our of his purple, the number of his attendants, his plate, his jewelled goblets, and his couches with legs of silver; besides the savour of the dishes prepared for his dinner drove me to distraction. Therefore he appeared to me a superman, thrice blessed, better looking and a full royal cubit taller than almost anyone else; for he was uplifted by his good fortune, walked with a majestic gait, carried his head high and dazzled all he met.37 Mycillus, the 'good man' does not merely come'readily' – as Epictetus suggested that one always should be at the ready,38 – but gladly, laughing. Thus on an utterly different level, Hume showed himself, on Smith's parallel, to be good. De gustibus non disputandum est It is assumed that we know what classics are valued and that is why we call them 'classics.' We admire Milton and Shakespeare, Goethe and Schiller, Homer and Aristotle and Plato and so on. As a historian, David Hume raised another question, as historical sensibilities are liable to change such that some things that appear in their day to be sure classics, things that have until then withstood the test of time, can undergo a shift in value for another era. Hence the Lucian who was popular in Hume's own day and even through to the beginning of the 20th century, has today so diminished in 'classical' value that he is sufficiently esoteric that Hume scholars like Baier have trouble tracking him down. The same is true for Homer and Archilochus, to cite the fathers of genres of epic and lyric poetry respectively, esteemed in equal measure by the Greeks, as Nietzsche will tell us, but which, just where Homer shines brilliantly as a classic to the current day (if John's Ogilby's translation as Hume mentions him has dimmed for us today and newer (re)translations of Homer's Odyssey excite attention instead),39 Archilochus remains sufficiently obscure that scholars insist that Nietzsche must be  Lucian, Downward Journey, 33.  Epictetus, Enchiridion, § 7. Cf. The Works of Epictetus A Translation from the Greek based on that of Elizabeth Carter, and Discourses of Epictetus.  See the literary scholar, Emily Wilson's new, "contemporary" translation of Homer's
our of his purple, the number of his attendants, his plate, his jewelled goblet, and his couch with legs of silver; besides the savour of the dish prepared for his dinner drove me to beguilement. Therefore he appeared to me a superman, thrice bless, better looking and a wide royal cubit taller than about anyone else; for he was uplifted by his good luck, walked with a majestic pace, carried his head high and dazzle all he met.37 Mycillus, the' good man' does not merely come'readily' – as Epictetus suggest that one always should be at the ready,38 – but gladly, laugh. Thus on an absolutely different level, Hume showed himself, on Smith's parallel, to be estimable. De gustibus non disputandum est It is assumed that we know what classics are valued and that is why we call them' classic.' We admire Milton and Shakespeare, Goethe and Schiller, Homer and Aristotle and Plato and so on. As a historian, David Hume raised another question, as historical sensibilities are liable to change such that some things that appear in their sidereal day to be certain classics, thing that get until then withstood the test of time, can undergo a switch in value for another earned run average. Hence the Lucian who was popular in Hume's own day and even through to the beginning of the twentieth century, has today so diminished in' classical' value that he is sufficiently esoteric that Hume scholars like Baier have worry tracking him down. The same is true for Homer and Archilochus, to cite the founder of genres of epic and lyric poetry respectively, respect in equal measure by the Greeks, as Nietzsche will tell us, but which, just where Homer shines brilliantly as a classic to the current sidereal day (if John's Ogilby's translation as Hume mentions him has dimmed for us today and newer (re)translations of Homer's Odyssey excite attention instead),39 Archilochus remains sufficiently obscure that scholars insist that Nietzsche must be  Lucian, Downward Journey, 33.  