ParkCungHee
Deity
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2006
- Messages
- 12,921
Non-Fiction, not so much. My thesis adviser was livid when he found out his book plans were stolen based on a paper he presented.
History Questions Not Worth Their Own Thread VII
- Thread starter Plotinus
- Start date
Yes, prime example of a "brilliant' human idea which in the end devastates the environment.
Is there any possible way of turning (some)deserts back into fertile land?
I've heard about that possibility. Need to copyright your work asap, I think.
A great book idea though. One that could be made into a movie down the road, perhaps somewhat similar to "Das Boot".
I know ancient Egypt (especially the area around Alexandria) was a major grain producer. So was Sicily. Didn't know about animal domestication affecting the area to such a scale, fascinating.
Ancient cave paintings indicate that at least some of the currently existing North African deserts were in the past in fact fertile lands.
Is it true that Rus was formed thanks to Norse trade with the wealthy Abbasid Caliphate? Arabian silver for Viking(Norse) furs, and Slaves (usually consisting of Rus Slavs)
Nevertheless there must have been previous Slavic domains/states (prior to Varangians settling there) in those parts already. Otherwise Slavic culture and language wouldn't have won over, Norse must have been a minority, rich and royal, but a minority. They(Norsemen) conquered and/or were accepted by the rather peaceful and agricultural Slavs as their overlords, in exchange for protection. OF course might be off on this assumption.
In Egypt I think it was more to do with the Nile floods - which no longer happen, because they dammed the river at Aswan. That said, it's fairly well-established I think that the line of desertification in Europe and North Africa was further south around the turn of the Common Era than it is today, though there seems to be contention as to precisely when and why it moved.
Domen
Misico dux Vandalorum
Daft,
When you look at the West African analogy, then slave trade was a business in which native West Africans played a key role, and European traders were only intermediaries - they bought slaves from local chieftains, who had been enslaved by the locals, and then exported them farther. Such was the case for example in Lagos - one of the main slave trade centres in West Africa, to which Portuguese slave traders were invited by native Black Africans:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lagos_Colony#Origins
I see no reason why should that be different in Russia, where foreigners played the same role as Portuguese traders in Lagos.
However, slave trade in Russia was not on a massive scale, it was about exporting small amounts, but of "deluxe products" - sexy girls:
During 100 years some 30,000 - 60,000 slaves, largely girls, were exported from Russia, so ca. 300 - 600 per year (not a large number):
So it was all about sexual slavery and a 10th century equivalent of porn industry. Shockingly, this takes place there also today:
The "Natasha" Trade: The Transnational Shadow Market of Trafficking in Women:
http://www.uri.edu/artsci/wms/hughes/natasha.htm
http://www.uri.edu/artsci/wms/hughes/natasha_nij.pdf
East European Women Trapped In Sex Slavery:
http://www.sos-sexisme.org/english/east.htm
Beaten, raped, tortured and starved: The shocking fate of Eastern European sex trafficking victims revealed:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/a...uropean-sex-trafficking-victims-revealed.html
Human Trafficking & Modern-day Slavery in Ukraine:
http://gvnet.com/humantrafficking/Ukraine.htm
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_trafficking_in_Ukraine
The Desperate Western Men Hunting For Wives In Ukraine:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8wW7c58nMI4
Etc., etc., etc. All these links are about the modern situation, in the 21st century.
Ca. 117,000 Ukrainians were enslaved between 1991 AD and 2006 AD (15 years).
Compare this with ca. 45,000 enslaved between 900 AD and 1000 AD (100 years).
Even accounting for differences in population size, modern slavery is worse than 10th century slavery in the same region.
Situations such as the current war in Donbass create even more favourable conditions for slavery to flourish.
When you look at the West African analogy, then slave trade was a business in which native West Africans played a key role, and European traders were only intermediaries - they bought slaves from local chieftains, who had been enslaved by the locals, and then exported them farther. Such was the case for example in Lagos - one of the main slave trade centres in West Africa, to which Portuguese slave traders were invited by native Black Africans:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lagos_Colony#Origins
I see no reason why should that be different in Russia, where foreigners played the same role as Portuguese traders in Lagos.
However, slave trade in Russia was not on a massive scale, it was about exporting small amounts, but of "deluxe products" - sexy girls:
During 100 years some 30,000 - 60,000 slaves, largely girls, were exported from Russia, so ca. 300 - 600 per year (not a large number):
So it was all about sexual slavery and a 10th century equivalent of porn industry. Shockingly, this takes place there also today:
The "Natasha" Trade: The Transnational Shadow Market of Trafficking in Women:
http://www.uri.edu/artsci/wms/hughes/natasha.htm
http://www.uri.edu/artsci/wms/hughes/natasha_nij.pdf
East European Women Trapped In Sex Slavery:
http://www.sos-sexisme.org/english/east.htm
Beaten, raped, tortured and starved: The shocking fate of Eastern European sex trafficking victims revealed:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/a...uropean-sex-trafficking-victims-revealed.html
Human Trafficking & Modern-day Slavery in Ukraine:
http://gvnet.com/humantrafficking/Ukraine.htm
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_trafficking_in_Ukraine
The Desperate Western Men Hunting For Wives In Ukraine:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8wW7c58nMI4
Etc., etc., etc. All these links are about the modern situation, in the 21st century.
Ca. 117,000 Ukrainians were enslaved between 1991 AD and 2006 AD (15 years).
Compare this with ca. 45,000 enslaved between 900 AD and 1000 AD (100 years).
Even accounting for differences in population size, modern slavery is worse than 10th century slavery in the same region.
Situations such as the current war in Donbass create even more favourable conditions for slavery to flourish.
Attachments
Khazaria was a major purchaser of young/pretty/sexy Slavic Girls, usually for further trade, it has been documented. Was it a Judaic state back then already? I've read about Volga Bulgars, who later (or at that time already?) converted to Muslim faith, eagerly buying young Slavic slaves from the Norsemen (and others?) to trade to the Arabs.
Quite despicable.
Quite despicable.
Domen
Misico dux Vandalorum
Yes, Jewish traders played a major role in slave trade throughout Early Medieval Europe.
Christians had a Church-imposed ban on enslaving other Christians. They could only enslave Pagans (and Non-Christians in general).
There was even such an episode - a scandal - in the Frankish Empire, when Bishop Agobard of Lyon (lived in 779 - 840) mass-baptised - by simply sprinkling holy water at them - entire convoy with slaves of Jewish slave traders, that was moving through Lyon to Marseille.
Then Bishop Agobard ordered Jewish traders to release their slaves, because they were now Christians and thus had to be freed.
Jews issued a complaint against Agobard to local authorities of Lyon, but they decided that the Bishop was right. Then traders started an appeal to the King. The King ruled that Agobard had the right to do that, but at the same time he forbade such practices in the future.
Christians had a Church-imposed ban on enslaving other Christians. They could only enslave Pagans (and Non-Christians in general).
There was even such an episode - a scandal - in the Frankish Empire, when Bishop Agobard of Lyon (lived in 779 - 840) mass-baptised - by simply sprinkling holy water at them - entire convoy with slaves of Jewish slave traders, that was moving through Lyon to Marseille.
Then Bishop Agobard ordered Jewish traders to release their slaves, because they were now Christians and thus had to be freed.
Jews issued a complaint against Agobard to local authorities of Lyon, but they decided that the Bishop was right. Then traders started an appeal to the King. The King ruled that Agobard had the right to do that, but at the same time he forbade such practices in the future.
Domen
Misico dux Vandalorum
daft said:
Jews were probably not the majority of population, but yes - Judaism was the state religion of Khazaria.
By the way - recently a publication on genetic origin of Ashkenazi Jews has been published:
James Xue, Shai Carmi, "Time and Place of European Gene Flow Into Ashkenazi Jews":
https://shaicarmi.files.wordpress.com/2014/08/aj_admixture_poster.pdf
This study says the following:
Ashkenazi Jews are 50% Middle Eastern, 35% Southern European, 12% Eastern European and 3% Western European genetically.
Their Southern European admixture (35%) was determined to be older than 2000 years. So intercourse with Southern Europeans took place mostly Before Christ. Authors don't explain details, but I suppose that it was due to mass-conversions to Judaism in the Hellenistic period.
About conversions to Judaism in Hellenistic times - "The Hellenistic Era - Greeks, Romans, and Jews":
http://www.theopavlidis.com/MidEast/part10.htm
On the other hand, their Eastern European admixture (12%) is younger than 2000 years, it was "flowing" during the Middle Ages and later. Maybe some part of this admixture comes from Khazars converted to Judaism, while the other part is from mixing with Poles, Russians, etc.
Provided of course, that the Khazars were "Eastern European" genetically. I'm not sure if they had this component.
===============================================
Let's note, that the "Eastern European" genetic component peaks among Lithuanians (it should in fact be called "North-Eastern European"):
The entire Sahara was at some point fertile land. (Hence the theory that, for instance, Egypt was inhabited following the desertification of the Sahara.) Not sure how you conclude "animal domestication affecting the area to such a scale" has anything to do with desertification. We don't quite know if and to what extent intensive agriculture contributed to desertification in Africa north of the Sahara. There's simply isn't sufficient data to justify such a conclusion.
It would probably be wise not to confuse mass-conversion and 'intercourse with Souther Europeans.' Though in later times Judaism became somewhat oblivious of it, it had been quite actively proselytizing in ancient times. Especially in the Roman empire Jewish communities preceded Christian ones in quite a lot of places. Which was, of course, rather the result of conversion rather than 'mass intercourse.'
ParkCungHee
Deity
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2006
- Messages
- 12,921
Can't copyright the basis for non-fiction. You present a paper based on your research, you cite your sources, some guy goes and cranks out a book using sources you've uncovered and brought together, and you're out of luck.
Is your synthesis not your own, though? In other words, if you've published a paper claiming that reading A and B leads to the new conclusion C, anyone else using the same line of argument has to acknowledge that they got it from you?
Almost afraid to ask, but to what question was that a response?
Well not really a question, just Domen's reference to Agobard a couple of posts earlier.
Yes, but I don't think that's legally enforceable. There are two distinct issues here - copyright violation, which is a legal matter, and plagiarism, which isn't, at least not in the same way. If one academic steals another's idea, but not their words, then that's plagiarism but it's not copyright violation. It would be considered academic fraud and the person doing it might be subject to professional penalties rather than legal ones.
This doesn't apply to creative writing, for a number of reasons: first, the copying of ideas is a traditional part of the creative process and isn't regarded as negatively as in the academic world; second, practically everything's already been done and so any given artistic work could be regarded as copying the ideas of another, whether deliberately or not; and third, ideas aren't really that important in fiction publishing. What's important is the execution. You could describe the plot of an Iain Banks novel to me, but it doesn't follow that I could then write a book as sellable as an Iain Banks one around it.
ParkCungHee
Deity
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2006
- Messages
- 12,921
That would be freaking super. To live in such a world where books were required by law to admit their thought processes were established by the Nazi Party, or the KGB, or by some French Legal Scholar who didn't have any interest in History!
Of course, if that was the case, I'd have less of a job tracking down where people get stupid ideas about Irish History from.
Ah, of course - but I assume that professional penalties are still a serious matter? I mean, even the disgust of your entire field and their subsequent refusal to help you with anything would hardly do your career any good, before we start talking about formal sanctions.
I imagine it would simply be a matter of a world in which authors, who found their own work in others' books, could insist that they cite it properly.
Similar threads
