Page 4 of 42 FirstFirst 123456789101112131429 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 836

Thread: Was the Roman Empire really glorious ?

  1. #61

    Default Re: Was the Roman Empire really glorious ?

    It seems to me that the Sassanids started off well against the Romans, but did less well against their Byzantine successors. I don't pretend to be a historian, but didn't the battles of Nineveh and Dara prove that the Romans, or at least their successors, could expand? After Nineveh, Heraclius gained a large amount of territory from the Sassanids, even if the Arabs swiftly overran it.

    Game of the Fates
    Mod of the week on hold -- I've played nearly every RTW mod out there.
    BOYCOTT THE USE OF SMILEYS! (Okay, just once)
    Antiochos VII...last true scion of the Seleucid dynasty...rest in peace, son of Hellas.
    I've returned--please forgive my long absence.

  2. #62
    Dracula's Avatar Praefectus
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    6,877

    Default Re: Was the Roman Empire really glorious ?

    Yeah.

    There's a special atmosphere that can be felt in all the romanic countries. But I believe it is best preserved in Spain. It's all one mix of nuances,I can't describe it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Cursed View Post
    It seems to me that the Sassanids started off well against the Romans, but did less well against their Byzantine successors. I don't pretend to be a historian, but didn't the battles of Nineveh and Dara prove that the Romans, or at least their successors, could expand? After Nineveh, Heraclius gained a large amount of territory from the Sassanids, even if the Arabs swiftly overran it.
    The Byz Empire was also strong. It problem in time became the growing number of barbarian tribes,their multitude of people and the constant wars it had to be engaged in. It ruined the state machine from inside. And it happened exactly as it should. As one Emperor ordered a reference to be made it appeared that" For the last 800 years we have been almost constantly in war. There isn't another state from the beginning of the world to be so much in war" said he to the council. So it started loosing from exhaustion.
    Last edited by Dracula; June 02, 2008 at 05:13 PM.

  3. #63

    Default Re: Was the Roman Empire really glorious ?

    I believe the Roman Empire is best preserved in the good old U S of A!

    (just kidding...US sucks right now.)

    Game of the Fates
    Mod of the week on hold -- I've played nearly every RTW mod out there.
    BOYCOTT THE USE OF SMILEYS! (Okay, just once)
    Antiochos VII...last true scion of the Seleucid dynasty...rest in peace, son of Hellas.
    I've returned--please forgive my long absence.

  4. #64
    deathmaw's Avatar Ordinarius
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Orlando,FL
    Posts
    773

    Default Re: Was the Roman Empire really glorious ?

    I think Romans were Glorious in their own right because they had things not made until over a thousand year's later such as Hadrians Wall which has it's very own flush toilets.
    One by one they fell to the power of the Ring

  5. #65

    Default Re: Was the Roman Empire really glorious ?

    True, true. Still, it's just a toss-up...if my buddy Alexander the Great hadn't caught a fever and died, maybe all our languages would be some kind of Greek-Celtic fusion...

    Game of the Fates
    Mod of the week on hold -- I've played nearly every RTW mod out there.
    BOYCOTT THE USE OF SMILEYS! (Okay, just once)
    Antiochos VII...last true scion of the Seleucid dynasty...rest in peace, son of Hellas.
    I've returned--please forgive my long absence.

  6. #66
    Dracula's Avatar Praefectus
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    6,877

    Default Re: Was the Roman Empire really glorious ?

    Quote Originally Posted by SigniferOne View Post
    I think Spanish heroic pinnacle came with Hernando Cortez, but I will be jumped for that remark so I won't expand on that, other than mentioning it.

    Also, it's nice to know that the last Classically trained Christian was Spanish -- St. Isidore, who was worshipped by El Cid fighting back the Moors. In prior and happier times, the Spanish Cornelius Bocchus provided scientific material for Pliny to include in his work. Spain gave Rome two of its greatest emperors, an eminent orator (Seneca the Elder), and in a famous story, a learned Spaniard was so struck by Livy's History, that he travelled all the way to Rome just to shake his hand, and then right away turned back to travel back to Spain.
    When I think you bring good points out. You must be very brave to stand 1000 against 60000 (Cortez) and not rout but win. And also very good to win against the arabs like Cid did. And st.Isidor is a great figure truely. :hmmm: I am going to sleep now. There's what to think while falling asleep. Almost unmatched examples done by people with great spirit.

  7. #67
    Opifex
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    New York, USA
    Posts
    15,154

    Default Re: Was the Roman Empire really glorious ?

