 6 - 1638

FILUON-LAHILLE,

MORTUREUX, B . (Paris)

Les idéaux stoïciens et les premières responsabilités politiques: l e ' D e clementia' 1639—1685 (Paris) Les désillusions de Sénèque devant l'évolution de la politique néronienne et l'aspiration à la retraite: le 'De vita beata' et le 'De beneficiis' 1686 - 1723

CHAUMARTIN, F . - R .

XIII

INHALT ANDRÉ, J . - M . ( D i j o n ) Sénèque: ' D e breuitate uitae', ' D e constantia sapientis', ' D e tranquillitate a n i m a e ' , ' D e o t i o ' CODOÑER, C .

1724-1778

(Salamanca)

La physique de Sénèque: O r d o n n a n c e et structure des ' N a t u rales quaestiones'

1779-1822

MAZZOLI, G . (Pavia)

Le 'Epistulae M o r a l e s ad Lucilium' di Seneca. Valore letterario e filosofico

1823-1877

DIONIGI, I. ( B o l o g n a )

Il ' D e Providentia' di Seneca fra lingua e filosofia [Hinweis a u f den Nachtrag in Bd. II. 3 6 . 6 ] LAUSBERG, M .

1878

(Augsburg)

Senecae o p e r u m fragmenta: Überblick und Forschungsbericht G R I M A L , P.

(Paris)

Sénèque et le Stoïcisme R o m a i n RIST, J . M .

1879-1961 1962-1992

(Toronto)

Seneca and Stoic O r t h o d o x y

MOST, G . W. (Innsbruck) C o r n u t u s and Stoic Allegoresis: A Preliminary R e p o r t

1993-2012

. . .

FREDE, M . (Princeton, New Jersey) Chaeremon

LAURENTI, R .

2014-2065

2067 — 2103

(Napoli)

M u s o n i o , m a e s t r o di Epitteto

2105-2146

HERSHBELL, J . P. (Minneapolis, M i n n e s o t a ) T h e Stoicism o f Epictetus: Twentieth Century Perspectives

2148-2163

JAGU, A. (Angers) La M o r a l e d'Epictète et le christianisme

2164-2199

ISNARDI PARENTE, M .

(Roma)

Ierocle stoico. Oikeiosis e doveri sociali

2201-2226

XIV

INHALT

ASMIS, E. (Chicago, Illinois) T h e Stoicism o f M a r c u s Aurelius

2228 - 2 2 5 2

Band II. 36.5: Philosophie (Einzelne Denker; allgemeine historische und systematische Themen) Varia zu: Plinius d. Ä., Plutarch, Galen CITRONI MARCHETTI, S.

(Siena)

Filosofia e ideologia nella 'Naturalis historia' di Plinio

HERSHBELL, J . P. (Minneapolis, Minnesota) Plutarch and Stoicism HERSHBELL, J . P. (Minneapolis, Minnesota) Plutarch and Epicureanism AALDERS, G . J . D . f (Amsterdam) - DE BLOIS, L. (Nijmegen) Plutarch und die politische Philosophie der Griechen

DONINI, P. (Torino) Galeno e la filosofia HANKINSON, J . (Austin, Texas) Galen's Philosophical Eclecticism HULSER, K. (Konstanz) Galen und die Logik

D o x o g r a p h i c a : Diogenes Laertius, Hippolytus MEIER, J.

(Copenhagen)

Diogenes Laertius and the Transmission of Greek Philosophy GIANNANTONI, G .

(Roma)

Il secondo libro delle 'Vite' di Diogene Laerzio BRISSON, L.

(Paris)

Diogène Laérce, livre III

INHALT

SOLLENBERGER, M . G. (New Brunswick, New Jersey) The Lives of the Peripatetics: An Analysis of the Contents and Structure of Diogenes Laertius' Vitae philosophorum Book 5 GOULET-CAZE, M . - O . (Paris)

Le livre VI de Diogène Laërce: étude de sa structure et réflexions méthodologiques BRANCACCI, A .

(Roma)

I Koivrj àpéoKovxa dei Cinici e la Koivcovia tra Cinismo e Stoicismo in Diogene Laerzio VI 103—105 GIGANTE, M .

(Napoli)

Das zehnte Buch des Diogenes Laertios: Epikur und der Epikureismus MUELLER, I. (Chicago, Illinois) Heterodoxy and Doxography in Hippolytus' 'Refutation of All Heresies' Systematische Themen N.N. Divine Providence in the Philosophy of the Empire CITRONI M A R C H E T T I , S . ( S i e n a )

Il sapiens in pericolo. Psicologia del rapporto con gli altri, da Cicerone a M a r c o Aurelio C o x MILLER, P. (Chicago, Illinois) T h e Ideal of the Holy Philosopher in Pagan and Christian Biographies (2nd —4th Centuries) KLASSEN, W. (Winnipeg, M a n i t o b a , Canada) T h e Simple Life as an Ethical Ideal in the First Century GILL, C . (Exeter, G . B.)

Peace of Mind and Being Yourself: Panaetius to Plutarch MITSIS, P. (Ithaca, N e w York) Natural L a w and Natural Rights in Post-Aristotelian Philosophy SCHALL, J . V., S . J . ( W a s h i n g t o n , D . C . )

Post-Aristotelian Philosophy and Modernity DUMONT, J . - P .

(Lille)

Sensation et perception dans la philosophie d'époque hellénistique et impériale

XV

XVI

INHALT

WATSON, G . (Mainooth, C o . Kildare, Ireland) The Concept of 'Phantasia' from the Late Hellenistic Period to Early Neoplatonism

Band II. 36.6: Philosophie (Allgemeine historische und systematische Themen [Forts.]; Nachträge zu Bd. II 3 6 , 1 - 3 ) Indirekte Überlieferungen: Orientalia GUTAS, D. (New Haven, Connecticut) Philosophical Material from Early Empire in Arabic: Gnomologia, Platonica, Pythagorica, Stoica, Epicurea DAIBER, H .

(Amsterdam)

Hellenistisch-kaiserzeitliche Doxographie und philosophischer Synkretismus in islamischer Zeit DAIBER, H .

(Amsterdam)

Neuplatonische Pythagorica in arabischem Gewände: Der K o m m e n t a r Jamblichs zum 'Carmen aureum'. Ein verlorener griechischer Text in arabischer Überlieferung

Zwischen Hellenismus und Spätantike: Allgemeines zur Philosophie der römischen Kaiserzeit FREDE, M . (Princeton, N e w Jersey) Philosophy 125 B . C . - 2 5 0 A . D . BOND, R . P. ( C h r i s t c h u r c h ,

New

Z e a l a n d ) - MANNING, C .

E.

(Christchurch, N e w Zealand) School Philosophy and Popular Philosophy in the R o m a n Empire DONINI, P. ( T o r i n o )

Testi e commenti, manuali e insegnamento: l'orizzonte scolastico della filosofia MORESCHINI, C . (Pisa)

Aspetti della cultura filosofica negli ambienti della Seconda Sofistica

INHALT NACHTRAG ZU BAND II. 36.1: FREDE, M . (Princeton, N e w Jersey) Celsus philosophus Platonicus BRISSON, L. (Paris)-PATILLON, M . (Paris) Longinus Platonicus philosophus et philologus, I. Longinus philosophus BUSSANICH, J . (Albuquerque, N e w M e x i c o ) Mystical Elements in the T h o u g h t o f Plotinus EMILSSON, E. K . ( R e y k j a v i k , Island - P r i n c e t o n , N e w J e r s e y ) Platonic Soul-Body Dualism in the Early Centuries o f the Empire to Plotinus

NACHTRAG ZU BAND II. 36.2: BECCHI, F. (Firenze) Aspasio, c o m m e n t a t o r e di Aristotele

NACHTRAG ZU BAND II. 36.3: CHAUMARTIN, F . - R . (Paris) Les œuvres philosophiques 1986-1989)

de

Sénèque

(Bibliographie

MOTTO, A. L. ( T a m p a , Florida) - CLARK, J . R . ( T a m p a , F l o r i d a ) Serenity and T e n s i o n in Seneca's ' D e tranquillitate a n i m i ' DIONIGI, I. (Bologna) Il 'De Providentia' di Seneca fra lingua e filosofia

PHILOSOPHIE; WISSENSCHAFTEN;

TECHNIK:

PHILOSOPHIE (EPIKUREISMUS, SKEPTIZISMUS, KYNISMUS, ORPHICA; DOXOGRAPHICA)

EPIKUREISMUS,

SKEPTIZISMUS, ORPHICA

KYNISMUS,

Epicureanism under the Roman Empire by

JOHN FERGUSON

f , Birmingham

revised and supplemented by J A C K S O N P. Minnesota*

HERSHBELL,

Minneapolis,

Contents I. Introduction

2260

II. Epicureanism under the Republic

2261

1. Epicureanism in the Third and Second Centuries B. C

2261

2. Epicureanism at the end of the Republic

2262

III. The Augustan Age

2263

1. Augustus and Epicureanism

2263

2. Epicurean 'friends' of Augustus

2263

3. The Epicureanism of Maecenas

2263

4. The Epicureanism of Vergil

2265

5. The Epicureanism of Vergil's friends

2267

6. Horace's Epicureanism

2268

7. Propertius and Tibullus

2270

* The late JOHN FERGUSON submitted the following study some years ago, but given the tremendous task of coordinating the many contributions to ' A N R W ' , and arranging these in coherent and consistent volumes, publication of FERGUSON'S article had to be delayed until the present collection of studies on Epicureanism, Scepticism, Cynicism, and individual thinkers and themes of later philosophy, was ready for the press. Sadly, the author died before seeing his work appear, though shortly before his death, Mrs. FERGUSON and WOLFGANG HAASE encouraged me to bring the bibliographical references up to date. I have tried do to this. I have also completed the table of contents, and made minor changes in the original text for the sake of clarity. I herewith honor JOHN FERGUSON'S memory by helping to edit his work for A N R W . He was several times at the University of Minnesota as a visiting professor, and I came to know him in the last decade. He was a very knowledgeable scholar, much respected by colleagues and graduate students at Minnesota, but I leave it to others to compose the full and proper eulogy which his full and productive life deserves. JACKSON

P.

HERSHBELL,

University of Minnesota, Minneapolis

2258

JOHN

FERGUSON

8. Epicureanism in Vitruvius

2270

9. Medicine and Epicureanism

2271

10. Livy and Epicureanism

2271

11. Ovid and Epicureanism

2272

12. Summary of Epicureanism in the Augustan Age

2273

IV. The First Century A. D

2273

1. Epicureanism and Judaism, and especially Philo of Alexandria

2273

2. Epicureanism, Christianity and the Writings of Paul

2275

3. Petronius

2277

4. Other Epicureans of the First Century

2279

5. Seneca 6. Herculaneum and the villa suburbana

2280 dei papiri

2283

7. Pap. Oxy. 215

2283

8. Other Latin Writers and Epicureanism A. Persius B. Quintilian C. Statius D. Valerius Flaccus E. Silius F. Pliny the Elder G. Codex Vossianus Q. 86

2283 2283 2284 2284 2284 2284 2284 2285

9. Concluding observations

2285

V. The Second Century A. D

2285

1. Plotina

2285

2. Tacitus

2286

3. Plutarch

2286

4. Juvenal

2286

5. Hadrian

2287

6. Some known Epicureans of the Second Century

2288

7. Diogenianus

2289

8. Diogenes of Oenoanda

2290

9. Lucian

2293

10. Writers more or less hostile to Epicureanism A. Epictetus B. Marcus Aurelius C. Apuleius D. Aulus Gellius E. Cleonides F. Dio of Prusa G. Numenius H. Aristocles I. Sextus Empiricus J. Atticus K. Athenaeus L. Aetius

2294 2294 2294 2294 2295 2295 2295 2295 2296 2296 2296 2296 2296

11. Second Century A. D. references to Epicurus

2297

12. Epitaphs and Epicurean sentiments

2297

EPICUREANISM

UNDER T H E

ROMAN EMPIRE

2259

13. Epicureanism and Early Christian Writers A. Justin B. Athenagoras C. Irenaeus D. Theophilus of Antioch E. Minucius Felix F. Isidore (?)

2298 2299 2299 2300 2300 2300 2301

14. T h e Talmud and Epicureanism

2301

15. Summary

2302

VI. T h e T h i r d Century A. D

2302

1. Christian Writers continued A. Tertullian B. Hippolytus of R o m e C . Clement of Alexandria D. Origen E. Pseudo-Clement F. Dionysius of Alexandria G . Arnobius

2302 2302 2303 2303 2304 2305 2305 2306

2. References to the Epicureans which occur in other writers A. Aelian B. Philostratus C . Galen D . Diogenes Laertius E. Longinus F. Alexander of Aphrodisias G . Plotinus H . Porphyry

2307 2307 2308 2308 2308 2308 2309 2309 2309

3. Epitaphs o f the T h i r d Century

2310

4. Summary

2311

VII. T h e Fourth Century A. D

2311

1. Diocletian

2311

2. Christian Writers and Epicureanism A. Lactantius B. Eusebius C . Athanasius D . Hilary o f Poitiers E. Basil F. Gregory o f Nazianzus G . Gregory o f Nyssa H . Eunomius I. A m b r o s e J . Pelagius K. Augustine L. J e r o m e M . Paulinus of Nola N . Prudentius

2312 2312 2313 2313 2314 2314 2314 2315 2315 2315 2316 2316 2317 2318 2318

3. Non-Christian Writers A. Julian the Apostate B. Themistius

2318 2318 2318

2260

JOHN C. D. E. F.

FERGUSON

Sallustius Macrobius Claudian Sulpicius

2318 2319 2319 2319

4. I n s c r i p t i o n a l evidence

2320

5. Busts of E p i c u r u s

2321

6. S u m m a r y

2321

VIII. T h e Fifth C e n t u r y O n w a r d s

2321

1. Synesius

2321

2. T h e o d o r e t u s

2322

3. E p i c u r e a n i s m in t h e West A. M a r t i a n u s Capella B. Salvian C. Orientius D. C l a u d i u s M a r i u s Victor E. C a e l i u s A u r e l i a n u s F. C l a u d i a n u s M a m e r t u s G. A p o l l i n a r i s Sidonius H. Boethius I. Fulgentius

2323 2323 2323 2323 2323 2324 2324 2324 2324 2325

4. E p i c u r e a n i s m in t h e East A. Socrates B. Synesius C. John Stobaeus D . Proclus E. M a r i n u s F. J u s t i n i a n a n d p h i l o s o p h y at A t h e n s

2325 2325 2325 2325 2326 2326 2326

IX. Conclusions

2326

I.

Introduction

Summary accounts of Epicureanism often end with Lucretius. Even the encyclopaedic USENER dismissed the imperial period in less than three pages of his introduction, and DE WITT'S expansive advocacy a m o u n t s to not much more than about eight pages. My study is an attempt to present the evidence as I have collected it over a n u m b e r of years. It is no more than a preliminary survey, and I have relied more heavily than I would wish on indices. O n e problem about understanding Epicureanism in the imperial period, is the tendency of ancient authors to allude to its doctrines w i t h o u t the name. There is also the problem of knowing whether authors w h o mention Epicurean doctrines are alluding to their o w n experiences, or are merely familiar with Lucretius (in the West), or some h a n d b o o k of philosophical history (in the East). I have tried to weigh the evidence reasonably, and significant modern literature is listed at the end of the appropriate sections. T h e fragments are

EPICUREANISM

UNDER

THE

ROMAN

EMPIRE

2261

from H. USENER, 'Epicurea' (Leipzig, 1887). I have not mentioned all imperial writers who preserve references to Epicurus; USF.NF.R'S index will help in supplying these references. One thing needs to be noticed at the outset: the Epicurean school more than any other remained true to the tenets of its founder. There were no major doctrinal changes in the history of the school, though later Epicureans did not always emulate their master's purity of life: Epicurus rejected luxury, political power, literary ability, military ambition. But Maecenas and Petronius, for example, combined wealth with Epicureanism; Hirtius and Pansa were consuls; Lucretius, Vergil, and Horace were writers of style, and Cassius was a very brilliant soldier. Two forces are here at work. First, the individual's capacity for ignoring any aspect of religious or philosophical belief inconvenient to a daily way of life. Second, the capacity of national cultures (and the Romans were especially adept at this) to conquer by absorption. One need only reflect on Christianity's history to see millionaires acknowledging a Master who said "Woe to you rich!" or soldiers professing loyalty to a Lord who told them to turn the other cheek. It is not a surprise to find equally compromising Epicureans. See in general N . W. DE WITT, Epicurus and his Philosophy (Minneapolis 1 9 5 4 ) ; W. SCHMID, Reallexikon für Antike und Christentum, V, ed. T. KLAUSER (Stuttgart 1 9 6 2 ) , s. v. Epikur, cols. 7 6 1 ff.; P. BOYANCÉ, L'épicurisme dans la société et la littérature romaine, Bull. Ass. G. Budé ( 1 9 6 0 ) , 4 9 9 - 5 1 6 ; also ID., Actes VIII e Congrès G . Budé (Paris 1 9 6 9 ) ; C . W. CHILTON, Diogenes o f O e n o a n d a : T h e F r a g m e n t s ( L o n d o n 1971) has a brief, but very g o o d s u m m a r y of the E p i c u r e a n school in Imperial times, xxii —xxvii; see also J . - M . ANDRE'S excellent study on the philosophical schools in the time o f the Principate, ' L e s écoles philosophiques a u x d e u x premiers siècles de l'Empire', A N R W II, 3 6 , 1 , ed. W. HAASE ( B e r l i n - N e w Y o r k 1 9 8 7 ) , 5 — 7 7 , esp. 4 1 ff. ANDRÉ'S 'L'otium dans la vie m o r a l e et intellectuelle r o m a i n e ' , Publications de la F a c u l t é des lettres et sciences humaines de Paris, Série «Recherches», 3 0 (Paris 1966) also has relevance. Studies relevant to individual authors, e. g. Vergil, H o r a c e , Plutarch, w h o had c o n t a c t with or k n o w l e d g e o f Epicureanism are listed when their w o r k s a r e considered.

II. Epicureanism

under the

Republic

1. Epicureanism in the Third and Second Centuries B . C . T h e R o m a n s became aware of Epicureanism during Epicurus's lifetime: tradition told of the shock caused by Pyrrhus's representative's account of a system which denied divine activity, refused political life, and aimed at pleasure (Plut., Pyrrh. 20,6; Val. M a x . 4,3,6). Rome's expansion to the south and the Second Punic War brought fresh contacts, and Ennius discoursed on some of these beliefs. Senators were suspicious: in 161 B. C. they expelled two Epicurean missionaries, Alcius and Philiscus, "for teaching pleasures" (Aul. Gell. 15,11; Ath. 547 A). It is significant that there was no Epicurean on the Embassy of

2262

JOHN

FERGUSON

Philosophers. But the Epicureans could not be kept out. One of the Claudii Nerones was in touch with Demetrius the Spartan (R. P H I L I P P S O N , Papyrus Herculanensis 831, AJP 64 [1943] 1 6 1 - 2 ) , and by the end of the century T. Albucius, Cicero's 'perfect Epicurean', was prominent, and indeed a target for Lucilius's shafts (Cic., Fin. 1,3,9; Brut. 35,131). Hostility remained strong, and in 92 B.C. the school was closed (Aul. Geli. 5,11; Suet., Gramm. 6).

2. Epicureanism at the end of the Republic The last period of the Republic was a great period for Epicureanism. There was Phaedrus, teacher in Rome and Athens; C. Velleius, Epicurean spokesman in 'De Natura Deorum', tribune in 90 B. C., and a senator; T. Pomponius Atticus, Cicero's friend and publisher; C. Memmius, patron to Lucretius; L. Calpurnius Piso Caesoninus, Caesar's father-in-law and Philodemus's patron; L. Cornelius Sisenna, historian and governor of Sicily; M. Fadius Gallus, the anti-Caesarian; C. Cassius Longinus, who was converted in 46; C. Trebatius Testa, converted in Caesar's camp in Gaul in 53; Hirtius and Pansa, consuls in 43; C. Matius, Caesar's ideal friend; C. Sergius Orata, a businessman; L. Papirius Paetus; L. Thorius Balbus, legate to Q. Metellus Pius; L. Saufeius, Atticus's friend; Statilius Taurus, who died at Philippi; probably Antony's friend P. Volumnius Eutrapelus; C. Catius Insuber, one of the more attractive of Epicurean writers; T. Manlius Torquatus, spokesman in 'De Finibus'; perhaps his relative L. Torquatus; perhaps also L. Lucceius; M. Marius, a friend of Cicero; Siro, of course, who taught in Campania and attracted some of the outstanding poets of the next generation; and his friend Trebianus; and Philodemus; Lucretius himself; and the doctor Asclepiades. Caesar was influenced but not committed (Cic., Pis. 25,59). Note too the inscription from Naples (DESSAU 7781): Stallius Gaius has sedes Hauranus tuetur ex Epicureio gaudivigente choro. Influence from elsewhere may be suspected: Catullus, for example, was familiar with Memmius, saw death as everlasting night, and came from Gallia Cisalpina, and like many others (note M. Fadius Gallus and Catius Insuber, as well as Vergil and Horace) probably encountered Epicureanism in his younger days. It is an impressive list. F A R R I N G T O N ' S suggestion that there was a plebeian mass-movement alongside the aristocrats and intellectuals has not proved convincing. Even without that, they are a formidable array. But the Romans had made Epicureanism their own; the list includes politicians, soldiers, authors with some concern for style, and botis viveurs. See B. FARRINGTON, Science and Politics in the Ancient World (London 1939), and the review by A. MOMIGLIANO, JRS 31 (1941), 149 ff. ( = ID., Secondo contributo alia storia degli Studi classici, Storia e letteratura 77 [ R o m e 1960], 375 ff.). See also E. PARATORE, La

EPICUREANISM

UNDER

THE

ROMAN

EMPIRE

2263

p r o b l e m a t i c a sull'epicureismo a R o m a , A N R W 1 , 4 , ed. H . TEMPORINI ( B e r l i n - N e w York 1973), 1 1 6 - 2 0 4 . M . FUSSL, F.pikureismus im U m k r e i s Caesars, Symmicta philologica Saliburgerisia G e o r g i o Pfligersdorffer s e x a g e n a r i o oblata ( R o m e 1980), 61 - 8 0 .

III. The Augustan

Age

1. Augustus and Epicureanism It is likely that Augustus was not favourably disposed to Epicureanism. T h e political affiliations of the public-minded Epicureans had been various, but Cassius was too prominent a m o n g Caesar's assassins (Brutus's affiliations were later to make Stoics suspect). M o r e seriously, the Epicureans worked against Augustus's policies for a stable society. Superstitious rather than religious, Augustus had a fine sense of religion as giving divine sanction to the status quo, and fostered it accordingly; the Epicureans were accused of undermining society by undermining religion. Augustus wanted to inculcate in the u p p e r classes a sense of public responsibility; Epicurus advocated w i t h d r a w a l . Augustus continued to fly the military pennants; the creed of Epicurus w a s pacifistic. Augustus, whatever his private life, became publicly a stern moralist; Epicurus 'taught pleasures' in a way contrary to the mos maiorum. We cannot trace overt disapprobation. Augustus maintained a public tolerance. But Epicurean w a t c h w o r d s are gradually ousted by Stoic w a t c h w o r d s : the process is very clear in Vergil and Horace. And there certainly seems to be a conspiracy of silence: Lucretius for example was read but n o t n a m e d . DE WITT'S conclusion is reasonable (Epicurus and his Philosophy [op. cit. p. 2261 above], 345): " T h u s Epicureanism, t o o strongly entrenched to be u p r o o t e d , was forced to become a n o n y m o u s . "

2. Epicurean 'friends' of Augustus Lucius Varus was an amicus of Augustus and an Epicurean. Quintilian tells an amusing story. Cassius Severus was criticized for letting his supporters insult Varus; he replied "I d o n ' t k n o w w h o they were w h o were so insulting to him; Stoics, I suppose" (6,3,78). T h e story, though slight, is very illuminating. First, because it reveals an active hostility between Stoics and Epicureans in Augustus's time. Second, because it shows that an Epicurean might still be amicus principis.

3. T h e Epicureanism of Maecenas Maecenas is also an interesting study. Some verses of his are cited by Seneca (Ep. 101,11):

2264

JOHN FERGUSON

Debilem facito manu, debilem pede coxo, tuber adstrue gibberum, libricos quate dentes: vita dum superest, benest; banc mihi, vel acuta si sedeam cruce, sustine. Seneca is critical. Yet the passage does not seem, as he implies, redolent of an inglorious love o f life, but rather a personal elaboration o f the Epicurean Kav (TTpeptaoGfj 5' 6 aocpoq, elvai aircdv Eu5ai|iova. M u c h of our knowledge of M a e c e n a s c o m e s from Seneca, and much of it seems Epicurean. For example (Ep. 9 2 , 3 5 ) the words

Nec tumulum euro: sepelit natura

relictos.

are reminiscent of the Lucretian insistence on how little it matters how you are buried, since death is the end. Again the saying ipsa enim altitudo attonat summa (Ep. 19,9) fits well Epicurus's injunction to avoid the positions of power. Indeed this was o n e o f the most remarkable — and Epicurean — things a b o u t M a e c e n a s : he w a s content to remain an eques, to live out of the public eye, and t o exercise influence without the possession of power. A n o t h e r Epicurean trait recorded by Seneca (Ep. 114,7) in a highly critical passage, was his abstention f r o m bloodshed. T h i s is confirmed by a story recorded by D i o Cassius (55,7), and the Byzantine monk Georgius Cedrenus. Augustus was busy condemning men to death. M a e c e n a s could not get near him for the c r o w d and tossed a message into his lap which read Surge tandem carnifex. Augustus refrained from further condemnations. In general, D i o believed that M a e c e n a s influenced Augustus toward calmness and moderation. Seneca indicts M a e c e n a s for laxness and effeminacy. He was possibly indifferent to his personal appearance, but this could c o m e from indifference to material values. Similarly, the carelessness of style with which Seneca reproached him was wholly c o m p a t i b l e with Epicurean indifference to such matters. T h e r e is little doubt that in his own way M a e c e n a s pursued pleasure, that he was very rich, and t h a t he was also very liberal. H e spent most of his time in his own house and garden; this t o o seems very Epicurean. Finally, there was M a e c e n a s ' genius for friendship. T h e great trait of his c h a r a c t e r was loyalty (Prop. 3 , 9 ) . His relations with a beautiful but difficult wife s h o w the same trait. H e had only one, said Seneca (Ep. 114,6), and he remarried her a thousand times. Certainly his friendship with H o r a c e shines through the poet's verses. T o H o r a c e M a e c e n a s was " h a l f of my s o u l " (Od. 2 , 1 7 , 5 ) . M a e c e n a s ' s dying injunction to Augustus was: " R e m e m b e r Horatius Flaccus as you would remember m e . " W h e n this exaltation of friendship is c o m b i n e d with the fact that so many of his literary circle had associations with Epicureanism I c a n n o t d o u b t that M a e c e n a s t o o had such associations.

EPICUREANISM

UNDER T H E

ROMAN

EMPIRE

2265

See C. PASCAL, Epicurei e Mistici (Catania 2 1914); R . AVALLONE, Profilo umano di Mecenate, Antiquitas 8 (1953), 3 - 16; ID., Mecenate (Naples 1962); J . - M . ANDRÉ, Mécène: Essai de biographie spirituelle (Paris 1967); ID., Mécène écrivain (avec, en appendice, les fragments de Mécène), ANRW II, 30,3, ed. W. HAASE ( B e r l i n - N e w York 1983), 1 7 6 5 - 1787.

4. T h e Epicureanism of Vergil Vergil's relation to Epicureanism has been much discussed, and can therefore, be given summary treatment. From a variety of sources it is known that about 48 B. C. Vergil went to Campania, and spent six years or more in an Epicurean community whose leading professor was Siro. Tacitus (Dial. 13) speaks of Vergil's securutn et

quietum ... secessum and his felix contubernium:

the latter is a technical

Epicurean term. T h e period is reflected in the little collection 'Catalepton', which seems to be mainly authentic. T w o of the poems refer to Siro (5; 8); there are amiable little poems to Tucca and Varius (1; 7); a well-known fragment from Herculaneum (A. KÖRTE, Augusteer bei Philodem, Rh. M u s . 45 [1890], 172) testifies to the presence of Varius and Quintilius and plausibly to Plotius and Vergil as well. Particularly Epicurean are the expression o f friendship for M u s a (4), and the invocation of the dulces Camenae, using the Epicurean dulces (5). 'Ciris', whether or not it was Vergil's, was written by an Epicurean, who was seeking wisdom in the Garden (Ciris 3). Servius (in Aen. 6,264) testified to the continued impact o f Siro on Vergil's thought. There is no doubt that at this stage Vergil was a committed Epicurean. By the time he wrote the 'Eclogues' Vergil was full of an assimilated Epicureanism. T h i s comes out for example in Silenus's song (6,31) when he tells of the formation o f the universe out of the seeds of the elements streaming through the void. But while there is assimilated Epicureanism, there is also a rejection of specific Epicurean doctrines, as in D a m o n ' s scorn nec curare deum credis mortalia quemquatn (8,35). T h e key line, however, is near the beginning

of the first poem, where Tityrus says deus nobis

haec otia fecit (1,6). The

exact sense here is important. Otium was an Epicurean concept; it is the pleasure in retirement promised by Epicurus. And because Epicurus had shown human beings the way to peace, Lucretius says of him dicendum est, deus ille

fuit, deus, inclyte Memmi (L. 5,8). But Tityrus, by common consent, is referring

not to Epicurus, but to Octavian. In other words, Octavian has for Vergil taken Epicurus's place. T h e pax Augusta has made irrelevant Epicurean quietistic philosophy. Political and public action has done the philosopher's work for him. T h e movement is still clearer in the 'Georgics', especially in the second book (2,490):

Felix qui potuit rerum cognoscere causas, atque metus omnis et inexorabile fatum subiecit pedibus strepitumque Acherontis avari. fortunatus et ille, deos qui novit agrestis ...

2266

JOHN FERGUSON

The indicative verbs show that Vergil has definite people in mind. The first three lines clearly refer to Lucretius; they allude to the title of his poem and echo his verses. It is hard not to think that in the fourth line Vergil refers to himself. The exact meaning is important: "Blessed by Fortune also is the man who has come to know the gods of the countryside." Vergil has come to know: he has passed from disbelief to belief, for though Epicurus believed in gods, he did not believe in gods of the countryside. And in so doing, Vergil is blessed by that Fortune with whom Epicurean wisdom had no dealings (Epic. fr. 77). The outcome is fascinating. One could say that Aratus and Lucretius are jousting for mastery within Vergil, and Lucretius does not always lose. For example, the spontaneous generation of bees from a carcass (4,295 ff.) comes from a very odd passage in Lucretius (L. 3,713 ff.). In all, MERRILL has calculated that one line in twelve is derived consciously or unconsciously from Lucretius. The passage about dulces ... Musae (2,475) is referred to by Tacitus in the context of Vergil's Epicurean quietism (Dial. 13) and echoes the dulces Camenae of Catalepton 5. Even more interesting is the anthropology of the first book (1,125 ff.). At first blush Vergil has abandoned the Epicurean view altogether; a close view shows that he has incorporated the Epicurean picture (note the keyword usus at 1,133) within a framework of myth (1,125; 1,147). The same Epicurean insistence on usus is even clearer in the next book (2,22). Again, the horror of war which ends the first book ( 1 , 4 6 1 - 5 1 4 ) is strongly Epicurean. Vergil regrets the beating of sickles into swords, and welcomes the conversion of a Corycian pirate into a gardener (1,508; 4,125 ff.). He rejects negotium and all the busyness of public life, and welcomes the latis otia campis (2,461 ff. cf. L. 2,29 — 33). Even more striking is the rejection of love. The third book of the 'Georgics' (3,209 ff.) is nearly as bitter as the fourth of Lucretius. Sexual intercourse is enervating (3.209); the idealized bees do not indulge in it (4,197). Love in the 'Georgics' is disastrous, whether to Leander, Aristaeus, or Orpheus; in the Thracian women it is a power of destruction. Even in the famous passage which attributes to bees a share of the divine mind and which asserts a kind of pantheism (4.219 ff.) he retains a certain ambivalence, being content to attribute the view to others (quidam ... dixere). Still, the movement which was observed in the 'Eclogues' has gone further, and in the last lines he contrasts the ignobile otium which he enjoyed at dulcis Parthenope in the past, with Augustus's military glory and divine destiny ( 4 . 5 5 9 ff.).

In the 'Aeneid' the change is completed. The theme of the glory of Rome is impossible in Epicurean terms. The world-picture is dominated by destiny. The famous philosophical picture of the sixth book is eclectic, linking traditional mythology with Stoic pantheism, Pythagoreanism, and Platonism, but it is not Epicurean at all (6.724ff.). Aeneas is depicted as a Stoic hero who goes through various tests till he can say in technical Stoic language omnia praecepi (6,105). The only expression of Epicureanism is put into the mouth of misguided Dido, and patently repudiated: she scorns the idea that the gods intervene, and she is wrong (4.379: scilicet is superis labor est). The aim is

EPICUREANISM

UNDER

THE

ROMAN

EMPIRE

2267

still peace, but it is governed by destiny (1,205 — 6: sedes ubi fata quietas / ostendunt) and approached through world dominion (6,851—3). In Lucretius the eternal wound of love subdues the god of war (L. 1,34); in Vergil the eternal wound of love (however disastrous to Dido and Lavinia) makes Vulcan consent to forge Aeneas's arms (8,394), and Vergil points the change by quotation. For Lucretius, Venus is the personification of Epicurean pleasure; for Vergil she is the mother of Aeneas and arbiter of Rome's destiny. O f course, the influence of Lucretius remains strong, but it is verbal echo now rather than ingrained thought, and F R A N K made too much of vaguely Epicurean phrases (e.g. 6,6; 7,527; 8,23; 8,315), or the passing compliment to Memmius (5,117). Yet Vergil could not completely throw off an attitude of mind so deeply implanted. T h e Epicureans were alone among Hellenistic philosophical schools in extolling pity as a virtue. Seneca actually called it "the vice of a feeble mind which succumbs at the sight of suffering in others" (Clem. 2,5,1). But Aeneas is a man of pity. T h e spectacle of the Trojan War in pictures moves him to cry sunt lacrimae rerum et mentem mortalia tangunt (1,462). T h e sight of the unburied dead leads him to pity them (6,332). Yes, and he pities Lausus whom his own hand has killed (10,823). T h e pity does not and cannot lead to action: it is there for its own sake. It is Vergil's residual Epicureanism. See further C. PASCAL, La dottrina epicurea nell'egloga vi di Vergilio, Atti della R. Academia delle Scienze di Torino 37 (1901 - 2 ) , 168 ff. (but note the contrary view of M. G. HACKMANN, Vergils sechste Ekloge, Hermes 58 [1923], 290 ff.); W. A. MERRILL, Parallelisms and Coincidences in Lucretius and Virgil (Chicago 1918); T.FRANK, Vergil (New York 1922) (to be used with caution) and ID., Epicurean Determinism in the Aeneid, AJP 41 (1920), 115 ff.; N . W . DE WITT, Vergil and Epicureanism, CW 25 (1932), 89 ff.; ID., Vergil, Augustus and Epicureanism, CW 35 ( 1 9 4 1 - 2 ) , 2 8 1 - 2 ; B. FARRINGTON, Vergil and Lucretius, Acta Classical (1959), 45 ff.; L. ALFONSI, L'Epicureismo nella storia spirituale di Vergilio, in: Epicurea: In memoriam Hectoris Bignone (Genoa 1959); M . J . OROZ-RETA, Virgile et l'epicurisme, Actes VIIle Congres G. Bude (Paris 1969), 436 - 4 7 . 1 have not seen P. BOYANCE, Virgile et l'epicurisme, Bull, de la Franco-ancienne (1958). W. SPOERRI, Zur Kosmogonie in Vergils 6. Ekloge, Museum Helveticum 27 (1970), 1 4 4 - 6 3 in which SPOERRI argues that Eel. 6 is not eclectic, but Epicurean, in its orientation; P. FEDELI, Sulla prima bucolica di Virgilio, Giornale Italiano di Filologia 24 (1972), 273 - 300; E. PARATORE, La problematica sull'epicureismo a Roma, ANRW 1,4, ed. H. TEMPORINI ( B e r l i n - N e w York 1973), 1 9 4 200 ('Motivi epicurei nell'opera di Virgilio'); H. NAUMANN, War Vergil Epikureer?, Sileno 1 (1975), 245 — 247; J. BOLLACK, Die Tartaros-Szene in der Aeneis, Annates Universitatis Budapestinensis de Rolando Eotvos nominatae4 (1976), 47 - 61; C. NAUMANN, 1st Vergil der Verfasser von Catalepton V und VIII?, Rheinisches Museum 121 (1978), 7 8 - 9 3 (cf. also J. RICHMOND, Recent Work on the 'Appendix Vergiliana' [ 1 9 5 0 - 1 9 7 5 ] , ANRW II, 31,2, ed. W . HAASE [ B e r l i n - N e w Y o r k 1 9 8 1 ] , 1 1 1 2 - 1 1 5 4 , e s p . 1 1 4 7 f . a n d 1 1 4 8 ) ; W . R .

JOHNSON,.

The Broken World. Virgil and his Augustus, Arethusa 13 (1981), 4 9 - 5 6 .

5. T h e Epicureanism of Vergil's friends We note briefly Vergil's other associates in Siro's school. Not much is known about Plotius Tucca except that he survived Vergil and was one of his executors; he too was a friend of Horace and belonged to the circle of Maecenas 149

ANRW II 36.4

2268

JOHN

FERGUSON

(H., S. 1,5,40; 1,10,81). Much the same is true of Varius, Vergil's other executor. More is known about his writing, including a poem On Death', perhaps a lamentation for Caesar, but conceivably an Epicurean work (fragments in Macrobius 6,1 —2 indecisive, but 6,1,40 incubet et Tyriis atque ex solido bibat auro has an Epicurean ring), a panegyric on Octavian, and a popular tragedy 'Thyestes'. We cannot be certain, but it looks as if he may have moved away from Epicureanism as did Vergil. To these we may perhaps add Octavius Mussa, poet and historian, to whom one of the 'Catalepton' is addressed. He was probably in the Naples circle, and is mentioned by Horace in the context of other members (H., S. 1,10,82). Among these perhaps C. Valgius Rufus (to whom various literary works are attributed by a variety of sources), the Visci, of whom we know nothing (cf. S. 1,9,22), and Aristius Fuscus, recipient of a somewhat Epicurean letter (Ep. 1,10 laetus sorte tua vives sapienter Aristi) and the delightful Integer vitae (O. 1,22). Certainty is not possible. We know that several of these belonged to the Naples contubernium. We also know that they remained close friends with one another, and were together in Maecenas's circle. Maecenas retained Epicurean attitudes; it is known that Vergil and Horace moved away from them without losing them altogether. Probably the circle was held together by their personal relations with Maecenas and one another, rather than by a continued Epicureanism. But it is just possible that Epicurean ties remained, and that those who abandoned the philosophy remained for the friendship; certainly it is possible that some of these retained their Epicureanism. On the Naples contubernium, Tucca, Varius etc., see W. W I M M E L , Der Augusteer Lucius Varius Rufus, ANRW II, 30,3, ed. W. HAASE (Berlin-New York 1983), 1567f.

6. Horace's Epicureanism Horace is another interesting study. Horace has been well treated by DE WITT. It looks as if his father, to whose upbringing he owed much, was an Epicurean (S. 1,6,65 — 88); certainly he himself learned of the blessed unconcern of the gods (S. 1,5,101), and he calls himself whimsically but sincerely enough Epicuri de grege porcum (Ep. 1,4,16). Epicurean values shine from his poems at all periods: in his utilitarianism (S. 1,3,98; Ep. 2,2,141 - 5; AP 343); in his exaltation of the simple life (S. 2,2,1; O. 2,16,13 vivitur parvo bene; Ep. 1,10,39; 1,15,41 —6); in his attacks on Stoic paradoxes (Epod. 8,15 — 6; S. 1,3,96); in his exaltation of friendship (S. 1,4,135); in his acceptance of death as the end (Ep. 1,16,79; O. 2,20,21 - 4 ) ; in his refusal to take thought for the morrow (O. 1,9,13 eras fuge quaerere cf. 1,11 with its attack on astrology); in his independence of Fortune (Ep. 1,1,68 - 9); in his exaltation of Maecenas as praesidium, that is the guarantor of securitas (O. 1,1,2); in his concept of the end of life as mens sana in corpore sano (O. 1 , 3 1 , 1 7 - 9 ; Ep. 1 , 1 8 , 1 1 1 - 2 ) ; in his search for otium (O. 2,16); in his calculus of pleasures and his doctrine of choice and avoidance (S. 1,2; cf. Ep. 1,2,55 sperne voluptates\ nocet empta dolore voluptas)-, in his XtiGe

EPICUREANISM

UNDER T H E R O M A N

EMPIRE

2269

P i é a a ç which he himself practised (Ep. 1 , 1 1 , 7 - 1 0 . 2 9 - 3 0 ; 1,16,15; 1,17,10; 1,18,103 fallentis semita vitae). At times he is almost paraphrasing Epicurus. " I f you wish to make Pythocles really happy, don't give him more money but try to lessen his desires" (Epic., fr. 28 B) contracto melius parva vectigalia porrigam

cupidine ... (O. 3,16,39).

Again g rata superveniet quae non sperabitur hora (Ep. 1,4,13) is straight from Epicurus. He is full of Epicurean technical terms: falsis vocibus are Kevai ô ô ^ a i (O. 2,2,19 — 21); in one single stanza tutus, sordibus, invidenda and sobrius are technical terms (O. 2 , 1 0 , 5 - 8 ) . Dulcis is worth watching for: it means in Epicurean circles 'giving pleasure'. Thus it is applied to friends (S. 1,4,135; O. 1,1,2 etc.); to the pleasure which mingles with the profitable to produce the best poetry (AP 343); to relaxation (O. 2,7,28; 4,12,28); to music (O. 2,13,38). But note too the familiar dulce et decorum est pro patria mori (O. 3,2,13); one is tempted to translate: " T o die for your country is both Epicurean and Stoic." And where is there a better exposition of Epicureanism than in Odes 3,29,41? ¡lie potens sui laetusque deget, cui licet in diem dixisse „vixi ..." Horace moved away from Epicureanism. In Odes 1,34 he tells how as parcus deorum cultor he heard thunder from a clear sky, to believers an omen, to unbelievers an impossibility whose non-occurrence was a standard argument (Lucr. 6,400). H o r a c e heard it and thought "Lucretius is wrong". So we have the exaltation o f Jupiter (O. 1,12,17; 3,5,1) and the plea for the rebuilding o f the temples (O. 3,6) and the acceptance of the commission to write the 'Carmen Saeculare'; we have also the adaptation of the Stoic sage exemplified in their picture of Socrates: iustum et tenacem propositi virum (O. 3,3,1). N o t that he became a convert to Stoicism. A. Y. CAMPBELL (Horace [London 1924]) overstated this. In fact allegiance to any school sat lightly upon Horace (Ep. 1,1,13 — 9). H e retained many Epicurean attitudes, and his personal friendships with Epicureans in Maecenas's circle. But it doubtful whether he retained any other contacts with the school. See N . W . DE WITT, Epicurean Doctrine in Horace, CP 34 (1939), 127 ff.; P. MERLAN, Epicureanism and Horace, JHI 10 (1949), 445 ff.; L. ALFONSI, Un poetico protrettico epicureo di Orazio, Riv. di St. della Filos. 4 (1949), 207 - 9; C. DIANO, Orazio e l'epicureismo, Atti dell'Istituto Veneto, Classe di Scienze Morali e Lettere 120 ( 1 9 6 1 - 2 ) , 43 ff.; K. BUCHNER, Horace et Epicure, Actes VIIIe Congrès G . Budé (Paris 1969), 4 5 7 - 6 8 ; K. GANTAR, Horaz zwischen Akademie und Epikur, Ziva antika 22 (1972), 5 — 2 4 who argues that Horace was really opposed to Epicureanism, and only after the conspirators' defeat at Philippi did he turn to it. A. TRAGLIA, L'epicureismo in Orazio, Atti del convegno di studio: Horatianum (Rome 1971), 4 1 - 5 4 ; E. PARATORE, La problematica sull'epicureismo a Roma, A N R W I , 4 , ed. H. TEMPORINI ( B e r l i n - N e w York 1973), 2 0 1 - 2 0 2 ('L'epicureismo in Orazio e il suo culmine in età augustea'); W. D. LEBEK, Horaz und die Philosophie: Die 'Oden', A N R W II, 31,3, ed. W. HAASE ( B e r l i n - N e w York 1981), 2 0 3 1 - 2 0 9 2 . 149»

2270

JOHN

FERGUSON

7. Propertius and Tibullus We can pass briefly over Propertius and Tibullus. Propertius was not an Epicurean though. He thinks of travelling to Athens to escape the pangs of love and will clear his soul by studying in Plato's Academy or Epicurus's Garden (3,21,25 — 26). N o t much here — except that Epicureanism is decidedly a live option in Athens (and perhaps not easily in Rome), and perhaps Propertius knows enough to know that in their different ways both schools offered a cure for passion. About Tibullus I am not so sure. Certainly there is a delight in the country's gods and their activities in developing civilization which is not Epicurean (2,1,37 ff.); but if you strip the gods away the account might (and doubtless ultimately did) come from Lucretius. T h e first poem of all is a strongly Epicurean account of the simple life, contentus vivere parvo (1,1,25), and an attack on the pursuit of riches and military glory; it ends in a variant on the Lucretian suave mari magno (1,1,45 cf. L. 2,1). Again the tenth poem is a strongly pacifist assault on war; it is hard not to see Epicurus behind it (1.10). O n e suspects that Tibullus has at some time been exposed to Epicureanism and assimilated a good deal without becoming an adherent of the school. See J. P. BOUCHER, Properce et ses amis, Colloquium Propertianum, eds. M . BIGARONI, and F. SANTUCCI (Assisi 1976), 5 3 - 7 1 , w h o appreciates the role of Epicureanism in Propertius' concept of friendship.

8. Epicureanism in Vitruvius Vitruvius seems more unlikely; one does not expect to find Epicureanism in a military architect, and his suggestions (e.g. 9,1,1) that the world is designed by a divine intelligence are incompatible with Epicurean theology. But his anthropology is wholly Epicurean, both in general outline and in detail: the wild, animal-like life of primitive man, the origin of fire in the friction between the branches of storm-tossed trees, the account of the origin of language from a combination of natural cries and agreed articulation, the emergence of society, the creation of shelters f r o m caves or the imitation of animals, the way necessity becomes the mother of invention, the gradual emergence of scientific craftsmanship (2,1,1—7). This is a splendid account, which could hardly have been given by anyone belonging to another school of thought, or indeed by anyone who did not k n o w Epicureanism f r o m the inside. Vitruvius does mention the name of Epicurus three times. T w o of these are in summary histories of philosophy (2,2,1; 7 pref. 2); the third is a quotation to the effect that wise men owe little to fortune, everything to thought (6 pref. 3), and as it does not recur in this form (cf. Ep. fr. 77) it suggests again internal knowledge. See A. STÜCKELBERGER, Die Atomistik in römischer Zeit: Rezeption und Verdrängung, below in this same volume (ANRW II, 36,4), 2574 ff.

EPICUREANISM

UNDER

THE

ROMAN

EMPIRE

2271

9. Medicine and Epicureanism Asclepiades of Prusa, a dominant figure in medicine in the first century B. C., brought together Epicurean philosophy and the Greek medical tradition. Why not, given that according to Epicurus the greatest pleasure consisted in freedom from pain? His associate Themison is usually credited with the foundation of the Methodist school of medicine. Themison believed in atoms, but in practice concentrated more upon the pores. He systematized Asclepiades's somewhat pragmatic approach; pain was caused by overcrowding of atoms in a given area, but the thinning out of the atoms was in the long run more radically dangerous. The Methodists, who were generally opposed to dogmatism, came to something like a dogma of three states of 'universals', the clogging of the pores, the relaxation of the pores, and a mixture of the two. In general, the Methodists, starting from an Epicurean scheme, were influenced by the sceptical Empiricists. They showed a commendable awareness of the individual and the particular. It would be quite false to suggest that the adherents of the schools were Epicureans, but it is clear that the school helped to keep Epicureanism alive. We may here mention Antonius Musa. Whether any doctor ever served such an eminent group as Augustus, Agrippa, Maecenas, Vergil and Horace is questionable. He was a disciple of Asclepiades, as we know from his use of physical treatment such as cold baths. This leads us to think that he may have had Epicurean connections. We have noticed Octavius Musa as a probable Epicurean; we do not know of any relationship between them but it seems likely. And it is, after all, the circle of Maecenas.

10. Livy and Epicureanism Livy twice shows an awareness of Epicurean beliefs. The first is in the third book. Appius Claudius records people as growling that gods exist and are indifferent of human affairs (3,56,7). The wording of the second clause is a direct negation of Epicureanism; the dramatic date is 449 B. C. and must be anachronistic if it is a reference to Epicureanism. Livy is reflecting a controversy of his own day. But the assertion of the people is not upheld by events: the implication might be taken to be that the Epicurean view is true. Livy, however, does not intend this conclusion, and in the tenth book approves Sp. Papirius as iuvenis ante doctrinam deos spernentem natus (10,40,11); the chapter ends in an omen and the affirmation by the consul that the gods were active in human affairs (10,40,14). T h e passage is clear evidence of the prevalence of Epicureanism in Livy's own time. See W. WEISSENBORN, Livius I (Berlin 1885), Einleitung, 17; G . STÜBLER, Die Religiosität des Livius (Stuttgart - Berlin 1941), 80; P. G . WALSH, Livy a n d Stoicism, AJP 79 (1958), 355 ff. a n d ID., Livy ( C a m b r i d g e 1961), 51.

2272

JOHN FERGUSON

11. Ovid and E p i c u r e a n i s m Finally we mention O v i d . H e r e the evidence is ambiguous. T h e a c c o u n t o f the creation of the world which begins the ' M e t a m o r p h o s e s ' ( M . 1,5 — 88) is eclectic, largely Stoic and not at all E p i c u r e a n ; the last b o o k c o n t a i n s several hundred lines o f P y t h a g o r e a n i s m . Again the ' F a s t i ' is an unlikely subject for an E p i c u r e a n , and in it O v i d speaks o f the god within much as does Seneca, and plainly identifies him with the primal fire (F. 6,5). But there are passages which point in a very different direction. E c h o e s of Lucretius need n o t c o u n t for m u c h , though O v i d ' s knowledge seems very thorough (Am. 1 , 1 5 , 2 4 , L. 5 , 9 5 , 1 0 0 0 ; M . 7 , 5 1 7 - 6 1 3 , L. 6 , 1 1 3 6 - 1 2 8 5 ; M . 1 5 , 1 4 3 - 5 3 , L. 2 , 7 f f . ; Tr. 2 , 2 6 1 - 2 , L . 1,1). But w h a t can be said of Ovid's rejection o f augury ( M . 1 5 , 1 2 7 f f . ) o r o f ritual purification (F. 2 , 4 5 — 6)? And when O v i d says t h a t the gods were invented for the g o o d of society

nec secura quies illos similisque sopori detinet: inrtocue vivite, numen adest.

(AA. 1,637)

does it n o t f o l l o w that he really believed that the gods do n o t intervene in h u m a n affairs, and e n j o y secura quies, which is pure Epicureanism? It is in the last p o e m s that Epicureanism seems strongest. But s o m e o f the passages refer to his earlier life.

quique fugax rerum securaque in otia natus aspera militiae iuvenis certamina fugi, nec nisi lusura movimus arma manu.

(Tr. 3,2,9) (Tr. 4,1,71)

... quaeque meae semper placuerunt otia menti carpere et in studiis molliter esse meis, et parvam celebrare domum veteresque Penates, et quae nunc domino rura paterna carent, inque sinu dominae carisque sodalibus inque securus patria consenuisse mea. (Tr. 4,8,7) optabam placide vivere posse senex.

(Tr. 4,8,30)

nec patiens corpus, nec mens fuit apta labori, sollicitaeque fugax ambitionis eram, et petere Aoniae suadebant tuta sorores otia, iudicio semper amata meo. (Tr. 4,10,37) So t o o he claims t h a t his life was chaste even if his poetry was gay, and the o b j e c t o f his writing was honesta voluptas (Tr. 2 , 3 5 3 - 8 ) . H e still writes n o t for gloria but for utilitas (P. 3 , 9 , 5 5 — 6). His o w n fate has shut the path t o utilitas (Tr. 3 , 5 , 1 6 ) , though he still pursues it (Tr. 4 , 1 , 3 8 ; P. 1,5,554). H e advises a friend t o avoid great n a m e s and glory (Tr. 3 , 4 , 3 — 6 cf. 43). All these references strongly suggest Epicureanism's influence on Ovid. T h e m o s t impressive aspect o f these later p o e m s is their e x a l t a t i o n o f friendship. It would be tedious to q u o t e all the passages, but some references

EPICUREANISM U N D E R T H E R O M A N

EMPIRE

2273

show how deep this runs: Tr. 1,8,15 amicitiae sanctum et venerabile nomett-, 1,9,39 — 40; 3,4,1; 3,5,1 usus amicitiae; 3,6,1 foedus amicitiae; 4.8.11. Or look at the expression of conjugal affection in Tr. 1,3; 1,6; 3,3; 4,3. Such amicitia, between man and man or between man and woman, was a peculiar characteristic of the Epicureans. What does this amount to? I suspect an exposure to Epicureanism in Ovid's youth, leading to a general commitment to an Epicurean way of life. I do not see any evidence of membership in an Epicurean confraternity. As Ovid grew away from his youth his Epicureanism sat more lightly on him; other interests developed, and for poetic or other purposes he turned to other philosophies. When he was broken by exile he reverted to the 'religion' of his younger days, which he had never wholly lost. It is not an uncommon experience. 12. Summary of Epicureanism in the Augustan Age At Boscoreale two silver cups of the Augustan Age show a morbid and extravagant satire on death and culture. Skeletons are identified as well-known figures in literature and philosophy. The philosophers include Zeno, Epicurus, the Cynic Monimus, and perhaps Demetrius of Phalerum. Epicurus is accompanied by two pigs; he has his hand on a cake, and is associated with the motto TO teA-oq F|5ovf|. It is a comment on the transitoriness of material enjoyment which Epicurus might not have disowned. A summary is in order: At the beginning of this period there were a good many Epicureans at Rome, and the philosophy permeated in their youth to adult Augustans. Lucretius is the main, but not sole channel through which Epicureanism continued to be known. There seems, however, to have been a movement away from Epicureanism, probably fosterd by official policy, which was not intolerant. The Epicureanism which survived tended to adjust itself to Roman social values, and except possibly in Maecenas's circle there are no signs of an Epicurean community at Rome. Meanwhile Epicureanism continued to flourish in Greece.

/V. The First Century A. D. 1. Epicureanism and Judaism, and especially Philo of Alexandria To the Jews Epicureanism was anathema. Their natural repugnance to a creed to which God was irrelevant was intensified by the career of Antiochus Epiphanes, who became an Epicurean convert. Philo's evidence is thus of particular interest. H. A. WOLFSON says well of him: "He openly disagreees with the Epicureans on the most essential points

2274

JOHN

FERGUSON

in their doctrine. In physics he rejects their a t o m i s m ; in ethics he rejects their hedonism; in theology he denounces the belief in the existence o f gods in the f o r m of human beings, as taught by Epicurus in his popular writings, and he denounces also the denial o f providence and the doctrine that the world is governed by chance, as taught by Epicurus in his philosophical writings." (Philo 1 [Cambr., M a s s . 1948], 1 1 0 - 1 ) . T h e fact is that Philo has an accurate and detailed k n o w l e d g e o f Epicurean doctrine. H e k n o w s , to take an obvious instance, that the Epicureans are not atheists, and contrasts those w h o say that G o d does not exist at all (Opif. M u n d i 61,170) with those w h o say that deity exists but does not exercise providence, and that the world moves on unstably as c h a n c e directs (Confus. Ling 2 3 , 1 1 4 ) . H e knows that the Epicurean gods are c o r p o r e a l , and claims that to portray G o d in human form is to plunge straight on the road to Epicurean impiety (Post. Caini 1,2). H e k n o w s the doctrine that the gods live in the interstices between worlds (Somn. 1 , 3 2 , 1 8 4 ) . Again he k n o w s the relationship and difference between the cosmologies o f D e m o c r i t u s and Epicurus (Aet. M u n d i 3,8); much of his own c o s m o l o g y is an a t t e m p t to defend a Platonic view against an Epicurean view on allegedly scriptural but really philosophical grounds. In a homily on Genesis 1 5 , 1 0 (Quis R e r u m 2 6 , 1 3 0 1) " h e divided them in the midst" he says that the L o g o s " n e v e r stops dividing; when it has passed through all sensible o b j e c t s d o w n to the a t o m s , the socalled indivisibles, it goes on again to divide the o b j e c t s o f reason into parts which are beyond verbal a c c o u n t " . T h i s is an a t t a c k on the doctrine o f indivisible a t o m s , but it is an accurate a t t a c k ; Philo k n o w s that the a t o m s are accessible to the mind, not to the senses. A n o t h e r impressive assimilation of detail is his assertion that G o d made a m p h i b i o u s a n i m a l s , and could if he c h o s e have created an animal capable o f living in all the elements ( Q u o d Deterius 4 2 , 1 5 4 ) . T h i s runs counter to the E p i c u r e a n view t h a t trees c a n n o t exist in the sky, clouds in the sea, or fishes live in the fields; each has its determined place o f existence (L. 3 , 7 8 7 ) . Philo, then, is opposed to Epicureanism. In a homily on E x o d u s 2 , 1 2 (Fug. et Inv. 26,148) he interprets the Egyptian w h o m M o s e s s m o t e as " t h e doctrine that pleasure is the principal and supreme g o o d , and the doctrine that a t o m s are the elementary principles o f the universe". But he k n o w s what he is opposing, and we can legitimately deduce a lively Epicurean school at Alexandria under the early empire. T h e r e is a contrast here with J o s e p h u s , w h o is a w a r e o f the Epicureans (Ant. 1 0 , 2 2 7 - 9 ; 19,32; Ap. 2,180) and thinks they are w o r t h a t t a c k i n g , but in an extended paragraph against them says nothing m o r e than that they deny providence. T h i s is partly a contrast between the p h i l o s o p h e r and the historian, and partly between Palestine and Alexandria. See W. C . VAN UNNIK, An Attack on the Epicureans by Flavius J o s e p h u s , in: R o m a n i t a s et Christianitas. Studia J a n o Henrico Waszink ... o b l a t a , edd. W. DEN BOER et al. (Amsterdam

1973), 341-355.

EPICUREANISM UNDER T H E ROMAN

EMPIRE

2275

2. Epicureanism, Christianity and the Writings of Paul N. W. Df. W i t t in his 'Epicurus and His Philosophy' (Minneapolis 1954) made some original observations about the possible influence of Epicureanism on Christianity. He pointed out the following facts: a) although the Jews generally repudiated the Epicureans, there was possible Epicureanism in the Jewish tradition, certainly in 'F.cclesiastes' and possibly among the Sadducees, with their reluctance to hold public office, their denial of immortality, their denial of providence, and their assertion of free will; b) Epicureanism certainly existed in the Decapolis, as Philodemus came from Gadara, and c) Epicureanism was strong in Antioch, where the followers of Jesus were first called Christians; lastly, d) Epicureanism forms a bridge between Greek philosophy and Christian ethics. Plato's ethics are part of his total philosophy, and directed to an intellectual aristocracy. Epicurus's ethics are linked with physics but divorced from politics, and directed to the middle class. Jesus's ethics are individual, and directed to the poor. T h i s is far too schematic an account, but the vocabulary of Epicureanism and of the New Testament are sometimes closely similar, and examples are necessary for such a generalization. In 'St. Paul and Epicurus' (Minneapolis 1954) D e W i t t made a closer examination o f passages in Paul which seemed to him to show traces o f Epicureanism, either assimilated or opposed. T h e first letter to Thessalonians is a good example. D e W i t t starts from Paul's use of TtappTiaid^EAOAI (2,2), and suggests rightly that it is used, as Epicurus uses it, to mean 'speak with complete frankness'. N o w in the last chapter Paul speaks of those who believe in 'peace and security' (eipfjvT| Kai daqxitaia: 5,3), and D e W i t t rightly claims that these are Epicurean catchwords. T h e Christians to whom Paul is writing are not like that: they know that peace comes from God (5,23). Similarly he has earlier contrasted the Christian belief in resurrection with the state of those who have no hope (4,13); this probably fits the Epicureans better than any other group of the ancient world. In the second letter (2,1 —12) Paul has an account o f the coming of Antichrist; the description seems based on Antiochus Epiphanes, who was a convert to Epicureanism. Without pressing all the points made by D e W i t t it seems reasonable to assume that when Paul wrote about the middle of the first century A. D., there was a strong Epicurean community at Thessalonica, some of whose members had been converted to Christianity. 'Colossians' deserves treatment next. Colossae is not far from Oenoanda where Diogenes proclaimed salvation according to Epicurus a century or so later. D e W i t t points out that in the letter to Colossae, in three verses (2,18 20) Paul uses five concepts associated with Epicureanism: the emphasis on the evidence of sight, the allegation of arrogance, 'the mind o f the flesh', 'the elements of the universe' (a phrase for the atoms), and the dogmatism. Angelworship adduced in the same passage clearly takes it away from the Epicureans, and Paul speaks o f the elements in a non-Epicurean sense. None the less the concatenation is striking, and when Paul afterwards calls on his readers to concentrate on the things above, not on earthly things (3,2), we may well

2276

JOHN FERGUSON

think that his words are directed against Epicurean tendencies: quod super nos nihil est ad nos. 'Philippians' is clearer. In the first place, the pattern of the letter: warm beginning, critical admonition, ethical exhortation, is characteristically Epicurean. In the central section Paul characterizes some non-Christians: " . . . their god is their belly and they glory in their shame" (3,19). This is a typically hostile view of Epicurus and his followers. Paul says that "their minds are set on earthly things" (which seems to refer to Epicureans in 'Colossians') and that they are headed for destruction, which similarly appears of the Epicureans in '1 Thessalonians'. But now in the final, positive, section, Paul takes up for his own purposes some constructive sides of Epicureanism. For example "Rejoice in the Lord a l w a y s " (4,4) seems to echo Epicurus's invitation to c o n t i n u o u s pleasures, but now in a Christian context ( " T h e Lord is at hand"), to ¿meuce*; (4,5), not in the gospels, a favourite Epicurean word; jtpocrcriKfjJtó|iVTina quindi e non ÓJtO|ivT|naxiKÓv. Della subscriptio oggi si legge ...j AT...O[ — ]|YnOMNHMAT[ —]|Ä | e poi tracce della sticometria molto incerte àpi0 [X]Xn[...]H. Cf. T. DORANDI, Stichometrica, ZPE 70 (1987), p. 38. 2I< Al 'De pietate' fu attribuito dal CROENERT, APF 1 (1901), p. 109 n. 1 anche il PHerc. 1815 (di cui resta solo un frammento conservato nell'Apografo Oxoniense) seguito dal LUPPE, Philologus 118 (1974), pp. 193 - 202 e 119 (1975), p. 143s. Dubita invece A. HENRICHS, ZPE 15 (1974), pp. 3 0 2 - 3 0 4 . Cf. CErc 8 (1978), p. 159 e ANGELI, Syzetesis, II, p. 611 s. 214 CRÖNERT, KM, p. 89 n. 435. Lo SCOTT, p. 48 aveva pensato a parte del 'De natura' di Epicuro o al 'De Providentia' di Crisippo.

F I L O D E M O : ORIENTAMENTI DELLA RICERCA ATTUALE

2355

Il testo, pubblicato dal BASSI 215 e ripreso dal BIGNONE,216 fu ritenuto dal PHILIPPSON di contenuto oscuro. 2 1 7 Un notevole progresso si è avuto con lo

studio e l'edizione della FERRARIO:218 è stata, tra l'altro, sancita la definitiva scomparsa (fr. 34) dei nomi di Basilide e Crinis (due stoici?) e individuato, nel medesimo frammento, un accenno all'uccisione di Filippo II di Macedonia invece che a un ignoto Fintea, già identificato col Filtea autore di 'AuSiatcà'. 219 Il ricorrere nel testo di termini come 7tpóvoia e ei(iap|iévri e la presenza nella biblioteca di Ercolano di resti dell'opera di Crisippo 'Ilepi rcpovoicu;' hanno rafforzato l'idea che nel PHerc. 1670 sia contenuto uno scritto di F. 'Sulla provvidenza'. A causa del cattivo stato del papiro è impossibile verificare se si tratti di un'opera sulla provvidenza, sul destino o sugli dèi o di un trattato generale contro gli Stoici (FERRARIO).220 Di sicuro si può affermare che il testo è in polemica con i concetti stoici di itpóvoia e einapnévri: all'idea stoica di un dio provvidenziale F. oppone la dottrina degli aggregati non sottoposti a nessuna legge superiore. 12. L'opera logica Accanto al più importante e meglio conservato scritto 'Ilepi ^.fjv ... 6 éaxi Jte]pi 0pyrjXT| n i e n t ' a l t r o c h e un ÔST]XOÇ a i x í a ) . L ' i m p r e c i s i o n e della d o s s o g r a f i a è a n c h e in q u e s t o c a s o evidente: la f o r m u l a di â c r t a t o ç a í t í a per la tì>xt| n o n c o l l i m a p e r f e t t a m e n t e c o n E p i s t . ad M e n . 1 3 3 - 1 3 4 , ove, c o m e si è visto s o p r a , E p i c u r o r i c o n o s c e si la r e a l t à della x ú x i , m a si rifiuta di c o n s i d e r a r l a una causa.

38

Per il de f a t o dello p s . P l u t a r c o (a p a r t e K . Z I E G L E R , P l u t a r c h o s , R E X X I , 1 , 1 9 5 1 , coli. 725-726

in part.) cfr. D . BABUT, P l u t a r q u e et le s t o ï c i s m e , Paris 1 9 6 9 , 157 ss.,

l ' i n d i v i d u a z i o n e di presenze s t o i c h e n e l l ' o p e r e t t a e c l e t t i z z a n t e .

con

DIOGENIANO,

GLI

EPICUREI

E

LA

TYXH

2441

forze contrapposte; o forse anche alla presentazione allegorica di 'AvàyKT| nel mito di Er. M a abbandona poi Platone per adottare un vocabolario tipicamente peritatetico, e non diverso da quello di Alessandro: distingue anch'egli la TÙXTI, c o m e a m a ìcaià aunPePr|KÓ.T| propria di ciò che è è(p' f|(iìv, in nostro potere, dell'agire libero. La Ti)%r) è un tipo di causa estrinseca o contingente, che 'sopravviene' dall'esterno rispetto a ciò che è in nostro potere, ècp' rmìv (570 e - f ) . L'eclettismo dell'autore si rivela poi in quanto, dopo questo avvicinamento alla tradizione aristotelica, egli compie una nuova conversione verso un platonismo colorito vagamente di stoicismo, accennando ad una npóvoia che è al di sopra, àvcoTàtco (573 a), superiore alla stessa einapnévri 39 . M a tutto questo non interessa più il nostro assunto. N o n dunque nell'ambito della tradizione peripatetica è da cercarsi la matrice dell'argomentazione diogenianea. E gli autori antichi che hanno ricondotto a questa il concetto diogenianeo di TÓXT| hanno forse sottovalutato il fatto che il tema della TÌ>XT| è chiaramente perseguibile, con diversi connotati, nell'epicureismo di età imperiale. Non a b b i a m o , per questo, che da rifarci a Diogene di Enoanda, quei significativi N F 7 — 8 in cui tale tema non solo torna con motivazioni singolari, ma si intreccia con un altro anch'esso in Diogeniano presente, quello della morte.

VII. La

TUXTI

nell'epicureismo tardivo

Nel N F 7 di Diogene di Enoanda è stato riconosciuto un tratto della descrizione del naufragio cui Epicuro, fortunosamente, scampò 4 0 . Di tale episodio Diogene si serve in forma paradigmatica, in due sensi: per dimostrare 39

Per trovare una traccia di ciò nell'ambito dello stoicismo occorrebbe prestar fede alla testimonianza di Calcidio su Cleante, In Plat. Timaeum, p. 183,10 ss. WASZINK = SVF II, fr. 933; sulla quale peraltro si dimostra scettico, e forse non senza ragione, M . DRAGONA MONACHOU, Providence and Fate in Stoicism and prae-Neoplatonism, Chalcidius as an Authority on Cleanthes' Theodicy (SVF 2,933), Philosophia, III, 1973, 2 6 2 - 306.

40

Dopo l'edizione di questo gruppo di 'nuovi frammenti' da parte di M . FERGUSON SMITH, in: Amer. Journal Archaeol., LXXV, 1971, 368 - 3 7 0 in part, per i N F 7 - 8 , l'analisi di D. CLAY, Sailing to Lampsacus. Diogenes of Oenoanda, New Fragment 7 (Greek Rom. Byz. Studies, XIV, 1 9 7 3 , 4 9 - 59) ha dimostrato come il frammento contenga la descrizione del naufragio di Epicuro, già a noi più sommariamente noto in base a fonti letterarie. Studi successivi si sono avuti da parte di A. BARIGAZZI, Prometheus, I, 1975, 99 — 116; A. LÀKS - C . MILLOT, Études sur l'Épicurisme antique, Cahiers de Philologie, I, Lille 1976, 3 1 9 - 3 6 6 ;

G . ARRIGHETTI, A t e n e e R o m a , N . S . X X I I I , 1 9 7 8 , 1 6 1 - 1 7 2 .

Ancora

cfr. D. CLAY, The Philosophical Inscription o f Diogenes of Oenoanda: New Discoveries 1 9 6 9 - 1 9 8 3 , in questo stesso volume ( A N R W II, 36,4), infra, pp. 2446 - 2 5 5 9 , spec. 2544 -

2548.

2442

MARGHERITA

ISNARD1 P A R E N T E

come Epicuro, in forza di XÓXTI, sfuggì allora alla morte, e per ribadire come tuttavia egli non sia potuto s c a m p a r e poi in seguito alla inesorabile necessità della morte. Descritto il naufragio e il salvataggio (NF 7 col. Ili), a f f e r m a a commento che la spontaneità assoluta della sorte (aùxònaxov) p u ò esserci, come in questo caso, benevola. M a aggiunge subito d o p o : xéGvriice yàp óné[xEpoç] Kf|pu^ ôç 8i8CTtoXT| si contrappone la sola vera einapnévri che è giocoforza riconoscere 4 1 . Subito di seguito ( N F 8, col. I), Diogene loda Epicuro per non aver voluto eliminare la sorte dalla sua dottrina. La sorte esiste e p u ò danneggiarci, tuttavia aravicaç, raramente, poiché „non ha, come il f u o c o , una sua materia (OXri) cui apprendersi"; non è, i n s o m m a , una forza fisica, né della forza fisica ha la necessità intrinseca e la concretezza. Un parallelo a ciò potrebbe forse esser cercato in Alessandro (de fato, 14, p. 183 BRUNS), là dove questi, per illustrare la necessità dell'azione che esercitano i corpi fisici, prende a suo esempio anch'egli il f u o c o : „ciò che si compie per opera del f u o c o non potrebbe compiersi per opera di alcunché di diverso". Pur con questi suoi limiti — né concretezza fisica, né forza reale, né entità specifica - la XÓXT| è pur sempre una realtà, un fatto; né sarebbe degno del filosofo e della sua serietà negare, dichiarar falso (KaxavyEÛaaaOai) un fatto così chiaro, evidente, f o n d a t o sull'universale consenso. E qui sopravviene una citazione da Epicuro stesso, R S X V I : Ppaxéa aotpqj xûxi] 7iap£|i7ieÌJtx£I KTX. (NF 8, col. II), con l'esaltazione di quel A.oyiCT|iôç che sa rendersi superiore alle circostanze. E ' la ôiàGeaiç propria del filosofo quella che sa sempre far fronte alle circostanze, xaûxonâxou CTUVXUXÌAI — anche qui un saggio di eclettismo, giacché la XÛXTI viene nominata con l'espressione peripatetizzante di aùxónaxov. TÓXTÌ e einapnévri-morte, i n s o m m a , a p p a i o n o anche all'epicureo Diogene di E n o a n d a due realtà evidenti nei loro effetti pratici, e, se marginali nella vita del saggio, non per questo meno reali 4 2 . Una testimonianza d o s s o g r a f i c a tardiva, ma che risale c o m u n q u e ad Aezio, e reca forse materiale peripatetico (Plac. 1,4,1, p. 2 8 9 D I E L S = fr. 308 Us.), applica al movimento degli atomi l'aggettivo xuxaïoç, p a r l a n d o di ànpovÔT|Toç Kaì Toxaia Kivt|aiç. Epicuro non avrebbe probabilmente a m m e s s o la legittimità del termine. E' tuttavia evidente che il concetto di xóxt| nella sua nuda essenza, sfrondato di quei connotati di tipo popolare-religioso che generalmente gli si a c c o m p a g n a n o , è strettamente apparentato con quello di indeterminazione; e l'importanza di quest'ultimo per il sistema fisico di Epicuro non ha bisogno di esser dimostrata. M a è anche noto c o m e tale sistema non

41

42

Cfr. ancora, per questo motivo della morte e la sua pregnanza nella letteratura epicurea, e in particolare in N F 7, LÂKS - MILLOT, Réexamen de quelques fragments de Diogène d'Oenoande sur l'âme, la connaissance et la fortune, in: Études F.pic., cit., 326 ss. (e il confronto con Lucrezio, III, v. 1042, ipse Epicurus obiit). I termini non sono scelti a caso, e penetreranno anche nel linguaggio di Alessandro, de fato, 8, p. 173,15 BRUNS (cntavicoç àjtavxàv, detto degli eventi prodotti dalla U>XT|).

DIOGENIANO,

GLI

EPICUREI

E LA

TYXH

2443

faccia perno né esclusivamente né fondamentalmente sulla dottrina della 7tapéyKXiai BOLLACK/WISMANN, La lettre d'Epicure, Paris 1971, 12. Diogenes Laertius, X 26. Published by D . COMPARETTI and G . DE P E T R A , La villa ercolanese dei Pisoni: i suoi monumenti e la sua biblioteca, Turin 1883, 8 6 - 1 4 4 . C O M P A R E T T I ' S identification of the villa he published as that of L. Calpurnius Piso Caesoninus has been vindicated again MOMMSEN'S skepticism by H. BLOCK, L. Calpurnius Piso Caesoninus in Samothrace and Herculaneum, in: AJA 44 (1940) 490 - 493 and the contents of its library have now been catalogued by V. LITTA, I papiri ercolanesi II, Naples 1977 (I Quaderni della Biblioteca Nazionale di Napoli, Serie I V - N o . 6) and M. GIGANTE, Catalogo dei Papiri Ercolanesi, Naples 1979, who provides a valuable bibliography of work on the individual papyri. — For the small bronze busts of Epicurus, see now M A R I A R I T A W O J C I K , La Villa dei Papiri ad Ercolano, Rome 1986, 1 4 3 - 1 4 4 (Table LXXV E 10) and 1 6 3 - 1 6 4 (Table LXXVI F 4). — See also T. DORANDI, Filodemo: gli orientamenti della ricerca attuale, above in this same volume (ANRW II 36.4) pp. 2328-2368; E. ASMIS, Philodemus' Epicureanism, above pp. 2369 - 2406, and T. DORANDI, Filodemo storico del pensiero antico, above pp. 2407 - 2423.

2450

DISKIN

CLAY

in northern Lycia. Inscribed on the wall of a stoa in the northern part of Oenoanda, then a prosperous city of the Kibyratis, Epicurus could have read his letter to his mother explaining the true source of her anxious dreams about him. On the lowest inscribed course of this eloquent (and sometimes prolix) wall he could have discovered his letter to friends (possibly in Lampsacus) describing his narrow escape from death in a shipwreck. And running along the bottom of this huge philosophical inscription he could have followed a 'frieze' displaying his 'Kôpiai AôÇai' and some of his other sayings. Until the end of the X I X century, Oenoanda was only a little known name for a little known place in northern Lycia. 4 The name Diogenes of Oenoanda was completely unknown. The site of ancient Oenoanda was known only as 'Ooloojah' to HOSKYN and FORBES who visited it in October of 1841. Thes site was visited again in May of 1842 by FORBES and Lt. THOMAS SPRATT who left a description of the remains and the striking setting of Oenoanda and prepared a map which remained useful to the rare visitors to the site in the X X t h century. 5 But in the abundance of its ruins and civic inscriptions the site did not clearly reveal the name of the man who is now its best known citizen until October of 1889 when the French epigrapher, GEORGES COUSIN, discovered a large limestone block bearing in large letters the name of the author responsible for a philosophical treatise on stone, fragments of which had begun to come to light in 1884: AIOrENO .... This clearly is a title block - the equivalent on stone of the subscription to an ancient papyrus roll. COUSIN took it to be the heading {en tête) of the entire inscription, 6 but its height (35 cm.) puts it 4

O f the f o u r ancient references t o O e n o a n d a , S t r a b o X I I I 4 . 1 7 and Pliny, N a t . Hist. V 2 8 . 1 0 1 are the most i m p o r t a n t . W h a t was k n o w n o f the city a n d its inscriptions until 1937 is given in W. RUGE'S article, R E X V I I 2 (1937) cols. 2 2 3 0 - 2 2 3 4 . GEORGE BEAN has provided an a c c o u n t o f the city in his article, O i n o a n d a , in: T h e Princeton E n c y c l o p e d i a o f Classical Sites, ed. STILWELL, MACDONALD, and MCALLISTER, Princeton 1 9 7 6 , cols. 6 4 0 - 6 4 1 , as well as in his 'Lycian Turkey: An Archaeological G u i d e ' , London 1978, 170-174.

5

HOSKYN gave a brief a c c o u n t o f his visit t o the 'Sedeler Yailahsi' and t h e m o u n t a i n site k n o w n as ' U r l u j a h ' in 1841 in the ' J o u r n a l o f the R o y a l G e o g r a p h i c S o c i e t y ' , L o n d o n 12, 1842, 156. His copy o f an inscription he found on a pedestal in Urlujah (no. 6 , pp. 1 5 9 - 1 6 0 = I G R 4 9 7 ) allowed LEAKE t o identify the site as ancient O e n o a n d a (in his observations on HOSKYN'S paper in this s a m e issue, pp. 1 6 6 - 1 6 7 ) . SPRATT and FORBES describe their visit t o the site on M a y 12, 1 8 4 2 in their Travels in Lycia, M i l y a s , and the Cibyratis I, L o n d o n 1 8 4 7 , 2 7 3 - 2 7 6 . (In his ' D i o g e n e s o f O e n o a n d a : T h e F r a g m e n t s ' , O x f o r d 1 9 7 1 , CHILTON conveniently reproduces SPRATT'S excellent plan [opposite p. 17]). It would seem f r o m CHARLES FELLOW'S description o f the ancient remains on the 'Carachewfathers-yeeilassy' that he visited the suburb o f O e n o a n d a at the base o f the m o u n t a i n at K e m e r a r a s i . T h e r e he discovered and copied an inscription o n a s a r c o p h a g u s dedicated by a Diogenes t o his father, D i o g e n e s , son o f M o l e s , in m e m o r i a m (not to be found in I G R ) , An A c c o u n t o f Discoveries in Lycia, L o n d o n 1 8 4 1 , 2 3 5 - 2 3 6 . HEBERDEY and KALINKA identified the ancient settlement at Kemerarasi as T e r m e s s o s M i n o r , but J . J . COULTON has argued convincingly that T e r m e s s o s M i n o r is the m o u n t a i n city o f O e n o a n d a itself, Termessians at O e n o a n d a , AS 3 2 (1982) 1 1 5 - 131.

6

Inscriptions d ' O e n o a n d a , in: B C H 16, 1892, 1.

DIOGENES

OF

2451

OENOANDA

at the beginning o f the top of a group of three tiers o f ashlar blocks which contain Diogenes' Treatise ' O n O l d Age' (CHILTON 54). T h e name Diogenes gave some coherence to the 64 fragments which COUSIN,7

MAURICE

HOI.LF.AUX,

PIF.RRE

PARIS,

and

CHARLES

DIEHL

had

discovered during three visits to the site in 1884, 1885, and 1889. During their first visit to the site of ancient O e n o a n d a in D e c e m b e r in 1884 HOLLEAUX and PARIS had discovered five fragments o f s o m e important document. T h e y could not be more precise. 8 O n e of the fragments of this document preserved the beginning of a letter from s o m e o n e whose n a m e ended in HZ to s o m e o n e whose n a m e began with ANTI, written from R h o d e s at the beginning of winter (CHILTON 15). Another fragment (CHILTON 50) proved to contain the last will and testament of our Diogenes, but COUSIN'S transcription o f its first line disguised the n a m e AIOrENHX. T h i s i m p o r t a n t d o c u m e n t was written when its a u t h o r was so weak that he felt at death's door. Still another fragment of this inscription preserved a criticism of D e m o c r i t u s ' theory o f knowledge (CHILTON 6). And m o r e surprising still in the c o n t e x t o f the civic inscriptions of O e n o a n d a was the complete block preserving in four inscribed columns part o f an a c c o u n t o f the development o f h u m a n civilization (CHILTON 28). T h e i m p o r t a n t document the French discovered o r began t o discover in 1884 proved to be a n u m b e r o f documents collected and displayed on a stoa wall as an advertisement o f the gospel o f Epicurus. Its a u t h o r was evidently s o o n forgotten, as was O e n o a n d a itself. And even in m o r e recent times the n a m e Diogenes o f O e n o a n d a does n o t find a place a m o n g the 54 namesakes listed in P A U L Y - WISSOWA.9 Another Diogenes with an interest in Epicureanism lists four Diogenes in his treatment o f Diogenes o f Sinope; t w o o f these were philosophers, but Diogenes Laertius had clearly never heard either o f o u r D i o g e n e s or o f O e n o a n d a . 1 0 Diogenes of O e n o a n d a would have remained buried or, what is worse, e x p o s e d in the ruins o f O e n o a n d a still longer were it n o t for the discoveries o f the F r e n c h and their publication by COUSIN in 1892.11 And even then his

7

Published by COUSIN in B C H 16, 1892, 1 - 7 0 . T h e work of the French School at the site of Oenoanda is now described by MARTIN FERGUSON SMITH, Diogenes of Oenoanda and l'École Française d'Athènes, in: B C H 101 (1977) 353 - 381. SMITH has been able to study COUSIN'S notebook from 1889 and his inquiries have led to the discovery of COUSIN'S squeezes for exactly half (44) of the inscriptions published in 1897 by HEBERDEY and KALINKA (an inventory of these is given on p. 372).

8

«Au mois de décembre 1884, M. M. Holleaux et Paris, découvrirent à Oenoanda, au pied d'un grand mur, plusieurs inscriptions qui parurent dès l'abord n'être que des morceaux isolés d'un document important», COUSIN, B C H 1 6 ( 1 8 9 2 ) 1.

9

R E VI 1 (1903). Diogenes of Oenoanda figures as no 47 a in PHILIPPSON'S important contribution to R E Supplementband V (1931) cols. 1 5 3 - 1 7 0 . VI 81 - a passage COUSIN consulted, but which did not give him the answer to his question «Quel est ce Diogenes?», B C H 1 6 ( 1 8 9 2 ) 6 5 . In my Epilogue ( 1 9 8 0 ) (below, p. 2551) I report on the most recent attempt t o answer this question, ALAN HALL, W h o was Diogenes of Oenoanda?, in: J H S 99 (1979) 1 6 0 - 1 6 3 . See note 7 above.

10

11

2452

DISKIN

CLAY

great inscribed wall with its proclamation of the good to be gotten from the philosophy of Epicurus would have attracted little attention if others interested in Epicureanism had come to the same conclusion about Diogenes as COUSIN: «Ce ne fut donc qu'une gloire locale, et à le lire, on doit reconnaître qu'il ne mérite pas davantage.»11 The value if not the merit of this local celebrity (if he was that) was seen immediately by H E R M A N N U S E N E R who had published his 'Epicúrea' in 1 8 8 7 . USENER introduced his treatment of the new Epicurean writings made available by COUSIN with the very natural expression of astonishment before so unlikely a discovery in so unlikely a place; and he concluded his edition of the 64 fragments COUSIN had published earlier that same year with a recognition of the difficulties of working from obviously imperfect transcriptions of Diogenes' inscription and an appeal for a new attempt to add to and to improve the text of the newly discovered Diogenes of Oenoanda. 1 3 U S E N E R ' S appeal did not fall on deaf ears. It prompted the two Austrian epigraphers, R U D O L F H E B E R D E Y and ERNST KALINKA, to turn their attention to the remote and deserted mountain city above the small village of Inçealiler. There in June of 1895 they discoverd 16 new inscribed blocks from the wall of Diogenes' stoa and 8 fragments. They also made new and usually highly accurate transcriptions of the inscriptions discovered by the French and drawn by COUSIN. And once they had published the 8 8 fragments of Diogenes of Oenoanda, 1 4 their transcriptions became, in the words of C . W. CHILTON, "at once the archetype and editio princeps" of the new inscription. 15 CHILTON'S language speaks for the attitude of Diogenes' three editors from WILLIAM'S Teubner Diogenes to his own 'Diogenis Oenoandensis Fragmenta'; but it did not speak for the attitude of M A R T I N FERGUSON SMITH who will be Diogenes' fifth editor in this century and the only editor who intimately knows the stones from which our printed texts derive. 16 Meanwhile, what WILLIAM had called "that fertile soil of Lycia" lay fallow. Indeed, WILLIAM could only describe it as he did because he had not been there. Oenoanda is more a sea of rock. From the time the Austrians left the site in 1895 the fragments from Diogenes' stoa dispersed and lost in the collapse of Oenoanda were exposed only to snow, rain, extremes of temperaCOUSIN, (1892) 66. » Epikureische Schriften auf Stein, in: R h M 47 (1892) 4 1 4 - 4 5 6 . 14 Die Philosophische Inschrift v o n O e n o a n d a , in: B C H 21 (1897) 3 4 6 - 4 4 3 . T h e o n l y editor of this century in a position t o c o m p a r e these drawings with their originals is SMITH, w h o s e collection of squeezes, photographs, and n o t e b o o k s will soon provide the materials for a n e w edition of D i o g e n e s of O e n o a n d a — the fifth in this century. (For this f o r t h c o m i n g edition, see m y Epilogue (1988) [below, p. 2554]). 15 D i o g e n e s of O e n o a n d a : T h e Fragments, O x f o r d 1971, xxxiv. 16 J . WILLIAM, D i o g e n i s O e n o a n d e n s i s Fragmenta, Leipzig 1907; A. GRILLI, D i o g e n i s O e n o a n d e n s i s Fragmenta, M i l a n 1970; C. W. CHILTON, D i o g e n i s O e n o a n d e n s i s Fragmenta, Leipzig 1967. ANGELO CASANOVA, I Frammenti di D i o g e n e d'Enoanda, Florence 1984, is the fourth editor of D i o g e n e s in this century; I report of his edition briefly in my Epilogue (1988), b e l o w , p. 2553. 12

DIOGENES OF OENOANDA

2453

ture, and the feet of g o a t s and the occasional h u m a n predator. What is baffling a b o u t Diogenes' editors in the first six decades of this century is their shared a s s u m p t i o n that the transcriptions of HEBERDEY and KALINKA can be treated as the copy of a p a p y r u s role and not first and foremost as parts of a stoa wall and epigraphical documents, with their claim to the attention any epigrapher would give a new inscription. T h e a u t o g r a p h Diogenes handed his m a s o n s has not survived, but the inscribed wall or walls of his stoa is a direct, if not perfect, copy of what he wrote. 1 7 In time, in the s u m m e r of 1968, one scholar returned to O e n o a n d a to study the remains of Diogenes' inscription. MARTIN FERGUSON SMITH w a s not the first to return to a site the Austrians had left in 1895 to study at first hand what remains of Diogenes in O e n o a n d a . GEORGE BEAN got to In^ealiler in 1952 and recorded s o m e inscriptions from the village, but none f r o m the m o u n t a i n a b o v e it. 1 8 C . W. CHILTON followed him in 1962. H e measured the ' p a v e d a r e a ' (or agora) which he took (as had HEBERDEY and KALINKA) to be the site of D i o g e n e s ' stoa and located a few of the k n o w n fragments. H e c a m e a w a y with the conviction that there w a s m o r e of Diogenes to be discovered in O e n o a n d a , " a l m o s t certainly more than h a l f " . 1 9 Only a few years later CHILTON'S estimate w a s proved right. In the s u m m e r of 1975 N e w Fragment 88 w a s discovered. In the s u m m e r of 1969 SMITH discovered four new fragments of D i o g e n e s and after several successive visits to the site of O e n o a n d a SMITH has n o w published a total of 124 new f r a g m e n t s . 2 0 COUSIN'S publications of the new Diogenes h a d the effect both of engaging experts in ancient philosophy of the stature of USENER and TH. GOMPERZ 21 and o f p r o m p t i n g a fresh investigation of the site of O e n o a n d a only six years after COUSIN left it in December of 1889. SMITH'S visit to O e n o a n d a in July of 1968 and the discoveries he m a d e between 1969 and 1973 of 38 new f r a g m e n t s of D i o g e n e s ' inscription bearing m o r e than 1,200 w o r d s of text have h a d the effect of reawakening interest in Diogenes a n d they have p r o m p t e d the 17

C f . J . IRIGOIN in his r e v i e w of CHILTON'S edition in E r a s m u s 2 2 , 4 (1970) 1 7 3 - 1 7 6 . A s

for the drawings of HEBERDEY and KALINKA being in some sense our 'archetype' for Diogenes, by an exact definition of this term (e.g. that of PAUL MAAS in his 'Textual Criticism', trans. B. FLOWER, Oxford 1958, 2 — 3) they cannot be described as such since they do not need to be reconstructed from any 'split' in the tradition. The split comes b e t w e e n t h e c o p i e s o f COUSIN a n d t h o s e o f HEBERDEY a n d KALINKA.

18

19

Annual of the British School in Athens 51 (1956) 142 - 1 4 3 , BEAN returned to Incealiler and Oenoanda in 1967 and reported on some of its civic inscriptions, Journeys in Northern Lycia 1965-1967, Denkschriften der österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Philosophisch-Historische Klasse, 104, Vienna 1971 (Ergänzungsbände zu den 'Tituli Asiae Minoris', No. 4). CHILTON briefly describes this visit in the Postscript to his 'The Inscription of Diogenes o f O e n o a n d a ' , in: A J A 6 7 (1963) 286 a n d in h i s t r a n s l a t i o n a n d c o m m e n t a r y , CHILTON,

20

21

(1971) xxxiii — xxxiv. SMITH'S publications of the new fragments discovered between 1969 and 1983 are listed in the Bibliography to this article. GOMPERZ gave a brief account of the new discoveries in the 'Anzeiger der Akademie der Wissenschaften in Wien', Philosophisch-Historische Klasse 16 (1892) 5 3 - 5 7 .

2454

DISKIN

CLAY

first attempt to place Diogenes and his inscription in their proper context. In July of 1974, under a permit granted by the Turkish authorities, SMITH returned to Oenoanda with a mission from the British Institute of Archaeology at Ankara directed by ALAN S. HALL formed to conduct a topographical survey of the main acropolis area of O e n o a n d a . T h e Oenoanda Survey was also undertaken in order to record the position of all Diogenes fragments, new and old, above ground level; its final object was to collect the Diogenes fragments in a place where they could be both displayed and protected. T h e work of the Oenoanda Survey continued in 1975 and, after a year of interruption, in 1977. And it has been pursued, for brief periods, in 1981 and 1983. It is not clear if it will be continued by the British Institute of Archaeology at Ankara or if the long term aims of the O e n o a n d a Survey can be realized in this century. But the accomplishments of the O e n o a n d a Survey and the group of epigraphers, surveyors, and architectural historians who have worked on top of the mountain which protected the ancient city of Oenoanda are considerable. T w o of the objectives of the project have been accomplished in the publication of a series of survey maps and a series of studies of the buildings of O e n o a n d a . For the purposes of the student of the philosophical inscription of Diogenes o f O e n o a n d a , t w o maps are of great importance. T h e first (Figure 1) plots the vast extent of the buildings of Oenoanda and allows for an exact recording of the location o f the Diogenes fragments that have been discovered or rediscovered since 1969. T h e second (Figure 2) displays the distribution of these fragments as of 1977 and points unmistakably to the site of the stoa that housed Diogenes' philosophical inscription. T h e epigraphic survey associated with the O e n o a n d a Survey has produced a vast corpus o f civic inscriptions and brought to light — and often only in favorable sunlight — new inscribed blocks and fragments from Diogenes' stoa. 2 2 In the short season of 1974, 23 new fragments were discovered; in 1975 another 44 came to light. T h e n , in August of 1976, AI.AN HALL discovered

22

SMITH'S first publication of the new fragments of Diogenes discovered in 1 9 7 4 and the first season of the work of the O e n o a n d a Survey c a m e in ' M o r e N e w F r a g m e n t s of Diogenes of Oenoanda',

in: JEAN BOLLACK a n d

ANDRE

LAKS, E t u d e s sur

l'Epicurisme

antique (Cahiers de Philologie I), Lille 1 9 7 6 , 2 7 9 - 3 1 8 (where he published N F F 3 9 5 1 ) . ALAN HALL reported on the w o r k o f the first three years o f the survey in ' T h e O e n o a n d a Survey 1 9 7 4 - 1 9 7 6 ' , in: AS 2 6 ( 1 9 7 6 ) 191 - 197. Since this report, there have appeared studies of the m a j o r buildings o f the city and its a q u e d u c t : ROGER LING, Building M k 1 at O e n o a n d a , in: AS 31 ( 1 9 8 1 ) 31 - 5 3 (with an a p p e n d i x on the inscriptional record for this bath-building by AI.AN HALI.); J . J . COULTON, O i n o a n d a : T h e D o r i c Building, in: AS 3 2 ( 1 9 8 2 ) 4 5 - 5 9 ; ID., T h e Buildings o f O i n o a n d a , in: Proceedings o f the C a m b r i d g e Philological Society NS 2 9 ( 1 9 8 3 ) 1 - 2 0 ; E. C . STENTON and J . J . COULTON, O i n o a n d a : T h e W a t e r Supply and A q u e d u c t , in: AS 3 6 ( 1 9 8 6 ) 1 5 - 5 9 ; and J . J . COULTON, O i n o a n d a : T h e A g o r a , in: AS 3 6 ( 1 9 8 6 ) 61 - 9 0 . Both LING, (1981) 41 and COULTON, ( 1 9 8 2 ) , c o n f i r m my hypothesis (p. 2 4 6 2 , n. 41 below) that the site o f Diogenes' stoa w a s not in the a g o r a of O e n o a n d a but along the late R o m a n defensive wall (Area M l o f the O e n o a n d a Survey) t o the south o f the Esplanade.

K

L

M

P

Fig. 1. Plan of main buildings of Oenoanda (The Oenoanda Survey)

200m

THEATRE

1430

I400

AGORA

£

11-20 fragments

0

6-10 fragments

•

3-5 fragments

/ • •

Fig. 2. Diogenes fragment distribution (1975) (The O e n o a n d a Survey)

2 fragments 1 fragment

D I O G E N E S OF

OENOANDA

2455

still another Diogenes fragment (NF 94) in his search for the civic inscriptions of Oenoanda. In 1977, 10 Diogenes fragments were discovered; seven of these were new, but three ( C H I L T O N 11, 4 3 , and 6 2 ) were fragments H E B E R D E Y and K A L I N K A had discovered in the rubble south of the South Stoa. In 1 9 8 1 , the last year of the search for the fragments of Diogenes' philosophical inscription on the site of Oenoanda, SMITH discovered three new fragments. In 1983, quite by chance, C O U L T O N and H A L L found three new fragments of Diogenes' inscription built into a fountain house (çesme) and new storage-building in the small village of Zorban Kôy, a place no one would have thought to look for Diogenes. (For more on these discoveries at Zorban Kôy, see my Epilogue o f 1988.)

These new discoveries, which come close to exhausting what remains to be discovered on the surface of the site of ancient Oenoanda, bring the grand total of Diogenes fragments discovered between 1969 - 1 9 8 3 to 124 and the total of the blocks and fragments from Diogenes' inscription to 212. It is now clear that the project of assembling, protecting, and displaying these discoveries is more remote than it seemed in 1974. And a full-scale excavation of the remains of Oenoanda - the undertaking that would put Diogenes' stoa into its context in the history of the city — is even more remote. An excavation of Oenoanda would produce, inevitably, a great new harvest of Diogenes fragments and it would answer many of the questions concerning Diogenes' stoa and philosophical inscription that can now have no definite answer. It would have a result that is equally important: it would return Diogenes and his benefaction to his city to its immediate context in the history of Oenoanda, whose history, architectural development, civic life, and prosopography are only now beginning to be seen as a whole. 2 3 This Oenoanda is of great interest. Despite the unsettling new finds at Z o r b a n Kôy, it is still secure that its remoteness has preserved it from almost every threat except the threat of earth-quake and the occasional marauding illegal excavation of its sarcophagi. This city is significant enough not to stand, as did Diogenes' reader, in the shadow of Diogenes' stoa. But if Diogenes had never conceived of making his Epicurean gospel public on the wall of his stoa, Oenoanda would still be standing in its lofty and magnificent isolation.

23

W i t n e s s t h e i n s c r i p t i o n s r e c o r d e d b y G E O R G E BEAN, ( 1 9 7 1 ) 18 — 2 2 , a n d t h e d i s c u s s i o n

BEAN'S fresh publication of a Clarian oracle inscribed on a boss worked in the form of an altar above a doorway in the Southern Wall has provoked, Louis ROBERT, Un oracle g r a v é à O i n o a n d a , in: C R A I ( 1 9 7 1 ) 5 9 7 - 6 1 9 , a n d MARGHERITA GUARDUCCI, C h i è D i o ? ,

Rendiconti dell'Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, Classe di Scienze morali, storiche, e filologiche, Serie VIII (27) 1972, 3 3 5 - 3 4 7 . The four inscriptions from the Letoon at O e n o a n d a p u b l i s h e d b y ALAN H A L L in: A S 2 7 ( 1 9 7 7 ) 1 9 3 - 1 9 7 a r e i m p o r t a n t f o r a n

understanding of the cults of Oenoanda and one of them, no. 2, might prove to be the earliest inscription from Oenoanda. (HALL gives it a date " n o later than the early second century B. C."). The theater which SPRATT and FORBES could not discover at first has been included in the survey of DARIA DE BARNARDI FERRERO, Teatri classici in Asia Minore, II, Città di Pisidia, Licia e Caria, R o m e 1969, 8 9 - 6 5 .

2456

DISKIN CLAY

II. Diogenes'

Stoa

1. Diogenes and his inscription T h e r e is no better introduction to Diogenes o f O e n o a n d a than D i o g e n e s ' own a c c o u n t o f his inscription. T h i s account stood in the middle o f the inscribed wall, above the 'Ethics Treatise' and below the treatise ' O l d Age Treatise'. T h e visitor to Diogenes' stoa would have encountered it first, then continued down along the stoa wall following the same course, and then moved b a c k and down to the first inscribed course which carried D i o g e n e s ' treatment of ethics (in Greek [Flepi] rcaGmv Kai [npa^ecov]), and the other d o c u m e n t s displayed on this register; he would then have returned to his starting place to look up to D i o g e n e s ' ' O l d Age Treatise'. D i o g e n e s ' Introduction to his inscription survives in three b l o c k s (HK. 5 9 , 57/58 = C H I L T O N 1 and 2). At least one block is missing before C H I L T O N fr. 1 and at least another is missing after fr. 2. But thanks to D i o g e n e s ' habit o f repeating himself, 2 4 we can recover something o f what has been lost from the beginning o f D i o g e n e s ' introduction t o his huge inscription as a whole. H e was moved to produce his inscription by his h u m a n e reaction to the spiritual state of the majority o f his fellow men whose contagious sufferings he c o m p a r e s to a plague (KctGarcep ev A.oinqj, C H I L T O N 2 IV 5). T h i s infectious malaise derived, as Diogenes saw it, from the mastery the soul exerts over the body. Fr. 1 begins with Diogenes' version o f the complaints o f the body against the soul. ( T h e language set o f f in square brackets is a c o n j e c t u r a l restoration of the gaps in the inscription.) 1. I " [ I am writing this inscription because I see that m o s t men follow the empty desires or opinions o f the soul and do not hear the c o m p l a i n t s of the body] against the soul which are [abusive] 2 5 and just, t h a t the body is wrongly abused by the soul and oppressed and dragged t o things which are not necessary to it. F o r the things the body seeks are small and easily obtained, and the soul can enjoy these in c o m m o n with the body and live well. II T h e objects the soul strives for are great and difficult to obtain as well quite in addition to their being o f no benefit to [a man's] real nature [TT)V (puoiv] and to their entailing dangers. N o w , as I saw these men in this state — for I return to where I left o f f — I was filled with grief for the kind o f life they were leading and I wept t o o over the loss brought on

24

25

TOÙTOIX; oùv ópwv (itóXtv yàp èrtavaXfmvonai) Siaiceinévoui; outcot;, CHILTON 1 II 4 - 7 ; and ènei 5é, ùnev, II 6 - I I . As documented by BERNARD FRISCHER, T h e Sculpted Word. Epicureanism and Philosophical Recruitment in Ancient Greece, Berkeley, Los Angeles, and London 1982, 87 — 96. H e cites N F 12 5 - 9 as evidence for the sympathy that obtains between the viewer and the object of his vision (p. 82). In N F 115 he has a strong confirmation of his reading of the Epicurean conception of the sympathetic response to the objects of perception; for the response to the images of the gods, cf. Lucretius V 68 — 7 8 . I attempt to characterize the Epicurean attitude towards participating in the public cults of the Greek states in ' T h e Cults of Epicurus', in: CErc 16 (1986) 15. SMITH, X (1984) 4 4 - 4 9 .

DIOGENES OF

OENOANDA

2497

letters. It concerns the art of dream interpretation. SMITH, I think is right in associating NF 122 with NF 19 and Diogenes' discussion of the ambiguities of oracles. 145 ^ T h e alternative is to connect NF 122 with the Epicurean interpretation of dreams to be found in both the 'Physics' (CHILTON 7, NF 1, NFF 5 - 6 ) and 'Ethics (NFF 13/12) Treatises'. Diogenes is clearly concerned with the ambiguity of oracles in NF 19 and the ambiguity of dreams in NF 122. The case against oneiromancy Diogenes is urging in NF 122 preserves a well-known anecdote retailed in a fuller form by Cicero in 'De Divinatione' II 70. 144. It goes back to Antiphon the Sophist's 'On the Interpretation of Dreams', but Diogenes' source for it might have been Chrysippus' 'On Dreams'. In Cicero the anecdote about Antiphon and the runner who dreamed that he was an eagle in pursuit of other birds is cited with two other cases where the 'natural' interpretation of the 'coniector or 'interpres, is contradicted by a clever reading of the dream. The first instance he gives is the dream of a runner who saw himself in a four-horse chariot; the second is the dream of a runner who was about to compete in the Olympic games and saw himself as an eagle in the pursuit of other birds; and the third is of a married women who thought she might be pregnant and dreamed that her womb had been sealed. 143h In all three cases, the dreamer consults an interpreter of dreams and in all three cases the second reading of the dream illustrates not the workings of divine providence but the ingenuity of the interpretor (interpretum ... ingettia). In the first two cases the interpretation of the dream interpretor is pitted against the ingenuity of Antiphon who saw that the athlete, either drawn by four horses or seen as an eagle in pursuit of other birds, will not come in first in his race. It could be that letters v tcai [itpa^ECAV' (CHILTON 23). 1 4 6 P H I L I P P S O N ' S restoration of picov is not far off the m a r k , but it is virtually ruled out by a p a s s a g e from the end of Diogenes' introduction to the 'Ethics' (CHILTON 28) where he announces that he will discuss activities (jipa^eiq) once he has discussed emotional states and feelings — Katacrt rinata. 1 4 7 T h i s p a s s a g e provides a grid for the interpretation of the 'Ethics Treatise'. It c o m e s at the end of Diogenes' protreptic (and as far as the Stoics are concerned, apotropaic) introduction at a point where he is weighing the results of his controversy with the Stoics over the relation between pleasure and the virtues. T o introduce his positive Epicurean argument on pleasure, he p r o m i s e s to show how human life becomes pleasurable. In contrast to the Stoics and their mindless devotion to virtue, Diogenes sets out the goal of the Epicurean: 1 4 8 " B u t w h a t we [are seeking] now is an answer to the question: H o w can our life give us pleasure both in our dispositions a n d feelings and in our actions. And let us speak first of emotional states, keeping well in mind the doctrine that, once the passions that i m p e d e the soul are removed, the things that produce pleasure enter in their stead.

145

146

147

148

Epicurus' language in KA III and Diogenes' response to it in CHILTON 28 VI 9 —13 is quoted below on page 2535 (and in note 148 below). The definite article in line 2 of CHILTON 23 seems out of place; both WILLIAM and GRILLI ignore the help to be gotten from the inscription itself and supply itepi xéXouq] naOcòv in lines 2 — 3. PHILIPPSON, (1931) col. 161. In itself, his restoration has nothing implausible; Diogenes Laertius reports a work of Epicurus in four volumes 'Ilepi Pitov' (X 28) and describes the 'Letter to Menoeceus' as treating xà rapì picov (X 29). f|n[6ìi; ¡¡r|TO]0nev f|8r| nwq ó pioi; f|neìv f|8ùi; yévrixai Kaì èv xoù; KaxaaxT|uacn Kai èv xaù; Ttpà^eaiv. jtepì 8è icòv icaxaaxTinàxcov jipóoxov eÌ7tco|iev, èiceìvo xtipoùvxeq xò 8T) oxi xà>v òxXouvxcov TTIV *|/uxiìv jtaGcòv fme^aipeQévxwv xà fl8ovxa aòxì|v àvxutapépxexai. xà oòv òx^-oùvxa xiva [èax]iv; xr|, a b o v e in this s a m e v o l u m e ( A N R W II 36.4) p p . 2424 - 2443.

DIOGENES

OF

OENOANDA

2509

three fragments representing Diogenes' discussion of desire and possibly three more representing his discussion of action. Before there had been none. The new fragments disrupt the order of the 'Ethics Treatise' as this was presented in editions of Diogenes before SMITH'S discoveries in Oenoanda. But since they force a reexamination of the plan of Diogenes 'Epitome on Emotional States and Actions' and recall attention to the guidance Diogenes' editor has in the programmatic statement in CHILTON fragment 2 8 , they can now be seen to attract the fragments discovered in the X I X century into a new order. Here, at the conclusion of my report on the new fragments from the 'Ethics Treatise', is an armature of that order; just what the precise syntax of the fragments, both new and old, is under the main headings of Diogenes' discussion first of emotional states and then of actions remains a problem for the editor of the new Diogenis Oenoandensis Fragmenta. d) A skeletal arrangement of the fragments of the 'Ethics Treatise' The Title Block:

CHILTON 2 3

Diogenes' introduction: the discussion of fear)

CHILTON

24, 25, 26 + NF 42, 28, 29 (introductory to

The discussion of emotional states: 1. Fear of the gods: CHILTON 3 0 , 3 1 , NFF 1 3 / 1 2 2. Fear of death: CHILTON 33, NF 2 / C H I L T O N 34, 35, 37, NFF 61, 62 3. Fear of pain: i. caused by want: CHILTON 36, NF 14 ii. caused by external trauma: NFF 17, 44, 63, 64 4. The limit of pleasure and desires: COUSIN 23, followed after one block b y CHILTON 2 7 , CHILTON 3 8 , N F

The discussion of actions:

CHILTON

20

32, N F 21, NF 34 (?)

3. Diogenes' private writings and epistolary a) The 'Scripta Privata' One of the many ways in which Diogenes resembles and indeed imitates Epicurus is his correspondence with his friends. Not only did he display Epicurus' 'Letter to Mother' on one of the uppermost registers of the wall of his stoa (cf. Figure 7), he took equal care to preserve and display his own correspondence in which he addresses an individual or a smaller group than the addressees of his three major treatises. In the X I X century only two of Diogenes' letters had been recovered from the ruin of his stoa. One of these, the first discovered, is to an otherwise unknown Antipater on the question of the infinity of the universe (CHILTON, fragments 15 - 22). This letter, addressed to Antipater, contains a discourse within a discourse, for Diogenes has recorded 164'

2510

DISKIN

CLAY

the conversation (8iaA.e^iv, CHILTON 16 II 14) he had with one Theodoridas of Lindos just before Antipater's letter had reached him in Rhodes at the beginning of winter. This letter, written in columns of 14 lines, with ample margins top and bottom, paragraphai and even an asteriskos (at HK 38 II 10), occupied the same level of the stoa wall as the 'Ethics Treatise', and the diacritical marks that articulate its text have the same function as those of the 'Ethics Treatise'. Diogenes' other known letter came from one of the upper inscribed registers. Its height is that of a C block from the 'Old Age Treatise', but unlike the C blocks of the 'Old Age Treatise' it has no scored margin (cf. Figure 6b). It is addressed to a certain Menneas (CHILTON 51 II 4 - 5), mentions a Karos and Dionysios and a certain woman in Rhodes to whom Diogenes was introduced during his stay there, and it has been taken to refer to Diogenes' stoa. Then there was CHILTON 49 ( H K 3 ) , a block ( H 3 8 . 5 cm.) that would have been on the level of he B course of the 'Old Age Treatise'; the height of its letters is 2 . 5 cm. and SMITH has discovered that it contained 1 0 lines to a column. In this document, Diogenes speaks of the philanthropy of (helping?) the foreigners who visit Oenoanda and his precise understanding of the benefit of a knowledge of the matters — both physical and ethical - he has displayed "in the sections below" (7 — 8, ¿v tavi; | ujtoKaxoj x®pav.T)pCOTai.

Here we have a source, if not the source, for Diogenes' IT^.F|pcona (CHILTON 2 III l ) . 2 5 8 And Diogenes' imitation o f the language of Metrodorus on old age and death poses another delicate problem for the historian of the transmission o f Epicurean philosophy: Did Diogenes k n o w M e t r o d o r u s directly? or did he know him through the mediation o f Epicurus' ' M e t r o d o r u s ' ? I have no answer to this question and can only point to the mutual emulation a m o n g the first Epicureans which makes the problem more interesting than its solution. A simpler instance o f Diogenes' imitation o f Epicurus comes later in his introduction when he speaks of his desire to ' c o m e to the aid' o f the people who were visitors to O e n o a n d a and c a m e to read his inscription. His word is ¿rciKoupeiv (CHILTON 2 V 7); it suggests that he intended to help the visitors to his stoa who were capable o f being helped just as Epicurus had c o m e to the aid o f the larger world. We have a better glimpse of Diogenes Epikouros in his 'Letter to Antipater' where we get our best view o f the kind o f community in which Diogenes lived and its relation with other Epicurean communities in mainland Greece. We can also see Diogenes in the role he was pleased to assume in this Epicurean world. H e writes to Antipater in Athens in much the same manner as Epicurus wrote to the young Pythocles. T h e subject of the t w o letters is different, but, as SMITH has seen in his publication of N F 107, the attitudes are much the s a m e . 1 5 9 Epicurus opened his letter to Pythocles with word that Kleon has brought him a letter from Pythocles — a letter in which Pythocles had shown himself worthy o f the philosopher's concern for him and requested a brief account o f Epicurus' arguments concerning tct netscopa (ad Pyth. 8 4 - 8 5 ) . Diogenes opens his 'Letter to Antipater' by noting the many signs Antipater had given o f his serious application to philosophy ( C H I L T O N 1 5 1 3 - 1 4 ) . ([SnouSfiq] is WILLIAM'S restoration; it seems guaranteed by the 'Letter to Pythocles'.) H e says that he has sent Antipater the explanation he had requested on the problem o f the infinity of worlds; what follows is a record 258

At CHILTON 2 II 1 2 - I I I 1 I w o u l d r e s t o r e [nsxci KaXoju naiav[oV [fjSeJtov TtXr} pronator a n d t a k e into a c c o u n t b o t h t h e l a n g u a g e o f M e t r o d o r u s , fr. 5 1 KOERTE a n d the vestigial letters r e c o r d e d for c o l . II 14 in H K 5 8 . SMITH, V I I I ( 1 9 7 9 ) 7 2 - 7 3 . C f . my brief n o t e o n the p a r a l l e l s , in: G R B S 14 ( 1 9 7 3 ) 5 8 .

DIOGENES

OF

OENOANDA

2531

of the dialogue Diogenes had had with their 'companion' Theodoridas of Lindos. And just as Epicurus had hoped that his response to Pythocles would be helpful to Pythocles and to many others, "especially those who are getting a taste of genuine physiology" (ad Pyth. 85), so Diogenes speaks of his eagerness to meet Antipater and the others who were their friends in Athens, Chalkis, and Thebes. He does not speak explicitly of the letter as meant for these communities as well, but as S M I T H observed, the very fact of his having had it inscribed on the wall of his stoa means that it was destined for a larger group. T h i s attitude of mutual concern and Diogenes' air of one who had come to assume a position of authority in the large world of Epicurean communities are the replicas of Epicurus' generous, exuberant, and serious responses to the people his teaching attracted. 2 6 0 T h i s personal concern is reflected in Epicurus' epistolary, or 'npcrynaTeiai' as it is known in Philodemus' work of that title, 2 6 1 and in Diogenes' decision to preserve some of his own letters, as well as at least three of Epicurus', by having them inscribed on the wall (or walls) of his stoa. Indeed, the desire to make what was significant in the transactions of their private life public is one o f the closest bonds between Diogenes and Epicurus. T h e peculiar fact that Epicurus' letters were later known and cited by Athenian archon years must mean that Epicurus deposited his correspondence in the M e t r o o n or State Records Office of Athens. 2 6 2 Diogenes adopted a very different method to preserve and set on public record some of his own correspondence as well as Epicurus' 'Letter to M o t h e r ' and the letters preserved in N F F 7, 3, 24, and 110. Plutarch, who knew Epicurus' letters but does not cite them by their dates, was struck by the conflict between the m a x i m 'AaGe Picbaacf - Live so your life will be forgotten - and Epicurus' concern to make himself and his teaching known to all and sundry. He turns his own precept against him and urges him not to send his books to the whole world, or make a display

260

261

262

Reflections of this attitude from Oenoanda come from the two courses which Diogenes reserved for a display of his own epistolary as well as his selection of the letters of Epicurus; cf. Section V 2 below, p. 2541 and the Epilogue (1980) to this report, below, p. 2550. For which, cf. W. LIEBICH, Aufbau, Absicht und Form der Pragmateiai Philodems, BerlinSteglitz 1960, especially 8 1 - 8 7 . Some 23 of the letters in ARRIGHETTI'S collection of the fragments of Epicurus' letters are dated by archon years (the dates are disgested in Us. pp. 1 3 2 - 1 3 4 ) , a peculiarity which I think must be explained by the hypothesis that Epicurus desposted his private letters, as well as the 37 individual books of his 'On Nature' and finally his last will and testament, in the Metroon where they were filed by archon years and later copied by interested Epicureans. These letters, with their dates, confirm the hypothesis advanced first by BOECKH and then by CARL CURTIUS that the state registry of Athens stored the material deposited there by archon years: Das Metroon in Athen als Staaatsarchiv, Berlin 1868, 23 — 24. (I pursue this argument in my 'Epicurus in the Archives of Athens', in: Hesperia Supplement X I X (Studies in Attic Epigraphy, History and Topography presented to Eugene Vanderpool), Princeton, New Jersey 1982, 17 - 26.

2532

DISKIN

CLAY

of his wisdom, or make arrangements for burial. 2 6 3 Diogenes was no more concerned with the precept 'AáGe Picbcrac;' than was Epicurus. He records his last will and testament on the wall of his stoa (CHILTON 50). We have only the first column from this document, but it is clearly directed both to Diogenes' family and friends. If this last word has its normal associations, Diogenes' 'friends' are his fellow Epicureans. Diogenes' desire to preserve and display his last will and testament in his stoa is the distant but direct result of Epicurus' concern to deposit his last will and testament in the State Records Office of Athens (DL X 16). Thus, Diogenes' paradosis is a part of Epicurean paradosis. Diogenes also seems to have been concerned, as was Epicurus late in life, to make his philosophy permanent by making it memorable. His garrulity gets in the way of this, but he meant his 'Ethics Treatise' as an 'epitome' and, now that the maxims can be attributed to Diogenes with some confidence, they can be seen as Diogenes' counterpart to the 'Kúpiai Aó^ai' of Epicurus. Unlike Epicurus' 'Master Sayings', which they sometimes reflect, these maxims treat of physical as well as ethical questions. Their generous display and unusual brevity are indications that Diogenes was concerned, as was his master, that his philosophy should survive him in the memory of those who stopped to enjoy the shelter or shade his stoa provided.

2. Quotation from Epicurus a) The 'Kupuzi Ao^ai' Diogenes' quotations from Epicurus confirm the Epicurean character of what C O U S I N had initially identified as «MH document important». The relationship between Diogenes' own presentation of Epicurean philosophy and the philosophy of Epicurus is manifest is the nearly unbroken frieze of Epicurus' ethical maxims which defined the lowest inscribed register of the long wall of Diogenes' stoa (cf. Figure 7) and, in a manner which has only recently been appreciated, underwrote Diogenes' 'Ethics Treatise'. In 1892 COUSIN recognized that Diogenes had incorporated two important writings of Epicurus into his inscription. T h e first of these were familiar; they were ten of Epicurus' 'Kupiai Ao^ai' displayed in a line of large letters (about 3.5 cm. in height) running under the successive columns of the 'Ethics Treatise'. There were another three maxims preserved on this line which are unlike the 'Master Sayings' in Diogenes Laertius ( X 139 - 154) and, indeed, not identifiable with any sayings of Epicurus previously known. T h e second document was a previously unknown letter from Epicurus to his mother. C O U S I N suggested

261

nt|8è 6iÓ7ten7ie pí|3Xou6JIEVO£, C H I L T O N 2 1 4 — 5 ) — which does not mean that he could never have held the high office of Lyciarch. An alternative to Flavianus Diogenes comes in another Diogenes and two inscriptions from the reign of Septimius Severus (193 — 211 A. D.) whose literary career just might have been remembered in a small four line codicile to a statue base. T h e main inscription has already been published, 3 2 5 but H A L L now publishes the codicile for the first time. T h e reason for 320

321

322

323 324

325

"Advanced" seems to be the meaning of s^coBe in the phrase 8ia ... x6 ¿jiov e^0)6e yfjpa.6yoi are summarized by Photius (Biblotheca c. 212, 169 b, 18 ff.). From this summary it is clear that Aenesidemus was an Academic whose decision to revive Pyrrhonism was a result of a strong, negative reaction to what he saw as a weakening in the Academy's skepticism; his fellow Academics, he claimed, had become little more than Stoics fighting Stoics, differing only over the Stoic criterion of truth, the Kaiakr|jmKT| cpavTaaia (170al4 - 1 7 ) . This objection sounds very much like the complaints leveled against Antiochus inside the Academy (PH I 235; Cicero Ac. pr. 69, 132). And earlier scholars assumed that Antiochus was the object of Aenesidemus' reproach. 1 1 But it has since been realized that this cannot be right: Antiochus was more rather than less firmly wedded to Stoic views on the criterion of truth and related epistemological matters than to Stoic views on other topics. Rather, it appears that it was the direction in Academic thought identified with Philo against which Aenesidemus reacted so strongly. The weakening of the Academy's skepticism came in two steps. In agreement with Metrodorus, a student of Carneades', Philo held that the wise man will have opinions, i. e., assent to impressions which are non-cognitive and therefore do not afford the perfectly secure grasp of their objects which the Stoics had made a precondition for the wise man's assent (Cicero Ac. pr. 78; cf. 59). 1 2 This seemed to represent a break with, and to those attached to it, a falling away from, the Academic tradition reaching back to Arcesilaus, whose arguments concluded that the wise man would suspend judgement on all matters because of the non-existence of the cognitive impression (M VII 155 - 6; Cicero Ac. pr. 59). Philo took this step because he had come to believe that human beings have the means to arrive at views which are probable 1(1

11

12

On the ancient term 'skeptic' see GISELA STRIKER, Skeptical Strategies, in: Doubt and Dogmatism, ed. M. SCHOFIELD et al. (Oxford, 1980), p. 54, n. 1. E. ZELLER, Die Philosophic der Griechen in ihrer geschichtlichen Entwicklung III 1, ed. 5 (Leipzig, 1923), p. 632, n. 1, followed by H. VON ARNIM, S. V. Ainesidemos Nr. 9, R. E., I 1 (1894), col. 1023. On the Stoic criterion of truth, see M. FREDE, Stoics and Skeptics on Clear and Distinct Impressions, in: The Skeptical Tradition, ed. M . BURNYEAT (Berkeley, 1983), pp. 65 — 93 ( = M. FREDE, Essays in Ancient Philosophy [Oxford, 1987], pp. 151 - 176); F. H. SANDBACH, Kataleptike Phantasia, in: Problems in Stoicism, ed. A. A. LONG (London, 1971), pp. 9 - 2 1 ; G. STRIKER, Kpuf|ptov xfji; &A.r|0eiauA.fj Kai xq> 8f|nq>. And 5oy|ia, in its earliest surviving occurrences, has a political colouring: a 6oy|xa is what 5OK£I to an official o r to an authoritative body; it is a decree o r a resolution. 6 8 T h e w o r d is found in Plato with the same political t o n e , 6 9 and throughout its history it appears frequently in political or semi-political c o n t e x t s . 7 0 I shall return t o this fact later on. Plato was perhaps the first philosopher to use the word 86y|ia. 71 In the maieutic section o f the ' T h e a e t e t u s ' Socrates states that his task will b e t o bring T h e a e t e t u s ' 8oy|iaxa into the light (157 D 2). As the c o n t e x t shows, the

65

66

67

68

69

70

71

The survey is impressionistic: I have not conned every occurrence of 5oy|ia and its cognates in Greek. In addition to the authors mentioned in the text, I have consulted concordances or indexes t o all the major prose-writers from 400 BC to AD 250: the general conclusions I reach in this section would doubtless be refined by further study, but I hardly think that they would be overthrown. For verbal nouns in -JIA see C . D. BUCK and W. PETERSEN, A Reverse Index of Greek Nouns and Adjectives (Chicago, 1944) p. 221: they suggest that the -|ici termination was an intellectual's favourite. See also Pollux, Onom. VII. 80. See D L III. 51 auxo xoivuv x6 8oynaxi£eiv £axi 86ynaxa xiOevai (ac, x6 vonoGexeiv v6nou