/clas/ - Classical Greek and Roman Literature Thread

[Anonymous No.10477068]

It's been a while.

>classics that you are reading right now
>expected future readings
>interesting scholarship you’ve come across, old and new

CHARTS
Start with the Greeks
>https://i.warosu.org/data/lit/img/0086/04/1476211635020.jpg (Essential Greek Readings)
>https://i.warosu.org/data/lit/img/0099/17/1503236647667.jpg (Start with the Greeks 1)
>https://i.warosu.org/data/lit/img/0098/47/1501831593974.jpg (Start with the Greeks 2)
>http://i.4cdn.org/lit/1511555062371.png (What Translation of Homer Should I Read?)

Resume with the Romans
>https://i.warosu.org/data/lit/img/0103/04/1511545983811.png (More thorough than the other two)

>https://i.warosu.org/data/lit/img/0080/46/1463433979055.jpg (Resume with the Romans 1)
>https://i.warosu.org/data/lit/img/0086/97/1478569598723.jpg (Resume with the Romans 2)


ONLINE RESOURCES
>http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/ (Translations, Original Texts, Dictionaries)
>http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/home.html (Translations)
>https://pleiades.stoa.org/ (Geography)
>https://plato.stanford.edu/ (Philosophy)
>http://www.mqdq.it/public/indici/autori
>http://www.attalus.org/info/sources.html
>http://www.attalus.org/translate/index.html
>http://digiliblt.lett.unipmn.it/index.php (Site in Italian)
>http://www.library.theoi.com/ (Translations)
>https://www.hs-augsburg.de/~harsch/a_chron.html (Site in Latin)
>https://droitromain.univ-grenoble-alpes.fr/
>http://www.earlymedievalmonasticism.org/Corpus-Scriptorum-Ecclesiasticorum-Latinorum.html (CSEL)
>http://www.papyrology.ox.ac.uk/POxy/ (Oxyrhynchus Papyri)
>http://db.edcs.eu/epigr/epi.php?s_sprache=en (Epigraphy)
>http://epigraphy.packhum.org/ (Ephigraphy)
>http://papyri.info/

THREAD THEME
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x6-0Cz73wwQ

[Anonymous No.10477102]

>>10477068
>https://i.warosu.org/data/lit/img/0086/04/1476211635020.jpg
What the fuck guys,
Why do you only recommend Books 1-5 of Politeia???
Missing some of the most important things by not reading the other half.

[Anonymous No.10477117]

>>10477102
Yeah books 6, 7 and 9 are probably the most important (if something like that can even be said)

[Anonymous No.10478125]

>>10477117
I also love the description of what happens after death at the end of book 10

[Anonymous No.10478608]

Start with the Egyptians.

[Anonymous No.10478615]

>>10478608
Quit trying to meme this.

[Anonymous No.10478628]

How long does it normally take to read the main recommened list?
I really just want to read the Greeks for vocabulary and philosophy.
Should I stick to philosophy or read it all?

Thanks

[Anonymous No.10478655]

Just finished Thucydides. That Sicilian expedition was fucked up and I feel really bad for Nicias. Also the parts about Alcibiades was pretty fun, he sounds like a real life Odysseus. But it was quite a sad read after all and I could use something to cheer me up. Does Herodotus have a more positive outlook?

[Anonymous No.10478669]

>>10478628
You need to read all of Homer and main Greek Myths for most philosophy desu.

[Anonymous No.10478675]

>>10478669
Not true

[Anonymous No.10478688]

>>10478675
>Wants to Read (Any modern western philosopher)
>Cant because hasn't read Platon
>Cant because hasn't read Homer
LUL

[Anonymous No.10478691]

>>10478675
>>10478669
Anons, please.

I have a pretty good grasp on philosophy, I just want the greek structures and idea patterns

[Anonymous No.10478711]

>>10478688
You don't need to read Homer in order to understand Plato. You'll miss some references here and there, but ultimately it's not that important, especially if you get an edition with footnotes.

[Anonymous No.10478738]

>>10478711
>You'll miss some references here and there, but ultimately it's not that important,
opinion discarded.
Please don't give me any more (you)s.
Thx!

[Anonymous No.10478772]

Currently a classics student at uni. Reading catullus and the aeneid. Translating aesop, virgil and petronius

[Anonymous No.10478773]

>>10478738
Not an argument.

[Anonymous No.10478792]

>>10478773
Let me make it clearer for you then:
You are a pleb.
Arguing with you is worthless.
Bye bye! <3 :* XXX

[Anonymous No.10478805]

>>10478792
Not an argument.

[Anonymous No.10478815]

>>10478688
t. Has never read Platon

[Anonymous No.10479122]

Does anyone have any books about how the monarchy of Rome worked?

[Anonymous No.10479246]

>>10477068
Thanks for finally adding my Romans chart, OP

>>10478772
How's aesop? Never tried in the original. I'll be reading Petronius this upcoming semester for the first time too. You doing any work you're proud of / excited about?

>>10477102
Agreed. Probably just someone who copied their intro to phil syllabus reading list or something.

>>10478125
Myth of Er, for those curious. It's one of Plato's most famous and fascinating stories. I'd assign it on its own for a class on "myth" in ancient philosophy.

>>10478608
Any reason why, besides they came first? Greek lit and thought heavily influenced Roman and later most western lit that we all love; it would be very difficult to make the same argument for the Egyptians.

>>10478628
Depends on your speed (obviously), but the plays/dialogues move very quickly and you can easily finish in one sitting. If you are only interested in "vocab and phil," skip reading them altogether and just read Stanford encyclopedia entries on the thinkers you're interested in.

>>10478655
tldr yes. More fantastic stories as well; more fun all around

>>10478669 >>10478738 >>10478792
fuck off with your gatekeeping; of course reading is more productive if you do more of it, but the idea of "necessity" is idiotic for those not formally studying a subject. If someone has an interest in a book, telling them to read something else often serves only to frustrate and push students away. Read what you want first; when you realize how much better that book is in conversation with others, read the others.

[Anonymous No.10479527]

I'm new to philosophy reading but already read some epics, including the Iliad and the Odyssey. I just got the complete works of Plato, but really don't want to read everything before getting to the Republic. What besides the Apology, Crito, and Phaedo should I read first?

[Anonymous No.10479863]

Is Hesiod's Theogony essential? What about his 'Works and Days'? After reading Hamilton and Bulfinch what I enjoyed the most were the creation stories, but mainly for enjoyment. I'm not interested in the serious and somber sludge of holy gospel from another era.

Basically what I'm looking for is more like the Homeric Hymns but less like dry Apollodorus. I won't set a high standard, I'll welcome any recommended works from antiquity, provided they're written as prettily as Ovid's.

[Anonymous No.10480949]

>>10479863
Yes and yes. Although Hesiod is considered dry, he sometimes becomes pretty beautiful, especially in W&D.

[Anonymous No.10480969]

Favorite book in the Odyssey?

[Anonymous No.10480974]

have read homer, hesiod, complete aeschylus and almost finishing complete sophocles. this year my goal is to focus on nonfic, to read euripides and aristophanes, herodotus and thucydides, euclid, archimedew, apolloniud and nicomachus, and finally plato and aristotle.

[Anonymous No.10481010]

Reading "Mythology" by Edith Hamilton. Is that a good enough primer before going into Homer?

[Anonymous No.10481080]

>>10478608
oh fug username checks out lmao :DDDD

[Anonymous No.10481084]

>tfw finally finished The Histories

It started lurching the longer I read it, by the last chapters I was just trudging through out of habit. It was still rewarding to read it, and now no other classical work will seem as long in comparison, I got some gain out of it.

But now I need to fucking scream and do some pleb shit like video games for a bit.

[Anonymous No.10481090]

>>10481084
And then I'll only have Thucydides, The Anabasis, The Theban Cycle, The Argonautica, some more myth afterwards, Diogenes Laertios, the socratics proper, so I can move on to Livy and Gibbon while simultaneously reading 1 other book about early modern history or classic English fiction

The ride NEVER ends

[Anonymous No.10481263]

>>10481090
>>10481084
>And now no other classical work will seem as long in comparison
>Thucydides
"And then the Athenians sent six ships, five from Lesbos and one from Euboea against the Ambriocans to support their friends the Thrachymacheans whom they had an alliance with since the year in which Osydecles won the olympic games."

[Anonymous No.10481291]

>>10479527
Start with The Apology

[Anonymous No.10481374]

Aristophanes bores me

[Anonymous No.10481378]

>Spartans are assholes and their women are sluts!!
Real classy, Eurypides.

[Anonymous No.10481384]

Delphi Complete Works of Plato or pic related?

[Anonymous No.10481428]

>>10479527
I followed this and found it helpful.

[Anonymous No.10481850]

>>10479527
That chart >>10481428 is not half bad. For the abbreviated version, I'd just assign the Apology, the Crito, and the Symposium before the Republic, but there's nothing really "wrong" with starting wherever you want. I know /lit/ has always loved its progression charts, but like I said above, follow your interests and you'll always go further.

>>10479863
He rarely is assigned to undergrads, even in more advanced mythology classes -- this may be because his language is eclectic and few profs want to teach him though. I got little out of the theogony in English (haven't read the Greek), but one of my peers is writing his dissertation on it so who the fuck knows. Clearly there's a lot there; try it and when you get bored, move along. Unfortunately, very little literature is "written as prettily Ovid's."

>>10480969
6 (intro to Nausicaa), 9 (favorite part of Od's stories), 17 (Eumaus & Od's dog), 21-end (fight and reconciliation)

>>10481010
Yes. It will be fun! Don't worry about "missing stuff;" it's not like you'll only be thinking about / reading Homer once.

>>10481084 >>10481090
Don't play vidya. You know you'd rather read. Don't give in to the worst parts of yourself. There are more books that you want to read than you have life.

>>10481374
Then don't read him. Pretty good chance you're reading a lame translation / don't really grasp why he's so important as an author. What are you reading? (and english or greek?)

>>10481378
>Athenians insulted people with whom they were at war and whom they considered lesser thinkers and writers than themselves? No way!

>>10481384
I have literally never seen anyone -- undergrad, grad student, professor, random person on the subway w/e -- with one of the Delphi classics editions. I can't comment on their quality because I haven't read them, but their unpopularity is striking.