    Quote Originally Posted by gaius valerius View Post
    As for my posts on the Mongols:

    Anyways, I'd still like you to explain what exactly is 'wrong'
    Simply that it's unconscionable to compare Mongols, who built pyramids out of the human skulls, with people who laid down civilized rules for mankind. It doesn't take a fanboy, it takes a person living and loving a post-Renaissance Europe, which is thoroughly infused with the spirit of Antiquity.

    China had its moments, but it currently is living under Roman laws, as imposed on it by the victorious Europe, and recognized by itself as superior to Confucian law or legalism.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dracula View Post
    When I think you bring good points out. You must be very brave to stand 1000 against 60000 (Cortez) and not rout but win.
    You're right. Nor is it easy to profess the supremacy of Classical antiquity in face of hordes of those who nowadays assert that Aztecs were just as good, that Classical civilization came from Africa, that Middle Ages are nothing to look down on, or that China's "Classical texts" stand in comparison to Tacitus or a Livy (or to the Greeks). Yet, there's a reason why all of Europe has been reading these texts, and, reading them, has become so advanced. The supremacy, why we call the culture Classical, was the universal opinion of every learned man in modern Europe, and it's my opinion now as well.
    Last edited by SigniferOne; June 02, 2008 at 08:15 PM.


    "If ye love wealth greater than liberty,
    the tranquility of servitude greater than
    the animating contest for freedom, go
    home from us in peace. We seek not
    your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch
    down and lick the hand that feeds you,
    and may posterity forget that ye were
    our countrymen."
    -Samuel Adams

  8. #68

    Default Re: Was the Roman Empire really glorious ?

    Quote Originally Posted by SigniferOne View Post
    Nor is it easy to profess the supremacy of Classical antiquity in face of hordes of those who nowadays assert that .... Middle Ages are nothing to look down on .... The supremacy, why we call the culture Classical, was the universal opinion of every learned man in modern Europe, and it's my opinion now as well.
    Considering when this was "the universal opinion of every learned man in modern Europe" the modern and systematic study of the Middle Ages hadn't even begun (it didn't begin until well into the Twentieth Century), the fact that they held this quaint opinion is pretty irrelevant now.

    If you want to cling to these outdated, periwigged opinions from a by-gone era, feel free. But don't expect others to ignore current research and indulge in strange eccentricities.

  9. #69
    AqD's Avatar 。◕‿◕。
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    🏡🐰🐿️🐴🌳
    Posts
    10,931

    Default Re: Was the Roman Empire really glorious ?

    Quote Originally Posted by SigniferOne View Post
    Simply that it's unconscionable to compare Mongols, who built pyramids out of the human skulls, with people who laid down civilized rules for mankind.
    Romans live by eating the grains from slave farms. And they also destroyed carthaginians and dacians and many other civilization.

    They're just as ruthless as mongols.
    ________
    couple Webcams
    Last edited by AqD; September 20, 2011 at 07:01 AM.

  10. #70
    Dracula's Avatar Praefectus
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    6,877

    Default Re: Was the Roman Empire really glorious ?

    SigniferOne,you must be knighted. Unfortunately with some cold-blooded reason and indifference the world looses its fortune. But I am astonished we got such a fan in USA. I thought the place is still culturally deserted

  11. #71

    Default Re: Was the Roman Empire really glorious ?

    Quote Originally Posted by SigniferOne View Post
    Simply that it's unconscionable to compare Mongols, who built pyramids out of the human skulls, with people who laid down civilized rules for mankind. It doesn't take a fanboy, it takes a person living and loving a post-Renaissance Europe, which is thoroughly infused with the spirit of Antiquity.

    China had its moments, but it currently is living under Roman laws, as imposed on it by the victorious Europe, and recognized by itself as superior to Confucian law or legalism.
    I live in Europe, I love my post-Renaissance Europe.

    Yes the Mongolians were hardcore, even cruel for their time, but does this diminish what came after? Since the historian is their not to judge but to describe, he does not even need to answer that question. Djenghis and Ogedei swept over Eurasia leaving death and decay in their wake. Ogedei was confronted with the following problem: what now? You can conquer an empire from the saddle but you can't govern it. His generals urged him to kill every Chinese and turn the land into a new giant steppe. He choose to follow the advise of a Khitan in his entourage and impose a more lasting form of control. It would be Kubilai who'd make the final step by transforming himself from a Khan to a Chinese emperor.

