[COMPOSITIO LOCI HOMEPAGE. I envision the first essay (titled "The Historical and Geographical Context") serving as the CompLoci homepage. Within the text of the essay, I have written, in brackets and capitals, LINK WORD "x" TO PICTURE X. The commentaries which I would like to go with the map/pictures are immediately following the first essay. After this first essay and these commentaries, I have written a bibliographical essay with the title "Further Reading." This reading pertains to the first essay, and should probably go directly underneath it on the CompLoci homepage. After the "Further Reading" essay I have put, in capitals, the titles of three further essays. These titles should also go on this homepage under the heading ESSAYS ON RELATED TO PICS (or some other appropriate heading) so that the reader can get to them directly from this page. Finally, at the beginning of each essay, I have put, again in brackets and capitals, the title of the essay and the place within the actual text to/from which I think the essay should be linked. Anything in brackets, then, is a message for you and NOT part of what should end up on the web-site.]
THE HISTORICAL AND GEOGRAPHICAL CONTEXT [Compositio Loci homepage essay]
The text which we now possess of Apuleius' Apologia is a document which represents the written version of a speech delivered in the year A.D. 158 in the town of Sabratha. Although many of the themes in the Apologia are indeed timeless and universal, the nature of Apuleius' defense is in many ways shaped by the time and place of its composition. The time is the middle of the second century A.D., that period during which Gibbon imagined "the condition of the human race was most happy and prosperous;" the place is the region known as Tripolitania, at that time part of the Roman province of Africa Proconsularis. We can think of the Apologia as a window to this time and this place -- a blueprint which allows us to map Apuleius' rhetoric against Gibbon's. But before we can press the text into this type of service, we must have some basic sense of its historical and geographical context. This context will, hopefully, give us a better understanding of the atmosphere in Sabratha on that day in 158 when Apuleius defended himself against the charge of magic.
Tripolitania is a region within the borders of modern Libya [LINK "MODERN LIBYA" TO MAP]. The climate of this region is primarily Saharan, but the long coastal strip is typically Mediterranean. The three cities which gave the area its name in antiquity were Lepcis Magna (home of L. Septimius Severus, Roman emperor 193-211 A.D.), Oea (modern Tripoli, capital of Libya), and Sabratha [LINK "SABRATHA" TO PICTURE OF AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH].
The coastal towns of Tripolitania began as Phoenician trading settlements. Archeological data indicate that the area was settled between the period from the late seventh century to the fifth century B.C. The growth and commercial development of these towns evidently occurred under Carthaginian domination in the fourth and third centuries B.C. In 202 B.C., however, the Carthaginians under Hannibal suffered a massive defeat at the hands of P. Cornelius Scipio (the later Africanus), and in 146 B.C. Carthage itself was destroyed. This destruction of Carthage at the end of the Third Punic War (149-146 B.C.) eliminated the principal trading rival of the coastal towns of Tripolitania. In addition to agriculture and trans-Saharan trade, the economy of these towns was based to a large degree on maritime commerce [LINK "MARITIME COMMERCE" TO PICTURE OF ELEPHANT MOSAIC AT OSTIA], so the elimination of a commercial giant like Carthage certainly will have improved the economic situation of a town like Sabratha.
The war with the Numidian king Jugurtha (112-105 B.C.) and the civil war between Caesar and Pompey (49-46 B.C.) insured a continued Roman presence in North Africa. The province of Africa Proconsularis, a consolidation of the already existing provinces Africa Vetus (146 B.C.) and Africa Nova (46 B.C.), was created no later than 27 B.C. This was a senatorial province, which meant that it was governed by a proconsul (a senatorial nominee, such as Claudius Maximus) and not by an imperial representative (a < i>legatus pro praetore), as was the case in imperial provinces such as Egypt. In the early Principate, Tripolitania enjoyed virtual independence. Most importantly, the towns of the area were not compelled to surrender land to Roman settlers. Only o ne legion was permanently stationed in the province. In A.D. 40 control of that legion was transferred from the proconsul to an imperial legate, and from that moment Tripolitania became subject to two branches of Roman government: the civil bureaucracy which was centered at Carthage (which had been recolonized by Augustus), and the military division which had its headquarters at Lambaesis in Numidia.
