Isn't it time to start winding Classics departments down? Or is there stuff still left to cover? I don't want to rush anybody, but I also feel like there's some more useful work in astronomy or materials science we could put these people on.
-
Show this thread
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @phirephoenix
My question is more along the lines of how much scholarship you can squeeze out of a limited quantity of source material. We've been working this vein of ore for millennia.
6 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @Pinboard @phirephoenix
As someone who works in Classics, there are still vast expanses of unexplored and underexplored material. And there’s also more new source materials being discovered or published all the time.
1 reply 2 retweets 34 likes -
Because my domain is primarily papyrology, I’ll give you an example from there. The Oxyrhnchus papyri (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxyrhynchus_Papyri …) started publication over a century ago. At the current rate of publication, it will take about another century to work through the unpublished material.
3 replies 2 retweets 29 likes -
While technically not "classics," there are also thousands of untranslated cuneiform tablets sitting around in museums.
3 replies 3 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @saraht_74 @Pinboard and
@Pinboard is taking these responses so well that I suspect this was all a false-flag operation. He’s always been pro-classics.1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
It was a sneaky, underhanded way to get classicists to fill my timeline with cool links, and reinforce my worst behavior.
-
-
Replying to @Pinboard @hyperpape and
Just get yourself over to
@EmilyRCWilson 's timeline & start reading. Enjoy!0 replies 0 retweets 2 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.