Seneca the Elder, the Controuersia Figurata, and the Political Discourse of the Early Empire

This paper studies examples of how exponents of Roman declamation could insert into arguments on the trivial, even fantastic, cases known as controuersiae statements of striking relevance to the political culture of the triumviral and early imperial period. This is particularly apparent in the Controuersiae of Seneca the Elder but some traces remain in the Minor Declamations attributed to Quintilian. The boundaries separating Rome itself from the declamatory city referred to by modern scholars as Sophistopolis are significantly blurred even in those instances where the exercise does not turn on a specific event from Roman history, and there is much to be gained from how the declaimers deploy Roman historical examples. Some of the most sophisticated instances of mediated political comment exploit the employment of universalizing sententiae, which have considerable bite when they are related to contemporary Roman discourse and experience. The declamation schools are a forum for thinking through the implications of the transformation of the Roman state and deserve a place within any history of Roman political thought.

ADDENDUM TO ‘DID CICERO “PROSCRIBE” MARCUS ANTONIUS?’

This note adduces three passages in Seneca the Elder to reinforce a demonstration in CQ 69 (2019), 793–8001 that the text of Plin. HN 7.117 has suffered corruption in one of its clauses and requires emendation to restore Pliny's intent. This additional evidence concerns a trope employed by declaimers which could have predisposed a scribe to alter Pliny's text to state that Cicero proscribed Mark Antony. Such a statement has no place in a list of achievements that otherwise all belong to Cicero's consulship twenty years earlier in 63 b.c.

To Endure: An Exploration of Male Rape in the Declamatory Cases of Pseudo-Quintilian and Seneca the Elder

<b>This thesis explores the declamatory works of Pseudo-Quintilian and Seneca the Elder (specially Major Declamations 3 and Controversiae 5.6) with particular attention being placed upon the representation of the male victims of sexual assault. </b><p>These explorations are then paralleled with modern sensibilities towards the same subject. </p> <p>The goal of this writing is to illustrate the purpose of declamation as a literary source, the way in which said declamation reveals key characteristics of Roman society and how these characteristics compare to modern approaches towards this topic. </p>

To Endure: An Exploration of Male Rape in the Declamatory Cases of Pseudo-Quintilian and Seneca the Elder

<b>This thesis explores the declamatory works of Pseudo-Quintilian and Seneca the Elder (specially Major Declamations 3 and Controversiae 5.6) with particular attention being placed upon the representation of the male victims of sexual assault. </b><p>These explorations are then paralleled with modern sensibilities towards the same subject. </p> <p>The goal of this writing is to illustrate the purpose of declamation as a literary source, the way in which said declamation reveals key characteristics of Roman society and how these characteristics compare to modern approaches towards this topic. </p>

Intertextuality in Seneca the Elder

This chapter consists of two parts, both of which centre upon intertextuality in the Controversiae and Suasoriae and place special emphasis on Seneca’s use of allusion. Pingoud outlines the role played by Cicero, Ovid, Horace, and Lucretius on the language of Senecan declamation by examining how Seneca imitates these authors both to teach and to entertain his audience. Rolle similarly explores the ramifications of intertextuality on Seneca’s writing by investigating how Greek oratorical texts influenced Latro’s characterization (Controversiae 1.praef). She reveals that every aspect of Latro—from his voice to his physical appearance—is based on Greek ideals of the ideal declaimer, but notes the subtle ways in which Latro’s persona is deliberately and pointedly set apart from that of Demosthenes.

The Bitter Medicine of History

This chapter investigates how Seneca the Elder negotiates the generic position of declamation in his Controversiae and Suasoriae. It argues that his practice shows a perception of close generic affinity between declamation and poetry, and focuses on his attempt to force his readers into a closer engagement with historiography. In the course of critiquing declamations, Seneca not infrequently offers as extra-declamatory comparanda examples from poetry, and especially from epic. He appears to take for granted his audience’s acceptance of the models of poetic description and poetic pathos. History, by contrast, does not appear as a parallel genre in the Controversiae and is cited only in the divisio of the sixth suasoria, on whether Cicero should ask Antony to spare him. Seneca expects his audience to be distressed by the introduction of historiographical texts, but insists on an extensive engagement with historical treatments as non alienum to the subject. This juxtaposition of attitudes suggests awareness on the part of Seneca’s audience of a generic identity centred on fictionality (a crucial distinction from traditional oratory). By centring his discussion on this exemplum, moreover, Seneca uses the most temporally proximate subject, Cicero’s death, to make the strongest possible argument for the potential benefit of history to the future development of the declamatory genre.

Reading Roman Declamation

Situated at the crossroads of rhetoric and fiction, the genre of declamatio offers its practitioners the freedom to experiment with new forms of discourse. This volume places the literariness of Roman declamation into the spotlight by showcasing its theoretical influences, stylistic devices, and generic conventions as related by Seneca the Elder, the author of the Controversiae and Suasoriae, which jointly make up the largest surviving collection of declamatory speeches from antiquity. In so doing, it draws attention to the complexity of these texts, and maps out, for the first time, the sociocultural context for their composition, delivery, and reception. The volume’s chapters have been authored by an international group of leading scholars in Latin literature and rhetoric, and explore not only the historical roles of individual declaimers but also the physical and linguistic techniques upon which they collectively drew. In addition, the ‘dark side of declamation’ is illuminated by contributions on the competitiveness of the arena and the manipulative potential of declamatory skill. In keeping with the volume’s overall treatment of declamation as a literary phenomenon, a section has also been dedicated to intertextuality. This comprehensive, innovative, and up-to-date treatment provides thought-provoking analyses of Roman declamation, and therefore constitutes an essential volume for both students and scholars in the fields of Latin literature, Republican Roman history, and rhetoric.

Between Real and Fictional Eloquence

In his critical edition of fragmentary Roman oratory of the Augustan and Tiberian periods, Andrea Balbo has dealt with many declaimers who were active both in the schools and the forum or during centumviral trials. We know about their activity in particular from Seneca the Elder: among those are L. Arruntius Pater, C. Albucius Silus, M. Porcius Latro, and T. Labienus, as well as Cassius Severus. This chapter examines some of the school speeches witnessed by Seneca with regard to their stylistic features and compares the characteristics of these fictional orations with fragments of real oratory, giving particular attention to rhetorical elements that can be ascribed to actio, and special emphasis on the declamatory contributions of Albucius Silus and Porcius Latro.

Introduction

This introduction explains the nature of ‘declamation’, not only in terms of the genre’s specific attributes but also in comparison with other Latin literary forms such as epic, satire, historiography, and philosophy. It also contains chapter summaries for the volume as a whole and outlines major trends in recent scholarship on Seneca the Elder. In the process, it outlines the characteristics which differentiate Seneca’s writings on declamation from those of other Roman writers, and suggests that the role of ancient declaimers is similar to that of modern scholars: both groups are tasked with organizing, evaluating, ranking, and reinterpreting declamatory speeches.