Bitter European refuse to belive Chinese can defeat Roman
Andy
Chiew Lee Yih wrote:
> The bitter Westerner do not want to belive that Chinese
> can defeat Ancient Roman.
>
> When Westerner, especially the KKK guys learned that
> Chinese archealogist found blue eyes and red hair
> Tocharian bodies, they were so exited, they claimed
> that it is another proof of Aryan "Superiority".
> [largish snip]
> When I read the last line, I know the west won't create
> a frenzy about this, like they did with the Tocharian But
> I am still not sure, so I do some research on internet,
> using www.dejanews.com, I type in "ancient roman in
> china", and I find a person that is so hostile to the idea
> that Chinese can defeated Roman that he say:"Damn
> them all".
>
You managed to totally misunderstand the statement "damn them all" as used by TheDavid (any
relation to "The Donald"?). The "all" he is referring to in the original quote are clearly
the "greedy and the mighty" who "will do or say damn near anything to draw in the
tourists".
Your ravings and the very subject of your post are therefore baseless.
====>Andy
> This two person that suppost to be knowledgeable
> in history. (They posted in soc.history.ancient)
>
> *****************
>
> The bitter 'Terrestrial Phlegmissary' thed...@tsoft.com said:
>
> > To cater to the interest generated by the finds, local authorities have
> > built a hotel with Roman architectural features, a Roman Shopping Mall
> ^^^^^
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^
> BINGO. As here in San Francisco, the greedy and the mighty will
> do or say damn near anything to draw in the tourists.
>
> Damn them all.
>
> TheDavid
>
> *****************
>
Karen K.
Chinese archealogist found some mummy of European decendence. The film
maker twisted the Chinese conversation and insisted that these European
brought far superior technologies from the west to China 2000 years ago.
... I believe that film maker is just a mind manipulator. We all know
that both China and India were far advanced than Europe until 13th
century. China might be still more advanced than Europe until 17th
century.
No one is superior than any other. Our fate is controlled by our rulers.
Nations rise and fall. Generations come and go. Why should we waste our
time in search of superiority?
Chiew Lee Yih wrote:
> The bitter Westerner do not want to belive that Chinese
> can defeat Ancient Roman.
>
> When Westerner, especially the KKK guys learned that
> Chinese archealogist found blue eyes and red hair
> Tocharian bodies, they were so exited, they claimed
> that it is another proof of Aryan "Superiority".
>
> http://x12.dejanews.com/dnquery.xp?QRY=Supremaci
> t+Tocharian+proof+Aryan&svcclass=dnold
>
> ttp://x12.dejanews.com/dnquery.xp?QRY=Racial+Origins+of+Turks+&+Mongols&svcclass=dnold
>
> http://www.wlc.com/oxus/tocharia.htm
>
> The PBS was also exited with the news that it shot a
> documantary in China.
>
> http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/chinamum/taklamakan.html
>
> And Discover magazine report extensively in this
> "discovery".
>
> http://coldfusion.discover.com/output.cfm?ID=353
>
> The white supremacist like the PBS documantary so much that
> they shout:
>
> http://x12.
> ejanews.com/dnquery.xp?QRY=Aryan+Ancestors+Silk&svcclass=dnold
>
> Now, Chinese Archealogist have another finding, they
> have discovered defense works built by the Roman army
> 2,000 years ago.
>
> Most interesting of all, the local in where they find the Roman
> remains have Roman feature. The were believe to be the
> descendent of the Roman army which was defeated by a
> Han Chinese troop. (Han Chinese here mean both Han
> Dynasty and Han Nation)
>
> http://www.dejanews.com/dnquery.xp?QRY=ancient+roman+in+China
>
> When I read the last line, I know the west won't create
> a frenzy about this, like they did with the Tocharian But
> I am still not sure, so I do some research on internet,
> using www.dejanews.com, I type in "ancient roman in
> china", and I find a person that is so hostile to the idea
> that Chinese can defeated Roman that he say:"Damn
> them all".
>
> This two person that suppost to be knowledgeable
> in history. (They posted in soc.history.ancient)
>
> *****************
>
> The bitter 'Terrestrial Phlegmissary' thed...@tsoft.com said:
>
> > To cater to the interest generated by the finds, local authorities
> have
> > built a hotel with Roman architectural features, a Roman Shopping
> Mall
> ^^^^^
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^
> BINGO. As here in San Francisco, the greedy and the mighty will
> do or say damn near anything to draw in the tourists.
>
> Damn them all.
>
> TheDavid
>
> *****************
>
> The bitter 'Larry Plona' l...@tiac.net said:
>
> > Saw this posting in the Asian NG, any comments on its possibilities
> ?
> >
> > HONG KONG -- (Agence France Presse) A group of ancient Roman
> soldiers may
> > have survived a devastating battle against the Parthian empire 2,000
> years
> > ago and made their way to China where their descendants still live.
> >
> > ....
> >
> > To cater to the interest generated by the finds, local authorities
> have
> > built a hotel with Roman architectural features, a Roman Shopping
> Mall and a
> > giant stone sculpture depicting the town's history. ( (c) 1998
> Agence France
> > Presse)
>
> I have no idea whether or not this is true, but that last sentence
> makes the whole thing sound suspicious.
>
> - Larry Plona
>
> -------------------------------------------------------
> Larry Plona Sit Denique Inscriptum In Fronte Unius
> l...@tiac.net Cuiusque Quid De Republica Sentiat
>
> *****************
>
> Original poster, 'L. Lee' le...@prosser.seas.ucla.edu
>
> Saw this posting in the Asian NG, any comments on its possibilities ?
>
> L.
> ----------------
>
> From: "Leo" <yo...@efnet.com>
> Subject: Ancient Romans May Have Lived in China
> Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1998 20:11:20 +1000
> Organization: University of New South Wales
>
> Ancient Romans May Have Lived in China
>
> HONG KONG -- (Agence France Presse) A group of ancient Roman soldiers
> may have survived a devastating battle against the Parthian empire
> 2,000 years ago and made their way to China where their descendants
> still live.
>
> In a desolate village in Gansu province in northwestern China, Chinese
>
> archaeologists recently come across people they believe are descended
> from the legionary veterans.
>
> The archaeologists were doing excavation work in the village of
> Zhelaizhai and believe they may have discovered defense works built by
>
> the Roman army 2,000 years ago.
>
> The government-run Xinhua news agency reported that the archaeologists
>
> also found people in the village whose physical characteristics are
> similar to people in Mediterranean countries.
>
> One villager, who is taller than average, told the news agency his
> father "told me that our ancestors migrated from the far West. He
> himself had brown hair and blue eyes, just like the Europeans I've
> seen in pictorials."
>
> Anthropologists say that physical characteristics like these could be
> kept for as long as 2,000 years, and that they could be related to
> Europeans, Xinhua added.
>
> The scientists believe the Romans may have been survivors from a
> battle in 53 BC in Central Asia.
>
> "There are historical records of more than 45,000 Roman soldiers
> engaged in a battle in Central Asia in 53 B.C. who were defeated by
> Asians. But, about 6,000 soldiers who survived, went missing after the
>
> fierce battle," Xinhua said.
>
> The accepted historical record of the battle suggests that 6000 Romans
>
> took part in the battle and 5,500 were killed before the rest were
> captured.
>
> The Roman army led by Marcus Licinius Crassus, one of the First
> Truimvirate with Julius Caeser and Pompey, was defeated by a Parthian
> army at Carrhae, now Haran, Turkey, in 53 B.C.
>
> Over two days his army was slaughtered by the Parthian cavalry and
> horse archers. Crassus was later executed. According to Roman
> historians the handful of survivors were taken into slavery. Those
> still alive were released some 30 years later under a separate treaty.
>
> Roman historians make no mention of survivors traveling eastwards
> towards China.
>
> The Parthian empire lasted between 250 BC and 224 AD with its capital
> at Ctesiphon, near modern day Baghdad and formed part of the Silk
> Road, which was used by Chinese traders to bring silks to the
> Mediterranean between the first century BC and the third century AD
>
> The Chinese scientists also point to Han Dynastic (206 BC- 220 AD)
> records which tell of a military group defending the frontiers that
> encountered a peculiar army that used Roman military tactics, Xinhua
> said.
>
> The alien soldiers surrendered to the Han Dynasty and later settled in
>
> a village named of Liqian.
>
> Zhong Sengzu, a cultural relics expert told the agency that one
> historian found a cloth map made in 9 BC with the characters "liqian,"
>
> near today's Yongchang County, which is near the village of
> Zhelaizhai.
>
> The archaeologists also unearthed pottery and a skeleton and a lock of
>
> brown hair that date back at least 2,000 years.
>
> Other finds include a bronze medal with the characters "zhao'an,"
> indicating the Chinese emperor had offered amnesty to surrendering
> enemy soldiers. They believe the bronze medal might have come from a
> Roman soldier's helmet.
>
> Legionaries under the Roman Republic (510 BC - 27 BC) wore bronze
> equipment.
>
> Most villagers never left the tiny county, but have some traditions
> shared with foreigners who live thousands of miles (kilometers) away,
> Xinhua said.
>
> "Every spring, they make sacrificial offerings shaped like an ox head.
>
> They also mimic oxen fighting with each other, a custom that can
> clearly be traced back to the ancient Romans," it said.
>
> Bull dancing, where young men and women performed acrobatics using
> live bulls, can be traced back to the Etruscans, who lived in modern
> day Tuscany in central Italy and who were absorbed by the early
> Romans.
>
> To cater to the interest generated by the finds, local authorities
> have built a hotel with Roman architectural features, a Roman Shopping
>
> Mall and a giant stone sculpture depicting the town's history. ( (c)
> 1998 Agence France Presse)
Chiew Lee Yih
can defeat Ancient Roman.
When Westerner, especially the KKK guys learned that
Chinese archealogist found blue eyes and red hair
Tocharian bodies, they were so exited, they claimed
that it is another proof of Aryan "Superiority".
http://x12.dejanews.com/dnquery.xp?QRY=Supremacist+Tocharian+proof+Aryan&svcclass=dnold
http://x12.dejanews.com/dnquery.xp?QRY=Racial+Origins+of+Turks+&+Mongols&svcclass=dnold
http://www.wlc.com/oxus/tocharia.htm
The PBS was also exited with the news that it shot a
documantary in China.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/chinamum/taklamakan.html
And Discover magazine report extensively in this
"discovery".
http://coldfusion.discover.com/output.cfm?ID=353
The white supremacist like the PBS documantary so much that
they shout:
http://x12.dejanews.com/dnquery.xp?QRY=Aryan+Ancestors+Silk&svcclass=dnold
Mike Cleven
Lee Yih) wrote:
>The bitter Westerner do not want to belive that Chinese
>can defeat Ancient Roman.
Oh, bitter, bitter, bitter, bitter. Gad, I can just taste those
angosturas! Damn, if only we Westerners were as morally and
culturally superior as those Chinese that we've never been able to
fully conquer! Hah - we'll get even by having bigger cars and newer
refrigerators, and launching ships for the stars. That'll show 'em!
>
>When Westerner, especially the KKK guys learned that
>Chinese archealogist found blue eyes and red hair
>Tocharian bodies, they were so exited, they claimed
>that it is another proof of Aryan "Superiority".
Nobody said anything about "Aryan superiority" - except you. And none
of the archaeologists and anthropologists involved have ANY link to
the KKK. What branch of the PRC propaganda machine are you from? Or
are you just from Mars?
Or is it just that you have a problem with the knowledge that people
similar to Europeans once lived in lands that your country claims has
"always been a part of China"????
>
>http://x12.dejanews.com/dnquery.xp?QRY=Supremacist+Tocharian+proof+Aryan&svcclass=dnold
>http://x12.dejanews.com/dnquery.xp?QRY=Racial+Origins+of+Turks+&+Mongols&svcclass=dnold
>http://www.wlc.com/oxus/tocharia.htm
>
>The PBS was also exited with the news that it shot a
>documantary in China.
>
>http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/chinamum/taklamakan.html
>
>And Discover magazine report extensively in this
>"discovery".
>
>http://coldfusion.discover.com/output.cfm?ID=353
>
>The white supremacist like the PBS documantary so much that
>they shout:
>
>http://x12.dejanews.com/dnquery.xp?QRY=Aryan+Ancestors+Silk&svcclass=dnold
>
>Now, Chinese Archealogist have another finding, they
>have discovered defense works built by the Roman army
>2,000 years ago.
>
>Most interesting of all, the local in where they find the Roman
>remains have Roman feature. The were believe to be the
>descendent of the Roman army which was defeated by a
>Han Chinese troop. (Han Chinese here mean both Han
>Dynasty and Han Nation)
Glad you cleared that up, so we wouldn't think we were talking about
Uighurs or Mongols or Tibetans........(that's sarcasm, in case you
don't get it).
>
>http://www.dejanews.com/dnquery.xp?QRY=ancient+roman+in+China
>
>When I read the last line, I know the west won't create
>a frenzy about this, like they did with the Tocharian But
> I am still not sure, so I do some research on internet,
>using www.dejanews.com, I type in "ancient roman in
>china", and I find a person that is so hostile to the idea
>that Chinese can defeated Roman that he say:"Damn
>them all".
You appear to be the one having the frenzy. You typed in one (very
select) phrase into DejaNews and found ONE WHOLE PERSON who said
something you don't like.
Gee, I didn't have to go to DejaNews and I've found YOU without even
trying to dislike you.
That the subject of a Roman army being defeated by Chinese troops has
NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with the origin of the so-called Tocharian
red-hair, blue-eyed mummies in Eastern Turkestan is clearly beyond
your grasp.
So please entertain us with further rantings. Just try and be
coherent, OK?
Mike Cleven
Iron Mountain Creative Systems
http://members.home.net/ironmtn/
An enemy is as good as a Buddha - Buddhist proverb
The realization that one is a lost soul has two corollaries. One, that one is lost. Two, that one has a soul.
{}Tom Goodman...
wrote:
>Or is it just that you have a problem with the knowledge that people
>similar to Europeans once lived in lands that your country claims has
>"always been a part of China"????
The discovery could prove that Chinese or Mongols had captured some
white caucasians from Europe and used they as slaves.
T*o*m G*o*o*d*m*a*n
God Hates Democracy ! Ever Since The 5th Century BC Greek Pagan
Ideology Of Democracy Became A World Ideal, There Has Been More
And More God's Wrath.
