forgetting any voicemods?

[blitzkrieg80]

Oh, don't get me wrong, I never said that you offended anyone, I was merely warning you that it doesn't take a lot to turn Foot against you. Better watch out for him - he stays true to his name, crushing every post that is goes against history and EB!

although you might have the right intention at heart, this is still untrue- EB tolerates quite a high degree of skepticism, criticism and anachronism, nonetheless spam for the sake of spam and troll-feeding... sometimes Foot or other moderators might need to put a stop to such for the sake of the community (thank the Heavens), but it is hardly any infringement on free speech / thought or police state implied by the all or nothing mentioned. The high degree of posts NOT deleted and threads NOT locked when they should be (such as this one), besides threads only locked much later, all illustrate what I say concerning censorship. We all know how out of control the 'mob' is when it comes to trollspamination [yes, a new word I invented just now ], so let us not discuss why censorship and moderators exist on the internet in the first place...

PS - Persian Cataphract, you only mention Scandinavia because you have lived there it is hardly so interolerant or Romanocentric to get special mention...

PPS - Rome never conquered Germany, nor Persia, besides others. Winning battles (forays against tangible armies) is hardly 'conquest'. Being uncontested at times along their borders maybe-so. Napoleon won IN Russia, yet did not conquer it.

*- Here's the philosophical question of the day: should a culture be highly valued for its historical spam? Literary or elsewise? That's what Rome did (and I'm not talking about Cicero or writers of similar esteem). So yes, nobody wrote quite as much as Rome and thus that is the perspective many have... ugh and bleh

[Pontius Pilate]

although you might have the right intention at heart, this is still untrue- EB tolerates quite a high degree of skepticism, criticism and anachronism, nonetheless spam for the sake of spam and troll-feeding... sometimes Foot or other moderators might need to put a stop to such for the sake of the community (thank the Heavens), but it is hardly any infringement on free speech / thought or police state implied by the all or nothing mentioned. The high degree of posts NOT deleted and threads NOT locked when they should be (such as this one), besides threads only locked much later, all illustrate what I say concerning censorship. We all know how out of control the 'mob' is when it comes to trollspamination [yes, a new word I invented just now ], so let us not discuss why censorship and moderators exist on the internet in the first place...

PS - Persian Cataphract, you only mention Scandinavia because you have lived there it is hardly so interolerant or Romanocentric to get special mention...

PPS - Rome never conquered Germany, nor Persia, besides others. Winning battles (forays against tangible armies) is hardly 'conquest'. Being uncontested at times along their borders maybe-so. Napoleon won IN Russia, yet did not conquer it.

*- Here's the philosophical question of the day: should a culture be highly valued for its historical spam? Literary or elsewise? That's what Rome did (and I'm not talking about Cicero or writers of similar esteem). So yes, nobody wrote quite as much as Rome and thus that is the perspective many have... ugh and bleh

I don't understand the meaning of your post. Why should this thread be closed, we are talking about history and the impact of civilizations on history. I hardly call what Rome did and what writings it left behind spam. Okay, Rome may have not conquered all of Germania and Persia, but it did conquer:
* Gaul
* Spain
* entire Italian Penisula
* Greece
* most of eastern europe
* the levant
* southern Britain
* north africa
* and controlled the entire mediteranean region
* won many battles in Germania and Persia

So I don't know what you're trying to say about Rome when you say it didn't conquer Germania and Persia, completely. You surely aren't undermining the Romans as conquerers?

[Tellos Athenaios]

Would grafitti on the walls of Pompei qualify as 'spam'?
Would the fact that Latin is itself derived from a language whose native speakers likely hailed from Armenia count for anything?
Would the fact that these speakers were to participate in what eventually became known as the first International System count for anything?
What would the fact that a Roman once remarked that Greece conquered its conquerors make?
What does it say that Romans sought to participate in such cults as Eleusinian mysteries?
What does it say that Christianity itself is based on a series of ancient and all non-Roman precedents?
Where does the very ritual of hand-shaking come from?
What does it mean that Rome itself likely developped into a city only after Etruscans and Greeks from Magna Graecia showed them the way?
Yes indeed: what does it actually mean that most if not all 5 'good emperors' were not from Rome?

It does not mean Rome did not influence the world, it does however beg to differ from the view that Rome was not *at least equally* influenced by that very same world.

[Ibrahim]

@TPC: you forgot al-Hira. now that was a pretty place.

[Pontius Pilate]

Would grafitti on the walls of Pompei qualify as 'spam'?
Would the fact that Latin is itself derived from a language whose native speakers likely hailed from Armenia count for anything?
Would the fact that these speakers were to participate in what eventually became known as the first International System count for anything?
What would the fact that a Roman once remarked that Greece conquered its conquerors make?
What does it say that Romans sought to participate in such cults as Eleusinian mysteries?
What does it say that Christianity itself is based on a series of ancient and all non-Roman precedents?
Where does the very ritual of hand-shaking come from?
What does it mean that Rome itself likely developped into a city only after Etruscans and Greeks from Magna Graecia showed them the way?
Yes indeed: what does it actually mean that most if not all 5 'good emperors' were not from Rome?

