Societe d’Etudes Latines de Bruxelles

Petronius, Philo and Stoic Rhetoric

Author(s): E. J. Barnes
Source: Latomus, T. 32, Fasc. 4 (OCTOBRE-DÉCEMBRE 1973), pp. 787-798
Published by: Societe d’Etudes Latines de Bruxelles
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/41529524 .
Accessed: 18/06/2014 12:48

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Societe d’Etudes Latines de Bruxelles is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
Latomus.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 62.122.76.45 on Wed, 18 Jun 2014 12:49:00 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 Petronius, Philo and Stoic Rhetoric

In 1932, A. D. Nock firstdrewattentionto a possible relationshipbet-

ween Sat. 1-2 and Philo. In a reviewof the Colson-Whittaker editionof
Philo's De Plantationehe wrote,"De plantatione156 occursin an excursus
whichbears unmistakeablesigns of havingbeen copied fromsome Greek
source of a more or less popular philosophicaltype ... Both [Philo and
Petronius]are using a commonplace,knownto us also fromPseudo-Lon-
ginus, Seneca Ep. 114, and Persius 1. This use of an earliersource", he
goes on, "explains whyPetroniusspeaks of the infectionof Athensby the
Asiaticstyle,a reproachhardlyto the pointafterthe timeof Augustus,for
theAsiaticstyleis hardlyheardof later.It shouldfurther be remarkedthat
Petronius is not wholly serious( 0. Rhetorical absurditiesand moral
theories of degenerationare equally a matterof amusementto him.
Agamemnon'sremark,sermonemhabes non publici saporis, and the un-
dignifiedendingof thescene,and the returnto thethemein 8*8(again with
a bad reception),indicatethat here,as in the tiradeon luxuryin 55, we
have a caricatureof the serious and philosophicpoint of view. Perhaps
Petroniushad Seneca in mind(2)'' With regardto this last suggestion,he
pointsout the use of adflaturin Ep. 114. 3 and PetroniusSat. 2. 7 (3).
The pertinent passage in Philo is foundin a contextconcerningopinions
on why wise men get drunk; there is regretfor the Good Old Days.
Longinus(44) cites "a recentphilosopher",who says thingsare not what

(1) Cf.G.Bagnani, ArbiterofElegance {Phoenix

suppl. vol.2 ; Toronto 1954)4,n.8 : "Asalutary
warningthatonemust nottake anystatement ofPetroniustooseriously hadbeenissued byA.D. Nock
etc".However,commentators still
ignore theprincipleinthiscontext : E. Cizek, Autourdela datedu
dePétrone
Satyricon inStudii clasice7 (1966)203; P. Veyne, Le 'je' dansleSatiricon inREL42
(1964)308,n.6 ; J.P.Sullivan, TheSatyricon ofPetronius: ALiterary Study (London 1968)171;
notso P. George, andCharacter
Style intheSatyricon inArion 5 (1966)351-356.
(2) CR46 (1932)173.
(3) Seneca: ingenium
... ilio(sc.animo hocquoque
) uitiato, adflatur. Petronius: nuperuentosa
istaec
etenormis ...ánimos
loquacitas iuuenum admagna surgentes ...adflauit. (Itshouldbenotedthat
at thebeginning ofhisletterSeneca hadalready written utaliquando inflataexplicatio
uigeret.)
's metaphor
Petronius ismore vividbecause ofhisuseofuentosa, which may byitself
betheexplanation
ofadflauit
, ratherthananyremembrance ofSeneca,though thelatter cannot bedenied Nock
outright
finishes
bycomparing Sat.55 with Epist.114.9 ; heapparently is referringtothepoemwhich
Trimalchioseems tobeaccrediting toPublilius Syrus.

This content downloaded from 62.122.76.45 on Wed, 18 Jun 2014 12:49:00 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
788 E. J. BARNES

