Exclusive philosophy: Philodemus' criteria for Epicureans
In the first century B.C., after the Greek mainland was conquered by the Romans, Greek culture was becoming more and more influential in the Roman empire. This included Greek art, which was passionately collected by rich Romans, and Greek literature, which was being translated and adapted by Roman writers, but also Greek philosophy. All of the major philosophical schools of the time were expanding their territory into Italy: Plato's Academy, Aristotle's Lyceum (also known as the Peripatetics), the Stoics and the Epicureans. Of these four, the Epicurean school was the most succesful in Italy during the first century B.C. Cicero tells us about Gaius Amafinius, an Epicurean who was the first to write philosophical texts in Latin. Cicero has a very bad opinion of this Amafinius, and chastized him for watering down the doctrines of this philosophy in order to appeal to a large audience (Tusc. 4.3.6-7) and for being a bad writer (Acad. 1.2.5). Nevertheless, Amafinius seemed to be succesful in spreading his philosophical ideas to the lower classes of Italy.
Exclusive networks
This growth of the Epicurean school made the older generation of Epicureans question what constitutes an Epicurean. Could just anyone call himself an Epicurean, or were there certain requirements for someone to be considered one? And who was allowed to decide on these criteria? The founder of the school had been dead for 200 years and the doctrine had spread throughout the entire mediterranean. How could the school maintain its unity in a philosophical diaspora?
I believe that the Epicurean school, or any philosophical group for that matter, can be seen as a perceived netwerk: both insiders and outsiders had an impression of Epicureanism and associated it with certain kinds of people and behavior. There was no formal list of criteria for belonging to the Epicurean school. Instead, one only had to be acknowledged as an Epicureans by other people. These other people could be scholars of the Epicurean doctrine, but also the general public. Therefore, someone could be considered an Epicurean by common opinion, even if the insider-group of Epicurean experts thought of him as a heretic. This also means that someone could influence whom others would consider to be Epicureans. The result was a competition where people needed to prove that they fit into the mold of an Epicurean and therefore fought for acknowledgement by especially the established Epicureans. This is what I mean by a perceived network: a network that is not visible or tangible, but rather constantly being defined and redefined by its users, according to what they consider to belong to the network.
One of our main sources for Epicureanism in this period is Philodemus, an Epicurean who resided in Herculaneum for a large portion of his life and of whom a large body of texts has survived. As one of the leading experts in Epicurean doctrine of his time, we can find remarks on his thoughts about this problem throughout his writings. While he never specifically mentions Amafinius or his followers, some passages in his work can be explained in the light of these events. In his work, we see that he is also trying to define what, according to him, makes someone an Epicurean and therefore excluding people from his insider group. In Philodemus, we see an honest attempt to define criteria for an Epicurean identity that adhere to the school's orthodox doctrine. At the same time, however, Philodemus does interpret the doctrine in ways that suit his lifestyle and intellectual background and exclude people from the lower, less well educated groups of society.
|
EpicureanismThe Epicurean school was founded by Epicurus in Athens. Epicurus denied a life after death and therefore taught that pleasure was the greatest good a person could obtain. This pleasure was not, however that of indulgence into desires. This would only bring pain, which was exactly the opposite of pleasure: if someone eats too much food, he will make himself sick instead. Therefore, Epicurus taught that one should only pursue pleasure that does not lead to pain and lead a simple life, always weighing a pleasure against the possible pains that accompany it. The school that he formed was not a school in the strict sense of the word, but rather a community that gathered in his garden in Athens, in which friendship and simple life was the goal. Nonetheless, many people considered Epicureans to be antipolitical, hedonistic atheists.
For further information on Epicurus and Epicureanism, see:
|
Philodemus' libraryThe philosophical texts by Philodemus have been uncovered in an unusual way: they were found in a villa in Herculaneum, called the Villa of the Papyri, which included a large library with mainly Epicurean texts. Due to the famous eruption of the Vesuvius in 79 A.D., this villa was preserved and the papyri in the library were turned into lumps of charcoal. With modern technology we are able to read more and more of these unique texts, and there are still many scrolls which have not been studied yet. If not for the eruption, these texts and therefore a lot of our knowledge of the Epicurean philosophy would have been eternally lost.
Picture source: The Philodemus project by the UCLA (see below)
It is commonly assumed that during Philodemus' lifetime, the villa was owned by Lucius Calpurnius Piso Caesonius, the patron of Philodemus, and that Philodemus himself lived in this villa. Scholers have inferred this because we seem to have rough drafts of the works of Philodemus in the collection of papyri.
Further reading:
The various texts written by Philodemus are sadly spread throughout various publications and mostly not available in the public domain. The only text that is available online in my knowledge is his On Rhetoric, the 1928 edition by Hubbell. |
A textually centered networkMore than for any other philosophical school, the works of the founder were considered to contain irrefutable truths. After Epicurus' death, many important Epicurean scholars were busy with interpreting the scriptures of their founder and singling out works that they considered to be spurious. There were lively debates between various Epicurean communities about fine points of the doctrine. One example of this is the question if rhetoric can be regarded as an art or not, a discussion in which Philodemus took a strong stance and which resulted in him writing a treatise in seven books on the topic. The common ground for all Epicureans was formed by the body of texts by the founder and his three direct pupils: these were the absolute authority on the school's main points. This does not mean that there were no fresh ideas however: it was no problem to develop new ideas, as long as they did not contradict the teachings of the master.
