|
Kemper Boyd posted:Also, Iceland. I thought Iceland was a democracy but looks like I was wrong.
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 15:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 05:56 |
|
|
I need to remember something but I'm drawing a blank - does anyone know that Ancient Egyptian papyrus that had animals doing human things like a zebra playing a horn or a board game (don't exactly remember) and can find it and its details?
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 17:50
|
|
|
Fututor Magnus posted:I need to remember something but I'm drawing a blank - does anyone know that Ancient Egyptian papyrus that had animals doing human things like a zebra playing a horn or a board game (don't exactly remember) and can find it and its details? do you mean this one? http://www.britishmuseum.org/resear...objectid=117404
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 18:18
|
|
|
Jamwad Hilder posted:do you mean this one? thanks. needed it for research into history of furries.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 18:45
|
|
|
There was one in SF with little kids jerking off adults under a banquet table. All I can recall is it was ancient Egyptian. It was right next to a statue of two Aztec dogs loving but I forget what the point of the exhibition was.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 21:18
|
|
|
LingcodKilla posted:two Aztec dogs loving Well now I know what my next parachute account is named
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 22:49
|
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:Well now I know what my next parachute account is named Lucky day. I actually took a photo of that one. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 23:35
|
|
|
https://www.google.com/search?q=larco+museum+pottery&tbm=isch The Larco Museum's Gallery of Pre-Columbian Erotic Pottery in Lima. It's pretty great.
|
|
#
?
Nov 10, 2016 23:57
|
|
|
Noticed a Netflix Original called Roman Empire. Anyone checked it out yet?
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2016 22:59
|
|
|
10 Beers posted:Noticed a Netflix Original called Roman Empire. Anyone checked it out yet? We were chatting about it a page or two back, I got about fifteen minutes into the first episode last night and then fell asleep. Not because it was bad or anything, I was just tired. It looks ok, definitely takes an aesthetic cue from Rome, Sean Bean is a very listenable narrator, Commodus is an excellent story to focus on just because it's such a clusterfuck and such an obvious "turning point" in the empire's fortunes. I'll watch some more tonight.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2016 23:24
|
|
|
Oh, Sean Bean talking about Rome sounds super interesting, thanks!
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2016 23:40
|
|
|
10 Beers posted:Noticed a Netflix Original called Roman Empire. Anyone checked it out yet? I found the switch between narration and historian interviews and dramatized vignettes pretty annoying. The first episode was playing in the background while I was cooking, and it didn't seem worth it to keep watching. There was a bunch of stuff about Faustina accidentally starting a war based on a miscommunication about the supposed death of Marcus Aurelius, that would be cool if true, but it seemed too Shakespearean to be a thing that actually happened as told. I was pretty happy to see clips of historians talking about him, but their presence was edited down to really simple stuff. I was hoping they might get into the historiography of how good an emperor Commodus was or wasn't, maybe that is in there, but no trace of it in the first episode. I don't know that Commodus' reign is such a "turning point" though. I mean it clearly is to the extent that "turning points" truly exist, but the empire has seen a lot of low points prior, and will see many high points after. PittTheElder fucked around with this message at 00:09 on Nov 16, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2016 00:06
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
PittTheElder posted:I don't know that Commodus' reign is such a "turning point" though. I mean it clearly is to the extent that "turning points" truly exist, but the empire has seen a lot of low points prior, and will see many high points after. I put it in scare quotes because there's obviously not the case that Rome was all good before he showed up and all poo poo afterwards, but Cassius Dio, who wrote in Commodus' day and those of the Severans, definitely conceived of Commodus' reign as having been the end of the good old days when autocratic emperors ruled well for the good of all, fought and won victories over the barbarians, enriched the empire, wisely appointed their successors and were generally awesome and widely beloved. Obviously his point of view was historically contingent and god knows how accurate our concept of his writings is, let alone how accurate his portrait of events was; but in hindsight it's hard to disagree with the point that Roman power ran more smoothly under the so-called "good emperors" than it did under the Severans or those who came after them.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2016 00:51
|
|
|
I got to the part where a historian said "the problem with Marcus Aurelius is that he didn't pick a qualified, trained, individual to lead his empire, instead he wanted to give it to his son". I get why they would simplify it, but leaving out the fact that Marcus Aurelius was the only one of the Five Good Emperors to even have a son was enough of an omission for me to decide that the show just isn't what I'm in the mood for at the moment. It probably isn't bad, but it seems like they want it to be accessible to a wide audience, which probably won't satisfy many posters in this thread either. Mr Bean's narration is nice. I will probably go back later and give it another shot.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2016 03:03
|
|
|
Chichevache posted:Mr Bean's narration is nice. I would pay a lot of money for a Mr. Bean in Rome movie.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2016 05:43
|
|
|
packetmantis posted:I would pay a lot of money for a Mr. Bean in Rome movie. Plus he already speaks movie Latin!
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2016 05:56
|
|
|
Does anyone know anything about the first horse riding? I know that they were domesticated around 5000 years ago, but they were used for carts and chariots for a few thousand years, right? Who were the idiots who decided "I'm going to sit on this animal that could kill me with a kick and learn how to fight while riding it"? (I realize that the answer is probably "some steppe nomads and therefore all we know is that the first record we've found of people riding horses start showing up around time x", but I'm still curious.) Elyv fucked around with this message at 22:17 on Nov 16, 2016 |
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2016 22:12
|
|
|
I can almost guarantee it was a side-effect of some dude deciding to try and gently caress a horse.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2016 22:54
|
|
|
Elyv posted:(I realize that the answer is probably "some steppe nomads and therefore all we know is that the first record we've found of people riding horses start showing up around time x", but I'm still curious.) From "The Horse, The Wheel and Language": "The earliest evidence for possible horse domestication in the Pontic-Caspian stepped appeared after 4800 BCE." "The domestication of the horse is dated about 2500 BCE by the size-variability method. The earliest site that shows both a significant decrease in average size and an increase in variability is the Bell Beaker settlement of Csepel-Haros in Hungary." So...some steppe nomads and therefore all we know is that the first records we've found of people riding horses, and also the horses getting bigger start showing up around time x.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2016 23:02
|
|
|
Well What Now posted:I can almost guarantee it was a side-effect of some dude deciding to try and gently caress a horse. Which in itself is probably a side effect of a friend daring him after said dude ingested too much alcohol.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2016 23:03
|
|
|
I know greco-roman statues depict an idealized physique, but do we know if your average male legionary, hoplite, farmer, or whoever was actually rocking the rippling abs and pecs of a statue? I know some early accounts of european colonists comment on how tall and shapely the natives of America were, so it seems possible that Titus Pullo might be jacked. We tend to think of people in the past as being dwarfish and unhealthy but that's mostly a Victorian problem stemming from the horrible conditions of early labor, yeah?
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2016 23:15
|
|
|
Lol In the Gallic Wars Caesar mentions how huge and beefy the Germans are because they eat loads of red meat and bathe in the rivers like big manly dudes. Possibly in a lot of more complex industrial societies like Rome and European countries heading to America, the average poor person in a city or a big army would be eating an unvaried diet of bread and flour porridge. They probably looked like the Victorian poor, I doubt they all looked like idealised body builders. On the other hand being a Greek hoplite was pretty loving physical
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2016 01:00
|
|
|
Roman legionaries got a pretty balanced and healthy diet at least, don't know about how much effort they put into their general physique but they certainly weren't underfed runts even if Gauls/Germans mocked them about it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2016 01:09
|
|
|
Magnus Manfist posted:On the other hand being a Greek hoplite was pretty loving physical you can be strong as hell while not having the physique of a greek god, just look at lots of people in the developing world today. that old granny who carries 15 gallons of water home every day for several miles could beat the snot out of me.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2016 01:18
|
|
|
skasion posted:Roman legionaries got a pretty balanced and healthy diet at least, don't know about how much effort they put into their general physique but they certainly weren't underfed runts even if Gauls/Germans mocked them about it. It should also be remembered that someone could easily look like poo poo as a poor person or dirt farmer and then get in shape when they joined the military.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2016 01:45
|
|
|
I can't speak for the average citizens, or even legionnaires.. but there are good odds that due to their diet and need for showmanship, Gladiators were a bit on the fattish side. Not fat per say, but thicker than your average person. http://archive.archaeology.org/0811/abstracts/gladiator.html https://outofthiscentury.wordpress....nt-roman-arena/
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2016 01:50
|
|
|
Dalael posted:I can't speak for the average citizens, or even legionnaires.. but there are good odds that due to their diet and need for showmanship, Gladiators were a bit on the fattish side. Not fat per say, but thicker than your average person. So we're talking linemen and not wide receivers or runningbacks. Seems fair given the profession, you want to be able to put some weight behind your weapon so the other guy can't just deflect that poo poo with impunity.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2016 02:18
|
|
|
vintagepurple posted:I know greco-roman statues depict an idealized physique, but do we know if your average male legionary, hoplite, farmer, or whoever was actually rocking the rippling abs and pecs of a statue? I'd say probably picture like some wiry but strong farmer type. The guys that aren't jacked at all because they don't work out, but are strong from physical labor.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2016 02:39
|
|
|
Magnus Manfist posted:Lol Romans tended to be shorter than the barbarians since they grew up in a huge city without the best nutrition. Once they were soldiers they were eating well and working out a ton, so the average Roman legionary was shorter than most dudes now, but in drat good shape. Human height has varied over time, with Victorian times being some of the shortest.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2016 04:07
|
|
|
You know who has jacked up calves? Porters. After going up and down hills carrying >80kg all day for years they look like they're trying to smuggle melons in their legs.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2016 05:11
|
|
|
I remember reading somewhere that the Romans and Greeks held middle-aged veterans in much higher esteem than younger soldiers, which probably doesn't speak for any obsession with physique. Unless I'm misunderstanding how active middle-class romans were.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2016 06:38
|
|
|
There's a differenc between esteem and admired beauty. I'm sure they could recognize that the 40 year old vet knew his poo poo backwards and forwards and went to him first if things got hairy while still admitting that the 17 year old was hotter.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2016 07:11
|
|
|
Well for soldiering middle age is like late 30s early 40s. You've spent years exercising constantly and eating a pretty good, healthy diet, with access to the best medical care in the world (for the Romans at least, Greeks didn't have the same system). And you have a ton of experience. Those make sense as the peak guys in the army.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2016 07:15
|
|
|
Slim Jim Pickens posted:I remember reading somewhere that the Romans and Greeks held middle-aged veterans in much higher esteem than younger soldiers, which probably doesn't speak for any obsession with physique. Unless I'm misunderstanding how active middle-class romans were. You do get cases of generals specifically calling out the youngins (20-30 year olds) to do poo poo like run off scouts or race up mountainsides.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2016 07:34
|
|
|
Cyrano4747 posted:There's a differenc between esteem and admired beauty. I'm sure they could recognize that the 40 year old vet knew his poo poo backwards and forwards and went to him first if things got hairy while still admitting that the 17 year old was hotter. Didn't the Romans even value rugged looks beyond plain beauty, I've read that that is the reason why a lot of statues of consuls and senators look crusty as gently caress.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2016 09:08
|
|
|
Grand Fromage posted:Well for soldiering middle age is like late 30s early 40s. You've spent years exercising constantly and eating a pretty good, healthy diet, with access to the best medical care in the world (for the Romans at least, Greeks didn't have the same system). And you have a ton of experience. Those make sense as the peak guys in the army. I guess my default image of a middle-aged man is Al Bundy.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2016 09:26
|
|
|
Slim Jim Pickens posted:I guess my default image of a middle-aged man is Al Bundy. Yeah you gotta think of your dad's grizzled friend who looks like nothing and can lift a whole fridge when he's helping you move in his van with the wizard painted on the side. Kemper Boyd posted:Didn't the Romans even value rugged looks beyond plain beauty, I've read that that is the reason why a lot of statues of consuls and senators look crusty as gently caress. Age was very much valued in the Republic and statues are accurate. If anything they might emphasize and exaggerate the age with wrinkles and stuff. Augustus changes this, his imagery portrays him as youthful for his entire life and other emperors follow suit.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2016 09:38
|
|
|
I remember reading somewhere that legionaries when not on campaign were probably also on the chubbier side, since you can march further on less food if you're carrying a bit of extra weight at the start
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2016 12:09
|
|
|
Grand Fromage posted:Well for soldiering middle age is like late 30s early 40s. You've spent years exercising constantly and eating a pretty good, healthy diet, with access to the best medical care in the world (for the Romans at least, Greeks didn't have the same system). And you have a ton of experience. Those make sense as the peak guys in the army. I will argue up and down that the supposed "fall" of the Roman Empire is a bunch of complete bullshit but goddamn did ancient Roman army surgeons know their stuff compared to the medical professionals who succeeded them. I don't mean the "doctors" who had Galen as their Bible, I mean the actual cut you open and fix your wounds fellows, they reached a new level of world excellence at what they did and it is recognized that they were not equalled anywhere for centuries.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2016 12:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 11, 2024 05:56 |
|
|
It's real hard to find any medical care better than the Roman kind until the 1800s. There were advancements in understanding of anatomy and stuff but as for what a surgeon could actually pull off, honestly I'm not sure are any significant improvements until antiseptics.
|
|
#
?
Nov 17, 2016 12:14
|
|