The comma is a very useful invention, as it structures
a text and gives a guidance for interpretation and that is why in modern text
editions of Greek and Latin authors commas are used. The comma itself was
invented in the third century BC at Alexandria by the Greek grammarian Aristophanes
of Byzantium, but this comma was used to divide verses and not to structure a
text. That use of the comma was introduced in the late Middle Ages. However,
sometimes a comma can destroy a text rather than help the reader. I have come upon this while reading the
following epigram by Martial:
3.8
"Thaida Quintus amat." "Quam
Thaida?" "Thaida luscam."
Unum oculum
Thais non habet, ille duos.
Thais
(Greek acc. Thaida - Greek names often retain the Greek declension ) is a common name for designating
women in a certain branch of trade, named after the (in)famous Greek prostitute Thais
who lived during the time of Alexander
the Great and actually accompanied him. She convinced Alexander to burn down the palace at Persepolis as a retribution for Xerxes' burning of the temple of Athena on the Acropolis in Athens in 480 BC.
luscus: one-eyed
The remainder is easy Latin, but what is the point? Is
it that Thais has one eye and Quintus two? Well, let’s remove the comma,
keeping in mind that Martial himself was unaware of the use of the comma. But
now non habet can belong both to Thais and to ille: Thais
does not have one eye and Quintus does not have two eyes. Here lies the pun. Of
course Quintus has two eyes, but according to Martial, he is blind by falling
in love with that one-eyed Thais! And so the placing of that comma by the
editor has destroyed the whole pun, you see?
I don't understand the form "Thaida".
ReplyDeleteProbably I too am blind.
Thaida is the Greek accusative of Thais. Greek names often retain the Greek declension. I forgot to mention that.
ReplyDeleteSo I was blind...
ReplyDeleteNo, you are not. It was my fault not to mention this, but I have improved my post on this point.
ReplyDeleteI presume that by "one eye" and "two eyes" Martial is not referring to physical characteristics but to fidelity, or lack of it.
ReplyDeleteHi Henry, I have considered your idea, but I think that it is unlikely. There are other poems too in which Martial is making fun of outward appearences and handicaps. Antiquity had no room for anti-discrimination laws and handicapped people were not seen as `people with other possibilities', but often simply as people to make fun of....
ReplyDeleteHello, nice to visit your blog finally (I remember you announcing it on LinkedIn but didn't have much time then) :)
ReplyDeleteI don't think this comma destroys anything. I don't remember when I first saw this epigram, but it seems quite natural to me that "ille duos" shares the negation as well as the verb with "Thais unum oculum", and I think the comma actually helped me to understand this.
My point is that `non habet' has Thais with the comma as is stands. but if we leave the comma ille is subject too: Quintus has no two eyes because he falls in love with a one-eyed woman. Love makes blind...
DeleteSorry, I just don't see why comma makes Thais the only subject - I think I understand your point, but I fail to see the reason for it. (Maybe it's my native language (Russian) punctuation habits?) With the comma, the verb for 'ille' may seem to be missing at first, but is is found just before the comma and I see no reason to apply it to 'ille', while omitting the 'non' at the same time (as you apparently suggest is the case when the comma is present).
ReplyDeleteHi Peter, I think normally the negative is repeated: cf English: she has not one eye, he two. I will take this sentence as a about a woman with one eye and a man with two eyes. But you raise an interesting point: it could be that I read this poem with the English or Dutch syntax in mind.
ReplyDeleteHow would I translate this? “Thāida Quīntus amat.” “quam Thāida?” “Thaida
ReplyDeletelūscam.” ūnum oculum Thāis nōn habet, ille duōs.
and then scan it