(From reading the title only) This hilarious, and highlights the reason I got out of academia. Long, hard fought arguments over things that ultimately don't matter in the slightest.
(From reading the title only) This hilarious, and highlights the reason I got out of academia. Long, hard fought arguments over things that ultimately don't matter in the slightest.
I recently had a conversation with a professor about similar concerns about wasted words among historical Church scholars. Does the Trinity even really matter? His response, more nuanced than I...
I recently had a conversation with a professor about similar concerns about wasted words among historical Church scholars. Does the Trinity even really matter?
His response, more nuanced than I can muster in transaltion, was that truth actually matters, and I was compelled to agree. How to live is a Christian is dependent on a proper theology. The same may be true of history. In this case, the lesson might be to just lighten up on the sexual purity stuff.
There is an equivalence in science. Basic research is important because so many of the greatest discoveries come from a small, unrelated discovery leading to a whole new line of thought. History and other humanities are similarly important. This discovery may be just for fun, but paying attention to small details can change our understanding of past events, and how not to repeat mistakes of the past, or improve on their progress.
This one at least seems more in good fun/humor than a serious debate. Also, how often do you get to argue over if something's a penis or not in a genuinely professional context?
This one at least seems more in good fun/humor than a serious debate. Also, how often do you get to argue over if something's a penis or not in a genuinely professional context?
The context is actually interesting, though. From the picture, doesn’t look like a scabbard to me. There’s a dude to his left that doesn’t have one and it really stands out.
The context is actually interesting, though. From the picture, doesn’t look like a scabbard to me. There’s a dude to his left that doesn’t have one and it really stands out.
What, you haven't heard of the famous double-balled, red-knobbed scabbard? ;) More seriously though, there are plenty of medieval daggers that were intentionally designed to look phallic, and one...
What, you haven't heard of the famous double-balled, red-knobbed scabbard? ;)
More seriously though, there are plenty of medieval daggers that were intentionally designed to look phallic, and one kind in particular that even included testes. See: Bollock daggers, which were often depicted in medieval and Tudor imagery as being hung close to men's genital areas. See: Portrait of Henry VIII.
So it's actually not too much of a stretch to assume that the character in question in the Bayeux tapestry is simply wearing a scabbard containing a bollock style dagger of some sort, especially since the scabbard is depicted as being black while the wearer's skin is white. However, it's also worth noting that the Bayeux tapestry is from a few hundred years before we think bollock daggers really became popular.
Even if it is depicting a scabbard, the debate is still a bit pointless though since much like with the Henry VIII portrait it was probably still fully intended as sexual innuendo.
(From reading the title only) This hilarious, and highlights the reason I got out of academia. Long, hard fought arguments over things that ultimately don't matter in the slightest.
I recently had a conversation with a professor about similar concerns about wasted words among historical Church scholars. Does the Trinity even really matter?
His response, more nuanced than I can muster in transaltion, was that truth actually matters, and I was compelled to agree. How to live is a Christian is dependent on a proper theology. The same may be true of history. In this case, the lesson might be to just lighten up on the sexual purity stuff.
There is an equivalence in science. Basic research is important because so many of the greatest discoveries come from a small, unrelated discovery leading to a whole new line of thought. History and other humanities are similarly important. This discovery may be just for fun, but paying attention to small details can change our understanding of past events, and how not to repeat mistakes of the past, or improve on their progress.
This one at least seems more in good fun/humor than a serious debate. Also, how often do you get to argue over if something's a penis or not in a genuinely professional context?
The context is actually interesting, though. From the picture, doesn’t look like a scabbard to me. There’s a dude to his left that doesn’t have one and it really stands out.
What, you haven't heard of the famous double-balled, red-knobbed scabbard? ;)
More seriously though, there are plenty of medieval daggers that were intentionally designed to look phallic, and one kind in particular that even included testes. See: Bollock daggers, which were often depicted in medieval and Tudor imagery as being hung close to men's genital areas. See: Portrait of Henry VIII.
So it's actually not too much of a stretch to assume that the character in question in the Bayeux tapestry is simply wearing a scabbard containing a bollock style dagger of some sort, especially since the scabbard is depicted as being black while the wearer's skin is white. However, it's also worth noting that the Bayeux tapestry is from a few hundred years before we think bollock daggers really became popular.
Even if it is depicting a scabbard, the debate is still a bit pointless though since much like with the Henry VIII portrait it was probably still fully intended as sexual innuendo.