|
So you're saying he wasn't quite ready?
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 10:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 18:29 |
|
|
thrakkorzog posted:Well, Aethelred the Unready was a ten year old kid who was crowned King of England, and had to fend off vikings. Now now, he was clearly a better ruler than David Cameron.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 10:41
|
|
|
thrakkorzog posted:I still think that Ivar the Boneless has the best Viking name ever. Lets not forget Ivar's old man, Ragnar who wears hairy trousers, or his brother Sigurd Snake-in-the-eye. Vikings did names right. But yeah, one theory about Ivar was that he was impotent, the other that it's just one of those wacky Viking ironic nicknames because he was really tall. Others just think he was really flexible, and some think he had some sort of brittle bone disease which meant he couldn't walk, which sort of seems ridiculous because he was noted as a fearsome warrior. But yeah, erectile dysfunction seems the most likely to this total amateur considering the sagas even have a line about love and lust playing no part of his life. But the short answer is we'll never know the real reason, so lets just go with him not being able to get a stiffy.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 10:42
|
|
|
Kassad posted:The portrayal of Egypt was a bit inaccurate, as I remember. At least, there was no ancient Egyptian palace in Alexandria since the city was ~300 years old at the time. I don't know enough Egypt to say for that part. Certainly wouldn't be an ancient one but maybe a fake ancient one?
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 12:07
|
|
|
I don't know, the palace was just a backdrop and never actually talked about. It was probably to show "this is Egypt" in an easy to grasp way, to be honest. I also think they were deliberately going for a kind of orientalist aesthetic to try and translate how the Romans would have seen the Ptolemies (a decadent dynasty about to fall apart).
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 12:26
|
|
|
As I understand it, at the time period in question the Egyptians didn't really dress like ancient Egyptians and would have been fairly Hellenized by that point. So they wouldn't be wearing schentis and such like they did on the show, basically. Edit: I am going to assume this was more for the benefit of the viewer, so they would know that the bits set it Egypt were actually set in Egypt. When talking about Egyptians of 2,000 years ago folks expect to see schentis and nemyss-cloths.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 15:31
|
|
|
Grand Fromage posted:Rome is the most accurate show/movie in general. They do play with timescales and stuff and make Pullo/Vorenus more important than reality obviously but other than that I never really noticed anything that stood out.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 15:37
|
|
|
Mad Hamish posted:As I understand it, at the time period in question the Egyptians didn't really dress like ancient Egyptians and would have been fairly Hellenized by that point. So they wouldn't be wearing schentis and such like they did on the show, basically. This bothered me as well, but I thought it was just playing into larger cultural ideas and using a shorthand for storytelling purposes.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 15:49
|
|
|
Halloween Jack posted:Is it true that their plans for future seasons included Titus Pullo converting to Christianity? A guy who must have been at least 30 at Actium? Basically season 2 as it exists is 2 and 3 smashed together. 4 and 5 were to focus on the holy land and tell the story of Jesus. I am very happy 4 and 5 were not made as that story has been told enough goddamn times, and no i don't want to watch Pullo be Saved and essentially get preached too.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 15:53
|
|
|
WoodrowSkillson posted:Basically season 2 as it exists is 2 and 3 smashed together. 4 and 5 were to focus on the holy land and tell the story of Jesus. I am very happy 4 and 5 were not made as that story has been told enough goddamn times, and no i don't want to watch Pullo be Saved and essentially get preached too. It would have been neat to see that same attention to historical detail focused on Judea, but it would have had to compete with The Life of Brian in that space.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 16:04
|
|
|
WoodrowSkillson posted:Basically season 2 as it exists is 2 and 3 smashed together. 4 and 5 were to focus on the holy land and tell the story of Jesus. I am very happy 4 and 5 were not made as that story has been told enough goddamn times, and no i don't want to watch Pullo be Saved and essentially get preached too. That idea seems completely ludicrous considering the timeline. A spiritual successor series with similar production values and telling the story of the early church could have been something to watch. Or even better: depicting the rise to power and reign of Constantine the Great, what with him waging war against his rivals, making Christianity the official religion and building the new capital at Constantinople.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 16:14
|
|
|
WoodrowSkillson posted:Basically season 2 as it exists is 2 and 3 smashed together. 4 and 5 were to focus on the holy land and tell the story of Jesus. I am very happy 4 and 5 were not made as that story has been told enough goddamn times, and no i don't want to watch Pullo be Saved and essentially get preached too. That's a helluva extrapolation, especially for a series that was so well done.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 16:20
|
|
|
lets be honest there's at least a 50% change pullo would headbut Jesus then start hitting on mary
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 16:34
|
|
|
Unready means unwise or bad counsel, not not ready.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 18:21
|
|
|
It would've been interesting to see a more historical depiction of Israel, but trying to maintain the same sort of historical tone while mixing with Christ would've been playing with fire. Maybe if they tried doing Mithras instead... One of my favorite moments from the series was Lucius talking about how he's made some investments so that he can comfortably retire, and then his investments turn out to be slaves, because of course they're a commodity back in those days, and then of course something horrible happened to them while their owner wasn't there to pay any attention.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 19:30
|
|
|
Kopijeger posted:That idea seems completely ludicrous considering the timeline. A spiritual successor series with similar production values and telling the story of the early church could have been something to watch. Or even better: depicting the rise to power and reign of Constantine the Great, what with him waging war against his rivals, making Christianity the official religion and building the new capital at Constantinople.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 20:01
|
|
|
Jerusalem posted:That was loving beautiful, I couldn't turn away. gently caress. Strong stuff.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 20:34
|
|
|
Kopijeger posted:Or even better: depicting the rise to power and reign of Constantine the Great, what with him waging war against his rivals, making Christianity the official religion and building the new capital at Constantinople. Starring the distant descendants of Pullo and Vorenus, Blackadder style.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2016 23:24
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
Mad Hamish posted:As I understand it, at the time period in question the Egyptians didn't really dress like ancient Egyptians and would have been fairly Hellenized by that point. So they wouldn't be wearing schentis and such like they did on the show, basically. Does anyone know what the normal Egyptians would have looked like? The people in charge were Greek but I wonder how much of that really filtered down to the average person. The Ptolemys made an effort to present themselves as Egyptian in their political art for the general public, as did the Romans after, so I would think the everyday culture had remained fairly Egyptian.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 02:52
|
|
|
Grand Fromage posted:Does anyone know what the normal Egyptians would have looked like? The people in charge were Greek but I wonder how much of that really filtered down to the average person. The Ptolemys made an effort to present themselves as Egyptian in their political art for the general public, as did the Romans after, so I would think the everyday culture had remained fairly Egyptian. It depends on whether you're talking about rural or urban Egypt. I can't speak for rural Egypt, but I can offer an educated guess for Alexandria, the intellectual and cultural center of the Roman Empire. As a port city connecting to all reaches of the Empire and several non-Roman states far off, Alexandria was extremely cosmopolitan and contained the Greek elite whose ancestors were responsible for constructing it, as well as Italian Romans, sub-Saharan Africans, Jews, Indians, and native Egyptians, among others. I wasn't there and can't tell you whether or not a ton of "race-mixing" went on, but given that modern attitudes toward race wouldn't exist for about fifteen hundred more years, my guess would be that the Greek families probably stuck to their own while the rest considered themselves Romans first and Alexandrians second. The influx of Arabs into Egypt wouldn't start in significant amounts until the Islamic Empire, so based off of that, I believe the average urban Egyptian would look slightly less swarthy than now, but also with slightly more Africanized hair. Beards would be small if they existed at all.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 16:51
|
|
|
SlothfulCobra posted:It would've been interesting to see a more historical depiction of Israel, but trying to maintain the same sort of historical tone while mixing with Christ would've been playing with fire. Maybe if they tried doing Mithras instead... Part of me does love the idea of Pullo getting sucked into a Pauline church and accompanying Saul to Jerusalem where they run into Jesus' brother who says Pullo can't be a Christian because he isn't Jewish and it goes against his brother's preaching. Like, I can't imagine the reaction most evangelicals would even have to have to that as accurate history.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 16:55
|
|
|
Grand Fromage posted:Does anyone know what the normal Egyptians would have looked like? The people in charge were Greek but I wonder how much of that really filtered down to the average person. The Ptolemys made an effort to present themselves as Egyptian in their political art for the general public, as did the Romans after, so I would think the everyday culture had remained fairly Egyptian. I'm guessing they looked like normal Mediterranean traders like Greeks or Persians. It's kind of hard to say, since Egypt got conquered by the Arabs, and displaced or bred with the native population. And it's kind of hard to talk about it without sounding kind of racist. I know some of the black power folks claim that the Egyptians were black people. Well it's not to hard to look at a map of Africa and say they might not be wrong.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 17:26
|
|
|
Didn't they do genetic studies based on ancient mummies and it turned out that modern Egyptian are pretty much the same as ancient ones?
