Who are the EB Historians?

Disclaimer: This thread is by no means a challenge to the intelligence, validity or authority of the awesome EB historians.

Instead, I have simply grown curious as to who these wonderful people are in real life. It's hard enough meeting some of the Historian team members on the forums, let alone in the world outside. So I was wondering if any of the EB historians who are professors, archeologists or writers (etc.) would like to mention their names here so that we know who they are.

I would like to add that if you do so, it makes it easier for the fanbase to support you by buying any of your publications.

For those who value their privacy, I both completely understand and entirely respect that. Thank you in advance.

Chairman

EB/data/credits.txt

Bovi, I was actually meaning their real names, not their forum names.

Not meaning to be presumptious.

Chairman

I believe, though I'm not sure, that those people who wanted their real names released in the credits had them put in the credits next to their forum name. It must be understood that, in academic circles, to find yourself associated with a project such as this is probably looked down upon.

Foot

They hide in secrecy plotting for domination :skull:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Foot

I believe, though I'm not sure, that those people who wanted their real names released in the credits had them put in the credits next to their forum name. It must be understood that, in academic circles, to find yourself associated with a project such as this is probably looked down upon.

Foot

---

Hence the problem with academic circles.

(Not that I am much of an historian really, but...) You might get one replying, but we are hounded and harassed at times on these public boards and much further than that even in particular cases. As much as I have poured into this mod I want no one outside the team members to know who I am and very few people in "RL" (mostly just some super-interested students) to know about my work here. It's more sad than anything else imo but that is the way it has to be.

So if not a historian, something related?

I'm not a historian either, but I certainly don't want people outside the membership to know who I am in RL....just look at the some of recent forum goers around here to know why! :freak:'s

Suffice to say people have their reasons for not revealing their real names. One is that many are working with history or in Universitites and similar institutions where projects like these are frowned upon.

I won't reveal my name, because I'm from Norway with 4,6 million people and I'm the only person with the exact first name & surname in Norway.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Foot

I believe, though I'm not sure, that those people who wanted their real names released in the credits had them put in the credits next to their forum name. It must be understood that, in academic circles, to find yourself associated with a project such as this is probably looked down upon.

Foot

---

Yep. And what Teleklos said.

Come on, we won´t do anything bad to you if you tell us your names, just send you flowers, leave burning dog poo infront of your house, send you strange and disturbing letters and generally stalk you. Nothing I´m sure you aren´t already experiencing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by General Appo

Come on, we won´t do anything bad to you if you tell us your names, just send you flowers, leave burning dog poo infront of your house, send you strange and disturbing letters and generally stalk you. Nothing I´m sure you aren´t already experiencing.

---

You won't...others though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Foot

I believe, though I'm not sure, that those people who wanted their real names released in the credits had them put in the credits next to their forum name. It must be understood that, in academic circles, to find yourself associated with a project such as this is probably looked down upon.

Foot

---

And, you would call that an understatement? I suggest that crucifixion would not be an exaggeration. I can see it now as clear as day; a callow queue files past the headmaster besides a great glass case that trophies a huge Kilner where wide-eyed aquamarine gawks back in creepy green, and titled hung for all to read;

'Hearken all yee Sons o'Cook, for Hair Floats, þee Pickled Lug a’Foot!'

Eh, they´re all just jealous anyway, just becasue none of their work will ever be mentioned in a magazine read by 1 million people. Jealous bastards.

As a student of classics, i can't see any of my profs being mean about one of their number doing such a thing. Can anyone explain why they would? Why are academics so nosy about things like EB.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by General Appo

Eh, they´re all just jealous anyway, just becasue none of their work will ever be mentioned in a magazine read by 1 million people. Jealous bastards.

---

:laugh4:

Part of the bitterness comes from having to write trillion page documents to keep their job; and, never getting an ounce of fame for it, outside of an abstract in some obscure journal.

Indeed, it’s no surprise that hard-pressed academics turn bitter and cling to their books, their guns; or develop an antipathy toward people who aren't like them. And right, their extensive esoteric experience provides that they’re always wary of the dreaded Serbo-snipbots hidden in the hills, Round-a-Bout.

Which is why go into the industry instead of academia if you're in a science.

Pfft, I don't care, I'm a philosophy grad. Historians can't touch me, and if I went back into the academic world this would be seen as an interesting side-project as it is completely to do with another discipline.

Foot

Academia is somewhat limited compared to creative endeavors such as EB because academia requires 10 authorities or more behind any assertion, so that true academians spend much of their time only trying to claim the tiniest point (such as /b/ became /v/ during the initial stage of West Germanicization or some such- i made that up as an example) because anything beyond that is unfounded in so many previous authorities, so that original ideas are very rare, because they would thus have no authority on the subject because it is new. It is the very nature of things. This system works to our benefit when crazy theories pop up that are hardly well-founded, such as Alexander's army encountering a UFO at the siege of Tyre. On the other hand, the aristocracy uses this to limit the influence of those who do not conform to their accepted 'authorities' so that some like Copernicus are viewed as a troublemaker (bad example- moving on). Since facts and evidence usually speak for itself without the bias of the interpretor, scholarship has continued to be the best method for what it does. EB will ALWAYS be viewed as too hypothetical or unfounded by the academic community. A single good reason why is that it operates outside of its community and academia was originally built by the middle/upper class to support the middle/upper class (ever wonder why people go to college? no jobs available nowadays ~:) but you can 'buy' yourself higher into social strata- if you're lucky... most of us waste money on a broken system but learn how to better ourselves through education). Another good reason is that EB is not going to pay anybody to sponsor / publish / circulate, or peer review it. We make effort to make sure everything is backed by 'authorities', physical material, linguistic and literary evidence, because if we ever ARE peer reviewed- it will withstand the process: this takes so much time to document it all that the sources are not brought to the attention of others even if used and sometimes we cannot bring back work of those who leave, which is unfortunate. The future wiki pages and source documentation for EB2 will help this much, but it DOES deter from more time to spend on the game itself. I am still continuing to go to great lengths to not make errors in the Proto-Germanic Voice Mod, and I might have some mistakes since I am human :yes: but I use my background in history and language, but more importantly, my individual drive and interest to use those available facts and material to pummel those errors into submission. :7wizard:

The best example for this, imo, is Indo-European culture and language. We have sooo much evidence of related linguistics, historical movements of peoples, common religion and culture, yet Indo-Europeans as a people are still thought of as highly theoretical. Why? Because it's so old that there isn't 10 authorities on it! :grin: so how could we ever hope to know 'academically' with certainty about stuff that old? We can't and never will. Thus, ancient Germans will always either be as the Romans describe them, as they're found archaeologically, or 'theoretically' based on later evidence. All of these are not founded in strong authority- thus why you might find so many people interested in Vikings and the time of Charlemagne.