{"title":"The Students of Panaetius in Philodemus’ Stoicorum Historia 74, 1–6","authors":"A. Zaitsev","doi":"10.21638/spbu20.2022.107","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article compares Cicero’s testimonies concerning Roman students of Panaetius with Philodemus’ tradition, which is accessible to us through his Stoicorum Historia. While Cicero associates prominent Roman politicians of the second century BC — among them P. Cornelius Scipio Aemilianus — with Panaetius in multiple testimonies, Philodemus only attests the study of the two Samnites Marcius and Nysius and the Roman Piso — all three of whom were probably politically insignificant — with Panaetius. This can be explained by the different intended audiences of the two authors: Cicero’s readers were primarily the Roman nobiles who were (occasionally) engaged in philosophy; Philodemus, on the other hand, was addressing the members of a Greek-speaking community of practicing philosophers. The fact that the testimonies do not coincide is thus no reason to deny their historicity. It seems more appropriate to accept the existence of Italic and Roman (professional) philosophers in addition to the politicians mentioned by Cicero who were students or friends of Panaitios.","PeriodicalId":0,"journal":{"name":"","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu20.2022.107","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This article compares Cicero’s testimonies concerning Roman students of Panaetius with Philodemus’ tradition, which is accessible to us through his Stoicorum Historia. While Cicero associates prominent Roman politicians of the second century BC — among them P. Cornelius Scipio Aemilianus — with Panaetius in multiple testimonies, Philodemus only attests the study of the two Samnites Marcius and Nysius and the Roman Piso — all three of whom were probably politically insignificant — with Panaetius. This can be explained by the different intended audiences of the two authors: Cicero’s readers were primarily the Roman nobiles who were (occasionally) engaged in philosophy; Philodemus, on the other hand, was addressing the members of a Greek-speaking community of practicing philosophers. The fact that the testimonies do not coincide is thus no reason to deny their historicity. It seems more appropriate to accept the existence of Italic and Roman (professional) philosophers in addition to the politicians mentioned by Cicero who were students or friends of Panaitios.
本文将西塞罗关于帕纳提乌斯的罗马学生的证词与菲洛德摩斯的传统进行比较,我们可以通过他的《斯多伊orum Historia》了解到这一点。西塞罗将公元前2世纪的著名罗马政治家——其中包括P. Cornelius Scipio Aemilianus——与帕纳提乌斯联系在一起,而菲洛德摩斯只证明了两个萨谟奈人,马丘斯和尼修斯以及罗马人皮索——这三个人在政治上可能都是微不足道的——与帕纳提乌斯的研究。这可以用两位作者不同的目标读者来解释:西塞罗的读者主要是(偶尔)从事哲学的罗马贵族;另一方面,菲洛德摩斯是在向讲希腊语的实践哲学家团体的成员讲话。这些证词不一致的事实,因此没有理由否认它们的历史性。除了西塞罗提到的政治家之外,似乎更应该接受意大利和罗马(专业)哲学家的存在,他们是帕纳提奥斯的学生或朋友。