Note 62 — Chapter III · HISTORY OF THE STOICS UNTIL THE END OF THE SECOND CENTURY B.C.

Cic. Off. iii. 12, 51, only calls him his pupil; but it is clear that he taught in Athens from Plut. Ti. Gracch. c. 8, as Zumpt, Ueber die philos. Schulen in Athen. Abh. d. Berl. Acad. 1842, Hist. phil. kl. p. 103, already remarks; and Plut. Tranq. An. 9, p. 469, seems to imply that he continued to live at Athens after leaving Cilicia. The same fact is conveyed by the mention of Diogenists and Panætiasts at Athens (Athen. v. c. 2, p. 186, a); by the charge brought against Antipater (Plut. Garrul. c. 23, p. 514; Numen. in Eus. Pr. Ev. xiv. 8, 6; Cic. Acad ii. 6, 17, and the fragment from Acad. Post. I. in Non. p. 65), that he never ventured to dispute with Carneades; and by Diog. iv. 65; Stob. Floril. 119, 19. According to these two authorities, he voluntarily put an end to his own life. In Acad. ii. 47, 143, Cicero calls him and Archedemus ‘duo vel principes dialecticorum, opiniosissimi homines.’ It appears from Off. iii. 12, 51, where he is also called ‘homo acutissimus,’ that he pronounced a severer judgment on several moral questions than Diogenes. Sen. Ep. 92, 5, reckons him among the magnos Stoicæ sectæ auctores. Epictet. Diss. iii. 21, 7, speaks of the φορὰ Ἀντιπάτρου καὶ Ἀρχεδήμου. See Van Lynden, De Panætio, 33; and Fabric. Biblioth. iii. 538 for his numerous lost treatises. ↑