[Anonymous No.10481946]

>>10481850

>I have literally never seen anyone -- undergrad, grad student, professor, random person on the subway w/e -- with one of the Delphi classics editions. I can't comment on their quality because I haven't read them, but their unpopularity is striking.

That;s because it's only sold as an ebook. I guarantee that they're widely read in universities today because the translations are all in the public domain. I don't know why you feel the need to respond to so many people when you don't know what you're talking about and have nothing useful to say. You're just replying for the sake of replying.

[Anonymous No.10481996]

>>10478608
Id love to if I could find any book other than "the book of the dead " that actually exists.

I'm convinced they couldn't write.

[Anonymous No.10482145]

>>10481946
Trying to help m8. I know they are ebooks, but why you purchase and use something in the public domain when Perseus.tufts is free? The only reason one has to purchase Classics texts are the commentaries

Why be a dick when you could just make a point?

[Anonymous No.10482251]

>This is a reminder to read Plato's myths

Many of these can be found in the inexpensive
"Plato: Selected Myths."

https://global.oup.com/academic/product/selected-myths-9780199552559

[Anonymous No.10482257]

>>10480974
>this year my goal is to focus on nonfic

All ancient literature is non-fiction though.

[Anonymous No.10482408]

have read SPQR, looking to pick up some proper Roman lit now, what would you recommend? I'm sketchy on going for Plutarch since I believe I'd need benefit more from being taught Plutarch, but I'm definitely picking up Meditations.

[Anonymous No.10482415]

>>10482408
>I'm definitely picking up Meditations

You'll get a lot more out of Epictetus.

[Anonymous No.10482419]

>>10481084
>buy The Histories
>figure it'll be written something like some other dense Greek philosophies
>I can handle The Republic, and there's no way its as dense as Aristotle, I got this

>by page 2 I feel my brain begin to melt out my fucking ears
How was this written at all
Holy fuck

[Anonymous No.10482424]

>>10482408
>have read SPQR

If you want more popular takes, consider Tom Holland. I'm listening to the Persian Fire audiobook right now, and it's very good. Mary Beard on the other hand, I don't like.

[Anonymous No.10482426]

>>10482415
Discourses first or Enchiridion? I know Meditations are basically a journal of one practitioner of a heavily distorted philosophy, but I consider having been the fucking Emperor of Rome a pretty good sell for Aurelius' writing.

[Anonymous No.10482434]

>>10482419

What translation do you have? I got the one by Aubrey De Selincourt and I'm enjoying the shit out of it.

[Anonymous No.10482435]

>>10482424
The way I understand it, Beard is an intro to Rome for people who have no knowledge base while Holland is more about contextualizing the vast ocean of information about periods of Roman history into a comprehensible logic. I'll probably pick up Holland's Roman writing after I fill in the blanks in my own knowledge.

[Anonymous No.10482436]

>>10482426

>Discourses first or Enchiridion?
Discourses

>the fucking Emperor of Rome a pretty good sell for Aurelius' writing
Don't get me wrong. I like Marcus. By all means get the Meditations, but his self-reminders aren't nearly as meaty as the teachings of Epictetus put to word.

[Anonymous No.10482443]

>>10479527

[Anonymous No.10482445]

>>10482434
Selincourt. It's not that Its difficult to read, it just blows through paragraphs of information at a glance with absolutely no context. I'll need to find a guided reading or a map to go with the book or something, trying to retain anything in that book by rote is impossible for me.

[Anonymous No.10482450]

>>10482443
And here's the image inside the image (woah).

[Anonymous No.10482481]

>>10482445

I recommend the Landmark Herodotus for this very reason. Maps help very much.

[Anonymous No.10482493]

The link for (What Translation of Homer Should I Read?) is not working. I've read a little of Alexander Pope's translation for the Iliad. Thoughts?

[Anonymous No.10482503]

>>10482445
>>10482481
Preview the prose AND the maps of the Selincourt + Landmark versions and decide which you like

Reminder: Early Herodotus is Hard Herodotus because he's assuming familiarity (I mean, obviously, based on the educated Athenian audience he READ the book to) with the common mythology and quasi-history of the Greek world. They all not only knew the tyrants Herodotus is mentioning as legendary figures, they knew them as relatively recent historical figures as well - some in very recent memory. The thing is, it's nowhere near as daunting as it seems - it seems like he's just giving dozens of names of minor figures, but actually all these guys will become quite familiar to you as you learn more about Greek history, and the whole Archaic Age with its various storied tyrannies will become easy as fuck. The real meat of the book, the Persian Wars, actually gets easier than the beginning because it's more of a narrative.

The maps are handy but you may not absolutely need them.

[Anonymous No.10482507]

>>10482493

Pope is fine, but he doesn't fit well with contemporary sensibilities. Many now tend to find him overly refined and find that the poetic structure of his translation gives it a certain "cheesy" quality.

[Anonymous No.10482512]

>>10477068
Exaclty why should one start with the Greeks? I never got these meme?

[Anonymous No.10482517]

>>10482512

Because all of our predecessors also started with the Greeks? How will you understand their allusions if you don't read what they read?

[Anonymous No.10482544]

>>10482507
Then what translation would you suggest?

[Anonymous No.10482577]

>>10482507
I've read that Pope's has the same sound effects and rythm as of the original, and i liked it more than other prose translations.

[Anonymous No.10482581]

>>10482544

I'd say start with either Fagles, Lombardo, or Lattimore.

You could compare a few passages online to see which one you like best.

[Anonymous No.10482585]

>>10482544
not him, but Fitzgerald is excellent for a first time read of both of Homer's epics.

[Anonymous No.10482607]

>>10479122
using those search terms will not Garner anything, instead search for nepotism since the rules of succession were paraded as equal among all citizens which what a republic offered theoretically..... monarchy was none existent given that Rome was always either ruled by the senate or by a ceasar

[Anonymous No.10482689]

>>10482493
Here's the image it's supposed to link to.

[Anonymous No.10482704]

What's the best collection of the Homeric Hymns? Also, how much of Greek mythology is only known to us from later (often Roman) writers? I'm trying to read semi-chronologically but it's a bit difficult when most myths aren't told by Greek writers.

To be fair I haven't gotten to the Greek plays yet, does it get better there?

[Anonymous No.10483386]

>>10482704
>What's the best collection of the Homeric Hymns?
I'd just get this.

>how much of Greek mythology is only known to us from later

Take a look at this for our sources on Greek myth:

http://www.theoi.com/Bibliography.html

Look up the authors to see when they wrote.

[Anonymous No.10484762]

>>10478738
He's right, though, and this is coming from someone reading the greeks/romans to a borderline autistic level. Obviously every classic, especially from antiquity, ESPECIALLY classical Greece, will inform much of your subsequent reading. Personally I think that makes most of it worth reading. But if someone sees fit to read Homer, some Plato, maybe Herodotus and a few plays, they'll probably be fine. They'll miss some hints and references, and I 100% agree that it will at least to some degree lessen their later reading experiences, but if someone doesn't love the Greeks there's no need to force them to read the classics in full.

>>10481084
>now no other classical work will seem as long in comparison
m8 there are numerous primary source histories from antiquity easily 2-3x as long and far less approachable
buckle up motherfucker

>>10481090
Just a quick word of advice: don't bother trying to plan so far ahead. It doesn't work, because it can't work, because you haven't yet read the things you're trying to plan around, so you don't know what time periods they'll cover and which ones you'll need to fill in elsewhere. It's easy to whip up a list of 6-10 writers in reference to the Greek or Roman chart, but if you actually diligently read those few you're starting off with, you'll stumble onto references to other interesting, valuable writers as well, whom you may very likely wish to check out.

As a few examples, you might finish Thucydides and realize his books end before telling how the Peloponnesian war ends. Oops. If you want to wrap it up with a primary source, you have to read Xenophon's Hellenika.

Or you might start reading about Rome and realize that the Aeneid is way more important to have under your belt than the Argonautica.

Or you might look at the ToC of Gibbon and realize most of the history takes place after what you think of when you think "ancient Rome." Might want to read some Dio, maybe some Procopius, maybe some Byzantine history.

Or you might read all of Livy (and you should, he's great). Turns out his extant works tell you nothing about Pyrrhus (better read Plutarch) or the first Punic war (better read Polybius), or the perceived moral degradation of Rome after the fall of Carthage (better read Sallust), or the birth of the empire (better read Caesar), but oh fuck even Caesar is just a latecomer in a long series of 1st C BC civil wars (better read Appian) and the empire par excellence doesn't even come about until Augustus (relevant books in Appian lost; obviously outside of the scope of Caesar's books; better read Dio Cassius).

Obviously you don't need to actually read all of these guys. My point is just to take it one step at a time and do not even try to set a 10 book plan or whatever. It won't work. And it shouldn't. If you discover no new, exciting, possibly minor authors along the path of reading Thucydides and Livy, that will be the saddest possible conclusion of the very noble plan that you have so far.

[Anonymous No.10484772]

>>10482408
Livy is a shitload of fun, but long
Everyone without a significant background reading history should read Polybius
Sallust is short and interesting and captivating
Caesar is basically a must

IMO either read very specific selections from Plutarch, as in "I want to read about Aemilius Paulus and I don't feel like digging through 2000 pages of Livy so I'll read his 30 page bio in Plutarch." If you want just straight up Roman history and don't know which eras/figures to focus on, leave Plutarch for later: he's surprisingly hard to approach, the original structure of his Lives jumps around a lot between place and time and thus expects you to basically already know the political histories and figures involved; reading the Lives in full is a great capstone to an already-strong historical background in that it revisits a lot of familiar or half-familiar stories with new angles, lenses, and emphases, but it's very light on the political events which act as the backbone for all of the stories.

[Anonymous No.10484801]

>>10482704
Loeb's edition is worth it.

[Anonymous No.10485158]

>>10484801
Why?

[Anonymous No.10485169]

>>10484772
I've read The Gaelic Wars but I just find Caesar's autobiographical style insufferable, its probably more suited to a guided reading or other breakdown for me.

Polybius seems like a good jumping on point for me, my general knowledge of Roman history is incredibly limited, hence why I picked up SPQR. May look into Sallust as well, I remember him being a subject of much interest to Beard as well.

[Anonymous No.10485208]

Why does /lit/ ridicule Eastern philosophy for being "mystical" and "spiritual" but slobbers over the Greeks, who were polytheists and believed in plenty of mystical bullshit themselves?

