Posts by Don

Here is Vatican Saying 63 as contained in the early 14th century manuscript, Vat.gr.1950.pt.2, folio 404r.

VS63 starts at the red epsilon (Eστι...) and ends at the end of the line before red alpha (Aκολουθεῖν) that starts VS64. This is *the* source of our discussion.

The first controversy seems to have to do with the disagreement between Usener/Bailey/Bignone and von der Muehli.

Bailey (using Usener) transcribes the manuscript as:

von der Muehli transcribes it as (click here to link to the book on Hathitrust )

with the following footnote (following the 10):

noting that Usener "corrects" the text of the manuscript to λιτοτητι καθαριος.

Von der Muehli, on the other hand, transcribes the manuscript as λεπτοτητι καθαριοτης.

To my eye, the manuscript itself clearly agrees with von der Muehli's transcription of λεπτοτητι

Usener appears to be "outhinking" the scribe who copied the manuscript on that specific word; however, the second word appears to agree with Usener/Bailey because the ending is clearly ...ριος but the previous letter looks like an theta alpha (...θα...) so it looks like ...θαριος. But what are those first two letter? That's the rub.

It might be handy to have a chart of ancient Greek miniscule. Click here to go with the handy chart at Wikipedia.

and here is a link to a collection of ancient Greek ligatures.

Here is where the scholarship above my pay grade comes in!! The reason Usener/Bailey and von der Muehli can disagree on what the manuscript is *supposed* say is that they're trying read into the possible transcription mistakes that the scribe could have done in copying the text from a source to vat.gr.1950.

Let's at least examine those two words that are in disagreement: λιτοτητι and λεπτοτητι.

λιτοτητι the dative of λιτότης "plainness, simplicity"

Henry George Liddell, Robert Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon, λι_τότης

Note that the LSJ definition even gives "for λεπτότης in Epicur.Sent.Vat.63." so it appears they accept that λιτότης is supposed to be λεπτότης in VS63. So...

λεπτότης "thinness: fineness, delicacy, leanness"

Henry George Liddell, Robert Scott, An Intermediate Greek-English Lexicon, λᾶας , λεπιδόομαι , λεπτότης

So, Saint-Andre follows von der Muehli *and*, more importantly to me, the actual text of the source manuscript.

ἔστι καὶ ἐν λεπτότητι καθαριότης, ἧς ὁ ἀνεπιλόγιστος παραπλήσιόν τι πάσχει τῷ διʼ ἀοριστίαν ἐκπίπτοντι.

The issue for me lies in the fact that if we follow the manuscript on λεπτότητι, why aren't we following the manuscript text on the second word ending with ...θαριος?

More to come (no doubt), but I want to save here before I lose all this!

Quote from Cassius

Quote from Pacatus

63. There is an elegance in simplicity, and one who is thoughtless resembles one whose feelings run to excess. (Trans. Peter Saint-Andre, Monadnock Valley Press; this one seems to be somewhat in contradiction to the others.)

Oh no, I hope you copied that wrong from St Andre - but I suspect you did not!

And *that* , ladies and gentlemen, is why we delve into the Greek.

I found von der Muehli's work but it'll have to wait until this evening... Consider this a teaser

Here's Horace's Satire 1.1:

Horace (65 BC–8 BC) - The Satires: Book I Satire I

Bailey's Extant Remains commentary.

I was curious to see what Plutarch was saying specifically what Epicurus was advocating for as opposed to "disputes about music or in questions of poetry."

So, I should say that it's not clear if Epicurus was actually saying one should *prefer* "some narration of military adventures or ...the importune scurrilities of drolls and buffoons" over the "disputes about music or in questions of poetry" or was being hyperbolic. Maybe he was talking more about attending symposia in the first place. If you are planning one, don't ruin it with disputes about poetry and music. If you're going that route, you might as well go all in and tell crude tales told by soldiers and present crude jokes and "coarse, vulgar buffoonery."

στρατιωτικὰ διηγήματα καὶ φορτικὰς βωμολοχίας

στρατιωτικὰ διηγήματα (stratiōtika diēgēmata) = tales of/for soldiers or military matters. There's also an adverb form of στρατιωτικὰ that connotes "like a rude soldier, brutal" so take that for what it's worth.

φορτικὰς βωμολοχίας (portikas bōmolochias)

Wikipedia: Bomolochus

In the theatre of ancient Greece, the bômolochus (Ancient Greek: βωμολόχος) was one of three stock characters in comedy, corresponding to the English buffoon. The bômolochus is marked by his wit, his crudity of language, and his frequent non-illusory audience address.

In modern Greek, the word refers to a foul-mouthed person.

Books and papers...

The Boastful Chef

books.google.com

https://camws.org/sites/default/files/meeting2016/406.Bomolochia.pdf

https://www.jstor.org/stable/23324452

I don't know. Sounds like a fun time!

Quote from Joshua

When θεωρίαις passed into Latin as theōria, it was reduced to a single definition: contemplation/speculation. Festivals was lost.

This is a great catch!!

Plus, check out the Etymology Online entry for the English word **Theory**:

1590s, "conception, mental scheme," from Late Latin theoria (Jerome), from Greek theōria "contemplation, speculation; a looking at, viewing; a sight, show, spectacle, things looked at," from theōrein "to consider, speculate, look at," from theōros "spectator," from thea "a view" (see theater) + horan "to see," which is possibly from PIE root *wer- (3) "to perceive." Philosophy credits sense evolution in the Greek word to Pythagoras.

We had Thai food tonight that came with fortune cookies. Thought mine would be appropriate to share...

That's a good find, Todd ! I had to look up the Greek from U20:

Quote

Quote from Usener

U20

Plutarch, That Epicurus actually makes a pleasant life impossible, 13, p. 1095C: The absurdity of what Epicurus says! On the one hand, he declares in his Problems that the Sage is a lover of spectacles and yields to none in the enjoyment of theatrical recitals and shows; but on the other, he allows no place, even over wine, for questions about music and the inquires of critics and scholars and actually advises a cultivated monarch to put up with recitals of stratagems and with vulgar buffooneries at his drinking parties sooner than with the discussion of problems in music and poetry.

δι᾽ ἀτοπίαν ὧν Ἐπίκουρος λέγει φιλοθέωρον μὲν ἀποφαίνων τὸν σοφὸν ἐν ταῖς Διαπορίαις καὶ χαίροντα παρ᾽ ὁντινοῦν ἕτερον ἀκροάμασι καὶ θεάμασι Διονυσιακοῖς,, προβλήμασι δὲ μουσικοῖς καὶ κριτικῶν φιλολόγοις ζητήμασιν οὐδὲ παρὰ πότον διδοὺς χώραν, ἀλλὰ καὶ τοῖς φιλομούσοις τῶν βασιλέων παραινῶν στρατιωτικὰ διηγήματα καὶ φορτικὰς βωμολοχίας ὑπομένειν μᾶλλον ἐν τοῖς συμποσίοις ἢ λόγους περὶ μουσικῶν καὶ ποιητικῶν προβλημάτων περαινομένους.’

So, the word used for "spectacle" here is θεάμασι Διονυσιακοῖς (dative of θέαμα):

Henry George Liddell, Robert Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon, θέ-α_μα

along with the Dionysia

Henry George Liddell, Robert Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon, Δι^ονυ_σ-ιακός

Plus Epicurus's book Problems is cited: ἐν ταῖς Διαπορίαις

So, θεωρίας doesn't actually appear in Plutarch's passage. So, technically, both can be true: taking pleasure in festivals and contemplation. The be whole ambassador connotation of θεωρία still inclines me against reading that as festival since "contemplation" seems to be such a common translation elsewhere.

The Perseus translation of the patch Plutarch passage gives:

Quote from Plutarch

by reason of the inconsistency of what Epicurus saith, when he pronounceth in his book called his Doubts that his wise man ought to be a lover of public spectacles and to delight above any other man in the music and shows of the Bacchanals; and yet he will not admit of music problems or of the critical enquiries of [p. 177] philologists, no, not so much as at a compotation. Yea, he advises such princes as are lovers of the Muses rather to entertain themselves at their feasts either with some narration of military adventures or with the importune scurrilities of drolls and buffoons, than to engage in disputes about music or in questions of poetry.

I'll say that "some narration of military adventures or ...the importune scurrilities of drolls and buffoons" sounds like more fun at a symposium than disputes about music or poetry.

Quote from Cassius

have to think that a lot of the difficulty in discussions of Epicurus' views comes from failure to explain that "happiness" as a concept does not have a single precise definition.

The only general definition I'd offer is...

happiness (or eudaimonia or well-being...) is a life filled with necessary desires, taking pleasure in the everyday joys available too us, and fulfilling "extravagant" desires to create memorable moments ready at hand to be remembered, as well as a life free of worry and anxiety, with only the occasional pain to be endured, leading to a pleasurable life with friends by one's side.

Quote from Cassius

Ok -- As usual it looks like you're doing great work Don.

LOL. Please... Don't... Stop.

Quote from Cassius

Great question, but it seems to me every translator (Bailey? Yonge? Others?)use some variation of festival.

I'd like to see what Elli thinks of this too!

Not Yonge. Check out my notes link above:

Hicks: He will take more delight than other men in state festivals.

Yonge: ...and he will find more pleasure than other men in speculations.

Mensch: He will enjoy himself more than others at the state festivals.

It also seems the theōriai were often delegates to other polis's festivals or were ambassadors? Take a look at all the uses of the term even within Diogenes to mean contemplation, etc.

Quote from Todd

Have you checked if any of the "festival" translators offer a justification for their choice?

Unfortunately, I haven't seen any citations or justifications for either "festival" or "contemplation." However, Bailey does give some background for each of the translation options in his Extant Remains:

We also refer to LSJ for interesting citations of different uses:

Henry George Liddell, Robert Scott, A Greek-English Lexicon, θεωρ-ία

I find No. 4 especially intriguing:

4. Rhet., explanatory preface to a μελέτη, Chor. in Hermes 17.208, etc.: so in Philos., continuous exposition, Olymp.in Mete.18.30, al.

in light of the use of that word in the Letter to Menoikeus in particular:

Meditate day and night then on this and similar things by yourself as well as together with those like yourself.

Ταῦτα οὖν καὶ τὰ τούτοις συγγενῆ μελέτα πρὸς σεαυτὸν ἡμέρας καὶ νυκτὸς πρός <τε> τὸν ὅμοιον σεαυτῷ

I have to ask a translation question since it came up it The Next Big Idea episode with Emily Austin.

Emily mentioned there that "Epicureans will enjoy themselves more at festivals than other people." While I like that sentiment, I've seen in some translation from Diogenes Laertius Book 10.120 the English word used is "contemplation" and similar words in place of "festivals." The Greek is θεωρίαις. My own take on my website was "The sage will also enjoy themselves more than others in contemplation, speculation, and theorizing,..." So, is it "festivals" vs "contemplation"?

I could see "festivals" if it referred specifically to state festivals like the Panathenaea or Mysteries since "only" the Epicureans practiced true piety and reverence for the gods. But the ancient Greek word doesn't seem to apply to that kind of festival, also including visits to oracles and the like.

I could also see "contemplation" since even Lucretius talks about Epicurus "traveling" in his mind through the cosmos and bringing back the truth of how things are.

Any thoughts are welcomed and appreciated!

The full notes on my translation are here:

Quote from ScottW

What I find remarkable about Epicurus is that he came to a 'scientific' world-view and somehow rose above mythological and religious explanations of natural phenomena, as well as an epistemology and ethic that holds true thousands of years later.

Fully agree!! and well said.

Quote from ScottW

Sorry to ramble here somewhat

That wasn't rambling at all! You want to see some rambling, take a look at a few of my posts

Welcome aboard!

Quote from Don

PPS. Still about 14 minutes to go in the podcast episode but so far SO refreshing to hear such positive conversation on a mainstream podcast of Epicureanism and Epicurus! Can't wait to finish.... But it's late so I'll leave that till morning.

Okay, finished up The Next Big Idea podcast episode with Emily Austin, and "Yes, yes, yes!" Some random thoughts to simply add to the κῦδος (kudos) she's already acquired.

btw, I double-checked and κῦδος is defined by LSJ as "glory, renown, esp. in war" and, in some ways, I'd say the Stoics are gonna see this as a "war." They've been largely unopposed in the popular arena for a long time. But, by Zeus, we have a new champion on the Epicurean side!

• The episode was lively, conversational, and a classic example of The Next Big Idea podcast format. You wanna share TNBI podcast with friends? Share this one!
• The Twentiether/kegger comment was amusing.
• The host was, as others have pointed out, extremely welcoming. What I found most interesting was his acknowledgement that he had had these "Epicurean" tendencies and thoughts *before* knowing about Epicurus. Epicurus was in some ways a validation of his intuition. I think that's a good thing and points to the "common sense" within the philosophy... As opposed to say Stoicism.
• And the contrasts consistently made between the classical and modern Stoics vs Epicureans was great!!
• Emily's consistent emphasis on "extravagant desires aren't bad" is refreshing!!
• I also liked Rufus saying the line about greed, satisfaction, and tranquility stopping him in his tracks was great. I realize it was an ad for the app, but it felt genuine too. The Stones excerpt was a nice touch.

I know I'm not saying anything novel in this post, so I'll end with "Thank you! To Emily! To Rufus! To The Next Big Idea for inviting her on! Well deserved and well played!"

For contrast...

Quote from Epictetus, Discourses 3.3

In this manner ought every one chiefly to train himself. When you go out in the morning, examine whomsoever you see or hear; and answer as if to a question. What have you seen? A handsome person. Apply the rule. Is this a thing controllable by Will or uncontrollable? Uncontrollable. Then discard it. What have you seen? One in agony for the death of a child. Apply the rule. Death is inevitable. Banish this despair, then.

This is an interesting dialogue in Epictetus, too:

Epictetus, Discourses, book 3, Concerning a certain governor who was an epicurean.

Quote from Joshua

(Mis)Quoting Epicurus--An Analysis of Language in Epictetus

The title of your thread caught me eye too since I just started listening to a new podcast: Misquoting Jesus with Bart Ehrman.

Time for a new podcast spinoff from Lucretius Today? Misquoting Epicurus with Joshua and Dr. Emily Austin

Quote from Joshua

Somehow I don't think that modern Stoics would accept this argument if it were put the other way--if it were claimed, for example, that Torquatus, Lucretius, or Philodemus understood Stoicism better than any modern Stoic ever could.

While there's no question Epictetus, Cicero, Arrian, Plutarch, Paul the Apostle, et al. would have known more about Epicureanism than we do, would have known practicing Epicureans, and would have had access to Epicurean texts now lost to us, it's also no question that they all had axes to grind, were no friend to the philosophy, and had no reason to give an unbiased report. There is no reason why we shouldn't take a cautious approach to what they wrote about a rival philosophy while at the same time being grateful (??) to them for transmitting to us what they did. At the same time, these are the same people and their ilk that burned, threw away, and generally discarded the Epicurean texts in the first place, so my gratitude only goes so far.

Nice work, Joshua! I found this to maybe provide even more context.

Quote from Usener w translation via Attalus website

[ U523 ]

Lactantius, Divine Institutes, III.17.42: [Epicurus maintains that] pleasure is the greatest good; there is no human society – each one takes thought for himself. {Cf. U581}

Cf. Cicero, Letters to Atticus, VII.2.4: …Carneades {spoke} with more wisdom than our philosophers Lucius and Patron, who in sticking to selfish hedonism and denying altruism, and saying that man must be virtuous for fear of the consequences of vice and not because virtue is an end in itself, fail to see that they are describing a manner not of goodness but of craftiness.

Arrian, Diatribes of Epictetus, II.20.6: So too Epicurus, when he wishes to abolish the natural fellowship of men with one another, makes use of the very thing he is destroying. For what does he say? "Don’t be deceived, men, or misled or mistaken: there is no natural fellowship of rational beings with each other. Believe me: those who say otherwise are deceiving you and reasoning falsely."

Ibid., II.20.20: So with Epicurus: he cut off everything that characterizes a man, the head of a household, a citizen, and a friend, but he did not succeed in cutting off the desires of human beings; for that he could not do.

http://www.attalus.org/translate/epicurus3.html

Usener. Epicurea. 1887. p.318

Display More

Usener includes that as a quote of Epicurus in U523, but also includes several others in U523 as context. So, Arrian could easily be paraphrasing for his own purposes or even pulling out of context for his own purposes.

On this very topic, I agree with Dr. Austin when she talks and writes about Epicurus and the community of Epicureans relying on each other. Epicurus took guardianship of children, made arrangements for dowries, allowed people to name their children after him, made arrangements for people to live in his house and garden after he died, and so on. That doesn't sound like someone who was vehemently opposed to "fellowship of rational beings."

It seems that Arrian, via Epictetus, is setting up a diatribe against Epicurus and so is more than willing to do what it takes to make his point.