Greco-Roman Peoples React To Modern World

[oscssw]

Mar 6, 2021 19:19:15 GMT Zyobot said:

Mar 6, 2021 14:19:00 GMT oscssw said:

Thanks Zyobot.  I always enjoy a good portrayal of Sir Winston delivering one of his superb speeches.

For me, his speeches have to be heard.  Reading them does not invoke the emotional awe for me that seeing and hearing them does.   

I have no idea who that actor is/was but he surely fit the part for me.

Thanks; I like the job he did, too. Brian Cox played Churchill here, and though I haven't watched many movies about Old Winston, this is probably the portrayal that'll resonate with me most. I'd hope that Greco-Roman audiences feel the same way, and recognize Churchill as an important statesman who led Britain to victory in a conflict of unprecedented proportions.

One Sir Winston movie I would not waste my time on was "Young Winston".  How a production manages to make Sir Winston's early life dull, tedious and boring beggars the imagination! IMHO, total waste of two hours. I would definitely not show this to the time travelers.

[Zyobot]

Mar 7, 2021 12:24:17 GMT stevep said:

  I think provided the language translates well enough they will like his oratory and probably a lot of his ideas, although some of his comments about Italy probably won't go down very well.  He will definitely attract their attention, both for his speeches and his behaviour.

He also had a history of making some, ah, politically incorrect comments on race, correct? I ask because the Greco-Romans seemed to care less about one's racial background that the bigots of modernity, so I'd guess that Churchill's views on the issue would prove confusing to them. They might nod in agreement with his love for the British Empire, considering both how a) at least the Romans can relate to such sentiments and b) dissolving an empire as vast and wealthy as Great Britain's would strike them as an irreparable loss. Not that it was faring well leading up to its dissolution, mind you.

Aside from Churchill, though, what about his counterpart across the Atlantic? Again, I'm sure they'd be baffled at how a disabled, polio-stricken man who would've died had they born in Greco-Roman times became one of America's most revered statesmen. Ditto with how he won four consecutive terms, thanks to a series of electoral landslides. Downtimer reactions to the 1936 election map should prove interesting, to say the least.

[stevep]

Mar 7, 2021 19:53:51 GMT Zyobot said:

Mar 7, 2021 12:24:17 GMT stevep said:

  I think provided the language translates well enough they will like his oratory and probably a lot of his ideas, although some of his comments about Italy probably won't go down very well.  He will definitely attract their attention, both for his speeches and his behaviour.

He also had a history of making some, ah, politically incorrect comments on race, correct? I ask because the Greco-Romans seemed to care less about one's racial background that the bigots of modernity, so I'd guess that Churchill's views on the issue would prove confusing to them. They might nod in agreement with his love for the British Empire, considering both how a) at least the Romans can relate to such sentiments and b) dissolving an empire as vast and wealthy as Great Britain's would strike them as an irreparable loss. Not that it was faring well leading up to its dissolution, mind you.

Aside from Churchill, though, what about his counterpart across the Atlantic? Again, I'm sure they'd be baffled at how a disabled, polio-stricken man who would've died had they born in Greco-Roman times became one of America's most revered statesmen. Ditto with how he won four consecutive terms, thanks to a series of electoral landslides. Downtimer reactions to the 1936 election map should prove interesting, to say the least.

  It might vary depending on the personality but I suspect a lot of them would respect him deeply for both overcoming his personal health challenges and also for managing things that well that by 1945 the US was pretty much the only power left standing.  With possible concern that he should have foreseen the cold war or at least the Soviet potential as a rival and been less helpful to the USSR once the worse was over so as to leave them more weakened by the war.  - Remembering that some of them would have though Machiavelli rather soft and wimpish

[Zyobot]

Mar 8, 2021 12:00:35 GMT stevep said:

Mar 7, 2021 19:53:51 GMT Zyobot said:

He also had a history of making some, ah, politically incorrect comments on race, correct? I ask because the Greco-Romans seemed to care less about one's racial background that the bigots of modernity, so I'd guess that Churchill's views on the issue would prove confusing to them. They might nod in agreement with his love for the British Empire, considering both how a) at least the Romans can relate to such sentiments and b) dissolving an empire as vast and wealthy as Great Britain's would strike them as an irreparable loss. Not that it was faring well leading up to its dissolution, mind you.

