January Meme: Selena and the Classics
Jan. 6th, 2022 03:49 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
selenakmildred_of_midgard wanted to know my state of knowledge re: the Ancient World/Classics: where I’m well versed, what I want to learn more about. Languages: Well, Latin was the first foreign language I learned, and I do have das grosse Latinum, whiich is what they call it if you did seven to nine years of it in grammar school, but that was a life time ago, and I certainly couldn't read Latin now, at least not with a dictionary at my side and without any fun. Greek I don't know at all, to the great distress of my Latin teacher who thought I should have picked Greek, not French, as language No.3 (No.2 was English, which wasn't optional). No Hebrew, either, alas.
Myths: I'm pretty good with Greek and Roman myths, which I first was introduced to via a traditional gift geeky kids used to get for their first communion in my home state of Bavaria, Gustav Schwab's "Greek and Roman Myths". (Think late Victorian retellings of same in English, and you have the equivalent.) I later read Greek and some Roman plays in translation, plus Ovid's versions both in Latin and in translation, and the Iliad and Odyssey in German. I don't think I ever managed the complete Aeneid, as opposed to the retellings from my childhood, but that' partly because the translation situation for the Aeneid is less than stellar in German.
Poetry: Sappho, Alkeios, some Horace, Catullus, Martial, Ovid again.
History: I'm pretty good with the late Roman Republic and the Claudio-Jiulians thath followed, both in terms of primary sources and current day biographies of the most important players. When we get to the Flavians, I've read the Jewish War by Flavius Josephus/Josef ben Matthias, but not his other works. Once the Flavians are over, my knowledge is really sporadic - I don't think I ever read a non-fictional take on Hadrian or Marcus Aurelius, for example -, and the only era of the Byzantine Emperors I'm somewhat better informed in again is the Justinian and Theodora one. I did read the occasional novel about, say, Julian (the Apostate) or Helena the mother of Constantine, as well as Cavafy's withering poetry, but no non-fiction book. Oh, and due to a combination of movies, audio plays and opera, I know a bit about the Attila the Hun era, fiction not fact wise.
What I'd like to learn more about: Mildred has made me curious about the Tetrarchy (Diokletian, Maximinian, and their various junior Emperors), and Mike Walker's audio series Caesar! has gotten me intrigued about both the breakaway Gallic Empire and the melodrama in Constantine's family (his second wife Fausta, daughter of Maximian, got boiled alive after what sounds like a replay of the Phaedra myth involvng her stepson Crispus).
What I already know about but would have fun debating, retelling etc. about to
cahn or other unsuspecting victims: We could always do a gossipy sensationalist take on the late Roman Republic, complete with Cicero's letters, Suetonius' biographies and Catullus' poetry. The later in the translation of Roz Kaveney, which I've been meaning to reccomend for a good while now.Speaking of translations: I would also like to to read Emily Wilson's translation of the Odyssey, which I've been curious about.
Alternate book club ideas: for current day Aeneid-inspired novels, Jo Graham's "Black Ships" and Ursula Le Guin's "Lavinia": compare and contrast! For example.
Oh, and I suddenly realise, I didn't say anything about Greek history. Okay, here, too, I'm better with novels than with primary sources and biographies. I've yet to read more than excerpts from Plato, for example, and my knowledge of Athens' golden age - Pericles etc. - is school history plus fiction. Dito for the Spartans. I did read some Herodotus.
I would like to know more about: the Persians. I've been meaning to have a go at Tom Holland's book. If anyone has read it, I'd be grateful for impressions.
Lastly: Ancient Egypt. I'm reasonably good with the 18th Dynasty (courtesy of Hatshepsut on the one hand and Akhenaten ont he other), and extremely spotty in the centuries before and after until we get to the Ptolemies.
