Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 29 of 29

Thread: The Influence of Roman/Greek Culture on Germanics and Its Value

  1. #21
    Account Inactive
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    English
    Country
    England England
    State
    Yorkshire Yorkshire
    Gender
    Posts
    135
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts
    I don't believe the Greeks or Romans did anything philosophically for the Christians, as you know. But they were crucial in a number of other ways. This I don't deny.

    I don't think there's any shame in being influences by others as long as your own cultures remain intact. For this reason, I maintain that the Greeks had a positive influence on Germanics, and the Romans a negative.

  2. #22
    Extra ecclesiam nulla salus. Primus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Online
    4 Days Ago @ 10:21 AM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-American
    Ancestry
    Albion.
    Subrace
    Alpinid
    Country
    United States United States
    State
    New York New York
    Gender
    Age
    41
    Family
    Single adult
    Occupation
    'anti-semite'
    Politics
    Republicanism, traditionalism, .
    Religion
    Roman Catholic
    Posts
    1,802
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    4
    Thanked in
    4 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Gustaaf View Post
    I don't believe the Greeks or Romans did anything philosophically for the Christians, as you know. But they were crucial in a number of other ways. This I don't deny.

    I don't think there's any shame in being influences by others as long as your own cultures remain intact. For this reason, I maintain that the Greeks had a positive influence on Germanics, and the Romans a negative.
    The Romans had positive and negative influences on the Germanic tribes.

    Positive influences:

    * Warfare, as the influence of the Roman military on the Germanic tribes, especially towards the end of the Western Empire, is obvious.

    * Administration, law, politics, etc.

    * Architecture and engineering.

    * Ethnicity, as the great tribal groupings (Anglo-Saxons, Franks, Goths, etc.) developed as a consequence of contact/conflict with the Empire.

    Negative influences:

    * The soft aspects of Roman civilization, i.e. cultural decadence, materialism, etc.

    * Christianity (according to some; I consider the influence of Christianity to be more ambivalent).

    * Imitation, i.e. various Germanic polities imitating the Roman Empire (Carolingian Empire, Holy Roman Empire, Prussia/German Empire, Third Reich, British Empire, USA).

    * Adoption/importing of Oriental ideas (according to some; see my above comments on Christianity- not every Near Eastern idea was a bad thing imo; Stoicism was the creation of a Hellenized Phoenician and Mithraism came from Asia Minor, as two examples).

    * Jews, who were pests to the Romans and have been pests in post-Roman Germanic nations ever since. The great obsession of the USA, founded by Anglo-Celtics, is the modern-day incarnation of the ancient Jewish nation-state and many good white people, well-meaning Christians, slavishly pander to these invidious outsiders.

    And so on. Even centuries later it's obvious the Roman Empire continues to awe Germanic people (or incite feelings of antipathy); it left a large impression in the collective memory of us all (positive or negative).

  3. #23
    Account Inactive
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    English
    Country
    England England
    State
    Yorkshire Yorkshire
    Gender
    Posts
    135
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Primus View Post
    The Romans had positive and negative influences on the Germanic tribes.

    Positive influences:

    * Warfare, as the influence of the Roman military on the Germanic tribes, especially towards the end of the Western Empire, is obvious.

    * Administration, law, politics, etc.

    * Architecture and engineering.

    * Ethnicity, as the great tribal groupings (Anglo-Saxons, Franks, Goths, etc.) developed as a consequence of contact/conflict with the Empire.

    Negative influences:

    * The soft aspects of Roman civilization, i.e. cultural decadence, materialism, etc.

    * Christianity (according to some; I consider the influence of Christianity to be more ambivalent).

    * Imitation, i.e. various Germanic polities imitating the Roman Empire (Carolingian Empire, Holy Roman Empire, Prussia/German Empire, Third Reich, British Empire, USA).

    * Adoption/importing of Oriental ideas (according to some; see my above comments on Christianity- not every Near Eastern idea was a bad thing imo; Stoicism was the creation of a Hellenized Phoenician and Mithraism came from Asia Minor, as two examples).

    * Jews, who were pests to the Romans and have been pests in post-Roman Germanic nations ever since. The great obsession of the USA, founded by Anglo-Celtics, is the modern-day incarnation of the ancient Jewish nation-state and many good white people, well-meaning Christians, slavishly pander to these invidious outsiders.

