Cicero Delayed Publishing a Book of Poetry Because the Acknowledgements Would Be Too Long

Cicero, Letters to Friends  30 Lentulus Spinther 1.9. 29

“I have also composed a three book poem On My Times which I ought to have sent you previously if I thought it right to publish it. For these books are truly an eternal testament of your efforts for me and my duty to you. But I was reluctant not because of those who might judge themselves wounded by it—I have done this rarely and gently—but because of those who had helped me, if I had named them at all I would have gone on for ever.

But you will still see these books if I can find anyone I can rightly trust to bring them to you. I will entrust this for your preservation. I pass to you for judgment this part of my life and my practice, however much I am able to accomplish in literature, in research and in our old pleasures, I send to you who have always loved these things.”

scripsi etiam versibus tris libros De temporibus meis, quos iam pridem ad te misissem si esse edendos putassem; sunt enim testes et erunt sempiterni meritorum erga me tuorum meaeque pietatis. sed quia verebar, non eos qui se laesos arbitrarentur (etenim id feci parce et molliter), sed eos quos erat infinitum bene de <me> meritos omnis nominare ∗ ∗ ∗quos tamen ipsos libros, si quem cui recte committam invenero, curabo ad te perferendos. atque istam quidem partem vitae consuetudinisque nostrae totam ad te defero; quantum litteris, quantum studiis, veteribus nostris delectationibus, consequi poterimus, id omne <ad> arbitrium tuum, qui haec semper amasti, libentissime conferemus.

Harley MS 4329, f 130r. 

In Honor of Labor Day: Collective Action and the Maturation of Rome

Livy 2.32 Secessio Plebis, 449 BCE

“A fear overcame the senators that if the army were dismissed, then secret assemblies and conspiracies would arise. And thus, even though the draft was made by a dictator—because they had sworn a consular oath they were still believed to beheld by this sacrament—they ordered the legions to depart the city on the grounds that the war had been renewed by the Aequi. This deed accelerated the rebellion.

At first, there was some interest in the murder of the consuls (to absolve them of their obligation); but when they then learned that no crime would release them from their oath, they seceded on to the Sacred Mount across the Anio river, which is three miles from the city, on the advice of a man named Sicinus.  This story is more common than the one which Piso offers—that the secession was made upon the Aventine hill.

There, the camp was fortified without any leader with a trench and wall quietly, as they took nothing unless it was necessary for their food for several days and neither offended anyone nor took offense. But there was a major panic in the city and because of mutual fear all activities were suspended. Those left behind feared violence from the senators because they were abandoned by their own class; and the senators were fearing the plebians who remained in the city because they were uncertain whether they stayed there or preferred to leave. How long could a mass of people who had seceded remain peaceful? What would happen after this if there were an external threat first? There was certainly no home left unless they could bring the people into harmony; and it was decided they must reconcile the state by just means or unjust.”

  1. timor inde patres incessit ne, si dimissus exercitus foret, rursus coetus occulti coniurationesque fierent. itaque quamquam per dictatorem dilectus habitus esset, tamen quoniam in consulum uerba iurassent sacramento teneri militem rati, per causam renouati ab Aequis belli educi ex urbe legiones iussere. [2] quo facto maturata est seditio. et primo agitatum dicitur de consulum caede, ut soluerentur sacramento; doctos deinde nullam scelere religionem exsolui, Sicinio quodam auctore iniussu consulum in Sacrum montem secessisse. trans Anienem amnem est, tria ab urbe milia passuum. [3] ea frequentior fama est quam cuius Piso auctor est, in Auentinum secessionem factam esse. [4] ibi sine ullo duce uallo fossaque communitis castris quieti, rem nullam nisi necessariam ad uictum sumendo, per aliquot dies neque lacessiti neque lacessentes sese tenuere. [5] pauor ingens in urbe, metuque mutuo suspensa erant omnia. timere relicta ab suis plebis uiolentiam patrum; timere patres residem in urbe plebem, incerti manere eam an abire mallent: [6] quamdiu autem tranquillam quae secesserit multitudinem fore? quid futurum deinde si quod externum interim bellum exsistat? [7] nullam profecto nisi in concordia ciuium spem reliquam ducere; eam per aequa, per iniqua reconciliandam ciuitati esse.

