Podcast episode
November 2, 2019
Episode 74: I’m Not Sorry: The Apology of Apuleius
In the year 157 or 158, the orator and Platonist philosopher Apuleius was traveling in North Africa and ended up marrying the widowed mother of an old mate of his from his student days in Athens. Now, this lady was rich, presumably in part at least because of wealth she got from her late husband, and her late husband’s brother wanted a piece of that pie. So he took Apuleius to court on charges of having ensorcelled his new wife into marrying him. The Apologia or Defense-Speech of Apuleius is the surviving record of the trial that then took place, in which Apuleius not only defends himself, but redefines magia, philosophia, and religio into a fascinating new conjunction.
Apuleius both denies having committed magia and simultaneously argues that the true magia is in fact a high-level form of divine worship. This is the religio-philosophical tradition of Epimenides, Pythagoras, Plato, and Ostanes, and that of the ‘family of Plato’, of which Apuleius is proud to be a member. It is a religio which both embraces traditional aspects of cult and understands that the true highest god, ‘the King’, exists beyond all forms, beyond time and space, and beyond the ability of human speech to express.
This highest Platonist god is thus ineffable, and also surrounded by rhetorical silence. In this construction of the silence/ineffability conjunct, and through the positioning of elite cultural actors in the Roman world (namely Apuleius and the presiding judge, the philosophic proconsul C. Claudius Maximus) as members of an esoteric lineage with privileged access to the truths of religion, philosophy, and true magic, the Apology offers a priceless insight into the social and ideological functions of esoteric Middle Platonism in the Empire, and would provide fuel for very elevated esoteric speculation in the later western esoteric traditions, particularly when it came to the question of rehabilitating ‘magic’.
Works Cited in this Episode:
Primary:
The edition of Hunink 1997 is a good Latin text for Apuleius’ Apology.
- Apuleius: Pudentilla’s extensive wealth: Apol. 93.3- 5. The sitting Proconsul’s word as law: Flor. 9.11-12. The proconsul has sapientia (Apol. 60.3), providentia (84.6), doctrina (48.12), and perfecta eruditio (91.3). Apuleius is defending not only himself, but philosophia: Apol. 3: sustineo enim non modo meam, uerum etiam philosophiae defensionem, cuia magnitudo uel minimam reprehensionem pro [ma]ximo crimine aspernatur.
- Plato: On rhetoric as a pharmakon: Phædr. 257c-279b. ‘To discover the maker and father of the all is a serious task, and, having discovered him, to speak of him to everyone is impossible’ (Τὸν μὲν οὖν ποιητὴν καὶ πατέρα τοῦ παντὸς εὑρεῖν τε ἔργον καὶ εὑρόντα εἰς πάντας ἀδύνατον λέγειν). Tim. 28c 3-5.
Secondary:
See below for the articles by Bradley and Nelson about the fish.
Recommended Reading:
- J. Beaujeu. Apulée: Opuscules philosophiques et fragments. Les Belles Lettres, Paris, 1973.
- Keith Bradley. ‘Law, Magic, and Culture in the “Apologia” of Apuleius’. Phoenix, 51(2): 203–23, 1997.
- L. Callebat. ‘La prose d’Apulée dans le De Magia: Elements d’interpretation’. Wiener Studien, 18:143–167, 1984.
- B. L. Hijmans. ‘Apuleius Orator: “Pro se de magia” and “Florida”’. Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt, 34:1708–1784, 1994.
- V. Hunink. Apuleius of Madaura: Pro se de magia (Apologia). J. C. Gieben, Amsterdam, 1997.
- M. Nelson. ‘A Note on Apuleius’ Magical Fish’. Mnemosyne, 54(1):85–6, Feb. 2001.
- C. Pharr. ‘The Interdiction of Magic in Roman Law’. TAPA, 63:269–95, 1932.
- C.R. Phillips III. ‘Nullum crimen sine lege: Socioreligious Sanctions on Magic’. In C.A. Faraone and D. Obbink, editors, Magika Hiera: Ancient Greek Magic and Religion, pages 260–76. Oxford University Press, Oxford/New York, NY, 1991.
- Regen. Apuleius philosophus Platonicus: Untersuchungen zur Apologie (De magia) und zu De mundo. De Gruyter, Berlin, 1971.
- Ulrike Riemer. ‘Apuleius, De Magia: zur Historizität der Rede’. Historia: Zeitschrift für Alte Geschichte, 55(2):178–90, 2006.
