īut the one that is a little silly is the Caesar Salad meme - I don’t have any problems with them, because they are just that - silly. I’ve also already spent a lot of time talking about the Caesar calendar meme - read all about it here. Caesarean section comes from the Latin caedo (to cut) and is otherwise unconnected. This is of course, not true but also implausible, especially as Caesar gave a speech at his mother’s funeral many years after his birth. An obvious example is the idea that Julius Caesar was born by ‘caesarean' section’ and the practice gained its name and fame from him. There are lots of misconceptions about things being named after Julius Caesar, which then come with invented stories to explain how the connection works.

So, while technically there was a fire and some of it was damaged, there was no cataclysmic loss of information the likes of which people so often bemoan! 3. As much as we know, some part of the building was caught in a fire and was damaged, though we know it was not so extensive that it caused significant long-term problems - we know it was back in business a few years later. Many people point to a specific event as the source of the ‘fire’ legend - the attack of Julius Caesar on Alexandria in 48 BC, during the Civil War when he aligned himself with Cleopatra. It both waxed and waned as a centre of intellectual thought and research. Being in Alexandria, it was of course subject to the tumult of the several changes of regime in Egypt during its lifespan. It certainly had a large collection, owing to rather vigorous collection policies, but it was only one of several such libraries in the ancient world, many of which outlasted it. So, where did all this come from? And what happened to the Library then? Well first of all, the Library absolutely did exist but it wasn’t perhaps the great repository of all knowledge that we think. The Library of Alexandria never burnt down I think it’s also important to note that a lot of these memes target ‘historians’ with their ire - although this might have been the case in the distant past, there are so many wonderful people out there in the world of Classics now that present a nuanced and unbiased picture of life in the Ancient world as it truly was. So, yes they are cousins but it really isn’t the gotcha people think it is!

In reality, it’s the act of reducing their relationship to only cousins to explain their bond that is most egregious in Troy (2004) - as well as the fact that Patroclus is shown to be younger than him, despite being clearly older and more responsible, even in Homer. The question about the interpretation of their relationship really doesn’t hinge on whether they were related or not - this was no particular barrier in Greek mythology, where almost everyone is related to each other one way or another. Their relationship as cousins is never really stressed in ancient sources, and they are never really defined by it. HOWEVER - there is not much to be read into this familial connection. This makes Achilles and Patroclus first cousins, once removed (as they are a generation apart on the tree). She later, however, had a son with the mortal Actor, and that son was the same Menoetius, father of Patroclus. The family link, as far as the mythological family trees make sense, is as follows: Aegina, a beautiful nymph, was ‘abducted’ by Zeus (in Eagle form) and… well long story short, she has a son named Aeacus, the father of Peleus and thus the grandfather of Achilles. There are at least five different versions of his parents in Greek texts, although they all agree that Menoetius is his father. Except, here’s the thing… Achilles and Patroclus are cousins.

Hades game patroclus