The secessio plebis was repeated at key times in Roman history and became a fundamental instrument to force the ruling (and moneyed/landed) class to make political compromises with the larger number of citizen soldiers upon whom the city (and the Republic) depended for its safety (and, really, existence). Modern labor strikes are not directly related to this Roman action–they developed with the rise of the Industrial state. In a short analogy, labor is to capital as the army was to the Roman state.

Labor unions are, in my ever so humble opinion, probably the last possible bulwark against not just the corporatization of higher education but also against the completion of our anglo-american metamorphoses in to technology-driven plutocracies. (And it may be too late.) But I take the limited coverage in our presses as a sign that such subjects are threatening to the very media corporations that deny collective bargaining to their ‘workers’ in the gig economy. 

Caesar, Civil War 1.7.5-7

“Whenever in the past the senate has made a decree asking officers to make sure that the republic meet no harm—and in this wording the senatus consultum is also a call to arms for the Roman people—it has been made under the condition of evil laws, a violent tribune, or during a secession of the plebs when they had occupied the temples and mounts. [Caesar] explained that these examples from an earlier age were paid for with the fates of Saturninus and the Gracchi. (At that time none of these things were done or even considered. No law was suggested; no assembly was called; no secession was made.)

quotienscumque sit decretum darent operam magistratus ne quid res publica detrimenti caperet, qua voce et quo senatus consulto populus Romanus ad arma sit vocatus, factum in perniciosis legibus, in vi tribunicia, in secessione populi, templis locisque editioribus occupatis. 6Atque haec superioris aetatis exempla expiata Saturnini atque Gracchorum casibus docet. (Quarum rerum illo tempore nihil factum, ne cogitatum quidem. Nulla lex promulgata, non cum populo agi coeptum, nulla secessio facta.)

Cicero, Republic II.58

“For that very principle which I introduced at the beginning is this: unless there is equal access in a state to laws, offices, and duties so that the magistrates have sufficient power, the plans of the highest citizens have enough authority, and the people have enough freedom, the state cannot be guarded against revolution. For when our state was troubled by debt, the plebeians first occupied the Sacred Mount and then the Aventine.”

Id enim tenetote, quod initio dixi, nisi aequabilis haec in civitate conpensatio sit et iuris et officii et muneris, ut et potestatis satis in magistratibus et auctoritatis in principum consilio et libertatis in populo sit, non posse hunc incommutabilem rei publicae conservari statum. nam cum esset ex aere alieno commota civitas, plebs montem sacrum prius, deinde Aventinum occupavit.

 

Cicero, Republic II.63

“Therefore, because of the injustice of these men [the decemviri], there was the largest rebellion and the whole state was transformed. For those rulers had created two tables of laws which included most inhumanely, a law against plebeians wedding patricians, even though marriage between different nationalities is permitted! This law was later voided by the plebeian Canuleian Decree. The [decemviri also pursued their own pleasure harshly and greedily in every exercise of power over the people.”

ergo horum ex iniustitia subito exorta est maxima perturbatio et totius commutatio rei publicae; qui duabus tabulis iniquarum legum additis, quibus, etiam quae diiunctis populis tribui solent conubia, haec illi ut ne plebei cum patribus1 essent, inhumanissima lege sanxerunt, quae postea plebei scito Canuleio abrogata est, libidinoseque omni imperio et acerbe et avare populo praefuerunt.