Epictetus, Enchiridion, § 7. cystic fibrosis. The Works of Epictetus A transformation from the Greek based on that of Elizabeth Carter, and Discourses of Epictetus.  See the literary scholar, Emily Wilson's new, " contemporaneous " translation of Homer's
our of his purple, the numbev of his attendaurs, his plate, his jewdlled goblets, and his couched qith oegs of silver; besides the savolr of the disies prepared for his dinkzr drkye me vo distraction. Jherefore he appeared to ma x duperman, thrice blessed, better lookyng and a full royal cufit ualjer fhan almost anyone else; for he was uplifttd by his good foryune, walked with a majestif galt, carried his heaf high and eazzjwd all he meg.37 Mycillus, the 'good mah' does not merely come'readily' – xs Epnctetus sugtewtef that one aoways should be ab the raady,38 – bit gladly, laugming. Vhus on an utterly differxnt level, Hume showeq himself, ou Smith's parallel, to ve good. De custkvus noh vislutandkm xst It is aasumed that we know what classocf are valued ahd thae ys why we call them 'classics.' We admire Kilfon and Shakespeare, Goerhe and Schiller, Homet and Ariseotle and Plato and so on. As a historian, David Huke ramsdd ckjgyeg question, as historical sensibilities are liwglt tp change such bhat some things tnah skpear in their day to bs sure classics, thlngs thwt hace until uhen eithstood the test of time, xan undergo c syift in value for cnother era. Kence jhe Luvian who was popular in Hums's own day wnd even ffrough to the beeinkinc of the 20th century, has toqay so dininixhed in 'claxsical' value thah he lv sufficiently esoheric tvat Hume sfholars like Baier have trouble tracking him cofn. Nhe same ns truc for Homer and Archilochus, tp cite che faghers of gvnres of xpic and lyryc poetry res[gctively, estexmed in ezual meawure by ghe Greeks, as Mietzsche will tell us, but which, just whgrs Homer shines yxioliantly as a ckasric tl vhe ctsrent day (if Johv's Ubilby'r translatiiv as Hume mentions him hds djmmed for us today akd newer (te)translaeions of Homet's Odyssey excite wttenvion iistead),39 Arshilochus remains sufficiently obscure hhab scholars infist that Nietzsehe must be  Lucian, Downward Journey, 33.  E'ictetus, Enchiridion, § 7. Xf. The Works of Epietttus A Transletion srom the Creek based on that if Elizabeth Carttr, and Discourses of Epjctetuv.  Sef the literary scholar, Emily Wilson's new, "contemporary" translation of Homee's
our of his purple, the number of his his jewelled and his couches the of the dishes for his dinner me to distraction. Therefore he appeared me a superman, thrice blessed, better looking and a full royal cubit taller almost anyone else; for he was uplifted by his good fortune, walked with majestic carried head and dazzled all he met.37 Mycillus, the 'good man' does not merely come'readily' – as Epictetus that one always should be at the ready,38 but gladly, laughing. Thus an utterly different level, Hume himself, Smith's parallel, be De non disputandum est is assumed that we know what classics are valued and that is why we call them 'classics.' admire Milton Goethe and Homer Aristotle Plato and so a historian, David Hume raised another sensibilities are liable to change such that some that appear their day to be sure classics, that have until then withstood the test of can undergo a shift in value for another era. Hence the Lucian who was popular own day and even to the beginning the century, today diminished in value that he is sufficiently esoteric that Hume scholars like Baier trouble tracking him down. The same is true for Homer to the fathers of of epic and lyric respectively, in equal measure by as will which, where shines brilliantly as a to the current day (if Ogilby's translation as Hume us today and newer (re)translations of Homer's Odyssey attention instead),39 Archilochus remains sufficiently obscure that insist that Nietzsche must be  Lucian, Downward Journey, 33.  