theywere.Seneca (114. 11) also offersan explanationforthecontemporary

degeneracyof eloquenceand morals.In his firstpoem, Persiuslamentsthe
death of a great language: over its grave he mocks(39-40) thatyou can
almost hear the violets growing.
I shall begin by illustratingNock's opinion througha word-for-word
comparisonof passages fromPhilo and Petronius; instructive parallelsfrom
Longinus,Seneca, and otherswill be includedin footnotesalong theway. It
will thenbe possible to evaluateNock's suggestionwithsome awarenessof
fact,and to attempta more definitiveanswer to what we may call "the
Philo question".
The readermay be astonishedto learn that it is possible to isolate no
fewerthan six themes by which the two authors develop theirsimilar
viewpoint.Each themewill firstbe named; thena parallelverticalpairing
of quotationswill be givenin illustration,
Philo on theleftand Petroniuson
the right.
Theme One : Currentdisregardfor the past, includingthe experienceand
methodof the older writers,who are regardedas "better" yet slighted(4).
... (bç ókíyovçeivai navxánaaivéxa- - Nam nisi dixerint
quae
тégoiç, ëçyoïç те xal Xóyoiç
, à g- adul esce ntul i probe nt, ut ait
Хаю xçónov ÇrjXáioecoí ê- 0cew so/j/„scolls re/inquentur (3.
Q&VT<iç(158). 2)(6)
("With the resultthatthereare very - Nunc ... quod turpiusest, quod
few indeed who eitherin deeds or quisque <puer> perperamdidicit,in
in writing,take delight in those senectuteconfitennon uult (4. 4).
things of which men of old were
fond") (5)
(4) PlatoLaws700-701 173c; G.M.A.Grube,
; cf.Theaetetus Plato'sThought (1935,repr. 1958)
200.CiceroDeOrat. 1. 12.52; ProCaelio17.40and41; Brutus 81.280.Longinus 44.l*ooavrr¡
Xáymv xoGfiixrjrtçèjié%ei ròvßiovòtpogía ("Aworld-wide ofutterance
sterility hascome upon
ourlife");44.2r¡Òrjjuoxgatia tôjvjLieyáÀow àyadr) Ttdrjvóç, fff*6vy ox&àòv xal awr¡xfiaaav
oi negtÀóyovç ôeivolxal owcméQavovC Democracy isa goodfoster-mother ofgreatness -.great
speakers when
flourished sheflourishedanddiedwith her"); onthedateofLonginus andhispossible
place inAugustan seeG.P.Goold,
letters AGreek ProfessorialCircleatRome inТАРА 92( 1961) 168-
178,189-192. SenecaControversiae 1 Prooem. 1; ibid.6 ; Hid.8 ; 10Prooem. 6 ; ibid.7. Seneca
Epist. 114.1; 10; 12(although Seneca'sEpist.97seems totake theopposite view tothatofthelast-
named passage:today is noworse thanyesterday). Persius 1. 61-62;69-71.
(5) CiceroTusc. Disp.5.47qualis autem homo ipseesset,talem eiusesseorationem; oration
i autem
facta similia,
factisuitam ("Asa manhimself is,so is hisstyleofspeech : moreover deedsresemble
speech, andliferesembles deeds").So SenecaEpist. 114.2 quemadmodum autem uniuscuiusque actio
dicentisimilis
est,sicgenus dicendialiquandoimitaturpúblicosmores ("Why, inthemanner hisactions
aresimilartohiswords inthecaseofevery human being,soatthepublic level tooattimes thestyle of
speech betraysthecharacter").
(6) Becauseoflackoffeethey would : cf.Sat.14.2quidfaciant
starve leges, ubisolapecunia regnati
("What may rulesavailwhere money aloneisqueen?") andPropertius 3. 7 ergo tucausa,
sollicitae

This content downloaded from 62.122.76.45 on Wed, 18 Jun 2014 12:49:00 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 PHILO,ANDSTOICRHETORIC
PETRONIUS, 789

Theme Two : Substitutionof new mannersthat can only be describedas

shallow noveltiesor fads, whose origin is simply the scramblingafter
newness,oddity,mutual indulgence,point(7).

... ttogdqriow olôova, jC xa- - ••• et rerum tumore et

X^Síaç áyayávreç xal хоф <pv- uanissitno Strepitìi(1. 2).
ri
otf/ta fiárov ¿яа/povreç - ... orationon est ...
(157).("They turgida (2.
debase language into a bloated 6).
misgrowth of disease to which they - ... uentosa istaec et enormis
give a seemingloftinessand gran- loquacitas ... ánimos iuuenum ...
deur by empty puffing and adflauit (2.7).
blowing".) - crudaadhuc studia inforumim-
pellunt (4. 2) (8).

ThemeThree: Throughthisnovelty,thefeedingof a lasciviouspassion for

; the vigourof mendeteriorated
extravagance intoeffeminatesimpering(9).
tdç éí яQáÇeiçènmvêoecaç xal <ntov-effecistis Ut corpus orationis
eneruaretur (2. 2). (Cf. uses of
ôijç ctfíaçxal avzáç (âç ínoç ebceïv)
âqqevaç ¿SedtfXvvav aia• neruUS in PetroniuS to mean
XQàç dvríxaX&v ¿çyaÇópevoi(158).membrum Uirile: 129. 8; 131.
("Deeds deservingpraise and en- [6; 134. 1.)

