What Are You Reading Right Now? ( Hwæt béon ðu bocrædung?) Showing 1,901-1,950 of 10,106

[Simona]

Terri wrote: "Maybe they would not say "mama mia", since wouldn't that refer to the Virgin Mary, so would be anachronistic. But they could say "Bona Dea" [good goddess] who was one of their goddesses.
A thought: Vespasian was in Britannia [with the II Legion]-- maybe he could have learned the word "lass" there. :) ."

Actually, "mamma mia" does not refer to the Virgin Mary but to the mother of the speaker, so he/she could have used it - I'm almost sure that also Romans had mothers.
Italians would probably use "bella" to address a young girl (meaning beautiful).

[Simona]

Tim wrote: "Gratuitous swearing has no place anywhere, however people are people and haven't changed through the centuries, and classical writers record the fact that Roman legionaries used bad language as muc..."

I agree Tim, Romans sweared copiously, as one of my favourite poets, Catullus, Gaius Valerius, can demonstrate. Bad language was - in Rome, I don't know about Celts or Vikings - as frequent as it is today. The Latin professor of my kids showed them some inscriptions found in Pompeii: really colorful!

[Darcy]

Out comes the anthropologist in me: I suppose I would question whether morality/ethics/codes of good conduct were imposed on language the same way then as they are now? Would the meanings/sentiments that we have toward these words today be understood in the same way? I'm not convinced. Does anyone know if there's any evidence of this or are there any studies on the subject?

[Jane]

Simona wrote: "Tim wrote: "Gratuitous swearing has no place anywhere, however people are people and haven't changed through the centuries, and classical writers record the fact that Roman legionaries used bad lan..."

If I'm not mistaken, that tv program "Rome" used those graffiti; they're copies of ones from Pompeii, so they should be authentic.
BTW, the first few episodes of "Rome" uses Latin vulgarities. I don't know what happens as the series progresses and different writers are used, as I've only seen a few episodes.

You mention Catullus: In Orff's Catulli Carmina, the cantata, the bad language isn't always translated.

[Mark]

Monica wrote: "I'm hooked on the Maureen Ash Templar Knight mysteries! Just finished book 3: A Plague of Poison and on to book 4: Murder for Christ's Mass

This could make an interesting TV series. I could see A..."

i am glad you are liking them, i have only read the first 2.

[Tim]

D wrote: "Out comes the anthropologist in me: I suppose I would question whether morality/ethics/codes of good conduct were imposed on language the same way then as they are now? Would the meanings/sentiment hat we have toward these words today be understood in the same way? I'm not convinced. Does anyone know if there's any evidence of this or are there any studies on the subject?"

If we take the example of the English language, the absolute worst thing you could say in the middle ages was to swear on the body parts of God, but it was OK to use the word "queynte" in everyday speech, which is the middle english form of a word that I don't believe you can say on the TV in the UK today. Like I said above, everyday words used by the Anglo-Saxons are now considered very rude, but only due to the fact that the Normans invaded and denigrated the status of the Old English language.

[Mark]

Tim wrote: "D wrote: "Out comes the anthropologist in me: I suppose I would question whether morality/ethics/codes of good conduct were imposed on language the same way then as they are now? Would the meanings..."
only after 9pm.

[Jane]

D wrote: "Out comes the anthropologist in me: I suppose I would question whether morality/ethics/codes of good conduct were imposed on language the same way then as they are now? Would the meanings/sentiment..."

Just guessing, but I'm assuming a lot of our morality comes from Judaeo-Christian standards. Standards would probably be much more relaxed in a non-Judaeo-Christian society.

[Simona]

Jane wrote: "You mention Catullus: In Orff's Catulli Carmina, the cantata, the bad language isn't always translated."

Neither Carmina Burana are, but colorful Catullo poems have been translated a number of times, from very good translators, over the years. And in Carmina Catulli there isn't actually any swearing, but *ahem* some mentioning of body parts.

