I chose a peculiar subject for my master's degree dissertation, encompassing hermetic philosophy, ancient secret societies and magico-religious rituals summoning spirits. I made quite a big mistake. In browsing for books on the subject, I happened across one book which weighed in at the hefty price of £170. Instead, I opted to buy a number of long since out of print Oxford Reds (that is, University level detailed commentaries from the University of Oxford - a university not exactly unknown to the world...). However, I recently bought that book, at a bargain (£100, first edition), and just re-reading it a moment ago, it has dawned on me what a gross error of judgement it was for me to not have bought it at the time I was studying towards my final dissertation. Equally, no one wears glasses of 20/20 hindsight, and in retrospect, it was better that I bought the extremely precious (irreplaceable) Oxford Reds, because at least then I have them in my collection. Had I bought Apuleius instead, I may not have had access to the likes of Virgil, Quintilian or Euripides, in Oxford University's finest editions.
Even so, this particular book is an absolutely fascinating read. There are three inscriptions I was previously unaware of from Apuleius' birthplace, moreover, a law in Justinian I was also unaware of at the time. Little things like Marcus Fronto coming from the same place (a near contemporary of Apuleius, tutor and indeed intimate companion of the great [pagan] emperor and philosopher Marcus Aurelius Antoninus). I should have clocked these things. There are also testomonia I was unaware of. I thought to myself, "I have the Latin text, which is all I need. I also have the Budé edition [which is an excellent edition, by the way: the University of Paris] so what need have I of another translation?" I had already translated the work (Apuleius' De deo Socratis), therefore did not need some other scholars' conjectural interpretations. However, I passed over one important point: these are my betters. These scholars have been reading Apuleius even before I had begun studying at University some dozen years ago now. Even Dr. Paula James (fellow of the magnificent Open University) had written an excellent work on the subject. It was through the voice of Paula (and also Chris Emlyn-Jones) that I first learnt the sacred and ancient Latin language. Yet that is all by the by. Are they better? That remains to be seen.
For example, I have spent a very long time learning about Apuleius, poring over all his works in their original language. I have access to articles which are way beyond anything the Open University had to offer on their limited database (which is actually quite extensive, by comparison, though a shadow of its former self by the way - when I first began studying there). Moreover, I have bought a great many books on the subject, required reading for a master's degree dissertation. I, am a scholar of the future, whereas they, are the scholars of the past.
Yet we all share one thing in common: a love for classical studies, especially Latin, and most especially Apuleius. His Defence Against Magic is an absolutely goddamn fascinating read, and I mean 'it doesn't get any better than that' kind of fascinating. For example, the trial (almost certainly in 158 or 159 C.E. at Oea, North Africa - the only one of Apuleius' works which can be dated with any certainty) is extremely nuanced. It is not, actually, all about magic. Vincent Hunink (a magnificent scholar, by the way) argues that the trial of witchcraft may have only been an afterthought of the charges brought against Apuleius, and that it was more to do with money. This is certainly a motive, as much was at stake. Imagine. You're a die hard classicist, obsessed with magico-religious philosophy, but also a keen student of the law. This speech has absolutely everything: invective, dirt digging, sophistry, elusive facts, tenuous evidence, almost impossible points to defend (which Apuleius adroitly side-steps) and there is one thing most of all. This something is what I first thought (and first impressions are important) when I first read the speech in 2017 (having just bought the hot off the press translation by Jones [Loeb]). This point is something which Hunink emphasises: How much did Apuleius actually know about magic? He seems to know a great deal, very much so. Does this mean he was guilty? Perhaps not. Association does not necessarily imply causation (okay, he had written a book on demonology, which may well incriminate him somewhat...) because it is the pretext which is most important here, the motive and that motive, is money (and a large amount of money, at that). Naturally Pudentilla's brothers would have been pissed off (they would lose everything, and it would all go to Apuleius instead). I absolutely love this work, so much so that I dedicated my master's degree dissertation to its author (though I did, in fact, focus on the book on spirits [daimones] instead of the trial).
My point is, that as the late great savant Didier Deman once said to me, "Maxwell, it is not the learning which is important, it is what you do with that learning, applying it to something practical and useful which is more important." Never have truer words been spoken. Okay, so the British academic establishment are like Vladimir Putin (i.e. their word is absolutely worthless, and they have no honour whatsoever), yet I can use what these dishonourable group of academics have taught me to apply it to something practical and useful instead. It is not the M.A. which is important (look where that got me: washing up at the kitchen sink! And that's okay too: this is not Renaissance Italy, evidently. It's Dark Age Britain), but the publication which is more important. So what if I missed a couple of inscriptions and a line in Justinian's law code during my M.A. dissertation? (It's not like the markers would even notice that...) What is more important is that I consolidate what I have learnt, draw it together, note anything I may have missed, and publish the best translation possible. At present, the only two translations of this work are available for £170 (Oxford) or £25 (Loeb). I will charge £10. As Denzel Washington said in the movie American Gangster, "I'm a Renaissance man." Blue magic: it's a trademark. It guarantees a quality product at a price which blows any competition straight out of the water. Besides, what people want is a good, clear, readable translation, not the facing Latin text (which they cannot understand) or a bunch of citations they'll never follow up (because they either cannot afford to buy so many books, or, more likely, are not bothered to). I will succeed, because it's what I do. It's my business.
Max.
No comments:
Post a Comment