posted with permission:
Verity Platt, Facing the Gods: Epiphany and Representation in Graeco-Roman Art, Literature and Religion. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press, 2011. Pp. xviii + 482. Hardcover, £75.00/$130.00. ISBN 978-0521-86171-7.
Reviewed by Francesca Tronchin, Rhodes College
In our age of IMAX movies, skyscrapers, and colossal billboards, it is hard to imagine seeing a statue and believing it to be a manifestation of a divinity. Yet when seeing Alan LeQuire’s scale replica of the Athena Parthenos in Nashville, Tennessee, one of my companions started and gasped audibly. How could a plaster statue have evoked such a physical response, in a scholar of Greek sculpture no less? Was this a kind of epiphany? Clearly this is no mere depiction of a goddess; the factor of size is heightened by workmanship, setting, and materials (even if mundane compared with Phidias’ gold and ivory). Yet it is an extreme case of cognitive dissonance to feel Athena’s presence inside a building in central Tennessee (all due respect to Mr. LeQuire). And now that I have seen the replica a number of times, I continue to be surprised by the awesome (in the truest sense of the word) presence of this statue.
Transforming an epiphanic encounter into either image or text requires the highest levels of technē and enargeia (54). Such qualities of both ancient sculpture and ancient texts (hymns, ekphrasis, epigrams) are Verity Platt’s subject. In an extended and revised version of a doctoral thesis written under the guidance of Jaś Elsner, Platt explores the formal means by which Greeks and Romans made “the gods present through acts of human creativity” (2). She expresses her thesis perhaps best at the end of Chapter 2: depictions of the gods “reveal how an active and self-conscious engagement with the ontological and theological problems raised by the mutual dependence of epiphany and representation was fundamental to religious art and its literary reception” (122). Such representations are, naturally, not unproblematic and Platt deals deftly with the ways in which artificial creations can sometimes undercut the spectacular aspects of epiphany.
Speaking most generally, this volume’s argument lies in a variety of binaries regarding supernatural and “man-made,” carried over different media or textual types. The book is divided into three Parts, arranged chronologically (Archaic, Classical, and Hellenistic Greece; the Second Sophistic; Roman sarcophagi). Part III (Chapter 8) is the most narrowly defined, examining “how the relationship between epiphany, representation and paideia” on mythological sarcophagi was addressed in ways different from the Second Sophistic philosophical and literary evidence (27), which is explored in Part II. Individual chapters deal with epiphany in assorted settings/media: votive reliefs and early Greek poetry (Chapter 1); Hellenistic politics and sculptural production (Chapter 3); Callimachus and epigrams on sculpture (Chapter 4, in particular the Aphrodite of Knidos); Dio Chrysostom (Chapter 5); dreams and cult statues in the Second Sophistic (Chapter 6); and a discussion of Hellenic anthropomorphism in book 6 of Philostratus’ biography of Apollonius of Tyana (Chapter 7).
One of the clearest and best case-studies in Platt’s collection of visual analyses is that of Phidias’ colossal Athena Parthenos and the more ancient Athena Polias (Chapter 2, especially pp. 83–100). The question of which image was more potent to ancient viewers, which was “closer” to Athena in appearance or sacredness has been an issue since at least Herrington 1955[]. While more recent studies[] have mostly assigned numinous qualities to Parthenos and Polias based upon expensive materials and miraculous appearance, respectively, Platt more carefully articulates the shared functions of these two statues with respect to the variety of possible epiphanic qualities. Indeed these two statues illustrate the conceptual crisis of sacred images in Greek culture, the tension between “their phenomenological effect (when they are experienced as a form of epiphany) and their ontological status (that is, their material … nature, their existence as objects)” (82, Platt’s emphasis). Phidias’ Parthenos might have been the very definition of agalma, blending as it did luxurious materials, essential iconography, Classical naturalism, and a high level of technē. This was essentially a hand-crafted divine manifestation. Viewers lucky enough to actually lay eyes on the Parthenos[] would have been charmed into thinking they had witnessed an actual epiphany as “cognitive reliability” surpassed “cognitive dissonance” (83). That is to say that the accuracy of the statue as a real depiction of the goddess (as described in literature or reinforced through common knowledge) was more apparent to viewers than the statue’s status as a man-made object. Yet the mysterious origins of the Athena Polias, combined with a (purported) aniconic appearance and olive-wood material, might have positioned it as something theologically “closer” to the goddess. The fantastic advent of the Polias, having fallen from heaven,[] confirms “the gods’ power to materialize” (97) in the physical world. The epiphanic nature of the more formally humble Polias was also bound up in its status of not being worked by hand, according to Platt, as well as its olive-wood material, a metonym for the goddess’ gift to the city (98).
Platt’s deftness with both literary and visual analysis, across a broad chronological range, is impressive. Yet this reviewer found Platt’s writing style to be syntactically abstruse and heavy-laden with the jargon of critical theory. While Platt’s theoretical approaches could be of tremendous help to graduate students approaching textual and visual material with similar hermeneutic aims, such students might be alienated by her dense prose and use of trendy buzzwords. One thinks of the maxim attributed to Albert Einstein: “Everything should be as simple as possible, but not simpler.”
To conclude, two technical observations and one more general: The bibliography is comprehensive and up-to-date.[] The illustrations are of generally good—not excellent—quality; the fifty-odd photographs are all black and white. In short, this book is ultimately a valuable exploration of an under-studied phenomenon worthy of attention, yet this reviewer fears Platt’s style will be a hindrance to its receiving broad appeal.
[] C. J. Herrington, Athena Parthenos and Athena Polias (Manchester, 1955).
[] E.g. A. A. Donohue, “The Greek Images of the Gods. Considerations on Terminology and Methodology,” Hephaistos 14 (1997) 31-45;K. D. S. Lapatin, Chryselephantine Statuary in the Ancient Mediterranean World (Oxford, 2001).
[] One compelling question not raised by Platt’s book is the functional accessibility of ancient cult statues. How many viewers would have had the opportunity to study these statues with the same kind of diligent eye with which modern scholars can conjure up even now-lost images? Moreover, the volume takes for granted an intellectually elite viewer, one with vast knowledge of literature and art history.
[] Paus. 1.26.6.
[] I was surprised not to find the following volume in the bibliography, as it seems relevant to Platt’s aims: James I. Porter, The Origins of Aesthetic Thought in Ancient Greece (Cambridge, 2010).
The BBC’s coverage of that curse tablet that was recently looked at by Roger Tomlin hinted that more work might be done on it (A Roman Curse Tablet from Kent (and a Phylactery from West Deeping)), and now we hear that there will be … from Kent Online:
Work to conserve a Roman scroll believed to be more than 1,700 years old is to be carried out in Sittingbourne.
Archaeologist and conservator Dana Goodburn-Brown will pick up the lead tablet from Oxford University towards the end of next month.
She will then bring it back to her CSI (Conservation Science Investigations) lab at The Forum shopping centre, giving visitors and shoppers the chance to watch her working on the artefact in October.
The scroll was unearthed by members of the Maidstone Area Archaeological Group in a field in East Farleigh, in 2009.
Measuring just 60mm by 100mm and only one millimetre thick, it is believed to be a curse tablet.
Used by the Romans to cast spells on people accused of theft or other misdeeds, they were rolled up to conceal their inscriptions then hidden in places considered to be close to the underworld, such as graves, springs or wells.
Since its discovery, Dana has sought ways of reading its inscription without unrolling it due to its fragility.
She said: “We took it to the Paul Scherrer Institute in Switzerland for neutron-computed tomography imaging but the scroll is very thin and the resolution of the tomography was not good enough to see the writing.”
Several months ago the decision was finally made to unroll it.
It was then sent to Dr Roger Tomlin, lecturer in Late Roman History at Wolfson College, Oxford, and an authority on Roman inscriptions, who spent four days examining it.
He found, in capital letters, the Latin names SACRATUS, CONSTITUT[US], CONSTAN[...] and MEMORIA[NUS], the Celtic names [ATR]ECTUS and ATIDENUS, and eight others which are incomplete.
As the Romans were the first inhabitants of Kent who could read and write the names are likely to be the earliest written record of inhabitants in the village.
Dana now plans to carry out further work to reveal more of the scroll’s letters.
She said: “It’s corroded in some places so I will be testing methods to reveal more of the letters and our new Scanning Electron Microscope, which allows us to magnify and take pictures of the letters, will hopefully be installed at CSI around the same time. So we should be able to get some more of the names.
“I’ll have it until I’m finished with it then it will go back to Dr Tomlin and eventually back to the archaeological group.”
- via: Archaeologist Dana Goodburn-Brown set to conserve Roman scroll (Kent Online)
posted with permission:
Ken Dowden and Niall Livingstone, eds. A Companion to Greek Mythology. Blackwell Companions to the Ancient World. Malden, MA and Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell, 2011. Pp. xxvii + 643. Hardcover, $199.95/£110.00. ISBN: 978-1-4051-1178-2.
Reviewed by Hugh Bowden, King’s College London
What is the difference between a guide and a companion? On an expedition, you might employ a guide if you know where you want to get to, but are not certain about which way to go. You would bring along a companion, on the other hand, if you were less concerned about getting to the destination by the shortest route, and instead were interested in learning more about what you might see on the way; a companion might encourage you to go down by-ways, pause to see the view, and possibly even persuade you that your original destination was not really where you should be going. On this basis, Dowden and Livingstone’s volume is very much a companion, and distinctly not a guide.
The book is made up of twenty-eight chapters, which, after the introduction, are arranged in six parts. The titles of the parts (“Establishing the Canon,” “Myth Performed, Myth Believed,” “New Traditions,” “Older Traditions,” “Interpretation,” “Conspectus”) do not immediately make clear what the individual chapters discuss, and chapters within sections take very different approaches to superficially similar material. Two examples must suffice. Part I, “Establishing the Canon,” consist of three chapters: in “Homer’s Use of Myth” (27–45) Françoise Létoublon identifies references in the Iliad and Odyssey to stories known from the Epic Cycle, and then discusses how these stories and some others, are used in the poems. Ken Dowden, in “Telling the Mythology: From Hesiod to the Fifth Century” (47–72), gives a brief history of mythography, that is, concentrating on works that compile stories of gods and heroes, and despite the chronological limits suggested by the title, he ends with an analysis of Pseudo-Apollodorus’ Library. Radcliffe Edmonds starts his chapter on “Orphic Mythology” (73–106) with the statement that “there was no such thing as Orphic mythology in the classical world,” before going on to discuss the various stories that, in antiquity or more recently, have been attributed to Orpheus and “Orphic tradition,” which are bound together more by their exoticness than by their sharing any distinctive doctrine. Létoublon provides a page of notes, Dowden half a page and Edmonds fourteen pages.
