#my name in times roman saying i passed inter level???? i had no idea they did something like this marksheet already aa chuki thišŸ˜­
Explore tagged Tumblr posts
girlivealwaysbean Ā· 1 year ago
Text
so
i want to be a part of a big group of people who love each other SO BAD i want to have a friend group i want to care and love many people at once i want to belong feel a sense of community but i am so isolated i don't even have one single friend and am i just going to die alone probably yes right im already 20 years old and this 19 year old guy at office was like we were both waiting counting down the minutes till 4 pm so we could go home and we were like yaar kal parso bhi aana padega sunday kitna door hai but then he was like yaar do yk it's already been a month here and time is passing so fast and im not doing anything that people my age do im sitting in a locked office my whole day and aise hi sunday ka wait karte karte 2 saal ho jayenge fir job main bhi aise hi lagega and yaar aise tog puri zindagi hi nikal jayegi and i was like what the fuck shut up you're so right and im already 20 and i feel so lonely and other people are so fucking normal and happy and enjoy festivals while im sitting here worrying about how to finish my backlog watch lectures my life is so small limited to 10 books one course and i feel so on the outside of everything what the fuck man how do i live like this šŸ§
6 notes Ā· View notes
dwellordream Ā· 3 years ago
Text
ā€œā€¦Now, if people are taught anything at all about medieval history it often is English medieval history. People with absolutely no other frame of reference can often tell you when the Norman Conquest of England took place, or the date of the signing of Magna Carta even if they donā€™t know exactly why these things are important. (TBH Magna Carta isnā€™t important unless you were a very rich dude at the time, sooooo.) If you ask people to name a medieval book theyā€™ll probably say Beowulf even if theyā€™ve never read it.
Hereā€™s the thing though ā€“ England was a total backwater in terms of the way medieval people thought and was not particularly important at the time. How much of a backwater? Well, when Anne of Bohemia, daughter of my man Holy Roman Emperor Charles IV (RIP, mate. Mourn ya til I join ya.) married King Richard II of England in the fourteenth century there was uproar in Prague. How could a Bohemian imperial princess be sent to London? How would she survive in the hinterlands? The answer was she was sent along with an entire cadre of Bohemian ladies in waiting to give her people with whom she could have a sophisticated conversation.
This ended up completely changing fashion in England. Anne is the girl who introduced those sweet horned headdresses you think of when you think of medieval ladies, riding side-saddle, and the word ā€œcoachā€ to England, (from the Hungairan Kocs, where the cart she arrived at court the first time came from). Sweetening her transition to English life was the fact that she didnā€™t have to pay a dowry to get married. Instead, the English were allowed to trade freely with Bohemia and the Holy Roman Empire and allowed to be around a Czech lady. That was reward enough as far as the Empire was concerned. Thatā€™s how much England was not a thing. (The English took this insult very badly, and hated Anne at first, but since she was a G they got over it. Donā€™t worry.)
If England was unimportant why do we know about English medieval history and nothing else? Same reason youā€™re reading this blog in English right now, homes. Iā€™m not sure if you know this, but in the modern period, the English got super super good at going around the world an enslaving anyone they met. When youā€™re busy not thinking about German imperial atrocities in the nineteenth century itā€™s because youā€™re busy thinking about British imperial atrocities, you feel me? So we all speak English now and if we harken back to historical things it gives us a grandiose idea of English history.
Say, then, you are trying to establish a curriculum for schools that bigs up English history, as is our want. Ask yourself ā€“ are you gonna want to dwell on an era where England was so unimportant that Czechs were flexing on it? Answer: no. You gonna gloss right over that and skip to the early modern era and the Tudors who I am absolutely sure you know all the fuck about. The second colonial-imperialist reason for not learning about medieval history is that medieval history doesnā€™t exactly aggrandise the colonial-imperialist system.
Yes, there are empires in medieval Europe. In addition to the Holy Roman Empire thereā€™s the Eastern Roman Empire, aka the Byzantine Empire, whose downfall is often pointed to as one of several possible bookends to the medieval period. You also have opportunists like the Venetians who set up colonies around the Adriatic and Mediterranean, or the Normans who defo jump in boats and take over, well, anything they could get their hands on.
Notably, when these dudes got where they were going, they didnā€™t end up enslaving a bunch of people, committing genocide, and then funnelling all resources back to a theoretical homeland. The Normans settled down where they were eventually creating distinctive court cultures, and the Venetian colonies enjoyed a seriously high level of trade and quality of life without major disruption to local customs. Force was certainly used to take over at the outset, but it wasnā€™t something that resulted in the complete subjugation and deaths of millions halfway around the world from where the aggressors started.
No, the European middle ages are a lot more about local areas muddling along with smaller systems of rule. Thatā€™s why you have distinctive areas like say, Burgundy or Sicily calling their own shots and developing their own styles and fashions. Hell, even within imperial systems like the Holy Roman Empire Bavarians or Bohemians saw themselves as very much distinct peoples within an imperial system, not necessarily imperial subjects first and foremost.
You know where you would go to find some history that justifies huge imperial systems that require constant conquest and an army of slaves to keep them afloat? Ancient Rome. Remember how you got taught how great Rome was? How it was a democracy? How they had wonderful technology and underfloor heating, and oh isnā€™t that temple beautiful? Yeah, thatā€™s because you were being inculcated to think that the ends of imperial violence justifies mass enslavement and disenfranchisement.
In reality, Rome wasnā€™t some sort of grand free democracy. Only a tiny percentage of Romans could actually vote. Women of any station certainly could not, and even men who were lucky enough to be free werenā€™t necessarily Roman citizens. Freedom here is particularly important because by the 1 century BCE 35 ā€“ 40% of the population of the Italian peninsula were slaves. Woo yeah democracy. I love it. And thatā€™s not even taking into account all those times when an Emperor would suspend voting altogether.
Those slaves were busy building all the grand buildings your high school history teacher was dry jacking it about, stuffing the dormice that the rich people were reclining to eat, and basically keeping the joint running. Those slaves also necessitated the ridiculously huge army that Rome kept going because you had to get slaves from somewhere after all, so warfare had to be continuous. How uplifting.
Eagle-eyed readers will notice that this Roman nonsense is pretty much exactly what was going on during the modern colonial imperial age. You can say whatever the fuck you want about how free and revolutionary America was, for example. That doesnā€™t change the fact that only a handful of white property owning men could vote, and that the entire project required the mass enslavement of Africans and the genocide of Native Americans. Thatā€™s why youā€™ve been taught Rome is great. It helps you sleep well at night on stolen land because, really, havenā€™t all great societies done this? I mean without a forever war against anyone you can find, how will you keep a society going?
Our imperialist ideas about history lead to some weird historical takes. People love to tell you that no one bathed in the medieval period when medieval people had pretty much exactly the same sort of bathing culture as Romans. People laugh at medieval people believing in medical humoral theory despite the fact that Romans believed exactly the same thing and get a total pass on that front. The Roman ban on dissection is often taught as a medieval ban, shifting Roman superstition onto the shoulders of medieval people.
On-going Roman warfare is reported in glowing terms with emphasis on the ā€œbrillianceā€ of Roman military technique, while inter-kingdom warfare in the medieval period is portrayed as barbaric and ignorant. The Roman people who were encouraged to worship emperors as literal gods are used as an example of theoretical religion-free logical thinking, while medieval Christians are cast as ignorant for believing in God even when they are studiously working on the same philosophical queries as their predecessors. None of this makes any fucking sense.
But hereā€™s the thing ā€“ it doesnā€™t need to. In a colonial imperialist society we have positioned Rome as a guiding light no matter what itā€™s actual practices and thatā€™s not a mistake. Itā€™s a design that helps to justify our own society. Further, this mindset requires us to castigate the medieval period when rule was more localised and systems of slavery had taken a precipitous dive. If only there had been more slavery, you know? Things might have been so much better.
Historical narratives and who controls them are always in flux. That old adage ā€œhistory is written by the winnersā€ comes to mind here, but thatā€™s not exactly true. What the winners do is decide which histories are promoted, taught, and broadcasted. You can write all the history you want and if no one reads it, then it doesnā€™t really matter. Thatā€™s the gap that medieval history has fallen into. Colonial imperialism hasnā€™t figured out how to weaponise it yet, so itā€™s ignored. You could write this off as a ā€œso whatā€, of course. Sure, maybe teaching the Roman Empire as a goal is a negative, but is ignoring medieval history really that bad a thing? You will be unsurprised to learn that I definitely think it is a bad thing, yes.
Ignorance about the medieval period is one of the things that is allowing the current swelling ranks of fascists to claim medieval Europe as some sort of ā€œpureā€ white ideal. Spoiler: it was not. However, if you donā€™t know anything about medieval society how are you gonna argue with some chinless douche with a fake viking rune tattoo?History is always political. We use it to understand our world, but more than that we also use it to justify our world. Ignoring it helps us prop up our worst impulses, so letā€™s not.ā€
- Eleanor Janega, ā€œOn colonialism, imperialism, and ignoring medieval history.ā€
48 notes Ā· View notes