The Connection(s) Between Speaking and Fate: Varro, On the Latin Language VI.52

“A man speaks [fatur] who first releases from his mouth a sound that has a meaning. From this, children are called infants [lit. the ‘unspeaking’] before they can do this; when they can do this, they are said “to speak”. Then, the words ‘soothsayer’ [fariolus] and ‘prophet’ [fatuus] are made based on similarity to a child’s speech. Because of the fact that the fates set the lifetime for a child by “speaking” [fando], the words ‘fate’ [fatum] and ‘fateful’ [fatales res] have developed. From the very same word, those who speak easily are called “eloquent” [facundi dicti] and those who are in the habit of uttering the future by sensing it beforehand are called “speakers of fate” [fatidici] and are also described as “speaking prophecy” [vaticinari] because they do this when their mind is in a frenzy: but this will be addressed later when we talk about poets.”

Fatur is qui primum homo significabilem ore mittit vocem. Ab eo, ante quam ita faciant, pueri dicuntur infantes; cum id faciunt, iam fari; cum hoc vocabulum, tum a similitudine vocis pueri fariolus ac fatuus dictum. Ab hoc tempora quod tum pueris constituant Parcae fando, dictum fatum et res fatales. Ab hac eadem voce qui facile fantur facundi dicti, et qui futura praedivinando soleant fari fatidici; dicti idem vaticinari, quod vesana mente faciunt: sed de hoc post erit usurpandum, cum de poetis dicemus.

Missed Your Target But Hit Your Step-Mother? That’s Not So Bad: Plutarch on Adapting to Chance

Plutarch, On The Tranquility of Mind, 467 C-D

“Thoughtful men–just a bees have find honey in thyme, the most bitter and driest plants–extract something fitting and useful to themselves even from the most adverse situations.

It is necessary that we practice and take care of this first, like the man who missed a dog with a stone but struck his step-mother instead and said “That’s not so bad”. For it is possible to change our reception of chance from undesired outcomes. Diogenes was sent into exile? “That’s not so bad!” For he began to become a philosopher after his exile.”

οἱ δὲ φρόνιμοι, καθάπερ ταῖς μελίτταις μέλι φέρει τὸ δριμύτατον καὶ ξηρότατον ὁ θύμος, οὕτως ἀπὸ τῶν δυσχερεστάτων πολλάκις πραγμάτων οἰκεῖόν τι καὶ χρήσιμον αὑτοῖς λαμβάνουσι.

Τοῦτ’ οὖν δεῖ πρῶτον ἀσκεῖν καὶ μελετᾶν, ὥσπερ ὁ τῆς κυνὸς ἁμαρτὼν τῷ λίθῳ καὶ τὴν μητρυιὰν πατάξας ‘οὐδ’ οὕτως’ ἔφη ‘κακῶς•’ ἔξεστι γὰρ μεθιστάναι τὴν τύχην ἐκ τῶν ἀβουλήτων. ἐφυγαδεύθη Διογένης• ‘οὐδ’ οὕτως κακῶς’• ἤρξατο γὰρ φιλοσοφεῖν μετὰ τὴν φυγήν.

Fortune, Chance and Real Life: Pacuvius, lines 37-46

“Philosophers claim that Fortune is insane, blind, and savage,
That she stands on a rolling and treacherous stone—
Whichever way chance tips that stone, fortune falls nearby.
They say that she is insane because she is merciless, unsteady and faithless.
They repeat that she is blind because she does not see where she goes;
she is savage because she makes no distinction between a worthy or worthless man
But there are different philosophers who deny that Fortune exists
Who say that the law that governs everything is chance.
This is closer to real life and habit teaches us through experience.
Just as Orestes who once was a king, was also once a beggar.”

Fortunam insanam esse et caecam et brutam perhibent philosophi
Saxoque instare in globoso praedicant volubilei
Quia quo id saxum inpulerit fors,eo cadere Fortunam autumant.
Insanam autem esse aiunt quia atrox incerta instabilisque sit;
Caecam ob ream esse iterant quia nil cernat quo sese adplicet;
Brutam quia dignum atque indignum nequeat internoscere
Sunt autem alii philosophi qui contra Fortunam negant
Esse ullam sed temeritate res regi omnes autumant.
Id magis verisimile esse usus reapse exeriundo edocet.
Velut Orestes modo fuit rex, factus mendicus modo.

Pacuvius? Perhaps not a household name like Ennius, Naevius or even Livius Andronicus–but according to the tradition he was Ennius’ nephew, a painter as well as a poet, and one of Rome’s greatest tragedians. Of course, we have only fragments.

The Mind Rules All: Sallust, Bellum Jurguthinum, 1

“The race of man complains wrongly about its nature, namely the fact that it is feeble in strength, limited in years and ruled more by chance than virtue. To the contrary, you can realize through contemplation that nothing else is greater or more extraordinary—that human nature lacks only perseverance instead of strength or time. The leader and ruler of mortal life is the mind. When it proceeds to glory along virtue’s path, it is fully powerful, potent and famous; it does not need fortune since fortune cannot grant or revoke honesty, perseverance, or any other good quality from any man. But a mind seized by desires is dedicated to laziness and worn by obedience to physical pleasure; accustomed to ruinous temptation for too long, when, thanks to sloth, strength, age and wit have diminished, only then is the weakness of nature at fault. Every man shifts his own responsibility to his circumstances.”

