Humanities desk | ||
---|---|---|
< September 30 | << Sep | October | Nov >> | October 2 > |
Welcome to the Wikipedia Humanities Reference Desk Archives |
---|
The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages. |
Something like 15 or 20 years ago, I ran into an argument in a book that part of the economic downfall of the Norse colonies in Greenland was believed to have been excessive spending on impractical luxury goods from Europe, including fancy clothing that was not suited for the climate, and which ate into their profits from walrus ivory (their main export), a trade which was already under stress due to European imports of walrus ivory from Russia and elephant ivory from Africa. But I can't remember what it was I was reading (much less what sourcing it was based on). I do remember ploughing through Mark Kurlansky's Cod and Salt back-to-back around the same time, and both did touch on the Norse and what they were up to in the Arctic Sea. Anyway, I'm wondering if there's readily accessible material on this, perhaps in journals I'm not familiar with. If there's evidence for it, I think it might relate at least peripherally to other material I've seen about sumptuary excess in Scandinavia and even in the pre-modern Scottish Highlands (which were strongly Norse-influenced), with west-to-central continentental European fashion having a strong influence and market in the north, earlier than people would probably typically think. Also reminds me of a hypothesis I encountered in another work that part of the downfall of the Roman empire was excessive, "addictive" consumption of luxury goods from Asia. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 15:10, 1 October 2023 (UTC)
The Little Ice Age of this period would have made travel between Greenland and Europe, as well as farming, more difficult; although seal and other hunting provided a healthy diet, there was more prestige in cattle farming, and there was increased availability of farms in Scandinavian countries depopulated by famine and plague epidemics. In addition, Greenlandic ivory may have been supplanted in European markets by cheaper ivory from Africa.[15]
Also, had Norse individuals used skin instead of wool to produce their clothing, they would have been able to fare better nearer to the coast, and wouldn't have been as confined to the fjords.[19][20][21]
In 1984, Alexander Demandt enumerated 210 different theories on why Rome fell, and new theories have since emerged.[1][2]
"Formerly, says Ammianus, Rome was saved by her austerity, by solidarity between rich and poor, by contempt for death; now she is undone by her luxury and greed (Amm. xxxi. 5. 14 and xxii. 4.). Salvianus backs up Ammianus by affirming that greed (avaritia) is a vice common to nearly all Romans".[60] However, Lucius Calpurnius Piso Frugi (consul 133 BC) had already dated the start of Rome's moral decline to 154 BCE.[61]
During the height of the Empire, expenditure on silk imported from China was so high, Imperial advisers warned that Roman silver reserves were becoming exhausted.[10]
Humanities desk | ||
---|---|---|
< September 30 | << Sep | October | Nov >> | October 2 > |
Welcome to the Wikipedia Humanities Reference Desk Archives |
---|
The page you are currently viewing is a transcluded archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages. |
Something like 15 or 20 years ago, I ran into an argument in a book that part of the economic downfall of the Norse colonies in Greenland was believed to have been excessive spending on impractical luxury goods from Europe, including fancy clothing that was not suited for the climate, and which ate into their profits from walrus ivory (their main export), a trade which was already under stress due to European imports of walrus ivory from Russia and elephant ivory from Africa. But I can't remember what it was I was reading (much less what sourcing it was based on). I do remember ploughing through Mark Kurlansky's Cod and Salt back-to-back around the same time, and both did touch on the Norse and what they were up to in the Arctic Sea. Anyway, I'm wondering if there's readily accessible material on this, perhaps in journals I'm not familiar with. If there's evidence for it, I think it might relate at least peripherally to other material I've seen about sumptuary excess in Scandinavia and even in the pre-modern Scottish Highlands (which were strongly Norse-influenced), with west-to-central continentental European fashion having a strong influence and market in the north, earlier than people would probably typically think. Also reminds me of a hypothesis I encountered in another work that part of the downfall of the Roman empire was excessive, "addictive" consumption of luxury goods from Asia. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 15:10, 1 October 2023 (UTC)
The Little Ice Age of this period would have made travel between Greenland and Europe, as well as farming, more difficult; although seal and other hunting provided a healthy diet, there was more prestige in cattle farming, and there was increased availability of farms in Scandinavian countries depopulated by famine and plague epidemics. In addition, Greenlandic ivory may have been supplanted in European markets by cheaper ivory from Africa.[15]
Also, had Norse individuals used skin instead of wool to produce their clothing, they would have been able to fare better nearer to the coast, and wouldn't have been as confined to the fjords.[19][20][21]
In 1984, Alexander Demandt enumerated 210 different theories on why Rome fell, and new theories have since emerged.[1][2]
"Formerly, says Ammianus, Rome was saved by her austerity, by solidarity between rich and poor, by contempt for death; now she is undone by her luxury and greed (Amm. xxxi. 5. 14 and xxii. 4.). Salvianus backs up Ammianus by affirming that greed (avaritia) is a vice common to nearly all Romans".[60] However, Lucius Calpurnius Piso Frugi (consul 133 BC) had already dated the start of Rome's moral decline to 154 BCE.[61]
During the height of the Empire, expenditure on silk imported from China was so high, Imperial advisers warned that Roman silver reserves were becoming exhausted.[10]