|
Immanentized posted:
Doesn't that all prove my point? It's a successful and influential social order. Did it originate from Rome? Sounds like all the city-states of Italy later on too. And the Mafia. And it's real bad in New Jersey but people don't discuss it just accept it. Like that's Roman bullshit they exported around the globe. Greedy opportunistic thinking.
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 20:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 01:07 |
|
|
Smoothrich posted:Doesn't that all prove my point? It's a successful and influential social order. Did it originate from Rome? Sounds like all the city-states of Italy later on too. And the Mafia. And it's real bad in New Jersey but people don't discuss it just accept it. In the summer, murder rates go up. In the summer, ice cream sales go up. Therefore, ice cream causes murder. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 20:03
|
|
|
Smoothrich posted:Doesn't that all prove my point? It's a successful and influential social order. Did it originate from Rome? Sounds like all the city-states of Italy later on too. And the Mafia. And it's real bad in New Jersey but people don't discuss it just accept it. As far as I know, it originated somewhere in Anatolia c. 10,000 BCE when that jackass Gr'ndl convinced Gch to help carve a gazelle right on top of Hawat's hand-eagle and upset his harvest.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 20:05
|
|
|
Smoothrich posted:Doesn't that all prove my point? It's a successful and influential social order. Did it originate from Rome? Sounds like all the city-states of Italy later on too. And the Mafia. And it's real bad in New Jersey but people don't discuss it just accept it. Like that's Roman bullshit they exported around the globe. Greedy opportunistic thinking. People in Western Europe use latrines. Romans invented the latrine. Therefore, the only reason why anybody in Western Europe poops is because of the Romans - if there weren't any Romans, there would be no pooping. Goddamn Roman bullshit. Again, explain Chinese corruption. What, did Romans infect China too?
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 20:06
|
|
|
Tomn posted:Again, explain Chinese corruption. What, did Romans infect China too? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liqian_(village) 
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 20:07
|
|
|
Noctis Horrendae posted:What armour would average Joeus legionary have been issued prior to the Gallic Wars? Squamata? It would have been hamata. Chainmail. Back before the marian reforms, some of the richer soldiers would have Greek-style breastplates with stylized pecs and abs.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 20:09
|
|
|
Tomn posted:Hell, for that matter, are you talking about North Italians or South Italians? There's so much of a difference between cultures there that there's a major political party specifically devoted to seeing North Italy secede from South Italy. Which one of these are the uber-corrupt Italians? I'm talking about the rich ones haha. Rich power broker type people who seemed to be in control of Italian city-states mostly in the North I guess. Italy was being ruled by the richest people in individual cities when the rest of Europe had kings and crap instead. That sounds Roman to me. An ideal where the dude with the most money was the one in charge just because no business deals could be made unless he got a piece of it. Favors, trade, petty vendettas between families all of that. City-state thinking that defined ancient Greece and Rome. It seems like you had to be a bully to get anywhere in those societies. And they took that old world poo poo to NYC right off the bat and it caught on. Criminal organizations, corrupt state politics, the entire Roman empire, seems like just taking the "city-state" model in different ways and its full of greedy egomaniacs controlling all the interconnected parts of the society getting rich off it. I guess that's what I'm thinking. Classical city-state models that we all see on the big time world stage with Rome and Greece, that thrived in Renaissance Italy and is how NYC and NJ seemed to shape around from their mass immigration. It seems like greed is real bad with it too and lots of other cultural phenomenon in the distinct individualized attitudes that define Roman motivations when they tore their world apart in civil wars over petty poo poo. People talk like we got nothing in common with Rome but that model of civic institutions being paralyzed on a whim by people's egos that makes no sense when I try to wonder why because its so petty in a modern world.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 20:15
|
|
|
