І. Pompey and the Jewish Sabbath
The 63 B.C. the famous Roman general Pompey took by force the city of Jerusalem and entered the Holy of the Holies in the Temple: which, as everybody then knew, was not permitted not only to pagans as Pompey himself, but to anybody – except of the High Priest once in the year. Pompey won easily one or two battles against a Judean army, but was stopped by the mighty wall around this part of Jerusalem, where was the Temple. According to most historians of the time – including the best informed among them, Josephus – Pompey was helped by the condition, that the Jews did not fight in the day of Sabbath.
Josephus tells us about this in the following way:
And indeed it was a hard thing to fill up that valley, by reason of its immense depth, especially as the Jews used all the means possible to repel them from their superior situation; nor had the Romans succeeded in their endeavours, had not Pompey taken notice of the seventh day, on which the Jews abstain from all sorts of work on a religious account and raised his bank, but restrained his soldiers from fighting on those days; for the Jews only acted defensively on Sabbath days. But as soon as Pompey had filled up the valley, he erected high towers upon the bank, and brought those engines, which they had fetched from Tyre near to the wall, and tried to batter it down… but the towers on this side of the city made very great resistance, and were indeed extraordinary both for largeness and magnificence (Josephus, The Wars Of The Jews, I, 7, 3)
Besides, Pompey had been amazed by the perseverance and imperturbability, with which the Jewish priests had performed the worship service, although they had been directly attacked. Even when they had been beaten to death, they hadn’t ceased to execute the demanded sacred deeds with the greatest punctuality, precisely in the same manner, in which they would have done it in peaceful time.
Josephus says the following:
Now here it was that, upon the many hardships which the Romans underwent, Pompey could not but admire not only at the other instances of the Jews' fortitude, but especially that they did not at all intermit their religious services, even when they were encompassed with darts on all sides; for, as if the city were in full peace, their daily sacrifices and purifications, and every branch of their religious worship, was still performed to God with the utmost exactness. Nor indeed when the temple was actually taken, and they were every day slain about the altar, did they leave off the instances of their Divine worship that were appointed by their law; for it was in the third month of the siege before the Romans could even with great difficulty overthrow one of the towers, and get into the temple (Josephus, The Wars Of The Jews, I, 7, 4).
The Jews had become famous with this way of self-sacrifice centuries before that. So, one of the Macedonian rulers of Egypt had taken Jerusalem in the beginning of the third century B.C., taking advantage, like Pompey, of the Sabbath.
Now it came to pass, that when Ptolemy, the son of Lagus, came into this city with his army, that these men, in observing this mad custom of theirs, instead of guarding the city, suffered their country to submit itself to a bitter lord; and their law was openly proved to have commanded a foolish practice. This accident taught all other men but the Jews to disregard such dreams as these were, and not to follow the like idle suggestions delivered as a law, when, in such uncertainty of human reasonings, they are at a loss what they should do (Agatharchides, a pagan historian cited by Josephus in Against Apion, I, 22).
ІІ. Jerusalem and the boundaries of pagan Europe
Pompey had captured Jerusalem, but treated the population mercifully and did not sack the treasures in the Temple. 133 years later Titus not only had conquered the town, but also burnt the Temple and murdered the majority of its population. Half a century after that Hadrian built at this place a huge pagan temple and even changed the name of the city – he called it Elia. This had never happened to any of the cities, with which Rome had conflicts. Carthago, one hundred years after its demolition, had been rebuilt by the Romans themselves – and with the same name. It is obvious, that Jerusalem had been considered as an irreconcilable enemy – a city, which cannot be associated, but only deleted.
These events might serve as the basis of reflection on the question: where are the boundaries of Roman Europe. The expansion of Rome, as well as of the Hellenistic kingdoms, governed by the successors of Alexander, was marked by the acceptance of its deities. Imperial Rome was there, where was erected the statues of her emperors. The Jews probably never would rebelled – neither against the emperorors nor before them against Hellenistic kings as Antioch the IV – if the state of the conquerors had not menaced their divine service. But it had been inevitable the pagan state to be a threat, because the Roman religion, especially after the deification of the emperors from Caesar onwards, is a cult to the Roman state, and the Jews refused to serve other gods besides their Lord. So, thus, this conflict, which at first glance seems to be “only religious”, turns out to be a political one, as well. Because, the essence of the worship of the Roman deities is the welfare of the state, and therefore the one, who refuses to worship them, opposes the state. According to the Jews, however, a state should exist in order to protect the divine service; and a state, which cannot secure the service to the one God, is useless. That’s why the Romans as statesmen inevitably will persecute a worship, which rejects their deities, and the Jews will reject a state, which imposes to them a cult, incompatible with their worship.
After the demolition of the Temple in front of the Roman state emerges a problem, in a certain degree similar to the previous one – the problem with the Christians. From the correspondence between Pliny the Younger and the emperor Trajan is evident that the Christians had been persecuted mainly as a political community, although they hadn’t perceived themselves like that. The reason had been the same – the refusal to participate in the state cult. Thus the emperor had been confronted by people, who despite of the fact that they are Roman citizens, actually live in the empire as its opponents – because they do not obey and refuse to obey the orders of the state, in the cases when these commands refer to a matter of faith.
How this conflict could be resolved? Either the state had to give up its own cult, or the Christians to be exterminated – as believers or physically. The first had happened and so the Roman state had disappeared as pagan state. Thus, the policy of the emperors – external and internal – of imposing the state cult forcibly had been in vain; the cult had disappeared.
ІІІ. Pope Benedict XVI on the spiritual situation of our times
Recently, (10 days ago in Paris) pope Benedict XVI, made the following public statement:
The word 'idol' comes from the Greek and means 'image,' 'figure,' 'representation,' but also 'ghost,' 'phantom,' 'vain appearance.' An idol is a delusion, for it turns its worshipper away from reality and places him in the kingdom of mere appearances."
"Now," the Pope asked, "is this not a temptation in our own day - the only one we can act upon effectively? The temptation to idolize a past that no longer exists, forgetting its shortcomings; the temptation to idolize a future which does not yet exist, in the belief that, by his efforts alone, man can bring about the kingdom of eternal joy on earth!" In the same way, "have not money, the thirst for possessions, for power and even for knowledge, diverted man from his true destiny?" (Pope: Shun the worship of modern idols http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=13794)
On my part, personally, without being a Roman Catholic, I could agree with the words of the pope. The European Union does not have any clear politics on the question of the religion. It is considered, that religion is just “one of the many problems” and maybe not the most important one, and moreover, that it is “a personal matter of everybody”.
However, it is possible religion to abide in a place, where it is imperceptible for the majority of the people. The head of the Catholic Church already says that today the attitude of the people to the market is in fact a religious attitude. The supreme values are the welfare, conceived as the satisfaction of all kinds of desires in one’s personal life and the equity in front of the law.
But the same values had been the pride of Rome, as well. Its deities had been the deities of the well-being and success. The myths narrate that they are creatures, who try to satisfy their own bodily desires and striving for power and honour. Today the boundaries of Europe again reach to the limit, from where on the satisfaction of various desires in one’s personal life is not a supreme value. Beyond this limit, however, occur changes in the public life, as well.
***
The aim of this text is to pay attention to the indifference of the European leaders towards the question of religion in the European union. In fact, there is an implicit hostility against the view, which claims that the goods of this world are temporary and therefore insignificant. The example of the Roman Empire shows that neither the welfare, nor the violence could resist a faith, which points to the supreme good as external from this world.
Contemporary Europe, deprived from a religion of its own, will be left open to the increasing pressure from Islam – and this will be not so much external, as internal pressure. This may lead to violence, probably exerted by xenophobic groups in the beginning, but tolerated by some governments. Then this might lead to the break of the union. Then the leadership will be taken either by professed neo-pagans, similar to the Italian and German rulers 70 years ago, either by countries, whose rulers will be the first to declare, that the state exist for the sake of the religion.
Tuesday, September 23, 2008
Thursday, July 31, 2008
Josephus. Antiquities of the Jews
Antiquities of the Jews, XI, 8.1 - XII, 1.1
1. ABOUT this time it was that Philip, king of Macedon, was treacherously assaulted and slain at Egae by Pausanias, the son of Cerastes, who was derived from the family of Oreste, and his son Alexander succeeded him in the kingdom; who, passing over the Hellespont, overcame the generals of Darius's army in a battle fought at Granicum. So he marched over Lydia, and subdued Ionia, and overran Caria, and fell upon the places of Pamphylia, as has been related elsewhere...
3. About this time it was that Darius heard how Alexander had passed over the Hellespont, and had beaten his lieutenants in the battle at Granicum, and was proceeding further; whereupon he gathered together an army of horse and foot, and determined that he would meet the Macedonians before they should assault and conquer all Asia. So he passed over the river Euphrates, and came over Taurus, the Cilician mountain, and at Issus of Cilicia he waited for the enemy, as ready there to give him battle. Upon which Sanballat was glad that Darius was come down; and told Manasseh that he would suddenly perform his promises to him, and this as soon as ever Darius should come back, after he had beaten his enemies; for not he only, but all those that were in Asia also, were persuaded that the Macedonians would not so much as come to a battle with the Persians, on account of their multitude. But the event proved otherwise than they expected; for the king joined battle with the Macedonians, and was beaten, and lost a great part of his army. His mother also, and his wife and children, were taken captives, and he fled into Persia. So Alexander came into Syria, and took Damascus; and when he had obtained Sidon, he besieged Tyre, when he sent all epistle to the Jewish high priest, to send him some auxiliaries, and to supply his army with provisions; and that what presents he formerly sent to Darius, he would now send to him, and choose the friendship of the Macedonians, and that he should never repent of so doing.
1. NOW when Alexander, king of Macedon, had put an end to the dominion of the Persians, and had settled the affairs in Judea after the forementioned manner, he ended his life. And as his government fell among many, Antigonus obtained Asia, Seleucus Babylon; and of the other nations which were there, Lysimachus governed the Hellespont, and Cassander possessed Macedonia; as did Ptolemy the son of Lagus seize upon Egypt. And while these princes ambitiously strove one against another, every one for his own principality, it came to pass that there were continual wars, and those lasting wars too; and the cities were sufferers, and lost a great many of their inhabitants in these times of distress, insomuch that all Syria, by the means of Ptolemy the son of Lagus, underwent the reverse of that denomination of Savior, which he then had. He also seized upon Jerusalem, and for that end made use of deceit and treachery; for as he came into the city on a sabbath day, as if he would offer sacrifices he, without any trouble, gained the city, while the Jews did not oppose him, for they did not suspect him to be their enemy; and he gained it thus, because they were free from suspicion of him, and because on that day they were at rest and quietness; and when he had gained it, he ruled over it in a cruel manner. Nay, Agatharchides of Cnidus, who wrote the acts of Alexander's successors, reproaches us with superstition, as if we, by it, had lost our liberty; where he says thus: "There is a nation called the nation of the Jews, who inhabit a city strong and great, named Jerusalem. These men took no care, but let it come into the hands of Ptolemy, as not willing to take arms, and thereby they submitted to be under a hard master, by reason of their unseasonable superstition." This is what Agatharchides relates of our nation.
Иосиф Флавий. Иудейскиe древности. Перевод Г.Г. Генкеля. "Крон-пресс", 1996. Репринт от Санкт-Петербург, 1900.
http://www.ccel.org/j/josephus/works/JOSEPHUS.HTM
1. ABOUT this time it was that Philip, king of Macedon, was treacherously assaulted and slain at Egae by Pausanias, the son of Cerastes, who was derived from the family of Oreste, and his son Alexander succeeded him in the kingdom; who, passing over the Hellespont, overcame the generals of Darius's army in a battle fought at Granicum. So he marched over Lydia, and subdued Ionia, and overran Caria, and fell upon the places of Pamphylia, as has been related elsewhere...
3. About this time it was that Darius heard how Alexander had passed over the Hellespont, and had beaten his lieutenants in the battle at Granicum, and was proceeding further; whereupon he gathered together an army of horse and foot, and determined that he would meet the Macedonians before they should assault and conquer all Asia. So he passed over the river Euphrates, and came over Taurus, the Cilician mountain, and at Issus of Cilicia he waited for the enemy, as ready there to give him battle. Upon which Sanballat was glad that Darius was come down; and told Manasseh that he would suddenly perform his promises to him, and this as soon as ever Darius should come back, after he had beaten his enemies; for not he only, but all those that were in Asia also, were persuaded that the Macedonians would not so much as come to a battle with the Persians, on account of their multitude. But the event proved otherwise than they expected; for the king joined battle with the Macedonians, and was beaten, and lost a great part of his army. His mother also, and his wife and children, were taken captives, and he fled into Persia. So Alexander came into Syria, and took Damascus; and when he had obtained Sidon, he besieged Tyre, when he sent all epistle to the Jewish high priest, to send him some auxiliaries, and to supply his army with provisions; and that what presents he formerly sent to Darius, he would now send to him, and choose the friendship of the Macedonians, and that he should never repent of so doing.
1. NOW when Alexander, king of Macedon, had put an end to the dominion of the Persians, and had settled the affairs in Judea after the forementioned manner, he ended his life. And as his government fell among many, Antigonus obtained Asia, Seleucus Babylon; and of the other nations which were there, Lysimachus governed the Hellespont, and Cassander possessed Macedonia; as did Ptolemy the son of Lagus seize upon Egypt. And while these princes ambitiously strove one against another, every one for his own principality, it came to pass that there were continual wars, and those lasting wars too; and the cities were sufferers, and lost a great many of their inhabitants in these times of distress, insomuch that all Syria, by the means of Ptolemy the son of Lagus, underwent the reverse of that denomination of Savior, which he then had. He also seized upon Jerusalem, and for that end made use of deceit and treachery; for as he came into the city on a sabbath day, as if he would offer sacrifices he, without any trouble, gained the city, while the Jews did not oppose him, for they did not suspect him to be their enemy; and he gained it thus, because they were free from suspicion of him, and because on that day they were at rest and quietness; and when he had gained it, he ruled over it in a cruel manner. Nay, Agatharchides of Cnidus, who wrote the acts of Alexander's successors, reproaches us with superstition, as if we, by it, had lost our liberty; where he says thus: "There is a nation called the nation of the Jews, who inhabit a city strong and great, named Jerusalem. These men took no care, but let it come into the hands of Ptolemy, as not willing to take arms, and thereby they submitted to be under a hard master, by reason of their unseasonable superstition." This is what Agatharchides relates of our nation.
Иосиф Флавий. Иудейскиe древности. Перевод Г.Г. Генкеля. "Крон-пресс", 1996. Репринт от Санкт-Петербург, 1900.
http://www.ccel.org/j/josephus/works/JOSEPHUS.HTM
Monday, July 21, 2008
The Maccabees 1
The First Book of the Maccabees
1:1-48
ΚΑΙ ἐγένετο μετὰ τὸ πατάξαι ᾿Αλέξανδρον τὸν Φιλίππου τὸν Μακεδόνα, ὃς ἐξῆλθεν ἐκ τῆς γῆς Χεττειείμ, καὶ ἐπάταξε τὸν Δαρεῖον βασιλέα Περσῶν καὶ Μήδων καὶ ἐβασίλευσεν ἀντ᾿ αὐτοῦ πρότερος ἐπὶ τὴν ῾Ελλάδα. 2 καὶ συνεστήσατο πολέμους πολλοὺς καὶ ἐκράτησεν ὀχυρωμάτων πολλῶν καὶ ἔσφαξε βασιλεῖς τῆς γῆς· 3 καὶ διῆλθεν ἕως ἄκρων τῆς γῆς καὶ ἔλαβε σκῦλα πλήθους ἐθνῶν. καὶ ἡσύχασεν ἡ γῆ ἐνώπιον αὐτοῦ, καὶ ὑψώθη, καὶ ἐπήρθη ἡ καρδία αὐτοῦ. 4 καὶ συνήγαγε δύναμιν ἰσχυρὰν σφόδρα καὶ ἦρξε χωρῶν καὶ ἐθνῶν καὶ τυράννων, καὶ ἐγένοντο αὐτῷ εἰς φόρον. 5 καὶ μετὰ ταῦτα ἔπεσεν ἐπὶ τὴν κοίτην καὶ ἔγνω ὅτι ἀποθνήσκει. 6 καὶ ἐκάλεσε τοὺς παῖδας αὐτοῦ τοὺς ἐνδόξους τοὺς συντρόφους αὐτοῦ ἀπὸ νεότητος καὶ διεῖλεν αὐτοῖς τὴν βασιλείαν αὐτοῦ ἔτι ζῶντος αὐτοῦ. 7 καὶ ἐβασίλευσεν ᾿Αλέξανδρος ἔτη δώδεκα καὶ ἀπέθανε. 8 καὶ ἐπεκράτησαν οἱ παῖδες αὐτοῦ ἕκαστος ἐν τῷ τόπῳ αὐτοῦ. 9 καὶ ἐπέθεντο πάντες διαδήματα μετὰ τὸ ἀποθανεῖν αὐτὸν καὶ οἱ υἱοὶ αὐτῶν ὀπίσω αὐτῶν ἔτη πολλὰ καὶ ἐπλήθυναν κακὰ ἐν τῇ γῇ. 10 καὶ ἐξῆλθεν ἐξ αὐτῶν ρίζα ἁμαρτωλὸς ᾿Αντίοχος ᾿Επιφανής, υἱὸς ᾿Αντιόχου βασιλέως, ὃς ἦν ὅμηρα ἐν τῇ Ρώμῃ· καὶ ἐβασίλευσεν ἐν ἔτει ἑκατοστῷ καὶ τριακοστῷ καὶ ἑβδόμῳ βασιλείας ῾Ελλήνων.
13 καὶ προεθυμήθησάν τινες ἀπὸ τοῦ λαοῦ, καὶ ἐπορεύθησαν πρὸς τὸν βασιλέα, καὶ ἔδωκεν αὐτοῖς ἐξουσίαν ποιῆσαι τὰ δικαιώματα τῶν ἐθνῶν. 14 καὶ ᾠκοδόμησαν γυμνάσιον ἐν ῾Ιεροσολύμοις κατὰ τὰ νόμιμα τῶν ἐθνῶν 15 καὶ ἐποίησαν ἑαυτοῖς ἀκροβυστίας καὶ ἀπέστησαν ἀπὸ διαθήκης ἁγίας καὶ ἐζευγίσθησαν τοῖς ἔθνεσι καὶ ἐπράθησαν τοῦ ποιῆσαι τὸ πονηρόν.
47 καὶ οἰκοδομῆσαι βωμοὺς καὶ τεμένη καὶ εἰδωλεῖα καὶ θύειν ὕεια καὶ κτήνη κοινὰ 48 καὶ ἀφιέναι τοὺς υἱοὺς αὐτῶν ἀπεριτμήτους, βδελύξαι τὰς ψυχὰς αὐτῶν ἐν παντὶ ἀκαθάρτῳ καὶ βεβηλώσει...
6:1-2
ΚΑΙ ὁ βασιλεὺς ᾿Αντίοχος διεπορεύετο τὰς ἐπάνω χώρας καὶ ἤκουσεν ὅτι ἐστὶν ᾿Ελυμαΐς ἐν τῇ Περσίδι πόλις ἔνδοξος πλούτῳ ἀργυρίῳ τε καὶ χρυσίῳ· 2 καὶ τὸ ἱερὸν τὸ ἐν αὐτῇ πλούσιον σφόδρα, καὶ ἐκεῖ καλύμματα χρυσᾶ καὶ θώρακες καὶ ὅπλα, ἃ κατέλιπεν ἐκεῖ ᾿Αλέξανδρος ὁ Φιλίππου βασιλεὺς ὁ Μακεδών, ὃς ἐβασίλευσε πρῶτος ἐν τοῖς ῞Ελλησι.
7:1
ΕΤΟΥΣ ἑνὸς καὶ πεντηκοστοῦ καὶ ἑκατοστοῦ ἐξῆλθε Δημήτριος ὁ τοῦ Σελεύκου ἐκ Ρώμης καὶ ἀνέβη σὺν ἀνδράσιν ὀλίγοις εἰς πόλιν παραθαλασσίαν καὶ ἐβασίλευσεν ἐκεῖ.
8:1-19
ΚΑΙ ἤκουσεν ᾿Ιούδας τὸ ὄνομα τῶν Ρωμαίων, ὅτι εἰσὶ δυνατοὶ ἰσχύϊ καὶ αὐτοὶ εὐδοκοῦσιν ἐν πᾶσι τοῖς προστιθεμένοις αὐτοῖς, καὶ ὅσοι ἂν προσέλθωσιν αὐτοῖς, ἱστῶσιν αὐτοῖς φιλίαν, 2 καὶ ὅτι εἰσὶ δυνατοὶ ἰσχύϊ. καὶ διηγήσαντο αὐτῷ τοὺς πολέμους αὐτῶν καὶ τὰς ἀνδραγαθίας, ἃς ποιοῦσιν ἐν τοῖς Γαλάταις, καὶ ὅτι κατεκράτησαν αὐτῶν καὶ ἤγαγον αὐτοὺς ὑπὸ φόρον, 3 καὶ ὅσα ἐποίησαν ἐν χώρᾳ ῾Ισπανίας τοῦ κατακρατῆσαι τῶν μετάλλων τοῦ ἀργυρίου καὶ τοῦ χρυσίου τοῦ ἐκεῖ· 4 καὶ κατεκράτησαν τοῦ τόπου παντὸς τῇ βουλῇ αὐτῶν καὶ τῇ μακροθυμίᾳ, καὶ ὁ τόπος ἦν μακρὰν ἀπέχων ἀπ᾿ αὐτῶν σφόδρα, καὶ τῶν βασιλέων τῶν ἐπελθόντων ἐπ᾿ αὐτοὺς ἀπ᾿ ἄκρου τῆς γῆς ἕως συνέτριψαν αὐτοὺς καὶ ἐπάταξαν ἐν αὐτοῖς πληγὴν μεγάλην, καὶ οἱ ἐπίλοιποι διδόασιν αὐτοῖς φόρον κατ᾿ ἐνιαυτόν· 5 καὶ τὸν Φίλιππον καὶ τὸν Περσέα Κιτιέων βασιλέα καὶ τοὺς ἐπῃρμένους ἐπ᾿ αὐτοὺς συνέτριψαν αὐτοὺς ἐν πολέμῳ καὶ κατεκράτησαν αὐτῶν· 6 καὶ ᾿Αντίοχον τὸν μέγαν βασιλέα τῆς ᾿Ασίας τὸν πορευθέντα ἐπ᾿ αὐτοὺς εἰς πόλεμον ἔχοντα ἑκατὸν εἴκοσιν ἐλέφαντας καὶ ἵππον καὶ ἅρματα καὶ δύναμιν πολλὴν σφόδρα, καὶ συνετρίβη ὑπ᾿ αὐτῶν, 7 καὶ ἔλαβον αὐτὸν ζῶντα καὶ ἔστησαν αὐτοῖς διδόναι αὐτόν τε καὶ τοὺς βασιλεύοντας μετ᾿ αὐτὸν φόρον μέγαν καὶ διδόναι ὅμηρα καὶ διαστολὴν 8 καὶ χώραν τὴν ᾿Ινδικὴν καὶ Μηδίαν καὶ Λυδίαν καὶ ἀπὸ τῶν καλλίστων χωρῶν αὐτῶν, καὶ λαβόντες αὐτὰς παρ᾿ αὐτοῦ ἔδωκαν αὐτὰς Εὐμένει τῷ βασιλεῖ· 9 καὶ ὅτι οἱ ἐκ τῆς ῾Ελλάδος ἐβουλεύσαντο ἐλθεῖν καὶ ἐξᾶραι αὐτούς, 10 καὶ ἐγνώσθη ὁ λόγος αὐτοῖς, καὶ ἀπέστειλαν ἐπ᾿ αὐτοὺς στρατηγὸν ἕνα καὶ ἐπολέμησαν πρὸς αὐτούς, καὶ ἔπεσον ἐξ αὐτῶν τραυματίαι πολλοί, καὶ ᾐχμαλώτευσαν τὰς γυναῖκας αὐτῶν καὶ τὰ τέκνα αὐτῶν καὶ ἐπρονόμευσαν αὐτοὺς καὶ κατεκράτησαν τῆς γῆς αὐτῶν καὶ καθεῖλον τὰ ὀχυρώματα αὐτῶν καὶ κατεδουλώσαντο αὐτοὺς ἕως τῆς ἡμέρας ταύτης· 11 καὶ τὰς ἐπιλοίπους βασιλείας καὶ τὰς νήσους, ὅσοι ποτὲ ἀντέστησαν αὐτοῖς, κατέφθειραν καὶ ἐδούλωσαν αὐτούς, 12 μετὰ δὲ τῶν φίλων αὐτῶν καὶ τῶν ἐπαναπαυομένων αὐτοῖς συνετήρησαν φιλίαν· καὶ κατεκράτησαν τῶν βασιλειῶν τῶν ἐγγὺς καὶ τῶν μακράν, καὶ ὅσοι ἤκουον τὸ ὄνομα αὐτῶν, ἐφοβοῦντο ἀπ᾿ αὐτῶν. 13 ὅσοις δ᾿ ἂν βούλωνται βοηθεῖν καὶ βασιλεύειν, βασιλεύουσιν· οὓς δ᾿ ἂν βούλωνται, μεθιστῶσι· καὶ ὑψώθησαν σφόδρα. 14 καὶ ἐν πᾶσι τούτοις οὐκ ἐπέθετο οὐδεὶς αὐτῶν διάδημα καὶ οὐ περιεβάλοντο πορφύραν ὥστε ἁδρυνθῆναι ἐν αὐτῇ· 15 καὶ βουλευτήριον ἐποίησαν ἑαυτοῖς, καὶ καθ᾿ ἡμέραν ἐβουλεύοντο τριακόσιοι καὶ εἴκοσι βουλευόμενοι διαπαντὸς περὶ τοῦ πλήθους τοῦ εὐκοσμεῖν αὐτούς· 16 καὶ πιστεύουσιν ἑνὶ ἀνθρώπῳ τὴν ἀρχὴν αὐτῶν κατ᾿ ἐνιαυτὸν καὶ κυριεύειν πάσης τῆς γῆς αὐτῶν, καὶ πάντες ἀκούουσι τοῦ ἑνός, καὶ οὐκ ἔστι φθόνος οὐδὲ ζῆλος ἐν αὐτοῖς. 17 καὶ ἐπέλεξεν ᾿Ιούδας τὸν Εὐπόλεμον υἱὸν ᾿Ιωάννου τοῦ ᾿Ακκὼς καὶ ᾿Ιάσονα υἱὸν ᾿Ελεαζάρου καὶ ἀπέστειλεν αὐτοὺς εἰς Ρώμην στῆσαι αὐτοῖς φιλίαν καὶ συμμαχίαν 18 καὶ τοῦ ἆραι τὸν ζυγὸν ἀπ᾿ αὐτῶν, ὅτι εἶδον τὴν βασιλείαν τῶν ῾Ελλήνων καταδουλουμένους τὸν ᾿Ισραὴλ δουλείᾳ. 19 καὶ ἐπορεύθησαν εἰς Ρώμην, καὶ ἡ ὁδὸς πολλὴ σφόδρα, καὶ εἰσῆλθον εἰς τὸ βουλευτήριον καὶ ἀπεκρίθησαν καὶ εἶπον·
10:1,48-56
ΚΑΙ ἐν ἔτει ἑξηκοστῷ καὶ ἑκατοστῷ ἀνέβη ᾿Αλέξανδρος ὁ τοῦ ᾿Αντιόχου ὁ ᾿Επιφανὴς καὶ κατελάβετο Πτολεμαΐδα, καὶ ἐπεδέξαντο αὐτόν, καὶ ἐβασίλευσεν ἐκεῖ. 2 καὶ ἤκουσε Δημήτριος ὁ βασιλεὺς καὶ συνήγαγε δυνάμεις πολλὰς σφόδρα καὶ ἐξῆλθεν εἰς συνάντησιν αὐτῷ εἰς πόλεμον.
