Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-g96k6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-10T03:49:30.564Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Superstitio and ’Eπἰσταμαι

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 May 2015

G.P. Shipp
G.P. Shipp*
Affiliation:
University of Sydney
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

As this word is so important for the student of Roman religion, and for the student of religion in general, since it has in western Europe helped to fix a pattern of thought in which ‘superstition‘ is contrasted with ‘religion’, it is natural that there should have been many attempts to explain its semantic origin, i.e. how the historical senses have come from that of‘standing over’.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Antichthon , Volume 3 , 1969 , pp. 29 - 31
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Journal of Law and Jurisprudence 1969

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

1 Cf.Leumann, M.Glotta 21 (1932),Google Scholar198 and xxiii (1935), 144 for this remark and the separation of superstes and superstitiosus. For -iosus from stems in -ion- see Stolz-Leumann, p. 231. For a summary of previous views on superstitio see Walde-Hofmann and the article of Linkomies referred to below.

2 Arctos ii (1931), 73 ff.

3 Römische Religionsgeschichte, p. 268 n. 1.

4 Compare now Jocelyn, The Tragedies of Ennius, p. 212 and p. 397. In Cicero’s quotation from the Telamo, his CXXXIV (b), Jocelyn prints superstitiosi vates as Cicero, not Ennius, the adj. having here its later pejorative value.

5 For previous interpretations of see the literature in Frisk, adding for the group Grimm, Deutsches Wörterbuch, s. v. verstehen. The interpretations of Bréal and Grimm have no real evidence to support them.

6 Journal of Philology vi (1876), 99. I owe the reference to Pease’s note on Cic. Div. ii 148. Nettleship’s remarks on contemplor and considero in the same article are still of value.