Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
That is quite interesting. I didn't know that there was one person responsible for a lot of Latin-to-English words. I know that during the 14th or 15th centuries there was more focus on the Latin language, and a number of Italian humanists changed their names to sound more Latin-like (such as Petrarch).
Yes Phid, it is quite interesting. Skelton is a very ambitious fellow, he is "coming up" with "Englished" Latin because he wants to be well known and to have his words accepted into the vernacular. Skelton marks the beginning of Modern English, he is the first major writer to have been published entirely in print. Geoffrey Chaucer and William Caxton were edging towards Englishized Latin but were slowed by intellectuals who saw Middle English as less elegant, lacking nuance and meant for the unwashed masses. John Wyclif, of Chaucer's time, reached the largest audience to date with his translation of the Vulgate. Wyclif wanted English speakers to have access to the bible. Its a very difficult job, because scholars loathed the changes and it was excruciating to keep the Latin word order in sync with English affixes. A few gems from Wyclif: "behemoth" "chimera" "puberty" "civility" "zeal" "alleluia" and the very graphic "arse ropes" meaning intestines! -paraphrased "The Secret Life of Words" -HitchingsSt. Jerome has a smoother translation from Greek to Latin in his translation, except that he made what could be considered major contextual changes to the text. Poor black eyed Jerry(Leviticus, Deuteronomy)
Its hard to imagine Virginians just taking this in stride. I read 400 demonstrators against, not what I would expect. Its a sacrilege. Sam can't you do better than this?
John Skelton 1460-1529, scholar and tutor to HenryVIII, was a brilliant man but a bawdy, rather crude comic poet. He was the first to use “idiocy” in print. Skelton wrote knowing that “Engilishing” of Latin texts would not end with him, but with the reader. In one translation of 1485 he "Englished" 800 Latin terms. Skelton also gave us "contraband" "declamation" "shuttlecock" and "boohoo."paraphrased-"The Secret Life of Words" Henry Hitchings 2008
The lesson may be different for studying history but when I write papers for Eng. Lit., I'm stepping out to new areas but leaving a clew connected to where my strengths are. Pysch. papers lend themselves well to connections in History or Lit. Example, I tied in the Battle of Shiloh to Herman Melville, and Kholberg's Universal Ethical Principle, did a lot of reasearch and got three papers, for three classes out of it. Saves time and gives you a full 360 degrees on several topics. Maybe this approach is possible for you to maximize time and a more complete understanding of your subjects, just a thought. Good on ya mate! Very glad to hear that your living the dream, man.
nkuler, pretty funny! ;D Scout, what is the best local food you have tried anywhere? I mean local food, not well known cuisine.Maybe the fly is best part of the drink!
I do not know of any heavy losses in defending the wall (scout? phid?).
Thank you skiguy, and I'm asking anyone who is inclined to reply.
I've read about it so far, the third century was relatively peaceful because of the buffer zone between the two walls.
Are you aware of any offensives against the Scots tribes during this priod?
It was chemical tests that proved the paint. What is the best explation for Rome having not conquered the Scots? I know the wall was built across the shortest distance from coast to coast. Did Rome incur heavy losses in defence of the wall?
I haven't been there but I saw it on PBS's Travel Europe series. Thank goodness for PBS! Are you brave Scout? That is do you sample the local food with wild abandon? 😀
Yes Skiguy, the thinking among scholars is that the wall was a marker, the border of the Empire. Trade required tariff but why did the border end there? The Northern Tribes of Scotland were not conquered, they resented the wall and regularly caused trouble for the Empire. The wall was painted white to further assert Roman rule.
Of the primary sources treating the life of Hadrian there are but two significant extant works: the Vita Hadriani as found in the Historia Augusta (HA), and Dio Cassius; they are not wholly trusted.
http://www.roman-emperors.org/hillhadri.htm
The repairs made to Hadrian's wall at this time as a result of it being breached generally were so extensive that most Roman authors thereafter concluded that the wall itself had been Severus' rather than Hadrian's initiative. Septimius Severus died at York in 211 C.E. while planning yet another invasion. His failure to subdue Scotland after mobilising the resources of his empire to do so proved definitive and subsequent Roman incursions were temporary reactions to raids across the wall or scouting parties known as exploratores. Never again would Romans delude themselves that they could conquer Scotland.
http://www.siol-nan-gaidheal-usa.com/invicta.htmSkiguy, the failure, if any, was in controlling the Scots, the major losses of men and need for constant repairs to the wall due to attacks from Scots. If you have a few minutes, the article at the link is worth a read.
I wonder if Alaskans felt the same way
No, at least not this year. They celebrated, even plan to issue a "50 years of statehood stamp." http://www.stlbeacon.org/coins_and_stamps/alaska_celebrates_50_years_of_statehood
Aha! Brilliant! I curse my lousy memory and praise yours! It was Traveler at Antietam, yes a very beautiful animal. I believe Grant was very fond of horses, had a soldier tied to a tree for six hours for mistreating one.
There is a British historian, whose name now escapes me but which I can provide for you in a day or two. I watched a lecture from the Library on Hadrian's Wall. In it this historian (apologise for not remembering his name) said that fires were constantly being set by native Britons, they also sailed to and from what is now Scotland to provide supplies and armaments. Certain Roman soldiers along the wall became known for their willingness to trade for access to pass through and parts of the wall itself along with barracks, stables and towers had been literally diassembled and moved to try to gain a better topographical advantage. When Hadrian built the wall, very good use was made of the natural lay of the land, it was built on mounds and where none exsisted, they were created. These mounds were destabalized from time to time. The causes ranged from the natural,ie. waterflow from underground springs and flooding, and also they were deliberately picked away at through organized, sort of terrorist operations, if you will. Once I find the historians name I'm sure some of this can be accessed online.
” The Wind that Shakes the Barely” Michael Collins features briefly, I'll tell you what, the director captures post WW1 British soldiers to a tee, as was explained to me by an older gent, and my own eyes convinced me as well! Also, loved "Flyboys" and you all must have seen "Gods and Generals" same guy who directed "Gettsburg" Ronald F. Maxwell.
I did see Open Range, I liked it. Really bad villians and Costner shows a lot of restraint in his acting, which is impressive for a guy whose been in so many successful films. Robert Duvall was born to be a cowboy eh? You know he's got a pretty young wife from South America, I think 30 years his junior, lives in Panama.
