"Adopting Ancient Prejudice" Topic

Do you find yourself taking on the biased opinions of the ancients?
The Spartans good or bad thread got me thinking about it.

Do you take on Roman and Greek attitudes towards Carthaginians?
Do you consider Gauls to be barbarian hordes?

When I read Thucydides I even get caught up in bias against specific Greek city-states and even individuals.

Polybius seems to tell it like it is…until he starts talking about the Hellenistic world. Then the axe comes out. Just remember that the Achaean League is better….waaaaay better than the Aetolian League.

Taking 3 years of Latin taught me to hate the Romans.
Livy reminds me of some of the more obnixious "politicals" in the Flashman novels.

I got tired of making excuses for bad Athenian behavior because of their alleged "democracy", and so usually root against them.

Gauls invented soap, you know. They were a lot "nicer" than the Romans.

So, my Ancient prejudices are usually upside down from others.

Do you take on Roman and Greek attitudes towards Carthaginians?
Do you consider Gauls to be barbarian hordes?

I think, sometimes, these days we tend to kick against those prejudices.

Maybe too much – see the rampant PC from some contributors to the Dark Ages thread (sorry 'Early Medieval Western Europe 400 up to 650 _CE' thread ) …

I am sure there are some examples where ancient people were actually just how their copntemporaries described them!

Add the bias against the Persians thread to this.

There is an element of falling in love in my atttitude to many armies. However, I can love the machine like Romans and the erratic, heroic Gauls each for their own virtues, They are all my children in a Blucherish sense.
Roy

It is here and there for the others but Makedon can do no wrong by Phillip II's time.

The Gauls aren't barbarians. The Persians are Barbarians! And the Carthaginians, they even wear loin cloths under their tunics : P

The Romans are down right mean and nasty rotters. But it's fun to play the bad guys sometimes.

Gauls invented soap, you know. They were a lot "nicer" than the Romans

Well, they smelled nicer, presumably.

Doug

Carthaginians? Never mind Carthaginians! Some Hittites moved in next door, and…

I have a bias for the hairy northern fringes-Celts, Germans, etc of various stripes. I'll even throw in the Thracians/Dacians, Illyrians. Head hunting seems somehow less barbaric than Punic baby sacrifice.

In terms of the Classical World, most of our information comes from Roman or Greek sources, so there is a built-in prejudice against whatever outside group they are telling you about. I recently read a book by Terry Jones about the Celtic and Germanic tribes which basically told their side of the story*. It also detailed how the Romans screwed over other groups, including the Greeks, in everything from science and technology to religion by stealing or taking credit for their accomplishments if it benefited them, and ignoring or suppressing them if it didn't. 'To the victor belong the spoils', and all that, but this made the Romans look like a real bunch of a_holes. I guess since then, I've come to relish treating them as such on the tabletop.

*Which, I believe, came from a BBC miniseries

From a gaming perspective, the sad thing is that with the notable exception of Phil Barker and the old beloved WRG rules, every set of Ancients rules I have read seems to want to guarantee that the Romans will always win. Even if we are using points based armies.
And if the Romans come with less than a 51% win-loss ratio, you make up special Roman rules to bring up the desred rato to at least 75%.

I have always said that the reason the Romans won was because they kept coming back after they lost. The army was not really all that special.

But the Roman lovers will not accept anything less than Roman victories in every single game.

I take my attitudes from Spartacus and the Gauls- the Gauls thought the human personification very juniville. Famiously a Gaul Farmer claimed his cow was more of a god to him than Caligula. And taking a leak on the Romans gods after they took Rome.

Breaking the truce of a parlay seems very bad form and the Romans deserved to have their city trashed for it. I guess that's an ancient attitude.

I'm a big fan of Terry Jones.

You can get most of his stuff on Youtube- the only decent popular historian that generatlly made it onto regular TV in the UK. Most of the rest really are PC nonsense or old fuddy dudies who are natural forlock tuggers specially on the BBC.

Phil Barker may not over rate the Romans- but he seems to too keen on Byzantine sterotypes.

I'm a big fan of Terry Jones.

Me too, I've also read his book about the (possible) assassination of Chaucer that was a lot of fun.

I did have a chance to see one of his BBC history programs several years ago, in which he illustrated an Assyrian siege using 28mm figures which looked like they might be based for DBM/DBA, if I remember correctly. That started me wondering if he, in fact, was a wargamer also.

cool fact- we'll claim him.

I have no problem despising any and all things Persian.

Except for the pastries. They probably stole the idea for those, though.

I have no problem despising any and all things Persian.

Not me, I like Persian culture, history, and I greatly prefer their religion, society, and government over the Greek alternative. I don't see why anyone would "despise" a system that emphasized free will, truthfulness, and an abhorrence of slavery.

Taking that down to the present day, I've got several Persian (or at least Iranian) friends and coworkers, as well as my son's girlfriend. The ones I know personally are a great bunch of guys, with a great family-oriented culture. To each his own, I suppose.

The OP's premise is a valid one.
You see quite a bit of prejudice here on the Ancient's board but only in the nicest possible way ( Go Cathos! What's a little child sacrifice between friends?)

What bemuses me is the same thing over at Naps where, in the C21st, various people are rabid Prussian nationalists, or adoring Bonapartists etc.

I hate old people; oh wait that would be me!

What bemuses me is the same thing over at Naps where, in the C21st, various people are rabid Prussian nationalists, or adoring Bonapartists etc.

… and it can be quite hard to tackle some ECW topics …

I won't even hazard a look over to the Nappy boards any more. It's just not worth the effort.

I like the Persians, but that's my Greek prejudice. They called Xerxes the "Great King" too. The Greeks admired just about everyone and it is especially heartwarming when they grudgingly respect a truly powerful enemy.
They thought the Romans were inferiors. The Carthaginians were awesome, because they were a Greek colony.

the odd thing about ancients predjudices is that no one (well, maybe a few lunatic fringe nationalists) claims any personal alegiance to the ancients themseveles.

This is not he case with any of the civil wars (come on, we all know parliamentarians and royalists, or true rebs and unionists), and not so with Napoleonics either.

so in a way you can understand folk getting 'het up' about the moderns sicne they see part of themsevles in that historical period, and take a side.

But to get personally offended by Mithridates or Sulla?
To take a side on thermopylae? what are you drinking?

I once said something about Macedonians not being Greeks on another forum & a Greek member went ballistic. There was virtual frothing of the mouth & digital steam coming out of his ears.

It seems some Greeks are touchy about something to do with the current Greek claim on Macedon or some such ridiculous modern politics.

As a Karpathian I am above such fulminations ( Moldavia must be Karpathian!!)

But the Roman lovers will not accept anything less than Roman victories in every single game.

John – they'd hate this AAR then:

link

I once said something about Macedonians not being Greeks on another forum & a Greek member went ballistic. There was virtual frothing of the mouth & digital steam coming out of his ears.

I still cringe every time I hear that Alexander the Great was a Greek and he lead the Greek army to victory.

The Carthaginians were awesome, because they were a Greek colony.

Hmmmm…

I still cringe every time I hear that Alexander the Great was a Greek and he lead the Greek army to victory.

I know that a lot of our friends in the UK will probably roll their eyes at this, but in the Alexander movie, I liked the way Oliver Stone had all of the Macedonians speaking with Irish or Scottish accents and all the Greeks speaking with British accents. Simplistic approach, I know, but it was shorthand for illustrating the difference between the two. Still not sure what accent his mom was using, but anyway…

It was pretty normal to massacre one's enemies and do unspeakable things back then. These days we only intervene in just causes and are careful to employ euphemisms, so I stick with our modern biases on the grounds that they are far more sophisticated ;-)

Thanks for the interesting thread.

Alexander isn't a "period" I'm much up on, so I may be wrong here, but weren't the Macedonians tiffed that they weren't recognized by the Greeks as being a part of the greater Greek world?

…weren't the Macedonians tiffed that they weren't recognized by the Greeks as being a part of the greater Greek world?

That's been my understanding. The Macedonians considered the Greeks effete, wordy, and untrustworthy, and the Greeks regarded the Macs as uncultured sh**kickers who really weren't Greeks at all. From what I understand, Alexander really tried to bridge that gap, as well as the cultural gap between them and conquered Persians, but I don't think he was completely successful. He made an effort to integrate Greek officers into his staff, but these were subject to a lot of mistrust by the other Macedonians. Later, he tried to integrate the Persians into positions in his government, but this went over like a lead balloon with the Greeks and Macedonians.

Isn't the Greek Macedonian thing kept alive by the modern situation where part of Ancient macedonia is a Slavic state that the Greeks would rather like back. So the modern claims are buttressed by the claim that the Greeks had it first. These things get hot when there is a live cause to keep them smoldering.
Try telling the Scots that Edinmburgh is really part 9along with the Borders of the Anglian kingdom and properly belongs to England. Even blokes with the properly English surname of Wilson get het up at the mention of that.

Reminds me of the furore in the USA when some archaeologist suggested that Clovis spearpoints represented Indo European settlers who had been massacred by later arriving 'Native Americans' who were thus not going to be the original inhabitants, but just another wave of conquerors.
Would that have been such a hot issue if the rights to tax free gambling were not at stake??
Roy:-)

I do not understand why you'd bring modern politics into Ancient gaming.My Greek friend should leave his view of the Macedonian question to a political forum, where it belongs.

Anf if I choose to paint my ancient Moldavian battle-axe men in the colours of revolutionary Karpathia, that's my business.

(Moldavia belongs to Karpathia!)

My five-year old watched the 3D film at the Roman Army Museum at Greenhead last week & somehow got the idea the Romans were the Goodies.

Tacitus' pours pure venom on the Jews with about 5 different nasty stories about their origins as a people, not one of which is anything like the Torah's… Dio seems to have started the 'blood-libel' by claiming the Jewish rebels in the Kitos revolt ate their victims' flesh & drank their blood.

I like the way John James & Harry Sidebottom both depict Romans as taking it as read that Christians are filth & scum.

The Romans seem to have been good at appealing to childish prejudice.

I won't even hazard a look over to the Nappy boards any more. It's just not worth the effort.

Especially when some people keep deploying weapons-grade Zardoz images (like there's any other kind, I know).

I tend to assume jingoistic levels of 'tribal nationalism' (for want of a better word). You know, good old-fashioned smack-talking, as used in pubs the world over shortly before the fisticuffs start.

But I will adopt that level of attitude against anyone not of the faction I'm playing. To borrow (and probably mangle) a quote from 300: "I heard that those Athenian boylovers turned you down. And, well we Spartans have a reputation to uphold…"

The Greeks in Alexander had English accents. British accents would include Welsh and Scottish ones.

"I still cringe every time I hear that Alexander the Great was a Greek and he lead the Greek army to victory."

Alexanderos and Phillipos would have considered themselves
to be Hellenic (Greek). Why have Greek names , Why ape
Greek culture, Why say your descendants were from Argos,
Why base your whole empire on Greek learning and
enlightenment ?

Both were born in what is Northern Greece today, not in
the Slavic Macedon to the North. The Macedonians spoke
a distant , crude but still a Greek dialect. The ruling
class spoke educated Greek.
The main difference was they had no polis system compared
to the most of the rest of the Greek World. They had a Mycenaean archaic culture. Such a contrast of monarchy
to the democratic or aristocratic systems to the south.
Yes some Greeks would denounce them as fellow Hellenes
but most of this was born over bitter wars for domination
of the Greek world. Many others thought of them as Greeks
, if a crude form such as Herodotus.
Macedonia means highlander in Greek , not from any
other language .
The Greeks do not want any part of Northern Slavic part.
"An opinion built on ignorance is worthless"
Lysicos

Macedonia means highlander in Greek , not from any
other language

That's just a best guess. The root means something like 'Tall' but it's an Indo-European Root. Attic has some similar words meaning 'tall'. How much of Ancient Macedon was Mountains?

I am neither a Slav or Greek Nationalist, I just feel an Opinion Built on a guess is worthless.

The whole 'Macedonia is Greece' stuff is just nonsense of course, but like any Nationalist rubbish believers get very het up if you rebut it.

Pat

I agree about the "makedonia is Greece" Stuff.
The point is about ancient Makedonia .

Macedonia comes from the ancient Greek word
Makednos meaning tall one or highlander.
What other language does it come from ?

Also the ancient Macedonians worshipped the
Olympic pantheon , long before their affairs
with the Southern Greeks.

My point is they were distinctly different
from most of the Greek world. They wanted to be
and were part , maybe distant , but Hellenes.

Makednos means 'Tall' not 'highlander'. I am quite tall – do I have to wear a kilt?

Pat

I agree that the ancient Macedonians were very different from
the advanced cultured world to the south.

Alexander considered himself a modern Achcilles,
a hero to the Greeks. They loved all things Greek.
Maybe not the polis system.
Different but still a branch of the Greek family.
I think the meaning of the word is not that
important but more that it is a form of
Greek.
Cheerio
Olive

Like the OFM my prejudices seem upside down.
I like Persians against Greeks and Romans. Prefer Carthaginians and Celts to Romans. Mothrdates was a great leader and so was Zenobia.

Nah – no real ancient prejudices – but I'll NEVER play as the dirty rotten stinking thieving Normans. Just saying…