What's So Funny?: Laughter and Incest in Invective Humor

Hickson-Hahn: What's So Funny? What's So Funny? Laughter and Incest in Invective Humor Frances Hickson-Hahn Although Roman society held incest to be a serious violation of social custom and religious taboo, punishable even by death, authors of invective humor frequently employed accusations of incest to evoke laughter from their audiences.1 The apparent paradox between the seriousness of this offense and its use as a vehicle for humor makes the topic a thought-provoking subject of inquiry and warrants a more comprehensive study than has yet been undertaken. Past scholarship on humor and invective has touched on the topic of incest in only a summary fashion, simply categorizing it as a common theme.2 Through the use of humor theory and the analysis of individual passages of invective humor, this article takes both a theoretical and philological approach to the issue. Although ancient authors certainly did not think in psychological terms, 1 An earlier version ofthis essay was delivered at the April 1994 meeting ofCAMWS. It has benefitted from the helpful suggestions of participants in that meeting, including Timothy Moore of the University of Texas, Austin, who also read an early draft of this article and offered valuable advice. I appreciate too the valuable suggestions offered by Helena Dettmer, Mary Depew and Robert Morstein-Marx, who read drafts. In this essay, I use the term invective broadly to refer to literature with an invective spirit, including satire and jokes. E.g., S. Koster, Die Invektive in der griechischen und römischen Literatur (Meisenheim am Glan 1980). J. Tatum considers the accusation of incest as political invective in "Catullus 79: Personal Invective or Political Discourse?" Papers of the Leeds International Latin Seminar 7 (Leeds 1993) 34-35. A. Richlin's study of humor makes only brief mention of incest (Garden of Priapus: Sexuality and Aggression in Roman Humor [New Haven 1983], rev. ed. Oxford 1992). M.B. Skinner focuses on the political metaphor of incest in Catullus 79 in "Pretty Lesbius," TAPA 112(1982) 197-208. HX). Rankin is concerned with Catullus' personal feelings about incest, in particular that of Clodia Metelli ("Catullus and Incest," Éranos 74 [1976] 113-21). KA. Geffken 's monograph on the Pro Caelio does give due attention to passages involving incest in that work (Comedy in the Pro Caelio, Mnemosyne supp. 30 [Leiden 1973] 21 , 35-36). Syllecta Classica 9 (1998) modern psychological studies provide valuable insights into the workings of their humor.3 In particular, incongruity theory stands out as being of primary importance in the analysis of humor centering around incest. Through contrasting images and surprising turns, authors repeatedly draw attention to the incongruity of incest within Roman society. In fact, had incest not been a serious violation of custom, it would not have been such an effective topic in invective humor. The Seriousness ofthe Accusation Social tradition and religious taboos supported the prohibition against marriage and thus sexual intercourse between close kin in ancient Rome. Restrictions against incest were broad, forbidding marriage between all ascendants and descendants whether related by blood, marriage or adoption (even after emancipation canceled the adoption).4 Custom limited the practice of marriage between collaterals as well, extending perhaps as far as first cousins during the early years of Rome.5 The penalty for incest in the regal period, according to Tacitus, required that the guilty man be thrown to his death from the Tarpeiean rock; the historian even cites the use of this punishment by the Princeps Tiberius.6 Laws of the imperial period prescribed exile to an island as punishment for the guilty parties.7 As an offense threatening relationships between the E.g., Richlin (above, note 2) and Geffken (above, note 2). For documentation from the imperial period on restricted marriages, see Gaius, Institutiones 58-64; Mosaicarum et Romanarum Legum Collatio 6.3.1-3 (Paulus Sententiae 2) "De incestis nuptiis"; Ulpian Regulae 5.6; Digesta 23.2.39-40, 53ff. Livy fr. 12 M (book 20.6) mentions a violation of the customs restricting marriage within the seventh degree of relationship. Livy also provides the earliest attestation of marriage between first cousins (171 B.C., [42.34.3]). At the request...