{}Tom Goodman...
wrote:
>Or is it just that you have a problem with the knowledge that people
>similar to Europeans once lived in lands that your country claims has
>"always been a part of China"????
Because there was very few remains of caucasians discovered, it
probably mean that they were captured from Europe and brought to China
and used as slaves. The Mongols probably brought those white
caucasians.
Htin Aung Moe
> >When Westerner, especially the KKK guys learned that
> >Chinese archealogist found blue eyes and red hair
> >Tocharian bodies, they were so exited, they claimed
> >that it is another proof of Aryan "Superiority".
>
> of the archaeologists and anthropologists involved have ANY link to
> the KKK. What branch of the PRC propaganda machine are you from? Or
> are you just from Mars?
>
> similar to Europeans once lived in lands that your country claims has
> "always been a part of China"????
>
Wald'sk
>
> God Hates Democracy ! Ever Since The 5th Century BC Greek Pagan
> Ideology Of Democracy Became A World Ideal, There Has Been More
> And More God's Wrath.
Prove it! What god? What democracy? what wrath? How on Earth would you
know, if you can't even be bothered to 'listen' and show a minimum of
respect to the groups you are posting to?
Wald'sk
MtLoweMan
It was Sakas in Parthian service who defeated Crassus. The Sakas still had
some holdings in Xinjiang, though what waqs left of the Sakas there hasd to be
vassels to the Huns, who then were in one of their declining periods, though
they revived later.
These Romans likely were prisoners sold as "military slaves" to some king in
the area, perhaps the king of Kucha.
The Parthians did not fight the Han all that much.
The asshole who discussed KKK beliefs is a fool.
Chris----...@aol.Com
Mike Cleven
({}Tom Goodman...) wrote:
>On Fri, 21 Aug 1998 05:12:43 GMT, iro...@bigfoot.com (Mike Cleven)
>wrote:
>
>>Or is it just that you have a problem with the knowledge that people
>>similar to Europeans once lived in lands that your country claims has
>>"always been a part of China"????
>
>Because there was very few remains of caucasians discovered, it
>probably mean that they were captured from Europe and brought to China
>and used as slaves. The Mongols probably brought those white
>caucasians.
Tom Goodman's sparse knowledge of history reveals itself again. The
mummies in question predate the Mongol invasions of Europe by at least
3000 years, Tom.............
Mike Cleven
wrote:
Well, this Goodman fellow, y'see, he's been enlightened - or is that
visited? God talks to him. Y'know - on the park bench, in the
subway, etc. Tells him all kinds of things. Like how to hate better.
And how to call people names. And how to make up wild fictions and
claim that only he could be right about them and how everyone who
disagrees with him will burn in hell.
Must be some church this guy belongs to......
Norenxaq
Karen K. wrote:
> 2 weeks ago, I watched a documentary show on TV. The film showed that
> Chinese archealogist found some mummy of European decendence. The film
> maker twisted the Chinese conversation and insisted that these European
> brought far superior technologies from the west to China 2000 years ago.
> ... I believe that film maker is just a mind manipulator. We all know
> that both China and India were far advanced than Europe until 13th
> century. China might be still more advanced than Europe until 17th
> century.
> No one is superior than any other. Our fate is controlled by our rulers.
>
> Nations rise and fall. Generations come and go. Why should we waste our
> time in search of superiority?
>
Those that do mask their own sense of inferiority
/Tom Goodman...
wrote:
>On Fri, 21 Aug 1998 07:24:44 GMT, Comment...@Headquarter.org
>({}Tom Goodman...) wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 21 Aug 1998 05:12:43 GMT, iro...@bigfoot.com (Mike Cleven)
>>wrote:
>>
>>>Or is it just that you have a problem with the knowledge that people
>>>similar to Europeans once lived in lands that your country claims has
>>>"always been a part of China"????
>>
>>Because there was very few remains of caucasians discovered, it
>>probably mean that they were captured from Europe and brought to China
>>and used as slaves. The Mongols probably brought those white
>>caucasians.
>
>Tom Goodman's sparse knowledge of history reveals itself again. The
>mummies in question predate the Mongol invasions of Europe by at least
>3000 years, Tom.............
Hey, don't forget that there were Mongols more than 3,000 years ago
too. But anyway, I said "probably". It is still a strong theory that
the caucasians were captured and used as slaves by Chinese.
T*o*m* G*o*o*d*m*a*n*
Jim Walsh Is Hypocrite And Fake Human Right Activist.
He Couldn't Care Less About Chinese Indonesians. His Sole
Intention Is Bash China And Communism.
/Tom Goodman...
wrote:
>> T*o*m G*o*o*d*m*a*n
>>
>> God Hates Democracy ! Ever Since The 5th Century BC Greek Pagan
>> Ideology Of Democracy Became A World Ideal, There Has Been More
>> And More God's Wrath.
>
>Prove it! What god? What democracy? what wrath? How on Earth would you
>know, if you can't even be bothered to 'listen' and show a minimum of
>respect to the groups you are posting to?
>Wald'sk
See to it that no one takes you captive
through hollow and deceptive philosophy,
which depends on human tradition and the
basic principles of this world rather than on
Christ. - Colossians 2:8
Chiew Lee Yih
So the Roman were actually defeated by Chinese silk?
>In THE SILK ROAD, Luce Boulnois described the fight between the Pathians and
>the Romans:
>
>"For a long time the Romans held firm. But when, towards midday, the
>Parthians suddenly unfurled their gleaming banners, the effect was such that,
>added to the exhaustion, thirst and fear, the famous valour of the Roman
>legions came abruptly to an end. It was a rout."
>
>"As for the brilliantly coloured, gold-embroidered banners which has so
>dazzled the legionnaries in the course of this diastrous battle, they were if
>the historian Florus is to be believed, the first articles of silk that the
>Romans had ever seen."
>
>-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
>http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum
Da Ye
%On Fri, 21 Aug 1998 14:26:14 +0200, Wald'sk <Wal...@mailxcite.com>
%wrote:
%>> God Hates Democracy ! [...]
%>
%>Prove it! What god? Wha[...]
% See to it that no one tak[...]
Tom, you are repeating yourself. You need some fresh kill.
--Chris Stead
Error 7017 BREAKFAST.SYS halted. Cereal port not responding.
Ken Greaves
1. The Roman defeat at Carrhae.- A financier was the miltary commander.
2. Romans defeat Parthia.-Countless times, and never seriously threaten
Syria or Rome's suvenity(?) over Armenia
3. Rome conquers Parthia.- Under Trajan, Mesopatamia in Roman hands.
4. Carrhae vetrans that survived and moved to the Far East may have
numbered at most 6,000.-It took the Hans what,100,000 men to kill them.
What a powerhouse! Can I be a powerhouse too!.
5. Superiority?->Europe,and the Americas and especially the USA have a
system of government based on Roman government
(Senate,President,Electrol Colleges and so on).
6. Superiority?-> What is the language spoken by most of the world, is
it not Latin in origin?-Spanish, Portugese, Italian, Romanian, French...
7. Superiority?--> Roman culture still flurishing after 2700 years. Can
any EMPIRE claim that!
I can go on but, some oriental just slammed his Mazda into my house.
----------------------------------------------------
Antonino Adamo
now#17
-----------------------------------------------------
Quote from 'Married ...with Children'
Episode 501: Al... With Kelly
Kelly: " You don't know much about me, do you?"
Al: " Well, I do know that I carried you from the hospital the day
you were born. I remember, because I accidentally left you
on the top of the car. I was about to drive away, when
I heard this sad little voice say 'Stop you're forgetting
me'. So I get out, let your mother in and there you were."
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
S Singh Sandhu
descendant of romans , you can find indians with blue eyes and blondish
hair.
Chiew Lee Yih wrote in message <35dcee3c...@news2.ibm.net>...
Mike Cleven
(\/Tom Goodman...) wrote:
>>Tom Goodman's sparse knowledge of history reveals itself again. The
>>mummies in question predate the Mongol invasions of Europe by at least
>>3000 years, Tom.............
>
>Hey, don't forget that there were Mongols more than 3,000 years ago
>too. But anyway, I said "probably". It is still a strong theory that
>the caucasians were captured and used as slaves by Chinese.
A "strong theory"???? No, Tom - just another childish hypothesis like
so many other "ideas" you foist upon an unwilling world.......
Of course, if the First Qin Emperor had been such a good
totalitarianist and not burned all the records of the Zhang and Hsia
dynasties, and all the other writings of all the other ancient peoples
of what is now "China", we might know more about the identity of the
Tarim Basin Mummies. But it's pretty obvious from the gravegoods at
these sites that these were _free_people_ with their own culture and
property, and NO SIGN of Chinese domination/enslavement.
Mike Cleven
Lee Yih) wrote:
>On Fri, 21 Aug 1998 22:59:24 GMT, ltl...@mindspring.com wrote:
>
>So the Roman were actually defeated by Chinese silk?
You really _are_ grasping at straws, aren't you? No, you ninny - they
were "actually defeated" by _Persian_ silk (bought from Chinese
merchants, perhaps, but undubitably Persian in tailoring and design).
Kevin Douglas
Norenxaq wrote in message <35DDC0FC...@sdcampus.com>...
>
>
>Karen K. wrote:
>
>> 2 weeks ago, I watched a documentary show on TV. The film showed that
>> Chinese archealogist found some mummy of European decendence. The film
>> maker twisted the Chinese conversation and insisted that these European
>> brought far superior technologies from the west to China 2000 years ago.
>> ... I believe that film maker is just a mind manipulator. We all know
>> that both China and India were far advanced than Europe until 13th
>> century. China might be still more advanced than Europe until 17th
>> century.
No, apparantly people are rethinking that, I don't know the chronology but
if you look at specific advances a lot did happen in Europe first and China
played "catchup" until around 500 AD (eg. the bronze age happened in Europe
before China).
"More advanced", of course, is a difficult concept because it implies
there's some single scale of invention and innovation. When the Europeans
arrived in Asia during the 16 c the Chinese did consider them to be
"barbaric", weren't that interested in learning about European technology,
and yet by this time Europe, clearly, was outpacing the Chinese in key areas
(military technology, seafaring, science).
What China had and the Europeans didn't, I think, was an imperial heritage
which centralized everything to a much extent than what existed in Europe.
That created a perception of being more advanced in some ways but probably
held the Chinese back in some others.
Suggested in a recent post that this lack of centralization in Europe,
actually, might have been key to that continent's developing hegemony over
the world, an emailer "ripped me a new one", but this is where Europe was
different.
Just one example, China was a seafaring nation in the 14c, launched fleets
that were much larger than anything put together in the rest of the world.
And then, for political reasons, the Chinese court put a stop to it. So
what is more advanced?
>> No one is superior than any other. Our fate is controlled by our rulers.
I don't think people or cultures are superior, but it seems clear Europe
"built" modernity, the rest of the world is rushing to imitate that model, I
don't think Europe (or, by extension, the US) "owns" it anymore but this is
the new culture and Europe, in some sense, was able to impose its model on
the rest of the world.
Finally, about the Chinese archeologist who supposedly found Roman troops in
China. I guess anything is possible, but given the number of wars Rome
fought with Parthia and the fact that there was some trade at the time the
idea that an archeologist might be able to identify who these people were
shows, um, creativity on his part.
Kevin Douglas
/Tom Goodman... wrote in message <35e3f4e0...@n2.idirect.com>...
>Hey, don't forget that there were Mongols more than 3,000 years ago
>too. But anyway, I said "probably". It is still a strong theory that
>the caucasians were captured and used as slaves by Chinese.
Or they were just traders. People moved around in the ancient world, if
they weren't attached to some official embassy and never returned there's no
reason any official historian would take note. Think about the records
which survive from earlier and later periods. Herodotus, for instance,
didn't visit every area of the ancient world he described but it seems clear
his contacts were very good. And if his book had somehow disappeared we
might think Greece's knowledge of the Ancient world was much more limited
than it probably was.
Or Father William of Rubrick, an official account of China which survived
because William was part of a papal delegation and wrote back. Or Marco
Polo. His account seems to have been a matter of luck, he wasn't planning
to write a book, and I think there's still some debate whether he even made
it to China at all or just repeated stories he'd heard from others who who
had. Just suggesting there's always some trickle back and forth. It might
not show up in the historical record but the rule of thumb, I suspect, is if
people could get from point A to point B they went, even if just a few.
genera...@my-dejanews.com
Ken Greaves <kgre...@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca> wrote:
> Let me enlighten you
> 1. The Roman defeat at Carrhae.- A financier was the miltary commander.
> 2. Romans defeat Parthia.-Countless times, and never seriously threaten
> Syria or Rome's suvenity(?) over Armenia
> 3. Rome conquers Parthia.- Under Trajan, Mesopatamia in Roman hands.
> 4. Carrhae vetrans that survived and moved to the Far East may have
> numbered at most 6,000.-It took the Hans what,100,000 men to kill them.
> What a powerhouse! Can I be a powerhouse too!.
> 5. Superiority?->Europe,and the Americas and especially the USA have a
> system of government based on Roman government
> (Senate,President,Electrol Colleges and so on).
> 6. Superiority?-> What is the language spoken by most of the world, is
> it not Latin in origin?-Spanish, Portugese, Italian, Romanian, French...
> 7. Superiority?--> Roman culture still flurishing after 2700 years. Can
> any EMPIRE claim that!
>
The US government is not based on Roman Government. Roman Government was
controlled by the Legions it was pretty much a military state.
If legion Commanders didn't like the Emperors of Rome they would kill
them and replace them. The reason why the Roman empire fell
was due to the fact that all their plumbing had lead pipes which causes
Dementia in all the leaders and they added lead to wine.
Which most of the upper crust drank . And the legions had to recruit
many foreigners to fight there wars Because they ran out of Actual Romans
to fight and keep order in their Empire. So in the End the Loyalty to Rome
wasn't as strong as in the early days of the Empire. Hence they didn't fight
with their pride anymore.
Robert Sulentic
lot less Parthians than were actually there. You missed the part about the
cataphracts taking off their cloaks, so their armor could shine in the sun.
And the Romans knew about silk before 53BC.
That's one of the reasons moneybags was out there.
Serge
>The US government is not based on Roman Government.
True
> Roman Government was
> controlled by the Legions it was pretty much a military state.
Not always. Only at certain times.