It does not mean Rome did not influence the world, it does however beg to differ from the view that Rome was not *at least equally* influenced by that very same world.

Good point. Rome was very much influenced by the Greeks, Etruscans, and some other Italic tribes, you could also argue that they were influenced by the Trojans, or so the myth goes. But then the Romans went on to influence our world. Which is my point. It is sort of like a cycle but I see where you're trying to get at.


Now about Armenia. Why does everyone keep bringing up the point of the Romans originated from Armenia, thus Armenia has more impact on the world, and without Armenia there would be no Rome, or something similar to that line? Okay, let us say that the Romans and all Indo-Europeans originated from present day Armenia. So what. The whole human race as a species originated from Africa, then it spread out into the rest of the world. With that said, one could make the argument that without Africa there would be no Armenia, or even people in general. So you see, to say that Rome or Indo-Europeans hold some kind of debt to Armenia is foolish, because in that case Armenia has a debt to Africa.

Once again I have to stress that there is nothing wrong with Armenia, I am sure it is a wonderful country, but that is not the point.

[||Lz3||]

did you ever saw a cartoon in wich, by traveling to the past, someone kills a small insignificant fly...and then when he returns he finds his world completely diferent?

[Zeibek]

Just to add my worthless two cents:

Nothing has any intrinsic value, nothing. When it comes to something as subjective as "what we find interesting" finding any justification is totally pointless, we simply have to accept the fact that we have different opinions and can't do anything about it. And even if one viewpoint is supported by the majority it makes no difference because reality simply isn't consensus. The cultural collective in which we live in influences these values and might even define them to a certain point, but it's important that we dont't become solipsistic and actually believe them to be true.

So just stop this pety debate that amounts to intellectual masturbation at best, no nation is more worthy of representation than another, the best choice is to choose factions where their culture can be expressed accurately, and Armenia fills that criterion.

Feel free to flame if you find this post annoying.

[Gleemonex]

So just stop this pety debate that amounts to intellectual masturbation at best, no nation is more worthy of representation than another, the best choice is to choose factions where their culture can be expressed accurately, and Armenia fills that criterion.

Feel free to flame if you find this post annoying.

On the contrary -- well said!

-Glee

[Pontius Pilate]

Just to add my worthless two cents:

Nothing has any intrinsic value, nothing. When it comes to something as subjective as "what we find interesting" finding any justification is totally pointless, we simply have to accept the fact that we have different opinions and can't do anything about it. And even if one viewpoint is supported by the majority it makes no difference because reality simply isn't consensus. The cultural collective in which we live in influences these values and might even define them to a certain point, but it's important that we dont't become solipsistic and actually believe them to be true.

So just stop this pety debate that amounts to intellectual masturbation at best, no nation is more worthy of representation than another, the best choice is to choose factions where their culture can be expressed accurately, and Armenia fills that criterion.

Feel free to flame if you find this post annoying.

I see you are trying to stay neutral here and to say that this is all pointless. Which is all fine with me, but then at the very end, you start praising the greatness of Armenia. So I hardly call you neutral and your post was fine until you contradicted yourself at the end.

[Gleemonex]

So you see, to say that Rome or Indo-Europeans hold some kind of debt to Armenia is foolish, because in that case Armenia has a debt to Africa.

Pray tell what makes that foolish.

-Glee

[artavazd]

OK this thread is becoming a "Rome is better than Armenia and vis versa"

Originaly I made a comment to a post which said that Armenia is insignificant. I put up a couple of links, and put the names of contemporary scholars who have done much work in the area of Ancient Armenian history. I never said Rome is not significant.

Also people are confusing the Indo-European Homland being in the area of Armenia, with the notion that Romans derivied their language from Armenian. Armenian just like all IE languages is derived from Proto-IE although it is just a single offshoot from the Mother Tounge (which to me is fascinating)
To put it shortly the IE tribes who did not migrate out of the area of Armenia, became the Armenians.

Again I will admit that until recently there was not much work being done on Ancient Armenian history. Armenia as an independent nation did not exist since 1375. Most of it was under Turkish rule, and the eastern part was Under Soviet rule. It wasnt until 1991 when the eastern part gained independence from the Soviet Union that the circumstances favored scholarly work on Armenia. I believe in about 5-8 years there would be much more information available on Ancient Armenian history.


I will be honest I am not well aquainted with the Out of Africa theory, but I have also heard of a nother theory which states that Humans developed separatly in diffrent places.

[Pontius Pilate]

I will be honest I am not well aquainted with the Out of Africa theory, but I have also heard of a nother theory which states that Humans developed separatly in diffrent places.

I am pretty sure that the Out of Africa theory is the one accepted by the majority of the scientific community today. The other widely accepted theory is the Bible's explaination.

[Pontius Pilate]

Pray tell what makes that foolish.

-Glee

The whole point of the argument is that some people think without Armenia there would be no Rome, because Romans originated from that part of the world( or some people say). thus they think Armenian influence is greater than Roman and is responsible for everything Rome did. But if that's the way you want to think about the situation, then you could also say that without Africa there would be no Armenia (because the human race originated from Africa). If you want to think like that you could then say that Africa is responsible for everything Armenia did. And I don't think many people would argree with that. Capice?