The face of character

In describing Hasdrubal’s1 wickedness, Polybius says “He was by nature corpulent, and he had

now become potbellied and was unnaturally red in the face, so that it looked as if he were living

like a fatted ox in the plenty of a festival”2 Polybius used of his physical appearance as evidence

for his baseness of character, accentuating his moral failures and justify his assertion about the

decadency of Carthaginian rulers by mid second century.

Polybius takes particular interest in his external looks in order to reveal his character “at his

meeting with Gulussa, king of the Numidians, he appeared in a complete suit of armour over

which was fastened a cloak of sea purple and with a retinue of ten swordsmen”3 This sort of

character’s representation via a physical reflexion is already present in Aristotle he describes

the vulgar man Banaucos as a person who tastelessly displays his wealth even in small

occasions or dressing extravagantly4. In the same manner, Polybius’ empty-headed braggart is

exposed through his ridiculous appearance. Further on Polybius makes claims that “When the

rest of the citizens were utterly perishing from famine, he gave drinking parties and offered his

guests sumptuous second courses and his own good cheer (διὰ τῆς ἰδίας εὐεξίας) exposed the

general distress”5 The unpunished exhibition of well-being emphasized his wickedness and

base character. In the same manner, his actions and discourses end up exposing his vileness,

“by making mock of some and inflicting outrage and death on others he terrorized the populace

and maintained his authority in his sorely stricken country by means to which a tyrant in a

1
Not to be confused with Hamilcar’s son-in-law, this one was attacked and defeated by Masinisa 151/150
2
38.8.7
3
38.7
4
Atist. EN 1123a 20-24
5
38.8.11

1
prosperous city would scarcely resort”6. The resulting portrait is just as visually powerful as

morally striking. This is one of the best physical descriptions that we have in Polybius’ account,

and we should ask ourselves why he did not provide us with similar ones, when he clearly

understood impact of such images. One of the reasons, we might presume, is that this

description is part of the second-to-last book, that means that its story is contemporary to

Polybius’ own time, and he might actually have seen Hasdrubal with his own eyes. Given his

endeavor to present physical evidence as proof of his account, he might actually avoid making

a detail description of those people he didn’t know, using a psychological portrait, that is,

imprinting in their looks some sort of physical evidence of their character.

Polybius’s aim to create a “vicarious experience”7 of History is reflected in the vivid

description of individual rather than collectives. This emphasis has been explained by

Momigliano who argues that in the fourth century a new kind of history was developing and

eventually gave way to the biographical genre.8On the other hand, Graham Oliver has asserted

that biography was considered an entirely different genre than history.9 A new focus on

individual –already at display in Theopompus Philippica- celebrated the deeds and

accomplishments of a single person, but it also added interest in their disposition and

temperament as a major element on the outcome of events. Nevertheless, we should not be

carried away, this new individual perspective was far from representing physical aspects except

on those circumstances in which a distinguishable feature of the character.10

Already the first extant treatise on physiognomy, ps.-Aristotle’s

Physiognomonica (3rd century BC), distinguishes between invariable and

variable physical features. It postulates that physiognomy is concerned with

6
38.8.13
7
Walbank, HCP (1967:92)
8
Momigliano (1993)
9
Oliver (2006:116)
10
Ex. Pericles, Philip’s one eye, Homer etc.

2
 inferring one’s permanent (μoνιμον) characteristics. Since variable physical

feaures are no indications of ethos, only invariable physical features are said

to constitute the object of physiognomy stricto sensu.11

Therefore, we should abandon any hope in finding in Polybius any mention about Hannibal’s

skin colour or Aratus height. What I will argue is that portrait is a description of their

appearance that is encompassed both with personality and character. Just as Pédech concludes

« Il veut élaguer tout ce qui n’est pas nécessaire à l’intelligence des évènements. (…) Il aboutit

à la même conclusion : il ne faut retenir des hommes que ce qui explique les conjonctures ou

ils se mêles »12. In Polybius’ opinion, even psychological traits were useless unless they were

an instrument to explain the outcome of events. However, we cannot not discard the fact that

Polybius’ highly visual account entangles a great deal of vivid manifestation of character in the

sensible world. To this manifestation I shall devote this chapter. In that sense, I will propose to

look at some of the action narrative and scenes as allusions to create portraits for his characters.

On the other hand, Polybius’ descriptions and visual impressions are consciously used to create

a first-hand sensation in the reader so that the actions were presented as in front of their eyes,

thus creating an experiential education in which the leaders could learn from the past.

Interestingly, some of these characterizations which were made through allusions and

insinuations, are the most powerful visual representations we have. For example, Polybius

described a man called Babytas as “one of those who had in every way renounced his claim to

be a man”13. From a singled phrase, we can presume how he looked like without even seeing

him. Though his role in the story is only referential, the description is visually palpable, and,

more importantly, has an effect on the outcome of events, for his confusion with Dorimacus is

11
De Temmerman (2010:38)
12
Pédech (1964:215)
13
4.4.5

3
what leads the reader into understanding Dorimachus character as conceit and arrogant. In the

same way Aratus is described as an acute politician but inconstant and ineficitient strategos.

This inefficiency is reflected in his feeble body “But this very same man, when he undertook

field operations, was slow in conception, timid in performance, and devoid of personal

courage”14. Eventually, it was established the tradition –which was refuted by Plutarch- that he

developed “severe cramps in his bowels when a battle was imminent”15. From this perspective,

Polybius assertion about his lack of personal courage is inextricable related to physical

weakness. Moreover, as we shall see, in Polybius’ mind this sort of references about courage

and bravery in generals and soldiers are always connected to physical training and body

strength.

Polybius’ lack of details in physical descriptions might be understood as part of a tendency in

the Historiography of his time. What little evidence we have about biography in Hellenistic

age comprised a recueil of facts and impressions that more often than not were very close to

the encomiastic genre.16 Indeed, we have little evidence of such portraits in any previous or

contemporary historians and this absence would not be reverted, as far as we know, until the

late Hellenistic period and the Roman Empire.17 In the fourth century, however, was developed

a tendency to assimilate history to biography, and to emphasize the personal element in

historical narrative as a source to explain the causes and consequences of historical events.18

Speaking about Polybius’ predecessor, Theopompus, Robert Connors said that one of the great

innovations on the Philippica is that personal morality started to be considered a suitable topic

to be considered for historical discussion.19 Additionally, Bruce has remarked that

Theopompus benefited from the broadened perspective of the Greek world and that he followed

14
4.8.1
15
Plut. Arat. 29.5
16
Momigliano (1993:83)
17
Momigliano (1993:9)
18
Connors (1967:142)
19
Connors (1967:152)

4
Thucydides example in analysing history as well as Herodotus contrast between the Greeks

and the Barbarians, which focused on personal and cultural differences rather than objective

narrative of events20.

Moreover, the author of the Hellenistic Rhetorica ad Alexandrum says “One should make a

distinction between the goods external to virtue and those actually inherent in virtue… Those

belonging to virtue are justly eulogized, but those external to it are kept in the background,

since it is appropriate for the strong and handsome and well-born and rich to receive not praise

but congratulations on their good fortune”21 By external goods, the author includes body

strength and physical appearance and even wealth. Thus, the fact that these elements were

recognized just as much part of a person as temperament and inherent virtue, signalised a turn

in the conception of history and biography; for although they might not be praised, they are

still acknowledged as a reflection of their inherent good fortune. It should be supposed that the

same principle could be applied to the wicked, who were described –probably- as ugly and

deformed. All in all, in the fourth century, a new wave of interest in personality flourished and

developed a necessity to include more references about historical characters, whether they were

physicals or psychological, the important thing is that there was a magnified glass over these

characters and the audience expected a more detailed account of the protagonist of the stories

that they were about to read.

Nevertheless, it should be noted that by Polybius time, the limits between historic and

biographic (and, by extension, encomiastic) genre were already delineated and he himself

exposed the reasons why they should not be mixed22. This is attested by the fact that he himself

composed a biography of Philopoemen as early as 170 BC23, and he considered irrelevant to

20
Bruce (1970:95)
21
[Arist.] Rhet. Ad Alexandrum 35, 1440b15
22
Pédech (1951:92)
23
Pédech (1951:89)

5
include biographic details in his account of the events that involved Philopoemen in his

history.24

Another good example is the allusions about the fragility of Aratus’ body which described

through his actions. In 4.19.11in an accusatory tone Polybius says “But Aratus who had his

Achaeans, displayed rather on this occasion the caution of a politician than the courage of a

general”. In this occasion, courage seems to be more valuable than caution, the reason for this

is explained by Eckstein when he asserts that Polybius is still anchored in the aristocratic ethos

inherited from classical times25. Moreover, courage and bravery, as I have mentioned before

are connected to physical strength and vigor, Aratus’ weakness is a physical manifestation of

his character. Notably, Aratus is shown as an inefficient general, this draws for us a powerful

visual, even though there is little description of his physicality. Interestingly, Polybius’

intentions in writing history is to educate future leaders and politicians rather than generals26,

but this implied resentment towards Aratus demonstrates that he not only hoped that a good

politician was to be astute but also trained and physically apt to face battle.

Polybius’ description of the Gauls in the Battle of Talamone makes emphasis on the Gauls’

appearance and its contrast with the Roman army “The Insubres and the Boii drew up for battle

wearing their trousers and light cloaks but the Gestaes had discarded these garments owing to

their proud confidence in themselves, and stood naked with nothing but their arms in front of

the whole army, thinking thus they would be more efficient”27. The image that the tribe projects

is one of barbaric self-confidence, though not unappealing in Polybius’ account. At the very

least, the reader must respect the strength and courage of such people who faces the enemy

armed only with their arms and naked bodies. The image is quite attractive.

24
10. 21.8
25
Eckstein (1995:28)
26
REFERENCE
27
2.28

6
Polybius use of descriptive images through ekphrastic discourse creates a first-hand experience

of History. We are not only reading about the distant -or near- past, but participating in the

actual events. Where does that lead the reader with regard to the historical figures? I would

argue that Polybius intention was to create the sensation of familiarity with some of his

characters, in order not only to come to know the chronology but to be acquainted with their

thinking, the circumstances and the reasons for every decision they take. It is frequent to read

in Polybius accounts the train of thoughts that eventually lead to actions.

Notably, external appearances can also be reflected in the garments and armors, the description

of the uniform of some of the Roman soldiers28 is not miscellaneous information nor is it there

only to evidence Polybius’ familiarity with the Roman infrastructure. The detailed portrait of

clothing and garments served to illustrate Roman efficiency and organization. Provided that

the reader had never seen the Roman formation, this description not only would show how they

looked but also demonstrate their strength and competence.

Correspondingly, it should come to no one’s surprise the extensive number of visual verbs

whenever Polybius is describing a particular feature (either moral or physical) that he wants to

signalize. For example, Hamilcar shows himself worthy (ἐφάνη δ᾿ ἄξιος)29, on other instances,

moral and ethics are shown in actions, factual consequences of the internal thoughts are part of

Polybius’ moral conception, according to Eckstein, the character’s decisions and eventual

actions are a reflection of their own ethos, and hence they are not coerced but the product of

their character and personality30.

28
6.22-24
29
1.75
30
It is interesting to study those circumstance in which the characters are forced into an undesired action. How
does their thinking process is reflected and how they responded? A good example are the cases of mass suicide
(5.39; 9.40) given the chance to survive, the characters prefer to die rather than to contradict their ethos, this is
factual evidence of their heroic temperament. On the contrary, Hasdrubal’s refusal to participate in the mass
suicide and in saving his life (38.20) he demonstrated his wickedness and cowardliness.

7
Under those circumstances, the physical features of historical characters solidify the bond

between the reader and the character, seen them as if they were there. In that sense, Longley

has claimed that Polybius sought to create a sense of autopatheia (αὐτοπαθεία) by using the

first person (both singular and plural) on his accounts in order to recreate a first-hand

experience on his readers.31

In Xenophon’s opinion, the most important requirement for a leader is the ability to make his

followers “willingly obedient” to his command.32 But the greatest achievement of the leader is

to be loved by his followers in a relationship that Xenophon presents as having the same

dynamics as Socratic friendship: ‘to being loved by those under command, which seems to me

among the greatest achievements, the way is the same as for the one who desires to be loved

by his friends: that he be seen, I think, to be doing them good’ (εὐ̓̑ ποιεἰ̑ν: 1.6.24).33

Conclusion

My conclusion is that Polybius’ characterization is a step forward in the literary portrait, it

relays both in traditional rhetoric description as well as in the new forms of representation

present in the Hellenistic period. The confluence of these two tendencies create an entirely new

portrait that is particularly alive and familiar at the same time. The innovative portraits are an

instrumental tool in the programmatic purpose of the Histories for they are an essential part of

the causes (aitiai) that explain the outcome of events.

31
Longley (2013:182)
32
Grey (2011:17)
33
Grey (2011:28)