Petronius Cena Trimalchionis and Plutarch s Quaestiones Convivales: a Comparative Approach to the Banquet and to the Banqueteers

Abstract

Despite the fact that Plutarch knew reports that referred to the Petronius Arbiter of Nero’s court and that, as a consequence, he could also have come into contact with his work, this comparative approach to Petronius’ Satyricon (and in particular to the central episode of the Cena Trimalchionis) and to Plutarch’s Quaestiones convivales does not intend to suggest that the biographer was somehow influenced by the work of the Roman author. Nevertheless, this does not prevent both authors from having several points of contact, most probably because they are embedded in a common Greek and Roman culture, and especially in a common literary tradition. In fact, the Greek influence in Petronius is detectable throughout the entire Satyricon, and Plutarch, despite being a Greek, wrote under Roman domination and could count as well on a Roman audience of his work. This paper will, therefore, analyze the way concepts and ideas, literary topoi and exempla, rhetorical and narrative strategies are used by both authors in the two works. Global issues regarding the making of a banquet and the role played by the host of a banquet are particularly present in book 1 of the Quaestiones convivales, offering an illuminating and contrasting approach to the Cena Trimalchionis. The proposed analysis is focused on the first quaestio raised in book 1 of the Quaestiones convivales: “Should one philosophize while drinking?” (Εἰ δεῖ φιλοσοφεῖν παρὰ πότον).