Encolpius and Agamemnon in Petronius

Author(s): George Kennedy

Source: The American Journal of Philology , Summer, 1978, Vol. 99, No. 2 (Summer,
1978), pp. 171-178
Published by: The Johns Hopkins University Press

Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/293644

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.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

The Johns Hopkins University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and
extend access to The American Journal of Philology

This content downloaded from

95.91.249.86 on Thu, 13 Jul 2023 10:09:48 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 ENCOLPIUS AND AGAMEMNON IN PETRONIUS

The opening scene of what survives of Petronius'

takes place outside of a rhetorical school and consist
encounter between Encolpius and Agamemnon, A
somewhere nearby. Since we lack any introduction to
tion, it is not surprising that it has not been well under
example, Philip Corbett says, "We do not know why
here, whether driven by the hazard of their wandering
or attracted by the reputation of the head of the school
Agamemnon." We may not know why they are in this particu-
lar Graeca urbs, but we can say why they have sought out a
school of rhetoric, which incidentally may not be Agamemnon's
at all. Evan Sage thought that it was Agamemnon's school and
that he had invited general discussion of declamation,2 but this
is unlikely. The declamations are still going on inside and we
witness a conversation between the two characters.
In order to understand the dramatic situation it is necessary to
be familiar with the practices of the schools of rhetoric in first
century Rome. These are reasonably well known from the ac-
counts of Seneca the Elder and Quintilian, with some cor-
roborative information in Tacitus, Juvenal, and other writers,
and they have been extensively studied.3 Here I will only sum-
marize a few features which readers of Petronius need to keep in
mind. The students in rhetorical schools were ordinarily boys
ranging from around fourteen to around eighteen years of age.
Although teachers gave lectures on rhetoric, the major activity
of the schools was the writing, memorizing, and delivery of
declamations, either suasoriae, in which the speaker gives ad-
vice to an historical or mythological figure, or controversiae, in
which certain laws and actions are posited and the student

1 Cf. Philip B. Corbett, Petronius (New York 1970) 46.

2 Petronius, The Satiricon, ed. by Evan T. Sage, rev. by Brady B. Gilleland
(New York 1969) 145.
3 Cf., e.g., Henri Bornecque, Les declamations et les declamateurs d'apres
Seneque le pere (Lille 1902); S. F. Bonner, Roman Declamation in the Late
Republic and Early Empire (Liverpool 1949); George Kennedy, The Art of
Rhetoric in the Roman World (Princeton 1972) 312-37.

AJP 99 (1978) 171-178

0002-9475/7/0992-0171 $01.00 ? 1978 by The Johns Hopkins University Press

This content downloaded from

95.91.249.86 on Thu, 13 Jul 2023 10:09:48 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
172 GEORGE KENNEDY

composes a speech for one participant. In Augustan t

clamation became a social fad for adults as well as the basis of
secondary education. Rhetoricians invited the public in to hear
the speeches of themselves and their students much as a modern
citizenry might go to a school athletic event, except that the
visitors were invited to participate in the declaiming. Much of
the declamation described by Seneca the Elder took place on
such occasions. Almost anybody with a rhetorical education
and the nerve could apparently show off his skills or enjoy the
spectacle, and it became a good place to meet fashionable
people. Unlike the students, adults under these circumstances
apparently declaimed extempore, but since the themes tended
to recur and commonplaces had many applications, rhetorical
enthusiasts, not to say the professionals, could easily build up
repertories. It must also be remembered that declamation was
not debate. To judge from ancient accounts, declaimers were
free to speak for or in the person of any of the characters in the
theme posited and to take any approach (color) which appealed
to them. There was no necessary attempt to answer points made
by a previous speaker. At the end there was no vote, no judging,
but the applause or laughter often indicated the audience's
reaction to the figures, the points, and the conceits.
As our text opens, Encolpius is telling the rhetorician
Agamemnon about the vices of declamation. The situation be-
comes clearer in chapter six where we are told that the two are
walking in a garden beside a portico. A crowd of scholastici (of
which more later) then pours out ab extemporali declamatione
nescio cuius qui Agamemnonis suasoriam exceperat. That the
declamation was extemporalis is evidence that the speaker was
not a student; probably a minor professional rhetorician or
visitor is intended. Clearly this is a day when the public has been
invited into the school in question. Agamemnon has left the hall,
which may be evidence that this is the school of some other
teacher which he is visiting. Agamemnon of course did have a
school in the city, to which Trimalchio later refers (48), but if he
were the host it would seem discourteous to leave, and his
students would need supervision.4 Otherwise wandering in and

