DAMASCIUS

The Philosophical History

text with translation and notes

by
Polymnia A thanassiadi

A P A M E IA
 published by
Apamea Cultural Association
Democharous 7, Athens 115 21, Greece
fax 7224 143

distributed outside Greece by

Oxbow Books, Park End Place, Oxford ΟΧΙ 1HN, UK
phone 01865-241249; fax 01865-794449
and
The David Brown Book Company
PO Box 511, Oakville CT 06779, USA
phone 860-945-9329; fax 860-945-9468
or website
www.oxbowbooks.com

ISBN 960-85325-2-3
DAMASCIUS
The Philosophical History
text with translation and notes

by
POLYMNIA ATHANASSIADI

APAM EIA
f

l
 PREFACE

My interest in Damascius and in his Philosophical History was

kindled by my desire to find out about the pagan communities of
late antiquity and their spiritual posterity. The movement of this
search has been largely retrogressive from roots which lie in the
present; for the Greater Eastern Mediterranean, which has been my
home for many generations, is rich in what a scholar might call
“pagan survivals”, but a local would perceive as the natural way of
going about life and after-life. This unavowed moral and spiritual
orthodoxy which underlies all local creeds and codes of behaviour
is what has cemented the empires which flourished in this part of
the world, ensuring as it did their effortless mutation from Roman
to Byzantine to Ottoman; for, while publicly proclaiming for two
thousand years the oecumenicity of the emperor cult, of
Christianity or of Islam, the Empire has fostered -possibly un­
awares- a specific ethos which is recognisable in explicit forms or
otherwise in all periods and at all social and intellectual levels.
When I first came upon the Philosophical History, its enigmatic
shreds bred in me a sense of frustration and dissatisfaction, and it
was some time before I felt truly involved with the fortunes of its
author and his responses to them. Then suddenly the Philosophical
History with its little fragmentary lives, its allusiveness, brusque
halts and sheer sense of loss struck me as the perfect symbol of the
fragmentary and cryptic character which underlies Mediterranean
 religion in all its secular and mystic forms. When I reached this
vantage point I decided to share it with others, and in the Spring of
19931 announced a seminar on the Philosophical History. The first
classes were held in my office at the University, but after a few
sessions we moved to the more congenial atmosphere of my study
at home, and as May set in we began to meet in the main atrium of
a late antique house on the north slope of the Areopagus.
Untypically I refrained from thrusting upon my students the
hypothesis that this had indeed been the house of Damascius,
though the sense that we were squatters in a place known by him
was inescapable. Every Monday at 5 o’clock, dragging the
fragments of the Philosophical History, our little band would troop
in through a hole in the fence, chasing away the odd Albanian
immigrant. At dusk the search for Damascius would become even
less dry -τοϋ πότου καθηδύνοντος την όμιλίαν- at the nearby
“Platanos” off the Roman Agora.
Even then we were careful to distinguish between fact and
conjecture in a remarkable life. Yet with all our shunning of
certainties, the outline of this life eventually stood out with bold
clarity: indisputably Damascius was bom in Damascus; studied
and practised rhetoric in Alexandria; travelled extensively in Syria
and Asia Minor in the company of Isidore under whose influence
he abandoned his career for the study of philosophy. Assuming the
Platonic Succession in Athens, he redefined the institution,
enhancing its international prestige; he then led -in his late sixties-
his colleagues to Ctesiphon in search of intellectual freedom, and
responded to the culture-shock by negotiating their privileged
return to the Roman Empire. And as the end approached, he chose
to go and die in his Syrian homeland.

When the idea of offering the fragments of the Philosophical

History in a readable form had crystallised, other considerations
came to the forefront. What would the shape of the book be? So
fragmentary a text, and one which has come down in alternative
versions, needed to be presented in as comprehensive and clear a
form as possible, a philological task which proved more taxing
 than I had first thought. Eventually the notes which described and
justified my textual choices evolved into a basic critical apparatus
from which it is possible to reconstruct the original fragments as
they appear respectively in Adler’s Suda and Henry’s Photius.
While providing a translation for the text which had thus been
established I increasingly felt that so discontinuous and allusive a
story called for extensive clarification and it was at that point that
there emerged the problem of the dividing line between
explanatory notes and commentary. After much thought I decided
to stay on the borderline, while leaning slightly towards the side of
a commentary. Being more licitly subjective than other forms of
scholarly discussion, commentaries lend themselves not only to
selectivity but also to interpretativeness. Thus the emphasis in the
notes which accompany the translation is laid on the transcendence
of gossip: the broader ideological and cultural issues lurking
behind the quarrels, the hopes and the fears of the characters of this
book receive much more attention than the larger historical
framework within which these people move. The other two areas
which attracted my curiosity concern the philosophical background
of this late antique prosopography and Damascius’ use of
language.
As the work progressed, its format became a growing concern.
Who would be the publisher to provide technical expertise and
aesthetic sensibility, while guaranteeing the pecuniary accessibility
of the book? What was needed was a “scribe”. I decided to become
that scribe and immerse myself in the infinitely rewarding under­
taking of producing the book as a physical entity.
Several people played a part in the production of this book. An
old friend, Augusto Guida of the University of Florence, read the
entire manuscript and proposed methodological alterations as well
as changes of detail. Among the students who participated in the
genesis of the book Aphrodite Kamara and George Voulgaridis
should be specially mentioned and specially thanked as should also
Thanassis Karaphotias who has produced the indexes and
concordances. Of the friends and colleagues who offered advice on
specific points or discussed general issues with me, I am
particularly grateful to Averil Cameron, Stephen Colvin, Michael
Frede, Thanos Marcopoulos, Fergus Millar, Simon Price, Richard
Sorabji and Nigel Wilson. But my greatest debt is to John
Avgherinos whose involvement with this work in scholarly,
aesthetic and technical terms was decisive, so that the book bears
his mark in far more essential ways than the dedication reveals.

February 1998

1
 CONTENTS

Preface............................................................................. 9
Abbreviations................................................................... 14
Technicalities................................................................... 15
Introduction...................................................................... 19
Summary.......................................................................... 71
The Philosophical History: Text and Translation........... 74
Testimonia........................................................................ 334
Appendix I: The House of Damascius?.......................... 343
Appendix II: The two Asclepiodoti................................. 348
Appendix III: Who was Count Zosimus?....................... 350
Plates................................................................................ 358
Map.................................................................................. 360
Select Bibliography......................................................... 366
Index of Personal Names................................................. 372
Index of Geographical Names......................................... 380
Index of Groups............................................................... 383
Concordances................................................................... 385
 ABBREVIATIONS

BZ 18 = Asmus R., ‘Zur Rekonstruktion von Damascius’ Leben

des Isidores’ BZ 18 (1909) 424-480
BZ 19 = Asmus R., ‘Zur Rekonstruktion von Damascius’ Leben
des Isidores’, BZ 19 (1910) 265-284
CAG = Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca
Herm I - XVIII = Hermetica, Nock - Festugifcre vols 1 - 2
Herm S I-XXIX = Hermetica, Nock - Festugiere vols 3 - 4
JHS 113 = R Athanassiadi, ‘Persecution and response in l^te
paganism: the evidence of Damascius \J H S 113 (1993) 1-29
Griffiths = Plutarch, De Iside et Osiride, ed. trans. J.G. Griffiths,
Cambridge 1970
Leben = Asmus R., Das Leben des Philosophen Isidoros, Leipzig
1911
Myst. = Iamblichus De mysteriis, ed. trans. E. des Places, Paris 1966
PGM = K. Preisendanz - A. Henrichs, Papyri Graecae Magicae I-
II, Stuttgart 1973-742
PH —Philosophical History
Φ = Photius Bibliotheca Cod. 242
PLREII = Martindale J.R. (ed.), The Prosopography of the later
Roman empire, A.D. 395-527, Cambridge 1980
Plutarch Is. = De Iside et Osiride, ed. trans. J.G. Griffiths,
Cambridge 1970
Princ. = Damascius, De primis principiis: all references to the
volume and page number of the Westerink-Combes edition
S = Suidae Lexicon, ed. A. Adler, Leipzig 1928-1938
Test. = Testimonia
VP = Marinus, Vita Procli, ed. R. Masullo, Naples 1985
VS = Zacharias Scholasticus, Vita Severi, ed. trans. M.A. Kugener,
Patrologia Orientalis II (1904)
Zintzen = Vitae Isidori Reliquiae, ed. C. Zintzen, Hildesheim 1967
 TECHNICALITIES

The Text

The text is based on Adler’s edition of the Suda and Henry’s of

Photius. Variants from the text of these editions are to be found in
the Apparatus.

Photius

I include in my edition all the passages contained in Photius’

two recensions of Damascius, though often a passage is given in a
version collated with the equivalent passage or passages from the
Suda or from the alternative Photian reading. In the rare cases
where my text is based wholly on the Suda reading, I quote the
Photius text in the Apparatus. It is therefore possible from my
edition to reconstruct the whole of Photius Cod. 242 as edited by
Henry.
The numbering of the Photius excerpts from 1 to 312 was
carried out by Westermann, who followed the division of the text
given in Bekker’s edition. In the few cases where I have not found
Bekker’s division logical, I have subdivided passages or joined
them together.

The Suda

The Suda contains standard lexicographical definitions and also

entries which are biographical and geographic in nature. The
format of the entries normally consists of the initial title {lemma), a
 brief definition or comment and, finally, attributed or unattributed
passages of Greek which include the title word (locus classicus).
Occasionally a single entry contains two or more titles.
References to passages from the Suda in this edition are
introduced by S followed by the number of the book in Roman
numerals and the page and line in Adler’s edition in Arabic
numerals (e.g. S II 219, 3). The number preceding the Suda entry
(which was added by Adler) is given only where two entries have
the same title (e.g. αξίωμα 2825) and the number is therefore
needed for identification purposes.
Where a fragment, or part of a fragment, in this edition is taken
from the Suda, the title of the relevant entry and its reference are
given at the end of the Greek text. Where an entry contains more
than one title, e.g. άγυρις/άγυρισμός, S I 40, 1), I have given the
title relevant to the quoted passage. '
Where the reference is not followed by the letters p or pp, the
fragment contains the whole of the Suda entry (though normally
without the initial definition or comment). The letters signify the
following:
p (pars): the fragment contains a passage quoted by the Suda, but
not the whole Suda entry, which consists of two or more passages,
pp (partis pars): the fragment contains part of a passage quoted by
the Suda, which for the purposes of this edition has been split with
the remainder allocated elsewhere.
For the use of the asterisk see p. 68. In brief, S* means that the
Suda fragment is assumed to be the work of Damascius, though
this cannot be proved, and *S that authorship is doubtful. Where
no asterisk is given, the passage is clearly by Damascius.

The Apparatus

1 have attempted to keep the critical apparatus as simple as

possible, generally placing alternative readings side by side
without additional annotation. As for its typology, I have adopted
the following order: for each fragment I give first, where
appropriate, abbreviated references of further passages in the Suda
which quote the same or a similar text; secondly, in the case of
collated passages, an indication of how much of the fragment
comes from each source; thirdly I note the variants in my text from
Adler’s Suda and Henry’s Photius, using the abbreviation v.l. (varia
lectio) where the variant is a manuscript reading and, in the case of
conjectures, giving the name of modem editors.

Punctuation and transliteration

I use bold numbers and letters to indicate the fragments in the

present edition. In punctuating the text I invariably use a capital
after a full stop; however, when a fragment clearly represents the
latter part of an otherwise lost sentence, I begin with a small letter.
Absolute consistency in the transcription of Greek and exotic
names (Iranian, Gothic etc.) is neither possible nor desirable, and I
have found in this quarter that common usage and aesthetic
considerations are more important guidelines than pedantry.
 IN T R O D U C T IO N

DAMASCIUS

I Origins
Damascius was bom in Damascus in the early 460s.1 From the
fact that both he and his younger brother Julian pursued higher
studies in Alexandria we may safely assume that he belonged to a
well-to-do family,2 whose decision to name a son after its native
town may be an indication of a special attachment to it.3 Even if
fortuitous, this circumstance carries great symbolic significance:

1The date of Damascius’ birth can be inferred from the combined information
of 56, which describes him as κομιδή μειράκιον at the time of Aedesia’s death,
when he seems to have just embarked on his rhetorical studies in Alexandria, and of
137B, where Damascius says that when he left Alexandria during the persecution of
488/89, he had spent nine years in rhetorical pursuits (cf. also 137C referring to the
same period).
2 Moreover both Damascius and Julian studied under Severianus who came
from “one of the best families” in Damascus (108) and was clearly a family friend.
I assume that Damascius’ training with Severianus took place in his native city,
where the latter retired after the “harsh and pointless” years he had spent as
imperial administrator. Alternatively it is possible, though less plausible, that
Severianus retired to Alexandria and took up a formal teaching career, so that when
Damascius and his brother came to the metropolis for higher studies, they were first
sent to a fellow-citizen and family friend. However, the stories that Damascius
reports about Severianus suggest the informality of casual teaching. My guess is
that the nine year period spent by Damascius in rhetorical pursuits includes both the
study and the practice of the discipline in Alexandria as well as his preliminary
training in that discipline at home under Severianus.
3 Damascius is an unusual name which does not occur in any of the published
inscriptions from Roman Syria. Moreover we do not know of any tradition which
suggests that, as in the case of Porphyry, Damascius acquired his name at an adult
age through translation or for some other reason.
 for the complex and ambiguous nature of Damascus is mirrored in
both the character and the life of the man who bears its name.
On the borderland between the settled and the nomadic, and a
mere hundred kilometres from the Mediterranean (from which
however a double chain of mountains provides a significant
barrier), Damascus commands the roads which unite Arabia with
Anatolia.4 A high, salubrious place and a prosperous, self-
confident and sophisticated metropolis long before the advent of
the Greeks, Damascus combined the Aramaic, Nabataean and
Hellenic traditions in a way which has been superbly encapsulated
by the personality of Damascius himself.5 This reflects at all times
the indissoluble synthesis of the three elements which are foremost
in the make-up of his native city, but one can nonetheless detect the
dominance of each one in turn in Damascius’ behaviour and
decisions at the most critical moments of his existence. Thus the
nomadic instinct is foremost in Damascius’ life-long wanderings in
search of inner freedom, the ineluctable attachment to the Aramaic
homeland marks his decision to end his life in Syria, and finally the
Greek ingredient is uppermost in his exceptional understanding of
Plato and in the extreme ease with which he settled himself in
Alexandria and especially Athens, whose ultimate flowering was
brought about by Damascius himself.

II Alexandria

1. The intellectual and the spiritual

In the early 480s Damascius came to Alexandria to study
rhetoric in Horapollo’s school. This was an exclusive college of
higher education where the most famous rhetors and philosophers
in Alexandria taught a mixed audience of pagan and Christian

4 Cf. B. Isaac, The limits of empire. Oxford 19922, 138-9.

5 For an overview, see N. Elissieff, s.v. ‘Dimashk’, Encyclopedic de TIslam1
vol. II, col. 286.
students assembled from all over the Mediterranean world.6
Horapollo was responsible for the conversion of many a pupil from
Christianity to Hellenism, an activity which earned him the
nickname “Soul-destroyer”.7 His own father, Asclepiades, was also
a devout pagan and an expert on traditional Egyptian culture,8 a
taste that he passed on to his son, to whom we owe a monograph
on hieroglyphics.9 At the time when Damascius joined the school,
Asclepiades was a prominent figure there, dedicating hymns to the
Egyptian gods and composing a treatise (which incidentally he
never finished) on the accordance of the Egyptian with other
theologies.10 Though a student in rhetoric, Damascius must have
come into daily contact with the philosophers who were connected
with the school in an official or informal capacity.11 One of the
most eccentric among them was Asclepiades’ younger brother, the
holy Heraiscus, who was instantly seized by a headache if he found
himself in the presence of a menstruating woman and, on a more
exalted note, could tell whether or not a cultic statue was possessed
of the god.12 His encyclopaedic treatise on the Egyptian religion,

6 The ambience of the school is conjured up for us by one of its students.

Zacharias Scholasticus, Bishop of Mitylene, in the biography of his fellow-pupil,
Severus. Preserved in a Syriac translation in Patrologia Orientalis II (1904)
(French translation by M.A. Kugener), the Life o f Severus, the Monophysite Bishop
of Antioch, is a mirror text of the Philosophical History as regards events in
Alexandria -and to a lesser extent in Aphrodisias- in the 480s. Moreover the two
texts, which were composed at about the same time (the Life o f Sevens was written
between 512 and 518), present other significant parallels: for example the funeral
oration of Aedesia pronounced by Damascius corresponds to that of Menas
delivered by Zacharias (VS 45), a speech in which the destruction of the idols at
Menuthis and Alexandria is a prominent theme.
7 VS 32: Psychapollo.
8 Cf. 72AD with notes.
9 An exercise which was inspired by a romantic interest in Egyptian antiquities
and which bears no relation to the scholarly realities of a script which had become
obsolete and incomprehensible by Horapollo’s day. For editions and translations of
this work, see Bibliography and nn. 175 and 180 on pp. 191 and 193 respectively.
10 Princ. Ill, 167, 22-4 and 72D.
11 For the ethos and organisation of this bi-disciplinary institution, Zacharias,
VS 23: on Fridays the philosophers and Horapollo taught at the school, in contrast
with the rhetoricians who on “the sixth day of the week” held their classes at home.
12 76E.
 addressed to Proclus, was a popular handbook among the pupils,
one of whom, Isidore, was to preach the principles of the two
brothers to large audiences on both sides of the Mediterranean. At
this time however, Isidore was just embarking on his teaching
career in Horapollo’s school where he impressed the students with
both his spiritual gifts and his idiosyncratic ways.13 Nor was
Isidore the only brilliant philosopher of the younger generation in
Horapollo’s establishment. The controversial Ammonius -master
of John Philoponus and Zacharias of Mytilene, among others- also
taught there in the 480s, as did the polymath Asclepiodotus.14
Among the many students of Horapollo’s international
community -pagan or Christian, gifted or otherwise- Damascius
was immediately singled out as someone exceptional on all
accounts. As such, he was introduced to the personalities who,
even more than its teaching staff, gave Horapollo’^ school its
distinctive aura as a citadel of the new paganism. Prominent
among them was Aedesia, a society lady, “the most beautiful and
noble of the Alexandrian women”, widow of the philosopher
Hermeias and mother of Ammonius himself.

She was simple and honourable, while caring throughout her life
for justice no less than moderation. But where she was truly
exceptional was in her love o f God and o f Man. Hence she
attempted to benefit the needy in a manner beyond her means so
that when after Hermeias’ death she was left with orphans to look
after, she continued to spend just as much on charity, with the
result that she bequeathed to her sons a life o f debt. For this some
people criticised her. But she, thinking that the one treasure o f any
worth as regards the life after death was the will to lighten the
burdens ofpoverty fo r holy and good people, spared nothing in her
compassion fo r the human condition. As a result, she was beloved
even by the most wicked of her compatriots. (...) This was the
Aedesia whom as a young girl Syrianus intended to betroth to

13 For the portrayal of Isidore, see Section II.

14 VS 16.22.
Proclus if some god had not prevented Proclus from entering on
marriage. She was so pious and holy towards God and -to tell the
truth- so beloved of the gods, that she was blessed with many
divine epiphanies. (...) I knew her as an old lady; and when she
died I delivered on her grave the customary funeral oration
adorned with heroic verses. I was then very young, a mere boy.15

That Damascius should have been chosen shortly after his

arrival in Alexandria to deliver Aedesia’s funeral oration is
indicative not only of a close relationship with the venerable lady,
who may have spoken to him about her spiritual experiences, but
equally of the fact that he must have been deemed technically
competent enough in that highly competitive school to be entrusted
by his masters with a task for which intellectual excellence was as
crucial as emotional involvement.
At the opposite pole to the sociable Aedesia stood Sarapio, a
holy solitary who, even more than Asclepiades and Heraiscus,
served Isidore as a spiritual guide:

A seeker of the Truth and a man with a theoretical cast o f mind, he

could not bear to occupy himself with the technicalities of
philosophy, but immersed himself in those vigorous concepts which
are apt to fill one with God; for this reason he possessed and read
almost nothing except for the writings o f Orpheus, putting his
questions as they arose to Isidore who was as it were invested with
the absolute theological knowledge. It was only [Isidore] whom he
recognised as a kinsman and received at home. Indeed he thought
he saw in him [Sarapio] the legendary golden age o f Cronus. He
spent his entire life in deed and word focusing his attention and
concentrating as far as possible on the inner and the indivisible.
(...) And such was his scorn for bodily pleasures that from his
earliest youth he offered his body the bare necessities only while
remaining throughout his life completely undefiled by sexual
intercourse. Besides he so disdained social distinctions that not

15 56.
 even his name was known in the city; nor would it have become
known afterwards had not some god desired to grace humanity
with a model o f the golden age o f Cronus, so that this expression
would not appear to refer merely to a legend, unsupported by
historical evidence.16

Damascius turns Sarapio -Isidore’s foremost model- into the

archetype of a man from a golden past living uncorrupted in the
depraved present, although he makes it quite clear that Sarapio’s
misanthropy was his only protection from moral pollution, just as
his bibliophilic frugality was the surest way of preventing his mind
from becoming contaminated by all the nonsense that
contemporary philosophers and other wits kept decanting into the
monstrous Typhonian world in which this Cronian served as a
model of sainthood.17 Damascius’ only contact with Sarapio was
through Isidore’s accounts of him, but retrospectively he came to
view Sarapio as his spiritual grandfather whose physical presence
in Alexandria on his arrival there acted on him as a potent charm
and a long-term inspiration.

2. Towards the Persecution

The 480s were exceptionally troubled years for Alexandria. At
the beginning of the decade the milieu into which Damascius had
been accepted remained unaffected by the quarrels raging between
the Chalcedonian and the various monophysite parties, as
Damascius testifies,18 but soon repercussions of the feud reached

16 111. The last sentence refers to the Platonic description of the golden age
(Leg. 713c ff.). On the antithesis Cronian-Typhonian life, cf. 4C, 18 and 112A, with
relevant notes.
17Throughout the PH Damascius attacks πολυδοξία (cf. 35), the natural fruit of
being πολυήκοος (37E; for a devastating critique of the πολυήκοοι, Plato Phaedr.
275ab). Sarapio read “two or three books” as a matter of principle, an attitude of
which Proclus would have approved (cf. Marinus VP 38). We are at the dawn of the
Middle Ages, when the main sources of knowledge are the Master and inspiration
or divine intuition (for an explicit defence of these two, 35B).
18 73 and 75DE. It is interesting to note that John of Ephesus among others
Horapollo’s school, where some of the future hierarchs of the
Eastern Church were then being trained.19 Animated theological
discussions among Christians and Hellenes which lasted for
several days were frequent in the School, and some of the most
heated arguments of that time were subsequently recast by their
protagonists into philosophical dialogues or treatises. Men like
Zacharias of Mytilene, Aeneas of Gaza and, I would add, the
anonymous author of the Tubingen Theosophy give us a direct
insight into the nature of the debates, which involved not only
students but also teachers and even their relatives and friends.20
The revolt of Illus against Zeno (484-488)21 was an additional
aggravating factor as regards these disputes: a champion of the
dogma of Chalcedon, Illus was also represented by his Egyptian
associate Pamprepius as a defender of paganism, two respects in
which his policies went against the religious sensibilities of the
overwhelming majority of the Egyptians. Pamprepius in particular,
who was touring Egypt in the early 480s disseminating his own
prophecies about the restoration of paganism and implying that he
was associated with the philosophers, appeared to Damascius as
the very incarnation of wickedness 22 In the form in which the
Philosophical History has come down to us, Pamprepius
dominates, or rather haunts, the central part of the book (Sections

calls his own party “the orthodox” and “the believers”, while reserving for the
Chalcedonians the name of “Synodites”: John Bishop of Ephesus, The Third Part of
the Ecclesiastical History, trans. R. Payne Smith, Oxford 1860, passim. The
Chalcedonians for their part called the Monophysites “διακρινόμενοι". For a
detailed description of the situation, see W.H.C. Frend, The rise o f the Monophysite
Movement, Cambridge 1972,174-183; for a more general but clearer account, S.A.
Harvey, Asceticism and society in crisis: John of Ephesus and the Lives of the
Eastern Saints, Berkeley 1990, 21-25. For a presentation of the sources and a fine
analysis of the events, Stein-Palanque II, 20-39.
19 Severus, Zacharias, Athanasius, among others.
20 Ammonius and the maternal uncle of Isidore, Aegyptus, are cases in point.
For further details, see Appendix III.
21 Cf. Stein-Palanque II, 19-31, and n. 307 p. 273; for a description of the revolt
from the viewpoint of Antioch, Glanville Downey, A history o f Antioch in Syria,
Princeton 1961, 490-496.
22 112A: “a beast even more contorted and rabid than Typhon himself’.
 V and VII), where he is specifically contrasted with the Cronian
Sarapio. This is a point of importance -indeed a major clue- for
our understanding of Damascius’ moral outlook: rather than a
Christian dignitary, such as the Patriarch Peter Mongus under
whom the persecution of intellectuals in Alexandria took place, it
is a pagan champion who is chosen as the very incarnation of the
forces of evil.23 For, as Damascius states in the words of Plato,
philosophy can only be harmed from within.24
Deviation from the norm -indeed heresy- is a greater danger to
the pagan community than any attack from the outside. This is why
in this book Damascius is so critical of everybody, but especially
of those who are seen as the pillars of Hellenism: “over all those
whom he extols in his account, and celebrates as having risen
above the human condition through their perfect, theoretical
knowledge and quick intelligence, he then sets himself ixp as judge,
not leaving a single one of those on whom he has lavished praise
without some deficiency: one, who had been praised for his sharp
wit, is criticised as not being altogether sharp-witted; another,
whose learning was incomparable, as not being learned in all
fields; a third, who was next to God in virtue, as a man deficient in
many respects”.25 This feature of the Philosophical History, which
so shocked and angered Photius, is certainly a token of Damascius’
over-critical or even cantankerous nature, but also a guideline as
regards the purpose of his book. At a momentous time for the fate
of the old order Damascius considers those who represent it in the
teaching profession either as rhetors or, more importantly, as
philosophers, and despairs. He has strong views on what is and
what is not orthodox in Hellenism as a culture and a theology, and
feels that it is incumbent on him to set the tenets of this orthodoxy
once and for all. Like those who preceded and succeeded him, he
regulates dogma by commenting on the Scriptures of Hellenism

23 113D: “Pamprepius was an effective instrument of that Necessity which

opposes the good.” Cf. 77D: Pamprepius’ prosperity “was the cause of many
misfortunes for the state”.
24146E.
25 Photius, Test III, 26-33.
both orally and in writing, but this is an activity which touches his
academic peers only. By contrast, in reviewing the virtues and the
vices of everybody in the intellectual firmament for three
generations, he is addressing a wider audience, the educated man
beyond the confines of a purely philosophical milieu. His objective
is the definition of the ideal pagan leader at a time when such a
leader is so desperately needed. And, just as in his philosophy he
defines the first principles apophatically, so in his attempt to
describe “the orthodox pagan” he follows the negative path of
contemporary investigation. Thus he does not attack the luminaries
of his time -men like Proclus or Asclepiodotus- in order to gratify
his eristic nature (though this may occur incidentally) but in the
name of “the true belief’ -orthodoxy. And it is in much the same
spirit that he denounces the trendy subjects of the late antique
educational curriculum, as we shall later see.

As a hotbed of Hellenism in both intellectual and spiritual terms

and a highly cosmopolitan establishment, Horapollo’s school was a
natural target in the jealous city of Alexandria. And when in the
charged atmosphere of the mid-480s a religious scandal broke out
in the school, Aphthonius for one, a Christian teacher of rhetoric
“with many students”,26 saw a unique opportunity for demolishing
his successful rival. The affair started as a private feud between
two citizens of Aphrodisias, the student Paralius and the greatly
envied Asclepiodotus: the latter was an Alexandrian polymath who
had returned to teach in his native city after marrying into the
richest and most prominent family of Aphrodisias.27 The reason
for his return is given in great detail by Zacharias: as no children
were bom to the couple, Asclepiodotus was advised by Isis in a
dream to visit her shrine in Menuthis-Abukir together with his
barren wife.28 This he did and, according to the Christian version

26 VS 25.
27 VS 17, together with L. Robert, Hellenica IV (1948), 115-126 and C.
Roueche, Aphrodisias in late antiquity, 85-93. Cf. Appendix II, pp. 348-9.
28 VS 17-18; cf. 95CD.
 of the story, the couple eventually bought the baby of a pagan
priestess and presented it as their own divinely granted offspring.
The deceit was however uncovered by the leading lights at the
nearby monastery of Enaton, where Paralius’ brother was a monk.
Shocked by the story, Paralius changed sides and was sent by the
monks to Horapollo’s school with orders to provoke the pagans.
Choosing a Friday for this purpose, he arrived at the school venting
sarcasm against the teachers and blasphemy against the gods.
Friday was the day when only those studying philosophy were
present in Horapollo’s school, as the rhetoricians were teaching at
home, and, picking their moment carefully, a band of pagan
students fell on Paralius and savagely beat him up.29
This incident caused a common front to be formed by Peter
Mongus, the rhetor Aphthonius and the monks of Enaton, where
Paralius was taken for nursing.30 Their anti-pagan operation began
with the destruction of a secret shrine of Isis hidden in a house at
Menuthis-Abukir, where cultic objects of great symbolic
significance and antiquity were hidden.31 Horapollo’s school -and
Asclepiodotus in particular, as we have seen- had a special
connection with this oracular temple, which had become an
important repository of paganism in Egypt. The discovery and
pillaging of the shrine was accompanied by the arrest of the priest
and the confiscation of its sacred objects.32 Seeing a unique
opportunity to incite the people against the leading pagans of
Alexandria, some of whom held high office in the imperial
administration, Peter Mongus made the most of this incident;
twenty camels were loaded with the most valuable of the sacred
objects found in Menuthis and were paraded in Alexandria to a

29 VS 22-24.
30 Whereas Peter Mongus was a moderate, the monastery of Enaton was a
citadel of Monophysitism, whose members systematically undermined the
accommodating policies of the patriarch.
31 VS 27-29 and 74 for a description of some of the idols and the significance of
the hieroglyphic symbols with which, according to Zacharias, the house was
covered.
32 Cf. 53B, with relevant note.
chorus of imprecations against Horapollo, the “Soul-destroyer”.33
Anti-pagan speeches were declaimed and the priest of Isis was
made an object of public derision, before the idols were burned at a
public feast.34
Judging from the testimony of Zacharias of Mytilene, who was
an eye-witness of these events, the wrath of both pro-Chalcedonian
and Monophysite monks and laymen against the city-pagans lasted
for a long time, though it did not at this stage escalate into a serious
persecution, owing among other factors to the lack of anti-pagan
zeal displayed by the praefectus augustalis, Entrechius.35 But the
formal end of Illus’ revolt in 488 was clearly viewed by Peter as a
propitious moment for an application to Constantinople for anti­
pagan support. An imperial envoy by the name of Nicomedes was
immediately dispatched to Alexandria and a systematic
investigation was conducted into the state of paganism there,
beginning with Horapollo’s school. The majority of Horapollo’s
colleagues took Nicomedes’ summons to an interview as a signal
to go into hiding, but Ammonius, it would appear, judged otherwise.

33 On Horapollo’s private misfortunes and eventual conversion to Christianity,

JHS 113,20-21.
34 VS 33ff and 58A with note ad loc. A recent find from Alexandria (E.
Rodziewicz, ‘Remains of a chryselephantine statue in Alexandria’, Bull, de la Soc.
Arch. d'Alexandrie 44 (1991) 119-130) could plausibly be associated with the
events described by Zacharias. At a distance of some eighty metres from the Via
Canopica near the city’s market place there were discovered piles of ashes
containing the remains of vandalised and burned objects; these included several
fragments of a life-size chryselephantine statue (among them a lock of hair),
mutilated marble busts of Sarapis, marble slabs inscribed in Greek, multicoloured
glass and semi-precious stones. The process of destruction involved the use of
tools, and the excavator argues from the valuable nature of the burned materials that
this act was not only deliberate but also “highly demonstrative and collective”. The
dating of the find, which is complicated by die fact that the layers were disturbed by
ireasure hunters in medieval times, yields a terminus post quern in the late fourth
century. On the evidence of the lock of hair, Rodziewicz tentatively identifies the
chryselephantine figure with either Sarapis or Isis, and assumes it to come from the
temple of Isis in the Via Canopica.
35 According to Zacharias, the Prefect Entrechius was a crypto-pagan, while his
assessor was an open worshipper of idols: VS 25-26.
 3. Ammonius
Orphaned at an early age, this son of Hermeias and Aedesia had
succeeded in completing his philosophical education thanks to his
mother’s perseverance and her connections. He emerged from his
studies as a pragmatic philosopher with a scientific cast of mind
and with little sympathy for the mysticism of a Heraiscus or even a
Proclus.36 Back in Alexandria after his Athenian training, family
connections led him to join Horapollo’s establishment where he
rubbed shoulders with an older and younger generation (the latter
represented by Isidore) whose theological approach to philosophy
he clearly despised. But the early 480s were hard years for
Ammonius in more than one respect: on his mother’s death, he and
his elder brother had found themselves burdened with debt, a
situation which must still have been afflicting him in 4^88, when he
found himself part of a collapsing and illegal professional
institution whose philosophical ethos he had never espoused.
When Nicomedes arrived in Alexandria, Ammonius no doubt saw
a unique opportunity for redressing both his financial and his
professional position and with this in mind he approached Peter
Mongus.37

36 See the analysis of Ammonius’ thought-patterns by K. Verrycken, ‘The

metaphysics of Ammonius, son of Hernias’, in R. Sorabji, Aristotle transformed:
the ancient commentators and their influence, London 1990, 199-231; also R.
Sorabji, ‘Infinite power impressed: the transformation of Aristotle’s physics and
theology’, ibid. 182-184, for the manner in which Ammonius harmonises
Aristotle’s god with that of Plato. For an amusing anecdote illustrating Ammonius’
rejection of the r61e of the supernatural in human life, Olympiodorus In Gorg. 199,
2 ff. For his extreme rationalism, ibid. 214, 21 ff. and 230, 29ff., a passage which
indicates that the foremost motive behind Ammonius’ travels was not piety but
intellectual curiosity.
37 118B. As realised by Asmus (BZ 18, 469-70), the bishop mentioned in the
passage is Peter Mongus, against whom Damascius fulminates at length (cf. 1131
and 118A). On Peter’s duplicity and dishonesty, Stein-Palanque II, 35. In a letter to
the Emperor Zeno Pope Felix III accuses Peter Mongus of being a “fixer” (Mansi,
Sacrorum Conciliorum Nova et Amplissima Collectio 7 (1901), col. 1066), while,
according to the ecclesiastical historian Evagrius {HE III. 17), δ Πέτρος, ώς
κόθορνος καί παλίμβολος καί τοΐς καιροΐς συνδιατιθέμενος, ήκιστα πρός μίαν έστη
γνώμην. Asmus’ subsequent conjecture that the bishop in question is Athanasius II
(Leben 110, 186), not endorsed by Zintzen (p. 250), rests on the improvable
 Whether Ammonius betrayed the hiding place of colleagues
and pupils, some of whom were arrested and subjected to physical
torture, we will never know; what is certain, however, is that he
emerged unscathed from the wreckage of Horapollo’s school,
which resulted in the death, exile or professional ruin of many
others.38 Moreover what reinforces the disturbing suspicion that in
488/9 Ammonius was out to destroy his colleagues is the fact that
of the five persons consistently mentioned by Zacharias of
Mytilene as representing the spirit of paganism in Horapollo’s
establishment -Horapollo himself, Heraiscus, Asclepiodotus,
Ammonius and Isidore-39 Ammonius was the only one to survive
professionally in Alexandria. Asclepiodotus had already returned
to Aphrodisias,40 while the other three went underground; Isidore
sought refuge in the house of the young Damascius (122AB), who
still at that time “gave speeches wearing a rhetorician’s gown”
(122D); while Horapollo and his uncle were arrested and tortured
in order to disclose the hiding place of Isidore and of Harpocras,
Ammonius’ familiar (117AB). But the two men “gritted their
teeth” and refused to utter a word (I17C), in contrast with
Ammonius who went straight to “the overseer of the prevailing
doctrine” (I18B), “a wicked man with an infamous life” (118A),
and “had intercourse for the sake of producing political offspring”

hypothesis that Ammonius’ deal took place after the end of the persecution. Among
other things, this interpretation leaves unexplained the characterisation of α’ισχρο-
κερδέστατος applied by Damascius to Ammonius.
38 It is generally assumed that Ammonius’ deal with the bishop was an
ideological bargain: he would concentrate on interpretating Aristotle rather than
Plato, which from a dogmatic point of view would be less offensive to his Christian
pupils. This is a supposition not borne out by the evidence. Moreover, it ignores the
basic late antique dogma of “the agreement of Plato and Aristotle”. Zacharias’
dialogue Ammonius shows that Ammonius continued to expound quintessentially
anti-Christian doctrines such as that of the eternity of the world, to the distress of
his Christian audience. Indeed, what the dialogue -together with Aeneas of Gaza’s
Theophrastus- shows is that Ammonius’ school was the direct successor of
Horapollo’s establishment in spirit and ambiance.
39 VS 16,22.
40 VS 36; as suggested by 95D he had already left before the outbreak of the
persecution, as his wife was about to give birth.
 (119G). In this connection Ammonius is painted in colours no less
dark than Peter Mongus: “being sordidly greedy and seeing
everything in terms of profit of any kind, Ammonius came to an
agreement with the then overseer of the prevailing doctrine”
(118B). The charge of αίσχροκέρδεια launched against him by
Damascius in this context need not be taken literally as meaning
the actual receipt of money in exchange for a base act; yet when
one contemplates subsequent events and the totally unchallenged
position as a philosopher that Ammonius enjoyed in Alexandria for
the rest of his days, one begins to see the point of Damascius’
characterisation. Independent evidence strengthens rather than
disproves the denunciation. For the portrait left by Ammonius’
other pupil, Zacharias of Mytilene, in the dialogue named after him
presents him as an amusing but unprincipled man, a cunning
compromiser who used ambiguity, sarcasm and personal charm as
a weapon in argument when other methods failed;41 while an
incident, mentioned by Damascius significantly enough in
connection with Heraiscus, which relates to a ruthless power
struggle between Ammonius and a fellow-Egyptian in Con­
stantinople (78E), adds further credibility to this judgement.

I ll The journey of conversion

1. Isidore
As Damascius, now in his late twenties, watched how people
responded to persecution, he discovered many unpleasant things
about human nature, reviewed his scale of values and lost
confidence in several of his associates. But he also verified for
himself the cardinal Platonic axiom that man is not an essentially
evil creature; the behaviour of several pagans during the crisis
-including that of his own younger brother Julian, who “was

41 Zacharias, De mund. op., PG 85, col. 1117 (= Colonna, p. 131): when

Ammonius is cornered by his students in philosophical argument, he has recourse
to his charm: ύπομειδιάσας μάλα τι σαρδώνιον μετά τίνος έρυθρήματος έσιώπα καί
έτέρου έίχετο λόγου.
beaten up with many rods, but did not utter a word” (119J)—
showed that, by triumphing over moral laxity, adversity may reveal
unsuspected depths of bravery and nobility in quite ordinary
men.42 Thus the persecution of 488/9 proved a turning point -and a
positive one- in Damascius’ life, prompting thoughts like the
following:

Men tend to bestow the name of virtue on a life of inactivity, but I

do not agree with this view. For the virtue which engages in the
midst o f public life through political activity and discourse fortifies
the soul and strengthens through exercise what is healthy and
perfect, while the impure and false element that lurks in human
lives is fully exposed and more easily set on the road to
improvement. And indeed politics offers great possibilities for
doing what is good and useful; also for courage andfirmness. That
is why the learned, who sit in their corner and philosophise at
length and in a grand manner about justice and moderation,
utterly disgrace themselves if they are compelled to take some
action. Thus bereft of action, all discourse appears vain and empty43

Even more importantly, Damascius did not remain on the level

of theoretical speculation, but underwent a true conversion as a
result of his experience. Already a professional rhetorician, he
suddenly saw all the inanity of that discipline and began to wonder
if he should turn to philosophy, a field with which he had so far had
only a casual but significant acquaintance. For this he had recourse
to Isidore, with whom he had been living for several months (122B
and 137D).
The image of Isidore that emerges from Damascius’ book is
that of a true eccentric. He is so unconventional both in behaviour
and professional skills that most people find him rude and almost
mad, while his students, including Damascius, love to tease him,
without of course his realising it.44 His senses were far from being

42 The doctor Gessius is another case in point; cf. 128.

43 124.
44 Isidore was naive: 17.
 sharp, his power of imagination mediocre, his memory faulty, “For
it seems that God wanted to show that he was a soul rather than a
combination of soul and body, and that he had not deposited
philosophy in this combination but had established it in the soul
alone” (14). He was so open and sincere and loved truthfulness so
much that he was thought to be unduly plain-spoken, incapable of
any affectation and pretence (23). These qualities had their
counterpart in the practical sphere: Isidore was certainly noble and
brave, but he was also unaware of the dangers involved in the way
in which he carried out his plans. An illustration of this is provided
by the circumstances attending his flight from Alexandria during
the persecution. Impelled by his well-attested parsimoniousness
and his rigid sense of justice (24), Isidore seems to have attempted
to take with him most of his possessions (119C), a highly
imprudent endeavour as others realised (121). Whether he
succeeded in his plan to any degree we do not know. All that
emerges from the surviving fragments of Damascius’ account is
that the two men made their escape from Alexandria, probably
leaving behind Isidore’s little son, Proclus.45 Before leaving,
Isidore seems to have written to his old tutor in Aphrodisias
announcing his intention of visiting him on his way to Athens,46
after discovering for himself to what extent the lands of Syria and
Arabia had kept their pagan traditions 47
Though slender, the evidence provided by this part of the work

45 130: by dying on the fifth day after giving birth to Proclus, Isidore’s wife
“freed her philosopher from an evil monster and a bitter marriage.” Whether the
newly bom shared his mother’s fate we do not know. What is however apparent
from the sequence of the fragments is that the passage belongs to the end of the
Alexandrian period.
*122C.
47 On the combined evidence of the VS and the surviving fragments of the PH
Isidore seems to have visited Athens for the first time in the 470s and, after
spending a few years studying under Proclus, to have returned to Alexandria
together with Salustius; there he seems to have stayed teaching until 488/9 except
for a short visit to Athens in 485 on the occasion of Proclus’ death. Damascius,
about whom there is no evidence that he ever taught rhetoric in Athens, must have
first visited Athens together with Isidore in 489/90 and probably stayed there
uninterruptedly until Justinian’s edict obliged him to leave for Ctesiphon. As for
 is sufficient to allow a reconstruction of the main stages of
Isidore’s and Damascius’ travels. One of their first stops must have
been Gaza where, to their immense delight, the two men met the
Alexandrian Antony, not a great scholar, but “most holy with a
soul firmly disposed towards divine worship”; indeed, a man who
had contributed in recent years towards turning Gaza into “a much
holier place than it was before”. Writing at least twenty five years
after the events, Damascius remembers with gratitude “the truly
great favour” that he owes Antony and prays “the gods to return
[it] to him in the Isles of the Blessed, where he must already be
deservedly dwelling with them”.48
Whether the influential and persistent49 Antony secured for the
two men material resources or a safe conduct, or indeed both, we
can only guess, but what is certain is that Isidore and Damascius
eventually reached the prosperous town of Bostra, where they were
received by the Aristotelian Doras;50 here they seem to have spent
some time, and, while Doras regaled them with stories on the
archaeology of the town and the wider area around, Isidore was
responsible for the conversion of his host to “Plato’s lofty wisdom”
(134A). Being a keen spiritual tourist, as he subsequently proved
by his Phrygian feats (87A), Doras took his two guests on several
excursions to holy sites in the Hauran. Visiting the waters of the
Styx in the upper Yarmuk valley, Damascius was filled with
religious awe at the sight of a spectacle at once majestic and
terrifying (135B). It was indeed during these days of renewed
physical and intellectual freedom, which followed so closely upon
the dark Alexandrian months illuminated solely by theoretical
discussion on the merits of philosophy (129A), that Damascius
was confirmed in his spiritual conversion.

Isidore we can deduce from the PH that immediately after Marinus’ death he left
Athens (151C).
48 133.
49 On this trait of his character see the anecdote reported in 133.
50 For a good analysis of the tone of the passage regarding Bostra and for the
ingenious hypothesis that the philosophers’ host in that town was Dorus, see M.
Tardieu, Paysages reliques, 27-31. Cf. 134 and 135 with commentary.
 How pernicious an activity was rhetoric, focusing all my attention
on the mouth and the tongue and turning it away from the soul and
from the blissful and divine lessons which purify it. Realising this, I
was sometimes distracted from my rhetorical exegeses with which I
had been occupying myselffor nine years (Ί37Β).

By now Damascius had spent eight full months in the company of

Isidore (137D), had witnessed the conversion of another man to
Platonism under Isidore’s guidance and had fully realised where
his own vocation lay.51
Elated and encouraged by their experience of the Hauran,
Isidore and Damascius, now accompanied by Dorus, moved to the
holy town of Heliopolis (Baalbek), where their presence caused
some stir (140D).52 Their popularity with the locals·in Phoenicia
did not however produce entirely benign results, as Isidore seems
to have been tracked down by his persecutors, arrested, thrown into
gaol and even tortured,53 while Damascius was fervently praying
in the local temples and at the same time using his connections and
diplomatic skills in an attempt to free his mentor.54 Eventually
Isidore was freed,“but without sparing the expense which costs one
the most, time”(141E). The delay was indeed “too long for the
hopes which sped him towards Caria and Athens” (141B).

51 The same spiritual itinerary from rhetoric to philosophy had been followed
by Proclus (Marinus VP 8,11), but at a younger age and in less dramatic fashion.
52 As late as 579 a religious scandal broke out in Heliopolis which resulted in a
large-scale anti-pagan persecution all over the East involving high state and church
officials: cf. John of Ephesus, Ecclesiastical History III.26-34; Evagrius HE V.18.
On the persistence of paganism in the area, J.H.W.G. Liebeschuetz, ‘Epigraphic
evidence on the Christianization of Syria’ in 1. Fitz, Limes: Akten des XI. Internat.
Limes-kongress, 485-508.
53 141A and 143A. This seems a much more plausible interpretation of the
evidence than Asmus’ assumption that Damascius fell ill at Berytus (Leben 124).
Moreover the VS (57-75) presents Berytus at this time as an important (and known
to the authorities) centre of magical lore.
54 141CD, 142.
 2, A sclepiodotus a n d A phrodisias

When the three men finally arrived in Aphrodisias they enjoyed

the hospitality of Isidore’s old tutor, Asclepiodotus. Excursions not
only in the vicinity of Aphrodisias (81, 82) but as far as Hierapolis
in Phrygia were arranged by Asclepiodotus for his younger guests,
who often came back burning with the desire to tell him of their
experience of the holy and the miraculous; their accounts were
answered by anecdotes of Asclepiodotus’ own spiritual feats in the
same locations (87A).
This was typical of a man who wanted to excel in all fields, and
who indeed succeeded in spreading his fame as a universal and
original genius among his contemporaries and posterity alike.55
But to Damascius at least, Asclepiodotus appeared as an intensely
irritating figure, indeed as one subtly harmful to the cause of
paganism, and for this reason he undertook to demolish his claim
to intellectual let alone spiritual wholeness:

Asclepiodotus’ mind was not perfect, as most people thought. He

was extremely sharp at raising questions, but not so acute in his
understanding. His was an uneven intelligence, especially when it
came to divine matters -the invisible and intelligible essence of
Plato’s lofty thought. Even more wanting was he in the field of
higher wisdom -the Orphic and Chaldaean lore which transcends
philosophical common sense. In the natural sciences however he
was by far the best among his contemporaries. Likewise, he was
strong in mathematics, and this is what earned him the reputation
o f an overall genius. Finally, in the field o f moral philosophy he
constantly attempted to innovate and to limit research to the visible
realm below, without rejecting any of the doctrines o f the Ancients,
but packing everything together and bringing it down to the level
of the physical world.56

55 Two generations later Simplicius will remember Asclepiodotus as “the best

of Proclus’ pupils” who “delighted in new ideas because of his extraordinary intel­
ligence” (CAGIX, 795).
56 85A; cf. below, pp. 54, 57.
Asclepiodotus’ passionate attachment to the palpable, manifested
in the form of an excessive curiosity for the physical universe and
of an empirical approach to the things of the spirit,57 caused
Damascius to view him as the anti-type of the ideal philosopher.
Just as the Typhonian Pamprepius haunts large areas of the
Philosophical History as the anti-type of the blessed Sarapio, so
does Asclepiodotus dominate the latter part of the work as the
image of the “anti-philosopher” and hence the negative counterpart
of Isidore.
Yet this is not the whole story. Asclepiodotus was also a man of
action, who proved instrumental in turning Aphrodisias into a
“holy city” of Hellenism,58 and Damascius was sufficiently
impressed -not to say obsessed- with the practical aspect of his
achievement to want to reproduce it. Indeed Damascius’
institutional and material reforms once he became! the Platonic
diadochus can be seen as a conscious imitation of what
Asclepiodotus had attempted in Aphrodisias. Moreover Damascius
was benefited by Asclepiodotus at a critical stage in his life, and as
a man with a strong sense of justice he did not forget it (144A).
After Asclepiodotus’ death, and while his fame as an original
genius was still growing, Damascius felt obliged to register his
debt of gratitude to the man who in terms of spiritual hierarchy
was, at least formally, his own “grandfather”.59

57 See in particular 80 and 85BC.

58 See 83 and 87. Cf. the clues assembled by C. Roueche, Aphrodisias in late
antiquity, 85-97 (esp. 91) and 154, in conjunction with R.R.R. Smith, ‘Late Roman
philosopher portraits from Aphrodisias’, JRS 80 (1990) 127-155. An overall
consideration of the architectural (several important houses), sculptural and
epigraphic material from late antique Aphrodisias may result in a new picture of the
status of Neoplatonism at that period; a first step in this direction has been taken by
S. Campbell, ‘Signs of prosperity in the decoration of some 4th - 5th century
buildings at Aphrodisias’ in C. Roueche - R.R.R. Smith, Aphrodisias Papers 3
(1996), 187-199: according to the preliminary report the archaeological data
provide evidence for flourishing paganism and a luxurious life-style in the fifth
century.
59 Asclepiodotus had been Isidore’s tutor, as Damascius notes in 81.
 IV Athens and the P h ilo so p h ical H istory

At the time when Asclepiodotus was busy turning Aphrodisias

into a major Neoplatonic centre, Athens was steadily declining.
Following Proclus’ protracted illness and death and the election to
the Academic diadoche of a weak unself-confident man,60 the
prospects of a regeneration of philosophical studies there did not
appear favourable, at least if local resources had to be relied on. All
this must have been discussed in Aphrodisias and perhaps
Asclepiodotus urged his old pupil Isidore to sail to Athens and take
care of the tottering Platonic succession. However this may be, in
490 Damascius and his tutor crossed from Ephesus to Samos and
thence to Piraeus (144B).
At the end of his pagan pilgrimage to people and places
Damascius had given up rhetoric for philosophy as a professional
pursuit, a decision which meant the change from a life of cultivated
inanity to the passionate search for God through the wonders of
nature and the words of inspired men; to this goal he dedicated
himself with missionary zeal. In Athens, he became a full time
student of the Academy, reading mathematics with its head,
Marinus, and theoretical philosophy with Zenodotus, who may
have been Marinus’ successor.61 But, even more importantly, in
Athens Damascius continued to study people, observe reality and
assess it. This occupation, on which he had already embarked in
Alexandria, resulted in a unique piece of literature: the
Philosophical History.
In its triple meaning of history of philosophy, history of
philosophers and enquiry into philosophy, the title of the book is
eminently successful, for it conveys in an admirably laconic
manner the variety of purposes of the composition. Porphyry too
had written a Φιλόσοφος Ιστορία from Homer to Plato in four

60 Cf. 38A, 97CFIJ, 98F, 101C together with JHS 113, 11.
61 Cf. Test. Ill, 83-87, where it is explicitly stated about Zenodotus διάδοχος δέ
καί οδτος Πρόκλου, τά δεύτερα Μαρίνου φέρων. On the possible interpretations of
this enigmatic sentence, see below, pp. 43-44, nn.73,74.
 books, one of which, The Life o f Pythagoras, is still extant.62 Yet
its compilatory and antiquarian character (combining biography
and doxography in strict chronological order and ending with
Plato) disqualifies it from any claim to stand in the tradition in
which Damascius writes. Even Eunapius’ Lives of the Philo­
sophers, whose focus is on contemporary Neoplatonism, can in
no way be seen as a predecessor of Damascius' Philosophical
History, for it stands half way between hagiography and obituary
and completely lacks the critical, let alone polemical, character of
Damascius’ work.63 If we are looking for an ancestor, we must turn
to Numenius’ remarkable book On the dissension between the
Academics and Plato. As much by its theme as by its methodology
Numenius' devastating critique of Plato’s heirs provides a close
parallel to Damascius’ Philosophical History·, for it too exposes the
betrayal by a group of self-styled successors of a ihetaphysical
doctrine which combined the authority of Plato and Pythagoras,
and postulates a new beginning.64 The extremely fragmented state
in which this pioneer text has come down to us does not allow
further comparison with Damascius’ work, the character of which
we are therefore forced to analyse by fleeting references to modem
rather than ancient authors.
In many ways the precursor of the Proust of A la recherche du
temps perdu, Damascius integrated in the social and sacred
geography of the eastern Mediterranean in late pagan times the
concentric circles which formed around le petit noyau, those
intersecting it and, finally, those tangentially relevant to it. Thus at
the concrete historical level the Philosophical History is the
portrait of a human -not necessarily a social- group, whose
geographical locus transcends a single city and whose religious
allegiances cut across creeds in an irrefutably ambivalent way; for

62 The surviving fragments of the work and the testimonia referring to it are
collected by A. Smith in Porphyrii Philosophi Fragmenta (1993) Nos 193-223; cf.
A. R. Sodano, Porfirio, Storia della ftlosofia, Milan 1997.
63 For an analysis of the character of the work, R.J. Penella, Greek philosophers
and sophists in the fourth century A D .: Studies in Eunapius o f Sardis, Leeds 1990.
64 See in particular ff. 24, 66-79.
 the book deals with pagans and Christians, but even more
ominously with Jews and Christians who convert to paganism and
with pagans who turn Christian or at least are forced to use
Christianity as a flag of convenience.65 In this way Damascius
emerges as the social historian of late antique Platonism who uses
the prosopographical technique in order to set in relief social and
spiritual change. Like Ronald Syme -and unlike Diogenes Laertius
or Eunapius- Damascius sets upon the stage not just individuals
but philosophical dynasties and shows how their rise and fall
affects the social landscape of late antiquity. Yet, unlike Syme, as a
late antique historian Damascius also shows how the ascent and
decline of philosophical clans is determined by criteria of moral
integrity and spiritual excellence,66 and this brings us to the deeper
structure and intention of the book: the didactic and moralistic.67
An obsessive theme of the Philosophical History is a
systematic assault on rhetoric; in this respect the book is very
much an intellectual autobiography and a conscious endeavour to
destroy the accepted patterns of knowledge on which social power
rested in the later Roman empire, and to replace them with
structures of a more solid nature (hence the centrality of the word
“philosophy” in the title). What is truly fascinating though is to
watch how Damascius transforms his own personal history of
conversion into the would-be history of the Roman empire. By
having recourse to the prosopographical (and the autobiographical)
method, he mingles the subjective with the objective and turns the
vanity fair of Athens and Alexandria into the universal history of
his times. Through their weaknesses and eccentricities as much as
through their success or failure, the characters in Damascius’

65 Evidence collected and interpreted in JHS 113,12.

66 See in this connection the judgement on the quintessentially Neoplatonic
dynasty as represented by Hegias and his sons: 145,146, and cf. the way in which
other dynasties such as that of Horapollo and of Hermeias-Aedesia are presented.
67 The characterisation of Damascius as a Stoic philosopher by the Suda
excerptor (Test. I), who was well acquainted with the Philosophical History, is
worth bearing in mind.
menagerie make anti-history: for the author the social and political
framework within which these people move is damaged and their
lives debased because their personalities were formed by an
educational ethos which had sacrificed truth and sincerity to
fashion. The true villain of Damascius’ story is rhetoric, the art
which constituted the passport to the higher grades of the
administration in Church and State, and thus to the ruling of the
world. We are told several times that Isidore’s contempt for
rhetoric was matched only by his indifference towards poetry, a
discipline that, as a good Platonist, Damascius ranks as fit only for
donkeys.68 Indeed if one gathers together all the anecdotes
referring to the achievement of rhetors, one realises that the
Philosophical History is really a satire on the current educational
system judged by its results. This world is misguided and deeply
vulgar, as Damascius maintains with uncommon phssion right at
the beginning of his book (18), not so much because of
Christianity, but because the gurus of education are either empty-
headed rhetoricians (like his own master Theo)69 or, like
Asclepiodotus, technicians of philosophy of the type already
deplored by Iamblichus;70 Christianity is merely a symptom of the
general decadence in this era of rising violence and brutality.

V Athens: the Platonic Succession

The historical information provided by the Philosophical

History places its composition between the years 517 and 526, a
fact which has generally been seen as an indication that Damascius

68 Ammonianus had a donkey who forgot to eat when listening to lectures on

poetry even if he had been deliberately starved beforehand (47). This amusing story
is immediately followed by an explicit statement on Isidore’s “minimal sympathy”
for poetry, a discipline which “does not reach the soul but remains at the level of the
imagination and the tongue, while indeed some of it is even in conflict with the
reality of Ideas.” (48A).
69 Cf. 49.
70 Myst. VII.5, 259.
must have assumed the Platonic diadoche around 515.71 This
connection rests on a double assumption: firstly, that by the end of
the fifth century the man elected as Plato’s Successor saw it as his
primary obligation to produce an account of the life of his
predecessor and, secondly, that Isidore had been a fully-fledged
diadochus of the Athenian Academy. This second hypothesis
imperceptibly led scholars to refer to the Philosophical History by
its alternative, less well attested title of Life of Isidore.12 A critical
questioning of these regurgitated certainties may result in quite
different assumptions.
Damascius tells us that Isidore “was elected a diadochus of the
Platonic School in honorary rather than in real terms” (148C). This
honoris causa appointment may have meant that, while being
recognised as forming a link in the golden chain of the Platonic
Succession, Isidore could indulge in the unconventional existence
of a freelance diadochus, possibly away from Athens.73 Proclus’
direct successor, Marinus, died some time in the early 490s,74

71 See, i.a. J. Combfes, Damascius, Traite des premiers principes I, pp. XIX,
XXXVI.
72 The Suda invariably refers to the work as Φιλόσοφος 'Ιστορία Cs.vv.
Γρηγόριος, Δαμάσκιος, Λώρος, ϊφικρατίδες), while Photius, who gives the title Εις
τόν Ισιδώρου τσϋ φιλοσόφου βίον, comments as follows: οΰ μήν γε μάλλον
Ισιδώρου βίον ή πολλών δλλων, συναναγράφει (Test III, 18-20).
73 For another possible example, see Marinus VP 26 (on Domninus). On the
subject of “secondary diadochi” Glucker (155, n. 122) offers the following
interpretation: ever since Plutarch’s term, he argues, there were always two
diadochi, a senior and a junior one, serving simultaneously. Thus Domninus would
have been second-in-command under Proclus, as probably was Marinus towards
the end of Proclus’ life, while Zenodotus would have held the second chair under
Marinus. Glucker rightly claims that his hypothesis “does less violence to the texts
of Photius and Marinus than other explanations” (156). My own hypothesis
assumes the existence both of a waiting list and of a διαδοχικόν status which could
be conferred on as many individuals as were those members of the “sacred race”
who fulfilled the requirements of holiness and learning expected from a leader of
the pagan community. See also following note.
74 He taught Damascius mathematics, which constituted an early stage in
philosophical studies, while Zenodotus taught him the more advanced discipline of
theoretical philosophy (cf. Test. HI, 83-86, clearly reproducing information from
Damascius himself); it is fair to assume that if Marinus were the diadochus, it is not
likely that another would be teaching the more prestigious discipline of theoretical
having on his death-bed persuaded Isidore to assume the diadoche
(148C). Isidore, whose name appears to have been on the list of his
successors drawn up by Proclus himself,75 seems to have accepted,
yet no sooner had Marinus died than Isidore began to think about
leaving Athens (I51BC). Another diadochos had to be found, and
Damascius’ testimony suggests that this man may have been
Zenodotus, “a successor of Proclus immediately after Marinus”,76
or even Hegias, about whom Damascius is extremely
uncomplimentary.77 Whether Zenodotus or Hegias (or both) filled
the Platonic succession at the very end of the fifth and the
beginning of the sixth century, their appointment, following as it
did Marinus’ undistinguished performance, contributed to
strengthen the reports that Athens had now irretrievably declined.78
The balance however was tipped once more, and by 529 the rise

philosophy (on Zenodotus, see above n. 61). Together with the assumption that
Damascius. who arrived in Athens c. 490, read mathematics for no more than two
years, this puts the date of Marinus’ death in the spring of 492 or 493 (for the
season I51C). In this connection Schamp, who accepts Glucker’s scheme of the
two diadochi, proposes an ingenious theory (146-152): Zenodotus, he argues, is
none other than Isidore, the senior diadochus of the time, to whom Marinus plays
second fiddle. Thanks to a play on words, “the gift of Isis” becomes “the gift of
Zeus” when leaving Egypt to come to Athens. “Zenodotus” therefore has been a
figment of the scholarly imagination from Photius to the present day! Unfortunately
this theory, which presupposes that Damascius is keen on this kind of word-play, is
considerably weakened by the three parallel word-games which Schamp adduces.
“Euboean” (= “Cribonnier") with reference to the hare-lipped Heraiscus is attested
in one of the manuscripts only and seems to be a misreading for άνεβόα (cf. 79A).
“Emesion" (=Vomition) is also a copyist's mistake for “Nemesion” (132A); yet
even if one accepts the form Έμεσίων one cannot see how it could be associated
with vomiting, for which a form like Έμετ(τ)ίων would have been required; if
anything, Έμεσίων implies some connection with the city of Emesa. Finally the
third example of a word-game proposed by Schamp is that of Nemesion
(=Indignion). A current late-antique name, Nemesion does not bring to mind
indignation, but rather the goddess and concept of Nemesis.
75 152. Note the phrase τό ψήφισμα της διαδοχής (148C) in combination with
the sentence των διαδόχων οϋς εΐλετο Πρόκλος (152).
76 See above p. 39, n. 61.
77 See 145, with notes.
78 Cf. Aeneas of Gaza Theophrastus, pp. 4, 5-8 and Id. Ep. 18, with 150,
151BE.
 in the philosophical fortunes of Athens was so dramatic that it
provoked an imperial decree demanding the immediate suspension
of all philosophical activity there.79 The major agent of this change
seems to have been Damascius who initiated and sustained
extensive reforms on both the institutional and the scholastic level.
Indeed the sheer weight of Damascius’ achievement as teacher,
administrator and educational propagandist, and the amplitude of
its repercussion abroad, suggest that he cannot have become head
of the Academy long after 500.80 The principal aim behind
Damascius’ massive effort consisted in the emphatic re-association
of the Academy with its founder, Plato, and its second founder,
Iamblichus; for this to be achieved, however, a clear break was
required with the recent past as represented by Proclus and his
progeny, and in this regard Damascius’ emancipation was total and
unequivocal, comprising both an intellectual and a physical
dimension.
In his exegesis of Plato, the new head of the Academy was
thorough and methodical, establishing Iamblichus’ authority,
dissociating Iamblichus from Proclus and finally playing down the
latter’s contribution to the understanding of the Platonic theology.
We are fortunate in possessing in virtually complete form four
commentaries of Damascius on Platonic dialogues; two of them
consist of lecture notes by the same student on the Philebus and the
Phaedo; a third work includes notes by a different student on the
Phaedo as expounded by Damascius on another occasion and
incorporates a treatise by Damascius himself on the first proof of
the immortality of the soul; finally, we have a commentary by
Damascius himself on the quintessentially theological dialogue,
the Parmenides.81 In all these works Damascius’ attempt to refute

79 Malalas 451: θεσπίσας πρόσταξιν Επεμψεν έν Άθήναις, κελεύσας μηδένα

διδάσκειν φιλοσοφίαν. For the recent bibliography on the issue, see JHS 113, 1,
n.l.
so Date proposed by Westerink on the strength of “Damascius’ considerable
teaching activity and his no less considerable publication record” (The Greek
Commentaries on Plato’s Phaedo II, 8).
81 The beginning of the treatise is missing.
Proclus is so systematic that L.G. Westerink could describe the In
Parmenidem as “critical observations on Proclus”, and suspect that
Damascius’ lost treatise In Timaeum “was another commentary on
a commentary” since in what survives “most of Damascius’
remarks are directed against Proclus”.82 It should be added in this
connection that the seven instances where the Alexandrian
Olympiodorus cites Damascius’ lost commentary On the
Alcibiades invariably deal with his opposition to Proclus, “which is
more than can be accounted for as accidental”, as Westerink
judiciously remarks.83 One may safely assume that in his
succession years Damascius lectured several times on the Platonic
canon, establishing his own orthodoxy which in due course found
its way to the other important centres of Platonic study.84 Moreover
it would appear from hints in his writings that he held two types of
classes: purely philosophical ones in the form of commentaries on
the classics, and esoteric sessions on the Chaldaean Oracles.85
In his ambitious campaign of revival Damascius did not rely
solely on his own wisdom and hard work; he also exploited his far
from negligible social and academic connections as well as the
Academy’s funds.86 Eventually he assembled in Athens the best
philosophers “from all over the domain of Hellenism”87 and may

82 Westerink, op. cit. (n. 80), 10,11. Indeed the very title of the Commentary on
the Parmenides, Δαμασκίου Διαδόχου είς τόν Πλάτωνος Παρμενίδην άπορίαι καί
έπιλύσεις άντιπαρατεινόμεναι τοίς είς αίτιόν ΰπομνήμασιν τοϋ φιλοσόφου, makes
sufficiently clear the contentious spirit in which Damascius writes.
83 Op. cit. (n. 80), 11.
84 We have evidence that Damascius lectured and/or produced commentaries
on the Republic, the Phaedrus, the Sophist, the Timaeus, the Laws and finally the
quintessential^ Neoplatonic text of the Chaldaean Oracles (J. Combfes, Damascius
Prine. I, p. XXXIV). On the Iamblichan canon, Combes, Damascius Parmenide I,
p. XI, n. 4. Damascius also produced a work On Number, Place and Time (cf.
Bibliography) and a treatise on astronomy (John Philoponus CAG XIV, 44, 116-
117). It would appear from remarks in Olympiodorus’ works among others that the
School of Alexandria possibly possessed more than one copy of Damascius’
commentaries (Westerink, Damascius In Phil. p. XXII).
85 Cf. In Parm. (Ruelle) 132,9-10 for the χαλδαϊκοί συνουσίαι.
86 102 indicates that Damascius occupied himself with the finances of the
Academy.
87 Agathias II.30.3.
 well have housed them in a superb building complex on the
northern slope of the Areopagus which must have functioned for
many years as living quarters, as a teaching and research centre,
and as a place of worship.88 Here indeed was a radical break with
Proclus which, even if unintentionally initiated by Hegias,89 seems
to have been fully exploited only by Damascius.90

While the Platonic theology was imparted by Damascius and his

colleagues to a new generation of bright young men who were
expected in their turn to spread the word around the Mediterranean
at the academic level, a broader message had to be preached to the
world, and this is the function which seems to have been envisaged
by its author for the Philosophical History·, it was to be a cultural
manifesto weaving around the historical leitmotiv of the Platonic
diadoche the various themes of “the education of the future”.
These themes consisted in the cultivation of philosophy for the few
and in the worship of the holy for all, inspired both by the narration

88 On the “House of Damascius", see JHS 113, 23. Commenting on the

complex of houses A,B,C and D (five structures altogether, as house C seems to
represent two separate buildings at this date), Frantz (p. 46) notes the following:
“the close interrelationship of the Areopagus houses seems to indicate some sort of
coordinated plan and therefore a common purpose”. For a fuller treatment, see
Appendix I.
89 See 145 and 151E with relevant footnotes as well as Appendix I, where it is
suggested that House C was the ancestral residence of Hegias.
90 Proclus had lived, taught and worshipped in a house on the southern slope of
the Acropolis which had belonged before him to Syrianus and Plutarch, his spiritual
father and grandfather respectively (VP 12,29). A recent re-examination of the data
relating to a fifth century building in that location (now symbolically buried under
Dionysios the Areopagite Street, named after the patron saint of Athens) confirms
the theory advanced in 1955 by its excavator, I. Meliades, who identified House
Chi (X) with the Neoplatonic premises in use throughout the fifth century (I.
Meliades, "Ανασκαφή νοτίως τής Άκροπόλεως’ ΠΑΕ 1955 (1960) 47-50). A new
construction dating from the very end of the fifth or the early sixth century
(Building Sigma) which blocked the entrance to the most important section of the
house, clearly suggests the abandonment of House X at that date (see Arja
Karivieri, ‘The House of Proclus’ on the Southern Slope of the Acropolis: a
Contribution’ in P. Castren, Post-Herulian Athens, Helsinki 1994, 115-139), a
conclusion already reached by Meliades himself.
and exegesis of myths and miracles, and by describing the
topography and properties of sacred places.
Such a complex work, containing also the evaluation of all the
great names in rhetoric and philosophy for three generations, is not
likely to have been written as soon as Damascius assumed the
direction of the Academy, but must have ripened in him over the
years through critical observation, selective recollection, and
discussion with colleagues and students. Indeed it seems that its
author viewed the Philosophical History as a diary of the Platon-
ists’ collective fortunes, and it is even possible that, once away
from Athens, he added as a postscript to the work the account of
the Persian experience.

VI The Return I

1. T he P ersian E xperience

It was to be expected that Damascius’ provocatively flourishing

pagan institution could not indefinitely pursue its multiple
activities unimpeded in a symbolically important city of the
Byzantine empire, especially after Justinian came to the throne.91
In 529 an imperial edict specifically aimed at Damascius’
establishment ordered the cessation of philosophical teaching in
Athens.92 Damascius, who had seen several waves of persecution
come and go, felt that this time he had to resort to drastic measures
and, like the jinns in the marvellous tales that he was collecting,93

91 Viewed from a hostile perspective Justinian was “the greatest possible

destroyer of the good old institutions” μέγιστος δή οΰτος ήν διαφθορείς των εΰ
καθεστώτων (Procopius Anecd. VI.21).
92 Cf. above η. 79. I see no reason to doubt Malalas’ credibility which is
additionally supported by legal evidence (C.J. 1,5,18,4 and 1,11,10,2). Moreover
529 was the year of an organised pagan persecution which claimed many victims -
among others the praetorian prefect Phocas: evidence collected by Stein-Palanque
Π, 371; cf. Lemerle, 66-70.
93 In a now lost work Damascius presented 572 fantastic stories, one supposes
much in the vein of Λ Thousand and One Nights. According to Photius, Bibl. Cod.
130, the style was clear, concise and elegant.
 he conceived the idea of transferring intact to another land the
edifice that he had been building over the years.94 Platonic
reminiscences of the constitutionally just character of the Persian
king, fashioned by the ideal educational methods, mingled in his
mind with the language of contemporary Sassanian propaganda
and, suddenly, Ctesiphon appeared as the ideal philosophical
abode. Once the decision was made, Damascius, now in his late
sixties, hid the sacred objects with extreme care in the wells of his
mansion, packed his manuscripts and, at the head of a group of at
least another six philosophers, embarked on the great adventure.95
The journey was a long one. The seven men were leaving
behind for ever (as they then thought) the Roman oikoumene, and
considerations of spiritual tourism, which formed such a strong
tradition in the circle, would no doubt have prompted them to pay
prolonged respects to important holy places. Foremost among
them was Harran, stigmatised in the Acts of the Council of
Chalcedon (451) as ή Ελλήνων πόλις -the city of the Hellenes.96
Damascius and his companions must have stopped at this frontier
town to visit its temples and examine its libraries. They then
pressed on to Persia, where it took them only a short time to
discover that reality fell short of legend. The young Khusrau, who
had just ascended the throne, faced grave problems of
succession.97 In addition to his distinctly alien ways, the king’s
private troubles hardly rendered Ctesiphon an ideal abode for the
philosophers, who were used to a life of active teaching rather than
to the stifling routine of royal consultants -a realisation which was
enormously facilitated for them by the idealised memory of
Harran. Yet, despite a certain culture shock on the part of both
sides, a real bond developed between the young sovereign and the

94 Damascius and his peers would have agreed with Procopius’ acid remark that
it was possible to escape the plague if one lived in the Roman empire, but not the
afflictions imposed by Justinian’s rule. (Anecd. VI.22-23).
95 For all this, see Appendix I.
96 SeeE. Schwartz, Acta Conciliorum Oecumenicorum II. 1.3 (1935), p. 25; II.3.3
(1937), p. 30. For references illustrating Harran’s paganism, cf. JHS 113, n. 173.
97 Cf. Procopius BP 11.23.7; A. Christensen. L'lran sous les Sassanides, 361-2.
wise men from Greece. Khusrau seems to have read the Platonic
dialogues on the syllabus which had been fixed once and for all by
Iamblichus, and to have inundated his guests with questions.98
Judging from a work which has reached us in a Latin translation
with the revealing title Answers to the questions asked by
Chosroes, King o f the Persians, Khusrau held discussions with his
guests on the nature of the soul, its relation to the body and fate
after death, on dreams and visions, and on important subjects of
geography and anthropology.99 Unfortunately this intellectual
curiosity was combined with a tyrannical temperament and a rather
cruel sense of humour, as both Persian and Greek sources report.100
Whatever the explanation of their wish to return home, the
philosophers seem to have made up their mind to do so in a
relatively short time after their arrival in the Persian capital, while
the king appears to have discussed with them the niost satisfactory
long-term solution to the problem of how and where they could
best pursue their customary mode of life.
The solution they came up with was the shrewdest possible and
it would appear that Damascius was instrumental not only in
devising and carrying it out, but also in bequeathing it to posterity.
As Khusrau Anushirwan prepared to sign the Eternal Peace with
Justinian (September 532), Damascius drafted a clause of privilege
for himself and his colleagues. Reported by the Byzantine historian
Agathias, this clause, together with the entire story of the
philosophers’ journeying to Persia and back, has long intrigued

98 Agathias (11.28) gives the following list of Khusrau’s readings: των (...)
Πλάτωνος (...) άναπέπλησται δογμάτων, οΰτε δ Τίμαιος αυτόν άποδιδράσειεν &ν, εΐ
καί σφόδρα γραμμική θεωρία πεποίκιλται καί τάς τής φύσεως άνιχνεΰει κινήσεις,
οΰτε δ Φαίδων οΰτε δ Γοργίας, οΰ μέν ούδέ άλλος τις των γλαφυρών τε καί
άγκυλωτέρων διαλόγων, όποιος οίμαι, δ Παρμενίδης. On Khusrau’s more general
interest in Greek philosophy, Zeller-Mondolfo VI, n. 111 (pp. 227-228).
99 Priscianus Solutiones eorum de quibus dubitavit Chosroes Persarum rex. in
CAG Suppi. 1.2 (I. Bywater), 1886,41-104.
100 On Khusrau’s intellectual curiosity, Christensen, 427-431, and more
recently, N. Garsoian ‘Byzantium and the Sassanians’ Cambridge History o f Iran
III (1), 1983, 577; J. Duchesne-Guillemin ‘Zoroastrian Religion’, ibid. 895. On his
cruelty, see the anecdotes collected by Christensen, 374-376, 381-383 and cf.
Procopius BP I. 23. 12-29,11.11.36-38, 17.11-12; Agathias IV.23.
scholars as to its provenance. More than a hundred years ago the
expert eye of Eduard Zeller detected in it the style of
Damascius;101 subsequently Averil Cameron referred in her studies
on Agathias to his “detailed knowledge of the whole affair such as
can only have come from information from one of the philosophers
themselves”, and pertinently pointed out the fact that Agathias
included in his Cycle a funeral epigram by Damascius, though she
also noted that “Damascius would have been extremely old, and
Agathias extremely young, had they ever met”. Finally in a further
step of intuitive logic, Cameron claimed that Agathias must have
seen “a work in which one of them [the philosophers] described his
experiences”.102 Could it be that this work was the Philosophical
History with a postscript on the Persian adventure?

2. A m bigu ou s H arran

When these men return home they will spend the rest o f their
lives free o f any fear, as private individuals, never forced to profess
belief in anything contrary to their conscience or to change their
traditional views, ran the clause concerning the philosophers in the
Eternal Peace of 532, as reported by Agathias.103
As Michel Tardieu has argued in a controversial article, there
was indeed one place in the Christian Empire which could ideally
lend itself to such a life of perfect intellectual freedom: the city of
Harran.104 For these men of mainly Eastern provenance, as their
ethnic description suggests,105 this culturally ambiguous, but

101 Zeller-Mondolfo VI, 228, n. H I.

102 DOP 23-24 (1969-70) 173-176 and Agathias, 102. Commenting on the
“code-phrase” ή κρατούσα δόξα used by Agathias in the present context, Alan
Cameron had already assumed that “he was drawing on an account of the Persian
adventure written by one of the seven” (Last days, 18).
103 11.31: δεΐν έκείνους τούς δνδρας ές τά σφετερα ήθη κατιόντας βι,οτεύειν
άδειος τό λοιπόν έφ’ έαυτοΐς ούδέν δτιοΰν πέρα των δοκούντων φρονεΐν η
μεταβάλλειν τήν πατρφαν δόξαν άναγκαζομένους.
104 ‘Sabiens coraniques et “sabiens” de Harran’, Journal Asiatique 274
(1986) 1-44.
105 Agathias II, 30.3.
resolutely pagan, city combined a congenial intellectual climate
with the security implicit in the proximity of the Persian border. In
this connection, an anecdote reported by Procopius may be richer
in meaning than it appears at first glance: in 540, when Damascius
may no longer have been alive, Khusrau visited many frontier
towns in the course of a military campaign which left the area in
disarray, dragging behind him a host of prisoners. Everywhere he
either took money in exchange for the release of prisoners or killed
them, sometimes even after accepting ransom money. But in
Harran, where he was possibly met by his one-time guests, he
indignantly rejected the offer of ransom “because the majority
were not Christians” and seems to have handed back the prisoners in
a typical gesture of royal patronage towards his life-long proteges.106
To go as far as to suggest that Damascius refounded the
Academy as an official institution in Harran could be at variance
with the enigmatic expression έφ’ έαυτοις in the peace clause,
which can plausibly be translated “as private individuals”. But in
the case of academics it is hard to draw a line between “private”
and “public” pursuits. Protected by imperial legislation and
inspired by a friendly environment, the Neoplatonists seem to have
fertilised the indigenous intellectual and cultic traditions in
important and far reaching ways;107 while in so far as Damascius’
private destiny is concerned, his refusal to accept events in a
fatalistic manner meant that, by a benign stroke of fortune, the last
diadochos of the Academy could die in his native Syria.
A funerary stele dated 538 and discovered in 1925 at Emesa
(modem Homs) bears the following epigram, also known from
Agathias’ Cycle as being a composition of Damascius.108
Ζωσίμη, ή πριν έοϋσα μόνφ τφ σώματι δούλη
καί τφ σώματι νΰν ηύρον έλευθερίην.

106 Procopius BP II. 13.7.

107 As argued in JHS 113, 26-29.
108 Anthol. Gr. VII.553 and L. Jalabert -R. Mouterde, Inscriptions grecques et
latines de la Syrie V (1959) 155 (No 2336). The inscription here quoted reports the
epigram in the first person (Zosime speaking, as is normal on a tomb-stone) as
opposed to the version of the Agathias Cycle in which Damascius speaks.
 I, Zosime, who was before a slave in body only
have now gained freedom for my body too.
Commemorating the free spirit of the slave woman Zosime, who
may have been closer to her master than a mere servant, the
epigram at the same time provides evidence of the open mind and
still active spirit of Damascius, now in his seventies and in his
native Syria.

VII The Bacchus

Whether at the approach of death Damascius felt that he should

return home, and left Harran for the no less holy city of Emesa
where Iamblichus’ ancestors had originated, we cannot tell. The
evidence furnished by the funerary epigram is certainly an
indication in this direction. More importantly however, in his life
and philosophical career he achieved a rounding of the circle in
ways which transcend the topographical, and even the personal.
When Damascius came to philosophy, the Neoplatonic scene
had been dominated for half a century by one man: Proclus. A
compulsive writer, a paradigmatic saint, sage and leader of the
pagan community as he emerges from Marinus’ biography, Proclus
had had no difficulty in propagating through his voluminous
writings his own view of Iamblichan Platonism as the authorised
version.109 Those who came after him espoused his interpretations
with religious reverence, with two exceptions as Simplicius
remarks: Asclepiodotus, the best o f Proclus' pupils, and our
Damascius. The first delighted in new ideas because of his
extraordinary intelligence; as for Damascius, he did not hesitate to
oppose many o f Proclus’ doctrines because o f his taste for hard
work and also his appreciation o f Iamblichus’ theories.110

109 See my articles in JRS 83 (1993) 115-130 and JRS 85 (1995) 244-250. To
the evidence gathered there, add the testimony of Psellus on Proclus’ excellence:
Chronogr. 6.38: προβαίνων είς τόν θαυμασιώτατον Πρόκλον ώς έπΐ λιμένα
μέγισχον καιασχών, πάσαν έκείθεν έπιστήμην τε καί νοήσεων άκρίβειαν έσπασα.
1,0 G 4G IX, 795,13-17.
 As we have seen, Damascius’ view of Asclepiodotus’
“originality” was less complimentary than his pupil’s.111
Incompetent in theology and too literal in ethics, the “innovatory”
Asclepiodotus represents for Damascius an extreme case among
those who ignored or perverted the Platonic doctrine. But his
contribution to philosophy was felt to be so superficial as to be
deemed unworthy of any attempt at a refutation. By contrast
Damascius felt that the presentation of Iamblichus’ thought by
Syrianus, and especially Proclus, was subtly misguided and as such
exceptionally harmful. Summarily styling for his polemical
purposes the two men as “the philosophers”, Damascius undertook
a systematic refutation of their theories in an attempt to rehabilitate
“the true Iamblichus”, perceiving himself as his natural interpreter
and philosophical heir.
In Westerink’s words, Iamblichus’ scholarly achievement had
been “to make Plotinus’ belief of the superiority of intuition to
reason the guiding principle of a new systematic approach to Plato.
(...) Intuition, which is a superior form of sight, does not proceed
from point to point, but has a unified vision of the structure of all
reality. (...) The inspired thinker will, from his high point of
vantage, be able to discern the same essential patterns everywhere.
He will find in all perfect literature (whether Plato, the Chaldean
Oracles, Orpheus or Homer) the faultless reflection of the entire
transcendental, physical and moral world”.112 This is precisely
what Damascius attempted to show by constant reference to
Iamblichus’ theses. Yet one should not underestimate the
originality of his own thought. At a time when the most
revolutionary ideas could only be presented as scholia on the
classics, Damascius faithfully followed the trend established by his
great predecessors, Plotinus and Iamblichus. Thus, his systematic
work On the First Principles, which endeavours to substantiate the

111 Cf. above p. 37.

112 L.G. Westerink, The Greek Commentaries on Plato’s Phaedo I:
Olympiodorus, Amsterdam 1976, 15. See now G. Shaw, ‘The mortality and
anonymity of the Iamblichean soul’ Syllecta Classica 8 (1998) 177-190.
oecumenicity of pagan monotheism while expounding at the same
time a philosophy of language, appears on the scholastic level as
an attempt to purge Iamblichan Platonism of any innovatory
interpretations.113 In the process of doing this Damascius emerges
as a ferocious researcher -άνήρ ζητητικώτατος-,114 a superb
logician and a master of the dialectic game;115 but at the same time
he appears fully and continuously aware of the fundamental
Platonic dichotomy between a human science of dialectics, which
uses the restricted and restrictive (as well as unnecessarily
complicated) path of proof,116 and a heavenly intuition which
enables us, if not to grasp, at least to divine the ineffable.117
Knowing where cognition and categorisation end and intuitive
understanding begins, Damascius interprets in Chaldaean terms the
theologies of the Greeks and the Barbarians118 in a manner which
is distinctly at variance with that of Proclus.

113 Princ. Ill, 119,6: “I would have been ashamed of the divine Iamblichus if I
innovated in any way on these subjects”. Combfes (II, 215 n. 3) advances the
plausible hypothesis that many elements of Iamblichus’ Chaldaean Theology were
integrated by Damascius in his treatise On the First Principles. Indeed he describes
the entire first volume as “une justification critique de la doctrine selon laquelle
Γineffable est transcendant a l’un et l’un transcendant h la triade qui suit”, which on
his evidence was Iamblichus' interpretation, not accepted by Proclus, and not
apparent from the De Mysteriis.
114As realised by his pupil and companion in exile, Simplicius (CAGIX, 624,38),
who nevertheless found him too hard to follow: cf. i.a. CAG IX, 625-2: τό καινοπρεπές
τϋς ΐιποθέσεως of Damascius’ treatise shocks Simplicius, and ibid. 775,32.
115 See the excellent analysis of Damascius’ thought and methodology by M.-
C. Galperine in her introduction to the translation of the De principiis, 23-97. Same
appreciation of Damascius’ methodological subtlety and originality in Combes,
Princ. I, pp. XXIV-XXVI.
116 Princ. 1,9,23-10,10.
117 Cf. the poignant cry of Damascius: εΐ δέ ή συναίρεσις ήμάς υπερβαίνει τούς
έν τφ τιτανιχφ πολεμώ διεσπασμένους τί θαυμαστόν; (1,66,18-19; cf. I,5,4ff., Ill,
92, Iff.). From its “dislocated” state the soul “divines (μαντεύεται) a principle
beyond everything” (1,4,13) and can even be gratified with a vision of the spheres
which lie beyond intellection (11,33,23 - 34,8).
118 The Orphic, Persian, Babylonian, Phoenician and Egyptian theologies (as
transmitted respectively by several versions of the Orphic hymns, Eudemus,
Mochus and his own contemporaries, Asclepiades and Heraiscus) are analysed by
Damascius in his Princ. Ill, 159-167.
 Damascius also had an acute sense of both history and tragedy.
Like Plotinus, who often uses his grasp of contemporary realities
as a stand from which to launch himself into metaphysical
developments, he exploits his sensitivity as historian and poet in
ways which endow his most abstract reflections with poignancy
and immediacy.119 Not fully understood by his best pupil,
Simplicius, ignored in Byzantium, despised by the great Neo­
platonic scholar Wilhelm Kroll, and pronounced incomprehensible
by Eduard Zeller,120 Damascius has recently become the object of
a vivid interest. The reason for the attention displayed in the last
decade towards his very difficult, and at times highly frustrating,
philosophical work may be sought in Damascius’ sense of the
tragic and his twin awareness that, while standing at the limit of an
ancient tradition whose demise he is passionately trying to arrest,
he is also breaking new philosophical ground in the Very name of
this tradition.
Of the two roads to salvation -parallel, but running in opposite
directions- Damascius preferred the philosophical to the
theurgic,121 as he often declared, yet he knew that the ideal resided

1,9 See my analysis of this process in ‘The Chaldaean Oracles: theology and
theurgy’ in P. Athanassiadi and M. Frede, Pagan Monotheism in Late Antiquity,
Oxford 1999, 164-6.
120 For Simplicius’ remarks, cf. above η. 114. The remarkable Marcianus
graecus 246, which preserves the De primis principiis and the In Parmenidem, has
been tentatively attributed by Comtes to Leo the Mathematician or Leo
Choerosphactes because of the important scholia that it contains in the scribe’s
hand (Prine. I, pp. LXXIII-LXXX); its first known possessor was Bessarion, who
annotated it, and it is fair to assume that between its production in the ninth century
and its re-appearance in the fifteenth the codex was not used, except perhaps by
Psellus (ibid. pp. XXVIII-XXIX, LXXXII); its coeval Marc. gr. 196 which
preserves the In Phaedonem and the In Philehum, seems to have had a similar fate.
G. Kroll (De oraculis chaldaicis, Breslau 1894, p. 10, n. 2) complains of Damas­
cius’ lack of originality in rather strong terms when he refers to his ingenii
sterilitas. He is even ruder about Damascius’ editor, Ruelle (nihil fere intellexit: p.
8, n. 2), whose edition of the First Principles had come out in 1889. For Zeller’s
condemnation of Damascius, whom he holds responsible for “the wreckage of
Neoplatonism”, Zeller-Mondolfo VI, 210-218.
121 See 4 and 88A with relevant notes; cf. 150.
 in their fusion. As he put it:122 There are those who prefer
philosophy, like Porphyry and Plotinus and many other
philosophers, and those who prefer theurgy, like Iamblichus and
Syrianus and Proclus and the rest o f the hieratics. Found in the
notes of one of his students, this well-known passage is rarely
quoted with its concluding punch-line: But Plato, realising that
strong arguments can be advanced from both sides, united them in
one single truth by calling the philosopher a Bacchus. For indeed
if the man who has freed himselffrom genesis were to stand in the
middle, he would pull both to himself. And yet it is clear that he
calls the philosopher a Bacchus in his desire to exalt him, in the
same way in which we call Nous a god or the physical light
spiritual light.
Damascius knew that it had not been given to him to achieve
this coincidence, but he sensed it in Isidore, who after spending
years on the conventional curriculum, ended up not so much
rejecting as redefining the traditional tools of culture. Like his
prototype, the urban hermit Sarapio, Isidore “did not care for the
bubble of books, which bring about a multitude of opinions rather
than wise thinking” (35A); he emerges from Damascius’ book as
the anti-type of Asclepiodotus, the parody of the empiricist who
made 220 tests in order to recapture a lost musical scale (85B) and
remained irretrievably entrenched in the visible world, seeking to
understand what lies beyond it by analogy rather than intuition.
Even more completely than his master Heraiscus, Isidore had
realised the “bacchic” state expected of the true philosopher.

122 In Phaed. 1.172. For Heraiscus as a Bacchus, 76A.

 THE PHILOSOPHICAL HISTORY

I The literary genre

Upon succeeding Proclus as head of the Academy in 485,
Marinus produced an elegant work of hagiography under the title
Proclus or On Bliss. Damascius belonged to the same tradition.
After he had assumed the Platonic diadoche, Theodora, a pupil
both of Damascius and of Isidore -and, like Iamblichus, a
descendant of the royal house of Emesa- approached him, together
with others, and specifically requested him to write the life of the
eccentric Isidore, who may never have been a fully-fledged
diadochus.m Complying in his own manner with school
convention and ceding to their request, Damascius then seems to
have given the alternative title Life o f Isidore to the great work of
transcendental prosopography that he had in mind under the
equivocal title of The Philosophical History. And in a further
unconventional gesture, which expressed his attachment to his
female pupil while alluding at the same time to his solidarity with
Iamblichus, he dedicated the book to the learned and pious
Theodora.
I have already attempted, if not to define the genre exemplified
by Damascius’ Philosophical History, at least to trace the literary
ancestry of its title.123124 This exercise, which shed some light on the
specific tradition within which Damascius composed, can by no
means account for the range of the work as it emerges from the
surviving fragments. The structure of the book (which so irritated
Photius who was viewing it from the standpoint of a biography)
begins to become apparent only if one is prepared to place it in its
own time, and attempt to understand the crucial role played by the
device of digression within its overall scheme.125 Even in what

123 The specific demand may be seen as further evidence in support of the fact
that Isidore was not Damascius’ predecessor.
124 See above, pp. 39-40.
125 Photius failed to grasp the complex character of the book as a chronicle
interspersed with the minor genres of patria and paradoxa, and consequently found
the use of digression in Damascius’ text “abusive” (Test. Ill, 21).
 survives of the original Damascius repeatedly indicates that he has
been digressing and must “recall the argument which is being
diverted from its subject-matter”.126 Usually the digression
consists of an anecdote, prosopographical or historical, or of a
mythological excursus connected with some town or site. Indeed
an integral part of this book is represented by the patriographic
genre which here operates as an ingredient of a larger whole, as
one might expect in a sixth-century chronicle.
According to the definition offered by the Suda, the patria deal
with aspects of popular culture in connection with particular cities
or sites.127 In the work of Damascius, as in that of his younger
contemporary Malalas, one finds foundation myths, descriptions of
monuments (ekphraseis) and accounts of local customs and
traditions. The reason for the inclusion of such material in a work
like the Philosophical History is easily understood: if the
awareness of change urged Damascius’ Christian contemporaries
to try and preserve as much of the fabric of the past as they
could,128 he himself had additional reasons for feeling that the
tradition to which he belonged and had the mission to perpetuate
“now stood on a razor’s edge”.129
Closely linked with the late antique genre of patria is that of

126 5A; cf. 78F, 103A, 116A.

127 Suda IV 69, 4: “πάτρια (...) λέγουσι τά ίθη καί τά νόμιμα καί τά μυστήρια
καί τάς έορτάς”.
128 Choricius of Gaza puzzled Photius because, despite being a Christian, he
included in his narratives δλιγώρως καί λόγω σύν οΰδενί μύθους καί Ιστορίας έλλη-
νικάς (Bibl. Cod. 160).
129 For the expression, 150. It is worth mentioning in this connection that
Damascius’ younger contemporary Christodorus of Coptos, who wrote a book on
the pupils of Proclus (below, p. 257 n. 278), also composed patria of considerable
length for Constantinople, Thessalonica, Aphrodisias, Nacle, Tralles, Miletus and
Aphaca (Suda IV 827, 5). For an excellent study of the patriographic genre, which
constitutes a vital part of the Byzantine oral and written culture from the sixth to the
tenth centuries, see G. Dagron, Constantinople imaginaire: Etudes sur le Recueil
des Patria, Paris 1984, passim., and for a brief analysis, ibid. 10-19. Commenting
on the fascination exerted by works of art from the pagan past on the Byzantines of
the early Middle Ages, Dagron pertinently remarks: “Cet art rfipute profane
conserve (...), ou meme acquiert, une valeur magique que Ton tentait prudemment
de faire perdre a l’ic6ne” (134).
paradoxa with its double affiliation with the miracles of saints and
with marvellous tales, both of which were to develop into major
genres, capturing the medieval imagination in East and West.
Damascius indeed produced an independent work of paradoxo-
graphy which comprised 572 marvellous stories classified in four
books according to their typology of the miraculous and the
bizarre.130 In the Philosophical History we not only encounter
miracles and monsters from the author’s personal experience, but
we hear him relate fantastic stories, often in the style of the original
narrator, and describe men and animals which refer us to the world
of the Thousand and One Nights
The patria and the paradoxa, which punctuate the Philo­
sophical History in the guise of anecdotes, endow it with a popular
touch, even an air of orality, which has its prosopographical
counterpart in the gossip concerning rhetors, philosophers and
politicians. As I reassembled the pieces of the jigsaw puzzle left by
Photius and the Suda, I increasingly saw how all this disparate
material -the patria and paradoxa, the lives of the pagan
intelligentsia against a background of persecution and martyrdom,
the history of the Platonic succession, and the story of Damascius’
conversion to philosophy- formed more of an organic whole than
had ever been realised before.

