Languish.org

General Category => Off the Record => Topic started by: merithyn on October 26, 2009, 09:11:01 AM

Title: Clarification needed on pre-Roman text
Post by: merithyn on October 26, 2009, 09:11:01 AM
So, a friend of mine sent me a link to a translation of an unbelievable story that supposedly comes from a Roman in ~70 B.C.

http://mvtabilitie.blogspot.com/search/label/Celtic%20Studies (http://mvtabilitie.blogspot.com/search/label/Celtic%20Studies)

But the thing is, I've never heard of this guy, this story, nor this writing attributed to him. My bullshitometer is flying off the scale. I haven't been able to find any citations for this supposed tale, nor of the author or book.

Can someone else verify that this is a true story? It would, of course, be interesting if so, but I'm not buying it until I see something a little more solid than that guy's blog.
Title: Re: Clarification needed on pre-Roman text
Post by: Brazen on October 26, 2009, 10:07:56 AM
Quote from: merithyn on October 26, 2009, 09:11:01 AM
So, a friend of mine sent me a link to a translation of an unbelievable story that supposedly comes from a Roman in ~70 B.C.

http://mvtabilitie.blogspot.com/search/label/Celtic%20Studies (http://mvtabilitie.blogspot.com/search/label/Celtic%20Studies)

But the thing is, I've never heard of this guy, this story, nor this writing attributed to him. My bullshitometer is flying off the scale. I haven't been able to find any citations for this supposed tale, nor of the author or book.

Can someone else verify that this is a true story? It would, of course, be interesting if so, but I'm not buying it until I see something a little more solid than that guy's blog.
Yup, I call bullshit too. It reads as fiction and even the loosest translation of text from around that time reads nothing like that. You don't get huge tracts of dialogue like that outside plays.

Also, earliest first-person travelogue? Hello, Herodotus?
Title: Re: Clarification needed on pre-Roman text
Post by: Jos Theelen on October 26, 2009, 10:10:12 AM
QuoteFrom Atratinus' De Britannia Insula, c. 70 BC: this is the earliest first-person travelogue from the ancient world

Nothing on internet about this book, so I think its bullshit.
Title: Re: Clarification needed on pre-Roman text
Post by: Slargos on October 26, 2009, 10:12:58 AM
Quote'I am Speech', said one face.
'I am Dawn', said another.
'Lukii, I am Your Father', said the third, and she pointed again at the Dagodeiwos.

I call bullshit. :thumbsdown:
Title: Re: Clarification needed on pre-Roman text
Post by: Malthus on October 26, 2009, 10:15:39 AM
It's tagged as "creative writing".  :lol:
Title: Re: Clarification needed on pre-Roman text
Post by: Valmy on October 26, 2009, 10:15:39 AM
Yeah this is as suspect as that Cicero quote American Conservatives use sometimes that actually came from a Kansas City newspaper.
Title: Re: Clarification needed on pre-Roman text
Post by: Caliga on October 26, 2009, 02:13:55 PM
Fake.  As Brazen mentioned, this style of writing is nothing like what contemporary authors produced.
Title: Re: Clarification needed on pre-Roman text
Post by: merithyn on October 26, 2009, 02:28:31 PM
Quote from: Brazen on October 26, 2009, 10:07:56 AM
Yup, I call bullshit too. It reads as fiction and even the loosest translation of text from around that time reads nothing like that. You don't get huge tracts of dialogue like that outside plays.

Also, earliest first-person travelogue? Hello, Herodotus?

That was pretty much what I figured, too.
Title: Re: Clarification needed on pre-Roman text
Post by: The Brain on October 26, 2009, 02:34:24 PM
[BB] It's true!!!111 God (pbuh) said so!!!!!11111 [/BB]
Title: Re: Clarification needed on pre-Roman text
Post by: Scipio on October 26, 2009, 02:58:10 PM
Faker than interpolations to Josephus.
Title: Re: Clarification needed on pre-Roman text
Post by: Ed Anger on October 26, 2009, 03:00:34 PM
Th Druids deserved everything that happened to them.
Title: Re: Clarification needed on pre-Roman text
Post by: Lucidor on October 26, 2009, 03:10:17 PM
Quote from: Valmy on October 26, 2009, 10:15:39 AM
Yeah this is as suspect as that Cicero quote American Conservatives use sometimes that actually came from a Kansas City newspaper.
Si vis aliquem nostorum televisionem vidit, credit Obamam insanem?
Title: Re: Clarification needed on pre-Roman text
Post by: Ed Anger on October 26, 2009, 03:11:55 PM
Quote from: Lucidor on October 26, 2009, 03:10:17 PM
Quote from: Valmy on October 26, 2009, 10:15:39 AM
Yeah this is as suspect as that Cicero quote American Conservatives use sometimes that actually came from a Kansas City newspaper.
Si vis aliquem nostorum televisionem vidit, credit Obamam insanem?

FoxNews delenda est.

And yes, I know that is Cato. Eat me.
Title: Re: Clarification needed on pre-Roman text
Post by: The Minsky Moment on October 26, 2009, 05:16:07 PM
It's fake.

The giveaway is that there are no furries, which were a highly popular literary trope at the time that were woven into all the period's travel literature.
Title: Re: Clarification needed on pre-Roman text
Post by: Martinus on October 26, 2009, 06:17:05 PM
Quote from: Ed Anger on October 26, 2009, 03:00:34 PM
Th Druids deserved everything that happened to them.

I agree.

First they put people into cages and set them on fire. Then they try to pass themselves as a nature-loving bunch of peaceniks and do-gooders.

They are like tories.
Title: Re: Clarification needed on pre-Roman text
Post by: Razgovory on October 26, 2009, 06:34:45 PM
Quote from: Martinus on October 26, 2009, 06:17:05 PM
Quote from: Ed Anger on October 26, 2009, 03:00:34 PM
Th Druids deserved everything that happened to them.

I agree.

First they put people into cages and set them on fire. Then they try to pass themselves as a nature-loving bunch of peaceniks and do-gooders.

They are like tories.

I don't think they tried to pass themselves off as that.