|
Tao Jones posted:King Herod is my favorite Biblical hero and I won't hear this nonsense. I hope we can all at least agree that the "Coventry Carol" is an entirely inappropriate song for Christmas, once you understand what it's about. I don't care that it has a pretty tune. 
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 05:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 1, 2024 02:45 |
|
|
Bronze age collapse archeology (interesting, but no amazing conclusions, yet): "It's the dirt that's resulting in a new look at farming in the Dark Age, scientists report. The village of Nichoria in Messenia was located near the palace of Pylos during the Greek Bronze Age, when Greece was considered a Superpower of the Mediterranean. The region thrived on its trade and economic stability, culture, and art and architecture, including great monuments, palaces and writings. The collapse of the Bronze Age (beginning around 1200 BC), including the abandonment of cities and the destruction of palaces, is known as the Dark Age." http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/01/150105112416.htm
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 06:33
|
|
|
Kennewick Man may have been related to Polynesians (no DNA as of the time of the article): http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/kennewick-man-finally-freed-share-his-secrets-180952462/?page=2
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 06:47
|
|
|
Grand Fromage posted:I'm not sure, you could be adopted and inherit as someone's son as an adult so they might've granted citizenship after the fact that way. I have no idea but the way Roman law worked it wouldn't be impossible. It's certainly possible legally, but Ceasar would probably have had to be responsible for it one way or the other, and Josephus never mentions that Ceasar's gift was extended to Antipater's family. And then Ceasar traveled far away and was killed, so there probably would never have been another opportunity for Herod. It seems like the issue would have come up at some point, particularly when the Roman Senate voted to back Herod to the Jewish kingship (or biblically, when Pontius Pilate sent Jesus to be tried by Herod's son Herod Antipas because of jurisdictional issues). Kaal fucked around with this message at 07:45 on Jan 6, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 07:41
|
|
|
Otteration posted:Kennewick Man may have been related to Polynesians (no DNA as of the time of the article): http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/kennewick-man-finally-freed-share-his-secrets-180952462/?page=2 The article kind of muddles the subject but the relationship, if it existed, was extremely distant. Kennewick man lived at least 9,000 years ago, whereas Polynesian culture only came into existence within the last 3,000 years. Also determining race or lineage by skull morphology is a controversial subject and probably not very reliable. There's a lot of baggage from old racial classifications and intentional skull deformation is really common historically, muddling identification.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 08:52
|
|
|
Squalid posted:The article kind of muddles the subject but the relationship, if it existed, was extremely distant. Kennewick man lived at least 9,000 years ago, whereas Polynesian culture only came into existence within the last 3,000 years. Also determining race or lineage by skull morphology is a controversial subject and probably not very reliable. There's a lot of baggage from old racial classifications and intentional skull deformation is really common historically, muddling identification. Yep. Phrenology came to mind when I first read it. Waiting for some decent DNA, but interesting article anyway.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 18:09
|
|
|
Deteriorata posted:Yeah, Luke got a bunch of stuff confused and his whole birth narrative seems pretty contrived. I wasn't defending a literal reading of the text, only commenting that what the Gospels had to say about Herod seemed pretty consistent with what is known from elsewhere. I honestly wouldn't be surprised f most of his birth story was laid down at Nicaea to fit in line with the Mithraic religion which was super popular in the army. I don't think their are any real copies of pre-Nicaea bibles left anywhere so no way to really know what was changed from the pre-Nicaea Christian story to the post-Nicaea story.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 18:43
|
|
|
sbaldrick posted:I honestly wouldn't be surprised f most of his birth story was laid down at Nicaea to fit in line with the Mithraic religion which was super popular in the army. I don't think their are any real copies of pre-Nicaea bibles left anywhere so no way to really know what was changed from the pre-Nicaea Christian story to the post-Nicaea story. That seems quite unlikely to be true, as the oldest surviving copy of Luke dates to the 3rd century, well before Nicea. Other Gospels are quoted in 2nd century correspondence, so anybody making big changes in them would have been noticed.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 18:55
|
|
|
Deteriorata posted:That seems quite unlikely to be true, as the oldest surviving copy of Luke dates to the 3rd century, well before Nicea. Other Gospels are quoted in 2nd century correspondence, so anybody making big changes in them would have been noticed. Only fragments have been found and if the single most powerful man in the world wants to sit down on codify your religion of which he's just made himself the temporal head of on Earth then you let him. There are clear pickups of Christianity of the other major religion of the Empire at the time, shoving the existing store into the one the army loves is pretty easy.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 19:23
|
|
|
sbaldrick posted:Only fragments have been found and if the single most powerful man in the world wants to sit down on codify your religion of which he's just made himself the temporal head of on Earth then you let him. There are clear pickups of Christianity of the other major religion of the Empire at the time, shoving the existing store into the one the army loves is pretty easy. The "Christianity copied Mithraism" conspiracy theory is mostly bullshit. Christianity had a huge following throughout the empire quite independent of the military. The evidence seems to point to Mithraism borrowing from Christianity, not the other way around.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 19:27
|
|
|
Deteriorata posted:The "Christianity copied Mithraism" conspiracy theory is mostly bullshit. Christianity had a huge following throughout the empire quite independent of the military. The evidence seems to point to Mithraism borrowing from Christianity, not the other way around. Not really, Christianity is well know to have borrowed from the major religions of the Empire at the time and given that the Empire had spent most of the last 100 years in a civil war the army was key for Constantine.. In all honest any real fact on the matter is so muddled in legend that we can only really guess the truth.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 20:11
|
|
|
sbaldrick posted:Not really, Christianity is well know to have borrowed from the major religions of the Empire at the time and given that the Empire had spent most of the last 100 years in a civil war the army was key for Constantine.. In all honest any real fact on the matter is so muddled in legend that we can only really guess the truth. You're going to have to walk me through why Constantine would unilaterally introduce hundreds of years after the fact contradictory nativity accounts in the synoptic gospels to appease a dwindling group of Mithras followers in his legions, then not only do this but do it in secret as the canon of the Bible wasnt even decided on in Nicea.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 21:24
|
|
|
Mithras worship itself was of Atlantan origin, and was only introduced to the Greco-Roman world during the protracted struggle beween Atlantis and Athens.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 21:34
|
|
|
So...Jesus is Bolivian? That must be why there are so many Roman Catholics in South America! It...it all makes so much sense! On a more serious note, regarding patrilinear versus matrilinear: at least in modern American law, a child is the property of a marriage (assuming a marriage exists). If my wife cheats on me and bears a son, legally that child is my son unless I disown him (itself a legal process). I know nothing about Ancient Jewish law* but it may have been similar. * Although I'll bet somebody has a PhD in it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 23:21
|
|
|
Ynglaur posted:So...Jesus is Bolivian? That must be why there are so many Roman Catholics in South America! It...it all makes so much sense! Why not? We already know hes chinese, korean, and Ethiopian!   
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 23:26
|
|
|
Libluini posted:I think I remember the so-called historian Jim Butcher writing a series of books about the history of some plucky Romans in exile. Something about a lost legion meeting dangerous insects or something. (It has been a while, my memories are a bit fuzzy on the details.) Are you talking about the Codex Alera series, or is there another Jim Butcher author out there? Because Codex Alera was (loosely) inspired by ancient Rome but is unapologetically fantasy.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 23:28
|
|
|
Ynglaur posted:So...Jesus is Bolivian? That must be why there are so many Roman Catholics in South America! It...it all makes so much sense! That's also the reason his name is Jesus.
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 23:35
|
|
|
Elyv posted:Are you talking about the Codex Alera series, or is there another Jim Butcher author out there? Because Codex Alera was (loosely) inspired by ancient Rome but is unapologetically fantasy. He literally wrote it on a dare to cross pokemon with the lost legion how the hell can you be literate and think its meant to be a historical peace
|
|
#
?
Jan 6, 2015 23:56
|
|
|
Agean90 posted:He literally wrote it on a dare to cross pokemon with the lost legion how the hell can you be literate and think its meant to be a historical peace Best book to come out of an internet flamewar.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 00:08
|
|
|
Elyv posted:Are you talking about the Codex Alera series, or is there another Jim Butcher author out there? Because Codex Alera was (loosely) inspired by ancient Rome but is unapologetically fantasy. I'm pretty sure that's the joke.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 00:12
|
|
|
This thread spent like 10 pages arguing over bolivian atlantis im pretty sure our ability to detect jokes will need a while to recover.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 00:13
|
|
|
Besides the Emperor and Pontifex Maximus, what high ranking offices and positions existed in the Roman Empire? Did the Emperor have anything like an official cabinet or council of advisers that he could call upon to provide policy recommendations? The way that this thread describes taxation and public works seems to imply that the Emperor was just shooting in the dark without guidance and had no idea how his actions would affect things.
QuoProQuid fucked around with this message at 02:47 on Jan 7, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 02:44
|
|
|
The Bethlehem story makes sense as a very early invention because the main audience who would care about it (Jews who know that their Messiah is supposed to be a descendant of King David born in David's city) were pretty irrelevant to conversion efforts by the 3rd and especially 4th centuries. Given that Bethlehem is a pretty solidly Palestinian town and there aren't a lot of Jews born there, odds are the Jews are going to be waiting quite a bit longer on that Messiah.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 03:15
|
|
|
Is there even a traceable decent from the house of David anymore. I guess there is consensus David existed at this point?
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 03:17
|
|
|
euphronius posted:Is there even a traceable decent from the house of David anymore. Well, the Assyrians recorded interactions with the "House of David" so it would be rather odd if he didn't.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 03:23
|
|
|
Deteriorata posted:Well, the Assyrians recorded interactions with the "House of David" so it would be rather odd if he didn't. I've never heard of that.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 03:26
|
|
|
euphronius posted:I've never heard of that. http://blog.ctnews.com/kantrowitz/2...ibition-in-nyc/ There's also the Tel-Dan Stele from Aram (found in northern Israel) that dates a couple hundred years earlier and also speaks of the House of David. It's a bit more controversial, but seems to be generally accepted as genuine now.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 03:34
|
|
|
QuoProQuid posted:Besides the Emperor and Pontifex Maximus, what high ranking offices and positions existed in the Roman Empire? Did the Emperor have anything like an official cabinet or council of advisers that he could call upon to provide policy recommendations? The way that this thread describes taxation and public works seems to imply that the Emperor was just shooting in the dark without guidance and had no idea how his actions would affect things. There were plenty of political institutions either continuing on from the Roman Republic (like the Senate, the priests, the tribes, and the centuries) or newly created by an Emperor (like the board of commissioners for the grain supply) that could provide advice. A lot of the Republican offices lost a lot of power, especially the Consuls, who went from being the masters of Rome to being some guy who can judge criminal cases. Ultimately the Emperor was in a position where he could overrule anyone or, if he didn't like what someone was saying, he could have them killed and replace them with one of his friends. While I could post pages about the screwy-rear end systems that existed in the last period of the Republic, I don't know much about the mechanics of how things worked in the Principate or the later Empire. I'd be surprised if taxation was organized well at all -- generally the system was something called tax farming. Say you're the Emperor and I'm your buddy in the far-flung province of Thrace. You tell me that the province of Thrace owes a million bucks in taxes this year. I send my armed goons/employees out to extort as much as I can get away with, send you the million bucks, and pocket any additional money that my goons collected. Some version of this was pretty much how taxes were done even up until the French Revolution, where it was still a common enough practice that Marat accused the famous chemist Lavoisier of unduly profiting from a tax farming contract.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 04:23
|
|
|
I think other countries had things a lot more organized by that time, France at that time was just a total mess, administratively speaking.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 05:38
|
|
|
Tao Jones posted:There were plenty of political institutions either continuing on from the Roman Republic (like the Senate, the priests, the tribes, and the centuries) or newly created by an Emperor (like the board of commissioners for the grain supply) that could provide advice. A lot of the Republican offices lost a lot of power, especially the Consuls, who went from being the masters of Rome to being some guy who can judge criminal cases. Tax farming doesn't really make sense in a feudal/manor type economy, since a) no tax farmer wants to be paid in kind, and b) the local lord doesn't want some rear end in a top hat skimming off the top, he wants to skim off the top. That being said, it was still a good way to deal with taxing some area you didn't really care about. France moved back towards tax farming as they moved towards a more centralized administration, while England (I think) relied a bit more on customs duties. And everyone loved the old royal monopoly. As far as imperial administrations go, yeah, they were pretty ad-hoc. The emperor just had whoever he liked offer him advice, and he took it or didn't depending on his whim. So you have scenarios where the emperor would just let his slaves run things, because he couldn't be bothered. Or Honorius letting Stilcho run things until his flunkies convinced him to have Stilcho killed. Or Constantine letting Ambrose dictate policy. Or John the Orphan-Master, who was the power behind the throne for, like, three emperors and an empress.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 06:17
|
|
|
It was pretty ad hoc under the principate which is I think one reason why the imperial system broke down in the 3rd century. The whole system was based on an informal collection of powers and offices set up by Augustus. Once the Senate became irrelevant the administration was so concentrated in one man that if that man was busy or incompetent crises went unanswered. Diocletian reformed the administration into something that looks a lot more familiar with Dukes in charge of provincial defense and taxation.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 11:08
|
|
|
Elyv posted:Are you talking about the Codex Alera series, or is there another Jim Butcher author out there? Because Codex Alera was (loosely) inspired by ancient Rome but is unapologetically fantasy.  Tomn posted:I'm pretty sure that's the joke. Yes.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 11:39
|
|
|
Before everything went to poo poo, were there any attempts to fix the system or at least introduce some standardization? I just can't believe that 300 years would go by before anyone realized how much of a mess Augustus's network of offices had become and how dangerous the system was to the state.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 15:46
|
|
|
Diocletian was the main reformer. I can't think of anyone before him who tried anything sweeping, though many emperors adjust things here and there to serve their interests as they go. Inertia's a hell of a thing. Keep in mind that of those 300 years, things pretty much worked for the majority of it. The empire didn't have much in the way of insurmountable problems from Augustus through Commodus, and even then poo poo doesn't entirely hit the fan until into the 200s. Also even if they realized it, that didn't mean they could do anything about it. Consider the US today; most people recognize that the government is severely hosed up. Compare with how much is being done to fix that. A key thing you learn to keep in mind studying history. Individuals may be rational in some/many circumstances. People, in general and as a whole, do not operate rationally. A corollary, most things have some reason that would make sense to you if you were in their position at the time. People aren't rational (mostly), but neither do they just do random stupid poo poo that they know won't work (usually). Grand Fromage fucked around with this message at 15:57 on Jan 7, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 15:53
|
|
|
Yeah, that's an important thing to remember. However crazy and jerry-rigged the system seems from the outside, for the people inside it's just life. It may be complex and crazy, but they grew up in it and knew how it worked and managed to get along with it. Compare with changing from Imperial units to Metric. It doesn't matter how much simpler the metric system is once you're in it. People have an intuitive understanding of how much a cup or a pound is and how their system of units all fit together. They are not interested in giving it up.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 16:09
|
|
|
Grand Fromage posted:A key thing you learn to keep in mind studying history. Individuals may be rational in some/many circumstances. People, in general and as a whole, do not operate rationally. A corollary, most things have some reason that would make sense to you if you were in their position at the time. People aren't rational (mostly), but neither do they just do random stupid poo poo that they know won't work (usually). Yeah, like the whole feudal system. People who haven't read much history tend to think that it was dumb that the king just wasn't in charge of everything, why does he need these dukes and counts to run poo poo? The answer is of course that the thing that came before that had stopped working.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 16:18
|
|
|
It's always amazed me just how well many of these huge ancient empires were able to hang together, considering how it could take weeks or months to communicate from one end to the other and back. To administrate an empire the size of Rome now would probably be close to trivial, but back then you had no choice but to give administrators in far-flung provinces a large degree of day-to-day autonomy, having to rely that they were honest enough not to completely screw things up.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 16:19
|
|
|
It's also worth pointing out that the civil service institutions and traditions born in the Roman Republic, especially the late Republic, took a long time to wither away. Augustus co-opting the machinery of the Republic rather than starting from scratch was eventually part of the problem, since those institutions no longer had enough constituency with the head of state to renew themselves, but it worked okay anyway for 100+ years. It's when you get Emperors like Domitian who don't even try to maintain relationships with the Roman elite and consciously erode the power of the Senate and the Roman civil service and replace it with the army that Augustus' system falls apart. I don't think it's a coincidence that the Crisis of the 3rd Century coincides with the political irrelevance of Rome. The army wasn't the only constituency for the Julio-Claudian dynasty. It was probably the most important constituency already, but it wasn't the only one. Caligula's murder for example wasn't a strictly Praetorian coup. After Domitian the army is the only constituency, and the state becomes very unstable to the point that the Danube Legions are deciding succession almost by themselves for a good 40 years. (Not laying that on Domitian though he definitely continued the trend.) The Gallic and Levantine provinces secede basically because Valerian and Gallienus can't do more than one thing at a time, because they need to stay on top of the army constituency 100% of the time in addition to ruling the Empire. There's no Agrippa to do the fighting, no Senate to handle the quiet provinces, no Consul and whole list of junior politicians doing their time in the civil service in Rome to delegate, there's only the Emperor and the Army and he can't be everywhere or allow the army to be active where he isn't. When we look back and think Diocletian's four-emperor system was obviously going to blow up in his face, you have to remember that this is the context he's emerging from. He was actually very successful in delegating although not in solving the problem of the army dominating succession. Many of the duchies he created survived until the Arab/Turkish conquests in the East and until the early modern state-building projects in the West. dupersaurus posted:It's always amazed me just how well many of these huge ancient empires were able to hang together, considering how it could take weeks or months to communicate from one end to the other and back. To administrate an empire the size of Rome now would probably be close to trivial, but back then you had no choice but to give administrators in far-flung provinces a large degree of day-to-day autonomy, having to rely that they were honest enough not to completely screw things up. Rome was special in that regard because of the Mediterranean. You could get to most provincial coasts from Rome and vice versa in 5-10 days. Arglebargle III fucked around with this message at 16:31 on Jan 7, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 16:25
|
|
|
dupersaurus posted:It's always amazed me just how well many of these huge ancient empires were able to hang together, considering how it could take weeks or months to communicate from one end to the other and back. To administrate an empire the size of Rome now would probably be close to trivial, but back then you had no choice but to give administrators in far-flung provinces a large degree of day-to-day autonomy, having to rely that they were honest enough not to completely screw things up. Most Empires had insanely good messenger services. There was a website that said the whole Roman Empire could basically be crossed in 30 days, while that gives administrators a lot of autonomy, it still center makes major decisions.
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 18:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 1, 2024 02:45 |
|
|
You still need an empowered class of local administrators, military officials and governors, which is why issues relating to corruption and justice are always a major consideration for large empires.
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 7, 2015 18:17
|
|