[Kate]

I'm not sure I'd agree that characters depicted in ancient Roman books should use Italian words. After all, in that era there WAS no Italian - they would be speaking Latin. So surely Italian would be as inaccurate as anything else.

The question of how to make dialogue in HF sound realistic and yet still readable truly is a never-ending conundrum, though. As Tim said above, one man's meat is another man's poison.

Swearing can be a particular thorn in the side when writing anything pre-Christian. Because how many exclamations refer to "God" in some derivation or other? "Oh God, Dear God, Oh Jesus Christ" etc. You have to find some equivalent that doesn't sound quite so corny as "Oh, Zeus!"

[Terri, Wyrd bið ful aræd]

Simona wrote: "Terri wrote: "Maybe they would not say "mama mia", since wouldn't that refer to the Virgin Mary, so would be anachronistic. But they could say "Bona Dea" [good goddess] who was one of their goddess..."

Just checking...you have me writing that quote and you are replying to it, but I did not say that. :-)

[Terri, Wyrd bið ful aræd]

Kate wrote: "I'm not sure I'd agree that characters depicted in ancient Roman books should use Italian words. After all, in that era there WAS no Italian - they would be speaking Latin. So surely Italian woul..."

Hi Kate,
Here's the thing though. I don't think any of us were saying they should swear in latin. I think Jane mentioned the series Rome where they do swear in latin.
I myself, was saying that Roman soldiers would have had nothing in common with a British Squaddie and I don't think they should speak like they are from Liverpool and I don't think excessive modern interpretations of swearwords are authentic.
Not all British Squaddies even speak in the way that some writers implant onto their Roman soldiers. When I refer to them speaking like Bristish Squaddies I don't just mean the swearing though, I mean the style of the dialogue. Swearing is one part of that.

As mentioned earlier. I do not mind the occasional swear word in a Hist fic. A couple is hardly noticeable. Robert Low for instance, in his Viking series, uses the F word every mow and then. Not enough to make the language sound modern, just enough to emphasise when a character is irate about a situation or someone.
And then Bernard Cornwell, as far as I can remember, has never used the F word in his books. If he has it is like Robert Low. A natural use of the F word and not a forced over the top use of multiple swearing in an effort to sound cool.

In some kinds of HF books, the use is not only of an occasional F word..warning, swearing ahead..eg (view spoiler)[
Swearing sounds natural to me in this example;
Vespasian threw himself to the ground and wiped his sword on the grass to clean it. "F#ck, I thought he had me."

But then some authors swear too much thinking it is what readers think is cool.
"Come on fuckers. Move your f#cking arses, or I'll pig f#ck you all into Sunday if you don't stop being slack bastards!."

(hide spoiler)]

Too much swearing and usinf swearwords in modern ways takes the quality out of a book and turns it into D#ck Lit. And dick lit is not for me. :-)

[Bobby]

I agree swearing, esp. the F word, is a style of dialogue and can exemplify the mood of the speaker at that moment. I'm sure they had a full vocabulary of "swear" words for their time that wouldn't probably translate today. Well put, Terri.

[Jane]

Simona wrote: "Jane wrote: "You mention Catullus: In Orff's Catulli Carmina, the cantata, the bad language isn't always translated."

Neither Carmina Burana are, but colorful Catullo poems have been translated a ..."
You're right -- not bad language per se [I used the wrong term] but pretty--uh--earthy in places.
I like this music 1000% better than Carmina Burana.

[Jane]

Terri wrote: "Kate wrote: "I'm not sure I'd agree that characters depicted in ancient Roman books should use Italian words. After all, in that era there WAS no Italian - they would be speaking Latin. So surely..."

I love your coinage "dick lit"!! :)
Yes, I've noticed no swearing in Cornwell. Also, Ruth Downie is pretty clean.

