"How often do you think about the Roman empire?"

6,079 Views | 44 Replies | Last: 2 yr ago by Apache
aalan94
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
3:21p, 9/16/23
AG
This gives me hope for humanity. What's great is how all these guys are like, not much, and then it's actually far more than their wives expected.

https://www.instagram.com/reel/CxQYHsfOZ2_/?fbclid=IwAR1oE7H5jfT3jPKxgylUbcZZN54tS9W80kQEbrIGOn-GEdGZLswROHYVjbg
Reply Quote
6
jkag89
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
11:02a, 9/18/23
Every March 15th.
Reply Quote
6
Blanco Jimenez
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
1:51p, 9/18/23
AG
I used to be an AP world history teacher so obviously it's quite a bit but I'm still in public ed in admin and every time I have to deal with woke BS (almost daily) I think about the things that happened in Roman society prior to the fall and how it correlates to what's going on here.
Reply Quote
23
1 edit
Sapper Redux
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Blanco Jimenez • 4:33p, 9/18/23
Except it doesn't.
Reply Quote
4
Rongagin71
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Sapper Redux • 9:31a, 9/20/23
AG
I have all three volumes of Gibbon's "Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire" and from my reading (well, skimming - it is very long) I definitely got the opinion that Gibbon did not like the "Greek" influence (homosexual behavior) on the Roman Empire.
As for thinking about the Empire, I seldom do that nowadays unless I'm playing a game like Europa Universalis - or possibly I think about it everyday if you count things like the alphabet or calendar.
Reply Quote
3
LMCane
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
10:09a, 9/20/23
I'm reading "Rome and Jerusalem" now so it's pretty interesting

the Roman invasion and destruction of the Second Temple in Jerusalem from 67-70 AD led to the dispersion of the Israelites/Jews for the next 2000 years

Reply Quote
2
Sapper Redux
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Rongagin71 • 2:34p, 9/20/23
Rongagin71 said:
I have all three volumes of Gibbon's "Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire" and from my reading (well, skimming - it is very long) I definitely got the opinion that Gibbon did not like the "Greek" influence (homosexual behavior) on the Roman Empire.
As for thinking about the Empire, I seldom do that nowadays unless I'm playing a game like Europa Universalis - or possibly I think about it everyday if you count things like the alphabet or calendar.


Gibbons placed significant blame on Christianity for the fall of Rome. I say that to also say that Gibbon's entire thesis is suspect.
Reply Quote
4
P.H. Dexippus
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to jkag89 • 7:02p, 9/20/23
AG
jkag89 said:
Every March 15th.

July
August
Reply Quote
1
Ciboag96
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:05p, 9/20/23
At least once a week:

….And He was crucified for us under Pontius Pilate, and suffered, and was buried. And the third day He rose again, according to the Scriptures; and ascended into heaven, and sits at the right hand of the Father…..
Reply Quote
15
Green2Maroon
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:20p, 9/20/23
AG
I have been fascinated with the Roman Empire since I was 11 years old.
Reply Quote
6
Martin Cash
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:46a, 9/21/23
AG
Never.

I try to think about Elvis, Memphis
Oprah in the afternoon
I try to think about palm trees, fig leaves
The creature from the Black Lagoon
Reply Quote
5
Rongagin71
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Martin Cash • 9:02a, 9/21/23
AG
The crittur from the Black Lagoon was nasty.
I believe it was operating back in the fifties,
along with a giant octopus that attacked cities,
and a large floating brain that liked to hover over my bed.
Reply Quote
Rabid Cougar
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:05a, 9/21/23
AG


When I see either one these guys on another TV series or movie.
Reply Quote
10
LMCane
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
10:51a, 9/21/23
the romans actually spoke Latin correct?

so why did that die out and now they speak italian?
Reply Quote
1
Rongagin71
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to LMCane • 11:09a, 9/21/23
AG
LMCane said:
the romans actually spoke Latin correct?

so why did that die out and now they speak italian?
It didn't entirely die out...

Reply Quote
1
Hubert J. Farnsworth
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Rabid Cougar • 1:17p, 9/21/23
Rabid Cougar said:


When I see either one these guys on another TV series or movie.


I loved that show. It's sad it only had 2 seasons.
Reply Quote
3
NE PA Ag
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:08p, 9/21/23
I think about it pretty often, but I'm a history buff, and Rome is one of my favorite subjects. I have Anthony Everrit's biography of Hadrian on deck. For fiction, Colleen McCullough's First Man in Rome series is one of my all time favorites, regardless of genre.

