The host of reprehensible and compelling characters found in the Satires forms one of the salient features of Juvenalís artist

James H. CROZIER Aelius Theon, Aristotle and the Case for Dramatic Characters in Juvenal's Satires

W.S. Anderson's application of the "persona theory" to the study of the Satires (Anderson, Essays on Roman Satire, 1982) has transformed Juvenalean scholarship. Anderson's work, developed from Kernan's initial iteration of the persona theory (A. Kernan, The Cankered Muse, 1962), argues for the dismissal of historical-biographical readings of the Satires in favor of viewing the poems as dramatic monologues in which the speaker is a character invented by the author. This view has been recently challenged by Iddeng, who cites a lack of evidence in ancient texts to suggest a theoretical framework for using dramatic characters in works of poetry during or before Juvenal's day (J. Iddeng, SO 2000, 120-122). This study argues that Iddeng's objection is incorrect and demonstrates congruencies between Juvenal's poetic practice and the principle of dramatic ethos set forth in Aristotle's Rhetoric (3.16.1417a20-26) that support the validity of reading and understanding the Satires as dramatic monologues.

The first half of this paper addresses the evidence upon which Iddeng bases his objection to Anderson's approach. Iddeng's thesis is that "poetics in Roman imperial times do not show any sign of close connection between dramatic characters and the first person voice of poetry and satire (Iddeng, 120)." While this criticism is fair, Iddeng's handling of the well-known practice of assuming different personae in the Roman schools of declamation is less satisfying. The author admits that the "Romans were well aware of the concept of the persona, especially through schooling in declamation (Iddeng, 121)," but denies that this awareness was influential in Roman literature. This viewpoint is wholly incompatible with Bonner's findings (Bonner 1977, 250-276), which include a passage found in Aelius Theon's Progymnasmata (70.24-30) indicating that declamation, the standard exercise practiced in the Roman schools of rhetoric, was intended to provide not only rhetorical training but also a foundation for literary composition. A discussion of this passage, combined with Russell's evidence for a strong link between declamation and literature in Greece (D.A. Russell, Greek Declamation 1983, 1-16), will show that Iddeng's assumption that the use of personae in declamation did not influence Roman literary activity is faulty.

The second half of the paper demonstrates the congruency between the persona theory's approach to understanding Juvenal's satires and the principle of dramatic ethos set forth in Aristotle's Rhetoric. Juvenal's use of a first person narrator to set each satire's moral tone (3.16.1417a 29-43), determine its moral agenda (3.16.1417a20-26) and posit character based exempla as proof his point of view (3.16.1417a27-29) reflect key aspects of Aristotle's theory on the use of dramatic ethos as a rhetorical tool. An analysis of the speaker's role in the infamous Satire 6 is used to confirm and illustrate these findings, thereby calling Iddeng's criticism into serious question.