The other days
no subject
Date: 2022-01-06 03:22 pm (UTC)I would detail my own background but I must start work, alas. But I'm bookmarking this post.
no subject
Date: 2022-01-06 03:26 pm (UTC)I enjoyed the Tom Holland book about the Persian Wars but I have a sense that people who actually know things about Persia don't think much of it; I suspect that it suffers, like his other work, from a kind of superficial and uncritical use of sources. I was going to suggest Pierre Briant's book (From Cyrus to Alexander -- I haven't read it but he's someone whose name I know, at least) but I just googled and it's ridiculously expensive to purchase.
no subject
Date: 2022-01-06 03:35 pm (UTC)You intrigue me. If Cicero sides with Caesar in 49, does that save his life (Cicero's, not Caesar's) later on post- Caesar's death and the fallout, or is the alteration more radical than that (i.e. a reformed republic and either a delayed or avoided principate)?
no subject
Date: 2022-01-06 03:55 pm (UTC)The thought-experiment is really meant to save Quintus and younger Quintus, both of whom I have a lot of time for -- I love Cicero but he can be A Lot. But I think Cicero might be able to figure out more constitutionally-acceptable ways for Caesar to demonstrate his position, which might postpone his (Caesar's) assassination, at least -- you might actually see something much more like the Principate, at a much earlier stage, since Augustus was probably Cicero's most attentive student. But, you know, what if Quintus was Caesar's consular colleague in 44, instead of Antony? The possibilities are interesting.
no subject
Date: 2022-01-08 06:30 am (UTC)And I've read the Iliad and the Odyssey, but back in middle/high school, so I don't remember a lot about it, and as a uncivilized barbarian didn't really like them all that much :P I read the Sarah Ruden translation (recced to me by
I know basically noooothing about Latin or Greek poetry OR history except, you know, the kinds of things you get from basically what amounts to fandom osmosis :P I did once read a one-volume abridgement of John Julius Norwichs Byzantine Empire and enjoyed it a lot, but have forgotten it all.
(Oh, I only now realized after your post that Cavafy wrote Waiting for the Barbarians, which I read in a college class. I only knew him from "che fece... il gran rifiuto," which I came across far later at exactly the right time, and which is an extremely meaningful poem for me.)
What I already know about but would have fun debating, retelling etc. about to [personal profile] cahn or other unsuspecting victims: We could always do a gossipy sensationalist take on the late Roman Republic, complete with Cicero's letters, Suetonius' biographies and Catullus' poetry.
Yes please, as I said above, history and poetry I know nothing about! (I have read one or two fics about Cicero, that's it.) :D
Alternate book club ideas: for current day Aeneid-inspired novels, Jo Graham's "Black Ships" and Ursula Le Guin's "Lavinia": compare and contrast! For example.
...actually part of why I read the Aeneid was so I could read Lavinia, but then I never actually got around to it *facepalm* Yes, I want very much to do this! Mildred wouldn't be interested in that, of course, but she could tell us history or something?
The sum total of what I know about Egypt is reading Judith Tarr's historical novels about Alexander the Great, Hatepshut (these two books I remember very little about), Cleopatra, and Akhenaten -- I own the last two, so have reread those and remember a lot more about them. (Tarr's degree is in Classics/Medieval Studies, and I get the sense that she did her research, but she did write these decades ago, and the Akhenaten book in particular was based on an academic theory that Akhenaten was Moses, to which she said something in the afterword along the lines of, "it's crack, but such a fun idea for a novel" :D )
Tangentially, it's interesting to me that you have serviceable French but not Latin -- is it that you learned French later (what I as an American would call high school) and so it stuck better? (This makes me feel better about my kids' elementary school which has terrible/no language program...)
no subject
Date: 2022-01-08 09:26 am (UTC)No, not at all. I was always just avarage in French, whereas I had top grades in Latin and liked it far more. But look, I'm 52, school was literally decades ago, and while I did have opportunity to listen to and read French post school - not as constantly as with English, but now and then - I never had need to practice Latin beyond my A-Levels, and thus inevitably I forgot a lot.
I also read those Judith Tarr novels you name except for the one about Cleopatra, but my Akhenaten exposure came first through Mika Waltari's novel The Egyptian, which was actually the very first historical novel I ever read. And Hatshepsut, I first came across via Pauline Gedge's novel Child of the Morning, which I still love to bits.
I'll talk some more about translations when I get to your prompt for the January meme. :)
no subject
Date: 2022-01-08 11:54 pm (UTC)I very much attempted to keep my Latin (and Greek) up and failed: it was just too painful. A top student like me and
I mean,
My friend from France said that in his French school, "learning Latin" was also learning a method of looking things up rather than learning a language, and thus his Latin is also weaker than it should be vis-a-vis years invested in studying. He had a theory that classism plays a role: if you make studying Latin efficient, then it will be much easier, and more people will be able to do it, and it won't be as exclusive a skill.
And professors complain that Classics programs are being shut down for lack of funding.
no subject
Date: 2022-01-11 06:33 am (UTC)Now, this was also in the days when I actually had a good memory and retained everything. (I obviously don't have a good memory at all now, but I really did back in high school! If only I had had salon in high school :P ) I was going to say that I took in theory a similar level of Italian as an adult from the local community college and retain almost none of it, which is absolutely partially due to retaining things much better in high school, but also those classes were twice a week instead of every day, and then I only took two semesters' worth, in which we did about as much material grammar-wise as we would have done in two years of high school, but obviously I only got a year's worth of practice (and I wasn't motivated enough to practice outside of classwork).
no subject
Date: 2022-01-09 12:03 am (UTC)Yeah, I had no language learning opportunities until high school, and then my choices were up to 2 years of French, or up to 4 years of Spanish. You couldn't do both. I picked French, so my official language learning opportunities ended after 2 years.
Being me, a big fish in a small pond at my rural high school, senior year I managed to beg and plead until someone arranged for me to do a Latin independent study by correspondence. I was given a textbook and told that the correspondence program would mail me an exam at the end of the year, which I would take and mail back, for a pass/fail grade. I had no one I could ask questions of, since I didn't know anyone who knew any Latin. This correspondence course was paid for by the aunt of my high school principal, who was a philanthropist, and my case was brought to her attention by the principal. As you can see, this means it was way, way outside the norm of what was on offer to students.
I read about
ETA: Oh, who am I kidding. I don't restrain my envy, not even a little bit. :P
no subject
Date: 2022-01-09 07:21 am (UTC)Mind you: to me, you sound like a linguistic genius, and I'm in awe at all you've learned and are able to do in this regard!
no subject
Date: 2022-01-09 05:20 pm (UTC)Oh, neat, I didn't know those were your options. I'm glad you got to go to the one best suited to your interests! My school had a strong agricultural program and was probably pretty good if you wanted to be a farmer. Academics, not so much. (My parents, enrolling me in this school: "We're told it's the worst school in the area, but you're smart, so it doesn't matter what school you go to.")
Mind you: to me, you sound like a linguistic genius, and I'm in awe at all you've learned and are able to do in this regard!
Thank you. <3 I hear this a lot, which is why it's so outrageous that after all this time and effort, I'm still monolingual!
As for me...
Date: 2022-01-08 11:38 pm (UTC)It's that thing where I studied Latin for 6 years and got my Greek up to an equivalent proficiency level in a far shorter time (because I was more passionate), tried to keep them up after unversity, and couldn't because the method involved a dictionary and not a lot of fun. Hence they're all rusty now. Ugh. So my PLAN, now that I know a much
less masochisticmore efficient way of learning languages, is to change that.Linguistics: WELL. My PhD was in historical linguistics, and although my original research was on the history of English, much of my course and exam work was on Latin and Greek historical linguistics. Furthermore, the only course I ever taught as instructor of record was titled "The Classical Origins of English Vocabulary." So if you want to know how two Latin and/or Greek words are or are not related, or how English words came from Latin or Greek, I know or will find out!
And I can definitely talk about writing systems.
Mythology
Mythology was the area I studied most, albeit many, many years ago. I read a great many of the Greek and Roman sources, sometimes in Greek or Latin. The one thing I'm weak on is a lot of the Roman-specific mythology that's less closely derived from the Greek.