The Rome series second season was rushed unfortunately as they knew it was shortened when they made it. Season 1 was excellent. It's too bad they didn't get 2 seasons to cover what they did in season 2.
Reply Quote
1 edit
P.H. Dexippus
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:42p, 9/21/23
AG
The first podcast I ever listened to was the History of Rome podcast back during its original run...been thinking about it ever since. I am due to revisit Gibbon.
Reply Quote
3
sonnysixkiller
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
10:20p, 9/21/23
AG
At least twice a day. Sometimes more!
Reply Quote
OldArmy71
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to LMCane • 9:44a, 9/22/23
AG
I am a retired English teacher who also had some Latin in high school. The evolution of the English language and other languages interests me.

The evolution of Latin is more complicated than I realized many years ago. I am sure I don't understand all the parts to it, but here is my understanding.

The Romans spoke and wrote Latin.

However, as is true of any language, the spoken and the written languages differed. They were not separate dialects and they were mutually intelligible, but the spoken Latin was much more informal, as spoken languages tend to be, and was more flexible and responsive to changes. It gradually lost many of the cases and pronunciations that Classical Latin retained.

The written language tended to be more conservative and changed less.

Eventually the Latin that was closest to the spoken language came to dominate in Rome. Eventually it was so different as to become Old Italian.

As the Empire spread, the Latin spoken by the Roman occupiers merged with the local languages to form subsets of Latin, each of which took on the unique flavors supplied by the local language.

That's why Spanish and Romanian and French and Italian are "Romance" languages, derived from Latin, but also differing in many ways.

I am going to get the dates wrong on this, but just as an example, by the year 500 AD or so, the congregants at a Mass given in some town in France were no longer able to understand the Latin.

English and Latin share a common ancestor in that they are both Indo-European languages, but English is not a Romance language. (English is a Germanic language.) Latin has had a major influence on English, but it came during the Renaissance, not when England was occupied by the Romans.
Reply Quote
6
6 edits
KingofHazor
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to OldArmy71 • 11:48a, 9/22/23
Quote:
Latin has had a major influence on English, but it came during the Renaissance, not when England was occupied by the Romans.
I did not know that. Very interesting and thanks for sharing. I hope that it's correct!
Reply Quote
1
OldArmy71
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to KingofHazor • 1:08p, 9/22/23
AG
It is correct!

In fact, during the Roman occupation, there was no English language to influence.

Romans occupied England from about 40 AD until 410 AD. The people living there when the Romans took over were Celts, speaking various versions of Celtic languages.

Celtic is an Indo-European language, but it is not a Germanic language, so English did not evolve from Celtic.

English developed from various Germanic languages spoken by the tribes that invaded England around 450 AD, after the Romans had pulled out: the Angles, Saxons, and Jutes.

Some linguistic evidence of the Roman occupation made its way into English, primarily through place names. The Latin word for "camp" (castra) became "Chester" or "caster" in English: Winchester, Lancaster, etc.

The Celtic language left its mark in a similar way: "Avon" means river, for instance.
Reply Quote
5
P.H. Dexippus
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to OldArmy71 • 1:40p, 9/22/23
AG
Don't forget the Normans
Reply Quote
2
KingofHazor
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to OldArmy71 • 2:00p, 9/22/23
What about the Latin influence on the English language through the Church?

Also, Latin and French were the "official" languages of England (i.e., spoken at Court or in legal courts) for hundreds of years before the Renaissance.

Upon further reflection, I suspect that Latin had found its way into English in a major way long before the Renaissance. See, e.g.:

Appendix:English words by Latin antecedents - Wiktionary, the free dictionary
Reply Quote
2
OldArmy71
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to P.H. Dexippus • 2:58p, 9/22/23
AG
True!
Reply Quote
OldArmy71
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to KingofHazor • 2:58p, 9/22/23
AG

Quote:
What about the Latin influence on the English language through the Church?

Also, Latin and French were the "official" languages of England (i.e., spoken at Court or in legal courts) for hundreds of years before the Renaissance.

Very true!


What I was trying to point out is that although Latin has profoundly influenced English, the influence did not occur at the time of the Roman occupation of England.

Poorly expressed. My bad. Thanks to those who clarified for me.
Reply Quote
1 edit
McInnis
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
8:43p, 9/24/23
AG
I'm currently watching a series about ancient Rome on the history channel. Something that amazes me is the descriptions of the battles that the Romans fought against the Gallic and Germanic tribes to their north. The documentary says that some of these battles resulted in more than 100,000 deaths.

That seems hard to believe. The decisive battle for American independence at Yorktown had only about 10,000 participants on both sides total if I recall correctly. And the battle of SanJacinto had way less than that. I'm pretty sure that none of the battles of the American civil war had anywhere near those kind numbers. Can what I'm hearing from that series be right?
Reply Quote
1
Rabid Cougar
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to McInnis • 9:41a, 9/25/23
AG
McInnis said:
I'm currently watching a series about ancient Rome on the history channel. Something that amazes me is the descriptions of the battles that the Romans fought against the Gallic and Germanic tribes to their north. The documentary says that some of these battles resulted in more than 100,000 deaths.

