Metrodorus of Lampsacus in Plutarch Autor(es): Roskam, Geert Publicado por: Imprensa da Universidade de Coimbra URL persistente: URI:http://hdl.handle.net/10316.2/47367 DOI: DOI:https://doi.org/10.14195/9789892616407_8 Accessed : 23-Sep-2021 14:14:24 A navegação consulta e descarregamento dos títulos inseridos nas Bibliotecas Digitais UC Digitalis, UC Pombalina e UC Impactum, pressupõem a aceitação plena e sem reservas dos Termos e Condições de Uso destas Bibliotecas Digitais, disponíveis em https://digitalis.uc.pt/pt-pt/termos. Conforme exposto nos referidos Termos e Condições de Uso, o descarregamento de títulos de acesso restrito requer uma licença válida de autorização devendo o utilizador aceder ao(s) documento(s) a partir de um endereço de IP da instituição detentora da supramencionada licença. Ao utilizador é apenas permitido o descarregamento para uso pessoal, pelo que o emprego do(s) título(s) descarregado(s) para outro fim, designadamente comercial, carece de autorização do respetivo autor ou editor da obra. Na medida em que todas as obras da UC Digitalis se encontram protegidas pelo Código do Direito de Autor e Direitos Conexos e demais legislação aplicável, toda a cópia, parcial ou total, deste documento, nos casos em que é legalmente admitida, deverá conter ou fazer-se acompanhar por este aviso. pombalina.uc.pt digitalis.uc.pt Les textes ici réunis invitent à aborder l’œuvre du Chéronéen selon le prisme choisi : ils HVMANITAS SVPPLEMENTVM • ESTUDOS MONOGRÁFICOS déclinent différentes « figures » selon six sections, qui ne sont évidemment pas sans relation ISSN: 2182-8814 parfois les unes avec les autres, mais tâchent également lorsque cela est possible de distinguer entre « sage » et « philosophe » : sagesse et types de sages ; figures « mythiques Apresentação: esta série destina-se a publicar estudos de fundo sobre um leque variado de » ; le sage et le politique ; figures de philosophes ; figures exemplaires « en situation » ; temas e perspetivas de abordagem (literatura, cultura, história antiga, arqueologia, história Représentations et relectures. da arte, filosofia, língua e linguística), mantendo embora como denominador comum os Estudos Clássicos e sua projeção na Idade Média, Renascimento e receção na atualidade. 61 OBRA PUBLICADA COM A COORDENAÇÃO CIENTÍFICA Breve nota curricular sobre os coordenadores do volume Figures de sages, Olivier Guerrier est Professeur en Littérature française de la Renaissance à l’Université de Toulouse Jean Jaurès, et ancien membre de l’Institut Universitaire de France. Il est spécialiste de La Boétie et de Montaigne - et actuel Président de la Société Internationale des Amis de figures de philosophes Montaigne (SIAM) –, des rapports entre Littérature et savoirs dans l’humanisme, ainsi que de la réception moderne de Plutarque ; à ce titre, il codirigeait, avec la Françoise Frazier dans l’œuvre de (Décédée le 14 décembre 2016), l’édition critique des Œuvres morales et meslées, dans la traduction d’Amyot. dans l’œuvre de Plutarque dans l’œuvre Plutarque Figures de sages, figures de philosophes figures de sages, Figures Delfim Leão est Professeur à l’Institut d’Études Classiques et chercheur au Centre d’Études Classiques et Humanistes de l’Université de Coimbra. Ses principaux domaines d’intérêt sont .) S D l’histoire ancienne, le droit et la théorie politique des Grecs, la pragmatique théâtrale et le E ( roman antique. Il s’intéresse également beaucoup aux humanités numériques. Parmi ses principaux travaux récents, se trouvent D. F. Leão and P. J. Rhodes, The Laws of Solon. A UERRIER G new Edition, with Introduction, Translation and Commentary (London, I. B. Tauris, 2015) ; D. F. Leão and G. Thür (Hrsg.) Symposion 2015. Vorträge zur griechischen und hellenistischen LIVIER O Rechtsgeschichte (Wien, Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 2016). & Avec Lautaro Roig Lanzillotta, il est le rédacteur en chef de Brill’s Plutarch Studies. EÃO L Delfim Leão & Olivier Guerrier (eds.) ELFIM D IMPRENSA DA UNIVERSIDADE DE COIMBRA COIMBRA UNIVERSITY PRESS Coimbra Geert Roskam Metrodorus of Lampsacus in Plutarch Geert Roskam KU Leuven ([email protected]; ORCID: 0000-0002-8158-6458) Abstract: Metrodorus of Lampsacus was one of the most significant figures of the first generation of Epicureans. In this paper, all the passages from Plutarch’s works that contain information about Metrodorus are examined in detail. For methodological reasons, we first briefly deal with Metrodorus’ philosophical position, since this enables us to evaluate the details of Metrodorus’ life against the background of his theoretical convictions (thus taking into account the ancients’ own concern for consistency). The second part of the paper then focuses on biographical data (Metrodorus’ illness, his ‘marriage’, his quarrel with his brother Timocrates, and his friendship with Mithres). Keywords: Plutarch, Metrodorus, Epicureanism 1. Metrodorus, a bad model? “Do everything as if Epicurus were watching you1”. This advice could give Epicureans something to hold