«Symposion» and «Philanthropia» in Plutarch - Bad Request ...

The omnipresence of philosophy in Plutarch’s Quaestiones Convivalesthe presence of philosophy in the symposia. Thus, by noting so clearly thisaffiliation with such a tradition, the reader will obviously expect to find inthe following pages a set of conversations about serious – even philosophical– matters and not a collection of jokes or other amusing activities, as in thearchaic symposia or the one described in the Wasps. Later, in the Prooemiumto Book VI, Plutarch confirms this affiliation by insisting on the necessity ofwriting down all that was said during the banquet, leaving aside everythingrelated to its material side, like the dishes or drinks that were consumed, justlike Xenophon and Plato had done (686 D).On the other hand, these conversations, in order to follow theirphilosophical legacy, will have to be governed by the rules of proper conversationheld by educated people; otherwise it would become the record of a symposiumof the φαύλοι καὶ ἀγοραῖοι. But we must ask ourselves what kind of λόγοςthis is: the “saying” one, or the “discussing” one? When, in the Proemium toBook I, Plutarch makes use of the examples of other authors of symposia andsays that the task of writing down the conversations held while one drinksis worthy and that, on the other hand, it is wise to forget the improprieties(612D4: τῶν πλημμεληθέντων) committed during the gathering, he is notvery explicit about the content of those talks. But, to say that what is impropermust be forgotten and, at the same time, assuming that something must bewritten down implies that the things that deserve to be remembered shouldbe something proper.According to L. Van der Stockt, the QC follow a model of conversationamong polite and moderate men based on the ethical criteria of φιλία,φιλανθρωπία, εὔνοια, and κοινωνία 9 . For this reason, it is very rare to findsomeone exceeding the limits imposed by these values 10 . Hence, we must inferthat these parts of the symposia that Plutarch wanted to transmit to posteritythrough writing have some kind of normative codification as far as concernsthe conversation rules. Besides, the main goal of the symposium itself was tocultivate those criteria which govern conversation and, even though there issome room left for certain useful amusements (711A), it is quite clear thatthere is a supremacy of λόγος to the disadvantage of the spirit of fun that wefind in archaic symposia; for the pleasures generated during the symposiumwill be taken from conversation (713C1: τὰς ἡδονάς ἐκ λόγου λαμβάνειν).In truth, throughout the QC there are few references to other ludic activities;for this work is, in a general way, a set of conversations that occurred duringsymposia, and the meaning of a symposium is to share not only meat anddrink but also conversations, which leads to friendship (660B).Returning to the distinction established by Plato in the Protagoras betweenthe symposium of the φαύλοι καὶ ἀγοραῖοι and that of the καλοὶ κἀγαθοί, itis very curious to note that, in the Septem Sapientium Convivium, Mnesiphilussays that the character of the men Periander had gathered exempted wine9L. Van der Stockt, 2000, p. 94.10See L. Van der Stockt, 2000, pp. 93-4; F. Martín García, 1987, pp. 11-2.417