You are on page 1of 18

Philodemos on Chairon, Tyrant of Pellene (P. Herc. 1021, Col.

10, 40-12, 41) Author(s): Jan Bollanse Reviewed work(s): Source: Historia: Zeitschrift fr Alte Geschichte, Bd. 51, H. 1 (1st Qtr., 2002), pp. 32-48 Published by: Franz Steiner Verlag Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/4436638 . Accessed: 28/11/2012 01:28
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Franz Steiner Verlag is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Historia: Zeitschrift fr Alte Geschichte.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.82.209 on Wed, 28 Nov 2012 01:28:50 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

PHILODEMOSON CHAIRON,TYRANT OF PELLENE (P. HERC. 1021, COL. 10, 40- 12, 41)
In the rough version of Philodemos' Historia Academicorum,preserved on P. Herc. 10211, the chapteron Herakleidesof Pontos (col. 9 - 10) is followed by an interestingdiscussion of Chaironof Pellene, the pupil of Plato and Xenokrates whom Alexander's arpatwjy6 'ExupwmiM; Antipatros installed as a tyrant in his hometown. This section, which takes up two complete columns of the Herculaneum papyrus (col. 10, 40 - 12, 41), is the longest extant account on the vicissitudes of Chaironfrom antiquity;thus, it constitutes a valuable complement to the mere three passages more - from the speech On the Treatywith Alexander in the Demosthenic corpus2, from Athenaios' Deipnosophistae3 and Pausanias'
Modern researchhas shown that P. Herc. 1021 does not contain the final, published version of Philodemos' History of the Academy - a title suggested by T. Dorandi, Filodemo, Storia dei filosofi. Platone e l'Academia (PHerc. 1021 e 164). Edizione, traduzionee commento(Napoli 1991) 25 n. 1, and, indeed,muchpreferableto the older suggests thatthe work was merely a catalogue which inaccurately IndexAcademicorum, of membersof the Academy-, but an earlierdraft(datingfromthe beginningof the first century B.C.) in which the excerpts culled by Philodemos from his sources appeared with the occaand unedited,linked by small introductions transitions,and interspersed sional touch of personalcomment(P. Herc. 164, on the otherhand,probablypresentsus copy of the definitive version, datingfrom the end of the first with a second-generation century B.C.). On this issue, see K. Gaiser, Philodems Academica.Die Berichte uber Cannstatt Papyri(Stuttgart-Bad Platon unddie Alte Akademiein zwei herkulanensischen 1988) 27-28; 32-66 passim; Dorandi,Filodemo, 109-113. Ps.-Dem. Or. 17,10: "Butjust reflect, men of Athens,thatthe Achaeansin the Peloponnese enjoyed democraticgovernment,and one of theirdemocracies,that of Pellene, has now been overthrownby the Macedonianking, who has expelled the majorityof the citizens, given their propertyto their slaves, and set up Chairon,the wrestler,as their tyrant(transl.J.H. Vince, Loeb Classical Library)." Athen. 11,509a-b: "Some of the Academicphilosophersof today are like that, living as they do wickedly anddisgracefully.Foraftergainingpossessionof a fortuneby sacrilege courses throughtrickery,they are now looked up to with admiration; and by unnatural just like Chaironof Pellene, who attendedthe lectures not only of Plato but also of Xenokrates.He too, as I was saying, ruledhis nativecity with bittertyranny,andnot only drove out its best citizens, but also bestowed upon their slaves the propertyof their masters, and forced the masters' wives into wedlock with the slaves; these were the beneficialresultshe derivedfrom the noble Republicandfromthe lawless Laws! (transl. C.B. Gulick, Loeb Classical Library)." Paus.7,27,7: "ButChairon,who carriedoff two prizesfor wrestlingin the (Pythiansuppl. Gaiserp. 494 [cf. P. Herc. 1021col. 11, 11-141: lsthmian suppl.BoeckhJones : om. mss.) Gamesand four at the Olympic,they (sc. the people of Pellene) will not even mentionby Historia,BandLI/i (2002) ? FranzSteinerVerlag WiesbadenGmbH,Sitz Stuttgart

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.82.209 on Wed, 28 Nov 2012 01:28:50 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Philodemoson Chairon,Tyrantof Pellene (P. Herc. 1021, col. 10, 40 - 12, 41)

33

Periegesis4 - dealing with this shadowy figure, who obviously failed to make a big impression on subsequent generations. Philod. Hist. Acad. P. Herc. 1021 col. 10, 40 - col. 12, 41 = Hermippos of Smyrna FGrHist IV A 3, 1026 F 39 (F 89 Wehrli SdA Suppl. I) = (partim) Phainias of Eresos FGrHist IV A 1, 1012 F 6: Still, since there is no impediment, a quotation is in place of what Hermippos has put down with regard to the man from Pellene, Chairon, in his work On Those who Convertedfrom Philosophy to <...> and the Exercise of Power: "At first, Chairon of Pellene sojourned in the Academy with Plato and Xenokrates, but after having won victories over men in wrestling without falling - two or three times, so it is said, [in the Olympic Games], and thrice in the Pythian Games - he no longer submitted himself to the principles of the high-minded and noblest man (sc. Plato), who advocated "the equal rights of equals," as Dikaiarchos reports. Indeed, because he had achieved decorous deeds through his vigour, he did not uphold the Platonic way of life anymore in contacts with his friends. (...) However, precisely because of these things the Macedonian (sc. Alexander the Great) established this man, who looked down on all and yet was generally admired, as an insolent tyrant in his hometown. We all know that he had a sly twist to his mouth when he reported to ambassadors of Antipatros that, with the help of Korragos and his valiant soldiers who at the time were stationed on the Peloponnese, he had taken firm control of his hometown, on the one hand by exiling the citizens, and on the other by bestowing on the slaves the properties and the spouses of their masters. Phainias states that he became covetous of honour, thinking solely of his own advantage, and that he revealed himself as an insolent tyrant in accordance with [the arrogance resulting from] his Olympic victory. Some report that he even attempted to found a city called Chaironeia in the vicinity of the so-called Megarian Marshes, as if they belonged to him. He is also said to have conceived the plan of digging a canal, sufficiently deep [for shipping traffic], through the Isthmos, without succeeding in joining [the seas]. [a lacuna of 5 lines follows: col. 12, 17-21] The aforementioned Xenokrates, on the contrary, offered a serene education, giving praise and mild criticism alike, so that through reverence [for his master] and recognition [of his master], his (sc. Chairon's) training proceeded prosperously as long as he stayed with him; all this was over when he left Athens and the demands made on him by Xenokrates as well as the latter's praising. There were many who recom-

name. This I believe is because he overthrew the constitution of Pellene, and received from Alexander, the son of Philip, the most invidious of all gifts, to be set up as tyrant of one's own fatherland." (Transl. W.H.S. Jones, Loeb Classical Library, with one modification.)

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.82.209 on Wed, 28 Nov 2012 01:28:50 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

34

JAN BOLLANS-E

mended him as ruler - though not entirely without fear - because they regarded him as one who had acquired wisdom, having completed such a high training. Others, however, dreaded him, because he had clearly had a sly twist to his mouth when he said to Antipatros' envoys that his affairs were prospering, thanks to the assistance given by Korragos and the thousand soldiers encamped with him on the Peloponnese5." This passage presents us with three closely interrelatedproblems. The first and most obvious is the historical value of the report on Chairon's activities as a philosopher turned politician. The second query regards the identity of the source(s) underlying the account of Hermippos of Smyrna, whom Philodemos seems to acknowledge as his main authority on the subject, and whose monograph On Those who Convertedfrom Philosophy to <...> and the Exercise of Power the Epicurean historian of philosophy in all likelihood was able to consult directly6. Third, the entire chapter appears to fall into two sections: the initial part (col. 11, 7 - 12, 2) indisputably goes back to Hermippos, but in col. 12, 2 Philodemos introduces a second authority, Phainias of Eresos, who in an unspecified work also treated of the fallen Peripatetic Chairon. This quotation possibly extends to the very end of column twelve; the big question is whether Hermippos had already incorporated it in his expose, or whether Philodemos discovered it independently of the Hellenistic biographer(either directly, or via a different intermediary). I need not dwell too long on the historical minutiae concerning the figure of Chairon of Pellene, for they have been covered repeatedly and in detail over the

As the basis for this translation,I have not used the more recent edition of Dorandi (1991), but the 1988-editionby Gaiser, for two obvious reasons. First, both scholars of closely anywayin the preparation theirrespectiveeditions appearto have collaborated Dorandi (thusGaiser,PhilodemsAcademica[as in n. 1115). Second,andmoreimportant, only gives what is actuallystill discernibleon the papyrus,while Gaiserhas extensively the yet judiciouslysupplemented text; the value of the emendationsproposedby him lies in the fact that the great majority were not thought up e nihilo, but on the basis of sovrappostiand, most of all, availableparallels(either providedby the relatedP. Herc. 164, or by literarypassages). of For the papyrologicalparticulars the passus underdiscussionand the proposedtextual emendations,see Gaiser, PhilodemsAcademica(as in n. 1) 216-227; 495-500. Two of of his supplementsI cannotgo along with. The first one concernsthe exact formulation the title of Hermippos'work (col. 11, 4-7); this problemI have dealt with in a separate and of Hermippos Smyrna his see on monograph thatHellenisticbiographer: J. Bollans&e, Biographical Writings. A Reappraisal (Leuven 1999) chapter II A.6. The second supplement regardsthe lacunain col. 12, 17-21, which will be discussedbelow. So it is also stated by Gaiser, PhilodemsAcademica(as in n. 1) 94-96; 123-128; and Dorandi, Filodemo (as in n. 1) 85-86; 91-92. As to the precise title of Hermippos' see monograph, the referencein the previousnote.

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.82.209 on Wed, 28 Nov 2012 01:28:50 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Philodemoson Chairon,Tyrantof Pellene (P. Herc. 1021, col. 10, 40- 12, 41)

35

past decade and a half. Suffice it to review the ancient tradition and to recapitulate the main conclusions reached by present-day scholarship7. Most of the facts such as they are recorded in the account of Hermippos are also found in one or more of the afore-cited ancient literary parallels. That Chairon was a disciple of Plato and Xenokrates is stated by Athenaios8. Ps.Demosthenes and Pausanias report that he was a wrestler (nakaXtang;),and the Periegete also adds his victories in the Panhellenic Games. Finally, Chairon's return to his Achaean hometown and the establishment of a tyrannis there, is common to all ancient sources. According to Ps.-Demosthenes, Alexander the Great overthrew the democratic government in Pellene, drove out the majority of the citizens, gave their property to the slaves and installed Chairon as a tyrant. Athenaios, whose text comes the closest to that of Hermippos, relates that he expelled the 'best' citizens, bestowed the property of the banished masters to their respective slaves, and forced the spouses to marrythose slaves. In Pausanias we read that Chairon fell victim to a damnatio memoriae in his hometown, the citizens of Pellene refusing to mention his name because he had dissolved the constitution and had been made a tyrant by Alexander. Chairon's discipleship with Plato and Xenokrates goes undisputed in modem literature (and it indicates that he must have stayed in Athens from before 347, the year of Plato's death, until after 339, the year in which Xenokrates became head of the Academy), just like his glorious victories in the great athletic contests. Those must have earned him a great reputation, which he appears to have used as a stepping stone to even greater things, namely, the position of tyrant in Pellene. Two factors seem to have contributed greatly to the realization of this ambition9. First and foremost, there is the ever increasing
7 The most valuablediscussion of Chaironof Pellene, which hithertohas been completely overlookedin modernliterature,is that by G. Marasco,"Cheronedi Pellene: un tiranno
del IV secolo a.C.", in F. Broilo (ed.), Xenia. Scritti in onore di Piero Treves (Roma 1985)

111-1 19. In spite of a few minordetails which the Italianscholargot wrong due to him having to rely on Mekler'soutdatededition of P. Herc. 1021 (S. Mekler,Academicorum philosophorumindexHerculanensis,2nd ed., Berlin 1958), he convincinglymanagedto place the tyrannisof Chaironin the social and historicalcontextof its time; the following exposition is mainly based on his findings. In addition, see A. Worle, Die politische Tatigkeitder SchulerPlatons (Darmstadt1981) 105-111; Gaiser,Phi'odemsAcademica (as in n. 1) 494-501 passim; Dorandi, Filodemo (as in n. 1) 48-50; K. Trampedach, Platon, die Akademieund die zeitgenossischePolitik (Stuttgart1994) 64-65. Chaironis also cited in the catalogueof Academicsgiven by Philodemosandpreserved on P. Herc. 1021 col. 6, 4 (p. 184 Gaiser);fromthe fact thatChairon'sname is clearlya later additionto thatlist (it is writtenabove the line), it can be inferred thatPhilodemosdid not consultHermippos the firstphaseof his research,butat some laterpointin time (though, in of course,still beforethe finaleditingof theHistoryof theAcademy): Gaiser,Philodems see Academica(as in n. 1) 93-94; Dorandi,Filodemo(as in n. 1) 84; 90 + n. 343. The following is basedto a largeextenton the expositionof Marasco, "Cherone Pellene" di (as in n. 7) 111-114; for a few of the details,see also the literature cited above, in n. 7.

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.82.209 on Wed, 28 Nov 2012 01:28:50 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

36

JAN BOLLANSEE

social inequality which reared its head in many parts of Greece in the third quarterof the fourth century B.C., and apparently in Pellene as well: this much can be deduced from the measures Chairon is said to have taken at the time of his coup, namely, exile of the aristocrats (oi aptaTot, as Athenaios calls them10), redistribution of land and property and compulsory marriage of the former mistresses with their slaves. These are measures which recur again and again in ancient reports about the establishment of a tyrannis and which indicate that social abuse proved an excellent breeding ground for tyrannical
regimes.

More importantly, this episode should be seen in the light of the policy conducted by the Macedonians with regard to the Peloponnese, which in the second half of the 330s B.C. was a veritable hotbed of resistance. When King Agis III of Sparta started to put together an anti-Macedonian coalition with other cities, Antipatros (who had been appointed the regent or viceroy of Macedonia and Greece by Alexander while he was campaigning in Asia) initially tried to counter him by establishing friendly tyrants in strategic strongholds like Sikyon and Messene. Within this context it looks like Antipatros shrewdly exploited Chairon's pursuit of honour and power to turn him into another tool of Macedonian foreign policy. The direct support contributed to the would-be tyrant by the Macedonian general Korragos allows to place this episode aroundthe year 331 B.C., when Antipatros sent the latterto the Peloponnese to increase the pressure on the insurgent Agis 1111 1. In sum, it appears that Hermippos' account of Chairon's rise to power, in which emphasis is put on the latter's ardentdesire for power and the intervention of the Macedonians, may well be an accuratedescription of the actual course of events. It has even been argued that the forcing of the aristocraticwomen into wedlock with their slaves, a strangemeasure which is also reportedfor Dionysios I of Syracuse, Klearchos of Herakleia on the Pontos and Nabis of Sparta'2and

10 The assertionof Ps.-DemosthenesthatAlexanderandChaironoverthrewthe democratic regime at Pellene does not deserve to be taken seriously, as it was clearly inspiredby propagandistic motives vis-a-vis the Athenianpublic which the authorof the speech (a plea againsta treatywith Alexander)was addressing. II Two different Macedonianofficials by the name of Korragosare known to us: see H.
Berve, Das Alexanderreich auf prosopographischer Grundlage, 2. Prosopographie

an (MUnchen1926) 219-220 nos. 444-445. Interestingly, officer of Alexanderthe Great 3085 called Korragosis also mentionedin the recentlypublishedpapyrusP. Brit.Library. x verso: cf. fr. a col. 2, 4-5: K6ppayov .ev.[ nicar]atoraa; / Eva rvy ikPOvKtX. One wonders, with the editors, which of the two bearersof the name the newly discovered of figure is to be identifiedwith: see W. Clarysse- G. Schepens,"A PtolemaicFragment an AlexanderHistory",CE 60, 1985, 30-47, esp. 40-41.
12 Cf. Diod. Bibl. 14,66,5 (on Dionysios 1); Iustin. Epit. Pomp. Trog. Hist. Phil. 16,5,1-4

(on Klearchos);Pol. 16,13,1 (on Nabis).

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.82.209 on Wed, 28 Nov 2012 01:28:50 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Philodemoson Chairon,Tyrantof Pellene (P. Herc. 1021, col. 10, 40- 12, 41)

37

which some scholars have accordingly suspected of being a topos in the antityrannical ancient traditionI3,may well be historical after all14. This, of course, raises the question which source Hermippos used for the Chairon-episode.A first point to be made in this respect is that the occurrence of the name Dikaiarchos, heavily supplemented though it is in P. Herc. 1021 (col. 11, 18), can be substantiatedon two grounds; firstly, the name is preserved in slightly fuller form in the parallel fragment of P. Herc. 164 (fr. 22 Dorandi); secondly, the contents of the quotation- the expression ar 'iawv 'Iaa - can also be found, in slightly modified form, in col. 2 (lines 3-4) of P. Herc. 1021, which contains the end of Dikaiarchos' Life of Plato15. Moreover, the reference to the Peripateticphilosopher doubtless derives from Hermippos himself. The fact that after his Olympic and Pythian victories, the haughty Chairon departedfrom the egalitarianpolicy adoptedby Plato towardshis pupils in the Academy, touches on the very essence of the theme of the monograph On Those who Convertedfrom Philosophy to <...> and the Exercise of Power, and constitutes the very reason for Hermippos for dealing with the Pellenian tyrant in that work; this point is driven home precisely by the quotation of the Platonic adage as reported by Dikaiarchost6. At the same time, however, it is perfectly clear that Dikaiarchos did not reportChairon's 'desertion' in the Plato-vita, certainly not in connection with a passage celebrating Plato's egalitarianideas; therefore, there is no reason to think that Hermippos used him as his source for the entire life of Chairon. Starting from the remarkable analogies existing between Hermippos' and Athenaios' accounts of Chairon's tyrannis (cf. supra), some modem scholars

13 See Trampedach, Platon (as in n. 7) 64 + n. 24 (thoughhe is less categoricalelsewhere in the same book, on p. 82 n. 155);J. Engels in the commentary PhainiasFGrHist 1012 F on 6 (fascicle IV A I [Leiden- Boston - Koln 1998], p. 306-307). 14 See Marasco,"Cherone Pellene"(as in n. 7) 113-114, referring D. Asheri,"Tyrannie di to et mafiage forc6. Essai d'histoiresociale grecque",Annales (ESC) 32, 1977, 21-48, esp. 36-39. In addition,see C. Mosse, La tyranniedans la Grece antique (Paris 1969) 184186 (who, pace Marasco,"Cheronedi Pellene" [as in n. 7] 113 + n. 32, defends the historicityof the measuresregardingthe slaves, at least in the case of Sparta);Worle,
Politische Titigkeit (as in n. 7) 109-110.

15 Cf. Philod. Hist. Acad. P. Herc. 1021 col. 2, 1-5 (p. 157 Gaiser): ['O &i / &r[6etav tnoict 0t]Xav0[p]cw-/niav fnEtat 86oovs,o[n] npoi[?_-]/,o ' [ofl; 'toa. Totau-Ta yeypa-/ (F 46o[r AltKcaLdpXou 45 WehrliSdAI) icX. On the Platonicprinciplein question, see
Gaiser, Philodems Academica (as in n. 1) 364-366.

16 This point was also observed by Gaiser, Philodems Academica (as in n. 1) 496; see Dorandi,Filodemo(as in n. 1) 92, as well. At the same time, Gaiser,PhilodemsAcademica (as in n. 1) 126, has arguedthat the fuller version of the Dikaiarchos-citation which can be found in P. Herc. 164 (as already stated above, the definitive version of Philodemos' History) is due to the interventionof Philodemos himself, who was also acquaintedwith the originalDicaearchean work, witness P. Herc. 1021 col. 1* - I - Y - 2, 5 (p. 144-157 Gaiser).

