History questions not worth their own thread III

[Virote_Considon]

You do realize you're speaking a corrupted Germano-Franco-Latinate-everything-else-that-goes-into-English-stew? All language is corrupted so to claim there's something bad about it is, frankly, silly. Corruption is natural.

Not to mention the fact that I'm 99.8% sure you don't pronounces Xerxes (regardless of how you spell it) the way the Persians did, ergo you're a corruptor?

In short I think to believe that any one spelling/ pronunciation system is better just because "that's how it was originally done" is arrogant reactionaryism. Languages are inherently dynamic.

I agree with Lunkman226 over here.

 

[Linkman226]

You seem to be under the misapprehension that I'm some sort of linguistic prescriptivist, which is about as far from the truth as you can get; long ago the prophet Billdo did preach to me, and lo mine eyes were open'd. I can't really figure out any other explanation for it, since I've repeatedly said (hell, the post you quoted implied as much) that I like the way I do things because it's the way I do things, not because it is some sort of immutable law of transliteration.

So I'll just write this post off as uninformed and poorly aimed overreaction.

But that's exactly what it came off as- linguistic prescriptivism. If, in fact, it's a personal preference, it's rather bold to refer to it as corruption.

However, I wouldn't write off for example the Iranian monarchs' Greek names as a simple mutation of language. It's not as if the name Xsayarsa entered our language in exactly this form a long time ago and was then corrupted by the process of oral tradition.

If anything, it was the Greeks who were prescriptive about this (unintentionally, perhaps, or out of necessity). And personally I'd also prefer the indigenous names because they don't imply that the whole ancient world spoke languages suspiciously similar to Greek.

That second reason makes more sense but I still feel it inevitable that such corruption is going to happen because, well, the victors write history and ultimately the "west" "won" over the Persians (in terms of historical legacy).

 

[J. pride]

That second reason makes more sense but I still feel it inevitable that such corruption is going to happen because, well, the victors write history and ultimately the "west" "won" over the Persians (in terms of historical legacy).

True, that is atleast why i like to think Alexander is remembered more that Cyrus even though the later was better in most aspects including human rights (treatment of the jews and the Cyrus Cylander) and he did conquer a similar sized empire (Acheaminid Empire might have been a little smaller at his death than the Macedonian Empire); not to mention the fact that he had a more direct legacy which led to the establishment of one of the greatest empires in the world. Although not at Cyrus's death, the Acheaminid were the largest empire of the ancient era (which makes them larger than Alexander's empire).

 

[Dachs]

But that's exactly what it came off as- linguistic prescriptivism. If, in fact, it's a personal preference, it's rather bold to refer to it as corruption.

Bold? Try honest.

 

[Yeekim]

True, that is atleast why i like to think Alexander is remembered more that Cyrus even though the later was better in most aspects including human rights (treatment of the jews and the Cyrus Cylander).

Unfortunately, the Cyrus Cylinder is a hoax.

 

[Dachs]

Not a hoax, but definitely doesn't mean what it's popularly believed to mean.

EDIT: Whoa. This was my 25,000th post. It's kinda lame, but whatever. Kickass.

 

[W|M]

Why didn't the English follow up on their victory in the Battle of Flodden?

 

[General Pilates]

Not a hoax, but definitely doesn't mean what it's popularly believed to mean.

Do elaborate?

 

[spryllino]

True, that is atleast why i like to think Alexander is remembered more that Cyrus even though the later was better in most aspects including human rights (treatment of the jews and the Cyrus Cylander) and he did conquer a similar sized empire (Acheaminid Empire might have been a little smaller at his death than the Macedonian Empire); not to mention the fact that he had a more direct legacy which led to the establishment of one of the greatest empires in the world. Although not at Cyrus's death, the Acheaminid were the largest empire of the ancient era (which makes them larger than Alexander's empire).

Human rights in the classical world is what most people would call an anachronism.

Why didn't the English follow up on their victory in the Battle of Flodden?

Victory was won and the enemy king was dead; but it had been Surrey's victory, not Henry's, and any further military action would be against a an infant king (James V). In Henry VIII's eyes, there was no honour to be gained from exploiting the situation any more, and Henry was far more interested in France. He set up a pro-English regency council, and sent back the prisoners from Flodden having made them swear to advance the cause of English over French influence in Scotland, but they unsurprisingly largely ignored their oaths, and soon enough the French sent the Scots a new regent. I'm sure financial and practical concerns also impeded the idea of invading Scotland properly.

 

[Dachs]

Do elaborate?

What spryllino said. It's not a human-rights declaration, and if it was intended to be such (a long shot) it was propaganda, not a realistic depiction of anybody's, let alone Kurush's, policy. If such an interpretation finds support in the writings of other authors about Kurush, it must be remembered that many, if not all, of those are encomiastic in nature and as such highly suspicious.

 

[Huayna Capac357]

How much control did the Mongol Empire actually have over Burma?

 

[Leoreth]

That second reason makes more sense but I still feel it inevitable that such corruption is going to happen because, well, the victors write history and ultimately the "west" "won" over the Persians (in terms of historical legacy).

Argh, how much I hate stylizing the Greek-Persian wars into an East-West conflict

 

[Linkman226]

I'm not, hence the quotes.

 

[Tee Kay]

How much control did the Mongol Empire actually have over Burma?

Almost nonexistant. The Burmese splintered into several warring states after the Mongol invasion but the Mongols didn't impose anything resembling imperial rule on them; they received tribute from the Burmese on a semi-regular basis as was the nature of the relationship between China and the SEA states back in the day, and kept a few garrisons near the border with Yunnan, and that's about the extent of their presence.

 

[Yeekim]

Not a hoax, but definitely doesn't mean what it's popularly believed to mean.

EDIT: Whoa. This was my 25,000th post. It's kinda lame, but whatever. Kickass.

Do elaborate?

Yeah, I was a bit obscure. The cylinder itself exists, but it is not "a human rights charter". Translation to that effect is fake.
http://www.livius.org/ct-cz/cyrus_I/cyrus_cylinder.html
Correct translation can be found here.
http://www.livius.org/ct-cz/cyrus_I/cyrus_cylinder2.html

 

[General Pilates]

Yeah, I was a bit obscure. The cylinder itself exists, but it is not "a human rights charter". Translation to that effect is fake.
http://www.livius.org/ct-cz/cyrus_I/cyrus_cylinder.html
Correct translation can be found here.
http://www.livius.org/ct-cz/cyrus_I/cyrus_cylinder2.html

The Fake text is so amusingly stereotypical

 

[Leoreth]

I'm not, hence the quotes.

Yeah, but being reminded of it was enough.

 

[Linkman226]

How much control did the Mongols exercise over Goryeo?

 

[ParkCungHee]

Pretty close to total control for a brief period, mainly around the invasion of Japan.

 

[Tee Kay]

How much control did the Mongols exercise over Goryeo?

Pretty close to total control for a brief period, mainly around the invasion of Japan.

Note that the Invasions of Japan wouldn't have happened had the Mongols not been in complete control over Korea, since Korean ships, troops and supplies played a central role in the Japanese expeditions.

Goryeo took 28 years to subdue (longer if you count the insurgency that lasted until 1273). When the capital looked as if it was about to fall, the government moved to an offshore island and continue to direct a guerrila campaign. Korea kept its king and was at most only officially a "tributary state" under Mongol rule.