The Off Topic Topic

[ulmont]

Ryder Hook

That first book uses the cover art I knew in the US as "Hardwired" by Walter Jon Williams:

[Maladict]

Note that Aethiopean means black in latin literature, it doesn't necessarily mean they were from the region known as Aethiopia.

Also note that the Historia Augusta is about the most problematic text in all antiquity.
We do not know who wrote it, when it was written, or what its purpose and intended audience were.

[The Brain]

Note that Aethiopean means black in latin literature, it doesn't necessarily mean they were from the region known as Aethiopia.

Also note that the Historia Augusta is about the most problematic text in all antiquity.
We do not know who wrote it, when it was written, or what its purpose and intended audience were.

Did you look at the back cover?

[Malthus]

Note that Aethiopean means black in latin literature, it doesn't necessarily mean they were from the region known as Aethiopia.

Also note that the Historia Augusta is about the most problematic text in all antiquity.
We do not know who wrote it, when it was written, or what its purpose and intended audience were.

For this particular purpose, though -  it doesn't matter who wrote it or exactly when (other that 'late Antiquity'), or (in fact) whether the story has any truth whatsoever to it.

It probably isn't a factual account, because making an obvious reference to the death of the Emperor would be a bad career move for a real-life soldier, to say the least.   

However, the writing is proof that, at least during late antiquity, the idea that there could be specifically Black African soldiers in the Roman province of Britain wasn't considered inherently improbable. If it was, the writer (whoever it was) wouldn't have set this story there. 

[Zanza]

I hate preparing presentations where staying in the time limit is more important than the actual contant of the presentation.

[mongers]

I hate preparing presentations where staying in the time limit is more important than the actual contant of the presentation.

Might I suggest:

"I refuse to have my creativity constrained by artificialities, so fill in the blanks yourself."  Exits stage left.

[Ed Anger]

Ryder Hook

That first book uses the cover art I knew in the US as "Hardwired" by Walter Jon Williams:

Good book. Voice of the Whirlwind was tops though.

[Maladict]

Note that Aethiopean means black in latin literature, it doesn't necessarily mean they were from the region known as Aethiopia.

Also note that the Historia Augusta is about the most problematic text in all antiquity.
We do not know who wrote it, when it was written, or what its purpose and intended audience were.

For this particular purpose, though -  it doesn't matter who wrote it or exactly when (other that 'late Antiquity'), or (in fact) whether the story has any truth whatsoever to it.

It probably isn't a factual account, because making an obvious reference to the death of the Emperor would be a bad career move for a real-life soldier, to say the least.   

However, the writing is proof that, at least during late antiquity, the idea that there could be specifically Black African soldiers in the Roman province of Britain wasn't considered inherently improbable. If it was, the writer (whoever it was) wouldn't have set this story there.

Well, probably but not necessarily. We know one or more parts of the HA were copied from other, still extant, works. It's unlikely but possible that a story, now lost, of an Ethiopian and an emperor was reused, this time incorporated into the Life of Severus and set in Britain, without the author giving any thought to the plausibility of that setting. As it may have been written as late as the 5th century, the author may not even have been aware of what would have been plausible or not.
This is why the HA should not be used in support of any theory imo.

[Malthus]

Note that Aethiopean means black in latin literature, it doesn't necessarily mean they were from the region known as Aethiopia.

Also note that the Historia Augusta is about the most problematic text in all antiquity.
We do not know who wrote it, when it was written, or what its purpose and intended audience were.

For this particular purpose, though -  it doesn't matter who wrote it or exactly when (other that 'late Antiquity'), or (in fact) whether the story has any truth whatsoever to it.

It probably isn't a factual account, because making an obvious reference to the death of the Emperor would be a bad career move for a real-life soldier, to say the least.   

However, the writing is proof that, at least during late antiquity, the idea that there could be specifically Black African soldiers in the Roman province of Britain wasn't considered inherently improbable. If it was, the writer (whoever it was) wouldn't have set this story there.

Well, probably but not necessarily. We know one or more parts of the HA were copied from other, still extant, works. It's unlikely but possible that a story, now lost, of an Ethiopian and an emperor was reused, this time incorporated into the Life of Severus and set in Britain, without the author giving any thought to the plausibility of that setting. As it may have been written as late as the 5th century, the author may not even have been aware of what would have been plausible or not.
This is why the HA should not be used in support of any theory imo.

I don't agree.

This is one of the rare cases in which using the otherwise unreliable source is totally useful.

The issue is a basic one: is there justification for showing a Black Roman soldier in Roman Britain?

As far as I know, no specific time is specified for this question. So it doesn't particularly matter when the story was written down. Or is the allegation that it was written so late that its audience would be unfamiliar with Roman Britain at all? The consensus appears to be that the Augusta was written down before Britain was abandoned. 

I disagree that the author would have given no thought to its plausibility. The author, or redactor, would naturally want his audience to believe his story. If it was inherently implausible, it would damage the anecdote.

It would be wrong to assert that the event actually happened based on this authority. It is equally wrong to assert that the account is useless for any purpose.

Moreover, it isn't necessary to assert that this account "proves" that there was a Black African soldier in Britain - merely whether it is "plausible" so that depicting one in a cartoon doesn't violate inherent probabilities, unlike (say) depicting a Black pre-Columbian native American. We have at least one source expressly claiming one was there, so evidently The Romans themselves didn't think it was "implausible"! 

[The Brain]

In 2,000 years future Languish will believe that a dwarf and an elf actually could become good friends.

[Ed Anger]

In 2,000 years future Languish will believe that a dwarf and an elf actually could become good friends.

[CountDeMoney]

In 2,000 years future Languish will believe that a dwarf and an elf actually could become good friends.

Ed would fuck a male Elf, if he knew nobody would find out.

[Ed Anger]

You are thinking of Cal "a mouth is a mouth".

[Eddie Teach]

Nah. Cal wouldn't care if people found out.

[Maladict]

Note that Aethiopean means black in latin literature, it doesn't necessarily mean they were from the region known as Aethiopia.

Also note that the Historia Augusta is about the most problematic text in all antiquity.
We do not know who wrote it, when it was written, or what its purpose and intended audience were.

For this particular purpose, though -  it doesn't matter who wrote it or exactly when (other that 'late Antiquity'), or (in fact) whether the story has any truth whatsoever to it.

It probably isn't a factual account, because making an obvious reference to the death of the Emperor would be a bad career move for a real-life soldier, to say the least.   

However, the writing is proof that, at least during late antiquity, the idea that there could be specifically Black African soldiers in the Roman province of Britain wasn't considered inherently improbable. If it was, the writer (whoever it was) wouldn't have set this story there.

Well, probably but not necessarily. We know one or more parts of the HA were copied from other, still extant, works. It's unlikely but possible that a story, now lost, of an Ethiopian and an emperor was reused, this time incorporated into the Life of Severus and set in Britain, without the author giving any thought to the plausibility of that setting. As it may have been written as late as the 5th century, the author may not even have been aware of what would have been plausible or not.
This is why the HA should not be used in support of any theory imo.

I don't agree.

This is one of the rare cases in which using the otherwise unreliable source is totally useful.

The issue is a basic one: is there justification for showing a Black Roman soldier in Roman Britain?

As far as I know, no specific time is specified for this question. So it doesn't particularly matter when the story was written down. Or is the allegation that it was written so late that its audience would be unfamiliar with Roman Britain at all? The consensus appears to be that the Augusta was written down before Britain was abandoned. 

I disagree that the author would have given no thought to its plausibility. The author, or redactor, would naturally want his audience to believe his story. If it was inherently implausible, it would damage the anecdote.

It would be wrong to assert that the event actually happened based on this authority. It is equally wrong to assert that the account is useless for any purpose.

Moreover, it isn't necessary to assert that this account "proves" that there was a Black African soldier in Britain - merely whether it is "plausible" so that depicting one in a cartoon doesn't violate inherent probabilities, unlike (say) depicting a Black pre-Columbian native American. We have at least one source expressly claiming one was there, so evidently The Romans themselves didn't think it was "implausible"!

I think there is plenty of implausible material in the HA, enough to at least question the validity of the rest of it, unless supported by other sources. Whoever the intended audience was, probably Roman senators and the like, they would presumably not be bothered by some very unlikely and implausible stories. For instance, the insertion of a wholly made up emperor into the timeline.
But maybe my training as an archaeologist has led me to distrust all written sources, and especially this one, too much.