Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T17:18:43.577Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Symbols of Marginality From Early Pythagoreans to Late Antique Monks

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 September 2009

J. N. Bremmer
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

One day the shepherd Apollo saw a pregnant woman in the fields. A dark thought struck him: he wanted to see how the foetus was lying in her womb. He therefore killed the woman and ripped her open. Afterwards he repented and took refuge among the monks of Scetis in Egypt, where he became a hermit (133). By contrast, Hilarion came to be a hermit in a wholly honourable manner, as related by Hieronymus in his Life of Hilarion. He felt drawn by St. Anthony, gave away his inheritance, and embarked upon a life of solitude in the Gaza region. Apollo, Hilarion, and all other monks and hermits whose sayings and biographies have been I handed down by the early Church had in common that they abandoned the society they lived in and developed an alternative lifestyle. They were not, however, the first in antiquity to go against established norms and values.

Type
Research Article
Information
Greece & Rome , Volume 39 , Issue 2 , October 1992 , pp. 205 - 214
Copyright
Copyright © The Classical Association 1992

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

NOTES

1. Bracketed numbers without further specification refer to the relevant columns of the Greek, edition of the Apophthegmata Patrum in PG 65, col. 71–440Google Scholar.

2. For all sources, see Burkert, W., Lore and Science in Ancient Pythagoreanism (Cambridge, Mass., 1972), pp. 189ffGoogle Scholar.

3. Reitzenstein, R., Des Alhanasius Werk über das Leben des Antonius, Sitzungsberichte der Heidelberger Akademie der Wissenschaften, Philos.-hist. Klasse 5 (Heidelberg, 1914)Google Scholar, although this work is not without its exaggerations; cp. Dörries, H., Wort und Stunde I (Göttingen, 1966), pp. 145–224Google Scholar; Bartelink, G. J. M., ‘Les oxymores desertum civitas et desertum floribus vernans’ Studia monastica 15 (1973), 7–16Google Scholar. Bieler, L., Theios aner I (Vienna, 1935), pp. 124–9Google Scholar and Festugière, A.-J., Études de philosophie grecque (Paris, 1971), pp. 443–61Google Scholar (= REG 50, 1937, 470–94) subsequently studied general parallels between monastic life and Pythagorean lifestyle and organization.

4. Iamblichus, VP 253Google Scholar, cf Burkett, W., ‘Craft versus Sect: The Problem of Orphics and Pythagoreans’, in Meyer, B. F. and Sanders, E. P. (eds.), Jewish and Christian Self-Definition III (London, 1982, 1–22, 183–9), p. 13Google Scholar. For mutual dependence of Christian and pagan authors, see now the sophisticated analysis by Uytfange, M. Van, ‘Het “genre” hagiografie: christelijke specificiteit versus laat-antieke context’, in Hilhorst, A. (ed.), De heiligenverering in de eerste eeuzven van het Christendom (Nijmegen, 1988), pp. 63–98Google Scholar, who has unfortunately been overlooked by the less satisfactory approach of Smith, J. Z., Drudgery Divine. On the Comparison of Early Christianities and the Religions of Late Antiquity (Chicago and London, 1990)Google Scholar.

5. Bartelink, G. J. M., ‘Die literarische Gattung der Vita Antonii’, Vig Christ. 36 (1982), 38–62Google Scholar; Drijvers, H. J. W., East ofAntioch, London, 1984, Ch. IVGoogle Scholar (= Hackel, S., ed., The Byzantine Saint, London, 1981, pp. 25–33Google Scholar).

6. Antisthenes: Diodes and Neanthes (FGH 84 F 24) in Diog. Laert. 6.13. Diodoros: Sosicrates in Diog. Laert. 6.13, who probably uses Aristoxenus here, cp. Burkert (see n. 2), p. 165 n. 249, and pp. 202 ff, with an enlightening discussion of the relation between Pythagoreans and Cynics in this respect.

7. Diogenes and the Cynics: Diog. Laert. 6.22.104; see also Courtney on Juvenal 13.122. Zeno, Chrysippus, and Pythagoras: Burkert (see n. 2), p. 202. Cleanthes: Diog. Laert. 7.169. Cato Minor: Plutarch, Cat. Min. 6.3Google Scholar; 44.1.

8. Matthew 10.10; Mark 6.9 (many thanks to Prof. J. C. M. van Winden). I hope to return to this passage elsewhere, because the versions and commentaries consulted by me claim mistakenly that Jesus encourages going without two undergarments.

9. Apollo: H. Mon. 8.5, cp. Festugière, A.-J., Les moines d'Orient IV/1 (Paris, 1961), p. 48 n. 45Google Scholar. Isidore: Palladius H. Laus. 1.2 Bartelink.

10. Cyril of Scythopolis Vita Sabae 44 (Aphrodisius); Leontius of Neapolis Life of St. John the Almsgiver 21.

11. Pythagoreans: Alexis fr. 197 Kock. Plato, too, is portrayed as a grouch by the comic poet Amphis (fr. 13 Kock) – perhaps in analogy to the Pythagoreans. Pythagoras: Diog. Laert. 8.20; for Porphyry VP 35, see below. Naturally, the misanthrope Timon was also depicted as never laughing: Phrynichus F 19 Kassel-Austin.

12. Chaeremon FGH 618 F 6 = fr. 10 van der Horst, cp. Reitzenstein (see n. 3), 43–5; van der Horst, P. W., Chaeremon: Egyptian Priest and Stoic Philosopher (Leiden, 1987 2), pp. 16–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar (text and translation), 56–61 (extensive commentary). In his Porphyry-edition (Bude 1982,154), E. des Places draws a comparison between Pythagoras and Plato's advice (Laws 732c) to laugh in moderation; see also de Vries, G. J., ‘Laughter in Plato's Writings’, Mnemosyne IV (1985), 378–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

13. For the medieval monks laughter was similarly problematic: Resnick, I. M., ‘“Risus monasticus”. Laughter and Medieval Monastic Culture’, Rev. Benedictine 97 (1987), 90–100Google Scholar.

14. Adkin, N., ‘The Fathers on Laughter’, Orpheus NS 6 (1985), 149–52Google Scholar.

15. See also my The Early Greek Concept of the Soul (Princeton, 1983), p. 86Google Scholar, where I have offered a first draft of the material presented above; there too further bibliography.

16. Pythagoristae: Aristophon F 10 and 12 Kassel-Austin; Alexis fr. 198, 220 ff., 378 Kock. Pythagoras: Clement Paed. 2.1.11; Diog. Laert. 8.13; Iamblichus VP 13.107; Palladius H. Laus. 12.98 Bartelink. For other waterdrinkers see Kassel and Austin on Cratinus F 203.

17. Diogenes: Diog. Laert. 54. Cynics: Diogenes Ep. 37.4; Diog. Laert. 6.104.

18. Cf. Bremmer, ZPE 39 (1980) 33Google Scholar with extensive testimonia; see in addition Chaeremon fr. 10; cp. Van der Horst (see a 12), p. 54 n. 22.

19. Wine at festivals: see e.g. , J. and Robert, L., Bulletin Épigraphique 1940.85Google Scholar; 146/7.155; 1958.336; 1962.239; 1969.394. Symposium: see most recently the studies in Murray, O. (ed.), Sympotica (Oxford, 1990)Google Scholar and Slater, W. J. (ed.), Dining in a Classical Context (Ann Arbor, 1991)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

20. Pythagoras and vegetarianism: Burkert (see n. 2), pp. 180 ff.; Parker, R., Miasma (Oxford, 1983), pp. 296 ffGoogle Scholar. Modern vegetarianism: Thomas, K., Man and the Natural World (Harmondsworth, 1983 2), pp. 291 ff, 297Google Scholar.

21. Cp. Bremmer (see n. 18), 32.

22. For the opposition between raw and cooked, see e.g. Ch. Segal, , ‘The Raw and the Cooked in Greek Literature: Structure, Metaphor, Values’, CJ 69 (1973–4), 289–308Google Scholar.

23. Brown, P., Society and the Holy in Late Antiquity (London, 1982), pp. 110 ffGoogle Scholar; Bartelink (see n. 3).

24. Cp. the large fruits eaten by Macarius (H. Mon. 21) in the picture of paradise made by Iannes and Iambes.

25. Theodoret, H. Rel. 21.12Google Scholar; cp. Canivet, P., Le monachisme syrien selon Théodoret de Cyr (Paris, 1977), p. 126Google Scholar. For demons as tax-officials, see Banelink, G.J.M., ‘Telonai (Zöllner) als Damonenbezeichnung’, Sacris Erudiri 27 (1984), 5–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar. For further observations on fasting by the monks and hermits see also Elliott, A. G., Roads to Paradise. Reading the Lives of the Early Saints (Hanover and London, 1987), pp. 137–42Google Scholar; Brown, Peter, The Body and Society: Men, Women and Sexual Renunciation in Early Christianity (London, 1988), pp. 218–24Google Scholar.

26. For the offence caused by the regimen of John the Baptist, see Brock, S. P., ‘The Baptist's Diet in Syriac Sources’, Oriens Christianus 54 (1970), 113–42Google Scholar.

27. See Drijvers, H. J. W., ‘Askese und Mönchtum im frühen Christentum’, in Schluchter, W. (ed.), Max Webers Sicht des Antiken Christentums (Frankfurt/M, 1985), pp. 444–65Google Scholar; id., ‘De heilige man in het vroege Syrische Christendom’, in Hilhorst (see n. 4), pp. 11–26.

28. For the beginnings of a study of growing control over affects and emotions in antiquity, see my ‘Adolescents, Symposium, and Pederasty’, in Murray (see n. 19), pp. 135–48, esp. p. 144, and my ‘Walking, Standing, and Sitting in Ancient Greek Culture’, in Bremmer, J. and Roodenburg, H. (eds.), A Cultural History of Gesture (Cambridge, 1991), pp. 15–35Google Scholar.

29. For the increasing alienation from the world and the body, see Dodds, E. R., Pagan and Christian in an Age of Anxiety (Cambridge, 1965), p. 136CrossRefGoogle Scholar. His Freudian approach is rightly rejected by Brown, P., Religion and Society in the Age of St. Augustine (London, 1972), pp. 74–83Google Scholar, and Drijvers (see n. 5), pp. 30 ff. (cp. also n. 27), who in these studies treats the problem too much from a specifically Syrian angle; for a more general approach see now his ‘Apocryphal Literature in the Cultural Milieu of Osrhoēne’, Apocrypha – Le Champs des Apocryphes 1 (1990), 231–47, esp. p. 241Google Scholar. For many illuminating insights on the Christian attitude towards the body, but unfortunately without paying sufficient attention to pagan literature, see now Peter Brown (see n. 25).

30. An earlier, Dutch version of this paper appeared in Hilhorst (see n. 4), pp. 1–10.1 would like to thank once again Ton Hilhorst for his critical reading of that version, and Peter Walcot and Hans van Wees for the translation into English.