Invective (literature)

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The invective (from the Latin. Invehi , hit someone ') refers to a pamphlet or diatribe directed mostly against people. Such texts, written in prose or verse , are often found in ancient literature . B. with Cicero , Catullus , Sallust and Claudian . The insults and public exposures intended with the invectives can have political as well as personal reasons.

Definition of terms

The concept of invective has been traceable since the 4th century AD. The term comes from the adjective invectivus (' insulting '), which in turn was derived from the verb invehi , so an invective is a diatribe. Before the 4th century AD, substitute terms were used to describe diatribes. In the Greek-speaking area, the ὁ ψόγος, the rebuke, was used for it, in the Latin vituperatio . Due to the diversity of the invective and its different uses, it is difficult to distinguish it from other literary genres such as iambik and satire . In 1980 Koster found a definition:

"The invective is a structured literary form, the aim of which is to publicly disparage a named person as a personality against the background of the currently valid values ​​and norms by all suitable means."

Building an invective

A diatribe has no specific structure in the sense that every invective must correspond to the following points. Rather, an invective is a compilation of the points according to the author's preference and possibilities. Not all categories can be dealt with because the vilified cannot find material for every single category.

The collection of those categories was done by Werner Süss. He shows them for example in works such as Cicero's In Pisonem and Cassius Dios Calenusrede.

The invective usually begins with the accusation of origin, be it from non-Roman origin or from the slave class - that is, both the local and the class origin, any origin could be interpreted negatively. This is followed by the charge of operating a business. This is to be understood as an attack on the position of the reviled. In ancient times, the ideal was intellectual work. So the livelihood should be earned through literary or political activity, but not through ordinary work.

The attack of being a thief or something else followed.

In the invective, sexual preferences and machinations were expanded at this point. The author of the diatribe was able to portray almost every sexual act as reprehensible, since there was no ideal sex life in the ancient conception. The actions of the addressee were evaluated according to the author's moral concept. Another point is made by referring to the reviled as μισόφιλος (someone who hates his friends) and μισόπολις (someone who hates the state).

Thereupon the addressee was accused of having a "dark being"; the next focus was on clothing, appearance and demeanor. Here, too, the evaluation of the criteria was in the hands of the invective author. Depending on what ideal they had of their appearance, there were opportunities to attack the other person. In addition, it was considered improper at the time to attract attention in every respect through one's appearance. Anyone who could do that had to expect criticism. Being a "shield thrower" was another point in the invective. This meant that the vilified in war did not fight out of cowardice, but threw away his shield and was able to flee through the now lighter ballast. The cowardice of the counterpart was assumed and attacked.

The last point is that of wealth. The vilified is assumed to have run down (financially) completely and, in the worst case, to live on the assets of relatives or donations from strangers.

Topoi

Even in ancient times, various topoi of the invective, i.e. objects of abuse, were listed in rhetorical textbooks . They are among the most important structuring elements of an invective. For the sake of completeness, the latest analysis of the topoi by the classical philologist Craig is listed here:

  1. The family's origins are shameful. ( embarrassing family origins )
  2. You don't deserve belonging to your own family. ( being unworthy of one's family )
  3. Physical appearance. ( physical appearance )
  4. Eccentric, flashy clothing style. ( eccentricity of dress )
  5. Gluttony and drunkenness, possibly as causes of crudelitas and libido actions . ( gluttony and drunkenness, possibly leading to acts of crudelitas and libido )
  6. Hypocrisy, glory. ( hypocrisy for appearing virtuous )
  7. Greed, possibly combined with extravagance. ( avarice, possibly linked with prodigality )
  8. Acceptance of bribes. ( taking bribes )
  9. Ostentatiousness. ( pretentiousness )
  10. Sexual misconduct, e.g. B. Adultery. ( sexual misconduct )
  11. Hostility towards one's own family. ( hostility to family )
  12. Cowardice in war. ( cowardice in was )
  13. Squandering assets or financial difficulties. ( squandering of one's patrimony or financial embarrassment )
  14. Striving for royal or tyrannical rule , combined with vis , libido , superbia and crudelitas . ( aspiring to regnum or tyranny, associated with vis, libido, superbia, and crudelitas )
  15. Cruelty to citizens and allies. ( cruelty to citizens and allies )
  16. Misappropriation of private or state property. ( plunder of private and public property )
  17. Oratorial inability. ( oratorical ineptitude )

The invective in Greece

The invective has its origin in Greece, so Homer already used it in the Iliad . From its use in a poetic context, the diatribe made a development up to rhetoric , where it started in the 4th century BC. Can be found regularly in litigation speeches.

