The chapter considers the motivation for Alexander the Great’s expedition to India, which took him beyond the limits of the Persian Empire he had set out to conquer. Ambition (pothos) is seen as more probable than either strategic necessity or scientific curiosity. The course of the campaign from November 326 to July 325 BC is outlined, and the reasons for the savagery of the fighting during the journey down the Indus are considered. The chapter also reviews the impact of Alexander’s encounter with the ‘naked philosophers’ of Taxila. One of them, Calanus, travelled with Alexander until his death, and it is suggested that his conversation made an impression on another of Alexander’s companions, the philosopher Pyrrho, who became known as the founder of scepticism. The paper also reviews the legacy of Alexander in India. Foremost is the detailed account of India written by Megasthenes, a former member of Alexander’s army and ambassador from Seleucus to Candragupta. Indo-Greek dynasties persisted in north-west India for two centuries after Alexander’s death, but to narrate this history would go beyond the subject. The chapter looks briefly at the evidence for other Greeks who left records of their residence in India.

Chapter 3 deals with the possible encounters of the West with Buddhism from Alexander the Great’s expedition to India in the fourth century BCE to Saint Jerome’s belief that the Buddha was born of a virgin in the fourth century CE. It deals in particular with the question of whether the Greek historians of antiquity were identifying Buddhists among the Indian philosophers that they encountered, the difficulties that we have in interpreting their words, and the care we need to take in coming to any conclusions that they were encountering Buddhism. It examines also what is unarguably the first reference to the Buddha in the West in Clement of Alexandria’s Stromateis (Miscellanies) and the importance of Alexandria in the Buddha’s coming to the West. It also examines the much-disputed question of the extent to which the Buddha may have influenced Greek philosophy and particularly Pyrrho, the traditional founder of Greek scepticism. In conclusion, the chapter looks at Saint Jerome’s awareness of the Buddha as the founder of a religion and the role of the tradition of the Manichees in bringing knowledge of Buddhism to the West.

Since late antiquity, bishops have been regarded as possessing the highest authority among Christians. But there was no linear path leading there. Rather, there were different bearers of authority among Christians: James, as the respected brother of Jesus, was a key figure at the beginning; intellectuals were able to gain importance as teachers, prophets also appeared after Jesus, among them many women; widows and virgins attained a special position; finally, the authority of ascetics increased. Basically, authority could be derived from an office within the church or from personal charisma, which was considered God given. Good bishops tried to combine both, but charismatics could always challenge them and would continue to do so throughout the history of Christianity.

Was demythologization driven by a change in taste among Rome’s aristocratic elite, as they increasingly retreated from public life to the comforts of their rural villas? This chapter turns to sarcophagi featuring bucolic and philosopher imagery, the most popular of the mythless genres, and to theories that appeal to politics, especially the changing political fortunes of Rome’s traditional senatorial families, when trying to account for their popularity.

Was demythologization a response to the Third-Century Crisis? With the empire reeling from the combined pressures of civil war, barbarian invasion, plague, and economic depression, perhaps Rome’s elite were drawn to bucolic, seasonal, and philosophical scenes for the allegorical tranquility they offered, as a form of refuge from the turmoil of real life? This chapter interrogates this thesis, with far-reaching implications for how we understand similar arguments launched about other periods in world art.

This chapter unveils the author’s view of what was at stake in demythologization: the viewer’s attitude to chronology, to temporality, to characters defined by their residence in earlier time. For confirmation of this claim, the chapter studies archaeological evidence from Rome’s suburbium, examining the altered spatial relationships between house and tomb that came to dominate in the Late Empire. This reveals what was at stake in the third-century disappearance of mythic figures from sarcophagi: new demands among the living, manifested in multiple domains of Roman life, for greater proximity to their dead.

From the mid-1880s until his death in 1910, Tolstoy maintained close ties with Americans. He received about 2,500 letters from them and numerous books and periodicals, and thus became acquainted with those American writers, philosophers, and public figures who were near to him in spirit. For Tolstoy, the United States was “the most sympathetic country.” Tolstoy discovered America for himself, but America, in turn, discovered Tolstoy for itself. Many publishers brought out his works; literary magazines competed for his novels and philosophical and religious tracts. On June 21, 1900, Tolstoy addressed the American people. Tolstoy expressed his gratitude for the enormous help he received from American writers who flourished in the 1850s. He wrote about “a brilliant galaxy” of writers “of the kind one rarely encounters in world literature.” American utopia in literary and documentary texts had an impact on Leo Tolstoy’s ideas and literature. Tolstoy had a special interest in American religious communities in part because of his interest in writing an essay “About 1000 Faiths.” Inspired by Tolstoy’s ideas, American pilgrims journeyed to Yasnaya Polyana. In the words of the journalist Lucy Mallory, Tolstoy “became immortal in his own lifetime.”

We now know that in Classical Athens there were as many as 200 occupations. This essay shows that not all occupations enjoyed an equal amount of status and prestige. Four occupations are studied: actors, especially those in the Associations of Dionysiac Artists, philosophers, doctors, and sculptors. These occupations required extensive training and acquired some features associated with modern professions.

This chapter describes how, over the course of the fourth century, Christians took over the role that was traditionally ascribed to the pagan court philosopher, who was defined (at least in the public imagination) by his freedom of speech, disregard for wealth and social conventions, equanimity, and an uncompromising attitude towards political authority. It discusses biographies and histories from the fourth and fifth centuries AD, which recount the lives and deeds of pagan philosophers and Christian holy men. It also analyses one ceremonial speech delivered by the court philosopher Themistius to Emperor Constantius II, showing that a speech of praise could also be a vehicle for advice and criticism. The chapter focuses on the cultural construction, performance and narrative representation of two varieties of political parrhesia, to wit, ‘bold speech’ and ‘privileged access’, that were relevant to the pagan philosopher and later to the free-speaking bishop who followed in his footsteps.

This chapter investigates narrative representations of free speech in early Christian martyr acts written between c. 150 and the end of persecution in 313. It discusses both pagan and Christian models that inspired authors of early Christian martyr acts to represent the speech and behaviour of martyrs in a certain manner. One of the issues the authors addressed was how a Christian should behave when he or she stood trial before secular authorities, and what measure of frank speech was appropriate in this situation. Early Christian martyrs are often presented as respectful, polite and reticent towards authorities during interrogation. We also see a clear preference for plain speech over studied rhetoric. The chapter addresses the question of whether new interpretations of parrhesia that we find in these martyrdom narratives should be seen as indicative of a growing reluctance among Christians to criticise those in power, or as part of a process of acculturation.