is there is a nation that survived (exactly as it was , culture , language , religion , names and so on) the roman conquest and it is here today except for the jews ?
Printable View
is there is a nation that survived (exactly as it was , culture , language , religion , names and so on) the roman conquest and it is here today except for the jews ?
There were more factors that contributed to the loss of identity in cultures. Christianity for example.
I would say though that the nations that weren't "conquered" by the Romans were the Germanic tribes, the Parthians, and Irish(lol).
If you accept that every culture, even Jewish culture, has changed considerably in the last 1500 years, then yes, in addition to those mentioned, you'd have to add the Slavic tribes, the Greeks and perhaps also the Palestinians (who some historians believe trace their ancestry to the Philistines and/or Phoenecians).
okQuote:
Originally Posted by Hurin_Rules
but it is steal a jewish people
the people had the same names , the same writing etc and most of all the same nationality , same religion , same language , same god
now , the slavic tribes did not came as a whole under roman rule
the greeks of 146 bce to let say 300 ce are not the greeks of our days in many aspects
about the palestinians - i consider you really did not mean what you have said
~:cheers:
What aspect? We have the same language and writing(its changed in very minor ways). The only one is Christianity but that's not really Rome's fault. Guess who's fault that was? ~;)Quote:
the greeks of 146 bce to let say 300 ce are not the greeks of our days in many aspects
The Parthians got overthrown by one of their subjects, the Sassanids, a fair while before Rome even went under. I don't think they count.
The Greeks spent about four centuries or thereabouts under Ottoman Turkish influence. And before that was Byzantium, which was neither Rome nor ancient Greece. 'Nuff said, really.
The Arabs and Beduins would probably be a pretty good bet, though. The Romans and Persians weren't too interested in fighting over sand, sand and some more sand with them, the Migrations didn't touch them at all, and they got generally left to their own devices. So past the standard cultural exchange you get with trade and raiding and the rest of the routine, and what the passage of time now does to everyone, they "survived" right fine.
christianity in greece changed all !!! and i don't want to demonstrate because it could make an offenseQuote:
Originally Posted by Byzantine_Prince
heil socrates , plato and aristotle (where are their successors ?)
:book: ~:cheers: :book:
The Arabs, as Watchman mentioned above, the peninsula was almost worthless, except Yemen, but no one would go through the entire peninsula to get there anyways, they could easily go through abyssinia to reach yemen.
-
China. They survived Rome (being too far away) but culdn't survive Mao. :dizzy2: (Re: Cultural Revolution)Quote:
Originally Posted by caesar44
-
heh i'm under the impression that he meant those that came into direct contact and rule with the Romans.Quote:
China. They survived Rome (being too far away) but culdn't survive Mao. (Re: Cultural Revolution)
though yes China's culture/identity language can be traced continusingly for at the least 3000+ years, the writting system of today (well before the Communist simplified it... but it's still in use in Taiwan / Hong Kong anyway) came to be by the Han dynasty that started in around 200 b.c, and can be easily associated with the systems it evolved from (today's use grammer wise wis quiet different though... then again so is English from say... Shakespear's day)
DNA wise though you could trace but there is a huge mix from everywhere else...
Then again same could be said about Japan and many other places
Hey, we Finns have been puttering around out here in the far north since late Stone Age (when, one suspects, we drove the Sámi farther north...) and didn't even get a written history before the Swedish conquests in the early second millenium. Does that count as "surviving the Romans", even if out only connection to them was indirect trade links (those pesky German tribes were in the way, y'see) ?
I would disagree; it was the Romans that were ultimately responsible for Christianity.Quote:
Originally Posted by Byzantine_Prince
The small community Jesus and his few followers organized was never meant to be world wide. In fact they all knew they would be killed and that their Judean sect would fall.
The miraculous survival of the church in the 3rd century would directly be attributed to Constantine and his joint conspirators.
I think I’ll stop there; further details would overdo the offensiveness towards our Christian .org members.
Rome was responsible for the spreading of Christianity and hence conquered most of the pagan western world.
I think you're being a bit dramatic here.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sigurd Fafnesbane
Christianity was spread in urbanized areas around the Medditeranian well before Constantine converted to Christianity.
There weren't many Christians around in 1st-3rd century AD but they were there. And they were prosecuted by the Romans.
