Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-09T05:57:52.916Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Moeragenes and Philostratus: Two Views of Apollonius of Tyana

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 February 2009

D. H. Raynor
D. H. Raynor
Affiliation:
Queen's College, Birmingham
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

It has commonly been assumed that the work of four books by Moeragenes on Apollonius of Tyana, to which Philostratus refers disparagingly when discussing the source material for his own work, represented a viewpoint hostile to the sage, and was for this reason discarded by Philostratus. Hand in hand with this assumption has gone the view that Moeragenes presented Apollonius as an undesirable μγος, a wizard and sorcerer, or even a charlatan pretending to be a μγος. These views have recently been challenged by E. L. Bowie, who rejects both, arguing not only that Moeragenes was favourable to Apollnius, but also that he presented him as an intellectual philosopher, a figure instantly recognisable from Philostratus' account. This leaves Bowie in some difficulty when he attempts to explain Philostratus' strong disapproval of Moeragenes' work. His only suggestion is that ‘the main reason for Philostratus’ hostile attitude is clearly the usual ground for ancient polemic: Moeragenes' was the standard work when he wrote'. In this paper I propose to argue, on the basis of a re-examination of the available evidence, that there was a considerable divergence between Philostratus' and Moeragenes' views of Apollonius, and that this offers a more substantial and satisfactory explanation of the later author's disapproval of his predecessor.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Classical Quarterly , Volume 34 , Issue 1 , May 1984 , pp. 222 - 226
Copyright
Copyright © The Classical Association 1984

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Philostratus, , Life of Apollonius of Tyana, 1. 3Google Scholar.

2 Apollonius of Tyana: Tradition and Reality, Aufstieg, und der Römischen Welt, Niedergang, 2. 16. 2 (1978), 1652–99Google Scholar.

3 p. 1673.

4 op. cit. 3. 41.

5 6. 41.

6 My rendering owes a number of phrases to the translation by H. Chadwick (Cambridge, 1953).

7 Philostratus, , In Honour of Apollonius of Tyana, tr. Phillimore, J. S. (Oxford, 1912), xxvGoogle Scholar.

8 Alexander the False Prophet, 5.

9 Philostratus, , Life of Apollonius, tr. Jones, C. P., ed. & intro. Bowersock, G. W. (Harmondsworth, 1970), 12Google Scholar.

10 Philostratus, , The Life of Apollonius of Tyana, tr. Conybeare, F. C. (London & New York, 1912), viiiGoogle Scholar.

11 p. 1673.

12 LSJ cites no pejorative use, outside comic contexts.

13 Letters 16 & 17.

14 pp. 1676–7.

15 Philostratus, op. cit. 8. 7.

16 For a similar assertion concerning Pythagoras, v. Iamblichus, Life of Pythagoras, as discussed in Hull, J. M., Hellenistic Magic and the Synoptic Tradition (London, 1974), 52Google Scholar.

17 Note that the misattribution of Apollonius' achievements to magical power is condemned by Philostratus as τν τν πολλν γνοιαν: cf. his accusation of Moeragenes as γνοςαντι.

18 pp. 1678–9.

19 Hellenistische Wundererzählungen (Leipzig, 1906), 40Google Scholar.

20 Moeragenes' work is also mentioned by Tzetzes, John, Histories, 2, 60Google Scholar, line 977, alongside the names of Philostratus and of Maximus, another of Philostratus' sources. This need only indicate that Tzetzes found the name in Philostratus; his short narrative cannot be used to furnish any evidence on the nature of Moeragenes' work or on its survival into the twelfth century.