A Shot in the Gut not the Foot!

~ sententiaeantiquae ~ Leave a comment

Eustathius, Comm. ad Hom. Odyssey, 11.538 1696, 50

“The story is that Paris killed Achilles by shooting him with his bow. Sôstratos records that Alexandros was lusted after by Apollo and was his student in Archery. He was holding an ivory bow he got from Apollo when he shot Achilles in the stomach.”

᾽Αχιλλέα δὲ ὅτι ΙΙάρις ἀνεῖλε τοξεύσας καθωμίληται. Σώστρατος δὲ ἱστορεῖ ᾽Αλέξανδρον ᾽Απόλλωνος ἐρώμενον καὶ μαθητὴν τοξείας, ὑφ᾽ οὗ τόξον ἐλεφάντινον σχόντα τοξεῦσαι ᾽Αχιλλέα κατὰ γαστρός.

From the Decembrists’ “July July”

And I say your uncle was a crooked french Canadian
And he was gut-shot runnin’ gin
And how his guts were all suspended in his fingers
And how he held ’em
How he held ’em held, ’em in

Image result for paris shooting achilles vase

I talk a little bit about the symbolic value of foot wounds in “Diomedes’ Foot-wound and the Homeric Reception of Myth.”

Ancient Greece and Rome had the Death Penalty for Treason

~ sententiaeantiquae ~ 1 Comment

From the Twelve Tables

“The Law of the Twelve Tables commands that anyone who has conspired with an enemy against the state or handed a citizen to a public enemy, should suffer capital punishment.”

Marcianus, ap. Dig., XLVIII, 4, 3: Lex XII Tabularum iubet eum qui hostem concitaverit quive civem hosti tradiderit capite puniri.

Cicero, De Legibus 3.2

“[Cases concerning] death and citizenship must not be pursued except before the greatest assembly and those whom the censors have recorded in the rolls of the citizens.”

de capite civis nisi per maximum comitiatum ollosque, quos censores in partibus populi locasint, ne ferunto.

The death penalty is not the enactment of justice, it is the execution of vengeance when justice is impossible or not actually desired. It does not function as a deterrent. It is meted out disproportionately to people without financial and social capital, which in the United States means that people of color face capital charges and are executed at far higher rates.  The moral peril is compounded by the imperfection of our criminal system where at least 1 in 25 people on death row are actually innocent. The death penalty is not part of a justice system, it is part of a vengeance system.

Note the connection in several passages between the sanctity of the state, the power to end a life, and citizenship.

Xenophon, Apology 25

“These opponents have not said that I am guilty of any of the actions for which the established penalty is death–robbing a temple, theft, enslaving someone, betraying the state…”

ἐφ᾿ οἷς γε μὴν ἔργοις κεῖται θάνατος ἡ ζημία, ἱεροσυλίᾳ, τοιχωρυχίᾳ, ἀνδραποδίσει, πόλεως προδοσίᾳ, οὐδ᾿ αὐτοὶ οἱ ἀντίδικοι τούτων πρᾶξαί τι κατ᾿ ἐμοῦ φασιν.

Plato, Laws 856b-d

“Whoever raises a human being into power and thus enslaves the laws, whoever makes the state subordinate to his petty faction and transgresses what is right by doing all of this violently and stirring up civil strife, he should be considered the most inimical to the whole state.

And the kind of person who does not share these actions, but does occupy some of the most important offices of the state and either fails to observe them or does not fail but will not avenge his country because of cowardice, he should be considered as a citizen at a second degree of evil.

Let each person whose worth is small bear witness to the officers of the state by bringing this person to court for his plotting violent and unconstitutional revolution. Give them the same charges we have for temple robbery and run the trial as it is in those cases where the death penalty comes by majority vote.”

ὃς ἂν ἄγων εἰς ἀρχὴν ἄνθρωπον δουλῶται μὲν τοὺς νόμους, ἑταιρείαις δὲ τὴν πόλιν ὑπήκοον ποιῇ, καὶ βιαίως δὴ πᾶν τοῦτο πράττων καὶ στάσιν ἐγείρων παρανομῇ, τοῦτον δὴ διανοεῖσθαί δεῖ πάντων πολεμιώτατον ὅλῃ τῇ πόλει. τὸν δὲ κοινωνοῦντα μὲν τῶν τοιούτων μηδενί, τῶν μεγίστων δὲ μετέχοντα ἀρχῶν ἐν τῇ πόλει, λεληθότα τε ταῦτα αὐτὸν ἢ μὴ λεληθότα, δειλίᾳ δ᾿ ὑπὲρ Cπατρίδος αὑτοῦ μὴ τιμωρούμενον, δεῖ δεύτερον ἡγεῖσθαι τὸν τοιοῦτον πολίτην κάκῃ. πᾶς δὲ ἀνὴρ οὗ καὶ σμικρὸν ὄφελος ἐνδεικνύτω ταῖς ἀρχαῖς εἰς κρίσιν ἄγων τὸν ἐπιβουλεύοντα βιαίου πολιτείας μεταστάσεως ἅμα καὶ παρανόμου. δικασταὶ δὲ ἔστωσαν τούτοις οἵπερ τοῖς ἱεροσύλοις, καὶ πᾶσαν τὴν κρίσιν ὡσαύτως αὐτοῖς γίγνεσθαι καθάπερ ἐκείνοις, τὴν ψῆφον δὲ θάνατον φέρειν τὴν πλήθει νικῶσαν.

Lycurgus, Against Leocrates, 126-7

“It is right that punishments for other crimes come after them, but punishment for treason should precede the dissolution of the state. If you miss that opportune moment when those men are about to do something treacherous against their state, it is not possible for you to obtain justice from the men who did wrong: for they become stronger than the punishment possible from those who have been wronged.”

τῶν μὲν γὰρ ἄλλων ἀδικημάτων ὑστέρας δεῖ τετάχθαι τὰς τιμωρίας, προδοσίας δὲ καὶ δήμου καταλύσεως προτέρας. εἰ γὰρ προήσεσθε τοῦτον τὸν καιρὸν, ἐν ᾧ μέλλουσιν ἐκεῖνοι κατὰ τῆς πατρίδος φαῦλόν τι πράττειν, οὐκ ἔστιν ὑμῖν μετὰ ταῦτα δίκην παρ’ αὐτῶν ἀδικούντων λαβεῖν· κρείττους γὰρ ἤδη γίγνονται τῆς παρὰ τῶν ἀδικουμένων τιμωρίας.

Plato, Laws 881a-b

“Death is not the most extreme penalty–there are those described in Hades for offenses like this which are beyond death and are truly described, but they are useless in deterring some kinds of minds from their crimes.”

θάνατος μὲν οὖν οὐκ ἔστιν ἔσχατον, οἱ δὲ ἐν Ἅιδου τούτοισι λεγόμενοι πόνοι ἔτι τε τούτου εἰσὶ μᾶλλον ἐν ἐσχάτοις, καὶ ἀληθέστατα λεγόμενοι οὐδὲν ἀνύτουσι ταῖς τοιαύταις ψυχαῖς ἀποτροπῆς·

From Brill’s New Pauly on the death penalty in Greece and Rome by Gottfriend Schiemann:

“In Athens not only premeditated killing (phónos) and sedition and high treason (katálysis toû dḗmoû, prodosía ) resulted in the death penalty, but also religious offences such as desecration of the temple (hierosylía) and (cf. in particular the case against Socrates [2], 399 BC) publicly taught godlessness (asébeia). In a similar way, in Rome there was provision for the state death penalty for sedition and high treason (perduellio) by beheading (decollatio , in Greece apokephalízein) with an axe, later a sword. In the Roman Imperial period this was the typical death penalty for honestiores , but now sometimes also for homicide.”

Image result for medieval manuscript traitor
Jacob van Maerlant, (The traitor Ganelon drawn and quartered)., Spieghel Historiael, West Flanders, c. 1325-1335

Give Me Some F**king Books!!!

~ Erik ~ Leave a comment

Petrarch, Epistles 3.18

“There are those who accumulate books not from eagerness to use them, but from the desire to have them, and they possess them not as a bulwark to their minds, but as an ornament for their bedrooms. And so, passing over the others, Julius Caesar and Augustus both concerned themselves with a Roman library. For such an important task, one of them put Marcus Varro in charge of the library, and this is with all respect to Demetrius of Phalerum, who had the greatest name among the Egyptians for his librarianship; but Varro is in no way inferior to Demetrius – in fact, he is far superior. Pompeius Macer, himself an eminently learned man, was put in charge of the library by the other. Asinius Pollio, the most illustrious orator, burned with enthusiasm for a library of Greek and Latin literature, and is said to have opened the first one for the public in Rome.

But those are private things. Cato’s appetite for books was insatiable, a fact of which Cicero is a witness, and even Cicero was possessed of an ardor for purchasing books, which is attested by many of his letters to Atticus, on whom he imposed the task of purchasing them, driving him on with the greatest insistence and all the power of entreaty, as I now do to you. Indeed, if a rich reader is permitted to beg for patronage in the way of books, what do you think is permitted to the poor reader?”

Image result for scholar woodcut

Sunt enim qui libros, ut cetera, non utendi studio cumulent, sed habendi libidine, neque tam ut ingenii presidium, quam ut thalami ornamentum. Atque, ut reliquos sileam, fuit romane bibliothece cura divis imperatoribus Iulio Cesari et Cesari Augusto; tanteque rei prefectus ab altero — pace Demetrii Phalerii dixerim, qui in hac re clarum apud Egiptios nomen habet — nichil inferior, ne dicam longe superior, Marcus Varro; ab altero Pompeius Macer, vir et ipse doctissimus. Summo quoque grece latineque bibliothece studio flagravit Asinius Pollio orator clarissimus, qui primus hanc Rome publicasse traditur.

Illa enim privata sunt: Catonis insatiabilis librorum fames, cuius Cicero testis est, ipsiusque Ciceronis ardor ad inquirendos libros, quem multe testantur epystole ad Athicum, cui eam curam non segnius imponit, agens summa instantia multaque precum vi, quam ego nunc tibi. Quodsi opulentissimo ingenio permittitur librorum patrocinia mendicare, quid putas licere inopi?

Aristotle Against the Machine

~ sententiaeantiquae ~ Leave a comment

Aristotle, Poetics 1454a

“Clearly, the resolution of the plots should come from the plot itself and not, as in the Medea, from some divine contrivance or as in the Iliad during the rush to the ships (Il. 2.155). The divine device should instead be used for events that are outside the drama either for those that come before what people could know or those that come later which require prophecy and revelation—since we allow that the gods may see everything. There should be nothing illogical in the events, unless it comes from outside the tragedy itself as in Sophocles’ Oedipus.”

φανερὸν οὖν ὅτι καὶ τὰς λύσεις τῶν μύθων ἐξ αὐτοῦ δεῖ τοῦ μύθου συμβαίνειν, καὶ μὴ ὥσπερ ἐν τῇ Μηδείᾳ ἀπὸ μηχανῆς καὶ ἐν τῇ ᾿Ιλιάδι τὰ περὶ τὸν ἀπόπλουν. ἀλλὰ μηχανῇ χρηστέον ἐπὶ τὰ ἔξω τοῦ δράματος, ἢ ὅσα πρὸ τοῦ γέγονεν ἃ οὐχ οἷόν τε ἄνθρωπον εἰδέναι, ἢ ὅσα ὕστερον, ἃ δεῖται προαγορεύσεως καὶ ἀγγελίας· ἅπαντα γὰρ ἀπο-δίδομεν τοῖς θεοῖς ὁρᾶν. ἄλογον δὲ μηδὲν εἶναι ἐν τοῖς πράγμασιν, εἰ δὲ μή, ἔξω τῆς τραγῳδίας, οἷον τὸ ἐν τῷ Οἰδίποδι τῷ Σοφοκλέους.

Aristotle, Poetics 1460a26

“Narratives ought to prefer likely events, even if impossible, to improbable possible ones. Stories should not be made from illogical parts: in the best case, they should contain nothing illogical, unless it comes from outside the plot itself as when Oedipus is not aware how Laios died, instead of in the play itself, as when they report the events at Delphi in the Elektra or when the silent man comes from Tegea to Mysia in the Mysians. To say that otherwise the plot would be wrecked is ridiculous—it isn’t right to set up these sorts of events from the beginning. If a poet does this, and there is a more logical option available, it is strange. Even those illogical events in the Odyssey when Odysseus is put ashore [asleep by the Phaeacians] would have been manifestly intolerable if a lesser poet had created it. In the poem now, Homer softens and erases the strangeness with his other good traits.”

προαιρεῖσθαί τε δεῖ ἀδύνατα εἰκότα μᾶλλον ἢ δυνατὰ ἀπίθανα· τούς τε λόγους μὴ συνίστασθαι ἐκ μερῶν ἀλόγων, ἀλλὰ μάλιστα μὲν μηδὲν ἔχειν ἄλογον, εἰ δὲ μή, ἔξω τοῦ μυθεύματος, ὥσπερ Οἰδίπους τὸ μὴ εἰδέναι πῶς ὁ Λάιος ἀπέθανεν, ἀλλὰ μὴ ἐν τῷ δράματι, ὥσπερ ἐν ᾿Ηλέκτρᾳ οἱ τὰ Πύθια ἀπαγγέλλοντες ἢ ἐν Μυσοῖς ὁ ἄφωνος ἐκ Τεγέας εἰς τὴν Μυσίαν ἥκων. ὥστε τὸ λέγειν ὅτι ἀνῄρητο ἂν ὁ μῦθος γελοῖον· ἐξ ἀρχῆς γὰρ οὐ δεῖ συνίστασθαι τοιούτους. †ἂν δὲ θῇ καὶ φαίνηται εὐλογωτέρως ἐνδέχεσθαι καὶ ἄτοπον† ἐπεὶ καὶ τὰ ἐν ᾿Οδυσσείᾳ ἄλογα τὰ περὶ τὴν ἔκθεσιν ὡς οὐκ ἂν ἦν ἀνεκτὰ δῆλον  ἂν γένοιτο, εἰ αὐτὰ φαῦλος ποιητὴς ποιήσειε· νῦν δὲ τοῖς ἄλλοις ἀγαθοῖς ὁ ποιητὴς ἀφανίζει ἡδύνων τὸ ἄτοπον.

Image result for Medieval manuscript deus ex machina
George Whiter, Deus Ex Machina

Latin vs.Philology, Part XXV:

~ Erik ~ Leave a comment

Francesco Filelfo, Letter to Lorenzo Medici (Part 25)

“So Nonius Marcellus and Festus Pompeius and Caper and Diomedes and Donatus and Servius and Priscian and Phocas and Aulus Gellius and Macrobius and the other most approved authors who have taught us something about grammar are not only to be learned, but even to be learned by heart. For it is a bad sort of Latinity which does not know the meaning of words, their peculiarities, their differences, or their genders and constructions. In this matter, you must consult the ancient authors.

For indeed, I see certain people of our time who want to make a big show of themselves in the art of grammar, but have sunk into the greatest errors. Of them, Giovanni Tortelli of Arezzo seems to me to hold the chief place: when he wants to be seen to know both Greek and Latin literature, he makes it as clear as possible that he knows neither.

Therefore, you should take care that your children are full of the goods of both intellect and learning, as the riches of the greatest fortune. You’ll do perfectly well if you take care that they grow up to be just like you.

I should not of course omit what seemed correct to Quintilian, that most acute man, that one should as much as possible start with the Greek language and literature. If I might pass over the other arts and sciences, which we know have come from Greek learning, who would dare to claim themselves a professor without knowing Greek literature?

And so in turn and at the same time, in my opinion, one should study Greek and Latin literature – a practice which I have always observed in raising my own children, and which I still observe even today. I have never had cause to regret it, when I see that they have advanced so far above the common herd in the literature and speech of each language. But you will consider this in the best light according to your own wisdom.”

Related image

Quare et Nonius Marcellus et Festus Pompeius et Caper et Diomedes et Donatus et Servius et Priscianus et Phocas et Au. Gellius et Macrobius et caeteri probatissimi auctores qui aliquid de arte grammatica tradiderunt, non solum discendi sunt, verum etiam ediscendi. Nam male ea latinitas habeat, quae aut significata verborum, aut proprietates, aut differentias aut genera constructionesve ignorarit. Qua in re prisci auctores consulendi sunt.

Video enim quosdam nostrae tempestatis homines, qui cum magnum de se quiddam voluerunt in arte grammatica profiteri, in maximos errores devenerunt. E quorum numero principatum mihi tenere visus est Ioannes Tortelius arretinus, qui, cum et graecam et latinam litteraturam novisse videri vult, utranque ignoravisse apertissime declarat.

Curandum igitur tibi est, ut liberi tui aeque abundent ingenii atque doctrinae bonis ut amplissimae fortunae divitiis; quod tum cumulate feceris, si operam dabis ut tibi sint quam simillimi.

Nec illud certe praetermiserim, quod Quintiliano etiam viro acutissimo videtur, a graeco sermone, quo ad eius fieri possit, atque litteratura esse incipiendum. Ut enim caeteras artis disciplinasque praeteream, quas omnis inde fluxisse novimus, quis audeat se profiteri grammaticum graecis litteris ignoratis?

Et vicissim quidem ac simul, mea sententia, studendum est graecis atque latinis litteris, id quod ego in omnibus meis liberis et observavi antehac semper, et hoc etiam tempore observo, idque me fecisse nunquam poenituit, cum eos viderim in utraque et litteratura et oratione egregie profecisse. Sed haec tu, pro tua prudentia, perpulchre considerabis.

Andromache’s Sons With Neoptolemos

~ sententiaeantiquae ~ Leave a comment

Scholia ad Eur. Andromache, 24

“In these halls, I [Andromache] produced this male child / after sleeping with Achilles’ son, my master]:

One source says that she bore only one son to Neoptolemos while others say that there were three: Pyrrhos, Molossos, Aiakos and a daughter named Troas. Lysimachus, in the second volume of his On Homecomings, writes that Proxenos and Nikomedes the Akanthian report in Macedonian Matters that Andromache gave birth to those who were just mentioned, and from Leonassa, Kleodaios’ daughter, [he fathered?] Argos, Pergamos, Pandaros, Dorieus, Genyos, Danae and Eurylockus. They also say that Pyrrhos received the kingdom from his father and that the country was named Mossia to give honor to Molossos.”

κἀγὼ δόμοις [τοῖσδ᾽ ἄρσεν᾽ ἐντίκτω κόρον / πλαθεῖσ᾽ ᾽Αχιλλέως παιδί, δεσπότῃ γ᾽ ἐμῷ] ἰδίως ἕνα φησὶ παῖδα γενέσθαι τῷ Νεοπτολέμῷ, ἄλλων τρεῖς λεγόντων Πύρρον, Μολοσσόν, Αἰακίδην καὶ Τρωάδα. Λυσίμαχος δὲ ἐν τῷ δευτέρῳ τῶν Νόστων φησὶ Πρόξενον καὶ τὸν ᾽Ακάνθιον Νικομήδην ἐν τοῖς Μακεδονικοῖς ἱστορεῖν ἐκ μὲν ᾽Ανδρομάχης γενέσθαι τοὺς προειρημένους, ἐκ δὲ Λεωνάσσης τῆς Κλεοδαίου ῎Αργον, Πέργαμον, Πάνδαρον, Δωριέα, Γένυον, †δανάην, Εὐρύλοχον. φασὶ δὲ Πύρρῳ μὲν ἐγχειρίσαι τὴν βασιλείαν τὸν πατέρα, Μολοσσῷ δὲ τὴν ἐκ τῆς προσηγορίας τιμὴν προστάξαντα τὴν χώραν Μολοσσίαν ὀνομάζειν.

Andromache and Neoptolemus, by Pierre-Narcisse Guerin

Changing Tack: Cicero on Ends and Means in Politics

~ sententiaeantiquae ~ Leave a comment

Ep. 20 (I.9) Cicero to Lentulus Spinther

“For I do not think it is necessary to fight against such powers nor to get rid of the precedence taken by our highest citizens, even if it were possible; nor do I think it necessary to affix myself to a single opinion when situations change and the desires of good men change with them—no, one must change with the times. Remaining in an permanent opinion has never been praised among exceptional men for the governing of the state.

But, as in sailing it is good to get ahead of a storm even if you will not find the harbor; yet if you can make it to safe ground by changing your approach, only a fool would risk danger to hold to the course he began rather than make his destination by changing something. Thus, while all of us running the state should seek the proposition which I have often sought—peace with dignity—we should ensure not to speak the same but always to seek the same thing.”

  1. nam neque pugnandum arbitrarer contra tantas opes neque delendum, etiam si id fieri posset, summorum civium principatum <neque> permanendum in una sententia conversis rebus ac bonorum voluntatibus mutatis, sed temporibus adsentiendum. numquam enim <in>praestantibus in re publica gubernanda viris laudata est in una sententia perpetua permansio; sed ut in navigando tempestati obsequi artis est etiam si portum tenere non queas, cum vero id possis mutata velificatione adsequi stultum est eum tenere cum periculo cursum quem coeperis potius quam eo commutato quo velis tamen pervenire, sic, cum omnibus nobis in administranda re publica propositum esse debeat, id quod a me saepissime dictum est, cum dignitate otium, non idem semper dicere sed idem semper spectare debemus.
Image result for Medieval Manuscript Cicero
Burney 275

Glory & Anxiety

~ Erik ~ Leave a comment

Petrarch, Epistles 4.4:

“I know that in human affairs, there is nothing solid. In a great part of our cares and actions, unless I am mistaken, we are deceived by mere shadows. Yet, as the mind of youth is more desirous of glory than of virtue, why – since you provide me with the audacity to brag to you – should I not think that this is as much a glory to me as Syphax, once the most powerful king of Africa, thought it for himself, that he was called to friendship with the two greatest cities in the world at one and the same time, namely Rome and Carthage?

To be sure, that was a tribute to his kingdom and his riches, but this is a tribute to me. And so, suppliants found him resting on a haughty throne among gold and gems, surrounded by a crowd of armed toadies, but my friends found me wandering alone in the woods in the morning, in the fields later on, walking along the banks of the Sorgue. Honor was offered to me where assistance was sought from him.

Image result for petrarch nuremberg

Scio quidem in rebus humanis fere omnibus nichil solidi inesse; magna, ni fallor, in parte curarum actuumque nostrorum umbris eludimur; tamen ut est animus iuvenum glorie appetentior quam virtutis, cur non ego — quoniam apud te familiariter gloriandi prestas audaciam — tam hoc michi gloriosum rear quam sibi olim potentissimus Africe regum Siphax, quod uno eodemque tempore duarum toto orbe maximarum urbium, Rome atque Carthaginis, in amicitiam vocaretur?

Nimirum, id regno eius atque opibus tribuebatur, hoc michi; itaque illum inter aurum ac gemmas superbo solio subnixum et armatis stipatum satellitibus sui supplices repperere; me solivagum mane in silvis, sero autem in pratis, Sorgie ripis obambulantem invenerunt mei; michi honor offertur, ab illo auxilium poscebatur.

No One Calls the Iliad a “Prequel” to the Odyssey….

~ sententiaeantiquae ~ Leave a comment

From (Ps.) Longinus On the Sublime, 9.11-13

“Nevertheless, all through the Odyssey, which must be examined for many reasons, Homer reveals that as great inspiration fades away, storytelling becomes the dominant attribute of old age. For it is clear in many ways that this epic was composed second. Throughout the Odyssey we find episodes modeled on scenes from the Iliad, and, by Zeus, he apportions his heroes grief and misery as if these tales were long already known. The Odyssey is nothing other than an epilogue to the Iliad:

There lies fierce Ajax; here lies Achilles
There likes Patroklos, an advisor equal to the gods,
There lies my own dear son. (Od. 3.109-111)

The cause of this fact, I imagine, is that when the Iliad was being written at the peak of his strength, Homer imbued the whole work with dramatic power and action; when he was composing the Odyssey, however, he made it more of a narrative, as appropriate for old age. For this reason, you can compare the Odyssey’s Homer to a setting sun: the magnitude remains without its power. Since, in it, he no longer preserves the same power of the Iliad, that overwhelming consistency which never ebbs, nor the same rush of changing experiences, the variety and reality of it, packed full with things from true experience.

It is as if the Ocean were to withdraw into itself, quietly watching its own measure. What remains for us is the retreating tide of Homer’s genius, his wandering in storytelling and unbelievable things. When I claim this, I am not forgetting the storms in the Odyssey and the events placed near the Kyklopes and elsewhere—I am indicating old age, but it is still Homer’s old age. And, yet, the mythical overpowers in every one of these scenes.”

δείκνυσι δ’ ὅμως διὰ τῆς ᾿Οδυσσείας (καὶ γὰρ ταῦτα πολλῶν ἕνεκα προσεπιθεωρητέον), ὅτι μεγάλης φύσεως ὑποφερομένης ἤδη ἴδιόν ἐστιν ἐν γήρᾳ τὸ φιλόμυθον. δῆλος γὰρ ἐκ πολλῶν τε ἄλλων συντεθεικὼς ταύτην δευτέραν τὴν ὑπόθεσιν, ἀτὰρ δὴ κἀκ τοῦ λείψανα τῶν ᾿Ιλιακῶν παθημάτων διὰ τῆς ᾿Οδυσσείας

ὡς ἐπεισόδιά τινα [τοῦ Τρωικοῦ πολέμου] προσεπεισφέρειν, καὶ νὴ Δί’ ἐκ τοῦ τὰς ὀλοφύρσεις καὶ τοὺς οἴκτους ὡς πάλαι που προεγνωσμένοις τοῖς ἥρωσιν ἐνταῦθα προσαποδιδόναι. οὐ γὰρ ἀλλ’ ἢ τῆς ᾿Ιλιάδος ἐπίλογός ἐστιν ἡ ᾿Οδύσσεια·

ἔνθα μὲν Αἴας κεῖται ἀρήιος, ἔνθα δ’ ᾿Αχιλλεύς,
ἔνθα δὲ Πάτροκλος, θεόφιν μήστωρ ἀτάλαντος·
ἔνθα δ’ ἐμὸς φίλος υἱός.

ἀπὸ δὲ τῆς αὐτῆς αἰτίας, οἶμαι, τῆς μὲν ᾿Ιλιάδος γραφομένης ἐν ἀκμῇ πνεύματος ὅλον τὸ σωμάτιον δραματικὸν ὑπεστήσατο καὶ ἐναγώνιον, τῆς δὲ ᾿Οδυσσείας τὸ πλέον διηγηματικόν, ὅπερ ἴδιον γήρως. ὅθεν ἐν τῇ ᾿Οδυσσείᾳ παρεικάσαι τις ἂν καταδυομένῳ τὸν ῞Ομηρον ἡλίῳ, οὗ δίχα τῆς σφοδρότητος παραμένει τὸ μέγεθος. οὐ γὰρ ἔτι τοῖς ᾿Ιλιακοῖς ἐκείνοις ποιήμασιν ἴσον ἐνταῦθα σῴζει τὸν τόνον, οὐδ’ ἐξωμαλισμένα τὰ ὕψη καὶ ἱζήματα μηδαμοῦ λαμβάνοντα, οὐδὲ τὴν πρόχυσιν ὁμοίαν τῶν ἐπαλλήλων παθῶν, οὐδὲ τὸ ἀγχίστροφον καὶ πολιτικὸν καὶ ταῖς ἐκ τῆς

ἀληθείας φαντασίαις καταπεπυκνωμένον· ἀλλ’ οἷον ὑποχωροῦντος εἰς ἑαυτὸν᾿Ωκεανοῦ καὶ περὶ τὰ ἴδια μέτρα †ἐρημουμένου τὸ λοιπὸν φαίνονται τοῦ μεγέθους ἀμπώτιδες κἀν τοῖς μυθώδεσι καὶ ἀπίστοις πλάνος. λέγων δὲ ταῦτ’ οὐκ ἐπιλέλησμαι τῶν ἐν τῇ ᾿Οδυσσείᾳ χειμώνων καὶ τῶν περὶ τὸν Κύκλωπα καί τινων ἄλλων, ἀλλὰ γῆρας διηγοῦμαι, γῆρας δ’ ὅμως ῾Ομήρου· πλὴν ἐν ἅπασι τούτοις ἑξῆς τοῦ πρακτικοῦ κρατεῖ τὸ μυθικόν.

While Longinus sees many moments in the Odyssey as modeled after the Iliad, others have suggested that the Odyssey does not refer to the main events in our Iliad. [This is called Monro’s Law.] Instead, it refers generally to events which occur outside the Iliad in the Trojan War in general. Rather than indicating that the Iliad and the Odyssey did not know of one another, many interpreters have instead suggested that such nonconvergence is pointed and indicative of deep mutual knowledge.

Detail. Wooden board (writing tablet) inscribed (Greek) in ink with lines 468-473, Book I of Homer's Iliad.

Latin vs. Philology, Part XXIV

~ Erik ~ Leave a comment

Francesco Filelfo, Letter to Lorenzo Medici (Part 24):

“The same thing happened in Latin use in the common language that is happening now in Greek, which everyone, since they learn it from infancy, has no difficulty with when it comes to nouns, verbs, or the other parts of speech.

But Leonardo judges that illiterate people, whom he embraces with the name of Latinity, can understand the Missarum Sollemnia. Everyone understands what truth that suggests.

But I don’t think that the Missarum Sollemnia are either Latin or grammatical. I know that there is this difference between sollemnia and stata, that the grammarians wish the stata to be sacrifices which occur on certain times, but consider the sollemnia to be those which occur on specific days. But we see that those which Leonardo calls the Missas, i.e. the celebrations and consecrations of the body of Christ, occur not on certain and fixed days, but rather on individual days.

But why do Leonardo and Poggio call them ‘Missas’ to me, when no learned person in the entire Christian church from antiquity onward has named them thus? Nor could anyone consistently say that missa is a participle, which cannot stand without a substantive. For when at the end of this rite the priest says, ‘Go, it has been sent,’ one must understand it to be ‘the prayer to Christ.’ Rightly can we call that type of sacrifice, which the Greeks call liturgy (i.e. the suppliant operation or the operative prayer) the celebration or the consecration of the body of Christ. We could even call it a sacred compliance, where liturgy is written with the dipthong ei (leiturgy).

You have then, my Lorenzo, what I judge we should think both about this language of Italy which we all have on our tongues, as well as about Latin both common and literary. I don’t doubt that you, who are so powerful with your sharpness of intellect, your study, and your diligence, will come to the same conclusion.

It only remains that, since you have now been made a father, you get those nurses for your children which have sober lives respecting their characters, and speak the Tuscan dialect as beautifully as possible. For, in all of Italy, Tuscan – and especially the Florentine variety – is the most elegant and certainly the finest language.

As concerns Latinity, one should employ instructors who are both erudite and eloquent, whose speech smells of nothing but Caesar and Cicero and similar authors who were considered the most learned at that time. Nor should you think that anyone is sufficiently learned in Latin if they have neglected literature, which – if it be good – does not only improve every part of one’s Latin, but even governs and guards it.”

Image result for leonardo bruni

Idem veniebat usu latina in lingua quae vulgaris erat, quod hoc etiam tempore in graeca, quam omnes, cum a prima discant infantia, nihil habere possunt difficultatis, neque in nominibus, neque in verbis, nec in aliis orationis partibus.

Quod autem afferat Leonardus homines illetteratos, quos eosdem latinitatis nomine complectitur, evangelia intelligere Missarumque sollemnia, quam id veritatem sapiat, omnes intelligunt.

At Missarum solemnia neque latine dictum reor, nec grammatice. Scio inter sollemnia et stata hoc interesse, quod stata grammatici ea sacrificia esse volunt, quae certis fierent temporibus, at sollemnia quae certis diebus fieri consueverunt. At quas Leonardus Missas nominat, hoc est celebrationes consecrationesve corporis Christi, non certis statutisque diebus, sed singulis potius fieri videmus.

Verum quid Missas mihi Leonardus aut Poggius appellat, quas nemo unquam doctus in universa ecclesia christiana ex omni antiquitate nominavit? Nec congrue quisquam dicat: missa enim participium est, quod per sese stare sine substantivo non potest. Nam quod in fine huius consecrationis a sacerdote dicitur: “Ite, missa est”, “ad Christum oratio” intelligatur necesse est. Recte id sacrificii genus, quam Graeci litourghian vocant, idest supplicem operationem, vel precem operativam, nos corporis Christi vel celebrationem, vel consecrationem, appellemus. Possimus etiam sacrum obsequium nominare, ubi leitourghia per ei diphtongum in prima syllaba scribatur.

Habes, mi Laurenti, quid ego sentiendum censeam, cum de hac Italiae lingua quae nunc omnibus est in ore, tum de latina atque litterali. Nec ambigo tibi quoque, qui et ingenii acrimonia et studio atque diligentia plurimum vales, idem visum iri.

Reliquum est ut, quoniam pater iam factus es, eas nutrices infantibus tuis compares, quae et vita sint sobria quo ad mores, et ethrusce quam pulcherrime loquantur. Nam ex universa Italia ethruscus sermo, et maxime florentinus, elegantissimus est et optimus.

Nam, quantum ad latinitatem attinet, doctoribus est utendum et eruditis et eloquentibus, quorum oratio aliud nihil oleat praeter Caesarem et Ciceronem atque horum similes qui per idem temporis habiti sunt disertissimi. Nec quenquam latinitatis satis excultum putes, qui litteraturam neglexerit, quae bona si fuerit, non solum adiuvat omnem latinitatis rationem, sed etiam regit ac tuetur.