> If legion Commanders didn't like the Emperors of Rome they would kill
> them and replace them. The reason why the Roman empire fell
> was due to the fact that all their plumbing had lead pipes which causes
> Dementia in all the leaders and they added lead to wine.
This is an oversimplification, to put it lightly.
> Which most of the upper crust drank . And the legions had to recruit
> many foreigners to fight there wars Because they ran out of Actual Romans
> to fight and keep order in their Empire. So in the End the Loyalty to Rome
> wasn't as strong as in the early days of the Empire. Hence they didn't fight
> with their pride anymore.
You need to do a lot more reading an thinking.
Michal Szczepaniak
"> The US government is not based on Roman Government"
It is, just like most of, if not all, european governments.
"Roman Government was
> controlled by the Legions it was pretty much a military state."
false. You see, before Rome became a military - controlled Empire, it was a
Republic. It's rules and methods of governing, adapted to the needs of
today, are used in constitutions and laws worldwide.
"> If legion Commanders didn't like the Emperors of Rome they would kill
> them and replace them."
It wasn't always that simple. Remember that the legion commander in chief
was the Emperor himself. If one legon did rebel, he had more of them to
crush the rebellion.
" The reason why the Roman empire fell
> was due to the fact that all their plumbing had lead pipes which causes
> Dementia in all the leaders and they added lead to wine."
This sounds like another "X-File" Theory - can't be taken seriously! Lead
pipes were used only in some cities, and Rome was a rural country.
"> Which most of the upper crust drank . And the legions had to recruit
> many foreigners to fight there wars Because they ran out of Actual
Romans
> to fight and keep order in their Empire. So in the End the Loyalty to
Rome wasn't as strong as in the early days of the Empire. Hence they didn't
fight
> with their pride anymore."
The legions have never consciously fought themselves for the country. They
were mercenaries - they fought for loot and money since the late Republic.
>
genera...@my-dejanews.com
Dure...@NOSPAMworldnet.att.net (Serge) wrote:
> On Sat, 22 Aug 1998 15:02:34 GMT, genera...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>
> True
> > Roman Government was
> > controlled by the Legions it was pretty much a military state.
>
>
> > was due to the fact that all their plumbing had lead pipes which causes
> > Dementia in all the leaders and they added lead to wine.
>
>
> > many foreigners to fight there wars Because they ran out of Actual Romans
> > to fight and keep order in their Empire. So in the End the Loyalty to Rome
> > wasn't as strong as in the early days of the Empire. Hence they didn't fight
> > with their pride anymore.
>
>
What are you talking about ? I saw it on the History Channel !
MtLoweMan
today are ignorant assholes who read NO real history.
Assuming the Roman soldiers were Parthian prisoners, it is very possible to
find them posted as soldiers on a frontier opposite to Rome.
As for the Mongols, at the time these Romans MAY have been there, there was NO
tribe of Yakka Mongols doing anything of note. They were likely still living
in the Siberian forest. The dominant Steppe peoples in the East were Huns,
Hsiung Nu who were almost certainly Turks.
The "recent" digs in Xinjiang so not prove anything that was not already
discussed in Grousset's EMPIRE OF THE STEPPES written back in the 1920's. He
discusses the Aryan steppe peoples like the Yueh Chich who the Huns drove out
of Gansu. He discusses the Tokarian city folk. He discusses how their
aristocracy got wiped out by the T'ang after very ill advised moves against
China. He discusses the high civilization of the later Uighur Tuks, how the
Kirghiz dispossessed them of Mongolia, and how the Uighurs moved to towns in
Xinjiang and intermarried with the locals, created the mixed blood, Turkic
language culture of today.
Don't you fucking assholes EVER read the most important book on Steppe history?
Chris----...@aol.Com
Serge
>In article <35def1c5...@netnews.worldnet.att.net>,
> Dure...@NOSPAMworldnet.att.net (Serge) wrote:
>> On Sat, 22 Aug 1998 15:02:34 GMT, genera...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>>
>> >The US government is not based on Roman Government.
>> True
>> > Roman Government was
>> > controlled by the Legions it was pretty much a military state.
>>
>> Not always. Only at certain times.
>>
>> > If legion Commanders didn't like the Emperors of Rome they would kill
>> > them and replace them. The reason why the Roman empire fell
>> > was due to the fact that all their plumbing had lead pipes which causes
>> > Dementia in all the leaders and they added lead to wine.
>>
>> This is an oversimplification, to put it lightly.
>>
>> > Which most of the upper crust drank . And the legions had to recruit
>> > many foreigners to fight there wars Because they ran out of Actual Romans
>> > to fight and keep order in their Empire. So in the End the Loyalty to Rome
>> > wasn't as strong as in the early days of the Empire. Hence they didn't fight
>> > with their pride anymore.
>>
>> You need to do a lot more reading an thinking.
>>
>
>What are you talking about ? I saw it on the History Channel !
>
>
That certainly explains it.
Serge.
';Tom Goodman=
<kev...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>/Tom Goodman... wrote in message <35e3f4e0...@n2.idirect.com>...
>
>>Hey, don't forget that there were Mongols more than 3,000 years ago
>>too. But anyway, I said "probably". It is still a strong theory that
>>the caucasians were captured and used as slaves by Chinese.
>
>Or they were just traders.
This is highly possible, or that they were wonderers or nomads.
Someone pointed out that there are some caucasians (East Indians are
caucasians) with blue eyes and blond hair in India. They could have
come from India. There are hybrid people of Chinese and caucasians
with blonde hair and blue eyes, so, it's also possible that they were
the offsprings of Chinese who went to Asia Minor or Eastern Europe,
made some babies with caucasians, and returned to China.
It is also possible that they were caucasian females captured from
Europe and brought to China to serve as sex slaves for the kings or
emperors.
Captain Wolf
--
Captain Wolf
Bard
*********************************************************
** St Vidicon of Cathode protect me from Bill Gates! **
*********************************************************
Padraic Brown
: But China already has a writing system on paper which is still pretty
: much intact way before Europe - unless you want to claim direct
: descendency from the ancient Greeks. Chinese were already clothed in
: silk and satin when Europeans (Goths or Saxons - take your pick) were
: still clothed in animal skin - pray tell, who is more advanced
Well, whoever were to wear some pretty but admittedly flimsy little
something in silk in the middle of a German winter would probably be dead.
I'll therefore vote for the animal hides. So, what's so special about
wearing something made from worm spit anyway? If you want "advanced" try
whoever made the first synthetics.
Therefore: Chinese 1 (due to advances in writing), Goths 1 (due to more
intelligent clothing choices).
Padraic.
Timothy N Riordan
On Fri, 21 Aug 1998, /Tom Goodman... wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Aug 1998 14:26:14 +0200, Wald'sk <Wal...@mailxcite.com>
> wrote:
>
> >> T*o*m G*o*o*d*m*a*n
> >>
> >> God Hates Democracy ! Ever Since The 5th Century BC Greek Pagan
> >> Ideology Of Democracy Became A World Ideal, There Has Been More
> >> And More God's Wrath.
> >
> >Prove it! What god? What democracy? what wrath? How on Earth would you
> >know, if you can't even be bothered to 'listen' and show a minimum of
> >respect to the groups you are posting to?
> >Wald'sk
>
> See to it that no one takes you captive
> through hollow and deceptive philosophy,
> which depends on human tradition and the
> basic principles of this world rather than on
> Christ. - Colossians 2:8
This would also apply to communism!
Steve Hix
genera...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> In article <01bdcdfb$b4ad8d00$8ef0cdc3@default>,
> "Michal Szczepaniak" <m...@box43.gnet.pl> wrote:
> > This sounds like another "X-File" Theory - can't be taken seriously! Lead
> > pipes were used only in some cities, and Rome was a rural country.
> No this is very much a fact look it up !!
> Rome was not rural dingaling ! it was the largest City in all of Europe !
Rome the city and Rome the nation were two different things.
Rome the nation was very much rural.
Kevin Douglas
>But China already has a writing system on paper which is still pretty
>much
>intact way before Europe - unless you want to claim direct descendency
>from the
>ancient Greeks. Chinese were already clothed in silk and satin when
>Europeans
>(Goths or Saxons - take your pick) were still clothed in animal skin -
>pray
>tell, who is more advanced.
Hmm...you think clothes make some huge difference? And of course European
civilization was descended from Greece, Rome, and half a dozen other empires
where people didn't wear animal skins. I'm not sure I'm following your
argument. My opinion, I suppose, is a Chinese visitor to the imperial court
in Rome wouldn't notice some vast inferiority in culture if one just
considers technology.
The Chinese had some things, so did the Europeans. The same visitor might
have
concluded that Chinese civilization was superior to Rome in the area of
culture, but
then Chinese made the same argument well into the 20th century, Europeans
returned
the favor.
Rather than argue about paper, gunpowder, astronomy, etc., I think the
useful demarcation point is what happened in Europe starting in the
renaissance and what didn't happen in the rest of the world. There's no
question, I think, that Europe just lept ahead in every field of knowledge
we now consider modern. I'm not sure China had claim to technological
superiority in any area by 1800. Actually hope someone will dispute that,
curious what that exception might be.
Today, of course, we live in one world. Europe, the United States, etc., is
technologically more advanced than China and other developing countries, who
knows what the situation will be 200 years from now, or whether it's even
possible for regions to develop areas of knowledge which aren't available to
the rest of the world (which makes the question one of economics, certainly
not about the superiority of cultures, I think that way of viewing the
problem is an anachronism).
One more thing I found interesting. Apparantly China didn't have any great
advantage vis a vis Europe when it came to population throughout most of
history, estimates suggest that there were more people in Europe in 0AD
(here including the Middle East, I'm guessing, referring to this cultural
bloc) than in Asia (ie. another cultural bloc).
That is not going to stay the same. Off the top of my head, I think
Europeans made up something like 1/3 of the estimated world population in
0AD, Asia slightly less. Today Europe, I think, accounts for something like
17% of the world's population (and isn't growing), in the future it could
reach as low as 10%.
This might have the greatest influence on technology and economic
development during the next 200 years. As countries develop it makes sense
that their birth rates will go down, eventually reaching zero growth. Other
parts of the world might find themselves in a population trap (ie. their
growth in population exceeds growth in the economy).
So what might Europe's "prize" be for reaching modernity first? They could
be the aging underpopulated but affluent countries in a world of young,
overpopulated, and very hungry up and comers. Not the most comfortable slot
for anyone.
Kevin Douglas
Inanna wrote in message <35DF1960...@uruk.net>...
>But China already has a writing system on paper which is still pretty
>much
>intact way before Europe - unless you want to claim direct descendency
>from the
>ancient Greeks. Chinese were already clothed in silk and satin when
>Europeans
>(Goths or Saxons - take your pick) were still clothed in animal skin -
>pray
>tell, who is more advanced.
Hmm...you think clothes make some huge difference? And of course European
civilization was descended from Greece, Rome, and half a dozen other empires
where people didn't wear animal skins. I'm not sure I'm following your
argument. My opinion, I suppose, is a Chinese visitor to the imperial court
in Rome wouldn't notice some vast inferiority in culture if one just
considers technology. The Chinese had some things, so did the Europeans.
The same visitor might have concluded that Chinese civilization was inferior
Kevin Douglas
>But China already has a writing system on paper which is still pretty
>much
>intact way before Europe - unless you want to claim direct descendency
>from the
>ancient Greeks. Chinese were already clothed in silk and satin when
>Europeans
>(Goths or Saxons - take your pick) were still clothed in animal skin -
>pray
>tell, who is more advanced.
Hmm...you think clothes make some huge difference? And of course European
civilization was descended from Greece, Rome, and half a dozen other empires
where people didn't wear animal skins. I'm not sure I'm following your
argument. My opinion, I suppose, is a Chinese visitor to the imperial court
in Rome wouldn't notice some vast inferiority in culture if one just
considers technology.
The Chinese had some things, so did the Europeans. The same visitor might
have
concluded that Chinese civilization was superior to Rome in the area of
Kevin Douglas
Inanna
> No, apparantly people are rethinking that, I don't know the chronology but
> if you look at specific advances a lot did happen in Europe first and China
> played "catchup" until around 500 AD (eg. the bronze age happened in Europe
> before China).
>
But China already has a writing system on paper which is still pretty
->>>Tom Goodman=
wrote:
>On Fri, 21 Aug 1998 23:26:08 GMT, hancult...@hotmail.com (Chiew
>Lee Yih) wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 21 Aug 1998 22:59:24 GMT, ltl...@mindspring.com wrote:
>>
>>So the Roman were actually defeated by Chinese silk?
>
>You really _are_ grasping at straws, aren't you? No, you ninny - they
>were "actually defeated" by _Persian_ silk (bought from Chinese
>merchants, perhaps, but undubitably Persian in tailoring and design).
Still they were Chinese silk.
Why do you have so much grudge against Chinese ? You KKK racist.
Vagor
GENERALRECALL: Rome had no constitution ! look it up !
GENERALRECALL: Oh yeah I guess you never heard of Julius Ceasar then ?
>
GENERALRECALL: " The reason why the Roman empire fell
>> > was due to the fact that all their plumbing had lead pipes
GENERALRECALL: No this is very much a fact look it up !!
GENERALRECALL: Rome was not rural dingaling ! it was the largest City in all
of Europe !
GENERALRECALL: What Loot and Money ? the rest of Europe were barbarians
living like
> American Indians in the 18 century. the only country Rome Looted was
> Carthage and Athens they didn't really loot Athens but they
> copied the Greeks.
Mr. Recall: You do, alas, have the right to express your opinions; and there
is no more eloquent peacetime reminder of the price of liberty. You have a
great deal of offline reading to do.
But do your parents know you're using the computer?
genera...@my-dejanews.com
>
> It is, just like most of, if not all, european governments.
>
> > controlled by the Legions it was pretty much a military state."
>
> Republic. It's rules and methods of governing, adapted to the needs of
> today, are used in constitutions and laws worldwide.
>
Rome had no constitution ! look it up !
> "> If legion Commanders didn't like the Emperors of Rome they would kill
> > them and replace them."
>
> It wasn't always that simple. Remember that the legion commander in chief
> was the Emperor himself. If one legon did rebel, he had more of them to
> crush the rebellion.
Oh yeah I guess you never heard of Julius Ceasar then ?
> " The reason why the Roman empire fell
> > was due to the fact that all their plumbing had lead pipes which causes
> > Dementia in all the leaders and they added lead to wine."
>
> This sounds like another "X-File" Theory - can't be taken seriously! Lead
> pipes were used only in some cities, and Rome was a rural country.
No this is very much a fact look it up !!
Rome was not rural dingaling ! it was the largest City in all of Europe !
>
> "> Which most of the upper crust drank . And the legions had to recruit
> > many foreigners to fight there wars Because they ran out of Actual
> Romans
> > to fight and keep order in their Empire. So in the End the Loyalty to
> Rome wasn't as strong as in the early days of the Empire. Hence they didn't
> fight
> > with their pride anymore."
>
> The legions have never consciously fought themselves for the country. They
> were mercenaries - they fought for loot and money since the late Republic.
> >
>
What Loot and Money ? the rest of Europe were barbarians living like
American Indians in the 18 century. the only country Rome Looted was
Carthage and Athens they didn't really loot Athens but they
copied the Greeks.
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
Serge
>In article <01bdcdfb$b4ad8d00$8ef0cdc3@default>,
> "Michal Szczepaniak" <m...@box43.gnet.pl> wrote:
>>
>> "> The US government is not based on Roman Government"
>>
>> It is, just like most of, if not all, european governments.
>>
>> "Roman Government was
>> > controlled by the Legions it was pretty much a military state."
>>
>> false. You see, before Rome became a military - controlled Empire, it was a
>> Republic. It's rules and methods of governing, adapted to the needs of
>> today, are used in constitutions and laws worldwide.
>>
>
>Rome had no constitution ! look it up !
Some of us don't have to look it up. Polybius has a chapter titled "On
the Roman Constitution in its Prime" in his "The Rise of the Roman
Empire". Look it up, Mr. Recall.
This is what happens when people entrust their education to the
History Channel.
Serge.
genera...@my-dejanews.com
pbr...@nova.umuc.edu (Padraic Brown) wrote:
> Inanna (ina...@uruk.net) wrote:
>
> : But China already has a writing system on paper which is still pretty
> : much intact way before Europe - unless you want to claim direct
> : descendency from the ancient Greeks. Chinese were already clothed in
> : silk and satin when Europeans (Goths or Saxons - take your pick) were
> : still clothed in animal skin - pray tell, who is more advanced
>
> something in silk in the middle of a German winter would probably be dead.
> I'll therefore vote for the animal hides. So, what's so special about
> wearing something made from worm spit anyway? If you want "advanced" try
> whoever made the first synthetics.
>
> Therefore: Chinese 1 (due to advances in writing), Goths 1 (due to more
> intelligent clothing choices).
>
> Padraic.
>
Ghengis Kahn and Attila the Hun used Silk. It was lighter than Armor So
their Warriors could be more agile and when an Arrow peirced them the silk
has special properties where you can just pull out arrows of your body
without doing to much damage when retracting the arrows.
genera...@my-dejanews.com
"Vagor" <dave...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>
>
> GENERALRECALL: Rome had no constitution ! look it up !
> GENERALRECALL: Oh yeah I guess you never heard of Julius Ceasar then ?
> >
> GENERALRECALL: " The reason why the Roman empire fell
> >> > was due to the fact that all their plumbing had lead pipes
> GENERALRECALL: Rome was not rural dingaling ! it was the largest City in all
> of Europe !
>
> GENERALRECALL: What Loot and Money ? the rest of Europe were barbarians
> living like
> > American Indians in the 18 century. the only country Rome Looted was
> > Carthage and Athens they didn't really loot Athens but they
> > copied the Greeks.
>
> is no more eloquent peacetime reminder of the price of liberty. You have a
> great deal of offline reading to do.
>
> But do your parents know you're using the computer?
>
>
Does your Momma know that you are sucking college Dick why you are at college
?
Mike Cleven
>In article <01bdcdfb$b4ad8d00$8ef0cdc3@default>,
> "Michal Szczepaniak" <m...@box43.gnet.pl> wrote:
>
>What Loot and Money ? the rest of Europe were barbarians living like
> American Indians in the 18 century. the only country Rome Looted was
> Carthage and Athens they didn't really loot Athens but they
> copied the Greeks.
Erg..... Egypt? Syria? Anatolia/Armenia? Persia?
Mike Cleven
Iron Mountain Creative Systems
http://members.home.net/ironmtn/
An enemy is as good as a Buddha - Buddhist proverb
The realization that one is a lost soul has two corollaries. One, that one is lost. Two, that one has a soul.
Mike Cleven
(->>>Tom Goodman=) wrote:
>>You really _are_ grasping at straws, aren't you? No, you ninny - they
>>were "actually defeated" by _Persian_ silk (bought from Chinese
>>merchants, perhaps, but undubitably Persian in tailoring and design).
>
>Still they were Chinese silk.
>
>Why do you have so much grudge against Chinese ? You KKK racist.
The issue here isn't any "grudge against Chinese", but the obvious
grudge against westerners that Chiew started this whole stupid thread
off with. You PRC toe-sucking pseudo-Christian fascist.
Mike Cleven
(';Tom Goodman=) wrote:
>>Or they were just traders.
>
>This is highly possible, or that they were wonderers or nomads.
>Someone pointed out that there are some caucasians (East Indians are
>caucasians) with blue eyes and blond hair in India. They could have
>come from India. There are hybrid people of Chinese and caucasians
>with blonde hair and blue eyes, so, it's also possible that they were
>the offsprings of Chinese who went to Asia Minor or Eastern Europe,
>made some babies with caucasians, and returned to China.
>
>It is also possible that they were caucasian females captured from
>Europe and brought to China to serve as sex slaves for the kings or
>emperors.
>
Tom's posts here are rather odd, because IIRC he was one of the
ratpack in talk.politics.tibet who were on a rampage a while back
claiming that there had never been any slavery in China. Now he seems
quite positively enthusiastic about the idea that there must have been
slavery, in order to explain the presence of European-type features in
Asia.......
Somebody should grab Occam's Razor and slit Tom's throat,
methinks.....
genera...@my-dejanews.com
Dure...@NOSPAMworldnet.att.net (Serge) wrote:
> On Sun, 23 Aug 1998 02:24:23 GMT, genera...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>
> >In article <01bdcdfb$b4ad8d00$8ef0cdc3@default>,
> > "Michal Szczepaniak" <m...@box43.gnet.pl> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> It is, just like most of, if not all, european governments.
> >>
> >> "Roman Government was
> >> > controlled by the Legions it was pretty much a military state."
> >>
> >> false. You see, before Rome became a military - controlled Empire, it was a
> >> Republic. It's rules and methods of governing, adapted to the needs of
> >> today, are used in constitutions and laws worldwide.
> >>
> >
>
> the Roman Constitution in its Prime" in his "The Rise of the Roman
> Empire". Look it up, Mr. Recall.
> This is what happens when people entrust their education to the
> History Channel.
>
> Serge.
>
>
I'm to lazy to look it up ! SERGE !!!!!! I mean SURGE !!!!! But you are
saying that Guys with PHD's who produce those shows and are usually experts
on the subjects are lying ? So are you saying anything on TV is a lie ? You
must read books to get the truth ?
///Tom Goodman///
wrote:
>Inanna (ina...@uruk.net) wrote:
>
>: But China already has a writing system on paper which is still pretty
>: much intact way before Europe - unless you want to claim direct
>: descendency from the ancient Greeks. Chinese were already clothed in
>: silk and satin when Europeans (Goths or Saxons - take your pick) were
>: still clothed in animal skin - pray tell, who is more advanced
>
>Well, whoever were to wear some pretty but admittedly flimsy little
>something in silk in the middle of a German winter would probably be dead.
There was no textile before the silk cloth, so silk cloth is the
mother of all textile; and Chinese invented using silk threads to make
textile.
Silk cloth is a textile, except that it uses thread made by silkworms.
Before silk cloth was invented, humans worn animal skins. After the
Chinese invented using thread from silk worm cocoons, they also
created weaving methods. Silk threads must be weaved together to form
a cloth. This weaving technique was the start of all other textiles.
Later, people discovered plant fibers such as cotton and animal hair
such as wool could be weaved to make into textile. So, the clothing
you're wearing are connected to the invention of silk cloth.
Silk cloth is not necessarily used singularly, it can be used like
other textile to form a thick coat. Silk is a good material to keep
warm, it "breathes" better than synthetic, making it high quality
material to make underwear for cold weather. Cotton is not as good at
retain body heat, synthetic is even worse. Silk keeps warm, but
"breathable", and sweat is easily past to the outer surface and
evaporates quickly. If you have a think coat or a winter suit with
silk inner lining or underwear made of silk, then you'd know what I
mean. Some of the more expensive business suits made of high grade
wool or cashmere for winter have a silk inner lining.
>I'll therefore vote for the animal hides. So, what's so special about
>wearing something made from worm spit anyway? If you want "advanced" try
>whoever made the first synthetics.
You can't wear animal hides in warm weather. Silk is good for both
cold and hot weather. Also, you'd feel clumsy and stuffy in an
over-all made of animal hides, unless you're in the sub-zero
temperature. Silk doesn't make you stuffy even you're covered from
neck to feet with silk cloth. So, silk makes an ideal textile for
normal temperature. That's why silk was treasured by rich people, and
still is. Silk is expensive to produce and production is limited.
Without silk cloth invention, there is no textile, and no synthetic
textile.
>
>Therefore: Chinese 1 (due to advances in writing), Goths 1 (due to more
>intelligent clothing choices).
>
There was no textile before the silk cloth, so silk cloth is the
mother of all textile; and Chinese invented using silk threads to make
textile.
So, who is the intelligent one ?
Robert Sulentic
I think that would come as a surprise to all those people a Catal Huyuk who
were weaving woolen cloth before silk ever made it west.
And the Goths were wearing wool too, guys. (Not to mention linen).
And the Chinese were wearing furs. Sentry duty on the great wall in winter
was not done in silk alone.
And the Han never fought Romans. They never made it that far west.
Robert Sulentic
Those shows are made by TV producers (who are not historians) and written by
writers (who are also not historians, though they may have read something on
the subject), thus ending up with the entertainment product you so eagerly
watch.
Vagor
genera...@my-dejanews.com wrote in message <6rofdi$et8
<lavatory wall carving snipped>
Despite your unfortunate decision to respond, it provides a satisfaction
akin to that of a submarine crew, who unable to see the hidden target when
the torpedoes are launched, are nonetheless gratified by the distant,
muffled "whump" of a target destroyed.
Usenet is a place for discussion. Don't post opinions you are unprepared to
support. Most people here are adults.
Da Ye
>
> On Sun, 23 Aug 1998 02:24:23 GMT, genera...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>
> >In article <01bdcdfb$b4ad8d00$8ef0cdc3@default>,
> > "Michal Szczepaniak" <m...@box43.gnet.pl> wrote:
> >
> > copied the Greeks.
>
> Erg..... Egypt? Syria? Anatolia/Armenia? Persia?
>
Chris Stead
002CONGRESS.SYS corrupted... Reboot Washington_DC? (Y/N)
趙里昱
<kev...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>/Tom Goodman... wrote in message <35e3f4e0...@n2.idirect.com>...
>
>>Hey, don't forget that there were Mongols more than 3,000 years ago
>>too. But anyway, I said "probably". It is still a strong theory that
>>the caucasians were captured and used as slaves by Chinese.
>
>Or they were just traders. People moved around in the ancient world, if
>they weren't attached to some official embassy and never returned there's no
>reason any official historian would take note. Think about the records
Should be the WESTERN records.
>which survive from earlier and later periods. Herodotus, for instance,
>didn't visit every area of the ancient world he described but it seems clear
>his contacts were very good. And if his book had somehow disappeared we
>might think Greece's knowledge of the Ancient world was much more limited
>than it probably was.
>
>Or Father William of Rubrick, an official account of China which survived
>because William was part of a papal delegation and wrote back. Or Marco
>Polo. His account seems to have been a matter of luck, he wasn't planning
>to write a book, and I think there's still some debate whether he even made
>it to China at all or just repeated stories he'd heard from others who who
>had. Just suggesting there's always some trickle back and forth. It might
>not show up in the historical record but the rule of thumb, I suspect, is if
>people could get from point A to point B they went, even if just a few.
>
>
Joe Lin
manufacturing steps. it also requires cultivation of silk worms to produce the
raw material. In the north, silk and wool were used together to make winter
garments.
As for the Mongol warrior wearing silk, the rationale is that silk is an
extremely flexible fabric. When an arrow hits the silk, it puches a hole at the
tip and then drag the fabric in with it. When you pull the arrow out, there is
less tearing of the tissue around the entry. That's why Mongols wears a silk
undershirt right next to his skin.
genera...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> > Padraic.
> >
>
> Ghengis Kahn and Attila the Hun used Silk. It was lighter than Armor So
> their Warriors could be more agile and when an Arrow peirced them the silk
> has special properties where you can just pull out arrows of your body
> without doing to much damage when retracting the arrows.
>
Joe Lin
European culture. They were a different people geographically, culturally, and
religiously.
Joe Lin
movies. First, the legions did not heavily influence succession until
Vespasian's rule. The Flavian period was stable in terms of succession for most
of the 2nd century. The phenomenon of the Praetorian Guard and Legions guarding
the succession didn't really hit full swing until the 3rd century.
genera...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>
>
> The US government is not based on Roman Government. Roman Government was
> controlled by the Legions it was pretty much a military state.
> If legion Commanders didn't like the Emperors of Rome they would kill
> them and replace them. The reason why the Roman empire fell
> was due to the fact that all their plumbing had lead pipes which causes
> Dementia in all the leaders and they added lead to wine.
> Which most of the upper crust drank . And the legions had to recruit
> many foreigners to fight there wars Because they ran out of Actual Romans
> to fight and keep order in their Empire. So in the End the Loyalty to Rome
> wasn't as strong as in the early days of the Empire. Hence they didn't fight
> with their pride anymore.
>
Pete Barrett
>I'm to lazy to look it up ! SERGE !!!!!! I mean SURGE !!!!! But you are
>saying that Guys with PHD's who produce those shows and are usually experts
>on the subjects are lying ? So are you saying anything on TV is a lie ? You
>must read books to get the truth ?
You need to make a distinction between what they say (which is limited
by the amount of time they're allowed, and by the background knowledge
of their audience), and what they actually _mean_. And the only way to
make a decent guess at what they mean, is to have some background
knowledge yourself. That means reading, I'm afraid.
