News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:The great Medieval water myth (2013) by baldfat on Wednesday February 11, 2015 @07:28AM (#9032462)
Former Historical Theology Student. If this drives you nuts wait till you read primary sources of many different historical documents and than just heard how people corrupt history all the time.

Example Nicolaus Copernicus, was persecuted by the Catholic Church for writing his sun centered book and arrested. The book in fact was dedicated to the Pope. It wasn't till 73 years after the book was written that anyone said anything against the theory. It wasn't even a theological attack but was a difference in philosophical thought which was from Aristotle and his opposition to mathematical physics (AKA numbers does not equal reality).

Re:The great Medieval water myth (2013) by analog31 on Wednesday February 11, 2015 @08:21AM (#9032647)
I've read a few books pertaining to the Galileo affair. It seems to be conventional wisdom that Copernicus had permission to publish his book, and that he was not attacked by the Church in his day.

I've also read that Galileo received favorable treatment from the Pope at first, then things went downhill for him later.

A weird tidbit, that I can't confirm, is that Martin Luther denounced Copernicus.

Re:The great Medieval water myth (2013) by ijk on Wednesday February 11, 2015 @08:43AM (#9032750)
There's a record of Luther dismissing Copernicus, or at least geocentrism, though it's from four years before On the Revolutions of the Heavenly Spheres was published:

"So it goes now. Whoever wants to be clever must agree with nothing that others esteem. He must do something of his own. This is what that fellow does who wishes to turn the whole of astronomy upside down."

But that's pretty mild for Luther. If he wasn't using scatalogical references, his heart wasn't really in it. We only know about it because many of Luther's casual conversations were recorded; he was literally complaining about it at the dinner table.

Re:The great Medieval water myth (2013) by mcguire on Wednesday February 11, 2015 @12:43PM (#9034236)
"So it goes now. Whoever wants to be clever must agree with nothing that others esteem. He must do something of his own. This is what that fellow does who wishes to turn the whole of astronomy upside down."

Fortunately, things are completely different in the modern world.

Re:The great Medieval water myth (2013) by xyzzyz on Wednesday February 11, 2015 @01:56PM (#9034763)
Well, Copernicus died before the book became widely available, didn't he? Maybe that's why he was not attacked during his life by church establishment.
Re:The great Medieval water myth (2013) by analog31 on Wednesday February 11, 2015 @07:34PM (#9036631)
Good eye. But it's still my understanding that the attack from the church fathers didn't occur until much later, around the time of the Galileo affair.
Re:The great Medieval water myth (2013) by kevinwang on Wednesday February 11, 2015 @08:37AM (#9032715)
Re:The great Medieval water myth (2013) by cturner on Wednesday February 11, 2015 @07:53AM (#9032532)

   > Example Nicolaus Copernicus
Where is it [falsely] written that Copernicus was attacked? There's a fair bit on Gallileo being attacked for advocating Copernicus' ideas. I can imagine innocent mistakes coming from confusion of this.
Re:The great Medieval water myth (2013) by robbrown451 on Wednesday February 11, 2015 @02:27PM (#9035066)
It was Galileo that was persecuted for promoting heliocentrism (a.k.a. "Copernicanism"). I was never taught that Copernicus was persecuted...but I can see why some people could get it mixed up. I think you'd have a hard time finding any historians that presented the position that Copernicus himself was persecuted -- it was probably mostly that teachers (etc) remembered incorrectly.
Re:The great Medieval water myth (2013) by mc32 on Wednesday February 11, 2015 @11:23AM (#9033714)
The way I've heard it wasn't that people drank wine instead of water rather that wine was less alcoholic in antiquity. Then people asked why and concluded it might have been more widely drunk. I don't recall hearing of it as a substitute for water. Just that it was weaker and thinking if the implications that could present.
Re:The great Medieval water myth (2013) by kedean on Wednesday February 11, 2015 @03:17PM (#9035452)
Yes, wine was weaker, but that only explains willingness to drink so much, not the actual practice. Romans and greeks generally watered their wine down to about half/half if I remember right, and considered anything higher to be barbaric (and a waste of good wine). That's part of why greeks could go all night drinking from bowls in large groups without turning into frat boys, the reduced alcohol content may everything quite a bit tamer than it could have been.
Re:The great Medieval water myth (2013) by benihana on Wednesday February 11, 2015 @08:43AM (#9032752)
Also the notion that humans in the past were just so vastly different than humans today is another myth we like to tell ourselves. We look at stonehenge and the pyramids of Giza and assume there must be some great philosophical plan behind it, not that people did things for the same reasons we do things today: to impress people, to leave our mark, to challenge ourselves, or just to try something new. The implication here is that if our ignorant savage ancestors endeavored to put the effort into building something, there must be a great spiritual or philosophical reason. It doesn't cross our minds that they sat around and pondered this stuff just like we do.

I feel like this plays into the popular idea that everything in medieval times was poorly built and covered in shit. We seem to want to think that because they lived in a largely illiterate, Church dominated feudal society that all the peasants were too stupid to function. That these savages would be too dim to possess the critical thinking skills to realize that if they used well built tools, that they could accomplish their work faster. That after thousands of years of human advancement, we hit this period where everyone not just lost accumulated knowledge, but forgot how to be a human in the process.

Re:The great Medieval water myth (2013) by Retric on Wednesday February 11, 2015 @09:20AM (#9032935)
While not exactly covered in shit, things where far more dirty than we are used to. First off dirt floors where fairly common, though this quickly became dry hard pact dirt which is better flooring than you might think. Second running water was uncommon let alone vacuums and dish washers. Even bathing was far less common as getting a warm bath together was difficult in the winter and bathing in freezing water is unpleasant. Add to that indoor fireplaces added quite a bit of smoke and soot into people’s homes.

That said, some things where higher quality back then. For example modern fast growth wood is far lower quality let alone things like particle board.

Re:The great Medieval water myth (2013) by mcguire on Wednesday February 11, 2015 @12:39PM (#9034218)
One of the more surprising things that I found in Claude Fisher's Made in America[1] is the idea that as late as the American colonial period, chairs were a luxury item. Presumably stools and benches were available, but sitting on the ground is the default choice.

[1] https://madeinamericathebook.wordpress.com/

Re:The great Medieval water myth (2013) by icebraining on Wednesday February 11, 2015 @10:36AM (#9033392)
You don't need to go to medieval times for that, though. My grandparents grew up in those conditions, here in Europe.
Re:The great Medieval water myth (2013) by Mobiu5 on Wednesday February 11, 2015 @10:51AM (#9033482)
Of course, high quality wood items still exist just as they did then. But now there are cheaper alternatives for those on a budget.
Re:The great Medieval water myth (2013) by abakker on Wednesday February 11, 2015 @11:24AM (#9033726)
I don't disagree that modern, high-quality wood items exist, but the actual wood available today is inferior. The hardwoods that came from old-growth forests are fundamentally different, as the wood from a tree that has survived hundreds of years is different than the wood from a tree that is only 50-60 years old.

One reason for this is that in larger trees, the rings themselves play less of a role in causing warping. Another is that many trees that make it to 50 years in a modern forest wouldn't have made it to 400 years if left alone. Old-growth forests have much greater spacing between trunks as the overgrowth trees that were successful outcompeted their neighbors; to have survived 400 years indicates a tree that was given superior placement and nutrition.

Finally, when trees are much older, they are much larger. This means that relatively more of the wood comes from the center of the tree, where there are fewer knots, voids, inclusions, etc. The moisture bearing part of the tree is on the outside, and in many species is unusable, so you have a much higher uniformity and yield in board feet from a bigger tree.

Re:The great Medieval water myth (2013) by panzagl on Wednesday February 11, 2015 @12:36PM (#9034202)
Old-growth wood would have been rare in much of medieval Europe as well.
Re:The great Medieval water myth (2013) by pekk on Wednesday February 11, 2015 @12:58PM (#9034348)
This has almost nothing to do with the original post, I guess you just wanted to bring up the strange idea that Christians are being unfairly persecuted all of the time by the less-religious minority.