Posts by Don

Quote from Cassius

Thats a really good point - checking out Raphael's other works for clues.

That's an idea, but I didn't mean to imply that for this painting. Just that that crowd listening to Paul has to have Epicureans and Stoics since that's who Paul was preaching to according to Acts 17:18.

I don't know if he's supposed to portray Epicurus or not, but I'm pretty well convinced that this is a portrait of Tommaso Inghirami, the Pope's librarian, a friend of Raphael's, and one of the people that helped Raphael with his research. Tommaso was also named a poet laureate by Maximilian I which may explain the wreath: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tommaso_Inghirami

"art historians credit Inghirami with authorship of the program for Raphael’s frescoes that decorate the Stanza della Segnatura, which establishes a relationship between ancient Roman and Renaissance culture.."

So, it makes too much sense to me that Raphael would paint him above the entrance to the room. Then Raphael bookended the fresco with himself in the opposite corner.

If we're looking for Epicureans in Raphael's work: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raphael_C…hens_(1515).jpg

There's a whole crowd of Epicureans and Stoics to illustrate that Bible verse.

I'd suggest caution again as to who knew what when as to those busts. I'll mention as the exemplar caveat that caricature of Epicurus in the Nuremberg Chronicle. If you don't have a reference, you can draw/paint someone any way you like. It would be nice if we had access to a full set of preparatory sketches of the School of Athens to see the planned and the final appearance of all these figures.

I keep coming back to the question: At what time did that figure become associated with Epicurus? As we've seen, it's not universally accepted (at least in the 1800s) but that's the majority opinion it appears today.

My money is currently on grape leaves. Plus I just realized he's not writing in the book, he's reading. The hand closer to his head is getting the figure behind him. Might be old news, but new to me

Oh, I think that's an interesting theory but I doubt Raphael would take a chance in poking any fun at Julius II. From what I've cleaned, he was a huge patron of the arts but also an irascible, volatile warrior with a short fuse.

Maple or common fig?

Yeah, I didn't think that looked like Laurel. Could it be grape leaves? Joshua says oak. There are three lobes on those leaves.

Here's a snip from WP:

"Different plants were dedicated to various gods: oak to Zeus, laurel to Apollo, herbs to Demeter, grapevine to Dionysos and myrtle to Aphrodite. Wreaths were also used to decorate the hermae, stone pillars surmounted with the head of a god or distinguished mortal."

Another:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civic_Crown?wprov=sfla1

Here's a new one:

This author floats the idea that this is Diogenes Laertius welcoming us into his Lives, in which he is writing:

https://risingtidefoundation.net/2020/12/08/the…phers-explored/

PS I'm not convinced by his argument. But at least it's another perspective. Having skimmed the articles 3 parts, he doesn't seem to include Epicurus which seems odd if we're using Laertius's Lives as the guide to the painting. Laertius devoted the final entire chapter to him!

To help consolidate, here is my post with the relevant articles:

1)

RAPHAEL'S "SCHOOL OF ATHENS"

Author(s): Gertrude Garrigues

Source: The Journal of Speculative Philosophy , October, 1879, Vol. 13, No. 4 (October 1879), pp. 406-420 (Excerpt, p. 417)

Published by: Penn State University Press

Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/25667781

"Over his "Garden" in Athens might have been written the noble aphorism of Goethe, " Think of Living." Democritus had a glimpse of this high thought, Aristippus saw it "darkly," too, but to Epicurus is due its embodiment ? to his followers, alas, its prostitution.

Perhaps the finest episode of the picture, certainly the strongest antithesis, is the contrast of Cynicism and Epicureanism, as represented by their chief exponents. Lying negligently upon the middle step (Raphael was no ascetic) is Diogenes of Sinope. His eyes fixed upon a tablet which he holds in his hand, he is absorbed in thought. His drapery is scanty and poor, but he has not yet reached the lowest point of his voluntary destitution; his bowl stands on the step beside him. Mounting the steps we see a young man, handsomely dressed. He has heard of the congress of philosophers, it seems, and has come hither to seek a master. Meeting a stranger (Epicurus, also richly dressed) descending, he inquires of him, "Who is the greatest teacher here? Surely this man, who exhibits so much contempt for all the luxuries and gauds of life; who, solitary, has no need of companionship." Epicurus points to the triumvirate above, telling him not to stop on the way, but seek always the highest good; and bids him not to trust too much to an appearance whose only characteristic may be its singularity. We seem almost to hear the echo of words like unto these of Emerson: "It is easy in the world to live after the world's opinion; it is easy in solitude to live after our own; but the great man is he who, in the midst of the crowd, keeps, with perfect sweetness, the independence of solitude.""

