Pers. 3.39–43 and the Phalaris legend

Discussing how the reproaches of a guilty conscience haunt a man who has not lost the understanding of true virtue despite having fallen from its path, Persius (3.39–43) alludes to two well-known examples associated with Phalaris and Dionysius/Damocles: if Jupiter wanted to punish cruel tyrants with mental anguish, the sufferings of (a) one who is roasted in a copper bull, or (b) one over whose head a sword hangs, would seem trifling to them. The traditional explanation of these lines suggests several strong logical ‘leaps’, rightly recognized (but justified with some difficulty) by N. Rudd and R. A. Harvey. The remorse of tyrants is compared to the physical suffering of their victims, not their own; at the same time, for the sake of the balance between the two exempla, the story of Damocles is forcibly interpreted as an elaborate torture inflicted on him by Dionysius, moving away from the interpretation that Cicero and Horace give to the episode with the sword (Dionysius demonstrates to his subject what life is like for a despot who constantly fears an assassination attempt). Meanwhile, it seems possible to restore coherence to Persius’ thought by suggesting that v. 39 refers to a version of the Phalaris legend according to which the rebellious citizens of Agrigentum burned the tyrant in the same copper bull in which he burned others (cf. first of all Ovid Ibis 439–440, a passage close to Persius also lexically). In this interpretation, the punishment for tyrants’ crimes is either talionic revenge (Phalaris) or the constant fear of retribution which poisons their life (for it is Dionysius, not Damocles, who is the protagonist of vv. 40–41); but the virtual torment of remorse can be more painful than both.