[Anonymous No.10485222]

>>10485208
>baiting this hard
stop

[Anonymous No.10485224]

>>10485208
>actually thinks most Greeks during the age of Socratic philosophies LITERALLY believed in the Olympic pantheon
Why do you post dumb shit like this when you assuredly live in a socially religious, culturally secular country?

[Anonymous No.10485256]

>finish the Histories yesterday
>decide I'll have a break for one day, I'll just read a summary of it to reinforce the details for my classical study
>forgot about 40% of the details I read

Is there a fucking point in thoroughly reading the classicals if I'm such a fucking immense brainlet? Totally forgot about the anecdote with the horse or the pretext for Cambyses' invasion of Egypt. Might not seem like much but these are key to joining the historical narrative together. How can I remedy my leaky brainlet?

[Anonymous No.10485266]

>>10485224
>disclosing religious mysteries would be punished by death
>Herodotus ascribes the finding of the Plataean victory at Mycale before it was physically possible for tidings to reach them to divine intervention
>Believes or reports an account that no Persians approached the statues of Ceres during Plataea or Mycale
>People sacrificed animals fit for eating to rivers and shit
>Almost any power referred to an oracle to predict a battle

Greekz wuz religious ironically

[Anonymous No.10485273]

>>10485256
Reread it

[Anonymous No.10485274]

>>10485256
If you think the point of reading is Rote recall, you're an idiot and can't be saved.
Yeah there are specific things you'll need to remember for specific later references, but the larger goal of reading the Greeks especially is to imbue yourself with a comfortable and general familiarity with a wide range of subjects that would become foundations of Western thought.

Having finished Histories, do you find yourself more comfortable with the development of History as a means of scientific enquiry, and the means by which it is used to predict and contextualize the actions of later individuals and populations?

[Anonymous No.10485279]

>>10485266
>what is cultural iconography
>what is the legitimization of political power through religious institutional support
HURRRRRR SO CRATES WUZ KILT BECUZ HE HABE PET DEMUN N ZOOS WUZ MAD

[Anonymous No.10485288]

>>10485273
please no
>>10485274
uh yes i think

[Anonymous No.10485300]

>>10485279
>legitimization of political power through religious institutional support

What use would this have without a religious society? What point are you arguing, that they were agnostics or that they were moderately spiritual and not the bash-stones and dash-wood to worship their rock gods sort of people? Because it seems ridiculous to propose that Greeks were not religious when lavish sacrifices of perfectly serviceable goods were made.

[Anonymous No.10485306]

>>10485279
>>10485300
Nevermind that also the Spartands adjourned military relief to Athens at Marathon due to a religious festivity when they showed themselves most eager to aid otherwise even after Athens has proven able to match the barbarians.

You think Greeks would endanger their muh freedomz for a LARP?

[Anonymous No.10485416]

>>10477102
>https://i.warosu.org/data/lit/img/0086/04/1476211635020.jpg
You have read the chart incorrectly.
Politeia Books 1-5 is a random loeb serving as an example of publishers of original texts. If you continued to look at the chart you would have found an image of the complete works of Plato, as well as text recommending that one reads all of Plato.

[Anonymous No.10485432]

>>10481996

...

[Anonymous No.10485768]

>>10484762
>someone reading the greeks/romans to a borderline autistic level.
Can you tell us about yourself, dear anon?

[Anonymous No.10485804]

>>10484762

I love this post.

One thing I would stress is that mapping out a sort of outline of ancient authors that truly speak to you can be very fun. You'll also find that authors you thought would be good don't really do it for you.

I'd consider seeking out some anthologies with good intros and notes. I'd also caution not to ignore any genres or time periods. Explore the ancient world as a whole. You'll find all sorts of surprises. Before you know it, you'll be building your own personal canon which you can fill-in and adjust over the course of your life.

[Anonymous No.10485817]

>>10484772
>Livy is a shitload of fun, but long

Sadly, we don't have the whole thing.
It would be much longer!

>Of its 142 books, we have just 35, and short summaries of all the rest except two.

[Anonymous No.10485823]

>>10485256

Even if you absorb only 10%, it's still worth it.
You'll be reading it again anyways right?

[Anonymous No.10485840]

>tfw writing an essay about a certain greek author whom a bunch of renaissance painters borrowed from for the theme of their paintings
can you guess who it's? ps: not ovid

[Anonymous No.10485854]

I am a noob
I started like this:

1. Don Quijote
2. Dialogues of Plato:
- Euthyphro, Apology, Crito, Meno, Gorgias, Menexenus, Phaedo
3. The Republic
4. Meditations - Aurelius
5. The Prince
Next: Kierkegaard, Nietzsche, Freud

Why am I like this?

[Anonymous No.10485987]

I finished reading Volume 1 of the The Cambridge History of Philosophy in Late Antiquity.

It has made me reevaluate a number of ancient figures

Cicero
I disliked him before. Now I appreciate him; especially as a source for the skeptical Platonism.
His use of the dialogue form is great too.

Ptolemy
I didn't think of Ptolemy as a philosophical figure.
That has changed. I appreciate him a little more now.

Galen
My love of Galen has grown

Philo of Alexandria
Philo is more Greek in his thought than I thought.
I like him more now.

Clement of Alexandria
I knew almost nothing about him before.
I love him now.

Porphyry
Enigmatic as always.
These days, my appreciation is waxing.

Themistius
I had no idea who this guy was.
I really like him.

Hypatia
I like her less now.

Hierocles of Alexandria
My appreciation for Hierocles has deepened considerably.

Basil of Caesarea/Gregory of Nyssa/Gregory of Nazianzus
I thought these guys would be great. I was wrong.

Calcidius
A fascinating figure.
The reception of his work is really strange and interesting too.

Nemesius of Emesa
I wasn't familiar with him.
I like his stuff.

Synesius of Cyrene
New to me.
I really like him.

Augustine
I like him a lot less now.

[Anonymous No.10486729]

>>10485768
I got memed into the Greeks and fell in love with them. Been reading Greeks/Romans regularly for almost 3 years. One of the best things to ever happen to me.

>>10485804
Great advice. You're right that planning can be fun; I guess I was really warning against being disappointed when a list falls apart and has to be remade with new information, which happens not just for "the Greeks" but for genres and even single writers among them. Before I started Aristotle I figured I could read him like I had read Plato, and expected I could read 40 pages a day and be done in two months. Literally day 1 of Categories knocked me on my ass and made me scramble to figure out a new method of approach. Probably took me 3-4 months to comfortably establish a method for reading, annotating, and finding/evaluating/choosing/reading secondary sources.

And you're absolutely right, there's a lot of fun to be had, and a lot of surprises to be found. Antiquity is not just something to get out of the way; it's something to steep yourself in and savor.

>>10485169
I haven't read SPQR and I hear it's a bit of a meme, but frankly it might be good for a starting point. There is no single primary source which will give you all the information you need. Livy cuts off early; Polybius strictly covers only 264-146BC. Appian's histories (not the civil wars) are a decent overview, arranged such that Roman history is told roughly "enemy by enemy," i.e., as an enemy comes into contact with Rome, Appian follows their relationship to the end before moving to the next enemy, and so on.

Also Sallust is technically history, but is more valuable IMO as a moralist. You'll see what I mean when you read him; the two episodes he's most known for are relatively minor in Roman history, but his writing is excellent. Quick read, definitely recommend it at some point.

Anyway, I hope you stick with it; there's a lot to be learned, and much of it is tough to get into, but it starts flowing more easily as you go on, and I believe much of it is very valuable. One last tip: When deciding which edition to buy, reference the ToC against the books offered by Loeb (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loeb_Classical_Library)) so that you can see if the edition you're considering is complete or selected, rearranged, etc. Many minor writers will be only available in bits and pieces from normal publishers like penguin, oxford. Polybius is one of these (oxford version is like 4 complete books and like 3 fragmented books; penguin edition is excerpts from most of the 40? total books, and even the completely extant books are only presented as selections). Plutarch is particularly notorious for being chopped up and repackaged into countless editions like "the founders of Rome" or whatever. If you buy him, buy the Modern Library 2 vol set (paper or hardback both easily found used).

Hope that helps!

>>10485817
Yeah that's a bummer. I would have loved to read him describe the 1st, 3rd punic wars, and Pyrrhus.

[Anonymous No.10486750]

>>10486729
>Many minor writers will be only available in bits and pieces from normal publishers like penguin, oxford.

I found this out again when looking for a complete translation of Pliny's Natural History in English.

It can be had in French at least, but the prices are very high.

[Anonymous No.10486789]

>>10486750

To elaborate a little.
I was hoping to find the whole thing in one or two volumes.

[Anonymous No.10487168]

>>10486750
At a certain depth into Greece/Rome you need to start buying Loeb editions (English translation) or a similar publisher (I think French has Budé or something like that). Small, pricey books to which there is often no alternative, as you found for Pliny; the loeb Pliny is 10 vol at retail $26 each. Sometimes you can find them used (I got a pliny set for like $100 on abebooks a while back) but usually the prices won't go much lower than $20 a volume.

[Anonymous No.10487267]

Second Sophistic is the best Roman period. Loving studying it.

[Anonymous No.10487843]

>>10487267

Any recommendations or general pointers?
You can be vague. I don't mind.

[Anonymous No.10489606]

>>10486729
Polybius anon here, thanks for the link. Delving into multi-volume historical works is ominous for beginners.

[Anonymous No.10489680]

>>10489606
Cheers, I totally understand. Polybius is actually what first tuned me into Loebs. Until then I had only read widely published stuff (like Herodotus, Livy), and neither the penguin nor oxford editions of Polybius were clear about how they were arranging the text; after a lot of confusion trying to reconcile the two tables of contents I ended up finding the loeb editions.

Once you know what's up it's easier to keep an eye out for passing mentions of "selections" or "excerpts" but if you're unused to that it's easy to get dicked. Like the penguin Dio Cassius is fucking 10 books out of 80 lmao

[Anonymous No.10489800]

Hey /clas/ I need some recs with Presocratic commentaries.
Because my Dad's a patrician he bought me Grahams 2 volumes of the Presocratics for Christmas, knowing my interest in classics. Whilst having the original and the translation is quite nice, the notes are limited. Is there anyone well acquainted with the secondary literature on the Presocratics that could make some recommendations?
I'll obviously read the relevant volume of Copleston, but I'm looking for something in addition to that. Guthrie has a multiple volume series on Ancient greek philosophy but it's incredibly expensive, does anyone know if it's a worthwhile investment? Also is there anybody familiar with the Kirk, Raven, Schofield release that would be able to comment on it's usefulness?
Thanks in advance, /clas/ is one of the best things to happen to /lit/ in a long time.

[Anonymous No.10489839]

I can't find Thucydides' books 3-6 online, please succor me /lit/ I can trade the pdfs for some rare memes if you want some

[Anonymous No.10489860]

finish the Illiad
started the Odyssey


When does greeks get good?

[Anonymous No.10489864]

>>10489860
>When does greeks get good?
When you get good.

[Anonymous No.10489907]

"Greek Epic Fragments" by Martin L. West isn't available at the kindle store. Anyone got a torrent/download link that is working?

[Anonymous No.10489918]

>>10487843
It's the epoch of Trajan, Hadrian, Severus, Caracalla amongst others, so you need to know your Roman history right. The period is named after Philostratus' Life of Sophists. Philostratus is the main figure here. A great sophist, familiar to the great aristocratic circle of Julia Domna, wife of Severus, he has an extremely varied corpus: Eikones is a ekphrasic text describing some paintings of a Naples gallery to some kids (to-be sophists), Tician, Goethe, Caravaggio, Isabella d'Este and Poussin all read this text and were amazed by it. Life of Sophists is a historical account of the sophists from 50 to 230 AD more of less. Life of Apollonius of Tyana is a ficctionalized biography of a saint. Gymnasticus is an apologetics of Olympian athletes, Heroicus is a dialogue borrowing from Plato. The interesting thing about Philostratus is his sense of historicism, knowing he's in a period of decadence (he's the last in his Life of Sophists) and his longing for a return of classical Greek modes of culture.

Jas Elsner edited a entire book dedicated to him, very worth checking out. Here's some more bibliography about him (articles):
>Philostratus and the Narcissus of Caravaggio – Stephen Bann
>L’ekphrasis dans Les Tableaux de Philostrate de Goethe – Isabelle Guillot
>The Palestrina Mosaic with a Nile Scene: Philostratus and Ekphrasis; Ptolemy and Chorographia – John F. Moffitt
>Continuity in Change: Revisualizations of Philostratus's Eikones – Raichel Le Goff

I've talked only about Philostratus, but there's more to the Second Sophistic authors: Dio Chrysostom, Lucian, Callistratus and Aelius Aristides.

[Anonymous No.10489922]

Currently reading a great modern annotated copy of Herodotus' Histories, learning quite a bit.
Going to start on pic related (The Satyricon) afterward. Anyone who has read it want to tell me what I am in for?

[Anonymous No.10489986]

Daily reminder that pitch doesn't exist:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=149&v=3HxzDZUzHi8

[Anonymous No.10489997]

>>10478608
WE WUZ /LIT/ AND SHEET

[Anonymous No.10490058]

>>10489907
libgen.pw

[Anonymous No.10490067]

>>10489839
Please anons, I can't stand the uncertainity of being able to advance from one book from another every time I'm done with one. I've already had to skip Sophocles. I'll give you as many memes as you need.

[Anonymous No.10490088]

What's the point to reading the Histories? If I wanted to learn ancient Greek history wouldn't it be better to just read modern books about it? I realize Herodotus is the father of history, but just like Aristotle being the father of physics doesn't mean I should read him to learn physics, it seems silly to read Herodotus to learn history.

Not trying to be sardonic, it's a genuine question.

[Anonymous No.10490099]

>>10490088
because reading him is very fun

[Anonymous No.10490282]

>>10489800

I can't give you any personal recommendations. I didn't really like any of comprehensive overviews I've looked at, but you may find the following useful.

>Many books on Presocratic philosophy cover the field chronologically, taking each philosopher (or group of philosophers) in turn; some of these (including Burnet 1930; Kirk, et al. 1983; and McKirahan 2011) contain large numbers of fragments and testimonia in translation (some give the original text as well) together with discussion and interpretation. Others (including Barnes 2001 and Waterfield 2000, both cited under Collections of Source Materials) consist mainly of translations, while Warren 2007 is mainly discussion and interpretation, with few texts quoted. Guthrie 1962–1965 is the first two volumes of the six-volume History of Greek philosophy, which although showing its age is still excellent for providing an overall picture of the Presocratics and their period. Taylor 1997, Long 1999, and Curd and Graham 2008 contain essays by leading scholars that cover the entire Presocratic period.

Burnet, J. 1930. Early Greek philosophy. 4th ed. London: Black.
This celebrated history of Presocratic philosophy, influenced by Tannery 1930 (cited under Science), overturned the Hegelian tradition of the history of philosophy. It situates the Presocratic thought outside of any reference to religion and keeps its distance from the thesis of oriental influence, and it puts its emphasis on philosophy of nature.

Curd, P., and D. Graham, eds. 2008. The Oxford handbook of Presocratic philosophy. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press.
Essays by leading scholars on specific issues treated by the major Presocratics and on the topics of medicine, cosmology, explanation, epistemology, and theology. The essays are intended for upper-level students and specialists and are not simply overviews.

Guthrie, W. K. C. 1962–1965. A history of Greek philosophy. Vol. 1, Earlier Presocratics and Pythagoreans. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press.
Comprehensive history of Presocratic thought. For each philosopher a detailed analysis of the biographical data, lists of writings, and doctrines with critical examination of ancient texts and modern interpretations. Volume 1 covers Thales through Heraclitus and the Pythagoreans. Volume 2 (1965) treats the later Presocratics from Parmenides through the Atomists.

Kirk, G. S., J. E. Raven, and M. Schofield. 1983. The Presocratic philosophers. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press.
A famous history of Presocratic thought (known as “KRS,” which replaces “KR,” published in 1957) which foregrounds the interest of the first philosophers in explaining nature. Greek text and English translation of source materials are accompanied by critical commentary and an interpretation of the doctrines of the Presocratics.

[Anonymous No.10490285]

>>10490282

Long, A. A., ed. 1999. The Cambridge companion to early Greek philosophy. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univ. Press.
Contains essays by leading scholars on major Presocratics and Sophists and on topics including theology, epistemology, sensation, medicine, cosmology, causality, and poetics. The essays are accessible to beginners but are also useful for advanced students and specialists.

McKirahan, R. D. 2011. Philosophy before Socrates. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett.
First edition in 1994. A comprehensive selection of fragments and testimonia of the principal Presocratics and Sophists, translated into English and accompanied by an account of the thought of each of the philosophers covered and a discussion of the principal interpretive issues. The revised edition contains an appendix with translations of three Hippocratic writings and the Derveni Papyrus.

McKirahan, Richard D. 2012. Collections containing articles on Presocratic philosophy. Pomona Faculty Publications and Research Paper 93. Claremont, CA: Pomona College.
This list of collections containing papers on Presocratic philosophy includes many of the sources included in the present article.

Taylor, C. C. W., ed. 1997. The Routledge history of philosophy. Vol. 1, From the beginnings to Plato. London and New York: Routledge.
Contains essays on the principal Presocratics by leading scholars.

Warren, James. 2007. Presocratics: Natural philosophers before Socrates. Stocksfield, UK: Acumen.
An excellent introduction to Presocratic philosophy with frequent references to conflicting interpretations and to recent challenges to older, widely accepted views.

[Anonymous No.10490288]

>just found out Galatea is four sylabllyes
>realize poem ruined and i'm a pleb in one moment

[Anonymous No.10490291]

>>10490288

Keep those Ts hard my man.

[Anonymous No.10490294]

>>10489918

Thank you very much.
I will update and expand my wishlists accordingly.

[Anonymous No.10490310]

>>10489800

This may seem a strange recommendation, but I'd consider taking a look at this book.

It has a thematic approach which can be useful in grounding further explorations. That and it's only a few dollars.

[Anonymous No.10490501]

>>10489839
>>10490067
You're new? Remember: perseus and loeb have everything
http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/

[Anonymous No.10490510]

>>10490088
You don't read them for the history lessons, mate. You read them because they are literature

[Anonymous No.10490574]

>>10490501
I am speechlesly obliged by you anon, here is the pledged rare meme, capped from an opera.

[Anonymous No.10490902]

>>10490088
>I realize Herodotus is the father of history, but just like Aristotle being the father of physics doesn't mean I should read him to learn physics, it seems silly to read Herodotus to learn history

This is a fair question. But you're kind of missing the point, which I would argue is largely to be expected from someone who hasn't read Herodotus or modern historiography. I don't mean that as an insult; what I'm getting at is that Herodotus as "father of history" is valuable not (just) for the actual stories he told, but how he went about gathering them, arranging them, presenting them, packaging them. History didn't just always exist, and it's valuable to check out why humans started writing it and how we went about doing it.

Herodotus is fun literature, but besides enjoyment, what you're really getting out of it is an idea of what history as a field is/was/should be. That's not to say that Herodotus is an ideal or even particularly good historian; in fact even by almost-immediately-contemporary standards he's quite poor. But those standards only exist because Herodotus struck out on totally new ground with an untried method, and his successors were able to build on and adjust that method.

Even today the method used in history books is argued and often disagreed about: top-down, bottom-up, methodology, literary presentation, etc. You don't NEED to read Herodotus to understand those issues (and in fact he alone won't teach them to you), but he IS an accommodating, fun starting point to start considering what history as a field is and how to study and write it. And the contrast with Thucydides goes a long way in jarring and challenging your perspective.

Similarly you don't read Aristotle to learn physics (although he's often impressively correct); you read him to consider how people started studying physics, considering the differences between him and the various pre-socratics, and between him and science as we know it today.

As an example, yeah it's easy to take for granted nowadays that the Earth revolves around the Sun. But Aristotle wasn't dumb; how did he fuck up that bad? How did we all fuck up so bad for thousands of years? Actually his conclusion was pretty natural and uncontroversial given the assumption of antiquity that gas is light and earth is heavy; combined with a nascent theory of gravitation (present, undeveloped in Aristotle), it's simple to (wrongly) conclude that the Earth is at the "bottom" of everything, and the Sun revolves around it. There was no way for him to know with the tools he had that gas wasn't simply weightless; had antiquity been made aware of the Sun's mass, we would have just as easily had a 2500 year tradition of believing in heliocentricity.

