Want to see more of Cosi and I being chaotic together? Check out our previous collaboration: ua-cam.com/video/T-E8ARRiluc/v-deo.htmlsi=cX5z_5b_bQFMxClE
The main reason I ever think about Rome is when I read my Asterix and Obelix comics, where they are members of the only village of Gauls that Rome hasn't occupied in 50 BC.
I'd be very curious to know what *exactly* they are thinking about Ancient Rome. It's such a long period of history covering such a large geographical expanse, surely the men who claim this about themselves must be meditating on something more specific than that?
For me it gets sparked from other conversations: see a raven? Well, now via the Latin name you're thinking about the corvus and the naval reforms that defeated carthage. Off to Barcelona for work? Here's hannibal and his invasion. Discussing a medical issue? Hello again Rome and Greece, havnt thought about you for 10 minutes. See a curved arch? Roman architecture. See a concrete building is disrepair? Lament that until recently roman concrete was lost to us. Many of our laws and social systems stem from Rome also - ultimately if you spend any time thinking about society in almost any aspect you end up thinking about Rome if you're from the USA or Europe. If you don't, then you should probably learn more about Rome and start tbh. *editted to fix autocorrects *fixing* of 'corvus'.
@jecsquire9508 that's interesting, but I think there are other directions those trains of thought could go that aren't about Ancient Rome but are equally valid. The medical issue is an interesting one because while a lot of medical terms are from Latin, many will have been coined after the empire had ceased to exist. So it both is and isn't about the Roman Empire, if you see what i mean? It's also about Latin remaining the language of the church and the language of learning in Europe. I don't think anyone has a *duty* to learn about ancient Rome, or to think about it that often. I'm sure it can enrich your understanding of aspects of Western culture but everyone's got their own niches that do that in their own ways.
@@bogbody2213 oh for sure re the nedical bit, tbh that often sends me down an 18th century imperial rabbit hole, as there are a few reasons for this: 1 - gives an international medical language so any European could work with any other European on a patient. 2 - allowed Dr's to discuss what was about to be done to the patient without the patient understanding (useful in pre anaesthetic days) Also ofc that Dr's from Greece and Rome discovered many of the ailments and developed the first treatments:p) Re the duty thst was somewhat tongue in cheek, although if you don't understand your history (and for Europeans and Americans, Rome is where a lot of it starts) then you can't work your way forward to why the world is as it is now, you're kinda of flapping in the moment woth no understanding, which seems to me a form of voluntary madness :p Eg, the question why does Eastern Europe have more mistrust for muslim migrants than western? Has a simple answer: the eastern roman empire fell 1000 years after the western, and those nations were attacked by the third people of the book far more recently than say slain and Portugal, and so the memory of those times is far more fresh, resulting in a stronger antipathy today than is seen in andalusia. Everything has a reason, and history usually provides - and many of those spreading trees of answers, of cause and effect, were seeds planted in Rome.
@jecsquire9508 do you have any sources for your point about there being greater levels of mistrust of Muslim migrants in Eastern Europe? Especially any studies that are able to link this to the Roman Empire?
I haven't seen the video yet, but Ash made a really good video pointing out that interest in the Romans can also be a bit of a red flag for things like white supremacy and that's really gotten me thinking about the whole thing.
The white supremacy aspect of this is something that we didn't get into, but there is definitely a concerning overlap. There are other creators on UA-cam that have done some excellent work exploring this.
@@SierraSierraFoxtrot I sincerely believe this is why this topic is being pushed by the mainstream media, they are trying to spin this as a "white supremacy" thing, when it absolutely is not... the question is being prompted to see how often "white men" specifically think about it, because that is who the left is after the most at the moment. White supremacy is the boogie-man the left constantly has to use to incite hate toward white men.
I just finished reading Mary Beard's _SPQR_ while I can safely say that my husband doesn't think about Rome, ancient or modern, unless it pops up in some extremely random video game thing. Didn't one of the Assassin's Creed games take place partly in Renaissance Rome or near there? 🤣 Honestly, it looks like people on tiktok trying too hard to create content out of nothing.
