80

The argument of my accusers regarding the letter is logically inconsistent. On a true interpretation, the letter exonerates me. I shall have it read aloud right now, and stop the clerk at the crucial words where our interpretations differ.

(1)

Postrēmō: "finally" = "when all is said and done," OLD postremo 4.

quid vīs: "what are you alleging?"

sānam an īnsānam fuisse: understand Pudentillam as the subject of this indirect statement.

Sānam dīcēs:  dīcēs (Pudentillam) sānam (fuisse)?

erat ... passa: plupf. > patior patī passus sum.

eōque: "and for that reason."

eī fidēs nōn habenda est: "she should not be trusted."

(2)

absurdē facit: "behaves in an irrational manner." The subject is the given in the following qui-clause.

ibīdem dīcendō tacēre sēsē: "instantly upon saying that he is being silent."

īnfirmat: "invalidates."

ita vel magis: "in this same way or even more so."

repugnat: "is self-contradictory."

porrō: "but on the other hand," LS porro II.b.2.b.

scīre sē: "to recognize itself."

(3)

compos mentis: "in control of (her) mind," i.e., of sound mind.

plūribus: supply verbīs ūtī, "to employ more words," i.e., to go on.

mittō: "I pass over," LS mitto II.F.

dialectica: neuter plural accusative, "dialectics." Dialectics is the study of logic and the art of forming logically valid arguments. It was a specialty of the Stoic school, and could at times descend into the pursuit of logic puzzles or paradoxes like this. See Cicero, Stoic Paradoxes. Jones aptly translates, "logic chopping."

read more 1

Apuleius enters on a piece of dazzling reasoning, modeled on the example of the Liar paradox (see Cicero, Academica 2.95). On closer scrutiny, there are several weak points in the argument. (80.1:) Being sane does not automatically exclude influence of magic, while a woman may be insane but still know what she has written. An insane woman may well be aware of her insanity. (80.2:) The truth of the statement “I am insane” does not depend on the speaker's own knowledge, while being sane does not consist in knowing what insanity is. “Insanity knowing itself” is a misleading personification (insanity cannot know). (80.3:) The conclusion is a paradox which, on the speaker's terms, could equally have been reversed: if Pudentilla was really sane, she would not think that she was insane. She wrote that she was insane. Therefore she was not sane. Instead of “dialectics,” we can apply the term “sophistry” here. The passage is clearly designed as a showpiece to impress the audience (Hunink).

recitābō: written evidence was read in court during the speeches, while personal testimony was not delivered till after the speech of the advocate who called the evidence. Written evidence was as a rule read by an official or clerk of the court: see Cicero Pro Caelio 55, Pro Cluentio 168. ... Recitabo is not to be taken literally. Here it means "I will cause to be read" (B/O).

longē aliud clāmantēs: "declaring (a) vastly different (state of affairs than the accusers have presented)."

dēditā operā: "with concerted effort," "deliberately.”

istud = hoc, as often in Apuleius.

usque dum: "until the point at which."

(4)

Sustinē paulisper: the promised interruption.

secuntur: sequuntur.

dēverticulum reī: "the crucial point of the whole matter." The use of the word in this metaphorical sense seems to be unique. Deverticulum means a byroad. The sense here is "so far our course has been plain. We now come to a point where the roads diverge. My accusers put one interpretation on the letter, I another" (B/O).

ventum est: an impersonal passive construction: "it has been come" = "we have come."

(5)

magīam nōmināvit: "used the word magic."

ōrdinem:  "course of events" (Jones).

repetīvit: "went over."

quem ego paulō prius: supply repetīvī.

voluntāte: "her desire."

suāsū ipsīus: "his own (Pontianus's) effort to persuade her."

mihi potissimum: "specifically to me."