Literary Networks in the Second Sophistic (50 - 250 A.D.)
As we have learned from such books and articles as A Small Greek World, by Irad Malkin, Network Theory and Theoric Networks, by Ian Ruterford, and Religious Networks in the Roman Empire, by Anna Collar, social networks pervaded Greek and Roman history from the very beginning. Whether focused on economic, cultural or religious merit, the relations formed by people across the Mediterranean slowly but undeniably evolved into complex networks, which were to have a profound impact on the growth and development of the social and political structures of the later Roman Empire. Ties between Romans and Greeks had of course already flourished in the Archaic and Classical Periods, but the direct incorporation of Greece into the Roman sphere of influence greatly intensified these relations, to the point that the political elite of Greece became dependant on Roman patronage to strengthen and legitimize their position.
|
The literary networks in the Second Sophistic were to be defined by the new social and political context which had firmly settled over Greece around 200 A.D. In classical Greece, with the ascendancy of Athens and Sparta, the Greek poleis on the mainland and along the Anatolian coasts, had been focused on these two great cities, or hubs, now, so to speak, all eyes were on Rome. Greek cities actively pursued the growth of intercultural relationships, especially in the form of financial endowments by Roman emperors. Onno van Nijf and Christina Williamson have supplied several interesting case-studies in their article Netwerken, panhelleense festivals en de globalisering van de Hellenistische wereld which provide us with valuable insight into the newly developed social networks that spanned from Greece to Rome. Greek cities, but also Greek individuals, as the case of Lucian will demonstrate, participated in these networks to seek financial or political (the two are often synonymous) support from the Roman state. Greek intellectuals in the second century were often employed by rich Roman patrons, a position they readily submitted themselves to, because it provided them with amble opportunities for their future wellbeing. The example of Lucian of Samosata (125 – 180 A.D.) is very telling in this regard: on the one hand his story dutifully followed the neatly defined paths which had been laid out for him, adapting itself to the reality of life in these new circumstances, on the other hand he was an outsider in the literary networks of the Second Sophistic, an outsider whose parentage was neither Greek nor Roman and who had no illustrious past or great fortune to boast of. Lucian was a Syrian from a relatively unknown eastern city, who nevertheless managed to elevate himself to the centre of Greek and Roman literary life. It is no wonder then, that the main question of my essay revolves around this man: how was he able to climb from the periphery and achieve great acclaim in both literature and politics? The answer to this question lies in the complex nature of the literary networks of the Second Sophistic, and the, sometimes paradoxical, ways in which they functioned.
Lucian of Samosata
Lucian was, in contrast to many other prominent sophists and philosophers, not born into a wealthy Greek family, whose private funds allowed him quick and easy access into the social and political elite of his time. However, when he died in 180 A.D. Lucian was a respected member of the international Greco-Roman elite, who had mingled with such greats as Lucius Verus and Herodes Atticus. These accomplishments suggest that the networks of the Second Sophistic allowed for a certain measure of social mobility, whereby even people from a relatively humble background could attain significantly higher social status. For this reason I’ve placed Lucian in the first and second chapter of my essay against the social and political reality of the Second Sophistic, in an effort to determine how these networks functioned and whether they accommodated the entry of outsiders. Additionally, I’ve chosen several texts from Lucian’s oeuvre which demonstrate the role of intellectuals within these networks and the methods they used to cement their position. In regard to the contemporary perspective of my essay, writers such as Glen Warren Bowersock, Kendra Eshleman and C.S. Jones have provided me with the necessary theoretical framework.
The Inner Structure of the Networks in the Second Sophistic
The word ‘literary’ carries with it the assumption that the people who engaged in ‘literary’ activities did nothing more than read, write, and now and then discuss. In reality, however, literary networks in the Second Sophistic were deeply immersed in the political and cultural spheres of the Roman Empire. Greek and Roman intellectuals, who mostly sprang from the educated city-elite, not only conducted religious ceremonies, but were at the forefront of political and economical development in the Greco-Roman World. Successful rhetoricians could directly contribute to the financial and political wellbeing of their city. Bowersock stresses in his classic Greek Sophists in the Roman Empire that ‘literary’ networks, or networks at all, should not be seen to represent just one, isolated sphere. On the contrary: politics, economics, culture, religion – it all flowed through the same channels and these channels were actively navigated by the intellectuals of the Second Sophistic. Lucian, for example, wasn’t just a talented rhetorician, he was also involved in international politics when, at the age of 50, he served as secretary to the governor of Egypt.
Social Mobility and Conflict within these Networks
Consequently, the networks in the Second Sophistic seem to have been overflowing with vitality and variation: all aspects of the Greco-Roman world were represented. There were several problems however, which plagued the participants of these networks from the beginning. The first problem centred around the lack of clarity and information: since there were no clearly structured schools or universities, no places where one could obtain a diploma of sorts in philosophy or rhetoric and where one could easily verify the claims of other participants, there was a great deal of confusion surrounding the intellectual communities of the Second Sophistic. Kendra Eshleman has written extensively on this subject in her book The Social World of Intellectuals in the Roman Empire. She argues that the intellectual communities in this period were characterized by a structural lack of boundaries, and, as a result of this shortcoming, by constant strife pertaining to the nature and the participants of the networks. For instance, the thought that their community was being infiltrated by ‘unworthy outsiders’ was no random fear: many of Lucian’s texts (among others Remarks Addressed to an Illiterate Book-Fancier, Alexander, the Oracle-Monger, and The Dependent Scholar) deal exclusively with this subject. Pseudo- philosophers, charlatans, oracles promising immediate relief – all these feature steadily in Lucian’s work. By attacking these outsiders in his satirizing texts Lucian hoped to rid the intellectual community of these parasites; at the same time however his attack can be understood as an attempt to further strengthen his own identity as a member of the intellectual community. Evidently, the process worked both ways: by alienating certain people and removing them from the system, you could place yourself more firmly at the centre of the network. This brings us to the final chapter of my essay: the use of satire in the networks of the Second Sophistic.
Satire as a Purifying Agent
As with social networks satire has a decidedly multifunctional purpose. It can serve as comic relief, by transforming the gloom of a subject into something both funny and absurd; it can subtly criticize far-reaching changes, by concentrating on the flaws of a project, and thereby raising awareness for the problems it might entail; but above all satire is an effective instrument that combines the attribute of commenting with the skill of manipulation. By consistently stressing that the views and ideas of the opposing party are without any credence, are, in fact, nothing more that preposterous, satire can be used to mould the boundaries of systems, slowly adjusting them to the preferred shape and size. In the Second Sophistic satire was employed exactly for this purpose: because there were no fixed confines, no easy means to identify genuine participants, satire functioned as the gate-keeper of intellectual communities, making sure that possible assailants would be identified and subsequently evicted. The nature of Lucian’s texts make this abundantly clear: parasites or pseudo-intellectuals would not be tolerated. Lucian was in this sense safeguarding the networks in which he played a vital part, an attitude which somewhat resembled a paradox. The social mobility within the networks of the Second Sophistic had ensured that outsiders, like Lucian, could nonetheless participate, provided of course they followed the unwritten rules, adhered to the patronage-system, and were able to ‘defend’ themselves in the conflict-ridden environs of these networks. Lucian possessed these skills, could navigate these stormy waters, ergo, he was able to transform his status as an outsider into that of a puritan, proving indirectly that inclusion in these networks depended on a large part on one's ability to exclude.
Bibliography
Jones, C.P. Culture and society in Lucian. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press, 1986.
Eshleman, Kendra. The social world of intellectuals in the Roman Empire : sophists, philosophers, and Christians. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012.
Bowersock, Glen Warren. Greek Sophists in the Roman Empire. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1969.
Collar, Anna. Religious networks in the Roman empire : the spread of new ideas. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2013.
Van Nijf, Onno en Christina Williamson. ‘’Netwerken, panhelleense festivals en de globalisering van de Hellenistische wereld.’’ Groniek, Historisch Tijdschrift, 200 (2014): 253 – 265.
Rutherford, Ian. ‘’Network Theory and Theoric Networks.’’ Mediterranean Historical Review, 22, no. 1 (2007): 23-37.
Malkin, Irad. A small Greek world : networks in the Ancient Mediterranean. New York : Oxford University Press, 2011.
Eshleman, Kendra. The social world of intellectuals in the Roman Empire : sophists, philosophers, and Christians. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012.
Bowersock, Glen Warren. Greek Sophists in the Roman Empire. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1969.
Collar, Anna. Religious networks in the Roman empire : the spread of new ideas. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2013.
Van Nijf, Onno en Christina Williamson. ‘’Netwerken, panhelleense festivals en de globalisering van de Hellenistische wereld.’’ Groniek, Historisch Tijdschrift, 200 (2014): 253 – 265.
Rutherford, Ian. ‘’Network Theory and Theoric Networks.’’ Mediterranean Historical Review, 22, no. 1 (2007): 23-37.
Malkin, Irad. A small Greek world : networks in the Ancient Mediterranean. New York : Oxford University Press, 2011.
H.V.