    As Braudel said: le barbare n'a triomphe qu'a court terme (I could again be missing out with the spelling ). The idea is that the Mongolian coin has 2 sides: the first one we know all to well through your famed piramids of skulls, the other side is less known and often overshadowed by the first. The Mongolians - as it goes with nomads and Braudel so powerfully summarised - only won in the short term. In the long run they themselves were conquered by those cultures they had manu militari subjected, only this time they weren't conquered by force, but by culture and economic necessity. It didn't matter whether Kubilai still honoured Djenghis in his personal sphere or that Mongolian noblewoman gave birth in tents in the yards of their palaces, they were actively supportingthe socio-economic system of China, as had all Chinese rulers and elites done before them (and they were even better at it for they were much more open minded, as I said, if it hadn't been for the Yuan the chance for Marco Polo being so famous would have greatly diminished).


    Timur once more constructed piles of skulls, yet under him and his grandson Ulegh Beg we have a Timurid Renaissance in his corelands, for example Samarkand, flourishing like never before. Babur, the last one to retain the fiction of the united Mongolian empire (he threw that large party for all elite families but I forgot the name) and later conquered India. Though he had adapted to the latest military techniques (gunpowder) in his heart he was still a Mongolian (of Turkish descent but as you know the term "Mongolians" covers all steppe ppl from Mongolians to Turks), his heart belonged on the saddle of a horse. He never liked India, his new conquest. But just look at Humayun: fell over his own silk clothes while having a bunch of books in his hands, falling of the stairs and breaking his neck? How un-Mongolian can you be? Or the portraits of Akbar in comparison to that of Djenghis: it is all to clear, the Mongolians were everywhere absorbed/assimilated into the societies they governed.



    You were however missing every point with your reply: I was NOT elevating the Mongolian achievements above those of the Classics, in any case this is irrelevant for both. As I said before: towards history one must retain his distance and judge as objective as possible. For Europe the Mongolian legacy might seem less important then that of the classics, however for Eurasia all the more (Russia, China, India, etc), it just matters where in the world you live. I was simply stating there was more to the Mongolia legacy then burning and pillaging. AND placed in HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE this was of great importance for all of the world including the west. You need to place historical facts in their contemporary perspective in time/space.



    Anyways, current day Europe isn't built on your 'classic' ideas (they are secondary), but primarily on the Late Medieval culture, which is of course another debate. Yeah you'll probably get a heart attack reading this but I feel safe with Max Weber on my side
    Last edited by gaius valerius; June 03, 2008 at 03:21 AM.
    Patronised by Voltaire le Philosophe

    Therefore One hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the most skillful. Seizing the enemy without fighting is the most skillful. War is of vital importance to the state and should not be engaged carelessly... - Sun Tzu

    Orochimaru & Aizen you must Die!! Bankai Dattebayo!!

  12. #72

    Default Re: Was the Roman Empire really glorious ?

    Rome kicked ass, in every way that it is possible to kick ass, culturally, militarily, technologically, more than anyone else ever has, or ever will, in my opinion.
    "Aut viam inveniam, aut faciam." -Hannibal Barca
    http://[IMG]http://img52.imageshack.....png[/IMG]

  13. #73
    AqD's Avatar 。◕‿◕。
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    🏡🐰🐿️🐴🌳
    Posts
    10,931

    Default Re: Was the Roman Empire really glorious ?

    Quote Originally Posted by Hounf of Culan View Post
    Rome kicked ass, in every way that it is possible to kick ass, culturally, militarily, technologically, more than anyone else ever has, or ever will, in my opinion.
    People say this because they know nothing else. I doubt any arabians or iranians would agree with that.
    ________
    Tarzan
    Last edited by AqD; September 20, 2011 at 07:01 AM.

  14. #74

    Default Re: Was the Roman Empire really glorious ?

    Quote Originally Posted by aqd View Post
    People say this because they know nothing else. I doubt any arabians or iranians would agree with that.
    *Putting Eurocentric glasses on*: What are you talking about you foooool?

    *Taking off Eurocentric glasses*: ooow... now I see...
    Patronised by Voltaire le Philosophe

    Therefore One hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the most skillful. Seizing the enemy without fighting is the most skillful. War is of vital importance to the state and should not be engaged carelessly... - Sun Tzu

    Orochimaru & Aizen you must Die!! Bankai Dattebayo!!

  15. #75

    Default Re: Was the Roman Empire really glorious ?

    Im not even from Europe, but Rome and the civilizations it "spawned" have been abusrdly more advanced and powerful than any eastern nations, its not coincidence that Europe went around colonizing everywhere and literally owning like half the world.
    "Aut viam inveniam, aut faciam." -Hannibal Barca
    http://[IMG]http://img52.imageshack.....png[/IMG]

  16. #76

    Default Re: Was the Roman Empire really glorious ?

    Quote Originally Posted by Hounf of Culan View Post
    Im not even from Europe, but Rome and the civilizations it "spawned" have been abusrdly more advanced and powerful than any eastern nations, its not coincidence that Europe went around colonizing everywhere and literally owning like half the world.
    Absurdely more advanced then the Chinese who invented among many other things gunpowder? And what is this about civilisations they spawned? The Roman legacy is less important to us than that of the Late Middle Ages. And before Sig jumps on this cursing me to death: WE WON THE QUERELLE DES ANCIENS ET DES MODERNES!! I have both Montesquieu and Weber on my side!

    Europe only caught up with the east around 1800, up untill the 1600's it had always been marginal in the reigning world-system dominated by Asia. We needed an Industrial Revolution and Imperialism to break these chains that kept us down, frankly, I see little link here with the heritage of Rome ??? You? Tell me, I'd like to know. The fact we owned half of the world is coincidence, unless you have some teleological believe in history as planned ahead.
    Last edited by gaius valerius; June 03, 2008 at 03:53 AM.
    Patronised by Voltaire le Philosophe

    Therefore One hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the most skillful. Seizing the enemy without fighting is the most skillful. War is of vital importance to the state and should not be engaged carelessly... - Sun Tzu

    Orochimaru & Aizen you must Die!! Bankai Dattebayo!!

  17. #77

    Default Re: Was the Roman Empire really glorious ?

    Its not that they had to catch up, but they progressed beyond that point, which the east never did to the same level. All of the West's most important philosophical and moral convictions and methods are traced straight back to Rome, and the Greeks before. The West strived towards and and succeeded in bringing about many of the great ideas the Greeks and Romans first expounded. They progressed their culture, striving to reach the perfection of government and justice instead of staying in one spot for centuries on end. It is no coincidence that the Western cultures were and still are the most prosperous, free, powerful and sophisticated on earth.
    "Aut viam inveniam, aut faciam." -Hannibal Barca
    http://[IMG]http://img52.imageshack.....png[/IMG]

  18. #78

    Default Re: Was the Roman Empire really glorious ?

    Quote Originally Posted by Hounf of Culan View Post
    All of the West's most important philosophical and moral convictions and methods are traced straight back to Rome, and the Greeks before.
    Like the rights of women? While I won't pose that the classic cultural legacy is irrelevant, it is not so important as you claim (IMO). Cause then you'd be ignoring the Late Middle Ages and Enlightenment. Further more: the 'west' surpassing the 'east' has nothing, but then absolutely nothing to do with Classic culture but with socio-economic reasons which have no link to the Classic period.
    Patronised by Voltaire le Philosophe

    Therefore One hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the most skillful. Seizing the enemy without fighting is the most skillful. War is of vital importance to the state and should not be engaged carelessly... - Sun Tzu

    Orochimaru & Aizen you must Die!! Bankai Dattebayo!!

  19. #79

    Default Re: Was the Roman Empire really glorious ?

    You can think that, but I believe that the socio-economic reasons are intrinsically related to the nature of the cultures. I would say that the middle ages etc are in fact traceable to Rome. I would side with Hegel, there is a reason it goes Greece, Rome, Middle Ages, etc. I do not buy the socio-economic stuff taken apart from the nature of the cultures involved.
    "Aut viam inveniam, aut faciam." -Hannibal Barca
    http://[IMG]http://img52.imageshack.....png[/IMG]

  20. #80

    Default Re: Was the Roman Empire really glorious ?

    Sadly for you I think in (not vulgar) marxist terminology. So I can't follow you on that. I do recognise the fact that the upper echolons which vulgar marxism often ignores do have some influence (as Engels reprimanded them).

    If you are interested in the (debate about) the origins of western culture or the Great Divergence, you should read P. Stearns, Western Civilisation in World History.
    Patronised by Voltaire le Philosophe

    Therefore One hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the most skillful. Seizing the enemy without fighting is the most skillful. War is of vital importance to the state and should not be engaged carelessly... - Sun Tzu

    Orochimaru & Aizen you must Die!! Bankai Dattebayo!!

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •