If you enjoy reading accounts of history… You could a lot worse than to check this out…
The Silk Roads. A New History of the World by Peter Frankopan.
Summary:
The traditional view is that Western civilization descends from the Romans, who were in turn heir to the Greeks, who, in some accounts, were heir to the Egyptians. However, Frankopan argues that the Persian Empire was the actual centre point of the rise of Western civilization.
1 Like
You are quite right, It was my (failed) attempt at irony. Sorry.
Anyway, apart from architecture, engineering, trigonometry, and algegbra, what has the Abbasid Caliphate done for us? 
Of course he does. 
Why can’t we have an ironic/tongue in cheek font please? 
5 Likes
It is just that it can sometimes to be hard to read the irony when it is in answer to a non-ironic post.
Continue having fun with irony 
2 Likes
Well, when you get to my age, having fun with irony is about all that’s left… 
2 Likes
pardon ??
Do old guitars count?
See, I picked the Mongols, because they destroyed the barriers to the exchange of technology, ideas, and people that existed between Europe, China, and Persia - China and Persia both being very advanced at the time, but insular. The Mongols had few prejudices, happily used the best available expertise anywhere across their empire, and did not care much about religion at all.
6 Likes
Yeah they do, and you just had a nice one didnt ya? What was it? Did she like it, or even better not notice. Oh that, Ive had it years luv, dont you take an interest in me anymore.
I sent the mods a PM about installing the Sarcastica plug-in, but no go.
3 Likes
No.
1 Like
No idea what the picture you attached was. Doesn’t matter I’m sulking
2 Likes
I swear she knows. Not discussed, head down, do my jobs, don’t make a mess etc.
It’s a Framus, 5/50 model or 5/51. 1958 so 62 years old. Sadly condition was not what I had hoped for so I have a little project ahead of me at some point. Lot’s of unoriginal parts as well but that doesn’t bother me so much, it’s a joy to play and sounds quite good for what is essentially a smaller parlor style guitar.
Enjoying my first steps into Delta style Blues and stuff.
And for @SBYM’s benefit I’ve also just bought a Big Muff. I know he likes to hear stuff like this
2 Likes
I want a critique of the above.
2 Likes
Oh wow that sounds a good one; been after a parlour nylon for years but dont quite like the larger flat neck/fretboards with classical guitars. Saw an 80s Ibanez in a shop in Bristol, just the once, a nylon acoustic with a traditional acoustic neck, it went in 2 days whilst I was wondering if I could get it past her! Enjoy and do let us know how the project transpires!
Always avoided having a Bug Muff, but thats one of the best, just dont like what Fuzz transistors do to a guitar signal. Prefer clipped distortion…anyway back in topic its the Indians for inventing the guitar.
2 Likes
3 Likes
yet more homework. …seriously? I’ve just finished Project Bathroom.
It’s a steel string, and has a little floating pick up fitted. Nice for little bit of jazzy type tones and slightly dirty blues.
Impressed with the Big Muff to be honest. Fairly meaty and when you really dial it up it’s fairly full on. It can certainly be right in your face and I hear some people like that. Not too mushy either.
On a serious note it’s really easy to get that Gary Moore type sustain that I’ve longed after for years although he did use a Ibanez TS8 I think but I’ve always found his live tone just little too harsh when compared to his studio / recorded tone. I’m a pretty big fan, he got me into playing and his back story is quite fascinating with the links to Thin Lizzy, Peter green and the like.
I could easily study musical history surrounding the guitar I think. very rich topic.
2 Likes
Personally prefer a Rat over a Big Muff and yeah, I know how that sounds
6 Likes
Rome, without a shadow of a doubt IMHO. I’m not about to type out a thesis as there are better qualified but just on an architectural basis, they laid the metaphorical foundations for pretty much all non mechanical and electrical development. Yes the Greeks invented the concept of classical column based architecture but the Romans went nuts with it. Plus their obsession with bathing gave us the greatest building in the world (granted I’ve not seen the Taj Mahal) the Pont Du Gard. No cement, just stone and still standing 2000 years later with a river at its base that goes crackers every winter. Until recently carried a road on its base deck. Simply a phenomenal achievement. Yes there was exceptional work in Venice and Florence and the Egyptians really did do astounding things even further back but their monuments are in one country, Roman architecture exists in this day from Hardian’s wall to the Red Sea.
5 Likes
The Romans were always more engineers than architects. The Pont du Gard is a breathtaking structure, but it’s first and foremost a utility structure. Compare it with the Sphinx of Giseh or the Acropolis, and it’s apples and oranges really.
For me, the Greeks are real architects. In their religious buildings, beauty, harmony and proportion attain a unique intensity and perfection. They invented a new set of rules to obtain this, their temples are built art, messengers of a better world.
In comparison, the Romans were honest craftsmen who took the Greek principles for themselves, without adding much of their own. Their innovations were all directed towards utility. The roads, the bridges, the aqueducts, the therms… despite of this, behind everything they did, there is always the Greek philosophy, the Greek art and architecture shining through.
I don’t disagree with your general point btw. The Romans left a deep mark on the whole of Europe with their infrastructure, and also with the way they achieved to manage an extended realm over a longer time. Their legal and political structures are still a reference until this day, which says something. But the important things remaining from them are all oriented towards utility.
That’s why they resonate a lot with us , as we too are an ‘empire’ orientated towards utility these days. Beauty, harmony, or developing a relation with our profound nature and with Creation are completely subordinated to utility and comfort, and that’s why we won’t be remembered very fondly in the future (if we allow some future to exist, that is). Same with the Romans: we must acknowledge their dominance and superiority over a longer period, but it’s a somewhat reluctant admiration, at least as far as I’m concerned.
However, one building from the Roman period stands out for me as a stellar exception from the rule: the Pantheon. For me this building represents a mystery, as it came out of nothing in the general context. It’s an absolutely unique masterpiece, probably my all-time preferred building, but it’s not at all representative of Roman architecture in general.
4 Likes
Somewhat off-topic.
Is it weird that I hate wars but at the same time have keen interest about it? I really enjoy reading about modern (20th century onwards) warfare and the tactics, formation, maneuvers etc. knowing all the while that it had killed thousands.
3 Likes