#a fragment of Seneca translated | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

formisthemaskofspace · 2 years ago

Text

Is meditating on death like putting on a fur coat in summer?

Antonia Macaro

Memento mori – invitations to reflect on our own mortality – have been common throughout history. Two ancient traditions that made reflection on death central to their paths are Buddhism and Stoicism. For both, the starting point is the fact that our normal perceptions of value are deeply flawed, as we are constantly craving or loathing things that in reality are unimportant. The Buddhist texts offer a neat list of these: gain and loss, fame and disrepute, praise and blame, pleasure and pain. The Stoics had a word for them, which translates as ‘indifferents’. The things that we are so keen to pursue – wealth, material possessions, sense pleasures, comfort, success, people’s approval, romantic love and so on – are bound to disappoint and distract us from what really matters, which is our ethical and spiritual progress.

But arguing that we shouldn’t spend our lives seeking those things is not enough. The urges are strong and engrained in us, and both traditions knew it takes more than reason to begin to shake them. It takes sustained reflection on vivid and even shocking imagery to make the point on a more visceral level. This is where death meditations come in.

One of the most striking examples of this is the meditation on corpses presented in the Buddhist Satipatthana Sutta. In ancient India, corpses were left out in ‘charnel grounds’, and people would have had the opportunity to observe the various stages of decomposition. The text is nothing if not thorough, describing in some detail ‘a corpse thrown aside in a charnel ground – one, two or three days dead, bloated, livid, and oozing matter … being devoured by crows, hawks, vultures, dogs, jackals or various kinds of worms’, eventually turning into ‘bones rotten and crumbling to dust’. On observing this, the monk reminds himself that ‘This body too is of the same nature, it will be like that, it is not exempt from that fate.’

Reminders of death are everywhere in the Stoic literature, albeit generally less graphic. The nearest the Stoics come to such detailed descriptions is with the Meditations of Marcus Aurelius: ‘Bear in mind that everything that exists is already fraying at the edges, and in transition, subject to fragmentation and to rot. Or that everything was born to die.’ He is also concise and to the point in his assessment of human life, which is ‘brief and trivial. Yesterday a blob of semen; tomorrow embalming fluid, ash.’

Epictetus advises to keep death always at the front of our minds: ‘Day by day you must keep before your eyes death and exile, and everything that seems terrible, but death above all; and then you will never have any abject thought, or desire anything beyond due measure.’

These reflections are meant to alert us to the fact that the things we find attractive and desirable are ‘shiny on the outside, but on the inside are pitiful’, as Seneca put it. Practices that instigate detachment from the things of the world are a preparation for death in the sense that the recognition that they are not important should make it easier to accept that soon enough we will not be around to enjoy them.

The ancients knew that such practices should be handled with care. Their intention was to elicit equanimity, not aversion. The Buddha warns that if a meditation of this kind were to evoke loathing, the monk should switch to a different one. To illustrate this, one discourse reports the case of a group of monks who engage so enthusiastically with contemplating the unattractiveness of the body that a number of them end up killing themselves. On finding out what happened, the Buddha decides to teach the survivors the more soothing practice of mindfulness instead.

Join over 250,000+ newsletter subscribers. Our content is 100 per cent free and you can unsubscribe anytime.

Daily: A daily dose of essays, guides and videos from Aeon+Psyche

Weekly: A week’s worth of big ideas from AeonSubscribe for free

I’m already subscribedPrivacy policy

As the Buddha advised, we need to be alert to the possibility that death meditation could be detrimental if we overdo it, or do it in the wrong spirit or state of mind. But why do it at all, if we’re not Buddhists or Stoics? Not everyone is convinced that preparing for death is a good idea. In ‘On Physiognomy’ (1580), Michel de Montaigne muses that it’s a bit like putting on a fur coat in summer because we’ll need it at Christmas: ‘It is certain that most preparations for death have caused more torment than undergoing it.’ Why weigh ourselves down with thoughts of our demise when we can choose to enjoy life and leave the end to take care of itself?

While that is an appealing perspective, there are reasons to keep mortality towards the front of our minds. According to the existential psychotherapist Irvin Yalom’s Staring at the Sun (2008), the fear of death is with us all the time, whether we realise it or not. Even if we are not racked with it, death anxiety sneaks into our life in many disguises. It is what causes us to distract ourselves through the pursuit of wealth and status, for instance, or seek comfort through merging with another, or a cause. But such denial ‘always exacts a price – narrowing our inner life, blurring our vision, blunting our rationality. Ultimately self-deception catches up with us.’

Sometimes, we are shaken out of our denial by a great crisis, such as terminal illness or bereavement, or by another significant life event. Unexpectedly, Yalom argues, such experiences can evoke a sense of awakening, leading to a dropping away of trivial concerns, to reprioritising what matters in life and a heightened perception of the beauty around us: ‘[T]hough the physicality of death destroys us, the idea of death saves us.’

But we needn’t wait for pivotal experiences, says Yalom. By confronting our finitude through therapy, or reflection on death, a lasting shift in perception can arise. Yes, the process might evoke some anxiety, but ultimately it is worth it, as it can make our life richer and more vibrant.

By highlighting the fact that time is short, death meditation can help us to put things in perspective and appreciate the present more. It can remind us that the things we get so worked up about are not worth it – our appearance, career, how our achievements compare with those of our peers, the satisfaction of material desires, disputes with neighbours and tradespeople. Marcus Aurelius draws out this aspect of it well: ‘think of the list of people who had to be pried away from life. What did they gain by dying old? In the end, they all sleep six feet under.’

Death can happen at any time, as Seneca is fond of reminding us: ‘There’s no way to know the point where death lies waiting for you, so you must wait for death at every point.’ But this thought need not lead us to brood on the unsatisfactory quality of the human condition. Instead, it can open the way to a deep acceptance of it, together with the awareness that we had better make the most of what we have here and now. This is no glib hedonism, but a bittersweet recognition that any joy in life is always and necessarily intermingled with death and transience.

2 notes · View notes

domus-laurea · 10 months ago

Text

Hesperiad: The Epistulae Pavonii and Selections From Domus Taurea

Set in an alternate-historical world inspired by Roman literature and politics, Hesperiad contains the two best-known texts of the Irenian-period, the Epistulae Pavonii and Domus Taurea, as well as scholarly commentary and translator's notes.

Longer summary, extra info, & navigation below the cut!

The Epistulae, written by Pavonia Irene herself as a young woman, is a record of her travel across the Moran Empire to her ill-fated wedding. Her letters also frequently allude to a turbulent period in Mora: on the one hand, a conspiracy between the sitting emperor and his family (in which Pavonia herself may be complicit), on the other hand, a scandal surrounding Pavonia's fiancé, Spurius Ardorius Palmatus. Yet amidst the turbulence, Pavonia enjoys a comfortable journey with her tutor, the court historian and poet Calamus, remarking on landmarks, monuments, and other wonders to the mysterious figure Sophia, her friend in the capital.

Domus Taurea, a fragmented satirical novel written by Calamus near the end of Irene's rule, offers a glimpse into life in the imperial house (the Domus Laurea). As her ambitious construction project expands, Irene - now the infamous empress - hosts a series of lavish dinner parties at which her close friends and guests are alternately entertained and terrified by the stories they exchange. Meanwhile, outside the walls of the Domus, Mora is ravaged by fire, pestilence, and popular uproar.

about Hesperiad

🏛️ Genres | historical fiction / alternate history / historical fantasy, horror, suspense, metafiction

🌿 Themes | consumption of food...and other things, destructive desires and ambitions, all time is all time, history as memory, haunting the narrative / presence of absence / the text's got holes in it, hostile architecture in more ways than one

🪦 Influences | Cicero's letters, Petronius' Satyricon, Ovid's Fasti and Heroides, Crimson Peak, Domina, Labyrinth, Dimension 20's Neverafter, Lucan's Pharsalia, Vergil's Eclogues and Georgics, Seneca's Thyestes, Horace's Satires

Other things to know; or, my WIP explained badly 💀

There's ghosts (metaphorical)

There's ghosts (literal)

There's bisexuality (fun & evil)

And (somewhat) period-accurate gender weirdness

Haunted house, toxic yuri, mimetic desire

Mise en abyme / multiple nested layers of story-in-a-story

There's footnotes (questionably reliable)

And of course, there's good food!

And bad food.

main tags

hesperiad | main tag for general WIP-related things

scribo | original posts

scripsi | writing snippets

character tags

irene | posts related to Pavonia Irene

spurius | posts related to Spurius Ardorius Palmatus

picus | posts related to Sophia / Marcus Viridius Picus

calamus | posts related to Lucius Acacius Calamus

aurelia | posts related to Aurelia Ardoria

setting tags

domus | posts related to the Domus Laurea

mora | posts related to the city of Mora

hesperia | posts related to other locations in Hesperia

other

inspo | posts for inspiration/reference...what it says on the tin

craft | posts about writing, the process, prompts, etc

#pinned #hesperiad #scribo

1 note · View note

catilinas · 3 years ago

Note

I know we've lost Tumblrinus' memoirs, but can you recommend a good translation of Blorbus' poetry? I've heard the composition is a bit clumsy but it still provides unique commentary about the political climate.

hate to be the one to tell you this but based on multiple similarities in phrasing with senecan tragedy most scholars now think the blorbiad was actually written in the 1st century ce by someone other than titus blorbus :((( like there is still the Possibility that it was autobiographical by blorbus and seneca was deliberately referencing it, but plutarch does say yea that blorbus' composition is kinda not great, while the fragments of the blorbiad are relatively Not clumsy. good even. and ok maybe plutarch just fell for the anti-italian propaganda and blorbus was actually a great author whose work was unfairly slandered by his political rivals! maybe even blorbus was a good author and the blorbiad is still by someone else. personally i would still put the author as pseudo-blorbus in a bibliography. but it is up to you. and yeah even if it is from a later period even seeing what imperial authors thought of the republican political climate is really cool! esp. the sections that might be about the mithridatic wars, because afaik no other republican Or imperial poet put that much emphasis on their importance. anyway. because the poem is so fragmentary and infrequently studied the most recent translation is the 1921 loeb classical library edition trans. christopher legge. have fun

#also watch out bcs the german edition of just the text uses a completely different numbering system for the fragments #it completely threw me off :/#blorbus and tumblrinus #beeps

451 notes · View notes

flores-et-dracones · 5 years ago

Note

Could I get some recommendations on classic literature? I absolutely love to read and would like more books to add to my reading list.

Of course! Here are some of my favourites:

Homer’s Iliad and Odyssey - epic poems recounting episodes from the Trojan War. The Iliad tells the story of Achilles’ quarrel with Agamemnon and it’s consequences, while the Odyssey tells the story of the Greek hero Odysseus and his ten year journey home after the war. They were first recited orally around 750/700 BC, and were later written down. They had a profound influence on all later literature. The earliest surviving written sources from ancient Greece. Must reads for anyone with an interest in Greek mythology. Both poems are available in prose and verse translations. For prose, I’d recommend Martin Hammond’s penguin classics edition of the Iliad, and E. V. Rieu’s penguin classics edition of the Odyssey. Both are very accurate to the Greek and very readable. Hammond in particular has excellent introductory notes and critical summaries, that are very useful for a first time reader. For verse translations, I’d recommend Robert Fagles for both. Bernard Knox’s introductory essays for Fagles’ translations are works of art in themselves. Emily Wilson has also recently published a verse translation of the Odyssey. I haven’t read it in full myself yet, but it seems very easy to read and her introductory notes are excellent.

Virgil’s Aeneid - Rome’s answer to Homer, written 700 years after the Iliad and Odyssey. An epic poem recounting the story of the Trojan hero Aeneas and his quest to find a new home for the survivors of the Trojan War. A foundation story for Rome, patronized by the Emperor Augustus himself. The only epic in which we actually see the wooden horse and the sack of Troy (the Iliad ends with the death of Hector, long before the city falls; the Odyssey takes up the story long after the war has ended. Aeneas recounts the fall of Troy in book 2 of the Aeneid). For prose, I’d recommend David West’s penguin classics translation, and for verse, I’d recommend Robert Fagles again. A quicker read than either the Iliad or Odyssey, as it is only half their length.

Ovid’s Metamorphoses - another must read for anyone with an interest in myth. Often considered a mock-epic because of its humor and irreverence, Metamorphoses presents a kaleidoscopic sequence of Greek and Roman myths, from the origins of the universe down to the deification of Julius Caesar during the reign of Augustus (Ovid’s contemporary era). The unifying theme is - you’ve guessed it - metamorphoses, change and transformation. No other ancient text (except perhaps Apollodorus’ Library of Greek Mythology) gathers together so many myths. It was the primary source of classical myth for Shakespeare and the Elizabethan poets, who would have read William Golding’s translation.

The poetry of Sappho - one of the very few female authors whose work survives from antiquity. She lived on the Greek island of Lesbos in the 7th century BC. She was a lyric poet - her poems were accompanied by music, typically the lyre. Her genius was highly respected in antiquity, but today most of her work survives only in fragments. I’d recommend Anne Carson’s translation If Not, Winter: Fragments of Sappho. Carson is a poet in her own right, and the format in which she presents Sappho’s work makes for a unique and beautiful reading experience.

Greek Tragedy - one of my favourite genres, and a great place to start if you are new to classics, because they are quite short, usually easy to read, and always intensely gripping. 32 plays survive in full, so there’s plenty to choose from, but I’d recommend Euripides’ Medea, Sophocles’ Oedipus Tyrannos, Sophocles’ Antigone, Aeschylus’ Oresteia, and Euripides’ Electra (make sure you read the Oresteia before Electra - you’ll appreciate it more that way). Also Aeschylus’ Prometheus Bound and Euripides’ Trojan Women, which deals with the fate of the women after the destruction of Troy.

