Thanks to bbc and to Michael Scott for this great three parts of documents that express so beautifully the way of life of ancient greeks inciding in the importance of Drama. I never guessed that Drama were as significant as indeed it were. Is a fantastic opportunity to me to learn to listen english and over all, from these great representative men from British Universities. Thanks to you. Beautiful images too.Farewell.
ΣΥΓΧΑΡΗΤΗΡΙΑ ΘΕΡΜΑ κύριε Μιχαήλ Σκόττ . Είναι συγκινητική η ελληνομάθειά σας και η ενθουσιώδης ευαισθησία σας . Κερδίζετε επαξίως τον τίτλο - βραβείο του φιλέλληνος.
Romans when conquered Greece took thousands of ships/wagons of monuments and art in general and they moved them to Italy and in the same time all philosophers and highly educated people went to Italy as teachers.
That senate house, or curia, at the back of the garden behind the Theatre of Pompey, was where Julius Caesar was assassinated in 44 BC. You can still see about 100 square feet of the foundation of the back of it sticking out in the Largo di Torre Argentina, behind the circular temple, of the goddess of the luck of the day, with the stucco still on its columns, near where the narrator is speaking with the other man in the video around 16:34. The tree that is growing in the middle of that foundation, is very close to where the statue of Pompey stood at the back of the curia, so that when you are standing on the sidewalk looking down upon it, you are basically just a few feet above the spot where Caesar fell. Gotta love ancient cities for that.
This is, BY FAR, the best of the various “Greek documentary BBC series” that Dr. Scott hosts : long enough, to be fairly authoritative on ONE, small aspect of Greek life (theater)… This is in opposition to the far more -perhaps over-adventurous - “The History of Greece,” series (in 3 hours ), which was, of course, so condensed & abbreviated, that more was omitted than included……
clearly a grade 1 programme not concentrating on the military aspects, but on the humanities. I hope to see more like this, instead of the headline grabbing, with little understanding of time and place, programmes. well done, BBC Mike in Ireland
Love with past faded glories, repertoire of music and theater of only famous, established works, reflect today's attitudes toward many contemporary writers. New works are squashed as well and stagnates just as in the period mentioned in this video.
Thanks, This was wonderful. This and some other series by Dr. Scott that I have seen so far, but I wonder if you can have a Blueray or something to collect those wonderful Documentaries/Lectures by Dr. Scott.
So really, to be blunt: the Romans were highly prejudiced against foreigners, believing themselves to be superior, and this attitude significantly coloured their plays and treatment of other cultures. They were envious and jealous of the Greeks, so even though they tried so hard to copy Greek art and theatre, they enjoyed using their own plays to mock and demean the Greeks, portraying them as stupid and inferior, outwitted by even their own slaves (laughable to Romans with their strict social hierarchy and growing slave-state). Unlike Greek plays, which would pose sharp sociopolitical questions, make criticisms, and could laugh at themselves, the Romans couldn't really laugh at themselves or tolerate criticisms (only "inferior" foreign characters mocked Romans). Instead of introspection and asking questions of society, the Romans wrote plays that confirmed that the world was the way the Romans wanted it to be, and celebrated history the way they wanted to remember it. So, ultimately, Roman plays ignored uncomfortable questions, preserving a world view of Roman superiority and hierarchy where the Romans could feel good about themselves - or at least the aristocrats could. Pretty much sums up Rome and its problems, actually.
Ummmm, the Greeks were probably the biggest "racists" the world had ever seen! And also the STAUNCHEST REGIONALISTS, thus the infighting & wars amongst each other, which the Romans gladly took advantage of. The Greeks thought everyone was inferior to them & their Particular City or Kingdom. That includes the Persians, Romans, and everyone else! Amongst each other, they vilified & made fun of every aspect of each others unique states, from their dress codes, mannerisms, and dialects..
@@SpartanLeonidas1821 Yes, you're right. One of the aspects that allowed Rome to conquer the Mediterranean world was its large manpower, largely composed by those peoples who were granted citizenship. Rome managed to assimilate populations in a way that Greeks simply could not. Moreover, the Romans freed the Greek cities after defeating the kings of Epirus and Macedonia. What did the Greeks do with their new freedom? Quarreled among themselves, permanently sending embassies to the Roman Senate, asking for intervention or arbitration. It was the Greeks, with their petty quarrels and disunity, who brought the Romans unto themselves. Certainly, Rome was no heaven, nor Romans were any saints at all. Neither were the Greeks.
Actors were about the lowest on the social ladder as you can get in Rome and later in Roman worshiping nations like England. Even lower than criminals, beggars, or common slaves. In fact the only way to be lower down in the veiw of society, was to be an actor and slave who was caught in a crime . They were considered morally damaged and corrupt as they lied for a living and with no personal honor or pride as they willingly gave up self and identity to take anothers identity. Definitely the opposite of the city of Athena, where actors were given awards and accolades.
ROMAN SENATE SPOKE GREEK ,GREEK TEACHER TAUGHT ROMANS TO READ AND WRITE MANY THINGS ROMANS HAD WERE TAKEN FROM GREECE THE GOOD THING WAS ROMANS NEVER DENIED THIS,
The Romans were better at government and engineering, but the Athenians had the best sense of fun, and were really the least monstrous of the ancients: That it was possible for a comedy god like Aristophanes to flourish among them is something of a miracle, especially when you consider that in much of the so-called modern world today his like would be promptly executed, with maximum prejudice, for satirizing his contemporaries with so little restraint and so much imaginative freedom. It's in this sense that Rome, though geographically further west, was never as far West culturally as the Greeks were, at least on the whole. True, they had Ovid, Catullus and Lucretius, and others who were as far West in attitude, but they were apart from, rather than a central part of, the civilization in which they lived.
What? Your comparison makes no sense. Let me remind you that the Romans were inclusive of non Latins into their republic unlike the Athenians who just restricted it to those who were natives if Attica, not to mention the Spartans who didn't even include the Perioikoi. Rome, in Ethos, was somewhere between Sparta and Athens; disciplined, militaristic, austere and "devout" of law like Sparta but also very inclusive(more so then the Athenians) of foreigners and almost a full democracy(Concilium Plebis). I say almost because the Senate was still revered by the Romans just like the Gerousia was among Spartans.
@@jasonivancontreras9340Thats Correct! The Greeks downfall was their non-exclusive tendencies. They were equal opportunist "racists" & stern regionalists! This is why they constantly fought each other, whether in the City State Era or the Diadochi "War of the Worlds" Era…😃
Greeks and Italians are close culturally but they are not friends. Every nation is out for itself. In times of crisis and desperation, best friends can turn into worst enemies (such as World War II)... Besides, Greeks and Italians, in this modern world, have much less power and cultural influence than the Ancient Greeks and Romans did.
forgot to mention the colosseum of Rome was designed by a Greek, ALSO THE PARTHENON IN ATHENS IS A BUILDING THAT EVEN TODAY CANNOT BE DUPLICATED IT WAS TRIED IN THE USA WITH ALL THE ENGENEERS AND COMPUTERS ;BUT FAILED MOST UNIK AND COPIED BUILDING IN THE WORLD
There doesn't appear to be any close captioning on this - the automated kind probably wouldn't have caught it either...but what does that guy ramble off at around 34:58? "The funny thing is, the Greek word for ??? seems to be associated with standing up. Whereas the Roman word for civil ??? is actually connected to ideas of sitting down." I feel like maybe he uses Greek and Latin words in there but swallows/mumbles them so quickly that whatever the English equivalent is, is lost.
"The funny thing is, the Greek word for *civil strife, stasis,* seems to be associated with standing up. Whereas the Roman word for *civil strife, sedition,* is actually connected to ideas of sitting down."
Believe it or not, you can find a little bit of Ancient Greece in almost every home, in almost every kitchen. Under the stove. Ummm, the Greeks introduced theater to the ancient world. The Romans kept it alive forever after, at least in one form or another. Cornelius Sulla engaged in a form of theater and acting before being elected to consulship. Perhaps I should refrain from further indulgence in comedy and the power of words while I'm ahead?
Graecia capta ferum victorem cepit et artes intulit agresti Latiο. Oratio Epistolarum, II,1,156 Greece, once conquered, in turn conquered its uncivilized conqueror, and brought the arts to rustic Latium (Horace).
"[...] Platonic myth may thus be roughly defined as a tale of various episodes reported by the voice of the narrator only...which tries to reveal in iconic form the initial truth of the world. The synoptic function of the myth whose circular structure duplicates that of the cosmos enables it to integrate in one vision the manifold experiences acquired by men through contact with things. As in a theater the representation of the invisible takes shape and puts rhythm into space. "At the center of the enclosure built on a hill and opened to the outer world, the drama that holds together the lives of men with the lives of gods, as well as the forces of heaven with those of the earth, enacts the meeting point of all the perspectives to which it communicates its primal unity." The Theater of Myth in Plato Jean-Francois Matte'i, in PLATONIC WRITINGS, PLATONIC READINGS, ed. Charles Griswold Show less
I read El libro de Michael by Femin Bocos in spanish and wondered why this book isn't available in German. All the names and the fascination of Greece, all the history of the places and the influence in connection with wider philosophical meanings, seemed unknown or full of dust - not in that way vivid and full of actuality . Well - we live in a virtual computer world, so why should we think about ruins, stones and speculations of far-gone times? Walking straigt through or building a road for cars is much more important and eficient, instead of walking around ruins and archeological stuff hidden in the ground (that's the way most people think! I found out for myself while reading, that thinking like this, is a mistake. But, that I only find something about it in a few standard works of mythology like Gustave Schwab on the book-market or in cross-words, is a pitty, I don't manage to read the Odyssee and Sophocles and his fellows are so gruesome in their plays, so tragic things they deal with, it's heavy stuff! We don't even have much drawings or children's books with stories about ancient history. The classic is an exclusive knowledge and for elite and educated people only, but not for normal people. The reason why the classic is such a treasure of humanity and the struggle for democracy, is something that needs explanation and lecturing, so I would like to thank Dr. Michael Scott for his super interesting engagement. Please go on and work together with German universities.
As societies became more autocratic, theater was turned from events of creative democratic participation into caricature scripted soap operas. Talk about history repeating it self!
….The point is, for all of the grumbling about “Empire” & the British, the entire WORLD-esp. those countries whose heritage & relics have been so important to history-owe Britain the greatest debt of thanks…..If not for the British, those marbles would have been broken up, and long ago sold on the black market, or by corrupt governments….There would be no “Greek/Roman/Egyptian” relics-for the same reason… It was due, almost 100%, to enlightened, upper-crust British-who realized the immense value to humankind to protect & preserve these cultures-for the generations to come… It’s very easy for formerly unenlightened/destitute/colonized countries to say NOW-after centuries of BRITISH care & study of such items, not to mention, often great sums paid for same-“We want them back”……As HISTORY has shown : countries vulnerable to weakness, corruption & instability in the past…tend to REPEAT such patterns in future. I hope the UK NEVER returns them, lest they be lost forever…
@ 52:42 "the tutor to Hadrian's children, Herodes Atticus". Who are these children? It is well known that Hadrian had no children. And Herodes was a millionaire, not a teacher. Are we meant to take these children as metaphorical?
Yes, mocking Roman aristocrats in plays is not cool... But mocking them in person is? And even mocking the emperors to their face in public was okay? Because this was a common practice throughout the Roman period and even throughout the Byzantine period. It's even noted as exceptional and bad form when emperors like Domitian can't handle getting grief from the public.
Hellenistic, they are use that word pretty loosely. However, when the Greeks, and the Romans took the Hellenistic's ways to Ancient Egypt and to Egypt Israel and took their way of life and their religions. The Hellenistic Jews are still walking around to day. They are those white looking so called Jews.
"marble columns imported from turkey"...and it was so nice show you ruined it at the end...when you talk for those ages you should say asia minor or asia not turkey.turkey came 2000 years later.
phoenix1925 Only if people have a problem with Turks, like they are Greeks with a xenophobic prejudice against their neighbours who ruled them for centuries, does this sort of thing become a problem.
Matthew McVeagh well. it's a matter of precision, not prejudice! I admire Dr Scott for being precise, so I'm rather demanding: Asia Minor he should have said!
Yorgo Skep We get a similar issue with Canaan/Judah/Israel/Philistia/Samaria/Palestine/Israel again/Levant/Holy Land. If people feel emotional about the replacement of one culture by another in a geographical area - the supplanting of one political country by another in the same geographical country - these things may matter to them. But to a British audience the land area we're talking about can be called 'Turkey' without that meaning a polity created by ethnic/linguistic Turks. Just as we talk about the prehistoric animals in North America long before Amerigo Vespucci found the continent, which itself was long after Siberians found it from the north-west and populated it. Or many other examples. "Asia Minor" itself has a history and an origin, and will have been felt to be inappropriate when applied to the whole of Anatolia, by some ancient peoples who have disappeared culturally now.
it's one thing to steal another's IP to put on RU-vid for educative purposes. but it really is quite another when you steal another's IP fill it with advertising on youtube for your own gain. you really are the lowest of the low
……I FAR preferred the academic panel from part II to this group (and the Kings College Professor, Rosie Wyles, is just…not very informative-and far too eager to say what she thinks Dr. Scott wants to hear)…
