Even in the darkest of dark ages Frankish swords were among the most prized goods in the markets of the Middle East.
After this time, and subsequent to the death of the three brothers in Kyiv, the Polyanians were oppressed by the Derevlians and other neighbors of theirs. Then the Khazars came upon them as they lived in the hills and forests, and demanded tribute from them. After consulting among themselves, the Polyanians paid as tribute one sword per hearth, which the Khazars bore to their prince and their elders, and said to them, “Behold, we have found new tribute.” When asked whence it was derived, they replied, “From the forest on the hills by the river Dnipro.” The elders inquired what tribute had been paid, whereupon the swords were exhibited. The Khazar elders then protested, “Evil is this tribute, prince. We have won it with a one-edged weapon called a sabre, but the weapon of these men is sharp on both edges and is called a sword. These men shall impose tribute upon us and upon other lands.” All this has come to pass, for they spoke thus not of their own will, but by God’s commandment.
Pangur Bán;13082276 said:People often think Westerners came to rule the world because some renaissance guys started re-reading Greek stuff ... had nothing to do with it. That stuff if anything ******ed Europeans. Europe's advantages lay primarily with its advanced metallurgic technology and the skills that allowed them to excel in making at low cost everything from printed books to guns , chemical distillation equipment and steam engines. It was never backward when it came to those things. Even in the darkest of dark ages Frankish swords were among the most prized goods in the markets of the Middle East.
The stuff that "******ed" Europeans set the foundation of the scientific revolution, which was instrumental of technological developments.
Do you have a degree in science, by any chance? Just wondering.
Pangur Bán;13084303 said:You are just repeating what I claimed to be a myth. It was European metal-working skill that turned outside technology into books and guns and so forth, the useful Greek and Roman stuff had already largely been absorbed by the time of the Renaissance and was thereafter a set of distracting mistakes and dead ends.
Our myth about Renaissance learning and 'classical revival' is to a large extent the product of Renaissance and Enlightenment propaganda from non-church literati trying to get jobs and patronage from the church guys.
Pangur Bán;13084303 said:You are just repeating what I claimed to be a myth. It was European metal-working skill that turned outside technology into books and guns and so forth, the useful Greek and Roman stuff had already largely been absorbed by the time of the Renaissance and was thereafter a set of distracting mistakes and dead ends.
Our myth about Renaissance learning and 'classical revival' is to a large extent the product of Renaissance and Enlightenment propaganda from non-church literati trying to get jobs and patronage from the church guys.
How does something that's not even a thing have multiple causes?The Renaissance occurred due to a multitude of factors and nobody said the revival of interest in Greek culture is THE cause of it.
Oh, that's how. Lol.Decadence, reactionarism, and competition are often cited as important factors.
Am I wrong for thinking that Europe's rise had little to do with its ability to work with random objects out of the earth, and more on its actions in distinct, contingent situations?
People love to find systemic explanations for stuff, because it makes them think they have what is needed to solve future problems, but, in truth, history has been more about people making very specific choices in a variety of very specific situations. The "rise of Europe" had a lot to do with discovering the Americas, for instance, and that's as random an event as you can have.
Sure it creates a unique position for the Ancient Greek man. In fact, most people who hold this position have the weird, simultaneous belief that northern Europeans in Antiquity were barbarians who didn't know how to do anything (which is also nonsense). But the whole idea of that the Renaissance created modern science is built around the assumption that the Greeks and Arabs living in the middle ages couldn't do science with Aristotle, because reasons.You could also interpret it that the Greek man was intellectually superior to the northern European because they worked out this science.
Just sayin'.