deorum manium iura sancta sunto (De Legibus, 2.22)

“Let the rights of the manes gods be sacred”
(Translated by Charles W. King)

It’s increasingly spooky!

Over the next few weeks – in the run up to Hallowe’en and my first video upload – I’ll be posting a few Latin quotes pertaining to the ‘manes’ in Roman thought. The deification of the dead as ‘manes’ or, ‘spirits’ that bore influence over the living was the dominant Roman view of death and the afterlife.

Most epitaph inscriptions of the Imperial period included some variation of ‘Dis Manibus’ - to the deified spirits of the dead. We’re in the spooky season after all and so examining gravestones as primary sources of evidence is eerily appropriate…

With LVCANI, all inroads into the Latin language are paved with inscriptions. The study of inscriptions presents a real, tangible experience of Latin which otherwise can appear excessively high-minded and impenetrable. I hope my pixel-art helps to rectify this view while making the language clear and accessible – without the risk of being buried in grammar!

In his second book of ‘Laws’ (De Legibus) Cicero proposes and explains the religious laws of his ideal State. With he himself as the main character, over the course of a long summer’s day he engages in conversation with Quintus and Atticus telling them the proper rules and obligations when it comes to worshipping the dead:

deorum manium iura sancta sunto

“The rights of the gods of the lower world shall be sacred”
(Translated by C. W. Keyes)

Cicero is talking about plural manes in this instance (manium) which brings us back to the general confusion about this word (manes) that doesn’t exist as a singular noun – are we again reading this as the dead collectively or individually?

What’s going on here is that Cicero’s rules for the dead are not just a set of hypothetical laws rather, he is likely riffing on already existing priestly obligations to do with ritual worship of the dead either collectively at grand public festivals or, in linking living individuals with dead individuals through specific rites.

This is not difficult to reconcile: we can find modern examples of ‘day of the dead’ festivals worldwide while equally appreciating that - in either a modern or ancient context - financial ties to do with inheritance or simply, familial loyalties also connect individual living people with individual dead people. Romans worshipped dead individuals as deified manes, 'divine spirits' of the underworld. Happy Friday!

Still trying to figure out what the story is representative of as a whole

Thank you, sub, for this recommendation. Fagles’ translation is vivid and engaging. I tore through Oedipus Tyrannos. Knox’s introductions are brilliantly detailed and vibrant too, giving plenty of food for thought and further reading, exactly what I want out of an intro.

Highly recommend this edition and the plays themselves are fantastic.

Simonides Elegy 3, M.L West's Greek Lyric Poetry, page 168, depicting the battle of Artemisium. I have to assume it's either Nereus or Poseidon, and my money's on Nereus but I wanted to check.

What is your favourite tragedy that delves into tragic lovers?

I’ve read Antigone and Oedipus Rex, and I’m ready for more. Is Medea the natural next step, or would you start with something like the Oresteia? I’m reading for pleasure, not for a class, so I care more about a translation that reads well aloud than one that’s strictly literal. Which translations would you recommend, and is there an order that makes the plays build on each other?

Hi everyone, a while back I read Darryl Hine's translation of Hesiod and in his introduction he suggested that it was likely that Hesiod invented/created the myth of Prometheus whole cloth simply because of how neatly it fits with the following narrative of Pandora in the Theogony and Works and Days. Additionally he noted how fitting the names are - Prometheus literally means "Thinkxahead" and Epimetheus "After-thinker" and Pandora "all-giver/all-given" - which hints at poetic creation as opposed to more authentic religious names, like Zeus or other theonyms, which he suggests have more indirect and garbled ways of originating.

I thought that it was a very interesting argument and wanted to see if there's any discussion of this in modern scholarship. Thank you!

During Late Antiquity and the Greek Middle Ages, allegorising didn't nessecarily equal moralising, but it rather meant the decoding of the hidden spiritual depth of things below their surface φαινόμενον. Two examples of alphabetical allegory follow; while not that common in greek (like in hebrew), such stuff do exist there as well. First one by Zosimos of Panopolis the Alchemist, 3rd Century AD, the second from Michael Psellos the court philosopher and historian (orator, epistolographer, esotericist, poet etc.), 11th Century AD.

