sign in sign up
<<
Home , Herculaneum papyri, Otium, Philodemus, Tetrapharmakos

The W.H. Allen Memorial Lecture 2015: Changing Perceptions: and Epicurean Iris | Journal of the Classical Association of Victoria | New Series | Volume 28 | 2015

SONYA WURSTER today.1 is reputed to have been a prolific writer, but most of his works did not make the transition from roll to The W.H. Allen Memorial Lecture is an and then to manuscript. Instead, short annual lecture held at Ormond College to citations of Epicurus’ works appear in other commemorate the life and work of Barney writers. Often these writers are opponents of Allen (1875-1949), who was a teacher of Epicurus and misrepresent his teachings. The , Vice-Master at Ormond College works of , Plutarch, , and the first secretary of the Classical Seneca, Athenaeus and Lactantius fall into this Association of Victoria, as well as its category. Not all of the texts preserved by later second president — a combined service to scribes and scholars were hostile, but, as in the the CAV of 37 years. case of Diogenes Laertius’ doxographical work entitled ‘The Lives of Eminent ’, they can be Stoicising in nature. Of all the Greek philosophical schools, is perhaps the most widely It is in Diogenes’ work that we find Epicurus’ misunderstood. The extent to which the own words in the form of three letters. The school’s key messages have been obscured over letters detail Epicurus’ physical theory, offer a some 2000 years is most clearly seen in the way brief introduction to and give an account the term is used in a contemporary context. of their views on astronomy and meteorology.2 ‘Epicurean’ and ‘epicure’ now refer to a person Diogenes fills in the gaps on topics not covered devoted to sensual enjoyment, especially that by the letters,3 and he also provides a list of derived from food and drink, and there are Epicurus’ works.4 Diogenes also recorded the numerous food and wine magazines as well as Principal Sayings, also known as the restaurants that label themselves ‘epicurean’. (KD), short maxims designed for rote In comparison, the term ‘stoic’ refers to a learning by students. The recordedΚυρίαι person who can endure hardship or Δόξαιby Diogenes have some overlap with the so- without showing their feelings or complaining. called Vatican Sayings, whichδόξαι were found in Although this is reductive to the extreme, it a manuscript in the Vatican. Likewise, the does get across the way that ancient KD were recorded by Diogenes Oenoanda focused on feeling indifference, or ἀ , in an inscription, which was discovered in towards anything external. Epicureans and Turkey in 1884. The inscription also records Stoics were fierce rivals in the ancientπάθεια world, some of Diogenes’ own views on Epicurean and the way that the term stoic more closely teachings. There are variations between our reflects its namesake, while its epicurean three sources for the KD, which suggests that counterpart does not, is no accident. First of all, it is the result of parallels between Stoicism and , which enabled key Stoic ideas to 1 Reynolds and Wilson (1991). be incorporated and transformed by Christian 2 The Letter to Herodotus (Diog. Laert. 10.34-83) outlines theologians. In contrast, Epicureanism, with Epicurus’ physical doctrines; the Letter to Pythocles (Diog. its emphasis on and the denial of Laert. 10.83-116) offers an account of astronomy and mete- divine providence, jarred with the Church’s orology; the Letter to Menoeceus (Diog. Laert. 10.121-135) is teachings. Secondly, it is the result of which a very brief introduction to Epicurean ethics. ancient texts were preserved, and the interests 3 For an introductory discussion of Epicurus’ views, see of later scholiasts and commentators largely Diog. Laert. 10.29-34. For a report of Epicurus’ ethical dictated which texts have come down to us positions, see Diog. Laert. 10.117-121. For the difference between Cyrenaic and Epicurean , see Diog. Laert. 10.136-138. 4 Diog. Laert. 10.27.

12 13 Iris | Journal of the Classical Association of Victoria | New Series | Volume 28 | 2015

they were ‘an organic, expandable collection Epicurus’ Greek into , which means that of Epicurus’ sayings that were sometimes sometimes ’ discussion lacks the transmitted orally.’5 Another important source clarity of Epicurus’ in key respects.11 for Epicureanism is Lucretius’ epic poem, or The nature of things, six books I will begin by discussing what we know of of hexameter verse that outlines Epicurus’ Epicurean doctrines based on the sources that physical and epistemological doctrines. The have survived in the manuscript tradition. I source for this was most likely Epicurus’ On will also highlight some of the misconceptions nature.6 Despite Cicero’s hostility toward propagated by hostile writers that have impaired Epicureanism, his De finibus and Tusculanae our understanding of Epicurus’ teachings. I Disputationes are important sources of will then discuss the impact of the discovery of information for Epicurean ethics, while De the of the Papyri at , with natura deorum presents Epicurean views of particular focus on the works of Philodemus. the gods alongside the views of the Stoic and Material from Philodemus, who wrote on a Academic schools. Similarly, Plutarch, despite wide range of topics including death, , his dislike of Epicurean teachings, offers some music, , logic, , epistemology, evidence, especially in his attack on , a the history of philosophy and ethics, has follower of Epicurus. We also find information been fundamental to changing perceptions in his critique of the Epicurean dictum to of Epicurean philosophy. His works have also live unnoticed in Is ‘Live Inconspicuously’ a provided insight into how Epicureans dealt wise precept? and in his polemical piece called with the competing claims of philosophy and a ‘It is quite impossible to enjoy life on Epicurean Roman context. principles’.

The problems with these sources are many. In Epicurus’ Teachings the case of Diogenes Laertius, we are left with a reductive account derived from Stoic sources.7 was in some part a While Cicero’s account is often biased and response to its socio-political environment, incomplete in the sense that he transmits only and the growth of monarchs after the classical what he selected.8 Cicero also seems to have period has been viewed as giving rise to relied on later Epicurean handbooks rather that prized an authoritative than the works of Epicurus, and he does not and utterly consistent self, whose power lay always seem to have understood what he was in being exactly the opposite to what gave transmitting—or he chose to misrepresent the monarchs their power. Thus, many schools material.9 Despite the fact that Plutarch and of Hellenistic philosophy, Epicureanism Sextus Empiricus more often quote directly included, espoused frugality, simplicity and from Epicurus himself, they also tend to adaptability.12 However, these schools were distort the school’s messages.10 Of all these not simply responding to their contemporary sources, Lucretius is the most reliable, but context, and the ideas of were even he poses problems as he is transforming particularly influential on their ethical focus. Like Socrates, Hellenistic philosophy focused 5 Gordon (1996), 64. on the questioning of convention, the removal of irrational fears and desires, the care of the 6 Sedley (1998), xvi; 135-143. 7 Gordon (1996), 52. 8 Hutchinson (1994), xiv. 11 For example, Lucretius uses the Latin term sensus to refer to both to refer to both sense ( ἴ ) and feelings 9 Hutchinson (1994), xiv. ( ) (Císar (2001), 24; Glidden (1979), 155). α σθησις 10 Hutchinson (1994), xiv. 12πάθη Long (2006), 15.