That seems hard to believe. The decisive battle for American independence at Yorktown had only about 10,000 participants on both sides total if I recall correctly. And the battle of SanJacinto had way less than that. I'm pretty sure that none of the battles of the American civil war had anywhere near those kind numbers. Can what I'm hearing from that series be right?
One of the the largest battles was the Battle of Teutoburg Forrest in Germany. The Germanic tribes (30,000 +/-) defeated three Legions and auxiliaries ( 20-22,000 men). Killed them almost to a man. Whoever survived was sold into slavery. That was the SOP for the battles of the day. Kill every male of fighting age and sell the women and children into slavery.

I only know of this because of the series the "Barbarians" on Netflix. Which entailed me to read up on Arminius (Germanic leader) and Varus (Roman commander) . Both very real people.

Notable for it was the battle that established the Rhine as the northern boundary of the Roman Empire..

There had been other Roman campaigns with up to 13 Legions. (80,000 men plus 20,000 camp followers)
Reply Quote
2
1 edit
terata
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
11:37a, 9/25/23
AG
Oh, aalan94 I spend every waking minute of my life thinking about the Roman Empire....
Reply Quote
1
1 edit
LMCane
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to McInnis • 1:33p, 9/26/23
McInnis said:
I'm currently watching a series about ancient Rome on the history channel. Something that amazes me is the descriptions of the battles that the Romans fought against the Gallic and Germanic tribes to their north. The documentary says that some of these battles resulted in more than 100,000 deaths.

That seems hard to believe. The decisive battle for American independence at Yorktown had only about 10,000 participants on both sides total if I recall correctly. And the battle of SanJacinto had way less than that. I'm pretty sure that none of the battles of the American civil war had anywhere near those kind numbers. Can what I'm hearing from that series be right?
Yorktown had more than 10,000 (in fact 26,000 fighters) but your overall point is well taken.

On September 28, 1781, General George Washington, commanding a force of 17,000 French and Continental troops,

begins the siege known as the Battle of Yorktown against British General Lord Charles Cornwallis and a contingent of 9,000 British troops at Yorktown, Virginia,

in the most important battle of the Revolutionary War.
Reply Quote
KingofHazor
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
1:50p, 9/26/23
The armies in the US at that time were small because the population of the US was small, England historically had small armies even by European standards, and European armies were small.

But ancient armies were often huge, if ancient documents and records can be believed. They number the Persian army at Thermopylae in the millions, although modern scholars somewhat arbitrarily reduce it to 120,000-300,000.

And although no Civil War battle had 100,000 deaths, something like 51,000 casualties at Gettysburg, 34,000 at Chickamauga, etc., with total deaths during the war of at least 600,000 or more. So the Civil War battles were within the same order of magnitude.

And looking at deaths in Texas is apples to oranges. Anything in Texas would be considered minor skirmishes on the scale of world history, even though the results of the battles in Texas may have had major historical consequences.
Reply Quote
3
3 edits
Rongagin71
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
2:04p, 9/26/23
AG
I remember reading that it was difficult to keep an army of more than about 30,000 together for long because of the lack of supplies and excess of poop and disease.
I wondered if in the past people were smaller and less disease ridden?
Reply Quote
Rabid Cougar
User Profile Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
3:29p, 9/26/23
AG
McClelland's Army of the Potomac on the Peninsula was upwards of110,000 in 1861. He had nearly 90,000 at Antietam in 1862. Meade had 105,000 at Gettysburg in 1863. Grant had 125,000 on the Overland Campaign in 1864. Sherman had 124,000 in 1864.

You could sustain large armies for long periods of time if supply lines were open and Sherman did so even without a supply line.

Less disease ridden? In the American Civil War there were more deaths from disease than bullets. Rural American's had little to no disease immunity built up. Crowded numbers and lack of hygiene was the worst enemy on both side
Reply Quote
1
1 edit
BQ78
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
3:29p, 9/26/23
AG
I tend to think more about the Rhoman Empire, since it is just south of Paradise in Wise County

Reply Quote
1
Sapper Redux
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to KingofHazor • 3:47p, 9/26/23
Quote:
But ancient armies were often huge, if ancient documents and records can be believed. They number the Persian army at Thermopylae in the millions, although modern scholars somewhat arbitrarily reduce it to 120,000-300,000.


There's zero evidence to support armies of that size in that era. The size estimates are based on population estimates derived from the size of settlements and logistics of movement and sustaining operations. The final numbers are arbitrary. No one will ever know the exact numbers.
Reply Quote
2
Page 1 of 2 ▼
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.