This discussion is now closed.
Check out other Related discussions
- jact greek summer school 2023
- Classics- Oxford or Cambridge?
- Dropping an A Level
- New College Oxford elitist classics department?
- English & classical studies/civilisation
- Maya’s GYG (GCSE) + study tracker 🌸
- American Applicant Response Time
- Ancient History, Classics or Archaeology at University in 2023
- Can I switch my course at Oxford - single to joint
- oxford classics offer holders 2024
- University of Salford or Manchester Metropolitan University ?
- Guys whose parents didn't show intimacy or affection
- Accademia Vivarium Novum - Latin Summer School in Rome
- Difference in courses
- A Level Art Supplies
- Which of these A-Level combinations would be the best to study a law degree?
- Maths: I need help on this question
- Civil engineering
- Engineering apprenticeships
- How good is this 30 maker? illiad
Classicists of a Different Kind? Does this work?
Hmm, this is something I've been messing about with in my head, not sure it really works (either way it doesn't matter) but thought it may be interesting to see what the rest of you think.
Roman, Greek and Egypt. - Classicists.
Ancient India and Persia. - Orientalist.
Anglo Saxon, Norse and Celtic. - Not sure what the term here is, Nova Classicists?
The Islamic Caliphate and the Near East. - Middle Eastern Studies/Medieval/Byzantine sort of covers it.
Do you put all these on an equal footing? Are they vaguely equivalent to one another? For me Classics encovers Languages, Art, Philosophy, History and Literature. A rather broad term and hence it being such a respected subject.
Orientalism isn't a new thing and was indeed the discipline as such Great Britons as Sir Richard Francis Burton. The study of Classical Sanskrit is apparently a difficult yet rewarding one, I've briefly looked at the kingdoms and customs of Ancient India and was boggled. They also tend to encompass a similar area as Classicists.
Persia is somewhat covered in Classics and I'd wager Classicists are very well known with it's place in history.
Not sure about the others, I enjoy reading some of the stuff that ASNC covers but I don't really feel that it "deserves" the same regard as Classics (not trying to be snobby, I use that term loosely) and that most may be covered by Early Medieval/Dark Age History.
I think the above points also really go for Middle Eastern studies, with regards to the Caliphate etc, a branch of history more so then anything.
Thoughts? Comments? Additions?
Roman, Greek and Egypt. - Classicists.
Ancient India and Persia. - Orientalist.
Anglo Saxon, Norse and Celtic. - Not sure what the term here is, Nova Classicists?
The Islamic Caliphate and the Near East. - Middle Eastern Studies/Medieval/Byzantine sort of covers it.
Do you put all these on an equal footing? Are they vaguely equivalent to one another? For me Classics encovers Languages, Art, Philosophy, History and Literature. A rather broad term and hence it being such a respected subject.
Orientalism isn't a new thing and was indeed the discipline as such Great Britons as Sir Richard Francis Burton. The study of Classical Sanskrit is apparently a difficult yet rewarding one, I've briefly looked at the kingdoms and customs of Ancient India and was boggled. They also tend to encompass a similar area as Classicists.
Persia is somewhat covered in Classics and I'd wager Classicists are very well known with it's place in history.
Not sure about the others, I enjoy reading some of the stuff that ASNC covers but I don't really feel that it "deserves" the same regard as Classics (not trying to be snobby, I use that term loosely) and that most may be covered by Early Medieval/Dark Age History.
I think the above points also really go for Middle Eastern studies, with regards to the Caliphate etc, a branch of history more so then anything.
Thoughts? Comments? Additions?
I don't know that I'd put Oriental Studies in with Classical Studies. To me Classical Studies encompasses the worlds of Ancient Greece and Rome and it would explain why most universities have a separate Oriental Studies department. Here in Oxford we actually share our Linguistics Centre with the Oriental Studies library - don't know if that holds any significance 
The Near East overlaps a little bit imo - one of my classicist friends specialised in Byzantine poetry. So thinking of it I'd probably be tempted to construct the three categories you posit as more of a Venn diagram.
I'm not really a specialist in Orientalism or anything though so feel free to disregard what I say
The Near East overlaps a little bit imo - one of my classicist friends specialised in Byzantine poetry. So thinking of it I'd probably be tempted to construct the three categories you posit as more of a Venn diagram.
I'm not really a specialist in Orientalism or anything though so feel free to disregard what I say
Hmm I'm not sure they interlap (admittedly the phonology between Sanskrit and Latin/Greek/Other Indo European languages and deities etc is fascinating but too academic fro me) I was thinking more in terms of academic regard?
I think the near East is interesting considering modern politics and that before, essentially you had the power block of Rome and Persia, and later Byzantium and Persia and Europe/Near Asia relations were completely different.
But I think in regards to studying what we now call the Middle East, particularly from Islams point of view, there's not enough there to put it on an equal footing wtih Classics, whatever that means.
For example, being able to specialise in Byzantine poetry, shows the sheer wealth of the Classics, if we include Byzantium in the Classics and not Medieval category? Admittedly it's not an era I know much about bar, Belisarius, Justinian, Eunuchs, Christian debates etc.
Meh I know nothing about Orientalism either.
(Thanks for responding, I'm going to see if I can grab other Classicists etc in here.
)
I think the near East is interesting considering modern politics and that before, essentially you had the power block of Rome and Persia, and later Byzantium and Persia and Europe/Near Asia relations were completely different.
But I think in regards to studying what we now call the Middle East, particularly from Islams point of view, there's not enough there to put it on an equal footing wtih Classics, whatever that means.
For example, being able to specialise in Byzantine poetry, shows the sheer wealth of the Classics, if we include Byzantium in the Classics and not Medieval category? Admittedly it's not an era I know much about bar, Belisarius, Justinian, Eunuchs, Christian debates etc.
Meh I know nothing about Orientalism either.
(Thanks for responding, I'm going to see if I can grab other Classicists etc in here.
)Salient point. ^^
The Lyceum
Hmm, this is something I've been messing about with in my head, not sure it really works (either way it doesn't matter) but thought it may be interesting to see what the rest of you think.
Roman, Greek and Egypt. - Classicists.
Ancient India and Persia. - Orientalist.
Anglo Saxon, Norse and Celtic. - Not sure what the term here is, Nova Classicists?
The Islamic Caliphate and the Near East. - Middle Eastern Studies/Medieval/Byzantine sort of covers it.
Do you put all these on an equal footing? Are they vaguely equivalent to one another? For me Classics encovers Languages, Art, Philosophy, History and Literature. A rather broad term and hence it being such a respected subject.
Orientalism isn't a new thing and was indeed the discipline as such Great Britons as Sir Richard Francis Burton. The study of Classical Sanskrit is apparently a difficult yet rewarding one, I've briefly looked at the kingdoms and customs of Ancient India and was boggled. They also tend to encompass a similar area as Classicists.
Persia is somewhat covered in Classics and I'd wager Classicists are very well known with it's place in history.
Not sure about the others, I enjoy reading some of the stuff that ASNC covers but I don't really feel that it "deserves" the same regard as Classics (not trying to be snobby, I use that term loosely) and that most may be covered by Early Medieval/Dark Age History.
I think the above points also really go for Middle Eastern studies, with regards to the Caliphate etc, a branch of history more so then anything.
Thoughts? Comments? Additions?
Roman, Greek and Egypt. - Classicists.
Ancient India and Persia. - Orientalist.
Anglo Saxon, Norse and Celtic. - Not sure what the term here is, Nova Classicists?
The Islamic Caliphate and the Near East. - Middle Eastern Studies/Medieval/Byzantine sort of covers it.
Do you put all these on an equal footing? Are they vaguely equivalent to one another? For me Classics encovers Languages, Art, Philosophy, History and Literature. A rather broad term and hence it being such a respected subject.
Orientalism isn't a new thing and was indeed the discipline as such Great Britons as Sir Richard Francis Burton. The study of Classical Sanskrit is apparently a difficult yet rewarding one, I've briefly looked at the kingdoms and customs of Ancient India and was boggled. They also tend to encompass a similar area as Classicists.
Persia is somewhat covered in Classics and I'd wager Classicists are very well known with it's place in history.
Not sure about the others, I enjoy reading some of the stuff that ASNC covers but I don't really feel that it "deserves" the same regard as Classics (not trying to be snobby, I use that term loosely) and that most may be covered by Early Medieval/Dark Age History.
I think the above points also really go for Middle Eastern studies, with regards to the Caliphate etc, a branch of history more so then anything.
Thoughts? Comments? Additions?
I think all of the 'categories' you've mentioned falls under your definition of 'Classics'(
Languages, Art, Philosophy, History and Literature
I'm not sure each of the categories can be that easily defined. What about the Peloponnesian War? That was Persia and Greece, but they're in two different categories? And of course Rome also had dealings with Persia too, so again they overlap.
Also, the word "Classics" comes from the latin meaning "of the highest degree/superiority" and has traditionally been used to refer to Latin/Greek history, however the Romans and Greeks themselves also used the term to refer both to earlier writers of their own kind and of history before them.
I think the term "Classicists" could be used by any of the above categories you suggest but it could also be further divided down into sub-categories when more precision is needed. To say "Classicists" refers strictly to Graco-Roman and Egyptian studies however, I think would be a mistake!
That was really rambly and probably not very coherent. Sorry!
Related discussions
- jact greek summer school 2023
- Classics- Oxford or Cambridge?
- Dropping an A Level
- New College Oxford elitist classics department?
- English & classical studies/civilisation
- Maya’s GYG (GCSE) + study tracker 🌸
- American Applicant Response Time
- Ancient History, Classics or Archaeology at University in 2023
- Can I switch my course at Oxford - single to joint
- oxford classics offer holders 2024
- University of Salford or Manchester Metropolitan University ?
- Guys whose parents didn't show intimacy or affection
- Accademia Vivarium Novum - Latin Summer School in Rome
- Difference in courses
- A Level Art Supplies
- Which of these A-Level combinations would be the best to study a law degree?
- Maths: I need help on this question
- Civil engineering
- Engineering apprenticeships
- How good is this 30 maker? illiad
Latest
Trending
Last reply 1 week ago
Is getting a 3rd class honours in interior architecture and design bad?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Foundation Art Falmouth or Bath Spa or Edinburgh College or UAL.Last reply 2 weeks ago
UAL London College of Fashion or Leeds Arts University for Fashion Design?Trending
Last reply 1 week ago
Is getting a 3rd class honours in interior architecture and design bad?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Foundation Art Falmouth or Bath Spa or Edinburgh College or UAL.Last reply 2 weeks ago
UAL London College of Fashion or Leeds Arts University for Fashion Design?