14 The W.H. Allen Memorial Lecture 2015: Changing Perceptions: Philodemus and Epicurean Philosophy

soul` and self-mastery.13 However, you had to to gain this pleasure is to live a virtuous and make a choice as to which school to follow, and, simple life. Secondly, Epicurus teaches that like all the Hellenistic schools, Epicureanism we must consider the consequences of amoral was a way of life. Adherents were expected to and antisocial behaviour. This particular live their lives according to the metaphysical, argument is apparent in Epicurean teachings epistemological and ethical teachings of on justice and friendship, and the complete Epicurus. Epicurus himself functioned as a Epicurean life is lawful, aims at peace and role model, as someone who had lived his life seeks to promote the wellbeing of others. For in accordance with his own teachings. The most Epicureans this will be the wellbeing of outcome of following the school’s doctrines one’s friends, but for a select number this may was ( ὐ ), which is often be humankind more broadly.15 translated as ‘’, although it is better rendered as ‘livingε δαιμονία well’. Happiness implies Epicurean hedonism is thus a strange sort a temporary emotion whereas living well of hedonism. It is characterised by conveys the degree to which eudaimonia was (ἀ ) or ‘peace of mind’ and ‘’ the ongoing objective of an Epicurean’s actions (ἀ ) ‘freedom from pain’, which are and attitudes. In fact, Epicurus, like the Stoics, attainedταραξία by living simply, by understanding argued eudaimonia is a natural good sought by bothπονία how the world works and the limits of all humans. In short, he regarded humans, our desires. Epicurus argued that if four basic regardless of gender, age, or social status as principals were followed, then freedom from predisposed towards eudaimonia, which could fear and and thereby happiness could be gained with the aid of philosophy.14 be achieved. The four key doctrines—that what is good is easy to attain, what bad is easy to The goal of attaining ὐ was common endure and that the gods, and death, should among the different schools. However, what not be feared—are referred to as the ‘four-fold varied, was their definitionε δαιμονία of what a eudaimon remedy’ or ( ), life actually was. For , it was activity and they underpin Epicurean ethics. How did and the display of virtue in accordance with Epicurus arrive at the viewτετραφάρμακος that these four reason. For the Stoics, virtue and the right simple points could provide the key to our well attitude were needed for eudaimonia. Rather being? He did so by modifying the atomist controversially, Epicurus defined eudaimonia theories of , which held that the as hēdonē (ἡ ) or ‘pleasure’. The modern basic components of the world are indivisible philosophical position of egoistic hedonism bits of matter (atoms) moving around in space advances theδονή view that morally speaking we (void).16 A particularly problematic aspect should do whatever makes us happiest. As a of the Democritean theory of atoms was its result, it proposes that we only worry about fatalism and scepticism. Democritus had the consequences of our actions for ourselves. regarded the senses to be misleading and he Their effect on anyone else is not important. was unsure if it was possible to gain knowledge Epicurean egoistic hedonism varies quite at all.17 Epicurus resolves the scepticism substantially from the description I have of Democritean by showing that just outlined. Firstly, it has a very specific atomism is consistent with sense perception.18 definition of happiness, which is a negative He removes the fatalism by introducing his one that defines pleasure not as sensual gratification but as the absence of mental 15 Mitsis (1989). disturbance and physical pain. The best way 16 O’Keefe (2010), 16. Democritus was a pre-Socratic who lived c. 460 BCE to c. 370 BCE.

13 Long (2006), 5. 17 O’Keefe (2010), 16.

14 Long (2006), 30. 18 O’Keefe (2010), 18.

14 15 Iris | Journal of the Classical Association of Victoria | New Series | Volume 28 | 2015

theory of the swerve, which is the random pleasure and pain. The criterion of feeling, movement of an atom that breaks any sequence pathē ( ), is the centrepiece of Epicurean of antecedent cause.19 ethical choices, and they judge good choices to be thoseπάθη based on a feeling of pleasure and bad The three main areas of Epicurean philosophy, choices to be those based on a feeling of pain.23 metaphysics, ethics and epistemology, are Pleasure also comes in two forms: the first is mutually dependent and reinforcing. The a kinetic sort, a pleasure that arises from the Epicurean telos ( ), or goal of life, to live temporary satisfaction of a desire. For example, free from anxiety and pain, is confirmed by the pleasure felt while drinking a good glass of their empiricist theoryτέλος of knowledge, which is wine. The second, static pleasure, is the state in turn the result of their views on atomism and after a desire has been fulfilled.24 What this a naturalistic account of evolution. According means is that Epicureans did not dismiss all to Epicurus everything is composed of atoms desires. Instead they assessed desires based and voids,20 and he explained all natural on three categories: natural and necessary, phenomena in atomistic terms, arguing against natural and unnecessary and unnatural and ’s theory of the forms and the belief that unnecessary.25 Natural and necessary desires the gods control the lives of humans. Because of are those that bring pleasure and are naturally his materialistic bent, he argued that the senses limited, such as simple food and a simple help us gain knowledge, including knowledge house. Unnecessary and natural desires are that the goal of life is pleasure, which could be those that aim for variation of that feeling of achieved by limiting our desires, by removing pleasure, for example luxury food. The third our fear of the gods and death. category are unnatural and unnecessary desires. These are unbounded desires, such Aside from seeking to explain the nature of as wealth and power, which cause pain and the universe, Epicurus also wished to clarify bring no pleasure. Negative desires are the the nature of the soul. Like the universe, it result of mistaken beliefs as to what will bring is also made of atoms, because all things happiness. must be made up of atoms. That the soul is composed of atoms is evident from the fact This emphasis on pleasure led Epicurus to that, firstly, it is aware of what happens in the argue that nothing is good or bad per se but body and, secondly, it sets physical movement only for its contribution to pleasure. This is in motion.21 The atomic structure of the soul the case with Epicurean virtues, which are has important consequences for Epicurean instrumental. Thus moderation, courage, ethics. First, since all atoms are perishable and friendship and justice are valuable only so too is the human soul, which means that for their contribution to pleasure. Justice death should not be feared, because at death contributes to pleasure because it is a mutual our atoms will disperse and we will cease to pact between humans not to harm each other, feel.22 In this, the Epicurean view ran counter but it is nothing in itself.26 Likewise, the well- to mainstream beliefs of an which known Epicurean dictum that withdrawal from potentially included punishment by the gods. political life is the best means of achieving Second, it is because the soul is made up of security arises not from an issue with political atoms that we have sensations and experience involvement itself but from the fact that people

19 Lucr. 2.218-219; Lucr. 2.251-255; Long (2006), 158. 23 Epicurus Ep. Men. 129. 20 Epicurus Ep. Hdt. 40; Morel (2009), 90 24 Diog. Laert. 10.136. 21 Epicurus Ep. Hdt. 63. 25 Epicurus Ep. Men. 129; Epicurus RS 29. 22 Epicurus Ep. Men. 124; Lucr. 3.417-614. 26 See Epicurus RS 31-33.

