Misopogon

Misopogon (Greek for " Beard Hater ") is the title of a satire, written by the Roman emperor Julian ( 361-363 ) between mid-January and mid-February, 363 in Antioch on the Orontes in response to satirical verses in the New Year celebrations of 363. The script is written in the Greek language. The satire consists of both parts, which are characterized by self-ironic detachment, on the other hand, invidious attacks on the citizens of Antioch, castigates their moral depravity Julian. The ironic and distanced sections and the right - aggressive sections, however, can not be neatly separated from each other; Thus, speculation about the genesis of two texts or a subsequent edition are unfounded.

Content

The work Misopogon ( German: beard beard hater or enemy ) was written in response Julians on the behavior of the population of Antioch to the emperor. The ratio between the population of Antioch and Julian was excited from the beginning. Antioch was already heavily Christianized, yet the population of public amusements was very fond. The emperor in turn was attached to the old gods cults, but simultaneously attacked almost ascetic and philosopher with a beard. When the emperor after a fire in the sanctuary of Apollo the suburb Daphne pulled hastily Christians accountable, it came to an open break.

The Antioch doused the Emperor formally with scorn, whereupon he was irritated and accused in the work itself Misopogon of hatred on his beard. In it romped vermin and he must be careful always not to bite off his beard while eating. With the embossed part of a hint of self -irony, but partly also of sarcasm satire Julian intends to contempt of his view depraved population of Antioch, which he had tried in vain to win over. The work was written apparently shortly after the signature Caesars in great haste, the reasoning is often disordered. Then broke Julian on the Persian campaign and died on June 26, 363 due to a suffered in the battle wound.

See also: Julian the historical context

Reception

Reception in antiquity

The Misopogon was assessed differently in ancient times. Through its distribution during the lifetime Julians nothing is known ( the work was - according to John Malalas - before the palace on Elephantine Island in the Orontes publicly posted ). From the time after Julian's death, we find fundamental rejection by Gregory of Nazianzus, tendentious rejection by Libanius and enthusiastic approval by Zosimus; also positive are the church historians Socrates and Sozomen, relative to the work.

Modern reception

About the quality of the literary creation Julians, also the Misopogon, is judged differently. "Especially in his letters disclose any page that Julian's temperament would not suffer the stifling costume of a [ ... ] artificial language. [ ... S ] an impulsive temperament [ ... ] make [t ] many of his letters to preserve patterns of an individual style. " Marion goes to the Gable Misopogon and the Emperor satire only superficial and does not deliver a quality judgment. Bernhard Kytzler thinks Julian had " as a writer of rank equally entitled to interest, such as historical phenomenon or as a fictional character [ ... ]. His sentences are [ ... ] literary heritage of an emperor, as the author to know no less valuable than as a form of a new era ". Joseph Bidez claims that " laborieux et appliqué, Julien voulut briller of genres dans pour lesquels il n'était pas doué. Ne l' avait La nature fait ni philosophe, poète ni, ni vulgarisateur. Il s'évertua cependant à faire croire que les Muses ne lui avaient refusé rien ".

For a long time unclear - not clear yet in research today - were targeted audience and intention of the text. The answers to both questions are closely related. The intention is simply given by the French philologist Christian Lacombrade and Jacques Fontaine, who issued both works Julians: the text is the " psychological profile of its author " and press from the frustration that had befallen after his seven -month stay in Antioch Julian. This answer appears to be obvious, but the satire is a strange text - such self-reproaches of an emperor were and are unique. For the advocates of this interpretation, the audience probably is not relevant. However, Hans -Ulrich Wiemer is the opposite critical: This interpretation ignores the fact that we are dealing with a public letter of an emperor. One must therefore ask first about the political function. A second Deutungsart Wiemer called " propaganda " ( including Glanville Downey ) claim Proponents of this interpretation, the satire is a piece of evidence for an advertising campaign of the emperor, who wants to attribute the failure in Antioch of the depravity of the local population. Thus also the intended audience is clear: all other except the Antiochenes to be brought into contempt.

A third interpretation (which Maud W. Gleason represents ) sees the text primarily as a " means of communication ": Using the satire of the emperor exchange with the population of Antioch from, reply their satirical verses appropriate and could be a reasonable time still greater hardness on mockery respond or let the whole thing is based on himself. Thus, the audience is mainly the citizens of Antioch, but with the intended " Mitleserschaft " other cities (such as the feuding with Antioch ). Wiemer sees this reading as a great advance over the two described above, but criticized the lack of Gleason confrontation with the representatives of the " propaganda " interpretation manner. Even Wiemer waived on an assignment to one of three groups (although with clear sympathy for Gleason ), but leads to a longer analysis of the structure of the work some of the thoughts expressed earlier on and came to the view that Scripture just a failed communication with representative of the population as they are much too complex, full of literary allusions and therefore is incomprehensible. Thus, a propaganda point of view is completely impossible, and the variant " psychological profile of the author " again moved closer, but not in the original sense, but in that Julian fail because literarily challenging to realize and simultaneously to preserve the dignity of an emperor.

Tradition history

When V is the most important and best manuscript, the Codex Leyden Vossianus from the 12th/13th. Century. Pc is the handwriting Pari Sinus 2964 from the 15th century. When Mb is manuscripts from the 15th century, when F to those from the 16th century. E and F are copies of the same Codex, but not Mb August dates from the 12th/13th. Century, M from the 15th century, Bav from the 16th century.

Expenditure

• Christian Lacombrade Julianus, empereur romain, dit l' apostate: Oeuvres completes. Les Belles Lettres, Paris 1964.
• Friedhelm L. Muller ( translator and editor ): The two satires of the Emperor Julian the Apostate. Franz Steiner, Stuttgart 1998, ISBN 3-515-07394-9 ( Palingenesia. monographs and texts on classical antiquity, Volume 66 ).
• Carlo Prato, Dina Micalella: Misopogon / Giuliano Imperatore. Edizione critica, traduzione e commento. Edizioni dell'Ateneo & Bizzarri, Rome 1979.
• Carlo Prato, Jacques Fontaine, Arnaldo Marcone (ed.): Alla madre degli dei e altri discorsi / Giuliano Apostate. Fondazione Lorenzo Valla 3rd edition, Mondadori, Rome -Milan 1987, ISBN 88-04-28801-9.