The aim of this chapter is to examine in closer detail the elements of competition involved in the ancient Greek wisdom tradition. [1] This aspect of Greek intellectual life is particularly relevant since there is in our material a close affiliation on the part of sophoi with the Panhellenic games, the sites of competition par excellence. [2] An exploration of this subject will also help us achieve a better understanding of the agonistic elements of the teachings present in our sources on the sophists: Protagoras, for example, wrote two works called Overthrowing Arguments (Καταβάλλοντες) and Contradictory Arguments (Ἀντιλογικοί); [3] we are told that Hippias was ready to lecture at Olympia on any subject he had prepared for exhibition and afterwards to answer any questions raised by his audience. [4] Gorgias also offered to answer any question asked by his listeners after he was done lecturing. [5] Another example of this agonistic genre is the anonymous work we have preserved under the name Twofold Arguments (Δισσοὶ Λόγοι). [6] Finally, this sort of investigation will help us place the activities of the sophists in a more nuanced cultural context and acquire a better sense of how their works related to traditional genres and discourses.

We shall proceed by reviewing the sources we have for competition in wisdom. Special attention will be given to the recurring contrast between intellectual and athletic achievements and their due rewards. The material on the sophists will then be considered against the backdrop of this discourse. We shall suggest that the competitive elements present in the sophistic material should be understood as traditional and in line with the practices of earlier sophoi. In fact, competitiveness and contestation will prove to be some of the most pervasive characteristics of the Greek wisdom tradition.

Hesiod supplies us with early evidence for competition in wisdom. In the Works and Days he discusses his (un)familiarity with sailing and concedes that he has only sailed from Aulis to Euboea—a distance of some 65 meters. [7] He continues: In the Homeric Hymn to Apollo (149–150, Allen) we hear of a similar competition: Later, the poet asks the maidens who are his audience to remember him in the future (ἐμεῖο δὲ καὶ μετόπισθε μνήσασθ’), and to say that his songs are the best in times to come (τοῦ πᾶσαι μετόπισθεν ἀριστεύουσιν ἀοιδαί), whenever a stranger asks them. [9]

There is also some interesting information in the work that has come down to us under the name Contest of Homer and Hesiod. This piece was composed close to the time of Hadrian, but it is clear that the author draws upon sources that go back at least to the Museum of Alcidamas in the early fourth century BCE. [10] The setting for the Contest of Homer and Hesiod is the funeral games of Amphidamas, king of Euboea, and in addition to trials in bodily strength and speed, there is also a competition in wisdom (σοφία), lines 62–66: We hear of judges (κριταί, 69) presiding over the contests, as the sages question each other. Whoever gives the best answers is victorious. The capacity to answer any question is crucial, and this is highlighted in Homer’s remark to Hesiod (160): Hesiod walks away the victor on the grounds that his poetry promotes peace whereas Homer sings of war. His prize is a tripod, which he dedicates to the Muses. In this work, then, we hear of a highly formalized competition in wisdom, alongside other more traditional athletic competitions, where what counts is one’s ability to answer any question. Further, the winner is crowned (ἐστεφάνωσεν, 208) and rewarded with a prize in the same manner as the athletes: the words ἀγωνίζομαι and ἀγών (54, 65, 68, 71, and 215), νικάω and νίκη (71, 207, 209, 210, 214, 216, and 255) are used to describe the competition between Hesiod and Homer. These verbs are typically affiliated with athletic prowess. [11] It is worth mentioning that the prize, a tripod, is a familiar element in our sources as a reward for wisdom: Diogenes Laertius tells the story of the tripod and the Seven Sages, where the Delphic oracle declares that the tripod should belong to the wisest man alive. [12] In the Contest of Homer and Hesiod we similarly have a wisdom contest with the prize of a tripod and, as we shall see shortly, an important role played by oracular responses.