4 Quintilian discusses the problems of the classroom in 2.2. but admittedly his
standards were higher than most teachers.

This content downloaded from

95.91.249.86 on Thu, 13 Jul 2023 10:09:48 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 ENCOLPIUS AND AGAMEMNON 173

out was not unusual.5 We are expressly told that the

tion was a suasoria, and thus not a controversia, but the
specific theme is not identified. Seneca cites (Suas. 3) one which
suggests where Agamemnon may get his name: "Agamemnon
deliberates whether to sacrifice Iphigenia." Sullivan translates
suasoria here as "lecture,"7 but that is misleading. Rhetori-
cians sometimes gave lectures, but they are not the same as the
delivery of a suasoria, which is an example of oratorical art.
Exceperat means "follows" as Arrowsmith translates it,8 not
"took over" as in Sullivan9 or "rdpondu" as in Ernout,10 espe-
cially not "rdpondu." Declamation is not debate.
The situation at the opening of the Satyricon, therefore, is a
public session of a rhetorical school. Agamemnon, probably a
visitor, has delivered a suasoria and while the next declaimer
speaks has wandered outside where he is accosted by Encol-
pius. Ascyltus has come to the school with Encolpius, but either
remains inside or is quiet during the interview. He may well be
with Menelaus. At the beginning of chapter six he slips away.
Encolpius' remarks are described in the Sage-Gilleland edition
as a declamation. 1 They are certainly declamatory in tone, but
they are not strictly speaking a declamation. It is thus a mildly
amusing metaphor when at the beginning of chapter three En-
colpius remarks that Agamemnon did not allow him to declaim
(declamare) longer in the portico than Agamemnon himself had
sweated (sudaverat) in the school. Literally it is Agamemnon
who has declaimed and it seems to be Encolpius who is hot
under the collar. As far as we know Encolpius has not partici-
pated in the declamation and simply, or not so simply, imparts
his views on declamation privately to Agamemnon.

5 Cf. Seneca, Contr. 3. par. 10. The younger Pliny's picture of recitation
confirms the custom of coming and going, Ep. 1.13.2.
6 On the following day at Agamemnon's own school the theme was a con-
troversia, cf. chapter 48.
7 Petronius, The Satyricon and the Fragments, trans. by John Sullivan,
(Penguin Books 1965) 32.
8 The Satyricon, Petronius, trans. by William Arrowsmith (New York 1960)
25.

9 Loc. cit. (supra n. 7).

10 Petrone, Le Satiricon, traduit par Alfred Ernout (Paris 1922) 5.
1 Op. cit. (supra n. 2) on 1.1. Sage and Gilleland are also wrong in the same
passage in defining declamatores as professional rhetoricians. The term in-
cludes anyone who declaims: students, professionals, amateurs.