48 Καὶ συνήγαγεν ᾿Αλέξανδρος ὁ βασιλεὺς δυνάμεις μεγάλας καὶ παρενέβαλεν ἐξεναντίας Δημητρίου. 49 καὶ συνῆψαν πόλεμον οἱ δύο βασιλεῖς, καὶ ἔφυγεν ἡ παρεμβολὴ Δημητρίου, καὶ ἐδίωξεν αὐτὸν ὁ ᾿Αλέξανδρος καὶ ἴσχυσεν ἐπ᾿ αὐτούς. 50 καὶ ἐστερέωσε τὸν πόλεμον σφόδρα, ἕως ἔδυ ὁ ἥλιος, καὶ ἔπεσεν ὁ Δημήτριος ἐν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ ἐκείνῃ. 51 καὶ ἀπέστειλεν ᾿Αλέξανδρος πρὸς Πτολεμαῖον βασιλέα Αἰγύπτου πρέσβεις κατὰ τοὺς λόγους τούτους λέγων· 52 «᾿Επεὶ ἀνέστρεψα εἰς γῆν βασιλείας μου καὶ ἐκάθισα ἐπὶ θρόνου πατέρων μου καὶ ἐκράτησα τῆς ἀρχῆς, καὶ συνέτριψα τὸν Δημήτριον καὶ ἐπεκράτησα τῆς χώρας ἡμῶν 53 καὶ συνῆψα πρὸς αὐτὸν μάχην, καὶ συνετρίβη αὐτὸς καὶ ἡ παρεμβολὴ αὐτοῦ ὑφ᾿ ἡμῶν, καὶ ἐκαθίσαμεν ἐπὶ θρόνου βασιλείας αὐτοῦ· 54 καὶ νῦν στήσωμεν πρὸς ἑαυτοὺς φιλίαν, καὶ νῦν δός μοι τὴν θυγατέρα σου εἰς γυναῖκα, καὶ ἐπιγαμβρεύσω σοι καὶ δώσω σοι δόματα καὶ αὐτῇ ἄξιά σου». 55 Καὶ ἀπεκρίθη Πτολεμαῖος ὁ βασιλεὺς λέγων· «᾿Αγαθὴ ἡμέρα, ἐν ᾗ ἀνέστρεψας εἰς γῆν πατέρων σου καὶ ἐκάθισας ἐπὶ θρόνου βασιλείας αὐτῶν. 56 καὶ νῦν ποιήσω σοι ἃ ἔγραψας, ἀλλ᾿ ἀπάντησον εἰς Πτολεμαΐδα, ὅπως ἴδωμεν ἀλλήλους, καὶ ἐπιγαμβρεύσω σοι, καθὼς εἴρηκας».
11:12-19
12 καὶ ἀφελόμενος αὐτοῦ τὴν θυγατέρα ἔδωκεν αὐτὴν τῷ Δημητρίῳ καὶ ἠλλοτριώθη τῷ ᾿Αλεξάνδρῳ καὶ ἐφάνη ἡ ἔχθρα αὐτῶν. 13 καὶ εἰσῆλθε Πτολεμαῖος εἰς ᾿Αντιόχειαν καὶ περιέθετο τὸ διάδημα τῆς ᾿Ασίας· καὶ περιέθετο δύο διαδήματα περὶ τὴν κεφαλὴν αὐτοῦ, τὸ τῆς ᾿Ασίας καὶ Αἰγύπτου. 14 ᾿Αλέξανδρος δὲ ὁ βασιλεὺς ἦν ἐν Κιλικίᾳ κατὰ τοὺς καιροὺς ἐκείνους, ὅτι ἀπεστάτουν οἱ ἀπὸ τῶν τόπων ἐκείνων. 15 καὶ ἤκουσεν ᾿Αλέξανδρος καὶ ἦλθεν ἐπ᾿ αὐτὸν πολέμῳ. καὶ ἐξήγαγε Πτολεμαῖος τὴν δύναμιν καὶ ἀπήντησεν αὐτῷ ἐν χειρὶ ἰσχυρᾷ καὶ ἐτροπώσατο αὐτόν. 16 καὶ ἔφυγεν ᾿Αλέξανδρος εἰς τὴν ᾿Αραβίαν τοῦ σκεπασθῆναι αὐτὸν ἐκεῖ. ὁ δὲ βασιλεὺς Πτολεμαῖος ὑψώθη. 17 καὶ ἀφεῖλε Ζαβδιὴλ ὁ ῎Αραψ τὴν κεφαλὴν ᾿Αλεξάνδρου καὶ ἀπέστειλε τῷ Πτολεμαίῳ. 18 καὶ ὁ βασιλεὺς Πτολεμαῖος ἀπέθανεν ἐν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ τῇ τρίτῃ, καὶ οἱ ὄντες ἐν τοῖς ὀχυρώμασιν ἀπώλοντο ὑπὸ τῶν ἐν τοῖς ὀχυρώμασι. 19 καὶ ἐβασίλευσε Δημήτριος ἔτους ἑβδόμου καὶ ἑξηκοστοῦ καὶ ἑκατοστοῦ.
12:5-22
5 Καὶ τοῦτο τὸ ἀντίγραφον τῶν ἐπιστολῶν ὧν ἔγραψεν ᾿Ιωνάθαν τοῖς Σπαρτιάταις· 6 «᾿Ιωνάθαν ἀρχιερεὺς καὶ ἡ γερουσία τοῦ ἔθνους καὶ οἱ ἱερεῖς καὶ ὁ λοιπὸς δῆμος τῶν ᾿Ιουδαίων Σπαρτιάταις τοῖς ἀδελφοῖς χαίρειν. 7 ἔτι πρότερον ἀπεστάλησαν ἐπιστολαὶ πρὸς ᾿Ονίαν τὸν ἀρχιερέα παρὰ Δαρείου τοῦ βασιλεύοντος ἐν ὑμῖν ὅτι ἐστὲ ἀδελφοὶ ἡμῶν, ὡς τὸ ἀντίγραφον ὑπόκειται. 8 καὶ ἐπεδέξατο ᾿Ονίας τὸν ἄνδρα τὸν ἀπεσταλμένον ἐνδόξως καὶ ἔλαβε τὰς ἐπιστολάς, ἐν αἷς διεσαφεῖτο περὶ συμμαχίας καὶ φιλίας.
19 Καὶ τοῦτο τὸ ἀντίγραφον τῶν ἐπιστολῶν, ὧν ἀπέστειλαν ᾿Ονίᾳ· 20 «῎Αρειος βασιλεὺς Σπαρτιατῶν ᾿Ονίᾳ ἱερεῖ μεγάλῳ χαίρειν. 21 εὑρέθη ἐν γραφῇ περί τε τῶν Σπαρτιατῶν καὶ ᾿Ιουδαίων, ὅτι εἰσὶν ἀδελφοὶ καὶ ὅτι εἰσὶν ἐκ γένους ῾Αβραάμ. 22 καὶ νῦν ἀφ᾿ οὗ ἔγνωμεν ταῦτα, καλῶς ποιήσετε γράφοντες ἡμῖν περὶ τῆς εἰρήνης ὑμῶν...
13:31-42
31 ῾Ο δὲ Τρύφων ἐπορεύετο δόλῳ μετὰ ᾿Αντιόχου τοῦ βασιλέως τοῦ νεωτέρου καὶ ἀπέκτεινεν αὐτὸν 32 καὶ ἐβασίλευσεν ἀντ᾿ αὐτοῦ καὶ περιέθετο διάδημα τῆς ᾿Ασίας καὶ ἐποίησε πληγὴν μεγάλην ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς. 33 καὶ ᾠκοδόμησε Σίμων τὰ ὀχυρώματα τῆς ᾿Ιουδαίας, καὶ περιετείχισε πύργοις ὑψηλοῖς καὶ τείχεσι μεγάλοις καὶ πύλαις καὶ μοχλοῖς καὶ ἔθετο βρώματα ἐν τοῖς ὀχυρώμασι. 34 καὶ ἐπέλεξε Σίμων ἄνδρας καὶ ἀπέστειλε πρὸς Δημήτριον τὸν βασιλέα τοῦ ποιῆσαι ἄφεσιν τῇ χώρᾳ, ὅτι πᾶσαι αἱ πράξεις Τρύφωνος ἦσαν ἁρπαγαί. 35 καὶ ἀπέστειλεν αὐτῷ Δημήτριος ὁ βασιλεὺς κατὰ τοὺς λόγους τούτους καὶ ἀπεκρίθη αὐτῷ καὶ ἔγραψεν αὐτῷ ἐπιστολὴν
41 ἔτους ἑβδομηκοστοῦ καὶ ἑκατοστοῦ ᾔρθη ὁ ζυγὸς τῶν ἐθνῶν ἀπὸ τοῦ ᾿Ισραήλ, 42 καὶ ἤρξατο ὁ λαὸς ᾿Ισραὴλ γράφειν ἐν ταῖς συγγραφαῖς καὶ συναλλάγμασιν ἔτους πρώτου ἐπὶ Σίμωνος ἀρχιερέως μεγάλου καὶ στρατηγοῦ καὶ ἡγουμένου ᾿Ιουδαίων.
14:16-20
16 Καὶ ἠκούσθη ἐν Ρώμῃ, ὅτι ἀπέθανεν ᾿Ιωνάθαν, καὶ ἕως Σπάρτης, καὶ ἐλυπήθησαν σφόδρα. 17 ὡς δὲ ἤκουσαν, ὅτι Σίμων ὁ ἀδελφὸς αὐτοῦ γέγονεν ἀντ᾿ αὐτοῦ ἀρχιερεὺς καὶ ἐπικρατεῖ τῆς χώρας καὶ τῶν πόλεων τῶν ἐν αὐτῇ, 18 ἔγραψαν πρὸς αὐτὸν δέλτοις χαλκαῖς τοῦ ἀνανεώσασθαι πρὸς αὐτὸν φιλίαν καὶ τὴν συμμαχίαν, ἣν ἔστησαν πρὸς ᾿Ιούδαν καὶ ᾿Ιωνάθαν τοὺς ἀδελφοὺς αὐτοῦ. 19 καὶ ἀνεγνώσθησαν ἐνώπιον τῆς ἐκκλησίας ἐν ῾Ιερουσαλήμ. 20 καὶ τοῦτο τὸ ἀντίγραφον τῶν ἐπιστολῶν, ὧν ἀπέστειλαν οἱ Σπαρτιάται· «Σπαρτιατῶν ἄρχοντες καὶ ἡ πόλις Σίμωνι ἱερεῖ μεγάλῳ καὶ τοῖς πρεσβυτέροις καὶ τοῖς ἱερεῦσι καὶ τῷ λοιπῷ δήμῳ τῶν ᾿Ιουδαίων ἀδελφοῖς χαίρειν.
15:15-24
15 Καὶ ἦλθε Νουμήνιος καὶ οἱ παρ᾿ αὐτοῦ ἐκ Ρώμης ἔχοντες ἐπιστολὰς τοῖς βασιλεῦσι καὶ ταῖς χώραις, ἐν αἷς ἐγέγραπτο τάδε· 16 «Λεύκιος ὕπατος Ρωμαίων Πτολεμαίῳ βασιλεῖ χαίρειν. 17 οἱ πρεσβευταὶ τῶν ᾿Ιουδαίων ἦλθον πρὸς ἡμᾶς, φίλοι ἡμῶν καὶ σύμμαχοι, ἀνανεούμενοι τὴν ἐξ ἀρχῆς φιλίαν καὶ συμμαχίαν, ἀπεσταλμένοι ἀπὸ Σίμωνος τοῦ ἀρχιερέως καὶ τοῦ δήμου τῶν ᾿Ιουδαίων· 18 ἤνεγκαν δὲ ἀσπίδα χρυσῆν ἀπὸ μνῶν χιλίων. 19 ἤρεσεν οὖν ἡμῖν γράψαι τοῖς βασιλεῦσι καὶ ταῖς χώραις ὅπως μὴ ἐκζητήσωσιν αὐτοῖς κακὰ καὶ μὴ πολεμήσωσιν αὐτοὺς καὶ τὰς πόλεις αὐτῶν καὶ τὴν χώραν αὐτῶν καὶ ἵνα μὴ συμμαχήσωσι τοῖς πολεμοῦσιν αὐτούς. 20 ἔδοξε δὲ ἡμῖν δέξασθαι τὴν ἀσπίδα παρ᾿ αὐτῶν. 21 εἴ τινες οὖν λοιμοὶ διαπεφεύγασιν ἐκ τῆς χώρας αὐτῶν πρὸς ἡμᾶς, παράδοτε αὐτοὺς Σίμωνι τῷ ἀρχιερεῖ, ὅπως ἐκδικήσῃ ἐν αὐτοῖς κατὰ τὸν νόμον αὐτῶν». —22 Καὶ τὰ αὐτὰ ἔγραψε Δημητρίῳ τῷ βασιλεῖ καὶ ᾿Αττάλῳ, ᾿Αριαράθῃ καὶ ᾿Αρσάκῃ 23 καὶ εἰς πάσας τὰς χώρας καὶ Σαμψάμῃ καὶ Σπαρτιάταις καὶ εἰς Δῆλον καὶ Μύνδον καὶ Σικυῶνα καὶ εἰς τὴν Καρίαν καὶ εἰς Σάμον καὶ εἰς τὴν Παμφυλίαν καὶ εἰς τὴν Λυκίαν καὶ εἰς ῾Αλικαρνασσὸν καὶ εἰς Ρόδον καὶ εἰς Φασηλίδα καὶ εἰς Κῶ καὶ εἰς Σίδην καὶ εἰς ῎Αραδον καὶ εἰς Γόρτυναν καὶ Κνίδον καὶ Κύπρον καὶ Κυρήνην. 24 τὸ δὲ ἀντίγραφον αὐτῶν ἔγραψαν Σίμωνι τῷ ἀρχιερεῖ.
http://st-takla.org/pub_Deuterocanon/Deuterocanon-Apocrypha_El-Asfar_El-Kanoneya_El-Tanya__8-First-of-Maccabees.html
http://www.apostoliki-diakonia.gr/bible/bible.asp?contents=old_testament/contents_MakkavaionA.asp&main=makkavaionA&file=21.8.htm
1:1-48
ΚΑΙ ἐγένετο μετὰ τὸ πατάξαι ᾿Αλέξανδρον τὸν Φιλίππου τὸν Μακεδόνα, ὃς ἐξῆλθεν ἐκ τῆς γῆς Χεττειείμ, καὶ ἐπάταξε τὸν Δαρεῖον βασιλέα Περσῶν καὶ Μήδων καὶ ἐβασίλευσεν ἀντ᾿ αὐτοῦ πρότερος ἐπὶ τὴν ῾Ελλάδα. 2 καὶ συνεστήσατο πολέμους πολλοὺς καὶ ἐκράτησεν ὀχυρωμάτων πολλῶν καὶ ἔσφαξε βασιλεῖς τῆς γῆς· 3 καὶ διῆλθεν ἕως ἄκρων τῆς γῆς καὶ ἔλαβε σκῦλα πλήθους ἐθνῶν. καὶ ἡσύχασεν ἡ γῆ ἐνώπιον αὐτοῦ, καὶ ὑψώθη, καὶ ἐπήρθη ἡ καρδία αὐτοῦ. 4 καὶ συνήγαγε δύναμιν ἰσχυρὰν σφόδρα καὶ ἦρξε χωρῶν καὶ ἐθνῶν καὶ τυράννων, καὶ ἐγένοντο αὐτῷ εἰς φόρον. 5 καὶ μετὰ ταῦτα ἔπεσεν ἐπὶ τὴν κοίτην καὶ ἔγνω ὅτι ἀποθνήσκει. 6 καὶ ἐκάλεσε τοὺς παῖδας αὐτοῦ τοὺς ἐνδόξους τοὺς συντρόφους αὐτοῦ ἀπὸ νεότητος καὶ διεῖλεν αὐτοῖς τὴν βασιλείαν αὐτοῦ ἔτι ζῶντος αὐτοῦ. 7 καὶ ἐβασίλευσεν ᾿Αλέξανδρος ἔτη δώδεκα καὶ ἀπέθανε. 8 καὶ ἐπεκράτησαν οἱ παῖδες αὐτοῦ ἕκαστος ἐν τῷ τόπῳ αὐτοῦ. 9 καὶ ἐπέθεντο πάντες διαδήματα μετὰ τὸ ἀποθανεῖν αὐτὸν καὶ οἱ υἱοὶ αὐτῶν ὀπίσω αὐτῶν ἔτη πολλὰ καὶ ἐπλήθυναν κακὰ ἐν τῇ γῇ. 10 καὶ ἐξῆλθεν ἐξ αὐτῶν ρίζα ἁμαρτωλὸς ᾿Αντίοχος ᾿Επιφανής, υἱὸς ᾿Αντιόχου βασιλέως, ὃς ἦν ὅμηρα ἐν τῇ Ρώμῃ· καὶ ἐβασίλευσεν ἐν ἔτει ἑκατοστῷ καὶ τριακοστῷ καὶ ἑβδόμῳ βασιλείας ῾Ελλήνων.
13 καὶ προεθυμήθησάν τινες ἀπὸ τοῦ λαοῦ, καὶ ἐπορεύθησαν πρὸς τὸν βασιλέα, καὶ ἔδωκεν αὐτοῖς ἐξουσίαν ποιῆσαι τὰ δικαιώματα τῶν ἐθνῶν. 14 καὶ ᾠκοδόμησαν γυμνάσιον ἐν ῾Ιεροσολύμοις κατὰ τὰ νόμιμα τῶν ἐθνῶν 15 καὶ ἐποίησαν ἑαυτοῖς ἀκροβυστίας καὶ ἀπέστησαν ἀπὸ διαθήκης ἁγίας καὶ ἐζευγίσθησαν τοῖς ἔθνεσι καὶ ἐπράθησαν τοῦ ποιῆσαι τὸ πονηρόν.
47 καὶ οἰκοδομῆσαι βωμοὺς καὶ τεμένη καὶ εἰδωλεῖα καὶ θύειν ὕεια καὶ κτήνη κοινὰ 48 καὶ ἀφιέναι τοὺς υἱοὺς αὐτῶν ἀπεριτμήτους, βδελύξαι τὰς ψυχὰς αὐτῶν ἐν παντὶ ἀκαθάρτῳ καὶ βεβηλώσει...
6:1-2
ΚΑΙ ὁ βασιλεὺς ᾿Αντίοχος διεπορεύετο τὰς ἐπάνω χώρας καὶ ἤκουσεν ὅτι ἐστὶν ᾿Ελυμαΐς ἐν τῇ Περσίδι πόλις ἔνδοξος πλούτῳ ἀργυρίῳ τε καὶ χρυσίῳ· 2 καὶ τὸ ἱερὸν τὸ ἐν αὐτῇ πλούσιον σφόδρα, καὶ ἐκεῖ καλύμματα χρυσᾶ καὶ θώρακες καὶ ὅπλα, ἃ κατέλιπεν ἐκεῖ ᾿Αλέξανδρος ὁ Φιλίππου βασιλεὺς ὁ Μακεδών, ὃς ἐβασίλευσε πρῶτος ἐν τοῖς ῞Ελλησι.
7:1
ΕΤΟΥΣ ἑνὸς καὶ πεντηκοστοῦ καὶ ἑκατοστοῦ ἐξῆλθε Δημήτριος ὁ τοῦ Σελεύκου ἐκ Ρώμης καὶ ἀνέβη σὺν ἀνδράσιν ὀλίγοις εἰς πόλιν παραθαλασσίαν καὶ ἐβασίλευσεν ἐκεῖ.