During the first and second centuries A.D. the towns of Tripolitania became increasingly incorporated into the Roman system of provincial government. Lepcis Magna was granted municipal status sometime during the Flavian period (69-96 A.D.). Both Oea and Sabratha became municipia during the reign of Antoninus Pius (138-161 A.D.), probably sometime in the late 150s. Citizens of municipia enjoyed the ius Latii, or Latin rights, which allowed them not only to enter into valid contracts with Roman citizens (commercium), but also to contract legal marriages with Romans (conubium). In addition, the magistrates of municipia became full Roman citizens after their tenure of office. By the end of the second century Tripolitania was sending a significant number of senators to Rome. This process of Romanization came to its natural zenith in 193 when L. Septimius Severus of Lepcis Magna rose to imperial eminence.
The history of Sabratha itself is known to us primarily from archeological and epigraphical sources. The existence of an offshore reef at Sabratha certainly explains the location of the town. The coast of Tripolitania is notoriously lacking in suitable harbors, but the reef at Sabratha, later supplemented by an artificial breakwater, created a natural harbor. The first stone buildings at the site date to the second half of the fourth century B.C. The first major phase of expansion took place in the first century B.C., and this development probably reflects the destruction of Carthage by Rome in 146 B.C. The town continued to grow in the first century A.D., but it is the late Antonine period, precisely the time when Apuleius delivered the Apologia, which marks the height of the town's prosperity. By this period Sabratha was graced with all of those physical structures which marked it out unmistakably as a Roman settlement: a forum, a basilica, baths, a theater, and an amphitheater. Excavation s at the site of Sabratha [LINK "EXCAVATIONS AT THE SITE OF SABRATHA" TO PICTURE OF ARCHEOLOGICAL SKETCH] have given us a very good idea of what the town looked like in antiquity.
So Sabratha in the year A.D. 158 was, in contemporary terms, a "happening place." Along with the building program which evidently was thriving at this time, the visit of the Roman proconsul Claudius Maximus and the trial of Apuleius in a Roman court of law certainly contributed to the increasingly "Roman" atmosphere of the town. But Sabratha was not Rome. We must remember that whatever Romanization took place in Tripolitania came only after the thorough Punicization of the area. The buildings, the temples, the official titles, the ostensibly Roman cultural practices -- the elements which constituted the periphery's simulation of the center -- may represent nothing more than a veneer which had been methodically laid over earlier, Punic foundations. There was indeed a multiplicity of cultures in Roman Tripolitania, and Apuleius' speech is clearly directed at a multiplicity of audiences. The intended audience of a certain passage, or a certain phrase, or even of a certain word, is often transparent. Apuleius' rhetorical prowess is largely a measure of his ability to appeal to a sense of Roman justice in a distinctly Roman setting while simultaneously administering a biting invective against his local opponents in terms which will have had a particular resonance in a town like Sabratha. And it is in this context that we can begin to understand the nature of Apuleius' defense.
[COMMENTARY TO GO WITH MAP]
Map of modern Libya. The remains of Lepcis Magna lay just east of modern Al Khums. Tripoli is the Oea of Apuleius. Sabratha (modern Sabratah) is between Zuwarah and Az Zawiyah, the two towns west of Tripoli. The slightly darkened area between Tripoli and Medenine in Tunisia represents the Gefara Plain. Most of the central Gefara is desert which is unsuitable for settled agriculture, and the vast majority of the modern tribes of the Gefara are pastoralists. Only a thin strip of coastal territory is suitable for unirrigated agriculture. It is likely that Sabratha depended on maritime commerce for most of its needs.
[COMMENTARY TO GO WITH PICTURE OF AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH OF SABRATHA]
Aerial view of Sabratha's center. The large, open square surrounded by columns in the upper left hand portion of the picture is the Forum. The large columns to the right (east) of the Forum are the remains of the East Forum Temple. Immediately on the n ear side (south) of the Forum is the Basilica where Apuleius spoke. To the right (east) of the Basilica and across the principal road which ran through the center of Sabratha is the Antonine Temple. The offshore reef which is visible in the picture provided Sabratha with a natural harbor. Due to the paucity of suitable harbors along the coast of Tripolitania, the existence of this reef certainly explains Sabratha's location.
[COMMENTARY TO GO WITH PICTURE OF ELEPHANT MOSAIC AT OSTIA]
Sabratha apparently had a large enough maritime trade to warrant a permanent office at Rome's port of Ostia. This mosaic, from the Piazzale delle Corporazioni at Ostia, is what remains of Sabratha's office. The commercial and civic symbol of the elephant was also used by Lepcis Magna. It is not impossible that the coastal towns of Tripolitania exported elephants (along with other wild beasts) and ivory on a large scale.