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.82.209 on Wed, 28 Nov 2012 01:28:50 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

38

JAN BOLLANStE

have been led to think that the two authors drew on a common source. Now, the Athenaios-passage is part of a long diatribe which amounts to nothing less than a vitriolic attack on Plato and the philosophy he stood for; the final section thereof consists in an enumerationof Platonists who got involved in politics and who "revealed themselves as men of tyrannical and slanderous disposition", and Chairon's name and actions are duly recorded there17. It is near-unanimously accepted that Athenaios' principal source for that final section was the notorious Oration Against the Philosophers delivered in 307/6 B.c. by Demochares of Leukonoe, the son of Demosthenes' sister, who is actually cited by Athenaios in the course of his exposition18. Accordingly it has been conjectured that Hermippos also used Demochares as his source. Gaiser has been the most vocal in this respect, adducing four arguments to substantiatethe assumption19. Because he has used the introductionto his fundamental Philodemos-edition as a platform for pleading his case, and because his arguments are (I am afraid to say) anything but compelling, I will discuss them one by one here (though not in the order in which Gaiser gives them), and try to refute them as I go along.

504b-509e of Athenaios'eleventhbook. tiradespansparagraphs 17 The entireanti-Platonic xxv avrroij The last section is introducedthus (Athen. 11,508d): oi nroXAoi pgaxOTirv
T1JpaVVtKoi TIV?; Kcai &tdIoXot

yvy6vactv; then follow short reports on the activities of

Timaiosof Kyzikos and, finally, Euphraios,Kallipposof Athens, Euaionof Lampsakos, Chaironof Pellene. 18 Cf. Athen. 11,508f. On Demochares and/or the circumstancessurroundinghis antiphilosophicalspeech (the bill proposedby one Sophokleswhich placed all philosophical schools understate control),see W.S. Ferguson,HellenisticAthens.An HistoricalEssay (London 1911 = 1969) 104-107; F. Jacoby in the commentaryon FGrHist 75 (IIC, p. 114-115); J.P. Lynch, Aristotle's School. A Study of a Greek EducationalInstitution zur (Berkeley-LosAngeles 1972) 103-104; 117-118; C. Habicht,Untersuchungen poliv.Chr.(Munchen1979) 22-32; G. Marasco, tischen GeschichteAthensim 3. Jahrhundert Democare di Leuconoe (Firenze 1984); Gaiser,PhilodemsAcademica(as in n. 1) 120122; P.A. Brunt,"Plato's Academy and Politics", in Id., Studies in Greek History and Thought(Oxford1993) 282-342, esp. 332-334; C. Habicht,Athenin hellenistischerZeit. Aufsdtze(Mlunchen 1994) 231-247, esp. 236-239; 251-255; Id., Athen.Die Gesammelte Geschichteder Stadtin hellenistischerZeit (Munchen1995) 81-82. ThatAthenaiosdrew excerptsfromit) was already on Demochares'speech (and mightactuallyhave preserved stated by MUllerFHG II, p. 447 n. 6; this opinion has also been voiced by U. von Antigonosvon Karystos(Berlin 1881) 195-197; W.S. FerguWilamowitz-Mollendorff, son, HellenisticAthens, 106 + n. 2; I. During,Herodicusthe Cratetean.A Studyin AntiPlatonic Tradition(Stockholm1941) 84-85; F. Wehrli,Die Schule des Aristoteles.Texte 1974) 96; Marund Kommentar, Suppl. 1. Hermipposder Kallimacheer(Basel-Stuttgart asco, "Cheronedi Pellene" (as in n. 7) 114; Gaiser, PhilodemsAcademica(as in n. 1) Platon (as in n. 7) 64 n. 18. 121-122; Trampedach, 19 See Gaiser, PhilodemsAcademica(as in n. 1) 124-126. Otherswho have expressedthe same view: During,Herodicus(as in n. 18) 86; Brunt,"Plato's Academy"(as in n. 18) Platon (as in n. 7) 64 n. 18. 289; Trampedach,

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.82.209 on Wed, 28 Nov 2012 01:28:50 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Philodemoson Chairon,Tyrantof Pellene (P. Herc. 1021, col. 10, 40- 12, 41)

39

Firstly, Philodemos has probably used Demosthenes' nephew as his source for the chapter preceding the one on Chairon, dealing with Herakleides of Pontos (as stated above); this can be gleaned from the criticism levelled at that source (whose name is sadly lost on the papyrus) in the ensuing transitional paragraphwhich leads to the section devoted to Chairon20.At the end of that transition, the Epicurean historian announces that he does not want to write about all the philosophers whom Demochares had attacked, but that he does want to discuss the case of Chairon of Pellene on the authority of Hermippos. Gaiser takes this to mean that Philodemos had the choice there between the Smyrnaean biographer and Demochares, and that he preferred the former's account because that was, on the one hand, more concise and less polemic, and, on the other, contained several additional literary references (on which more below). Since, furthermore, the Hermippos-quotation is introduced with the word KcatXoptlEv, which literally means "set down in a book" or "place on record",Gaiser argues that Philodemos must have wanted to stress that Hermippos' own text was a compilation of excerpts from earlier sources, "wie hier (die) Demochares-Rede und (die) Schrift des Phainias." The latter, of course, is a clear instance of begging the question; whereas the verb icaraXwpi' does, indeed, seem to refer to a compilation of excerpts21, it is simply rash to infer anything from this about the actual sources from which the extracts were drawn. As for Philodemos' transitional paragraph,its purportis much stronger than is suggested by Gaiser: the Epicureanhistorian mercilessly exposes the unreliability of Demochares and his slanderous speech. If, subsequently,Philodemos expressly says thathe will neverthelessdiscuss the tyrannyof Chairon(read:"although of on he, too, was underattackby Demochares"), the authority Hermippos,it is more naturalto assume that he expected the latter to have reported on those facts in a manner which owed absolutely nothing to Demochares.

20 Cf. P. Herc. 1021 col. 9, 1-10, 11 (Philodemosquoting the account of a source whose namecan tentativelybe emendedin the additamentum columnae8 margineinferiore: in iaTroy ?i[aat] ca-rfa col. 10, 11-11, 1 (Philo16v] / [Otko6sow]yKTX.); A1[JioXdpJ13y demos criticizing his source), and see the convincing argumentsadduced by Gaiser, Philodems Academica (as in n. 1) 119-123, for identifying the anonymoussource as Demochares.Dorandi,Filodemo (as in n. 1), p. 90-91, shows some reserve regarding Gaiser's hypothesis,insistingthat Hermipposcannotbe ruledout as Philodemos'source for the chapteron Herakleides; however,as I have arguedin the comnmentary Hermipon pos FGrHist 1026 F 71 (publishedin fascicle IV A 3 of the series, Leiden- Boston- Koln 1999, p. 502-506; on the project set up to continue F. Jacoby's Fragmenteder griechischen Historiker, see the introductionby G. Schepens to Id. [ed.], FGrHist IV A: Biography,fasc. 1. ThePre-HellenisticPeriod, Leiden- Boston- Koln 1998, p. vii-xiv), it is simply impossible that the same source is underlyingPhilodemos' discussions of Herakleidesand Chaironof Pellene. 21 This has been argued by Gaiser, Philodems Academica (as in n. 1) 125; 495, whose suggestionhas been acceptedby Dorandi,Filodemo (as in n. 1) 232.

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.82.209 on Wed, 28 Nov 2012 01:28:50 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

40

JAN BOLLANStE

Secondly, Gaiser points out that we have every reason to believe that Chairon was adduced and exposed by Demochares as one of the disreputable examples illustrating the anti-democratic disposition of all philosophers. This probably is true (as, indeed, I have just admitted in the previous paragraph,and as the majority of modern scholars is prepared to accept on the basis of the attributionof Athen. 508d-509e to Demochares in its entirety22),but it is still a long way from proving that Hermippos must have used the Oration for his treatment of that particular episode - as if no other source could have been available on the subject. Thirdly, Gaiser claims, on the basis of a comparison of P. Herc. 1021 col. 9, 1 - 10, 11 to Diog. Laert.5,91 (= Hermipposof SmyrnaFGrHist IV A 3, 1026 F 71), that Hermippos and Philodemos alike used Demochares' speech as the source for their respective accounts of the death of Herakleides of Pontos; the several unmistakabledifferences between the two passages would indicate that Philodemos did not use Hermippos as his intermediarythere, and that the latter, in turn, must have changed the information of his source drastically. This argumentmay be discussed in close connection with the fourthand last, which is to the effect that the close (almost verbal) agreement between Athenaios and Philodemos/Hermipposregardingthe ruthless measures taken by Chaironat the start of his tyrannical rule, again shows Hermippos to have used Demochares' speech, which we know to be underlying the account of Athenaios. In this case, too, Hermippos would have adapted the account of his source, on the one side abridging it (writing toiq nokXiTag EicpaXetv instead of toi; &pit'ou); txv LoXtt6vF#4iXauev,and deleting the references to Plato's State and Laws altogether), on the other expanding it with erudite citations from Dikaiarchos and Phainias (on the latter, again, cf. infra). So, in both instances, Hermippos would have used Demochares' Oration Against the Philosophers as his source, but at the same time he would have made importantchanges to the information thus gained. From a methodological point of view, this consideration is highly dubious: to postulate that an ancient authorwhose work has only come down to us in a fragmentarystate, was not averse to distorting his sources, is a rathershaky and wanton basis for determiningthe identity of those sources. Besides, this is hardly the picture which emerges of Hermippos from the surviving body of his fragments; instead, the impression is created that he was a tireless researcherwho meticulously reported, with matching source citations, all the stories which he found in the vast collection of literatureassembled in the Alexandrianlibrary- as indeed may be expected from a pupil of Kallimachos, whose famous motto "I
sing nothing that is unattested" (ikt6pTupov oO&?v
akti6&;

F 612 Pfeiffer I) can

be linked to the derivative nature of a great deal of Alexandrian (scholarly and

22 Cf. supra, n. 18.

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.82.209 on Wed, 28 Nov 2012 01:28:50 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Philodemoson Chairon,Tyrantof Pellene (P. Herc. 1021, col. 10, 40- 12, 41)

41

poetical) writing23.Accordingly, it is gratuitous to make Demochares Hernippos' source and to explain the great differences between their respective accounts as interventions of the 'Callimachean' himself in his source text24. Moreover, the dissimilarities between Athenaios/Demochares and Hermippos are not restrictedto a purely factual level: the very tenor of both accounts is radically different. As already indicated above, Hermippos stresses that Chairon's 'desertion' from the Academy and the subsequent establishment of the tyrannis in his hometown are purely personal decisions, inspired by an unquenchablethirstfor glory and power resulting from the honourbestowed on him because of his physical prowess. In other words, true to the title of the Hermippean treatise from which the passage under discussion derives, the protagonist severs all ties with philosophy before devoting himself to the mundane exercise of absolute power. In Demochares' speech, on the other hand, Chairon's harsh misdemeanour is presented as the very outcome of his adherence to Plato's political theory: "these were the beneficial results Chairon derived from the noble Republic and from the lawless Laws," so it is stated full of irony25. Assuming that one of the two accounts truthfully mirrorsthe historical facts (but we cannot even be completely sure of that), it is clear that the other one must be a deliberate manipulation of the evidence. Wehrli (whom Gaiser eagerly follows) suggested that Hermippos might have been responsible for adapting the facts in order to fit them in with the general theme of his work26.

23 On Hermippos a pupilof Kallimachos, FGrHist 1026 T 2 in fascicle IV A 3 (as in n. as cf. 20), with commentary p. 97-98. On the derivativenatureof the literaryproductionin on the AlexandrianMuseion, see R. Pfeiffer, History of Classical Scholarshipfrom the
Beginnings to the End of the Hellenistic Age (Oxford 1968) 102-103; P.M. Fraser, Ptolemaic Alexandria I (Oxford 1972) 777-784; P. Bing, The Well-Read Muse. Present and Past in Callimachus and the Hellenistic Poets (Gottingen 1988) passim; A. Cameron, Callimachus and his Critics (Princeton 1995) 24-25; G. Schepens - K. Delcroix, "Ancient

Production Reception", 0. Pecere- A. Stramaglia and in Paradoxography: Origin,Evolution,


(ed.), La letteratura di consumo nel mondo greco-latino (Cassino 1996) 375-460, esp.

382-390. On Hermipposadopting the same method in his biographicalwritings, see chapter11I.3in my monograph this biographer, on cited above, n. 5. 24 See also my remarksin the commentary Hermippos on FGrHist 1026 F 71, in fascicle IV A 3 (as in n. 20), p. 505-508.
To Marasco, "Cherone di Pellene" (as in n. 7) 113 + n. 26; 114 n. 37, the factual

differences between the accounts of Athenaios and Hermippos were the conclusive argumentagainstmakingthe latterthe source for the former;of course, this implies that the Italiandid not thinkthat Hermipposused Democharesas his authorityeither. 25 Cf. Athen. 11,509b,cited above, in n. 3. 26 See Wehrli,Hermippos(as in n. 18) 96: "H.s Darstellungwar dadurchbestimmt,daBer seinem Thema gemaBChaironsganze politische Betatigungals Abfall von der Philosophie zu behandeln,ihn fur seine Vergehen also personlich verantwortlichzu machen hatte."This passage is quoted in extenso no less than two times by Gaiser, Philodems Academica(as in n. 1) 124; 500-501.

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.82.209 on Wed, 28 Nov 2012 01:28:50 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

42

JAN BOLLANStE

Above, however, it has been argued that Hermippos' version of the facts comes closest to what one may expect, in the light of the then political constellation and social situation in the Peloponnese, to have actually happened at Pellene towards the end of the 330s B.C. Correspondingly, one cannot seriously be expected to believe that his account was a deliberate distortion of the historical facts, which just happens to coincide with the most likely course of events. Demochares, on the other hand, whose entire Oration Against the Philosophers was conceived as a veritable attack on the Peripatetic school in particularand philosophy in general, had every reason to make the most of all available pieces of evidence which might be helpful to shed unfavourable light on the political views of the leading philosophical movements. In this respect, it would have been wholly in keeping with currentrhetorical practice if he had chosen to twist and distort some of the facts, should this have been beneficial to his cause. As a matter of fact, his malicious intentions and his unreliability are abundantly clear when one considers that he does not say a word about the Macedonian help which Chairon is said to have received and which (as has been shown above) is almost certainly historical: in this way attention is focused exclusively on the alleged pernicious effects of Platonic training27.Accordingly, the most naturalconclusion is that Demochares was responsible for stretching the truth, converting the (probably well-known) case of the renegade Academic and Olympic victor turned tyrant into that of the Academic philosopher who, in accordance with his philosophy, started to oppress the citizenry in his hometown28.

Of course, this does not necessarily and inevitably imply that Hermippos' version is completely foolproof; the possibility that modern scholarship has been tricked into attaching credence to a version of the facts touched up by proAcademic apologists cannot be excluded. On the other hand, there are serious

slant is detectible in the accountcontainedin the seventeenth 27 A similar propagandistic Demosthenicspeech. The anonymousauthoris oratingagainstthe conclusionof a treaty with Alexander and accordingly remains silent about Chairon's Academic training, stressingthe very fact that Chaironwas a mere puppetin the handsof the Macedonians (and in the process creatinga certainlyfake democraticregime for the Achaeancity of Pellene, not unsimilarto the Atheniantype of government...). 28 That Demochares' reliability as a historical source is most problematic,was also the di conclusionreachedby Marasco,"Cherone Pellene"(as in n. 7) 114-115, who used this for as the mainargument refutingthe thesis of some modem scholars- for instance,most recently,Worle,Politische Tatigkeit(as in n. 7) 108-1 11 - thatdeep-downinsideChairon remaineda trueAcademicphilosopherwho triedto put into practicethe Platonicpolitical traditionwas unjustlydepicted as a gruetheory and who by the stronganti-tyrannical Platon (as in n. 7) 65 n. 33, as some tyrant.The latterview was disputedby Trampedach, well; on the lack of a direct link between Plato's philosophyand the political activity of some of his pupils, and Plato's rejectionof tyrannicalrule based on violence in general, Platon (as in n. 7) 146-147; 280-281. see also Trampedach,

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.82.209 on Wed, 28 Nov 2012 01:28:50 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Philodemoson Chairon,Tyrantof Pellene (P. Herc. 1021, col. 10, 40 - 12, 41)

43

indications that occasionally, this Hellenistic biographer (who has an undeserved reputation for consistently inventing salacious stories or maliciously manipulating evidence) did draw on a reliable source29.The fact that we are no longer able to attribute a name and a face to that source does not mean that it could not have existed: the episode must have been sufficiently famous for Demochares to be able to use it in his harangue, so it may well have been reported in other contemporary, late-fourth century sources as well. One cannot but deplore that Philodemos has not cited the name of Hermippos' authority which - judging from the numerous source-references which occur in this biographer's remaining fragments - the latter may be expected to have actually mentioned. Summing up, it appears that the case for making Demochares Hermippos' source is, to say the least, very weak. Instead, I subscribe to the view that the Callimachean has used a reliable historical writer for the Chairon-episode, who shall remain nameless, and that Demosthenes' nephew is the one who misrepresented the facts; for all we know, the verbal similarities which nevertheless exist between the accounts of Demochares/Athenaios and Hermippos may be explained by assuming that the former go back to the same source as the latter (this, in turn, could indicate that Hermippos' source was active close in time to the events which he wrote about). The final issue to be tackled here is the identification of the lower boundary of the Hermippos-quotation, which unmistakably starts at col. 11, 7. At col. 12, 2 Philodemos cites another authority, an otherwise unspecified Phainias. It is generally assumed - and rightly so, I might add - that the latter should be identified as the Peripatetic philosopher Phainias of Eresos, who lived from circa 375 until 300 and was a direct pupil of Aristotle. The reference to the said Phainias within the framework of a discussion of the Pellenian tyrant Chairon comes as no surprise, for he wrote at least two works on tyrants: there are fragmentary remains of a treatise On the Tyrants of Sicily (Hsp'. t6v ?V ItlC?Xkig tupdvvov) and of The Slaying of Tyrants out of Vengeance (Ttpavvov dvaipecatu ?1CttWpia;). As a matter of fact, even though the preserved text does not say anything about Chairon's death (I will return to this point at the end of this article), the present citation in all likelihood derives from the latter work30. The questions to be answered, then, are two. The first one

29 For instance,in the case of the famouslawgiverDemonaxof Mantineia: J. Bollansee, see "Hermippos Smymaon Lawgivers: of Demonaxof Mantineia", AncSoc27, 1996,289-300. In addition,see chapterlII.I in the monograph Hermippos on cited above, in n. 5. 30 Thatthis quotationbelongs to the Tupdvvov dvaiptq 6c 'rtgopia; was first suggested by T. Gomperz,"Die Akademieund ihr vermeintlicher Philomacedonismus. Bemerkungen zu Bernays' Phokion",WS 4, 1882, 102-120, esp. 115 n. 14; the propositionwas subsequently endorsedby During,Herodicus(as in n. 18) 86; Mekler,IndexHerculanensis (as in n. 7) 31; H. Berve, Die Tyrannis bei den Griechen, II. Anmerkungen (Munchen

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.82.209 on Wed, 28 Nov 2012 01:28:50 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

