D. The Latin Tradition 2 page

) and her attendants. Virgil's failure, in Augustine's mind, is his final counsel of submission to these corrupt powers, delivered through the seer Helenus to Aeneas (Aen . 3.438-39). A Christian Aeneas would have persevered to victory over the daemones , until Juno was forced to say vincor ab Aenea (which she does say at Aen . 7.310, but that defeat is short-lived). The potentially liberating myth of the Aeneid is corrupted by the defeat-ism common to pagan demonology in general, and Virgil glimpsed the truth that might have freed him from bondage to the evil daemones , but (like Porphyry) was unable to realize that vision and liberate himself.

There is no direct evidence for Augustine's understanding of the meaning of the Greek epics, though he had read at least selections from Homer in the original Greek in his youth.^[101] His only direct paraphrase of Homer is in connection with the interpretation of Virgil.^[102] Nevertheless,

[100] Civ. Dei 10.15.

[101] August. Conf . 1.14 (23). Cf. Henri-Irénée Marrou, Saint Augustin et la fin de la culture antique , p. 28 and n. 1.

[102] August. Civ. Dei 3.2. Cf. Marrou, Saint Augustin , p. 33, n. 4.

― 260 ―

Augustine was aware of Stoicizing allegorical interpretation of the myths and absorbed some of the Neoplatonic allegory of Homer from Plotinus.^[103] He ridicules Stoic attempts to save the myths by explaining the gods as representations of the elements,^[104] and when he mentions Homer it is primarily to dismiss his lies.^[105]

He is aware, by way of Varro, of a mythicon genus theologiae , but he discusses it only to reject it (Civ. Dei 6.5). It is the theology "mainly used by the poets," and Varro's own description of it is, for Augustine, a sufficient condemnation: "Thus in this theology all things are ascribed to the gods that may befall not merely a man, but the most contemptible of men."^[106] Augustine's position, then, recalls that of Xenophanes and is close to that of Socrates in the Republic . In echoing with approval Socrates' rejection of Homer (Civ. Dei 2. 14), Augustine was not alone in the early Church. The same sentiments were expressed by Origen (Contra Cels . 1.36) and by Augustine's younger contemporary Theodoret.^[107]

Augustine indicates that he knows that the Platonists, and specifically Apuleius, tried to salvage some of the stories by claiming that they referred not to gods but to demons.^[108] He does not specifically reject this notion, but his ultimate goal in the passage in question is the demonstration that Christ is the only mediator between the divine and the human (Civ. Dei 9.15). The Homeric passage evoked in this context is that where Athena restrains Achilles (Il . 1.199-200), and Apuleius is represented as

[103] See August. Civ. Dei 7.16 and Green's note ad loc . in the Loeb edition, vol. 2, p. 432, n. 1. The connections between Augustine's view of allegory in the Scriptures and the pagans' ideas about allegory are explored by Jean Pépin in "Saint Augustin et la fonction protreptique de l'allégorie," pp. 267-85.

[104] August. Civ. Dei 4.10.

[105] Cf. August. Civ. Dei 25.9 and 4.26 and 30, where Augustine introduces a Stoic denunciation of Homeric anthropomorphism for which his own source is Cicero. In a blanket denunciation of the "poets also called theologians" (poetae,' qui etiam theologi dicerentur ), Homer is surprisingly absent from the list, which includes only Orpheus, Musaeus, and Linus (Civ. Dei 18.14). The subsequent list of their impious fables, however, includes the fall of Troy (Civ. Dei 18.16). There is an echo of this denunciation in Aquinas Met. Arist. Exp . 1.4.82-83.

[106] Denique in hoc omnia diis adtribuuntur quae non modo in hominem, sed etiam in contemptissimum hominem cadere possunt (Civ. Dei 6.5). Cf. Civ. Dei 8.5, where Varro's allegorizing of repellent rituals is likewise rejected, on the grounds that it is wrong: quia nec ipsa illis ritibus significatur quae ipse [sec. Varro] insinuare conatur .

