The guys are back at it this week, with round two of the deep dive into textbooks for Attic Greek. After some opening shenanigans, a corrigendum, a choice quote from Basil of Caesarea, and a trip to Burrito Chime®, Jeff and Dave review some salient differences between Attic and Koine dialects, courtesy of P.V. Nunn (1920). Six, six total! Then it's off to textbooks by Hansen and Quinn and Keller and Russell. How robust should one's grammar-translation method be? How many omega-verbs do you need, and what's the right quotient of exercise sentences in a given chapter? All this and more is in store, so don't miss the usual depth and dippy drollery!

Attic? Koine? Both? Groten and Finn? Anne Groton's Alpha to Omega? Donald Mastronarde? Hansen and Quinn? This week Jeff and Dave start a short series on how to choose a Greek textbook. After a few moments strolling down memory lane (γε!), the guys get down to business with a brief discussion of the merits of studying the Attic vs. Koine dialects (more on that in the next episode). Then they walk through the first two books in the series, pointing out the standard structure for an introductory textbook and some strategies for getting your feet wet in the language. Episdoe 185 will go deeper into the standard college texts, before pivoting (everything's basketball) to the Koine books by Mounce, Wallace, and co. Oh, and MossMethod may come up at some point! If you've studied Greek, are teaching Greek, or are thinking about taking it up, then this episode could be a great entry point for your interests!

This week we head back to Carl Richard's masterpiece from 2009, and the guys are taking a careful look at Chapter IV: Nationalism. We start out with a nice definition and perspective from one of Dave's long list of overrated authors (does he like anybody?): C.S. Lewis. Clive explains to us from The Four Loves that every country has a dreary past of some shameful and shabby doings, but it's natural and good to love her nonetheless, within reason. Then we dive into the antebellum adulation of one George Washington. Is he Demosthenes, Cicero, Hannibal, Severus, Cincinnatus, Camillus? Or is he actually all of them rolled into one? Tune in for insights from Edward Everett, Calhoun, Walt Whitman, Danile Webster, Frederick Porcher, and more, on everything from neoclassical revival to the vast American superiority over those doddering ancients. Along the way, you'll enjoy reminiscences of the celery fields of Jenison and rural Ionia County, Michigan, as well as one of Jeff's all-time best puns. And in the end, Marathon is Always Great Again.

So, is there a Homeric influence on the New Testament? Or, more specifically (per MacDonald), did Luke deliberately pattern and structure elements in Acts of the Apostles on episodes from Iliad 2? In this episode, the guys consider the case that MacDonald lays out, namely that Luke pairs the visions of Cornelius and Peter (in Acts 10 and 11) in a way that tags the Zeus-sent dream to Agamemnon and Odysseus’ recollection of the portent of the serpent and the sparrow. Does it hold up? Would a first century audience have recognized it as such? Are the linguistic parallels convincing? And perhaps the biggest question of all: why tag Homer in the first place?

In 2003, Dennis R. MacDonald published an important monograph with Yale University Press entitled: Does the New Testament Imitate Homer? Four Cases from the Acts of the Apostles. In the provocative opening salvo, MacDonald explains: ‘"'Who would claim that the writing of prose is not reliant on the Homeric poems?' This rhetorical question by a teacher of rhetoric requires a negative answer: no ancient intellectual would have doubted that the Iliad and the Odyssey informed the composition of prose, including potentially the stories of the New Testament." Come along this week as Jeff and Dave tackle the big questions about the form-criticism take on the New Testament vs. imitation (μίμησις). MacDonald lays out his six criteria, and we get into the nit and grit of some first century compositional realities. Is MacDonald's thesis ultimately persuaive? Did Luke in Acts imitate Vergil, Homer, neither, or something else altogether? It's a complicated topic, for sure, with a long and thus far intractable history.

Neoteric poetry is on the menus this week, as the guys take a close look at what Dave considers the most beautiful and moving poem from antiquity: Catullus 101. This is the famous threnody that Gaius Valerius Catullus (87-55 B.C.) addressed to his brother's ashes in Bithynia around 57 BC. The haunting lines of elegiac couplet compress a world of sorrow and sadness into 10 short verses. Along the way, Jeff explains how Catullus might have been a beat poet, and there's much discussion of what was driving the art and culture of the time. The one gentleman of Verona, the place that was a kind of Roman Hocking Hills, made his way to the capital city at the age of 22 and quickly put his name in lights with his brilliant and racy poetry addressed to cow-eyed Lesbia. Listeners will want to tune in for the new music, a brand-new sponsor (dellachelpka.art), and the usual, though moderated - given the weighty subject matter - hijinks. Check out A.S. Kline's translation of the poem here: https://www.poetryintranslation.com/PITBR/Latin/Catullus.php#anchor_Toc531846828

It's time to blind you with some science! Jeff and Dave follow Marrou's masterful tome (Part II, Chapter VIII) back through the centuries to see what place the other, non-literary side of the education coin held in antiquity. In contrast to present-day obsessions with STEM, we learn that while branches of mathematics were held up as an ideal, they never really took pride of place in the general education of Greeks and Romans. Instead, despite Plato's and Isocrates' best efforts, much like today math was left to the experts. In fact, when the ancients did get their math, geometry, music, and astronomy on, they preferred them with a heaping dose of myth, magic, and mysticism (we're looking at you, Pythagoras). Come along for maybe the worst ever opening gag, some Mike Rowe inspired musings, a quick look at the Greek terror of infinity, and much more. Plus: the long-awaited drawing for the Ratio 4. Who will win?

The guys are excited this week to welcome into the studio (via Zoom) their colleague from Hope College Dr. Bram ten Berge. After coming close to a career in professional tennis (more on that in the show), Bram finished his B.A. in Classics at U. Miss and matriculated through U. Mich, graduating with the PhD in 2016. In this episode, we get to ask Bram, a topshelf scholar of Roman history and a specialist in Tacitus (c. 55-120 A.D.), all manner of recondite questions. Bram helps us sort through Tacitus' political consistency, his historiographical program, relevance to contemporary politics, and questions of Latin style. Based on his outstanding 2023 book Writing Imperial History: Tacitus from Agricola to Annales, Bram's acute expertise and conversational style are sure to appeal to aficionados of Roman history. If you like Tacitus and the writing of res gestae, this episode is game : set : match!