Orithya or Boreas?

(As taken from Edith Hamilton's "The Way of The Greeks")

Socrates and Phaedrus are taking a summer stroll....

"Is not the road to Athens made for conversation?" 

The younger man asks if they are not near the place where Boreas is said to have carried off Orithya.

"The little stream is delightfully clear and bright.  I can fancy there might be maidens playing near.  Tell, me, Socrates, do you believe the tale?"

"The wise are doubtful," Socrates answers, "and I should not be singular if, like them, I too, doubted.  I might have a rational explanation that Orithya was playing when a northerly gust carried her over the rocks, and therefore she was said to have been carried off by Boreas.  Now I quite acknowledge that these allegorical explanations are very nice, but he is not to be envied who has to make them up; much labor and ingenuity will be required of him; he will have to go on and rehabilitate Hippo-centaurs and chimeras dire.  Gorgons and winged steeds flow in apace, and numberless inconceivable and portentous natures.  And if he would fain reduce them to rules of probability it will take up a great deal of time.  Now I have no leisure for such inquiries; shall I tell you why?  I must first know myself as the Delphic inscription says; to be curious about things not my concern while I am still in ignorance of my own self would be absurd.  And therefore I bid farewell to all that sort of thing.  I want to know about myself; am I a monster more complicated and swollen with passion than the serpent Typho, or a creature of a gentler and simpler sort, to whom Nature has given a lowlier and diviner destiny?"

- Ms. Hamilton's translation is from Plato's "Phaedrus"

Seven Sages

According to Wikipedia...

The Seven Sages (of Greece) or Seven Wise Men (Greek: οἱ ἑπτά σοφοί, hoi hepta sophoi; c. 620 BC–550 BC) was the title given by ancient Greektradition to seven early 6th century B.C. philosophers, statesmen and law-givers who were renowned in the following centuries for their wisdom.

Wikipedia goes on to say that some people say that they didn't exist, most people say that they weren't wise at all, they were just politicians, and everyone agrees that the quotes attributed to them were not actually their own.  But I say that the quotes are wise nonetheless, and, if it's about Ancient Greece, I want to know about it, seemingly irrelevant or not.  So here it goes.

The Seven Sages of Ancient Greece are (drum roll):

Solon of Athens - "Nothing in excess."

Thales of Miletus - "To bring surety brings ruin."

Chilon of Sparta - "Know thyself."

Bias of Priene - "Too many workers spoil the work."

Cleobulus of Lindos - "Moderation is impeccable."

Pittacus of Mitylene - "Know thine opportunity."

Periander of Corinth - "Forethought in all things."  

Michael Lahanas has an excellent site profiling them all.

Part One - East vs West - Spirituality

Wisdom comes by disillusionment.
- George Santayana

My next discourse was going to use as a jumping off point quotes from Edith Hamilton's ideas about the differences between Eastern and Western ideas about art and spirituality. The time frame to which Ms. Hamilton is speaking throughout "The Greek Way" is primarily the Classical Age, and specifically, in this chapter, 480 BC, The Battle of Thermopylae.  Therefore, by "Eastern" she means "Persian" - but she generalizes it to include all of the Middle East and Asia.  Likewise, "Western" starts out as meaning "Greek", but as a term grows to encompasses all of Western European and America.

So, I start thinking about all this, and it's all soon turns into a mess. Why? Because I'm not just thinking about what I'm thinking about, I'm also thinking about the context in which I'm thinking about what I'm thinking about. Let me make it more plain: this is personal. I am a white, middle-class, Christian, American woman living in the 21rst century. That's the context in which I'm learning all of this. And it's that context, I have found, that can be a stumbling block when I'm studying the history of other cultures, and especially ancient ones. I have to be aware of that context whenever I start nodding in agreement when people are passing broad sweeping judgements on the people of the past. I have to be aware of that context when people are passing broad sweeping judgements on modern people in foreign lands. Why am I nodding in agreement? Am I nodding in agreement because what they're saying is true, or am I nodding in agreement because what they're saying strokes my ego, "proves" to me that my way of being is far superior to theirs?

