Short Story 61*: Civus Laputus Sum

entonio at gmail.com · 30 Apr 2014, 20:32 · from 2014-April.txt.gz

This is the message as the crawl holds it, before anything here touched it. What the conversation shows has been through ingest: transfer encodings decoded, attachments dropped, quote markers repaired, and the archiver’s ? resolved into quotation marks and dashes. Those repairs are judgements and some of them are wrong, which is what this page is for. Email addresses are obscured here as they are everywhere else on the site, so it is before our repairs rather than byte for byte.

From: entonio at gmail.com (entonio at gmail.com)
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2014 21:32:19 +0100
Subject: (urth) Short Story 61*: Civus Laputus Sum
In-Reply-To: <5360a568.09da420a.4ea6.ffffc08aSMTPIN_ADDED_BROKEN at mx.google.com>
References: <CAF1072xa01ew-Ntsw1fcsYRc0Mhb4O=YqKhMim-yoVknDJSc+g at mail.gmail.com>
	<5360a568.09da420a.4ea6.ffffc08aSMTPIN_ADDED_BROKEN at mx.google.com>
Message-ID: <C402F600-E9E0-4D1F-A2A5-857EE804C19D at gmail.com>

No dia 29/04/2014, ?s 22:47, Mo Holkar <lists at ukg.co.uk> escreveu:

> At 19:33 29/04/2014, you wrote:
>> There is an odd statement Jeremy makes, saying his murder will be "the first time in five thousand years one of us has taken the life of one of them."? If taken literally, this really complicates the time line. More likely he is just exaggerating the importance of their animosity. Is he talking about Biblical creation?
> 
> 
> In the Ussherian Biblical chronology, five thousand years prior to the 1990s (ie. 3000 BC) is some time prior to the Flood, among the uneventful list of patriarchs in Genesis 5. I had wondered if Jeremy was referring loosely to Cain and Abel: but that would be more like six thousand years. Also, hard to make that story match the theme of scholars vs athletes.

I doubt it is either. I recall having thought of something when I first read it, but can't remember what. 

> (Of course, it may be a reference to a non-Christian myth.)
> 
> 
> On another note, I'd be interested if any Latinist can explain why it's 'Laputus' rather than 'Laputanus' in the title. It seems an unlikely slip, for Wolfe.

That kind of derivation does exist. Or both may be adjectives. I haven't a dictionary at hand; I just wanted to say it's not, at first sight, a mistake. It may be a clue!

An unofficial mirror of a public mailing list · about & removal requests · download the archive · before the list · original archive at urth.net