Login

scythius · 02-22-2003, 07:09 PM

Avete, omnes! 
 
Here's another case of some provincial whining about the Romans: 
 
news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/2786615.stm 
 
Scythius 
LEG~IX~HISP (USA) 
et 
COH I BRIT (USA)

02-22-2003, 07:49 PM

Centurion! Flog that man!

02-23-2003, 11:56 AM

The explanation of the roads leading to traffic jams is a typical reverse explanation. It sits on its head. The roads were built because of increasing commercial traffic. 
The facts that roads existed before the Romans is an evidence. The Romans did not invent the road. They developped the surfaced all weather road. And that makes the whole difference. 
That gentleman there is hell bent on demonstrating, like he clearly states, that the Romans were nothing but "a bunch of military thugs". 
Non-scientific uselessly inflammatory, and basically false. 
The Celts were the best. Everybody knows that. They were the best metal workers, the best artists, the best farmers, the best warriors and they had the best religion and the best civilization. 
Then, one fine day, they got defeated by a bunch of "military thugs", who had lousy weapons, bad artists, deficient farmers, cowardly soldiers, rotten priests and a civilization that was bound to fail. 
Get real... 
This other gentleman states that the Romans conquered "only half of the British Isles". 
I fear the English didn't fare any better on that one....

Goffredo · 02-23-2003, 04:34 PM

I confess that am "slightly" suspicious of this growing fashion/mania of celtic culture amoung certain types of people. It is even growing here in northern Italy. 
 
I have reason to suspect that it is contaminated and confused with "new age" ideas. Several times I have come across enthusiastic and knowledgeable people of Celts only to be deeply disappointed/annoyed by the side aspects (or central ones?) of their positions. 
 
We all have hidden agendas, hidden even to our-selves: we all are looking for a sense of self (be cool, be different, be unique) and yet longing for a belonging, doing anything, even surrendering one-self and any notion of critical thinking, just to fit in, into a group, maybe an exlcusive one at that, hence back to being different. Self and non-self: What a wonderful contradiction. 
 
So now that I have have shown I am empathetic to the human condition..... 
All this new-age stuff, the druid nostaglia, the magic stones and swords, the holy graals and round tables is real crap! I really turns me off. 
 
Hope I didn't offend anyone but sometimes its feels great to let off some steam. Now its your turn. 
 
 
 
p.s. What little I gather was that the Celtic culture was on the retreat, not expanding. Had the romans not arrived, the "germans" would have. Indeed they eventually did several centuries later. Anyone what to play the game of "what if..."? Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub45.ezboard.com/bromanarmytalk.showUserPublicProfile?gid=goffredo>goffredo</A> at: 2/23/03 5:38:14 pm

02-23-2003, 06:25 PM

This guy is an idiot.... 
 
"I don't like the Romans. They were a bunch of militaristic thugs I suppose you could say," said Dr Pryor. 
 
I don't like....wow...this guy is a realprofessional, isn't he? I hope nobody listens to him...what a bunch of bull... 
 
Who listens to guys with a name like "Francis" anyway... 
 
 
 
Magnus/Matt 
Optio 
Legio XXX "Ulpia Victrix"

rekirts · 02-23-2003, 09:10 PM

Er...my grandfather's name was Francis. 'Course nobody called him that. They called him Frank. 
 
I deeply regret that I didn't get a PHD in History or Archaeology or something and become such a bigwig in my field that I could dismiss whole civilizations with authority. Such power! 
 
Wendy

Jeroen Pelgrom · 02-23-2003, 09:32 PM

, other "expert". Seems that almost everybody calls himself an expert these days... I can remember that when i was little, Romans were displayed as "evil oppressors" etc in school. Even in most Hollywood movies this is the case. 
The link new-age and Celts is an old story. This was done in the 19th century. I think that the old Celts wouldn't even understand this so-called Celtic revival nowadays. 
 
gr, jeroen

02-23-2003, 10:24 PM

The New Age movement has even worse fates in store for cultures about which little is known and are safely dead and can't defend themselves. At least nobody is claiming that the Celts were a peace-loving matriarchy that worshipped the Goddess until those nasty patriarchal sky-god worshippers came along.

**richsc** · 02-24-2003, 03:29 AM

Simon James was pilloried by all the newage 'celts' for his book 'The Atlantic Celts' when he stated that the modern term Celt got it's connotation from an 18th century linguist. And I think there is a large number of new age folks who think Celts are just what you said. Or at least they have large choirs of women singing acapella. Richard Campbell, Legio XX

02-24-2003, 06:33 AM

I don't think that New Age fringe elements are as much a cause for concern as accredited historians writing history from a 'politically correct' viewpoint. 
If Dr. Francis Pryor's comments weren't too palatable, I'm afraid there are more from his school of thinking out there writing politically correct history. 
Neil Faulkner's 'The Fall of Roman Britain' is an example I recently came across. I advise anyone who is susceptible to attacks of apoplexy to avoid this one like the proverbial plague! Not only does the Romans as militistic thugs and oppressors theme occur continuously thro' 180 pages (the Celts are wretched innocent peasants driven to despair by Roman brutality of course) Neil Faulkner actually goes one step further and actively labels them them as Nazis! 
The real worrying thing is these books are often targeted at lay readers who are probably going to end up believing this vitriolic one sided point of view. Not to mention that in the current politically correct climate this view point no doubt gets a lot of academic acceptance too. As if the Romans didn't already get a bad enough rap thanks to Hollywood and the likes! 
As John said-it 'aint too fair (or ethical for that matter) to slander a long dead culture that can't defend itself! 
Jackie.

02-24-2003, 05:08 PM

Ah, well, it's not a modern phenomenon. People have laways distorted history for political and racial purposes. The 19th century German and French nationalist movements tried to play up the Teutons and the Gauls as the founders of Europe, and they squabbled over whether the Franks were really German or French. The Nazis notoriously played the historical race card, and the Communists tried to co-opt Spartacus as the first social rebel, so much so that in Howard Fast's book, Spartacus wants not only to destroy Rome but abolish slavery, as if somebody back then had a viable alternative to the slave system. Shouldn't blame new agers and dim professors, I guess.

02-25-2003, 03:32 PM

Hmmm.....well I suppose when all is said and done, they are as entitled to their opinions as anybody else. But I just wish those p.c historians weren't so abnoxious about the way they express theirs. It's the in your face attitude that really gets me riled!!

02-25-2003, 03:58 PM

Come to think of it maybe one should pity them, that they are narrow minded enough to let the matter of a bit of thuggery blind them to the many positive aspects of a great civilization!

02-25-2003, 05:48 PM

I get the feeling ol' Francis was often beaten up or picked on by "bullies" in school as a young lad... 
Magnus/Matt 
Optio 
Legio XXX "Ulpia Victrix"

mcbishop · 02-25-2003, 07:12 PM

To be fair, the Francis Pryor programmes are really rather good (watch them with an open mind when you get a chance to see them: he is well worth listening to). He is not really a member of the 'Romans are fascist militarists' school of thinking (there is more than an element of tease in what he says) which, to be honest, I have been listening to for more years than I care to mention (and I have had to listen to some real anti-Roman cretins in my professional career, if you can call what I do a 'career'). A lot of it goes back to Roman archaeologists having discovered 'new archaeology' (which those of us who have actually studied any prehistory can tell you was old in the 1970s). It is sloppy academic thinking and does little to elucidate the past for either scholars or the general public (which is, after all, what it's all about). Even better is the assumption that if you study the Roman army, you too are a fascist militaristic pig (that one regularly comes out too). Those of us working in the field just grin at each other 'cos we've heard it all before and can recognise it for what it is: BS. You cannot study things Roman without adopting a holistic approach: citizens with provincials, military with civil, and (shock horror) literature with history. 
 
Not that I feel strongly about such things, you understand... ;-) 
 
Mike Bishop

Login
Username:
Password:	Lost Password?
	Remember me