So then, thinking about THAT, I have to re-evaluate my initial reaction to my beloved Ms. Hamilton's musings on "The Way of the East and The West in Art". Since most art is religious art, "art" in this context became synonymous with "spirituality".  She talks about how the rejection of spiritualism in favor of realism shows itself in the art of the Western world.    Conversely, the favoring of the spiritual realm over harsh reality is displayed in the art of the Eastern world.  The art produced in the West reflected its love of order and realism (relative realism anyway) whereas the art of the East reflected fear, chaos, and dark imaginings. That, in turn, leads her to this comparison:

Abide by the facts, is the dictum of the mind; a sense for fact is its salient characteristic.... In proportion as the spirit predominates, this sense disappears. So in the Middle Ages, when the West was turning more and more to the way of the spirit, the foremost intellects could employ their great powers in questioning how many angels could stand on a needle's point, and the like. Carry this attitude toward the world of fact a few steps farther and the result is the Buddhist devotee swaying before the altar and repeating 'Amida' a thousand, thousand times until he loses all consciousness of the altar, 'Amida', and himself as well. The activity of the mind has been lulled to rest and the spirit, absorbed, is seeking the truth within itself.

I liked this passage because, at the time, I was disillusioned with religion, both with Christianity and Buddhism, which I had been investigating wholeheartedly. What seemed to be working for everyone else in the way of spiritual enlightenment was not working for me. So this passage soothed the ego.  Hamilton went on to compare two sources. First the East:

"Let a man," say the Upanishads, the great Brahman document, "meditate on the syllable Om. This is the imperishable syllable and he who knowing this, loudly repeats that syllable, enters into it and becomes immortal."

Then the West:

"God offers to everyone," says Emerson, "his choice between truth and repose. Take which you please - you can never have both."

Ah-ha! I thought. There you have it. All this spiritual nonsense it's all an enemy of the Truth! What's more, in an ironic twist, it's an enemy of God! That's why I'm not getting it. I knew it!

Hamilton goes on:

The practical divergence is of course immediately apparent in the intellectual realm. Those whose aim is to be completely independent of 'this muddy vesture of decay' do not become scientists or archaeologists or anything that has to do with actualities past or present. In art the result, though less immediately apparent, is no less decisive. In proportion as the spirit predominates, the real shapes and looks of things become unimportant and when the spirit is supreme, they are of no importance at all.
- pg. 40-41

Now, she was really getting to me. I'd just broken up with spirituality; I was on the rebound with reason. But now that I've sobered up - and gotten back together with Christianity - I have to question whether or not Ms. Hamilton's I actually buy Ms. Hamilton's argument, or was I just being a sucker? And there's where I struggle. Reading this chapter last year, I felt elated. Reading it this year, it sounds both narrow-minded and absurd (Now, anyone who has read Hamilton's works will know that she is not narrow-minded. That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that I question - not outright disagree, but question - this one part.) Was Hamilton saying that the East was and is the enemy of the Truth, or was she just saying that spiritualism is the enemy of Truth? Because, while she started out contrasting the art of Ancient Persia with Ancient Greece, she wound up contrasting the quest for spiritual Truth (knowledge gained from divine revelation or personal insight) with the quest for rational Truth (knowledge gleaned from reason and experience). Her language is harsh, and I would go so far as to characterize her opinion of spiritualism as intrinsically evil. It's should be obvious which of the two paths this journal intends to explore. But do I think the other path is invalid? Just because it's not my cup of tea, do I think that it's evil? No.

   

   Secondly, I find it confounding that she would lump Persian spirituality in with what is obviously Buddhism, a religion originating in the Indian subcontinent.  I find it particularly confounding because the source she is drawing most of her information from - Herodotus' "Histories" - presents clear evidence that the Persians are practicing an early form of Zoroastrianism, which, to even a part-time religious scholar like myself, doesn't bear any resemblance to Buddhism.  "The Greek Way" was originally written in 1930.  Was Ms. Hamilton just ignorant about this?  I find that hard to accept, but maybe I want her to be as informed as 21rst century technology would have allowed her to be.  But, if she was ignorant of the religious practices of the Persians - and, granted, even with the insights from Herodotus, we don't truly know what their spiritual life was like - why didn't she just lump them together with the other pagan religions as they are described in The Bible?  This would seem to me a common, albeit inaccurate, thing to have done at the time.   The alternative is that it was a conscious choice.  But why?  I wish that I knew.  

