Celeron

McDermott, William C. 1970. The Sisters of P. Clodius. Phoenix 24(1): 39-47.

Appius was staid and old-fashioned, consul, censor, and an auur who believed in the augural lore; Gaius was a shadow of his brother; Publius was a demagogue, fantastic even for those days. (McDermott 1970: 39)

Staid on vaoshoitud, kindel, tõsine, püsiv, jääv.

The Clodia who married Celer gained immortality for her immorality from Cicero - and Catullus; for it seems reasonable to conclude that the Medea of the Palatine was Lesbia. The Clodia who married L. Lucullus was just as infamous, but less famous. (McDermott 1970: 39)

Clodia on eeldatavasti "Klaudia" nime päritolu. See autor kasutab parallelisme väga vabameelselt.

Clodia Quarta, born ca. 94, wife of Celer, cos 60. (McDermott 1970: 41)

Celeri naine oli seega "Neljas Klaudia" (kõikidele tütardele pandi sama nimi ja eristati numbritega). Päris äge on, et Clodia Metellis Celeris'il on isegi FB profiil, mille järgi ta on "In a complicated relationship with Gaius Valerius Gatullus."

Cicero at one point in his scurrilous attack upon Clodia while defending Caelius refers to her as mulier potens quadrantaria (62). Since this phrase occurs in the section on the supposed exchange of poison in the balneum, Cicero may be making an indirect reference to the quadrans which was the fee there. (McDermott 1970: 41)

Scurrilous or "ropendav".

Cicero would hardly have risked offending Celer who, however dull he may have been, was usually a firm political ally (cf. Att. 2.1.4). (McDermott 1970: 43)

Cicero oleks vaevalt riskinud solvata Celerit kes, kuitahes nüri ka ei olnud, oli harilikult kindel poliitiline liitlane.

Boyd, Barbara Weiden 2000. "Celabitor Auctor": The Crisis of Authority and Narrative Patterning in Ovid "Fasti" 5. Phoenix 54(1): 64-98.

I intend to scrutinize the apparent randomness of several of the book's juxtaposed episodes, and to suggest that beneath the superficial discontinuities of theme there is in fact a network of narrative patterns that pulls together much of the otherwise disparate material in Fasti 5. (Boyd 2000: 64)

Jutustusmustrite võrgustik.

[...] there is in fact a pitched battle between order and randomness constantly being waged in the Fast, as, directed by Ovid, we move back and forth between the rigid constraints of the Roman calendar and the juxtaposition, random in its studied effect if not in its cause, of Greek astronomical lore on the one hand and Roman myth and ritual on the other. (Boyd 2000: 65)

Ma kujutan ette, et selline võitlus korrastuse ja juhuslikkuse vahel toimub igasuguses tekstiloomes.

The paradigm of a series of ages defined by a metallic metaphor is clearly modelled on Hesiod's version of the history of human development (Op. 106-201), although of course Aratus also varies this metaphor: the Hesiodic age of heroes is gone from his version, as is our own age, that of iron. (Boyd 2000: 67)

Huvitav, kas seda inimarengu järjestust - kiviaeg, pronksiaeg, rauaaeg - annaks edasi viia nii, et 19. ja 20. sajadi vahetusel algab nö "teraseaeg" ja 20. ja 21. sajandi vahetusel nö "räniaeg" (või mistahes metalli kasutatakse personaalarvutite kiipide loomisel).

ter sunt conati imponere Pelio Ossam (Virgil in Boyd 2000: 69)

Tõlkes: "kolm korda üritasid nad ületada Pelio Ossamit (mäge)". Siit võib leida konatiivse funktsiooni selgituse: conatus on üritamine (üritus, katse).

The description of the origins of the Horn of Plenty, created from one of the horns of Capella accidentally broken in the course of her service to baby Jupiter (5.121-124), gives Ovid the opportunity to outdo the reference to Capella's catasterism with which the episode opened [...] (Boyd 2000: 74)

Midagi Ancient Aliens teooria kapsaaeda: "Horn of Plenty" ehk cornucopia on väga pinnapealselt (st iidsete tulnukate teooria võtmes) võrreldav Jeeriho linna vallutamise looga, milles puhutakse sarve ja kõnnitakse seitse korda ümber linna müüride kuniks need varisevad kokku (Joosua 6: 1-27). Iidsete tulnukate teoorias samastatakse seda "tehnoloogilist" seadet millega müür langetatakse sama seadmega millega Egiptustest põgenevad juudid kõrbes nelikümmend aastat ringi käies mannat taevast alla sadama panevad.

The imagery with which Ovid describes Flora's departure suggests an almost symbiotic relationship between the two - she is all fragrence, while he is all nose. Which one of them has created the poetry just completed? Who inspires whom? The next story to which we shall turn suggests that Flora is effectively Ovid's muse and role-model, now that the official nine have proven so useless. (Boyd 2000: 78)

Sarnasus Uexkülli poolt vahendatud Goethe luuletus vms sellest kuidas silmad on loodud päikesevalguse jaoks vms.

Orion's conception proceeds without delay. The three gods, taking advantage of the available hide from the recently-slaughtered bull, stand behind the hide, "water" it, and then cover the damp spot with soil. Ten months pass, and Orion is born (531-534). Hyrieus names the boy Urion in honor of the way in which he was conceived; the passage of time has caused a change in the initial vowel of his name, and so he is now called Orion (535-536). (Boyd 2000: 80)

Kena lugu. Jumalad kasutavad ära äsja ohverdatud pulli nahka, urineerivad selle peale, katavad märja koha mullaga ja kümne kuu pärast sünnib Urion, kellest nime esimesest häälikust saab ajapikku Orion.

The reference to Remus' lack of swiftness (male veloci ... Remo) also alerts us to the fact that Ovid knows of a tradition in which Remus' slowness (Remus > remorari, "to delay") somehow explains his death. In fact, as Ovid's narrative proceeds, no more authoritative witness than the ghost of the dead Remus himself appears before Faustulus and Acca in their sleep to lament his fate, to lay the blame for his death at the door of a certain Celer, and to let Romulus off the hook (455-474). The contrast ho drawn between Celer and Romulus is particularly worth noting (467-474):

"quem lupa servavit, manus hunc temeraria civis
perdidit. o quanto mitior illa fuit!
saeve Celer, crudelem animam per volnera reddas,
utque ego, sub terras sanguinulentus eas.
noluit hoc frater, pietas aequalis in illo est:
quod potuit, lacrimas in mea fata dedit.
hunc vos per lacrimas, per vestra alimenta rogate,
ut celebrem nostro signet honore diem."

The dead Remus is granted his final request: the twins' step-parents take their appeal to Romulus, who responds by making the next day a religious festival in honor of the dead and calling it the Remuria; this name has over time been changed to Lemuria (475-482). (Boyd 2000: 86-87)

Siin ilmneb huvitav opositsioon: Remulus on "viivitus" ja Celer on "äkilisus". See kindel Celer on ladina keeles saeve Celer - saevus on raevukas, metsik, äge, vägivaldne, barbaarne, julm, metslane (savage) - st "metslane Celer".

This tale is one to which Ovid has made reference in Fasti 4; in the earlier episode, we learn that Celer has been appointed by Romulus to urge on the building of the city walls and to prevent any would-be aggressor from crossing them (4.837-840). When Remus makes fun of the walls and leaps across them, therefore, Celer is ready and strikes Remus with a shover (4.841-844). Even as he recognizes that Celer was just doing his job (4.845-848), the new king laments his brother's loss and grants him funeral honors in which Romulus himself displays his emotion (4.849-852):

dat tamen exsequias; nec iam suspendere fletum
sustinet, et pietas dissimulata patet;
osculaque applicuit posito suprema feretro,
atque ait "invito frater adempte, vale."

Noteworthy in this scene too is the pietas attributed to Romulus; though civic responsibility has led to private grief, the new king acknowledges the importance of both in his farewell to his brother. (Boyd 2000: 87)

See on see narratiiv millest ma teadsin kunagi ammu Google Books'ist midagi lugedes.

[...] the Catullan echo draws particular attention to the familiar relationship between the two brothers. We see this relationship emphasized again in the episode in Book 5, when we hear virtually nothing of Celer's motive, only of the results of his action. (Boyd 2000: 87)

Etümoloogiliselt on kõik korrektne (EOKK). Kiirete või äkiliste tegude puhul ei olegi motiivid vb selged, küll aga on tagantjärgi näha tagajärgi.

Indeed, we should already be suspicious of a tale in which one of the major characters, Celer, embodies one of the qualities prized by the god telling the tale. Fleetness of foot is, after all, a distinctive feature of Mercury, and one which Ovid emphasizes in Fasti 5 (aetherium volucri qui pede carpit iter, 88; alato qui pede carpis iter, 666); and it is the swift Celer to whom is attributed the death of the slow (male velocy, 5.452) Remus. I have already noted that, according to one tradition concerning Remus' death, the etymological association of his name with delay is used to explain his death (see above, 86); another feature of this tradition is the correlative association of Romulus with haste and even rashness. In the speech of Remus' ghost, however, rashness is attributed not to Romulus but to the man who had killed Remus at his behest, the citizen Celer: the dead Remus singles him out with the description manus ... temeraria civis, 5.467. We can hardly trust the narrator's divine source. Furthermore, Ovid himself has already revealed on more than one occasion in this book a propensity for unauthorized tales. I would, therefore, suggest that, in having both the god of swiftness and Remus' ghost attribute to Celer the death of Remus, Mercury leads us down a blind alley, offering up a story which pokes holes in its own credibility every step of the way. Indeed, Mercury's story of Celer's act effectively enacts a version of the logical puzzle made prominent in Callimachus' Hymn to Zeus and evoked earlier in Fasti 5. Mercury's tale about Celer turns in upon itself, substituting for the rash Romulus the equally rash Celer, who in turn disappears from the story once Mercury has made his point. As if taking a cue from Ovid's mentor Flora, Mercury conceals the identity of Remus' murderer behind the name Celer (celer, "may I be hidden"), a name which punningly recalls Flora's promise to Juno: "celabitur auctor." Remus' smurderer is indeed hidden - behind the convenient epiteth Celer. Let us also recall for a moment the tradition concerning Romulus the hasty, whose rashness is neutralized by his brother's death and who, as sole sovereign with no potentially competitive sibling, will later give himself a bodyguard of men called Celeres in memory of the swiftness which won him his throne. In Fasti 4, Ovid had noted that Celer was summoned by Romulus (Celer ..., quem Romulus ipse vocarat, 4.837); the verb vocarat is just ambiguous enough to suggest a second connotation, i.e., that Celer was not only summoned but also given his name by Romulus. The implication of his calling Celer by name is that Romulus gives to a trusted supporter a name indicative of a quality he prizes and wishes to reinforce. Now, as sole surviving brother, the once-hasty Romulus can afford to create an annual holiday in memory of his dead sibling and so can separate himself even further from Celer's deed, making it seem like patriotic necessity in the process. Likewise, the patron god of swiftness can help to put the best possible light on Remus' murder by emphasizing the swift show of pietas with which Romulus responds to his loss, a pietas for which only Quirinus in Fasti 4 and Mercury in Fasti 5 are our sources. (Boyd 2000: 91-92)

Niiet tegelikult on hoopis Romulus väle ja äkiline, aga omistas oma kuritöö väljamõeldud ja kohapeal nimetatud patuoinale, kelleks saab Celer. Selle nime leiutamise juures on footnote: "The difference in vowel quatity between celo and celer is not in and of itself an obstacle to such punning, as is well known." - s.t. cerabitur auctor ehk "peidetud autor" on Celeri tegelik etümoloogia.

Ovid's second proem also sends us back to F. 4.830, Romulus' address to the ods: "auspicibus vobis hoc mihi surgat opus." Romulus utters these words as part of his invocation to the gods to be with him and aid him in the founding of Rome; Jupiter responds with favorable thunder and lightning. Consequently, Rome and its walls are built by Romulus' alter ego, Celer: even the words Ovid uses to describe Celer's action echo Romulus' prayer ("surgat opus," 830; Celer urget opus, 837). Celer then kills Remus. Divine will, it seems, enables the fulfilment of marvelous feats, granting to those who acknowledge it the power to prevail. And as Romulus, with Celer's help, builds his walls, so Ovid, with Flora and Mercury, builds his poem, moving beyond witnessed tradition to create a work that questions the fundamental character of the city whose life it celebrates. (Boyd 2000: 93)

Mulle isiklikult sobib vägagi hästi, et Celer on alter ego või "peidetud autor". Muuseas, celer on saksa keeles rasch, millest võib vabalt aretada ismus'e - rasch-mus. Viide mis puudutab Romuluse väledust ja Remuluse aeglust: Wiseman, T. P. 1995. Remus: A Roman Myth. Cambrudge. Pp. 3, 8-10, and esp. 111.

Frazer, Sir James George 1931. Ovid's Fasti. With an English translation. London: W. Heinemann; New York: G.P. Putnam.

"A citizen's rash hand [manus hunc temeraria civis] undid him whom the she-wolf saved; O how far more merciful was she! Ferocious Celer [saeve Celer], mayest thou yield up thy cruel soul [crudelem animam] through wounds, and pass like me all bloody underneath the earth! My brother willed not this: his love's a match for mine: he gave to my departed soul - 'twas all he could - his tears. Pray him by your tears, by your fosterage, that he would celebrate a day by signal honour done to me." (Frazer 1931: 295; Ovid's Fasti 5.467-5.474; May 9)

"Kodaniku metsik käsi tegi olematuks tema kelle hundiema päästis; Oh kui palju armulikum oli tema! Metsik Celer, võiksid oma julma hinge üles anda ja surra nagu mina verisena maas! Mu vend ei soovinud seda: meie armastus oli vastastikune: ta andis mu lahkunud hingele - kõik mida ta suutis - oma pisarad. [...]" - Siin on moodustatud opositsioon armuliku hundiema ja metslasest kodaniku vahel.

Glad at the augury, the citizens laid the foundations, and in a short time the new wall stood. The work was urged by Celer [hec Celer urget opus], whom Romulus himself had named [quem Romulus ipse vocarat) and said, "Celer, be this thy care; let no man cross the walls nor the trench which the share hath made: who dares to do so, put him to death." Ignorant of this, Remus began to mock the lowly walls and say, "Shall these protect the people?" And straightaway he leaped across them. Instantly Celer struck the rash man with a shovel [rutro Celer occupat ausam]. Covered with blood, Remus sank on the stony ground. When the king heard of this, he smothered the springing tears and kept his grief locked up within his breast. He would not weep in public; he set an example of fortitude, and "So fare," quoth he, "the foe who shall cross my walls." Yet he granted funeral honours, and could no longer bear to check his tears, and the affection which he had dissembled was plain to see [nec iam suspendere fletum sustinet, et pietas dissimulata patet]. (Frazer 1931: 251; Ovid's Fasti 4.835-4.850; April 21)

"(Linnamüüri ehitus-)tööd juhtis/kehutas Celer, kelle Romulus ise nimetas ja ütles, "Celer, see on sinu hoole all, ära lase mitte kellelgi ületada müüri või kraavi mida me ühiselt oleme teinud: kes julgeb seda teha, tapa ära." Seda teadmata hakkas Remus madalaid müüre mõnitama ja ütles "Kas need peaksid rahvast kaitsema?" ja hüppas neist üle. Kärmelt lõi Celer rutakat meest labidaga. Verisena langes Remus kivisele pinnale." - Lõppkokkuvõttes kõlab see nagu anekdoot: üks vend annab töödejuhatajale käsu tappa need kes julgevad tema alles ehitusjärgus müüri ületada ja seda teeb tema vend, kes saab surma. Pirniks on siin tema ütlemine "Nii sureb vaenlane kes sa ületas mu müüri."

Laidlaw, W. A. 1939. S.V.B.E. Classical Philology 34(3): 251-252.

Seneca (Ep. 15) cites a short formula, si vales, bene est, which appears in the Ciceronian correspondence either in full (Fam, v. 1, xiv. 15 [a letter to Terentia]) or as s.v.b. (Fam, vii. 29, xi. 3, xii, 16, xv. 19) or s.v.b.e. (in two copies of the letters, viz. Att. viii. 11C, ix. 7B). Pliny quotes the longer form: "si vales, bene est, ego valeo"; and this appears in the Ciceronian correspondence as s.v.b.e.v. (Fam, v. 14, xii. 13, xii. 6 and in most of Cicero's letters to Terentia, Fam. xiv. 11, 16, 17, 21-24) or as s.v.b.e.e.v. (Fam. v. 9; x 34; xiv. 8) or in the longer formulas s.v.b.e.e.q.v. (Fam. v. 10, x. 33; xii. 11, 12) and s.v.v.b.e.e.q.v. (in two formal letters written by Cicero from his province to the Senate, Fam. xv. 1, 2). (Laidlaw 1939: 252)

Siin on tegelikult päris kena näide sõnade taandamisest esitähtedeks - nähtus, millest on kirjutanud nii Šklovski kui ka Lotman. Väljend ise on tõlkes "If you're well, that's good" ja pikemas vormis "If you are well, that is good; I'm well".

It remains to mention that formula of greeting which strikes themodern reader as peculiar, almost humorous. When the proconsul of Cisalpine aul, Q. Metellus Celer, in January, 62, took Cicero severely to task for his words about the governor's brother, Metellus Nepos, he began briefly, "si vales benest" (Fam, v. 1). Cicero, in a stilted letter of self-exculpitation, begins: "si tu exercitusque valetis, benest" (Fam, v. 2). Clearly, Cicero had been nettled; and, if the formula occurred only here, one might indulge in speculation. But it appears again, in another formal letter (Fam. v. 7) written in 62 by Cicero to Pompeius Magnus Imperator. (Laidlaw 1939: 252)

See on tõenäoliselt igasuguste formaalsuste saatus - kaduda käibelt ja muutuda tagasivaatajatele kummaliseks või naljakaks. Nettled on ärritunud, vihane.

Hill, H. 1938. Equites and Celeres. Classical Philology 33(3): 283-290.

Practically all histories of Rome and reference books of every kind assume that Celeres was merely an old name for the equites, and scholars seem to have no qualms about using evidence which concerns the Celeres in their accounts of the early equites. Yet this identification is, to say the least, far from certain; and I hope to show in this article that there are strong reasons for believing it to be incorrect. (Hill 1938: 283)

Eques on ladina keeles "rüütel".

Of the Celeres (κελέρνον) he gives a quite distinct account, describing how Romulus, after having chosen his senate (and therefore some time after the founding of Rome and the establishment of the corps of three hundred equites), selected three hundred of the noblest and strongest youths to act as his bodyguard, under the title of κελέρνον. (Hill 1938: 284)

300 on ikka õige number. Meenutagem seda 2007. filmi ja käesoleval aastal Iraaki ISIS'e vastu võitlema saadetud 300t USA konsultanti. Hillil on ka selgitus: "it is more probably the result of "contamination" of the two versions" (Samas, 285).

5. That Celer, traditionally the first commander of the Celeres, is described by Servius (Ad Aen. xi. 603) as tribunus equitum.
This proves nothing except that Servius identified Celeres with equites. Celer himself, of course, is an etiological myth. Whatever be true etymology of the word "Celeres," it does not affect the point at issue, because all the suggested explanations of the title would apply just as well to a bodyguard as to a cavalry force. (Hill 1938: 286)

Tribunus equitum on "the commander of the cavalry" (ratsaväeülem). Etioloogia on põhjuseõpetus ja siin muidugi mõeldaks Ovidiuse luuletusi, mis räägivad jumalate sündidest (Urion, Orion) ja Rooma linna asutamisest (Romuluse ja Remuluse lugu). St jah, Celer on tõepoolest etioloogiline müüt.

To sum up: the best ancient authorities make a clear distinction between equites and Celeres, and describe the latter as the royal bodyguard. Not a single argument produced by modern scholars in support of the alternative view that the Celeres were the early equites can stand criticism. (Hill 1938: 289)

St Romuluse ihukaitsjatest ei saanud rüütliklass. Igaks juhuks mainin ka, et ma ei ole üldse kindel, kas κελέρνον sai õigesti ümber kirjutatud. Samas on kirjapilt lahe, just nagu ka целер (ru. seller) ja cēlāre (lad. peitma).

Courtney, E. 1988. Problems in the Silvae of Statius. Classical Philology 83(1): 43-45.

iuvat ora tueri
mixta notis belli placidamque gerentia pacem.

Here is described the expression on the face of the equestrian statue of Dominitian, which blends bellicosity with placability. It is possible, I suppose, that Statius expressed this in the confused way presented by his manuscript, which defies precise analysis through the general sense is apparent; but I think it much more likely that he wrote bellum, intending us to pause before this word: the face is an amalgam of indications, offering as it does both peace and war. For the asyndetic relationship which I introduce between mixta and its explanation with gerentia there is a not exact but adequate parallel at 2. 2. 125-27: "voto sublimior omni, / exemptus Fatis indignantemque refellens / Fortunam." (Courtney 1988: 43)

iuvat ora tueri tähendab "ma tahan näha su nägu" ("I want to see your face."). Need segunevad väljendused, bellicosity ja placability on sõjalaadne või vaenulik suhtumine (bellum on sõda) ja rahu-stamine või patsifitseerimine (pax on rahu). Asündeetiline suhe on seotud terminiga asyndeton, ehk konjunktsiooni puudumisega (umbes nagu väljendus "ma tulin, ma nägin, ma vallutasin").

The restoration currently favored for line 6, alte tamen et or ac (due to Markland, I regret to say), is so unstylish and indeed gross that the mere mention of it sullies my page. In its stead I propose at te domat ac. (Courtney 1988: 43)

Väga raske on ette kujutada, et mõni tänapäeva uurija kirjutaks, et mingi rekonstruktsioon vms on niivõrd ebastiilne või rõve, et isegi selle mainimine rikub ta lehekülje ära.

The notion "ship" in poetical contexts carries with it certain conventional corollaries, of which "oars" is one; the question whether or not the ship concerned would in fact have oars is a question to be asked of sobersided prose authors, not of poets. (Courtney 1988: 44)

Ülle Pärli ettekandest Semiosalongis õppisime, et samasugune lugu on rongidega vene luules. Väga üldiselt puudutab see konteksti funktsiooni.