obtained a higher repute than T. Lucretius Carus,' whose poem, carefully reproducing the Epicurean notions on natural science, is one of the most valuable illustrations of their system we possess. Contemporary with Lucretius the celebrated physician Asclepiades of Bithynia 2 resided at Rome, but to judge by the views on nature attributed to him, Asclepiades can have been no genuine Epicurean although connected with the Epicurean School.3 N. D. i. 6, 15; 21, 58; De Orat. iii. 21, 78). Other Epicureans were: C. Catius, a native of Gaul, some time anterior to Cicero (Ad Fam. xv. 16)-by Quintilian, x. 1, 124, he is called levis quidem sed non injucundus tamen auctor; and the Comment. Cruqu. in Hor. Sat. ii. 4, 1, says that he wrote four books De Rerum Natura et De Summo Bono;-C. Cassius, the well-known leader of the conspiracy against Cæsar (Cic. Ad Fam. xv. 16, 19; Plut. Brut. 37); C. Vibius Pansa, who died at Mutina, in 43 B.C. (Cic. Ad Fam. vii. 12; xv. 19); Gallus (Ad Fam. vii. 26); L. Piso, the patron of Philodemus (Cic. in Pis. 28; 1. c. 9, 20; 16, 37; 18, 42; 25, 59; Post Red. 6, 14); Statilius (Plut. Brut. 12); a second Statilius (Cat. Min. 65); L. Manlius Torquatus (Cic. Fin. i. 5, 13). Moreover, T. Pomponius Atticus, the wellknown friend of Cicero, approached nearest to the Epicurean School, calling its adherents nostri familiares (Cic. Fin. v. 1, 3) and condiscipuli (Leg. i. 7, 21), and being a friend of Patro's; but his relations to philosophy were too free to entitle him properly to be ranked in any one School (Cic. Fam. xiii. 1). The same observation applies also to his friend, L. Saufeius (Nepos, Att. 12; Cic. Ad Att. iv. 6). Still less can C. Sergius Orata (Cic. Fin. ii. 22, 70; Off. iii. 16, 67; De Orat. i. 39, 178), L. Thorius Balbus (Fin. 1. c.), and Postumius (Ibid.) be called Epicureans. Nor can anything be stated with certainty respecting L. Papirius Pactus (Cic. Ad Fam. vii. 12) or C. Memmius (Cic. Ad Fam. xiii. 1; Lucret. De Rer. Nat. i. 24; v. 9). 1 Born, according to Hieron. (in Eus. Chron.), 95 B.C., he died in his 44th year, or 51 B.c. In Vita Virgilii, 659 ought therefore to be substituted for 699 A.U.C. It is clear, from Nepos, Att. 12, that he was dead before the assassination of Cæsar. Teuffel (in Pauly's Realencycl. iv. 1195) justly disputes the statement of Hieronymus, that he committed suicide in a fit of madness. 2 According to Sext. Math. vii. 201, a cotemporary of Antiochus of Ascalon, and reckoned by Galen. Isag. c. 4, among the leaders of the logical School of Physicians. Known for three things-his CHAP. XV. CHAP. XV. Several supporters of the practical philosophy of the Epicureans in the following century are also known to us,' but no one appears who comes up to Zeno or Phædrus in scientific importance. Rehabili theory of atoms, his theory of acquiring knowledge, and his resolution of the soul into matter. All bodies, he held, consist of atoms, differing, however, from the atoms of Democritus in that they owe their origin to the meeting and breaking up of greater masses, and are not in quality alike and unchangeable (anateîs). Sext. Pyrrh. iii. 32; Math. ix. 363; x. 318; viii. 220; iii. 5; Galen. 