|
homullus posted:So that's the big question, right? Are the semata lugra letters? Pictograms? Drawings? I don't think it's a given that they're alphabetic writing, or that the poet even understands literacy. Might be letters! Might be a stick figure of Bellerophon lying dead, with a stick figure of Iobates shrugging his shoulders!
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2014 13:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 14:41 |
|
|
Ras Het posted:A lot of classics students and Roman history aficionados are awful conservative shitheads. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2014 13:58
|
|
|
I saw some Cato Institute article about how the Roman Empire fell because of overtaxation (as opposed to landowners withholding manpower and taxes being a contributing factor in the decline of the West) And who was that goon who unironically thought he was a Spartan ubermensch?
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2014 14:03
|
|
|
Overtaxation was a thing, but it was a symptom of the larger economic collapse of the western Empire, not a cause. An easy mistake to make as a libertarian shitheel.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2014 14:09
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:And who was that goon who unironically thought he was a Spartan ubermensch?
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2014 14:11
|
|
|
The decades of plagues killing off huge %s of the population does a number on your GDP.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2014 14:13
|
|
|
I never realised the emote was for him specifically, nice. So yeah, Mike Duncan had a pretty big aside how landowners in the West retreated from public life into their estates and ruled petty fiefdoms without contributing to government. How serious an issue was that?
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2014 14:15
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:I saw some Cato Institute article about how the Roman Empire fell because of overtaxation (as opposed to landowners withholding manpower and taxes being a contributing factor in the decline of the West) Is it this one? "How excessive government killed Ancient Rome" http://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/serials/files/cato-journal/1994/11/cj14n2-7.pdf People really love to use Rome as a vehicle to push their pet issues. Falukorv fucked around with this message at 20:20 on Oct 7, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2014 15:10
|
|
|
Berke Negri posted:The pan-Goddess theory is very strange as the regular routine for most pre-Christian women in the Mediterranean was to sit locked up home knitting until you died during childbirth.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2014 16:05
|
|
|
The ancient Basque pantheon is so much better for that, though!
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2014 16:32
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:I never realised the emote was for him specifically, nice. The term you're looking for is the "Flight of the Curiales." Basically, rich men used to subsidize their towns to the hilt because well into the imperial period, you could still advance your career as a leading man in your city. There were substantial benefits to being one of the top men in town and building a massive bath complex with "Publius Did This" on the inscription would help substantially. After Diocletian's reforms increased the power of the imperial bureaucracy, rich people in the cities realized where the power was going and tried to get their kids into the bureaucracy rather than into city offices, which lost most of their meaning, and there was no longer any incentive for rich people to build up local infrastructure just to build personal support for them, so all of those "Publius Did This" buildings stop getting built. Peter Heather talks a lot about this in his books.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2014 17:22
|
|
|
Patter Song posted:The term you're looking for is the "Flight of the Curiales." Basically, rich men used to subsidize their towns to the hilt because well into the imperial period, you could still advance your career as a leading man in your city. There were substantial benefits to being one of the top men in town and building a massive bath complex with "Publius Did This" on the inscription would help substantially. After Diocletian's reforms increased the power of the imperial bureaucracy, rich people in the cities realized where the power was going and tried to get their kids into the bureaucracy rather than into city offices, which lost most of their meaning, and there was no longer any incentive for rich people to build up local infrastructure just to build personal support for them, so all of those "Publius Did This" buildings stop getting built. I remember that those kind of positions eventually became a burden for local elites, since they had to pay for the government of towns out of their own pockets. I think Justinian upped the punishment for "desertion" and made those offices hereditary.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2014 18:28
|
|
|
Halloween Jack posted:Neopagans, from what I can tell, aren't focused on Greek and Roman gods--nor Egyptian or Mesopotamian ones. As to these revelations, they are 99.99% likely to be one or more of: 1) Conjured from thin cloth because people are hanging on your word and who's going to stop you? 2) Conjured from thin cloth but genuinely believed in. ("Inspired by a dream I had, which Athena sent me" etc.) 3) An interpretation of a secondary/tertiary source without any application of skill, context, judgement or reservation. 4) An interpretation of a secondary/tertiary source which appeals to the priest's prejudices with even less application of skill, context, judgement or reservation. 5) An interpretation of a secondary/tertiary source (without any skill etc.) which is chosen as appealing to an audience's prejudices. Generally in fact harmful to the advancing of the audience's ideals. Passing off misogynistic texts or authors as feminist conveys bad messages, you pillocks, whether you're doing it deliberately or ignorantly. (Ditto for other groups - race per the Black Athena thing we were talking about a while back, or whatever other set of people has congealed into this particular neopagan circle.)
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2014 18:49
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:So yeah, Mike Duncan had a pretty big aside how landowners in the West retreated from public life into their estates and ruled petty fiefdoms without contributing to government. How serious an issue was that? BravestOfTheLamps posted:I remember that those kind of positions eventually became a burden for local elites, since they had to pay for the government of towns out of their own pockets. I think Justinian upped the punishment for "desertion" and made those offices hereditary.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 02:11
|
|
|
You might say inequality doomed the western empire. Not the result Cato wants!
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 02:25
|
|
|
Fell Fire posted:I kind of want this. I wish I knew some, beyond the usual aliens/Atlantis stuff. I had an otherwise sane co-worker who had been convinced that ancient Troy was located in Great Britain.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 03:19
|
|
|
Sleep of Bronze posted:Probably just the places on the Internet I wander, but I've found enough Classical neopagans. They typically gather around 'priest'-type figures, who tell them everything about the gods they're supposedly interested in. In a given community, you probably get .... 50ish followers to one person who's meant to know what they're doing? The followers coo and gasp at the coolness of every revelation of "ancient research" about Greek worship from these priestly figures. 6) Translated from the ORIGINAL BASQUE NO REALLY YOU GUYS I HAVE DIAGRAMS Maybe we should move to P/C, I think it's back for Halloween
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 03:27
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:I remember that those kind of positions eventually became a burden for local elites, since they had to pay for the government of towns out of their own pockets. I think Justinian upped the punishment for "desertion" and made those offices hereditary. Well, in a sense this was a legitimate example of overtaxation. The Empire's recovery from the Crisis of the Third Century was very, very extended and taxes were continually ratcheted up throughout late antiquity. It makes no sense to talk about this in the context of modern economics like the Cato Institute would like to do, but the Romans did not really have a solid grasp of economics at all and did a lot of counterproductive things to try to raise revenue that just ended up destroying the Empire's societal infrastructure.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 04:20
|
|
|
And as Peter Heather would be quick to point out, the Sassanids were a vigorous, lively military superpower replacing the defensively minded Parthians and the existence of the Sassanids required a massive military increase at just the time the budget was already squeezed to the breaking point by the increase in bureaucracy etc. under Diocletian. Heather estimated something like a 30% increase in the size of the Roman military as a response to the Sassanids by the 4th century, which dramatically increased the military spending that was always the largest item on the Roman budget ledger.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 04:44
|
|
|
GhostofJohnMuir posted:Yeah, the whole thing seemed like it was really ignoring the elitist and exclusive nature of democracy in the Roman Republic and the times Cicero violated his principles in the name of political expediency. I would also quibble that most of Cicero's influence on America's constitution mostly came from his influence on the writings of Montesquieu rather than as some kind of glorious direct line of inspiration. I just wanted to see if this kind of narrative was commonly taught since I've picked up most of my knowledge through self directed reading. It's common among the political right, because the Roman Republic was a heavily aristocratic "democracy" controlled entirely by wealthy landowners, IE the kind of society they want. Caesar used his power base as a man of the people and land reformer to get political support, and land reform/taking poo poo from the rich is the worst thing possible to right wingers, so therefore Caesar and the Roman Republic is a perfect allegory for what they don't want to happen to America. GhostofJohnMuir posted:Yeah, the whole thing seemed like it was really ignoring the elitist and exclusive nature of democracy in the Roman Republic ... Falukorv posted:You would think, that being a classics student, he ought to know better, but there you go. So no, it's not ignoring anything. That's the entire point. icantfindaname fucked around with this message at 05:46 on Oct 8, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 05:39
|
|
|
Halloween Jack posted:Neopagans, from what I can tell, aren't focused on Greek and Roman gods--nor Egyptian or Mesopotamian ones. It's always the ancient Germans and Celts, or Neolithic tribes, about whose religion we know little and can thus project whatever we want onto it. It's because they're neonazis. You see similar things with Slavic paganism from Russian/South Slavic fascists
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 05:43
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:I saw some Cato Institute article about how the Roman Empire fell because of overtaxation (as opposed to landowners withholding manpower and taxes being a contributing factor in the decline of the West). "Overtaxation" is bullshit pandering by the Cato conservatives. One of the consistent problems with the empire was its inability to tax effectively and therefore it was always running out of money. There were large swathes of the empire and its citizens that were entirely exempt from taxation (like most of Italy, or non-citizens), and taxes were not tied to inflation and generally only targeted niche elements of the economy. The Roman government was frequently broke, and the imperial family would have to bail it out and then go to war in order to seize other people's assets. Even after Diocletian's tax reforms broadened the tax base and allowed people to pay taxes in kind, there were persistent issues with the taxation system that meant actual tax rates were far below the nominal values. For example, late-Imperial tax law covered buying commodities like food, but didn't cover hiring someone to produce those commodities locally. So wealthy nobility (known as duxes) would create self-sufficient estates that would make their own cheese and wine rather than buying it on the market and paying tax - and they would actively protect their workforce from imperial taxation or conscription. As you may might guess, this later lead directly to the feudal ducal estates of the Medieval Europe. All this taken together, the general trend was for taxation to be largely avoidable, particularly for the rich. The estimate is that the average Roman tax rate was between 2 to 5 percent, which is absurdly low considering how much the state provided. Even the occasional infusions of wartime plunder and asset seizures would never be enough to maintain an empire with such low taxation. Presumably this was made up for in the form of institutionalized fees and graft at other layers of the system. But getting away from the Cato Institute, there were two issues where overtaxation did become a problem. I say "getting away from the Cato Institute" because these were features of the Roman tax system that simply don't exist in the American system, and didn't constitute overtaxation on a systematic level. The first was that taxation was effectively privatized. Wealthy Romans would essentially bid for the right of tax collection, and the winner would pay the Roman state a flat amount and be entitled to skim off the top. This combined with the expense of the political patronage system and encouraged governors to go into debt to win the job and then to squeeze their provinces for as much as they could stand while serving their term. Since there was a limited class of people that paid taxes, this would often mean targeting the same people over and over. Separately, there was an issue in that taxes were often paid for multiple year periods. You can imagine the issues that would be presented if modern tax collectors only came by once every five or ten years. People would neglect to save up money, and then wouldn't be able to pay what they owed when the taxman came by. Both of these are overtaxation in some ways, but not in the way that Cato implies would translate to contemporary America. Kaal fucked around with this message at 07:35 on Oct 8, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 07:23
|
|
|
Halloween Jack posted:Neopagans, from what I can tell, aren't focused on Greek and Roman gods--nor Egyptian or Mesopotamian ones. It's always the ancient Germans and Celts, or Neolithic tribes, about whose religion we know little and can thus project whatever we want onto it. Back when I was vice chair of a neopagan organization here in Finland, there was a fair amount of Roman reconstructionalists around. And shitloads of Wiccans and LaVeyan Satanists. These days it's apparently mostly about Finnish reconstructionalism.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 07:28
|
|
|
I've read a couple of stories that purport to tell how nudity came to be part of the Olympic games. Explanations seem to range from youth initiation rites, to a lost loincloth, to "the Spartans started it." Is there an explanation that is more widely accepted than others? Are there any recorded incidents of Olympic boners? As in, dudes sporting wood while wrestling, or hitting themselves in the donger with a discus? Did Arrhachion of Philgaleia actually exist, and did he really simultaneously die and win a pankration contest?
|
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 08:10
|
|
|
Centripetal Horse posted:Are there any recorded incidents of Olympic boners? As in, dudes sporting wood while wrestling, or hitting themselves in the donger with a discus? Haha, your question reminded me of this  UFC fighter Will Campuzano had a boner during his weigh in So yeah I'm sure ancient Greek dudes got boners from time to time
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 08:44
|
|
|
Centripetal Horse posted:I've read a couple of stories that purport to tell how nudity came to be part of the Olympic games. Explanations seem to range from youth initiation rites, to a lost loincloth, to "the Spartans started it." Is there an explanation that is more widely accepted than others? They competed nude because Greeks loved dicks.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 08:57
|
|
|
Hogge Wild posted:They competed nude because Greeks loved dicks. Just not big ones.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 09:08
|
|
|
I assume it's the same reason why heroes are always nude in art. Nudity and heroism were linked. As for why, I think that goes back before Greek writing so we have no idea.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 14:14
|
|
|
I think it's obvious. Heroes are people who fight and win and look good naked. Fighting and winning while looking good naked is just another great Greek invention.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 16:18
|
|
|
Interesting question, but when the the naked ape start being ashamed of his nakedness? Clothing is, after all, merely a technology to keep us warm and protected, later to indicate status, that we were fine to do without for the larger portion of our history. Then at some point, this technology becomes mandatory for our cocks. Who made it mandatory?
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 16:37
|
|
|
Exioce posted:Interesting question, but when the the naked ape start being ashamed of his nakedness? Clothing is, after all, merely a technology to keep us warm and protected, later to indicate status, that we were fine to do without for the larger portion of our history. Then at some point, this technology becomes mandatory for our cocks. Who made it mandatory? Ancient Egyptian men wore short skirts that probably exposed their junk more often than not. They had underwear though! Very modern for 3000 years ago. Across almost all cultures, people cover up their genitals, but not necessarily their asses. For women, it's just more hygienic, considering how common yeast infections are. And for men, pricking your dick on a thorn or something would be a pretty bad situation for your health and sexual activity, so there's a base biological drive for basic clothing. Everything else you can chalk up to the natural prudishness of civilization. From butts to breasts to ankles it goes on.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 17:11
|
|
|
Exioce posted:Interesting question, but when the the naked ape start being ashamed of his nakedness? Clothing is, after all, merely a technology to keep us warm and protected, later to indicate status, that we were fine to do without for the larger portion of our history. Then at some point, this technology becomes mandatory for our cocks. Who made it mandatory? Not even in the gay ancient world did people want to see your dick all the time.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 18:19
|
|
|
Also, once clothing was available, it became a status symbol. In ancient Egypt slaves often worked naked, as did laborers who couldn't afford to dirty their shendyt.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 18:23
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:It's because they're neonazis. You see similar things with Slavic paganism from Russian/South Slavic fascists Some of the Germanic/Scandinavian groups certainly trend that way. The Celtic ones are generally just hippies (see the guys who have that ceremony at Stonehenge every year, etc)
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 19:15
|
|
|
Being naked is a really bad idea in hot places where the sun hangs in the sky like Sauron's eye. Getting back to nakedness and heroism, I'm thinking of this wonderful piece by Polybius where he talks about the Gaesatae.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 19:46
|
|
|
I just got the first volume of the Cambridge History of China covering the Qin and Han. Good time for any questions. I haven't even made it through pre imperial Qin yet. Turns out King Zheng aka First Emperor of China was only the last in a long line of badass kings of Qin. King Wu of Qin died in a weight lifting competition, possibly the most manly royal death I have ever heard of. Hey there's a fragment of mid 3rd century Qin legal code mentioned in here. Apparently a Qin official had his book of statutes buried with him and it was dug up in 1975. I may have overstated Qin's draconian "ancient Chinese Judge Dredd" legal code. Death is only mentioned as a punishment for incest and "one who praises the enemy so as to bring fear to the hearts of the multitude," i.e. treason. The most disproportionate punishment in the fragment is reserved for police* corruption; five or more police conspiring to commit robbery, no matter the value of the robbery, were to be punished by amputation of the left foot and tattooing followed(!) by hard labor. *literally "robber-destroyer" Fewer than five conspiring to commit a robbery of greater value than 660 copper cash were to be punished by amputation of the nose, tattooing and hard labor, between 220 and 660 tattooing and hard labor without mutilation, 1 to 219 by tattooing and exile. For ordinary citizens petty theft was punishable by 30 days forced labor. The text points out that until the 19th century theft above five shillings in value was punishable by death in the United Kingdom. Most of the fragment is concerned with administrative codes: the duties of various officials, the standards to which they were to be carried out, and the punishments for failure to comply with statute. Most punishments were a simple fine, but the value of fines were calculated in suits of armor and shields which is a little eccentric. For really trivial offenses the punishment was an official reprimand. The text really hammers on about doing things in the proper way and writing everything down. Official requests had to be in writing and delivered in person rather than by a third party, official messages had to be signed, dated, and time-stamped or you were doing it wrong. One thing I found particularly impressive were the fines for officials having inaccurate weights and measures. An official (presumably in some sort of economic role) could be fined a coat of armor if his weights were 1% off the official standard, with other units of measure having various acceptable margins. There is also a great deal about proper use of land. Such and such a crop should use so many seeds for a given amount of land. County-level records of acreage cultivated and with what crop, precipitation, any natural disasters, harvest yields etcetera were due at the capital by the end of 8th month or you get a fine. Private cutting of wood, making of dams, poisoning of fish(?) were forbidden for half the year with an exception for woodcutting in the event of the unexpected need for a coffin. I would just post the whole three page discussion of the fragment but I don't want to bother typing! Here's the conclusion though: Derk Bodde, Professor Emeritus U of Pittsburgh yes that is his name posted:Perhaps, however, what has been cited suffices to demonstrate the functioning of principles which contributed in a major way to the Ch'in triumph: insistence on efficiency, precision, and fixed routine in administrative procedure; emphasis on the exact quantification of data; and attention to the improvement of agricultural production and conserving of natural resources. Oh God Qin Shi Huang took the bronze weapons from the conquered states and melted them to cast twelve 28-ton human statues. The Qin really did have the most metal kings ever. Did I mention that the Qin state color was black? It was. Their flags were black and official uniforms were black.  Dong Zhuo destroyed ten of the statues in 192 AD and the last two were melted down in the Northern and Southern Dynasties period. This Dong Zhuo guy is just the worst. Didn't think I'd find a link between the Qin and Three Kingdoms but there it is. Arglebargle III fucked around with this message at 13:24 on Oct 9, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 06:18
|
|
|
That's really cool, thanks! Is this a recent book, or an older one?
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2014 13:28
|
|
|
This ancient China stuff is interesting, where could an poorly educated slob like myself get started?
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 01:58
|
|
|
Rockopolis posted:Is this a recent book, or an older one? It's from 1986. Ithle01 posted:This ancient China stuff is interesting, where could an poorly educated slob like myself get started? http://amzn.com/052166991X http://amzn.com/002908752X
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 05:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 14:41 |
|
|
Can you recommend something for the fall of the Han/Three Kingdoms period? I'm reading the Romance of the Three Kingdoms, which is certainly dramatic, but I'm only getting a hint of how much I'm missing because I don't know Chinese culture, politics, history, philosophy....
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 06:34
|
|