You do realise that the Mafia is Sicilian, right? You know, from the part of Italy noted for its lack of mercantile city-states in the Middle Ages? I already know you're a moron, but I assumed you knew something. And Italian merchant city states were not uniformly ruled by a single family who ruled "with bribes and favours". You're thinking of Florence and the Medici. Most city-states were ruled by political parties (oligarchic/middle class or Guelph/Ghibelline), and when they began to ruled by a single family they'd already transformed into de-facto monarchies. And they generally were corrupt, but nothing like you think. The Mafia weren't born in the city-states. I'm going to assume you're illiterate and are actually dictating your posts. BravestOfTheLamps fucked around with this message at 20:32 on Oct 3, 2018 |
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 20:20
|
|
|
Tomn posted:All right, here's a question: The difference between shield walls could be substantial, such as a between a full hoplite phalanx and the kinds various "barbarian" cultures used. The difference between the legionary and say, a gaul who fought in a shieldwall, was the type of shield used and the use of a sword as the primary weapon opposed to a spear. Legionaries were equipped for semi-single combat as opposed to a formation that was dependent on a close order formation and unit cohesion. The soldiers had 3 feet on either side within a rank, and 6 feet between ranks. This let them have space to fight. Their big shield gave them a lot of protection, and their strategy was to use it to be able to close in on the enemy and use their short(ish) swords where they were the most effective. This went with the overall philosophy of legions as flexible fighting forces. They cut their teeth against phalanx based armies, and in the end the Romans being able to split off cohorts and take advantage of openings was a huge advantage. The Romans would use shieldwall tactics as well, such as when they beat Boudicca and multiple times against substandard phalanxes. The center could use a shieldwall and hold firm while the flanks used more open order fighting as they hit the sides of the enemy to break up the enemy flanks and start messing up their formations. In late antiquity the legions could not maintain the same level of training and expertise as they used too, and went back to a more spear based military. The spear works fantastic in an ordered formation, and you can train people to use it faster then the multifaceted training a legionary was given at the height of the empire. This means the shieldwall came back as a primary tactic, as the spear is the natural weapon to pair with it when you are not going to be charging phalanxes with the intent to drive a wedge between them.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 20:35
|
|
|
BravestOfTheLamps posted:You do realise that the Mafia is Sicilian, right? "Therefore, the Sicilian adjective mafiusu (in Italian: mafioso) may derive from the slang Arabic term mahyas (مهياص), meaning "aggressive boasting, bragging ... in 19th century Sicily was ambiguous, signifying a bully, arrogant but also fearless, enterprising, and proud" Haha from Wikipedia. Those translations sounds like scholars struggling to describe "dignitas" as a foreign Roman ideal but to me that sounds like a Jersey blowhard type too. Guess Arabic has words for Roman ideals that English does not. You guys are being real mean to me but I like this thread and try to read stuff people suggest and enjoy talking to knowledgeable people who can share or disagree opinions backed with information. You know just cuz some poster wanders in here asking what's the deal with all the Roman bs that sounds greedy and petty like the Praetorian Guard and reminds me of my mafia-generalized home state with seemingly relatable problems like a pervasive exploitation of working class people and civic institutions that exist as money bags only doesn't make me a racist or crazy haha. It is full of ethnically rooted immigrant communities with a real hard gently caress you pay me + braggart attitude though. And yes I understand Sicilians. I had an English teacher in highschool who would shock their class going "IM SICILIAN WHICH IS AFRICAN SO I CAN SAY.. friend of the family! CUZ IM BLACK. IM A friend of the family. I HATE WHITE PEOPLE LIKE YOU ALL" an 80 year old very talented jazz musician Italian dirtbag from Newark, for example. He denied being white at all I'm not sure if he was serious ever he probably was. Smoothrich fucked around with this message at 21:08 on Mar 9, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 21:01
|
|
You know, from the part of Italy noted for its lack of mercantile city-states in the Middle Ages? I already know you're a moron, but I assumed you knew something. And Italian merchant city states were not uniformly ruled by a single family who ruled "with bribes and favours". You're thinking of Florence and the Medici. Most city-states were ruled by political parties (oligarchic/middle class or Guelph/Ghibelline), and when they began to ruled by a single family they'd already transformed into de-facto monarchies. And they generally were corrupt, but nothing like you think.
|
Smoothrich posted:You know just cuz some poster wanders in here asking what's the deal with all the Roman bs that sounds greedy and petty like the Praetorian Guard and reminds me of my mafia-generalized home state with seemingly relatable problems like a pervasive exploitation of working class people and civic institutions that exist as money bags only doesn't make me a racist or crazy haha. It is full of ethnically rooted immigrant communities with a real hard gently caress you pay me attitude though. One thing you might not have known is that there have been a few centuries worth of people comparing some aspect of their contemporary life to that of the ancients to show they're "connected" -- people saying that if there's a similarity, they must be related. People have wanted Britain to be founded by a Roman (or even Trojan) "Brutus" because both words have B R _ T in them. People have wanted the ancient Aztec to have been visited by spacemans because the stylized warrior helmets look like space suits. You jumped in with another similarity = connection, so people reacted.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 21:09
|
|
|
Slim Jim Pickens posted:It would have been hamata. Chainmail. But didn't the Romans develop hamata by essentially reverse-engineering Gallic armour? That's what I've always heard.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 21:16
|
|
|
Edit- accidental post. NJ sucks tho
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 21:16
|
|
|
Noctis Horrendae posted:But didn't the Romans develop hamata by essentially reverse-engineering Gallic armour? That's what I've always heard. That's the hypothesis, it's first documented use was when the Romans conquered parts off Spain, so it was in common use probably before that time, sometime in the 200's BC.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 21:21
|
|
|
Noctis Horrendae posted:But didn't the Romans develop hamata by essentially reverse-engineering Gallic armour? That's what I've always heard. The Gallic wars are fought by Caesar in 50 BC. Romans and Gauls had been fighting since like 400 BC. They sacked Rome in 390 BC, for starters. I don't know very much about the early Roman army, but google tells me they were armed like the Greeks. Breastplates if you could afford them, otherwise just greaves and a helmet, plus a big honking shield.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 21:30
|
|
|
WoodrowSkillson posted:The difference between shield walls could be substantial, such as a between a full hoplite phalanx and the kinds various "barbarian" cultures used. The difference between the legionary and say, a gaul who fought in a shieldwall, was the type of shield used and the use of a sword as the primary weapon opposed to a spear. Legionaries were equipped for semi-single combat as opposed to a formation that was dependent on a close order formation and unit cohesion. The soldiers had 3 feet on either side within a rank, and 6 feet between ranks. This let them have space to fight. Their big shield gave them a lot of protection, and their strategy was to use it to be able to close in on the enemy and use their short(ish) swords where they were the most effective. This went with the overall philosophy of legions as flexible fighting forces. They cut their teeth against phalanx based armies, and in the end the Romans being able to split off cohorts and take advantage of openings was a huge advantage. Now that's interesting. I'd always heard (again, mostly via osmosis) that one of the major Roman strengths was that they were trained to support each other in combat instead of doing their own thing, and I'd always assumed that was talking about individual soldiers watching each other's backs. I take it then that what was meant was that individual tactical formations would maneuver independently and intelligently to flank enemy formations instead of just picking an opposing formation and charging straight in at them? How did we come to know this, specifically the bit about the exact amount of space between soldiers? Did we manage to dig up a Roman drill manual or something? Look, here's the really short version since you seem to have trouble getting it: You assume corruption exists because of Roman culture spreading throughout the ages. It doesn't. Corruption exists because of human nature, and has been with us long before Rome was a twinkle in a she-wolf's eye and the Greeks were a handful of mud farmers in straw huts.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 21:32
|
|
|
homullus posted:One thing you might not have known is that there have been a few centuries worth of people comparing some aspect of their contemporary life to that of the ancients to show they're "connected" -- people saying that if there's a similarity, they must be related. People have wanted Britain to be founded by a Roman (or even Trojan) "Brutus" because both words have B R _ T in them. People have wanted the ancient Aztec to have been visited by spacemans because the stylized warrior helmets look like space suits. You jumped in with another similarity = connection, so people reacted. I understand that all but I don't think you get how hosed up the corruption in NJ is at every level. Like every institution is paralyzed over petty beefs between people and my hometown of only 50,000 people or so is just one mayor after another throne out for corruption who all buy mansions next to each other with stolen money, repeat everywhere. Our governor was withholding Hurricane Sandy funds unless people paid up favors cutting deals to his prefered land development businesses, letting thousands be homeless till people kissed the governors ring and showed respect + bribed with favor. Its this indescribable need they have to be petty and greedy like their job of a politician is to steal everything, every single political office is like this. The only ones who don't get any power are the ones without the balls to be a cutthroat rear end in a top hat from the start. This is the entire Roman philosophy of governance where you immediately began extracting wealth like a compulsive disease. You can't even pretend to help people or pass anything unless you pay off 10000 people who will shut down construction immediately so you probably need most of that money to do your job anyways haha. The governor shut down lanes on the George Washington Bridge into NYC that millions of people needed to commute on because some insignificant mayor disrespected him months prior haha. That sounds like the crap Romans pulled on each other over imaginary concepts like "dignitas" where your name and reputation in causing problems to countless innocent people if one guy don't know his place is everything. They started civil wars over meaningless poo poo and picked and chose when to press charges over illegal acts that were the implicit functions of their office if they felt too disrespected. Julis Caesar simply showed too little respect to the Senate so he didn't keep his dignitas rising anymore right when they were like "this guy is fronting gently caress him!" and stabbed him. Augustus played imaginary Senate theater respecting their names in a way hometown politicians need to in order to get old money to step aside over anything. Roman history has these real personal petty feuds blowing up on a much larger stage so they seem to make much less sense, but it makes sense if that is how tight-nit immigrant communities typically operate and the Romans never changed their psychology around it even when they were an empire and an army of street thugs became a legion of professionals (all bribed constantly mind you for loyalty). New Jersey plays this stuff out daily from the smallest to biggest offices and social institutions where pettiness just doesn't make sense at all but is nonstop too. It's not like NEW JERSEY IS THE NEW ROME! it is just struggling to understand the connections that are highly evident in the personal nature of the like, fake unnecessary conflicts that would cause so many civil wars in Rome over individual egos. Its more than corruption its a very personal and ego-driven nature of it and flaunting it around all brazenly as a weapon of power. Its just ridiculous when its happening at the top tiers of the government effecting millions of people. I highly doubt you guys got stories about your states that sound similar but if so prove me wrong. Smoothrich fucked around with this message at 21:35 on Mar 9, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 21:33
|
|
|
omg shut the gently caress up
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 21:35
|
|
|
Tomn posted:Now that's interesting. I'd always heard (again, mostly via osmosis) that one of the major Roman strengths was that they were trained to support each other in combat instead of doing their own thing, and I'd always assumed that was talking about individual soldiers watching each other's backs. I take it then that what was meant was that individual tactical formations would maneuver independently and intelligently to flank enemy formations instead of just picking an opposing formation and charging straight in at them? I think it is Vegetius who writes about soldiers being rotated to the back of the line so that they can rest and the guy who was previously behind him fights on. To do that, you need lanes where the guys can pass to the back.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 21:36
|
|
|
Slim Jim Pickens posted:The Gallic wars are fought by Caesar in 50 BC. Romans and Gauls had been fighting since like 400 BC. They sacked Rome in 390 BC for starters. I don't know very much about the early Roman army, but google tells me they were armed like the Greeks. Breastplates if you could afford them, otherwise just greaves and a helmet, plus a big honking shield. Oh, I completely forgot about that. How could I do such a thing? Brennus owns. Thanks.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 21:37
|
|
|
Thanks for the terrible discussion folks, I hope none of you are history teachers or anything lol. One guy knew what I was talking about with the immigrant culture, no one else even understands at all like I'm crazy. I'll go read some books about it, or write one I guess.. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 21:38
|
|
|
If you love New Jersey so much why don't you just marry it already
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 21:39
|
|
|
JaucheCharly posted:I think it is Vegetius who writes about soldiers being rotated to the back of the line so that they can rest and the guy who was previously behind him fights on. To do that, you need lanes where the guys can pass to the back. I've heard of that, and I've always wondered about it. Leaving aside the issue of the lanes, it always seemed terribly obliging of the enemy to just let people swap in like that without causing difficulties - I assume it's not exactly an easy thing to back away from an angry Gaul hacking away at you. Have any re-enactors actually tried that out to get an idea of how it worked? Does the guy in the back just tap the first dude on the shoulder and then they swap the moment the enemy looks like he's going to take a while to get a swing in or something?
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 21:45
|
|
|
Jamwad Hilder posted:You guys just wouldn't get it. It's a New Jersey thing. But was it a New Jersey thing back when New Jersey was a pure anglo-saxon Garden State??!
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 21:47
|
|
|
Tomn posted:Now that's interesting. I'd always heard (again, mostly via osmosis) that one of the major Roman strengths was that they were trained to support each other in combat instead of doing their own thing, and I'd always assumed that was talking about individual soldiers watching each other's backs. I take it then that what was meant was that individual tactical formations would maneuver independently and intelligently to flank enemy formations instead of just picking an opposing formation and charging straight in at them? The spacing is from vegetius iirc, and we assume he was working off texts we lost. There are also tons of accounts of battles in sources like Polybius, Livy, etc, and as such and there is enough there to figure out a lot of how they fought. They certainly supported each other, which is why i used the term semi-single combat. They were not like a phalanx where you are 100% counting on the guy next to you to cover you with his shield, but they did not just break formation and fight. They had room to dodge and maneuver a bit, and could trust their buddies to not let a Gaul get them from behind. You are right about the the cohorts moving on their own. One of the huge differences between the legion and the successor state phalanxes was the cohort/maniple commanders were given authority to react to things on the battlefield. The exact battle escapes me, but one of the victories against a Macedonian phalanx is credited to a maniplular commander seeing a break in the enemy phalanx, and moving his soldiers around to dive through it and break the enemy cohesion by hitting them from behind. The enemy phalanx could not reorganize and reform before the Romans were able to charge them. This kind of battlefield mobility is very hard to do with a phalanx. You obviously could do it, Alexander did, but most armies were not led by Alexander.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 21:49
|
|
|
Smoothrich posted:Thanks for the terrible discussion folks, I hope none of you are history teachers or anything lol. One guy knew what I was talking about with the immigrant culture, no one else even understands at all like I'm crazy. I'll go read some books about it, or write one I guess.. lol shut the gently caress up nerd we want to talk about history queer (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 21:50
|
|
|
Smoothrich posted:I understand that all but I don't think you get how hosed up the corruption in NJ is at every level. I probably don't get it, not the way you do. What we're saying, though, is that the amount that the corruption is hosed up in NJ has zero connection to the Romans. You can pile up the hosed up corruptions in NJ and compare it to a pile of hosed up corruptions in Rome and say WOW THAT IS hosed UP all you want, but that doesn't make them connected, even if you say WOW THAT IS hosed UP extra loud, or in a funny voice, or in ten paragraphs written on the bleached hide of a monkey. homullus fucked around with this message at 21:55 on Mar 9, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 21:52
|
|
|
Smoothrich posted:Thanks for the terrible discussion folks, I hope none of you are history teachers or anything lol. One guy knew what I was talking about with the immigrant culture, no one else even understands at all like I'm crazy. I'll go read some books about it, or write one I guess.. You aren't actually responding to anybody, you just quote posters that are already dignifying your terrible argument with a response, and then launch a 4 paragraph diatribe about NJ politics. Tomn posted:You assume corruption exists because of Roman culture spreading throughout the ages. It doesn't. Corruption exists because of human nature, and has been with us long before Rome was a twinkle in a she-wolf's eye and the Greeks were a handful of mud farmers in straw huts. This is pretty much what everybody else is saying. Human beings are petty and selfish literally everywhere. Again, do you think that corruption in South Africa or China is different from New Jersey? I'm from a non-European society, and I've heard just as many political horror stories as you have. Also, "dignitas" shouldn't be a hard concept to grab. It's just an amalgamation of basic human concepts like pride, family, influence, image, respect, and so on. We just call it "dignitas" when we're specifically discussing Romans because it's the most accurate summation of those concepts, since it's their own word, after all.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 21:57
|
|
|
Tomn posted:
Can you even prove this, by the way? You sound like an expert. Where's the earliest documented cases of ego driven corruption where everyone is entitled to bribes before they do their jobs? Please give me your insight into human nature that I am missing? That's what I'm asking specifically. There are annals of human truth and nature? That is some amazing poo poo you must know about billions of people of all human history and how every society is identical. Many corrupt aboriginal peoples waiting for a handout before they give you construction permits? Lmao cite your sources if you think your smart?
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 21:57
|
|
|
RZApublican posted:But was it a New Jersey thing back when New Jersey was a pure anglo-saxon Garden State??! New Jersey was settled by Swedes! God damned, Swedo-Lapplander filth!
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 21:58
|
|
|
.
WoodrowSkillson fucked around with this message at 19:41 on Nov 22, 2019 |
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 21:59
|
|
|
Smoothrich posted:Thanks for the terrible discussion folks, I hope none of you are history teachers or anything lol. One guy knew what I was talking about with the immigrant culture, no one else even understands at all like I'm crazy. I'll go read some books about it, or write one I guess.. Please write a book, I want to read your magnum opus about the corrupt Italians.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 22:00
|
|
|
Smoothrich posted:Can you even prove this, by the way? You sound like an expert. Where's the earliest documented cases of ego driven corruption where everyone is entitled to bribes before they do their jobs? Please give me your insight into human nature that I am missing? That's what I'm asking specifically. There are annals of human truth and nature? That is some amazing poo poo you must know about billions of people of all human history and how every society is identical. Many corrupt aboriginal peoples waiting for a handout before they give you construction permits? Lmao cite your sources if you think your smart? Looks as though corruption goes back to 2300 BC at least.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 22:02
|
|
|
Ask me about our Greek philosophical heritage of critical thinking skills in this thread haha.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 22:04
|
|
|
Smoothrich posted:Ask me about our Greek philosophical heritage of critical thinking skills in this thread haha. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 22:04
|
|
|
yeah the corruption in this case was actually caused by romano-atlantean immigrants fyi
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 22:06
|
|
|
He sounds much more enlightened of a ruler than any Roman ever was. He's doing the opposite of what Romans did! Then I read more and he's a hypocrite too of course. But it don't sound real petty and personal problems either like Romans had. Smoothrich fucked around with this message at 22:09 on Mar 9, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 22:06
|
|
|
New Jersey has senators, right? SO DOES ROME GUYS
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 22:07
|
|
|
Smoothrich posted:He sounds much more enlightened of a ruler than any Roman ever was. He's doing the opposite of what Romans did! And yet he wouldn't have made laws about corruption if it weren't a problem for the people of Lagash. You can know some of the problems of a society by looking at the laws it makes.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 22:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 01:07 |
|
|
In short: Corruption would be present in New Jersey regardless of whether or not Italians are present, Atlantis still isnt in Bolivia, Hammurabi did nothing wrong.
|
|
#
?
Mar 9, 2015 22:14
|
|
