Free Speech Freeze

S.F. Bonner

Roman Declamation in the Late Republic and Early Empire (Chp. 2)

Under the Republic, oratory had been essential for success in public life, and the whole subject was alive and keenly debated; but under the principate it had lost much of its political value. It was not so much that the courts had lost a great deal of their power; there were still civil and criminal cases to attract the advocate. It was rather the lack of assured success in public life,
which the good orator in Republican days could naturally expect. Under the principate, so much depended upon Imperial and Court patronage; and it became necessary to choose one’s words rather too carefully when speaking in public for the practice to be a popular one. Writing under Tiberius (if not Caligula) the elder Seneca could look back upon the Augustan Age as a time when there was ‘so much liberty of speech’; but even then that freedom which the author of the Dialogues and the philosopher in Longinus consider so essential for good oratory, was fast disappearing from Roman public life.

And so oratory betook itself to the safer arena of the schools, where a man might air his Republicanism without fear of consequences, and where one might be recompensed for the loss of political prestige by the plaudits of one’s fellow-citizens. The term scholastica came into vogue – a ‘school oration’ as opposed to the genuine public speech, and the exponents of these display-speeches became known as ‘schoolmen’ – scholastici.

A Fragment of An Odyssey

P. Ryl. 3.487 = Exertatio Ethopeoiaca [TLG] = LCL 360 Select Papyri 137

“…Ill-fated Elpenor, the one Kirke’s home stole away–
Like Antiphanes and man-eating Polyphemos–
Of the immortal [ ] [stories like that] I will tell you..

[fragments]

…and the trials of Penelope.
Don’t disbelieve that Odysseus has returned home,
When you see the scar that not even Penelope has seen.
Quit the stable, Philoitios. I will relieve you
Of trembling before the suitors to wander with your cattle.
I will make your household free for you. But in turn
All of you take up arms by my side against Eurymakhos and the rest
Of the suitors. You are well versed in their evil
Just as Telemachus and prudent Penelope are.
Cowherd, pledge yourself…
Become….

δύσμορ[ο]ς Ἐλπήνωρ, τ[ὸ]ν ἀφήρπασε δώματα
Κίρκης.
ἴκελ[α] Ἀν[τ]ιφάτηι καὶ ἀνδροφάγωι Πολυφήμωι
ἀθανά[τ]ο̣υ̣ .εσ[..]ψ̣ατ̣[…..]ρ̣ητην ἀγορεύσω
α̣ἰγὸς ᾿Αμαλ̣θεία̣ς σ̣[έ]λ̣[α]ς̣ [..].[..]εν αἰγίοχος Ζεύς
[ο]ὔριος̣ ὁρμ̣α̣[ί]ν̣ουσι̣ν ο̣τει̣ο αρουρ̣[….].π̣ι̣σ̣
οὐ ρ̣α̣.[.].θ..ο̣υθο..[.]υ̣κ̣…[…].[.]ε̣ς̣ [οὐ]δὲν ἐο̣ῦ̣σιν
ειμ̣[ ] ἀ̣νδρῶν
[ ]ι̣
[ ]ο̣ι̣μ̣ων
[ ]ε̣ μάκελλαν
[ ]ε̣ ποθ’ ὕδωρ
[ ]η̣ν ἐπὶ βώλῳ
[ ]θιος ἀνήρ
[ ]β̣[..]ρες
[ ]κα.[]

[]..ρ̣α̣τ̣ι̣[]
[]μ̣ω̣ι̣[]

. . . . .
ἀ]θλήματα [Πη]νελοπείης.
μὴ σύ γ᾿ ἄπιστος ἐῆις ὡς οὐ νόστησεν Ὀδυσσεύς,
οὐλὴν εἰσοράαις τὴν μηδ᾿ ἴδε Πηνελόπεια.
παύεο νῦν σταθμοῖο, Φιλοίτιε, κ[α]ί σε μεθήσω
μνηστῆρας τρομέοντα τεαῖς σὺν βουσὶν ἀλᾶσθαι·
στήσω σοι τεὸν οἶκον ἐλεύθερον. ἀλλὰ καὶ ὑμεῖς
ἀμφ᾿ ἐμὲ θωρήσσεσθε κατ᾿ Ἐυρυμάχοιο καὶ ἄλλω(ν)
μνηστήρων· κακότητος ἐπειρήθητε καὶ ὑμεῖς,
ἴκελα Τηλεμάχωι καὶ [ἐχέφρονι Πηνελοπείηι.
βουκόλε κάτθεο̣ []
γείνεο μὲν ποτι[]

