ya, don't worry about the name of the Faction, it should do fine, imo, not really important, some countries call themselves many names and we may not really know
Printable View
ya, don't worry about the name of the Faction, it should do fine, imo, not really important, some countries call themselves many names and we may not really know
We are discussing it internally still, but just to be clear, none of the coins ever said "basileia".Quote:
Originally Posted by Big_John
!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Teleklos Archelaou
well what was the text then? was it just the particular king that was being named on the coins? like i saw one coin that read, "ΒΑΣΙΛΕΩΣ ΣΕΛΕΥΚοΥ" or something.. that just means "king seleukos", not "the kingdom of seleukos"?
Just pointing out that while they said "king", they didn't say "kingdom" on them, which is what your post sounded like. That's all mate. ~:)Quote:
Originally Posted by Big_John
@ Teleklos Archelaou
Quote:
You have received more helpful and polite attempts to explain and make clear two words than any other thread I have ever seen in a total war forum. These have been your only posts on any matter. Posting smiley-laden tomes on the same two words over and over while numerous people have tried to explain things shows who is being tolerant here. Your attempt to paint the EB members here and the non-members who have tried to explain things as being intolerant is not appreciated (by myself at least), whether Arche Seleukeia is right or wrong.
I am sure that your grasp of the English language is much better than what you display in you post, because I don’t believe for a moment that you can’t see that there is no such intention in my post.
I, nevertheless, will try to give some explanations: ~;)
I did not “attempt to paint” as “being intolerant” ANYONE, I just asked for more tolerance simply because, I genuinely did not understand the answers given- call me dumb if you like- and because I also believed that “OK.. one last time..” was not called for. What is it that you wanted me to do, pretend that I understood so as to appear clever? All I was asking- and I still am- is ‘why” the S makes all this difference, here is my question again: why does Arche Seleukeia refers to the whole realm, whereas Arche Seleukeias- ending with S- would refer only to a particular (small?) place? and since I’ve already conceded that the syntax and grammar in Arche Selukeia are essentially correct, is obvious that I simply wanted to know for the sake of knowing, that's all.
The reason for “these have been your only posts” is maybe quite hard for you to grasp, but I’ll try and explain.. Short of joining the cheer leading squad thread- and I was very tempted to do so on numerous occasions and eventually made clear my sentiments about EB in my very first post- the main reason for not posting is…wait for it…
:drummer: :drummer: :drummer: :drummer: I HAD ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO SAY!! ~:cheers:
I was content to just sit back and enjoy the offerings, marvel at the accomplishments with enormous respect and admiration, and for that reason alone I will not allow YOU or anyone else, whether you are a member of EB or the Mafia, to even SUGGEST that I showed any kind of disrespect towards ANYONE!
About “posting smiley-laden tomes” again the explanation is quite simple: ~;p I just LOVE the damn things!! ~:grouphug: I find them to be totally charming and very clever; it also did it to keep my postings in a casual, friendly tone as to not upset or flame anyone (obviously I failed) and as an attempt to be humorous (obviously failed there too, so I won’t be quitting my day job any time soon..) since I am just a layman tackling a rather “specialized” subject.
Last but not least “whether Arche Seleukeia is right or wrong” has yet to be answered.
Please, let me make this absolutely clear: as far as I am concerned you don’t have to answer anything, and like I said before, if you choose to call the Seleucid faction Ding-Dong because that’s what you want to call it, you will never hear “pip” from me.. your_mod_your_choice, no arguments, period!
However, since you invite everyone to comment and you say you welcome any input, then you have to expect questions, some kind of scrutiny and even- hopefully constructive- criticism.
Take a look at this, please:
Q: Why is Carthage called Tsorim now?
A: Because that is what they called themselves!!
What a great answer indeed, precise, to the point, a marvel of simplicity, no much room for argument and very correct! I nearly fell off my chair the first time I read it! ~D
But, when I suggested that the word Arche does not mean Empire in Ancient Greek, you reply with some impressive references pointing to “translations” of the word to mean Empire, knowing full well that the word Empire didn’t even exist at that time period, and that it is translated to mean a Great Power, an Empire “as we understand it today”; so, you just selectively picked from Liddell-Scott the references that “sort of” supported your position and said “that’s it, no more explanations needed” knowing- again- full well that there are many other sources that do not translate Arche as Empire, and even knowing-much better than I, am sure- that “translation” is the means to communicate to your own what something “means” in another language or culture, therefore one has license to substitute words in order to convey that meaning.
That does not mean that the substituted translation is necessarily what the original meaning was.
For example, why don’t you post as a “source” the translation of “an arche imposing douleia” means “an Empire imposing slavery” and then explain that the Empire it is talking about is Athens!! Imagine how many eyebrows will reach for the havens.. and those that don’t will assume that it means what we might today call the “Microsoft Empire” or the “Donald Trump Empire”. Athens the Empire indeed..
This mode is supposed to be educational as well and I believe that it fulfils this role admirably !! The depth and scope of every aspect of it, research, analysis, historical accuracy etc, go far beyond the expectations one might have from simply “another game mod”, and I for one don’t underestimate even for a moment the dedication and hard work that all the people involved with it contributed, so that everyone can almost “see” what those long-dead peoples looked like and all the rest; so when a mod with such impeccable credentials claims that Arche=Empire, almost everyone- and with good reasons- will take this to be true, which it is not.
I firmly believe that Arche does not mean Empire in Ancient Greek and to claim otherwise is incorrect.
I venture that I can prove my position, can you? ~;)
Humbly,
O_Stratigos :bow:
Silver shields... so shiny. Soooooo shiny...
now that you mention it, i cant find teh argyraspidai anywhere. only the torikatai version. but not the "regular" pikemen. th eonyl screenie ive seen is a wip on sheeps thread
Because while Seleukeia is a noun that refers to a more specific region, Seleukeios, -a, -on is the adjective that means "seleukid" (not necessarily referring to the region; more commonly used to refer to the "empire"). Using the noun as a genitive (arche seleukeias) would mean "empire of this area called seleukeia". Using the adjective in an attributive manner and modifying arche (arche seleukeia) means "seleukid empire". This is the same thing that Dux, Big John, and the Wizard have all stated. I'm saying it for the fourth time (at least) here because you keep calling me out on it.Quote:
Originally Posted by o_megas
There will never be an absolute answer to this. If there was one we wouldn't be having all of this.Quote:
Last but not least “whether Arche Seleukeia is right or wrong” has yet to be answered.
Pissing me off here. :furious3: I'm not just "selectively picking from Liddell-Scott the references that 'sort of' support my position". Look up "Empire" in an English to ancient greek dictionary, what will you find? Yonge's 1899 English-Greek Lexicon (the best one I've ever found) says: "arche, Soph., Eur., Hdt., Thuc., Vid. Kingdom, Dominion." Look up "Rule" there: "(i.e., government) arche, Pind., Omn. Att.; kratos, Ep., also kartos, Omn.; dunasteia, Soph., Omn. Att. prose; hegemonia, Omn. prose." By the gods...just use Perseus: do a search for "empire" in english. Only in their Greek and Roman materials. Then look at those texts where it occurs and hit "greek version" and see what the word was. "Arche"=empire (when dealing with governments). Andocides' speeches, Aeschylus' tragedies, Appian's histories, Atistotle's treatises, Aristophanes' comedies... and those are just the "A" authors!Quote:
you just selectively picked from Liddell-Scott the references that “sort of” supported your position and said “that’s it, no more explanations needed” knowing- again- full well that there are many other sources that do not translate Arche as Empire, and even knowing-much better than I, am sure- that “translation” is the means to communicate to your own what something “means” in another language or culture, therefore one has license to substitute words in order to convey that meaning.
That does not mean that the substituted translation is necessarily what the original meaning was.
For example, why don’t you post as a “source” the translation of “an arche imposing douleia” means “an Empire imposing slavery” and then explain that the Empire it is talking about is Athens!! Imagine how many eyebrows will reach for the havens.. and those that don’t will assume that it means what we might today call the “Microsoft Empire” or the “Donald Trump Empire”. Athens the Empire indeed..
You say that you are correct and the dictionaries are not? Oh, except that it is the first word given for "Empire" and "Rule".Quote:
I firmly believe that Arche does not mean Empire in Ancient Greek and to claim otherwise is incorrect.
:stare:Quote:
I venture that I can prove my position, can you? ~;)
Leave it be man. He's not worth it.
true. though i'd like to thank all the guys that contributed to the discussion. i, for one, learned a lot. :bow:Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarcasm
Indeed... I realized that halfway into a post spanning most of my window. Don't stress yourself out further because of pointless debate, David... it certainly isn't worth it.
Just to deliver my final words on this debate: 'arche' is something referring to power, certainly, as in the words 'oligarchy', 'monarchy', et cetera. Therefore a translation of 'Arche Seleukeia' as 'Power' or 'Dominion' of the Seleukids is quite appropriate. From there, the term 'Empire' can acceptably be taken as a translation. It is necessary to make it immediately translatable to the term usually used in English to refer to the Seleukids, and therefore to make it immediately understandable by those not so well versed in Greek as, for instance, Teleklos.
~Wiz
Etymologically, does "archeology" mean "the study of what came first"? I never thought about the term "arche" before I read through this thread.
It actually is an ancient greek word! An archaiologos is a person who likes to deal with ancient things. An antiquary. Used first (that we know of) in Thucydides. People interested in the "story" of the "first" dudes. ~DQuote:
Originally Posted by NeonGod
Right, so the study of what came first. Awesome. Then there's Arch-nemesis or arch-enemy...see what I mean? I never bothered to think of that little nuance of English before. How enlightening.Quote:
Originally Posted by Teleklos Archelaou
Yeah, in those words, the "arch" root is closer to the meaning of "chief" or "primary", but it is still the same greek root. One of my favorite courses to teach is one on the Greek and Latin Roots of English. For non-latin or greek students. A pretty easy course, but great for preparing for things like the SAT or GRE or whatever.Quote:
Originally Posted by NeonGod
There's no chance I could take that by correspondence or anything crazy like that, is there? I love etymology.Quote:
Originally Posted by Teleklos Archelaou
It would be super easy and perfect for a correspondence course, but I doubt anywhere has it like that. The school I'm at currently doesn't even offer it (they do a version for students with a medical interest, but that's not as fun for me). But when I was at Mizzou as a TA, it was a blast (they didn't do it by correspondence either unfortunately). I'll have to remember this though. It would be great to propose one day.Quote:
Originally Posted by NeonGod
Despite all my efforts as just a layman to keep this a simple, humorous and polite conversation while trying to learn something, I've managed somehow to step on to some very touchy toes, and in response there are some things said that I found them to be quite unfair.
My late father once said that “we scholars, live by: τον μεν πλουτον πολλοι εμισησαν την δε δοχα ουδεις, die for: εν ειδα οτι ουδεν ειδα, and don’t mush care about: γιρασκω αει διδασκομενος, how sad if true..
I could go on and argue that, these sources point mainly towards the meaning already assumed, counter with sources of my own, that the explanation for the S is quite arbitrary etc, but from this position on, things might get a bit too ugly for my liking and I for one, if I cannot be a gentleman in what I participate I will not participate at all; and let me be clear, I am speaking strictly about my self here, in case someone decides to take things out of context again.
I apologize if I’ve offended or “pissed” anyone- I was merely bantering- please be assured that it was never my intention, as I’ve learned from a very early age to have the outmost respect for everyone in general and learned people in particular, and I also like to thank anyone who tried to help me understand a few things.
I can’t even begin to comprehend what it is that I wrote that warrants a response like “he is not worth it” and that I found such a derogatory remark to be quite shameful.
I can’t, somehow, bring my self to be angry about the vitriolic responses directed towards me; I can only say that I am quite disillusioned.
Now, I’ll let all you good people to get on with your excellent work, looking forward to its eventual release.
Farewell in peace,
O_Stratigos :bow:
Maybe that was a bit over the top, I admit it. We've all been a little bit touchy these days, with all that's been going on.
However, you were constantly, brushing aside the opinion of 3 of our guys like they were unimformed, and are just making stuff up. You made a question, they answered, both were repeated a few times, and you still refuse to acknowledge that they might be right. You just keep asking for every insignificant detail (which they were still patient enough to answer, long after I would have lost my patience, if I were in their place).What more do you want?
You can hardly blame me for loosing my cool, when you keep "harassing" people that I've come to consider as friends.