[Terri, Wyrd bið ful aræd]

Sometimes it is the only term that describes a book. :D

[Dawn]

Should we be adding it to the group description??? :)

[Kate]

What I admire is when writers find creative bad language. In HBO's "Rome" I remember one of the heroes used to shout in frustration "Gates of Dis!" which in context sounded quite natural. And conversely, endearments (literally the flip side of the profanity coin): the other HBO Rome hero used to address his ladies as "my honey" rather that just "honey" which might have sounded too modern. (And I believe that's an endearment that had a basis in one of the ancient Roman writers like Ovid, but I can't remember which . . . *goes to look up*)

And I don't mind the occasional use of the F-word either in HF - after all, even if the word itself is in English, the concept exists in more or less every language! Over-use, as has been noted in this thread, tends to make things sound too modern.

[Terri, Wyrd bið ful aræd]

Kate wrote: "What I admire is when writers find creative bad language. In HBO's "Rome" I remember one of the heroes used to shout in frustration "Gates of Dis!" which in context sounded quite natural. And con..."


I like that. Gates of Dis!! I may use it. :)

[Terri, Wyrd bið ful aræd]

Dawn wrote: "Should we be adding it to the group description??? :)"

lol. Definitely not. I do not like D#ck Lit books. They gives HF a bad name. :)

[Jane]

Kate wrote: "What I admire is when writers find creative bad language. In HBO's "Rome" I remember one of the heroes used to shout in frustration "Gates of Dis!" which in context sounded quite natural. And con..."

In the Colleen McCullough's
Roman series, she used "mi mel" which could be translated as "my honey". I seem to remember in the parts of "Rome" I saw: "Sons of Dis" and "Cac"! Those got the idea across without relying on the vulgar [and overused]. And I have no objections to the two words they used for physical intimacy [except the F-word].

[Simona]

Terri wrote: "Just checking...you have me writing that quote and you are replying to it, but I did not say that. :-)
"

You are right! I was answering to Jane. Sorry, I made a mess of copy-paste-reply-edit....

[Richard]

Mods - if this post constitutes spam, please don't hesitate to delete it.

I think authors need to not only be authentic but, to a certain extent, pander to a reader's expectations. Undoubtedly the people of Rome spoke in such a way that, even translated, would be alien to us and difficult to read, so we shouldn't even try to imitate it too authentically.

My novel is set in Ancient Egypt and use an old-fashioned way of speaking which is probably closer to Victorian than anything else. This isn't because they actually spoke in that way, but because it gives an 'old-fashioned' feel to the dialogue while remaining understandable. If I was to use an Egyptian style of speech (or, at least, as close as we can approximate from surviving inscriptions and letters) it would be terribly authentic, but also terribly unreadable.

I was lucky in the extent that most of my characters were members of court and so are easy to 'hear' using received pronunciation, but how to treat everyday people from history is a bit of a dilemma. I think I'd draw the line at trying to echo modern accents though.

Picture the scene. Boadicea lies in the field of battle. Over her stands the imposing frame of a Roman legionary, his sword held at her throat. Her voice etched with defiance, Boadicea speaks:

"Howay pet Roman man! Lerrus gerrup yer big soft Southern Jesse!"

"Alright geerl," the Roman replies. "Calm down, calm down. Dee doo doh, don't dee doh?"

It just doesn't work for me.

[Tim]

Richard wrote: ""Howay pet Roman man! Lerrus gerrup yer big soft Southern Jesse!"

"Alright geerl," the Roman replies. "Calm down, calm down. Dee doo doh, don't dee doh?"

It just doesn't work for me..."

You haven't watched that movie "The Eagle" then have you? :-)

[Richard]

Tim wrote: "You haven't watched that movie "The Eagle" then have you? :-)"

I haven't. And from your comment, I somehow think I never will.

[Jane]

Oh good grief!!! The Eagle was terrible. The Eagle Of The Ninth was 1000% better. I liked the other 2 books in Rosemary Sutcliff's Roman-Britain trilogy:
The Silver Branch was ok
and I really liked The Lantern Bearers

You're not missing a thing if you don't see that movie!

[Terri, Wyrd bið ful aræd]

Richard,
That's bloody funny. :D

Accents and swearing.
I write also. I do it for me and will probably never try and get published. I write in the 11th century.
When I do dialogue, if I wanted a Saxon to curse about something, I may say (although I haven't) "By William's hairy backside!" Or that sort of thing.
To me it is authentic for a culture to curse or say an oath and use a hated figure in their culture. In history it may be a way of denigrating a King or Caesar they don't like. In my opinion, they would risk their neck to say these kinds of curses in private as they would face reprimand if overheard by a supporter of said King or Caesar. Political protest through swearing.
The F means the act of sex. It just doesn't compute to me that they would call something a F#cking such and such. "Get those f#cking men up here." sexing men? That would make no sense. That is our modern use of the word. Whereas I would believe using the f#ck word on its own, and that's why I do tolerate it on its own in HF.

When I write though, I would never think of using the F word. It makes no sense to me or to my characters to say swearwords like that. Even though in real life I swear more than anyone I know.
Historical cultures may have sworn, but we don't know in what context they did so I am not going to force my modern interpretations of swearing onto my characters.

Being born in the 70's...even in my lifetime I have seen swearing change and become more frequent.
I feel in the 80's, the American movies started increasing our 'swearload'. Those movies made it cool to swear much and often. And it has been only getting worse from there.
A special award on that goes to Samuel L. Jackson for "Let's get these mother f#cking snakes off this mother f#cking plane".
I am already seeing lines like that in Hist Fic (only sans the plane and the snakes) and it is so bloody stupid.

[Bryn]

Whaddayaknow. That last post of Terri's expresses my thoughts too. I'll second it.

Particularly like the 'political protest through swearing' bit. Go guys, and I bet they did. Indeed I know they did. What's more, that's interesting to read and contributes to the historical story!

[Terri, Wyrd bið ful aræd]

I agree. It is interesting to read. I admire an author who so cleverly uses politics of the day to create cursing or 'under the breath' oaths. That is using the old coconut.

[Bryn]

Terri wrote: "I admire an author who so cleverly uses politics of the day to create cursing or 'under the breath' oaths.

Reminds me of our nursery rhymes that are in fact old political lampoons. From the English Civil War or what-not. Lampoons were huge and we have no end of examples of them. What they sung at Caesar in the streets. Swearing is pretty obviously going to go down those avenues.

Edit. I never spell Caesar right. Since I wasn't there to sing in the streets, instead I misspell. It's an unconscious kind of graffiti.

[Terri, Wyrd bið ful aræd]

I had not thought about that. I can think of a few nursery rhymes that are actually political lampoons...
Of course the one I can't get out of my head now wasn't a political lampoon, but a nursery rhyme about the Black Death. :( Ring-a-ring-a-rosey.

[Bryn]

I always enjoyed 'The Grand Old Duke of York'--maybe an early interest in historical fiction--which, Wiki tells me, is attributed to a number of potentials. I still think it's funny today.

[Terri, Wyrd bið ful aræd]

That was one I was thinking of. A classic example.

[Tim]

Terri wrote: "I agree. It is interesting to read. I admire an author who so cleverly uses politics of the day to create cursing or 'under the breath' oaths. That is using the old coconut."

However that's not "historically accurate" either: we know that 11th century people in England swore/cursed on the body of Christ or God. "By God's Blood/Bones" was just about the worst thing you could say in those days. If you wanted to protest against King William all you needed to do was go and shoot one of his deer.

[Bryn]

@Tim Ah, but I think the nursery rhymes (God knows how they've lasted from five centuries ago, but so they seem to), and the graffiti, prove that this type of swearing went on. Maybe from the creative and/or politicised element.

I do like religious swearing in histfic. Again, it's cultural information.

[Jane]

Terri wrote: "Richard,
That's bloody funny. :D

Accents and swearing.
I write also. I do it for me and will probably never try and get published. I write in the 11th century.
When I do dialogue, if I wanted a..."

With me, I finally figured it out -- it's the SOUND of the word and other obscenities/taboo/coarse words that have "uh" -- the "uh" sound is so ugly.

@Terri -- I liked your post about the meaning of the F-word and how it's been misused as an adjective.

[Terri, Wyrd bið ful aræd]

Tim wrote: However that's not "historically accurate" either: we know that 11th century people in England swore/cursed on the body of Christ or God. "By God's Blood/Bones" was just about the worst thing you could say in those days. If you wanted to protest against King William all you needed to do was go and shoot one of his deer...."

But, as Bryn says, it is historically accurate to curse the King or mock the King, or Caesar etc... Yes, they used religious curses too. For the record, I wasn't saying they didn't.

P.S And shooting the King's deer isn't a political protest.

[Bryn]

It can be done with three eyes in the head.
Sorry, joke. I have eight on my 'currents'.

[Bryn]

And "The Golden Mean" which I hadn't heard of, looks interesting. On Aristotle as Alexander's tutor. Trying a sample now.

[Terri, Wyrd bið ful aræd]

Good luck, Marina. I am hopeless. I am one. When i try for two I fail.

[Tim]

Terri wrote: "Tim wrote: However that's not "historically accurate" either: we know that 11th century people in England swore/cursed on the body of Christ or God. "By God's Blood/Bones" was just about the worst ..."

At the risk of sounding like some sort of hippy, I think we are probably all correct in different ways. @Bryn I was intrigued by what you said about nursery rhymes and looked into it a bit. Some of this rings true to me, and personally I now side with the theory that The Grand Old Duke of York refers to James II.
As for Caesar, one of Ben Kane's books (maybe Spartacus) mentions the rather derogatory names folks in Rome used for him based on his alleged promiscuity - something about being "every man's wife" but I can't remember which book it was so can't quote it directly.
As for the deer , in England under the early Norman yoke, a simple act of survival like killing the King's deer (which was pretty much all deer, as he had annexed most of the forests in the country for him and his cronies to use as private hunting grounds) was regarded as an act of treason, which is political act, if not strictly a "protest". I think Angus Donald in "Outlaw" went through the whole "caught red handed" thing in one of the chapters.
As for William's hairy backside, it never ceases to amuse me that up until he conquered England, William of Normandy's official title was "William the B*stard". With a nickname like that he would have had to do something drastic to get a new one.
@Terri: Please consider publishing your work. IMHO there isn't enough HF set in 11th century England, a fascinating, very violent time. the possibilities for adventure are enormous. I've read that you should write the sort of book you want to read and given what we know about your HF tastes if you do that its bound to be a great read.

[Dawn]

You'll be able to do it Marina, having at least 4 books on the go at the same time staves off boredom in any one book. :)

[Simona]

Marina wrote: "I've seen people on GR with 3 and more books, that's why I decided to give it a try, see if I could do it.
Maybe it helps they're all historical fictions."

On the contrary, in my experience it gets confusing: it's much easier to mix really different genres.

[Dawn]

Personally I find that as long as it's different eras the multiple HF books works. So a medieval and a WWI at the same time are okay.

[Alex]

When I read simultaneously several books, I also select books describing different time periods. Also it is easy to read in the same time fiction and nonfiction.

[Simona]

Dawn wrote: "Personally I find that as long as it's different eras the multiple HF books works. So a medieval and a WWI at the same time are okay."

...or different eras, you are right.

[Darcy]

As well as time, I try to have the multiple books be about different 'cultures' for lack of better term. Currently, I'm reading about Brazilian Jews in New Amsterdam, a book mostly set in Bruges with ties to the Medici in Florence, and a mystery featuring Dante Aligheri as the investigator.

[Simona]

And how are you liking the Alighieri mistery?

[Darcy]

I've just started it, but so far I'm enjoying it.

[Tim]

I'm very much a 1 book at a time person. I found that in the past if I try to read several simultaneously I almost always never finish most of them. My wife says that is because as a male I cannot "multi task", though when i pointed out that I can both watch TV and drink beer at the same time she just gave me a look that suggested pity.