Seneca was a Roman writing in the mid-first century AD.
Read the whole satyrical essay (in Sullivan) which presents itself as what really happened to emperor Claudius after his death. You should know that Seneca did not like Claudius much since this emperor had exiled him from Rome.
We have seen a lot of "immortalization" in this course and mentioned that as early as Gilgamesh and the Egyptian pharaohs some men were worshiped as gods after their deaths. Alexander was worshiped and so were many Roman emperors. Seneca here presents a comical alternate view of the "reality" of deification. His title Apocolocyntosis ("Pumpkinification" or "Gourdification")is a parody of the Greek Apotheosis ("Deification").
Saturday, March 28, 2009
CLS 276- Friday April 3- Berossus and Modern Alternate History
Here is a short fragment of Berossus a Chaldean or Babylonian historian of the 3rd cent. BC who wrote in Greek but based his account on Sumerian and/or Babylonian records. This story was the basis for an episode of Stargate- SG1 which you will be watching on Friday April 3 while I am gone. Zander has said that he can show it for you. It is 43 minutes so you should be able to watch the whole thing. Stargate the movie and Stargate SG-1 are both good examples of alternate history, a kind of genre that presents a new, "true" version of the past that we were all ignorant of. The Alexander Romance's "true" story of Alexander is like an alternate history. Many modern alternate histories include elements of fantasy (magic, etc.) or science fiction (aliens and space travel) in periods of history where we don't expect them. See here for more on alternate history: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternate_history. Other alternate histories try to present a new, more believable version like the King Arthur flick that Katie showed us.
Much of the reading for the rest of the course will be different kinds of alternate history from the ancient world. While watching the SG-1 episode think about why people are interested by alternate history stories, since they seem to have been popular at least since the Greeks and Romans.
One thing that you should know about this fragment is that scholars recognize that Berossus partially based his account on the Enuma Elish which we read at the beginning of the course. Remember Tiamat was the great water goddess who was defeated by Marduk, who is sometimes known as Baal (Greek Belos, Latin Belus) which means "Lord". Look for parallels to the Enuma Elish and thematic parallels with other narratives we have discussed.
FRAGMENTS OF CHALDÆAN HISTORY, BEROSSUS: FROM ALEXANDER POLYHISTOR:
BEROSSUS, in the first book of his history of Babylonia, informs us that he lived in the age of Alexander the son of Philip. And he mentions that there were written accounts, preserved at Babylon with the greatest care, comprehending a period of above fifteen myriads of years: and that these writings contained histories of the heaven and of the sea; of the birth of mankind; and of the kings, and of the memorable actions which they had achieved.
At Babylon there was (in these times) a great resort of people of various nations, who inhabited Chaldæa, and lived in a lawless manner like the beasts of the field. In the first year there appeared, from that part of the Erythræan sea which borders upon Babylonia, an animal destitute of reason, by name Oannes, whose whole body (according to the account of Apollodorus) was that of a fish; that under the fish's head he had another head, with feet also below, similar to those of a man, subjoined to the fish's tail. His voice too, and language, was articulate and human; and a representation of him is preserved even to this day.
This Being was accustomed to pass the day among men; but took no food at that season; and he gave them an insight into letters and sciences, and arts of every kind. He taught them to construct cities, to found temples, to compile laws, and explained to them the principles of geometrical knowledge. He made them distinguish the seeds of the earth, and shewed them how to collect the fruits; in short, he instructed them in every thing which could tend to soften manners and humanize their lives.
From that time, nothing material has been added by way of improvement to his instructions. And when the sun had set, this Being Oannes, retired again into the sea, and passed the night in the deep; for he was amphibious. After this there appeared other animals like Oannes, of which Berossus proposes to give an account when he comes to the history of the kings. Moreover Oannes wrote concerning the generation of mankind; and of their civil polity; and the following is the purport of what he said:
There was a time in which there existed nothing but darkness and an abyss of waters, wherein resided most hideous beings, which were produced of a two-fold principle. There appeared men, some of whom were furnished with two wings, others with four, and with two faces. They had one body but two heads: the one that of a man, the other of a woman: and likewise in their several organs both male and female.
Other human figures were to be seen with the legs and horns of goats: some had horses' feet: while others united the hind quarters of a horse with the body of a man, resembling in shape the hippocentaurs. Bulls likewise were bred there with the heads of men; and dogs with fourfold bodies, terminated in their extremities with the tails of fishes: horses also with the heads of dogs: men too and other animals, with the heads and bodies of horses and the tails of fishes. In short, there were creatures in which were combined the limbs of every species of animals.
In addition to these, fishes, reptiles, serpents, with other monstrous animals, which assumed each other's shape and countenance. Of all which were preserved delineations in the temple of Belus at Babylon.
The person, who presided over them, was a woman named Omoroca; which in the Chaldæan language is Thalatth; in Greek Thalassa, the sea; but which might equally be interpreted the Moon. All things being in this situation, Belus came, and cut the woman asunder: and of one half of her he formed the earth, and of the other half the heavens; and at the same time destroyed the animals within her.
All this (he says) was an allegorical description of nature. For, the whole universe consisting of moisture, and animals being continually generated therein, the deity above-mentioned took off his own head: upon which the other gods mixed the blood, as it gushed out, with the earth; and from thence were formed men. On this account it is that they are rational, and partake of divine knowledge.
This Belus, by whom they signify Jupiter, divided the darkness, and separated the Heavens from the Earth, and reduced universe to order. But the animals, not being able to bear the prevalence of light, died. Belus upon this, seeing a vast space unoccupied, though by nature fruitful, commanded one of the gods to take off his head, and to mix the blood with the earth; and from thence to form other men and animals, which should be capable of bearing the air. Belus formed also the stars, and the sun, and the moon, and the five planets.
(Such, according to Polyhistor Alexander, is the account which Berossus gives in his first book.)
Much of the reading for the rest of the course will be different kinds of alternate history from the ancient world. While watching the SG-1 episode think about why people are interested by alternate history stories, since they seem to have been popular at least since the Greeks and Romans.
One thing that you should know about this fragment is that scholars recognize that Berossus partially based his account on the Enuma Elish which we read at the beginning of the course. Remember Tiamat was the great water goddess who was defeated by Marduk, who is sometimes known as Baal (Greek Belos, Latin Belus) which means "Lord". Look for parallels to the Enuma Elish and thematic parallels with other narratives we have discussed.
FRAGMENTS OF CHALDÆAN HISTORY, BEROSSUS: FROM ALEXANDER POLYHISTOR:
BEROSSUS, in the first book of his history of Babylonia, informs us that he lived in the age of Alexander the son of Philip. And he mentions that there were written accounts, preserved at Babylon with the greatest care, comprehending a period of above fifteen myriads of years: and that these writings contained histories of the heaven and of the sea; of the birth of mankind; and of the kings, and of the memorable actions which they had achieved.
At Babylon there was (in these times) a great resort of people of various nations, who inhabited Chaldæa, and lived in a lawless manner like the beasts of the field. In the first year there appeared, from that part of the Erythræan sea which borders upon Babylonia, an animal destitute of reason, by name Oannes, whose whole body (according to the account of Apollodorus) was that of a fish; that under the fish's head he had another head, with feet also below, similar to those of a man, subjoined to the fish's tail. His voice too, and language, was articulate and human; and a representation of him is preserved even to this day.
This Being was accustomed to pass the day among men; but took no food at that season; and he gave them an insight into letters and sciences, and arts of every kind. He taught them to construct cities, to found temples, to compile laws, and explained to them the principles of geometrical knowledge. He made them distinguish the seeds of the earth, and shewed them how to collect the fruits; in short, he instructed them in every thing which could tend to soften manners and humanize their lives.
From that time, nothing material has been added by way of improvement to his instructions. And when the sun had set, this Being Oannes, retired again into the sea, and passed the night in the deep; for he was amphibious. After this there appeared other animals like Oannes, of which Berossus proposes to give an account when he comes to the history of the kings. Moreover Oannes wrote concerning the generation of mankind; and of their civil polity; and the following is the purport of what he said:
There was a time in which there existed nothing but darkness and an abyss of waters, wherein resided most hideous beings, which were produced of a two-fold principle. There appeared men, some of whom were furnished with two wings, others with four, and with two faces. They had one body but two heads: the one that of a man, the other of a woman: and likewise in their several organs both male and female.
Other human figures were to be seen with the legs and horns of goats: some had horses' feet: while others united the hind quarters of a horse with the body of a man, resembling in shape the hippocentaurs. Bulls likewise were bred there with the heads of men; and dogs with fourfold bodies, terminated in their extremities with the tails of fishes: horses also with the heads of dogs: men too and other animals, with the heads and bodies of horses and the tails of fishes. In short, there were creatures in which were combined the limbs of every species of animals.
In addition to these, fishes, reptiles, serpents, with other monstrous animals, which assumed each other's shape and countenance. Of all which were preserved delineations in the temple of Belus at Babylon.
The person, who presided over them, was a woman named Omoroca; which in the Chaldæan language is Thalatth; in Greek Thalassa, the sea; but which might equally be interpreted the Moon. All things being in this situation, Belus came, and cut the woman asunder: and of one half of her he formed the earth, and of the other half the heavens; and at the same time destroyed the animals within her.
All this (he says) was an allegorical description of nature. For, the whole universe consisting of moisture, and animals being continually generated therein, the deity above-mentioned took off his own head: upon which the other gods mixed the blood, as it gushed out, with the earth; and from thence were formed men. On this account it is that they are rational, and partake of divine knowledge.
This Belus, by whom they signify Jupiter, divided the darkness, and separated the Heavens from the Earth, and reduced universe to order. But the animals, not being able to bear the prevalence of light, died. Belus upon this, seeing a vast space unoccupied, though by nature fruitful, commanded one of the gods to take off his head, and to mix the blood with the earth; and from thence to form other men and animals, which should be capable of bearing the air. Belus formed also the stars, and the sun, and the moon, and the five planets.
(Such, according to Polyhistor Alexander, is the account which Berossus gives in his first book.)
CLS 276- Philo and Josephus
Josephus and Philo (1st cent. AD) were Jews writing in Greek under the Roman empire. The reading from Josephus is from 2 sources.
The first, is a passage of his _Jewish Antiquities_, a history of the Jews (based on many of the sources that later became the Old Testament). Here he attacks Greek historians for connecting the rest of the world's peoples to Greeks by foundation myths (all the stories that said Heracles and other heroes founded foreign races--remember Herodotus' stories about Scythes, the son of Heacles, and Candaules who was descended from Heracles). Instead, Josephus uses Genesis to show that the Hebrew tradition presents the "true" origins of all the peoples of the world.
The second, Against Apion is an essay that Josephus wrote to defend his history of the Jews (written in Greek) from the criticisms made by the Greek historian Apion. In the course of this short essay, we learn much about how ancient historians wrote and specifically about some of the historians who told the histories of non-Greek peoples such as Manetho an Egyptian and Berossus a Chaldean. Both of these men, like Josephus, knew their native records and stories but wrote Greek histories about their home countries. Through these authors we can see more examples of history as a way of explaining the connections between different peoples in the world. Josephus in particular is trying to prove the antiquity of the Jews by connecting them with various stories in other histories as far back as Herodotus.
The reading from Philo is different. It is an interpretative account or commentary on part of the Torah. We have talked about rationalization as a way to explain myths by removing the fantastic aspects of the stories (for example, Hecataeus of Miletus made Cerberus a poisonous snake in a cave instead of a three-headed dog in the underworld), but another technique which Greeks sometimes used to explain Homer and other myths is to take the stories as allegories. Greek philosophers particularly liked to treat myths this way--for example, the golden apples that Heracles got from the Garden of Hesperides were treated as allegorical symbols for virtues. This method of understanding myths and early stories was particularly common among ancient Jewish scholars of the Torah. From both Greek and Jewish practice early Christians inherited this interpretative strategy which has remained important for many Christian and Jewish scholars. Allegorical interpretation became so popular in the middle ages that many fictional stories were purposefully written as allegories. If you don't know what allegory is, see here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allegory
The first, is a passage of his _Jewish Antiquities_, a history of the Jews (based on many of the sources that later became the Old Testament). Here he attacks Greek historians for connecting the rest of the world's peoples to Greeks by foundation myths (all the stories that said Heracles and other heroes founded foreign races--remember Herodotus' stories about Scythes, the son of Heacles, and Candaules who was descended from Heracles). Instead, Josephus uses Genesis to show that the Hebrew tradition presents the "true" origins of all the peoples of the world.
The second, Against Apion is an essay that Josephus wrote to defend his history of the Jews (written in Greek) from the criticisms made by the Greek historian Apion. In the course of this short essay, we learn much about how ancient historians wrote and specifically about some of the historians who told the histories of non-Greek peoples such as Manetho an Egyptian and Berossus a Chaldean. Both of these men, like Josephus, knew their native records and stories but wrote Greek histories about their home countries. Through these authors we can see more examples of history as a way of explaining the connections between different peoples in the world. Josephus in particular is trying to prove the antiquity of the Jews by connecting them with various stories in other histories as far back as Herodotus.
The reading from Philo is different. It is an interpretative account or commentary on part of the Torah. We have talked about rationalization as a way to explain myths by removing the fantastic aspects of the stories (for example, Hecataeus of Miletus made Cerberus a poisonous snake in a cave instead of a three-headed dog in the underworld), but another technique which Greeks sometimes used to explain Homer and other myths is to take the stories as allegories. Greek philosophers particularly liked to treat myths this way--for example, the golden apples that Heracles got from the Garden of Hesperides were treated as allegorical symbols for virtues. This method of understanding myths and early stories was particularly common among ancient Jewish scholars of the Torah. From both Greek and Jewish practice early Christians inherited this interpretative strategy which has remained important for many Christian and Jewish scholars. Allegorical interpretation became so popular in the middle ages that many fictional stories were purposefully written as allegories. If you don't know what allegory is, see here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allegory
CLS 276- Diodorus Siculus, Monday March 30
Hey all,
Diodorus Siculus or Diodorus of Sicily was a Greek writing under Roman rule in the 1st century BC. We read some of a later book of his history which dealt with Alexander the Great (in Mensch and Romm). His work is called the Library of History and it is a 44 book universal history. Universal history is a specific sub-genre of history in the ancient world that tried to tell the history of the whole world from the earliest times. In many ways Herodotus' long digressions on other cultures such as Egyptians, Persians, and Lydians inspired the universal historians. In fact, the universal historians often tried to validate their new histories by showing how Herodotus and other previous historians had been wrong and so "improving" on earlier histories. Another influence on universal historians came from the mythographers including the early ones like Hecataeus of Miletus (6th bc) who predated Herodotus and later ones like the author of Pseudo-Apollodorus' Library (2nd AD?) which we read earlier in the course. These mythographers had sometimes rationalized the myths to make them suitable for history.
Diodorus like other universal historians saw the world as a common or universal home for all mankind. He tells early history in a way akin to how many ancient philosophers described it. It is a story of how ambitious great men used their strength and intelligence to benefit all of mankind by killing large or monstrous beasts by killing bandits and tyrants to bring order out of chaos and peace out of violence. Furthermore, these benefactors of mankind bring civilization in the form of agriculture, astronomy, religion, architecture, medicine, metal working, and in short all good arts and sciences that make life better for human beings. At times, Diodorus shows that he knows there are multiple versions of a story that conflict. However, he seems little concerned with such conflicts when examining the earliest periods, since he apparently is more concerned with presenting the ideals and imagined precedents of these proto-historical or legendary figures so that they can be models for contemporary men.
Because he is concerned with the whole world, he and other universal historians often show connections between various cultures--some of these connections are found in what we consider the mythical period where Heracles, Aeneas, and other heroes are seen as world traveling founders of other states around the world. Such world-traveling heroes thus connect the world together, showing that we are all related if you go far enough back in time--an important claim if one wants to suggest that we are all one.
The sections to read are: 4.1-39
Things to look for this time (make note of section numbers for discussion)...
1) Diodorus' self-glorification or criticism of other historians (a key trait of most ancient historiography)
2) Examples of euergesia or benefactions of heroes that better the world
3) Examples of nations, peoples, and institutions that are created by these culture heroes
4) After reading my description of how Diodorus wrote and reading the assignment, how would you describe what Diodorus is doing? Why does he write the way he does? Do you think he is trying to tell the truth? If so, what did truth mean to him?
Diodorus Siculus or Diodorus of Sicily was a Greek writing under Roman rule in the 1st century BC. We read some of a later book of his history which dealt with Alexander the Great (in Mensch and Romm). His work is called the Library of History and it is a 44 book universal history. Universal history is a specific sub-genre of history in the ancient world that tried to tell the history of the whole world from the earliest times. In many ways Herodotus' long digressions on other cultures such as Egyptians, Persians, and Lydians inspired the universal historians. In fact, the universal historians often tried to validate their new histories by showing how Herodotus and other previous historians had been wrong and so "improving" on earlier histories. Another influence on universal historians came from the mythographers including the early ones like Hecataeus of Miletus (6th bc) who predated Herodotus and later ones like the author of Pseudo-Apollodorus' Library (2nd AD?) which we read earlier in the course. These mythographers had sometimes rationalized the myths to make them suitable for history.
Diodorus like other universal historians saw the world as a common or universal home for all mankind. He tells early history in a way akin to how many ancient philosophers described it. It is a story of how ambitious great men used their strength and intelligence to benefit all of mankind by killing large or monstrous beasts by killing bandits and tyrants to bring order out of chaos and peace out of violence. Furthermore, these benefactors of mankind bring civilization in the form of agriculture, astronomy, religion, architecture, medicine, metal working, and in short all good arts and sciences that make life better for human beings. At times, Diodorus shows that he knows there are multiple versions of a story that conflict. However, he seems little concerned with such conflicts when examining the earliest periods, since he apparently is more concerned with presenting the ideals and imagined precedents of these proto-historical or legendary figures so that they can be models for contemporary men.
Because he is concerned with the whole world, he and other universal historians often show connections between various cultures--some of these connections are found in what we consider the mythical period where Heracles, Aeneas, and other heroes are seen as world traveling founders of other states around the world. Such world-traveling heroes thus connect the world together, showing that we are all related if you go far enough back in time--an important claim if one wants to suggest that we are all one.
The sections to read are: 4.1-39
Things to look for this time (make note of section numbers for discussion)...
1) Diodorus' self-glorification or criticism of other historians (a key trait of most ancient historiography)
2) Examples of euergesia or benefactions of heroes that better the world
3) Examples of nations, peoples, and institutions that are created by these culture heroes
4) After reading my description of how Diodorus wrote and reading the assignment, how would you describe what Diodorus is doing? Why does he write the way he does? Do you think he is trying to tell the truth? If so, what did truth mean to him?
Monday, March 23, 2009
CLS 276- Origo Gentis Romanae, March 25
You will see many similarities to Livy's account here so let's try to concentrate on differences. Pick out a few key differences and be ready to explain why you think Livy or the later author of the _Origo_ would have told the story the way they did.
Friday, March 6, 2009
CLs 276: Monday March 6, Xenophon of Ephesus, Ephesian Tale
Read pp. 1-49 in Hansen.
Keep in mind that there was no genre title for novels and romances in the ancient world, so this, like the Alexander Romance, would have been called a "narrative" (diegema) using the same word as applied to ancient histories.
Besides the 5 core questions we always keep in mind, note the following.
How does this narrative seem similar or dissimilar to the other ancient romance we read?
How does the role of love here compare to the ideas and manifestations of love we have seen in our earlier readings (Gilgamesh & Enkidu & the harlot and Ishtar, Plato's Symposium, Odyssey, Shakespeare's Tempest, Achilles and Briseis and the Amazon Penthesilea, Alexander and Hephaestion, Potiphar's wife & Bellerophon)?
How does this romance seem similar or dissimilar to more recent novelistic depictions of love? Think of some particular examples of modern love stories to compare.
Keep in mind that there was no genre title for novels and romances in the ancient world, so this, like the Alexander Romance, would have been called a "narrative" (diegema) using the same word as applied to ancient histories.
Besides the 5 core questions we always keep in mind, note the following.
How does this narrative seem similar or dissimilar to the other ancient romance we read?
How does the role of love here compare to the ideas and manifestations of love we have seen in our earlier readings (Gilgamesh & Enkidu & the harlot and Ishtar, Plato's Symposium, Odyssey, Shakespeare's Tempest, Achilles and Briseis and the Amazon Penthesilea, Alexander and Hephaestion, Potiphar's wife & Bellerophon)?
How does this romance seem similar or dissimilar to more recent novelistic depictions of love? Think of some particular examples of modern love stories to compare.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)