Constantine did much to promote the Catholic church and sponsered it openly. This does not mean however that all Roman citizens immediately converted, let alone the 'barbarian tribes' at the edges of the empire.
And that last sentence is nonsense, but maybe I'm just interpeting it wrongly...:)
so
the jews are the only ones to survived the roman conquest !! amazing !
there is a 2000 years phenomenon - people , nations ets always want to relate themselves to ancient cultures
"oh yes we the macedonians are the sons of ancient macedon" ets
from scotland to syria , any modern nation was created from the middle age onward
the jews (who left their mother land from 70 ce to 250 ce) managed somehow to exist as a nation centuries after the fall of rome
these are the simple facts and it nothing to do with nations greatness or something like that
:book: ~:cheers: :book:
Well first off, how many nations (as we define that term in 19th century terms) on this planet do you know which have survived from before Medieval times?Quote:
Originally Posted by caesar44
Second of all, the Jews are a people not a nation, and they have had their own country only since 1948 - which they're still fighting over with the native inhabitants of that region.
Handle with care folks. We've ventured into territory requiring a delicate touch. :yes:
Jewish culture and language has changed just as much if not more then the greek culture and language. Rome wasn't a destroyer of cultures. Religion was. I don't see the point you're trying to make about the jews. ~:confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by caesar44
Yemen and Oman were actually Sassanid possessions from the 4th century until Mohammed... Kurdish explorers actually founded colonies in Kenya and Tanzania for the shahanshah!Quote:
Originally Posted by Watchman
~Wiz
Jews have not survived as a nation for 2000 years. The modern state of Israel, which of course includes Arabs and non-Jews, is a recent invention. This state is nothing like the Jewish kingdoms of the ancient world. So no, 'the Jews' did not survive the Romans as a nation any more than the Greeks did.
The Jewish religion has proven remarkably durable, there is no disputing that. Other religions--Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, to name a few-- have proven just as durable. The main difference that allowed the Jewish religion to survive was the fact that Christianity and Islam allowed the Jews to maintain their synagogues and their religion under Christian and Muslim rulers. Jews were periodically persecuted, and in some instances massacred and expelled, but there were always places where they had a safe haven (Italy, for example). Without this, one wonders whether Judaism would have survived or gone the way of ancient paganism.
As to the Jewish language, does anyone know how close modern Hebrew is to ancient? Is it like ancient and modern Greek?
I'm not exactly sure what the original poster is trying to say. The point about 'the Jews' surviving the Romans is difficult to interpret. No Jewish state survived the Romans, but the Jewish religion did survive (mainly due to the benevolence of other Peoples of the Book). That being said, other ethnic groups managed to maintain their own languages and religions after contact with the Romans, and later went on to found their own nation-states (The Franks created France, the Greeks Greece, the Scots Scotland, The Anglo-Saxons England, etc. etc.).
-
I never ever mean it. ~;) It's -IMO- just a watered-down racism. *shudders*Quote:
Originally Posted by RollingWave
-
As far as I know (Orthodox Jew here) Hebrew has not changed so much from anceint times though some grammer and words have been changed to deal with modern society. Technically speaking, a person who knows Hebrew today could go back 2000 years and hold a conversation with a Jew.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hurin_Rules
-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sethik
You guys can travel in time?! ~:eek: Wanna learn Talmud now! ~DQuote:
Originally Posted by Sethik
:medievalcheers:
-
unbelievable !!!
"the jews are not a nation"..........................
what ?!?!?!
waow , this is the year 2005 ?
the state of israel is modern invention ? the jews were in judea 1000 years before the roman conquest , they were still living in judea as a nation until about 500 ce !
if the jews are not a nation why that have a unique language , writing , names , religion , history , motherland and so on
according to hurin the jews should thanks the muslims and christians for their survival...
what do think was hadrian intention in 133 ce when he changed the name of jerusalem to aelia capitolina ? or the name of judea to palestina ? it was to delete the jewish connection to the holly land !
please don't make rash statements
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sethik
I have always thought that ancient Hebrew was a bit different of a dialect than modern Hebrew? Kind of like Middle English and modern English. You could understand each other, but it would take work.