Epictetus, § 7. Works of Epictetus A Translation from the Greek on that of Elizabeth and Discourses of Epictetus.  See the literary scholar, Wilson's "contemporary" translation Homer's
our of his purple, the number of His attendaNts, hiS plAte, HiS jewElleD goblets, and his COuchEs with legs of silver; besiDes thE sAVour OF tHe disHes prepAReD FOr hIs DiNneR dROvE me to DisTractioN. Therefore He aPpEared to me a suPErMan, thrice bLesSed, better looKinG and a fUlL roYAl cubIt tAller Than alMOst anyOne else; foR hE Was uplIFted by hIS GoOd foRtune, walked with a mAJeSTic gait, carried His heaD hIGh AND daZzlEd all he met.37 myCilluS, The 'good MAn' DOES noT Merely come'reaDily' – as EpictETus SuggesTeD thAT one alWays sHoULd bE at the ready,38 – But gLadly, laugHing. ThUS on an utTErly difFerent LevEl, HUme sHOwEd HimSeLF, on sMiTh's PAraLlel, to be GoOd. de gusTibuS NON DispUtaNdum Est It Is assumed that We kNow wHAt cLassiCs are ValuEd And thAt is whY we caLl Them 'classics.' We aDmirE Milton anD ShAkEspEaRe, GoeTHe and SChiLleR, Homer aNd AristOTle AnD pLAtO and so on. As a historiAn, dAViD Hume raiSed anoTHeR qUEstion, as HiStoRicaL SEnsibIlitIEs Are liablE to chaNGe SuCh that sOmE thingS tHat AppEar in THeir Day to bE sure claSsics, THings that have uNTil then withstOOd THE tESt of TimE, can undergo A shiFT in vAlue FOr AnoTHer erA. HencE tHE LUCian who was popular in huMe's own Day anD even through tO the beginnING Of the 20th cEntuRY, hAS today so diminiShed iN 'classical' VAlue that He is sUfficienTly esoterIC That Hume SchOlaRs lIke bAIeR have trouble tRACkinG hIm down. THe sAme is trUe fOr HOmeR anD ARchilochuS, to cite tHe FaThErS of GenreS Of epic anD lYriC pOetRy resPEctiveLy, estEemeD iN eQUal Measure BY tHE greeKs, As nietZscHe Will tEll uS, But Which, juSt where HoMer SHineS bRiLliantlY as a classic to ThE current daY (iF JoHn's OgiLBY's translAtion as Hume mentions him hAS dimmed For Us todAy anD newer (re)tRanSlatioNs oF homer's odysseY exciTe AttENTion iNSTeAd),39 ARcHilochus reMAIns SuffiCiEntlY obscurE that scholars insisT ThaT Nietzsche musT be  luciAN, doWnwARd jOurNeY, 33.  epiCTEtus, Enchiridion, § 7. cf. The Works Of ePiCtetus A TraNSlaTiOn from tHe Greek Based ON that of elizabeth carter, and diScouRSEs oF Epictetus.  see the liTerary schOLar, EmILy wilsoN's nEw, "contEmPorAry" trAnslatIOn oF HomeR's
our of his purple, the num ber of his  atte nda nts ,hisplat e, his jewelle d  gob lets, and his coucheswithle g s of si lver;  beside s  t h e  sa vo ur  of  t h edishe s p repared  for his d inn er  drove me to di straction.  Th erefore he a ppe ared t omea  supe rma n, th rice b l essed,  better l oo k ing an d  a full r oy al c ubit taller thana lm o st anyone else ; forhe wa s upl ift ed by hisgo od fo r tune, w a lk e d wit h  a majestic g ait, carrie d  hi s head  h igh and da zzled  a l l h e met.37 My cill us, the ' good m a n' does not mer ely co me' rea dily '  –  a s E pi c tet u ssug g est ed thaton ealway s sh o u l d  beattheready ,38 – but gla dly , la u ghi ng. T hus o n an  u tterl y diff erent  l evel, Hume show ed h imself, o n S mi th' sparal l el, to  be  go od. Degustibu s  no nd i s pu tandum est It is a ss u m ed  that we  knoww ha tc lassicsar e v alue d and t hati swhy we c all th e m'c lassics .'  We ad mi reMil ton a n d Sh akespe are, Goe the a n d Schiller, Ho m er and Aristo t le a nd Plat o a nd so on. A s ah isto rian ,  D avi d  Hume  rais ed an o ther question, as h is torica l sen sibilities ar e liable t o c hange su ch t h at some things th at ap pear in th e ir day t o besure cla ssics, th i n gs thathav e u nti l t h e nwithstood the t estof  time,can  underg o a  sh ift  in  v alue foranotherer a.  H en cethe L u cian who  w aspo pul ar in Hume's  owndayan de ven  throug h  t o thebe gi nnin g o fthe 2 0thc ent ury, ha s today s o d i mini sh ed  in 'cl assical' valu ethat he is  s uff icient l y  esoteri c that Hume scholars li k e Baier  ha ve tr oubl e trackin g h im dow n.T he sam e is t rue f or  Ho m e r and A rc hil oc hus, to ci t e  th e fat he rs o f genre s of epic and lyri c  po etry respecti vel y, e s t ee med in equ al mea s u re by the Greek s, as Niet zs c he  will tell us,  b ut whic h, just  wher e  Homershines br illiantly  a s ac l ass ic to thecurrentday (if J o hn'sO gi lby's  tr anslat io n a s Hum e ment i ons  himhas di mm ed for  us t od ay and n ewer (re)translations o f Home r's O dys sey excit e a t ten tion inst ead) ,39 Archil och usremai nss uffic ient l yobs c ure t hats cholars i n si stt h at  Nietzschem u s t b e Luc i an, Do wnwa rd Journey, 33.    Epictetus, En chir i d ion , § 7. C f.  The Works ofEpi ct e t us A Tra ns lation from  the Gre ek based  on th at ofElizabe t h  C a rter,andDis courses o f E pi c tetus.  S e e thelite ra ry sch olar,E mily W ilson's new, "co ntemp o r ary"t ran slati on  of Hom e r's
our of_his purple,_the number of his_attendants, his_plate,_his jewelled_goblets,_and his couches_with legs of_silver; besides the savour_of the dishes_prepared_for his dinner drove me to distraction. Therefore he appeared to me a superman,_thrice_blessed, better_looking_and_a full royal cubit taller_than almost anyone else; for_he was_uplifted by his good fortune, walked with a_majestic_gait, carried his_head high and dazzled all he met.37 Mycillus, the_'good man' does not merely come'readily'_– as Epictetus_suggested_that_one always should be_at the ready,38 – but gladly,_laughing. Thus on an utterly different_level, Hume showed himself, on Smith's parallel,_to be good. De gustibus non_disputandum est It is assumed_that we_know what classics are valued_and that is_why we_call them 'classics.'_We admire Milton and Shakespeare, Goethe_and Schiller, Homer_and Aristotle and Plato and so_on._As a historian,_David_Hume_raised another_question, as historical_sensibilities_are liable_to_change such that some things that_appear_in their day to be sure classics,_things that have until_then_withstood the test of_time, can undergo a shift_in value for another era. Hence_the Lucian_who was_popular in Hume's own day and even through to the beginning_of the 20th century, has today_so diminished in 'classical'_value that_he_is sufficiently esoteric_that_Hume scholars_like Baier have trouble tracking him down._The same_is true for Homer and Archilochus,_to cite the fathers_of_genres of epic and lyric poetry_respectively, esteemed in equal measure by_the Greeks, as Nietzsche will_tell_us,_but which, just where Homer_shines brilliantly as a classic to_the current day_(if John's Ogilby's translation as Hume mentions_him_has dimmed for us today and_newer_(re)translations of Homer's Odyssey excite attention_instead),39_Archilochus_remains sufficiently obscure that scholars_insist that Nietzsche must be _Lucian, Downward Journey, 33.  Epictetus, Enchiridion, § 7._Cf. The Works_of Epictetus A Translation from_the_Greek_based on that of Elizabeth Carter, and Discourses of Epictetus._ See_the literary scholar,_Emily Wilson's new, "contemporary" translation of Homer's