forgetting any voicemods?

[Pontius Pilate]

I meant no offense to Foot or anyone else, sorry if I offended. I was merely saying my opinion. Thanks for the support Aemilius Paulus, glad to see another Romani fan here.

[The Persian Cataphract]

This passage from Justin's Historiarum Philippicarum is to me the perfect counter of anyone who seeks to deliberately downplay the macro-historical significance, influence and importance of Armenia in the alleged shade of Graeco-Roman or even Persianate cultures:

"...Sed quoniam in Armeniam transitum facimus, origo eius paulo altius repetenda est. Neque enim silentio tantum regnum praeteriri fas est, cum fines eius post Parthiam omnium regnorum magnitudinem superent..."

"...But since we here make a transition to Armenia, we must look a little farther back into its origin; for it is not right that so great a kingdom should be passed in silence, since its territory, next to that of Parthia, is of greater extent than any other kingdom..." Liber XLII, Vol.2

Marcus Junianius Justinus, a Roman of his time, acknowledges the greatness of this sacred land of Ararat. The bosom of Armenia, including her famed foothills, was a land harboured between the rivers Halys, Kura and Araxes, the plains of Albania, the mountains of Iberia, the forests of Hyrcania and Colchis, the deserts of Assyria and the steppes of Cappadocia. A vast stretch extending their culture well into the cultures of the Black and Caspian seas.

Two of the dynasties of this land were of Iranian descent. The Achaemenid high nobility. The Iranians would call them the kings of "Arvand". The Greeks would call them the kings of "Orontes". The Armenians call them the Yervanduni. The other Iranic dynasty, the successors of the famed Artaxiads, the Arsacid cadet branch, Arshakuni, have an even more lasting influence. It was through an Arsacid that Armenia would become the first nation to institutionalize Christianity as her state religion. Some say it is an irony. Others maintain that it set Armenia culturally more apart from her Persianate cousins, previously the Arsacid and Sassanid dynasties of the Greater Iran. From the Iranian perspective, the Armenian history is an absolutely crucial component.

The mob has never been an adequately objective "instrument" of measurement of historical or cultural impact as some of you would like to suggest. It only measures popular appeal, and hardly serves as a reflection of facts. I can certainly understand Artavazd might be disgruntled by someone like Mr. Aemilius "Politically Incorrect" Paulus, who is already infamous for making rash entries on arbitrating cultural significance of other nations. The culture of Armenia does not need to gratuitously flaunt its greatness just to satisfy popular curricula; it is survived by its own beautiful script, institutionalized by the eminent Mashtots, and a respectable collection of historiography written by Vartapet Yeghishe, and Sebeos. To Iranian history, these works are invaluable treasures.

Last but not least, one of the greatest Armenian rulers, Tigranes carved for himself an empire from absolutely nothing. He was a key-personality during the first Parthian civil war and that of the Mithridatic wars, and was the last of several persons to have sank the Seleucid hegemony into final decline.

Who cares about the mob? Ask a teenager about Marc Anthony and Cleopatra and he or she will probably answer "the most romantic couple of Antiquity" or "Romeo and Juliet of the ancient era". A historian schooled in Armenian history will however answer "The political Bonnie and Clyde of their time", or even go as far as to say that they were the grotesque result of Ptolemaïc incest and Roman egomania. Which really isn't that far from the truth. It's a refreshingly sobering read to be made aware of their strangulation of Armenia. Not quite like Liz Taylor, eh? Sounds like a lot of Rome-bashing, but the bizarre fact is that the likes of Cassius Dio, Plutarch and Justin passed down this information for our reading. Either the Romans weren't all "The world is Rome" as much as Hollywood would like to orgasm to, or the mob needs to shape up. My money's on the latter.

The world is Rome. If the world was no greater than the stupidity of the common man, that is. Armenia needs no justification to satisfy the common sensibilities. She doesn't need the historical size of her Graeco-Roman and Iranian cousins to have a comparable beauty.

And to top it off, "Western Civilization", a phrase that I do not personally accept, needs to get a clue as far as the Graeco-Roman civilization is concerned. There was more to Europe, but it wasn't this perverted, skewed perception on a homogeneous commonwealth European identity standing opposite to their Oriental rivals. I hear most of this cacophony from Scandinavians, Western-Europeans and the Americans. This sort of inspiration, which is far much more apt as far as designations are concerned are not limited to nor the property of Europe, but stretches far into the depths of Asia, with the Sassanian city of Bîshâpûr being far more ample than some occasional potsherd in Britain.

I do not condone or propose the down-playing of any significant cosmopolitan culture; the inflation of Graeco-Roman culture by Eurocentric "scholarship" is a perversion of facts more serious than the contemporary sensationalism in the primary sources. They come at the expense of other cultures, and to point out these discrepancies is only fair and a standard in the protocal of scholarly peer-review. I constantly remind my Arab friends about the rich heritage of the pre-Islamic Arabian cultures, which were left in the shadows of Islam as an "age of ignorance" in spite of the fact that they had their own highly developed script and left behind themselves a significant number of written works. That the "idols" that Mohammed Ibn Abd'allah denoted as "false", were in fact elaborate statues and highly developed works of art. That the backwardness and poverty of the Arabs before Islam is in fact contrasted by the lush landscapes of the Mar'ib.

The mob means nothing to me. If they haven't at least bothered to have read A.E. Redgate's "The Armenians", let alone taken a glimpse of the exquisite works of Mark Chahin and Cyril Toumanoff, then I will not even pay heed to their valueless impressions of historical Armenia.

[Aemilius Paulus]

I meant no offense to Foot or anyone else, sorry if I offended.

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!

[Pontius Pilate]

The mob has never been an adequately objective "instrument" of measurement of historical or cultural impact as some of you would like to suggest. It only measures popular appeal, and hardly serves as a reflection of facts.
The mob means nothing to me. If they haven't at least bothered to have read A.E. Redgate's "The Armenians", let alone taken a glimpse of the exquisite works of Mark Chahin and Cyril Toumanoff, then I will not even pay heed to their valueless impressions of historical Armenia.

wow, that was quite a large post. and yes non-western cultures are very important and had a large impact on the world. and yes the mob or common people, are not a very good instrument to measure anything for that matter. But then again history has shown that the mob itself has more times than not played a huge part in the history of the world. The fate of entire nations and empires has been decided by the mob. A person who wants to make a huge difference in the world usually needs the support of the mob if they want to get anywhere. It might not seem fair, but that is just how things work in this world.

[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.

[Tellos Athenaios]

to make an entire voicemod for just one faction, especially so small and relatively insignificant (please don't flame me, after all, the Armenians weren't as pivotal as Seleukids, Romans, Parthians, Greeks, etc) .

Those bold underlined bits, that was 'The Point (tm)'. Or perhaps the controversy which ensued. However, bear with me just a little longer: I have not seen anyone saying "Romans are descendant of Armenians" or anthing so much as implying this. All we have seen is the (widely accepted) thesis that Latin is a derivative of a speculative Indo-European language of which its first natively speaker most likely hailed from what is known as Armenia. The Hittites are only one such people, but seems on a relative solid basis that they are the result of a migration from Armenia.

This says little about the Romans except their language is derived from an Armenian language; if someone therefore argues that the Romans were so influential by virtue of the widespread loan words from and existance of derivative languages today, he must a fortiori conclude that Armenians of long, long ago have been (especially in this regard) equally influential if not more (because this Indo-European language also similarly influenced Iranian and Germanic languages among others such as Sanskrit).

Ergo that argument merely serves to show the logical fallacy of the assumption that because of Latin's influence the importance of Romans can be shown. It cannot. For all that it matters, I think the Latin influences in our language are more a product of Medieval Latin, which was not even Roman Latin to begin with: Erasmus complained for some reason.

The only other argument I heard was that the Romans conquered such an vast amount of area. And spread its culture. Truth is likely closer to the idea that this culture spreading worked both ways, and at any rate much of the 'Imperial' (or indeed all) Roman culture was borrowed from other cultures to begin with. You may want to compare the effect of (ancient and continuous) policies of Chinese authorities to style the cultures of their realm towards Han precedent. Yet: it is Qin script and Chu food the Chinese are famous for.

Conquering a vast amount of area is a similar argument to that of the language thing. It is true the Romans conquered a vast amount of people, but it is dwarfed in the face of what some Chinese dynasties have conquered. Or compare the territory the Khans subjugated.

[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]

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?

[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.

[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.

[artavazd]

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.

You think thats what we came from?


a human being and a banana have 50% of the same genes so is a banana our ancestor as well?

Im not trying to be an ass, I dont know theres just alot of unanswered questions which science can not answer.

[Zeibek]

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.

Umm...

the best choice is to choose factions where their culture can be expressed accurately, and Armenia fills that criterion.

At least in my opinion that doesn't amount to praise really. Try replacing Armenia with Rome.

the best choice is to choose factions where their culture can be expressed accurately, and Rome fills that criterion.

Equally true isn't it?

[desert]

In b4 theological debate.

[Pontius Pilate]

You think thats what we came from?


a human being and a banana have 50% of the same genes so is a banana our ancestor as well?

Im not trying to be an ass, I dont know theres just alot of unanswered questions which science can not answer.

Don't even get me started on this one. Yes I admit, science does not know the answers to all the questions. But just because we don't know something doesn't me we should just make up an explanation to fill in the dots! There has been so much evidence discovered in recent years to prove that humans did evolve from apes. Come on people, open up your minds here. So you think some imaginary person in space, who was bored one day decided to put us on this earth? Then to have us all worship him or else be damned for eternity? Please tell me you are not one of those religious fanatics.

[Pontius Pilate]

Umm...



At least in my opinion that doesn't amount to praise really. Try replacing Armenia with Rome.



Equally true isn't it?

Yes, but remember you said Armenia, not Rome originally. If you want to avoid mistakes like this just say both next time I guess.

[Zeibek]

Yes, but remember you said Armenia, not Rome originally. If you want to avoid mistakes like this just say both next time I guess.

Well, I said that factions that could be historically accurately portrayed should be present, Rome should be a no-brainer on that one and since people were talking about the insignificance of Armenia I thought that I'd have to mention it separately in order to get the message through. Apparently yeah I'll have to mention everything in the future in order to prevent people from going on with their arguments.

[Foot]

You think thats what we came from?


a human being and a banana have 50% of the same genes so is a banana our ancestor as well?

Im not trying to be an ass, I dont know theres just alot of unanswered questions which science can not answer.

Wow, well done my friend, you've managed to misrepresent a sound science and close a thread in just one post.

Locked.

Foot