1. c. 9; Dionys.; Alex. (in Eus. Pr. Ev. xiv. 23, 4); Col. Aurelian. De Pass. Acut. i. 14. Although in this respect he resembled Heraclides, with whom he is generally classed, and applied, like him, the name bykot to atoms, still it is probable that his knowledge of Heraclides was traditionally derived from the Epicureans. He also asserted, with Epicurus (Antiochus, in Sext. Math. vii. 201): Tàs μèv aiolńσeis ŏvtws kal ἀληθῶς ἀντιλήψεις εἶναι, λόγῳ δὲ μηδὲν ὅλως ἡμᾶς καταλαμβάνειν. He differs, however, entirely from Epicurus in denying the existence of a soul apart from body, and in referring every kind of notion, including the soul itself, to the action of the senses (Sext. Math. vii. 380; Plut. Plac. iv. 2, 6; Cal. Aurelian. 1. c.; Tertullian, De An. 15). All that is otherwise stated of Asclepiades is not at variance with Epicurean principles. 1 Quint. Inst. vi. 3, 78, names L. Varus as an Epicurean, a friend of Augustus, perhaps the individual who, according to Donat. V. Virg. 79, Serv. on Ecl. vi. 13, attended the lectures of Syro, in company with Virgil. Horace, notwithstanding Ep. i. 4, 15, was no Epicurean, but only a man who gathered everywhere what he could make use of (Sat. i. 5, 101). In Caligula's time, a senator Pompedius was an Epicurean (Joseph. Antiquit. ix. 1, 3); under Nero, Aufidius Bassus, a friend of Seneca (Sen. Ep. 30, 1 and 3 and 5; 14), the elder Celsus (Orig. c. Cels. i. 8), and Diodorus, who committed suicide (Sen. Vi. Be. 19, 1); under Vespasian or his sons, Pollius (Stat. Silv. ii. 2, 113). In the first half of the second century, Cleomedes, Met. 87, complained of the honours paid to Epicurus. In the second half of the same century lived Antonius, mentioned by Galen. De Prop. An. Affe. v. 1, and Zenobius, who, according to Simpl. Phys. 113, was an opponent of Alexander of Aphrodisias. In the first half of the third century lived Diogenes Laërtius, who, if not a perfect Epicurean himself, was at least a friend of the Epicureans. Amongst other Epicureans, the names of Athenæus (whose epigram on Epicurus is quoted by Diog. x. 12), Antodorus (Diog. v. 92), and Hermodorus (Lucian, Icaromen. 16) may be mentioned; but Diog. x. 11, has no right to set down Diocles as an Epicurean. tated under the Antonies by the establishment of a public chair in Athens, Epicureanism survived longer than most other systems, and continued to exist as late as the fourth century after Christ.1 The 1 Diog. x. 9, in the first half λλns Tŵr præpiμwv. of the third century, writes: testimony of Lactantius, Inst. διδαχὴ πασῶν σχεδὸν ἐκλιπουσῶν iii. 17, to the wide spread of τῶν ἄλλων ἐσαεί διαμένουσα καὶ Epicureanism, is not so trustνηρίθμους ἀρχὰς ἀπολύουσα ἄλλην worthy. CHAP. XV. CHAP. A. Cha racter of system. (1) Its porner of self-pre CHAPTER XVI. CHARACTER AND DIVISIONS OF THE EPICUREAN TEACHING: THE TEST-SCIENCE OF TRUTH. THE scientific value and capacity for development of the Epicurean teaching bears no proper proportion to the extensive diffusion and the length of time Epicurean during which that teaching continued to flourish. No other system troubled itself so little about the foundation on which it rested; none confined itself so exclusively to the utterances of its founder. Such was the dogmatism with which Epicurus propounded his precepts, such the conviction he entertained of their usefulness, that his pupils were required to commit summaries of them to memory; and the superstitious devotion for the founder was with his approval carried to such a length, that not the servatim. 1 Cic. Fin. ii. 7, 20: Quis enim vestrum non edidicit Epicuri κυρίας δόξας: Diog. 12. Epicurus often exhorted his scholars (Ibid. 83; 85; 35) to commit to memory what they had heard. His last exhortation to his friends was: τῶν δογμάτων μιμνῆσθαι. 2 He speaks of himself and pressions: &s Koλúrns pèv avròv φυσιολογοῦντα προσκυνήσειεν γονάτων ἁψάμενος· Νεοκλῆς δὲ ὁ ἀδελφὸς εὐθὺς ἐκ παίδων ἀποφαίνοιτο μηδένα σοφώτερον Επικούρου γεγονέναι μηδ' εἶναι· ἡ δὲ μήτηρ ἀτόμους ἔσχεν ἐν αὐτῇ τοαύτας, οἷαι συνελθοῦσαι σοφὸν ἂν ἐγέν νησαν. Conf. Id. Frat. Am. 16; Adv. Col. 17, 5; Cleomed. Meteor. p. 89. Not only was Epicurus' birthday observed by the Epi slightest deviation from his tenets were on a single point permitted, whereas in Cicero's time the writings of Epicurus and Metrodorus found hardly a reader beyond the School; it is asserted that as late as the first and second centuries before Christ the Epicureans still kept closely to their master's teaching.2 Probably it was easier for an Epicurean to act thus than it would have been for any other thinker; the Epicurean, like his master,3 being indifferent to the curean School during his lifetime, but the 20th of every month was celebrated as a festival, in honour of him and Metrodorus. In his testament, Epicurus especially ordered this twofold observance for the future. Diog. 18; Cic. Fin. ii. 31, 101 ; Plut. N. P. Suav. Viv. 4, 8; Plin. Η. Ν. xxxv. 5. Athen. vii. 298, d: Επικούρειός TIS EikadioThs. The extravagant importance attached to Epicurus is proved by the high eulogies in Lucret. i. 62; iii. 1 and 1040; v. 1; vi. 1. Metrodorus, in Plut. Adv. Col. 17, 4, praises Tà 'Emκούρου ὡς ἀληθῶς θεόφαντα ὄργια. 1 Cic. Tusc. ii. 3, 8. Sen. Ep. 33, 4, compares the scientific independence of the Stoics with the Epicurean's dependence on the founder: Non sumus sub rege: sibi quisque se vindicat. Apud istos quicquid dicit Hermarchus, quicquid Metrodorus, ad unum refertur. Omnia quæ quisquam in illo contubernio locutus est, unius ductu et auspiciis dicta sunt. On the other hand, Numenius (in Eus. Pr. Ev. xiv. 5, 3), little as he can agree with their tenets, commends the Epicureans for faithfully ad hering to their master's teaching, a point in which only the Pythagoreans are their equals. Of the Epicureans, it may be said: und αὐτοῖς εἰπεῖν πω ἐναντίον οὔτε ἀλλήλοις οὔτε Επικούρῳ μηδένα εἰς μηδὲν, ὅτου καὶ μνησθῆναι ἄξιον, ἀλλ' ἔστιν αὐτοῖς παρανόμημα, μᾶλλον δὲ ἀσέβημα, καὶ κατέγ νωσται το καινοτομηθέν. Thus the Epicurean School resembles a state animated by one spirit, in which there are no divisions of party. It has been already observed that Epicurus ignored his obligations to his teachers Pamphilus and Nausicydes, and only confessed his debt to Democritus. All other philosophers provoked, not only his contempt, but likewise his abuse. Diog. 8, communicates his remarks on Plato, Aristotle, and others. Cic. N. D. i. 33, 93: Cum Epicurus Aristotelem vexarit contumeliosissime, Phædoni Socratico turpissime maledixerit. Plut. N. P. Suav. V. 2, 2: Compared with Epicurus and Metrodorus, Colotes is polite; τὰ γὰρ ἐν ἀνθρώποις αἴσχιστα ῥήματα, βωμολοχίας, ληκυθισμούς, συναγαγόντες ̓Αριστοτέ K.T.A. CHAP. XVI. |