Posts by Don

Quote from Cassius

Do I recall correctly that Usener wrote in German? I presume that now given our internet reach we have the ability to ask Martin and possibly others as well for assistance in understanding Usener's own notes on these issues?

Or are you already able to consult Usener?

He actually wrote in Latin:

Hermann Usener Epicurea ( 1887) : Hermann Usener (editor) : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

Epicurea is a collection of texts, fragments and testimonies by Epicurus composed by Hermann Usener in 1887

archive.org

I've been using Bailey and Usener interchangeably since I think Bailey was a protege of his?

Quote from Little Rocker

Don, I love how you produce posts like the ones above and then say you're no good at such things.

I am just painfully aware of what I don't know when it comes to ancient Greek. I don't want to succumb to the Dunning-Kruger Effect or to pretend I'm fluent. I often feel like I know just enough to get myself into trouble!! Then the curiosity and enthusiasm take hold, all caution goes out the window, and I end up posting deep dives into manuscripts and paleography... but ask me to conjugate a verb past the present indicative or decline a noun into all its various permutations, and I'm going to have to look it up!

Quote from Kalosyni

So we probably should be careful with "translations" like this?

Not necessarily, but it pays to be cautious. Especially when someone is using only the English and is not comparing those to the original.

There are methods of translation called dynamic and formal equivalence:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamic_and_formal_equivalence#%3A%7E%3Atext%3DFormal_equivalence_approach_tends_to%2Cbut_with_less_literal_accuracy.?wprov=sfla1

The dynamic tries to convey the sense or meaning, the formal tries to be more word for word. Both are valid, but it's always better to translate from the original and to consciously decide which method you're going to use.

One thing I find annoying about Bailey is that he says outright "I do not understand the meaning of λεπτότης here." So instead trying to understand, he just decides it's the *wrong* word and fits in one he understands that's similar spelling.

To me, this looks like κ_θαριος but what that second letter is...? According to a search in LSJ for words with that ending, the only word that fits the letters is καθάριος. But according to LSJ, καθάριος refers to "purgative medicine, POxy.116.15 (ii A.D.)" but that appears to be from the 2nd c. AD/CE! So, it appears von der Muehli is trying to correct for grammar and "correcting" to καθαριότης. "

Saint-Andre's note to VS63 reads:

[63] The phrase ἐν λεπτότητι καθαριότης is somewhat obscure; καθαριότης means purity, cleanliness, neatness, scupulousness, integrity, elegance, refinement, simplicity, frugality, economy, etc., while λεπτότης means thinness, meagreness, fineness, delicacy, subtlety, etc. Can there be a purity in meagreness, a scrupulousness in delicacy, an integrity in fineness, a frugality in subtlety? Translating this phrase as "an elegance in simplicity" ties it to other statements Epicurus makes about both living beautifully (e.g., Vatican Saying #17) and living simply or naturally (e.g., Vatican Saying #21).

Have we brought up the Epicurus Wiki VS63:

Vatican Saying 63 - Epicurus Wiki

There is [due measure] even in frugality (and) he who (is) thoughtless [about this] suffers [somewhat as badly].

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!"