Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: CHAT: better than others (late reflection)

From:Thomas R. Wier <artabanos@...>
Date:Tuesday, March 21, 2000, 13:01
BP Jonsson wrote:

> As for Greek _barbaros_ I'm not so sure it implied cultural as opposed to > linguistic contempt: the Greeks could feel admiration for Egyptians and > Persians, yet they were by definition _barbaroi_. Yet the extent of Greek > self-righteousness in *linguistic* matters was probably abysmal:
You're right that linguistic contempt and sheer ignorance played a part (there's another part of Herodotus's _Histories_ where he mentions off-hand that all Persian names end in a sigma, which is true only in their Greek transliterations) but it went beyond language, though. _The Histories_ is virtually brimming over with moralizing about how the Persians transgressed certain fundamental rules of the cosmos when they crossed over into Europe. The entire work is, in fact, a piece of hyperpatriotic apologetics designed to justify the peculiar Greek notion of liberty as _eleutheria_, or political autonomy for the polis and for the handful of citizens who ran it. His point boils down to: the Greeks were noble and brave but poor, while the Persians were wealthy beyond measure, decadent and, most importantly, hubristic, and that the Greeks won because of their greater moral virtue (because of all possible sins, the gods hate hubris the most). His explanation for the fall of Croesus and the Lydian Empire, a non-Greek but highly hellenized culture in Asia Minor, falls along exactly the same terms. These faults are, crucially, seen as inherent in the culture that gave rise to them, because, as Aristotle later made explicit in his _Politics_, the Greeks thought that some races were born to be free, and other born to be slaves (literally -- "douloi")*. The Greeks, naturally, belonged to the former group, and the Persians, as part of that whole "oriental despotism" myth the Greeks believed in, to the latter. _The Histories_ was without a doubt a seminal work in European historiography, but that doesn't mean it, or the culture that produced it, was culturally *neutral* in any real sense. *(This serves both as Aristotles rationalization of the institution of slavery and as his reason for why, going along with Herodotos, the Greeks could maintain their _eleutheria_ but the Persians, during Aristotles's time, could not. For me, I can see in this no other reading than an innate cultural biggotry on their part.) ====================================== Tom Wier <artabanos@...> ICQ#: 4315704 AIM: trwier "Cogito ergo sum, sed credo ergo ero." ======================================