| The crab's
thought (July 2000) What the crab thinks in his hole-garden.
|
| The crab's
thought (July 2000) What the crab thinks in his hole-garden.
|
| Concerning to the Roman history and all the other hisories
it's known how historians are always lying, because their projects are different
from the objectivity. For exemple Sallustious was indeed a honest and
conscientious historian, but he was one of the Caesar's clients and, even
if Caesar didn't need any historians, because he wrote the history of his
own wars by himself, he worked only to get rich: that is a good idea but
it frequently brings the best men to be lying. Tacitus, one of the world's
greatest historians, was very worried because of the fatal actual events,
when depraved and megalomaniac emperors quelled the last remainders of Republic
represented by the Senate. He was deceived by his right indignation so that
he wasn't able to show all the aspects of the facts and the characters living
in his age. All people know how every serious historian is partial and unable
to scientifically investigate on either contemporary or recently past facts.
But I think the ancient facts too are often unfaithfully described, because
the modern historians think as modern people, and they are unable to perfectly
understand the mentality of the ancient people. Since the modern people have
an untamable aggressive and savage disposition they are perfectly tuned with
ancient characters when they relate about wars, murders, abductions, tortures
and slaughters; while kind actions, mildness, humble people's peaceful life
are not very interesting for modern historians. I'm not able to demonstrate
my thesys: it's only a suspicion.
I smiled when I read this passage in the "Great Roman History" by Antonio Spinosa: "The Empire was going through an extreme instability phase. The Romans had the sensation to be sitting on a powder-agazine being about to explode...".  mic.dang@tiscalinet.it mic.dang@libero.it RITORNA ALL'INIZIO - BACK TO HOME
|