Delphi Complete Works of Dio Chrysostom

by Dio Chrysostom

  The occasion for the address is briefly as follows. As a result of the rising price of grain at Prusa a bread riot has taken place. The excited mob rushed to attack the properties of Dio and an unnamed neighbour, either because they were suspected of having manipulated the grain market or because it was felt that they should be doing something toward the relief of the masses or because of pure hatred of the poor for the rich. Having reached a narrow lane near Dio’s estate, the mob suddenly was seized with panic and withdrew. The following morning the local authorities call a town meeting to discuss ways and means of easing the situation. In this meeting of citizens Dio rises to protest against his maltreatment by the mob. The gathering is hostile, and he appeals for a fair hearing both in the beginning of his remarks and later when he speaks of the price of grain; but he shows himself a man of fearless courage both in defending himself and in upbraiding his fellow townsmen. The address is interesting, not only as presumably the spontaneous eloquence of a distinguished speaker, but also as portraying in vivid colours the social and economic unrest that must have characterized more than one community in Bithynia.

  The Forty-sixth Discourse: Delivered in his Native City prior to his Philosophical Career

  I am not so astounded at your conduct, gentlemen, shocking as it is, but since I cannot see any justification for your anger against me, I am in a quandary. For while justifiable anger can be assuaged by entreaty, hatred that is unjust who could heal? However, I ask you to give me a hearing, since I speak as much on your account as on my own. For if I am guilty of no wrong, neither do you, I presume, wish to hate without a cause one of your own citizens; while if I am guilty, my words will be harmful instead of helpful to me; and thus I shall undergo at your hands a punishment greater than you yourselves are seeking. For it is in every way more dreadful to be proved a scoundrel than to be stoned to death or consumed by fire. [2] And you must recognize first of all that the things which seem terrible to you — stones and fire — are not terrible to anybody, and that you are not really strong because of these things, but weakest of all — unless one were to take into account the strength of brigands and madmen. But as for a city and a government by the people, strength lies in other things, and first and foremost in wisdom and fair dealing.

  Now with reference to my father, there is no need for me to tell whether he was a good citizen, for you are always singing his praises, both collectively and individually, whenever you refer to him, as being no ordinary citizen. [3] You should know, however, that these words of praise of yours are of no use to him; on the other hand, when you give your approval to me, his son, then you have been mindful of him too. Again, no one could say of my grandfather either that he disgraced the city or that he spent nothing on it out of his own means. For he spent on public benefactions all that he had from his father and his grandfather, so that he had nothing left at all, and then he acquired a second fortune by his learning and from imperial favour. [4] Moreover, it is plain that he asked for no favour for himself, though held in such great friendship and esteem, but rather that he guarded and husbanded for you the goodwill of the Emperor. But if anyone thinks it foolishness to remind you of goodwill and nobility on the part of your own citizens, I do not know how such a man can wish to be treated well himself. Being descended, then, from such forebears, even if I were an utter knave myself, yet surely on their account I should merit some consideration instead of being stoned or burned to death by you.

  [5] But consider my own claims too, gentlemen, not unsympathetically. For my father left us an estate which, while reputed to be large, was small in value, yes, much less than that of others; for no less than four hundred thousand drachmas were in bills receivable, besides foreign business ventures of such nature that they were far more troublesome than the bills. For we had no security, I might say, for any part of our assets, but my father had acquired all his wealth through trusting to his own influence, believing that no one would contest his claims. [6] Yet, left as I was in such a situation, while I have not even now succeeded in securing a settlement of that part of the loans which fell to me, I have performed for you the greatest liturgies, in fact no one in the city has more of them to his credit than I have. Yet you yourselves know that many are wealthier than I am. What is it, then, that makes you angry with me, and why of all the citizens have you singled out for dishonour me and what’s-his-name, and why do you threaten us with stoning and burning? And let no one say that I am speaking in behalf of that man. For though perhaps you should not be so exasperated at any one, even among the wrongdoers, still my own troubles are enough for me.

  [7] And pray consider what sort of citizen I am in other respects also, comparing me with whom you please — of all whom you do not consign to the flames. For example, though I have real estate, all in your territory too, yet none of my neighbours, whether rich or poor — and many of the latter class are my neighbours too — has ever lodged complaint against me, either justly or unjustly, alleging that he was being deprived of something or being evicted. Nor am I either over-clever as a speaker or, if I may say so, poorest of all in that art. [8] Well then, is there any one whom I have injured by my words, by causing trouble for any one who loves peace and quiet or by contriving some outrage against him? Or have I placed anyone in jeopardy touching his estate, pretending that it belongs to Caesar, or have I as advocate played false to any one?

  Again, no man is more blameless than I am in connexion with the present shortage. Have I produced the most grain of all and then put it under lock and key, raising the price? Why, you yourselves know the productive capacity of my farms — that I rarely, if ever, have sold grain, even when the harvest is unusually productive, and that in all these years I have not had even enough for my own needs, but that the income from my land is derived exclusively from wine and cattle. Nay but, some one may claim, though I lend money, I am unwilling to supply it for the purchase of grain. There is no need for me to say anything on that score either, for you know both those who lend money in our city and those who borrow.

  [9] What is it, then, which I might do to relieve you from your distress but which I refuse to do, or what is it that makes you feel toward me as you do? It is because, by Heaven, I have built the colonnades near the hot springs, and workshops too; for this is the injury some claim the city is suffering at my hands! Yet whom have either you or any other person ever taken to task for building a house on his own farm? Or is it that which makes grain dearer? Why, I bought the land at fifty thousand drachmas, a price altogether higher than its worth! Nay, I am ashamed, by all that’s holy, if any of the citizens — for of course it is not the city itself — is so depraved as to feel hurt and jealous if he sees that somebody has built a colonnade or a workshop!

  [10] Besides, though the matter over which you have become incensed truly does require some attention, still it is not beyond repair or such as to make you act as you are acting. For while the cost of grain has risen higher than what is customary here, it is not so high as to make you desperate. Why, there are cities in which it always is at that price, when conditions are best! There you go, making a tumult once more, as if I were saying it ought to be that price at Prusa too, and never lower. But the point I am making is that, while it is necessary to take steps to make it cheaper, still it is not necessary to feel so bitter over what had happened or to lose your senses; for the way you have acted just now is not the conduct befitting such a matter, nay, if I had murdered your children and your wives you could not have behaved with greater savagery. [11] For to be enraged at one’s own fellow citizens — I care not whether justly or unjustly, but at all events at fellow citizens, citizens in good standing, yes, as good as anybody — and not to let them explain or to make an explanation to them, but without more ado to try to stone them and burn their houses, with a view to consuming in one conflagration, if possible, them and their children and their wives — what kind of human beings act that way? In my opinion, I swear by all that’s holy, no matter if you will be angry to hea
r it, such conduct is not that of men in needy circumstances or lacking the necessaries of life. For need develops self-control.

  And if you do not suppose these remarks of mine are being offered for your good, you are very much mistaken. [12] For if you are going to be like this and, in case you become angry with any one — and many things are likely to happen in a city, both right and wrong — you are going to see fit to exact so extreme a punishment as forthwith to try to consume with fire the victim of your rage along with his children and to force some of the women, free citizens as they are, to appear before you with garments rent, supplicating you as if in time of war, what mortal is so foolish, so unfortunate, that he will choose to live in such a city a single day? The fact is, it is far better to be an exile and a sojourner on foreign soil than to be subjected to such outrage. Why, even now the alleged reason which, they say, made you turn back from my house — having become suspicious, forsooth, at the depth of the lane — see how flimsy it is! [13] For if that is what saved me, it is high time from now on, as if the city were an armed camp, to occupy the difficult terrain and the lofty or precipitous positions! And yet, God knows, not even in armed camps does one soldier seek a safer spot than his neighbour in which to pitch his tent; no, their precautions are aimed at the men with whom they are at war.

  So, although my thanks are due to the lucky chance which made you turn back, whether this was your motive or anything else at all; still you had no real reason to be suspicious. For I should not have warded you off, no, so far as that is concerned, you are absolutely safe in burning down my house any time you please, and I was content to take my wife and baby and leave.

  [14] And let no one imagine that it is in anger over my own position that I have said these things rather than in fear for yours, lest possibly you may some day be accused of being violent and lawless. For nothing which takes place in the cities escapes the attention of the proconsuls — I mean the more important ones in these parts; on the contrary, just as relatives denounce to the teachers the children who are too disorderly at home, so also the misdeeds of the communities are reported to the proconsuls. Now while such conduct as yours would not be honourable or advantageous for yourselves, to demand that there should be supervision of your market and that those men should be elected who are financially able and have not performed liturgies, but if that cannot be, that then the choice of supervisors should rest with you, this, I say, is the course of sensible human beings and in this no one will oppose you.

  THE FORTY-SEVENTH DISCOURSE: A SPEECH IN THE PUBLIC ASSEMBLY AT PRUSA

  The theme of this Discourse is Dio’s pet project of embellishing his native city. He seems to have conceived the idea soon after his return from exile (A.D. 96). We learn both from the present address and from Or. . that the people of Smyrna, Ephesus, Tarsus, and Antioch, not to mention lesser communities in that quarter of the Roman world, were taking energetic measures to beautify their respective cities, and Dio was concerned that Prusa should not lag behind. The full magnitude of his ambitious scheme is suggested by Or. .-, where he says he had dreamed of constructing not merely colonnades and fountains but also fortifications, harbours, and shipyards and of increasing the population of Prusa by attracting immigration from all directions and even by incorporating with Prusa while communities, “as Epaminondas once brought Boeotia into union with Thebes and as Theseus had brought Attica into union with Athens.”