In this particular case, what was meant is probably that the Romans
didn't have a _written_ constitution. Like the UK today, they had an
unwritten one, consisting of a set of laws which could be changed like
any other laws, and which regulated how the state was run. This method
has the advantage of being very flexible - if you were to read (!!!)
Livy, you'd see how the constitution was able to change to meet
changing circumstances (no matter that Livy is rather unreliable as a
historian - he's a good read).
Pete Barrett
Pete Barrett
(///Tom Goodman///) wrote:
>There was no textile before the silk cloth, so silk cloth is the
>mother of all textile; and Chinese invented using silk threads to make
>textile.
What's the date of the earliest known silk cloth? And for other kinds
of cloth? (These are archaeology questions, I would think, and I'm not
too well up on that). Predynastic Egyptian (ca. 3500 BCE) objects show
people wearing what is indubitably cloth, but I would think cloth
predates that, probably both in China and the Middle East.
Pete Barrett
Mike Cleven
<cks...@shell.dixie-net.com> wrote:
>On Sun, 23 Aug 1998, Mike Cleven wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, 23 Aug 1998 02:24:23 GMT, genera...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>>
>> >In article <01bdcdfb$b4ad8d00$8ef0cdc3@default>,
>> > "Michal Szczepaniak" <m...@box43.gnet.pl> wrote:
>> >
>> >What Loot and Money ? [...]
>> > copied the Greeks.
>>
>> Erg..... Egypt? Syria? Anatolia/Armenia? Persia?
>>
>Surrender. All you have learned is wrong. revision carries the day.
Hmm. The Romans didn't conquer (and loot) Egypt and Syria and
Armenia? They didn't wage war with Persia and annex parts of Persian
Mesopotamia (albeit briefly)? The post _I_ was responding to claimed
that the Romans only beat up on the Germans and Gauls, and never had
anyone to loot. The history of the Roman occupation of Egypt and
Palestine/Syria says otherwise.
So _you_ surrender......
Mike Cleven
>In article <6rnqrb$feq$1...@nova.umuc.edu>,
> pbr...@nova.umuc.edu (Padraic Brown) wrote:
>> Inanna (ina...@uruk.net) wrote:
>Ghengis Kahn and Attila the Hun used Silk. It was lighter than Armor So
>their Warriors could be more agile and when an Arrow peirced them the silk
>has special properties where you can just pull out arrows of your body
>without doing to much damage when retracting the arrows.
There's nothing worse than arrow-holes in a fashionable silk camise,
is there?
Mike Cleven
(///Tom Goodman///) wrote:
>>Well, whoever were to wear some pretty but admittedly flimsy little
>>something in silk in the middle of a German winter would probably be dead.
>
>There was no textile before the silk cloth, so silk cloth is the
>mother of all textile; and Chinese invented using silk threads to make
>textile.
>
>Silk cloth is a textile, except that it uses thread made by silkworms.
>Before silk cloth was invented, humans worn animal skins.
Tom's profound ignorance of damned near everything reveals itself once
again. "Let them wear silk" he cried at the mangy fur-wearing
barbarians, blind to the fact that flax, cotton, papyrus, and other
fibres were already in use for centuries before the invention of silk
textiles (in _India_, not China); as for animal hides, apparently Tom
doesn't know what chamois is like, or sheepstomach either. In my part
of the world (the Pacific Northwest), fine garments were made of the
cambium of cedar bark (known as kalakhwatie). Who wants to wear
worm-spit anyway?
Kevin Douglas
>>Or they were just traders. People moved around in the ancient world, if
>>they weren't attached to some official embassy and never returned there's
no
>>reason any official historian would take note. Think about the records
>
>Should be the WESTERN records.
Hmm, interesting point. Are there non-western records which describe trips
by Europeans to China before, say, the 15th century in any detail? Or which
described trips by Chinese to Europe in the same fashion? I'm not aware of
any, which doesn't mean they don't exist, but if they do please point me in
a direction. I would love to read an account by a Chinese diplomat to the
vatican, something like that. Or the only records which survive are western
records
Kevin Douglas
Mike Cleven wrote in message
<35e483f4...@news.nvcr1.bc.wave.home.com>...
>Who wants to wear
>worm-spit anyway?
Or who wants to base their argument that Chinese civilization was more
advanced on the circumstance that Asia had worms which could spit? That's a
function of climate. The Europeans turned grapes into wine, China didn't,
big deal, too.
Da Ye
%<cks...@shell.dixie-net.com> wrote:
%>On Sun, 23 Aug 1998, Mike Cleven wrote:
%>> On Sun, 23 Aug 1998 02:24:23 GMT, genera...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
%>> >In article <01bdcdfb$b4ad8d00$8ef0cdc3@default>,
%>> > "Michal Szczepaniak" <m...@box43.gnet.pl> wrote:
%>> >[...]
%>> Erg..... [...]
%>Surrender. [...]
%Hmm. The Romans didn't conquer (and loot) Egypt and Sy[...]
%So _you_ surrender......
%
Oh for pity's sake. When will you get it through your head. White opressor
= wrong. Historical revision is the way to the truth. Let others guide
you.
--Chris Stead
Error 7017 BREAKFAST.SYS halted. Cereal port not responding.
Don Kirkman
<6rnqrb$feq$1...@nova.umuc.edu>:
>Inanna (ina...@uruk.net) wrote:
>: But China already has a writing system on paper which is still pretty
>: much intact way before Europe - unless you want to claim direct
>: descendency from the ancient Greeks. Chinese were already clothed in
>: silk and satin when Europeans (Goths or Saxons - take your pick) were
>: still clothed in animal skin - pray tell, who is more advanced
>Well, whoever were to wear some pretty but admittedly flimsy little
>something in silk in the middle of a German winter would probably be dead.
>I'll therefore vote for the animal hides. So, what's so special about
>wearing something made from worm spit anyway? If you want "advanced" try
>whoever made the first synthetics.
>Therefore: Chinese 1 (due to advances in writing), Goths 1 (due to more
>intelligent clothing choices).
Hey, don't you give away MY patrimony so easily! :-)
European writing IS (as Inanna seemed doubtful about) in a direct
linkage to paper/papyrus use in Egypt and alphabetical writing at least
as early as the ancient Greeks and Phoenicians (I think)--I won't even
push the issue of cuneiform or hieroglyphics, though they're analogous
to ideographs. I don't know if that predates Chinese paper and writing,
but it was quite a while ago, so it's worth arguing over. :-)
--
Don
new...@abac.com
Don Kirkman
<35e5d70a...@n2.idirect.com>:
>On 22 Aug 1998 21:21:47 -0400, pbr...@nova.umuc.edu (Padraic Brown)
>wrote:
>>Inanna (ina...@uruk.net) wrote:
[Re writing]
>>Well, whoever were to wear some pretty but admittedly flimsy little
>>something in silk in the middle of a German winter would probably be dead.
>There was no textile before the silk cloth, so silk cloth is the
>mother of all textile; and Chinese invented using silk threads to make
>textile.
I thought the bog mummies of northern Europe had some woven material on
them. Maybe the Ice Man as well? How far back does silk date? Near
Eastern paintings show cloth apparel back several centuries BCE.
>Silk cloth is a textile, except that it uses thread made by silkworms.
>Before silk cloth was invented, humans worn animal skins. After the
>Chinese invented using thread from silk worm cocoons, they also
>created weaving methods. Silk threads must be weaved together to form
>a cloth. This weaving technique was the start of all other textiles.
>Later, people discovered plant fibers such as cotton and animal hair
>such as wool could be weaved to make into textile. So, the clothing
>you're wearing are connected to the invention of silk cloth.
Again, I guess it depends on when silk first came along. Wool was in
common use (had to use it for something, with all those sheep running
around the desert) in Little David's time, maybe 600 BC or so.
Then again, we're ALL ignoring what may have been happening in South
American (llamas, alpacas) and Africa during all those years, aren't we?
[...]
--
Don
new...@abac.com
Curt Emanuel
>
> It seems to me I heard somewhere that Padraic Brown wrote in article
> <6rnqrb$feq$1...@nova.umuc.edu>:
>
>
> >intelligent clothing choices).
>
> Hey, don't you give away MY patrimony so easily! :-)
> European writing IS (as Inanna seemed doubtful about) in a direct
> linkage to paper/papyrus use in Egypt and alphabetical writing at least
> as early as the ancient Greeks and Phoenicians (I think)--I won't even
> push the issue of cuneiform or hieroglyphics, though they're analogous
> to ideographs. I don't know if that predates Chinese paper and writing,
> but it was quite a while ago, so it's worth arguing over. :-)
> --
> Don
> new...@abac.com
Actually paper(but not the writing) can be traced from China to Europe
fairly well. The first use of paper in China is thought to have been
developed before the Christian era and was widely used by the 3rd
century AD. Some Chinese paper craftsmen were captured at the battle of
Talas River in 751 which eventually led to the establishment of a paper
mill at Baghdad in the late 8thc. In the 10th century paper reached
western Europe via Moslem Spain. I've left out several of the
intermediate steps.
IMO the real advance was when they started using toilet paper in the 6th
century.
Curt Emanuel
Mike Cleven
<drg...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>remove alt.news.macedonia from the thread.
Sorry - it had been taken out. Someone stuck it back in just to be
annoying (probably Tom Goodman).
Mike Cleven
<sain...@imaginet.co.za> wrote:
>Mike Cleven wrote in message
><35dfab0e...@news.nvcr1.bc.wave.home.com>...
>>On Fri, 21 Aug 1998 14:26:14 +0200, Wald'sk <Wal...@mailxcite.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>> T*o*m G*o*o*d*m*a*n
>>>>
>>>> God Hates Democracy ! Ever Since The 5th Century BC Greek Pagan
>>>> Ideology Of Democracy Became A World Ideal, There Has Been More
>>>> And More God's Wrath.
>>>
>>>Prove it! What god? What democracy? what wrath? How on Earth would you
>>>know, if you can't even be bothered to 'listen' and show a minimum of
>>>respect to the groups you are posting to?
>>
>>Well, this Goodman fellow, y'see, he's been enlightened - or is that
>>visited? God talks to him. Y'know - on the park bench, in the
>>subway, etc.
>
> [snip]
>
>Not to say I support any one view here, but, "co-incidentally", the Jewish
>federal government system, with the balance of the three brances of
>government, on which many modern governments are based on, died out about a
>century (I have no dates) before the Greeks introduced "democracy" with
>their asking for a king (see 1 Samuel in the Bible).
Hmm. That's an interesting coincidence - it was in the same rough
time period when the Greeks sacked the Temple, taking the sacred veil
to Olympia to drape on the statue of Zeus by Phidias.......
>
>So, off-topically (very sorry, but I wanted my say), the free world owes our
>forms of government more to ancient Israel than to ancient Greece. It's my
>opinion.
Well, if we want to get that reductionist, we'd have to go to the
Mesopotamian sources of Jewish culture, then........and say that our
form of government derives from the Sumerian priesthoods.
Yawn.
Zimri
>Hi, I "wanted my say" again ;-)
Hi again :^)
>Ken Greaves wrote in message <35DDF5...@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca>...
>>Let me enlighten you
>[snip]
>>5. Superiority?->Europe,and the Americas and especially the USA have a
>>system of government based on Roman government
>
>>(Senate,President,Electrol Colleges and so on).
>
>
>Refer to my other posting - I suggested that the ancient Israelites already
>had the form of government which now USA etc base on, through however many
>twists and turns through history. And to make the connection clearer, the
>US constitution was overtly Biblical too.
I don't believe you. Prove it. Quotations from the Constitution and/or the
Bible only - no apocryphal comments taken out of context from some obscure
speech, please.
>>6. Superiority?-> What is the language spoken by most of the world, is
>>it not Latin in origin?-Spanish, Portugese, Italian, Romanian, French...
>
>Well this shouldn't even *warrant* a reply, but English, the most
widespread
>of languages, is not directly descended from Latin; Chinese, spoken by most
>people in the world, is definitely not Latinate.
I agree with you there... but who cares. I'm not out to prove Latin
superiority.
>>7. Superiority?--> Roman culture still flurishing after 2700 years. Can
>>any EMPIRE claim that!
>
>
>This is *really* off topic, but in Daniel in the Bible, the Roman Empire
>(the legs of bronze and clay, I think?) was said to be crushed by a rock
(by
>allegory, the "kingdom of heaven" which Jesus Christ preached later, during
>Roman times.) So yes, if you ask which "empire" can claim a flourishing
>over the millenia, the Christian empire is still alive and kicking, and
>proves to be the most flexible of all in inflitrating/adapting/being
>accepted into all sorts of cultures.
A few words about Daniel / "Christian empires":
(1) Daniel only barely made it into the Hebrew Bible. Rabbinic Jews
consider it part of the "Writings", behind the true Prophets and far, far
behind the Torah.
(2) Scholars classify Daniel as a "pseudepigraph" - a "false writing". Half
of it is second-century Aramaic, half sloppy Hebrew. One prime example:
Nabuchadrezzar (Ezekiel's rendering of "Nabu-kudurri-utzur") is
mispronounced "NabuchadNezzar", in accordance with the Greek
"Nabochodonosor". This is misspelled even in chapter 4, which (Daniel
claims) was written by the king himself! It is clear that the author would
rather have been writing in Aramaic.
Also, its ignorance of seventh-century Babylonian events is astounding.
Daniel 4 had the wrong king anyway; the original version survived in the
Dead Sea Scrolls as the "Prayer of Nabunai". There never was a Median King
named "Darius" (Dan. 5); Babylon actually fell to Cyrus the Persian. And
Belshazzar, king in Dan 6, was never king of Babylon. He was only Prince
Regent.
Daniel is not, however, as ignorant of Hellenistic and especially
second-century Syro-Palestinian events. The four portions of the statue in
Dan. 2 are mirrored in the four beasts of Dan. 7:
-- The winged lion is a national symbol of Babylon.
-- The three ribs in the bear's mouth probably refer to the three great
conquests of Medio-Persia: Lydia, Egypt, Babylon itself. So the bear is
probably Media / Persia (there's no real distinction; Cyrus was a relative
of the Median dynasty).
-- four-headed leopard: one head each for Ptolemy, Seleucus, Cassander, and
Lysimachus. Greek.