Greek Comedy - I’d recommend Aristophanes’ Lysistrata, Assembly Women, Frogs and Birds in particular. Absolutely absurd.

Seneca’s Medea - a Roman tragedy. Very interesting to compare to Euripides’ play. He wrote other tragedies too, if you develop a taste. This is the famous Seneca, the stoic philosopher, the one who tried to curb the emperor Nero’s megalomania and was eventually ordered to commit suicide by him.

The poetry of Catullus - a Roman poet, living during the reign of Julius Caesar. His poetry ranges from the hilarious to the heart-breaking, and is noted for being full of ‘obscenity and abuse’ (which makes it very fun to read). I’d recommend Guy Lee’s oxford world’s classics translation.

Tristia and the Black Sea Letters - the poems and letters Ovid wrote from exile. He wrote them in Tomis in modern day Romania on the coast of the black sea, and sent them back to Rome, where he intended them to circulate amongst a broad audience, despite their ostensibly private nature. They were essentially a propaganda campaign, designed to build sympathy for him and pressurize Augustus into recalling him to Rome. My favourite of his works, I think. I’d recommend Peter Green’s translations.

Longus’ Daphnis and Chloe - a charming little Greek novel, telling a story of first love between two shepherds, set in an idyllic, pastoral setting. A very quick read and available as a penguin little black classic.

Seutonius’ Lives of the Caesars - to brush up on your Roman history. Covers the lives of 12 Roman emperors, controversially including Julius Caesar as the first. Includes some of the most notorious figures from Roman history, such as Caligula and Nero. Scandalous and dramatic, not exactly objective, but an entertaining read.

I think that’s probably enough to be getting on with!

#classics #asks #book recs #ancient literature #mine #greek & roman literature #tagamemnon

271 notes · View notes

rainwolfheart · 4 years ago

Text

Classical Literature Prompts vol. I

Here are some out-of-context quotes from classical Greek literature to use as fic prompts. Square brackets represent missing text. I tried my best to replicate the spacing and line breaks for Sappho (below the cut). Yellow underscores represent large spaces, since Tumblr doesn't like poetry :/ I'd like to do more of these, especially Emily Wilson's translations of Seneca and Homer!

Hippolytus by Euripides

Translated by Rachel Kitzinger (published in The Greek Plays, eds. Lefkowitz and Romm)

Here’s the light (178)

Aimlessly we’re carried along by stories (197)

One cannot trust the tongue: it knows how to give advice to others but gets only the greatest disaster for itself. (394-6)

You’re in love—why the amazement? (439)

It’s help, not knowledge, you need (517)

In the smoke and blood of a deadly wedding (551-2)

So this is your justice? I deserve this? You wound me and then talk your way out? (702-3)

cover in silence what you’ve heard here. (712)

the house a desert (847)

What a conjurer! A wizard! (1038)

I have no need of bird-omens flying above my head. (1058-9)

If not, winter by Sappho

Translated by Anne Carson

all night long] I am aware _____________]of evildoing (fragment 3)

the most beautiful thing on the black earth (fragment 16)

Holy and beautiful maiden (fragment 17)

the one with violets in her lap _______]mostly _______]goes astray (fragment 21)

if not, winter (fragment 22)

]dewy riverbanks ]to last all night long (fragment 23)

]you will remember ]for we in our youth _______did these things _ yes many and beautiful things (fragment 24a)

______________]you, I want ______________]to suffer _______]in myself I am aware of this (fragment 26)

lovely laughing—oh it puts the heart in my chest on wings (fragment 31)

tongue breaks and thin fire is racing under skin (fragment 31)

you burn me (fragment 38)

myrrh and cassia and frankincense were mingled. (fragment 44)

as long as you want (fragment 45)

_______and I on a soft pillow will lay down my limbs (fragment 46)

I don’t know what to do _____________________two states of mind in me (fragment 51)

not one girl I think ______who looks on the light of the sun _____________will ever _____________have wisdom _____________like this (fragment 56)

]some sweet song ]in honey voice ]piercing breezes ]wet with dew (fragment 71)

the blessed Graces prefer to look on one who wears flowers and turn away from those without a crown. (fragment 81)

]right here ] ](now again) (fragment 83)

___________]and yes I shall love___]as long as there is in me (fragment 88A/88B)

]and know this _ ]whatever you ]I shall love (fragment 88A)

_______sometimes at sunset ______________the rosyfingered moon surpasses all the stars. And her light _______stretches over salt sea ______________equally and flowerdeep fields. (fragment 96)

exile memories____terribly leaked away (fragment 98B)

I am broken with longing (fragment 102)

Evening _______you gather back _____________all that dazzling dawn has put asunder (fragment 104A)

of all stars the most beautiful (fragment 104B)

or you love some man more than me (fragment 129A)

I conversed with you in a dream (fragment 134)

messenger of spring _______________nightingale with a voice of longing (fragment 136)

someone will remember us _____________________I say _____________________even in another time (fragment 147)

and on the eyes ______________black sleep of night (fragment 151)

a very long farewell (fragment 155)

with anger spreading in the chest to guard against a vainly barking tongue (fragment 158)

with what eyes? (fragment 162)

Moon has set and Pleiades: middle night, the hour goes by, alone I lie. (fragment 168B)

I would lead (fragment 169)

celery (fragment 191)

#prompt list #fic prompts #euripides #sappho

1 note · View note

classicwisdom · 3 years ago

Photo

The Classic Wisdom Collection is a library of ancient philosophical texts that have been re-worked as a labor of love into high-quality books with gold foiled edges, clean, easy to reference page design, and beautiful cover design and feel. The Stoic Collection 2 is a collection of four ancient Stoic Philosophy books presented in a beautiful box set. The four books included are: • Minor Dialogues - Seneca • Stoic Fragments - Musonius Rufus - Epictetus - Hierocles • Letters & Lectures - Marcus Tullius Cicero • Moral Sayings - Publius Syrus The perfect accompaniment to original The Stoic Collection boxset, this collection is for people looking to dig deeper into the Stoic writings the inspired the likes of Marcus Aurelius and Seneca. The Stoic Collection 2 box set (Classic Wisdom Collection) includes: - The Minor Dialogues by Seneca Translation by Aubrey Stewart Hardback: 364 pages Dimensions: 224mm H x 150mm W - The Moral Sayings of Publius Syrus, A Roman Slave by Publius Syrus Translation by D. Lyman Hardback: 174 pages Dimensions: 224mm H x 150mm W - Letters by Marcus Tullius Cicero - Letters of Cicero - On Friendship - Cato the Elder on Old Age - Stoic Paradoxes Hardback: 224 pages Dimensions: 224mm H x 150mm W - Stoic Fragments A great portion of Stoic writings are lost to time. Some famous documents were found and preserved some partially destroyed or lost. We have collated three manuscripts from Musonius Rufus, Hierocles, and Epictetus. - Letters & Fragments - Musonius Rufus - Ethical Fragments of Hierocles - Hierocles - Fragments of Epictetus - Epictetus Hardback: 168 pages Dimensions: 224mm H x 150mm W #books #bookstagram #book #philosophy #philosophybooks #stoicphilosophy #stoicism #stoic #stoicquotes #stoicmindset #stoicismdaily #dailystoic #stoiclife #stoicwisdom #wisdom #wisdomquotes #inspiration #inspirationalquotes #motivation #motivationalquotes #life #lifequotes #bookrecommendations #booklover #read #reading #readinglist #readmore #readmorebooks https://www.instagram.com/p/CYsnD9ePs2z/?utm_medium=tumblr

0 notes

whydoiloveyouanyway-blog · 6 years ago

Text

Serious question: how am I supposed to interact with this kind of post? I see people saying this kind of thing all the time, but are these posts that haters aren't supposed ("allowed") to interact with? I recognize that I have not read all 12000 lines of the Aeneid in Latin but I have carefully read about 2000 and like ... I have good reasons for my opinions.

I do not, even in the slightest, think the problem with the Aeneid is that it "copies Homer": in fact, I doubt if Virgil ever COPIES Homer, any more than he copies Ennius or Lucretius when he repeatedly quotes half-lines and lines from either of them, or Homeric Hymns and other post-Homeric material we only have in fragments that he uses and replies to [none of which anyone on tumblr seems to notice or talk about, just his relationship to Homer -- ?!]; as my friend says, "in Virgil, there's always a reason for the allusion, there's always a meaning to the allusion" -- and in Virgil, specific references to Homer are often meant to deliberately turn Homeric and especially Iliadic value systems inside out. (Have you ever read the Nisus and Euryalus episode next to the Doloneia? Note how, unlike Homer, Virgil thinks romantic murder escapades are an extremely not smart or good idea. Or hey, remember that time when Homer's Hector says "if the war is already lost, don't keep fighting it; flee with your family, take care of them, that's the true way to be responsible for the people you lead?" No, you don't? That's funny, because that's what Hector's ghost begs Aeneas to do when Aeneas wants to get himself killed "for Troy" in Aeneid ii. [And incidentally, the portrayal of Aeneas's dream of the ghost of Hector draws as much on Ennius, and also Lucretius's recounting of Ennius's dream of the ghost of Homer, as it does on Homer directly.])

The Aeneid participates in a long and surprisingly continuous (across Greek, Etruscan, Roman, etc.) centuries-long tradition of myth conceived as quasi-history, of which Homer forms a smaller part than we can be aware so much later, but certainly with a special awe for the place of Homer in that tradition. But even if it were "Homer fanfiction" -- that would be excitingly creative, too, and not amount to copying.

I also am not upset about his politics. Believe me, if I can forgive Seneca for initially having high hopes for Nero's reign, I can accept Virgil's joy that Augustus looked to be establishing peace after a hundred years of civil war in Rome, including in some slightly tawdry and campy manifestations, and especially as tempered by his recognition of the human and social costs of war.

I can't blame Virgil for the Aeneid not having received especially vivid English translations, though my impression from talking to people has always been that essentially no one who has only read the Aeneid in translation "gets it." (And as I recall, in the introduction to his translation of the Aeneid, Allen Mandelbaum mentions that it took him years to think of Virgil as great in his own right rather than a transition between Homer and Dante.)

I don't even blame the Aeneid for its misogyny any more than I think that Tacitus's frequent acceptance of the most misogynistic of his source-materials makes him less than brilliant as a historian and analyst of human behavior under dreadful circumstances -- much less disqualifying his prose, teaching which is always a real thrill for me. (Though having it pointed out that every other use of fallo, fallere in the Aeneid is critical and not neutral, and therefore that Aeneas is almost certainly blaming his wife Creusa for getting lost while fleeing Troy when he says "fallit" -- saying not "I lost track of her" but "she deceived/cheated me" -- did make me feel kind of sick.)

Virgil is clever at verse-writing. He has an astonishing knowledge of the treasurehouse of sources he draws on, and uses them creatively. He repeats words and themes in different contexts with the effect of building meaning in often quite subtle ways. He even has a couple of good ideas undergirding the Aeneid. As I suggested above, I think that structuring an epic around not only the impossibility, but the unreasonableness and viciousness of living according to Homeric kleos is a great use of the form, and I think that writing an epic that doesn't justify every death in battle as glorious is a great use of the form, too.

So, in short I blame the Aeneid for the same things as I would blame any other work of art for: I find the characters and similes just about equally lifeless, I find Virgil's interest in "technically perfect" verse monotonous, I find his engagement with philosophy embarrassingly shallow when he decides to waste a bunch of our time with his philosophy talk (book vi whyyy; but also, bits of bad Stoicism scattered everywhere). When he describes natural phenomena I find myself thinking "if you don't care about what's outside, you don't have to spend so much time talking about it" (and this is just as true when I read the Eclogues. haven't read much of Georgics except, like everyone else, the bees). I should say, not only do I find the characters generally flat and lifeless, I think they make decisions that are without basis to the point of becoming unintelligible with unacceptable frequency. And more damning still, I find both their rational and their foolish decisions equally unengaging and unmoving. And yes, I also find both the constant allusions to other sources and the constant echoes of other parts of the Aeneid wearying and sometimes precious.

Does it make a difference to my reading that Virgil has been held up, since the day after he died, as the pinnacle of poetic achievement? Of course it does; my experience of Virgil is so stained with disappointment it's practically soaked through, in a way that it wouldn't be if I weren't familiar with Augustine's schoolboy tears for Dido, and the story Servius passes along that Octavia fainted during the description of her sons dying [important context for the fainting that OP mentioned], and the joke (in Tacitus maybe?) that "in our days there are some people so perverse in their 'primitivist' taste as to prefer Lucretius to Virgil -- and there are even those true freaks who like Ennius best!," and Dante's worshipful use, and Mediaeval traditions of Magic Virgil with his Magic Virga (wand) being a prophet who like also saves princesses suffering in durance vile, and if Virgil weren't still a name in common use because the Aeneid has been a school text continuously for over two thousand years, and all that.

Do I acknowledge that Virgil is smoother to read than Ennius and Lucretius? Yes, naturally. Except the descriptions of battles (where I cam't always follow who's doing what to whom without a commentary), I can pretty much just sit and read Virgil in Latin. And that's nice.

