On thinking about this further, I think I’d use one of two cutoff points for the “Modern Era”. The later one is Watt’s steam engine, which basically introduced combustion as a practical energy source for doing work. We can trace almost all our vehicles to that, plus the generators which produce almost all of our electricity (which meets most of our other energy needs).
The earlier one would be Galileo’s work (as a whole), him being the first person to really engage in the science of physics, and one of the key figures in the development of the scientific method at all. Before him, there was of course work done in physics and related fields, but it was treated as subservient to philosophy. Folks weren’t so much studying the way the world was, but the way (they thought) it should be. Galileo started the long process of changing that.
I think you’ll find that the Medes wore trousers, they were a small bit of the Persian Empire that … well took it over - and then Alexander took over the lot.
Actually, it historically was the other way around: Persia under Cyrus and the Achaemenids took over the pre-existing Median Empire (along with a few others: Chaldean [Neo-Babylonian], Lydian, Egyptian…).
Of course, as Will Cuppy noted, one man’s Mede is another man’s Persian.
Nice retort to my “observation” and guess as to the 10% thing. I can only hope there are more of you whose view into the past doesn’t stop at your own birth. I’d say you have a head start on relating to older generations as compared with others in your age group. It’s quite possible that I have been unfair in that 10% thing, too.
Judging from Dope topics on music, though, I do get the feeling that most younger people have everything as some subset of Rock, unless they are admitted jazz, folk, classical or some other genre fans.
Your point about movies is well-stated, as well. As I see it, the tastes in movies are less well-defined and pigeon-holed as those relating to music. And it’s a little easier to allow values to overlap older things in movies.
Traditionally, the ancient era ended on the 4th of September, 476, when Romulus Augustus abdicated as the last western emperor of Rome. He was, of course, named both after the traditional founder of Rome and after one of the greatest emperors of Rome. He was also about 13 at the time. (In other words, a lot older than the last emperor of China was when he abdicated).
[QUOTE=Polycarp]
Actually, it historically was the other way around: Persia under Cyrus and the Achaemenids took over the pre-existing Median Empire (along with a few others: Chaldean [Neo-Babylonian], Lydian, Egyptian…).
[QUOTE]
I spoke too loosely, thanks for the correction. My understanding is that the Persians conquered the Medes, but the Medes became dominant, a raddled memory from a book I read long ago. What really stuck was trousers
I really can’t say when it began, but I was told in graduate school that the modern era ended precisely at 3:32 pm on July 15, 1972, at which point the post-modern era was ushered in.
That is the time at which a large housing project was destroyed in St Louis. IIRC, when that structure was built, it was supposed to be the first step towards Jetsons style living, leading the way to food pills and everything being engineered to suit people’s precise needs. Then, in the early 1970s, the building was deemed to be uninhabitable, or so the story goes.
Peter Bernstein in his book Against the Gods maintains that the modern era began when we began to understand and quantify the concept of risk, a process that began in the 15 century and is still going on today.
This had the effect of freeing us from the belief that our future was simply the whim of the gods and our being able to harness what we understood of the future for the profit of the present (e.g. security markets, mortgages, scientific testing of drugs etc.).
Uh…what? The last time chariots were used was when Darius’ chariots, already noted by contemporary Greek writers to be anachronistic, were destroyed at Gaugamela in 331 BC.
The Celts were still using chariots in Britain and Ireland a lot later than this. Caesar mentions them, Boudica used them, and they appear in the Tain -OK, that last is a myth cycle, but it is supposed to reflect 1st C. Ireland.
Yes, and I’m sure there are primitive tribes on the prehiphery of civilization today that still make war with bow and arrow, but I’d say the era of the bow and arrow as a battlefield dominating weapon is a tad past, no?
No civilization or military power of any importance made large scale use of the chariot after the ascention of calvary, which was a lot earlier than 500AD. Alexander’s calvary and infantry army made short work of Darius’ outdated chariots just as the Romans would of the British.
Well, where would Technicals come into it? A Toyota with a half dozen guys with assault rifles and a mounted machine gun in the bed is arguably equivilant to a chariot.
Of course, as the ICU recently learned in Somolia, the modern day analogue of chariots are no match for the modern day analogues of cavalry - tanks and attack aircraft, so the point still stands.
That wasn’t what you said - you said “The last time chariots were used”. All your qualifiers are coming in post hoc. I was pointing out that between Alexander and Boudicca there’s several centuries when the chariot kept current in parts of Europe.
And you pointing to primitive tribes versus modern warfare is a bad analogy, as the difference between chariot and cavalry isn’t as extreme as between AK47 and bow. A better analogy would be to say there are still people warring with Mausers and Lee Enfields.
I’m saying that chariots ceased to be a major or pivotal weapon on the ancient battlefield long before 500AD. The fact that the Celts/Britons continued to use them for some time after most of the world stopped does nothing to change this.