This brings us to:
(3) -- ten-horned beast: a very, very detailed satire on Antiochus IV,
"Epiphanes". I especially like that bit about the one horn pushing out the
other three ... he was supposed to have murdered (1) his brother Seleucus
Philopater, and (2) his nephew Antiochus; and (3)it didn't hurt that his
other nephew was being held in Rome at the time.
It does NOT refer to the Roman Empire. It refers to the Syrian / Seleucid
Empire which had ousted the Ptolemies from the area.
(4) Daniel's ability to predict the future: Well, since the resurrection of
the righteous dead did NOT happen right after Antiochus died, I think we
know how well to trust THAT particular fundamentalist rant.
(5) The term "Jesus Christ" is an a priori assertion that Jesus was the
Anointed King of Israel. The evidence for this is questionable, to say the
least. Assertions like that need to be proven before they can be tossed out
there. Stick to "Jesus the Nazarene" or "Y'shua ben Joseph (or Mariam, if
you like) of Galilee".
Anyway, thanks for giving me the chance to show off my degree in Ancient
Mediterranean Civilizations. It was fun but too easy.
Daniel is very useful for studies of apocalyptic and late Hellenistic
events, but you didn't use it as such. You used it to prove that (1) a
"Christian empire" exists and (2) that it has lasted for 2000 years. In
summary: don't do that, it makes you and your religion look bad.
-- Zim
Sources used: "Bible Prophecy: Failure or Fulfillment?" by Tim Callahan p.
171, and "The Cambridge Companion to the Bible" pp. 274-9.
Zimri
>On Sun, 23 Aug 1998 21:08:59 GMT, iro...@bigfoot.com (Mike Cleven)
>wrote:
>
>>Tom's profound ignorance of damned near everything reveals itself once
>>again.
>
Your knowledge of everything IS pretty amazing. I haven't seen anything like
it since ... since Louis Farrakhan, or maybe Mr Garrison in South Park.
>> "Let them wear silk" he cried at the mangy fur-wearing
>>barbarians, blind to the fact that flax, cotton, papyrus, and other
>>fibres were already in use for centuries before the invention of silk
>>textiles (in _India_, not China);
>
>Chinese invented the loom, so how could there be textile before the
>loom ?
Bollocks. I dug at Ashkelon in 1993. I'll have you know we found
Philistine loom weights dating from 1200 BCE. And they got THOSE from
Mycenaean Greece. We could tell they were Mycenaean because they differed
from those of... the contemporary world-famous Phoenician / Canaanite
textile industries! And need I mention Egyptian linen?
Looms have been in use in the Near East for millennia. This is not
anti-Chinese bias.
>If India invented silk cloth, then why did the Europeans traveled all
>the way to China but not the shorter distance to India ?
At least THIS is a good question...
>You anti-Chinese propaganda machine is still running, I see.
Hardly.
>> as for animal hides, apparently Tom
>>doesn't know what chamois is like, or sheepstomach either. In my part
>>of the world (the Pacific Northwest), fine garments were made of the
>>cambium of cedar bark (known as kalakhwatie). Who wants to wear
>>worm-spit anyway?
>
>Why do you wear sheep hairs and leather shoes/ runners ? Silk is 100%
>natural, it doesn't cause environment pollution like synthetic does.
>Picking cotton is a very painful job because cotton plant has thorns.
Any monotonous task causes repetitive motion disorders - in that, cotton is
no different from silk. Or from typing as much crap as you do.
Good day.
-- Zim
Kevin Douglas
Joe Lin wrote in message <35E05EDF...@mediaone.net>...
>It's not a good assumption to include the Middle East when speaking of the
>European culture. They were a different people geographically, culturally,
and
>religiously.
No, that's true today but not historically. Mesopotamia was the cradle of
European civilization. When Alexander the Great conquored the "known world"
he marched east, not west. If one thinks in terms of "regions of culture"
everything west of Persia was part of what we now call "western
civilization" until the rise of Islam and the fall of the Byzantine empire.
I suppose one can debate the appropriateness of including Parthia in this
(I'd be open to that), but on the other hand one can even argue that Islam
is just another variation of western culture.
Argued in a previous post that the "west" has always been divided along this
faultline which separates Mediterranean empires from those based in central
Europe. If I pursue this idea western civilization broke into two parts,
the "christian" varient and the "islamic" version (whose borders were not
all that different from empires which existed on that territory previous).
Since I don't want to make things too complicated I'll just suggest that
what we call "western culture" today was the version which emerged in
Central Europe and led the age of exploration. But if you think in terms of
broad cultural regions it seems clear, at least to me, that Islam was much
closer to the west, culturally, technologically, etc., then to regions like
India and China (just consider the religions, Islam is monotheistic, law
based, doesn't have a caste system, etc.).
One could have a good debate about this, I suppose, but then the question
becomes when did Islam split off and form its own cultural region. It seems
clear that the world of European antiquity (eg. which formed the basis for
what happened later), though, was centered on the Eastern Mediterranean and
even the Persian Gulf. Dissenters?
Kevin Douglas
\Tom Goodman\ wrote in message <35f3c7f9...@n2.idirect.com>...
>Through out the Chinese history, there was hardly any peace among
>kingdoms. Even dynasty changed hand every few centuries. Written
>records owned by the conquered were often destroyed by the conquerers.
Yes, but then we're saying the same thing. My original point was that just
because there wasn't a historical record of a journey doesn't mean people
didn't go back and forth. You're saying there is no historical record.
Fine. People still went back and forth.
Marco Polo wasn't the first person from the west to reach China, he was
someone who came back and wrote a book about it which survives to this day.
Some people still argue that he didn't go at all, just stitched together the
accounts of some who did.
This thread started because of someone discovered (possibly) the remains of
caucasians in China. My position, that shouldn't come as much surprise, I'm
sure there were people who went back and forth. One doesn't have to discuss
legions, slaves, etc., as if these are the only possibilities.
But of course archeologists will always have this temptation to link their
discoveries to things we know about. Why did this archeologist mention
Crassus? He knew he existed, a Roman army was defeated by the Parthians,
why not spin a scenario which is based, at least in some part, upon things
we know about?
The chances that this is the correct explenation, of course, are tiny.
Sometimes things turn up which weren't mentioned at all in any historical
record which survives. If I'm correct the terra cotta army in Xian was one
of these, no record it existed until it was discovered.
Kevin Douglas
\Tom Goodman\ wrote in message <35f7c807...@n2.idirect.com>...
>On Sun, 23 Aug 1998 21:08:59 GMT, iro...@bigfoot.com (Mike Cleven)
>wrote:
>
>>Tom's profound ignorance of damned near everything reveals itself once
>>again.
>
>encyclopedia such as Compton's ?
>
>Here is an article on silk by Compton's:
Which says that silk production began in China, which no one disputes, not
that the production of silk led to the textile industry, which was your
claim (and a silly one at that).
walter lee
Don Kirkman wrote:
> It seems to me I heard somewhere that ///Tom Goodman/// wrote in article
> <35e5d70a...@n2.idirect.com>:
>
> >On 22 Aug 1998 21:21:47 -0400, pbr...@nova.umuc.edu (Padraic Brown)
> >wrote:
>
> >>Inanna (ina...@uruk.net) wrote:
>
> [Re writing]
>
> >>Well, whoever were to wear some pretty but admittedly flimsy little
> >>something in silk in the middle of a German winter would probably be dead.
>
> >There was no textile before the silk cloth, so silk cloth is the
> >mother of all textile; and Chinese invented using silk threads to make
> >textile.
>
silk is cool but there were other textiles before
silkhttp://sln2.fi.edu/tfi/info/current/crafts.html
the ancient egyptians/isrealites had fine linen (cotten)
http://www.horus.ics.org.eg/html/pharaonic_egyptg.html
ancient europeans fabrics...
http://www47.pair.com/lindo/Textiles_Page.htm
http://www.radix.net/~lindo/Textiles_Page.htm
> I thought the bog mummies of northern Europe had some woven material on
> them. Maybe the Ice Man as well? How far back does silk date? Near
> Eastern paintings show cloth apparel back several centuries BCE.
>
> >Silk cloth is a textile, except that it uses thread made by silkworms.
> >Before silk cloth was invented, humans worn animal skins. After the
> >Chinese invented using thread from silk worm cocoons, they also
> >created weaving methods. Silk threads must be weaved together to form
> >a cloth. This weaving technique was the start of all other textiles.
> >Later, people discovered plant fibers such as cotton and animal hair
> >such as wool could be weaved to make into textile. So, the clothing
> >you're wearing are connected to the invention of silk cloth.
>
> Again, I guess it depends on when silk first came along. Wool was in
> common use (had to use it for something, with all those sheep running
> around the desert) in Little David's time, maybe 600 BC or so.
http://www.cascadewool.com/wool.htm
>
>
> Then again, we're ALL ignoring what may have been happening in South
> American (llamas, alpacas) and Africa during all those years, aren't we?
http://www.uiowa.edu/~artmus/andean.htmlhttp://www.uiowa.edu/~artmus/andeanpg3.html
> [...]
> --
> Don
> new...@abac.com
Kevin Douglas
'Tom Goodman' wrote in message <360be80c...@n2.idirect.com>...
>On Sun, 23 Aug 1998 20:11:29 -0500, "Zimri" <zim...@earthlink.com>
>wrote:
>
>>And to make the connection clearer, the
>>>US constitution was overtly Biblical too.
>
>>I don't believe you. Prove it. Quotations from the Constitution and/or
the
>>Bible only - no apocryphal comments taken out of context from some obscure
>>speech, please.
>
> Separation of Church and State
>
> It is assumed that the United States was never Christian in
> its basic ideals and values because the Constitution does not
> specifically mention Christianity.
The United States was founded by Christians, no question. You're skipping a
few steps, though. Christianity had already gone through the reformation
and the enlightenment, both had changed people's view of the bible and the
role of churches, and in a sense the US constitution was meant to solidify
these newer understandings.
It's a fact that Christianity was the dominant religion among the people who
drew up the constitution, for instance, but which one? Catholicism?
Anglicanism? Prebyterianism? In fact none of these or a dozen others. The
constitution specifically did not create a state religion. The goal of
Jefferson and others, no "doctrinal version".
I'm curious if there was any government before the US which endorsed this
principle. You won't find it in the old testament. The closest you'll get
in the new testament is Jesus's statement to "render unto Caesar that which
is Caesar's" (which in a roundabout way implies separation of church and
state), but it's not something people practiced.
It took western civilization 2,000 years to develop democracy, but other
traditions didn't develop it at all. I think an interesting subject to
debate, actually, is whether Christianity contributed some necessary
principles to this modern idea, I'll suggest one: this notion that every
soul is equal before god.
Christianity starts out with a universality which doesn't exist, I think, in
other religions. In polytheistic religions, for instance, people don't have
equal claims, dieties are benefactors, which post you hitch your horse to is
important. Monotheism, moreover, has this idea of god as the giver of laws,
the supreme authority, of which a constitution is a secular variant.
So was the constitution based on christian principles? Given the role
christianity played in western civilization I don't see how it could be any
other way. That's different from arguing that it was based upon some
fundamentalist interpretation of the bible (clearly it wasn't) or even the
model of ancient Greece (Rome was not a democracy, neither, for that matter,
was Athens in any modern sense).
I think the best one can say is the constitution was created at a certain
time and place. Christianity was one influence on that, and ironicly part
of that influence was to separate church and state for the first time, I
think, in history. Curious if anyone disputes that.
Also interesting is how constitutional democracy, in some ways, has become a
new secular religion, I suppose it's still an open question as to whether
the rest of the world is going to imitate this but all signs so far suggest
that the more modern a country gets, the more likely it is to incorporate
these principles into their societies.
Which is to say western principles. The west might not "own" modernity
anymore but the more time passes the more clear it becomes that the west, in
some sense, "invented" it, and the rest of the world is transforming itself
along these lines.
Kevin Douglas
Mike Cleven wrote in message
>Linen, woven cotten, non-Chinese varieties of silk, whatever. The
>Chinese didn't invent everything, although you apparently consider it
>your mission in life to claim that they did.....
And even if they did who cares? Would that mean we'd all have to send
royalties to China every time we bought a pair of silk pajamas? No culture
"owns" silk anymore, or even the microchip. We don't live in a world where
cultures are isolated from each other. I don't even think the US "owns"
icons like Elvis or Michael Jackson. Can we all agree that this is ancient
history?
The next 100 years is going to be nothing like the past 3,000, the human
race seems to have broken through some basic barrier during the past couple
of decades, all culture, to some extent, is global. I can type these words
in Los Angeles, someone can read them in Beijing and Capetown. That's the
new situation.
And in that environment "cultural superiority" is meaningless, about as
relevant as who invented the stirrup, what difference does it make?
Seriously. Arguing that it does is an anachronism.
Kevin Douglas
'Tom Goodman' wrote in message <360de819...@n2.idirect.com>...
>Paper gets its name from the Egyptian papyrus plant, used to make
>paperlike sheets as early as 2300 BC (see Papyrus Plant).
Then why not give Egypt credit for inventing paper, since it seems they
invented the basic concept (although not paper in the modern sense) a good
two millenia before paper became widespread in China? Which culture
invented writing first, for that matter? Or used it first to record laws,
business transactions, and the rest (I think the west beats out China
again).
All of this is silly since you're dealing with two civilizations which
didn't have much contact with each other. When I suggested in a previous
post that people are reassessing the idea that China, historically, was more
"advanced" than the west, I think much of this comes from discoveries that
China before 0 AD had less technology than people thought.
Kevin Douglas
Pete Barrett wrote in message <35e366d3...@news.clara.net>...
>In this particular case, what was meant is probably that the Romans
>didn't have a _written_ constitution. Like the UK today, they had an
>unwritten one, consisting of a set of laws which could be changed like
>any other laws, and which regulated how the state was run. This method
>has the advantage of being very flexible - if you were to read (!!!)
>Livy, you'd see how the constitution was able to change to meet
>changing circumstances (no matter that Livy is rather unreliable as a
>historian - he's a good read).
Rome certainly did have a constitution. When Augustus became Emperor all he
did was lump together some titles which were held by different people in the
old Republic (so he became a Senator, Consul, Tribune of the People,
Pontifex Maximus, etc., "Imperator" was an honoriffic which meant commander
of an army).
