Comments on: A Roman Villa (Part 2)

By: erikatakacs

erikatakacs — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 15:26:58 +0000

Well, novels should be read as fiction, and not as source of history. People should know that. I wouldn’t blame him for that. But this is an entirely different subject, I didn’t want to sidetrack your post. I was strictly referring to your style.

By: 100swallows

100swallows — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 14:28:40 +0000

Thanks, Erika. I read his bestseller and admired all the ingenuity in it but I was shocked at the way he messed with history. Somebody as knowledgeable as he is ought to be more responsible. He mis-educated a lot of people, all to make a good read.

By: erikatakacs

erikatakacs — Sun, 09 Mar 2008 23:06:10 +0000

Swallows, sometimes I wonder whether you’re Dan Brown in disguise. :) Your storytelling is so like his. And I mean that in a good way, because not everybody is his fan. I enjoyed it, good read.

By: 100swallows

100swallows — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 17:12:36 +0000

Danu: There is no sign of wear in the mosaics or the pieces of furniture that have been found (their feet, for instance). The ovens which heat the hypocaustum have not been used much, the mosaics look the same (except for some places where the ground has risen) as the day they were laid. Take the mosaics on the steps: just a few years of treading would wear those down fast, in a very visible and predictable way.
Old houses always show repairs and additions. Here there are none. The painting on the walls is the first and last coat.

You are a lucky dog to have worked with a good arky. You have done about everything, Danu!
I know what you mean about fabulation. The arkies, though they spend their time being scientific, often come up with the damnedest fantasies. Of course I’m just as bad or worse. Thanks about the “grace”.

By: ivdanu

ivdanu — Sat, 08 Mar 2008 15:57:53 +0000

As a history student I did one summer of archaeological practice. With one of our professors (Branga, specialist in the roman antiquity) we, the students, did unveil a villa rustica somewhere near the old town of Sibiu (Cibinium in latin). I have learn as much: usually, newer buildings are built OVER old one. Strata after strata of habitations, like the layers in a cake…Nothing surprising in that…

And how can anyone say that construction was never inhabitated? How can we know really what and how it happened a few thousands years ago, or a few hundreds when it is SO DIFFICULT to know what happended yesterday? Witnesses are way uncertain, material findings are interpretable (either way) and the only thing we can do is FABULATE? You do it with grace, anyway, swallows, and si non e verro e ben trovato…

By: A Roman Villa (Part I) « Great Names in History

A Roman Villa (Part I) « Great Names in History — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 11:28:54 +0000

[...] See A Roman Villa (Part 2) [...]