- Joined
- Jul 4, 2020
- Messages
- 1,527
- Reaction score
- 975
Last edited:
Yeah but thats just @PolishHeadlock2 s nickname for his dick....oh shit gulag has been invoked
Dude, I'm not saying Romans didn't contribute but you seriously need to study how heavily Greek culture and ideas influenced the Romans.
In pandemic terms the Greeks were the virus while the Romans were the speader.
The dude lost his throne... TWICE, and got it back, TWICE before finally meeting his end.
Is this consider conquer?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vassal
Ok then semi-semi-conquerYes, abso-fuckin-lutely.
Then why are their roads and aqueducts still in use today?Ok then semi-semi-conquer
The point was that the Romans destroy
Ok then semi-semi-conquer
The point was that the Romans destroy
After they destroy they buildThen why are their roads and aqueducts still in use today?
Their giant cathedral is still in use in Istanbul
Their fucking wall to keep the Saxons our still stands for crying out loud
Its important wether the locals are in their city or in babylonActually, the original point was that they weren't first. You're the only one trying to argue degrees of destruction of iron age societies.
Its important wether the locals are in their city or in babylon
Nice, objective, argument
can you make a new thread?
Nice, objective, argument
Not as devastating as the romans
Assyrians didn't reach to judea
Yes, people could actually live there
That's
Nebuchadnezzar II
I don't on what you are relying on, the Assyrians didn't conquered judea
Is this consider "conquered" ?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vassal
Pekah had allied with Rezin, king of the Arameans against Ahaz (known to the Assyrians as Yahu-khazi), of the Kingdom of Judah, who responded by appealing for the Assyrian monarch's help with the Temple gold and silver. Tiglath-Pileser answered swiftly
Ok then semi-semi-conquer
The point was that the Romans destroy
After they destroy they build
Its important wether the locals are in their city or in babylon
can you make a new thread?
What's so hard to understand
What's so hard to understand
The Romans were the most destructive
Also the first ones that conquered Jerusalem from the jews (Romans, Byzantines)
Actually, the original point was that they weren't first. You're the only one trying to argue degrees of destruction of iron age societies.
I'm well aware of the influence of the greeks on the Romans. But what you don't seem to get is that the influence was bidirectional, and the Greeks became Romans WAY more than Romans became Greeks. To the point that it took hundreds of years after the sack of Rome for the Greeks to stop using Latin in administrative and academic functions. They considered themselves Romans to the point that the Great Schism between Orthodox and Catholic Christians was primarily a function of who was more Roman according to the ancient texts.
So yeah, the Greeks influenced the Romans. But the Roman identity literally became the basis of Greek society for thousands of years. Remember that the "Byzantine Empire" was a modern invention, they considered themselves to be Rome as founded by Romulus and Remus.