So, Garrigues sees Epicurus as the figure descending the staircase and speaking to the person coming up the steps beside Diogenes. I do think having that reclining figure be Diogenes of Sinope makes the most sense. That cup beside him isn't hemlock (like the other recent author we found who says that's Socrates and his cup of hemlock). That's Diogenes last remaining possession before he was embarrassed by the child using his hands to scoop up water, then Diogenes throwing away his cup. **IF** there was no portrait bust for Raphael to go by, he could make Epicurus appear any way he wanted. I personally like the idea of the striding figure descending the steps rather than the pudgy wreathed librarian... even if he is a librarian.

2)

https://archive.org/details/ra…s01pass/page/128/mode/2up

Raphael d'Urbin et son père, Giovanni Santi by Passavant, Johann David, 1787-1861

See p. 128

(I'm using Google Translate to get this translation)

In the middle of the steps, Diogenes of Sinope, named the Cynic, lying negligently, holds a tablet in his hand, and seems to be meditating deeply, without taking care of the illustrious assembly which surrounds him.

This singular man (born 414 years BC), disciple of Antisthenes, founded the severe school of Virtue, which he interpreted as an absolute renunciation of the material things of life. He thus expressed the basis of his doctrine: “To need nothing is proper to the gods. To need only a little is to be like the gods. So we see near him his bowl, the only utensil he wanted to have - until he recognized its superfluity, seeing a child draw water from his hand to drink.

Contemporary with Cynicism and Stoicism, Epicureanism differed on several points. The founder of the Epicurean sect, Epicurus (born 34 ^ years BC, in Gargettus, near Athens) also tended towards personal contentment, but he sought happiness in the harmony of moral pleasures and sensual pleasures. The Epicurean practiced virtue and wisdom only in view of their consequences and as a means of pleasure; he lived soberly and fraternally, and mastered both joy and suffering.

The fresco shows Epicurus descending the steps of the estrade, he converses with Aristippus', named Metrodidactus, a young man with curly hair, in a rich costume, and he indicates to him with a gesture the proud Stoic, disdainful of sensual pleasures.

The Greek genius, in search of a solution to the universal enigma, had exhausted itself in these multiple attempts. When the great men disappeared, there remained only sects which crossed and clashed.

This confused transition is indicated by the young man leaning against the base of one of the columns of the vestibule. Equilibrium on one leg, the other leg crossed in the air, he writes on his knee, not what his own research has taught him, but what he has heard from here and there. 11 represents Eclecticism which begins.

But while Eclecticism grasps all that seems to it to be true in the different systems, Skepticism, emerging at the same time, goes so far as to maintain that one can prove the falsehood of all established truth - a tendency which would have as a result the annihilation of all science, of all philosophy.

Pyrrho d'Elis (born 3M years BC) is the representative of this skeptical philosophy, which has even been given its name (Py rr honism). ^ E will not be accused of levity, if we designate , as Pyrrho, the standing and inactive philosopher, who leans against the base of a column and looks sarcastically into the book written by the young eclectic.

Standing next to him, the philosopher who, by a movement of hesitation, turns his head to one side and the body to the other side, must be Archilaus of Pitane (born 318 years BC), the founder of the new Academy, whose theory leaned towards Skepticism, the practice towards Stoicism. In general he only concluded with problematic knowledge, and, as all reason is subject to contradiction, he believed he should refrain from any decided adhesion.

I like the idea of Epicurus taking center stage, so to speak. And it would make sense that Pyrrho is nearby Epicurus since Epicurus had some degree of respect for him. They could be placed together.

3)

https://www.researchgate.net/p…7s_%27School_of_Athens%27

Codes and Messages in Raphael's 'School of Athens'

August 2016

State: In Progress

Authors: John Douglas Holgate, St George Hospital

Whether we identify one of those figures with Epicurus or not they are definitely composed as a pair. Raphael did preparatory sketches with those two. Plus they are definitely reacting to the figure on the steps with whom I find the most convincing argument to be Diogenes the Cynic with his cup, the last material possession of his. The figure to the left of Plato looks too much like Socrates to not be him (plus Socrates was "sanctioned" by the Church via Plato and Aristotle,if I remember correctly).

The questions remain, however, as to HOW the two figures on the steps are reacting to Diogenes. Favorably? Scornfully?

I think these figures are due some investigation (especially since 19th c. academics were equating each of them with Epicurus).

https://archive.org/details/sim_fi…/1up?q=Epicurus

Here's another author who equates Epicurus with the descending figure on the steps (1864)

Some of the Popes were humanists, too, weren't they? What was the pope who commissioned the work like?

Do we know when the wreathed figure became associated with papal librarian Tommaso Inghirami?

And when the figure became associated with Epicurus?

What's the timeline for all that?

And I agree with Nate insofar as Raphael could have used unidentified busts laying around the Vatican or Rome. It is possible that the *likeness* of Epicurus was used unbeknownst to him *AND* Tommaso Inghirami is supposed to represent Epicurus in an ironic way. Both are not mutually exclusive. Or neither could have been in Raphael's mind when he composed the work.

