There are a lot of conflicting ideas floating around. The most common I've seen are:>Rome was like America (or sometimes the EU).>Rome was a multicultural land with lots of promise but weighed down by savagery it couldn't get over (the Ridley Scott view).>ACTUALLY Rome was a third world shit hole (like modern Indian) and people only remember good stuff because only rich guys wrote things down.>Rome was an apollonian rational paradise that was undone by a combo of superstition, hedonism and decadence, and by falling it set back science by 1,500 years. >Rome was a pagan theocracy hippie land full of esoteric wisdom that was destroyed by Christians.>Rome was a shame based society and more socially similar to modern China then the individualist west (Spangler view).>Rome was an irredeemable evil empire that was the OG Nazi Germany.>Ancient Rome is basically the same thing as modern Italy or Spain or even HispanicsSo which one is correct? And why are the so many interpretations?
>>17965700all of them are true to some extent
>>17965700>but white men ruled itThe BBC doesn’t even say that.
>>17965839ESL?
None of the above. You ancestors destroyed the empire. The Britons were Barbarians.
>>17965700All of them at the same timeIt was an incredibly multifaceted culture
>>17965700Rome was a giant empire covering most of west eurasia, which makes it impossibile to fully find a parallel.It lasted so long that people thought it would simply go on forever.Empires that can boast similar levels of hegemony lasted far less.It had a thalassocratic dimension, but acquired that through the punic wars.
>>17965700Sargon is right for most of the RepublicGreen is right for the Empire past Nero (and the fall of the republic)Spectrum is off or using an odd definition of mercantile. But there are very few governments through history were people are happy about economic downturnsLynch has a gross oversimplification, but there are many parallels with the late republic and modern populismthe other two are shit takes
>>17965700>And why are the so many interpretations?Because Rome changed a lot and we have a lot of details about it, but there is still plenty of room to project many possible correct options of what it was really like. But even a factually correct option can have multiple more or less valid interpretations depending on the viewpoint of the interpreter.
If we look at what the Roman Republic and Roman Empire were from an objectivist perspective, you can see that it was an Oligarchy ran by a non-elected assembly or aristocrats and a head of stateRoman culture is harder to generalize because any attempts to will inevitably be made through a modern lens, which can be a fallacious way of approaching history (That's literally what "Presentism" is and for some reason so many Pop Historians on social media do this)Based on evidence we can find, we see that Roman culture and society were extremely complex, similar to how our modern society is, and for every aspect of Roman culture you find, you can always find contrarian examples, because contrarians existed in Rome like they do today.
>>17965700"Rome" stretched almost 1000 years of history, narrow it down a bit.But in a broad sense>early republicA hyper militarized, totalitarian state where citizenship was a privilege that came with the expected duty to further the glory of Rome in every facet of life. The Chud era, Hitlers wet dream. >late republic/early empireThe patricians expanded their wealth and influence, slaves started to push out the plebs from their professions which lead to social conflicts that were exploited by demagogues like Sulla, Caesar and Octavian. A more lax approach towards citizens duties and bigger focus on rights.>late empirePure globohomo degeneracy with patricians having gay child orgies in their villas, plebs living off gibs because they cant compete with slaves, foreigners constituting the military, citizenship given to any barbarian and more of a burden than a "privilege", constant civil wars until the whole thing was finally put out of its misery.
>>17965828At the same time
>>17966208>demagogues like SullaSulla was not a demagogue. he ran a military junta with support of (part of) the elite
>>17966208Most of the male population were soldiers.The roman army was a giant government jobs program. Working in agriculture was far, far worse than anything else and meant a life of slavery.Some hellenic slaves had the privilege of being teachers to kids of wealthy families and later becoming freedmen.
>>17966208>degeneracy with patricians having gay child orgies in their villasIsn't this a globohomo meme itself?
>>17966255People worked on farms and only after the farms were bought up and run with slave labor did they move to the city and join the legions. Working on a medium sized farm as a free worker was no more slavery than soldiering. >>17966261no one bat an eye in Rome if you buggered your slaves, no matter who your slaves were. getting buggered, that is what triggered Gaius and Publius
>>17966268No, farming was always bad, even in feudalist time, farmers were often short and had skeletal malformations due to backbreaking work, it was always the hardest and most "rewarding" for the state in terms of raw output of food.Soldiers normally was the pipeline to get out of farming, i.e own your own land and have someone else do the farming for you.
>>17965700Assuming you are talking about the Empire after Augustus:>Rome was like America (or sometimes the EU).Hilariously, the EU is a better paralel, as the empire was quite decentralized, it was more of a protection scheme where local elites arranged taxation and protected Roman citizens in exchange for protection against foreign threats and revolts. Imagine if Brussels was Europe's second-largest city, and a class of people held Brussels citizenships, some of whom would form colonies in member states, which would be governed by administrators sent from Brussels. Also instead of NATO, there is an EU army, and serving in it could get you a Brussels citizenship, which many people want because it would guarantee you a pension and other rights. Oh, and there is no customs union.>Rome was a multicultural land with lots of promise but weighed down by savagery it couldn't get over (the Ridley Scott view).It was even more multicultural than people imagine. The provinces mostly had their own culture that wasn't really repressed. Roman culture spread mostly due to trade and migration. As for savagery, yeah, it was a more violent time than today. Although violence in Rome itself was not particularly bad, the constant large-scale wars were a much bigger issue.>ACTUALLY Rome was a third world shit hole (like modern Indian) and people only remember good stuff because only rich guys wrote things down.The first half is largely true. Wealth differences were extreme, there was slavery and a class of urban poor dependent on handouts. The second part is false though, literate people were often critical of how things were going.
>>17965700>>17966294>Rome was an apollonian rational paradise that was undone by a combo of superstition, hedonism and decadence, and by falling it set back science by 1,500 years.Bullshit. Traditional Roman/latin culture was superstitious, pious, austere, and warlike (at least that's how it was imagined after it got infused by foreign cultures). Science, philosophy, art etc. were associated more with Greek culture, but so was hedonism and decadence. But really, different people had different values. Many of the famous writers liked Stoicism (also a Greek philosophy), so they accused everyone they don't liked of being degenerate hedonists because that was a big no-no in Stoicism.>Rome was a pagan theocracy hippie land full of esoteric wisdom that was destroyed by Christians.Only true in the sense that the pagan Roman imperial religion (a leftover of the city state's religious institutions) basically left local religion alone, while Christians wanted everyone to convert to their own specific version of Christianity.>Rome was a shame based society and more socially similar to modern China then the individualist west (Spangler view).Not really, if you were powerful enough, you could survive being shamed. Arguably Early Modern/Modern Europe was more shame-based, which is where insulting ones' honour and dueling comes from. The Romans had no such institution.>Rome was an irredeemable evil empire that was the OG Nazi Germany.By modern standards, sure. But not compared to any other empire in the era.>Ancient Rome is basically the same thing as modern Italy or Spain or even HispanicsWho says that? Modern Italy or Spain is not even the same thing as Italy or Spain 100 years ago.
>>17965700>YT historiansTrash
>>17966208>where citizenship was a privilegeRoman, and Central Italian citizenship was actually rather liberal compared to Greek ones. It was usually associated with just what city you aligned yourself with, patrician clans in early Central Italy just moved between communities as they wished and it wasn't until the middle 4th century it stopped.>>late republic/early empire>The patricians expanded their wealth and influenceNigga it's literally the exact opposite. The Patrician class lost all of their class privileges and were slowly getting muscled out by 'new men'. The only thing special about them at this point was their generational wealth and the fact they belonged to a prestigious clan.>slaves started to push out the plebs from their professionThis never happened btw>Pure globohomo degeneracy with patricians having gay child orgies in their villasDon't think I need to say that this is retarded.>plebs living off gibsThe only places in the empire with any sort of 'welfare' were Rome and Constantinople and they were only partial, largely as discounted food.>because they cant compete with slavesSlavery was on the decline in Late Antiquity>foreigners constituting the militaryNever true in the East and wouldn't be true in the West until the 450's.
>>17966350Nobody gives a fuck about the east. Rome was Italy, Britain and Gaul and sometimes the northern Balkan.
>>17966350>patrician clans in early Central Italy just moved between communities as they wished and it wasn't until the middle 4th century it stopped.Yeah? Rome wasnt a city state. Point is Roman citizenship was a privilege that allowed you full active and passive participation in public life. When Caracalla forced it on everybody he just did so to collect more taxes. >The only thing special about them at this point was their generational wealth and the fact they belonged to a prestigious clan.Thats what being a patrician was, whats your point? >This never happened btwYeah it did>welfareI mean you are right but my point is that people were no longer independent or "free", just serfs and gibsmedat coons. >Slavery was on the decline in Late AntiquityRome was a slave society to the end.
Rome was just like the regime I like but the people I don't like ruined it
Rome was around for 1000 years. It was all of those things and none of them at different points.
>>17965828Yup. Rome is a litmus test of your values.
>>17965843Brown hand?
>>17966483>Rome was around for 1000 years.You sure about that? So it lasted from 753bc to 753ad exactly.... Yeah sure ok.
rome was based except for all the times it was cringe
Rome was basically the EU without human rights.
>>17965700Honestly it was maybe more like the U.S confederacy. Large slave plantations which ruined regular laboring, delineation between peoples, government largely made up of and for powerful land owners, and ultimately, it's own corruption and backwardness played a key role in its' downfall.
>>17966208>Pure globohomo degeneracy with patricians having gay child orgies in their villas, plebs living off gibs because they cant compete with slaves, foreigners constituting the military, citizenship given to any barbarian and more of a burden than a "privilege"are we talking about ancient rome or the US
>>17966208>>17967871>Pure globohomo degeneracy with patricians having gay child orgies in their villas, plebs living off gibs because they cant compete with slaves, foreigners constituting the military, citizenship given to any barbarian and more of a burden than a "privilege"Sounds familiar>constant civil wars until the whole thing was finally put out of its misery.Coming soon, maybe 5-15 years or whenever resource production peaks globally. Only way more messy and chaotic than anything Rome ever dealt with.
>>17967567>You sure about that? So it lasted from 753bc to 753ad exactly.... Yeah sure ok.you absolute fucking retard
>>17965700>Trump is literally the Gracchi brothersIn the sense that he's a populist who wants to enforce existing laws and the Elites want to kill him for it because he's threatening their gravy train, yes, he's a Gracchi. But he also suffers from the greed of Crassus (right down to shaking down various institutions for shekels like some non-violent form of proscription), the authoritarian impulses of Sulla, and the narcissism of Caesar/Augustus.
>>17966208>Pure globohomo degeneracy with patricians having gay child orgies in their villasAlready happening in the early republic and only stopped during the late empire with its christianization.
>>17966208>>17967860You guys realize that slavery in the Roman Republic went into terminal decline after the Third Servile War right?
>>17966391>Rome wasnt a city stateIt literally was.>When Caracalla forced it on everybody he just did so to collect more taxes.If you're trying to equate early and middle Republican Rome to even the early Empire in terms of military participation you're going to be dead out of luck. Mass conscription in Central Italy ended during Augustus' reign and military participation always had a massive non-Roman part, being other Central Italian peoples.>Thats what being a patrician wasNo it wasn't. The Patricians was a very particular group of clans. They were exclusive and only included a small number. They used to have a complete monopoly by law over nearly all political and religious matters by law until it was largely legislated out during the early Republic and no longer existed at all by the late Republic.>Yeah it didI don't know why people cling to this idea with absolutely no evidence to prove it.>people were no longer independent or "free", just serfs and gibsmedat coons. Serfdom did not exist in ancient Rome. The only unfree class were slaves. People were free to move around and could petition the courts for free as any citizen could. >Rome was a slave society to the end.Your point was slavery was impacting people massively in Late Antiquity. I pointed out that it was in the decline during that period.
>>17965700>Ginsberg
>>17968792>It literally was.Not after the Latin League was dissolved. >If you're trying to equate early and middle Republican Rome to even the early Empire in terms of military participation you're going to be dead out of luck. Where was implying that? Yes, the empire was decadent, the republic was spartan, thats my point. >The Patricians was a very particular group of clans....who had money and political influence, that was their defining trait which was used throughout Romes existence to determine if somebody was a patrician or a pleb, although the distinction was less loaded by then. >I don't know why people cling to this idea with absolutely no evidence to prove it.Its well known that Roman farmers and other menial workers were driven into the city(s) because large landowners bought all those slaves captured in Romes many wars to toil on their latifundia. Some plebs were able to establish themselves as artisans or merchants, but most fell into poverty or at least lost economic standing. I dont know why you would argue with this..>Serfdom did not exist in ancient Rome.Medieval serfdom had its roots in the late empires coloni. >Your point was slavery was impacting people massively in Late Antiquity. I pointed out that it was in the decline during that period.These two points dont exclude each other.
>>17965700Ancient Rome was a very militaristic and fascistic society. Military service was required for the cursus honorum to pursue a political career. The only way for non-Romans (peregrini) to obtain Roman citizenship was to serve as auxiliaries in the armies of Rome for 25 years. Imperator/emperor was a military title given to victorious Roman generals by their troops when the commanders were acclaimed.
>>17966208When people think of Rome, they think of the late republic/early empire.
>>17965700Actually, France and Italy are continuers of the Western Roman Empire and Russia is a continuer of the Easter Roman Empire (Byzantium).Furthermore, Rome itself was a continuer of classical Greece. Rome was a vast vacuum cleaner that appropriated the best parts of whoever they fought: art, philosophy, naval warfare, infantry warfare, constitutional government, chemical batteries, alphabet. I'm not sure to what extent concrete and civil engineering might have been native tech.
>>17965700Talk about rewriting history. How about I not talk about this on 4chan. I don’t like to register incorrect information and there is nothing but that here.
Sorry for derailing, I've been trying to find this guy for days now.Does anyone know of an ancient general/politician, probably Roman/Macedonian/Greek etc. who after getting tired of a rival that was constantly spreading anti-propaganda against him captured and defeated him and paraded him (probably on a donkey) with excrement (shit) in his mouth/eyes etc.? I watched this story in a documentary and can't remember who it was.
The Romans were parasites who lived off of the plunder and slavery of their subjects.Theft and murder is bad therefore Rome is bad. Simple as.
>>17965700>Rome was a mercantile empireThat would have been pretty funny if they viewed themselves in that way because the economy of the Roman Empire was in a constant decline from the time of Octavian until the end of the Empire without even the shortest upturn. By the time of Constantine all trade but that with salt had vanished.
>>17968629Trump is emperor Nero plane and simple.
>>17969106>When people think of Rome, they think of the late republic/early empire.THIS. No one gives a flying fuck about byzantium (minus E. euros savages and crusaderboo autists). And no one cares about the ooga booga mud-hut kingdom.