II The transmission of the text

In the ninth century the Patriarch Photius read Damascius’ book

and was both fascinated and repelled by it. Photius probably felt

150 Photius Bibl. Cod. 130; cf. above, n. 93. A comment like the following
“Photius obviously despised the rubbish collected by the Neoplatonist philosopher
Damascius” (N.G. Wilson. Photius: the Bibliotheca, London 1994, 12) in
connection with the content of Cod. 130, while reflecting something of Photius’
incomprehension of part of the cultural tradition in which he stood, does not help us
to understand Damascius or his era either.
131 Two striking instances concern the stories told by Eusebius in Heliopolis
(138) and (probably) by the priest of Eshmun at Berytus (142B). In both cases
Damascius seems to be reproducing the straightforward narrative style of the
Oriental priests from whom he heard the stories.
 that he could not give a summary of so complex and multi-tiered a
composition and accordingly he copied out loosely connected or
totally unrelated passages132 which offer concrete -but all too often
frustratingly elliptic- information on people and situations. Yet at
the same time captivated by the linguistic command of one whom
he considered a major novelist,133 once he had finished copying the
text for doxographic purposes, he went back to the beginning and
selected “those excerpts which have been omitted, but should be
included in the selection on account of their elegant language”.134
In the Bude edition of Photius’ Bibliotheca these stylistic extracts
cover ten pages, the rest thirty nine.135
Yet, despite the abundance of quotations, it is not possible to
make any sense of this epitome, even if one considers it in
combination with Cod. 181, which is really a review of the book
full of biographical information and astute comment.136 In it
Photius tells us that he has read The Life o f Isidore, a title whose
relevance he justifiably challenges by remarking that Damascius
“does not so much write the Life of Isidore, as that of many other
people, both his contemporaries and his predecessors. Another

132 A pattern applied to the later codices of the Myriobiblos or Bibliotheca. Of

the 280 codices which constitute it, the first 234 are systematic descriptions of the
books read, while the remaining 46 form disconnected extracts. Unfortunately Cod.
242, which represents the Philosophical History, is particularly inconsequential.
133 In Bibl. Cod. 166, 11 lb, 32-35, Photius lists Damascius alongside Lucian,
Lucius of Patras, Iamblichus the Novelist, Achilles Tatius and Heliodorus; cf.
Cod. 130.
134 Bibl. Cod. 242, 349b, 13-14 (Φ 230). Same pattern in Cod. 241 which deals
with Philostratus’ Life of Apollonius of Tyana. According to Lemerle, 169. the first
part of Cod. 241 dealing with mirabilia was copied by Photius himself, whereas the
second part with elegant extracts may be the work of a secretary who would have
copied out the passages selected by Photius as he read. I see no reason for such an
assumption.
135 Cod. 242, 231-312, vol. VI, pp. 47-56 and Cod. 242, 1-230, vol. VI, 8-46.
Photius’ text has come down in two codices, the tenth century Marcianus graecus
450 (A) and the twelfth century Marcianus graecus 451 (M), which are
independent from each other. For details on the manuscript tradition, R. Henry,
Photius, Bibliothique I, pp. XXVII-XXXV and Schamp, 27-29.
136 Test. ΠΙ. As Schamp pertinently remarks, Photius is the creator “du genre
litteraire particulier que constitue le compte rendu critique" (25).
critical remark concerns the length of the book in connection with
literary genre: this is a βιβλίον πολύστιχον in no less than sixty
chapters, too long and too lofty in tone for a mere biography;
besides, its grandiloquent style is not that of a biographer but rather
“suits a lawgiver or a ruler”.137 A third point, not irrelevant to the
above, deals with the overcritical and often sarcastic tenor that
Damascius assumes when viewing his human gallery, among
whom Isidore -Photius is appalled to note- does not constitute an
exception. Such are the clues offered us by Photius.
Our other source is the tenth-century encyclopaedia known as
the Suda. Its excerptor gleaned through Damascius’ book -which
he invariably refers to as The Philosophical History- 138 with one
concern in mind: to find material for the Lexicon. Assembling
under separate headings all the information relating to particular
individuals, he completed some fifty biographical notes whose
length ranges from a few lines to a couple of pages. By doing this,
the anonymous excerptor has probably offered us a more faithful
epitome of Damascius’ academic Who’s Who than did Photius. At
the same time however he did not forget the other major object of
the Lexicon -its purely linguistic dimension- and accordingly he
searched the Philosophical History for peculiar usages, interesting
constructions and elegant phrases.
Roughly of the same total length as the Photian Epitome, the
Suda passages partly coincide with and partly complement the
patriarchal text. Taken together, the two excerptors offer us
valuable clues to the style, intent and ambience of the Philo­
sophical History, while their discrepancies allow us glimpses into
the type and degree of distortion undergone by the original text at
the hands of Photius and of the anonymous lexicographer.

137 Not much evidence of this style is to be found in what survives of the PH.
Perhaps Photius’ dislike of it was so strong that it conditioned his work as
excerptor.
138 S.vv. Δαμάσκιος, Λώρος, Γρηγόριος, Ιφικρατίδες, the latter two coinciding
with Photian excerpts and thus making it absolutely certain that the Philosophical
History and the Life o f Isidore are one and the same work.
 ΙΠ Modern scholarship

The enigmas arising from omission and misrepresentation in

the Damascius text have preyed on the mind of several modem
scholars, and attempts at a reconstruction have been made since the
mid-nineteenth century. The most ingenious was that by Rudolf
Asmus who in the early years of our century produced out of the
chaos of the Photian and the Suda fragments a more or less
sequential story. In two learned articles Asmus collected the
certain (and the not so certain) Suda fragments, collated, divided
and finally organised them around the figure of Isidore.139 Then,
using the first Photian reading as a backbone, he integrated the
second Photian epitome and the Suda passages as he went along
and produced an attractive volume in German with no further
reference to his Greek sources.140 This elegant translation is
supplemented by comments in italics which paper over the gaps
left by the adroit if too intuitive selection and juxtaposition of the
fragments.
By grouping his evidence around Isidore, Asmus has
unwittingly obscured the structure of the text, concealed its
purpose and, above all, rigidified the relationship between
Damascius and his mentor. Having cast the fragments into the
mould of a biography,141 he then attempted a detailed comparison
between Marinus’ Life o f Proclus and Damascius’ Life o f Isidore,
which he sees as a “philosophical canon”, heavily influenced by
Marinus’ work in both form and content.142 To be fair, in all these
regards Asmus was encouraged as much by the academic
orthodoxies of his time as by personal experience; for, as a German
professor of his generation, he understood scholarly identity as a
creative and exclusive bond between master and pupil, and in this
connection at least German academic ethos of the early twentieth

l39‘Zur Rekonstruktion von Damaskius’ Leben des Isidorus’ I and Π respectively

in BZ 18 (1909) 424-480 and BZ 19 (1910) 265-284.
140 Das Leben des Philosophen Isidoros von Damaskios a us Damaskos, 1911.
141 BZ 19,268-279.
141BZ 18,475-477.
century did not differ substantially from late antique ideology and
practice. Indeed since the time of Porphyry and Gregory the
Thaumaturge it had been the custom for the student who inherited
his teacher’s mission to celebrate his achievement in a Vita, a
tradition which came to be regarded as an obligation in
Neoplatonic circles, as Theodora and her fellow-students clearly
felt.143 Yet the Philosophical History was, as is clear from the
surviving fragments, a larger project than a mere vita, and to view
it as a biography (as both Photius and Asmus did) adds to its
inbuilt confusion.

IV The present edition

j
1. The text
Asmus’ reconstruction of “The Life of Isidore” was charged
with indisputable if undeserved objectivity when, fifty-six years
after its publication, it served as the almost exclusive basis of the
edition of the Greek text.144 What C. Zintzen did was to add to the
material collected and arranged by Asmus the fragments attributed
to Damascius by Ada Adler in her edition of the Suda. As I do not
always agree with Asmus’ classification of the fragments -and
furthermore the two sources from which the Philosophical History
derives are easily available in Henry’s and Adler’s respective
editions-1 have turned directly to them.
As I attempted to reconstruct the text, a major problem emerged
stemming from the methods of the excerptors. It was fair to assume
in this connection that the most faithful texts come from Photius’
second reading and from the purely linguistic Suda notices.
Conversely one could infer that in his first reading Photius was
more interested in the spirit than the letter of the work, the meaning
rather than mere words; this hypothesis should also apply to the

143 Cf. above, p. 58.

144 C. Zintzen, Damascii Vitae Isidori Reliquiae, 1967. For a detailed review,
R. Henry, RBPH 46 (1968) 853-858.
 prosopographical articles of the Suda, where the material is often
extracted from various parts of the original and juxtaposed in an
anarchic way interspersed by summaries. These plausible
assumptions however proved invalid when I began to compare
parallel Suda passages. Faithfulness to the word, rather than to the
phrase -let alone the spirit- of the original seems to be the guiding
principle of the Suda, and surprisingly the same holds true for
Photius who often produces a more literal text in his first rather
than his second, self-avowedly stylistic recension. Emerging as
they did with painful slowness, these considerations gradually
led me to understand that no system for a reconstruction of
Damascius’ text could be devised, that each case had to be viewed
individually. I also realised that the introductory δτι and the verb
φησί in Photius are no guarantee of a verbatim reproduction of the
text.145 For this reason I have retained them in the Greek while
italicising them; however, as they add nothing to the meaning, I
have not translated them.
I have also italicised the quotes from Photius and the Suda
whenever I had sure signs that the exceiptors spoke, either
summarising Damascius’ text or making some comment on it or
expressing their own views, and I have carried this italicisation to
the translation. Yet often enough I had the feeling that I was not
faced with Damascius’ own words, without nevertheless being
able to prove it by the use of objective criteria; especially in the
Suda articles I often recognised the flat style of the lexicographer
or the commentator. In all these cases I left the text as it was,
relegating my reservations to a footnote. Even more problematic
were the few instances when I was presented with two different
versions of the same basic statement, as in 4A. In such cases I
combined the variants, treating them as probable summaries of
Damascius’ lost text.
In my reconstruction of the text I have been conservative. Like

145 if/ t Treadgold, The nature o f the Bibliotheca o f Photius, Washington D. C.

1980, 44, regards δτι as an indication that Photius is not following too closely the
wording of the original.
Asmus (and Zintzen), I treat the fragments of the first Photian
reading (Φ 1-230) as the spine of the reconstructed text, yet a spine
with several missing or dislocated bones; thus, while Asmus and
Zintzen regarded the Photian order as an absolute -almost
metaphysical- concept, only recognising a disruption of the pattern
at the very end (Φ 307-312),146 I have found several cases where
the order of the original can be shown to have been changed. An
obvious example applies to the inversion of frs Φ 222,223 (146A),
which is apparent both from the disposition of the particles μέν / δέ
and from the parallel text in the Suda. Other instances concern Φ
79/78 (in 57C, 58B), Φ 82/81 (in 60) and Φ 105/104 (in 75F and
76B respectively). Yet, though I have on these few occasions
reversed the order of the fragments, on the whole I chose, like my
predecessors, to be bound by the order of Φ 1-230 and Φ 231-
306.147 Had I been bold enough to break this doublet chain and the
considerable restrictions it imposes, several excerpts would have
been placed elsewhere and the flow of the narration would have
been more natural. I am thinking of a case like Φ 25, which seems
to belong with 9,10 or 11 rather than with 27 where I was obliged
to allocate it. But I have not dared to take so bold a step and
consequently I have integrated the second Photian reading (Φ 231-
312) and the Suda articles within the framework provided by the
first Photian reading, following the clues left by Photius and with
the reservations expressed above.
Asmus had a tendency to fragment the Suda articles as a matter
of principle and to allocate their parts to several places in the work,
sometimes following indications offered by the Photian epitome,
but at other times a preconceived scheme which is certainly
logical, but lacks any objective foundations in what survives.148 A

146 Cf. BZ 18, 427 and Zintzen, p. VI. According to P. Courcelle (REA 70
(1968) 177), Φ 307-312 were added by a continuator of Photius.
147 Both T. Hagg, (Photios als Vermittler antiker Literatur: Untersuchungen
zur Technik des Referierens und Exzerpierens in der Bibliotheke, Uppsala 1975,
192-194) and W.T. Treadgold (as in n. 145,43) recognise these as pure excerpts. I
agree, with the reservations expressed above.
148 As a good philologist, Asmus understands the techniques of compilation
 typical example of this method is provided by the long lemma
‘Sarapion’ (111) whose natural place is indicated by Φ 167. A
reference to Sarapio’s “Cronian” way of life was sufficient for
Asmus to place the bulk of the article (further divided into several
smaller fragments) near the beginning of the work because of a
mention there of the Cronian life.149 In this initiative he was
followed by Zintzen who numbered the fragments accordingly (33,
34,39,41). Indeed, when setting out the methodological principles
on whose basis he attempts to reconstruct the Urtext,150 Asmus
seems to be inspired by an overwhelming confidence in Photius’
rationality. Moreover, what is presented as a possibility or a
working hypothesis in the preliminary articles, is transformed into
absolute certainties in the subsequent Life, where one finds a
scheme that is all too rigid.
Though the Suda excerptor can sometimes be shown to collate
material from various places without following an obviously
logical pattern, I have decided to keep the Suda articles in their
original form whenever I can see no objective reason for
fragmenting them. On the other hand as regards the place of
fragments in the text, whenever I could see no reason either for or
against Asmus’ allocation, I have endorsed his order rather than
introducing a new, no more plausible, choice. I must confess that I
have found it imposible to disregard Asmus’ text. Indeed if his
reconstruction did not exist, I would have possibly relegated to the
end as unclassified many more fragments and would have followed
a different order for other passages.
As Photius testifies, the Philosophical History was a long book
in some sixty chapters. Asmus thought that in what he could

and gives a shrewd analysis of the methodology of the Suda excerptor (BZ 18,439,
on the lemma ‘Isidores’, and BZ 18, 437-439, BZ 19, 266-7, for general
considerations); at the same time though his determination to proceed to what he
calls “die Auflosung der Suidasbioi in ihre Elemente” (BZ 19, 281) leads him to
arbitrary acts of surgery.
149 BZ 18, 448.
150BZ 18,443.
salvage, he had approximatively a quarter of the original. However
this may be, I have, in an attempt to allow the unity of the material
to emerge, divided the text into 159 thematic units of uneven
length, consisting of one or more Suda or Photius passages, and
have numbered them consecutively, while stating their provenance
at the end of each fragment. I can only suggest in this connection
that some of the longer units may amount to a whole chapter (e.g.
43, 51, 66,108). On the other hand, bound as I felt by the Photian
order, I have often combined in one unit brief irrelevant passages
which appear in sequence in our Epitome and make no sense
whether taken together or separately (75, 78, 79, 88, 144).
Conversely, when a sentence, however short, seemed to indicate a
step forward in the overall story, I have listed it by itself (e.g. 44).
I have excluded many dubious fragments, especially some of
the shorter ones which do not provide any substantial aid to the
understanding of the text, and I have added two myself (64 and
120A). The remainder I have divided into two categories according
to their degree of genuineness, a distinction which imposed itself
as I progressed with the work; thus, where no specific attribution to
Damascius is attested or can be adduced from a Photian parallel,
but proper names such as Isidore, Heraiscus etc. occur, I have put
an asterisk after the letter S in the Suda references to indicate that,
though it cannot be proved by formal means, the genuineness of
the fragment may be assumed. When, on the other hand, the
asterisk precedes the letter S then the claim to genuineness rests on
more tenuous grounds of either a stylistic-philological or a
thematic order. Finally, I have serious doubts as regards the
attribution of Vaticanus 1950 fo 401 to Damascius as the προθεω-
ρία of our text,151 and therefore I do not reproduce it here.
Despite the exclusion of several dubious passages and the re­
alignment or collation of others, the final result displays an overall
agreement with the order established by Asmus, whose exceptional
philological acumen must be praised, especially in the light of the

151 See A. Brinkmann, “Die Protheoria zur Biographie eines Neuplatonikers”

RM 65 (1910) 618-626. and Zintzen, pp. 2-3.
inadequate editions from which he was working. If my text
however does not present a dramatic contrast with that established
by Asmus, its interpretation differs substantially both in general
plan and individual detail; thus the nine sections (I-IX) into which
I divide the work, and whose content is summarised on pp. 71-73,
present its structure in a resolutely “un-biographical” light.

2. T ranslating the P h ilo so p h ica l H istory

Damascius’ language and style are made up of substantial

contradictions which minor both his character and his scholastic
diversity. A professional rhetorician with a considerable poetic gift
who “converted” to philosophy, Damascius displays in all his
surviving texts the same apparent incompatibility between a taste for
extreme analysis and the allusiveness of poetic diction. His style is
often metaphorical to the point of obscurity, while at other times it is
too explicit and even formula-ridden, as his text abounds in standard
quotations from the classical authors on the syllabus. On the purely
linguistic level his familiarity with the ancient authors seems to have
imbued him with a certain traditionalism which conflicts with his
temperament as a man of action and his extraordinary adaptability to
circumstances and milieus. A man vigorously engaged in his times,
Damascius was fully aware of the directions in which the language
was moving, and often opts for a “modem” usage in semantic and
even syntactic terms. This duality of the author’s linguistic
allegiance becomes more enigmatic when considered against the
fragmentary character of a text which has also been amply tampered
with by the Byzantine excerptors’ numerous interventions.
These are some of the difficulties that confronted Asmus, who
was not only working from less satisfactory editions of the
original, but also at a time when the study of late antiquity, and in
particular the cultural idiom of the Neoplatonists, had not yet
formed the subject of systematic research. It is fair to say that not
enough credit has been given him for his double achievement: the
detective and construction work that he carried out with empathy
and imagination, and the elegant and clear German into which he
has converted the bulk of our fragments.152 As I worked on
Damascius’ text my respect for Asmus grew together with a sense
of gratitude and solidarity. Indeed his only serious drawback
derives from his invariably classical understanding of Damascius’
Greek. Henry, on the other hand, who has rendered the Photian
Epitome into French, seems to have based his translation on
Asmus’ German, occasionally with comic results. In my own
attempt to “copy” the text into a modem language, the most
difficult consideration centred on the diachronic character of
Greek, as in each case a separate decision had to be made as to
the way (or ways) in which a word of a phrase was used by
Damascius. Apart from this concern, my guiding principles in
translating have been faithfulness to the original and clarity, while
elegance, I am sorry to say, had sometimes to be sacrificed as a
result.

152 A notable exception is L. Robert who praises “le beau travail de

reconstitution et classement de R. Asmus” (BCH 101 (1977) 86, n. 65).
 SUMMARY

I
(Proemium)
Egypt and Hellenism: 1- 4
Egypt and Hellenism. Under Neoplatonic auspices, Egyptian
and Greek mythology, theology and ritual are synthesised. The
fundamental Neoplatonic myth of the rending apart of Dionysus by
the Titans is merged with the national Egyptian myth of Osiris who
was tom asunder by Seth-Typhon. The symbolism suggested by
the passion of Dionysus dramatises the Platonic doctrine of
manence-progression-retum (μονή-πρόοδος-επιστροφή) and is
thus a reminder of the dichotomy unity-plurality or being­
becoming, which rules human life, and of the lonely struggle that
each incarnate soul has to engage in to be restored to unity; the
sufferings of Osiris on the other hand allude to the collective
affliction of humanity at large, and of “the sacred race” in
particular, in the Christian empire.

II
Isidore: 5-38
The theme of the book, announced in 5, is the descent of the
soul from heaven to earth, from being to becoming. Because of its
awareness of its destiny, Isidore’s soul is associated with the first
rank of humans, that of philosophers; it also has the gift of
prophecy. There follow some methodological remarks on the
biographical genre. Among the people whom Isidore met as a
young man in Alexandria was Severus, consul for 470, and with
him are introduced two of the book’s major themes, the
prosopographical and the paradoxographical. There follows a
description of Isidore from the externals to the inner man;
anecdotes relating to his life and career and maxims of his bring
the portrayal to life, while Damascius’ often apparently
irreconcilable statements about his master convey the complexity
of his personality. There emerges the portrait of a true eccentric, a
contradictory personality both as holy man and intellectual.

Ill
Alexandria: prosopography and history: 39-58
Alexandria: prosopography and history of the pagan commun­
ity since the late fourth century, punctuated by two digressions (53
and 58) which point to the dramatic events of the persecution of
the philosophers in 488-89. 'i

IV
Athens in the 470s: 59-70
The Athenian intellectual scene of the 470s, portrayed against a
background of world-wide politics and cultural history. The
section opens with Isidore’s first arrival in Athens for further
philosophical studies under Proclus some time in the early or mid-
470s.

V
Alexandria in the 470s: 71-96
Return of Isidore to Alexandria (mid to late 470s). Partly
dominated by Asclepiodotus, whose talents, connections and
peregrinations usher in a resolutely cosmopolitan ambience, this
section is also characterised by the ubiquitousness of international
politics. Pamprepius’ personality looms large, while the
inescapable connection between his indiscreet support of paganism
and the final persecution at Alexandria is highlighted. A reference
to the initial episodes of the conflict between the two communities
at Menuthis provides the opportunity for a substantial parenthesis
on Egyptian animal worship, theology, iconography, symbolism
and hieroglyphics, which may have been inspired or at least
influenced by Horapollo’s personal interest in these fields.

VI
The golden chain: 97-105
“The golden chain” or the vicious struggle for the Platonic
succession at Athens in the early 480s, while Proclus is still alive
but struck by senility.

VII
Alexandria in the 480s: 106-131
Alexandria in the 480s. People and events as witnessed by
Damascius. The Cronian Sarapio and the Typhonian Pamprepius.
Ulus’ ill-fated revolt and its consequences for the pagan
community in Alexandria where personal rivalries and hatreds are
exploited by the Monophysite Patriarch Peter Mongus. A
description of the various stages of the persecution of 488-89.

VIII
The conversion to philosophy: 132-144
Damascius’ conversion to philosophy under the auspices of
Isidore and their eventual flight from Alexandria. A description of
the itinerary followed by the two men until they reach Athens: in
Gaza, they are helped by Antony, to whom Damascius remains for
ever grateful; then they reach Bostra, where they meet Doras and
take a few excursions with him which exemplify the taste of all
three men for spiritual tourism. They all leave for Caria but not
before visiting Damascus, Heliopolis and Berytus where Isidore
meets with bad luck. After spending some time with Asclepiodotus
at Aphrodisias, they embark for Piraeus.

IX
Athens f in de siecle: 145-152
Decadence and intrigues in the Platonic School.
 ΑΑΜΑΣΚΙΟΥ

<ΦΙΑΟΣΟΦΟΣ ΙΣΤΟΡΙΑ>

1
Αιγύπτιοι τοίνυν δτι μέν παλαίτατοι άνθρώ^ων είσίν, ών
άκοή γινώσκομεν, όλίγου τι πάντων, ούδείς ούτως έστίν όψι-
μαθής δς ούχί πολλών άκήκοε λεγόντων τε και γραφόντων.
[Φ 1]

2
Α Εΐσω δέ ή τοιαύτη σοφία κρυπτόμενη έν τφ άδύτω τής μυθολό-
γου ταύτης άληθείας, οϋτως ήρεμα παραγυμνούται κατά βραχύ τφ
δυναμένψ πρός θεόν άνακλΐναι τήν ίεράν αύγήν τής ψυχής.
[Φ 2]
Β Διά μηχανής τινός άπορου καί ανθρώπινης έλπίδος εξω καθε-
στηκυίας έν άπορρήτοις τά άπόρρητα διαμηχανωμένους ύπέρ τε
σφών αύτών τής ούρανίας έλπίδος καί ύπέρ τών άλλων Αιγυ­
πτίων τής δλης εύθημοσύνης.
[Φ 231]
 D A M A S CIUS

THE PHILOSOPHICAL HISTORY

I: E g yp t an d H ellenism

1
That the Egyptians are almost the oldest race of which we have
heard, nobody is ignorant enough not to have learned from many
oral and written sources.1

2
A Wisdom of this kind, concealed in the shrine of that truth which
is expressed in myth, is thus quietly and slowly revealed to the man
who can lift up to God the sacred light of his soul.2
B [Their priests] carry out secret rites in secret places in ways
which are unfathomable and free from the hope of any reward in
this life, in the interest both of their own personal hope of heaven
and of the general welfare of the other Egyptians.3

1 According to Herodotus (11.2), the general belief that the Egyptians were the oldest
race on earth was revised at the time of Psammetichus who showed by experimental means
that this claim should be made on behalf of the Phrygians. Another tradition, espoused by
Aristotle, presents the Persian Magi as older than the Egyptians (Diogenes Laertius 1.8).
But Damascius is here referring to a religious topos, popular among philosophers since
Plato’s day (Tim. 22b for the classic quotation; cf. Criti. 108d). The literal meaning of the
word δψιμαθής, which I here translate as ‘ignorant’, is ‘of late learning’ and has the
pejorative connotation of the culturally nouveau riche: cf. Theophrastus XXVII.
2 A reminiscence of Plato’s allegory of the cave, conveyed through a verbatim
quotation from Resp. 540a, (cf. Damascius Princ. 1,70, 17; 82). We are dealing here
with the Neoplatonic understanding of myth (for a standard definition, Proclus In Remp.
1,73-79).
3 This is a summary of Iamblichus Myst. X.6-7.
Α Ό τι οί Αιγύπτιοι εσεβον θεών μάλιστα, φησίν, Όσιρίν τε και
Ίσιν, τον μέν άπαντα δημιουργεΐν νομίζοντες εΐδεσί τε καί άριθ-
μοΐς τήν ύλην διακοσμούντο, τήν δέ κατάρδουσάν τε καί πιαίνου-
σαν τήν τούτου δημιουργίαν άενάου ζωής όχετοΐς άμετρήτοις.
[Φ3]
Β Τούτον οί μέν λέγουσιν είναι τον Διόνυσον, οί δέ άλλον δν
υπό Τυφώνος δαίμονος έσπαράχθαι, καί μέγα πένθος γενέσθαι
A Among the gods, the Egyptians primarily worshipped Osiris
and Isis.4 They believed that Osiris was the universal creator,
arranging matter by form and number,5 and that Isis watered and
nurtured his creation through the innumerable channels of
overflowing life.6
B Some say that he is Dionysus; others that he is another god. He
was tom in pieces by the demon Typhon;7 this was a cause of great

4 For the Neoplatonic identity of these two deities as first and second principles of
the intellectual triad in the Iamblichan system, see Asmus. Leben, 141.
5 These are the Platonic ideas and the Pythagorean numbers: Damascius In Parm.
98, 4 ff.
6 As this phrase includes two characteristically Chaldaean terms (ζωή, όχετός) and
constitutes an almost complete hexameter line, I suggest that Damascius may here be
quoting a Chaldaean oracle, which I would reconstruct as follows:
<Τσίν τε> άενάου ζωής δχετοϊς άμετρήτοις.
For the interpretation of the myth in straightforward Platonic terms, see Plutarch Is.
53-54, 64 and Sallustius De diis 4, who follows Plutarch while simplifying him. Faithful
to his “natural” interpretation of myths, Porphyry had identified Osiris with both the
creative principle and water (the Nile): De imag. ap. Eus. PE III. 11.51 (= fir. 360,37ff.).
7 Typhon was the last and most terrible in the series of monsters who challenged the
rule of Zeus, and therefore he remained a potent symbol of the forces of evil
(Damascius In Phaed. II. 142). Like the Titans and the Giants who preceded him, he
represents in Neoplatonism an allegory of Christian misrule, especially in his capacity
to create confusion by fathering the winds which cause destruction and death (cf.
Hesiod Theog. 869-880 and Marinus VP 15: Proclus has to swim through life
πνευμάτων τυφωνείων άντιπνεόντων τή έννόμω ζωή). In the present context Typhon is
singled out by Damascius in preference to the other monsters because of his special
connection with Egypt: according to the legend, when the Olympians sensed his
approach, they fled in panic to Egypt where most of them took animal forms and hid in
the desert; only Zeus and Athena kept their original shape and pursued the monster.
More importantly, Typhon was identified with the Egyptian Seth, who killed his brother
Osiris, tore him limb from limb and threw his remains into the Nile, thus polluting both
water and air, until Osiris was avenged by his son Horns and order was re-established
on the earth: cf. Diodorus 1.23.6-7, 17-18 and Plutarch Is. 13-19, 49, together with
Griffiths' commentary, pp. 388-390; for the persistence of the myth, Nonnus 1.48Iff.
On the related myth of Dionysus and the Titans, and its symbolism in Neoplatonic
 τοΐς Αιγυπτίους, καί τοϋ σπαραγμού μνήμην ποιείσθαι έπί πάντα
τόν χρόνον.
[S* III568,31 (Όσιρις)]
C Όσιρις, Διόνυσος-
[S III568,14 (όσιον χωρίον ρ)]

4
Α 'Ιερατική καί φιλοσοφία ούκ άπό των αϊτών άρχονται άρχών-
άλλ’ ή μέν φιλοσοφία άπό τής μιάς τών πάντων αίτιας εις τήν
υποστάθμην τών δντων καθήκουσα, διά μέσων τών όλων γενών,
θείων τε καί τών μετά θεούς κρειττόνων καί έν τρίτιρ, φασί, βήμα-
τι φαινομένων. Τήν δέ Ιερατικήν, ή έστι θεών θεραπεία, έντεΰθέν 5
ποθεν άπό τής τρίτης καί περικοσμίου γενέσεως άναδήσασθαι τά
πείσματα τής άναγωγοΰ σωτηρίας - άπό τών περικοσμίων αίτιών
άρχεσθαι καί περί ταΰτα πραγματεύεσθαι, ψυχών Ιπερί άθανα-
σίας, ότι κατά τά αυτά καί Αιγυπτίους φιλοσοφεΐται- τών τε έν
"Αιδου μυρίων λήξεων παντοίων πρός άρετήν καί κακίαν άφωρι- ίο
σμένων, έτι τών περί τόν βίον μυρίων μεταβολών, ώς άλλοτε έν
άλλοις σώμασιν ή γένεσιν ζφων καί φυτών διατριβουσών. Έ ν
γάρ ούδέν έστι τών καθόλου προειρημένων τοΐς έκατέρωθι φιλο­
σόφους, ώστε καί φςχδίαν είναι τήν έφαρμογήν τφ βουλομένφ προσ-
αρμόττειν τοΐς Αίγυπτίοις τά τών Ελλήνων. Αιγύπτιοι δέ ταΰτά 15

4Α cf. S IV 267,18.
Φ 232 solum 5 έντεΰθεν - 7 σωτηρίας.
5 post φαινομένων verba 12 §ν - 15 Ελλήνων habet S: transposui.
5 έντεΰθεν S: άλλ’ έντεΰθεν Φ. 6 άπό - 7 σωτηρίας om. S.
 sorrow to the Egyptians, and his dismemberment is everlastingly
remembered.8
C Osiris, Dionysus.9

4
A Theurgy and philosophy do not stem from the same principles.10
Philosophy descends from the one cause of all things to the lowest
level of existence through all the intermediate orders -the divine,
the next in excellence after the divine and, on the so-called third
level, the visible.11 As for theurgy, which is the worship of the gods,
it ties the ropes of heavenbound salvation on the third, pericosmic
level, that of generation;12 it has its root in the pericosmic causes
and this is its subject -the immortality of the soul (on which the
philosophy of the Egyptians is the same), the infinite variety of
fates allotted in Hades according to one’s good or bad qualities, and
also the infinite changes in life, how at different times souls inhabit
different human bodies or different species of animals and plants.13
Of all the above mentioned, nothing is exclusive to philosophers on
one side [of the Mediterranean] only; so that it is easy, if one
wishes, to adapt Greek notions to conform with Egyptian ones. The

theology, see Proclus In Remp. I, 174, 23 and esp. Damasci us In Phaed. 1.1-13, who
surveys all previous literature on the subject. It is worth pointing out that in the
Hermetica τυφώνιος means brutal and deprived of logic (JIerm. S XXV. 8).
* A reference to the variety of Osirian festivals and rituals from Pharaonic times to
Damascius’ own day, some of which had crystallised into the mysteries performed all
over the Roman world from 26th October to 3rd November; these mysteries
commemorated the cycle of the passion of Osiris and the finding of his members
(εϋρεσις / inventio) by the faithful: Plutarch Is. 39.
9 This may well be the introduction to 3B slightly misplaced by the Suda copyist.
10 For the famous distinction between philosophers and hieratics, Damascius In
Phaed. 1.172 (quoted above, p. 57); cf. ibid. 11.109.
11 For a forceful affirmation of this, Iamblichus, Myst. Vin.3.
12 This is indeed the function of theurgy, to raise the soul to the intelligent universe
by means of “the ropes” of worship: Iamblichus Myst. X.6. The phrase immediately
following (it... causes), which I treat as an apposition, may be merely a Suda
simplification of what precedes.
13 Here we have an example of the way in which the Neoplatonists had absorbed
Pythagorean eschatology; cf. Damascius In Phaed. I. 495.
 είσιν ot πρώτοι φιλοσοφοΰντες· άπό γάρ των Αιγυπτίων Εκαστα
τούτων οΐ Πυθαγόρειοι έξήνεγκαν είς τούς Έλληνας.
[S I I 613,14 (Ιερατική) + Φ 232]
Β “έκ τρίτων”άντί τοϋ “τρίτον”.
[Φ 4 ]
C Καί τούτ’ άν εΐη θεοκρασία, μάλλον δέ ένωσις παντελής, έπά-
νοόος τών ήμετέρων ψυχών πρός τό θειον έπιστρεφομένων καί
συναθροιζομένων άπό τού πολλού μερισμού, καί τί γάρ ού λέγω
σπαραγμού διαρρήδην, δν ένταΰθα φυεϊσαι καί σώμα γήινον λα-
βοΰσαι διεσπάσθησαν αύταί άφ’ έαυτών, καί πολλαχή διφκίσθη- 5
σαν ύπό τών Τυφωνείων τφ δντι καί άλλως γηγενών παθημάτων,
δντων γε ού κατά τόν Τυφώνα μόνον, άλλ’ έτι οίμαι καί τούτου
πολυπλοκωτέρων.
[Φ5]
ϊ
 Egyptians were the first men to philosophise on these things.
Indeed it is from the Egyptians that the Pythagoreans introduced all
these matters to the Greeks.14
B “in the third place” instead of “thirdly” .15
C And that would be the fusion with the divine, or rather the
perfect union, the return of our souls to God, as they turn back and
reassemble themselves after the multiple division -one may even
say after being rent asunder when, having flown hither and taken an
earthly body,16 they were tom apart from their own selves and
scattered in many different places through sufferings which were
truly Typhonian and in other ways Titanic -indeed not only like
those imposed by Typhon, but even more tortuous than his.17

14 A remark along the lines of 1; cf. also Diodorus 1.96.3-4 and Ammianus
XXII. 16.20-22. On the genuine synthesis in the religious sphere between the Greek and
the Egyptian cultures in late antiquity, Bowersock, Hellenism, 55-69; JHS 113,12; and
R.S. Bagnall, Egypt in late antiquity, 323-325 (some pertinent remarks on the culture of
the Elites).
15 A linguistic comment by Photius.
16 Man was created from the ashes of the Titans who, having cut Dionysus into
pieces and devoured him, were subsequently incinerated by Zeus’ thunderbolt; thus the
human race owes its origin to a crime and a punishment, while at the same time
partaking of the divine. For Damascius’ treatment of the myth, In Phaed. I. 8.
17 A reminiscence of Plato Phaedr. 230a, where Socrates compares himself to
Typhon inasmuch as he lacks self-knowledge. For a further reference to the same
passage, see below 112A. For the Neoplatonic interpretation of the Titanic war,
Damascius Princ. Π, 205; 210; Proclus In Crat, 55.5ff
 5
Α Άλλ’ σδ δή ένεκα τόν λόγον άπαντα τούτον ήγείραμεν, καιρός
άν ειτι προσαποδοΰναι, καί άμα άνακαλέσασθαι τήν διήγησιν έξω
φερομένην τής ύποθέσεως.
[Φ6]
Β Καί έχεται αΰτη καταπτάσα τής ούρανίας άψΐδος τού χθονίου
βίου.
[Φ 7 ]
C νΩμην αυτόν κεκραγέναι καταβάντα είς γένεσιν έγώ δέ καρρό-
θεν ένθάδε άφικόμην.
[S I I I 35, 30 (καρρόθεν)]

6 ί
Α ’Αλλά τάχα άν τις ύπολάβοι τό λεγόμενον μδειν μακαρίας.
Έτοιμον γάρ είς έρώτησιν πόθεν, ώ έταΐρε, δήλον, εΐποι τις άν,
δτι δ σός φιλόσοφος άπό τοΰδε τού έθνους ώρμητο τών ψυχών;
Έγώ δέ πρός ταϋτα άποκρινοΰμαι οΰτι γε μαχητικώς ώσπερ έν
δικαστηρίφ, άλλα πρμότερον, ουδέ γε διά σπουδής οΐας έν διαλέ- s
κτψ πρός τό άκριβέστατον άμιλλωμένης, άλλ’ οΐα μέτρα βιογρα­
φίας, αυτά μόνα, άπερ άληθή είναι πιστεύω καί τού έμοΰ καθηγε-
μόνος άκήκοα, προφερόμενος.
[Φ 8]
Β Προύργου νενόμικα καί τούτων κάκείνων τήν άμετρίαν φυ­
γών, δσα προσήκε ταΐς παλαιαϊς ίστορίαις, ταϋτα προσαρμόσαι.
[*S IV 241,14 (προύργου ρ>]
 5
A But it is time both to state the reason why we embarked on this
account and also to recall the argument which is being diverted
from its subject-matter.
B Flying down from the vault of heaven,18 it19 attached itself to
life on earth.
C And I thought that he was shouting as he descended into
generation: “I have arrived here from a better place”.20

6
A But possibly one might think that, as the proverb goes, “I sing a
song of bliss”;21 and indeed it would be appropriate to ask “How
can you prove, my friend, that your philosopher descended from
that order of souls?”22 To these words I will answer not in an
aggressive spirit, as one does in a law court, but calmly; not with
the zeal which strives for absolute accuracy in argument, but
according to the rules of biography, putting forward only what I
believe to be true and what I have heard from my master.
Β I thought it beneficial to avoid the excess of both these things
which befitted ancient tales and to adapt them.23

18 The passage alludes to the Platonic description of the descent of the souls in
Phaedr. 246-248; note in particular the expression τήν ΐιπουράνιον άψϊδα (247ab).
19 This may refer both to Isidore’s soul and to the argument of the book.
20 Cf. the lament of the soul which is about to be incarcerated in a body in Herm. S
ΧΧΙΠ. 34-37 (from the discourse of Isis to Homs, known as Kore Kosmou).
21 i.e. “I talk nonsense”.
22 The Hermaic order, for which see below, 13 and cf. 152. The Neoplatonists
believed that before their descent the souls formed groups under the protection of
individual gods who each imparted to them his or her own characteristic: Proclus In
Tim. Ill, 279 and 84E (according to Isidore, Iacobus’ soul was Asclepeian). Proclus too
was part of the Hermaic chain (VP 28); cf. his In Tim. II, 294.
23 This programmatic statement, which discusses methodology in the context of
literary genre, could have been equally plausibly placed after 29A.
 Ή ν δ ’ ό Σεβήρος 'Ρωμαίος καί 'Ρωμαίων πατήρ κατά την τού
νόμου άξίωσιν. Άλλα τε διηγείτο έν Άλεξανδρείμ συνδιαιτώμε-
νος καί δτι λίθον έθεάσατο έν φ σελήνης έγίνετο σχήματα μετα-
μορφουμένης παντοΐα μέν, άλλοτε δ’ άλλα πρός ήλιον αύξομένης
καί μειουμένης, ένόντα τφ λίθφ καί αύτόν τον ήλιον· δθεν ή φήμη 5
τούς τοιούτους λίθους καλεΐ συνοδίτας. Καί ήλίτην δέ λίθον έλε-
γεν έωρακεναι, ούχ olov οί πολλοί έωράκαμεν, άκτινας διαφαίνον-
τα άπό τοΰ βάθους χρυσίτιδας, άλλά δίσκον ήλιοειδή κείμενον μέ­
σον τοΰ λίθου, σφαίραν αύτόθεν πυρός ώς Ιδεϊν άπ’ αύτής δέ τάς
άκτινας έκθρώσκειν έως έπί τήν ΐτυν· είναι γάρ σφαιροειδή καί ίο
δλον τόν λίθον. Ίδεΐν δέ καί σεληνίτην, ού τόν ΰδατι τεγγόμενον,
εΐτα έκφαίνοντα τόν μηνίσκον, καί διά τοΰτο ύδροσεληνίτην κα-
λούμενον, άλλά κατά φύσιν τήν έαυτοΰ τρεπόμενον δτε καί δπως
ή σελήνη τρέποιτο, θαυμάσιον χρήμα τοΰτό γε φΰσεώς.
ΙΦ9 + Φ233]

8
A Τυφλής δέ καί άσαφοϋς τής φήμης περιπλανωμένης...
[Φ 234]
Β Ό μέν ούν πλεΐστος λόγος άπολωλέναι τόν ΑΙγΰπτιον, διεφέ-
ρετο δέ δμως καί σωτηρίας τις άγγελος φήμη.
[Φ 235]

9
Α Ό γοϋν ’Ισίδωρος έφκει μέν τό ζητούμενον είδότι, λέγειν δ’
οΰκ ήβούλετο.
[Φ 10]
Β Καί τούτο δέ μαθεΐν έξ όνείρου θαυμάσιου τινός έναργέστατα
διετείνετο.
[Φ 11]

7 Φ 9 solum usque ad 5 ήλιον.

1 ήν - 2 άξίωσιν Φ 9: καί δή Σεβήρος άνήρ τής Ρώμης πατρίκιος Φ 233.
2 άλλα - 3 έθεάσατο Φ 233: δς έλεγε καί λίθον Ιδεΐν Φ 9. 4 δ’ Φ 233: δέ Φ 9.
 7
Severus was a Roman and had the legal status of a patrician.24
Among the stories he told when we both lived in Alexandria was
that he had seen a stone on which appeared the shapes of the moon
in its various phases, now waxing, now waning in its relationship to
the sun. The sun too was contained in the stone, which is why these
stones are commonly called “synoditae”.25 He also said that he had
seen a sun-stone, not of the type that many of us have seen,
projecting golden rays from its depth, but with a sun-shaped disc
lying in the middle of the stone and thus giving the impression of a
fiery ball from which rays leapt out to the very rim; for indeed the
whole stone is round. He had also seen a moon-stone -not the one
which when moistened reveals a crescent, and for this reason is
called a water-moon-stone- but one which changes by its own
nature as and when the moon changes, a true wonder of nature.

8
A While the obscure and vague rumour circulated...
B The general view was that the Egyptian had died, but there was
also a rumour that told of his deliverance.26

9
A And Isidore gave the impression of knowing the matter in hand,
but did not want to speak.
B This too he claimed to have learned most clearly from a
miraculous dream.

24 Consul for 470 and a favourite of the “graecus imperator” Anthemius (467-472):
see Stein-Palanque I, 393-395 and below, 51 and 77A. For a characteristic anecdote
illustrating Severus’ altruism, Malchus, ff. 3.
25 i.e. relating to the conjunction of the sun with the moon.
26 The reference may be to Pamprepius; see below, 77CD, 112B and 115C with
note.
C Καί γάρ ήν 6 μέγας Ισίδωρος είς τοσοϋτον εύ ήκων φύσεώς τε
καί τύχης όνειρωττούσης, ώστε έμοιγε θαυμάζειν έπεισι πολλάκις
άποπειρωμένφ των έργων άποβαινόντων τής τοιαύτης αύτοϋ
προρρήσεως. ΕΙσί μέν δή καί Άλεξανδρεΐς όλίγου πάντες εύφυείς
τε καί ευτυχείς όνειροπολείσθαι· καί τούς όνείρους έκεΐνοι διά s
τούτο καί νϋν χρησμούς δνομάζουσιν.
[Φ 12]
D Καί τάχα άν ήδε ή πάθη άπροαίρετος άν εΐη, καί διά τούτο
συμβαίνοι άν Ισως καί ταΐς άκηράτοις.
[Φ 236]
Ε Έγρηγορότι μέν τφ Ίσιδώρψ ού παρήν ή δρρητος αύτοψία- ού
γάρ οΰτω λαμπράν ούδέ βαθεΐαν παρείχετο την μαρμαρυγήν ώστε
καί ύπό τών αισθητών έπί θάτερα άνταυγούντων έπηλυγαζομένην
είσω δμως άνάπτεσθαι καί διαλάμπειν. ’Αλλ’ δτε έξω. τούτων καθί­
στατο ή ψυχή, μηκέτι τής αίσθήσεως ένεργούσης, ήδ^ δέ παρειμέ- 5
νης ύπό τού ύπνου, τότε μονουμένη καθ’ έαυτήν ή άεί ένδον
έστώσα τού θείου άστραπή, καί άπαλλαττομένη τών έμποδίων,
έπί μάλλον άνεζωπυρεΐτο καί έξεχεΐτο πρός τό έκτος έπί
πλεΐστον, έως άν καί αύτήν καταστράψειεν έπ’ έσχάτφ τήν φαν­
τασίαν. ίο
[Φ13]
F Ό τι διττόν έλεγεν έκ τούτου τόν τρόπον τών θείων αύτοψιών,
τόν μέν αισθητικόν τών έγρηγορότων, φαντασιώδη δέ τών καθευ-
δόντων, άληθή δέ έκάτερον.
[Φ 14]

10
Α Δαιμονίως πως οίωνισάμενος τό μέλλον.
[*S III 627, 7 (οίωνισάμενος)]
Β Πάντα αύτφ κατά τάς προφητείας άπήντησεν.
[*S 1284, 8 (άπήντησεν ρ)]

11
Νέφ δέ δντι θαυμαστόν τι συμβέβηκεν. Αδελφής γάρ υιός

11 cf. S Π 12,18, S I I 562,29.

C The great Isidore27 was so blessed by nature and fortune with
prophetic dreams that my own experience of the outcome of events
often led me to marvel at his powers of divination. Indeed nearly all
Alexandrians are blessed by nature and by fortune in their dreams
and this is why even now they refer to dreams as “oracles”.
D It would appear that this state is not the result of conscious
effort; this may be why it tends to happen especially to unpolluted
[souls].28
E When Isidore was awake the ineffable vision disappeared. For it
was not bright and profound enough to remain alight and to shine
when overshadowed by the rival brilliance of sensible things. But
when, paralysed by sleep, sense-perception was no longer active,
and the soul stood apart from these things, then, isolated in itself
and liberated from all obstacles, the ever-present inner spark of the
divine was re-kindled and poured out its light to its full extent until
it finally outdazzled the very world of illusion itself.29
F He therefore talked of the dual nature of divine visions -that
which is perceived by the senses when one is awake, and that which
proceeds from the imagination when one is asleep- and declared
them both truthful.

10
A Divining the future by supernatural means.
B Everything happened for him according to the prophecies.

11
And when he was still a young man an extraordinary thing

27 A theophoric name meaning “the gift of Isis", cf. below, n. 333.

28 Asmus links this passage with ISA (flZ 18, 446-7). The word άκήρατος in this
context is a technical term; Iamblichus uses it in his treatise On the Soul to describe the
state enjoyed by the highest type of soul as it enters the body (Stobaeus I, 380, 23 ff.).
29 For a case when the divine vision intrudes on the world of the awake, see 96A,
and cf. 9F and 75B.
 αύτφ καί ήλικιώτης έτη όκτωκαίδεκα γεγονώς, έπιδειξάμενος
ευθύς έκ νέων φύσεώς τινα φώμην δαιμονίαν, άπό τού τέγους
πεσών έτελεύτα παραχρήμα τόν βίον καί πένθους έπ’ αύτφ μεγά­
λου συνεστώτος, έπιφοιτών ένύπνιος τφ Ίσιδώρφ τούτον πάρε- 5
μυθεΐτο.
[S* I I 668,25 (Ισίδωρος 631 pp)]

12
Α ’Απαλλαγήν ήτει τού κατακλύζοντος όχετοΰ τής γενέσεως.
[Φ 15]
Β Ό δέ ’Ισίδωρος διαπτύων τήν γένεσιν άεί πρός θεόν έτέτατο
τήν ψυχήν. Καί ούδέν ήν ίδέίν ή άκοϋσαι φθεγγόμενον ή τά αύτά
περί τών αύτών {ή} περί άρετής καί κακίας.
[S* 1514,18 ζγένεσις 135)]
C Καταβοών δέ των αισθήσεων πασών, μάλλον τών άλλων τής
άπτικής κατεβόα- είναι γάρ αύτήν τφ δντι χθονίαν καί άντίτυπον
καί κατασπώσαν τήν ψυχήν εις τόν τής γενέσεως άέναον όχετόν.
[Φ 312]

13
Ή ν δέ Ιδεΐν δ Ισίδωρος έμφρων καί πρεσβυτικός, έτι δ’
έμβριθής καί βεβαιότροπος. Τό μέν πρόσωπον όλίγου τετράγωνον
ήν, Έρμου λογίου τύπος Ιερός· οι δέ όφθαλμοί, πώς μέν άν φρά-
σαιμι τήν έν αύτοΐς Ιδρυμένην χαρίεσσαν άληθώς Άφροδίτην,
πώς δ’ άπαγγείλαιμι τήν ένοϋσαν αύτοΐς Άθηνάν σοφωτάτην; 5
Ούκ άν δέ φθάνοιμι λέγων αύτούς άπό τών έναντίων εις τό αύτό
συνηρμοσμένους Ιν είδος άμήχανον, έστώτας άμα βεβαίους καί
έπίτροχα κινουμένους· πώς φάναι τό παν έν τφ αύτφ καί περί τό
αύτό δινουμένους, άμα μέν τό σεμνόν άμα δέ τό χαρίεν έπιφαίνον-
τας, βαθυτέρους τούς αύτούς καί άπλουστέρους είναι βουλομέ- ίο
νους; 'Απλώς δ’ είπεΐν, άγάλματα ήσαν όφθαλμοί έκεΐνοι τής

12Β 3 del. Zintzen.

 happened to him: his sister’s son, who was eighteen years old like
himself, and had from a very young age displayed astonishing
strength, fell from the roof and was instantly killed. There was great
mourning at his death, but he frequently appeared to Isidore in his
sleep and consoled him.
12
A He was seeking deliverance from the overflowing channel30 of
generation.
B Spitting upon generation, Isidore continually extended his soul
towards God; and he was never to be seen or heard talking except in
the same words on the same subjects: good and evil.
C While denouncing all the senses, he denounced the sense of
touch more than the others, for it is truly earth-bound and solid,
pulling the soul down towards the ever-flowing channel of
generation.31
13
Isidore’s appearance was that of a sensible, elderly man,
dignified and resolute. His face was almost square, his divine
model being that of Logios Hermes.32 As for his eyes, how can I
describe the true charm of Aphrodite herself that resided in them,
how can I express the very wisdom of Athena that was contained in
them? I would never stop saying that they were an unimaginably
harmonious combination of opposites, standing still and, at the
same moment, moving animatedly. How can I describe how they
moved ceaselessly both in and around the same point, conveying at
once dignity and charm, profound and straightforward at will.33 To

30 Note the Chaldaean term όχετός, which also occurs in 3A and 12C.
31 On the “materiality” of the sense of touch, Proclus In Tim. II, 90,22.
32 In a very interesting passage of his Commentary on the Parmenides Damascius
stresses the theological dimension of geometrical figures, refers to the Pythagorean
practice according to which particular geometric figures were consecrated to particular
gods, and cites the specific connection between Hermes and the figure of the square
(127). The hagiographical topos connecting Isidore with Hermes hints at Proclus, who
had learned from a dream that he belonged to “the chain of Hermes” and also that he
possessed the soul of the Pythagorean Nicomachus of Gerasa (VP 28); cf. above, 6.
33 Cf. 59A.
 ψυχής άκριβή, ού μόνης γε, άλλα καί της ένοικούσης αύτή θείας
άπορροής.
ΓΦ 16]

14
AL δέ γε αισθήσεις μετρίως αΐ)τφ διέκειντο προς μόνην ύπηρε-
τοΰσαι την χρείαν. Καί ούχί αί αισθήσεις μόναι, άλλά καί τό κήρι-
νον έκμαγεΐον, ή φαντασία, ούτε πρός μνήμην τι των πολλών δια-
φέρουσα καί τής λήθης ού τό παράπαν άπηλλαγμένη. Καί γάρ
ήβουλήθη αυτόν ό θεός, ώς εοικε, ψυχήν μάλλον δντα έπιδεΐξαι ή 5
τό συναμφότερον μετά τού σώματος, καί την φιλοσοφίαν ού τφ
συναμφοτέρω έναποθεΐναι, άλλ’ αύτή μόνη τή ψυχή ένιδρϋσαι.
Ώ ς εγωγε ένίοις ήδη περιτετύχηκα τά μέν έξω φιλοσοψοΰσι
λαμπρώς Ιν τε μνήμη βαθείμ πολλών δοξασμάτων καί έν άγχι-
στρόφφ δεινότητι συλλογισμών άπεράντων καί έν1δυνάμει συχνή ίο
δαιμόνιας αίσθήσεως, εισω δέ τά τής ψυχής άποροϋσι καί πενομέ-
νοις άληθοϋς έπιστήμης.
[Φ Π]

14 cf. S m i l l , 8.
 put it simply, those eyes were the true images of his soul, and not of
the soul alone, but of the divine emanation34 dwelling in it.

14
His senses were moderately acute, merely serving his needs;
and not only the senses, but also the wax mould which is the
imagination35 did not surpass the average as regards its memory nor
was it altogether free of forgetfulness.36 For it seems that God
wanted to show that he was a soul rather than a combination of soul
and body, and that he had not deposited philosophy in this
combination but had established it in the soul alone.
I have indeed chanced upon some who are outwardly splendid
philosophers in their rich memory of a multitude of theories; in the
shrewd flexibility of their countless syllogisms; in the constant
power of their extraordinary perceptiveness. Yet within they are
poor in matters of the soul and destitute of true knowledge.

34 This is a crucial Neoplatonic term, and one which sharply distinguishes Hellenic
from Judaeo-Christian metaphysics where God manifests himself in the act o f creation
rather than the process of emanation. As Jean Trouillard has succintly put it: “la
difference entre procission et creation n’est pas Γ opposition entre une expansion de
nature et une initiative personnelle, mais la distinction entre une conception
metaphysique et une expression psychologique de la libertd creatrice” (‘Procdssion
neoplatonicienne et creation judeo-chritienne’, Melanges Trouillard, 1981,10).
35 A reference to a famous Platonic passage (Theaet. 191c); for a fuller commentary
on this enigmatic expression see Iamblichus Myst. X.2.286.18-287.3. According to
Proclus (In Crat. 67, 24ff.) φαντασία, in the sense of a product of the imagination, is
lower than δόξα, let alone έπιστήμη. Elsewhere Proclus (In Tim. ΙΠ, 286, 20ff.)
describes φαντασία as the upper boundary of the lower soul. For Damascius (In Phaed.
1.111), φαντασία is “the last garment and the most difficult to cast off” on the cognitive
level, as is ambition on the level of appetite.
36 Note the contrast with Proclus, whose power of memory is praised on several
occasions by Marinus (VP 4,5,20).
A Et δέ που θυμούμενος έωράτο καί άγανακτών, άλλά τοϋ λογι­
σμού ήγουμένου, καί δ θυμός δή κατόπιν εΐπετο. Ουδέ γάρ οίός τε
ήν γίνεσθαι πράος ούδέ δθυμος έν τφ έλέγχφ των άνθρωπίνων
πονηρευμάτων. Ώ ν γάρ έτοιμότατος εις ευεργεσίαν, έτι καί τού­
του προχειρότερος ήν είς έπιτίμησιν τής πονηριάς. Διό καί θαμά 5
δή πολλοΐς πρσσέκρουεν, ούκ άνεχόμενος αυτών τήν κακίαν ύπο-
κορίζεσθαι, ούδέ μελετών άντί τής άληθινής φιλίας τήν πολυάρα-
τον κολακείαν.
[Φ 18]
Β 'Αμαρτάνοντι έπέπληττε καί άδικοΰντα ήλεγχε καί άνέστελλε
τού άδικεϊν πατρική, ναι μά τόν, ό γενναίος τή παρρησίμ.
[*S III 443,3 (ναι μά τόν 97)]
C Ούτε φιλαιτίως ούτε έθελέχθρως πρός ούδένα διέκειτο.
1 [Φ 19]

16
Α Τά βέλτιστα παραινών, καί παροξύνων τφ λόγφ τούς έν τφ
έργφ βλακεύοντας. Ούδεμιάς γοϋν έτίθετο κακίας έλάττω τήν
φαθυμίαν, άπασών δέ σχεδόν τήν μεγίστην.
[Φ 237 + S 1474,16 (βλακεύει ρ)]
Β Καί αύτφ μέν ούδείς έπεκάλει τών πώποτε φίλων ούτε δκνου
πρόφασιν ούτε μαλακιζομένην τινά άναβολήν έν ταΐς χρείαις,
ούτε φαθυμίαν άργίας έκγονον ή δειλίας. Ό δέ πολλοΐς έπεκάλει
τών φίλων τά τοιαΰτα έγκλήματα.
[*S Π 337,2 (έπεκάλει ρ)]

ISA cf. S IV 671,18.

15Β 1 άνέστελλε ν.1.: άνέστειλε S.
16Α Φ solum usque ad 2 βλακεύοντας.
1 τά βέλτιστα παραινών Φ: om. S. 1 έν τφ ίργψ Φ: έν έργψ S.
 15
A If he was ever seen in a state of anger or indignation, it was
nevertheless his judgement that led the way with anger following
behind.37 For he was incapable of behaving in a mild or passionless
manner when pronouncing on human wickedness. Extremely quick
to do good deeds, he was even quicker to censure vice; this is why
he often came into conflict with many people, as he could not bear
to gloss over their wickedness; nor did he practise the accursed
flattery instead of true friendship.
B He rebuked error, and exposed injustice and courageously
checked wrong-doing with truly paternal frankness.
C He did not harbour a censorious or resentful disposition towards
anybody.

16
A Giving the best advice and stimulating with his words those who
were sluggish in action, as he considered sloth to be as bad as any
vice, indeed almost the greatest of them all.38
B None of his friends ever accused him of making excuses for
inaction or timorous hesitation in times of need, nor of the
inactivity which is bom of sloth or cowardice.39 But he himself
brought such charges against many of his friends.

37 Proclus is described in very similar terms by Marinus VP 16.

38 Cf. Marinus VP 16 on sloth as a terrible vice. In the Mithraic scale of values sloth
was the last and gravest vice of which one was divested as the fully saved initiate left
behind the planetary universe for the sphere of the fixed stars.
39 For the vocabulary cf. Plato Leg. 901e. For the attitude, 124.
C Τοιαΰτα ό ήμέτερος έπεπόνθει φιλόσοφος ύπ’ έρωτος μέν τής
περί τά άνθρώπινα πράγματα διορθώσεως, έχθρας δέ καί μίσους
άδιαλλάκτου τών κακοήθων έπιτηδευμάτων.
[Φ 20]

17
Άγχίνους δέ ών καί έπιστρεφής, δμως τι καί εύπαράγωγον
έπεδείκνυτο. Τών μέν γάρ έπιεικών είναι προσποιούμενων
φςχ,δίως άν τις αύτόν παρήγαγεν, άτε ούκ έπιφέροντα έπί τούτον
άκριβή έξέτασιν διά τό τής έπιεικείας άνύποπτον ό δέ τής προ-
λαμβανούσης υποψίας άξιος ούκ άν αύτόν έλαθεν ένεδρεύων 5
ούδέ πλέκων δόλους.
[Φ21]

17 cf. S Π 384, 20.

C This is what our philosopher suffered through his desire to
rectify the affairs of mankind, and his loathing and irreconcilable
hatred for evil-minded behaviour.

17
Though he was sharp-witted and alert, he was nevertheless
capable of a certain credulity, and anyone who pretended to be a
decent person could easily have deceived him since he would not
distrust this “decency” and put it to a strict test. But a man who
aroused suspicion from the outset would not succeed in laying a
trap or weaving a plot against him.
 O rt τριών δέ δντων μερών ή είδών της ψυχής, ή δπως άν τις
έθέλοι καλεΐν, τριττήν έφασκε γίνεσθαι πολιτείαν, Ιχουσαν μέν
έκάστην τάς τρεις, άλλά τφ κρατοΰντι ένί τό παν μορφουμένην καί
όνομαζομένην τφ έπικρατοϋντι. Καί τήν μέν προϊέναι μάλιστα
κατά λόγον, ήν δν τις οίμαι τόν έπί Κρόνου βίον έπονομάσειεν ή 5
τήν χρυσήν γενεάν ή τό θεών άγχίσπορον γένος, οΐα έν σχήματι μύ­
θου σεμνύνουσιν οί έν τφ τρίποδι τής Μούσης καθήμενοι ποιηταί·
τήν δέ κατά θυμόν, διανισταμένην έπί πολέμους καί μάχας καί ώς
έπίπαν φάναι, τήν περί πρωτείων καί δόξης άγωνιζομένην, οΐαν
γενέσθαι τήν έπί τής ιστορίας έκάστοτε θρυλουμένην άκούομεν ίο
τήν δέ κατ’ έπιθυμίαν, πανταχή διαρρέουσαν καί ύπό τρυφής άκο-
λάστου διεφθαρμένην, ταπεινά καί γυναικεία φρονούσαν, δειλίμ
σύνοικον καί έν πάση ύηνείςι καλινδουμένην, φιλοχρήμονα, μικρο­
πρεπή, δουλεύειν άσφαλώς έθέλουσαν, ούδέν τίμιον· ούδέ έλεύθε-
ρον διαπραττομένην, άνδραποδώδη καί άσθενή, γαστρί καί αίδοί- is
οις άεί τήν εύδαιμονίαν μετρούσαν ούδέ θυμφ γενναίφ χρωμένην
οΐον σώμα παρειμενον έν μιφ χώρμ κείμενον έκνενευρισμένον,
ούδέ κινεισθαι έτι δυνάμενον καί πολλφ χαμαιπετεστέραν έπεδεί-
κνυτο τήν ζωήν τών νύν έν τή γενέσει πολιτευόμενων άνθρωπων.
[Φ 22 + Φ 238 + S IV 852, 19 (ψυχή ρ)]

18 cf. S IV 637, 10; S IV 637, 17.

Φ 22 solum usque ad 7 ποιηταί.
1 δτι - 7 ποιηταί: δτι τριών δντων ειδών τής ψυχής τριττή καί ή πολιτεία, καί
έχει μέν έκάστη τάς τρεις, άλλ' ένί διαμορφοΰται καί όνομάζεται τφ έπικρα-
τοϋντι. Καί λόγιρ μέν Ιθύνεται, ώς δ έπί Κρόνου βίος, ή λεγομένη χρυσή γενεά, ή
τό θεών άγχίσπορον γένος, οΐα έν σχήματι μύθου σεμνύνουσιν οΐ έν τφ τρίποδι
τής Μούσης καθήμενοι ποιηταί. Φ 238.
δτι μέρη τής ψυχής ή είδη τρία- λογιζόμενον, θυμούμενον, έπιθυμοΰν.
άναγκαίον ούν καί τριττή πολιτεία έγένετο, έχουσα έκάστη τάς τρεις, άλλά τφ
κρατοΰντι ένί τό π&ν μορφουμένη καί τήν μέν προϊέναι κατά λόγον, ήν &ν τις
τήν έπί Κρόνου όνομάσειε ζωήν καί πολιτείαν. S.
1 δτι om. Φ 22. 3 καί - 4 έπικρατοϋντι om. Φ 22 4 όνομαζομένην
scripsi. 7olom . Φ 22. 8 τή ν - θυμόν S: θυμφ δέ Φ 238. 8 post διανιστα-
μένην habet Φ 238 πολιτείαν τήν 8 έπί Φ 238: εις S. 8 καί ώς - 9 τήν
om. S. 9 άγωνιζομένην - 10 άκούομεν Φ 238: οΐα τά έν ταΐς Ιστορίαις θρυ-
λούμενα S. 11 τήν δέ - έπιθυμίαν S: έπιθυμίμ δέ τήν Φ 238. 13 μικροπρεπή
- 14 έθέλουσαν Φ 238: δουλοπρεπή S. 14 ούδέν usque ad finem S: οΐα τών έν
τή νΰν γενέσει πολιτευμένων ή ζωή Φ 238.

Φ
 He used to say that, just as the soul has three parts or types (or
whatever one chooses to call them), so too there are three different
ways of life,40 each of which contains all three elements while
receiving its overall shape from the dominant one, which also gives
it its name. Reason is the main influence on the first of these, which
could be called the Cronian life,41 the golden race or the generation
akin to the gods, celebrated in the guise of myth by poets seated on
the tripod of the Muse. Emotion influences the second, which
engages in wars and battles and generally fights for the first prizes
and for glory, and which we continually hear talked about by
history. Appetite rules the third, which is totally dissipated,
corrupted by unbridled wantoness, dominated by base and
womanish thoughts, associated with cowardice, wallowing in
swinishness of every kind, avaricious and petty, desiring the
security of a slave,42 achieving nothing noble or free, servile and
weak, measuring happiness solely in accordance with the belly and
the pudenda,43 totally without nobility of spirit; like a body dumped
in a comer, lying enervated and incapable of movement. And he
showed the life of the men who are now in the service of
generation44 to be much baser even than this.45

40 Πολιτεία means both way of life and government. For the classic tripartite
division of the soul, Plato Resp. 435c ff.
41 The antithesis between the Cronian and the Titanic life is one of the leitmotivs of
the book (cf. Introduction, pp. 23-26). In his Commentary on the Phaedo (1.9)
Damascius defines the Titanic way of life as irrational: ή τιτανική ζωή ϋλογός έστιν
ύφ’ής ή λογική σπαράττεται. For a philosophical analysis of the Cronian life in contrast
with that of the other gods, Damascius In Parm. 218.
42 A possible alternative translation is “merely wanting servitude”.
43 This phrase is an almost verbatim quotation from Demosthenes (De cor. 296: Tfl
γαστρί μετροΰντες καί τοϊς αίσχίστοις τήν ευδαιμονίαν). Somewhat unexpectedly,
Mendelssohn (who does not know the Damascius fragment) quotes the Demosthenic
passage as an inspiration of Zosimus IV.33.3 (note ad loc., p. 188).
44 The vocabulary is Platonic throughout the passage; here it alludes to the
antithesis Being-Becoming.
45 The three kinds of life represent the mythical past, which was ruled by wisdom;
historical times, when valour and virtue were considered the highest qualities, and the
present time, when Christianity had brought about the demise of all moral standards. As
 Άθεόν έστι τό μή τήν άθανασίαν τής ψυχής διασφζειν καί
άνάγειν εις τό θεοειδές καί συνάγειν αύτήν πρός τό θεΐον άρρή-
κτοις καί άλύτοις δεσμοις, ή τάναντία τούτων, τό κατασπαν καί
καθέλκειν τό έν ήμϊν θειον εις τό γηγενές καί άλιτήριον καί γιγαν-
τώδες ή τιτανικόν δεσμωτήριον. 5
[*S 167,31 (&θεον)]

20
Α Τούς δέ παντάπασιν άπεωθεΐτο ώς έναγεΐς όντας καί άνιά-
τους, ούδέν τε αύτόν έδυσώπει προσδέχεσθαι σφών τήν όμιλίαν,
ού πλούτος έξαίσιος, ού περιφάνεια πολιτείας, ού δυναστεία
άμαχος, ού κακοήθεια τυραννική τις.
[S I I 266,24 (έναγεΐς 1088)]
Β Τούς πλουσίους ούκ έν θοίνη ποιούμενος, ούδέ τά τούτων
δώρα προσιέμενος.
[S I I 732,19 (θοίνη ρ)]

21
Προθυμότατος εις άποδημίαν ού τήν μάταιον καί τρυφώσαν,
εις άνθρώπινα οικοδομήματα καί μεγέθη καί κάλλη πόλεων δια-
χαίνουσαν άλλ’ ει πού τι θαυμαστόν άκήκοεν ή ιεροπρεπές,
άφανές ή φανόν, αύτόπτης ήβούλετο γενέσθαι τού θαύματος.
[Φ 239]

22
Αύτήν δέ τήν ψυχήν έν ταΐς Ιεραΐς εύχαΐς πρός δλον τό θειον

20Α cf. S Π 303,28, S 1 136,5.

21 4 άφανές v.l.: fi άφανές Φ.
 19
It is a sacrilege not to preserve the immortality of the soul,
raising it to the level of the holy and uniting it to the divine with
bonds which cannot be broken or loosened, but by contrast to pull
and drag downwards the divine which is within us, confining it in
the earthly, sinful and Giant- or Titan-like prison.46

20
A He utterly rejected them as being incurably polluted, and
nothing whatever would compel him to accept their company;
neither fabulous wealth nor exalted social position nor unassailable
political power nor a tyrant’s malignity.47
B He neither dined with the rich nor accepted their gifts.

21
He was devoted to travel, not of the empty and hedonistic kind
which gapes at man-made buildings and the size and beauty of
cities; but, if he ever heard of some extraordinary or sacred
phenomenon, whether secret or manifest, he wanted to witness it
for himself.48

22
He49 used to say that when the soul is in holy prayer facing the

a young man Proclus described the effect of Christianity on Attica as a natural disaster
(In Tim. I, 122, 8ff.; for the date, Marinus VP 13). Later in life he used more moderate
terms, defining life under Christian rule as “irrational” (VP 20) according to the
Platonic model. The three kinds of life correspond to the three parts of the soul, the
λογιστικόν, which is divine, the θυμοειδές, which should be tempered by the activity of
the first part of the soul, and finally the έπιθυμρτικόν, which should obey the other two.
Their respective types in the government of a city are the βουλευτικόν, πολεμικόν and
χρηματιστικόν. On this analogy, Resp. 441c.
44 A Neoplatonic topos: for a few striking parallels, Eunapius VS VI. 11.2: Proclus
In Remp. 1,74,12-16; II, 176,14; Marinus VP 15; cf. JHS 113,7 (on the “Palace of the
Giants”).
47 The reference is clearly to the Christians.
48 Spiritual tourism is an important theme in late Platonism (cf. JHS 113, 9-10) and
finds its literary expression in the highly fashionable contemporary tradition of patria
and paradoxa, a genre well exemplified by the fragments of the PH: see pp. 59-60.
49 The reference is probably to Isidore. Asmus however considers that Sarapio is
 πέλαγος έλεγε τά μέν πρώτα συναγειρομένην άπό τοΰ σώματος
είς έαυτήν, αδθις δέ έξισταμένην τών Ιδίων ήθών καί άναχωρού-
σαν άπό τών λογικών έννοιών έπί τάς τφ νφ συγγενείς, έκ δ’ αδ
τρίτων ένθουσιΦσαν καί παραλλάττουσαν είς άήθη τινά γαλήνην
θεοπρεπή καί ούκ άνθρωπίνην.
[Φ 240]

23
Α Ό δέ Ισίδωρος πρός τη άφελείςι οϋτω καί τήν άψεύδειαν ήγά-
πα διαφερόντως καί άπεδέχετο, ώστε καί εύθΰγλωττος είναι πέρα
τοΰ δέοντος έδοξάζετο, καί ούδ’ ότιοϋν έχειν έν έαυτφ προσποι-
ούμενον. Πολλοϋ γε καί έδέησε τούτο παθεΐν.
[Φ 23 + S 1428,27 (άφέλεια)]
Β Ήκιστα δ ’ &ν τις αυτόν έθεάσατο παρεκβαίνονρ τό άληθές
Ιργφ ή λόγφ ποτέ, ήτοι πρός τό είρωνικώτερον ή άλαζονέστερον.
[*S I I 534,21 (εΐρων 207) + *S I I 558,4 (ήκιστα ρ)]
C Ό δέ τό ψεύδος άπεστρέψετο καθάπερ άλλο τι τΦν έξαγίστων.
[*S I I 298,12 (έξάγιστος 1509 ρ)]

24
Α Ού γάρ προΐετο τά χρήματα ζ)φίως, ούδέ πρόχειρος ήν κατα-
φρονεΐν χρημάτων δικαίως όφειλομένων, άλλά παρίστατο καί
έξήτει τοϊς άποστερούσι μέχρι καί δικαστών άγοραίων.
[S IV 57,30 ( παρίστασθαι ρ)]
Β Ούκ ήν φιλοχρήματος, άλλ’ οικονομικός κατά φύσιν· Ή ν γάρ
καί τά άλλα πάντα σοφός οϊκου διαθέτης, καί πολύ τι τής ήμέρας
εις ταύτα άνήλισκε μέρος, τά μέν αύτουργών, τά δέ διατάττων.
[Φ 24]

23Α cf. S Π 450,16, S IV 232,11.

S usque ad 3 προσποιοΰμενον.
1 ό δέ Φ: om. S. 1. ’Ισίδωρος S: om. Φ. 1 οΰτω καί τήν Φ: καί S.
2 διαφερόντως και άπεδέχετο S: om. Φ. 3 έδοξάζετο Φ: om. S.
23Β S I I 534,21 (S,), S Π 558,4 (S2) solum usque ad 2 ποτέ.
1 fixiora - έθεάσατο S2: ούκ είδεν αύτόν S,. 2 ποτέ S2 om. S,.
24Α cf. S I 33,2.
1 προΐετο Kassel: προσίετο S.
24Β cf. S I I 57, 6.

lOO
 mighty ocean of the divine, at first, disengaged from the body, it
concentrates on itself; then it abandons its own habits, withdrawing
from logical into intuitive thinking;*50 finally, at a third stage, it is
possessed by the divine and drifts into an extraordinary serenity
befitting gods rather than men.51

23
A In addition to simplicity, Isidore particularly loved and valued
truthfulness, with the result that he was considered to be unduly
plain-spoken and to have nothing in the way of affectation. Indeed
he was far removed from this defect.
B He would never be seen to deviate from the truth in word or
deed, either through false modesty or through boastfulness.
C He hated falsehood as something truly abominable.52

24
A He would not easily spend money nor did he readily overlook
debts which were rightly owed to him, but he sued defaulters and
prosecuted them as far as the Courts of the Agora.
B He was not a lover of money, though thrifty by nature.53 He was
in all respects a wise manager of his household, and spent a large
part of the day dealing with its affairs, both working himself, and
giving instructions to others.

referred to, and inserts here part of the Suda article on him, presumably because of the
similar attitude to prayer displayed in the two passages. As the attitude constitutes a
Neoplatonic topos, I have not followed Asmus and have placed the Suda passage much
later (111).
50 Damascius is using the cardinal Platonic distinction between the domains of
dianoia and nous.
51 Cf. Iamblichus Myst. V. 26 for an analogous tripartite division of prayer.
52 Cf. Marinus VP 4 for a similar attitude to truthfulness, expressed in almost
identical terms.
53 Cf. Marinus VP 4.

ΙΟ Ι
C Καί παρατιθέναι των τραγημάτων πολλοίς &μα συνεστιωμέ-
νοις ένίοτε καρύων μέν τρία ή τέτταρα, των δέ Ισχάδων, &ν ούτω
τύχοι, πέντε ή εξ. ΕΙ δέ παρρησιασθέντες ημείς χαρίεσσάν τινα
παρρησίαν ητήσαμεν Ιτι πλείους, προσέθηκεν &ν ίσως δύο ή τρία,
μάλα σεμνφ προσώπφ καί ούδέν ύφορώμενος τόν τών νεωτέρων 5
γέλωτα.
[*S IV 580,22 (τραγήματα)]

25
Καί ήν τη τε άλλη άγαστός άρετή καί ταύτη, διότι κάν ταις
εύπραγίαις τφ τής φύσεως θεσμφ τό είκός άποδιδούς ού πέρα τού
νενομισμένου τή εύτυχίμ έπεξήει.
[*S I I 525,4 (είκός ρ)]

26 '1
Α Ό δέ τών φίλων έχρήτο τοΐς βουλεύμασι, τά οικεία προέμενος·
περί γάρ ούδεμίαν τών πολλών άρετών ούτως έσπούδακεν ως
περί την μητέρα αύτών, κατά τόν Πυθαγόραν είπεΐν, αύτήν τήν
φιλίαν.
[S IV 204,27 (προέμενος)]
Β Ώ ς δέ ένί λόγφ τό παν συλλαβεΐν, δπερ έφη ό Πυθαγόρας
όμοιότατον Ιχειν τφ θεφ τόν άνθρωπον, τούτο σαφώς έπί τών
έργων αυτός έπεδείκνυτο, τήν άγαθοεργόν προθυμίαν καί τήν ές
πάντας έπεκτεινομένην ευεργεσίαν, μάλιστα μέν τήν άναγωγήν
τών ψυχών άπό τής κάτω βριθούσης παντοίας κακίας· έπειτα καί s
τήν σωτήριον τών σωμάτων έκ τής άδικου ή άνοσίου ταλαιπωρίας·
τό δ’ αδ τρίτον, έπεμελείτο τών έξω πραγμάτων, δση δύναμις.
[S 1 15,10 (άγαθοεργία)]

24C of. S IV 687, 24.

26Λ cf. S IV 723,17.
 C And sometimes, when he had many people to dinner,54 he would
produce as dessert three or four nuts and, on a good day, five or six
dried figs. And if we spoke out in the nicest possible way and asked
for more, he might add another two or three with a very serious
expression, not having the least suspicion as to why the younger
ones were laughing.

25
He was to be admired for virtue generally, but in particular
because in times of success he paid respect to the law of nature and
did not indulge in happiness beyond the norm.

26
A He would follow his friends’ wishes, in preference to his own;
for he cultivated none of the many virtues as fully as friendship,
which, according to Pythagoras, is the mother of virtues.55
B To sum it all up in a word, his actions were a clear illustration of
the manner in which Pythagoras conceived of Man as most
resembling God:56 eagerness to do good and generosity extended to
all, indeed the raising of souls above the multiplicity of evil which
encumbers the world below; secondly the deliverance of mortal
men from unjust or impious suffering;57 thirdly, engagement in
public affairs to the extent of one’s abilities.

54 The Ιεραί έστιάσεις were part of the duty of a Platonist teacher: cf. Eunapius VS
V. 1.6 (for Iamblichus), and Marinus VP 5.
55 Friendship, the Pythagorean virtue par excellence (cf. Iamblichus V. Pyth. 230
and Marinus VP 17), acquires new relevance for a circle of men and women who feel
increasingly excluded from the society of their contemporaries and even persecuted by
them. Indeed, as practised by the late Neoplatonists, the social virtue of φιλία displays
common characteristics with the solidarity of the pre-Constantinian Christians. For
examples, see below, 117B, 128.
56 A Neoplatonic topos. The model of the holy man for the Neoplatonists is Pytha­
goras.
57 No doubt at the hands of the civil authorities or of the Christians.
 Καί 6 μέν διαναστάς, έπειδή έως έγεγόνει, έτι τήν ψυχήν υπό
τής όμφής κατεχόμενος, διηγείτο τόν δνειρον. Έγώ δέ ούκ δναρ
άντί όνείρατος, άντί δέ άληθείας άλήθειαν, έγρηγορυϊαν άντί
ύπνωττούσης, έπεδίδουν, άπερ άκήκοα διεξιών.
[Φ25]

28
Α Ύποπεσών δέ συμφορά δημευούση τά δντα ό πριν τήν παρα-
θήκην άποστερήσας, κάκείνην καί των αύτοϋ δσα ήδύνατο προ-
λαβών παρέθετο τφ πιστοτάτψ τών πολιτών. Ώ ς δέ παρεδέξατο ό
Έπιδαύριος μετά τών άλλων καί ήν άπεστέρητο παραθήκην καί
έπέγνω ταύτην, ήσαν μέν οΐ συνεβούλευον κατέχειν τά οικεία καί 5
μή άποδοϋναι τφ κατ’ άρχάς άπεστερηκότι, ό δέ έν οίς έπιστεύθη
ούκ φετο δέίν άπιστος γενέσθαι, ούδέ καταρρυπαίνεΐν τήν πασών
άρετών ώφελιμωτάτην πιστότητα διά τής εύλόγου φαινομένης
άπιστίας, κατά τόν Αισχύλον, ού δοκεϊν δίκαιος άλλ’ είναι θέλων,
βαθεΐαν τφ δντι καί αύτός αύλακα διά φρένων καρπούμενος. ίο
[Φ 26 + S Π 94,18 (δίκαιος 1070 ρ)]
Β Τούτον έπαινών Ισίδωρος ό φιλόσοφος κατά στόμα είχε.
[Φ 241]

29
Α Μετριωτέρα γάρ πειθώ καί παραίνεσις τής άπό τών άλλων λό­
γων τοϊς πολλοις ή άπό τής Ιστορίας, καί μάλλον τής παλαιοτέ-
ρας ή άπό τής νεωτέρας καί τοϊς άκροωμένοις φέρουσά τι γνωρι-
μώτερον.
[Φ 242]

28Α cf. S II124,12

S solum 9 κατά usque ad finem.
9 κατά τόν ΑΙσχύλον S: om. Φ. 9 δοκεϊν S: δοκεϊν δέ Φ. 9 θέλων S: ήθελε Φ.
 Getting up as soon as it was dawn, with his soul still possessed
by the divine voice, he related his dream. And in recounting what I
heard, I offer not “a dream for a dream”,58 but rather the waking
truth for the sleeping truth.

28
A A man who had previously misappropriated goods with which
he had been entrusted himself fell into a misfortune consisting in
the confiscation of his own property;59 taking as many of his own
possessions as he could, he entrusted them to the most honest of the
citizens. As Epidaurius60 received, along with the rest, property of
which he had been deprived and recognised it as his own, some
people advised him to retain what belonged to him and not to hand
it back to the man who had originally deprived him of it; but he
thought that he should not be dishonest in a matter of confidence
nor pollute the most beneficial of virtues -good faith- through an
apparently justifiable act of dishonesty. In the words of Aeschylus
“he did not want to appear just, but to be so, harvesting thus the
fertile furrow of his mind”.61
B The philosopher Isidore never ceased to praise him.62

29
A For the multitude the persuasiveness and guidance offered by
history is more fitting than that provided by other kinds of
discourse -ancient rather than recent history, since it conveys
something more familiar to the listener.

38 For the expression cf. Plato Theaet. 201d.

59 The reference may be to the Alexandrian persecution of 488-89.
30 Here Epidaurius is a personal name and not an adjective of origin as assumed by
Asmus (Lebert 19,148). For other examples see P.M. Fraser - E. Matthews, A Lexicon
o f Greek Personal Names l, 1987, s.v. (p. 156).
61 The Aeschylean text (Septem 592-3) has “the best” (δριοτος) instead of “just”, a
variation introduced by Plato, who discusses the passage at length (Resp. 361b). For
another reference to the same passage, see below 97F.
62 The reference must be to Epidaurius and not to Sarapio, as Asmus had assumed
(BZ 18,448; 19,269).
Β "Οταν άντί πραγμάτων γεγενημένων είδωλα δττα συγγραφώ-
μεθα, σκιάν όνείρων, κατά Πίνδαρον.
S IV 378,17 (σκιά όνείρων)
C Έπιδείξει δέ δσον οΐικ ήδη τό τοιοϋτον ή των καθ’ έκαστα τοϋ
λόγου διέξοδος.
[Φ 27]

30
Α Έςρθέγγετο μέν έλάχιστα, τά πολλά δέ ήκροατο λόγων γεγηρα-
κότων καί σοφίςι τινί κεκραμένων.
[Φ 28 + S 191, 26 (άκροατής καί άκροάσθαι)]
Β Οΰτω δε ένδόμυχος έγεγόνει καί σιωπηλός έπί τούτοις &κρύ-
πτειν έδοκίμαζεν, ώστε μηδέ έρωτώση τη μητέρι λέγειν δπη άπίοι.
[S I I 273,27 (ένδόμυχος)]
C Πάντων των καθ’ αύτόν Ιδιωτών όμοίως καί φιλοσόφων έχέ-
μυθος ές τά μάλιστα καί κρυψίνους fiv, άλλ’ εις γε συναύξησιν
τής άρετής καί τής κακίας μείωσιν δλην έξεκέχυτο την ψυχήν.
[S I I 611,1 (ιδιώτης)]
D Ό δέ καί παράδοξον άκοΰσαι, μετά σεμνότητος εύγενοΰς καί
βεβαίας έφαίνετο τοϊς παροϋσι χαρίεις, τά μέν πολλά σπουδάζων
εις τό κοινόν τοϊς άκούουσιν όφελος, άνιείς δέ ένίοτε τφ παίζοντι
την σπουδήν, καί σκώπτων εύφυώς τούς άμαρτάνοντας, ώστε έπι-
καλύπτειν τφ γελοίω τόν έλεγχον. 5
[Φ 307]

31
Α Τό κόσμιον καί ήσύχιον μετά τοΰ δραστηρίου αύτφ έτέτακτο
καί τοΰ άνδρώδους- έπιεικής γάρ ών καί πρός γ’ έτι άπράγμων
δμως εις άγώνα πραγμάτων έμβεβηκώς έξ άνάγκης οΰδενός έλεί-
πετο τών περί ταΰτα καλινδουμένων.
[*S Π 140,4 (δραστήριον)]

29Β cf. S Π 522,14.

30Α 1 έφθέγγετο - δέ Φ: ό δέ S. 2 καί - κεκραμένων S: om. Φ.
30Β cf. S II 205,25.
30C cf. S Π 492,19, S ΙΠ 197, 30, S m 381,1, S III517,12.
 B When instead of actual events, we describe fantasies -the
shadow of dreams, as Pindar said.63
C The unfolding of the details of the story will almost immediately
show this.

30
A He spoke very little, but listened much to stories which had
grown old with time and had become compounded with a certain
wisdom.
B He was so secretive and silent over the things that he thought fit
to conceal that he would not even tell his mother when she asked
him where he was going.
C Of all his contemporaries, philosophers and laymen alike, he
was in the highest degree taciturn and secretive,64 yet he poured out
his entire soul in the advancement of virtue and the reduction of
vice.
D Strange though it may sound, with all his noble and austere
dignity, he appeared charming to those who met him. His main
preoccupation was with the common interest of his students; at
times however he would temper his gravity with playfulness,
teasing those who made mistakes so cleverly that the joke masked
the criticism.

31
A In him propriety and gentleness went hand in hand with energy
and manliness; tor, though he was decent and even unpolitical, once
he was forced to engage in a battle over practical issues, he did not
prove inferior to any of those who wallow in such things.65

63 Pyth. 8.95.
64 These are essential qualities of the Pythagorean sage, as emphasised by
Iamblichus in his V. Pyth. 94.
65 Whereas the term καλινδοϋμοα denoting those who occupy themselves with
practical matters is pejorative, the word άπράγμων that I translate as “unpolitical” has
positive connotations for the Neoplatonists, cf. below, p. 261, n. 282.
Β Ού γάρ μόνον ό μέγας κίνδυνος άναλκιν ού φώτα λαμβάνει,
ώς λέγει Πίνδαρος, άλλά καί δ μέγας άνήρ ούδένα μικρόν άγώνα
προσίεται· άλλ’ δπου φυγάδες άλλοι δι’ άνανδρίαν άποδιδρά-
σκουσιν, ένταϋθα καταβαίνει παραβαλλόμενος, ένθ’ άρετή διαεί-
δεται άνδρών κατά τόν ποιητήν. 5
[S IV 758,18 (φώτα) + Φ 29]
32
Α Ό δέ Ισίδωρος ένστατικός ών άήττητος έμενεν.
[S* I I 292, 18 (ένστατικός)]
Β Καί δή έδόκει τφ δντι δίκαια μέμφεσθαι τφ γε άκριβεΐ λογι-
σμφ, τφ δέ συνήθει καί άνθρωπίνψ πολλαχή τό μέτριον έδοξεν άν
ύπερβαίνειν. Καί έθαύμαζον έπί πολλοίς οΐ έγκαλσύμενοι καί ώς
φιλαιτίου περί αύτοϋ διέκειντο τάς γνώμας. Ό δέ παράδειγμα
άληθινόν όμονοίας έν έαυτφ περιφέρων πρός τούτο τρϋς άλλους 5
έκρινε.
[Φ 30]

33
Α Τρία πάντες όμολογοΰσι πρώτα καί μέγιστα στοιχεία τής τών
δντων φιλοθεάμονος Ιστορίας· έρωτα, φιλοπονίαν, άγχίνοιαν.
Έρωτα τό πρώτον στοιχεΐον καί μέγιστον, τόν τών άπάντων τών
καλών καί προσέτι άγαθών δεινότατον Ιχνευτήν. Όξέΐαν δέ καί
άγχίνουν φΰσεως δύναμιν, έπί πολλά δι’ όλίγου φέρεσθαι δυνα- 5
μένην έτοιμοτάτην συνιέναι καί γνωρίζειν τά ίχνη τών θηραμά­
των δσα τε άληθή καί δσα ψευδή έστι πρός τήν άγραν. Έκ δ ’ αύ

31Β cf. S 1 174,15, S Π Ι40,18, S Π 55,20.

Φ solum 2 ό μέγας usque ad finem.
3 άλλοι S: ot άλλοι Φ. 4 ένθ’ S: ένθα Φ.
32Β 5 post όμονοίας habet άληθινής Φ: omisi.
33Α cf. S IV 730,16, S I 41,15,S I 408,25.
Φ 1 τρία - 2 Ιστορίας, έρωτα τών χαλών καί άγαθών δεινότατον Ιχνευτήν,
4 δξεΐαν usque ad finem.
S I I 418, 8 (Sj) έρως τό πρώτον στοιχεΐον καί μέγιστον τής τών δντων πολυθεά-
μονος Ιστορίας, καί φιλοπονία και άγχίνοια. Ο&τος δέ έστιν ό τών άπάντων
τών καλών καί προσέτι άγαθών δεινότατος Ιχνευτής.
5 IV 446, 6 (S2) στοιχεία πρώτα καί μέγιστα τής τών δντων πολυθεάμονος
Ιστορίας, έρως, φιλοπονία, άγχίνοια.
4 δέ: om. Φ.

ιθ8
B Not only does the great danger not come to a weak man, as
Pindar says, but equally the great man will not take on a small
cause; but where others desert and run away through cowardice, he
will risk himself in the fray where, as the poet says, “a man’s worth
is brought to light”.66

32
A Being a lover of argument, Isidore remained invincible.
B His criticisms seemed to be wholly justified, at least on an
unbiased judgement; but for those who judged by common and
ordinary criteria he often appeared to go too far.67 Those against
whom he brought charges were usually suiprised and considered
him litigious. Yet he who bore within himself the very model of
concord, judged others according to this standard.

33
A All agree that there are three primary and essential principles for
an enquiry which contemplates reality:68 love, industry, sagacity.
Love is the first and greatest principle, the most wondrous tracker
after all that is beautiful as well as good. [Then one needs] sharp
and sagacious natural powers, capable of covering much ground in
a short time, truly adept at following up and recognising which of
the quarry’s tracks are genuine and which are false for the purposes
of the chase. The third requirement is relentless industry, not

66 For the literary references, Pindar 01. 1.81 and Homer//. 13.277.
67 Deeply Platonic in spirit, this passage, which opposes the judgement of the many
to that of the philosopher, is at the same time a commentary on the Heraclitean maxim
Β 1 (Diels - Kranz 1,150).
68 For the expression, Plato Resp. 475e. For a similar variation on the same theme,
see V. Pyth. ap. Photius Bibl. Cod. 249,440b, 39-43.
 τρίτων φιλοπονίαν ατρυτον, ούκ έώσαν τήν ψυχήν ήρεμεΐν έως δν
έπΐ τέλος ελθ-ρ τοΌ κυνηγεσίου, δ έστί τής άληθείας ή εϋρεσις.
[Φ 31 + S I I 418, 8 (έρως 3071 ρ) + S IV 446,6 (στοιχεία)]
Β Ό ρους δέ έτίθετο καί τεκμήρια ό Ισίδωρος τών θείων άφωρι-
σμένα στοιχείων πρός τήν τών άνθρωπείων διάκρισιν τής μέν φι-
λοπονίας τό άνύσιμον υπέρ πάντα λόγον, τής δέ εύσυνέτου γνώ­
μης τό έξιστάμενον τής εμφανούς καί συνήθους τοΐς πολλοϊς άκο-
λουθίας, τού δέ έρωτος αυτού τό παρηρεθισμένον εις τήν τού νοη­ 5
τού κάλλους άπόλαυσιν άλλη δέ ούδαμοΰ άποπλανώμενον.
[S III564, 1 (δροι) + S IV 516,24 (τεκμήριον ρ)]
C Ό τι άγχίνοιαν καί όξύτητα δ Ισίδωρος, φησίν, έλεγεν ου τήν
ευκίνητον φαντασίαν, ουδέ τήν δοξαστικήν ευφυΐαν, ουδέ μόνην
(ώς δν τις οίηθείη) διάνοιαν εΰτροχον καί γόνιμον άληθείας· ου
γάρ είναι ταύτας αιτίας, άλλά τη αίτίμ δουλεύειν εις ν^ησιν τήν
δέ είναι θείαν κατοκωχήν, ήρέμα διανοίγουσαν καί άποκαθαίρου- 5
σαν τά τής ψυχής δμματα, καί τφ νοερφ φωτί καταλάμπουσαν,
εις θέαν καί γνώρισιν τού άληθούς καί τού ψευδούς. Εύμοιρίαν
ταύτην έκεΐνος ώνόμαζε καί ώς ούδέν γένοιτ’ δν δφελος άνευ
εύμοιρίας, ώς ουδέ όφθαλμών ύγιαινόντων δφελος δνευ τού
ουρανίου φωτός, διετείνετο. 10

[Φ 32]

34
A Τό ύψηλόνουν καί τελεσιουργόν είχεν ού περί τά κάτω στρε-
φόμενον, δλλ’ ευθύς άναθρφσκον άπό μικρός άφορμής έπί τά
πρεσβύτατα τών θεαμάτων αύταϊς γε ταΐς Πλάτωνος άκηράτοις
έννοίαις ού κατά τάς συνήθεις τών πολλών φιλοσόφων έπιβολάς
ένεφύετο, μετά δέ γε Πλάτωνα καί ταΐς θαυμασταΐς Ιάμβλιχου 5
περινοίαις.
[Φ 33]

33Β S III564,1 (Sj), S IV 516, 24 (S2) solum usque ad 6 άπόλαυσιν.

1 ό ’Ισίδωρος Sji om. S2 2 στοιχείων S2: στοίχων S,.
33C cf. S ill 47, 29, S II 459, 3.
 allowing the soul to rest until it has reached the end of the hunt,
which is the discovery of truth.
B As regards divine principles, Isidore laid down well-defined
terms and criteria to distinguish them from things human: in
industriousness [he required] absolute efficiency; in quick
intelligence aloofness from the obvious and habitual conformity
with the multitude; in love an unswerving impulse towards that
delight in intelligible beauty which is never diverted elsewhere.
C Isidore used to say that sagacity and acuity are not the same
thing as a swift imagination or a conjectural talent or merely -as
one might think- an intelligence which is quick and productive of
the truth; for these are not causes in themselves, but serve the cause
of intellection. As for intellection, it is the possession by the divine
which gradually opens up and purifies the eyes of the soul,
illuminating it with its spiritual light to allow the perception and
understanding of the true and the false. This is what he called “good
fortune”,69 also maintaining that nothing is of any use without good
fortune, just as healthy eyes are of no use without the heavenly
light.

34
A He had a mind which was lofty and the ability to induce spiritual
perfection,70 being not involved with the things of this world, but
leaping up immediately on the smallest pretext towards the most
exalted contemplation. He was rooted in the very purity of the
Platonic ideas, which he did not interpret in the accustomed manner
of the majority of philosophers, and after Plato in the extraordinary
subdeties of Iamblichus.

69 What is really meant by εύμοιρία is heavenly grace or εϋκληρία, which is the

term given as a synonym by the Suda (Π 459,1); cf. Marinus VP 33. For a more
technical use of the word, Proclus In Tim. ΠΙ, 52,16.
70 The expression τό όψηλόνουν καί τελεσιουργόν comes directly from Plato,
Phaedr. 270a, but the second word seems to be used here in its specific Neoplatonic
meaning of initiatiory action rather than in its straightforward classical meaning of
practical achievement.