[107] Theodoret Serm. 2 (De principio ), cited ad loc . in Migne, PG 11 (Origen 1), col. 1083, n. 26.

[108] August. Civ. Dei 9.7.

― 261 ―

asserting that this would have been the act not of the divinity herself, but of some daemon .^[109]

It is clear that Porphyry, for whom he retained great respect, was Augustine's source for at least some aspects of the Neoplatonic exegesis of myth and ritual. He offers Porphyry's explanation of the castration of Attis, and, though he approves neither of the myth nor of the interpretation, he does not allow Porphyry to bear the brunt of his scorn.^[110]

Augustine never refers to pagan attempts to elevate the Iliad and Odyssey to the level of scripture, but he appears to be aware of such treatment of the early poetic tradition and to consider it both dangerous and contemptible. This attitude comes out in a passage in which he is citing with approval the Stoic belief in a fate that has its source in the will of Zeus (Civ. Dei 5.8). A Latin version of a Homeric passage is cited in support of the opinion, but Augustine is quick to add that it is the ideas of his proximal Stoic source that are of interest to him and that he is quoting Homer only because the Stoics did so in this context, "not that a poet's opinion would have any authority in this matter."^[111]

It is hardly surprising that Augustine should have so little use for Homer. What is striking in his sparse references to Homer is his knowledge and understanding of the philosophical interpretive tradition in isolation from the text of the poems, of which his knowledge must have been minimal. He nonetheless displays and passes on, albeit with contempt, an understanding of the way that text was read , both by Stoics and by Platonists. These traditions of interpretation had, for him, largely obscured and replaced a text in which he had little interest.

Returning to the pagan revival itself and to the Roman senatorial establishment that held off the eventual repression of the pagan cults for

[109] The passage as a whole provides an interesting precedent for one of Proclus's defensive-allegorical procedures. He was to present the same idea in far more schematic form in his discussion of the theomachy of Il . 20 and 21 and that passage has affinities with Augustine's discussion of Apuleius's method (Civ. Dei 9.7).

[110] August. Civ. Dei 7.26. See Green's note ad loc . in the Loeb edition, vol. 2, p. 466, n. 1.

[111] nec in hac quaestione auctoritatem haberet poetica sententia (Civ. Dei 5.8). This scorn for the elevation of poetry to a position of authority is also heard in the earlier De magistro (28): Non enim horum [sc., poetarum ] auctoritati subiecti sumus in talibus rebus . Here the subject is the relationship of the knowledge of signs to the knowledge of the things signified, and a line of Persius has entered the discussion.

― 262 ―

decades both before and after the brief rule of Julian the Apostate, we may consider the contributions of Vettius Agorius Praetextatus and Macrobius, as well as the less direct contribution of the Virgilian commentator Servius.

The first of these figures was primarily a man of action. He was at the center of the senatorial pagan resistance, a group whose lack of reading and culture is ridiculed by Ammianus Marcellinus.^[112] Whatever the reading habits of these aristocrats as a group, however, we owe to them the transmission of much that might otherwise have been lost from classical culture, and they and their successors after the military and political disaster of 394^[113] demonstrably read, annotated, and copied the classics in the hope that at least in this way the traditions might survive.^[114]

Praetextatus is agreed to have been an intellectual as well as a political leader for this group,^[115] and he was active as a translator of Aristotle and of other Greek authors. John Lydus mentions a work where Praetextatus apparently spoke of "Ianos" as a force presiding over the "two bears" (the Big and Little Dippers) and directing divine souls to the lunar paradise.^[116] W. Ensslin^[117] asserts that this work will have been "im Geiste der Theologie des Iamblichos," but the true spirit of the observation may well be Numenian and have reached Praetextatus by way of Porphyry.^[118] Iamblichus and his followers were clearly the major influence on Julian and so on the pagan revival in the East, but Porphyry almost certainly had more currency in Platonist circles in the West, even during Julian's reign.

Virtually nothing survives of Praetextatus's writings, perhaps in part because of the quite understandable hostility of the Christian tradition. He emerges as a personality and an intellectual presence, however, in

[112] Cf. Bloch, "The Pagan Revival," pp. 206-7.

[113] Bloch, "The Pagan Revival," p. 201. In 394, the two-year reign of the pagan Eugenius, raised to power in the West by the magister militum Arbogast, was ended when Theodosius came to the support of Valentinian II.

[114] Bloch, "The Pagan Revival," pp. 213-16.

[115] Bloch, "The Pagan Revival," passim; cf. Ensslin in P-W ("Praetextatus [1]"): "Auch wurde ihm, der noch des Griechischen mächtig war, Beschäftigung mit per Philosophie und der alten Literatur durch Übersetzungen und Emendieren zur Stützung des Götterglaubens nach gerühmt" (col. 1579).

[116] John Lydus De mens . 4.2.

[117] Ensslin, "Praetextatus," col. 1579.

[118] Another possibility is that Lydus is referring to Praetextatus's long speech in the first book of the Saturnalia , where he discusses the name Ianus at length, though without offering the bit of lore in question (Macrob. Sat . 1.9).

― 263 ―

the major literary accomplishment of the pagan revival, Macrobius's Saturnalia , composed about 430, nearly half a century after Praetextatus's death, but set in the 380s.^[119] This work is an imitation of an imitation—an indication of the complexity and the conservatism of the tradition that produced it.^[120] Macrobius presents us with a dialogue in imitation of the De re publica of Cicero, itself based on Platonic models and most obviously on the Republic .^[121]

Stating as his goal the presentation of his learning in useful form for the education of his son (to whom the work is addressed), Macrobius evokes a manifestly fictional conversation involving many of the leaders of the pagan senatorial resistance of an earlier generation. The speakers have decided to devote the period of the Saturnalia to conversations about philosophical and religious traditions. Praetextatus is the most important among them in the surviving portions of the treatise, along with Symmachus, who in 384 succeeded him as leader of the group and later debated with St. Ambrose. Other contributors include Nichomachus Flavianus, Rufinus, and Caecina Albinus, who were, like the preceding, important figures in pagan senatorial society, as well as a philosopher named Eustathius and a rhetor named Eusebius, both Greeks and otherwise unknown. Among the less important contributors appear several stock figures, a Cynic named Horus and an uninvited boor named Evangelus, as well as the famous Virgilian commentator Servius. The last is presented as much younger than most of the company, however, and never speaks unless spoken to.^[122] Much of the work as we have it is dedicated to the glorification of Virgil and, as a recent historian has put it, to the elevation of the Aeneid to the status of a "pagan Bible."^[123] In the process, frequent reference is, of course, made to Homer. We may examine these references in two groups, first isolating the use made of Homer by

[119] The dialogue contains some deliberate anachronisms, justified by reference to the example of Plato (Macrob. Sat . 1.5). On the identity of its author, see Cameron, "Date and Identity of Macrobius," as well as Flamant, Macrobe , pp. 91-141. Cameron argues compellingly (p. 29) that the dramatic date of the dialogue may be set at Dec. 17-19, 384.

[120] On Macrobius and his sources, see Courcelle, Les lettres grecques en occident , ch. 1.

[121] Cf. Bloch, "The Pagan Revival," pp. 208-9.

[122] On all of the participants and the society they represent, see Flamant, Macrobe , pp. 25-87.

[123] So Bloch, "The Pagan Revival," p. 210. The expression is perhaps too strong. See Cameron, "Date and Identity of Macrobius," p. 36, on Macrobius's goals.

― 264 ―

Macrobius's Praetextatus,^[124] then considering in more general terms the idea of Homer's poetry contained in the Saturnalia .

Praetextatus dominates the opening book of the Saturnalia , previous to the extended discussion of Virgil (books 3-6) and two sections (books 2, 7) devoted to less structured chatter on subjects ranging from the favorite anecdotes of Cicero (Sat . 2.3) to the question of the relative antiquity of the chicken and the egg (Sat . 7.16). He emerges as the highest authority on religious matters in the gathering and as a source of virtually unimpeachable information on the proprieties of religious law and custom. With only brief interruptions, he holds forth from the seventh to the twenty-third chapter of book 1, covering first the origins of the Saturnalia (ch. 7), then various religious and calendar questions (chs. 8-16), and concluding with an extensive exposition of solar theology, recalling Julian's hymn to the sun (chs. 16-23).^[125] The special appropriateness of this discourse, coming from the mouth of the pontifex solis , has been noticed,^[126] and this seems a strong argument against those who have wished to see in Macrobius's portrait of Praetextatus a reflection of the religious thought of a later generation.^[127]

If Praetextatus's goals are similar to Julian's, his use of Homer likewise recalls that of the emperor, without the latter's explicit reservations regarding myth and poetry. He knows a variant of the

allegory in which Zeus's father devouring his children becomes an image of time as the producer and destroyer of all things (Sat . 1.7.10).^[128] Homer is evoked as an expert on the character of Mars (Sat . 1.12.9) and in support of the supposed ancient custom of counting the days of the month retrograde, this last by a dubious interpretation of Od . 14.162 (Sat . 1.16.42). Virgil is also cited as an authoritative source and at one point called Homerus vester Mantuanus (Sat . 1.16.43). Homer is likewise referred to by the simple, unexplained epithet poeta , translating the Hellenistic

.^[129]

[124] On Macrobius's portrait of Praetextatus, see Flamant, Macrobe , pp. 33-36. It is Flamant's belief that the theology attributed to Praetextatus in the Saturnalia belongs to Macrobius himself and to the 420s, rather than to Praetextatus and the 380s (see pp. 36, 662-80).

[125] See Flamant, Macrobe , p. 659 and n. 43, on the correspondences.

[126] Bloch, "The Pagan Revival," pp. 209-10.

[127] See n. 124 above.

^[128]

[129] E.g., Macrob. Sat . 1.17.38.

― 265 ―

It is primarily as a theological authority to help him associate various deities with the sun that Macrobius's Praetextatus makes use of Homer, just as Julian had done before him.^[130] Though he uses none of the same passages—a good argument for the complete independence of the two pieces—the procedure is essentially the same. To pick a single example, "Mars" is shown to be, for Homer, a name for one effect of the sun, by virtue of the line

He raged like Mars waving his spear, or like destructive fire.

(Il . 15.605)

This is the last of a series of assertions justifying the conclusion that "the effect of the sun bringing about warmth in souls and heat in the blood is called Mars."^[131]

The problem of the identification of Zeus with the sun—the high point and climax of Praetextatus's speech—reposes on an extended discussion of Thetis's lines to Achilles,

For yesterday Zeus went off to the Ocean to feast
among the beautiful Ethiopians and all the gods followed.
He will come back to Olympus on the twelfth day.

(Il . 1.423-25)

Praetextatus's cited sources for his analysis are all Stoics. Cornificius supplies the information that "Zeus" here means "sun," because the exhalations of the ocean nourish the sun.^[132] Cornificius's testimony is supplemented by the testimony of Posidonius and Cleanthes that it is for this reason that the sun remains in the "burning zone," through which Ocean flows, since heat is universally agreed to be nourished by moisture.

The passage is examined phrase by phrase in a manner not characteristic of Macrobius but familiar from Porphyry's essay on the cave of the nymphs. The "gods" that follow Zeus to his feast are the stars, and this

[130] See Macrob. Sat . 1.17.11, 21, 38, 44; 1.19.6, 9; 1.20.5; 1.22.4; and 1.23.1, 9.

[131] In summa pronuntiandum est effectum solis, de quo fervor animorum, de quo calor sanguinis excitatur, Martem vocari (Sat . 1.19.6).

[132] Jovis appellatione solem intelligi Cornificius scribit cui unda Oceani velut dapes ministrat (Sat . 1.23.2). Porphyry mentions this doctrine of Stoic physics in the cave essay.

― 266 ―

is supported by the familiar etymology of

from

("run"), with which is juxtaposed a derivation from

("to be contemplated") (Sat . 1.23.3). The isolated adjective "twelfth"

is said to refer not to the twelfth day (sc.,

) but rather to the twelfth hour (sc.,

), which returns a star that has set to the opposite horizon (Sat . 1.23.4). This requires of course that we ignore the amount of time required by the Iliad narrative—quite explicit at Il . 1.493-94—but we are clearly dealing with an interpretive tradition accustomed to viewing passages and individual phrases as isolated, oracular utterances independent of any context.

The analysis of the Homeric passage is immediately supported by means of a substantial citation from the Phaedrus (246e). The fit between the Homeric and Platonic passages is exceptionally good, and the "explanation" of the use of the number twelve by the juxtaposition of the two passages is rather subtle. The further cumulative material, drawn from Euripides among many more exotic sources (Sat . 1.23.8), need not concern us. The probability is that the cited Stoic sources are not the proximal ones tapped by Macrobius, though his own source cannot be identified with certainty.^[133] The most recent theory of the source of most of the material seems particularly plausible in view of the light the present study throws on the history of the interpretation of the passage. Jacques Flamant^[134] points to a series of Porphyrian sources, specifically the

, the

, and a treatise on the sun. He emphasizes the idea that the Porphyry who influences Macrobius is the Porphyry of the "philological period,"^[135] but we have seen that this distinction may well be an artificial one. Suffice it to say that the theological Homer of Praetextatus's discourse in book 1 of the Saturnalia , for all his Stoic affinities, may well be dependent, once again, on a Porphyrian source.

Looking now at the references to Homer elsewhere in the Saturnalia , and leaving behind both the fictionalized and the historical Praetextatus, it becomes clear that the various speakers in Macrobius's dialogue represent a spectrum of attitudes toward the poets. Praetextatus himself was, of course, a native Roman, and the vast bulk of his discussion of religious law and tradition refers to Roman sources. His scholarship and his knowledge of Greek allow him to reach beyond that tradition at will, but

[133] See Flamant, Macrobe , pp. 655-68.

[134] Ibid., pp. 667-68. He is following F. Altheim—see pp. 657-61 with notes for the sources.

[135] Flamant, Macrobe , p. 668.

― 267 ―

he rarely feels the need. His most frequent antiquarian authority is "your Mantuan Homer."

The two Greeks portrayed in the dialogue, Eustathius and Eusebius, have an appropriately differing view of the tradition. The devil's advocate, the intruder Evangelus, is a Roman prig with a strong anti-Greek prejudice reminiscent of the personae of Juvenal's Satires .^[136] The thrust of his first offensive remark at the end of Praetextatus's speech is nevertheless extremely revealing. He objects specifically to Praetextatus's frequent use of Virgil as evidence and support for his theological exposition:

Am I supposed to believe that when [Virgil] says "Liber" and "alma Ceres" for "sun" and "moon," he hasn't simply done this in imitation of some earlier poet and repeated what he has heard without knowing why it was said? Unless, of course, like the Greeks, who exaggerate enormously the importance of everything Greek, we also want to claim that our poets are philosophers.^[137]

He goes on to observe that Cicero, for all his rhetorical skill, is least elegant when talking about the gods, a further proof that style and poetic effectiveness have no connection with theological authority. The point was made by Augustine as well,^[138] and from our perspective seems perfectly sound. It is immediately clear in the dialogue, however, that Evangelus's remark is considered not only inept (and doubtless offensive to the Greeks present) but wrong. The feeling of the assembly is that early poetry—Virgil, for his demonstrable scholarship, included—is philosophically and theologically authoritative. Two prevalent attitudes emerge from this polarization: first, it was possible, at the end of the fourth century, to view the elevation of early poetry to a position of theological and philosophical authority as a contemptible and characteristically Greek form of exaggeration, and second, this position was not shared by the Platonizing pagan senatorial class in Rome, who were disposed to treat Virgil as well as early Greek poetry in the manner in which the Greek Platonists treated Homer.

Symmachus's reply to Evangelus evokes the Socratic critique of Homer. He asks whether in fact the verses of Virgil are fit for the education

[136] The idea that Evangelus's name might be an indication that he is a Christian is examined and rejected, I think rightly, by Flamant (Macrobe , pp. 74-75).

[137] An ego credam quod ille, cum diceret Liber et alma Ceres pro sole ac luna, non hoc in alterius poetae imitationem posuit, ita dici audiens, cur tamen diceretur ignorans? Nisi forte, ut Graeci omnia sua in immensum tollunt, nos quoque etiam poetas nostros volumus philosophari (Sat . 1.24.3-4).

[138] See n. 111 above.

― 268 ―

of the young (Sat . 1.24.5). Evangelus's reply is negative—when we were children, he says, sine judicio mirabamur , but Virgil was wise to will his flawed poem to the flames (Sat . 1.24.6-7). Symmachus then tries without success to make Evangelus admit Virgil's rhetorical power (Sat . 1.24.8-9). Finally, after emphasizing the breadth of Virgil's wisdom, he laments the fact that the critics habitually limit themselves to examining Virgil's language and consider the vast content of his poetry forbidden ground (Sat . 1.24.10-12). He then sets the tone of the discussion to follow:

[Unlike such critics,] since we have no business acting in a crude manner, let us not allow the secret places of the sacred poem to remain shut up, but by exploring the access to its arcane meanings let us offer its newly opened sanctuary to be celebrated by the adoration of the wise.^[139]

The task is divided up among the participants. Eusebius (the Greek rhetor) will expound Virgil's oratory, and each person present will examine Virgil in the light of his own specialty. Praetextatus will "show Virgil to be our high priest."^[140] Flavianus will expound his mastery of augury, Eustathius (the Greek philosopher) will demonstrate the poet's knowledge of astrology and philosophy as well as his use of Greek material, the Albinii will explore his use of Latin sources, and Servius will be available for help with obscure points (Sat. 1.24.14-20).

We are not concerned here with the interpretation of Virgil, but the project that forms the core of the Saturnalia has been sketched out to emphasize the dependence of the interpretation of Virgil—at least for this milieu—on the developments in the interpretation of Homer that concern us. It is quite significant that Evangelus's judgment is borne out at least to the extent that the task of the exposition of the "philosophy" of Virgil is conferred on a Greek. His speech, which for our purposes would have been the most interesting part of the discussion of Virgil, is sadly lost in a lacuna at the beginning of book 3. In book 4, also fragmentary, Eusebius illustrates various rhetorical tropes from Virgil in exactly the manner applied by Ps.-Plutarch to Homer. When it is agreed that Virgil is an orator and superior even to Cicero as a rhetorical educator (Sat . 5.1), Eustathius takes over again to complete the second part of his task and to demonstrate Virgil's borrowings from the Greek tradition.

[139] Sed nos, quos crassa Minerva dedecet, non patiamur abstrusa esse adyta sacri poematis, sed, arcanorum sensuum investigato aditu, doctorum cultu celebranda praebeamus reclusa penetralia (Sat . 1.24.13).

[140] promitto fore ut Virgilius noster pontifex maximus asseratur (Sat . 1.24.16).

― 269 ―

Since he is a Greek and more familiar with Homer than with Virgil, Eustathius begins by requesting a copy of Virgil to stimulate his memory. He opens at random, announces that the port of Ithaca has been turned into the city of Dido, reads Aeneid 1.159-69, and then cites from memory the passage on the description of the cave of the nymphs in the Odyssey , the subject of Porphyry's essay. It is difficult to say what significance can be attached to this choice, since there is no explicit reference to Porphyry and no interpretation of the passage is offered. In view of Macrobius's demonstrable knowledge of some of the works of Porphyry, however, it is tempting to believe that the passage had a special "theological" significance for him. The commentary on the dream of Scipio, probably written a few years later than the Saturnalia ,^[141] shows a full knowledge of Numenius's ideas on the passage, obtained in all probability by way of Porphyry.

Date: 2015-12-17; view: 596