And exactly this knowledge of the founder's writings was a way for Philodemus to exclude (some of) the newly converted Epicureans: they had not read the most important writings of the school. That it was essential for an Epicurean to know these texts was also mentioned by Cicero, who asks an Epicurean "quis enim vestrum non edidicit Epicuri κυρίας δόξας?" (indeed, who of you has not memorized the Principle Doctrines [a list of main Epicurean maxims] by Epicurus?) Moreover, in a fragment of an unidentified text, Philodemus is outraged by certain Epicureans who had not read complete texts by the founder, but only summeries: More
Phil. PHerc. 1005 Col. 4.2-18. The text in the brackets is my own attempt
to fill in the gaps in the papyrus. All translations on this page are my own. |
It is not possible, Philodemus argues, to be a decent philosopher without reading the founder's original texts, in the same way that nobody can learn to steer a ship without practical experience. Somewhat ironically, Philodemus tries to encourage people to read the original texts with an example where reading lots of books is counteractive. In addition, further in this text Philodemus writes that not reading enough is unforgivable for Epicureans:
Phil. PHerc. 1005 col. 14.13-18.
Philodemus is not satisfied with second-hand knowledge of the doctrine. For him, it is a requirement that every Epicurean is well-versed in the writings of their master: these are, after all, the ties that bind the community together. According to Philodemus, someone cannot be an Epicurean if he has not read the founding texts. This attitude would have dire consequences: books were expensive in antiquity, and aside from the writings of Amafinius (which, according to Cicero, were not of any value), there were no philosophical texts in Latin. It was necessary to be proficient in Greek in order to read the works of Epicurus, if one was able to read at all. With these requirements, Philodemus was effectively excluding the larger part of the Italian population from 'his' philosophy.
An important question in this is whether Philodemus wanted to actively exclude the new converts from his philosophical network. Was he really worried that people who did not know the original writings would damage the orthodoxy of the doctrine, or was he afraid that the reputation of the Epicureans, including himself, as members of an intellectual elite was be at stake? Would Philodemus have wanted the whole world to be Epicurean, or did he value being a member of an exclusive community? We will never be able to completely determine which it is, but I myself suspect that Philodemus was torn between the two. It is never be possible to be completely selfless, but Philodemus was trying his best to live after the teachings of his master.
|
Philodemus' life
Philodemus was born in the Syrian city of Gadara. He moved to Athens sometime in his youth and studied under Siro, the current head of the Epicurean garden in Athens. At some point in his life he was exiled from the Sicilian city Himera. He ended up in Italy and got to know Piso, who would become his patron and let him live in Herculaneum. Philodemus would dedicate various texts to Piso. In Herculaneum Philodemus belonged to the circle of Siro, a small Epicurean community that included many intellectuals of the time such as Horace and Virgil. This circle was not only interested in the philosophical life, but also in poetry. Aside from the philosophical texts from the papyri, we also have a few epigrams written by Philodemus from the Greek Anthology.
Fur further reading, see the previously mentioned sources and also D. Sider, The Epigrams of Philodemos. Introduction, Text and Commentary (Oxford 1997) for the most comprehensive biography of Philodemus.
|
Sean McGrath
Sources
Angeli, A. 1988. Agli amici di scuola: PHerc. 1005. Napoli.
Erler, M. 2011. “Autodidact and student: on the relationship of authority and autonomy in Epicurus and the Epicurean tradition”, in: Epicurus and the Epicurean Tradition, eds. Fish, J. & K.R. Sanders. Cambridge, 46-64.
Eshleman, K. 2012. The Social World of Intellectuals in the Roman Empire. Cambridge.
Gigante, M. 1995. Philodemus in Italy: the books from Herculaneum. Ann Arbor (translated from Italian by D. Obbink).
Jones, H. 1989. The Epicurean Tradition. London.
Sedley, D. 2009. “Epicureanism in the Roman Republic”, in: The Cambridge Companion to Epicureanism, ed. J. Warren. Cambridge, 29-45.
Sider, D. 1997. The Epigrams of Philodemos. Introduction, Text and Commentary. Oxford.
Snyder, H.G. 2000. Teachers and Texts in the Ancient World. Philosophers, Jews and Christians. London.
Erler, M. 2011. “Autodidact and student: on the relationship of authority and autonomy in Epicurus and the Epicurean tradition”, in: Epicurus and the Epicurean Tradition, eds. Fish, J. & K.R. Sanders. Cambridge, 46-64.
Eshleman, K. 2012. The Social World of Intellectuals in the Roman Empire. Cambridge.
Gigante, M. 1995. Philodemus in Italy: the books from Herculaneum. Ann Arbor (translated from Italian by D. Obbink).
Jones, H. 1989. The Epicurean Tradition. London.
Sedley, D. 2009. “Epicureanism in the Roman Republic”, in: The Cambridge Companion to Epicureanism, ed. J. Warren. Cambridge, 29-45.
Sider, D. 1997. The Epigrams of Philodemos. Introduction, Text and Commentary. Oxford.
Snyder, H.G. 2000. Teachers and Texts in the Ancient World. Philosophers, Jews and Christians. London.