INTRODUCTION
Why Apuleius's Apologia?
I had never heard of Apuleius’s Apologia when Professor Francese proposed putting together a commentary on it– but it didn’t matter. He could have proposed any text at all and I still would have jumped at the chance. He has cultivated such a collegial, spirited and cordial working environment for students of all ages and levels of Latin ability, and working with our Dickinson Summer Latin crew is always such a powerful good in my life that I wanted to be first in line to join in on whatever it would be.
When I found out the basic premise of his Apologia-- namely, that Apuleius was defending himself against a charge of witchcraft-- I was unsurprised. After all, his Metamorphoses has witchcraft and magic as its central themes; it isn't hard to imagine that people might have thought he was involved in such practices. I was also really excited about the prospect of seeing what exact actions he had been accused of and how he defended himself; there would certainly be some neat information in this text about how witchcraft was perceived outside of a literary setting full of details which might be more to do with tropes than actual contemporary understanding of the practice.
Over the course of the next three years of reading, re-reading, annotating and editing the text, I not only found out a great deal about Roman conceptions of religious and magical practices, but found a whole host of other reasons to love this speech, a few of which I will outline here, starting with possibly the most boring but also the most beneficial:
Prose Grammar
When it comes to reading Latin my first love is with the poets. By the time I started attending Summer Latin at Dickinson I had just finished a full read-through of Ovid’s Metamorphoses and Vergil’s Georgics, and was following it up with his Eclogues and then a plan to read one book per month of his Aeneid the following year. But I had always kind of found Cicero tedious and Tacitus impenetrable.
I have found Apuleius to be a great helper text in accessing both of these latter authors: he is wordy, but not as wordy as Cicero; he is elliptical, but nowhere near as elliptical as Tacitus. In the last year I have read the first two of Cicero's Philippics, helped along the way by many of the oratorical and semantic signposts that I have grown familiar with from reading Apuleius' Apologia. I have also finally gotten past the first two pages of the first book of Tacitus's Historiae, a chestnut that has long been on my shelf waiting to be cracked. In writing notes for Apuleius's Apologia I have been careful to notice when words and thoughts have been left in ellipse and to think through their accurate summary or replacement-- in this way I've honed the skill of mentally ‘filling in the blanks,' which is essential to wrangling Tacitus's more loose and elliptical style.
Archaisms & Colloquialisms
One of the oddities we noticed in reading through the Apologia was how many forms and how much vocabulary was only otherwise attested in Plautus, leading to amazing discussions of whether these were meant as archaisms to a grandiose or comic effect, or whether there was a sort of hidden through-line of colloquial Latin that merely went unattested between the two. I don’t know whether there will ever be an answer to this question but now it’s one I can barely stop thinking about. At any rate, if you want to read Plautus next, you’ll at the very least recognize the heck out of ‘cedo’ (‘gimme’) by the time you do.
Humor & Sarcasm
Apuleius is FUNNY in this speech. I remember the first time I noticed, and was taken aback – wait, was that sarcasm? It was! And then it never seemed to stop. I was careful to mark the sarcastic comments as such in the commentary and, where the force of the sarcasm was a little more obscure, to explain that as well. Several times I actually found myself laughing aloud at a remark of his.
Not only did this pervasive ironic humor make the text all the more of a delightful read, it also may have served a point in his defense. At the climactic moment of the speech, when he finally addresses the main piece of evidence presented by his accusers of his engaging in sorcery – namely, a letter from his wife which seemed to claim that Apuleius was indeed a sorcerer and had cast a spell on her to make her fall in love with him – what was his defense? She was being sarcastic. She was speaking ironically in order to say the very opposite of the explicit text of the letter-- something which Apuleius had been ‘priming the pump’ for, as it were, by doing the same thing constantly to his accusers and their ridiculous accusations in the build-up to his big reveal.
Incidental Cultural Information
As with many texts, some of the most interesting pieces of Apuleius’s Apologia are the incidental details which give us a sneak peek into life in the Roman Empire. Most famously, this work gives us the true identity of Catullus’s Lesbia, as well as names associated with the other puellae of the elegiac era. Beyond that, I never even knew to be curious about how someone’s age might have been confirmed for the sake of a trial before Apuleius took us through the steps. And when Apuleius complains that Aemilianus never even puts wreaths on the branches of trees on his farm, we catch a little peek of something that must have been common rustic practice for those without the means to build shrines on their property. The text is rich with little gems like these.
Notes on Notes (or: My Apologia)
I’d like to take a minute to explain a basic set of precepts which have underscored my writing process for anyone who might take the following exceptions to the grammar notes which accompany this text.
Why Are There So Many Notes?
As someone whose constant experience with commentaries has been to find plenty of notes on the things that I had already figured out on my own but absolute silence on the one thing that was tripping me up, I wanted to be comprehensive and not let that one person down. If you don’t need the note, feel free to skip right past it, and spare a thought for the person who might.
Why Are The Notes So Repetitive?
I always wanted to keep in mind “those of you just joining us” as we went along, with the personal opinion that “see note on … “ notes are supremely annoying and disjunctive of the reading experience. I don’t think that many people are going to want to read the entire thing, especially not at the high school and college levels at which this commentary is aimed.
But that’s perfectly fine! There are lots of great individual sections on a wide variety of interesting topics someone can duck in, read about, and abandon the rest. For people looking for a short snippet of interest, or teachers looking for an interesting prose selection for the new AP curriculum, I am including in this introduction an index of some interesting topics with section numbers and short descriptions.
Why Do You Translate So Many Words And Phrases?
Because honestly nothing beats the dopamine hit of finding a PERFECT phrase that encapsulates the meaning in modern, colloquial English while allowing the grammar of the section to remain intact. Let me have this.
TOPICS OF INTEREST:
MAGIC / WITCHCRAFT / SORCERY:
Whatever you want to call it; the Latin term is magīa. Apuleius is defending himself against a charge of using magīa to force Pudentilla to marry him. Here is a list of the sections where Apuleius refutes various pieces of evidence that he did, in fact, engage in witchcraft.
What Even IS a Magus: Chapters 25.5-27.4
Apuleius comes to the crux of the accusation against him: that he is a magus. But what do his accusers even mean by that? Here he whips up some straw men to knock down on that topic.
On the Acquisition of Fishes: Chapters 29-41
Apuleius is accused of paying top dollar for people to find him certain unusual fish to use in magical potions to make Pudentilla fall in love with him.
some interesting excerpts from this section include:
30.5-31.12: a catalogue of attested love potion components and other magical herbs and items from various authors of antiquity including Vergil and Homer – none of which are found in the sea.
33.1-4, 40.5-11: the charge that Apuleius came into possession of a poisonous sea-hare; its refutation by scientific analysis of the specimen.
34.4-6, 35.5-7: Apuleius is accused of using a sort of sympathetic name magic, using fish with suggestive-sounding names to provoke an erotic response in Pudentilla.
36-39: a survey of philosophers and poets who had produced studies on sea life, inspiring Apuleius to take up the study at an advanced age; chapter 37 includes a digression on Sophocles penning the Oedipus at Colonus at an advanced old age to generous applause.
On Thallus, his Epileptic Slave: Chapters 42-52
Apuleius is accused of using a male slave named Thallus as a component in his sorcery, of casting a spell on him and causing him to collapse. Apuleius explains that Thallus actually suffers from epilepsy, which explains his collapse, and that his research into the disease is of a scientific, not magical, nature.
some interesting excerpts from this section include:
42.5-43.3: a selection of stories about young boys actually entering trances for magical/prophetic purposes; the philosophical rationale for its plausibility.
43.9: a catalogue of Thallus’ symptoms.
44: the treatment of Thallus by the other slaves in the household; his removal into quarantine so as not to infect others; the inappropriateness of bringing him into court.
45.4: the olfactory and visual stimuli which are known to trigger attacks of epilepsy (and are so used to diagnose the disease).
48.1-4, 11-12: Apuleius describes examining a woman with epilepsy (who his accusers also claim he enchanted into collapsing).
49-51: Apuleius expounds Plato’s theory of diseases and describes where epilepsy falls in that system; a description of epilepsy’s root causes and the resulting symptoms.
On Whatever Was In The Napkin: Chapters 53-55
Apuleius is accused of leaving some sort of magical item wrapped up in a napkin on the lararium of Pontianus, son of Pudentilla. Apuleius rejects the entire premise as ridiculous and concludes his retort by declaring that even if he had left some religious item wrapped in a napkin, it was a symbol of a mystery cult and thus to be protected from public view.
some interesting excerpts from this section include:
53.7-9: a description of the duties of a freedman in Pontianus’s household whose job was to care for the locked library where the purported napkin was kept.
54.4-55.2: a reductio ad absurdum of what madness would overrun courtrooms if people were allowed to accuse others without proof and to simply ask after evidence once the trial had started.
55.7-56.10: a discussion on the proper methods of storing sacred items and maintaining their mystery from the uninitiated; a contrasting picture of Aemilianus’s lack of religious observance includes passing mention of many simple rustic religious customs.
On the Feathers and Smoke: Chapters 57-60
Apuleius is accused of performing nocturnal rituals with his friend Appius Quintianus in a house the latter was renting from a man named Junius Crassus. Crassus has sent a written testimony that he found smoke stains on the walls and feathers on the floor as evidence for these rites. But Crassus was in Alexandria at the time in question and was also well-paid for his testimony by Aemilianus.
some interesting excerpts from this section include:
57.2-6: a humorous analysis of Crassus’s superhuman ability to sense smoke rising from his home from all the way from Alexandria.
58.3-10: Apuleius picks apart the remainder of Crassus’ testimony as absurd.
On the Wooden Statuette: Chapters 61-65
Apuleius is accused of having in his possession a secret idol of a grotesque, skeletal deity which he refers to as “king.” Apuleius explains that this was a statuette of Mercury which had commissioned openly, spoken to many people about, and carried around with him in his usual manner. He has the statue with him today in court and shows it to the assembled to prove it was nothing strange or unusual.
some interesting excerpts from this section include:
61.4-8: Apuleius discovers Saturninus’s work and commissions the statuette; Pontianus acquires some fancy wood and delivers it to Saturninus as a surprise for Apuleius.
63: Apuleius just happens to have the statuette of Mercury with him, which he takes out and describes in detail for the court.
64.3-8: Apuleius explains the name he is accused of calling the statuette, discoursing on the Platonic idea of a mysterious, all-encompassing universal deity known as “king.”
65: an explanation of why Apuleius wanted the piece done in wood rather than a higher-status materials like gold or silver.
On Pudentilla’s Letter: Chapters 78.5-84.6
The central piece of evidence against Apuleius on the charge of magīa comes in the form of a letter of Pudentilla’s to her son Pontianus which says, and I quote, “Apuleius is a magus.” It seems pretty damning until Apuleius puts the quote back into its original context (which had been carefully concealed by his accusers): Pudentilla scolding her son for believing such far-fetched things.
some interesting excerpts from this section include:
78.6: a description of the process by which both sides in a trial were provided with a copy of important pieces of evidence.
79: on the dishonest nature of women in general and specifically what they write in letters concerning love affairs (e.g., Phaedra).
81: on Rufinus’ amazing power of deceit to turn a letter written in support of Apuleius into one that reads the exact opposite; a catalogue of mythic/historical liars.
82-83: the letter itself; how a portion of it was taken out of context. the importance of context and an impressive personification of words and letters.
MARRIAGE / DOWRY / INHERITANCE:
Because the purported aim of Apuleius’s’ sorcery was to win the hand of the wealthy widow Pudentilla in marriage, the speech also dips into a lot of interesting topics surrounding marriages, specifically second marriages, and the legal protection of Pudentilla’s adult sons from her first marriage where it came to ensuring their inheritance wouldn’t be stolen by her new husband.
On Pudentilla’s Widowhood: Chapters 68.2-69.3
Pudentilla had two sons with her first husband before he died: read here about the precarious situation this left both her and her sons in; how her father in law used the boys’ status against her and ended up compelling her to live as a widow for 14 years, to the detriment of her health.
On Pontianus's Matchmaking: Chapters 71.4-73.9
Once his mother is on the market, Pontianus, the dutiful son, takes it upon himself to find her the perfect match. Into the mix enter one Apuleius, exhausted from his travels. The rest is history!
On Where To Get Married: Chapters 87.10-88.7
Apuleius discusses his and Pudentilla’s decision to get married at a country estate. It touches on the social expectations of wealthy families celebrating a wedding or other major milestone in the city and, on the other hand, some praises of the countryside as a venue for a wedding.
On Pudentilla's Age: Chapter 89
The accusers have said that Pudentilla is 60 years old, presumably to make it seem more likely that Apuleius is after her fortune. Apuleius does some clever rhetorical math tricks, but there are also some cool insights here into how births were recorded, how official age was calculated in cases like these, and the system of hand gestures Romans used to represent numbers.
On Pudentilla's Dowry: Chapters 91.6-92.11
Apuleius opens his marriage contract with Pudentilla to show that he did not receive a large dowry from her, as his accusers have alleged. The marriage contract contains specific protections for her sons to inherit her wealth if she dies without another child from Apuleius, and what will happen to her money if she does have further offspring, showing how long and intricate these documents could become in a world of frequent divorces and remarriages. There is also a general sense that widowed or divorced women could reasonably offer larger dowries to offset the various drawbacks of their status– including a lack of virginity.
On The Inheritances of Pontianus and Pudens: Chapters 93.1-94.5, 99.3-100.10
Far from trying to weasel Pudentilla’s fortune for himself, Apuleius worked hard to reconcile the boys to their mother, asking her to give them a large portion of their inheritance ahead of time (93.1-94.5) and later stopping Pudentilla from disinheriting Pudens entirely for his bad behavior (99.3-100.10).
On Rufinus and his Daughter: Chapters 74.1-77.4, 97.3-99.1
Rufinus, a morally shady character, runs his household like a brothel and makes money renting out his wife and daughter by the night; next he hopes to rope in some big bucks by catching Pontianus in marriage to his daughter and so obtaining access to Pudentilla’s fortune; once Pontianus dies, he hopes to rope in the younger brother Pudens for the same purpose, and lures him away from his mother’s household to a debased life like his own.
some interesting excerpts from this section include:
75.1-4: a description of the proceedings in Rufinus’ household brothel; how rich and poor alike are fleeced.
76.4-6: Herrenia and Pontianus’ wedding; red flags abound.
97.3-98.1: An astounding passage: Rufinus has a) consulted oracles as to the best way to make money from his daughter’s bed, b) calculated what his daughter had ‘earned’ in her short marriage based on her nightly ‘rate’ and found her inheritance from Pontianus wanting, and c) decided to continue pursuing Pudentilla’s fortune by marrying his daughter to Pudens next.
98.4-99.1: Rufinus’s corrupting influence on Pudens; Apuleius washes his hands of the boy.
MISCELLANEOUS TOPICS:
Apuleius’s accusers also threw in a handful of maledicta – not exactly charges, but general bits of character assassination – some of which might be of interest.
On Handsomeness: Chapters 4-8
Apuleius is accused of generally being well-spoken and good-looking and specifically going so far as to brush his teeth in order to be so. This is presumably in order to paint him as ‘slick’ or otherwise overabundantly urbane, and to undercut his ability to defend himself by painting his oratorical ability as manipulative.
some interesting excerpts from this section include:
4.3-13: A catalogue of handsome philosophers; Apuleius declines to count himself among him; look at his hair!
6.1-4: A poem of Apuleius written about toothpaste was used against him in the trial; he recites it and explains its context. Interesting information about ancient toothpaste.
8.6-7:The exemplum of the crocodile and the plover.
On His Love Poems: Chapters 9-13.2
Apuleius is accused of writing love poetry to two boys enslaved by a friend of his, Scribonius Laetus, and presumably of sexually assaulting them. Apuleius brings a whole catalogue of examples of other authors who had done the same thing without being accused of witchcraft.
some interesting excerpts from this section include:
9.12-14: the text of Apuleius’s actual poems addressed to the boys.
10.2-5: Apuleius is accused of not using the boys’ real names in his poetry; he argues that this is the best policy, as not to embarrass the beloved boys in a public sphere, and gives many examples of authors who used pseudonyms for the objects of their love poems.
12.1-13.2: Plato’s theory of the two Venuses, the earthly and the divine; Apuleius argues that love can be a philosophical good, something that reminds the soul of the platonic ideal of beauty in the eternal realm of forms.
On Owning A Mirror: Chapters 13.5-16.7
Apuleius is accused of owning a mirror, and presumably of the vanity implied by the fact of owning one. He admits to the possession, but defends his use of it in philosophical terms.
some interesting excerpts from this section include:
14.1-15.2: seeing an image of oneself in progeny or honorary statues is an honor and a good; why then is seeing the image of oneself all the more accurately reflected in a mirror an evil? Either both should be banned or both accepted.
15.12-16.6: philosophers are naturally obsessed by mirrors and the many questions of natural philosophy and physics that they produce; some catalogued here.
On Poverty: Chapters 18-23.5
Apuleius is accused of being poor, presumably in order to corroborate the argument that he was after Pudentilla’s fortune. Apuleius takes a philosophical view of this accusation in his reply to it.
some interesting excerpts from this section include:
18.1-19.5: poverty is a philosophical good which has produced men of outstanding virtues both among Greeks and Romans; Romans in particular should be proud of the archaic simplicity in which the great men of antiquity lived and strive to live in a similar lack of luxury.
20.1-9, 21.4-6: a philosophical paradox: true poverty is wanting more than you have while true wealth is being content with very little.
22: Apuleius meditates on the traditional philosopher’s gear: the satchel and the walking stick.