Anja Bettenworth, University of Cologne
This paper analyses the narrative function of pudor (shame) in Curtius Rufus, starting from the burning of the royal Persian palace of Persepolis by Alexander the Great in 330 BCE. The destruction of the palace is a defining moment in Alexander’s conquest of Persia. It is frequently mentioned in ancient literature and has attracted the attention of archeological, historical and literary researchers. Archeologists confirmed that objects of value were systematically removed before the fire started, which makes it likely that the burning of the palace was not an accident (Schmidt 1953; Sancisi-Weerdenburg 1993). Historical research has been concerned with Alexander’s motivation for destroying Persepolis (Atkinson 1994, Baynham 1998, San José Campos 2021, Wirth 1993).
In contrast, little attention has been paid to the burning of Persepolis as a part of the sources’ narratological strategy. This paper focuses on the Historiae Alexandri Magni of Curtius Rufus, who is notoriously fascinated by psychological processes (Porod 1987; Wulfram 1996; Bettenworth 2020). In Curtius, Alexander’s Macedonian soldiers first believe that the fire is an accident, but when they discover that their king is drunk and is fueling the blaze, they change the mind and “command (i.e. force) themselves to believe that Persepolis had to be destroyed that way”. Their prime motivation is shame: in order to keep up their high esteem of Alexander, they need to suppress their negative feelings about the destruction (Curt. 5.7.10: Pudebat Macedones tam praeclaram urbem a comissabundo rege deletam esse: itaque res in serium versa est, et imperaverunt sibi, ut crederent illo potissimum modo fuisse delendam. On pudor in Latin literature see Vaubel 1969 and Thomas 2007). Pudor also plays a crucial role in two later scenes in the Historiae: When the drunken Alexander murders his friend Clitus, the soldiers, wishing to mitigate their sense of shame, decide that Clitus had been lawfully killed (Curt. 8.2.12: Quoque minus caedis puderet, iure interfectum Clitum Macedones decernunt). Finally, when Alexander marries Roxane, the Macedonian soldiers are ashamed because of Roxane’s barbaric origins. This time, they do not find any justification for Alexander’s behavior, but nobody dares to object because the murder of Clitus took away their freedom of speech (Curt. 8.4.30: Pudebat amicos super vinum et epulas socerum ex deditis esse delectum, sed post Cliti caedem libertate sublata vultu, qui maxime servit, adsentiebantur).
This paper argues that Curtius’ unique use of pudor and its deliberate suppression serves to depict the way in which tyranny may encroach on a political system. Specifically, I argue that the emotion of shame can serve as an early warning sign that something is amiss. If its impulses are ignored for too long, the tyrant may grow strong, which leads to a situation in which opposition is no longer possible without immediate danger. These lines of thought resemble political discussions in Pliny and Tacitus, which would put Curtius Rufus (whose date is contested, see already Rüegg 1906) roughly at the end of the 1st century CE.