Posts by Eikadistes

Quote from Don

Wasn't there a scholarch with a Roman name? Source amnesia on that one.

I'm thinking you mean Popilius Theotimus. He's the only listed Scholarach with a Latin familiar name.

There also seems to be some suggestion that after somewhere between Apollodorus the "Tryant" and Zeno of Sidon there was a fracture of inheritance that lead to some level of involvement from characters like Diogenes of Tarsus, the Ptolemys of Alexandria, and perhaps Orion the otherwise unattested Epicurean. I believe that is speculative.

Quote from Joshua

I'm wondering if Eikadistes and Don can help clear up the succession of scholarchs for me. I was going by the link to the table posted by Cassius in #1, but then I found this list by Nate at Society of Epicurus and some of the dates don't match.

Protrarchus isn't mentioned at all in the table Cassius linked to, but does appear in SoFE list. The dates for Apollodorus are completely conflicting.

Nate, should I go with the list you posted at SoFE? It looks more complete.

I recently realized that a number of those dates from my study are inaccurate. Mostly, some of the more fragmentary characters are estimated, and one of my sources seems to have mixed-up BCE and CE in a few entires.

Given that, in a bizarre wave of serendipity, I have been scouring that document for the last few weeks to improve upon it and add additional Epicureans that have been found since Herculaneum papers continue to be decoded.

Quote from Joshua

I'm wondering whether anybody else has come across him. I know Hiram has delved deeply into Philodemus' scrolls. I'm just wondering if he should be on our radar?

Yes, and I am currently curious which Caecilius is Caecilius.

Right now, I am juggling with the possibility that he is just a character in "Octavius" by Minucius Felix".

I came across the possibility that he is Caecilius Statius. He (Caecilius "the Epicurean") could also be Titus Pomponius Atticus, whom was later called Quintus Caecilius Pomponianus Atticus.

Granted, the Romans, as I now realize, had a very, very limited number of first names, as an individual's identify was largely informed by their heritage, thus, driving modern historians to insanity ... so there were a ton of Quintus Caecilius' out there, and, regarding "Statius", we have, at least, Caecilius Statius the comic poet, whose works contrast with those of Horace such to give us reason to be suspicious of an Epicurean pedigree.

I have no answers to this.

Only one request:

Moving forward, let's all give our kids unique names. There are an innumerable amount of familiar names, and the Romans, who were emaculate with their historiography, only had about 6 names for boys.

Quote from Pacatus

Eikadistes This is beautiful (the other one also)! I just ordered the large one from Etsy. There is a big blank white wall in front of my desk, where it will hang!

I am glad you like it! I will be sure to pass along that compliment to my wife.

Quote from Don

I *really* like that one.

Thank you! I'll pass along that compliment.

One other print she's done that she posted: https://www.etsy.com/listing/158761…N_re-qfdOzQz0r8

Quote from Kalosyni

Eikadistes, thanks for sharing, very nice! Since the description doesn't say a print of an original oil or acrylic painting, then wondering if these are text-to-image designs?

Also, seeing Epicurus in a red toga got me curious, as I seem to remember reading that philosophers wore white...but I need to find a reference for that (so do not yet have reference source for that).

Based on my understanding, the "white toga" is a bit of a historical misnomer. The toga is a Roman-specific piece of garb whereas the Greeks wore tunics and chitons (among a number of other styles). Clothing was typically colorful and included a variety of dyes, as much as people have always used dyes and pigmentation as an aesthetic. (Lee, Mireille M. Body, dress, and identity in ancient Greece. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2015).

Outside of graphic design, Gen is a seamstress and costume designer, and has an extensive knowledge base when it comes to the history of fashion and clothing design, so I defer to her artistic choices as far the red goes.

Quote from Cassius

I hope you'll be able to encourage her to do more like this. And do I see that she's done more than one work on Epicurus? I tried to follow links on the etsy page but was not sure how to look for the rest of her work.

She does have a number of designs that I will be sharing soon!

I initially asked her to make some renderings for my Hedonicon ("Epicurean Bible"), which I'll be sharing soon. I will share the other renderings she has done soon, as well. One of her specialties is to take portraits and turn them into Renaissance-styled paintings, and she's advanced to making realistic renderings, so we'll have some to share.

Gen has been a digital artist for over a decade, so everything is done with a digital tools. However, she does neither use AI Optimization Enhancement tools nor does she use text-to-image designs.

In our opinion (her's, specifically), that would be copyright infringement. No one should be selling text-to-image designs.

My wife has created some renderings of Epicurus and the gang and is selling prints of them:

https://www.etsy.com/listing/1573433330/a-day-in-the-garden-epicurus-hermarchus?click_key=43bbe34527c6f41d510fa513249b5b07061e9bb5%3A1573433330&click_sum=afcdbd34&ref=shop_home_active_2

Christian heresy has always really fascinated me.

Incidentally, I have been reading a lot about Marcion recently and the development of Biblical Canon. It is interesting to view Christianity at a time before orthodoxy developed, and explore how we view those figures from history.

Exceptional research, Don. Thank you for sharing!

This is an engaging and welcome read after a few days helping my wife through her last surgery.

In Epicurus & Apikorism, Yaakov Malkin makes an interesting argument that Epicurean thought heavily influenced the production of the Books of Ecclesiastes and Job from the Old Testament. The link is tenuous, but note-worthy.