[1] Falso queritur de natura sua genus humanum, quod inbecilla atque aevi brevis forte potius quam virtute regatur. Nam contra reputando neque maius aliud neque praestabilius invenias magisque naturae industriam hominum quam vim aut tempus deesse. Sed dux atque imperator vitae mortalium animus est. Qui ubi ad gloriam virtutis via grassatur, abunde pollens potensque et clarus est neque fortuna eget, quippe quae probitatem, industriam aliasque artis bonas neque dare neque eripere cuiquam potest. Sin captus pravis cupidinibus ad inertiam et voluptates corporis pessum datus est, perniciosa libidine paulisper usus, ubi per socordiam vires tempus ingenium diffluxere, naturae infirmitas accusatur: suam quisque culpam auctores ad negotia transferunt.

I can’t help but thinking that maybe Sallust had read (or heard) the beginning of the Odyssey where Zeus complains that Aigisthus ignored divine warnings (1.32-34)

ὢ πόποι, οἷον δή νυ θεοὺς βροτοὶ αἰτιόωνται.
ἐξ ἡμέων γάρ φασι κάκ’ ἔμμεναι• οἱ δὲ καὶ αὐτοὶ
σφῇσιν ἀτασθαλίῃσιν ὑπὲρ μόρον ἄλγε’ ἔχουσιν

“Mortals! They are always blaming the gods and saying that evil comes from us when they themselves suffer pain beyond their lot because of their own recklessness.”

But, of course, there is a typically eclectic blend of Roman philosophy in Sallust’s statements: some Stoicism, an echo, perhaps, of Empedocles and much more….

Whether Life is Chance or Fate Rules All, Be Sudden (Lucan, 2.4-14)

Since we have lately been a bit obsessed with Housman’s idea of scholarship, his invective, and his memory for student names, I thought it only fair to visit with a poet he edited (and there was no way I was reading Manilius this morning):

“…Ruler of Olympos, why did you
Add this worry to human suffering:
To learn of coming horrors through awful omens?
Is it true that the father of nature, when he first grasped unformed realms
And the raw material as creation’s flame receded,
Established causality forever, an act which bound him
To keep the law himself, carrying out the ordered ages
that he decreed for the world with his unchangeable boundary?
Or is it that nothing is certain, and chance wanders without reason:
It turns and returns and governs human outcomes?
May you be prepared, whatever is true, to be sudden:
May man’s mind be blind to future fate; allow the fearful to hope.”

…cur hanc tibi, rector Olympi,
sollicitis uisum mortalibus addere curam, 5
noscant uenturas ut dira per omina clades?
siue parens rerum, cum primum informia regna
materiamque rudem flamma cedente recepit,
fixit in aeternum causas, qua cuncta coercet
se quoque lege tenens, et saecula iussa ferentem 10
fatorum inmoto diuisit limite mundum,
siue nihil positum est, sed fors incerta uagatur
fertque refertque uices et habet mortalia casus,
sit subitum quodcumque paras; sit caeca futuri
mens hominum fati; liceat sperare timenti.

Lucan’s lines of thought are so long! But I do like this passage….

Homer, Odyssey 16.147-149

“It is rather painful–but let’s let it be, even though it hurts us.
For, if it were at all possible for men to choose all things,
the first thing we would choose is the homecoming day of our father”

 
ἄλγιον, ἀλλ’ ἔμπης μιν ἐάσομεν, ἀχνύμενοί περ.
εἰ γὰρ πως εἴη αὐτάγρετα πάντα βροτοῖσι,
πρῶτόν κεν τοῦ πατρὸς ἑλοίμεθα νόστιμον ἦμαρ

 

Thus Telemachus says to the swineherd in front of his father in disguise.

 

 

Homer, Odyssey 4.236-7

“The god Zeus gives good to some people sometimes

and bad other times. He’s capable of everything.”

 

 

ἀτὰρ θεὸς ἄλλοτε ἄλλῳ

Ζεὺς ἀγαθόν τε κακόν τε διδοῖ· δύναται γὰρ ἅπαντα· —

 

Zeus, himself, might disagree since he thinks mortals share the blame for their own fortunes. But this epic is keenly interested in exploring the horrible complicity of god and man that causes and exacerbates suffering.

Democritus, fr. 103 (Stob. IV 34, 58)

“Good things rarely happen when you look for them, but bad things happen even when you don’t.”

 

διζημένοισι τἀγαθὰ μόλις παραγίνεται, τὰ δὲ κακὰ καὶ μὴ διζημένοισιν

Anacreon 395.9-12

 

Hades’ hall is horrifying

And the passage there is hard.

Worse: it is decided that

whoever ventures there may not return

 

Ἀίδεω γάρ ἐστι δεινὸς

μυχός, ἀργαλῆ δ᾿ ες αὐτὸν

κάτοδος. και γὰρ ἐτοῖμον

καταβάντι μὴ ἀναβῆναι

Homer, Odyssey 4.397

 

 

“It’s hard for a man to overcome a god”

 

ἀργαλέος γάρ τ’ ἐστὶ θεὸς βροτῷ ἀνδρὶ δαμῆναι.

 

(The English translation certainly doesn’t measure up to the Greek. Maybe if I dropped the indefinite articles….)