So that's the point. If methodology and puzzles like that don't interest you, that's fine, but frankly that IS what history (and physics) is: it's not just studying ourselves but learning HOW to study ourselves, which, far from easy, is arguably even harder.

[Anonymous No.10490927]

>>10489800
Nigga I recommend Windelband's History of Ancient Philosophy and History of Philosophy for a good primer on "standard" modern critical readings of the Presocratics, then check out Nietzsche's Philosophy in the Tragic Age of the Greeks and Heidegger's stuff on the Presocratics. Check out:
>The Presocratics in the Thought of Martin Heidegger, by W. Julian Korab-Karpowicz

[Anonymous No.10490947]

https://community.middlebury.edu/~harris/homer.translation.html

[Anonymous No.10490972]

wow i am so happy this exists. after years of being intrigued by the classics, i finally read homer and hesiod this summer. i’m currently almost halfway through the aeneid and i just picked up a bunch of aeschylus plays at the library. i wanna get through the greek dramas and the bible before the summer comes. what else is necessary before reading the divine comedy?

[Anonymous No.10491243]

>Overrated
Illiad and Odyssey, Bronze Age culture is far too removed from the Classical culture, peopel fight for glory and honor and wealth rather than the city, values etc. This removal doesn't mean that I imply illiad and odyssey were not important to Greeks, but just as one from 3000 AD should not read bible (at least at first) to understand americans of 20st century (who were mostly christians) I think people should read classical works first, before moving to illiad.
>Underrated
Works from Late Antiquity, but we are getting there.
>Rightfully rated in the right place
Xenophon, Anabasis is a delight to read, both as if its an adventure novel or as a historical account

[Anonymous No.10491423]

>>10478608
i know this is a meme, but I am finding a lot of interesting stuff in the book of writings. i especially love their sayings, like how "westerners" are the dead, etc.

[Anonymous No.10491571]

Anyone here familiar with the Straussian exoteric reading of Xenophon's Hiero? I'm amazed at how he has seemingly managed to get so much out of what had at first come across to me as a fairly dry work. Does anyone have any suggestions for any other approaches/theories on classical works that cause you to read them in a completely different way?

[Anonymous No.10492204]

>>10490972
Before reading the divine comedy you should read a butload of latin poetry, particularly vergil and ovid. You'll also need some secondary lit to understand all the dated references that dante is making.

[Anonymous No.10492238]

>>10491571
I have the perfect book for you: Ancient Readers at the Limits of Their Texts (2004).

Also, read Porphyry's On the Cave of Nymphs here: http://www.tertullian.org/fathers/porphyry_cave_of_nymphs_02_translation.htm

He does a pretty heavy esoteric exegesis of some passages of the 13th book of Odyssey.

[Anonymous No.10492380]

>>10490902

[Anonymous No.10492402]

>>10491571
check out other Benardete's "The Argument of the Action," a collection of essays on Homer, Plato, Aristotle, and the tragedians

[Anonymous No.10492409]

>>10492402
uhhhh ignore that "other"

[Anonymous No.10492416]

Having read Odyssey and Illiad, what's recommended reading for the Aeneid? I know I need to reread the Odyssey since I read it years ago for school, but what will prepare me for the Roman interpretation?

[Anonymous No.10492435]

>>10477068
>classics you are reading right now
I skipped the whole Greeks and started with Ovid's Metamorphoses. But it's phenomenal. I might hit the Iliad after this.

[Anonymous No.10492445]

>>10491243
The Illiad and Odyssey were pro-social, pan-Hellenistic repackages of existing mythological tales. They were the fundamental media of Athenic social and political values and came to represent the Greek culture universally as Athens spread its cultural values accross the Mediterranean.
Imagine being so stupid you took the epics at face value.

[Anonymous No.10492465]

Good critical text on the presentation of social ethics and political theory in the Illiad? I consider I WILL NOT YIELD THE MARE to be the cornerstone of Western political and social ideology so a text that's equally as spergy on that point would be nice.

[Anonymous No.10492504]

>>10492445
I think you misunderstand me, I don't disagree with what you said.
My only problem is that they start from Illiad Odyssey and many don't move onto futher works. Homeric Epics are important but I completely disagree that they should be the starting point to learn about ancient -classical- greeks

To just know about mycaneans or pre dark ages period? sure but I don't believe you should start with illiad if you are examining the times of pericles and the like

Histories is a much better start imho

[Anonymous No.10492692]

>>10481428
>reading aristotle
why

[Anonymous No.10494440]

>>10492504
Anon, the Illiad and the Odyssey are not intended as records of Bronze Age Collapse era Greece. They don't tell the audience ANYTHING about that time period, and they weren't considered historical records during their own times, otherwise Heredotous would not be called "The Father of History".

The Homeric Epics are recontextualized versions of openly mythologized pseudo-historical events that marry Athens societal and cultural values with a pan-Hellenic origin story. The Homeric Epics were adopted in their own time as the cultural jewel of Athens and later 'Greece', to say that they're not the best starting point for understanding the Greeks goes against what they would have told you themselves.

Hell, I guarantee you the average audience member of Herodotus's lectures would have been there to learn a more real account of the places and events that he'd heard about in yesterday's performance of The Illiad.

[Anonymous No.10495513]

What's some elementary Cicerocore for taking the tyrian pruple pill?

[Anonymous No.10496010]

>>10492504
The Homeric Epics are a great starting point for the very fact that they bridge Bronze Age values with Classical values. That's why Diomedes isn't the main hero, although he takes part to, in my opinion, contrast with Achilles' aristeia. They're the foundation you build on. In addition, they're amazing works.

[Anonymous No.10496231]

>>10492204
currently on the aeneid, should i read vergil's other work like the eclogues? also, should i read a lot of greek stuff besides the plays?

[Anonymous No.10496765]

>>10485158
Fairly recent, good typeface, bilingual, good introduction, notes, and has more than just the Homeric Hymns.

[Anonymous No.10498413]

Why is Odysseus so fucking alpha? In the Iliad he is already well regarded, when Agamemnon's ruse to test the men's morale fails and they prepare to sail home, it is Odysseus who rouses them to stay and fight. Despite not being as big as the Aiaxes, he commands equal respect and appears more "lordy", as Helen describes him to old Priam from atop the battlements of Troy.

In chapter 10 when Agamemnon and Diomedes gather the leaders to infiltrate the Thracians' camp, Odysseus bids them to dispense with the formalities and titles. Something like "these men already know who I am and what I can do, let's hurry up and get on with it". That entire chapter, like many others is a killing-spree.

Don't forget that Athena has his back, and everyone knows it. I don't think anything will ever match the magnitude of Achilles fighting the River Xanthus, but remember that it's Odysseus who reminds the fucker that he's still mortal and neither Achilles nor his men can fight on an empty stomach. Back when Phoenix, Lil Aiax and my nigga Odysseus go to convince him to rejoin the fight, it's Odysseus who (albeit unsuccessfully) relates the terms, and the Honor that will be his should he return to arms. I haven't even read his return epic yet, I'm still building my hype for it. Is it that much greater than the Iliad?

[Anonymous No.10498414]

>>10496765
Is it this one you mean?
http://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674996069

[Anonymous No.10498439]

Has anyone read pic related? I want to read some more of the Epic Cycle, but felt that the Loeb book on a similar topic was a bit too intense for me. While I can read fragments, I'm not as interested in fragments that are 2-3 lines. This one is written by the same author as the meme picture recommends as well.

[Anonymous No.10498471]

>>10498439

It looks like a good book.
I've had my eye on it for some time now.

There's a review of the book here:
http://bmcr.brynmawr.edu/2014/2014-10-06.html

>English readers could hardly ask for a better synoptic analysis of the endlessly fascinating remains of this corpus of poetry, which will form the basis for future discussions of the Cycle for decades to come.

[Anonymous No.10498485]

>>10485256
take notes

[Anonymous No.10498558]

[Anonymous No.10498759]

Why does Odysseus try to keep his identity hidden from the Phaeacians for so long?

[Anonymous No.10498777]

>>10498759
That's kind of obvious, isn't it?

[Anonymous No.10498831]

>>10498777
Evidently not if I have to ask.

[Anonymous No.10499202]

>>10498413
Odysseus represents the new paragon of the male in Athens society, with an emphasis on cleverness over Achilles' brute strength and control over his emotions in contrast to Achilles as well.

If the Illiad could be said to de-mythologize the male Greek paradigm, the Odyssey re-mythologizes it by replacing the Fate-cursed tragic life of the Hero with one of personal consequences, growth through adversity and ultimate redemption instead of ultimate collapse through valorous death.

[Anonymous No.10499215]

I have a question for /lit/ philosophers. I did my small part in reading but as a STEMfag I have no formal education in this field (also excuse my wording, not sure what the exact terms are in English).

I'm looking for a word/phrase: So let's say that we have a form X which relates to something physical or abstract (for example: money, happiness, equality etc.).

So, let's say that Bob values X and has constructed a model to maximize X and has a vision of what it would look like. But over time, X is being reduced under Bob's model. Jim has another model to maximize X, and indeed it does - but messes up a lot of other things Bob values but are not central to his worldview - so Bob dismisses Jim's model, let's say, on purely emotional or aesthetic basis (it is not as he hoped it would look like). So, Bob has seen the perfect variant of maximization of X, but finds it repulsive, yet he still professes X to be a central value of his model.

My question is: What has Bob rejected?

You could say that he has rejected a logical conclusion or logical extreme of his values. But I'm talking about something on a higher level: In order for Jim's model to be as it is, and aesthetically or otherwise unpleasant to Bob; the value X under current circumstances has to have such property that it's maximization is by it's very nature contradictory to (undermines) a plurality of other forms which Bob values. But Bob, in order to justify his persistence on maximization of X has to refuse this proposition. So, what is Bob rejecting here?

Is he rejecting (I am always reluctant to use this word) metaphysics? What would be the correct term? Am I talking bullshit?

[Anonymous No.10499216]

>>10477068

OP of the first /clas/ here.
Thanks for bringing the flame forth, anon!

[Anonymous No.10499235]

>>10499215
>stemfag writes this much shit to try and understand what metaphysics means
Oh wow dude I can only assume you make a shitton of money building fucking robots or something with that autism.

Anyways, metaphysics is a school of philosophical inquiry that seeks to define or explain the existence or necessity of an incorporeal higher power or cause within reality which provides context for or actively engages the ontological value of Things. Plato's Forms are the archetypal metaphysics, though for a STEMfag I'd recommend Aquinas's Summa Theologica as he goes much farther into the engineering of the Universe as evidence that a higher power must be operating.

Metaphysics is distinct from theology in that metaphysics solely attemtps to distinguish IF a greater power exists, and WHY it must be so. Metaphysics makes no claim to a value system derived from this knowledge (Plato did not argue that knowing that a Form of Good existed inherently made you more Gooder) and does not advocate ideological devotion to the Metaphysical force (though the neoPlatonic Gnostics are a great example of what kind of weird shit happens when you do).

In your model I would say Bob has rejected moral relativism, not metaphysics, but its 5am and my understanding of your post may be jank. Like if Bob were of the mindset that all value could be measured through the accrual of value, but also held positions that discouraged him from undermining others or compromising his ethical values in the pursuit of even more money, he could be said to be working under a system of objective morality, i.e. that specific actions are always Bad even in pursuit of a greater good. Moral objectivism does often come paired with a theological or ideological value system grounded in some degree of metaphysics, though.

[Anonymous No.10499239]

>>10499235
>the accrual of money*

[Anonymous No.10499293]

>>10499235
Thank you for your explanation of metaphysics, I did actually read Aristotle's few years back but mostly it flew over my head and the way people use the word often makes me reluctant to ever write it, but the subjects it touches upon reminded me of this situation.

On your last paragraph, I'm not sure why you involved morality, you probably skipped few steps ahead of me into something that I didn't take into consideration in the first place but is probably related to the subject. My example in my mind had nothing to do with other people, or even necessarily with morals (perhaps the examples of maximizing money or equality were deceptive) unless you would argue that there is something of moral nature in Bob's "ought to maximize X" irregardless of context. If that is so, I can accept that that is the case.

What enters my focus is that various concepts obviously interact with each other, such as maximization of X undermining plurality of other things Bob values which is demonstrated empirically - but Bob still rejects the necessity of this conceptual interaction, and at the same time rejects Jim's model for X.

I'm trying to say that there has to be something within X, which makes pursuing it a waste of time for Bob's vision - or alternatively makes Bob's vision itself contradictory.

So on your involvement of morality (if your involvement of it does not stem from misunderstanding of my sloppy writing) - I have hard time understanding why Bob would reject "moral relativism" - it is not the process to gaining absolute X he rejects, it is that he dislikes the state in which absolute X is achieved.

[Anonymous No.10499894]

>>10498485
This. I can't believe how many people here read without taking notes. Always take notes, people, and not only of what is being said in the book but also writing down your thoughts about them - examine and scrutinize the text, don't read it passively without a thought.

[Anonymous No.10499927]

>>10477068
Can I read Aristotle before Plato ?

[Anonymous No.10499934]

>>10482607
you're retarded
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Kingdom

Rome was a kingdom before a republic

[Anonymous No.10499954]

>>10489800
i literally also got those two books from my parents for christmas what

[Anonymous No.10500095]

>>104992935
Switch the usage of Morality in that explanation with Ethics and it should make a bit more sense.

Also, Aristotle's conception of Metaphysics is, like much of his work, totally unique to him and difficult to relate to even other philosophers' ideas until over a thousand years later. Most western philosophers have more in common with the basis layed out by Plato.

[Anonymous No.10500100]

>>10499954
You wrote that post

/sci/-ai

[Anonymous No.10500102]

Reposting this
https://youtu.be/BpwH0i0l0po

[Anonymous No.10500478]

>>10499927

Sure. In Late Antiquity is was common to study Aristotle for years before even touching Plato.

Proclus did 2 years of Aristotle. Most student did 3 or 4 years of Aristotle. Proclus was particularly gifted.

[Anonymous No.10500842]

How many lives do i need to comprehend the classics ?

[Anonymous No.10500881]

>>10478608

[Anonymous No.10500949]

I studied classics in school but I'm totally unbalanced in it.

I love reading in the original languages and I love poetry but I know very very little about myth or history - not much more than I've picked up reading footnotes and introductions to understand the classical poets. I don't have any head for or interest in philosophy, either.

>>10500842

You'll never understand. Back in the olde times you would read more Latin and Greek in four years of seminary than a professional classicist might read in his whole life now.

There's nothing more humbling for a classicist than reading Vossius or Erasmus or Bacon.

I've been lucky enough to run into a couple of respected academic classicists but I don't think any of them could hold a candle to the greats of the past as far as sheer erudition goes.

That realization + apathy and laziness is what led me to abandon the formal study of classics. I still want to read through as much of the canon as I can in the original before I die, sed fugit interea, fugit inreparabile tempus,

[Anonymous No.10500982]

Another big problem with studying classics is our loss of connection with the languages. You might compose a little in a high level course but you certainly aren't using Latin in your everyday life the way scholars of the past did.

Someone like Machiavelli could probably think in Latin as easily as he could in Italian.

And then of course when I do sit down to read one of these things out loud all that comes out is my nasal American accent, and I have no idea how the interrelationship of ictus and word stress sounded, and nobody else does either.

Are there any contemporary languages that have a weak stress accent + strong vowel quantities? I just want to have some inkling of what this stuff actually sounded like.

[Anonymous No.10501042]

Realistically speaking how possible is it to self-learn either Greek or Latin to a level where one could enjoy reading the great works in their original language?

[Anonymous No.10501144]

>>10501042

Not many have the discipline to study alone an hour every day for many years. It can be done though.

[Anonymous No.10501610]

>>10501042

100% possible, less than 1% probable. The worst part of learning Latin/Greek is the intermediate phase, when you know all of the morphology and most of the syntax but can still hardly read anything. That phase can easily last 2-3 years, and that's after a year or so getting the basics down.

[Anonymous No.10503002]

>>10500982
>Someone like Machiavelli could probably think in Latin as easily as he could in Italian.
As someone who took 5 years of French in highschool and was not even remotely fluent by my own standards, that's not as hard as you're making it out to be. The actual vocabulary your brain uses in day-to-day thought is nowhere near as the vocabulary you need for communication with society at large.

Not that the rest of your post is wrong though, in fact I agree completely.

[Anonymous No.10503071]

>>10500982
>>Are there any contemporary languages that have a weak stress accent + strong vowel quantities?
Japanese

[Anonymous No.10503086]

>>10503071
Oops ignore this, I misread "weak stress accent" as "weak pitch accent", as I tabbed in from reading something about Greek pitch accent.

[Anonymous No.10503092]

>>10477068
The Oresteia

[Anonymous No.10503835]

Imagine winning this in a raffle...

[Anonymous No.10503872]

>>10503835
How much would that cost ?

[Anonymous No.10503950]

>>10503872
it would be very expensive

[Anonymous No.10504043]

>>10503950
for you

[Anonymous No.10504077]

>>10485288
if you dont enjoy, why do?

[Anonymous No.10504284]

>>10503835
HNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

[Anonymous No.10504321]

>>10485300
>>10485306
First off, the Spartans were brutes compared to the Athenians

Secondly, and this should have been fucking obvious, Athenian and Greek society as a whole was largely stratified, the people giving lectures on Philosophy held very different views from those of the average men. Having said that, though, the impact of this upper echelon of educated public figures would have swayed the Greek commoner into secularism without completely erasing the dominant religious orthodoxy.

[Anonymous No.10504450]

>>10504321
Are you seriously trying to argue that all the philosophers were secretly atheists?

It's pretty obvious that 99% of the greeks believed in the existence of multiple gods, including Plato, Socrates and Aristotle. Just because they differed in certain aspects doesn't mean they weren't polytheists. You're projecting your own notions of rationality onto the Greeks. From what we know of them, they were extremely devout and worshipped Zeus and the entire gang.

[Anonymous No.10504703]

English translation of the Meditations to look for?

[Anonymous No.10504722]

>>10504450
not atheists, just very particularly secular, and in the case of the politically motivated, cynical

[Anonymous No.10504762]

>>10504703
>English translation of the Meditations to look for?

If you truly love the work, you'll consult more than one translation.

I'd start with Hays though. It's probably the most accessible of the bunch.

[Anonymous No.10504773]

>>10496231
Ovid's Metamorphoses is a must because everybody in the Middle Ages (i.e. artists, poets, writers...) that couldn't read Greek got their Greek myths from it.

Read Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics, Categories (it's part of the Organon) and Metaphysics because Dante is super into Aristotle (Aristotle was translated in Latin).

[Anonymous No.10504784]

>>10504762
Thanks. Picked up a cheap selected writings of Epictetus today to prep me for it.

[Anonymous No.10504797]

>>10504321
>the Spartans were brutes compared with Athenians

Something something Melos

[Anonymous No.10504798]

>>10485208
Because the latter features both mythos and logos, whereas the former is pure mythos.

[Anonymous No.10504812]

>>10504321
>the Spartans were brutes compared to the Athenians
>watched "300" in high school history class, like, once.

Sparta was respected by much of the Greek world. Most people have the concept that the Spartans are backward, hulking warrior people comes from a general lack of effort on history teachers' parts to paint a nuanced view of the Greek world. A lot of the information we have about "Spartan society" comes from commentators around the Greek world--a lot from the Athenians who had a vested interest in making them look like drooling idiots. Also, much of what we have from the Greeks come in the form of Roman copies of Greek material (this is why we have so much Euripides, for instance). It's more convenient for teachers giving a survey course to say "These guys were smart. These guys were covered in muscle." Who wants to spend time teaching Alcman or Tyrtaeus when Frank Miller has done such a good job historically representing the Greek world already?

[Anonymous No.10504837]

>>10504812
Correct anon. In addition, Spartans practiced krypteia, which never allowed information about Sparta to flow out. Since spartans never used written documents, all we know about it are observations from outsiders who visited them. I can say a lot more on the subject (greekanon).

[Anonymous No.10505024]

>>10504812
Not the anon you're referring to, but I would assume 'brutes' to mean traditionalists in that context.

[Anonymous No.10505159]

You guys know nothing about Sparta.

Read this.

[Anonymous No.10505214]

[Anonymous No.10505269]

>>10505214
What's this from?

[Anonymous No.10505517]

Hey /lit/. Wanted to get into the Ancients so I decided to go to a thrift store and I copped these books $5 a pop. Was wondering if there's a specific order I should read them or if I should just use them for fire wood.

