The Value of ὑπομνήματα: Ancient Notebooks and Their Role in Authenticity

In ancient literary traditions, the distinction between ὑπομνήματα (notebooks or commentaries) and finished works was fundamental. Yet, within the realm of ὑπομνήματα, there existed a subset that was intentionally published as raw, unpolished records, prized for their perceived authenticity over a more rhetorically polished composition. This excursus explores the significance of ὑπομνήματα in ancient texts, highlighting how their rawness was sometimes seen as a virtue rather than a flaw.

The Distrust of Rhetoric and the Appeal of ὑπομνήματα

Rhetorical sophistication often came with a degree of skepticism. It was believed that such techniques could engage emotions and mislead audiences. Julius Caesar’s early volumes on the Gallic Wars, titled commentarii, exemplify this tactic. By presenting these works as straightforward commentaries rather than polished histories, Caesar lent them an air of authenticity and reliability, free from the manipulations of grand rhetoric.

The Case of Damis and Apollonius: Unpolished Truth

Philostratus’ Life of Apollonius provides an explicit illustration of this principle. In the narrative, Philostratus introduces the ὑπομνήματα of Damis, a companion of Apollonius. These notebooks are portrayed as valuable precisely because of their unembellished, straightforward nature:

"The empress commanded me to recast and edit these essays, at the same time paying more attention to the style and diction of them; for the man of Nineveh had told his story clearly enough, yet somewhat awkwardly."

Philostratus acknowledges the awkwardness of Damis’s account but stresses its value as a verbatim record of Apollonius's teachings. This portrayal emphasizes the intrinsic worth of an unpolished account, preserving even the trivial details.

Arrian’s Approach: Publishing Raw ὑπομνήματα

Arrian’s introduction to his Discourses of Epictetus showcases a similar respect for the raw form of ὑπομνήματα. Arrian explicitly states that he has not composed these words in the traditional sense but has instead recorded them as they were spoken:

"I have not composed these Words of Epictetus as one might be said to 'compose' books of this kind, nor have I of my own act published them to the world; indeed, I acknowledge that I have not 'composed' them at all. But whatever I heard him say I used to write down, word for word, as best I could, endeavouring to preserve it as a memorial [ὑπομνήματα], for my future use, of his way of thinking and the frankness of his speech."

Arrian’s confidence in the vividness and authenticity of these unembellished records suggests that the rawness of ὑπομνήματα could convey truth and evoke the intended response more effectively than polished rhetoric.

Origen’s Defense of the Gospels

Origen adapts this approach in his defense of the gospel authors in Contra Celsum:

"We are convinced that men who had not learnt the technique taught by the pernicious sophistry of the Greeks, which has great plausibility and cleverness, and knew nothing of the rhetoric prevalent in the law-courts, could not have invented stories in such a way that their writings were capable in themselves of bringing a man to believe and to live a life in conformity with his faith."

Origen argues that the simplicity and naivety of the gospel writers' approach made their accounts more credible. Their lack of rhetorical sophistication was a testament to their innocence and the divine power guiding their words.

Conclusion

The deliberate use of ὑπομνήματα reflects a broader ancient appreciation for authenticity over polish. Figures like Philostratus, Arrian, and Origen demonstrate that unembellished records were sometimes valued more highly than rhetorically sophisticated compositions. This preference underscores a significant aspect of ancient literary culture: the belief that truth and authenticity could shine more clearly through simplicity and directness than through the artifices of polished rhetoric. In an era where the line between history and storytelling was often blurred, the rawness of ὑπομνήματα provided a crucial anchor for perceived authenticity and credibility.