The evolution of hope in the Hellenistic period

Introduction

During the Hellenistic period, philosophical concepts evolved significantly, reflecting the complexities of an era marked by political and cultural changes. One of the least explored concepts was that of hope (ἔλπις). This article examines how different philosophical schools, such as Epicureanism and Stoicism, approached hope, as well as exploring the transformation of this concept in Polybius and during the Roman Empire.

Little Philosophical Interest in Hope

In the centuries before Christ, the main Hellenistic philosophies showed little interest in the concept of hope. Epicurus, for example, advocated a happy life based on the individual’s relationship with inner time. He argued that humans should not expect anything certain from the future, which is beyond their control, but also should not believe that nothing will happen (Letter to Meneceus, 133). This balanced stance allows the individual to experience joy both in memories of the past and in future expectations (Diog. Laertius 10, 137, 4d; Epicurus, fragment 444 Usener = Cicero, Tusculan Disputations 3, 33).Although adopting a more positive attitude toward hope, Epicurus warned against excessive concerns about the future (fragments 242 Arrighetti. 397 Usener = Cicero, Fins 1, 18, 60). He preferred to seek lasting joy rather than relying on empty hopes, rejecting the idea of an afterlife and any divine intervention (Letter to Meneceus, 124-134; Plutarch, Non posse suaviter vivi secundum Epicurum 27, 1105A. 31, 1107B). However, Epicurus suggested that humanity could hope for a future where their freedom would be decisive, without fearing the envy of the gods (Letter to Meneceus, 134; Philodemus, On Death 12/20. 36/9).

The Stoic stance

In contrast, Stoic philosophy demonstrated complete disinterest in hope. Terms such as ἔλπις and its Latin equivalent *spes* appear rarely in ancient Stoic fragments. According to the Stoics, all events follow the order of divine reason, and the wise must submit to providence, adjusting to the flow of the cosmos (Zeno, fragment 211 [SVF 1, 51]). Happiness, for the Stoic, lies in accepting the present, without allowing future desires or fears to disturb their peace (SVF 3, 63-94; Van Menxel 143-146).

The transformation of hope in Polybius

Polybius uses the terms ἔλπις and *sperare* (hope/confidence) in a dual manner. On one hand, neutral or negative expectation. On the other, a confident expectation of future good, often in opposition to despair (*desperatio*) (Cicero, Tusculanas 1, 24, 32, 44).With the Advent of the Roman Empire, the vision of hope underwent significant transformations. Plutarch presents an active God in the improvement of humanity, describing future life as divine service and fellowship with pure people (De sera numinis vindicta 4-8; Fragment 178f). He mentions the *Elpistici*, who saw joyful hope as the foundation of human life (Quaestiones convivales 4, 4, 3, 668E).In the Latin world, the dual meaning of *spes* and *sperare* became widely accepted: on one hand, neutral or negative expectation. On the other, a confident expectation of future good, often in opposition to despair (*desperatio*) (Cato Maior 67-84).

Cicero and Hope in the Roman Context

Cicero defines *spes* as “hope for a future good” and explores the relationship between hope and fear (Tusculan Disputations 1, 24, 32, 44). He suggests that statesmen sacrifice themselves for the good of the fatherland motivated by a great hope of immortality (Tusculan Disputations 1, 32). In his old age, Cicero contrasts the foolish hope of youth with prudence that recognizes the uncertainty of the future, rejecting illusions as certain (Cato Maior 68).Even if this thought were an error, Cicero argues that he could not give up this “happy deception” (Cato Maior 85; Cf. Tusculanas 1, 11. 1, 24). However, when dealing with the immortality of the soul, he does not use the terms *spes* (hope) or *sperare* (to hope), but rather *cernere* (to perceive), *credere* (to believe), and *consolari* (to console oneself) (Cato Maior 84f).

Conclusion

The Hellenistic period presents a multifaceted view of hope, ranging from Epicurean moderation to Stoic rejection and transformation in Roman thought. Although hope was little valued by some philosophical schools, it found new forms and meanings as it interacted with different cultural and religious contexts. This evolution reflects the complexity of human conceptions about the future, happiness, and the relationship with the divine even before the Incarnation of the Word.The Locus Mariologicus Institute is the world’s leading academic reference in Mariology. Discover our resources on Marian Theology, Marian Apparitions, and the Postgraduate Program in Mariology. To deepen the theology of Marian hope, consult the Encyclical *Redemptoris Mater* by Pope John Paul II.