[Anonymous No.10505562]

>>10505269
The good place, its a netflix show about ethics and that but had a particular giggle at this point

[Anonymous No.10505577]

>>10505517
What's the translation on Homer?
I don't like Hamilton desu, I'd reccomend Werner Jaeger

[Anonymous No.10505589]

>>10505577
Iliad is Samuel Butler and Odyssey is Alexander Pope. Which of these books should I read first?

[Anonymous No.10505601]

>>10505517
>>10505589
>Hard copy of a Pope Odyssey
Pretty jealous desu, I've never been able to find one that isn't a shittily bound print-on-demand thing.

[Anonymous No.10505613]

>>10505589
You need a new Iliad translation, Lattimore, Fitzgerald or Pope. Just burn that one

[Anonymous No.10505622]

>>10505613
I really don't wanna spend money. What should I start with from the books I got.

[Anonymous No.10505707]

>>10505517
>>10505622
A History of Greece
Iliad
Odyssey
The Greek Way
Plato
Aristotle

[Anonymous No.10505785]

>>10505712
>>10505707
Thanks

[Anonymous No.10505802]

>>10478615
best post ITT. thoth is a kekistan-tier meme.

[Anonymous No.10505821]

>>10505622
You don't need to there are plenty of free Iliad translations online, do not read a prose rendition

[Anonymous No.10505833]

>>10505802
It also has no basis, Start with the Sanskrits actually makes some sense

[Anonymous No.10506223]

>But what about being hanged - isn't that intolerable? Well, people frequently go and hang themselves, whenever they judge that it is a reasonable thing to do
- Epictetus, Discourses (trans R. Dobbin)

O I am laffin

[Anonymous No.10506654]

>>10505601
Can you help me find a listing or something telling me about the edition I got? The only information I got is pic related and that it was printed in America

[Anonymous No.10506788]

>>10506654
Looks early 20th cent, although if there is no copyright that usually means it's 19th cent, but there's no way that edition is. It's less valuable than you'd think, maybe $20 on ebay. Just read it, although it's Pope so you will be lost at first, it's something you come back to and reread chapters of like Moby Dick or Shakespeare

[Anonymous No.10506924]

>>10506788
Hey I mean, if these books are collectively worth over $30 then I'm colored happy. I just wanted to read them cheap.

[Anonymous No.10507062]

>>10506223
Speaking of Epictetus, what should I look for in terms of foundational works on Stoicism?
I don't believe Zeno wrote much of anything, so should I just look for a good translation of Chrysippus? Or should I go back further into Cynicism and Heraclitus' physics?

[Anonymous No.10507090]

>>10507062

>what should I look for in terms of foundational works on Stoicism?
Dude. All of it is lost. All of it!

>so should I just look for a good translation of Chrysippus?
All of it is lost bro. All of it!

[Anonymous No.10507184]

Why was it such a big deal that Prometheus gave fire to man? I mean, his punishment is literally legendary.

Did fire mean that man would start down the path of technological prowess? So that one day they would no longer need the gods? If so, why did they want to keep man down?

[Anonymous No.10507554]

Phenomenal thread OP. Thank you very much!

[Anonymous No.10507626]

>>10507090
Lmao what the fuck, really? That's legitimately unbelievable, considering the huge impact Stoicism had on the entirety of philosophical thought until the 600s. I understand that not committing your maxims to stone weakens the possibility of your school of thought surviving, but I'd have also thought the early Stoic teachings would still exist as commentaries from either contemporaries or later revisionists whose works had been saved.

In other news, goddamn does Epictetus just destroy Nietzsche's conception of the Ubermensch:
>If Plato had been strong and handsome, should I also try to become strong and handsome, as if this were essential to philosophy, since there was one particular philosopher who combined philosophy with good looks?
>I mean, if I (Epictetus) were a philosopher, would you be required to become lame as well?

[Anonymous No.10507630]

Daily reminder that Aristotle is a hack and Zeno of Elea is yet to be disproved.

[Anonymous No.10507636]

>>10507184
There are two different accounts of the Promethean story. In one, the stealing of fire is the focus of his betrayal of Zeus, but in Hesiod's Theogony iirc the story goes instead that he attempted to fool Zeus into choosing the discarded bones and offal of animals as his sacrifical rite, and though Zeus saw through the ploy he decided to punish Prometheus by allowing humans to keep the meat of their sacrifices but deny them the power of fire to cook said meat with.

[Anonymous No.10507925]

>>10482493
Unironically Peter Green, the guy is a British classics scholar, pretty old school, born in 1924 and he wrote a shitton on Greece. He has the experience and the historical knowledge to bring you to really understand Homer from a historical context. Which is invaluable, since you can always switch to other more "aesthetic" translations if you think that Fagles, Pope or whatever does a better job. He only translated the Iliad but I think his translation of the Odyssey will be done this year too. I really appreciate his translation because of the footnotes and explanations. Just don't read Emily Wilsons meme translation of the Odyssey.

[Anonymous No.10508084]

>>10507626
Reminder to ignore all memers.

[Anonymous No.10508101]

>>10507626

[Anonymous No.10508796]

>>10507626
>Lmao what the fuck, really? That's legitimately unbelievable, considering the huge impact Stoicism had on the entirety of philosophical thought until the 600s.

A ton of these works were rescued only to have them all disappear again shortly after.

Feels bad man.

[Anonymous No.10508803]

On the topic of lost works, check this out.

>Lost works of Plutarch

[Anonymous No.10508806]

>>10508803
>Discourse against Dio
muda muda muda muda muda muda muda muda muda muda muda muda muda muda muda muda muda

[Anonymous No.10508878]

>>10508803
Wat would you give to acquire a tenth of that?

[Anonymous No.10508905]

>wanting to read Livy
Are the oxford translations good? I understand Loeb is preferred but i prefer the book format of the oxford paperbacks.

[Anonymous No.10508908]

>>10508878

A number of limbs for starters.

[Anonymous No.10508910]

>>10508905
>Are the oxford translations good?

Yes.

>"The most reliable translations with the most detailed and up-to-date annotations and introductions are those in the Oxford World’s Classics series"

[Anonymous No.10508939]

Is it true that heroes have blue hair in Homer à la Dragonball?

[Anonymous No.10508970]

>>10508939
Maybe he meant black with blueish shade?

[Anonymous No.10509014]

>>10508939

The Greek word for dark blue, kyaneos, could also mean dark green, violet, black or brown. The ancient Greek word for a light blue, glaukos, also could mean light green, grey, or yellow.

[Anonymous No.10509021]

>>10508939

The ancient Greeks classified colours by whether they were light or dark, rather than by their hue. The Greek word for dark blue, kyaneos, could also mean dark green, violet, black or brown. The ancient Greek word for a light blue, glaukos, also could mean light green, grey, or yellow.

[Anonymous No.10509631]

What is better for learning about classic astrology? I was thinking about either Macrobius' Commentary on the Dream of Scipio or Ptolemy's Tetrabiblos...

[Anonymous No.10509728]

>>10509021
This. The Greek color system is weird, they considered the Sky to be "bright", and fire to be the same, so they describe colors mainly as shades. The basically have a black, white, and then a 'light color' word and a 'dark color' word.

[Anonymous No.10510308]

>>10484762
>maybe some Procopius, maybe some Byzantine history.

Procopius is pure fun, I really enjoyed The Wars of Justinian

[Anonymous No.10510415]

>3 different greek charts

so which one do I follow

[Anonymous No.10510474]

>>10510415
Just grab the Iliad

[Anonymous No.10510508]

>>10510474
The Iliad is boring and awful read the Odyssey instead.

[Anonymous No.10510840]

>>10510415
I was going to answer but then my post got erased so nevermind

[Anonymous No.10511208]

>>10505517
Good cop. The used bookstore in my city wants fucking $30 for that edition of Plato.

[Anonymous No.10511457]

>>10511208
This store has a bunch of finely binded books and stuff that are from private libraries and stuff, what should I be on the look out for?

[Anonymous No.10511550]

Anyone have any thoughts on Michael Reck's translation of The Illiad?

[Anonymous No.10512078]

Epictetus reader here, there's a passage in Book II of the Discourses where Epictetus tells his students that, although he takes note of their dissertations, in comparison to the greater value of their use of correct impressions those works are so worthless that his students may as well burn them.

Following this, a hypothetical argument is posed: 'But wasn't Socrates a writer, and prolific at that?'
Now this really has got my noggin joggin because afaik Socrates didn't write anything, at all. Even the translator doesn't, according to the footnote immediately preceeding. So now I'm wondering if there are any more substantial references to these lost texts of Socrates, or if this is just a clerical error on Arrian's part.

[Anonymous No.10512082]

>>10512078
>Even the translator doesn't
Doesn't understand*

[Anonymous No.10512251]

Just read Euthydemus, I know Plato purposefully made the sophists look as idiotic as possible, but it's hard to believe that anybody took those clowns seriously desu

[Anonymous No.10512280]

>>10512251
Their ENTIRE job was getting people to take them seriously, and they were formally trained in grammar and rhetoric during an era where 99% of the population was only functionally literate, if that.

[Anonymous No.10512463]

>>10477068

I don't have time to read actual books anymore, I just do TLG researches for words I'm interested in, with no understanding of the context whatsoever.

[Anonymous No.10512571]

>>10511550
it's excellent

[Anonymous No.10512998]

>>10512078
>But wasn't Socrates a writer, and prolific at that?

Could he have been speaking of Plato?

[Anonymous No.10513014]

>>10512251
>Plato purposefully made the sophists look as idiotic as possible, but it's hard to believe that anybody took those clowns seriously

Prodicus was alright

[Anonymous No.10513305]

>>10512078

>“What then did not Socrates write?” And who wrote so much? But how? As he could not always have at hand one to argue against his principles or to be argued against in turn, he used to argue with and examine himself, and he was always treating at least some one subject in a practical way. These are the things which a philosopher writes. But little dissertations and that method, which I speak of, he leaves to others, to the stupid, or to those happy men who being free from perturbations have leisure, or to such as are too foolish to reckon consequences.

He didn't mean the literal act of writing, but the act of a philosopher examining and conversing with himself.

[Anonymous No.10513342]

What's the best way to learn greek? I'm gonig through the JACT course.

[Anonymous No.10513394]

>>10513342

>What's the best way to learn greek?

It depends. If you've never done any Greek or Latin, I'd recommend Athenaze.

If you've done some Greek or Latin before, I'd take a look at Mastronarde.

[Anonymous No.10513612]

>>10513394
assume I live in the 1930s

[Anonymous No.10513625]

>>10513612
>assume I live in the 1930s

Get it taught by a teacher

[Anonymous No.10513627]

>>10513625
I'm also poor but can access every book published

[Anonymous No.10513709]

>>10513305
Possibly, but that's a glaring error in translation if true, especially since much of Book I is spent with Epictetus distinctly instructing his students on the proper use of theoretical arguments as a tool for furthering their own understanding of ethics, and not once does that come up as writing specifically. Again, a mistake maybe on Arrian's part, but you'd think after so many decades of modern readings somebody would have proposed a transliteration or deletion of the line as with several other erroneous bits.

>>10512998
Unlikely, as Epictetus does refer to Plato and Socrates separately. He would not have intentionally replaced one with the other.

[Anonymous No.10513925]

Anything else like 'Batrachomyomachia' (or 'Battle of Frogs and Mice')? Pretty dry humour desu, especially after working through the actual epics, which it satires.
I'd recommend it.

[Anonymous No.10514087]

When Artabanes delivers his chilling warning to Xerxes that "God always smites the greatest, just as lightning smites the tallest tree or beast, so does He plainly love to punish that which exalts itself" (paraphrasing maybe one of the greatest lines in literature tbwqh), in the Greek original, is Artabanes referring to "God", to wit, Ahura Mahzda, the chief God of Persia, or is he speaking of "the god" (aka the most topical god to the situation), a figure that the Greek audience would be much more conversant with?

[Anonymous No.10514430]

Help me out /lit/, I need to find the name of something

There is this method of critical thinking where you keep asking "Why do you think X is the case" and when the answer is Y then you ask again "Why do you think Y is the case" and repeat this until you end up at the most basic assumption that is the basis of the logical construct that lead you to that original belief.

That method had a name and I am pretty sure its from an ancient greek or roman philosopher, but I can't remember.

[Anonymous No.10514756]

Hey guys, does anyone have a preffered anki set for 6 principle part verb sheets

[Anonymous No.10515109]

>>10514430
Literally the Socratic method, though you may also be thinking of Dialectic

[Anonymous No.10515256]

>why is Quest for the Golden Fleece never brought up?

I heard he was a pretty cool guy

Is it worth a readaroo?

[Anonymous No.10515264]

I love the classics more than most.
How should I announce this to the world?

[Anonymous No.10515528]

>>10514087
Given the reference to lightning I would assume the Greek generalized deity

[Anonymous No.10515567]

>>10515264
Why is this woman sniffing the butt of a statue?

[Anonymous No.10515569]

Any pre-reqs before the Golden ass? I'm currently finishing up pic related.

Will re-read Aeneid if necessary.

[Anonymous No.10515831]

How does this hold up? Its nearly 50 years old, anything better by now?

[Anonymous No.10515946]

Thoughts on pic related?

[Anonymous No.10515959]

Does lit have an archive? I need this for future reference

[Anonymous No.10516196]

>>10515959
All boards have a temporary archive for a few days now, it's accessible from the catalog. I don't think any of the major 4chan archives are still up though, so beyond that you'll be wanting to save an image of the webpage if you can (I believe Google Chrome lets you do this natively and I'm sure Firefox has an extension for it)

On an unrelated note, Epictetus continues to be hilarious
>Butt nowadays engaging in logical dialogue is just not a very safe business, in Rome especially. Because of course, you can't do it off in a corner somewhere.
>You may find yourself approaching a Senator, someone with money, and asking: 'Do you know, sir, to whom you have entrusted the care of your horses?'
>Pester him further, and he is liable to punch you in the nose. I myself was once keen for this sort of discourse, until I met with just such a reception.

[Anonymous No.10516203]

>>10515959
>>10516196

can you guys even use google? It is literally the first link

[Anonymous No.10516213]

>>10516196
>I don't think any of the major 4chan archives are still up though
What the fuck? There are at LEAST 2 archives for /lit/ my man.

[Anonymous No.10516223]

>>10516213
>>10516203
Well shit, glad to have been proven wrong

[Anonymous No.10517011]

Anyone have a better understanding of Epictetus' treatment of the Master Argument? For those unaware, the Master Argument of Diodorus is based on 3 principals drawn roughly from Aristotle's paradox of the Sea Battle in 'On Interpretation'
The three principles are as follows:
1: Everything that has happened, and is true, must necessarily have happened
2: An impossible event cannot arise from a possible event
3: Something that is not True, nor will ever become True, is possible

Diodorus maintains that the first two principles remain true, while the third is false. In other words, he maintains that you can't change Destiny and so upholds Determinism. But Epictetus also references two opposing views, one that agrees with points 3 and 2 but refuses 1, and another that backs 3 and 1, but not 2.
Evidently I'm supposed to form my own answer for this Argument, but I don't really understand what follows from the other two categorizations, and only have a brief snippet from Aristotle's original paradox in the Discourses I'm reading to help.

[Anonymous No.10517277]

>>10482424
kek what is this pic?

[Anonymous No.10517991]

>Want to buy an ancient Greek dictionary
>It's almost 200$

Feels bad man :(

[Anonymous No.10518093]

>>10517011

I'm not sure I would speak of it in terms of determinism exactly.

Here is an intriguing passage of Alexander of Aphrodisias that is of some relevance.

[Anonymous No.10518096]

>>10517991
https://my.mixtape.moe/bjjlli.pdf

[Anonymous No.10518117]

>>10518096

Thank you very much.

And one day I may get a physical copy to match it.

[Anonymous No.10518235]

>>10517991
>brill
>not LSJ
βαρβαρε

[Anonymous No.10518273]

I assume that learning Latin would be a lot easier than learning Greek?

[Anonymous No.10518283]

>>10518273
No. They are equally difficult.

[Anonymous No.10518288]

>>10518235

I like the colour yellow.

[Anonymous No.10518293]

>>10518273

Yes. More words will seem more familiar, you won't have to learn a new alphabet, and the word endings aren't as complex.

[Anonymous No.10518302]

>>10518273
I've heard many times that Greek is hard at first then gets easier, while Latin is easy to start and gets harder.

[Anonymous No.10518671]

A Brief History of Greece 1ed
https://ufile.io/lqn72

[Anonymous No.10518689]

>>10518093
I don't see how that isn't determinism. By Diodorus' claim, an event that will happen at some point in the future must necessarily be predestined to Happen.

For what it's worth I worked through the proofs for the other sets of principles, and if my logic is decent then both seem to suggest a certain rule of causality in conflict with Determinism, but I'll need to go do some research into the philosophies of the individuals Epictetus cites as originally proving those alternative sets to see if my conclusions are in line with theirs. Online the best references I can find simply state that X individual proved that Points 1 and 3 disproved 2, etc, but not the consequences therein.

[Anonymous No.10518722]

>>10518689
>I don't see how that isn't determinism.

I only hesitate because words like determinism or predestination have a lot of baggage.

Note too that some have interpreted Diodorus to mean that everything that can happen has happened, is happening, or will happen, and not simply that what has happened needed to happen. I think this is a bit stronger than what you have in mind though I could be wrong.

[Anonymous No.10518773]

Just finished Homer, gonna read the Aeneid next. How is it?

[Anonymous No.10518808]

>>10518773
>How is it?

Really really good.

[Anonymous No.10518812]

>>10518722
So a Parmenides-inspired reading? I see that, but at the very least I don't think that clashes with determinism.

[Anonymous No.10520278]

>>10518773
It's pretty excellent.

[Anonymous No.10520476]

How did ancient greek sacrifices even work? I keep reading about them burning the fat of animals and shit but I can never form a mental image of what's going on.

[Anonymous No.10520494]

>>10520476
in a formal setting they burned the bones and offals of animals, and then ate the actual meat as barbecue. This would be the only common consumption of meat for many greeks

In an informal setting, there was typically the erection of a hekatomb (think a sacrificial bonfire) which would be used to burn the offal and then also cook the meat
Of course the cults of each deity had more elaborate rituals

[Anonymous No.10521555]

>>10498759
It's because he's been burned by so many others before.

[Anonymous No.10521691]

>no longer in print

They don't want you to read this

[Anonymous No.10521779]

>>10521691
No, they just want you to buy the actual works the poems come from.

[Anonymous No.10522974]

From the chart:

>I'd recommend Toynbees On hellenism but it expects a certain level of British schoolboy knowledge of narrative history

What did anon mean by this?

[Anonymous No.10523199]

>>10501042
It is 100% possible if you already know an Indo european language close to those (spanish, italian, french, greek), otherwise it might be harder for you to actually bother as you have a lot of rules to learn.
The biggest problem for Greek especially would be the conjugations and the irregularrities.
>>10503086
Don't bother learning the pitch accent unless you want to be very anal about poetry and metrics

[Anonymous No.10523417]

>>10522974
>What did anon mean by this?

You need to know basic periods of history.
When the Alexander sweep forth. What happens after. When does the Republic become Empire. When does the western half of the Roman Empire fall. etc.

Not so much the dates, but how these things relate to each other.

[Brendon Jon No.10523417,20]

Norton antivirus provide full protection from all kind of viruses, malware, spyware and online threats. It comes with many powerful tools which detect
the potential threats and warns you before it damage your system.

[PVRealtyAdvisors No.10523417,34]

PV Realty Advisors is a Toronto Area-based Real estate Appraisal Services & Consulting Firm providing real estate appraiser, commercial appraisal, residential property appraisal, and land appraisal services for a wide range of Commercial, Residential and Investment properties.

[Psychology Coursework Writing Services No.10523417,35]

Psychology research writing services have become very popular among psychology essay writing service seekers in need of Psychology Coursework Writing Services and online psychology assignment writing services.

[office.com/setup No.10523417,43]

you have shared such a great sculpture. I am very impressed by this art.

[office.com/setup No.10523417,48]

I read your content and it was very inspiring towards literature.

[HP instant ink login No.10523417,56]

Thanks for sharing your amazing thoughts. It's a well-explained and informative blog. Click here for more details

[<a href="https://officess-setup.com">office.com/setup</a> No.10523417,58]

The post "Classical Greek and Roman Literature" is very interesting and informative. Thanks for sharing this post with us.

[espn plus activate No.10523417,65]

Sign in with your espn activate account on your connected TV device. Activate your Device. Enter Your Activation Code WITH espn plus activate