  The opening paragraphs of Or. form a valuable supplement to our present Discourse, which it seems to have preceded by not more than a few months. By combining both sources of information we gather that thus far Dio’s operations have been confined to the construction of one or more colonnades; that the project had been sponsored by one or more proconsuls, as well as by Trajan himself; and that it had been welcomed by the people of Prusa, who on more than one occasion had heard the plan explained and had repeatedly expressed enthusiastic approval and guaranteed financial support by private subscription. However, the work involved the demolition of older structures and the removal of certain landmarks, both sacred and profane, and Dio son found himself the target for hostile criticism. He seems to have been attacked on the charge of impiety and lack of local patriotism and as being chiefly concerned to serve his personal pride and ambition. It was no doubt by means of such charges that the small but energetic group of opponents tried to discourage payment of subscriptions to the building fund and thus to block proceedings. In the concluding paragraphs of the present address Dio deals ironically with the criticisms of one enemy in particular, whose gossipy remarks are treated as if they were intended for Dio’s own good but who seems to have likened him to a tyrant.

  Dio tells us, no doubt truthfully, that his active opponents are relatively few; yet his long exile had made him seem to be an outsider, his social and financial status undoubtedly raised him above the general level at Prusa, and his intimacy with Trajan and other influential Romans, while on occasion it was capitalized to the advantage of his people, laid him open to popular suspicion and jealousy. Again, it is human nature for men to be carried away by enthusiasm when plans are first proposed but to find their ardour cooling when work is in progress and subscriptions are falling due. Whatever may have been the cause, it is apparent that affairs have reached such a stage that Dio feels he must abandon his earlier intention of making no more public appeals in support of the work. The speech which he proceeds to deliver is notably sarcastic and bitter, but the justice of his case is made so manifest and his threat to wash his hands of Prusa is so disturbing that his hearers seem to have burst forth into shouts calling for the work to be carried forward. That it was carried forward to completion and acclaimed as a success may reasonably be inferred from the close of Or. , which Arnim dates in A.D. 101 or 102, at most but a few months later than the present Discourse.

  We find welcome testimony regarding conditions in Bithynia in the tenth book of Pliny’s Letters. Immediately following Pliny’s entry into that province, A.D. 100 or 111, he reports (17A and B) that finances are in bad shape, that on various pretexts private individuals are in possession of public funds, that public grants have been made for illegal purposes, but that substantial sums may be recoverable from certain contractors at Prusa. Letter and Trajan’s reply concern a project to “repair an ancient and ruinous bath” at Prusa. A sequel is found in , in which Pliny proposes to abandon the original structure, once a private residence of some pretensions but now “a hideous ruin,” and to build afresh in a district now “exceedingly deformed.” More interesting still for our present purpose is , in which it is reported that Cocceianus Dio had been eager to have the Council of Prusa accept for the city “a public edifice which had been erected under his charge.” A certain Flavius Archippus, acting through his attorney Eumolpus, had demanded that Dio first render an account of expenditures, charging that the work had not been carried out according to specifications and adding that Dio had been guilty of a grave offence in setting up a statue of Trajan in the same edifice in which were buried Dio’s wife and son. Dio had been prompt in presenting to the proconsul the required statement and was urging a speedy hearing, but his opponents continued to create delays. We do not know the outcome of the squabble, but Trajan’s reply (82), while recommending an inspection of Dio’s accounts, as a matter of public interest, exhibits slight concern over the charges laid against him.

  Thus we are led to infer that the popular support achieved by Or. 47 sustained Dio in the years that followed the completion of the colonnade and encouraged him to undertake with renewed zeal some of the projects associated with the ambitious program spoken of in Or. .-. It is equally clear that he still had to contend with the opposition of some of his fellow citizens.

  The Forty-seventh Discourse: A Speech in the Public Assembly at Prusa

  In the first place, my friends, do not by any means suppose when I rise to speak that you are about to hear a discourse that is extraordinary or remarkable; I mean, for example, one composed to produce a kind of p
leasure or to exhibit beauty or wisdom. For possibly I should not in any event have been equal to that sort of thing, but it may be that by good luck I have deceived the public and all the cities; yet be that as it may, it stands to reason that now at all events I have experienced a great lack, indeed a complete forgetfulness, of that sort of eloquence. For a man’s words must needs be coloured by the nature of what he is doing and in which he is engrossed; and in my case I have long been engaged in petty and inglorious affairs.

  [2] Now perhaps this experience of mine is a matter of necessity, for previously I used to be surprised at those philosophers who abandoned their own countries under no compulsion and chose to dwell among other peoples, and what is more, despite their own claim that a man should honour his fatherland and regard it as of supreme importance, and that activity in public affairs and playing one’s part as a citizen is the natural duty of a human being. I am referring to Zeno, Chrysippus, and Cleanthes, not one of whom stayed at home, despite these brave words. Did they not, then, mean what they said? They above all others did, to my way of thinking. [3] Why, they regarded concern for a man’s own city as a noble and truly blessed and appropriate function for men of wisdom; on the other hand, they used to view with distrust the difficulties and vexations it involved — not only ignorance on the part of some, but malice on the part of others, and sheer heedlessness on the part of still others — unless a man of wisdom could at the same time possess the strength and power of a Heracles; however, they considered this impossible.