16 The W.H. Allen Memorial Lecture 2015: Changing Perceptions: Philodemus and Epicurean Philosophy

suffer unnecessary harm when trying to RS 58).29 In the case of both RS 7 and RS attain political office.27 This is a point of view 58, Epicurus does not prohibit participation articulated in RS 7: in politics rather he seeks to highlight the general misconceptions that lead people into ἔνδοξοι καὶ περίβλεπτοί τινες taking part. Epicurus’ strategy of showing the ἐβουλήθησαν γενέσθαι, τὴν ἐξ way that incorrect beliefs lead to unhappiness ἀνθρώπων ἀσφάλειαν οὕτω highlights the therapeutic nature of Epicurean νομίζοντες περιποιήσεσθαι ὤστε, teachings, and they aim to help followers εἰ μὲν ἀσφαλὴς ὁ τῶν τοιούτων overcome the negative desires that inhibit their βίος, ἀπέλαβον τὸ τῆς φύσεως happiness. ἀγαθόν· εἰ δὲ μὴ ἀσφαλὴς, οὐκ ἔχουσιν οὗ ἕνεκα ἐξ ἀρχῆς κατὰ τὸ Epicurus’ social theory reflects his view on the τῆς φύσεως οἰκεῖον ὠρέχθησαν. importance of pleasure, and he regards friends as essential for gaining ataraxia and aponia. Some wish to become famous and According to Epicurus, friendship is, in fact, respected, believing that they would the best means of gaining eudaimonia, because gain security from men. Thus if the it offers security when one has withdrawn from life of such men is secure, they acquire the many.30 Just how important friendship was the natural good; if it is not secure, to Epicurus is indicated by his statement that ὁ they do not have that for which they ῖ ὶ ὶ strove from the beginning according , ὧ ὸ ἐ ὸ ἀ , ὸ what is naturally congenital. γενναὲ ἀ ος περ (‘[t]heσοφίαν high-mindedκα φιλίαν manμάλιστα is most (Epicurus RS 7)28 γίγνεταιengaged in νwisdomτ μέν andστι friendship,θνητ ν γαθόν of whichτ δthe θάνατον former is a mortal good and the latter Here, Epicurus suggests that politics is a an immortal good’, Epicurus Sent. Vat. 78). possible, although highly unlikely way to Friendship rates more highly for Epicurus than gain ataraxia because it is too dependent on wisdom because the gods have friends but do fame and the respect of others, over which not require wisdom to live a happy life—they we have no control. In short, this sort of have blessed and immortal natures which security is based on external goods, which means that wisdom is unnecessary for them.31 are inherently fragile and beyond our control. The significance of Epicurus’ statement that In contrast, true security is self-mastery over friendship is an immortal good lies not only our own desires. This is an idea we see in the fact that friendship is as important as expressed in KD 58, when Epicurus contrasts wisdom but that it allows humans to be more the true freedom of the wise man to that of like the gods, a central goal of Epicurean the politician: ἐ ἑ ὺ ἐ ῦ ὶ sages.32 ὰ ἐ ὶ ὰ (‘[t]hey must freeκλυτέον themselvesαυτο fromς κtheτο prisonπερ Based on the sources preserved in the τof generalγκύκλια educationκα πολιτικ and politics’,δεσμωτηρίου Epicurus manuscript tradition, including Epicurus’ own letters, Lucretius and the doxographical tradition, we are presented with a reasonably rounded image of Epicurus and his philosophies, 27 Roskam (2007), 38. 29 Fowler (1989), 125. 28 Citations in Ancient Greek are from Muehll, Peter von der (ed.), (1966), Epicurus: Epistulae Tres et Ratae Sententiae 30 Roskam (2007), 38. (Stuttgart: Teubner). My translation follows Roskam (2007, 31 Rist (1980), 122. On the fact that the gods have friends, 38), who has argued based on analogy with other instances see Phld. De dis 3.1 and fr. 85. of the term that ἐ should be understood as ‘from’ rather than ‘against’. 32 Long (2006), 10. ξ

16 17 Iris | Journal of the Classical Association of Victoria | New Series | Volume 28 | 2015

in the sense that we have information about context, that depict Epicureans as food-loving the school’s social theory and the three main sensualists. So, for example, he includes a branches of philosophy (metaphysics, ethics quote from Metrodorus, one of the school’s and epistemology). However, our knowledge founders, to his brother to Timocrates, in of Epicurus and his teachings without the which Metrodorus says that it is not the role of is an overly simplified Epicureans to save Greece ‘but to eat and drink one, and, as D.S. Hutchinson has noted, many wine, a pleasure and no harm to the belly’ modern philosophers still regard it ‘as a lazy- (ἀ ᾽ ἐ ὶ ἶ , ὦ , minded, shallow, pleasure-loving, immoral, ἀ ῶ ῇ ὶ ὶ ’, or godless travesty of real philosophy.’33 Such Plut.λλ Nonσθίειν posseκα 1098c).πίνειν 37ο νον Cicero’sΤιμόκρατες depiction perceptions are based partly on the extant ofβλαβ Epicureanς τ pleasureγαστρ isκα moreκεχαρισμένως nuanced. He Epicurean sources, because the writings of argues that having pleasure as a philosophical Epicurus which happen to have survived in the goal or telos ( ) is dangerous because manuscript tradition are, in fact, intentionally it is open to wilful misinterpretation by simple.34 Epicurus himself says that he has members of theτέλος Roman elite who use it to written the letters to help students who are at justify decadent lifestyles.38 He acknowledges the start of their development as Epicureans.35 the discursive power of misrepresenting the In the case of Lucretius, we likewise have a school’s hedonistic doctrines in the In Pisonem, writer who is trying to attract new recruits by saying audistis profecto dici philosophos Epicureos presenting Epicurean doctrine in poetic form. omnis res quae sint homini expetendae voluptate Lucretius famously compares himself to a metiri; rectene an secus, nihil ad nos aut, si ad nos, doctor, who must sometimes disguise the bitter nihil ad hoc tempus (‘of course, you have heard taste of medicine for children.36 However, the it said that Epicurean philosophers measure lack of detailed Epicurean argumentation in everything that is desired by man by pleasure; the manuscript tradition does not account for whether rightly or not is nothing to us, or, if it the misconceptions of Epicurean pleasure. Nor is, it is not important right now’, Cic. Pis. 68).39 does it explain why they have been represented Cicero thus presents the misinterpretation of as atheistic, anti-intellectuals. What does Epicurean pleasure as a choice, both for those account for these misconceptions is the hostile who disparage it and for those who incorrectly source tradition. practice it.

Aside from the school’s telos, ancient writers Hostile Sources also took issue with their apparent injunction to withdraw from politics. Plutarch accuses The Epicurean emphasis on pleasure and Epicurean views of destroying human the apparent advice to withdraw from life because of their opinions of politics politics together with their denial of divine and justice.40 Cicero likewise presents the providence were frequently misconstrued by Epicurean stance on politics as anti-social, hostile sources. Plutarch typifies the tradition a representation that he constructs by of misrepresenting the nature of Epicurean comparing Epicurean and Roman values. pleasure, and he is fond of including quotes from Epicurean sources, entirely without 37 Citation in Ancient Greek are from Bernardakis, Gre- gorius N. (1895), Plutarch. Moralia. (Leipzig: Teubner). See Gordon (2004, 16) for a discussion of this quote.