I am a weak Platonist about aesthetic value: I believe that the good that people find in aesthetic objects and experiences is there. But that leaves plenty of room for different angles, emphases, and interests. (Hence, e.g., the fact that someone very familiar with a genre reads individual participants in that genre quite differently than a novice to the genre, and the fact that our outside interests and knowledge legitimately affect what bad things in a text we can shrug off vs. what feels like the straw that broke the camel's back.) I am far, far, far from the only person I know who -- having been always told that Virgil is the pinnacle of Latin poetry and Cicero is the pinnacle of Latin prose -- decided, after reading a chunk of the Aeneid and In Catilinam i, that I could trudge through Latin when I had to for scholarly purposes (plus read Catullus for pleasure), but that basically Latin wasn't for me, and I should stick with Greek. Many non-classicists who take Latin have had similar experiences, but so have multiple Latin teachers that I know and tons and tons of Hellenists. Maybe if we tried a little harder to combat and complicate that presentation and NOT to make Virgil a litmus test for loving Latin, we could make Latin just that little bit more welcoming to people who learn Latin when they are old enough to make their own decisions about what they like and dislike.

i have a really hard time understanding when people say that they don’t like the aeneid or that they think it’s poorly written. like have all the opinions you want about augustus and the way that vergil interacts with him but the aeneid literally slaps so hard it made a augustus’s sister pass out

#virgil #vergil #uncarnetmaisvirtuel is pretty much a saint to put up with this kind of project #as always #btw i still think virgil never went outside and probably didn't know anything about weapons either #can you imagine vergil writing about what dogs and horses dream about #i also do not care about the spelling of the anglicization of p. vergilius maro's name

592 notes · View notes

aegialia · 8 years ago

Note

I want to start reading the iliad and those types of books!! I'm not sure where to start though, and I can't find anything online. What books should I read that involve Greek/roman mythology?And what order should I read them? + any other comments/things I should know? Thank you in advance!!!

sorry for the late reply! i’ve broken this down into a few sections.

If you really don’t have much of a grounding in greek mythology/the trojan war, here’s where you should start:

if you want to read a good, easy to read, and short-ish summary of the whole war, i really like black ships before troy, a children’s version of the story. it’s the first thing i read, and it’s pretty accurate. also comes with pictures!

age of bronze is a graphic novel of the whole trojan war, good if you have a hard time with the language and style of epic poetry. i like some of it a lot and hate some of it a lot.

honestly, reading the summary of the trojan war on wikipedia is a pretty good idea. the back story is weird, contradictory, and convoluted, and wikipedia is (usually) correct

once you have an idea of what’s going on, here’s where to go next:

the iliad. you really should start with it, if only because basically everything that’s written after it draws on it.

everyone has an opinion of what translation is best. here’s my two cents: lombardo is easy to read and fun, but sometimes a little too modern. lattimore is pretty, but i don’t like how he translates stuff with women. fagles is decent, if kinda boring. pope has very archaic language, so avoid it your first read through. those are the most common translations i’ve seen, but there are others out there. please don’t read a prose version, They Are Evil (a lot of the time they cut out bits of the story and they lose all musicality)

after the iliad, the odyssey should come next. it’s got similar characterization and style to the iliad, so it’s easy to read

there are version of it written by the people who wrote ‘black ships’ and ‘age of bronze’. most translation advice remains the same

the aeneid seems like where you should go next, but i’ll warn you- it’s a bit of a drag. it’s got some fun bits, and then a lot of really boring bits

i don’t know of any modern adaptations of it, but you should definitely read a summary before reading it

as for translation, i’ve only read fritzgerald. it’s a good translation and easy to read.

after the big three:

if you don’t want to read 12 books of aeneas whining, you can skip here after the odyssey

greek tragedy! there’s a lot of it, and it’s fun. there are three surviving playwrights, who i’ll talk about below

aeschylus: tbh, i haven’t read much of him. i liked ‘agamemnon’, but i’ve never gotten around to the rest of his works. he wrote a trilogy of plays about agamemnon’s homecoming and all the shit that went down after that called the oresteia. the only other one i’ve read is ‘7 against thebes’, which was boring

sophocles: not my fav, but he’s pretty great. ‘ajax’ is amazing, but very depressing. ‘philoctetes’ is kinda weird, but ok.

euripides: i love euripides so much, man. my favorite is ‘the bacchae’, but it’s not about the trojan war. ‘the trojan women’, ‘hecuba’, and ‘andromache’ are all good and trojan-centric. i really liked ‘iphigenia in tauris’. ‘electra’ is hands down my favorite trojan war play. btw, he really hates sparta, which is why menelaus and all of his family are usually super evil

i have no advice on translations, tbh. go and see the plays if you can

weirder and usually unread things:

fragments of the epic cycle: there were a bunch more epics than the two we have! unfortunately, we only have like 3 lines from any of them. they’re fun to read and have some neat side stories, but there are no modern translations that i know of

hesiod: we’ve got some bits of some stories from the trojan war from him. tbh, i haven’t read them much, he’s not my type

apollodorus has an account of the trojan war in his big book o’ myths

lycorphon’s poem ‘alexandra’ gives a neat perspective on the war from cassandra

colluthus has a version of the abduction of helen, i am not a huge fan of it

tryphiodorus has a short little poem about the fall of troy. it’s kinda cool

seneca wrote a few plays set during the trojan war, i haven’t read them

statius wrote part of an epic about achilles. if i cared slightly more about achilles, i’d probably like it

dares of phrygia also wrote an account of the fall of troy, which i enjoyed

the posthomerica is fun, and full of death

ovid wrote some

not classical, but about the trojan war:

dante’s inferno. you get to see all of your favs in absurdly wrong circles of hell (why is achilles in lust??? literally the most important thing about him is rage!!!!) and hang out with vergil

shakespeare’s ‘troilus and cressida’. idk man it’s a weird play. i kinda liked it, but it’s pretty removed from the iliad

there are a bunch of medieval romances based on it

helen turns up in ‘faust’

you probably know about the song of achilles. if not, it’s the story told by patroclus, focusing on his relationship with achilles. i have complicated feelings about it

‘helen of troy’ is the story from helen’s perspective. i haven’t read it, but i’ve heard it’s good

non-trojan war classical stuff:

there’s a ton of stuff about the argonauts, which is super fun

reading hesoid and ovid’s stuff is fun, b/c you get all the weird little stories

cicero is an engaging read, if an annoying dude

herodotus is fun if you like fake history. my fav roman historian is polybius, because he writes about carthage

reading basically anybody’s letters is fun

sappho and the other lyrical poets are lovely

i have a soft spot for the homeric hymns

the satyricon is one wacky adventure

general tips:

theoi.org has translations of most of the things i’ve mentioned, as well as a good reference guide to general greek mythology stuff

please don’t read de bello gallico. it isn’t fun and you’ll probably hate caesar

don’t watch troy. it’s terrible. it’s just so.so.so. bad

the movie version of the satyricon is bizarre and unpleasant to look at

there are twenty versions of every myth. there is no consistent characterization. medieval writers had weird ideas. most translations come from like 1920.

none of this is essential, not even the iliad. these stories are ancient and nebulous and you can pick and choose what sounds interesting to you

if you’re confused by something (for instance- wtf is happening in the house of atreus), feel free to ask me. i love talking about this stuff So Much

there are also lots of people on tumblr with actual classics degrees and stuff who know more than me

i am a 17 year old who has taken a few years of latin classes. you don’t need a degree or a teacher to get into this stuff

have fun, ignore logic, laugh at ridiculous stuff, skim the boring bits

this is crazy long, sorry, i got Very into this

#classics #tagamemnon #the iliad #the odyssey #greek mythology #gloomth and circumstance #greek tragedy #Anonymous

20 notes · View notes

lodelss · 5 years ago

Link

The following essay, like all those collected in I Will Never See the World Again, was smuggled out of jail among Ahmet Altan’s notes to his lawyers.

I woke up. The doorbell was ringing. I looked at the digital clock by my side, the numbers were blinking 05:42.

“It’s the police,” I said.

Like all dissidents in this country, I went to bed expecting the ring of the doorbell at dawn.

I knew one day they would come for me. Now they had.

I had even prepared a set of clothes in an overnight bag so that I would be ready for the police raid and what would follow.

A pair of loose black linen trousers tied with a band inside the waist so there would be no need for a belt, black ankle socks, comfortable soft trainers, a light cotton T-shirt and a dark-colored shirt to be worn over it.

I put on my “raid uniform” and went to the door.

Local Bookstores Amazon

Through the peephole I could see six policemen on the landing, sporting the vests worn by counterterrorism teams during house raids, the acronym “TEM” stamped in large letters on their chests.

I opened the door.

“These are search and arrest orders,” they said as they entered, leaving the door open.

They told me there was a second arrest order for my brother Mehmet Altan, who lived in the same building. A team had waited at his door, but no one had answered.

When I asked which number apartment they had gone to, it turned out they had rung the wrong bell.

I phoned Mehmet.

“We have guests,” I said. “Open the door.”

As I hung up, one of the policemen reached for my phone. “I’ll have that,” he said, and took it.

The six spread out into the apartment and began their search.

Dawn arrived. The sun rose behind the hills with its rays spreading purple, scarlet and lavender waves across the sky, resembling a white rose petal opening.

A peaceful September morning was stirring, unaware of what was happening inside my home.

While the policemen searched the apartment, I put the kettle on.

“Would you like some tea?” I asked.

They said they would not.

“It is not a bribe,” I said, imitating my late father, “you can drink some.”

Exactly forty-five years ago, on a morning just like this one, they had raided our house and arrested my father.

My father asked the police if they would like some coffee. When they declined, he laughed and said, “It is not a bribe, you can drink some.”

What I was experiencing was not déjà vu. Reality was repeating itself. This country moves through history too slowly for time to go forward, so it folds back on itself instead.

Forty-five years had passed and time had returned to the same morning.

During the space of that morning which lasted forty-five years, my father had died and I had grown old, but the dawn and the raid were unchanged.

Mehmet appeared at the open door with the smile on his face I always find reassuring. He was surrounded by policemen.

We said farewell. The police took Mehmet away.

My two high walls were built with a single sentence.

I poured myself tea. I put muesli in a bowl and poured milk over it. I sat in an armchair to drink my tea, eat my muesli and wait for the police to complete their search.

The apartment was quiet.

No sound could be heard other than the police as they moved things around.

They filled thick plastic bags with the two decades-old laptops I had written some of my novels on and therefore could not bring myself to throw away, old-fashioned diskettes that had accumulated over the years and my current laptop.

“Let’s go,” they said.

I took the bag, to which I had added a change of underwear and a couple of books.

We left the building. We got into the police car that was waiting at the gate.

I sat with my bag on my lap. The door closed on me.

It is said that the dead do not know that they are dead. According to Anatolian mythology, once the corpse is placed in the grave and covered with dirt and the funeral crowd has begun to disperse, the dead person also tries to get up and go home, only to realize when he hits his head on the coffin lid that he has died.

When the door closed, my head hit the coffin lid.

I could not open the door of that car and get out.

I could not return home.

Never again would I be able to kiss the woman I love, embrace my kids, meet with my friends, walk the streets. I would not have my room to write in, my machine to write with, my library to reach for. I would not be able to listen to a violin concerto or go on a trip or browse in bookstores or buy bread from a bakery or gaze on the sea or an orange tree or smell the scent of flowers, the grass, the rain, the earth. I would not be able to go to a cinema. I would not be able to eat eggs with sausage or drink a glass of wine or go to a restaurant and order fish. I would not be able to watch the sunrise. I would not be able to call anyone on the phone. No one would be able to call me on the phone. I would not be able to open a door by myself. I would not wake up again in a room with curtains.

Even my name was about to change.

Ahmet Altan would be erased and replaced with the name on the official certificate, Ahmet Hüsrev Altan.

When they asked for my name, I would say “Ahmet Hüsrev Altan.” When they asked where I lived, I would give them the number of a cell.

From now on, others would decide what I did, where I stood, where I slept, what time I got up, what my name was.

I would always be receiving orders: “stop,” “walk,” “enter,” “raise your arms,” “take off your shoes,” “don’t talk.”

Kickstart your weekend reading by getting the week’s best Longreads delivered to your inbox every Friday afternoon.

The police car was speeding along.

It was the first day of a twelve-day religious holiday. Most people in the city, including the prosecutor who had ordered my arrest, had left on vacation.

The streets were deserted.

The policeman next to me lit a cigarette, then held the packet out to me.

I shook my head no, smiling.

“I only smoke,” I said, “when I am nervous.”

Who knows where this sentence came from. Nowhere in my mind had I chosen to make such a declaration. It was a sentence that put an unbridgeable distance between itself and reality. It ignored reality, ridiculed it, even as I was being transformed into a pitiful bug who could not even open the door of the car he was in, who had lost his right to decide his own future, whose very name was being changed; a bug entangled in the web of a poisonous spider.

It was as if someone inside me, a person whom I could not exactly call “I” but who nevertheless spoke with my voice, through my mouth, and who was therefore a part of me, said as he was being transported in a police car to an iron cage that he only smoked when he was “nervous.”

That single sentence suddenly changed everything.

It divided reality in two, like a Samurai sword that in a single movement cuts through a silk scarf thrown up in the air.

On one side of this reality was a body made of flesh, bone, blood, muscle and nerve that was trapped. On the other side was a mind that did not care about that body and made fun of what would happen to it, a mind that looked from above at what was happening and at what was yet to happen, that believed itself untouchable and that was, therefore, untouchable.

I was like Julius Caesar, who, as soon as he was informed that a large Gallic army was on its way to relieve the besieged occupants of Alesia, had two high walls built — one around the castle to prevent those inside from leaving, and one around his troops to prevent those outside from entering.

My two high walls were built with a single sentence which prevented the mortal threats from entering and the worries accumulating in the deep corners of my mind from exiting, so that the two could not unite to crush me with fear and terror.

Reality itself is taken aback.

I realized once more that when you are faced with a reality that can turn your life upside down, that same sorry reality will sweep you away like a wild flood only if you submit to it and act as it expects you to.

As someone who has been thrown into the dirty, swelling waves of reality, I can say with certainty that its victims are those so-called smart people who believe that you have to act in accordance with it.

There are certain actions and words that are demanded by the events, the dangers and the realities that surround you. Once you refuse to play this assigned role, instead doing and saying the unexpected, reality itself is taken aback; it hits against the rebellious jetties of your mind and breaks into pieces. You then gain the power to collect the fragments together and create from them a new reality in the mind’s safe harbor.

The trick is to do the unexpected, to say the unexpected. Once you can make light of the lance of destiny pointing at your body, you can cheerfully eat the cherries you had filled your hat with, like the unforgettable lieutenant in Pushkin’s story “The Shot” who does exactly that with a gun pointing at his heart.

Like Borges, you can answer the mugger who demands, “Your money or your life,” with, “My life.”

The power you will gain is limitless.

I still don’t know how I came to utter the sentence that transformed everything that was happening to me and my perception of it, nor what its mystical source might be. What I do know is that someone in the police car, the person who was able to say he smoked only when he was nervous, is hidden inside me.

He is made of many voices, laughs, paragraphs, sentences and pain.

Had I not seen my father smile as he was taken away in a police car forty-five years ago; had I not heard from him that the envoy of Carthage, when threatened with torture, put his hand in the embers; had I not known that Seneca consoled his friends as he sat in a bath full of hot water and slit his wrists on Nero’s orders; had I not read that, on the eve of the day he was to be guillotined, Saint-Just had written in a letter that the conditions were difficult only for those who resisted entering the grave and that Epictetus had said when our bodies are enslaved our minds can remain free; had I not learned that Boethius wrote his famous book in a cell awaiting death, I would have been afraid of the reality that surrounded me in that police car. I would not have found the strength to ridicule it and shred it to pieces. Nor would I have been able to utter the sentence with secret laughter that rose from my lungs to my lips. No, I would have cowered with anxiety.

But someone whom I reckon to be made from the illuminated shadows of those magnificent dead reflected in me spoke, and thus managed to change all that was happening.

Reality could not conquer me.

Instead, I conquered reality.

In that police car speeding down the sunlit streets, I set the bag that was on my lap onto the floor with a sense of ease, and leaned back.

When we arrived at the Security Department, the car drove through a very large gate at the entrance and started down a winding road. As we descended the slope there was less and less light and the darkness deepened.

At a turn in the road, the car stopped and we got out. We walked through a door into a large underground hall.

This was an underworld completely unknown to the people milling about above. It reeked of stone, sweat and damp. It tore from the world all those who passed through its dirty yellow walls, which resembled a forest of sulphur.

In the drab raw light of the naked lamps every face bore the wax dullness of death.

Plainclothes policemen waited to greet us creatures ripped from the world. Past them, a hallway led deeper inside. Piled at the base of the walls were plastic bags that looked like the shapeless belongings of the shipwrecked swept ashore.

The policemen removed the tie from around the waist of my trousers, together with my watch and my ID.

Here in depths without light, the police, with each of their gestures and words, carved us out of life like a rotten, maggot-laced chunk from a pear, severing us from the world of “the living.”

I followed a policeman into the hallway, dragging my feet in laceless shoes. He opened an iron door and we entered a narrow corridor where an oppressive heat grasped me like the claws of a wild beast.

A row of cells behind iron bars ran along the corridor. They were congested with people lying on the floor. With their beards growing long, their eyes tired, their feet bare and their bodies coated in sweat, the boundaries of their existence had melted and they had become a moving mass of flesh.

They stared at me with curiosity and unease.

The policeman put me in a cell and locked the door behind me.

I took off my shoes and lay down like the others. In that small cell filled with people, there was no room to stand.

In a matter of hours, I had traveled across five centuries to arrive at the dungeons of the Inquisition.

I smiled at the policeman who was standing outside my cell, watching me.

Viewed from outside, I was one old, white-bearded Ahmet Hüsrev Altan lying down in an airless, lightless iron cage.

But this was only the reality of those who locked me up. For myself, I had changed it.

I was the lieutenant happily eating cherries with a gun pointing at his heart. I was Borges telling the mugger to take his life. I was Caesar building walls around Alesia.

I only smoke when I’m nervous.

* * *

From I Will Never See the World Again, by Ahmet Altan, recently published by Other Press.

Ahmet Altan, born in 1950, is one of Turkey’s most important writers. In the purge following the failed coup in July 2016, Altan was sent to prison pending trial for giving “subliminal messages” in support of the coup. In February 2018 he was sentenced to life in prison without parole for attempting to overthrow the government. Fifty-one Nobel laureates have signed an open letter to President Erdogan calling for Altan’s release. Altan is the author of seven essay collections and ten novels.

Longreads Editor: Dana Snitzky

#IFTTT #Blogger

0 notes

emmagreen1220-blog · 6 years ago

Text

New Post has been published on Literary Techniques

New Post has been published on https://literarytechniques.org/motif-in-literature/

Motif in Literature

Examples of Motif in Literature

Motif, in essence, is a recurring element, whether a concept, a phrase, an image, an object, an event, or a situation. This element can reappear within a single work, but also across many works written by one or numerous different authors (not always consciously imitating each other). Modern scholars tend to distinguish these two meanings of the word “motif” in literary studies by labeling the recurrence of elements in a single work with the German word leitmotif (“leading motif”)—borrowed from early analyses of the music of Wagner—and by referring to the repetition of concepts and themes across literary works with the rather old term topos (pl. topoi; “(common) place”)—borrowed from ancient rhetoric. So that you can understand better this distinction, below we provide examples of both topoi and leitmotifs, i.e., the two different types of motifs.

Across Many Works (Topoi)

Example #1: Ubi Sunt

“Ubi sunt” is Latin for “where are… [they]?” and it is one of the oldest and most pervasive motifs in world literature. It is a melancholic comment on the transience of life, usually made through a series of rhetorical questions concerning the fate of the most exemplary people of the past, be they the bravest, the wealthiest, or the most beautiful. Sometimes, ubi sunt can also take the form of a nostalgic yearning for “the good ol’ days;” in this case, the mood it tries to convey approximates the one captured by the numerous variations of another widespread motif: the “golden age” motif.

The Bible

You can find one of the earliest appearances of the ubi sunt motif in the Book of Baruch (33:16-19), a deuterocanonical book of the Bible (meaning: it is considered to be part of the Bible only by Catholics and Orthodox Christians). In fact, the expression ubi sunt is derived from the Latin translation of the first two words of this passage:

Where are the rulers of the nations, and those who lorded it over the animals on earth; those who made sport of the birds of the air, and who hoarded up silver and gold in which people trust, and there is no end to their getting; those who schemed to get silver, and were anxious, but there is no trace of their works? They have vanished and gone down to Hades, and others have arisen in their place.

Medieval Poetry

Medieval poets attempted to bring to mind this feeling of fleetingness pretty often, and you can find the same motif expressed in numerous poems written in many different languages during this period of time. Thus, the Old English poem Wanderer asks “Where is the horse gone? Where the rider? Where the giver of treasure?/ Where are the seats at the feast? Where are the revels in the hall?” and 13th-century French trouvère Rutebeuf sings “What has become of my friends/ That I had held so close/ And loved so much?”

One of the most famous evocations of the ubi sunt motif can be found in another French poet of the Middle Ages, the notorious François Villon. In his “Ballade of the Ladies of Times Past,” he sings that all the most beautiful maidens in history have disappeared just like last year’s snows. The poem contains perhaps the most imitated and alluded-to refrain of this kind: “Where are the snows of yesteryear?”

On a more positive note, the well-known academic commercium song “Gaudeamus igitur” contains the verses “Where are those who trod this globe/ In the years before us?” but only so as to inspire those who listen to seize the day, which is another prominent literary topos sometimes associated with the ubi sunt: the carpe diem motif. But we’ll get back to it later.

Renaissance and Romanticism

Shakespeare revisits the ubi sunt motif in the “Alas, poor Yorick” speech given by Hamlet in the fifth act of his most celebrated play, as does James Macpherson in his pseudo-translations of Ossian, Fragments of Ancient Poetry: “Where is Fingal the King? where is Oscur, my son? where are all my race?”

From the Romantic period come two more personalized and, thus, more devastating manifestations of the ubi sunt motif. The first one can be found in Goethe’s “Dedication” to Faust, in which he bemoans the fact that the people he wrote his poems for can no longer read them:

They hear no longer these succeeding measures, The souls, to whom my earliest songs I sang: Dispersed the friendly troop, with all its pleasures, And still, alas! the echoes first that rang!

The second example comes from Charles Lamb’s brief poem “The Old Familiar Faces” which opens with this heart-rending tercet:

I have had playmates, I have had companions, In my days of childhood, in my joyful school-days, All, all are gone, the old familiar faces.

We can list many more examples, but we guess the above should suffice. As you can see, all of the works quoted here essentially say the same depressing thing—namely that life ends and that even the most remarkable among us will eventually die. Because of this, they can all be considered variations of the same theme, in this case labeled the ubi sunt motif.

Example #2: Ars Longa, Vita Brevis

Ars longa, vita brevis is another Latin phrase which is used as a common designation for a recurring theme in literature. Meaning “art is long, life is short,” this motif is essentially the optimistic other side of the ubi sunt coin. It says that even though our time on earth is short, and our beauty, bravery and wealth mean little when death arrives, our artistic creations remain long after we’re gone and can outlive us by centuries; death may conquer life, but art triumphs over death. The phrase is most frequently used with reference to the timelessness of the written word, or more particularly, poetry.

Ancient Rome

Interestingly enough, the antithetical phrase “ars longa, vita brevis” is a misinterpretation of an aphorism by the Father of Medicine, Hippocrates, who actually says (as translated by Chaucer): “the life so short, the craft so long to learn.” It is in this manner that Seneca quotes him in On the Shortness of Life from where the Latin phrase originates. However, the word “ars,” which originally meant “craft” or “technique,” in time came to mean “the fine arts,” which inspired many poets to reinterpret this initially pessimistic quote into the much more hopeful idea that art outlasts its creator.

The most celebrated ancient meditation upon this ars longa motif is the final poem of the third book of the Odes by Horace, in which the poet confidently—and correctly—predicts that, through his poetry, he has built himself a monument as enduring as time itself (tr. Sidney Alexander):

I have erected a monument more durable than bronze, loftier than the regal pile of pyramids that cannot be destroyed either by corroding rains or the tempestuous North wind or the endless passage of the years or the flight of centuries. Not all of me shall die. A great part of me shall escape Libitina, Goddess of Death.

William Shakespeare

If that first line from Horace above rings any bells, it is because you’ve probably already read it rephrased into English by none other than Shakespeare in his Sonnet 55: “Not marble, nor the gilded monuments/ Of princes, shall outlive this powerful rhyme.” However, as he informs us in the second stanza of the same sonnet, Shakespeare is interested in the timelessness of poetry not because of his own fame, but because of the beauty of his lover:

When wasteful war shall statues overturn, And broils root out the work of masonry, Nor Mars his sword nor war’s quick fire shall burn The living record of your memory.

Shakespeare restates these feelings several times, most famously in the closing couplet of Sonnet 18, which, referring to itself, claims that:

So long as men can breathe or eyes can see, So long lives this, and this gives life to thee.

Romanticism

Far from being the only one, Shakespeare is merely one of the hundreds and hundreds of poets who adapted Horace’s ode and generated their own variation of the ars longa motif. Alexander Pushkin directly imitates Horace in “Exegi momentum,” and both Keats’ “Ode on a Grecian Urn” and Shelley’s “Ozymandias” comment upon the timelessness of art in connection with the brevity of life—though in a much less confident manner. One of the most popular Romantic poems which uses this motif is certainly Henry Wadsworth Longfellow’s “A Psalm of Life” which, among others, contains these verses:

Art is long, and Time is fleeting, And our hearts, though stout and brave, Still, like muffled drums, are beating Funeral marches to the grave.

Example #3: Carpe diem

Of course, in addition to producing artistic creations which may outlast you, there’s another way for you to confront the brevity of life; and that is by living it to the full. Made famous by the 1989 movie, Dead Poets Society, this motif is most succinctly referred to as the “carpe diem” motif, which is Latin for “seize the day” and which, once again, comes from Horace (I.11): “Even as we speak, envious Time is fleeing./ Seize the day: entrusting as little as possible to tomorrow.” Horace himself has written quite a few verses expressing this very same feeling, and who knows how many poems written after him are no more than variations of this motif! Here are just a few.

Pierre de Ronsard, “Sonnet to Helen” (II.43)

Pierre de Ronsard was the first French poet to be called “a prince of poets,” and it is only because he wrote in French that he is not that famous in the English-speaking world. Few of his poems have, nevertheless, reached a wide audience. Famously adapted by W. B. Yeats under the title “When You Are Old,” the most famous of Ronsard’s numerous “Sonnets to Helen” is undoubtedly one of the most memorable expressions of the carpe diem motif in any language. In it, Ronsard warns Helene that one day he will be dead and she just an old crone, sitting by the fireside and regretting the fact that she had once scorned the advances of one who loved her and thought her beautiful; however, the poet doesn’t want Helene to recognize this as a reason for concern, but as an invitation to enjoy the pleasures of life (tr. Humbert Wolfe):

And since what comes to-morrow who can say? Live, pluck the roses of the world to-day.

Robert Herrick, “To the Virgins, to Make Much of Time”

Writing a century after Ronsard, English Cavalier poet Robert Herrick voices the very same opinion in the 208th poem of his lifework, the collection of verses, Hesperides, with language which obviously echoes his French predecessor:

Gather ye rosebuds while ye may, Old Time is still a-flying; And this same flower that smiles today To-morrow will be dying.

Andrew Marvell, “To His Coy Mistress”

In the last stanza of Herrick’s carpe diem masterpiece, the poet urges the virgins to “be not coy, but use [their] time” while they still can. Written probably just a year after “To the Virgins, to Make Much of Time” was published, “To His Coy Mistress,” Andrew Marvell’s most famous love-song, is merely a modification of this advice, in this case, addressed to one particular lady.

In the first stanza of the poem, Marvell explains to this shy maiden that if they had “but world enough, and time,” he would have courted her for millennia, praising her eyes for at least a century and adoring each of her breasts for twice that time. However—he goes on in the second stanza—he can always hear “Time’s wingèd chariot” behind him, making him fully aware that, before too long, his lust will turn into ashes, and his beloved’s “long preserved virginity” will be tried by worms.

And if that is the case—Marvell finally gets to the point in the third stanza—then why all the coyness? “Let us sport us while we may,” the poet urges his beloved, “and tear our pleasures with rough strife/ Through the iron gates of life.” That way the two will have nothing to regret when they die because they’ve made the most of their lives:

Thus, though we cannot make our sun Stand still, yet we will make him run.

In a Single Work (Leitmotifs)

Example #1: William Shakespeare, Macbeth (1606)

Back in the time when there were no computers and Ctrl+F shortcuts, an English literary critic by the name of Caroline Spurgeon managed to diligently index every single image and metaphor in all of Shakespeare’s plays.

“It is a curious thing,” she notes at the beginning of Chapter XV of her pioneer study Shakespeare’s Imagery and What It Tells Us, “that the part played by recurrent images in raising, developing, sustaining and repeating emotion in [Shakespeare’s] tragedies has not, so far as I know, ever yet been noticed. It is a part somewhat analogous to the action of a recurrent theme or ‘motif’ in a musical fugue or sonata, or in one of Wagner’s operas.” And then she proceeds to trace “the recurring images which serve as ‘motifs’” in each of Shakespeare’s great tragedies, after having done the same with his histories, comedies, and romances in the previous three chapters.

Spurgeon singles out Macbeth’s imagery as “more rich and varied, more highly imaginative, more unapproachable… than that of any other single play.” However, among the several motifs she registers, one seems to stand out—that of Macbeth’s ill-fitting garments. Shakespeare makes recurrent allusions to this humiliating image of “a notably small man enveloped in a coat far too big for him.” First, it is Macbeth who brings attention to it, after he is named the Thane of Cawdor in the third scene of the first act (I.3.108-9):

The Thane of Cawdor lives: why do you dress me In borrow’d robes?

Just a few moments later (I.3.144-6), Banquo explicitly calls it to mind by claiming of Macbeth that:

New honours come upon him, Like our strange garments, cleave not to their mould But with the aid of use.

And when Lady Macbeth later scolds her husband for his hesitation in relation to the murder of King Duncan, she admonishes him with these words (I.7.36-7): “Was the hope drunk/ wherein you dress’d yourself?” Macduff also resorts to clothing imagery in an ironic comment on Macbeth becoming the new king just as he sends Ross to the coronation in Scone (II.4.37-8): “Well, may you see things well done there: adieu!/ Lest our old robes sit easier than our new!”

Shakespeare returns to this same motif twice more in the second scene of the fifth act when, first, Caithness describes the already shaken Macbeth as someone who “cannot buckle his distemper’d cause/ within the belt of his rule” (V.2.15) and, furthermore, when Angus, just a few verses later (V.2.20) “sums up the essence” of Macbeth:

now does he feel his title Hang loose about him, like a giant’s robe Upon a dwarfish thief.

The motif of Macbeth’s “ill-fitting garments” is probably not something one is capable of noticing at first or even third reading; however, as Spurgeon demonstrated, it was always there in the verses, appearing over and over again across the play, so as to serve as a sort of a soundtrack for its main protagonist; just like a Wagnerian leitmotif.

Example #2: William Faulkner, The Sound and the Fury (1929)

William Faulkner’s The Sound and the Fury is one of the indisputable masterpieces of 20th-century modernist literature (though Wyndham Lewis and Vladimir Nabokov would probably disagree). Similarly to a few other books which share comparable reputation—think Proust’s In Search of Lost Time—Faulkner’s novel deals prominently with the topic of subjective vs. objective time. Faulkner uses several motifs masterfully, not only so as to periodically suggest and hint at the theme (mainly that of arrested development), but also so as to provide some unity to his highly experimental work.

And this is especially evident by Faulkner’s prominent use of motifs in the first two parts of his work, which are narrated, respectively, by the intellectually disabled Benjamin “Benjy” Compson (who acts as if he is 3 even though he is 33 years old) and the depressed and deteriorated Quentin on the day of his suicide. Since both of these parts are presented in a stream of consciousness fashion, it can be difficult for the reader to make out the chronology of the described events or detect any intelligible storyline. However, by saturating Benjy’s and Quentin’s accounts with sporadically reappearing motifs, Faulkner successfully compensates for this lack of narrative clarity, transforming the first half of his novel into a sort of a lyrical exposé, rich with refrains and repetitions.

Think of these Faulknerian leitmotifs as conspicuous cues planted in the text so as to remind the reader from time to time that it is still the same story he’s trying to get to the bottom of, even though occasionally it may not seem like that. To understand this better, just consider how the word “caddie”—often uttered at the golf course—reminds Benjy of his favorite sibling’s name and stirs his mind into a whirlwind of unrelated associations of his sister Caddy. The word “caddie” itself doesn’t stand for anything here, i.e., it is not a symbol; it is merely a cue for a stream of connotations, a motif Faulkner spins out into something more important for the overall theme: the brothers’ relationship with Caddy.

Another thing that Benjy is passionate about is fire. It is an image he is fascinated and calmed by, and it often comes to his mind for no apparent reason whatsoever. A few examples should suffice: “I liked to smell Versh’s house. There was a fire in it…;” “There was a fire in the house, rising and falling…;” “He was just looking at the fire, Caddy said”… The fire-motif here works the same way choruses work in songs: reemerging from time to time to create a lyrical pattern. It is difficult to say whether the fire is meant to represent something: to Benjy, it is probably a friendly element and, just like caddies, it seems to have some kind of a warm connection to Caddy.

However, the fire-motif is infused with other meanings when it reappears in the second part as in this meditation by Quentin:

If it could just be a hell beyond that: the clean flame the two of us more than dead. Then you will have only me then only me then the two of us amid the pointing and the horror beyond the clean flame.

In Dante’s Purgatorio, poets are purified by passing through a wall of fire; it is what Dante has to do in order to see Beatrice. However, Quentin’s love for his sister seems something beyond purification, which is why he associates fire with both “clean flames” and “hell” at the same time: on the other side of the “clean flame” there is no Paradise, but “pointing and horror.” The phrase “amid the pointing and the horror beyond the clean flame” reappears four times in Quentin’s musings, thus becoming a sort of a sub-motif which always recalls and points to something more than what the phrase itself contains.

It is difficult to say here more without getting into unnecessary details with regards to our keyword, but, if you are interested, an excellent place to go on with your research is Sartre’s exceptional essay “Time in the Work of Faulkner”: large parts of it treat some of Faulkner’s time-related motifs, mostly in Quentin’s part (reference).

1 note · View note

catilinas · 6 years ago

Note

Hi! I'm planning to buy some new books later and I was wondering if you could recommend me some of your favorite translations/favorite classic works? I trust that you have good taste

yeehaw time for more book recs...... please bear in mind that my definitions of “translation” and “classic” may not match yours.

ancient texts in translation:

bellum catilinae, bellum iugurthinum, histories - sallust tr. william w. batstone. the bellum catilinae SLAPS! sallust sees the world as existing in a (non-christian) post-lapsarian state! society fucks up people and then people fuck up society! the virtue machine broke! the catilinarian conspiracy!!!!!!

pharsalia / bellum civile - lucan tr. susan h. braund. my second favourite epic! it’s about caesar’s civil war and lucan is so bitter. the atmosphere is terrifying. necromancy happens. cato gets his ass kicked by snakes in the desert.

six tragedies - seneca tr. emily wilson. do it for her...... seneca’s medea...... do it also because right before atreus feeds his brother his children he says “party time”

“““translations”““:

war music - christopher logue. the iliad, but the “translator” knows no greek. the poetry is beautiful and does really cool things with Viewpoint and Gaze and Cinematography But In Writing. i find the battle scenes in homer kinda dull but Fun And Sexy here. christopher logue walked so that alice oswald could fly.

memorial - alice oswald. the iliad, but it’s only the deaths. the poetry is in the pity! oswald says: “This is a translation of the Iliad’s atmosphere, not its story. Matthew Arnold (and almost everyone ever since) has praised the Iliad for its ‘nobility’. But ancient critics praised its ‘enargeia’, which means something like ‘bright unbearable reality’. It’s the word used when gods come to earth not in disguise but as themselves. This version, trying to retrieve the poem’s enargeia, takes away its narrative, as you might lift the roof off a church in order to remember what you’re worshipping.”

autobiography of red - anne carson. which among being Many Other Things, is a reimagining of the fragmentary poem geryoneis by stesichorus. “the fragments of the Geryoneis itself read as if Stesichoros had composed a substantial narrative poem then ripped it to pieces and buried the pieces in a box with some song lyrics and lecture notes and scraps of meat. The fragment numbers tell you roughly how the pieces fell out of the box. You can of course keep shaking the box.”

Is This What The Kids Call A Classic Work:

selected poems - w.s. graham

catiline his conspiracy - ben jonson

no longer at ease - chinua achebe

flèche - mary jean chan

julius caesar - shakespeare

nothing - janne teller

surge - jay bernard

the smell of good mud - lauren zuniga

#me @ literally anyone: read memorial #book list #beeps #Anonymous

29 notes · View notes

how2to18 · 7 years ago

Link

SOME OF US want to be rock stars or rocket scientists when we grow up, while others want to be actors or athletes. Marcus Aurelius, though, wanted to grow up to be a Stoic. That, at least, is the impression Marguerite Yourcenar gives us in her novel Memoirs of Hadrian. This brilliant reimagining of the Roman imperial period is cast as a letter written by the dying Hadrian to the teenage Marcus Aurelius he has chosen to succeed him. While Hadrian admires his “dear Mark,” he also chides him. He was, Hadrian recalls, an “almost too sober little boy” who had grown into a young man a tad too zealous in his practice of “the mortifications of the Stoics.”

What would Hadrian — or, at least, Yourcenar’s Hadrian — have made of our current craze with Stoicism? While it is too late for many of us to grow up to become Stoics, more than a few of us want to finish up as Stoics. Princeton University Press’s new edition of Epictetus’s Encheiridion and selected Discourses, titled How to Be Free: An Ancient Guide to the Stoic Life, is the latest entry in a wave of works, both popular and scholarly, on Stoicism. Massimo Pigliucci’s How to Be a Stoic: Using Ancient Philosophy to Live a Modern Life and Donald Robertson’s Stoicism and the Art of Happiness are fresh additions to the former category, while A. A. Long’s classic Stoic Studies and Pierre Hadot’s La citadelle intérieure: Introduction aux Pensées de Marc Aurèle are notable examples of the latter category.

How to Be Free seeks to bridge the worlds of both kinds of readers. Translated and introduced by Long, a renowned scholar of Stoicism and classics professor at UC Berkeley, the work presents the Greek text and English translation on facing pages. While the original text is, well, Greek to me, Long’s translation is sharp and straightforward — qualities always associated with Epictetus’s teachings. Like Socrates, Epictetus did not write down his words; it is thanks to his student Arrian — who became one of Hadrian’s closest aides — that we have the Encheiridion (or “handbook”) and Discourses. But whereas, in Plato’s writings, Socrates often serves as a proxy for his student’s own philosophical agenda, Arrian’s transcription of this freed slave’s words seems free of invention.

Most important, Socrates and Epictetus — though separated by more than four centuries — are alike in the coherence between their convictions and actions. One of the few, and certainly best known (if not substantiated) of episodes we have from Epictetus’s life occurred when he was still a slave. In a fit of rage, his master began to twist his leg. In a calm voice, the slave warned him that the leg would break. The master, ignoring the warning, broke Epictetus’s leg, prompting the maimed man to declare in an even voice: “Did I not tell you it would break?”

It is not clear whether Epictetus’s lameness was a result of his master’s inhumanity or, more prosaically, the consequence of arthritis. What is clear, though, is that Epictetus’s experience as a slave shaped his philosophy. The term philosophy now generally brings to mind an academic discipline, whose practitioners publish peer-reviewed journal articles and academic monographs that reexamine questions ranging from epistemology and ontology to linguistics and metaphysics or, more broadly, reassess the history of their profession. As anyone familiar with this world can report, its language and concerns are often difficult and demanding. This is not, by itself, a problem: readers of Joyce and Woolf, Dickinson and Faulkner, treasure the moments of luminous truths and insights these writers conjure in their difficult and demanding works.

But I am not alone, I suspect, in thinking that academic philosophers, with a few important exceptions, are mostly wanting when it comes to lasting truths or insights. All too often their present world seems light-years distant from the world in which I live and for which I would welcome the wisdom their profession supposedly offers. As Hadot declared in a series of interviews with the American philosopher Arnold Davidson: “The historian of philosophy must cede her place to the philosopher — the philosopher who must always remain alive within the historian of philosophy. This final task will consist in asking oneself, with unflinching candor, the decisive question: ‘What is it to philosophize?’”

In his revelatory writings on ancient Greek and Roman schools of philosophy, Hadot argues that it is not what passes for philosophizing nowadays. Rather than offering, as do modern philosophy departments, a smorgasbord of courses in various sub-disciplines, the ancient philosophical schools offered what Hadot calls “spiritual exercises” — namely, the means to change the way you saw the world and the power to change your very self.

While there was no shortage of such schools — Epicureans, Stoics, Skeptics, Platonists, and Aristotelians all had their shingles out — they all promised not only to inform their students about a particular philosophy, but also to transform them by it. In this sense, a novice’s choice of a particular school was existential. The urgency of, say, Albert Camus’s voice in The Myth of Sisyphus — no one, he reminds us, “ever died for the ontological argument” — had been sounded more than two millennia earlier by the Roman statesman, writer, and philosopher Seneca. Berating those philosophers who busied themselves batting around theoretical questions, he roared: “There is no time for playing around […] You have promised to bring help to the shipwrecked, the imprisoned, the sick, the needy, to those whose heads are under the poised axe […] What are you doing?”

As we learn from the Encheiridion, Epictetus was not one for playing around. He warned his students:

Do you suppose you can go in for philosophy and eat and drink just as you do now or get angry and irritated in the same way? You are going to have to go without sleep, work really hard, stay away from friends and family, be disrespected by a young slave, get mocked by people in the street, and come off worse in rank, office, or courtroom, everywhere in fact.

For Epictetus, Stoicism was not a pastime, but instead it was a set of rigorous practices. With the goal of rebooting one’s life, it is far more demanding, at least from a practical perspective, than the more recondite philosophical schools that have followed. If the Stoics had recruiters, they would have warned that philosophy is the hardest job we’ll ever love.

In both its original Hellenistic and subsequent Roman iterations, Stoicism fastened onto reason’s decisive role in our lives. The compass of our rational faculties allows women and men — Stoicism, along with Epicureanism, was exceptional in its refusal to relegate women to an inferior position — to navigate a world in which we are carried aloft by vast and immovable forces. We cannot master these circumstances, but we can master our attitude toward them. These happenings, for Stoics, are identified mostly as “things indifferent” — namely, events and facts that, in and of themselves, are neither intrinsically bad nor good.

Things indifferent cover those things we tend to care about, but on further reflection reveal themselves to be inconsequential, like the color of my car or the color of my skin. But, more provocatively, things indifferent also cover my social or legal status. What if my skin color condemns me to a life of slavery? As a former slave, Epictetus’s answer is blunt: physical enslavement, as anyone who has attained Stoic wisdom knows, is a thing indifferent. The Stoic knows she must “remove goodness and badness from the things not up to us and ascribe it only to the things that are up to us.” Nearly everything that is external to us — the world’s unfolding warp and woof — is not up to us, but instead to nature.

Crucially, what is up to us is our outlook. By dint of our reason, we can grasp and assent to the way of the world. Though it requires a lifetime of effort to scale these philosophical heights, once I scramble to the summit I will see that mere material and physical things cannot breach what Marcus Aurelius calls the “inner fortress” of my self. And it is within that fortress, whether I am a senator or slave, rich or poor, a centurion or courtesan, that I cultivate what the Stoics called ataraxia, or serenity.

That Stoicism held such great appeal for a certain class of Romans is hardly surprising. Not only did it reflect and reinforce the battery of values, or mos maiorum, that defined the life of a proper thinking Roman, but it also provided a modicum of agency and freedom in a world of imperial domination. Equally unsurprising is that Stoicism now enjoys a revival with a certain class of Americans. In our world of institutional bureaucratization, social fragmentation, and political polarization, the therapeutic promise of Stoicism holds much attraction. It is telling, in this regard, that the founders of cognitive behavioral therapy like Albert Ellis and Aaron Beck were deeply influenced by the ancient Stoics.

Yet there is darkness at the heart of Stoicism — a darkness that, in Yourcenar’s novel, Hadrian glimpses. While he admires the example set by Epictetus — the crippled old man, Hadrian reports, seemed to “enjoy a liberty which was almost divine” — the emperor tells Marcus Aurelius that he nevertheless refuses to embrace either the man or his philosophy. Epictetus, Hadrian muses, “gave up too many things, and I had been quick to observe that nothing was more dangerously easy for me than mere renunciation.” The emperor is on to something. The reach of Stoic renunciation, unflinchingly acknowledged by Epictetus, is much further than most of us would ever wish to go. In one of his prosaic similes, he compares the Stoic’s life to a voyage on a ship commanded by nature. Just as a voyager on a real sea voyage might disembark at a port to gather “a little shellfish and vegetable,” he must be prepared to drop these things and return to the ship at a moment’s notice. So, too, on the ship of life, the Stoic, during a port of call, might gather “a little wife and child.” Ah, but don’t treasure these souvenirs, for “if the captain calls you, run to the boat and leave all those things without even turning around.”

In the Encheiridion, Epictetus — a childless bachelor, mind you — multiplies such examples. Should I want my wife and children to live, not to mention flourish, he lectures me for being “silly” because I want things to be up to me that are not up to me. Should one of my children or wife die, I must never say “I have lost” them. They were never mine in the first place, which is why I should instead say that they have been returned. Classicists like Martha Nussbaum and Richard Sorabji rightly question the consequences and costs of Stoic renunciation. Not only is it good to have attachments to those we love, but it is also necessary; without these attachments, we might enjoy greater security and even serenity, but we would also experience less humanity. We would be, quite simply, less human.

There are other big questions raised by this small handbook. Does not Stoicism, which tells us that economic, political, and social issues are things indifferent, thus encourage forms of political resignation? Is there not the danger that Stoics, in the wide swath they cut with the blade of things indifferent, are in fact conspiring with forms of slavery we could and should resist? Is it really silly to wish with all your heart that your children not only survive you, but flourish as well? Once you put down Epictetus, you might wish to ask yourself whether you side with Hadrian, who accepted his own vulnerability and mourned the loss of his beloved Antinous, or “dear Mark,” who sought to evince his vulnerability by instead loving mere humanity.

Robert Zaretsky teaches in the Honors College at the University of Houston. He is the author of numerous books and articles on French intellectual history. His new book, Catherine & Diderot: An Empress, A Philosopher and the Fate of the Enlightenment, will be published this winter by Harvard University Press.

The post Almost Too Sober: On the Appeal of Stoicism appeared first on Los Angeles Review of Books.

from Los Angeles Review of Books https://ift.tt/2qr5aZL via IFTTT

#Blogger

0 notes

morganh1066-blog · 8 years ago

Text

why the historicity of the jesus character is poor

did the jesus character really exist?

keep in mind that i'm not saying that this character 100% didn't exist. i'm saying that it's extremely unlikely due to the lack of credible evidence. it is fallacious to say that because something is possible that it is therefore probable. i'll answer this in multiple posts, and they will be a bit long, but give it some patience, and i'll describe it in as much depth as i can.

historically the question on the historicity isn't anything new, there have been a number of people who have doubted the credibility of the proposed data. the scholarly research into the idea that the jesus character wasn't real goes back to the 1700s with Volney and Dupuis. There's also Bauer, Remsberg, W.B. Smith, Arthur Drews, Couchoud, Bolland, Allegro, GA Wells, Richard Carrier, Robert Price, Thomas Brodie, and Doherty

the main point is that *there is absolutely no direct evidence or primary sources for the character. * it never wrote anything, no one who met the character wrote anything about it, thus all of the proposed evidence is secondary at best and hearsay.

the people i have communicated with have brought up a number of people's writing as "proof." in particular:

Mara Bar Serapion (prisoner awaiting execution), Clement of Rome, 2 Clement4, Ignatius, Josephus (Jewish historian), Polycarp, Martyrdom of Polycarp, Didache, Barnabas, Shepherd of Hermas, Fragments of Papias, Tacitus (Roman historian), Lucian (Greek satirist), Justin Martyr, Aristides, Athenagoras, Theophilus of Antioch, Quadratus, Aristo of Pella, Phlegon (freed slave who wrote histories), Melito of Sardis, Diognetus, Gospel of Peter, Apocalypse of Peter, Epistula Apostolorum, Celsus (Roman philosopher), Pliny the Younger (Roman politician), Gospel of Thomas, Gospel of Truth, Apocryphon of John, Treatise, Suetonius, Thallus, gospels: Matt, Mark, Luke, John, Paul, and the reference to tiberius

first off, the gospels themselves are not valid forms of biography.

_"Paul did not write the letters to Timothy to Titus or several others published under his name; and it is unlikely that the apostles Matthew, James, Jude, Peter and John had anything to do with the canonical books ascribed to them."_ -- Michael D. Coogan, Professor of religious studies at Stonehill College (Bible Review, June 1994)

_"The Gospel authors were Jews writing within the midrashic tradition and intended their stories to be read as interpretive narratives, not historical accounts."_ -- Bishop Shelby Spong, Liberating the Gospels

_"Other scholars have concluded that the Bible is the product of a purely human endeavor, that the identity of the authors is forever lost and that their work has been largely obliterated by centuries of translation and editing."_ -- Jeffery L. Sheler, “Who Wrote the Bible,” (U.S. News & World Report, Dec. 10, 1990)

_"Yet today, there are few Biblical scholars– from liberal skeptics to conservative evangelicals- who believe that Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John actually wrote the Gospels. Nowhere do the writers of the texts identify themselves by name or claim unambiguously to have known or traveled with Jesus."_ -- Jeffery L. Sheler, “The Four Gospels,” (U.S. News & World Report, Dec. 10, 1990)

_"The bottom line is we really don’t know for sure who wrote the Gospels."_ -- Jerome Neyrey, of the Weston School of Theology, Cambridge, Mass. in “The Four Gospels,” (U.S. News & World Report, Dec. 10, 1990)

_"So unreliable were the Gospel accounts that 'we can now know almost nothing concerning the life and personality of Jesus.' "_ -- Rudolf Bultmann, University of Marburg, the foremost Protestant scholar in the field in 1926

_"The gospels are very peculiar types of literature. They’re not biographies."_ -- Paula Fredriksen, Professor and historian of early Christianity, Boston University (in the PBS documentary, From Jesus to Christ, aired in 1998)

_"The gospels are not eyewitness accounts."_ -- Allen D. Callahan, Associate Professor of New Testament, Harvard Divinity School

the other very important fact is that there is no contemporaneous historical account of the jesus character. there are first century historians that never mention the jesus character at all:

*seneca*: 4bce-65ce *pliny the elder*: 23-79 *quintilian*: 39-96 *epictetus*: 55-135 *martial*: 38-103 *juvenal*: 55-127 *plutarch*: 46-119 *philo-judaeus*: 15bce-50ce

some of the dead sea scrolls were contemporaneous and they don't mention the character either.

next i’ll discuss the books of the new testament.

================================

here is the list of the books in the new testament:

_*writer book*_ *matt* matt *mark* mark *luke* luke acts *john* john I john II john III john revelation *peter* I peter II peter *james* james *jude* jude *paul* romans philipians I timothy II timothy I corinthians II corinthians colossians titus I thessalonians II thessalonians philemon galatians ephesians *undetermined* hebrews

note that paul appears to have written pretty much half of these books and according to *galatians 1:11-12* he clearly states that he didn't get this information from a man, but rather from revelation.

*matt*: not able to confirm author. _written in the 80s_. (ehrman, lost christianities: the battles for scripture and the faiths we never knew [oup2003], p235) no original manuscripts are in existence. could not have been an eyewitness as written far after the supposed death (einar thomassen, " 'forgery' in the new testament," in the invention of sacred tradition, ed. james r lewis and olav hammer [cambridge: cambridge university press, 2007], p141)

*mark*: not able to confirm author. _written 70-75._ no original manuscripts are in existence. not an eyewitness as per matt reference

*luke, acts*: not able to confirm author. _written in the 80s._ no original manuscripts are in existence.not an eyewitness as per matt reference

*john, I john, II john, III john, revelation*: not able to confirm author. however it is the only gospel that gives a clue that the actual author could have been john (john 21:20-24). _written in the 90s._ no original manuscripts are in existence. not an eyewitness as per matt reference.

*I peter, II peter*: not able to confirm author. _written about 80-90_ [Stanton, Graham. Eerdmans Commentary of the Bible. Wm.B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. 2003.] considered to be "wisdom literature." Many scholars are convinced that Peter was not the author. (Achtemeier, Paul. Peter 1 Hermeneia. Fortress Press. 1996) authorship of 1 Peter remains contested. (Travis B. Williams (1 November 2012). Persecution in 1 Peter: Differentiating and Contextualizing Early Christian Suffering. BRILL. pp. 28–. ISBN 978-90-04-24189-3. Retrieved 1 April 2013.)

*james*: not able to confirm author, considered to be pseudonymous. considered to be written in the last 1st and first 2nd century ("Epistle of James". Early Christian Writings. Retrieved 16 May 2012.) _The earliest extant manuscripts of James usually date to the mid-to-late third century._ (McCartney, Dan G (2009). Robert W Yarbrough and Robert H Stein, ed. Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament: James. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic.)

*jude*: _written at the end of the 1st century_. Although some scholars consider the letter a pseudonymous work written between the end of the 1st century and the first quarter of the 2nd century, arguing from the references to the apostles (jude 17&18), and tradition (jude 3). and the book's competent Greek style, conservative scholars date it between 66 to 90 (Norman Perrin, (1974) The New Testament: An Introduction, p. 260 and Bauckham,RJ (1986), Word Biblical Commentary, Vol.50, Word (UK) Ltd. p.16-17)

*attributed to paul*: romans, philipians, I timothy, II timothy, I corinthians, II corinthians, colossians, titus, I thessalonians, II thessalonians, philemon, galatians, ephesians. thessalonians is usually dated to 49 ce, but later ones are mid 60s. paul, by his own witness was not an eye-witness of the jesus character as stated in galatians 1:11-12. no originals are in existence. the earliest are some from 200 (Ehrman, Bart (2005) Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why, Harper SanFrancisco. ISBN 0-06-073817-0. page 60)

*hebrews*: author unknown. _written around 80_. no original manuscript is in existence.

bruze metzger wrote: *"none of the original documents is extant, and the existing copies differ from one another."* (Bruce M. Metzger, The Text of the New Testament: Its Transmission, Corruption, and Restoration, 1992) the earliest manuscripts date back to 125 to 400, and none of those are originals.

incidentally, bart ehrman considers that 11 or more books out of the 27 books of the new testament were written as forgeries and that the "New Testament books attributed to Jesus’ disciples could not have been written by them because they were illiterate." the article continues to say that ehrman believes that _"Many of the New Testament’s forgeries were manufactured by early Christian leaders trying to settle theological feuds."_ (*"Half of New Testament forged, Bible scholar says".* CNN. 2011. retrieved 1 25 14)

ehrman continues to say that these are the forged books: Acts of the Apostles, First Epistle of Peter, Second Epistle of Peter, Epistle of James, Epistle of Jude, First Epistle of Paul to the Thessalonians, First Epistle of Paul to Timothy, Second Epistle of Paul to Timothy, Epistle of Paul to Titus, Epistle of Paul to the Ephesians, and the Epistle of Paul to the Colossians.

thus from this information, with no original documents in existence, none of the manuscripts is a primary source for the sole purpose of evaluating the historicity of the jesus character.

next, i'll show the "proofs" outside of the bible

==========================

now regarding the "proofs" outside of the bible that people have frequently presented to me:

1 Mara Bar Serapion (prisoner awaiting execution) 2 Clement of Rome 3 2 Clement4 4 Ignatius 5 Josephus (Jewish historian) 6 Polycarp 7 Martyrdom of Polycarp 8 Didache 9 Barnabas 10 Shepherd of Hermas 11 Fragments of Papias 12 Tacitus (Roman historian) 13 Lucian (Greek satirist) 14 Justin Martyr 15 Aristides 16 Athenagoras 17 Theophilus of Antioch 18 Quadratus 19 Aristo of Pella 20 Phlegon (freed slave who wrote histories) 21 Melito of Sardis 22 Diognetus 23 Gospel of Peter 24 Apocalypse of Peter 25 Epistula Apostolorum 26 Celsus (Roman philosopher) 27 Pliny the Younger (Roman politician) 28 Gospel of Thomas 29 Gospel of Truth 30 Apocryphon of John 31 Treatise. 32 Suetonius 33 Thallus

gospels: 34 Matt 35 Mark 36 Luke 37 John 38 Paul

39 reference to tiberius

what's also important is to not fall into the fallacy of mistaking *quantity over quality.* this is akin to two wrongs making a right. it needs to be *quality over quantity.*

so let's start with #39, tiberius:

that someone says another person lived during the time of the supposed character but that the person never wrote about the character is not proof. you have to have the writing about the character for there to actually be contemporaneous evidence. until then it's just claimed contemporaneous _*existence.*_ NOT evidence.

and let's go to 34-38. the gospels. and paul.

These are a few of the quotes regarding the gospels as non-historical accounts like i had mentioned before:

_"The gospels are not eyewitness accounts."_ -- Allen D. Callahan, Associate Professor of New Testament, Harvard Divinity School

_"the gospels are very peculiar types of literature. they're not biographies. I mean, there are all sorts of details about jesus that they're simply not interested in giving us. they are a kind of religious advertisement. what they do is proclaim their individual author's interpretation of the christian message through the device of using jesus of nazareth as a spokesperson for the evangelists's position"_ -- religious scholar and historian (paula fredriksen, pbs, "paula fredriksen: religious advertisements," accessed 2/4/12)

gospel "proof":

#34: *matt*: not able to confirm author. _written in the 80s_. (ehrman, lost christianities: the battles for scripture and the faiths we never knew [oup2003], p235) no original manuscripts are in existence. could not have been an eyewitness as written far after the supposed death (einar thomassen, " 'forgery' in the new testament," in the invention of sacred tradition, ed. james r lewis and olav hammer [cambridge: cambridge university press, 2007], p141)

#35: *mark*: not able to confirm author. _written 70-75._ no original manuscripts are in existence. not an eyewitness as per matt reference

#36: *luke, acts*: not able to confirm author. _written in the 80s._ no original manuscripts are in existence.not an eyewitness as per matt reference

#37: *john, I john, II john, III john, revelation*: not able to confirm author. however it is the only gospel that gives a clue that the actual author could have been john (john 21:20-24). _written in the 90s._ no original manuscripts are in existence. not an eyewitness as per matt reference.

#38: *attributed to paul*: romans, philipians, I timothy, II timothy, I corinthians, II corinthians, colossians, titus, I thessalonians, II thessalonians, philemon, galatians, ephesians. thessalonians is usually dated to 49 ce, but later ones are mid 60s. paul, by his own witness was not an eye-witness of the jesus character as stated in galatians 1:11-12. no originals are in existence. the earliest are some from 200 (Ehrman, Bart (2005) Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why, Harper SanFrancisco. ISBN 0-06-073817-0. page 60)

the gospels make no mention that the name of the gospel was written by that person. these are written far after the death of the jesus character, and thus is hearsay. none of these people ever met the jesus character.

hearsay is not credible evidence.

and now on to #1-#33 non-biblical "proofs:"

*#1:* Mara Bar Serapion (prisoner awaiting execution). the reference to the "crucifixion" was written 73 AD does not show direct evidence but just proves that people talked about it. he could have been talking about santa claus, but that doesn't mean it would be true.

*#2:* Clement of Rome. his papacy was between 92-99. he never met the character.

*#3:* 2 Clement4. this character is in the new testament. modern scholars believe 2 clement is written around 95-140 by an anonymous author.

*#4:* Ignatius. never met the jesus character. (from 98 to 117)

*#5:* Josephus (Jewish historian). born after the supposed death of the characer. never met the jesus character. this only confirms that christians existed. this is not direct evidence; it is hearsay

*#6:* Polycarp. was a 2nd-century Christian bishop of Smyrna. never met the character.

*#7:* Martyrdom of Polycarp. from 155-160. this is well outside the life of the supposed jesus character. it just proves that christians existed.

*#8:* Didache. late first and early 2nd century.

*#9:* Barnabas. never anywhere does it say that barnabas met the jesus character. and amusingly, there's another book called, the "gospel of barnabas" which is a post-medieval manuscript that says that the jesus character wasn't even the son of god and that it never died on the cross. dating on it is disputed, but it's post-medieval

*#10:* Shepherd of Hermas. first or second century. in the document it never states that the character ever met the jesus character.

*#11:* Fragments of Papias. who died in AD 155. never met the jesus character.

*#12:* Tacitus (Roman historian) 56-133. born after the supposed death of the characer. never met the jesus character. this only again confirms that christians existed. this is not direct evidence; it is hearsay. rafael lataster writes, _"it is interesting that the name 'jesus', 'jesus son of joseph' or 'jesus of nazareth' is never used, and that this is tacitus' only supposed reference to jesus."_ he continues, _"though 'Annals' covers the period of rome's history from around 14ce to 66ce no other mention is made of 'jesus christ'."_ ehrman references this as well in "did jesus exist, p54. lataster, p61.

Tacitus writes in annals, book 15, chapter 44, *written 116 ad:* _“Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus.”_

*most importantly tacitus was born 20 years after the supposed death of the character and lived 2000 miles away and wrote the passage in 116. So as for the two sentences attributed to tacitus' to be a source to without a doubt to clinch it for the jesus character to actually exist, it's not going to be with tacitus.*

notice also that it was *written 116 ad.* this is almost 100 years after the supposed death of the jesus character. We have no primary sources for Tacitus only *copies or copies* that were *written centuries later.* To suggest that these are word for word copies of the original are absurd considering the considerable christian forgeries during that time.

This passage is also not any different or a more credible source for the jesus character than for me writing in 2014 on Mormonism, "the great golden plates were delivered unto joseph smith as told by moroni" just because i went to school 23.5 miles away from palmyra new york doesn't make it any more plausible.

johannes weiss, the german theologian wrote, _*“Assuredly there were the general lines of even a purely fictitious Christian tradition already laid down about the year 100; Tacitus may therefore draw upon this tradition” *_

german theologian david strauss wrote that the earliest christian communities reworded the gospels to suit local prejudices. hegel noted that christian doctrine kept changing to suit power hierarchy. forgery in the early church was rampant and nothing new.

the contradictions are rampant with regard to the completely missing mention of christianity in book 5 chapters 8 through 10 of the annals that describe judea at the supposed time of the jesus character. *they make no mention of the crucifiction of the jesus character as described in the dubious book 15 chapter 44 two sentences.*

What's more is in the annals of chapters 8-10 makes not even a mention of christians, christianity or the jesus character at all. and all of these references are from writings that are not primary sources as the originals are no longer extant and all we have are copies of copies.

In the tacitus' histories book 5.2-5 he rationalies the greek-roman myths by believing that zeus and kronos were kings. So we're not particularly dealing with someone who could separate fact from fiction.

and with these glaring contradictions, we can thoroughly question the credibility of the claim that the *mere two sentences* attributed to tacitus in any way corroborates anything about the life of a jesus figure's historicity.

We still have no contemporary sources for the existence of the jesus character, nothing written by the character, and especially nothing written about the tons of people that flocked to the character whether or not the character was miraculous or not.

*we want evidence; distinct, obvious, uncompromised evidence.* That is a reasonable request. we want evidence not based on hearsay accounts or ambiguous and slightly dubious sources. Evidence that is not just being argued to fit a narrative that is devoid of any contemporary evidence. then I will change my opinion. but until then, it doesn't matter at all how many times you bang the drum of an appeal to authority or populace or through abusive ad hom call those that require unabiguous evidence "delusional."

*#13:* Lucian (Greek satirist). *lucian (Greek satirist)* -- 125-180. born after the supposed death of the characer. never met the jesus character. this once again only confirms that christians existed. this is not direct evidence; it is hearsay.

*#14:* Justin Martyr. 100 – 165 Ad. he never met the jesus character.

*#15:* Aristides. do you mean "aristides the athenian" who was born in the 2nd century ad or do you mean aelius aristides (117-181)? neither of these people met the jesus character.

*#16:* Athenagoras. born 133 ad in greece. never met the character.

*#17:* Theophilus of Antioch. died around 183-185. never met the jesus character.

*#18:* Quadratus. again, born way late in the first century, and died 129. never met the jesus character. *#19:* Aristo of Pella. from 100-160, who is only known because of a mention by eusebius.

*#20:* Phlegon (freed slave who wrote histories). who lived in the 2nd century AD. born after the supposed death of the characer. never met the jesus character.

*#21:* Melito of Sardis. mid 2nd century.

*#22:* Diognetus. late 2nd century.

*#23:* Gospel of Peter. this is actually in the bible, so it's not, "outside the new testament." *I peter, II peter*: not able to confirm author. _written about 80-90_ [Stanton, Graham. Eerdmans Commentary of the Bible. Wm.B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. 2003.] considered to be "wisdom literature." Many scholars are convinced that Peter was not the author. (Achtemeier, Paul. Peter 1 Hermeneia. Fortress Press. 1996) authorship of 1 Peter remains contested. (Travis B. Williams (1 November 2012). Persecution in 1 Peter: Differentiating and Contextualizing Early Christian Suffering. BRILL. pp. 28–. ISBN 978-90-04-24189-3. Retrieved 1 April 2013.)

*#24:* Apocalypse of Peter. this is from the 2nd century. way after the death of the supposed character. this does not corroborate anything.

*#25:* Epistula Apostolorum. also from the 2nd century.

*#26:* Celsus (Roman philosopher). 2nd-century Greek philosopher. born after the supposed death of the character. never met the jesus character. this is not direct evidence; it is hearsay

*#27:* Pliny the Younger (Roman politician). 61-112 born after the supposed death of the character. never met the jesus character. this is not direct evidence; it is hearsay.

*#28:* Gospel of Thomas. Heretical Writings Gospel of Thomas, Gospel of Truth, Apocryphon of John, and Treatise on resurrection. this is very nice, but most scholars state that thomas was written in the second century.

*#29:* Gospel of Truth. Was written in greek probably between 140 and 180 by valentinian gnostics. (Attridge, Harold W. and MacRae, George W. "The Gospel of Truth (Introduction and Translation)". The Nag Hammadi Library, James M. Robinson (ed.), pp. 38-51.) the text puts "error" in personified form. and says that the jesus character was sent down by god to remove ignorance. error grew angry that the jesus character confounded scribes and teachers and nailed the jesus character to a tree. bit of a different story there.

*#30:* Apocryphon of John. written in 185. it was referred to by irenaeus in "adversus haereses" and stated that teachers in the 2nd century were producing an "an indescribable number of secret and illegitimate writings, which they themselves have forged, to bewilder the minds of foolish people, who are ignorant of the true scriptures" (adversus haereses 1.20.1 and Pagels 2003:96)

*#31:* Treatise. not exactly sure what this is referring to. the book of acts refers to the gospel of luke as "the former treatise." if this is the case, it is not non-biblical. luke and acts do not have a confirmed author. _written in the 80s._ no original manuscripts are in existence.not an eyewitness as per matt reference.

*#32:* Suetonius. aside from seutonius not being a contemporary of the jesus character, only wrote, "since the jews constantly made disturbances at the instigation of chrestus, he expelled them from rome." (seutonius and jc rolfe, the lives of the caesars, vol 2[london: heinemann, 1914, life of claudius 25.4]) chrestus is a greek name, meaning "the good," so does not necessarily have to refer to the jesus character. note that christians are also not specified, though many early christians were undoubtedly jews. this passage offers little to no information about the jesus of nazareth character.

*#33:* Thallus. lived in the third century. born after the supposed death of the character. never met the jesus character. it's just a reference that 9th century christian chronologer george syncellus wrote, "Thallus calls this darkness an eclipse of the Sun in the third book of his Histories." this is ultimately not non-christian reference as syncellus wrote it.

nothing in the dead sea scrolls, btw, which actually was contemporaneous!

and lastly the talmud which some christians reference: there are a number of reference to various character called "jesus" (specifically from the "gemara") which may or may not reference the jesus character of nazareth. the gemara is actually from the 5th or 6th century which is 400-500 years after the death of the supposed character. there are other jesuses refered to in josephus as well, such as , "jesus ben pandira," jesus bar phabet,” and “jesus bar gamaliel." the name “jesus” was a very common name. nothing to directly connect to the jesus of nazareth character.

there is no additive truths here, that the more fractional truths add up to an actual truth. you can have a bunch of people pretending that santa claus was real and the more people saying it's true doesn't make it any more true due the the fallacy of appealing to populace. don't mistake quantity over quality and make two wrongs make a right.

and that something must have been amazing to cause people to write so much after the fact is not evidence either. it just made it an ad hoc popular idea. and evidence from silence is still silence not evidence.

there's also a quote from historian robert wilken:

_"when christianity gained control of the roman empire it suppressed the writings of its critics and even cast them into flames."_ (robert louis wilken, the christians as the romans saw them, [new haven, ct: yale university press, 2003] p xvi)

so there's some censorship for ya of critics of christianity. what they complained about we'll never know either.

next i will discuss the problem of the jesus character not fullfilling the prophecies. these are not at all related to proofs for the historical existence of the jesus character but internal criticism (relating just within the bible itself).

=============================

this is the last post of why the evidence (or lack of evidence) suggest that the jesus character very likely didn't exist. these are not at all related to proofs for the historical existence of the jesus character but internal criticism (relating just within the bible itself).

as for if the character even fulfilled the prophecies that's another problem and let's go over that, too:

and according to the jews, the jesus character doesn't fulfill the prophecies. specifically, the bible says he will: Build the Third Temple -- *Ezekiel 37:26-28* Gather all Jews back to the Land of Israel -- *Isaiah 43:5-6* Usher in an era of world peace, and end all hatred, oppression, suffering and disease. As it says: "Nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall man learn war anymore." -- *Isaiah 2:4* Spread universal knowledge of the God of Israel, which will unite humanity as one. As it says: "God will be King over all the world ― on that day, God will be One and His Name will be One" -- *Zechariah 14:9*

If an individual fails to fulfill even one of these conditions, then he cannot be the Messiah. none of these has been fulfilled.

and that this deity which cannot support any burden of proof of itself either sends this message of a mortal son to illiterate bronze age idiots instead of people who could actually make written testimony of it like china for example.

Sin is an imaginary disease that was invented to sell you an imaginary cure. it's the essence of marketing. and the outlandish cures are snake oil cures.

even the old testament doesn't allow for the scapegoat: Deut 24:16 states "Parents are not to be put to death for their children, nor children put to death for their parents; each will die for their own sin."

Exodus 32:30-34 shows that the deity refuses to make a scapegoat of moses: The next day Moses said to the people, “You have committed a great sin. But now I will go up to the Lord; perhaps I can make atonement for your sin.” So Moses went back to the Lord and said, “Oh, what a great sin these people have committed! They have made themselves gods of gold. But now, please forgive their sin—but if not, then blot me out of the book you have written.” The Lord replied to Moses, “Whoever has sinned against me I will blot out of my book. Now go, lead the people to the place I spoke of, and my angel will go before you. However, when the time comes for me to punish, I will punish them for their sin.”

ezekiel 18:1-4 shows that the deity refuses to make scapegoats, each shall take responsibility for their actions: "guilty he word of the Lord came to me: “What do you people mean by quoting this proverb about the land of Israel: ‘The parents eat sour grapes, and the children’s teeth are set on edge’? “As surely as I live, declares the Sovereign Lord, you will no longer quote this proverb in Israel. For everyone belongs to me, the parent as well as the child—both alike belong to me. The one who sins is the one who will die."

and then of course there's the point that the jesus character was a total commie, " sell all that you own and distribute the money to the poor and you will have treasure in heaven." *luke 18:22, mark 10:21, matt 19:21. *

horrible family values of the jesus character: _"... i have come to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother in law and one's foes will be members of one's own household"_ -- matt 10:35-36; luke 12:52-53

more horrible family values of the jesus character: _"whoever loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; and whoever loves son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me"_ -- matt 10:37

and even more bad family values of leaving one's own family: _"another said, 'i will follow you lord; but let me first say farewell to those at home.' jesus said to him 'no one who puts a hand to the plow and looks back is fit for the kingdom of god"_ -- luke 9:61-62

we all are a better example of this so-called savior who wants people to abandon their family.

and great forgotten teachings that no one follows: _".. anyone who divorces his wife, except on the ground of unchastity, causes her to commit adultery; and whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery"_ -- matt 5:32; 19:9; mark 10:11-12; luke 16:18

this immoral character is not only not likely to be real, but is an horrible example of any kind of idol one should ever follow.

and after all of that, 1 cor 15:14, _"... if christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith."_

1 note · View note

greatwrath · 4 years ago

Text

Azrael’s powers and abilities [UPDATED]

• Immortality - As an Archangel, Azrael possesses an unending lifespan. Her vessel does not age.

• Bioluminescence - When Azrael revs up her Light, it spills out over her vessel, first from her eyes, then through her skin.

• Mental Projection - Azrael is capable of projecting her consciousness into someone else’s mind. This ability is especially useful for communicating with people who are possessed by another entity, or communicating with people who are unconscious.

• Heightened Senses - Azrael’s visual, auditory, tactile, gustatory, and olfactory senses are incredibly sensitive. This is why she frequently wears dark tinted sunglasses and steers clear of modern foods with too much sugar. Her senses are that way to give her an edge in battle. However, in the modern world, Azrael can become overwhelmed with so much input.

• Temperature Resistance - Azrael is easily able to withstand some pretty extreme temperatures, from about -1500 °C and + 1500 °C. However, in the event that she is badly injured, her Light, which is normally super hot and bright, will fade and its temperature will drop, leaving her susceptible to the cold.

• Enhanced Reflexes - Azrael’s average reaction time is a little more than five hundredths of a second (fifty-five milliseconds) - faster than a Lamborghini gear shift.

• Enhanced Strength - Azrael is strong enough to throw a 300lb man through a steel reinforced wall. She can also break a gun in half, punch through metal or solid rock etc.

• Enhanced Combat Skills - Warrior angels and Archangels possess superhuman hand-to-hand combat skills. Basically, you don’t want to get into a fight with Azrael, because she is probably at least four times faster and hits harder than a motherfucker.

• Expert Swordsmanship - Azrael has been wielding Vanquish for upwards of 300,000 years, so it goes without saying that she has both the skills and the experience handling a sword. This is an example of how Azrael uses a sword.

• Regenerative Healing (Limited) - Azrael can easily heal anything that was’nt dealt by white fire or empyrean steel. Wounds dealt by white fire and empyrean steel are difficult to heal, especially given the fact that Azrael has to rely on her own steam.

• Soul Detection - Azrael can tell whether you have a soul, and what sins you have committed. That’s partly how she can tell whether a person is a half-breed, because the soul of a half-breed is distinctly different from a mortal human soul.

• Heavenly (White) Fire Production - As an Archangel, Azrael can summon white fire to the blade of her sword, which remain burning until she extinguishes it.

• Memory Manipulation - Azrael can erase memories and manipulate them. It’s not something she uses often, but she can do it.

• Extrasensory Perception - Azrael can see and communicate with spirits lingering in both the astral and earthly realm. She also possesses Claircognizance, clairsentience, clairaudience and clairomancy.

• Telekinesis (Limited) - Like the other Archangels, Azrael is a very, very powerful telekinetic, even running on her own steam. At the height of her power, she could’ve easily raised the Titanic from the Atlantic ocean without experiencing any blowback. She could do the same now, but it would put significant strain on her and result in her running out of power entirely.

• Resurrection of dead mortals(Limited) - Azrael is more than capable of bringing a dead person back to life, even if that person’s body is desiccated and rotted. It takes some time and a lot of power, but she can do it. • Temporal Control (Limited) - Temporal control is how angels travel through time, though they usually only use it when ordered to do so. Azrael has only used temporal control once, and it knocked her out for several days because of her being disconnected from The Source. In that instance, Azrael divided her light into billions of fragments and spread them across the previous nine hundred years.

• Photokinesis (Limited) - Azrael can manipulate her Light to make images that look like holograms. Sometimes she uses her Light to show people what she looks like in her second form, sometimes her Light pulses in her hands and on her fingertips, sometimes she forms the a map of the cosmos around her

• Interdimensional Travel/Teleporting - Azrael uses this ability to get places quickly, to move around in battle, and to move between the earthly realm, the spirit world and the heavens. She can also shift between alternate dimensions in order to hide from her enemies.

• Atmokinesis - Azrael can and has been known to conjure up some pretty crazy storms, like the storm she created to destroy the Tower of Babel. Around the time of Moses, the Egyptians became afraid of dark clouds and lightning. The storms are probably part of how Azrael earned ‘the great wrath’.

• Wing Manifestation - Azrael has gigantic wings in her corporeal ‘cryptid’ form, and they translate onto her vessel as two six-foot-wide wings with pitch-black feathers. They are bulletproof, sharp as razors when they need to be, and very sensitive.

• Self Sustenance (almost) - Azrael doesn’t require water/food/air, and does not ‘evacuate’ waste. The only thing Azrael does require is sleep, but she refuses to sleep all the same.

• Earth Contaminant Immunity - Azrael is immune to all pathogens from the Earthly/physical realm. That means things like polio, rabies, small-pox, tuberculosis, leprosy, bubonic plague etc. However, rare and fatal pathogens created in Hell, or created by Raphael’s angels, can infect Archangels.

• Omnilingualism - Azrael can speak and read every language ever written or spoken on Earth, including her own mother-tongue. She also understands the Infernal languages but never speaks them. These are the languages she speaks, reads and write:

Enochian, Demonic Tongues (Cthonic, Gehenic, Tartarian, Purgatic etc.), English, Middle English, Latin, Aramaic, Hausa, Iroquoian (Seneca, Cherokee, Mohawk Etc.), Phoenician, Ammonite, Māori, Archaic Japanese, Haitian Creole, Navajo, Qaniujaaqpait, Old Chinese, Old Cyrillic, Powhatan, French, Nepalese, Italian, Inuktitut, Russian, Adamic, Chaldeac, Kathlamet, Xhosa, Spanish, German, Sanskrit, Assyrian, Malay, Filipino, Shina, Ancient Greek, Persian, Sumerian, Archaic, Punjabi, Egyptian, Afrikaans, Chiricahua, Old Huron, Hebrew, Gothic, Etruscan, Scythian, Proto-germanic, Western Apache, Celtic, Swahili, Yucatec Maya, Akkadian, Malagasy, Mycenaean Greek, Carthaginian, Sinhalese, Zulu, Mauritian Creole, Mandarin Chinese, Xiang Chinese, Turkmen, Uzbek, Nobiin, Atikamekw, Mi'kmaq, Kashmiri, Gujurati, Kurdish, Tamil, Chechen, Portugese, Witsuwit'en, Kazakh, Icelandic, Tajik, Kyrgyz, Qatari Arabic, Sioux, Cree, Korean, Algonquian (Ojibwe-potawatomi, Menominee, Cheyenne), Tibetan, Urdu, Adyghe, Bhutanese, Kachin, Burmese, Kabardian, Lithuanian, Old High German, Hittite, Danish, Mayan, Somali, Batek, Amharic, Manding, Vietnamese, Thai, Kordofan Nubian, Pictish, Turkish, Kanakanabu, Coptic, Lao, Khmer, Belarusian, Ukrainian, Polish, Auyokawa, Sentinelese, Jarawa, Czech, (Irish, Scottish) Gaelic, Welsh, Gaulish, Proto-celtic, Old Brythonic, Maharashrtri, Bering Strait Inupiatun, Eskimo-Aleut, Kalaalisut, Signing Exact English, ASL Etc.

• Ecological Empathy - Angels have a connection to all creation, including plants and animals. If you see Azrael talking to an animal, she’s not mad, she’s just doing what angels do.

• Enhanced Intelligence - Azrael’s IQ number is 400+ approximately, which is twice the number of the most intelligent human being.

• Possession - Although Azrael has her own vessel, she can possess a human body for a limited amount of time. If she is out of a vessel for an extended period of time, then she can become disorientated after returning to her body or another body.

• Neurocognitive Deficit - In the event that Azrael is low on power or experiencing a lot of pain, she can put herself into neuro-shut down, which essentially means that she is still in her vessel but totally unresponsive to all outside stimuli. This is also called a state of dormancy.

• Dimensional Awareness - The power to detect cross-dimensional portals/barriers within their proximity. Useful when Hell gates are opened.

• Astral Trapping - “The user can restrain, trap and/or seal astral beings (including astrally projecting being, ghosts, spirits, psychic entities, etc.) into a specific place, item or being (possibly allowing their energies to be tapped by others) or prevent them from entering certain areas or possessing beings/items. They can prevent a ghost from manifesting, prevent an astral projector from entering their body, or force ghosts on or off their plane of existence.”

• Beacon Emission - Azrael can send out a sort of SOS signal which can be perceived by other angels and intercepted by some other creatures. It’s kind of like the ping from a crashed aircraft.

• Omnidirectional Light Waves - Azrael can release a blast of destructive light that is powerful enough to send anyone and anything standing in its way flying. It’ll also smash windows and lights, and knock out the electrical grid.

• Energy Field Emission - The energy field around Azrael is a constant presence. It’s is the reason people who encounter her experience cold chills, goosebumps, and a feeling of dread when she gets close.

MISC. • She is immune to radiation. • She can interfere with the electrical grid (power cuts) and manipulate electrical instruments.

#hollow is our chest [headcanons & shit]#i am ruination [abilities & skills]

1 note · View note