[COMMENTARY TO GO WITH PICTURE OF ARCHEOLOGICAL SKETCH OF SABRATHA]
The principal excavated area of Sabratha. Apuleius would have delivered his speech in the Basilica, immediately south of the Forum. The amphitheater, which is not shown in this picture, is about 750m east of the theater.
FURTHER READING [Bibliographical essay which should go directly below first essay]
For a one volume introduction to the Roman Empire, see Colin Wells' The Roman Empire (Harvard, 1992). For a more detailed narrative of Roman history, Cary and Scullard's A History of Rome: Down to the Reign of Constantine (London, 19 79) is quite practical. The best introduction to Roman Africa is Susan Raven's Rome in Africa (London, 1993). For the history and geography of Tripolitania, D.J. Mattingly's Tripolitania (Ann Arbor, 1994) is fundamental. This book provides ample bibliography. Town and Country in Roman Tripolitania, a series of essays edited by Buck and Mattingly (Oxford, 1985), is slightly more specialized and covers a wide range of topics. Essay titles include "Frontier Processes i n Roman Tripolitania" and "Climate and Social Dynamics: the Tripolitanian Example, 300 B.C. - A.D. 300." For provincial administration see The Roman System of Provincial Administration to the Accession of Constantine the Great (Rome, 1968) by W.T. Arnold. For the process of Romanization in Tripolitania, see T.R.S. Broughton's The Romanization of Africa Proconsularis (New York, 1968). On language and culture in Tripolitania see Fergus Millar's "Local cultures in the Roman Empire: Libyan, Punic, and Latin in North Africa," JRS lviii (1968) pp. 126-34. For the archeology of Sabratha, see Kenrick's Excavations at Sabratha: 1948-51 (London, 1986). Finally, the epigraphic evidence for Sabratha can be found in The Inscriptions of Roman Tripolitania (IRT) (Rome, 1952), and in the Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum (CIL), vol. 8.
ESSAYS ON RELATED TOPICS [This should go directly beneath the essay on "Further Reading"]
IS APULEIUS A ROMAN?
PUNIC, GREEK, AND LATIN: LANGUAGE IN TRIPOLITANIA AND ITS FUNCTION IN THE APOLOGIA
THE STATUES OF THE EMPEROR PIUS AND THE APPEAL TO ROMAN JUSTICE
IS APULEIUS A ROMAN? [I think the only place in the text from/to which to link this essay is chapter 24, where Ap. discusses his background]
Is Apuleius a Roman? The simplicity of the question belies its complexity. The answer to the question, if an answer exists, is of course a matter of perspective. As a second century A.D. rhetorician who lived within the borders of the Roman empire and who wrote in Latin, Apuleius certainly qualifies as a Roman in the eyes of the modern observer. If Apuleius does indeed come from a colony, as he claims in chapter 24 (splendidissima colonia sumus), then his juridical status is that of a Roman citizen. It must be noted, however, that even as a Roman citizen in a Roman court of law, in front of the Roman proconsul Claudius Maximus, Apuleius never once identifies himself explicitly as a Roman. This seeming oversight requires attention.
Immediately prior to addressing the main charge of magic, Apuleius very briefly discusses his background (ch. 24). He notes that his accusers have asserted, based on his own writings, that his birthplace is at the border of Numidia and Gaetulia (De patria mea vero, quod eam sitam Numidiae et Gaetuliae in ipso confinio meis scriptis ostendistis). We are told by Augustine (City of God 8.14) that Apuleius was born at Madaurus, a colony in the south of Numidia (cf. CIL 8.4672, where Madaurus is attested as a colonia). Apuleius admits that he has in fact described himself, in a public speech, as half Numidian, half Gaetulian (Seminumidam et Semigaetulum). The Numidae were a large and powerful confederation of tribes west of Tripolitania. The Gaetuli were pastoralists who lived along the coastal hinterland, but the name "Gaetuli" eventually became synonymous with all the tribes living in the pre-desert beyond the perimeter of sedentary civilization. Pliny's account of North Africa (5.24-39) reveals a schematic organization of tribes based on their location. The barbarism of the tribes was a measure of their distance from the Mediterranean coast, with the furthest tribes (i.e. those of the deepest interior) considered the most barbaric. We should expect, then, that Apuleius' accusers reproached him for his perceived barbarism, and in fact Apuleius asks his accusers (ch. 25) how they can fault him simultaneously for Greek eloquence and barbarian birth (eloquentiam Graecam, patriam barbaram).