Here is the opening summary from Brill’s New Pauly on the secessio plebis (2006: von Ungern-Sternberg, Jürgen)

“Roman tradition terms as secessio (from Latin secedere, ‘to go away, to withdraw’) the remonstrative exodus of the Roman plebeians from the urban area delimited by the pomerium on to a neighbouring hill. This action was on a number of occasions the culmination of confrontation between the patricians ( patricii ) and the plebs . The first secessio in particular may have been instrumental in the formation of a self-conscious plebeian community under the leadership of at first two, later apparently five people’s tribunes ( tribunus plebis ), to whose protection all plebeians committed themselves by a lex sacrata (‘law subject to the sanction of execration’)”

Related image

A Pleasury Treasury

Aulus Gellius, Attic Nights 9.5:

Various opinions of philosophers about the type and nature of pleasure; and some words of the philosopher Hierocles, with which he censured the ideas of Epicurus.

The ancient philosophers pronounced various opinions on pleasure. Epicurus sets pleasure down as the highest good, yet he defines it thus: a healthy condition of the flesh. Antisthenes the Socratic says that pleasure is the highest evil; for this is his opinion: I would rather lose my mind than feel pleasure. Speusippus and the old Academy say that pleasure and pain are two evils opposed between themselves, and the good is to be found between them. Zeno thought that pleasure was indifferent, that is neither good nor bad, which he called adiaphoron in Greek. Critolaus the Peripatetic says that pleasure is an evil and it brings forth many other evils from itself, such as carelessness, laziness, forgetfulness, idleness. Plato discoursed upon pleasure before all these guys so variously and with such comprehensiveness that all of those opinions, which I have placed above, appear to have flowed forth from the fountains of his writings. He uses each of these arguments as the nature of pleasure, which is manifold, suggests, and as is demanded by the reason of the causes which he is conducting and the things which he wishes to effect. But our man Taurus, whenever mention was made of Epicurus, always had these at the ready words of that serious holy man Hierocles the Stoic: Pleasure as the goal is a prostitute’s dogma; there is no foresight, nor a prostitute’s dogma.

Epicurus - Wikipedia
“Do I look like a voluptuary!?”

V. Diversae nobilium philosophorum sententiae de genere ac natura voluptatis; verbaque Hieroclis philosophi, quibus decreta Epicuri insectatus est. De voluptate veteres philosophi diversas sententias dixerunt. Epicurus voluptatem summum bonum esse ponit; eam tamen ita definit: σαρκὸς εὐσταθὲς κατάστημα;. Antisthenes Socraticus summum malum dicit; eius namque hoc verbum est: μανείην μᾶλλον ἢ ἡσθείην. Speusippus vetusque omnis Academia voluptatem et dolorem duo mala esse dicunt opposita inter sese, bonum autem esse, quod utriusque medium foret. Zeno censuit voluptatem esse indifferens, id est neutrum, neque bonum neque malum, quod ipse Graeco vocabulo adiaphoron appellavit. Critolaus Peripateticus et malum esse voluptatem ait et multa alia mala parere ex sese, incurias, desidias, obliviones, ignavias. Plato ante hos omnis ita varie et multiformiter de voluptate disseruit, ut cunctae istae sententiae, quas supra posui, videantur ex sermonum eius fontibus profluxisse; nam proinde unaquaque utitur, ut et ipsius voluptatis natura fert, quae est multiplex, et causarum, quas tractat, rerumque, quas efficere vult, ratio desiderat. Taurus autem noster, quotiens facta mentio Epicuri erat, in ore atque in lingua habebat verba haec Hieroclis Stoici, viri sancti et gravis: δονὴ τέλος, πόρνης δόγμα: οὐκ ἔστιν πρόνοια, οὐδὲ πόρνης δόγμα.

Make Me Lose My Mind GIFs | Tenor
Antisthenes channels his inner DMX when people offer him anything pleasurable.

An Untold Number of Gods and the Path to Eternal Fame

Pliny the Elder, Natural History 2.5 16–18

“This is the reason it is possible to estimate a greater number of divinities than there are humans: individuals make a number of gods equal to their number by adopting their own Junos and Genii. Indeed, some peoples have animals, even horrible ones, for gods and many others too shameful to report, such as swearing by rotten food or other similar things.

Believing in marriage among the gods but without anyone being born from them for such a great span of time or that some are always old and graying while others are eternally young even children, or that some gods are dark-colored, winged, crippled born from eggs, or dying and living on alternating days, these beliefs are like childhood delusions. But it is beyond every kind of shame to imagine adultery among them, then strife and hatred, and that there are powers of thieves and criminals. “God” is a person helping another person; this is the path to eternal fame.”

quamobrem maior caelitum populus etiam quam hominum intellegi potest, cum singuli quoque ex semetipsis totidem deos faciant Iunones Geniosque adoptando sibi, gentes vero quaedam animalia et aliqua etiam obscena pro dis habeant ac multa dictu magis pudenda, per fetidos cibos et alia similia iurantes. matrimonia quidem inter deos credi tantoque aevo ex eis neminem nasci, et alios esse grandaevos semper canosque, alios iuvenes atque pueros, atricolores, aligeros, claudos, ovo editos et alternis diebus viventes morientesque, puerilium prope deliramentorum est; sed super omnem inpudentiam adulteria inter ipsos fingi, mox iurgia et odia, atque etiam furtorum esse et scelerum numina. deus est mortali iuvare mortalem, et haec ad aeternam gloriam via.

File:Pliny the Elder, Natural History, Florence, Plut. 82.4.jpg
Pliny the Elder, Natural History in ms. Florence, Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana, Plut. 82.4, fol. 3r.

On Barbarism

Isidore of Seville, Etymologies 1.32:

Barbarism is a word pronounced with a corrupted letter or sound. In the case of a letter, you might have floriet where it is appropriate to say florebit. In the case of sound, the first syllable might be drawn forth in place of the middle, as in latebrae, tenebrae. It is called barbarism after barbarians, since they were ignorant of the purity of Latin speech. For every people who became part of the Romans transmitted, along with its resources, all of its faults in language and customs.

But between barbarism and barbarolexis, there is this difference, that barbarism occurs in a Latin word when it is corrupted. When, however, barbarian words are brought into Latin speech, it is called barbarolexis. Similarly, when a fault of speech occurs in prose, it is called barbarism; but when it occurs in verse, it is called metaplasmus.

Barbarism, however, occurs both in writing and in pronunciation. In writing, it can take four forms: if someone adds, subtracts, transposes, or reduces a letter or syllable in a word. In pronunciation, it happens in time, tones, aspiration, and the rest which follow. In time, barbarism occurs if a short syllable is used in place of a long or a long in place of a short. In tone, it occurs if an accent is transferred to other syllables. In aspiration, it happens if H is added where it is not appropriate, or taken from a place where it belongs. In hiatus, it happens whenever a verse is broken off in pronunciation before it is completed, or whenever a vowel follows another vowel, as in the phrase ‘Musae Aonides.’

Barbarism can occur through motacismos, iotacismos, and labdacismos. Motacismos occurs whenever a vowel follows the letter M, as in ‘bonum aurum’, ‘iustum amicum’; but we can avoid this problem either by the suspension of the letter M or its removal. Iotacismus occurs whenever the sound of the letter i is duplicated, as in words like ‘Troia’ and ‘Maia’, where the pronunciation of those letters is so light than one iota, not two seem to be pronounced. Labdacismus is when two Ls are pronounced in place of two, as people from Africa tend to do, as in words like ‘colloquium’ instead of ‘conloquium’; or whenever we pronounce one L rather lightly, but two Ls more generously. Which is bass-ackwards. We should pronounce one L more expansively, while pronouncing Ls lighter when part of a pair. Collision occurs whenever the end of the last syllable is the beginning of the next syllable, as in the word ‘matertera’.

If this bear’s name were Ian, he could be a Bar Bear Ian.

Barbarismus est verbum corrupta littera vel sono enuntiatum. Littera, ut “floriet” dum “florebit’ dicere oporteat; sono, si pro media syllaba prima producatur, ut “latebrae” “tenebrae” Appellatus autem barbarismus a barbaris gentibus, dum latinae orationis integritatem nescirent. Vnaquaeque enim gens facta Romanorum cum opibus suis vitia quoque et verborum et morum Romam transmisit. Inter barbarismum autem et barbarolexim hoc interest, quod barbarismus in verbo latino fit, dum corrumpitur; quando autem barbara verba latinis eloquiis inferuntur, barbarolexis dicitur. Item quando in prosa vitium fit sermonis, barbarismus vocatur; quando in metro, metaplasmus dicitur. Barbarismus autem fit scripto et pronuntiatione. Scripto quattuor modis: si quis in verbo litteram vel syllabam adiciat, mutet, transmutet, vel minuat. Pronuntiatione autem fit in temporibus, tonis, aspirationibus et reliquis quae sequuntur. Per tempora quippe fit barbarismus, si pro longa syllaba brevis ponatur, aut pro brevi longa. Per tonos, si accentus in alia syllaba commutetur. Per aspirationem, si adiciatur H littera ubi non debet, aut detrahatur ubi esse oportet. Per hiatum, quotiens in pronuntiatione scinditur versus antequam conpleatur, sive quotiens vocalis vocalem sequitur, ut “Musae Aonides” Fit barbarismus et per motacismos, [iotacismos] et labdacismos. Motacismus est, quotiens M litteram vocalis sequitur, ut “bonum aurum” “iustum amicum’; sed hoc vitium aut suspensione M litterae, aut detractione vitamus.Iotacismus est, quotiens in iota littera duplicatur sonus, ut “Troia” “Maia’; ubi earum litterarum adeo exilis erit pronuntiatio, ut unum iota, non duo sonare videantur. Labdacismus est, si pro una L duo pronuntientur, ut Afri faciunt, sicut “colloquium” pro “conloquium’; vel quotiens unam L exilius, duo largius proferimus. Quod contra est; nam unum largius, duo exilius proferre debemus. Conlisio est, quotiens novissimae syllabae finis in alterius principio est, ut “matertera”.

How to End a History with a Cliffhanger

The Romans fought a war in Africa against the Numidians led by their King, Jugurtha (112-104 BCE). The Romans won. Sallust tells the tale of the war, but he ends it with the ominous anticipation of future dangers:

Sallust, Bellum Jugurthinum 114

“At that time, a battle was fought and lost against the Gauls by the generals Quintus Caepio and Gnaeus Mallius. Because of this, all of Italy quaked in fear. The Romans from that time down to our own have believed that while all other matters give way to our virtue, with the Gauls it is an issue of safety, not glory.

After it was made known that the war in Numidia was concluded and that Jugurtha was being returned as a prisoner, Marius was made consul even though absent, and Gaul was set as his province. On the first day of January, he celebrated his triumph as consul in great glory. And at that moment, the hope and health of the state resided with him.”

Per idem tempus adversum Gallos ab ducibus nostris Q. Caepione et Cn. Manlio male pugnatum. Quo metu Italia omnis contremuerat. Illincque [et inde] usque ad nostram memoriam Romani sic habuere, alia omnia virtuti suae prona esse, cum Gallis pro salute, non pro gloria certare. Sed postquam bellum in Numidia confectum et Iugurtham Romam vinctum adduci nuntiatum est, Marius consul absens factus est, et ei decreta provincia Gallia, isque Kalendis Ianuariis magna gloria consul triumphavit. Et ea tempestate spes atque opes civitatis in illo sitae.

Fateful Etymology

Giovanni Boccaccio, Genealogy of the Pagan Gods (1.5):

“Proper names have already been discussed, so we must speak now of common names. Cicero calls the Fates the Parcae, through antiphrasis as I believe, because they would spare (parcant) no one. They admit no exceptions for any persons, and God alone is able to change their power and order. The name Fatum or Fata is, however, derived from the verb for fari [=to speak], as if the people who imposed the name on them wished to indicate that what they do is irrevocable, as if spoken or preordained by God. We can see this readily enough in the words of Boethius, and even Augustine seems to agree in his City of God. But he holds back from using the word itself, advising us that if anyone should wish to call the will or power of God by the name of Fate, they should hold their opinion and bridle their tongue.”