To be continued.... 

Ethics

God offers to everyone his choice between truth and repose. Take which you please - you can never have both.
- Ralph Waldo Emerson

I haven't often considered some of the deeper questions of philosophy. The branches of metaphysics and epistemology are new ways of thinking to me and very exciting, although I think that I may not have enough patience to investigate them thoroughly. The questions of "Where does knowledge come from? Where do we come from? What is the nature of reality?" have rarely crossed my mind. They seem to me to be impractical. Indeed, if anything, I question the point of ever posing those questions because I do not believe that we can ever know the answers. By the very act of asking, "What is knowledge? How is it best acquired - through the senses or by reasoning?" aren't we answering ourselves? Isn't that a question of reason? And shouldn't we be engaged in a deeper investigation of the knowledge that we already do have to see if it leads us someplace else? Isn't that what we do, what history is all about? I don't know. Greater minds have gone before me; who am I to question the conclusions they drew? But maybe a new generation comes up with its own answers to everything. And, even if fresh eyes don't come up with new answers after all, maybe they can learn to better defend the answers already given, especially where the existence of Truth (with a capital "T") is disputed.
I believe strongly in the existence of the ultimate Truth. Of course, the great Socrates was wise enough to not give a definition to Truth because he knew that the height and breadth of it could never fully be grasped. Indeed, perhaps there's a fear that, defining it, is kind of like defining God; we run the risk of limiting our imaginations as to what it is. Nevertheless, I am not as wise as Socrates. So, for the purposes of this journal, I will at least give a broad definition of that which I'm looking for. Truth (capital T) is, in my opinion, the union of the fundamental, all-inclusive explanations as to the nature of life, living, and living things.
This, I think, is where there's a crossover between the branches of philosophy - metaphysics and epistemology - over to ethics, the only branch that really holds my interest. Because, if we're going to talk about "What is ethical behavior?" then don't we have to acknowledge that there is a Truth, a fundamental acknowledgement that X kind of behavior is always harmful and Y kind of behavior is always helpful, or, if not behavior, at least motives? And then we have to acknowledge the Truth in every human heart, right? What I really want to know is, "How should I live? What should I do?" Ethics interests me the most because, first of all, I believe that, at the end of my life, I will have to answer to God as to how I spent my time. But, second of all, even if today I suddenly lost all my faith in a Higher Power or an afterlife, the question of "What is right living?" would still be important because I believe that ethical behavior brings quality and satisfaction to my life as well as making life easier on those around me, thus strengthening our bond as a community, and this has its own intrinsic rewards regardless if there's a bigger one after death. I want to reach the end of my life in satisfaction that I used everything that I was given, and I'd given everything I had. Is that possible? Can we ever be satisfied with our own efforts? That leads me in a circle. The Biblical argument for a Savior is that we need someone to atone for the shortcoming that are the very nature of humanity thus reconciling us with the Perfection that is God. It all tangles my head into knots. I feel that I have been given every advantage that someone can be given and many wonderful opportunities besides. I have not always been thankful for these advantages, and I have not always made use of the opportunities. I can - and, by all means, should - strive towards excellence even if I can't fully achieve it. But I think maybe what's more fundamental to ethics than the goal of excellence is the role of gratitude. I will never be the "best" at anything, I will always fall short in the way of behavior or words, but out of gratitude for the gifts given me, I can take advantage of the opportunities that I have left for service, the gifts for giving. Investigating the questions that the branch of Ethics poses is the only way to know how to do this fully, correctly, and purposefully.

The First Indispensible Steps

In nearly every field of thought, they (the Greeks) took the first indispensible steps. The statement means more than is apparent on the surface.
- Edith Hamilton, "The Greek Way"

It was amazing to me to read about everything that the Greeks discovered, so many things that I thought were only known to modern man, were discovered previously by them, and then forgotten! Ignored! We saw a light and then were plunged back into darkness. Such a tragedy.

Here is another passage that blew my mind. I was talking about this one for days after I read it...


In the world of antiquity, those who practiced the healing art were magicians, priests versed in special magical rites... The Greeks called their healers physicians, which means those versed in the ways of nature. Her in brief is an exemplification of the whole trend of the Greek mind, its swing from antiquity and toward modernity. To be versed in the ways of nature means that a man has observed outside facts and reasoned about them. He has used his powers not to escape from the world but to think himself more deeply into it. To the Greeks, the outside world was real and something more, it was interesting. They looked at it attentively and their minds worked upon what they saw. This is essentially the scientific method. The Greeks were the first scientists and all science goes back to them.
In nearly every field of thought "they took the first indispensible steps". The statement means more than is apparent on the surface. The reason that antiquity did not give birth to science was not only because fact tended to grow more and more unreal and unimportant. There was an even more cognent cause; the ancient world was a place of fear. Magical forces ruled it and magic is absolutely terrifying because it is absolutely incalculable. The minds of those who might have been scientists had been held fast-bound in the prison of that terror. Nothing of all the Greeks did is more astonishing than their daring to look it in the face and use their minds about it. They dared nothing less than to throw the light of reason upon dreadful powers taken completely on trust everywhere else, and by the exercise of the intelligence to banish them. Galileo, the humanists of the Renaissance, are glorified for the courage in venturing beyond the limits set by a power that could damn their souls eternally, and in demanding to know for themselves what the universe was like. No doubt it was high courage, great and admirable, but it was altogether beneath that shown by the Greeks. The humanists ventured upon the fearful ocean of free thought under guidance. The Greeks had preceded them there. They chanced that great adventure all alone.
- pg. 32

Even now, I live in that fear. I was raised to avoid the world. The world was a bad and evil place. I am disobeying God by having any interest in it. It makes no sense to a secular mind, anyone raised outside of a hyper religious family. But there are a lot less secular minds out there than the internet would have you believe. There's a lot more of us than of them. So much tragedy has happened to my family, to many families, and they've used rosaries and scapulars and prayers and songs and fasting and many other things to feel like they have some control over it all, or they would say that they've given God some control over it all, that they've persuaded him towards mercy. Isn't God, by His very nature, merciful? But what of all the problems my family faces? And what happens to me when I should face tragedy? Sure, my life is good now, they'd say, but what happens when all that goes away? And it's not an "if" with them, it's a "when". Surely then, all this foolish talk about science and logic and a denial of magical or supernatural forces that control everything and everyone, surely that will all shrivel up and die, won't it? And then you'll be ashamed of this blog, ashamed that you wasted your time on the Greeks, ashamed that you were stupid enough to put your hope in the faith that there's a reason and order in God's plan instead of just realizing that we will always be in the dark, we'll always be Job. It's best to tremble in shadows, to gain all one's pleasure from spiritual ecstasy instead of wallowing in the filth of a dying world.

My parents, my mother in particular, things have happened to them that are beyond understanding. Of course, they would feel the way that they do. But it's no way to live. Edith
Hamilton called the superstitious mind "the way of the East" and the rational mind "the way of the West". She would say that they are at war in my soul. I think they are at war in many people's souls. I have to believe in a God who loves us, who wants the best for us, but the body rebels, wars happen, people are unkind, jobs are lost. God takes our lemons and makes lemonade, but it's not magic, and it cannot be controlled by magical means. It's not magic, it's mercy. Isn't it said to be better to light one candle and SEE the truth than to sit and cower in the darkness. But maybe the truth is ugly. Maybe it is best to just turn out the lights....

My History With History

For thousands of years, humans were oppressed - as some of us still are - by the notion that the universe is a marionette whose strings were pulled by a god or gods, unseen or inscrutable. Then, 2,500 years ago, there was a glorious awakening in Ionia; on Samos and the other nearby Greek colonies that grew up among the the islands and inlets of he Aegean Sea. Suddenly, there were human beings who believed that everything was made of atoms; that human beings and other animals had sprung from similar forms; that diseases were not caused by demons or the gods; that the Earth was only a planet going around the Sun, and that the stars were very far away. This revolution made Cosmos out of Chaos.
- Carl Sagan, "Cosmos"

So, long ago, on a hot summer day not unlike today, I would sometimes be lucky enough to be taken to a nice cool library. My parents are Christian fundamentalists. My Mom is Roman Catholic, and my Dad is right-wing fundamentalist Protestant. For me to take out a book on Greek mythology would be a sin. The Greeks, in their opinion (and not entirely without basis), were all homosexual pagans. Worse than that, their pagan religion was adopted by the Romans. The Romans then went on to persecute the Christians viciously for not worshipping in the Roman way. Therefore, to perpetuate the memory of that pagan religion by the reading of its myths was, as they said, to vicariously support the Romans and murder the early Christians and even Christ himself all over again. So, if I went to the library with my mother, I had to sneak off to read the myths. Or, if my Aunt Julie took me, I had to leave the checked out book on mythology at my Grandmother's house. It was just as well. I was both fascinated and appalled by Greek mythology. For one thing, women are treated very shabbily in most Greek myths. And the ones who are not - the goddesses, like all the immortals - are all coniving, manipulative, fickle, and brutally unfair. None of it had any ring of truth at all to me. My parents did love movies, and we saw "Clash of the Titans" which only furthered my confusion. Human sacrifice anyone? The final blow to my budding interest in the Greeks was given by my know-it-all friends, all of whom were nerdy boys. I was a fat, nerdy girl. I figured out pretty quickly that the boys who got beat up all the time were a lot nicer to me than the pretty girls and their bewildering interest in Barbie dolls. But, as I said before, my friends were know-it-alls, and so if I said, "Did Aphrodite and Venus ever get into a fight since they had the same powers?" They would've said, "Duh! Everyone knows Aphrodite and Venus are the same goddess!" Or if I called Zeus "the father of the gods" they would've schooled me that Kronos was in fact the father of the gods, and how could I be so stupid? So, I then surmised that Greek mythology was a "boy" thing that I'd never understand much like video games or the myriad of seemingly insignificant characters in Star Wars.

I fared little better in college. All the know-it-all friends grew up to be argumentative young men, two even went on to become actual philosophers themselves. Ugh, philosophy. Argument for the sake of argument has the distinction to me of being both tedious and stressful. And simple things, innocent comments, they took pleasure in flipping so as to make themselves always the intellectual alpha dog. I teased my boyfriend (now husband) about his "yeah buts". Always with the "yeah buts" over any opinion. Even if he agreed with your opinion, he had to play devil's advocate with the "yeah buts". Now, I have a three year old with a serious case of the yeah buts. Of course, what did I have to say at this time that was of any interest? Not much. They had to make it fun for themselves somehow. I was so depressed and so confused. I changed my major something like six or eight times, I lost track. One of the courses of study I pursued - and probably should've stayed with if my boyfriend-now-husband hadn't offered such a convincing argument on "why history is completely stupid and only stupid people are interested in history" - was art history. There were two art history professors in my little college. I pissed off one completely through a series of personal disasters in which he openly took sides. The other was a great lady professor, very passionate, especially about overlooked women artists, which was illuminating and inspiring. But she wasn't exactly a fan of the Classical Studies. She had an even more sour opinion of the ancient Greek than my parents, I think. The Greeks were women haters, she said. They hated women and thought that sex with women was an odious task, done only out of the necessity of producing young boys bred for the sole purposes of child rape. The Romans that followed were a little better, but they were gluttons and drunkards and they all got what they deserved in the end when the barbarians invaded, didn't they, ha, ha?!

So, what? Were the Greeks all these things, really? Were they just all these things? Were they all these things and more? Or were they something completely different from what I'd been told? In 2003, I was a receptionist working in a medical marketing office office populated entirely by highly-Botoxed Southern Baptist women. I was bored with women's magazines. I was bored with the snarky, one-upsmanship of the the internet. I was tired of having my poor Catholic soul prayed for during the day and listening to endless fire-and-brimstone-your-best-isn't-good-enough phonecalls from my mother at night. I craved an intellectual makeover. I craved an intelligent conversation. I craved reason and order. I love my faith, but why did spirituality have to seem so far removed from those things?I turned again to the library. But why did I pick up a book of Plato and another by Marcus Aurelius? Rebellion? Was it just that Plato was synomynous with logic by general opinion? Had I read somewhere that Marcus Aurelius's "Meditations" was a work of Stoicism, and that Jesus himself could have been considered a Stoic (ironically considering Marcus Aurelius' persecution of the early Church)? I don't know. I remember only that my interest was perked. In "Symposium", I found the Socratic method to be a much more gentle and gentlemanly manner of debate when coming from its source than the bitter diatribes I was used to hearing from my school friends. Nevertheless, I have to admit that even the best of arguments didn't hold my attention, and that book remained unfinished. "Meditations", on the other hand, was right up my alley. I don't remember which version I read, but the one I had was annotated, which only added to my enjoyment of it, if you could call it enjoyment. It's not the happiest piece of literature, but at least I had finally read something different. There was a recognition of truth there by my spirit, a little bit of the same feeling that I had felt as a child upon reading Proverbs or The Gospel of John.

But, as I said, it was not the happiest tome one could read, especially as I did it over an otherwise romantic weekend with my husband (who now thinks it's absolutely fabulous that I'm interested in history even if he isn't). I was struck at that time with the baby fever, but it wasn't until 2005 that the longed-for baby actually materialized. Baby's are a lot of work. Young babies make you tired, and tired makes you stupid. Last summer, 2007, I dropped the finally two year old off at Mother's Day Out for a few hours. I was feeling very empty, drained, depressed. I'd sucked the teat of the library dry, so I went to the bookstore looking for comfort. Barnes and Nobles. Clearance section. What made me pick up a book of Greek quotations? That I have no idea. Angelic intervention? A little bird told me? I really have no answers. But, just by flipping randomly through "The Wisdom of the Ancient Greeks" by Steven Stavropoulo, I thought I heard the strum of a million harps. There was such a chorus of truth in my heart that I was wide-eyed with amazement. I became like a starving person who had stumbled upon a banquet. A week later, I had purchased "The Greek Way" by Edith Hamilton, and a coffee-table on Greek art and history. Summer 2007, I read "The Iliad", and a lot of other things. I don't know if words can express how much I love Edith Hamilton. She has bridged the gap for me between modern Christianity and the ancients. A good many of the next few posts will be shameless homages to her wisdom and insight. But here ends my account of how I came to be interested in Classical Studies. Edith Hamilton. She's where I'm at right now, interspersed, of course, with readings from the actual readings that she quotes. Her enthusiasm is contagious. The ancient Greeks and Roman thinkers have as much to say to us about ourselves today as they did to the people of their generation. And that is what this blog is all about.

Quotes

When a man craves to acquire wealth ignobly, or feels no qualms in so acquiring it, he does not then by his gifts pay honor to his soul - far from it, forsooth!

- Plato, "Laws"

Why, what esle can I, a lame old man, do but sing hymns to God?  If, indeed, I were a nightingale, I should be singing as a nightingale; if a swan, as a swan.  But as it is, I am a rational being, therefore, I must be singing hymns of praise to God.

- Epictetus, "Discourses" 

(This is my favorite of the quotes I've listed so far)

Beng mortal, never pray for an untroubled life.  Rather, ask the gods to give you an enduring heart.

- Menander, fragment

(My mother had a poster on the wall of her office when I was a child.  It was the ocean crashing against some rocks, and it said, "Do not pray for an easy life.  Pray to be a strong person.")

Practice is everything.