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 17:31
|
|
|
thrakkorzog posted:I'm guessing they looked like normal Mediterranean traders like Greeks or Persians. It's kind of hard to say, since Egypt got conquered by the Arabs, and displaced or bred with the native population. And it's kind of hard to talk about it without sounding kind of racist. Their own paintings of themselves show them to be Mediterranean in appearance, as were North Africans generally, like the Berbers:   They made a distinction between themselves and the Nubians to the south based on skin color.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 17:35
|
|
|
I sorta thought Grand Fromage meant their attire rather than ethnicity. (for that I have absolutely no idea) There've been pretty extensive genetic studies of Egyptians, as I recall the consensus is that ethnically they were pretty close to how they are now. In general native populations actually getting displaced by their conquerors is really rare- even in cases like England, there was a big study that came out a couple of years ago where it turned out modern "Anglo-Saxon" English people are still mostly the same as Welsh and Scots etc, and that'd go doubly so for the Islamic conquests where the ethnic Arabs were spread over such a large area, and weren't even very numerous to begin with. Compared to Egypt which was one of the most densely populated parts of the world. If you wanna have an idea of what Ancient Egyptians looked like physically, look no farther than the people that are there today.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 17:37
|
|
|
I don't know what everyone else's elementary school was like, but there is some implicit racism in the way people are often told that the ancient Egyptians weren't quite black.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 17:39
|
|
|
Koramei posted:I sorta thought Grand Fromage meant their attire rather than ethnicity. (for that I have absolutely no idea) Yeah, another good example are the Turks and Greeks who are genetically almost identical. Halloween Jack posted:I don't know what everyone else's elementary school was like, but there is some implicit racism in the way people are often told that the ancient Egyptians weren't quite black. thrakkorzog posted:I'm guessing they looked like normal Mediterranean traders like Greeks or Persians. It's kind of hard to say, since Egypt got conquered by the Arabs, and displaced or bred with the native population. And it's kind of hard to talk about it without sounding kind of racist. What?
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 17:44
|
|
|
Koramei posted:I sorta thought Grand Fromage meant their attire rather than ethnicity. (for that I have absolutely no idea) Yeah, I remember seeing a study comparing the genetic makeup of modern Greeks and modern Turks, and they're loving identical, which gave me a good chuckle. Just goes to show how invented and subjective ethnicity really is. fe: beaten Hogge Wild posted:What? No longer a thing in modern scholarship, but still a big deal in crazier parts of the internet: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Egyptian_hypothesis Halloween Jack posted:I don't know what everyone else's elementary school was like, but there is some implicit racism in the way people are often told that the ancient Egyptians weren't quite black. Also that. I imagine it's a bigger deal in the States, where I'm sure people would love to point to ancient black polities to say they're just like the "mainline" white polities. I imagine they did exist in West Africa, but I think last time we talked about this the conclusion was that the archaeology just wasn't as developed there yet. PittTheElder fucked around with this message at 17:50 on Oct 11, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 17:48
|
|
|
PittTheElder posted:Yeah, I remember seeing a study comparing the genetic makeup of modern Greeks and modern Turks, and they're loving identical, which gave me a good chuckle. Just goes to show how invented and subjective ethnicity really is. Fair enough. I've also found that it's better to talk some bullshit than ask a question. If you ask a question you will get crickets, but if you make a wrong statement, people can't correct you fast enough. thrakkorzog fucked around with this message at 18:18 on Oct 11, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 18:00
|
|
|
Koramei posted:I sorta thought Grand Fromage meant their attire rather than ethnicity. (for that I have absolutely no idea) Aren't the Scots a group of Irish invaders themselves?
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 18:04
|
|
|
Halloween Jack posted:I don't know what everyone else's elementary school was like, but there is some implicit racism in the way people are often told that the ancient Egyptians weren't quite black. They've got nothing to do with African Americans, nor the West African peoples that most blacks in the New World descend from. That said, neither do the Sudanese, Amhara, Xhosa, Kikuyu, and the litany of other phenotypically "black" but non-West-African ethnic groups in the continent. I don't think there's really a "look" to Egyptians, in any time period. Egypt has always been the at the crossroads of three continents, and like there's darker and paler Egyptians today, there were probably darker and paler Egyptians as long you look back.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 20:43
|
|
|
thrakkorzog posted:I'm guessing they looked like normal Mediterranean traders like Greeks or Persians. It's kind of hard to say, since Egypt got conquered by the Arabs, and displaced or bred with the native population. And it's kind of hard to talk about it without sounding kind of racist. Herodotus describes the people who lived south of Egypt as being black, but doesn't call attention to skin color in other descriptions of the Egyptians. He doesn't talk much about their physical features at all, in fact, and in terms of clothes he mainly points out priestly garments. So I think either Greeks and Egyptians looked similar enough that it wasn't remarkable or that he thought it so commonly known to his audience that he didn't have to mention it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 03:14
|
|
|
Koramei posted:I sorta thought Grand Fromage meant their attire rather than ethnicity. You are correct.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 13:13
|
|
|
Slim Jim Pickens posted:They've got nothing to do with African Americans, nor the West African peoples that most blacks in the New World descend from. That said, neither do the Sudanese, Amhara, Xhosa, Kikuyu, and the litany of other phenotypically "black" but non-West-African ethnic groups in the continent. I think his point is people can be real quick to dive on that particular issue to correct it. White people are wrong about a billion historical things, and when some black people try and find something to hang their hat on, they get shouted down real fast. The whole hotep "black people ran literally everything" deal is wrong, but you need to remember the context of it and not be a dickhead about correcting it since its not born of stupidity.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 13:43
|
|
|
WoodrowSkillson posted:I think his point is people can be real quick to dive on that particular issue to correct it. White people are wrong about a billion historical things, and when some black people try and find something to hang their hat on, they get shouted down real fast. The whole hotep "black people ran literally everything" deal is wrong, but you need to remember the context of it and not be a dickhead about correcting it since its not born of stupidity. Interesting of course is that the people the hat is being hanged on are insufficiently american to be of concern for either side.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 14:18
|
|
|
WoodrowSkillson posted:I think his point is people can be real quick to dive on that particular issue to correct it. White people are wrong about a billion historical things, and when some black people try and find something to hang their hat on, they get shouted down real fast. The whole hotep "black people ran literally everything" deal is wrong, but you need to remember the context of it and not be a dickhead about correcting it since its not born of stupidity. The irony here is that the Egyptians themselves would cut you if you dared suggest they were connected to any other people on the planet. The Sun rose and set on Egypt, everyone else was inferior and may as well not even exist unless it was somehow useful to them. The ancient Egyptians were Egyptians. That is all.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 14:47
|
|
|
WoodrowSkillson posted:I think his point is people can be real quick to dive on that particular issue to correct it. White people are wrong about a billion historical things, and when some black people try and find something to hang their hat on, they get shouted down real fast. The whole hotep "black people ran literally everything" deal is wrong, but you need to remember the context of it and not be a dickhead about correcting it since its not born of stupidity. You don't have to be a dick about it, but it does no one any good to have people believing in what are essentially comforting myths at the expense of understanding the reality of the area. If african americans (or afro-whatevers living somewhere else) want to be proud of a history that isn't just getting kidnapped by assholes there are things you can legitimately point them to. While the archaeology is sparse due to a combination of academic neglect and the political difficulties of the region, there are bona fide medieval kingdoms you can point to in W. Africa. Barring that we know significantly more (although still depressingly little) about groups on the E. African coast.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 15:49
|
|
|
I think the key on something like that is to correct it while immediately offering follow-up examples so that it's clear that you're not spouting some kind of "Black people are incapable of civilization" crap.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 16:46
|
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:You don't have to be a dick about it, but it does no one any good to have people believing in what are essentially comforting myths at the expense of understanding the reality of the area. If african americans (or afro-whatevers living somewhere else) want to be proud of a history that isn't just getting kidnapped by assholes there are things you can legitimately point them to. While the archaeology is sparse due to a combination of academic neglect and the political difficulties of the region, there are bona fide medieval kingdoms you can point to in W. Africa. Barring that we know significantly more (although still depressingly little) about groups on the E. African coast. Also, Nubia was a thing, and there were actual, verifiable Nubian Pharaohs. That's kind of the tiny kernel of truth at the core of the Black Aphrodite thing. The Egyptians certainly weren't black, but there were periods towards the end of ancient Egypt where they were in fact, as far as we can tell, ruled by black people.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 17:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 18:29 |
|
|
WoodrowSkillson posted:Basically season 2 as it exists is 2 and 3 smashed together. 4 and 5 were to focus on the holy land and tell the story of Jesus. I am very happy 4 and 5 were not made as that story has been told enough goddamn times, and no i don't want to watch Pullo be Saved and essentially get preached too. Hey now, Rome was a BBC/HBO co-production. That might be something you'd see in something pitched exclusively at the American market but I don't really see it panning out over here or internationally.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 17:13
|
|