Joseph A. Howley
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by St Andrews Research Repository Intellectual Narratives and Elite Roman Learning in the Noctes Atticae of Aulus Gellius Joseph A. Howley A thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy at the University of St Andrews June 2011 Declaration I, Joseph Howley, hereby certify that this thesis, which is approximately 80,000 words in length, has been written by me, that it is the record of work carried out by me and that it has not been submitted in any previous application for a higher degree. I was admitted as a research student in October 2007 and as a candidate for the degree of PhD in October 2008; the higher study for which this is a record was carried out in the University of St Andrews between 2007 and 2011. Name: Joseph Howley Signature:.............................. Date: .............. I hereby certify that the candidate has fulfilled the conditions of the Resolution and Regulations appropriate for the degree of PhD in the University of St Andrews and that the candidate is qualified to submit this thesis in application for that degree. Name: Jason K¨onig Signature:.............................. Date: .............. i In submitting this thesis to the University of St Andrews I understand that I am giving permission for it to be made available for use in accordance with the regulations of the University Library for the time being in force, subject to any copyright vested in the work not being affected thereby. I also understand that the title and the abstract will be published, and that a copy of the work may be made and supplied to any bona fide library or research worker, that my thesis will be electronically accessible for personal or research use unless exempt by award of an embargo as requested below, and that the library has the right to migrate my thesis into new electronic forms as required to ensure continued access to the thesis. I have obtained any third-party copyright permissions that may be required in order to allow such access and migration, or have requested the appropriate embargo below. The following is an agreed request by candidate and supervisor regarding the electronic publication of this thesis: (ii) Access to all of printed copy but embargo of all electronic publication of thesis for a period of 5 years (maximum five) on the following ground(s): publication would preclude future publication Signature of candidate:.............................. Date: .............. Signature of supervisor:.............................. Date: .............. ii Abstract This thesis offers a new interpretation of the literary techniques of the Noctes At- ticae, a second-century Latin miscellaneous work by Aulus Gellius, with new readings of various passages. It takes as its main subject the various ways in which Gellius nar- rates and otherwise represents mental and intellectual activity. It proposes a typology for these representations in Chapter One, the Introduction. Chapter Two examines the \dialogic" scenes, which relate the conversations of characters, in the context of the history of dialogic writing. It argues that Gellius's unique approach to relating conversation, besides revealing specific concerns about each stage of ancient education, encourages readers to develop strategies for imagining and reconstructing the intellec- tual character and lifestyle that lie behind an individual's speech | in short, to see every instance of conversation as a glimpse at others' mental quality. Chapter Three of the thesis examines Gellius's narrative accounts of his own reading experiences, a body of ancient evidence unparalleled in both substance and detail. Focusing on his de- pictions of reading Pliny the Elder, it shows the way Gellius, in the traditionally public contexts of ancient reading, seeks to invent a performative space in the privacy of the reader's mind. Chapter Four explores Gellius's essays and notes which, despite lack- ing clear narrative frameworks, nonetheless share common themes with the rest of the Noctes, and can be understood as representations of the mental activity and standards that Gellius associates with his contemporaries' relationship to the past. The Con- clusion points the way for further applications of the thesis's conclusions in Imperial intellectual culture and beyond. This thesis suggests a new approach for examining depictions of the acquisition, evaluation and use of knowledge in the Imperial period, and contributes to the ongoing scholarly discussion about the reading of miscellaneous literature. iii This thesis would not have come to be without the capable, insightful and eternally patient supervision of Jason K¨onigand Jill Harries. It originated in a conversation with Prof. Harries and Christopher Smith during M. Litt. studies under Prof. Harries, Greg Woolf, and Dr. K¨onig. It has been shaped by the positive influences and helpful interventions of the entire faculty of St Andrews, 2006-2011, including Ralph Anderson, Jon Coulston, Harry Hine, Sian Lewis, Alex Long, Katerina Oikonomopoulou, and Roger Rees. I was launched on my journey there by many remarkable and generous teachers and advisors, including Christopher Lloyd and Joseph Lynch at Montgomery Blair High School; Christopher Corbett, Jay Freyman, Marilyn Goldberg, Carolyn Koehler, Nancy Miller, Walt Sherwin, and Rudy Storch at UMBC; and Catherine Steel at the University of Glasgow. For their keen questions and suggestions, I am also indebted to my examiners, William Fitzgerald and Greg Woolf. Chief among the contubernales in whose company the long and peculiar path of postgradu- ate study was more easily and pleasantly journeyed are Adam Bunni, Gwynaeth McIntyre, Jamie McIntyre, Daniel Mintz, Dan Lucas, Hannah Swithinbank, Amos van Die, Matthijs Wibier, and Katie Wilson. I could not have asked for better postgraduate colleagues than those at St Andrews, to whom, for their willingness to share their own work and read or listen to mine, as well as their generally positive and collegiate attitudes and overall moral support, I am greatly indebted. I am likewise grateful to postgraduate colleagues in exilio: Francis DiTraglia, Georg Gerleigner, Johanna Hanink, and Emily Kneebone. Helpful observations, patient reading, shared work, and important insights at critical junc- tions were provided by Aude Doody, Marcus Folch, Rebecca Langlands, Eugenia Lao, Pauline LeVen, Karen N´ıMheallaigh, Katerina Oikonomopoulou, Dennis Pausch, Steven Smith, Phil- lip van der Eijk, and Jim Zetzel. Contra Gellius Pr. 18, any errors that remain in spite of the generous assistance of all those named here (and any neglected) are my own. In pecuniary and logistical terms, this thesis could not have been written without the support, first and foremost, of the University of St Andrews and the School of Classics. Other support for travel and invitations to speak, allowed me to share and improve upon key sections of the thesis; these came from the Thomas Wiedemann Memorial Fund; Classics or History departments at Reading, King's College London, Syddansk Universitet in Odense, and Columbia University; the Classical Association of Great Britain, the Cambridge Classics GIS; and the TOPOI Excellence Cluster in Berlin. The rolling and unrolling of books was possible thanks to hard-working librarians in St Andrews, Cambridge, and Harvard. The writing and rewriting of words was lubricated with caffeine provided by the gracious staff of cafes in St Andrews (Zest on South St) and Cambridge (the Christ's Lane Starbucks). What sanity and solvency remain to me at the end of the process is due to the loving support of my family: John and Nora Howley, Malka Howley, Enrique Lerdau, Bill and Lorie Howley, Isaac Howley, Jacob Howley and Maria Paoletti, and Bonnie Gordon and Manuel Lerdau. The sine qua non of the whole business, and indeed of myself, is Skylar Neil, who keeps my head above water. This thesis is dedicated to the memory of Louise P. Lerdau (February 2, 1927 | December 2, 1998), who taught me to hold on to that which otherwise seemed useless, to take things apart and put them back together, and to keep asking questions. iv Contents Declaration i Abstract iii Acknowledgements iv 1 Introduction: approaching Gellius 4 1.1 Staging mental activity in the Noctes Atticae ............... 4 1.1.1 Text and context . 4 1.1.2 Characterising the text . 8 1.1.3 Relevant anachronisms . 11 1.2 Prior approaches: scholar to satirist . 14 1.2.1 Gellius (as) scholarship . 14 1.2.2 Satire, sophistication and society . 18 1.3 Structure of the text . 21 1.3.1 Preface: models of learning from text . 21 1.3.2 Table of contents: Seek and find . 23 1.3.3 Articles: a typology of Gellian intellectual narrative . 24 2 Scenes of learning and learnedness 27 2.1 Introduction: Understanding dialogue, interpreting speech . 27 2.1.1 Dialogic scenes in the Noctes Atticae . 27 2.1.2 Trends in Imperial dialogue . 30 2.1.3 Reading minds in Gellius . 39 2.1.4 Fable and communication . 43 2.1.5 The uses of discourse . 47 2.1.6 Educational autobiography . 51 2.2 The grammarian's reading: adolescent poses & the questioning of authority 53 1 2.2.1 Grammatici on hand in elite learning . 53 2.2.2 Learning about grammarians firsthand (6.17) . 56 2.2.3 Finding the (limits of the) right grammarian . 58 2.3 The rhetorician's speech: interests and knowledge on display . 60 2.3.1 What makes a rhetor ........................ 60 2.3.2 Julianus and the adulescens (9.15) . 64 2.4 The philosopher's thought: discursive modes in Athens and Rome . 69 2.4.1 Episodic dialogue and the fractured narrative of learning . 69 2.4.2 Philosophy at Athens . 70 2.4.3 A philosopher at Rome . 77 2.5 Experts in dialogue . 86 2.6 Conclusion: stakes and strategies of learning and learnedness .