INFORMATION TO USERS The most advanced technology has been used to photo­ graph and reproduce this manuscript from the microfilm master. UMI films the original text directly from the copy submitted. Thus, some dissertation copies are in typewriter face, while others may be from a computer printer. In the unlikely event that the author did not send UMI a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized copyrighted material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Oversize materials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are re­ produced by sectioning the original, beginning at the upper left-hand comer and continuing from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. Each oversize page is available as one exposure on a standard 35 mm slide or as a 17" x 23" black and white photographic print for an additional charge. Photographs included in the original manuscript have been reproduced xerographically in this copy. 35 mm slides or 6" x 9" black and white photographic prints are available for any photographs or illustrations appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to order. Accessing theUMI World’s Information since 1938 300 North Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 USA Order Number 8824587 A new interpretation of Juvenal HI Parmer, Jess Henry, Ph.D. The Ohio State University, 1988 UMI 300 N. Zeeb Rd. Ann Arbor, MI 48106 A NEW INTERPRETATION OF JUVENAL III DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of the Ohio State University By Jess Henry Parmer, B.A., M.A., M.F.A * * * * * The Ohio State University 1988 Dissertation Committee: Approved by C. C. Schlam M. P. O. Morford CLJ. 6 Adviser C. L. Babcock Department of Classics ACKNOWLEDGMENTS For Dr. Mark P. 0. Morford's kind encouragement, from the inception of this work, and for his patience as the writ­ ing drew to an end, I am obliged to an extent which gratitude on this page can only begin to repay. For guidance in the later stages of the research, I wish to express genuine ap­ preciation to Dr. Carl C. Schlam, for without his insights this work would have languished. I would here also like to thank the third member of my advisory committee, Dr. Charles L. Babcock, for his valuable and timely suggestions. VITA July 12, 1942 ............. Born - Poplar Bluff, Missouri 1967......... ............. B. A., The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 196 9 ......... ............. M. A., University of Illinois, Urbana, Illinois 197 0 ......... ............. M.F.A., Bowling Green State University, Bowling Green, Ohio 1986-1988 . ............. Instructor, Division of Communications and Humanities, Owens College, Toledo, Ohio Major Field: Classical Languages and Literature TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS.............................................. ii VITA.......................................................... iii LIST OF TABLES.................................................. v LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND SYMBOLS ........................... vi INTRODUCTION................................................ 1 CHAPTER PAGE I. THE BACKGROUND OF THE NEW INTERPRETATION OF JUVENAL I I I ....................................... 8 II. THE PERSONAE OF UMBRICIUS AND THE EGO .............. 70 III. THE CASE FOR A STRUCTURE OF JUVENAL III BASED ON WIT AND HUMOR .......................................109 IV. PERSONAE, TOLERANCE AND INTOLERANCE, AND HUMILIATION OF THE PAUPER ......................... 149 V. THE DEPERSONALIZATION OF THE VICTIM OF THESAEVA URBS................................................. 275 VI. CONCLUSIONS......................................... 330 BIBLIOGRAPHY 342 LIST OF TABLES TABLE PAGE 1. Adamietz's Structure of Satire III on Antithetical Principles.......................... 25 2. Parallel Structures of Juvenal III.21-57 and 58-125 ............................................ 77 3. The Fabellae of Juvenal III...................... 127 4. Parallel Structures of Horace Sermo II.6 and Juvenal III....................................... 278 v LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND SYMBOLS Ernout-Meillet............. Ernout, A. and A. Meillet. Dic- tionnaire Stymologique de la langue latine: Histoire des mots. 4th ed. Paris: Klinck- sieck, 1959. LSJ ........................ A Greek-English Lexicon. Comp. and ed. Henry George Liddell, Robert Scott, and Henry Stuart Jones. 9th ed. 1940. With a Supplement. Ed. E. A. Barber, et al. 1968. Oxford: Clarendon, 1978. OLD ........................ Oxford Latin Dictionary. Ed. P. G. W. Glave. Oxford: Clarendon, 1982. TLL ........................ Thesaurus Linguae Latinae. Leip­ zig: Teubner, 1900- //.......................... Indicate line-end when signifi­ cant for hiatus, closure, or end stopping. I .......................... Indicates cesura. INTRODUCTION This dissertation will present a new interpretation of Juvenal's third Satire. Few would argue that the time is not ripe for such an effort: two recent commentaries on Juvenal1 have provided close-up views of this work, but no assessment that embraces the several poetic systems within this large satire has yet appeared. Its size— 322 densely packed Silver Age Latin hexameters— itself presents a challenge to criti­ cism but, to its author, may have represented an opportunity for the unfolding of genuine talent. This dissertation holds that Juvenal is a major poet in his language but that inter­ pretation has not yet succeeded in demonstrating this for his third Satire. The premise of Juvenal's quality as a poet requires a new departure in criticism of the third Satire. This writer believes, above all, that the text— in this case, Clausen's corrected Oxford text of 1966— can demonstrate Juvenal's ar­ tistry if appropriately set in its intellectual context. Very little of this text remains in doubt, so that Satire III has, for over two decades, stood ready for systematic inter­ pretation. 1 The systems which I, in attempting this analysis of Ju­ venal's poetry in III, shall apply are clearly founded in Ro­ man satire and ancient rhetoric or are represented in some way in the work itself. No one, to my knowledge, has ever seriously argued that Juvenal was ignorant of rhetoric or of the Lucilian tradition in Roman satire. But it has been ar­ gued recently that Juvenal was unaware of persona criticism.2 Was he? Does a satire which employs the term persona in two theatrical contexts support such a theory or not? Surely it cannot— not in the flagship satire in an author's first book. Exploration of the idea that Umbricius and the ego of Juvenal III are satiric personae with some dramatic qualities is thus indicated. Chapter II below, where criticism involving these two personae is undertaken, also presents a poetic interpretation of the imagery in Satire III. Again, is this anachronistic? Hardly: importation of sense-imagery into prose fell under the rhetorical concept of enargeia, and it is difficult to conceive how this can be excluded from poetry, where it is much more at home than in prose. The imagistic interpretation offered in this disserta­ tion asserts that the tiny drama enacted between the ego and Umbricius depends on two insights connected with these perso­ nae. The ego is an instance of homo urbanus, with appropri­ ately sophisticated attitudes towards folly and vice, his as­ sociates, religious observance, and the attractions of the 3 city, including periodic vacations from it and the aspiration to writing poetry. Umbricius is a shade, recently dead but unaware of this, who acts as vates and proceeds to initiate the ego into the mysteries of poetry. Naturally, the imagery of death and threats of death found throughout Satire III contributes to these inferences; the imagery of initiation is virtually confined to the ego’s lines. Not only must satiric personae exhibit this imagistic or sensory configuration, just as Horace's ego must seem to travel to Brundisium, but they require a moral dimension, too. Chapter II argues that Umbricius's moral virtue is pu- dor, or his sense of self-restraint and of public decency. The word-family in root pud- appears a handful of times in key passages in which this moral topic either serves as a preface to brief exempla of vice or is itself developed in an anecdote. The ego's apparent lack of such a well-defined virtue marks him as an ingSnu and as the target of the strong impression to be made by the vates upon the initiate. The moral question put to the ego is an outgrowth of Umbricius's decision to leave Rome for good: are you truly ready to re­ sist any temptation in my bill of complaint? will Rome spoil you morally and as a poet? It strikes me that the other Sat­ ires in Book I are the answers. That such strong characterization can emerge at all from a text ostensibly devoted to the topic of the dilemma of the poor, honest native in the saeva urbs is a considerable testament to Juvenal's poetic powers. But he goes much fur­ ther than this, as the range of situations in the work sug­ gests and, more importantly, the satiric characterization of the ego requires. The comic typing of this persona proceeds almost entirely from his own mouth and places him, along with every other pauper, poet or not, in the position of replying to taunts and jibes, derision and mockery. He is De Decker's (1913) viva vox of satire who is constantly imagined as an­ swering questions and challenges throughout Umbricius's ser- mo. From this it may be deduced that there is a structure of pauses while the ego puzzles over his answers. Chapter III explores the rhetorical background of the wit and humor lead­ ing up to these pauses. This discussion shows that Juvenal employed a fabella resembling that developed early by Lucili- us and later used by Cicero in de Ora tore II as his principal vehicle of situational wit and humor. Cicero was inclined to trust situational comic forms far more than verbal, and he explains why: the fabella, as anecdote, possesses sufficient dramatic properties to fit it to many settings, and it can expand towards perpetuae facetiae, or continuous mirth.