Homer

In the Iliad, diatribes are given by various figures. For example, from Achilles to Agamemnon in the first book, from Hector to Paris in the third book or from Helena to Paris, also in the third book. The manner of speaking differs: Achilles' speech is a pure diatribe, Hector's speech to Paris, on the other hand, is a reproachful speech, i.e. a ψόγος. Homer calls the reciprocal holding of speeches ἀντιβίοισι μαχεσσαμένω ἐπέεσιν, that is, as "fighting with hostile words". So here Homer doesn't let his heroes fight with weapons, but with words.

Archilochus

Archilochus became known through the mockery of Lykambes , his former friend and at times future father-in-law . Archilochus wrote the invectives against the former more or less encoded in iambi. He founded this genre with it. It is noteworthy that Archilochus does not write insults out of insult, but out of self-defense - the son of a slave could not defend himself against injustice in any other way. Because Archilochos processed personal motifs in the invectives, they no longer consisted of invented figures and backgrounds. Archilochus also has the first evidence of the τρόποι in the invective, namely in the self-abuse that he writes.

Hipponax

Hipponax wrote personal abuse on the brothers Bupalus and Athesis. He built in parodic elements to create comedy and to give the invective more effect. He parodied a call to the muses from Homer's work Iliad. The invective, which first appeared in the epic, was now used in the opposite context: it should no longer give the epic more affectivity, but the (parodied) epic element should give it more comedy.

Alcaios

With Alkaios the invective got a political element. He used them in his revolutionary songs, in which he wrote about current political events on Lesbos.

Aristotle

In the fourth chapter of Poetics, Aristotle refers to the genesis of poetry and explains it. He also goes into the natural disposition of poets. Good poets write good poetry, according to Aristotle, and bad poets write bad poetry. Bad poetry is understood to mean immoral and value-degrading poetry. Aristotle cites the ψόγοι, the rebuke, and the ἴαμβοι, the mocking poems. They differ in that the former wants the addressee to be good, i.e. pursues a positive goal. The ἴαμβοι, on the other hand, only aim to discredit the counterpart.

The invective had changed since it was used by Homer in that there were now direct expressions of the poet in the speeches. In addition, there was now a direct historical reference, as for example with Alkaios.

Invective in Tragedy, Comedy, and Litigation

The invective also appeared in tragedy and comedy and continued to develop. Aeschylus , for example, uses an invective at the end of his work Orestie to close with a climax. Euripides, on the other hand, uses an invective in the form of the Stichomythie in Alcestis' work by having Pheres and his son Admet insult each other. The technique of swipes, the παράψογος, appears in the comedies of Aristophanes . Insults also find their way in litigation and thus in court, the beginnings of which go back to Lysias and Demosthenes . In the invective, not only the speaker took a position on the charge, but also on the defendant. The structure of the invective described above developed in litigation speeches.

The invective in Rome

The development that the invective took in Greece continued in Italy. There, too, there were both poetic and prosaic invectives. Diarrhea can be found in all literary genres, for example in plays, epigrams , satires and others. Many authors used invective elements in their speeches: Cato d. Elderly , Scipio Aemilianus , etc.

Lucilius and Catullus occupied a special position , as they wrote direct, partly veiled, abusive poems on named persons, Catullus against Caesar and Pompey . This was not the case before.

The invective had its climax with Cicero , who knew how to process the addressee's résumé in his diatribes in such a way that every stage of his life came off badly. Even in comparison with the speaker himself, the addressees were always in a bad light. In doing so, Cicero used both the private life of the vilified as well as the career and compared these with his experiences and actions in order to then come to a bad judgment about the counterpart. The invective Ciceros against Piso and against Catiline have become exemplary . In these speeches, Cicero attacks personal opponents. They are considered to be the pattern of a Latin invective. In the 4th century AD, the Catilinarian speeches were also given the title invectiones by grammarians after the term was defined.

During the imperial era , the invectives were still written, but not further developed. The punishment for these diatribes was often death and exile.

See also

literature

Web links

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ See Koster, 1980.
  2. ↑ For example Anaximenes from Lampsakos in Techne 3,1, 1425b or Aphthonios from Antiochia in RG 2.36.7-19.
  3. ↑ Novokhatko, Anna: The invectives of Sallust and Cicero: Critical Edition with Introduction, Translation, and Commentary. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 2009. Page 14. (Own translation of the English terms)