Classics

[hungry_ghost]

Veering slightly off-topic:
I recently became aware of a Classics department with a major called "Ancient Civilization" (just one) that focuses on the ancient Mediterranean world and excludes all other ancient world societies.
Apparently they renamed their dying major a few years ago in hopes of attracting more students.

Thoughts?

Classics typically promotes an ahistorical view of the ancient world that was originally created to service the needs of empire.

My concern was the idea that everything outside the Mediterranean lies beyond the pale of civilization.

I was thinking, someone there could set up a Barbarian Studies program. It would exclude Greece and Rome (too civilized!) but cover the rest of the ancient (but uncivilized) world: Mesopotamia, China, India, MesoAmerica ...

[mamselle]

This is an example, in a research setting, of how collaborative work can move informational frontiers along:

   https://scitechdaily.com/harvards-new-genetics-research-on-ancient-britain-contains-insights-on-language-ancestry-kinship-milk/

Linguists, genomic scientists, archeological experts, and those doing anthro/material culture studies worked cooperatively to arrive at a conclusion about timed migration of Celtics peoples into early Britain.

Notable is the phrase suggesting that serious scholars will want to read and take this new information in, and use it to revise earlier assumptions.

That's what scholars do. They learn new stuff and let it affect how they think about things, rather than sit, like Narnian trolls at the end of time, complaining about the scruffy potatoes and rotten carrots, which is all their jaded viewpoint lets them see before them, while everyone else is joyfully frolicking in the dance that goes onward and upward.

That's not to say one shouldn't have a measure of mercy for the trolls.

But they shouldn't be allowed to set policy.

M.

[Hibush]

Great distinction. P&T committees in all fields should weigh heavily a candidate's contribution to the joyful frolic.

[mamselle]

;--》

M.

[Parasaurolophus]

Veering slightly off-topic:
I recently became aware of a Classics department with a major called "Ancient Civilization" (just one) that focuses on the ancient Mediterranean world and excludes all other ancient world societies.
Apparently they renamed their dying major a few years ago in hopes of attracting more students.

Thoughts?

Classics typically promotes an ahistorical view of the ancient world that was originally created to service the needs of empire.

My concern was the idea that everything outside the Mediterranean lies beyond the pale of civilization.

I was thinking, someone there could set up a Barbarian Studies program. It would exclude Greece and Rome (too civilized!) but cover the rest of the ancient (but uncivilized) world: Mesopotamia, China, India, MesoAmerica ...

Those programs are derided and defunded as "area studies" programs.

[Ruralguy]

And the collaborative efforts Mamselle speaks of most often seem to be part of the efforts of very large departments that can afford the time and energy. Smaller departments might do some of this, but it doesn't seem like the bread and butter that keeps teaching going, save for an occasional gee whiz sort of course.

[Hibush]

My concern was the idea that everything outside the Mediterranean lies beyond the pale of civilization.

I was thinking, someone there could set up a Barbarian Studies program. It would exclude Greece and Rome (too civilized!) but cover the rest of the ancient (but uncivilized) world: Mesopotamia, China, India, MesoAmerica ...

Those programs are derided and defunded as "area studies" programs.

They are calling our Barbarian Studies program area studies!?!!? We ride at dawn, and pillage the administration building of every last tenure-track line!

As a decendant of ancient barbarians, I'm curious about the notion that ancient civilizations were largely similar in terms of art, social structure and raiding neighboring societies for wealth and slaves. They all considered the neighbors barbarians to justify the raids. But some wrote the descriptions down, and the written history is how we have come to know some as civilized and some as barbarian. If so, can the ancient civilization courses be completely integrated?

[spork]

My concern was the idea that everything outside the Mediterranean lies beyond the pale of civilization.

I was thinking, someone there could set up a Barbarian Studies program. It would exclude Greece and Rome (too civilized!) but cover the rest of the ancient (but uncivilized) world: Mesopotamia, China, India, MesoAmerica ...

Those programs are derided and defunded as "area studies" programs.

They are calling our Barbarian Studies program area studies!?!!? We ride at dawn, and pillage the administration building of every last tenure-track line!

As a decendant of ancient barbarians, I'm curious about the notion that ancient civilizations were largely similar in terms of art, social structure and raiding neighboring societies for wealth and slaves. They all considered the neighbors barbarians to justify the raids. But some wrote the descriptions down, and the written history is how we have come to know some as civilized and some as barbarian. If so, can the ancient civilization courses be completely integrated?

In the USA, the "ancient civilization" courses are overwhelmingly dedicated to Greece and Rome. Civilization is defined as a straight line of Greece - Rome - St. Thomas Aquinas - Magna Carta - Industrial Revolution.

[Parasaurolophus]

They are calling our Barbarian Studies program area studies!?!!? We ride at dawn, and pillage the administration building of every last tenure-track line!

Hehe. Just make sure you bring along a siege train, or you're in trouble.

[downer]

My concern was the idea that everything outside the Mediterranean lies beyond the pale of civilization.

I was thinking, someone there could set up a Barbarian Studies program. It would exclude Greece and Rome (too civilized!) but cover the rest of the ancient (but uncivilized) world: Mesopotamia, China, India, MesoAmerica ...

Those programs are derided and defunded as "area studies" programs.

They are calling our Barbarian Studies program area studies!?!!? We ride at dawn, and pillage the administration building of every last tenure-track line!

As a decendant of ancient barbarians, I'm curious about the notion that ancient civilizations were largely similar in terms of art, social structure and raiding neighboring societies for wealth and slaves. They all considered the neighbors barbarians to justify the raids. But some wrote the descriptions down, and the written history is how we have come to know some as civilized and some as barbarian. If so, can the ancient civilization courses be completely integrated?

In the USA, the "ancient civilization" courses are overwhelmingly dedicated to Greece and Rome. Civilization is defined as a straight line of Greece - Rome - St. Thomas Aquinas - Magna Carta - Industrial Revolution.

How do they do it elsewhere? Obviously some histories include China and India. As far as I know, there's no evidence that they affected the Greek/Roman tradition to a significant extent. I teach, or taught, a version of ancient civilization. It's helpful to remember that Greek/Roman culture combined elements from large chunks of western Asia and northern Africa.

It's not easy to include a lot of complexity in one of these courses. It's tempting to simplify. It's also tempting to teach it as a history of progress. Resisting those temptations makes the narrative more confusing.

[mamselle]

Actually, not true.

There's a line of scholarship, based on art historical evidence, that the animal stories attributed to Aesop may have originated in those found in E. Asia, possibly Japan.

Dates for Silk-Road-like interchanges keep getting pushed back further and further; more interaction and influence are possible than before thought.

M.

[hungry_ghost]

My concern was the idea that everything outside the Mediterranean lies beyond the pale of civilization.

I was thinking, someone there could set up a Barbarian Studies program. It would exclude Greece and Rome (too civilized!) but cover the rest of the ancient (but uncivilized) world: Mesopotamia, China, India, MesoAmerica ...

Those programs are derided and defunded as "area studies" programs.

They are calling our Barbarian Studies program area studies!?!!? We ride at dawn, and pillage the administration building of every last tenure-track line!

As a decendant of ancient barbarians, I'm curious about the notion that ancient civilizations were largely similar in terms of art, social structure and raiding neighboring societies for wealth and slaves. They all considered the neighbors barbarians to justify the raids. But some wrote the descriptions down, and the written history is how we have come to know some as civilized and some as barbarian. If so, can the ancient civilization courses be completely integrated?

In the USA, the "ancient civilization" courses are overwhelmingly dedicated to Greece and Rome. Civilization is defined as a straight line of Greece - Rome - St. Thomas Aquinas - Magna Carta - Industrial Revolution.

How do they do it elsewhere? Obviously some histories include China and India. As far as I know, there's no evidence that they affected the Greek/Roman tradition to a significant extent. I teach, or taught, a version of ancient civilization. It's helpful to remember that Greek/Roman culture combined elements from large chunks of western Asia and northern Africa.

It's not easy to include a lot of complexity in one of these courses. It's tempting to simplify. It's also tempting to teach it as a history of progress. Resisting those temptations makes the narrative more confusing.

How do they do it? They call their major "Classics." The few "Ancient World" or "Ancient Studies" programs of which I'm aware require at least a token non-Mediterranean course. Then there's this one "Ancient Civilization" major, ick.

Suggesting that there is one, and only one, ancient civilization implies that ancient India pr ancient China were not "civilizations." This is offensive. Students notice; don't think they don't. It is racist. (Oh, hey, you guys over there on the other side of the globe? Oops we didn't notice you, just forgot you were there!) It hurts students who are not of Western (Euro-American) heritage. And ultimately, it hurts Classics departments.

Also, what's with this word "civilization"? It's a pretty loaded term. It implies the existence of uncivilized "others" (barbarians). Why not "ancient societies" or "the ancient world" or "ancient studies"?

As a decendant of ancient barbarians, I'm curious about the notion that ancient civilizations were largely similar in terms of art, social structure and raiding neighboring societies for wealth and slaves. They all considered the neighbors barbarians to justify the raids. But some wrote the descriptions down, and the written history is how we have come to know some as civilized and some as barbarian. If so, can the ancient civilization courses be completely integrated?

I have never heard that ancient civilizations were largely similar in any of the terms mentioned here. There was at least a much religious, cultural, and political diversity 25-45 centuries ago as now. But this They all considered the neighbors barbarians to justify the raids is no doubt true, and is why I think we can find (and should) a better term than "civilization."

[Durchlässigkeitsbeiwert]

This is an example, in a research setting, of how collaborative work can move informational frontiers along:

   https://scitechdaily.com/harvards-new-genetics-research-on-ancient-britain-contains-insights-on-language-ancestry-kinship-milk/

Linguists, genomic scientists, archeological experts, and those doing anthro/material culture studies worked cooperatively to arrive at a conclusion about timed migration of Celtics peoples into early Britain.

My understanding is that such stuff falls under history/archeology/biology departments, while classicists  study texts. The latter may constitute another factor preventing individuals from easily expanding their geographical scope: learning a new language seems to be inherently harder than making a new dig or analysing a set of remains from a different region.

[marshwiggle]

Also, what's with this word "civilization"? It's a pretty loaded term. It implies the existence of uncivilized "others" (barbarians). Why not "ancient societies" or "the ancient world" or "ancient studies"?

As a decendant of ancient barbarians, I'm curious about the notion that ancient civilizations were largely similar in terms of art, social structure and raiding neighboring societies for wealth and slaves. They all considered the neighbors barbarians to justify the raids. But some wrote the descriptions down, and the written history is how we have come to know some as civilized and some as barbarian. If so, can the ancient civilization courses be completely integrated?

I have never heard that ancient civilizations were largely similar in any of the terms mentioned here. There was at least a much religious, cultural, and political diversity 25-45 centuries ago as now. But this They all considered the neighbors barbarians to justify the raids is no doubt true, and is why I think we can find (and should) a better term than "civilization."

As someone not having a background in any of these fields, I would suggest that the merit of a "civilization" is how much of its influence extends beyond (in space and time) its ability to impose itself on the "barbarians".

For example, even after Rome had replaced Greece as the dominant global power, many elements of Greek culture, including use of the Greek language for many important things, persisted for a long time.

In a similar way, how influential my teaching is on students will only really be apparent when they're not in my class; if years later they're still quoting me, or using practices I taught them, then I have made a significant contribution. Otherwise, it doesn't matter if I shot lasers out of my eyes.

[downer]

We often contrast the culture of Ancient Rome with that of the Goths and the Vandals. Whether or not they were barbarians, we don't have much of a legacy of art, architecture, literature or philosophy from them. Those are the things that mostly get taught in these ancient world courses, apart from a history of the battles. Another reason we end up focusing more on Greece and Rome. You can do a bit with the mythologies of other cultures, but even then, what we have about them is often written by the Romans.

It would be fun to expand what gets taught -- maybe a section on cooking, farming and agriculture, for example. But it is hard to find much info on those sorts of things.