    And so on. Even centuries later it's obvious the Roman Empire continues to awe Germanic people (or incite feelings of antipathy); it left a large impression in the collective memory of us all (positive or negative).
    I agree with this. What I meant was that the cons outweighed the pros, in my opinion. The one great plus I have to give to Romans is its being a vehicle for the dissemination of Christianity throughout Germanic Europe, but I believe the truth of that religion would have won Germanic hearts regardless.

    The con for Rome was its upsetting of population movements, blueprints of cosmopolitanism, destruction of ethnic identities and integrity (e.g. in Britain) etc.

  4. #24
    Extra ecclesiam nulla salus. Primus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Online
    4 Days Ago @ 10:21 AM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-American
    Ancestry
    Albion.
    Subrace
    Alpinid
    Country
    United States United States
    State
    New York New York
    Gender
    Age
    41
    Family
    Single adult
    Occupation
    'anti-semite'
    Politics
    Republicanism, traditionalism, .
    Religion
    Roman Catholic
    Posts
    1,802
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    4
    Thanked in
    4 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Gustaaf View Post
    I agree with this. What I meant was that the cons outweighed the pros, in my opinion. The one great plus I have to give to Romans is its being a vehicle for the dissemination of Christianity throughout Germanic Europe, but I believe the truth of that religion would have won Germanic hearts regardless.

    The con for Rome was its upsetting of population movements, blueprints of cosmopolitanism, destruction of ethnic identities and integrity (e.g. in Britain) etc.
    I'd say that the main sickness that was inherited from the Romans by the Germanic tribes is the same sickness that infected (and ultimately destroyed) the Romans themselves, i.e. a spiritual, materialistic sickness.

  5. #25
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Last Online
    Monday, May 29th, 2017 @ 05:26 PM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-Saxon
    Ancestry
    British Isles
    State
    Florida Florida
    Gender
    Age
    25
    Family
    Married
    Politics
    Manifest Destiny
    Religion
    God
    Posts
    612
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1
    Thanked in
    1 Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Þoreiðar View Post
    No, I didn't know that. Nor do I see how it changes my point. The Romans were the ones to start granting people citizenship regardless of national origins in Europe. Not from day one, surely, but over time.
    Yes, but the same thing happened with the Greeks of the Hellenistic Era, 323 -200 BC (rise of Rome). Eastern natives, Eastern customs, Eastern religions, they all worked their way into the quasi-Hellenic successor states, the diadochoi. Alexander the Great himself married a barbarian woman, Roxanne, the Bactrian. The Persians before the Greeks had mixed plenty with the Semitic inhabitants of Mesopotamia and the Levant.

    The peak of the Rome was reached at about the end of the Second Punic War. Morally & ethically it went downhill, especially after the reforms of Marius. But the Romans had their day as we had ours. Are we not like Tacitus, lamenting the situation of our time? Reminiscing on an age gone by?

    Of course I am not defeatistic enough to simply say we're doomed to a 476 as well.

    Quote Originally Posted by Þoreiðar View Post
    Then I think you should keep your tongue untill you have some potent arguments to offer. My initial question was merely a question, as I personally don't see what of value the Romans have brought to the table that makes up for their destructive conduct.
    Just read Elessar's and Primus' post. Architecture; administration; law; preservation of Western knowledge through the various libraries, perpetuation of the Greek legacy which could have easily been destroyed; basically all of the history of that era comes from Roman or Romanised sources; the blueprint for the nation-state; the model for post-Roman states; a stalwart defender against the Arab invasions; the last great bastion of the knowledge of antiquity before it fell in 1453, then breathing new life into Europe with the sudden influx of preserved texts; the first true unifier of Europe, etc etc. Longest lasting civilisation in the history of the entire world... 752 - 1453 BC, 2205 years.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gustaaf View Post
    I don't think there's any shame in being influences by others as long as your own cultures remain intact. For this reason, I maintain that the Greeks had a positive influence on Germanics, and the Romans a negative.
    Quote Originally Posted by Primus View Post
    I'd say that the main sickness that was inherited from the Romans by the Germanic tribes is the same sickness that infected (and ultimately destroyed) the Romans themselves, i.e. a spiritual, materialistic sickness.
    Is everyone forgetting the fact the Greeks themselves were sick and corrupt until the more virtuous Romans overtook them?

