|
Silver2195 posted:Sixth category: Same as the fifth, but the originators of the cult are charlatans instead of madmen. The snake-god Glycon is an actual recorded example of this. Wikipedia posted:According to Lucian, Alexander had less magical ways of causing pregnancy among his flock as well. 
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2015 10:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 03:06 |
|
|
ALL-PRO SEXMAN posted:Citation needed. Why? Would an appeal to authority make you read my reading differently? None of this is facts. All of this is interpretations of narratives. Something all people can do. My reading is not true, nor is it false. It is interesting. The point I'm trying to make is that myths should be read as condensed information which can be interpreted historically (actual events), religiously (what defines a human), politically (this is why Athens has no kings!) etc. The correct interpretation of a myth is therefor a political question. If an authority claims that there is a correct reading that is less subversive than yours that is a political act. That story about a demigod who claimed all rich people were assholes who could not get to heaven serves as an obvious example. You can either interpret that as a consolation to the poor, or as revolutionary. Both interpretations are valid, although I obviously prefer one over the other. But then again I'm a Christian who believes we can create paradise on earth if people were more kind to each other. I do not interpret the teachings of Jesus as there being an actual after life. You might claim that is heresy, which it obviously is. But again, heresy is what power calls interpretations that are not in beneficial to the church. So, politics. ___ As I stated the myths get altered over time to adapt and integrate more information. So they may describe several different events at the same time. Which given that they were used in a culture without texts is quite obvious. We on the other hand live in culture of thousands of years of literacy. Something which has seriously altered the way we intact with stories.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2015 14:05
|
|
|
quote:Re: the origin of gods and myths, I don't think all gods got started the same way. Someone like Aphrodite might have started as a poetic metaphor and gradually became literalized into an actual being to appease and ask for help I thought Aphrodite was imported from the Phoencians and inserted into the Greek pantheon?
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2015 14:08
|
|
|
sullat posted:I thought Aphrodite was imported from the Phoencians and inserted into the Greek pantheon? Weirdly enough, wiki suggests that she may have derived from an Indo-European goddess of dawn, which actually does go against my idea that she originated as a personification of love. As I said, that whole post was unscholarly speculation. Saying that she was originally a Phoenician goddess doesn't explain why the Phoenicians started believing in her in the first place, though.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2015 15:29
|
|
|
Yeah Eros, Aphrodite, Ishtar, Eoster, all probably the same goddess imported because temple prostitutes and sex mystery cults are the sort of thing people twig to.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2015 16:52
|
|
|
Quift posted:Why? Would an appeal to authority make you read my reading differently? If you could show some evidence that your interpretation isn't just something you made up doing shrooms on the toilet, than yes I would. That's how making an argument works. quote:None of this is facts. All of this is interpretations of narratives. Something all people can do. So what? I can interpret the Iliad to actually be a veiled reference to Homer selling running a Philly Cheesesteak stand in Athens. That doesn't mean anyone is required to take my interpretation seriously, and indeed they shouldn't because it's nonsense that I just made up. quote:My reading is not true, nor is it false. It is interesting. It's also completely unsupported by anything at all. You're being derided because you've presented no evidence. You might as well say that Agamemnon was a six foot tall frog monster from Sheboygan. quote:The correct interpretation of a myth is therefor a political question. This is pretty much counter to everything I've ever read about ancient mythology.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2015 22:38
|
|
|
Wow I interpret this as you being really hostile for some reason that must be internal to yourself.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2015 23:17
|
|
|
Silver2195 posted:Weirdly enough, wiki suggests that she may have derived from an Indo-European goddess of dawn, which actually does go against my idea that she originated as a personification of love. As I said, that whole post was unscholarly speculation. Oh, sorry, the Phoenician goddess of fertility Astarte/Ishtar is, like, one of the oldest worshipped divine concepts in the world, right after bearded sky-dude. Arglebargle III posted:Yeah Eros, Aphrodite, Ishtar, Eoster, all probably the same goddess imported because temple prostitutes and sex mystery cults are the sort of thing people twig to. Religion just isn't what it used to be.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2015 23:25
|
|
|
homullus posted:For "history of Rome books" I'll make the unusual recommendation of starting with Colleen McCullough. In the course of telling the stories, she shows you the politics of the Roman republic rather than telling you about them. I didn't read all of them, so I can't vouch for the whole series, but the first couple will get you through Marius and Sulla. It's much easier to hang the contents of a nonfiction Roman history book or three onto an existing understanding, even if that base was achieved by historical fiction. These books are what kicked off a (greater) interest in Roman history for me, beyond the basic knowledge of major events I'd kind of just picked up throughout the years. They're drat good reads and do a pretty good job of laying out a generally accurate timeline of events, though McCullough makes no bones about the fact they are absolutely fiction and her accounts of characters/personalities/motivations are largely her own creation even if they based on real life events. She had a real blind spot for Caesar too, justifying his actions sometimes to an absurd degree and really idealizing him as a character, but otherwise she is pretty evenhanded in her treatment of the major personalities and doesn't shy away from showing their bad sides (perhaps too much so in Sulla's case).
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2015 23:47
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:Wow I interpret this as you being really hostile for some reason that must be internal to yourself. Atlantischat makes me angry.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 00:27
|
|
|
So to change the subject a bit, I've started watching the Three Kingdoms series shared earlier in the thread and it's pretty great, but I feel like I don't quite understand some of the social context of the late Han setting. A couple questions: The characters occasionally refer to clans, and the characters occasionally meet distant relatives they seem obligated to support but don't know very well. Are these simply extended families or is there a more complex kinship system at work here? The characters, especially in the first few episodes before everything really goes bottoms up, frequently reference their position in some kind of feudal system of ranked social classes, with characters like Cao Cao and Lu Bu appearing to be minor nobles. Liu Bie, by virtue of his imperial lineage, is respected despite his poverty. People like Sun Quan Wang Yun appear to have well established pedigrees. However appointment seems to be by merit and at the Emperor's or a Lord's discretion, so what is the meaning of good birth? How does the Han peerage system work?
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 01:03
|
|
|
Squalid posted:The characters occasionally refer to clans, and the characters occasionally meet distant relatives they seem obligated to support but don't know very well. Are these simply extended families or is there a more complex kinship system at work here? This is a good question and I"m not 100% sure on it myself. Liu Bei is a poor noble, which is pretty understandable from a Western historical perspective. In the show they list his lineage, and he's like 9 generations removed from a cadet branch of the Imperial family. His father had no position and I think his grandfather failed to pay the Imperial dues to remain an official member of the Imperial house. With China's polygamist marriage system there were a lot of Imperial scions many generations removed. Liu Bei is seriously a nobody and the novel and Emperor Xian both exaggerate his importance for their own reasons. I think Sun Jian and Cao Cao are actually "new men" in the sense that while they may come from powerful and wealthy clans that wealth and power doesn't go very far back. The 2nd century was a time when the nobility succeeded in arrogating power to themselves very rapidly. 200 years previously Wang Mang had instituted harsh land redistribution but I don't know too much about how wealthy families came through that. It suggests that few families maintained their fortunes though. Cao Cao traces his aristocratic lineage back only four generations, to a wealthy and powerful court eunuch who legally adopted Cao Cao's grandfather. The Sun family I don't know about, but Sun Jian was basically a low-level general with a lot of talent and the Sun family as we think of them with the Jiangdong region as their power base didn't exist until Sun Ce went out conquering in the early 200s. Sun Quan inherits the title of Marquis of Wu from Sun Ce... who only got it like two years before his death. Oh also the Han peerage system existed in parallel to the Legalist state bureaucracy. Through the 1st century BC the bureaucracy would have been a lot more important. The aristocracy got really stomped in the Revolt of the Seven States in the early Han dynasty. From 130 AD onward though the aristocrats managed to get sale of state titles legalized. By the end of the 2nd century the wealthy and powerful families had largely displaced the examination-selected petty aristocracy in the state bureaucracy. I sort of get the sense that in the 190s the noble families are making it up as they go along. Technically, they're not supposed to be serving themselves. Instead they're supposed to be serving the Emperor, and theoretically all titles flow from him. But the collapse of that fiction is precisely what's going on the late 190s and early 200s, so they're all just winging it. I mean the Gongsuns and Caos and Suns kind of stick together, but there are Lius fighting each other, and Yuan Shao and Yuan Shu are brothers and they're the heads of opposing coalitions! Arglebargle III fucked around with this message at 02:28 on Sep 14, 2015 |
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 01:45
|
|
|
Speaking of interpreting myths, there's a hilarious review of The Greek Myths on Amazon about applying Robert Grave's White Goddess thing to Cinderella:Kelly on Amazon posted:
Speaking of, is the Greek Myths worth picking up? I feel like it'd be really annoying having to read his weird theory no one but modern day pagans seems to be into, but I heard he does a really thorough job in relating the actual myths.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 04:13
|
|
|
As one of those actual pagans, gently caress Robert Graves and the horse he rode in on. If anyone can read The White Goddess and come even close to figuring out what he was getting at I'll be amazed. It's incomprehensible garbage. I really like the way he writes in his novels, although he really flogs his waning moon bitch-goddess theory hardcore. Also, his translation of 'The Golden rear end' is the best I've read. I would say the way he tells the stories and myths is great, however, his interpretation of them is as suspect as anything written by, say, Marija Gimbutas. Graves' bullshit tree calendar continues to be a scourge upon us to this very day.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 12:49
|
|
|
Mad Hamish posted:As one of those actual pagans, gently caress Robert Graves and the horse he rode in on. If anyone can read The White Goddess and come even close to figuring out what he was getting at I'll be amazed. It's incomprehensible garbage. drat, where were you when I was asking for which translations of the Golden rear end I should put on my Christmas list? And I meant no offense re: modern pagans, I could never make sense of his theory either, though like you I love his fiction and Goodbye To All That is also a powerful book.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 13:02
|
|
|
I'm sorry! I don't like phone posting and I'm usually reading the forums while on the bus or something. But yeah, Graves' translation gets a lot of the comedy across. I've read 3 or 4 versions of The Golden rear end and his actually made me laugh.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 14:14
|
|
|
Mad Hamish posted:As one of those actual pagans, rofl
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 16:03
|
|
|
Tao Jones posted:The earliest possible date for Homer as a (at least semi-mythical) person is estimated at 1102 BC, with around 850 BC being the latest estimated date. Hesiod, the other famous Greek religious poet, is estimated at 750 BC as the earliest date he could have lived. It's supposed that the epics were codified and written down around 700-600 BC, but we have no way of knowing when people started telling stories about these figures or formulating religious ritual around them. I would speculate people weren't telling stories about Achilles in 11,000 BC, though. I believe the oldest Troy is about 1800BC but the War more then likely takes place around 1200BC during the Doric invasion. I've been reading about the records of pre-Pharaonic Egypt and some of the crazy theories people believe about that. It makes Dalel look normal.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 16:24
|
|
|
ALL-PRO SEXMAN posted:If you could show some evidence that your interpretation isn't just something you made up doing shrooms on the toilet, than yes I would. That's how making an argument works. I make no separation between ancient and contemporaries myths. All myths are interpreted differently even today. Some interpretations are more canon than others of course. Now, it doesn't matter if I made it up during a nice session of shrooms or if a professor did the shrooms. The argument stands or falls independently. That is how an argument works. For more information about the subject of arguments, see logic. I had plenty of sources in my original source and did not alter a single piece of the story. https://youtu.be/C_Gz_iTuRMM This is a retelling of karate kid. It is neither true nor false. Is is hilarious. Now, you do not need to agree with my reading. If you feel that I have misunderstood the symbolism please feel free to add to the discussion. The point is that myths should be read like this. Not as a list of facts people believed at face value. This is basically the opposite of thinking that there is a place in Bolivia were Atlantis used to be. Atlantis was a symbol (still is) made to illustrate a point. To really hammer this down, a point about governance. Politics! So everything you have learned about myths actually support my view. Some basic humility (not thinking that I'm an idiot beforehand and actually reading my post) would have shown you that. So an excuse is in order. Thank you.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 16:57
|
|
|
I'm going to request Hubble time to find Coruscant.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 16:59
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:I'm going to request Hubble time to find Coruscant. The hubble telescope is up my rear end.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 17:42
|
|
|
Baracula posted:rofl
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 17:48
|
|
|
In honor of the heavy drinking I'm going to do because of this derail, did the Romans drink other stuff than wine, were there any class or cultural differences where some groups drank other things or drink their wine differently, and were there any interesting shifts in that over time?
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 18:16
|
|
|
xthetenth posted:In honor of the heavy drinking I'm going to do because of this derail, did the Romans drink other stuff than wine, were there any class or cultural differences where some groups drank other things or drink their wine differently, and were there any interesting shifts in that over time? Mead was also a thing as was beer and barley wine.Tacitus was apparently rather disparaging about German beer. Wine of various description and adulterations was definitely more the thing in Rome.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 18:44
|
|
|
xthetenth posted:In honor of the heavy drinking I'm going to do because of this derail, did the Romans drink other stuff than wine, were there any class or cultural differences where some groups drank other things or drink their wine differently, and were there any interesting shifts in that over time? According to Diocletian's price edict, Egyptian beer was the Bud Light Lime of the ancient world and should be sold for considerably less than any other variety.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 18:53
|
|
|
xthetenth posted:In honor of the heavy drinking I'm going to do because of this derail, did the Romans drink other stuff than wine, were there any class or cultural differences where some groups drank other things or drink their wine differently, and were there any interesting shifts in that over time? You need to drink for better reasons. Like the reason that you've given up on life.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 19:05
|
|
|
As anu baka who has watched Firefly would now, egyptian beerw as the "mudder's milk" of the anicent world. Similarly, Ramesesss the IIIIrd stole a million moneys from the Israelitse and retisttributed it to Bernie Sanders, the goblins.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 19:08
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:As anu baka who has watched Firefly would now, egyptian beerw as the "mudder's milk" of the anicent world. Similarly, Ramesesss the IIIIrd stole a million moneys from the Israelitse and retisttributed it to Bernie Sanders, the goblins. Phone broken or already drunk in the afternoon?
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 19:54
|
|
|
people from the germanosphere have no right to throw shade on day-drinking
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 20:06
|
|
|
JaucheCharly posted:Phone broken or already drunk in the afternoon? 
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 20:16
|
|
|
Was Atlantis Real?!?
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 20:56
|
|
|
Not shaming daydrinking. Some of the best memories that other people have of me involve daydrinking.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 21:17
|
|
|
Friendly Tumour posted:Was Atlantis Real?!? We just finished this discussion a few pages back. Go back about 5 or 6 pages and enjoy.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 21:53
|
|
|
Dalael posted:We just finished this discussion a few pages back. Go back about 5 or 6 pages and enjoy. wow
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 21:58
|
|
|
What, would you rather we revisit the whole thing? I will not answer no to this question. And I've posted enough about it for a while.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 22:00
|
|
|
Dalael posted:What, would you rather we revisit the whole thing? I will not answer no to this question. And I've posted enough about it for a while. wowwwww
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 22:02
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:wowwwww Here is when you say No. Then says the texts itself says its not real. Then, I point out it states 22 times in the text that it is (which in itself proves nothing), but not once that it isn't. Then we argue about some other details, goal posts gets moved, I link sources, then you claim: But he didn't use the proper method, ergo it can't be true. We argue some more, and in the end neither one of us changed our minds. OR, he can go back a few pages, read the whole thing. Have a few laughs at the silliness of the whole argument and we don't go on another derail. Instead, we can focus on stuff we know to be true history, which is what this thread was intended for.
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 22:07
|
|
|
shut the gently caress up
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 22:08
|
|
|
i dont know how daleal consistently manages to be the dumbest motherfucker on a forum that hosts tcc
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 22:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 12, 2024 03:06 |
|
|
take your meds dalael
|
|
#
?
Sep 14, 2015 22:16
|
|