And OMG they're mentioned in the Bible, too! I forgot! So, the knowledge that there were Epicureans would NOT have gone away:

Acts 17:18

Then certain philosophers of the Epicureans, and of the Stoicks, encountered him. And some said, What will this babbler say? other some, He seemeth to be a setter forth of strange gods: because he preached unto them Jesus, and the resurrection.

The Church Fathers wrote about Epicurus and their writings were definitely never lost. For example:

https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/…EB11DC0F3E0CB77

Quote

Clement's definition of philosophy and the tolerance that it implies: “By philosophy I do not mean the Stoic nor the Platonic, or the Epicurean and Aristotelian, but everything that has been well said by each of the schools and that teaches righteousness along with science marked by reverence; this eclectic whole I call philosophy” (Strom., i. 7. 732CD).

So, Clement himself included Epicureanism within Philosophy.

https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/…D7ECDF96CA1A7AE

Quote

Origen ascribes to Epicurean influence the unorthodox views of his pagan opponent, Celsus. The opinions of Celsus in which Origen claims to detect latent Epicureanism concern a variety of topics.

It's not like Epicurus was forgotten. I have no problem believing his busts or likeness were lost. We have the fanciful depiction in the Nuremberg Chronicle to attest to that. But the philosophy itself - love it or hate it - is enshrined in the works of the "Church Fathers" so it would never have been forgotten or misplaced, misinterpreted yes, lost no.

I am pretty firmly in the camp of multiple viable explanations on The School of Athens now. Personally, I think this is the only reasonable stance *at this time*. Just like Epicurus in the letter to Pythocles says: "The evidence we can observe does not contradict any of these different theories."

Without specific notes from Raphael or a contemporary, we can propose, theorize, etc. until our fingers bleed on the keyboard and we won't come any closer to confirmation.

For me, the fact that Raphael used living people as models for many if not most of his philosophers (e.g., Da Vinci = Plato, one of the two key figures we can specifically identify) or used the fanciful portraits in the Nuremberg Chronicle negates any *need* for him to have seen a bust, ring, sculpture, etc., of anyone. I'm not saying it's not possible because "The evidence we can observe does not contradict any of these different theories."

Elli brings up interesting theories.

Nate brings up interesting theories.

Cassius brings up interesting theories.

The authors I posted bring up interesting theories.

"The evidence we can observe does not contradict any of these different theories."

Quote from elli

Τhere are some greek letters engraved on the right ring. I read the letters that form the word "NEAΡΚΟΥ". There is no such a greek name that includes the letter "K". But as far as I know there was a greek name as "NEAΡΧΟΣ" with the letter "X" and in genitive is "ΝΕΑΡΧΟΥ", and we meet this name as one the famous explorer, a navarch and officer in the army of Alexander the Great.

https://archive.org/details/handbo…ge/276/mode/2up

Nearkos was an ancient artist according to this catalog of names. (For those curious: Nearkou is simply the genitive form of his name.)

I'm getting the thought that, sans Raphael's personal notes, The School of Athens is almost a Rorschach test. Who do you want to see where? Oh, you think that's him? Interesting idea. Why? How's about this one?

That list we discussed in Latin:

intervalla vias conexus pondera plagas

concursus motus turbabat proelia miscens

Browne:

intervals, connections, weights, strokes, unions, and motions, and kept them so continually at war,

Google translate:

Intervals between these ways weights blows

emotional disturbance mixing melee battles

For different shapes and various shapes;

intervalla

intervallum n (genitive intervallī); second declension

- The open space within the vallum of a camp or between palisades or ramparts.

- interval, distance

- interval of time, pause, intermission

- difference

- (music) interval

vias

via f (genitive viae); first declension

- road, street, path

- highway

- way, method, manner, mode

- the right way

- (figuratively) journey, course, route

conexus

cōnexus (conn- ), ūs, m. conecto,

I.a joining together, combination, connection (several times in Lucr., elsewh. rare), Lucr. 3, 556; Vitr. 10, 1, 5.—In plur., Lucr. 1, 634; 2, 726; 2, 1020; 5, 443.

pondera

pondus n (genitive ponderis); third declension

- weight

- weight of a pound

- heaviness, weight of a body

- load, burden

- quantity, number, multitude

- consequence, importance

- (of character) firmness, constancy

plagas

plāga f (genitive plāgae); first declension

- plague, misfortune

- stroke, blow, cut, strike

- wound, gash, injury

concursus

concursus (feminine concursa, neuter concursum); first/second-declension participle

- flocked

- concurred

- coincided

motus

mōtus (feminine mōta, neuter mōtum); first/second-declension participle

- moved, stirred, disturbed, having been moved

- aroused, excited, begun, inspired, having been aroused

- troubled, concerned, tormented, having been troubled

https://www.bbc.com/culture/articl…n-a-masterpiece

This article contends that the figures may not be fixed identities. Some yes, others not. Food for thought.