©2014 Sergio Yona THE PSYCHOLOGY OF SATIRE: EPICUREAN ETHICS IN HORACE’S SERMONES BY SERGIO YONA DISSERTATION Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Classical Philology in the Graduate College of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 2014 Urbana, Illinois Doctoral Committee: Professor Ariana Traill, Chair Professor Antony Augoustakis, Director of Research Professor Kirk Sanders Professor Kirk Freudenburg, Yale University ABSTRACT This study examines the role of Greek philosophy, specifically the ethical doctrines of the Epicurean sect, in Horace’s satiric poetry. It endeavors to highlight the important influence of one of Horace’s contemporaries and neighbor in Italy, the Epicurean philosopher and poet Philodemus of Gadara. This is done through considerations of Horace’s self-portrayal as a qualified moralist who meets Epicurean standards and employs their tools of investigation and correction. A large portion of the study is dedicated to the manner in which he incorporates Epicurean economic and social teachings as communicated and preserved by Philodemus, and to explaining the significance of this for his literary persona in the Sermones. ii For Angela, sine qua non iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to acknowledge in a special way the support and advice offered to me by my adviser, Antony Augoustakis, who read numerous revisions of this paper and provided important guidance throughout. Many thanks also to the members of my committee, Ariana Traill, Kirk Sanders and Kirk Freudenburg, whose insights and suggestions at the outset (as well as at the end) of this project were extremely helpful, and to David Armstrong, who kindly shared some of his forthcoming work on Horace with me. Thanks to the University of Illinois Graduate College for awarding me a Dissertation Completion Fellowship, thus providing me with the financial means necessary to finish the project. Finally, I would like to acknowledge the invaluable support of my amazing wife Angela and the inspiration provided by our five children, whose refreshing cheerfulness and simplicity are a greater comfort and source of wisdom than all the books in the world. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION………………………………………………………………………………...1 CHAPTER 1: EPICUREAN ASPECTS OF HORACE’S UPBRINGING..……………………24 CHAPTER 2: EPICUREAN ECONOMIC THEORY IN SERMONES 1……………………….61 CHAPTER 3: EPICUREAN ECONOMIC THEORY IN SERMONES 2………………….......106 CHAPTER 4: FLATTERY AND FRANKNESS IN SERMONES 1……………………..........151 CHAPTER 5: FLATTERY AND FRANKNESS IN SERMONES 2…………………..............204 CONCLUSION…………………………………………………………………………………243 BIBLIOGRAPHY………………………………………………………………………………246 v INTRODUCTION Horace, in describing the unreservedness of his predecessor Lucilius, notes that he “entrusted his secrets to his books as if they were faithful companions” (2.1.30-1: ille velut fidis arcana sodalibus olim | credebat libris), with the result that “the old poet’s whole life is open to view, as if painted on a votive tablet” (ibid. 32-3: quo fit, ut omnis | votiva pateat veluti descripta tabella vita senis).1 The self-revelatory expression of one’s inner thoughts and convictions, which is at the heart of Roman satire,2 continues in Horace’s Sermones but with one important shift regarding intention: whereas the revelation of Lucilius’ character and disposition is a byproduct (32: quo fit, ut . .) of his frank criticism of contemporary society, Horatian satire is consciously introspective and, as such, revolves almost entirely around the poet’s reflections—whether explicit or made through implied contrast—concerning the development and presentation of his own persona. This persona, which is informed by and responds to various literary traditions,3 is anything but simple, and it would be nearly impossible (if not rather misguided) to attempt to confine Horace to any one of these influences. At the same time, however, it is possible to identify certain themes that, as will be shown in the following chapters, nearly pervade the 1All passages of Horace are from the 1970 edition of Friedrich Klingner, and all translations are taken from H. R. Fairclough’s 1991 revised Loeb text with minor alterations. Citations of the Sermones will henceforth be given by book, poem and line number(s), e.g., 1.2.1-3. 2Philippson (1911) 77 points to this very parallel between Horace and Lucilius at the outset of his study. Cf. Lejay (1915) xxxiii: “Le fond des Satires et des Épîtres est identique. Horace en est le principal sujet.” Both scholars, however, tend to interpret Horace’s self- portrayal as genuine autobiography, whereas I view it as the expression of an artistic and literary persona. 3The best examination of the confluence of various literary, stylistic and philosophical aspects of the Sermones is still that of Freudenburg (1993). 1 Sermones and therefore provide overall unity, such as the poet’s moral purity, his relationship with Maecenas, his attitude regarding wealth, his place in society and the correct approach to applying criticism. One will immediately recognize that all of these easily fall within the realm of ethics, which is not surprising given that Horace is often distinguished from other satirists by his significant concern with moral correction.4 Insofar as the Sermones are largely introspective and deal with ethical issues, therefore, one may be justified in speaking of the “psychology of satire” with respect to Horace’s critical examinations, which are about his own mental health (ψυχή; cf. 1.4.128-29: teneros animos . ego sanus) as considered through prolonged and repeated conversations (λόγοι; cf. 1.4.48: sermo merus). Although his informal, and, especially in Book 2, dialectical style has been linked to that of Plato,5 most commentators recognize the predominant role of Hellenistic ethics in Horatian satire.6 By highlighting the role of Epicurean ethics in the Sermones, this study aims to show how Horace shows consistency in developing a persona that is not only concerned with “saving face,” as Ellen Oliensis argues (1998), but with positively justifying his moral purity and defending his place in society, and that he accomplishes this largely within the framework of Philodemus of Gadara’s economic and social teachings, which would have been familiar to his closed-circuit audience of intimate friends and acquaintances.7 4Philippson (1911) 77 makes a vivid observation regarding Horace’s portrayal of himself (emphasis mine): “Und die Lebensanschauung, die er zur Darstellung bringt, ist getränkt mit Gedanken, die er der griechischen Philosophie, vor allem der epikureischen entnommen hat.” 5Anderson (1982) 41-9. 6See, e.g., Kiessling-Heinze (1910) xv-xix, Lejay (1915) xxxiv-xxxv, Muecke (1993) 6-8 and Gowers (2012) 20-1. 7Although I recognize that my views regarding the poet’s moral concerns likely reflect something about the historical Horace, I intend to apply them exclusively to one aspect of his 2 One finds a complex blend of ethical doctrines in the Sermones, although, in addition to expressing more general views such as Aristotle’s extremely influential concept of the virtuous mean (cf. 1.1.106: est modus in rebus), Horace also engages with the more specific teachings of other philosophical schools.8 These include various ethical paradoxes of the Stoics attributed to Chrysippus (expressed in 1.3, 2.3 and 2.7), the importance of decorum and consistency as emphasized by Panaetius (1.3.9: nil aequale; cf. 2.3.307-13 and 2.7.22-42), and, perhaps most prominent of all, Epicurus’ insistence on the withdrawal from public affairs (1.6.18: a volgo longe longeque remotos), the importance of meager fare (2.2.1: vivere parvo) and his doctrine concerning the pleasure calculus (1.2.77-9). As mentioned above, it is the purpose of the following investigation to enhance this appreciation of Horace’s engagement with Hellenistic philosophy by considering the influence of Philodemus’ ethical views, specifically as they pertain to the administration of wealth, the problem of flattery and the therapeutic application of frank criticism. There are various reasons for investigating such a connection, which, aside from a recent article dealing very briefly with Philodemus’ observations concerning flattery in the Sermones,9 has been completely overlooked in modern scholarship. One of the justifying literary persona, namely, that of self-revealing and self-justifying moralist. In this sense, I agree with Freudenburg (2010) 271, who, as part of a tradition beginning with Alvin Kernan (1959), regards any autobiographical details “not as documentary evidence for who [Horace] was, but as the first moves of a back-and-forth game played between reader and writer.” On the other hand, while I think persona theory has undoubtedly contributed to a more sophisticated (or at least less naïve) understanding of the Sermones, I maintain that, in addition to playing various roles and wearing different masks, Horace presents his audience with a persona that is consistently engaged with Epicurean ethics throughout the entire collection. This consistency may communicate something about the poet’s own convictions or idealisms, and I would align my reading of Horace with that of Suzanne Sharland (2009b), who posits the predominant role of a “second self,” which is the “overriding persona who is there in a sense throughout the Satires” (63). 8Mayer (2005a) 141-44. 3 reasons for this study is purely historical: not only was Philodemus a contemporary of Horace as well as his Italian neighbor to the south of Rome, but he was also familiar and even on demonstrably friendly terms with the poet’s intimate friends Plotius, Varius and Vergil (cf. 1.10.81: Plotius et Varius . Vergiliusque).10 It is highly likely, therefore, especially given Horace’s playful fondness for Epicureanism (cf. Ep. 1.4.15-16: me . Epicuri de grege porcum),11 that, in addition to being familiar with Philodemus’ poetry (cf. 1.2.121: Philodemus ait), he would likewise have been familiar with, and, as I will argue, rather partial to his philosophical insights.