- Periander, as quoted by Diogenes Laertius in "Lives and Opinions of Eminent Philosophers"

It will not always be summer; build barns.

-Hesiod, "Works and Days"

Eureka!

-Plutarch

The primary classes of men are these:  the philosopher or lover of wisdom, the lover of victory, and the lover of gain.

-Plato, "The Republic"

Of what use is a philosopher who doesn't hurt anybody's feelings?  

-Diogenes of Sinope, fragment

The people always have some champion whom they set over them and nurse into greatness...  This and no other is the root from which a tyrant springs; when he first appears as he is a protector.

- Socrates, as quoted in Plato's "The Republic"

Ancient Television

Not too much on television in the summertime.  

Last night, on the SciFi show "Scariest Places on Earth", they explored the curse of the Roman gladiators in the coliseum.  The Roman gladiator part was actually a small part of it.  I recorded it so luckily I can fast forward through the irrelevant parts.  It's one of those shows where they take an infrared camera and follow people around in the dark as they pretend to be scared.

Tonight, at 10 PM on TCM, they're showing "Down to Earth" staring Rita Hayworth as Terpsichore, one of the nine muses.  She comes down to Earth to star in a Broadway production.  Yeah.

On Tuesday, the 22nd, the History Channel is reconstructing the seige of Troy on Ancient Discoveries at 9 PM.  I think I saw it last year, but I'm going to watch it again.  Ancient Discoveries is also exploring the underwater ruins of the ancient Roman navy.  I watched that last year too, but it wasn't nearly as interesting as it sounded.  See, the ships in the Roman navy were made of wood, and when wood is submerged in water for a long time....  Anyway.

That's all my Tivo could find.  I'll try again in August.

Quotes

It's only the women of ripe age who understand the art of love.

- Aristophanes, "The Ecclesiazusae"

Beware that you do not lose the substance by grasping at the shadow.

- Aesop, "Fables"

Sickness is a hindrance to the body, but not to your ability to choose, unless that is your choice.  Lameness is a hindrance to the leg, but not to your ability to choose.  Say this to yourself with regard to everything that happens, then you will see such obstacles as hindrances to something else, but not to yourself.

- Epictetus, "Enchiridion"

But what says Zeus?  "Epictetus, had it been possible I should have made both this paltry body and this small estate of thine free and unhampered.  But as it is - let it not escape thee - this body is not thine own, but only clay cunningly compounded.

- Epictetus, "Discourses"

Peace with justice and honor is the fairest and most profitable of possesions, but with disgrace and cowardice it is the most infamous and harmful of all.

- Polybius, "Histories"

There are some who praise a man free from disease; to me no man who is poor seems free from disease but to be constantly sick.

- Sophocles, fragment

Why Classical Studies?

What, then, is the true nature of God?  Flesh?  Far from it!  Land?  Far from it!  Fame?  Far from it!  It is intelligence, knowledge, right reason.

- Epictetus, "Discourses" as taken from "The Wisdom of the Ancient Greeks" by Steven Stavropoulos

Classical studies speaks to me in a language that my soul can understand.  Of the poets and philosophers who acknowledge the existence of a soul, there seems to be a running belief that the soul is not just some lump of white light that resides in your heart, but is something that grows and acts and is acted upon.  Menanader, Epictetus, Sophocles, Plato - they speak of spiritual matters logically, believing that spirituality can and should be understood through the application of logic and reason.  More recently, P.J. O'Rourke said that many of the misunderstandings about the nature of life that young people have could be eliminated by a classical education ("Age and Guile Beat Youth, Innocence, and a Bad Haircut", pg. 201).  I look forward to obtaining this education, albeit later in life.  The works of those ancients and the society that they created laid the foundation for all civilization.  We have as much to learn from them today as the students who sat at their feet did thousands of years ago.  

Introduction

This site is a compiling of quotes from ancient Greek and Roman sources.  I became interested in Classical Studies last year.  I don't speak or read Greek, and I've only had two semesters of Latin, so all of these quotes are from English translations, references provided.