Quote
Mystery 13th Century eruption traced to Lombok, Indonesia
By Jonathan Amos
Science correspondent, BBC News
Scientists think they have found the volcano responsible for a huge eruption that occurred in the 13th Century.
The mystery event in 1257 was so large its chemical signature is recorded in the ice of both the Arctic and the Antarctic.
European medieval texts talk of a sudden cooling of the climate, and of failed harvests.
In the PNAS journal, an international team points the finger at the Samalas Volcano on Lombok Island, Indonesia.
Little remains of the original mountain structure - just a huge crater lake.
The team has tied sulphur and dust traces in the polar ice to a swathe of data gathered in the Lombok region itself, including radiocarbon dates, the type and spread of ejected rock and ash, tree-rings, and even local chronicles that recall the fall of the Lombok Kingdom sometime in the 13th Century.
"The evidence is very strong and compelling," Prof Clive Oppenheimer, from Cambridge University, UK, told the BBC.
Co-worker Prof Franck Lavigne, from the Pantheon-Sorbonne University, France, added: "We conducted something similar to a criminal investigation.
"We didn't know the culprit at first, but we had the time of the murder and the fingerprints in the form of the geochemistry in the ice cores, and that allowed us to track down the volcano responsible."
The 1257 eruption has been variously linked with volcanoes in Mexico, Ecuador and New Zealand.
But these candidates fail on their dating or geochemistry, the researchers say. Only Samalas can "tick all the boxes".
Global event
The team's studies on Lombok indicate that as much 40 cubic kilometres (10 cubic miles) of rock and ash could have been hurled from the volcano, and that the finest material in the eruption plume would likely have climbed 40km (25 miles) or more into the sky.
It would have had to be this big in order for material to be carried across the entire globe in the quantities seen in the Greenland and Antarctic ice layers.
The impact on the climate would have been significant.
Medieval texts describe atrocious weather the following summer in 1258. It was cold, and the rain was unrelenting, leading to flooding.
Archaeologists recently put a date of 1258 on the skeletons of thousands of people who were buried in mass graves in London.
........
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fnews.bbcimg.co.uk%2Fmedia%2Fimages%2F70187000%2Fjpg%2F_70187714_70187713.jpg&hash=9d9e32aab5c3bd91026dc1d9c724db416aaa7a71)
The bowl that is today Segara Anak Crater Lake formed after the eruption
Full article here:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-24332239 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-24332239)
Oh, Indonesia and its wacky volcanoes ... I remember when I was in Bali and I visited Mt. Batur ... a volcano inside a set of enormous craters, the outer one being 10 km across. That must have been something, when it blew. :hmm:
Can see it in panorama here:
http://www.360cities.net/image/inside-mount-batur-s-caldera#-280.69,-22.81,79.5
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mount_Batur
I read about this. Because that's the timeframe that I spend most of my studies, I was thrilled! There are illuminated manuscripts in the Newberry Library in Chicago that have drawings of the failed crops and "dark skies" of that year.
Is it sad that I'm getting goosebumps? :blush:
Quote from: merithyn on October 02, 2013, 08:48:03 AM
I read about this. Because that's the timeframe that I spend most of my studies, I was thrilled! There are illuminated manuscripts in the Newberry Library in Chicago that have drawings of the failed crops and "dark skies" of that year.
Is it sad that I'm getting goosebumps? :blush:
No, I too like finding out about these non-traditional historical narrative forces. A nice contrast to you know, who married Z queen, which king followed Y kings and when was X battle fought.
Quote from: mongers on October 02, 2013, 10:10:36 AM
No, I too like finding out about these non-traditional historical narrative forces. A nice contrast to you know, who married Z queen, which king followed Y kings and when was X battle fought.
Learning about royalty and wars is easy. I want to know about the day-to-day stuff.
Like, the idea that Totnes, Devon was once a thriving minter for the kings of old. How did that happen? Why? (The nearby mines, of course, coupled with a straight shot across water to London.) How did they process the coins, and what "security" was in affect at the time? How did that directly affect the growth of that city, and what caused it to suddenly start dropping population in the 15th century? How did that affect the wool and cloth industry there?
Oh, so many questions! :wub:
Quote from: merithyn on October 02, 2013, 10:17:59 AM
Quote from: mongers on October 02, 2013, 10:10:36 AM
No, I too like finding out about these non-traditional historical narrative forces. A nice contrast to you know, who married Z queen, which king followed Y kings and when was X battle fought.
Learning about royalty and wars is easy. I want to know about the day-to-day stuff.
Eh...not really. There is alot of propaganda and ass covering to sort through, especially when wars are involved. Learning the details you find things are often dramatically different than the accepted story. Especially when they do archaelogical excavation of the sites and so forth.
QuoteLike, the idea that Totnes, Devon was once a thriving minter for the kings of old. How did that happen? Why? (The nearby mines, of course, coupled with a straight shot across water to London.) How did they process the coins, and what "security" was in affect at the time? How did that directly affect the growth of that city, and what caused it to suddenly start dropping population in the 15th century? How did that affect the wool and cloth industry there?
Oh, so many questions! :wub:
Oh yeah that stuff rocks to. Just not sure why it was necessary to be all like 'things in history that do not interest me are totally lame man' like you and Mongers are doing. I suspect even the two of you know that is not true. Heck what happened to Totnes, Devon is of course tied up in that stuff as well.
Quote from: mongers on October 02, 2013, 10:10:36 AM
No, I too like finding out about these non-traditional historical narrative forces. A nice contrast to you know, who married Z queen, which king followed Y kings and when was X battle fought.
A nice contrast to what? Does a political or military history exist that just goes 'so this person married Z queen, this king followed Y king and this battle was fought at this date'? I mean outside of trivia books or something.
Meri would like the history channel show 'Going Medieval'. A lot of the mundane stuff is covered.
Quote from: Valmy on October 02, 2013, 10:50:14 AM
Quote from: merithyn on October 02, 2013, 10:17:59 AM
Learning about royalty and wars is easy. I want to know about the day-to-day stuff.
Eh...not really. There is alot of propaganda and ass covering to sort through, especially when wars are involved. Learning the details you find things are often dramatically different than the accepted story. Especially when they do archaelogical excavation of the sites and so forth.
There is a hell of a lot more information to sort through to get those answers when discussing royalty and wars than there are when discussing the day-to-day life of a peasant. Yes, it may take some doing, but the information is handy. One cannot say the same for the stuff that I prefer to learn about.
QuoteQuoteLike, the idea that Totnes, Devon was once a thriving minter for the kings of old. How did that happen? Why? (The nearby mines, of course, coupled with a straight shot across water to London.) How did they process the coins, and what "security" was in affect at the time? How did that directly affect the growth of that city, and what caused it to suddenly start dropping population in the 15th century? How did that affect the wool and cloth industry there?
Oh, so many questions! :wub:
Oh yeah that stuff rocks to. Just not sure why it was necessary to be all like 'things in history that do not interest me are totally lame man' like you and Mongers are doing. I suspect even the two of you know that is not true. Heck what happened to Totnes, Devon is of course tied up in that stuff as well.
I didn't say it was lame; I said that it doesn't interest me. I also said that there's a lot more digging required to figure out the stuff that I am interested in than in figuring out wars, etc. In fact, the stuff that I'm interested in requires that I actually make an effort to try to learn the techniques involved in day-to-day stuff, as it's the only way to really understand what little information we've been able to salvage. That interests me.
Why the wars were fought by whom and for what? Yeah, I don't really care. Other historians can work that stuff out, and more power to them.
I'm not sure why it offends you that I feel that way, though.
Quote from: Valmy on October 02, 2013, 10:52:55 AM
Quote from: mongers on October 02, 2013, 10:10:36 AM
No, I too like finding out about these non-traditional historical narrative forces. A nice contrast to you know, who married Z queen, which king followed Y kings and when was X battle fought.
A nice contrast to what? Does a political or military history exist that just goes 'so this person married Z queen, this king followed Y king and this battle was fought at this date'? I mean outside of trivia books or something.
Wow. This really bothers you, doesn't it?
Dude, if you like that kind of history, then by all means, read up on it. Study it to your little heart's content. Just because Mongers and I prefer a different take on history doesn't mean that we're dissing your personal pet projects.
Quote from: Valmy on October 02, 2013, 10:50:14 AM
Quote from: merithyn on October 02, 2013, 10:17:59 AM
Quote from: mongers on October 02, 2013, 10:10:36 AM
No, I too like finding out about these non-traditional historical narrative forces. A nice contrast to you know, who married Z queen, which king followed Y kings and when was X battle fought.
Learning about royalty and wars is easy. I want to know about the day-to-day stuff.
Eh...not really. There is alot of propaganda and ass covering to sort through, especially when wars are involved. Learning the details you find things are often dramatically different than the accepted story. Especially when they do archaelogical excavation of the sites and so forth.
QuoteLike, the idea that Totnes, Devon was once a thriving minter for the kings of old. How did that happen? Why? (The nearby mines, of course, coupled with a straight shot across water to London.) How did they process the coins, and what "security" was in affect at the time? How did that directly affect the growth of that city, and what caused it to suddenly start dropping population in the 15th century? How did that affect the wool and cloth industry there?
Oh, so many questions! :wub:
Oh yeah that stuff rocks to. Just not sure why it was necessary to be all like 'things in history that do not interest me are totally lame man' like you and Mongers are doing. I suspect even the two of you know that is not true. Heck what happened to Totnes, Devon is of course tied up in that stuff as well.
How exactly do you get that from this:
QuoteA nice contrast to you know..
Other than by mis-characterising someone's post?
Quote from: Ed Anger on October 02, 2013, 10:54:47 AM
Meri would like the history channel show 'Going Medieval'. A lot of the mundane stuff is covered.
:wub:
I've seen it. Another great favorite of mine is Tales from the Green Valley from BBC. It shows two historians and three archeologists trying to live as early 16th-century farmers for a year. It's fascinating how much they learn about food production, household work, and general money-making schemes for plebes of the time.
I recommend this book for the "everyday stuff". I liked it. Suitable for the curious non-academic, like me, but I think even the serious academic type would find something they didn't know in it.
http://www.amazon.com/Time-Travelers-Guide-Medieval-England/dp/1439112908/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1380730677&sr=8-1&keywords=a+time+traveler%27s+guide+to+medieval+england
Quote from: merithyn on October 02, 2013, 11:01:13 AM
Quote from: Ed Anger on October 02, 2013, 10:54:47 AM
Meri would like the history channel show 'Going Medieval'. A lot of the mundane stuff is covered.
:wub:
I've seen it. Another great favorite of mine is Tales from the Green Valley from BBC. It shows two historians and three archeologists trying to live as early 16th-century farmers for a year. It's fascinating how much they learn about food production, household work, and general money-making schemes for plebes of the time.
Next week I'm going to a talk by one of the 'stars' of that and the victorian farm series.
Quote from: mongers on October 02, 2013, 11:26:33 AM
Next week I'm going to a talk by one of the 'stars' of that and the victorian farm series.
:w00t: :w00t: :w00t:
WHICH ONE??????
I :wub: them all, but Peter and Ruth are my favorites. :wub: :wub: :wub:
Quote from: Malthus on October 02, 2013, 11:22:10 AM
I recommend this book for the "everyday stuff". I liked it. Suitable for the curious non-academic, like me, but I think even the serious academic type would find something they didn't know in it.
http://www.amazon.com/Time-Travelers-Guide-Medieval-England/dp/1439112908/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1380730677&sr=8-1&keywords=a+time+traveler%27s+guide+to+medieval+england
That's a good one, but my favorite is the excavation series.
http://www.amazon.com/Textiles-Clothing-c-1150-1450-Medieval-Excavations/dp/1843832399/ref=pd_bxgy_b_img_y
http://www.amazon.com/Dress-Accessories-Medieval-Excavations-London/dp/1843833514/ref=pd_bxgy_b_img_y
http://www.amazon.com/The-Medieval-Household-c-1150-c-1450-Excavations/dp/1843835436/ref=pd_sim_b_4
:wub:
Another really good one is the Mary Rose excavation book, but it's a bit out of my price range. A friend has it, and I've spent some time drooling over his book, but not something that I'm ready to put the money out for just yet.
The one really expensive one that I've bought, however is this one:
http://www.amazon.com/Archaeology-Medieval-Bookbinding-J-Szirmai/dp/0859679047/ref=sr_1_5?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1380731597&sr=1-5&keywords=bookbinding+history
Worth. Every. Penny.
Meri, the Mary Rose book is being sold secondhand for pennies on Amazon.
Quote from: Richard Hakluyt on October 02, 2013, 11:38:32 AM
Meri, the Mary Rose book is being sold secondhand for pennies on Amazon.
I just saw that, but I wasn't sure if it's the same one that my friend has. I need to ask him if it's the same author.
That stuff looks very cool, but for myself it's a level of specialization higher than I usually go for purely recreational reading on medieval England. Though I do love a good excavation report, my typical area is the mid-east.
Quote from: Malthus on October 02, 2013, 11:42:19 AM
That stuff looks very cool, but for myself it's a level of specialization higher than I usually go for purely recreational reading on medieval England. Though I do love a good excavation report, my typical area is the mid-east.
Well, at the moment, I'm learning to make 14th-century brass needles and pins for modern use. So, these books are invaluable to me. I'm also looking into making some bone buttons and a few other odds and ends.
Quote from: merithyn on October 02, 2013, 11:01:13 AM
Quote from: Ed Anger on October 02, 2013, 10:54:47 AM
Meri would like the history channel show 'Going Medieval'. A lot of the mundane stuff is covered.
:wub:
I've seen it. Another great favorite of mine is Tales from the Green Valley from BBC. It shows two historians and three archeologists trying to live as early 16th-century farmers for a year. It's fascinating how much they learn about food production, household work, and general money-making schemes for plebes of the time.
We had a show around here last year which was called historical food or some such. Basically a man and a woman who was to live a week surrounded by the proper seeting, wearing the proper clothes etc. And of course eating the proper food. Most of the shows were different eras of the 20th century to give people those "oh remember that" moments but a few had them going way back. The one in the early 17th century had them being mostly drunk for a week.
Quote from: merithyn on October 02, 2013, 10:58:31 AM
I didn't say it was lame; I said that it doesn't interest me. I also said that there's a lot more digging required to figure out the stuff that I am interested in than in figuring out wars, etc. In fact, the stuff that I'm interested in requires that I actually make an effort to try to learn the techniques involved in day-to-day stuff, as it's the only way to really understand what little information we've been able to salvage. That interests me.
Why the wars were fought by whom and for what? Yeah, I don't really care. Other historians can work that stuff out, and more power to them.
I'm not sure why it offends you that I feel that way, though.
What does not offend me: not caring about something though I think you are misguided a bit. What did offend me: attacking it as easy or requiring no effort or something. Is that really necessary?
Quote from: Valmy on October 02, 2013, 11:50:51 AM
Quote from: merithyn on October 02, 2013, 10:58:31 AM
I didn't say it was lame; I said that it doesn't interest me. I also said that there's a lot more digging required to figure out the stuff that I am interested in than in figuring out wars, etc. In fact, the stuff that I'm interested in requires that I actually make an effort to try to learn the techniques involved in day-to-day stuff, as it's the only way to really understand what little information we've been able to salvage. That interests me.
Why the wars were fought by whom and for what? Yeah, I don't really care. Other historians can work that stuff out, and more power to them.
I'm not sure why it offends you that I feel that way, though.
What does not offend me: not caring about something though I think you are misguided a bit. What did offend me: attacking it as easy or requiring no effort or something. Is that really necessary?
Actually given that it is easy, will Meri please clear up for me who killed Lord Darnley, ordered the hit on Andrew (Duke of Calabria), and where those princes in the tower went?
Quote from: Valmy on October 02, 2013, 11:50:51 AM
What does not offend me: not caring about something though I think you are misguided a bit. What did offend me: attacking it as easy or requiring no effort or something. Is that really necessary?
I'm misguided in what I find interesting? Wow. Think about that statement for just a second, will you?
