LITMIR.BIZ

Скачать книгу

reject Roman rule, which seems to be tolerated as a fact of life.⁶⁹ Plutarch writes approvingly of it, and disparagingly of Greece’s infighting and decline.⁷⁰ The sophist Aelius Aristides, too, contrasts the Hellenic and Roman attempts at self-rule.⁷¹ Philosopher and master rhetorician Dio Chrysostom insists that the present age is not evil and never speaks out against the greater regime.⁷² The same is true of the historian Pausanias, and the famous doctor Galen.⁷³ Engagement with Roman politics was a marked improvement for the relationship between Greek thinkers and autocrats—the emperors Vespasian and Domitian appear to have despised philosophers, and “talking back” to a ruler is a cliché in Greek philosophy.⁷⁴ The Romans were hardly considered to be Hellenes themselves; rather, they are like barbarians who occasionally imbibe the draught of Hellenic education (παιδεία).⁷⁵ This is particularly evident in Plutarch’s Lives, where his Roman subjects rarely behave like sophisticates, and Political Advice, where Roman rule is tolerated only on the grounds of Greece’s own factionalism.⁷⁶ Yet even if the Romans themselves were considered uncultured, Rome was the best place to acquire—and demonstrate—one’s education.⁷⁷

      The ambivalent attitude of Hellenophone intellectuals toward the government is in part explained by their privileged socioeconomic backgrounds and high standing in their communities. The sophists came from wealthy and often politically influential families.⁷⁸ They had friends in high places, commonly serving as intermediaries between their towns and the emperor himself.⁷⁹ Some sophists, like Polemo and Herodes, were personally beloved by the emperors.⁸⁰ Thanks to the crowds they could draw, crowds that included emperors, towns invited sophists to open shop in hope of stimulating the local economy.⁸¹ There even was a tertiary pilgrimage effect whereby great sophists traveled to meet other great sophists, of course with their entourage in tow.⁸² Aside from simply teaching and speaking,⁸³ sophists built monuments,⁸⁴ alleviated local factional politics,⁸⁵ officiated over civic cults and festivals,⁸⁶ served as administrators and military leaders,⁸⁷ and were general public benefactors.⁸⁸

      This evidence coheres well with what we know of the social environment of the Platonists from the first to third centuries CE, which was also elite, public, and male.⁸⁹ Our information about the lives of the Middle Platonists is admittedly scarce, but Dio Chrysostom, Plutarch, and Apuleius all assume that the philosopher has the ways and means to be active in public life, and expect him to do so.⁹⁰ Inscriptional evidence also testifies to the stature of philosophers in the public sphere.⁹¹ The word “philosopher” (φιλόσοφος) is also used in honorary inscriptions to designate morality and wisdom in public life; philosophy was thus considered an appropriate reference for a public life well lived.⁹²

      The Neoplatonists mingled with politicians constantly and extolled political activity.⁹³ Plotinus’s benefactrix has already been mentioned; his circle included senators and politicians.⁹⁴ Although he discouraged some of his students from pursuing politics further, he also intervened in political disputes, joined the entourage of Emperor Gordian, befriended Emperor Gallienus, and attempted to found a Platonic city-state (“Platonopolis”).⁹⁵ Porphyry came from a wealthy, noble Syrian family—his name at Tyre was “Malkhus” (from the Phoenician/Punic for “king”), so Amelius nicknamed him “Basileus,” while Longinus dubbed him “Porphyrios” (“royal purple”).⁹⁶ While he, Plotinus, and Iamblichus certainly subordinated the political virtues to the contemplative, they nonetheless counted them as virtues, early but necessary steps for the embodied soul on the road to contemplation, not to be disparaged.⁹⁷ Similarly, Porphyry has only kind words for one of Plotinus’s politically ambitious students, Castricius Firmus.⁹⁸ Iamblichus too came from a royal family in Syria (and was named accordingly), whither he returned after completing his study in the West.⁹⁹ His school’s legacy was carried on by his patron, Sopater, who met an unfortunate end in court intrigue.¹⁰⁰ The Athenian academy of Proclus was funded by wealthy benefactors whose families remained involved with the school across generations.¹⁰¹ Proclus himself participated in local politics.¹⁰² Even in the dark, final days of the school, Damascius too advocated the philosophers’ political activism.¹⁰³

      One can also observe significant differences between the public lives of sophists and philosophers. For instance, in the confines of imperial quarters, it was the duty of the sophist to flatter, as distinct from philosophical frankness (παρρησία).¹⁰⁴ Although philosophers served in the public sphere, the bulk of their “performances”—lectures, debates, writing, philosophizing—was generally in-house, although public debates did happen.¹⁰⁵ Rivalry between sophists was normal, at times puerile, and occasionally applauded and enjoyed by high society, and even the participants.¹⁰⁶ Meanwhile, philosophers had rivalries, but this never bled over into humiliation or, significantly, authoritarianism. Such differences notwithstanding, most philosophers tended to be influential citizens, pundits, public intellectuals, or beneficiaries of wealth.¹⁰⁷ At the same time, in all of these spheres, sophists, philosophers, and their coteries saw themselves working not on behalf of the Romans but the Greeks.

      GOING TO SACRIFICE

      The noun Ἑλληνισμός—an “imitator of the Greeks, Greek-ifier”—is first used in 2 Maccabees 4:13, but in the Second Sophistic the term becomes associated with a kind of pan-Hellenism, articulated under the aegis of παιδεία (“education,” or “culture”).¹⁰⁸ Moreover, it came to indicate adherence to the civic cults associated with the Greek and Roman pantheon, as in the literature of the emperor Julian the Apostate (mid-fourth century CE).¹⁰⁹ Thus the term “Hellene” is preferable to “pagan” to describe the Hellenophone intellectuals of late antiquity.¹¹⁰ These Hellenes we see portrayed in the literature of the Second Sophistic associated popular Greek religion and civic cult, a cultic conservatism that is also shared with the Neoplatonists. Like the political activism that philosophers took for granted, this cultic conservatism was also a crucial issue for Plotinus in his battle with the Gnostics.

      The urban centers of the Second Sophistic were Athens, Smyrna, and Ephesus, yet for Philostratus, Hellas no longer had a strictly geographical sense but instead had a cultural one.¹¹¹ To the subject of his biography of Apollonius of Tyana (first century CE), he gives the line, “a wise man finds Hellas everywhere and a sage will not regard or consider any place to be a desert or barbarous.”¹¹² His hometown is “a Greek city nestled among the Cappadocians,” and Gadeira (modern Cadiz) is praised as a highly religious and “Hellenic” place.¹¹³ According to Philostratus’s Lives of the Sophists, Timocrates came “from the Pontus and his birthplace was Heraclea, whose citizens admire Greek culture.”¹¹⁴ Herodes addresses his students and admirers simply as “Hellenes.”¹¹⁵ Hadrian (the sophist) is “escorted by those who loved Hellenic culture, from all parts of the world.”¹¹⁶ The extrageographical and ethnic definition of Hellas is paralleled by Dio Chrysostom’s account of the Borysthenians, who worship Achilles, wear beards, and are so “truly Greek in character” that a whole town turns out to meet the visiting sophist.¹¹⁷

      Reflecting the period’s turn toward Atticism, the Greek language itself takes on an almost magical quality in Philostratus’s books.¹¹⁸ Favorinus’s Greek was so good that “even those in the audience who did not understand the Greek language shared in the pleasure of his voice; for he fascinated even them by the tones of his voice, his expressive glance and the rhythm of his speech.”¹¹⁹ Apollonius is portrayed as having spoken perfect Attic despite his Cappadocian rearing, speaking nothing else when traveling—which is easy, because everyone he meets who knows something of “philosophy” happens to speak Greek too.¹²⁰

      Thus Hellenism in the Antonine and Severan periods was defined by possession of the lore of Hellas, and, for those not born with Apollonius’s supernatural mastery of the Pythagorean tradition, this was acquired through education. Yet the term παιδεία itself also came to mean “elite Greek culture” as much as simply “education.”¹²¹ In second-century legal texts, the educated (πεπαιδευμένοι)

Скачать книгу