In the same tradition, Heraclitus expresses his strong disapproval of Homer and Archilochus, and voices his discontent within a framework of competition: In fragment 2, Xenophanes outlines his criticism of athletic competition, and compares the benefits of his own wisdom to those of the athletic competitions: [14] Traditionally, this fragment has been read as Xenophanes’ condemnation of athletics. If we put it together with the passage quoted from Heraclitus, however, we can read it as an affirmative declaration of his own wisdom, in which his intelligence is carefully framed to contrast with the benefits of athletic victory. Heraclitus, focusing exclusively on competition in sophia, acknowledges that his wisdom participates in an agonistic relationship with earlier and contemporary sophoi. Xenophanes, on the other hand, shifts the focus and articulates the benefits of wisdom contrastively by saying what athletics cannot accomplish. Both Heraclitus and Xenophanes, however, promote the pursuit of wisdom as an agonistic activity. Similar sentiments were later expressed in Euripides’ Autolykos, where the uselessness of athletes is contrasted with the benefit to society of the wise man:

ἢ δίσκον ἄρας ἢ γνάθον παίσας καλῶς

πόλει πατρῴᾳ στέφανον ἤρκεσεν λαβών;

…

23ἄνδρας χρὴ σοφούς τε κἀγαθοὺς

φύλλοις στέφεσθαι, χὥστις ἡγεῖται πόλει

κάλλιστα σώφρων καὶ δίκαιος ὢν ἀνήρ,

ὅστις τε μύθοις ἔργ’ ἀπαλλάσσει κακὰ

μάχας τ’ ἀφαιρῶν καὶ στάσεις· τοιαῦτα γὰρ

πόλει τε πάσῃ πᾶσί θ’ Ἕλλησιν καλά.

battles and civil strifes. For such things are good both for every

The next set of evidence to consider is what we might refer to as riddle competition. [18] Perhaps the most famous instance of this is preserved in the myth of Oedipus and the Sphinx, but there are other instances. Hesiod, for example, relates the encounter and trial between the two seers (μάντεις) Calchas and Mopsus. [19] This encounter results in the death of Calchas when he is surpassed in prophetic knowledge by Mopsus. Greek literature abounds in references to how it is important for wise men to be able correctly to interpret riddles. This was particularly valued since the riddle was the oracular response par excellence: riddles and the enigmatic nature of wisdom and knowledge are recurrent themes in our sources. [20] In the Contest of Homer and Hesiod, for example, part of the contest consists of Homer having to finish enigmatic lines of poetry fired at him by Hesiod. Also, in the same work, both sages are said to have died due to their incapacity to correctly interpret riddles, as had been prophesied to them by oracles: Hesiod fails to understand the true meaning of an oracle from Delphi, [21] and Homer falls short of understanding the riddle posed by some young boys. [22]

Lucian’s Herodotus reveals another outlet for competitive intellectual practices. There Lucian relates how Herodotus recited his work at Olympia. [23] He describes how Herodotus presented himself as an Olympic competitor, not a spectator (οὐ θεατὴν ἀλλ’ ἀγωνιστὴν Ὀλυμπίων παρεῖχεν ἑαυτόν) and recited his work before a large audience. The result was that Herodotus became better known than the Olympic victors themselves, and that his name was proclaimed not only by one herald but in every city that had dispatched attendants to the festival. This performance by Herodotus is not only a flashy display of wisdom, but it also provides an explicit contestation of the worth of athletic accomplishments, especially when contrasted to Herodotus’ own practices. After all, Herodotus presents himself as an athletic competitor, wins more fame than the athletes, and has his name proclaimed in every city. All this reinforces the idea of the superiority of his wisdom over the achievements accomplished by the athletes—a theme familiar from the fragments of Xenophanes and Euripides quoted above. [24]

Thucydides offers a perfect illustration of the agonistic aspirations of works such as those of Herodotus in his disclaimer at the beginning of Book 1. There he contrasts these agonistic tendencies in favor of his own goals: Thucydides addresses other aspects of this agonistic nature later in his work (3.38.4–7). The context is a deliberation in the assembly over what actions should be taken in the face of the revolt of Mytilene in 427 BCE. Cleon addresses the assembly and criticizes the citizens for allowing the act of political deliberation to turn into an oratorical competition: This passage illustrates how commonplace these competitive performances were, and how, in the eyes of Cleon (and, presumably, Thucydides), they were significant enough to influence negatively the political climate of the time.

But perhaps the most important source for actual competitions in wisdom comes from the medical writers. In the treatise Nature of Man, we are told how inadequate are the theories of others who, although they adopt the same opinion (γνώμῃ τῇ αὐτῇ), nevertheless fail to say the same things (τὰ αὐτά). [26] And the author continues: We are left without any doubt that there existed formal debates on a variety of topics that we can loosely collect under the heading of sophia, and that these debates bore a close resemblance to other forms of agonistic contests with a developed vocabulary of winning and losing (περιγίνεται, ἐπικρατέει). This is a point stressed by Lloyd: In the Nature of Man (1, 23–24) the author goes on to assert that it is the lack of understanding that makes the debaters contradict themselves (αὐτοὶ ἑωυτοὺς καταβάλλειν … ὑπὸ ἀσυνεσίης). The verbs used to mean “debate” and “contradict” in the passages quoted above (καταβάλλειν and ἀντιλέγειν) correspond to the names of Protagoras’ works, the Overthrowing Arguments (Καταβάλλοντες) and the Contradictory Arguments (Ἀντιλογικοί), and they seem to be appropriately used in the context of competitive debate, where the goal is to overcome one’s opponent. [29] Gorgias uses the verb καταβάλλειν in his Defense on behalf of Palamedes when he talks about the danger that awaits the judges if they make the wrong decision and condemn him: In this passage, καταβάλλειν is employed where reputation is at stake. By winning the argument one’s own reputation is enhanced, while that of the opponent is overthrown; and this is clearly the meaning of the passage from the Hippocratic corpus quoted above, where the disputants attack each other in order to be proclaimed victors in the debate. It is also likely that this was the ability that the Overthrowing Arguments of Protagoras dealt with, and which he sought to instill in his students. Plutarch preserves the name of one of Thrasymachus’ works, Ὑπερβάλλοντες, and though the prefix used here is different, the meaning is likely similar to that of the κατα-prefix. [31]

Lysias, in his Olympian Speech, tells how Heracles first founded the Olympic Games, and lists intellectual competition alongside athletic ones: Finally, Isocrates mentions the allurements of Athens in the Panegyricus and, when enumerating the attractions the city offers, he says that it provides a variety of contests:

What emerges from the examples above is a pattern of competitive performances of wisdom where such qualities as poetic excellence, riddle-solving capabilities, and specialized expertise were highly valued and rewarded. The competitive venues for these performances employed a language that mirrors the vocabulary we traditionally associate with athletic competition, for example, the use of terms such as “judges,” “winners,” “crowns,” or “prizes.” A crucial feature of these performances seems to have consisted in the ability on the part of the sage to answer any questions posed to him. In the surveyed material we witness a clear rivalry between athletic and intellectual accomplishments. The swiftness or strength of athletes is repeatedly juxtaposed to the wisdom of the sages (ταχύτης ποδῶν and ῥώμη vs. σοφίη in Xenophanes; ῥώμη καὶ τάχος vs. σοφία in the Contest of Homer and Hesiod; and τάχος καὶ ῥώμη vs. γνώμη καὶ λόγοι in Isocrates). The juxtaposition between athletic and intellectual prowess exhibits a formal characteristic that suggests that this rivalry was a traditional topic. [34] Sophoi could be quite jealous of the rewards reaped by athletes. Xenophanes, for example, complains about how athletic victors receive the front seats at the games (καί κε προεδρίην φανερὴν ἐν ἀγῶσιν ἄροιτο) and meals at public expense (καί κεν σῖτ’ εἴη δημοσίων κτεάνων ἐκ πόλεως), [35] despite the fact that, in his view at least, his wisdom is more deserving than their accomplishments. This theme is picked up by Socrates who, when asked to suggest an alternative penalty to the death penalty suggested by his accusers, answers: Socrates contrasts his own accomplishments and usefulness to the polis to the achievements of the athletic victors. By claiming for himself the public recognition normally granted to athletic success he locates himself within the agonistic tradition outlined above. It is interesting to note that Socrates’ claim to fame came from the oracle of Apollo at Delphi which, after being asked by Chaerephon whether there was anyone wiser than Socrates, pronounced that there existed no wiser man in the world. [37] Socrates challenges the rewards given to athletes and claims that he is more worthy of them, but he also attributes his reputation for wisdom to the prophetic utterances of Delphi. He thereby acknowledges, at least indirectly, his indebtedness to a long tradition of practitioners of wisdom dating all the way back to the Seven Sages. [38] Furthermore, although he emphasizes the rivalry between athletes and sophoi, the question posed to Delphi regarding his wisdom is clearly asked with a view also to the rivalry among sophoi—no one is wiser (σοφώτερος) than Socrates—and thus stresses the twofold competition seen above: both between athletic and intellectual pursuits and among practitioners of wisdom.