- J. B. Rives. ‘Magic in Roman Law: The Reconstruction of a Crime’. Classical Antiquity, 22:313–39, 2003.
Themes
Addressative Ritual, Esotericism, Ineffability, Middle Platonism, Natural Magic, Philosophy, Silence
James Lomas
November 19, 2019
Epimenides was twice quoted by Paul/Saul, one of the only non-biblical works ever referenced in the Bible. So, we at least know a bit about Paul’s literary interests.
Earl Fontainelle
November 19, 2019
I did NOT know that! References, please!
James Lomas
November 21, 2019
Wikipedia provides the specific verses, but Paul quotes him in his speech in Athens (and then later to a missionary in Crete)
From Acts 17 verse 28
“for in Him we live and move and have our being, as also some of your own poets have said, ‘For we are also His offspring'”
From Epimenides “Cretica”:
“They fashioned a tomb for you, holy and high one, Cretans, always liars, evil beasts, idle bellies.
But you are not dead: you live and abide forever, For in you we live and move and have our being”
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epimenides
Any character in a Pythagorean litany will be investigated by me! I am particularly intrigued by the Pythagorean narrative of early Christianity — vis a vis the Pythagorean Therapeuts/Essenes and referenced by Philo, Josephus, Clement, Origen, etc. But now, this little nugget links Pythagorean lore to Paul’s intellectual history. Muahaha !!
Now, since I’m discussing the esoterica of Christianity, let me share an esoteric interpretation. Indulge me, please.
I’ve struggled with the so-called mind-virus of Christianity, that is, that belief in Jesus is necessary for eternal life. Jesus doesn’t seem to be the “believe in me or be dammed” type, but he clearly advocates something similar. How frustrating that a belief like this would come from a platonic philosophical tradition!
So, here is my gentle and compassionate take, quite obviously formulated for the purpose of a global reformation of the church to return to its esoteric roots. Yes, please bear with me.
Quite simply, to attain eternal life, one must understand the logos — even, to have faith in it. The logos is, of course, the emmanation of the One, which composes all. If we are all of the logos, we can realize that we are the logos and, therefore, have eternal life.
Not bad, right? Jesus must be the incarnation of the logos, as Origen claims, as all carnate beings must be. Note, however, that this perspective still yet requires a belief in the illusion of personhood/self — both of ourselves, the One and the logos. That might be too hard to historically connect. All said, I hope this discussion stayed esoteric.
Earl Fontainelle
November 22, 2019
All right! I like it. As upcoming episodes demonstrate, we have a lot of evidence that some early Christians saw an exoteric/esoteric dichotomy as an essential structuring element of their religion, and we shall indeed be seeing some more logos-oriented approaches to Christology and salvation. I think you’re on to something here.
James Lomas
November 22, 2019
Great! I can’t wait to hear about references to a hidden side of Christianity.
Logos. The word of the lord. Jesus. Logos is the emanation of the One — the son of a One God. That is uber esoteric, nah?
Origen describes Philo’s logos as being incarnated in Jesus. That is the the word made flesh. The logos incarnate in Jesus.
That is NOT Christianity 101.
From Philo, we know there were Pythagorean Jewish communities living and worshipping. The Therapeuts of Egypt and the Essenes of the dead sea and Mt Carmel. According to Iamblicus, Pythagoras ascended mt Carmel before his trip to egypt. We don’t know that, but we do know that the end of the Babylonian captivity coincided with Pythagoras’ travels. So a visit is not out of the question.
Clement of Alexandria, I believe, referred to both Philo and Origen as Pythagorean. A monastic, communistic spiritual community of scholarship — Pythagorean Jews.
Early church father Origen and Plotinus were potentially classmates — !!
Well, the point is that an esoteric allegorical Jewish god can be acceptable to a Platonist when representing the One.
Thus a son of the One, the logos, can be acceptable.
Since everything is in the logos, all things are the logos incarnate. So, we all have eternal life.
So — this esoteric view of Judaism as an allegorical representation of the Oneness — this passed into some number of early Christian Pythagorean Nazoreans, Egyptian therapeuts, or later Greek followers.
And what happened? I believe that pope Theodorus in Alexandria, around 391, said that God was not like a person — AND THE MONKS RIOTED. So Theodorus recanted.
Therefore the esoteric
Albert Hand
June 3, 2020
Here’s a recent paper on Apuleius and theurgy https://www.academia.edu/30834607/The_Philosopher-Magus_Apuleius_in_the_Mirror_of_Theurgy