studied pose was simply a disguised form of arrogance. A refusal to respond to insults
might well pass for a manifestation of an excessive distance, for it was a way of
refusing to communicate with ordinary citizens, even in an aggressive mode. Such was
the reproach expressed by Ion of Chios, who was always quick to criticize the stratēgos , to the advantage of Cimon: “The poet Ion, however, says that Pericles had a presumptuous
[ hupotuphon ] and somewhat arrogant manner of address and that into his haughtiness [ megalaukhiais ] there entered a good deal of disdain andcontempt for others; he praises, on the other hand, the tact, complaisance and elegant
address which Cimon showed in his social intercourse.” 26
When he displayed such emotional detachment, Pericles shocked his contemporaries as
much as he fascinated them: when solemnity ( semnotēs ) was not tempered by a dose of affability, it always risked being taken badly and
considered to reflect an anti-democratic stance. 27 That is precisely the gist of a line by the comic poet Cratinus, who presents Pericles
as “a man full of haughtiness and frowning brows [ anelktais ophrusi semnon ].” 28 Weird though it might seem, in Athens, certain facial expressions conveyed well-established
political meanings. Frowning eyebrows were considered as an external sign of oligarchical
or even tyrannical aspirations. So when the orator Demosthenes wanted to discredit
his opponent Aeschines, he reproached him not only for his sumptuous clothing and
his imposing trailing train but also for his frowning brows: “But since he has perpetrated
wrongs without number, he has become mighty supercilious [ tas ophrus anespake ]. … Behold him, pacing the market-place with the stately stride of Pythocles, his
long robe reaching to his ankles, his cheeks puffed out, as one who should say ‘One
of Philip’s most intimate friends, at your service!’ He has joined the clique that
wants to get rid of democracy.” 29 As a reflection of a misplaced solemnity, frowning brows—here rendered as “superciliousness”—could
be interpreted as a manifestation of overweaning scorn. So when he dwelt on this seemingly
anodyne facial detail, Cratinus was launching a particularly grave accusation against
Pericles. 30
When Pericles addressed the people with such imposing solemnity, he was bound to attract
virulent criticism from all those bent on representing such behavior as tyrannical
haughtiness. To counter that suspicion, the stratēgos devised a new stratagem to protect himself from similar accusations: he would take
care to limit his public declarations and appearances so as not to have the people
tire of him.
P ERICLES O FFSTAGE : K NOWING H OW TO K EEP Q UIET
The Art of Delegation
Whoever intervened on every point on the political stage, was bound, eventually, to
aggravate his fellow-citizens. In his Precepts of Statecraft (811E), Plutarch enjoys reminding his readers of this fact: “Those who strip for
every political activity … soon cause themselves to be criticized by the multitude;
they become unpopular and arouse envy when they are successful, but joy when they
meet with failure.” Pericles seems to have been deeply aware of thisdanger. In the course of his career, he limited the number of his public interventions
by getting his friends to speak in his place. It was often those close to him who,
in the Assembly, stepped up to the tribune to propose the decrees that Pericles wished
to submit for public approval. In this way, his authority was protected from envy
yet without being any the less effective. As Plutarch, again, remarks: “Pericles made
use of Menippus for the position of general, humbled the Council of the Areopagus
by means of Ephialtes, passed the decree against the Megarians by means of Charinus,
and sent Lampon out as founder of Thurii. For, when power seems to be distributed
among many, not
might well pass for a manifestation of an excessive distance, for it was a way of
refusing to communicate with ordinary citizens, even in an aggressive mode. Such was
the reproach expressed by Ion of Chios, who was always quick to criticize the stratēgos , to the advantage of Cimon: “The poet Ion, however, says that Pericles had a presumptuous
[ hupotuphon ] and somewhat arrogant manner of address and that into his haughtiness [ megalaukhiais ] there entered a good deal of disdain andcontempt for others; he praises, on the other hand, the tact, complaisance and elegant
address which Cimon showed in his social intercourse.” 26
When he displayed such emotional detachment, Pericles shocked his contemporaries as
much as he fascinated them: when solemnity ( semnotēs ) was not tempered by a dose of affability, it always risked being taken badly and
considered to reflect an anti-democratic stance. 27 That is precisely the gist of a line by the comic poet Cratinus, who presents Pericles
as “a man full of haughtiness and frowning brows [ anelktais ophrusi semnon ].” 28 Weird though it might seem, in Athens, certain facial expressions conveyed well-established
political meanings. Frowning eyebrows were considered as an external sign of oligarchical
or even tyrannical aspirations. So when the orator Demosthenes wanted to discredit
his opponent Aeschines, he reproached him not only for his sumptuous clothing and
his imposing trailing train but also for his frowning brows: “But since he has perpetrated
wrongs without number, he has become mighty supercilious [ tas ophrus anespake ]. … Behold him, pacing the market-place with the stately stride of Pythocles, his
long robe reaching to his ankles, his cheeks puffed out, as one who should say ‘One
of Philip’s most intimate friends, at your service!’ He has joined the clique that
wants to get rid of democracy.” 29 As a reflection of a misplaced solemnity, frowning brows—here rendered as “superciliousness”—could
be interpreted as a manifestation of overweaning scorn. So when he dwelt on this seemingly
anodyne facial detail, Cratinus was launching a particularly grave accusation against
Pericles. 30
When Pericles addressed the people with such imposing solemnity, he was bound to attract
virulent criticism from all those bent on representing such behavior as tyrannical
haughtiness. To counter that suspicion, the stratēgos devised a new stratagem to protect himself from similar accusations: he would take
care to limit his public declarations and appearances so as not to have the people
tire of him.
P ERICLES O FFSTAGE : K NOWING H OW TO K EEP Q UIET
The Art of Delegation
Whoever intervened on every point on the political stage, was bound, eventually, to
aggravate his fellow-citizens. In his Precepts of Statecraft (811E), Plutarch enjoys reminding his readers of this fact: “Those who strip for
every political activity … soon cause themselves to be criticized by the multitude;
they become unpopular and arouse envy when they are successful, but joy when they
meet with failure.” Pericles seems to have been deeply aware of thisdanger. In the course of his career, he limited the number of his public interventions
by getting his friends to speak in his place. It was often those close to him who,
in the Assembly, stepped up to the tribune to propose the decrees that Pericles wished
to submit for public approval. In this way, his authority was protected from envy
yet without being any the less effective. As Plutarch, again, remarks: “Pericles made
use of Menippus for the position of general, humbled the Council of the Areopagus
by means of Ephialtes, passed the decree against the Megarians by means of Charinus,
and sent Lampon out as founder of Thurii. For, when power seems to be distributed
among many, not
Similar Books
