sigaloenta (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
ricardienne) wrote2007-10-29 08:43 pm
ricardienne) wrote2007-10-29 08:43 pm
Entry tags:
si fuit ut fiat…
Old-school classicists make me laugh. In his earnest attempt to vindicate Lucretius V.1308-1340 as not the product of insanity (the article he cites dates from 1926 -- the fact that people were still taking the love potion story seriously so late boggles as well), dear R.B. Onians mentions, among other rather far-fetched examples, that "The Royal Welch Fusiliers have enjoyed the protection of a live goat down to the present day."
Is this perhaps a vague source for Aberforth's goat? (Isn't Godric's Hollow in Wales?)
ETA:
Also, consider this explanatory note:
On the plus side, I now know what a "birkie" is -- and the OED even cited that exact Burns line as explanatory. Further on the plus side, I feel that Jeeves must have had a hand in the writing of these notes. On the minus side, although I agree that "yon birkie ca'd a lord" might accurately describe the (supposed) antecedent of "ille," I'm not clear on how "ille" inherently gives that impression: for me, it's rather the whole 8-line passage.
Is this perhaps a vague source for Aberforth's goat? (Isn't Godric's Hollow in Wales?)
ETA:
Also, consider this explanatory note:
ille. Force of pronoun is conveyed by Burns' phrase "yon birkie ca'd a lord."
On the plus side, I now know what a "birkie" is -- and the OED even cited that exact Burns line as explanatory. Further on the plus side, I feel that Jeeves must have had a hand in the writing of these notes. On the minus side, although I agree that "yon birkie ca'd a lord" might accurately describe the (supposed) antecedent of "ille," I'm not clear on how "ille" inherently gives that impression: for me, it's rather the whole 8-line passage.
no subject
no subject