As far as any culture surviving untouched since Roman times.. Hard to say. The Jewish people have kept their culture remarkably well, everyone else in Europe tended to blend together. The German and Scandinavian people are different culturally from the Romatic countries, but even there a lot of cross pollination has occurred.
I never said that. I said "Jews have not survived as a nation for 2000 years. The modern state of Israel, which of course includes Arabs and non-Jews, is a recent invention. This state is nothing like the Jewish kingdoms of the ancient world. So no, 'the Jews' did not survive the Romans as a nation any more than the Greeks did."Quote:
Originally Posted by caesar44
by nation I mean an independent nation, a 'nation-state'. The Jews did not survive as an independent nation for 2000 years. In fact, the Jews were deprived of a homeland and autonomy from the first century CE to 1948. So my statement remains true.
Hyperbole adds nothing to this debate.Quote:
what ?!?!?!
waow , this is the year 2005 ?
Then who was the ruler of Israel in 1000? In 1500? in 1848?Quote:
the state of israel is modern invention ? the jews were in judea 1000 years before the roman conquest , they were still living in judea as a nation until about 500 ce !
By your reasoning, then, Ireland has never ceased to be a sovereign nation, the US confederacy is still an independent nation-state and both the Native Americans and the Roma (gypsies) are currently nation states.
And what was Hadrian's religion?Quote:
according to hurin the jews should thanks the muslims and christians for their survival...
what do think was hadrian intention in 133 ce when he changed the name of jerusalem to aelia capitolina ? or the name of judea to palestina ? it was to delete the jewish connection to the holly land !
Yes, the Jews do in large part have Christian and Muslim rulers to thank for surviving as a nation. The Dhimmi laws in Islam and Catholic/Byzantine Church law, in addition to the support of the papacy, have generally worked to protect Jews from persecution. It is undeniable that many Jews have been persecuted, but how many Jews survived in non-Christian or Muslim states? Had they not been seen as peoples of the book, they would have suffered much worse treatment.
Sorry, I find it hard to reply to that; I'm too busy dodging the stones you're throwing from your glass house.Quote:
please don't make rash statements
Let's keep the discussion civil please.
The last I checked (some three or four days ago, admittedly) there were at least two Israel-related threads in the Back Room. May I humbly suggest messirs caesar and Hurin take it there if they're inclined to keep going on the topic ?
That aside, either there is something downright odd about Jews (and to my knowledge there isn't) or I strongly suspect the parts of their culture that weren't directly tied to their religion (AFAIK properly termed "Judaism") underwent a whole lot of change depending on where they lived.
Or at least I entirely failt to comprehend how four random Jews from, say, Russia, the Ottoman Empire, England and Spain from, say, the 1500s, would share a "common culture". A religion and a language, certainly, and Jewish traders, envoys and businessmen certainly benefited greatly from that (much the same happened among Muslims, incidentally), but culture ?
If I understand the question correctly the focus is nations that survived Roman conquest. Peripheral nations or tribes are not part of the discussion.
Hurin-Rules is right about Jewry and its political fortunes. The same can be said about the religious dimension. Judaism after the sack of Jerusalem and the putting out of the attendant fires was not the same. There are estimated over 70 sects of Judaism prior to the fall of Jerusalem. The aftermath saw the growth of Rabbinic Judaism. The change in Jewish religious life is even more dramatically seen with the destruction of the Temple. The Temple was the center of Jewish devotional life. It was never rebuilt and Judaism was forced to move in new directions.
I don't believe there are any "nations" that survived the Roman conquest intact.
My apologies; I got a bit carried away there.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gregoshi
Well, obviously. The Romans liked to integrate the conquered peoples into the Empire and its culture ASAP, so if the Romans were in charge for any longer time any region would get fairly "romanized" pretty quickly.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pindar
Perhaps everyone could define their definition of "nation", so we can all interpet each poster's reply correctly.
ps Modern day Israel is very different from the kingdom of Judea 2000 years ago.
Good idea.
Perhaps Caesar44 is not a native English speaker, in which case the confusion regarding 'nation' may be completely understandable.
The English word 'nation' comes from the Latin 'natio', which usually means a people or tribe. But the modern English word nation more commonly refers to a 'nation-state', that is to say, a sovereign political entity.
If we define it as the latter, then clearly, there was no sovereign Jewish 'state' after the Roman conquest and the destruction of the Temple.
If we define it as the former, then clearly, there are many peoples and tribes, in addition to the Jews, who survived the Roman conquest. The Jews also retained their distinctive religion (although as Pindar noted it went through some important changes after 70 CE), which was unusual. But alongside the Jews we could also place the Greeks, Arabs, various Slavic and Germanic tribes, etc.
... except that the original criteria were that the culture be unchanged, religion unaltered, etc.; the modern day greeks, germans, slavs, et al are christians today because of the roman empire in one form or another.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hurin_Rules
also, if we posit that nothing happens in a vacuum, then the idea of the jews being 'unaltered' is flawed; even the famous statement which begins "give unto caesar...", used supposedly also by contemporaries of jesus, shows signs of stress and adaptation.
greek, hebrew, german, etc. all have names of latin derivation.
and one profound effect in greek culture was an elevation of the status of the common woman...
steph
Heh, then maybe a better question would be, "Who survived Christianity?" ~:)
is there anywhere in the map from england to iraq a pagan nation ? no
is there is a pure celtic nation ? no
germany of today have the same culture of the germans tribes of ancient times ? no
is there is a hellenic nation like that of ancient times ? no
the tribes of italy survived ? no
where are the hispanic tribes of anciet times ? gone ! spain of today is a mix of arabs latins celts ets
where are the phoenicians ? gone !!
where are the ancient egyptians ? gone !
where are the numidians ? the gaetulians ? the sarmatians ? the dacians ? the thracins ? the pontics ? the parthians ? all gone !!
these are only facts not statements
think logically , if i said survived the roman conquest i meant surviving as a ethnic nation and not an independent nation we are talking about conquest and surviving it
the jews are here after the romans and what that got to do with the state of israel andits struggle against the palestinians ?
if these facts are offensives so i am very sorry
please , stop with the greek example - the greeks have a different religion a different names , culture ets ethnically they are not the greeks of ancient times , helas of socrates plato pericles alcibiades is not hellas of theodoracis
again , sorry if the facts are so offensives
:book:
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedJack
People spoke much more formally back then. If you look at almost any dialouge in the Torah you can see that. Beyond that the language isn't all that different. Then again most Orthodox Jews today learn to speak Hebrew from studying the Torah so that might be the reason (The scripture is the same today as it was thousands of years ago.)
What you say is partly-true. Today there are a lot of varying customs (I'm using the world very, very loosely.) The divisions are primarily divided into two groups: people who follow Ashkenaz customs and those who follow Sephardic ones. Ashkenaz Jews were those that eventually settled in Countries above Italy in Europe (Germany, Poland, England, etc.) Sephardic Jews are those that settled in and south of Italy (Spain, Morroco, Italy, Baghdad, etc.)Quote:
Originally Posted by Watchman
Now while customs such as the position of certain blessings during prayer, food, and dress are different, on the whole, there is no real-- I don't know how to put it into words, but there is still an underlying unity among all of us the religious Jews atleast.
Hope my post helps more than confuses. ~;)
Ethnicity and nationhood are not necessarily the same. By joining the two as the area of focus the possible candidates for study is greatly reduced.Quote:
Originally Posted by caesar44
This becomes a problem with the simple reference to Jewry as well. The Jewish Kingdom established with Saul ceased to exist in 587 B.C. with the coming of the Babylonians. By the time of the Maccabean revolt there was already a Diaspora in effect. Large swaths of Jews lived in Mesopotamia, Egypt and elsewhere outside of Hasmonian influence. Further, after Pompey subjugated Jerusalem there was no real surviving Jewish polity to speak of so this undercuts the grounding noun (nation) of your thesis.
If one were to simply focus on the ethnic aspect of Jewry this again raises difficulties. Judaism was not the same after the destruction of the Temple. The faith changed with the removal to the center piece of devotional life. As far as base cultural mores are concerned: Ashkenazi, Sephardic, Ethiopic as well as more exotic varieties of Jewish life are distinct. Thus, politically, religiously and culturally Jewish ethnicity was a different creature after the Roman Period.
God watches over Israel as he promised.Quote:
Originally Posted by caesar44
Isaiah 43:1 Now, this is what the Lord says,the one who created you, O Jacob,and formed you, O Israel:"Don't be afraid, for I will protect you.I call you by name, you are mine"
amen !!!