philosophy is unattainable even over a long period, unless you are very much awake all the time and keep a stern glaring eye on her. The venture is for no mere trifle—whether to perish miserably in the vulgar rabble of the common herd or to find happiness through philosophy.86
φιλοσοφία δὲ καὶ μακρῷ τῷ χρόνῳ ἀνέφικτος, ἢν μὴ πάνυ τις ἐγρηγορότως ἀτενὲς ἀεὶ καὶ γοργὸν ἀποβλέπῃ ἐς αὐτήν, καὶ τὸ κινδύνευμα οὐ περὶ μικρῶν, ἢ ἄθλιον εἶναι ἐν τῷ πολλῷ τῶν ἰδιωτῶν συρφετῷ παραπολόμενον ἢ εὐδαιμονῆσαι φιλοσοφήσαντα.
Meanwhile, the first to second century CE Pythagorean and possibly Stoic-influenced87 allegorical work known as the Tablet of Cebes compares philosophical instruction to be like an arduous physical journey. It portrays the road to true education as being a rocky, trackless wasteland that forces its travelers to climb up a high hill that has a narrow ascent and that features dangerously deep precipices on either side.88 Eventually, the author claims, only if the two sisters named “self-control” and “perseverance” come down and lift the traveler up can those on the journey hope to reach their desired destination.89
The speech of philosophical students was also expected to be carefully honed, with, as Allen Hilton has reflected,90 the reputed proper use of diction and pronunciation being one of the first features that was taken to signify whether a person was educated or not. Hilton, for example, highlights that the poet Ausonius refers to “a scholar’s accent” (doctis accentibus),91 and that Sextus Empiricus remarks on the characteristic difference in speech that differentiates the learned (πιλολόγοι) and laypeople (ιδιῶται).92 It might be further added that Aupelius valuably reflects upon the type of speech that was expected to emanate from a philosopher’s lips, stating: “the philosopher’s reasoning and speaking are to be continuous in time, solemn to the ear, profitable to the mind, and polyphonous in tone” (sed enim philosophi ratio et oratio tempore iugis est et auditu uenerabilis et intellectu utilis et modo omnicana).93 In addition, the expectation that a philosopher will have been coached to speak in a well-ordered way (εὐφυής), and to clearly (καθαρός) read in the style of the philosopher(s) they are reading or discussing is also highlighted by Epictetus and Seneca.94
Given such a demanding series of skills and intellectual requirements, it is no wonder that philosophy’s students are frequently portrayed in classical literature as remaining awake throughout the night so they can devote themselves to their studies,95 and depicted as trembling when they have to speak in front of their fellow students.96 Epictetus, for example, imagines one of his students sitting in a lecture and reflecting: “What are my people at home saying about me? Right now they are thinking that I am advancing in my studies, and they are saying ‘He will come back knowing everything,’” τί λέγουσιν οἱ ἐκεῖ ἄνθρωποι περὶ ἐμοῦ; νῦν οἴονταί με προκόπτειν καὶ λέγουσιν ὅτι῾ήξει ἐκεῖνος πάντα εἰδώς.97 In this regard, it can be observed that the complexity of Stoicism in particular is remarked upon by individuals from within as well as from outside of the school (and is reflected upon by modern scholars too98). Epictetus himself notes the difficulties that people can have in understanding philosophical thought99; for example, regarding discussing philosophical themes, he states: “These are technical terms, which are tiresome for the non-philosopher and difficult for them to comprehend, and yet for our part we are unable to dispense with them,” ῥήματα τεχνικὰ καὶ διὰ τοῦτο τοῖς ἰδιώταις φορτικὰ καὶ δυσπαρακολούθητα, ὧν ἡμεῖς ἀποστῆναι οὐ δυνάμεθα, and, so, Epictetus continues to reflect, they are unable to move him.100 He elsewhere notes that if an individual in his school reveals insufficient comprehension, then they risk exposing themselves to ridicule from their fellow students; refers to the study of philosophy as being serious/demanding work (συσπουδάζω); and notably, after having apprehended what his tuition under Epictetus will entail, one of his pupils is recorded as exclaiming: “But this requires long preparation, and much effort and study.” To which the philosopher pointedly replies: “So what? Do you believe that the greatest of arts can be acquired with little study?” ἀλλὰ πολλῆς ἔχει χρείαν παρασκευῆς καὶ πόνου πολλοῦ καὶ μαθημάτων . . . τί οὖν; ἐλπίζεις ὅτι τὴν μεγίστην τέχνην ἀπὸ ὀλίγων ἔστιν ἀναλαβεῖν.101 Such is the effort that Epictetus is trying to convey to this pupil that he should expend the noun he uses which is rendered as “much effort,” πόνος, usually designates hard, painful labor, and even physical distress. Meanwhile, in another passage Epictetus chides a person who has evidently only engaged in the self-study of philosophy, and emphasizes to him that extended periods of learning under a vocational teacher, and a deep rather than a casual knowledge of a school’s texts and tenets are required before he can legitimately stake his claim to be a philosopher:
What did you do at school then, what did you hear? What did you learn? Why do you mark yourself down as being a philosopher when you might have recorded the reality, saying, “I have studied a few introductory works and have read a bit of Chrysippus, but I have never even approached the door of a philosopher.”102
τί οὖν ἐν τῇ σχολῇ ἐποίεις, τί ἤκουες, τί ἐμάνθανες; τί σαυτὸν φιλόσοφον ἐπέγραφες ἐξὸν τὰ ὄντα ἐπιγράφειν; ὅτι ‘εἰσαγωγὰς ἔπραξάς τινας καὶ Χρυσίππεια ἀνέγνων, φιλοσόφου δ᾽ οὐδὲ θύραν παρῆλθον.
The verb above, ἐπιγράφω, “putting down,” is commonly used in the sense of someone inscribing something, usually on stone, or, less commonly, to publicly attach one’s name to something. It is clear, therefore, that Epictetus is intending to portray this person who has only a passing interest with philosophy, as attempting to formally have their identity as a philosopher be recognized, something that Epictetus strongly contests. Intending to lead someone to reach a similar conclusion, Dio Chrysostom asks an unnamed dialogue partner what he would think of an individual who professes to be a huntsman, but who has no equipment that would allow him to engage in the activity; or a musician who neglects to ever pick up an instrument; or an astronomer who exchanges time contemplating the science to pursue gambling? When Dio’s imagined interlocutor replies that he would not believe these people to be genuine practitioners of their proclaimed arts/area of expertise, Dio similarly argues that if a person were to claim that they are a philosopher a thousand times, even in front of a public assembly or kings, it is of no matter, for:
there are certain words which one who goes in for philosophy must hear, and studies which he must pursue, and a regimen to which he must adhere, and, in a word, one kind of life belongs to the philosopher and another to the majority of mankind.103
Ἀλλὰ δὴ καὶ λόγοι τινές εἰσιν ὧν δεῖ τὸν φιλοσοφοῦντα ἀκούειν, καὶ μαθήματα