cerity; or perhaps Lucian is close to the truth and he was an egomaniac who
obsessively sought the limelight. We cannot know with any certainty. Yet
Peregrinus is a fascinating example of a figure who shifted allegiance more
than once, apparently with both plausibility and success, and who did so
perhaps not because he was enticed by the missionary efforts of others but
because he was following his own quest for religious satisfaction.
Many examples arise in connection with the disputes and divisions in
philosophical schools. Timocrates, like his brother Metrodorus, once a ded-
icated Epicurean, eventually abandoned the Epicurean school and became
its implacable opponent (Diog. Laert.10.6–8). Both Metrodorus and Epicu-
rus wrote refutations of Timocrates’ polemical attacks on their school, but
Timocrates still became an influential source for the anti-Epicurean tradi-
tion (see Sedley 1976). Among the reasons for the split, Diogenes Laertius
lists the following: Epicurus was a glutton, in poor health and largely chair-
bound; Epicurus had only limited knowledge of philosophy and real life;
Epicurus and Metrodorus encouraged courtesans to join their school; Tim-
ocrates was tired of the “midnight philosophizing” and the “secrets of the
confraternity” (tên mystikên ekeinên syndiagogên); and Epicurus had few orig-
inal thoughts, expending his energy as a dismissive and satirical critic of
his philosophical predecessors and contemporaries.
It is hard to get beyond the polemical slant of this exposé. Some Epi-
curean positions were easy to distort, such as their qualified hedonism, or
their encouragement of philosophical training for women, and Timocrates
took full advantage of this weakness. In general, his criticisms concern
two things: communal lifestyle and intellectual pretension. David Sedley
(1976, 153n. 34) suggests that a fratricidal split was at the root of things.
He also thinks that Timocrates may have joined the Academy (see also
Frischer 1982, 50–52). Some things may have been rankling for a while and
may genuinely have precipitated his defection, but a lot of it looks like post
factojustification and polemics, too. It is not unusual for a certain type of
defector—those who become active opponents of the group they have aban-
doned—to exaggerate the shortcomings of the community they have left,
and give to everything a negative twist.
Epicureans were far more communally minded than other philosoph-
ical schools. They lived together in well-ordered communities that resem-
bled miniature states. The religious element included commemorative
festivals, common meals, honouring the founder (the “sole saviour” Epi-
curus), and the extensive use of statues of their masters (Glad 1995, 8–9;
Frischer 1982, 52–70). Diskin Clay notes the broad similarities between
Epicureans and Christians to outsiders, something observed as early as the
nora
(Nora)
#1