Observation About The Opening Of The Letter To Menoeceus vs The Letters To Pythocles and Herodotus

DeWitt on page 12 holds up the letter to Menoeceus as (alone of the extant letters) "composed according to the rules of rhythmical prose". Epicurus in this one letter is writing artfully. Perhaps that includes eschewing his customary synoptic introduction?

Regarding the same letter on page 46-47 he says this;

"Were it not for the survival of this piece we could not be so sure of his ability to write artfully, but possessing this we are justified in believing that other writings of similar merit existed."

So there's something about this letter in Greek that sets it apart stylistically, though if course it surpasses my power to say what that is exactly.

Is there any information showing that the Menoeceus letter could have been written significantly earlier or later than the other two, reflecting a development in Epicurus' writing style?

Menoeceus in greek "Μενοικεύς" derives from the verb (μένω) & the noun (oικεύς), and means the one who stays/lives at his family's house.

Meneoceus, as it is said, was a pupil of Epicurus. For sending him a letter, maybe Meneoceus lived in the city of Lampsacus, when Epicurus was teaching there. In Lampsacus there were many of the friends of Epicurus.

It seems to be that the letters to Herodotus and Pythocles, were after their request, and maybe they were teachers in an epicurean school of philosophy that had been established by them in Lampsacus. So, the only need they had, was for a good summary of the works on Physics and celestial phenomena, by Epicurus. The letter to Meneoceus looks like to be addressed in a young man that Epicurus cared for him, as he also lived him behind in Lampsacus with the other friends.

Because who needs more wise exhortations on ethics : a young man or a middle-aged man that was also to Epicurus a very known friend, and for a long life period of time?

And imo here is the answer :

ES 17. It is not the young man who should be thought happy, but the old man who has lived a good life. For the young man at the height of his powers is unstable and meets up (on his way) many coincidentally opinions (i.e. empty beliefs), like a headlong stream. But the old man has come to anchor in old age as though in port, and the good things for which before he hardly hoped he has brought into safe harbor in his grateful recollections.

On the above saying, for caring for and supportive of youth as Epicurus may have been, he also recognized that the young are unstable in their beliefs (unlike, presumably, mature Epicureans), and are therefore dragged in all sorts of directions by the whims of chance or cunning persons. This sort of vacillation and instability, Epicurus implies, is not conducive to bliss and pleasure.

The old man, on the contrary, who has lived out his life well, is presented in a beautiful simile: he is like a sailor who has let down anchor in old age, as if in a safe harbor. He is to wander no more. Better yet, all those "goods" i.e. his experiences that made him also to be prudent and happy that once seemed to him hard to attain, he now guards safely in the repository of his own grateful memory of good times past.

Yes, when we write to someone for humans' fears, desires, feelings etc the style seems to be more emotional. I do not find it "artful". The style of writing "artfully" was only by Plato. I found it that is written emotionally and with clarity. Moreover, in all Epicurus letters the words, the grammar and the syntax are in accordance with the Attic greek language.

In addition: Scientific papers and works have nothing to do with letters that are addressed to some of our young friends that within we exhort them on some wise thoughts and on how they shall live for the achievement of the goal of pleasure and eudaemonia.