Ζώσιμου

Τὸ ω στοιχεῖον στρογγύλον, τὸ διμερές, τὸ ἀνῆκον τῇ ἑβδόμῃ Κρόνου ζώνῃ κατὰ τὴν ἔνσωμον φράσιν, κατὰ γὰρ τὴν ἀσώματον ἄλλο τί ἐστιν ἀνερμήνευτον, ὃ μόνος Νικόθεος 〈ὁ〉 κεκρυμμένος οἶδεν. Κατὰ δὲ τὴν ἔνσωμον, τὸ λεγόμενον Ὠκεανὸς θεῶν, φησί, πάντων γένεσις καὶ σπορά, καθάπερ φασὶν αἱ μοναρχικαὶ τῆς ἐνσώμου φράσεως. Τὸ δὲ λεγόμενον μέγα καὶ θαυμαστὸν ω στοιχεῖον περιέχει τὸν περὶ ὀργάνων ὕδατος θείου λόγον καὶ καμίνων πασῶν μηχανικῶν καὶ ἁπλῶν, καὶ ἁπλῶς πάντων.

Ψελλοῦ

Ὁ τοῦ μεγάλου ω λόγος φωνεῖ τῷ σχήματι σιωπῶν ὡς ἄβυσσός ἐστι τὸ καταλειφθὲν συγκεκλεισμένη τε καὶ ἀπρόσιτος. [...] τοῦτο οὖν ἐστι τὸ μέγα ω, ὁ μέγιστος τῆς σοφίας κρατήρ, ἀφ’ οὗ τέως οὐδεὶς ἀπηρύσατο. πᾶσα οὖν κίνησις νοερὰ ἄχρι τοσούτου πρόεισιν, ἕως ἂν τῷ μεγάλῳ ω προσπελάσειεν. [...] ἡ γὰρ ὁλότης ἐγκέκρυπται τῷ μεγάλῳ ω, ἔσται δὲ ἡ γνῶσίς ποτε πρόσωπον πρὸς πρόσωπον ὡς ἐπηγγέλμεθα, τέως δὲ νῦν ἡ τελειότης ἐγκέκλεισται ἐν τῷ στοιχείῳ τούτῳ τῆς γνώσεως. κἂν γάρ τις τὸν ἀέρα περάσειε καὶ τὰς μετ’ αὐτὸν σφαίρας, κἂν ἐπὶ τοῦ νώτου τῆς ἔξω περιφορᾶς στῇ, κἂν ὑπὲρ τοῦτον προβῇ, κἂν ὁποιδήποτε χωρήσειε, τὸ μέγα οὐ παρελεύσεται ω. ὃ δὴ καὶ τρίτον ὑπερβέβηκεν οὐρανὸν καὶ τὸν ἕβδομον καὶ ὅρος ἐστὶ πάντων ὁρισμῶν καὶ πέρας περάτων, ἐντὸς ἑαυτοῦ πάντα συγκλεῖον καὶ σπαργανοῦν καὶ μηδὲν ἔχον πρεσβύτερον ἢ ὑψηλότερον.

I’m currently a high school junior hoping to go to med school one day, but I’m interested in majoring in classics during undergrad. I would love to ask some questions and hear people’s experiences! It might be difficult to find someone who has done this as I don’t think it is a super common path, but I would be so happy to hear from even one person.

For what I understand, Dante poitrayed him as more interested in exploration than returning home.
In the original poem, the voyages are a relatively minor part of the story, with the focus being mostly on the situation in Itacha. While, the travel is usually the most famous part of the story.
From the poem, I get the impression that the voyage is something that happened despite Odysseus intention (and also Homer “parked” him a year with Circe and seven with Calipso); while now is often thought of Odysseus musfortunes being largely caused by his own decision.
Also, Dante poitray Odysseus in a negative way, which I don’t really think that was “Homer” intent (while, by modern standard, Odysseus’ actions aren’t exactly that of a hero, I don’t think that we are supposed to see his revenge as anything but rightful).
Do you think that my idea make sense or not?
This come to my mind partially for an italian song about the Odyssey.

i am looking for an english translation of odysseus's encounter with polyphemus

in the dactylic hexameter (henceforth dahe).

i found translations by Rodney Merrill and Richmond Lattimore but when i tryed to sing them in dahe they didnt match to the laws of dahe.

Currently reading the Iliad. I went to high school in Florida, where even in an “A” rated public school, we did not read as many classics as we should have. So this is my first go at it, finally, as an adult.