I wrote a whole book about the Odyssey and just found out about this fragment. It is dated to the 3rd/4th century CE by Roberts in Catalogue of the Greek Papyri in the John Rylands Library. The hexameter is clearly later than Homer, but the story it tells is interesting: the bulk of the fragment seems to have Odysseus trying to convince the cow-herd Philoitios to join him in the fight against the suitors in exchange for a promise of manumission. This concept is really alien to the Homeric Odyssey

Philoitios is something of a silent double for Eumaios in the Odyssey as one of the “good” enslaved people. He closes the door on the suitors in book 21 (240) but speaks rarely. When He does, in book 20, he asks Eumaios who this stranger is, and confirms that he looks like a kingly man. He expresses sympathy with the stranger and tells Odysseus in disguise how much he misses his former master. Odysseus tells him that Odysseus will soon come home.

Odysseus, zijn zoon Telemachus, Eumaeus en Philoetius verlaten gewapend het paleis en gaan onderweg naar de vader van Odysseus: Laërtes. Minerva verbergt hen in duisternis op klaarlichte dag, zodat ze ongezien wegkomen.

Ignorance of Animals

In the world of Sophocles’s Antigone, birds and dogs are instruments of defilement associated with the corpse of Polynices:

Creon to the Chorus (203-206):

Regarding this man, it’s been proclaimed to this city
That no one honor him with burial or mourn him,
And his body be left unburied for the birds
And dogs, ravaged fare, and for all to see.

τοῦτον πόλει τῇδʼ ἐκκεκήρυκται τάφῳ
μήτε κτερίζειν μήτε κωκῦσαί τινα,
ἐᾶν δʼ ἄθαπτον καὶ πρὸς οἰωνῶν δέμας
καὶ πρὸς κυνῶν ἐδεστὸν αἰκισθέν τʼ ἰδεῖν.

Tiresias to Creon (1015-1018):

There’s plague in the city because of what you concocted.
All our altars and hearths are clogged
With the carcass scraps, carried by dogs and birds,
Of the ill-fated, fallen son of Oedipus.

καὶ ταῦτα τῆς σῆς ἐκ φρενὸς νοσεῖ πόλις.
βωμοὶ γὰρ ἡμῖν ἐσχάραι τε παντελεῖς
πλήρεις ὑπʼ οἰωνῶν τε καὶ κυνῶν βορᾶς
τοῦ δυσμόρου πεπτῶτος Οἰδίπου γόνου.

Wild animals can trouble corpses too, but in Antigone they are associated with corpses other than Polynices’. Wild animals are absent from Creon’s prescription for Polynices’ remains and absent from Tiresias’s account of what befell them.

Dogs and birds are certainly a threat to all unburied corpses, but the involvement of wild animals marks corpses as not-Polynices’:

Tiresias to Creon (1080-1083):

All the cities are vibrating with hate:
Bits and pieces of their dead have been hallowed
By dogs, wild animals, or some winged bird transporting
The unholy stench into the hearth-bearing city.

ἐχθραὶ δὲ πᾶσαι συνταράσσονται πόλεις,
ὅσων σπαράγματʼ ἢ κύνες καθήγνισαν
ἢ θῆρες ἤ τις πτηνὸς οἰωνός, φέρων
ἀνόσιον ὀσμὴν ἑστιοῦχον ἐς πόλιν.

If this is a plausible reading of dogs, birds, and wild animals, then something must be said about the guard.

The guard, a curious figure in many respects, speaks of Polynices’ corpse in relation to wild animals and dogs, a combination absent from the authoritative discourses of Creon and Tiresias:

The guard to Creon (253-258):

When the first watch of the day showed us,
Amazement hard to grasp came over us all:
The man could not be seen! He was not entombed,
But there was fine dust on him.
It was as if someone had done it to avoid pollution.
Also, there were no signs a wild animal
Or dogs had come and torn the body.

ὅπως δʼ ὁ πρῶτος ἡμὶν ἡμεροσκόπος
δείκνυσι, πᾶσι θαῦμα δυσχερὲς παρῆν.
ὁ μὲν γὰρ ἠφάνιστο, τυμβήρης μὲν οὔ,
λεπτὴ δʼ, ἄγος φεύγοντος ὥς, ἐπῆν κόνις·
σημεῖα δʼ οὔτε θηρὸς οὔτε του κυνῶν
ἐλθόντος, οὐ σπάσαντος ἐξεφαίνετο.

I’m going to suggest the guard’s invocation of animals is at odds with Creon’s and Tiresias’s precisely because the guard does not know the identity of his dead charge.

That is why the guard speaks of “the corpse” (τὸν νεκρόν), “he” (ὁ), “the man” (τὸν ἄνδρʼ), and “a body” (σῶμα). He never says “Polynices,” “the son of Oedipus,” or anything of the kind.

Consistent with that, the guard also does not know the identity of the woman he’s arrested. That is why he says “she” (ἦ), “this woman” (ταύτην), and “the girl” (ἡ παῖς). He never says “Antigone,” “the dead man’s sister,” or anything of the kind.

Black and white bird sitting on back of german shepherd

Larry Benn has a B.A. in English Literature from Harvard College, an M.Phil in English Literature from Oxford University, and a J.D. from Yale Law School. Making amends for a working life misspent in finance, he’s now a hobbyist in ancient languages and blogs at featsofgreek.blogspot.com.

Clovis Loves Killing

Gregory of Tours, Histories 2.42:

Clovis however came and made war against Ragnachar. Ragnachar, seeing that his army had been defeated, prepared to slip away, but as he was doing so he was captured by his army, had his hands tied behind his back, and was brought before Clovis along with his brother Ricchar. Clovis addressed him thus: “Why did you humiliate our people by letting them tie you up? It would have been better for you to die.” Raising the axe, he fixed it into his head, and turning to his brother he said, “If you had granted your brother some solace, he would not at any rate have been bound up” and killed him with a similar blow of the axe.

After their deaths, the men who had betrayed them learned that the gold which they had received from the king was adulterated. When they complained of this to the king himself, he responded, “Rightly does one receive such gold when they lead their master to death by their own choice.” He added that it ought to be enough for them to live on that they would not atone for the betrayal of their master by dying under torture. When they heard this, they decided to take the hint and the favor, claiming that it was indeed enough for them if they were allowed to live.

There were however relations of the king mentioned earlier: their brother, named Rignomeris, was killed in the city of Mans on the orders of Clovis. After their deaths, Clovis received all of their kingdoms and all of their treasure. Once all of these and many other kings had been killed along with his nearest relations (who, he feared, might take his kingdom away from him), he extended his reign over all of Gaul. Then he gathered all of his people together at once and he said to have spoken about his relations, whom he killed, in this way: “Ah, pity me, I who remain as a stranger in a strange land and have no relatives who could help me if I were faced with some adversity!” He said this not to grieve over their deaths, but to lay a trap to see whether he might find someone else whom he could kill.

Veniens autem Chlodovechus, bellum contra eum instruit. At ille devictum cernens exercitum suum, fuga labi parat, sed ab exercitum conpraehensus ac ligatis postergum manibus in conspectu Chlodovechi una cum Richario fratre suo perducetur. Cui ille: ‘Cur’, inquid, ‘humiliasti genus nostrum, ut te vincere permitteris? Melius enim tibi fuerat mori’. Et elevatam securem capite eius defixit, conversusque ad fratrem eius, ait: ‘Si tu solatium fratri tribuissis, allegatus utique non fuisset’; similiter et hunc secure percussum interfecit.

Post quorum mortem cognuscent proditores eorum, aurum, quod a regi acceperant, esse adulterum. Quod cum rege dixissent, ille respondisse fertur: ‘Merito’, inquid, ‘tale aurum accepit, qui domino suo ad mortem propria voluntate deducit’; hoc illis quod viverent debere sufficere, ne male proditionem dominorum suorum luituri inter tormenta deficerent. Quod ille audientes, optabant gratiam adipisci, illud sibi adserentes sufficere, si vivere mererentur. Fuerunt autem supradicti regis propinqui huius; quorum frater Rignomeris nomen apud Cinomannis civitatem ex iusso Chlodovechi est interfectus. Quibus mortuis, omnem regnum eorum et thesaurus Chlodovechus accepit. Interfectisque et aliis multis regibus vel parentibus suis primis, de quibus zelum habebat, ne ei regnum auferrent, regnum suum per totas Gallias dilatavit. Tamen, congregatis suis quadam vice, dixisse fertur de parentibus, quos ipse perdiderat: ‘Vae mihi, qui tamquam peregrinus inter extraneus remansi et non habeo de parentibus, qui mihi, si venerit adversitas, possit aliquid adiuvare’. Sed hoc non de morte horum condolens, sed dolo dicebat, si forte potuisset adhuc aliquem repperire, ut interficeret.

Incrimination and Punishment

Demosthenes, On the False Legation

“You hear me always accusing these men and incriminating them and saying directly that they have taken the money and made off with all the things of the state.”

καὶ κατηγοροῦντος ἀκούετέ μου καὶ ἐλέγχοντος ἀεὶ τούτους καὶ λέγοντος ἄντικρυς ὅτι χρήματ᾿ εἰλήφασι καὶ πάντα πεπράκασι τὰ πράγματα τῆς πόλεως.

Terence, The Eunuch 809

“Are you listening? He’s incriminating himself for theft!”

audin tu? furti se alligat

Dinarchus, Against Demosthenes 113

“Athenians, you know that these men testify against your concerns and that they are common enemies of the laws and the whole state. Do not accept them, but demand that they defend themselves against the actual charges. And don’t tolerate his madness either, this man who thinks much of his rhetorical abilities and since he has clearly accepted bribes against you, he has been refuted even more as defrauding you.

Punish him as is worthy of yourselves and this state. If you do not, you will permit all those who have been implicated in a single vote and hearing–you will encourage corruption for all those in the future to act against you and the people and even if you try to prosecute those who acquitted them later, it won’t help you at all.”

νομίσαντες οὖν, ὦ Ἀθηναῖοι, καθ᾿ ὑμῶν πάντας τούτους ἀναβαίνειν καὶ κοινοὺς ἐχθροὺς εἶναι τῶν νόμων καὶ τῆς πόλεως ἁπάσης, μὴ ἀποδέχεσθ᾿ αὐτῶν, ἀλλὰ κελεύετ᾿ ἀπολογεῖσθαι περὶ τῶν κατηγορημένων· μηδὲ τὴν αὐτοῦ τούτου μανίαν, ὃς μέγα φρονεῖ ἐπὶ τῷ δύνασθαι λέγειν, καὶ ἐπειδὰν φανερὸς ὑμῖν γένηται δωροδοκῶν, ἔτι μᾶλλον ἐξελήλεγκται φενακίζων ὑμᾶς, <ἀλλὰ> τιμωρήσασθε ὑμῶν αὐτῶν καὶ τῆς πόλεως ἀξίως. εἰ δὲ μή, μιᾷ ψήφῳ καὶ ἑνὶ ἀγῶνι πάντας τοὺς ἀποπεφασμένους καὶ τοὺς μέλλοντας ἀφέντες εἰς ὑμᾶς αὐτοὺς καὶ τὸν δῆμον τὴν τούτων δωροδοκίαν τρέψετε, κἂ ὕστερον ἐγκαλῆτ τοῖς ἀφεῖσιν, ὅτε οὐδὲν ἔσται πλέον ὑμῖν.

Punishment of a Hunter, Paulus Potter 1650

Disappointing Delphic Demands

Rousseau, Reveries of a Solitary Walker (4):

Among the tiny number of books that I sometimes read again, Plutarch is the one that ropes me in and does me the most good. He was the first thing I read in childhood, and he will be the last thing I read in my old age. He is pretty much the only author that I have never read without drawing some benefit. Just the other day I was reading in his Moralia the essay How One Can Profit from One’s Enemies. That same day, flipping through some pamphlets that were sent to me by various authors, I happened upon one of the journals of the abbé Royou, in the title of which he had added these words: vitam vero impendenti, Royou. Being too experienced in the ways of these gentlemen to be duped by this crap, I understood that through this air of politeness he thought that I had told some cruel lie; but what was this founded on? What was up with this sarcasm? What reason could I have given him for it? In order to gain some profit from the lessons of the good Plutarch, I resolved to busy myself in examining this lie the next day, and I became totally confirmed in the opinion that I had formed earlier: that the maxim Know Thyself at the temple of Delphi was not so easy to follow as I had thought when I wrote my Confessions.

Dans le petit nombre de livres que je lis quelquefois encore, Plutarque est celui qui m’attache et me profite le plus. Ce fut la première lecture de mon enfance, ce sera la dernière de ma vieillesse; c’est presque le seul auteur que je n’ai jamais lu sans en tirer quelque fruit. Avant-hier, je lisois dans ses œuvres morales le traité Comment on pourra tirer utilité de ses ennemis. Le même jour, en rangeant quelques brochures qui m’ont été envoyées par les auteurs, je tombai sur un des journaux de l’abbé Royou, au titre duquel il avoit mis ces paroles: vitam vero impendenti, Royou. Trop au fait des tournures de ces messieurs pour prendre le change sur celle-là, je compris qu’il avoit cru sous cet air de politesse me dire une cruelle contre-vérité; mais sur quoi fondé? Pourquoi ce sarcasme? Quel sujet y pouvois-je avoir donné? Pour mettre à profit les leçons du bon Plutarque, je résolus d’employer à m’examiner sur le mensonge la promenade du lendemain, et j’y vins bien confirmé dans l’opinion déjà prise que le Connois-toi toi-même du temple de Delphes n’étoit pas une maxime si facile à suivre que je l’avois cru dans mes Confessions.

The Broken Hopes of a Once Prosperous Life

From “An Old Woman’s Lament” [=P. Oxy. xv. 1921, no. 1794, p. 110 = LCL 360 122] 7-21

“…My life’s hopes are shattered
My home makes a hollow sound.
Luck turns for different people at random.

Wealth’s ‘right’ is just like the fall of dice–
A toss brings people good fortune on different days.
They fall for a good man and make a poor man wealthy
And sometimes they make the rich man poor.

This is how fortune alights on turning wings
Bringing luck up and down the ranks of people.

You know that I have shared food and drink with many
And in days past I was not an outcast.
My field was deep with grain and so was the threshing floor;
We had many sheep, but this plague has destroyed it all.

And so I drag myself around this crowded city
A beggar with no one to care for me.”

] ἐλπωραὶ δ᾿ ἐάγησαν
ἡμετέρης βιοτῆ[ς, αὖ]ον δέ μοι οἶκος ἀυτεῖ.
ἄλλοτε γὰρ ἄλλο[ι]ς ὄλβ[ο]υ λάχος ἀνθρώποισιν·
οἵη τοι πεσσοῖο δίκη, το[ι]ήδε καὶ ὄλβου·
πεσσ[ὸ]ς ἀμειβόμενος [π]οτὲ μὲν το[ῖς, ἄ]λλοτετοῖσι[ν
εἰς ἀγαθὸν πίπ[τει] καὶ ἀφνεὸν αἶψα τίθησι
πρόσθεν ἀνολβείοντ᾿, εὐηφενεόντ[α] δ᾿ ἄνολβον·
τοῖος διν(η)τῆσι περ[ιστ]ρέφεται πτερύγεσσιν
ὄ]λβος ἐπ᾿ ἀνθρώπους [ἄλ]λον δ᾿ ἐξ ἄλ[λο]υ ὀφέλλει.
ἡ δ᾿ αὐ[τ]ὴ πολέεσσι π[οτὸ]ν καὶ σῖτον ὄρεξα
τὴν ὁράας, ἐπεὶ οὔτι λιπ[ερ]νῆτις πάρος ἦα,
ἔσκε δέ μοι νειὸς βαθυλ[ή]ιος, ἔσκεν ἀ[λ]ωή,
πολλὰ δέ μοι μῆλ᾿ ἔσκε, [τ]ὰ μὲν διὰ πάντα κέδασσεν
ἥδ᾿ ὀλοὴ βούβρωστις, ἐγὼ δ᾿ ἀκόμιστο[ς ἀ]λῆτις
ὧ]δέ ποθι πλήθουσαν ἀνὰ πτόλιν ε[. . . ἕ]ρπω

“The story of a fallen woman. IV.” Christoffer Vilhelm Eckersberg 1808

A/Non Anonymous

H.W. Fowler, A Dictionary of Modern English Usage: a-, an-:

a-, an-, not or without. Punctilious word-making requires that these should be prefixed only to Greek stems; of such compounds there are some hundreds, whereas Latin-stemmed words having any currency even in scientific use do not perhaps exceed half a dozen. There are the botanical ascapular and acaulous, the biological asexual and acaudate, and the literary amoral. This last being literary, there is the less excuse for its having been preferred to the more orthodox non-moral. Amoral is a novelty whose progress has been rapid. In 1888, the OED called it a nonce-word, but in 1933 full recognition had to be conceded. These words should not be treated as precedents for future word-making.

fowler on pedantry and purism

F**k Poggio!

Francesco Diana to Lorenzo Valla (December 1452)

Never did anyone feel greater joy than I did when I read your Invective against Poggio, that endlessly garrulous shit talker. You shut the mouths of his zealous little partisans who used to mock me for preferring your writings to all of their scribbles after they read his Invective against you. I triumph over them and, as they say, return like for like; and this hurts them to no end. They marvel at your genius and your learning, and I brought them from sickness into health so that now they always have the name of Lorenzo in their mouths.

Nulla umquam maior letitia fuit quam ea quam nuper ex invectiva tua in Pogium, procacissimum hominem et maledicum accepi; quod multis Pogii studiosissimis, qui me ridebant, accepta illius in te Invectiva, quod omnium scriptis tua preferebam, os compressisti. Triumpho ego inter illos et par pari, ut aiunt, refero; quod eos vehementissime mordet. Admirantur ingenium tuum et doctrinam et ex insanis sanissimos eos feci, adeo ut Laurentium semper in ore habeant.

Intention and Not Knowing the Self

Seneca, De Beneficiis 4.6

“What did I want? What have I gained from my good intention?” I gain even in torture; I gain the fire. Even if the fire consumes my limbs bit by bit and overcomes my whole body, even as my heart is filled up with good conscience yet still drips blood, it will be delighted by the flame whose light proves its pure intention.”

‘Quid mihi volui? Quid nunc mihi prodest bona voluntas?’” Prodest et in eculeo, prodest et in igne; qui si singulis membris admoveatur et paulatim vivum corpus circumeat, licet ipsum cor plenum bona conscientia stillet: placebit illi ignis, per quem bona fides conlucebit.

 

Seneca, De tranquilitate animi 15-16

“Although I should not give too much information, I am stalked by the weakness of good intention in all things. This worry, that I am slowly slipping behind or–what I fear more–that I am wavering like someone who is always just about to fall and may actually be much worse off than I can sense. We tend to look favorably upon our own affairs and this inclination impedes our judgment.

I imagine many people would have made it up that hill to wisdom if they had not already imagined they had already arrived, if they had not told themselves lies about their own character, as if they passed by everyone with eyes firmly shut. There’s no good reason to think that other people’s praise is more harmful to us than our own. Who is so daring as to tell themselves the truth?”

Ne singula diutius persequar, in omnibus rebus haec me sequitur bonae mentis infirmitas. Quin ne paulatim defluam vereor, aut quod est sollicitius, ne semper casuro similis pendeam et plus fortasse sit quam quod ipse pervideo; familiariter enim domestica aspicimus et semper iudicio favor officit.

Puto multos potuisse ad sapientiam pervenire, nisi putassent se pervenisse, nisi quaedam in se dissimulassent, quaedam opertis oculis transiluissent. Non est enim, quod magis aliena iudices adulatione nos perire quam nostra. Quis sibi verum dicere ausus est?

Know yourself – Youth between Vice and Vertu, attributed to Jacob Jordaens