on to in the tribulations of everyday life. The master’s general and abstract reflections on the nature of virtue and the importance of a careful calculus of pleasure and pain provided the necessary theoretical framework, but in concrete circumstances, we are often confronted with particular questions that require specific answers. Then, it may be very helpful to recall great models and draw inspiration from their conduct. Plutarch agrees on this point. The man who makes progress towards virtue sets before his eyes famous models and reflects: What would Plato have done in this case? What would Epameinondas have said? How would Lycurgus have conducted himself, or Agesilaus?2 Plutarch and Epicurus thus fundamentally agreed about the interesting opportunities that such models of human wisdom and virtue can offer, but they disagreed in answering the question of who should be regarded as appropriate models. From an Epicurean point of view, the models are the distinguished teachers of the Garden, whereas Plutarch prefers Plato and the great statesmen of the past. The latter’s accomplishments are related at length in the Parallel Lives and presented to the reader as a source of inspiration. But eminent philosophers like Plato or Socrates no less qualify as models. Plutarch did not write a series 1 Seneca, epist. 25,5 (= fr. 211 Us.). 2 De prof. in virt. 85AB; cf. Roskam, 2005, 331-332. All translations are from the LCL. https://doi.org/10.14195/978-989-26-1640-7_8 109 Metrodorus of Lampsacus in Plutarch of biographies of these philosophers3, but many of his works contain anecdotes that reveal their character, manner and disposition4. And just as the Parallel Lives contain a few negative examples that illustrate virtuous behaviour e contrario5, so Plutarch also repeatedly mentions negative examples of philosophers. Prominent among them are the Epicureans, who are usually characterised as inveterate hedonists and subversive atheists. In this contribution, I focus on Plutarch’s view of Metrodorus of Lampsacus, one of the principal figures among the Epicureans of the first generation. As Plutarch is by far our most important non-Epicurean source about Metrodorus’ life and philosophical convictions6, an exhaustive and thorough discussion of the relevant material that can be found in his works can significantly contribute to a better understanding of Metrodorus. Before turning to the different passages, I would like to make two more general preliminary observations. a) Plutarch quite often connects Metrodorus closely with Epicurus. This is not surprising, of course, and reflects the previous tradition. Cicero aptly calls Metrodorus a paene alter Epicurus7 and the philological problems which this close relationship between the two Epicureans entails are well-known8. Several statements are both ascribed to Epicurus and to Metrodorus, and it cannot even be excluded that they could indeed be found in the writings of both thinkers, who then borrowed insights from one another. Epicurus and Metrodorus were cheek by jowl, and thus they also appear in Plutarch’s writings9. Quotations from their works are juxtaposed as cumulative support for the Epicurean point of view10, and they generally appear as the two great coryphaei of the Garden. This picture corresponds to what we find in the Epicurean sources. Several quotations from Metrodorus were inserted in Epicurean collections such as the Vatican sayings11, Metrodorus himself connected his situation and that of 3 As far as we know, he wrote a Life of Crates (Lamprias catalogue 37; cf. Julian, orat. 6, 200b = fr. 10 Sandbach). Other lost works that may have contained relevant material are On famous men (Lamprias catalogue 168) and On the first philosophers and their successors (Lamprias catalogue 184). Cf. also On the Cyrenaic philosophers (Lamprias catalogue 188 – it is unlikely, however, that Plutarch would have regarded these philosophers as models). 4 Cf. Nic. 1,5 and De Her. mal. 856D. 5 Demetr. 1,1-6. It is by no means clear, however, whether such ‘negative’ Lives are entirely negative. See on this esp. Duff, 1999, 53-65. 6 Cf. Koerte, 1890, 531-532. 7 Cicero, fin. 2,92 (= fr. 5 K.). 8 See esp. Clay, 1983. 9 See, e.g., De def. or. 420D; Non posse 1087A; 1091E; 1096A; 1098B; Adv. Colot. 1127E. See also Heracleides’ reaction to Plutarch’s attack on Colotes in Non posse 1086E. 10 See Non posse 1091AB (ὅμοια δὲ καὶ τὰ Ἐπικούρου λέγοντος κτλ.). 11 Koerte, 1890 included SV 10 (fr. 37), 27 (= fr. 47), 30 (= fr. 53), 31 (= fr. 51), 41 (= fr. 59), 45 (= fr. 48) and 47 (= fr. 49) into his collection. In some cases, the arguments for his ascription are far from compelling, but several are supported by other sources and are plausible indeed. 110 Geert Roskam Epicurus in one of his letters12, and Epicurus wrote several commemorative writings in honour of Metrodorus13. There can be no doubt that Metrodorus was a significant figure and an authoritative source for the doctrine of the Garden, and Plutarch was surely right in regarding him as a “grosse pointure”.