44

JAN BOLLANStE

concerns the scope of the Phainias-quotation;the second is whether Philodemos had direct access to the work of the Peripatetic, or whether the quotation from the latter was transmitted through the intermediary of Hermippos, who is quoted immediately prior to Phainias. Gaiser has shown that several considerations invite to think that the whole of P. Herc. 1021 col. 12 (starting from line 2) should be traced back to Phainias31.For one, it is unthinkablethat such an authoritywas only referredto for the general statement about Chairon's move from philosophy to insolent tyranny32 after his glorious victories in the Olympic Games (col. 12, 2-7), information which is merely a repetition of what has already been said in col. 11, 11-16. Actually, the ensuing contentions (col. 12, 7-16) about Chairon's attempted founding of a city called Chaironeia and digging through of the Corinthian Isthmos, reported on the authority of anonymous informants (Xt9v; Xyovac ... Xgyrrat), are the perfect illustrations of the tyrant's tXortgtiaFi (cf. ncXeovFE,iq col. 12, 3-4), so it makes good sense to attribute them to Phainias as well33. Also, the very reference to unspecified authorities smacks of 'hear-say' and rumoursratherthan a bonafide written source, and this suggests that the source for these unverified pieces of information was an author active around the time of Chairon - another pointer in the direction of Phainias. In other words, the change from indirect to direct speech which occurs at col. 12, 7 would not correspond to a change of source. Furthermore,the exposition in col. 12, 2-41 forms a coherent whole, in which a second complete survey is given of the important events in Chairon's life (his discipleship with Xenokrates, his

di 1967)677; Worle,Politische Tatigkeit(as in n. 7) 111; Marasco,"Cherone Pellene"(as in n. 7) 116;Gaiser,PhilodemsAcademica(as in n. 1) 126;Dorandi,Filodemo(as in n. 1) 91-92; Trampedach, Platon (as in n. 7) 65 + n. 31-32. Most recently,see Engels in the commentary PhainiasFGrHlist1012 F 6 (IV A 1, p. 309-311). Oddly, Wehrlidid not on includethe passus underdiscussion amongthe fragmentsof the work in question(F 1416 in Wehrli SdA IX); in fact, it is missing altogetherfrom his edition of Phainias' fragments, nor did he enter into the matter in his commentaryon the Hermipposfragments,even though he assumed that the latter was Philodemos' authorityfor the Phainias-citation which, more below). (on 31 See Gaiser, Philodems Academica (as in n. 1) 127-128; his conclusion is implicitly Platon (as in n. 7) 65 + n. 33. acceptedby Trampedach, 32 Gaiser, PhilodemsAcademica(as in n. 1) 498, and Dorandi,Filodemo (as in n. 1) 233, attributean ironicalconnotationto the adjective veavtc6; ('vigourous'), but Engels in on the commentary PhainiasFGrHist 1012 F 6 (IV A 1, p. 306 n. 69) points out thatthe word had alreadybeen used in a purely negative sense (meaning'headstrong'or 'insolent') in a philosophicalcontext by Plato (Gorg. 508d) and Aristotle(Pol. 1296a4). 33 Pace Duiring, Herodicus(as in n. 18) 86. On the contentsand/orthe veracityof Phainias' contentions, see Marasco,"Cheronedi Pellene" (as in n. 7) 115-116 + n. 56; Gaiser, Platon (as in n. 7) 65; Engels in PhilodemsAcademica(as in n. 1) 498-499; Trampedach, on the commentary FGrHist 1012 F 6 (IV A 1, p. 306-308).

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.82.209 on Wed, 28 Nov 2012 01:28:50 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Philodemoson Chairon,Tyrantof Pellene (P. Herc. 1021, col. 10, 40 - 12, 41)

45

victories in the Panhellenic Games, his 'defection' from the Academy and the setting up, with Macedonian help, of a tyrannis in his hometown of Pellene) albeit in reversed chronological order, which can be explained in view of the fact that the Phainias-quotation is linked directly to the preceding one from Hermippos, which already ends with the measures taken by Chairon at the beginning of his rule. Thus, I arrive at the second question that has been posed above, whether Philodemos juxtaposed the accounts of Phainias and Hermippos by himself, or whether the Phainias-citation should be attributedto Hermippos, like the first part of the chapter on Chairon. As it is, the latter assumption is the preferable one, on the following grounds. To begin with, the way in which Philodemos introduces the chapter on Chairon is highly suggestive of the fact that all information contained in it (including the references to Dikaiarchos, Phainias and the anonymi) goes back to the one authority cited at the beginning, Hermippos34.Secondly, as already stated above, the choice of verb for characterizing Hermippos' text - a caQtX%o)ptalV "Epgtuno; (col. 11, 3-4) - indicates that the latter's account consisted of a compilation of excerpts from earlier authors; accordingly, Phainias may have been mentioned by Hermippos alongside the main source for col. 11 (unknown to us, but no doubt originally mentioned by name by the Callimachean) and Dikaiarchos35.Moreover, the contents of col. 12, 21-29, just like those of col. 11, 8-22, fits the main theme of Hermippos' monograph like a glove: it is reported how Chairon under Xenokrates' guidance behaved in a suitably modest manner, but upon leaving Athens (to participate in the Olympic and Pythian Games) lost all sense of measure and evolved away from the Academy, straight to tyranny; therefore, we have good reason to believe that that passus goes back to the biographer from Smyrna36.A final point is that at col. 11, 9-10, Plato and Xenokrates are mentioned side by side as Chairon's teachers, and that in the following lines 11-23 there is talk of how Chairon after his victories in the Panhellenic Games became discontent with the way he was treated by Plato, while Xenokrates' teachership of the Pellenian is only mentioned several lines further, precisely in the Phainias-citation; accordingly, it might be argued that the statement at col. 11, 9-10 serves as the trait d'union signifying that the entire chapter, including the reference to Phainias halfway through it, goes back to one and the same authority, Hermippos37.
34 This was the sole reasonfor Wehrli,Hermippos(as in n. 18) 95, for attributing 11-12 col. in theirentiretyto Hermippos. 35 On the meaningof the verb KaraXwpilco, supra, n. 21. cf. 36 So also Gaiser,PhilodemsAcademica(as in n. 1) 127. 37 Gaiser, Philodems Academica (as in n. 1) 128, nearly put his finger on this argument
when he remarked: "Man wird den Ruckverweis (sc. 6 6ipijgvo;
-Hvoicpd"q

at col. 12,

21-22, harkingback to col. 11, 10) am ehesten der RedaktionHermippszuschreiben

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.82.209 on Wed, 28 Nov 2012 01:28:50 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

46

JAN BOLLANStE

Above, mention has already been made of the fact that in the two text columns under discussion, a conversation which Chairon had with envoys from Antipatros about Korragos' help in seizing control of Pellene is described twice, in near-identical words (compare col. 11, 30-37 and col. 12, 36-41). Because, in addition, there is a right-angle sign in the bottom margin, on the left-hand side, of col. 12 (so, near the second of the two passages in question) which should be interpreted not as a paragraphos, but as a deletion-mark, Dorandi has argued that Philodemos must have been responsible for juxtaposing the excerpts from Hermippos and Phainias; afterwards, he would have spotted the repetition and decided to exclude the second passage from the final version of his Historia Academicorum38.The argument, however, while judicious, is not conclusive. In fact, the reiteration can be shown to make good sense: in the first instance, the reference to the conversation with Antipatros' ambassadors is an integral part of the description of how Chairon actually rose to the position of tyrant in his hometown with the help of the Macedonians, whereas in the second, it is adduced as one of the causes of the feelings of fear experienced by partof the Pellenian citizenry at the time of Chairon's seizure of power39. Accordingly, it is conceivable that the repetition, occasioned by the use of two different sources, was a conscious move by Hermippos, deemed meaningful in view of the double function of the conversation; Philodemos may not have been happy with this editorial decision and may subsequently have resolved on doing away with it. I will readily admit that in itself, this argument is equally inconclusive as the alternative one proposed by Dorandi; however, in the light of all considerations listed above in favour of the attribution of the entire Chairon-chapterto Hermippos, it is clear that the deletion-mark cannot be used to rule out that he was Philodemos' only direct source. Illustrative of our precarious knowledge of so many ancient figures and events is the fact that even about an apparentlywell-known case like that of the renegade Academic Chairon, we have to content ourselves with a mere handful of mostly short passus. Moreover, those sources concentrate exclusively on his triumphsin the Panhellenic contests, his defection from the Academy and/orhis 'collaboration' with the Macedonians while establishing his tyrannis. So, we
was, indeed,alreadymadeby Obviously I am convincedthatthe cross-reference diirfen." Hermippos. by was to One morereasonfor ascribingthe Phainias-citation Hermippos proposed Gaiser, PhilodemsAcademica(as in n. 1) 128; accordingto that Germanscholar,Philodemosis becausethatis out unlikelyto have perusedthe workTheSlayingof Tyrants of Vengeance not anobvioussourceforone writinga generalhistoryof the Academyandits philosophers; would source(besidesDikaiarchos) on for Hermippos, the otherhand,a secondPeripatetic Both be a good possibility,the moreso in view of the generalthemeof the workconcerned. to are sides of the argument a trifletoo conjectural my liking. 38 See Dorandi,Filodemo(as in n. 1) 50 + n. 127 (on the right-anglesign); 92. was 39 This interpretation given by Gaiser,PhilodemsAcademica(as in n. 1) 128.

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.82.209 on Wed, 28 Nov 2012 01:28:50 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Philodemoson Chairon,Tyrantof Pellene (P. Herc. 1021, col. 10, 40 - 12, 41)

47

barely learn a thing about his actual rule (the exception being col. 12, 7-16 of P. Herc. 1021), the duration thereof and how it came to an end40. Still, the only right conclusion to be drawn from the attribution of the Phainias-quotation to the latter's The Slaying of Tyrants out of Vengeance is that Chairon met with a violent death, which is an altogether plausible assumption41. Accordingly,it has been suggestedthatthe descriptionof the tyrant'soverthrow might have been given in the lacuna of col. 12, 16-21, which unfortunatelyis damaged beyond repair42. Two considerations compel me to doubt that proposition. Judgingby the colourful fragmentswhich have come down to us of Phainias' work, the latter went at great lengths to describe the character(and the depravity) of his protagonists and the situation leading up to their being ousted and assassinated "out of vengeance"43.Correspondingly, the Eresian may be expected to have portrayedthe actual slaying of Chairon in considerable detail too, and the limited space of the lacuna does not seem to allow of that, especially not in view of the fact that the preceding lines 7-16 do not hint at an upheaval against the tyrant or a reason for a vengeful reaction against him. This objection might be countered by the argument that Hermippos could have abridged Phainias' account, but that is a second unlikely option, for several fragmentstestify to the fact that the biographerfrom Smyrna relished describing the deaths of his subjects in a pictorialmanner'4,so it is not warrantedto conjecturethat in this case - with the given subject and source - he would have departedfrom his usual practice.On the contrary, since Chairon's degeneration from philosophy to tyrannical behaviour is portrayedin a careful manner, it is improbablethat Hermipposdisposed of his death in a mere six lines. Therefore, it seems safer to assume that in the lacuna underdiscussion a third illustrationwas given of Chairon's Aotiojita 'ERnXovctiVc, or that the failure of the aforementionedprojects was reported45.

40 For considerationsregardingthese matters,see Worle, Politische Tatigkeit(as in n. 7) 111; Marasco,"Cherone Pellene"(as in n. 7) 115-116; Trampedach, di Platon (as in n. 7)
65 + n. 32.

41 This conclusionwas alreadyreachedby Gomperz,"Die Akademie" in n. 30) 115 n. 14. (as Not surprisingly, scholarswho followed in his wake for the attribution the Phainiasall of fragment- see the referencesgiven above, in n. 30 - also accepted that Chaironwas, indeed,murdered. 42 See Gaiser,PhilodemsAcademica(as in n. 1) 126; 225*; 499; Dorandi,Filodemo (as in n. 1)49n. 125; 233. 43 Cf. PhainiasFGrHist 1012 F 3-6 (F 14-16 WehrliSdAIX). 44 See chapterII1.2in the monograph announcedabove, in n. 5. 45 These possibilities were duly acknowledgedby Gaiser,PhilodemsAcademic (as in n. 1) a 499, as well. The very fact thatwe have beforeus an excerptfromHermippos'On Those ..., andnot an epitome, precludesthe assumptionthat the story of Chairon'sdeath was derived in full from Phainiasby Hermippos was eventuallyabridgedby Philodemos,the last link in and the chain.

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.82.209 on Wed, 28 Nov 2012 01:28:50 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

48

JAN BOLLANStE

Nevertheless, we may assume that Hermippos must have dealt with the tyrant's death in a subsequent paragraphof his work, which Philodemos (for reasons no longer fathomable) chose not to include in his excerpt. If anything, this omission and the very contents of the fragment underdiscussion go to show that, while Hermippos undeniably paid a lot of attention to death-stories (the several fragments devoted to the topic provide clear enough testimony to that), it would be jumping to conclusions to claim that they took up a disproportionate amount of space in his biographies, as was once the prevailing view among modem scholars46. Katholieke Universiteit Leuven Jan Bollansee

46 On this, see my observationsin chapterIII.2 and Appendix2 in the Hermippos-monographcited above, in n. 5.

This content downloaded by the authorized user from 192.168.82.209 on Wed, 28 Nov 2012 01:28:50 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

You might also like