And all of his immediate successors did the same thing, these titles were
conferred upon emperors by the Senate which, theoretically, had the
authority not to do this. The Senate even appointed two consuls (one of
which was the Emperor, although in some years I think he even sat out).
The Emperor's official honoriffic, I think, was "first citizen", and when he
died all he could do was recommend in his will that the Senate appoint his
favorite to the same position (but since the Senate usually did that
established a de facto mechanism for secession, the new first citizen got
all of the above titles).
I'm not sure when the constitutonality of this changed, if it ever did. I'm
blanking on some details, I think "Emperor" was made an real office a
hundred years or so into the Empire. I don't think the Romans ever did away
with the Senate, though, or most of these other offices.
I think Constantine (I think) later redrew the Roman constitution and split
the empire into East and West, each had its own Emperor and, even, Vice
Emperor who served in a capacity similar to the American Vice President (was
the designated successor to the Emperor if he died).
The Eastern part, of course, continued as the Byzantine Empire, I think it
had the same Senate up until the fall of Constantinopal in 1453, so in some
ways the continuity of the Roman constitution was more than 2,000 years.
Was it written down in a single document? No. Was it all tradition? In
fact a lot of this was written down, the position of Tribune, for instance,
was created by law during the time of the Republic by the Senate, there were
laws which stipulated qualifications for being a Senator or Equite (lesser
noble).
There was no law which stipulated that a single individual couldn't hold
more than one office, and that's what led to the downfall of the Republic
once Augustus started the practice of doubling up (one reason he did this,
by the way, is so he could claim he was being a good Republican, Julius
Caesar wasn't so tactful, one reason he was killed).
The Roman constitution, even in the days of the Republic, was not a
democracy, one had to be an aristocrat before one could participate in the
system. But it did have a huge influence on the drafting of the American
constitution.
I'm guessing that those who argue that the constitution was based upon
something found in the Bible, the tribal practices of the Iroquois nations,
etc., just don't know this Roman history. More on point, the framers of the
constitution certainly did, and in great detail, it was a basic part of
their educations.
Kevin Douglas
Magnus Ingmarsson
> The US government is not based on Roman Government. Roman Government was
>
> controlled by the Legions it was pretty much a military state.
>
Wrong. Most western democracies are based on the Roman and Greek system.
Are you talking about republic days or imperial days?
> If legion Commanders didn't like the Emperors of Rome they would kill
>
> them and replace them. The reason why the Roman empire fell
>
> was due to the fact that all their plumbing had lead pipes which causes
>
> Dementia in all the leaders and they added lead to wine.
>
>
>
Completely wrong. The inside of the pipes became coated with residue from
the water, so the lead couldn't get out into the water.
--
************************************************************************
* /\/\agnus Ingmarsson | Studying for a masters in *
* Linkoping University Sweden | Cognitive Science *
*-----------------------------+------------+---------------------------*
* WWW: http://www.lysator.liu.se/~emperor/ | Phone: INT+46(0)705641323 *
*-----------------------------------+------+---------------------------*
* e-mail: emp...@lysator.liu.se | Proud European Federalist *
************************************************************************
Kevin Douglas
Padraic Brown
: In article <6rnqrb$feq$1...@nova.umuc.edu>,
: pbr...@nova.umuc.edu (Padraic Brown) wrote:
: > Well, whoever were to wear some pretty but admittedly flimsy little
: > something in silk in the middle of a German winter would probably be dead.
: > wearing something made from worm spit anyway? If you want "advanced" try
: > whoever made the first synthetics.
: > Therefore: Chinese 1 (due to advances in writing), Goths 1 (due to more
: > intelligent clothing choices).
: >
: > Padraic.
: >
: Ghengis Kahn and Attila the Hun used Silk. It was lighter than Armor So
: their Warriors could be more agile and when an Arrow peirced them the silk
: has special properties where you can just pull out arrows of your body
: without doing to much damage when retracting the arrows.
I wasn't aware of silk's armour like properties; but the question then
would be: did G.K. and A.H. wear _only_ silk, or something perhaps a tad
warmer. I understand winter on the steppes can be a wee bit nippy.
Padraic.
Padraic Brown
: On 22 Aug 1998 21:21:47 -0400, pbr...@nova.umuc.edu (Padraic Brown)
: wrote:
: >Well, whoever were to wear some pretty but admittedly flimsy little
: >something in silk in the middle of a German winter would probably be dead.
: There was no textile before the silk cloth, so silk cloth is the
: mother of all textile; and Chinese invented using silk threads to make
: textile.
So the American Indians did _not_ actually weave cloth before Chris
Columbus and his Merry Conquistadores graciously gave them the knowledge?
Perhaps the Chinese invented silk textiles, but I doubt very much that
they invented textiles on the whole.
: Silk cloth is a textile, except that it uses thread made by silkworms.
: Before silk cloth was invented, humans worn animal skins. After the
Many did, and many still do. So what. A lot wore cotton and wool. Also
keep in mind that it requires a _lot_ of skill and patience to put
together a fur anything that doesn't look like a misshappen sack. I've
tried, and it's very difficult; I would praise a master furrier as much as
a master weaver.
: Chinese invented using thread from silk worm cocoons, they also
: created weaving methods. Silk threads must be weaved together to form
: a cloth. This weaving technique was the start of all other textiles.
Not likely. When did they forst do it?
: Later, people discovered plant fibers such as cotton and animal hair
: such as wool could be weaved to make into textile. So, the clothing
: you're wearing are connected to the invention of silk cloth.
So people actually took the trouble to weave worm dribble first, and the
much more obvious wool later?
: Silk cloth is not necessarily used singularly, it can be used like
: other textile to form a thick coat. Silk is a good material to keep
: warm, it "breathes" better than synthetic, making it high quality
: material to make underwear for cold weather. Cotton is not as good at
Of course, but one fur coat will keep you much snugger than half a dozen
of silk. With respect to synthetics, that was an argument for "advanced"
vs. "not so advanced". It has nothing to do with inherent properties.
: retain body heat, synthetic is even worse. Silk keeps warm, but
: "breathable", and sweat is easily past to the outer surface and
: evaporates quickly. If you have a think coat or a winter suit with
: silk inner lining or underwear made of silk, then you'd know what I
: mean. Some of the more expensive business suits made of high grade
: wool or cashmere for winter have a silk inner lining.
Still never cared for it too much; and the others do well enough, even if
not as well as silk for some things. It would require too much material
to keep warm in winter, and is way way to flimsy for my personal taste.
: >I'll therefore vote for the animal hides. So, what's so special about
: >wearing something made from worm spit anyway? If you want "advanced" try
: >whoever made the first synthetics.
: You can't wear animal hides in warm weather. Silk is good for both
Why not? Hides can be made very thin and comfy for warmer days. Plus,
most folk that wore hides regularly simply took them off and wore less
clothing when warm. _They_ were truly the most advanced: direct
evaporation and all that. Very clever.
: cold and hot weather. Also, you'd feel clumsy and stuffy in an
: over-all made of animal hides, unless you're in the sub-zero
: temperature. Silk doesn't make you stuffy even you're covered from
: neck to feet with silk cloth. So, silk makes an ideal textile for
: normal temperature. That's why silk was treasured by rich people, and
: still is. Silk is expensive to produce and production is limited.
Not too expensive anymore, if britches and the like can be found at Kmart
for $10.99.
: Without silk cloth invention, there is no textile, and no synthetic
: textile.
Don't think so. Textiles were more likely invented in a number of
different places.
: >
: >Therefore: Chinese 1 (due to advances in writing), Goths 1 (due to more
: >intelligent clothing choices).
: >
: There was no textile before the silk cloth, so silk cloth is the
: mother of all textile; and Chinese invented using silk threads to make
: textile.
You've said this about a half a dozen times already.
: So, who is the intelligent one ?
The one that uses the best and cheapest material available. If silk
originates in China and is prohibitively expensive, then the intelligent
man (in, say Londinium or Eburacum) will spend his hard earned money on
good warm and stout woolen; and maybe a bit for a silken something for his
lady. The man that sinks every penny he has for enough silk to make one
set of clothes will spend his winter somewhat dead. Though, at least his
family won't have to buy a new suit to bury him in. ;-)
If the man in Beijing can afford the silk, and enough of it to keep warm,
then by all means let him!
Padraic.
Acty Tang
>On Fri, 21 Aug 1998 14:26:14 +0200, Wald'sk <Wal...@mailxcite.com>
>wrote:
>
>>> T*o*m G*o*o*d*m*a*n
>>>
>>> God Hates Democracy ! Ever Since The 5th Century BC Greek Pagan
>>> Ideology Of Democracy Became A World Ideal, There Has Been More
>>> And More God's Wrath.
>>
>>Prove it! What god? What democracy? what wrath? How on Earth would you
>>know, if you can't even be bothered to 'listen' and show a minimum of
>>respect to the groups you are posting to?
>
>Well, this Goodman fellow, y'see, he's been enlightened - or is that
>visited? God talks to him. Y'know - on the park bench, in the
>subway, etc.
[snip]
Not to say I support any one view here, but, "co-incidentally", the Jewish
federal government system, with the balance of the three brances of
government, on which many modern governments are based on, died out about a
century (I have no dates) before the Greeks introduced "democracy" with
their asking for a king (see 1 Samuel in the Bible).
So, off-topically (very sorry, but I wanted my say), the free world owes our
forms of government more to ancient Israel than to ancient Greece. It's my
opinion.
A Tang
Acty Tang
Ken Greaves wrote in message <35DDF5...@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca>...
>Let me enlighten you
[snip]
>5. Superiority?->Europe,and the Americas and especially the USA have a
>system of government based on Roman government
>(Senate,President,Electrol Colleges and so on).
Refer to my other posting - I suggested that the ancient Israelites already
had the form of government which now USA etc base on, through however many
twists and turns through history. And to make the connection clearer, the
US constitution was overtly Biblical too.
>6. Superiority?-> What is the language spoken by most of the world, is
>it not Latin in origin?-Spanish, Portugese, Italian, Romanian, French...
Well this shouldn't even *warrant* a reply, but English, the most widespread
of languages, is not directly descended from Latin; Chinese, spoken by most
people in the world, is definitely not Latinate.
>7. Superiority?--> Roman culture still flurishing after 2700 years. Can
>any EMPIRE claim that!
This is *really* off topic, but in Daniel in the Bible, the Roman Empire
(the legs of bronze and clay, I think?) was said to be crushed by a rock (by
allegory, the "kingdom of heaven" which Jesus Christ preached later, during
Roman times.) So yes, if you ask which "empire" can claim a flourishing
over the millenia, the Christian empire is still alive and kicking, and
proves to be the most flexible of all in inflitrating/adapting/being
accepted into all sorts of cultures.
> I can go on but, some oriental just slammed his Mazda into my house.
LOL a little healthy economic competition from us in the East won't hurt
that much. ;-)
A Tang
Boris Docevski
-boris docevski
S Singh Sandhu wrote:
Just because the main has blue eyes and brown hair doesn't mean he's a
descendant of romans , you can find indians with blue eyes and blondish
hair.Chiew Lee Yih wrote in message <35dcee3c...@news2.ibm.net>...
>The bitter Westerner do not want to belive that Chinese
>can defeat Ancient Roman.
>
>When Westerner, especially the KKK guys learned that
>Chinese archealogist found blue eyes and red hair
>Tocharian bodies, they were so exited, they claimed
>that it is another proof of Aryan "Superiority".
>
>http://x12.dejanews.com/dnquery.xp?QRY=Supremacist+Tocharian+proof+Aryan&sv
cclass=dnold
>http://x12.dejanews.com/dnquery.xp?QRY=Racial+Origins+of+Turks+&+Mongols&sv
cclass=dnold
>http://www.wlc.com/oxus/tocharia.htm
>
>The PBS was also exited with the news that it shot a
>documantary in China.
>
>http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/chinamum/taklamakan.html
>
>And Discover magazine report extensively in this
>"discovery".
>
>http://coldfusion.discover.com/output.cfm?ID=353
>
>The white supremacist like the PBS documantary so much that
>they shout:
>
>http://x12.dejanews.com/dnquery.xp?QRY=Aryan+Ancestors+Silk&svcclass=dnold
>
>Now, Chinese Archealogist have another finding, they
>have discovered defense works built by the Roman army
>2,000 years ago.
>
>Most interesting of all, the local in where they find the Roman
>remains have Roman feature. The were believe to be the
>descendent of the Roman army which was defeated by a
>Han Chinese troop. (Han Chinese here mean both Han
>Dynasty and Han Nation)
>
>http://www.dejanews.com/dnquery.xp?QRY=ancient+roman+in+China
>
>When I read the last line, I know the west won't create
>a frenzy about this, like they did with the Tocharian But
> I am still not sure, so I do some research on internet,
>using www.dejanews.com, I type in "ancient roman in
>china", and I find a person that is so hostile to the idea
>that Chinese can defeated Roman that he say:"Damn
>them all".
>
>This two person that suppost to be knowledgeable
>in history. (They posted in soc.history.ancient)
>
>*****************
>
>The bitter 'Terrestrial Phlegmissary' thed...@tsoft.com said:
>
>> To cater to the interest generated by the finds, local authorities have
>> built a hotel with Roman architectural features, a Roman Shopping Mall
> ^^^^^
>^^^^^^^^^^^^
>BINGO. As here in San Francisco, the greedy and the mighty will
>do or say damn near anything to draw in the tourists.
>
>Damn them all.
>
>
>TheDavid
>
>*****************
>
>The bitter 'Larry Plona' l...@tiac.net said:
>
>> Saw this posting in the Asian NG, any comments on its possibilities ?
>>
>> HONG KONG -- (Agence France Presse) A group of ancient Roman soldiers may
>> have survived a devastating battle against the Parthian empire 2,000
years
>> ago and made their way to China where their descendants still live.
>>
>> ....
>>
>> To cater to the interest generated by the finds, local authorities have
>> built a hotel with Roman architectural features, a Roman Shopping Mall
and a
>> giant stone sculpture depicting the town's history. ( (c) 1998 Agence
France
>> Presse)
>
>I have no idea whether or not this is true, but that last sentence
>makes the whole thing sound suspicious.
>
>- Larry Plona
>
>-------------------------------------------------------
> Larry Plona Sit Denique Inscriptum In Fronte Unius
> l...@tiac.net Cuiusque Quid De Republica Sentiat
>
>*****************
>
>Original poster, 'L. Lee' le...@prosser.seas.ucla.edu
>
>Saw this posting in the Asian NG, any comments on its possibilities ?