Marco Bigio, The Three Parcae (1550)

De nominibus propriis predictum est, de appellativis dicendum. Vocat igitur has Tullius Parcas, ut reor per antiphrasin, quia nemini parcant; nulla enim apud eas est acceptio personarum, solus deus potest pervertere earum vires et ordinem. Fatum autem aut Fata a for faris tractum nomen est, quasi velint, qui id imposuere nomen, quod ab eis agitur a deo quasi irrevocabile dictum sit seu previsum, ut per verba Boetii satis assumitur, et etiam sentire videtur Augustinus, ubi De civitate dei. Sed abhorret ipse vocabulum admonens, ut si quisquam voluntatem dei seu potestatem nomine Fati appellet, sententiam teneat, linguam coerceat.

Filthy Friday: What to Name My Smutty Book?

Antonio Beccadelli, The Hermaphrodite 1.3

“Cosimo, if you read the title of my book in the upper margin, you will see that it is The Hermaphrodite. There is a bit of pussy in this book, and a bit of cock as well. Ah, what a fitting name it has, then! But if you called my book The Asshole because it sings with the old rectal flute, it will still have a pretty fitting name. If neither this name nor that seems good to you, put down whatever you would like – just make sure that it isn’t chaste!

Image result for antonio beccadelli

Si titulum nostri legisti, Cosme, libelli
Marginibus primis, Hermaphroditus erat.
Cunnus et est nostro, simul est et mentula, libro:
Conveniens igitur quam bene nomen habet!
At si podicem vocites, quod podice cantet,
Non inconveniens nomen habebit adhuc.
Quod si non placeat nomen nec et hoc nec et illud,
Dummodo non castum, pone quod ipse velis.

Do YOU Know Your Great-Grandfather’s Grandfather?

Varro, on the Latin Language (VII. 3)

“It is not surprising [that ancient words have unclear meanings] since not only was Epimenides not recognized by many when he got up from sleep after 50 years, but Teucer as well was unknown by his family after only 15 years, according to Livius Andronicus. But what is this to the age of poetic words? If the source of the words in the Carmen Saliorum is the reign of Numa Pompilius and those words were not taken up from previous composers, they are still 700 years old.

Why, then, would you criticize the labor of an author who has not successfully found the name of a hero’s great-grandfather or that man’s grandfather, when you cannot name the mother of your own great-grandfather’s grandfather? This distance is so much closer to us than the period from now to the beginning of the Salians when people say the Roman’s poetic words were first in Latin.”

Nec mirum, cum non modo Epimenides sopore post annos L experrectus a multis non cognoscatur, sed etiam Teucer Livii post XV annos ab suis qui sit ignoretur. At hoc quid ad verborum poeticorum aetatem? Quorum si Pompili regnum fons in Carminibus Saliorum neque ea ab superioribus accepta, tamen habent DCC annos. Quare cur scriptoris industriam reprehendas qui herois tritavum, atavum non potuerit reperire, cum ipse tui tritavi matrem dicere non possis? Quod intervallum multo tanto propius nos, quam hinc ad initium Saliorum, quo Romanorum prima verba poetica dicunt Latina.

Teucer was a king of Salamis who was absent during the Trojan War.

Epimenides was a poet from Crete who wrote a Theogony. He allegedly went to sleep as a boy and awoke 57 years later. Here’s his strange entry from the Suda.

“Epimenides, son of Phaistos or Dosiados or Agiasarkhos and his mother was Blastos. A Cretan from Knossos and epic poet. As the story goes, his soul could leave his body for however long the time was right and then return again. When he died, after some time his skin was found to be tattooed with words. He lived near the 30th olympiad and he was among the first of the seven sages and those after them. For he cleansed Athens of the plague of Kylôneios at the time of the 44th Olympiad when he was an old man. He wrote many epic poems, including in catalog form about mysteries, purifications, and other riddling matters. Solon wrote to him asking for the cleansing of the city. He lived 150 years but he slept for 50 of them. “The Epimenidean skin” is a proverb for mysterious writings.”

᾿Επιμενίδης, Φαίστου ἢ Δοσιάδου ἢ ᾿Αγιασάρχου υἱός, καὶ μητρὸς Βλάστας, Κρὴς ἀπὸ Κνωσσοῦ, ἐποποιός· οὗ λόγος, ὡς ἐξίοι ἡ ψυχὴ ὁπόσον ἤθελε καιρόν, καὶ πάλιν εἰσῄει ἐν τῷ σώματι· τελευτήσαντος δὲ αὐτοῦ, πόρρω χρόνων τὸ δέρμα εὑρῆσθαι γράμμασι κατάστικτον. γέγονε δὲ ἐπὶ τῆς λ′ ὀλυμπιάδος, ὡς προτερεύειν καὶ τῶνζ′ κληθέντων σοφῶν ἢ καὶ ἐπ’ αὐτοῖς γενέσθαι. ἐκάθηρε γοῦν τὰς ᾿Αθήνας τοῦ Κυλωνείου ἄγους κατὰ τὴν μδ′ ὀλυμπιάδα, γηραιὸς ὤν. ἔγραψε δὲ πολλὰ ἐπικῶς· καὶ καταλογάδην μυστήριά τινα καὶ καθαρμοὺς καὶ ἄλλα αἰνιγματώδη. πρὸς τοῦτον γράφει Σόλων ὁ νομοθέτης μεμφόμενος τῆς πόλεως κάθαρσιν. οὗτος ἔζησεν ρν′ ἔτη, τὰ δὲ Ϛ′ ἐκαθεύδησεν. καὶ παροιμία τὸ ᾿Επιμενίδειον δέρμα, ἐπὶ τῶνἀποθέτων.

Suicide in Style

Tacitus, Annals 16.19:

“By chance, Nero had gone to Campania then, while Petronius progressed to Cumae, where he was detained. He no longer put up with the delays of fear and hope, but he did not end his life precipitately. He cut his veins, as it pleased him, and bound them up. He then reopened them as he talked to his friends not about serious things or the kinds of things which would earn him a reputation for firmness of character. He heard no speeches about the immortality of the soul or the systems of philosophers, but rather, he enjoyed some trifling poems and a couple of silly verses. He gave some of his slaves a pension, and had some of the others beaten. He had dinner and then took a little nap, so that his death – though compulsory – would be similar to one by chance. Unlike many others who died at the time, he did not flatter Nero or Tigellinus or any of the other potentates in his will. Rather, he wrote a detailed account of the emperor’s debaucheries with the names of his boy-toys and lady lovers, describing the utter novelty of each lewd act. He signed this and sent it to Nero. Afterward, he broke his signet ring, so that no one could afterward use it to endanger other lives.”

Image result for petronius at his farewell party

Forte illis diebus Campaniam petiverat Caesar, et Cumas usque progressus Petronius illic attinebatur; nec tulit ultra timoris aut spei moras. neque tamen praeceps vitam expulit, sed incisas venas, ut libitum, obligatas aperire rursum et adloqui amicos, non per seria aut quibus gloriam constantiae peteret. audiebatque referentis nihil de immortalitate animae et sapientium placitis, sed levia carmina et facilis versus. servorum alios largitione, quosdam verberibus adfecit. iniit epulas, somno indulsit, ut quamquam coacta mors fortuitae similis esset. ne codicillis quidem, quod plerique pereuntium, Neronem aut Tigellinum aut quem alium potentium adulatus est, sed flagitia principis sub nominibus exoletorum feminarumque et novitatem cuiusque stupri perscripsit atque obsignata misit Neroni. fregitque anulum ne mox usui esset ad facienda pericula.