Patruus: Paragon or Pervert? The Case of a Literary Split Personality

F.V. Hickson: Patruus: Paragon or Pervert?21 Patruus: Paragon or Pervert? The Case of a Literary Split Personality Frances V. Hickson Latin literature reveals two seemingly paradoxical characterizations ofpatrui, paternal uncles.1 On the one hand, paternal uncles were proverbially known in ancient Rome for their censorious moralism; on the other, there are a number of literary passages which recount morally questionable acts, frequently incest, of individual paternal uncles. It is my thesis that the relative frequency of such references is directly related to the proverbial role of the patruus as a guardian of morality. In fact, it is precisely the cultural expectation of severe morality which gives these incidents their power. A translation of M. Bettini's 1987 book, Antropología e cultura Romana parentela, tempo, immagini dell'anima (Rome), appeared in the spring of 1991 making available in English a fascinating study of one area of kinship relationships in ancient Rome.2 Bettini examines the traditional roles of fathers and uncles and aunts, both paternal and maternal (1-112). He illustrates well the differing familial roles expected of the father's siblings in contrast to those of the mother's siblings. Since Bettini's work offers a fairly comprehensive review of the characterization of moralistic paternal uncles, I present only a few illustrations here. The Canillan invective against acertain Gellius begins: 1 At the request of the editors of this journal, I have briefly documented papers delivered at the Southern Section meeting of CAMWS, April 1992 and the Western Association of Women Historians, May 1992 so that this article can appear in the current issue. I plan to treat the topic in greater detail in the future. I wish to express my gratitude to the NEH and Packard Foundations, which funded my year as APA lexicography fellow at the Thesaurus Linguae Latinae in Munich, 1986-87, where I spent many weeks researching and writing the lexicon's article on patruus, col. 772-774, vol. 10.1. I am also grateful for a fellowhip from the Interdisciplinary Humanities Center of the University of California at Santa Barbara, which funded a graduate asssistant to do further research into the subject of incest in general. I have benefitted from the suggestions of readers including S.P. Gardner, J. Linderski and R. Renehan. 2 Anthropology and Roman Culture: Kinship, Time, Images ofthe Soul, trans, by J. Van Sickle (London 1991). Page references in this article will refer to the English translation. 22Syllecta Classica 4 (1993) Gellius audierat patruum obiurgare soleré, Si quis delicias diceret aut faceret Hoc ne ipsi accideret, patrui perdepsuit ipsam Uxorem et patruum reddidit Arpocratem. Quod voluit fecit: nam, quamvis irrumet ipsum Nunc patruum, verbum non faciet patruus. (74) Gellius had heard that a patemal uncle was accustomed to scold anyone who had sex or talked about it. To prevent this from happening to himself, he screwed his uncle's wife and made him silent He achieved what he wanted; for even if he should rape his uncle's mouth, his uncle would not utter a word. The entire invective revolves around the traditional role of the paternal uncle as a verbal critic of sexual activity. It is this role which gives an ironic twist to Gellius' method for avoiding his uncle's scolding by sleeping with his uncle's wife. Gellius' goal is to make silent one who traditionally speaks out. Moreover, his means of silencing the uncle is the very sexual activity which the uncle would normally criticize. Catullus pushes the comic inversion even further by suggesting that the paternal uncle would remain silent even if Gellius should rape him orally. The uncle would be silent not only figuratively, with respect to his nephew's sexual activity, but also literally, because his mouth would be full.3 Catullus' periphrasis for "to silence," reddere Arpocratem, refers to the Egyptian god of silence. Catullus may have chosen this image quite intentionally for the traditional iconography since this god showed his finger pressed to his lips, an apt suggestion of oral rape, as well as silence. The only external information on the identity of Gellius comes from Valerius Maximus, who recalls the famous case of one Gellius Poplicola who...