Apuleius declares that he has no reason to be ashamed of his mixed descent (ch. 24), and he compares himself to Cyrus, who was half Mede, half Persian (non video quid mihi sit in ea re pudendum, haud minus quam Cyro maiori, quod genere mixto fuit Semimedus ac Semipersa). More important to Apuleius' self-presentation, however, is his statement that character and not birthplace must serve as the true mark of a man's worth (non enim ubi prognatus, sed ut moratus quisque sit spectandum). Apuleius adduces Anacharsis, the wise Scyth, and Meletides, the idiotic Athenian, as examples of men whose characters were diametrically opposed to their places of origin. The reference to Anacharsis is particularly revealing. From Herodotus (4.76-7) we learn that Anacharsis, after traveling among the Greeks and acquiring vast knowledge, was put to death by the Scythians for attempting to introduce the foreign cult of Magna Mater. The parallels with Apuleius' own situation are evident, and it is not impossible that Apuleius is seeking to ally himself, notionally, with the Scythian sage.
So Apuleius does not deny that he comes from a place which, in the eyes of his accusers and the people of Sabratha, seems "barbarian." He mentions only that he comes from a colony (a status to which Sabratha had not yet attained), and he claims that his father had served there as duumvir (ch. 24). But regardless of whatever status his family might have had in Madaurus, his status in Sabratha was that of an outsider. For Apuleius to claim he was a Roman in Sabratha would be not unlike a small-tow n Oklahoman wandering into a Cuban neighborhood in Miami and pointing out that he was an American. A claim to "Roman" status in Sabratha would have had little or no weight. This is not to say, however, that Apuleius is content to define himself as nothing more than a Numidian/Gaetulian hybrid who happens to have come from a colonia. Apuleius' frequent quotation of such authors as Homer, Plato, and Vergil, in addition to strengthening his various arguments, allows Apuleius to posit himself in their elite company. This intellectual group is emblematic of the heights of Graeco-Roman culture and transcends mere romanitas. By portraying himself as a man of letters, Apuleius can also portray himself as a man of the world.
Only in the strictest technical sense, then, can we call Apuleius a Roman. Although he was by law a Roman citizen, I strongly suspect that Apuleius did not think of himself as a Roman, and his decision not to identify himself as a Roman in a speech deliv ered before a Roman proconsul in a Roman court of law suggests that "Roman" was not an important social category in Sabratha in 158. Apuleius was, to be sure, a Roman citizen, and he also admitted to being half Numidian, half Gaetulian, but if he were as ked to define himself, he probably would have answered, simply, "I am a disciple of Plato."
PUNIC, GREEK, AND LATIN: LANGUAGE IN TRIPOLITANIA AND ITS FUNCTION IN THE APOLOGIA [This essay is slightly more difficult to link to one particular spot in the text. I will, in the course of the essay, refer to chs. 4, 25, 30, 36-39, 82-3, 87, and 98. Chs. 4, 83, and 98 are probably the most crucial. They could be linked directly to this essay, and perhaps the essay could link back to the text at the other places where I make citations.]
The Roman Empire contained many different languages within its far-flung borders. North Africa was certainly no exception. In addition to the indigenous languages which were spoken in Tripolitania, the period of Carthaginian domination (ca. 600 - 200 B. C.) gave rise to Punic as a common dialect, and Greek was not unknown. The Romans naturally brought Latin along with their legions to the area. This multiplicity of languages is reflected in the Apologia. Apuleius uses language not only as a too l for his defense, but also as a weapon against his opponents. Before we examine the function of language in Apuleius' defense, let us consider briefly what we know about the various languages of Tripolitania.
The native language of North Africa may for practical purposes be called "Libyan," but no ancient source actually names the language. By the time of Apuleius' trial (A.D. 158), the utility of this dialect had been reduced to a couple of formulae which ar e found on inscriptions, and there is no evidence that it was in common use at all. There is some literary evidence that Punic survived throughout the imperial period as a common language in North Africa. Punic was a Semitic language which was closely r elated to Biblical Hebrew, and it is now the common view that it was the vernacular language in Tripolitania. Extended Punic inscriptions appear roughly up to the end of the second century A.D., and there are indications that Punic, in some form, continued to be inscribed (in Latin lettering) until the end of the fourth century. Evidence for the use of Greek is slim in the extreme. It is likely that this language was confined to only the most educated members of the local aristocracy, such as L. Septimius Severus of Lepcis Magna, the Roman emperor from 193 -211 A.D., who spoke Punic, Latin (albeit with an accent, cf. Historia Augusta Sept.Sev. 19.9), and Greek. An inscription from A.D. 229 (CIL 8.8500) confirms that knowledge of both Greek and Latin was considered a high achievement (studiis utriusque linguae perfecte eruditus). Latin was of course the language of official discourse, and, as is likely, the language of culture. It is impossible to discern, however, to what extent Latin replaced Punic as the common language in North Africa.
