What is your favorite literature thats considered an ancient

File: Poggio Bracciolini - Cristofano Dell'Altissimo.jpg (11KB, 240x273px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 240x273px

>>7779211
Aside from Homer
Lucretius' De Rerum Natura, was a tremendous find. Thank Poggio we have it today.

>>7779211
The Bible

>Divine Comedy
>ancient

Anyways, my favorite ancient classic is Frankenstein

The golden ass, by Lucius Apuleius
Because even the ancient romans wrote cheap comedies.

Also, i would not go so far as to calling it ancient, but you should check out the Lusiads. It is basically a "modern" remake of greek mithology.

>>7779211
Not ancient, but Utopia by Sir Thomas More is bretty gud.

the Meditations I guess

>>7779211
Gravity's Rainbow

>>7779211
>Divine Comedy
>not funny at all

>>7779211
Aristophanes' The Clouds is fucking hilarious.

>>7783359
I always liked The Wasps, myself.

Pretty much all pre-Shakespearean English is never mentioned here aside from Chaucer (and obviously Beowulf). There are many spectacular works and authors from OE and ME.

>>7780117
I… what?

>>7784871
Not him but are you really this dense?

>>7784878
> The Divine Comedy
> finished in 1320
> not ancient in comparison to Frankenstein, published in 1818, despite being centuries older

I guess I am dense, anon. Please enlighten me.

>>7784897
The Divine Comedy is just as "ancient" as Frankenstein.

>>7784906
How, if The Divine Comedy is centuries older? Isn't one more ancient than the other?

And then what did the other poster mean then when they implied Divine Comedy wasn't ancient in their green text?

>>7784913
"Ancient" doesn't mean "old".

Hence The Divine Comedy is not ancient at all, and neither is Frankenstein.

If The Divine Comedy qualifies as ancient then so would Frankenstein, hence why anon sarcastically cited it as his favorite piece of ancient literature.

He might as well have picked Harry Potter or anything else that's not ancient.

Lucan's Civil War would be right up /lit/'s alley.

>>7784937
OK, fair enough. My current understanding of "ancient" was that it did mean old. How would you define ancient, anon? Google tells me that it means to belong to the very distant past, and I'd have thought that The Divine Comedy was part of the distant past (maybe not so distant as Homer or Virgil, but still, the 1300s is pretty distant, right?)

>>7779211
Ab Urbe Condita Libri desu.

File: 1456856310203.jpg (495KB, 742x804px) Image search: [Google]

495KB, 742x804px

>>7784957
Stop now. You are on the edge of a paradox. If you take another step forward then you will begin questioning how much money makes a man rich.

File: 15202479-Teacher-with-a-group-of-high-school-students-in-classroom-Stock-Photo.jpg (143KB, 878x585px) Image search: [Google]

143KB, 878x585px

>>7784957
When you use "ancient" in a historical context like this it describes a specific time period ("antiquity"), up to ~500 A.D.
Ancient literature would have been written before 500 A.D. and not 700 years ago.

It's like "modern" not necessarily meaning "today" when you talk about art or literature

>>7785355
Fair enough, thanks for clearing things up for me, kind anon.

>>7785335
Sorry, anon, I went past the point of no return.

Zhuangzi by miles