Tracing Orpheus (Studies of Orphic Fragments) || 45. Synesius, Dio 7 (OF 674)

45. Synesius, Dio 7 (OF 674)*

Mara Paz Lpez MartnezUniversidad de Alicante

OF 674 is a passage by Synesius of Cyrene that includes an Orphic sententia also edited by Alberto Bernab as OF 576.

The saying in question is the hexameter: , , For there are many that carry the thyrsus, but few are the Bacchi. In Dionysian rituals, the thyrsus is the staff carried by the followers of Bacchus, and is one of their main attributes. But Orphism is known to go further in its interpretation of Dionysism, as this verse seems to point out. The sententia first appears in Platos Phaedo (69c):

E , [] , , .There are indeed, as those concerned with the mysteries say, many who carry the thyrsus, but the Bacchants are few. These latter are, in my opinion, no other than those who have practised philosophy in the right way.

In this passage, Plato establishes a comparison between initiation into the Dionysian mysteries and initiation into true wisdom. As initiation into Dio-nysism, philosophy is not within the grasp of everyone, but only of those few that have practised philosophy correctly, who can be equated with purified Bacchants of the Dionysian cults.1

This sententia, ennobled by the prestige of having been quoted by Plato,2 developed into an entity of its own, forming part of paremiographical litera-ture.3 For example, it is found with a slight variation in word order in the col-lection by Zenobius (5.77), and probably already appeared in the anthology by Didymos, to warn of those who may dazzle with unmerited reputation: , . Zenobius also provides an-other hexameter offering similar advice (5.75): , ; there may be many who cast pebbles, but few prophets.

* I would like to thank my colleague Miguel Herrero from the Complutense Univer-sity for his pertinent observations.

1 Merino Rodrguez (2004).2 Bernab (1998).3 Leutsch Schneidewin (1839: 150151).

Brought to you by | St. Petersburg State UniversityAuthenticated | 134.99.128.41

Download Date | 10/30/13 6:07 PM

284 Mara Paz Lpez Martnez

The collection by Diogenianus includes a further variation, which is also hexametric (7.86): , ; many goad the oxen, but few plough the land.

The structure of the sententia is usual in Greek literature of all ages and genres. It presents an antithetical parallelism found in Homer (Od. 2.276277), and is also found in prose, as Herodotus (7.210.2) repeats a stylistic expression of this kind: , , there were many men, but few of them true, and Demosthenes (19.113) writes: , , plenty of shouters, but very few fighters, together with other authors in-cluded in the apparatus of parallels to OF 576.

However, the most well-known version of this formula is found in the Gospel of Matthew: So the last shall be first, and the first last (Matth. 20.16), and more particularly, ; For many are called, but few chosen (Matth. 22.14). Christian authors such as Theoderetus and Clement of Alexandria explicitly compare this last passage with Platos Orphic quote.4

Returning to Synesius, the sententia belongs to one of his more interest-ing treatises: Dio, or, on Living by his Example.5 Dio is a rich and complex text, a reflection on education, culture, literature and philosophy that is difficult to classify, and which has even been called an examination of conscience.6 In this opuscle, Synesius defends a holistic conception of knowledge. Rath-er than the excessive specialisation of the , he prefers the breadth of views and the knowledge of the . Synesius himself is an erudite whose literary references occur naturally throughout his works, an example of which is the fragment chosen. The figure of Dio of Prusa, a model phi-losopher, intellectual and learned scholar, is used by Synesius to reflect more widely on the understanding that should preside over the relationships be-tween Philosophy and Rhetoric. Synesius quotes Dio on various occasions, together with other authors such as Homer, and Plato in particular.7

In the context in which the fragment exists (Dio 68), Synesius urges us to assume our condition, our humanity. We cannot and should not equate ourselves to the gods, as to do so would be frivolous and boastful:

4 Clem. Al. Strom. 1.19.92.3, 5.3.17.4; Thdt. Affect. 12.35.5 Worthy of note among the available bibliography are the edition by Terzaghi (1944:

233278), revised in certain aspects by Latte 1956. Also of interest are: Garzya (1989), Greek text with translation into Italian, Lamoureux Aujoulat (2004: 91140) Greek text with translation into French, the translation into Spanish by Garca Moreno (1993: 348397), the commentary by Treu (1958) and the study of the era in which Synesius lived, by Cameron Long Sherry (1993), of which pages 6269 refer specifically to the Dio, among other reference works.

6 Lacombrade (1978: XXXI).7 On the literary references of the Dio, Piero (1975).



45. Synesius, Dio 7 285

, (6.3840). We are not imperturbable, as this quality only resides in God: (6.40). Synesius also discusses the matter of pleasure, one of the greatest concerns of Greek thought. In his understanding, it is most realistic for us as human beings to aspire to moderation in our enjoyment of pleasure. We are not pure intellect, and each pleasure and pain nails our soul to our body and makes it physical. We must accept that we are not gods, but men. Our own nature, therefore, tends to drag us towards the material. It is precisely culture, and more specifically literature, which can reconcile us with our own humanity.

This is the context of the fragment to which this work is devoted and where Synesius describes the desert life led by anchorite monks who them-selves, isolated from the world and imitating the forty days and nights that Jesus spent in the desert, withdrew to live the experience of contemplation,8 (7.2: Who professed a contemplative exis-tence). These monks lived in the monasteries of Nitria and Scetis, where some gathered in communities and others lived as recluses in their cells: (7.3: They took no part in public life, and became unsociable). Leading a very austere existence, they devoted themselves to manual work, prayer and charity. They also ignored bodily hygiene, wore rough black clothing and ate a frugal diet of water, bread, a little oil and wild plants, thus identifying themselves with the most humble sectors of the population, which was the vast majority. They were suspicious of pleasure, worked in a communal room and sold the results of their manual labour. The most typical items were wickerwork and palm leaf baskets. Naturally, they also prayed and sang psalms. On Saturday and/or Sunday they attended church, (7.5: They had sacred songs, holy symbols, and certain ordered approaches to the Divinity). They refused to hold positions of power and enjoyed considerable independence from any civil authorities. However, they were seriously concerned with the problems of those most in need, and one of their chief aims was charity and to help the poor with the resources they obtained from alms and the exchange of the items they produced.

Most of these ascetics were Egyptian and could neither read nor write. They therefore learnt the Bible by memory, and were able to recite parts of it, particularly from the Old and New Testaments. They spoke no Greek or Latin, and showed no interest in it either. They spoke only Coptic, their native lan-guage, which was not one of culture. This illiteracy is indicative of their social isolation, and explains their disdain of education and pagan culture. It is sig-

8 Blzquez Martnez (1996, 1998). Also Mazzarino (1974), among many other publi-cations.




nificant that Anthony, the monks founder, did not even wish to attend class-es, lest he be contaminated by his companions knowledge of pagan culture. If he wished to communicate with an Alexandrian, he had to resort to another monk to act as interpreter. However, in this early era learned monks did ex-ist, such as Ammonius and monks from high social ranks. The rejection was mutual. Pagan intellectualism, meanwhile, hated and scorned these monks. Libanius and Julian made explicit attacks on them, accusing them of being uncultured, fanatical, violent and worse. Specifically, the historian Eunapius (Vitae Soph. 6.11.6) describes them as men by their appearance, but pigs for their style of life, , .

In the Dio, Synesius seems to empathise with these monks who have withdrawn to the Nitria desert. By referring to them as (7.1), this is not a sign of aggressiveness, but rather an allusion to the objective fact that they are Coptic, and (subtly) to their rejection of literary culture.

The fragment, as it appears in Bernab, is as follows (7.2332): , , , , , , , , . ; , , ;For there are many that carry the thyrsus, but few are the Bacchi.But even these men do not bear the Bacchic frenzy with sufficient patience, but at one moment they rest in the god, at another in the universe, and again in their bod-ies. They know that they are but men, small fragments of the universe at that, hav-ing lesser lives lying beneath them, and suspicious of these to the point of frustrat-ing them, lest they should bestir themselves and rise against them. What, after all, is the meaning of their baskets and of the wickerwork objects which they handle, if not to signify first of all that they were human beings at a given moment; in other words, were paying attention to matters here below?

Synesius does not criticise their devotion to their manual work, nor does he consider the rigour or the austerity that presides over their lives to be useless, but he finds all the effort excessive, in the idea that we are human beings and that, however hard we may try to cancel out our physical com-ponent, this will win out in the end, as something inherent to us. What Synesius reproaches them for is their lack of a rational method to achieve the experience of contemplation. For a such as Synesius, the objective of virtue is not achieved all at once, or through a vertiginous and orgiastic lifestyle; it is a long road to be taken methodically and in stages throughout ones life.

In his opinion, it is precisely good literature that can help us to redirect this tendency of ours to slide towards the physical world: because human



45. Synesius, Dio 7 287

nature tends towards pleasure, the study of the sciences and the arts pro-vides us with a far superior enjoyment to that experienced as a result of any other kind of purely physical satisfaction. Synesius opens an intermediate way to achieve contemplation. The mind cannot be in higher matters all the time, as even those most familiarised with intellectual beauty can have their fill of it (7.1517): , .

Synesius also establishes a curious distinction between barbarians and Greeks: the former are more stubborn in maintaining an enterprise than the Greeks, whereas the Greeks make a great show of their superior intellectual curiosity.9

After all, philosophers and monks pursue the same objective. Howev-er, whereas philosophers strengthen their spirit after years of meticulous preparation, to achieve the same objective, monks rely on perseverance and routine rather than reason.

In other works Synesius is more visceral in expressing his opinions about these basket-weaving monks. In correspondence with his loved ones, he expresses himself more freely. In some of these letters (Ep. 143 and 154), Synesius criticises the monks and calls them ignorant. In the year 405, Syn-esius writes to Hypatia and includes with his letter a copy of the Dio, so that his teacher may read the opuscle and cast judgement on the work before its publication:10 After me, you are the first of the Greeks that shall read them (Ep. 154.112114). Synesius confesses that he feels attacked from two sides, by those who wear white mantles and those who wear black mantles: the first are philosophers; the second are monks. He criticises those who think that one must hate literature to be a philosopher, and justifies his own effort to express his ideas with beauty.

It is worth noting in this fragment that Synesius does not include the quote with the word order presented by Plato, but rather in the order in which it appears in the collection produced by Zenobius in Alexandria. This word order is exactly the same as the wording used in the maxim by Olympiodorus, another celebrated representative of Neo-Platonism, the philosophical school of thought that includes Synesius.11 It seems, therefore,

9 7.46. For Synesius, Hellenism is an exclusively cultural concept referring to a common civilised world, with no religious connotation.

10 Even when he was bishop, Synesius continues to call her (Ep. 16). References for the figure of Hypatia include the study by Dzielska (1996) and the article by Blzquez Martnez (2004), among others. In 2009, and with wide media coverage, the film Agora was released, a Spanish superproduction by Ale-jandro Amenbar, with Hypatia of Alexandria as the protagonist, played by Rachel Weisz, and with the appearance of Synesius of Cyrene, portrayed by Rupert Evans.

11 Much has been written and discussed about the paganism of Synesius, his conver-sion to Christianity and his Platonism and/or Neo-Platonism. This is a complex




that Synesius quotes an already proverbial expression from memory, or per-haps following a scholarly edition rather than the original text by Plato, in the same tradition as the subsequent Alexandrian Neo-Platonism. However, in the late second century, Clement of Alexandria, the maximum exponent of Christian integration with Greek philosophy, quotes the verse with the same word order as Plato, who he cites as a direct source.12 Like Clement, Synesius adapts his interpretation to his ideology and to the situation of Alexandrian Christianity, although two centuries of distance imply large differences in that context, and consequently in the Christian interpretation of the Orphic sententia.

Bibliography

Bernab, A. 1998: Platone e lorfismo, Destino e salvezza: tra culti pagani e gnosi cris-tiana. Itinerari storico-religiosi sulle orme di Ugo Bianchi, Sfameni Gasparro, G. (ed.), Cosenza, 3393.

Blzquez Martnez, J. M. 1996: El nacimiento del Cristianismo, Madrid. 1998: Intelectuales, ascetas y demonios al final de la Antigedad, Madrid. 2004: Sinesio de Cirene, intelectual: la escuela de Hypatia en Alejandra, Gerin

22, 403419.Cameron, A. Long, J. Sherry, L. 1993: Barbarians and Politics at the Court of Arca-

dius, Berkeley Los Angeles.Dzielska, M. 1996: Hypatia of Alexandria, Cambridge MA (trad. esp. 2009: Hipatia de

Alejandra, Madrid).Garca Moreno, F. A. 1993: Sinesio de Cirene. Himnos. Tratados, Madrid. 1995: Sinesio de Cirene. Cartas, Madrid.Garzya, A. 1989: Opere di Sinesio di Cirene, Epistole, Operette, Inni, Torino.Lacombrade, Ch. 1978: Synsios de Cyrne. Tome I. Hymnes, Paris.Lamoureux, J. Aujoulat, N. 2004: Synsios de Cyrne. Tome IV. Opuscules I, Paris.Latte, K. 1956: Textkritische Beitrge zu Synesios, C&M 17, 9197.Leutsch, E. L. Schneidewin, F. G. 1839: Corpus Paroemiographorum Graecorum, Gt-

tingen.Mazzarino, S. 1974: Il basso impero. Antico, tardoantico ed ra costantiniana, I, Bari.Merino Rodrguez, C. 2004: Acerca de un proverbio citado por Platn en Fedn, 69C:

(= Zenobius Vulgatus V 77), Paremia 13, 159166.Piero, A. 1975: La imagen del filsofo y sus relaciones con la literatura. Un estudio

sobre el Din de Sinesio de Cirene, CFC 9, 133200.Terzaghi, N. 1944: Synesii Cyrenensis opuscula, Roma.Treu, K. 1958: Synesios von Kyrene: Ein Kommentar zu seinem Dion, Berlin.

issue that remains open, and on which the 1993 study by Cameron includes various opinions and bibliographic references to the subject.

12 Cf. n. 4.



Tracing Orpheus (Studies of Orphic Fragments) || 45. Synesius, Dio 7 (OF 674)

Documents

Transcript of Tracing Orpheus (Studies of Orphic Fragments) || 45. Synesius, Dio 7 (OF 674)