Ill
Β Ό τι ούκ όλίγους των φιλοσοφούντων όρώμεν καί άκούομεν
τούς μέν άβατον είναι τόν ’Ιάμβλιχον οίομένους, τούς δέ αύθάδει
μεγαληγορίςι λόγων τό πλέον ή άληθείμ πραγμάτων έπαιρόμενον.
[Φ 34]
C 'Ρητορικής καί ποιητικής πολυμαθίας μικρά ήψατο, εις δέ τήν
θειοτέραν φιλοσοφίαν έξώρμησε τήν Άριστοτέλους. Όρων δέ
ταύτην τφ άναγκαίφ μάλλον ή τφ οίκείω νφ πιστεύουσαν καί τεχ­
νικήν μέν ίκανώς είναι σπουδάζουσαν, τό δέ ένθεον ή νοερόν ού
πάνυ προβαλλομένην, όλίγον καί τούτης ό ’Ισίδωρος έποιήσατο 5
λόγον. Ώ ς δέ τΦν Πλάτωνος έγεύσατο νοημάτων, ούκέτι παπταί-
νειν ήξίου πόρσιον, ώς έφη Πίνδαρος, άλλα τέλος έχειν ήλπιζεν εί
τής Πλάτωνος διανοίας εΐσω των άδυτων δυνηθείη διαβαλεΐν καί
πρός τούτο 6 πάς αύτφ δρόμος έτέτατο τής σπουδής.
. [Φ 35 ]
D ’Ισίδωρος ό φιλόσοφος, ώ ς φησι Δαμάσκιος, πάντα τά τών
παλαιών έξετάζων ούκ άνίει πρός τό άκριβέστατον. Τών μέν πα-
λαίτατα φιλοσοφησάντων Πυθαγόραν καί Πλάτωνα θειάζει, καί
τών έπτερωμένων ύκείνων ψυχών είναι αΐ εις τόν ύπερουράνιον
τόπον, εις τό πεδίον τής άληθείας, εις τόν λειμώνα τών θείων νέ- 5
μονται ειδών. Προσείχε δέ τόν νοϋν ές τά μάλιστα μετά Πλάτωνα
τφ Ίαμβλίχφ καί τοϊς ’Ιάμβλιχου φίλοις δή καί όπαδοϊς, ό ν άρι-
στον είναι διισχυρίζετο τόν έαυτοΰ πολίτην Συριανόν, τόν Πρό-
κλου διδάσκαλον καί άλλους δέ έν μέσω τού χρόνου πολΰν θη­
σαυρόν συλλέξαι λέγει έπιστήμης θεοπρεποΰς. Άτψάζειν δέ ίο
ούδένα ήξίου πρός συναγυρμόν άληθοΰς έπιστήμης.

34D cf. S IV 274,11, S IV 471, 17, S IV 463, 9.

S solum usque ad 11 έπιστήμης, Φ solum 2 τών μέν usque ad finem.
2 τών μέν - 6 είδών Φ: om. S. 6 προσείχε - 9 διδάσκαλον S: τών νειοστ! δέ
Πορφύρων καί Ιάμβλιχον καί Συριανόν καί Πρόκλον Φ. 9 καί άλλους - 10
θεοπρεποΰς Φ: om. S. 10 άτιμάζειν - 11 έπιστήμης S: om. Φ.
 B We see and hear not a few among those who philosophise,
having the opinion, some that Iamblichus is utterly inaccessible,
others that he glorified in wilful grandiloquence rather than the
truth of things.
C He spent little time on rhetorical and poetical erudition,
throwing himself into the more divine philosophy of Aristotle. Yet
seeing that it too relied on the minimal rather than the essential
qualities of the mind,71 striving to be rather technical and scarcely
propagating the divine and the spiritual, Isidore thought little of this
as well. But hardly had he touched on the teaching of Plato than “he
felt that he did not have to search any further”, as Pindar says,
considering that he would reach his goal if he could penetrate into
the shrine of Plato’s thought, and it was this end to which the course
of all his efforts was directed.
D As Damascius says, Isidore the philosopher, who examined all
the doctrines of the Ancients, would not let anything pass without
the strictest scrutiny. Among the ancient philosophers he
worshipped as divine Pythagoras and Plato [considering them] to
be among those winged souls who dwell in the supra-celestial
regions, in the plain of Truth, in the meadow of divine forms. After
Plato he particularly devoted himself to Iamblichus and his friends
and adepts, the best of whom he claimed was his own fellow-citizen
Syrianus, the teacher of Proclus.72 He also said that in the meantime
there had been others who accumulated a great treasure of divine
knowledge. Indeed he thought that in the cause of the accumulation
of true knowledge no one ought to be despised.

71 That is the discursive rather than the intuitive qualities of the mind; only the latter
bring one to God; cf. above p. 101, n. 50.
72 An Alexandrian philosopher, the successor of Plutarch of Athens and teacher of
Proclus, who assumed the Platonic diadoche after him. As well as a textbook on
rhetoric (Comm, in Hermogenem) which survives, he wrote a commentary on Homer in
seven books (for Homer as the quintessentially mystical poet in late antiquity, see R.
Lamberton, Homer the Theologian, Berkeley 1986), a treatise on Homer’s gods,
another on the agreement between Orpheus, Pythagoras and Plato, and commentaries
on the Phaedrus (preserved in Hermeias’ relevant Commentary), the Republic, the
Orphic Theology and The Chaldaean Oracles (Suda IV 478, 21). His commentary on
 Τούς μέντοι θνητά καί άνθρώπινα φιλοπονουμένους ή συνιέν-
τας όξέως η φιλομαθείς είναι βουλομένους ούδέν μέγα άνύτειν εις
τήν θεοπρεπή καί μεγάλην σοφίαν. Τών γάρ παλαιών ’Αριστοτέλη
καί Χρύσιππον εύφυεστάτους γενομένους, άλλα καί φιλομαθε- is
στάτους γεγονότας, έτι δέ καί φιλοπόνους, ούκ άναβήναι δμως
τήν δλην άνάβασιν. Τών δέ νεωτέρων Τεροκλέα τε καί εΐ τις δμοι-
ος, ούδέν μέν έλλείποντας εις τήν άνθρωπίνην παρασκευήν, τών δέ
μακαρίων νοημάτων πολλαχή πολλών ένδεεϊς γενομένους φησίν.
[S IV 479, 2 ( Συριανός ρ) + Φ 36]

35
Α Ό τι καί τών βιβλίων τον δμαδον παρητεΐτο, πολυδοξίας
μάλλον αίτιον δντα ή πολυνοίας. Έ νί δέ μόνψ τφ διδασκάλψ
έπαναπαυόμενος πρός μόνον έκεινον άπετύπου έαυτόν, τά παρ’
αύτοϋ λεγάμενα άπογραφόμενος. *
[Φ 37]
Β Οί δέ καί έν τοΐς Αίγυπτίοις φιλοσοφήμασι τόν ’Ισίδωρον συν-
εργόν καί συγκυνηγέτην παρελάμβανον τής έν βυθφ κεκρυμμένης
ώς άληθώς ίερας άληθείας· καί πολλαχοϋ φώς άνήπτεν αύτοϊς έν
ταΐς ζητήσεσι τής άρχαιοτρόπου σοφίας. Τό δέ σύμπαν αύτφ τής
εύπορίας ούκ άπό βιβλίων καί δοξασμάτων έπορίζετο άλλοτρίων 5
διά μνήμης, άλλ’ έξιν τινά βεβαίαν καί πάμφορον άληθείας τής γε
τοιαύτης άπ’ άρχής έκτήσατο.
[Φ 243]

36
Α Δήλος δ ’ ήν ούκ άγαπών τά παρόντα ούτε τά άγάλματα προσ-
 [He thought that] those who dedicated their labour to things
mortal and human or merely had a sharp intelligence or desired to
amass knowledge* 73 would never go far towards the acquisition of
the great and divine wisdom. He used to say that, among the
Ancients, Aristotle and Chrysippus, who were supremely gifted and
at the same time keen on learning and also hard-working,
nevertheless did not reach the summit. Among the Modems, he said
that Hierocles and his like, though lacking nothing in their human
equipment, were greatly deficient in many things when it came to
the divine concepts.

35
A He did not care either for the noisy babble of books, which bring
about a multitude of opinions rather than wise thinking. Having
settled on a single teacher, he modelled himself upon him, and
recorded all his words.74
B Even in questions of Egyptian philosophy they75 took Isidore
with them as a companion and fellow-seeker after the truly sacred
truth which lies hidden in the depths. Indeed it often was he who
kindled the light for them in their quest for traditional wisdom. And
he did not derive all this facility from memorising books or the
opinions of others, but possessed from the outset a powerful and
creative skill at discovering that kind of truth.76

36
A It was clear that he disliked the present situation,77 nor did he

Aristotle’s Metaphysics is extant (CAG VI.1 (1902)). He was related to both Aedesia
and Ammonianus, cf. 47,56.
S IV 274, 11 and Photius (Φ 36) mention Porphyry as well. Presumably his name
was added on account of his tremendous reputation as a philosopher in Byzantium.
73 i.e. for its own sake.
74 Pace Zintzen (p. 62, n. at 1. 9), I think that this teacher was Sarapio and not
Heraiscus. The tone of this passage already ushers in the Middle Ages with their
religious respect for the one book and the one master.
75 Presumably Heraiscus and Asclepiades.
76 i.e. metaphysical.
77 The legal prohibition of pagan worship. According to Alan Cameron (‘The last
days’, 15) in the present context “τά παρόντα is one of the ‘code phrases’ (...) that these
 κυνεΐν έθέλων, άλλ’ ήδη έπ’ αυτούς τούς θεούς Ιέμενος εΐσω κρυ­
πτομένους, ούκ έν άδύτοις άλλ’ έν αύτφ τφ άπορρήτφ, δ τι ποτέ
έστί, τής παντελούς άγνωσίας. Πώς ούν έπ’ αύτούς ΐετο τοιού-
τους δντας; ΤΕρωτι δεινφ, άπορρήτφ καί τούτφ. Καί τις δέ άλλος 5
ή άγνωστος καί δ έρως; Καί τίνα τούτον φαμέν, ΐσασιν οι πειρα-
θέντες, είπείν δέ άδύνατον καί νοήσαί γε ούδέν μάλλον φφδιον.
[Φ 38]
Β Κινδυνεύει άποσβήναι τής άληθείας τό χρήμα.
[*S IV 821,24 (χρήμα 475 ρ)]
C Καί δύσεται τοις άνθρώποις, άτε ού δυναμένοις αύτού φέρειν
τήν θείαν άνατολήν.
[Φ 244]

Α Ήναγκάζετο έπιμελείσθαι τής των παίδων εύαγωγίας.

[Φ 245 ]
Β Ό δέ ’Ισίδωρος ύπερηγορών τού Σωκράτους βαθύτερον ή κατ’
άκροατάς διελέγετο.
[S* IV 653,26 (ύπερηγορών)]
C Σφιγγός πράγματα παρέχων πολλά έπί πολλαϊς ταΐς ζητήσεσι
τών άτόπων τούτων αινιγμάτων, ού τής Καδμείας Σφιγγός, άλλά
Σφιγγός μέν τίνος άτεχνώς, έτι δέ θειοτέρας καί πολύ σοφωτέρας.
[*S IV 487,5 (Σφιγγός)]
D Καί μην καί έν ταις έξηγήσεσιν ένδεέστερος τφ λόγω ή ώστε
έρμηνεύειν τά δοκούντα άποχρώντως. Ού μήν ούδέ ένταύθα
άβοήθητος ήν ύπό τής φύσεως καί τής άλλης μελέτης, άλλά κατε-

37D cf. S IV 164, 28, Φ 39 εΐπεν&ν τις »0 λόγους αύτόν άλλά πραγμάτων <ρθέγγε-
σθαι οΐισίας.
 wish to worship the statues of the gods, but he was fast moving
towards the gods themselves, who are hidden within, not in
sanctuaries but in the very mystery -whatever this may be- of the
completely unknowable. And how did he move towards them,
when they are of such a nature? By the power of an extraordinary
love, itself no less mysterious. What is love if not unknowable?
Those who have experienced it know what I am saying, for it is
impossible to describe it, nor is it any easier to comprehend it with
the mind.*78
B Truth itself is in danger of being extinguished.
C Men will experience its sunset since they are unable to endure
its sacred dawn.

37
A He was obliged to look after the children’s education.
B When defending Socrates79 Isidore spoke too profoundly for his
pupils’ understanding.
C In the many quests for the solution of those strange riddles, he
posed many sphinx-like problems -not the Cadmeian sphinx, but a
sphinx just the same, yet one more divine and much wiser.
D When lecturing he lacked the linguistic skill necessary to
present his views satisfactorily. And yet, not being unaided in this
respect either by nature or by training, he still made zealous efforts

last pagans invariably used in preference to those hateful syllables ot χριστιανοί”. Yet,
while deploring the lack of religious freedom, Isidore understood private piety as
independent from —and even opposed to— public worship; in this he was following on
the footsteps of Plotinus about whom the following anecdote is reported by his
biographer: “when Amelius grew ritualistic and took to going round visiting the
temples at the New Moon and the feasts of the gods and once asked if he could take
Plotinus along, Plotinus said: ‘they ought to come to me, not I to them’”. (Porphyry V.
Plot. 10, trans. A.H. Armstrong, my italics).
78 Cf. Herm. S I. The next two sentences are also in typical Hermetic language,
recalling the Asclepius Apocalypse.
79 It is significant that Isidore should identify with Socrates, the unconventional oral
teacher, rather than with Plato as would most Neoplatonists; cf. I16E.
 βάλλετο μέν σπουδήν πρός τήν σαφήνειαν, τήν δέ των όνομάτων
εύρυθμίαν άφιείς έτέροις, πρός έπίδειξιν εΐχετο των πραγμάτων, 5
ού λόγους τό πλέον ή νοήσεις φθεγγόμενος, ούδέ νοήσεις μάλλον
ή τάς ουσίας αυτών τών πραγμάτων άγων είς φώς.
[Φ 246]
Ε Ή ν δέ καί εύρετής έτοιμότατος <δν τε αυτός ήπόρει πρός έτέ-
ρους καί ών έτεροι πρός αύτόν, ού πολυμαθίμ καί άλλοτρίων δο-
ξασμάτων ίστορίμ καταχωννύς μέν τήν άλήθειαν καί άποκρύ-
πτων, έπιστομίζων δέ τούς άποροΰντας. Ούδέ ήν τών βιβλίων πο-
λυήκοος, άλλα φώμη γενναίας φύσεως καί θεών άγχισπόρου έν s
ταΐς έξηγήσεσιν ήν θαυμάσιος· πόθφ τε άμηχάνφ τής περί τό
θειον βακχείας, οΐον άπομαντευομένψ έφκει τήν τής άλήθειας
εϋρεσιν.
[Φ 40 + S Π 467,2 (εύρετής) + S IV 164,26 (πολυήκοος pp)]
F Ή ν δέ Ικανός διιδεΐν δπη τε σαθρόν φθέγγεται ό λόγος καί
δπη υγιές, ΐνα τό μέν πρόσοιτο, τό δέ έξελέγξειε.
[Φ 41 + S IV 235,12 (πρόσοιτο ρ)]

37Ε cf. S I 41,19, S I 141,18.

S I I 467, 2 (Sj) solum usque ad 4 άποροΰντας, S IV 164, 26 (S2) solum 4 ούδέ
- 6 θαυμάσιος.
2 πολυμαθίς Φ: πολυμαθείς Sj. 3 καί άποκρύπτων S,: om. Φ. 4 ούδέ - 5
πολυήκοος S2: om. Φ. 5 έν - 6 θαυμάσιος S2: om. Φ.
37F Φ solum usque ad 2 ΐιγιές.
1 δέ S: δ' Φ. 1 διιδεΐν Φ: Ιδεϊν S. 1 δπη - 2 δπη Φ: δπη -δ π η S.
 at clarity. Leaving to others the graceful display of words, he
occupied himself with revealing the thing itself, pronouncing
concepts rather than words; indeed it was not so much concepts that
he brought to light as the very essence of the things themselves.
E He was also very inventive both in proposing questions for
discussion and in solving the problems that others put forward to
him, not using mere erudition and the relating of other people’s
opinions to bury and conceal the truth and to silence his
questioners. Nor had he read many books, but he was remarkable in
his expositions through the power of a nature which was noble and
akin to the gods.80 In the infinite rapture of his yearning after God
he resembled a seer who divined the truth by instinct.
F He was able to distinguish between sound and unsound
arguments in order to expound the former and refute the latter.

80 The pattern of natural as opposed to acquired wisdom and of the one book as
opposed to many is applied by Damascius to Isidore who had nevertheless studied
assiduously under many masters.
Α Μαρίνος· ούτος τήν Πρόκλου διατριβήν παραδεξάμενος καί
’Ισιδώρου τοΰ φιλοσόφου τών Άριστοτέλους λόγων καθηγησάμε-
νος, έλθόντι τό δεύτερον Άθήναζε, τοΰ κοινού διδασκάλου τετε-
λευτηκότος, έπέδειξεν αύτφ συγγεγραμμένον ύπόμνημα πρός έαυ-
τοΰ στίχων παμπόλλων είς τόν Πλάτωνος Φίληβον, έντυχεΧν τε s
καί έπικρϊνάι κελεύσας, εΐ έξοιστέον εΐη τό βιβλίον. Ό δέ άνα-
γνοΰς έπιμελώς ούδέν άπεκρνψατο τών αύτφ δοκούντων, ού μέν-
τοι άμουσον άφήκε φωνήν ούδεμίαν, τοσοϋτον δέ Ιφη μόνον,
Ικανά είναι τά τού διδασκάλου υπομνήματα είς τόν διάλογον
συνείς δ’ έκεϊνος παραυτίκα διέφθειρε πυρί τό βιβλίον. ίο
[S III324,16 (Μαρίνος 199 pp)]
Β Έξαίρετον δ ’ ήν αύτφ παρά τούς άλλους καί τούτο φιλοσό­
φους· ούκ ήβούλετο συλλογισμοίς άναγκάζειν μόνον ούτε έαυτόν
ούτε τούς συνόντας έπακολουθείν τή άληθείμ μή όρω^ένη, κατά
μίαν όδόν πορεύεσθαι συνελαυνομένους ύπό τοΰ λόγου, οϊον τυ­
φλούς τήν όρθήν άγομένους πορείαν. ’Αλλά πείθειν έσπούδαζεν s
άεί καί δψιν έντιθέναι τή ψυχή, μάλλον δέ Ινούσαν διακαθαίρειν.
[Φ43]

38Α cf. Φ 42 Μαρίνος δέ ό Πρόκλου διάδοχος ό καί Ισιδώρου (μετά καί άλλων)
τών Άριστοτέλους λόγων διδάσκαλος, ύπόμνημα πολύστιχον είς Φίληβον συν-
τάξας τοΰ Πλάτωνος, ούτος τφ Ίσιδώρψ έντυχεϊν τε τφ ύπομνήματι κελεύει,
καί έπικρΐναι εΐ έξοιστέον. Ό δέ άναγνούς ούδέν άπεκρύψατο τών αύτφ δοκούν-
των, ού μένιοι ούδέ άμουσον άφήκε φωνήν, τοσοϋτον δέ μόνον έφη, Ικανά είναι
τά τοΰ διδασκάλου. '0 δέ Μαρίνος συνείς πυρί διέφθειρε τό βιβλίον.
A Marinus: he took over the philosophical school of Proclus and
instructed Isidore the philosopher in Aristotelian doctrine. During
Isidore’s second visit to Athens, after the death of their common
master,81 he showed him a prolix commentary that he had
composed on Plato’s Philebus, urging him to read it critically in
order to tell him whether he should publish the book. Isidore read it
carefully and, concealing nothing of what he thought, but at the
same time not uttering a single unseemly word, he merely said that
the master’s commentary on the dialogue was quite sufficient.
Marinus understood his meaning and immediately burned the book.
B He surpassed the other philosophers in this respect too: he did
not want to force either himself or his pupils to pursue the invisible
truth through reasoning alone, herded together by logic along a
single road like the blind whom one guides on the right path. But he
always strove to persuade them by placing eyes in their soul, or
rather cleansing those which were already there.

81 This is in 485 when Isidore comes to Athens in view of Proclus’ impending

death.
 Ill

39
A Υπηρεσίαν έτέλει, fi πρός τάχος έπετέτακτο γράφειν τά ύπό
των άρχόντων προσταττόμενα.
[Φ44]
Β Περί σδ έρώ κατά τόν Ικνοΰμενον λόγον. Ό είδώς οΰ λέγω, ώς
μηδέ άκοϋσαι ώφελον.
[Φ 45]

40
Α Ό δε Λεόντιος άριστα βεβουλεϋσθαι νομίζων οΐκαδε έπανήει
μετά παρρησίας άτυχους καί κακοδαίμονος, οΰ πλουτήσας οΰδέ
σωθείς, ώς φετο, άλλα ζημιωθείς μέν εΰσεβείας θεοφιλούς, πανω­
λεθρία δέ τήν ψυχήν διαφθαρείς. *
[Φ 46]
Β Ό μέν σδν ούτω διήντλησε πάντα τόν βίον έν συμφοραϊς.
[Φ 47]

41
Έπιφάνιος καί Εύπρέπιος έγενέσθην Άλεξανδρεϊς τό γένος
άμφότεροι καί τών παρά Άλεξανδρεΰσι τελετών νομίζομενων
δαημονέστατοι, τών μέν Περσικών καλούμενων ό Εΰπρέπιος

41 cf. S i l l , 17, SII 349, 13.

 39
A His function was to take down the magistrates’ orders in short­
hand.
Β I will talk about it in the course of my exposition. Though I
know it I will not say anything. If only I had never even heard of it!

40
A And Leontius,82 who thought that he had taken an excellent
decision, went back home with unfortunate and ill-inspired
outspokenness; he acquired neither riches nor security, as he had
expected, but lost the piety that has the favour of the gods and
delivered his soul to utter perdition.
B He thus spent all his life in misfortune.

41
Epiphanius83 and Euprepius were both of Alexandrian descent
and were experts in the mystical rites established among the
Alexandrians, Euprepius presiding over the so-called Persian

82 A famous lawyer, about whom there is much in Zacharias’ VS (47, 66-73). The
reference here must be to his final conversion to Christianity. The misfortune referred to
in 40B must be that suffered by Leontius.
83 The Epiphanius mentioned here cannot possibly be the well-known sophist from
Petra who flourished in Athens in the mid-fourth century. Zintzen could reach such a
conclusion (p. 75) only because he viewed Sozomen’s information that he composed a
hymn to Dionysus (HE VI. 25. 9) in isolation from the rest of the evidence and without
considering the fact that Epiphanius of Petra was bom before Christianity was declared
a religio licita in 313. This Epiphanius is much more likely to be the dedicatee of two of
the works of Theo, who addresses him as τέκνον Έπιφάνιε (On Ptolemy’s Πρόχειροι
Κανόνες p. 199,2 (Tihon)). As a contemporary of Theo’s daughter Hypatia (for whom
a date of birth around 355 has been recently defended (Dzielska, 68)), the Alexandrian
astronomer Epiphanius fits the chronological implications of our passage: he was bom
after 313, but gained a considerable knowledge of the pagan mysteries through his
contact with men of previous generations. This consideration was instrumental in my
decision to integrate the passage in the context of the stories of Olympos and Hypatia
by way of introduction.
 έξάρχων, των δέ άμφί τόν Ό σιριν ό ’Επιφάνιος. Ού μόνον δέ,
άλλα καί των τοϋ Αίώνος ύμνουμένου θεού- δν Εχων είπέϊν δστις s
έστίν, δμως ού γράφω κατά γε τήν παρούσαν τούτην όρμήν. Ό δέ
’Επιφάνιος Εξηγείτο καί τώνδε τών ίερών.
Ούτοι μέντοι οί άνδρες ούκ έγένοντο μέν έπί τής άρχαιοπρε-
ποΰς πολιτείας, τοΐς δέ γενομένοις έπιβεβήκασι καί ένέτυχον, καί
παρ’ έκείνων ώφεληθέντες, Επειτα τοΐς καθ’ έαυτοΰς έγένοντο ίο
πολλών άγαθών ηγεμόνες, τών τε άλλων καί παλαιών διηγημά­
των πολύφωνοι κήρυκες.
[S I I 391,29 (’Επιφάνιος καί Εύπρέπιος)]

42
Α ’Όλυμπος, άδελφός Γενερώσης- δς ήκεν άπό τής Κιλικίας εις
’Αλεξάνδρειαν έπί τήν θεραπείαν τοϋ Σαράπιδος.
[S ΙΠ 522,5 (Όλυμπος l l 8 pp)]
Β Ούδείς δέ ήν ούτως άτεράμων καί βάρβαρος τήν ψυχήν, δς ούκ
έπείθετο καί κατεκηλεΐτο τοΐς άπό τοϋ ίεροϋ στόματος Εκείνου
φέουσι λόγοις. Τοιάδε τις έπεκάθητο πειθώ τοΐς χείλεσι τοϋ
άνδρός, ούκ άνθρώπειόν τι χρήμα, άλλά θειότερον.
[Φ 48 + S Π Ι522,10 (Όλυμπος 218 pp)]
C Ή ν δέ ές πάντα φύσιν άξιάγαστον κεκτημένος, μέγας μέν τό
σώμα καί εύμήκης Ιδεΐν, καλός δέ καί άγαθός τήν δψιν. Τής δέ
ήλικίας έν τφ φρονιμωτάτφ τότε γεγονώς, εύόμιλός τε ήν καί
ήδύς ίκανώς τοΐς έντυγχάνουσι καί ωφέλιμος εΐπερ τις Ετερος

42Α 2 Σαράπιδος Valesius, Kiister, Asmus: Σαρπηδόνος S.

42Β cf. S I 402,6.
1 ούδείς - ούτως S: ούδείς δ’ ούτως ήν Φ. 1 τήν ψυχήν ante άτεράμων habet
Φ.
42C Φ solum usque ad 4 ωφέλιμος.
1 ήν δέ - κεκτημένος S: φύσιν άξιάγαστος Φ. 2 τής δέ S: τής δ ’ Φ. 3 ήν S:
om. Φ. 4 Ικανώς S: ικανός Φ. 4 τοΐς έντυγχάνουσι post ώφέλιμος habet Φ.
 mysteries and Epiphanius over those related to Osiris -and not
merely those, but also the mysteries of the god celebrated as
Aion.84 (Though I can disclose the identity of the god, I will not
write it down on this occasion.) Anyway, Epiphanius presided over
these mysteries.
These men were not bom into the traditional way of life, but
they overlapped with and met those who had and, having benefited
from their company, they became for their contemporaries the
source of many blessings and, among other things, the powerfully
voiced messengers of ancient tales.

42
A Olympos, brother of Generosa, who came to Alexandria from
Cilicia in order to worship Sarapis.85
B Nobody’s soul was so hard and barbarous that it was not
persuaded and charmed by the words which flowed from that
divine mouth; for the persuasiveness which dwelt on the lips of the
man was not human but altogether godlike.
C He was admirable in all respects: he was tall and impressive
with a face which conveyed beauty and goodness. Having reached
that age when the mind is at its most mature, he was sociable and

84 As an astronomer and a pupil of Theo in particular, Epiphanius was eminently

suited to preside over the mysteries of Eternal Time, the annual festival celebrated in
Alexandria on the eve of Epiphany (10/11 Tybi) and symbolising the perpetual rebirth
of the Sun. According to Epiphanius of Salamis, who describes the ritual as performed
in the reign of Valens (Pan. 51.22.9-10), when, after an all-night vigil, the faithful are
asked what the mystery signifies, they respond with the liturgical cry: ‘Today at this
hour the Virgin gave birth to Aion”. Epiphanius additionally reports that the virgin birth
of “the only son of the Lord” —which is how he translates the name Dusaies— was
also celebrated in Petra in accordance with a similar ritual and in the Arab tongue
(άραβική διαλέκτφ έξυμνοϋσι τήν παρθένον...καΙ τόν έξ αυτής γεγενημένον Δουσάρην
τουτέστιν μονογενή τοϋ δεσπότου, ibid. 10); on Dusares, cf. below, nn. 360, 361. It is
worth mentioning in the present context Hippolytus’ interpretation of the Eleusinian
mystery in which ή παρθένος ή έν γαστρί ίχονσα m i σνλλαμβάνουσα καί τίχτουσα υΙόν
ού ψυχικόν ού σωματικόν άλλα μακάριον ΑΙώνα ΑΙώνων (cf. Ref. V.8.40 and 45 with
Marcovicz’s notes ad loc.). On Aion's popularity as a supreme god in late antique
Egypt, PGM 1 ,164-5; IV, 2198, Synesius Hymn 5.67 and cf. Nock, Essays 1,377-396.
85 Olympos/Olympius defended the Sarapeion against Christian attack in 491; on
him and his activities in Alexandria and abroad, see JHS 113,14-16.
 τοϊς πειθομένοις. 5
[Φ 49 + S III522,6 (Όλυμπος 218 ρρ)]
D Καί τήν τροφήν έκληρώσατο μετρίαν τινά καί άθρυπτον, ούτε
κακουργούσαν διά πενίαν, οΰτε διά πλούτον βλακεύουσαν, άλλά
μέσην καί μουσικήν, τόν Δώριον τρόπον τής ψυχής άληθώς ήρμο-
σμένην.
[Φ 50 + S I I 136,3 (Δώριος)]
Ε Μόνος δέ άνθρώπων ών άκοή ΐσμεν, τήν παλαιάν παροιμίαν
Ιργφ διήλεγξεν ου γάρ έκεϊνόν γε ήλιξ έτερπεν ήλικα δντα, ό νέος
τόν νέον, άλλά τινι λόγφ έτέρφ κατακολουθούσα ή φύσις τοϊς
όμοίοις αυτόν συνήπτε κατά τό δμοιον ου των έτών τού σώματος,
άλλά τών τρόπων τής ψυχής. 5
[Φ 51 + S I I 563,7 (ήλιξ ήλικα τέρπει)]
F Ταΰτά τοι τοις ’Αλεξανδρεΰσι κατέστη Ιεροδιδάσκαλος, ήδη
κατασυρομένης υπό τού χειμάρρου τής πολιτείας. Ό δέ (Ιυναγεί-
ρων έκάστοτε τούς παρατυγχάνοντας έδίδασκε τήν περί τό θειον
άγιστεύουσαν θέμιν, τά άρχάΐα νόμιμα καί τήν τούτοις έφεπομέ-
νην ευδαιμονίαν, δση τε καί οΐα θεόθεν άπήντα τοις άκριβώς 5
ταΰτα διαφυλάττουσιν.
[S III522, 14 (Όλυμπος 218 pp) + Φ 247]
G Ταύτά τοι καί θαρρών αυτός κατά τι έθος άρχαίον έκέλευσε
δι* ημέρας τήν Ιερουργίαν τήν τεταγμένην δράσαι τφ θεφ.
[*S IV 510, 20 (ταύτά τοι ρ)]
Η Οϋτω δέ ήν ό Όλυμπος πλήρης τού θεού, ώστε καί προεϊπε
τοϊς έταίροις, δτι Σάραπις άφίησι τόν νέων δ καί γέγονεν.
[S III522, 18 (Όλυμπος 218 pp)]

42D cf. S I 72,20.

1 καί τήν Φ: τήν δέ S. 3 τής ψυχής Φ ν.1; τής τύχης Φ, S. 3 άληθώς S: ώς
άληθώς Φ.
42Ε 1 δέ Φ: om. S. 2 ού γάρ - 5 ψυχής S: οΰχ ήλιξιν άλλά πρεσβύταις καί πρεσβυ-
•ακοίς λόγοι,ς τερπόμενος Φ.
42F Φ solum 3 τήν περί - 4 θέμιν; quae verba S omittit,
2 κατασυρομένης Zintzen: κατασυρομένοις S.
 very charming to the people he met, and proved exceptionally
useful to those who followed his advice.
D He had chosen a moderate and frugal diet which neither harmed
him through deprivation nor enervated him through its richness. It
was balanced and harmonious, truly regulated according to the
Dorian mode of the soul. 86
E He was the only man of whom we have heard who contradicted
in his actions the old saying: for, though young, he took no pleasure
in the company of his young contemporaries, since Nature,
following a different rule, attached him to those who resembled him
not in bodily years but in spiritual ways.87
F Thus he became a teacher in religious matters to the
Alexandrians at the time when their society was already being
swept away by the torrent.88 He used to gather together those
around him and teach them the rules of divine worship, the ancient
traditions and the happiness which attends on them -that great and
wonderful happiness sent by the gods to those who faithfully
observe them.
G Thus, taking heart, he bade [them] to perform throughout the
day the ordained ritual to the god according to ancient custom.89
H Olympos was so possessed by the god that he prophesied to his
disciples that Sarapis would abandon the temple; and this came to
pass.

86 The reading ψυχής, instead of M’s τύχης followed by Henry, was suggested to
me by Augusto Guida who also pointed out the relevance to the present context of the
Platonic passage Ladi. 188d and especially of Proclus’ comment (In Remp. I, 61, 28ff):
άγαθόν δνδρα είναι καί όντως πεπαιδευμένον τόν άρμοσάμενον ... τήν αύτοϋ ψυχήν ...
δωριστί, ήπερ μόνη έστΐν άρμονία έλληνική.
87 A reference to and at the same time a commentary on Plato Phaedr. 240c.
88 A reference to the events preceding the destruction of the Serapeion. Cf. above
pp. 115-117, n. 77.
89 The word ιερουργία (as also the expression Ιερά άγιστεία) is extremely common
in Zosimus, cf. Appendix III.
Α Ύπατία· αΰτη έν Άλεξανδρείρ καί έγεννήθη καί άνετράφη καί
έπαιδεύθη. Την δέ φύσιν γενναιότερα τού πατρός οΰσα ούκ ήρκέ-
σθη τοίς διά τών μαθημάτων παιδεύμασιν υπό τφ πατρί, άλλά καί
φιλοσοφίας ήψατο τής άλλης ούκ άγεννώς, περιβαλλομένη δέ τρί-
βωνα ή γυνή καί διά μέσου τοΰ άστεως ποιουμένη τάς προόδους 5
έξηγεϊτο δημοσίρ τοϊς άκροδσθαι βουλομενοις ή τόν Πλάτωνα ή
τόν Άριστοτέλην ή τά άλλου δτου δή τών φιλοσόφων. Πρός δέ τφ
διδασκαλικφ καί έπ’ άκρον άναβάσα τής πρακτικής άρετής, δί­
καια τε καί σώφρων γεγονυΐα, διετέλει παρθένος, οΰτω σφόδρα
καλή τε ούσα καί εύειδής, ώστε καί έρασθήναί τινα αύτής τών ίο
προσφοιτώντων. Ό δέ ούχ οίός τε ήν κρατειν τού έρωτος, άλλ’
αϊσθησιν ήδη παρείχετο καί αύτή τοΰ παθήματος. Οί μέν ούν
άπαίδευτοι λόγοι φασί, διά μουσικής αυτόν άπαλλάξαι τής νόσου
τήν Ύ πατίαν ή δέ άλήθεια διαγγέλλει πάλαι μέν διεφθόρέναι τά
μουσικής, αύτήν δέ ,προενεγκαμένην τι τών γυναικείων φακών is
αΐματι βεβαμμένον καί τό σύμβολον έπιδείξασαν τής άκαθάρτου
γενέσεως
[S* IV 644, 12 (Ύπατία pp)]
Β (δη φυλακεΐα οί "Αλέξανδρέϊς έκάλουν τά έκμαγεϊα των γυναικεί­
ων μολυσμών),
[Φ 52]
C τούτου μέντοι, φάναι, έρφς, ώ νεανίσκε, καλού δέ ούδενός· τόν δέ
ύπ’ αισχύνης καί θάμβους τής άσχήμονος έπιδείξεως διατραπή-
ναί τε τήν ψυχήν καί διατεθήναι σωφρονέστερον.
[S* IV 644,27 (Ύπατία pp)]
D (καί Κηρυκίνας έκάλουν Άλεξανδρεΐς γυναίκας, αϊτινες εις τάς
αύλάς παριοϋσαι καί τάς συνοικίας, έφ’ φτε συναγείρειν τά μιά­
σματα καί άποφέρειν εις θάλασσαν, άπερ έκάλουν φυλάκια)
[*S III 111, 19 (Κηρύκαινα)]

43Α 5 άστεως Zintzen: άστεος S. 7 τά άλλου ν.1.: άλλου S. 16 αΐματι βεβαμμένον

Asmus: αΰτοϋ βαλλομένην S.
43Β cf. S IV 772,23.
A Hypatia: she was bom, brought up and educated in Alexandria
and, being endowed with a nobler nature than her father,90 she was
not content with the mathematical education that her father gave
her, but occupied herself with some distinction in the other
branches of philosophy. And wrapping herself in a philosopher’s
cloak,91 she progressed through the town, publicly interpreting the
works of Plato, Aristotle or any other philosopher to those who
wished to listen. As well as being a gifted teacher, she had reached
the peak of moral virtue and was just and prudent; she remained a
virgin, but as she was remarkably beautiful and attractive one of her
students fell in love with her and, not being able to control his
passion, he betrayed it to her as well. Ignorant legend has it that
Hypatia cured him of his disease through music. But the truth is
that when music failed to have any effect, she produced a rag of the
type used by women, stained with blood and, showing him the
symbol of the impurity of birth
B -the towels o f menstrual pollution were called ‘preservatives’
by the Alexandrians-,
C she said: “This is what you are in love with, young man, and not
a thing of beauty”. His soul was overcome by shame and
astonishment at the unseemly display and he adopted a more
rational attitude.
D (And the Alexandrians called ‘heraldesses’ the women who
went round the courtyards and neighbourhoods in order to pick up
and take to the sea the refuse called “preservatives”).

90 The mathematician Theo. In Barbarians and politics at the court o f Arcadius

(50-58), Alan Cameron argues that Theo and Hypatia were adepts of Iamblichan
Neoplatonism, well versed in both the Hermetic and the Chaldaean wisdom — certainly
the taste for the occult displayed by her pupil Synesius is an indication in this direction.
For the intellectual milieu of Theo and Hypatia, see now Dzielska, passim.
91 Cf. below 86F, on Damiane.
Ε Οΰτω δέ έχουσαν την Ύπατίαν, έν τε τοΐς λόγοις ούσαν
έντρεχή καί διαλεκτικήν έν τε τοΐς έργοις δμφρονά τε καί πολιτι­
κήν, ή τε άλλη πόλις εικότως ήσπάζετό τε καί προσεκύνει διαφε-
ρόντως, οί τε άρχοντες άεί προχειριζόμενοι <τά> τής πόλεως
έφοίτων πρώτοι πρός αυτήν, ώς καί Άθήνησι διετέλει γινόμενον. 5
ΕΙ γάρ καί τό πράγμα άπόλωλεν, άλλα τό γε όνομα φιλοσοφίας
έτι μεγαλοπρεπές τε καί άξιάγαστον είναι εδόκει τοις μεταχειρι-
ζομένοις τά πρώτα τής πολιτείας.
Ήδη γοϋν ποτέ συνέβη τόν έπισκοποΰντα τήν άντικειμένην
αΐρεσιν Κύριλλον, παριόντα διά τού οϊκου τής Ύπατίας, ίδεϊν 10

πολύν ώθισμόν όντα πρός ταϊς θύραις, έπιμίξ άνδρών τε καί

ίππων, τών μέν προσιόντων, τών δέ άπιόντων, τών δέ καί προσι-
σταμένων. Έρωτησαντα δέ δ τι είη τό πλήθος καί περί οδ κατά
τήν οικίαν δ θόρυβος, άκοϋσαι παρά τών έπομένων, ότι ^ροσαγο-
ρεύοιτο νΰν ή φιλόσοφος Ύπατία καί έκείνης είναι τήν οικίαν. 15
Μαθόντα δή οΰτω δηχθήναι τήν ψυχήν, ώστε φόνον αΰτή ταχέως
έπιβουλεΰσαι, πάντων φόνων άνοσιώτατον. Προελθούση γάρ
κατά τό είωθός έπιθέμενοι πολλοί άθρόοι θηριώδεις άνθρωποι,
ώς άληθώς σχέτλιοι, ούτε θεών δπιν είδότες οΰτ’ άνθρώπων νέμε-
σιν άναιροϋσι τήν φιλόσοφον, -καί τούς όφθαλμούς αύτής μι­ 20
κρόν ύποσπαιρούσης Ιτι έκκόπτουσιν- άγος τούτο μέγιστον καί
όνειδος προστριψάμενοι τή πατρίδι. Καί ό βασιλεύς ήγανάκτησε
έπί τούτφ <...> εί μή Αίδέσιος έδωροδοκήθη. Καί τών μέν σφαγέ­
ων άφείλετο τήν ποινήν, έφ’ έαυτόν δέ καί γένος τό άφ’ έαυτοϋ
ταύτην έπεσπάσατο, καί έξέπλησε δίκην ό τούτου έκγονος. 25
[S* IV 644,30 (Ύπατία ρρ) + *S IV 676,1 (ύποσπαιρούσης)]

43Ε S IV 676,1 solum 20 καί - 21 έκκόπτουσιν (quae verba omittit S IV 644,30).

4 τά add. Zintzen. 23 lacunam indicavit Asmus.
E Hypatia being of such a nature -skilled and dialectical in
speech, wise and politic in behaviour- the entire city naturally
loved her and held her in exceptional esteem, while the powers-
that-be paid their respects first to her, as indeed was the custom in
Athens. Even if philosophy itself was dead, its name at least still
seemed most honourable and worthy of admiration to those who
ran the affairs of the city.92
It happened one day that Cyril, the man in charge of the
opposing sect,93 was passing Hypatia’s house and seeing a great
crowd at the door “a mix of men and horses”,94 some going, some
coming and some standing around, he asked what the crowd was
and why there was this commotion in front of the house. His
attendants told him that honours were being paid to the philosopher
Hypatia and that this was her house. When he heard this, envy so
gnawed at his soul that he soon begun to plot her murder -the most
ungodly murder of all. When she left her house as usual, a crowd of
bestial men -truly abominable- those who take account neither of
divine vengeance nor of human retribution- fell upon and killed the
philosopher; and while she still gasped for air they cut out her eyes;
thus inflicting the greatest pollution and disgrace on the city. And
the emperor was vexed at that (...)95 had not Aedesius been bribed.
He removed the punishment from the murderers and brought it
upon himself and his offspring; it was his grandson who paid the
penalty.96

92 It is worth pointing out in this connection that Hypatia’s murder did not put an
end to this tradition: during his student days in Alexandria in the early 430s Proclus too
had close relations with the political establishment (Marinus VP 8-9).
93 This derogatory expression is a pun on the word έπίσκοπος-bishop.
94 Cf. Homer//. 21.16.
95 Asmus rightly suspects a lacuna at this point. The text may have said something
like the following: “and would have dealt with the culprits accordingly”. However it is
possible that the text is complete, with the meaning “the emperor would have been
angry had Aedesius not been bribed”, since the potential άν can be omitted at this date
in the apodosis of a conditional sentence.
96 Both in detail and general spirit Damascius’ account of Hypatia is corroborated
by Socrates, HE VII. 15, who also gives jealousy as the motive for her murder; an
epigram ascribed to Palladas (Anthol. Gr. IX. 400) and addressed to Hypatia, a virgin,
an astronomer, a wise teacher and a talented orator, clearly refers to our Hypatia, as
 44
Ούκ ήν δέ γνήσιος δ γάμος, εί μή 6 Ιερεΰς δ τής θεοΰ έν τοίς
γαμικοις συμβολαίοις ύπεσημήνατο χειρί τή έαυτοΰ.
[Φ53]

45
Α Ό τι 'Ιεροκλής, δ τάς έν ’Αλεξανδρείςι διατριβάς ύψηλοφρο-
σύντι και μεγαληγορίμ κοσμήσας, μετά τοΰ άτρέπτου καί μεγαλο­
πρεπούς εύρους τε τήν διάνοιαν ε’ις υπερβολήν ήν, καί διαφέρων
εύγλωττη καί εύποριμ των καλλίστων όνομάτων και βημάτων
κατέπληττε πανταχή τούς άκροωμένους, πρός τήν Πλάτωνος 5
άμιλλώμενος άεΐ καλλιρρημοσύνην καί πολύνοιαν. Οΰτός ποτέ
τόν Πλάτωνος Γοργίαν τοΐς έταίροις έξηγέϊτο- εις δέ τις τών
άκροατών, Θεοσέβιος, άπεγράψατο τήν έξήγησιν. Πάλιν δ’, οία
εΐκός, έκ δευτέρου τοΰ Ίεροκλέους εις τόν Γοργίαν κατα^αλλομέ-
νου μετά τινα χρόνον τήν έξήγησιν δ αύτός ταύτην άπεγράψατο, 10

καί άντιπαραβαλών τά πρότερα καί τά ύστερα εύρεν ούδέν τών

αύτών ώς έπος είπεΐν, έκάτερα δέ δμως, δ καί παράλογον
άκοΰσαι, τής Πλάτωνος έχόμενα καθ’ δσον οΐόν τε προαιρέσεως.
Τούτφ μέν ούν έπιδείκνυται τοΰ άνδρός ήλίκον ήν άρα τό τών
ψρενών πέλαγος. 15
[Φ 54]
Β Ή ν δέ αύτφ καί μαθητής Θεοσέβιος, άνήρ, εΐπερ τις έτερος ών
ήμείς ΐσμεν, είωθώς άποβλέπειν εις τάς τών άνθρώπων ψυχάς.
Έλεγε δέ δ αύτός Θεοσέβιος έξηγούμενον φάναι ποτέ τόν 'Ιερο-
κλέα, κύβοις έοικέναι τούς Σωκράτους λόγους· άπτώτας γάρ
είναι πανταχοΰ δπη δν πέσωσι. 5

45Α cf. S II 616,4.

 44
The marriage was not valid unless the priest of the goddess
signed the marriage contract with his own hand.

45
A Hierocles, who was an adornment to the Alexandrian scholastic
scene with his lofty spirit and eloquence, was a man of
overwhelming power and distinction as regards the breadth of his
mind. Everywhere he impressed his public with his uncommon
eloquence and the ease with which he produced the most beautiful
words and expressions in his constant effort to emulate Plato’s
beauty of style and wealth of meaning. On one occasion he was
expounding to his students Plato’s Gorgias, and one of his pupils
-Theosebius- wrote down his commentary. As was natural, some
time later Hierocles again gave a class on the Gorgias; the same
pupil took down the commentary and comparing his previous notes
with the ones taken later he found almost nothing the same, though
both versions -extraordinary though this may sound- reproduced
Plato’s meaning to the extent that this is possible.*
97 This indicates
how broad was the ocean of his mind.98
B He had a pupil -Theosebius- who, more than any man I have
ever met, had the power of looking directly into men’s souls. This
Theosebius said that in the course of a lecture Hierocles once
likened the words of Socrates to dice: however they fall, they fall
rightly.

indeed is argued by P. Waltz and G. Soury, Anthologie grecque VIII, ad loc. (the
ascription is doubted by Alan Cameron, The Greek Anthology from Meleager to
Planudes, Oxford 1993,323-324, who argues that the epigram was addressed to a nun).
Hypatia’s martyrdom, which occurred in March 415, is mentioned by several Byzantine
chroniclers (Philostorgius VIII.9; Malalas 359; John of Nikiu (Zotenberg / Charles) 87-
102; Theophanes A.M. 5906 (de Boor I, 82) among others); for a discussion of the
sources and a plausible reconstruction of the events leading up to her death, Dzielska,
83-100.
97 If we judge from the two versions of Damascius’ In Phaedonem as preserved by
a pupil (edited and translated by L.G. Westerink), this seems to have been quite a
common game.
98 In Aeneas of Gaza’s Theophrastus Hierocles is called δ διδάσκαλος by the
interlocutors, among whom is Isidore’s maternal uncle Aegyptus (Colonna, pp. 2,18).
 Τοϋ δέ 'Ιεροκλέους τό άνδρεΐον και μεγαλόθυμον ήθος άπέδει-
ξεν ή συμβάσα τύχη περί αύτόν. Εις γάρ τό Βυζάντιον άνελθών
προσέκρουσε τοΐς κρατοϋσι καί εις δικαστήριον άχθείς έτύπτετο
τάς έξ άνθρώπων πληγάς. 'Ρεόμενος δέ τφ α'ίματι βάψας κοίλην
τήν χεΐρα προσραίνει τόν κριτήν άμα λέγων κύκλωψ, τή, πιε ίο
οίνον, έπεί φάγες άνδρόμεα κρέα. Φυγήν δέ κατακριθείς καί έπα-
νελθών χρόνψ ύστερον εις ’Αλεξάνδρειαν συνεφιλοσόφει τά
είωθότα τοΐς πλησιάζουσιν. Έξεστι δέ μαθεΐν τήν Ίεροκλέους με-
γαλογνώμονα φρόνησιν άπό τών συγγραμμάτων, ών γέγραφεν εις
τά Χρυσά έπη τών Πυθαγορείων καί έτέρων βιβλίων Περί προ- is
νοίας συχνών εν οίς φαίνεται ό άνήρ τήν μέν ζωήν ύψηλόφρων,
τήν δέ γνώσιν ούκ άκριβής.
[S II 616, 7 (Ιεροκλής pp)]

46 *
Α Γυναίκα παιδοποιόν άγεται
[Φ 55]
Β Ώ ς δ’ούκ έπείθετο τό δαιμόνων τής γυναικός έξελθεΐν λόγοις
ήμερωτέροις, δρκιρ αυτό έπηνάγκαζεν δ Θεοσέβιος, καίτοι ούτε
μαγεύειν είδώς ούτε θεουργίασμά τι μελετήσας. "Ωρκιζε δέ τάς
τοΰ Ήλιου προτείνων άκτΐνας καί τόν 'Εβραίων θεόν. Ό δέ άπε-
λήλατο ό δαίμων, άνακραγών εύλαβείσθαι μέν τούς θεούς, αίσχύ- 5
νεσθαι δέ καί αύτόν.
[Φ56]
C Πάντα ούν κάλων έκίνει καί πάντα έπραττε καί έλεγε πείθων
καί παρακαλών, οίος έκείνου θυμός, ούδέν άπρακτον άπολιπεΐν
άνεχόμενος, έφ’ δτι άν όρμήσειεν.
[Φ57]
 Hierocles’ brave and noble nature was demonstrated by the fate
which befell him. Once in Byzantium," he gave offence to the
ruling party and, being taken to court, he was savagely beaten up.99100
As he flowed with blood he gathered some into the hollow of his
hand and sprinkled it over the judge exclaiming: “There Cyclops,
drink the wine now that you have devoured the human flesh”.101 He
was condemned to exile and after returning to Alexandria some
time later he continued to teach philosophy to his disciples just as
before.
It is possible to discern Hierocles’ wise and lofty mind from the
treatise that he composed on the Pythagorean Golden Verses102 and
from his many other books On Providence,103 in which he is
revealed as having a noble philosophy of life, but to be lacking in
detailed knowledge.

46
A He married a woman who could bear him children.
B But as the demon could not be persuaded by gentle words to
leave the woman, Theosebius forced him out by an exorcism,
though he understood nothing of magic nor had he ever studied
theurgy. He exorcised him by invoking the rays of Helios and the
god of the Jews;104 and the demon was driven away shouting that
he feared the gods, but also felt awe towards him [Theosebius],
C He had recourse to every possible method;105 he did and said all
he could by way of persuasion and exhortation; for such was his
character106 that he could not bear to leave undone any task on
which he had embarked.

99 Deliberate archaism for Constantinople.

too “jh g miing party” is a scathing reference to the Christians. The phrase τάς έξ
ανθρώπων πληγής is a verbatim quotation from Aeschines, Tim. 59.
101 Homer Od. 9.347.
102 Extant; latest edition by F.G. Koehler, cf. Bibliography.
103 See the detailed summary of the work by Photius, Bibl. Codd. 214 and 251.
104 The syncretism of Theosebius tallies with that of the Magical Papyri, where the
God of the Jews is often mentioned alongside Greek divinities. For obvious historical
reasons his powers of exorcism were widely invoked in Egypt from an early date.
105 A nautical metaphor; literally, “he moved every reefing rope”.
i°6 jqote the standard Homeric expression (//.15.94; 18.262; Od. 15.212), used by
D Έλεγε μεν ό Θεοσέβιος τά πολλά άπό των Επίκτητου σχολών,
τά δέ καί αυτός έπετεχνάτο τής ηθοποιού διανοήματα μούσης,
Ικανά πεί,θειν και δυσωπεϊν τών ψυχών τάς μή παντάπασιν άτεγκ­
τους καί άτεράμονας· άποστρέφεσθαι δέ καί άποδιδράσκειν τά
χείρω τής ζωής είδη κατά δύναμιν, άσπάζεσθαι δέ τά άμείνω καί 5
μεταδιώκειν, καθ’δσον οΐόν τε παντί σθένει· τοιγαροΰν καί έν
συγγράμμασι καταλέλοιπε τοιούτοις τισί τάς έαυτοϋ νουθετήσεις
οΐοις Επίκτητος πρότερον. Καί μοι δοκει ό άνήρ γεγονέναι άντι-
κρυς, ώς ένα πρός ένα άντιβαλεΐν, δ τοϋ καθ’ήμάς χρόνου Ε π ί­
κτητος, άνευ μέντοι τών στωικών δοξασμάτων. Ό γάρ Θεοσέβιος 10
οϋδέν τοσοΰτον δσον τήν Πλάτωνος άλήθειαν ήσπάζετο καί έθαύ-
μαζε. Καί δή τι καί συνεγράψατο μικρόν βιβλίδιον περί τών έν
Πολιτείμ τή μεγάλη κεκομψευμένων, τήν άπό τών θεών ήκουσαν
θεοσοφίαν έξαίρων λόγφ· ταύτην γάρ διαφερόντως έτίμα καί έσε-
βεν. ’Αεί γάρ έν τοΐς ήθικωτέροις φιλοσοφήμασι διατριβών έφαί- 15
νετο. Καί γάρ εΰ έπεφύκει πρός εύζωΐαν μάλλον ή έπιστήμην,
ουδέ ταύτην ήσυχάζουσαν, ούδέ έν μόναις ταΐς φαντασίαις γυ-
μναζομένην, άλλά ζώσαν Ικανώς έπ’ αύτών τών πραγμάτων. Εί
μή γάρ καί τόν δημόσιον έπολιτεύσατο τρόπον, άλλά τόν ίδιον,
δν καί Σωκράτης έκεΐνος καί ό ’Επίκτητος καί πας εΰ φρονών με­ 20
ταχειρίζεται, τήν έαυτοϋ καί έν έαυτφ πολιτείαν διακοσμών·
τούτο μέν πρώτον, έπειτα καί πρός άλλους έν μέρει καθέκαστον
Ιδίςι συνισταμένην πρός τό βέλτιστον.
[Φ 58 + S II 365,27 (’Επίκτητος ρ)1
Ε Ό δέ πάντων σωφρονέστατος Θεοσέβιος καί τήν πρός γυναί­
κα παιδοποιόν δμιλίαν έδέξατο. Έπεί δέ παϊδας ούκ έγεννάτην,
κατασκευασάμενος δ Θεοσέβιος τόν τής σωφροσύνης δακτύλιον
ώ γύναι, φησί τή γυναικί, πάλαι μέν σοι έπιδέδωκα δακτύλιον

46D cf. S I 401,3.

Φ solum usque ad 2 μοΰσης.
1 έλεγε - πολλά Φ: Θεοσέβιος 6 φιλόσοφος έλεγε πολλά S. 11 οΰδέν Bucherer:
ούδενδς S.
46Ε Φ 59 solum usque ad 10 έδέξατο.
1 δ δέ - 4 γυναικί Φ 59: δ δέ Θεοσέβιος τόν τής σωφροσύνης δακτύλιον δν δ
Χαλδαΐος είσιών παραδίδωσι, τούτον οδτος κατασκευασάμενος, προσελθών τή
γυναικί, έφηΦ 311.
D Much of what the philosopher Theosebius said came from the
school of Epictetus, but he also fashioned concepts in accordance
with the morals of his own Muse, which could prevail upon and put
to shame those souls which were not entirely rigid and obdurate, so
that as far as possible they turned away and fled from the worse
modes of life and they espoused and pursued the better insofar as
they could. Accordingly he left his admonitions in writings like
those of Epictetus in earlier times. And it seems to me that if you
compare the two men he is very much the Epictetus of our time
except that he did not follow the Stoic doctrine.*107 For there was
nothing that Theosebius welcomed and admired more than Plato’s
truth. Indeed he wrote a little pamphlet on the subtleties contained
in the great Republic, praising in rational terms the theosophy
which comes from the gods. For he had an exceptional respect and
veneration for theosophy.108 He was always seen to occupy himself
with the study of moral philosophy. Indeed he had a natural
inclination towards the life of virtue rather than towards
scholarship;109 though this “life of virtue” was by no means a quiet
one, exerted only in imaginary labours, but a life sufficiently
involved with action; however he did not lead a public existence
but a private one, such as that led by Socrates and by Epictetus and
by everyone who is in his right mind, regulating his outward way of
life and the life within. This was his first concern, and then to deal
with every one else in turn with the aim of their improvement.
E Theosebius, the most temperate of men, had agreed to have
relations with a woman in order to produce children. Yet as no
children were bom to them, Theosebius displayed the ring of
continence and told his wife: “Wife, long ago I gave you a ring to

both Damascius (In Phaed. 1.207) and Olympiodorus (In PhaedAQA) in connection
with Iamblichus’ boldness.
107 It is typical of the philosophical imperialism of the Neoplatonists that, having
appropriated the Stoic ethics, they christened them ‘Platonic’.
108 This and the previous sentence refer to the Chaldaean Oracles. Theosebius must
have put several verses in Plato’s mouth, as did Proclus in his Platonic Theology (V.35,
p. 127, 8-15).
109 In other words he had a practical rather than a theoretical mind.
 άρμοστήν παιδουργοϋ συμβιώσεως· τά νύν δέ τούτον έπιδίδωμί 5
σοι σωφρονιστήν, έπίκουρόν σοι παρεσόμενον άεί τής σώφρονος
οίκουρίας, εΐ μέν σδν δυνήση τε και θελήσεις έμοί συμβιώναι τόν
καθαρώτερον τρόπον εΐ δέ μή, έξεστιν άπαλλάττεσθαι πρός έτε­
ρον εύμενώς καί πρφως έκδιδομένην παρά φίλου φίλην. Ή δέ
άσμένως έδέξατο, καί συνέζησε τφ άνδρί τόν λοιπόν χρόνον άνευ 10

σωματικής κοινωνίας. Τφ δέ φυλακτηρίψ τούτφ τό δραστήριον

ούκ έπί τή γαμετή μόνον άλλα καί έφ’ έαυτοΰ πάλαι εΐώθει μαρ-
τυρεϊν· καί γάρ δτε νεώτερος ήν, ώμολόγει καί αύτός άγωνιεΐσθαι
τόν παιδείας άγώνα πρός τούς γενεσιουργούς πολεμίους, τούς τε
έξωθεν έπιτιθεμένους καί τούς ένδον προδιδόντας. 15
[Φ59 + Φ311]

47
Άμμωνιανός, γραμματικός, κοσμούμενος τή συγγενείς Συρια­
νού καί άμα τή συμφύτω όμοιότητι των τε ηθών καί τού σώματος
κατά τόν Όμηρον είδός τε μέγεθός τε φυήν τ’άγχιστα έφκει. Τό τε
γάρ σώμα καλός τε καί μέγας ήν έκάτερος. Καί έτι προσήν ύγεία
καί ισχύς ούδέν άποδέουσα τής άλλης εύφυίας τού τε δλου καί 5
τών μερών ή τε ψυχή έρρωτο πρός τό βέλτιστον αύτοΐς τό όμοιό-
τροπον. Ά λλ’δ μέν θεοφιλέστερος ήν ό Συριανός καί τφ δντι φι­
λόσοφος· ό δέ ήγάπα τήν έπί ποιητών έξηγήσει καί διορθώσει τής
έλληνικής λέξεως καθημένην τέχνην.
Οΰτος ήν Άμμωνιανός, φ κεκτήσθαι συμβέβηκεν δνον, δν φα- 10
σιν άκροώμενον τών ποιητικών μαθημάτων πολλάκις τροφής
άμελεΐν, καίτοι καί έκ παρασκευής καί λιμώττειν ήναγκασμένον
ούτως ώφθη φιλομαθίας ποιητικής άλούς ό δνος.
[S 1 145,20 (Άμμωνιανός) + Φ 60]

6σοιΦ 59:οιη. Φ311. 6 άεΙΦ 59: om. Φ 311. 7 εΐ μέν - 9 φίλην Φ 59: ora.
Φ311. 9 ή δε άσμένως έδέξατο Φ 311: ή δέήσμένισενΦ 59.
47 S solum usque ad 10 δνον, Φ solum 8 ό δέ ήγάπα usque ad finem.
8 δ δέ S: δ δέ Άμμωνιανός Φ. 10 φ κεκτήσθαι συμβέβηκεν S: φ συνέβη
κεκτήσθαι Φ. 10 δνον Φ: δνον σοφίας άκροατήν S.
 govern a union destined to bring forth children; now I give you this
ring of continence which will help you henceforth to live a chaste
domestic life, provided, of course, you are able and willing to live
with me in a pure manner; if not, you have my permission to take
another husband; I will give you away affectionately and with good
will as a friend would do to a friend. But the wife accepted his
proposal with joy and lived the rest of her life with her husband
without any sexual intercourse.
Theosebius used to testify to the efficacy of this talisman, not
only for his wife but also for himself in the past; indeed he admitted
that when he was younger he had struggled to discipline himself
against the forces which produce generation, both the attackers
from without and the traitors within.110

47
Ammonianus was a grammarian graced by kinship with
Syrianus and at the same time by a natural resemblance to him in
character and appearance alike; as Homer said “they were closely
alike in appearance, stature and nature”,111 for they were both tall
and good-looking and they had a health and a strength which lacked
no general or particular natural qualities. And their souls strove for
perfection in like manner. Yet Syrianus was more beloved of the
gods and a true philosopher; while Ammonianus was content with
the art which deals with the interpretation of poetry and the
emendation of Greek texts.
This was the Ammonianus who happened to own a donkey who,
they say, when listening to lectures on poetry often forgot to eat,
even if he had been deliberately starved beforehand; so overcome
did he appear by his love of poetic learning.

110 Both the language and the sentiment recall the experience of St Antony. Yet the
cardinal difference between late antique pagans and Christians is that the latter
discipline themselves in the desert, while the former lead an ascetic life in cities in the
midst of temptations, cf. Marinus VP 19.
111 Homer//. 2.58.
 48
Α Ό δέ Ισίδωρος έμελέτα άττα τών ποιητικών, ούχ δσον δυνά-
μεως, άλλ’ δσον όρέξεως εΐχεν. Είχε δέ έπ’ έλάχιστον της πρός
αύτά συμπάθειας, άτε ούχ άπτόμενα τής 'ψυχής, άλλά μέχρι φαν­
τασίας καί γλώττης ίστάμενα, τά δέ αύτών καί μαχόμενα ταΐς
όμολογουμέναις έννοίαις· διό καί ένδεέστερος ην έν τούτοις. s
Ό θεν καί ΰμνους δσους έγραψεν, εΰροι τις άν τό μέν ύψηλόνουν
καί τελεσιουργόν έπιφαίνοντας, τοίς δ’ έπεσιν ού πάνυ συνηρμο-
σμένους, άλλά τούτων δσον άμετρον άπέβαινε καί άλλως ού κατά
τόν πρεπώδη φυθμόν, έμοί έπανορθοϋσθαι έπέτρεπε.
[Φ 61 + S 1397, 17 (άττα 4304 p) + S IV 305, 20 ρυθμίζει)]
Β Ούδέ τή φητορική προσέσχε τόν νοΰν, δτι καί λόγου άξιον, τό
σοβαρόν αύτής καί άλαζονικόν εύλαβηθείς καί μισήσας.
[S IV 292, 23 (φητορική γραφή ρ)]
\
49
Θέων, σοφιστής λόγων ρητορικών, γεγονώς άπό τής ίεράς
Μαρκέλλης τό γε άνέκαθεν, τό δέ έξ ύπογύου πατρόθεν άπό
Έκδικίου, διδασκάλου καί τούτου τέχνης φητορικής.
Ή ν δέ ό Θέων ού μάλα άγχίνους ούδέ όξύς, φιλομαθής δέ καί
φιλόπονος, εΐ τις άλλος. Διό καί ποιητών καί φητόρων έμπειρό- 5
τατός τε καί μνημονικώτατος γέγονε καί τεχνικής άκριβείας έκα-
τέρων εις άκρον ήκειν έδόκει. Ταϋτά τοι καί έγεγόνει πολυμαθέ­
στατος έν όλίγψ χρόνω πολλήν άρχαίαν Ιστορίαν, πολλήν δέ νέαν

48Α cf. S Π 145,11, S Π 337,24, S Π 271,21, S IV 518,17.

Φ solum usque ad 7 συνηρμοσμενους, S 1397,17 (S,) solum usque ad 4 Ιστάμε-
να, S IV 305, 20 (S2) solum 6 δθεν usque ad finem.
1 6 δέ ’Ισίδωρος - 3 συμπάθειας St: δτι φησί μετρίως μετέσχε τών ποιητικών ό
’Ισίδωρος, ού λίαν σπουδάσας περί αϋτά Φ. 6 δθεν - τις άν Φ: άλλ’ δσα έγρα­
ψε S2. 7 καί Φ: τε καί S2. 7 έπιφαίνοντας Φ: είχαν S2. 7 δ’ Φ: δέ S2.
7 συνηρμοσμένους Φ: ήν συνηρμοσμένα S2.
49 cf. S I I 323,2, S IV 92,17.
Φ solum 4 ήν usque ad finem.
4 δ θέων Φ: ούτος δ θέων S. 5 εί τις άλλος Φ: εις Υπερβολήν S. 5 διό - 7 έδό-
κει Φ: om. S. 7 ταϋτα - 9 περιβαλόμενος S: om. Φ.
 48
A Isidore was reasonably well versed in poetry, not to the full
extent of his abilities but merely in accordance with his
inclinations; his sympathy for it was minimal since as a discipline it
does not reach the soul but remains at the level of the imagination
and the tongue, while indeed some of it is even in conflict with the
reality of Ideas.112 For this reason he was rather deficient in this
area, so that the hymns that he wrote may be found to show
loftiness of spirit and to cause ritual perfection, but not to be
impeccably composed as regards versification. However he
allowed me to amend their metrical defects and whatever went
against the correct rhythm.113
B He paid the minimum of attention to rhetoric, feeling suspicious
of and hating its pompous and pretentious nature.114

49
Theo was a teacher of rhetoric; he was ultimately descended
from the holy Marcella115 and, more recently, on his father’s side,
from Ecdicius, who was himself also a teacher of rhetoric.
Now this Theo was not particularly sharp or bright, but was
exceptional in his love of learning and hard work. In this way he
acquired an excellent knowledge and a sure memory of the poets
and orators, reaching in both these areas the highest degree in
technical expertise. Equally he became very knowledgeable in a
short time, encompassing a great deal of both ancient and modem

112 Damascius is here voicing Plato's objections to poetry as expressed in the

Republic (i.a. 387ab; 599a; 606d).
113 In this Isidore appears as a counterpart of Plotinus who “expected” Porphyry “to
correct his writings” (Porphyry V. Plot. 7).
114 One of the clear messages of this book is that on the whole rhetors arc idiots; cf.
Introduction, pp. 36,41-42.
115 The reference must be to Porphyry’s wife; if Proclus’ mother, also called
Marcella, were meant, Proclus himself would have been mentioned.
περιβαλόμενος. Γράφειν δέ μέτρα ή λόγους, καίτοι λίαν έρών,
άδύνατος ήν. 10
[S I I 702,26 (Θέων 209) + Φ 62]

50
Ό τι Μάχης πρό τοΰ 'Ρώμης άστεως γεγενημένης 'Ρωμαίων
πρός Σκύθας οΰς ’Αττίλας ήγεν, Ούαλεντινιανοΰ τοϋ μετά Όνώ-
ριον 'Ρώμης βασιλεύοντος, φόνος έρρύη έκατέρωθεν τοσοΰτος ώς
μηδένα των συμπλακέντων τή μάχη μηδετέρου μέρους περισωθή-
ναι, πλήν των ήγεμόνων καί των περί αύτοΰς όλίγων δορυφόρων. 5
Τό δέ παραλογώτατον, δτι φασίν, έπειδή πεπτώκασιν οί μαχόμε-
νοι, τοις σώμασιν άπειπόντες Ιτι ταΐς ψυχάϊς ΐσταντο πολεμοΰν-
τες έπί τρεις ημέρας δλας καί νύκτας, ούδέν τών ζώντων είς άγώ-
να άπολειπόμενοι, ούτε κατά χεΐρας ούτε κατά θυμόν. ?|Εωρδτο
γοΰν καί ήκούετο τά είδωλα τών ψυχών άντιφερόμενα καί τοις 10
δπλοις άντιπαταγοΰντα.
Καί άρχαϊα δέ άλλα τοιαϋτα φάσματα πολέμων μέχρι νΰν φαί-
νεσθαι φησί, πλήν δτι ταΰτα τά μέν άλλα, δσα ζώντες άνθρωποι
κατά πόλεμον δρώσιν, ούδέν ύστερεΐν, φθέγγεσθαι δέ ούδέ έπί μι­
κρόν. Καί έν μέν έπιφαίνεσθαι έν τφ περί Σόγδαν ποτέ λίμνην 15
ούσαν πεδίω, φαίνεσθαι δ’ υπό τήν έω τό φάσμα, φωτός ήδη τήν
γην ύπαυγάζοντος· δεύτερον δ ’ έν Κούρβοις χωρίφ τής Καρίας·
έν τούτφ γάρ φαίνεσθαι ού καθ’ έκάστην ήμέραν, άλλ’ ένίοτε δια-
λείποντα όλίγας τινάς, ούδέ ώρισμένας γε ταύτας, περί δρθρον
Ιως ήλίου λαμπρός άνατολής έν άέρι διαφοιτώντα ψυχών άττα 20
σκιοειδή φαντάσματα πολεμοϋντα άλλήλοις. Καί έν τοις καθ’
ήμός δέ χρόνοις πολλοί διηγήσαντο, ούχ οΐοί τε δντες ψεύδεσθαι,
κατά Σικελίαν έν τφ λεγομένφ πεδίφ τετραπυργίφ καί έν άλλοις
ούκ όλίγοις αύτής μέρεσιν όρδσθαι Ιπποτών πολεμίων έπελαυνόν-
των φάσματα κατά τόν τοΰ θέρους μάλιστα καιρόν, μεσημβρίας 25
σταθηρδς ίσταμένης.
[Φ 63]

9 περιβαλόμενος Zintzen (cf. S IV 92, 17): περιβαλλόμενος S. 9 γράφειν - 10

άδύνατος ήν Φ: om. S.
 history. But, much as he would have liked to, he was incapable of
writing poetry or prose.116

50
In the time of Valentinian who ruled Rome after Honorius, a
battle took place in front of the city of Rome between the Romans
and the Scythians [Huns] who were led by Attila; and the slaughter
on both sides was so great that none of the combatants on either
side survived, except for the generals and a few of their immediate
bodyguards. But the strangest thing of all is the story that when the
combatants fell, their bodies having failed, they still stood there
fighting with their souls for three whole days and nights without in
any way being inferior in battle to the living in physical strength or
courage. The phantoms of the souls could indeed be seen and heard
confronting each other and rattling their weapons.
He says that many such ancient apparitions of wars have
appeared up to the present day and their actions are in no way
inferior to those of living men in war, except that they do not utter
the slightest sound. One such apparition can be seen in the plain of
Sogda, once a marshy lake; the phenomenon appears at dawn as
light begins to shine over the earth. Another apparition manifests
itself at Kourboi, a place in Caria; it is not visible every day but at
intervals which are not even regular. Then between daybreak and
the moment when the sun rises in its full glory “shadowy phantoms
of souls”117 can be seen haunting the air and fighting against each
other. In our time too, many people incapable of falsehood have
said that in Sicily in the so-called Plain of the Four Towers and in
several other places ghosts of enemy knights can be seen charging,
mainly in the summer and at the height of noon.118

116 Damascius studied rhetoric under Theo for three years in Alexandria: Test. Ill,
78-9. Theo’s surviving Progymnasmata (Spengel, Rhetores Graeci II, 59-130) justify
Damascius’ judgement on all counts.
117 Cf. Plato Phaedo 8led.
118 The Cretan tradition of the Drosulites (= Dew-men), which relates to a battle of
the Greek War of Independence in the Sfakia area, is very similar. At the end of May
Α Ό τι τόν Σεβήρου ίππον φησί (Ρωμαίος δ ’ ήν οΰτος, καί ’Ανθε­
μίου παρασχόντος έλπίδας ώς ή 'Ρώμη πεσοϋσα πάλιν δι’ αύτοϋ
άναστήσεται, έπί 'Ρώμην, τούτης προαναχωρήσας, έπανηκε καί
τιμής ύπατικής έτυχε) τούτου τοίνυν δ ίππος, φ τά πολλά έχρήτο,
ψηχόμενος σπινθήρας άπό τοϋ σώματος πολλούς τε καί μεγάλους 5
ήφίει, έως αύτφ τό τέρας είς τήν ύπατικήν άρχήν έν τή 'Ρώμη
κατηνύσθη. ’Αλλά καί Τιβερίψ δνος, ώς Πλούταρχος ό Χαιρω-
νεύς φησίν, έτι μειρακίφ δντι καί έν 'Ρόδφ έπί λόγοις φητορικοίς
διατρίβοντι, τήν βασιλείαν διά τοϋ αύτοϋ παθήματος προεμήνυ-
σεν. ’Αλλά καί τών περί ’Αττίλαν ένα δντα τόν Βαλίμεριν άπό τοϋ 10
οίκείου σώματος άποβάλλειν σπινθήρας· ό δέ ήν ό Βαλίμερις
Θευδερίχου πατήρ, δς νΰν τό μέγιστον έχει κράτος Ιταλίας πό­
σης. Λέγει δέ καί περί έαυτοϋ ό συγγραφεύς ώς καί έμοί ένδυο-
μένφ τε καί έκδυομένφ, εί καί σπάνιον τοΰτο συμβαίνει, συμβαί­
νει δ’ οδν σπινθήρας άποπηδάν έξαισίους, έσθ’ δτε καί κτύπον 15
παρέχοντας, ένίοτε καί φλόγας δλας καταλάμπειν τό ίμάτιον, μή
μέντοι καιούσας· καί τό τέρας άγνοεΐν εις δ τελευτήσει. Ίδεΐν δέ
λέγει καί άνθρωπόν τινα άπό τής κεφαλής άφιέντα σπινθήρας,
άλλά καί φλόγα άνάπτοντα, δτε βούλοιτο, Ιματίφ τινί τραχεΐ
παρατριβομένης. 20
[Φ64]
Β Ήλαυνε τόν ίππον, δσον είχε τάχους· είχε δέ τών άλλων ένδε-
έστερον.
[Φ 65]

51Α cf. S IV 335, 28.

A He says that the horse of Severus -he was a Roman who had
been led by Anthemius to hope that he would bring about the
resurrection of fallen Rome, and having left Rome, returned and
took consular office- the horse then that he usually rode emitted
many huge sparks from its body when stroked until the omen was
fulfilled by his consulate at Rome. There was a donkey too, as
Plutarch of Chaeronea reports, who, when Tiberius was still a youth
studying rhetoric in Rhodes, foretold his reign in the same manner.
And Valamer, one of Attila’s companions, radiated sparks from his
own body. This Valamer was the father of Theodoric who now has
supreme rule over the whole of Italy.*119Speaking also o f himself the
author says: when I dress and undress it happens, albeit rarely, that
huge sparks leap off my body, sometimes with a crackling sound,
while at other times flames illuminate my clothes without binning
them. However he does not know what result this portent will
bring. He also says that he saw a man who emitted sparks from his
head and who besides could light a fire whenever he wanted by
rubbing his head against a rough garment.
B He drove on his horse as quickly as possible, yet he was left
behind by the others.

and the beginning of June there appears in the plain of Frangokastello just before dawn
a procession of phantom warriors marching down from the ruined monastery of St
Charalambos towards the sea. The vision, which lasts several minutes, is believed to
represent the soldiers of the Epirote Hadjimichalis Dalianis who fell there in battle
against the Turks in May 1828.
119 Valamer was the king of the Ostrogoths (c.447-c.465) and fought alongside
Attila in the battle of the Catalaunian Plains (451); he was the uncle rather than the
father of Theodoric.
C Των πολιτικών πραγμάτων άποτυχών, έν Άλεξανδρείςι δέ
άφικόμενος έπΐ τόν ήσύχιον καί άπράγμονα βίον έτράπετο, μισεί
τών έν τη πολιτείφ δυσχερασμάτων -πολλά δέ τοΰ δήμου τών
'Ρωμαίων καί τών αύτοκρατόρων κατεβόα- φίλοσοφών, έν βιβλί-
οις άφθόνοις ούσιν αύτψ καί παντοδαποΐς. Εΐπερ δέ τις έτερος 5
Ικανός ήν έπαγαγέσθαι τούς έπί παιδείμ διενεγκόντας ώς έαυτόν
ίέναι πολλάκις· έπιεικής τε...
[Φ 66 +S IV 335, 29 (Σεβήρος pp) +*S III 66, 20 (κατεβόα)]
D Ήκον δέ πρός τόν Σεβήρον καί Βραχμάνες κατά τήν 'Αλεξάν­
δρειαν, καί έδέξατο σφάς οΐκψ ίδίφ καί θεραπείμ τη προσηκούση-
οΐ κατά χώραν έπ’ οίκου μάλα σεμνώς έμενον, ούτε λουτρών δεό­
μενοι δημοσίων ούτε άλλης έπόψεως ούδεμιάς τών κατά άστυ γι­
νομένων, άλλά παν τό θυραΐον έξετρέποντο. Έσιτοϋντο δέ φοίνι­ 5
κας καί όρυξαν, καί ήν αύτοΐς πόμα τό ύδωρ. Ήσαν δέοΰτοι ούτε
τών έν δρεσι διατριβόντων Βραχμάνων ούτε τών *έν πόλεσι
κατωκημένων ’Ινδών, άλλ’ άτεχνώς άμφίβιοι τοΐς Βραχμάνοις
ύπηρετούμενοι τά πρός τάς πόλεις, εΐ που δεήσειεν, καί ταις πό-
λεσιν αύ τά πρός τούς Βραχμάνας. Έλεγον δέ καί ούτοι περί τών 10
όρείων Βραχμάνων όσα οί συγγραφείς περί αύτών θρυλοϋσιν,
όμβρους τε καί άνομβρίας εύχαΐς καταπράττειν καί λιμών καί
λοιμών άποδιώξεις άλλων τε κακών άποτροπάς, όσα μή άνίατον
έχει τήν είμαρμένην. "Ελεγον δέ ούτοι καί μονόποδας άνθρώπους
παρά σφίσιν Ιστορήσαι, καί δράκοντας έξαισίους κατά μέγεθος 15
έπτακεφάλους, καί άλλα άττα πολύ τό παράλογον έχοντα.
[Φ 67]
Ε Ό τι έλεγεν ό Σεβήρος τεθεάσθαι γοργονιάδα βοτάνην, ής είναι
τήν φίξαν άντικρυς όμοίαν παρθένφ τήν κεφαλήν έχούση κατη-
ρεφή δρακοντείοις πλοκάμοις.
[Φ 68]

51C cf. S Π 154,29.

Φ solum usque ad 3 δυσχερασμάτων, S IV 335, 29 (S,), S III 66, 20 (S2) solum
3 πολλά - 4 κατεβόα.
1 τών-άποτυχών Φ: om. S,. 1 έ ν - 2 άφικόμενος Sp om. Φ. 2 έ π ΐ - 3 δυ­
σχερασμάτων Φ: τόν άπράγμονα βίον έζη Sj. 3 πολλά - 4 κατεβόα S2: om. S,.
51D 5 πάν v.l.: om. Φ.
C Having failed in politics, he came to Alexandria and turned to a
quiet life of leisure through his disgust at the unpleasantness of a
public career. (He vehemently inveighed against both the people of
Rome and the emperors.) He pursued the study of philosophy
through the numerous and varied books which he possessed. And
he was more capable than anybody of attracting those who excelled
in learning so that they continually visited him. And he was
pious.120
D Brahmans also came to Sevems in Alexandria and he received
them in his own house with all due courtesy.121 They for their part
spent all their time undisturbed at home in a truly holy manner,
without seeking to visit either the public baths or anything else
which went on in the city, being altogether uninterested in external
things. They ate dates and rice and their drink was water. They did
not belong either to the Brahmans who live in the mountains or to
the city-dwelling Indians, but were inhabitants of two worlds,
giving service when needed to the Brahmans on city issues, and to
the cities on issues concerning the Brahmans. They also related all
the stories about the mountain Brahmans which are repeated by the
authors, that they cause rain and droughts by prayer, as well as
driving away famines and epidemics and removing any other evil
which is not destined to be incurable. They also said that they had
seen at home one-legged men and seven-headed snakes of extra­
ordinary length, and other such supernatural things.
E Severus said that he had seen a Gorgon-like plant whose root
looked exactly like a girl whose head was covered in snaky locks.

120 The word έπιεικής is one of the favourite Damascian terms occurring over
twenty times in the surviving fragments; its basic meaning seems to be not just fair,
educated and upper class, but also traditionally pious, i.e. “good pagan”.
121 As emerges from the story narrated by Malchus fr. 3 (cf. p. 85, n. 24), the fame
of Severus as a truly just man exceeded the confines of the Roman empire.
 "On τήν διά τών νεφών μαντικήν ούδαμώς τοϊς παλαιοΐς ούδ’
άκοή έγνωσμένην Άνθουσάν τινα γυναίκα έξευρεϊν έν ταΐς ήμέ-
ραις Λέοντος τοϋ Τωμαίων βασιλέως- έξ Αίγών δέ κατήγετο τών
Κιλικίων ή γυνή, τό δέ άνέκαθεν άπό τών έν Καππαδοκία κατοι-
κισθέντων έπί τόν Κομανόν τό δρος Όρεστιάδων· καί άνάγειν τό 5
γένος είς Πέλοπα. Αυτή φροντίζουσα περί τάνδρός έπιτετραμμέ-
νου στρατιωτικήν τινα άρχήν καί έπί τόν κατά Σικελίαν άπεσταλ-
μένου μετά καί άλλων πόλεμον, ευξατο προϊδέϊν δνείρψ τά συμ-
βησόμενα, ευξατο δέ πρός ήλιον άνίσχοντα. Ό δέ πατήρ δναρ
αύτή έπιστάς έκέλευε καί πρός δυόμενον εύξασθαι. Καί εύχομέ- 10
νης έξ αίθριας τινός νέφος συστήναι περί τόν ήλιον, έκεΐθεν δ ’
αύξηθήναι καί είς άνθρωπον διατυπωθήναι· έτερον δ ’ αυτοί) νέ­
φος άποσπασθέν έπεδίδου τε είς μέγεθος ίσον καί είς λέοντα διε-
σχηματίζετο θηρίον ό δέ ήγρίαινε, καί μέγα χάσμα πεπ'οιημένος ό
λέων καταπίνει τόν άνθρωπον· Γότθφ έφκει τό άνθρώπειον καί 15
νεφοποίητον εΐδωλον. Έπί δέ τοϊς φάσμασιν όλίγον έπειτα τόν
ήγεμόνα τών Γότθων Άσπερα βασιλεύς Λέων έδολοφόνησεν
αύτόν καί παιδας. Έξ έκείνου ούν τοΰ χρόνου διέμεινεν ή
Ανθούσα άχρι δεύρο άεί έπιτηδεύουσα τόν τρόπον τής διά νεφών
μαντικής προγνώσεως. 20

[Φ 69]
 Divination by clouds, which was not known to the Ancients
even by hearsay, was discovered by a woman called Anthusa122 at
the time of the Roman emperor Leo. This woman came from Aegae
in Cilicia but her original descent was from the family of the
Orestiads who had settled at Mount Comanus in Cappadocia and
she traced her lineage back to Pelops. Concerned about her
husband, who had been invested with some military office and sent
with others to the Sicilian War,123 she prayed to the rising sun for
foresight into the future in her dreams. Then her father, appearing in
a dream, exhorted her to pray to the setting sun as well, and as she
prayed there formed out of a clear sky a cloud around the sun which
eventually grew and took the shape of a man. Another cloud broke
away from it and grew until it reached an equal size and took the
shape of a lion who became angry and, opening his mouth wide,
swallowed the man; the man-shaped cloud looked like a Goth. Soon
after these apparitions the emperor Leo treacherously put to death
Aspar, the leader of the Goths, and his children.124 From that time
until now Anthusa has continued to practise this method of
divination by clouds.

122 As well as being the name of Illus’ daughter, Anthusa was the mystical name of
Constantinople by analogy with Roma-Flora (cf. G. Dagron, C onstantinople
im a g in a ire, 44, 336).
123 The reference is to the expeditionary force under Basiliscus which was sent
against the Vandals in 468. The story was possibly related by Severus who went to
Carthage in 474 at the head of an embassy to negotiate with Geiseric the terms of a
peace treaty, which remained in force until the abolition of the Vandal kingdom by
Justinian. For the disastrous Vandal War undertaken by Leo in 468, Stein-Palanque I,
358-362, 390-391 and Blockley, 75-76.
124 In 471; two of Aspar’s sons, Ardabur and Patricius, were attacked but the latter
eventually recovered from his wounds, cf. below, p. 261, n. 285.
Α Ό τι την Σώθιν Αιγύπτιοι την ΤΙσιν είναι θεολογοΰσιν, οί δέ
Έλληνες είς τόν Σείριον άνάγουσι τούτο τό δστρον, καί ώς κύνα
τόν Σείριον, δπαδόν τού Ώρίωνος δντα κυνηγετοΰντος, οΰτω δια-
ζωγραφοΰσι, μάλλον δέ έντετυπωμένον τφ ούρανφ δεικνύουσι.
[Φ 70]
Β Τινές δέ έλαθον τό ίέρωμα κατάξαντες καί διαφθείραντες, καί
άπορούμενοι τελεστικής βοηθείας οί έπιχώριοι άνθρωπίνη
σπουδή καί τέχνη τόν λιμένα μόλις έαυτοις περισφζουσιν οί
Αιγύπτιοι.
[Φ 71]
C Οί δέ έδίωκον, οί τής γυναικός θεράποντες, τόν κύνα φεύγον-
τα, τής λιβυκής στρουθού τά κρέα άρπάσαντα.
. [Φ 72]
D Όρυττόντων δέ άνακύπτει καί έκφαίνεται παλαιιίάτου νεώ
άέτωμα.
[Φ 73]
A The Egyptian theologians identify Sothis with Isis, whereas the
Greeks attribute this star to Sirius, whom they represent as the dog
who accompanies Orion in his hunting, or rather they show him
engraved in the sky in this form.125
B Some people had secretly broken and destroyed the consecrated
statue. Bereft of ritual assistance the local Egyptian population
succeeded with difficulty in preserving the harbour using human
effort and skill.126
C The woman’s servants chased the dog who had grabbed the
ostrich meat and was running away.
D As they dug, there emerged and came into view the pediment of
a very ancient temple.127

125 This is a simplification of the following: Sothis (Sopet in Egyptian; Seirios in

classical Greek) is the brightest star of the constellation C a n is M a io r which appears
next to Orion. The Egyptians had observed that at latitude 30° (where Memphis is
situated) Sothis rises at the same time as the sun on 19/ 20th July after an occultation of
about seventy days; this heliac rise of Sothis coincides with the inundation of the Nile-
Osiris and marks the beginning of the calendar year in Egypt (cf. i.a. Porphyry D e a ntro
24). On the importance of the canicular year not only in Egypt, but all over the Near
East, see J. Bidez - F. Cumont, L e s m a g es hellen ises, Paris 1938,1 ,123-127.
The identification of Isis with Sothis was very ancient and remained popular
throughout Pharaonic and Hellenistic times (cf. Plutarch Is. 38 and 21 for the identi­
fication of constellations with divine souls (Isis=the Dog, Horus=Orion, Typhon=the
Bear), together with Griffiths’ commentary, p. 371); also P M G VII. 490ff.; P.Oxy. 1380
etc). Damascius nevertheless seems to obtain his information from Horapollo’s
H iero g lyp h ica 1.3 (Sbordone, pp. 6-9), where Isis, as a representation of the year, is said
to be called in Egyptian Sothis and in Greek Astrocyon. For an intelligent presentation
of the evidence concerning Sothis, see Bonneau, 263-269.
126 Corrupt text. The story is told by Zacharias (V S 28-29), who presents the
Christians as destroying the idols at Canopus-Menuthis. Originally I had reconstructed
the latter part of this passage as follows: oi έπιχώριοι άνθρωπί,νη σπουδή και τέχνη
<εΙς> τόν λιμένα μόλις έαυτο<ϋ>ς περισφζουσιν οΐ ΑΙγΰπτιοι, assuming that the locals
were persecuted by the Christians, and I had consequently translated it in the following
manner: “the local inhabitants narrowly escaped to the harbour with their lives using
human speed and cunning", but Augusto Guida drew my attention to the more plausible
version suggested by the text of the manuscripts: deprived of divine protection after the
destruction of the statue of the goddess, the locals had to rely entirely on their own
abilities in order to keep the shallow marshy harbour fit for navigation (cf. Strabo 17,
801 and Baedeker, A eg yp ten , Leipzig 1906, 105: “Abukir, ein unbedeutendes Dorf mit
seichtem Hafen”).
127 Cf. Zacharias V S 19: “Mdnouthis, le village de la deesse, oh quelqu’un a,
 'O n ό Έρμείας γένος μέν ήν Άλεξανδρεύς, πατήρ δ ’ Άμμωνί-
ου καί Ήλιοδώρου, τών διδασκάλων Λαμασκίου. Ή ν δέ δ
Έρμείας φίλος ές τά μάλιστα ΑΙγύπτψ, άδελφφ Θεοδότης, μη-
τρός Ισιδώρου φιλοσόφου. Ό δέ Αίγυπτος ήν φιλομαθής.
Οΰτος έπιεικής ήν τήν φύσιν καί άπλοϋς τό ήθος. Φιλοσοφή- s
σας δέ ΰπό τφ μεγάλω Συριανφ, φιλοπονίςι μέν ούδενός έλείπετο
τών έταίρων, ουδέ αυτού γε συνακροωμένου τού πάνυ Πρόκλου,
<τοϋ διαδόχου> γεγονότος ΰστερον ουδέ έρωτος μαθημάτων, οΐα
παρέχεται φιλοσοφία τφ δντι άξιέραστα. Άγχίνους δέ ο ΐτι σφο­
δρά ήν ούδέ λόγων εύρετής άποδεικτικών, ούδέ γενναίος δρα ζη- ίο
τητής άληθείας· ούκουν ούδ’ οίός τε έγεγόνει πρός άποροΰντας
κατά τό καρτεράν άνταγωνίζεσθαι, καίτοι έμέμνητο ώς είπειν πάν­
των ών τε άκηκόει τού διδασκάλου έξηγουμένου καί τών έν βιβλί-
οις άναγεγραμμένων. ’Αλλά τό αύτοκίνητον ού προσήν^ει τη πο-
λυμαθίμ. is
Ή ν γάρ τά μέν περί λόγους ένδεέστερος ή κατά τήν άκρίβειαν,
τά δέ πρός άρετήν εύ ήσκημένος. "Ωστε μηδ’ άν τόν Μώμον αύτόν
έπιμωμήσασθαι, μηδ’ αΰ μισήσαι τόν Φθόνον τοσαύτη πρμότης
ένήν τφ άνδρί καί τοιαύτη δικαιοσύνη.

54 cf. S 1420, 20, S III 418, 16, SII 412, 12.

