>Pliny discusses Egypt, along with just about every other region known to the Romans, in his Natural History (5.11), and says that "Egypt, besides its boast of extreme antiquity, asserts that it contained, in the reign of King Amasis, 20,000 inhabited cities", but also notes that "in our day they are still very numerous, though no longer of any particular note" - it seems that Romans liked to use Egypt as a point of reference for themselves to justify their own superiority and greatness. He also says that Alexandria, founded by Alexander the Great, is greater by far than any of the ancient Egyptian cities. He was also very impressed by the Pyramids, "[whose] renown has filled the whole Earth," although he calls them "idle and frivolous" and the product of the "great vanity" (36.16) of the kings of Egypt. The sentiment is echoes by Frontinus, a Roman Imperial officer in charge of the city's water supply who wrote a treatise on Roman hydraulic technology, who compares the marvellousness of the Roman aqueducts to the "idle Pyramids or the useless, though famous, works of the Greeks."Total EVROPEAN domination
>>530376142you dont want to know what romans thought of your ancestors if they even knew they existed
>>530376286your ancestors were filthy barbarians who had no writing or civilizationmy ancestors (AMERICANS) on the other hand were fucking based
>>530376286They used them for the only thing they were good for. Lion chow. I mean they are essentially Jews.
>>530376286Romans had generally more respect for warlike albeit poor tribes than for decadent/effeminate but urbanized populations
>>530376142Would lick her unwashed asshole
