It also means dividing lines are harder to draw, since individual languages "flow" into one another. Limited records makes it hard to distinguish "this author's uses a different cross-section of his language's vocabulary" from "this author couldn't spell for shit" from "no he was just speaking a different language." However, given the lack of overarching authority to enforce language homogeneity (e.g., Rome's enforcement of Latin or Greek as a language required for existing in the upper echelons of society) suggests their language diversity was comparable to other small-scale subsistence societies that unified more recently ( Papua New Guinea perhaps being the most dramatic example of this).
#Edict of cultural unification crusader kings 2 plus full
It's very hard to characterize the full spread of linguistic diversity when we have few examples of the language and no way to identify what local variation looked like. In contrast, the amount of Germanic language examples we have from the time is approximately none. Certainly Latin as a dominant language diverged heavily, but this is one of the exceptions. Latin language and Roman culture may have dominated at the highest levels, but in the east Greek still held sway and not all Latin was like the others. Click to expand.This is a common misconception.
0 kommentar(er)
