This volume presents Epictetus' fragments. It is composed of an introduction, four sections and notes. In addition, D'J. offers a translation of the sentences (the so-called Gnomologium epicteteum) that were attributed to Epictetus by Stobaeus, even though we know today that they are not genuine.
In the foreword D'J. refers to Epictetus' Enchiridion as one of the most translated and discussed ancient books of all time, but notes that this is the first French translation. He mentions translations of fragments in Spanish, Italian, German and English. There is now also a Portuguese translation (A. Dinucci and A. Julien [2007]).
In ‘Une philosophie de l'engagement’ D'J. provides a superficial overview of Epictetus' life. D'J. notes that Epictetus suffered violence at the hands of his master Epaphroditus and, for this reason, the philosopher became lame. However, this account is conjectural. Musonius Rufus, Epictetus' teacher, who is mentioned six times in Epictetus' Discourses, is not named. Indeed, there is just a single note in the whole book about Musonius, where it is stated that he ‘was a stoic philosopher of the 1st century who taught in Rome’ (p. 106 n. 26). More information about Musonius should have been provided, not only because he was Epictetus' teacher, but also because some of Epictetus' fragments are at the same time regarded as Musonius' fragments (see fragments 67, 69, 70, 134, 169 and O. Hense, Musonii Rufi Reliquiae [1905]).
D'J. erroneously states that Epictetus met Arrian in a.d. 125. D'J. seems unaware of the fact that they met between a.d. 108 and 113, when Arrian was eighteen or nineteen years old. Around a.d. 125 Arrian took up the post of praetor at Rome, becoming consul four or five years later and eventually governor of Cappadocia (for the details concerning these dates, cf. P.A. Stadter, Arrian of Nicomedia [1980]).
Following the account of Epictetus' life, there is a brief and well-written history of Stoicism containing a description of its main concepts. D'J. notes that Stoicism is not – as it is frequently and wrongly depicted – a philosophy of resignation, but a philosophy that focuses on commitment and responsibility.
The following brief section, ‘La question des sources: méthodologie’, attempts to provide relevant information about Epictetus' fragments and their transmission. But the section is sketchy. Only H. Schenkl's edition of the Discourses (1888), which also includes Epictetus' fragments, is mentioned. Other important editions are omitted, such as those of Upton (Epicteti quae supersunt dissertationes [1741]) and Schweighäuser (Epicteteae Philosophiae Monumenta [1798]). D'J. does not explain the reception and the transmission of the fragments through the Renaissance, the modern period and up to today; the reader is left without any information about critical work on them (both textual and literary). There is no data about Asmus's work on the fragments, which established the orthodox modern selection of them (cf. R. Asmus, Questiones Epicteteae [1888]). D'J. also reintegrates some fragments which were excluded by Schenkl, arguing that he offers the reader the opportunity to make their own decision about those fragments (p. 48). But if D'J.'s intention was to inform the reader about the omissions, why did he not include all 181 fragments present in Schweighäuser's edition? Also lacking is information concerning Epictetus' sentences (Gnomologium epicteteum), which are widely known not to be genuine.
Despite the lack of information about them, D'J. helpfully includes a translation of ‘Epictetus' sentences’. Although we can determine with certainty that they were composed at some point in medieval times (as there is no information about them in antiquity), their transmission and reception deserve dedicated study. D'J.'s translation of Epictetus' fragments is sound. The book ends with a good glossary and a bibliography (which is not exhaustive).
The book is valuable for its translations and overview of Stoicism in general and Epictetus' doctrine in particular, although it does not contain necessary information about the reception and transmission of the fragments.
