(no subject)
Jan. 17th, 2009 12:28 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
ricardiennesorry...moderate obsession here, but this translation doesn't even make sense, does it?
Am I missing something rather obvious here? The standing interpretation seems to be that Vitellius' comment = "I often disagree with other senators, e.g. Thrasea. But dissent is good, and I guess I just argue a lot" and is well-meaning. The scorn comes from his having dared put himself on the level (through shared disagreement) with Thrasea. But the second part still doesn't follow for me. "Disagreements happen, as for example, frequently between me and even Thrasea" in no way sets up Thrasea as a paragon of greatness and a model. Particularly when the context is free speech. It's possible that there is an "agree to disagree" thing going on, due to the Helvidius-Thrasea connection. But again, Thrasea is made out to be, if anything, so formidable that it takes great courage to disagree with him. And that happens to be incorrect: we all know it.so screw you, commentators
EDIT: and Dio (64.7) just has the first bit ("disagreement is normal"): only the fiction of non interference, none of the stuff about Thrasea.
Also, most people who write about this kind of despise Priscus, and go on about how put-upon poor, conciliatory Vitellius was by this irritating republican throw-back.
"Nothing new has happened: two senators have different in opinion; and is not that a common occurrence? I have myself often opposed the sentiments of Thrasea." The allusion to a character so truly eminent provoked a smile of contempt. Some, however, were glad to find, that, instead of the men who glittered in the sunshine of a court, he chose Thrasea for the model of true greatness.
Am I missing something rather obvious here? The standing interpretation seems to be that Vitellius' comment = "I often disagree with other senators, e.g. Thrasea. But dissent is good, and I guess I just argue a lot" and is well-meaning. The scorn comes from his having dared put himself on the level (through shared disagreement) with Thrasea. But the second part still doesn't follow for me. "Disagreements happen, as for example, frequently between me and even Thrasea" in no way sets up Thrasea as a paragon of greatness and a model. Particularly when the context is free speech. It's possible that there is an "agree to disagree" thing going on, due to the Helvidius-Thrasea connection. But again, Thrasea is made out to be, if anything, so formidable that it takes great courage to disagree with him. And that happens to be incorrect: we all know it.
EDIT: and Dio (64.7) just has the first bit ("disagreement is normal"): only the fiction of non interference, none of the stuff about Thrasea.
Also, most people who write about this kind of despise Priscus, and go on about how put-upon poor, conciliatory Vitellius was by this irritating republican throw-back.