Right? Also there were crossdressing in the german army as fun in the 30s and we wouldnt exactly imagine them as feminine (Erwin Rommel also participated and there is a photo lmao). There were many cultures across history that viewed things entirelly diferently but werent any less manly, just look at how mercenaries and nobles dressed in the middle ages, in colorfull puffy clothes and feathers, from todays perspective that would seem kinda gay, but they wouldnt understand what is particularly womanly about it.
"construction that falls appart easily" yeah, sure. Have you heard about the female only legion lead by a female general that won many battles and had a Triumph in Rome? Neither I...
I want you to talk to some of my friends that are PhD in Roman Law by La Sapienza (one is a woman, it seems that you care about it) about how "easily" the "binary" falls appart. I learned some Roman Law in Law School - from the XII tables to the Codex Justinianus - extremelly diverse in many aspects during this time period, but the existence of "women" and "men" as objective reality is not one of them. Of course there was some queer here and there (the celebrated by some dramaturgists, Helio Gabalus), but that doesn't disproof the continuity of the basic binary man/woman. There were more or less stances that could be called "mysoginistic" or "sexist" today, but none is near close to the modern equalitarianism or subjectivism - this concepts are post protestant reformation and some post enlightenment. It's not because you like a time period that you have to make it palatable for modern tastes, to respect them is to be faithful in portraying their reality.
@@HoradrimBRI recommend you read Marcus Aurelius' mediations: not only is he quite clear about the differences between men and women in terms of thought, expectation and deed, but it is quite clear he views women as children and not adults. Showing excessive emotion or vexation in public is termed weak and womanish in his own words for example. Admittedly this is in the Christian era and not the republican or early imperial eras but certainly in the last few hundred years of the empire, they knew what men and women were, and they made observations on the gross differences between the two in action, thought and demeanor.
Want to see more of Cosi and I being chaotic together? Check out our previous collaboration: ua-cam.com/video/T-E8ARRiluc/v-deo.htmlsi=cX5z_5b_bQFMxClE
All thoughts lead to Rome.
The main reason I ever think about Rome is when I read my Asterix and Obelix comics, where they are members of the only village of Gauls that Rome hasn't occupied in 50 BC.
I'd be very curious to know what *exactly* they are thinking about Ancient Rome. It's such a long period of history covering such a large geographical expanse, surely the men who claim this about themselves must be meditating on something more specific than that?
For me it gets sparked from other conversations: see a raven? Well, now via the Latin name you're thinking about the corvus and the naval reforms that defeated carthage. Off to Barcelona for work? Here's hannibal and his invasion.
Discussing a medical issue? Hello again Rome and Greece, havnt thought about you for 10 minutes. See a curved arch? Roman architecture. See a concrete building is disrepair? Lament that until recently roman concrete was lost to us. Many of our laws and social systems stem from Rome also - ultimately if you spend any time thinking about society in almost any aspect you end up thinking about Rome if you're from the USA or Europe. If you don't, then you should probably learn more about Rome and start tbh. *editted to fix autocorrects *fixing* of 'corvus'.
@jecsquire9508 that's interesting, but I think there are other directions those trains of thought could go that aren't about Ancient Rome but are equally valid. The medical issue is an interesting one because while a lot of medical terms are from Latin, many will have been coined after the empire had ceased to exist. So it both is and isn't about the Roman Empire, if you see what i mean? It's also about Latin remaining the language of the church and the language of learning in Europe.
I don't think anyone has a *duty* to learn about ancient Rome, or to think about it that often. I'm sure it can enrich your understanding of aspects of Western culture but everyone's got their own niches that do that in their own ways.
@@bogbody2213 oh for sure re the nedical bit, tbh that often sends me down an 18th century imperial rabbit hole, as there are a few reasons for this: 1 - gives an international medical language so any European could work with any other European on a patient.
2 - allowed Dr's to discuss what was about to be done to the patient without the patient understanding (useful in pre anaesthetic days)
Also ofc that Dr's from Greece and Rome discovered many of the ailments and developed the first treatments:p)
Re the duty thst was somewhat tongue in cheek, although if you don't understand your history (and for Europeans and Americans, Rome is where a lot of it starts) then you can't work your way forward to why the world is as it is now, you're kinda of flapping in the moment woth no understanding, which seems to me a form of voluntary madness :p
Eg, the question why does Eastern Europe have more mistrust for muslim migrants than western? Has a simple answer: the eastern roman empire fell 1000 years after the western, and those nations were attacked by the third people of the book far more recently than say slain and Portugal, and so the memory of those times is far more fresh, resulting in a stronger antipathy today than is seen in andalusia.
Everything has a reason, and history usually provides - and many of those spreading trees of answers, of cause and effect, were seeds planted in Rome.
@jecsquire9508 do you have any sources for your point about there being greater levels of mistrust of Muslim migrants in Eastern Europe? Especially any studies that are able to link this to the Roman Empire?
This explains the weird message I got from my son. Especially since I don’t do TicTok
I haven't seen the video yet, but Ash made a really good video pointing out that interest in the Romans can also be a bit of a red flag for things like white supremacy and that's really gotten me thinking about the whole thing.
That's an asinine opinion.
The white supremacy aspect of this is something that we didn't get into, but there is definitely a concerning overlap. There are other creators on UA-cam that have done some excellent work exploring this.
@@SierraSierraFoxtrot
I sincerely believe this is why this topic is being pushed by the mainstream media, they are trying to spin this as a "white supremacy" thing, when it absolutely is not... the question is being prompted to see how often "white men" specifically think about it, because that is who the left is after the most at the moment.
White supremacy is the boogie-man the left constantly has to use to incite hate toward white men.
@@SierraSierraFoxtrot so completely asinine lol
I just finished reading Mary Beard's _SPQR_ while I can safely say that my husband doesn't think about Rome, ancient or modern, unless it pops up in some extremely random video game thing. Didn't one of the Assassin's Creed games take place partly in Renaissance Rome or near there? 🤣
Honestly, it looks like people on tiktok trying too hard to create content out of nothing.
"Sex and body positivity in ancient times".
Ok.
Please stop overstating the cross dressing in ancient Rome: male prostitutes and one emperor we know of crossed dressed and that's it.
Right? Also there were crossdressing in the german army as fun in the 30s and we wouldnt exactly imagine them as feminine (Erwin Rommel also participated and there is a photo lmao). There were many cultures across history that viewed things entirelly diferently but werent any less manly, just look at how mercenaries and nobles dressed in the middle ages, in colorfull puffy clothes and feathers, from todays perspective that would seem kinda gay, but they wouldnt understand what is particularly womanly about it.
"construction that falls appart easily" yeah, sure.
Have you heard about the female only legion lead by a female general that won many battles and had a Triumph in Rome?
Neither I...
I want you to talk to some of my friends that are PhD in Roman Law by La Sapienza (one is a woman, it seems that you care about it) about how "easily" the "binary" falls appart.
I learned some Roman Law in Law School - from the XII tables to the Codex Justinianus - extremelly diverse in many aspects during this time period, but the existence of "women" and "men" as objective reality is not one of them.
Of course there was some queer here and there (the celebrated by some dramaturgists, Helio Gabalus), but that doesn't disproof the continuity of the basic binary man/woman.
There were more or less stances that could be called "mysoginistic" or "sexist" today, but none is near close to the modern equalitarianism or subjectivism - this concepts are post protestant reformation and some post enlightenment.
It's not because you like a time period that you have to make it palatable for modern tastes, to respect them is to be faithful in portraying their reality.
@@HoradrimBRI recommend you read Marcus Aurelius' mediations: not only is he quite clear about the differences between men and women in terms of thought, expectation and deed, but it is quite clear he views women as children and not adults. Showing excessive emotion or vexation in public is termed weak and womanish in his own words for example. Admittedly this is in the Christian era and not the republican or early imperial eras but certainly in the last few hundred years of the empire, they knew what men and women were, and they made observations on the gross differences between the two in action, thought and demeanor.