>>18600163
No, because at least their skin wasn't the color of shit.

>>18600163
Germanics are racially superior to Romans.

>>18600163
No because Romans loved globohomo as long as it was their own. So a Romanced Nord was Roman

>>18600178
In a backwards kinda way, isn't it kind of an accomplishment to say that your empire and culture is capable of dominating even the spirits and souls of human beings? That a displaced Gaul living in Rome would be so thoroughly Romanized that his ancestors would not even recognize him?
I guess it's based until it isn't, and they start toppling your statues. Oh well.

>>18600163
Why did you use an image of a Gaul?

It was just like today. Some Romans romanticized the Germanic peoples and exalted their physiques—a precursor to the BBC—while others were repulsed by them and highlighted their explosive temperaments.

>>18600193
It reminds them of their bell beaker paternal ancestors

>>18600163
The Roman answer as to the invading barbarians was that they wanted them all killed
The settled Laeti got a shrug and something more on the lines of not wanting them but the emperor scattered them and settled them to farm so it meant they had to pay less tax.

>>18600163
>alamy
At least put in some more effort you lazy faggot
You think you would have made the legions with this kind of work ethic?

>>18600163
Yes, there were xenophobic Romans who complained that Rome was increasingly becoming filled with foreigners.
The difference is that the average Roman had no access to an education or the Internet so they had no way to know that the influx of foreigners was a direct consequence of Rome's imperialism which benefited elites since it created a steady flow of slaves to work on their villas and freemen looking for better opportunities by joining the foederati, thus reinforcing the system.
Americans and Europeans have no such excuse.

>>18600180
>he doesn't know how many non Romans saved Rome countless times
>he doesn't know about Aurelian
>he doesn't even know about Flavius Stilicho
I won't even bother insulting you

No, they considered the Germanics to be begrudgingly superior. Conservative Politicans would lament, when Roman women were yet again acting like total devious sluts, who secretly controlled Roman men behind the curtains of official appearance, constantly cheating and whoring around and then making jokes about it in public. They would point that behavior out and say "you know the Germanics would not consider this funny. They would actually fucking kill you, if you joked about not taking your marriage to your husband seriously and just using him as a prop, while you cheat on his friends".

>>18600166
The Romans were the shitskins

>>18600206
>Aurelian
A man whose ancestors had been Romanised for nearly 200 years? That's like calling Trajan a non-Roman
>Stilicho
A half-Roman who was raised as nothing but a Roman and had absolutely no ties with anything that wasn't Roman

>>18600166
>implying it's because of skin color that people don't like migrants

>>18600221
>but ackshualky
Trajan was Italic, Aurelian was Illyrian/Thracian. Big difference
Moreover, the list does not finish with Aurelian and Stilicho. There were many non emperors and non magister militum who served Rome faithfully. Romans had no problem naturalizing Germanic warriors. Case in point the entire Frankish nation and Visigoths too. Again, the list does not end here.

>>18600232
>Big difference
The difference being you are just wrong. You are equating men who know literally nothing but a Roman world and culture with foreigners who have nothing in common with them. What would have Aurelian have known about Illyrian culture? The answer is nothing, the Illyrian language and culture was all but extinct.
>Romans had no problem naturalizing Germanic warriors. Case in point the entire Frankish nation and Visigoths too
The Franks and Visigoths were never 'naturalized'. They were treated as a hostile foreign state until the very end. The best the Visigoths got was a negotiated settlement which was all but a surrender by the Roman state, the Visigoths in Thrace and later Aquitaine were treated like enemies, and were handled like them, and for good reason too. The Visigoths did not care about the Romans and at every opportunity tried to attack the Romans. The Franks were given land which were ceded by Constantius II, and they were never considered as part of Rome, but allies, which became defunct in the 5th century as they attempted to invade (and fail).

>>18600241
>The answer is nothing, the Illyrian language and culture was all but extinct.
Wrong
>Franks and Visigoths
Both heavily Romanized as the languages themselves attest to. But as I said before they were not the only ones. Rome took tribute in young boys every time it defeated a neighboring tribe. These boys mostly ended up in the legions. This is on top of the auxiliares and foederati (like the Franks) who fought alongside Rome all through its history.
You are making the argument that Germanic barbarians could not be naturalized. You are factually and historically wrong.

People like to obsess over "le Germanic barbarians" so much. The closest equivalent of modern mass migration in Roman times was coming from the Eastern provinces, and yeah, the reaction of (conservative) Romans was the same as that of modern Westerners. The most scornful statements in Roman literature are about the Easterners. Even their contemporary Greeks got a quite bad treatment, and the Romans (even Cicero) claimed, that they weren't the descendants of the Greeks of old, which they admired, but of recent immigrants.

>>18600252
>Wrong
Then where was it? It wasn't spoken widely, we don't see it in any records and all the evidence we do have points to Latin being the language of nearly the entire region. What Illyrian culture did Aurelian have?
>Both heavily Romanized as the languages themselves attest to
Post-hoc justification.
>Rome took tribute in young boys every time it defeated a neighboring tribe.
Individuals being broken up is not the same as entire nations at arms.
>You are making the argument that Germanic barbarians could not be naturalized
No. I am stating that the Visigothic and Frankish peoples as a whole were not, which you stated were. Did you even read my argument?

>>18600163
>Did Ancient Roman citizens feel the same about the Germanic people coming to live in Rome
This didn't happen. The migrants to Rome were overwhelmingly Levantine/Oriental.

When Germanics arrived it was as warriors or rulers. There was no settlement in the third world migrant sense.

As for how they were received, Theodoric was said to have been popular with the people. His reign is often considered to preside over the last flowering of classical Roman culture before the Byzantines ruined it all.

>>18600180
>In a backwards kinda way, isn't it kind of an accomplishment to say that your empire and culture is capable of dominating even the spirits and souls of human beings? That a displaced Gaul living in Rome would be so thoroughly Romanized that his ancestors would not even recognize him?
>I guess it's based until it isn't, and they start toppling your statues. Oh well
Was this you? If it was, you are wrong. If it wasn't you are still wrong
>what Illyrian culture did Aurelian have
The cult of Sol Invictus, but you could call it Illyro-Thracian or Paleobalcanic or whatever fancy term you like. People and cultures don't disappear, and certainly it wasn't Roman policy to make them disappear unless they were Carthage or Judaea.
>I made the argument that nations don't assimilate
Nope, you made the argument that barbarians don't assimilate

>>18600353
This. People hear "migration period" and think it must have been the same as what we call migration today.

In reality it was mostly Germanic rulers who either lost their lands or had ambitions to rule over Roman cities instead of Germanic villages "migrating" with their armies (armed vassals). It was really more similar to the crusades, where European nobles conquered lands, and settled their vassals there to help them rule it. But the crusades are never called migration, people insted compare it to colonization.

This is purely due to presentism and eurocentrism. Rome is seen as the civilizational center in the migration period, so people moving there are called migrants, even though they were elites with their armies taking titles and land. But when the same happens from Europe to the Middle-East, nobody calls it migration, only colonization.

>>18600489
>Germanic villages "migrating" with their armies
Why don't you think that happened? Every piece of evidence is in favor of it. The Visigothic samples from 6th century Spain are 25% Northern European - that's five centuries or roughly 15 generations after the Goths left Scandinavia. It would be impossible to retain such high levels for so long without Germanic women coming along for the migration. A male dominated migration would result in less than 10% by 600. The Visigothic skulls are also noticeably long-vaulted and broader compared to contemporaneous Iberian ones.

There's also the Speidel et al paper from 2025 that I haven't bothered to read past the abstract, but which says the migrations left a real mark in the genetic record, in two visible streams, roughly one Gothic and one Lombard.

The nail in the coffin is that we know what an exclusively elite warrior migration looks like, it's the Vandals in North Africa.

Not really, they welcomed the Germanics as liberators because autocractic divide and rule bullshit meant they had been under the rule of syrians and serbs for hundreds of years by that point just like provincials had been ruled by non-locals from the start. If you need a contemporary example see Jewtin's Russia forcing chechens down everyone's throat

File: 1787995470542.png (170 KB, 579x569)

170 KB PNG

>>18600566
Oh and,yes the present day brown presence is trending that way in even the 'democractic west' as well

>>18600489
Completely wrong. This is the problem with basing your view of history on countering or deboonking whatever you imagine the prevailing consensus to be at the time.

It was a mass migration, entire tribes uprooted, women and children included. We know from Roman records. Hundreds of thousands of Germans were streaming into the empire, you think it was all men? Think of the kind of insane apocalyptic catastrophe would have to occur for a sex imbalance like that. Literally would only happen if the world was ending and everyone said fuck it I'm running away.

The late Caesars banned intermarriage between Roman and barbarian, do you think all the barbarians who obeyed the law just died incels? They brought their women with them and practiced endogamy

>>18600560
The samples vary wildly, probably because the idiots who did the study intentionally took samples from a variety of burial contexts because they were more interested in getting a "big picture" of the genetics of Spain. They said some migration era skeletons were only 12% native Iberian and left it at that. How many purely Goth women made it all the way to Spain? Who knows, but there's no reason to assume they couldn't.

Late Romans were racist as shit against the foederati kek

>>18600221
I would make the argument that Stilicho was an emperor even if he never officially held the position. He was the actual power behind the throne

>>18600573
>Hundreds of thousands of Germans were streaming into the empire
This was only true of the Visigoths (back when they were called Thervingi, and they were running for their lives from the Huns), and it was a disaster for them, they ended up starving. You couldn't just uproot 100s of thousands of people at once at a time most people were subsistance farming.

Think about it this way, the largest army that the Roman Empire at its peak could assemble for a campaign was around 200,000-strong. This was a trained army that was supported by a continent-spanning empire, supplied on roads in good condition, with the most advanced military logistics system of the day. And still, 200,000 men was about the ceiling. It is difficult to believe that bigger masses of Germanic farmers (including women, children, and elderly, with no logistical support network) could be on the march. They would have starved, even if they foraged and looted for food. It probably wouldn't have been even possible to get people to leave in such numbers, they would have known that it was a recipe for disaster.

Sure, after the military elites "migrated" and already controlled formerly Roman lands, there probably were some Germanic farmers migrating there, similarly to migration patterns after Roman conquests.

There was also zero instancies Germanics migrating to Roman population centers seeking work and slowly replacing the natives or changing the culture or whatever retarded modern-day paralels people are trying to make.

>>18600573
>The late Caesars banned intermarriage between Roman and barbarian
That was about elite families. The emperors didn't care about who peasants married. They wanted to keep the privileges of patrician families, keeping German military officers out of this class. Banning intermarriage was a way to keep the lines clear between them.

>>18600573
>>18600641
Even the Huns at their peak were maybe 100,000 strong and they had a habit of adopting conquered peoples as their own. The migrating tribes were never all that numerous. They simply replaced the local ruling class.

>>18600641
>Think about it this way, the largest army that the Roman Empire at its peak could assemble for a campaign was around 200,000-strong.
The single largest field army ever assembled in Antiquity was under Julian and it was 70,000 large, this is probably the same as the Persians at Issus and Xerxes' main invasion force of Greece. There have been larger total forces mobilised like during the Middle Republic or by the Diadochi against Antigonus, but they were not single armies.
Most estimates for the invading Germanic peoples put their numbers around 30-50,000 people total.
>>18600646
>They wanted to keep the privileges of patrician families
Patrician families did not exist in Late Antiquity. They disappeared in the 3rd century and had lost all their unique privileges by the Late Republic. Patrician in Late Antiquity was an exclusive title given to the highest state officials like the Magister Militum or highest Comes of the Civil Service. It was not inherited.

>>18600229
It is, crypto-woketard.

File: Trabzon_Trabzonspor_Sadri(...).png (2.79 MB, 1424x1264)

2.79 MB PNG

>>18600211
Greco-Romans have delicious olive skin like this, not poopoo brown.

>>18600353
>The migrants to Rome were overwhelmingly Levantine/Oriental
Anatolians

>>18600163
No, they thought they were clever, well built, tall, and good looking. They were not seen as landscapers and cleaning ladies.

>>18600641
>>18600646
>>18600647
You are twisting yourself into knots to remain contrarian to whatever the mainstream dogma happens to be at the time. When the 1980s dogma was that "pots aren't people" and wholesale folk migrations were impossible, historians went great lengths to prove that migrations are in fact possible and don't only happen under duress.

Now that the dogma is migration good, you're hurriedly trying to back track for no rational reason.

Hundreds of thousands of Suebi, Goths, Lombards, and other tribes entered and settled Roman territory. 200,000 Ostrogoths into Italy, 100,000 Burgundians into Gaul. THERE WAS NO SEX BIAS. It was not an elite dominance phenomenon. The women joined in. It resembled the Voortrek.

In fact, the Visigoths could have been the LEAST endogamous of the migration period Germanics. The Lombard migration period skeletons are 100% Northern European at Turin and other sites. Obviously after the migration period these people were subsumed into local populations, but it didn't happen immediately because the migration wasn't sex biased.

You can't orient your understanding of history on whatever would make you the most based and redpilled. Is it more BASED to have a male warband charge into a territory and RAYP all the women, or is it more BASED to bring your fair Freyjas with you on the voortrek so that you avoid racemixing?

It doesn't matter. Just go to a Longobard cemetery in Italy and dig up the skeletons. You'll find men and women in roughly equal proportion, both groups genetically Nordic.

I knew I shouldn't have brought up the late Caesars banning intermarriage because idiots will immediately latch on to that and obfuscate and wheedle and say well that doesn't prove anything.

The point is that a Caesar would only make an intermarriage decree if there was a significant racial and tribal presence in his land, which invariably includes WOMEN. This is why we have to resort to genetics these days, because people refuse to stop being autistic. No, there was not a horde of 100,000 men just stampeding off and leaving behind 100,000 women at home just to be BASED.

>>18600641
It wasn't 200,000 Germanics at once idiot, it was 200,000 CUMULATIVE. It was a centuries long period. Renders your whole pathetic theory useless.

>>18600163
There is no good analogy because it hasn't been replicated in history again.

All current immigrants have lower iq/low creativity etc. They just come to basically do menial labor get on welfare, or commit fraud. If the state were to collapse they would not be able to suceed or replicate anything.

The germanics were backwards yes, but elite human capital who not only adapted fast but joined the leadership and strengthened the empire. Stilicho for example was germanic and he saved the empire on numerous occasions with his germanic troops.

This is why any analogy to the roman empire's "immigration" to ours is always a tortured one at best. Not the least of which the romans didn't really invite them in, the germans forced their way in.

>>18601530
>elite human capital
don't call them that

>>18600166
So what? Do you think the Romans cared about your retarded anglo colorism? The Germanic barbarians smelled like shit, there are roman accounts talking about how much of an affront was to having to serve alongside them in the roman army because the barbarians stank to high heaven

>>18600163
No because I can't legally own a mexican

Yeah.

Just read St Ambrose, eventually you'll find out how he felt.

>>18601592
They may smell bad, but jeets LOOK like they smell bad!

File: Kashyap_P._Patel.jpg (70 KB, 500x625)

70 KB JPG

>>18601530
>The germanics were backwards yes, but elite human capital who not only adapted fast but joined the leadership
You mean like pic related?