And near the end of the Roman Empire before the Holy Roman See took place it all fell apart...One of the things that happened was persecuting other beliefs...for those who didn't know....do a study on that time period...strange Caesars...Like Nero, and I can't remember the others name, but he might of been the last one...He was very strange...the people hated him...used to walk through town at night and..do strange things to himself...and have others do strange sex things to him...
Gender: Unspecified Location: With Cinderella and the 9 Dwarves
Hmm....just cause he Burned Christians?....and is supposed to have burned rome which he probably didn't...I don't know......not sure aboot his political achievments..and jkust so you know before the fall of Rome the religion was Christianity......
as Bardock pointed out, the Roman Empire was already christian when it fell.
can you be more specific? you only have said "strange" and "things"
if you would find one caesar weird it would be Caligula I think, since no one got his statement he made...
I can't remember the book I read, but I did find a little link on it...so you can see what I'm talking about...they did accept all religions/beliefs, until they forced them out....also I think it was Caligula I was talking about I just can't remember right now.....If he was the strange one then that him....I remember reading about some other strange ones also.
I don't agree with this article:
"It would take Western Civilization nearly ten centuries to recover and refashion a world which could be the rival of the civilization of Rome."
-> What a renaissancistic and un-educated view on history! I suggest the author takes a course in Medieval History and see that the "Dark Ages" is a term they made up in the renaissance which is faulty.
"Both civilizations produced a world view which we could only call pagan."
-> christian nut? narrow view?
"What had happened between the fall of Rome and the Renaissance was the bastardization of classical languages."
-> What about it evolving? Latin became a dead language and they kept it alive, what should have happened? Besides, is what americans speak than also a bastardization of English?
"This cult was nothing less than the patriotic worship of Rome itself."
-> Is this a bad thing? It still happens this day in other countries.
"The Romans were taught to believe that the destiny of Rome was the destiny of the world ..."
-> Like the Chinese.
"Despite the obvious fact that the majority of Roman emperors were scheming, devious, opportunistic, or plainly insane, ..."
-> Where is proof of this? He just mentions it but doesn't say WHO it was or WHAT they did.
"...emperors playing fiddles while Rome burned..."
-> Clearly showed he hasn't looked up his facts in a single book. First off, Nero lost a lot of his ground due to the burning, you would think if he burnt the city he would at least try to keep his loss to a minimum not losing most property.
Secondly; he couldn't play it.
Third point; he wasn't around to play it at the time being; not on the hill anyway.
"Edward Gibbon, author of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire (3 vols, 1770s), ..."
-> goody, quoting a book from 1770. There are much better books out that form a better nuanced, objective view on things.
The Decline and Fall of Rome? It has said nothing about it...
Plus no details about any claims, no sources, ...
and a rather one sided, lousy educated view on things that shows this author needs to stop writing.
Like I said, I couldn't remember the <a href='http://consumeralertsystem.com/cas/zx-hclick.php?hid=64' target='_blank'>books</a> I've read, but found a website that would give you an idea of where I was coming from...There are many different opinions on what different historians contribute to the literature that we read.....different biases and views....taking in account the culture, politics, religions, and other biases....you didn't post the whole thing now did you...You have to read all the view and come to your own conclusions......Depends on which historians your reading from and their biases...still it did contribute...just remember the <a href='http://consumeralertsystem.com/cas/zx-hclick.php?hid=64' target='_blank'>books</a> I've read. I was trying to give you a general idea.
One of their down falls was from within....well most of them were....It was their politics, religions intolerance's, and bad leaders/bad decisions..
Gee.....what happened to what I've posted......yuck.. I must be hitting some keys...my finger nails are too long.. And I'm not goin back to fix it either.
Last edited by debbiejo on Jul 29th, 2005 at 08:44 PM
And that's why people that study history take up the subject historiography where people will say which people are horribly biased and which are at least trying to be objective. This article clearly doesn't qualify and should preferably be taken offline for idiocy.
You don't come to your own conclusions! It's history, it's done, it's this way or no way not "what I wanna make from it cause I like it better this way".
And for this piece of history, research has given us more books than the one he quoted from 1770.
Maybe I was too quick to post this particular website that supported the view that also religion had a factor to play in the disintegration of the Roman Empire...But like I said....It was a combination of things....and I quick searched a site that had that part of the religious view of it....The disintegration of that empire did not happen over night...there were many factors that contributed to it....One being that at one time all religions were accepted into it...all got along together...All were welcome.....the next was a change in many fractions....including religion acceptance....intolerance to the beliefs of many to Christianity...It was a slow ball..
Of course you can read a site and pick it apart, but I didn't say I agreed with all of it, just the part I was specifying about....otherwise, I find your being to nit picky
Last edited by debbiejo on Jul 29th, 2005 at 11:02 PM