“It would be profitable neither to believe in everything nor yet to disbelieve it.”
καὶ γὰρ κέρδος (ἂν) εἴη μήτε πιστεύειν, μήτε ἀπιστεῖν πᾶσιν.
Tag: Philostratus
Philostratus, Discourse II: Nature vs. Nurture
“To me, custom and nature are not merely not opposed but they are most closely related, similar and overlapping one another. For custom is the way we approach nature and nature is our avenue to custom; we do call one the starting point and one the result: let nature be called the leader and culture the follower. For custom never would have built walls or outfitted men against them if nature hadn’t given man hands.”
ἐμοὶ δὲ νόμος καὶ φύσις οὐ μόνον οὐκ ἐναντίω φαίνεσθον, ἀλλὰ καὶ ξυγγενεστάτω καὶ ὁμοίω καὶ διήκοντε ἀλλήλοιν· νόμος τε γὰρ παριτητέος ἐς φύσιν καὶ φύσις ἐς νόμον καὶ καλοῦμεν αὐτοῖν τὸ μὲν ἀρχήν, τὸ δ’ ἑπόμενον, κεκληρώσθω δὲ ἀρχὴν μὲν φύσις, νόμος δὲ τὸ ἕπεσθαι, οὔτε γὰρ ἂν νόμος ἐτειχοποίησεν ἢ ὑπὲρ τείχους ὥπλισεν, εἰ μὴ φύσις ἔδωκεν ἀνθρώπῳ χεῖρας….
Philostratus, Heroicus 7.5
“There was no telling of tales nor yet did anyone sing things that had not happened before Priam and Troy. The art of poetry concerned prophecy and Alkmene’s son Herakles and had just been established, not yet in its bloom since Homer had not yet sung, some say until right after the sack of Troy or within a few years, but others say that he made it a poem as many as eight generations later.”
… καίτοι, ξένε, πρὸ Πριάμου καὶ Τροίας οὐδὲ ῥαψωδία τις ἦν, οὐδὲ ᾔδετο τὰ μήπω πραχθέντα, ποιητικὴ μὲν γὰρ ἦν περί τε τὰ μαντεῖα περί τε τὸν ᾿Αλκμήνης ῾Ηρακλέα, καθισταμένη τε ἄρτι καὶ οὔπω ἡβάσκουσα, ῞Ομηρος δὲ οὔπω ᾖδεν, ἀλλ’ οἱ μὲν Τροίας ἁλούσης, οἱ δὲ ὀλίγαις, οἱ δ’ ὀκτὼ γενεαῖς ὕστερον ἐπιθέσθαι αὐτὸν τῇ ποιήσει λέγουσιν.
Yeah, we’re getting Second Sophistic with it today. There were a few Philostratoi, but this Lucius Flavius Philostratus was a sophist who lived in the second and third centuries CE.
The Importance of Clarity: Philostratus, Discourse 1
“Clarity is a good rule for all speech, but especially for a letter. Regardless of whether we are assenting or begging, relenting or not, laying blame or defending, or even in love, we persuade more easily if we explain ourselves clearly. We will explain ourselves clearly and without being vulgar if we phrase common sentiments uniquely and new thoughts in familiar ways.”
… σαφήνεια δὲ ἀγαθὴ μὲν ἡγεμὼν ἅπαντος λόγου, μάλιστα δὲ ἐπιστολῆς· καὶ γὰρ διδόντες καὶ δεόμενοι καὶ ξυγχωροῦντες καὶ μὴ καὶ καθαπτόμενοι καὶ ἀπολογούμενοι καὶ ἐρῶντες ῥᾷον πείσομεν, ἢν σαφῶς ἑρμηνεύσωμεν· σαφῶς δὲ ἑρμηνεύσομεν καὶ ἔξω εὐτελείας, ἢν τῶν νοηθέντων τὰ μὲν κοινὰ καινῶς φράσωμεν, τὰ δὲ καινὰ κοινῶς.
Philosopher-King? Lollianus was Almost Stoned Over Bread (Philostratus, Vita Sophistarum, 526
Philostratus, Lives of the Sophists, 526
“Lollianus the Ephesian was the first Chair of Rhetoric at Athens and he also stood as governor of the Athenian people as the general of the hoplites. This office in early years was meant for the gathering of supplies and preparations for war; but in those days it was concerned with provisions and the food in the market. When there was a serious protest in the bread-sellers district, and the Athenians were on the verge of stoning Lollianus, Pankrates the Cynic, who in later years studied Philosophy at the Isthmus, stepped forward and said: “Lollianus isn’t a bread-seller, he’s a purveyor of words!” He distracted the Athenians enough that they put down the rocks that were in their hands.”
κγ′. Λολλιανὸς δὲ ὁ ᾿Εφέσιος προὔστη μὲν τοῦ ᾿Αθήνησι θρόνου πρῶτος, προὔστη δὲ καὶ τοῦ ᾿Αθηναίων δήμου στρατηγήσας αὐτοῖς τὴν ἐπὶ τῶν ὅπλων, ἡ δὲ ἀρχὴ αὕτη πάλαι μὲν κατέλεγέ τε καὶ ἐξῆγεν ἐς τὰ πολέμια, νυνὶ δὲ τροφῶν ἐπιμελεῖται καὶ σίτου ἀγορᾶς. θορύβου δὲ καθεστηκότος παρὰ τὰ ἀρτοπώλια καὶ τῶν ᾿Αθηναίων βάλλειν αὐτὸν ὡρμηκότων Παγκράτης ὁ κύων ὁ μετὰ ταῦτα ἐν ᾿Ισθμῷ φιλοσοφήσας παρελθὼν ἐς τοὺς ᾿Αθηναίους καὶ εἰπὼν „Λολλιανὸς οὐκ ἔστιν ἀρτοπώλης, ἀλλὰ λογοπώλης” διέχεεν οὕτω τοὺς ᾿Αθηναίους, ὡς μεθεῖναι τοὺς λίθους διὰ χειρὸς αὐτοῖς ὄντας.
Lovely Lollianus? Also known as Publius Hordeonius Lollianus, a rhetorician during the time of Hadrian.
Demosthenes Drank Water; Aeschines Drank Wine (Philostratus, Livesof the Sophists 507-8)
“The conflict between Aeschines and Demosthenes began in part because of the fact that the one acted on behalf of the King and the other acted for another—as it seems to me. But there was also a difference of character: and hatred always seems to develop from characters that are strongly opposed to one another without any other cause. And the two were opposed for these reasons. Aeschines was a man who liked to drink, but he was sweet and had kind manners and he had the general charm of Dionysus; indeed, when he was in his youth he played parts for the tragic actors. But Demosthenes had a downcast face, a heavy brow, and he drank water: and for this reason he was assumed a ill-tempered and bad-mannered man….”
διαφορᾶς δ’ ἦρξεν Αἰσχίνῃ καὶ Δημοσθένει καὶ αὐτὸ μὲν τὸ ἄλλον ἄλλῳ βασιλεῖ πολιτεύειν, ὡς δ’ ἐμοὶ φαίνεται, τὸ ἐναντίως ἔχειν καὶ τῶν ἠθῶν, ἐξ ἠθῶν γὰρ ἀλλήλοις ἀντιξόων φύεται μῖσος αἰτίαν οὐκ ἔχον. ἀντιξόω δ’ ἤστην καὶ διὰ τάδε• ὁ μὲν Αἰσχίνης φιλοπότης τε ἐδόκει καὶ ἡδὺς καὶ ἀνειμένος καὶ πᾶν τὸ ἐπίχαρι ἐκ Διονύσου ᾑρηκώς, καὶ γὰρ δὴ καὶ τοῖς βαρυστόνοις ὑποκριταῖς τὸν ἐν μειρακίῳ χρόνον ὑπετραγῴδησεν, ὁ δ’ αὖ συννενοφώς τε ἐφαίνετο καὶ βαρὺς τὴν ὀφρὺν καὶ ὕδωρ πίνων, ὅθεν [ἐν] δυσκόλοις τε καὶ δυστρόποις ἐνεγράφετο…
Dio Quotes Homer and Trajan Loves Him as Himself (Philostratus, Lives of the Sophists, 1.488)
“[Dio] frequently visited military encampments dressed poorly according to his custom. When he noticed that the troops turning to revolt after the assassination of Domitian, he could not restrain himself as he looked upon the churning disorder. So he leapt naked onto the high rostrum and began his speech like this:
“Then very-clever Odysseus was stripped of his rags..” (Od. 22.1)
And after he said this and made clear that he was not a beggar nor who they thought he was, but instead was Dio the wise man, then he produced a great indictment of the tyrant Domitian and he persuaded the soldiers that it was better to act with the interests of the Roman people in mind. Truly, the persuasiveness of this man was such that it bewitched even those who had no great knowledge of Hellenic matters. For example, when the emperor Trajan seated him beside himself in the golden chariot in which the emperors join the victory procession of a triumph, he often turned to Dio and said: “I don’t know what you’re saying, but I love you as I love myself.”
θαμίζων δὲ ἐς τὰ στρατόπεδα, ἐν οἷσπερ εἰώθει τρύχεσθαι, καὶ τοὺς στρατιώτας ὁρῶν ἐς νεώτερα ὁρμῶντας ἐπὶ Δομετιανῷ ἀπεσφαγμένῳ οὐκ ἐφείσατο ἀταξίαν ἰδὼν ἐκραγεῖσαν, ἀλλὰ γυμνὸς ἀναπηδήσας ἐπὶ βωμὸν ὑψηλὸν ἤρξατο τοῦ λόγου ὧδε•
„αὐτὰρ ὁ γυμνώθη ῥακέων πολύμητις ᾿Οδυσσεύς,”
καὶ εἰπὼν ταῦτα καὶ δηλώσας ἑαυτόν, ὅτι μὴ πτωχός, μηδὲ ὃν ᾤοντο, Δίων δὲ εἴη ὁ σοφός, ἐπὶ μὲν τὴν κατηγορίαν τοῦ τυράννου πολὺς ἔπνευσεν, τοὺς δὲ στρατιώτας ἐδίδαξεν ἀμείνω φρονεῖν τὰ δοκοῦντα ῾Ρωμαίοις πράττοντας. καὶ γὰρ ἡ πειθὼ τοῦ ἀνδρὸς οἵα καταθέλξαι καὶ τοὺς μὴ τὰ ῾Ελλήνων ἀκριβοῦντας• Τραιανὸς γοῦν ὁ αὐτοκράτωρ ἀναθέμενος αὐτὸν ἐπὶ τῆς ῾Ρώμης ἐς τὴν χρυσῆν ἅμαξαν, ἐφ’ ἧς οἱ βασιλεῖς τὰς ἐκ τῶν πολέμων πομπὰς πομπεύουσιν, ἔλεγε θαμὰ ἐπιστρεφόμενος ἐς τὸν Δίωνα „τί μὲν λέγεις, οὐκ οἶδα, φιλῶ δέ σε ὡς ἐμαυτόν”.
Dio? Dio of Prusa, AKA Dio Chyrsostom, friend of philosophy, exiled under Domitian. Champion of Nerva.
Philostratus, Lives of the Sophists 1.502 (Critias): On the Importance of Harmony in Word and Deed
In discussing the life and death of Critias (relative of Plato, one of the Thirty Tyrants of Athens), Philostratus writes.
“I claim that no man can die nobly if he does so for the wrong beliefs. This seems to me to be the reason that [Critias’] wisdom and thoughts are less well esteemed by the Greeks. For, if our words are not in accord with our character, we seem to speak with a foreign tongue, like flutes.”
ἐμοὶ δὲ ἀποπεφάνθω μηδένα ἀνθρώπων καλῶς δὴ ἀποθανεῖν ὑπὲρ ὧν οὐκ ὀρθῶς εἵλετο, δι’ ἅ μοι δοκεῖ καὶ ἡ σοφία τοῦ ἀνδρὸς καὶ τὰ φροντίσματα ἧττον σπουδασθῆναι τοῖς ῞Ελλησιν• εἰ γὰρ μὴ ὁμολογήσει ὁ λόγος τῷ ἤθει, ἀλλοτρίᾳ τῇ γλώττῃ δόξομεν φθέγγεσθαι, ὥσπερ οἱ αὐλοί.
Philostratus, Lives of the Sophists 1.480-481: The Difference between a Sophist and a Philosopher is Swagger
“It is necessary to consider the ancient sophistic art as a kind of rhetoric. For it presents discourses on the same things philosophers cover, but where the philosophers, in setting forth questions and in making small advances on their objects of investigations, assert that they still do not know anything, the ancient sophist claims that he does know the things he describes. At least, he recites as a beginning of his discourse phrases like “I know”, “I recognize”, and “I have noticed for some time,” or “Nothing is certain for man”. This species of introduction furnishes a sense of nobility and certainty to a speech along with implying a clear sense of what is real.”
Τὴν ἀρχαίαν σοφιστικὴν ῥητορικὴν ἡγεῖσθαι χρὴ φιλοσοφοῦσαν• διαλέγεται μὲν γὰρ ὑπὲρ ὧν οἱ φιλοσοφοῦντες, ἃ δὲ ἐκεῖνοι τὰς ἐρωτήσεις ὑποκαθήμενοι καὶ τὰ σμικρὰ τῶν ζητουμένων προβιβάζοντες οὔπω φασὶ γιγνώσκειν, ταῦτα ὁ παλαιὸς σοφιστὴς ὡς εἰδὼς λέγει. προοίμια γοῦν ποιεῖται τῶν λόγων τὸ „οἶδα” καὶ τὸ „γιγνώσκω” καὶ „πάλαι διέσκεμμαι” καὶ „βέβαιον ἀνθρώπῳ οὐδέν”. ἡ δὲ τοιαύτη ἰδέα τῶν προοιμίων εὐγένειάν τε προηχεῖ τῶν λόγων καὶ φρόνημα καὶ κατάληψιν
σαφῆ τοῦ ὄντος.
Philostratos, Heroicus 43.1: Addicted To Listening to (You Talk About) Homer
The Phoenician Says to the Vinedresser
“If those who ate the lotus leaf in Homer desired the plant so eagerly that they completely forgot about their homes, don’t doubt that I am addicted to your tale, just like the lotus. Instead of leaving here willingly, I would practically have to be carried off to a ship and tied to it while weeping and I’d continue mourning the fact that I hadn’t had enough of your tale.
You have already convinced me concerning the poems of Homer, to believe now that they are divine and clearly beyond human ability. And now I am surprised more not at the poetry alone nor even at the pleasure that comes from it, but much more at the names of the heroes and their heritages and, by Zeus!, how each one was fated to kill someone or be killed by another.”
Φ. Εἰ οἱ τοῦ λωτοῦ παρ’ ῾Ομήρῳ φαγόντες, ὦ ἀμπελουργέ, προθύμως οὕτως προσέκειντο τῇ πόᾳ, ὡς ἐκλελῆσθαι τῶν οἴκοι, μὴ ἀπίστει κἀμὲ προσ-
κεῖσθαι τῷ λόγῳ, καθάπερ τῷ λωτῷ, καὶ μήτ’ ἂν ἑκόντα ἀπελθεῖν ἐνθένδε, ἀπαχθηναί τε μόγις ἂν ἐπὶ τὴν ναῦν καὶ δεθῆναι δ’ αὖ ἐν αὐτῇ κλάοντα καὶ ὀλοφυρόμενον ἐπὶ τῷ μὴ ἐμπίπλασθαι τοῦ λόγου.
καὶ γάρ με καὶ πρὸς τὰ τοῦ ῾Ομήρου ποιήματα οὕτω διατέθεικας, ὡς θεῖά τε αὐτὰ ἡγούμενον καὶ (οἷα) πέρα ἀνθρώπου δόξαι νῦν ἐκπεπλῆχθαι μᾶλλον οὐκ ἐπὶ τῇ ἐποποιίᾳ μόνον, οὐδ’ εἴ τις ἡδονὴ διήκει σφῶν, ἀλλὰ πολλῷ μᾶλλον ἐπί τε τοῖς ὀνόμασι τῶν ἡρώων ἐπί τε τοῖς γένεσι καί, νὴ Δί’, ὡς ἕκαστος αὐτῶν ἔλαχε τοῦ κτεῖναί τινα ἢ ἀποθανεῖν ὑφ’ ἑτέρου.
My students do not say such things to me…