Fw: BMCR 2006.08.03, Romeyer-Dherbey & Gourinat (edd.): Les Stoi+ciens
----- Original Message -----
To: <unlisted-recipients:>; <no To-header on input>
Sent: Tuesday, August 01, 2006 12:47 PM
Subject: BMCR 2006.08.03, Romeyer-Dherbey & Gourinat (edd.): Les Stoi+ciens
> G. Romeyer-Dherbey, J.-B. Gourinat, Les Stoi+ciens. Paris: Vrin,
> 2005. Pp. 622. ISBN 2-7116-1778-5. EUR 48.00.
> Reviewed by Gretchen Reydams-Schils, University of Notre Dame
> Word count: 2028 words
> To read a print-formatted version of this review, see
> [Authors and titles are listed at the end of the review.]
> This collection of essays is foundational enough to merit a place next
> to the fundamental works in the field. The general quality of the
> essays is high; they give useful overviews or contribute to a deeper
> understanding of specific issues, as well as paying attention to the
> reception of Stoicism in later ancient thought. The four divisions of
> the collection are: I. Logic, Poetics, and Theory of Knowledge; II.
> Physics, Nature and the Gods; III. Humans and Ethics; and IV. Reception
> History. The volume represents a truly international cooperation across
> boundaries between different academic cultures, and includes scholars
> with a wide range of experience.
> The value of the book is also enhanced by very good selected readings
> in the bibliography and detailed indices.[] One issue to be taken
> into account is the time lag between the seminars held in 1998-2000 at
> the so-called Centre Le/on Robin (Centre de Recherches sur la Pense/e
> Antique), and the year of publication, 2005. In the case of Michael
> Frede's contribution, on Stoic theology (213-32), this makes the
> information already outdated. While for some of the French scholars the
> lack of bibliography can be explained by a limited access to libraries
> and secondary literature, this can hardly have been the case for M.
> Frede. In contrast, David Sedley--whose paper on 'The origins of Stoic
> God' is the only piece of secondary literature M. Frede cites--did
> update the bibliography between the earlier versions and the published
> version of his paper (in 2002). Frede's claim that the subject of Stoic
> theology has been relatively neglected (213) is gently but effectively
> corrected in a section of the bibliography devoted to the topic of
> physics and theology. But even this bibliography, because of the
> structure of its headings, does not include W. Go+rler's very fine
> analysis--the best to my knowledge--of Cicero's representation, in his
> Academics, of Antiochus' position.[]
> Because of the time lag, some of the contributions already started to
> lead a life of their own. Hence Jacques Brunschwig's contribution, 'Sur
> deux notions de l'e/thique stoi+cienne. De la "re/serve" au
> "renversement" ' (357-80), has been eagerly anticipated ever since Tad
> Brennan published his version of the argument as "Reservation in Stoic
> Ethics," in Archiv fu+r Geschichte [small typo in the bibliography, p.
> 568] der Philosophie 82 (2000) 149-77. Tad Brennan is at his best in
> this article, and Brunschwig does not falter either. I also note his
> courtesy in not only acknowledging and complimenting Brennan, but even
> summarizing his argument, while in the end parting ways with him.
> Brennan and Brunschwig discuss how the Stoic notion of 'reservation'
> would entail adding a conditional clause to a hormetic proposition (one
> that through our assent activates impulse). The philosophical exchange
> is exciting and of the highest caliber, and involves central work by
> Brad Inwood as well. A gentlemen's disagreement. An issue not addressed
> by Brennan and Brunschwig, however, is why the notions of 'reservation'
> and of 'turn-around,' in Brunschwig's case, would be of such interest
> to Epictetus, Seneca, and especially Marcus Aurelius.
> Another instance of a contribution that had already started to lead an
> illustrious life of its own is the one by A. A. Long, on the influence
> of Socrates and his dialectic on Epictetus (403-26), published as ch. 3
> in Long's Epictetus, a Stoic and Socratic Guide to Life (Oxford:
> Clarendon Press, 2002). The break-through of this work is its focus on
> the importance for Epictetus of Socrates' mode of interacting with his
> interlocutors (as rendered mostly, but not exclusively, by Plato).
> The collection is too large to do full justice to its riches (see also
> the list at the end of this review). The book opens with two
> preliminary contributions that are very helpful: one, by Gourinat, does
> not focus only on our main sources for Stoic material, but explains
> also (and this is less often discussed) the history of Stoicism's
> transmission; the other, by Dorandi, brings together an overview of the
> papyrological material pertaining to Stoicism. Both of these
> contributions should become standard works of reference.
> If we turn to Part I now, on Logic, Poetics, and Theory of Knowledge,
> A. Brancacci opens with an assessment of Antisthenes' influence on
> Stoic logic, particularly concerning the epistemological status of
> Ideas as mere concepts, and the theory of definition. In connection
> with the first theme, Brancacci also establishes a tradition linking
> the Stoics with Antisthenes and the school of Eretria (as well as a
> Theopompus of Chios), rather than the Megarians (Stilpon), as Rist had
> previously suggested.
> D. Sedley performs a surgical operation on Zeno's tripartite account of
> the kataleptic impression, so crucial to Stoic epistemology, by drawing
> primarily on a distinction between a causal sense and a
> 'representative' sense of the preposition apo, a distinction that then
> could also leave room for non-sensory kataleptic impressions.
> R. Goulet revisits the Stoics' so-called allegorical interpretation of
> Homer (challenged recently by Steinmetz and Long), in a contribution
> that is particularly helpful because of the many subtle distinctions it
> introduces in the discourse about allegory (even if one ultimately
> disagrees with Goulet's own stance on allegory, these crucial
> distinctions have been overlooked). A. M. Ioppolo makes a systematic
> case for identifying Philodemus' antagonist in the fifth book of his
> Peri poie^mato^n as the Stoic Ariston of Chios. S. Toulouse, in the
> final contribution of the first part, draws renewed attention to a
> passage from Plutarch's De animae procreatione in Timaeo on Posidonius'
> account of the composition of the World Soul (1023B-D; see now also the
> work by F. Ferrari, among others). In reinterpreting Seneca's Letter 88
> (contra Merlan and Bre/hier), Toulouse also affirms that the
> mathematical sciences for Posidonius had a subsidiary role in relation
> to philosophy, and to physics in particular.
> Part II, on Physics, Nature and the Gods, opens with a contribution by
> M. Isnardi Parente on the Stoic notion of incorporeals, followed by L.
> Couloubaritsis' assessment of "henology" in Stoicism, which builds on
> his interpretation of Aristotle, and hence reaffirms the importance of
> Aristotelianism for Stoicism (with Hahm, but contra Sandbach and
> others), under the assumption that the importance of henology is not
> limited to later Platonism. M. Frede's contribution on theology, with
> an emphasis on the Stoic principles of god and matter, has already been
> mentioned above.
> Based on an analysis of the internal structure of Books Two and Three
> of Cicero's De natura deorum, C. Auvray-Assayas reexamines the
> connections between what she considers to be two lines of argument on
> the Stoic notion of Providence: one focuses on the successive treatment
> of the gods' existence, their nature, their administration of the
> world, and their care for human beings; the other, announced but not
> developed in our extant version of Book Three, approaches the issue
> from the angle of four causes posited by Cleanthes for how humans
> arrive at their notion of the gods. In his second contribution to the
> volume, J.-B. Gourinat proposes a reconstruction of the two books of
> Chrysippus' On Fate, by drawing on Diogenianus' criticisms as preserved
> in Eusebius, in conjunction with Cicero and ps.-Plutarch on the same
> topic, and explores divination in particular in greater detail.
> The opening papers of Part III, on Humans and Ethics (the largest in
> the collection), complement each other beautifully: G. Romeyer Dherbey
> approaches the Stoic notion of subjectivity from what he calls a
> phenomenological angle (see also, in comparison, Michel Foucault's
> L'Herme/neutique du sujet); whereas M. Forschner focuses on personhood
> (in the wake of the work of scholars such as C. Gill), with due
> attention to the importance of physics and the social implications of
> personhood in Stoicism. M.-A. Zagdoun gives an overview of questions
> pertaining to oikeio^sis, including the issue of the relation between
> self- and other-directed behavior, and between oikeio^sis and the Stoic
> account of the goal, and taking into account also art, especially
> C. Viano analyzes the principles and internal structure of the
> doxography on Stoic ethics in Stobaeus (II, 7, 57, 13-116, 18), which
> has been attributed to Arius Didymus. While making good use of Hahm's
> previous work, Viano succeeds in bringing the doxographer himself to
> life, in his 'theoretical independence,' rather than treating this
> material as a mere concatenation of fragments. J. Brunschwig's
> contribution has already been discussed above. M. Daraki attempts to
> develop parallels between the Stoic distinction of sage and fool, and
> Hesiod's myth of the successive human generations. I have already drawn
> attention above to A.A. Long's contribution on Epictetus. The final
> contribution under this heading, a paper co-authored by P. and I. Hadot
> provides an ideal bridge to the final part, by examining side by side
> Epictetus' use of the parable of life as a brief interlude of landing
> on a shore (Encheiridion 7) and Simplicius' reinterpretation of this
> image from a Neoplatonist point of view in his commentary on Epictetus.
> The last part of the collection deals with the reception history of
> Stoicism. J.-J. Duhot examines the possible connections between the
> Stoic notions of logos and the New Testament use (especially in John
> 1.1) via a possible link through Philo of Alexandra. (On Philo's notion
> of logos see also the work of D. Winston, D. Runia, and J. Dillon,
> among others.) A. Pigler examines in detail Plotinus' creative
> appropriation, in a Platonist context, of the Stoic notion of
> sumpatheia for his own theory of knowledge (Treatise 29). Ph.
> Hoffmann's contribution ranks among the finest in the collection:
> through a careful examination of Plotinus' and Iamblichus' critique of
> the Stoic definition of time as the diaste^ma of movement, he succeeds
> in conveying very complex doctrine, transmitted through a complicated
> tradition, as well as in adding a fragment to the collection of Stoic
> material by von Arnim, and in correcting a serious misreading of
> another that had been included. M. Gourinat concludes the volume as a
> whole with an overview of Hegel's assessment of the Stoics over the
> course of his philosophical development.
> In sum, this collection of essays provides impressive testimony of
> high-level and innovative scholarly inquiry. Because the presentations
> were given over an extended time period of several years,
> cross-references between the different contributions are lacking. But
> the reader can easily supply such cross-references with the help of the
> indices, which would add a meta-level of debate within the book itself,
> to enhance even further its many strengths.
> The collection contains the following contributions:
> Preliminary papers:
> J.-B. Gourinat, La disparition et la reconstitution du stoi+cisme:
> e/le/ments pour une histoire;
> T. Dorandi, La tradition papyrologique des stoi+ciens.
> Part I. Logic, Poetics, and Theory of Knowledge:
> A. Brancacci, Antisthe\ne et le stoi+cisme: la logique;
> D. Sedley, La de/finition stoi+cienne de la phantasia katale^ptike^;
> R. Goulet, La me/thode alle/gorique des stoi+ciens;
> A. M. Ioppolo, Poe/tique et the/orie de la perception chez Ariston;
> S. Toulouse, Les sciences et l'a^me chez Posidonius. Remarques sur une
> de/finition de l'a^me conserve/e dans Plutarque et sur le statut de
> l'astronomie et des mathe/matiques dans sa philosophie;
> Part II. Physics, Nature and the Gods:
> M. Isnardi-Parente, La notion d'incorporel chez les stoi+ciens;
> L. Couloubaritsis, Les structures he/nologiques dans le stoi+cisme
> M. Frede, Sur la the/ologie stoi+cienne;
> C. Auvray-Assayas, Deux types d'expose/ stoi+cien sur la providence
> dans le De natura deorum de Cice/ron;
> J.-B. Gourinat, Pre/diction du futur et action humaine dans le traite/
> de Chrysippe Sur le destin.
> Part III. Humans and Ethics:
> G. Romeyer Dherbey, La naissance de la subjectivite/ chez les
> M. Forschner, La Portique et le concept de personne;
> M.-A. Zagdoun, Proble\mes concernant l'oikeio^sis stoi+cienne;
> C. Viano, L'Epitome^ de l'e/thique stoi+cienne d'Arius Didyme (Stobe/e,
> Eclog. II, 7, 57, 13-116, 18);
> J. Brunschwig, Sur deux notions de l'e/thique stoi+cienne. De la
> "re/serve" au "renversement";
> M. Daraki, Les deux races d'hommes dans le stoi+cisme d'Athe\nes;
> A.A. Long, L'empreinte socratique dans la philosophie d'E/picte\te;
> I. Hadot and P. Hadot, La parabole de l'escale dans le Manuel
> d'E/picte\te et son commentaire par Simplicius.
> Part IV. Reception History:
> J.-J. Duhot, Me/tamorphoses du logos. Du stoi+cisme au Nouveau
> A. Pigler, Les e/le/ments stoi+ciens de la doctrine plotinienne de la
> connaissance (Traite/ 29);
> P. Hoffmann, La de/finition stoi+cienne du temps dans le miroir du
> ne/oplatonisme (Plotin, Iamblique);
> M. Gourinat, Hegel et le stoi+cisme.
> 1. On the other hand, something has gone wrong in the production
> process with the spacing of the words in the contribution by Ste/phane
> 2. Originally published as W. Go+rler, "Antiochus von Askalon u+ber
> die 'Alten' und u+ber die Stoa : Beobachtungen zu Cicero, Academici
> Posteriores 1, 24-43," in Beitra+ge zur hellenistischen Literatur und
> ihrer Rezeption in Rom (Palingenesia 28), edited by P. Steinmetz
> (Stuttgart: F. Steiner, 1990) 123-139; republished in his Kleine
> Schriften zur hellenistisch-ro+mischen Philosophie (Philosophia Antiqua
> 95), edited by C. Catrein, (Leiden, Boston: Brill, 2004), 87-104.
> The BMCR website (http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/bmcr/) contains a complete
> and searchable archive of BMCR reviews since our first issue in 1990.
> It also contains information about subscribing and unsubscribing from
> the service.
> Please do not reply to this email as this is an unmonitored mailbox.
> You can contact us by sending e-mail to bmr@....