Favorinus belonged to the Skeptic school of Philosophy and lived c. 80-160 CE. This biographical sketch was written by Philostratus, another sophist, living c. 170-250 CE, as part of a book full of similar bio-sketches called Lives of the Sophists. Much of his thought is preserved in quotations in other writers and he was familiar with the leading men of his day.
8. Favorinus the philosopher, no less than Dio, was proclaimed a sophist by the charm and beauty of his eloquence. He came from the Gauls of the West, from the city of Arles which is situated on the river Rhone. He was born two-natured (διφυὴς), a man-woman (ἀνδρόθηλυς), and this was plainly shown in his appearance; for even when he grew old he had no beard; it was evident too from his voice which sounded thin, shrill, and high-pitched, with the modulations that nature bestows on eunuchs (τοὺς εὐνούχους) also. Yet he was so hot (θερμός) in matters of desire (τὰ ἐρωτικά) that he was actually charged with adultery by a man of consular rank. Though he quarreled with the Emperor Hadrian, he suffered no ill consequences. Hence he used to say in the ambiguous style of an oracle, that there were in the story of his life these three paradoxes:
Though he was a Gaul he led the life of a Hellene;
a eunuch, he had been tried for adultery;
he had quarreled with an Emperor and was still alive.
But this must rather be set down to the credit of Hadrian–if a king (βασιλεὺς) disagrees on terms of equality with one whom it was in his power to put to death, it is the king who is really superior for his restraining his anger
When he is wrath with a lesser man,
[Iliad 1.8]
Mighty is the anger of Zeus-nurtured kings,
[Iliad 2.196]
if only it be kept in check by reason. Those who endeavor to guide and amend the morals of kings would do well to add this saying to the sentiments expressed by the poets.
He was appointed high priest [i.e. told he has to pay for lots of regional religious festivals], whereupon he appealed to the established usage of his birthplace, pleading that, according to the laws on such matters, he was exempt from public services because he was a philosopher. But when he saw that the Emperor (αὐτοκράτορα) intended to vote against him on the ground that he was not a philosopher, he forestalled him in the following way.
“O King,” he cried, “I have had a dream of which you ought to be informed. My teacher Dio appeared to me, and with respect to this suit admonished and reminded me that we come into the world not for ourselves alone, but also for the country of our birth. Therefore, O King, I obey my teacher, and I undertake this public service.”
Now the Emperor had acted thus merely for his own diversion, for by turning his mind to philosopher and sophists he used to lighten the responsibilities of Empire. The Athenians however took the affair seriously, and, especially the Athenian magistrates themselves, hastened in a body to throw down the bronze statue of Favorinus as though he were the Emperor’s bitterest enemy. Yet on hearing of it Favorinus showed no resentment Or anger at the insult, but observed:
“Socrates himself would have been the gainer, if the Athenians had merely deprived him of a bronze statue, instead of making him drink hemlock.”
He was very intimate with Herodes [one of the richest most powerful men of the time] the sophist who regarded him as his teacher and father, and wrote to him:
“When shall I see you, and when shall I lick the honey from your lips?”
Aristophanes, fragment 231 = Dio Chrysostom, Orations 52
Accordingly at his death he bequeathed to Herodes all the books that he had collected, his house in Rome, and Autolecythus. This was an Indian, entirely black, a pet of Herodes and Favorinus, for as they drank their wine together he used to divert them by sprinkling his Indian dialect with Attic words and by speaking barbarous Greek with a tongue that stammered and faltered.
The quarrel that arose between Polemo and Favorinus began in Ionia, where the Ephesians favoured Favorinus, while Smyrna admired Polemo; and it became more bitter in Rome; for there consulars and sons of consulars by applauding either one or the other started between them a rivalry such as kindles the keenest envy and malice even in the hearts of wise men. However they may be forgiven for that rivalry, since human nature holds that the love of glory never grows old; but they are to be blamed for the speeches that they composed assailing one another; for personal abuse is brutal, and even if it be true, that does not acquit of disgrace even the man who speaks about such things. And so when people called Favorinus a sophist, the mere fact that he had quarreled with a sophist was evidence enough; for that spirit of rivalry of which I spoke is always directed against one’s competitors in the same craft.
His style of eloquence was careless in construction, but it was both learned and pleasing. It is said that he improvised with ease and fluency. As for the speeches against Proxenus, we must conclude that Favorinus would neither have conceived nor composed them, but that they are the work of an immature youth who was intoxicated at the time, or rather he vomited them, But the speeches On One Untimely Dead, and For the Gladiators, and For the Baths, I judge to be genuine and well written; and this is far more true of his dissertations on philosophy, of which the best are those on the doctrines of Pyrrho; for he concedes to the followers of Pyrrho the ability to make a legal decision, though in other matters they suspend their judgement.
When he delivered discourses in Rome, the interest in them was universal, so much so that even those in his audience who did not understand the Greek language shared in the pleasure that he gave; for he fascinated even them by the tones of his voice, by his expressive glance and the rhythm of his speech. They were also enchanted by the epilogue of his orations, which they called “The Ode,” though I call it mere affectation, since it is arbitrarily added at the close of an argument that has been logically proved. He is said to have been a pupil of Dio, but he is as different from Dio as any who never were his pupils. This is all I have to say about the men who, though they pursued philosophy, had the reputation of sophists. But those who were correctly styled sophists were the following.
Sayings of Favorinus
“That which among men is called favour is the relaxing of strictness in time of need.”
Other attestations
Favorinus takes down a grammarian in the entrance hall of the imperial palace on the Palatine.
Favorinus questions the connection between avarice and effeminacy while walk in Titus’ Baths
Favorinus’ views on mother’s breast-feeding their own children versus the use of wet-nurses
Favorinus’ advice on how to reconcile friends who have quarreled
Favorinus’ discusses the names of the winds
Favorinus debates with Fronto (tutor to Marcus Aurelius) the language used to describe color
Favorinus tries to understand the meaning of dedicated spoils in the Forum of Trajan
Favorinus advocates for the use of everyday word
Favorinus exchanges words with Demonax and is mocked for not being able to grow a beard
Plutarch responds to Favorinus’ views on the Principle of Cold
Gender & Sexuality 