# What Caesar said at the Rubicon



## Tubéreuse

Greetings!

Doing some research regarding the famous latin phrase attributed to Julius Caesar "Alea Iacta Est (The Die is Cast)" I've came across Plutarch's version of the episode, on which Caesar quoted the greek dramatist Menander and the words were actually – Ἀνερρίφθω κύβος –. 

So, unfortunately, I can't check the sources cause they're in greek, and well, I don't understand greek nor ancient greek. At all. 
Plutarch,  Pompey, chapter 60, section 2

However, reading a little further I find out that the ancient greek alphabet didn't have the modern upper and lower-case distinction that it have today and, in some cases, neither the modern diacritics, like the ones used in the Ἀ, ί and ύ present in the quote. The letters were written slightly different too for what I see and even then some had several forms. This table shows what I mean: File:Griechisches Alphabet Varianten.png - Wikipedia


My questions is: given the time Caesar possibly uttered that, 49 BC, how exactly Ἀνερρίφθω κύβος would be written back then? 


I mean, not only the form of the letters but there were other differences like, idk, the presence of spaces between the words as we have today in modern languages? If there were already acute accents, how did they looked like?

I really appreciate any help you can provide.


----------



## sotos

ΑΝΕΡΡΙΦΘΩΚΥΒΟΣ, or ΑΝΕΡΡΙΦΘΩΚΥΒΟC


----------



## Tubéreuse

Wow thanks!

Just a question: what was the difference between Σ and C?

I've just read about lunate sigma in C shape.


----------



## bearded

Tubéreuse said:


> Just a question: what was the difference between Σ and C?


Hi
No difference in pronunciation, but concerning the use of different shapes of that letter in different periods, see here: Sigma - Wikipedia.
I would like to add that Plutarch's version of the phrase in Ancient Greek (anerriphtho kybos) actually means ''the die be cast'' (imperative tense of passive aorist, a tense that does not exist any more in Modern Greek).


----------



## Perseas

Just for the record, today this phrase is mostly known to us as "O κύβος ερρίφθη", where  the verb is in past tense passive.


----------



## Scholiast

Greetings, of course

sotos and Perseas (native speakers of Greek) are of course quite right. bearded too.

But (though of course, like any educated Roman of his epoch, he knew Greek) Caesar will have uttered whatever it was he said in Latin.

As Suetonius puts it (_Vita Caesaris_ 32), it was_ iacta alea est_. _iacta alea sit_ would be closer to what Plutarch makes of it (as bearded has interpreted it), and although of course we cannot now know whether he actually spoke these words, my inclination is to believe that someone in his entourage remembered that he said something like this.

Incidentally, from a modal point of view, the tense of a Classical Greek verb is irrelevant: an aorist passive imperative can have present force if it is imperative, subjunctive or optative.

Σ


----------



## apmoy70

sotos said:


> ΑΝΕΡΡΙΦΘΩΚΥΒΟΣ, or ΑΝΕΡΡΙΦΘΩΚΥΒΟC


If I may chime in, I think that in Attic inscriptional form, it would be ΑΝΕΡΡΗΙΦΘΩΚΥΒΟΣ.
Τhe second ρ of geminate ῤῥ is aspirated /rrʰ/ and in Attic inscriptions the aspiration was written using the H (heta).


----------



## Tubéreuse

Guys, thank you so much for your attention!

After reading your replies, I went after what the Aorist is. So, basically, is a tense that is no longer used (as you said) and _aóristos_ actually means "indefinite" or "limitless", right? If I understand it correctly, you can't determine exactly when the "action" described took place.

In my native language there's nothing like this, the closer you get it's only possible if you combine two forms of nonfinite verbs.

THAT. IS. SO. COOL.


----------



## Tubéreuse

apmoy70 said:


> If I may chime in, I think that in Attic inscriptional form, it would be ΑΝΕΡΡΗΙΦΘΩΚΥΒΟΣ.
> Τhe second ρ of geminate ῤῥ is aspirated /rrʰ/ and in Attic inscriptions the aspiration was written using the H (heta).



But Attic Greek was more or less gradually replaced by Koine from the 3rd century BC onward, right? In 1st Century BC the romans would still be adepts of the Attic dialect?


----------



## Tubéreuse

Scholiast said:


> Greetings, of course
> 
> sotos and Perseas (native speakers of Greek) are of course quite right. bearded too.
> 
> But (though of course, like any educated Roman of his epoch, he knew Greek) Caesar will have uttered whatever it was he said in Latin.
> 
> As Suetonius puts it (_Vita Caesaris_ 32), it was_ iacta alea est_. _iacta alea sit_ would be closer to what Plutarch makes of it (as bearded has interpreted it), and although of course we cannot now know whether he actually spoke these words, my inclination is to believe that someone in his entourage remembered that he said something like this.
> 
> Incidentally, from a modal point of view, the tense of a Classical Greek verb is irrelevant: an aorist passive imperative can have present force if it is imperative, subjunctive or optative.
> 
> Σ




Man, reading a little further, I've found out that the main theory for Plutarch's source was Gaius Asinius Pollio's account of the event, as he was present at the Rubicon with Caesar and supposedly recorded/wrote the anecdote at the time. Unfortunately, the originals are lost.

But, all in all, sotos version: ΑΝΕΡΡΙΦΘΩΚΥΒΟΣ is correct, right?


----------



## bearded

Scholiast said:


> an aorist passive *imperative* can have present force *if it is imperative*, subjunctive or optative.


Sorry, Scholiast, but it seems to me that this sentence is a bit...inconsistent.  How can/could an aorist passive imperative be anything else but an aorist passive imperative? Or did you mean ''an aorist passive can have present force...''? (Then I'd agree, of course).


----------



## Scholiast

Greetings again


Tubéreuse said:


> But Attic Greek was more or less gradually replaced by Koine from the 3rd century BC onward, right? In 1st Century BC the romans would still be adepts of the Attic dialect?


By Plutarch's time the _koiné_ was (like internet-English today) 'everyone's' second language: any Albanian lorry-driver can manage 300 words of English, enough to get him a sandwich, fuel or a berth in a hostel. But it's not the language of Shakespeare or Milton or a leader-column in _The Times. _The _koiné _was the language of the markets, the taverns, the brothels. But for an educated élite, both Greek and Roman, classical Attic remained the language of rhetoric, literature and elegant discourse.



Tubéreuse said:


> the main theory for Plutarch's source was Gaius Asinius Pollio's account of the event


Yes, I ought to have remembered this. Pollio was an important and influential historian, whose work is (regrettably) as you say lost; and he was indeed with Caesar's army at the Rubicon. My guess is that this remark would have been something Caesar said in council with his officers.



bearded said:


> it seems to me that this sentence is a bit...inconsistent


Yes, I'm sorry this was unclear. I wrote in too much haste. I meant that it is only in the indicative mood that the Greek aorist tense relates to the time of the event. Imperative (and infinitive, subjunctive or optative) verbs can have a present sense.

Σ


----------



## Armas

How is it aorist? My knowledge of ancient Greek is quite non-existent, but I know αγιασθήτω is aorist passive 3rd person sg imperative, so wouldn't the same form of αναρρίπτω be αναρριφθήτω? Isn't the ε in ανερρίφθω *perfect* reduplication?


----------



## Perseas

Armas said:


> How is it aorist? My knowledge of ancient Greek is quite non-existent, but I know αγιασθήτω is aorist passive 3rd person sg imperative, so wouldn't the same form of αναρρίπτω be αναρριφθήτω? Isn't the ε in ανερρίφθω *perfect* reduplication?


You 're right.
"ἀνερρίφθω" is perfect passive 3rd person sg imperative. The aorist imperative would be "ἀναρριφθήτω".


----------



## Scholiast

Greetings again

I was just about to write the same as Perseus (# 14), but he got in there first.

It may be added, however, that this squares better with the Latin _iacta alea sit_, which is also a perfect passive—though subjunctive (which in the absence of conjugated 3rd-person imperative-forms in Latin does duty for it).

 Σ


----------



## bearded

It is perfect passive imperative, not aorist passive imperative.  Sorry for my mistake.
The meaning, however, is still ''the die be cast'' in English.


----------



## Αγγελος

Pedantic correctons:
1. Latin does NOT distnguish between aorist and perfect. A form like 'scrpsi' means both 'I wrote' and 'I have written'. Moreover, in the passive voice this tense is expressed periphrastically: 'she was cast' or 'she has been cast' would be 'iacta est' (alea, die, is feminine in Latin).
2. Latin does have a 3d person imperative: esto = let ... be. So does Ancient Greek, of course.
3. It is true that in Greek the forms called aorist subjunctive or aorist imperative only differ in aspectual, not temporal meaning from the coresponding present forms: ρίπτε (present imperative) means 'keep throwing', ρίψον (aorist imperative) means 'throw (one or more times) and be done with it'. But perfect forms always refer to the present result of a past event: ανερρίφθω ο κύβος means 'let the die have been cast', i.e. 'we have made our move and cannot take it back'.


----------



## bearded

Αγγελος said:


> ανερρίφθω ο κύβος means 'let the die have been cast', i.e. 'we have made our move and cannot take it back'.


Not at all pedantic, Anghelos, and thank you for your precisions and interesting explanation. My only remark (not objection, mind you) is that in English the expression ''let the die have been cast'' is not really idiomatic...


----------



## Scholiast

Χαἰρετ᾽ ὦ φίλοι



Αγγελος said:


> 2. Latin does have a 3d person imperative: esto = let ... be. So does Ancient Greek, of course.



Yes, of course, but it is exceedingly rare, as are other 3rd-person imperatives.



Αγγελος said:


> ανερρίφθω ο κύβος means 'let the die have been cast', i.e. 'we have made our move and cannot take it back'



In principal sense of course this is right. The perfect tense always refers (in classical or _koiné_ Greek) to a present state of affairs resulting from a previous action. _τετέλεσται.
_
Σ


----------



## Tubéreuse

Guys, sorry for the delay in thanking you! So, thank you very much.

I got kinda lost along the way when greek grammar showed up in the topic, but I have an additional question regarding another part of Plutarch's quote, if you don't mind. Do I open another topic or ask it here?


----------



## Scholiast

Dear lady


Tubéreuse said:


> I got kinda lost along the way when greek grammar showed up in the topic, but I have an additional question regarding another part of Plutarch's quote, if you don't mind. Do I open another topic or ask it here?



Ask away... The Moderator will surely move it elsewhere or delete it if he considers it inappropriate for this Forum.

Σ


----------

