World History Discussion

[Five_X]

God save the Franks

[LegalLoliLover]

you know all those games with multiple, joinable rival factions, and a lot of people do a lot of thinking trying to make the "best RP"? Don't. Why? Because this guy:

[Nanashi(kari)]

Speaking of the Franks sometime ago I realized due the method of succession I mentioned last page royal houses in regions the Franks didn't conquer (Iberia, Britain, Hungary and Bohemia) became of franking origin in the male line which is something I don't like aesthetically speaking.

[Nanashi(kari)]

Recently, I realized that apparently only the Greeks (which passed it to the Romans and thus to Europe), Chinese (which passed it to East Asia) and Muslim invented history as a literary genre. Every other literary culture only had songs commemorating the feats of kings, short barebones chronicles and/or king lists.

[Petrikow]

It's likely the Muslims got it from the Greeks as well. The Islamic scholarship inherited a lot of its academic literature from them.

[SpoonyViking]

Recently, I realized that apparently only the Greeks (which passed it to the Romans and thus to Europe), Chinese (which passed it to East Asia) and Muslim invented history as a literary genre. Every other literary culture only had songs commemorating the feats of kings, short barebones chronicles and/or king lists.

Depends on what you mean by "literary" genre, really. Don't underestimate oral literature - it was used to record *a lot* of things, certainly far more than that reductive description.

[Five_X]

If you're more interested in the actual context of his post, "literary" is meant in the explicit sense there, as in involving the written word. There's also within there the notion of history, that is, a mode of inquiry (istoria) into the past: that's where the point is. Cross-culturally, it's a fairly rare thing. Obviously every group of people in some way created a record of the past, written or otherwise. That's not history.

[SpoonyViking]

Well, yeah, that's my point: that when talking about History or Literature, "literary" *shouldn't* be taken stricto sensu (even if it has been for most of history), and that the distinction between "recording" and "inquiring" isn't as strong as one might assume at first glance.

ETA: This isn't meant as criticism or dismissal of History or its study, of course! I'm just saying, I agree with Jenkins's view that "history" and "story" aren't dissimilar, and I don't see that as a bad thing.

[Five_X]

It's useful, academically and culturally, to consider that there was a peculiar form of writing about the past that emerged in some societies and not in others. An erasure of distinctions doesn't inherently benefit anyone, even as we contextualise those distinctions. For Jenkins (this isn't a groundbreaking definition), history is a discourse: that we can point to certain peoples and places in the world for whom and where this discourse was more active and self-conscious is a useful thing. Thus, we can start to ask questions about why the ancient Greeks and ancient Chinese developed a similar, discursive method of looking at the past and why that method spread to neighbouring cultures. Then we're really in the rabbit hole.

[SpoonyViking]

Oh, don't worry, I'm well aware he's not groundbreaking! It's been, what, 10 years since his last book? More?
But yeah, OK, that's a fair point; it's important to keep distinctions in mind.
Is there a consensus, then, or at least a leading theory on why Greek and Chinese historiographies are different from, say, Babylonian or Egyptian?

[Kamera]

It's likely the Muslims got it from the Greeks as well. The Islamic scholarship inherited a lot of its academic literature from them.

It's more of a Biblical approach to history inherited from early Christians and Jewish writers.

[Kamera]

Average Greek history literature topic:
"This West Asian tribe is descended from Great Greek Hero Leukimiacus, the Schytian carpet trader down the street told me so."

Average Chinese history literature topic:
"The ritual practice of using chop sticks to decide land bureaucracy originates from Emperor Shu being pranked by his nephew."

Average Muslim history literature topic:
"5 pages long genealogy of Genghis Khan's ancestors traced back to Prophet Adam."

[Five_X]

Oh, don't worry, I'm well aware he's not groundbreaking! It's been, what, 10 years since his last book? More?
But yeah, OK, that's a fair point; it's important to keep distinctions in mind.
Is there a consensus, then, or at least a leading theory on why Greek and Chinese historiographies are different from, say, Babylonian or Egyptian?

I wish that I knew! For Greece, one naturally has to wonder about the co-development of materialist natural philosophies and similarly "scientific" thinking about history. Scientist-historians in the vein of Carl Sagan would have it that "free thought" naturally leads to scientific, analytical thinking, which still holds a lot of popular sway, but it doesn't offer any solid material explanation or causality.

[SpoonyViking]

Indeed! The potential link to the material sciences is intriguing, though.

[tsugumi]

Only just learnt Cleopatra was mid, feeling shook

[Five_X]

No such thing as calling a beautiful Mediterranean nose "mid."

[tsugumi]

But the jaw... the forehead... it's so much... the world has lied to me my entire life...

[Five_X]

I wouldn't put as much stock in coinage-as-representation before very modern times. The coin die used to make standard coins in the ancient world were hand-engraved and imprecise, and the results consistently inconsistent: no two coins are alike. It's a bit like when you're baking cookies and make a cute design in the dough, then once you've baked them the cute design is totally unrecognisable.

[tsugumi]

I will take heart... crazy that her nose was erased from pop culture though

[SpoonyViking]

Yes, qwhite a mystery. '-'

- - - Updated - - -

For what it's worth, there are some conflicting sources? Some do say she was exceptionally beautiful, but they often (maybe always?) use that to slander her as some kind of evil temptress who led Mark Antony astray with her seductive wiles; others say she wasn't as beautiful as Mark Antony's wife, but more than made up for it with her force of personality. So, you know... Eh.