R. Bultmann, Der Stil der paulinischen Predlgt und die kynisch-stoische Diatribe. Marburg, 1910. "Das religiose Moment in der ethischen Unterweisung des Epiktets und das Neue Testament," Zeitschr. für die neatest. Wiss. 1912, 13, 97 ff., 177 ff.
Th. Colardeau, Étude sur Épictète. Paris, 1903.
F. W. Farrar, Seekers after God. London, 1863, and often reprinted.
H. Gomperz, Die Lehensauffassung der griechischen Philosophen und das Ideal der inneren Freiheit. Jena, 1904. P. 186, and especially 195 ff. 2nd ed. 1915.
O. Halbauer, De diatribis Epicteti. Leipzig, 1911.
K. Hartmann, "Arrian und Epiktat," Neue Jahrb. 1905, 15, 248-75.
E. Hatch, The Influence of Greek Ideas and Usages upon the Christian Church. Sixth ed., London, 1897.
Fr. M. J. Lagrange, "La philosophie religieuse d'Épictète, etc." Revue Biblique, 1912, 91 ff.; 192 ff.
W. S. Landor, Imaginary Conversations of Greeks and Romans. London, 1853, and often reprinted. "Epictetus and Seneca."
J. Lipsius, Manuductio ad Stoicam philosophiam. I. xix, pp. 62-64. ed. Antwerp, 1604. Vol. IV, p. 681 f., ed. Wesel, 1625.
C. Martha, Les moralistes sous l'empire romain, philosophes et poètes. Paris, 1865, and often reprinted.
J. B. Mayor, Rev. of H. Schenkl's "Epictetus," Class. Rev., 1895, 9, 31-7.
P. E. H. Melcher, "De sermone Epicteteo quibus rebus ab Attica regula discedat," Diss, philol. Hallenses, 17, 1905.
G. Misch, Geschichte der Autobiographie. Leipzig and Berlin, 1907. Pp. 257-65.
P. E. More, Hellenistic Philosophies. Princeton, 1923. Epictetus, pp. 94-171.
R. Mücke, Zu Arrians und Epiktels Sprachgebrauch. Nordhausen, 1887.
B. Pascal, Entretien avec de Saci sur Épictète et Montaigne. First published in authentic form in M. Havet: Pensées de Pascal, Paris, 1852, and frequently since that time. For discussions of Pascal's very interesting views see especially M. J. Guyau: Pascal, etc., Paris, 1875 C. A. Saint-Beuve: Port Royal, fifth edition. Paris, 1888 ff., Vol. II. pp. 381 ff. F. Strowski: Histoire du sentiment religieux en France du xviii siècle, fourth edition. Paris, 1909.
R. Renner. Zu Epiktets Diatriben. Amberg, 1904. Das Kind. Ein Gleichnismiittl aes Epiktets München, 1905.
D. S. Sharp, Epictetus and the New Testament. London, 1914.
Rt. Rev. J. L. Spalding, Glimpses of Truth, with essays on Epictetus and Marcus Aurelius. Chicago, 1903. Third edition, 1913.
L. Stein, Die Psychologie der Stoa. Berlin, 1886, 1888.
J. Stuhrmann, De vocahulis notionum philosophicarum in Epicteti libris. Neustadt, 1885.
K. Vorlander, "Christliche Gedanken eines heidnischen Philosophen," Preuss. Jahrb., 1897, pp. 89, 193-222.
Louis Weber, "La morale d'Épictète et les besoins présents de l'enseignement moral," Rev. de Metaph. et de Moral, six articles, 1905-1909.
U. von Wilamowitz-Möllendorff, "Die griechische Literatur des Altertums," in Kultur der Gegenwart³, I. 8 (Leipzig and Berlin, 1912), 244. Compare also the admirable statement in his Griechisches Lesebuch, I. (Berlin, 1902), pp. 230-1.
Th. Zahn, Der Stoiker Epiktet und sein Verhältnis zum Christentum. Erlangen, 1894. Second edition, Leipzig, 1895. The thesis, that Epictetus was acquainted with the New Testament, has been very generally rejected, but the address has value apart from that contention.
L. Zanta, La renaissance du stoicisme au xvie siecle. Paris, 1914. La traduction française du Manuel d'Épictète d'André de Rivaudeau, etc. Paris, 1914.
E. Zeller, Die Philosophie der Griechen⁴, III. 1 (Leipzig, 1909), 765-81; III. 2 (1902), 910-14.
There have been three notable translations into English of Epictetus; a vigorous and idiomatic reproduction by Elizabeth Carter (1758, and often thereafter), a learned and exact rendition by George Long (1877, and frequently reproduced), and a most fluent and graceful version by P. E. Matheson (1916). To all of these, but especially to the last mentioned, I have been indebted upon occasion.
Symbols
S = Cod. Bodleianus Misc. Graec. 251, s. xi/xii. Sa, Sb, Sc, Sd = corrections of different periods, as discriminated by Schenkl. s = one or more copies of S.
In general only the important deviations from S have been recorded in the apparatus criticus. All substantial emendations, when made by modern scholars, are recorded, but the obvious corrections made by Greek scholars themselves, either on S itself or in its numerous copies, have generally been passed over in silence, since the number of these is so large (for S is full of errors of all kinds) that they would seriously clutter up the page without adding anything important to our knowledge. For details of the MS. tradition the reader is referred to the elaborate apparatus in Schenkl's second ed. (Leipzig, 1916), upon which the present text is dependent, although I have not hesitated to depart from his reading or his punctuation in a number of passages.
W. A. OLDFATHER.
Urbana, Illinois. March 6, 1925.
Footnotes
1. Δοῦλος Ἐπίκτητος γενόμην καὶ σῶμ᾿ ἀνάπηρος καὶ πενίην Ἶρος καὶ φίλος ἀθανάτοις. An anonymous epigram (John Chrys., Patrol. Gr. LX. 111; Macrob. Sat. I. 11, 45; Anth. Pal. VII. 676), as translated by H. Macnaghten. The ascription to Leonidas is merely a palaeographical blunder in part of the MS. tradition, that to Epictetus himself (by Macrobius) a patent absurdity.
2. This is the explicit testimony of an undated but fairly early inscription from Pisidia (J. R. S. Sterrett: Papers of the Amer. School of Class. Stud. at Athens, 1884-5, 3, 315f.; G. Kaibel: Hermes, 1888, 23, 542ff.), and of Palladius (Ps.-Callisthenes, III, 10, ed. C. Müller), and is distinctly implied by a phrase in a letter professedly addressed to him by one of the Philostrati (Ep. 69: ἐκλαθάνεσθαι τίς εἶ καì τίνων γέγονας). I see, therefore, no reason to doubt the statement, as does Schenkl (2nd ed., p. xvi). The phrase δοῦλος . . . γεόμην in the epigram cited above cannot be used as certain evidence, because γίγνεσθαι, as Schenkl observes, too frequently equates είναι in the poets, but, in view of the other testimony, it in probable that servile origin was what the author of it had in mind. There in little reason to think, with Martha (Les Moralistes, etc., 159), that Epictetus was not his real name, and that the employment of it is indicative of a modesty so real that it sought even a kind of anonymity, since the designation is by no means restricted to slaves, while his modesty, because coupled with Stoic straightforwardness, is far removed from the shrinking humility that seeks self effacement.
3. It is noteworthy, as Lagrange, p. 201, observes, that Montanus, who soon after the time of Epictetus "threatened Christianity with the invasion of undisciplined spiritual graces," was also a Phrygian.
4. So many passages in Epictetus can be paralleled closely from