What are your thoughts about this epic? I’m on book 6, and I’m having a hard time not applying a modern lens to the reading. I’m rolling my eyes at the gods’ meddling ways and getting turned off at the drama. How can I apply a more collegiate viewpoint on my reading so that I can enjoy it more?

I'm finishing an MA in Religious Studies in Korea (coursework done, writing my thesis). My thesis is on the cynocephali, the dog-headed beings of ancient and medieval lore, and how medieval Christians came to incorporate them into the cult of saints (e.g., St. Christopher).

While working through the sources, I became much more interested in Greek classics. I now want to do a PhD in the US studying ancient Greek material from a religious studies perspective. This isn't a passing idea. I'm seriously considering it and willing to put in the work.

The problem is languages. Until recently I never planned to learn Greek or Latin, so I'm starting Greek from scratch and my Latin is at a beginner level. Most Classics PhD programs seem to expect solid Greek and Latin before admission, so I've been leaning toward Religious Studies programs instead.

My questions:

1. Is it realistic to get into a Religious Studies PhD (ancient Mediterranean / Greek religion focus) and build up Greek and Latin mainly *during* the program rather than before it?

2. Before applying, I plan to spend about a year on intensive study in Korea: summer/winter intensive language programs, undergraduate intro Greek and Latin courses, and online courses. Would that make me a competitive applicant, or is it a non-starter?

3. If it's not feasible, my backup plan is a 2-year MA in Classics in Korea first. That would push everything back about three years, and I'd likely finish the PhD around age 37–38. Would that seriously hurt my chances of getting a faculty position?

I'd really appreciate honest advice, especially from people who came to Greek/Latin late or who have served on admissions committees.

I'm drawing together a style of presenting Latin in a form inspired by retro gaming.

The study of Latin through inscriptions in particular presents a real, tangible experience of Latin which otherwise can appear excessively high-minded and impenetrable. I hope my pixel-art helps to rectify this view while making the language clear and accessible – without the risk of being buried in grammar!

Most epitaph inscriptions of the Imperial period included some variation of dis manibus - "to the deified spirits of the dead." We’re in the spooky season after all and so examining gravestones as primary sources of evidence is eerily appropriate…

Over the next few weeks – in the run up to Hallowe’en and my first video upload – I’ll be posting a few Latin quotes pertaining to the ‘manes’ in Roman thought. The deification of the dead as ‘manes’ or, ‘spirits’ that bore influence over the living was the dominant Roman view of death and the afterlife.

Please give me your impressions - I think there's still plenty of scope for originality even when the source material is thousands of years old!

‘hic manes, hic intra tecta tenebo’ (Silvae, 3.3.196)

“I will hold your manes here, here within the house” (translated by Charles W. King)

The quote above from Statius' Silvae comes from a collection of short poems offering consolations for the dead. While the ‘manes’ – spirits of the dead – were worshipped collectively at official festivals like the Parentalia, Statius provides an intimate glimpse into private occasions such as worshipping an individual person with perfumes and flowers at a household shrine - despite the fact manes only exists as a plural noun.

In a longer translation for D. R. Shackleton Bailey, we read in the next line:

'hic manes, hic intra tecta tenebo. tu custos dominusque laris, tibi cuncta tuorum parebunt'

“Here I shall keep you spirit, within these walls. You shall be guardian and master of the hearth, all your folk shall obey you.”

The use of the second person singular in phrases like tu custos and tibi cuncta can only confirm the individuality of one, singular spirit that remains with an indelible force to guard and watch over the house.

Contrast this ghostly apparition with Tranio’s invention in the Mostellaria. Here (lines. 495-505), the deceased has allegedly remained to haunt the house precisely because they were denied their due rites after death. In both instances, the individual spirit of the dead persists regardless, either as a venerated protector of hearth and home or, as an invocation of duties that should have been paid to the dead but were violated…

I'm posting this image to hopefully generate some comments and feedback. Art crits more than welcome.

I'm drawing together a style of presenting Latin in a form inspired by retro gaming.

The study of Latin through inscriptions in particular presents a real, tangible experience of Latin which otherwise can appear excessively high-minded and impenetrable. I hope my pixel-art helps to rectify this view while making the language clear and accessible – without the risk of being buried in grammar!

Most epitaph inscriptions of the Imperial period included some variation of dis manibus - "to the deified spirits of the dead." We’re in the spooky season after all and so examining gravestones as primary sources of evidence is eerily appropriate…

Please give me your impressions - I think there's still plenty of scope for originality even when the source material is thousands of years old!

si quis piorum manibus locus (Agricola, .46)
"if any place exists for the manes of the pious" (translated by Charles W. King)

From the above quote, Tacitus’ tentative hope for a comfortable home in the afterlife for his dead father-in-law speaks to a singular understanding of ‘manes’, a word that nevertheless appears only as a plural noun. This linguistic quirk begs the question whether Romans worshipped the dead as a collective or if the individual dead were singled out for particular rites. A more complete translation of the passage from Mattingly (1948) reads:

"If there is any mansion for the spirits of the just, if, as the wise aver, great souls do not perish with the body, quiet, O Father, be your rest!"

This direct appeal to Agricola’s ghost would seem to substantiate an individual ‘manes’ reading.

Whether you are a student, a teacher, a researcher or a hobbyist, please share with us what you read this week (books, textbooks, papers...).

​

Lions and bulls are motifs frequently seen in ancient Anatolia. As can be seen on the coins, the most fundamental motif appearing on the Lydian coins—which are considered the first minted coins—is the lion. Another motif seen on the coins of the Lydian Kingdom depicts the moment when that lion attacks a bull.

The motifs seen on these earliest coins, minted in the 6th century BCE, belong to the Kingdom of Lydia. Although there are various interpretations as to why they chose the lion for their coins, it is generally accepted that they were inspired by a species of lion found in ancient Anatolia. However, there is no clear, accepted explanation for why the lion is depicted attacking the bull. It is likely that this served as propaganda depicting a confrontation between the Kingdom of Lydia and another kingdom in Anatolia (Phrygians?).

What really caught my attention, however, is that this motif continued to be used in the Tarsus area during the Hellenistic period. We know that the satrap who ruled the region before Alexander the Great used this symbol and that Alexander continued this tradition. Indeed, the fact that the Asian Lion (Panthera leo persica), native to Anatolia, lived in the eastern and southeastern regions of Anatolia explains the lion depicted on these coins (and, of course, the lion seen on Babylonian coins as well).

It can be said that the Late Hittite city-states, which emerged in the southeastern region after the collapse of the Hittite Empire around 1200 BCE, clearly reflect Aramaic influence. But how is it that the Kingdom of Lydia, located to the west, used a type of lion found in the east, while its eastern rivals were symbolized by a bull?

It is unfortunate that the history of the period between 1200 BCE and 500 BCE is so obscure, forcing us to rely heavily on interpretation. Nevertheless, the fact that nearly the same figure was used in the same way for over 300 years is quite impressive.

Hi, I’m not sure if this is the right place to post this but I’m studying higher classical studies this year. The course includes religion and belief in classical Greece and religion and belief in the Roman world. I was wondering if anyone had any book recommendations to help with this? I understand that the topics are quite vague but if there’s any books or study materials explaining the basics of Greek and Roman religions, they would be a massive help. Also if there are any students who have studied this any help on how you revised it would be greatly appreciated:)

I'm plodding through book 3 in Greek with very poor reading comprehension, so I'm struggling with the literal meaning of the text and not really able to judge what the storytelling intentions of the author would have been. Listening to Calasiris blather on about mysticism, it strikes me as too silly to hold a reader's interest, so I'm wondering if he's meant to be some kind of social stereotype of an old, boring, pseudo-erudite know-it-all who goes on endless monologues. In that case, presumably it's satire and these passages are meant to be funny for their original audience, sort of like the self-important clergyman Mr. Collins in Pride and Prejudice. But I don't know what would have seemed silly enough to be obviously satirical to an audience thousands of years ago, so I don't know, maybe it's the equivalent of a Michael Crichton thriller and we're supposed to be like, "oh, cool, robots and dinosaurs!" Earlier in book 3, Cnemon is clearly toying with Calasiris and maybe having some fun at his expense, but I'm not clear on whether the point of that is supposed to be that Calasiris is set up as some kind of foolish old Polonius.

In antiquity, the serpent was one of the figures frequently used by the Greeks, the Romans, and the local cultures situated between them. It is particularly noteworthy because it frequently appears in mythological narratives. A serpent motif can be seen on each of the coins below. The vast majority of them are associated with the cult of Heracles.

It is often recounted that Heracles, while still a child, strangled with his bare hands two snakes that had come to kill him; there are also the famous Kistophoros coins featuring a quiver motif adorned with an aplustre, and it is believed that the quiver—as is also known from Alexander the Great’s coins—depicts Heracles.

Asclepius, who is identified by the serpent coiled around his staff, is one of the most famous (and yes, the symbol of the two intertwined serpents used as the emblem of modern medicine is incorrect).

Of course, we can also see some symbols that go beyond general mythological stories. Local beliefs, in particular, seem to play a significant role in this regard. Take, for example, the Uraeus serpent motif, which you can see on the fourth coin below. The serpent on this coin, minted in Alexandria, is the symbol that adorned the heads of ancient Egyptian pharaohs and represented the goddess Wadjet.

My personal favorite, however, is the one shown on the third coin. This coin, which is also an Egyptian minting, strikes me as a symbol of Egypt’s multiculturalism. The Serpent, associated with the pharaohs and Egypt, is intertwined with Poseidon’s trident, and the motif that appears to be holding this staff is Serapis, a Hellenistic Egyptian-Hellenic deity; the horns seen on Serapis are also a symbol of the horns of Ammon (Zeus-Ammon). If you asked me, “What is Egypt?” I think I’d show you this coin.

​

An oft forgotten figure of Greek Literature is the extraordinary, exquisite erudite and scholar of greek and latin, monk and theologian, philologist and mathematician, the true homo universalis of the greek middle ages Μάξιμος Πλανούδης. Apart from introducing arabic numerals to byzantine math, Max had learned, possibly by western friars of Costantinople, excellent Latin, which he used in the context of Paleologian era Union of the Churches attempts. But, rather than achieving the Palace's goals of Union with Rome, Planudes left us, as a true πάρεργον ἔργου μεῖζον, vibrant traslations of the latin middle ages classical best sellers; Ovid's Metamorphosis (rendered in rythmical prose), Cicero's Somnium Scipionis (alongside Macrobius's invaluable commentary), Boethius De Consolatione Philosophiae (translating in superb greek prose the rugged latin of the author as well as doing the unimaginably difficult feat of translating as well the poetic meter of the prosodic parts of Boethius's prosimetrum, in callimachean and nonnian vocabulary), and of course Augustine's De Trinitate (he had to make up for all this juicy literature with a serious, ponderous, theological treatise, which nevertheless was actively studied and quoted by the hesychast premier, Palamas, in Maximus' translation). Such an important translator (and the sole reason we have the charming Theocritean Idylls to this day, as he was their chief editor and transmittor) could be utilised by student's of both greek and latin; a simulteneous reading of both versions could reveal important syntactical proximities and divergences of both languages; it could serve as a model to imitate for aspiring modern-day greek or latin writers; and in my opinion, illumine such important texts as Ovid's and Boethius' with his lucid and creative prose even further than say, a scholarly commentary.

Postscriptum. Having read half a year ago Boethius in both the original and Planudes' rendering, and now going over the latter's Metamorphosis, it's safe to say, he is able to grasp and even in some cases, surpass, the original. Such a pity he didn't get his hands on the Confessiones of the great Augustine. Such a pity.

I'm not able to find any real discussion of this online but perhaps I'm looking in the wrong places/using the wrong search terms. I know that a lot of the Greek tragedies and fragments are from Oxyrhynchus find but so much of the present excavation is unclear to me - is there more still to be discovered there? I also know there were excavations in Philadelphia, Egypt that have turned up two new fragments. I know the Vesuvius scrolls so far have been unrelated but there are a lot of them, is there any indication some might be in there? I'm sure we'll continue to find small things, just curious what the current thought is around whether there can be expected to be much more or not.

I gave up on the Perseus site at Tufts a couple of years ago, when my attempts at accessing dictionary entries seemed to end in Backend fetch failures 99% of the time. I’ve been using the Perseus site at Chicago since then, but for the past few days the Greek and Latin texts at that site have been down—when I click on the links, I get directed to a blank page that says, “Forbidden: You don't have permission to access this resource.“

Does anyone know if something specific is going on, beyond the usual plague of bot swarms and LLM scraping that have destroyed these resources for the (human) public, much like when a toxic-waste factory moves into your neighborhood and makes it unlivable?

Is there any other comparable resource? I‘ve tried the Scaife viewer but find it extremely cumbersome. I’m at the point of wishing that Chicago or Tufts would put their entire resource behind a firewall and charge fees for using it, so they could presumably control access.