Quote:
Originally Posted by SameOldStory
...
If Scarrow has a weak point it's in the use of familiar words instead of "Roman" words. I say Roman as not all words used in the Roman army would be Latin.
Ex. - Cato's short sword flashed out to meet the enemy's attack.
As opposed to - Cato's gladius flashed out to meet the enemy’s attack.
At the start of the book he could introduce the gladius as a short sword, and then used the word gladius from that point on.
In that Under the Eagle was his first "Roman" book, written for a UK audience, I can make allowances for simplifications. Were it written for an Australian or US audience others might have the same complaint. Only further reading of the series will tell.
|
Not quite sure I follow you here... Would you prefer the use of 'gladius' over 'short sword'? And would Australian and USA audiences be much more likely to know what a gladius is than a British audience? That's what I understand you are saying.
Personally I'd be cautious about using too many 'original' words, however historically correct they may be, if they get in the way of the narrative - it's a story told in English after all. Not that "short sword" sounds much better either.
It's not that I can't understand the need for accuracy, but too much of it kills the story. It's like in historical films; the design is a balance between what was actually there, what the audience expect, what looks good, and what aids the narrative.