The University of Chicago Roman
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO ROMAN DECLAMATION: BETWEEN CREATIVITY AND CONSTRAINTS A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE DIVISION OF THE HUMANITIES IN CANDIDACY FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY DEPARTMENT OF CLASSICS: CLASSICAL LANGUAGES AND LITERATURES BY JEREMY DAVID BRIGHTBILL CHICAGO, ILLINOIS DECEMBER 2015 TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Tables …………………………………………………………………………… iv Acknowledgments ……………………………………………………………………… v Introduction …………………………………………………………………………….. 1 I. What declamation accomplished 3 II. Texts and evidence 14 III. The argument of this dissertation 16 Excursus: The terminology of declamation 24 Chapter 1. Imbalanced controversia themes and moral reasoning …………………. 27 I. The nature of the imbalances: law, fairness, and audience sympathy 28 II. For and against public perception: narratives of the sacerdos prostituta 33 III. Conflicting sympathy and legal facts: an laesa sit res publica? 49 IV. Confused speakers, confused audiences: the father’s vitae necisque potestas 62 V. Conclusion 70 Chapter 2. Constraining and directing creativity …………………………………….. 73 I. Grammatical study and its social significance 77 II. Some rules were made to be broken 83 III. The ideal declamation performance 116 IV. Conclusion 122 Chapter 3. Intersections of fictionality and factuality in declamation …………….. 125 I. Plausibility and the events of the theme 128 II. Applying historical exempla to implausible fictional cases 143 III. Contesting or not contesting history through declamation 158 IV. Conclusion 166 ii Chapter 4. Legal interpretation in declamation …………………………………….. 169 I. Family cases in declamation 173 II. Legal interpretation in Roman jurisprudence 178 III. The lawgiver’s intention and the mythic past 184 IV. Fairness, utility, and legal fictions 191 V. Conclusion 201 Conclusion ……………………………………………………………………………. 205 Appendix A: Imbalanced themes 211 Appendix B: Constraints on creativity 232 Appendix C: Selected passages on letter vs. intent 236 Bibliography ………………………………………………………………………….. 241 iii LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Imbalanced themes ………………………………………………………… 211 iv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS For a project of this nature, the debts to acknowledge are innumerable. I will start with the members of my committee: Shadi Bartsch-Zimmer (chair), Michèle Lowrie, and Peter White. Many of the key insights of this dissertation arose out of conversations with them, and the presentation became much clearer as a result of their patient feedback and criticism. Thanks also to Cliff Ando, who though not on the committee gave input on Chapter 4. Next, I am thankful to the entire University of Chicago Classics Department for the collegial scholarly environment that they provided. In particular, I am grateful for the generous financial support of the department through research fellowships provided at key times. Thanks to Kathy Fox for incalculable assistance in all the practical matters that are involved in completing a graduate degree. One of the greatest benefits I received from the Classics Department was the chance to teach numerous undergraduate language classes. Thanks to Helma Dik for the key role that she has played in coordinating these classes, and for invaluable tips on pedagogy. I am also thankful to all my students who asked good questions or misunderstood Latin in interesting ways, and thus helped me to understand the language better myself. But for my own Latin knowledge, I owe the greatest thanks to Harm Pinkster, who provided the opportunity to work as a research assistant since 2009, and also offered frequent encouragement on my own projects. Other debts go much farther back. I am thankful to my parents, who first introduced me to foreign languages and encouraged me to read books and be inquisitive, and to my brother and sisters (and their spouses) for their support over the years. Thanks to my former colleagues in SIL International, and all the many fine people I met during four years in South Asia; those experiences gave me a much broader perspective on language and culture. Most importantly of all, thanks to my wife Alex, for her love and patience in helping “our dissertation” to get done. v INTRODUCTION Declamation in ancient Rome was a rhetorical exercise through which young men gained facility at public speaking. It was a fundamentally creative activity, but at the same time subject to constraints that channeled this creativity in particular directions. This dissertation studies how the themata (“themes,” or fictional legal scenarios) of Roman declamations invited different types of responses – argumentative, narrative, emotional, character-driven, utilitarian, and so forth – from the speaker. The combination of creativity and constraints provided training in moral reasoning and social valuation in addition to practical skills for courtroom advocacy. Many puzzling features of the genre make sense when compared with other Roman discursive practices, such as the use of historical exempla (“examples”) in ethical decision making, the assertion of control in literary translations of Greek texts, and the use of legal fictions in jurisprudence. Students began declaiming during the final phase of the education process, which consisted of study with a rhetorician.1 The previous two stages were led by a praeceptor or magister, who taught basic reading and arithmetic, and a grammaticus, who covered poetry and simple composition exercises known as progymnasmata. The vast majority of non-elite children in the Roman world never 1 Comprehensive accounts of the ancient education system are Stanley F. Bonner, Education in Ancient Rome: From the Elder Cato to the Younger Pliny (Berkeley, 1977) and Raffaella Cribiore, Gymnastics of the Mind: Greek Education in Hellenistic and Roman Egypt (Princeton, 2001). Also valuable is F. H. Colson, ed., M. Fabii Quintilani Institutionis Oratoriae Liber I (Cambridge, 1924) for its detailed commentary on Quintilian’s discussion of Roman education. 1 advanced to the rhetorical stage. For those students who did reach it, beginning around age 12 or 15, activity centered on the declaiming of two types of exercises.2 In the first, known as a suasoria, the student gave advice to a historical or mythological character faced with some choice. The second, known as a controversia – the focus of this dissertation – was considered more advanced: the student was presented with a fictional legal controversy and had to make a court speech on behalf of either the prosecution/plaintiff or the defense. Observers since antiquity have been struck by the improbable and fantastic nature of these controversia themes. Here are two typical examples, each beginning with a fictional law or laws, and then stating a series of events leading to a legal conflict: LIBERI PARENTES ALANT AUT VINCIANTUR. Quidam alterum fratrem tyrannum occidit, alterum in adulterio deprehensum deprecante patre interfecit. A piratis captus scripsit patri de redemptione. Pater piratis epistulam scripsit: si praecidissent manus, duplam se daturum. Piratae illum dimiserunt. Patrem egentem non alit (Sen. Con. 1.7).3 QUO QUIS LOCO FULMINE ICTUS FUERIT, EODEM SEPELIATUR. TYRANNI CORPUS EXTRA FINES ABICIATUR. Tyrannus in foro fulminatus est. Quaeritur an eodem loco sepeliatur ([Quint.] 274).4 Students were expected to compose their speeches in writing, applying standard principles of rhetorical theory. They then memorized and rehearsed them, and finally presented them before the entire class and the rhetorician. It appears that many or all the students declaimed the same themes, though not necessarily on the same occasion. The atmosphere was often raucous and competitive. The rhetorician would critique the students’ performances and sometimes deliver model speeches of 2 A good general account of declamation is Stanley F. Bonner, Roman Declamation in the Late Republic and Early Empire (Berkeley, 1949). 3 “CHILDREN MUST SUPPORT THEIR PARENTS OR BE IMPRISONED. A man killed one of his brothers, a tyrant; he caught the other in adultery and killed him in spite of their father’s pleas. He was captured by pirates and wrote to his father requesting a ransom. The father wrote back to the pirates and said he would pay double if they cut off his hands. The pirates released him. Now the father is destitute and the son is not supporting him.” (Translations in this dissertation are my own except where otherwise noted.) 4 “IN WHATEVER PLACE A PERSON IS STRUCK BY LIGHTNING, IN THE SAME HE MUST BE BURIED. THE BODY OF A TYRANT MUST BE CAST AWAY OUTSIDE THE BOUNDARIES. A tyrant was struck by lightning in the forum. It is inquired whether he must be buried in the same place.” 2 his own.5 Ancient critics claimed that the atmosphere of the rhetoric classroom encouraged empty bombast, a striving after applause and effect rather than substance.6 It is certain that throughout this time period, there was in increasing appetite for sententiae: pointed phrases that contained ironic juxtapositions or striking collocations of words or ideas. Not only are the themes themselves sensational, but in the resulting speeches, we see the most vivid possible descriptions of these unbelievable scenes: tyranny, torture, dismemberment, pirates, storms at sea, evil stepmothers, and raped virgins. Perhaps most disturbingly for modern popular conceptions of the Romans, declamation continued to be practiced by adult elites, and performances were even held in the court of the emperor Augustus.7 I. What declamation accomplished In view of its sensational nature, it would be tempting to dismiss declamation