Latin 510 (Tacitus). Assignment for Week 4 (M 10/21 and W 10/23)

Germania 1-15

On Monday we’ll concentrate on (and translate much of) the beginning chapters, probably 1-6; and on Wednesday, the rest (or as much as we have time for). Now, obviously, we will all be reading from the OCT (so be sure you have that!).

As an experimental exercise, I'd like you to choose three words from Chaps. 1-6 to look up in the OLD. They may be any three words, but choose words whose meaning is not entirely obvious to you on first read -- alternatively, choose a word you think you know well, and see if you surprise yourself. Be prepared to talk briefly about your words, telling us at precisely what level you found the best or most acceptable translation (e.g., ‘OLD 5a’ or ‘OLD 3b) and how you would render the word in a publishable (i.e., Penguinesque) translation. Be prepared to note, too, if the passage from which you select the word is specifically cited in the OLD definition of the word.

A comment on commentaries: As you may have surmised, the commentary situation for the Germania is rather different than for the Agricola or the Dialogus. The reason I have had you purchase Rives is so you will have a serviceable commentary...though you will note that the commentary is keyed to Rives' English translation. It is, therefore, a commentary focused not much on questions of grammar and Latin, but rather on content, history, etc. Since most of you may not be intimately familiar with the habits and customs of the early Germans, this is not necessarily a bad thing.

Of the commentaries in English and in the library (and seminar room), Furneaux's is the best available: I will place the seminar room copy of this on a reserve shelf in the seminar room (Anderson's is perhaps better -- see bibliography on course website for all these -- but not available). Of those in German, Much's is still very good indeed, but Lund's 1988 commentary is the one you should use if you want to use a German commentary (it contains in addition to the commentary the Latin text with facing German translation). Lund's commentary has two advantages over the rest: he pays attention to all aspects of the Germania (literary, philological, archaeological, etc.) and is far more up-to-date than Much (and all other commentators, for that matter) on relevant archaeological evidence. If you read German, I encourage you to consult it (it is available in Suzzallo). Between Rives, Lund, and the ANRW volume cited on your bib., you could assemble a pretty respectable bib. on the Germania.

Ponderanda

Beginnings, again: what differentiates the beginning of the Germania from that of the Dialogus? What seems to be the chief purpose of the Germania?

Secondary reading

Rives’ Introduction, pp. 1-74

Optional: Furneaux pp. 4-33

To get a good sense of the range of current scholarship on the Germania, you might have a look at the table of contents of Beiträge zum Verständis der Germania des Tacitus, H. Jankuhn and D. Timpe, edd. 2 vols. (Göttingen 1989). In Suzzallo.