Near the beginning of his speech (ch. 4), Apuleius reminds his audience that he has been accused of eloquence -- in both Latin and Greek ("accusamus...te...tam Graece quam Latine... disertissimum"). Apuleius is evidently proud of his linguistic accomplishments: a quote from Homer, read aloud in Greek, serves as part of his response to the accusation. But this is by no means the end of Apuleius' boasting. In the middle of a rather lengthy digression on his accomplishments in the field of ichthyology, Apuleius mentions that he is writing on the subject in both Latin and Greek (ch. 36). What is more, Apuleius claims that he is attempting to write in a more organized and concise manner than even Aristotle or Plato could manage (praesertim cum ordinatius et cohibilius eadem Graece et Latine adnitar conscribere). The culmination of this linguistic parade comes when Apuleius produces in the courtroom a volume of his Greek writings on the subject of ichthyology (ch. 36), followed by a collection of his Latin translations (ch. 38). Leaving nothing to the imagination, Apuleius has excerpts from both works read aloud.
Apuleius' command of the Latin language is evidenced by the mere fact of his presenting his defense in Latin, and the myriad references to Greek authors throughout the speech reinforce the impression of his fluency in Greek. Apuleius makes numerous allusions to the erudition of Claudius Maximus, and it is clear that Apuleius' claim to linguistic achievement is an attempt to ally himself with the "learned" judge. In fact, Apuleius quite openly seeks to exploit an intellectual and cultural gradient between the educated judge and his boorish accusers. For, as we are about to see, Apuleius' facility in two languages also serves to put his opponents' linguistic inferiority in high relief.
Apuleius never launches an all-out assault on the shabby linguistic resume of his accusers. Nevertheless, sporadic references to his opponents' lack of familiarity with Greek (and even Latin) indicate that language is an important part of Apuleius' overall scheme of invective. Again discussing his study of fish (ch. 30), Apuleius quotes a passage from Vergil, and then tells Tannonius Pudens that he would have quoted similar passages from Theocritus, Homer, and Orpheus, and from Greek comic poets, tragedians, and historians, if he had not noticed that Tannonius was unable to read Pudentilla's Greek letter (memorassem tibi etiam Theocriti paria et alia Homeri et Orphei plurima, et ex comoediis et tragoediis Graecis et ex historiis multa repetissem, ni te dudum animadvertissem Graecam Pudentillae epistulam legere nequivisse). Later in his defense Apuleius accuses his accusers of having forged a letter which they claimed he had written (ch. 87). Their crucial blunder, however, was writing the letter in a barbarous Greek far beneath Apuleian standards (cur praeterea tam vitiosis verbis, tam barbaro sermone ego scriberem, quem idem dicunt nequaquam Graecae linguae imperitum?). Finally, and perhaps most damning to the opposition, Apuleius note s (ch. 98) that Sicinius Pudens, in whose name the accusation had been brought, could only speak Punic, with a touch of Greek which he had been taught by his mother -- but that he spoke no Latin (loquitur nunquam nisi Punice et si quid adhuc a matre graecissat; enim Latine loqui neque vult neque potest)! Apuleius then recalls with horror how Pudens could barely stammer out a couple of syllables (vix singulas syllabas fringultientem) when questioned by Claudius Maximus.
So language plays a crucial role in Apuleius' defense. It is important for a number of reasons, not the least of which is the fact that Pudentilla's letter, one of the physical pieces of evidence on which the entire case hinges, is written in Greek (ch. 83). Because the actual meaning of what Pudentilla has written is subject to debate, Apuleius' claim to linguistic superiority in Greek, a claim reinforced repeatedly throughout the speech, invests his interpretation of the letter with a certain authority. In addition, Pudentilla's capacity to write a letter in Greek further diminishes the perceived competence of Apuleius' accusers in the field of language. And this in turn allows Apuleius to ally himself with the bilingual Claudius Maximus against his unlettered accusers -- a fundamental strategy to his overall defense.
THE STATUES OF THE EMPEROR PIUS AND THE APPEAL TO ROMAN JUSTICE [This essay has an obvious link: the mention of the statues in ch. 85. The commentary which I would like to go with the photograph of Pius immediately follows the essay.]
A key part of Apuleius' defense is the appeal to a sense of Roman justice in the distinctly Roman setting of the Basilica at Sabratha. Nowhere is this more explicit than the passage late in the speech where Apuleius lambastes Sicinius Pudens for reading his mother's letters in court (ch. 85). Apuleius wonders aloud how Pudens could dare expose these personal documents not only in front of Claudius Maximus, but also in the presence of the statues of the emperor Pius (matris suae epistulas quas putat a matorias pro tribunali pronconsulari recitet apud virum sanctissimum Claudium Maximum, ante has imperatoris Pii statuas). This reference to the imperial statues is the only point in the entire speech where Apuleius invokes the living emperor Antoninus Pius. The statues themselves formed a crucial part of the courtroom's physical structure, and Apuleius' appropriation of his physical surroundings for his defense forms a crucial part of his overall strategy. This fleeting episode is worth considering in some detail.
The functions of imperial statuary in a Roman court of law were varied. Firstly, the statues were part of the artistic and juridical apparatus of the courtroom in a strictly technical sense: they converted the physical space of the courtroom into an official tribunal of Roman justice. The very presence of the imperial statues allowed valid juridical processes to take place. By the middle of the second century A.D., the imperial statue had also become invested with a certain notarizing power. To do something in front of an imperial statue, in other words, was tantamount to having done it in front of the emperor himself. In the imperial biography of Caracalla (Historia Augusta Carac. 5.7) we are told that people were executed for having urinated near imperial statues. It is evident that any perceived disrespect toward the imperial statue was a very serious matter, and Apuleius certainly capitalizes on this phenomenon when he draws attention to Pudens' decision to read his mother's "love" letter s aloud in court. This act was disrespectful not only toward his own mother, as Apuleius makes clear, but also toward the emperor Antoninus Pius.
An imperial statue also served as a place of refuge. Philostratus tells the story of how Apollonius took refuge at an imperial statue after a large crowd, apparently irate at a corn shortage, had mobbed him (Life of Apollonius 1.15). Pliny relates the case of a slave in Bithynia who had taken refuge at the statues of the emperor Trajan (Letters 10.74). By making a reference to the imperial statues, Apuleius can, at least implicitly, invoke the protection which they offered. Although these statues of Antoninus Pius [LINK "THESE STATUES OF ANTONINUS PIUS" TO PICTURE OF BUST OF PIUS] will have been clearly seen by everyone in the courtroom, Apuleius spotlights their presence by mentioning them, and this of course reinforces the notion that the courtroom, specifically because it contained within its walls the statues of the emperor, was an asylum for Apuleius.
Finally, Apuleius' use of the cognomen Pius to refer to the emperor is a clever tactic which further underlines the blatant impiety of Sicinius Pudens. We must bear in mind that Antoninus' full title was "Imperator Caesar Titus Aelius Hadrianus Antoninus Augustus Pius." To refer to an emperor as "Caesar" or "Augustus" was probably most common. Antoninus, however, had earned the honorary title "Pius" after persuading a hesitant Senate to consecrate his adoptive father Hadrian (A.D. 138). The contrast with Pudens could not be more clear. Whereas Antoninus had exhibited singular devotion to his dead father Hadrian, Pudens, by reading Pudentilla's letters aloud in court, displayed a remarkable disrespect toward his living mother. And while the full wealth of this rhetorical trick might have been lost on the audience as a whole, there can be no doubt that Claudius Maximus appreciated its significance.
The mere reference to the statues of the emperor Pius, then, reveals the full scope of Apuleian rhetoric. Not only does Apuleius strengthen his appeal to Roman justice, he also invokes the protection offered by the beneficent emperor -- through his perceived presence in the form of his statue. In addition, Apuleius turns a piece of his accusers' evidence, the letters of Pudentilla, into a damning testimony of their own impiety. With such oratorical exploits as this, can there be any doubt that Apuleius was acquitted?
[COMMENTARY TO GO WITH PICTURE OF BUST OF PIUS]
The bust of Antoninus Pius. This statue comes from modern Sousse (Tunisia). The imperial image in the courtroom at Sabratha was probably a full body statue. Also, imperial statuary tends to come in dynastic groups, so we should expect that Faustina, the wife of Antoninus, was also represented in the courtroom.