Also, I didn't say it was easy or that it required no effort. I said that it's easIER than learning about peasants. If you know anything about history, you know that this is true. The MOUNTAINS of documents about royals, government, wars, etc., make it much easier to figure out how people lived at that level of society, who the royals were, and why wars were fought. Does it answer everything? Of course not. Do I really care? No, not really. I know the basics, I get the gist of it, and pretty much, that's where my interest lies.
You enjoy it. Great! Have fun reading about it. There's lots out there for you to read about. The stuff that I'm interested in, however, is... lacking, comparatively.
I'm still not understanding where the affront is.
Quote from: garbon on October 02, 2013, 11:54:09 AM
Actually given that it is easy, will Meri please clear up for me who killed Lord Darnley, ordered the hit on Andrew (Duke of Calabria), and where those princes in the tower went?
I forgot that this was Languish, where words mean whatever others want them to mean, rather than how they were used in sentences.
Quote from: merithyn on October 02, 2013, 12:00:10 PM
Quote from: Valmy on October 02, 2013, 11:50:51 AM
What does not offend me: not caring about something though I think you are misguided a bit. What did offend me: attacking it as easy or requiring no effort or something. Is that really necessary?
.....
I'm still not understanding where the affront is.
People bringing their own real-world frustrations to bare on fellow languishites ? :unsure:
I am not going to read it, but how the hell, has the thread about a cool thing turned into Meri-bashing after she mentioned her cool interest in a cool period?
What a sorry-ass place this can be at times.
Quote from: Tamas on October 02, 2013, 12:03:51 PM
I am not going to read it, but how the hell, has the thread about a cool thing turned into Meri-bashing after she mentioned her cool interest in a cool period?
What a sorry-ass place this can be at times.
You know, I stopped wondering about that a long time ago. If I focus too much on it, I remember why I take breaks from this place.
Quote from: Tamas on October 02, 2013, 12:03:51 PM
I am not going to read it, but how the hell, has the thread about a cool thing turned into Meri-bashing after she mentioned her cool interest in a cool period?
What a sorry-ass place this can be at times.
Because of this:
Quote from: merithyn on October 02, 2013, 10:17:59 AM
Quote from: mongers on October 02, 2013, 10:10:36 AM
A nice contrast to you know, who married Z queen, which king followed Y kings and when was X battle fought.
Learning about royalty and wars is easy. I want to know about the day-to-day stuff.
Quote from: Tamas on October 02, 2013, 12:03:51 PM
I am not going to read it, but how the hell, has the thread about a cool thing turned into Meri-bashing after she mentioned her cool interest in a cool period?
What a sorry-ass place this can be at times.
Yes, it is rather sad if you look at it that way. :)
And if people actually read what Meri posted in reply to my comment, rather than someone else's version of it, they'd see what an odd reactive mentality is being expressed in this thread.
Quote from: merithyn on October 02, 2013, 12:01:02 PM
Quote from: garbon on October 02, 2013, 11:54:09 AM
Actually given that it is easy, will Meri please clear up for me who killed Lord Darnley, ordered the hit on Andrew (Duke of Calabria), and where those princes in the tower went?
I forgot that this was Languish, where words mean whatever others want them to mean, rather than how they were used in sentences.
So learning about royalty and wars is not easy? And the information is not handy?
Quote from: mongers on October 02, 2013, 12:08:11 PM
Quote from: Tamas on October 02, 2013, 12:03:51 PM
I am not going to read it, but how the hell, has the thread about a cool thing turned into Meri-bashing after she mentioned her cool interest in a cool period?
What a sorry-ass place this can be at times.
Yes, it is rather sad if you look at it way. :)
And if people actually read what Meri posted in reply to my comment, rather than someone else's version of it, they'd see what an odd reactive mentality is being expressed in this thread.
TBH, I thought you and Meri to be sounding rather dismissive about the part of history I like most, but wouldn't have said anything if Valmy hadn't gotten angry.
Quote from: garbon on October 02, 2013, 12:08:56 PM
Quote from: merithyn on October 02, 2013, 12:01:02 PM
Quote from: garbon on October 02, 2013, 11:54:09 AM
Actually given that it is easy, will Meri please clear up for me who killed Lord Darnley, ordered the hit on Andrew (Duke of Calabria), and where those princes in the tower went?
I forgot that this was Languish, where words mean whatever others want them to mean, rather than how they were used in sentences.
So learning about royalty and wars is not easy? And the information is not handy?
Do carry on digging, or is it building a bridge, or maybe a sniper's nest ?
Quote from: mongers on October 02, 2013, 12:10:37 PM
Quote from: garbon on October 02, 2013, 12:08:56 PM
Quote from: merithyn on October 02, 2013, 12:01:02 PM
Quote from: garbon on October 02, 2013, 11:54:09 AM
Actually given that it is easy, will Meri please clear up for me who killed Lord Darnley, ordered the hit on Andrew (Duke of Calabria), and where those princes in the tower went?
I forgot that this was Languish, where words mean whatever others want them to mean, rather than how they were used in sentences.
So learning about royalty and wars is not easy? And the information is not handy?
Do carry on digging, or is it building a bridge, or maybe a sniper's nest ?
Well either she meant what she said when she said it was easy and the information is handy or she didn't. Is there some other meaning for what those words mean?
Quote from: garbon on October 02, 2013, 12:09:51 PM
Quote from: mongers on October 02, 2013, 12:08:11 PM
Quote from: Tamas on October 02, 2013, 12:03:51 PM
I am not going to read it, but how the hell, has the thread about a cool thing turned into Meri-bashing after she mentioned her cool interest in a cool period?
What a sorry-ass place this can be at times.
Yes, it is rather sad if you look at it way. :)
And if people actually read what Meri posted in reply to my comment, rather than someone else's version of it, they'd see what an odd reactive mentality is being expressed in this thread.
TBH, I thought you and Meri to be sounding rather dismissive about the part of history I like most, but wouldn't have said anything if Valmy hadn't gotten angry.
I say it again, how do you get that, from me saying "A nice contrast.." ?
Quote from: mongers on October 02, 2013, 12:11:55 PM
Quote from: garbon on October 02, 2013, 12:09:51 PM
Quote from: mongers on October 02, 2013, 12:08:11 PM
Quote from: Tamas on October 02, 2013, 12:03:51 PM
I am not going to read it, but how the hell, has the thread about a cool thing turned into Meri-bashing after she mentioned her cool interest in a cool period?
What a sorry-ass place this can be at times.
Yes, it is rather sad if you look at it way. :)
And if people actually read what Meri posted in reply to my comment, rather than someone else's version of it, they'd see what an odd reactive mentality is being expressed in this thread.
TBH, I thought you and Meri to be sounding rather dismissive about the part of history I like most, but wouldn't have said anything if Valmy hadn't gotten angry.
I say it again, how do you get that, from me saying "A nice contrast.." ?
Because you stated the latter bit as entirely formulaic. You even reduced many of the inputs to symbols (letters). And then Meri followed up by saying that sort of stuff was easy.
Quote from: garbon on October 02, 2013, 12:08:56 PM
So learning about royalty and wars is not easy? And the information is not handy?
The information is far more handy than on the topics that I find interesting, yes. Am I mistaken on this? If so, please, share where all of this mountain of information on 13th-century British serfs is, because I've been beating my head against a brick wall for two decades! It would sure help me a lot!
Learning about royalty (who, what, where, why) and wars (who, what, where, why) is easy. Getting into the nitty-gritty of it, not so much. But again, I don't really care about that stuff. And the reality is that there are dozens upon dozens of historians who work very hard to figure that kind of stuff out, so even if you don't want to go through the papers and codices yourself, someone else has already probably done so. The stuff I want to learn? Not so much.
Which has been my point from the beginning. I don't really care about that stuff, and if I did, it would be easier to learn more about it than the stuff that I do actually care about.
I wasn't sniping at those who enjoy those things. I was stating my personal preference. If you guys took offense to that, well, fuck. Get over yourselves. It was never about you.
