Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

Founded in 1846!

Philologus

Zeitschrift für antike Literatur und ihre Rezeption / A Journal for Ancient Literature and its Reception

Ed. by Föllinger, Sabine / Fuhrer, Therese / Reinhardt, Tobias / Stenger, Jan / Vöhler, Martin


CiteScore 2018: 0.12

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2018: 0.100
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2018: 0.867

Online
ISSN
2196-7008
See all formats and pricing
More options …
Volume 163, Issue 1

Issues

What is Pythagorean in the Pseudo-Pythagorean Literature?

Leonid Zhmud
  • Corresponding author
  • Russian Acadamy of the Sciences, Institute for the History of Science and Technology, St. Petersburg, Russian Federation
  • Email
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
Published Online: 2018-02-28 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/phil-2018-0003

Abstract

This paper discusses continuity between ancient Pythagoreanism and the pseudo-Pythagorean writings, which began to appear after the end of the Pythagorean school ca. 350 BC. Relying on a combination of temporal, formal and substantial criteria, I divide Pseudopythagorica into three categories: 1) early Hellenistic writings (late fourth – late second centuries BC) ascribed to Pythagoras and his family members; 2) philosophical treatises written mostly, yet not exclusively, in pseudo-Doric from the turn of the first century BC under the names of real or fictional Pythagoreans; 3) writings attributed to Pythagoras and his relatives that continued to appear in the late Hellenistic and Imperial periods. I will argue that all three categories of pseudepigrapha contain astonishingly little that is authentically Pythagorean.

Keywords: Pythagoreanism; pseudo-Pythagorean writings; Platonism; Aristotelianism

An earlier version of this article was presented at the colloquium “Pseudopythagorica: stratégies du faire croire dans la philosophie antique” (Paris, 28 May 2015). I would like to thank Constantinos Macris (CNRS) for his kind invitation. The final version was written during my fellowship at the IAS of Durham University and presented at the B Club, Cambridge, in Mai 2016. I am grateful to Gábor Betegh for inviting me to give a talk and to the audience for the vivid discussion. My thanks are due to Phillip Horky (Durham) and Stefan Schorn (Leuven) for their very helpful comments on this paper.

Bibliography

  • D. Balch, “Neopythagorean Moralists and the New Testament Household Code”, ANRW II.26.1, 1992, 380–411.Google Scholar

  • M. Baltes, Timaios Lokros, Über die Natur des Kosmos und der Seele, Leiden 1972. Google Scholar

  • M. Bonazzi, “Pythagoreanizing Aristotle: Eudorus and the Systematization of Platonism”, in: M. Schofield (ed.), Aristotle, Plato and Pythagoreanism in the First Century BC, Cambridge 2013, 160–186.Google Scholar

  • M. Bonazzi, “Eudorus of Alexandria and the ‘Pythagorean’ Pseudoepigrapha”, in: G. Cornelli/C. Macris/R. McKirahan (eds.), On Pythagoreanism, Berlin 2013, 385–404.Google Scholar

  • W. Burkert, “Hellenistische Pseudopythagorica”, Philologus 105, 1961, 16–43, 226–246.Google Scholar

  • W. Burkert, “Review of Vogel, C. de. Pythagoras and Early Pythagoreanism. Assen, 1966”, Gymnasium 74, 1967, 458–460. Google Scholar

  • W. Burkert, “Zur geistesgeschichtlichen Einordnung einiger Pseudopythagorica”, in: K. von Fritz (ed.), Pseudepigrapha I, Genève 1971, 57–102.Google Scholar

  • W. Burkert, Lore and Science in Ancient Pythagoreanism, Cambridge, MA 1972.Google Scholar

  • W. Burkert, “Pythagoreische Retraktationen”, in: id. et al. (eds.), Frag­ment­­sammlungen philosophischer Texte der Antike, Göttingen 1998.Google Scholar

  • B. Centrone, Pseudopythagorica Ethica: i trattati morali di Archita, Metopo, Teage, Eurifamo, Napoli 1990.Google Scholar

  • B. Centrone, “L’VIII libro delle ‘Vite’ di Diogene Laerzio”, ANRW II.36.6, 1992, 4183–4217.Google Scholar

  • B. Centrone, “La letteratura pseudopitagorica: origine, diffusione e finalità”, in: G. Cerri (ed.), La letteratura pseudepigrafa nella cultura greca e romana, Napoli 2000, 429–452.Google Scholar

  • B. Centrone, “The pseudo-Pythagorean Writings”, in: C. A. Huffman (ed.), A History of Pythagoreanism, Cambridge 2014, 315–340. Google Scholar

  • P. Corssen, “Die Schrift des Arztes Androkydes Περὶ πυθαγορικῶν συμβόλων”, RhM 67, 1912, 240–262.Google Scholar

