Epicurean vs. Stoic Debate and Lazarillo's Character

Abstract

Fictional debates between Epicures and Stoics existed in classical antiquity and lived on in the neo-Latin literature of the Renaissance, as in Lorenzo Valla's De Voluptate and Erasmus's Epicureus. Specific parallels suggest that the creator of the picaresque genre knew this tradition. Fifteenth- and sixteenth-century humanists connected Epicureanism with the cult of Bacchus, and the Lazarillo contains several parallels to the Bacchean myth. In the first two books of his dialogue Valla creates an unrestrained Epicure that dwells on the foolishness of Stoics, who condemn their natural urges – though secretly following them – and blame them on Stepmother Nature's blinding influence. The self-serving narrator of the Lazarillo makes a similar claim, and in several ways lives out the recommendations of Valla's voluptuary. Similarly, Erasmus remarks on the etymology of the word 'Epicurean,' which suggests a guide who is a boy or son, and so the proto-picaro himself. After profiling the disastrous moral slide of the unrepentant who begin sinning in childhood, he praises an unblemished life, spent from youth in ever growing virtuous pleasures. Lazarillo's life and the concluding line of his account may echo that praise in ironic reversal.