Isocrates also complains that athletic achievements are held in higher regard than intellectual pursuits (Panegyricus 1): It is particularly relevant that this complaint is voiced in the context of the games at the Panhellenic sanctuaries. It emphasizes the traditional theme of the opposition between athletic and intellectual pursuits, on the one hand, but it also focuses attention on the games as potential or desired sites for competition in wisdom, on the other. [39] What, then, do the frequent comparative appeals to athletic prowess accomplish? The answer, I suggest, is twofold. It situates intellectual activity within the sphere of public goods—goods that deserve public recognition. But, perhaps more importantly, it construes wisdom as a competitive enterprise—one with winners and losers and with high stakes in the taking for the victor.

It is in the light of the competition in wisdom outlined above that I suggest we now review the material on the sophists. Although the main bulk of the evidence concerns only two of the sophists, Gorgias and Hippias, I believe it provides us with a representative view of the intellectual practices of the other sophists. In the case of Gorgias, we have already seen that he made quite a name for himself at the Panhellenic games (ἐμπρέπων δὲ καὶ ταῖς τῶν Ἑλλήνων πανηγύρεσι), [40] where he gave public displays. We also hear of his activities in Athens:

There is a controversial piece of evidence from Clement of Alexandria. [43] In a discussion on the futility of worldly wisdom, he refers to Gorgias: Bernays, who saw in this passage the first prose mention of Olympia, [44] was puzzled over the use of αἴνιγμα γνῶναι, and asked if Clement indeed meant to imply that there existed riddling contests at Olympia. He thought not, and suggested instead an emendation of the word that would agree with a line in Homer. [45] Diels also emended αἴνιγμα, but chose a word that meant “to trip up” (πλίγμα), taking the metaphor from the world of wrestling. Ferguson, on the other hand, defended αἴνιγμα and thought that it was “a plain allusion to a famous legendary feat of σοφία,” that is, Oedipus’ encounter with the Sphinx. [46] Thomas Buchheim likewise sees no reason for emending the text as long as it has not been clearly established what sort of ἀγώνισμα is meant. [47]

Although it is hard to sort out any obvious and undisputed conclusions regarding Clement’s quotation of Gorgias, it is still worth the effort to take this passage seriously and compare it to the investigation we have conducted thus far. To begin with, the ability to solve riddles and the designation for such knowledge as σοφία is a well-established pattern that emerges from our sources. Further the positioning of Gorgias’ intellectual activities in the context of competitions (ἀγώνισμα) is also a common theme. Finally, his competitive performance of wisdom at Olympia, one of the most important Panhellenic centers, mirrors a pattern we have detected dating back to the alleged congregation of the Seven Sages at these centers. We may never know the truth about Clement’s quotation, but we can perhaps glean from it attitudes regarding wisdom that circulated in antiquity. These attitudes, as far as we can determine, seem to agree to a remarkable degree with other, older, and more reliable sources, such as those voiced in the Contest of Homer and Hesiod.

Gorgias also had a golden statue of himself erected at Delphi. [48] This is especially striking in the context of athletic competition and victory celebration. As Leslie Kurke has pointed out, it was the prerogative of the aristocratic victors at the Panhellenic games to erect a statue of themselves to commemorate their success. [49] Thus, one way of understanding the statue of Gorgias is to see it as an act of self-promotion rivaling the dedications made by the athletes. This line of interpretation ties in well with the competition we have already described between athletic and intellectual achievements.

Hippias made innumerable visits to Olympia at the time of the festival and he was ready to speak on any subject he had prepared for display. Plato also mentions that Hippias had visited Olympia wearing clothes all of which he had made for himself: ring, skin-scraper, oil-flask, sandals, cloak, tunic, and girdle, and that, besides this, he had with him poems, epics, tragedies, dithyrambs, and many prose writings. He is also said to have published a List of Olympic Victors. [50] Finally, Philostratus says that:

In the case of both Gorgias and Hippias, it seems clear that one of the main arenas for their activities was the Panhellenic games. Moreover, their performances there are clearly competitive and oriented towards winning debates and reputation, and this competitive behavior is often juxtaposed and likened to athletic competition. Both the performance aspects of their exhibitions, including extravagant clothing and other forms of self-presentation, [52] and their promise to know and answer all questions clearly draw upon traditional features of an earlier wisdom tradition. These elements of thematic continuity have often been ignored in favor of criticism that promotes the uniqueness and innovativeness of the sophists. [53]