English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The form and contents of Galen’s newly recovered letter πeρὶ ἀλυπίας have come under intense scrutiny, especially since 2010, when both critical edi-tions by Kotzia/Soutiroudis and Boudon-Millot/Jouanna respectively were published. Galen’s philosophical mindset, in particular, has attracted consider-able interest, since he addresses a number of issues around pain and grief that have concerned philosophers before and after him. Similarly, the additional clues given away by Galen about his own life, possessions and opinions have overall been carefully studied, although some degree of controversy affects the interpretation of the text itself. Most specialists of Galen have come to grips with the meaning of the letter in the context of the rest of his production. But seldom has the text been subject to rhetorical analysis, beyond identifying its main logical articulations and unfolding its overall argument. Galen’s words, however, lend themselves quite well to a rhetorical reading: the notion of μeγαλοψυχία (‘magnanimity’), prominent in the text,1 is as typical of a good rhetor’s ēthos as of a philosopher’s. In this chapter, I intend to explore what the πeρὶ ἀλυπίας brings us in terms of self-characterization by Galen at this point in life. In other words, what does the πeρὶ ἀλυπίας add to, or transform, in terms of our understanding of Galen’s ēthos? Is this just a typical old man stance about wisdom and knowledge, or is there more? How does it supplement Galen’s other extant texts about himself, especially among the works of his later life?  To answer this question, I will include some thoughts on the evidence about Galen’s last few years (a relatively neglected topic) and about the role of old age in his texts, both as a fact and as a literary construct.

Death, Posterity and the Vulnerable Self: Galen’s Περὶ Ἀλυπίας in the Context of His Late Writings