Zyobot
Fleet admiral
Just a time-traveling robot stranded on Earth.
Posts: 17,352 
Likes: 7,260
|
Post by Zyobot on Oct 18, 2020 18:20:49 GMT
Yes their reaction to the images of Earth would be interesting. That is something they should be able to take in, once many areas are explained to them although how relatively 'small' compared to the planet as a whole the Roman empire was. Expect a number would be very interesting in those 'new' lands they would never even have rumours of in their time. I figured they'd be disappointed that the Roman Empire took up a smaller share of the planet than they once thought. Not to mention how future empires--Britain, Mongolia and Russia as some big contenders I can name off the top of my head--surpassed it for sheer territorial extent. More inquisitive Greeks and Romans will want to know how they reached that level of size and influence, which would again call for a long history lesson that draws upon plenty of ideas and concepts they'd have little to no preexisting familiarity with. Once-mysterious lands like Asia are bound to arouse their curiosity, with previously unknown ones like the Americas probably being the most striking landmass upon first glancing at a modern map. That is, in large part, why I once suggested that the United States would be of immodest interest to Greco-Roman eyes, after all (as well as Canada, Mexico, Brazil, and so on). Movies and the idea of moving images and representations of people, both real and fake would be an interesting concept for them let alone what they actually contain. I think Apollo 13 isn't too far off, especially for Hollywood and they might find the Martian rather too artificial. Possibly also some might argue it was stupid risking so many lives to save one. How they react to some of the fiction put out could be interesting, including some of the stories based on classical mythology - i.e. some of the Jason and the Argonauts and Hercules presentations in films. What they would think of more flashy presentations such as the Troy one a decade or so back as well. Now that'd be quite something. Besides being awestruck at the very idea of moving pictures with accompanying sound, as well as the ability to record the audio and video used to make them in the first place, seems pretty much indubitable to me. Live theater probably being their closest equivalent and something within their frame of reference already, I can see more observant Greeks/Romans noting distinctly modern cinematic features like camera angles, special affects, and a more consistent-across-the-board depiction of characters due to how modern media solidifies that image into their minds of viewers far more easily. The popularity of certain actors and Hollywood's influence on Western pop culture should also be of notice, both of which would showcase another aspect of the millennia-sized generational gulf between us and them, if you catch my drift. Live-action aside, cartoons and animation will also be quite new to them--especially since their entertainment didn't tend to feature moving and highly stylized drawings that depicted mascot mice with giant, circular ears or jubilant yellow sponges living under the sea. What they'd make of our interpretations of their cultures and histories (aside from how much we almost certainly got wrong), I can't comment too much on. As far as classical mythology goes, the first work that comes to mind for me is Percy Jackson--which, as far as I can tell, isn't the best depiction of their gods and how they operate (which is something they're likely to give us an earful over once they get wind of it). I mentioned religious concerns by both Christians and Pagans because I know even as recently as the 19thC in the west there was criticism of progress and technology taking humanity into areas supposed to be reserved for god so your likely to see some such reaction there. That they can do bugger all about it is largely beside the point. A number might decide to go a more sectare route in reaction, deciding both faith systems are deeply flawed. True, doubly because of how they lack the ideal of constant technological advancement that's considered normal and to be expected nowadays. Due to how alien that notion would probably seem, as well as how incomprehensible the various gadgets and gizmos we take for granted would be to Greco-Roman eyes, I can see a number of them becoming Luddites and borrowing from the playbook of more reactive, progress-critical schools of thought like Romanticism. In fact, I can easily imagine them broadening those criticisms to encompass our whole mindset of "progress for its own sake", which would stand out to societies as traditional and socially/culturally static as theirs (not that I'm making a value judgment one way or the other). That we've gone so far as to think of certain decades as unique eras unto themselves--the Gay Nineties, the Roaring Twenties, the Nifty Fifties, and so on and so forth--would only work to underscore this characteristic of constant and year-to-year change, if you ask me. As would our tendency to separate different age demographics into unique generations with their own shared qualities and era-specific upbringings (the Greatest Generation, Baby Boomers, Millennials, etc). |
|
Zyobot
Fleet admiral
Just a time-traveling robot stranded on Earth.
Posts: 17,352
Likes: 7,260
|
Post by Zyobot on Oct 20, 2020 1:58:13 GMT
Seeing as I posted it in this thread's AH.com counterpart, I'm surprised to realize that it's not yet posted here as well. Perhaps it's time that I fix that.
How The Romans Would See Us Today
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,835
Likes: 13,224
|
Post by stevep on Oct 20, 2020 10:43:54 GMT
Seeing as I posted it in this thread's AH.com counterpart, I'm surprised to realize that it's not yet posted here as well. Perhaps it's time that I fix that. How The Romans Would See Us Today
Interesting although rather frivolous. I also rather doubt the Catholic church would be a good intermediary with the new 'migrants' to modern Italy. Constantine might be happy with the idea of a Christian dominated Europe but would probably be appalled by the modern Papacy's political and religious claims. How Diocletian would react I dread to think while when Julius Caesar mention he once held the title of Pontifex_maximus, from which the early church took the modern papal title I suspect the reaction on any modern cleric would not be good.
|
|
Zyobot
Fleet admiral
Just a time-traveling robot stranded on Earth.
Posts: 17,352
Likes: 7,260
|
Post by Zyobot on Oct 20, 2020 16:56:14 GMT
Seeing as I posted it in this thread's AH.com counterpart, I'm surprised to realize that it's not yet posted here as well. Perhaps it's time that I fix that. How The Romans Would See Us Today
Interesting although rather frivolous. I also rather doubt the Catholic church would be a good intermediary with the new 'migrants' to modern Italy. Constantine might be happy with the idea of a Christian dominated Europe but would probably be appalled by the modern Papacy's political and religious claims. How Diocletian would react I dread to think while when Julius Caesar mention he once held the title of Pontifex_maximus, from which the early church took the modern papal title I suspect the reaction on any modern cleric would not be good.
Given that Pope Francis is much more liberal compared to his various predecessors--let alone by the standards of Greco-Romans straight out of Late Antiquity--I can imagine they won't think highly of him. Nor the organization that he's at the head of, due to how it seems to have accepted him as its supreme leader. Seeing as you single out Diocletian specifically, I imagine that due to his record of persecuting Christians en masse, whatever animosity springs up would be mutual on the part of the Christian community worldwide. Him being well-versed in politicking and knowing full well that he holds no power in this new environment, I hope he'd have the sense to hold his tongue and say "please" and "thank you" whenever interacting with modern authorities.
Expanding on what I've said about our uniquely modern propensity for progress for its own sake, I'm interested in what more history-inclined Greco-Romans would make of the Enlightenment and the Age of Revolutions that emerged in its wake. The diverse selection of radical ideas introduced by the former, and the sheer social/cultural change and tide of "liberal" reforms that marked the latter, are bound to catch the eye of peoples who had no expectation of constantly-evolving social systems and ways of life heading into their current circumstances. I imagine that the twentieth century would be of similar (or even greater) note to them, both due to its comparative recency and how it often proved even more bloody and radical than the revolutionary period that preceded it. What would probably seem like an almost nonstop outflow of ever-changing lifestyles and new extremes arising left, right and center to Greco-Roman eyes are sure to plenty of scrutiny, both needlessly one-sided and somewhat warranted. For those more Greeks and Romans who happen to be more reasonable and level-headed, I can imagine some truly fascinating inter-cultural dialogue arising between them and certain uptimer intellectuals when it comes to the roles and ramifications of progress and tradition (among a host of other subject matters, of course).
|
|
Zyobot
Fleet admiral
Just a time-traveling robot stranded on Earth.
Posts: 17,352
Likes: 7,260
|
Post by Zyobot on Oct 23, 2020 2:41:02 GMT
I know that one point was made on how the resurrected Greeks/Romans wouldn't comprehend the full ramifications of using them. But maybe showing rather than just telling will leave them with a somewhat different impression?
Russia releases secret footage of 1961 Tsar Bomba hydrogen blast
As it relates to such ramifications as Mutually Assured Destruction, what would they make of close calls like the Cuban Missile Crisis or the 1983 Soviet false-alarm incident? We're beyond fortunate that they were both resolved peacefully, and I'd hope that even ancient Greco-Romans will have the sense to agree on that for once. They still shouldn't be permitted to acquire nukes, though, given their warlike ways and far higher tolerance for casual brutality in any case.
