Diogenes Laertius and the Chreia Tradition, Jan Fredrik Kindstrand.

Elenchos 7: 217-
243 (1986)
219: In Diogenes Laertius work on Greek philosophers pointed sayings and anecdotes play an
important role. These collections are prominent especially for the Seven Sages and many
members of the Socratic schools, and certainly belong to the most entertaining parts. In some
biographies they dominate absolutely, and if they were to be removed, little would be left in the
form of biography for characters such as Anacharsis, Aristippus, Antisthenes and above all the
Cynic Diogenes. It was pointed out already by F. Bahnsch 1 in 1868 that Diogenes used several,
already existing collections of sayings and anecdotes, especially for the Cynic Diogenes.
221: When dealing with the singular items, which make up these collections of pointed sayings
and anecdotes, we are confronted with different terms, of which , ,
and are the most important. Ancient tradition, and especially works on
rhetorical theory, provide definitions for some of these concepts, but are generally of a late date
and do not relate the different terms to each other in a consistent and complete manner, which
results in a lack of clear distinctions, as the terms constantly seem to overlap. Gnome:
indicates a short saying, in poetry or prose, with a general application and a moral
intention, the Latin equivalent being sententia. Apotegma The term is known
from Xenophon and Aristotle, but the term is rarely treated in rhetorical theory, and no definition
is offered until very late. Originally it indicates just a pointed saying,
222: and can therefore include different types, as is clear from its application. So it can be used
for short, moral maxims, usually called , which are associated especially with the Seven
Sages. But it can also denote a saying which includes an indication of the situation and an
element of wit and is attributed to a specific individual. The Latin equivalent here would
be dictum. Apomnemoneuma: The term is known first from Xenophons
recollections of Socrates, and is used originally for personal recollections of sayings and
actions, belonging to a remarkable individual. It is therefore very close to the in its
second meaning, but usually longer in form. A late Latin equivalent is commemoratio.
223: The term does not provide any information concerning the form, but seems to be
used originally as a collective term for the different types already mentioned, stressing their
usefulness. The origin of this use of can be found in the Socratic schools. We find the term
used for what seems to be a separate work of Antisthenes: , mentioned in
Diog. Laert. VII 19 but of doubtful interpretation. The anonymous catalogue of Aristippus
works in Diog. Laert. II 84 includes the following three works: ,
, . If these titles are genuine, we must assume that
the term is here used for a somewhat longer text than is usually assumed, as it merits a
separate title. It would probably indicate a short philosophical treatise, probably shorter but
perhaps not too different in character from those called . It is commonly held that the
use of the term for shorter items originated in the Cynic school,but even if this is doubtful,
there is a strong connection between the
224: and the Cynics, as indicated by an anecdote in Diog. Laert. V 18, where the Cynic
Diogenes is described as , which seems to imply the conscious
fabrication of a cutting reply. The first known collector of is also a Cynic, Metrocles
(Diog. Laert. VI 33). En los escritores de Progymnasmata. The is here regarded as an
, consisting of a saying or an action of a specific individual, always in prose,
sometimes with an element of wit, but shorter than the pure . we may regard
as a suitable collective term for different types of sayings and anecdotes, which in
collections, including also those of Diogenes, are brought together without any obvious regard
for their differences.
228: sometimes even doubt whether the philosopher connected with the collection is really the
author and not only the main character, around whom the sayings and anecdotes have been
collected. This applies
especially to the collection, which is attributed to the Cynic Diogenes, who holds a very
prominent position in most later collections. Furthermore a number of collections are entioned
in context as sources for different sayings and anecdotes: one by the Stoic Hecaton in two books,
which is quoted for Cynic and Stoic philosophers five (or seven) times ( VI 4, VI 32, VI 95, VII 26,
VII 172; cfr. VII 2 and VII 181), one by the Cynic Metrocles, quoted for the Cynic Diogenes
(VI 33) and one by Zeno of Citium, quoted for the Cynic Crates (VI 91).
229: the works quoted, both in catalogues and in context, were certainly not used directly by
him, with the exception of that of Favorinus. We see that works of this kind belong particularly
to the Hellenistic period, and that they were employed especially in the Cynic and Stoic
schools.
230: The first group of persons, who could have had their sayings collected presumably
within some kind of framework at an
231: early date was the Seven Sages, probably already in the archaic period. For the following
periods we gain the impression that certain groups of people especially attracted , such as
the Spartans, for whom there probably existed a collection in the classical period, wits, different
kings and rulers, such as Themistocles, Philip of Macedonia and at a later date Alexander the
Great, and finally philosophers, among whom Socrates and other members of the Socratic
schools holdpride of place, following the tradition from the Seven Sages. Collections for this
group would have existed already in the fourth century.
232: it was a literature with no firm tradition and lacking a good reputation, being instead
generally anonymous and highly variable in character. Moreover we may assume that there was a
constant exchange of material between originally different collections, and that new ones were
constantly appearing, as almost every scribe would try to improve upon his immediate
predecessor.
233: Collections of this kind may also have served as a kind of literature in its own right, being
both entertaining and edifying, and this aspect becomes increasingly dominant during later
periods. Fuentes de Laercio: Returning to Diogenes we can without hesitation assume that he
had access to a vast literature in the form of collections of pointed sayings and anecdotes, which
was of a later date. It is not possible to make any general statements concerning his sources or to
try to reconstruct them, and it is doubtful whether it ever will be.
238: The two texts share some small groups of material, e.g. for Anaxagoras,Socrates and
Aristotle, but in general the similarities are not impressive, or indeed are non-existent. Therefore
we may state that the original collection behind Gnomologium Vaticanum and its parallel
versions even in its complete form was certainly not the only or even the main source used by
Diogenes for the philosophers of the Socratic schools. We can see from many indications that
the collections as found now in Diogenes are not uniform, but that they represent the product of a
long process, which seeks to combine different collections.
239: Even if it is most natural to assume that Diogenes collections originally came from
gnomologies, there is still reason to consider the relations between his collections and earlier
biographies, a point, on which I have already touched. It would seem that biography from an
early stage contained a large amount of sayings and anecdotes, perhaps originally integrated in
the text.
240: On the other hand, there are also clear arguments in other biographies against an
assumption that Diogenes took his collections from the same source as the pure biography, or at
least against the view that he preserved them in their original form and in the same place.
241: Perhaps at least part of the collection has here been inserted in what was originally a
continuous text. We find similar conditions in the biography of Bion of Borysthenes, where IV
47 seems to originally have been connected with IV 52, while now the collection of sayings and
anecdotes falls in between. The same applies to the biography of the Cynic Diogenes, where
VI 23 ends with the participle . Then follows the huge collection of sayings and
anecdotes, which ends with VI 69. With the beginning of the next paragraph VI 70:
, Diogenes seems to refer back to what preceded the collection, which
would therefore have been inserted in a description which was originally continuous Against
these cases I do not consider it reasonable to believe that Diogenes always received the
collections as such from his biographical source, unless we postulate that the source was
composed in the same unsatisfactory fashion.
242: the extent of these collections make it obvious that he considered them as an important part
of the characterization of the philosophers. It is certain that the was originally intended
to convey a philosophical message, and popular especially with the Cynics. Consequently we
can assume that it dealt with ethical and practical questions, being less suited to a discussion of
more technical problems.
243: What remains is if we look at the material as a whole a very general ethical attitude,
and in many cases a prominent element of wit. Many of them contain an ethical message, but
many also have traits to attract and entertain the reader, who would delight in all the witty, well
formulated remarks. This reminds us of the period, when Diogenes was writing, the Second
Sophistic. This movement stressed the purely literary aspects of all kinds of literature, and
generally strove to please the reader by providing entertaining reading. On the other hand much
of the literature of this period also manifested a rather general moralistic tinge. In this literary
climate Diogenes collections of would have been most welcome as meeting both
these demands.