As for revisiting: I'm torn. I studied a fair amount of Homeric scholarship back in the day. I have a six-volume commentary on the Iliad that I acquired only after I read the Iliad in Greek, and have therefore never properly used. While I very much *want* to revisit it, I know that I'll get sucked in at the expense of everything else I want to do, because there is so much, and it's so interesting. Currently trying to put it off until I cover some new ground. (Also, the Scholiasts are apparently only accessible if you're comfortable with Greek, as there is no translation, or I was told in 2005 that there wasn't then. So it's best to hold off until my Greek is better anyway.)
Poetry
I was made to read a ton of poetry, Latin and Greek, and hated everything that wasn't either mythological or Lucretius. ("Pulvis et umbra" has mythological references in the final verse, that's why I like it. :P) Catullus bore the brunt of my fiery passion, because I got an entire semester on Horace and Catullus (Horace is categorized in my head as "could be worse, could be Catullus"), but there were several other poets I hated so much I had rants.
But when it comes to mythological poetry, I was on happier ground. Homer remains the greatest thing I've ever read, in any language, to this day. Sorry, Tolkien! You're second. But if I end up on a desert island, I'm taking Homer. (Preferably after I learn how to read Greek in a less painful way.)
Vergil was less exciting but I still quite liked the Aeneid. I read all of it in English, and about half in Latin.
History
Spotty. Deep in some places, huge gaps in others.
My Greek history is probably stronger than my Latin, especially 5th-4th centuries, but there's some spottiness there too, especially in the golden age of Athens. I read Herodotus and Thucydides, but my memory has faded, and I lacked a bunch of context back then. I definitely want to cover this more and learn it properly this time. This is my number one goal!
My cultural/social history/everyday life history of any place and time is nearly nonexistent, and I'd like to remedy that, especially for 5th and 4th century Athens. I want the geopolitical and military history first, though, as always.
History of scientific progress: less interesting to me than it should be, as you can see from the 18th century. Not totally uninteresting, but not a priority.
Roman history: Ask me about the Punic Wars. :P I will draw you maps of Hannibal's battles! That's probably my deepest period on the Roman side. And I totally want to go back to it, and I'd love to finish reading Polybius.
Circa 100 BCE-100 CE, the period everyone knows, is somehow the one I missed out on. I picked up some by osmosis, because my Latin degree covered primarily Latin literature of the 1st century BCE, but my professors seemed dedicated to making sure we read all our texts in isolation from any context, because otherwise we might accidentally learn something. *bangs head against desk*
On my own, I read some Roman republic history, but mostly the 19th century German scholar Mommsen, hence very out of date scholarship. I gave myself some decently broad coverage of the Romans starting with maybe Marcus Aurelius and running up through Justinian (we'll handwave him as a Roman), but no depth there. Mostly, this was Gibbon (again, out of date, but so much fun), and modern biographies of the major emperors from this period.
I read Suetonius' Twelve Caesars, of course, but what the heck do I remember. That falls under "not my period," which I should remedy. (Sort of out of a sense of obligation, so I'm counting on you to get me interested, Selena.) I skipped Tacitus (except for excerpts, of course) and much of Livy, which a sense of obligation tells me I should read. I did read Plutarch's Lives, more than once, but some of them without enough context to remember them well (I'm pretty good at spotting questions, allusions, and references, though.)
I'm more motivated to beef up my early Roman Republic and later Roman empire, the periods that I read up on on my own.
Diocletian and Maximian: Loyalty kink! Competence kink! Problematic fave kink! <3
Oh, problematic faves:
- Diocletian
- Hannibal
- Alcibiades
:D
Oh, and the Byzantines I know zilch about except by osmosis, after the first few emperors, and someday I should remedy that, because that's kind of an embarrassing gap in my historical background (much like the Crusades).
Literature
Well. I'm not a literature person (see poetry section above). I was made to read a couple of Roman comedies (Plautus and Terence) in Latin, read a couple of the novels (Satyricon, and the Golden Ass) on my own, and read Aristophanes on my own. Hated all of these except that the Plautus was mythological, so it was okay.
I would like to revisit Aristophanes as a source to be mined for Greek history, now that I know something about Greek history, but I'm still not a literature person. The only semester I skipped the official Latin course was the semester I was teased with "We're going to do Lucretius!" and got super excited, then the prof was like, "Nah, I decided that would be too hard for the rest of the students and no1curr, so we'll be doing the Satyricon instead." I was like, "Oh, FUCK no, I hated the Satyricon in English, like hell am I reading it in slow motion in Latin." I wandered off and did some church Latin, like the Rule of St. Benedict and Augustine, in an independent study instead. I stand by that decision. (The history of Christianity is an actual interest of mine.)
I liked the tragedies better, largely because they were mythological, but I never *loved* them.
Oratory
I was *starting* to do a deep dive into 4th century Athenian oratory when Fritz interrupted me. :P I had read a bunch of historical context, 2 of Aeschines' 3 speeches (one I read 10 years ago in Greek), and most of Demosthenes' political speeches. I am passingly familiar with the other orators, and I was just about to finish up Aeschines and Demosthenes and start the others when--salon! (I regret nothing.)
I was made to read some Cicero, without historical context, in college, which frustrated me to no end, because I really wanted to read *all* the Cicero with *all* the context. (If you're wondering why I didn't do it on my own: I got the message from my professors that learning too much context made the Latin easier because you came into the text with some idea already of what it said, and that was bad because it interfered with encountering the material first in Latin. So while they liked it when I knew random things, I was consciously refraining from studying the context that would help me understand a specific work. I am still angry with them about this.) I still plan to read all Cicero with all the context, but only after I read *all* the Aeschines and Demosthenes with *all* the context. (Or at least all the political Demosthenes speeches; not sure how interested I am in the forensic ones. Then again, who could have predicted I would do a deep dive into 1720s diplomacy, so we'll see!)
(Part of the reason I hated the poetry so much was that I felt I was wasting so much time learning Latin slang for oral sex when what I wanted was Lucretius and Cicero. And I did not like Herodotus much, but enjoyed Thucydides, and strongly preferred Polybius to Livy. Yes, I was always the odd one out in the class.)
Philosophy
I've read Lucretius, more than once, but could use a refresher. I still want to read him in Latin, because I never did. I read a whole bunch of Plato, though not all, and several Aristotle's works. All in English. I want to read more Aristotle; not sure about Plato, except for the Symposium. Which I got halfway through in Greek on my own, when I burned out on looking every word up. I am going to do it the right way this time, and I will finish! (In Greek, I mean; I obviously finished it in English. Multiple times.)
I hated the pre-Socratics at the time, but am willing to cover them for
I read some Ciceronian philosophy, but wouldn't mind reading more.
Archaeology
I did a couple courses on the Aegean Bronze Age, and I got passionate about it at one point and read quite a lot on my own. Ten years ago, so I've forgotten a ton, but I kind of really do want to revisit it. It's just lower priority behind oratory, history, and learning the languages properly.
Oh, I did do some Mycenaean Greek and Linear B coursework. I in no way have a command of either, but I could teach interesting things in salon.
Art history
Extremely spotty. I could definitely teach interesting things! I could even teach boring things: at one point I got obsessed with a particular statue and got halfway through an original article that I still maintain could be published if I finished it. The big obstacle was that there was exactly one book-length source I needed in order to write a responsible article, and it was in German before I had any ability to read German. I might go back to this article! If I don't write it up formally, I will at least tell you and
But my breadth of art history is extremely full of gaps, and outside of that one statue, my depth is not great even on the stuff I do know. The problem is that for most of my formal education, I confused not liking art, and not liking studying art, with not liking art history. I actually tried to talk the faculty into exempting me from the art history requirement! Once I realized art history was amazing, I started wishing I had majored in it! The only course I made time to go and audit on campus after I was working a 9-5 job was an art history course, because I had just discovered what I'd missed out on. I want more!
Egypt and the Persians
WELL. I know very little about either, but they're categorized in my head with Ancient Near East studies, not Classics, and if we start talking ANES background and interests, that's a whole 'nother post. ;)
In conclusion, this is why your love of literature and knowledge of the peak Roman period are going to complement my background and result in a well-rounded Classical education for everyone in salon. :D
Now if I can just sleep already, so I can resume reading German instead of writing long comments like this!