I wanted to share some additional material from On Piety, mixed in with some of my theological notes:

While scrutinizing these conjectures about divine “beings surpassing [ὑπερβαλλουσῶν or hyperballousōn] in power [δυνἀμει or dynámei] and excellence [σπουδαιότητι or spoudaiótēti]”, beings that “excel [ὑπερέχον or hyperékhon] in sovereignty [ἡγεμονίαν or hegemonían]”, Philodemus entertains the critical position that “no one has been prolific in finding convincing demonstrations for the existences of the gods; nevertheless all men, with the exception of some […] worship them, as do we” (οὐδεὶς εἱκνουμένας περὶ τ[οὺ θ]εοὺς ὑπάρχε[ιν τἀς ἀπο]δείξεις εύπ[όρησ]εν· ὁμῶς δε [σέβ]ονται πάντε[ς εἱ μή παρ]άκοποί τινε[ς αὑτούς, On Piety, Col. 23, 13-17). The conception of the divine nature “is the best [ἄριστον or áriston] and most holy [σεμνότατον or semnótaton or “dignified”], most worthy of emulation [ἄξιοζηλωτότατον or áxiozēlōtótaton, “enviable”], having dominion over all good things, unburdened by affairs, and exalted [ὑψηλόν or hypsēlon, “sublime”] and great-minded [μεγαλόφρονα or megalóphrona, “noble”] and great-spirited [μεγαλόψυχον or megalópsykhon, “generous”] and ritually pure [ἅγιον or hágion, “sacred”] and purest [ἅγιοτατον or àgiōtaton, “holiest”] and propitious [ῑ̔́λεων or hī́leōn, “blameless”]. Therefore they say that they alone strive after the greatest form of piety [εὐσὲβειαν] […] the ineffable [ἄφραστον or áphraston, “inexpressible” or "marvellous"] pre-eminence [ὑπεροχήν or hyperokhēn, “superiority”] of the strength [ἰσχύος or ìskhúos] and perfection [τελειότητος or teleiótētos, “completeness”] of the divine [toû theíou]. (On Piety. Col 45.2-30)

"Humanism" has meant so many things throughout history, I tend to avoid it at this point. Cicero's usage 2,000 years ago informs its contemporary, academic usage of as "Liberal Arts". Renaissance "humanism" needs to be contextualized alongside a cultural movement driven by wealthy patrons funding of major art projects. Some early American colonists saw their revolution as being "humanistic" (against the proposition of the Divine Right of kings), and Marxists in the 1920s adopted the word to refer to the transformative nature of their politics and economics. It has also been championed by modern Unitarians to emphasize the human-aspect of their Christ. The generalized definition includes half of all thinkers throughout history, in which case, most of the pre-Socratic naturalists, and later Epicurus, would easily fall in this category (or, essentially, any naturalists). Interestingly, the phrase "Secular Humanism" was first employed by religious detractors of Secularism, but then, as happens, their secular opponents later adopted the the term as a badge.

So, if philosophers, liberal scholars, financiers, clergy, laity, colonists, revolutionaries, and religious critics are all comfortable using the term "humanism", then that word may have functionally run its course. I usually only run into it from two sources: (1) contemporary critics of religion and (2) Pope Francis, and that seems strange.

Frohes Eikadenfest!

Quote from Cassius

Today we are launching a new feature for the front page of the forum - a "Navigation Map" with clickable boxes to take you to the relevant sections of the forum. This is only a first version and will no doubt go through lots of iterations, but this is intended to be a help for everyone (old and new here at the forum) in finding some of the most important subforums and seeing their relevance to each other.

The version below is not clickable or well zoomable, but the version on the front page is an SVG graphic that is fully zoomable to any size and remains sharp. Click over to that one and you can zoom in and out to your heart's content.

It is formatted in "portrait" since most people are using phones and devices of similar format to access the forum. We can probably do a "landscape" version as well if we can figure a way to display the correct one for the correct screen size.

This is an excellent graphic, by the way.

Given that Epicurus died of gallstones (and given that my wife and I recently learned that passing gallstones carries the risk of tearing the bile duct of your pancreas, leading to jaundice, sepsis, necrosis, organ failure, and death), I have to believe that the last week of Epicurus was largely spent managing excruciating pain, and, knowing that organ pain is comparable to childbirth, or getting shot, and knowing that even mild opiates barely manage organ pain, and that there is an entire medical discipline devoted to pain management, there is absolutely no way that my soul would entertain spending a week in a dying body suffering from organ failure. It is categorically excruciating, and while his Epistle To Idomeneus may be inspiring, I am convinced that dying of complications from stones is utterly horrific.

(I also have a new perspective and respect for his students: watching someone go through that is traumatic).

The anonymous shepherd may not have developed the same intellectual tools that would allow him to compose a beautiful reflection during the peak of pain due to a medically-remarkable illness, but the diversity of his pleasure is so much greater than Epicurus', I have to go with the shepherd. Epicurus may have enjoyed the maximum amount of pleasure that was available to him, which might have meant some relief through alcohol (though I have my doubts, knowing how much worse my wife would have been if she had been a drinker), a warm bath, and calm faces, but the shepherd is not physically immobile, nor is he forced to face the threat of immanent death. Perhaps if Epicurus had a bad heart and died in his sleep, but ... gallstones? Absolutely not. His physical condition was too dangerous.

Ah ... I think I just had a brain fart. They're there.

Did the Bookmarks disappear?