    Polybius 'The Histories' 36.17
    Quote Originally Posted by Polybius
    In our times the whole of Greece has suffered a shortage of children
    and hence a general decrease of the population, and in consequence some cities have become deserted and agricultural production has declined, although neither wars nor epidemics were taking place continuously. Now if anyone had proposed that we should consult the gods to find out what we should sayor do as to increase our numbers and repopulate our cities, his advice would have been considered quite futile, since the cause of this situation was self-evident and the remedy lay within our own power. This evil grew upon us rapidly and overtook us before we were aware of it, the simple reason being that menhad fallen prey to inflated ambitions, love of money and indolence, with the result that they wereun willing to marry, or if they did marry, to bring up the children that were born to them; or else they would only rear one or two out of a large number, so as to leave these well off and able in turn to squander their inheritance. For in cases where there are only one or two children and one is killed off by war and the other by sickness, it is obvious that the family home is left unoccupied, and ultimately, just as happens with swarms of bees, little by little whole cities lose their resources and cease to flourish
    Heraclides of Crete 1.1-2
    The city itself is all dry and does not have a good
    water supply; the streets are narrow and winding, as they were built long ago. Most of the
    houses are cheaply built, and only a few reach a higher standard; a stranger would find it
    hard to believe at first sight that this was the famous city of Athens
    Plutarch 'Life of Agis'
    The first symptoms of corruption and distemper in their commonwealth appeared at the time when the Spartans had completely destroyed the Athenian empire, and began to bring gold and silver into Lacedaemon. 2 Nevertheless, while the agrarian law established by Lycurgus still remained, and the lots of land descended undiminished from father to son, order and equality in some measure remained, which prevented other errors from being fatal. 3 But Epitadeus, a man of great authority in Sparta, though at the same time factious and ill-natured, being appointed one of the ephors, and having a quarrel with his son, procured a law that all men should have liberty to give away their estates in their lifetime, or to leave them to whom they pleased at their death. 4 It was to indulge his private resentment, that this man proposed the decree, which others accepted and confirmed from a motive of avarice, and thus the best institution in the world was abrogated. 5 Men of fortune now extended their estates without bounds, not scrupling to exclude the right heirs; and property quickly coming into a few hands, the rest of the people were poor and miserable. The latter found no time or opportunity for liberal arts and exercises, being obliged to drudge in mean employments for their living, and consequently looking with envy and hatred on the rich. 6 There remained not above seven hundred of the old Spartan families, of which, perhaps, one hundred had estates in land. 7 The rest of the city was filled with an insignificant rabble without property or honour, who had neither heart nor spirit to defend their city against wars abroad, and who were always watching an opportunity for changes and revolutions at home.

  6. #26
    Extra ecclesiam nulla salus. Primus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Online
    4 Days Ago @ 10:21 AM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-American
    Ancestry
    Albion.
    Subrace
    Alpinid
    Country
    United States United States
    State
    New York New York
    Gender
    Age
    41
    Family
    Single adult
    Occupation
    'anti-semite'
    Politics
    Republicanism, traditionalism, .
    Religion
    Roman Catholic
    Posts
    1,802
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    4
    Thanked in
    4 Posts
    I would also point out that the ancestors of the Romans were, anciently, tribalistic (Latins, Marsii, Oscan, Sabine, etc.) and vigorous. The early history of Rome, when it was still a localized power in Italy, is interesting and it shows the growth and development of the Roman polity.

    As Roman society developed, rather quickly, it took on the trappings of high culture from various neighbors (Etruscans, Greeks, Phoenicians) and decadence eventually settled in, at least in the aristocratic class. The lower classes of Roman Italy always remained vigorous, ungentrified, close to the land, and so on- or rather simple folk. I could point out two Romes:

    Rome of the aristocrats.
    Rome of the common people.

    The two aren't the same thing of course, and I think many of the negative aspects of Roman civilization have to do with the imperial Rome created by the aristocrats.

  7. #27
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Last Online
    Monday, May 29th, 2017 @ 05:26 PM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-Saxon
    Ancestry
    British Isles
    State
    Florida Florida
    Gender
    Age
    25
    Family
    Married
    Politics
    Manifest Destiny
    Religion
    God
    Posts
    612
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1
    Thanked in
    1 Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Primus View Post
    I would also point out that the ancestors of the Romans were, anciently, tribalistic (Latins, Marsii, Oscan, Sabine, etc.) and vigorous. The early history of Rome, when it was still a localized power in Italy, is interesting and it shows the growth and development of the Roman polity.

    As Roman society developed, rather quickly, it took on the trappings of high culture from various neighbors (Etruscans, Greeks, Phoenicians) and decadence eventually settled in, at least in the aristocratic class. The lower classes of Roman Italy always remained vigorous, ungentrified, close to the land, and so on- or rather simple folk. I could point out two Romes:

    Rome of the aristocrats.
    Rome of the common people.

    The two aren't the same thing of course, and I think many of the negative aspects of Roman civilization have to do with the imperial Rome created by the aristocrats.
    Hmmm. Interesting.

    I personally favour the Rome of the Aristocrats. But I think we speak of different things. To me, the Roman Empire was not one of Aristocrats, but of populist powermongers. Perhaps they were of Aristocratic birth, but their populism with the masses led to the destruction of the original Roman Character and Roman virtues. Popular generals with their troops and later the foederati loyal only to them, and after Marius these troops weren't even true Romans.

    I like the Rome when the Patricians ruled. In the period directly before the victory in the Second Punic War, which had horrible circumstances for Rome with the great Latifundia arising, and the huge influx of slave labour.

    I guess Imperial Rome was created by the Aristocrats, but it was really in the name of the filthy masses of plebeians and slaves that wonder Rome's roads.

  8. #28
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Last Online
    2 Weeks Ago @ 10:48 AM
    Ethnicity
    france-german-italian
    Ancestry
    france-german-italian
    Country
    Switzerland Switzerland
    State
    Ticino Ticino
    Location
    switzerland
    Gender
    Family
    married
    Occupation
    manager
    Politics
    conservative
    Religion
    Christian
    Posts
    35
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    14
    Thanked in
    9 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by DevZeBeserker View Post
    In my opinion it would be better if we still used runes to write...
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Runes

    The runes developed centuries after the Old Italic alphabets from which they are probably historically derived. The debate on the development of the runic script concerns the question regarding which of the Italic alphabets should be taken as their point of origin and which, if any, signs should be considered original innovations added to the letters found in the Italic scripts. The historical context of the script's origin is the cultural contact between Germanic people, who often served as mercenaries in the Roman army, and the Italian peninsula during the Roman imperial period (1st century BC to 5th century AD).[citation needed] The formation of the Elder Futhark was complete by the early 5th century, with the Kylver Stone being the first evidence of the futhark ordering as well as of the p rune.

    The alphabets of Este (Venetic), Magrè and Bolzano/Bozen-Sanzeno (Raetic), Sondrio (Camunic), Lugano (Lepontic)


    Specifically, the Raetic alphabet of Bolzano is often advanced as a candidate for the origin of the runes, with only five Elder Futhark runes ( e, ï, j, ŋ, p) having no counterpart in the Bolzano alphabet.[7] Scandinavian scholars tend to favor derivation from the Latin alphabet itself over Raetic candidates.[8][9][10] A "North Etruscan" thesis is supported by the inscription on the Negau helmet dating to the 2nd century BC.[11] This is in a northern Etruscan alphabet but features a Germanic name, Harigast. Giuliano and Larissa Bonfante suggest that runes derived from some North Italic alphabet, specifically Venetic: but since Romans conquered Venetia after 200BC, and then the Latin alphabet became prominent and Venetic culture diminished in importance, Germanic people could have adopted the Venetic alphabet within 3rd century BC or even earlier.[12]

  9. #29
    Account Inactive
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Last Online
    1 Week Ago @ 05:09 AM
    Ethnicity
    Ethnicity
    Ancestry
    Ancestry
    Gender
    Age
    35
    Posts
    2,133
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,489
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    119
    Thanked in
    99 Posts
    I agree with Luther on Rome's influence, having bewildered us Germanics. Rome used parlor tricks and reeducation propaganda to raise several generations of doubt in the process of instilling literacy, like Hippie professor indoctrination. Basically, Popery was the original SJW foundation, with Gothic guilt and Vandal guilt or Viking guilt transmuting into White guilt further down the spiral.

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Similar Threads

  1. Runic Source of Greek and Roman Alphabets?
    By SubGnostic in forum Runes & Sinnbildkunde
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: Thursday, April 19th, 2018, 08:18 AM
  2. Replies: 1
    Last Post: Thursday, April 19th, 2018, 08:03 AM
  3. How Can I Understand the Jewish Influence on Germans and Germanics at Large?
    By Unregistered in forum Questions About Germanics (Guest Section)
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: Wednesday, December 22nd, 2010, 04:54 PM
  4. Hip Hop and Its Influence on Germanics
    By Aeternitas in forum Music & Hymns
    Replies: 40
    Last Post: Sunday, June 22nd, 2008, 03:18 AM
  5. Book: Blacks in the Ancient Greek and Roman World
    By jeba dan in forum Literature & Book Reviews
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: Monday, November 1st, 2004, 02:23 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •