blatham wrote:Thanks.
No, wasn't trying to be cute, though I have cuteness available at a moment's notice. It's just that 1) my limited familiarity with Latin writing at that period has never bumped into such commentary and 2) my familiarity with your writing demonstrates a dependably recurrent Finnish theme ("Intellectuals! Sometimes they poop, sometimes they speak and if they weren't constitutionally upside down then they might themselves know which one it is they are doing.")
A couple of items found through a quick and rough Google search:
From Barbarians to New Men: Greek, Roman, and Modern Perceptions of Peoples of the Central Apennines By Emma Dench
This study explores the conflicting Greek and Roman perceptions of the mountain peoples of ancient Italy: as either dangerous, decadent, snake-charming barbarians; or as austere, morally upright country-people and soldiers. It considers how Roman identity developed to encompass them.
"His treatment of the Germanic peoples outside the empire is of mixed value to historians. Tacitus uses what he reports of the German character as a kind of 'noble savage' as a comparison to contemporary Romans and their (in his eyes) 'degeneracy'. Despite this drawback, he does supply us with many names for tribes with which Rome had come into contact. Tacitus' information was not, in general, based on first-hand knowledge, and more recent research has shown that many of his assumptions were incorrect. In fact, contemporary historians debate whether all these tribes were really Germanic in the sense that they spoke a Germanic language - some of them, like the Batavii, may have been Celts.
Tacitus survived a reign of terror and from a senator he advanced to consulship in AD 97 . Fifteen years later he held the highest civilian governorship, that of Western Anatolia. Tacitus was a friend of Pliny the Younger and was greatly admired by him. His wife was the daughter of Julius Agricola, who governed in Britain and was the subject of one of his works.
Enough links found to confirm to me that by old history prof was correct. If you disagree, fine.
For relevance see
Barbarians
By the way, I do not have contempt for all intellectuals, only the ones who glory in the label, the ones who consider themselve so apart from the masses they would judge, the ones who loath their own intellectual foundation. In short, the ones who are horses' asses.