Aside from Churchill, though, what about his counterpart across the Atlantic? Again, I'm sure they'd be baffled at how a disabled, polio-stricken man who would've died had they born in Greco-Roman times became one of America's most revered statesmen. Ditto with how he won four consecutive terms, thanks to a series of electoral landslides. Downtimer reactions to the 1936 election map should prove interesting, to say the least.

  It might vary depending on the personality but I suspect a lot of them would respect him deeply for both overcoming his personal health challenges and also for managing things that well that by 1945 the US was pretty much the only power left standing.  With possible concern that he should have foreseen the cold war or at least the Soviet potential as a rival and been less helpful to the USSR once the worse was over so as to leave them more weakened by the war.  - Remembering that some of them would have though Machiavelli rather soft and wimpish

The US also benefited from being two oceans away from the devastation, meaning that it remained intact aside from one surprise bombing and had more to work with when rebuilding until the rest of the world caught up decades later. That said, it indisputably emerged the most powerful nation on earth by then, something that I'm sure the Romans would have respect for. However unoriginal, I wonder if America's superpower status would convince more easily persuaded downtimers that it is indeed the New Rome, though skeptics may point to how the same comparison was made with Great Britain a hundred years ago. Seeing how that turned out, we'd need to find a new analogy, or perhaps scrap those equivalencies altogether.

Having said that, I'm sure the industrial might the US brought to bear would've astounded them. In fact, considering that this was true of both World Wars as a whole, that astonishment would probably apply to every major power (but particularly America, since it was again the premier economic power of the time, and even today remains in first place).

[stevep]

Mar 8, 2021 15:33:09 GMT Zyobot said:

Mar 8, 2021 12:00:35 GMT stevep said:

  It might vary depending on the personality but I suspect a lot of them would respect him deeply for both overcoming his personal health challenges and also for managing things that well that by 1945 the US was pretty much the only power left standing.  With possible concern that he should have foreseen the cold war or at least the Soviet potential as a rival and been less helpful to the USSR once the worse was over so as to leave them more weakened by the war.  - Remembering that some of them would have though Machiavelli rather soft and wimpish

The US also benefited from being two oceans away from the devastation, meaning that it remained intact aside from one surprise bombing and had more to work with when rebuilding until the rest of the world caught up decades later. That said, it indisputably emerged the most powerful nation on earth by then, something that I'm sure the Romans would have respect for. However unoriginal, I wonder if America's superpower status would convince more easily persuaded downtimers that it is indeed the New Rome, though skeptics may point to how the same comparison was made with Great Britain a hundred years ago. Seeing how that turned out, we'd need to find a new analogy, or perhaps scrap those equivalencies altogether.

Having said that, I'm sure the industrial might the US brought to bear would've astounded them. In fact, considering that this was true of both World Wars as a whole, that astonishment would probably apply to every major power (but particularly America, since it was again the premier economic power of the time, and even today remains in first place).

  I'm not sure Britain was every really compared to Rome.  True we had a large empire at our height, and even larger in the declining period from ~1870 onward but I would say the comparison would be more with a victorious Carthage than with Rome.  Which is something that would probably be picked up by the Romans here.  Our empire was largely maritime and commercial whereas Rome was fundamentally a continental power who's strength came from its army. 

  Where the Romans might be dubious about accepting the US as a new Rome might be in its lack of a large continental empire - other than in N America of course.  Although Rome in the early empire did have a lot of protectorates and satellites that they might accept as a comparison. 

[Zyobot]

Mar 9, 2021 10:41:03 GMT stevep said:

Mar 8, 2021 15:33:09 GMT Zyobot said:

The US also benefited from being two oceans away from the devastation, meaning that it remained intact aside from one surprise bombing and had more to work with when rebuilding until the rest of the world caught up decades later. That said, it indisputably emerged the most powerful nation on earth by then, something that I'm sure the Romans would have respect for. However unoriginal, I wonder if America's superpower status would convince more easily persuaded downtimers that it is indeed the New Rome, though skeptics may point to how the same comparison was made with Great Britain a hundred years ago. Seeing how that turned out, we'd need to find a new analogy, or perhaps scrap those equivalencies altogether.

Having said that, I'm sure the industrial might the US brought to bear would've astounded them. In fact, considering that this was true of both World Wars as a whole, that astonishment would probably apply to every major power (but particularly America, since it was again the premier economic power of the time, and even today remains in first place).

  I'm not sure Britain was every really compared to Rome.  True we had a large empire at our height, and even larger in the declining period from ~1870 onward but I would say the comparison would be more with a victorious Carthage than with Rome.  Which is something that would probably be picked up by the Romans here.  Our empire was largely maritime and commercial whereas Rome was fundamentally a continental power who's strength came from its army. 

  Where the Romans might be dubious about accepting the US as a new Rome might be in its lack of a large continental empire - other than in N America of course.  Although Rome in the early empire did have a lot of protectorates and satellites that they might accept as a comparison. 

Well, that was the impression I was under based on what Adrian Goldsworthy has said about the comparisons. Which he seems to view disparagingly, though how much editorializing there is in that claim, I don't know. They'd surely respect the size, mercantile success, and naval supremacy that Britain achieved during its heyday, though comparisons to a victorious Carthage make sense, if we're looking for more direct equivalencies. Spartans strike me as the type to look down on its more commercialistic tenants, though they'd be a vocal minority who almost no uptimer listens to, at best.

Again, I'm aware these analogies aren't perfect, though I think there's more of an argument to apply them loosely. I'm not completely sold on that proposition myself, but still. Especially when there are at least topical similarities between Rome and America that go back further than their place in the current global order, such as both of them throwing off monarchies and expanding massively in the centuries since. Ditto since the Founding Fathers drew much inspiration from Rome when structuring the government, though they certainly added new things that'd strike actual Romans as something new (i.e. a written constitution). I can also imagine downtimer tourists admiring all the Greek/Roman-inspired architecture in Washington, D.C., which may reinforce Rome-America comparisons for more impressionable downtimers.

Furthermore, while I'm not sure how realistic it is at the moment, I'm curious about what it'd be like for the U.S. President to address the Roman senate, or for the reverse to happen as some prominent Roman statesman--Caesar, Augustus, Septimus Severus, or any combination of them--to speak to Congress? Both cases would require interpreters for them to get their message across, unless either party masters their audience's language before introducing themselves.

[stevep]

Mar 9, 2021 19:17:36 GMT Zyobot said:

Mar 9, 2021 10:41:03 GMT stevep said:

  I'm not sure Britain was every really compared to Rome.  True we had a large empire at our height, and even larger in the declining period from ~1870 onward but I would say the comparison would be more with a victorious Carthage than with Rome.  Which is something that would probably be picked up by the Romans here.  Our empire was largely maritime and commercial whereas Rome was fundamentally a continental power who's strength came from its army. 

  Where the Romans might be dubious about accepting the US as a new Rome might be in its lack of a large continental empire - other than in N America of course.  Although Rome in the early empire did have a lot of protectorates and satellites that they might accept as a comparison. 

Well, that was the impression I was under based on what Adrian Goldsworthy has said about the comparisons. Which he seems to view disparagingly, though how much editorializing there is in that claim, I don't know. They'd surely respect the size, mercantile success, and naval supremacy that Britain achieved during its heyday, though comparisons to a victorious Carthage make sense, if we're looking for more direct equivalencies. Spartans strike me as the type to look down on its more commercialistic tenants, though they'd be a vocal minority who almost no uptimer listens to, at best.

Again, I'm aware these analogies aren't perfect, though I think there's more of an argument to apply them loosely. I'm not completely sold on that proposition myself, but still. Especially when there are at least topical similarities between Rome and America that go back further than their place in the current global order, such as both of them throwing off monarchies and expanding massively in the centuries since. Ditto since the Founding Fathers drew much inspiration from Rome when structuring the government, though they certainly added new things that'd strike actual Romans as something new (i.e. a written constitution). I can also imagine downtimer tourists admiring all the Greek/Roman-inspired architecture in Washington, D.C., which may reinforce Rome-America comparisons for more impressionable downtimers.

Furthermore, while I'm not sure how realistic it is at the moment, I'm curious about what it'd be like for the U.S. President to address the Roman senate, or for the reverse to happen as some prominent Roman statesman--Caesar, Augustus, Septimus Severus, or any combination of them--to speak to Congress? Both cases would require interpreters for them to get their message across, unless either party masters their audience's language before introducing themselves.

  Now that last point is an interesting idea.   Mind you if multiple emperors and other prominent military leaders have been brought along I can see a lot of jockeying for power, which could be quite bloody given who they are and the political background their used to. 

[Zyobot]

Mar 9, 2021 23:20:21 GMT stevep said:

Mar 9, 2021 19:17:36 GMT Zyobot said:

Well, that was the impression I was under based on what Adrian Goldsworthy has said about the comparisons. Which he seems to view disparagingly, though how much editorializing there is in that claim, I don't know. They'd surely respect the size, mercantile success, and naval supremacy that Britain achieved during its heyday, though comparisons to a victorious Carthage make sense, if we're looking for more direct equivalencies. Spartans strike me as the type to look down on its more commercialistic tenants, though they'd be a vocal minority who almost no uptimer listens to, at best.

Again, I'm aware these analogies aren't perfect, though I think there's more of an argument to apply them loosely. I'm not completely sold on that proposition myself, but still. Especially when there are at least topical similarities between Rome and America that go back further than their place in the current global order, such as both of them throwing off monarchies and expanding massively in the centuries since. Ditto since the Founding Fathers drew much inspiration from Rome when structuring the government, though they certainly added new things that'd strike actual Romans as something new (i.e. a written constitution). I can also imagine downtimer tourists admiring all the Greek/Roman-inspired architecture in Washington, D.C., which may reinforce Rome-America comparisons for more impressionable downtimers.

Furthermore, while I'm not sure how realistic it is at the moment, I'm curious about what it'd be like for the U.S. President to address the Roman senate, or for the reverse to happen as some prominent Roman statesman--Caesar, Augustus, Septimus Severus, or any combination of them--to speak to Congress? Both cases would require interpreters for them to get their message across, unless either party masters their audience's language before introducing themselves.

  Now that last point is an interesting idea.   Mind you if multiple emperors and other prominent military leaders have been brought along I can see a lot of jockeying for power, which could be quite bloody given who they are and the political background their used to. 

That'd likely be their first impulse, though the international community might step in and tell them to "play nice" before heads start rolling. Especially given that they're confined to a set of small islands, which would be easier to invade and occupy than a whole continent teeming with Greco-Romans.

As far as contacting them goes, I suppose having the POTUS deliver a televised address from the White House makes the most sense, initially. Again, each downtimer household has a TV and at least one computer, with detailed instructions on what they're for and how to use them. Seeing as some proportion of them will figure it out after some fiddling--though not everyone, both due to illiteracy and the sheer "alienness" of their new devices--it strikes me as the best option, considering how in-person introductions could cause an exchange of diseases, which is a whole separate problem they'll have to figure out. To that end, I wonder what Greco-Roman audiences--as well as their leaders--would think when being addressed by the head-of-state of the most powerful nation in the modern world? I imagine the reverse would also happen at some point, but only after a) the aforementioned disease problem is solved and b) downtimer politicians receive the technical and linguistic aid to publicly broadcast their speeches.

Maybe it's unrealistic, but now I'm envisioning Air Force One descending into Rome, with the POTUS exiting to shake hands with either the Consuls or the Emperor and their associated dignitaries. While some uptimer staff set up a stage and teleprompter for them as both parties introduce themselves, before everything's set up, speakers blasting "Hail to the Chief!" as a crowd of downtimers gathers to watch the American President speak to them in person. There'd also be some news crews who come to broadcast the event, via a combination of carefully fixed cameras, and drones and helicopters filming from a bird eye's view. But I digress.

[stevep]

Mar 10, 2021 0:06:22 GMT Zyobot said:

Mar 9, 2021 23:20:21 GMT stevep said:

  Now that last point is an interesting idea.   Mind you if multiple emperors and other prominent military leaders have been brought along I can see a lot of jockeying for power, which could be quite bloody given who they are and the political background their used to. 

That'd likely be their first impulse, though the international community might step in and tell them to "play nice" before heads start rolling. Especially given that they're confined to a set of small islands, which would be easier to invade and occupy than a whole continent teeming with Greco-Romans.

As far as contacting them goes, I suppose having the POTUS deliver a televised address from the White House makes the most sense, initially. Again, each downtimer household has a TV and at least one computer, with detailed instructions on what they're for and how to use them. Seeing as some proportion of them will figure it out after some fiddling--though not everyone, both due to illiteracy and the sheer "alienness" of their new devices--it strikes me as the best option, considering how in-person introductions could cause an exchange of diseases, which is a whole separate problem they'll have to figure out. To that end, I wonder what Greco-Roman audiences--as well as their leaders--would think when being addressed by the head-of-state of the most powerful nation in the modern world? I imagine the reverse would also happen at some point, but only after a) the aforementioned disease problem is solved and b) downtimer politicians receive the technical and linguistic aid to publicly broadcast their speeches.

Maybe it's unrealistic, but now I'm envisioning Air Force One descending into Rome, with the POTUS exiting to shake hands with either the Consuls or the Emperor and their associated dignitaries. While some uptimer staff set up a stage and teleprompter for them as both parties introduce themselves, before everything's set up, speakers blasting "Hail to the Chief!" as a crowd of downtimers gathers to watch the American President speak to them in person. There'd also be some news crews who come to broadcast the event, via a combination of carefully fixed cameras, and drones and helicopters filming from a bird eye's view. But I digress.

  Now that would be interesting.  Not sure how quickly they might adapt to access to PCs and computers, especially since this also assumes some sort of continued power supply - would that mean also supplying lights, heating etc?  There's also a possible problem that they need to know not to try and take them apart or mix them with water!

  I suspect if you have a number of the 'more determined' leaders present in this relatively small space you wouldn't be able to avoid violence, without a pretty violent intervention yourself to display that what you say goes.  Even then unless there's quite a strong intelligence effort too keep an eye on leading figures your likely to see more subtle measures, i.e. assassination, poisoning etc.  Especially with probably Julius himself and some of the latter, more autocratic emperors who are used to no check on their powers and authority.

[Zyobot]

Mar 10, 2021 11:19:52 GMT stevep said:

Mar 10, 2021 0:06:22 GMT Zyobot said:

That'd likely be their first impulse, though the international community might step in and tell them to "play nice" before heads start rolling. Especially given that they're confined to a set of small islands, which would be easier to invade and occupy than a whole continent teeming with Greco-Romans.

As far as contacting them goes, I suppose having the POTUS deliver a televised address from the White House makes the most sense, initially. Again, each downtimer household has a TV and at least one computer, with detailed instructions on what they're for and how to use them. Seeing as some proportion of them will figure it out after some fiddling--though not everyone, both due to illiteracy and the sheer "alienness" of their new devices--it strikes me as the best option, considering how in-person introductions could cause an exchange of diseases, which is a whole separate problem they'll have to figure out. To that end, I wonder what Greco-Roman audiences--as well as their leaders--would think when being addressed by the head-of-state of the most powerful nation in the modern world? I imagine the reverse would also happen at some point, but only after a) the aforementioned disease problem is solved and b) downtimer politicians receive the technical and linguistic aid to publicly broadcast their speeches.

Maybe it's unrealistic, but now I'm envisioning Air Force One descending into Rome, with the POTUS exiting to shake hands with either the Consuls or the Emperor and their associated dignitaries. While some uptimer staff set up a stage and teleprompter for them as both parties introduce themselves, before everything's set up, speakers blasting "Hail to the Chief!" as a crowd of downtimers gathers to watch the American President speak to them in person. There'd also be some news crews who come to broadcast the event, via a combination of carefully fixed cameras, and drones and helicopters filming from a bird eye's view. But I digress.

  Now that would be interesting.  Not sure how quickly they might adapt to access to PCs and computers, especially since this also assumes some sort of continued power supply - would that mean also supplying lights, heating etc?  There's also a possible problem that they need to know not to try and take them apart or mix them with water!

  I suspect if you have a number of the 'more determined' leaders present in this relatively small space you wouldn't be able to avoid violence, without a pretty violent intervention yourself to display that what you say goes.  Even then unless there's quite a strong intelligence effort too keep an eye on leading figures your likely to see more subtle measures, i.e. assassination, poisoning etc.  Especially with probably Julius himself and some of the latter, more autocratic emperors who are used to no check on their powers and authority.

A continued power supply and other underlying infrastructure to support computers and TV broadcasts make sense, though bolded warnings not to dissemble them and keep them away from water should be covered in the instructions. Which might as well be useless for illiterate or particularly stupid Greco-Romans, but mistakes are part and parcel when it comes to massive time-travel shenanigans. I'm guessing word of electronics shorting out or being impossible to reassemble would spread as friends and neighbors converse, both at home and in their local bath house. In this way, even illiterate Greco-Romans would catch onto common-sense things, though they'd need help using them, since reading and writing are indispensable for navigating the internet and whatnot.

I also wonder if uptimer heads-of-state broadcasting verbal warnings to behave before green-lighting a display of force, such as a drone strike that doesn't kill anyone or live footage of the latest nuclear test, would convince downtimers to play nice. Outsiders who wield the Gods' might like children's toys would be hard to ignore or dismiss for long, if they know what's good for them. Caesar may have been a war criminal by our standards, but for all his scheming and ruthlessness, he'd have to be monumentally arrogant and/or stupid to keep defying them, risk to himself and his forces be damned. Needless to say, I think he'd much rather watch an exercise featuring F-16s than be on the receiving end of their payloads in an actual military operation. There'd be plenty of books and footage demonstrating modern military capabilities as is, which Caesar and other Greco-Roman militarists would avidly study and know better than to do battle with (at least, presumably).

[Zyobot]

In the vein of contemporary warfare, one semi-random thought that occurred to me is what downtimers would think of our depictions of it? Besides being moving pictures with accompanying sound, I again imagine there'd be shock value associated with the weapons and tactics featured. Since I probably can't post clips from Band of Brothers or The Pacific--though I'm still curious as to how Greco-Romans would react to both of those--here's some particularly violent clips from The Clone Wars TV series in their stead. Which, ironically, doesn't always feature the most up-to-date warfare itself, despite its space-age backdrop.

Star Wars The Clone Wars - Battle of Geonosis


Star Wars The Clone Wars - Battle of Umbara[Landing]


Star Wars The Clone Wars -- Republic Arrives on Mon Calamari [1080p]

[Zyobot]

Something big we haven't discussed yet is how Greco-Romans would react to germ theory and microbiology in general. For one, I'm guessing they'd be both surprised and creeped out to learn about how these tiny creatures have been responsible for their hygienic troubles. Not to mention how they can be found everywhere ranging from inside larger organisms, to extremophile communities thriving in the most inhospitable environments on Earth.

How a few scientists transformed the way we think about disease - Tien Nguyen


In hot water with extremophiles| Adventures in Genomics

[Zyobot]

One funny thought that occurred to me recently is how we'd see a surge in Greco-Roman internet memes. I wonder how downtimers would react to "wide Caesar" or "wide Augustus" videos similar to this one, for example.

Wide Putin walking but he's always in frame (full version)

[Zyobot]

Since the Greco-Romans would soon realize the importance of bridging the skills gap that exists between themselves and uptimers, I think it's only be a matter of time before Greco-Roman exchange students head off to receive schooling in uptimer lands, majoring in subjects that range from medicine to software engineering (and then some). As said before, I wonder how much success reality TV centered around downtimer students making sense of twenty-first century life would rake in? It'd almost certainly be an idea bandied about in meetings between network executives, and statistical probabilities mean that at least a handful of Greco-Roman youths might agree (once they learn what reality TV is, anyway).

Something else I'd like to expand upon is what Greco-Romans, but especially Romans in particular, would make of the United States? Its merit may be debatable, but because people like to boast (or fear-monger) about America being a modern Rome so much regardless of how much sense it really makes, I imagine they'd like to learn more. Perhaps videos like these would help them make heads or tails of America's civic history (on the federal level, at least).

The American Presidential Election of 1788-1789


The American Presidential Election of 1860


The American Presidential Election of 1932


The American Presidential Election of 1980


If they just want a series of election results devoid of real context, though, then maybe this one's more their speed:

U.S. Presidential Elections 1789-2012

[Zyobot]

A rather random thought, but I wonder what Greco-Romans would make of modern RPGs, such as Warhammer 40K? For one, they'll first need to learn what an RPG is, before learning about the background of this game specifically. The Imperium taking some cues from Ancient Rome aside, my guess is even they'd find the setting a bit gratuitous in how grim-dark it is, with humanity's distant future a stark contrast to the one they've been sent to.

State of the Galaxy in Warhammer 40,000


Imperium of Man | Warhammer 40,000


The Emperor of Mankind | Warhammer 40,000