|
karl fungus posted:What were Byzantine-Chinese interactions like? Also, how were the various incarnations of Roman governments viewed by the Chinese? How did the Romans/Byzantines view the Chinese? There were a bunch of diplomatic missions sent, but the coolest bit of Byzantine and Chinese relations was when Justinian sent monks to be James Bond level spies and steal silkworm eggs from China. They succeeded and Byzantine silk broke the stranglehold China had held on that bit of trade for 1000 years or so. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Romano-Chinese_relations http://traumwerk.stanford.edu/philolog/2011/08/byzantine_silk_smuggling_and_e.html
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2013 11:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 17:50 |
|
|
Jerusalem posted:Ahhh man, I just found out how Aurelian's career ended Yeah. Who knows what Aurelian could have accomplished had he lived longer, he did a hell of a lot in the five years he was in charge and really put the empire back on track to stability. It's kind of amazing the empire survived the crisis of the third century at all considering how chaotic that period was.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2013 13:53
|
|
|
Jerusalem posted:Sometimes I wonder how the hell the Roman Empire lasted as long as it did. Bureaucracy, it's designed to keep running no matter what, including mad emperors, civil wars and loss of provinces. Rome had civil and military administrations, each with each own offices. The civil service kept everything running even if the army and rulers went crazy. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Constitution
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2013 14:47
|
|
|
WoodrowSkillson posted:There were a bunch of diplomatic missions sent, but the coolest bit of Byzantine and Chinese relations was when Justinian sent monks to be James Bond level spies and steal silkworm eggs from China. They succeeded and Byzantine silk broke the stranglehold China had held on that bit of trade for 1000 years or so. Yep. If you search the thread we've talked about it a lot. The wiki article is pretty good, also.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2013 14:54
|
|
|
Libluini posted:So I read that wikipedia-entry and I have a question: Uh, you do realize all of the pyramids have been heavily raided for building materials over the millenia right? Take a look at this pyramid:  See how the top part has a much smoother and sleeker look? The whole pyramid used to have that kind of facing rock, as well as many layers of rock behind it. Tons and tons of stone have been harvested from the pyramid over time for construction projects, but since there was just so much to start with we do still have a pyramid left.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2013 15:15
|
|
|
Install Gentoo posted:Uh, you do realize all of the pyramids have been heavily raided for building materials over the millenia right? I don't know about that- for some of the smaller pyramids that were just filled with dirt sure, but the massive ones from the height of the Old Kingdom were left mostly intact; for the Great Pyramid, aside from the metal cap which was obviously quick to go, it took an earthquake nearly four thousand years after it was built for even the casing stones on the very outer layer to be removed fully. It may at first glance seem like an obvious source of resources, but those bricks are loving huge; it took a period of unbelievable wealth and tens of thousands of people to put them into place. As well as the fact that unlike stuff like castles and roman bathhouses and whatever, the pyramids have pretty much always been considered important.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2013 15:44
|
|
|
They were covered in sand for a long time, though. Well, some of the pyramids.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2013 16:37
|
|
|
Aren't a lot of them out in the middle of nowhere as well. The biggest reason for stealing from old buildings is convenience and cost. Huge heavy blocks of stone out in the desert? I'm willing to wager there was always something a bit easier nearby.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2013 17:47
|
|
|
Install Gentoo posted:Uh, you do realize all of the pyramids have been heavily raided for building materials over the millenia right? There are some new ideas running around that the limestone wasn't actually stripped - it fell off of its own accord and builders then scavenged the blocks from the sand. Some guy has shown that thermal expansion and contraction was enough to make the casing blocks gradually move to where they would just fall off. Rocks heat up during the day, expand and push apart. They contract at night leaving small gaps between them. Sand blows into the cracks, filling the gap so when they start expanding again the next day they push out more. Over hundreds or thousands of years it's enough to move the blocks a long way, possibly leading to them losing support and falling off. It's possible that one of the reasons the Egyptians stopped building the huge pyramids is that they actually saw some of the blocks go tumbling off, which they took as a sign from the gods that it was a bad idea. It's largely conjecture, but plausible.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2013 18:21
|
|
|
Install Gentoo posted:Uh, you do realize all of the pyramids have been heavily raided for building materials over the millenia right? Oh I know all this, but I was horrified because this kind of destruction was fairly recent. And the pyramids haven't been bulldozed over to be replaced by a wallmart or some dumb poo poo like that, either.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2013 18:29
|
|
|
Do we know if Romans glorified actors in the same way we do in America? I remember we discussed that they did regarding Gladiators, but I mean theatre actors.Libluini posted:Oh I know all this, but I was horrified because this kind of destruction was fairly recent. And the pyramids haven't been bulldozed over to be replaced by a wallmart or some dumb poo poo like that, either. I'd pay a pretty penny to go shopping at a walmart inside of a pyramid. e: The Pyramid in Memphis, TN doesn't count 
Iseeyouseemeseeyou fucked around with this message at 05:13 on Jul 3, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2013 05:09
|
|
|
Iseeyouseemeseeyou posted:Do we know if Romans glorified actors in the same way we do in America? I remember we discussed that they did regarding Gladiators, but I mean theatre actors. They absolutely did not. People involved in the performing arts were looked down upon.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2013 05:15
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
Iseeyouseemeseeyou posted:Do we know if Romans glorified actors in the same way we do in America? I remember we discussed that they did regarding Gladiators, but I mean theatre actors. Being an actor was considered being one of the dregs of society, on the same basic level as slaves. Even if the upper classes regularly attended shows, people of Senatorial class who hung out with actors publicly were really looked down on. Even when Emperors took to hanging out with actors or even acting themselves, while everybody had to put up with it they didn't approve of it at all.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2013 05:18
|
|
|
I believe that Justinian had to change imperial laws to allow him and Theodora to get married; high ranking people weren't allowed to marry actresses.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2013 05:25
|
|
|
Why were actors treated so poorly? What if you gave a seriously profound, stirring performance? Did people just not respect you?
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2013 05:38
|
|
|
karl fungus posted:Why were actors treated so poorly? What if you gave a seriously profound, stirring performance? Did people just not respect you? A lot of the plays were considered quite lewd or somehow scandalous, designed to appeal to commoners or in some way critical of the ruling classes. To hang out with actors/treat them well was to put yourself in danger of seemingly endorsing or sharing their views. Everything I've read indicates that while the Ancient Romans were more than willing to engage in all kinds of "lewd" activity, it was considered improper to flaunt it or be open about it. Older men used to regularly engage in affairs with young men (well, boys to be perfectly frank) for example, and that was considered quite normal... so long as it was done quietly and privately and never brought out into the open. Jerusalem fucked around with this message at 07:45 on Jul 3, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2013 05:55
|
|
|
In Greece, aristocrats thought of themselves as being people who spoke truth and didn't countenance liars, since lying was a sign of having a base character and not a noble one. Since acting requires you to be good at lying, there was a prejudice against the profession. I imagine the same sort of assumptions might have been present in Roman patrician culture.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2013 06:26
|
|
|
karl fungus posted:Why were actors treated so poorly? What if you gave a seriously profound, stirring performance? Did people just not respect you? They're grown adults playing make-believe for a living. I find it harder to understand why this view of actors disappeared. (Sure, sometimes plays are good: Why should this make being a play-worker more respectable than being a plumber? Functioning poo poo-disposal is reliably better than most plays, but no society has given much pride of place to plumbers: being the sort of person that chooses to produce functioning poo poo-disposers or plays seems suspect.)
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2013 06:30
|
|
|
quote:no society has given much pride of place to plumbers Ahem. The Cappadocians 
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2013 06:52
|
|
|
meatbag posted:Ahem. Fine, the Cappadocians  Although John McCain did try to push the whole "Joe the Plumber" thing during the 2008 Presidential Election.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2013 07:44
|
|
|
If they showed more pride in the trade of plumbing, they may have been able to do a better job with the draining of the Fucine Lake.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2013 09:18
|
|
|
meatbag posted:Ahem. I looked around for a bit and I couldn't find info on Cappadocians and plubming; what's up with Cappadocians and plumbing?
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2013 11:39
|
|
|
I can't find the clip on Youtube, but it's a reference to here On a related note, did anyone else get irritated as a 14 year old when this first aired that clearly the capadocians had no real specialty with hydrological engineering, and the Nabataeans would have been a better example? Or should I have just gotten out more?
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2013 12:05
|
|
|
Suenteus Po posted:They're grown adults playing make-believe for a living. I find it harder to understand why this view of actors disappeared.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2013 14:07
|
|
|
Halloween Jack posted:I believe evolving communication networks allowed individual actors to develop star power, which was definitely cemented for the top actors by the mid 19-th century. Once broadcast communication technology allowed performers to make boatloads of money, the stigma quickly disappeared completely (for actors who are actually making a living at it). In addition to this point, I imagine the current societal place of "aspiring actors" is about similar to how actors were viewed in Rome. If youre at a dinner party full of 35 year old managers, doctors, lawyers etc and you told them you were an aspiring actor you'd probably receive a similar dose of condescension/pity for your occupation to that you would have in Roman times. Its only the very small massively successful minority that have lost the stigma.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2013 15:38
|
|
|
Blut posted:In addition to this point, I imagine the current societal place of "aspiring actors" is about similar to how actors were viewed in Rome. If youre at a dinner party full of 35 year old managers, doctors, lawyers etc and you told them you were an aspiring actor you'd probably receive a similar dose of condescension/pity for your occupation to that you would have in Roman times. Its only the very small massively successful minority that have lost the stigma. It might be relevant to note that 'aspiring actor' really means 'street entertainer and sock-puppet theatre'(hell, for most aspiring actors it means things like that now). Another important thing to note in the context of this issue is that the Romans loving loved rhetoric and oratory skills. The law courts worked in the forum remember. People with aptitude for acting would simply be applying those theatrical skills at the forum in the Senate, but with a different label on them.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2013 15:55
|
|
|
I don't think it's as cut and dried as "actors were pariahs." Certainly, actors were not accepted in polite society, but they were still popular in their own way. There was a reason why the less morally inhibited people in Roman history kept getting caught hanging out with them. I think a better parallel is to high-class strippers or porn stars. If you're a senator (then or now) you'd be stoked to go to that kind of party, you just really really wouldn't want anyone to find out.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2013 18:07
|
|
|
Perhaps a better way to characterise the Roman disdain for actors might be to replace the work actor with porn star. So Nero would be like George Bush suddenly deciding he wanted to do porn. While in office. Only actually having enough power that he could make watching it mandatory.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2013 18:09
|
|
|
Cast_No_Shadow posted:Perhaps a better way to characterise the Roman disdain for actors might be to replace the work actor with porn star.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2013 21:24
|
|
|
So was Procopius not really lying about Theodora?
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2013 21:45
|
|
|
karl fungus posted:So was Procopius not really lying about Theodora? Unless she really was possessed by a demon, I think it's safe to say that the Secret Histories was a bit of libel on the Imperial couple.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2013 22:53
|
|
|
I study philosophy like theres no tomorrow. And I just recently learned that Plato's name was not Plato and that it was actually Aristocles. My mind exploded in the most literal of all possible senses. What sort of things have blown your mind, or blown the minds of others when you tell them? (all in regards to roman/greek history, of course) For those whose minds have been blown with me, apparently "plato" is greek for "broad" or "wide" and it was his nickname because of his broad shoulders.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2013 04:26
|
|
|
Space T Rex posted:I study philosophy like theres no tomorrow. And I just recently learned that Plato's name was not Plato and that it was actually Aristocles. My mind exploded in the most literal of all possible senses. What sort of things have blown your mind, or blown the minds of others when you tell them? (all in regards to roman/greek history, of course) Aristotle wrote some dialogues. We only have them in fragments, but he didn't just write treatises. Also: it's unclear if anything we have as a "treatise" from Aristotle is anything but lecture notes compiled by students. (Physics and De Anima are almost certainly nothing but that.) It's not clear why Plato was called "Plato". I've always liked the claim that it was because of his wrestling stance. (This is Diogenes's explanation of the name.)
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2013 04:38
|
|
|
It amazes me that any literature at all survived 2,600+ years of European history, that we can still read any of it, and that a lot of the plays and stories raise issues that are still resonant today. Hell, even the mode of storytelling is still resonant today - I've seen advice for aspiring Hollywood screenwriters by industry professionals that includes Aristotle's Poetics as one of the top five books to read on the subject. It also amazes me that the ancients thought jokes about farting and masturbation were hilarious, along with jokes about making fun of other city-states' funny accents.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2013 04:46
|
|
|
I always love being reminded that the people of 2000-2500 years ago were pretty much exactly like us, only without the benefit of widespread education and a lot of technological advances. The fact that a lot of the graffiti preserved in Pompeii is the ancient equivalent of scribblings on school desks and bathroom walls (or internet forums) is hilarious to me. My favorite is probably,"Theophilus, don’t perform oral sex on girls against the city wall like a dog" I mean, for gently caress's sake, Theophilus!
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2013 05:00
|
|
|
Jerusalem posted:I always love being reminded that the people of 2000-2500 years ago were pretty much exactly like us, only without the benefit of widespread education and a lot of technological advances. The fact that a lot of the graffiti preserved in Pompeii is the ancient equivalent of scribblings on school desks and bathroom walls (or internet forums) is hilarious to me. My favorite is probably,"Theophilus, don’t perform oral sex on girls against the city wall like a dog" I think that's what you meant to type. But yeah, I also find it funny but almost more heartening that people then were the same as they are now. With my occasionally very low opinion of humanity in general it kind of helps to know that we're no worse off today than we were 2000 years ago, human nature-wise, at least.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2013 05:05
|
|
|
Space T Rex posted:I study philosophy like theres no tomorrow. And I just recently learned that Plato's name was not Plato and that it was actually Aristocles. My mind exploded in the most literal of all possible senses. What sort of things have blown your mind, or blown the minds of others when you tell them? (all in regards to roman/greek history, of course) Recent scholars have argued that the legend about his name being Aristocles originated in the Hellenistic age. Plato was a common name, of which 31 instances are known at Athens alone.[26] Tarán, L., "Plato's Alleged Epitaph" in Collected Papers (1962-1999) (Brill, 2001), p. 61. Found on wiki with citations!
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2013 05:14
|
|
|
I wonder if people were the same 2000 years before the Romans, too.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2013 05:21
|
|
|
Yep. The oldest recorded joke is a fart joke, it's from like 1600 BC in Sumeria, where writing was invented. Biologically, modern humans have been basically the same for the past 50,000 years or so. So I would guess people from 50,000 years ago were fundamentally the same as we are now.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2013 05:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 17:50 |
|
|
That's incredible. What was the joke?
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2013 05:29
|
|