[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
.Valerius rhetoric, moreover, leaves no doubt as towhich option is correct.The presence of the gods was in Livy heralded by acrow.In Valerius the power of the gods to punish immoral behavior (lying)is made central and explicit.Valerian rhetoric harnesses sacred history,including ritual, for ethical improvement.The consul becomes religiosus,that is, infused with a religiosity that in Livy would be more akin toSamnite superstition.Valerius Papirius does not simply declare that thegods are present.He invaded Aquilonia with a faithful spirit (fidenteanimo).We find, in short, an emotional religion engaged with morality andgrappling with issues of belief.Republican ritual has been harnessed tomoral persuasion.Translating fidente in terms of faith rather than simple confidence, theusual translation,19 should not, moreover, be dismissed as tendentious orChristianizing.The concept of faith in our own common usage (loyal andzealous adherence to partisan stances in regard to matters divine and secular)is central to Valerian rhetoric, and is adumbrated as such in his preface.What is it that renders Caesars in general and Tiberius in particular sothrilling in comparison with earlier gods? Tiberius divinity appears equal to115 RITUAL VOCABULARY AND MORAL IMPERATIVESthe paternal and grandpaternal star.By what mechanism? By immediate(and thus powerfully effective) faith: By means of immediate belief yourdivinity appears equal to your paternal and grandpaternal star (tua[diuinitas] praesenti fide paterno avitoque sideri par videtur; praef.).Valeriusspeaks too of miracles producing faith.When the augur Attus Naviuspredicts correctly to King Tarquin that the gods will accomplish what hehas in mind to do namely, split a whetstone with a razor the miracleengenders, in the surviving epitome of Nepotianus, great faith in, as well asthe authority of, augurs at Rome (magna fides et auctoritas Romae augurum;Valerius 1.4.1 [Nep.]) as well as, in the surviving epitome of Paris, ocularproof of his craft in action (effectum suae professionis oculis regis subiecit; Valerius1.4.1 [Par.]).Not all those with eyes see, but those who do, believe.20To return, though, to Papirius, another version of comparative interestsurvives.The ancient Christian presbyter, Paulus Orosius, also focused hishistorical gaze on birdkeepers lies, but he contrasts the lies of augur bird-keepers with the signal victory Romans won over Samnites.What is more,the navely sincere guardian of ritual propriety in Livy, who becameemotionally religious in Valerius, becomes in Orosius a contemner of augurbirdkeepers, laughing at them when they try to prevent him from enteringbattle:adversum [Samnites] Papirius consul cum exercitu missus cum apullariis auguribus uana coniectantibus congredi prohiberetur,inridens eos tam feliciter confecit bellum quam constanterarripuit.(Orosius Hist.3.22.3)Against [the Samnites] Papirius, the consul, was sent with an army,although the augur birdkeepers, predicting empty outcomes,prohibited the advance.Laughing at them, he carried out the war assuccessfully as he had firmly undertaken it.Orosius, as a Christian priest, ridicules the ancient gods.So does hisPapirius.This anti-ritual rhetoric brings into even sharper focus the morallycharged rhetoric of ritual in Valerius Maximus.Valerius consul religiosus istransformed in Orosius into an embodiment of the doctrine that ridiculesgods (doctrina deos spernens) decried by Livy.One ritual, three interpreta-tions, three lessons.Livy extols the ancient as different.His ritual embodiesa time when, as opposed to his own times, men believed simply and did notdoubt.Orosius sees shrewd men, even cynics, who recognized the absurdi-ties of their own religious practice, and consequently ignored it.Neither ofthese views will come as news to those who have studied Roman religion.116 RITUAL VOCABULARY AND MORAL IMPERATIVESAttention to Valerius contributes something less frequently examined oracknowledged in the study of Roman ritual.21 A rhetoric of faith, a zealousand emotional one at that, seizes upon ritual as a means to impress uponan audience a doctrine that gods intervene, that gods care about theconduct of individuals, and that the gods are on the side of conventionalmorality.The language of ritual becomes part of the language of moralpersuasion.Priesthood in Valerius MaximusA discussion of priesthood in Valerius Maximus confronts us, in the veryintroduction to his work, with a significant literary dichotomy.In his intro-duction, the author contrasts his own insignificance (paruitas) with theoutstanding priests of the past (excellentissimi uates).We confront a seconddichotomy.The priests of the past derived their subject matter from somegod or other (numine aliquo), whereas our author invokes a present andmanifest god, Tiberius, equal to the paternal and grandpaternal star (Caesar & diuinitas & paterno auitoque sideri par).The past thus, on the onehand, contrasts favorably with the present.Outstanding priests outshine theauthor.On the other hand, the present is in an important respect superior tothe past.The present offers Caesars, gods who deign to dwell among humanbeings in human flesh.This double dichotomy is most clever indeed [ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
zanotowane.pl doc.pisz.pl pdf.pisz.pl matkasanepid.xlx.pl
.Valerius rhetoric, moreover, leaves no doubt as towhich option is correct.The presence of the gods was in Livy heralded by acrow.In Valerius the power of the gods to punish immoral behavior (lying)is made central and explicit.Valerian rhetoric harnesses sacred history,including ritual, for ethical improvement.The consul becomes religiosus,that is, infused with a religiosity that in Livy would be more akin toSamnite superstition.Valerius Papirius does not simply declare that thegods are present.He invaded Aquilonia with a faithful spirit (fidenteanimo).We find, in short, an emotional religion engaged with morality andgrappling with issues of belief.Republican ritual has been harnessed tomoral persuasion.Translating fidente in terms of faith rather than simple confidence, theusual translation,19 should not, moreover, be dismissed as tendentious orChristianizing.The concept of faith in our own common usage (loyal andzealous adherence to partisan stances in regard to matters divine and secular)is central to Valerian rhetoric, and is adumbrated as such in his preface.What is it that renders Caesars in general and Tiberius in particular sothrilling in comparison with earlier gods? Tiberius divinity appears equal to115 RITUAL VOCABULARY AND MORAL IMPERATIVESthe paternal and grandpaternal star.By what mechanism? By immediate(and thus powerfully effective) faith: By means of immediate belief yourdivinity appears equal to your paternal and grandpaternal star (tua[diuinitas] praesenti fide paterno avitoque sideri par videtur; praef.).Valeriusspeaks too of miracles producing faith.When the augur Attus Naviuspredicts correctly to King Tarquin that the gods will accomplish what hehas in mind to do namely, split a whetstone with a razor the miracleengenders, in the surviving epitome of Nepotianus, great faith in, as well asthe authority of, augurs at Rome (magna fides et auctoritas Romae augurum;Valerius 1.4.1 [Nep.]) as well as, in the surviving epitome of Paris, ocularproof of his craft in action (effectum suae professionis oculis regis subiecit; Valerius1.4.1 [Par.]).Not all those with eyes see, but those who do, believe.20To return, though, to Papirius, another version of comparative interestsurvives.The ancient Christian presbyter, Paulus Orosius, also focused hishistorical gaze on birdkeepers lies, but he contrasts the lies of augur bird-keepers with the signal victory Romans won over Samnites.What is more,the navely sincere guardian of ritual propriety in Livy, who becameemotionally religious in Valerius, becomes in Orosius a contemner of augurbirdkeepers, laughing at them when they try to prevent him from enteringbattle:adversum [Samnites] Papirius consul cum exercitu missus cum apullariis auguribus uana coniectantibus congredi prohiberetur,inridens eos tam feliciter confecit bellum quam constanterarripuit.(Orosius Hist.3.22.3)Against [the Samnites] Papirius, the consul, was sent with an army,although the augur birdkeepers, predicting empty outcomes,prohibited the advance.Laughing at them, he carried out the war assuccessfully as he had firmly undertaken it.Orosius, as a Christian priest, ridicules the ancient gods.So does hisPapirius.This anti-ritual rhetoric brings into even sharper focus the morallycharged rhetoric of ritual in Valerius Maximus.Valerius consul religiosus istransformed in Orosius into an embodiment of the doctrine that ridiculesgods (doctrina deos spernens) decried by Livy.One ritual, three interpreta-tions, three lessons.Livy extols the ancient as different.His ritual embodiesa time when, as opposed to his own times, men believed simply and did notdoubt.Orosius sees shrewd men, even cynics, who recognized the absurdi-ties of their own religious practice, and consequently ignored it.Neither ofthese views will come as news to those who have studied Roman religion.116 RITUAL VOCABULARY AND MORAL IMPERATIVESAttention to Valerius contributes something less frequently examined oracknowledged in the study of Roman ritual.21 A rhetoric of faith, a zealousand emotional one at that, seizes upon ritual as a means to impress uponan audience a doctrine that gods intervene, that gods care about theconduct of individuals, and that the gods are on the side of conventionalmorality.The language of ritual becomes part of the language of moralpersuasion.Priesthood in Valerius MaximusA discussion of priesthood in Valerius Maximus confronts us, in the veryintroduction to his work, with a significant literary dichotomy.In his intro-duction, the author contrasts his own insignificance (paruitas) with theoutstanding priests of the past (excellentissimi uates).We confront a seconddichotomy.The priests of the past derived their subject matter from somegod or other (numine aliquo), whereas our author invokes a present andmanifest god, Tiberius, equal to the paternal and grandpaternal star (Caesar & diuinitas & paterno auitoque sideri par).The past thus, on the onehand, contrasts favorably with the present.Outstanding priests outshine theauthor.On the other hand, the present is in an important respect superior tothe past.The present offers Caesars, gods who deign to dwell among humanbeings in human flesh.This double dichotomy is most clever indeed [ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]