DOCSLIB.ORG

Arius Didymus and Luke-Acts

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

ARIUS DIDYMUS AND LUKE-ACTS by CHRISTOPH HEIL Bamberg For James M. Robinson* 1. Intioduction1 In Acts 1:1-2, Luke summarizes the contents of his first book (τον μεν πρώτον λόγον), but in the following, he fails to give a description of his second book, which is unusual according to ancient conven­ tions.2 E Norden conjectured the following description of the book of Acts which originally would have followed Acts 1:2, * J M Robinson, "the doyen oí modern Q studies" (G Stanton, Gospel Truth·* New light on Jesus and the Gospels [ Valley Forge, ΡΛ 1995] 75), has continuously emphasized the împoi tance of Religion sge schuhte, Formgeschichte and Redaktionsgeschichte regarding "the quest for QJ Ci J M Robinson, 'Theological Autobiogiaphy," in The Craft of Religious Studies ed JR Stone ^London-New York 1998) 117-150, 140-141 It is the recon- stiuction of Qm which Jim has invested most of his energy in recent years Cf ibid, 158-149 and especially Documenta Q_ Reconstructions of Q Through Two Centuries of Gospel Resemeli Exieipted, Soiled and Evaluated, eds J M Robinson et al (Leuven 1996 ff, more than 30 volumes aie planned) J M Robinson and C Heil, "Zeugnisse eines schriftlichen, griechischen voi kanonischen textes Mt 6,28b Ν*, Ρ Oxy 655 1,1-17 (Evlh 36) und Q, 12,27," £\ll 89 α998) 30-44, The Critical Edition of Q A Synopsis Including the Gospels of Mattheit and Luke, Alaik and Thomas with English, German and French Translations of Q and Thomas, eds J M Robinson et al ^Hermeneia Supplements, Minneapolis, MN-Leuven 2000] I hus, trying to shed some new light on Luke, the following essay compares Luke-Vets with a nearly contemporary historian of philosophy 1 \ summary of this paper was read in the Luke-Acts Group at the SBL Annual Meeting 1998 in Oliando, PL 1 thank Prof Κ Döring (Bamberg) and Prof A Fürst Munster) for many helpful suggestions and corrections "W-H" stands for Ioannis Stobaei Anthologium leeensuerunt C Wachsmuth et O Hense Volumina I-IV Lditio altera ex cditione anni 188 4/1912 lucís ope expressa, reprint Berlin, 1958 Gf L Norden, Agnostos Tìieos Untersuchungen zw Eormengeschichte religiöser Rede (Stuttgart- Leipzig 1996) 311-3H, WG van Unmk, "Ihe 'Book of Acts' The Confirmation of the Gospel," m Id, Spaisa Colletta Collected Essays I Evangelia, Paulina, Acta (NFS 29, Leiden 1973) 340-373, 344 ("A clear objective statement is not given here nor any- vvheie else, henceforth the chase foi the great Unknown is open ") (c Konmkhjke Bull NV, Leiden, 2000 Nov urn 1 estamentum XLII, 4 ARIUS DIDYMUS AND LUKE"ACTS 359 νυνι δε τα συνεχή τούτοις, α τε αυτός πάρων ειδον α τε παρ άλλων αξιόπιστων όντων επυθομην συγγραψαι πειρασομαι μέχρι της επι της Ρώμης επιδημίας τοΰ Παύλου * Now I will attempt to write down the events immediately following, that is, both which 1 have seen while being present and which I have learned from others who are trustworthy as far as to Paul's arrival m Rome Of course such a conjecture is hypothetical, but it illustrates Norden's view of Luke's second volume as a histonographical work While most scholars would agree with this generic classification,4 there is a lively debate about exactly what kind of history Luke was writing 5 In a * Norden ignostos Theos 315-316 J RolofT considers a similar addition to Acts 1 2, but finally accepts the text as we have it today (Die Apostelgeschichte [ΝTD 5, Gottmgen 19881 20) 4 Note howevei the lecent caveat by LG A Alexander who has argued that edu­ cated Greek readeis would hardly have seen Acts as "history", cf her "The preface to A.cts and the historians," m History, Literature, and Society in the Book oj Acts, ed Β Witherington III (Gambndge 1996) 73-103, 102, Ladern, "Marathon or Jerichop Reading Acts in Dialogue with Biblical and Greek Historiography,' m Auguries The Jubilee I o lume of the Sheffield Department of Biblical Studies, eds DJ A Cime s and SD Moore ( JSOISup 269, Sheffield 1998) 92-125, Ladern, "Pact, Fiction and the Genre of Acts," NTS 44 v1998) 380-399, 397-398 "for readers educated in the Greek classics, much of the narrative content of Acts would place it in the danger-area of 'fiction'—though with a disturbing undercurrent which suggests that it might after all be fact " ' lor example, DI Balch describes Acts as "political history", GL Sterling as apologetic historv Cf D L Balch, " 1 he Genre of Luke-Acts Individual Biography, Adventure Novel, or Political History^, ' Southwestern Journal of Theology 33 (1990) 5-19, Id "Comments on the Genre and a Political I heme of Luke-Acts A Preliminary Comparison of I wo Hellenistic Historians,' SBISP28 (1989) 343-361, G E Sterling, Luke-\cts and Apologetic Historiography, SBISP 28 (1989) 326-342, Id Historiography and Self Definition Josephos Iuke Acts and Apologetic Histonography (NI S 64, Leiden 1992) 19 320 n 47 Among others G L Sterling (Historiography and Self Definition, 352-369) and LCA Alexander ('Marathon orJenchop, ' 119-123) have emphasized that Luke is indebted particularly to Jeuish historiography On the other hand, Luke employs many foims and elements "which are unambiguous indicators of the movement of Christian traditions into the larger Greco-Roman world" (Sterling, Historiography and Self Definition, 369, cf ibid, 369-374) Γο be sure, some have rejected the definition of Acts genre as historiography, but their own suggestions focus only on (secondary) fea­ tures of Acts without being able to explain the whole document Lor C H Talbert's proposal that I uke-Acts belongs to the ancient biographical Διαδοχαί genre cf below n 11 R I Pervo's attempt of looking at Acts as an example of the ancient historical novels if not a \ery first example of that genre is not comincine; (cf his Profit with Delight Ehe literary Geme of the 4cts of the Apostles [Philadelphia 1987J) For recent crit­ icisms cf D L Balch "Apostelgeschichte," RGCf 1 (1998) 642-648, 643, BWR Pearson and SL Porter, ' I he Genres of the New lestament," in Handbook of Exegesis of the New Testament, ed S L Porter (NITS 25, Leiden 1997) 131-165, 144-146 However, Pervo is right that Luke s two volumes do not share the same genre (cf M C Parsons and RI Pervo, Rethinking the I nity of I uke and Acts [Minneapolis, MN 1993J), while Luke's two treatises form a unity, the gospel is an ancient biogiaphy and Acts is an 360 CHRISTOPH HEIL recent contribution to that debate H. Cancik argued that Acts con­ veys some features which are similar to the ancient historiography of institutions6. According to Cancik, the "heuristic" title of Luke's sec­ ond λόγος could be περί αρχής και αυξήσεως τής των Χριστιανών εκκλησίας,7 "About origin and growth of the church of the Christians." One theme of Luke's history is the origin and spread of an institution, the ekklesia or hairesis of the Christians The comparison with the texts of Greek and Roman historiography of philosophy and religion confirms, it appears to me, the designation of this particular theme as "institutional history" The compari­ son also shows some concrete connections to the historiography of culture among Gieeks and Romans and, at the same time, makes the exceptional position of Luke's history clear H However, the comparison of Luke-Acts with "the historiography of philosophy" shows a typical dilemma of Form Criticism. If the net is cast widely and if a broad basis of texts is chosen, the number of par­ allels with Luke-Acts grows. If only one ancient text is compared with Luke-Acts, the formal parallels will be few (but possibly instructive never­ theless), and the discrepancies receive more attention. Both ways are certainly legitimate, if only they enhance our understanding of Luke- Acts' literary profile. In antiquity, there were three subspecies of the genre "history of philosophy", namely Άρέσκοντα {placito), Περί αιρέσεων and Διαδοχαί.9 The first two are exclusively interested in philosophical, not in bio­ graphical issues.10 The third subspecies, on the other hand, is indeed ancient histonographical monograph For this not unusual μετάβασις εις άλλο γένος cf 13 I rickenschmidt, Evangelium als Biographie Die vier Evangelien im Rahmen antiker Erzahlkunst (1ANZ 22, Tubingen-Basel 1997) 498-500 ( H Cancik, "The History oí Culture, Religion, and Institutions in Ancient His­ toriography Philological Observations Concerning Luke's History," JBL 116 (1997) 673-695 The topic of this essay is anticipated in H Cancik, "Die Funktion der judi­ schen Bibel fur die Geschichtsschreibung der Christen in der Antike," in Bibel und Literatur, eds J Fbach and R Faber (München 1995) 19-29, 22 Already here Cancik asks, " ist die Apostelgeschichte eine 'Kirchengeschichte', eine Art Institution­ engt schichte^" As examples of institutions which are presented in Greek historiogra­ phy he mentions "Verfassungsgeschichte bei Aiistoteles, Polybios, Cicero, Livius, Geschichte der Philosophenschulen bei Diogenes Laertius, Geschichte von Religion bei Varrò und Livius" (ibid) 1 Cancik, "History," 680 8 Cancik, "History," 694 () Ci D F Ruma, "Doxographie," in Der Neue Pauly Enzyklopädie der Antike Altertum Vol 3, eds H Cancik and H Schneider (Stuttgart-Weimar 1997) 803-806, 804-805 10 Ci Κ Döring, Historia Philosopha Grundzuge dei antiken Philosophiegeschichtsschreibung Freiburg ι Br-Wur/burg 1987) 6-16 ARU S DIDYMUS AND LUKF"ACTS 361 a biographical form " For example, anecdotes are told only in the Διαδοχαι Cancik wants to prove that Luke-Acts is similar to histories of philosophy and therefore it must be proven that it is similar to works of the Αρεσκοντα or Περί αιρέσεων literature How­ ever the examples
Recommended publications
  • KEIMPE ALGRA 155-184.Qxd

    KEIMPE ALGRA 155-184.Qxd

    Ο Ζήνων ο Κιτιέας και η Στωική κοσμολογία: μερικές σημειώσεις και δυο συγκεκριμένες περιπτώσεις. KEIMPE ALGRA Η έκταση και η φύση της συμβολής του Ζήνωνα στη Στωική φυσική και κοσμολογία είναι δύσκολο να θεμελιωθούν. Η ανακοίνωση αυτή μελετά μερικά από τα σχετικά προβλήματα. Η χρήση της ονομαστικής ετικέτας "Ζήνων" από τις αρχαίες μας πηγές δε θα πρέπει πάντα να αξιολογείται επιφανειακά, και η απόδοση καθώς και η διευθέτηση του υλικού του Hans Von Arnim στο Stoicorum Veterum Fragmenta (SVF) δε θα πρέπει να γίνεται αποδεκτή χωρίς κριτική, για λόγους που περιγράφονται σ’ αυτή την εργασία. Παρέχονται δύο συγκεκριμένες περιπτώσεις αποσπασμάτων, οι οποίες, με μια πιο προσεκτική ματιά, δε θα πρέπει να αποδοθούν στο Ζήνωνα. Τελικά, υποστηρίζεται ότι ο Ζήνων δεν ήταν παραγωγικός συγγραφέας σε θέματα φυσικής, και ότι έτυχε στους διαδόχους του ( σε μερικούς από αυτούς) – πιο συγκεκριμένα στον Σφαίρο, στον Κλεάνθη και στον Χρύσιππο – να επεξεργαστούν περαιτέρω και να συγκροτήσουν λεπτομερειακά την φυσική κοσμοεικόνα της Στωικής σχολής. Αυτό σημαίνει πως υπάρχουν περιθώρια ανάπτυξης της φυσικής και της κοσμολογίας στα πλαίσια του αρχαίου Στωικισμού, και πως, συνακόλουθα, είναι ζωτικής σημασίας να διακρίνουμε πιο ξεκάθαρα, απ’ ότι συνήθως, τι πρέπει με ασφάλεια να αποδοθεί στο Ζήνωνα και ότι τέτοιου είδους "κοινά στωικά" δόγματα πρέπεί μόνο πιθανά, ή μερικά, να ανιχνευτούν σ΄αυτόν. Zeno of Citium and Stoic Cosmology: some notes and two case studies KEIMPE ALGRA 1 Zeno of Citium, as indeed the early Stoics in general, conceived of philosophy as consisting of three interrelated parts: logic, physics and ethics.1 But although Zeno’s foundational work covered all three areas, he appears to have had his preferences.
  • Passionate Platonism: Plutarch on the Positive Role of Non-Rational Affects in the Good Life

    Passionate Platonism: Plutarch on the Positive Role of Non-Rational Affects in the Good Life

    Passionate Platonism: Plutarch on the Positive Role of Non-Rational Affects in the Good Life by David Ryan Morphew A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (Classical Studies) in The University of Michigan 2018 Doctoral Committee: Professor Victor Caston, Chair Professor Sara Ahbel-Rappe Professor Richard Janko Professor Arlene Saxonhouse David Ryan Morphew [email protected] ORCID iD: 0000-0003-4773-4952 ©David Ryan Morphew 2018 DEDICATION To my wife, Renae, whom I met as I began this project, and who has supported me throughout its development. ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS First and foremost, I am grateful to my advisors and dissertation committee for their encouragement, support, challenges, and constructive feedback. I am chiefly indebted to Victor Caston for his comments on successive versions of chapters, for his great insight and foresight in guiding me in the following project, and for steering me to work on Plutarch’s Moralia in the first place. No less am I thankful for what he has taught me about being a scholar, mentor, and teacher, by his advice and especially by his example. There is not space here to express in any adequate way my gratitude also to Sara Ahbel-Rappe and Richard Janko. They have been constant sources of inspiration. I continue to be in awe of their ability to provide constructive criticism and to give incisive critiques coupled with encouragement and suggestions. I am also indebted to Arlene Saxonhouse for helping me to see the scope and import of the following thesis not only as of interest to the history of philosophy but also in teaching our students to reflect on the kind of life that we want to live.
  • Aristotle and Arius Didymus on Household and Polis

    Aristotle and Arius Didymus on Household and Polis

    ARISTOTLE AND ARIUS DIDYMUS ON HOUSEHOLD AND POLIS Newman noted long ago that although Aristotle was witness to the rise of Macedonia “[f]or all that appears to the contrary in its pages, the Politics may have been written while Thebes was still the leading power. Not a particle of Aristotle’s attention is diverted from the pÒliw to the ¶ynow.”1 The pÒliw remained central to his thought. As a result, Aristotle bequeathed to his followers in the world after Alexander, and especially in the centuries which saw the rise of Rome, a number of difficult philosophical and practical problems. While remaining central in many ways to the cultural and social life of Greeks (and of other peoples) it became increas- ingly difficult to make a convincing case for the political and social centrality of the pÒliw as maintained in Aristotle’s philosophy of the state. Apart from challenges from the world of politics and international affairs, there were also philosophical and purely so- cial challenges that needed to be met. Stoicism, in particular, with its doctrine of social ofike¤vsiw, the theory explaining the relation- ship of individuals to family, kin, fellow citizens and the rest of hu- mankind, offered an attractive alternative to Aristotle’s restricted emphasis on the pÒliw. Already in the works of Theophrastus and in the pseudo-Aristotelian Oeconomica we can see a shift in doc- trine. Our sources for Aristotelian political theory in the period after Alexander are extremely limited, and it is not before the age of Augustus that we have anything like an overview.
  • Stoicism a School of Thought That Flourished in Greek and Roman

    Stoicism a School of Thought That Flourished in Greek and Roman

    Stoicism A school of thought that flourished in Greek and Roman antiquity. It was one of the loftiest and most sublime philosophies in the record of Western civilization. In urging participation in the affairs of man, Stoics have always believed that the goal of all inquiry is to provide man with a mode of conduct characterized by tranquillity of mind and certainty of moral worth. Nature and scope of Stoicism For the early Stoic philosopher, as for all the post-Aristotelian schools, knowledge and its pursuit are no longer held to be ends in themselves. The Hellenistic Age was a time of transition, and the Stoic philosopher was perhaps its most influential spokesman. A new culture was in the making. The heritage of an earlier period, with Athens as its intellectual leader, was to continue, but to undergo many changes. If, as with Socrates, to know is to know oneself, rationality as the sole means by which something outside of the self might be achieved may be said to be the hallmark of Stoic belief. As a Hellenistic philosophy, Stoicism presented an ars vitae, a way of accommodation for people to whom the human condition no longer appeared as the mirror of a universal, calm, and ordered existence. Reason alone could reveal the constancy of cosmic order and the originative source of unyielding value; thus, reason became the true model for human existence. To the Stoic, virtue is an inherent feature of the world, no less inexorable in relation to man than are the laws of nature. The Stoics believed that perception is the basis of true knowledge.
  • The Fragments of Zeno and Cleanthes, but Having an Important

    The Fragments of Zeno and Cleanthes, but Having an Important

    ,1(70 THE FRAGMENTS OF ZENO AND CLEANTHES. ftonton: C. J. CLAY AND SONS, CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS WAREHOUSE, AVE MARIA LANE. ambriDse: DEIGHTON, BELL, AND CO. ltip>ifl: F. A. BROCKHAUS. #tto Hork: MACMILLAX AND CO. THE FRAGMENTS OF ZENO AND CLEANTHES WITH INTRODUCTION AND EXPLANATORY NOTES. AX ESSAY WHICH OBTAINED THE HARE PRIZE IX THE YEAR 1889. BY A. C. PEARSON, M.A. LATE SCHOLAR OF CHRIST S COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE. LONDON: C. J. CLAY AND SONS, CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS WAREHOUSE. 1891 [All Rights reserved.] Cambridge : PBIXTKIi BY C. J. CLAY, M.A. AND SONS, AT THK UNIVERSITY PRKSS. PREFACE. S dissertation is published in accordance with thr conditions attached to the Hare Prize, and appears nearly in its original form. For many reasons, however, I should have desired to subject the work to a more under the searching revision than has been practicable circumstances. Indeed, error is especially difficult t<> avoid in dealing with a large body of scattered authorities, a the majority of which can only be consulted in public- library. to be for The obligations, which require acknowledged of Zeno and the present collection of the fragments former are Cleanthes, are both special and general. The Philo- soon disposed of. In the Neue Jahrbticher fur Wellmann an lofjie for 1878, p. 435 foil., published article on Zeno of Citium, which was the first serious of Zeno from that attempt to discriminate the teaching of Wellmann were of the Stoa in general. The omissions of the supplied and the first complete collection fragments of Cleanthes was made by Wachsmuth in two Gottingen I programs published in 187-i LS75 (Commentationes s et II de Zenone Citiensi et Cleaitt/ie Assio).
  • Download Date | 6/9/19 10:06 AM Pseudo-Pythagorean Literature 73

    Download Date | 6/9/19 10:06 AM Pseudo-Pythagorean Literature 73

    Philologus 2019; 163(1): 72–94 Leonid Zhmud* What is Pythagorean in the Pseudo-Pythagorean Literature? https://doi.org/10.1515/phil-2018-0003 Abstract: This paper discusses continuity between ancient Pythagoreanism and the pseudo-Pythagorean writings, which began to appear after the end of the Pythagorean school ca. 350 BC. Relying on a combination of temporal, formal and substantial criteria, I divide Pseudopythagorica into three categories: 1) early Hellenistic writings (late fourth – late second centuries BC) ascribed to Pytha- goras and his family members; 2) philosophical treatises written mostly, yet not exclusively, in pseudo-Doric from the turn of the first century BC under the names of real or fictional Pythagoreans; 3) writings attributed to Pythagoras and his relatives that continued to appear in the late Hellenistic and Imperial periods. I will argue that all three categories of pseudepigrapha contain astonishingly little that is authentically Pythagorean. Keywords: Pythagoreanism, pseudo-Pythagorean writings, Platonism, Aristote- lianism Forgery has been widespread in time and place and varied in its goals and methods, and it can easily be confused with superficially similar activities. A. Grafton Note: An earlier version of this article was presented at the colloquium “Pseudopythagorica: stratégies du faire croire dans la philosophie antique” (Paris, 28 May 2015). I would like to thank Constantinos Macris (CNRS) for his kind invitation. The final version was written during my fellowship at the IAS of Durham University and presented at the B Club, Cambridge, in Mai 2016. I am grateful to Gábor Betegh for inviting me to give a talk and to the audience for the vivid discussion.
  • Acanthus, 212–213, 215, 218, 224, 288 Achilles, Shield Of, 148

    Acanthus, 212–213, 215, 218, 224, 288 Achilles, Shield Of, 148

    index Acanthus, 212–213, 215, 218, Antony, Mark (Marcus Antonius, 224, 288 triumvir), 67, 163, 296 Achilles, shield of, 148 Apelles, 127, 205, 209 Actium, 67, 163, 168, 246, 256, 280 Aphrodisias, 34 Aeneas, 31, 113, 120, 140, 201–202 Aphrodite, 201, 216. See also shield of, 146–148 Venus Agricola, Gnaeus Julius, 151 Apollo, 67, 165, 256 Agrippa, Marcus Vipsanius, 20– temples of, 125, 162–165, 22, 24–25, 227, 291, 296 168, 285 Alberti, Leon Battista, 2 Aquitania, 143, 146 Alêtheia and to alêthes (truth and Ara maxima, rite of, 113–115, 120 the true), 57–58, 97 Architectura. See also Architecture Alexander the Great, 12, 18, 20, as the agent of squaring, 246 52–53, 73, 92–97, 127–129, as the art of the geometrical foot- 142, 205 print, 226 and Augustus, 120–124 as knowledge of the architect, 58, and Hercules, 98–100 100, 148, 299 Alexandria, 84, 94–96, 122, 124, as proof of conquest, 151 127, 137, 139, 149, 241 as summation of humanitas, Altars, 173–174, 182, 291 145–146, 152–154 ara maxima (altar of Hercules), summum templum of, 28–30, Rome, 113–115, 120 145–148, 301 Ara Pacis Augustae (altar of Au- tripartite whole of, 25, 300, 302 gustan peace), Rome, 213, Architecture. See also Architectura; 244–246 De architectura; Vitruvius Ambracia, 115 body of, 6, 9, 12, 57, 129, 227– Ammianus Marcellinus, 96 229, 236, 250, 270, 274, Amor, son of Venus, 209, 270 300–302 Amplification, 83 Christian, 174 Analemma, 137–138, 235, 245 and empire, 145–149, 193–195, Analogia, 26, 71–72, 195 279–280 Angelos (messenger), 11 factuality of, 186, 192 Anomalia,
  • Space in Hellenistic Philosophy

    Space in Hellenistic Philosophy

    Graziano Ranocchia, Christoph Helmig, Christoph Horn (Eds.) Space in Hellenistic Philosophy Space in Hellenistic Philosophy Critical Studies in Ancient Physics Edited by Graziano Ranocchia Christoph Helmig Christoph Horn ISBN 978-3-11-036495-8 e-ISBN 978-3-11-036585-6 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data A CIP catalog record for this book has been applied for at the Library of Congress. Bibliographic information published by the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliografie; detailed bibliographic data are available on the Internet at http://dnb.dnb.de. © 2014 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston Printing and binding: CPI books GmbH, Leck ♾ Printed on acid-free paper Printed in Germany www.degruyter.com Acknowledgements This volume has been published with the financial support of the European Research Council (ERC) and the National Research Council of Italy (CNR). Thanks are due to Aurora Corti for her editorial work and to Sergio Knipe for the linguis- tic revision of the manuscript. Table of Contents Abbreviations IX Introduction 1 Keimpe Algra Aristotle’s Conception of Place and its Reception in the Hellenistic Period 11 Michele Alessandrelli Aspects and Problems of Chrysippus’ Conception of Space 53 Teun Tieleman Posidonius on the Void. A Controversial Case of Divergence Revisited 69 David Konstan Epicurus on the Void 83 Holger Essler Space and Movement in Philodemus’ De dis 3: an Anti-Aristotelian Account 101 Carlos Lévy Roman Philosophy under
  • SEXTUS on TIME: NOTES on SCEPTICAL METHOD and DOXOGRAPHICAL TRANSMISSION∗ Susanne Bobzien

    SEXTUS on TIME: NOTES on SCEPTICAL METHOD and DOXOGRAPHICAL TRANSMISSION∗ Susanne Bobzien

    Forthcoming in: K. Algra. & K. Ierodiakonou (eds.), ‘Sextus Empiricus and Ancient Physics’, Cambridge: CUP 2013. SEXTUS ON TIME: NOTES ON SCEPTICAL METHOD AND DOXOGRAPHICAL TRANSMISSION∗ Susanne Bobzien For the most part, this paper is not a philosophical paper in any strict sense. Rather, it focuses on the numerous exegetical puzzles in Sextus Empiricus’ two main passages on time (M X.169-247 and PH III.136-50), which, once sorted, help to explain how Sextus works and what the views are which he examines. Thus the paper provides an improved base from which to put more specifically philosophical questions to the text. The paper has two main sections, which can, by and large, be read independently. Each is about a topic which, to my knowledge, has so far not been treated in detail. The first section is concerned with the argument structures of the two main passages on time in Sextus, pointing out various irregularities in the overall argument in both passages, as well as parallels and differences, and asks the question what kinds of scepticism and sceptical methods we find in the various parts of each passage. The second section focuses on the doxographical accounts of time in the two passages: what they are, how they compare with surviving parallels, to what philosophers we can attribute those accounts for which Sextus himself provides either no, or more than one, possible ascriptions, and how Sextus treats the doxographical material. This discussion is inspired by the contributions Michael Frede offered on this topic the day before his untimely death.1 ∗ I am grateful for the useful and spirited discussion of a draft version of this paper by the participants of the Symposium Hellenisticum.
  • Pre-Socratic Thought in Sophoclean Tragedy

    Pre-Socratic Thought in Sophoclean Tragedy

    University of Pennsylvania ScholarlyCommons Publicly Accessible Penn Dissertations 2006 Pre-Socratic Thought in Sophoclean Tragedy Meggan Jennell Arp University of Pennsylvania Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations Part of the Ancient Philosophy Commons, and the Classical Literature and Philology Commons Recommended Citation Arp, Meggan Jennell, "Pre-Socratic Thought in Sophoclean Tragedy" (2006). Publicly Accessible Penn Dissertations. 473. https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations/473 This paper is posted at ScholarlyCommons. https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations/473 For more information, please contact [email protected]. Pre-Socratic Thought in Sophoclean Tragedy Abstract This dissertation investigates the relationship between the plays of Sophocles and the philosophy of the pre-Socratics. The question considered is whether or not Sophocles' tragedies were influenced by pre- Socratic thought in distinction from Sophistic thought. Scholars generally have recognized the impact of the Sophists on Sophoclean tragedy and determined it to be evidence of Sophocles' primarily negative dramatic treatment of so-called 'Enlightenment' thought of the 5th century B.C.E. This study determines the presence of pre-Socratic thought in the tragedies of Sophocles and views its influence as a primarily positive instance of 5th century 'Enlightenment' thought in these plays, in contrast to the general depiction of Sophistic thought. Three works of Sophocles' extant plays are examined in separate chapters. A chapter on Sophocles' Philoctetes elucidates traces of the philosophy of Heraclitus in this tragedy. Sophocles deploys certain Heraclitean images in the character portrayal of Philoctetes, whose moral outlook contrasts with the Sophistic vision of Odysseus. A second chapter, on the Trachiniae, argues that this tragedy recalls the philosophy of Heraclitus, as well as 'Enlightenment' thought of the Ionian scientific tradition in general.
  • Chrysippus and the First Known Description of Cataract Surgery

    Chrysippus and the First Known Description of Cataract Surgery

    medicines Review Chrysippus and the First Known Description of Cataract Surgery Juliusz Grzybowski 1 and Andrzej Grzybowski 2,3,* 1 Faculty of Fine Arts and Pedagogy, Adam Mickiewicz University Pozna´n,Nowy Swiat´ 28-30 Street, 62-800 Kalisz, Poland; [email protected] 2 Department of Ophthalmology, University of Warmia and Mazury, 10-561 Olsztyn, Poland 3 Institute for Research in Ophthalmology, Foundation for Ophthalmology Development, 60-554 Poznan, Poland * Correspondence: [email protected] Received: 1 June 2020; Accepted: 19 June 2020; Published: 22 June 2020 Abstract: Although the origin of cataract surgery is unknown, the earliest identified mention of cataract surgery comes from Chrysippus in the 3rd century B.C.E. This historical review analyses this first description of cataract surgery from both philosophical and linguistic perspectives, within the original context in which early cataract surgeries were performed, as well as within the context of contemporary medical knowledge. Keywords: history of ophthalmology; cataract surgery; Chrysippus 1. Introduction The place and time in which cataract surgery originated are uncertain. It is often stated that the earliest description of cataract surgery comes from Sushruta, who probably lived in the 6th century B.C.E. However, the earliest surviving manuscripts of his work, “Sushruta Samhita: Uttara Tantra” date from the Common Era [1]. Thus, the earliest available description of cataract surgery comes from Chrysippus and was written in the 3rd century B.C.E. Interestingly, Chrysippus was known as a philosopher rather than as a physician. The aim of this study is to analyse the first mention of cataract surgery from both philosophical and linguistic perspectives within the original context in which early cataract surgeries were performed, as well as within the context of contemporary medical knowledge.
  • Heraclitus: the River Fragments

    Heraclitus: the River Fragments

    Binghamton University The Open Repository @ Binghamton (The ORB) The Society for Ancient Greek Philosophy Newsletter 12-1989 Heraclitus: The River Fragments Leonardo Taran Columbia University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://orb.binghamton.edu/sagp Part of the Ancient History, Greek and Roman through Late Antiquity Commons, Ancient Philosophy Commons, and the History of Philosophy Commons Recommended Citation Taran, Leonardo, "Heraclitus: The River Fragments" (1989). The Society for Ancient Greek Philosophy Newsletter. 253. https://orb.binghamton.edu/sagp/253 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by The Open Repository @ Binghamton (The ORB). It has been accepted for inclusion in The Society for Ancient Greek Philosophy Newsletter by an authorized administrator of The Open Repository @ Binghamton (The ORB). For more information, please contact [email protected]. P urma δ ΐ Leonardo Taran, Heraclitus : The River Fragments. Heraclitus* was known in antiquity for the obscurity and the ambiguity, of his expression, and there can be little doubt .that he purposely made-use of ambiguity to emphasize the paradoxical character of some of his doctrines. For us who so many centuries later wish to understand his thought, these characteristics are increased and magnified by the very way his thought has been transmitted: citations and paraphrases by others whose interests were in most cases alien to his. Yet many ancient authors cited him to find authority and corroboration for their views in such an archaic thinker. Other writers, among whom the Christian apologists are prominent, saw in him the ultimate origin of opinions they set out to confute.