8:1-19
ΚΑΙ ἤκουσεν ᾿Ιούδας τὸ ὄνομα τῶν Ρωμαίων, ὅτι εἰσὶ δυνατοὶ ἰσχύϊ καὶ αὐτοὶ εὐδοκοῦσιν ἐν πᾶσι τοῖς προστιθεμένοις αὐτοῖς, καὶ ὅσοι ἂν προσέλθωσιν αὐτοῖς, ἱστῶσιν αὐτοῖς φιλίαν, 2 καὶ ὅτι εἰσὶ δυνατοὶ ἰσχύϊ. καὶ διηγήσαντο αὐτῷ τοὺς πολέμους αὐτῶν καὶ τὰς ἀνδραγαθίας, ἃς ποιοῦσιν ἐν τοῖς Γαλάταις, καὶ ὅτι κατεκράτησαν αὐτῶν καὶ ἤγαγον αὐτοὺς ὑπὸ φόρον, 3 καὶ ὅσα ἐποίησαν ἐν χώρᾳ ῾Ισπανίας τοῦ κατακρατῆσαι τῶν μετάλλων τοῦ ἀργυρίου καὶ τοῦ χρυσίου τοῦ ἐκεῖ· 4 καὶ κατεκράτησαν τοῦ τόπου παντὸς τῇ βουλῇ αὐτῶν καὶ τῇ μακροθυμίᾳ, καὶ ὁ τόπος ἦν μακρὰν ἀπέχων ἀπ᾿ αὐτῶν σφόδρα, καὶ τῶν βασιλέων τῶν ἐπελθόντων ἐπ᾿ αὐτοὺς ἀπ᾿ ἄκρου τῆς γῆς ἕως συνέτριψαν αὐτοὺς καὶ ἐπάταξαν ἐν αὐτοῖς πληγὴν μεγάλην, καὶ οἱ ἐπίλοιποι διδόασιν αὐτοῖς φόρον κατ᾿ ἐνιαυτόν· 5 καὶ τὸν Φίλιππον καὶ τὸν Περσέα Κιτιέων βασιλέα καὶ τοὺς ἐπῃρμένους ἐπ᾿ αὐτοὺς συνέτριψαν αὐτοὺς ἐν πολέμῳ καὶ κατεκράτησαν αὐτῶν· 6 καὶ ᾿Αντίοχον τὸν μέγαν βασιλέα τῆς ᾿Ασίας τὸν πορευθέντα ἐπ᾿ αὐτοὺς εἰς πόλεμον ἔχοντα ἑκατὸν εἴκοσιν ἐλέφαντας καὶ ἵππον καὶ ἅρματα καὶ δύναμιν πολλὴν σφόδρα, καὶ συνετρίβη ὑπ᾿ αὐτῶν, 7 καὶ ἔλαβον αὐτὸν ζῶντα καὶ ἔστησαν αὐτοῖς διδόναι αὐτόν τε καὶ τοὺς βασιλεύοντας μετ᾿ αὐτὸν φόρον μέγαν καὶ διδόναι ὅμηρα καὶ διαστολὴν 8 καὶ χώραν τὴν ᾿Ινδικὴν καὶ Μηδίαν καὶ Λυδίαν καὶ ἀπὸ τῶν καλλίστων χωρῶν αὐτῶν, καὶ λαβόντες αὐτὰς παρ᾿ αὐτοῦ ἔδωκαν αὐτὰς Εὐμένει τῷ βασιλεῖ· 9 καὶ ὅτι οἱ ἐκ τῆς ῾Ελλάδος ἐβουλεύσαντο ἐλθεῖν καὶ ἐξᾶραι αὐτούς, 10 καὶ ἐγνώσθη ὁ λόγος αὐτοῖς, καὶ ἀπέστειλαν ἐπ᾿ αὐτοὺς στρατηγὸν ἕνα καὶ ἐπολέμησαν πρὸς αὐτούς, καὶ ἔπεσον ἐξ αὐτῶν τραυματίαι πολλοί, καὶ ᾐχμαλώτευσαν τὰς γυναῖκας αὐτῶν καὶ τὰ τέκνα αὐτῶν καὶ ἐπρονόμευσαν αὐτοὺς καὶ κατεκράτησαν τῆς γῆς αὐτῶν καὶ καθεῖλον τὰ ὀχυρώματα αὐτῶν καὶ κατεδουλώσαντο αὐτοὺς ἕως τῆς ἡμέρας ταύτης· 11 καὶ τὰς ἐπιλοίπους βασιλείας καὶ τὰς νήσους, ὅσοι ποτὲ ἀντέστησαν αὐτοῖς, κατέφθειραν καὶ ἐδούλωσαν αὐτούς, 12 μετὰ δὲ τῶν φίλων αὐτῶν καὶ τῶν ἐπαναπαυομένων αὐτοῖς συνετήρησαν φιλίαν· καὶ κατεκράτησαν τῶν βασιλειῶν τῶν ἐγγὺς καὶ τῶν μακράν, καὶ ὅσοι ἤκουον τὸ ὄνομα αὐτῶν, ἐφοβοῦντο ἀπ᾿ αὐτῶν. 13 ὅσοις δ᾿ ἂν βούλωνται βοηθεῖν καὶ βασιλεύειν, βασιλεύουσιν· οὓς δ᾿ ἂν βούλωνται, μεθιστῶσι· καὶ ὑψώθησαν σφόδρα. 14 καὶ ἐν πᾶσι τούτοις οὐκ ἐπέθετο οὐδεὶς αὐτῶν διάδημα καὶ οὐ περιεβάλοντο πορφύραν ὥστε ἁδρυνθῆναι ἐν αὐτῇ· 15 καὶ βουλευτήριον ἐποίησαν ἑαυτοῖς, καὶ καθ᾿ ἡμέραν ἐβουλεύοντο τριακόσιοι καὶ εἴκοσι βουλευόμενοι διαπαντὸς περὶ τοῦ πλήθους τοῦ εὐκοσμεῖν αὐτούς· 16 καὶ πιστεύουσιν ἑνὶ ἀνθρώπῳ τὴν ἀρχὴν αὐτῶν κατ᾿ ἐνιαυτὸν καὶ κυριεύειν πάσης τῆς γῆς αὐτῶν, καὶ πάντες ἀκούουσι τοῦ ἑνός, καὶ οὐκ ἔστι φθόνος οὐδὲ ζῆλος ἐν αὐτοῖς. 17 καὶ ἐπέλεξεν ᾿Ιούδας τὸν Εὐπόλεμον υἱὸν ᾿Ιωάννου τοῦ ᾿Ακκὼς καὶ ᾿Ιάσονα υἱὸν ᾿Ελεαζάρου καὶ ἀπέστειλεν αὐτοὺς εἰς Ρώμην στῆσαι αὐτοῖς φιλίαν καὶ συμμαχίαν 18 καὶ τοῦ ἆραι τὸν ζυγὸν ἀπ᾿ αὐτῶν, ὅτι εἶδον τὴν βασιλείαν τῶν ῾Ελλήνων καταδουλουμένους τὸν ᾿Ισραὴλ δουλείᾳ. 19 καὶ ἐπορεύθησαν εἰς Ρώμην, καὶ ἡ ὁδὸς πολλὴ σφόδρα, καὶ εἰσῆλθον εἰς τὸ βουλευτήριον καὶ ἀπεκρίθησαν καὶ εἶπον·
10:1,48-56
ΚΑΙ ἐν ἔτει ἑξηκοστῷ καὶ ἑκατοστῷ ἀνέβη ᾿Αλέξανδρος ὁ τοῦ ᾿Αντιόχου ὁ ᾿Επιφανὴς καὶ κατελάβετο Πτολεμαΐδα, καὶ ἐπεδέξαντο αὐτόν, καὶ ἐβασίλευσεν ἐκεῖ. 2 καὶ ἤκουσε Δημήτριος ὁ βασιλεὺς καὶ συνήγαγε δυνάμεις πολλὰς σφόδρα καὶ ἐξῆλθεν εἰς συνάντησιν αὐτῷ εἰς πόλεμον.
48 Καὶ συνήγαγεν ᾿Αλέξανδρος ὁ βασιλεὺς δυνάμεις μεγάλας καὶ παρενέβαλεν ἐξεναντίας Δημητρίου. 49 καὶ συνῆψαν πόλεμον οἱ δύο βασιλεῖς, καὶ ἔφυγεν ἡ παρεμβολὴ Δημητρίου, καὶ ἐδίωξεν αὐτὸν ὁ ᾿Αλέξανδρος καὶ ἴσχυσεν ἐπ᾿ αὐτούς. 50 καὶ ἐστερέωσε τὸν πόλεμον σφόδρα, ἕως ἔδυ ὁ ἥλιος, καὶ ἔπεσεν ὁ Δημήτριος ἐν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ ἐκείνῃ. 51 καὶ ἀπέστειλεν ᾿Αλέξανδρος πρὸς Πτολεμαῖον βασιλέα Αἰγύπτου πρέσβεις κατὰ τοὺς λόγους τούτους λέγων· 52 «᾿Επεὶ ἀνέστρεψα εἰς γῆν βασιλείας μου καὶ ἐκάθισα ἐπὶ θρόνου πατέρων μου καὶ ἐκράτησα τῆς ἀρχῆς, καὶ συνέτριψα τὸν Δημήτριον καὶ ἐπεκράτησα τῆς χώρας ἡμῶν 53 καὶ συνῆψα πρὸς αὐτὸν μάχην, καὶ συνετρίβη αὐτὸς καὶ ἡ παρεμβολὴ αὐτοῦ ὑφ᾿ ἡμῶν, καὶ ἐκαθίσαμεν ἐπὶ θρόνου βασιλείας αὐτοῦ· 54 καὶ νῦν στήσωμεν πρὸς ἑαυτοὺς φιλίαν, καὶ νῦν δός μοι τὴν θυγατέρα σου εἰς γυναῖκα, καὶ ἐπιγαμβρεύσω σοι καὶ δώσω σοι δόματα καὶ αὐτῇ ἄξιά σου». 55 Καὶ ἀπεκρίθη Πτολεμαῖος ὁ βασιλεὺς λέγων· «᾿Αγαθὴ ἡμέρα, ἐν ᾗ ἀνέστρεψας εἰς γῆν πατέρων σου καὶ ἐκάθισας ἐπὶ θρόνου βασιλείας αὐτῶν. 56 καὶ νῦν ποιήσω σοι ἃ ἔγραψας, ἀλλ᾿ ἀπάντησον εἰς Πτολεμαΐδα, ὅπως ἴδωμεν ἀλλήλους, καὶ ἐπιγαμβρεύσω σοι, καθὼς εἴρηκας».
11:12-19
12 καὶ ἀφελόμενος αὐτοῦ τὴν θυγατέρα ἔδωκεν αὐτὴν τῷ Δημητρίῳ καὶ ἠλλοτριώθη τῷ ᾿Αλεξάνδρῳ καὶ ἐφάνη ἡ ἔχθρα αὐτῶν. 13 καὶ εἰσῆλθε Πτολεμαῖος εἰς ᾿Αντιόχειαν καὶ περιέθετο τὸ διάδημα τῆς ᾿Ασίας· καὶ περιέθετο δύο διαδήματα περὶ τὴν κεφαλὴν αὐτοῦ, τὸ τῆς ᾿Ασίας καὶ Αἰγύπτου. 14 ᾿Αλέξανδρος δὲ ὁ βασιλεὺς ἦν ἐν Κιλικίᾳ κατὰ τοὺς καιροὺς ἐκείνους, ὅτι ἀπεστάτουν οἱ ἀπὸ τῶν τόπων ἐκείνων. 15 καὶ ἤκουσεν ᾿Αλέξανδρος καὶ ἦλθεν ἐπ᾿ αὐτὸν πολέμῳ. καὶ ἐξήγαγε Πτολεμαῖος τὴν δύναμιν καὶ ἀπήντησεν αὐτῷ ἐν χειρὶ ἰσχυρᾷ καὶ ἐτροπώσατο αὐτόν. 16 καὶ ἔφυγεν ᾿Αλέξανδρος εἰς τὴν ᾿Αραβίαν τοῦ σκεπασθῆναι αὐτὸν ἐκεῖ. ὁ δὲ βασιλεὺς Πτολεμαῖος ὑψώθη. 17 καὶ ἀφεῖλε Ζαβδιὴλ ὁ ῎Αραψ τὴν κεφαλὴν ᾿Αλεξάνδρου καὶ ἀπέστειλε τῷ Πτολεμαίῳ. 18 καὶ ὁ βασιλεὺς Πτολεμαῖος ἀπέθανεν ἐν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ τῇ τρίτῃ, καὶ οἱ ὄντες ἐν τοῖς ὀχυρώμασιν ἀπώλοντο ὑπὸ τῶν ἐν τοῖς ὀχυρώμασι. 19 καὶ ἐβασίλευσε Δημήτριος ἔτους ἑβδόμου καὶ ἑξηκοστοῦ καὶ ἑκατοστοῦ.
12:5-22
5 Καὶ τοῦτο τὸ ἀντίγραφον τῶν ἐπιστολῶν ὧν ἔγραψεν ᾿Ιωνάθαν τοῖς Σπαρτιάταις· 6 «᾿Ιωνάθαν ἀρχιερεὺς καὶ ἡ γερουσία τοῦ ἔθνους καὶ οἱ ἱερεῖς καὶ ὁ λοιπὸς δῆμος τῶν ᾿Ιουδαίων Σπαρτιάταις τοῖς ἀδελφοῖς χαίρειν. 7 ἔτι πρότερον ἀπεστάλησαν ἐπιστολαὶ πρὸς ᾿Ονίαν τὸν ἀρχιερέα παρὰ Δαρείου τοῦ βασιλεύοντος ἐν ὑμῖν ὅτι ἐστὲ ἀδελφοὶ ἡμῶν, ὡς τὸ ἀντίγραφον ὑπόκειται. 8 καὶ ἐπεδέξατο ᾿Ονίας τὸν ἄνδρα τὸν ἀπεσταλμένον ἐνδόξως καὶ ἔλαβε τὰς ἐπιστολάς, ἐν αἷς διεσαφεῖτο περὶ συμμαχίας καὶ φιλίας.
19 Καὶ τοῦτο τὸ ἀντίγραφον τῶν ἐπιστολῶν, ὧν ἀπέστειλαν ᾿Ονίᾳ· 20 «῎Αρειος βασιλεὺς Σπαρτιατῶν ᾿Ονίᾳ ἱερεῖ μεγάλῳ χαίρειν. 21 εὑρέθη ἐν γραφῇ περί τε τῶν Σπαρτιατῶν καὶ ᾿Ιουδαίων, ὅτι εἰσὶν ἀδελφοὶ καὶ ὅτι εἰσὶν ἐκ γένους ῾Αβραάμ. 22 καὶ νῦν ἀφ᾿ οὗ ἔγνωμεν ταῦτα, καλῶς ποιήσετε γράφοντες ἡμῖν περὶ τῆς εἰρήνης ὑμῶν...
13:31-42
31 ῾Ο δὲ Τρύφων ἐπορεύετο δόλῳ μετὰ ᾿Αντιόχου τοῦ βασιλέως τοῦ νεωτέρου καὶ ἀπέκτεινεν αὐτὸν 32 καὶ ἐβασίλευσεν ἀντ᾿ αὐτοῦ καὶ περιέθετο διάδημα τῆς ᾿Ασίας καὶ ἐποίησε πληγὴν μεγάλην ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς. 33 καὶ ᾠκοδόμησε Σίμων τὰ ὀχυρώματα τῆς ᾿Ιουδαίας, καὶ περιετείχισε πύργοις ὑψηλοῖς καὶ τείχεσι μεγάλοις καὶ πύλαις καὶ μοχλοῖς καὶ ἔθετο βρώματα ἐν τοῖς ὀχυρώμασι. 34 καὶ ἐπέλεξε Σίμων ἄνδρας καὶ ἀπέστειλε πρὸς Δημήτριον τὸν βασιλέα τοῦ ποιῆσαι ἄφεσιν τῇ χώρᾳ, ὅτι πᾶσαι αἱ πράξεις Τρύφωνος ἦσαν ἁρπαγαί. 35 καὶ ἀπέστειλεν αὐτῷ Δημήτριος ὁ βασιλεὺς κατὰ τοὺς λόγους τούτους καὶ ἀπεκρίθη αὐτῷ καὶ ἔγραψεν αὐτῷ ἐπιστολὴν
41 ἔτους ἑβδομηκοστοῦ καὶ ἑκατοστοῦ ᾔρθη ὁ ζυγὸς τῶν ἐθνῶν ἀπὸ τοῦ ᾿Ισραήλ, 42 καὶ ἤρξατο ὁ λαὸς ᾿Ισραὴλ γράφειν ἐν ταῖς συγγραφαῖς καὶ συναλλάγμασιν ἔτους πρώτου ἐπὶ Σίμωνος ἀρχιερέως μεγάλου καὶ στρατηγοῦ καὶ ἡγουμένου ᾿Ιουδαίων.
14:16-20
16 Καὶ ἠκούσθη ἐν Ρώμῃ, ὅτι ἀπέθανεν ᾿Ιωνάθαν, καὶ ἕως Σπάρτης, καὶ ἐλυπήθησαν σφόδρα. 17 ὡς δὲ ἤκουσαν, ὅτι Σίμων ὁ ἀδελφὸς αὐτοῦ γέγονεν ἀντ᾿ αὐτοῦ ἀρχιερεὺς καὶ ἐπικρατεῖ τῆς χώρας καὶ τῶν πόλεων τῶν ἐν αὐτῇ, 18 ἔγραψαν πρὸς αὐτὸν δέλτοις χαλκαῖς τοῦ ἀνανεώσασθαι πρὸς αὐτὸν φιλίαν καὶ τὴν συμμαχίαν, ἣν ἔστησαν πρὸς ᾿Ιούδαν καὶ ᾿Ιωνάθαν τοὺς ἀδελφοὺς αὐτοῦ. 19 καὶ ἀνεγνώσθησαν ἐνώπιον τῆς ἐκκλησίας ἐν ῾Ιερουσαλήμ. 20 καὶ τοῦτο τὸ ἀντίγραφον τῶν ἐπιστολῶν, ὧν ἀπέστειλαν οἱ Σπαρτιάται· «Σπαρτιατῶν ἄρχοντες καὶ ἡ πόλις Σίμωνι ἱερεῖ μεγάλῳ καὶ τοῖς πρεσβυτέροις καὶ τοῖς ἱερεῦσι καὶ τῷ λοιπῷ δήμῳ τῶν ᾿Ιουδαίων ἀδελφοῖς χαίρειν.
15:15-24
15 Καὶ ἦλθε Νουμήνιος καὶ οἱ παρ᾿ αὐτοῦ ἐκ Ρώμης ἔχοντες ἐπιστολὰς τοῖς βασιλεῦσι καὶ ταῖς χώραις, ἐν αἷς ἐγέγραπτο τάδε· 16 «Λεύκιος ὕπατος Ρωμαίων Πτολεμαίῳ βασιλεῖ χαίρειν. 17 οἱ πρεσβευταὶ τῶν ᾿Ιουδαίων ἦλθον πρὸς ἡμᾶς, φίλοι ἡμῶν καὶ σύμμαχοι, ἀνανεούμενοι τὴν ἐξ ἀρχῆς φιλίαν καὶ συμμαχίαν, ἀπεσταλμένοι ἀπὸ Σίμωνος τοῦ ἀρχιερέως καὶ τοῦ δήμου τῶν ᾿Ιουδαίων· 18 ἤνεγκαν δὲ ἀσπίδα χρυσῆν ἀπὸ μνῶν χιλίων. 19 ἤρεσεν οὖν ἡμῖν γράψαι τοῖς βασιλεῦσι καὶ ταῖς χώραις ὅπως μὴ ἐκζητήσωσιν αὐτοῖς κακὰ καὶ μὴ πολεμήσωσιν αὐτοὺς καὶ τὰς πόλεις αὐτῶν καὶ τὴν χώραν αὐτῶν καὶ ἵνα μὴ συμμαχήσωσι τοῖς πολεμοῦσιν αὐτούς. 20 ἔδοξε δὲ ἡμῖν δέξασθαι τὴν ἀσπίδα παρ᾿ αὐτῶν. 21 εἴ τινες οὖν λοιμοὶ διαπεφεύγασιν ἐκ τῆς χώρας αὐτῶν πρὸς ἡμᾶς, παράδοτε αὐτοὺς Σίμωνι τῷ ἀρχιερεῖ, ὅπως ἐκδικήσῃ ἐν αὐτοῖς κατὰ τὸν νόμον αὐτῶν». —22 Καὶ τὰ αὐτὰ ἔγραψε Δημητρίῳ τῷ βασιλεῖ καὶ ᾿Αττάλῳ, ᾿Αριαράθῃ καὶ ᾿Αρσάκῃ 23 καὶ εἰς πάσας τὰς χώρας καὶ Σαμψάμῃ καὶ Σπαρτιάταις καὶ εἰς Δῆλον καὶ Μύνδον καὶ Σικυῶνα καὶ εἰς τὴν Καρίαν καὶ εἰς Σάμον καὶ εἰς τὴν Παμφυλίαν καὶ εἰς τὴν Λυκίαν καὶ εἰς ῾Αλικαρνασσὸν καὶ εἰς Ρόδον καὶ εἰς Φασηλίδα καὶ εἰς Κῶ καὶ εἰς Σίδην καὶ εἰς ῎Αραδον καὶ εἰς Γόρτυναν καὶ Κνίδον καὶ Κύπρον καὶ Κυρήνην. 24 τὸ δὲ ἀντίγραφον αὐτῶν ἔγραψαν Σίμωνι τῷ ἀρχιερεῖ.
http://st-takla.org/pub_Deuterocanon/Deuterocanon-Apocrypha_El-Asfar_El-Kanoneya_El-Tanya__8-First-of-Maccabees.html
http://www.apostoliki-diakonia.gr/bible/bible.asp?contents=old_testament/contents_MakkavaionA.asp&main=makkavaionA&file=21.8.htm
Tuesday, July 15, 2008
to be mentioned
1. The Apology of Aristides
2. A Plea for the Christians by Athenagoras the Athenian
3. Justin Martyr
4. Tatian. Address to the Greeks
5. Hermias the Philosopher
6. Theophilus of Antioch
7. Hippolytus of Rome. The Refutation of all Heresies
8. Clement of Alexandria
9. Gregory Thaumaturgus
10. Origen
11. Eusebios of Caesarea. Praeparatio and Historia
12. Theodoret of Cyrus
13. Gregory of Nyssa
...
ascetics, desert Fathers
...
14. Patriarch Photius... and the orthodox authors until the Fall of Constantinople
...
Annex -
the Bulgarian orthodox authors: 9th-19th cent.
2. A Plea for the Christians by Athenagoras the Athenian
3. Justin Martyr
4. Tatian. Address to the Greeks
5. Hermias the Philosopher
6. Theophilus of Antioch
7. Hippolytus of Rome. The Refutation of all Heresies
8. Clement of Alexandria
9. Gregory Thaumaturgus
10. Origen
11. Eusebios of Caesarea. Praeparatio and Historia
12. Theodoret of Cyrus
13. Gregory of Nyssa
...
ascetics, desert Fathers
...
14. Patriarch Photius... and the orthodox authors until the Fall of Constantinople
...
Annex -
the Bulgarian orthodox authors: 9th-19th cent.
Bibliography
I. Books
1. Sources
a. Originals
Saint Basil. Aux jeunes gens. Texte etabli et traduit par F. Boulenger. "Les belles lettres", 1965.
b. Translations
Василий Велики. Шестоднев и други беседи. Превод Росен Тенев. "Народна култура", 1999.
Беседа 22. К юношамъ о том, как пользоваться языческими сочиненiями. В: Творения Василiя Великаго. Ч.ІV. Москва, 1993 (1846).
Григорий Богослов. Слово 5. Второе обличительное на царя Иулиана. В: Григорий Богослов. Собрание творений. Т. І. "Харвест"-"Аст", 2000.
Йоан Златоуст. Към враждуващите против тези, които привличат към монашески живот. В: Св. Иоан Златоуст. Творения. Славянобългарски манастир "Св. Вмчк Георги Зограф", Света гора, Атон. 2007
2. Secondary
II. Sites
1. Sources
a. Originals
Basilii Magni Sermo de legendis libris gentilium, sive Ad adolescentes. Quomodo possint ex gentilium libris fructum capere. PG 31, 564-590
Clementis Alexandrini Philosophorum apud Graecos successio. PG 8, 758-768
Gregorii Nazianzeni Contra Julianum imperatorem II. PG 35, 663-719
Iohannis Chrysostomi Adversus Oppugnatores Eorum Qui Monasticam Vita Inducunt. PG 47, 319-386
b. Translations
- St Basil
http://www.ellopos.com/study/default.asp?h=http://www.ccel.org/p/pearse/morefathers/basil_litterature01.htm
- Clement of Alexandria
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf02.vi.iv.i.xiv.html
- St Gregory
http://www.tertullian.org/fathers/gregory_nazianzen_3_oration5.htm
2. Secondary
(http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02330b.htm)
1. Sources
a. Originals
Saint Basil. Aux jeunes gens. Texte etabli et traduit par F. Boulenger. "Les belles lettres", 1965.
b. Translations
Василий Велики. Шестоднев и други беседи. Превод Росен Тенев. "Народна култура", 1999.
Беседа 22. К юношамъ о том, как пользоваться языческими сочиненiями. В: Творения Василiя Великаго. Ч.ІV. Москва, 1993 (1846).
Григорий Богослов. Слово 5. Второе обличительное на царя Иулиана. В: Григорий Богослов. Собрание творений. Т. І. "Харвест"-"Аст", 2000.
Йоан Златоуст. Към враждуващите против тези, които привличат към монашески живот. В: Св. Иоан Златоуст. Творения. Славянобългарски манастир "Св. Вмчк Георги Зограф", Света гора, Атон. 2007
2. Secondary
II. Sites
1. Sources
a. Originals
Basilii Magni Sermo de legendis libris gentilium, sive Ad adolescentes. Quomodo possint ex gentilium libris fructum capere. PG 31, 564-590
Clementis Alexandrini Philosophorum apud Graecos successio. PG 8, 758-768
Gregorii Nazianzeni Contra Julianum imperatorem II. PG 35, 663-719
Iohannis Chrysostomi Adversus Oppugnatores Eorum Qui Monasticam Vita Inducunt. PG 47, 319-386
b. Translations
- St Basil
http://www.ellopos.com/study/default.asp?h=http://www.ccel.org/p/pearse/morefathers/basil_litterature01.htm
- Clement of Alexandria
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf02.vi.iv.i.xiv.html
- St Gregory
http://www.tertullian.org/fathers/gregory_nazianzen_3_oration5.htm
2. Secondary
(http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02330b.htm)
Gregory Nazianzen, Invective II Against Julian
Contra Julianum imperatorem II (PG 35, 663-719)
Pagan Historians; Mythology and Oracles
5. What will those gentlemen say of these events-they who are wise, as this world goes, and make a fine show of their own cause, smoothing down their flowing beard and trailing before our eyes that elegant philosophic mantle! Reply to me for thyself, thou writer of long discourses, that dost compose incredible stories and gapest up at the skies, telling lies about things celestial, and weaving out of the movements of the stars, people's nativities and predictions of the future! Tell me of those stars of thine, the Ariadne's Crown, the Berenice's Hair, the lascivious Swan, the violent Bull! or, if thou pleasest, tell me of thine Ophiuchus, or of thy Capricorn, or of thy Lion, or all the rest that thou hast discovered for a bad end and made them into gods in constellations! Where dost thou find this cycle in thy science, where the Star that of old moved towards Bethlehem out of the East, that leader and introducer of thy own Wise Men! I, too, have something to tell from the heavens: that Star declared the presence of Christ: this Crown is that of the victory of Christ!
8... None of these things does he seem to have considered when he engaged without reflection in his schemes: and whilst his Romans were still convulsed and ill-disposed towards him on account of the persecution, to covet a stranger's empire and to be a Salmoneus, making thunder out of a drum, having his eyes fixed upon the Trajans and Hadrians of former times, (persons whose caution was no less admirable than their bravery,) he did not think of the Carus,8 and the Valerian who paid the penalty of their inconsiderate rashness ("not to insult misfortune," as the tragedian says) in the territories of Persians, and were destroyed in the middle of their success.
11. For a man, one of no little consideration amongst the Persians, following the example of. that Zopyrus employed by Cyrus in the case of Babylon, on the pretence that he had had some quarrel, or rather a very great one and for a very great cause, with his king, and, on that account very hostile to the Persian cause, and well disposed towards the Romans, thus addresses the emperor: "Sire, what means all this, why do you take such rotten measures in so important a matter?
13. Up to this point, such is the universal account; but thenceforward, one and the same story is not told by all, but different accounts are reported and made up by different people, both of those present at the battle, and those not present; for some say that he was hit by a dart from the Persians, when engaged in a disorderly skirmish, as he was running hither and thither in his consternation; and the same fate befell him as it did to Cyrus, son of Parysatis, who went up with the Ten Thousand against his brother Artaxerxes, and by fighting inconsiderately threw away the victory through his rashness. Others, however, tell some such story as this respecting his end: that he had gone up upon a lofty hill to take a view of his army and ascertain how much was left him for carrying on the war; and that when he saw the number considerable and superior to his expectation, he exclaimed, "What a dreadful thing if we shall bring back all these fellows to the land of the Eomans!" as though he begrudged them a safe return. Whereupon one of his officers, being indignant and not able to repress his rage, ran him through the bowels, without caring for his own life. Others tell that the deed was done by a barbarian jester, such as follow the camp, "for the purpose of driving away ill humour and for amusing the men when they are drinking." This tale about the jester is borrowed from Lampridius, who gives it as one of the many current respecting the death of Alexander Severus. The "Historia Augusta," a recent compilation, was then in everybody's hands. At any rate, he receives a wound truly seasonable (or mortal) and salutary for the whole world, and by a single cut from his slaughterer he pays the penalty for the many entrails of victims to which he had trusted (to his own destruction); but what surprises me, is how the vain man that fancied he learnt the future from that means, knew nothing of the wound about to be inflicted on his own entrails! The concluding reflection is for once very appropriate: the liver of the victim was the approved means for reading the Future, and it was precisely in that organ that the arch-diviner received the fatal thrust.
15... So they agreed to these terms, so disgraceful, and so unworthy of the hand of Romans, to sum up the whole in one word; of the blame of which convention if anyone acquits the late and charges the present emperor, he is, in my opinion, but an ignorant critic of what has happened, for the crop is not due to the reaper, but to its sower, nor the conflagration to him that is unable to extinguish it, but to the incendiary. And the remark of Herodotus about the tyranny at Samos may be appropriately quoted, "that Histiaeus stitched the shoe, but Aristagoras put it on," meaning him that had received the succession from the man who had first gotten it.
20. What shall I say of his revisals and alterations of sentences, frequently changed and upset at midnight, like the tides? For my fine fellow thought proper to play the judge, making everything his own out of vanity. But perhaps by blaming him for very trifling things I shall be thought to disparage very important matters through others inconsiderable; nevertheless, it must be owned that such conduct is not deserving of the Elysian Fields, nor of the glory of a Rhadamanthus in the next world, a lot which those of the same fraternity and set claim for him. One thing in his conduct I have to admire. Many of his former companions and acquaintances, principally from the schools in Asia, he summoned to him with all haste, as though about to do wonderful things for them, as he excited them to hope when they remembered his fine promises. |103 But when they were arrived, 'twas the saying, "the deceits of counters and the illusions of dreams," for some he befooled in one way, some in another, for there were whom he entertained at table, and drank to, with much bawling out of "My friend," and after all sent them about their business disappointed, not knowing whom to blame the most-him for the deception, or themselves for their credulity.
31... No more shall gluttonous and sinful demons have dominion; no more shall the creature be dishonoured under pretence of honour, being worshipped in the place of God! Throw down thy Triptolemuses, and thy Eleusis, and thy foolish Dragons: shame thyself of the books of thine oracular Orpheus: accept the gift of the season that covers thy nakedness; and if these things be but fables and fictions, I will reveal to thee the mysteries of Night!
32. No more does the Oak speak; no more does the Cauldron give oracles; no more is the Pythia filled with I know what, save lies and nonsense. Again the Castalian Fount has been silenced and is silent, and becomes no |longer an oracular stream, but an object of ridicule: again a voiceless statue is Apollo: again is Daphne a shrub bewailed in fable: again is thy Bacchus a catamite, with a train of drunkards tied to his tail, as well as thy grand mystery, the Phallus; and a god abandoning himself to the beautiful Prosymnus: again Semele is struck with lightning: again Vulcan is lame (though quick to catch an adulterer), and a god grimed with soot, although a famous artificer, and the Thersites of Olympus: again Mars is a prisoner for adultery, with all his terrors, and frights, and tumults, and gets wounded through his audacity: again Venus is one, formerly a harlot, to her shame, and the procuress of shameful copulations: again Minerva is a maid, and yet brings forth a dragon: again Hercules is mad, or rather has ceased to be mad: again out of lasciviousness and impurity, Jove, teacher, and sovereign of the gods, turns himself into all sorts of things; and though able to draw up all the gods together with all living things, is himself drawn down by none: again Jupiter's tomb is shown in Crete. If I see thy god of gain, thy god of speech, thy president of games, I close my eyes and run past thy god out of shame for the exhibition: thou mayest, for ought I care, adore the tension of his-speech (shall I call it), and his money-bag. One thing alone of them all is respectable-namely, the honours paid amongst the Egyptians to the Nile by the catamite, also those to Isis, and the gods of Mendes and the Apis bulls, and the other things thou dost sculpture or paint, composite and monstrous creatures, thy ludicrous Pan, thy Priapus, thy Hermaphroditus; and the gods who castrate themselves, or tear themselves to pieces. These subjects, however, I will leave to the stage, and to those |113 who decorate them with pomps and ceremonies, and I will conclude my discourse with an exhortation.
38. I pass over the inspired, and our own denouncements, and the punishments that, according to us, are in store in the world to come: turn, pray, to thine own stories that are accepted, not by the poets only, but also by people who were philosophers; I mean thy Pyriphlegethons, Cocyti, and Acherons, wherewith they punish wickedness, Tantalus, Tityos, Ixion. Julian, your king of this fraternity, shall be reckoned amongst these-nay, at the head of them all, according to my calculation and definition-though he be not tormented with thirst whilst up to his chin in a lake; nor fearing (as Tragedy pleases) the rock overhanging his head, continually pushed away, continually rolling back; nor revolving along with the whizzing wheel; nor torn by vultures in his liver, never coming to an end, always renewed-whether all this be truth, or fable foreshowing the truth |in fictions-but we shall see with what, and what sort of torture he will be punished, and how much more severely than all the rest-if, indeed, punishments and retributions be adjudged according to the measure of offences.
39. Here is "a keepsake for thee in return for a kick,"28 thou best and wisest of men! (to address thee in thy own words); this do we offer thee, we that were excluded from the use of words, according to thy mighty and wonderful legislation; thou seest that we were not destined to be silenced for ever, or be condemned to speechlessness by thy decrees, but to utter a free voice demonstrative of thy folly. For neither is there any means of holding-in the cataracts of Nile, which tumble down from Ethiopia upon Egypt, nor yet the solar beam, even though it may be veiled for a little space by the snowfall, nor to tie the tongue of Christians from exposing to ridicule thy religion. These words Basil and Gregory send thee, "those opponents and counterworkers of thy scheme," as thou wast wont to call them and persuade others to do the same-doing us honour by what thou didst threaten us with, and moving us all the more to piety-persons who being well known for their life, discourse, and mutual affection, and whom thou wast acquainted with ever since our common residence in Greece, thou didst treat with the honour the Cyclops paid Ulysses; thou didst keep us in reserve as the last victims for the persecution, and didst probably design as a thankoffering for victory to thy own demons (a great and splendid one, in truth!) in case we should get thee back returning triumphant from Persia; or else them didst hope, in thy infatuation, to drag us along with thee into the same abyss as thyself!
http://www.tertullian.org/fathers/gregory_nazianzen_3_oration5.htm
Pagan Historians; Mythology and Oracles
5. What will those gentlemen say of these events-they who are wise, as this world goes, and make a fine show of their own cause, smoothing down their flowing beard and trailing before our eyes that elegant philosophic mantle! Reply to me for thyself, thou writer of long discourses, that dost compose incredible stories and gapest up at the skies, telling lies about things celestial, and weaving out of the movements of the stars, people's nativities and predictions of the future! Tell me of those stars of thine, the Ariadne's Crown, the Berenice's Hair, the lascivious Swan, the violent Bull! or, if thou pleasest, tell me of thine Ophiuchus, or of thy Capricorn, or of thy Lion, or all the rest that thou hast discovered for a bad end and made them into gods in constellations! Where dost thou find this cycle in thy science, where the Star that of old moved towards Bethlehem out of the East, that leader and introducer of thy own Wise Men! I, too, have something to tell from the heavens: that Star declared the presence of Christ: this Crown is that of the victory of Christ!
8... None of these things does he seem to have considered when he engaged without reflection in his schemes: and whilst his Romans were still convulsed and ill-disposed towards him on account of the persecution, to covet a stranger's empire and to be a Salmoneus, making thunder out of a drum, having his eyes fixed upon the Trajans and Hadrians of former times, (persons whose caution was no less admirable than their bravery,) he did not think of the Carus,8 and the Valerian who paid the penalty of their inconsiderate rashness ("not to insult misfortune," as the tragedian says) in the territories of Persians, and were destroyed in the middle of their success.
11. For a man, one of no little consideration amongst the Persians, following the example of. that Zopyrus employed by Cyrus in the case of Babylon, on the pretence that he had had some quarrel, or rather a very great one and for a very great cause, with his king, and, on that account very hostile to the Persian cause, and well disposed towards the Romans, thus addresses the emperor: "Sire, what means all this, why do you take such rotten measures in so important a matter?
13. Up to this point, such is the universal account; but thenceforward, one and the same story is not told by all, but different accounts are reported and made up by different people, both of those present at the battle, and those not present; for some say that he was hit by a dart from the Persians, when engaged in a disorderly skirmish, as he was running hither and thither in his consternation; and the same fate befell him as it did to Cyrus, son of Parysatis, who went up with the Ten Thousand against his brother Artaxerxes, and by fighting inconsiderately threw away the victory through his rashness. Others, however, tell some such story as this respecting his end: that he had gone up upon a lofty hill to take a view of his army and ascertain how much was left him for carrying on the war; and that when he saw the number considerable and superior to his expectation, he exclaimed, "What a dreadful thing if we shall bring back all these fellows to the land of the Eomans!" as though he begrudged them a safe return. Whereupon one of his officers, being indignant and not able to repress his rage, ran him through the bowels, without caring for his own life. Others tell that the deed was done by a barbarian jester, such as follow the camp, "for the purpose of driving away ill humour and for amusing the men when they are drinking." This tale about the jester is borrowed from Lampridius, who gives it as one of the many current respecting the death of Alexander Severus. The "Historia Augusta," a recent compilation, was then in everybody's hands. At any rate, he receives a wound truly seasonable (or mortal) and salutary for the whole world, and by a single cut from his slaughterer he pays the penalty for the many entrails of victims to which he had trusted (to his own destruction); but what surprises me, is how the vain man that fancied he learnt the future from that means, knew nothing of the wound about to be inflicted on his own entrails! The concluding reflection is for once very appropriate: the liver of the victim was the approved means for reading the Future, and it was precisely in that organ that the arch-diviner received the fatal thrust.
15... So they agreed to these terms, so disgraceful, and so unworthy of the hand of Romans, to sum up the whole in one word; of the blame of which convention if anyone acquits the late and charges the present emperor, he is, in my opinion, but an ignorant critic of what has happened, for the crop is not due to the reaper, but to its sower, nor the conflagration to him that is unable to extinguish it, but to the incendiary. And the remark of Herodotus about the tyranny at Samos may be appropriately quoted, "that Histiaeus stitched the shoe, but Aristagoras put it on," meaning him that had received the succession from the man who had first gotten it.
20. What shall I say of his revisals and alterations of sentences, frequently changed and upset at midnight, like the tides? For my fine fellow thought proper to play the judge, making everything his own out of vanity. But perhaps by blaming him for very trifling things I shall be thought to disparage very important matters through others inconsiderable; nevertheless, it must be owned that such conduct is not deserving of the Elysian Fields, nor of the glory of a Rhadamanthus in the next world, a lot which those of the same fraternity and set claim for him. One thing in his conduct I have to admire. Many of his former companions and acquaintances, principally from the schools in Asia, he summoned to him with all haste, as though about to do wonderful things for them, as he excited them to hope when they remembered his fine promises. |103 But when they were arrived, 'twas the saying, "the deceits of counters and the illusions of dreams," for some he befooled in one way, some in another, for there were whom he entertained at table, and drank to, with much bawling out of "My friend," and after all sent them about their business disappointed, not knowing whom to blame the most-him for the deception, or themselves for their credulity.
31... No more shall gluttonous and sinful demons have dominion; no more shall the creature be dishonoured under pretence of honour, being worshipped in the place of God! Throw down thy Triptolemuses, and thy Eleusis, and thy foolish Dragons: shame thyself of the books of thine oracular Orpheus: accept the gift of the season that covers thy nakedness; and if these things be but fables and fictions, I will reveal to thee the mysteries of Night!
32. No more does the Oak speak; no more does the Cauldron give oracles; no more is the Pythia filled with I know what, save lies and nonsense. Again the Castalian Fount has been silenced and is silent, and becomes no |longer an oracular stream, but an object of ridicule: again a voiceless statue is Apollo: again is Daphne a shrub bewailed in fable: again is thy Bacchus a catamite, with a train of drunkards tied to his tail, as well as thy grand mystery, the Phallus; and a god abandoning himself to the beautiful Prosymnus: again Semele is struck with lightning: again Vulcan is lame (though quick to catch an adulterer), and a god grimed with soot, although a famous artificer, and the Thersites of Olympus: again Mars is a prisoner for adultery, with all his terrors, and frights, and tumults, and gets wounded through his audacity: again Venus is one, formerly a harlot, to her shame, and the procuress of shameful copulations: again Minerva is a maid, and yet brings forth a dragon: again Hercules is mad, or rather has ceased to be mad: again out of lasciviousness and impurity, Jove, teacher, and sovereign of the gods, turns himself into all sorts of things; and though able to draw up all the gods together with all living things, is himself drawn down by none: again Jupiter's tomb is shown in Crete. If I see thy god of gain, thy god of speech, thy president of games, I close my eyes and run past thy god out of shame for the exhibition: thou mayest, for ought I care, adore the tension of his-speech (shall I call it), and his money-bag. One thing alone of them all is respectable-namely, the honours paid amongst the Egyptians to the Nile by the catamite, also those to Isis, and the gods of Mendes and the Apis bulls, and the other things thou dost sculpture or paint, composite and monstrous creatures, thy ludicrous Pan, thy Priapus, thy Hermaphroditus; and the gods who castrate themselves, or tear themselves to pieces. These subjects, however, I will leave to the stage, and to those |113 who decorate them with pomps and ceremonies, and I will conclude my discourse with an exhortation.
38. I pass over the inspired, and our own denouncements, and the punishments that, according to us, are in store in the world to come: turn, pray, to thine own stories that are accepted, not by the poets only, but also by people who were philosophers; I mean thy Pyriphlegethons, Cocyti, and Acherons, wherewith they punish wickedness, Tantalus, Tityos, Ixion. Julian, your king of this fraternity, shall be reckoned amongst these-nay, at the head of them all, according to my calculation and definition-though he be not tormented with thirst whilst up to his chin in a lake; nor fearing (as Tragedy pleases) the rock overhanging his head, continually pushed away, continually rolling back; nor revolving along with the whizzing wheel; nor torn by vultures in his liver, never coming to an end, always renewed-whether all this be truth, or fable foreshowing the truth |in fictions-but we shall see with what, and what sort of torture he will be punished, and how much more severely than all the rest-if, indeed, punishments and retributions be adjudged according to the measure of offences.
39. Here is "a keepsake for thee in return for a kick,"28 thou best and wisest of men! (to address thee in thy own words); this do we offer thee, we that were excluded from the use of words, according to thy mighty and wonderful legislation; thou seest that we were not destined to be silenced for ever, or be condemned to speechlessness by thy decrees, but to utter a free voice demonstrative of thy folly. For neither is there any means of holding-in the cataracts of Nile, which tumble down from Ethiopia upon Egypt, nor yet the solar beam, even though it may be veiled for a little space by the snowfall, nor to tie the tongue of Christians from exposing to ridicule thy religion. These words Basil and Gregory send thee, "those opponents and counterworkers of thy scheme," as thou wast wont to call them and persuade others to do the same-doing us honour by what thou didst threaten us with, and moving us all the more to piety-persons who being well known for their life, discourse, and mutual affection, and whom thou wast acquainted with ever since our common residence in Greece, thou didst treat with the honour the Cyclops paid Ulysses; thou didst keep us in reserve as the last victims for the persecution, and didst probably design as a thankoffering for victory to thy own demons (a great and splendid one, in truth!) in case we should get thee back returning triumphant from Persia; or else them didst hope, in thy infatuation, to drag us along with thee into the same abyss as thyself!
http://www.tertullian.org/fathers/gregory_nazianzen_3_oration5.htm
Thursday, July 10, 2008
Clement of Alexandria, the Stromata
Philosophorum apud Graecos successio (PG 8, 758-768)
XIV. Succession of Philosophers in Greece
The Greeks say, that after Orpheus and Linus, and the most ancient of the poets that appeared among them, the seven, called wise, were the first that were admired for their wisdom. Of whom four were of Asia—Thales of Miletus, and Bias of Priene, Pittacus of Mitylene, and Cleobulus of Lindos; and two of Europe, Solon the Athenian, and Chilon the Lacedæmonian; and the seventh, some say, was Periander of Corinth; others, Anacharsis the Scythian; others, Epimenides the Cretan, whom Paul knew as a Greek prophet, whom he mentions in the Epistle to Titus, where he speaks thus: “One of themselves, a prophet of their own, said, The Cretans are always liars, evil beasts, slow bellies. And this witness is true.” You see how even to the prophets of the Greeks he attributes something of the truth, and is not ashamed, when discoursing for the edification of some and the shaming of others, to make use of Greek poems. Accordingly to the Corinthians (for this is not the only instance), while discoursing on the resurrection of the dead, he makes use of a tragic Iambic line, when he said, “What advantageth it me if the dead are not raised? Let us eat and drink, for to-morrow we die. Be not deceived; evil communications corrupt good manners.” Others have enumerated Acusilaus the Argive among the seven wise men; and others, Pherecydes of Syros. And Plato substitutes Myso the Chenian for Periander, whom he deemed unworthy of wisdom, on account of his having reigned as a tyrant. That the wise men among the Greeks flourished after the age of Moses, will, a little after, be shown. But the style of philosophy among them, as Hebraic and enigmatical, is now to be considered. They adopted brevity, as suited for exhortation, and most useful. Even Plato says, that of old this mode was purposely in vogue among all the Greeks, especially the Lacedæmonians and Cretans, who enjoyed the best laws.
The expression, “Know thyself,” some supposed to be Chilon’s. But Chamæleon, in his book About the Gods, ascribes it to Thales; Aristotle to the Pythian. It may be an injunction to the pursuit of knowledge. For it is not possible to know the parts without the essence of the whole; and one must study the genesis of the universe, that thereby we may be able to learn the nature of man. Again, to Chilon the Lacedæmonian they attribute, “Let nothing be too much.” Strato, in his book Of Inventions, ascribes the apophthegm to Stratodemus of Tegea. Didymus assigns it to Solon; as also to Cleobulus the saying, “A middle course is best.” And the expression, “Come under a pledge, and mischief is at hand,” Cleomenes says, in his book Concerning Hesiod, was uttered before by Homer in the lines:
Wretched pledges, for the wretched, to be pledged
(Odyss., viii. 351)
The Aristotelians judge it to be Chilon’s; but Didymus says the advice was that of Thales. Then, next in order, the saying, “All men are bad,” or, “The most of men are bad” (for the same apophthegm is expressed in two ways), Sotades the Byzantian says that it was Bias’s. And the aphorism, “Practice conquers everything,” Μελέτη πάντα καθαιρεῖ. they will have it to be Periander’s; and likewise the advice, “Know the opportunity,” to have been a saying of Pittacus. Solon made laws for the Athenians, Pittacus for the Mitylenians. And at a late date, Pythagoras, the pupil of Pherecydes, first called himself a philosopher. Accordingly, after the fore-mentioned three men, there were three schools of philosophy, named after the places where they lived: the Italic from Pythagoras, the Ionic from Thales, the Eleatic from Xenophanes. Pythagoras was a Samian, the son of Mnesarchus, as Hippobotus says: according to Aristoxenus, in his life of Pythagoras and Aristarchus and Theopompus, he was a Tuscan; and according to Neanthes, a Syrian or a Tyrian. So that Pythagoras was, according to the most, of barbarian extraction. Thales, too, as Leander and Herodotus relate, was a Phœnician; as some suppose, a Milesian. He alone seems to have met the prophets of the Egyptians. But no one is described as his teacher, nor is any one mentioned as the teacher of Pherecydes of Syros, who had Pythagoras as his pupil. But the Italic philosophy, that of Pythagoras, grew old in Metapontum in Italy. Anaximander of Miletus, the son of Praxiades, succeeded Thales; and was himself succeeded by Anaximenes of Miletus, the son of Eurustratus; after whom came Anaxagoras of Clazomenæ, the son of Hegesibulus. He transferred his school from Ionia to Athens. He was succeeded by Archelaus, whose pupil Socrates was.
From these turned aside, the stone-mason; Talker about laws; the enchanter of the Greeks
says Timon in his Satirical Poems, on account of his quitting physics for ethics. Antisthenes, after being a pupil of Socrates, introduced the Cynic philosophy; and Plato withdrew to the Academy. Aristotle, after studying philosophy under Plato, withdrew to the Lyceum, and founded the Peripatetic sect. He was succeeded by Theophrastus, who was succeeded by Strato, and he by Lycon, then Critolaus, and then Diodorus. Speusippus was the successor of Plato; his successor was Xenocrates; and the successor of the latter, Polemo. And the disciples of Polemo were Crates and Crantor, in whom the old Academy founded by Plato ceased. Arcesilaus was the associate of Crantor; from whom, down to Hegesilaus, the Middle Academy flourished. Then Carneades succeeded Hegesilaus, and others came in succession. The disciple of Crates was Zeno of Citium, the founder of the Stoic sect. He was succeeded by Cleanthes; and the latter by Chrysippus, and others after him. Xenophanes of Colophon was the founder of the Eleatic school, who, Timæus says, lived in the time of Hiero, lord of Sicily, and Epicharmus the poet; and Apollodorus says that he was born in the fortieth Olympiad, and reached to the times of Darius and Cyrus. Parmenides, accordingly, was the disciple of Xenophanes, and Zeno of him; then came Leucippus, and then Democritus. Disciples of Democritus were Protagoras of Abdera, and Metrodorus of Chios, whose pupil was Diogenes of Smyrna; and his again Anaxarchus, and his Pyrrho, and his Nausiphanes. Some say that Epicurus was a scholar of his.
Such, in an epitome, is the succession of the philosophers among the Greeks. The periods of the originators of their philosophy are now to be specified successively, in order that, by comparison, we may show that the Hebrew philosophy was older by many generations.
It has been said of Xenophanes that he was the founder of the Eleatic philosophy. And Eudemus, in the Astrological Histories, says that Thales foretold the eclipse of the sun, which took place at the time that the Medians and the Lydians fought, in the reign of Cyaxares the father of Astyages over the Medes, and of Alyattus the son of Crœsus over the Lydians. Herodotus in his first book agrees with him. The date is about the fiftieth Olympiad. Pythagoras is ascertained to have lived in the days of Polycrates the tyrant, about the sixty-second Olympiad. Mnesiphilus is described as a follower of Solon, and was a contemporary of Themistocles. Solon therefore flourished about the forty-sixth Olympiad. For Heraclitus, the son of Bauso, persuaded Melancomas the tyrant to abdicate his sovereignty. He despised the invitation of king Darius to visit the Persians.
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf02.vi.iv.i.xiv.html
XIV. Succession of Philosophers in Greece
The Greeks say, that after Orpheus and Linus, and the most ancient of the poets that appeared among them, the seven, called wise, were the first that were admired for their wisdom. Of whom four were of Asia—Thales of Miletus, and Bias of Priene, Pittacus of Mitylene, and Cleobulus of Lindos; and two of Europe, Solon the Athenian, and Chilon the Lacedæmonian; and the seventh, some say, was Periander of Corinth; others, Anacharsis the Scythian; others, Epimenides the Cretan, whom Paul knew as a Greek prophet, whom he mentions in the Epistle to Titus, where he speaks thus: “One of themselves, a prophet of their own, said, The Cretans are always liars, evil beasts, slow bellies. And this witness is true.” You see how even to the prophets of the Greeks he attributes something of the truth, and is not ashamed, when discoursing for the edification of some and the shaming of others, to make use of Greek poems. Accordingly to the Corinthians (for this is not the only instance), while discoursing on the resurrection of the dead, he makes use of a tragic Iambic line, when he said, “What advantageth it me if the dead are not raised? Let us eat and drink, for to-morrow we die. Be not deceived; evil communications corrupt good manners.” Others have enumerated Acusilaus the Argive among the seven wise men; and others, Pherecydes of Syros. And Plato substitutes Myso the Chenian for Periander, whom he deemed unworthy of wisdom, on account of his having reigned as a tyrant. That the wise men among the Greeks flourished after the age of Moses, will, a little after, be shown. But the style of philosophy among them, as Hebraic and enigmatical, is now to be considered. They adopted brevity, as suited for exhortation, and most useful. Even Plato says, that of old this mode was purposely in vogue among all the Greeks, especially the Lacedæmonians and Cretans, who enjoyed the best laws.
The expression, “Know thyself,” some supposed to be Chilon’s. But Chamæleon, in his book About the Gods, ascribes it to Thales; Aristotle to the Pythian. It may be an injunction to the pursuit of knowledge. For it is not possible to know the parts without the essence of the whole; and one must study the genesis of the universe, that thereby we may be able to learn the nature of man. Again, to Chilon the Lacedæmonian they attribute, “Let nothing be too much.” Strato, in his book Of Inventions, ascribes the apophthegm to Stratodemus of Tegea. Didymus assigns it to Solon; as also to Cleobulus the saying, “A middle course is best.” And the expression, “Come under a pledge, and mischief is at hand,” Cleomenes says, in his book Concerning Hesiod, was uttered before by Homer in the lines:
Wretched pledges, for the wretched, to be pledged
(Odyss., viii. 351)
The Aristotelians judge it to be Chilon’s; but Didymus says the advice was that of Thales. Then, next in order, the saying, “All men are bad,” or, “The most of men are bad” (for the same apophthegm is expressed in two ways), Sotades the Byzantian says that it was Bias’s. And the aphorism, “Practice conquers everything,” Μελέτη πάντα καθαιρεῖ. they will have it to be Periander’s; and likewise the advice, “Know the opportunity,” to have been a saying of Pittacus. Solon made laws for the Athenians, Pittacus for the Mitylenians. And at a late date, Pythagoras, the pupil of Pherecydes, first called himself a philosopher. Accordingly, after the fore-mentioned three men, there were three schools of philosophy, named after the places where they lived: the Italic from Pythagoras, the Ionic from Thales, the Eleatic from Xenophanes. Pythagoras was a Samian, the son of Mnesarchus, as Hippobotus says: according to Aristoxenus, in his life of Pythagoras and Aristarchus and Theopompus, he was a Tuscan; and according to Neanthes, a Syrian or a Tyrian. So that Pythagoras was, according to the most, of barbarian extraction. Thales, too, as Leander and Herodotus relate, was a Phœnician; as some suppose, a Milesian. He alone seems to have met the prophets of the Egyptians. But no one is described as his teacher, nor is any one mentioned as the teacher of Pherecydes of Syros, who had Pythagoras as his pupil. But the Italic philosophy, that of Pythagoras, grew old in Metapontum in Italy. Anaximander of Miletus, the son of Praxiades, succeeded Thales; and was himself succeeded by Anaximenes of Miletus, the son of Eurustratus; after whom came Anaxagoras of Clazomenæ, the son of Hegesibulus. He transferred his school from Ionia to Athens. He was succeeded by Archelaus, whose pupil Socrates was.
From these turned aside, the stone-mason; Talker about laws; the enchanter of the Greeks
says Timon in his Satirical Poems, on account of his quitting physics for ethics. Antisthenes, after being a pupil of Socrates, introduced the Cynic philosophy; and Plato withdrew to the Academy. Aristotle, after studying philosophy under Plato, withdrew to the Lyceum, and founded the Peripatetic sect. He was succeeded by Theophrastus, who was succeeded by Strato, and he by Lycon, then Critolaus, and then Diodorus. Speusippus was the successor of Plato; his successor was Xenocrates; and the successor of the latter, Polemo. And the disciples of Polemo were Crates and Crantor, in whom the old Academy founded by Plato ceased. Arcesilaus was the associate of Crantor; from whom, down to Hegesilaus, the Middle Academy flourished. Then Carneades succeeded Hegesilaus, and others came in succession. The disciple of Crates was Zeno of Citium, the founder of the Stoic sect. He was succeeded by Cleanthes; and the latter by Chrysippus, and others after him. Xenophanes of Colophon was the founder of the Eleatic school, who, Timæus says, lived in the time of Hiero, lord of Sicily, and Epicharmus the poet; and Apollodorus says that he was born in the fortieth Olympiad, and reached to the times of Darius and Cyrus. Parmenides, accordingly, was the disciple of Xenophanes, and Zeno of him; then came Leucippus, and then Democritus. Disciples of Democritus were Protagoras of Abdera, and Metrodorus of Chios, whose pupil was Diogenes of Smyrna; and his again Anaxarchus, and his Pyrrho, and his Nausiphanes. Some say that Epicurus was a scholar of his.
Such, in an epitome, is the succession of the philosophers among the Greeks. The periods of the originators of their philosophy are now to be specified successively, in order that, by comparison, we may show that the Hebrew philosophy was older by many generations.
It has been said of Xenophanes that he was the founder of the Eleatic philosophy. And Eudemus, in the Astrological Histories, says that Thales foretold the eclipse of the sun, which took place at the time that the Medians and the Lydians fought, in the reign of Cyaxares the father of Astyages over the Medes, and of Alyattus the son of Crœsus over the Lydians. Herodotus in his first book agrees with him. The date is about the fiftieth Olympiad. Pythagoras is ascertained to have lived in the days of Polycrates the tyrant, about the sixty-second Olympiad. Mnesiphilus is described as a follower of Solon, and was a contemporary of Themistocles. Solon therefore flourished about the forty-sixth Olympiad. For Heraclitus, the son of Bauso, persuaded Melancomas the tyrant to abdicate his sovereignty. He despised the invitation of king Darius to visit the Persians.
http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf02.vi.iv.i.xiv.html
Wednesday, July 2, 2008
St John Chrysostom Vita monastica
Adversus Oppugnatores Eorum Qui Monasticam Vita Inducunt (PG 47, 319-386)
1. ...336-337;
Audi (apud Platonem) quid ad Socratem loquatur Crito: tuae sane sunt meae pecuniae, ut quidem reor, satis multae... intulit pecuniam ingentem Simmias Thebanus; paratus est Cebes quoque... sic ut nihil tibi in Thessalia desit.
339
Quid vero praeceptor eius Socrates? Quanto is Archelao fuit illustrior?
2. ...337
Quantum pecuniarum Alexandrum Diogeni daturum fuisse putas, si quidem ille voluisset accipere?
339
Sinopensis autem (Diogenes) alius philosophus tanto et his et allis innumeris regibus opulentior fuit, etsi pannis laceris vestitus... ut Alexander Philippi Macedo... ubi illum vidit... ad eum pergeret ac rogaret ullane re indigeret...
3. ...339
de Dionysio forte audisti Siciliae tyranno, itemque de Platone, Aristonis filio... ille in deliciis degebat.. hic autem in Academiae horto versabatur.. vilissimam imponens mensam illo omli vano splendore vacuus.
4. ...340
apud Athenienses Aristides, quem civitas sepelivit, Alcibiade, qui opibus, orationis vi... nobilitate ceterisque omnibus praestabat, tatnto clarior erat, quanto vili aliquo puerulo philosophus mirabilis.
5. ...340
apud Thebanus Epaminondas, in concionem vocatus, cum propterea eo se conferre non posset, quod vestem lavandam curaret, nec aliam haberet qua indueretur, omnibus tamen ducibus... praestantior erat.
1. ...336-337;
Audi (apud Platonem) quid ad Socratem loquatur Crito: tuae sane sunt meae pecuniae, ut quidem reor, satis multae... intulit pecuniam ingentem Simmias Thebanus; paratus est Cebes quoque... sic ut nihil tibi in Thessalia desit.
339
Quid vero praeceptor eius Socrates? Quanto is Archelao fuit illustrior?
2. ...337
Quantum pecuniarum Alexandrum Diogeni daturum fuisse putas, si quidem ille voluisset accipere?
339
Sinopensis autem (Diogenes) alius philosophus tanto et his et allis innumeris regibus opulentior fuit, etsi pannis laceris vestitus... ut Alexander Philippi Macedo... ubi illum vidit... ad eum pergeret ac rogaret ullane re indigeret...
3. ...339
de Dionysio forte audisti Siciliae tyranno, itemque de Platone, Aristonis filio... ille in deliciis degebat.. hic autem in Academiae horto versabatur.. vilissimam imponens mensam illo omli vano splendore vacuus.
4. ...340
apud Athenienses Aristides, quem civitas sepelivit, Alcibiade, qui opibus, orationis vi... nobilitate ceterisque omnibus praestabat, tatnto clarior erat, quanto vili aliquo puerulo philosophus mirabilis.
5. ...340
apud Thebanus Epaminondas, in concionem vocatus, cum propterea eo se conferre non posset, quod vestem lavandam curaret, nec aliam haberet qua indueretur, omnibus tamen ducibus... praestantior erat.
Tuesday, June 24, 2008
Saint Basil on the study of pagan literature
Sermo de legendis libris gentilium, sive Ad adolescentes. Quomodo possint ex gentilium libris fructum capere. PG 31, 564-590
Cites:
1. Hesiod,
Works and Days, 293-297;
οὗτος μὲν πανάριστος, ὃς αὐτὸς πάντα νοήσει,
φρασσάμενος, τά κ᾽ ἔπειτα καὶ ἐς τέλος ἦισιν ἀμείνω·
ἐσθλὸς δ᾽ αὖ καὶ κεῖνος, ὃς εὖ εἰπόντι πίθηται·
ὃς δέ κε μήτ᾽ αὐτὸς νοέηι μήτ᾽ ἄλλου ἀκούων
ἐν θυμῶι βάλληται, ὁ δ᾽ αὖτ᾽ ἀχρήιος ἀνήρ.
(...566 - apud eos qui ab Hesiodo laudantur secundum locum obtinebitis)
287-292
τὴν μέν τοι κακότητα καὶ ἰλαδόν ἐστιν ἑλέσθαι
ῥηιδίως· λείη μὲν ὁδός, μάλα δ᾽ ἐγγύθι ναίει·
τῆς δ᾽ ἀρετῆς ἱδρῶτα θεοὶ προπάροιθεν ἔθηκαν
ἀθάνατοι· μακρὸς δὲ καὶ ὄρθιος οἶμος ἐς αὐτὴν
καὶ τρηχὺς τὸ πρῶτον· ἐπὴν δ᾽ εἰς ἄκρον ἵκηται,
ῥηιδίη δὴ ἔπειτα πέλει, χαλεπή περ ἐοῦσα.
360-362
εἰ γάρ κεν καὶ σμικρὸν ἐπὶ σμικρῶι καταθεῖο
καὶ θαμὰ τοῦτ᾽ ἔρδοις, τάχα κεν μέγα καὶ τὸ γένοιτο.
ὃς δ᾽ ἐπ᾽ ἐόντι φέρει, ὃ δ᾽ ἀλέξεται αἴθοπα λιμόν·
2. Plutarch,
Solonis vita, 3
ὅτι δ' αὑτὸν ἐν τῇ τῶν πενήτων μερίδι μᾶλλον ἢ τῇ τῶν πλουσίων ἔταττε, δῆλόν ἐστιν ἐκ τούτων·
πολλοὶ γὰρ πλουτεῦσι κακοί, ἀγαθοὶ δὲ πένονται·
ἀλλ' ἡμεῖς αὐτοῖς οὐ διαμειψόμεθα
τῆς ἀρετῆς τὸν πλοῦτον· ἐπεὶ τὸ μὲν ἔμπεδον αἰεί,
χρήματα δ' ἀνθρώπων ἄλλοτε ἄλλος ἔχει.
(...574 - unde et Solon mihi videtur illud ad divites dicere)
Periclis vita, 5;
λοιδορούμενος γοῦν ποτε καὶ κακῶς ἀκούων ὑπό τινος τῶν βδελυρῶν καὶ ἀκολάστων ὅλην ἡμέραν ὑπέμεινε σιωπῇ κατ' ἀγοράν, ἅμα τι τῶν ἐπειγόντων καταπραττόμενος· ἑσπέρας δ' ἀπῄει κοσμίως οἴκαδε παρακολουθοῦντος τοῦ ἀνθρώπου καὶ πάσῃ χρωμένου βλασφημίᾳ πρὸς αὐτόν. ὡς δ' ἔμελλεν εἰσιέναι σκότους ὄντος ἤδη, προσέταξέ τινι τῶν οἰκετῶν φῶς λαβόντι παραπέμψαι καὶ καταστῆσαι πρὸς τὴν οἰκίαν τὸν ἄνθρωπον.
De liberis educandis, 10
Τό γε μὴν ἀόργητον ἀνδρός ἐστι σοφοῦ. Σωκράτης μὲν γάρ, λακτίσαντος αὐτὸν νεανίσκου θρασέος μάλα καὶ βδελυροῦ, τοὺς ἀμφ’ αὑτὸν ὁρῶν ἀγανακτοῦντας καὶ σφαδᾴζοντας ὡς καὶ διώκειν αὐτὸν ἐθέλειν, “ἆρ’,” ἔφησε, “καὶ εἴ μ’ ὄνος ἐλάκτισεν, ἀντιλακτίσαι τοῦτον ἠξιώσατ’ ἄν;” οὐ μὴν ἐκεῖνός γε παντελῶς κατεπροίξατο, πάντων δ’ αὐτὸν ὀνειδιζόντων καὶ λακτιστὴν ἀποκαλούντων ἀπήγξατο.
(...575 - percutiebat quidam Sophronisci filium Socratem in ipsam faciem...)
De cohibenda ira, 14
ὥσπερ Εὐκλείδης τοῦ ἀδελφοῦ πρὸς αὐτὸν ἐκ διαφορᾶς εἰπόντος "ἀπολοίμην, εἰ μή σε τιμωρησαίμην" "ἐγὼ δέ" φήσας "ἀπολοίμην, εἰ μή σε πείσαιμι" διέτρεψε παραχρῆμα καὶ μετέθηκε.
(...575 - quidam Euclidi Megarensi iratus, mortem ei minitatus est...)
Alexandri vita, 21
...ἀλλ’ ὥσπερ οὐκ ἐν στρατοπέδῳ πολεμίων, ἀλλ’ ἐν ἱεροῖς καὶ ἁγίοις φυλαττομένας παρθενῶσιν, ἀπόρρητον ἔχειν καὶ ἀόρατον ἑτέροις δίαιταν. καίτοι λέγεταί γε τὴν Δαρείου γυναῖκα πολὺ πασῶν τῶν βασιλίδων εὐπρεπεστάτην γενέσθαι, καθάπερ καὶ αὐτὸς Δαρεῖος ἀνδρῶν κάλλιστος καὶ μέγιστος, τὰς δὲ παῖδας ἐοικέναι τοῖς γονεῦσιν. ἀλλ’ Ἀλέξανδρος ὡς ἔοικε τοῦ νικᾶν τοὺς πολεμίους τὸ κρατεῖν ἑαυτοῦ βασιλικώτερον ἡγούμενος, οὔτε τούτων ἔθιγεν, οὔτ’ ἄλλην ἔγνω γυναῖκα πρὸ γάμου πλὴν Βαρσίνης.
(...578 - Alexandri factum, qui cum filias Darii captivas haberet...)
3. Homer,
Od. XII, 39-...
Σειρῆνας μὲν πρῶτον ἀφίξεαι, αἵ ῥά τε πάντας
ἀνθρώπους θέλγουσιν, ὅτις σφεας εἰσαφίκηται.
VI, 135
ὣς Ὀδυσεὺς κούρηισιν ἐυπλοκάμοισιν ἔμελλε
μίξεσθαι, γυμνός περ ἐών· χρειὼ γὰρ ἵκανε.
(...571 - ubi Cephallenorum ducem e naufragio nudum servatum exhibuit... cum virtus vestium loco eum exornaret)
X, 493-495;
ψυχῆι χρησομένους Θηβαίου Τειρεσίαο,
μάντηος ἀλαοῦ, τοῦ τε φρένες ἔμπεδοί εἰσι·
τῶι καὶ τεθνηῶτι νόον πόρε Περσεφόνεια,
οἴωι πεπνῦσθαι, τοὶ δὲ σκιαὶ ἀίσσουσιν.
4. Plato,
Res publica, 361a
οὕτω καὶ ὁ ἄδικος ἐπιχειρῶν ὀρθῶς τοῖς ἀδικήμασιν λανθανέτω, εἰ μέλλει σφόδρα ἄδικος εἶναι. τὸν ἁλισκόμενον δὲ φαῦλον ἡγητέον· ἐσχάτη γὰρ ἀδικία δοκεῖν δίκαιον εἶναι μὴ ὄντα. δοτέον οὖν τῷ τελέως ἀδίκῳ τὴν τελεωτάτην ἀδικίαν...
(...575 - hic est extremus injustitiae terminus, si qua fides Platoni habenda est...)
365c
πρόθυρα μὲν καὶ σχῆμα κύκλωι περὶ ἐμαυτὸν σκιαγραφίαν ἀρετῆς περιγραπτέον, τὴν δὲ τοῦ σοφωτάτου Ἀρχιλόχου ἀλώπεκα ἑλκτέον ἐξόπισθεν κερδαλέαν καὶ ποικίλην. «Ἀλλὰ γάρ, φησί τις, οὐ ῥάιδιον ἀεὶ λανθάνειν κακὸν ὄντα.» Οὐδὲ γὰρ ἄλλο οὐδὲν εὐπετές, φήσομεν, τῶν μεγάλων·
(...587 - Archilochi vulpeculae astutiam versutiamque aemulabimur...)
498b
μειράκια μὲν ὄντα καὶ παῖδας μειρακιώδη παιδείαν καὶ φιλοσοφίαν μεταχειρίζεσθαι, τῶν τε σωμάτων, ἐν ᾧ βλαστάνει τε καὶ ἀνδροῦται, εὖ μάλα ἐπιμελεῖσθαι, ὑπηρεσίαν φιλοσοφίᾳ κτωμένους· προϊούσης δὲ τῆς ἡλικίας, ἐν ᾗ ἡ ψυχὴ τελεοῦσθαι ἄρχεται, ἐπιτείνειν τὰ ἐκείνης γυμνάσια·
(...583 - tantum ei [corpori] indulgendum est, in quantum, inquit Plato, philosophiae inservit... )
Euthydemus, 288b
Fearing that there would be high words, I again endeavoured to soothe
Ctesippus, and said to him: To you, Ctesippus, I must repeat what I said
before to Cleinias - that you do not understand the ways of these
philosophers from abroad. They are not serious, but, like the Egyptian
wizard, Proteus, they take different forms and deceive us by their
enchantments: and let us, like Menelaus, refuse to let them go until they
show themselves to us in earnest.
(kai egô phobêtheis mê loidoria genêtai, palin katepraunon ton Ktêsippon kai eipon: ô Ktêsippe, kai nundê ha pros Kleinian elegon, kai pros se tauta tauta legô, hoti ou gignôskeis tôn xenôn tên sophian hoti thaumasia estin. all' ouk etheleton hêmin epideixasthai spoudazonte, alla ton Prôtea mimeisthon ton Aiguption sophistên goêteuonte hêmas)
(...587 - ab Aegyptio illo sophista aliquid differre dicemus...)
5. Prodicus
(in Xenophontis Memorabilia, 2.1.21-34)
καὶ Πρόδικος δὲ ὁ σοφὸς ἐν τῶι συγγράμματι τῶι περὶ Ἡρακλέους, ὅπερ δὴ καὶ πλείστοις ἐπιδείκνυται, ὡσαύτως περὶ τῆς ἀρετῆς ἀποφαίνεται, ὧδέ πως λέγων, ὅσα ἐγὼ μέμνημαι. φησὶ γὰρ Ἡρακλέα, ἐπεὶ ἐκ παίδων εἰς ἥβην ὡρμᾶτο, ἐν ἧι οἱ νέοι ἤδη αὐτοκράτορες γιγνόμενοι δηλοῦσιν εἴτε τὴν δι᾽ ἀρετῆς ὁδὸν τρέψονται ἐπὶ τὸν βίον εἴτε τὴν διὰ κακίας, ἐξελθόντα εἰς ἡσυχίαν καθῆσθαι ἀποροῦντα ποτέραν τῶν ὁδῶν τράπηται·
(...574 - quin et Ceus sophista Prodicus... ad Herculem juvenem... mulieres duas accessisse...)
6. Dio Chrysostomus,
251
When Diogenes of Sinope was exiled from that place, he came to Greece and used to divide his time between Corinth and Athens. And he said he was following the practice of the Persian king. For that monarch spent the winters in Babylon and Susa, or occasionally in Bactra, which are the warmest parts of Asia, and the summers in Median Ecbatana, where the air is always very cool and the summer is like the winter in the region of Babylon. So he too, he said, changed his residence according to the seasons of year.
(...586 - qui [Diogenes] pronuntiavit se rege magno divitiorem...)
7. Diogenes Laertius,
I,88 (Bias)
ἐφόδιον ἀπὸ νεότητος εἰς γῆρας ἀναλάμβανε σοφίαν· βεβαιότερον γὰρ
τοῦτο τῶν ἄλλων κτημάτων.
(...587 - Bias igitur filio ad Aegyptios abeunti...)
8. Herodotus,
I,163
ἀπικόμενοι δὲ ἐς τὸν Ταρτησσὸν προσφιλέες ἐγένοντο τῷ βασιλέι τῶν Ταρτησσίων, τῷ οὔνομα μὲν ἦν, Ἀργανθώνιος, ἐτυράννευσε δὲ Ταρτησσοῦ ὀγδώκοντα ἔτεα, ἐβίωσε δὲ πάντα εἴκοσι καὶ ἑκατόν. [3] τούτῳ δὴ τῷ ἀνδρὶ προσφιλέες οἱ Φωκαιέες οὕτω δή τι ἐγένοντο ὡς τὰ μὲν πρῶτα σφέας ἐκλιπόντας Ἰωνίην ἐκέλευε τῆς ἑωυτοῦ χώρης οἰκῆσαι ὅκου βούλονται·
(...587 - si quispiam proferat in medium senectam Tithoni, sive Arganthonii...)
9. Theognis,
1155-1156
(...586 - in his etiam Theognide magistro utendum est, qui dicit: "Non amo divitias etc.")
10.
(...586 - Phidias et Polycletus, qourum alter Eleis Jovem, alter Argivis Junonem fecit...)
The homily (xxii) on the study of pagan literature. The latter was edited by Fremion (Paris, 1819, with French translation), Sommer (Paris, 1894), Bach (Münster, 1900), and Maloney (New York, 1901).
(http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02330b.htm)
Василий Велики. Шестоднев и други беседи. Превод Росен Тенев. "Народна култура", 1999.
Беседа 22. К юношамъ о том, как пользоваться языческими сочиненiями. В: Творения Василiя Великаго. Ч.ІV. Москва, 1993 (1846).
Saint Basil. Aux jeunes gens. Texte etabli et traduit par F. Boulenger. "Les belles lettres", 1965.
Cites:
1. Hesiod,
Works and Days, 293-297;
οὗτος μὲν πανάριστος, ὃς αὐτὸς πάντα νοήσει,
φρασσάμενος, τά κ᾽ ἔπειτα καὶ ἐς τέλος ἦισιν ἀμείνω·
ἐσθλὸς δ᾽ αὖ καὶ κεῖνος, ὃς εὖ εἰπόντι πίθηται·
ὃς δέ κε μήτ᾽ αὐτὸς νοέηι μήτ᾽ ἄλλου ἀκούων
ἐν θυμῶι βάλληται, ὁ δ᾽ αὖτ᾽ ἀχρήιος ἀνήρ.
(...566 - apud eos qui ab Hesiodo laudantur secundum locum obtinebitis)
287-292
τὴν μέν τοι κακότητα καὶ ἰλαδόν ἐστιν ἑλέσθαι
ῥηιδίως· λείη μὲν ὁδός, μάλα δ᾽ ἐγγύθι ναίει·
τῆς δ᾽ ἀρετῆς ἱδρῶτα θεοὶ προπάροιθεν ἔθηκαν
ἀθάνατοι· μακρὸς δὲ καὶ ὄρθιος οἶμος ἐς αὐτὴν
καὶ τρηχὺς τὸ πρῶτον· ἐπὴν δ᾽ εἰς ἄκρον ἵκηται,
ῥηιδίη δὴ ἔπειτα πέλει, χαλεπή περ ἐοῦσα.
360-362
εἰ γάρ κεν καὶ σμικρὸν ἐπὶ σμικρῶι καταθεῖο
καὶ θαμὰ τοῦτ᾽ ἔρδοις, τάχα κεν μέγα καὶ τὸ γένοιτο.
ὃς δ᾽ ἐπ᾽ ἐόντι φέρει, ὃ δ᾽ ἀλέξεται αἴθοπα λιμόν·
2. Plutarch,
Solonis vita, 3
ὅτι δ' αὑτὸν ἐν τῇ τῶν πενήτων μερίδι μᾶλλον ἢ τῇ τῶν πλουσίων ἔταττε, δῆλόν ἐστιν ἐκ τούτων·
πολλοὶ γὰρ πλουτεῦσι κακοί, ἀγαθοὶ δὲ πένονται·
ἀλλ' ἡμεῖς αὐτοῖς οὐ διαμειψόμεθα
τῆς ἀρετῆς τὸν πλοῦτον· ἐπεὶ τὸ μὲν ἔμπεδον αἰεί,
χρήματα δ' ἀνθρώπων ἄλλοτε ἄλλος ἔχει.
(...574 - unde et Solon mihi videtur illud ad divites dicere)
Periclis vita, 5;
λοιδορούμενος γοῦν ποτε καὶ κακῶς ἀκούων ὑπό τινος τῶν βδελυρῶν καὶ ἀκολάστων ὅλην ἡμέραν ὑπέμεινε σιωπῇ κατ' ἀγοράν, ἅμα τι τῶν ἐπειγόντων καταπραττόμενος· ἑσπέρας δ' ἀπῄει κοσμίως οἴκαδε παρακολουθοῦντος τοῦ ἀνθρώπου καὶ πάσῃ χρωμένου βλασφημίᾳ πρὸς αὐτόν. ὡς δ' ἔμελλεν εἰσιέναι σκότους ὄντος ἤδη, προσέταξέ τινι τῶν οἰκετῶν φῶς λαβόντι παραπέμψαι καὶ καταστῆσαι πρὸς τὴν οἰκίαν τὸν ἄνθρωπον.
De liberis educandis, 10
Τό γε μὴν ἀόργητον ἀνδρός ἐστι σοφοῦ. Σωκράτης μὲν γάρ, λακτίσαντος αὐτὸν νεανίσκου θρασέος μάλα καὶ βδελυροῦ, τοὺς ἀμφ’ αὑτὸν ὁρῶν ἀγανακτοῦντας καὶ σφαδᾴζοντας ὡς καὶ διώκειν αὐτὸν ἐθέλειν, “ἆρ’,” ἔφησε, “καὶ εἴ μ’ ὄνος ἐλάκτισεν, ἀντιλακτίσαι τοῦτον ἠξιώσατ’ ἄν;” οὐ μὴν ἐκεῖνός γε παντελῶς κατεπροίξατο, πάντων δ’ αὐτὸν ὀνειδιζόντων καὶ λακτιστὴν ἀποκαλούντων ἀπήγξατο.
(...575 - percutiebat quidam Sophronisci filium Socratem in ipsam faciem...)
De cohibenda ira, 14
ὥσπερ Εὐκλείδης τοῦ ἀδελφοῦ πρὸς αὐτὸν ἐκ διαφορᾶς εἰπόντος "ἀπολοίμην, εἰ μή σε τιμωρησαίμην" "ἐγὼ δέ" φήσας "ἀπολοίμην, εἰ μή σε πείσαιμι" διέτρεψε παραχρῆμα καὶ μετέθηκε.
(...575 - quidam Euclidi Megarensi iratus, mortem ei minitatus est...)
Alexandri vita, 21
...ἀλλ’ ὥσπερ οὐκ ἐν στρατοπέδῳ πολεμίων, ἀλλ’ ἐν ἱεροῖς καὶ ἁγίοις φυλαττομένας παρθενῶσιν, ἀπόρρητον ἔχειν καὶ ἀόρατον ἑτέροις δίαιταν. καίτοι λέγεταί γε τὴν Δαρείου γυναῖκα πολὺ πασῶν τῶν βασιλίδων εὐπρεπεστάτην γενέσθαι, καθάπερ καὶ αὐτὸς Δαρεῖος ἀνδρῶν κάλλιστος καὶ μέγιστος, τὰς δὲ παῖδας ἐοικέναι τοῖς γονεῦσιν. ἀλλ’ Ἀλέξανδρος ὡς ἔοικε τοῦ νικᾶν τοὺς πολεμίους τὸ κρατεῖν ἑαυτοῦ βασιλικώτερον ἡγούμενος, οὔτε τούτων ἔθιγεν, οὔτ’ ἄλλην ἔγνω γυναῖκα πρὸ γάμου πλὴν Βαρσίνης.
(...578 - Alexandri factum, qui cum filias Darii captivas haberet...)
3. Homer,
Od. XII, 39-...
Σειρῆνας μὲν πρῶτον ἀφίξεαι, αἵ ῥά τε πάντας
ἀνθρώπους θέλγουσιν, ὅτις σφεας εἰσαφίκηται.
VI, 135
ὣς Ὀδυσεὺς κούρηισιν ἐυπλοκάμοισιν ἔμελλε
μίξεσθαι, γυμνός περ ἐών· χρειὼ γὰρ ἵκανε.
(...571 - ubi Cephallenorum ducem e naufragio nudum servatum exhibuit... cum virtus vestium loco eum exornaret)
X, 493-495;
ψυχῆι χρησομένους Θηβαίου Τειρεσίαο,
μάντηος ἀλαοῦ, τοῦ τε φρένες ἔμπεδοί εἰσι·
τῶι καὶ τεθνηῶτι νόον πόρε Περσεφόνεια,
οἴωι πεπνῦσθαι, τοὶ δὲ σκιαὶ ἀίσσουσιν.
4. Plato,
Res publica, 361a
οὕτω καὶ ὁ ἄδικος ἐπιχειρῶν ὀρθῶς τοῖς ἀδικήμασιν λανθανέτω, εἰ μέλλει σφόδρα ἄδικος εἶναι. τὸν ἁλισκόμενον δὲ φαῦλον ἡγητέον· ἐσχάτη γὰρ ἀδικία δοκεῖν δίκαιον εἶναι μὴ ὄντα. δοτέον οὖν τῷ τελέως ἀδίκῳ τὴν τελεωτάτην ἀδικίαν...
(...575 - hic est extremus injustitiae terminus, si qua fides Platoni habenda est...)
365c
πρόθυρα μὲν καὶ σχῆμα κύκλωι περὶ ἐμαυτὸν σκιαγραφίαν ἀρετῆς περιγραπτέον, τὴν δὲ τοῦ σοφωτάτου Ἀρχιλόχου ἀλώπεκα ἑλκτέον ἐξόπισθεν κερδαλέαν καὶ ποικίλην. «Ἀλλὰ γάρ, φησί τις, οὐ ῥάιδιον ἀεὶ λανθάνειν κακὸν ὄντα.» Οὐδὲ γὰρ ἄλλο οὐδὲν εὐπετές, φήσομεν, τῶν μεγάλων·
(...587 - Archilochi vulpeculae astutiam versutiamque aemulabimur...)
498b
μειράκια μὲν ὄντα καὶ παῖδας μειρακιώδη παιδείαν καὶ φιλοσοφίαν μεταχειρίζεσθαι, τῶν τε σωμάτων, ἐν ᾧ βλαστάνει τε καὶ ἀνδροῦται, εὖ μάλα ἐπιμελεῖσθαι, ὑπηρεσίαν φιλοσοφίᾳ κτωμένους· προϊούσης δὲ τῆς ἡλικίας, ἐν ᾗ ἡ ψυχὴ τελεοῦσθαι ἄρχεται, ἐπιτείνειν τὰ ἐκείνης γυμνάσια·
(...583 - tantum ei [corpori] indulgendum est, in quantum, inquit Plato, philosophiae inservit... )
Euthydemus, 288b
Fearing that there would be high words, I again endeavoured to soothe
Ctesippus, and said to him: To you, Ctesippus, I must repeat what I said
before to Cleinias - that you do not understand the ways of these
philosophers from abroad. They are not serious, but, like the Egyptian
wizard, Proteus, they take different forms and deceive us by their
enchantments: and let us, like Menelaus, refuse to let them go until they
show themselves to us in earnest.
(kai egô phobêtheis mê loidoria genêtai, palin katepraunon ton Ktêsippon kai eipon: ô Ktêsippe, kai nundê ha pros Kleinian elegon, kai pros se tauta tauta legô, hoti ou gignôskeis tôn xenôn tên sophian hoti thaumasia estin. all' ouk etheleton hêmin epideixasthai spoudazonte, alla ton Prôtea mimeisthon ton Aiguption sophistên goêteuonte hêmas)
(...587 - ab Aegyptio illo sophista aliquid differre dicemus...)
5. Prodicus
(in Xenophontis Memorabilia, 2.1.21-34)
καὶ Πρόδικος δὲ ὁ σοφὸς ἐν τῶι συγγράμματι τῶι περὶ Ἡρακλέους, ὅπερ δὴ καὶ πλείστοις ἐπιδείκνυται, ὡσαύτως περὶ τῆς ἀρετῆς ἀποφαίνεται, ὧδέ πως λέγων, ὅσα ἐγὼ μέμνημαι. φησὶ γὰρ Ἡρακλέα, ἐπεὶ ἐκ παίδων εἰς ἥβην ὡρμᾶτο, ἐν ἧι οἱ νέοι ἤδη αὐτοκράτορες γιγνόμενοι δηλοῦσιν εἴτε τὴν δι᾽ ἀρετῆς ὁδὸν τρέψονται ἐπὶ τὸν βίον εἴτε τὴν διὰ κακίας, ἐξελθόντα εἰς ἡσυχίαν καθῆσθαι ἀποροῦντα ποτέραν τῶν ὁδῶν τράπηται·
(...574 - quin et Ceus sophista Prodicus... ad Herculem juvenem... mulieres duas accessisse...)
6. Dio Chrysostomus,
251
When Diogenes of Sinope was exiled from that place, he came to Greece and used to divide his time between Corinth and Athens. And he said he was following the practice of the Persian king. For that monarch spent the winters in Babylon and Susa, or occasionally in Bactra, which are the warmest parts of Asia, and the summers in Median Ecbatana, where the air is always very cool and the summer is like the winter in the region of Babylon. So he too, he said, changed his residence according to the seasons of year.
(...586 - qui [Diogenes] pronuntiavit se rege magno divitiorem...)
7. Diogenes Laertius,
I,88 (Bias)
ἐφόδιον ἀπὸ νεότητος εἰς γῆρας ἀναλάμβανε σοφίαν· βεβαιότερον γὰρ
τοῦτο τῶν ἄλλων κτημάτων.
(...587 - Bias igitur filio ad Aegyptios abeunti...)
8. Herodotus,
I,163
ἀπικόμενοι δὲ ἐς τὸν Ταρτησσὸν προσφιλέες ἐγένοντο τῷ βασιλέι τῶν Ταρτησσίων, τῷ οὔνομα μὲν ἦν, Ἀργανθώνιος, ἐτυράννευσε δὲ Ταρτησσοῦ ὀγδώκοντα ἔτεα, ἐβίωσε δὲ πάντα εἴκοσι καὶ ἑκατόν. [3] τούτῳ δὴ τῷ ἀνδρὶ προσφιλέες οἱ Φωκαιέες οὕτω δή τι ἐγένοντο ὡς τὰ μὲν πρῶτα σφέας ἐκλιπόντας Ἰωνίην ἐκέλευε τῆς ἑωυτοῦ χώρης οἰκῆσαι ὅκου βούλονται·
(...587 - si quispiam proferat in medium senectam Tithoni, sive Arganthonii...)
9. Theognis,
1155-1156
(...586 - in his etiam Theognide magistro utendum est, qui dicit: "Non amo divitias etc.")
10.
(...586 - Phidias et Polycletus, qourum alter Eleis Jovem, alter Argivis Junonem fecit...)
The homily (xxii) on the study of pagan literature. The latter was edited by Fremion (Paris, 1819, with French translation), Sommer (Paris, 1894), Bach (Münster, 1900), and Maloney (New York, 1901).
(http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02330b.htm)
Василий Велики. Шестоднев и други беседи. Превод Росен Тенев. "Народна култура", 1999.
Беседа 22. К юношамъ о том, как пользоваться языческими сочиненiями. В: Творения Василiя Великаго. Ч.ІV. Москва, 1993 (1846).
Saint Basil. Aux jeunes gens. Texte etabli et traduit par F. Boulenger. "Les belles lettres", 1965.
Graeco-Roman Antiquity in the Writings of the Orthodox Fathers
1 text for week
at least 30 authors until Holy Spirit 2009
at least 30 authors until Holy Spirit 2009
Sunday, June 1, 2008
Reading the Bible
I. ΓΕΝΕΣΙΣ - ΡΟΥΘ (236 kεφ.)
- 50
1. ΓΕΝΕΣΙΣ (50)
- 137
2. ΕΞΟΔΟΣ (40)
3. ΛΕΥΙΤΙΚΟΝ (27)
4. ΑΡΙΘΜΟΙ (36)
5. ΔΕΥΤΕΡΟΝΟΜΙΟΝ (34)
- 49
6. ΙΗΣΟΥΣ ΝΑΥΗ (24)
7. ΚΡΙΤΑΙ (21)
8. ΡΟΥΘ (4)
II. ΒΑΣΙΛΕΙΩΝ Α' - ΕΣΘΗΡ (228 kεφ.)
- 167
1. ΒΑΣΙΛΕΙΩΝ Α' (31)
2. ΒΑΣΙΛΕΙΩΝ Β' (24)
3. ΒΑΣΙΛΕΙΩΝ Γ' (22)
4. ΒΑΣΙΛΕΙΩΝ Δ' (25)
5. ΠΑΡΑΛΕΙΠΟΜΕΝΩΝ Α' (29)
6. ΠΑΡΑΛΕΙΠΟΜΕΝΩΝ Β' (36)
- 71
7. ΕΣΔΡΑΣ Α' (10)
8. ΝΕΕΜΙΑΣ (13)
9. ΕΣΔΡΑΣ Β' (9)
10. ΤΩΒΙΤ (13)
11. ΙΟΥΔΙΘ (16)
12. ΕΣΘΗΡ (10)
III. ΙΩΒ - ΒΑΡΟΥΧ (442 kεφ.)
- 192
1. ΙΩΒ (42)
2. ΨΑΛΜΟΙ (150)
- 121
3. ΠΑΡΟΙΜΙΑΙ ΣΟΛΟΜΩΝΤΟΣ (31)
4. ΕΚΚΛΗΣΙΑΣΤΗΣ (12)
5. ΑΣΜΑ ΑΣΜΑΤΩΝ (8)
6. ΣΟΦΙΑ ΣΟΛΟΜΩΝΤΟΣ (19)
7. ΣΟΦΙΑ ΣΕΙΡΑΧ (51)
- 129
8. ΗΣΑΪΑΣ (66)
9. ΙΕΡΕΜΙΑΣ (52)
10. ΘΡΗΝΟΙ ΙΕΡΕΜΙΟΥ (5)
11. ΕΠΙΣΤΟΛΗ ΙΕΡΕΜΙΟΥ (1)
12. ΒΑΡΟΥΧ (5)
IV. ΙΕΖΕΚΙΗΛ - ΕΣΔΡΑΣ Γ' (183 kεφ.)
- 62
1. ΙΕΖΕΚΙΗΛ (48)
2. ΔΑΝΙΗΛ (14)
- 66
3. ΩΣΗΕ (14)
4. ΙΩΗΛ (3)
5. ΑΜΩΣ (9)
6. ΟΒΔΙΟΥ (1)
7. ΙΩΝΑΣ (4)
8. ΜΙΧΑΙΑΣ (7)
9. ΝΑΟΥΜ (3)
10. ΑΜΒΑΚΟΥΜ (3)
11. ΣΟΦΟΝΙΑΣ (3)
12. ΑΓΓΑΙΟΣ (2)
13. ΖΑΧΑΡΙΑΣ (14)
14. ΜΑΛΑΧΙΑΣ (4)
- 54
15. ΜΑΚΚΑΒΑΙΩΝ Α' (16)
16. ΜΑΚΚΑΒΑΙΩΝ Β' (15)
17. ΜΑΚΚΑΒΑΙΩΝ Γ' (7)
18. ΕΣΔΡΑΣ Γ' (16)
V. Καινή Διαθήκη (260 kεφ.)
- 89
1. Κατά Ματθαίον (28)
2. Κατά Μάρκον (16)
3, Κατά Λουκάν (24)
4. Κατά Ιωάννην (21)
- 28
5. Πράξεις Αποστόλων (28)
- 121
6. Προς Ρωμαίους (16)
7. Προς Κορινθίους Α' (16)
8. Προς Κορινθίους Β' (13)
9. Προς Γαλάτας (6)
10. Προς Εφεσίους (6)
11. Προς Φιλιππησίους (4)
12. Προς Κολοσσαείς (4)
13. Προς Θεσσαλονικείς Α' (5)
14. Προς Θεσσαλονικείς Β' (3)
15. Προς Τιμόθεον Α' (6)
16. Προς Τιμόθεον B' (4)
17. Προς Τίτον (3)
18. Προς Φιλήμονα (1)
19. Προς Εβραίους (13)
20. Επιστολή Ιακώβου (5)
21. Επιστολή Πέτρου Α΄(5)
22. Επιστολή Πέτρου B' (3)
23. Επιστολή Ιωάννου Α΄ (5)
24. Επιστολή Ιωάννου B' (1)
25. Επιστολή Ιωάννου Γ' (1)
26. Επιστολή Ιούδα (1)
- 22
27. Αποκάλυψις Ιωάννου (22)
- 50
1. ΓΕΝΕΣΙΣ (50)
- 137
2. ΕΞΟΔΟΣ (40)
3. ΛΕΥΙΤΙΚΟΝ (27)
4. ΑΡΙΘΜΟΙ (36)
5. ΔΕΥΤΕΡΟΝΟΜΙΟΝ (34)
- 49
6. ΙΗΣΟΥΣ ΝΑΥΗ (24)
7. ΚΡΙΤΑΙ (21)
8. ΡΟΥΘ (4)
II. ΒΑΣΙΛΕΙΩΝ Α' - ΕΣΘΗΡ (228 kεφ.)
- 167
1. ΒΑΣΙΛΕΙΩΝ Α' (31)
2. ΒΑΣΙΛΕΙΩΝ Β' (24)
3. ΒΑΣΙΛΕΙΩΝ Γ' (22)
4. ΒΑΣΙΛΕΙΩΝ Δ' (25)
5. ΠΑΡΑΛΕΙΠΟΜΕΝΩΝ Α' (29)
6. ΠΑΡΑΛΕΙΠΟΜΕΝΩΝ Β' (36)
- 71
7. ΕΣΔΡΑΣ Α' (10)
8. ΝΕΕΜΙΑΣ (13)
9. ΕΣΔΡΑΣ Β' (9)
10. ΤΩΒΙΤ (13)
11. ΙΟΥΔΙΘ (16)
12. ΕΣΘΗΡ (10)
III. ΙΩΒ - ΒΑΡΟΥΧ (442 kεφ.)
- 192
1. ΙΩΒ (42)
2. ΨΑΛΜΟΙ (150)
- 121
3. ΠΑΡΟΙΜΙΑΙ ΣΟΛΟΜΩΝΤΟΣ (31)
4. ΕΚΚΛΗΣΙΑΣΤΗΣ (12)
5. ΑΣΜΑ ΑΣΜΑΤΩΝ (8)
6. ΣΟΦΙΑ ΣΟΛΟΜΩΝΤΟΣ (19)
7. ΣΟΦΙΑ ΣΕΙΡΑΧ (51)
- 129
8. ΗΣΑΪΑΣ (66)
9. ΙΕΡΕΜΙΑΣ (52)
10. ΘΡΗΝΟΙ ΙΕΡΕΜΙΟΥ (5)
11. ΕΠΙΣΤΟΛΗ ΙΕΡΕΜΙΟΥ (1)
12. ΒΑΡΟΥΧ (5)
IV. ΙΕΖΕΚΙΗΛ - ΕΣΔΡΑΣ Γ' (183 kεφ.)
- 62
1. ΙΕΖΕΚΙΗΛ (48)
2. ΔΑΝΙΗΛ (14)
- 66
3. ΩΣΗΕ (14)
4. ΙΩΗΛ (3)
5. ΑΜΩΣ (9)
6. ΟΒΔΙΟΥ (1)
7. ΙΩΝΑΣ (4)
8. ΜΙΧΑΙΑΣ (7)
9. ΝΑΟΥΜ (3)
10. ΑΜΒΑΚΟΥΜ (3)
11. ΣΟΦΟΝΙΑΣ (3)
12. ΑΓΓΑΙΟΣ (2)
13. ΖΑΧΑΡΙΑΣ (14)
14. ΜΑΛΑΧΙΑΣ (4)
- 54
15. ΜΑΚΚΑΒΑΙΩΝ Α' (16)
16. ΜΑΚΚΑΒΑΙΩΝ Β' (15)
17. ΜΑΚΚΑΒΑΙΩΝ Γ' (7)
18. ΕΣΔΡΑΣ Γ' (16)
V. Καινή Διαθήκη (260 kεφ.)
- 89
1. Κατά Ματθαίον (28)
2. Κατά Μάρκον (16)
3, Κατά Λουκάν (24)
4. Κατά Ιωάννην (21)
- 28
5. Πράξεις Αποστόλων (28)
- 121
6. Προς Ρωμαίους (16)
7. Προς Κορινθίους Α' (16)
8. Προς Κορινθίους Β' (13)
9. Προς Γαλάτας (6)
10. Προς Εφεσίους (6)
11. Προς Φιλιππησίους (4)
12. Προς Κολοσσαείς (4)
13. Προς Θεσσαλονικείς Α' (5)
14. Προς Θεσσαλονικείς Β' (3)
15. Προς Τιμόθεον Α' (6)
16. Προς Τιμόθεον B' (4)
17. Προς Τίτον (3)
18. Προς Φιλήμονα (1)
19. Προς Εβραίους (13)
20. Επιστολή Ιακώβου (5)
21. Επιστολή Πέτρου Α΄(5)
22. Επιστολή Πέτρου B' (3)
23. Επιστολή Ιωάννου Α΄ (5)
24. Επιστολή Ιωάννου B' (1)
25. Επιστολή Ιωάννου Γ' (1)
26. Επιστολή Ιούδα (1)
- 22
27. Αποκάλυψις Ιωάννου (22)
Tuesday, March 4, 2008
The Theatre
The National Theater "Ivan Vazov" is something like a second emblem of Sofia. It was built in the period from 1905 till 1906 for the Duchy of Bulgaria by Ferdinand Fellner & Hermann Helmer. Opened 16 Jan 1907 with Dobri Christov's "Festive Ouverture", Ivan Vazov's scenic prologue "The Fame of Art" and Act V of Vasil Drumev's drama "Ivanko".
The 'Ivan Vazov' Theatre comprises of 1021 seats. The stage house was destroyed by a fire on 10 February, 1923 ( the auditorium was also damaged because the iron curtain did not work properly). In the period 1923-1928 a newly constructed stage house and a slightly altered auditorium was built by Martin Duelfer.
From 1972 till 1976 the stage house and exterior of the theatre were renovated to the original plans by Ivan Tomov and Lilija Toteva ( the auditorium was altered again, with only slight references to the 1906 original). The theatre was named in honour of the Bulgarian author, Ivan Mincov Vazov (1850-1921).
The National Theatre in the city park is a model of Baroque architecture. Along the facade of this majestic building, six columns with beautiful capitals support a large triangular pediment, decorated with mythological high reliefs. To the sides two towers rise up, topped by sculptures of the Goddess Nike.The red, white and gold neo-classical National Theatre 'Ivan Vazov' in Sofia is surrounded by loads of alleys, and is situated amid a pool and fountains and filled with sidewalk cafes.
(http://en.journey.bg/bulgaria/bulgaria.php?guide=800)
Monday, March 3, 2008
House of Gendovich
The seven-storey house of Baron Gendovich, one of the first high-rise buildings in the city, was completed in 1914
(Wikipedia)
Eagle`s Bridge
After entering Sofia from the East side by Tsarigradsko Shose Blvd (you use that boulevard also when you arrive at the airport), Eagle’s Bridge is the first crossing you have to stop at.
There are beautiful bronze bas-reliefs at the bottom end of the columns, on the top of which the proud birds are situated.
This place is the beginning of the perfect center. You will be thoroughly inspected by 4 bronze eagles with threateningly outspread wings at the four ends of the bridge when passing by it.
Exactly those statues give the name of the bridge – Eagle’s Bridge. Those are its symbols and ‘keepers’.
The bridge is built in 1891. It is a symbol of freedom because at that place for the first time in 1888 the prisoners from Diarbekir are welcomed (in that Turkish town figures from the Bulgarian National Freedom Movement of the 19th century have been sent in exile).
The architect of Eagle’s Bridge is Vatzlav Prosek. Beneath the juncture are the waters of Perlovska River. They pass through the whole city.
Ali Grigorova
(http://www.sofiabulgariatravel.com/eagles-bridge-sofia.html)
Thursday, January 31, 2008
The Greeks in history
Weber had already stressed in “Agrarverhaeltnisse im Altertum” that this was the fundamental difference between the Occidental (Graeco-Roman) world and Oriental world (ancient Egypt, Mesopotamia and Israel)… The citizen-state as a self-organizing military body developed in the coastal civilization of the Graeco-Roman world, because there the aristocracies had access to the gains made from commerce and thus could reduce the kingdom to a merely military leadership... Later they had to accept the political participation of the bulk of the citizenry who, as hoplites, provided most of the military. Priests were always mere functionaries of the community: they could claim no independent authority in political questions.
In the civilizations at the banks of great rivers, the necessity of river regulation and irrigation strengthened the primordial kingdoms and nurtured the development of a centralized bureaucracy subject to a monarch with an indisputable monopoly in political, military, and economic power. The monarch could rely on the support of a privileged priesthood. On this basis there later emerged what Weber described as “authoritarian liturgical state”. In the end this authoritarian liturgical state, especially as it has been created in Ptolemaic Egypt, came to dominate the later Roman Empire.
In his view commune building depends on the ability of the members to unite in a ritual community that he calls Verbruederung (confraternity) a community based on artificially-created and free-willed mutual ties, not in consanguinity. This meant that the community depended on the equal rights (in principle at least) of all its members, solidarity against non-members, connubium and a common cult symbolically expressed in communal cult-meals.
The notion of Verbruederung explains the fundamental difference between Occidental and Oriental city-dwellers and their different potential for commune-building; it also allows Weber to accentuate an important distinction between European Antiquity and Middle Ages.
In pre-Christian Antiquity… confraternity materialized in the union of heads of sibs that originally constituted the city-state by means of synoikismos (the real housing-together in an urban center or the constitution of a singular political center for hitherto separate communitites). The patrician clan, however, tried to preserve their ritual exclusivity with respect to the plebeians, an exclusivity abolished only after prolonged struggles… According to Weber, the ancient city-states failed to reach the intensity of confraternity that was later achieved in the medieval commune… In the European Middle Ageds confraternity possessed a positive religious basis, since all the members already belonged to the same church, as symbolized in the community of the Eucharist. (Of course, this inevitably implied the outsider-status of the Jews)…
In “Die Stadt” he makes the famous distinction between the ancient homo politicus and the medieval homo oeconomicus:
Whereas in Antiquity the hoplite army and its training, and thus military interests, increasingly came to constitute the pivot of all urban organization, in the Middle Ages most burgher privileges began with the limitation of the burgher’s military duties to garrison service. The economic interests of the medieval townsman lay in peaceful gain through commerce and the trade, and this was most pronouncedly so for the lower strata of the urban citizenry…
Weber followed a long tradition of criticism that held Graeco-Roman Antiquity responsible for cultivating the omnipotence of the state and preventing economical progress. This tradition goes back to the Scottish and French Enlightenment. It then was taken up in the French postrevolutionary debate (in reaction to the cult of Antiquity fostered by the Jacobins). In 1819 Benjamin Constant summarized and sharpened it in his famous essay on the distinction between the freedom of the ancients and that of the moderns. Finally, the tradition was developed in greater historical detail by late-nineteenth-century authors such as N.D. Fustel de Coulanges and Jacob Burckhardt.
Wilfried Nippel
***
Wilfried Nippel. Homo politicus and Homo Oeconomicus: the European Citizen According to Max Weber. In: Anthony Pagden ed. The Idea of Europe. From Antiquity to the European Union. Cambridge UP, 2002.
In the civilizations at the banks of great rivers, the necessity of river regulation and irrigation strengthened the primordial kingdoms and nurtured the development of a centralized bureaucracy subject to a monarch with an indisputable monopoly in political, military, and economic power. The monarch could rely on the support of a privileged priesthood. On this basis there later emerged what Weber described as “authoritarian liturgical state”. In the end this authoritarian liturgical state, especially as it has been created in Ptolemaic Egypt, came to dominate the later Roman Empire.
In his view commune building depends on the ability of the members to unite in a ritual community that he calls Verbruederung (confraternity) a community based on artificially-created and free-willed mutual ties, not in consanguinity. This meant that the community depended on the equal rights (in principle at least) of all its members, solidarity against non-members, connubium and a common cult symbolically expressed in communal cult-meals.
The notion of Verbruederung explains the fundamental difference between Occidental and Oriental city-dwellers and their different potential for commune-building; it also allows Weber to accentuate an important distinction between European Antiquity and Middle Ages.
In pre-Christian Antiquity… confraternity materialized in the union of heads of sibs that originally constituted the city-state by means of synoikismos (the real housing-together in an urban center or the constitution of a singular political center for hitherto separate communitites). The patrician clan, however, tried to preserve their ritual exclusivity with respect to the plebeians, an exclusivity abolished only after prolonged struggles… According to Weber, the ancient city-states failed to reach the intensity of confraternity that was later achieved in the medieval commune… In the European Middle Ageds confraternity possessed a positive religious basis, since all the members already belonged to the same church, as symbolized in the community of the Eucharist. (Of course, this inevitably implied the outsider-status of the Jews)…
In “Die Stadt” he makes the famous distinction between the ancient homo politicus and the medieval homo oeconomicus:
Whereas in Antiquity the hoplite army and its training, and thus military interests, increasingly came to constitute the pivot of all urban organization, in the Middle Ages most burgher privileges began with the limitation of the burgher’s military duties to garrison service. The economic interests of the medieval townsman lay in peaceful gain through commerce and the trade, and this was most pronouncedly so for the lower strata of the urban citizenry…
Weber followed a long tradition of criticism that held Graeco-Roman Antiquity responsible for cultivating the omnipotence of the state and preventing economical progress. This tradition goes back to the Scottish and French Enlightenment. It then was taken up in the French postrevolutionary debate (in reaction to the cult of Antiquity fostered by the Jacobins). In 1819 Benjamin Constant summarized and sharpened it in his famous essay on the distinction between the freedom of the ancients and that of the moderns. Finally, the tradition was developed in greater historical detail by late-nineteenth-century authors such as N.D. Fustel de Coulanges and Jacob Burckhardt.
Wilfried Nippel
***
Wilfried Nippel. Homo politicus and Homo Oeconomicus: the European Citizen According to Max Weber. In: Anthony Pagden ed. The Idea of Europe. From Antiquity to the European Union. Cambridge UP, 2002.
Books
Ewen Bowie. Lyric and Elegiac Poetry. In: J. Boardman, J. Griffin, O. Murray ed. The Oxford History of Greece and the Hellenistic World. Oxford UP, 1986-1991
Alan Bowman. Recolonising Egypt. In: T.P Wiseman ed. Classics in Progress. Essays on Ancient Greece and Rome. Oxford UP, 2002-2006.
Peter Burian. Myth and muthos:the shaping of tragic plot. In: P.E. Easterling ed. The Cambridge Companion to Greek Tragedy. Cambridge UP, 1997-2004.
Paul Cartledge. Greek civilization and slavery. In: T.P Wiseman ed. Classics in Progress. Essays on Ancient Greece and Rome. Oxford UP, 2002-2006.
Thomas Cole. The Origins of Rhetoric in Ancient Greece. The John Hopkins UP, 1991-1995.
Michael Dewar. Culture wars: Latin literature from the second century to the end of the classical era. In: Oliver Taplin ed. Literature of the Roman World. Oxford UP, 2000-2001.
G.R.F. Ferrari. Platonic Love. In: Richard Kraut ed. The Cambridge Companion to Plato. Cambridge UP, 1992-2005
John Miles Foley. Epic as a genre. In: Robert Fowler ed. The Cambridge Companion to Homer. Cambridge UP, 2004-2007.
Hans-Georg Gadamer. A Century of Philosophy. A Conversation with Riccardo Dottori. Transl. by Rod Coltman with Sigrid Koepke. Continuum, 2003.
Edith Hall. The Sociology of Athenian tragedy. In: P.E. Easterling ed. The Cambridge Companion to Greek Tragedy. Cambridge UP, 1997-2004.
David Hahm. Polybius' applied political theory. In: Andre Laks and Malcolm Schofield ed. Justice and Generosity. Studies in Hellenistic Social and Political Philosophy. Proceedings of the Sixth Symposium Hellenisticum. Cambridge UP, 1995.
Sally C. Humphreys. The Strangeness of Gods. Historical Perspectives on the Interpretation of Athenian Religion. Oxford UP, 2004.
Richard Jenkyns. Silver Latin Poetry and the Latin Novel. In: J. Boardman. J. Griffin, O. Murray ed. The Oxford History of the Roman World. Oxford UP, 1991.
George. B. Kerferd. The nomos-physis controversy; The theory of society. In: G.B. Kerferd. The Sophistic Movement. Cambridge UP, 1981-1999.
Matthew Leigh. Primitivism and power: The beginnings of Latin literature. In: Oliver Taplin ed. Literature of the Roman World. Oxford UP, 2000-2001
Peter Levi. Greek Drama. In: J. Boardman, J. Griffin, O. Murray ed. The Oxford History of Greece and the Hellenistic World. Oxford UP, 1986-1991.
Alasdair MacIntyre. Postscript to Plato; Aristotle's 'Ethics'; Postscript to Greek ethics. In: A Short History of Ethics. A history of moral philosophy from the Homeric Age to the twentieth century. Routledge 1967-2006.
Oswin Murray. Greek Historians. In: J. Boardman, J. Griffin, O. Murray ed. The Oxford History of Greece and the Hellenistic World. Oxford UP, 1986-1991.
Andrea W. Nightingale. The rhetoric of philosophic "freedom"; The politics of panhellenism. In: Spectacles of Truth in Classical Greek Philosophy. Cambridge UP, 2004-2006.
Wilfried Nippel. Homo politicus and Homo Oeconomicus: the European Citizen According to Max Weber. In: Anthony Pagden ed. The Idea of Europe. From Antiquity to the European Union. Cambridge UP, 2002.
Simon Price. Religions of the Ancient Greeks. Cambridge UP, 1999-2005.
Jacqueline de Romilly. The Great Sophists in Periclean Athens. Translated by Janet Lloyd. Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1992-2002.
Christopher Rowe. Plato. In: David Sedley ed. The Cambridge Companion to Greek and Roman Philosophy. Cambridge UP 2003-2004.
Oliver Taplin. The spring of the Muses: Homer and related poetry. In: Oliver Taplin ed. Literature in the Greek World. Oxford UP, 2000-2001.
Alan Bowman. Recolonising Egypt. In: T.P Wiseman ed. Classics in Progress. Essays on Ancient Greece and Rome. Oxford UP, 2002-2006.
Peter Burian. Myth and muthos:the shaping of tragic plot. In: P.E. Easterling ed. The Cambridge Companion to Greek Tragedy. Cambridge UP, 1997-2004.
Paul Cartledge. Greek civilization and slavery. In: T.P Wiseman ed. Classics in Progress. Essays on Ancient Greece and Rome. Oxford UP, 2002-2006.
Thomas Cole. The Origins of Rhetoric in Ancient Greece. The John Hopkins UP, 1991-1995.
Michael Dewar. Culture wars: Latin literature from the second century to the end of the classical era. In: Oliver Taplin ed. Literature of the Roman World. Oxford UP, 2000-2001.
G.R.F. Ferrari. Platonic Love. In: Richard Kraut ed. The Cambridge Companion to Plato. Cambridge UP, 1992-2005
John Miles Foley. Epic as a genre. In: Robert Fowler ed. The Cambridge Companion to Homer. Cambridge UP, 2004-2007.
Hans-Georg Gadamer. A Century of Philosophy. A Conversation with Riccardo Dottori. Transl. by Rod Coltman with Sigrid Koepke. Continuum, 2003.
Edith Hall. The Sociology of Athenian tragedy. In: P.E. Easterling ed. The Cambridge Companion to Greek Tragedy. Cambridge UP, 1997-2004.
David Hahm. Polybius' applied political theory. In: Andre Laks and Malcolm Schofield ed. Justice and Generosity. Studies in Hellenistic Social and Political Philosophy. Proceedings of the Sixth Symposium Hellenisticum. Cambridge UP, 1995.
Sally C. Humphreys. The Strangeness of Gods. Historical Perspectives on the Interpretation of Athenian Religion. Oxford UP, 2004.
Richard Jenkyns. Silver Latin Poetry and the Latin Novel. In: J. Boardman. J. Griffin, O. Murray ed. The Oxford History of the Roman World. Oxford UP, 1991.
George. B. Kerferd. The nomos-physis controversy; The theory of society. In: G.B. Kerferd. The Sophistic Movement. Cambridge UP, 1981-1999.
Matthew Leigh. Primitivism and power: The beginnings of Latin literature. In: Oliver Taplin ed. Literature of the Roman World. Oxford UP, 2000-2001
Peter Levi. Greek Drama. In: J. Boardman, J. Griffin, O. Murray ed. The Oxford History of Greece and the Hellenistic World. Oxford UP, 1986-1991.
Alasdair MacIntyre. Postscript to Plato; Aristotle's 'Ethics'; Postscript to Greek ethics. In: A Short History of Ethics. A history of moral philosophy from the Homeric Age to the twentieth century. Routledge 1967-2006.
Oswin Murray. Greek Historians. In: J. Boardman, J. Griffin, O. Murray ed. The Oxford History of Greece and the Hellenistic World. Oxford UP, 1986-1991.
Andrea W. Nightingale. The rhetoric of philosophic "freedom"; The politics of panhellenism. In: Spectacles of Truth in Classical Greek Philosophy. Cambridge UP, 2004-2006.
Wilfried Nippel. Homo politicus and Homo Oeconomicus: the European Citizen According to Max Weber. In: Anthony Pagden ed. The Idea of Europe. From Antiquity to the European Union. Cambridge UP, 2002.
Simon Price. Religions of the Ancient Greeks. Cambridge UP, 1999-2005.
Jacqueline de Romilly. The Great Sophists in Periclean Athens. Translated by Janet Lloyd. Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1992-2002.
Christopher Rowe. Plato. In: David Sedley ed. The Cambridge Companion to Greek and Roman Philosophy. Cambridge UP 2003-2004.
Oliver Taplin. The spring of the Muses: Homer and related poetry. In: Oliver Taplin ed. Literature in the Greek World. Oxford UP, 2000-2001.
Wednesday, January 30, 2008
Greek politicians and public figures
When I began research, in 1957, the two most original and stimulating scholars working on Ancient Greece were Moses Finley and Jean-Pierre Vernant. It was their example that led me into anthropology; both, but especially Finley, led me to see anthropology as concerned with the criticism of culturally shaped categories and presuppositions…
The posthumous honours granted to Lycurgus in 307/6, when the city was freed from Demetrios' rule, form a fitting end to this somewhat ambivalent career. His descendants were granted perpetual dining rights in the Prytaneion.
In the archaic period the grant of lifelong dining rights in the Prytaneion - mainly, probably, to victors in major events at the Panhellenic games - meant a permanent seat at the centre of power in the city. After the fall of the Peisistratid tyranny the honour was awarded - partly, perhaps, in sympathy with the growth of a more critical attitude towards the honours heaped on successful athletes, partly as a snub to the Alkmaionidai - to the senior representatives of the families of Harmodios and Aristogeiton, who had assassinated Peisistratos' son Hipparchos. The next Athenian to be awarded lifelong sitesis was Cleon, in the enthusiasm which followed his capture of the Spartan force on Sphacteria in 425. A similar grant was made to Iphicrates after the peace with Sparta in 371. In the period after Chaeronea, two divergent conceptions of the role of grants of perpetual sitesis seem to have coexisted in implicit contradiction. Grants to Demades in c. 335… and the comic poet Philippides of Kephale in 283/2 seem to extend to citizens who have played an important role as intermediaries between Athens and Macedonian rulers the honours which were being granted to non-Athenians for performing the same functions. Yet the posthumous hereditary honours granted to Lycurgus and (in 280/79) to Demosthenes indicate a different view: those who dine in the Prytaneion are seen as representing glorious moments in the city's past, players in a perpetual historical pageant. Less than twenty years after his death, Lycurgus had become a museum piece, a figure almost as remote as Harmodios and Aristogeiton - two other Athenian aristocrats whose lives ended in irony…
In 1985 I saw an analogy between Lycurgus and Margaret Thatcher in that both combined a patriotic and ostensibly democratic rhetoric with undemocratic practice (in the British case, dismantling the welfare state), and both seemed to be clinging in their patriotism to an outdated conception of their states as Great Powers… Demosthenes political speeches can be read in a Thucydidean light; he presents himself as having to argue a relatively unpopular political programme before voters who are either reluctant to support military action or still convinced that the major danger to Athens was Persia rather than Macedon. The hectoring tone, however, seems closer to that of Thucydides' Cleon than his Pericles; perhaps hearers did not find a significant difference between Demosthenes' harangues and the moralizing rhetoric of Lycurgus. Did Lycurgus indeed see himself as following in Demosthenes' footsteps?... Asking questions about what we want from our own politicians and how we would like to be constructed as citizens may be a way of formulating new questions about Athens.
S. C. Humphreys
***
Sally C. Humphreys. The Strangeness of Gods. Historical Perspectives on the Interpretation of Athenian Religion. Oxford UP, 2004.
The posthumous honours granted to Lycurgus in 307/6, when the city was freed from Demetrios' rule, form a fitting end to this somewhat ambivalent career. His descendants were granted perpetual dining rights in the Prytaneion.
In the archaic period the grant of lifelong dining rights in the Prytaneion - mainly, probably, to victors in major events at the Panhellenic games - meant a permanent seat at the centre of power in the city. After the fall of the Peisistratid tyranny the honour was awarded - partly, perhaps, in sympathy with the growth of a more critical attitude towards the honours heaped on successful athletes, partly as a snub to the Alkmaionidai - to the senior representatives of the families of Harmodios and Aristogeiton, who had assassinated Peisistratos' son Hipparchos. The next Athenian to be awarded lifelong sitesis was Cleon, in the enthusiasm which followed his capture of the Spartan force on Sphacteria in 425. A similar grant was made to Iphicrates after the peace with Sparta in 371. In the period after Chaeronea, two divergent conceptions of the role of grants of perpetual sitesis seem to have coexisted in implicit contradiction. Grants to Demades in c. 335… and the comic poet Philippides of Kephale in 283/2 seem to extend to citizens who have played an important role as intermediaries between Athens and Macedonian rulers the honours which were being granted to non-Athenians for performing the same functions. Yet the posthumous hereditary honours granted to Lycurgus and (in 280/79) to Demosthenes indicate a different view: those who dine in the Prytaneion are seen as representing glorious moments in the city's past, players in a perpetual historical pageant. Less than twenty years after his death, Lycurgus had become a museum piece, a figure almost as remote as Harmodios and Aristogeiton - two other Athenian aristocrats whose lives ended in irony…
In 1985 I saw an analogy between Lycurgus and Margaret Thatcher in that both combined a patriotic and ostensibly democratic rhetoric with undemocratic practice (in the British case, dismantling the welfare state), and both seemed to be clinging in their patriotism to an outdated conception of their states as Great Powers… Demosthenes political speeches can be read in a Thucydidean light; he presents himself as having to argue a relatively unpopular political programme before voters who are either reluctant to support military action or still convinced that the major danger to Athens was Persia rather than Macedon. The hectoring tone, however, seems closer to that of Thucydides' Cleon than his Pericles; perhaps hearers did not find a significant difference between Demosthenes' harangues and the moralizing rhetoric of Lycurgus. Did Lycurgus indeed see himself as following in Demosthenes' footsteps?... Asking questions about what we want from our own politicians and how we would like to be constructed as citizens may be a way of formulating new questions about Athens.
S. C. Humphreys
***
Sally C. Humphreys. The Strangeness of Gods. Historical Perspectives on the Interpretation of Athenian Religion. Oxford UP, 2004.
Tuesday, January 29, 2008
Greeks and others
It hardly needs saying that the Greeks had earlier fitted Egyptian 'historical' events into their own chronological narrative scheme, which accomodated, for example, Solon's visits to Egypt, where he heard about Atlantis. But early in the Ptolemaic period an internal Egyptian chronological 'narrative' was constructed, was used by classical historians such as Diodorus, and is still used, as is too rarely explicitly stated, as the basis of the modern chronology of dynastic Egypt. This was created in the third century BC in the ambience of the Ptolemaic court by an Egyptian priest of Isis, Manetho of Sebennytos (in the Delta), writing in Greek, who alone 'represents a complete and systematic version of the Egyptian tradition' (G.P. Verbrugghe and J.M Wickersham, Berossos and Manetho. Michigan, 1996).
Egyptian history was thus recaptured or re-invented within a classicising historiographical framework possibly with the encouragement, if not instruction, of Ptolemy II Philadelphus, the monarch who founded that factory of classical scholarship, the Alexandrian Museum.
The history and culture of one civilization were described and explained in the language of another. It is hardly necessary to labour the striking parallels: the work of Berossus, the Letter of Aristeas, the Septuagint. Manetho, of course, uses earlier Egyptian source material but, as far as I am aware, none of this is self-reflexive or historiographically conscious; that is, it never asks itself whether what it is saying is correct or plausible. The key difference is that Manetho and his material become part of a historiographical tradition, in which he debates with and criticises Herodotus and is in turn criticized by Josephus.
Alan Bowman
***
Alan Bowman. Recolonising Egypt. In: T.P Wiseman ed. Classics in Progress. Essays on Ancient Greece and Rome. Oxford UP, 2002-2006.
Egyptian history was thus recaptured or re-invented within a classicising historiographical framework possibly with the encouragement, if not instruction, of Ptolemy II Philadelphus, the monarch who founded that factory of classical scholarship, the Alexandrian Museum.
The history and culture of one civilization were described and explained in the language of another. It is hardly necessary to labour the striking parallels: the work of Berossus, the Letter of Aristeas, the Septuagint. Manetho, of course, uses earlier Egyptian source material but, as far as I am aware, none of this is self-reflexive or historiographically conscious; that is, it never asks itself whether what it is saying is correct or plausible. The key difference is that Manetho and his material become part of a historiographical tradition, in which he debates with and criticises Herodotus and is in turn criticized by Josephus.
Alan Bowman
***
Alan Bowman. Recolonising Egypt. In: T.P Wiseman ed. Classics in Progress. Essays on Ancient Greece and Rome. Oxford UP, 2002-2006.
Greek society
One way of re-posing the question 'Was Greek civilisation based on slavery?' is to ask what Greek civilisation would have been like without it...
Looking forward, to the world of semi-realistic Utopia, no matter how hard they tried to view things otherwise, the Greeks could not quite envisage a slaveless future. The only alternative to slave labour that they could imagine was a world of automatic life, in which the necessities were constantly available without human labour, on tap as it were, and craft goods were produced or moved by automation (Arist. Politics, 1253b).
The inescapable inference is that the Greeks could conceive of no practical alternative for slavery. That is especially clear from the work of Aristotle… The proverb he quoted 'No leisure for slaves' (1334a) was at one level a statement of fact; more significantly, leisure (schole) was what distinguished the truly free man (eleutheros) and the truly 'liberal' lifestyle (eleutherios).
Moses Finley, as we have seen, did not give a direct, unequivocal answer to his own question ['Was Greek civilization based on slave labour?' (1959)]. The nearest he came to it, with consciously appropriate imagery, was this: 'If we could emancipate ourselves from the despotism of extraneous moral, intellectual and political pressures, we would conclude, without hesitation, that slavery was a basic element of Greek civilization.' If we could... Granted that we cannot, should we even try?
I would like to end by returning to my starting point, morality, and by quoting some wise words of Keith Bradley which I entirely endorse:
'The kinds of impact on slaves made by the traffic in human merchandise that I have posited are symptomatic of what in contemporary affairs we should now call violation of fundamental human rights. If the current sensitivity to that concept sharpens perception and understanding of the past, then that to my mind marks a true historical advance. It does not follow that what is admirable from the past is any the less admirable; it simply means, that the price of the admirable - an incalculable degree of human misery and suffering - is given its full historical due…'
To put the same point emblematically: 1959 was the year not only of Finley's epoch-making article but also of the death of Billie Holiday. Both, it seems to me, have a place within the study and understanding of ancient Greek slavery. They remind us, rather uncomfortably, just how deeply the whole western tradition of freedom is implicated, at its source and in the ever flowing current, with a history of unfreedom.
Paul Cartledge
***
Αndocides in 400 BC was defending himself against accusations of being involved in the mutilation [of the herms, 415 BC] and of thus having turned informer to save his own skin. He had opposed the mutilation, which took place while he was incapacitated by injury. Only one herm in the city escaped mutilation, that near his house, which the conspirators had expected him to mutilate. Apparently, on his return to Athens from exile in 403, he had instituted proceedings for impiety against someone for mutilating a herm belonging to his own family. This ploy to clear his own name disgusted his prosecutor in 400, who argued that it showed contempt for the gods. Andocides' own speech and that of the prosecution concur in their condemnation of the impious nature of the crime.
The profanation of the Eleusinian Mysteries came to light immediately before the Sicilian expedition set off. It was alleged that Alcibiades and others had celebrated the Mysteries in at least five private houses in the presence of non-initiates… The prosecution of 400 stressed that the rite was performed by the wrong person and that in imitation of the rites sacred things were revealed to the uninitiated (Lysias 6.51). This celebration was even more shocking than the mutilation of the herms and challenged one of Athens' central religious rites. So sensitive was the matter that the assembly in 415 to which news of the profanation was brought was cleared of non-initiated before matters could proceed and Andocides' jury in 400 again consisted only of Eleusinian initiates…
Those implicated in the scandal, including Andocides, were the subject of an awesome curse by male and female priests. Andocides himself was excluded by a special decree of 415 from the Athenian Agora and the sanctuaries. He thus wandered the Greek world for thirteen years until his return in 402. At his trial in 400 Andocides denied that he had acted impiously or had turned informer, especially not of his own father. He also argued that the exile decree of 415 was no longer valid because of subsequent constitutional changes. He stressed his performance of religious functions for the state since his return in 402 and argued that his safe passage over the seas in the years of exile demonstrated that the gods did not seek his death. Conversely, the prosecution argued for the continuing validity of the exile decree, expressed horror at the impious nature of his advising the counsel on religious matters and the possibility of his being appointed magistrate in charge of the Mysteries, and claimed that he had been preserved from the sea specifically to stand trial in Athens. But the central event which had brought about the trial was Andocides' alleged participation in the Mysteries while still debarred. The prosecution argued for the absolute necessity pf punishing impiety: the gods were capable of punishing impiety themselves, but the jury should here act as agents of the gods. Andocides evaded the issue of his alleged participation in the Mysteries, obfuscated the events of 415 and appealed successfully for leniency. But he entirely agreed with the prosecution that those actually guilty of impiety deserved death (I.30)
Simon Price
***
Paul Cartledge. Greek civilization and slavery. In: T.P Wiseman ed. Classics in Progress. Essays on Ancient Greece and Rome. Oxford UP, 2002-2006.
Simon Price. Religions of the Ancient Greeks. Cambridge UP, 1999-2005.
Looking forward, to the world of semi-realistic Utopia, no matter how hard they tried to view things otherwise, the Greeks could not quite envisage a slaveless future. The only alternative to slave labour that they could imagine was a world of automatic life, in which the necessities were constantly available without human labour, on tap as it were, and craft goods were produced or moved by automation (Arist. Politics, 1253b).
The inescapable inference is that the Greeks could conceive of no practical alternative for slavery. That is especially clear from the work of Aristotle… The proverb he quoted 'No leisure for slaves' (1334a) was at one level a statement of fact; more significantly, leisure (schole) was what distinguished the truly free man (eleutheros) and the truly 'liberal' lifestyle (eleutherios).
Moses Finley, as we have seen, did not give a direct, unequivocal answer to his own question ['Was Greek civilization based on slave labour?' (1959)]. The nearest he came to it, with consciously appropriate imagery, was this: 'If we could emancipate ourselves from the despotism of extraneous moral, intellectual and political pressures, we would conclude, without hesitation, that slavery was a basic element of Greek civilization.' If we could... Granted that we cannot, should we even try?
I would like to end by returning to my starting point, morality, and by quoting some wise words of Keith Bradley which I entirely endorse:
'The kinds of impact on slaves made by the traffic in human merchandise that I have posited are symptomatic of what in contemporary affairs we should now call violation of fundamental human rights. If the current sensitivity to that concept sharpens perception and understanding of the past, then that to my mind marks a true historical advance. It does not follow that what is admirable from the past is any the less admirable; it simply means, that the price of the admirable - an incalculable degree of human misery and suffering - is given its full historical due…'
To put the same point emblematically: 1959 was the year not only of Finley's epoch-making article but also of the death of Billie Holiday. Both, it seems to me, have a place within the study and understanding of ancient Greek slavery. They remind us, rather uncomfortably, just how deeply the whole western tradition of freedom is implicated, at its source and in the ever flowing current, with a history of unfreedom.
Paul Cartledge
***
Αndocides in 400 BC was defending himself against accusations of being involved in the mutilation [of the herms, 415 BC] and of thus having turned informer to save his own skin. He had opposed the mutilation, which took place while he was incapacitated by injury. Only one herm in the city escaped mutilation, that near his house, which the conspirators had expected him to mutilate. Apparently, on his return to Athens from exile in 403, he had instituted proceedings for impiety against someone for mutilating a herm belonging to his own family. This ploy to clear his own name disgusted his prosecutor in 400, who argued that it showed contempt for the gods. Andocides' own speech and that of the prosecution concur in their condemnation of the impious nature of the crime.
The profanation of the Eleusinian Mysteries came to light immediately before the Sicilian expedition set off. It was alleged that Alcibiades and others had celebrated the Mysteries in at least five private houses in the presence of non-initiates… The prosecution of 400 stressed that the rite was performed by the wrong person and that in imitation of the rites sacred things were revealed to the uninitiated (Lysias 6.51). This celebration was even more shocking than the mutilation of the herms and challenged one of Athens' central religious rites. So sensitive was the matter that the assembly in 415 to which news of the profanation was brought was cleared of non-initiated before matters could proceed and Andocides' jury in 400 again consisted only of Eleusinian initiates…
Those implicated in the scandal, including Andocides, were the subject of an awesome curse by male and female priests. Andocides himself was excluded by a special decree of 415 from the Athenian Agora and the sanctuaries. He thus wandered the Greek world for thirteen years until his return in 402. At his trial in 400 Andocides denied that he had acted impiously or had turned informer, especially not of his own father. He also argued that the exile decree of 415 was no longer valid because of subsequent constitutional changes. He stressed his performance of religious functions for the state since his return in 402 and argued that his safe passage over the seas in the years of exile demonstrated that the gods did not seek his death. Conversely, the prosecution argued for the continuing validity of the exile decree, expressed horror at the impious nature of his advising the counsel on religious matters and the possibility of his being appointed magistrate in charge of the Mysteries, and claimed that he had been preserved from the sea specifically to stand trial in Athens. But the central event which had brought about the trial was Andocides' alleged participation in the Mysteries while still debarred. The prosecution argued for the absolute necessity pf punishing impiety: the gods were capable of punishing impiety themselves, but the jury should here act as agents of the gods. Andocides evaded the issue of his alleged participation in the Mysteries, obfuscated the events of 415 and appealed successfully for leniency. But he entirely agreed with the prosecution that those actually guilty of impiety deserved death (I.30)
Simon Price
***
Paul Cartledge. Greek civilization and slavery. In: T.P Wiseman ed. Classics in Progress. Essays on Ancient Greece and Rome. Oxford UP, 2002-2006.
Simon Price. Religions of the Ancient Greeks. Cambridge UP, 1999-2005.
Aristotle
In the most general term, banausoi is the label for people who earn their living by plying a "craft" that involves the use of the hands. Banausos, however, is not merely a descriptive term, since it invariably marks a person as mercantile and servile. Thus Aristotle places the "banausic" arts in the category of "wealthgetting that involves exchange" and identifies them as a form of "labour for hire". In text from the classical period, the word banausia and its cognate is virtually monopolized by Xenophon, Plato and Aristotle; this language is never used in oratory or comedy (whose authors tend to reflect democratic sentiments).
First of all, aristocratic writers use the term to define a group of people as "by nature" inferior and unfit for participation in politics.
Nay, in ancient times, and among some nations the artisan class (banausoi) were slaves or foreigners, and therefore the majority of them are so now. The best form of state will not admit them to citizenship; but if they are admitted, then our definition of the virtue of a citizen will not apply to every citizen nor to every free man as such, but only to those who are freed from necessary services. The necessary people are either slaves who minister to the wants of individuals, or mechanics and laborers who are the servants of the community (Aristotle, Politics, III,5 - Jowett).
Xenophon too, claims that banausoi should not participate in politics, since they lack the leisure required for participating in civic affairs in a responsible and beneficial manner:
A good suggestion, Critobulus, for the base mechanic (banausic) arts, so called, have got a bad name; and what is more, are held in ill repute by civilised communities, and not unreasonably… Hand in hand with physical enervation follows enfeeblement of soul: while the demand which these base mechanic arts makes on the time of those employed in them leaves them no leisure to devote to the claims of friendship and the state. How can such folk be other than sorry friends and ill defenders of the fatherland? So much so that in some states, especially those reputed to be warlike, no citizen is allowed to exercise any mechanical craft at all (Oec. IV,2 - Dakyns).
Clearly then, banausia is a loaded and highly derogatory term. Note in particular Aristotle's claim that many banausoi were nouveaux riches, i.e. wealthy members of non-aristocratic class (Politics, III,5)… A passage in Nicomachean Ethics offers clear evidence of this point:
The man who goes to excess and is vulgar (banausos) exceeds, as has been said, by spending beyond what is right. For on small objects of expenditure he spends much and displays a tasteless showiness; e.g. he gives a club dinner on the scale of a wedding banquet, and when he provides the chorus for a comedy he brings them on to the stage in purple, as they do at Megara. And all such things he will do not for honour's sake but to show off his wealth, and because he thinks he is admired for these things, and where he ought to spend much he spends little and where little, much (NE IV,2 - Ross).
In this period, then, we find a rhetoric and ideology which set the "truly free" individual in opposition to men who were free in a merely legal and civic sense. The free or "liberal" man, in short, is leisured, educated, independent, and "truly" fit for rule, whereas the "banausic" or "illiberal" individual is slavish, servile, wage-earning, uneducated and unfit for rule…
I have discussed this ideological and political program because it provides the context for the fourth-century discussions of the "free" activity of theoria.
Andrea Nightingale
***
Different activities, different pleasures; which activities then? The activities of the good man... What is best in us is reason and the characteristic activity of reason is theoria, that speculative reasoning which deals with unchanging truths. Such speculation can be a continuous and pleasant - it is, Aristotle says brusquely, "the pleasantest" - form of activity. It is a self-sufficient occupation...
Thus, surprisingly, the end of human life is metaphysical contemplation of truth. External goods are necessary only to a limited extent, and the wealth required is only moderate. Thus the whole of human life reaches its highest point in the activity of a speculative philosopher with a reasonable income. The banality of the conclusion could not be more apparent. Why then it is reached? One clue is in Aristotle’s concept of self-sufficiency…
Aristotle’s audience, then, is explicitly a small leisured minority. We are no longer faced with a telos for human life as such, but with a telos for one kind of life which presupposes a certain kind of hierarchical social order and which presupposes also a view of the universe in which the realm of timeless truth is metaphysically superior to the human world of change and sense experience and ordinary rationality. All Aristotle’s conceptual brilliance in the course of the argument declines at the end to an apology for this extraordinarily parochial form of human existence...
In fact, Aristotle is much more of a quietist in relation to political activity. Provided only that there is a room for the contemplative elite, the Nicomachean Ethics does not provide for a condemnation or an endorsement of any social structure… In fact, by his own practice as the tutor of the young Alexander, and by his advocacy of the life of contemplation, Aristotle, as Kelsen pointed out, sided with the powers, which were about to destroy the polis as a political entity. For the exaltation of the contemplative life is an exaltation of it as a form of life for those men who have hitherto composed the political elite. It provides a rationale for their withdrawal to the status of citizen, “good citizens” in Aristotle’s sense, but not rulers… As Kelsen puts it, “the glorification of the contemplative life, which has renounced all activity and more especially all political activity, has at all times constituted a typical element of political morality set up by the ideologies of absolute monarchy. For the essential tendency of this form of state consists in excluding the subjects from all share in public affairs” (International Journal of Ethics, XLVIII, 1).
Alasdair MacIntyre
***
Andrea W. Nightingale. The rhetoric of philosophic "freedom". In: Spectacles of Truth in Classical Greek Philosophy. Cambridge UP, 2004-2006.
Alasdair MacIntyre. Aristotle's 'Ethics'; Postscript to Greek ethics. In: A Short History of Ethics. A history of moral philosophy from the Homeric Age to the twentieth century. Routledge 1967-2006.
First of all, aristocratic writers use the term to define a group of people as "by nature" inferior and unfit for participation in politics.
Nay, in ancient times, and among some nations the artisan class (banausoi) were slaves or foreigners, and therefore the majority of them are so now. The best form of state will not admit them to citizenship; but if they are admitted, then our definition of the virtue of a citizen will not apply to every citizen nor to every free man as such, but only to those who are freed from necessary services. The necessary people are either slaves who minister to the wants of individuals, or mechanics and laborers who are the servants of the community (Aristotle, Politics, III,5 - Jowett).
Xenophon too, claims that banausoi should not participate in politics, since they lack the leisure required for participating in civic affairs in a responsible and beneficial manner:
A good suggestion, Critobulus, for the base mechanic (banausic) arts, so called, have got a bad name; and what is more, are held in ill repute by civilised communities, and not unreasonably… Hand in hand with physical enervation follows enfeeblement of soul: while the demand which these base mechanic arts makes on the time of those employed in them leaves them no leisure to devote to the claims of friendship and the state. How can such folk be other than sorry friends and ill defenders of the fatherland? So much so that in some states, especially those reputed to be warlike, no citizen is allowed to exercise any mechanical craft at all (Oec. IV,2 - Dakyns).
Clearly then, banausia is a loaded and highly derogatory term. Note in particular Aristotle's claim that many banausoi were nouveaux riches, i.e. wealthy members of non-aristocratic class (Politics, III,5)… A passage in Nicomachean Ethics offers clear evidence of this point:
The man who goes to excess and is vulgar (banausos) exceeds, as has been said, by spending beyond what is right. For on small objects of expenditure he spends much and displays a tasteless showiness; e.g. he gives a club dinner on the scale of a wedding banquet, and when he provides the chorus for a comedy he brings them on to the stage in purple, as they do at Megara. And all such things he will do not for honour's sake but to show off his wealth, and because he thinks he is admired for these things, and where he ought to spend much he spends little and where little, much (NE IV,2 - Ross).
In this period, then, we find a rhetoric and ideology which set the "truly free" individual in opposition to men who were free in a merely legal and civic sense. The free or "liberal" man, in short, is leisured, educated, independent, and "truly" fit for rule, whereas the "banausic" or "illiberal" individual is slavish, servile, wage-earning, uneducated and unfit for rule…
I have discussed this ideological and political program because it provides the context for the fourth-century discussions of the "free" activity of theoria.
Andrea Nightingale
***
Different activities, different pleasures; which activities then? The activities of the good man... What is best in us is reason and the characteristic activity of reason is theoria, that speculative reasoning which deals with unchanging truths. Such speculation can be a continuous and pleasant - it is, Aristotle says brusquely, "the pleasantest" - form of activity. It is a self-sufficient occupation...
Thus, surprisingly, the end of human life is metaphysical contemplation of truth. External goods are necessary only to a limited extent, and the wealth required is only moderate. Thus the whole of human life reaches its highest point in the activity of a speculative philosopher with a reasonable income. The banality of the conclusion could not be more apparent. Why then it is reached? One clue is in Aristotle’s concept of self-sufficiency…
Aristotle’s audience, then, is explicitly a small leisured minority. We are no longer faced with a telos for human life as such, but with a telos for one kind of life which presupposes a certain kind of hierarchical social order and which presupposes also a view of the universe in which the realm of timeless truth is metaphysically superior to the human world of change and sense experience and ordinary rationality. All Aristotle’s conceptual brilliance in the course of the argument declines at the end to an apology for this extraordinarily parochial form of human existence...
In fact, Aristotle is much more of a quietist in relation to political activity. Provided only that there is a room for the contemplative elite, the Nicomachean Ethics does not provide for a condemnation or an endorsement of any social structure… In fact, by his own practice as the tutor of the young Alexander, and by his advocacy of the life of contemplation, Aristotle, as Kelsen pointed out, sided with the powers, which were about to destroy the polis as a political entity. For the exaltation of the contemplative life is an exaltation of it as a form of life for those men who have hitherto composed the political elite. It provides a rationale for their withdrawal to the status of citizen, “good citizens” in Aristotle’s sense, but not rulers… As Kelsen puts it, “the glorification of the contemplative life, which has renounced all activity and more especially all political activity, has at all times constituted a typical element of political morality set up by the ideologies of absolute monarchy. For the essential tendency of this form of state consists in excluding the subjects from all share in public affairs” (International Journal of Ethics, XLVIII, 1).
Alasdair MacIntyre
***
Andrea W. Nightingale. The rhetoric of philosophic "freedom". In: Spectacles of Truth in Classical Greek Philosophy. Cambridge UP, 2004-2006.
Alasdair MacIntyre. Aristotle's 'Ethics'; Postscript to Greek ethics. In: A Short History of Ethics. A history of moral philosophy from the Homeric Age to the twentieth century. Routledge 1967-2006.
Elegiac, iambic and melic poetry
Only of hexameter poetry have we examples earlier than 700 BC. But many genres first known to us from the seventh century were certainly thriving long before – that century gives us our first elegiac, iambic, and melic poetry because by then writing was spreading so that the works of celebrated poets could be recorded as those of their predecessors could not. Of our genres only elegiac significantly exploited those formulaic phrases which both aided the composition and recitation of epic and contributed to its oral preservation. Furthermore much of our poetry was composed with particular audiences and occasions in view, so that incentives to preserve it orally were fewer.
Also different from epic is the prominence given to the personality of the poet or singer. The first person becomes the focus of attention and ‘I’ (occasionally ‘we’) tell of ‘my’ loves, grieves, hates, and adventures. This has sometimes misled scholars into seeing the seventh century as an efflorescence of individualism. Not only, however, did such poetry exist earlier, but the ‘I’ of a poem cannot unquestioningly be referred to the person of the singer or poet. As traditional folk-songs and modern popular songs show, ‘I’ songs can be sung with feeling by many other than their composers. Rarely do we take such statements as autobiographical; sometimes indeed no composer is known. Hence we should hesitate to use fragments of such poets as Archilochus to ascribe strident self-assertion or to reconstruct biography.
Three more preliminaries. First, although what survives is ascribed to a few dozen figures, the genres exemplified, and many conventional themes and approaches, will have been attempted by hundreds over the Greek world. Most of our poetry was not, like epic, the virtuosos’s preserve, but was designed for occasions were amateurs contributed. This is clearest in the tradition about after-dinner singing at Athens: a myrtle branch circulated, and with it the obligation to sing…
Second, relative importance of text and accompaniment. Melic and elegiac poetry was sung, usually accompanied respectively on the lyre and the aulos (an oboe-like wind instrument). For no song can we reconstruct the vocal or instrumental line, and indeed we have only a rudimentary understanding of what it might have been like. In many songs music may have contributed more to initial impact than text, in many more it was an integral part of the effect. Doubtless the texts selected for copying and transmission were those whose words were of greater moment than music: but never forget that, even reading these poems aloud, we gain access only to part of their intended effect, and before impugning deficiency of thought or skill, ponder whether modern song-writers would gladly be judged on ‘lyrics’ alone.
Third, the work of almost all these poets has survived only in shattered fragments, preserved by later quotation or on papyri recovered from Graeco-Roman Egypt. We have a few dozen elegiac poems arguably complete, but of melic poets other than Pindar and Bacchylides only half a dozen complete songs remain.
Ewen Bowie
Ewen Bowie. Lyric and Elegiac Poetry. In: J. Boardman, J. Griffin, O. Murray ed. The Oxford History of Greece and the Hellenistic World. Oxford UP, 1986-1991
Also different from epic is the prominence given to the personality of the poet or singer. The first person becomes the focus of attention and ‘I’ (occasionally ‘we’) tell of ‘my’ loves, grieves, hates, and adventures. This has sometimes misled scholars into seeing the seventh century as an efflorescence of individualism. Not only, however, did such poetry exist earlier, but the ‘I’ of a poem cannot unquestioningly be referred to the person of the singer or poet. As traditional folk-songs and modern popular songs show, ‘I’ songs can be sung with feeling by many other than their composers. Rarely do we take such statements as autobiographical; sometimes indeed no composer is known. Hence we should hesitate to use fragments of such poets as Archilochus to ascribe strident self-assertion or to reconstruct biography.
Three more preliminaries. First, although what survives is ascribed to a few dozen figures, the genres exemplified, and many conventional themes and approaches, will have been attempted by hundreds over the Greek world. Most of our poetry was not, like epic, the virtuosos’s preserve, but was designed for occasions were amateurs contributed. This is clearest in the tradition about after-dinner singing at Athens: a myrtle branch circulated, and with it the obligation to sing…
Second, relative importance of text and accompaniment. Melic and elegiac poetry was sung, usually accompanied respectively on the lyre and the aulos (an oboe-like wind instrument). For no song can we reconstruct the vocal or instrumental line, and indeed we have only a rudimentary understanding of what it might have been like. In many songs music may have contributed more to initial impact than text, in many more it was an integral part of the effect. Doubtless the texts selected for copying and transmission were those whose words were of greater moment than music: but never forget that, even reading these poems aloud, we gain access only to part of their intended effect, and before impugning deficiency of thought or skill, ponder whether modern song-writers would gladly be judged on ‘lyrics’ alone.
Third, the work of almost all these poets has survived only in shattered fragments, preserved by later quotation or on papyri recovered from Graeco-Roman Egypt. We have a few dozen elegiac poems arguably complete, but of melic poets other than Pindar and Bacchylides only half a dozen complete songs remain.
Ewen Bowie
Ewen Bowie. Lyric and Elegiac Poetry. In: J. Boardman, J. Griffin, O. Murray ed. The Oxford History of Greece and the Hellenistic World. Oxford UP, 1986-1991
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)