Quote from: garbon on October 02, 2013, 12:12:38 PM
Quote from: mongers on October 02, 2013, 12:11:55 PM
Quote from: garbon on October 02, 2013, 12:09:51 PM
Quote from: mongers on October 02, 2013, 12:08:11 PM
Quote from: Tamas on October 02, 2013, 12:03:51 PM
I am not going to read it, but how the hell, has the thread about a cool thing turned into Meri-bashing after she mentioned her cool interest in a cool period?
What a sorry-ass place this can be at times.
Yes, it is rather sad if you look at it way. :)
And if people actually read what Meri posted in reply to my comment, rather than someone else's version of it, they'd see what an odd reactive mentality is being expressed in this thread.
TBH, I thought you and Meri to be sounding rather dismissive about the part of history I like most, but wouldn't have said anything if Valmy hadn't gotten angry.
I say it again, how do you get that, from me saying "A nice contrast.." ?
Because you stated the latter bit as entirely formulaic. You even reduced many of the inputs to symbols (letters). And then Meri followed up by saying that sort of stuff was easy.
Do carry on, you're constructing an epic papier-mâché bridge over what you think I said and meant.
Quote from: mongers on October 02, 2013, 12:15:33 PM
Do carry on, you're constructing an epic papier-mâché bridge over what you think I said and meant.
Hey, I believe you if that isn't what you intended - I'm just explaining how I perceived it. I don't think that has anything to do with building epic bridges. :huh:
Quote from: merithyn on October 02, 2013, 12:14:50 PM
If you guys took offense to that, well, fuck. Get over yourselves. It was never about you.
Calm down, you're acting emotional.
*Actually I didn't want to say that, and feel bad that I did, but then you are the one getting heated.
History that isn't about Charles XII is lame.
Quote from: garbon on October 02, 2013, 12:17:38 PM
Quote from: merithyn on October 02, 2013, 12:14:50 PM
If you guys took offense to that, well, fuck. Get over yourselves. It was never about you.
Calm down, you're acting emotional.
*Actually I didn't want to say that, and feel bad that I did, but then you are the one getting heated.
:mellow:
Wow. Really. I get attacked because of my personal interests, I defend myself against those attacks, and this is how you - really, you? - respond?
I don't know why this still surprises me, and yet, everytime, it does.
History that is about Timur is lame.
Quote from: merithyn on October 02, 2013, 12:20:37 PM
Quote from: garbon on October 02, 2013, 12:17:38 PM
Quote from: merithyn on October 02, 2013, 12:14:50 PM
If you guys took offense to that, well, fuck. Get over yourselves. It was never about you.
Calm down, you're acting emotional.
*Actually I didn't want to say that, and feel bad that I did, but then you are the one getting heated.
:mellow:
Wow. Really. I get attacked because of my personal interests, I defend myself against those attacks, and this is how you - really, you? - respond?
I don't know why this still surprises me, and yet, everytime, it does.
I think we have a different definition of attacks and I don't think anything here stemmed from you being interested in a different facet of history. Also, you're the one who escalated to foul language.
Quote from: The Brain on October 02, 2013, 12:22:25 PM
History that is about Timur is lame.
Don't you dare say anything about the medieval wine trade or your have JR on your case. :)
Quote from: merithyn on October 02, 2013, 12:00:10 PM
I'm misguided in what I find interesting? Wow. Think about that statement for just a second, will you?
I think there is more to it than you give credit for. There I thought about it.
QuoteAlso, I didn't say it was easy or that it required no effort. I said that it's easIER than learning about peasants. If you know anything about history, you know that this is true. The MOUNTAINS of documents about royals, government, wars, etc., make it much easier to figure out how people lived at that level of society, who the royals were, and why wars were fought. Does it answer everything? Of course not. Do I really care? No, not really. I know the basics, I get the gist of it, and pretty much, that's where my interest lies.
And that is a great interest. I share and fully support this interest. I sort of disagree it is that much easier for all sorts of reasons that are complicated.
QuoteYou enjoy it. Great! Have fun reading about it. There's lots out there for you to read about. The stuff that I'm interested in, however, is... lacking, comparatively.
I'm still not understanding where the affront is.
I just did not understand why it was necessary to express how inferior something else was first. I do not understand where the confusion is about that.
I am not really that offended I just do not get it. I mean how annoying would it be before a military historian talked about wars for him to say something like 'social history is so pointless, I mean we are not peasants living on some estate how is that relevent to us? But humans will always fight wars so lets get into something really important!' This is not an uncommon thing for people to say (well usually not exactly like that) in history and I am usually like 'really? Why is this necessary to say?'. Just a pet peeve of mine.
Quote from: Valmy on October 02, 2013, 12:32:01 PM
I think there is more to it than you give credit for. There I thought about it.
Valmy, my degree is in medieval history. I was required, as part of my degree, to study exactly the stuff that you're claiming to love. I couldn't have cared less about any of it. I learned it because I had to, and I set it aside as soon as I could. To assume that I know nothing about it - and therefore am misguided in my distaste for it - is ridiculous. I DO know about it, which is WHY I dislike it. *I* dislike it. *Me*. Not *my* thing.
Quote
And that is a great interest. I share and fully support this interest. I sort of disagree it is that much easier for all sorts of reasons that are complicated.
Okay. You disagree. Given that you've probably never tried to find information on how peasants bathed, cared for their clothing, wove their fabrics, etc., you'll have to forgive me if I take your disagreement with a grain of salt, however. If you have and I'm mistaken in the belief that there is mountains of information on those very things, again I ask that you provide me any information you have, as two decades of studying it hasn't gotten me very far compared to learning about wars, royalty, and politics.
Quote
I just did not understand why it was necessary to express how inferior something else was first. I do not understand where the confusion is about that.
I am not really that offended I just do not get it. I mean how annoying would it be before a military historian talked about wars for him to say something like 'social history is so pointless, I mean we are not peasants living on some estate how is that relevent to us? But humans will always fight wars so lets get into something really important!' This is not an uncommon thing for people to say (well usually not exactly like that) in history and I am usually like 'really? Why is this necessary to say?'. Just a pet peeve of mine.
Oh, I'm sorry. Was I supposed to pretend to mongers - who, like me, prefers to learn about the more mundane aspects of history - that I gave a shit about that stuff just to appease you? I didn't realize! From now on, I'll be sure to curtail my every word to make sure that it doesn't offend someone with a different opinion on the topic.
And by the way, I've spent my entire life hearing about how fucking awesome learning about wars, military prowess, politics, etc., are compared to mundane life. How unimportant my area of interst is to "the grand scheme of things". So you'll have to forgive me if I don't bend over backwards in apology for actually saying, "Yeah, not that interesting. There's massive amounts of stuff on it, and I don't really care."
As interesting as this article is (still reading it) where the fuck is the mass mruder and the criminal investigation?! <_< :mad:
Quote from: merithyn on October 02, 2013, 12:43:43 PM
Valmy, my degree is in medieval history. I was required, as part of my degree, to study exactly the stuff that you're claiming to love.
I do not even especially love that stuff. But that may be why I enjoy it alot more than you: I did not endure having to study it in College.
Quote
Okay. You disagree. Given that you've probably never tried to find information on how peasants bathed, cared for their clothing, wove their fabrics, etc., you'll have to forgive me if I take your disagreement with a grain of salt, however. If you have and I'm mistaken in the belief that there is mountains of information on those very things, again I ask that you provide me any information you have, as two decades of studying it hasn't gotten me very far compared to learning about wars, royalty, and politics.
Well alot about wars and politics ALSO involve how peasants did those sorts of things now doesn't it? After all we are talking about the overwhelming majority of the population and the fighting strength of the armies.
Quote
Oh, I'm sorry. Was I supposed to pretend to mongers - who, like me, prefers to learn about the more mundane aspects of history - that I gave a shit about that stuff just to appease you? I didn't realize! From now on, I'll be sure to curtail my every word to make sure that it doesn't offend someone with a different opinion on the topic.
Ok...I have no idea what this has to do with anything I am saying.
QuoteAnd by the way, I've spent my entire life hearing about how fucking awesome learning about wars, military prowess, politics, etc., are compared to mundane life. How unimportant my area of interst is to "the grand scheme of things".
And all I am saying how tiresome it is for people to say the very things that made you upset. That is my entire beef here. It happens all the time I don't really get how it adds anything.
QuoteSo you'll have to forgive me if I don't bend over backwards in apology for actually saying, "Yeah, not that interesting. There's massive amounts of stuff on it, and I don't really care."
Well you sure showed me.
Quote from: Valmy on October 02, 2013, 01:12:37 PM
Well you sure showed me.
I wasn't trying to "show you" anything. I was telling mongers how cool I thought his article was and why.
Sometimes, maybe often, there's little utility to be had from starting new threads here.
Should I answer some of the 'savage' (:rolleyes) :criticism, myself and Meri have been challenged with or maybe instead I decided to do something else for half an hour whilst one or two others here continued to take pot shots?
See my post in the 'out and about' thread.
I wish that I could have joined you. :hug:
Anyway, who are you going to meet with tomorrow? You never said.
Somehow, we have strayed somewhat from bits of Indonesia exploding. :hmm:
We could go back to it, by remarking that a nice eruption makes for glorious sunsets, making going outside for a stroll more interesting. ;)
Quote from: merithyn on October 02, 2013, 01:28:20 PM
Quote from: Valmy on October 02, 2013, 01:12:37 PM
Well you sure showed me.
I wasn't trying to "show you" anything. I was telling mongers how cool I thought his article was and why.
YOu telling Mongers how cool his article was (and it is) and why has nothing at all to do with what we were discussing here. I was commenting on how you have been oppressed all your life by dismissive history types so like hell you are bend over and apologize now. IN YOUR FACE and so forth.
Quote from: Valmy on October 02, 2013, 02:27:00 PM
Quote from: merithyn on October 02, 2013, 01:28:20 PM
Quote from: Valmy on October 02, 2013, 01:12:37 PM
Well you sure showed me.
I wasn't trying to "show you" anything. I was telling mongers how cool I thought his article was and why.
YOu telling Mongers how cool his article was and why has nothing at all to do with what we were discussing here. I was commenting on how you have been oppressed all your life by dismissive history types so like hell you are bend over and apologize now. IN MY FACE and so forth.
Okay.
Did GF hijack Valmy's account?
Quote from: frunk on October 02, 2013, 02:31:03 PM
Did GF hijack Valmy's account?
Not that I am aware of. This was just something that always bothered me in reading history so I brought it up. I full accept this turning into this shitstorm may well have been due to my communication skills as Meri said:
QuoteAnd by the way, I've spent my entire life hearing about how fucking awesome learning about wars, military prowess, politics, etc., are compared to mundane life. How unimportant my area of interst is to "the grand scheme of things".
Which is precisely what I was talking about. Yet it went this way anyway. Doh. I suck.
Quote from: merithyn on October 02, 2013, 02:18:45 PM
I wish that I could have joined you. :hug:
Anyway, who are you going to meet with tomorrow? You never said.
Damnit, Mongers! Who is it?? :contract:
Quote from: merithyn on October 02, 2013, 12:43:43 PM
my degree is in medieval history.
What a waste of time!
Quote from: The Brain on October 02, 2013, 02:42:52 PM
Quote from: merithyn on October 02, 2013, 12:43:43 PM
my degree is in medieval history.
What a waste of time!
No shit. Why do you think that I went back to school?
Quote from: Malthus on October 02, 2013, 02:22:18 PM
Somehow, we have strayed somewhat from bits of Indonesia exploding. :hmm:
We could go back to it, by remarking that a nice eruption makes for glorious sunsets, making going outside for a stroll more interesting. ;)
We get it. You're rich.
Quote from: Malthus on October 02, 2013, 02:22:18 PM
Somehow, we have strayed somewhat from bits of Indonesia exploding. :hmm:
We could go back to it, by remarking that a nice eruption makes for glorious sunsets, making going outside for a stroll more interesting. ;)
:)
Personally I suffered from the post-war british under-16 school's consensus that Tudors and Stuarts were at the core of British history, its' unimaginative* near rote-learning of kings and queens,battle dates and endless acts of parliament, nearly killed of my interesting in history several times.
Which is what I was getting at in my original post, I nearly wrote "name the six wives of Henry VIII, that he'd succeed his father Henry VII, who himself had defeated the previous king at Bosworth field in 1485", you get my drift.
Now if us impressionable schoolboys had been taught about sometime more recent, like the Napoleonic wars and that in one of its' climatic battle, the preceding nights bad weather and the morning rain had crucially delayed the battle may have been caused/influenced by the explosion of a massive volcano on the other side of the world, then I think that 'fact' might have lit out imaginations and enthusiasm for the subject, far more than an alternative somewhat dry diet of kings,queens and dates.
* It's rather different nowadays in state schools, but no longer compulsory for many school years.
Quote from: frunk on October 02, 2013, 02:31:03 PM
Did GF hijack Valmy's account?
Looks more like Martinus did.
Quote from: Maximus on October 02, 2013, 02:44:20 PM
Quote from: frunk on October 02, 2013, 02:31:03 PM
Did GF hijack Valmy's account?
Looks more like Martinus did.
Now that is just low. I swear to God this was an honest question and I meant to approach it with zero bile.
Quote from: Valmy on October 02, 2013, 02:41:32 PM
Quote from: frunk on October 02, 2013, 02:31:03 PM
Did GF hijack Valmy's account?
Not that I am aware of. This was just something that always bothered me in reading history so I brought it up.
This sentence baffles me:
QuoteI was commenting on how you have been oppressed all your life by dismissive history types so like hell you are bend over and apologize now.
Quote from: mongers on October 02, 2013, 02:44:01 PM
Quote from: Malthus on October 02, 2013, 02:22:18 PM
Somehow, we have strayed somewhat from bits of Indonesia exploding. :hmm:
We could go back to it, by remarking that a nice eruption makes for glorious sunsets, making going outside for a stroll more interesting. ;)
:)
Personally I suffered from the post-war british under-16 school's consensus that Tudors and Stuarts were at the core of British history, its' unimaginative* near rote-learning of kings and queens,battle dates and endless acts of parliament, nearly killed of my interesting in history several times.
Which is what I was getting at in my original post, I nearly wrote "name the six wives of Henry VIII, that he'd succeed his father Henry VII, who himself had defeated the previous king at Bosworth field in 1485", you get my drift.
Now if us impressionable schoolboys had been taught about sometime more recent, like the Napoleonic wars and that in one of its' climatic battle, the preceding nights bad weather and the morning rain had crucially delayed the battle may have been caused/influenced by the explosion of a massive volcano on the other side of the world, then I think that 'fact' might have lit out imaginations and enthusiasm for the subject, far more than an alternative somewhat dry diet of kings,queens and dates.
* It's rather different nowadays in state schools, but no longer compulsory for many school years.
Shit, you think you had it bad? Try
Canadian history teaching in the late 70s early 80s. :lol: That pretty well defines boredom.
Quote from: merithyn on October 02, 2013, 02:42:42 PM
Quote from: merithyn on October 02, 2013, 02:18:45 PM
I wish that I could have joined you. :hug:
Anyway, who are you going to meet with tomorrow? You never said.
Damnit, Mongers! Who is it?? :contract:
The Lecture ?
It's Alex Langlands of those tv programmes, next Tuesday he's given a talk about travel/transport within Anglo-Saxon Wessex, apparently he'd recently completed a PhD on the subject.
Should be interesting and also literally in an area that interests me. :)
http://www.alexlanglands.com/ (http://www.alexlanglands.com/)
Quote from: mongers on October 02, 2013, 02:44:01 PM
Quote from: Malthus on October 02, 2013, 02:22:18 PM
Somehow, we have strayed somewhat from bits of Indonesia exploding. :hmm:
We could go back to it, by remarking that a nice eruption makes for glorious sunsets, making going outside for a stroll more interesting. ;)
:)
Personally I suffered from the post-war british under-16 school's consensus that Tudors and Stuarts were at the core of British history, its' unimaginative* near rote-learning of kings and queens,battle dates and endless acts of parliament, nearly killed of my interesting in history several times.
Which is what I was getting at in my original post, I nearly wrote "name the six wives of Henry VIII, that he'd succeed his father Henry VII, who himself had defeated the previous king at Bosworth field in 1485", you get my drift.
Now if us impressionable schoolboys had been taught about sometime more recent, like the Napoleonic wars and that in one of its' climatic battle, the preceding nights bad weather and the morning rain had crucially delayed the battle may have been caused/influenced by the explosion of a massive volcano on the other side of the world, then I think that 'fact' might have lit out imaginations and enthusiasm for the subject, far more than an alternative somewhat dry diet of kings,queens and dates.
* It's rather different nowadays in state schools, but no longer compulsory for many school years.
Okay I guess I get that. The main thing I remember about my history classes in school is that they decided somehow history itself was not interesting so they kept making us do dioramas and other arts and crafts things to I guess make it interesting or something. I think the generation before me had the same sort of experience you did though because you could almost put money on the fact that the instructor would say something on the first day of class like 'we are not going to make you memorize dates'. Since nobody ever did I always thought it was weird they thought that was our expectation.
For those who may still be interested ( :rolleyes: ), this is the book that my friend has. It's been reprinted, which has brought the price way down:
http://www.amazon.com/Before-Mast-Aboard-Archaeology-Volume/dp/0954402944
Used books were selling for over $300, but now I can get a new one for closer to $100. :shifty:
Quote from: mongers on October 02, 2013, 02:51:04 PM
The Lecture ?
It's Alex Langlands of those tv programmes, next Tuesday he's given a talk about travel/transport within Anglo-Saxon Wessex, apparently he'd recently completed a PhD on the subject.
Should be interesting and also literally in an area that interests me. :)
http://www.alexlanglands.com/ (http://www.alexlanglands.com/)
Ooooo...... I'll have to check to see if he puts the lecture online after.
Quote from: Malthus on October 02, 2013, 02:49:49 PM
Shit, you think you had it bad? Try Canadian history teaching in the late 70s early 80s. :lol: That pretty well defines boredom.
OK you win, no contest there. :)
Quote from: Valmy on October 02, 2013, 02:51:24 PM
Okay I guess I get that. The main thing I remember about my history classes in school is that they decided somehow history itself was not interesting so they kept making us do dioramas and other arts and crafts things to I guess make it interesting or something. I think the generation before me had the same sort of experience you did though because you could almost put money on the fact that the instructor would say something on the first day of class like 'we are not going to make you memorize dates'. Since nobody ever did I always thought it was weird they thought that was our expectation.
So, to put that in context, I'm a generation older than you... or close to....
Quote from: frunk on October 02, 2013, 02:48:17 PM
Quote from: Valmy on October 02, 2013, 02:41:32 PM
Quote from: frunk on October 02, 2013, 02:31:03 PM
Did GF hijack Valmy's account?
Not that I am aware of. This was just something that always bothered me in reading history so I brought it up.
This sentence baffles me:
QuoteI was commenting on how you have been oppressed all your life by dismissive history types so like hell you are bend over and apologize now.
It was in response to this sentence:
QuoteSo you'll have to forgive me if I don't bend over backwards in apology for actually saying, "Yeah, not that interesting. There's massive amounts of stuff on it, and I don't really care."
So I considered myself served.
Quote from: Valmy on October 02, 2013, 02:46:04 PM
Now that is just low. I swear to God this was an honest question and I meant to approach it with zero bile.
I'm sorry. I take it back; I'm not the best communicator myself.
What I meant to say is: your initial post introduced a great deal of negativity to the thread that had not been there before.
Oh it had been there; it's always there, waiting.
Quote from: The Brain on October 02, 2013, 02:57:03 PM
Oh it had been there; it's always there, waiting.
:yes:
V just brought it to light. Clearly Mer had as big of a chip on her shoulder as V, just in the other direction.
Quote from: mongers on October 02, 2013, 02:53:47 PM
Quote from: Malthus on October 02, 2013, 02:49:49 PM
Shit, you think you had it bad? Try Canadian history teaching in the late 70s early 80s. :lol: That pretty well defines boredom.
OK you win, no contest there. :)
Since then, I've learned that Canadian history is downright bizzare.
I mean, what other country can trace its foundation to a style of hat? :lol:
I have two degrees in Medieval History and I hate everyone.
Quote from: Maximus on October 02, 2013, 02:56:10 PM
Quote from: Valmy on October 02, 2013, 02:46:04 PM
Now that is just low. I swear to God this was an honest question and I meant to approach it with zero bile.
I'm sorry. I take it back; I'm not the best communicator myself.
What I meant to say is: your initial post introduced a great deal of negativity to the thread that had not been there before.
I found this was a big problem during the semester last Spring. The farther I get in and the more tired I get and frazzled I start making some really bad posts.
Quote from: Valmy on October 02, 2013, 03:05:01 PM
I found this was a big problem during the semester last Spring. The farther I get in and the more tired I get and frazzled I start making some really bad posts.
Yea, I can sympathize with that.
Quote from: garbon on October 02, 2013, 02:58:31 PM
Quote from: The Brain on October 02, 2013, 02:57:03 PM
Oh it had been there; it's always there, waiting.
:yes:
V just brought it to light. Clearly Mer had as big of a chip on her shoulder as V, just in the other direction.
Oh my fucking god.
The thread was - WAS - about a particular time in history that I enjoy, regarding a particular subject that I enjoy. I mention that I think it's cool as hell, and that I prefer this over the other stuff that has shit-tons of information floating around about it.
That's all I said. That's it. Seriously. Read back through. In fact, I stated it over and over and over again. "No offense meant, this just isn't my thing." "It's easier to figure that stuff out than the stuff that I've been studying, but hey, if that's your bag, go for it." And somehow - someone please explain this to me - I'M the one with a chip on MY shoulder?
This thread could have been awesome. It could have been this really fabulous place to talk about history, about how fun it is to learn this kind of thing, and where and how. But no. Because it's Languish, this is what it turns into.
Thanks, Valmy and garbon. You guys
fucking rock.
Quote from: Maximus on October 02, 2013, 03:07:56 PM
Quote from: Valmy on October 02, 2013, 03:05:01 PM
I found this was a big problem during the semester last Spring. The farther I get in and the more tired I get and frazzled I start making some really bad posts.
Yea, I can sympathize with that.
Fuck you
Another promising thread ruined by the out of control passions of academic types.
Clearly, what this site needs is more lawyers. :P
Quote from: merithyn on October 02, 2013, 03:12:14 PM
Quote from: garbon on October 02, 2013, 02:58:31 PM
Quote from: The Brain on October 02, 2013, 02:57:03 PM
Oh it had been there; it's always there, waiting.
:yes:
V just brought it to light. Clearly Mer had as big of a chip on her shoulder as V, just in the other direction.
Oh my fucking god.
The thread was - WAS - about a particular time in history that I enjoy, regarding a particular subject that I enjoy. I mention that I think it's cool as hell, and that I prefer this over the other stuff that has shit-tons of information floating around about it.
That's all I said. That's it. Seriously. Read back through. In fact, I stated it over and over and over again. "No offense meant, this just isn't my thing." "It's easier to figure that stuff out than the stuff that I've been studying, but hey, if that's your bag, go for it." And somehow - someone please explain this to me - I'M the one with a chip on MY shoulder?
This thread could have been awesome. It could have been this really fabulous place to talk about history, about how fun it is to learn this kind of thing, and where and how. But no. Because it's Languish, this is what it turns into.
Thanks, Valmy and garbon. You guys fucking rock.
I've a riddle for you. Who said this?
QuoteOh, I'm sorry. Was I supposed to pretend to mongers - who, like me, prefers to learn about the more mundane aspects of history - that I gave a shit about that stuff just to appease you? I didn't realize! From now on, I'll be sure to curtail my every word to make sure that it doesn't offend someone with a different opinion on the topic.
And by the way, I've spent my entire life hearing about how fucking awesome learning about wars, military prowess, politics, etc., are compared to mundane life. How unimportant my area of interst is to "the grand scheme of things". So you'll have to forgive me if I don't bend over backwards in apology for actually saying, "Yeah, not that interesting. There's massive amounts of stuff on it, and I don't really care."
Quote from: garbon on October 02, 2013, 03:18:54 PM
I've a riddle for you. Who said this?
QuoteOh, I'm sorry. Was I supposed to pretend to mongers - who, like me, prefers to learn about the more mundane aspects of history - that I gave a shit about that stuff just to appease you? I didn't realize! From now on, I'll be sure to curtail my every word to make sure that it doesn't offend someone with a different opinion on the topic.
And by the way, I've spent my entire life hearing about how fucking awesome learning about wars, military prowess, politics, etc., are compared to mundane life. How unimportant my area of interst is to "the grand scheme of things". So you'll have to forgive me if I don't bend over backwards in apology for actually saying, "Yeah, not that interesting. There's massive amounts of stuff on it, and I don't really care."
Just out of curiosity, before it got to that point, how many times did I say, "Not my bag, but if you like it, cool"? And what part of:
QuoteSo you'll have to forgive me if I don't bend over backwards in apology for actually saying, "Yeah, not that interesting. There's massive amounts of stuff on it, and I don't really care."
is offensive? Because I don't feel a need to apologize for prefering a different aspect of history, I've got some chip on my shoulder?
But you know, whatever. I tried to be done with this line of chatter earlier, only to have you drag me back in with a mischaracterization. Silly me for allowing that to happen.
Quote from: merithyn on October 02, 2013, 03:23:57 PM
And what part of:
QuoteSo you'll have to forgive me if I don't bend over backwards in apology for actually saying, "Yeah, not that interesting. There's massive amounts of stuff on it, and I don't really care."
is offensive? Because I don't feel a need to apologize for prefering a different aspect of history, I've got some chip on my shoulder?
Are you kidding? That's clearly a jerk response. Fine if you want to go there but don't pretend your hands aren't dirty.
The chip is this piece:
QuoteAnd by the way, I've spent my entire life hearing about how fucking awesome learning about wars, military prowess, politics, etc., are compared to mundane life. How unimportant my area of interst is to "the grand scheme of things".
Besides, mis-characterization? I think you and mongers have made clear that you weren't initially intending to be offensive - and at least I stated that I understood that even though it had seemed dismissive to me.
Quote from: garbon on October 02, 2013, 03:29:10 PM
Quote from: merithyn on October 02, 2013, 03:23:57 PM
And what part of:
QuoteSo you'll have to forgive me if I don't bend over backwards in apology for actually saying, "Yeah, not that interesting. There's massive amounts of stuff on it, and I don't really care."
is offensive? Because I don't feel a need to apologize for prefering a different aspect of history, I've got some chip on my shoulder?
Are you kidding? That's clearly a jerk response. Fine if you want to go there but don't pretend your hands aren't dirty.
The chip is this piece:
QuoteAnd by the way, I've spent my entire life hearing about how fucking awesome learning about wars, military prowess, politics, etc., are compared to mundane life. How unimportant my area of interst is to "the grand scheme of things".
Besides, mis-characterization? I think you and mongers have made clear that you weren't initially intending to be offensive - and at least I stated that I understood that even though it had seemed dismissive to me.
Okay. Clearly, I was the problem in this thread.
Quote from: merithyn on October 02, 2013, 03:23:57 PM
Just out of curiosity, before it got to that point, how many times did I say, "Not my bag, but if you like it, cool"? And what part of:
I was just wondering why you were being so dismissive of another part of history and why that was necessary, the subject we were discussing (or failed to discuss :P) was interesting enough on its own. The context was I just see people do that so often and am always like 'really?'. I was not even offended really, I just did not get it.
But I get the way I posted that totally backfired and I am sorry.
Quote from: Malthus on October 02, 2013, 03:18:32 PM
Another promising thread ruined by the out of control passions of academic types.
Clearly, what this site needs is more lawyers. :P
Yeah I noticed that too.
Though I think more lawyer's would just mean a better definition of the word, History, rather than an understanding of 'What is History?', which this thread was in part about. :P
Quote from: Cecil on October 02, 2013, 11:48:11 AM
Quote from: merithyn on October 02, 2013, 11:01:13 AM
Quote from: Ed Anger on October 02, 2013, 10:54:47 AM
Meri would like the history channel show 'Going Medieval'. A lot of the mundane stuff is covered.
:wub:
I've seen it. Another great favorite of mine is Tales from the Green Valley from BBC. It shows two historians and three archeologists trying to live as early 16th-century farmers for a year. It's fascinating how much they learn about food production, household work, and general money-making schemes for plebes of the time.
We had a show around here last year which was called historical food or some such. Basically a man and a woman who was to live a week surrounded by the proper seeting, wearing the proper clothes etc. And of course eating the proper food. Most of the shows were different eras of the 20th century to give people those "oh remember that" moments but a few had them going way back. The one in the early 17th century had them being mostly drunk for a week.
The same crew that did the Tales from the Green Valley also did a Tudor Feast show. It was remarkable. It was basically a Yuletide Feast as would have been done during Tudor England. The food was incredible, and you had to marvel at how all of it was made for 100+ guests with the tools available.
I have about six books on medieval beer brewing, and I'm planning a brew day that will involve making a few gallons of 13th-century England brews, sans hops. Supposedly, the stuff is vile, but I want to try it to see. Having never actually tasted bog myrtle before, I've no clue how it will turn out.
Here's the show on YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q3DmrqjtD1Y
:wub: Ruth.
Quote from: Malthus on October 02, 2013, 03:18:32 PM
Another promising thread ruined by the out of control passions of academic types.
Clearly, what this site needs is more lawyers. :P
Fuck you too.
Wow. This almost cathartic. Now I need to go flunk some people.
I know this is a bit before the Medieval time period but one podcast I had been listening to recently was 'The British History Podcast' by this American-accented Welshman: http://thebritishhistorypodcast.com/
Yes I listen to history podcasts I do not have the time to read much these days. :(
Anyway, it starts kinda meh with him going through the pre-Roman and Roman stuff, nothing I had not heard or read before done better though he was pretty entertaining, but it really turned into something pretty special around episode 42. He goes into the daily life and times of people in post-Roman England. It completely challenged alot of my views on that period and introduced tons of new information not only on the nature of the Anglo-Saxon invasion but also on all sorts of aspects of culture and technology. He has a long series on the Staffordshire horde as well with guest experts that is tres cool. Anyway if one of you likes podcasts and has the time I would love to hear what you think about it.
One anecdote from this: I had just listened to the episode on Dark Ages farm life and then took David and my niece to a park near my house. In this park they have a preserved frontier farm that dates from the Republic and looking at the buildings and the sorts of things that went on there I couldn't help but notice that it was roughly the same sort of stuff that went on that Dark Ages Romano-British farm. In some ways those 1840s Texans had life styles closer to 6th century people than to me.
For something completely different: there was one episode about women in history that is more preachy than informative (though had a few interesting things) but it has one throw away line that Roman women could not inherit. I was kind of blown away by that. I mean I remembered how Livia had been adopted by Augustus and given something like a quarter of his estate, and how Galba had been forced to take his mother's name so she would put him in her will (she did not want her noble Patrician house to die out...but Galba, being the asshole he was, changed it back to his father's name once she died). Furthermore the Free Marriage that became the standard from the first century BC onwards was primarily about protecting the property of the wife's family from the grubby hands of the husband's family. But this is Rome so I am well aware that contradictory things can be true at the same time. Any truth to that for any Romanophiles out there? Was it in the Ten Tables, Justinian Codex, or some customary law that women could not inherit property?
Quote from: Valmy on October 02, 2013, 11:25:08 PM
I know this is a bit before the Medieval time period but one podcast I had been listening to recently was 'The British History Podcast' by this American-accented Welshman: http://thebritishhistorypodcast.com/
Sounds interesting. I'll see if I can get it at work.
QuoteAnyway, it starts kinda meh with him going through the pre-Roman and Roman stuff, nothing I had not heard or read before done better though he was pretty entertaining, but it really turned into something pretty special around episode 42. He goes into the daily life and times of people in post-Roman England. It completely challenged alot of my views on that period and introduced tons of new information not only on the nature of the Anglo-Saxon invasion but also on all sorts of aspects of culture and technology. He has a long series on the Staffordshire horde as well with guest experts that is tres cool. Anyway if one of you likes podcasts and has the time I would love to hear what you think about it.
This is the bit that intrigues me, too. It's called The Dark Ages, but they weren't without a society. It's one of the reasons the Skystone Series is one of my favorites. The author, Jack Whyte, did an insane amount of research on that time-period, so his books do a fairly good job of recreating how society operated then.
Quote from: merithyn on October 03, 2013, 07:45:37 AM
Sounds interesting. I'll see if I can get it at work.
I can. :shifty:
Sweeeeet
I'm starting at 35 - Scotland Part I.
I didn't realize that we'd had a mini-iceage while the Romans were there. I knew we'd had one in the 11th century (moving into the 12th), but this one is news to me. Interesting stuff.
The problem with Scotland is that its full of Scots.
Quote from: mongers on October 02, 2013, 02:44:01 PM
Personally I suffered from the post-war british under-16 school's consensus that Tudors and Stuarts were at the core of British history, its' unimaginative* near rote-learning of kings and queens,battle dates and endless acts of parliament, nearly killed of my interesting in history several times.
I must be the only person who likes this way of learning. Memorizing the succession of monarchs/leaders and important dates gives you an solid framework you can use to begin with.
Quote from: derspiess on October 03, 2013, 09:58:25 AM
Quote from: mongers on October 02, 2013, 02:44:01 PM
Personally I suffered from the post-war british under-16 school's consensus that Tudors and Stuarts were at the core of British history, its' unimaginative* near rote-learning of kings and queens,battle dates and endless acts of parliament, nearly killed of my interesting in history several times.
I must be the only person who likes this way of learning. Memorizing the succession of monarchs/leaders and important dates gives you an solid framework you can use to begin with.
It's important, but at a later time in the learing process - when you have an interest already in the subject-matter.
For a kid, there has to be some sort of "hook" as to WHY you would want to go through the process of learning history in the fisrt place (other than 'do it or you get in trouble' ;) ).
What that "hook" is will, as we can see very clearly in this thread, vary from person to person. Some get interested because they are excited to know how people in the past lived. Others, because they are excited about great battles and political intrigue. Others will have yet other reasons.
Quote from: Malthus on October 03, 2013, 10:11:03 AM
It's important, but at a later time in the learing process - when you have an interest already in the subject-matter.
I suppose that's true, but in my case I already had the interest, and learning chronology & whatnot was a great starting point. I could then pick out the time periods or events that most interested me and learn about them on my own (or pay special attention to them in class if they were being covered). Context was always important to me in learning history, and knowing the chronology helped with that.
Problem with teaching history in the US is that most American students seem have a shitty attitude about it, and there's rarely a hook to capture their interest.
Sweet find Valmy & It's on itunes too.
I'll be listening. Starting at 1, I'm hardcore like that.
I listen to alot of podcasts while at work, not sure where I'll fit that one.
Quote from: derspiess on October 03, 2013, 09:58:25 AM
Quote from: mongers on October 02, 2013, 02:44:01 PM
Personally I suffered from the post-war british under-16 school's consensus that Tudors and Stuarts were at the core of British history, its' unimaginative* near rote-learning of kings and queens,battle dates and endless acts of parliament, nearly killed of my interesting in history several times.
I must be the only person who likes this way of learning. Memorizing the succession of monarchs/leaders and important dates gives you an solid framework you can use to begin with.
I never found it interesting to know exact dates. Generally sequence in which things occurred, sure, but the exact date?
Quote from: garbon on October 03, 2013, 10:31:30 AM
I never found it interesting to know exact dates. Generally sequence in which things occurred, sure, but the exact date?
Yeah, exact date.
Quote from: derspiess on October 03, 2013, 10:32:47 AM
Quote from: garbon on October 03, 2013, 10:31:30 AM
I never found it interesting to know exact dates. Generally sequence in which things occurred, sure, but the exact date?
Yeah, exact date.
What benefit does that provide over knowing generally what occurred contemporaneously (and/or what order)?
We had a lot of that memorization in art history. I'd learn it all the day before test using divided sheet and then let go of all of the dates once the test was over.
If you don't know dates your ability to understand historical information is reduced significantly.
Way I look at dates is the same way I look at maps. It helps to know what is where ... and when. Particulatly, in relation to other events, objects, and people.
Quote from: The Brain on October 03, 2013, 10:38:20 AM
If you don't know dates your ability to understand historical information is reduced significantly.
I think you can understand historical information without knowing the exact date. Hell for large parts of history, we don't know the exact date.
Quote from: garbon on October 03, 2013, 10:57:08 AM
Quote from: The Brain on October 03, 2013, 10:38:20 AM
If you don't know dates your ability to understand historical information is reduced significantly.
I think you can understand historical information without knowing the exact date. Hell for large parts of history, we don't know the exact date.
I didn't mention exact dates.
Quote from: garbon on October 03, 2013, 10:35:19 AM
Quote from: derspiess on October 03, 2013, 10:32:47 AM
Quote from: garbon on October 03, 2013, 10:31:30 AM
I never found it interesting to know exact dates. Generally sequence in which things occurred, sure, but the exact date?
Yeah, exact date.
What benefit does that provide over knowing generally what occurred contemporaneously (and/or what order)?
It satisfies an odd OCD quirk I have ;)
Quote from: derspiess on October 03, 2013, 11:00:59 AM
It satisfies an odd OCD quirk I have ;)
I assumed that's what you were working with. I have friends like that. It's a helpful tool when learning history, that's for sure.
Because the stuff that I'm interested in is less "this happened on this date" and more "during the early 11th century, people did this", real dates not only don't matter, but aren't possible. Sure, knowing who was in power and why helps with understanding why trade routes were open or closed, but in general, having an idea of a time period is really all that's necessary.
At the end of the day, to the common person, it didn't really matter that much who was in charge. Their days continued the same, more or less.
Quote from: merithyn on October 02, 2013, 02:43:12 PM
Quote from: The Brain on October 02, 2013, 02:42:52 PM
Quote from: merithyn on October 02, 2013, 12:43:43 PM
my degree is in medieval history.
What a waste of time!
No shit. Why do you think that I went back to school?
I'm almost afraid to ask, but why did you major in history in the first place? Did you intend to teach history? I love history, but I never considered it as a major because, really, all you can do with it is teach, and at the time I was going to college, I had zero interest in teaching.
Quote from: dps on October 03, 2013, 11:37:44 AM
I'm almost afraid to ask, but why did you major in history in the first place? Did you intend to teach history? I love history, but I never considered it as a major because, really, all you can do with it is teach, and at the time I was going to college, I had zero interest in teaching.
I wanted to teach, but my grades weren't good enough to get into the Education College at the time that I needed to apply. So, I completed the degree and considered law school. (Heh.) Then I had babies, and I've been digging myself out of that hole ever since.
Quote from: merithyn on October 03, 2013, 11:51:04 AMThen I had babies
Children really are a blessing. They saved you from Law School.
Quote from: Valmy on October 03, 2013, 02:26:40 PM
Quote from: merithyn on October 03, 2013, 11:51:04 AMThen I had babies
Children really are a blessing. They saved you from Law School.
Naw. I'd already decided that law school wasn't my thing. It just took me another 20 years to figure out what my "thing" was, and it had nothing to do with history.
Quote from: merithyn on October 03, 2013, 02:29:57 PM
Quote from: Valmy on October 03, 2013, 02:26:40 PM
Quote from: merithyn on October 03, 2013, 11:51:04 AMThen I had babies
Children really are a blessing. They saved you from Law School.
Naw. I'd already decided that law school wasn't my thing. It just took me another 20 years to figure out what my "thing" was, and it had nothing to do with history.
He has a name you know.
Quote from: The Brain on October 03, 2013, 02:30:32 PM
He has a name you know.
:P
I found him after only 10 years. The career thing took a bit longer.
Quote from: Malthus on October 02, 2013, 03:18:32 PM
Clearly, what this site needs is more lawyers. :P
:mad: