|
Alan Smithee posted:What were the greatest stories of upward mobility? Someone lowborn holding high office that sort of thing Diocletian was the first emperor born of low status. He rose through the social ranks via the military. He also reorganized the empire politically and militarily after the Crisis of the Third Century, ensuring its survival for a couple more centuries in the west and several more in the East. Edit: Octy posted:Some emperors would have you believe the Stoics were an extremist group and certainly their beliefs went against the whole idea of the Principate. But I don't think they were ever a formal, organised group. Wasn't Marcus Aurelius a stoic philosopher? How would that have worked? I don't know much, if anything, about stoicism. How was it against the idea of the principate?
|
#
¿
May 31, 2012 12:58
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 5, 2024 07:23 |
|
|
Orkiec posted:How late did Roman Polytheism continue to exist? Not as in neopaganism or anything but when was it finally snuffed out of historical record? Not Roman polytheism necessarily, but in the west--particularly in Gaul--local paganism remained a strong force in the countryside up through and including the 7th century. Gaul was heavily de-urbanized during the transition from Roman to Germanic rule, even moreso than other places in Europe. Most of the population was evenly spread out in the inhabited parts of the countryside, which made travel and communication exceedingly difficult. One consequence of this is that oftentimes people only saw a priest or other clerical figure once or twice a year, if even that. With no local church and little-to-no contact with church authorities, people frequently adopted pagan gods and rituals to go alongside their nominally Christian faith.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2012 23:42
|
|
|
DarkCrawler posted:When and how did the official split of the Empire happen? Did the Eastern and Western Roman Emperors just divide it between them or was it a gradual process? Gradual process. The first to "split" the empire was Diocletian, who established the Tetrarchy. Under this system, there were four rulers: two Augusti, with one Caesar under each Augustus. Each ruler had his own section of the empire to oversee. This system collapsed almost immediately after Diocletian abdicated. The eventual sole successor to Diocletian was Constantine, who built Roma Nova (i.e., Constantinople) and made it the capital of the Empire. This was significant, as now the center of political power was in the east, and not the center/west as it had been with Rome. After Constantine, several emperors informally divided the empire with another co-emperor. This was the origin of the east/west split. These divisions were never formal or legal, only practical. In fact, on occasion for the 70 or so years between the end of Constantine's reign and Theodosius', emperors would rule alone, thus removing any distinction at all between east and west. Valentinian I and Theodosius I, for example, did this. Theodosius I would also be the last sole ruler of the whole empire. After Theodosius died, he left the eastern half of the empire to his older son, Arcadius, and the western half to his younger son, Honorius. From here on out the two halves were never again re-united in terms of rulership. The empire was still legally/technically one whole with two rulers, but the division from this point on grew increasingly real, as the two courts would squabble with one another and participate in mutual intrigues to increase their own standing and power. Edit: As a question of my own, does anyone know of any good books about Majorian? I know most of the people here are more knowledgeable about the republic and earlier empire, but the later empire/late antiquity has always been more of my thing. Majorian's article on wikipedia always stuck out to me, being arguably the last competent ruler of the west, successfully taking back some of the lands lost to the Germans. Judgy Fucker fucked around with this message at 16:43 on Jul 1, 2012 |
|
#
¿
Jul 1, 2012 16:38
|
|
|
Stormtrooper posted:Can you give some background on the state of the Roman empire during the late 14th century? How does it relate to the confederation (?) of German states known as the HRE? Short answer: The Romans at that time were quickly on their way out the door, getting their poo poo pushed in by the Turks. And the Roman Empire never had anything to do with the Holy Roman Empire. Not politically, anyway. The original idea of the HRE was to "re-found" the Empire in the West, with Charlemagne succeeding directly from the last Western Emperor. But that was all just Carolingian/Papal propaganda and nonsense.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 4, 2012 17:08
|
|
|
an skeleton posted:Here's a good 'un: If you could go back to Roman times, what would be the best way to preserve stuff for future generations? Grab a bunch of books and dig a hole, etc? Yeah, pretty much. This was posted earlier in the thread, many many thanks to whomever did. Fascinating reading! This article embodies what I find so interesting about the late empire/late antiquity/whatever flavor-of-the-month periodization for 4th-7th century Rome that suits your fancy. Things were changing in ways that wealthy people thought it would be best to just bury a shitload of their wealth in the middle of a field or forest, only to be forgotten (intentionally or not). Talk of "decline" is out of favor for this period, but it definitely was a period of political, social and economic turmoil, and I'm intrigued by how people of the time responded to the changes going on around them. Grand Fromage and others earlier talked about how comparisons of Rome and America (or the British Empire) really don't stack up, and I agree for the most part. Nevertheless I can't help but feel that America, and much of the world, are undergoing a period of "transition" similar to 4th-7th century Rome, with rapid and profound changes in politics, economics and society, for better or worse. Heightens my interest in the period.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 12, 2012 13:21
|
|
|
Grand Fromage posted:Rome was the largest city in the world for some time, and the largest city in Europe until gently caress, the 1700s? 1800s? (E: Wikipedia puts London's population at 1.3 million in 1825. That's probably the first time you can say Rome is definitely overtaken by another European city) Rome's population plummeted from over a million to some tens of thousands during the 5th and 6th centuries, what with all the sacking going on and the breaking of the aqueducts during the Gothic War. Rome wouldn't reach a population of over 1,000,000 again until the late 18th/early 19th centuries. During most of the middle ages Constantinople was the largest city in Europe. It's pretty eerie thinking of this sprawling metropolis largely abandoned, with only 50,000 or so people left living there. That's part of why a lot of Roman ruins are in such horrible shape. Apart from normal weathering and lack of upkeep, locals would frequently cannibalize Roman structures for stone and other materials because they were so readily available and no one was using them.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 27, 2012 13:27
|
|
|
Also, despite the Romans' engineering prowess, I figure there would be be a certain limit to technological advancement without the invention of algebra, which (I believe) was an Arab invention, occurring outside of the Roman world.
|
|
#
¿
May 13, 2013 02:04
|
|
|
I was browsing youtube the other day and found a couple videos showing an "ordinary" day in Rome during the 1st century AD. Both are from the perspective of adolescents: the first a 17-year-old boy, and the second four sisters ranging from ages five to 15. A Glimpse of Teenage Life in Ancient Rome Four Sisters in Ancient Rome I was looking for some videos to show my 7th-grade geography class. These unfortunately aren't appropriate for the kids I teach--the vocabulary is a bit too high, some of the content is inappropriate (the 17-year old getting drunk) and, frankly, the narrator's voice would definitely put a room full of 12-year-olds to sleep. For older, interested parties, though, I thought the videos would be pretty interesting. They're a little weak on plot, but the context(s) of the stories are explained, which both helps to teach a lot and really gives a sense of atmosphere of the place and time. Both are less than a year old; one only a few weeks. I hope this guy/these guys put more out in the future.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 2, 2013 12:56
|
|
|
I picked up I, Claudius a couple days ago and am enjoying the hell out of it. However, I'm curious as to how accurate the history portrayed in it is. I understand the context of the book--a fake autobiography of Claudius--but are the things being said true, or embellished from "Claudius'" standpoint? According to Wikipedia Graves not only read but translated some Roman histories, so I'm assuming he had a pretty good knowledge of the time, though it doesn't mention anything about the accuracy of the events in the book. For right now I'm taking things with a grain of salt as far as history goes. Good lord, though, who needs soap operas or reality TV when Roman history, even if embellished, has all the drama anyone needs!
|
|
#
¿
Jun 20, 2013 16:27
|
|
|
Mr. Spooky posted:Printed? Really? Please, tell me more about Greco-Roman printing practises and why this technology was lost to oblivion during the "dark ages." You do know that "print" can refer to handwritten text, right? As in writing in print versus cursive?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 21, 2013 16:00
|
|
|
Congratulations on being a tremendous pedant, I doubt anyone else had any qualms with what Vincent wrote. Connotation is important, too, especially to people who aren't a part of whatever "we" you're referring to. Thanks for the replies on I, Claudius. Considering the "history" in it really isn't so much, is the book comparable in style to an actual Roman history--for example, one written by Suetonius? Or is it really just a quick-and-dirty money job that Graves pumped out, as Wiki suggests?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 21, 2013 16:16
|
|
|
Cast_No_Shadow posted:I'm no scholar but one issue that you have to pay attention to in the ancient world is people coming over the nearby hill and taking all your stuff. At certain points in time across the Roman empire this is a very real threat. This obviously is a rather large disincentive to build outside the walls and away from the city defenses and works as a very harsh cap in sprawl. You're right in general, but wrong on the dates. The Servian Walls were built in the 4th century B.C., while the Aurelian Walls were built in the 270s, before Diocletian. Not to nitpick. Just being  in an academic thread!Edit: and beaten by a post from 3 hours ago. I should read more.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 7, 2013 14:50
|
|
|
Grand Fromage posted:E: I didn't know we had a reasonably close date. The last mention of the senate in Rome is in 603, and the Curia becomes a church in 630, so it stopped somewhere in there. This brings up something I've been thinking about-- It seems most historians/archeologists believe that by the 7th century Rome's population had catastrophically fallen, probably to 50,000 or even fewer people, leaving much of the city empty and in a state of gradual ruin. I also am aware that between the 5th and 7th/8th centuries it was common for the Bishop of Rome/Pope, Ostrogothic King, Eastern Emperor or whoever happened to be in control of Rome on that particular day to convert pretty much every still-usable public building into a church. By the end of the 7th century there had to have been a huge glut of churches in Rome compared to how many people actually lived there. I know Christianity had become this all-powerful social and political force by then, especially in Rome, but I imagine a huge city largely depopulated and falling apart dotted by churches that, while probably better taken care-of than other buildings in the city, were nevertheless still empty.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 6, 2014 00:06
|
|
|
redshirt posted:To go way back, what is actually known about the "Aryans"? It's thought the Aryans emerged from somewhere in Central Asia or the Caucasus. They did migrate in two different directions, and their cultural influences are today seen in India (religion and language) and Iran and neighboring countries (language, principally). Iranian and Indo-Aryan (e.g., Sanskrit, Hindi and Urdu) languages are part of the same branch (Indo-Iranian) within the Indo-European family. Most historians believe that some of the core concepts and, notably, scriptures (the Vedas) of Hinduism were brought to India by the Aryans. After their arrival they assimilated into (or assimilated?) the other local cultures of northern India between about 1000-500 B.C., during which time what we now call Hinduism continued to develop amongst the increasingly syncretic population. One of the big problems in studying ancient South Asia is that there are very few written records of any kind. Not that they don't exist at all, but they are significantly more scarce than compared to other cultural hearths (like Mesopotamia/Greece/Egypt and China). Further a lot of what we have is religious in nature--notably the Vedas, which are problematic sources as 1) they're religious, not historical, in nature, and 2) they were only codified in the 3rd-5th centuries AD after existing as a purely oral tradition since at least 1000 B.C. if not earlier. A lot of our knowledge of South Asia before the arrival of Islam is relatively patchy. It depends a lot more proportionally on archaeology because of the dearth of written records. Judgy Fucker fucked around with this message at 18:12 on Jul 22, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Jul 21, 2014 05:42
|
|
|
Siivola posted:Palgrave-Macmillan is having a completely bonkers sale, selling their academic textbooks for 9.99 a pop: https://www.palgrave.com/gp/shop/cybermonday-sale?token=cyber19pal Holy poo poo, thanks for this! Excited to read about the transformation-versus-decline perspectives applied to the Muslim conquests in the Eastern Mediterranean.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 28, 2019 15:34
|
|
|
I thought about posting this in the travel subforum, but it unsurprisingly is not getting much traffic these days, and I've lurked this thread for several years and know if anyone would have suggestions they'd be in here: My wife and I are planning on visiting Istanbul sometime in the summer of 2022 (both are full vaxx'ed plus boosters). We're going for a lot of reasons, but for me personally I want to see and experience the Roman and In particular I've got the various triumphal columns nailed down, including the Column of Marcian, which has somehow survived all these centuries only to be at the center of what appears to be an unremarkable and unceremonious traffic circle in a quiet neighbohood (love this kind of stuff, by the way). There's a little bit of the Blachernae Palace to see, have that marked as well. tl;dr--any niche Roman/Byzantine things to see in Istanbul, that only nerds that lurk and post in this tread would be into? And yeah, I know probably the best place to see Roman Istanbul is Venice, but no plans on going there anytime soon.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 13, 2021 22:20
|
|
|
Thanks for the suggestions, everyone. I won't poo poo up the thread about travel recs anymore but if anyone else has any either post 'em or PM me.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 17, 2021 15:34
|
|
|
Grumio posted:If you do go, you better post pictures here Will do! And to add some content, here's some pics from when my wife and I visited Ravenna back in 2018: The so-called "Palace of Theodoric." Sixth century. No consensus on what this structure actually was, but possibly a gatehouse to a larger palatial complex:    From the "Mausoleum of Galla Placidia." Mid fifth century. Was originally probably an oratory connected to San Croce; the Narthex and other oratory are gone, but the church still stands, albeit in a pretty dilapidated state. I bit of it can be seen behind the Mausoleum, including a medieval belltower, on the right:     The Basilica di San Francesco, 9th-10th centuries. Due to the high water table the crypt is now perpetually flooded.    San Vitale, 6th century. The model for Charlemagne's chapel at Aachen.    San Vitale is interesting for (among many reasons) having images of both a clean-shaven Christ--common from the 2nd to the 6th centuries--and a bearded one, which has now been en vogue for a millenium and a half:   I have some more to post but the kids are being lovely and I better help with that! Judgy Fucker fucked around with this message at 00:39 on Dec 18, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Dec 18, 2021 00:25
|
|
|
Fuschia tude posted:These bricked-over archways were originally open, right? They were just freestanding columns like in Greek temples? No, I don't believe so--not for the Mausoleum, anyway. I'm not 100% certain on that, but 1) nothing in the interior architecture suggests those areas were open to the outside at any point, and 2) early church architecture differed from pagan temple architecture deliberately in this manner. The pagan gods were to be worshiped out in the open, in their sight. Christians, on the other hand, had been acculturated to worshiping in secret, and as the religion grew and became accepted Christians deliberately differentiated themselves from pagans by (among other things) choosing the more cloistered basilica model for their holy spaces. Judgy Fucker fucked around with this message at 19:10 on Dec 19, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Dec 19, 2021 15:23
|
|
|
euphronius posted:Bascilicas are literally Walmarts I wish Wal Marts had arcaded isles with apses, that would make them a lot more tolerable to be in
|
|
#
¿
Dec 19, 2021 19:11
|
|
|
euphronius posted:you are calling bascilicas secret cloistered places Architecturally. And I suppose I should've clarified, basilicas of late antiquity were not the same of those that came before. Compare the Basilico Novo to the Basilica Julia, et al. edit: maybe poor terminology on my part. It seems like you're interpreting "cloistered" to mean "secret," I was just thinking more "indoors, separated from the world." Which, again, earlier basilicas would've been more exposed to the outside world, later ones (when Christianity was ascendant) definitely had a separation between the outside and in. Judgy Fucker fucked around with this message at 19:41 on Dec 19, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Dec 19, 2021 19:38
|
|
|
drat, this is great, thanks a ton! And thanks to everyone else again, I'm saving things in a text document and/or finding and saving them on tripadvisor Grand Fromage posted:Yeah post as many Istanbul tips as you got, I'm sure this thread is full of people who want to go sometime. I'm one of them. Not that I was losing sleep over it or anything but it's nice that Istanbul travel talk is now mod-sanctioned.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 24, 2021 17:17
|
|
|
Alright, Ravenna photo dump round two.    The Basilica of Sant’Apollinaire Nuovo, 6th century. While the structure has been repaired and rebuilt over time, still a fascinating specimen of what early Christian worship spaces were like--a classic aisled basilica with a transept and apse at the end. Most of the mosaics are original--in the last photo above, you can see disembodied hands superimposed over some of the columns. The church, and these mosaics, were commissioned by Ostrogothic King Theodoric, an Arian, and this mosaic in particular featured Theodoric and his court (note "PALATIVM" still visible). When Ravenna was retaken by the Romans the mosaics were redone to erase the heretic King, but done kinda sloppily. So now we have an empty palace! Also, the poster earlier asking about whether ground floor arcades were open to the exterior--here's some evidence they were.     The Orthodox, aka Neonian, Baptistry, late 5th century. Lot of baptistries still survive in Ravenna, and are distinguished between whether they were Arian or Orthodox. This one is notable because you can see Christ's pecker in the ceiling mosaic depicting his baptism by John the Baptist.   The Archepiscopal chapel, AD 430s. Now a part of a much larger and much more modern structure, this chapel features the oldest-surviving mosaics in all of Ravenna, preceding even the Mausoleum of Galla Placidia by a couple decades. Note again a beardless Christ, dressed in military garb, trampling a lion and a snake--symbols of temporal power. State propaganda much?   We saw an archaeologist working on San Croce while we were there! It was still closed to the public, but it was super cool seeing this being worked on while we enjoyed what had already been excavated and preserved.    Lastly, the Mausoleum of Theodoric. Quite underwhelming to be honest, as it's comparatively far away from the other sights in Ravenna, and...I mean, look at it. But still glad we went to see it, being the only extant example of secular Ostrogothic architecture in the world. And since the mosaic from the Palace of Theodoric was such a hit in the thread, have another: 
Judgy Fucker fucked around with this message at 18:35 on Dec 24, 2021 |
|
#
¿
Dec 24, 2021 17:39
|
|
|
euphronius posted:Did Ravenna not get bombed in ww2? Don't know for sure but I imagine not, as 1) all those mosaics above are, in fact, original--or at least, they are presented as such, and 2) Ravenna actually has an infamous history for not being a very strategic location. The reason it was ever the seat of authority in the first place is because in AD 408 Western Emperor Honorius, who resided in Milan, moved his court to Ravenna at the approach of the Visigoths who were invading from the north. His thoughts were that Ravenna was protected by a lagoon (long since vanished as the river silted up) and had sea access, making a siege survivable. What Honorius didn't anticipate was the Visigoths just ignoring Ravenna altogether, and marching straight down the peninsula toward Rome. So there's historic precedent for militaries ignoring Ravenna, lol.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 24, 2021 18:06
|
|
|
CommonShore posted:I heard on a podcast this week that Ravenna tends to be pretty chill wrt tourist smesh and is a great place for people who like to look at stuff without being surrounded by crowds - is this true? That was my experience, yes. It's out of the way, but fairly easy to get to--a 75 minute train ride to and from Bologna was how we did it. It caters to tourists but it's not, like, Rome or anything--people who run small shops are much less likely to be proficient in English, as an example. There were tourists there but no crowds. "Chill" is a good word to describe the 8 hours we spent there, yeah.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 24, 2021 18:33
|
|
|
Lead out in cuffs posted:Probably since before the invention of writing. IIRC beer and wine were among the first cuneiform symbols, and keeping track of workers' beer rations was the content of some of the earliest tablets. I thought I remember hearing/reading somewhere that hops is one of the earliest-domesticated plants, and across time and cultures hops has really only ever had one use, and that was for/with alcohol. I used to semi-facetiously tell my middle school students that one reason civilization was invented was for booze.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 31, 2021 18:32
|
|
|
Telsa Cola posted:Its not and probably not. I'd love to hear more about this.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 31, 2021 22:19
|
|
|
Telsa Cola posted:In the effort to help organize my thoughts let me know what you'd like to hear about. It's already been kinda answered, I guess. I had no idea that people who "dig around in the ground" had a notable drinking culture, let alone any ramifications of it.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 31, 2021 23:10
|
|
|
I know enough of Dwarf Fortress to know I don't drink enough to play it, that much is true
|
|
#
¿
Dec 31, 2021 23:17
|
|
|
Azza Bamboo posted:I like the early Roman calendar where they just stop counting the days in winter and pick up again when the weather does. As someone who suffers from pretty bad seasonal depression, I would also like to obliterate winter from the official calendar and reckoning of time.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 14, 2022 17:50
|
|
|
AAAAA! Real Muenster posted:Wow, thank you for all of the replies everyone! I was not expecting such a response. That is all incredibly useful info! I wont get to go through it in fine detail until later after work but I'm excited to have so much to work with. Something else to note (if this might at all be useful for your board game) is that historically speaking plateaus were excellent seats of empire as they are much easier to project power out of than in to. Ancient Iranian dynasties' preoccupation with Mesopotamia has already been discussed; see also (what is today) Afghanistan and South Asia.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 18, 2022 14:52
|
|
|
Lead out in cuffs posted:I seem to recall reading that if you were high enough ranking at Versailles, you didn't even bother with chamber pots. You just squatted wherever you felt like and left it for the servants to deal with. Yes, this is correct. Louis XIV in particular liked to use the various stairs to relieve himself.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 19, 2022 18:08
|
|
|
Edgar Allen Ho posted:It's always good to know that the ancient romans had the same garbage taste as your grandma in 1974 Just really highlight the "the more things change, the more they stay the same" with our modern lifestyles vis-a-vis the Romans. Kinda like the anecdote about Ridley Scott scrapping the historically-accurate detail of advertising during games in the Colosseum because he (correctly) assumed no modern viewer would believe poo poo like that actually happened.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 28, 2022 15:46
|
|
|
What's going on in here? This place is falling apart faster than the Western Roman Empire in the mid-fifth century.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 1, 2022 14:55
|
|
|
That might be enough Indigenous Americans talk for the roman/ancient history thread. Unless you yourself are indigenous, it might be best to just shut the gently caress up. Citation: I'm a painfully white dude from Oklahoma. I know indigenous people but would rather not parrot their opinions on identity and labels for them. I know my place.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 4, 2022 20:35
|
|
|
PittTheElder posted:Link me to an indigenous history thread or go to hell You could always start one instead of getting mad at me. Jazerus posted:way to poo poo all over a respectful discussion and imply that everyone else doesn't "know their place" by simply discussing the topic at all. very helpful I apologize for backseat moderating and I wasn't eloquent in what I said. It seemed the discussion was starting to go south, and this didn't seem like a super-relevant tangent to the ancient history thread.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 4, 2022 23:52
|
|
|
FreudianSlippers posted:Any cool Roman sites in Bologna? Santo Stefano has some parts that date from late antiquity, including a partially-excavated floor mosaic dating to the 4th century. I know you already kinda said you can't but if you had any way to catch a train to and from Ravenna (about 75 minutes each way from Bologna) you wouldn't be disappointed.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 7, 2022 20:41
|
|
|
Lawman 0 posted:How did Indians preserve their history? According to John Keay's India: A History, they really didn't. There's an extreme dearth of texts indigenous to South Asia that aren't religious in nature from before the arrival of Islam. One of the reasons why Ashoka's Edicts are particularly famous and significant is they're among the few "secular" texts that survive from Indian antiquity. Most other sources from before circa 1000 AD are from outsiders. Keay says there's no evidence of deliberate destruction of texts, and can only presuppose that South Asians just weren't culturally inclined to writing much down, or wrote things down on very impermanent media. Oral traditions played a huge role in "preserving" Indian history. Think about how the Indus Valley Civilization, by some accounts a mind-bogglingly advanced civilization for the time, vanished and was utterly forgotten about until 3,000 years later when it was excavated.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 3, 2022 19:06
|
|
|
Tulip posted:I mean, we have Tamil stuff pretty continuously going back to like 400BCE. Like that very much is a thing. And in the north we do start to get records starting in the Classical Period. How rich one considers the Pali and Prakrit stuff is a judgment call but it's not like Indian history starts with the Mughals. Wasn't implying Indian history started with the Mughals (who come 500 years after the arrival of Islam), but it's factual that most records that we do have date from the arrival of Islam to the subcontinent and later.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 3, 2022 23:37
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 5, 2024 07:23 |
|
|
Stairmaster posted:is there a dearth of records compared to other regions or just ordinary rigor of time stuff. Fewer records survive from the Indo-Gangetic plain compared to other civilizational cradles (Huang He, Fertile Crescent etc.) but, again, hard to tell if less was written down or if it's more rigor of time stuff. The Vedas were codified mid-first millennium BCE, but they come from an oral tradition that really emphasizes Not loving Them Up so they're more likely to be insulated from material decay.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 13, 2022 14:29
|
|