  • A. Delatte, Études sur la littérature pythagoricienne, Paris 1915.Google Scholar

  • A. Delatte, La vie de Pythagore de Diogène Laërce, Bruxelles 1922.Google Scholar

  • L. Delatte, Les traites de la royaute d’Ecphante, Diotogene et Sthenidas, Liège 1942.Google Scholar

  • H. Diels, “Ein gefälschtes Pythagorasbuch”, AGPh 3, 1890, 451–472.Google Scholar

  • H. Dörrie/M. Baltes (eds.), Der Platonismus in der Antike, vol. 2, Stuttgart 1990. Google Scholar

  • T. Dorandi, Filodemo. Storia dei filosofi. Platone e l'Academia, Napoli 1991.Google Scholar

  • D. S. Du Toit, Theios Anthropos, Tübingen 1997.Google Scholar

  • B. Ehrman, Forgery and Counterforgery: The Use of Literary Deceit in Early Christian Polemics, Oxford 2012.Google Scholar

  • A.-J. Festugière, “Les ‘Mémoires Pythagoriques’ cités par Alexandre Polyhistor”, REG 58, 1945, 1–65. Google Scholar

  • J.-J. Flinterman, “Pythagoreans in Rome and Asia Minor around the Turn of the Common Era”, in: C. A. Huffman (ed.), A History of Pythagoreanism, Cambridge 2014, 341–359.Google Scholar

  • K. von Fritz, “Theano”, RE 5A, 1934, 1379–1381.Google Scholar

  • R. Harder, Ocellus Lucanus, Berlin 1926.Google Scholar

  • P. Hardie, “The Speech of Pythagoras in Ovid’s Metamorphoses 15: Empedoclean Epos”, CQ 45, 1995, 204–214.Google Scholar

  • F. D. Harvey, “Two Kinds of Equality”, CM 26, 1965, 101–146.Google Scholar

  • P. S. Horky, “Theophrastus on Platonic and ‘Pythagorean’ Imitation”, CQ 63, 2013, 686–712.Google Scholar

  • C. A. Huffman, Philolaus of Croton. Pythagorean and Presocratic, Cambridge 1993.Google Scholar

  • C. A. Huffman, Archytas of Tarentum. Pythagorean, Philosopher and Mathematician King, Cambridge 2005. Google Scholar

  • C. A. Huffman, “Aristoxenus’ Pythagorean Precepts: A Rational Pythagorean Ethics”, in: M. M. Sassi (ed.). La costruzione del discorso filosofico nell’età dei Presocratici, Pisa 2006, 103–121.Google Scholar

  • C. A. Huffman (ed.), A History of Pythagoreanism, Cambridge 2014.Google Scholar

  • A. B. Huizenga, Moral Education for Women in the Pastoral and Pythagorean Letters: Philosophers of the Household, Leiden 2013.Google Scholar

  • A. Laks, “The Pythagorean Hypomnemata reported by Alexander Polyhistor in Diogenes Laertius (8.25–33)”, in: G. Cornelli/R. McKirahan/C. Macris (eds.), On Pythagoreanism, Berlin 2013, 371–384.Google Scholar

  • A. A. Long, “The Eclectic Pythagoreanism of Alexander Polyhistor”, in: M. Schofield (ed.), Aristotle, Plato and Pythagoreanism in the First Century BC, Cambridge 2013, 139–159.Google Scholar

  • C. Macris, “Jamblique et la littérature pseudo-pythagoricienne”, in: S. C. Mimouni (ed.), Apocryphité: histoire d'un concept transversal aux religions du Livre, Turnhout 2002, 77–129.Google Scholar

  • C. Macris, “Télaugès [de Samos]”, DPhA 6, 2016, 722–731 (= 2016a). Google Scholar

  • C. Macris, “Théano (de Crotone ou de Métaponte?)”, DPhA 6, 2016, 820–839 (= 2016b).Google Scholar

  • G. Méautis, Recherches sur le pythagorisme, Neuchâtel 1922.Google Scholar

  • P. Moraux, Der Aristotelismus bei den Griechen, vol. 2, Berlin 1984. Google Scholar

  • C. W. Mueller, “Die neuplatonischen Aristoteleskommentatoren über die Ursachen der Pseudepigraphie”, RhM 112, 1969, 120–126. Google Scholar

  • K. Praechter, “Metopos, Theages und Archytas bei Stobaeus Flor. I 64, 67”, Philologus 50, 1891, 49–57.Google Scholar

  • R. Reuthner, “Philosophia und oikonomia als weibliche Disziplinen in Traktaten und Lehrbriefe neupythagoreischer Philosophinnen”, Historia 58, 2009, 416–437. Google Scholar

  • E. Rohde, Psyche, London 1925. Google Scholar

  • Α. Rostagni, “Un nuovo capitolo nella storia della retorica e della sofistica” (1922), in: Scritti minori, vol. 1, Torino 1955, 3–59. Google Scholar

  • S. Schorn, Satyros aus Kalatis, Basel 2006.Google Scholar

  • S. Schorn, “Die Pythagoreer im zehnten Buch der Bibliothek Diodors: Quellen, Traditionen und Manipulationen”, in: M. Berti/V. Costa (eds.), Ritorno ad Alessandria. Storiografia greca e cultura bibliotecaria: tracce di una relazione perduta, Tivoli 2013, 179–259.Google Scholar

  • S. Schorn, “Pythagoras in the Historical Tradition”, in: C. A. Huffman (ed.), A History of Pythagoreanism, Cambridge 2014, 296–314.Google Scholar

  • A. Städele, Die Briefe des Pythagoras und der Pythagoreer, Meisenheim am Glan 1980.Google Scholar

  • K. Staehle, Die Zahlenmystik bei Philon von Alexandria, Leipzig 1931. Google Scholar

  • S. Swain, Economy, Family, and Society from Rome to Islam: A Critical Edition, English Translation, and Study of Bryson’s ‘Management of the Estate’, Cambridge 2013.Google Scholar

  • T. A. Szlezák, Pseudo-Archytas Über die Kategorien: Texte zur griechischen Aristoteles-Exegese, Berlin 1972.Google Scholar

  • W. Theiler, “Review of A. Delatte, Études sur la littérature pythagoricienne. Paris 1915 and other works”, Gnomon 2, 1926, 147–156.Google Scholar

  • H. Thesleff, An Introduction to the Pythagorean Writings of the Hellenistic Period, Åbo 1961. Google Scholar

  • H. Thesleff, The Pythagorean Texts of the Hellenistic Period, Åbo 1965. Google Scholar

  • H. Thesleff, “On the Problem of the Doric pseudo-Pythagorica”, in: K. von Fritz (ed.), Pseudepigrapha I, Genève 1971, 57–102.Google Scholar

  • J. C. Thom, The Pythagorean Golden Verses, Leiden 1995.Google Scholar

  • J. C. Thom, “Cleanthes, Chrysippus and the Pythagorean Golden Verses”, AClass 44, 2001, 197–219.Google Scholar

  • C. de Vogel, Pythagoras and Early Pythagoreanism, Assen 1966.Google Scholar

  • B. L. van der Waerden, “Die Schriften und Fragmente des Pythagoras”, RE Suppl. 10, 1965, 843–864.Google Scholar

  • M. Węcowski, “Pseudo-Democritus, or Bolos of Mendes (263)”, in: I. Worthington (ed.), Brill's New Jacoby Online, 2012.Google Scholar

  • M. Wellmann, “Eine pythagoreische Urkunde des 4. Jh. v. Chr.”, Hermes 54, 1919, 225–245.Google Scholar

  • W. Wiersma, “Das Referat des Alexandros Polyhistor über die Pythagoreische Philosophie”, Mnemosyne 10, 1941, 97–112.Google Scholar

  • F. Wilhelm, “Die Oeconomica der Neupythagoreer Bryson, Kallikratidas, Periktione, Phintys”, RhM 70, 1915, 161–223.Google Scholar

  • E. Zeller, Die Philosophie der Griechen in ihrer geschichtlichen Entwicklung, 6th ed., vol. III.2, Leipzig 1919.Google Scholar

  • L. Zhmud, “Aristoxenus and the Pythagoreans”, in: C. A. Huffman (ed.), Aristoxenus of Tarentum, New Brunswick 2011, 223–249.Google Scholar

  • L. Zhmud, Pythagoras and the Early Pythagoreans, Oxford 2012. Google Scholar

  • L. Zhmud, “Greek Arithmology: Pythagoras or Plato?”, in: A.-B. Renger/A. Stavru (eds.), Pythagorean Knowledge from the Ancient to the Modern World: Askesis, Religion, Science, Wiesbaden 2016, 311–336.Google Scholar

  • M. Zucconi, “La tradizioni dei discorsi di Pitagora in Giamblico”, Vita Pythagorica, 37–57, RFIC 98, 1970, 491–501.Google Scholar

About the article

Published Online: 2018-02-28

Published in Print: 2019-05-29


Citation Information: Philologus, Volume 163, Issue 1, Pages 72–94, ISSN (Online) 2196-7008, ISSN (Print) 0031-7985, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/phil-2018-0003.

Export Citation

© 2018 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston.Get Permission

Citing Articles

Here you can find all Crossref-listed publications in which this article is cited. If you would like to receive automatic email messages as soon as this article is cited in other publications, simply activate the “Citation Alert” on the top of this page.

[1]
Federica Cordano
Gaia, 2018, Number 21

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in