pecunia, uitaeM ... / tuuitiishominum crudeIia pabulapraebes; I ... I ancora teteneat,quem non
tenuere penatesi ("Soareyou, Cash,thereason fora harriedlife!Itisyou, through thevicesofmen,
whooffer them bitter sops.Cananyweight holdyoudown whom moral opinion cannotrestrain?").
Throughout theSatyricon penuryisdreaded bythepoor, andwealth criticizedbythewell-to-do. Here is
a socialfoible laughed at byPetroniusthrough caricature.
(7) ISOCRATES Against 2-8; Antidosis
theSophists 261; thepositive sideofthis negative
approach is
given inNicocles 5-9; Antidosis254; Panegyricus 8. PlatoLaws657; 660.CiceroBrutus 11.42;
Orator 9. 32. Demetrius OnStyle38; 245; 186(on affectation or"préciosité", xaxó£r¡Áov).
Longinus 44.3 ; 44. 11; alsovery pointedbutnotin44 are: "Writers slipinto puerility
through a
desire tobe unusual, elaborate,and,aboveall,pleasing. Theyrunaground ontawdriness andaf-
fectation" (3) and"Thedesire fornovelconceits,thechief maniaofourtime" (5); cf.alsoS. F. Bon-
ner,Roman Declamation intheLateRepublicandEarly Empire (Liverpool 1949)33ff. SenecaControv. 1
Prooem. 8 ; 10Prooem. 6. SenecaEpist.114.2 ; 10; 18; 21.Persius 1.38-40; 48-49.HoraceA.P.
416-418.
(8) Cf.Tacitus Dialogus 26negue enimoratorius immo
iste, hercule neuirilis quidem cultusest,quo
plerique temporum nostrorum actores
itautuntur,utlasciuiauerborum etleuitate sententiarumetlicentia
compositionis histrionalesmodos exprimant("Noristhis fellowanorator atheart, oreven a man for that
matter, whom attimes theperformersofourdaysousethat they produce a dramatist'sstylethrough
theirseductiveness ofdiction, their ofthought,
frivolity andtheir abandonment ofform").
(9) Isocrates Helen1-13 ; heconsidered anavoidance ofserious themes as a declaration
ofone's
ownweakness; in PlatoSymp. 177bthere is sucha dissertation on thetheme "Salt",while in
Aristotle Rhet. 2.24.2 wefind oneonthetheme "Mice". PlatoLaws 655.Pacuvius (inWar-
Niptra
mington Remains II, page266,number 269)lenitudo mollitudo
orationis, corporis("Agentleness of
speech anda softness ofbody" : Ulysses'
nursedescribing him?).CiceroDeOrat.. 1.54.231; Orator

This content downloaded from 62.122.76.45 on Wed, 18 Jun 2014 12:49:00 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 790 E. J. BARNES

thusiasm and even, so to speak,

masculinethey have effeminized to
make shamefulby performing them
against what is noble")
ToiyaQovvел' exeivmv noir¡- - leuibus enim
atque inanibus
ral xal koyoygáyoi xal öooi лeoi rà рли;1) /f ... . ,
^ : еолоуоа^ор
*93 ¡Aovoixrjç
алЛа ; ,* f. * o sortis ludibria quaedam exci -
rjvOovv,
où ràç àxoàç ôià r f¡ç è v tando, effecistisut corpusetc. (2.
Qv 0 /ло ï ç <pO)vf¡ç âq>rjô v v o v- 2).
réç те xal в q v л t o vt e ç(I59). - omniaquasi eodem cibo
pasta
("In those times ... non potueruntusque ad senectutem
[they] did not weaken and unsex canescere (2. 8).
men's ears throughthe rhythmsof - piscator earn
imposuerit
language") hamis escam quam scierit
appetituros esse pisciculos(3. 4).
Theme Four : Metaphor: a disease of the body thatoughtto be surgically
treated( 10).
- Primi omnium eloquentiam
Tovçfjièv yàgÁóyovç vyiaívovr aç
xai êQQœpévovç elç ла- perdidistis ... effecistisut corpus
doç âvtfxeorov xai tpBogàv orationiseneruaretur et caderet
ледиууауогàvri a(pQiyéarjç (2 2)
xai âOÂriTixfíç óvtcoç e v - - grandis ,. .
et ... pudica orationon
,
e çř i a ç ovöev «
.je' on v -
/ut) vo a o v v
xaraaxeváoarreç xai r òv nX^Qt, est maculosa (pimply) ПвС
xal vaoróv ...tn" eêrovíaç turgida (obese, bloated), sed
ßyxov eiçnaqà q/vatv oi&oéarjç naturali pulchritudine exsurgit
Xa X££ta ç àyayóvreç xal x e vф (2. 6).
yvottiaxi póvov ênaÍQovreç,ô -„uper uentosa istaec et
ÒCevôeiavтпд ovvevovoric ôvvaueœç , ...
e normis loquacitas ... ánimos

19.65: Tuse. Disp.2. 1.3. Demetrius OnStyle 189oneffeminacy theextreme ofpréciosité, languid
andtrivial
"likethemen whointhelegend arechanged intowomen" ; also287.HoraceA.P.60-72,
butonly totransfer
Philo's towords
figure themselves
ascreationsoroffspring ofman : they willhave
their
natural anddemise.
maturity ButPhilo'sideaofdecay oftheartseems nottohaveoccurred to
Horaceatall.CiceroDe Inventione 1. 1. 1; De Orat.1.4. 14; 8. 30; 9. 38; 2. 8. 33; Orator 41.
142; Tacitus Dialogus40; Quintilian2. 16.Iff.Aristotlehadbelieved toothat(forensic) eloquence
was"theoffspringnurturedbywell-established
political
harmony". Longinus 44.6 ; 44.7 ; cf.alsoad-
ditional
references
innote 7,above.SenecaControv. 1Prooem. 1.Seneca Epist.114.2 ; 3 ; 8 ; 11; 25.
Persius 1. 32-35;36; 63-65;103-104.
(10) Aristotle Rhet.3. 7, useofthemedical term axoc,"remedies" ofthemeans whereby
ina work
exaggerations aretoberemoved. CiceroDe Opt.Gen.Oral3. 8 ; Brutus 9. 36; 13.51;
Orator23.76.Demetrius OnStyle likeAristotle,using medicalterminology todescribe faults ina
work.Longinus 44.2 ; 44.6 ; he-
hadalready setthis
upforusin3.4 : "Asinthebody, soinwriting,
hollowandartificial
swellingsarebadandsomehow turnintotheir
opposite, as,theysay,nothing isdrier
thandropsy". SenecaControv. 10Prooem. 6. SenecaEpist.114.1; ibid.3; 4; 7; 11.

This content downloaded from 62.122.76.45 on Wed, 18 Jun 2014 12:49:00 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 PHILO,ANDSTOICRHETORIC
PETRONIUS, 791

õrav pákiara nsQnadfj, iuuenum ... ueluti pestilenti

étfyvvт ai (157). (disease-portending)quodam sidere
("Language once healthyand virile adflauit (2. 7).
- а с ne carmen quidem sani
theyhave turnedto a disease ... a
vital and athletichabit has become coloris enituit (2. 8).
sick ... a fulland massivebody has - doctores... necesse habentcum
been made unnaturally swollen and insanientibus furere (3. 2) ("to
misgrownwith hollow puffing... act insane amid the bedlam of the
whenfullydistended,it burstsasun- parents").
der") (n). j.
i

Theme Five : Metaphor: art has become confectionary,or an in-

toxicant( I2).
' - nihil ... aut audiuntaut uident
¿q> tfpœvôè óipcLQTvrai xa i
o ir о л óv o i xaí Saoi xfjçèv ßa~ sed mellitos uerborum
<pixf¡xai ¡uvgeyHxfj ai negieç- globulos et omnia dicta factaque
zexvïr
yiaç, àel ri xaivòvXQfbfia rj axfj^a et sesamo
quasi papauere
f¡ àt/jiàvfj xvÀòvênireixtÇov-
Te ç г aï ç alodifjaeaiv, Ôncoç sparsa (1. 3).
xòvfiyefAÓva - qui interhaec nutriuntur, non
noQdrjoœoi vovv
(159). i magis sapere possunt (have no
(contrastedwith "the poets and more sense of taste) quam bene
chroniclers of a bygoneage" : cooks olere qui in culina habitant (2.
and confectioners of our own day ... 1).
- omniaquasi eodem cibo pasta
I (2. 8).
! - piscator earn imposuerithamis
j escam (3. 4).

(11) HoraceA.P. 412-413 quistudet

optatamcursu metam
contingere ...sudauit
etalsit("Whoever
strivestograspinhisracetheyearned-forgoalhassweatedandshivered") 10.1.4 uerum
; Quintilian
nos...quomodo ...athleta,
...dicimus
sitinstituendus ...quogenere
quiperdidicerit adcer-
exercitationis
tamina praeparandus ofthenature
sit.("Because wecallhim
ofhisteaching, anathlete,
becausehehas
learned bywhat type hehastobetrained
ofdrill for ; notonly
thefray") doboth comparethewriter
to
anathlete, butalsodo they developa metaphor aroundtheimage.
( 12) PlatoGórgias 46a: asa corollary
tohistheory ofthefour
(anditsillustration) true and
sciences
four corresponding :
counterfeits
physical culture - cosmetic ) forthebody
medicine - cookery )
law-making - sophistry ) forthesoul
correctivejustice - rhetoric )
therhetor
weseethat istothe asthecookistothephysician.
judge Agamemnonusesthis
notion
tocon-
coct
a rather
weakdefence : they
ofteachers havetopleasetheir orthey
students, wouldnotearn
a living.
3. 25. 100.SenecaEpist.114.4 ; ibid.22; 25.
CiceroDe Orat.

This content downloaded from 62.122.76.45 on Wed, 18 Jun 2014 12:49:00 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
792 E. J. BARNES

besiege the senses so as to sack the - dent epulas et bella (5. 19)
mindO3). ("Tales of battles too shall feast
your ears").
Theme Six : Metaphor: degenerateart a militaryassault on the senses and
intellect( l4).

àeí Tl Haivòv
xeâpa x.zX ¿л ir st- - sicut fìcti adula tores cum
XiÇovTtç т ais aladeas- cenas diuitum captant ... nisi
,nsidi° * m"bus
(3. 3).
- sic
eloquentiae magister, nisi
tanquam piscator earn imposuerit
hamis escam quam scierit ap-
petiturosesse pisciculos, sine spe
praedae etc. (3. 4).

Afterthis extensivecompilationof similaritiesboth in idea and in dic-

tion, therecan be no doubt that Nock is accurate in his essentialpoint,
whichis thatPetroniusand Philo are drawingfromthesame tradition.How
could this have occurred?
It would hardlyseem probablethatPetroniusread Philo, thoughbecause
of the chance of personalcontactduringPhilo's embassyto Caligula the
remote possibilityof their actually having met cannot be ruled out
altogether(,5). On theotherhand,Seneca, thatinsomniacphilosopher,may
well have read Philo ; but Longinusmay have lived too earlyto have done
so(16) At any rate, it would seem that Petroniushas these ideas in mind
moreconcretelythanSeneca does, so thatI shouldsuggestoff-handthatin
this instanceSeneca is not the creditor.In fact,it is clear fromour foot-
notesalone thatthe elementsof our tropewerequite commonpossessions
under the early Empire. I agree with Nock that we have here at least a

(13) Philo's
entire onstyle
excursus isplacedinthemidstofanessay 14Off.,
neol/аевг/д inwhich
theviceofdrunkennessisdiscussed
fromnumerouspointsofview: weakness
ofthemind,andtherefore
ofitsproducts, from
is theconsideration which heentersintooratory.
(14) Longinus 44. 6. SenecaControv.10Prooem. 7.
(15) Orhemay have met anearly
Philoduring toSyria
trip ofBagnani,
(с/theconjectures Arbiter
57-58; theyear
would have been
39),when,asBagnani elsewhere (Phoenix
suggests 8[1954]80andn.
28),"hewillcertainly
have runafter
been oftheAlexandrian
bytheleaders Jews": cf.Josephus
Antig.
lud.18.8.
(16) СУsupra, note4, Goold.

This content downloaded from 62.122.76.45 on Wed, 18 Jun 2014 12:49:00 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 PHILO,ANDSTOICRHETORIC
PETRONIUS, 793

tradition; perhaps(ironyof ironies)it was even one of thecountlesscom-

monplace themes debated in the rhetoricalcurricula of the Roman
academies! Essentiallywe are dealing with the Those-Were-the-Good-
Old-Days Syndrome,promptedby some counter-revolutionary chemistry
withinthe blood of most of us.
But is the remainderof Nock's suggestionjustifiable?Philo's passage is
an obvious set-pieceand may well representcopying"from some Greek
source of a more or less popular philosophicaltype"; but I doubt that
Petroniusis copyingfromthe same source.There is no harmonyof order,
no glimpse of a lurkingstereotype,in the mannerby which these two
authors, under comparison,present the various themes. For example,
remarkhow variouslyscatteredthe quotationsare througheach passage
consulted.In fact,in the fifthcategorygiven above, the inebriationfigure
does not occur in Petronius.Either Longinus or Seneca would be more
likelythan would Petroniusto be using Philo's supposedsource,but their
treatment is just as individualas is Petronius's.I suggestthatthesewriters
"
followa commoncriticaltradition, but nota singleidentifiablesource",as
Nock believed.
*
* *

The questionwhich nextarises is this: fromwhat othersources,con-

cerningthemselvesas much with literarystyleas with philosophy,could
Philo and Petroniushave been drawing?Ratherthan extendthe limitsof
thisstudyexcessivelyin an attemptto be exhaustive,I shall brieflysketch
what to me is a reasonablesuccessionin the handing-downof our several
themes.
Isocrates was concerned with constructinga Rhetoric,not with its
dissolutionPD ; but it was for him a culturalstudyto providethe good
citizenwithpracticaland necessarytools. To him art forart's sake was an
imposture.Avoidanceof seriousand pertinentthemeswas a declarationof
weakness.Eloquence was a source of blessings.But even in his day, the

(17) Hebelieved that

only intreating
ofgreat
issues
wasgreatutterance : J.W.H.Atkins,
possible
Criticism
Literary inAntiquity
I (London1952)125.Sophistic
hadlostitself
ina mazeoftricksand
devices.
(Itisofinterest inPlato'sMeno
that, 90ff., thesonofa self-made
Anytus, man, infury
declares
thathenever hashadanything todowith : Trimalchio
a sophist wastosayalmostthesame and
thing,
boastabout it,onhistomb.Sat: 71. 12).Mechanical
methodsweredeemed tohaveaninfallible
ef-
ficacy;themes were (barren
trifling mythological
disputation,
pettylegalpleading).

This content downloaded from 62.122.76.45 on Wed, 18 Jun 2014 12:49:00 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
794 E. J. BARNES

doctrinethatcivilizationis nourishedby eloquencewas a commonplace.We

can in his worksdiscern ideas consonantwith our themes2 and 3 (18).
Plato provides material,throughouthis works and not gatheredin one
place, thatwouldfitour themes1, 2, 3 and 5. He does not use thefigureof
disease in connectionwithliterature as he did formoralfaults,presumably
because he feltone could alwaysban undesirableartand banishundesirable
artists: one would notbotherto curethem( 19).Aristotlethroughout is con-
cernedwithobservingdistinctpieces of art,and carriesno briefforart in
the abstractor for possible infirmities. However,in Rhetoric3. 7 we do
meetthemedicalterm"remedies"used of themeanswherebyexaggerations
in a work are to be removed; this fits our theme 4(20).
Cicero is the firstwriterin whose worksat large we findregularuse of
the variousthemes(21). Demetriusin his treatiseOn Style gives us several
uses of themes2, 3 and 4 (the last, similarto the methodof Aristotle,
above) (22). Horace comes veryclose on a few occasions to theme3. He
assumes that the classical way is the way in which thingswill be done,
even if he does feel it necessaryto repeathis admonitionto the Pisones to
be a creditto theirfather(23). This omissionof Horace's is odd, because
Naevius had asked the question: Cedo : qui uestramrempublicamtantam
amisistis tarn cito? and had answered himself(among other things):
Proueniebantoratoresnoui, stulti adulescentuli(as reportedby Cicero De
Senectute6. 20). ElsewhereCicero had put it theotherway around,but the
componentswere the same ( Brutus 12. 45).
The elderSeneca employsthe firstfourthemesas well as number6, but
theyare workedskilfullyintoset-piecesforthe introduction to Book 1 and
Book 10 only(24). Longinus and the younger Seneca have been dealt with
in the footnotes.Persius,a contemporary of Petronius,uses only themes1,
2 and 3; this is perhaps importanti25).
It is clear, then,thatCicero may hold a clue to our dilemma.His use of
our variousthemes,whilegenerous,is scattered: he omitsto organizethem
into a comprehensivescheme as had Philo and Petronius.But there is
anotherconnectionbetweenCicero and Philo, and it is a man we have not

notes
(18) C/1supra, 7 and9
227-228
(19) Sophist : onekind ofevilinthesoul(wickedness
; theother iscompared
isignorance)
with
diseaseinthebody:itmust becured orcutout,i.e.,punished. 4, 7, 9, 12.
notes
Cf.supra,
notes
(20) Cf.supra, 9 and10.
notes
(21) Cf.supra, 4, 7, 9, 10,12.
notes
(22) Cf supra, 7, 9, 10.
notes
(23) Cf.supra, 7, 9, 11.
4, 7, 9, 10,14.
notes
(24) Cf.supra,
4, 7, 9.
notes
(25) Cf.supra,

This content downloaded from 62.122.76.45 on Wed, 18 Jun 2014 12:49:00 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 PHILO,ANDSTOICRHETORIC
PETRONIUS, 795

yetmentioned.Cicero,along withotheryoungRomansof good family,had

studiedin Rhodes with the philosopherPosidonius,who died a veryold
man in 51 B.C. (26). Their trainingmust have been largelyrhetoricaland
academic: notjust whatto talkabout butalso how; forPosidoniuswas in-
terestedenoughin styleto writeneçi Xétjeœçsiaay<oyr¡ (Diogenes Laertius
7. 60), was a supporterof the principleof nçénov (the Xé£iç oixsía г ф
nqáyfiaxi),and believedthat rhetoricwas a servantto philosophy,that it
had a moralvalue. Posidoniuswas an eclecticscholar,forhe blendedStoic,
Platonic,and Aristotelian doctrines.But he was also quite conversant(even
involved)withthe rhetoricalideals sharedby the Scipionic circle; during
his youthin Athenshe studiedunderPanaetius,theStoic (Cicero De Off 3.
7-8) along withScipio and Laelius,who tookback to Rome (to suchfriends
as Lucilius) the ideals theyhad absorbed.It is reasonableto assume that
mensuch as Cicero learnedearlythe device of applyingmoralideas to the
studyof rhetoric.Certainlyin Cicero's case thestudyof theuses of rhetoric
was a centralconsideration, as it would have been in certainof Posidonius's
texts(not only neqi XéÇeœç,I should imagine,but even his booksneqi
xadrjxovroçand neqi àqerœv). It is not farfetchedto suppose that
Posidonius was responsible,to greateror lesser degree,for drillinghis
pupilsat timesin theapplicationof all thethemeswe have isolatedforthis
study.But theiruse would,to Romans,have been as rhetoricalcolores; to
Rhodians as well, no doubt.
Now Philo too, thoughlivinga coupleof generationsafterCicero,yetin-
volvedas he was in the learningof his time,was largelyinfluencedin his
methodby Posidonius.What Posidoniushad taught,or at least written,at
Rhodeswould be knownto Philo at Alexandria.It has been suggested,for
example,that Posidoniuswas a seminal influencein the compositionof
Tusc. Disp. 1 and in the moral attitudesof Galen (27), and Cicero's own
workson philosophyand rhetoricshow repeatedglimpsesof thegreatstoic.
"
It is inconceivablethat the scholar Philo, indisputably"indebted to
Posidoniusas a philosophicalmentor(28), shouldhave remainedignorantof
Posidonius'sneqi XéÇecoçor uninfluenced by it. Any rhetoricaluse in his

(26)ThearticleonPosidonius inRE22'(1953)coll.558-826, givesdepth towhat wearetoldby

Cicerohimselfinhisessays: Tusc.Disp.2. 61; Nat.deorum1.6 ; 2. 88(hedescribes Posidonius
as
familiaris
noster;Posidonius
livedwithCicero duringhisvisit
toRome lateinlife)
; De Diu.1.6 {cf.
esp.Columns 567,570,575,772,773; alsoref. toanarticle
inCQ43[1949] 82ff.); a complete
listing
ofPosidoniuss knownwritingsisalsoprovided,with oftheir
descriptions natureasfaras itispossible
totell.
AddCiceroOrator 25,wherein hementions that
theRhodian school ofrhetoric never
approved
therichandunctuous styleoftheAsianschools.
(27) RE (supra,
n. 26) 575.
(28) OCD684(Treves).

This content downloaded from 62.122.76.45 on Wed, 18 Jun 2014 12:49:00 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
796 E. J. BARNES

textsPosidoniushad made of our variousthemeswould have been familiar

to Philo ; therefore
it is suitablethatPhilo uses themin a rhetoricalcontext
insidea muchlargerfabricthatis purelymoral in purpose.It is as though
he paused to digressintoa familiarschool-boydeclamatiothatseemedper-
tinentin a peripheralway. Is it not fittingto revertto youthfulthoughts
whendiscussingthe Good Old Days? Things weredifferent when I was a
boy ...
What has all this to do with Petronius?I feel certainthat,if the syn-
drome of six themes which we have discoveredto be common to the
youngerSeneca, Philo, Longinus,and Petroniushad been in currentuse as
one comprehensiveidea in Cicero's day, then surely,somewherein all
Cicero's writingson spoken prose, he would have foundthe figuresuseful
to develop in our now-familiar pattern; yetwe findthat,in reality,he has
scatteredthem almost at random over the corpus of his treatises.Fur-
thermoreit is clear to thiswriterthat,in Cicero, thesethemesare less fully
realizedthaneven in theelderSeneca, who also did not use themas one in-
ter-complementary familyof themes.It would seem inescapableto conclude
that,since the themesare common individuallyto all these writers,then
probably,givenimpetusby theexampleof Posidonius,theywereamongthe
tools of discussionemployedin therhetoricalschools of thefirstcentury(if
not, in fact,of Cicero's day, as I could also believe). Yet once we get past
the elderSeneca, all the themessuddenlyappear in the writingsof several
"
authorsas a complete matched- set" of criticalimplements.And at the
same instantthereappears Persius,a Stoic, a contemporary of the younger
Seneca and of Petronius,certainlya well-readand eagercriticof thewriters
of his day, who has resistedpushingthe manifestations of our six-partsyn-
drometo the limit.The reason could surelybe thattherewas in his time
(sc. in Petronius'sand Philo's time)no one canonicalsourcefromwhichit
could be derived.Persiustook themesas he chose them,like everyoneelse,
and recognizedno debt to a "popular philosophicalsource". The themes
were treatedsynopticallyat this time by membersof Nero's coterie: but
Persius kept outside this group, as his mockeryof Nero shows.
The farther we go, the less we seem to have to do withsome philosophic
handbookor singlesource,forit would be an incrediblecoincidenceto find
all thesewritersso indebtedto anyone whose workis not available to us.
Yet we have also seen that thereis no apparentinter-dependencebetween
thefourauthorsmentionedby Nock : to all appearanceseach is developing
his selectionof the six themesin his own personalmannerexceptforwhat
maybe sharingof the conceitswithinNero's court-circle. The factthatan
involvedcontemporary like Persiusand an influentialpredecessorlike the
elder Seneca (not to mentionCicero) handle the themesin an even less

This content downloaded from 62.122.76.45 on Wed, 18 Jun 2014 12:49:00 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 PHILO,ANDSTOICRHETORIC
PETRONIUS, 797

organizedmanneris to be kept in mind. I put forwardthe opinion that

Philo,Seneca, Longinus,and Petronius,and Persiusand theotherstoo, are
drawingupon a broadlybased repertoire of generalcommonplacesthathad
been part of the arsenal of academic debate frombeforeeven the timeof
Plato,and whichby theearlyEmpirehad come to formtheautomaticcon-
textof any argumenthavingto do withthe past vs. thepresent,fluctuation
in moralcustoms,evils of education,Demon Rum,and Progress,The Most
ImportantProduct.
Quid ad nos ? CertainlyifPetroniushad come in contactwiththesecriti-
cal notionsin theeast at an earlierstage in his career,he could conceivably
have done so by means of sources available as well to Philo. However,
thereseems no reason to see him as an antiquaryin this fashion.The
notionswere currentrightin Rome throughouthis life; and the way in
whichtheyare presentedby otherwitnessessuggeststhattheywerepartof
theundercurrent of criticalthought.This suggests,morethananythingelse,
the academiesof rhetoric.We mustnot jump to the conclusionthathe is
parodyingSeneca, forwe have seen thatPetronius'smethodof handlingthe
themesis unique and connectshim withnone of the otherwriterswho use
the same themes.Likewise we have no righton this account to see in
Agamemnona caricatureof Seneca or of anyoneelse. Agamemnonis sim-
plybehavingin character.He is a rhetorsayingwhatrhetorsusuallysaid ;
Encolpius is a productof the rhetoricalsystem,sayingwhat it had taught
him to say. The internaldramaticmotiveis the reasonwhy Petroniushas
introducedinto his workat this pointa criticalsyndromeevidentin other
writersas well; but his use of the themeshas been entirelyartistic,not
critical; dramatic,not parodie.
The internaldramaticmotiveis, of course, to amuse the reader.Our
point of departurehere must be Nock's statementthat Petroniusis not
whollyserious.Commonsense and theaestheticsof prosecompositionUrge
the beliefthathe will have approvedof muchthatEncolpius says. On the
otherside it must be admittedhe would probablyagree with much in
Agamemnon'sarguments.He is outlininga typicaldeclamatio, paintingthe
characteristic colours vividlyenough that the species can be recognized
easily; but the implicationfollowsthat he kepthis own impartiality. The
transparent rhetorical tricks used by both debaters, and the effectof ab-
surditythat results,indicatethat Petroniusdoes not involvehimselfas a
partisanon one side or the other.Consequentlyit is irrelevant to ask, with
whomdoes Petroniusagree? We can, however,suggestthathe holds up to
ridicule the methods of scholastics who (1) would use the same old
argumentsto condemneducationwithoutapplyingremedies,or (2) would,
in an attemptto cure the creature,apply the same remediesthatkilledit.

This content downloaded from 62.122.76.45 on Wed, 18 Jun 2014 12:49:00 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
798 E. J. BARNES

Petroniusstaysout of theargumentpresumablybecause he recognizedthat

it had neverbroughtabout the reformsnecessary; and besides he is not
writinga treatiseof reform.He encouragesus to laugh at those persons
fromwhom reformshould be expectedto originatebut who insteadhave
remainedblindto thereal problems.BothAgamemnonand Encolpiuscause
us amusementas they reenact an absurd contemporaryphenomenon.
Petroniuswas probablycontentto let the matterrest there.

E. J. Barnes

This content downloaded from 62.122.76.45 on Wed, 18 Jun 2014 12:49:00 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions