Month: June 2016

Soul-Doctors: Libraries, Songs and Philosophers

~ sententiaeantiquae ~ Leave a comment

Diodorus Siculus, 1.49

“Right next to this we find the sacred library [of Alexandria] on which is inscribed “The Healer of the Soul”; and next-door to it are the statues of the gods of Egypt….”

ἑξῆς δ’ ὑπάρχειν τὴν ἱερὰν βιβλιοθήκην, ἐφ’ ἧς ἐπιγεγράφθαι Ψυχῆς ἰατρεῖον, συνεχεῖς δὲ ταύτῃ τῶν κατ’ Αἴγυπτον θεῶν ἁπάντων εἰκόνας,

Pin. Nem. 4.1-8

“When the struggles have been decided,
The best doctor is happiness;
And songs, the Muses’ wise daughters,
Enchant whomever they touch.
Warm water does not make the limbs as soft
As the praise that sounds with the lyre.
Speech far outlives deeds,
Whatever words with the Graces’ help
The tongue draws from a deep mind.”

Α′ ῎Αριστος εὐφροσύνα πόνων κεκριμένων
ἰατρός· αἱ δὲ σοφαί
Μοισᾶν θύγατρες ἀοιδαὶ θέλξαν νιν ἁπτόμεναι.
οὐδὲ θερμὸν ὕδωρ τόσον γε μαλθακὰ τεύχει
γυῖα, τόσσον εὐλογία φόρμιγγι συνάορος.
ῥῆμα δ᾽ ἑργμάτων χρονιώτερον βιοτεύει,
ὅ τι κε σὺν Χαρίτων τύχᾳ
γλῶσσα φρενὸς ἐξέλοι βαθείας.

 

Iliad 11.514

“A doctor is worth many other men”

ἰατρὸς γὰρ ἀνὴρ πολλῶν ἀντάξιος ἄλλων.

 

Galen, Why A Doctor Must Also be A Philosopher

“What reason remains for a doctor not to be a philosopher if he should acquire the art worthy of Hippocrates? In order to uncover the nature of the body, the differences of diseases, and correct signs for treatment, he must train in logical theory; in order to work diligently in the practice of these things, he must dismiss money, develop prudence— He requires a portion of every type of philosophy, logic, physics, ethics. For there to be no danger of him committing any injustice, he must despise money and develop temperance—avoiding all those actions which men dare wrongly because they are persuaded by avarice or because they are enchanted by pleasure.

In this way, a doctor will be sure to have other virtues too, for they all are connected to one another. It is not possible to possess only one but not acquire any other since they follow each other intimately as if they are bound by a single string. And if philosophy is necessary to doctors for their education from the beginning and to the end of their practice, then it is clear that whoever is a real doctor must also be a philosopher.”

τί δὴ οὖν ἔτι λείπεται πρὸς τὸ μὴ <οὐκ> εἶναι φιλόσοφον τὸν ἰατρόν,ὃς ἂν ῾Ιπποκράτους ἀξίως ἀσκήσῃ τὴν τέχνην; εἰ γάρ, ἵνα μὲν ἐξεύρῃ φύσιν σώματος καὶ νοσημάτων διαφορὰς καὶ ἰαμάτων ἐνδείξεις, ἐν τῇ λογικῇ θεωρίᾳ γεγυμνάσθαι προσήκει, ἵνα δὲ φιλοπόνως τῇ τούτων ἀσκήσει παραμένῃ, χρημάτων τε καταφρονεῖν καὶ σωφροσύνην ἀσκεῖν, πάντα δὴ τῆς φιλοσοφίας ἔχει τὰ μέρη, τό τε λογικὸν καὶ | τὸ φυσικὸν καὶ τὸ ἠθικόν. οὐ γὰρ δὴ δέος γε, μὴ χρημάτων καταφρονῶν καὶ σωφροσύνην ἀσκῶν ἄδικόν τι πράξῃ· πάντα γάρ, ἃ τολμῶσιν ἀδίκως ἅνθρωποι, φιλοχρηματίας ἀναπειθούσης ἢ γοητευούσης ἡδονῆς πράττουσιν. οὕτω δὲ καὶ τὰς ἄλλας ἀρετὰς ἀναγκαῖον ἔχειν αὐτόν·
σύμπασαι γὰρ ἀλλήλαις ἕπονται καὶ οὐχ οἷόν τε μίαν ἡντινοῦν λαβόντι μὴ οὐχὶ καὶ τὰς ἄλλας ἁπάσας εὐθὺς ἀκολουθούσας ἔχειν ὥσπερ ἐκ μιᾶς μηρίνθου δεδεμένας. καὶ μὴν εἴ γε πρὸς τὴν ἐξ ἀρχῆς μάθησιν καὶ πρὸς τὴν ἐφεξῆς ἄσκησιν ἀναγκαία τοῖς ἰατροῖς ἐστιν ἡ φιλοσοφία, δῆλον ὡς, ὅστις ἂν ἰατρὸς ᾖ, πάντως οὗτός ἐστι καὶ φιλόσοφος.

 

Ephesus_Celsus_Library_Façade.jpg
Remains of Library of Celsus at Ephesus

No Man Should be An Exile — Plutarch on World Citizenship

~ sententiaeantiquae ~ Leave a comment

While looking up some random phrases about the healing power of literature, I found myself reading Plutarch this morning.  His words on citizenship and exile our powerful and pertinent in our transatlantic crisis of Politics (xenophobia and racism from the right) and Wars (the refugee crises and responses in Europe and Asia). Though his words are of course influenced by his experience of the Roman Empire, there is an essential humanity to them and a belief in common good and shared existence that is too often lost in modern discourse.

But don’t take my word for it, you can always read the whole essay.

Plutarch, De Exilio 600e7-601b5

“This is the character of your current exile from your customary country. For we have no country by nature, just as we have neither home, nor field, nor blacksmith’s, nor doctor’s office, as Aristôn said. But each of these things develops or, rather, is named and called so by the man inhabiting or using it. For a human being, as Plato says, “is not earthly born and immovable but comes from heaven” just as if the head raises the body up straight from its root stretching towards the sky. So Herakles said well “Am I Argive or Theban? I do not claim / one—every citadel in Greece is my homeland”. But Socrates put it better saying “I am neither Athenian nor Greek, but a citizen of the world,” as someone might claim to be Rhodian or Korinthian, because he did not lock himself within Sounion, Tainaros, or the Keraunian mountains.

As [Euripides] puts it: “Do you see the boundless light above / and the earth opening below with damp embrace?” These are the boundaries of our countries and no man is an exile, foreigner or stranger where there is fire, water, air; where we find the same rulers, overseers, and presidents: the same sun, moon, and star at day’s break; where the same laws exist for all under one order and single government: the summer and winter solstices, the Pleiades and Arcturus, the seasons of planting and harvesting that rise and set for us all; and where there is one king and ruler, god, who knows the beginning, middle and end of everything; who travels through all, guiding it with a straight force. Justice is his attendant as an avenger for those who transgress divine law. We all by nature follow this law in treating all people as our fellow citizens.”

 

Οἷόν ἐστιν ἡ νῦν σοι παροῦσα μετάστασις ἐκ τῆς νομιζομένης πατρίδος. φύσει γὰρ οὐκ ἔστι πατρίς, ὥσπερ οὐδ’ οἶκος οὐδ’ ἀγρὸς οὐδὲ χαλκεῖον, ὡς ᾿Αρίστων (St. V.

Fr. I 371) ἔλεγεν, οὐδ’ ἰατρεῖον· ἀλλὰ γίνεται μᾶλλον δ’ ὀνομάζεται καὶ καλεῖται τούτων ἕκαστον ἀεὶ πρὸς τὸν οἰκοῦντα καὶ χρώμενον. ὁ γὰρ ἄνθρωπος, ᾗ φησιν ὁ

Πλάτων (Tim. 90a), ‘φυτὸν οὐκ ἔγγειον’ οὐδ’ ἀκίνητον  ‘ἀλλ’ οὐράνιόν’ ἐστιν, ὥσπερ ἐκ ῥίζης τὸ σῶμα τῆς κεφαλῆς ὀρθὸν ἱστάσης πρὸς τὸν οὐρανὸν ἀνεστραμμένον. ὅθεν εὖ μὲν ὁ ῾Ηρακλῆς εἶπεν (Trag. adesp. 392)

‘᾿Αργεῖος ἢ Θηβαῖος· οὐ γὰρ εὔχομαι
μιᾶς· ἅπας μοι πύργος ῾Ελλήνων πατρίς.’

ὁ δὲ Σωκράτης βέλτιον, οὐκ ᾿Αθηναῖος οὐδ’ ῞Ελλην ἀλλὰ κόσμιος εἶναι φήσας, ὡς ἄν τις ῾Ρόδιος εἶπεν ἢ Κορίν-θιος, | ὅτι μηδὲ Σουνίῳ μηδὲ Ταινάρῳ μηδὲ τοῖς Κεραυνίοις ἐνέκλεισεν ἑαυτόν.

‘ὁρᾷς τὸν ὑψοῦ τόνδ’ ἄπειρον αἰθέρα,
καὶ γῆν πέριξ ἔχονθ’ ὑγραῖς <ἐν> ἀγκάλαις;’ (Eur. fr. 941, 1. 2)

οὗτοι τῆς πατρίδος ἡμῶν ὅροι [εἰσί], καὶ οὐδεὶς οὔτε φυγὰς ἐν τούτοις οὔτε ξένος οὔτ’ ἀλλοδαπός, ὅπου τὸ αὐτὸ πῦρ ὕδωρ ἀήρ, ἄρχοντες οἱ αὐτοὶ καὶ διοικηταὶ καὶπρυτάνεις ἥλιος σελήνη φωσφόρος· οἱ αὐτοὶ νόμοι πᾶσι, ὑφ’ ἑνὸς προστάγματος καὶ μιᾶς ἡγεμονίας τροπαὶ βόρειοι τροπαὶ νότιοι ἰσημερίαι Πλειὰς ᾿Αρκτοῦρος ὧραι σπόρων ὧραι φυτειῶν· εἷς δὲ βασιλεὺς καὶ ἄρχων· ‘θεὸς ἀρχήν τε καὶ μέσα καὶ τελευτὴν ἔχων τοῦ παντὸς εὐθείᾳ περαίνει κατὰ φύσιν περιπορευόμενος· τῷ δ’ ἕπεται Δίκη τῶν ἀπολειπομένων τοῦ θείου νόμου τιμωρός’ (Plat. Legg. 716a),ᾗ χρώμεθα πάντες ἄνθρωποι φύσει πρὸς πάντας ἀνθρώπους ὥσπερ πολίτας.

 

Aeneas
Aeneas was a refugee..

But Plutarch’s sentiments may be alive and well in Canada…

Homer Forced the Birth of Philology (F.A. Wolf)

~ sententiaeantiquae ~ 3 Comments

Again, from the Prolegomena ad Homerum by F. A. Wolf:

 

“This story allows us a chance to make a few overarching comments about the birth of the practice of criticism. And this also permits us to evaluate the nature of the recensions which were reportedly made in that period. For I don’t think that anyone will be surprised today that the Greeks of the time—who were by chance more men of genius than of learning,—even though they were completely estranged from the polymathy to which kings eventually provided ample time, that they were already starting to turn their attention to that art which is the collected sum of the various disciplines of literature and antiquity.

Indeed, all the foundations which would guide the ancients to the art of criticism already existed at that time. Among them I would put in first place the ancient method of preserving songs by only the use of memory; in the second, the errors and frauds perpetrated in ascribing authorship; and in the third, the many kinds of easy mistakes made by untrained hands in preparing the first manuscripts.

But even if this last case would precipitate a need for this art after many generations, anyone who is familiar with the Greeks will easily see that their genius would not have been able of declining so severely or so eagerly to such nitpicking concerns if their writings were only corrupted in the way that most books are. Let it stand as the singular fate of the monuments of Homer and his peers that in some sense they forced philology to be born—and that they did so even before the word for Critic or Grammarian was commonly spoken.”

 

Haec narratio nobis occasionem offert in universum dicendi nonnulla de ortu studii critici, ex quibus existimare liceat de conditione earum recensionorum, quae hoc saeculo offeruntur factae esse. Nunc enim nemo, puto, mirabitur, Graecos iam tum, quum prosperrima sorte sua ingeniosiores essent quam doctiores, et ab illa [corrupt text] cui reges deinde otium praebuerunt alienissimi, animum paullatim applicuisse ad eam artem, quae tota collecta est ex multiplici doctrina litterarum et antiquitatis. Etenim quae causae maxime perduxerunt veteres ad criticam artem, iam tum eaedem exstiterant omnes. In quibus primo loco posuerim modum illum conservandorum olim Carminum ope unius memoriae, proximo errores et fraudes in prodendis auctoribus eorum, tertio varios facillimosque lapsus rudium manuum in primis exemplaribus parandis. Sed etsi haec postrema causa eius- modi est, ut post aliquot saecula istius artis desiderium necessario fuisset allatura, tamen qui Graecos norit, facile intelliget, ad tam minutulas curas ingenium eorum nec tam mature-nec tanto studio potuisse descendere, si sola omni scripturae communia menda libros corrupissent. Maneat igitur, singularem fortunam Homericorum et supparum monumentorum extudisse quodammodo philologam criticen, idque etiam antea, quam nomen Critici aut Grammatici vulgo auditum esset.

Meanings of the Word ‘Parable’, Mark Turner and the Suda

~ sententiaeantiquae ~ Leave a comment

From Mark Turner, The Literary Mind (1996, 7)

“Parable…has seemed to literary critics to belong not merely to expression and not exclusively to literature, but rather…to mind in general. If we want to study the everyday mind, we can begin by turning to the literary mind exactly because the everyday mind is essentially literary.

Parable is today understood as a certain kind of exotic and inventive literary story, a subcategory within the special words of fiction. The original Greek word—παραβολή (parabole) from the verb παραβάλλειν (paraballein)—had a much wider, schematic reading: the tossing or projecting of one thing alongside another…

I will use parable more narrowly than its Greek root but much more widely than the common English term: Parable is the projection of story.”

 

From the Suda:

“Parabolê: A story similar to a riddle, obscure; meant to bring benefit.

Παραβολή: λόγος αἰνιγματώδης καὶ κεκρυμμένος, πρὸς ὠφέλειαν φέρων.

“Parabolê: A narrative. ‘I will open my mouth in parables’.  This is used of ancient stories instead of the word narrative. It can also refer to a simile or speech. Or, a specific example [as in the Psalms] “You set us as an example for the Gentiles.”

Παραβολή: διήγημα. ἀνοίξω ἐν παραβολαῖς τὸ στόμα μου. ἀντὶ τοῦ ἐν διηγήσει ἀρχαίων λόγων. καὶ ἡ ὁμοίωσις. καὶ τὸ λάλημα, καὶ ὑπόδειγμα. ἔθου ἡμᾶς εἰς παραβολὴν ἐν τοῖς ἔθνεσι.

“Parabolê: A comparison of things.”*

Παραβολή: πραγμάτων ὁμοίωσις.

*The same definition is offered by Hesychius and Photius

Martial 4.50 (NSFW)

~ Erik ~ Leave a comment

“Thais, why do you call me old? No one is old when it comes to getting a bit of sucking.”

Quid me, Thai, senem subinde dicis?

Nemo est, Thai, senex ad irrumandum.

On the (rather thorough) Absence of Writing in Homer

~ sententiaeantiquae ~ Leave a comment

From F. A. Wolf’s Prolegomena ad Homerum section XX:

 

“Now there is not only no evidence or even whisper of [epistles] in Homer and no indication at all of even the most tenuous beginnings of institutionalized writing or that “gift of Cadmus” but—and this is clearly the most significant piece—only contradictory evidence. The word for ‘book’ is nowhere; a word for writing is nowhere; mention of letters is nowhere.

In so many thousands of lines there is nothing about reading while everything is set up for hearing. There are no contracts or treaties except in person; there is no source for stories from earlier days except for memory, rumor and uninscribed monuments. We find the repeated and, in the Iliad, diligent, invocation of the Muses, the goddesses of Memory. No title is inscribed on pillars and tombs which are often mentioned.

There is no other kind of inscription at all: we don’t find stamped coin or fabricated money; there’s no use of writing in domestic affairs and trade; there are no written or drawn maps; and, finally, there are no couriers or letters. If these had been customary in Odysseus’ homeland or if “folded tablets”* had been available to the inquiries of the suitors and Telemachus, we probably would have a much shorter Odyssey or, as Rousseau decided, we wouldn’t have any Odyssey at all!”

 

Iam vero non modo nullum tale in Homero exstat testimonium rei vel vestigium, nullum ne tenuissimorum quidem initiorum legitimae scripturae vel Cadmei muneris indicium, sed, quod longe maximi momenti est, contraria etiam omnia. Nusquam vocabulum libri nusquam scribendi nusquam lectio-fiis nusquam letterarum: nihil in tot millibus versuum adlectionem, omnia ad auditionem comparata; nulla pacta aut foedera nisi coram; nullus veterum rerum famae fons prae-ter memoriam et famam et illitterata monumenta. eo Musarum, memorum dearum, diligens et in Iliade enixe repetita invocatio; nullius incippis et sepulcris, quae interdum memorantur, titulus; non alia ulla inscriptio; non aes signatum aut facta pecunia; nullus usus scripti in rebus domesticis et mercatura; nullae geographicae tabulae; denique nulli tabellarii, nullae epistolae, quarum si consuetudo fuisset in patria Ulyssis, vel si percontationibus procorum et Telemachi suffecissent, procul dubio Odysseam aliquot libris breviorem, aut, ut Roussavius coniiciebat, omnino nullam haberemus.

 

*A reference to the only indication of writing in Homer, coming from Glaukos’ speech to Diomedes when he describes Bellerophon as sent to Lykia by Proitos with a “folded tablet” (6.168-170):

“He sent him to Lykia, and he gave him murderous signs
Which he wrote on a folded tabled, many heart-rending things,
In which he ordered his father-in-law to welcome him in order to kill him.”

πέμπε δέ μιν Λυκίην δέ, πόρεν δ’ ὅ γε σήματα λυγρὰ
γράψας ἐν πίνακι πτυκτῷ θυμοφθόρα πολλά,
δεῖξαι δ’ ἠνώγειν ᾧ πενθερῷ ὄφρ’ ἀπόλοιτο.

tablets
The Vindolanda Tablets from Britain

What Does an Oral ‘Homer’ Mean?

~ sententiaeantiquae ~ Leave a comment

The ‘modern’ Homeric ‘Question’ simmered for many centuries before it received its most clear articulation at the end of the 18th century when Wolf, who had been working on an edition of the Homeric text, published his Prolegomena.  He was one of the first to argue persuasively for the oral derivation of the Homeric poems. In the (declining) style of the time, Wolf published in Latin.

The full Latin text is available from Google books and on the Homer Multitext Project website. A fine translation was published in English in 1985/1988 by Anthony Grafton, Glenn W. Most, and James E. G. Zetzel.

Friedrich Augustus Wolf, Prolegomena ad Homerum (1795) section 23

 

“But what if the suspicion of a few scholars is likely, that these and the other compositions of those days were not written down but were first created by poets using memory and circulated as songs and then were ‘published’ widely by the singing of rhapsodes who were trained by their particular discipline to learn them? And if because of this, before they were fixed in writing, what if many changes naturally occurred either intentionally or by chance?

What if, for this reason itself, as soon as they began to be written, they exhibited many divergences and soon added new ones from the hasty adjustments by those who were eager to polish them and to align them with the best laws of the poetic art and their own custom And what if then this whole creation and series of two eternal songs are not of a single poet whom we are used to crediting for his genius but more from the dedication of a more polished time and thanks to the collected efforts of many—that the very songs from which the Iliad and the Odyssey were composed did not have a single author and this can be argued from likely propositions and reasons? What if, I ask, we must take up a belief different from the popular one about all of this, what then will it mean to restore the ancient gleam and original form to these poems?”

 

At vero, si nonnullorum probabilis est suspicio , haec et reliqua Carmina illorum temporum nullis litterarum mandata notis, sed primum a poetis memoriter facta et cantu edita, tum per rhapsodos, in iis ediscendis propria arte occupatos, canendo divulgata esse; ex quo, antequam scripto velut figerentur, plura in iis vel consilio vel casu immutari necesse esset; si hanc ipsam ob causam, statim ut scribi coepta sunt, multas diversitates habuerunt, mox novas subinde adsciverunt temeritate et coniecturis eorum, qui ea certatim expolire, et ad optimas leges poeticae artis ad suamque consuetudinem loquendi corrigere studebant; si denique totum hunc contextum ac seriem duorum perpetuorum Carminum non tam eius, cui eam tribuere consuevimus, ingenio, quam sollertiae politioris aevi et multorum coniunctis studiis deberi, neque adeo ipsas docdd, ex quibus Ilias et Odyssea compositae sunt, unum omnes auctorem habere, verisimilibus argumentis et rationibus effici potest; si, inquam, aliter de his omnibus, ac vulgo fit, existimandum est: quid tum erit, his Carminibus pristinum nitorem et germanam formam suam restituere?

Prolegomena