Blacks Had No History Before Slavery?

Status
Closed
May 2016
974
Nabataea
Ancient Romans were Indoeuropeans ( speaking indoeuropean language ) in the beginning... As the time went by many people from all the impero became roman Citizens.. from Babylon to west Spain... from Scotland to Egypt from Holland to Morocco..from Germany to Cyrenaica
so does Indians, Afghanis, Pakistanis and Persians are IndoEuropeans.
 

ameteurhistorian

Ad Honorem
Dec 2015
2,512
USA
so does Indians, Afghanis, Pakistanis and Persians are IndoEuropeans.
Whom are not western. Indo-European is simply a broad name that refers to hundreds of languages and to a lesser extent, peoples, that descent from a common root that arose in Eastern Europe.
 

ameteurhistorian

Ad Honorem
Dec 2015
2,512
USA
if i am bound to choose a perfect term, i'd say Romans are Mediterraneans.
That doesn't really change anything. Spain is Western and is Mediterranean, as is France, Greece, the Balkans, and Italy. Yes, they were originally a Mediterranean civilization that was influenced by other Mediterranean civilizations, but their scope and influence went far beyond that.

most of what we call western Europe were descendant from Germanic tribes, they didn't have a culture that is comparable to Rome, let alone influence it.
Yet they were still influenced by Rome and adopted much of Roman culture, language, and customs, even long after Rome fell in the west. The French for example are essentially a fusion of the Gallo-Romans and the Franks.

Again, the two main religious institutions in the West are direct descendants of the Roman Empire, including the Latin West and Greek East.

as far as i know, the Romans made racist poems that reflect their hatred of Germanic people.
Correction, they had a hatred of Germanic peoples that lived outside of and fought Rome. The same was not true for those that lived in the empire and worked with Rome.

the reason of Rome collapse is also due to the same Germanic people that they despised, if i remember correct The Romans called upon Queen Mavia for assistance when being attacked by the Goths, to which she responded by sending a force of cavalry. (Strange thing Romans did, to call foreigners for assistance)
Again, these peoples, like the Vandals, were originally allies, clients, and subjects of the Roman Empire. They invaded Rome because the Empire was basically using them as meat shields against outside incursions and they were facing possible starvation and enslavement by those same incursions.

PS: Queen Mavia was Rebellious Arabian ruler that fought and defeated the Romans in multiple occasions, gaining her people freedom. so she wasn't under the authority of Rome.
I thought we were talking about Germanics and westerners, not Arabs.
 
May 2016
974
Nabataea
That doesn't really change anything. Spain is Western and is Mediterranean, as is France, Greece, the Balkans, and Italy. Yes, they were originally a Mediterranean civilization that was influenced by other Mediterranean civilizations, but their scope and influence went far beyond that.
It does change everything, and i don't know where this notion "western civilization is not mutually compatible with Mediterranean civilizations" comes from. you should re-read my posts carefully to erase the haziness.
Today's western civilization is continuation of Rome, but they don't inherent the Roman civilization nor they had any hand in shaping/influencing it, they merely adopted what already existed.

Yet they were still influenced by Rome and adopted much of Roman culture, language, and customs, even long after Rome fell in the west. The French for example are essentially a fusion of the Gallo-Romans and the Franks.
In my quote i never said anything about reverse influence. Roman civilization culturally is part of Mediterranean/ME sphere and is propagation of Middle eastern civilization and was indeed influenced by it, giving credit to Germanic tribes is kinda absurd don't you think so?

so back to my main point.
Today's ME, is Islamic civilization in nature as it did developed distinct characteristic traits when time passed. Even alienated to their own (including Arabs). linking Germanic people to Roman heritage is really subjective matter. and by the same standard we could argue that Umayyads were the heirs of the Roman civilization in many aspects.

IMO Romans are Romans. Not sure who are their modern descendant(I would bet on modern Rome)

Again, the two main religious institutions in the West are direct descendants of the Roman Empire, including the Latin West and Greek East.
Please don't tell me that the religious institutions is not offspring of ME Religion, you are furthermore proving my point.

Correction, they had a hatred of Germanic peoples that lived outside of and fought Rome. The same was not true for those that lived in the empire and worked with Rome.
I'm sceptical about that.

Again, these peoples, like the Vandals, were originally allies, clients, and subjects of the Roman Empire. They invaded Rome because the Empire was basically using them as meat shields against outside incursions and they were facing possible starvation and enslavement by those same incursions.
agreed. i still don't see your point.
I thought we were talking about Germanics and westerners, not Arabs.
I Gave an example that Romans are also more middle eastern based (politically) empire.
 
Last edited:

ameteurhistorian

Ad Honorem
Dec 2015
2,512
USA
It does change everything, and i don't know where this notion "western civilization is not mutually compatible with Mediterranean civilizations" comes from. you should re-read my posts carefully to erase the haziness."
Mediterranean is simply just that, societies and cultures that grew around the Mediterranean Sea, whom also influenced societies not on the Mediterranean Sea, and vice-versa.

Today's western civilization is continuation of Rome, but they don't inherent the Roman civilization nor they had any hand in shaping/influencing it, they merely adopted what already existed.
That's mostly my point; the states that emerged after Rome's fall, specifically in Europe, made the more concerted and concrete effort on continuing Rome's history and legacy. You see it in law, architecture, social concepts, language, and religion.



In my quote i never said anything about reverse influence. Roman civilization culturally is part of Mediterranean/ME sphere and is propagation of Middle eastern civilization and was indeed influenced by it, giving credit to Germanic tribes is kinda absurd don't you think so?
Rome's two main influences are the Etruscans, whom lived in Tuscany and maybe originally in Turkey, and the Greeks. Mediterranean yes, Middle Eastern no. It is a propagation of Latin culture that defined Western European culture through it's conquest and gradual assimilation of Western Europe.

so back to my main point.
Today's ME, is Islamic civilization in nature as it did developed distinct characteristic traits when time passed. Even alienated to their own (including Arabs). linking Germanic people to Roman heritage is really subjective matter. and by the same standard we could argue that Umayyads were the heirs of the Roman civilization in many aspects.
Except these Germanics were either Romans or worked with Romans or worked under Romans. The states that emerged after the fall of Rome in the west attempted numerous times in appropriating, adopting, and adapting various aspects of Roman culture and civilization, because they were either part of it or were heavily influenced by it.

The Umayyads were never directly under control or influenced by Rome like many of the Germanic tribes were originally. They did not use Roman law, language, religion, or government to run their empire, partially because they never had any direct experience with it. They adopted some aspects of Roman engineering, but they never attempted to emulate and style themselves as its successors; the closest Islamic state that ever tried that was the Ottoman Empire, rather superficially.

IMO Romans are Romans. Not sure who are their modern descendant(I would bet on modern Rome)
People who speak Romance languages primarily are the best candidates, specifically Italians.



Please don't tell me that the religious institutions is not offspring of ME Religion, you are furthermore proving my point.
Much of the terminology, philosophy, hierarchy, and thought of the Catholic and Orthodox churches are heavily influenced by Latin and Greek culture respectively. That's partially why the Great Schism happened; Christianity was heavily colored by the cultures it was adopted in, especially between the Latin West and the Greek East. Christian scholars like Saint Augustine depended heavily on the philosophies of the Greeks and Romans, as opposed to the Hebrews, to rationalize and study their religion.


I'm sceptical about that.
Which is all well and good, but as a general rule not every Roman acted Roman and not everyone that was part of the Roman empire was technically Roman. The Gallo-Romans for example still worshiped the Celtic Gods alongside Roman ones while fully Latin Romans adopted Celtic gods. It wasn't necessarily a zero-sum game.


agreed. i still don't see your point.
The point is that since these peoples were close associates of Rome, they were expecting and hoping for greater privileges and rights such as citizenship or being able to have a voice in political discourse or play an active role in Rome's economy since they've been working with Rome for centuries. When they needed help from Rome, Rome wasn't going to provide because of the straits it was in, and so these barbarians that have been working as mercenaries, generals, and advisors to Rome decided to take what they needed.

I Gave an example that Romans are also more middle eastern based (politically) empire.
Not really. First off, Rome the city is in Europe. Secondly, you didn't give an example. The Romans didn't have any interactions with Arabs, or probably didn't even know that Arabia existed, until maybe after they defeated Carthage. The only Middle Eastern civilization that could've possibly influenced Rome were the Phoenicians.
 

mansamusa

Ad Honorem
Mar 2012
3,308
Except these ancestors of Western Europe were originally allies, vassals, traders, employees, and clients of the Roman Empire. They were intimately aware of Rome's political system, art, society, and culture, almost literally in sometimes marrying into and out of Roman families. The only real reason why they invaded Rome to begin with was because they were being accosted by hunger, Huns, and possible climate change, and Rome wasn't willing to pay their side of the bargain.

Many of the noble titles in the Middle Ages, such as count, duke, king, prince, paladin, and emperor are Germanic interpretations and translations of Roman or Greek terms and titles such as comes, dux, rex, principes, palatine, and imperator respectively. The two dominate religious institutions in Medieval Europe, the Roman Catholic and Greek Orthodox churches retained much of the literature, philosophy, ceremony, and history of the Roman Empire. Charlemagne's court and the Carolingian Empire and its renaissance is the earliest example of this.
Saying that Western Europe was a continuation of Ancient Rome is like saying that the 25th Dynasty and the Meroe civilization of Nubia is a continuation of Ancient Egypt. A Black person who makes that claim wouold be called an Afrocentric. Do we have a right to use teh word Eurocentric to describe someone who claims that Western Europe is a continuation of the Roman empire?
 

ameteurhistorian

Ad Honorem
Dec 2015
2,512
USA
Saying that Western Europe was a continuation of Ancient Rome is like saying that the 25th Dynasty and the Meroe civilization of Nubia is a continuation of Ancient Egypt. A Black person who makes that claim wouold be called an Afrocentric. Do we have a right to use teh word Eurocentric to describe someone who claims that Western Europe is a continuation of the Roman empire?
How does Afrocentrism and Eurocentrism factor into this? Roman symbols, practices, customs, beliefs, language, and culture clearly persist in many aspects of the West. Many countries don't call their legislative and representative bodies a senate for nothing.

Also, I am not saying that the West is a continuation of Ancient Rome, that was Byzantium and to a lesser extent, the Carolingian Empire. What I am saying is that the west is something of a successor and descendant of the Roman Empire. Practically every major polity and regime in Europe has tried to model itself as a Third Rome to varying degrees of authenticity and success.
 
Jul 2016
885
Europe/Switzerland/Ticino
if i am bound to choose a perfect term, i'd say Romans are Mediterraneans. most of what we call western Europe were descendant from Germanic tribes, they didn't have a culture that is comparable to Rome, let alone influence it. as far as i know, the Romans made racist poems that reflect their hatred of Germanic people. the reason of Rome collapse is also due to the same Germanic people that they despised, if i remember correct The Romans called upon Queen Mavia for assistance when being attacked by the Goths, to which she responded by sending a force of cavalry. (Strange thing Romans did, to call foreigners for assistance)

PS: Queen Mavia was Rebellious Arabian ruler that fought and defeated the Romans in multiple occasions, gaining her people freedom. so she wasn't under the authority of Rome.

The Roman Empire, ancient Greek, Italian renaissance ( Banks, Lombard Street London City, insurance ) remains the paragon of WESTERN SOCIETY – that’s why so many states kept insisting that they were their heirs or making connections to them, including the Germans. In a way, these countries preferred to prove a connection to their Southern heritage than to their Northern roots, to the point that they even attempted to fabricate connections to it, such as the Holy Roman Empire.


Roman Law and Christianity shaped Europe.



 
Last edited:

mansamusa

Ad Honorem
Mar 2012
3,308
How does Afrocentrism and Eurocentrism factor into this? Roman symbols, practices, customs, beliefs, language, and culture clearly persist in many aspects of the West. Many countries don't call their legislative and representative bodies a senate for nothing.

Also, I am not saying that the West is a continuation of Ancient Rome, that was Byzantium and to a lesser extent, the Carolingian Empire. What I am saying is that the west is something of a successor and descendant of the Roman Empire. Practically every major polity and regime in Europe has tried to model itself as a Third Rome to varying degrees of authenticity and success.
Well it does have little to do with Eurocentrism and Afrocentrism. But what I meant to say is that the West was inspired by Ancient Rome and aimed consciously to model itself after Ancient Rome. I really do not think this is the same thing as saying that the West was a continuation of the Roman empire.

We might as well say that the government of Erdogan in Turkey is a continuation of the Ottoman empire.
 
Jul 2016
885
Europe/Switzerland/Ticino
Well it does have little to do with Eurocentrism and Afrocentrism. But what I meant to say is that the West was inspired by Ancient Rome and aimed consciously to model itself after Ancient Rome. I really do not think this is the same thing as saying that the West was a continuation of the Roman empire.

We might as well say that the government of Erdogan in Turkey is a continuation of the Ottoman empire.

Why not Hittites ?
 
Status
Closed