03-13-2007, 02:43 AM
Quote:Frankly I am insulted that you feel that people conceptualize the past by reference to novels, comics and movies.Of course no offense was meant. However, I can not share your optimism and think you overestimate the importance of modern scholarship. As Jasper once remarked, "Ben Hur is singlehandedly responsible for the continuing myth about galleyslaves in the Roman navy". Or, to take another example, the number of people believing that there were two gunmen involved when Kennedy was assassinated, has doubled since Oliver Stone's JFK. For many people, movies, TV programs, and the wikipedia are more important than books.
Quote:I also think you do a great dis-service to Tom Holland's "Persian Fire", which at the very least attempts to present a balanced view of the very impressive ancient Persian culture.That is something I have not denied, but there is no excuse for repeating refuted nineteenth-century scholarship. Besides, Holland is extremely careless, does not understand the Babylonian insurrections in the 480's (which is deadly for his argument), and has not realized the importance of Briant's Histoire de l' empire Perse, although he quotes the English translation.
All this being said, I took your remarks as an incentive to write this review of Persian Fire. The first, theoretical, section will be familiar, but the second, third, and fourth sections may be of some interest to you.
