This topic is currently marked as "dormant"—the last message is more than 90 days old. You can revive it by posting a reply.
1Enodia
i've been reading Vitruvius' 'The Ten Books on Architecture', which i'm finding fascinating.
however i was absolutely laughing out loud as i began the first chapter of Book 6, which deals with the design of the common house.
the arrogance and inherent racism shown in what are purported to be scientific 'facts' is really quite amusing, although i have no doubt that this was considered valid in the day.
enjoy...
http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/ptext?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.02.0073;que...
however i was absolutely laughing out loud as i began the first chapter of Book 6, which deals with the design of the common house.
the arrogance and inherent racism shown in what are purported to be scientific 'facts' is really quite amusing, although i have no doubt that this was considered valid in the day.
enjoy...
http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/ptext?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.02.0073;que...
2timspalding
He's in a long tradition, starting with the Hippocratic Airs, Waters, Places (http://classics.mit.edu/Hippocrates/airwatpl.html).
3ThePam
Very entertaining! But I have to say that I didn't find it arrogant; just an effort to explain the data they had accrued.
4jcbrunner
Victor Davis Hanson sells essentially the same message (minus the architecture) to millions of airport readers today ...
5timspalding
That's pretty unfair.
6Enodia
#3 "But I have to say that I didn't find it arrogant; just an effort to explain the data they had accrued."
really?
"Hence, it was the divine intelligence that set the city of the Roman people in a peerless and temperate country, in order that it might acquire the right to command the whole world."
that sounds at least somewhat arrogant to me.
really?
"Hence, it was the divine intelligence that set the city of the Roman people in a peerless and temperate country, in order that it might acquire the right to command the whole world."
that sounds at least somewhat arrogant to me.
8timspalding
6
I don't know. It's just very un-ancient to expect anything else. That a culture would not think itself the best is a very modern idea. Almost no cultures behave that way today, even. In antiquity, it's unthinkable. Even *seeing* another culture clearly is hard. The best you can find in ancient discourse is praise of another culture for being what you *want* your culture to be. So, Tacitus praises the Germans for being faithful to their wives. He doesn't really *see* the Germans; he just sees himself. Or take the repeated Greek praise of Phoenician maritime ability and colonization—you praise in others what you see in yourself.
Oh, I was referring to 4. While you can disagree with him—and I hold no brief for much of what's written, since I haven't read it—he's not a nutcase. Any anway, any time you hear an author described as "selling" a point of view, you know calumny is coming. It's like calling your opponent's views "views."
I don't know. It's just very un-ancient to expect anything else. That a culture would not think itself the best is a very modern idea. Almost no cultures behave that way today, even. In antiquity, it's unthinkable. Even *seeing* another culture clearly is hard. The best you can find in ancient discourse is praise of another culture for being what you *want* your culture to be. So, Tacitus praises the Germans for being faithful to their wives. He doesn't really *see* the Germans; he just sees himself. Or take the repeated Greek praise of Phoenician maritime ability and colonization—you praise in others what you see in yourself.
Oh, I was referring to 4. While you can disagree with him—and I hold no brief for much of what's written, since I haven't read it—he's not a nutcase. Any anway, any time you hear an author described as "selling" a point of view, you know calumny is coming. It's like calling your opponent's views "views."
9Enodia
"I don't know. It's just very un-ancient to expect anything else. That a culture would not think itself the best is a very modern idea."
oh i will agree that these things must been seen in a time/culture context.
that doesn't make it any less funny though!
oh i will agree that these things must been seen in a time/culture context.
that doesn't make it any less funny though!
10ThePam
#6
I guess you just can't go by me. Afterall, I think the Franks were a reasonable people and they murdered their own siblings... and children now that I think of it.
So, of course, such statements as you quote just pass right through my arrogance detectors.
I guess you just can't go by me. Afterall, I think the Franks were a reasonable people and they murdered their own siblings... and children now that I think of it.
So, of course, such statements as you quote just pass right through my arrogance detectors.
11Stevia
#8
I agree, it's hard to take Caesar's ethnography as being anything other than a reflection of Rome. Also, when Livy is constructing the Carthaginian government system, it is blatantly Rome, but full of perfida Punica...
I also find Livy's character construction of Hannibal amusing (i.e., insert 'Cataline' here).
The attempt to define other will always be more a reference to one's own culture than the other itself. The difference today is that there is far more respect for the other (generally).
The Romans, arrogant? Never! I'm scandalized :o.
I agree, it's hard to take Caesar's ethnography as being anything other than a reflection of Rome. Also, when Livy is constructing the Carthaginian government system, it is blatantly Rome, but full of perfida Punica...
I also find Livy's character construction of Hannibal amusing (i.e., insert 'Cataline' here).
The attempt to define other will always be more a reference to one's own culture than the other itself. The difference today is that there is far more respect for the other (generally).
The Romans, arrogant? Never! I'm scandalized :o.
12Enodia
"The Romans, arrogant? Never! I'm scandalized"
LOL!
i'm having a ball with this book. for the most part it's a fascinating lecture on ancient architecture. but where its' science fails is where it becomes very entertaining.
for instance, his attempt to explain refraction as a distortion of the rays FROM the eyes... great stuff!
LOL!
i'm having a ball with this book. for the most part it's a fascinating lecture on ancient architecture. but where its' science fails is where it becomes very entertaining.
for instance, his attempt to explain refraction as a distortion of the rays FROM the eyes... great stuff!
