Dios Rome, Vol. 6 | Page 5

joker and would not refrain from aiming his shafts of wit at the very emperors: therefore Severus had him taken into custody, though without constraints. When he still continued, even under guard, to make the sovereigns the objects of his jests, Severus sent for him and swore that he would cut off his head. But the man replied: "Yes, you can cut it off, but as long as I have it, neither you nor I can restrain it," and so Severus laughed and released him.
He granted to Julius Paulinus twenty-five myriads because the man, who was a jester, had been led, though involuntarily, to make a joke upon him. Paulinus had said that he actually resembled a man getting angry, for somehow he was always assuming a fierce expression. [Footnote: None of the editors, any more than the casual reader, has been able to find anything of a sidesplitting nature in this joke. The trouble is, of course, that the utterance sounds like a plain statement of fact. Caracalla's natural disposition was harsh and irritable. Some have changed the word "man" to "Pan (in anger)", but without gaining very much. I offer for what it is worth the suggestion that a well-known truth, especially in the case of personal characteristics, may sound very amusing when pronounced in a quizzical or semi-ironical fashion by a person possessing sufficient vis comica. Thus we may conceive Paulinus, a professional jester, on meeting Antoninus to have blurted out in a tone of mock surprise: "Why, anybody would really think you are angry. You look so cross all the time!" There would then be a point in the jest, but the point would lie not in the words but in the voice and features of the speaker. Apart from this explanation of the possible humor of the remark an excerpt of Peter Patricius (Exc. Vat. 143) gives us to understand that it would be taken as a compliment by Antoninus from the mouth of a person to whom he was accustomed to accord some liberties, since Antoninus made a point of maintaining at all times this character of harshness and abruptness.]--Antoninus made no account of anything excellent: he never learned anything of the kind, as he himself admitted. So it was that he showed a contempt for us, who possessed something approaching education. Severus, to be sure, had trained him in all pursuits, bar none, that tended to inculcate virtue, whether physical or mental, so that even after he became emperor he went to teachers and studied philosophy most of the day. He also took oil rubbings without water and rode horseback to a distance of seven hundred and fifty stades. Moreover, he practiced swimming even in rough water. In consequence of this, Antoninus was, as you might say, strong, but he paid no heed to culture, since he had never even heard the name of it. Still, his language was not bad, nor did he lack judgment, but he showed in almost everything a keen appreciation and talked very readily. For through his authority and recklessness and his habit of saying right out without reflection anything at all that occurred to him, and not being ashamed to air his thoughts, he often stumbled upon some felicitous expression. [But the same Antoninus made many mistakes through his headstrong opinions. It was not enough for him to know everything: he wanted to be the only one who knew anything. It was not enough for him to have all power: he would be the only one with any power. Hence it was that he employed no counselor and was jealous of such men as knew something worth while. He never loved a single person and he hated all those who excelled in anything; and most did he hate those whom he affected most to love. Many of these he destroyed in some way or other. Of course he had many men murdered openly, but others he would send to provinces not suited to them, fatal to their physical condition, having an unwholesome climate; thus, while pretending to honor them excessively, he quietly got rid of them, exposing such as he did not like to excessive heat or cold. Hence, though he spared some in so far as not to put them to death, yet he subjected them to such hardships that the stain [Footnote: This is very likely an incorrect translation of an incorrect reading. The various editors of Dio have a few substitutes to propose, but as all the interpretations seem to me extremely lumbering I have turned the MS. [Greek] chêlidoysthai (taken as a passive) in a way that may be not quite beyond the bounds of possibility. The noun [Greek] chêlhist like the English "stain," often passes from its original sense of "blemish" to