Similar diversity is to be found in the three chapters that make up Part IV, “Older Traditions.” Nicholas Allen’s “The Indo-European Background to Greek Mythology” (341–56) is mainly about Dumézil’s methods, and is applied to four “case studies,” two of which are about early Roman history, while the other two make comparisons between Indian texts and Hesiod and the Epic Cycle. Alasdair Livingstone and Birgit Haskamp’s chapter on “Near Eastern Mythologies” (357–82) presents the basic features of Mesopotamian, Anatolian and Ugaritic mythologies, essentially as comparative material. In contrast Nanno Marinatos and Nicolas Wyatt, in “Levantine, Egyptian, and Greek Mythological Conceptions of the Beyond” (383–410), are much more ready to engage in comparisons, amongst other things offering a distinctive interpretation of the location of Hades in the Odyssey on the basis of Egyptian comparanda, illustrated with helpful diagrams.
Sometimes the allocation of chapters to parts might appear a little arbitrary. Susan Woodford’s study of visual material, “Displaying Myth: The Visual Arts” (157–78), a useful guide to what was depicted where, which includes an appendix on “how to identify myths depicted in images,” is placed in Part II, “Myth Performed, Myth Believed,” but in Part V, “Interpretation,” Woodford contributes, “Interpreting Images: Mysteries, Mistakes, and Misunderstandings” (413–23), which discusses a number of case-studies of misinterpretation, and is effectively a coda to the earlier chapter. Here it sits alongside chapters by Sian Lewis on “Woman and Myth” (443–58), which mainly discusses women in myth, but also myth in women’s (or gender) studies, and Richard Armstrong on “Psychoanalysis: The Wellspring of Myth?” (471–85), a critical, but sympathetic, discussion of the place of myth in Freud and Jung, among others. All these chapters are in some sense about interpretation, although not necessarily interpretation of myths: and all scholarship is interpretation of something. Dieter Hertel’s “The Myth of History: The Case of Troy” (425–41), a clearly presented revisiting of the age-old question of the historicity of the Trojan War, has also been put under the “Interpretation,” while Alan Griffiths’ similarly titled, but considerably more wide-ranging “Myth in History” (195–207), has been placed in “Myth Performed, Myth Believed.”
This slightly haphazard organization contributes to the character of the book. The editors make no claims to completeness in the areas they cover, and in the introduction, “Thinking through Myth, Thinking Myth Through,” happily identify a number of topics they were unable to include. Above all, anyone looking for discussion of the reception of Greek myth in modern literature should look elsewhere. Nor is it the case that all the contributions are of equal quality, although most have something to interest the inquisitive reader. Although many volumes in the Wiley-Blackwell series of companions may set out to provide a single place for students or general readers to get an introduction to the subject, and an indication of current trends in scholarship, Dowden and Livingstone have recognized that this would be impossible to achieve in a manageable volume on Greek mythology. So this is a book to dip into, rather than to read through from cover to cover. But that is equally a way of saying that it is a volume to which the reader can return often with profit.
Speaking of Cicero and Catiline (see next post), my spiders brought back an article from something called Student Pulse, which is some sort of online student journal, which includes this piece (typo in the title):
… it’s not bad as far as undergraduate papers go; folks might want to be aware of it because it is probably good plagiarism material.
… in addition to our (and NT Blog’s) blogiversary, September 2 (I keep meaning to mention it) is the anniversary of Cicero’s launching of the Second Philippic … fortunately the OUP blog remembered (although they somewhat incongruently illustrate it with Maccari’s Cicero Denouncing Catiline):
posted with permission:
Björn C. Ewald and Carlos F. Noreña, eds. The Emperor and Rome: Space, Representation, and Ritual. Yale Classical Studies 35. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press, 2011. Pp. xviii + 365. Hardcover, £60.00/$99.00. ISBN 978-0-521-51953-3.
Reviewed by Jennifer E. Thomas, Hamilton College
(Note: The Table of Contents of this volume appears at the end of the review.)
In September 2005, I had the pleasure of attending a conference in New Haven on “the Emperor and Rome.” It stood out for excellence in two categories: the high quality of the papers and the frequency with which Yale’s caterers brought out meals, snacks and coffee—perfect panem et circenses for a grad student. Over the years I have frequently consulted my notes from the conference for both research and teaching. I was pleased to see that those excellent papers have not only now been published, but also supplemented by two additional essays. The result is a thought-provoking collection that will benefit readers in a number of disciplines.
The essays examine “the relationship between … the Roman imperial monarchy, as a particular configuration of power, and the nexus of actors, practices, images, and spaces” of the city of Rome (xxi). Imperial presentation and the interconnection of place and politics in Rome are trendy topics, but this book goes beyond the normal focus on monuments to include factors like the urban plebs, public rituals and “ephemeral” structures, and private commemorations. The essays examine a city beyond concrete and marble, one that was not just built by emperors, but grew together with them. They also weave together different disciplines and methodologies, mixing theoretical approaches with the more positivist style of traditional topographic studies. Some of the ideas expressed here are not new, but several are presented in English for the first time, either as a new translation of an article or a revisiting of work previously published in German, French, or Spanish, a welcome development on both counts.
In their introduction, Ewald and Noreña connect the dots between the diverse topics and approaches of the volume and contextualize it in current scholarship. Their nuanced, rapid discussion may leave non-specialists a bit confused, but there are rewards here for anyone interested in the Principate’s public guise. In particular, their argument that the term “propaganda” “should ideally be given up altogether” (33) is cogent and ought to be read by anyone considering using it in the context of the emperors’ public representation.
Although the introduction deals individually with the themes of the subtitle (space, representation, and ritual), the volume is not similarly subdivided, and each essay combines the themes. The first is the only one not written for the volume; instead, Zanker’s Der Kaiser baut fürs Volk (1997) is offered in English as “By the Emperor, For the People” with updated bibliography. His examination of leisure, liberalitas, and urban space remains pertinent after 15 years, and his discussion of amusement parks complements recent scholarship, for instance, Spencer 2005 [] on Nero’s “Disneyfication” of Rome, but with a more positive, less condemning conclusion.
Similarly, although written for this volume, Flaig’s essay on Nero presents in English arguments he has previously published in French and German. Although his treatment of the plebs tends to create a political monolith of a group that must have been fragmented and inconsistent, his reading of Tacitus offers a convincing case for his model of the Principate as an “acceptance” system with no real legitimacy. Arce’s examination of imperial funerals in effigie also revisits a topic from his previous work in Spanish, but its presentation here in English allows him to respond to recent work on the imperial cult, notably Gradel.[] Fittschen’s essay on portraits focuses on the issue of Kopienkritik and offers Anglophone readers a snapshot of his four decades of publication in German on the subject. I found his chapter an engaging introduction to the subject.
The other essays feature original work on smaller areas of research. Eck focuses on the ways in which the elite adapted to new rules of public display under the Caesars, and his discussion of small equestrian statues and trapezophora was particularly fascinating. Mayer emphasizes that social roles limited the choices Romans had in praising the emperor and offers an alternative to viewing the uniformity of praise as centrally determined propaganda. Both chapters valuably give other Roman actors more of a voice in the representation of the emperor.
The next essays shift the focus from the people back to the buildings. Packer links Pompey’s theater with the Temple of Concord, as restored by Tiberius, showing how Pompey offered the Julio-Claudians a model for imperial behavior; this chapter is notable for beautiful illustrations, particularly the digital models of the theater. Boatwright’s title puns on “homeland security” to argue that Antonine monuments reflect a mood of anxiety, but her focus is mainly on the period’s temples, columns, and funerary monuments. Marlowe argues that Constantine usurped not only Maxentius’ throne, but also his building program, which had emphasized the conservation of Rome after a period of neglect. These chapters masterfully illustrate how exemplum-minded emperors exploited the palimpsest of the Roman cityscape.
The concluding chapters, including Fittschen, Flaig, and Arce, focus on the emperor himself. Koortbojian examines statues depicting Caesar and Augustus as imperatores, as opposed to traditional triumphator statues, and argues for anti-triumphal imagery in these innovative public portraits. D’Ambra, like Arce, focuses on imperial funerals, particularly the pyre and the sensory stimulation provided by the cremation, including the running colors of encaustic paintings, the burning of incense and other fragrant offerings as a buffer from the smell of the burning corpse, and the loud snaps and hisses as the massive wooden pyre collapsed. She marshals evidence from both literature and material sources to provides vivid testimony to how memorable these ephemeral monuments would have been to witnesses.
In sum, The Emperor and Rome brings together an impressive roster of experts from different fields, resulting in a well-rounded exploration of the complex relationships between Rome and its residents. The book contains many high-quality illustrations and is generally free from errors. I enjoyed reading it very much and find it a fitting monument to the equally enjoyable, albeit ephemeral gathering of seven years ago.
Table of Contents
Björn C. Ewald and Carlos F. Noreña, “Introduction.”
1. Paul Zanker, “By the emperor, for the people: ‘popular’ architecture in Rome.”
2. Werner Eck, “The emperor and senatorial aristocracy in competition for public space.”
3. Emanuel Mayer, “Propaganda, staged applause, or local politics? Public monuments from Augustus to Septimius Severus.”
4. James E. Packer, “Pompey’s Theater and Tiberius’ Temple of Concord: a Late Republican primer for an early Imperial patron.”
5. Mary T. Boatwright, “Antonine Rome: security in the homeland.”
6. Elizabeth Marlowe, “Liberator urbis suae: Constantine and the ghost of Maxentius.”
7. Klaus Fittschen, “The portraits of Roman emperors and their families: controversial positions and unresolved problems.”
8. Michael Koortbojian, “Crossing the pomerium: the armed ruler at Rome .”
9. Egon Flaig, “How the Emperor Nero lost acceptance in Rome.”
10. Eve D’Ambra, “The imperial funerary pyre as a work of ephemeral architecture.”
11. Javier Arce, “Roman imperial funerals in effigie.”
[] D. Spencer, “Lucan’s Follies: Memory and Ruin in a Civil-War Landscape,” G&R 52 (2005) 46-69.
[] I. Gradel, Emperor Worship and Roman Religion (Oxford, 2002).
All of a sudden my email box is full to bursting with good stuff … this one’s from Hurriyet:
The ongoing excavation works at one of Turkey’s most important archaeological sites, the Karacasu Aphrodisias Ancient City, have revealed two headless statues.
According to information provided by the Culture and Tourism Ministry, one of the statues is in 1.76 meters in height and the other is 1.68 meters. One of the statues holds a roll in its left hand and its right hand is on its chest. There is a pack of documents behind its left foot, but the fingers and head are broken.
The second statue is also headless. Its right hand is broken from the humerus down, and the left hand is broken from the elbow. There is also a pack of documents next to its right hand.
U.S. professor R. Roland Smith is heading the excavations at the site. The city of Aphrodisias, is one of the country’s most visited places. It is included in UNESCO’s world heritage permanent list.
- via: Headless statues unearthed in Aphrodisias excavations (Hurriyet)
There are some rather small photos accompanying the original article … for some background to the project: Aphrodisias.
posted with permission:
Norbert H. O. Duckwitz, Reading the Gospel of St. Mark in Greek: A Beginning. Mundelein, IL: Bolchazy-Carducci, 2011. Pp. xxi + 333. Paper, $19.00 ISBN 978-0-86516-776-6.
Reviewed by Wilfrid E. Major, Louisiana State University
This latest reader for intermediate students of Greek will serve a niche in the 21st century, although it is fundamentally a throwback to much older textbooks.
Anyone who has seen the author’s previous reader on the Gospel of St. John [] will find this offering familiar. The book comprises four components: an introduction (xiii–xxi) which surveys the Greek alphabet, pronunciation, and the structure of Greek nouns and verbs; the text of the Gospel of Mark (1–257), with vocabulary and plentiful notes below the text on each page; a reference grammar (258–308); and full vocabulary section (309–33). This arrangement repeats that of the John reader, and, indeed, the introduction and grammatical appendix are identical to those in the earlier one.
A brief preface explains the genesis and intended learning strategy of the book. Duckwitz developed both the John and Mark readers at Brigham Young University to enable students to read a substantial amount of the New Testament in Greek at the beginning and intermediate levels. Such a goal can at first seem as if he is providing a “reading approach” in contrast to a “grammar approach,” but such a categorization misrepresents his method, for Duckwitz intends students to build their comprehension of the text using quite traditional building blocks. Every few lines of text (no page reaches even ten lines of text) are followed by vocabulary entries, detailed information about the morphology and syntax, and some exegesis.
Insofar as Duckwitz’s goal is to have all the information students need at hand in a single volume, so that they do not have to consult a lexicon or grammar separately, his presentation is successful, valuable, and sure to be treasured by novice readers, who tend to approach large swaths of Greek text with trepidation. Although unstated, Duckwitz seems to have constructed his reader in opposition to textbooks like William Mounce’s Basics of Biblical Greek, the textbook used most widely for introducing students to Biblical Greek.[] No one would deny the virtues of Mounce’s materials: precision of detail and clarity of presentation. The knock on Mounce comes with syntax and comprehension, or rather the near absence of them. Despite the presence of short passages and brief examples of exegesis, Mounce’s book is dominated by phonology and morphology. Students can thus legitimately feel that they come to master an extraordinary amount of detail and still walk away with only a tender feeling for a simple Greek sentence or clause. Duckwitz’s readers are a welcome counterbalance.
Teachers and students should nevertheless be aware of blemishes and missed opportunities in the current volume. In the setting of the Greek text, stray spaces all too often split words, which can easily confuse novice readers who might think the two parts are separate words (e.g., on p. 28, Mk 1:34, ᾔδεισαν is split across lines as ᾔ and δεισαν, with no hyphen). The wealth of information provided in the notes on each page will be a substantial part of the book’s appeal, but sometimes Duckwitz and his editors seem to lose track of what they are saying (e.g., on p. 32, twice in a long paragraph comes the note that the verb governs the genitive), and there are errors (e.g., on p. 18, ὀλίγον is an accusative of duration, so the detailed explanation of it as a cognate accusative will confuse inexperienced readers).
Furthermore, while Duckwitz understandably wants to retain the features of his previous reader, he misses opportunities to capitalize on advances in Greek pedagogy over the last decade. Vocabulary is one such area. Duckwitz is to be commended for providing a vocabulary section for each page, but his strategy could be improved. At first, the vocabulary is complete for every word, and then lemmas drop out after about ten appearances. For those reading the entire Gospel continuously, this arrangement has benefits, but it can be counterproductive for those who read only selections. Moreover, there is no list of high-frequency words (a list of all the words occurring ten times or more would make sense, given Duckwitz’s approach). The bar for the pedagogical deployment of vocabulary has been raised since Duckwitz completed his John reader. For example, Mounce’s beginning Greek book purposefully builds a student’s high-frequency vocabulary comprising roughly 80% of the New Testament, and chapters even give a student’s statistical progress toward this goal. Two complete intermediate readers of the entire New Testament now provide vocabulary with the text for all lemmas which occur fewer than thirty times in the corpus, along with occasional parsing information.[]
Likewise, the phonological, morphological (parsing) and syntactical information eases from very full to less detailed, but Duckwitz never explains the arc to this pattern. For teachers, then, it is not clear how to guide and prioritize grammatical topics. Finally, the piling of information makes finding any given datum a challenge. The vocabulary entries are given in their own section, so why not analogous sections for the phonology, morphology, syntax and exegesis? In an age of digital layout, this is a reasonable expectation, but these pages have the look of a dense 19th-century schoolbook.
Overall, however, there are many positives that recommend this book. It does make an entire Gospel compact, accessible and affordable. For the price and the comprehensive annotation, there is nothing better for a course devoted to, at least in part, introducing readers to extended reading in the New Testament. It is thus a very welcome addition to the growing set of excellent intermediate readers for Greek.
[] Norbert H. O. Duckwitz, Reading the Gospel of St. John in Greek: A Beginning (New York: Caratzas, 2002), ISBN 978-089241-584-3.
[] William D. Mounce, Basics of Biblical Greek Grammar, 3rd ed. (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2009), ISBN 978-0310-287681.
[] Richard J. Goodrich and Albert L. Lukaszewski, A Reader’s Greek New Testament, rev. ed. (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2007), ISBN 978-0310-273783; and Barclay M. Newman, The UBS Greek New Testament: A Reader’s Edition (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2007), ISBN 978-1598562859.
The incipit of a review over at Comic Book Resources:
Marathon is exactly what it sounds like: an account of the battle of Marathon in 490 B.C., brought to us by filmmaker Boaz Yakin (I don’t know why he wrote a comic; his most recent movie was the Jason Statham vehicle Safe, and he doesn’t appear to have an ancient Greek movie in the pipeline) and artist Joe Infurnari. The comic is published by First Second and costs $16.99.
There’s not much to say about the way Yakin writes Marathon. It’s a very straight-forward account of the battle and of Eucles, the legendary Athenian runner who supposedly ran all over Greece before and after the battle (he’s an invention of ancient historians – Herodotus, for instandce – but a pretty cool one). Early on, we get flashbacks to Eucles as a boy, winning a race and impressing the Athenian tyrant, Hippias, who kills his own son for finishing second to a lowly slave (Hippias is not a nice guy). Eucles becomes his personal messenger, but with one condition: If he fails, his parents will be killed. So of course he does fail – once – because the other boys, including Hippias’ son Philon and Philon’s best friend, Antigonos, are jealous of his rise and beat him up. Later, Hippias is defeated by the Spartans and driven into exile – Eucles begs the Spartan king to have him killed – but years later, he returns as part of the Persian army under their king, Darius. He has been promised Athens as a client kingdom if he helps retake it. And so the stage is set! [...]
This is getting a bit of coverage … the Guardian seems to have the version that’s most appropriate for us (but see also Harry Mount in the Telegraph … link below):
Alarmed by a decline in the use of Latin within the Catholic church, Pope Benedict is planning to set up a Vatican academy to breathe new life into the dead language.
Long used by the Vatican as its lingua franca, Latin is currently promoted by a small team within the office of the Holy See’s secretary of state, which runs a Latin poetry competition and puts out a magazine.
But Benedict – a staunch traditionalist – is backing a plan for a new academy which would team up with academics to better “promote the knowledge and speaking of Latin, particularly inside the church,” Vatican spokesman Fr Ciro Benedettini said on Friday.
The academy, added one Vatican official, would be “livelier and more open to scholars, seminars and new media” than the existing set-up.
As the study of Latin dwindles in schools, it is also on the wane in the church, where seminarians no longer carry out their studies in Latin and priests from around the world no longer use it to chat to each other. Until the 1960s Vatican documents were only published in Latin, which remained the language of the liturgy.
Today cash machines in the Vatican bank give instructions in Latin and the pope’s encyclicals are still translated into the language, but the new academy could provide much needed help to those charged with translating Latin words for 21st-century buzzwords such as delocalisation, which appeared in Benedict’s 2009 document on the economic crisis as delocalizatio.
That choice was criticised by Jesuit experts, reported Italy’s La Stampa newspaper.
“Some don’t like that kind of translation because it simply makes Italian and English words sound Latin, rather than being more creative with the language, although both ways are valid,” said father Roberto Spataro, a lecturer at the Salesian Pontifical University in Rome, who described the idea of the academy as “very opportune”.
Jesuit critics were more impressed with the more elaborate translation of liberalisation in the encyclical as plenior libertas and fanaticism as fanaticus furor.
Lost in translation?
Vatican officials tasked with finding Latin words for new English words call the internet inter rete and emails inscriptio cursus electronici. The 2003 Lexicon Recentis Latinitatis also offers the following translations:
Photocopy exemplar luce expressum
Basketball follis canistraque ludus
Bestseller liber maxime divenditus
Blue jeans bracae linteae caeruleae
Goal retis violation
Hot pants brevissimae bracae femineae
VAT fiscale pretii additamentum
Mountain bike birota montana
Parachute umbrella descensoria
- via: Pope Benedict to open new Latin academy in the Vatican (Guardian)
- Latin rebirth in schools (Telegraph)
- Mirabile dictu! The Pope saves Latin (Harry Mount in the Telegraph)
- Breathing Life Into a Dead Language (New York Times)
Of course, we should note that this has been a sort of constant thing for HH Benedict:
- Vatican Promotes Latin (May, 2008)
- The Pope’s On Our Side … March, 2011)
- Dial-a-Bishop for Latin Test Help? (December, 2011)
Dickenson College Commentaries: The Future of Ancient Greek
Interesting little video clip from the BBC (which is hype for a program, of course) on the evidence for colorization of Roman statuary:
On the ‘egyptian blue’ thing, check out some of our previous posts:
I really think focus-fen ought to look into a better translation service:
The wedding ritual will start at around 4 p.m. The entire ceremony and the wedding festivities will be held in the spirit of the Ancient Rome. Though the wedding will observe all the Roman traditions and rituals it will be also in line with the legal requirements of the nowadays marriage procedure.
All guests at the wedding will be dressed in Roman tunicas. The wedding will start with the dance of the Vestal Virgins, who symbolically clean the house where the wedding ceremony will be held. The couple, which is to wed, will be brought in by their parents. Mayor of Veliko Tarnovo Municipality Daniel Panov will play the part of a senator, while a young man will be the pontiff, who will addressed a series of prayers to Jupiter, Venus and Diana.
After the wedding ceremony there will be treats for the guests, which will be made under ancient Roman recipes.
- via: Bulgaria to hold first Roman wedding at Nicopolis ad Istrum (Focus Fen)
Let’s hope they at least consulted Karen Hersch’s recent book and didn’t just take their info from the internet …
Seen on the Classicists list:
We are delighted to announce the details of the Iris annual under 19s fiction competition 2012!
This year we are looking for pieces inspired by the figure of the “locked-out lover” in Roman love poetry, in line with the theme of Roman love poetry in the forthcoming Iris annual edition. The maximum length for entries is 30 lines, and entries can be in poetry or prose. Entries should be emailed to editor AT irismagazine.org with the subject line “IRIS COMPETITION”, and your name and age. We are also delighted to announce that Madeline Miller, author of the bestselling novel The Song of Achilles, will be judging the competition.
For further details, please visit the competition page at http://irisonline.org.uk/index.php/fiction/fiction-archive/100-iris-annual-fiction-competition-2012-3-for-under-19s
The competition aims to encourage creative responses to the Classics in schools and amongst young people across the UK and beyond, in line with The Iris Project’s mission to promote Classics to a wide audience in an inclusive, creative and engaging way.
My spiders dragged back this really nice 3rd century sarcophagus at the Met:
Possibly one of the busiest scenes I’ve ever encontered on a sarcophagus … More views and details at the Met’s page:
Vacancy: Lecturer in Classics, University of Otago, New Zealand
The University of Otago is the oldest university in New Zealand. The Chair
in Classics was one of the three foundation chairs established in 1869,
and the Department is known for its excellence in research and teaching.
Our academic staff are recognised internationally for their scholarly
contributions in the broad fields of classical literature, history, and
archaeology, and are well represented in leading journals and on editorial
We particularly seek a new colleague who will augment and bolster our
existing research strengths and innovative teaching programme. This
lectureship is a permanent, full-time (confirmation-path) position.
Applicants will be qualified at PhD level, and will show clear evidence
of, or at least strong potential for, internationally rated publications,
and a willingness to seek external research funds. (Please attach a sample
of recently written research.)
While applications will be considered from candidates whose research
interests lie in any branch of classical studies, teaching expertise in
art/archaeology, mythology or philosophy or film/reception is desirable,
plus the ability to teach Greek language (preferably both Greek and Latin)
to a high level. Previous teaching experience (especially of large
classes) is also desirable, as well as a demonstrated ability to enthuse
and inspire students. (Please attach teaching evaluations.)
The successful appointee will be required to teach both language and
classical civilisation courses at both undergraduate and postgraduate
levels; to supervise research at Honours, Masters and PhD levels; to
develop and maintain a strong research profile; and to undertake
administrative roles and community/professional service activities which
contribute to the overall effectiveness and standing of the Department.
Specific enquiries prior to application may be directed to Associate
Professor Jon Hall, Convener of the Selection Committee (email:
jon.hall At otago.ac.nz); or to Dr Patricia Hannah, Head of Department
(email: pat.hannah AT otago.ac.nz).
Applications are to be submitted online. Please consult the following
webpage (the job number is 1201112):
Applications will close Friday, 12 October 2012. Starting date for the
appointment will be 1 July 2013.
This one was mentioned on the Latinteach list … seems that the BBC is asking assorted folks to nominate people for their Great Lives biography radio series … the latest nominee is Juvenal … here’s the blurb:
Matthew Parris invites writer and comic Natalie Haynes to explain why her nomination for a Great Life is a Roman poet about whose life we know very little. Dr Llewelyn Morgan of Brasenose College Oxford helps her explain the enduring appeal of this scurrilous writer.
On the face of it, Juvenal’s life is hard to defend as a Great one. In the first place – as Dr Llewelyn Morgan, lecturer in Classical Languages and Literature at Oxford, confirms – we know very little about his life. He may have been a first-generation Roman from a Spanish family; he may have served in army; he may have been sent into exile. None of this can be confirmed. What we do know is that he uses his Satires to rant and rail against women, foreigners, gays and the upstarts who are all ruining Rome – which might make him hard to love. But Natalie Haynes, veteran of the stand-up circuit and now a writer and critic, finds Juvenal an indispensable part of her life and is very happy to explain why.
- Juvenal (BBC Radio)
- 2012.09.05: Maria Serena Mirto, Death in the Greek World: from Homer to the Classical Age. (First published in Italian 2007; translated by A. M. Osborne).
- 2012.09.04: Steven Johnstone, A History of Trust in Ancient Greece.
- 2012.09.03: S. D. Lambert, Sociable Man: Essays on Ancient Greek Social Behaviour in Honour of Nick Fisher.
- 2012.09.02: Johann P. Arnason, Kurt A. Raaflaub, The Roman Empire in Context: Historical and Comparative Perspectives. The ancient world: comparative histories.
- 2012.08.60: Brigitte Pérez-Jean, Les Dialectiques de l’ascèse. Rencontres, 18.
- 2012.08.59: Zacharoula Petraki, The Poetics of Philosophical Language: Plato, Poets and Presocratics in the Republic. Sozomena. Studies in the recovery of ancient texts, 9.
- 2012.08.58: Christopher Shields, Ancient Philosophy: a Contemporary Introduction. Second edition (first edition published 2003).
- 2012.08.57: James G. Clark, Frank T. Coulson, Kathryn L. McKinley, Ovid in the Middle Ages.
- 2012.08.56: Daniela Patrizia Taormina, Rosa Maria Piccione, Giamblico. I frammenti delle epistole. Introduzione, testo, traduzione e commento. Elenchos, 56.
- 2012.08.55: David R. Slavitt, The Gnat and Other Minor Poems of Virgil.
- 2012.08.54: Pierre-Louis Gatier, Julien Aliquot, Lévon Nordiguian, Sources de l’histoire de Tyr: textes de l’Antiquité et du Moyen Âge.
- 2012.08.53: D. M. Carter, Why Athens? A Reappraisal of Tragic Politics.
- 2012.08.52: Noel Lenski, The Cambridge Companion to the Age of Constantine. Revised edition (first published 2006).
- 2012.08.51: Emma Aston, Mixanthrôpoi: Animal-human Hybrid Deities in Greek Religion. Kernos. Supplément, 25.
- 2012.08.50: Mark J. Lutz, Divine Law and Political Philosophy in Plato’s ‘Laws’.
- 2012.08.49: Andrea L. Carbone, Aristote illustré. Représentations du corps et schématisation dans la biologie aristotélicienne. Les anciens et les modernes – études de philosophie, 3.
- 2012.08.48: Fabrice Galtier, L’image tragique de l’Histoire chez Tacite: étude des schèmes tragiques dans les Histoires et les Annales. Collection Latomus, 333.
- 2012.08.47: David Stuttard, Power Games: Ritual and Rivalry at the Ancient Greek Olympics.
- 2012.08.46: José Antonio Dabdab Trabulsi, Le Présent dans le Passé: autour de quelques Périclès du XXe siècle et de la possibilité d’une vérité en Histoire. Institut des Sciences et Techniques de l’Antiquité.
- 2012.08.38: Oretta Olivieri, Miti e culti tebani nella poesia di Pindaro. Filologia e critica, 89.
- 2012.08.39: H. S. Versnel, Coping with the Gods: Wayward Readings in Greek Theology. Religions in the Graeco-Roman world, 173.
- 2012.08.40: Thomas Faucher, Marie-Christine Marcellesi, Olivier Picard, Nomisma: la circulation monétaire dans le monde grec antique. Actes du colloque international, Athènes, 14-17 avril 2010. BCH Supplément, 53.
- 2012.08.41: Vincent Azoulay, Paulin Ismard, Clisthène et Lycurgue d’Athènes: autour du politique dans la cité classique. Histoire ancienne et médiévale, 109.
- 2012.08.42: P. J. Rhodes, Alcibiades: Athenian Playboy, General and Traitor.
- 2012.08.43: Marina De Franceschini, Giuseppe Veneziano, Villa Adriana: architettura celeste: i segreti e i solstizi. Accademia Villa Adriana, 1.
- 2012.08.44: Filippo Canali De Rossi, Hippika: corse di cavalli e di carri in Grecia, Etruria e Roma. Volume I: la gara delle quadrighe nel mondo greco. Nikephoros. Beihefte Bd 18.
- 2012.08.45: Daniel J. Pullen, The Early Bronze Age Village on Tsoungiza Hill. Nemea Valley Archaeological Project, 1.
- 2012.08.46: José Antonio Dabdab Trabulsi, Le Présent dans le Passé: autour de quelques Périclès du XXe siècle et de la possibilité d’une vérité en Histoire. Institut des Sciences et Techniques de l’Antiquité.
Over the weekend we were out of town taking the protoclassicist to his new digs in some university town and the internet connections we had were, well, kind of sketchy. As such, I was unable to pat myself on the back and wish rogueclassicism at happy ninth anniversary. If you’re wondering about our past incarnations (pre WordPress) here’s our official ‘first day‘, if you missed it … there were some items before, but I was in the ‘seeing if this blog thing is feasible’ stage. You’ll have to scroll down a bit to the ‘Hic incipit feliciter’ … you might get a giggle out of a post called Blogging 101 as well (since we had to explain to Classicists back then what a blog was). I really have to migrate these to WordPress …
In other news, we also say ‘Happy Blogiversary’ to Mark Goodacre’s NT Blog, which began on the same day!
Last, and certainly not least, at some point last night while I was wading through the pile of email that had accumulated while we were enroute (can someone please make an iPad gmail app that actually works like gmail was intended?), we passed the one million visitors mark (since coming to WordPress … there were 745 000 more at the old site) … thanks for coming out!
36 B.C. — Marcus Vipsanius Agrippa’s fleet defeats that of Sextus Pompeius at Naulochus
History of the Ancient World: The Constitution of the Roman Republic: A Political Economy Perspective.