Onasander

The school system barely teaches history in the US beyond noting the most rudimentary aspects of colonial and revolutionary war subjects, barely note the war of 1812, civil war is.discussed a bit, and 20th century mumblings.... Here in the Ohio Valley, we mostly learn about history through our colonial forts.(rebuilt) and.town museums. It works well. Lord.Dunmore's war began here in my town, thinking about getting a robocrafter so I can make a pop up.book detailing all the genocides and cruel torture used so kids can learn it at a early age. Were better at recalling the federalists and antifederalists papers, or Tocquerville..... even the most ignorant can manage a discussion.

Gundobad is, to my knowledge, Rome's last military commander in the west with access to a recognized 'Roman Legion'.... After he gave up on Rome, and especially after Rome fell, was there this awkward Roman Legion, with standards and whatever was left of the old uniform, still kicking around in Burgandy? I find the possibility of a independent Roman legion surviving Rome, however bastardized and unrecognizable as it may be, even if short lived, intriguing. Wouldnt be a legion in a proper sense, but still.......

We've been experiencing trends at a increasingly quicker rate first set in motion by Marlborough in his French Campaign. It predates the US, and will likely outlast us, the concept of an American identity. It's a bit like the Cynics rejecting money, yet begging for it. Money has significantly evolved in its form and functions. I find myself wary of it, yet mystified and intrigued, noting the depth of total acceptance it has evolved into over time. Even racists will engage with one another for it. Damnest of things..... War is something similar. I have a strong pacifist streak to me, coupled with direct contact and a well developed knowledge base given warfare and statecraft. Right now, if it was Warsaw and not NATO that triumphed in the Cold War, it would be Warsaw stuck fighting very similar wars. Same had a European power triumphed. We didn't have a direction to go except mass homogenization. It was never any of our choices, and neither world war did shit to change the outcome, just the confused political philosophy and language that would be attached to push for a final mold. No matter what, the entire time the US has existed, we've been stuck in a bottleneck. The whole world is heading into a direction of a enevitable intergrated monoculture where nation states and the law of nations wont matter much. Morality has shifted . Part of me hates this, alot. But another is the good cosmopolitan. Expect the armies, and not just US ones, to roll out increasingly more. Your going to see alot of middle tiered power brokers emerging on the world stage, doing exactly what the US has been doing compulsively. No one really has much of a choice anymore.

http://scitech.foxnews.mobi/quickPage.html?page=43765&content=100302868&pageNum=-1 Old Gezer.....

Both..... there were colonies.

I recall you mentioning Polycarp once in a post. His disciple, Hippolytus..... he wrote a work on philosophy, called the Philosophumena, within this work is a short treatise on mathematics, espousing the church's hierarchical understanding of a very, very similar style of mathematics.... with a unexpected twist to it. Are you, or any historian here, aware what that twist is? I won't say. I'll let you look it up and have a look. It's a short treatise on this sort of mathematics.

No, I think the Hellenic Jews and Samaritans were every bit as bilingual as the Romans were, in terms of the elites. I can't see it any other way.

So the Ionians in asia Minor didnt learn the persian tongue, or the various states under the persian empire? Did the Jews under the Alexandrian successor states speak greek koine at a lower rate than the romans greek? I accept the Roman supremacy of scale in bilingualism, but not the originators, which is what this thread is about. Indiais the largest democracy, but did not invent democracy.

http://www.caesarsmessiahproven.com/ Supposedly, there is a mathematical structure to the above website. It is not my intention to either refute nor assert any data within, merely the method behind the presentation. For this task, I ask for everyone to focus on the logical constraints of his method. What are the strengths, and weaknesses. How is it structured, and is it better or worst, via specific aspects, over other historical methods in presenting theory. Finally, what is the healthy role of a skeptic, as well as a loyalist to this method, how can we judge them to be sane and rational, or a crack pot? Remember, we are not attacking any theory, much less the theory in the link, but the science behind the theory. It may be best, where possible, to recreate the methods used with your own data, to test it's validity in showing it's hypothetical faults or weaknesses. Alot of writers and future historians read this site, so I expect this thread to be a teaching aid of do and don'ts. Be specific, analytic, and explain in detail the logic behind the issue, just don't gripe. In my case, all I can say is he's trying to show out of context parallel s between selections of text, providing a context for them that intergrates a political dynasty covertly, yet cryptically not so covertly, with the founding of a puppet religion that got out of control. I fail to see the link, but making the link is expected. I therefore assume the fault is my own, in being deficient in logic. Furthermore, it may be my religious background, as a Roman Catholic blinding me. I dont feel it is, but perhaps it is. Since I am blind to the logic that leads to truth in this historical mathematics, I cant use a historical method such as this until I am taught it. I request help here. Teach me how to develope a theory on equivalent grounds to Gaius. What are the methods, and theory behind the method, that I should use?

I wonder why it ultimately died out. Why the middle ages were dominated by parliments and not senates.... I've read alot of kings mirrors from the middle ages, it's annoyingly never touched upon. Having a independent senate presided over by a emperor solves alot of dynastic weaknesses inherent in monarchy, such as the role and status of busy body nobles, what the kings offspring not expected to rule will do with their time, and a independent institution that can rule if a chold inherits the throne too early. At the very least, they will discuss every idea, point and counter point in detail. It seems eerie Italy of all places gave up on the concept, leaving it to others to resurrect it. My every impulse as a medieval ruler would be towards panic without one. A state's intelligence goes up dramatically when they are around to debate and contribute.

No, but it was in the Hellenistic Heritage, and the successor states of Alexander, especially the Ptolemies, had to do it. The Mauryan empire, though not of the western tradition, was of the Alexandrian-Hellen system, and I cant help but notice the western greeks, Romans, and Christian Apologists of the era knew about Buddhism.

So Emperor Ashoka's edicts don't count?

I had a few pan philosophy groups..... Don't forget history is a sub category of philosophy- if you are going to focus on technological legacy, look up the current big guns. I myself follow Samuel Butler, Ibn Khaldun, and a few philosophers from the middle ages no one here are expected to of heard of. Heron of Byzantium introduced 3d drawing..... something you should look into..... Dumbarton Oaks put a free translation online. Also check out: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_technology

How are you making money off this? This stuff is silly.... Are you aware that in philosophy, there are several complex schools of thought that tackles the concept of technology, it's effects on cognition, law, and values? If you're somehow making money telling people about this stuff, besides the quizzative idle chat of this forum..... you really should jump into the veneer of a more advance theory, and eludicate and expound on it from a platform more complex and meaningful than Top Ten Lists. A top ten list is perfectly okay for a website chit chat, but not for academic exercises that reel in money, as it only adds to the dumbing down trends. I tend to dislike academics, but grit my teeth less when they are penetrating, far reaching, and make their works affordable.

For those who insist on citizenship arising from your city of birth, google Nothoi or Nothos.

http://books.google.com/books?id=ybYGAPqkyh8C&pg=PA110&lpg=PA110&dq=diogenes+cynic+politeia&source=bl&ots=4HI78SBWJs&sig=VjqlegKondLFSOX7z28kjvPa9cI&hl=en&sa=X&ei=3zWIUsX-L5PJ4AOz5oB4&ved=0CCwQ6AEwAQ

I get Hastings confused with the French battle because of Age of Empires 2, I read up about the two, but always question myself when it comes to applying Names to Times and Places, even though I remember sequenced chronology well. I thank you for pointing this out, It's my major weakness. I spent the last fifteen minutes trying to track down the title to Diogenes lost work of Statecraft for another post, remember everything I need to say but the name, and am stuck with 15 Google books I bookmarked in my phone, trying to find the name...... despite literally remembering everything else. It's proleteria or something like that. I remember the entirety of it save the stupid word, and the titles get jumbled in my head, because I jumped between them so much..... experience tells me that as a result, I'm always going to be jumbled in accessing words from those texts, even if I can recite the essence of every argument in sequence as it was laid out in the text. Gotta love nuance mnemonics.

Gonna tell the local library to get it for me.

You did NOT get automatic citizenship by being born in a Greek City, you got it from having parents with citizenship rights, or having it bestowed on you. The Ancient Greeks, much like Liberals in America, are very tolerant and egalitarian, so long as your in their clique, and believe in everything they do. Everyone else can F off and die, or become a menial slave. Romans gave us the Strategic Reserve, a priori fortifications, self sufficient infantry operations ( Mar ius Mules), trained battlefield surgeons, The Who're-Madonna Paradox, corps of engineers, Professional NO O corps, industrial scale factories, Monks, division of power, martyrdom, mystery cults...... I'm stopping here. The Stoics didn't invent universal citizenship, Cosmopolitan was a Cynic concept pushed in Diogenes' work of statecraft countering Plato's republic. Stoics came around after Alexander's empire fragmented.

Ill get it translated.... I read Giorgio Agemben on and off... my Point-Elliptic Paradox was developed as a tool to criticise the way light travels in one of his essays.... found in parallel's Chrissypus's Stepped Cone Paradox in part, as well as makes the theory of relativity unstable..... this came about merely as a accident from reading him. He is a good read for anyone here on this site, given his focus on Antiquity. Can you give me a link to where used editions of this work is sold? I was always running away as a child, police had a hard time tracking me down. I remember once I was crawling over chain linked, barb wire fence into a railyard as a toddler. Also fell off the beginning of a highway bridge (one story with grass, landed back first, didn't look before I jumpped...... nor did I in the Airborne years later). Once I was found in a university during course signups, police saw this little set of legs among all the students. My mother would of gotten into trouble, but I took off once after they returned me, and made it very difficult for them to catch me. Moving from California to West Virginia, I got bored as hell, and by age twelve knew the surrounding area for ten miles, pushing a area over three states (my town is the only one to border three states in the country). Yes, we have a interstate highway system north and south, as well as east and west, but I also hit the railroad tracks, creek systems, every valley, and sometimes just ran over hills. There is one village nearby in PA, next creek system over near Meadowcroft Village (oldest inhabited site in north america) where the people dont know much about my town, as well as vice versa. However, two hundred years ago, historybooks mention people from both our towns, reliant on foot and water transport, knew each other well, and fought several wars together..... I admit, some people are instinctively xenophobic, and NEVER leave. However, you also have types that instinctively MUST. In my case, I am a INTJ, a very rare psychological type, but one that pops up in cultures and races the world over. We are known for endurance, solitary sports, like marathons. Im having a hard time believing we didn't go stir crazy in ancient times. The Cynics were known for traveling, the Satyricon is a well known satire of how much people traveled. Jason and the Agronauts, The Odyssey, the Phoenician and Cathegianian traders pushing everywhere. Greek Armed German Mercenary troops reliant on ships for transport. Naked Gymnosophists debating Christians, India.sending expeditions into Arabia, Egyptians into India, Sardinian mercenaries employed in Ancient Egypt, many philosophical, msthematical terms reaching India and Europe & North Africa, not to mention fragments and loss works referenced to by travelers. HotHowthe hell did Tacitus know about Sweden? Where was Mali paddling off too in the 1300? Leo Africanus? Battusa? Marco Polo..... The list goes on and on and on. No doubt a great bulk stayed put. But cultures can focus on one personality over another, giving life and impulse to the culture, values, and motivations of the entire community. Some native American groups in North America stayed put, others had a wonderlust, like the Shawnee, who were spread from the gulf of Mexico to New York..... they would divide, and later recall groups together for an offensive. Others, like the Iraquois, formed nations with territorial boundries and capitals. The Delaware tried to mimick the colonialists. I can't imagine these people (northern europeans) being so braindead. Were they genuises.... no. I think they had more than their fare share of stupidity. But I doubt it was the mere acceptance of Arian Christianity that caused the Goths to switch a switch and head south, ss far as Africa even! Furthermore, how could you explain a similar people, the Vikings and the Russ? The ancient world got around. Athenians knew Ukraine, ancient world fought over troy, etc. Some people get stir crazy. If we see the impulse behavior now, subtracting the influence of memes to to root psychological behavior, we find a psychological phenomena statistically likely to pop up across all societies. If it is that widespread across the human race, it likely has very ancient origins. Might even predate humans. Chances are, even in low population eras, every society could still produce a few. Just some were better placed economically, politically, militarily, or intellectually (writting) to exploit such people.

I have been coming across, quite often here, the belief that ancient people were afraid, due to superstition, of traveling/migrating into lands the modern historians know little about. I think this is taking cultural assumptions from a few select peoples or cultures at given points in time, and slapping it on the whole of antiquity until the Italian Merchant States, and later Columbus emerged. This is very difficult for me to swallow. It's painting the voids in history with the colors and presumptions of other ages, or a entire culture with the impulse, interactive dynamics of a few. The image of Celts and Gauls fearful of traveling through unknown, dark forests is a joke. Did they themselves know of a world any different? The whole world was forests and meadows. These tribes moved around alot, and traded. It's a convenient interposition to assert they were all terrified of the woods or exploration. It is especially hard, even if accept a superstitious fear preventing them in traveling into the dark unknowns that history is unable to penetrate, that they would prefer taking up full scale invasions of the Roman state without much fear, over s possible goblin in the forest. Even if Goblins were certain and real, and malicious, I would prefer my chances in tribal combat against a few of them than a couple roman legions. Rome is known to us. But shouldn't Rome be the equal unknown to them as any other land in this intellectual void they possess? It's obvious they had individuals who traded, traveled, explored, and/or were enslaved and escaped and knew enough to head back in with the rest of the tribe. If they knew how to trade with the Romans, they likely knew how to trade with others, which involves familiarity. Also, the fear of England..... some of it is factual, but how widespread and reasonable? The Isles were open up to international ore trade for centuries before this. Cross Chanel travel is certain, we have evidence stretching back thousands of years. Yeah, there might of been a fear of traveling by some, but they might of been exploiting old wives tails to avoid further intanglements that could lead to their deaths. Alexanders men mutinied less from the fear of the unknown but from never ending warfare increasingly farther away from home. A certain point occurs in a overextension of every army where every step foreward is a step farther away from the rationality and motivations of those who fight. This point is easy to detect. Chanakya mapped it out in his explanation of the RajaMandala. If your state is the center of the map, the states immediately around you are threatening, thus your natural enemy. The state on the other side is your ally. This radiates out, each state determining its enemies and friends. This causes statistical dilemmas to some states, like Frederick the Great's Prussia who found themselves mathematically ruled everyone's enemy, and preemptively struck as fast and decisively as the cold, staying close to their center. In Alexander's case, he conquered his natural ememy, then his former natural allies, then their enemies, and wanted to carry on with this absurdity. The military reached its Zenith from the prespective of Macedonia, Alexander tried to recenter them on babylonia for future, easier to justify expansions. The barbarian states to the north of Rome knew where their territory began and ended, and who their neighbors were. Some more hostile or friendly than others. The Romans under Caesar overran Gaul, their natural enemy. England was a natural ally turned sudden enemy, but one trapped on the most part harmlessly on the opposite chanel, with superior numbers on unscouted terrain. England was at best a minor threat, and yet a absurd enemy to want to face. Not because they couldnt be subdued by a proper roman force, but rather, absurd because it couldnt by a small expeditionary force. Not within reason at least, and without profit unless multiple strongholds were encountered. The fear of the sea, again, is something taken from the culture right before columbus. The ships of the Roman era, not designed for the atlantic. The belief in monsters, well deserved... cause the ocean does have some scary shit. Dozens of oars entering in and out of water at a snails pace could likely bring some freakish fish up occasionally. That is within reason. Also the stress and futility of such dangerous travel. However, that is empirical and pragmatic. Fear of the forests is childish. We are inserting infantile beliefs most people grow out of on ancient people to solve a big problem simply, which is wrong. These cultures produced adults who grew out of childhood, and had a range of personalities more than likely resembling what their neighbors had. Its quite likely the reasons the tribes stagnated is their natural enemies checked them... but some people always pushed out exploring, one way or another It would be better, than attributing the whole of migratory antiquity, be by land or sea, that they call collectively shared the same beliefs, and instead to say 'group A in era 2 held this superstition, which converges with these other groups in other eras', while noting exceptions to the rule.

I know the whole process for pig, cattle, and chicken They die when its time to be eaten, and are not bred for intelligence. I have issues hunting wild animals, even chickens unless they are killing crops. But caged ones tend to be psychotically stupified into nothingness. If a creature actually shows love and affection towards people, and a visible fear of death, I wont eat it. The chickens and goats in Iraq slaughtered in the streets didn't show either affection or fear, nor knowledge of what was about to happen, just annoyance they were being manhandled. Now, a pet goat no way. The wild chickens in hawaii a bit more intelligent, given the survival pressures of independent living. Not too smart even then. Literally barely above instinct..... My boss had me hunting roosters and chickens that would assault shop owners, running inside pooping, ruining stuff they were crafting..... those chickens would drop everything at dusk, even if I just shot and wounded one with a pellet gun, and sit in a nearby tree some ten feet off fhe ground and roost..... I was giving them to a crazy filipino, but found sometimes I could just grab them, and walk them a half mile down the road to a chicken farm and throw them over the fence uninjured. The crazy dog would run up barking, and chase it for a minute till they flew on a coup, or fall asleep mid chase. Hence, I dont weep over tge death of chickens, they have nearly no intelligence, and I question beyond one chicken, who I felt sorry for killing its mom (worst wild attack chicken of them all), I fed it once as a chickling, but it stuck around..... didnt want to kill a baby, but had to get rid of it, so I threw stuff at it and yelled at it..... it was always wary of me, but if I left the door open to my shack, would stand at my door clucking for food friendly like. Hence, it had some intelligence, as it new the parameters of the situation. Im willing to bet the chicken farmer couldnt figure out where all the extra chickens kept appearing from.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Cant-give-more-powers-to-CBI-director-Centre-says/articleshow/25713865.cms This is from today' paper, that almost exactly parallel's the issue I pointed out above. It's a line of thought traceable to the issues of favoring the martial over the civil, and of the check and balance system, with a clear emphasis on the chain of command, that keeps the chaos that brought down the roman republic. For the same reasons I pointed out not to centralize and aggrandize power under the coast guard or praetorians, India decided not to further centralize the CBI's authority. A philosopher a few centuries from now will look back at these trends for noting what points the nations of today turned under the kyklos cycle. India smart, america dumb.

Detroit = Rome Everywhere not Detroit/Rome = Rest of Roman Empire. Dogs are good to keep around. This well incident could of just been a guy too lazy to bury his dogs when they died and tossed them down a not to sacred well.

Ummmm..... you never seen rustics and their attachment to their dogs, have you? I know the same mentality exists at least in Albania as here in West Virginia, if you harm someone's dog, they will shoot you. However, if you head three hours over to Detroit, people kill dogs for sport. Detroit is a collapsed plebeian hellhole that only knows one word, socialism. Hence the disturbing chaos and low respect for life, human or dog.