This content downloaded from

95.91.249.86 on Thu, 13 Jul 2023 10:09:48 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
174 GEORGE KENNEDY

Now what is Encolpius doing here and why does

Agamemnon so sternly? An answer can be found i
the scene in chapter ten where Encolpius and Ascyl
split up. Encolpius there suggests that they divide
sions and each try to support himself and keep out of
way: et tu litteras scis et ego. ne quaestibus tuis ob
aliquid promittam. Sullivan aptly translates this: "You're a
literary sort of man and so am I. I don't want to interfere with
your earnings, so I'll offer some other line."'2 Arrowsmith's "I'll
arrange to take a different tutoring job,"13 initially attractive, is
based on a misunderstanding of scholasticus in Ascyltus' reply.
It is not a tutor. All that Encolpius is saying is that the two of
them live on the basis of their rhetorical education, and there are
a variety of ways to do that. Ascyltus' reply reveals how they
are living at the moment and thus what they were doing in the
rhetorical school. He suggests that they not split up until the
next day: hodie quia tamquam scholastici ad cenam pro-
misimus. non perdamus noctem. They are posing tamquam
scholastici, have visited a rhetorical school in hopes of meeting
a victim, and have been invited to dinner. This immediately
suggests the parasite of new comedy whose occupation is find-
ing invitations to dinner, but what does it mean to pose tam-
quam scholastici?
Petronius uses scholasticus four times in the Satyricon. Our
passage in chapter ten is one instance. In chapter 39 Trimalchio,
listing people born under various signs of the zodiac, attributes
to the Ram scholastici and arietilli, which is not very helpful
since we do not know exactly what arietillus means. Doubtless
something not very complimentary. In chapter 61, Niceros looks
across the room before telling his werewolf story and confesses
that he is nervous that the scholastici present may laugh at him.
The remark suggests that they are a critical lot and surely his
glance falls on Encolpius and Ascyltus. The fourth and most
important occurence is that in chapter six, quoted earlier, where
the scholasticorum turba 14 pours out of the hall of declamation.
Arrowsmith and Sullivan make this a crowd of students. The
scholastici laugh at the sententiae and arrangement of the

12 Op. cit. (supra n. 7) 34.

13 Op. cit. (supra n. 8) 27.
14 One is reminded of the scholasticorum natio of Virgil, Catalepton 5.4.

This content downloaded from

95.91.249.86 on Thu, 13 Jul 2023 10:09:48 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 ENCOLPIUS AND AGAMEMNON 175

suasoria they have heard, which suggests that they a

critical and imagine themselves as sophisticated. Perh
are not students at all. The scholastici of chapter six
scribed as iuvenes. Now terms for age groups in Latin
slippery indeed,15 but there is reason to think that iuven
a very suitable term for a student in a rhetorical sch
younger students are generally speaking pueri and o
adulescentuli. Tacitus, Dialogus 35.3, is a good source
distinction, and Petronius clearly recognizes it, for Ag
uses the same terms. In chapter three he speaks of his
as adulescentuli and in chapter four contrasts pueri
and iuvenes in the forum. So the scholasticorum turb
to be older than a crowd of students. Scholasticus is in fact the
word regularly used by the elder Seneca to refer to those people
who thronged to declamations as though to athletic events, but
who were not themselves students and not necessarily teachers.
They are the declamation-buffs, the aficionados, for the most
part enthusiastic amateurs. Winterbottom identifies the term as
one used of men who spent most of their time in schools or in
declamatory display.16 An examination of the half-dozen pas-
sages in which Seneca employs it bears out this definition. Some
professionals may be included, but all professional rhetoricians
are not scholastici, for Seneca (7. par. 4) reports that Albucius,
a professional, was afraid of being regarded as a scholasticus.
The term can still be found in this sense in Tacitus (Dialogus
26.8), but Quintilian and Pliny avoid the noun. An English
translation is not readily at hand. We might try the medieval
term "schoolman," but would have to add an explanatory
gloss.
Thus, in the opening scene of the Satyricon our young
heroes-on-the-make, posing as well educated visitors interested
in declamation, are trying to get the favorable attention of
Agamemnon in hopes that it will lead to something more, such
as dinner. Although critics have noted their interest in an invita-
tion,17 which is indeed made explicit,'8 the importance of their

15 For a recent discussion cf. the remarks of Jean Cousin, Quintilien,

Institution oratoire, Tome I (Paris 1975) xv-xvi, with bibliography.
16 Cf. The Elder Seneca, Declamations, trans. by M. Winterbottom 2 vols.
(Loeb Classical Library 1974) viii.
17 Cf. J. P. Sullivan, The Satyricon of Petronius. A Literary Study
(Bloomington 1968) 54 and P. G. Walsh, The Roman Novel (Cambridge 1970) 83.
18 Multo me turpior es tu hercule, qui utforis cenares, poetam laudasti, 10.2.

This content downloaded from

95.91.249.86 on Thu, 13 Jul 2023 10:09:48 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
176 GEORGE KENNEDY

role as scholastici has not been adequately stressed.

Encolpius has marked out his man and what he says
regarded as ad hominem argumentation. It is thus no
tive about the views of Petronius on the vices of de
and, as we shall see, is not even totally consistent w
which Encolpius himself expresses elsewhere. Encol
takes a very high tone, is very severe on "you teac
this is his persona. He has chosen a critical position
expects to impress Agamemnon and is of course pret
it is entirely his own view and that he does not expect
non to agree with him. The ploy works perfectly. It is
to note that Agamemnon is not at all offended, not at a
as we might expect him to be, considering what is said
profession. Quite the contrary, he is delighted, comm
has been said, flatters Encolpius, and takes him into
sional confidence, explaining the problems of being a
of rhetoric whose students are lazy and whose studen
are indulgent. In this satire of satyrs it is not unli
Agamemnon finds Encolpius physically attractive and
a sexual encounter with a simpatico young man of di
ing taste. This interpretation would help explain why
leaves Agamemnon so unceremoniously at the end of
and also his fears of being found alone by Agamemn
tant Menelaus in chapter 81.
Agamemnon's speech contains a passage (3.3-4) which is
surely intended to be funny if we understand the circumstances
of two rogues working on each other:

Sicut ficti adulatores cum cenam divitum captant nihil prius

meditantur quam id quod putant gratissimum auditoribus
fore, nec enim aliter impetrabunt quod petunt nisi quasdam
insidias auribus fecerint; sic eloquentiae magister, nisi tam-
quam piscator eam imposuerit hamis escam quam scierit

Agamemnon can qualify as a poet on the basis of chapter 5. Encolpius does not
praise his poem in our extant text, but his flattering interest in it is mentioned
at the opening of chapter 6, which seems to have a lacuna. Or alternatively.
praise of some lines of verse which Agamemnon mouthed was Encolpius' ploy
in approaching him in the first place. Declaimers rarely if ever quote verse in
the remains of the genre we have, but the Menippean conventions of the
Satyricon could take precedence over that custom.

This content downloaded from

95.91.249.86 on Thu, 13 Jul 2023 10:09:48 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 ENCOLPIUS AND AGAMEMNON 177

appetituros esse pisciculos, sine spe praedae morabi

scopulo.
Agamemnon's description fits not only his technique w
dents, but with Trimalchio; he does not appear to realiz
is also describing the technique being used on himself b
pius. We do not have the passage in which he invites E
to dinner at his house or invites him to come to Trimalchio's
house, or both, but it is clear from chapters twenty-six through
twenty-eight and elsewhere that Encolpius and Ascyltus do
indeed become better acquainted with Agamemnon and
Menelaus and accompany them to Trimalchio's banquet.
The critical position reflected in Encolpius' speech is the
most discussed aspect of these chapters.19 Doubtless it does
echo, if not parody, views which could be heard occasionally in
the first century from serious young men of a literary sort. The
position might be described as Greek Atticism of the most
uncompromising kind. The Atticism movement of the first cen-
tury B.C. began with Latin in the time of Calvus,20 and in the
Augustan period was imitated in Greek by critics like Dionysius
of Halicarnassus. In Greek it then flourished for centuries; in
Latin it is a much more exotic flower. Encolpius' point of view
in this passage is clearly Greek. He mentions no Latin writer. As
far as he is concerned, it would seem that literature ended with
Hyperides. Caecilius of Calacte and other fashionable Greek
rhetoricians of early imperial Rome would have approved.
Later in the Satyricon (68), however, Encolpius claims to be a
great lover of Virgil. If so, his passion for pure Greek is a pose.
More likely, both statements are a pose.
Agamemnon recognizes immediately the purity of Encolpius'
taste. He himself occupies a peculiar position between the two
languages. In reply to Encolpius' Greek purity he immediately
quotes Cicero, and the poem which he speaks in chapter five is
primarily on the theme of the adaptation of Greek eloquence to
Roman circumstances. Homer does not trouble himself much
about the language of the Trojans, and Petronius does not allow

19 Cf. the works cited in note 3; J. Schonberger, "Petron, c. 1-5," PhW 58

(1938) 174-76; idem, "Nochmals Petron, c. 1-5," PhW 59(1939) 478-80, 508-12;
idem, "Zu Petron, c. 3-5," PhW 60 (1940) 623-24; L. Alfonsi, "Petronio e i
Teodorei," RFIC 76 (1948) 46-53; Sullivan, op. cit. (supra n. 17) 158-65.
20 Cf. Kennedy, op. cit. (supra n. 3) 241-44; 352-54.

This content downloaded from

95.91.249.86 on Thu, 13 Jul 2023 10:09:48 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
178 GEORGE KENNEDY

linguistic differences to intrude into the action of the

but it seems clear from these statements that we are
Agamemnon, for all his Greek name, as a teacher o
declamation. It was not the custom for a teacher to teach both
Greek and Latin declamation,21 and if Agamemnon did he was a
rara avis.

Eugen Cizek has recently protested at the common view th

Encolpius and Agamemnon are in agreement about the faults
declamation.22 Agamemnon's point of view is in fact more prag-
matic, that of the teacher of declamation, and especially of Latin
declamation, while Encolpius mouths an impossible ideal. Th
Agamemnon begins by agreeing with Encolpius and praisin
him, but then proceeds to try to awaken his sympathies may
part of the erotic impulse which has been aroused in him. In any
event, it is more a part of his dramatic characterization than
Petronius' desire to plead a consistent critical argument.
Peter George has claimed that Encolpius has a weak chara
ter and that this weakness is shown, among other ways, by t
extent to which Agamemnon dominates him in this openin
scene. He says, "Encolpius is naive enough and suggestibl
enough to parrot his teacher, hypocrisy and all. 23 Agamemn
is of course not Encolpius' teacher, and through much of t
scene as we have it, Encolpius is out dangling his literary li
and Agamemnon is dancing at the end of it. Like most of t
characters in the Satyricon they deserve each other, but at le
Encolpius succeeds in getting a dinner.24

GEORGE KENNEDY
THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA
AT CHAPEL HILL

21 Quintilian's references (e.g. 2.5.5) seem to make it clear that in his time
there were separate schools of Greek and of Latin rhetoric, and Pliny names his
own two teachers in these subjects (Ep. 6.6.3). At the public shows of declama-
tion attended by the elder Seneca there were sometimes speeches in both Greek
and Latin, and Seneca quotes passages from the Greek speakers, but he indi-
cates (9.3.13) speaking in Latin was regarded as more appropriate and that to
declaim on the same day in both Greek and Latin was a virtuoso performance in
questionable taste.
22 Cf. "A propos des premiers chapitres du Satyricon," Latomus 34 (1975)
197-202.

23 Cf. "Style and Character in the Satyricon," Arion 5 (1977) 351.

24 I am indebted to Professors Gareth Schmeling and George Houston for
suggestions of bibliography and evidence.

This content downloaded from

95.91.249.86 on Thu, 13 Jul 2023 10:09:48 +00:00
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms