Dark Ages Treasure Hoard Found

[The Brain]

I can totally see why Health Issue McTim makes third rate modern medical care a top priority, but why does he consider a healthy person's preference for being a Viking chief absurd?

[Agelastus]

I can totally see why Health Issue McTim makes third rate modern medical care a top priority, but why does he consider a healthy person's preference for being a Viking chief absurd?

Maybe he thinks battleaxes are uncool?

[jimmy olsen]

That's because they don't know what they're missing, but we're not talking about a typical Viking chieftain, we're talking about you. You said that "I'd rather be a Viking chief than a ghetto dweller in Detroit." That's not true, you'd know what you'd be missing and you would be far less satisfied in the position of the chieftain than the ghetto dweller.

I disagree. Maybe *you* would rather be a ghetto dweller, and enjoy your TV and free medicare - but not *me*.

Maybe you could live with the risks for yourself, but what about Carl?

[The Brain]

That's because they don't know what they're missing, but we're not talking about a typical Viking chieftain, we're talking about you. You said that "I'd rather be a Viking chief than a ghetto dweller in Detroit." That's not true, you'd know what you'd be missing and you would be far less satisfied in the position of the chieftain than the ghetto dweller.

I disagree. Maybe *you* would rather be a ghetto dweller, and enjoy your TV and free medicare - but not *me*.

Maybe you could live with the risks for yourself, but what about Carl?

Contrary to popular belief having a dad who was a Viking chieftain was considered pretty cool in 9th century European playgrounds.

[The Brain]

Tim, here's a piece of wisdom for ya: it's about living, not surviving.

[jimmy olsen]

That's because they don't know what they're missing, but we're not talking about a typical Viking chieftain, we're talking about you. You said that "I'd rather be a Viking chief than a ghetto dweller in Detroit." That's not true, you'd know what you'd be missing and you would be far less satisfied in the position of the chieftain than the ghetto dweller.

I disagree. Maybe *you* would rather be a ghetto dweller, and enjoy your TV and free medicare - but not *me*.

Maybe you could live with the risks for yourself, but what about Carl?

Contrary to popular belief having a dad who was a Viking chieftain was considered pretty cool in 9th century European playgrounds.

We're talking about time travel here.

[The Brain]

That's because they don't know what they're missing, but we're not talking about a typical Viking chieftain, we're talking about you. You said that "I'd rather be a Viking chief than a ghetto dweller in Detroit." That's not true, you'd know what you'd be missing and you would be far less satisfied in the position of the chieftain than the ghetto dweller.

I disagree. Maybe *you* would rather be a ghetto dweller, and enjoy your TV and free medicare - but not *me*.

Maybe you could live with the risks for yourself, but what about Carl?

Contrary to popular belief having a dad who was a Viking chieftain was considered pretty cool in 9th century European playgrounds.

We're talking about time travel here.

Elaborate.

[The Brain]

Another one for Tim: the best you can hope for in life is uncertainty. Everything that is certain is bad.

[The Brain]

Candygram for Mr. Mongers!

[Ed Anger]

I want to be:

Olaf, the nun raper

[DisturbedPervert]

Him and his wife, in such a different context, would probably have conceived a dozen or more times.

In addition to the dozens he fathered while out raping and pillaging.

[Queequeg]

That's exactly my point - impressive jewelery-work isn't very useful a measure of civilization.

Metallurgy isn't? 

but I disagree that "civilization" and "progress" are meaningless terms.

For the vast majority of people, it most certainly is useless before the Industrial Revolution.



I think it is possible to talk of proto-progress since maybe the Neolithic, and early Progress during and after the late medieval period, but Progress as in "everything always getting better in Europe" is very, very recent and would not have been shared by the most optimistic Romano-Britain, let alone the Saxon. 

Thus I tend to look at statements of one society being "more civilized/advanced" than the other with a bit of skepticism.  The average nomad was well fed on a diet of meat and cheese supplemented by some grains, and combine this with a high mortality rate and I it is most certainly the case that the average Mongol was probably healthier and smarter than the average Indian, Roman, Chinese or Arab farmer from any pre-modern period, where malnutrition would have been near constant.   

In addition, you far overestimate the level of organization of steppe society. I recommend reading a translation of The Secret History for a view of how un organized steppe society usually was. The Imperium of the Mongols was a short-lived exception to the general rule.

I doubt that Mongol society was any more chaotic than the Rome of Marius and Caesar, or the Europe of Brusilov and Guderian, or the Italian city states of the renaissance.  Violence and creativity are not only not incompatible, but often seem to foster each other. 

[Malthus]

Metallurgy isn't? 

Depends on what that metalurgy is for, doesn't it?

Pretty well every human culture produces beautiful jewelry. Gold, which is ductile and easy to work in other ways, is frequently used for this. Ergo, gold-work is a poor indicator of "civilization".

For the vast majority of people, it most certainly is useless before the Industrial Revolution.



I think it is possible to talk of proto-progress since maybe the Neolithic, and early Progress during and after the late medieval period, but Progress as in "everything always getting better in Europe" is very, very recent and would not have been shared by the most optimistic Romano-Britain, let alone the Saxon.

Again, in your opinion there is no difference between the technology and life-ways of a Roman and an Australian Aborigine in terms of "progress"?

I beg to differ.

I also beg to differ that the Roman era was not an advance over what came before, that the Renaissance era was not an advance over the Roman, etc.

Certainly, there were dark ages and collapses - that's the origin of this whole debate: whether what passed after the fall of the Roman empire in England and prior to the re-establishment of urbanism can properly be considered a "dark age", or just business as usual.   

Thus I tend to look at statements of one society being "more civilized/advanced" than the other with a bit of skepticism.  The average nomad was well fed on a diet of meat and cheese supplemented by some grains, and combine this with a high mortality rate and I it is most certainly the case that the average Mongol was probably healthier and smarter than the average Indian, Roman, Chinese or Arab farmer from any pre-modern period, where malnutrition would have been near constant.

I suspect this is so much romantic mythology. The life of a pastoral nomad is every bit as nasty, brutish and short as any farmer. What makes the lifestyle attractive is comparative freedom, not material prosperity.   

I doubt that Mongol society was any more chaotic than the Rome of Marius and Caesar, or the Europe of Brusilov and Guderian, or the Italian city states of the renaissance.  Violence and creativity are not only not incompatible, but often seem to foster each other.

Even Marius never personally murdered his own brother over a fish. Temujin (the future Ghenghis Khan) did, ironocally enough for your thesis, while his entire family was busy starving to death. Unfortunately for the world, Temujin lived.

[Jaron]

Jewish greed + Viking savagery would make a fiercesome opponent.

[Malthus]

Jewish greed + Viking savagery would make a fiercesome opponent.

Our kosher mead hall will need an entertainer.