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,835
Likes: 13,224
|
Post by stevep on Oct 23, 2020 10:27:52 GMT
I know that one point was made on how the resurrected Greeks/Romans wouldn't comprehend the full ramifications of using them. But maybe showing rather than just telling will leave them with a somewhat different impression? Russia releases secret footage of 1961 Tsar Bomba hydrogen blastAs it relates to such ramifications as Mutually Assured Destruction, what would they make of close calls like the Cuban Missile Crisis or the 1983 Soviet false-alarm incident? We're beyond fortunate that they were both resolved peacefully, and I'd hope that even ancient Greco-Romans will have the sense to agree on that for once. They still shouldn't be permitted to acquire nukes, though, given their warlike ways and far higher tolerance for casual brutality in any case.
I suspect the best way of getting across the magnitude of nukes would probably be details of the attacks on Japan. They would see levels of destruction they could relate to with leveled buildings and ruins over a large area. Then explain that those were two small bombs and that humanity has thousands of far more powerful weapons.
I also can't see any danger of them obtaining nuclear weapons. Even if such small communities stay independent rather than being absorbed into existing states I think it would be at least the next generation before they have the basic understanding of the necessary technology to even attempt to construct such weapons. Then they have a very small resource base to which undertake such a massive project. They could possibly seek to buy such a weapon but who would sell to them, what could they supply in return and then you still have issues like maintaining such weapons or delivering them.
Not sure their that different from much of modern humanity, at least before the world wars modified western opinion and then we still had the fascists and communists emerging from western thought. They were used to the idea that the strong took what they wanted, at least if they could afford to but again that's still not too different from what many people seem to think today.
|
|
Zyobot
Fleet admiral
Just a time-traveling robot stranded on Earth.
Posts: 17,352
Likes: 7,260
|
Post by Zyobot on Nov 7, 2020 16:19:39 GMT
As it applies to how our era is one of constant (and often destabilizing) change, what might the Romans make of radical ideologies that gained traction in the twentieth century, like communism and fascism? While I've little doubt that pro-redistribution movements are as old as civilization itself, I feel that the radical writings of Karl Marx and the atrocities of the leaders who carried out his vision (or at least, their interpretations of it) would rather frighten them.
Hopefully, they'd recognize Joe Stalin as a murderous, power-hungry gangster that he was, and perhaps a few of their historians would draw comparisons with Caracalla. I also doubt they'd take kindly to radical red figureheads like Chairman Mao, with his bloodthirsty encouragement of a "Cultural Revolution" designed to sweep away "the old" in favor of "the new" through wanton violence and radicalization of the nation's youth. Pol Pot, I hope, is someone they'd know to be a straight-up lunatic who makes goddamned Nero look almost lovable. Killing a quarter to a third of your own people in only a few years for reasons as crazy as wearing glasses or knowing a foreign language tends to do that sort of thing.
Whether they'd denounce Hitler and the Nazis, other than for being needlessly obsessed with race and wasting resources on purging people based on the most deluded scapegoats, I'm not sure. Maybe they'd like Mussolini better, though I wouldn't be surprised if many Greco-Romans still snub him as an arrogant failure who didn't deserve to succeed the emperors of ages past.
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,835
Likes: 13,224
|
Post by stevep on Nov 7, 2020 19:29:36 GMT
As it applies to how our era is one of constant (and often destabilizing) change, what might the Romans make of radical ideologies that gained traction in the twentieth century, like communism and fascism? While I've little doubt that pro-redistribution movements are as old as civilization itself, I feel that the radical writings of Karl Marx and the atrocities of the leaders who carried out his vision (or at least, their interpretations of it) would rather frighten them. Hopefully, they'd recognize Joe Stalin as a murderous, power-hungry gangster that he was, and perhaps a few of their historians would draw comparisons with Caracalla. I also doubt they'd take kindly to radical red figureheads like Chairman Mao, with his bloodthirsty encouragement of a "Cultural Revolution" designed to sweep away "the old" in favor of "the new" through wanton violence and radicalization of the nation's youth. Pol Pot, I hope, is someone they'd know to be a straight-up lunatic who makes goddamned Nero look almost lovable. Killing a quarter to a third of your own people in only a few years for reasons as crazy as wearing glasses or knowing a foreign language tends to do that sort of thing. Whether they'd denounce Hitler and the Nazis, other than for being needlessly obsessed with race and wasting resources on purging people based on the most deluded scapegoats, I'm not sure. Maybe they'd like Mussolini better, though I wouldn't be surprised if many Greco-Romans still snub him as an arrogant failure who didn't deserve to succeed the emperors of ages past.
I suspect you would be broadly correct but if there is a reasonable number of such people brought from the past you would have some that were more favourable to the more 'socialist' ideas, albeit probably not the way they were carried out which proved to be far from equal. Not just talking about the Christians here as early Christianity was very social orientated.
|
|
Zyobot
Fleet admiral
Just a time-traveling robot stranded on Earth.
Posts: 17,352
Likes: 7,260
|
Post by Zyobot on Nov 13, 2020 23:58:01 GMT
As it applies to how our era is one of constant (and often destabilizing) change, what might the Romans make of radical ideologies that gained traction in the twentieth century, like communism and fascism? While I've little doubt that pro-redistribution movements are as old as civilization itself, I feel that the radical writings of Karl Marx and the atrocities of the leaders who carried out his vision (or at least, their interpretations of it) would rather frighten them. Hopefully, they'd recognize Joe Stalin as a murderous, power-hungry gangster that he was, and perhaps a few of their historians would draw comparisons with Caracalla. I also doubt they'd take kindly to radical red figureheads like Chairman Mao, with his bloodthirsty encouragement of a "Cultural Revolution" designed to sweep away "the old" in favor of "the new" through wanton violence and radicalization of the nation's youth. Pol Pot, I hope, is someone they'd know to be a straight-up lunatic who makes goddamned Nero look almost lovable. Killing a quarter to a third of your own people in only a few years for reasons as crazy as wearing glasses or knowing a foreign language tends to do that sort of thing. Whether they'd denounce Hitler and the Nazis, other than for being needlessly obsessed with race and wasting resources on purging people based on the most deluded scapegoats, I'm not sure. Maybe they'd like Mussolini better, though I wouldn't be surprised if many Greco-Romans still snub him as an arrogant failure who didn't deserve to succeed the emperors of ages past.
I suspect you would be broadly correct but if there is a reasonable number of such people brought from the past you would have some that were more favourable to the more 'socialist' ideas, albeit probably not the way they were carried out which proved to be far from equal. Not just talking about the Christians here as early Christianity was very social orientated.
Considering how they'd likely struggle to reconcile what they'd view as unimaginable wealth with the fact that drastic inequality still persists in our world, I've a feeling you're onto something there. Which is only further highlighted by the fact that even for us, economic disparities and rule by the top one-percent have become increasingly politicized as of late.
The most extreme cases of this, such as the Kim dynasty living in luxury while their subjects remain dirt poor and had suffered through a four-year famine not that long ago, would probably appall them. The Greeks and Romans probably being familiar with semi-regular famines and other such catastrophes, that'd probably hit where it hurts. Never mind in the case of massive artificial famines like the Holodomor (which, hopefully, would further drive them to think of Stalin as a Soviet Caracalla--and then some).
|
|
Zyobot
Fleet admiral
Just a time-traveling robot stranded on Earth.
Posts: 17,352
Likes: 7,260
|
Post by Zyobot on Nov 15, 2020 0:05:21 GMT
Even leaving everyday technologies like cars and cell phones aside, their reactions to heavier machinery and larger construction projects should also prove interesting. Given how the Romans were known for their engineering, and the Greeks for their various inventions, the fact that we've long surpassed them in these departments will both awe them and cause them considerable discomfort, I'm sure.
BMW X7 – Production Line – German Car Factory in USA
Time-lapse Construction of The Southern Star Observation Wheel by Eon-FX
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,835
Likes: 13,224
|
Post by stevep on Nov 15, 2020 13:44:17 GMT
Even leaving everyday technologies like cars and cell phones aside, their reactions to heavier machinery and larger construction projects should also prove interesting. Given how the Romans were known for their engineering, and the Greeks for their various inventions, the fact that we've long surpassed them in these departments will both awe them and cause them considerable discomfort, I'm sure. BMW X7 – Production Line – German Car Factory in USATime-lapse Construction of The Southern Star Observation Wheel by Eon-FX
Quite possibly although some at least are likely to start thinking, now what can we do with that sort of technology and abilities.
Steve
|
|
Zyobot
Fleet admiral
Just a time-traveling robot stranded on Earth.
Posts: 17,352
Likes: 7,260
|
Post by Zyobot on Nov 15, 2020 21:17:01 GMT
Even leaving everyday technologies like cars and cell phones aside, their reactions to heavier machinery and larger construction projects should also prove interesting. Given how the Romans were known for their engineering, and the Greeks for their various inventions, the fact that we've long surpassed them in these departments will both awe them and cause them considerable discomfort, I'm sure. BMW X7 – Production Line – German Car Factory in USATime-lapse Construction of The Southern Star Observation Wheel by Eon-FX
Quite possibly although some at least are likely to start thinking, now what can we do with that sort of technology and abilities.
Steve
Without a doubt, there are at least a few eager and inventive Greco-Romans fantasizing about doing that right about now. But in the short term, I think they'll be disappointed due to both geopolitical and infrastructural reasons. It'll take a while to bring both islands' industrial capacity up to speed so that they can build their own impressive projects and use all these magical machines to do so, and even then, there are plenty of uptimers and downtimers alike who'd want nothing of the sort happening. Uptimers for fear that the Greeks and Romans would gravely misuse whatever modern technology they got their hands on, and conservative downtimers who fear the effects of industrialization and the wave of fundamentally disruptive social and cultural changes that'd come with it.
Whatever course they take, though, I think showings like this would convincingly demonstrate to Greco-Roman audiences that their achievements--impressive as they were for their time, and instrumental to the development of Western civilization as they proved to be thousands of years after the fact--weren't the be-all, end-all of human success or ingenuity. Rome didn't forge the biggest empire the world has ever seen; Britain did. Greece wasn't the only hub of great thinkers, either; Enlightenment Europe produced plenty of brilliant minds and revolutionary ideas, too. They may take certain solace in the fact that that their legacy has lasted as long as it has, but for peoples brought up to think of themselves as the apex achievers, I imagine that such news would be a considerable blow to their collective psyche and be an extremely humbling revelation for them. We may be more willing to accept the idea that, given time, there will come future players who surpass the records we've set. But them lacking the Whiggish notion of constant and continuous progress that we've come to expect by default, that may be a more difficult pill to swallow for them.
Which reminds me, I wonder what they'd make of Carl Sagan's Pale Blue Dot speech. It's semi-related to my spiel above at best, but Sagan makes points that I think would really stir the pot among Greco-Roman audiences who bother watching it.
The Best Speech about Humanity - Carl Sagan
|
|
Zyobot
Fleet admiral
Just a time-traveling robot stranded on Earth.
Posts: 17,352
Likes: 7,260
|
Post by Zyobot on Nov 16, 2020 22:59:02 GMT
Making the newcomers feel small and long-surpassed aside, I wonder what they'd think of modern political satire? I'm aware that their graffiti and private accounts might've been chock full of critical rebukes of their leaders and the systems in place (and that popular discontent could prove much more violent when people finally reached their limits). However, at least for the perpetually patriotic Romans (and perhaps also the Greeks too), seeing how we're so public about not just finding fault with, but outright ridiculing the people who rule is may seem rather irreverent and strike them as another sign of how "spoiled and undisciplined" their descendants have become.
Without touching more current politics--namely, 2016 to present--here are some specific examples of what I'm talking about here.
JibJab.com "This Land!"
JibJab.com - Second Term
JibJab.com - Time for Some Campaignin'
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,835
Likes: 13,224
|
Post by stevep on Nov 17, 2020 12:49:28 GMT
Making the newcomers feel small and long-surpassed aside, I wonder what they'd think of modern political satire? I'm aware that their graffiti and private accounts might've been chock full of critical rebukes of their leaders and the systems in place (and that popular discontent could prove much more violent when people finally reached their limits). However, at least for the perpetually patriotic Romans (and perhaps also the Greeks too), seeing how we're so public about not just finding fault with, but outright ridiculing the people who rule is may seem rather irreverent and strike them as another sign of how "spoiled and undisciplined" their descendants have become. Without touching more current politics--namely, 2016 to present--here are some specific examples of what I'm talking about here. JibJab.com "This Land!"JibJab.com - Second TermJibJab.com - Time for Some Campaignin'
I think the issue here might be the time they were from. Those from the late Republic period and possibly even the early empire were used to a very 'robust' political debate as you say and probably might have found a lot of what you mention as fairly tame. However the later empire, which was very much a centralised autocratic state under siege to a greater or lesser degree probably have a lot less open dissent. If nothing else what might have been laughed off in even say Julius Caesar's time could possibly get you into a lot of problems in that period. Although I have seen suggestions that in later Byzantine times high officials and even emperors were sometimes held up for mockery so I could be surprised. There is always an issue when times are grim of unrest and jokes about those in power. For those from the late 3rd C I suspect they wouldn't be too surprised by the level of mockery and contempt displayed but more by that it could be done in such a public way.
|
|
Zyobot
Fleet admiral
Just a time-traveling robot stranded on Earth.
Posts: 17,352
Likes: 7,260
|
Post by Zyobot on Nov 17, 2020 18:46:45 GMT
Making the newcomers feel small and long-surpassed aside, I wonder what they'd think of modern political satire? I'm aware that their graffiti and private accounts might've been chock full of critical rebukes of their leaders and the systems in place (and that popular discontent could prove much more violent when people finally reached their limits). However, at least for the perpetually patriotic Romans (and perhaps also the Greeks too), seeing how we're so public about not just finding fault with, but outright ridiculing the people who rule is may seem rather irreverent and strike them as another sign of how "spoiled and undisciplined" their descendants have become. Without touching more current politics--namely, 2016 to present--here are some specific examples of what I'm talking about here. JibJab.com "This Land!"JibJab.com - Second TermJibJab.com - Time for Some Campaignin'
I think the issue here might be the time they were from. Those from the late Republic period and possibly even the early empire were used to a very 'robust' political debate as you say and probably might have found a lot of what you mention as fairly tame. However the later empire, which was very much a centralised autocratic state under siege to a greater or lesser degree probably have a lot less open dissent. If nothing else what might have been laughed off in even say Julius Caesar's time could possibly get you into a lot of problems in that period. Although I have seen suggestions that in later Byzantine times high officials and even emperors were sometimes held up for mockery so I could be surprised. There is always an issue when times are grim of unrest and jokes about those in power. For those from the late 3rd C I suspect they wouldn't be too surprised by the level of mockery and contempt displayed but more by that it could be done in such a public way.
Yeah, I imagined that reactions and where the Overton Window was would've depended on the eras from whence they came. That we broadcast all manner of criticism, gossip and ridicule so far and wide is something that I also expect to surprise them--whether via political cartoons in newspapers, late-night comedians on TV, or the endless memes that pervade social media. Which reminds me, I once saw a claim on Wiki that there was proposed legislation to prohibit politicians from making appearances so that voters would only focus on their policies rather than their delivery, though I believe it was shot down and happened sometime during the Republican years (long before 300 or thereabouts, in other words). Hopefully, even those surviving Greco-Romans receptive to such laws in principle would recognize the futility of imposing them in modern, liberal-democratic societies in practice (which they're not even political shareholders in anyway, or at least not now).
Still, them now being stakeholders in the goings-on of today's world, it may behoove them to pay attention to current events and read up on how modern geopolitics came to be in the first place. I'm not too well-acquainted with whatever electoral systems they're used to as is (it's probably rendered moot by the emperor's executive authority anyway), but modern mass-democracy strikes me as something that'd rather baffle them. Across-the-board suffrage would be one of the most obvious differences, as would the myriad ways in which technology has transformed the nature of modern campaigning and elections--constant news reports, big moments going viral online, televised debates between the finalists, and grassroots donations from everyday voters on the street being the main hallmarks that I can name right now. Moreover, while I don't have precise numbers on hand for how many Greco-Romans were eligible voters back in the day, I'm certain the fact that even losing candidates in US presidential elections can look forward to garnering somewhere around sixty-million votes nationwide will be a mind-boggling statistic to process. That audiences can watch Election Night unfold in real-time from their TV rooms or on their devices also wouldn't escape their notice, considering how the communications and infrastructure to rapidly tally all the ballots and report them to the public in timely fashion probably wasn't there around 300 A.D. or so. Granted, one caveat here is that I'm less familiar with the particulars of how the more parliamentary systems of other Western nations work, though I presume that many of the overarching characteristics I listed above also apply in those places, too.
As far as American electoral history goes, one thing that's been on my mind is what they'd make of some of the more noteworthy presidents who held office (let's not talk about Trump, please). It'd probably baffle them--especially Spartans from much earlier periods--that men who suffered from poor health and likely would've died had they been born in ancient Roman times, such as Franklin D. Roosevelt and John F. Kennedy, went on to become some of the most revered presidents in modern history. The Romans might think more highly of Eisenhower, considering how he was a general and great war hero before he was elected president. Probably Teddy Roosevelt too, considering what a manly personality he was (leaving aside what they think of his trust-busting and other progressive reforms). Them not really caring one way or another about race, it might take some time to explain why Obama's victory in 2008 was so historic (which is, admittedly, one way that the Romans were morally superior to the Jim Crow South and the various segregationists we've had in office).
|
|