Φsolum usque ad 31 άνατρέπουσαν, S II412, 22 (S,) solum usque ad 4 φιλο­
μαθής. SII412,26 (S2) 5 ούτος - 9 σφόδρα fjv, 32 όμωμοκέναι - 36 άθανασίας,
16 ήν γάρ - 31 άνατρέπουσαν.
1 δτι - 2 Ήλιοδώρου Φ: Έρμείας, φιλόσοφος, Άμμωνίου καί Ήλιοδώρου
Sj. 2 τών διδασκάλων - 4 φιλομαθής (sed post Δαμασκίου habet πατήρ) St:
om. Φ. 5 ούτος - φύσιν Φ: ούτος δ φιλόσοφος έπιεικής φύσει S2.
5 φιλοσοφήσας - 9 άξιέραστα S2: ήκροάσατο δέ καί Συριανοί σύν Πρόκλφ. Φι-
λοπονίμ μέν ούτος ούδενός ήν δεύτερος Φ. 7 πάνυ Bemhardy: πάλαι S2. 8
τού διαδόχου addidit Zintzen. 9 άγχίνους - 10 ήν Φ: άγχίνους δέ καί όξύς
σφόδρα. ήν ώστε S2. 16 ήν - άκρίβειαν S2: om. Φ. 17 ήσκημένος S2: ήσκητο
Φ. 18μηδ’ αύ82:μηδέΦ. 18 τοσαύτη - 19 δικαιοσύνη S2: om. Φ.
 Hermeias was of Alexandrian origin, the father of Ammonius
and Heliodorus who were the teachers o f Damascius. Hermeias was
also a great friend of Aegyptus, the brother of Theodote, the
philosopher Isidore’s mother. As for Aegyptus, he was a seeker
after knowledge.*128
Hermeias had a decent nature and an unaffected character.
Having studied philosophy under the great Syrianus, he proved
second to none of the pupils in hard work, not even to his famous
fellow-student Proclus who later became a diadochus. Nor was he
deficient in his love of those truly gratifying sciences supplied by
philosophy. Yet he was not very sharp nor was he one to invent
demonstrative arguments, and he was not a powerful seeker of the
truth. Thus he could not hold his own against those who set him
questions for discussion, though he had memorised virtually
everything that he had heard his master explain and everything that
was recorded in books. But in him originality of mind did not
blossom in harmony with erudition.
He was more deficient in his ability to argue than in accuracy,
but was so well exercised in virtue that not even Momus (Blame)
himself would have found fault with him or Phthonus (Envy) taken
an aversion to him. Such was his gentleness and sense of justice.

accomplissant ainsi une bonne action, enfoui sous le sable le temple d’Isis, au point
qu’on n’en voit meme plus la trace”.
128 Isidore’s uncle is clearly the somewhat anaemic interlocutor of Theophrastus
and Gessius in Aeneas of Gaza’s Theophrastus', he was also a pupil of Hierocles, as
emerges from the same text. It is interesting to note that Zacharias' philosophical
dialogue A m m o n iu s or O n the C reation o f th e W o rld was written in reply to the
T h eo p h ra stu s. Together the two texts convey a lively picture of the atmosphere of
philosophical debate among pupils and teachers in the Alexandria of the 480s. See
Appendix III, p. 353.
 Ούτος Ιδιώτου ποτέ πωλοϋντος αύτφ βιβλίον καί έλαττον 20
ήπερ fiv άξιον αίτοΰντος, έπτινώρθωσέ τε τήν πλάνην καί πλείο-
νος έωνήσατο. Καί ούχ άπαξ τήν δικαιοσύνην ταύτην, ής τοΐς
άλλοις ούδέ τις ήν έπιστροφή, άλλα πολλάκις, όσάκις συνέβαινεν
άγνοεΐν τόν πιπράσκοντα τό δίκαιον τίμημα, έπεδείκνυτο, οϋ
κατά τούς άλλους άγαπών τό ερμαιον, ούδέ οιηθείς άρα μηδέν 25
άδικεΐν εί έκών παρά έκόντος δτιοϋν έωνήσατο. Καί γάρ ένέδραν
τινά ένεΐναι τφ πράγματι καί άπάτην, ού λέγουσαν τό ψεύδος,
άλλά σιωπώσαν τήν άλήθειαν, καί άδικίαν ούσαν λανθάνειν τούς
πολλούς, ού βίαιον άλλά κλοπιμαίαν, ούδ’ έπικίνδυνόν τινα λη-
στοΰ δίκην κλέπτουσαν, άλλ’ ύπό μέν τού νόμου άφειμένην, τό δέ 30
δίκαιον άνατρέπουσαν.
Όμωμοκέναι λέγεται πρός τόν Αίγυπτον τελευτώντα άθάνα-
τον είναι καί άνώλεθρον τήν ψυχήν. ’Εποίει δέ τούτο τό θάρρος ή
εύζωία άναινομένη τήν τού σώματος φύσιν καί εις έ&υτήν έπι-
στρέφουσα καί συναισθανομένη τού χωρισμού καί άντικρυς ήδη 35

τής άθανασίας.
[Φ 74 + S I I 412,22 (Έρμείας 3035) + S I I 412,26 (Έρμείας 3036)]

20 ούτος - 24 έπεδείκνυτο Φ: τοιγαρούν εϊ τι πρίαιτο των πωλουμένων (συχνόν

δ’έπΐ βιβλίοις τοϋτο συνέβαινεν), 6 μέν πωλών ιδιώτης ών, &ν οΰτω τύχη, τίμη­
μα μέν άπήτει τής άξίας έλαττον, ό δέ Έρμείας έπηνωρθοϋτο τήν πλάνην, καί
πλείονος είναι φήσας άξιον τό βιβλίον τοσοϋτον άν έπέδωκεν S2. 25 άγαπών
Φ: άγαπήσας S2. 28 καί Φ: ώστε καί S2. 29 ούδ’ Φ: ούδέ S2. 32 ante όμω­
μοκέναι habet ώστε S2.
 Once when a layman offered to sell him a book, asking for less
than its value, Hermeias corrected the mistake and bought the book
for a higher price. Indeed this was not the only time that he
exhibited this sense of justice which would not have been a matter
of concern to other people, but often, whenever it happened that the
seller was unaware of the correct price, he pointed it out. In this
respect he was unlike other people who love to chance upon an
unexpected piece of luck thinking they are not committing an
injustice if they purchase from a willing seller. To him a transaction
of this kind contained a trickery and a deception which consisted
not in telling a lie but in concealing the truth; it was an injustice
based not on violence but on theft, which goes unnoticed by the
multitude -a method of stealing not in the dangerous manner of the
robber, but which is no less subversive of justice for being
neglected by the law.
It is said that as he was dying he swore to Aegyptus that the soul
is immortal and imperishable. What gave him this courage was his
virtuous life disowning the bodily nature, turning to itself and
experiencing the separation as it already stood face to face with
immortality.129

129 The passage must refer to Hermeias' own death rather than that of Aegyptus,
though in the state in which it has been transmitted the text is ambiguous. For the same
thought, expressed as a general statement, see Plutarch M or. fr. 178.
 55
Ό η ό άδελφός Έρμείου Γρηγόριος άπαν ήν τουναντίον, όξύ-
τατος μεν είς υπερβολήν καί ευκίνητος έπί τάς ζητήσεις καί τάς
μαθήσεις, άλλως δέ ούχ ήσύχιος ούδέ γαλήνην έν τοϊς ήθεσιν φέ-
ρων τινά, άλλά τι καί παρακεκινηκός. Έπεί δέ Άθήνηθεν ήκον εις
’Αλεξάνδρειαν, ύστερον δ Γρηγόριος έάλω τή νόσφ έπί τό πλέον, 5
ώστε δΰσχρηστον αύτοϋ τοϊς λογισμοϊς καί πολύ παραλλάττον
γενέσθαι τό δργανον.
[Φ 75 + S 1543, 8 (Γρηγόριος 453)]

56
ΑΙδεσία, Έρμείου γυνή. Αΰτη ήν μεν προσήκουσα γένει τφ με-
γάλφ Συριανφ, καλλίστη καί άρίστη γυναικών τών έν ’Αλεξαν-
δρείςτ τά μέν ήθη τφ άνδρί παραπλησία, άπλή καί γενναία καί δι­
καιοσύνης ούδέν ήττον ή σωφροσύνης έπιμεληθεΐσα διά|βίου παν­
τός· τό δέ έξαίρετον αύτής <τό> φιλόθεον καί φιλάνθρωπον. Διά 5
τούτο καί παρά δύναμιν εδ ποιέϊν έπεχείρει τούς δεομένους, ώστε
καί τού Έρμείου τελευτήσαντος έπί παισίν όρφανοΐς άποληφθεΐ-
σα τών αύτών είχετο δαπανημάτων είς τάς εύποιίας. Τοιγάρτοι
καί ύπόχρεων τοϊς υίέσι τόν βίον έποίησεν, έφ’ φ καί μέμψασθαί
τινες αύτήν έπεχείρουν. Ή δέ ένα θησαυρόν ήγουμένη τής άμείνο- 10
νος έλπίδος, εΐ τις έθέλοι τοϊς Ιεροϊς καί έπιεικέσιν άνθρώποις
έπικουφίζειν τά άχθη τής χρησμοσύνης, ούδενός έφείδετο διά τόν
έλεον τής κατά τά άνθρώπεια τύχης· τοιγαροΰν ήγάπων αύτήν καί
τών πολιτών οΐ πονηρότατοι.
Μάλιστα δέ τών υΐέων έπεμελεϊτο τά περί φιλοσοφίαν, όρεγο- 15
μένη τήν τού πατρός έπιστήμην αύτοϊς παραδοϋναι καθάπερ
κλήρόν τινα πατρφας ουσίας. Ή γε καί τήν δημοσίαν τφ πατρί
σίτησιν διδομένην τοϊς παισί διεφύλαξε νέοις έτι ούσιν, ώς έφιλο-
σόφησαν δπερ ούκ ΐσμεν ούδέ άνδρών έτερον πεποιηκότα μήτι γε

55 1 δτι - τούναντίον Φ: Γρηγόριος, άδελφός Έρμείου τοϋ φιλοσόφου- δς δπαν

τουναντίον ήν τφ Έρμείρ S. 2 έπί τάς Φ: έπί τε τάς S. 4 παρακεκινηκός S
παρακεκινηκώς Φ. 4 έπεί - 5 'Αλεξάνδρειαν S: om. Φ. 5 ύστερον - πλέον S:
ύστερον δέ καί τή νόσφ έάλφ έπί πλέον Φ. 6 τοϊς λογισμοϊς Φ: om. S. 6
πολύ Φ: πολλαχή S.
56 5 τό suppl. Kassel.
 Gregory, the brother of Hermeias, was the exact opposite:
extremely intelligent and quick in research and in learning, but he
was not calm and had no tranquillity in his behaviour; in fact he
was rather disturbed. Soon after the two brothers returned from
Athens to Alexandria Gregory succumbed to illness to such a
degree that his mind could no longer serve his reasoning faculty,
having become utterly alienated.

56
Aedesia, wife of Hermeias. She was a relative of the great
Syrianus, the most beautiful and noble of the Alexandrian women.
She had a similar character to that of her husband, simple and
honourable, while caring throughout her life for justice no less than
moderation. But where she was truly exceptional was in her love of
God and of Man. Hence she attempted to benefit the needy in a
manner beyond her means so that when after Hermeias’ death she
was left with orphans to look after, she continued to spend just as
much on charity, with the result that she bequeathed to her sons a
life of debt. For this some people criticised her. But she, thinking
that the one treasure of any worth as regards the life after death130
was the will to lighten the burdens of poverty for holy and good
people, spared nothing in her compassion for the human condition.
As a result, she was beloved even by the most wicked of her
compatriots.
She took particular care of her sons’ education in philosophy,
wishing to hand down to them their father’s professional skill as if
it were an ancestral inheritance; and she managed to retain for her
children the public maintenance given to their father from the time
when they were still young until they could become philosophers,

130 The reference to Άμεί,νων/άγαθή έλπίς immediately brings to mind the formula
of the Eleusinian mysteries.
 δή γυναικών. Ή ν γάρ παρά πάσι τιμή καί αΙδώς ούκ όλίγη τής 20

ΑΙδεσίας. Ά λλ’ έπεί καί συνέπλευσε τοϊς υίέσιν Άθήναζε στελλο-

μένοις έπί φιλοσοφίαν, έθαύμασεν αυτής την άρετήν δ τε άλλος
χορός τών φιλοσόφων καί δ κορυφαίος Πρόκλος. Αΰτη έστίν
ΑΙδεσία, ήν κόρην οΰσαν StL τφ Πρόκλψ κατεγγυησειν έμελλεν ό
Συριανός, εί μή θεών τις άπεκώλυσεν έπί γάμον δρμήσαι τόν 25
Πρόκλον. Τά δέ πρός θεόν εύσεβής οτπω καί Ιερά, καί τό δλον
φάναι θεοφιλής, ώστε πολλών έπιφανειών άξιοΰσθαι.
Ή δέ ΑΙδεσία τοιαΰτη ήν καί διεβίω πάντα τόν βίον ύπό θεοΰ
τε καί άνθρώπων άγαπωμένη καί έπαινουμένη. Καί ταύτην έπί-
σταμαι γραϋν γυναίκα- καί έπ’ αύτή τεθνεώση τόν έπί τφ τάφφ 30
λέγεσθαι νομιζόμενον έπαινον έπεδειξάμην ήρωικοίς επεσι κεκο-
σμημένον έτι νέος ών τότε καί κομιδή μειράκιον.
[S* I I 161,18 (ΑΙδεσία ρρ)]

57
Α Ό τι τφ Έρμείμ έκ τής ΑΙδεσίας πρεσβύτερον τών φιλοσόφων
υίέων τίκτεται παιδίον, καί ή ΑΙδεσία τφ υίεϊ έπτά μήνας άπό γε-
νέσεως δγοντι προσέπαιζέ τε οΐα εΐκός, καί βάβιον ή καί παιδίον
άνεκάλει, ύποκορίζουσα τήν φωνήν. Ό δέ άκούσας, ήγανάκτησε
καί έπετίμησε τόν παιδικόν τούτον υποκορισμόν, τοράν καί διηρ- 5
θρωμένην τήν έπιτίμησιν έξενεγκών. Καί άλλα δέ πολλά περί τοϋ
παιδόζ τούτον τερατολογεΐ, καί δ η ούκ άνεχόμενος τήν έν σώμα-
τι ζωήν έπτά έτών τοϋ βίου άπέστη. Ού γάρ έχώρει αύτοϋ τήν
ψυχήν δ περί γήν δδε τόπος.
Βάβια δέ οΐ Σύροι, καί μάλιστα οί έν Δαμασκφ, τά νεογνά κα- 10
λοϋσι παιδία, ήδη δέ καί τά μειράκια άπό τής παρ’ αύτοΐς νομιζο-
μενης Βαβίας θεού.
[Φ 76]
Β Ταύτης δέ παΐδες άπό τού Έρμείου νεότερος μέν Ηλιόδωρος,
πρεσβύτερος δέ Άμμώνιος. Οΰτος μέν οΰν ευφυέστερος ήν καί
φιλομαθέστερος, δ δέ άπλούστερος καί έπιπολαιότερος έν τε τοΐς

57Β 2 πρεσβύτερος ν.1. πρεσβύτης S.

 which, so far as we know, no other man or woman has ever
achieved. Indeed the respect and honour paid to Aedesia by
everybody was considerable. And when she accompanied her sons
to Athens where they studied philosophy, her virtue was admired by
the entire chorus of philosophers and not least by their leader
Proclus. This was the Aedesia whom as a young girl Syrianus
intended to betroth to Proclus, if some god had not prevented
Proclus from entering on marriage. She was so pious and holy
towards God and -to tell the truth- so beloved of the gods, that she
was blessed with many divine epiphanies.
Such was Aedesia who spent all her life loved and praised by
God and men. I knew her as an old lady; and when she died I
delivered on her grave the customary funeral oration adorned with
heroic verses. I was then very young, a mere boy.

57
A A boy, older than the philosophers, was bom to Hermeias from
Aedesia, and when he was seven months old Aedesia was playing
with him as is natural, and softening her voice she would call him
“babion” or even “little child”. On hearing this, he became angry
and castigated these childish diminutives, pronouncing his criticism
in a clear and articulate voice. He relates many other extraordinary
anecdotes about this child and says that since he could not endure
bodily existence, he departed from life at the age of seven; for his
soul could not be contained in this earthly region.
The Syrians, and especially those living in Damascus, call
babies and even older children “babia”, after Babia, a goddess
venerated by them.131
B Of the sons that she had by Hermeias, the younger was
Heliodorus and the older Ammonius. The latter was more
intelligent and fond of learning, while the former was simpler and

131 Whether the comment is by Damascius or Photius one cannot tell; for habosa
meaning ‘puellus’, C. Brockelmann, L exico n Syriacum , 19282, ρ. 62A. (I owe the
reference to Dr Sebastian Brock).
 ήθεσιν Ιν τε τοίς λόγοις. Α μφω μέν γάρ έφιλοσοφησάτην ύπό
Πρόκλφ μετά τής μητρός ώς αυτόν άφικομένω παιδαγωγούσης.
Καί 6 Πρόκλος αύτοΐς προσεΐχε τόν νοΰν έπιμελέστερον ώς
παισίν Έρμείου, φίλου τε καί έταίρου άνδρός, παισί δέ ΑΙδεσίας,
τής γένει Συριανφ προσηκούσης καί άμα σφίσι τό τηνικαΰτα πα-
ρούσης. Αφίκετο μέν δή σΰν αύτοΐς Αθήναζε καί 'Ιέραξ ό Συνεσί-
ου άδελφός.
[S* Π 162,13 (ΑΙδεσία pp)]
C "Οτι 6 Αμμώνιος φιλοπονώτατος γέγονε, και πλεϊστον ώφέ-
λησε τών πώποτε γεγενυμένων έξηγητών μάλλον δέ τά Αρκποτέ-
λους έξήσκητο. Έ τι δέ διήνεγκεν ού τών καθ’ έαυτόν μόνον άλλα
καί τών πρεσβυτέρων τοϋ Πρόκλου έταιρων, όλίγου δέ άποδέω
καί τών πώποτε γεγενημένων είπεΐν, τά άμφί γεωμετρίαν τε καί
άστρονομίαν.
1 [Φ79]

S7C 1 πλεϊστον Guida: πλείστους Φ.

 more superficial both in character and in reasoning. For they both
studied philosophy under Proclus, coming to him under their
mother’s guidance. And Proclus paid particular attention to them,
as they were the children of Hermeias, his friend and fellow-
student, and of Aedesia, the relative of Syrianus, who was also
there with them. At the same time there arrived with them in Athens
Hierax, the brother of Synesius.132
C Ammonius was an extremely hard worker who made the
greatest contribution of all commentators who ever lived.133 He was
really an expert on Aristotle. In geometry and astronomy he
distinguished himself among not only his contemporaries but also
his seniors in Proclus’ classes; indeed I would almost say that in
these subjects he surpassed the men of all ages.

132 This is clearly not the Synesius, who visited Athens, probably in 410, as bishop-
elect (for the new chronology, Alan Cameron, B a rbarians, 409-411) but another man
whose brother is a contemporary of Ammonius; cf. 58B.
133 The correction κλειστόν for πλείσχοις in the text was suggested by Augusto
Guida, who cites Galen XV, 519, 1 and XVI, 589, 2 for the ώφέλεια of the com­
mentators.
Α Ήδη γάρ ένίοις τών τά ώτα κατεαγόταιν καί άμα διεφθαρμέ­
νων τάς διανοίας εις κωμφδίαν έτράπη καί γέλωτα πολύν τά τής
φιλοσοφίας άπόρρητα. Δαμάακιος φησί, διά τό τινας έκφερομν-
θεΐν τά τής φιλοσοφίας άπόρρητα.
[Φ 77 +S III628,21 (Ώ τα κατεαγότα)]
Β "Οτι πανικόν τι ζφον διακομιζόμενον θεάσασθαί φησιν δ Ι έ ­
ραξ ό Άλεξανδρεύς, δ συνακμάσας Άμμωνίψ, έξ Αιθιοπίας εις
τό Βυζάντιον, έοικός άκριβώς τοίς γραφομένοις καί τυπουμένοις·
άκηκοέναι τε αυτοί τής φωνής διά τής ’Αλεξάνδρειάς φερομένου
οίονεί τριζούσης. s
[Φ 78]
C ’Επί Λέοντος τοΰ βασιλέως 'Ρωμαίων ΑΙΘίοπες έκόμισαν κα-
μηλοπαρδάλεις καί δύο έν βραχυτάτοις σώμασιν άνδρας φρενο­
βλαβείς, οΰς δή πυγμαίους Όμηρος ώνόμασε. '
[*S IV 761,3 (φρενοβλαβής)]

58Α cf. S IV 503,6, S III 66,13.

Φsolum usque ad 3 άπόρρητα.
1 άμα Φ: om. S.
A Already the mysteries of philosophy were turned into objects of
mirth and great laughter by some of those people whose ears are
shattered and perception destroyed, says Damascius about the fact
that some people divulged the mysteries of philosophy.134
B Hierax the Alexandrian, the contemporary of Ammonius, says
that he saw a Pan-like beast which was being transported from
Ethiopia to Constantinople; it looked exactly like those in drawings
or sculptures and its voice, which he heard as it was carried through
Alexandria, was like a shrill cry.135
C In the reign of the emperor Leo some Ethiopians brought
giraffes and two demented men with tiny bodies, whom Homer
calls “pygmies”.136

134 The comment is in the Suda; the passage clearly refers to the episode hinted at
above (53) and described by Zacharias at length: after twenty camels loaded with the
idols discovered by the Christians in the secret temple of Isis at Menuthis arrive in
Alexandria, the priest of the goddess is forced to describe the characteristics and
function of each idol in the presence of the ecclesiastical and secular authorities. (VS
33ff.) Especially revealing in this connection is the parallel Suda passage (III 66, 13:
κατεαγότων) which runs as follows: αΰτη τοίνυν f>, προθυμία ένίοις τών τά ώτα
κατεαγότων καί &μα διεφθαρμένων τάς διάνοίας έπί κωμψδίρ (1. -ίαν) έτράπη καί
γέλωτα πολύν. “This eagerness (clearly on the part of the priest of Isis) engendered
mirth and great laughter in some of those people whose ears had been shattered and
perception destroyed”. Zacharias on the other hand reports: “le peuple se moquait aussi
des autres idoles. S’il y en avaient parmi elles qui avaient des pieds et des mains, il les
brisait et criait en plaisantant dans la langue du pays” (VS 35). After being thus
vandalised, the sacred objects were publicly burned.
133 It is not impossible that this should be a reference to Pamprepius; cf. 112A.
136 For the Homeric quotation, see II. 3.6. On the iconography of dwarfs in
antiquity, see V. Dasen, D w a r fs in A n c ie n t E g y p t a n d G reece, Oxford 1993.
 59
Α Ό δέ Ισίδωρος εΰφραίνετο όρων τον Πρόκλον, αΐδοΐόν τε
άμα καί δεινόν Ιδεϊν, αυτό δοκών έκεϊνο όρΰν τό φιλοσοφίας τφ
δντι πρόσωπον. Έπεί καί ό Πρόκλος έθαύμαζε τοϋ ’Ισιδώρου τό
είδος ώς ένθεον καί πλήρες εΐσω φιλοσόφου ζωής, οΐ τε δφθαλμοί
τό τής διανοίας εΰτροχον άποσαφοϋντες καί άμα αύτοΐς έπιθέου- 5
σα σεμνότης ήδεΐα καί άπλαστος αιδώς έπέστρεφεν Ικανώς τόν
φιλόσοφον καί ήδη γνώριμον έποίει αΰτφ τόν νεανίσκον.
[S I I 163, 9 (αϊδοΐος) + Φ 248 + Φ 249
+ Φ 80 + S 1289, 9 (απλαστος ρ)]
Β Ό δέ Πρόκλος προσέταξεν ’Ισίδωρον μετασχηματίσασθαι
πρός τόν άριστον βίον καί τριβωνοφορεΐν ό δέ ούχ ύφέμεινε, καί
ταϋτα Πρόκλον ίσα καί θεφ σεβόμενος.
[S* IV 588,27 (τριβωνοφόρος) + S* IV 648,27 (ύπέμεινεν ρ)]
C Ουδέ ύπερβάθμιον πόδα φιπτών, κατά τό λόγιον, εις τήν θεο­
σέβειαν, άλλα μέτρα δρίζων έαυτφ τής ήλικίας άξια, γνησίφ καί
καθαρφ συνειδότι μεταχειρίζων τά περί τούς θεούς.
[S* IV 650, 30 (ύπερβάθμιον πόδα φιπτών)]
D ’Ισίδωρος εφη τήν μέν έν φιλοσοφίφ σπουδήν άνδρί νεωτέρψ
καί άρτι λόγων άπτομένω φιλοσόφων είναι πρεπωδεστέραν, τήν
δέ ευσεβή προθυμίαν καί φιλόθεον προσήκειν μάλιστα τοΐς ήδη
προβεβηκόσι καί πόρρωθεν έλαύνουσι τούτο μέν ήλικίας, τούτο
δέ φιλοσοφίας. 5
[S* IV 421,11 (σπουδή)]

S9A cf. S II 521,18, S II 541,18. S II 476, 27, S I 317,23.

S I I 163, 9 (S,) solum usque ad 3 πρόσωπον, Φ 248 solum usque ad 3 πρόσω­
πον, Φ 249 solum 3 έπεί - 4 ζωής, Φ 80 solum 3 καί δ Πρόκλος - 7 φιλόσοφον,
S 1289, 9 (S2) solum 5 και &μα usque ad finem.
1 δ δέ - Πρόκλον (sed έξεπλήττετο non εύφραίνετο habet) Sp εύφραίνετο δέ
δρών τόν Πρόκλον δ Ισίδωρος Φ 248. 2 έκεϊνο S,: έκεΐ Φ 248. 3 τοϋ - 4
είδος Φ 249: τό ’Ισιδώρου πρόοωπον Φ 80. 4 ένθεον Φ 249: ένθεον ην Φ
80. 6 έπέστρεφε (-ν Zintzen) Φ 80: επέτρεχεν S2. 6 Ικανώς S2: πρός αύτόν Φ
80.
59Β S IV 588, 27 (St) solum usque ad 2 ύπέμεινε, S IV 648, 27 (S2),
1 προσέτα|εν S^ έκέλευσεν S,. 1 μετασχηματίσασθαι - 2 καί S,: om. S2.
59D cf. SIV 199,12.
 IV: A th en s in the 470s

59
A A feeling of great joy came upon Isidore as he caught sight of
Proclus, whose appearance was both grave and formidable, so that
he seemed to be gazing on the very face of philosophy itself.
Proclus too marvelled at Isidore’s appearance as being divine and
full of the philosophical life within. His eyes betrayed the mobility
of his mind and at the same time there ran through them a charming
gravity and an unaffected modesty which attracted the philosopher
and made him look on the young man as an old friend.137
B Proclus ordered Isidore to change his appearance for the
purposes of the better life and to put on a coarse cloak. But Isidore
could not bring himself to do it, even though he revered Proclus as
much as a god.138
C “He did not tread too far”, as the oracle says,139 in the direction
of piety, but set rules for himself suited to his age, handling
religious matters with a clear and pure conscience.
D Isidore said that what befitted a young man who was just
embarking on the study of philosophy was zealous enthusiasm for
his subject; whereas pious devotion to the gods most suited those
who were already advanced and far on the road both in years and in
philosophy.

137 Cf. 13. Note the double sense of the word gnorimos, meaning both “familiar”
and “inner circle pupil in a philosophical school”. For the distinction between two
categories of participants, Porphyry V.Plot. 7; Marinus VP 38, cf. 17.
138 Proclus’ ascetic tendencies were judged excessive even by the aged Plutarch
who attempted to curb them: Marinus VP 12.
139 A Chaldaean expression (oracle 176) which also occurs in Marinus in
connection with Proclus, VP 13.
Ε Ό τι Πρόκλος τής φιλοσοφίας πάσης έπίπροσθεν ήγε τήν θεο­
λογίαν τής δε πρός άρετήν ζωής έρρωμένης τήν άντίστροφον
πρός έκείνην ευσέβειαν προτιμών έφαίνετο.
[S* I I 375, 27 (έπίπροσθεν ρ)]
F Διαπορουμένφ γοϋν τφ Πρόκλφ περί των Ισιδώρου μιμήσεων
τών δρνέων {καί} των φωνών <καί> των άπηχημάτων ένίοτε έν
τοις χαλδαϊκοΐς έπιτηδεύμασιν αυτός ύπεδείκνυε τήν όδόν τής μι-
μήσεως άλλων τε καί στρουθών τών μικρών τούτων καί κατοικί­
διων τής πτήσεως, οΐα ψοφοΰσι ταϊς πτέρυξιν έγειρόμενα πρός τό 5

πετδσθαι.
[S* IV 780,11 (χαλδαϊκοΐς έπιτηδεύμασι)]

60
Σαλούστιος· οΰτος είς ’Αλεξάνδρειαν ήκεν Άθήνηθεν σύν Ίσι-
δώριρ τφ φιλοσόφφ. Παράδοξος δέ ό τρόπος Σαλουστίου πασιν
άνθρώποις, τά μέν φιλοσοφοϋντος έπί τό καρτερώτερον, τά δέ
παίζοντος έπί τό γελοιότερον έκάτερον, οΐμαι, πέρα τοϋ μέτριου.
Καί δει κρίσεως, εΐπερ τινί άλλφ καί τφδε τφ βίφ. 5
Καί δή Σαλούστιος τά μέν πατρόθεν ώρμητο άπό <...> Συρίας,
τά δέ πρός μητρός Έμισηνός έγεγόνει. Ό πατήρ δέ αύτφ Βασιλί-
δης ώνομάζετο, Θεόκλεια δέ ή μήτηρ. Εύφυής δέ έπί πολλά γε-
γονώς καί τό ήθος αύστηρός καί φιλότιμος τά μέν πρώτα άπέβλε-
πεν είς τήν πολυάρατον δικανικήν καί έπαιδεύετο λόγοις φητορι- 10
κοΐς ύπό Εύνοΐφ σοφιστή, τότε δντι κατά Έμισαν· ύστερον δέ
ούκέτι τφ δικανικφ, άλλ’ ήδη τφ σοφιστικφ βίφ προσειχε τον
νοΰν καί έπί τούτφ διεμελέτα τούς λόγους, ούδέν ήττον τής (ρύσε­
ως έπί τοις πόνοις θαυμαζόμενος· τούς μέν γάρ δημοσίους τού
Δημοσθένους λόγους όμοΰ πάντας έξέμαθεν. ’Αλλά πρός τούτφ 15
καί λέγειν ήν Ικανός, ού τούς νεωτέρους έκμιμούμενος σοφιστάς,

59F 2 τών φωνών καί Zintzen: καί ιών φωνών S. 2 ένίοτε Zintzen: ένίας S.
60 Φ 250 solum 12 ούκέτι - 18 λειπομένους, Φ 82 solum 25 ήδη νεανικού - 26 λό-
γοις, Φ 81 solum 27 δτι - 28 ήν.
6 nomen urbis Syriae lacuna ereptum putat Asmus. 12 ούκέτι S: δ δέ Σαλού-
στιος ούκέτι Φ 250. 13 καί έπί - 14 θατιμαζόμενος S: om. Φ 250.
14 τούς μέν - 15 έξέμαθεν S: έξέμαθε δέ καί τούς δημοσίους δπαντας τού Δημο­
σθένους λόγους Φ 250. 15 άλλα - τούτφ S: om. Φ 250. 16 καί S: καί δή Φ
250. 16 νεωτέρους έκμιμούμενος S: νέους μιμούμενος Φ 250.
E Proclus put theology before any other branch of philosophy and
he seemed to prefer piety to its counterpart -a life strong in
virtue.140
F Proclus was bemused by Isidore’s imitation of the cries and
other noises produced by birds. Sometimes during the Chaldaean
rituals he gave a display of his imitation of sparrows and hens and
other birds fluttering their wings as they rouse themselves for flight.

60
Salustius: he came from Athens to Alexandria with Isidore the
philosopher.141 Salustius’ manner seemed odd to everybody, as his
philosophising was too heavy and his jokes too amusing, so that in
both pursuits he overstepped the mark. For good judgement is
needed for this way of life above all.
On his father’s side Salustius came from ... in Syria, while
through his mother he was an Emesene. His father’s name was
Basilides and his mother’s Theocleia. A man of many talents with
an austere and ambitious character, he at first had his eye on the
accursed bar and attended the rhetorical courses of Eunoius the
sophist who was then at Emesa. But subsequently he turned his
attention from a legal career to that of a sophist and he therefore
began to study the orators, being admired for his industriousness no
less than for his natural gifts. For he learned by heart the whole of
Demosthenes’ public orations while at the same time being able to
extemporise, though not in the manner of modem sophists but

140 Typically, in the intellectual sphere Proclus classifies theology higher than
ontology, just as in the practical sphere he allots to ritual a higher position than to ethics
(Marinus VP 22).
141 Presumably after Isidore’s studies with Proclus in the mid 470s. Considering
that, when Isidore arrived in Athens, he had already completed the curriculum in
Alexandria and studied philosophy with Heraiscus and Asclepiades —a pursuit not
normally embarked on before the age of twenty two— we may place his date of birth in
the early 450s.
 άλλα πρός τόν άρχαϊον πίνον τής λογογραφίας άμιλλώμενος.
Άμέλει καί έγραψε λόγους, ού πολύ τι έκείνων λειπομένους.
Τόν δέ ήμέτερον πολίτην Μάρκελλον, έταΐρον τοΰ Εύνοϊου,
καί τούτον έκμαθόντα μέν άπεμνημόνευε τά όκτώ βιβλία τής Θου- 20
κυδίδου Ιστορίας, ού μην τι καί λέγοντα δξιον άκοής. Καί Νόν-
νον δέ φασιν έκμαθόντα έξάκις δλον τόν Δημοσθένην, μηδέ διά-
ραι τό στόμα δύνασθαι πρός γε λόγων έπιεικών σύνθεσιν· ού γάρ
έστι ταύτόν ές πλήθος άποστηθίζειν καί γράφειν ές κάλλος.
Ό δέ Σαλούστιος άδρότερον ήδη άπτόμενος τής τέχνης -ήδη 25
νεανικού φρονήματος ύπόπλεως καί σοβών έν λόγοις- έλάττω ή
καθ’ έαυτόν ύπολαβών τόν Εύνόιον (ότι Εύνόιος ό ρήτωρ βραδύ-
νονς fjv), άπήρεν είς ’Αλεξάνδρειαν καί άπεπειράτο των ρητο­
ρικών διδασκαλιών.
[S IV 315,12 (Σαλούστιος 62) + Φ 250 + Φ 82 + Φ 81]
ί
61
Σουπηριανός, σοφιστής, τό γένος Ίσαυρος, τής Λαχάρου δια­
τριβής. Έγένετο δέ ούτος ό Σουπηριανός όψιμαθής μέν ίκανώς
καί τήν φύσιν ύπονωθέστερος, οΰτω δέ έπίπονος καί σπουδαίος,
ώστε πλειόνων ή τριάκοντα έτών άρξάμενον άναγινώσκειν τά
τών φητόρων βιβλία, καί άπλώς φάναι λόγοις έλευθέροις προσέ- 5
χειν τήν διάνοιαν, έαυτόν άπαιτεΐν πρός άνάγκης, ούδέ έπιτιμή-
σεων ούδέ μαστίγων φειδόμενον, έκμανθάνειν έν τφ τηλικούτφ
τής ηλικίας άπερ οΐ άλλοι πάντες έν τή νεότητι άπαιτοϋνται
παΐδες έτι δντες υπό παιδαγωγών τε καί διδασκάλων. ’Αλλ’ δ γε
Σουπηριανός αύτός ύφ’ έαυτού μεμαστιγωμένος έωράτο πολλά- ίο
κις έν τοϊς βαλανείοις. Οΰκουν ούδέ διήμαρτεν έλπίδος· άλλα μι-*61

17 πίνον S: τόνον Φ 250. 18 λειπομένους Φ 250: έκλειπομένους S. 25 ήδη

νεανικού - 26 λόγοις Φ 82: om. S. 27 δτι-2 8 ήνΦ 81: om. S.
61 cf. S m 6 0 2 ,1.
Φ ότι Σουπηριανός τριάκοντα έτών τών ρητορικών άρξάμενος καίτοι τήν φύσιν
ύπονωθέστερος ών, όμως δι’ υπερβολήν φιλοπονίας (cf. 2—4), ύστερον - δίπο­
λειπόμενος (12-13).

ι68
 emulating the archaic patina of speech writing. And indeed he
wrote speeches which are not much inferior to those.
Among Eunoius’ pupils he recorded that my own compatriot
Marcellus had learned by heart the eight books of Thucydides’
History, yet was unable to say anything worth listening to. They say
that Nonnus too studied Demosthenes assiduously from cover to
cover six times and yet was unable even to open his mouth to put
together a few decent sentences. For to learn a great deal by heart is
quite a different thing from writing well.
As Salustius was already a powerful master of his art -full of
juvenile self-confidence and pompous words- considering Eunoius
to be unworthy of him (Eunoius the orator had a sluggish mind),142
he sailed to Alexandria and began to sample the teachers of rhetoric
there.

61
Superianus, a sophist of Isaurian origin of the school of
Lachares.143 This Superianus came to learning quite late and also
had a dull mind, but he was so hard-working and serious that, at the
age of more than thirty, he began to read the works of the orators
and generally to occupy himself with the liberal arts and forced
himself (sparing neither reprimand nor the whip) to learn at that
advanced age what everybody else is compelled by tutors and
teachers to study in youth when they are still children. This
Superianus was often to be seen in the public baths with self-
inflicted lashes. And indeed he did not fail in his expectations, for

142 This is clearly a note by Photius summarising Damascius’ judgement on

Eunoius.
143 Lachares was a pupil of Syrianus and fellow-pupil of Proclus, whom on chrono­
logical grounds Damascius can never have met (pace PLREII ‘Lachares 2’); Marinus is
full of admiration for his piety and philosophical disposition (VP 11). A long, but
unfortunately badly mutilated funerary epigram (No 119, Athens, Epigraphic Museum;
see SEG 30, no. 276 for a reconstruction of the first five lines), composed by his son
Eustathius, praises Lachares’ many virtues along the same lines as do Marinus and
Damascius, and at the same time allows us to identify PLRE II 'Eustathius 6’ with the
son of Lachares.
 κρόν ύστερον έν ταΐς λιπαραΐς καί άοιδίμοις Άθήναις άνηγορεύε-
το σοφιστής, ού πάνυ τής Λαχάρου δόξης άπολειπόμενος.
[S IV 399,19 (Σουπηριανός pp) + Φ 83]

62
Α Οίδα γάρ καί Λαχάρην γεγονότα σοφιστήν έξ έπιμελείας τό
πλέον ή φύσεως· ένέτυχον γάρ αύτοΰ λόγοις. Καί μοι έδοξεν άπό
τοΰ λόγου εΐκάζοντί {μοι} τήν πρώτην έπιμελής μεν είναι σφο­
δρά, τήν δέ φύσιν άγεννέστερος. Εΐδον δέ καί εικόνα τοΰ άνδρός,
άντικρυς άπαγγέλλουσαν οίος ήν Λαχάρης τήν φύσιν· δτι βραδύ- 5
τερος μεν πρός τούς λόγους, καλός δέ καί άγαθός τήν δψιν προς
άρετήν, φιλόσοφος άξιος καλείσθαι μάλλον ή σοφιστής. Έπεί καί
άλλως θεοφιλής άνήρ ήν ό Λαχάρης, δς γε τάς όψεις άποβαλών
πάλιν άνεκτήσατο.
[S IV 399, 30 ((Σουπηριανός jbp) + Φ 84]
Β -άνδρα Ιερόν καί περί τά θεία βακχεύοντα μεγαλοπρεπώς.
[Φ 85]
C Ό τι Μητροφάνης ό σοφιστής έκγονος ήν Λαχάρου. Ώ ν δέ έν
παισίν έτι νήπιος άνεφθέγξατο βοών έγώ είμί, έφη, ’Αριστοφάνης
ό φαλακρός, οΰπω τι τών τοιούτα»ν άκηκοώς. Έπεί δέ οί άκούσαν-
τες άνέκρινον δ τι εΐποι, μηδέν είδέναι τών είρημένων διϊσχυρίζε-
το. Κατά τούτου τοΰ Μητροφάνους έγραψε λόγον Σουπηριανός ό 5
σοφιστής.
[Φ 86 + S III391,21 (Μητροφάνης 1011)]

63
Α Ό τι φησίν ό συγγραφεύς άγαλμα τής 'Αφροδίτης ίδεΐν ίδρυμέ-
νον Ήρώδου τοΰ σοφιστοϋ άνάθημα. Τοΰτο σδν, φησί, θεασάμε-
νος ίδρωσα μέν ύπό θάμβους καί έκπλήξεως, οΰτω δέ τήν ψυχήν
διετέθην ύπό τής εύφροσύνης, ώστε ούχ οΐός τε ήν οΐκαδε έπανιέ-

62Α cf. S 1237,10, S III 239, 6.

Φ δτι καί Λαχάρης έξ έπιμελείας μάλλον f| φύσεως Εδοξε κατά τήν ρητορικήν
εύδοκιμήσαι. ΔηλοΙ δέ αΐιτοϋ τό τής φύσεως άγενέστερον καί τά συγγράμματα
αίιτοϋ (cf. 1-4).
3 μοι del. Zintzen.
62C Φ solum usque ad 1 Λαχάρου.
1 δτι - Λαχάρου Φ: Μητροφάνης, έκγονος Λαχάρου S.

ιγ ο
 shortly afterwards he was to be proclaimed sophist in “Athens the
brilliant and glorious”,144 not falling much behind Lachares in
renown.

62
A I am indeed in a position to know that Lachares too became a
sophist through diligence rather than natural gifts, for I have read
some of his orations. And my first impression, judging from his
writings, is that he was exceptionally diligent though not
particularly gifted. I have also seen a statue of the man which tells
one immediately what kind of man Lachares was: rather slow in
intellectual pursuits, but when it came to virtue good and fair to
behold; worthy indeed of being called a philosopher rather than a
sophist; indeed Lachares was a man much beloved of the gods who
lost his sight and then regained it.
B -A holy man sublimely inspired with divine frenzy-
C Metrophanes the Sophist was a descendant of Lachares, who,
when still a very young child, shouted loudly “I am Aristophanes
the bald”,145 having not yet heard anything of such matters. But
when those who heard him asked him what exactly he meant, he
denied any knowledge of what had been said. Superianus the
sophist wrote an oration against this Metrophanes.

63
A The author says he saw a statue o f Aphrodite dedicated by
Herodes the sophist. Upon seeing it, I fell into a sweat through the
influence of divine terror and astonishment and my soul was filled
with such joy that I was quite unable to go back home. I went away

144Pindar fr. 76 (Mfihler), perhaps cited via Ps.-Lucian Dem. enc. 10.
145 Cf. Aristophanes Pax 767,771.
 ναι, πολλάκις δέ άπιών έπαναστρέφειν έπί τό θέαμα· τοσοΰτον 5
αυτώ κάλλος ένεκέρασεν ό τεχνίτης, ού γλυκά τι καί άφροδίσιον,
άλλά βλοσυρόν τε καί άνδρικόν, ένοπλον μέν, οΐον δέ άπό νίκης
έπανηγμένης καί τό γεγηθός έπιφαινούσης.
[Φ 87]
Β Ό τι Ίέριον τόν Πλουτάρχου, ύπό Πρόκλφ φιλοσοφοΰντα, ές
τήν Κυρίνου λεγομένην οίκίαν θεάσασθαί φησι μικράν οΰτω κε­
φαλήν μόνην άνθρώπου, τό τε μέγεθος καί τό είδος ούδέν έρεβίν-
θου διαφέρουσαν διό καί έρέβινθον αύτήν καλεΐσθαι- τά δ’ άλλα
κεφαλήν άνθρωπείαν είναι, όφθαλμούς τε έχειν καί πρόσωπον 5
καί τρίχας άνω καί στόμα πάν, καί άπό τοϋ στόματος φωνήν
άφιέναι, δσον άνθρώπων χιλίων, τοσοΰτον μεγάλην. Τοϋτο τερα-
τευσάμενος περί τοϋ έρεβίνθου ό συγγραφεΰς τής κεφαλής, καί
Άλλα μύρια περί αυτής άξια Δαμασκίω τφ δυσσεβεΐ καί γράφειν
καί πιστεύειν προστερατεύεται. ' ίο
[Φ 88]

64
Νικόλαος, φήτωρ, γνώριμος Πλουτάρχου καί Πρόκλου (Πλου­
τάρχου δέ λέγω τοΰ έπίκλην Νεστορίου). Έγραψε προγυμνάσμα-
τα καί μελέτας φητορικάς καί άλλα τινά. Έίκμαζεν έπί Λέοντος
βασιλέως τοϋ πρεσβύτου καί έως Ζήνωνος καί ’Αναστασίου.
[S* III469,1 (Νικόλαος 394 ρ)]
 several times only to return to that sight again. The sculptor has
blended into it so much beauty -nothing sweet or sensual, but
something dignified and virile: clad in armour and as if just
returning from a victory, with an expression of joy.14*146
B He says that Hierius, the son of Plutarch,147 who studied
philosophy under Proclus, saw in the so-called House of Quirinus a
human head on its own, so small that it did not differ from a chick­
pea either in size or in shape; and this is why it was called “the
chick-pea”. In every other respect it was a human head, complete
with eyes and face and hair and a perfect mouth from which it let
out a sound as loud as that produced by a thousand men.148 Having
related this monstrosity about the “chick-pea” head, the author
adds a multitude of other stories about it, worthy o f the beliefs and
writings of the impious Damascius.

64
Nicholas the orator: he was a pupil of Plutarch and of Proclus -
I mean Plutarch the so-called Nestorius.149 He wrote declamations
and rhetorical studies and other works. He flourished in the reign of
Leo the Elder and as far as those of Zeno and Anastasius.

144 This passage constitutes a typical ekphrasis, which forms a constituent part of
the patriographic genre.
147 PLRE Π ‘Hierius 5’ and ‘Plutarchus 2’ respectively. The latter, describing
himself in a dedicatory inscription as μύθων ταμίης, and styled in another as βασιλεύς
τών λόγων, three times defrayed the cost of the sacred ship of Athene at the
Panathenaea, cf. Robert, He lienica IV, 94-5.
148 An equally typical paradoxon which tallies well with the previous paragraph.
149 This phrase may be richer in meaning than has ever been realised, holding the
key to the identity of Nestorius. If Plutarch of Athens had the alternative name
Nestorius, then his father seems to have been the hierophant Nestorius who saved
Athens from an earthquake in 375 (Zosimus IV. 18.2-4), as indeed suggested by
Marinus VP 28. If this identification is correct, then the word πάππος referring to
Nestorius in Proclus’ phrase πάππος ών Πλουτάρχου (In Remp. Π, 64, 6) means
“progenitor” rather than “grandfather” and ‘Nestorius 2’ and ‘3’ in PLRE II are one and
the same person. On the scholarch Plutarch’s (presumably hereditary) cultic activities
and his specific connection with Asclepius, see the important inscription no. 30
(Sironen, pp. 48-50) and cf. 89A. Nicholas was a pupil of Lachares and a contemporary
of Proclus whom he welcomed on his arrival in Athens (Marinus VP 10); for his
copious literary production, Walz, Rhetores Graeci I, 266-420.
 65
Όδαίναθος, άπό Συρίας. Οΐτος τφ φιλοσόφφ Πλουτάρχφ
συνών άποριών ένεπίπλα τάς τού διδασκάλου διατριβάς καί ούκ
εΐα τόν λόγον άνύτειν συμποδιζόμενον. ’Αλλά πρός σύνεσιν τοΰ
άληθοϋς Ενδεέστερος ήν ό ’Οδαίναθος. Οΰκουν {οΐεσθαι δεΐν}
Εκείνος ήξίου τόν φιλόσοφον έρωτάσθαι ούδέ άποκρίνεσθαι έκ 5
τοΰ παρατυχόντος ότιοϋν. Μάλιστα δε χαλεπόν καί Εγγύς τι άδύ-
νατον είναι περί θειον τι λέγειν ή φρονεϊν άνθρώπους όντας.
[S* Π Ι507,16 (Όδαίναθος)]

66
Α Σαλούστιος, φιλόσοφος- δς Εφη άνθρώποις ο ι φάδιον είναι
φιλοσοφεϊν, άλλα καί άδύνατον. Τούτον άκούσας άπέστυξα δή
τότε τόν λόγον, ώς ούτε άληθή λεγόμενον ούτε λέγεσθαι άξιον.
’Αλλά γάρ ό Σαλούστιος ηδει τό ένόν είπεϊν. Ού γάρ διεβέβλητο
πρός τούς φιλοσόφους άπλώς, άλλά φύσει μισοπόνηρος ήν καί 5
κατά τόν Ηράκλειτον όχλολοίδορος καί πάσιν Επιτιθέμενος τοΐς
άμαρτάνουσι, καί όπωσοϋν έκ πάσης προφάσεως έλέγχων έκά-
στους καί διακωμωδών- Ενίοτε μέν σπουδάζων, τά δε πολλά τφ
γελοίφ χαίρων ηθει καί φιλοσκώμμονι. Καί γάρ fjv ό Σαλούστιος
εύτράπελος ίκανίος καί σκώπτειν εύφυέστατός τε καί προχειρό- 10
τατος, έξαιρέτους μέν Εχων αύτός, έκ γένους δέ όμως τάς τοιαύ-
τας χάριτας. Ό γάρ τοι πέμπτην άρετήν όνομάσας τήν περί θεών
δόξαν άληθή, δοκοϋσαν ένεΐναί ποτέ τοΐς πονηροτάτοις, Σαλού-
στιος έστίν. Έ τι δέ πρός ένίους τών άλλοιρύλων, τά μέν άλλα
αύτοϋ έπαινοΰντας, Εν δέ αύτφ λείπειν είρηκότας, τό μή δοξάζειν6515

65 4 οΐεσθαι δεΐν dei. Portus.

 Odaenathus the Syrian. He was a pupil of the philosopher
Plutarch and filled his master’s classes with so many questions that
the argument was obstructed and not allowed to proceed. Yet when
it came to the understanding of the truth Odaenathus was rather,
deficient. He did not think that the philosopher should have to
receive questions or give answers off the cuff. Indeed it is difficult
and almost impossible for men to say or think anything about the
gods.150

66
A Salustius, a philosopher who said that it is not easy for men to
philosophise - in fact it is impossible. Upon hearing this I was
filled with abhorrence, as this seemed neither true nor worth saying.
Salustius however knew how to express the inner truth. He had no
objection to philosophers as such, but was by nature a hater of the
wicked and, in Heraclitus’ words, “a despiser of the mob”,151 who
attacked anyone who made a mistake and seized any excuse to
criticise and make fun of people. Sometimes he did this by having
recourse to serious argument but usually by humour and mockery.
Indeed Salustius was quite witty and had a natural propensity and
inclination to ridicule; this gift, which he possessed to an except­
ional degree, was nevertheless a family characteristic.152 Salustius
is also the man who called the true belief about the gods “a fifth
virtue”,153 which is sometimes present in the most wicked of men.
And once when some foreigners154 praised his other qualities but

150 The passage is clearly corrupt. The subject of the penultimate sentence may be
Plutarch; the theme of the final sentence is continued in 66.
151 Diels-Kranz, D ie F ra g m en te der V orsokratiker I (19526), 1 ,141,4: the adjective
describing Heraclitus himself is to be found in Timo (fr. 43).
132 The Syrians had a reputation for mockery which Julian for one found
exceptionally unattractive (M iso p o g o n , p assim .).
153 In addition to the four cardinal Platonic virtues (wisdom, courage, temperance
and justice).
134 These are the Christians, who are here designated in the Julianic manner as
“foreign” to both divine matters and human institutions (C o n tra G alilaeos, p a ss im ).
 περί θεών τά αυτά τοΐς πολλοίς· έάτε, Ιφη, τοϋτό γε διά την νέμε-
σιν προσεΐναι μοι. Τφ δέ Παμπρεπίψ μέγιστον ήδη δυναμένφ
έντυχών, έπειδή έκεϊνος ώραϊζόμενος, τί θεοί πρός άνθρώπους,
έφη· τις δέ, έφη, ούκ οίδεν, ώς οϋτ’ έγώ πώποτε θεός έγενόμην
ούτε σύ άνθρωπος. Ταϋτα περί Σαλουστίου. Κυνικώτερον δέ έφι-
λοσόφει.
[S IV 316,4 (Σαλούστιος 63 p)J
Β Ό Σαλούστιος κυνίζων ού τήν είθισμένην όδόν έπορεύετο τής
φιλοσοφίας, άλλά τήν κεχαραγμένην πρός έλεγχόν τε καί λοιδο­
ρίαν καί τόν μάλιστα δή πόνον ύπέρ άρετής. Ύπεδέδετο δ’ ούτος
σπανιάκις, εΐποτε δέ τάς άττικάς Ιφικρατίδας ή τά συνήθη βάνδα­
λο. περιδεδεμένος περιενόστει. Έφαίνετο δέ ούδέποτε έπί πλεϊ-
στον χρόνον ούτε άρρωστων τό σώμα ούτε ταλαιπωρούμενος τήν
ψυχήν, άλλά τό λεγόμενον εύλόφψ αύχένι τήν άσκησινύπέμενε·
[Φ 89 + S I I 678, 24 (ΙφΙκρατίδες)]
C άνυπόδετος περιιών τήν οικουμένην, ώς φάναι λόγον, άπα-
σαν.
[Φ 251J
D Είσιών καί έξιών ό Σαλούστιος πρός τούς έταίρους έώρα τούς
χυτρόποδας άχράντους άεί καί άκάπνους, ώσπερ έν άγορά πρός
ώνήν έγκειμένους- έποιεϊτο δέ μέγιστον όπύρφ διαίτη κεχρήσθαι
πολύν χρόνον.
[S* IV 837,1 (χυτρόπους)]
Ε Ό δέ Σαλούστιος άπήγε τούς νέους τής φιλοσοφίας, δυοΐν τά
έτερα πεπονθώς, ή προσκρούων τοΐς καθηγουμένοις, έχθρμ τη
πρός εκείνους έπιβουλεύων τάϊς φιλοσόφοις διατριβάϊς, ή τό μέ­
γεθος τού έπιτηδεύματος έκλογιξόμενος, τφ οΐεσθαι πάντας
άνθρώπους άναξίους είναι αύτοϋ.
[S 1282, 9 (άπήγεν)]

66Β cf. S I I 456, 31.

S solum 4 εΐποτε - 5 περιενόστει.
4 εΐποτε δέ S: ή Φ. 5 περιενόστει S: om. Φ.
66Ε 2 προσκρούων scripsi: προσκρούσων S. 4 τφ οΐεσθαι Merkelbach: οΐεσθαι S.
 said that he was lacking in this one thing -that he did not hold the
same beliefs about the gods as the majority- he said “Let me keep
this one peculiarity to ward off Nemesis”. Meeting Pamprepius
when the latter was at the height of his power and being asked by
him in an exhibitionist manner155 “How do the gods relate to
men?”, Salustius answered “Everyone knows that I have not yet
become a god, nor you a man”. So much for Salustius. His
philosophy was along the lines of Cynicism.
B As a Cynic philosopher Salustius did not follow the well-
trodden path of philosophy, but the one made jagged through
criticism and abuse and especially through toil in the service of
virtue. He would rarely put on shoes and when he did so he went
round wearing either the Attic iphicratides or the common sandals.
And he never appeared either sick in body or distressed in spirit for
long, but submitted to an ascetic life “with his neck unbowed”, as
the proverb goes.
C He went round the whole world, so to speak, barefooted.
D As Salustius went in and out of the students’ dwelling place, he
saw that the cooking pots were absolutely immaculate and free
from smoke, as if they were on display for sale in the market-place;
for he laid particular stress on adhering to a diet of uncooked food
for a long time.
E Salustius led the young away from philosophy in one of two
ways: either he fell out with the teachers and, through his hostility
towards them, schemed against the philosophical schools or,
summing up the magnitude of the task, he considered that no man
was worthy of it.

155 The rare word ώραΐξομαι is also used by Zosimus with the same sarcastic
nuance (IV.42.5; IV.51.1).
F Τφ γάρ δντι συνέβαινε τούς τφ δντι φιλοσοφίας έρώντας τών
νέων ώσπερ έν πυρί χρυσόν δοκιμάζεσθαι. ΕΙ δέ μή ώμολόγει τήν
άπόπειραν, αύτό τούτο μάλιστα δή ήν fi άπόπειρα, σπουδή τις
είναι προσποιουμένη καί έλλοχώσα τάς νεοπρεπώς άττούσας κι­
νήσεις. Έμέ γοΰν διεκώλυεν ώς χαλεπωτάτου δντος τού πράγμα- 5
τος.
[S 1314, 8 (άπόπειρα)]
G “Οτι τφ Άθηνοδώρψ πάντα παρεσκεύαστο πρός φιλοσοφίαν
τά τε άπό τής φΰσεως καί τά άπό τής έπιεικοΰς προαιρέσεως <...>
δτε Πρόκλος έζη. Καί διαφανώς έξηγεΐτο τοΐς πλησιάζουσιν. Ό ν
ό Σαλούστιος θαυμάζων επί σπουδής Ιλεγεν δτι πυρί άρα έφκει δ
άνθρωπος έξάπτοντι πάντα τά παρακείμενα. Ά λλ’ δμως έπεισεν 5
’Αθηνόδωρον μή φιλοσοφήσαι.
[S* 170, 26 ( ’Αθηνόδωρος 735 ρ)]
\
67
Ζήνων, Άλεξανδρεύς, άνήρ ’Ιουδαίος μέν γεγονώς, άπειπάμε-
νος δέ δημοσία πρός τό φΰλον τών ’Ιουδαίων, ώς παρά σφίσι νε-
νόμισται, τόν λευκόν δνον έν τη άργούση ήμέρφ διά τής καλουμέ-
νης αυτών συναγωγής έλασάμενος. Ούτος ό Ζήνων έπιεικής μεν
ήν φύσει καί Ιερός, άλλά νωθέστερος έν λόγοις καί μαθήμασιν, 5
έφιέμενος μέν άεί τι μανθάνειν καί έρωτών δ τι άν άγνοόϊ, πάντα
δέ σχεδόν άγνοών. Καί γάρ νοήσαι βραδύτατος ήν, καί τών νοηθέν-
των όψέ ποτέ προδότης ύπό λήθης έτοιμότατος.
[S* I I 507, 24 (Ζήνων 82 pp)]

68
Ή ν δέ καί έτερος Ζήνων, τοϋ Πρόκλου έτάϊρος, κατά τόν
αύτόν χρόνον, τφ μέν γένει Περγαμηνός, τη δέ φύσει καί αύτός
ένδεέστερος τά γε πρός έπιστήμην· έπιεικής δέ καί τά ήθη κατηρ-
τυμένος. Όπότερος δέ αύτοίν άφορμήν τή διαστάσει παρέσχετο
τφ Σαλουστίφ πρός τόν Πρόκλον, ούκ έχω φράζειν. 5
[S* I I 507, 31 (Ζήνων 82 pp)]

66F 3 δή ήν Bekker: δι’ ήν S. 4 νεοπρεπώς Bekker: νεοπρεπείς S.

66G 2 lacunam statuit Asinus.
F It indeed happened that those young men who were truly in love
with philosophy had to be tested like gold in the fire. And even
though he did not admit that it was a test, it was in fact very much
one, consisting in an attempt to lay a trap and expose any
hyperactivity in movement. Me at least he sought to prevent from
embarking on the task on the grounds that it was extremely
difficult.
G Athenodorus had at his disposal all the essentials for a
philosophical career both through his nature and in the right
decisions he made ... when Proclus was alive. He explained (the
texts) to his pupils with clarity.156 Salustius, who admired him for
his zeal, used to say that the man was like a fire which kindles what­
ever lies next to it. And yet he persuaded Athenodorus to give up
philosophy.

67
Zeno the Alexandrian, a Jew by birth who publicly renounced
his Judaism in the traditional manner, namely by driving a white ass
through their so-called Synagogue on the Sabbath. This Zeno was
by nature a decent and pious man, but rather sluggish in the arts and
the sciences, always seeking knowledge and asking questions about
matters of which he was ignorant, but remaining ignorant of
virtually everything. For he was extremely slow in understanding,
and when he finally understood something he quickly lost it again
through forgetfulness.

68
Among Proclus’ pupils there was also another Zeno at the same
time. He was of Pergamene origin and he too was by nature rather
deficient in learning, but a good person and with moral discipline.
Now which one of the two Zenos provided Salustius with the
pretext for the quarrel with Proclus I cannot say.

156 Clearly Athenodorus was part of the Athenian professorial set-up hinted at by
Marinus (VP 22 ad fin.), teaching philosophy at the Academy alongside Proclus,
Salustius and others.
Α Μαρκελλΐνος, άνήρ έπιεικής καί γενναίος, έδυνάστευε μέν
Δαλματ<ί>ας έν Ήπείρω κατωκημένων ’Ιλλυριών, έπεπαίδευτο
δέ τήν φωμαΐδα παιδείαν καί μαντικής έμπειρότατος έγεγόνει καί
τδλλα φιλολογώτατος· δς έλευθέραν έκέκτητο τήν άρχήν οΰτε
'Ρωμαίων βασιλεία δουλεύων οΰτε άλλφ δυναστεύοντι τών έθνών 5
οΰδενί, άλλ’ ήν αύτόνομος, μετά δικαιοσύνης έξηγούμενος τών
ύπηκόων. Παρήν δέ αύτφ καί φρόνησις Ικανή πολιτεύματος καί
άνδρεία θαυμαστή, μεμελετηκύϊα τά πρός πόλεμον.
[S III325,23 (Μαρκελλΐνος pp)]
Β Καλά καί άξιέπαινα πολιτεύματα, καί δσα τοιαϋτα φιλανθρω-
πεύματα.
[Φ90]
C Ή ν δέ τό έπόμενον στράτευμα Μαρκελλίνιρ έπιφανέστερον
τφ εύσταλει τής δπλίσεως. *
[S* I I 473,20 (εύσταλής ρ)]
D Ό Καρχηδονίων βασιλεύς Γεζέριχος, άκούσας ώς οι 'Ρωμαίοι
τόν σύμμαχον αύτοΐς κατ’ αύτοϋ Μαρκελλΐνον δόλφ καί παρά
τούς όρκους άνειλον, ήσθη τε άγαν έπί ταΐς έλπίσι τής νίκης, καί
εδοξεν είρηκέναι λόγον ού Καρχηδονίφ προσήκοντα άλλά 'Ρω-
μαίφ βασιλεΧ- τούς γάρ τοι 'Ρωμαίους έφατο τη άριστερά χειρί 5
άποκόψαι τήν δεξιάν. Ό δέ Μαρκελλΐνος τής Δαλμάτων ήν χώ­
ρας αύτοδέσποτος ήγεμών, Έλλην τήν δόξαν φ συνήν Σαλού-
στιος ό φιλόσοφος.
[Φ 91 + S III325, 30 (Μαρκελλΐνος pp)]
Ε Τοσοΰτον αύτοΐς ένεποίει τής βεβαίας έλπίδος ή τού Μαρκελ-
λίνου περί τά θεία πιστότης.
[S* IV 136, 15 (πιστότης)]

69Α 2 Δαλματίας Zintzen.

69D Φ solum usque ad 7 δόξαν, S solum 7 φ συνήν usque ad finem. S
A Marcellinus157 was a noble and brave man. He ruled over
Dalmatia, an area in Epirus inhabited by Illyrians, and had received
a Roman education, being also an expert in divination as well as a
man of great general culture. He was independent, subject neither
to the Roman emperor nor to any other national ruler, but was
autonomous, governing his subjects with justice. He possessed
reasonable wisdom in government and remarkable courage well-
practised in warfare.
B Good and praiseworthy political actions and humane deeds at
the same level.158
C The army led by Marcellinus was particularly distinguished for
its light-armed equipment.159
D When Geiseric, the king of the Carthaginians, heard that the
Romans had killed Marcellinus, their ally against him,
treacherously and contrary to the oaths they had sworn, he was
jubilant at the hope of victory and apparently said something
befitting more a Roman emperor than a Carthaginian: namely that
the Romans had cut off their right arm with their left. Marcellinus
was the independent ruler of Dalmatia and a Hellene [pagan] in his
religious beliefs. The philosopher Salustius was at his court.
E Such was the sure hope that the faith of Marcellinus in divine
matters inspired in them.160

157 Like Severus (cf. 51A, 77A), Marcellinus was very close to the pagan emperor
of the West, Anthemius. For his career PLREII ‘Marcellinus 6’; for a critical analysis
of the historical context in which he moved, Stein-Palanque I, 387-391; for the
paganism of this milieu and its historical background, J.J. O'Donnell, ‘The demise of
paganism’, Traditio 35 (1979) 45-88.
138 This passage probably summarises what had already been said about the
qualities of Marcellinus.
139 Cf. Thucydides ΙΠ.22.2.
160 Combined with independent evidence, the information provided by Damascius
hints at a co-ordinated plan at a pagan restoration in the late 460s, to which Salustius8

l8 l
 Ό τι ό Σαλούστιος εις τούς τών έντυγχανόντων όφθαλμούς
άφορών προέλεγεν έκάστοτε τήν βίμ γενησομένην έκάστφ τελευ­
τήν. Τήν δέ αιτίαν τής προγνώσεως ούδ’ αυτός είχε φράζειν· καί-
τοι έπειράτο έρωτώμενος τό σκοτεινόν τών όφθαλμών αίτιασθαι
καί άχλυώδες καί νοτισμού μεστόν, οΐον έπί πένθεσι ταΐς κόραις 5
αύταΐς έμφερόμενον. Καί Ουράνιόν τι να όνομα, Άπαμείας τής έν
Συρίφ πολίτην καί άρξαντα Καισαρείας τής έν Παλαιστίνη, άπό
τών όφθαλμών γνωρίζειν τόν δμοιον τρόπον τούς πολναράτους
γόητας φησί. Καί Νόμον δέ τι να τοϋνομα, πολίτην ίδιον, ό συγ-
γραφενς λέγει άπό τής κατά τα δμματα τών έντυγχανόντων θέας ίο
τούς λανθάνοντας έπιγινώσκειν φονέας.
[Φ 92]
'1

ΐδ2
 By looking into the eyes of the people he met, Salustius could
foretell for each one the violent death that would come upon him.*161
The cause of this knowledge he himself could not explain, though,
if questioned, he attempted to attribute it to the darkness and
mistiness of the eyes and the abundance of moisture in them, such
as gathers into the very pupils of the eye at moments of great
affliction. He also says that a certain Uranius, citizen o f the Syrian
Apamea and governor of Caesarea in Palestine, could recognise
the accursed magicians from their eyes in a similar manner. The
author also mentions a certain Nomus,162 a compatriot of his, who
recognised undetected murderers by looking into the eyes of the
people whom he met.

and his patron Marcellinus would have been as crucial as Severus and his own patron,
the emperor Anthemius: cf. my remarks in JHS 113,18. Moreover, what survives of the
PH suggests that one of its central themes was the geographical unity of paganism, a
preoccupation which also characterises Zosimus’ History.
161 Possibly this sentence qualifies a missing piece of information concerning the
prediction of Marcellinus’ death referred to in 69D.
I6i Also mentioned in 106B and 109. A fellow-citizen of Damascius, Nomus
studied rhetoric in Alexandria at the same time as him and another pupil of Horapollo,
Severus of Antioch, with whom he maintained relations (cf. PLRE Π ‘Nomus 3’).
 71
Α Ό δέ τόν Αίγάϊον διαπεραιωθείς, δ Ισίδωρος <...>
[Φ 93]
Β δς έφιλοσόφησε μέν ύπό τοΐς άδελφοϊς, εΐπερ τις άλλος έν τοίς
μαθήμασιν έπιμελής τε έν ίεροΐς καί τά πρός ταΰτα κατασκευά-
ζειν άπαντα, ώς έπος είπεΐν, ίκανώτατος είς υπερβολήν. Έμοί τε
δοκεΐν τήν ζωήν μέν ήν φιλόσοφος, τά δέ πρός έπιστήμην ού διε-
ξητασμένος, άγύμναστος ών μάλλον ή άφυής τά διαλεκτικά. 5
[S* I I 668,20 (Ισίδωρος 631 pp)]

72
A ’Οτι τήν μέν φύσιν θεοειδέστερος ήν Ήραΐσκος, ό δέ τήν Αίγυ-
πτίων σοφίαν δαημονέστερος, δ Άσκληπιάδης, άτε* τοσοϋτον
χρόνον ούτος μέν τή ΑΙγυπτίων προσδιατρίβων, έκεΧνος δέ άπο-
δημών <...>. Ό δ’ έτερος δμως τής τοΰ έτέρου κατά πολύ έλείπετο
(ρύσεως ή έπιστήμης. 5
[S I I 579,3 (Ήραΐσκος 450 pp)]
Β Όθεν αύτώ καί δ βίος ές τούτο προήλθεν, έν άδύτοις έκάστοτε
καί τελεστηρίοις ένδιαιτάσθαι τήν ψυχήν, ουτι κατ’ Αίγυπτον μό­
νην κινοΰντι τάς πατρίους τελετάς, άλλά καί τής άλλοδαπής,
εΐπου τι κατελέλειπτο των τοιούτων.
[S I I 579,29 (Ήραΐσκος 450 pp)]
C Ό δέ έσπούδασεν είς τό δυνατόν πρός άγυρισμόν τής άπορρή-
του τών θείων θεραπείας.
[*S 140,1 (άγυρισμός)]
D Ό δέ Άσκληπιάδης έπιπλεΐον έν τοΐς Αίγυπτίοις βιβλίοις
άνατραφείς άκριβέστερος ήν άμφί θεολογίαν τήν πάτριον, άρχάς
τε αυτής καί μέσα διεσκεμμένος καί τήν άπειρίαν άτεχνώς τών

71Α Φ 93 in duas partes separavi: 71A et 72E.

1 post ’Ισίδωρος lacunam statui.
72A 4 post άποδημών lacunam indicavit Asmus.
72B 2 τΕλεστηρίοις Portus: τελεστήριον S.
 V: Alexandria in the 470s

71
A Having crossed the Aegean, Isidore ...,163
B who was taught philosophy by the brothers. He was
extraordinarily diligent in the sciences and more than anybody else
able to put forward arguments on virtually all matters concerned
with holy things. Yet to me at least he gave the impression of being
a philosopher in his way of life, but in the realm of knowledge he
appeared to be not terribly strong, being untrained in the art of
dialectics rather than without any natural aptitude.

72
A Heraiscus was of a more god-like nature, whereas Asclepiades
was more knowledgeable in the wisdom of the Egyptians because,
while the latter spent such a long time in Egypt, the former travelled
abroad. Each of the two was greatly deficient when compared with
the other, the one (Asclepiades) as regards natural gifts, the other
(Heraiscus) as regards precise knowledge.
B Hence his life reached the stage where at every opportunity his
soul dwelt in shrines and places of initiation, as he revived the
ancestral rites not just in Egypt, but also abroad wherever any such
customs might have survived.
C He put all his efforts in the collection of information on the
secret worship of the gods.
D As for Asclepiades, who had been educated mainly in Egyptian
literature, he had a more accurate knowledge of his native
theology,164 having investigated its principles and methods and

163 The missing lines must refer to Isidore’s return to Alexandria from Athens
together with Salustius. A fully-fledged philosopher, Isidore is now recognised as a
colleague by his mentors, Heraiscus and Asclepiades.
164 Cf. S I 42, 26: Ό δέ τήν τών ΑΙγυπτίων σοφίαν ήν άδαημονέστερος 6
Άσκληπιόδοτος (Asclepiodotus was supremely ignorant of the wisdom of the
Egyptians). I suspect this sentence to be a misreading of S I I 579,3 (72A), rather than a
pun by the Suda excerptor exploiting the similarity between the adjectives and the
names (δαημονέστερος Άσκληπιάδης/ άδαημονέστερος Άσκληπιόδοτος).
 έσχάτων περάτων πολυπραγμονήσας, ώς έξεστιν είδέναι σαφώς
άπό τε τών ύμνων ών συγγέγραφεν είς τούς ΑΙγυπτίων θεούς, καί 5
άπό τής πραγματείας ήν ώρμησε γράφειν περιέχουσαν τών θεολο­
γιών άπασών τήν συμφωνίαν. Καί συγγραφήν δέ έγραψεν Αίγυ-
πτίων ώγυγίων πράγματα περιέχουσαν ούκ έλαττόνων έτών ή
τριών μυριάδων, άλλά πλειόνων όλίγφ.
[S I I 579, 33 (Ήραΐσκος 450 pp)]
Ε Καί αύτός δέ Άσκληπιάδης έφασκεν έωρακέναι πλόκαμον έν
τφ Νείλφ ποταμφ δαιμόνιον τό μέγεθος καί τό κάλλος. Αύθις δέ
ποτέ παρά τόν Νείλον έστιωμένοις άμφοτέροις (παρήν δέ έκ τρί­
των καί ό ήμέτερος φιλόσοφος) άνέδραμεν άπό τοϋ ποταμού πλό­
καμος ώς ίδεΐν πεντάπηχυς. Καί πολλά τοιαϋτα φάσματα λέγει. 5
[Φ 93]
'ι

72Ε vide 71Α

 having enquired closely into the absolute infinity of its extreme
limits.165 One can clearly see this from the hymns that he composed
to the Egyptian gods and from the treatise that he set out to write on
the agreement of all theologies.166 He also wrote a work dealing
with Egyptian prehistory, which contains information covering no
less than thirty thousand years, indeed slightly more.
E Asclepiades also said that he had seen in the Nile a lock of hair
of supernatural size and beauty. On another occasion as the two of
them were having a meal by the Nile167 (there was a third party
present too -our philosopher),168 there rose from the river a lock of
hair which appeared to be five cubits long.169 Indeed he relates
many such phenomena.

165 Note the double meaning of the words άρχή, μέσον, πέρας in the text.
166 More details on this treatise in P rinc. Ill, 167. As was realised by Combes
(P rin c. Ill, 240, n. 5), the brief analysis that Damascius provides of the theological
works of Asclepiades and Heraiscus establishes a double connection, between Hermetic
theology (H e rm . S XXIII. 32) and Iamblichus (M yst. VIII. 3) on the one hand, and
between the same Hermetic text and Heraiscus and Asclepiades on the other. As is well
known, by the fifth century the main hermeneutic task of the Neoplatonists consisted in
proving the agreement between all Greek and Oriental theologies; cf. above, p. 113, n.
72 (on Syrianus); Marinus VP 22 (on Proclus).
167 The reference must be to Asclepiades and Heraiscus.
168 Isidore.
169 By combining a critical reading of the literary evidence available (Pharaonic,
Ptolemaic, Roman) with an intelligent understanding of natural history, Danielle
Bonneau (259-263) interprets the myths and legends which lie behind the phenomenon
of “the lock of Isis”: at the time when the Nile was bordered by enormous papyrus
plants measuring two to three metres in height (as is still the case at the Fifth Cataract),
the force of its inundation caused many plant-heads to be detached from their stems; as
they floated down the river on their way to the sea, they seemed like huge locks of hair
which the popular imagination attributed to Isis, since she was instrumental in the
regeneration of Nature caused by the rising of the waters. This phenomenon took place
towards the end of July (at the time when the star Sothis appeared in the sky, for which
cf. 53A with corresponding note) and was seen as the sign of the resurrection of Osiris,
forecasting an abundant inundation. As the rebirth of Adonis in neighbouring Phoenicia
occurred at the same time of the year, Egyptians and Phoenicians had, even before the
end of the second millennium B.C., begun to celebrate together the resurrection of their
gods, taking the arrival of the first papyrus head at Byblos as the signal to start the
festivities; cf. the description by an eye witness in the second century A.D.: “κεφαλή
έκάστου έτεος έξ ΑΙγύπτου ές τήν Βίβλον άπικνέεται πλώουσα ιόν μεταξύ πλόον έπτά
ήμερέων καί μιν οί άνεμοι φέρουσι θείρ ναυτιλίρ” (Lucian D ea Syr. 7). A similar ritual
F Ό τι κατά τήν Ήλιούπολιν τής Συρίας είς όρος τό τοϋ Λιβά­
νου τόν Άσκληπιάδην άνελθεϊν φησί, καί Ιδεϊν πολλά των λεγο­
μένων βαιτυλίων ή βαιτύλων, περί ών μυρία τερατολογεΐ άξια
γλώσσης άσεβούσης. Λέγει δέ καί έαυτόν καί τόν Ισίδωρον ταϋτα
χρόνφ ύστερον θεάσασθαι. s
[Φ 94]

73
Α Ή δέ Ιερά γενεά καθ’ έαυτήν διέζη βίον θεοφιλή καί εύδαίμο-
να, τόν τε φιλοσοφοϋντα καί τόν τά θεία θεραπεύοντα.
[Φ 95]
Β Άνέκαιον όσίφ πυρί τούς βωμούς.
[Φ 96]

74 '
Α "Οτι ή πάρδαλις άεί, φησί, διψή, ό Ιέραξ ούδέποτε· διό σπανιά-
κις όρδται πίνων.
[Φ 97]
Β Ό Ιπποπόταμος άδικον ζφον, δθεν καί έν τοϊς Ιερογλυφικοΐς

ι88
F He says that Asclepiades ascended Mount Lebanon in the area
o f Heliopolis in Syria and saw many o f the so-called baetylets or
baetyls,*170 about which he relates a multitude o f monstrous stories
worthy o f an impious tongue. He says that some time later171 he
himself and Isidore also saw them.172

73
A The holy race173 led a private life dear to the gods and blissful, a
life dedicated to philosophy and to the worship of things divine.
B They lit holy fire on the altars.

74
A The leopard is perennially thirsty, the falcon174 never. For this
reason one rarely sees it drinking.
B The hippopotamus is an unjust animal; hence it provides the

is described in the Book of Isaiah (18.1), and in his Commentary on the passage Cyril of
Alexandria (PG 70. 441-442) says that each year the women of Alexandria proclaimed
to the women of Byblos Aphrodite’s discovery of Adonis by means of a letter sealed in
an earthen pot. This ritual signifying the resurrection of Nature remained unchanged in
Damascius’ time, if we are to believe Procopius of Gaza (Comm, ad proph. Es. 258).
Viewed within the context of this long tradition with its persistent customs, Calli­
machus’ elegy on the lock of Berenice represents an unsuccessful attempt by the
Ptolemies to hellenise the myth behind the inundation of the Nile.
170 On the historical evolution of the baetyl cult as the aniconic expression of a
nomadic and oral culture, see D.T. Frankfurter ‘Stylites and Phallobates: pillar
religions in late antique Syria’ Vig. Christ. 44 (1990) 180. The frequent representation
of baetyls on coins illustrates the popularity of the cult in the ancient Near East, and
more specifically in Phoenicia; see Teixidor, Pagan God, 38-39 and Baumgarten, 202.
On the mythological aspect, Philo of Byblos, 23 (= Baumgarten 810): έπενόησεν θεός
Ουρανός βαιτΰλια, λίθους έμψύχους μηχανησάμενος.
171 During the journey of conversion c. 489-90, cf. 138. On baetyls, see previous
note.
172 Asclepiades’ stories of sacred tourism, as reported in this fragment, were clearly
among the influences which set Isidore on his travels.
173 For the expression Ιερά γενεά, which must be an “insider’s” term for the
Neoplatonists, cf. Hierocles On Providence ap. Photius Bibl. Cod. 214.173a ad fin.
174The sacred animal of Horus, who is often represented either as a falcon or with a
falcon’s head.
 γράμμασιν άδικίαν δηλοΧ- τόν γάρ πατέρα άποκτείνας βιάζεται
την μητέρα.
[Φ 98]
C Ό σοΰχος δίκαιος· δνομα δέ κροκοδείλου καί είδος ό σοϋχος.
Ού γάρ άδικε! ζφον ούδέν.
[Φ 99J
D Τάς δώδεκα ώρας ή αίλουρος διακρίνει, νύκτας καί ημέρας
ούροϋσα καθ’ έκάστην άεί, δίκην όργάνου τινός ώρογνωμονούσα.
’Αλλά καί τής σελήνης, φησίν, άπαριθμεϊται τά φώτα τοΐς οίκείοις
γεννήμασι. Καί γάρ τήν αίλουρον έπτά μέν τόν πρώτον, §ξ δέ τόν
δεύτερον τόκον, τόν τρίτον πέντε, καί τέτταρα τόν τέταρτον, καί 5
τρεΧς τόν πέμπτον, έφ’οΐς δύο τόν εκτον καί ένα έπί πάσι τόν
έβδομον καί είναι τοσαύτα γεννήματα τής αίλούρου, δσα καί τά
τής σελήνης φώτα.
[Φ 100]
 sign for injustice in the hieroglyphic script; for it kills its father and
rapes its mother.175
C The suchos is just -Suchos being the name of a type of
crocodile- for it does no injustice to any animal.176
D The cat marks the passing of the twelve hours by urinating in
each one both day and night without exception in the manner of a
clock. But also the phases of the moon can be counted by its
offspring, for a cat’s first parturition produces seven kittens, its
second six, the third five, the fourth four, the fifth three, then the
sixth two and finally the seventh one. And the number of the cat’s
progeny is the same as that of the phases of the moon.177

175 This is a topos: cf. Plutarch Is. 32, where the hippopotamus stands for
shamelessness: “λέγεται γάρ άποκτείνας τόν πατέρα rfj μητρί βίρ μίγνυσθαι”; similar
information in Aelian Ν Α 7.19 and Porphyry A b st. 3.23. But the direct source of
Damascius on hieroglyphics must have been Horapollo himself, to whom we owe a
treatise on the subject (cf. above, p. 151, n. 125). Under the heading ‘The unjust and the
ungrateful’ (I. 56) we read the following: “To symbolize an unjust and ungrateful man,
they depict two claws of an hippopotamus turned downwards. For this animal when
arrived at its prime of life contends in fight against his father, to try which is the
stronger of the two, and should the father give way, he assigns him a place of residence,
permitting him to live, and consorts himself with his own mother; but if his father
should not permit him to hold intercourse with his mother, he kills him, being the
stronger and more vigorous of the two.” (transl. by A.T. Cory, T h e H iero g lyp h ics
o f H o r a p o llo N ilo u s, London 1840, 76-77). It is noteworthy that the Egyptians
distinguished between male and female hippopotami; whereas the female was venerated
as the goddess Thoueris, the male was a Typhonian animal identified with Seth, cf.
Plutarch Is. 50. Both were associated with the inundation of the Nile.
176 According to Plutarch Is. 18, Isis searched for the limbs of Osiris while sailing
on a papyrus boat through the marshes; “this is why people who sail in papyrus skiffs
are not harmed by crocodiles on account of the latters’ fear or veneration towards the
goddess”. For iconographic evidence illustrating this belief and for a text from
Denderah describing Homs bringing the limbs of Osiris in his crocodile form, cf.
Griffiths, 340 and 556-7 (with reference to Plutarch Is . 75). For further details on the
nature of Sobek-Suchos in Egyptian literature, cf. Bonneau, 299-300.
177 Thus the total number of the cat’s offspring is twenty eight, as many as the
phases of the moon; same observation in Plutarch Is. 63, who also remarks that the cat
is a symbol of the moon διά τό ποικίλον και νυκτουργόν καί γόνιμον τοϋ θηρίου. In Is.
74 Plutarch refers to a tradition according to which the cat conceives through the ear
and gives birth through the mouth, thus symbolising the genesis of speech.
Ε Ό κήβος (έστι δέ πιθήκου είδος) άποσπερμαίνει κατά τήν σύ­
νοδον ήλιου καί σελήνης.
[Φ 101]
F Ό δρυξ τό ζφον πχαρνύμενος άνατέλλειν διασημαίνει τήν
Σώθιν.
[Φ 102]

75
Α Ό τι τά έδη καί έπί αυτών λαμβάνει των τεμενών, τάττεται δέ
καί έπί των άγαλμάτων λέγεται δέ έδος καί τό έδαφος τοϋ νεώ.
[Φ 252]
Β Ό ναρ μέν μυριάκις παρήν ώς φάναι τό έπος, άπαξ δε και
ΰπαρ έφάνη τό φάσμα.
, [Φ 253]
C Περιορώμενον τον άνθρωπον, άντί τοϋ έμβλέπονϊα άκριβώς,
έπισκοποϋντα, έναντίως τής των πολλών χρήσεως.
[Φ 254]
D ’Ακώλυτοι διέμενον ύπό τών εΐωθότων κατά τό άνθρώπινον
κωλυμάτων·
ΙΦ 255]
Ε έως οΐ ήγεμόνες αύτών διέστησαν είς εριν πολιτοφθόρον.
[Φ 103]

75C 1 έμβλέποντα scripsi: έμβλέπον Φ. 2 έπισκοποϋντα scripsi: έπισκοποϋν Φ.

E The kebus,178 which is a kind of ape, ejaculates at the
conjunction of the sun and the moon.179
F When the oryx sneezes it announces the rise of Sirius.180

75
A He uses the word εδη for the shrines themselves and also to
denote the statues o f the gods;m the foundation o f the temple too is
called £όος.182
B The vision appeared thousands of times so to speak as a dream
and once while he was awake.
C Contrary to the common usage [Damascius writes] the man was
"watching and waiting” instead of “looking straight in” or “ob­
serving”.
D They remained undisturbed by the obstacles which normally
beset men,
E until their leaders were set against each other in a quarrel which
brought disaster to the citizens.183

178 Aelian, NA 17.8, describes the κήβος/κήπος as a long-tailed monkey living on

the shores of the Red Sea. Th. Hopfner (Der Tierkult der alien Agypter, Vienna 1913,
31) identifies it with the baboon (cercopithecus ruber) and thus with the Egyptian
Hermes or Thoth. Lydus describes it as sacred to the moon (Mens. ΠΙ.11).
179 In what precedes we seem to have a description of the objects and the
hieroglyphic signs in the temple of Isis at Menuthis together with an explanation of
their sacred symbolism. As such, the passage is a mirror description of VS 34-35, where
the idols found in Menuthis are publicly displayed before being destroyed: “dans leur
nombre il y a encore des chiens et des singes et, en outre, des families des chats; car
ceux-ci igalement gtaient des dieux dgyptiens” (VS 35).
180 This is an almost verbatim rendering of Aelian NA 7.8: ΑΙγυπτίων άκοΰω
λεγόντων τόν δρυγα συνιέναι τήν τοϋ Σείριου έπιτολήν πρώτον, καί μαρτύρεσθαι τφ
πταρμφ αυτήν. Horapollo (1.49) on the other hand reports a conflicting tradition which
makes of the oryx the symbol of uncleanness (άκαθαρσία). Even though not strictly
correct in hieroglyphic terms, this version seems to be more in accordance with local
religious belief and practice, which view the oryx as a Sethian animal: for a full
commentary cf. Sbordone, 102-107 and B. van de Walle - J. Vergote in La chronique d'
Egypte 35 (January 1943), 77-78 .
181 Same usage in Zosimus (IV.36.2). Normally the term refers to the seated statue
of a god and to the Latin Penates.
182 Photius (or his secretary) comments on Damascius' use of words.
183 Judging from the use of the word ηγεμόνες, Damascius must be referring here to
the Christian and pagan communities in Alexandria, a city in which it was traditional
F Ό δ’ έν τφ τοίχψ τοϋ φωτός φανείς δγκος οΐον παγείς είς
πρόσωπον διεμορφοϋτο, πρόσωπον άτεχνώς θεσπέσιον δή τι καί
υπερφυές, ού γλυκείαις χάρισιν άλλά βλοσυραις άγαλλόμενον,
κάλλιστον δέ δμως ΙδεΙν καί ούδέν ήττον έπΐ τφ βλοσυρφ τό
ήπιον έπιδεικνύμενον. 5
[Φ 105]

76
Α Καί έγεγόνει ό Ήραΐσκος βάκχος, ώς δνειρος αυτόν κατεμή-
νυσεν.
[S I I 579, 32 (Ήραΐσκος 450 pp)]
Β Καί προέλεγε κατά τήν άπόρρητον θέαν.
[Φ 104]
C Ό δέ Ήραΐσκος ού μόνον άγαθός ήν καί ήπιος, άλλ’ είχέ τι
καί πρός τήν πονηριάν θυμούμενος καί πρός τάς επίβουλός των
άνθρώπων άνδριζόμενος, ούδαμοΰ δέ παρεκβαίνων τό μέτρον τής
δικαιοσύνης.
[S Π 580, 8 (Ήραΐσκος 450 pp)]
D Ό δέ Ήραΐσκος ό Αιγύπτιος ήν μέν συνεΐναι δεινότατος, άγω-
νιστής δέ ούκ Ισχυρός ύπέρ τής άληθείας, ούδέ τάς έξω φερούσας
άπό ταύτης δδούς άνιχνεΰσαι καί διεξελθεΐν. Ούτος γάρ ές τούναν-
τίον έκεκλήρωτο τήν εύμοιρίαν.
[S* IV 469,26 (συνεΐναι)]
Ε '0 μέν δή Ήραΐσκος αύτοφυής έγένετο διαγνώμων των τε ζών-
των καί των μή ζώντων Ιερών άγαλμάτων. Εύθύς γάρ έμβλέπων
έτιτρώσκετο τήν καρδίαν ύπό τοϋ θειασμοΰ καί άνεπήδα τό τε
σώμα καί τήν ψυχήν, ώσπερ ύπό τοϋ θεοϋ κατάσχετος. ΕΙ δέ μή

76D cf. S I I 580,15.

76Ε cf. S II 52,23.
S solum usque ad 25 γενέσεως, Φ 106 solum 7 δν - 8 θεοκρασίαν,
Φ 107 solum 9 ένην usque ad finem.
F The mass of light on the wall seemed to condense and take on
the shape of a face that was truly divine and supernatural and which
gloried in a grace that was not sweet but severe; a face that was
nevertheless very beautiful to behold and which for all its severity
displayed no less of gentleness.*184

76
A And Heraiscus had become a Bacchus,185 as the dream
prophesied to him.
B And he was foretelling the future according to the secret
vision.186
C Heraiscus was not merely good and gentle but he could show
anger against wickedness and a manly resolve against human
treacherousness, without ever exceeding the limits of justice.
D The Egyptian Heraiscus had extraordinary powers of perception
but was not a strong fighter in the cause of truth nor was he keen to
track down and explore the roads radiating from it. Yet he had been
assigned the opposite of these virtues: eumoiria.I87
E Heraiscus had the natural gift of distinguishing between animate
and inanimate sacred statues. He had but to look at one of them and
immediately his heart was afflicted by divine frenzy while both his
body and soul leapt up as if possessed by the god. But if he was not

for each ethnic and religious group to be represented by a leader or ethnarch.

Interpreting the evidence provided by the VS one may assign the title of the pagan
leader to Horapollo. Equally, on internal evidence, the title may be attributed to
Pamprepius (cf. below, 112). Asmus, Leben 167, assumes that the reference is to the
“Dyophysit Johannes Talaias und der Monophysit Petros III Mongos”.
184 Both the vocabulary and the ambiguity of the qualities refer us to Iamblichus'
description of the archangels, whose faces are at the same time βλοσυρά καί ήμερα
(Myst. II. 3).
185 A clear reference to the Orphic fragment 5 (Kent), in its Platonic interpretation
(Phaedo 69c), which defines the “bacchoi” as the true philosophers; cf. also
Introduction, p. 57.
186 It is not impossible that this passage refers to the divinatory activities of
Pamprepius, who may have styled himself as the leader of the Alexandrian pagan
community.
187 Εύμοιρία seems to be a catch-word meaning “being blessed at birth with
intuition”. Cf. above p. 111, n. 69.
κινοίτο τοιοΰτον, άψυχον ήν έκεΐνο τό άγαλμα καί άμοιρον θείας 5
έπιπνοίας. Οΰτω διέγνω τό άρρητον άγαλμα τοΰ ΑΙώνος ύπό τού
θεού κατεχόμενον, δν ’Αλεξανδρεϊς έτίμησαν, Όσιριν δντα καί
Ά δωνιν όμοΰ κατά μυστικήν ώς άληθώς φάναι θεοκρασίαν.
Ένήν δέ τοΰ Ήραΐσκου τη φύσει καί τι τούς μολυσμούς τής γενέ-
σεως άναινόμενον. ΕΙ γοϋν αΐσθοιτο φθεγγομένης διτως δή καί 10

δθεν γυναικός άκαθάρτου τινός, ήλγει παραχρήμα τήν κεφαλήν

καί τοϋτο σημεΐον έποιείτο τής άφεδρείας.
Οΰτω μέν ζώντι συνήν άεί τι θεοειδές· άποθανόντι δέ έπειδή
τά νομιζόμενα τοΐς ίερεΰσιν δ Άσκληπιάδης άποδιδόναι παρε-
σκευάζετο, τά τε άλλα καί τάς Όσίριδος έπί τφ σώματι περίβο­ 15
λός, αύτίκα φωτί κατελάμπετο πανταχή των σινδόνων άπόρρητα
διαγράμματα, καί περί αύτά καθεωράτο φασμάτων είδη θεοπρεπή
έπιδεικνύντων τήν ψυχήν έναργώς, ποίοις άρα θεοϊς έγεγόνει συν-
έστιος. Ή ν δέ αύτοΰ καί ή πρώτη γένεσις Ιερά καί μυστική. Λέγε­
ται γάρ κατελθεΐν άπό τής μητρός εις τό φώς έπί τοΐς χείλεσιν 20
έχων τόν κατασιγάζοντα δάκτυλον, olov Αιγύπτιοι μυθολογοΰσι
γενέσθαι τόν ΤΩρον καί πρό τοΰ Ώρου τόν Ήλιον. Τοιγαροϋν
έπεί ot συνεπεφύκει τοΐς χείλεσιν δ δάκτυλος, έδεήθη τομής, καί
διέμεινεν άεί τό χείλος ύποτετμημένον ίδείν, φανεροϋν τό σημεΐον
τής άπορρήτου γενέσεως. 25
Λέγεται δέ καί δ Πρόκλος έαυτοΰ άμείνονα τόν Ήραΐσκον

8 όμοϋ S: om. Φ. 8 μυστικήν S: τήν μυστικήν Φ. 8 ώς άληθώς φάναι S: om.

Φ. 9 ένήν - φύσει S: ότι ένήν, φασί, τη τοΰ Ήραΐσκου τοΰ φιλοσόφου φύσει
Φ. 9 γενέσεως Φ: φύσεως S. 12 καί - άφεδρείας S: om. Φ.
15 Όσίριδος S: Όσιριάδας Φ. 17. θεοπρεπή S: θεοπρεπών Φ. 18 έπιδει-
κνύντων - συνέστιος S: om. Φ. 18 έγεγόνει Zintzen: γεγόνει S.
19 Ιερά καί Φ: τφ δντι S. 20 γάρ S: δέ Φ. 20 είς τό φώς Φ: om. S.
22 τοιγαροϋν έπεί ol S: και έπεί Φ. 24 φανεροϋν Φ: άπάσι φανερόν S.
 moved in such a way, the statue was inanimate and devoid of divine
inspiration. It was in this way that he recognised that the
ineffable188 statue of Aion was possessed by the god who was
worshipped by the Alexandrians, being at the same time Osiris and
Adonis as a result of a truly mystical act of union.189 Heraiscus also
had something in him which instinctively rejected any impurity
connected with generation. If he ever heard anywhere the voice of a
woman in a state of uncleanness he immediately suffered a
headache; and this was a sign that she was menstruating.190
Thus so long as he lived there was something divine in him; and
when he died, as Asclepiades prepared to render him the honours
customary to the priests and in particular to wrap his body in the
garments of Osiris, mystic signs bathed in light appeared
everywhere on the sheets and around them divine visions which
clearly revealed the gods with whom his soul now shared its
abode.191 But his first birth too192 was sacred and mystical. It is said
that he was delivered of his mother into the light with a finger on
his mouth enjoining silence, in the same way that Horus and before
him Helios were bom according to Egyptian legend.193 And as his
finger was attached to his lips an operation was needed; his lip
nevertheless bore throughout his life the scar of the incision,
showing the mark of his mystical birth.
They say that even Proclus recognised Heraiscus as being

188 Literally “which cannot be mentioned”. As a personification of eternity ΑΙών is

identical with the ineffable First Principle; for a similar expression referring to the god,
PGM 1 .165; άδιήγητον αΙώνα.
189 Osiris symbolises death and Adonis rebirth, cf. Boweisock, 26. For Aion, see
above, p. 125, n. 84.
190 This sentence, which is absent from the Photian Epitome, may be an explanatory
intervention of the Suda excerptor.
191 As is clear from the expressions used by Horapollo in a public document about
his own father (έν τοΐς άγίοις μακαριωτάτω μου πατρί Άσκληπιάδη — τοΰ ήρωος μ
πατρός Άσκληπιάδου: P. Cair. Masp. 67295 I. 15, 26 = BIFAO 11, 165-166) the belief
that the pious dead attained sainthood must have been common in the circles in which
Damascius moved.
192 The one into this world as opposed to the spiritual rebirth ensured by initiation;
cf. above, 76A, Plato Phaedr. 248d, Marinus VP 3.
193 Cf. Plutarch Is. 68 (for Horus-Harpocrates).
 δμολογεΐν & μέν γάρ αυτός ήδει καί έκείνον είδέναι, & δέ Ήράΐ-
σκος ούκέτι Πρόκλον.
[S I I 579,7 (Ήραΐσκος 450 pp) + Φ 106 + Φ 107]

77
Α Ό τι :Α νθέμιον οϋτος τον 'Ρώμης βασιλεύσαντα έλληνόφρονα
καί όμόφρονα Σεβήρου τοϋ είδώλοις προσανακειμένου λέγει, δν
αυτός ύπατον χειροτονεί, καί άμφοϊν είναι κρυφίαν βουλήν τό
τών είδώλων μύσος άνανεώσασθαι.
[Φ 108]
Β Ό τι καί Ίλλουν οϋτος καί Λεόντιον δν έκεΐνος άντιχειροτο-
νεϊ Ζήνωνι βασιλέα, τά αύτά καί φρονέίν καί βούλεσθαι πρός
άσέβειαν, Παμπρεπίου πρός ταύτην αυτούς έλκύσαντος διατείνε­
ται.
ϊ [Φ 109]
C Ό τι περί Παμπρεπίου τό τερατολόγον καί άπιστότατον φί-
λοις, καί τόν βίαιον θάνατον όμοίως τοΐς άλλοις καί αυτός ιστο­
ρεί. Ή ν δ ’Αιγύπτιος γένος, τέχνην γραμματικός 6 Παμπρέπιος.
[Φ 110]
D Ό τι δ Ίλλους φιλόλογος ών ύπό παρουσίαν άνδρών λογίων
διεξοδικόν περί ψυχής έβούλετο άκοΰσαι λόγον. Πολλών δέ τών
παρατυχόντων πρός πεΰσιν αύτοϋ ποικίλα φιλοσοφησάντων,
έπεί έξ άσυμφωνίας ό λόγος άσΰστατος ώφθη, Μάρσος έφη δΰνα-
σθαι Παμπρέπιον τό προβληθέν άδιαπτώτως έπιλύειν. 5
Ή ν δέ οϋτος μέλας τήν χροιάν, ειδεχθής τήν δψιν, γραμματι-
στής τήν επιστήμην, έκ Πανός όρμώμενος τής έν Αίγύπτψ, πολϋν
χρόνον κατ’ έπιγαμίαν διατρίψας έν Έλλάδι, άχθείς ούν παρά
Μάρσου πρός Ίλλουν καί διελθών λόγον περί ψυχής έκ χρόνου
κομψώς πεφροντισμένον, έπεί ό ούκ είδώς τοϋ είδότος έν ούκ ίο
είδόσι, ώς είπε Πλάτων, πιθανότερος υπάρχει, φενακισθείς Ή ­
λους μεμεριμνημένη στωμυλίμ, λογιώτερον αυτόν πάντων έκρινε
τών παιδευτών τής Κωνσταντίνου. Διό καί πολλήν δοΰς αύτώ έκ

77D cf. S III 152,13, S II 262, 5.

4 Μάρσος ν.1.: Μάριος S. 6 τήν δψιν scripsi: τάς δψεις S.

ΐρ8
 superior to himself; for Heraiscus knew all that Proclus knew,
whereas the reverse was not the case.

77
A He says that the Roman emperor Anthemius was by religious
persuasion a Hellene, holding the same convictions as Severus, the
devotee of idols whom he made consul. Together they had a secret
plan to restore the abomination of idolatry.
B He also claims that Illus and Leontius (whom the former
proclaimed emperor in opposition to Zeno) had the same impious
ideas and schemes and that the person who led them on in this
direction was Pamprepius.m
C As regards Pamprepius, Damascius, like the other historians,
notes his tendency to tell extravagant stories, his betrayal of friends
and his violent death. Pamprepius was of Egyptian stock and a
grammarian by profession}95
D Being fond of learning, Illus wanted to hear a detailed
discussion about the soul in the presence of erudite men. Many
came and offered various philosophical theories as an answer to his
questions, but as the discussion became discordant and confused
Marsus said that Pamprepius would offer an infallible solution to
the problem. This Pamprepius was of dark complexion and
repellent appearance, a grammarian by profession who came from
Panopolis in Egypt. After spending a long time in Greece because
of his marriage,19415196 he was brought to Illus by Marsus and he
delivered an elegantly composed speech on the soul which had
been written some time before and, since in Plato’s words,197 the
ignorant appears more plausible than the knowledgeable to the
ignorant, Illus was deceived by his well studied prattle and
pronounced him the most learned of all the teachers in Con­
stantinople. So giving him substantial public support, he bade him

194 On the revolt of Illus, Stein-Palanque II, 19-31.

195 It is clear that Photius here summarises Damascius’ text.
196 The implication is that he was in Athens not in his own right as a result of his
personal abilities, but because of a wife. Cf. p. 269, n. 301.
197 Gorg. 459d.
 δημοσίων παραμυθίαν, τούς φοιτώντας ές μουσεία κατ’ έκλογήν
έκέλευσε παιδεύειν. Ή μέν ούν εύδαιμονία τούτου τοιαύτην is
Αφορμήν λαβοΰσα πολλών αίτια Ατυχημάτων γέγονε τή πολιτείμ.
[S IV 14,33 (Παμπρέπιος 137 pp)]

78
Α Ούδείς έστιν οΰτω τό θειον έκκεκωφημένος, δς ούκ αισθάνε­
ται αύτοΰ τής ένεργείας πάσης μέν, ούχ ήκιστα δέ τής κολαζούσης
τούς άμαρτάνοντας.
[Φ 256]
Β Ούκ άν άμάρτοι μούσης άληθοϋς, ή ούκ &ν άμάρτοι άληθείας
Ιερός.
[Φ257]
C ΟΙ τής Αλλοφύλου δόξης έταΐροι καί συστασιώται.
't [Φ 258]
D Οϋκ είμι πρόθυμος πράγμα λέγειν καί άδηλον είς Αλήθειαν καί
πρόχειρον είς φιλαπεχθημοσύνην.
[Φ 111]
Ε Ό τε γάρ Άμμώνιος καί Έρύθριος ό Αίγύπτιος διεμάχοντο
πρός Αλλήλους έν Βυζαντίφ, καί διετέλει προωθών Αεί ό έτερος
τόν έτερον εις τούς έσχάτους κινδύνους.
[S I I 580,11 (Ήραΐσκος 450 pp)]
F Βούλομαι δέ καί Αφείς ήδη τόν Πύθιον έπί τόν Ήραΐσκον έπαν-
ελθεΐν.
ΙΦ 112]

79
Α Άνεβόα μέγιστον δσον.
[Φ 113]
Β Τής κεφαλής αΐ κόμαι καθεΐντο μέχρι τών ώμων.
[Φ 114]
C Ό τι Φοίνικες καί Σύροι τόν Κρόνον Ή λ καί Βήλ καί Βω-
λαθήν έπονομάζουσιν.
[Φ 115]

78F 1 έπανελθεΐν Φ ν.1.: έπανελθέΐν τόν Εϋβοέα Φ (cf. Φ 113 άνεβόα).

 educate those who frequented the schools as he thought fit. Such
were the beginnings of his prosperity, which was the cause of many
misfortunes for the state.

78
A Nobody is so deaf to the divine that he does not sense its overall
activity and not least its punishment of sinners.198
B He('?) would not have been found wanting as regards the true
Muse, or he would not have been found wanting as regards the holy
truth}99
C The disciples and fellow conspirators of the outside creed.200
D I am not willing to say something which is uncertain in its truth
and liable to prove contentious.
E Ammonius and the Egyptian Erythrius201 intrigued against each
other in Constantinople and continually thrust each other into the
gravest dangers.202
F I would now like to leave the Pythian and come back to
Heraiscus.

79
A He was shouting as loudly as he could.
B His hair reached down to his shoulders.
C The Phoenicians and the Syrians give to Cronus the names El,
Bel and Bolathes.203

198 It is likely that this sentence refers to Pamprepius.

199 These are Photius' stylistic variants on Damascius’ text, which is itself based on
Plato Resp. 548b, 8-9.
200 Christianity. For similar expressions, cf. 66A and 118 with nn. 154 and 322 re­
spectively.
201 A distinguished and popular administrator who served three times as Praetorian
Prefect for the East, earning for himself a reputation for fair dealing; cf. Malchus fr. 6. It
might be of some relevance in the present context that Erythrius named his daughter
Hypatia.
202 What decided me to place this extract from the Suda article on Heraiscus here
(rather than under 77 which refers to imperial politics in connection with the pagan
intellectuals) is that the caveat in the previous fragment may be referring to it.
203 El was the supreme god of the Canaanites; for epigraphic evidence on his
 Άσκληπιόδοτος· οΐτος έκ παίδων εΐιθύς ώμολογεΐτο όξύτατος
και πολυμαθέστατος είναι των ηλικιωτών, ώστε και πολυπραγ­
μονών ούδέν έπαύετο περί έκαστου τών παραπιπτόντων, ών fi τε
(ή) φύσις απεργάζεται θαυμάσιων καί τέχνη έκαστη παρέχεται
δημιουργημάτων. Έν γοϋν δλίγφ χρόνφ παντάπασι κατανενοήκει 5
τών τε βαφικών χρωμάτων τάς μίξεις άπάσας καί τών περί
έσθητα κοσμουμένων βαμμάτων παντοδαπών, έτι δέ τών ξύλων

80Α 4 ή del. Zintzen.

 Asclepiodotus:204 ever since childhood he was declared to be
the sharpest and most learned of all his contemporaries, as he never
stopped occupying himself with whatever came his way, whether it
was a wonder of nature or a man-made handiwork.205 Thus in a
short time he fully understood all the methods of mixing colours for
dying and the variety of dyes prepared for clothes; also the

worship from Karatepe to Leptis Magna, see Teixidor, P a g a n G od, 46-47. The
evidence (mainly from Byblos and Berytus) discussed by D. Souidel (L es cu ltes du
H a u ra n ά Γ ep o q u e rom aine. 1952, 35) shows that the introduction of the cult of
Cronus to Phoenicia in Hellenistic times resulted in a resurgence in the popularity of the
local El with whom Cronus naturally became identified. For the cult of Cronus in the
Hauran in the Roman period, ibid. 35-37. The explicit identification of El with Cronus
occurs in Philo of Byblos 16 (809), who refers to the four children of Ouranos and Ge as
’Ηλον τόν καί Κρόνον καί Βαίτυλον καί Δαγών (δς έστι Σίτων) καί Άτλαντα (cf. also
ibid. 20 (= Baumgarten 810)), and may be reflecting a Byblian version of the god
(Baumgarten, 225). For the identification Elos = Cronus on inscriptions from Apamea,
Palmyra and the Hauran, see Teixidor, P ag a n G od, 46-48. On EI-Cronus as a dispenser
of oracles, Y. Hajjar “Divinit6s oratoires et rites divinatoires en Syrie et en Phenicie λ
Γepoque grico-romaine”, A N R W 11.18.4 (1990), 2240-1. Finally, on El’s philosophical
hypostasis according to Damascius, P rine. II, 210 and 285, n. 5.
The Babylonian supreme god Bel, who eventually became merged with the pre-
Hellenistic Palmyrene Bol (Teixidor, T he p a n th eo n o f P a lm yra , 1,7 and P ag a n G od,
106; Sourdel, 44), was normally identified with Zeus. It was only later and as part of the
more general tendency towards monotheism through radical syncretism and
homogeneity that Bel became identified with Cronus; cf. Nonnus XL.392-3: Βίίλος έπ’
Εΐιφρήταο... Άραψ Κρόνος, Άσσύριος Ζετις.
Bolathes looks like a compound with the name of the Palmyrene god Bol, though
the normal use is for the god’s name to appear as the second element of a divine or
theophoric name (e.g. Yarhibol, Aglibol. who represent the Sun and the Moon
respectively in the Palmyrene pantheon, Zabdibol = gift of Bol etc.); nevertheless in an
inscription from the temple of Baal-Shamin there is a reference to a certain Soados son
of Boliades (Βωλιάδους), and the names Βολακλης, Βωλακλτίς are attested in Cyrenaica
and probably Delos (Fraser-Matthews, I, j.vv.).
204 I assume that 79 refers to Heraiscus and his travels. The connection with 80
would then be that Heraiscus’ fellow Alexandrian Asclepiodotus was his exact
opposite.
205 Asclepiodotus’ inventiveness may be responsible for a horizontal sundial at
Aphrodisias which is calibrated for latitude 31° (the approximate latitude of
Alexandria), when the Aphrodisias latitude is 37° 4 0 ': for full details, P. Pattenden ‘A
late sundial at Aphrodisias’ J H S 101 (1981) 101-112, pi. II and Roueche, A p h rodisias,
91-92.
 τάς μυρίας διαφορότητας, δπως αύτών αί Ινες έχουσιν εύθύτητος
πέρι καί διαπλοκής. ’Αλλά μέντοι λίθων καί βότανών αί ποικίλαι
δυνάμεις τε καί ίδέαι, τών τε έν ποσί κειμένων καί τών σπανιωτά- ίο
των, άνεζητοΰντο καί εύρίσκοντο πάση μηχανή. Όχλον δέ παρεί-
χετο πολύν τοΐς περί έκαστα διατρίβουσι παρακαθήμενός τε συχ­
νά καί περί έκάστου άνερωτών ές τό άκριβέστατον. Τήν δέ περί
φυτών Ιστορίαν έπί μείζονος ήγάπα τιμής, καί ετι μάλλον τήν
περί ζφων, τά τε ένόντα διά τής δψεως άνακρίνων καί τά μή δυ- is
νατά διά τής άκοής έξετάζων έπί τό μακρότατον, δσα τε τοΐς πρε-
σβύταις άναγένραπται περί τούτων άναλεγόμενος.
[S 1383,9 (Άσκληπιόδοτος pp)|

81
Ένέβησαν μέν είς τό φέΐθρον τού Μαιάνδρου διανήξασθαι πο-
ταμοϋ αύτός τε καί ό Άσκληπιόδοτος δ πάλαι γεγέΙνώς παιδα­
γωγός αύτοϋ- ό δέ σφάς έν μέσαις τάϊς δίναις άπολαβών, ό Μαί­
ανδρος, ύποβρυχίους έποίει, έως ό Άσκληπιόδοτος έπί μικρόν
άναδύς, δσον θεάσασθαι τόν ήλιον, άποθνήσκομεν, εφη, καί τι s
προσθεϊναι καί άπόρρητον ήδυνήθη. Τότε δέ έξαίφνης, άπ’ ούδε-
μιάς φανερός προμηθείας, έπί τής δχθης έκεΐντο τοϋ ποταμού
ήμιθνήτες· είτα άνακτησάμενοι τάς ψυχάς άνεχώρησαν έξ αύτών
τών γε τού Ά ιδου φευμάτων. Οΰτως ένθεον έκτήσατο δύναμιν ό
Άσκληπιόδοτος, καί ταϋτα μετά τοϋ σώματος Ιτι ών. ίο
[Φ 116]

82
Α Απόλλωνος Αύλάς τούτο δή τό χωρίον οί Κάρες καλοΰσιν. Ό
Άσκληπιόδοτος τοίνυν άπό τών Αύλών είς Άφροδισιάδα οΐκαδε
επανερχόμενος, ήδη μέν ό ήλιος έδεδύκει, ό δέ παραχρήμα άνα-
τέλλουσαν έθεάσατο τήν σελήνην οΐα πανσέληνον ούσαν καίτοι
ούκ ήν έν τφ διαμετροΰντι ζωδίφ ό ήλιος. s
[Φ 117]

82Α 5 6 ήλιος scripsi: τόν ήλιον Φ.

 innumerable types of wood, and the way their fibres are interwoven
in straight and in complex fashion. Moreover he would use every
means to explore and find out about the manifold properties and
varieties of stones and herbs, both the commonplace and the highly
unusual. And he was a great nuisance to the experts in every field as
he often sat with them and questioned them on every point in exact
detail. What he loved in particular was the natural history of plants
and even more of animals; indeed he examined closely those that he
could cast his eyes on, and those which he could not find he
investigated at great length through hearsay, also collecting
whatever the Ancients had written about them.

81
He and his former tutor Asclepiodotus went into the river
Maeander in order to swim across it. But the Maeander seized them
in its eddies and submerged them, until Asclepiodotus came up to
the surface for a moment, just long enough to catch sight of the sun,
and cried out “We are dying”, managing also to add some secret
spell.206 Then suddenly, without any evident assistance, they were
lying on the bank of the river half-dead. Soon, recovering
consciousness, they departed from the very streams of Hades. Such
was the divine power possessed by Asclepiodotus, even when he
was still bound to an earthly body.

82
A The Carians call this place “The Hall of Apollo”.207 Now
Asclepiodotus was coming home to Aphrodisias from there. The
sun had already set when he saw the moon rising suddenly as if it
were a full moon, though the sun was not in the opposite sign of the
zodiac.

206 Though nobody who knows the Maeander today would find this story credible,
Strabo’s evidence (ΧΠ.8.19) testifies otherwise.
207 On the cave of Apollo Aulaites, and the miraculous statue mentioned below, see
L. Robert B C H 101 (1977) 86-88, who gives a full commentary on our passage.
B ’Αλλά δή καί τούτο τό άγαλμα καθεΐλεν ή πάντα τά άρχαΐα
καθελοϋσα άνάγκη.
[Φ 118]

83
Α Άλεξανδρεύς ήν τό γένος, ούκ έπιφανών γονέων τά άπό τής
τύχης, επιεικών δέ άλλως καί Ιερών. Τούτον οΐίν έπίσταμαι διά
πείρας συχνής εύ μάλα την τε άγαθοειδή προαίρεσιν προβεβλημέ-
νον και τού πατρός ού πολύ τι λειπόμενον κατά τήν εύσεβή προ­
θυμίαν και τήν πρός τό θειον άναγομένην έλπίδα σύντονόν τε καί s
έρωτικήν φιλοσοφούντα μέντοι ύπέρ έκεΐνον καί τή άλλη προ­
παιδεία κεκοσμημένον.
[Φ 119 + S I 383, 24 (Άσκληπιόδοτος pp)]
Β Οικονομικός δέ ών καί γεωργικός, άποθανόντος α^ιτφ τού πα­
τρός, άπέτισε χρέα πολλά. Έν χρηματισμφ δέ δικαίφ καταστάς
δμως έν δαπανήμασι μεγάλοις έγένετο, τής τε ίερδς εΐνεκα προαι-
ρέσεως καί τής άλλης πολιτικής φιλοτιμίας άναγκαίας είναι δο-
κούσης καί τφ οΐκψ συνήθους. "Ωστε ήναγκάσθη καί αύτός ΰστε- 5
ρον ύπόχρεων τήν ούσίαν καταλιπεΐν ταίς θυγατράσι.
[S 1384,4 (Άσκληπιόδοτος pp)]

84
Α Ιάκωβος, Ησυχίου υιός Ιατρού, ό έπικληθείς Ψύχριστος. ΕΙς
Τόδον δέ γενομένου τού πατρός, είτα εις Δρέπανον τό έν Άργει
έλθόντος κάκεΐ γήμαντος τήν έξ αύτού τεκούσαν τόν ’Ιάκωβον,
καταλιπόντος δέ τήν τε γαμετήν καί τόν παΐδα καί έκδημήσαντος
έπί έτη έννεακαίδεκα εις τε ’Αλεξάνδρειαν καί ’Ιταλίαν καί ούδέ 5
περιεϊναι δοκούντος· δθεν γαμεΐται μέν ή ’Ιακώβου μήτηρ δευ-
τέρφ άνδρί. Καί παίδων αυτή γενομένων δύο καί θηλείας, τε-

83Α cf. S 1169,1.

Φ solum usque ad 2 Ιερών.
1 Άλεξανδρεύς ήν Φ: fjv δε Άλεξανδρεύς S. 1 ούκ - 2 Ιερών om. S.
83Β cf. S 1296, 29, S IV 823, 12.
84A 1 post Ψύχριστος S έκ τού έξάρχου Δαμασκηνού habet: omisi.
B But this statue too was destroyed by the Necessity208 which
overthrows all that is ancient.

83
A He was an Alexandrian by birth, the child of parents who were
not distinguished in terms of worldly success, but were otherwise
decent and pious people. I know him from frequent contact as being
a man of good intentions and hardly inferior to his father (-in-
law)209 in pious ardour and in the intense and passionate hope
which leads to the divine; indeed in philosophy and in general
culture his gifts were certainly greater than those of his father (-in­
law).
B Being a good household manager and a farmer, he was able to
pay off many debts when his father (-in-law) died. And though he
earned a lot of money by just means, he nevertheless incurred great
expenses on account of his pious inclinations and his overall
political munificence, which was felt to be a traditional obligation
of the household [of Asclepiodotus Senior]. Thus he too was forced
to leave his property to his daughters encumbered by debts.

84
A Iacobus, nicknamed Psychristus,210 the son of Hesychius the
doctor. His father went to Rhodes and thence to Drepanon near
Argos where he married the woman who gave birth to his son
Iacobus; he then left wife and child and went abroad to Alexandria
and Italy for nineteen years, so that it was thought that he had not
survived. Hence Iacobus’ mother took a second husband who died
after two sons and a daughter were bom to her. Hesychius however

208 Note the possible double meaning of the word Ανάγκη, referring to time as a
natural cause of ruin and Christian action whose effects are no less inescapable.
209 It is clear from the context here and elsewhere that “father” refers to the
Alexandrian Asclepiodotus’ father-in-law (in Greece and the Middle East even today,
one addresses one’s parents-in-law as “mother" and “father”).
210 “The Chilliest”, clearly as a result of the cold baths that he used to prescribe as a
cure (84D). He was a c o m es and an arch ia tru s at Constantinople under Leo (Malalas
370; Chron. Pasch. 595, s.a. 467), whom he treated, surprising the courtiers by his
brusque and informal manner (Marcellinus Comes s.a. 462).
 λευτφ τόν βίον ό γαμήσας αύτήν· έπάνεισι δέ Ησύχιος έν Κων-
σταντινουπόλει- δπερ γνούς ’Ιάκωβος ήλθε πρός αύτόν· καί τότε
παιδείας ήρξατο καί ίάτρευσεν έν Κωνσταντινουπόλει έπί Δέον­ ίο
τος βασιλέως.
[S I I 601, 14 (’Ιάκωβος 12)]
Β Ό τι περί Ιακώβου τοϋ ίαχροϋ, δς έγγύς μέν τό γένος Άλεξαν-
δρεΰς ήν, πορρώτερον δ ’ έκ Δαμασκοϋ, υιός δ ’ ιατρού τετταρά-
κοντα έτη τή πείρο, σχολάοαντος καί μικρού την οικουμένην έπί
γυμνάσιο καί χρίσει τής τέχνης έπελθόντος, δς καί τόν Ιάκωβον
τήν Ιατρικήν τόν παΐδα έπί έτη τά ίσα έδιδάξατο· περί τοίνυν 5
τοϋδε τοϋ Ιακώβου, ώσπερ καί άλλοι, πολλά παράδοξα λέγει, καί
ώς άκούσας γυναίκα πταρεΐσαν άθροώτερον πόντος άποβαλεϊν
τούς όδόντας, έκ τούτου μόνου τοϋ συμβεβηκότος άνειπέϊν τά
περί τής γυναικός άπαντα, είδός τε καί χρώμα σώματος καί μέγε­
θος καί τής ψυχής δσα φυσικώτερα τών ηθών. 10
[Φ 120]
C "Οτι δ τού Ιακώβου πατήρ μετά τήν πολλήν τής οικουμένης
πλάνην ήλθε καί είς τό Βυζάντιον, φησί, καί τούς ένταϋθα κατέ-
λαβεν ιατρούς ούδέν άρα τής τέχνης έπισταμένους ακριβές ούδέ
αύτόπειρον, άλλ’ άπό τών άλλοτρίων δοξασμάτων ού θεραπεύον­
τας άλλα φλυαρούντας. Άμφω δέ, καί ό παϊς καί ό φύς, άσεβέε 5
ήστην.
[Φ 121]
D Ό τι έχρώντο κατά τών νόσων οΰτοι καθαρσίοις πολλοϊς καί
βαλανείοις, χειρουργεΐν δέ σιδήρψ καί πυρΐ ού λίαν ήσαν έτοιμοι,
άλλά καί τά μοχθηρότερα τών έλκών διαίτη κατηγωνίζοντο· φλε­
βοτομίαν δ ’ ού προσίεντο.
[Φ 122]
Ε ’Ιάκωβος Ιατρός. ’Από Δαμασκού εΐλκε τό γένος καί ές τό
άκριβέστατον άναβάς τής έπιστήμης τέλειος ήν, ού διαγινώσκων
μόνον τάς νόσους, άλλά καί Ιώμενος, όμοϋ μέν κατά τόν λόγον,
όμοϋ δέ κατά τήν πείραν, έπιμελώς τε καί Ικανώς· ώστε τά πρω­
τεία τής Ιατρικής εύκλειας άπενέγκασθαι τών καθ’ έαυτόν Ιατρών 5
 returned to Constantinople and, upon learning this, Iacobus went to
him; it was at that time that he embarked on his education and
practised medicine in Constantinople in the reign of Leo.
B About Iacobus the doctor, o f a family which had latterly lived in
Alexandria, but which came from Damascus, (he says that) he was
the son o f a doctor who practised for forty years, touring virtually
the entire world in the exercise and application o f his discipline; he
taught medicine to his son for an equal number o f years. Now about
this Iacobus he relates many incredible things (as do other
authors), among them how, having heard o f a woman who lost all
her teeth through her sneezing fits, he could describe from this
single circumstance everything about that woman: her appearance
and complexion and height and the more physical characteristics of
her soul.
C After his lengthy peregrinations through the world, Iacobus’
father arrived in Constantinople and found that the doctors
practising there had no accurate knowledge or personal experience
in their profession but used the opinions of others as a basis not for
healing but for idle chatter. Both the son and the father were
impious.211
D They [Hesychius and Iacobus] used against diseases a number
of purgative cures and baths. They were not at all keen to operate
with the flame and the knife, but combatted even the most
malignant of ulcers with a diet; and they abstained from blood­
letting.212
E Iacobus the doctor. He originated from Damascus and was
perfect in his science, having reached the very peak of precision not
just in the diagnosis of diseases but also in healing them, as with
diligence and skill he drew on both theoretical knowledge and
experience; so that he carried off the first prize in medical eminence
among contemporary doctors and was already compared with the

211 This is Photius’ comment on Damascius’ text which clearly elaborated on the
paganism of the two men.
212 This is an almost verbatim rendering of Iamblichus V .P yth. 244, where the basic
Pythagorean rules of healing are laid down.
 παραβάλλεσθαι δέ ήδη πρός τούς άρχαίους, ύπερβάλλειν δέ
αύτών τούς γε πλείους· οΐα δέ Ιχοντα δύναμιν Ισόθεον άγαπάσθαι
καί προσκυνεισθαι ύπό τών δεομένων· οΰτω δέ θαρρείν έφ’ έαυτφ
καί έπί τή κρίσει, τών οικείων μεθόδων, ώστε εί άπελθών πρός τόν
άρρωστον καί τοΐς σημείοις τό νόσημα διαγνούς άπεφήνατο βιώ- 10
σιμον είναι τόν άνθρωπον, εύέλπιδας γίνεσθαι πάντας ώς υγείας
έσομένης, εί δέ μή ώς τελευτής· καί μηδένα πώποτε τών έλπίδων
διαψευσθήναι.
Έλεγε δέ ό αύτός, χρήναι τόν άριστον ιατρόν ήτοι άπογνώναι
τής νόσου ή άψάμενον εύθύς εις φμον μεταβαλειν τόν νοσοΰντα 15
καί Ιχοντα μετριώτερον άπολείπειν· άλλως δέ μή άποστήναι πρό-
τερον. Πάντας δέ ώς είπεϊν άπήλλαττε τών ένοχλούντων παθών
παραυτίκα ή μικρόν ύστερον. Διόπερ οί μέν άλλοι σωτήρα τόν
Ιάκωβον άπεκάλουν, οίά ποτέ καί τόν ’Ασκληπιόν οί δέ ιατροί
διέβαλλον άεί καί έλοιδόρουν ώς όντα ούκ ιατρόν, άίλά θεοφιλή 20
τινα καί ιερόν καί ούκ έψεύδοντο. Ή ν γάρ επιεικής ό άνήρ καί
θεφ τφ δντι κεχαρισμένος. Εί δέ δει τό τού φιλοσόφου είπεϊν,
Άσκληπιαδικήν φετο τήν τού ’Ιακώβου ψυχήν καί κατά φύσιν
Παιώνειον προσεΐναι δέ καί τήν έρωτικήν τού έπιτηδεύματος
έπιμέλειαν, ή μάλιστα φιλεΐ τούς τεχνίτας έκάστους οίκειοϋν καί 25
προσάγειν τοϊς έφόροις τής τέχνης. Οΰτω καί Φειδίαν ένθουσιών-
τα δημιουργεΐν, οΰτω καί Ζεϋξιν είκάζειν τά άγάλματα.
[S II 601, 24 (’Ιάκωβος 13)]
F Έχων τόν νοϋν εύθιξίμ πρός τήν θεραπείαν εύθυβολοΰντα.
[*S I I 450, 11 (εύθιξίμ)]
G νΕπειθεν ό ’Ιάκωβος τούς πλουσίους ίατρεύων βοηθεϊν τή νο-
σούση πενίμ καί αύτός προίκα Ιάτρευε, τφ δημοσίψ μόνψ άρκού-
μενος σιτηρεσίφ.
[Φ 123]

84Ε 20 δντα Kassel: οΐόν τινα S.

 Ancients, most of whom he was deemed to surpass. Indeed he was
loved and worshipped by those in need of help as if he had divine
power. And he had such confidence in himself and in his own
methods of cure that if, upon visiting a patient and diagnosing the
disease from its symptoms he declared that the man would live,
everybody was filled with the hope that recovery would follow, but
if not, they expected death. And nobody’s expectations were ever
belied. He used to say that the perfect doctor must either give up
hope of curing the disease or, having taken on the patient, improve
his condition forthwith and leave him only once he is in a more
tolerable state; otherwise he should not abandon him.213 Indeed he
freed almost everybody immediately or in a short time from
whatever affliction troubled them, and for this reason people called
Iacobus the saviour, just as they had Asclepius in the past. However
doctors never stopped discrediting and abusing him for being not a
doctor but a holy man and a favourite of the gods. And what they
said was true, for the man was pious and truly graced by God. And
if I were to report what the philosopher (Isidore) said, he thought
that the soul of Iacobus was Asclepeian, endowed by nature with
healing powers.214 Moreover he had that passionate attachment to
his calling which is particularly apt to draw the craftsman nearer to
the patron god of his art, creating a true intimacy between the two.
It was thus that Pheidias, inspired by the god, produced his works
of art and that Zeuxis endowed his statues with form.215
F When it came to treating patients he had a mind which had the
skill to hit the target.
G Iacobus persuaded his rich patients to assist ailing poverty and
he himself received no money for treatment, contenting himself
with his municipal salary.

213 This is in character with Iacobus’ general views on health: according to

Ammonius, he used to say that it is not proper for a doctor to be in bad health, but he
must first heal himself and then attend to his patients’ needs (story reported by
Olympiodorus In G org. 204,14 ff.).
214 For the theory behind Isidore’s words, Proclus I n R em p . Π, 118.
215 Cf. Plotinus V.8.1.38ff.
Η Καί χαλαρόν ήν αύτφ καί θήλυ τό σπλάγχνον πρός τούς δεο­
μένους, εΐπερ τινί των καθ’ αύτόν άνθρώπων.
[*S IV 779,23 (χαλαρά ρ)]
I "On φησίν ό συγγραφεύς εΐδον εικόνα τοϋ ’Ιακώβου Άθήνησι,
καί μοι Ιδοξεν δ άνήρ εύφυής μέν ού πάνυ είναι, σεμνός δέ καί
έμβριθης.
[Φ 124]
J Ούτος δέ ό ’Ιάκωβος Πρόκλφ νοσοΰντι, έν Άθήναις διατρι­
βών καί θαυμαζόμενος, προσεταξεν άπέχεσθαι μέν κράμβης,
έμψορείσθαι δέ τών μαλαχών ό δέ κατά τόν Πυθαγόρειον νόμον
ούκ ήνέσχετο μαλάχης έσθίειν.
[Φ 125]

85 ,
Α Ή ν δέ ό Άσκληπιόδοτος ούχ όλόκληρος τήν εύφύΐαν, ώς τοϊς
πλείστοις έδοξε τών άνθρώπων, άλλ’ άπορειν μέν όξύτατος, συν-
εϊναι δέ ού λίαν άγχίνους ούδέ αυτός έαυτφ δμοιος, άλλως τε καί
τά θειότερα τών πραγμάτων, όσα άφανή καί νοητά καί τής Πλά­
τωνος έξαίρετα διανοίας. Πρός δέ τήν δρφικήν τε καί χαλδαϊκήν 5
τήν ύψηλοτέραν σοφίαν, καί τόν κοινόν φιλοσοφίας νοϋν ύπεραί-
ρουσαν, έτι μάλλον έλείπετο. Πρός δέ φυσιολογίαν τών καθ’
έαυτόν πάντων ήν έρρωμενέστατος· ωσαύτως καί έν τοΐς μαθήμα-
σιν, άφ’ ών καί έπί τά άλλα τό μέγα τής φύσεως άπηνέγκατο
H More than any of his contemporaries he had a soft and tender
heart towards those in need.216
I The writer says: I saw a statue of Iacobus in Athens. The man
did not look to me very handsome,217 but noble and imposing.218
J At the time when this Iacobus lived in Athens and was held in
high esteem, he told the sick Proclus to abstain from cabbage and
take his fill of mallow instead.219 Proclus however could not bring
himself to eat mallow following the Pythagorean law.

85
A Asclepiodotus’ mind was not perfect, as most people thought.
He was extremely sharp at raising questions, but not so acute in his
understanding. His was an uneven intelligence, especially when it
came to divine matters -the invisible and intelligible essence of
Plato’s lofty thought. Even more wanting was he in the field of
higher wisdom -the Orphic and Chaldaean lore which transcends
philosophical common sense.220 In the natural sciences however he
was by far the best among his contemporaries. Likewise, he was
strong in mathematics, and this is what earned him the reputation of

216 The cruelty of the times (as represented by the nature of the punishments in the
Theodosian Code among other evidence) had to be compensated for by individual
action or institutional welfare, as both the Church's activity and the Emperor Julian’s
“pastoral” schemes indicate.
217 Or possibly “intelligent”.
218 A statue of Iacobus had also been erected in Constantinople by the Senate
(Maialas 370).
2,9 Cabbage was part of the Pythagorean diet (Iamblichus V .P yth. 98), whereas
mallow was banned (ibid. 109). Iacobus clearly prescribed the taboo mallow because of
the laxative properties to which the word owes its etymology (μαλάσσαχμαλάχη). For
the same reason one had to “abstain from mallow” during the hot month of August, as
advised by a Chaldaean Oracle (210a and Lydus M ens. 4.120), an injunction which
probably found its way to Lydus through the intermediary of Proclus’ very last student,
Agapius (cf. below, n. 278). Dioscorides (M at. m ed. II, 118 (Wellmann I, 119))
provides the same information in every respect: μαλάχη κηπαία- Πυθαγόρας άνάθεμα,
Ζωροάστρης διάδεσμα. Ευκοίλιος ... έντέροις δέ καί κύστει ώφέλιμος.
220 Proclus for one would not have agreed with this statement. He dedicated to
Asclepiodotus his Commentary on the P a rm en id es, the metaphysical dialogue p a r
excellen ce, styling the dedicatee not only as φίλων φίλταιον, but also as φιλοσοφίας
Επάξιον Εχοντα τόν νοϋν (618,16-20).
 κλέος. Έν τοϊς περί ηθών δέ καί άρετών άεί τι καινουργειν έπε- 10
χείρει, καί πρός τά κάτω καί τά φαινόμενα συστέλλειν τήν θεω­
ρίαν, ούδέν μεν (ώς έπος είπεΐν) τών άρχαίων νοημάτων άποικο-
νομούμενος, πάντα δέ συνωθών καί κατάγων εις τήνδε τήν φύσιν
τήν περικόσμιον.
[Φ 126]
Β "Οτι ευφυέστατος ό Άσκληπιόδοτος περί μουσικήν γεγονώς,
τό έναρμόνιον γένος άπολωλός ούχ οΐός τε έγένετο άνασώσασθαι,
καίτοι τά άλλα δύο γένη κατατεμών καί άνακρουσάμενος, τό τε
χρωματικόν όνομαζόμενον καί τό διατονικόν. Τό δέ έναρμόνιον
ούχ εύρε, καίτοι μαγάδας, ώς έλεγεν, ύπαλλάξας καί μεταθείς ούκ 5
έλάττους είκοσι καί διακοσίων. Αίτιον δέ τής μή εύρέσεως τό έλά-
χιστον μέτρον τών έναρμονίων διαστημάτων, δπερ δίεσιν όνομά-
ζουσι. Τούτο δή άπολωλός εκ τής ήμετέρας αίσθήσεως καί τό
άλλο γένος τό έναρμόνιον προσαπώλεσεν, άγυμνάστου πρός αύτό
τής άκοής άπολελειμμένης. 10
[Φ 127 + S II 87,4 (δίεσιν pp)]
C Τφ δέ Άσκληπιοδότω σπουδή ήν εις τό χρωματικόν καί διατο­
νικόν είδος τής μουσικής· ώστε τήν έαυτού φωνήν καί τά περί
αύτήν όργανα τής φύσεως εύπλαστότερα κηρού διετίθετο καί μετερ-
ρύθμιζεν ές δ τι ήβούλετο καί ή χρεία παρήν ώστε καί ζφων άπά-
ντων μιμεΐσθαι καί τών άλλων κτύπων τάς άπηχήσεις. 5
[S III 111, 11 (κηρού εύπλαστότερος)]
D Ό τι Ίακώβφ τά κατά τήν ιατρικήν μαθητευθείς δ Άσκληπιό­
δοτος καί κατ’ ίχνη βαίνων έκείνου, έστιν οίς καί ύπερεβάλετο·
καί γάρ καί τού λευκού έλλεβόρου πάλαι τήν χρήσιν άπολωλυΐαν
καί μηδ’ Ίακώβφ άνασωθεισαν αύτός άνεκαίνισε, καί δι’ αύτοΰ
άνιάτους νόσους παραδόξως έξιάσατο. 5
[Φ 128]

85Β cf. SII87,4.

Φsolum usque ad 9 προσαπώλεσεν, S solum 8 τ ο ύ το usque ad finem.
3 τά αλλα scripsi: δλλα Φ. 8 τσϋτο δή Φ: δπερ S. 8 τό &λλο γένος Φ: om. S.
 an overall genius. Finally, in the field of moral philosophy he
constantly attempted to innovate and to limit research to the visible
realm below, without rejecting any of the doctrines of the Ancients,
but packing everything together and bringing it down to the level of
the physical world.
B Despite Asclepiodotus’ great gift for music, he was not able to
recover the enharmonic scale which was already extinct, even
though he could analyse and play the other two scales, the so-called
chromatic and diatonic. As for the enharmonic, he did not find it,
though, as he used to say, he shifted the bridge along (the
monochord) in no less than two hundred and twenty positions. The
cause of his failure lies in the very small size of the intervals of the
enharmonic scale which is known as diesis. The loss of this interval
from our perception has entailed the disappearance of the entire
enharmonic scale, our ear being no longer trained to hear it.221
C Asclepiodotus studied the chromatic and the diatonic scales in
music. Thus he made his voice and the organs connected with it
easier to mould than wax, modifying it according to his wishes and
requirements, so that he could imitate the sounds of all the animals
and any other noise.
D In medicine Asclepiodotus was the pupil of Iacobus and trod in
his footsteps, and indeed there were areas where he surpassed him.
For he re-established the long-lost use of the white hellebore, which
even Iacobus had not been able to recover, and through it he
remedied incurable diseases against all expectation.

221 As the quintessential empiricist, Asclepiodotus tried out all possible

combinations on a monochord using Pythagorean ratios. For a fuller analysis and a
Neoplatonic interpretation of the character of each of the three modes of ancient music,
Proclus In Tim . II, 168,14 ff.
Ε Ό τι Άσκληπιόδοτος ό φιλόσοφος καί τήν Ιατρικήν έκμαθών
των μέν νεωτέρων Ιατρών τόν ’Ιάκωβον μόνον άπεδέχετο, τών δέ
πρεσβυτέρων μετά τόν Ίπποκράτην Σωρανόν τόν Κίλικα, τόν
Μαλλώτην έπίκλην.
[Φ 129 + S IV 407, 25 (Σωρανός 852 ρ)]

86
Α Ό τι Άσκληπιόδοτος δσιος ήν καί ευσεβής· καί τά μέν πρώτα
δεισιδαίμων έγεγόνει καί ευλαβής οΰτω σφόδρα ώστε μήτε θύειν
άνέχεσθαι μήτε τινός άπορρήτου μηδενός άκούειν· ού γάρ είναι
ταΰτα τής γενέσεως άξια, άλλα τοϋ Όλυμπου καί τών έν Όλύμπψ
διαζήν ηγουμένων. 5
[S* I I 35, 22 (δεισιδαιμονία ρ)]
Β Τοιγαροϋν άνέθηλεν έπ’ αύτοϋ ή πόλις τής ’Αφροδίτης εις τό
ίερώτερον. 'Ηδη δέ καί ές τάς ύπερορίους άπφκισε τ*ήν άπόρρη-
τον θέμιν, ές τε ’Αλεξάνδρειαν τήν δσιρ<ι>άζουσαν καί τής έω
πολλαχή τήν μαγεύουσαν.
[S 1383, 29 (Άσκληπιόδοτος pp)]
C Καί πρός φιλοσοφίαν έρρωντο, καίτοι άρχήν άτυχοϋντες
εΐιαγωγίας φιλοσόφου.
[Φ 259]

85Ε 1 Άσκληπιόδοτος S: δ Άσκληπιόδοτος Φ. 16 φιλόσοφος - έκμαθών S: om.

Φ. 2 Ιατρών - όπεδέχετο Φ: οίιδένα άπεδέχετο πλήν ’Ιάκωβον S.
4 έπίκλην S: om. Φ.
86Β cf. S III 569, 3.
3 δσιριάζουσαν Ktister.
E Having studied medicine as well, the philosopher Asclepiodotus
recognised only Iacobus among modem doctors and among the
Ancients the Cilician Soranus, sumamed Mallotes, as next after
Hippocrates.222

S6223
A Asclepiodotus was holy and devout. At the beginning he was so
excessively god-fearing and pious that he could not bring himself to
sacrifice or to hear anything connected with secret worship; for he
thought that these things were unfit for the world of becoming and
worthy only of Olympus and of those who think that they inhabit
Olympus.224
B Consequently the city of Aphrodite enjoyed a religious revival
under him. And indeed he even exported the sacred mysteries
abroad -to Alexandria famous for her Osiris orgies and bewitcher
of much of the Orient.225
C And they devoted all their energy to philosophy, though initially
they failed to obtain good philosophical instruction.226

222 In two notices (including the one from which our fragment comes) the Suda
refers to Soranus as an Ephesian (S IV 407, 20 and 23). An adept of the School of
Methodism in medicine, Soranus practised in Rome in early Antonine times. For a full
treatment, assessing his place in ancient medicine, P. Burguihre and Y. Malinas,
Soranos d’Ephise: Maladies des femmes I, Paris 1988, pp. VII-LXXIV.
223 Excerpts A, B, E and F seem to me to refer to Asclepiodotus Senior.
224 This odd statement seems to refer to those who have reached union with the
divine through their own spiritual efforts. However the text may be corrupt.
225 This is a particularly obscure passage. Zintzen’s interpretation (p. 177, n. at 1. 4)
is grammatically possible but not very logical since it implies that Asclepiodotus
exported the cult of Osiris from Aphrodisias to Alexandria. A. Guida and G. Agosti
propose the correction τής μαγευούσης for τήν μαγεύουσαν, which would imply that
many places in the Orient were devoted to Zoroastrian worship.
226 If the subject of the verb is Asclepiodotus and Damiane, one assumes that they
travel to Alexandria, where Asclepiodotus initiates his wife in the mysteries of
philosophy and introduces her to his milieu; this interpretation also fits the story
provided by VS 16-19. Asmus on the other hand thinks that the fragment refers to the
citizens of Aphrodisias (Leben, 77).
D Καί τη ευχή χρησάμενος εις τήν συνήθη καί άνθρωπίνην
αϊσθησιν από των άλλοκότων όψεων έπανηλθε.
[Φ 260]
Ε Καί δή έξέδωκεν Ικνουμένφ τφ τοϋ γάμου καιρφ·
[Φ 261]
F άλλα καί τρίβωνα φιλοσοφίας περιβαλών, ως φιλόσοφον, τήν
νύμφην.
[Φ 262]
G Τοιγάρτοι καί άπετέλεσεν ό Άσκληπιόδοτος τήν Δαμιανήν
αίδημονεστάτην καί παρά λόγον οΰσαν, τήν έαυτού γαμέτην, ύψη-
λόφρονα καί άνδρόβουλον εις οικονομίαν, ώσπερ σώφρονα καί
άθρυπτον εις συμβίωσιν.
[Φ 130 ]

87 '
Α Ό τι έν Ίεραπόλει τής Φρυγίας ιερόν ήν ’Απόλλωνος, υπό δε
τόν ναόν καταβάσιον ύπέκειτο θανάσιμους άναπνοάς παρεχόμε-
νον. Τούτον τόν βόθρον οΐιδ’ άνωθεν έστιν άκίνδυνον οΐιδέ τοΐς

86G cf. S II 731,27.

2 παρά λόγον Westeimann: παράλογον Φ.
87Α cf. S 1260, 3.
D Turning to prayer, he reverted from his strange visions to normal
human perception.227
E And indeed he gave her to him when the right time for maniage
came,228
F but wrapping the bride in a philosophical cloak, as if she were a
philosopher.229
G Accordingly Asclepiodotus made Damiane, who was
inordinately modest, his wife; she was high-minded and had firm
judgement in household matters and was prudent and
incorruptible230 in their life together.

87
A At Hierapolis in Phrygia there was a sanctuary of Apollo and
below the temple there was an underground passage which emitted
deathly fumes230a. Even winged creatures could not pass over that

227 This may be a parallel passage to VS 18 “II s6jouma...a sa femme”.

228 Cf. VS 16-17: “Asklepiodotos d’ Alexandrie, qui s’occupait d’ enchantements,
exerfait la magie, faisait des invocations demoniaques, et qui avait conquis par la
Γ admiration des pai'ens pour sa philosophie, avait determίηέ son homonyme, qui en ce
temps-la se glorifiait des honneurs et des dignitis dont le comblait le roi, et tenait le
premier rang dans le senat d’ Aphrodisias, a lui donner sa fille en manage.” The
testimonies of Damascius and Zacharias, in combination with the fact that
Asclepiodotus Junior was Isidore’s tutor, lead us to assume that when Asclepiodotus
reached Aphrodisias, at some time in the 470s, he was already the polymath described
by Damascius and therefore at least in his thirties. The “inordinately modest” Damiane
must have been too young for marriage at the time and Asclepiodotus would have spent
some time trying to persuade his namesake to give him his daughter in marriage, as both
texts suggest. These events presumably occurred in the early 480s, and, two or three
years later, when no children were bom to the couple, they went to Alexandria —or
rather Menuthis— as Isis had instructed the husband in an oracular dream (VS 17); it is
worth mentioning in this connection that the Menuthis Isis was known as the Truth:
Pap. Oxy. 1380, 63.
229 or “since she was a philosopher".
230 Άθρυπτος is a key word, qualifying the ideal Pythagorean diet (Carm. Aur. 35
and cf. Hierocles’ commentary ad loc., pp. 76-79, whose language is very similar to that
used by Damascius in the present context).
230a Cf. Ammianus Marcellinus XXIII.6.18.
 πτηνοΐς τών ζφων διελθεΐν, άλλ’ δσα κατ’ αύτόν γίνεται, άπόλλυ-
ται. ΤοΧς δε τετελεσμένοις, φησί, δυνατόν ήν κατιόντας καί είς 5
αύτόν τόν μυχόν άβλαβώς διάγειν. Λέγει δ ’ ό συγγραφεύς ώς
αυτός τε καί Λώρος ό φιλόσοφος, υπό προθυμίας έχνικηθέντες,
κατέβησάν τε καί άπαθεϊς κακών άνέβησαν. Λέγει δ ’ ό συγγρα­
φεύς δτι τότε τή Ίεραπόλει έγκαθευδήσας έδόκουν δναρ ό Άττης
γενέσθαι, καί μοι έπιτελεΐσθαι παρά τής μητρός τών θεών τήν τών ίο
Ίλαρίων καλουμένην έορτήν δπερ έδήλου τήν εξ Ά ιδου γεγο-
νυΐαν ήμών σωτηρίαν.
Διηγησάμην δε τφ Άσκληπιοδότψ έπανελθών εις Άφροδισιά-
δα τήν τοϋ όνείρου δψιν. Ό δέ έθαύμασέ τε τό συμβεβηκός, καί
διηγήσατο ούκ δναρ άντί όνείρατος, άλλά θαΰμα μεΐζον άντί 15
έλάττονος. Νεώτερος γάρ έλεγεν είς τό χωρίον έλθεΐν τούτο καί
άποπειραθήναι αύτοϋ τής φύσεως. Δίς ούν καί τρις έπιπτύξας τό
ίμάτιον περί τάς φίνας, ΐνα, κάν άναπνέη πολλάκις* μή τόν διε-
φθαρμένον καί λυμαντικόν άέρα άναπνή, άλλά τόν άπαθή καί σω­
τήριον, δν έξωθεν είσήγαγε παραλαβών έν τφ ίματίψ, οΰτω πρά- 20
ξας, είσήει τε έν τή καταδύσει, τή έκροή τών θερμών ύδάτων έπα-
κολουθών έπί πλεΐστον τοϋ άβάτου μυχού, ού μήν είς τέλος άφί-
κετο τής καταβάσεως· ή γάρ είσοδος άπερρώγει πρός βάθος ήδη
πολύ τών ύδάτων καί άνθρωποι γε ού διαβατόν ήν, άλλ’ ό καται-
βάτης ένθουσιών έφέρετο μέχρι τού πέρατος. Ό μεντοι Άσκλη- 25
πιόδοτος έκέΐθεν άνήλθε σοφίςι τή αύτοΰ κακών άπαθής. Άλλά
καί πνοήν παραπλησίαν ύστερον τή θανασίμφ έκ διαφόρων ειδών
κατασκευασάμενος έμηχανήσατο.
[Φ 131]
Β Εύφυής δέ έκ παίδων γεγονώς άχρι γήρως πολλά συνεισήνεγ-
κεν είς τά Ιερά τής οικείας φύσεως έκγονα μηχανήματα, άγάλματά
τε διακοσμών καί ύμνους προστιθείς έστιν οΐς.
[S 1384, 1 (Άσκληπιόδοτος pp)]
C Τής περί τά θεία διατριβούσης θρησκείας, όση τε φητή καί δση
άπόρρητος.
[Φ 263]

11 καλουμένην ν.1.: καλουμένων Φ.

 pit without danger since everything which came within its ambit
died. For the initiated however it was possible to descend to its
lowest depths and stay there without suffering injury. The author
says that, overcome by their enthusiasm, he and the philosopher
Dorus went down and came up without suffering any harm. The
author also says: going to sleep at Hierapolis at that time I had a
dream in which I was Attis and, at the instigation of the Mother of
the gods, I celebrated the feast o f the so-called231 Hilaria, which
signified my23223salvation from death.
On my return to Aphrodisias I described my dream to
Asclepiodotus; he marvelled at what had happened and related to
me not “a dream for a dream”, but a greater miracle for a smaller
one. He said that in his youth he had come to this place to test its
nature. Wrapping his garment round his nostrils two or three times,
so that, even if he had to breathe frequently, he would inhale not the
bad and harmful air but the sound and salubrious air which he had
brought in from the outside within his garment, he penetrated the
underground path following the outflow of the hot waters almost as
far as its impassable extremities, even though he did not reach the
limit of the descent; for the path broke off where the waters became
very deep and impassable to man. Yet the kataibates233 reached the
end in a state of inspiration. And indeed thanks to his wisdom,
Asclepiodotus came up from there free from harm and some time
later he managed to produce a vapour similar to the deadly one by
using various ingredients.
B Being talented from childhood to old age, he provided the
temples with many devices of his own invention, adorning the
gods’ statues, and contributing hymns to some of them.
C Both the licit and the secret aspects of the divine cult.

231 A well established pejorative, and at the same time pmdish, expression whereby
Christians refer to things pagan.
232 The Greek text has ημών, a plural of modesty with reference to a spiritual
experience, as is still always the case in modem Turkish.
233 An epithet of Zeus “descending in thunder” and of Hermes as a leader of the
souls to the nether world.
Α Φιλοσοφοϋντος ούκ Soil μαντικήν έπαγγέλλεσθαι καί προφέ-
ρειν ούδέ τήν άλλην Ιερατικήν έπιστήμην χωρίς γάρ τά των φιλο­
σόφων καί τά των Ιερέων όρ'ισματα, ούδέν ήττον ή τά λεγάμενα
Μυσών καί Φρυγών. Ά λλ’ όμως ό Πατρίκιος έτόλμησε, παρά νό­
μον τόν φιλοσοφίας, έπί ταΰτα φυείς. 5
[S III577,21 (ούδέν ήττον ρ) + Φ 132]
Β Έμέμφετο αύτοΰ τό περί τάς μαντείας έπτοημένον καί βουλό-
μενον άεί τοΐς άγύρταις έπιτρέπειν τά οίκεΐα πράγματα.
[*S 140,14 (άγύρτης 389 ρ)]
C Ή ν γάρ αύτός άγύρτης τφ δντι καί φιλομαντευτής.
[*S 140, 10 (άγύρτης 388 ρ)]
D Ή δέ έφη· έγώ χωρΐτίς ειμι καί άγροικος.
[Φ 133]

89
Α Δομνϊνος, φιλόσοφος, Σύρος τό γένος άπό τε Λαοδικείας καί
Λαρίσσης πόλεως Συρίας, μαθητής Συριανού καί τού Πρόκλου
συμφοιτητής, ώς φησι Δαμάσκιος. Έ ν μέν τοΐς μαθήμασιν Ικανός
άνήρ, έν δέ τοΐς άλλοις φιλοσοφήμασιν έπιπολαιότερος. Διό καί
πολλά των Πλάτωνος οίκείοις δοξάσμασιν διέστρεψε. Καί διαλυ- 5
μηνάμενος άποχρώσας δμως εύθύνας τφ Πρόκλψ δέδωκε γράψαν-
τι πρός αύτόν δλην πραγματείαν, καθαρτικήν ώς φησιν ή έπι-
γραφή τών δογμάτων τοΰ Πλάτωνος. Ή ν δέ ούδέ τήν ζωήν άκρος
οΐον άληθώς φιλόσοφον ε’ιπεΐν.
Ό γάρ Άθήνησιν ’Ασκληπιός τήν αύτήν Ιασιν έχρησμφδει ίο
Πλουτάρχφ τε τφ Άθηναίφ καί τφ Σύρω Δομνίνφ, τούτφ μέν

88Α cf. S IV 818, 21.

S solum usque ad 4 Φρυγών, Φ solum 2 χωρίς usque ad finem.
2 γάρ S: om. Φ. 2 τών φιλοσόφων S: φιλοσόφων Φ.
89Α cf. S II 52,18.
Φ solum 16 άλλα -17 σκίμποδος.
A It does not befit a philosopher to profess and cultivate divination
or any other part of the science of theurgy; for the domains of the
philosopher and of the priest are no less separate than those of the
Mysians and the Phiygians, according to the proverb. And yet
Patricius, who had inclinations in these directions, dared to do so in
breach of the philosophical rule.234
B He blamed his passion for prophecy and his inclination to
entrust his own affairs to vagabonds.235
C For indeed he was a vagabond keen on divination..236
D But, she said, I am a peasant woman and a country bumpkin.

89
A Domninus the philosopher was of Syrian stock from Laodicea
and Larissa in Syria, a pupil of Syrianus and the fellow-student of
Proclus, as Damascius says. He was competent in mathematics but
rather superficial in the other branches of philosophy. Thus he
distorted many of Plato’s doctrines by introducing his own views.
However he was held to proper account for this falsification at the
hands of Proclus, who wrote against him a whole treatise
“purificatory” as its title indicates “of Plato’s doctrines”.237 And in
his way of life he did not display that perfection that would entitle
him to be called a true philosopher.
The Athenian Asclepius prescribed through an oracle the same
cure to the Athenian Plutarch and the Syrian Domninus. The latter

234 Behind this remark one detects a criticism of the active interest in theurgy as
theory and practice displayed by Proclus and Hegias; for an even clearer pronounce­
ment, see 150.
235 άγύρτης may also mean “mendicant priest”, an eminently possible meaning in
view of the religious context.
236 If combined with VS 40, this fragment may be seen to refer to Pamprepius.
237 As is clear from many passages in this work, by the time of Proclus there was
only one orthodox way of interpreting Plato, and heretics were duly dealt with. Those
who wished to remain within the orthodox mainstream and receive the approval of their
contemporaries and posterity had to destroy any of their own works which deviated
from the dogmatic norm: cf. the case of Marinus, 38A and 97J.
 αΐμ’ άποπτύοντι πολλάκις και τούτο φέροντι τής νόσου τό όνο­
μα, έκείνψ δέ ούκ οίδα δ τι νενοσηκότι. Ή δέ ΐασις ήν έμπίπλα-
σθαι χοιρείων κρεών. Ό μέν οΰν Πλούταρχος ούκ ήνέσχετο τής
τοιαύτης ύγιείας καίτοι ούκ ούσης αύτφ παρανόμου κατά τά πά- ΐ5
τρία, άλλά διαναστάς άπό τού ύπνου καί διαγκωνισάμενος έπί
τού σκίμποδος άποβλέπων είς τό άγαλμα τού ’Ασκληπιού (καί
γάρ έτύγχανεν έγκαθεύδων τφ προδόμφ τού Ιερού), ώ δέσποτα,
έφη, τί δέ άν προσέταξας Ίουδαίφ νοσούντι ταύτην τήν νόσον; ού
γάρ άν καί έκείνφ έμφορεΐσθαι χοιρείων κρεών έκέλευσας. Ταΰτα 2ο
εΐπεν, ό δέ ’Ασκληπιός <ίείς> αύτίκα άπό τού άγάλματος έμμελέ-
στατον δή τινα φθόγγον, έτέραν ύπεγράψατο θεραπείαν τφ πάθει.
Δομνϊνος δέ ούδέ κατά θέμιν <τήν Σύροις πάτριον> πεισθείς
τφ όνείρφ ούδέ παραδείγματι τφ Πλουτάρχψ χρησάμενος, εφαγέ
τε τότε καί ήσθιεν άεί τών κρεών. Λέγεται που μίαν εί διέλειπεν 25
ήμέραν άγευστος έπιτίθεσθαι τό πάθημα πάντως, έως ένεπλήσθη.
[S I I 127,21 (Δομνϊνος pp) + Φ 134]
Β Έδεΐτο μέν γάρ οί τό σώμα σαρκοφαγίας, άθύτου δέ ούκ ήνέ-
σχετο μεταλαβεϊν, τό παλαιόν παράγγελμα “θνησειδίων άπέχε-
σθαι” τούτο σημαίνειν ύπολαμβάνων.
[S IV 329,4 (σαρκοφαγία)]

90
Α Άστεΐός τε ην καί εύόμιλος, ού μόνον πρός τήν σπουδάζου-
σαν άλλά καί πρός τήν παίζουσαν ένίοτε συνουσίαν, ώστε καί
ήδιστος είναι τοϊς πλησιάζουσι πρός τφ ώφελίμφ.
[Φ 135 1
Β Γενόμενος δέ πρός τφ σεμνφ καί εύτράπελος, ήδίστην παρεί-
χετο τοϊς έντυγχάνουσι τήν αύτού συνδιαίτησιν.
[S 1383, 32 (Άσκληπιόδοτος pp)]
C Ούδ’ είς Άφροδισιάδα μετεχώρησε παρακληθείς.
[Φ 264)

14 οΰν ν.1.: δή S. 17 σκίμποδος S: σκίμποδος Ιφη Φ 21 Ιείς suppl. Kassel

23 ante τήν Σύροις habet θέμιν S: del. Bemhardy 23 τήν Σύροις πάτριον huc
transposuit Zintzen: θέμιν τήν Σύροις πάτριον post όνείρψ habet S.
89Β cf. S 173, 15.
 frequently spat blood -which accounted for his being given the
epithet of the disease-238 whereas I do not know the nature of the
former’s illness. The cure for them both was to stuff themselves
with pork. But Plutarch could not stand such a treatment, even
though it did not go against his native customs; waking up and
leaning on one elbow on his pallet he fixed his gaze upon the statue
of Asclepius (since he happened to be sleeping in the vestibule of
the temple) and said: “Master, what would you have prescribed for
a Jew suffering from this disease? Surely you would not have
ordered him also to fill himself with pork!”239 And Asclepius gave
voice most melodiously from his statue and prescribed a different
cure for the disease.
But Domninus was persuaded by the dream to go against the
traditional Syrian custom and, unheedful of the example of
Plutarch, ate the meat and continued to do so.240 It is even said that
if he failed to taste pork for one day, the affliction returned with
renewed violence until he had filled his stomach.
B His body needed a meat-diet, but he could not bear to eat meat
which had not been offered in sacrifice, interpreting in this way the
old precept “abstain from animal carcass”.241

90
A He was refined and sociable not only at serious gatherings but
also on light-hearted occasions, so that he was extremely pleasant
as well as being useful to those who approached him.
B Being witty as well as serious, he was extremely pleasant
company to those who met him.
C He did not leave for Aphrodisias when summoned.

238 Presumably he was known as δ αίμοπτυϊκός.

239 A standard joke. When the Pergamene Asclepius ordered Polemo to abstain
from cold drinks, the sophist retorted: “What would you have prescribed, my friend, if
you were treating a bull?” (Philostratus, V. Soph. 535).
240 Every possible effort is made to descredit Domninus: by the combined attack on
his mores, character and mind, he is shown to be the heretic who deserves a damnatio
memoriae (cf. 93). Yet Domninus had reached the status of a diadochus (Marinus VP
26; cf. below, p. 231, n. 247).
241 A Pythagorean injunction: cf. Diogenes Laertius VIII.33.
D Άθήνηθεν άποπλεύσας Άσκληπιόδοτος καί εις Σελεύκειαν
τής Συρίας άφικόμενος, διεσκοπεϊτο τά ήθη των ανθρώπων καί
έν τή περιόδφ δλη τρισί μόνοις εφη έντετυχηκέναι μετρίως εχου-
σιν άνθρώποις· Ίλαρίφ τε τφ φιλοσόφφ κατ’ ’Αντιόχειαν, έν δέ
Λαοδικείμ, τή έχομένη πόλει τών Σύρων Μάρμ τφ δικαιοτάτφ 5
τών καθ’ ημάς άνθρώπων καί τήν ’Αριστείδου έπωνυμίαν άπενεγ-
καμένφ, Δομνίνφ τε τφ φιλοσόφφ.
[S* III378,4 (μέτριοι 815)]

91
Α Ίλάριος, Άντιοχεύς, της έν Συρίμ πόλεως, έν τφ βουλευτηρίφ
τά πρωτεία φέρων έπιεικής δέ τήν φύσιν Φν καί φιλομαθής καί
προσέτι όξΰς έν τοίς λόγοις καί βιβλίων παντοδαπών εύπορώτα-
τος, δμως όψιμαθής έγεγόνει λόγων φιλοσόφων. Πολιτεύεσθαι
γάρ άναγκαζόμενος τά κοινά πολιτεύματα τής πατρίδος* ούδεμίαν 5
είχε σχολήν πρός φιλοσοφίαν. Ένήν δέ αύτφ δυσάγωγον ήθος έν
τή νεότητι πρός σωφροσύνην ώστε καί τούτο πολλήν άσχολίαν
παρείχετό οι πρός καλλίω βίον. ’Αλλά γάρ ή τύχη σοφώτερον
τούτφ κατέστη καί ό καιρός, άμα παρηκούσης ήδη τής άκρατούς
ήλικίας. ’Ατύχημα γάρ τι συνέβη κατά τόν οίκον, δπερ εύτύχημα 10
άπέβη κατά τό άληθέστερον ή γάρ γυνή αυτού τών οικείων τινί
συμφθειρομένη κατείληπτο. Ό οΰν οίκοφθόρος τό έπιτήδευμα
φήτωρ έγεγόνει, Μόσχος δέ δνομα. Τυγχάνων δέ τού Ίλαρίου
τινός εύνοιας καί οίκειότητος άδικος έφάνη περί τόν ευεργέτην
έάλω γάρ συνών τή γυναικί. Καί δς ούδέν ταραχθείς επί τή συμ- 15

91Α Φ solum 19 άπαιδα - συμβεβίωκεν.

D After sailing away from Athens and reaching Seleucia in Syria,
Asclepiodotus began to study human behaviour. And in this whole
period he said that he had met only three moderate men:242 in
Antioch, Hilarius the philosopher; in the Syrian border town of
Laodicea, Maras, the most just man among our contemporaries,
who gained for himself the surname “Aristides”; and Domninus the
philosopher.243
91
A Hilarius, from the Syrian town of Antioch where he held first
place in the council. Though he was a naturally talented man,
studious and also sharp in argument and had at his disposal books
of all kinds, he nevertheless came late to the study of philosophy,
for, being obliged to spend his life in the public administration of
his country, he had no free time to devote to philosophy. His
character in youth could not easily be steered towards moderation,
which also held him back from the better life. But fortune and
circumstance dealt more wisely with him at a time when the years
of intemperance were anyway drawing to an end. For there
occurred to him a domestic misfortune which in truth proved to be a
piece of good luck; his wife was caught in the act of sexual
intercourse with one of his close friends.244 The seducer was an
orator by profession, called Moschus; having enjoyed Hilarius’
favour and intimacy, he proved unjust towards his benefactor, since
he was caught making love to his wife. But Hilarius, showing no

242 The word “moderate” is used in its Platonic meaning, the subsequent description
of the behaviour of the three men illustrating the four Platonic virtues.
243 In view of what is later said about these three men, this seems an extraordinary
statement. One assumes that Asclepiodotus must have qualified it somehow, especially
in the case of Domninus who had excluded Asclepiodotus from his classes after a
dispute over a mathematical theorem. Judging from the stories given below and from
the use of certain key terms of Platonic ethics, such as άνδρεία and φρόνησις in the case
of the dissolute Hilarius and δικαιοσύνη in the case of Maras —though σωφροσύνη is
nowhere to be found in the surviving text—, one assumes that in the course of a
conversation on the stereotype of Syrian immoderation, Asclepiodotus mentioned three
cases of Syrians complying with the canon of the Platonic virtues.
244 or even “a relative”, the Greek having both meanings.
 φορά, πράγμα έποίησεν άνδρείας τε καί φρονήσεως έχόμενον.
Τόν γάρ άνδρα παραλαβών έξέστη μέν αύτφ τής γυναικός, έξέστη
δέ τού αφετέρου κλήρου έφ’ φ τε κατά τόν νόμον έκεϊνον βουλεύ-
ειν- αυτός δέ (καί γάρ άπαιδα βίον τή γυναικί συμβεβίωκεν) άπο-
λιπών τήν πατρίδα μετεσκευάσατο τόν βίον πρός τούς φιλοσό­ 20
φους, εις Καρίαν τε καί Λυδίαν μεταναστάς. Άθήναζε γάρ άφικό-
μενος ήβούλετο τοϋ Πρόκλου άκροάσασθαι καί λόγων φιλοσό­
φων ώς δέ ούκ ήνεγκεν αύτοΰ τήν τρυφήν ό Πρόκλος, άκηκοώς
αύτόν έληλυθέναι μετά τών παλλακίδων καί τής συνήθους έτι
έκδιαιτήσεως, άναχωρήσας Άθήνηθεν ό 'Ιλάριος άλλον μετεδίωκε 25
τρόπον ώφελείας τόν συμμετρότερον ή κατά τόν Πρόκλειον.
[S I I 629,21 ('Ιλάριος 291) + Φ 265]
Β Ό δέ 'Ιλάριος φιλοσόφων μέν, έκδεδιητημένος δέ τάς ύπογα-
στρίους ήδονάς, ούκ έτυχε Πρόκλου διδασκάλου.
‘ [Φ 266]
C 'Απαγορεύει πρός τούς πόνους πόθφ τής έν Συρίμ έκδιαιτήσεως.
TS* I I 216,12 (έκδιαίτησις ρ)]

92
Μόρας, άπό Βέροιας τής έν Συρίςι πόλεως, άνήρ τών πλου-
σιωτάτων, άλλ’ δμως ό κόρος ούδεμίαν αύτφ ύβριν ένέτεκεν-
ούδέ γάρ κόρος ούδείς έφαίνετο τών χρημάτων, άλλά ταΰτα μέν
όργανα έποιεϊτο δικαιοσύνης τε καί φιλανθρωπίας, έπιχορηγών
τε τοϊς δεομένοις καί φιλοτιμούμενος έν τοΐς πολιτεύμασιν. Οΰτω 5
παρεΐχεν έαυτόν τοϊς πάσιν έπιεική καί δίκαιον, ώστε ούτε τών
πολιτών ούδείς αύτφ έγκέκληκε πώποτε ούτε ξένων ούτε τφν
κατ’ άστυ γειτόνων ούτε τών έν άγροΐς δμορούντων. Ού μήν
ταΰτα δικαιοσύνης έργα άπελογίζετο, εί μηδένα άδικοίη τών πο-
λιτευομένων, άλλ’ έκεΐνα μάλλον, εί μή κάμνοι εύεργετών. Τοι- 10

92 9 άδικοίη S ed. pr.: άδικεΐν S.

 sign of any disturbance at this misfortune, behaved in a manner at
once manly and sensible:245 he summoned the man, gave up to him
his wife and as much of his property as represented a qualification
for being a councillor, and (since his marriage had been childless)
he left his country and went to Caria and Lycia where he converted
to the philosophical life. Arriving in Athens he wished to be
Proclus’ pupil in philosophy. However, as Proclus, having heard
that he had arrived with his concubines and his customary
hedonism, could not tolerate his wantonness, Hilarius left Athens
and sought to advance his own interests in a manner that suited him
more than that of Proclus.
B Pursuing philosophy but at the same time devoting his life to the
pleasures below the belly, Hilarius was not accepted as a student by
Proclus.246
C He gave up hard work through his longing for the hedonism of
Syria.

92
Maras, from the Syrian town of Beroia, was one of the richest
men, but abundance did not induce arrogance in him; his
extravagant wealth was not conspicuous, but he used it as an
instrument of justice and philanthropy, providing for the needy and
bestowing munificence on the city. And he was so good and just to
everybody that no citizen ever brought charges against him, nor did
any foreigner nor any of his neighbours in the city or in the country.
Indeed he did not consider it just behaviour if he merely abstained
from wronging any of his fellow-citizens but only if he never tired
of pouring benefactions on them. Consequently he not only looked

245 Though a pleasure-loving Antiochene, Hilarius displays the virtues corre­

sponding to the three parts of the soul, thus offering a striking contrast with the
notorious diadochus Carneades, who on a similar occasion behaved with wrath (for the
story Numenius fr. 27,61 ff. and Diogenes Laertius IV.63-64. who cites Favorinus, fr.
67 (Barigazzi), as his source). In practical terms however, the decurion Hilarius seems
to be grasping a golden opportunity for ridding himself of an onerous and by now
largely unenviable status.
246 This sentence sounds like a summary by Photius of the latter part of 91A.
 γαροϋν ού των έαυτοΰ μόνον έπεμελεΐτο πραγμάτων, άλλά καί
των άλλοτρίων, μάλιστα των παρακεκτημένων εν τε τφ άστει καί
κατ’ άγρούς. Μάλιστα δέ τούτου τεκμήριον, εΐ τις ήβούλετό τι
πωλεΐν η τις ώνεϊσθαι των πλησιαζόντων αύτφ, ό μέν προσαπή-
τει, ό δέ προσετίθει τφ τιμήματι τής άλλης άξίας, ύπέρ αυτού γέ is
τοι δήπουθεν, ύπέρ τού κτήσασθαι δμορον καί γείτονα Μάραν,
τόν πάντων άνθρώπων δικαιότατον. 'Ώστε καί έξενίκησεν εις πα­
ροιμίαν ό Μάρας, έπί δικαίρ χρήσει τών πέλας.
[S* III322, 20 (Μάρας)]

93
Τούτψ ούν ήδη προγεγηρακότι νεώτερος ών έντυχεϊν ό
Άσκληπιόδοτος λέγεται, ίδεϊν δέ άνθρωπον έχοντά τι περιττόν
καί άστεμφές, ούκ άξιοΰντα λόγου πολλοΰ τούς έντυγχάνοντας
ίδιώτας ή ξένους, άλλως τε καί τούς έπί τφ διαφέρειν αύχοΰντας·
άμέλει καί έαυτφ προσενεχθήναι τραχύτερον, έπειδή περί άριθμη- 5
τικοΰ δτου δή θεωρήματος ούκ ήξίου όμολογεΐν προς αύτόν, οΐα
δέ νέος ών ούδέ ένδιδόναι τι μαλθακόν, άλλά διελέγχειν τόν λό­
γον οΰτω θρασέως ώστε τόν Δομνΐνον μηκέτι προσέσθαι αύτόν
εις όμιλίαν.
[S I I 128, 13 (Δομνΐνος pp)]

94
Α Ού γάρ I u όρέγεσθαι τροφής, πλαδώντος αύτφ τού στομάχου.
[S IV 138, 12 (πλαδώσινρ)]
Β Τόν θεόν προύκαλεΐτο έπί πάθει περιωδύνψ τής τών όπισθίων
όχετών άφέσεως.
[Φ 136]

93 cf. S IV 223,18.
1 προγεγηρακότι Zintzen: προσγεγηρακότι S.
 after his own affairs but also those of other people, especially his
neighbours in town and in the country. And the greatest proof of
this is the fact that if anybody wanted to sell or buy land bordering
on his, the seller asked for a higher amount and the purchaser gave
more than the market value merely for the sake of having Maras,
the most just among men, as a neighbour and sharing a boundary
with him. Thus Maras won his way into a proverb on the just
treatment of one’s neighbours.

93
It is reported that in his youth Asclepiodotus met him
[Domninus], a prematurely aged man who had something snobbish
and inflexible about him, hardly deigning to address those whom he
met, whether they were locals or foreigners, and especially those
who prided themselves on being superior.247 And indeed he also
treated Asclepiodotus rudely, because the latter could not bring
himself to agree with him on some mathematical theorem or, in his
youthful manner, to make a polite concession, but refuted his
argument so vehemently that Domninus never again admitted him
to his circle.248

94
A He had no appetite, as he had an upset stomach.
B He was calling out to the god on account of the extreme pain
caused by the evacuation of his back passages.

247 A pupil of Syrianus, who was admitted along with Proclus to a “graduate
seminar” on Orphic/Chaldaean theology, Domninus seems to provide the key to the
enigma attending the term diadochus. It would appear on the combined evidence of
148C referring to Isidore as an honorary successor, and Marinus VP 26 concerning
Domninus, that the title was conferred on those who had reached a certain stage of
intellectual and spiritual achievement, yet without their becoming the actual holders of
Plato’s chair; cf. also pp. 39,43-44, nn. 61,73,74.
248 The complaint from which Domninus suffered (cf. above 89) may have been at
the root of his unpleasant manner.
Α Πεπεϊσθαι Ιλεγε πολυχρονιώτερόν οί γενέσθαι τόν μετά τοϋ
σώματος βίον διά τήν δεξιότητα τής γυναικός. Καί ταϋτα Ιλεγεν
ου χάριν όμολογών, ώς άν τφ δόξειεν, άλλά δυσχεραίνουν πρός
τήν έν σώματι διατριβήν, καί εις έκείνην άναφέρων, δσα γε εις
άνθρωπον, τήν τοϋ θανάτου άναβολήν. 5
[Φ 267]
Β Καί τής γυναικός έπήνει τήν εύαγωγίαν καί συνήδετο.
[Φ 268]
C Κατελεήσας τοϋ γάμου τάς πρώτας έλπίδας, ό θεός έδίδου
σύμβολον τής έσομένης γονής- καί τήν γαμετήν λοιπόν έώρα έπί-
τεκα οΰσαν ό άνήρ.
[Φ 269]
D Έπίτεκα σδσαν τήν γαμετήν συνεπήγεν.
' [Φ 137]
A He used to say that he was convinced that his bodily life was
protracted as a result of his wife’s skill. He said this in a spirit not of
gratitude, as one might expect, but of disgust at being detained in
the body, holding her responsible for postponing death to the extent
that any human can do so.
B He praised his wife’s amenable character and rejoiced at it.
C Showing compassion for the first hopes of the marriage, the god
gave a sign of the birth to come and the husband then saw that his
wife was pregnant.
D He took with him249 his wife who was about to give birth.250

249 Presumably to Aphrodisias.

250 Obviously 9SC and D are alternative versions of the same Damascius passage.
Α ’Επί τής κλίνης άνακειμένω έξαπίνης τήν Δίκην Ιδεΐν συνέβη,
λαμπράν κόρην, εΰζωνον, κολοβόν χιτώνα μηλινόχρουν άνεζω-
σμένην, πορφυροϊς πλατέσι σημαδίοις κεκοσμημένον, άναδεδεμέ-
νην μέν τήν κεφαλήν άναδέσμη, γυμνήν δέ περιβολαίου, βλοσυρόν
τι όρώσαν καί συνωφρυωμένον, οΰτι γε πρός αϊτόν άλλά πρός 5
τήν είσοδον.
[Φ138]
Β Ό τι Άσκληπιόδοτος ό φιλόσοφος, ό Πρόκλου μαθητής, έν
σκότω βαθεϊ γράμματά τε άνεγίνακτκε, φησίν, άνευ φωτός καί
τούς παρόντος τών άνθρώπων διεγίνωσκεν.
[Φ 139]
C Καί ούδέν έμποδών πρός τήν άνάγνωσιν τφ Άσκληπιοδότφ ό
σκότος έγίνετο.
■ [Φ 270]
D Διηγείτο δέ άλλα τε ών άκήκοε, καί δή καί τής αύτοϋ δψεως
ούκ όλίγα θαύματος άξια.
[Φ 271]
Ε Κεφαλήν γοϋν ποτέ δρακοντείαν έν Καρίμ εις άγρόν πεσοΰ-
σαν Πυθέου τοϋ Καρός, ένεχθεΐσαν δέ αύτφ τφ Πυθέμ, καί αϊτός
έφη θεάσασθαι, μέγεθος οϊσαν ταύρου μεγίστου κατά κεφαλήν.
Ίδεΐν δέ τόν Άσκληπιόδοτον καί ζώντα δράκοντα μετέωρον έν
άέρι συννεφεΐ πεπηγότα καί συνειλημμένον ύπό τού πνεύματος, 5
έν τή πυκνότηη τών νεφών άκίνητον έστώτα, δσον δή κοντόν τινα
μέγαν άποτεταμένον ίδεΐν τε τούτον, καί έπιδεΐξαι καί τοΐς πα-
ροΰσι, πυκνωθέντων δέ έπί μάλλον τών νεφών άφανισθήναι τό
θηρίον.
[Φ 140]
F Ή δ ’ άγνωστος φωνή δτου ειη τήν ναϋν άνακωχάζειν έκέλευε.
[Φ 272]
G τοϋ όμμακοΐον τής αυτοψίας καί άκοής άμα.
[Φ 273]
A As he lay in bed, he suddenly chanced to see Justice. She was a
radiant maiden, well-girdled, wearing a short quince-yellow tunic
decorated with wide purple bands; her hair was bound with a
ribbon, she wore no cloak and was looking sternly and with knitted
brow not at him but towards the entrance.
B The philosopher Asclepiodotus, Proclus’ student, could read in
great darkness without a light and recognise those present.
C and darkness was no obstacle to reading for Asclepiodotus.251
D He related many extraordinary things that he had heard and not
a few that he had seen himself.
E He said that he himself had seen in Caria a serpent’s head which
had fallen onto the land of Pytheas the Carian and had been brought
to Pytheas himself;252 it had the size of a huge bull’s head.
Asclepiodotus had also seen a living serpent fixed in mid-air in a
cloudy sky which, when seized by the wind, stood motionless in the
thickness of the cloud, stretched out like a long pole; he observed it
and showed it to those present, but as the clouds thickened even
more, the monster disappeared.
F And the unknown voice, whoever it belonged to, ordered the
ship to stop.
G Τό όμμακόιον means to see and hear at the same time.

251 96C, which belongs to the second Photian reading, is a paraphrase of 96B, and
at the same time reveals something of Photius’ method as a compiler.
252 Another Aphrodisian magnate, cf. Rouechd, 93-97. Pytheas was a vir illustris
and clearly a leading light of the pagan community in Aphrodisias, as his funeral
epigram suggests (Anthol. Gr. VII, 690). I would argue that inscription 59 in Rouechd’s
corpus is a double graffito providing further evidence of the social and religious tension
between the pagan and Christian communities at Aphrodisias: the slogan +νικ$ ή τύχη
τού Μαργαητου+ is scratched by the followers of ?Margaetus (obviously a Christian
leader to judge from the crosses introducing and concluding the inscription); while the
Πυθεανίται, that is the supporters of Pytheas, respond with the slogan νικςΐ ή τύχη τών
Πυθεανιτών. This tension, which is amply illustrated by Zacharias’ VS, is further
evidenced by inscription 64.
 97
Α Ό τι ό διάδοχος Πρόκλου, φησίν, δ Μαρίνος, γένος ήν άπό
τής έν Παλαιστίνη Νέας Πόλεως, πρός δρει κατφκισμένης τφ
Άργαρίζφ καλουμένφ. Εΐτα, βλάσφημων ό δυσσεβής φησιν ό συγ-
γραφεύς- έν φ Διός Ύψ ιστού άγιώτατον Ιερόν, φ καθιέρωτο
Άβραμος δ τΦν πάλαι Εβραίων πρόγονος, ώς αύτός έλεγεν δ 5
Μαρίνος. Σαμαρείτης σδν τό άπ’ άρχής δ Μαρίνος γεγονώς, άπε-
τάξατο μέν πρός την έκείνων δόξαν, άτε είς καινοτομίαν άπό τής
Άβράμου θρησκείας άπορρυεϊσαν, τά δέ Ελλήνων ήγάπησεν.
[Φ 141]
Β Καί διετέλεσεν άχρι θανάτου άμιγής παντός σώματος. Ούδ’
Ιστιν δστις έσυκοφάντησεν αυτόν έπί τοιαύταις διαβολαΐς, ουδέ
τΦν έχθίστων. '
[Φ 274]
C Όμως φιλοπονίρ τε καί άτρύτοις πόνοις έγκείμενος, εΰφυε-
στέρων ήδη πολλών καί τών πρεσβυτέρων κατέχωσε δόξας τφ
έαυτοΰ όνόματι δ Μαρίνος.
[Φ 142)
D Οΰτε έξετάσαι τόν άνθρωπον οΐόν τε ήν άκριβώς, άσθενείςι
σώματος δχλούμενον, οΰτε έρωτάν, εύλαβείμ τοϋ όχλώδους.
[S III600,29 (δχλου ρ)]
Ε Οΰκ εΐα δέ αύτόν έρωτάν δ Ισίδωρος, άσθενείςι σώματος ένο-
χλοΰμενον, εύλαβείςι τοϋ όχλώδους.
ΓΦ 143]
F Πλήν δ Μαρίνος έξ ών τε διελέγετο καί έξ ών έγραψεν (δλίγα
δέ ταϋτα έστί) δήλος ήν ού βαθεΐαν αύλακα τών νοημάτων καρ-
πούμενος, έξ ών τά σοφά βλαστάνει θεάματα τής τών δντων φύ-
σεως.
[Φ 144)
G Ό άριστος ήγεμών Πτολεμαίος τής άστροθεάμονος έπιστήμης.
[Φ 145]

97C cf. S I 408,21.

 97
A Marinus, the successor of Proclus, originated from Neapolis in
Palestine, a city founded near the so-called Mount Argarizos
[Gerizim]. Then the impious author blasphemously says: where
there is a most sacred temple of Zeus the Most High,253 to whom
Abraham the ancestor of the ancient Jews was consecrated, as
Marinus himself used to say. Bom a Samaritan, Marinus renounced
their creed (which is anyway a deviation from Abraham’s religion)
and embraced Hellenism.254
B He remained to his death free from any sexual contact. Nor did
even his worst enemy raise such false accusations against him 255
C Nevertheless through hard work and tireless effort, Marinus
succeeded in burying with his own name the reputations of many
people more gifted and also older than himself.
D It was not possible to examine the man properly as he was
debilitated by bodily infirmity, nor to ask him any questions for fear
of the trouble they would cause him.
E Isidore did not allow [them] to question him as he was
debilitated by bodily infirmity, for fear of the trouble they would
cause him.256
F Judging from his discourses and his writings (which are few
anyway), Marinus clearly did not reap the deep furrow of ideas
from which shoots forth the wise contemplation of the true nature
of beings.
G Ptolemy, the best guide in the science of the observation of the
stars.

253 Baal Shamin.

254 On the history of Samaria and the various types of “Samaritans”, see E.J.
Bickerman, The Jews in the Greek Age, Cambridge Mass. 1988, 8-12. On the
Macedonian colony of Neapolis (Nablus), ibid. 9. The rising of the Samaritans under
Zeno in the mid- 480s resulted in the building of a church of the Virgin on the top of
Mount Gerizim: Procopius Aedif. V.7.1-7 and cf. Stein-Palanque Π, 31-3.
233 Virginity constitutes a major late antique theme of equal importance among
pagans and Christians: cf. 43A (on Hypatia), 56 (on Proclus), 46E (on Theosebius).
236 Here too in 97D and E we have variants of the same original sentence.
Η Τά άρέσκοντα τοΐς έξηγηταΐς άπεγράφετο μάλα άκριβώς, είς
τό τής λήθης γήρας, ώς έφη Πλάτων, υπομνήματα καταλείπουν
έαυτφ καί άποθησαυριζόμενος.
[Φ 146 + S III261,3 (Λήθη)]
I Ό δέ Μαρίνος τφ άτόνψ τής φύσεως ουδέ τοΰ Παρμενίδου
τήν ΰπεραίρουσαν έξήγησιν τοΰ διδασκάλου ήνεγκεν, έπί τά είδη
δέ τήν θεωρίαν κατήγαγεν άπό τών υπερουσίων ένάδων, τάϊς Φίρ-
μου καί Γαληνοΰ τό πλέον έννοίαις έπισπώμενος ή ταΐς άκηρά-
τοις έπιβολάϊς τών μακαρίων άνδρών. s
[Φ 275]
J Ήδη δέ καί πρότερον δι’ έπιστολής έκοινώσατο πρός αυτόν
τήν έαυτοΰ δόξαν των εις Παρμενίδην υποθέσεων τε καί έξηγήσε-
ων· τά τε έπιχειρήματα συντάξας δπεμψεν οΐς έπείσθη μή είναι
τόν διάλογον περί θεών ό Μαρίνος, άλλα περί ειδών. Έ φ’ φ καί
υπομνήματα κατεβάλετο, τούτον έξηγούμενα τόν τρόπον τάς 5
Παρμενίδου διαλεκτικός υποθέσεις. Ό δέ καί πρός ταύτην άντι-
γράφει τήν έπιστολήν, μυρίαις δσαις άποδείξεσι καταβαλόμενος
άληθεστάτην είναι τήν θειοτέραν έξήγησιν τοΰ διαλόγου, ώστε εί
μή εφθη τό βιβλίον έκδεδομένον, τάχα αν καί τούτο διέφθειρεν.
’Ίσως δέ αύτόν διεκώλυσε καί ή δψις τοΰ ενυπνίου- δτι θεάσασθαί ίο
ποτέ έλεγεν ό Πρόκλος ώς υπομνημάτων εις Παρμενίδην αυτού
Μαρίνου έσομένων.
[S III 324, 25 (Μαρίνος 199 pp)]
Κ Καί τήν τοΰ σώματος άπορροήν βλέπων δ Πρόκλος έδεδίει
περί τφ νεανίσκο).
[Φ 147]

98
Α Ό τοίνυν τεθνηκώς, ό εύτυχής οΰτος νΰν, ή -ψυχή ψημι καί τό
τής ψυχής εΐδωλον, παρέστη μοι άναφανδόν έπί τοΰδε τοΰ σκίμ-
ποδος άνακειμένψ.
[Φ 148]

97Η 1 τά - έξηγηταΐς Φ: ό δέ τούς θείους έξηγητάς S. 1 μάλα άκριβώς S: om.

Φ. 2 Πλάτων Φ: 6 Πλάτων S. 2 καταλείπων S: καταλιπών Φ.
H He copied the selections made by the commentators with
extreme meticulousness leaving a store of reminders for himself, as
Plato said,257 with a view to the forgetfulness of old age.
I Because of his dull nature, Marinus could not sustain his
teacher’s exalted interpretation of the Parmenides, but dragged
down the inquiry from the transcendent henads to species,
following for the most part the theories of Firmus258 and Galen259
rather than the undefiled intuition of the blissful men.
J He had already communicated to him [Isidore] in a letter his
own view of the Parmenides' hypotheses and exegeses. He
assembled and sent off the arguments by which he had been
persuaded that the dialogue did not deal with gods but with species.
He even produced a treatise in which he interpreted the dialectic
hypotheses in the Parmenides in this way. To this letter too Isidore
responded, proving by an infinity of arguments that the more divine
interpretation of the dialogue is the most truthful. And indeed, had
the book not yet been published, he [Marinus] would have
immediately destroyed that one as well; probably, though, he was
also prevented from doing so by what was seen in a dream, for
Proclus had said that he once dreamed that Marinus would write a
commentary on the Parmenides.
K Seeing the wasting away of his body, Proclus feared for the
young man.

98
A The dead man, the one who is now blessed - I mean his soul and
the soul’s image- appeared to me very clearly while I lay on this
bed.

257 Phaedr. 276d; cf. Damascius In Phaed. 1.253.

258 Castricius Firmus was a pupil of Plotinus and an aesthete who made a career in
politics (Porphyry V. Plot. 7). Porphyry dedicated his De Abstinentia to him in an
attempt to recall him to a vegetarian diet. P. Kalligas (Πορφυρίου- Περί τού Πλωτίνου
βίου, Athens 1991, 120) plausibly proposes his identification with the usurper of that
name in the reign of Aurelian (cf. Historia Augusta Firmus III. 2-6).
259 The famous doctor of the second century.
Β Άπιστεΐν δέ ού δίκαιον τφ λόγφ βεβαιουμένφ θέςι τε έναργεΐ
τοϋ κορυφαίου σοφοϋ καί άκοή προσφάτφ τοϋ δευτέρου μετ’
έκεϊνον πρός άλήθειαν, καί Ιτι τφ τρίτφ βήματι καί είς τούτην
καταβεβηκότι τήν συγγραφήν ύπό τη φιλαλήθει πομπή τής έμής
αγγελίας. 5
[Φ 149]
C Καί ό Πρόκλος έπεδίδου ταϊς είς αύτόν όρώσαις έλπίσι μή
όιωθεϊσθαι τήν πατρικήν έπίταξιν, μηδέ τό τοΰ Πλάτωνος άξίωμα
άτιμάζειν, μηδέ τήν Ιάμβλιχου κρίσιν μηδέ τήν Πλουτάρχου
κατανωτίζεσθαι, μηδ’ αΰ μεϊζον φρονεΐν τής κοινωφελούς προαι-
ρέσεως. Ά λλ’ δσφ ηύξετο τής διαδοχής τό μέγεθος έν τφ λόγφ, 5
τοσούτφ μάλλον ό ’Ισίδωρος πρός τήν πειθώ συνεστέλλετο,
μεΐζόν γε δν ή καθ’ έαυτόν άρασθαι φορτίον. Καί γάρ εΐ τις μέ,
έφη, πρός ίερωσύνην έκάλει, όμολογών είναι τό χρήμα θεοφιλέ-
στατόν τε καί δσιώτατον, όμως τό έμαυτοΰ δέος ώμολογησα άν
τής άσθενείας· ύποκατακλινόμενός τε καί δυσωπούμενος πρός τό ίο
μέγα τούτο καί πάμμεγα τής ίερωσύνης <χρήμα>, άφίσταμαι κατά
Πίνδαρον, ού μέντοι τού χείρονος, ώς έκεϊνος, άλλα τοϋ κρείττο-
νος κατ’ έμαυτόν.
[Φ 150 + S 1254, 26 (άξίωμα 2825 p) + S 1336,28 (άρασθαι)]
D Οΰπω δέ έπείθετο τφ προστάγματι ό ’Ισίδωρος, άλλά τό τοΰ
’Ιβύκου έπος αύτόν έπήει μή τι παρά θεοΐς άμπλακών τιμάν πρός
άνθρώπων άμείψη.
[S* ΙΠ 390,14 (μή τι)|
Ε Δεδιώς δ ’ δ Πρόκλος περί τή Πλάτωνος χρυσή τφ δντι σειρά,
μή ήμΐν άπολίπη τήν πόλιν τής Άθηνάς,
[Φ 151]
F δεδιώς δέ έπί τφ Μαρίνφ διά τήν τοϋ σώματος άσθένειαν...
[Φ 152]

98C cf. S III 51,31.

Φ solum usque ad 7 φορτίον, S I 254, 26 (S,) solum 1 μή - 3 Ατιμάζειν,
S 1336,28 (S2) solum 5 άλλ’ δσφ usque ad finem.
1 μή - 2 έπίταξιν Sj: om. Φ. 2 άξίωμα άτιμάζειν S,: άτιμάζειν άξίωμα Φ. 5
άλλ’ δσφ Φ: δσφ δέ S2. 6 δ ’Ισίδωρος Φ: οΰτος S2. 11 χρήμα inserui.
98D cf. S 1 146.29, S Π 607.7.
B It is not right to mistrust the report whose truth has been
confirmed by the unmistakable appearance of the leading sage, by
the words recently heard by the man second only to him in
truthfulness, and, in the third place, by the truthful proclamation of
my own message as handed down in this composition.260
C Proclus added to the hopes placed in him [Isidore]261 not to
reject his own paternal injunction nor to bring into disrepute the
reputation of Plato, nor to despise the judgement of Iamblichus or
of Plutarch, nor of course to put his own interest before the
common good. Yet the more the importance of the Succession was
emphasised in Proclus’ words, the less disposed to persuasion
Isidore became, feeling that the burden he had to bear was too great
for him. “If I received an invitation to the priesthood”, he said,
“while admitting that the thing itself is most holy and beloved of
the gods, I would nevertheless express fear of my own inadequacy.
Shrinking away and lowering my eyes before this great -indeed
immense- priestly office, I withdraw from something which is not
unworthy of me, but of which I am unworthy, as Pindar says.”262
D Isidore did not obey the injunction [of Proclus], as the line of
Ibycus came to his mind, that he might receive honour from men at
the cost of sinning against the gods.263
E Proclus fearing that the truly golden chain of Plato might
forsake our city of Athena,
F fearing also on account of Marinus’ physical debility...264

260 This enigmatic passage must relate to the Platonic succession and more
specifically Isidore’s election to it. “The leading sage” must be Proclus appearing in a
dream, while “the man second only to him in truthfulness” may be Marinus, whose
words are then “truthfully proclaimed” by Damascius.
261 Literally: “the hopes which looked towards him”.
262 This is probably a reference to 0 . 1,52.
263 Fr. 29 (Page), quoted by Plato Phaedr. 242cd, and a standard Neoplatonic
citation (cf. Marinus, VP 1).
264 In combination with Marinus VP 10 (τήν δνωΟεν έσομένην ψήφον τής διαδοχής),
this passage makes it clear that Proclus and the other Neoplalonists saw the succession
primarily in spiritual rather than in merely intellectual terms, as a divine gift which
could at any point be revoked by the gods if not tended carefully enough. The poignant
precariousness of the bequest to the city of Athens is hinted at in the anecdote
concerning Proclus’ arrival there as a young student: on reaching the city gate at dusk
 99
Α ’Αληθινός έρως έμφύεται αύτφ φιλοσοφίας, καί πάντα γηγενή
δεσμόν άπορρήξας, έλπίδας τε πάσας τιμών τε καί χρημάτων
καταπατήσας, άφικνεΐται Άθήναζε πρός Πρόκλον.
[Φ 153 + S 1 109, 10 (άληθινός Ιρως)]
Β ’Αλλά γε τοιοϋτος καί ό φιλόσοφος Ιστορείται Ζηνόδοτος,
παιδικά τού Πρόκλου καλείσθαι μόνος άξιωθείς, έφ’ φ δή καί τάς
μάλιστα έπείχεν έλπίδας.
[Φ 154]
C Ό δέ ώργίζετο μεν άθετηθείς, οΐι μήν προσεποιήθη κατά τό πα­
ρόν.
[S* IV 223,4 (προσεποιήθη ρ)]

100
Α Θεαγένης- ’Αθηναίος, άρχων, φιλότιμος άνήρ καί μεγαλοφυής,
Ελλήνων τε ότι μάλιστα χρήμασι λαμπρυνόμενος, οίς εις δέον
έχρήτο τά πολλά πόλεών τε ένίων τά πταίσματα έπανορθούμενος

99Α 1 έμφύεται αύτφ S: έμφυτεύεται Φ. 2 τιμών S: όμού τιμών Φ. 3 Άθήναζε Φ:

om. S. 3 πρός Πρόκλον S: om. Φ.
100Α cf. S 1160,2. S I I 723,15
Φ 283 solum 4 ού - 5 παροιμίαν. Φ 276 solum 22 έθεράπευε - 23 βάναυσον,
Φ 155 solum 24 καί οΰκ - 25 ϊντευξιν, Φ 156 solum 30 τή τε - 32 έπιμελείφ.
A A true love for philosophy is implanted in him and, breaking
every earthly tie and trampling under foot all hopes of honours and
wealth, he comes to Proclus in Athens.*265
B But this is how the philosopher Zenodotus too was described,
the only man thought worthy of the nickname “the darling of
Proclus”, who placed his greatest hopes in him.
C He was angered at his rejection, but did not show it for the
present.266

100
A Theagenes, an Athenian, an archon.267 An ambitious man of
great nobility, eminently distinguished among Greeks for his wealth
which he mainly used as was necessary, redressing the
misfortunes268 of certain cities and helping people in need, giving

he was greeted by the porter with the symbolic words: “Truly, had you not come I
would have shut the gate” (VP 10). This sentence remained firmly embedded in
Proclus’ memory, for he repeated it to his students “in the very words of the little man”
(ibid.)·, indeed, as the critical moment of the succession approached and no heir
apparent was to be found among his pupils, Proclus became restless, especially after he
had been ordered in a dream to prepare his house to receive Athena now that her cult-
statue had been removed from the cella of the Parthenon (VP 30). It is against this
background that Proclus may then have summoned to Athens Asclepiodotus, of whom
he thought very highly (cf. n. 220).
265 Perhaps this is Asclepiodotus, who immediately obeys Proclus’ call, leaving the
splendours of Aphrodisias. Subsequently he seems to be described in particularly
laudatory terms, if we judge from the following passage which implies a comparison
with Zenodotus.
266 This fragment may well refer to the state of mind of one of the unsuccessful
candidates for the Platonic succession, which is why I have placed it here.
267 The Eponymous Archon (whose name was used for dating) was an honorary
office at Athens which was eagerly sought after by members of the local aristocracy.
We know from the Life o f Proclus (VP 36) that in 484/5 the office was filled by
Nicagoras the Younger, a member of the Minucianus philosophical dynasty to which
belonged among others Plutarch of Chaeronea and the Nicagoras who flourished in the
early fourth century (cf. O. Schissel, ‘Die Familie des Minukianos: ein Bcitrag zur
Personenkunde des neuplatonischen Athen’ Klio 21 (1927) 361-73). Cf. below,
pp. 251-3, n. 277.
268 The word πταίσμα denotes a misfortune due to one's own mistake, and in the
present context might refer to the adoption of Christianity by the towns in question.
 και τοίς δεομένοις τών ανθρώπων έπικουρών, ού μιμ χειρί δω-
ρούμενος άλλ’ άμφοιν, κατά τήν παροιμίαν. Ή ν γάρ φιλόδωρός 5
τε καί μεγαλόδωρος εις υπερβολήν. Άναλοϋτο δέ αύτφ πολλά
τών χρημάτων εις τε διδασκάλους καί Ιατρούς καί τήν άλλην τής
πατρίδος εύθημοσύνην. Ταϋτα μέν αξιέπαινα τών Θεαγένους. Ώ ν
δέ θυμοειδής καί ούδαμοΰ καταφρονεΐσθαι άνεχόμενος, άλλά καί
θεραπεύεσθαι σπουδάζων ύπό πάντων, καί ούχ ήκιστα τών φιλο- 10
σοφούντων, ύπερορών δέ καί διαπτύων τούς άλλους καί μάλιστα
τούς έν δυνάμει δοκοΰντας είναι καί προθυμουμένους έν τη 'Ρω­
μαίων πολιτείμ λαμπρύνεσθαι, καί τά νέα άξιώματα προτιμών
τών άρχαίων ηθών τής εύσεβείας, έλαθεν έαυτόν έμπεσών εις τόν
τών πολλών βίον άποσπασθείς τών Ελλήνων καί τών ετι άνω 15
προγόνων Ιλαθε δέ τούς πέλας ούκ έτι φίλους άληθινούς άλλά
κόλακας άπατηλούς κεκτημένος. Ούκουν έτι διέσφζε ρ ν πάλαι
αιδώ πρός φιλοσοφίαν, άλλά τφ μέν λόγφ τούς φιλοσόφους έπε-
ποίητο περί έαυτόν, τφ δέ έργψ τούς θεραπεύοντας.
Αΰτη πρώτη άρχή έγεγόνει τής πρός Μαρίνον ύποψίας. Ό γάρ 20
Μαρίνος έμμένων τή παραδοθείση σεμνότητι τών φιλοσόφων,
έθεράπευε μέν τά είκότα τόν Θεαγένη -έθεράπευε τά δίκαια καί
φιλοσοφίμ πρέποντα, άλλ’ ού τόν θώπα τρόπον καί βάναυσον-
καί ούκ ήν τις άρα πρός αυτόν άλαζών ούδέ σκαιός ούδέ σοβαρός
τήν έντευξιν ούδέ δυσόμιλος ούδέ άλλως ύπέρ τόν Ιδιώτην είναι 25
βουλόμενος, άλλά προσδεχόμενός τε καί προπέμπων έγίνετο
δήλος καί τάς όφειλομένας αύτφ τιμάς άπονέμων, οΐας ώφείλετο
πρωτεύων άνήρ έν τή πόλει, τάχα δέ καί έν τή 'Ρωμαίων πολιτείμ
συμπάση. Καί γάρ ήν τών 'Ρωμαϊκών πατέρων εϊς καί πρώτος τής
περί τά βασίλεια συγκλήτου βουλής, τή τε έξ άρχής εύγενείμ καί 30
τή μεγαλειότητι τών τρόπων καί τή περί τούς λόγους διαφανει
σπουδή τε καί έπιμελείμ.
[S I I 687,3 (Θεαγένης 78 pp) + Φ 283 + Φ 276 + Φ 155 + Φ 156]

22 έθεράπευε - 23 βάναυσον Φ: om. S. 31 τούς S: om. Φ.

 not just with one hand but with both, as the proverb says. He was
generous and even extravagant in his gifts. Much of his money was
spent on teachers, doctors and other matters relating to the welfare
of the town. These are the praiseworthy aspects of Theagenes. On
the other hand he was hot-tempered and could not tolerate the
disdain of others, but he went to all lengths to make sure that
everybody -and not least the philosophers- flattered him. He
spumed and spat upon the others, especially upon those who
appeared powerful and were eager to distinguish themselves in
government posts.269 Yet, as he preferred the new honours to the
traditional piety, he imperceptibly slipped towards the life of the
multitude, severing himself from the Hellenes and from his remoter
ancestors.270 Moreover he did not realise that those around him
were not real friends, but deceitful flatterers, nor did he any longer
preserve his old respect for philosophy, but whereas in theory he
surrounded himself with the philosophers, in reality he surrounded
himself with flatterers.
That was the beginning of his ill-feeling towards Marinus. But
Marinus, true to the traditional dignity of philosophers, paid the due
amount of respect to Theagenes -he honoured justice and all that
befits philosophy rather than the flattering and common way- and
was not arrogant, mde or haughty and unsociable whenever they
met, nor did he want to exceed the status of a private citizen, but in
greeting him and bidding him farewell he was conspicuous in
rendering him all due honours, indeed the honours appropriate to a
man who is pre-eminent in his city and perhaps in the whole of the
Roman empire too.271 For indeed he was one of the Roman
patricians, foremost in the Senate of Constantinople on account of
his aristocratic descent, his majestic manner and his manifest zeal
and diligence in the field of literature.

269 Theagenes is here presented as a champion of the old-fashioned cause,

favouring municipal as opposed to central government; this however seems to be
contradicted by what follows immediately.
270 According to Pamprepius’ encomium on Theagenes, the latter was a direct
descendant of Miltiades (IV, 4).
271 In his VP Marinus calls Theagenes his benefactor (29).
Β Πρός γάρ tol τούς άλλους τους εις βουλήν τήν μεγάλην συγκα-
λουμένους ού μόνον τά άλλα διαφέρων άνθρωπος ήν ό Θεαγένης,
άλλ’ ήδη τις καί φιλόσοφος. "Ωστε καί ό Μαρίνος έσπούδαζεν
αύτω συναύξειν τό μέγεθος τής κατά πάντα περιφανείας.
[Φ 157 + S I I 687,31 (Θεαγένης 78 pp)]

101
Α Ό δέ έν μέν ταϊς έντεύξεσι σκαιός ήν, έν δέ ταϊς ποάξεσι καί
μάλα ές τούναντίον ήπιος καί τό άγχίνουν άποχρώντως έχων.
[*S IV 374, 9 (σκαιός ρ)]
Β Ό δέ έν τή στάσει έγίνετο τής χείρονος συστοιχίας, άποστάς
μέν άπό τών πρώτων μαθημάτων, προσρυείς δέ τοϊς άλλοις.
[*S IV 482,4 (συστοιχία)]
C Διά τήν στάσιν ό Μαρίνος έξ Αθηνών εις ’Επίδαυρον άνεχώ-
ρησε, τάς άχρι τοΰ σώματος έκβαινούσας έπιβουλάς ύφορώμενος.
[Φ 277]

102
Ή τών διαδόχων ουσία ούχ ώς οί πολλοί νομίξουσι Πλάτω­
νος ήν τό άνέκαθεν πένης γάρ ήν δ Πλάτων, καί μόνον τόν έν
Άκαδημίφ έκέκτητο κήπον, δς μέρος έλάχιστον ήν των διαδο­
χικών ό μέν γάρ κήπος έγγύς τι χρυσών τριών νομισμάτων άπε-
δίδου, ή δέ δλη πρόσοδος χιλίων ή καί έτι πλειόνων ύπήρχεν έπί 5
Πρόκλου, άνθρώπων ιερών τε καί φιλολόγων άλλοτε άλλων άπο-
θνησκόντων καί κατά διαθήκας άπολειπόντων τοΐς φιλοσοφοϋ-
σιν άφορμήν τής έπί τφ φιλοσόφφ βίφ σχολής καί γαλήνης.
[Φ 158 + S IV 142, 3 (Πλάτων 1709 ρ)]

100Β Φ solum usque ad 3 φιλόσοφος, S solum 3 ώστε usque ad finem.

102 S solum 2 πένης usque ad finem.
2 πένης γάρ fiv δ Πλάτων Φ: ΙΙλάτων ό φιλόσοφος πένης ήν S. 3 ός - 5 χιλίων
S: ού ή πρόσοδος νομισμάτων τριών, ή δέ τής ούσίας δλης χιλίων Φ. 5 post
πρόσοδος habet S ύστερον: omisi 5 ή καί - 6 Πρόκλου Φ: ή καί πλειόνων όλί-
γον. Ηύξήθη δέ αΰτη κατά τούς νεωτέρους χρόνους S. 6 άνθρώπων - 8 γαλή­
νης S: πολλών τών άποθνησκόντων κτήματα τή σχολή καταλιμπανόντων Φ.
B Theagenes was distinguished among the rest of the senators not
only on account of his other virtues, but also as a philosopher, so
that even Marinus took pains to increase his fame in all things.

101
A In social gatherings he was clumsy, but in his actions he was the
exact opposite: mild and rather astute.
B During the strife, he adhered to the worse faction disowning his
original education and moving towards the others.272
C Because of the strife,273 Marinus departed from Athens to
Epidaurus, as he suspected that plots were being directed against
his very life.

102
The estate of the diadochi does not come directly from Plato, as
is commonly thought. Plato was poor, owning only the garden of
the Academy which formed a tiny part of the diadochica. For the
revenue from the garden amounted to just under three golden coins,
whereas eventually the total income had reached the sum of one
thousand coins or even more by the time of Proclus, as pious lovers
of learning who died at various times bequeathed to the
philosophers the requisite means for the leisure and tranquility of
the philosophical life.

272 An equally possible translation is the following: “In his philosophical position
he belonged to the lesser party, having abandoned his original creed and adhering to the
others”.
273 This is usually taken to refer to Christian persecution, but it seems to me that the
allusion is to the quarrel over the succession which had obviously begun while Proclus
was still alive but senile (VP 20, 26). The Damascius fragments suggest a power
struggle between two tycoons —Asclepiodotus of Aphrodisias and Theagenes of
Athens, who favoured their son-in-law and son respectively (for Hegias as a possible
diadochus succeeding Marinus, 145A). It would appear that Theagenes in particular
was persecuting the frail Marinus who, fearing for his life, had to leave Athens.
Α Ήδη τοίνυν κρουώμεθα πρύμναν έπΐ τόν λόγον δν άπελίπο-
μεν.
|Φ 159]
Β Ό μέν Άσκληπιόδοτος Ικοσμεΐτο πασι τοϊς τοϋ βίου λαμ-
προΐς, δ έπΐ θυγατρί γαμβρός τοϋ μεγάλου Άσκληπιοδότου
{’Ασκληπιόδοτος}, ην {δ’} ήδη έμνήστευεν, οι δέ ούδενί τούτων,
ού προβεβλημένοι τήν γαμικήν προβολήν, άλλα μόνον ήσαν τφ
δντι φιλόσοφοι, έπ’ ακρον έκάτερος ήκων, ό μέν Ιθυβόλου φύσε- 5
ως, <ό δέ> έπιμελοΰς ακρίβειας, {δ ’Ισίδωρος]
[Φ 160]
C Ό δέ Μαρίνος, καί αυτός ό Πρόκλος, ού τή έτέρςι μόνον άλλ’
άμφοΐν τοίν χεροϊν τοΰ ’Ισιδώρου περιείχοντο.
[Φ 278]
D Ό δέ Πρόκλος όρων αύτοΰ τήν προθυμίαν άτρυτον 6ύσαν καί
τήν φιλομάθειαν άκόρεστον, πηγάς λόγων είς τήν έκείνου ψυχήν
άφιείς Ιερών τε καί φιλοσόφων, γαννύμενος αύτφ διετέλει πλα­
τείαν ύπέχοντι καί άριήκοον τήν τής διανοίας υποδοχήν.
[Φ 279]
Ε Εΐξε δεδιώς τήν έκατέρου έπιτίμησιν καί άμα λύπην άγανα-
κτοΰσαν.
[Φ 280]

103Β vide η. 274 ad ρ. 249.

2 6 έπΐ - 3 έμνήστευεν inter φύσεως et έπιμελοΰς praebet Φ: transposui et
Άσκληπιόδοτος (3) seclusi. 3 δ’ seclusi. 4 ού cum Zintzen scripsi: ol Φ. 6 δ δέ
inserui. 6 ό ’Ισίδωρος cum Zintzen seclusi.
A Let us though turn the vessel back to the discourse that we have
abandoned.
B Asclepiodotus -the son-in-law of the old Asclepiodotus, whose
daughter he was already wooing- was equipped with all the things
which give glamour to this life, and they with nothing (they who
could not use marriage as a means of promotion), except that they
were true philosophers, both of them having reached a peak of
excellence, (Isidore) in intuitive sagacity, (Marinus) in diligent
accuracy.274
C Marinus and also Proclus himself clung to Isidore not just with
one but with both hands.
D Seeing that his zeal was indefatigable and his love of learning
insatiable, Proclus poured into his soul springs of holy and
philosophical discourses and rejoiced at seeing him offer a mind
that was fully open and receptive.
E He yielded, fearing the censure of both of them and also their
indignant sorrow.

274 This is a manifestly troubled text which in the codices runs as follows: ό μέν
Άσκληπιόδοτος έκοσμεΐτο πασι τοΐς τοϋ βίου λαμπροίς, οΐ δέ οΰδενϊ τούτων, οΐ
προβεβλημένοι τήν γαμικήν προβολήν, άλλά μόνον ήσαν τφ δντι φιλόσοφοι, έπ’ άκρον
έκάτερος ήκων, ό μέν Ιθυβόλου φύσεως, ό έπΐ θυγατρί γαμβρός τοΰ μεγάλου
Άσκληπιοδότου Άσκληπιόδοτος, δν δ’ ήδη έμνήστευεν, έπιμελοϋς άκριβείας, ό
’Ισίδωρος. Zintzen’s proposed reconstruction (pp. 212-214), also adopted by Henry in
his edition of the Bibliotheca, turns the plurals into singulars, thus contrasting
Asclepiodotus with Isidore only: δ μέν Άσκληπιόδοτος έκοσμεϊτο πάσι τοΐς τοϋ βίου
λαμπροίς, ό δέ <Ίσίδωρος> οΰδενϊ τούτων, ού προβεβλημένος τήν γαμικήν προβολήν,
άλλά μόνον ήν τφ δντι φιλόσοφος- έπ’ άκρον έκάτερος ήκων, δ μέν Ιθυβόλου φύσεως, ό
<δ’> έπΐ θυγατρί γαμβρός τοΰ μεγάλου Άσκληπιοδότου Άσκληπιόδοτος, ήν {δ’ 1 ήδη
έμνήστευεν, έπιμελοϋς άκριβείας (ό Ισίδωρος). In my reconstruction of the passage I
retain the plural, which to my mind contrasts Isidore and possibly Marinus (see 103C)
on the one hand as being “true philosophers” with Asclepiodotus on the other. The
words δ έπΐ θυγατρί... έμνήστευεν seem to be a scholium which became incorporated in
the text.
Α Έσεισεν ύπερφυή τινά σεισμόν καί ού φύσεως εκγονον.
[Φ 281]
Β Ή ν άρα τις ’Αττική γυνή, πολλάς είδυΐα μηχανάς είς πειθώ,
ώς διέδειξεν.
[Φ 282]
C Δεΐται τοϋ θεοϋ συμβουλήν άτεχνώς ίεράν παρασχεϊν αυτή και
διδάξαι περί τών πρακτέων.
[*S 1402,18 (άτεχνώς ρ)]

105
Α Άρχιάδας- οδτος οίος ήν τήν ψυχήν άπεδείκνυτο· πλείστων
γάρ αύτώ χρημάτων διηρπασμένων, έπειδή ήσθετο Θεαγένη ετι
παιδίον δντα λυποΰμενον έπί τοις άπολωλόσι καί πεπορθημέ-
νοις, ώ Θεάγενες, έφη, θαρρέϊν ήδη σε χρή καί τοΐς θεοίς δμολο-
γεΐν σωτηρίους χάριτας ύπέρ τών σωμάτων, υπέρ δέ τών χρημά- 5
των ουκ άθυμητέον. Εί γάρ Άθηνά ή Πολιάς έκέλευσεν αίιτά
άναλώσαι Παναθηναίοις, πόσου άν έπριάμεθα τήν δαπάνην ταύ-
την; άλλά τόν παρόντα άγώνα καί Παναθηναίων ήγείσθαι δει καί
παντός έτέρου λαμπρότερόν τε καί εύσεβέστερον.
[S* 1375,3 (Άρχιάδας)]
 104
A He/ She caused a supernatural earthquake, one that was not the
work of nature.275
B She was an Athenian woman much skilled in the art of
persuasion as she subsequently proved.276
C She prays to the god to give her truly holy counsel, and advise
her what to do.

105
A Archiadas. He displayed the nature of his soul: at a time when
most of his property had been looted, realising that Theagenes
-then a child- was sad at what had been lost and plundered, he said:
“Come, Theagenes, cheer up and give thanks to the gods for having
saved our lives, and do not be depressed about the money; if
Athena, the patron of our city, had ordered us to spend this money
on the Panathenaic festival we would have paid any price to acquire
the honour of incurring this expenditure. We should consider the
present cause to be more glorious and more holy than the
Panathenaea or any other contest”.277

275 This may be a reference to Proclus’ supernatural activities as described by

Marinus VP 28. Equally, it may be a metaphorical way of describing Proclus’ anger at
Isidore’s refusal to assume the diadoche, or even a reference to the “Athenian woman”
mentioned in the following sentence.
276 Perhaps this is Asclepigeneia (the Elder), daughter of Plutarch of Athens and
mother of Archiadas, who initiated Proclus into the art of theurgy; cf. VP 28.
277 Archiadas was the grandson of Plutarch and Proclus’ closest friend, at once
proficient in philosophy and a gifted politician (Marinus VP 14, 17). The occasion
described here may well be the plundering of Athens by Attila in 447, as Asmus
suspected, though it is more likely that the reference is to the damage caused by the
Vandals in 467: cf. Stein-Palanque I, 359; Frantz, 78-79. Subsequently Theagenes
married Archiadas’ only child Asclepigeneia the Younger, whom Proclus had saved
from an incurable disease (Marinus VP 29), and who was naturally named after her
paternal grandmother.
Archiadas came from a family in which piety and public munificence were
traditional, and, having no sons himself, he apparently wished to mould in accordance
with these ideals the man whom he may have already chosen as his future son-in-law.
 Β Τοιοΰτος ήν τό τε σώμα καί την ψυχήν, ώστε καταπληγνύναι
τη συννοία τούς έντυγχάνοντας, ήνίκα καιρός ήν σεμνότητος καί
έμβριθεστέρων ηθών τε καί λόγων χαρίεις δ’ αΰ προς τούς χαρί-
εντας.
[Φ 284]
C Πηγή άναδίδωσιν ύδωρ Ιερόν τε καί εΰποτον ώστε ποιητικός
άνήρ Ιφη αν τό στόμα αύτοΰ καί τό άλλο πρόσωπον οίκητήριον
είναι αύτών τών Χαρίτων.
[Φ 161 + Φ 162|
D Εΐ ποτέ γάρ καί αύτοί τίνος ήπορήθησαν, ήεσαν αύτίκα παρ’
αύτόν φίλοι παρά φίλον.
[Φ 163]

'1

10SC Φ 161 solum usque ad 1 εΰποτον, Φ 162 solum 1 ώστε usque ad finem.
B Such was he in body and soul, able to astound those around him
by his serious thinking when the occasion demanded grave and
weighty behaviour and words; but towards those who displayed
charm he could be charming as well.
C A spring giving water, which was holy and good to drink, so
that a poet would have said of his mouth and of his whole face that
it was the abode of the Graces themselves.
D If they ever lacked in anything, they immediately went to him as
friends go to a friend.

Asclepigeneia and Theagenes produced at least one son, who was named Hegias very
probably to honour the memory of a great-grandfather since the previous generation,
where it would have been normal to find the name, had produced no male children (cf.
Marinus’ emphatic assertion in VP 29).
A dedicatory inscription from the late fourth or early fifth century (I.G. Π/ΙΙΙ2 3692;
Sironen no. 11, pp. 26-7) reads as follows:
ιόν λαμπρότατον
Ήγείαν τόν Τιμοκράτσυς
δρξαντα τήν έπώνυμον
δρχήν φιλοτειμότατα
και πανηγυριαρχήσαντα
περιφανέστατα ή πόλις
σύνπασα τόν έαυτής
εύεργέτην τειμώσα
άνέστησεν.
A combination of the name Hegias and the reference to the panegyris (which I take
to be the Panathenaea in view of the inscription’s dedication by the city of Athens to its
eponymous archon) leads me to propose the following identification: the clarissimus
Hegias (unrecorded by PLRE) could well be the husband of Asclepigeneia the Elder
who is missing from our sources (cf. PLRE II, Stemma 35). It may also be of some
interest to the present argument that the statue was re-dedicated to the sophist Plutarch
(cf. above, p. 173, n. 147).
 106
Α Ό Ισίδωρος πολύ διαφέρων ήν τής Ύπατίας, ού μόνον οΐα
γυναικός άνήρ, αλλά καί οΐα γεωμετρικής τφ δντι φιλόσοφος.
[Φ 164]
Β Τούτων δέ ή μνήμη έτι σωζομένη τοΐς Άλεξανδρεϋσι συνέ-
στελλεν είς μικρόν κομιδή τήν περί τόν Ισίδωρον τών Άλεξαν-
δρέων τιμήν τε καί σπουδήν- δτε καί τοιούτου έπικρεμαμένου δέ­
ους, δμως έκαστοι εσπευδον αύτφ συνεΐναι θαμά καί τών άπό τοΰ
σωφρονοΰντος στόματος Ιόντων άκροάσθαι λόγων- έπεί καί δσοι 5
φητορικών προΐσταντο διατριβών ή ποιητικών, ήσπάζοντο τήν
τοΰ φιλοσόφου συχνήν δμιλίαν. Ei γάρ καί άνάγωγος ήν τά
τοιαΰτα, άλλα τή γε άλλη φιλοσοφώ άκριβείμ προσεχθεί τι καί
έκείνοις έπιμελέστερον εις τά σφέτερα αυτών τεχνύδρια. Τά τε
γάρ άλλα διηκρίβωτο καί τών έπιδεικνυμένων λόγων τε καί ποιη­ 10
μάτων κρίσιν έποιείτο διαφέρουσαν τών άλλων. Διό καί έν τοΐς
έπί τινι λογική άκροάσει θεάτροις όλίγα μέν έπήνει τούς έπιδει-
κνυμένους, καί πάνυ ήσυχάζοντι τφ έπαίνφ- καιρίως δέ δμως καί
κατά λόγον. Όθεν άπαν τό θέατρον, ώς ειπεΐν, τή έκείνου κρίσει
γνώμονι διεχρήτο τών άμεινον ή χείρον λεγόντων. 15
Τών δ’ έπ’ έμοΰ γεγονότων κριτικούς άνδρας έπίσταμαι τρεις
τά λεγόμενα κρίνειν δυναμένους έμμετρό τε άνευ τε μέτρου -τοΰ
γάρ αύτοΰ ή μέν κρίσις όμολογεΐται ούσα ποιημάτων καί συγ­
γραμμάτων- έγώ δέ καί δημιουργόν ήγοϋμαι τόν αύτόν έκατέρων,
μόνον εί γυμνάσιά πρός έκάτερον ίση γένοιτο καί διά προθυμίας 20
τής ίσης. Έ να δέ τούτων οΰ φημι τόν Ισίδωρον, άλλά καί πολλφ
έλαττοϋσθαι τών τριών. ΟΙ δέ κριταί ’Αγάπιος, Σεβηριανός, Νό­
μος- ήμέτερος δέ ήλικιώτης δ Νόμος.
[S* IV 645, 19 (Ύπατία pp)]

106Β 17 εμμετρά τε Gaisford: om. S.

 V II: Alexandria in the 480s

106
A Isidore and Hypatia were very different, not only as man differs
from woman, but as a true philosopher differs from a
mathematician.
B The memory of these events, which was still vivid among the
Alexandrians, considerably reduced the respect and devotion that
they showed to Isidore. Yet, despite the great fear hanging over
their heads, they often all sought his company in order to listen to
the discourses which flowed from that wise mouth. Those who
directed schools of rhetoric and of poetry also welcomed frequent
intercourse with the philosopher, for despite his lack of expertise in
their subjects he gave them through his philosophical precision a
sense of diligence towards their own little disciplines. For he
discussed everything in minute detail and gave a critique of the
speeches and poems that they produced, in a manner superior to
others. In rhetorical shows at the theatre he praised the performers
sparingly and in quiet tones, but pertinently and sensibly; and
virtually the whole theatre used his judgement as a yardstick by
which to measure the merits or the faults of the orators.
Among my contemporaries I know three critics able to judge the
products of poetic and prose discourse -for indeed it is
acknowledged that judgement of poetry and prose is the province of
the same person. Moreover I think that the same person can be a
creator in both fields, provided he undergoes the same amount of
training and is equally enthusiastic in both genres. Now I do not
count Isidore among these three, but consider him very much their
inferior. The judges are Agapius, Severianus, Nomus; Nomus is the
same age as me.
 ’Αγάπιος· Αθηναίος φιλόσοφος, μετά Πρόκλον άποιχόμενον,
ύπό Μαρίνιρ. Ό ς έθαυμάζετο έπΐ φιλομαθείς καί άποριών προ­
βολή δυσεπιβόλων. Οΰτος fiv ’Αλεξανδρεΰς μέν τό γένος- έκ παί-
δων δέ λόγοις έντραφείς έλευθερίοις καί Ιατρικών μαθημάτων
έξηγητής γεγονώς άνελθών εις τό Βυζάντιον διατριβήν τε συνεπή- 5
ξατο μάλα διαπρεπή, φύσεώς τε μεγέθει καί δεξιότητι τύχης χρη-
σάμενος, ένδοξός τε έπΐ τή τέχνη γέγονε καί χρήματα μεγάλα συνεί-
λοχεν.
[S* 120, 16 (’Αγάπιος 157) + S* 120, 19 (’Αγάπιος 158)]

107 S 120,16 usque ad 3 δυσεπιβόλων, S I 20,19. 3 οΰτος usque ad finem.

 Agapius,278 a philosopher at Athens who studied under Marinus
after Proclus’ death and was admired for his love of learning and
for propounding difficult questions. He was of Alexandrian stock.
Having been trained since childhood in the liberal arts and become
an exponent of the science of medicine, he went to Constantinople
where he founded a very distinguished school; taking advantage of
his great natural talents and of a dexterous fortune, he became
famous in his art and amassed a great amount of money.

278 The distinction between two Agapii made by the Suda (12 0 ,16ff., 19ff.) on the
grounds of the words “Athenian” and “Alexandrian”, was perpetuated by PURE II
(‘Agapius 2’ and ‘3’). It is clear nevertheless that the Alexandrian and the Athenian
Agapius are one and the same person, and the fragments of Damascius help us to
reconstruct his identity as follows: bom in Alexandria c. 460, Agapius had a shrewd and
critical mind (106B ad fin., 107), which allowed him to master the diverse disciplines of
letters, medicine and philosophy (127A). After completing the fiist cycle of his studies
in Alexandria, he came to Athens and was admitted into Proclus’ circle at a time when
the master could no longer teach, that is after 480 (’Αγάπιος fjv κατ’ (κείνον τόν χρόνον,
περί of Χριστόδωρος ό ποιητής έν τω περί των άκροατών τού μεγάλου Πρόκλου
μονοβίβλψ φησίν ούτως- ’Αγάπιος πύματος μέν, άτάρ πρώτιστος άπάντων: John Lydus
De mag. III.26), thus becoming the very last of Proclus’ pupils (πύματος). After
Proclus’ death he studied with Marinus (107), and was recognised as a genuine
Athenian philosopher. On his return to Alexandria some time in the late 480s he seems
to have attached himself to the already famous doctor Gessius. Caught in the Great
Persecution and arrested by Zeno’s special envoy (126C), he decided after his release to
leave Alexandria and go to Constantinople where he set up a philosophical school in
which, years later, John Lydus studied Aristotle under him (De mag. ΙΠ.26).
 Σεβηριανός· άπό Δαμασκού των εις τά πρώτα γένους άνηκόν-
των, Αυξεντίου τού Καλλινίκου υιός, είς 'Ρωμαίους άναγόμενος
προγόνους, έπωκηκότας πατρίδα τήν ’Αλεξάνδρειαν, παιδείας τε
τυχών πρός τη όξύτητι της φύσεως, ποιητικής τε καί φητορικής,
ετι δέ καί τής περί νόμους τούς "Ρωμαίων διατριβούσης, διαφέ- 5
ρων έδοξεν είναι τών ήλικιωτών. Στερρός δέ τό ήθος ών καί άπερ
άν διανοηθείη ταϋτα πράττειν έσπουδακώς, έφθανε τφ πρακτικφ
τό βουλευτικόν. Καί διά τούτο δ βίος αϊτφ πολλαχή διεσφάλη.
Προύθυμήθη μέν γάρ έξ άρχής έπί φιλοσοφίαν τραπήναι καί
τφ Πρόκλψ φέρων έαυτόν έπιδούναι· ήκμαζε δέ τότε καί ήνθει δ ίο
Πρόκλος Αθήνησιν. Έγένετο δέ αύτφ δ πατήρ έμποδών- ήβούλε-
το γάρ αϊτόν δίκας λέγειν καί χρηματίζεσθαι τόν έπιμίσθιον
τούτον χρηματισμόν. Ό μέν δή πατήρ αύτφ ώς τάχιστα τελευτά
τόν βίον, αυτός δέ έπί τάς ’Αθήνας δρμήσας δνειρον έθεάσατο
τοιόνδε· έδόκει έπί ράχει τίνος δρους έπικαθήσθαι ώσπερ όχήματι is
καί οΐον έλαύνειν τό δρος. Έξήγε δέ αϊτόν άρα ή ειμαρμένη καί
τό χρεών, έτι δέ τό αϊθαίρετον, δ τι έστί κακόν, είς βίον άλλον,
ϊψηλόν μέν είναι δοκούντα καί μεγαλοφυή, τραχϊν δέ τινα καί
άνήνυτον. Ό καί αϊτός έπέκρινε καί ή πείρα τής έκβάσεως άποδέ-

108 cf. S Π 392,24, S 1 155, 3, S Π 469,13.

Φ 165 solum 6 στερρός - 8 διεσφάλη, Φ 285 solum 20 άντί - 27 υπερέχοντας.
6 ών S: δ Σεβηριανός ών Φ.
 Severianus, from Damascus, coming from one of the best
families, the son of Auxentius son of Callinicus,279 descended from
Roman ancestors who had settled as colonists in Alexandria. In
addition to his natural gift of sharp intelligence, he received an
education in poetry and rhetoric as well as in Roman law and thus
appeared to be superior to his contemporaries. Being both stubborn
and quick to implement whatever sprang to his mind, he rushed into
action before taking time to think, with the result that his life was a
failure in many ways.
From the very beginning he wished to devote himself to
philosophy and entrust himself to Proclus; indeed this was the time
when Proclus flourished and blossomed in Athens. But his father
opposed him as he wanted him to become a jurist and make money
from hiring himself out to the administration of justice.280 Yet the
father died very soon afterwards and, just as he was setting out for
Athens, he himself had the following dream: he seemed to be seated
on the ridge of a mountain as if he was on a chariot, driving the
mountain. And indeed fate, necessity and also his own free choice
-which [in his case] was a bad thing-281 led him to another kind of
life which had the appearance of being as elevated and noble as in
reality it was harsh and pointless. He himself was responsible for
this and it was confirmed by the outcome of the events. Instead of

279 Damascius here speaks as a local having family connections with Severianus,
who taught both him and his brother Julian, presumably before they went to Alexandria
to pursue higher studies in rhetoric. It is interesting to note that, despite their Greco-
Roman names and pedigree, Severianus and his ancestors are identified in the oriental
way, through a chain of patronymics, a fact which may tell us more about Damascius
and his origins than about Severianus.
280 This is an untranslatable pun, χρηματισμός meaning both the administration of
justice and money-making.
281 The whole passage seems to be a commentary on and an illustration of Plato
Resp. 617de.
δειχεν. ’Αντί γάρ φιλοσοφίας καί άπραγμοσύνης εύδαίμονος είς 20
τήν πολιτείαν Εαυτόν καί είς άρχάς Εξέωσε φέρων. Φύσει δε ών
φιλόνεικος καί άήττητος Εφ’ δ τι άν όρμήσειε, καί φιλόδοξος ώς
ούκ οίδ’ εΐ τις Ετερος, άλλ’ Επί τιμίοις Εργοις τε καί λόγοις καί
τήν άρετήν είς τό Εξω προάγουσι τής ψυχής, περί μεν χρηματι-
σμόν ού διέτριβεν ουδέ όπωστιοϋν ούδέ πρός άδικίαν αύτόθεν 25
καί πλεονεξίαν έπίφορος fjv, προσκρουστικός δέ καί άμιλλητικός
άεί πρός τούς ύπερέχοντας καί ούδενί τών μειζόνων άρχόντων
άξιων παρά τά νομιζόμενα δίκαια είναι έξίστασθαι. Δικάζων δέ
πικρότατος ήν. Καί δή ποτέ Εξαγόμενος ύπό θυμοϋ καί τό άκατα-
φρόνητος είναι σπουδάζων, φόνους τε είργάσατό τινας ούκ 30
ευαγείς ούδέ εύτυχεις καί ές τούτους άνέφερε τήν αιτίαν τής ύστε­
ρον έπιγενομένης αύτφ τού βίου κακοπραγίας.
’Επεί καί Άρδαβουρίφ προσκρούσας, δντι μέν υίέϊ τοΰ πάνυ
Άσπερος, βαρβάρου μέν άνθρώπου, τά μέγιστα δέ παρά βασιλεΐ
δυναμένου, στρατηγοϋντι δέ τών έφων ταγμάτων, πολλά μέν 35
έκείνφ παρέσχετο πράγματα καί πατρί τφ έκείνου· πλείω δέ καί
άτοπώτερα πεπονθώς καί ύβρισθείς ούθέν άπώνατο τής πολλής
ταύτης ένστάσεως. Ίερώτατος δέ εις υπερβολήν καί Έλλην, καί
<...> πολλών μέν άπειλών καί φόβων ούκ ένέδωκεν ό άλιτήριος.
Έμοί δέ καί Εξηγείτο λόγους Ίσοκρατείους τούς μείζους καί 40
πολιτικωτέρους, ού τόν τεχνικόν τε καί σοφιστικόν, άλλά τόν
Εμφρονα καί φιλόσοφον τρόπον δτε καί είδον άνθρωπον εΰρουν

21 τήν Sr om. Φ. 23 et τις S: om. Φ. 23 άλλ’ S: om. Φ. 24 περί —26 ήν S:

om. Φ. 26 δέ S: άεί Φ. 27 άεί S: om. Φ. 27 υπερέχοντας S: υπερέχοντας frv
Φ. 29καΙδή8 ν.1.: καΙεΙ δή S. 39 lacunam statuit Bemhardy. 42 εΐρουν S
v.L: εΰρρουν S.
 pursuing philosophy and a life of leisurely bliss,282 he threw
himself into politics and administration.283 Being of a litigious
nature, invincible in whatever he undertook and ambitious to an
unparalleled degree, yet also bringing to light through honest deeds
and words the virtue hidden in his soul, he did not spend any time
making money for himself nor did his position of power make him
liable to injustice and greed; at the same time he was always
contentious and combative with his superiors, not tolerating any of
the higher magistrates to exceed the accepted bounds of justice.284
He was a very harsh judge. Sometimes indeed, incited by anger and
by his concern not to lose face, he was responsible for deaths which
brought with them pollution and misfortune. And it is to these that
he imputed the cause of his subsequent tribulations in life.
Indeed he also came into conflict with Ardabur, who was the
son of the famous Aspar, a barbarian with great influence on the
emperor. Ardabur was the commander of the Eastern Army285 and
Severianus created many problems both for him and for his father.
Suffering in return greater and even more extraordinary misfortunes
and disgraces, he gained nothing from all this confrontation. Being
excessively pious and a Hellene, the wretched creature did not give
in despite the presence of so many threats and menaces.
He took me through the most important and political of
Isocrates’ speeches, not in the technical manner of a sophist, but
with the wisdom of a philosopher. And then I recognised him to be

282 The ideal of άπραγμοσΰνη ευδαίμων occurs significantly enough also in

Zosimus who obviously identifies with the έπιεικεΐς καί άπράγμονες, and presents them
as being persecuted by the powers that be (1.5.4; 1.13.3).
283 This again seems to be inspired by the allegory of the cave: those who have
learned the μέγιστον μάθημα do not want to rule; they will only do so out of an extreme
sense of duty, when circumstances do not allow otherwise (520d: ήκιστα πρόθυμοι);.cf.
Marinus VP 14, where this is explicitly stated in the case of Proclus who asked
Archiadas to occupy himself with civic politics, έπειδή πράττειν αυτός έκωλύετο τά
πολιτικά, διά τό καί περί μείζονα ήσχολήσθαι.
284 Laws and legal decisions were notoriously ignored in the Roman empire. See
below, p. 323, n. 387.
285 Ardabur was MUM per Orientem between 453 and 466; he was murdered along
with his father by Leo in 471.
 τε άμα καί άμφιλαφή την διάνοιαν προς τάς πολιτικάς έξηγήσεις,
ετι δέ κριτήν αριστον δντα τών λεγομένων. Τόν δέ έμοΰ νεώτερον
άδελφόν Ίουλιανόν οΰτω παρώξυνεν είς φιλολογίαν, ώστε καί 45
έκμαθόντος ήνείχετο τά τε ποιητικά τών τε φητόρων τούς εύδοκι-
μοϋντας- μισθόν τε έδίδου τής προθυμίας φιλοτιμίαν προσήκου-
σαν έταίριρ· έστίασιν. Τά μέν οΰν τών άλλων ποιητών άπεδέχετο
μετρίως, τόν δέ Καλλίμαχον είς χεϊρας λαβών, ούκ έστιν δ τι ού
κατέσκωπτε τόν Λίβυν ποιητήν άνιώμενος δέ έπί μάλλον ήδη 50
πολλαχοϋ καί τφ βιβλίψ προσέπτυε.
Τούτφ κατεπηγγείλατο Ζήνων βασιλεύς, εί γένοιτο τών κρα-
τούντων, τήν μετά βασιλέα μεγίστην άρχήν. Ά λλ’ ούδέ ώς έπει-
θεν, ούδέ έμέλλησε πείσειν. Καί ήμίν ύπανέγνω τήν έπαγγελλομέ-
νην έπιστολήν καί μή πείθουσαν. 55
Καί Άρκαδίφ δέ τφ άπό Λαρίσσης δι’ έπιστολής έπετίμησε.
Καί γάρ έπιστέλλειν δεινός ήν ό Σεβηριανός καί έμφρορν, ώς εστι
μαθεϊν έντυχόντα ταϊς τού άνδρός έπιστολαΐς.
[S IV 332, 27 (Σεβηριανός) + Φ 165 + Φ 285]

109
Νόμος καί Ίαννουάριος· έπιεικείμ καί δικαιοσύνη τών πο­
λιτών ύπερφέροντες, οίμαι <δέ> καί τών άλλων σχεδόν άπάντων
άνθρώπων τών γε νΰν ζώντων καί έν πράγμασι πολιτικοϊς άνα-
στρεφομένων, έπηνοϋντο καί ήγαπώντο πρός τε άστών καί ξένων
τη τε γάρ πατρίδι χρησιμώτατοι γεγόνασιν καί δεξιώτατοι πρός 5
τούς ξένους. Έλόμενοι τόν ήσύχιον καί άπράγμονα βίον έλατ-
τοϋσθαι μάλλον ήροΰντο τά οικεία ή πλέον τι έχειν άπό τών
άλλοτρίων κοινά μέν οΰν ταϋτα αύτοϊς· ίδίςχ. δέ δ μέν Νόμος
εύφυέστερος ήν καί φιλομαθέστερος έν λόγοις τοίς τε φιλοσοφίας
άπογεύεσθαι βουλομένοις καί δσοι προπαιδεύουσι τούς νέους. 10

109 2 δέ add. Kassel.

 a man both eloquent and with a mind well endowed for political
analysis who was also an excellent judge of what people said. As
for my younger brother, Julian, he kindled in him such a love of
literature that he was prepared to learn by heart the poets and the
most popular of the orators. The reward he offered him for his zeal
was a type of munificence fit for a pupil -dinner.286 He had a
moderate enthusiasm for other poets, but when he took Callimachus
into his hands he could not stop displaying his uttermost contempt
for the Libyan poet; and, as his irritation grew, he spat at the book
in many places.
The emperor Zeno promised him the highest office after
kingship on condition that he converted to the prevailing [religious]
mode, but even so he did not persuade him, nor was he destined
ever to do so. And indeed he read to us line by line the letter which
made the offer but nevertheless did not persuade him.
Indeed he criticised Arcadius of Larissa287 in a letter -for
Severianus was a masterly and sagacious letter writer, as one can
see from his letters.

109
Nomus and Ianuarius, surpassing in fairness and justice their
compatriots and, I believe, nearly all men now living who are
involved in politics. They received the praise and affection of
citizens and foreigners alike, for they provided great service to their
country and kindness to foreigners. Having chosen a quiet life away
from public duties, they preferred to see their own resources
diminish rather than acquire anything at someone else’s expense.
These were the characteristics they had in common.288 Nomus in
particular was more intelligent and with a greater inclination
towards both philosophical discourse and the studies which serve as

286 For dinner as the standard reward to a promising pupil, cf. the explicit comment
of Marinus concerning Proclus and his mathematics teacher Hero of Alexandria: VP 9.
287 Probably the PPO in 486.
288 Possibly this is a pun on the word κοινή, which means both common property
and characteristic.
 Ή ν δέ καί κριτικώτατος των καθ’ ημάς έλλογίμων άνδρών, ποιη­
μάτων τε πάντων καί συγγραμμάτων τής λογογραφικής άρετής
καί κακίας· ώς γοϋν φάναι τό δλον, ούτε Σεβηριανόν ούτε ’Αγά­
πιον τόν φιλόσοφον είποιμι &ν γενέσθαι τοιούσδε περί λόγων
κρίσιν. Ό δέ Ίαννουάριος έμπειροπράγμων ήν καί φρόνιμος έν 15
τοΐς πολιτικοΐς έπί πλέον ή ό άδελφός αύτοϋ Νόμος, έτι δέ σω-
φρονέστερος καί τά άλλα μάλλον τεταγμένος.
[S* III476, 32 (Νόμος καί Ίαννουάριος)]

110
Α Ού γάρ έπιδιδόναι ρμδίως, ουδέ ήν αΰξεσθαι κατά πήχυν,
ώσπερ Θεόδωρος ό Άσιναϊος ηΰξήθη υπό τφ Πορφυρίφ.
[Φ 166]
Β Ό δέ φιλόσοφος άνεμπόδιστος εις έπίδοσιν διετέλει καί έπεδί-
δου κατά πήχυν, ώς φάναι άτεχνώς, άχρι τοΰ πανικόΰ δυστυχή­
ματος.
[S* III54, 20 (κατά πήχυν έπεδίδου)]
C Εαυτόν τι παρέχων υπόδειγμα, ώσπερ οΐ πλαστικώτεροι τών
δημιουργών, τόν χαλκόν άμορφον παραλαβόντες καί άειδέστε-
ρον, εις μορφήν έντείνουσι καί κατασχηματίζουσι.
[*S II 42,15 (δημιουργός ρ)]

111
Τούτον έποιήσατο φίλον δ Ισίδωρος, τόν ΰπερβαλόντα πάν-
τας άνθρώπους έπί εύσεβείμ τε καί δλη βίου φιλοσοφίμ, πλήν
αυτού τού ’Ισιδώρου. Τοσοΰτον δέ τφ άνδρί περιήν άληθούς τρό­
που τε καί λόγου, τοΰ τε έν παροιμίμ λέγεσθαι είωθότος, έργψ δέ
βεβαιωθέντος ύπ’ έκείνου, τού λάθε βιώσας, ώστε ούδένα τών τό- 5
τε ζώντων άνθρώπων ούτε τών νεωτέρων ούτε τών πρεσβυτέρων
έλπίσαιμι &ν είδέναι οΐον λέγω- ούδέ έγνω τις άλλος, οΐος ήν δ

HOB cf. S I I 354,27.

Ill cf. S III 228,4.
Φ solum 31 ώστε - 33 παντός.
I ΰπερβαλόντα Latte: λαβόντα S. 2 βίου φιλοσοφία S ν.1.: φιλοσοφίρ βίου S.
 preparatory training for the young.289 Moreover among our
renowned contemporaries he was the best critic of the stylistic
virtues and vices of all genres of poetry and prose. To sum up I
would say that neither Severianus nor the philosopher Agapius
were as gifted literary critics as he. As for Ianuarius, he was better
versed in affairs and a wiser politician than his brother Nomus and
in general a more prudent and systematic man.

110
A For it was not possible290 to make easy progress nor to advance
inch by inch,291 as Theodore of Asine advanced under Porphyry.
B The philosopher was unhindered in his progress, progressing
inch by inch, to speak plainly, until the Panic misfortune 292
C Offering himself as an example, like gifted sculptors who,
receiving a shapeless lump of bronze, work it into shape and endow
it with form.293

I ll
Isidore befriended this man, who in piety and his overall
philosophy of life surpassed all others except Isidore himself. He
was so full of the truth in his behaviour and speech that he provided
a living example of the well-known adage “Keep your light under a
bushel”,294 so that I doubt if any of his younger or older
contemporaries would have known his true nature. Nor did anyone

289 According to the curriculum, these are the rhetorical studies which formed the
first cycle of higher education: Marrou, 293-307.
290 Presumably for his pupils.
291 A standard expression used in a similar context by Marinus (VP 26) to describe
the progress made by Hegias under Proclus. Cf. also Eunapius VS VII.3.6 and
especially Zosimus IV.41.1.
292 In all probability this is a reference to Pamprepius.
293 This is a standard metaphor regarding progress in the spiritual life: see Plotinus
I.6.9.8ff. and cf. the saying of Abu Yazid al-Bestami as quoted by Farid al-Din Attar:
“For twelve years I was the blacksmith of my soul...” (Γadhkirat al-Auliya’ (trans. A. J.
Arberry, London 1966) p. 113). As I take it to refer to Isidore, I place the fragment here.
294 The Epicurean injunction (literally “live without attracting attention”) had been
fully adopted by the Neoplatonists who explicitly attributed it to Pythagoras; cf.
Marinus VP 15, with reference to Proclus.
 Σαραπίων έκεΐνος, ουδέ άν έγωγε νϋν ήπιστάμην, εί μή μοι αύτός
ό φιλόσοφος υπέδειξε τφ λόγψ τόν Σαραπίωνα. Ού γάρ έργω
ποτέ έφη πείσεσθαι αύτόν έντυχεϊν έτέρφ άνδρί' άλλως τε καί δτε 10
έγήρα μηκέτι καταβαίνειν θαμά άπό τής σφετέρας οικίας, οίκεΐν
δέ μόνον έν οίκίσκφ μικρφ, τφ όντι μονάδα βίον άναδεδεγμένον,
προς μόνον τά Αναγκαιότατα χρώμενον των γειτόνων ένίοις.
Εύκτικόν μέν ούν είναι τόν Σαραπίωνα διαφερόντως έλεγε καί έν
ιδιώτου σχήματι πανταχοϋ περιφοιτάν των Ιερών χωρίων, όπου 15
ήγεν ό τής έορτής νόμος. Τά πολλά δέ έπ’ οίκου διημερεύοντα
ζήν, ου τινα άνθρωπίνην ζωήν, άλλ’ άτεχνώς ε’ιπεΐν θείαν, εύχάς
τε αεί καί άρετάς προς έαυτόν ή πρός τό θειον φθεγγόμενον,
μάλλον δέ σιγή διανοούμενον. Ζητητικός δέ Φν τής άληθείας καί
φύσει θεωρητικός, ού περί τά τεχνικώτερα τής φιλοσοφίας ήξίου 20
διατρίβειν, άλλα τοΐς άδροτέροις καί ένθουσιαστικωτέροις νοή-
μασιν ένεφύετο. Διό μόνον σχεδόν τόν Όρφέα έκέκτητό καί άνεγί-
νωσκεν, έρωτών έφ’ έκάστοις άεί τοΐς παραπίπτουσι ζητήμασι
τόν Ισίδωρον, άκραν ώς είπεϊν έπιστήμην έν θεολογίφ προβεβλη-
μένον- δν μόνως οίκεΐον έγνώριζεν όντα καί προσεδέχετο. Καί δή 25
έν αύτφ θεάσασθαι έδόκει τόν μυθευόμενον Κρόνιον βίον. Ούδέ
γάρ άλλο τι διετέλει πράττων καί λέγων έκεΐνος ή συνάγων έαυτόν
άεί καί συναιρών, ώς οίον τέ, πρός τό εΐσω καί τό άμερέστερον.
Ό ς οΰτω μέν κατεφρόνει χρημάτων ώστε κεκτήσθαι μηδο-
τιοΰν ή μόνα δύο ή τρία βιβλία, ών ήν καί ή Όρφέως ποίησις· 30
ούτω δέ ηδονών τών περί τό σώμα, ώστε έξ άρχής εύθύς τά Αναγ­
καία καί μόνα προσφέρειν τφ σώματι, άφροδισίων δέ άχραντον
είναι διά βίου παντός. Οΰτω δέ ήμέλει τιμής τής παρά άνθρώπων,
ώστε ούδέ όνομα αύτοΰ ήν έν τή πόλει. Ούδ’ άν έγνώσθη μετά
ταΰτα, εί μή θεών τις ήβουλήθη παράδειγμα τοΐς άνθρώποις χαρί- 35

31 έξ άρχής εύθύς S: εύθύς έξ άρχής Φ. 32 καί S: om. Φ.

 else know the kind of man Sarapio was, nor indeed would I have
this knowledge now, had not the philosopher himself described
Sarapio to me. For he said that there was no way that Sarapio could
ever be persuaded to meet other people, especially as he hardly ever
left his house once he grew old. He lived alone in a tiny house,
embracing a life of utter solitude, in contact with a few of his
neighbours only when absolute necessity required it. He said that
Sarapio was exceptionally pious, going round dressed as a private
citizen to the holy places wherever festival custom took him. But
most of the time he spent at home, leading a life which was not that
of a man, but quite simply a god-like existence, constantly
addressing prayers and hymns to himself or to the divine, or rather
meditating in silence.295 A seeker of the Truth and a man with a
theoretical cast of mind, he could not bear to occupy himself with
the technicalities of philosophy, but immersed himself in those
vigorous concepts which fill one with God. For this reason he
possessed and read almost nothing except the writings of Orpheus,
putting his questions as they arose to Isidore who was as it were
invested with the absolute theological knowledge. It was only
[Isidore] whom he recognised as a kinsman and received at home.
Indeed he thought he saw in him [Sarapio] the legendary golden
age of Cronus. He spent his entire life in deed and word focusing
his attention and concentrating as far as possible on the inner and
the indivisible.
So great was his contempt for material goods that he owned
nothing except for two or three books, among which was the poetry
of Orpheus. And such was his scorn for bodily pleasures that from
his earliest youth he offered his body the bare necessities only,
while remaining throughout his life completely undefiled by sexual
intercourse.296 Besides he so disdained social honours that not even
his name was known in the city; nor would it have become known
afterwards, had not some god desired to grace humanity with a

295 On the Iamblichan tripartite categorisation of prayer, a variant of which this

seems to be, Myst. V. 26; cf. above 22.
296 Note the reference to the great late antique theme of virginity. Cf. above, n. 255.
 σασθαι τοϋ Κρονίου βίου, ΐνα μή δοκή μύθος είναι δ λόγος, μή
έχων έπιμαρτυροΰσαν τήν 'ιστορίαν. Ό μέν γάρ Χείρων λεγόμε­
νος έν μεθορίψ μάλλον είστήκει τής Κρόνου και Διός άρχής, δθεν
διφυής. Σαραπίων δέ οΰτος ύπό τού φιλοσόφου γνωσθείς άναγε-
γράφθω τοιούτος· δς κληρονόμω τφ Ίσιδώρω έχρήσατο, μηδένα 40
πρός γένους Ιχων, μηδέ δξιον άλλον ύπολαμβάνων είναι τής έαυ-
τοΰ ουσίας, δυεΐν λέγω ή τριών βιβλίων.
[S IV 323, 28 (Σαραπίων 116 pp) + Φ 167]

112
Α Έν'δέ τούτψ τφ χρόνφ έτερος άνήρ άφίκετο είς ’Αλεξάνδρει­
αν, κατά διάμετρον δλην τού Σαραπίωνος άφεστώς, μάλλον δέ έτι
καί τής διαμέτρου μειζόνως, εΐ οΐόν τε φάναι- ό μέν γάρ ήν τήν
ζωήν Κρόνιός τις καί Δίϊος, ό δέ Τυφώνειος, καί Τυφώνος έτι πο-
λυπλοκώτερον θηρίον, καί μάλλον έπιτεθυμμένον. Οΰπω γάρ τις 5
άγνοεΐ τών νύν ζώντων άνθρώπων, οΐος ό Παμπρέπιος έγεγόνει
τήν τε ψυχήν καί τήν τύχην.
[S IV 325, 3 (Σαραπίων 116 pp)]
Β Ό δέ φιλότιμος ών καί ούδενός έθέλων φαίνεσθαι δεύτερος

112Β Φ solum 5 έν όλίγψ - 16 έστησαν, S IV 15,12 (S,) 11ήν δέ -1 6 έστησαν, 1 6 δέ

- 9 πολυμαθίας, 16 τέως - 20 συμπ ότες: transposui, S Π 227,7 (S2) solum 14
μεταπεμψάμενοι -1 5 Παμπρέπιον.
 model of the golden age of Cronus, so that this expression would
not appear to refer merely to a legend, unsupported by historical
evidence.297 For the so-called Cheiron seems to have stood on the
dividing line between the reigns of Cronus and Zeus, hence his
double nature.298 But this Sarapion, who was known299 by the
philosopher, let him be recorded in this way. He made Isidore his
heir, having no relatives, since he considered no-one else worthy of
his property, that is his two or three books.

112
A At that time there arrived in Alexandria another man,
diametrically opposite to Sarapio -or rather more than diametric­
ally, if one may use the expression. For the one was Cronian and
Zeus-like in his way of life, whereas the other was Typhon-like,
indeed a beast even more contorted and rabid than Typhon
himself;300 for there is no living human being who is unaware of the
nature of Pamprepius’ soul and of his fate.301
B Being ambitious and wishing not to appear inferior to anyone,

297 Cf. 18.

298 Possibly this is an ironical allusion to the contemporary christological quarrels
about the nature of Jesus.
299 “Known” in the sense of recognised as a spiritual master.
300 For the pun associating Typhon with arrogance, see p. 279, n. 320.
301 The facts of Pamprepius’ life are known with precision from a variety of sources
including a horoscope (D. Pingree, ‘Political horoscopes from the reign of Zeno’ DOF
30 (1976) 144-146). Pamprepius was bom at Panopolis in 440 and was one of Nonnus’
first pupils. An impecunious grammarian until his thirty-third year when he married
“and began to recover” according to his horoscope, Pamprepius moved to Athens,
possibly on the invitation of Theagenes, and taught as an official grammarian from 473
to 476. We have substantial fragments of an exaggerated έγκώμιον in honour of
Theagenes (Pamprepii Panopolitani Carmina (ed. H. Livrea), No 4, pp. 33-37), with
whom he nevertheless quarrelled, subsequently leaving Athens for Constantinople (cf.
above 77D). Becoming involved with Ulus, he successively acquired the tides of
quaestor, consul and patricius, and in 481/2 he returned to Egypt “with a large retinue
and great pomp” and began to tour the country prophesying the restoration of paganism
and calling upon the locals to rise against Zeno. It was during that time that he must
have irrevocably compromised the pagan community (cf. VS 40), whose representatives
found him absolutely repulsive, describing him as unscrupulous, treacherous and lewd
(his horoscope contains a chapter on his άσέλγεια). Taking refuge in the fortress of
Papirius after Leontius’ defeat (484), he was almost immediately executed by his
fellow-rebels in the picturesque way described by Damascius (115C).
 άμιλλώμενος ήν πρός άπαντας, πλήν μόνου Πρόκλου καί των
άλλων φιλοσόφων. Τής δέ οϋχ οίός τε ήν ούδέ απτεσθαι τής σο­
φίας. Περί δ ’ ούν τήν άλλην προπαιδείαν οΰτω διεπονεΐτο καί ές
τοσοΰτον διεγυμνάζετο ό Παμπρέπιος, ώστε έν όλίγφ χρόνιρ λο- 5
γιμώτατος είναι έδοξε καί πολυμαθέστατος των αυτόθι παιδείας
μετειληχότων, Πλουτάρχου τε τοϋ Ίερίου, άνδρός ’Αθηναίου, καί
Άλεξανδρέως Έρμείου τοΰ ρήτορος, ών τό κλέος ύπερβαλεΧν
έσπουδάκει τής πολυμαθίας. Οΰτω διεπονεΐτο περί τήν άλλην προ­
παιδείαν, δσην ποιητική τε καί γραμματική σοφίζει παιδεύουσα. 10
Ή ν δέ ό Παμπρέπιος Αιγύπτιος- ποιητικός δέ ών καί πρός
ποίησιν εύφυής καί τήν ποιητικήν έν τη πατρίδι άσκήσας, άφίκετο
καί Άθήναζε κατά τήν ποιητικήν έπιτήδευσιν τά άναγκαϊα τφ βίφ
προσποριούμενος. Οί δέ ’Αθηναίοι, μεταπεμψάμενοι έκ περιου­
σίας καί Παμπρέπιον, γραμματικόν αύτόν έποιήσαντίρ καί έπί νέ- 15
οις διδάσκαλον έστησαν <...> Τέως μέν τοίνυν έτιμάτο πρός τών
’Αθηναίων, οΐα διδάσκαλος ούκ άγεννής- μετά δέ ταϋτα άρχή έτέ-
ρων πραγμάτων αύτόν διαδέχεται μεγίστων τε καί κακίστων, ϊνα
μάθωμεν τάς τής τύχης μεταβολάς έλεγχούσας έκάστοτε τών ψυχών
τάς παντοίας προαιρέσεις ούδέ μιάς ήττον μέθης συμποτικής. 20
[S IV 15,12 (Παμπρέπιος 137 pp) + Φ 168
+ S* I I 227,7 (έκ περιουσίας ρ)]
113
Α Ό δέ διηγείτο μυρία δσα δι’ ών έκήλει τούς άκούοντας ούδέν
έλαττον, εί μή καί πλέον <ή> Όδυσσεύς Όμήρου τούς Φαίακας.
Ό μέν γε Άλκίνου άπόλογ<ος> <τερατολογίας> μεστός, έν μέν
ύπονοίαις άληθευούσης, έν δέ τφ φανερφ διαβεβλημένης εις τό
ψευδέστερον. 5
[*S I I 219,3 (έκήλει p) + *S III 577,4 (ούδέν έλαττον)]

5 έν όλίγψ S,: ό Παμπρέπιος έν όλίγψ Φ. 6 τών αυτόθι - 9 πολυμαθίας S,:

om. Φ. 11 ήν δέ ό Παμπρέπιος Αίγύπτιος S,: Αίγύπτιος δ’ ήν Φ.
11 ποιητικός - 12 ευφυής S,: om. Φ. 12 καί - άσκήσας Φ: om. S,. 12 άφίκε­
το καί Άθήναζε S,: είτα Άθήναζε παρεγένετο Φ. 13 κατά- 14 προσποριούμε-
νος Sp om. Φ. 14 μεταπεμψάμενοι - 15 Παμπρέπιον S2: om. Φ, S,. 16 post
έστησαν lacunam suspicor.
113Α S I I 219, 3 (S,) solum usque ad 1 άκούοντας, S Π Ι577,4 (S2).
1 διηγείτο - ών S,: om. S2. 2 ή S2 ed. Basii.: om. S2. 3 Άλκίνου άπόλογος
scripsi: Αλκίνοος άπολογίας S2. 3 τερατολογίας Guida: om. S,.
 he competed with everybody except Proclus and the other
philosophers. For he could not even come near him in wisdom. But
as regards preliminary learning,302 Pamprepius toiled and exerted
himself so much that in a short time he gave the impression of
being the most knowledgeable and erudite man among the local
intelligentsia, namely the Athenian Plutarch, son of Hierius,303 and
the Alexandrian rhetor Hermeias, whose reputation in learning he
strove to surpass. It is in this way that he toiled hard to acquire the
preliminary education in so far as a training in poetry and grammar
can make one wise.
He was Egyptian with a natural talent for poetry and, having
practised the art of poetry in his native country, he arrived in Athens
in order to earn a living by exercising the profession of a poet. The
Athenians summoned him at their own expense,304 made him a
grammarian and appointed him to teach the young. And until
recently he was honoured by the Athenians as a teacher who was
far from contemptible. But after this came other things both
splendid and pernicious, from which we may leam how the changes
of fortune expose the various inclinations of the soul no less than a
state of drunkenness at a party.

113
A He narrated a thousand stories by which he bewitched his public
no less - if not more- than Homer’s Odysseus did the Phaeacians.
Yet Odysseus’ tale to Alcinous305 was full of mythical marvels,
truthful in its hidden depths, though on the surface it appeared to be
diverted towards falsehood.306

302 The disciplines of grammar and poetry, cf. 77C and previous note.
303 These may be PLRE Π ‘Plutarchus 4’ and ‘Hierius 5’ respectively.
304 The meaning of this sentence may be that Pamprepius was invited to fill the
municipal, rather than the imperial, chair. If so, the fragment provides evidence for the
continuation of the dual system in Athens into the late fifth century.
305 Ever since Plato, the expression “Alcinous’ tale” (Resp. 614b), means the story
told by Odysseus to the Phaeacians; cf. i.a. Himerius (or. 39, 14), where the expression
is used in association with the Emperor Julian.
306 I place this fragment here, as referring to Pamprepius who was a liar by nature
Β Ήβούλετο δέ μόνον άξιωθήναι ό δεόμενος τής τόν άρχοντα
προσκυνούσης έντεύξεως.
[Φ 286]
C Οί δέ πλεΐστοι ώρθοΰντο πρός τά άρχαϊα ταϊς έλπίσιν.
[Φ 287]
D Όργανον δ Παμπρέπιος επιτήδειον τής πρός τό κάλλιον άντι-
πνεούσης άνάγκης ήν.
[Φ 288]
Ε Δειλός δέ ών ό Ζήνων φύσει καί τόν Ίλλουν όρων έν δίκη
άγαπώμενον καί μέγα ήδη δυνάμενον, ευλαβείτο περί αύτφ, καί
δι’ άπιστίαν ούχ οϊός τε ήν ήρεμεΐν, άλλα πάσας δδούς διεξήει καί
πάσας έπλεκε μηχανάς δπως άν έκποδών ποιήσοιτο τόν Ίλλουν δ
Ζήνων. 5
, [Φ 169]
F Ό δέ διαφθονούμενος Ζήνωνι έν ήσυχίμ Ιμενεν.
[*S I I 77,18 (διαφθονούμενος)]
G Ταύτη τοι ού πολύ ύστερον παρελύθη τής άρχής.
[*S IV 510, 25 (ταύτη ρ)]
Η “κατά τόν ίκνούμενον χρόνον”άντΐ τοϋ “κατά τόν έπιόντα ”
[Φ 289]
I Ό δέ τών κρατούντων τής πολιτείας ήγεμών τήν δόξαν έπι-
σκοπειν είληχώς, δνομα Πέτρος, άνήρ Ιταμός ών καί περιπόνη-
ρος.
[Φ 170]
J Ό δέ πρός τινας τών γνωρίμων ύπούλως τε καί ούχ ύγιώς
έσχεν.
[*S IV 679,15 (ύπούλως)]
Κ Ό δέ Παμπρέπιος τούτοις άμφίβολος διηθείς, βραχύ παρε-
ωρατο.
[S* 1 152, 19 (άμφίβολοι ρ)]
L Ά λλ’ ίσως καί ένταΰθα έκράτουν οί Παμπρεπίου χρησμοί
βλακεύοντες άεί καί άναβάλλοντες είς χρόνους τόν πόλεμον.
[Φ 171]
B All that the petitioner wanted was to be granted a meeting in
which to pay homage to the magistrate.
C The majority were raised up by their hopes for a restoration of
the good old way of life.
D Pamprepius was an effective instrument of that Necessity which
opposes the good.
E Being a coward by nature and seeing that Mus was justifiably
loved and already very powerful, Zeno started fearing for himself.
His suspicious nature did not allow him any peace, as he exhausted
every path and wove every plot to put Ulus out of the way.* 307
F Being bitterly envied by Zeno, he kept a low profile.
G and not long afterwards he was discharged of his command in
this way.
H "in the future” instead o f “later”
I The leader of those in charge of the state, appointed to oversee
their creed was called Peter, a reckless and truly evil man308
J His309 attitude towards some of the members of the
philosophical circle was devious -not at all sound.
K Pamprepius was seen by them to be unreliable and was soon
ignored by them.
L But perhaps here too the prophecies of Pamprepius prevailed,
counselling inaction and constantly putting off the war to a future
date.

and therefore the opposite of Odysseus. I do not see why such an uncomplimentary
comment has been attributed by my predecessors to the pagan hero Olympos. Guida’s
reading τερατολογίας (I had suggested άληθείας against Hermann’s μυθολογίας) is
supported by Strabo 1.2.3; VI.2.4 and esp. by Proclus In Crat. 55,21.
307 For the revolt of Illus-Leontius, see Malalas, 388-389, together with the
translation of E. Jeffreys, M. Jeffreys and R. Scott, Melbourne 1986, 216-218 and
relevant notes for additional material. On Zeno’s behaviour towards Illus, which is as
described by Damascius, Stein-Palanque II, 28-31, drawing on a variety of sources. As
put epigrammatically by the Byzantine historian Zonaras (14.2), Zeno was “αΐσχιστος
καί τήν μορφήν καί τήν ψυχήν".
308 ρ0Γ Peter Mongus, cf. Introduction, pp. 28-32.
309 It is more likely that the fragment refers to Pamprepius than to Peter Mongus,
though Ammonius is also a possibility.
Μ Ταϋτα σύ διωλΰγιος φλυαρία δόξειεν &ν είναι, καί δικαίως ού
κατά γραών ΰθλον λεγόμενον, άλλα πέρα τοΰ μεγίστου φληνά-
φου;
[S Π 116,9 (διωλύγιον ρ)]
Ν Άλλ’ έγωγε, έφην, ταύτης μόνης έπιδεΐσθαι νομίζω τής μαν­
τικής τούς άνθρώπους είναι βουλομένους καί μή δίκην θηρίων
έξω κεχηνέναι ές προνομάς άπεράντους.
[S 1226,4 (άνθρωπος 2532 ρ)]
Ο Ό δε Παμπρέπιος κατά τήν Αίγυπτον παραγεγονώς Ίσιδώρφ
παρέσχεν έκ των λόγων αΐσθησιν ώς ούκ ύγιαίνοι πρός ’Ίλλουν.
[Φ 172]
Ρ ’Αλλ’ ήδη προδωσείοντι έοικε καί μέντοι καί περιορωμένφ τήν
'Ρωμαίων βασιλείαν.
[Φ 173]
Q Τούτον ώς ποινήλατον ό φιλόσοφος έξετρέπετο.'
[S* IV 260, 15 (ποινήλατον)]
R Ώ ς δέ ήσθετο σαφώς άποσειόμενον καί μόνον άφοσιούμενον
τόν ’Ισίδωρον, φχετο άπιών καί ούκέτι προσήει.
[S* 1433, 17 (άφοσιώμενοι)]

114
Α Ή πέτρα αΰτη τά μέν άνωθεν έκπεπετασμένη πολύ εις εύρος,
τά δέ κάτωθεν άποστενουμένη τοσοϋτον δσον ύπερείδειν τήν έπι-
κρεμαμένην εύρΰτητα μετέωρον, πολλαχή ύπερέχουσαν τής ΰπο-
κειμένης καί άνεχούσης κρηπϊδος όρείας· είκάσαις άν αύτήν αύχέ-
νι μεγάλφ φέροντι κεφαλήν ύπερμεγέθη τινά καί άξιοθέατον. 5
[Φ 174]
Β εις ύψος καί μήκος οΐον θαυμάσιον
[Φ 3081
C Τά γάρ έπιφανέστατα των όχυρωμάτων ώς έπίπαν κοινήν Εχει
τήν φύσιν. Γνοίη δ ’ άν τις τό λεγόμενον έκ των περί τάς άκροπό-
λεις συμβαινόντων. Αύται γάρ δοκοΰσι μέν μεγάλα συμβάλλεσθαι
M Would it not seem to be not merely a load of nonsense (what is
rightly called the babble of old women) but to exceed even the
limits of absolute rubbish?310
N For my part, I said, “I think that those who want to be human
and not gape at limidess supplies of fodder, like animals, need this
kind of divination only.
O Arriving in Egypt, Pamprepius gave Isidore the impression
through his words that his attitude to Illus was unsound.
P Indeed he already looked like a potential traitor who was
carefully watching the turn of events in the Roman empire.
Q The philosopher avoided him as a man pursued by the Furies.
R But when he felt that Isidore was clearly shunning him and
holding him in absolute abomination, he went away and never
approached him again.311

114
A This rock, whose upper part spread out widely, yet which
narrowed below to the point that it was just sufficient to support the
broad part which hung in the air, outflanking by far the
mountainous base which sustained it, was like a long neck which
carries a huge and rather impressive head.312
B extraordinarily high and long
C On the whole, particularly conspicuous strongholds tend to
share this feature. One can appreciate this statement if one
considers the history of citadels: they are indeed thought to

310 This passage was associated by Adler with the Christians mentioned in 58A,
while Asmus understood it to refer to the doctors in Constantinople on Hesychius’
arrival there (84C). As it contains two Platonic locutions (Theaet. 162a, 176b) referring
to the sophistic point of view in morals and metaphysics, 1 find it more likely that
Damascius should use these strong expressions about Pamprepius rather than about the
Christians or any other group.
311 The reference may he to Pamprepius or to Ammonius.
313 This seems to be a description of the castle of Papirius where the rebels held out
for four years (484-488). For a possible identification, see J. Gottwald, ‘Die Kirche und
das Schloss Paperon in Kilikisch-Armenien’, BZ 36 (1936) 86-100, who identifies the
castle with the substantial mins of Candir Kalesi, a majestic site in the Taurus
Mountains some 40 kilometers NW of Tarsos.
 πρός άσφάλειαν τών πόλεων έν αίς άν ώσι, καί πρός τήν τής έλευ-
θερίας φυλακήν, γίνονται δέ καί πολλάκις αΐτιαι δουλείας καί 5

κακών δμολογουμένων, ώς φησι Πολύβιος.

[S 193, 9 (άκρόπολις)]

115
Α Ό τι τούς κατά τής Ιεράς ημών καί άκαταλύτου πίστεως έπι-
λυττήσαντας 6 Δαμάσκιος άριθμούμενος καί άκων καί ϋπό τής
κατά τήν ένάργειαν άληθείας βραζόμενος τάδε άναγράφει. Έπε-
χείρησε μέν γάρ Ίουλιανός δ βασιλεύς, άλλ’ έτέων ούκ έπέβη πι-
σύρων, έπεχείρησε δέ χρόνοις ύστερον καί Λούκιος, άνήρ έν Βυ- 5
ζαντίψ τήν στρατηγίδα δρχήν ύπό βασιλεΐ Θεοδοσίφ κοσμών, δς
πειραθείς τόν βασιλέα άνελεϊν εΐσω τών βασιλείων παρήλθε, καί
τρις θελήσας έξελκύσαι τοϋ κολεού τό ξίφος άπετρέπετο καταπε-
πληγμένος· έώρα γάρ έξαίφνης γυναίκα μεγάλην καί βλοσυρόν
περιπτυσσομένην κατά νώτων τόν Θεοδόσιον. Μετά ταΰτα ό μέ- 10
γας τής Εω στρατηλάτης έπεχείρησεν, άλλ’ έπεσχέθη βίαιον εύρά-
μενος θάνατον· άπό γάρ τού ίππου πεσών καί τό σκέλος κακώς
διατεθείς έτελεύτησε τόν βίον. Είτα Σεβηριανός, φηαίν, δ πολίτης
ημών έν τοΧς καθ’ ήμάς χρόνοις μετά καί άλλων συχνών άλλ’
όλίγου δεΐν θανάτιρ έζημιώθη δι’ άπιστίαν τών συνειδότων, 15
άλλων τε Ισως καί Έρμενερίχου τοϋ Άσπερος παιδός έξειπόντος
τήν συνωμοσίαν τφ Ζήνωνι. Πρός οΐς Μάρσος καί Τλλους· ών ό
μέν Μάρσος έν αύτή τή έπαναστάσει νόσψ τέθνηκεν, δ δέ Πλλους
συλληφθείς ξίφει τόν βίον κατέστρεψεν.
[Φ 290]

114C 4 τών πόλεων έν αΐς Kiister: turv πολεμίων έν οΐς S.

115Α 10 τόν Θεοδόσιον Φ ν.1.: Θεοδόσιον Φ.
 contribute greatly towards the security of the towns in which they
are situated and towards the maintenance of freedom, but they often
become the cause of slavery and undeniable abuses, as Polybius
says.

115313
A R eviewing those who have raged against our holy and
everlasting faith , though unwillingly an d com pelled by the light o f
the truth that shines forth , D am ascius w rites the follow ing: An
attempt was made by the Emperor Julian, yet his reign did not last
for as long as four years; another attempt was made some time later
by Lucius who held the office of m agister militum praesentatis in
Constantinople under Theodosius.314 He came into the palace with
the intention of killing the emperor and, attempting to draw his
sword from its sheath three times, he was deterred from doing so in
his amazement at suddenly seeing a grim and powerful woman who
clasped Theodosius from behind. After that there was an attempt by
the Great General of the East, but he was prevented by a violent
death: he fell from his horse and injuring his leg, he died.315 Then
Severianus, my own fellow-citizen, made an attempt in our own
times together with many others; but he was betrayed by his
accomplices and came close to being condemned to death,
Ermenaric, son of Aspar -and probably some others too- having
divulged the plot to Zeno.316 In addition to these were Marsus and
Ilius; Marsus died of disease during the revolt itself, but Illus was
arrested and killed himself with his sword.

313 A detailed commentary on this passage is provided by R. von Haehling,

‘Damascius und die heidnische Opposition im 5. Jahrhundert nach Christus’, JAC 23
(1980) 82-95.
314 Cf. PLREII, ‘Lucius 2’.
315 This must be the Isaurian Zeno, MUM per Orientem (447-451), consul in 448
and a patricius (451), against whom Theodosius II sent a force: John of Antioch fr.
199.1. Our text is probably corrupt since the manner of death attributed to Zeno is
actually that of Theodosius Π.
316 Ermenaric was the youngest son of Aspar; his life was saved by Zeno when his
father and brother were murdered in 471 (sources in Stein-Palanque I, 591, n. 58; and
cf. above 108). It may therefore be asssumed that in divulging to Zeno a conspiracy
against him, Ermenaric was returning a favour.
Β Νϋν δέ καί τφ μή πάνυ γελασείοντι γέλωτα παρέξει γενναΐον ή
τοΰ έργου διέξοδος:
[S 1512, 9 (γελασείω)]
C Ακοντίζει τήν κεφαλήν είς τό των πολεμίων στρατόπεδον,
άνωθεν άπό τής πέτρας άποδισκεύσας.
[Φ 291]

116
Α Πάλιν δ’ έπί τόν ’Ισίδωρον άνακαλεσώμεθα τήν συγγραφήν.
[Φ 175]
Β Ούκ ήν τετυφωμένος ό ’Ισίδωρος οΰτε δυσόμιλος, οΐιδέ ήγνόει
τήν στωϊκήν συμπεριφοράν λεγομένην.
[Φ 176]
C Ό δέ έπίχαρις ήν, εύτραπελίας μέν καί βωμολοχίας δτι πορ-
ρωτάτω. *
[S 1491, 6 (βωμολόχος 490 ρ)]
D Καί ήν τότε αυτόν θεάσασθαι φαιδρόν τε καί γεγηθότα, τό τε
σώμα άνθοΰντα καί τήν ψυχήν ΰψοΰ διεγηγερμένον έτι, καί ταΰτα
τών περί θανάτου φροντίδων ΰπολειπομένων.
[Φ 177]
Ε Οΰδέν τι μεΐον ή ό Σωκράτης είς τήν ζήτησιν τοΰ άληθοΰς.
Έπεί καί έκεΐνος υπό τών Τριάκοντα μή διαλέγεσθαι προσταχθείς
οΰχ οίός τε ήν πείθεσθαι τφ προστάγματι.
[S* III381, 2 (μεΐον 850 ρ)]
F ’Επέπρεπε δέ αύτφ μάλιστα τό τής ψυχής ιλαρόν.
[*S I I 630,20 (ιλαρός ρ)]

117
Α 'Αρποκράς· οΰτος συνήθης ήν Άμμωνίψ, άνήρ Αΰγύπτιος,
γραμματικός, έπί Ζήνωνος τοΰ βασιλέως· δν άκούσας ό Νικομή-
δης τά άμφί τόν Άμμώνιον έπίστασθαι συλλαβέϊν ήπείγετο. Ό δέ
τά μέλλοντα άπ’ άρχής είκάσας ή καί προπυθόμενος εΰθύς άφα-
νής έγεγόνει. 5
[S* 1366, 23 (Αρποκράς)]
B The outcome of the business would provide true mirth even for
those who are not at all inclined to laughter.317
C He hurled the head into the enemy camp, throwing it like a
discus from the heights of the rock.318

116
A But let us bring the narration back to the subject of Isidore.
B Isidore was not filled with arrogance nor was he hard to live
with;319 nor was he ignorant of the so-called Stoic behaviour.320
C He was charming, as far removed as possible from ribaldry and
coarse jesting.
D And he could be seen at that time to be radiant and joyful,
physically flourishing, his soul raised on high, even though the fear
of death was ever present.
E No less than Socrates in the search for truth; for he too was not
able to obey the command of the Thirty Tyrants who had ordered
him not to hold discourse.
F His cheerfulness of soul was very prominent.

117
A Harpocras, an acquaintance of Ammonius, an Egyptian, a
grammarian in the reign of Zeno. When Nicomedes heard that he
knew about the Ammonius affair he hastened to arrest him. But,
guessing from the outset what would happen -or even having prior
information- he immediately disappeared.

317 For the rage of Damascius against Pamprepius who was seen by the
Neoplatonists as the main cause behind the persecution of 489, see JHS 113, 19.
3,8 This must refer to Pamprepius, whose corpse was treated in this manner.
319 Damascius, who spent eight months with Isidore under taxing circumstances
(hiding in Alexandria and travelling from Egypt to Athens through Syria and Asia
Minor, 137D), speaks from personal experience.
320 Unlike Pamprepius, who resembled Typhon (for the characterisation see 112A).
Note the pun Τυφών-τετυφωμένος, already exploited by Plutarch Is. 2: 6 Τυφών
πολέμιος <ών> xfl θεφ καί δι’ άγνοιαν καί απάτην τετυφωμένος καί διασπών καί
άφανίζων τόν Ιερόν λόγον.
 Β Ζητών δε δ Νικομήδης τόν Άρποκρδν ήν καί μή εύρ ίσκων
αυτόν. Ό δέ Ισίδωρος δ φιλόσοφος τοΰτο μαθών πέμπει <...> διά
γραμμάτων δηλούντων τούς έπιόντας. Έάλω δέ δ γραμματπφό-
ρος καί ώμολόγει τόν πέμψαντα. Καί τόν Ώραπόλλωνα καί τόν
Ήραΐσκον αίροΰσι καί νεύροις άνακρεμάσαντες άπό τής χειρός 5
έκάτερον άπήτσυν τόν 'Αρποκρδν καί ’Ισίδωρον.
[S* III615, 6 (Ώραπόλλων pp)]
C Καί κατατεινομένω ταΐς στρέβλαις ύπέρ τού κατειπεΐν τούς
συνεγνωκότας. ΟΙ δέ έμπρίσαντες τούς όδόντας τοΰ εΐξαι τφ τυ-
ράννψ γεγόνασι κρείττους.
[*S III 61,3 (κατατείνας έρώ ρ)]

118
Α Πονηρόν δέ άνθρωπον καί τόν βίον έπίρρητον.
[Φ 178]
Β Ό δέ Άμμώνιος αισχροκερδής ών καί πάντα όρων εις χρημα-
τισμόν δντιναοΰν, δμολογίας τίθεται πρός τόν έπισκοποΰντα
τηνικαΰτα τήν κρατούσαν δόξαν.
[Φ292 + Φ 179]

119
A Γρυμαία έκειτο παντοδαπών βιβλίων.
[Φ 293]
Β Ένέβαλον αύτά τοΐς Ίουλιανοϋ σκευαρίοις.
[Φ 180]
C Ό δέ ’Ισίδωρος τό τε κιβώτιον καί τά άλλα σκευάρια διέθηκεν
έτοιμα είναι καί πρόχειρα, ώς άποπέμψων εις τό έμπόριον.
[Φ 181]
D Ό δέ πολλάκις άκούων ού προσεποιεϊτο.
[* S IV 223,7 (προσεποιήθη ρ)]
Ε Στίφος άνδρών συγκεκροτημένων εις έφοδον
[Φ 182]
117Β 2 lacunam indicavit Asmus.
118Β Φ 179 solum 2 πρός - 3 δόξαν.
3 τηνικαΰτα Φ 292: τό τηνικαντα Φ 179. 3 δόξαν Φ 292: δόξαν ’Αθανάσιον Φ
179.
119Β 1 ένέβαλον Bekker: ένέβαλλον Φ.
B Nicomedes was searching for Harpocras and could not find him.
On hearing this, Isidore the philosopher sent Harpocras a letter
indicating his pursuers. The letter-bearer was captured and
disclosed the identity of the man who had sent him. They then
arrested Horapollo and Heraiscus and, suspending them by their
hands with cords, they demanded information about Harpocras and
Isidore.
C And when the two of them were being racked with tortures in
order to betray their accomplices, they gritted their teeth and proved
themselves superior to yielding to the tyrant.

118
A A wicked man with an infamous life.321
B Ammonius, who was sordidly greedy and saw everything in
terms of profit of any kind, came to an agreement with the then
overseer of the prevailing doctrine.322

119
A A bag with books of all kinds323 lay there.
B They /I put them (the books ?) in Julian’s324 luggage.
C Isidore made the chest and the other luggage ready and
accessible for sending to the baggage station.
D Though he heard this many times, he pretended not to have done
so.
E A group of men organised for attack .325

321 The reference may be to Peter Mongus with whom the money-minded
Ammonius comes to a political agreement; cf. Introduction, pp. 30-32.
322 Note the circumlocution for referring to the Christian bishop; cf. 78C.
323 As opposed to purely magical books, possession of which constituted incrimin­
ating evidence; cf. VS 61-62.
324 Julian is Damascius’ younger brother: 108; cf. 119J.
325 The reference may be to monks.
F Ό δέ καί ξύστρας ήδη άπτεσθαι διεκελεύετο τούς ύπηρέτας.
[Φ 183J
G Ό ταν άφροδισιάζη έπί παιδοποιίμ πολιτική.
[Φ 294]
Η Καί τούς φιλοσόφους εις τό δεσμωτήριον πάλιν ένέβαλεν έπί
ψήφω δευτέρων έλέγχων.
[Φ 184]
I Ένίας των κατηγοριών εΐωθεν άπιστους ποιεΐν δ τών έπικα-
λουμένων βίος.
[*S I I 358,22 (έπικαλουμένων)]
J Ό δέ Ίουλιανός σιωπή έδέξατο καρτερών τάς πολλάς έπί τοϋ
νώτου διά τών τυμπάνων πληγάς- καί γάρ πολλαϊς έπαίετο βα-
κτηρίαις, μηδέν δλως φθεγξάμενος.
[Φ 185]
Κ Τόν άνδρα έπί τοσόνδε καρτερίας έλθεΐν ώστε μεγίστων φό­
βων έπαρτωμένων καί βασάνων προσαγομένων αύτφ, ούδέν τών
άπορρήτων είπεΐν.
[*S I I 332,30 (έπαρτωμένων)]
L "Ωστε τά άρχαΐα καί πρός τό μυθώδες έκνενικηκότα μηκέτι
άπιστα είναι.
[Φ 309]

120
Α Ώραπόλλων ΦαινεβύΟεως, κώμης τοϋ Πανοπολίτου νομοϋ,
‘γραμματικός, διδάξας έν 'Αλεξανδρείφ καί έν Αίγύπτφ, εϊτα έν
Κωνσταντινουπόλει έπί Θεοδοσίου. Έγραψε Τεμενιχά, Υπόμνη­
μα Σοφοχλέους, 'Αλκαίου, Εις "Ομηρον. Λαμπρός μέν έπί τή τέ­
χνη άνθρωπος καί τών πάλαι λογιμωτάτων γραμματικών ούδέν τι 5
μεϊον κλέος άπενεγκάμενος.
[S* III615, 1 (Ώραπόλλων pp)]
F He was already ordering the servants to pick up the scrapers
also.326
G When he has intercourse for the sake of producing political
offspring.327
H He again threw the philosophers into prison in accordance with
the verdict of a second investigation.
I The way of life of the accused men made some of the charges
implausible.
J Julian received in silence and with fortitude the many cudgel
blows on his back. For he was beaten with many rods, but did not
utter a word.
K He displayed such a level of endurance, that, despite the great
terrors hanging over him and the tortures that were being
introduced, he revealed none of the secrets.328
L To the point that some ancient stories which have won their way
into mythology are no longer incredible.329

120
A Horapollo: from Phenebythis of the district o f Panopolis; a
grammarian who taught at Alexandria and in Egypt, then in
Constantinople under Theodosius. He wrote The Temenica and
Commentaries on Sophocles, Alcaeus and Homer. A brilliant
representative of his art and no less famous than the most
celebrated grammarians of old times.330

326 The text suggests that when attacked and arrested, the victim was in a public
bath house.
327 This may be a reference to the collaboration of Peter Mongus with Ammonius,
in which case the sexual metaphor would be used in an attempt to belittle both the
bishop and the philosopher.
328 The explicit references in this passage are to Xenophon An. IV. 1.23 and
Demosthenes C. Aristocr. 140.
329 This is an almost verbatim quotation from Thucydides 1.21.1 with its meaning
turned upside down.
330 I owe the inclusion of 120A to Stephane Diebler, who in an unpublished paper
defends the attribution of this passage to Damascius on grounds both of style and of
substance. As shown by J. Maspero (BIFAO 11,176-7), the grammarian Horapollo was
the grandfather of the philosopher, and his mention in the PH tallies with Damascius’
technique of putting on the stage whole dynasties of pagan intellectuals.
 Β Ό δέ Ώραπόλλων ούκ ήν τό ήθος φιλόσοφος, άλλά τι καί έν
βυθφ τής περί θεού δόξης ών ήδει άποκρυπτόμενος. Ό γάρ
Ήραΐσκος προεϊπεν ώς αύτομολήσει πρός έτέρους καί καταπροή-
σεται τούς πατρίους νόμους ό Ώραπόλλων· δ καί συνέβη γενέ-
σθαι. ’Απ’ ούδεμιάς γάρ άναγκαίας τύχης είναι δοκούσης αύθαί- 5
ρετον εϊλετο τήν μεταβολήν, έτι έπΐ έλπίσιν ίσως άπληστου τινός
έπιθυμίας. Ού γάρ άλλο τι Ιστι προχειρίσασθαι φμδίως είς άπο-
λογίαν τής μεταστάσεως.
[S* III615, 12 (Ώραπόλλων pp)]

121
Ίδών τά σκευάρια συνδούμενά πρός τόν άπόπλουν, τί τοϋτο,
έφη, ποιείς άνθρωπε; άλώση δέ ύπό των λιμενιτών φυλακτήρων.
, [Φ 186]

122
Α Καί ήτει παρ’ έμοί ύποδοχήν λανθάνουσαν.
[Φ 310]
Β Άφίκετο τοίνυν ού πολλφ ύστερον καί έν έμού τφ οϊκφ
διητάτο.
[Φ 187]
C Καί δή γραφόμενος έπιστολήν πρός τούς έν Καρίμ δύο φιλο­
σόφου έπιτίθησιν.
[S I I 387, 26 (έπιτίθησιν)]
D Λόγους, φησίν ό συγγραφεύς, έπεδεικνύμην πρότερον, τόν έπί
ρητορική τρίβωνα περιθέμενος. "Ωστε ήν καί τριβών βητορικός
ώς καί φιλόσοφος.
[Φ 295]

123
Α Ούλπιανός, άδελςρός ’Ισιδώρου τοϋ φιλοσόφου- δς εύφυέστα-
τος έγεγόνει πρός τάς μαθηματικάς έπιστημας, ώστε καί πολλάς

123Α cf. S IV 510,27.

B Horapollo was not a philosopher by nature; but he kept hidden
deep within himself some of the theological concepts of which he
was aware.331 Indeed Heraiscus foretold that he would desert to the
“Others” and would betray his ancestral principles. And this came
to pass. He chose this conversion voluntarily without any apparent
compulsion, perhaps even through his insatiable desire for gain; for
it is not easy to propose any other explanation to support the
conversion.

121
Seeing the luggage tied up together for the voyage, he said:
“What are you doing my friend? you will be arrested by the harbour
guards”.

122
A He asked to be received by me in secret
B and not long after, he arrived and stayed in my house.
C Writing a letter, he dispatched it to the two philosophers in
Caria.
D The author says I previously gave speeches, wearing a
rhetorician’s gown.332 Therefore he had worn a rhetorician’s gown
as well as that o f a philosopher.

123
A Ulpian, brother of the philosopher Isidore.333 He was
particularly gifted in the mathematical sciences, to the point that he

331 Through the teachings of his father and uncle: cf. above, p. 197, n. 191. On
Horapollo’s personality, marital vicissitudes and eventual conversion to Christianity,
JHS 113,21-22.
332 The author, whose reputation had long been solely that of a philosopher, is here
revealing the fact that he “converted” from rhetoric to philosophy under the influence of
Isidore.
333 Isidore must have been literally “the gift of Isis”, the last child of the middle-
aged Theodote, who had several older children: among them was a daughter who
produced a son at the same time as her mother gave birth to Isidore (cf. 11) and Ulpian,
who was a student in Athens a generation before Isidore while Syrianus was still active.
 είσενέγκασθαι καινός άπορίας καί λύσεις γε των άποριών πρός
τάς των μαθημάτων έξηγήσεις· δνομά τε αύτφ μέγα fjv έπί τοίς
μαθήμασιν Άθήνησιν. Θαυμάζων δέ αύτοΰ τήν φύσιν δ Συριανός 5
διηγείτο πολλοΐς τισίν, ώς ούδέν ήν αύτφ προβαλέσθαι κλειδίον
οΰτω πολύπλοκόν τε καί μηχανικώς είργασμένον, δπερ ούκ άνοι-
γνύναι φαδίως αύτόματον· άλλ’ δμως πρός τήν άλλην φιλοσο­
φίαν μηδέν έπιδείκνυσθαι λόγου άξιον. Επιεικής δέ καί τά ήθη
κεκοσμημένος ό Ούλπιανός έγεγόνει καί έδόκει ταύτη γε τοΰ ίο
άδελφοΰ διαφέρειν, ίσως δέ έπειδή πραγμάτων πολιτικών άπέ-
σχετο τό πάμπαν έξ άρχής εις τέλος.
[S III587, 20 (Ούλπιανός 914 pp)]
Β Τοιοΰτος ό Ούλπιανός γενόμενος έτι νέος ών άγαμος έτελεύτα
τόν βίον, πολύν έπαινον έαυτοΰ τής έπιεικείας άπολιπών.
[S III 588,12 (Ούλπιανός 914 ρρ)]

124
Πεφύκασι δέ οί άνθρωποι τη μισοπράγμονι ζωή τήν άρετήν
έπιφημίζειν, ούχ ούτως έχον κατά γε τήν έμήν κρίσιν. Ή γάρ έν
μέση τή πολιτεία διά τών πολιτικών έργων τε καί λόγων άναστρε-
φομένη άρετή γυμνάζει τε τήν ψυχήν πρός τό έρρωμενέστερον καί
βεβαιοϋται μάλλον έπί τής πείρας, δσον αύτής ύγιές τε καί όλό- 5
κληρον δσον δέ κίβδηλον καί έπίπλαστον έμφωλεύει τάϊς άνθρω-
πίναις ζωαΐς, τούτο πάν διελέγχεται καί έτοιμότερον καθίσταται
πρός διόρθωσιν. Τό δέ άγαθοεργόν τε καί ώφελητικόν δσον έστίν
έν τοΐς πολιτεύμασιν; τό δέ θαρραλέον καί βέβαιον ήλίκον; τοιγα-
ροΰν οΐ έν γωνία καθήμενοι λόγιοι καί πολλά φιλοσοφοΰντες εύ ίο
μάλα σεμνώς περί δικαίου καί σωφροσύνης, έκβαίνειν έπί τάς
πράξεις άναγκαζόμενοι δεινά άσχημονοΰσιν. Ώ ς άπας λόγος, άν
άπή τά έργα, μάταιόν τι φαίνεται καί κενόν.
[Φ 296 + S III 587,30 (Ούλπιανός 914 pp)]

124 cf. SUI 401,25.

Φ usque ad 12 άσχημονοΰσιν.
1 δέ Φ: γάρ S. 1 οί άνθρωποι S: άνθρωποι Φ. 2 κρίσιν Φ: om. S.
10 εύ Φ: om. S. 11 δικαίου Φ: δικαιοσύνης S. 12 δεινά Φ: om. S.
 invented many new problems with their solutions in connection
with mathematical hermeneutics. He had a great reputation in
Athens as a mathematician. Admiring his natural gift, Syrianus
used to tell many people that you could not present him with a
riddle too complicated and sophisticated for him not to be able to
solve it easily and without assistance. Yet, as regards the other
branches of philosophy, he did not display anything worth
recording. Ulpian was decent and with polished manners and in this
respect he appeared different from his brother, probably because he
completely abstained from politics throughout his life.
B Such was Ulpian who died at a young age, unmarried, leaving
behind much praise for his decency.334

124
Men tend to bestow the name of virtue on a life of inactivity, but
I do not agree with this view. For the virtue which engages in the
midst of public life through political activity and discourse fortifies
the soul and strengthens through exercise what is healthy and
perfect, while the impure and false element that lurks in human
lives is fully exposed and more easily set on the road to
improvement. And indeed politics offers great possibilities for
doing what is good and useful; also for courage and firmness. That
is why the learned, who sit in their comer and philosophise at
length and in a grand manner about justice and moderation, utterly
disgrace themselves if they are compelled to take some action. Thus
bereft of action, all discourse appears vain and empty.335

334 On the catchword, see p. 147, n. 120.

333 The outsiders’ view of the Neoplatonists (expressed with uncommon vigour by
Themistius or. XXVIII.341d: οΰκ Ανέχονται παρακύπτειν έξω τοϋ σκίμποδος και τής
γωνίας; and cf. XXXIV. 12: ούδέ (...) τήν έν ταΐς γωνίαις φιλοσοφίαν είλόμην) was that
they were cowards. Here Damascius reproduces the vocabulary of Themistius and at the
same time echoes the language of Callicles in the Platonic Gorgias (485d), exhorting
Socrates to embark on an actively political career.
 125
Α ΕΙς ’Αθήνας καί Πρόκλον άπαίρει έτι διακρατούμενον έν τφ
σώματι.
[Φ 297]
Β Άφίκετο μέν Άθήναζε τότε τφ Πρόκλφ έπί ταφής δντι τήν θυ-
μιατρίδα φέρων.
[Φ 188]

126
Α Ή μέν έσχάτη κακία καί άβοήθητος άξία τής παραυτίκα κολά-
σεως, ή δέ έπ’ όλίγον παρατετραμμένη άξία καί αίιτή τής τάχιστης
έπαφής- πλείστοις δέ των μέσων άναβάλλεται ή δίκη τά των
παθών Ιατρεύματα, ήτοι ώς βοήθειαν έχουσιν άπό τής άρετής, εΐ
πως έκφύγοιεν μάλλον τάς τομάς καί τάς καύσεις, ή ώς άναξίοις 5
τού παραυτίκα φαρμάκου διά κακίας μέγεθος, ή όφείλεται ένίοις
πρό τής τών κακών ή άμοιβή τών άγαθών.
[Φ 189]
Β Ή τών φιλοσόφων ύπεροψία τής παρακλήσεως Ικανή έκτρα-
χύνειν άνδρα βάρβαρον. ’Αλλ’ δμως οί φιλόσοφοι καρτερεΐν
φοντο δεΐν καί τά συμβαίνοντα φέρειν εύλόφως.
[Φ 190]
C Ό δέ άποσταλείς βασιλικός ’Αγάπιον καί τούς άλλους φιλο­
σόφους κατασχών είς τό άρχείον άπήγαγε.
[S 1521, 6 (Γέσιος pp)J
D Τά δέ άλλα τοίς φιλοσόφοις έπήρκουν καί τοΐς δεομένοις
άλλως δ ι’ έπιείκειαν καί έλευθέραν προαίρεσιν.
[S* 1125,27 (άλλως ρ)]
Ε ΟΙ δέ πρός άλκήν έτράποντο έκ τού άναγκαίου.
[*S 1 163,25 (άναγκαϊον ρ)]

126D cf. S II 348,2.

 125336
A He sails away to Athens and to Proclus who was still detained in
his body.
B He arrived in Athens then and was the incense-bearer at
Proclus’ funeral.

126
A Extreme and incurable wickedness is worthy of immediate
punishment; slight depravity on the other hand must also be dealt
with immediately. But for most of the intermediate cases
punishment delays the cure of the evil, either because they receive
benefit from their good behaviour in the hope that they will escape
the knife and the flame or because they are unworthy of immediate
cure on account of the magnitude of their vice or because some
deserve recompense for their good rather than their bad deeds.337
B The scorn of the philosophers at the summons was enough to
enrage a barbarous man. The philosophers nevertheless thought that
they should be patient and endure the events with fortitude.
C The imperial envoy arrested Agapius and the other philosophers
and brought them before the magistrates.
D The other things were sufficient for the philosophers and those
with “different needs” on account of their piety and free choice.
E Necessity made them turn and resist.338

336 This is a digression referring to 485 when Isidore visited Athens for the second
time in order to see Proclus before his death. The occasion for the digression may have
been a discussion between the two men on philosophy as a way of life.
337 126A is a logical sequence to 124. The whole passage is a commentary on the
main tenets of the Platonic Gorgias and especially on the famous discussion between
Socrates and Polus on wrongdoing and punishment (474c-481b). In view of its special
topicality, this constituted an important theme of conversation in Neoplatonic circles,
and anecdotes attributed to Proclus and other teachers in connection with Socrates’
views on crime and the expiatory nature of punishment were handed down from
generation to generation: cf. Olympiodorus In Gorg. 130, 6ff., where Ammonius
reports Proclus’ aphorism on the subject.
338 The Plutarchean tum of phrase here reproduced by Damascius sheds some light
on this extremely short passage: in his golden captivity in Seleucis, Demetrius “was
driven to defend himself’ “έγκλειόμενος ώσπερ θηρίον ... τρέπεται πρός άλκήν” {Dem.
XLVm.1).
Α Σεμνός ών άμα καί εύόμιλος ό ’Αγάπιος, τήν χε άρχαίαν
γλώτταν υπέρ χόν ιδιώτην μελετήσας, έπέστρεψεν είς έαυτόν χοΰς
έν Βυζανχίφ άνθρώπους, θαϋμα δέ έαυχοϋ παρέσχεχο καί έν Άλε-
ξανδρείμ χοίς λογιμωχέροις. Ώρμηχο γάρ άπό πόσης τής παιδεί­
ας, ζηχηχικός χε καί κριχικός ήβούλετο είναι γραμματικών τε καί 5
ρητορικών καί συλλήβδην είπείν έδόκει τετράγωνος είναι καί ήν
τήν σοφίαν.
[Φ 298]
Β Σεμνός δέ ήν καί εύσχημων τά πάντα καί τετράγωνος άνευ ■ψό­
γου τεταγμένος, ώς φάναι κατά τόν Σιμωνίδην. "Ωστε μηδέ τούς
έπαναστάντας αύτφ συκοφάντας τούτους άρνείσθαι τό μη ού πάν-
τη άξιάγαστον είναι τόν άνθρωπον.
[S IV 529, 26 (τετράγωνος)]
C Ό δέ πρός τούς έπαναστάντας εύλόφως άγωνισάμενος έπέδει-
ξεν άληθή δντα τόν λόγον δν έφη Σωκράτην είπεϊν ό Ξενοφών
πρός Ίσχόμαχον, ώς εστιν άρα τόν άγαθόν ώφελεΐσθαι καί ύπό
τών βλάπτειν αύτόν πειρωμένων.
[S* I I 456, 28 (εύλόφως ρ)]

128
Γέσιος- έπί Ζήνωνος ήν λαμπρυνόμενος έπί τέχνη Ιατρική, Πε-

128 Φ solum 4 καί - 6 παιδείας.

 127
A At once serious and sociable, Agapius had studied the ancient
language beyond the measure of the ordinary, attracting to himself
the attention of the inhabitants of Constantinople and being
admired as a prodigy by notables in Alexandria; for he possessed an
all-round culture, wishing to be at once a researcher and a critic in
both grammar and rhetoric. And to sum up, he appeared “square”339
in wisdom and actually was so.
B He was serious with an overall refinement and, in the words of
Simonides, square and flawless, so that even the informers who
confronted him could not deny that the man was worthy of the
highest admiration.340
C Patiently standing up to those who opposed him, he proved the
truth of the maxim which Xenophon quotes Socrates as addressing
to Ischomachus, that it is possible for the virtuous man to derive
benefit even from those who attempt to harm him.341

128
Gessius: an eminent doctor under Zeno.342 He came from Petra.

339 The word “square" with its Pythagorean connotations means perfect or all­
round.
340 The persecution provided people with a unique opportunity to give free rein to
their professional jealousy: the informers on Aphthonius, Ammonius and Agapius must
be some of those who took advantage of the situation in order to attack their successful
rivals.
341 For the maxim (which seems to have provided the inspiration for Plutarch’s
essay How to profit by one's enemies (Mor. 86b - 92f)), Xenophon Oecon. I. 15.
342 Not only a famous doctor and professor of medicine, whose academic witticisms
were still being quoted by his students’ students (cf. Stephanus of Athens, Comm, in
Hippocr. (Westerink) 11.53, CMG XI. 1.3.1 (1985) 256), but also an important figure in
the philosophical life of Alexandria in the early sixth century (δς έπί σοφίςι πάσρ
βρενθύεται καί γανύσκεται παρά πάντας τούς οίκοϋντας τόν Νείλον, Zacharias, De
mund. op., col. 1105 = Colonna p. 125). Gessius had been a lively student of
Ammonius, as remembered by his fellow-student Zacharias (De mund. op., col. 1060ff.
= Colonna p. 107), and a pillar of the Hellenic resistance then and later (cf. Sophronius
of Jerusalem Mir. 30), who nevertheless entertained friendly relations with both Aeneas
and Procopius of Gaza, as emerges from their letters to him (Aeneas epp. 19, 20;
Procopius epp. 16, 102, 122, 125, 164).
 τραΐος τό γένος. Καθελών δέ τον έαυτοϋ διδάσκαλον Δόμνον τόν
’Ιουδαίον καί τούς έταίρους πρός έαυτόν μεταστησάμενος όλίγου
πάντας πανταχοΰ έγνωρίζετο καί μέγα κλέος είχεν, ού μόνον
ιατρικής ένεκα παρασκευής, τής τε διδασκαλικής καί τής έργάτι- 5
δος, άλλα καί τής άλλης άπάσης παιδείας. Φιλότιμος γάρ καί φι­
λόπονος ών ό άνήρ άλλην τε πολλήν έν πολλφ χρόνιρ μελέτη καί
ού φύσει προσπεριεβάλετο δοξοσοφίαν καί τήν των Ιατρικών
έργων τε καί λόγων άκριβεστέραν τών καθ’ έαυτόν πάντων
ιατρών τε καί Ιατροσοφιστών κατόρθωσε τέχνην. Βραδέως δέ 10
άρξάμενος έπιδεικνύναι δημοσίμ τήν έπιστήμην ταχέως άνέδραμέ
τε καί εύθήνησεν έπ’ αύτή, πομπικός ών καί έπιδεικτικός, φιλοσο­
φίας μέν έπ’ δλίγον ήκων, ιατρικής δέ έπί πλεΐστον. Όθεν καί
χρημάτων μεγάλων έγένετο κύριος καί ρωμαϊκών έτυχεν άξιωμά-
των ού τών τυχόντων. , 15
’Αποδέχομαι δέ τό άνδρεϊον παράστημα τής άγαθής -ψυχής.
Τόν τε γάρ Ήραΐσκον έπιζητούμενον ύπό Ζήνωνος βασιλέως
οΐκφ τφ ίδίφ κατέκρυψε παραβαλόμενος πρός τόν κίνδυνον καί,
έπειδή έν τή φυγή νοσήσας άπηλλάγη τοΰ σώματος, εύ τε περι-
στείλας καί τά νομιζόμενα θεραπεύσας <έθαψεν>. 20
[S 1520,21 (Γέσιος pp) + Φ 299]

129
Α διαλεκτικαΐς συνουσίαις άρδόμενος τήν ψυχήν.
[Φ 300]
Β Καί γυναικί ένέτυχεν ιερά θεόμοιρον έχούση ςρύσιν παραλο-
γωτάτην. Ύδωρ γάρ άκραιφνές έγχέασα ποτηρίφ τινί τών ύαλί-
νων έώρα κατά τοΰ ύδατος εΐσω τού ποτηριού τά φάσματα τών
έσομένων πραγμάτων, καί προϋλεγεν άπό τής δψεως αύτά, άπερ
Ιμελλεν Ισεσθαι πάντως. Ή δέ πείρα τού πράγματος ούδέ ημάς 5
παρελήλυθεν.
[Φ 191]

4 καί μέγα κλέος Είχεν S: καί είς κλέος 6 Γέσιος μέγα άνέβη Φ. 5 ένεκα S: εΐνε-
καΦ. 6 άπάσης S: πάσης Φ. 20 έθαψεν proposuit Kassel.
 Deposing his own master, Domnus the Jew, and taking over almost
all his students, he acquired universal fame and was much admired
not only because of his medical proficiency both in teaching and in
practice, but also because of his overall culture. Being ambitious
and hard-working, he acquired over the years a semblance of
wisdom, through study rather than natural talent, while in medical
theory and practice he achieved a greater degree of precision than
any of his contemporary doctors and iatrosophists. Having come
late to the public practice of his science, he quickly progressed and
prospered in it, being impressive and not averse to pomp; he made
little progress in philosophy but thrived in medicine. This was the
source of a great fortune and of rare honours in the Roman State.
But I applaud the noble courage of his virtuous soul. For, when
Heraiscus was wanted by the emperor Zeno, he hid him in his own
house exposing himself to danger and, as Heraiscus fell ill in his
place of refuge and died, he buried him properly, wrapping up his
body and rendering it the customary honours.

129
A Refreshing his soul with dialectic intercourse.
B He met a holy woman blessed by the gods with a most
extraordinary nature. Pouring pure water into a glass cup, she saw
within the water the images of future events and from this vision
foretold things which always came to pass. And we ourselves had
personal experience of this.343

343 This may be a reference to the methods of divination to which the pagan community
had recourse during the persecution in order to foretell its outcome; cf. VS 40.
 Ό τι άγαγωμενφ Ίσιδώριρ Δόμναν γυναίκα τίκτεται αύτφ
παϊς έξ αυτής- Πρόκλον τό παιδίον έπωνόμασε. Καί ή Δόμνα έπί
γε τφ τόκφ πέμπτη ύστερον ήμεροι άποθνήσκει, κακοϋ θηρίου καί
πικρού συνοικεσίου έλευθερώσασα τόν φιλόσοφον έαυτής.
[Φ 301]

131
A Τόν δε Ίωάννην ό Άνατόλιος αίκισάμενός τε καί τών υπαρχόν­
των γυμνώσας.
[Φ 192]
Β Αύτίκα μέντοι καί οΐτος άπέρρηξε τόν βίον.
[Φ 193]
1
 After Isidore married Domna a son was bom to him by her; and
he named the child Proclus. Domna died on the fifth day after
childbirth, freeing her philosopher from an evil monster and a bitter
marriage.344

131
A Anatolius having tortured John345 and stripped him of his
possessions,
B he too died immediately after.

344 The association of Isidore with Socrates is further heightened by the parallel
Xanthippe / Domna.
345 This may well be the sophist who taught Severus and his brothers in Alexandria;
cf. VS 11-12.
 νπι
132
Α Ένέτυχον έξ άνάγκης τω Νεμεσίωνι· ού γάρ άν ποτέ έκών ήνε-
σχόμην τής αυτού ύηνείας, άλλ’ ή πρεσβεία μέ διηνάγκασε.
[Φ 194]
Β Ό δέ Νεμεσίων άνεπτεροΰτο καί μετέωρος fjv ταΐς έλπίσι καί
έδόκει έρμαίφ έντετυχηκέναι έμοί περιτυχών.
[S III447, 23 (Νεμεσίων)]

133
’Αντώνιος, Άλεξανδρεύς, δς ένδεέστερον έχων πρός τούς λό­
γους ού πάνυ τις fjv άκριβής· πρός δέ άλήθειαν ίερώτατος έγεγό-
νει καί λίαν έρρωτο τήν ψυχήν πρός θεού θεραπείμν, την τε δημο-
τελή τήν τε άπορρητοτέραν ώστε καί τήν Γάζαν άπέφηνεν ίερωτέ-
ραν πολλψ μάλλον ή πρότερον ήν. 5

132Α 1 Νεμεσίωνι scripsi duce Asinus: Έμεσίωνι Φ.

132Β cf. S I 206,29, S II 412,16.
 VIII: The conversion to philosophy

132
A Necessity drove me to Nemesio;346 for I would never willingly
have put up with his swinishness, but the embassy obliged me.
B When he came across me, Nemesion became excited and was
buoyed up by his hopes and felt that he had chanced upon an
unexpected treasure trove.347

133
Antony was an Alexandrian who, being rather deficient in
literary accomplishment, lacked precision in this field. But as
regards truth he was most holy with a soul firmly disposed towards
divine worship, both of a public and a more arcane nature, so that
he made Gaza a much holier place than it was before.348

346 This is in all probability the jurist mentioned by Aeneas of Gaza to Gessius (ep.
20). Damascius presumably contacts him as a member of a delegation on behalf of the
pagan community or simply in order to ensure a safe conduct for Isidore.
347 In accordance with the description by Aeneas of Gaza (ep. 20), Nemesio is eager
to make a new friend: ό καλός Νεμεσίων.-.φίλους οίδε θηρεϋειν.
348 The Life o f Porphyry, written by Mark the Deacon around 450, provides
excellent evidence for the tenacity of paganism in Gaza in the early fifth century.
Though his temple was destroyed by Bishop Porphyry, Mamas of Gaza was still a
popular god at home and abroad to judge from Proclus’ hymn dedicated to him
(Marinus VP 19); staunch pagans from Gaza like the rhetor Zosimus, who was executed
under Zeno, would still be found in the late fifth century (cf. PLREII ‘Zosimus 2'). For
the cultural and religious diversity of late antique Gaza, R. van Dam, ‘From paganism
to Christianity in late antique Gaza’, Viator 16 (1985) 1-20 and Colonna, Zacaria, 21-
22. On the ethnic composition of the population cf. the penetrating remarks of Stein
(Stein-Palanque II, 175). It is apposite to recall that Zacharias of Mytilene, Aeneas,
Procopius and Timotheus were all natives of Gaza, as also were Choricius and the
philosopher Isidore who taught in Athens before accompanying Damascius to
Ctesiphon in the aftermath of 529 (see also Appendix III). It is tempting to see a
connection between Isidore of Gaza and our Isidore who may have been responsible for
the former’s philosophical conversion during his stay in Gaza in 489/90; in recognition
of this debt, Isidore of Gaza would have assumed the name of his spiritual father either
then or later when he was summoned by Damascius to come and teach in Athens as one
of the leading minds “from all over the domain of Hellenism” (Agathias II.30.3).
 Έμβάς δέ είς πολιτικός υποθέσεις καί δικασάμενος ύπέρ τής
άδελφής προέστη αυτής έκθυμότερον τοϋ μέτριου και ύπερεδικά-
σατο κατά τό καρτερώτατον, ούτε χρόνου φειδόμενος είς ούδέν
δέον δαπανωμένου ούτε δόξης άμείνονος έπιστροφήν τινα ποιη-
σάμενος. Ήκουσε γάρ κακώς υπό τών τότε άνθρώπων ούχ ώς ίο
άδικών άλλ’ ώς φιλόδικων. Άνέβη γάρ καί ές τό Βυζάντιον έπί τή
δίκη καί σφόδρα φιλόνεικος έδοξέ τις είναι. Περιγενόμενος δέ
τών άντιδίκων ταΰτην μέν έξέδωκεν έτέρφ άνδρί, αυτός δέ έν ήσυ-
χίρ καί άπραγμοσύνη τό λοιπόν τοϋ βίου διετέλει, όλίγα μέν έν
φιλοσοφία, τά δέ πλείω διαιτώμενος έν τοΐς ίεροϊς. 'Απλούς δέ ήν 15
τό ήθος καί έτοιμος είς εύεργεσίας, άλλως τε καί τάς διά τών
ιερών. Έγωγε οΰν καί αυτός όμολογώ τφ άνδρί μεγίστην άτεχνώς
τήν χάριν, ήν άμείψασθαι αυτόν εύχομαι τους θεούς έν μακάρων
•νήσοις ήδη συζήν ήξιωμένον. 4
[S* 1249, 7 (’Αντώνιος)]

134
Α Λώρος ό άπό τής ’Αραβίας· ώς φησι Δαμάσκιος είς τήν Φιλό­
σοφον Ιστορίαν δεινότατον είναι ζητητήν τής άληθείας. Τούτον
’Ισίδωρος ό φιλόσοφος ήσθάνετο μέν τήν άρχήν έπί ταΐς Άριστο-
τέλους ύποθέσεσιν ένδεδεμένον, άτε εκ παίδων έν αύταις τεθραμ-
μένον πορρωτέρω τής ηλικίας, καί διά τήν άήθειαν τής Πλάτωνος 5
μεγαλοπρεπούς έπιστήμης ού δυνάμενον άναπτήναι πρός τά
ύψηλά καί λαμπρά τών νοημάτων. Οΰτω δέ έχοντα καταμαθών
άνεκαλέσατό τε κατά βραχύ καί άνεπέτασεν αύτοϋ τήν ψυχήν είς
τό μέγα πέλαγος τής άληθείας, ώστε άποσκευασάμενον τήν τά μι­
κρά συλλογιζομένην άκρίβειαν περιπατητικήν είς τήν διά Προμη- ιο
θέως τινός άμα φανοτάτψ πυρί καταπεμφθεΐσαν διαλεκτικήν,
αύτοψίαν τε καθαρώτατον ούσαν νοϋ καί φρονήσεως άναδραμεΐν
τε καί έν αυτή είσοικίσαι τάς τού βίου φιλοσόφους έλπίδας.
[S I I 137,3 (Λώρος)]
 Upon entering public life he undertook a law-suit on behalf of
his sister, pleading her cause too earnestly and defending her rather
too ardently, not heeding the amount of time that was being wasted
nor paying regard to his reputation. And he was accused by his
contemporaries not of wrongdoing, but of being too litigious; for he
took his case as far as Constantinople and gave the impression of
being extremely quarrelsome. When he had defeated his
adversaries he gave his sister in marriage to another man, and he
himself spent the rest of his life in peace and leisure, applying
himself a little to philosophy, while spending most of his time in the
temples. His character was simple and disposed to good works,
especially those concerning religion. And I myself owe him a truly
great favour which I pray the gods to return to him in the Isles of
the Blessed, where he must already be deservedly dwelling with
them.

134
A Dorus349 from Arabia. He was a mighty seeker after the truth.
The philosopher Isidore realised that he had been entangled from
the start in the hypotheses of Aristotle since these were the basis of
his education from childhood; given also his additional
unfamiliarity with Plato’s lofty wisdom, he was unable as he
progressed in years to soar towards elevated and luminous
concepts. Perceiving this, Isidore gradually drew him back and
unfurled his soul for sailing on the vast sea of Truth, so that Dorus
freed himself of the Peripatetic meticulousness which concentrates
on proving tiny points, and had recourse to the art of dialectics
which was sent down by some Prometheus at the same time as the
brightest fire to be the purest manifestation of the mind and of
wisdom, and based there his life’s hopes as regards philosophy.350

349 On the name Dorus. which is common in Arabia and seems to be a translation
of equivalent Semitic names, see M. Sartre, Inscriptions grecques et latines de la
Syrie, ΧΙΠ (1982), 9220,9441 and Id., Bostra: des origines ά Γ Islam, Paris 1985,199,
cf. 150.
330 It would appear that during the journey from Alexandria to Aphrodisias Isidore
was responsible for a double conversion to Platonic theology: that of the Aristotelian
Β Άπεδήμησεν εις τά Βόστρα τής ’Αραβίας, πόλιν μέν ούκ
άρχαίαν (ύπό γάρ Σεβήρου τοϋ βασιλέως πολίζεται), φρούριον δέ
παλαιόν, έπιτετειχισμένον τοΐς πέλας Διονυσιεϋσιν υπό των
’Αραβικών βασιλέων.
[Φ 196]
C Άκοΰσας τήν Ίώ θρυλουμένην καί τό δνομα τής πόλεως εις
τόν οίστρον τής βοός άναλυόμενον, ήγάπησε τήν συνέχειαν τής
περί τήν Ίώ πλάνης μυθευομένης.
[Φ 197]
D Έγνω δέ ενταύθα τόν Θεανδρίτην, άρρενωπόν δντα θεόν, καί
τόν άθηλυν βίον έμπνέοντα ταΐς ψυχαΐς.
[Φ 198]
B He journeyed to Bostra in Arabia, not an old town, since it
acquired the status of a city under the emperor Severus,* 351 but an
ancient citadel fortified by the Arab kings against their
neighbouring city of Dionysias.352
C Hearing the myth of lo353 and that the name of the city was
explained as “the gad fly of the heifer”,354 he took pleasure in the
connection with the legendary wanderings of Io.
D Here355 he came to know Theandrites, the masculine god who
inspires in one’s soul the taste for a virile life.

Dorus and of the rhetorician Damascius. The language of the passage is Platonic with
reminiscences of Phil. 16c.
351 Under the name of Nova Traiana Bostra, Bostra was made the capital of the
newly founded Province of Arabia in 106 A.D.; it was nevertheless only under Severus
Alexander that it was raised to the status of a Roman colonia; for full details, see Millar,
‘Roman Coloniae’ 39 ff. and Sartre, Bostra, esp. 122-124 discussing evidence relating
to A.D. 488-490 when the town was exceptionally prosperous. For a well documented
comprehensive history of the city and its monuments, see R. Bums, Monuments o f
Syria, London 1992, 61-68. Finally for an excellent analysis of the tone of this passage,
M. Tardieu, Paysages, 29-31.
352 See J.-P. Rey-Coquais, s.v. ‘Dionysias (Soueida)’, Princeton Encyclopaedia of
Classical Sites, 1976. The Greek name reflects the town's claim that it was founded by
Dionysus (cf. IGR 3, 1277, 1278) and below, n. 360. On the geographical identity and
ethnic constitution of the Decapolis in late antiquity, see P.-L. Gatier, ‘La presence
arabe i Gerasa et en D6capole\ in H. Lozachmeur, Presence arabe dans le Croissant
Fertile avant I'Hegire, 1995,109-118.
353 For a penetrating study on the Near-Eastern origin of the myth of Io, J.
Duchemin, ‘La justice de Zeus et le destin d’ Io: regard sur les sources proche-
orientales d’ un mythe dschylden’, REG 92 (1979) 1-54. The connection of Io with
Syria (Suda II 646, 23 ff.) remained vivid in the popular imagination: Malalas, 28-30,
gives a detailed description of the rituals and customs deriving from her legend, which
were still practised in his day at Antioch. The legend was also popular in Egypt where
Io was identified with Isis: for relevant references, see Griffiths, 443. For the Egyptian
connection from a Neoplatonic perspective, Macrobius Sat. 1.19.12-13.
334 From the Greek words βοός and οίστρος, a false etymology. Bostra is a phonetic
rendering of the local Semitic name Busrana.
333 According to Tardieu (Paysages, 38) the adverb “here” refers to a “high place”
in the Hauran east of Bostra, where Isidore recognised in the local god the Theandrites
that Proclus had celebrated in verse (cf. Marinus VP 19); hence the adjective
“masculine”, which indicates the anthropomorphic representation of a god more often
worshipped as a baetyl.
Α τής ’Αραβίας τό Στυγαΐον ύδωρ κατειβόμενον.
[Φ 195]
Β Λέγεται δέ καί τοϋτο τό ΰδωρ είναι Στύγιον. Τό δέ χωρίον, έν
φ έστί, πεδίον τής ’Αραβίας, άνηπλωμένον άπό τής έω μέχρι Δίας
τής έρημου πόλεως. Εΐτα έξαίφνης άναρρήγνυται χάσμα εις «βυ­
θόν πέτραις πανταχόθεν συνηρεφές καί τισιν άγρίοις φυτοΐς των
πετρών άποφυομένοις· κάθοδος έξ άριστεράς κατιόντι στενή καί 5
τραχεία (πρός γάρ τφ πετρώδει καί φυτοΐς άνημέροις καί άτά-
κτοις δασύνεται), μακρά δέ όσον έπί σταδίους πεντεκαίδεκα·
πλήν καταβαίνουσιν αύτήν ού μόνον ανδρες, άλλα καί γυναικών
αί εύζωνότεραι. Κατελθόντι δέ κήποι καί γεωργίαι πολλαί είσιν
έν τφ διαδεχομένψ αΰλώνι. Τό δ’ ούν άκρον αύτοΰ καί στενώτα- 10
τον ΰποδοχήν έχει τών καταλειβομένων έν κύκλφ Στυγίων ύδά-
των, καί διά την άπό πολλοΰ ύψους φοράν εις άέρα σκεδαννυμέ-
νων, εΐτα αύ πάλιν εις τό κάτω συμπηγνυμένων. Θέαμα τούτο καί
φύσεως έργον σεμνόν καί φρικώδες· ούκ έστιν ούδείς άνήρ δς
Ιδών ούκ άν πληρωθείη σεβασμίου φόβου. Τών δέ φιπτουμένων 15
τφ ΰδατι άναθημάτων τά μέν καταδύεται εις άβυθον, κάν έλαφρά
ή, οίς εύμενώς έχει τό θειον οΐς δέ μη, ταϋτα δέ άρα, κάν βαρύτα­
τα ή έπιπολάζει καί εις τό έκτος άποπτύεται θαυμαστόν τινα τρό­
πον. Τό δέ δρκιον τού τε χωρίου καί τών ύδάτων πεφρίκασι διά
πείρας οΐ έπιχώριοι, διό καί ήκιστα όμνύουσιν. Εί δέ ποτέ τις 20
έπιορκήσει, εΐσω ένιαυτοΰ άπόλλυται, φασί, φυσηθείς ύδέρφ τό
σώμα, καί ούδείς τήν δίκην διέφυγεν.
[Φ 199]
A The water of the Arabian Styx flowing down.356
B This water too is said to be Stygian. The area in which it lies is a
plain in Arabia stretching from the east as far as the abandoned
town of Dia.357 Then suddenly the earth splits into a deep chasm
thickly covered on all sides with rocks and with wild plants
growing from the rocks. On the left hand side the descent is narrow
and rough (since, as well as being stony, it is thick with wild and
irregular vegetation) extending for fifteen stades. Yet not only men,
but also fit women descend this path. At the bottom, in the glen
which follows on from it, there are gardens and many farms. At its
furthest and narrowest end the crevasse has a reservoir for the
waters of the Styx which fall down in a circle, are dispersed into the
air as a result of dropping from a great height and then collect again
below. This spectacle and natural phenomenon is both impressive
and terrifying. Noone has ever seen it without being filled with
religious awe. Of the offerings which are thrown into the water,
some sink into the abyss, even if they are light in weight, when the
divinity is favourable; otherwise, even if they are heavy, they float
and are regurgitated in an extraordinary manner.358 The local
inhabitants know from experience to hold in awe the oath sworn on
this place and these waters; this is why they swear by them veiy
seldom. And if anyone ever breaks this oath, they say that he
perishes within the year, his body becoming swollen by dropsy; and
noone has escaped this punishment.359

356 The words κατειβόμενον Στυγός ύδωρ are a standard Homeric expression
referring to “the greatest and most terrible oath” of the gods: cf. II. 15.36-38; Od. 5.184-
86 etc.; for an extensive commentary on this passage, see Tardieu, Paysages, 39-43. It
is worth noting that Porphyry had written a treatise Περί Στυγός, extensive fragments of
which have been preserved by Stobaeus (Smith Nos 372 - 380).
337 This is Dion, one of the cities of the Decapolis; the form Dia must represent the
name of the town in Damascius’ day, as it occurs in Hierocles, Synecdemus 722.4, who
gives a list of the cities of the empire in the early years of Justinian’s reign. For the
qualifying adjective Ερημος in the sense of “abandoned by the pagans", see Tardieu,
Paysages, 50-51 and 56 η. 119.
338 A similar story is told by Zosimus in connection with the cult of Aphrodite at
Aphaca, (I. 58.2).
339 For an exhaustive, if at times too subtle, commentary on this passage, see
 τ

Α Δουσάρην τόν Διόνυσον Ναβαταΐοι, ώς φησιν Ισίδωρος.

[Hesychius Δ 2277]
Β *Οτι Διόνυσος, φησί, Λυκούργον καί τούς έπομένους αύτώ
A The Nabataeans call Dionysus Dusares,360 as Isidore reports.361
B Dionysus prevailed against Lycurgus and his Arab followers by

Tardieu, Paysages, 43-69. As well as providing a Greek derivation for the name of the
river Yarmuk ('Iepopihtp=sacred bellowing, 48-49), Tardieu attempts to reproduce the
itinerary of Damascius and Isidore from Bostra to Dia (see his map on p. 44) and
identify the site of the Stygian waters described here. He concludes by proposing two
locations, both situated to the west of the Yarmuk and formed by its tributary Nahr al-
Ahrayr in the neighbourhood of Tall all-A$’ari (Dia) (see his map on p. 57).
360 Dusares-Dushara was the national god of the Nabataeans as a tribe and a state,
as well as the patron god of their ruling dynasty. His name, meaning “the one of ash-
Shara”, indicates his origin in the mountainous region of Petra before the rise of a city
there. After the demise of the Nabataean kingdom he remained an important deity of
Arabia and Syria (for a full spectrum of references, T. Fahd, Le pantheon de ΓArabie
centrale ά la veille de I’Higire, 71-75; additional details in E.A. Knauf, ‘Dushara and
Shai ‘Al-Qaum’, Aram 2 (1990), 175-181). Either alone or forming a trinity with Arsu-
Ares and Theandrites, Dusares is copiously represented in art and coinage both
anthropomorphically and aniconically, while by the mid-third century he was honoured
with special games, the Acta Dusaria: cf. G.W. Bowersock, ‘The Arabian Ares’ (1983),
‘An Arabian Trinity’ (1986) and esp. ‘The cult representation of Dusares in Roman
Arabia’ (1993) in id., Studies on the Eastern Roman Empire, Internationale Bibliothek
der Wissenschafien 9 (1994) 231-241 and 245-252. On the Acta Dusaria, celebrated at
Bostra, presumably every four years, Sartre, Bostra, 156-158.
The identification of Dusares with Dionysus, which goes back to the fifth century
B.C., indicates that in Jebel ash Shara the vineyard was cultivated before any contact
with the Greeks; the name Dionysias, given to Sueida in Hellenistic times, and the local
myths of rivalry between the god of wine and the teetotaller Shai ‘Al Qaum are
additional evidence in this direction while at the same time pointing to the tensions
arising from the two different ways of life. By late antiquity all this finds its expression
in the epic of Nonnus, whom Damascius may have met in Alexandria. As for the name
Δουσάριος, which seems to mean “leader of the road”, it is commonly attested in the
area (Sartre, Inscriptions, 9112,9129,9133,9439; Id. Bostra, 198-199).
361 The following passage may have its origin in the text of Damascius: θεύς Άρης·
τουτέστι θεός Άρης, έν Πέτρςι τής ’Αραβίας· σέβεται δέ θεός Άρης παρ’ αύτοίς- χόνδε δέ
γάρ μάλιστα τιμώσι. Τό δέ άγαλμα λίθος έσιΐ μέγας, τετράγωνος, άτύπωτος, ύψος
ποδών τεσσάρων, εύρος δύο- βάθος ένός· άνάκειται δέ έπί βάσεως χρυσηλάτον. Τούτψ
θύουσι καί τό αίμα τών Ιερείων προχέουσι· καί τοϋτό έστιν αύτοίς ή σπονδή. *0 δέ οίκος
άπας έστί πολύχρυσος, Οί τε γάρ τοίχοι χρυσέοι καί τά άναθήματα πολλά εΐσίν. (Patria,
84, Preger p. 194) “Theus Ares, that is the god Ares at Petra in Arabia, where they
worship the god Ares, rendering him particular honours. The statue is a shapeless black
square stone; its height measures four feet, its width two and its depth one; it rests on a
golden base. They sacrifice to it, pouring (on it) the blood of the victims and this is how
they offer libations. As for the temple, it is all in gold; its walls are gold-plated and there
are many votive offerings.”
 ’Άραβας κατηγωνίσατο οίνψ άπ’ άσκοΰ καταρράνας τήν πολε-
μίαν στρατιάν- έξ οδ καί τήν πόλιν έκάλεσε Δαμασκόν. Οί δέ τήν
έπωνυμίαν διδόασι τή πόλει άπό γίγαντος τινός, φ δνομα ’Ασκός,
δν ό Ζευς έδάμασεν ένταΰθα. Άλλοι δέ καί άλλας λέγουσι τής
έπωνυμίας αίτιας. Ό δέ συγγραφενς έκ ταύτης ώρμητο τής πόλεως.
[Φ 200]

137
Α Τόν χρωματισμόν, τουτέστι τήν των χρημάτων συλλογήν,
μηδέν φανείσθαι τοΐς έν Άιδου πρός βοήθειαν, ούδέ τήν τρυφήν,
ουδέ τάς πολυαράτους ταύτας τιμάς, ών ούδέν προτιμώσιν ο! πο­
λιτικοί καί σφόδρα υπό τών πολλών μακαριζόμενοι ώς εύδαίμο-
νες, δντες γε τή άληθείμ κακοδαίμονες.
[S IV 823, 13 (χρωματισμός ρ)]
Β Ώ ς ή άσχολία τού φητορεύειν δεινή, στρέφουσα μέν περί στό­
μα καί γλώτταν τήν δλην μου σπουδήν, άποστρέφουσα δέ τής
-ψυχής καί τών άποκαθαιρόντων αύτήν μακαρίων τε καί θεοφιλών
άκουσμάτων. Ταϋτα δ ’ έννοών, φησΐν ό συγγραφεύς, ένίοτε διεκο-
πτόμην τών ρητορικών έξηγήσεων. Ένατον έτος οΰτω μοι διελη-
λύθει.
[Φ 201]
C Άποστήναι ρητορικής καί ποιητικής καί άστ<ε>ϊσμών
[*S 1 391,24 (άστισμός)]
D Συνδιήγομεν άλλήλοις δσαι τε ήμέραι καί δσαι νύκτες, έπί
μήνας οκτώ.
[Φ 202]

137C 1 άστεϊσμών Zintzen.

 sprinkling the enemy army with the wine from a wineskin.362 This
is why he called the city Damascus.363 Others derive the name of
the city from a giant called Askos,364 whom Zeus overcame here,
while others explain the name in different ways. The author
originated in this city.

137
A The amassing of money is of no assistance to those in Hades nor
is luxury nor the accursed honours which are prized above all else
by those politicians who are envied by the multitude for their good
fortune, but are in truth ill-fated.
B How pernicious an activity was rhetoric, focusing all my
attention on the mouth and the tongue and turning it away from the
soul and from the blissful and divine lessons which purify it.
Realising this, I was sometimes distracted from my rhetorical
exegeses with which I had been occupying myself for nine years.
C To give up rhetoric and poetics and witticisms.
D We passed eight months in each other’s company, both day and
night.

362 Ever since Homer (//. 6.130-140), Lycurgus, son of Ares, had been known as the
enemy of Dionysus, ultimately punished by Zeus for exerting his insolence against the
god. Following local traditions, Nonnus transforms Lycurgus from a Thracian king into
a king of Arabia, and makes of the conflict between king and god a major episode of his
Dionysiaca (Books XX-XXI). Indeed, according to one identification, Lycurgus is none
other than Shai ‘Al-Qaum, the Nabataean god who hates alcohol (cf. Sourdel, Hauran,
81-84 and Knauf, art. cit. in n. 360). On variants of this important local myth and
relevant bibliography, see Nonnos de Panopolis, Les Dionysiaques VII Paris (1994),
11-19. It is worth pointing out that Nonnus was Pamprepius’ teacher and very probably
an acquaintance of Damascius. On the cult of Lycurgus in the Hauran, see P. Chuvin,
Mythologie et geographic dionysiaques: recherches sur /’ oeuvre de Nonnos de Pano­
polis, Clermont-Ferrand 1991,264-267.
363 From the verb δαμάζω (=subdue) and the noun άσχός (=wineskin); for an
equally fantastic etymology along Platonic lines, cf. Hesychius s.v. ‘Δαμασκός’: αίμα
σάκκου.
364 Cf. Stephanus Byzantius s.v. ‘Δαμασκός’: ώνομάσθη δέ δτι εϊς τών Γιγάντων
’Ασκός δνομα άμα Λυκούργω δήσας τόν Διόνυσον, Ιρριψεν εϊς τόν ποταμόν δν λύσας
ΈρμΑς, τόν ’Ασκόν το ί δέρματος έγύμνωσεν· δθεν πρός οίνον έπιτήδειον τό δέρμα.
 Είδον, φησί, τόν βαίτυλον διά τοΰ άέρος κινούμενον, ποτέ δ ’
έν τοΐς ίματίοις κρυπτόμενον, ήδη δε ποτέ καί έν χερσί βασταζό-
μενον τοΰ θεραπεΰοντος. Όνομα δ ’ ήν τφ θεραπεύοντι τόν βαίτυ­
λον Ευσέβιος, δς καί έλεγεν έπελθεΐν αύτφ ποτέ άδόκητον έξαίφ-
νης προθυμίαν άποπλανηθήναι τοΰ άστεως Έμίσης έν νυκτί με- 5
σούση σχεδόν ώς πορρωτάτω πρός τό δρος αυτό, έν φ της ’Αθή­
νας ϊδρυται νεώς άρχαιοπρεπής· άφικέσθαι δέ την ταχίστην είς
την υπώρειαν τοΰ δρους, καί αύτόθι καθίσαντα άναπαΰεσθαι
ώσπερ έξ όδοϋ· σφαίραν δέ πυράς ύψόθεν καταθοροΰσαν έξαίφ-
νης ίδεΐν, καί λέοντα μέγαν τή σφαίρμ παριστάμενον- τόν μέν δή to
παραχρήμα άφανή γενέσθαι, αύτόν δέ έπί την σφαίραν δραμεϊν
ήδη τοΰ πυρός άποσβεννυμένου καί καταλαβεΐν αυτήν ούσαν τόν
βαίτυλον, καί άναλαβείν αυτόν, καί διερωτήσαι δτου θεών άν εΐη,
φάναι δ’ έκεΐνον είναι τοΰ Γενναίου (τόν δέ Γενναϊον ot Ήλιου-
πολϊται τιμώσιν έν Διός ίδρυσάμενοι μορφήν τινα λέοντος), άπα- 15
γαγεΐν τε οΐκαδε τής αύτής νυκτός ούκ έλάττω σταδίων δέκα καί
διακοσίων, ώς έφη, διηνυκώς. Ούκ ήν δέ κύριος ό Ευσέβιος τής
τοΰ βαιτύλου κινήσεως, ώσπερ άλλοι άλλων· άλλ’ ό μέν έδεΐτο
καί ηΰχετο, ό δέ ύπήκουε πρός τάς χρησμωδίας. Ταϋτα ληρήσας
καί πολλά τοιαϋτα ό των βαιτυλίων ώς άληθώς άξιος, τόν λίθον 20
διαγράφει καί τό είδος αύτοϋ.
Σφαίρα μέν γάρ, φησίν, άκριβής έτύγχανεν ών, ύπόλευκος δέ
τό χρώμα, σπιθαμιαία δέ τήν διάμετρον κατά μέγεθος· άλλ’ ένίοτε
μείζων έγίνετο καί έλάττων, καί πορφυροειδής άλλοτε. Καί γράμ­
ματα άνέδειξεν ήμϊν έν τφ λίθφ γεγραμμένα, χρώματι τφ καλου- 25
μένφ τιγγαβαρίνφ κατακεχρωσμένα, {καί έν τοίχφ δέ έγκρούσας)
δι’ ών άπεδίδου τόν ζητούμενον τφ πυνθανομένφ χρησμόν <καί
έν τοίχψ έγκρούσας ...> καί φωνήν άφίει λεπτού συρίσματος, ήν

138 26 καί - έγκρούσας transposui, δέ omisi et post έγκρούσας lacunam suspicor.

 I saw the baetyl moving in the air, now hiding itself in the clothes
of its guardian, now held in his hands. The name of the guardian of
the baetyl was Eusebius, who said that at some point he had suddenly
had a strange urge to wander away from the town of Emesa in the
middle of the night almost as far as the mountain on which is built an
ancient temple of Athena; he came with great haste to the foot of the
mountain and sat down to rest as one does after a long journey. He
then suddenly saw a ball of fire leaping down from above and a huge
lion standing beside it, which instantly vanished.365 He ran up to the
ball as the fire was dying down and understood that this was indeed
the baetyl; picking it up, he asked it which god possessed it, and the
baetyl answered that it belonged to Gennaios (the Heliopolitans
honour Gennaios in the temple of Zeus in the shape of a lion).366 He
took it home that same night, covering, as he said, no less than two
hundred and ten stades. Eusebius was not the master of die baetyl’s
movement, as is the case with others, but he begged and prayed and
the baetyl listened to his incantations.367 Having babbled forth these
and many other such idiocies, the man truly worthy of little baetyls
describes its appearance.
The stone was a perfect sphere, whitish in colour and a span in
diameter; its size was sometimes larger, sometimes smaller, and on
occasions it acquired a purple hue. He pointed out to us letters
inscribed on the stone and coloured with the so-called vermillion,
through which it rendered oracles to the enquirer. And when he
banged it against a w all..., the stone gave out a soft whisding sound

365 Zosimus (1.58.1) also speaks of a torch or ball of fire which still appeared in his
own day (καί μέχρι τ(δν καθ’ ήμ&ς...χρόνων) at Aphaca as regular meetings to celebrate
Aphrodite Aphacitis were held; it is worth mentioning that according to the Christian
sources the temple of the goddess had been destroyed on Constantine’s orders
(Eusebius VC 111.55; Socrates 1.18.10), yet Sozomen (II.5.5), who faithfully echoes the
story of the temple’s destruction, also speaks of the darting fire, which rises from the
ridge of Mount Lebanon and plunges into the River Adonis, as a contemporary
phenomenon, indeed an epiphany of Aphrodite Urania.
366 This is the god Gad of Baalbek: Fahd, op. cit. 153. See also F. Cumont, RE s.v.
‘Γενναίος’ and Y. Hajjar, La triade d' Heliopolis-Baalbek, Leiden 1977, 288ff. (for a
negative view).
367 The baetyl’s independent movement reflects an ancient belief with deep
 ηρμήνευεν δ Εύσέβιος. Τερατολογήσας οΰν τά είρημένα ό χενό-
φρων οϋτος καί μύρια άλλα παραλογώτερα περί τοϋ βαιτύλον, 30
έπάγει- Εγώ μέν ωμήν θειότερον είναι τό χρήμα τοϋ βαιτύλου, ό δέ
’Ισίδωρος δαιμόνιον μάλλον Ελεγεν είναι γάρ τινα δαίμονα τόν
κινοΰντα αυτόν, ούτε τών βλαβερών οϋτε τών άγαν προσύλων, ού
μέντοι τών άνηγμένων είς τό άυλον είδος ουδέ τών καθαρών παν-
τάπασι. 35
Τών δέ βαιτύλων άλλον άλλφ άνακεϊσθαι, ώς έκεΐνος δυσφη­
μούν λέγει, θεφ, Κρόνφ, Διί, Ήλίφ, τοΐς άλλοις.
[Φ 203]

139
Ό τι Μαξιμϊνος φησίν-Έλλην δ ’ ούτος ήν τό σέβας, άνήρ δι’
άρετήν Ικανός έπαγαγέσθαι τό θειον- τάς βολάς τών όμμάτων
άφιείς οΰτω φοβερόν τι καί βλαβερόν ένέβλεπεν ώστε τών
ένορώντων άποστρέφειν τάς όψεις- καί τοϋτο φησίν Εκείνος συ-
νειδώς έαυτφ τά πολλά κάτω καί ού πρός τούς έντυγχάνοντας 5
Εβλεπεν. ’Αλλά καί πολλών ούτος φασμάτων έγίνετο θεατής,
άλλοις ούχ δρωμένων. Ικανός δέ ήν καί δαίμονας Επιπέμπειν
φθοροεργοΰς, καί άλλοθεν έπιπεμπομένους άναστέλλειν. Πλήν
δυσσεβών άλούς κατά τό Βυζάντιον τήν διά ξίφους ούκ έξέφυγε
δίκην. 10
[Φ 204 + *S I I 326,7 (έπαγαγέσθαι ρ)]

140
Α ούτε φιλόσοφον βίον έννοήσας. Η τις ών τών πολλών ύβρίζει
ύβρεις τάς έξ άνθρώπων...
[Φ 205]
Β Άκαμάτιος- Ήλιουπολίτης, Επιεικέστερος τών άλλων πο­
λιτών- ούτω δέ ίδιωτικώς είχεν, ώστε ούδέν προμαθών ούδέ έπι-
μαθών τών ές λόγους ήκόντων οίουσδήτινας, ήξίου καλείσθαι φι­
λόσοφος καί τφ όνόματι τούτφ πρός άπαντας Εαυτόν κατεμή-

139 S solum 1 άνήρ - 2 τό θείον, quae verba omittit Φ.

4 ένορώντων Φ ν.1.: όρώντων Φ.
 that Eusebius interpreted. After relating the above-mentioned
wonder, and thousands of even more absurd stories about the
baetyl, this empty-headed man adds: For my part I thought that the
baetyl was divine, while Isidore found it rather demonic; he said
that it was moved by a demon, not one of those who are harmful or
too material, nor yet one of those who have achieved immateriality
and are altogether pure.
Each baetyl is ascribed to a specific god, as he blasphemously
relates, to Cronus, to Zeus, to Helios, and to others.

139
When Maximinus -he was a Hellene by religion and a man
capable of summoning divinity through his virtue- fixed his gaze
on something, he stared in so frightening and baleful a manner that
those looking on would avert their eyes. Being aware of this, he
would normally keep his eyes on the ground rather than face those
he met. Nevertheless he was witness to many apparitions which
were not perceived by others, He was also able to let loose harmful
demons and to check those sent from elsewhere. Yet, convicted for
impiety in Constantinople, he did not escape punishment by the
sword.

140
A Nor did he understand what the philosophical life was all about.
Indeed if anyone among the common herd is guilty of insolence [it
was he].
B Acamatius, a native of Heliopolis. He was more decent than the
rest of the citizens. He was so unprofessional that he expected to be
called a philosopher without any previous training or subsequent
reading in letters,*368 and introduced himself to everybody by this

functional roots in Phoenician cosmogony. Thus, according to the tradition reported by

Philo of Byblos, Ouranos invented the Baetyls as weapons in his struggle against his
son Cronus: “έπενόησε θεός Οΐιρανός βοατύλια, λίθους έμψυχους μηχανησάμενος” 23
(=Baumgarten 810).
368 An ironically coloured reminiscence of Thucydides 1.138.3, which refers to
Themistocles.
 νυεν, ούδέ τών Ήλιουπολιτών άλλως ούδείς αύτόν έπωνόμαζεν ή 5
τόν φιλόσοφον. Τοΰτο μέν τοίνυν όνειδος έστω τής άνθρωπίνης
άπαιδευσίας.
[S* 175,17 (Άκαμάτιος pp)]
C Ό δέ, εΐ τι τύχοι, πρός έκαστον τών προσιόντων ήλαζονεύετο,
συμπλάττων άπό τών εΐκότων.
[*S I I 525,20 (είκότων ρ)]
D Παραγεγονότων δέ ημών είς Ήλιούπολιν άπέβη σχεδόν τοΰτο
τό πλάσμα τής Άκαματίου φιλοσοφίας. Ήβούλετο δέ τις είναι
καί τών Ιεροσκόπων. Τοΰτο μέντοι συγγνώμης άξιον, ότι καί
όπωσοΰν ήδΰνατο τά τοιαΰτα περιλαβεϊν, άλλως τε καί πρός
Ιδιώτας. 5
[S* 175, 22 (Άκαμάτιος pp)]

141
Α Άπειρος ών τών πληκτικών τούτων καί άνιάτων πραγμάτων.
[Φ 206]
Β Ή άναβολή μακροτέρα αύτφ γέγονε τών τε είς Καρίαν καί
τών Άθήναζε σπευδουσών έλπίδων.
[Φ 207]
C Καί πρός θεοΰ λιπαρήσεις έρχομαι.
[Φ 208]
D Τοΰ Κυλληνίου βλακεύοντος καί τά πράγματα άναβάλλοντος
ούδέν ήνυτεν ό Ισίδωρος.
[Φ 209]
Ε Ού φεισάμενος τοΰ πολυτελεστάτου τφ δντι δαπανήματος,
τοΰ χρόνου, κατά τόν είπόντα σοφόν.
[Φ 210]

142
A Όρών δέ έμαυτόν τφ θείφ φωτί περιρρεόμενον, πώς οΐει σφό-
δρα τήν ψυχήν έτανυσκόμην;
[Φ 211]

140C cf. S I 97,10.

 title so that no Heliopolitan called him by any name other than “the
philosopher”. Let this disgrace be a monument to the lack of
education among men.
C And if he had the chance, he boasted to each newcomer,
fabricating stories which sounded plausible.
D But our arrival in Heliopolis effectively meant the end of
Acamatius’ pretence at philosophy.369370
He also wanted to be a haruspex,m but this at least was
forgivable as it was a science that he could somehow comprehend,
especially by the standards of laymen.

141
A Having had no previous experience of these disturbing and
irreparable matters.
B The delay was too long for the hopes which sped him towards
Caria and Athens.371
C lam coming to the supplications to the god.
D As the Cyllenian / Cyllenius372 wasted time and delayed
matters, Isidore failed to achieve anything.
E But without sparing the expense which costs one the most
-time, as the philosopher said.373

142
A How mightily do you think my soul soared up as I saw myself
surrounded by divine light.

369 Damascius was seriously interested in local philosophical traditions, and

specifically refers in his discussion of first principles to different interpretations of letter
symbols among the Egyptians, the Heliopolitans and the inhabitants of Gaza (cf. In
F arm . 127-128 with note a d loc. reporting Georges Maspero’s comment on the
passage). This note can now be completed by the remarks contained in Combos’ edition
of the In F arm . Π, 155-158, nn. 2 and esp. 4 on the figure Hi dedicated by the
inhabitants of Gaza to Zeus-Mama, to which Damascius refers.
370 A diviner and inspector of sacrificial victims.
371 This, in connection with 122C, provides evidence for a p la n n e d trip to Athens
via Aphrodisias.
372 It is not clear from the text whether this is a personal or an ethnic name. Maybe
the reference is to a friend or a pagan official who had promised to help Isidore.
373 A saying attributed to many: cf. Diogenes Laertius V. 40 (for Theophrastus);
VII.23 (for Zeno of Kitium).
 B O n ό έν Βυρητφ φησίν ’Ασκληπιός ούκ έστιν Έλλην οΐιδέ
Αιγύπτιος, άλλά τις έπιχώριος Φοΐνιξ. Σαδύκφ γάρ έγένοντο
παΐδες, οΰς Διοσκούρους έρμηνεύουσι καί Κάβειρους. Όγδοος δε
έγένετο έπί τούτοις ό Έσμουνος, δν ’Ασκληπιόν έρμηνεύουσιν.
Οΰτος κάλλιστος ών θέαν καί νεανίας Ιδεϊν άξιάγαστος, έρώμε- 5
νος γέγονεν, ώς φησιν ό μύθος, Άστρονόης θεού Φοινίσσης, μη-
τρός θεών. Είωθώς τε κυνηγετεΐν έν ταΐσδε ταΐς νάπαις, έπειδή
έθεάσατο τήν θεόν αυτόν έκκυνηγετοΰσαν καί φεύγοντα έπιδιώ-
κουσαν καί ήδη καταληψομένην, έκμανής γενόμενος, άποτέμνει
πελέκει τήν αύτός αυτού παιδοσπόρον φύσιν. Ή δέ τω πάθει περί- ίο
αλγήσασα, καί Παιάνα καλέσασα, τόν νεανίσκον τη τε ζωογόνφ
θέρμη άναζωπυρήσασα θεόν έποίησεν, Έσμουνον υπό Φοινίκων
ώνομασμένον έπί τή θέρμη τής ζωής. Οί δέ τόν Έσμουνον όγδοον
άξιοΰσιν έρμηνεύειν δτι όγδοος ήν τφ Σαδύκφ παίς.
[Φ 302+ Φ 212]
C Καί έγώ ταΰτα άπήγγειλα τφ Ίσιδώρφ σοφήν τε καί ένθεον άεί
προτείνοντι πρός τούς μύθους τούς ιερούς άκοήν.
[Φ 213]

142Β Φ212 solum 9 έκμανής - 10 φύσιν.

9 έκμανής γενόμενος Φ212: om. Φ302. 9 άποτέμνει πελέκει Φ302: άνελών
τόν πέλεκυν άποτέμνει Φ212. 10 αύτοϋ Φ302: έαυτοϋ Φ212.
B The Asclepius of Berytus is neither Greek nor Egyptian but a
local Phoenician [god]. Sadycus had children who are identified
with the Dioscuri and the Cabeiri; after them the eighth child was
Eshmun who is identified with Asclepius.374 Being an extremely
beautiful young man, ravishing to the eye, he was loved, according
to the myth, by the Phoenician goddess Astronoe, the Mother of the
gods. He was hunting, as was his custom, in these375 glens when he
saw the goddess chasing after him; as she continued her pursuit and
was about to catch him, he fell into a state of frenzy and cut off his
own organs of procreation with an axe. Devastated by grief at this
misfortune, the goddess summoned Paean and, reviving the youth
with her life-giving warmth, she made him a god, called by the
Phoenicians Eshmun after the warmth of life. Others however
interpret the name “Eshmun” as “eighth” because he was the eighth
son of Sadycus.376
C I reported all this to Isidore377 who always paid to sacred myths
an attention that was wise and divinely inspired.378

374 Cf. Philo of Byblos 38 (=Baumgarten 813): ol έπτά Συδύκου παίδες Κάβειροι
καί ό δγδοος αυτών άδελφός ’Ασκληπιός. Also ibid. 25 (=Baumgarten 811): Συδύκψ δέ
τφ λεγομένψ δικαίψ μία τών Τιτανίδων συνελθοϋσα γεννά τόν ’Ασκληπιόν.
375 The demonstrative pronoun suggests that Damascius reproduces the story in the
words of a local inhabitant or from the temple archives; indeed the whole passage is
structured in the style of an oriental narrative; cf. above, p. 60, n.131.
376 The passage is translated and discussed by Baumgarten, 227-230, who considers
“the possibility that in the story of Asclepios and Astronoe Damascius has retold an
unrecognized fragment of Philo's P ho en icia n H isto ry " (230). A simpler and much
more likely explanation is that they are both drawing on a local tradition, which in the
case of the traveller Damascius, and in view of 142C, is an oral one. Baumgarten is
closer to the truth when stating: “it is impossible to prove that Damascius must have
derived his information from Philo; he might have had a different Phoenician source”
{ibid). It is worth pointing out that in terms of late antique spirituality the number eight
represents the absolute, as it evokes the sphere of the fixed stars which lies beyond all
movement and change symbolised by the seven planetary spheres.
377 Isidore seems to be detained in a local prison, cf. p. 36.
378 Cf. V P 22: “Proclus perceived that theology (...) which is hidden in fictional
myths and brought it to light for the sake of those who are willing and able to follow”.
 A ΟΙηθέντα περί τφ σώματι κινδυνεύειν.
[Φ 214]
B ’Αλλά τούτο μέν τής Ιδιώτιδος άρα δείγμα προαιρέσεως.
[Φ215]

144
Α Ταΰτα άναγεγράφθω μοι χαρίσια όλίγα άντί πολλών άποδι-
δόντι.
[S 1384, 9 (Άσκληπιόδοτος pp) + Φ 216]
Β Έναυστολούμεθα πρός τήν Σάμον.
[Φ 217]
C Τό σώμα δέ έφυσδτο, κάτωθεν άρξάμενον άπό τών ποδών εως
ήδη τών βουβώνων καί τής αίδούς.
[Φ 218]
D Κατεκοιμήθην έπί τής νεώς, καί πως άφροδισιάζομαι τοίς
όνείρασι.
[Φ 219]
Ε Κρήδεμνον, φωσσώνιον, δράριον φωμαϊκώς, προσώπου έκμα-
γείον, ήμιτΰμβιον.
[Φ 220]

144Α cf. S IV 790,1.

Φsolum όλίγα dtvrLπολλών άποδιδόντι χαρίσια.
144Ε cf. S IV 758,14.
r

143
A When he thought that his life was in danger.
B But this was a sure sign of his foolish choice of life.

144
A Let these words be recorded as a small thank-offerings for the
many favours he [Asclepiodotus] has rendered.379
B We were sailing to Samos.
C The body was swollen starting below from the feet and
extending to the groin and the private parts.
D I fell asleep on the boat and was somehow making love in my
dream.
E A linen head-dress, a towel -orarium in Latin- a face-cloth, a
napkin.

379 The sentence belongs to the article ‘Asclepiodotus’ in the Suda; its place here is
indicated by the parallel passage in the Photian Epitome. It is probable therefore that,
after describing their stay in Aphrodisias as guests of Asclepiodotus, Damascius
expresses his gratitude towards the Alexandrian philosopher, and continues the
narration of his travels: together with Isidore (and probably Dorns too) he journeys to
Ephesus, thence to Samos and finally to Piraeus.
 145
Α Εις τοσοϋτον γάρ άκηκόαμεν φιλοσοφίαν καταφρονηθεϊσαν
ούδέ πώποτε Άθήνησιν, όσον έωράκαμεν άτιμαζομένην έπί Ήγίου.
[Φ 221]
Β Ήγίας· ούτος άμείνω τοϋ πατρός ήν τά πρός άρετήν Σκόντα
και τά πρός λόγους. Έ τι μήν μειράκιον γεγονώς έλπίδας έσχεν
έφ’ έαυτφ καί πδσι παρέσχεν ώς ού πολύ τι άπολειψόμενος τοϋ
μεγάλου Πλουτάρχου. Τοιγαροΰν ό Πρόκλος ήξίωσεν αύτόν έτι
νέον δντα τής των χαλδαϊκών λογιών άκροάσεως. Φιλομαθία τις 5
αύτφ καί επιείκεια προσήν κατά φύσιν. Αλλά τοϋτο δή τό είωθός,
ό πλούτος μέγα κακόν ταΐς ψυχαΐς εοικεν είναι, νομήν άφθονον
τοϊς κόλαξι παρεχόμενος, ού χρυσίου μόνον (ουπω γάρ τοϋτο
δεινόν), άλλά νέου ψυχής άπαλής καί φςιδίως ύπό τών τοιούτων
θηρίων καταβοσκομένης, ώσπερ άτεχνώς άρτι άνθούσης βοτάνης. ίο
Οΰτοι διέφθειραν τήν Ήγίου ζωήν πρός γε τό μή γνησίως φιλοσο-
φεϊν. "Αλλως δέ φιλομαθής όσα τήν φύσιν έξηγήσασθαι* έπεί κατά
τήν άλλην συνήθειαν έστιν δπη καί διεκπίπτει τών όρθών λογι­
σμών. Ιερός δέ εΐπερ τις άλλος είναι βουλόμενος τά τε τών κηδε-
στών ιερά λαθών έτελειώσατο κατά τήν ’Αττικήν, ού πείσας έκεί- 15
νους, καί πολλά άλλα τών κειμένων τέως έκ πλείστου χρόνου πά­
λιν έκίνησε παραβολώτερον ή εύσεβέστερον τή προθυμία χρησά-
μενος. Όθεν έν τή πολιτεία περιβόητος έγένετο καί χαλεπούς έφ’

145Β 3 άπολειψόμενος Bemhardy: άπολειπόμενος S.

 IX: Athens fin de siecle

145
A We had never heard of philosophy being so despised in Athens
as we saw it dishonoured in the time of Hegias.380
B Hegias: he was superior to his father in the fields of virtue and
literary achievement. As an adolescent he had hopes for himself
and inspired hopes in all others that he would come close to
rivalling the great Plutarch, so that, when he was still young,
Proclus considered him worthy of following his lectures on the
Chaldaean Oracles. He had an innate love of learning and piety;
but, as is often the case, wealth proved a great evil to the soul,
providing a rich pasture for flatterers to feed on, not only as regards
his money -for this would not have been so terrible- but as regards
his young and tender soul, as easily devoured by such beasts as a
field of fresh grass. These were the people who corrupted Hegias’
life, leading him away from true philosophy. Otherwise he was
eager for learning in the field of the natural sciences; but in general
there were times when he even left the path of reason. Aspiring to
be the most pious of men, he completed work on the shrines of his
relatives all over Attica, secretly, for he did not have their
approval,381 and restored many holy places which had been lying in
ruins for a long time,382 with an enthusiasm which was more
indiscreet than pious. Thus he became notorious among his

380 The implication of this sentence is that Hegias, who was the offspring of a
philosophically famous and politically powerful family, and had been coached by
Proclus in Neoplatonic theology (V P 26, and below 151), occupied the Platonic chair
some time in the 490s. One should also mention the hypothesis that Glucker bases on
this passage (p. 307, n.23): “that Hegias became influential in local politics and treated
philosophy with contempt a s a p o liticia n ".
381 Alan Cameron finds in this obscure phrase evidence for Hegias’ relatives being
Christian (‘The last days’, 10, n. 4). I would not go so far as to interpret an attitude of
embarassed reserve as a sign of adherence to Christianity.
382 The following translation is also possible on grammatical grounds: “he
performed all over Attica holy rites on behalf of his relatives/ in-laws secretly —for he
did not have their approval—, and renewed many of the religious customs which had
not been performed for a long time”. If indeed Hegias is the holder of the Platonic chair,
 έαυτφ τούς έχθρούς έπεσπάσατο τούς τε μεγάλων χρημάτων όρε-
γομένους, ών κύριος ήν, καί άπό των καθεστώτων νομίμων έπι- 20
βουλεύοντας· ένήν γάρ τι τφ Ήγίμ καί τής Θεογενούς μεγαλόφρο-
νος φύσεως έν ταΐς εύεργεσίαις· άκριβέστερον δέ έκείνου
τοσοΰτον δσον ές φίλους καί δεομένους άναλίσκειν.
[S* I I 550, 3 (Ήγίας)]

146
Α Εύπείθιος καί Άρχιάδας, δύο υιοί Ήγίου. Καί ό μέν Εύπεί-
θιος εύφυέστερος έγένετο, τά δέ ήθη έπισεσυρμένος εις Ιδιωτι­
σμόν, ήδη δέ τι καί άτοπώτερον έχων ή κατά ιδιώτην, ώς δέ συλ­
λήβδην είπέϊν, πολλφ τοΰ πατρός άπολειπόμενος· ό δέ Άρχιάδας
τό μέν δλον τοΰ πατρός ούκ όλίγιρ ήν διαφέρων καί πολλών 5
άλλων εις άρετήν, τά δέ εις φιλοσοφίαν άγοντα παρειμένος, άτε
πρός ταϋτα άνάγωγος ών διά τήν ούκ άκολάκευτον πατρφαν
ούσίαν, ίεράν δέ ζωήν προβεβλημένος εΐπερ τις έτερος, καί πολυ-
πειρίαν άσκήσας Ιερών έργων τε καί λόγων ούδέν τι μεΐον τοΰ
πατρός1έχω γάρ τούτο καί τφ Ήγίρ μαρτυρεΐν. Ό δέ Άρχιάδας 10
καί τοΰ καθαροΰ συνειδότος έπεμελεϊτο διαφερόντως ούδέν
ήττον τών φιλοσοφούντων.
[Φ 223 + S I I 464,20 (Εύπείθιος καί Άρχιάδας pp) + Φ 222]
Β Ούδέν γάρ είναι τών άνθρωπίνων άκεραίου συνειδότος άντά-
ξιον. Δει δέ τόν εύσχήμονα τρόπον συνδιαιτάσθαι τοϊς πέλας. Ei
καί έναντίον εϊη τφ φαινομένφ τό άληθινόν άγαθόν, μηδέποτε
έκεΐνο τούτου έπίπροσθεν άγειν μηδέ άλλο ότιούν περί πλείονος
ποιεΐσθαι τής άληθείας, μήτε κίνδυνον άγώνος έπιφερομένου μήτε 5
δκνψ άποστρεφόμενον έργον έπίπονον, μηδέ κέρδος έπαίνου άδι­
κου, μήτε συνήθειαν φιλίας, μηδέ συγγένειας τινός άνάγκην.
[S 178, 6 (άκέραιον συνειδός)]

146Α Φ 223 solum 1 6 μέν - 3 Ιδιώτην, Φ 222 solum 4 6 δέ - 8 έτερος.

1 καί δ μέν S: δ μέν ούν Φ 223. 2 εύφυέστερος S: ευφυέστερος μέν
Φ 223. 2 εις Φ ές S. 3 ήδη δέ τι S: ήδη δέ Φ 223. 3 κατά Ιδιώτην S: κατ’
Ιδιώτην Φ 223. 5 ήν Φ 222: om. S. 5 καί πολλών άλλων εις άρετήν Φ 222:
είς άρετήν καί τών πολλών S. 6 είς Φ: ές S.
r

compatriots, attracting to himself dangerous enemies, of whom

some desired the huge fortune that he possessed, and others
conspired against him with the backing of the established order.
There was something in Hegias of Theagenes’ generous nature
when it came to benefactions; except that in spending on friends
and the needy he was more parsimonious than Theagenes.

146
A Eupeithius and Archiadas, two sons of Hegias. Eupeithius was
more gifted, but in behaviour he tended to vulgarity, indeed he was
in some ways even worse than one of the multitude and -to put it
simply- much inferior to his father.
Archiadas was in general considerably superior in virtue to his
father and many others, but in philosophical matters he was slack,
having remained untrained in this field on account of his paternal
fortune which made him susceptible to flattery. Yet, more than
anybody else, he had chosen a holy life, practising a variety of holy
words and deeds no less than his father, On this I can indeed testify
as regards Hegias too. Moreover Archiadas was particularly
concerned about having a clear conscience, indeed no less than the
philosophers.
B Nothing human is worth as much as a clear conscience. A man
should indeed live together with his fellow-humans in a decent
manner, and if the true good is contrary to the apparent good, never
prefer the latter nor give greater importance to anything other than
Truth - not the danger of an impending struggle, nor a difficult task
from which one turns away in fear;*383 nor the profit gained from
undeserved praise; nor a long-standing friendship nor the
obligations which arise from family connections.

as Damascius seems to suggest here (cf. 151E), then in behaving in this way he is
clearly imitating Proclus; cf. Marinus VP 36.
383 The attitude is typical of Damascius, who took over the Academy when it had
reached its lowest ebb and turned it into a flourishing institution.
C Ούχ δσιόν έστι τά μεγάλα σοφόν γενέσθαι τόν τά μικρά μή δυ-
νάμενον.
[S III568, 15 (όσιον χωρίον ρ)]
D Καί δή καί την άλλην άρετήν άστάθμητος, ώς είπείν, ό άνθρω­
πος οΰτος ήν.
[*S I 389,5 (άστάθμητος ρ)]
Ε Ή ν οΰν αισθάνεσθαι πάντων, ησθανόμην δέ καί αυτός έκά-
στοτε των άμφ’ αύτφ κενοΰ φυσήματος άνευ νοϋ έμπιπλαμένων.
Παθών δέ παντοίων κατάμεστοι δντες ουδέ έν μέσοις αύτοΐς
τοΐς δρωμένοις οΐοί τε ήσαν ήθεσι μετρίοις έγκαρτερεΐν- έπεί τά γε
έξω μισγάγκεια κακών έφαίνετο <...> μηδέν διαφέρουσα τής τών 5
άγελαίων άνθρώπων. Ό δ ’ οΰν Διομήδης διέφθαρτο καί αυτός
ύπό τής συνουσίας καί οΰδέν έχων έξαρμα φύσεως έτι ταπεινότε­
ρος έγεγόνει προς τά έπιταττόμενα. (καίτοι) Ύπό κολάκων διε-
φθάρη τήν διάνοιαν, <καίτοι> ευφυής (τε) γεγονώς άνήρ πρός φι­
λοσοφίαν, ή οάδέν άλλοτρίφ κακφ βλάπτεται ουδέ φθείρεται, ίο
οίκείφ δέ μόνφ, ώς έφη Σωκράτης. Διό καί φιλοσοφίαν έλυμήνα-
το τοϋτο αϊτό τό οΐκοθεν όνειδος. Ό ν γάρ έδει μάλιστα διασψ-
ζειν καί θεραπεΰειν πρός τό βέλτιστον, τούτον πρός ήδονάς άνα-
τρέφοντες καί μετεωρίζοντες ές αυχημα μεΐζον ή καθ’ έαυτόν,
έλαθον έαυτοΰς ές πάσαν άτιμίαν καταβαλόντες. is
[S I I 464, 30 (Εύπείθιος καί Άρχιάδας pp)]

146Ε 5 post έφαίνετο lacunam suspicor. 8 καίτοι transposui. 9 τε del. Zintzen.

C It is not right384 for the man who cannot be wise over small
things to become a sage over great things.
D And indeed as regards virtue in general, this man was, so to
speak, unstable.
E It was possible to notice everything, and I myself saw on each
occasion those around him filled with empty and mindless bluster.
Being replete with all kinds of passions, they were incapable of
maintaining rational behaviour even in the midst of such a
situation; indeed their external behaviour appeared a cocktail of
evils, differing in nothing from that of the common herd.385
Diomedes386 too had been corrupted by their company and, not
having any natural distinction, he became even more subservient
towards the Law.387 His mind was corrupted by flatterers, gifted
though he was in philosophy -and of course philosophy cannot be
harmed or damaged by any external evil, but only by the evil
within, as Socrates said- this is why the downfall of philosophy
was caused by disgrace from within, since the man who should
have preserved and fostered it for the best, this man they brought up
with a hedonistic mentality, and incited him to boast above his
worth, thus unwittingly hurling themselves into all manner of
dishonour.

384 In the sense of “according to the divine law”.

385 If I am right in detecting a lacuna after έφαίνετο, then the meaning of the
passage would be something like the following: “and while the external situation
seemed (to be) a watershed of evils, their behaviour fell short of the circumstances,
differing in nothing from that of the common herd”. For the meaning of the rare word
μισγάγκεια, cf. Princ. Ill, 214.
386 Diomedes may well be the son of either Eupeithius or Archiadas.
387 The law, especially on religious matters, was notoriously disregarded in the
later Roman empire (cf. Libanius or. 30.8). In this connection it is worth consulting
F.R. Trombley, Hellenic Religion and Christianization, c. 370-529,1-II, Leiden 1993-
94. Commenting on the book’s useful chapter on legislation against sacrifice, D.
Frankfurter (Bryn Mawr Class. Rev. 5.7 (1994) 640) appositely remarks: “Discussing
the full sequence of anti-“pagan” edicts through the sixth century in their historical
contexts, Trombley shows with little doubt that this legislation was unenforcable
locally, that the historical sequence of edicts actually documents the continuity of native
cults, and that legislators consistently compromised on the edicts’ wording and
enforcement and likewise ignored the local syncretisms that allowed continuities to
maintain their traditions”.
 Σιλβανός, φιλόσοφος- δς έπιεικής μέν ήν τά άλλα καί Ιερός,
άπλούστερος δέ τά ήθη καί έπιπόλαιος.
IS* IV 358, 20 (Σιλβανός)]

148
Α ’Ασθενών αυτός τό σώμα καί οΐ> πόρρω τείνουν θανάτου.
[Φ 224]
Β Ό δέ πρός μέν τό παραυτίκα δυσχερώς Ακούσε τής άπολογίας
άτε μή κατ’ έλπίδας αύτώ πραττούσης της άγαθοειδοϋς προαιρέ-
σεως.
[Φ225]
C Τοιαύτα πολλά λέγων τε καί έπάδων έπεισε τόν ’Ισίδωρον ό
Μαρίνος δέξασθαι τό -ψήφισμα τής διαδοχής- καί έψηφίσθη διάδο­
χος έπ’ άξιώματι μάλλον ή πράγματι τής Πλατωνικής έξηγήσεως.
[Φ 226]
D Έν σκότψ διωλυγίφ πολύ φώς άνάψας.
[Φ 303]
Ε Τούτον άπεδέξαντο τού νεανίσκου τόν λόγον καί ήγάσθησαν
οί άμφί τόν Μαρίνον, πώς οΐει σφόδρα.
[Φ 304]

149
Α Τόν άρχοντα τών άρχομένων εΐνεκα πάντα διαπράττεσθαι
δεϊν. Ό δέ Ήγίας ήξίου συ μόνον τόν άρχοντα τών άρχομένων τί-
θεσθαι πρόνοιαν, άλλά καί αύτοΰ πρό έκείνων. Έκάστψ γάρ είναι
την έφεσιν τού άγαθοΰ πρός έαυτόν μάλλον ή πρός έτερον. Ό δέ
’Ισίδωρός φησιν τόν άρχοντα ή <άρχων προνοεΐν τών άρχομέ- 5
νουν- διά τούτο γάρ αυτούς τού> άρχοντος άκούειν- εί δέ καί έαυ-
τοΰ φροντίδα ποιοΐτο, ώς ένός γε καί έαυτού τών άρχομένων καί
δεομένων προνοίας. Τόν γάρ τοι άρχοντα τφ άκριβέϊ λόγψ

147 cf. S II 375,6.

148Ε cf. S IV 224, 26.
149A 3 αύτοΰ Merkelbach: αύτοϋ S. 3 πρό Hermann: πρός S. 4 έαυτόν ed. Aid.:
έαυτό S. 5 ϋρχων - 6 τού . lacunam indicavit Kassel, sic proposuit
Merkelbach.
 147
Silvanus, a philosopher; he was generally decent and pious, but
too simple and superficial in character.

148
A He was weak in body and not far from death.
B But for the moment he listened to the plea with displeasure, for
the seemingly good decision was not in accordance with his
hopes.388
C Repeating and reiterating such things, Marinus persuaded
Isidore to accept the vote on the succession; and he was elected a
diadochus of the Platonic School in honorary rather than in real
terms.
D Shedding much light in the midst of this immense darkness.389
E The pupils of Marinus accepted the young man’s proposition
and were greatly delighted.

149
A The ruler must do everything for the sake of those he rules.390
But Hegias maintained that the ruler should not merely take care of
those whom he rules but of his own self in priority to them, since
everyone desires the good for himself before others. Isidore on the
other hand says that the ruler qua ruler looks after the ruled and for
this reason they obey him; but if he looks after himself as well, he
does so as one of the ruled who is in need of being cared for. The
ruler in the strict sense of the word needs nothing, though in his

388 What this enigmatic fragment may allude to is the obviously sensible decision to
elect Isidore to the Platonic succession, and his discontent at the choice.
389 This may be a comment on Marinus VP 37, a text written a few months after
Proclus’ death, where it is specifically stated that the loss of Proclus initiated an era of
philosophical darkness.
390 Here we may have not just the title of an aporia (as realised by Asmus BZ 18,
430), but a glimpse into the atmosphere of the circle’s discussions.
 δεΐσθαι μηδενός, fi δέ άνθρωπος <δέοιτο άν· ώσπερ καί τής τέ­
χνης, fi μέν άνθρωπος> ό τεχνίτης, δέοιτο άν, οίον Ιατρός τής 10

Ιατρικής εί νοσήσειεν- Ιατρική δέ ούκ άν ποτέ νοσήσειεν, ού τοί-

νυν ουδέ ό κατά τήν Ιατρικήν έστώς ιατρός, ού τοίνυν ουδέ ό
κατά τήν άρχικήν επιστήμην αρχών ώρισμένος. Λογικώτερον δέ
είπεΐν έπιχειρητέον, ώς τά πρός τι ού λέγεται μόνον, άλλά καί
έστι προσάλληλα. "Αρχών δρα πρός άρχομένους καί άρχόμενοι 15
πρός άρχοντα καί λέγονται καί εισίν, ώστε εΧτι τό άρχειν ωφελεί
τούς άρχομένους, ώφελήσει καί οίς τό άρχειν προσβέβληται.
[S* 1377,10 (άρχων χρότιος)]
Β Ό τ ι μείζονα τόν βίον εύεργετεΐ φιλόσοφος άνήρ ήπερ άριστος
βασιλεύς.
[*S IV 734,1 (φιλόσοφος 419)]
C Κοσμιότης καί σωφροσύνη ού μόνον εισίν άπαλλαγαί καί
άφαιρέσεις τών άντικειμένων πονηριών, άκοσμίάς καί άκολα-
σίας, άλλά ζωαί ενεργείς καί αύτοθελεϊς·. Καί ή μέν έπιστρέφει τά
χείρω εν ήμϊν πρός τά κρείττω, ή δέ δσα πάθη έστί τής ψυχής τάτ-
τουσα ταΰτα καί διακοσμούσα- έκγόνους τε εαυτών άρετάς έν 5
ταϊς τών πλησιαζόντων ψυχαΐς άποτίκτουσαι.
[S III 162,20 (κοσμιότης)]

150
Εί δέ θειότερον χρήμα, ώς σύ φής ώ Ήγία, έλεγε πρός αύτόν ό
Ισίδωρος, ή Ιερατική πραγματεία, φημί μέν τούτο κάγώ- άλλά
πρώτον άνθρώπους γενέσθαι τούς έσομένους θεούς δει. Διά τούτο
καί ό Πλάτων έφη μή έλθεΐν εις άνθρώπους μεϊζον άγαθόν φιλο­
σοφίας. Άλλά τούτο συμβέβηκε νύν έπί ξυροΰ έστδναι ού τής 5
άκμής, τού δέ έσχατου γήρως ώς άληθώς.
[Φ 227]

9 δέοιτο - 10 άνθρωπος lacunam indicavit Kassel, sic proposuit

Merkelbach. 13 ώρισμένος Kassel: δρώμενος S. 15 προσάλληλα
Merkelbach: πρός άλληλα S. 15 άρχόμενοι Merkelbach: άρχόμενος S. 17
καί οίς Merkelbach: πρός οΰς καί S. 17 προσβέβληται Merkelbach: προβέβλη-
ται S.
149C cf. S IV 507, 26.
t

capacity as a man he may have needs. In the same way the expert in
his capacity as a man may have need of expertise, as a doctor needs
medical skill if he falls ill. But medicine itself can never fall ill, nor
can the doctor when defined in terms of the art of medicine nor the
ruler when defined in terms of the science of ruling. If we attempt
to put this in terms of logic, we would say that the connection
between the two things is not only a matter of words but a reality
too.391 Therefore the connection between ruler and ruled and that
between ruled and ruler is both theoretical and real, so that if the act
of ruling benefits the ruled it will also benefit those to whom it is
assigned.
B That a philosopher is a greater benefactor of human life than an
excellent king.392
C Propriety393 and prudence are not only a means of reducing and
weakening the opposite vices of impropriety and intemperance, but
active lives moving according to their own will. And while the one
converts the evil in us into good, the other reforms the soul’s
passions by putting some order and decorum into them; and they
generate in the souls of those who approach them virtues deriving
from themselves.

150
“If, as you maintain, Hegias”, Isidore was telling him, “the
practice of theurgy is divine, I too admit it. But those who are
destined to be gods must first become human; this is why Plato too
has said that no greater good than philosophy has ever come down
to mankind,394395but it has come to pass that nowadays philosophy
stands not on a razor’s edge, but truly on the brink of extreme old

391 Here Damascius is referring to the two Aristotelian definitions of τά πρός τι

(Cat. 6b and 8a 32ff.).
392 Clearly this is the subject matter of another aporia.
393 The same word is used to qualify Proclus (Marinus VP 4).
394 Cf. Tim. 47b.
395 A pun: acme means both the apogee and the edge.
 151
Α Οΰπω έξερρώγει τά δύσκολα τής ύποθέσεως.
[Φ 305]
Β Έλάνθανε δέ έαυτόν άνίατα πράγματα και πόρρω μοχθηρίας
προβεβηκότα διορθώσασθαι έπιχειρών· ήνυτε δέ ούδέν έπί πλέον.
[Φ 228]
C Ή ρι δέ άρχομένφ, τού Μαρίνου τό σώμα άπολιπόντος, έβου-
λεύετο τάς ’Αθήνας άπολιπεϊν δ ’Ισίδωρος.
[Φ 229]
D ’Επεΐ δ ’ δσιον ήν έπιζητήσαι τόν άφανή γεγονότα άδελφόν τήν
έπί Καρίας έτράπετο.
[S* III568,16 (δσιον χωρίον ρ)]
Ε Παρήνει δέ Συριανόν καί Ήγίαν ό ’Ισίδωρος ώς χρεών εΐη φι­
λοσοφίαν ύπορρέουσαν άνασώσασθαι.
[Φ 230]
F Ό δέ ού μάτην έζη, ώς γε έμέ κρίνειν, ούδέ μήν ώς οί πολλοί ές
τραπέζας κεκυφέναι καί έμπίπλασθαι καί ύβρίζειν σπεύδων, άλλα
πλέον τι είδέναι καί σπεύδων καί μαστεύων ύφ’ ήγεμόνι θεφ.
[*S IV 631, 21 (ύβρίζειν p) + *S III 334, 19 (μαστεύων)]

152
Τόϊς γάρ τοϋ φιλοσόφου μαντεύμασι περί τής οικείας σειράς
έπόμενος, ούκ οίδ’ δπως έμέ έπεσπάσατο ή τοΰ λόγου φύμη κατ’
ίχνος έπιζητοΰσα τήν έν τή σειρά τάξιν τής αυτού ψυχής {ούκ} έν
τφ άκηράτφ χορφ, πρός τά μετά ταΰτα έκβεβηκότα ποιήσασθαι
τήν εκβολήν, έπακολουθήσαντα παριόντι τφ βίφ τών διαδόχων s
οΰς εϊλετο Πρόκλος.
[S IV 345, 25 (σειρά ρ) + Φ 306]

I51F S IV 631, 21 (S,), S ΠΙ 334,19 (S2) solum 2 άλλα usque ad finem.

3 καί σπεύδων καί S2: om. S ,.
152 Φ solum 2 έμέ usque ad finem.
2 έμέ έπεσπάσατο scripsi: έμέ δέ έπεσπάσατο Φ: om. S. 2 ή τοϋ λόγον φύμη S:
fl φύμη τού λόγου Φ. 2 κατ’ίχνος - 4 χορφ S: om. Φ. 3 ούκ delevi 4 πρός
- 6 Πρόκλος Φ: μετά δέ τούτον, ώς δέδεικται, τεταγμένης άφανοϋς, άπέστειλεν
ώς έμέ, τά σαφέστατα άπαγγεΐλαι προστάξας S.
 151
A The difficulties of the situation had not yet broken out.
B He did not realise that he was trying to remedy the irreparable, a
situation which had exceeded the limits of depravity;396 and he no
longer achieved anything.
C In early spring, when Marinus died, Isidore was planning to
leave Athens.
D Since it was right to seek the brother who had vanished, he set
out for Caria.
E Isidore urged Syrianus397 and Hegias to restore philosophy
which was now wasting away, as was their duty.
F In my opinion at least, he did not lead an empty life; he did not,
like the majority, gorge himself with food hunched over the dinner
table and indulge in riotous behaviour, but he earnestly sought to
gain knowledge under God’s guidance.

152
As I was following the oracles of the philosopher concerning his
own chain,398 somehow the flow of the speech, while seeking to
classify his soul in the genealogy of the pure chorus, led me to
digress and follow the track of the lives of the diadochi whom
Proclus had chosen to succeed him.

396 An echo of Plato Leg. 660c.

397 In view of the name that he bears, this philosopher may well belong to a local
philosophical dynasty and presumably to the same generation as Hegias. PLRE Π.
‘Syrianus 4’ clearly confuses him with the master of Proclus (‘Syrianus 3’) when
stating that he was an admirer of Isidore’s elder brother Ulpian.
398 Damascius is concerned to prove that Isidore’s soul formed part of the Hermaic
chain (cf. 6A) to which Proclus himsef belonged as he had been informed in a dream
(VP 28).
 153
A Έφασκε δ ’ούν παρ’ έκείνου και έκεΐνο άκηκοέναι ό ’Ισίδωρος,
ώς έχει τι ή ψυχή αυγοειδές όχημα λεγόμενον, άστροειδές τι καί
άίδιον. Καί τούτο μέντοι τφ άστροειδεϊ σώματι τφδε άποκέκλει-
ται ένίοις μεν εΐσω τής κεφαλής, ένίοις δέ εισω τού δεξιού ώμου.
Ό περ ούδείς φαίνεται άλλος ίστορήσαι. 5
[S* 1410, 11 (αυγοειδής)]
Β Τό όμόστολον ψυχής άσπιλον σώμα
[*S III 534, 3 (όμόστολος)]

154
Ήσθάνετο μέν οΰν ημών ταύτη πη διακειμένων, ού μέντοι
προσεποιήθη τόν νοΰν προσέχειν.
[S IV 223, 6 (προσεποιήθη ρ)]

155
Καί πλήν άγαθής ψυχής σώμα ούκ εχων δμως έκαμνε καί τάς
δυνάμεις έξήσκει καί κατεκόσμει πρός τό άνδρικώτερον.
[*S II 314, 24 (έξήσκει)]

156
Κατά τήν έξ άρχής αίρεθεϊσαν ένστασιν τής ζωής.
[*S I I 292,8 (ένστασις ρ) ]

157
Κινδυνεύομεν εις αυτά έμπεπτωκέναι τά τών χαριέντων
σκώμματα.
[S IV 788,28 (χαριεντίζεις καί καταπαίζεις
ήμών καί βωμολοχεύη)]
 153
A Isidore said that he had also heard from him that the soul
possesses the so-called “luminous vehicle”, something star-like and
eternal; and that this vehicle is enclosed in the starry body which in
some men lies inside the head, in others inside the right shoulder.399
Which nobody else seems to have related.
B The immaculate body which accompanies the soul.

154
He obviously understood that we felt that way, yet he pretended
not to notice.

155
And though his body did not match his soul in quality, he
nevertheless worked hard, exerting his strength and making it fitter.

156
According to the way of life chosen right at the beginning.

157
We run the risk of becoming the laughing stock of the wits.400

399 For the concept, Iamblichus Myst. III. 14. A further distinction between two
vehicles, a luminous or celestial one in which the soul is encased before incarnation,
and a chthonian vehicle which envelops the soul while it inhabits the “shell-like” body,
is made by Proclus, In Tim. Ill, 298; cf. also Marinus VP 3. For the history of the notion
from Plato onwards, E.R. Dodds, Proclus: The Elements c f Theology, Oxford 19632,
313-321; for the survival of the Neoplatonist theories on the various “vehicles” of the
soul among the Persian Platonists, see H. Corbin, Corps spirituel et terre celeste, Paris
19792, 116-127.
400 Cf. Plato Resp. 452b.
 Οΐ>κ άρκεΐ τόίς πράγμασιν fi άγαθοθέλεια μόνον, αλλά δει καί
φώμης καί έπιστρεφείας.
[*S 1 15, 19 (άγαθοθέλεια)]

159
Οΰτε έπεγγελαν ήνείχοντο τοΐς ειρημένοις.
[S I I 573, 17 (ήνείχοντο)]
 158
A desire to do good is not enough; one also needs strength of
character and single-mindedness.

159
Nor could they tolerate laughing at what was said.
 I
Δαμάσκιος, Στωικός φιλόσοφος, Σύρος, Σιμπλικίου καί
Εύλαλίου των Φρυγών όμιλητής· ήκμαζεν επί των Ιουστινιανού
χρόνων. Γέγραπται αύτφ υπομνήματα εις Πλάτωνα καί Περί
Αρχών καί Φιλόσοφος Ιστορία.
[S I I 3,28 (Δαμάσκιος)]

II
Πολλά λέγει παράδοξα καί δοκοΰντα τοΐς φιλοσόφοις, πολλά
τών καθ’ "Αιδου, ουπω τινά άκοήν φέροντα τφ Ίσιδώρψ (τοσού-
των άκουσμάτων}.
[S* I I 124,30 (δοκοΰντα)]

III
Άνεγνώσθη Δαμασκίου Δαμασκηνού εις τον ’Ισιδώρου τού φι­
λοσόφου βίον. Έ στι μέν σδν τό βιβλίον πολύστιχον, οίονεί δέ κε-
φαλαίοις έξήκοντα άπαρτίζεται. Γράφειν δέ τον ’Ισιδώρου βίον
προθέμενος, Θεοδώρμ τινί τό σύνταγμα προσπεφώνηκεν, "Ελλη­
να μέν καί αυτή θρησκείαν τιμώση, μαθημάτων δέ τών τε κατά φι- 5
λοσοφίαν, καί δσα περί ποιητάς τε καί γραμματικήν στρέφεται
έμπειρίαν, ούκ άπείρως έχούση, άλλά γε καί πρός γεωμετρικήν τε
καί άριθμητικήν άνηγμένη θεωρίαν, αύτού τε Δαμασκίου καί ’Ισι­
δώρου την διδασκαλίαν αυτή τε καί ταΐς νεωτέραις άδελφαΐς
κατά διαφόρους χρόνους πεποιημένων. Αΰτη θυγάτηρ έγεγόνει ίο
Κυρίνας καί Διογένους τού Εύσεβίου τού Φλαβιανοΰ, δς εΐλκε τό
γένος άπό Σαμψιγεράμου τε καί Μονίμου, εις οΰς άνάγεται καί
’Ιάμβλιχος, άνδρας τά πρώτα τής είδωλολατρούσης άσεβείας άπε-
νεγκαμένους.
Τήν μέν ούν βιογραφίαν ’Ισιδώρου ό Δαμάσκιος ταύτη προσ- is
 I
Damascius: a Stoic philosopher, a Syrian, a companion of
Simplicius and Eulalius of Phrygia; he flourished in the time of
Justinian. He has written Platonic commentaries, On Principles and
a Philosophical History.

II
He says many incredible things which are believed by the
philosophers, much that has to do with life after death, indeed tales
which bear no connection whatsoever with Isidore.12

III
Read Damascius the Damascene’s On the Life o f Isidore the
Philosopher. The book is long, comprising some sixty chapters.
Having decided to write the Life of Isidore, he dedicated the
composition to a certain Theodora, a Hellene too by religious
persuasion, not unacquainted with the disciplines of philosophy,
poetics and grammar, but also well versed in geometry and higher
arithmetic, Damascius himself and Isidore having taught her and
her younger sisters at different times. She was the daughter of
Kyrina and Diogenes, the son of Eusebius, son of Flavianus, a
descendant of Sampsigeramos and Monimos who were Iamblichus’
ancestors too, all of them first prize winners in idolatrous impiety.
Damascius dedicates Isidore’s biography to her; it was her

1 Only the texts which relate to the PH are quoted here.

2 The text, which presumably reproduces the view of a reviewer of the PH. appears
to be exceptionally corrupt and my translation can only be a guess at what the original
may have been.
 φωνεΐ, fig καί ή άξίωσις, καί &λλων τίνών συναιτίων γεγενημένων
τής προτροπής, αίτια κατέστη τφ συγγράφει, καθάπερ αυτός έπι-
μαρτύρεται, τής σπουδής. Ού μήν γε μάλλον ’Ισιδώρου βίον ή
πολλών άλλων, τών μέν συνηκμακότων τάνδρί, τών δέ καί προγε-
γονότων συναναγράφει πράξεις τε καί διηγήματα τούτων συνδια- 20
τεθείς καί πλείστη χρώμενος καί κατά κόρον τή παρεκδρομή.
Έ στι δέ τήν μέν περί τά θεία δόξαν εις άκρον δυσσεβής·
καινών δέ καί γραοπρεπών μυθαρίων αυτόν τε τόν νοϋν καί τούς
λόγους πεπληρωμένος· διό καί τής Ιεράς ήμών, εί καί δειλιώση
καί λαθραιοτέρςι κακοφροσύνη, όμως ούκ όλιγάκις φαίνεται καθυ- 25
λακτών εύσεβείας. Πάντων δ’ όσους Ιξαίρει τοϊς λόγοις καί
κρείττους ή κατ’ άνθρώπων φύσιν θειάζει γεγονέναι ταϊς τε τών
έπιστημών τελεωτάταις θεωρίαις καί τφ τάχει τής διανοίας, τού­
των έκάστου κριτήν έαυτόν έπικαθιστών ούκ έστιν δτου μή καθή-
ψατο έφ’ έκάστου τών θαυμαζομένων μή ένδεέστερον εχειν, τοϋ 30
μέν είς άγχίνοιαν έξηρημένου, ότι μή πάντα άγχίνους, τού δ’ εις
έπιστήμας άπαραβλήτου, ότι μή πάντα έπιστήμων, καί δή καί τοϋ
είς άρετήν έγγίζοντος θεφ ότι πολλών ένδεής.
Ούτως έκείνων έκαστον οΰς άνω φέρων έξήρει κατασύρων καί
φίπτων χαμαί, τό κράτος έαυτφ κατά πάντων καί έπί πάσι λελη- 35
θότως άναρτζί. Διό καί Ισίδωρον ούχ ήττον έπαινών ή ψόγοις περι-
βάλλων διατελεΐ. Καίτοι γε έξ ών άλλοτρίας τε λογικάς άπορίας
καί λύσεις ώς δή θαυμάσιους προκομίζει, καί &ς αύτός έπί τάχει
νοϋ καί άκριβείςι έπιστήμης μέγα φρονών είς μέσον προάγει, ούτε
τι τών περί φιλοσοφίαν συνήθων ύψηλότερον έστιν εύρεΐν τόν 40
άνθρωπον κατωρθωκότα, ούτε μήν είς δεινότητα καί άγχίστρο-
φον διανοίας τάχος, όση γε άνθρωπίνη, μή ότι γε δαιμονίςι, άνηγ-
μένον, άλλ’ ούδέ τινα τών μετρίως πως περί φιλοσοφίαν έχόν-
των, μήτι γε δι’ άκριβείας έντελοϋς ήγμένων, οίς έκεΐνος ελλαμ-
πρύνεται, σεμνυνόμενον. 45
Τήν μέντοι φράσιν δ άνήρ κατά γε τό πλέϊστον αύτοϋ τών λέ­
ξεων ού πόρρω τείνει τού σαφούς. "Εχει δέ τι καί τών άλλων
Ιδεών, δσαι χαρακτηρίζονται λέξεσι, τήν τε τραχεϊαν φημί, δι’ ής
τραχύνεται ή ηχώ, καί δή καί όση πλατύνει τήν φωνήν, καί τήν εις
 exhortation, together with that of certain others who joined in her
request, that was responsible for the author’s efforts, as he himself
testifies. However, he does not so much write the Life of Isidore, as
that of many other people, both his contemporaries and his
predecessors; he collects together their activities and also tales
about them through a generous and even excessive use of
digression.
In religious persuasion he is impious in the extreme, his
thoughts and words filled with strange old wives’ tales. Hence he
barks not infrequently, though with cowardly and disguised
malevolence, at our holy religion. Over all those whom he extols in
his account, and celebrates as having risen above the human
condition through their perfect theoretical knowledge and quick
intelligence, he then sets himself up as judge, not leaving a single
one of those on whom he has lavished praise without some
deficiency: one, who had been praised for his sharp wit, is criticised
as not being altogether sharp-witted; another, whose learning was
incomparable, as not being learned in all fields; a third, who was
next to God in virtue, as a man deficient in many respects.
Thus pulling down and throwing to the ground each one of those
whom he had extolled and glorified, he imperceptibly establishes
his own authority in every way above everybody else. This is why
he continually matches praise of Isidore with criticism. And yet,
judging from the logical problems and solutions that he quotes from
other people as being remarkable, and from those which he
advances himself with great pride in the quickness of his mind and
the accuracy of his knowledge, one finds that the man achieved
nothing out of the ordinary in philosophy nor did he excel in
astuteness and quickness of thought by human, let alone divine,
standards. Indeed no reasonably competent philosopher, far less
one who has achieved perfect exactitude, will show off in the
manner of Damascius’ boasting.
In style as regards the majority of his expressions, the man does
not fall far below the level of clarity. He also employs those stylistic
devices which depend on the use of words -I mean harshness which
coarsens the sound while amplifying the resonance, and poetic
 τό ποιητικώτερον, εί καί σπανιάκις, έλευθεριάζουσαν. Και αΐ 50
τροπικαί δέ διαμορφοϋσιν αύτοϋ τούς λόγους, ούκ είς άμουσον
ψυχρολογίαν η τροπάς άποτόμους έκφερόμεναι, άλλ’ εκ γε τοΰ
έπί πλεΐστον τό γλυκύ τε καί χαρίεν τό καθ’ έαυτάς παρεχόμενοι.
Άλλα σαφής ών τφ πλείστψ μέρει των λέξεων, ούκέτι καί τή δλη
τοΰ λόγου οίκονομίμ τοιοϋτος καθέστηκεν ή τε γάρ συνθήκη ού 55
συνθήκη μάλλον ή καινοπρέπεια καί ή περιβολή κόρον έμποιοΰσα
συχνόν τό τε είς σαφήνειαν έπηλυγάζει προφαινόμενον καί τήν
άλλην άπασαν τοΰ λόγου σπουδήν. Διό καί χαρίεις άν άλλως ό
λόγος είναι δυνάμενος, τήν όσην άν δυνατός ήν κεκολασμένων
τούτων χάριν παρασχεΐν τοΐς είρημένοις άφήρηται. Καί αΐ περί­ 60
βολοί δέ οΰτι γε δριμείας διανοίας ούδ’ έπαφρόδιτοι, ουδέ τό
γοργόν ύποτρέχουσαι, αίς άν τις κατά τρόπον καί καλλωπίσαιτο,
άλλά τούτων δή των κοινών καί επιπόλαιων καί ουδέ τό άναγ-
καιον τη χρήσει καί ταΐς περιστάσεσιν άναφαινόντων βλαστήμα­
τα. Τά δέ σχήματα εί μή κατά τό πλεονάζον επί μήκιστον ταΐς πε- 65
ριόδοις έξετείνετο, οΰτ’ άν αύτά τό μή κατά τό μάλλον μεγεθύνε-
σθαι ούτε τό μή τό ποικίλον άπενέγκασθαι ούκ άν αύτά τής συμ­
μέτρου κράσεως καί τό πρέπον έχούσης ίσχύν είχεν άπάγειν. Τό
μέντοι εύτονον καί πικρόν περίεστι τφ λόγψ· άλλά καί τούτο
πολλάκις έκλύεται, ού μίξει καί κράσει τών ιδεών, δπερ άριστον, 70
άλλ’ έπιλείψει καταβιαζόμενον τών τεινόντων τήν φράσιν καί
διογκούντων λέξεών τε καί τών άλλων μερών τής τοιαύτης
ισχύος. Ό πολλοΐς μέν τών γε τοιαύτην ιδιοτροπίαν έπιτετηδευ-
κότων συνέβη, ού μήν πρός έπαίνου γε τοίς μή διασεσωκόσι τόν
ύπέρ ίσχύν ήρμένον φόρτον άποβαίνει. 75
Άλλά τοιαΰτα μέν κρίσις ώς είπεΐν άπλώς γε λόγου, τοΰ δέ
βίον γράφοντος τάχα άν εΐη καί έτερα πλείονα· τί γάρ αύτφ δεή-
σει μορφή διά μεγέθους ήκουσα; νομοθέτου γάρ καί προστάττον-
τος τοΰτο λόγου. Τί δέ τόνος καί περιβολή τοσαύτη καί τής συν­
θήκης τό άηθες; Άλλά ταΰτα μέν έπί τοσοΰτον. 80
Ό δέ Δαμάσκιος τήν τε φητορεύουσαν τέχνην ύπό Θέωνι τρία
έτη δλα διεπόνησε καί προΰστη διατριβών φητορικών έπί έτη
έννέα. Γεωμετρίας δέ καί άριθμητικής καί τών άλλων μαθημάτων
 licence, though this he rarely uses. Likewise the figurative
expressions shape his discourse never resulting in artless frigidity
or blunt turns of phrase, but conveying in most cases their specific
grace and charm. Yet, though his phrases are for the most part
characterised by clarity, this is not a quality which governs his
discourse as a whole. Indeed his composition is not so much
composition as innovation, and his prolixity, which often induces
satiety, overshadows clarity and obscures the argument. This is why
the work, which could have been graceful, is bereft of what grace it
would have had, if these faults had been corrected. His digressions
are not those of an acute mind nor are they elegant or brief, in
which case they might have been something to be proud of. No,
they are of the trivial and superficial sort and not in the least
offshoots springing out of functional needs and circumstances. As
for the figures of speech, if they were not extended to inordinate
length, their extravagance and lack of variety would not have been
enough to subtract from a harmonious and pertinent whole. Yet his
style displays vigour and acerbity, qualities nevertheless which are
often impaired not by a blending and fusion of literary forms, which
would have been excellent, but through being held back by the lack
of those words and figures of speech which endow the text with
intensity and power. This often happens to those who affect
originality: they receive no credit for undertaking a burden which
exceeds their strength.
But this is merely a general appraisal of the style. One could say
much more about the biographer. Why did he need a literary genre
tending to grandiloquence? This is the language that suits a
lawgiver or a ruler; why this tone, this excessive use of digression,
this eccentricity of structure? But enough of this!
Damascius studied the art of rhetoric under Theo for three
whole years, and taught rhetoric for nine years.3 In geometry,
arithmetic and the other sciences he was taught in Athens by

3 Photius understands 137B in this way, whereas Damascius states that he has spent
a total of nine years in rhetorical pursuits, clearly including in this figure his years of
study in Damascus as well as Alexandria.
Μαρίνον τόν διάδοχον Πρόκλου έν Άθήναις έσχε διδάσκαλον.
Τής δέ φιλοσόφου θεωρίας δ τε Ζηνόδοτος αύτφ καθηγεμών 85
Άθήνησι και αυτός έγεγόνει (διάδοχος δέ καί ούτος Πρόκλου, τά
δεύτερα Μαρίνου φέρων) καί Άμμώνιος έν Άλεξανδρείρ ό
Έρμείου, δν ού μικρφ μέτρφ των καθ’ έαυτόν έπί φιλοσοφίςι
φησί διαφέρειν, καί μάλιστα τοΐς μαθήμασι. Τούτον καί τών Πλα­
τωνικών έξηγητήν αύτφ γεγενήσθαι Δαμάσκιος άναγράφει, καί βο
τής συντάξεως τών άστρονομικών Πτολεμαίου βιβλίων. Τής μέν-
τοι διαλεκτικής τριβής τάς Ισιδώρου συνουσίας τήν Ισχΰν αύτφ
διατείνεται παρασχεΐν, δν καί έπί τή τοιαύτη τών λόγων δυνάμει
πάντας άνθρώπους, δσους ό κατ’ έκείνην τήν γενεάν ήνεγκε χρό­
νος, άποκρύψασθαι φησίν. 95
[Photius Bibl. Cod. 181]
 Marinus, the successor of Proclus; in theoretical philosophy,
Zenodotus (also a successor of Proclus, immediately after
Marinus)4 was his master too in Athens, and Ammonius, son of
Hermeias, in Alexandria, who, he says, greatly surpassed all his
contemporaries in philosophy and especially in the sciences.
Damascius mentions him as the man who interpreted for him the
Platonic curriculum and Ptolemy’s astronomical treatises. He
claims that he acquired his strength in the practice of dialectic from
his relationship with Isidore, whom he declares to have eclipsed in
the power of his discourse all men bom in that generation.

4 The meaning of this passage may be that Zenodotus came immediately after
Marinus in the Succession waiting list: cf. above, pp. 43-44, n. 74.
 nymphaeum

triclinium

WIO.JR - l » 7l

The plan of House C after W. B. Dinsmoor (see p. 343, η. 1)

 A P P E N D IX I

The house of Damascius?*

Since its discovery in 1970, House C has been an object of

continuous fascination to the archaeologist and architect alike.1
Though not yet fully published, it has become increasingly
regarded as the most symbolic feature of the Athenian Agora in
late antiquity.2 With both a private and a more public section, each
arranged around its own peristyle court, this luxurious residence
recalls the recently excavated “Sebasteion House” in Aphrodisias
(which belongs to the same period and has been tentatively
attributed to Asclepiodotus)3 rather than any other of the few
Athenian houses of that period which have come to light so far.

* I would like to thank John Camp who put at my disposal the excavation
diaries relating to House C, and Clio Tsonga who showed me round the site after it
was cleared in the summer of 1998 and discussed several points with me. Thanks
are also due to Jan Jordan who provided me with the photographs published in this
volume from the photographic archive of the ASCSA.
1 For the exact location of House C cf. above, p. 47. In his methodological
article ‘The Archaeological Field Staff: the Architect’, Journal o f Field
Archaeology 4 (1977) 309-328, W.B. Dinsmoor Jr. uses House C as a model and
incidentally shows that Travlos’ plan (which is used by Alison Frantz in her
publication of 1988, where House C plays an important part) represents two
structures as one (see Frantz, pi. 27a). I follow Dinsmoor’s fig. 14 as a plan of the
house in its late Roman phase. Cf. also his figures 13-16 for different stages in the
structural development of House C, and fig. 10 for a combined picture of the site’s
diachronic face.
2 Significantly enough, the volume on Late Antiquity of the ASCSA, 24 (1988)
by Frantz has on its cover the nymphaeum of House C, while a large proportion of
its plates are dedicated to the house and the objects found in it; equally the guide
book to the Athenian Agora by J. Camp covers House C extensively.
3 R.R.R. Smith, JRS 80 (1990) 154; id, Aphrodisias Papers 2 (1991) 144-6.
 One of the most striking features of House C is its abundance of
waters. Welling up from a still active spring on the north-east side
of the Areopagus, and distributed by a sophisticated supply system
to a nymphaeum, several wells and one cistern in the main (public)
atrium, this affluence of water must have been regarded as a
special blessing in the dry Athenian climate. What indeed lends the
house its unique physiognomy is the harmonious ensemble
consisting of a fountain house, a nymphaeum in the form of a
semi-circular pool and a triclinium of great beauty, which opens on
to the main atrium adorned with Ionic columns.
It is notable that all who have studied the house -whether as
excavator or interpreter- have associated it on account of its shape
and style with some aspect of the teaching profession. I should like
to propose a more specific, if necessarily speculative, theory, that
the house was used as a philosophical school and was possibly the
ancestral residence of Theagenes and Hegias or some other
Athenian magnate of pagan sympathies, who, following the
example of Gemina among others,4 offered it to Damascius as
residence and teaching quarters. Alternatively it could be that
Hegias, who may have assumed the diadoche after Marinus’
death,5 had used his own house as teaching quarters, breaking with
a century of tradition by abandoning the place where his own
maternal ancestor, Plutarch, and after him Syrianus and Proclus
had taught;6 thus when Damascius took over the Succession, he
naturally used these new premises, especially as “the house of
Proclus” was no longer inhabitable.7

4 Cf. Porphyry Vita Plotini 9. In 102 (whose place in the context of the
discussion of Theagenes’ relations with the philosophers is indicated by the Photian
sequence) Damascius speaks of “the pious lovers of learning who at various times
(...) bequeathed to the philosophers the requisite means for the leisure and
tranquility of the philosophical life”. In 145B on the other hand he describes Hegias
as a man “of literary achievement” who also “aspired to be the most pious of men”.
Taken together the two passages could well point out to a legacy made by Hegias to
the Academy in his capacity either as diadochus or simply as Ιερός and φιλόλογος.
5 This seems to be the implication of 145A. On this issue cf p. 319, n. 380.
6 Cf. Marinus VP 12, 29.
7 See Introduction, p. 47, n. 90.
 What may indeed hold the key to the identity of the group of
individuals who inhabited the house is its remarkable collection of
antique statuary. The themes of several reliefs and statues
explicitly refer to the solar and dionysiac theology of the
Neoplatonists, while the human portraits convey a taste for
philosophical asceticism. The bulk of the statuary collection was
discovered by the excavators intact in two of the wells of the
house, both meticulously sealed at a date which can be inferred
from archaeological data to coincide with 529, when the house was
taken over under a different dispensation.8 In the main peristyle
court, however, the body of a decapitated classical Athena was
found face downwards, serving as a step, while a fourth century
B.C. votive relief of the cave of Pan was also discovered with the
faces of all those represented deliberately disfigured (see plates III
and V). Whatever pagan symbols had not been carefully hidden
were thus used by the new owner of the house in a way intended to
cause offence, as is further confirmed by the alterations wrought to
the floor of the triclinium: a coarse cruciform pattern of inferior
workmanship to the rest of the mosaic occupies the central part of
the floor, no doubt as a replacement for some mythological scene
which wounded the religious sensibilities of the new owner (see
plate II).
The list of clues on the basis of which House C may be
associated with Damascius can be extended by the addition of an
equally unprovable, if highly plausible, proposition: when
Justinian, “that greatest of all destroyers of established
institutions”,9 struck at the Athenian Academy in a way that
obliged its head to leave the city,10 the Bishop of Athens may have
moved into his house in a symbolically vindictive gesture, which

8 See Frantz, 87-88. In the other houses, and especially in House B, caches of
sculpture were also discovered by the excavators (cf. the head of Nemesis, plate
IV). Assessing the archaeological evidence, Frantz states that the complex of
houses on the north slope of the Areopagus “were abandoned suddenly...about
530..., not as a result of general decline, neither as a result of violence.” (87).
9 Procopius Anecd. VI .21.
10 It is worth mentioning in this connection that C. Just. 1.11.10.3-4 orders the
confiscation of the pagan teachers’ property.
 was nevertheless not devoid of realistic self-interest; as the Bishop
might have foreseen, throughout his long reign Justinian made a
point of not restoring a single public building in Athens.11 What
adds strength to this supposition is the very location of House C
just below the remains of the church of St Dionysios and of the
archbishop’s palace; dating from the sixteenth century these two
buildings seem to have replaced earlier structures on this most
symbolic spot where St Paul is believed to have addressed the
Athenians on the nature of the unknown god and made his first
local convert - the Areopagite Dionysios.12 Thus while the other
houses of the Areopagus complex were slowly allowed to decay,13
House C was remodelled to meet new needs: the elegant pool was
converted into a baptistery, while the large room to the west of the
triclinium seems to have been transformed into a catechumeneum,
as suggested by, among other things, the addition of benches along
its east and west walls. The sixth century lamps and the sigma table
(plate VI) which were found there also indicate ecclesiastical
connections; moreover, the coarse cross in the triclinium points to
more than lay sensibilities on the part of the new occupant. Finally,
as is often the case in baptisteries, a small bath complex was built
on the other side of the pool, while the small room adjoining it on
the north seems to have been converted into an apodyterion.u
Though none of these indications would in itself have sufficed to
support the hypothesis that the house was now the episcopal palace
of Athens, the combination of all these changes, which are
stratigraphically ascribable to c. 530, with the location of the
House itself may well be more than coincidental and provide a firm
pointer in that direction.
11 Procopius Anecd. XXVI. 33.
12 For details, J. Travlos and A. Frantz, ‘The church of St. Dionysios the
Areopagite and the palace of the Archbishop of Athens in the 16th century’,
Hesperia 34 (1965) 157-202, pis 41-55.
13 Frantz, 90.
14 Cf. Frantz 88-89, referring to the alterations which were made c. 530: “The
nature of the changes made at the time the floors of House C were relaid leaves no
doubt that they represent a transition to Christian use of an official character. (...) At
first glance it might be thought that the complex had been a baptistery from the
start, so conviniently does it comply with the requirements”.
 In its new identity, and by contrast with its declining
neighbours Houses A, B and D, House C flourished for several
decades, until what may have been the episcopal palace of Athens
was engulfed in the conflagration brought about by the Slavic
invasion of the 580s. One may be sure that, if not as the actual
occupant, at least as a visitor Damascius was well acquainted with
this elegant mansion.
 A P P E N D IX II

The two Asclepiodoti

A combined reading of the available fragments, of the

epigraphic and archaeological evidence and of the VS suggests the
following: in die second half of the fifth century there lived in
Aphrodisias a publicly-minded, traditionally cultured pagan
magnate who contributed significantly to making his home town a
holier place (Robert, Hellenica IV (1948) 115-126). Not content
with his activities at home, he decided to “export” paganism to
other civic centres of the Eastern Mediterranean (86B). While
visiting Alexandria he seems to have met a namesake —a
philosopher and a polymath— who was also a fervent pagan but
came from a modest background (83A). He eventually persuaded
the (not so much) younger Asclepiodotus to follow him back to
Aphrodisias, where the Alexandrian was charmed among other
things by the teenage daughter of his namesake. As she was too
young for marriage, it was some time before the father gave his
consent (86E). While the war for the succession of the Academy
was being waged in Athens around the ailing Proclus, Asclepio­
dotus, who was among the strongest candidates, was universally
known as the prospective son-in-law of the elder Asclepiodotus
(I03B). Eventually Marinus was chosen by Proclus to succeed him
and Asclepiodotus returned to Aphrodisias after a long journey in
the course of which he “studied people” (90D); it is even possible
that it was then that he met the notorious bon viveur Hilarius of
Antioch and converted him to the philosophical life, though a date
preceding 480 for their meeting would tally better with the
Proclean chronology, since Hilarius visited Caria and Athens while
Proclus was still capable of teaching (91). Back in Aphrodisias
Asclepiodotus seems to have married the “inordinately modest
Damiane” (86G); 482/483 as a date for their marriage ideally fits
the chronological clues provided by both the the VS and the PH
(see also p . , n. 228). Happy though the union seems to have been,
it was not immediately blessed with children and, following a
divine dream, the mature Asclepiodotus travelled with his wife to
his native Alexandria in order to pray to Isis in her hidden temple
at Menuthis. At the same time he joined the thriving establishment
of Horapollo where his old pupil Isidore also taught. Asclepio­
dotus’ return to Alexandria furnished the pretext for a quarrel
between the pagan and the Christian groups in Horapollo’s school,
which developed into a major scandal. But in the meantime Isis
wrought her miracle and Asclepiodotus was able to return to
Aphrodisias with his pregnant wife (95CD) and continue the
family tradition as philosopher and public man under the auspices
of his father-in-law (in the middle of the Great Persecution in 489,
Isidore sends a letter to the “two philosophers in Caria” (122C)).
More daughters were eventually bom to him, but his own health
was failing despite the efforts of his devoted wife whom he
jokingly (or philosophically) accused of keeping him alive by her
excessive care (95A). By the time Damascius writes his PH the
extravagant Asclepiodotus is dead and his heirs are dealing with
his debts (83B).
 APPENDIX III

Who was Count Zosimus?

The old-fashioned accountant, whom an overwhelming sense

of living in “an era of sterility” drove to write a contemporary
history, has probably left in his narrative enough autobiographical
clues to make it worth attempting a reconstruction of the jigsaw
puzzle of his formative years. Zosimus’ New History is a Polybian
endeavour deliberately reversed.1 On its opening page, the author
announces his intention to write the history of the decline and fall
of the Roman Empire, and reflects on the causes of its apogee and
its decadence. He concludes in a spirit of temperate determinism
that moral laziness and spiritual unconcern2 are responsible for the
desperate state of things in his day.3 At the same time however he
acknowledges the role played by Providence in human affairs and
seems to regard impiety as a result of an abeyance of the divine,4
though it is not clear in his circular way of thinking which is cause
and which is effect.
If Polybius provides a model for Zosimus’ history, Eunapius
and Olympiodorus are its basic sources.5 More revealingly, the

1 For an explicit statement see 1.57.1: Πολυβίου γάρ δπως έκτήσαντο 'Ρωμαίοι
τήν άρχήν έν όλίγψ χρόνψ διεξελθόντος, δπως έν οΐι πολλφ χρόνψ σφήσιν
άτασθαλίησιν αυτήν διέφθειραν έρχομαι λέξων.
2 Έκμέλεια is one of Zosimus’ favourite terms to describe the failure of
imperial policies both in military and administrative terms.
3 The theme of decadence reaches obsessive dimensions in the New History: for
a few examples, 1.1.2, 58.4; II.5.5, 7.1, 34.2; IV,59; V.40.4.
4 Cf. V.35.5: έν έρημίμ τοΰ θείου. See also V.51,2.
5 According to Photius (Bibl. cod. 98) “one could say that [Zosimus] has not
written a history but has transcribed the one by Eunapius”. Eunapius is the
figure who dominates it is Julian.6 For the emperor is present in the
New History in subtler and more significant ways than the mere
dedication of Book III to his works and days. The assessment of
the Roman emperors in Book I closely follows Julian’s Caesars,
with one significant exception -Aurelian, whom Zosimus, clearly
relying on Eunapius, sees as a landmark in the history of
paganism.7 Otherwise Julian constitutes both a linguistic and a
conceptual model for the New History, with whole phrases and
images faithfully reproduced.8
An unimaginative user both of his sources and of the Greek
language, Zosimus pursues his flat narrative in a simple, dry style.9
Apart from a vivid interest in administrative and more specifically
taxation issues, clearly inspired by the author’s professional back­
ground, his prosaic account is illuminated by flashes of uncommon
passion on the subject of Christianity and, on the linguistic and
literary level, by the use of technical Neoplatonic vocabulary and
of “inside” texts and stories. Yet it is the very unoriginality of
Zosimus’ writing that should serve as our best guide in any attempt
to detect his milieu and find out about the genesis of his History.
About Zosimus we know remarkably little. Internal evidence

fundamental source as far as V.25 (A.D. 404), whereas the part of the New History
describing the events from 404 to 410 seems to be based on Olympiodorus whose
History clearly Zosimus intended to continue. Dexippus’ Scythica and
Nichomachus Flavianus’ Annales also seem to have been used by Zosimus
independently. For a discussion of the matter, Paschoud, Zosime I, pp. XXI-LXIII
and III.2, pp. 82-91.
6 Julian is given by Zosimus the surname “Great” (Ίσυλιανός 6 μέγας: V.2.1).
7 Zos. 1.48-62; cf. Julian, or. X. 313d, who is critical towards Aurelian.
8 In III.2.4 Zosimus declares himself to be a thorough reader of Julian’s works,
and encourages his reader to be the same. For expressions copied from Julian: 312a
and 1.7.1; 312d and 1.8.2; 313a and 1.10.1; 313b and 1.12.2; 32a, 274c and 1.21.2;
more importantly in 11.29 the reasons given for Constantine’s conversion to
Christianity reproduce 336ab; while 329ab (on Constantine as a devotee and
protege of Tryphe and an impositor of new taxes) is at the basis of Zosimus’
statement. The description of the Antiochene character in IV.41.1 seems to come
straight from the Misopogon, of which Zosimus elsewhere gives a sensitive
definition (III. 11.5).
9 Photius (loc. cit.) pertinently comments on the divergence between the
elaborate manner of Eunapius and Zosimus’ unadorned style.
 places the composition of the New History after 498, with a date
nearer the end of Anastasius’ reign in 518, which constitutes its
terminus ante quern.10 According to the manuscript tradition its
author was a retired advocatus fisci, for whom we can claim
Palestinian origins on onomastic grounds. A notice in the Suda
speaks of a certain Zosimus from Gaza or Ascalon who lived under
Anastasius and wrote commentaries on Demosthenes and Lysias as
well as a theoretical treatise on rhetoric.11 Disregarding minor
points, we can take the core of this information as referring to our
historian, whose rhetorical education is beyond doubt, whether or
not he is the author of the particular treatises mentioned in the
Suda; as for the supposition of a Palestinian origin, this is
strengthened by the specific antipathy professed by Zosimus
towards the Arabs, at the basis of which one may detect the
prejudice of a coastal inhabitant for the people of the hinterland.
By contrast to “the disgusting Arabs”, Zosimus praises the
Egyptians as loyal, polite, brave and just.12 If his pro-Egyptian bias
suggests a happy relationship with that country, the thought springs
to the mind that Zosimus belonged to a generation of Palestinians,
specifically from Gaza, who studied in Alexandria, and cultivated
all aspects of literature in works which commemorate their
Alexandrian experiences. Aeneas and Procopius of Gaza, in both
of whose correspondence there appears a Zosimus,13 are just two
of the Christian thinkers who immortalised the debates of their
youth in the form of philosophical dialogues or commentaries.
More relevantly, Zacharias of Gaza, who studied rhetoric in
Horapollo’s school in the 480s before going on to read law in

10For a discussion, Paschoud, Zosime III 2, pp. 80-81.

11 S I I 515,9 (Ζώσιμος 169).
121.18.3 (on the Arabs); IV.30, 31 (on the Egyptians).
13 The addressee of ep. 153, being a pupil of Procopius about to embark on his
legal studies, cannot be our Zosimus on chronological grounds; moreover the tone
of the letter suggests that he is a Christian. Equally unlikely to be our Zosimus is the
addressee of ep. 8 by Aeneas, while the addressee of ep. 10 could plausibly be
identified with our historian. Positano (89-90) identifies him with the Suda sophist
(cf. above, n. 11).
Beirut, produced, in addition to his anti-Neoplatonic dialogue
Ammonius and the Life of Severus, a Church History which covers
Zeno’s reign. The works of these men help us reconstruct a lively
intellectual milieu with its animated discussions between pagans
and Christians. Aegyptus, Gessius and Ammonius are only some
of the identifiable interlocutors, while the subjects on which these
men exerted their mind and erudition include the eternity of the
world and the immortality of the soul, the role of Providence in
human affairs, the veracity of the pagan prophetic tradition,
revelation in its various forms and, most importantly, the definition
of monotheism.
Traces of all these debates are to be found in the work of an
Anonymous entitled Theosophia14 which was composed,
presumably in Alexandria, between 474 and 491. According to the
information provided by the Prologue, the work comprised eleven
books of which the first seven, now lost, expounded “the right
doctrine” (Περί της όρθής πίστεως); books 8 to 10, of which we
have substantial fragments, showed that “the oracles of the Greek
gods and the so-called theologies of the Greek and Egyptian sages
as well as the Sibylline oracles agree with the objective (σκοπός)
of the divine scriptures” (§ 1); finally Book 11 consisted of a brief
chronicle from Adam to the reign of Zeno (§ 2). Specific features
of the work are familiarity with Egypt expressed in both religious
and patriographic terms,15 an emphasis on negative theology
accompanied by technical Neoplatonic vocabulary in the
commentary on the oracles quoted,16 the centrality of Sibylline
material, which covers almost half of what survives, and finally a
first hand knowledge of Porphyry and Syrianus (§§ 27,20,50,65). •

• 14 According to the author (§ 5), the title was chosen to indicate τό υπό τού
Θεοϋ καί τούς Έλληνας σοφισθήναι.
15 See e.g. §§ 8 (on Osiris with comments on the etymology and meaning of the
name which recall Damascius 3); 31, 44 (on Hermes Trismegistus); 25 (on
Sarapis); 45-49 (specific temples in Upper Egypt); 69 (specific address of
Heraclitus to the Egyptians).
16 For a few typical terms with Chaldaean undertones; όχετεύουσα (§ 6);
έννοιας άνακινών (§ 7); νοητόν πϋρ (§ 14); έπίπνοια (S 3.92);
 A recurrent interest in linguistics and etymology points to a
possible link between Horapollo’s class-room and this work, the
main connection of course being its often recondite Egyptianism.
An injunction to the pagans to convert to Christianity, the
Theosophia is clearly the product of a contemporary debate in the
same way as are the Theophrastus and the Ammonius. At the same
time however it presents striking affinities with Zosimus’ New
History, which stops suddenly in 410, but was presumably
intended to cover the reign of Zeno, the emperor preceding the one
in whose reign the author wrote, as was the custom. To the
Sibylline oracles foretelling the birth of Christ according to the
Anonymous, Zosimus opposes his own version of the Sibylline
truth in an otherwise inexplicable digression on the Secular Games
which differentiates him from his source, in order to show how,
due to Constantine’s impiety, the empire was doomed to disaster.17
The digression on the history and etymology of the term pontifex
in 1V.36 is equally a piece of anti-Christian polemic defending the
high antiquity of Roman sacred institutions. More ancient even
than the invention of temples (for which Zosimus here uses the
peculiarly Damascian term £δος)18 the Pontifices (γεφυραιοι) have
their origin in Greece, and more specifically in the land of
prophecy and magic, Thessaly. While Mendelssohn saw that this
digression was added by Zosimus himself,19 Paschoud claims for it
a Eunapian origin and goes on to attribute the invention of the
story to a syncretistic milieu of Philhellenic Romans.20 On account
of the fantastic etymology produced by Zosimus for the Latin
pontifex, which is very much in the style of Horapollo’s
pronouncements on the hieroglyphics, the occurrence of turns of
phrase which also appear in Damascius,21 and above all the

17 II.1-7.
18 Cf. 75A with relevant note.
19 Videtur Zosimus sapientiam istam de pontificibus non ex Eunapio sed ex alio
quopiam fonte derivasse: p. 192.
20 Nichomachus Flavianus and his Annales are mentioned in this connection as
the obvious source of Zosimus: H.2, pp. 417-418.
21 Cf. Έδη and 75A; άπεσείσατο τήν αίτησιν and 113R.
Hellenocentric Roman patriotism of the whole passage, I would
identify it as a piece of late Neoplatonic propaganda. A third
indication pointing towards Horapollo’s circle is the story of the
salvation of Attica from the earthquake of 375 through the
activities of Nestorius as related by Zosimus in IV. 18. This also
comes from an independent source, Syrianus, and sounds like a
characteristic piece of Neoplatonic mythology. Emphasising the
double link of the golden chain of the Athenian Platonists with the
Eleusinian mysteries on the one hand and Chaldaean wisdom on
the other, Zosimus’ narration preserves an air of orality. But its
purpose is to mark a moment in human history when divine
providence intervened as a result of the pious maintainance of
tradition.
A historical “orthodoxy” with significant landmarks, sacred
geographical loci such as Alexandria, and black anniversaries such
as the destruction of the Serapeion in 391, had been fully
established by Zosimus’ day. According to Zosimus, who here
echoes Eunapius, Theophilus, the man responsible for this
destruction, was “ό πρώτος άρξάμενος τής κατά τών Ιερών καί
τών έξ αίώνος πατρίων επιβουλής”,22 a claim which is valid only
if one views things from the Egyptian perspective,23 but which is
corroborated by Damascius within the framework of the
Neoplatonic rather than merely Egyptocentric way of writing
history; revealingly the Philosophical History also treats the
destruction of the Serapeion as the opening episode in the narration
of the sufferings of the pagan intelligentsia.24 It is reasonable to
assume that Zosimus’ familiarity with Neoplatonic “inside” stories
and the cogent presentation of the important landmarks in
declining paganism by a historian who on the whole lacks
originality suggest that he was formed in a militantly pagan milieu
which encouraged him to continue Olympiodorus’ history, and it is

22 V.23.3. Cf. IV.37.3: on Cynegius’ anti-pagan activities “in the whole of

Egypt and Alexandria itself’.
23 As is rightly pointed out by Paschoud, III. 1, 178.
24 42.
 in this connection that one particularly regrets the fact that the
work suddenly stops in 410.
The scholarly consensus is that New History means “history of
the contemporary era”. The ambiguity of the title however may not
be entirely unintentional in what was presumably seen by the
author of the work and those sponsoring him as a pagan answer to
the truly new type of history - the ecclesiastical. If indeed Zosimus
emerged from the same milieu as the Theosophia Anonymous and
Zacharias, the New History would be not only a response to the
Eusebian historical model, but also an answer to provocations
nearer to home.
A fourth native of the city of Gaza who studied under
Horapollo and shared his interests was Timotheus. Known both
from a notice in the Suda and from his surviving work, Timotheus
of Gaza wrote on the theory of grammar (Κανόνες καθολικοί περί
συντάξεως), but also on zoology along the paradoxographical lines
represented by Horapollo in the Hieroglyphica and Damascius in
the Philosophical History. Most interestingly of all, we owe to him
a “tragedy” addressed to the emperor Anastasius on the abolition
of the collatio lustralis or chrysargyron.25 This is a subject that
Zosimus also treats in a “tragic” manner. In 11.38 he speaks of the
desperate state to which individuals and cities had been reduced in
a few generations as a result of having to pay the odious collatio
lustralis introduced by Constantine, and declares the tax to be the
main culprit for the depopulation of the cities of the Empire.26
Procopius of Gaza (whom Paschoud assumes to have been
Zosimus’ teacher but who must have been his peer since he
belonged to the same generation) also wrote a panegyric to
Anastasius in which he offers information on the same tax, so that
it may be more than a coincidence that the subject was of interest
to men who came from Gaza and studied in Alexandria.

25 τραγωδία περί τοϋ δημοσίου τοϋ καλουμένου χρυσαργύρου. PLRE II, s.v.
‘Timotheus 3’ translates the word τραγψδία as “oration”; in the light of Zosimus’
treatment of the subject I do not find this interpretation necessary.
26 The destruction of cities is a leitmotiv of the New History: cf. 1.31, 37.3;
II.34.2, 38.4; III.5.1; 1V.29.2, 32.2, 59.3 ; V.14.4.
 Leaving aside the prosopographical data, we may turn in our
search for Zosimus to a field unexplored so far: his use of
language.27 A survey of the latter reveals a wide usage of
specifically Neoplatonic vocabulary28 which, when combined with
the themes of anti-Christian polemic pursued by Zosimus, the
patriographic treatment of Constantinople (11.30-31; II 1.11.3) and
certain formulaic expressions which also occur in Damascius’
Philosophical Histoiy, reinforces the hypothesis of a common
milieu for the two men.29 Indeed it looks more and more as if
Zosimus’ aggressive paganism was formed in the 480s partly by
systematic preaching and propaganda, such as that practised in
Psychapollo's school,30 and partly by a traumatic experience, such
as the witnessing of the pagan persecution in Alexandria at the
close of the decade.

27 In his attempt to explain the fact that no important studies have been devoted
to the language of Zosimus so far, Paschoud concedes “que la langue banale de
Zosime n’attire gufere l’attention des spdcialistes” (I, p. LXXIV), and goes on to
describe it as a koine influenced both by the author’s classical readings and by
common usage - a proposition with which I fully agree- and to comment on the
vague and monotonous character of the author’s style. Yet like his predecessors
Paschoud seems to be more interested in the grammatical and syntactic rather than
the lexical aspect of Zosimus’ Histoiy.
28 κατά πήχυν.,.επιδιΛόντος (IV.4.41.1); πρηστήρες (V.41.1): περίνοιαι (1.3.1);
σειρά (V.35.5); Ιερά άγιστεία (ΙΙ.29.5; κατά τό πάτριον άγιστεία: V.41.3); Ιερουργία
(1Ι.3.1;4.2); δ τά άνθρώπινα λαχών άλιτήριος δαίμων (V.41.5).
29 A by no means exhaustive list of words, expressions and standard quotations
to be found in the two texts is the following: τά τών θειον έδη (IV.33.4; IV.36.2 and
75A); κατά πήχυν τό λεγόμενον έφ’έκάστης έπιδιδόντος (IV.41.1 and 110AB);
ώραϊζομένου (IV.42.5; 51.1 and 66A); ήνυε δε ούδέν (IV.53.2; V.44.1 and 151B);
επιεικείς καί άπράγμονες (1.5.4; 1.13.3 and 108); ή κρατούσα δόξα (V.41.2 and 118B);
των δέ πραγμάτων επί λεπτοτάτης έστώτων έλπίδος (IV.24.3 and 150); τά συνέχοντα
τό άνθρώπειον γένος άγιώτατα μυστήρια (IV.3.3 and 42F); έπαρΟέντες ταϊς έλπίσιν
(IV.26.8 and 113C); τό δέ όπως είδώς, ύπερβήσομαι (III. 12.1 and 39B); μή
άποσείσασθαι τά δωρούμενα παρά τής τύχης (IV.54.2; IV.55.3; IV.36.5 and 113R).
The prophetic prodigy in IV.21.1 is eminently reminiscent of Damascius both in
subject matter and narrative style, while the description of Fravitta in V.20
combines the phrases used by Damascius for the description of Olympos and
Marcellinus.
30 Cf. above, pp. 20-21.
House C: The nymphaeum with fountain house
PLATE II
House C: The decapitated Athena from the south-west corner
of the main peristyle court (Roman copy; its back is worn
from use as stepping block)
Nemesis found in well of House B
 Votive relief of the Cave of Pan (2nd half of the fourth century B.C.) found in
the main peristyle of House C: Hermes presenting the newly-born Dionysus to
the Nymphs. The faces of all the gods have been deliberately disfigured.
Sigma table found in House C
 SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHY

The Bibliography of literary sources and secondary works

includes the most important works referred to in this volume. The
abbreviations followed for ancient texts and periodical titles are
generally those used by Liddell-Scott-Jones (1940)9 and L ’Annee
Philologique respectively, although I have sometimes expanded
those which seemed particularly obscure.

LITERARY SOURCES

Aeneas of Gaza, Theophrastus, ed. M.E. Colonna, Naples 1958

---------Epistulae, ed. L.M. Positano, Naples 1962
Agathias, Historiarum libri quinque, ed. R. Keydell, Berlin 1967
Anonymous, Prolegomena philosophiae platonicae, ed. L.G.
Westerink, transi. J. Trouillard - A. Ph. Seconds, Paris 1990
Damascius, De primis principiis, I-III, ed. L.G. Westerink, trans. J.
Combes, Paris 1986 - 91
---------De primis principiis, trans. M.-C. Galperine, Lagrasse
1987
---------In Parmenidem, ed. C.A. Ruelle, Paris 1889 (all references
to this edition)
---------In Parmenidem, I, II ed. L.G. Westerink, trans. J. Combes,
Paris 1997
---------In Phaedonem I-II, ed. trans. L.G. Westerink, Amsterdam
1977
---------In Philebum, ed. trans. L.G. Westerink, Amsterdam 1959
-------- Περί άριθμοϋ καί τόπου καί χρόνου αρ. Simplicius in
CAGIX (1882) 601-645,773-800
---------Vitae Isidori Reliquiae, ed. C. Zintzen, Hildesheim 1967
Diogenes Laertius, Vitae philosophorum I-II, ed. H.S. Long,
Oxford 1964
Epiphanius, Panarion Haer. I-III, ed. K. Holl, Berlin 1915-33
Evagrius, Historia Ecclesiastica, ed. J. Bidez -L. Parmentier,
London 1898
Eunapius, Vitae sophistarum, ed. J. Giangrande, Rome 1956
Eusebius of Caesarea, Praeparatio Evangelica I, ed. K. Mras,
1954, II, ed. K. Mras - corn add. E. des Places, Berlin
1983
[Hermes Trismegistus] Corpus Hermeticum I-II, ed. A.D. Nock,
trans. A.-J. Festugiere, Paris 1945, III-IV, ed. trans. A.-J.
Festugi&re, Paris 1954
Hermeias, In Phaedrum, ed. P. Couvreur, Paris 1901
Hierocles, In Aureum Pythagoreorum Carmen Commentarius, ed.
F.G. Koehler, Stuttgart 1974.
— ----- De Providentia ap. Photius Bibliotheca, Codd. 214,251.
Hippolytus, Refutatio omnium haeresium, ed. M. Marcovicz,
Berlin 1986
Horapollo, Hieroglyphica, ed. F. Sbordone, Naples 1940
Iamblichus, De mysteriis, ed. trans. E. des Places, Paris 1966
---------De vita pythagorica, ed. L. Deubner, 1937 - corn add. U.
Klein, Leipzig 1975
Iohannes Antiochenus in Muller FHG IV (1851), 538-622
Iohannes Lydus, De magistratibus, ed. trans. A. C. Bandy, Philadel­
phia 1983
---------De mensibus, ed. R. Wuensch, Leipzig 1898
Iohannes Malalas, Chronographia, ed. L. Dindorf, Bonn 1831
Malchus in Muller FHG IV (1851), 111-132
Marinus, Vita Procli, ed. R. Masullo, Naples 1985
Nonnus, Dionysiaca, ed. R. Keydell, Berlin 1959
Numenius, Fragmenta, ed. trans. E. des Places, Paris 1973
Olympiodorus, In Alcibiadem, ed. L.G. Westerink, Amsterdam
19822
---------In Gorgiam, ed. L.G. Westerink, Leipzig 1970
---------In Phaedonem, ed. L.G. Westerink, Amsterdam 1976
 Oracula chaldaica, ed. trans. E. des Places, Paris 1971
Orphica, ed. O. Kern, Berlin 1922
Pamprepius, Carmina, ed. H. Livrea, Leipzig 1979
Philo of Byblus, The Phoenician History, ed. trans. H.W. Attridge -
R. A. Oden, Washington D.C. 1981
Photius, Bibliotheca, (1) I-Π, ed. I. Bekker, Berlin 1824-5 (2) I-
VIII, ed. trans. R. Henry, Paris 1959-1977 (IX = Indices by
J. Schamp, Paris 1991)
Plutarch, De Iside et Osiride, ed. trans. J.G. Griffiths, Cambridge
1970
Porphyrius, Vita Plotini, ed. P. Henry - H.-R. Schwyzer in Plotini
Opera I, Paris 1951.
---------Fragmenta, ed. A. Smith, Stuttgart-Leipzig 1993
Proclus, Hymni, ed. E. Vogt, Wiesbaden 1957
---------In Cratylum, ed. G. Pasquali, Leipzig 1908
---------In Parmenidem, ed. V. Cousin, Paris 1864
---------In Rempublicam, ed. W. Kroll, I-II, Leipzig 1899-1901
---------In Timaeum, I-III, ed. E. Diehl, Leipzig 1903-1906
---------Theologia Platonica, ed. trans. H.D. Saffrey - L.G.
Westerink, Paris 1968-1997
Procopius of Caesarea, De bello persico, ed. J. Haury, rev. G.
Wirth, Leipzig 1962
---------Historia Arcana, ed. J. Haury, rev. G. Wirth, Leipzig 1963
Procopius of Gaza, Epistolae et Declamationes, edd. A. Garzya -
R.J. Loenertz, Ettal 1963
Sallustius, De diis et mundo, ed. trans. G. Rochefort, Paris 1960
Simplicius, In Aristotelis Physicorum Libros Quattuor Priores
Commentaria, ed. H. Diels, CAG IX (1882)
Socrates Scholasticus, Historia ecclesiastica, ed. G.C. Hansen,
Berlin 1995
Sophronius Hierosolymitanus, Mirabilia, ed. N.F. Marcos, Madrid
1975
Sozomenus, Historia ecclesiastica, edd. J. Bidez - G.C. Hansen,
Berlin I9602
Suda Suidae Lexicon, (1) I-II, ed. Aem. Portus, Geneva 1630 (2)
ed. L. Kiister, Paris 1700 (3) I-III, ed. Th. Gaisford, Oxford
 1834 (4) I-II, ed. G. Bemhardy, Halle-Brunswick 1853 (5)
I-V, ed. A. Adler, Leipzig 1928-38
Synesius, Hymni, ed. N. Terzaghi, Rome 1949
Theophanes, Chronographia I, ed. C. de Boor, Leipzigl883
Theosophorum Graecorum Fragmenta, ed. H. Erbse, Stuttgart-
Leipzig 19952
Zacharias Scholasticus (1) De mundi opificio, PG 85, 1011-1144
(2) Ammonius, ed. M. Minniti Colonna, Naples 1973
---------Historia Ecclesiastica, trans. K. Ahrens - G. Kriiger, 1899
---------Vita Severi, ed. trans. M.A. Kugener, Patrologia Orientalis
II (1904)
Zosimus, Historia Nova (1) ed. L. Mendelssohn, Leipzig 1887 (2)
I-III, ed. trans. R Paschoud, Paris 1971-1989

SECONDARY WORKS

Asmus R., ‘Zur Rekonstruktion von Damascius’ Leben des

Isidores’, BZ 18 (1909) 424-480; BZ 19 (1910) 265-284
---------Das Leben des Philosophen Isidoros, Leipzig 1911
Athanassiadi P., ‘Persecution and response in late paganism: the
evidence of Damascius’, JHS 113 (1993) 1-29
---------‘Dreams, theurgy and freelance divination: the testimony
of Iamblichus’, JRS 83 (1993) 115-130
---------‘The oecumenism of Iamblichus: latent knowledge and its
awakening’, JRS 85(1995)244-250
Bagnall R.S., Egypt in late antiquity, Princeton 1993
Baumgarten A.I., The Phoenician History o f Philo o f Byblos: a
Commentary, Leiden 1981
Blockley R.C., East Roman foreign policy: formation and conduct
from Diocletian to Anastasias, Leeds 1992
Bonneau D., La crue du Nil, divinite igyptienne, Paris 1964
Bowersock G.W., Hellenism in Late Antiquity, Ann Arbor 1990
Cameron Alan, ‘Wandering poets: a literary movement in
Byzantine Egypt’, Historia 14 (1965) 470-509
---------‘The last days of the Academy at Athens’, Proceedings o f
 the Cambridge Philological Society 195 (1969) 7-29
---------and Long J., Barbarians and politics at the court of
Arcadius, 1993
Cameron Averil, Agathias, 1970
---------‘Agathias on the Sassanians’, DOP 23-24 (1969-70) 67-183
Camp J., The Athenian Agora, Athens 1990
Christensen A., L’lran sous les Sassanides, Copenhagen 19442
Dzielska M., Hypatia o f Alexandria (Engl, trans. F. Lyra)
Cambridge Mass. 1995
Fahd T., Le pantheon de TArabie centrale ά la veille de I’Hegire,
Paris 1968
Frantz A., The Athenian Agora: results o f excavations conducted
by the American School o f Classical Studies at Athens
XXIV: late antiquity A.D. 267-700, Princeton 1988
Froidefond C., ‘Etudes critiques sur le traite Isis et Osiris de Plutarque’,
REG 91 (1978) 340 - 357; REG 92 (1979) 99-112
Glucker J., Antiochus and the Late Academy, Gottingen 1978
Gregory T.E., Vox Populi: popular opinion and violence in the
religious controversies o f the fifth century A.D., Columbus
1979
Heather P., Goths and Romans 332 - 489, Oxford 1991
Henry R., review of Zintzen’s Vita Isidori, RBPH 46 (1968)
853-858
Lemerle R, Ό πρώτος βυζαντινός ουρανισμός (transi. Μ.
Nystazopoulou-Pelekidou, revised by the author) Athens
19812
Liebeschuetz J.H.W.G., ‘Epigraphic evidence on the Christian-
isation of Syria’ in J. Fitz, Limes: Akten des XI.
internationalen Limeskongresses, Budapest 1977,485-508
L’Orange H.P., ‘Some remarks on late Greek portraiture especially
regarding the “Iamblichos” type’, AAAH 6 (1975) 59 - 63.
Marrou H.-L, Histoire de T education dans Vantiquite Paris 19656
Martindale J.R., The Prosopography o f the later Roman empire, II
A.D. 395-527, Cambridge 1980
Maspero J., ‘Horapollon et la fin du paganisme egyptien’, BIFAO
11 (1914) 163-195
Millar F., ‘The Roman Coloniae of the Near East: a study of
cultural relations’, in Solin and M. Kajava, Roman Eastern
Policy and Other Essays in Roman History, Helsinki 1990,
7-58
---------‘II ruolo delle lingue semitiche nel vicino oriente tardo-
romano (V-VI secolo)’, Mediterraneo Antico 1 (1998)
71-94
Nock A.D., Essays on Religion and the Ancient World I-II, ed. Z.
Stewart, Oxford 1972
Remondon R., ‘L’Egypte et la supreme resistance au christianisme
(Ve -Vile siecles)’, BIFAO 51 (1952) 63-78
Robert L., Hellenica IV (1948)
Rouechd C., Aphrodisias in late antiquity, London 1989
Schamp J., Photios historien des lettres: la Bibliothique et ses
notices biographiques, Paris 1987
Sironen E., ‘Life and administration of late Roman Attica in the
light of public inscriptions’ in P. Castren, Post-Herulian
Athens, Helsinki 1994, 15-62.
Sourdel D., Les cultes du Hauran ά I’ipoque romaine, Paris 1952
Stein E. -Palanque J.M., Histoire du Bas-Empire, Paris I (1959) II
(1949)
Tardieu M., ‘Sabiens coraniques et “sabiens” de Harran’, Journal
asiatique 274 (1986) 1-44
---------Les pay sages reliques: routes et haltes syriennes d' Isidore
ά Simplicius, Louvain 1990
Teixidor J., The pagan god: popular religion in the Greco-Roman
Near East, Princeton 1977
--------- The pantheon o f Palmyra, Leiden 1979
Zeller E. - R. Mondolfo, La filosofia dei Greci nel suo sviluppo
storico VI: Giamblico e la Scuola diAtene, Florence 1961
 INDEX OF PERSONAL NAMES
The names are given in the form in which they appear in the translation. Bold
numbers refer to the fragments in the present edition and plain numbers refer
to pages; where a number in italics follows the plain number the reference is
to a footnote on the page concerned.
Abraham 97A
Acamatius 140 B, D
Achilles Tatius 61.733
Adam 353
Adonis 76E, 187-189.1 6 9 ,197.759
Aedesia 56,57A, B, 19.7,21.6, 22-
23, 30,41.66, 115.72
Aedesius 43E, 131.95
Aegyptus 54,25 2 0 , 133.95,
155.729, 353
Aelian 191.775, 193.178,180
Aeneas of Gaza 25, 31.38,44.78,
133.9 8 ,153.725, 291.342,
291.346147,348, 352, 352.75
Aeschines 135.700
Aeschylus 28A
Agapius 106B, 107,109,126C,
127 A, 2 13.2/9,251.278,
291.340
Agathias 46.57, 50, 50.98,100, 51,
51.702,705,52, 52.705,297.348
Aglibol 203.203
Aion 41, 76E, 125.54, 197.755, 759
Alcaeus 120A
Alcinous 113A, 271.305
Amelius 117.77
Ammianus Marcellinus 81.74,
219230a
Ammonianus 47,42.65,115.72
Ammonius 5 4 ,57B, C, 58B, 78E,
117A, 118B, Test. III.83, 22,
25.20, 29, 30, 30.56, 31, 31.57,
35, 32, 32.47,161,732,211.273,
273.309, 275-377,281.327,
283.327, 289.337,291.340,342,
353
Anastasius 64, 352,356
Anatolius 131A
Anthemius 51A, 77A, 85.24,
181.757,183.760
Anthusa 52
Antony 133, 35,73
Antony, St. 139.770
Aphrodite 1 3 ,63A, 86B, 189.769,
303.355, 309.365
Aphthonius 27,28,291.340
Apollo 82A, 87A, 2052 0 7
Apollonius 61.734
Arcadius 108
Archiadas the Elder 105A, 251.
276,277,261.253
Archiadas the Younger 146A, 323J56
Ardabur 108,149.724, 261.255
Ares 305.360,367, 307.362
Aristides 90D
Aristophanes 62C, 171.745
Aristotle 34C, D, 38A, 43A, 57C, Baalshamin see Zeus Hypsistos
134A, 30.36, 31.38,75.7, Babia 57A
115.72,257.275 Bacchus 76A, 53,57,57.722
Arsu 305.360 Baetylus 203.203
Asclepiades 72A, D, E, F, 76E, 21, Basilides 60
23, 55.118,115.75, 167.141, Basiliscus 149.723
185.1 6 3 ,1 6 4 ,187.166,167, Bel 79C, 203.203
189.772,197.797 Bessarion 56.720
Asclepigeneia the Elder 251.276, Bol 203.203
253.277 Bolacles 203.203
Asclepigeneia the Younger 251- Bolathes 79C, 203.203
2532 77 Boliades 203.203
Asclepiodotus of Alexandria 80,81,
82A, 83B, 85A, B, C, D, E,
86G, 87A, 90D, 93, 96B, C,E, Cabeiri 142B, 315.374
103B, 144A, 22, 27, 28, 31, 37, C allicies 287.335
37.55, 38, 38.59, 39,42, 53, 54. Callimachus 108, 189.769
57,72,73,185.764,203204, Callinicus 108
2 0 5 ,207.209,2132 2 0 ,215.227, Carneades 229245
217.226,219.225,227.243, Cheiron 111
243.264,265,249274, 3Π.379, Choricius 59.725,297.345
343, 348-349 Christodorus 59.729,257.275
Asclepiodotus of Aphrodisias 83B, Chrysippus 34D
?86A, B, 103B, 217.223,225, Constantine 309.365, 351.5, 354,
247.273,249.274, 348-349 356
Asclepius 84E.89A, 142B, 117.75, Cronus 18, 79C, 111, 138,23, 24,
173.749,225.239, 315.374,376 203.203, 311.367
Ascos 136B, 307.364 Cyclops 45B
Aspar 5 2 ,1 0 8 ,115A, 149.724, Cyllenius 141D
277.376 Cynegius 355.22
Astrocyon 151.725 Cyril 43E, 189.769
Astronoe 142B, 315.376
Athanasius 25.79
Athanasius II 30.37 Dagon 203.203
Athena 1 3 ,98E, 105A, 138,77.7, Damascius 34D, 54, 58A, 63B,
173.747, 243.264,345 75C, 77C. 89A, 115A, Test. I,
Athenodorus 66G, 179.756 Test. III.l, passim
Atlas 203.203 Damiane 86G, 129.97, 217.226,
Attila 50, 51A, 145.779, 251.277 219.225, 349
Attis 87A Demetrius 289.335
Aurelian 239.255, 351, 351.7 Demosthenes 60,97.43, 283.325,
Auxentius 108 352
 Dexippus 351.5
Dike 96A
Diodorus 77.7, 81.74
Diogenes Test. ΠΙ.9
Diogenes Laertius 41,75.7,
225.241,229245, 313.373
Diomedes 146E, 323.386
Dionysius the Areopagite 47.90,
346
Dionysus 3B, C, 136A, B, 71,77.7,
81.76, 123.83, 301.352, 305.360,
307362,364
Dioscorides 213.279
Dioscuri 142B
Domna 130,295344
Domninus 89A, 90D, 93, 43.75,
2252 4 0 ,227.243,231.247,248
Domnus 128
Dorus 87A, 134A, 35, 35.50, 36,
43.72,62.738,73,299.349,
301.350,317.379
Dusares 136A, 125.84, 305.360
Ecdicius 49
El 79C, 201-203.203
Entrechius 29,29.35
Epictetus 46D
Epidaurius 28A, 105.60,62
Epiphanius 41,123.83, 125.84
Epiphanius of Petra 123.83
Epiphanius of Salamis 125.84
Ermenaric 115A, 277.376
Erythrius 78E, 201.207
Eshmun 142B, 60.737
Eudcmus 55.778
Eulalius Test. I
Eunapius 40,41,99.46, 103.54,
265.297, 350, 350.5, 351, 351.9,
354.79,355
Eunoius 60, 169.742
Eupeithius 146A, 323.386
Euprepius 41
Eusebius of Caesarea 77.6,309.365
Eusebius, priest 138,60.737
Eusebius, son of Flavianus Test.
III.9
Eustathius 169.743
Evagrius 30.37, 36.52
Favorinus 229.245
Felix III 30.37
Firmus 971, 239.258
Flavianus Test. ΙΠ.9
Fravitta 357.29
Gad 309.366
Galen 971,161.733
Ge 203.203
Geiseric 69D, 149.723
Gemina 344
Generosa 42A
Gennaios 138
Gessius 128,33.42,153.728,
257.278, 291.342, 297.346, 353
Gregory 55,43.72. 62.738
Gregory the Thaumaturge 64
Hades 4A, 81,87A, 137A, Test. II
Harpocras 117A, B, 31
Harpocrates 197.793
Hegias 145A, B, 146A, 149A, 150,
151E, 41.66, 44,47,47.89,
223.234,247.273. 265.297,
319.380,387,382, 329.397, 344,
344.4
Hegias, Eponymous Archon
253.277
Heliodorus 54, 57B
Heliodorus, the novelist 61.733
Helios 46B, 76E, 138,125.84,
203.203
Heraclitus 66A, 175.151,353.15
Heraiscus 72A, 76A,C,D,E, 78F,
117B, 120B, 128,21,23, 30, 31,
32,44.74,55.118,57,57.122,
68,115.74, 7 5 ,167./4/.
185./63,187./66, /67,201.202,
203.204
Hermeias 54, 55, 56, 57A, B, 112B,
Test. III.8 4 ,22, 30,41.66,
113.72,155./29
Hermes 13, 89.32,221.233, 307.364
Hermes Trismegistus 193.178,
353.15
Hero 263286
Herodes 63A
Herodotus 75./
Hesiod 77.7
Hesychius 84A, D, 275.3/0,
307.363
Hierax 57B, 58B
Hierius 63B, 112B, 173./47,
271.303
Hierocles 34D ,45A ,B , 133.95,
153./25, 189-/73,219.230,
303.357
Hilarius 90D, 91A, B, 227243,
229.245, 348
Himerius 271.305
Hippocrates 85E
Hippolytus 125.54
Homer 4 7 ,58C, 113A, 120A, 39,
54,109.66,113.72, 131.94,
135./0/, 139.///, 307.362
Honorius 50
Horapollo the Elder 120A, 283.330
Horapollo (Psychapollo) 117B,
120B, 20, 2 1 ,2 1 .9 ,11,22, 25,
27,28,29,29.33, 30, 31, 31.33,
41.66,73, 1 51./25,183./62,
191./75, 193./50,195./33,
197.191, 285.33/, 349, 352,
354-356
Horns 76E, 7 7 .7,83.20,151./25,
1 89./74 ,1 9 1 ./7 6 ,197.193
Hypatia 43A, E, 106A, 123.83,
129.90,131.92,96,133.96,
237.255
Hypatia, daughter of Erythrius
201.201
Iacobus 84A, B, C, D, E, G, I, J,
85D, E, 83.22,211.2/3.
213.218,219
Iamblichus 34A, B, D, 98C Test.
IH .10,42, 45, 50, 53, 54,
55.113,51,58,61-/33,75.3,
19.11,12, 87.28,913 5 , 101-5/,
103.54,55,107.64,137./06,
187-/66, 195./84, 209.2/2,
213.2/9, 331.399
Ianuarius 109
Ibycus 98D
Ilius 77B, D, 113E, 0 ,1 1 5 Α , 25,
29,73, 149.Ζ22, 199.194,
269.301, 213.307
Io 134C, 301.353
Ischomachus 127C
Isidore 9A, C, E, 1 1,12B, 1 3,23A,
28B, 32A, 33B, C, 34C, D, 35B,
37B, 38A, 48A, 5 4 ,59A, B, D, F,
6 0 ,71A, 72F, 84E, 97E, J, 98C,
D, 103B, C, 106A, B, 111,1130,
R, 116A, B, 117B, 119C, 123A,
130,134A, 136A, 138,141D,
142C, 148C, 149A, 1 50,1S1C,
E, 153, Test. II, III.l, passim
Isidore of Gaza 297.348
Isis 3A, 53A, 27-29, 29.34,44.74,
77.6, 83.20, 87.27, 151.125,
153.1 2 7 ,163.134,181.169,
191.1 7 6 ,193-/79,219.228,
285.333, 301.353,349
Isocrates 108
 Jesus 269.298
John 131A
John of Antioch 277.375
John of Ephesus 24-25.18, 36.52
JohnofN ikiu 133.96
John Philoponus 22,46.34
Julian 10 8 ,119B, J, 19. 19.2, 32,
259.279, 281.324
Julian, emperor USA, 175.152,
213216,271.305,351,351.6,7,8
Justinian Test. I, 34.47,48,48.97,
49.94.50,149.723, 303.357,
345, 346
Khusrau 49, 50, 50.93, 9 9 ,100, 52
Kyrina Test. III.9
Lachares 6 1 ,62A, C, 169.743,
173.749
Leo, emperor 5 2 ,58C. 6 4 ,84A,
149.723, 207.270, 261.235
Leo Choerosphactes 56.720
Leo the Mathematician 56.720
Leontius, sophist 40A, 123.32
Leontius, usurper 77B, 269.307.
273.307
Libanius 323.337
Lucian 61.733, 187.769
Lucius USA, 277.374
Lucius of Patras 61.733
Lycurgus 136B, 307.362,364
Lydus, John 193.773.213.279,
257.273
Lysias 352
Macrobius 301.353
Malalas, John 45.79,48.92,59,
133.96,2072 1 0 ,213.278,
273.307, 301.353
Malchus 85.24,147.727,201.207
Maras 90D, 92,227.243
Marcella 49
Marcella, Proclus’ mother 141.775
Marcellinus 69A, C, D, E,
181.757,758,183.760, 767,
3572 9
Marcellinus Comes 207.270
Marcellus 60
Margaetus 235.252
Marinus 38A, 97A, C, F, I, J, 98F,
100A, B, 101C, 103B, C, 107,
148C, E, 151C, Test. ΠΙ.81,
passim
Mark the Deacon 2973 4 8
Mamas 297.348, 313.369
Marsus 77D, 115A
Maximinus 139
Menas 21.6
Metrophanes 62C
Miltiades 245.270
Minucianus 243.267
Mochus 55.778
Momus 54
Monimos Test. III.10
Moschus 91A
Muse 18, 46D, 78B
Nemesio 132A, B, 44.74, 297.347
Nemesis 66A, 44.74, 345.8
Nestorius 64,173.749, 355
Nicholas 64,173.749
Nicagoras the Elder 2432 6 7
Nicagoras the Younger 243.267
Nicomachus Flavianus 351.5,
354.20
Nicomachus of Gerasa 89.32
Nicomedes 117A, B, 29, 30
Nomus 7 0 ,106B, 109,183,762
Nonnus 60,77.7,2032 0 3 ,269.307,
305.360, 307.362
Numenius 40,229.245
Odaenathus 65
Odysseus 113A, 271.305,273.306
Olympiodorus, the historian 350,
351.5, 355
Olympiodorus, the philosopher
30.56,46,46.84,137.106,
211.213,289.557
Olympius see Olympos
Olympos 42A, H, 123.83,125.85,
273.306, 357.29
Orion 53A, 151.725
Orpheus see Orphica
Orphica 111, 23, 54,113.72,
195.185
Osiris 3A, C, 4 1 ,76E, 86B, 71,
77.6,79.8,151.725,187.769,
191.776,197.789,217.225,
353.75
Paean 142B
Palladas 131.96
Pamprepius 66A, 77B, C, D, 112A,
B, 113D, K, L, O, 25-26, 38, 72,
73, 85.26,163.735,195.783,
786,201.798, 223.236,245.270,
265.292, 269.307, 271.304,306,
273.309,275.370,377,279.3/7,
378,320, 307.362
Pan 345
Paralius 27,28
Patricius 88A, 149.724
Paul 346
Pelops 52
Peter Mongus 1131, 26, 28,28.30,
29, 30, 30.37, 32, 73, 273.308,
309,281.32/, 283.327
Pheidias 84E
Philo of Byblos 189.770,203.203,
311.367,315.374,376
Philostorgius 133.96
Philostratus 61.734, 225.239
Phocas 48.92
Photius 26, 26.25, 43.72, 73,44.74,
48.93, 58-68,81.75,109.68,
115.72,135.703,159.73/,
169.742,189.773,193.782,
199.795,201.799,209.277,
229.246,235.257,339.3,350-5,
351.9
Phthonus 54
Pindar 29B, 31B, 34C, 98C,
109.66,171.744
Plato 34A, C, D, 38A, 43A, 45A,
46D, 77D, 85A, 89A, 97H, 98C,
E, 102,134A, 150,20,24.77,
26,30.36, 31.38, 3 5 ,37,39,40,
43,45,46.82,50.98,54,57,
75.7,2,81.77,93.39,97.40,
105-58,67,109.68,111.70,
113.72,117.79,127.87,137.708,
141.772.143.777.197.792,
201.799, 223.237,231.247,
241-263,259.287,271.305,
329.396, 331.399,400
Plotinus 54,56,57,117.77,
141.773,211.275,239.258,
265.293,344.4
Plutarch, Athenian sophist 63B,
173.747, 253.277
Plutarch, diadochus 6 4 ,6 5 ,89A,
98C, 145B, 43.73,47.90,
113.72,165./38,173./49,
175./50,251-276,277,344
Plutarch of Chaeronea 51A, 77.6, 7,
79.8,151.725, 155.729,175.750,
191.175.176.177.197.793,
243-267,279.320,291.347
Plutarch, son of Hierius 112B,
271.303
Polemo 225.239
Polus 289.337
Polybius 114C, 350,350.7
Porphyry 110A, 19.3, 39, 57, 64,
 77.(5,115.72,117.77,14 17/3,
151.1 2 5 ,165.137,191.175,
239.258, 303.356, 344.4, 353
Porphyry, bishop 297.348
Priscianus 50.99
Proclus 34D, 38A, 5 4 ,5 6 ,57B, C,
59A, B, E, F, 63B, 64, 66G, 68,
76E, 84J, 89A, 91A, B, 96B,
97A, J, K, 98C, D, E, 99A, B,
102,103C, D, 107,108,112B,
125A, B, 145B, 152, T est
III.81, passim
Proclus, son of Isidore 130, 34,
34.45
Procopius, historian 48.9/, 49.94,
50.100, 52, 52.106, 237.254,
345.9, 346.//
Procopius of Gaza 189./69,
291.342,297.348, 352, 352./J,
356
Prometheus 134A
Psammetichus 75.1
Psellus 53709, 56.120
Ptolemy 97G, Test. III.8 5 ,123.55
Pythagoras 26A, B, 34D, 40,
103.56, 113.72,213.2/9,
265294
Pytheas 96E, 235.252
Quirinus 63B
Sadycus 142B, 315.374
Salustius 60, 66A, B, D, E, G, 68,
69D, 70, 34.47, 7 7 .6 ,179./56,
181760,185763
Sampsigeramos Test. III.10
Sarapio 111, 112A, 23-24, 26, 38,
57, 67, 73, 99.49.105.62, 115.74
Sarapis 42A, H, 29.34, 35375
Seth see TVphon
Severianus 106B, 10 8 ,1 0 9 ,115A,
19.2,259.279
Severus 7, 51 A, D, E, 77A, 71,
85.2 4 ,14772/, 149723,
181757,183762,295.345
Severus Alexander 301.351
Severus, bishop 21.6, 2579
Severus, Septimius 134B
Silvanus 147
Simonides 127B
Simplicius Test. 1 ,375 5 , 53,
5 5 7 /4 ,5 6 , 56720
Sirius 53A, 74F, 151725, 193780
Siton 203.203
Soados 203.203
Socrates 37B, 45B, 46D, 116E,
127C, 146E, 8177, 117.79,
287.335, 289.337,295.344
Socrates, Church historian 131.96,
309.365
Sopet 151725
Sophocles 120A
Sophronius 291.342
Soranus 85E, 217.222
Sothis 53A.74F, 151725,187769
Sozomen 123.83, 309.365
Sphinx 37C
Stephanus of Athens 291.342
Stephanus Byzantius 307.364
Stobaeus 87.28, 303.356
Strabo 151726,205.206,273.306
Suchos 74C
Superianus 6 1 ,62C
Synesius 57B, 161732
Synesius of Cyrene 129.90,161732
Syrianus diadochus 34D, 47, 54, 56,
57B, 89A, 123A, 22,47.90, 54,
57,113.72,169743,187766
231.247, 285.333, 329.397, 344,
353, 355
Syrianus 151E, 329.397
Theagenes 100A, B, 105A, 145B,
245.269,270,271,2A1273,
251-253.277,2693 0 1 ,344,
344.4
Theandrites 134D, 301.355,
305360
Themistius 287.335
Themistocles 31136 8
Theo 49, Test. ΙΠ .78,42,143.776
Theo, Hypatia’s father, 123.83,
125.84,129.90
Theocleia 60
Theodora Test. Π Ι.4 ,58,64
Theodoric 51A, 145.779
Theodosius II 115A, 120A, 277.375
Theodore of Asine 110A
Theodote 54,285.333
Theophanes 133.96
Theophilus 355
Theophrastus 75.7, 153.728,
313.373
Theosebius 45A, B, 46B, D, E,
135.704,137.708
Thoth see Hermes Trismegistus
Thoueris 191.775
Thucydides 60,181.759,283.329,
3U 368
Tiberius 51A
Timo 175.757
Timocrates 253.277
Timotheus 297.348,356, 3562 5
Typhon 3B, 4C, 112A, 25.22,71,
77.7,81.77,151.725,191.775,
26 9 3 0 0 ,2793 20
Ulpian 123A, B, 285.333, 329.397
Uranius 70
Uranus 189.770,203.203, 3113 67
Valamer 51A, 145.779
Valens 125.84
Valentinian 50
Xanthippe 295.344
Xenophon 127C, 283.328, 291.347
Yarhibol 203.203
Zabdibol 203.203
Zacharias 21.6, 77,22,25, 25.79,
2 7 ,2 8 J 7 ,29,29.34,35, 31,
31.38, 32, 32.47,123.82,
151.726, 727, 153.728,163.734,
219.228, 235.252, 291.342,
297.348, 352, 356
Zeno of Citium 313.373
Zeno, emperor, 64, 77B, 108,
113E,F, 115A, 117A, 128, 25,
30.37,237.254, 257.278,
2693 0 1 ,273.307,277.376,
297.348,353, 354
Zeno, MUM 277.375
Zeno the Alexandrian 67
Zeno the Pergamene 68
Zenodotus 99B, T est III.8 2 ,39,
39.67,43-44,243.265
Zeus 111, 112A, 136B, 138,44.74,
77.7, 81.76,221233, 307.362
Zeus Hypsistos 97A, 203.203,
237.253
Zeuxis 84E
Zonaras 273.307
Zoroaster 213.279
Zosime 52-53, 52.708
Zosimus 97.43,127.89,173.749,
177.755,183.760,193.787,
261.282, 265.297, 297.348,
303.358,309.365,350-357
 INDEX OF GEOGRAPHICAL NAMES
Abukir 27, 28
Adonis, river, 309.365
Aegae 52
Aegean 71A
Alexandria 7,42A, 43A, 45B,
51C.D, 5 5 ,58B, 6 0 ,84A,B,
86B, 10 8 ,112A, 120A, 127A,
Test. III.84, passim
Antioch 90D, 91A, 25.21, 301.353,
348
Apamea 70, 203.203
Aphaca 59.129, 303.358, 309.365
Aphrodisias 82A, 87A, 90C, 21.6,
27, 31, 34, 37,38,38.58, 39,
59.129,73,343, 348-9
Arabia 134A.B, 135B, 20,34,
299349, 301.357,305.360,361,
307.362
Areopagus 47, 344, 345.8, 346
Argos 84A
Ascalon 352
Asine 110A
Athens 38A, 43E, 55, 5 6 ,57B, 60,
61,841,J, 90D, 91 A, 99A,
101C, 107 ,1 0 8 ,112B, 123A,
125A.B, 141B, 145A, 151C,
Test. 111.80, passim
Attica 145B, 99.45, 319 J8 2 , 355
Baalbek see Heliopolis
Beroia 92
Berytus 142B, 36.53, 60.737, 73,
203.203, 353
Bostra 134B, 35,35.50,73,
301.357,3 54,355, 305.359,360
Byblos 187-189.769,203203
Byzantium see Constantinople
Caesarea 70
Canopus 151.726
Cappadocia 52
Caria 50, 91A, 96E, 122C, 141B,
151D, 36,73,348,349
Carrhae see Harran
Carthage 149.723
Chalcedon 25,49
Cilicia 42A, 52
Comanus 52
Constantinople 45B, 58B, 77D,
78E, 84A,C, 100A, 1 07,115A,
120A, 127A, 133,139,29, 32,
56, 115.72,135.99,149.722,
207.270,213.278,257.278,
269301,275310,357
Ctesiphon 34.47,49,297348
Cyrenaica 203203
Dalmatia 69A, D
Damascus 57A, 84B,E, 1 08,136B,
19, 19.2, 20,73, 307.363,364,
339.3
Delos 203203 Maeander 81,205.206
Dia 135B, 3033 5 7 ,3053 59 Mediterranean 4A, 2 0 ,2 1 ,2 2 ,4 0 ,
Dionysias 134B, 305.360 47, 348
Drepanon 84A Memphis 151.725
Menuthis 21.6,27,28,72,151.726,
727,163.734,193.779, 219228,
Egypt 72A, B, 77D, 1 1 3 0 ,120A, 349
25,28,44.74,71,77.7,125.84, Miletus 59.729
135.704,151.725,187.769,
269.307,279.379, 301.353,353,
353.75,355.22 Nacle 59.729
Emesa 60,138,44.74,52,53,58 Neapolis 97A .237254
Ephesus 39, 317.379 Nile 72E, 77.6, 7,151.725,187-
Epidaurus 101C 189.769,191.775,291.342
Epirus 69A
Ethiopia 58B Olympus 86A

Gaza 1 3 3 ,3 5 ,7 3 ,291.348, 313.369, Palestine 70,97A

352, 356 Palmyra 203.203
Gerizim 97A, 237.254 Panopolis 77D, 120A, 269.307
Greece 77D, 50, 354 Papirius 269.307,275.372
Pergamon 68
Persia 49-50
Harran 49,49.96, 51-52,53
Petra 128,125.54, 305.360,361
Hauran 35-36, 203.203, 301.355,
Phenebythis 120A
307.362
Phoenicia 36,187.769,189.770,
Heliopolis 72F, 140B, D, 36, 36.52,
203.203
60.737, 73, 309.366
Phrygia 87A, Test. I, 37
Hierapolis 87A, 37
Piraeus 39,73, 317.379

Italy 51A, 84A

Rhodes 51A, 84A
Rome 50, 51A.C. 77A, 149.722,
Kourboi 50 217222

Laodicea 89 A, 90D Samaria 237.254

Larissa 89A, 108 Samos 144B, 39, 317.379
Lebanon 72F, 309.365 Seleucia 90D
Leptis Magna 203.203 Sicily 50
Lycia 91A Sogda 50
Styx 135A, B, 35. 303.356 Thessalonica 59.729
Sueida see Dionysias Thessaly 354
Syria 6 0 ,72F, 89A, 90D, 91C, Tralles 59.729
19.3, 20, 34, 52-53, 279.319,
301.353, 305.360
Yarmuk 35,305.359

Tarsos 275.372
Taurus 275.372
 INDEX OF GROUPS
dynastic, ethnic, philosophical, religious, and associated institutions
Academy 102, 39, 43,45,46, 46.86,
48,52, 58,179,756, 321.383,
344.4, 345, 348
Alexandrian 9C, 41, 42F, 43B, D,
45A, 54,56, 58B, 67, 76E, 83A,
84B, 106B, 10 7 ,112B, 133,
passim
Arab/Arabian 134B, 135 A, 136B,
125.84, 203.203,352, 352.72
Aramaic 20
Aristotelian 35, 299.350, 327.397
Asclepeian 84E, 83.22
Athenian/Attic 66B, 89A, 100A,
104B, 112B
Babylonian 55.778, 203.203
Brahmans 51D
Canaanites 201203
Carian 82A, 96E
Carthaginian 69D
Chalcedonian 24,25.78,29
Chaldaean 59F, 85A, 145B, 37,
46.84,85,54,55,55.773,77.6,
89.30,129.90,137.708,165.739,
213.279,231.247, 353.76,355
Christian/ Christianity passim
Cilician 85E
Cronian 1 8 ,112A, 24, 24.76,26,
67,73,97.47
Cynics/Cynicism 66A, B
Diakrinomenoi 25.78
Dorian 42D
Egyptian 1, 2 ,3A, B, 4A, 8B, 35B,
53A, B, 72A, D, 76D, E, 77C,
78E, 112B, 117A, 142B. passim
Eleusinian 125.84,157.730, 355
Epicurean 265.294
Epiphany 125.84
Ethiopian 58C
Giants 19,77.7,99.46,307.364
Goths 52
Greek 4A, 4 7 ,53A, 100A, 142B,
passim
Hellenes 69D, 77A, 100A, 108,
139, Test. III.4 ,25,49, 353.74
Hellenism 97A, 21, 26, 27, 38, 46,
71,2973 4 8
Heliopolitan 1 3 8 ,140B, 313.369
Hermaic 83.22, 329.398
Hermetic 79.7, 117.78, 129.90,
187.766
Hilaria 87A
Huns 50
Illyrian 69A
Indian 51D
Isaurian 61, 277.575
Jew 46B. 6 7 ,89A, 97A, 128,41,
135.704
Judaic/Judaism 67,91.54
Magi 75.7
Mithraic 93,55
Monophysites/Monophysitism 21.6,
24, 25.18,28JO, 29,73
Mysian 88A
Nabataean 136A, 20, 305.360,
307.362
Neoplatonism/Neoplatonic passim
Orestiads 52
Orphic 85A, 3 7 ,55.118,231247
Ostrogoths 145.779
Pagan/paganism 69D, passim
Palestinian 352
Panathenaea 105A, 173.747,
253.277
Panic HOB
Peripatetic 134A
Persian 41, 48,49, 50, 50.99, 52,
55.118, 75.7,331.599
Phaeacians 113A, 271.505
Phoenicians 79C, 142B, 55.118,
187.769,311.567
Phrygian 88A, 35,75.7
Platonic/Platonism 34A, 148C,
Test. I, III.87, passim
Pygmies 58C
Pythagorean 4A, 45B, 84J, 77.5,
79.75, 89.52,103.55, 107.64,
209.272,213.279,215.227,
219.230,225.241,291.559
Pytheanitai 235.252
Roman 7 ,5 0 ,51A, 52, 69A, D,
77 A, 100A, 1 08,113P, 128,
passim
Samaritan 97A, 237.254
Scythian 50
Semitic 299.549,301.354
Sibylline 353-354
Slavic 347
Stoic 46D, 116B, Test. 1 ,41.67,
137.707
Stygian 135B, 305.359
Syrian 57A, 6 5 ,7 0 ,79C, 89A, 90D,
91A, 92, Test. 1 ,21.6,175.752,
227.243
Titans/Titanic 40,19,55.777,71,
77.7, 81.76, 77,97.47
Typhonian 4C, 24, 24.76, 38, 73,
77-79.7, 191.775
Vandals 149.723
Zoroastrian 217.225
 CONCORDANCES*

A z A Z

1 El 9D F16
2A E2 9E E13
2B F2 9F E14
3A E3 10A F171
3B F4 10B Fll
3C F4a 11 F7
4A F3, F3a 12A E15
4B E4 12B F75
4C E5 12C F12
5A E6 13 E16
5B E7 14 E17, F14
5C F5 15A E18.F15
6A E8 15B F18
6B F398 15C E19
7 E9,F6 16A F21, 21a
8A F8 16B F64
8B F9 16C E20
9A E10 17 E21
9B Ell 18 E22, F30, F30a
9C E12 19 F32

* A = ATHANASSIADI
Z = ZINTZEN
E = EPITOMA PHOTIANA
F =FRAGMENTUM
A Z A Z

20A F19 34D E36, F77, F79

20B F20 35A E37
21 F38 35B F80
22 F40 36A E38
23A E23, F45 36B F82
23B F46 36C F83
23C F47 37A F84
24A F53 37B F76
24B E24 37C F401
24C F51 37D F85, F85a
25 F333 37E E40, F86, F87
26A F49 37F E41.F89
26B F24 38A E42, F90
27 E25 38B E43
28A E26, F56 39A E44
28B F44 39B E45
29A F54 40A E46
29B F55 40B E47
29C E27 41 F100
30A E28, F58 42A F91
30B F59 42B E48, F92
30C F60 42C E49, F94
30D F309 42D E50, F98
31A F62 42E E51.F99
31B E29, F65 42F F95, F97
32A F66 42G F96
32B E30 42H F97
33A E31.F71 43A F102
33B F74 43B E52, F103
33C E32, F72, F73 43C F102
34A E33 43D F104
34B E34 43E F102, F105
34C E35 44 E53
A Z A Z

45A E54, F106 59A E80, F129, FI 29a,

45B F106 F 131, F131a, F132,
46A E55 FI 33
46B E56 59B F135
46C E57 59C F137
46D E58, F109 59D F136
46E E59.F110 59E F134
47 E60, F ill 59F F200
48A E61, FI 12, FI 13 60 E81.E82, F138,
48B FI 14 F138a
49 E62.F115 61 E83, F140
50 E63 62A E84, F140
51A E64, FI 16 62B E85
51B E65 62C E86, F141
51C E66, FI 17, FI 18 63A E87
51D E67 63B E88
51E E68 64 -

52 E69 65 F142
53A E70 66A F147
53B E71 66B E89, F151, F152
53C E72 66C F154
53D E73 66D F153
54 E74.F119, F120, 66E F144
F121, F122 66F F146
55 E75.F123 66G F145
56 FI 24 67 F239
57A E76 68 F143
57B FI 27 69A F155, F158
57C E79 69B E90
58A E77, FI 26 69C F156
58B E78 69D E91.F159
58C F128 69E F157
70 E92
A Z A Z

71A E93 78C F194

71B FI 60, FI 62, F267 78D Ell 1
72A F161 78E F173
72B F163 78F E112
72C F165 79A El 13
72D FI 64 79B E114
72E E93 79C El 15
72F E94 80 F183
73A E95 81 El 16
73B E96 82A El 17
74A E97 82B El 18
74B E98 83A E119, F185
74C E99 83B F189
74D E100 84A F190
74E E101 84B E120
74F E102 84C E121
75A FI 67 84D E122
75B F168 84E F191
75C FI 69 84F FI 93
75D F170 84G E123
75E E103 84H F196
75F E105 841 E124
76A FI 72 84J E125
76B El 04 85A E126
76C F173 85B E127, F199
76D FI 82 85C F198
76E E106, E107, F174 85D E128
77A E108 85E E129, F201
77B E109 86A F202
77C E110 86B F204
77D F178 86C F205
78A FI 80 86D F208
78B F181 86E F210
 A Z A z

86F F211 97A E141

86G E130 97B F238
87A E131.F207 97C El42, F240
87B F209 97D F241
87C F214 97E E143
88A E132, F213 97F E144
88B F215 97G E145
88C F212 97H E146, F242
88D E133 971 F244
89A E134, F218, F227 95J F245
89B F216 97K E147
90A E135 98A E148
90B F219 98B E149
90C F220 98C E l50, F250,
90D F221 F251.F252
91A F222, F223 98D F253
91B F224 98E E151
91C F225 98F E152
92 F226 99A E153, F255
93 F228 99B E154
94A F246 99C F148
94B E136 100A E155, E156,
95A F229 F257, F258,
95B F230 F261.F262,
95C F232 F264, F274
95D E137 100B E157, F261
96A E138 101A F260
I
96B E139 101B F243
96C F234 101C F266
96D F235 102 E158, F265
96E E140 103A E159
96F F236 103B E160
96G F237 103C F268
A Z A Z

103D F269 113J F299

103E F270 113K F300
104A F271 113L E171
104B F272 113M F195
104C F125 113N F363
105A F273 1130 E172
105B F275 113P E173
105C E161.E162 113Q F297
105D E163 113R F298
106A El 64 114A E174
106B F276 114B F301
107 F277, F330 114C F302
108 E165, F278, F278a, 115A F303
F279, F280, F282, 115B F28
F304, F305 115C F306
109 F284 116A E175
110A E166 116B E176
11OB F286 116C F311
110C F70 116D E177
111 El67, F33, F34, 116E F336
F39, F41, F287 116F F13
112A F287 117A F313
112B E168, F289, 117B F314
F290, F291 117C F315
113A F93, F93a 118A E178
113B F281 118B E179, F316
113C F294 119A F318
113D F295 119B E180
113E E169 119C E181
113F F176 119D F203
113G F177 119E E182
113H F296 119F E183
1131 E170 119G F322

39°
A Z A Z

119H E184 133 F186

1191 F293 134A F338
119J El 85 134B E196
119K F320 134C E197
119L F307 134D EI98
120A - 135A E195
120B F317 135B E199
121 El 86 136A F342
122A F321 136B E200
122B E187 137A F343
122C F233 137B E201
122D F323 137C F325
123A F324 137D E202
123B F324 138 E203
124 F324 139 E204, F344
125A F327 140A E205
125B E188 140B F345
126A E189 140C F347
126B E190 140D F345
126C F328 141A E206
126D F285 141B E207
126E F319 141C E208
127A F331 141D E209
127B F332 141E E210
127C F329 142A E211
128 F334, F335, F335a 142B E212, F348
129A F337 142C E213
129B E191 143A E214
130 F339 143B E215
131A El 92 144A E216, F349
131B E193 144B E217
132A El 94 144C E218
132B F341 144D E219

39i
A Z A z

144E E220, F350 151C E229

145A E221 151D F10
145B F351 151E E230
146A E222, E223, F351, 15 IF F370
F352, F353, F354 152 F249, F368, F369
146B F69 153A FI 07
146C F362 153B F108
146D F375 154 F52
146E F355, F358 155 F63
147 F359 156 F67
148A E224 157 F149
148B E225 158 F25
148C E226 159 F29
148D F360
148E F361, F361a
149A F364
149B F366
149C F61 TESTIMONIA
150 E227 I -

151A F367 II F42

15 IB E228 III pp.2 + 317-9
Z A Z A

El 1 E34 34B
E2 2A E35 34C
E3 3A E36 34D
E4 4B E37 35A
E5 4C E38 36A
E6 5A E39 37D
E7 5B E40 37E
E8 6A E41 37F
E9 7 E42 38A
E10 9A E43 38B
Ell 9B E44 39A
E12 9C E45 39B
E13 9E E46 40A
E14 9F E47 40B
E15 12A E48 42B
E16 13 E49 42C
E17 14 E50 42D
El 8 15A E51 42E
E19 15C E52 43B
E20 16C E53 44
E21 17 E54 45A
E22 18 E55 46A
E23 23A E56 46B
E24 24B E57 46C
E25 27 E58 46D
E26 28A E59 46E
E27 29C E60 47
E28 30A E61 48A
E29 31B E62 49
E30 32B E63 50
E31 33A E64 51A
E32 33C E65 51B
E33 34A E66 51C
z A Z A

E67 51D E100 74D

E68 5 IE E101 74E
E69 52 E102 74F
E70 53A E103 75E
E71 53B E104 76B
E72 53C E105 75F
E73 53D E106 76E
E74 54 E107 76E
E75 55 E108 77A
E76 57A E109 77B
E77 58A E110 77C
E78 58B El 11 78D
E79 57C E112 78F
E80 59A El 13 79A
E81 60 E114 79B
E82 60 El 15 79C
E83 61 E116 81
E84 62A E117 82A
E85 62B El 18 82B
E86 62C El 19 83A
E87 63A E120 84B
E88 63B E121 84C
E89 66B E122 84D
E90 69B El 23 84G
E91 69D E124 841
E92 70 E125 84J
E93 71A, 72 E E126 85A
E94 72F El 27 85B
E95 73A E128 85D
E96 73B E129 85E
E97 74A E130 86G
E98 74B E131 87A
E99 74C El 32 88A
E133 88D E166 110A
E134 89A El 67 111
E135 90A E168 112B
E136 94B E169 113E
El 37 95D E170 1131
E138 96A E171 113L
E139 96B E172 1130
E140 96E E173 113P
E141 97A E174 114A
E142 97C E175 116A
E143 97E E176 116B
E144 97F E177 116D
E145 97G E178 118A
EI46 97H El 79 118B
E147 97K E180 119B
E148 98A E181 119C
El 49 98B El 82 119E
E150 98C E183 119F
E151 98E E184 119H
E152 98F E185 119J
E153 99A E186 121
E154 99B El 87 122B
E155 100A E188 125B
E156 100A El 89 126A
El 57 100B E190 126B
E158 102 R191 129B
E159 103A E192 131A
El 60 103B E193 13 IB
E161 105C E194 132A
E162 105C E195 135A
E163 105D E196 134B
E164 106A E197 134C
E165 108 E198 134D
z A Z A

El 99 135B E215 143B

E200 136B E216 144A
E201 137B E217 144B
E202 137D E218 144C
E203 138 E219 144D
E204 139 E220 144E
E205 140A E221 145A
E206 141A E222 146A
E207 141B E223 146A
E208 14IC E224 148A
E209 141D E225 148B
E210 141E E226 148C
E211 142A E227 150
E212 142B E228 151B
E213 142C E229 151C
E214 143A E230 15 IE
Z A Z A

FI _ F30a 18
F2 2B F31 -

F3 4A F32 19
F3a 4A F33 111
F4 3B F34 111
F4a 3C F35 -

F5 5C F36 -

F6 7 F37 -

F7 11 F38 21
F8 8A F39 111
F9 8B F40 22
FIO 151D F41 111
Fll 10B F42 Test. II
F12 12C F43 -

F13 116F F44 28B

F14 14 F45 23A
F15 15A F46 23B
F16 9D F47 23C
FI 7 - F48 -

F18 15B F49 26A

F19 20A F50 24B
F20 20B F51 24C
F21 16A F52 154
F21a 16A F53 24A
F22 - F54 29A
F23 - F55 29B
F24 26B F56 28A
F25 158 F57 -

F26 17 F58 30A

F27 - F59 30B
F28 115B F60 30C
F29 159 F61 149C
F30 18 F62 31A
z A Z A

F63 155 F93a 113A

F64 16B F94 42C
F65 31B F95 42F
F66 32A F96 42G
F67 156 F97 42F, 42H
F68 - F98 42D
F69 146B F99 42E
F69a - FI 00 41
F70 110C F101 -

F71 33A FI 02 43A, 43C, 43E

F72 33C F103 43B
F73 33C F104 43 D
F74 33B F105 43E
F75 12B F106 45A, 45B
F76 37B FI 07 153A
F77 34D F108 153B
F78 - FI 09 46D
F79 34D FI 10 46E
F80 35B F ill 47
F81 - F112 48A
F82 36B FI 13 48A
F83 36C FI 14 48B
F84 37A FI 15 49
F85 37D FI 16 51A
F85a 37D F117 51C
F86 37E F118 51C
F87 37E FI 19 54
F88 37E F120 54
F89 37F F121 54
F90 38A F122 54
F91 42A F123 55
F92 42B F124 56
F93 113A F125 104C
Z A Z A

F126 58A F156 69C

F127 57B F157 69E
F128 58C F158 69A
F129 59A F159 69D
FI 29α 59A F160 71B
F130 — F161 72A
F131 59A F162 71B
F131a 59A F163 72B
F132 59A FI 64 72D
F133 59A F164a -

F134 59E F165 72C

F135 59B F166 -

F136 59D F167 75A

F137 59C FI 68 75B
F138 60 F169 75C
F138a 60 F170 75D
F139 - F171 10A
F140 61,62A F172 76A
F141 62C F173 76C, 78E
F142 65 F174 76E
F143 68 F175 -

F144 66E F176 113F

F145 66G F177 113G
F146 66F F178 77D
F147 66A F179 -

F148 99C F180 78A

F149 157 F181 78B
F150 - FI 82 76D
F151 66B F183 80
F152 66B FI 84 -

F153 66D FI 85 83A

F154 66C F186 133
F155 69A FI 87 -
z A Z A

F188 _ F221 90D

F189 83B F222 91A
F190 84A F223 91A
F191 84E F224 91B
FI 92 - F225 91C
F193 84F F226 92
FI 94 78C F227 89A
F195 113M F228 93
F196 84H F229 95A
FI 97 - F230 95B
F198 85C F231 -

F199 85B F232 95C

F200 59F F233 122C
F201 85E F234 96C
F202 86A F235 96D
F203 119D F236 96F
F204 86B F237 96G
F205 86C F238 97B
F206 86G F239 67
F207 87A F240 97C
F208 86D F241 97D
F209 87B F242 97H
F210 86E F243 101B
F211 86F F244 971
F212 88C F245 97J
F213 88A F246 94A
F214 87C F247 -

F215 88B F248 -

F216 89B F249 152

F217 - F250 98C
F218 89A F251 98C
F219 90B F252 98C
F220 90C F253 98D
Z A Z A

F254 F286 110B

F255 99A F287 111, 112A
F256 F288 66A
F257 100Λ F289 112B
F258 100A F290 112B
F259 - F291 112B
F260 101A F292 -

F261 100A, 100B F293 1191

F262 100A F294 113C
F263 — F295 113D
F264 100A F296 113H
F265 102 F297 113Q
F266 101C F298 113R
F267 71B F299 113J
F268 103C F300 113K
F269 103D F301 114B
F270 103E F302 114C
F271 104A F303 115A
F272 104B F304 108

F273 105A F305 108

F274 100A F306 115C
F275 105B F307 119L
F276 106B F308 -

F277 107 F309 30D

F278 108 F310 -

F278a 108 F311 116C

F279 108 F312 -

F280 108 F313 117A

F281 113B F314 117B
F282 108 F315 117C
F283 - F316 118B
F284 109 F317 120B
F285 126D F318 119A
z A Z A

F319 126E F351 145B

F320 119K F352 146A
F321 122A F353 146A
F322 119G F354 146A
F323 122D F355 146E
F324 123A, 123B, 124 F356 -

F325 137C F357 -

F326 - F358 146E

F327 125A F359 147
F328 126C F360 148D
F329 127C F361 148E
F330 107 F361a 148E
F331 127A F362 146C
F332 127B F363 113N
F333 25 F364 149A
F334 128 F365 -

F335 128 F366 149B

F335a 128 F367 151A
F336 116E F368 152
F337 129A F369 152
F338 134A F370 151F
F339 130 F371 -

F340 - F372 -

F341 132B F373 -

F342 136A F374 -

F343 137A F375 146D

F344 139 F376 -

F345 140B,140D F377 -

F346 - F378 -

F347 140C F379 -

F348 142B F380 -

F349 144A F381 -

F350 144E F382 -

Z A z A

F383 F394
F384 - F395 -

F385 - F396 -

F386 - F397 -

F387 - F398 6B
F388 - F399 -

F389 - F400 -

F390 - F401 37C

F391 — F402 -

F392 - F403
F393

4°3