33 Hutchinson (1994), xv. 38 Cic. Sest. 23. 34 Everson (1999), 190. 39 Citations in Latin are from Nisbet, R. G. M. (1961), M. 35 See, for example, Epicurus Ep.Hdt. 35. Tulli Ciceronis: In L. Calpurnium Pisonem : oratio (Oxford: Clarendon). 36 Lucr. 4.11-17. 40 Plut. Adv. Col. 1127d-1127e.

18 The W.H. Allen Memorial Lecture 2015: Changing Perceptions: Philodemus and Epicurean Philosophy

Where the ideal statesman actively creates of was the Epicurean view on sense- leisure for others through his involvement perception: if the only things which were in politics,41 Cicero claims that the result of considered to exist were those which they had Epicurean quietude is the end of the .42 directly experienced, then how could they Through Lucius Calpurnius Piso Caesoninus, think the gods exist?47 Epicureans were not a famous Epicurean and possible patron of atheists, and their belief that the gods did not Philodemus, Cicero depicts Epicureans as interfere in the lives of humans was not a cover selfishly looking after their own desires.43 He for this view. In fact, the gods were important even has Piso say that those who maintain the behavioural models for Epicureans.48 It is also state (rei publicae consulendum), who feel a sense possible to reconcile their views on atomism of dignity (dignitati esse serviendum), who lead with their belief in the gods as immortal. We lives dictated by a sense of duty (offici rationem know that the Epicureans thought of the gods in omni vita) and who sacrifice themselves for as immortal because they believed that gods their fatherland (adeunda pro patria pericula, were able to replenish with external matter vulnera excipienda, mortem oppetendam) belong to and because, unlike humans, they were this mad and insane group of men.44 In putting composed of a material that allowed atoms to these words into Piso’s mouth, Cicero distorts pass through them.49 Likewise, although the the Epicurean message, that it is misguided to Epicureans firmly held that sense-perception believe that political power will bring security. was an essential element in gaining knowledge, they also argued that it was possible to infer the Together with their views on political existence of unobservable phenomena, such involvement, Epicureans were also lambasted as the existence of the gods, from observable for their belief in the nature of the gods, and phenomena. they were often labelled atheists because they did not hold the belief that the gods played a role in human affairs.45 Epicurean views 47 Cic. Nat. D. 1.88. The question of whether or not the on bodily nature provided a further reason Epicureans held realist or idealist views of the gods contin- why they were called atheists. The Epicurean ues to be an issue of some debate. Long and Sedley (1987, 145) were among the first to suggest that Epicurean gods argument that everything is composed of were only thought-constructs, which is the idealist view. destructible material compounds, except for Sedley (2011) has continued to argue that they held an the gods who are indestructible, was heavily idealist view of the gods. Konstan (2011) in the same vol- criticised by other schools, who said that this ume argues the opposite, saying that the Epicureans held a was just a cover for the atheistic tendencies of realist view, which means that they conceived of the gods the Garden.46 A further ground for charges as real beings, composed of atoms and as possessing prop- erties that correspond to the (‘preconception’ or ‘basic grasp’) of them as blessed and immortal beings. πρόληψις 41 Cic. Rep. 1.7. Obbink (1996, 3-6 and 2002) also examines the issue more indirectly. For a brief discussion of the topic, see also Kon- 42 Cic. Rep. 1.9. stan (2008): 115-116. Asmis (2009) contextualises the dis- 43 Lucius Calpurnius Piso Caesoninus was consul in cussion within a broader examination of Epicurean views 58 BCE and proconsul of Macedonia in 57-55 BCE. His on sense perception. For Philodemus’ own views on sense daughter, Calpurnia, married Julius Caesar. He was from perception see De signis, in which he argues that a valid a plebeian family whose power increased in the second inference is made based on similarities. For how Philode- century BCE. See Nisbet (1961, v-vi) for Piso’s biography. mus’ views build on Epicurus’, see Asmis (2009), 88 and More recently Griffin (2001, 86) examines the historical 100. De Lacy and De Lacy (1941, 204-205) discuss the fact figure of Piso. that Philodemus uses the same theory of sense perception in De dis and De signis. For the importance of the Epicurean 44 Cic. Sest. 10.23. approach to logic, and its differences to Aristotelian logic, see Kapp (1947). 45 Obbink (1996), 16. Cic. Nat. D. 1.85. 48 Phld. De piet. 71.12-19. 46 Konstan (2011), 54; Obbink (1996), 3; Obbink (2002), 185. 49 Konstan (2011), 57; Lucr. 5.146-154; Cic. Nat. D. 1.48.

18 19 Iris | Journal of the Classical Association of Victoria | New Series | Volume 28 | 2015

Epicurus was also criticised for his pedagogical philosophers and thinkers to continue to take views, and he was notorious in antiquity the negative interpretations of Epicurean for his negative attitude to paideia, the main pleasure, political involvement, theology and system of education in the Hellenistic period. attitudes to paideia at face value. Much of the evidence for Epicurus’ negative attitude toward paideia comes from hostile sources.50 These sources assume their readers’ The Discovery of the Papyri familiarity with the stereotype, already well established in antiquity, which depicted The discovery of the papyri at Herculaneum Epicurus as anti-intellectual.51 For writers such has been fundamental to changing perceptions as Cicero, Athenaeus and Plutarch, Epicurus’ of Epicureanism. The first papyri rolls were negative attitude toward paideia validated discovered at Herculaneum in October 1752. this image. Epicurus’ dismissal of poetry, Camillo Paderni, director of the Museum which within traditional education played an Herculanese and the workers initially took important role in providing moral guidance, the charred papyri for pieces of wood and also contributed to the perception of him as disposed of them. After a short time, their uneducated.52 Cicero and Athenaeus claim consistently cylindrical shape was noticed, but that Epicurus disparaged paideia to disguise they were thought to be rolls of fabric or fishing his own lack of education within the system.53 nets so were again discarded. Eventually This representation can be seen as an attempt Paderni realised that he had found papyri. to undermine his contribution to philosophy, Overtime it became clear that they belonged and these writers respond to Epicurus’ view to an Epicurean philosopher, Philodemus, that it only through the study of nature and and that they contained an amazingly diverse not paideia that we can achieve the Epicurean range of treatises on ethics, theology, logic and telos.54 Due to the limited number and nature epistemology, poetic, musical and rhetorical of the Epicurean sources, it was easy for theory, and the history of philosophy. When the papyri were first discovered, the outer 50 The perception of Epicurus as anti-paideia can be layers were scrapped off and the remaining understood as arising from his epistemological argument better-preserved portions of the papyri were that the study of nature or physiologia ( ) and not cut in half. In 1753 Padre Antonio Piaggio paideia is the best means of achieving the Epicurean telos from the Vatican was brought in to assist. He (‘end’) of pleasure, which was characterizedφυσιολογία not by sensual worked out that the scrolls did not need to be delights but by ataraxia (‘freedom from mental anxiety’) cut all the way through, and that they could be and aponia (‘freedom from physical pain’). Together with cut along existing column lines. This method the type of mainstream paideia prevalent in the Hellenistic period, Epicurus’ system is also a response to educational left the scrolls in three pieces, but meant that programs proposed by Plato and Aristotle. Sources which each layer was destroyed in the process. To discuss Epicurus’ negative attitude toward paideia are large- get around this problem, drawings, called ly hostile or report hostile statements about Epicureans, disegni, were made of each outer layer. The and include, Ath. 13.588A; Cic. Fin. 2.12, 1.21 and 1.71-72; centrepiece, or midollo, was usually preserved, Diog. Laert. 10.6; Lactant. Div. inst. 3.25.4; U187; Plut. Mor. so Piaggio invented a machine to open it. Each 15D, 1094D and 1095C; Sext. Emp. Math. 1.1; Quint. Inst. piece of scroll was given a number by Piaggio. 12.2.24. Usually he started from the inside and worked 51 Cic. Fin. 2.12, 1.21 and 1.71-72; Plut. Mor. 15D, 1094D out, which meant they were opened in reverse. and 1095C; Quint. Inst. 12.2.24. Piaggio kept good records for those scrolls he 52 Isocrates’ system of paideia was similarly criticized as opened, but for On poems and On music, which insufficient because he did not recognize the importance of had been opened by Paderni, he renumbered poetry (Halliwell (2011), 285). them with his inside to outside system without 53 Ath. 13.588A; Cic. Fin. 1.21, 71-72. telling anyone. For two centuries people read the works back to front, and it was only in the 54 Epicurus Sent. Vat. 45.

20 The W.H. Allen Memorial Lecture 2015: Changing Perceptions: Philodemus and Epicurean Philosophy

1990s that scholars realised that this was the Philodemus’ Contribution to our Un- case. derstanding of Epicurean Philosophy

The condition of the scrolls and the way The outcome of clearer editions has been in which they were first opened had a huge to show that Philodemus made significant impact on the reception of Philodemus’ works, contributions to the development of Epicurean and many scholars felt it would have been doctrines, which in turn has led to the realisation much better if the scrolls had been authored that Epicureans were not nearly as dogmatic by Vergil, Livy, Aristotle or someone else and unchanging as our hostile sources had whose works were regarded as more important led us to believe. It is now understood that than those of an Epicurean philosopher.55 In Philodemus’ ideas were much less derivative the 1908 Herculaneum Buried, Ethel Barker than originally thought, especially in the says that the ‘works of Philodemus himself theory of art. Philodemus argues that art holds are of little or no value as philosophy or only aesthetic value rather logical or moral literature.’56 It was a commonly held view value, and he applies this definition to the that Philodemus was unoriginal, a view that areas of music, poetry and rhetoric.59 In short, relates to the general perception of Epicureans he argues against theories of mimesis held by as orthodox and dogmatic.57 It was not until the majority of other ancient philosophical the 1970s when Marcello Gigante opened schools.60 In De rhetorica, Philodemus argues the Centro Internazionale per lo Studio dei that sophistic, but not political, rhetoric is an Papiri Ercolansi that a greater appreciation art. Throughout the treatise, he questions the for the value of Philodemus’ works grew. traditional status of rhetoric as the preserve of Gigante ensured that new editions of the politicians and instead argues that sophistic works were released. He also opened up rhetoric is useful for philosophers, whose access to the papyri, which resulted in even careers depend on writing and speaking.61 more revised editions. The use of a number of new technologies, particularly multispectral drawn by the artists would have actually been the first. photography, has assisted in the clarification That this was the case with De musica, see Delattre (2004, of fragments. Reordering the papyrus in turn 247) and (2007, cii). For a discussion of how Obbink and meant that these texts made much greater Delattre have helped modern scholars to better understand sense. For example, it led and how ancient texts were read, see Janko (1995). Daniel Delattre to realise that De pietate and 59 Piero Treves and Dirk Obbink ‘Philodemus’, Horn- De musica had been ordered backwards by blower, Simon and Spawforth, Anthony (eds.) (2003), The previous scholars.58 Oxford Classical Dictionary (3 edn., Oxford: Oxford Uni- versity Press). For a discussion of Philodemus’ treatment of the art question in De rhetorica, see Blank (1995), 178-188; 55 Sider (2005), 60. Chandler (2006), 59-103; Gaines (2004), 212. For a discus- sion of the art question in De poematis, see Asmis (1995); 56 Barker (1908), 82. Clay (1995); Janko (2000), 8; Porter (1995); Sider (1995a); Wigodsky (1995). For a discussion of the art question in De 57 Comparetti described Philodemus as ‘an obscure, musica, see Delattre (2007): ccxlvi-ccl. For a discussion of verbose and inauthentic Epicurean of the days of Cicero’ how Philodemus’ definition of art is evident in a range of (Sider (2005), 63). This is a perspective expressed by some his works, including De oeconomia, De bono rege, De poematis scholars in the twentieth century. So, Sedley (1989, 99 and and De rhetorica see Blank (2009). On the fact that style 104) presents Philodemus as lacking philosophical inde- is inseparable from content, see Synder (1973). On the pendence and compares his works to Arrian’s transcripts of relationship between Philodemus’ view of and the ’ teaching. The negative view of many philosoph- practice of frank criticism, see Glad (1995), 134. ical works from the late republic also extended to Cicero, τέχνη and as, Striker (2001) notes, it was often the case that the 60 Haliwell (2002), 250. philosophical value of Cicero’s works was ignored in the twentieth century. 61 Phld. De rhet. 2.23.33-24.23 Sudhaus; Blank (1995), 187; Blank (2009), 233. Blank (2001, 248) suggest the strategy 58 Obbink (1996), 45 comments that the latest columns of writing about rhetoric may have been an attempt to gain

20 21 Iris | Journal of the Classical Association of Victoria | New Series | Volume 28 | 2015

More specifically, he argues that rhetoric can and form, subject and style.67 Philodemus also help ethical self-development but only because shows that the utility of poetry does not come of the ability of a philosopher to interpret from the art itself, that is, from the poet; rather, rhetoric and not because of any inherent moral it comes from the wise man’s ability to interpret value of the genre.62 it.68 Poetry can be a natural and unnecessary good, in that it can bring harmless intellectual In his other two aesthetic treaties, De poematis pleasure. As David Armstrong says, ‘each and De musica, Philodemus questions the moral exercise in it by a good poet has the glory of utility of poetry, which was traditionally held being unique in its impact to such an extent to be great.63 Music itself, says Philodemus, that that impact on the mind, not merely the does not have the power to affect the mind senses, is altered not only by large but by either positively or negatively because it small changes, such as variant readings, none cannot convey qualities of character.64 Due to a of which are indifferent to the experience as paucity of evidence, it is difficult to reconstruct a whole. Thus, even sonic beauty in poetry Epicurus’ precise views on poetry, although it adds not only to irrational music in the poem is clear that they were at odds with the long- but to intellectual meaning.’69 The relevance established view that poetry was inherently of such a theory to Augustan poetry is clear, moral.65 According to ancient sources, and the Augustan poets were fond of elaborate Epicurus argued that poetry provided some and highly intentional variations in sound and pleasure but that it held little educational value in the employment of all possible rhetorical because it did not conform with the his school’s figures.70 The connection is also attested more ethical doctrines.66 One of Philodemus’ aims in securely by Philodemus’ dedication of one writing De musica and De poematis was to show, of his treaties, On flattery, to four Augustan in line with Epicurus’ view of poetry as kinetic writers: Plotius Tucca, Varius Ruffus, Vergil pleasure, that its value does not lie in its moral and Quintilius Varus.71 content. However, in a departure from what is known of Epicurus’ views, Philodemus says Aside from the innovative nature of that a good poem is a combination of content Philodemus’ definition of art, Philodemus also shows himself to be highly original in his approach to ethics, particularly in his ability more students. to sympathetically approach commonly held fears.72 Likewise, Philodemus appears to have 62 Phld. De rhet. 2.1.26-34. It can help develop ethics refined Epicurean theories of the emotions by because sophistic rhetoric persuades through reason while mimicking the three categories of desire. Thus, political rhetoric persuades through negative emotions (Phld. De rhet. 2.46.28-47.12 Sudhaus). The stirring up of in the same way that Epicureans had always audiences’ emotions is encouraged by both Crassus and divided desires into natural and necessary, Antonius in (Cic. De or. 2.185 and 3.195). natural and unnecessary, and unnatural and 63 For discussions of Philodemus’ poetic theory, see Arm- strong (2001); Asmis (1995b); Hammerstaedt (2001); Porter 67 As Janko (2000, 8) notes, for Philodemus poetry has (1995); Janko (2000); Wilkinson (1933). aesthetic rather than moral value. As Sider (1997, 31) notes, 64 Haliwell (2002), 250. ‘it is not that a poem cannot contain useful or facts or a val- id argument; only that these function entirely apart from 65 Isocrates’ system of paideia was similarly criticised as any poetic virtue contained therein.’ insufficient because he did not recognise the importance of poetry (Halliwell 2011, 285). 68 Blank (1995), 185. 66 Asmis (1995a); Janko (2000), 9; Obbink (1995), iv. Ev- 69 Armstrong (2004), 10. idence for Epicurus’ views on poetry is limited, but some 70 Armstrong (2004), 10. information can be found in Diog. Laert. 10.121; Epicurus fr. 89 and fr. 43 Arrighetti; Cic. Fin. 1.71-2; Plut. Mor. 15d, 71 Armstrong (2004), 10. 1086f and 1095c. 72 Tsouna (2007), 9.

22 The W.H. Allen Memorial Lecture 2015: Changing Perceptions: Philodemus and Epicurean Philosophy

unnecessary, Philodemus also gives a tripartite family obligations.79 Philodemus also says that division to some emotions like anger and love. it is possible for politicians to have a positive Thus, in Philodemus presents anger as effect on those they rule or for whom they rule. natural and necessary when the harm that He does not argue that philosophy is able to causes the feeling of anger is both voluntary teach politicians how to be better politicians, and threatens or takes away life, bodily but better men; and he does say that the effect health or happiness.73 Anger is natural and of philosophy on politicians is astronomical, unnecessary when someone voluntarily harms (his word not mine) and I give you the relevant you, but does not threaten your life, health or passage in full: happiness.74 Anger that is caused by a slight harm, such as someone cutting you off in κα|λὸν μὲν οὖν γένοιτ’ ἂν, | [ε]ἰ traffic, is unnatural and unnecessary if you καὶ φολοϲοφία[ι χ]ορε[ύ]|ϲειεν ὁ react to those slight harms on every occasion πολειτικόϲ, | ἳνα καὶ νεανικωτέ|ρωϲ with anger.75 Other emotions, however, such ἀγαθὸϲ ἧι, καὶ διὰ | τοῦτο λέγομεν, as envy and greed are simply unnatural and [ὃ]τ[ι] φ[ι]|λοϲοφία[ι] καὶ κοινῶϲ unnecessary, because they always originate προϲ|τεθεῖϲα πολειτικῆι δι|αθέϲει from misguided beliefs as to what causes καὶ κατὰ μέροϲ | ὑποθήκαϲ happiness. Philodemus’ innovations to πρ[οϲ]εχεῖϲ | τῆι πολειτικῆ[ι δ] various philosophical issues, such as ethics ιο[ι]|κήϲει παραδο[ῦϲα] δι|αφορὰν and , has highlighted the fact that οὐρανομ[ή]κη | ποήϲει πρὸϲ τὸ Epicureans were in fact less dogmatic and κ[ρε]ῖτ|τον. much more willing to incorporate outside views than previously thought.76 It would also be a good thing, if the politician is also well-versed in Many of Philodemus’ changes to Epicurean philosophy, so that he might more philosophy can be understood as his willingness actively be a good man, for this to adapt to the Roman context in which he lived reason, we say that philosophy both and worked.77 This is particularly the case in generally, when it is imputed to a his attitude to political involvement, which as disposition for politics, and also I noted earlier was seen as a problematic way particularly when it gives suitable of gaining security by Epicureans, although suggestions for the politicians, will this is not to say that they explicitly prohibited make an astronomical difference for it. Philodemus too regards withdrawal from the better. the many as the best means of gaining the (Phld. De rhet. 3.15a.16-31 person security required for tranquillity.78 Hammerstaedt)80 However, he also acknowledges that some men are either constitutionally inclined toward political life or that it is too difficult for them Thus Philodemus is concurrently positive to disentangle themselves from it given their and negative about politics. He shows that politicians can do some good at the same time as he disparages politicians as unethical. He 73 Asmis (2011), 177. strongly associates greed, envy, anger and 74 Asmis (2011), 177-178. 75 Asmis (2011), 178. 76 Fitzgerald (2004), 2. 79 Phld. De adul. 4.4-12. 80 Citations in Ancient Greek are from Hammerstaedt, J. 77 Wurster (forthcoming). (1992), ‘Der Schlußteil von Philodems drittem Buch über 78 Wurster (forthcoming). Rhetorik’, Cronache Ercolanesi, 22, 9-117.

22 23 Iris | Journal of the Classical Association of Victoria | New Series | Volume 28 | 2015

flattery with politics,81 arguing that these arise Roman sources label amicitia.85 Philodemus from fear brought about by the misguided also engages in Roman discourse on the belief that external goods associated with nature of otium (‘leisure’) and the importance politics, namely wealth and power, will of labor at the same time as staying true to bring happiness. In this respect, the life of a traditional Epicurean views of ponos (πόνος, politician is contrasted to the life of the wise ‘work’, ‘labour’, ‘physical pain’). On the one man.82 However, Philodemus does not deny hand, Philodemus offers guidance on how the possibility that politicians can achieve a to ethically engage in negotium (‘business’, state of security through a political life, but ‘labour’) to those, including members of the he understands politicians as doing so only Roman elite, for whom it was the norm, while if they have attained some level of ethical on the other hand he enjoins fellow wise men self-realisation, and he sees his role as one to withdraw from the multitude.86 In this of helping them to do so.83 The kinds of men respect, Philodemus’ texts are multivalent, that Philodemus had in mind is demonstrated and he writes for an audience that includes by his dedication of De bone rege secundum both the philosophically-interested and sages. Homerum to the Roman statesman Piso and His discussions on the topic of work and of De rhetorica IV to Gaius Vibius Pansa philosophical leisure provide insight into how Caetronianus, also a prominent Roman Philodemus dealt with the competing claims of politician.84 Accordingly, Philodemus shows philosophy and his Roman reality. that gaining a certain degree of ethical self- realisation enables politicians to act with an In conclusion, Philodemus has been almost-Epicurean self-mastery. Philodemus’ instrumental in changing perceptions of willingness to recognise different interests Epicurean philosophy by showing scholars amongst his readers reflects the social reality that the school was less dogmatic and far more of his audience, many of whom were members innovative than previously thought. Likewise, of the Roman elite for whom withdrawal from the works of Philodemus, together with the political life was not an option. fragments of Epicurus’ On nature that were also found in the at Herculaneum, have This is just one example of the way that demonstrated that, although Epicureans may Philodemus adapts his Epicurean philosophy not have used dialectic and deductive logic, to his Roman world and on the whole he they were capable of complex and technical is keen to provide Epicurean solutions to argumentation. Likewise, Philodemus’ Roman problems. Another example includes texts clarify important aspects of Epicurean the way that he explores the nature of ethics, aesthetic theory and epistemology, friendships between Epicurean wise men which I have not mentioned in this paper. In who are financially dependent on wealthy November last year, a further development was benefactors, that is relationships which announced that may see the decipherment of even more scrolls, and findings were released on the use of X-ray phase-contrast tomography 81 Wurster (forthcoming). which revealed letters in the papyri without unrolling them.87 The advantages of such 82 Phld. De rhet. fr. 13.1-16 Longo Auricchio. According to Phld. De piet. 88.10-16, the lives of politicians are filled with misfortunes. 85 Wurster (forthcoming). 83 At Phld. De piet. 84.10-26, Philodemus talks about light- 86 Wurster (forthcoming). ening the load of rulers. 87 Mocella et. al. 2014. Also underdevelopment is a pro- 84 Gaius Vibius Pansa Caetronianus was consul in 43 cess called Reflectance Transformation Imaging (RTI), BCE: prior to that he had served in Gaul with Caesar. He which Dr. Kathryn E. Piquette from Cologne Center had governed Bithynia in 47-46 BCE and Cisalpine Gaul for eHumanities, Universität zu Köln is applying to the in 45 BCE. Herculaneum papyri.

24 Iris | Journal of the Classical Association of Victoria | New Series | Volume 28 | 2015 The W.H. Allen Memorial Lecture 2015: Changing Perceptions: Philodemus and Epicurean Philosophy

a technique are clear, as it would mean that — (2011), ‘The necessity of anger in the destructive process of opening the scrolls Philodemus’ On Anger’, in Jeffrey Fish could be entirely avoided. We can only hope and Kirk K. Sanders (eds.), Epicurus that new readings and interpretations of the and the Epicurean Tradition (Cambridge: texts from Herculaneum continue to explicate Cambridge University Press), 152-82. the teachings of Epicurus and that we also find some new authors preserved in the scrolls. Auvray-Assays, Clara and Delattre, Daniel (eds.) (2001), Cicéron et Philodème. La polémique en philosophie (Études de littérature ancienne n° 12 Paris: Sonya Wurster Éditions Rue d’Ulm/Presses de l’École The University of Melbourne noramle supérieure). [email protected] Barker, Ethel Ross (1908), Buried Herculaneum (London: A.&C. Black).

Bernardakis, Gregorius N. (1895), Plutarch. Moralia. (Leipzig: Teubner). Bibliography Blank, David (1995), ‘Philodemus on the Armstrong, David (2004), ‘Introduction’, in Technicity of Rhetoric’, in Dirk David Armstrong, et al. (eds.), Vergil, Obbink (ed.), Philodemus and Poetry: Philodemus and the Augustans (Austin: Poetic Theory and Practice in Lucretius, University of Texas Press), 1-22. Philodemus, and (New York; Oxford: Oxford University Press), — (2004), Vergil, Philodemus and the 178-88. Augustans (Austin: University of Texas Press). — (2001), ‘La philologie comme arme philosophique: la connaissance Asmis, Elizabeth (1995a), ‘Epicurean ’, technique de la rhétorique dans in Dirk Obbink (ed.), Philodemus and l’épicurisme’, Cicéron et Philodème. Poetry: Poetic Theory and Practice in La polémique en philosophie (Études Lucretius, Philodemus, and Horace (New de littérature ancienne n° 12 Paris: York; Oxford: Oxford University Éditions Rue d’Ulm/Presses de l’École Press), 15-34. noramle supérieure), 241-57.

— (1995b), ‘Philodemus on Censorship, — (2009), ‘Philosophia and techne: Moral Utility and Formalism’, in Dirk Epicureans on the arts’, in James Obbink (ed.), Philodemus and Poetry: Warren (ed.), The Cambridge Companion Poetic Theory and Practice in Lucretius, to Epicureanism (Cambridge: Philodemus, and Horace (New York; Cambridge University Press), 216-33. Oxford: Oxford University Press), 148-77. Chandler, Clive (2006), Philodemus On Rhetoric Books 1 and 2 (New York; London: — (2009), ‘Epicurean empiricism’, in Routledge). James Warren (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Epicureanism (Cambridge: Císar, Karel (2001), ‘Epicurean Epistemology Cambridge University Press), 84-104. in Lucretius’ “De rerum natura” IV 1-822’, Listy filogické / Folia philogica

24 25 Iris | Journal of the Classical Association of Victoria | New Series | Volume 28 | 2015

124 (1/2), 1-54. Novum Testamentum, 111; Leidon; Boston: Brill). Clay, Diskin (1995), ‘Framing the Margins of Philodemus and Poetry’, in Dirk Fowler, D.P. (1989), ‘Lucretius and Politics’, in Obbink (ed.), Philodemus and Poetry: Miriam Griffin and Jonathan Barnes Poetic Theory and Practice in Lucretius, (eds.), Philosophia Togata (Oxford: Philodemus, and Horace (New York; Oxford University Press), 120-50. Oxford: Oxford University Press), 3-14. Glad, Clarence E. (1995), Paul and Philodemus: Adaptability in Epicurean and Early De Lacy, Philp H. (1941), ‘Cicero’s Invective Christian Psychagogy, eds C.K. Barret, against Piso’, Transactions and et al. (Supplements to Novum Proceedings of the American Philological Testamentum; Leiden: Brill). Association, 71, 49-58. Glidden, David K. (1979), ‘”Sensus” and Sense Delattre, Daniel (2004), ‘Vergil and Music, in Perception in the “De rerum natura”’, and Philodemus’, California Studies in Classical Antiquity, in David Armstrong, et al. (eds.), 12, 155-81. Vergil, Philodemus and the Augustans (Austin: University of Texas Press), Gordon, Pamela (1996), Epicurus in Lycia: 245-63. the second-century world of (Ann Arbor: University of — (2007), Philodème de Gadara: Sur la Michigan Press). musique. Livre IV, 2 vols. (Collection des universités de France. Série — (2004), ‘Remembering the Garden: the grecque; Paris: Les Belles lettres). Trouble with Women in the School of Epicurus’’, in John T. Fitzgerald, Dirk Everson, Stephen (1999), ‘Epicureanism’, in Obbink, and Glenn S. Holland (eds.), David Furley (ed.), Routledge History Philodemus and the New Testament World of Philosophy Volume II: Aristotle (Supplements Novum Testamentum, to Augustine (London; New York: 111; Leiden; Boston: Brill), 221-44. Routledge), 188-221. Griffin, Miriam (2001), ‘Piso, Cicero and their Fish, Jeffrey and Sanders, Kirk K. (eds.) (2011), audience’, in Clara Auvray-Assays Epicurus and the Epicurean Tradition and Daniel Delattre (eds.), Cicéron et (Cambridge: Cambridge University Philodème. La polémique en philosophie Press). (Paris: Éditions Rue d’Ulm/Presses de l’École noramle supérieure), 85-99. Fitzgerald, John T. (2004), ‘Gadara: Philodemus’ Native City’, in John T. Halliwell, Stephen (2002), The aesthetics of Fitzgerald, Dirk Obbink, and Glenn mimesis: ancient texts & modern problems S. Holland (eds.), Philodemus and the (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University New Testament World (Supplements Press). Novum Testamentum, 111; Leiden; Boston: Brill), 343-97. — (2011), Between Ecstasy and Truth: Interpretations of Greek Poetics from Fitzgerald, John T., Obbink, Dirk, and Holland, Homer to Longinus (Oxford; New York: Glenn S. (eds.) (2004), Philodemus and Oxford University Press). the New Testament World (Supplements

26 Iris | Journal of the Classical Association of Victoria | New Series | Volume 28 | 2015 The W.H. Allen Memorial Lecture 2015: Changing Perceptions: Philodemus and Epicurean Philosophy

Hammerstaedt, J. (1992), ‘Der Schlußteil Long, A.A. (2006), From Epicurus to Epictetus: von Philodems drittem Buch über Studies in Hellenistic and Philosophy Rhetorik’, Cronache Ercolanesi, 22, (Oxford and New York: Oxford 9 -117. University Press).

Hammerstaedt, Jürgen (2001), ‘Réponse Long, A.A. and Sedley, D.N. (1987), The à David Armstrong’, Cicéron et Hellenistic Philosophers (1; Cambridge: Philodème. La polémique en philosophie Cambridge University Press). (Études de littérature ancienne n° 12 Paris: Éditions Rue d’Ulm/Presses de Mitsis, Phillip (1989), ‘Friendship and l’École noramle supérieure), 311-14. Altruism’, Epicurus’ Ethical Theory: The of Invulnernibility (Ithaca, Hutchinson, D.S. (1994), ‘Introduction’, in B. NY: Cornell University Press), 98-128. Inwood and L.P. Gerson (eds.), The Epicurus Reader: Selected Writings and Mocella, Vito, et al. (2015), ‘Revealing letters Testimonia (Indianapolis; Cambridge: in rolled Herculaneum papyri by Hackett Publishing Company, Inc.), X-ray phase-contrast imaging’, vii-xv. Nature Communications, 10.1038/ ncomms6895, 1-6. Janko, Richard (1995), ‘Reconstructing Philodemus’ On Poems’, in Dirk Muehll, Peter von der (ed.), (1966), Epicurus: Obbink (ed.), Philodemus and Poetry: Epistulae Tres et Ratae Sententiae Poetic Theory and Practice in Lucretius, (Stuttgart: Teubner). Philodemus, and Horace (New York; Oxford: Oxford University Press), 69- Nisbet, R. G. M. (1961), M. Tulli Ciceronis: In 96. L. Calpurnium Pisonem : oratio (Oxford: Clarendon). — (2000), ‘Philodemus On Poems Book One’, (Oxford; New York: Oxford O’Keefe, Tim (2010), Epicureanism (London; University Press). New York: Routledge).

Kapp, Ernst (1947), ‘Philodemus: On Methods Obbink, Dirk (ed.), (1995), Philodemus and of Inference. A Study in Ancient Poetry: Poetic Theory and Practice in Empiricism by Phillip Howard Lucretius, Philodemus, and Horace (New DeLacy; Estelle Allen DeLacy’, The York; Oxford: Oxford University American Journal of Philology, 68 (3), Press). 320-25. — (1996), Philodemus, On Piety Part 1 Konstan, David (2008), A Life Worthy of the (Oxford: Oxford University Press). Gods: The Materialist Psychology of Epicurus (Las Vegas, Zurich and — (2002), ‘’All Gods are True’ in : Publishing). Epicurus’, in Dorothea Frede and André Laks (eds.), Traditions of — (2011), ‘Epicurus on the gods’, in Theology: Studies in Hellenistic Theology, Jeffrey Fish and Kirk K. Sanders (eds.), Its Background and Aftermath (Leiden: Epicurus and the Epicurean Tradition Brill), 183-221. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), 53-71.

26 27 Iris | Journal of the Classical Association of Victoria | New Series | Volume 28 | 2015

Porter, James (1995), ‘Content and Form Synder, Jane McIntosh (1973), ‘The Poetry in Philodemus: The History of an of Philodemus the Epicurean’, The Evasion’, in Dirk Obbink (ed.), Classical Journal, 68 (4), 346-53. Philodemus and Poetry: Poetic Theory and Practice in Lucretius, Philodemus, and Tsouna, Voula (2007), The Ethics of Philodemus Horace (New York; Oxford: Oxford (Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press), 97-147. University Press).

Reynolds, L.D. and Wilson, R.G. (1991), Scribes Warren, James (ed.), (2009), The Cambridge and scholars: a guide to the transmission Companion to Epicureanism (Cambridge: of Greek and (Oxford: Cambridge University Press). Oxford: Clarendon Press; New York: Oxford University Press). Wilkinson, L.P. (1933), ‘Philodemus and Poetry’, Greece and , 2 (6), 144-51. Rist, John M. (1980), ‘Epicurus on Friendship’, Classical Philology, 75 (2), 121-29. Wurster, Sonya (forthcoming), Reconstructing Philodemus: A Hellenistic Philosopher in Roskam, Geert (2007), Live unnoticed: On the the Roman World (Aldershot: Ashgate). Vicissitudes of an Epicurean doctrine (Leiden: Brill).

Sedley, D.N. (1989), ‘Philosophical Allegiance in the Greco-Roman World’, in Miriam Griffin and Jonathan Barnes (eds.), Philosophia Togata (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 97-119.

Sedley, D. N. (1998) Lucretius and the transformation of Greek wisdom [online text], (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).

Sedley, D.N. (2011), ‘Epicurus’ theological innatism’, in Jeffrey Fish and Kirk K. Sanders (eds.), Epicurus and the Epicurean Tradition (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), 29-52.

Sider, David (2005), The Library of the Villa Dei Papiri at Herculaneum (Los Angeles: The J. Paul Getty Museum).

Striker, Gisela (2001), ‘Cicero and Greek Philosophy’, in Gregory Nagy (ed.), Greek Literature in the Roman Period and in Late Antiquity (Greek Literature, 8; London; New York: Routledge), 189- 97.

28