>
>L.
>----------------
>
>From: "Leo" <yo...@efnet.com>
>Subject: Ancient Romans May Have Lived in China
>Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1998 20:11:20 +1000
>Organization: University of New South Wales
>
>Ancient Romans May Have Lived in China
>
>HONG KONG -- (Agence France Presse) A group of ancient Roman soldiers
>may have survived a devastating battle against the Parthian empire
>2,000 years ago and made their way to China where their descendants
>still live.
>
>In a desolate village in Gansu province in northwestern China, Chinese
>archaeologists recently come across people they believe are descended
>from the legionary veterans.
>
>The archaeologists were doing excavation work in the village of
>Zhelaizhai and believe they may have discovered defense works built by
>the Roman army 2,000 years ago.
>
>The government-run Xinhua news agency reported that the archaeologists
>also found people in the village whose physical characteristics are
>similar to people in Mediterranean countries.
>
>One villager, who is taller than average, told the news agency his
>father "told me that our ancestors migrated from the far West. He
>himself had brown hair and blue eyes, just like the Europeans I've
>seen in pictorials."
>
>Anthropologists say that physical characteristics like these could be
>kept for as long as 2,000 years, and that they could be related to
>Europeans, Xinhua added.
>
>The scientists believe the Romans may have been survivors from a
>battle in 53 BC in Central Asia.
>
>"There are historical records of more than 45,000 Roman soldiers
>engaged in a battle in Central Asia in 53 B.C. who were defeated by
>Asians. But, about 6,000 soldiers who survived, went missing after the
>fierce battle," Xinhua said.
>
>The accepted historical record of the battle suggests that 6000 Romans
>took part in the battle and 5,500 were killed before the rest were
>captured.
>
>The Roman army led by Marcus Licinius Crassus, one of the First
>Truimvirate with Julius Caeser and Pompey, was defeated by a Parthian
>army at Carrhae, now Haran, Turkey, in 53 B.C.
>
>Over two days his army was slaughtered by the Parthian cavalry and
>horse archers. Crassus was later executed. According to Roman
>historians the handful of survivors were taken into slavery. Those
>still alive were released some 30 years later under a separate treaty.
>
>Roman historians make no mention of survivors traveling eastwards
>towards China.
>
>The Parthian empire lasted between 250 BC and 224 AD with its capital
>at Ctesiphon, near modern day Baghdad and formed part of the Silk
>Road, which was used by Chinese traders to bring silks to the
>Mediterranean between the first century BC and the third century AD
>
>The Chinese scientists also point to Han Dynastic (206 BC- 220 AD)
>records which tell of a military group defending the frontiers that
>encountered a peculiar army that used Roman military tactics, Xinhua
>said.
>
>The alien soldiers surrendered to the Han Dynasty and later settled in
>a village named of Liqian.
>
>Zhong Sengzu, a cultural relics expert told the agency that one
>historian found a cloth map made in 9 BC with the characters "liqian,"
>near today's Yongchang County, which is near the village of
>Zhelaizhai.
>
>The archaeologists also unearthed pottery and a skeleton and a lock of
>brown hair that date back at least 2,000 years.
>
>Other finds include a bronze medal with the characters "zhao'an,"
>indicating the Chinese emperor had offered amnesty to surrendering
>enemy soldiers. They believe the bronze medal might have come from a
>Roman soldier's helmet.
>
>Legionaries under the Roman Republic (510 BC - 27 BC) wore bronze
>equipment.
>
>Most villagers never left the tiny county, but have some traditions
>shared with foreigners who live thousands of miles (kilometers) away,
>Xinhua said.
>
>"Every spring, they make sacrificial offerings shaped like an ox head.
>They also mimic oxen fighting with each other, a custom that can
>clearly be traced back to the ancient Romans," it said.
>
>Bull dancing, where young men and women performed acrobatics using
>live bulls, can be traced back to the Etruscans, who lived in modern
>day Tuscany in central Italy and who were absorbed by the early
>Romans.
>
>To cater to the interest generated by the finds, local authorities
>have built a hotel with Roman architectural features, a Roman Shopping
>Mall and a giant stone sculpture depicting the town's history. ( (c)
>1998 Agence France Presse)
genera...@my-dejanews.com
"Vagor" <dave...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>
> genera...@my-dejanews.com wrote in message <6rofdi$et8
>
> <lavatory wall carving snipped>
>
> Despite your unfortunate decision to respond, it provides a satisfaction
> akin to that of a submarine crew, who unable to see the hidden target when
> the torpedoes are launched, are nonetheless gratified by the distant,
> muffled "whump" of a target destroyed.
>
> Usenet is a place for discussion. Don't post opinions you are unprepared to
> support. Most people here are adults.
>
>
Shut up ! you pompous Boob !
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum
MtLoweMan
BULLSHIT!!!!!!
How about flax and cotton? European flax for instance, was a much sought after
commodity in the Middle Ages, even in Islamic lands.
Chris----...@aol.Com
\Tom Goodman\
<kev...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>I would love to read an account by a Chinese diplomat to the
>vatican, something like that. Or the only records which survive are western
>records
Through out the Chinese history, there was hardly any peace among
kingdoms. Even dynasty changed hand every few centuries. Written
records owned by the conquered were often destroyed by the conquerers.
\Tom Goodman\
wrote:
>On Sun, 23 Aug 1998 07:06:28 GMT, genera...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>
>>In article <6rnqrb$feq$1...@nova.umuc.edu>,
>> pbr...@nova.umuc.edu (Padraic Brown) wrote:
>>> Inanna (ina...@uruk.net) wrote:
>
>>Ghengis Kahn and Attila the Hun used Silk. It was lighter than Armor So
>>their Warriors could be more agile and when an Arrow peirced them the silk
>>has special properties where you can just pull out arrows of your body
>>without doing to much damage when retracting the arrows.
>
>There's nothing worse than arrow-holes in a fashionable silk camise,
>is there?
Better than a ruptured artery.
\Tom Goodman\
Barrett) wrote:
>On Sun, 23 Aug 1998 08:53:47 GMT, Comment...@Headquarter.org
>(///Tom Goodman///) wrote:
>
>>There was no textile before the silk cloth, so silk cloth is the
>>mother of all textile; and Chinese invented using silk threads to make
>>textile.
>
>What's the date of the earliest known silk cloth? And for other kinds
>of cloth? (These are archaeology questions, I would think, and I'm not
>too well up on that). Predynastic Egyptian (ca. 3500 BCE) objects show
>people wearing what is indubitably cloth, but I would think cloth
>predates that, probably both in China and the Middle East.
The silk cloth is the world's earliest known textile.
\Tom Goodman\
wrote:
>Tom's profound ignorance of damned near everything reveals itself once
>again.
You mean Tom Goodman's amazing knowledge of everything.
> "Let them wear silk" he cried at the mangy fur-wearing
>barbarians, blind to the fact that flax, cotton, papyrus, and other
>fibres were already in use for centuries before the invention of silk
>textiles (in _India_, not China);
Chinese invented the loom, so how could there be textile before the
loom ?
If India invented silk cloth, then why did the Europeans traveled all
the way to China but not the shorter distance to India ?
You anti-Chinese propaganda machine is still running, I see.
> as for animal hides, apparently Tom
>doesn't know what chamois is like, or sheepstomach either. In my part
>of the world (the Pacific Northwest), fine garments were made of the
>cambium of cedar bark (known as kalakhwatie). Who wants to wear
>worm-spit anyway?
Why do you wear sheep hairs and leather shoes/ runners ? Silk is 100%
natural, it doesn't cause environment pollution like synthetic does.
Picking cotton is a very painful job because cotton plant has thorns.
\Tom Goodman\
wrote:
>Tom's profound ignorance of damned near everything reveals itself once
>again.
If you think you're the expert , then why don't you work for
encyclopedia such as Compton's ?
Here is an article on silk by Compton's:
History
Sericulture dates back to about 2640 BC in ancient China. The
Chinese Empress Hsi Ling Shi (venerated as the Goddess of Silk) gave
her royal patronage to the silk industry. She invented the loom and
applied it to the production of highly prized silk fabrics.
For some 3,000 years the secrets of silk production were closely
guarded by the Chinese. It was not until about AD 300 that a secret
mission from Japan succeeded in penetrating China. The members of the
mission obtained silkworms and brought four Chinese girls back to
Japan to teach the Japanese the art of sericulture and the uses of
silk.
According to legend, the silk industry spread to India when a
Chinese princess was given in marriage to an Indian prince. When she
went to India, the princess carried silkworm eggs and mulberry seeds
concealed in her headdress. From India the silk industry spread into
Persia and Central Asia, then slowly filtered into the Mediterranean
countries.
Beginning early in the 2nd century BC, caravans traveled the Silk
Road, a 4,000-mile (6,400-kilometer) trade route linking China with
the West. The route began in Sian in China and wound its way to the
countries along the eastern Mediterranean shores. From there the silk
was transported to Rome. The Silk Road did not begin to decline until
the 7th century AD, when the sea trade routes from China became fully
developed and were safer to travel than the Silk Road. The Silk Road
allowed a highly lucrative trade in silk fabrics to develop.
In AD 552 two Persian monks sent to China by the emperor Justinian
I succeeded in bringing back to Constantinople a small supply of
silkworm eggs concealed in hollow canes. Constantinople became the
center of the silk trade and retained that position until the 11th
century.
The Renaissance greatly stimulated the cultivation, manufacture,
and use of silk. In Flanders, Italy, and France industrial centers
developed for weaving highly decorative and luxurious silk fabrics. In
1522 Hernando Cortez brought silkworm eggs and mulberry trees to
Mexico from Spain (see Cortez). From the 17th to the 19th century, the
silk industry became established in England and was introduced in most
of the other countries of the world, though the industry did not
flourish everywhere.
---------------------------------------------------------
Excerpted from Compton's Interactive Encyclopedia
Copyright (c) 1994, 1995 Compton's NewMedia, Inc. All Rights Reserved
_Tom Goodman\
<kev...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>Mike Cleven wrote in message
><35e483f4...@news.nvcr1.bc.wave.home.com>...
>
>>Who wants to wear
>>worm-spit anyway?
>
>Or who wants to base their argument that Chinese civilization was more
>advanced on the circumstance that Asia had worms which could spit? That's a
>function of climate. The Europeans turned grapes into wine, China didn't,
>big deal, too.
>
Of course China already had grape wine in regions where grapes were
grew. Grapes don't grow everywhere in China, but they are all over
Europe. China made the rice wine though.
Do you know China really is the originator of spaghetti ?
Tom Goodman
wrote:
>And to make the connection clearer, the
>>US constitution was overtly Biblical too.
>I don't believe you. Prove it. Quotations from the Constitution and/or the
>Bible only - no apocryphal comments taken out of context from some obscure
>speech, please.
Quotations concerning the
Separation of Church and State
It is assumed that the United States was never Christian in
its basic ideals and values because the Constitution does not
specifically mention Christianity.
The Constitution is not devoid of Christian references. For
example, the Constitution acknowledges Sunday as a day of
rest: "If any bill shall not be returned by the President within
ten days (Sundays excepted) after it shall have been
presented to him, the same shall be a law. . ." (Article I,
section 7). Moreover, there is a direct reference to the Lord
Jesus Christ in the Constitution: "DONE in convention by the
unanimous consent of the States present, the seventeenth of
September, in the year of our Lord one thousand seven
hundred and eighty seven and of the independence of the
United States of America the twelfth. In witness whereof we
have hereunto subscribed our Names."
It was never the purpose of the Constitution to give religious
content to the nation, rather, the Constitution was an instrument
whereby
already existing religious values of the nation could be protected and
perpetuated.
In response to a request that all reference to religion be removed
from government, the House Judiciary Committee Report March 3,
1854 said:
"Had the people, during the Revolution, had any suspicion
of any attempt to war against Christianity, the Revolution
would have been strangled in the cradle. At the time of the
adoption of the Constitution and the Amendments, the
universal sentiment was that Christianity should be
encouraged, not any one sect. In this age there can be no
substitute for Christianity. That was the religion of the
founders of the republic, and they expected it to remain the
religion of their descendants. The great vital and
conservative element in our system is the doctrines and divine
truths of the gospel of Jesus Christ."
John Quincy Adams, sixth president of the United States, said:
"The highest glory of the American Revolution was this: it
connected, in one indissoluble bond, the principles of civil
government with the principles of Christianity."
From Christopher Columbus' Book of Prophecies:
"It was the Lord who put into my mind-I could feel His hand upon me .
. ..All who
heard of my project rejected it with laughter, ridiculing me...There
is no question
that the inspiration was from the Holy Spirit, because he comforted me
with rays of
marvelous illumination from the Holy Scriptures...For the execution of
the journey.
. . did not make use of intelligence, mathematics, or maps. It is
simply the
fulfillment of what Isaiah had prophesied.. .No one should fear to
undertake any
task in the name of our Savior, if it is just and if the intention is
purely for His Holy
service. ..the fact that the Gospel must still be preached to so many
lands in such a
short time-this is what convinces me."
The Mayflower Compact, from William Bradford's "History of Plymouth
Plantation":
"In the name of God, Amen. We, whose names are underwritten, the loyal
subjects
of our dread sovereign lord King James, by the grace of God, of Great
Britain,
France, and Ireland, king, defender of the faith, etc., having
undertaken for the
glory of God and advancement of the Christian faith, and the honor of
our king and
country, a voyage to plant the first colony in the northern parts of
Virginia; do by
these presents, solemnly and mutually in the presence of God and one
another,
covenant and combine ourselves together into a civil body politic, for
our better
ordering and preservation and furtherance of the ends aforesaid; and
by virtue
hereof do enact, constitute and frame such just and eclual laws,
ordinances, acts,
constitutions and offices, from time to time, as shall be thought most
meet and
convenient for the general good of the colony; unto which we promise
all due
submission and obedience. In witness whereof we have hereunto
subscribed our
names at Cape Cod the eleventh of November, in the reign of our
sovereign lord
King James of England, France and Ireland, the eighteenth and of
Scotland, the
fifty-fourth. Anno Domini, 1620."
From the "First Charter of Virginia:"
"We, greatly commending and graciously accepting of their desires for
the
furtherance of so noble a work, which may, by the providence of
Almighty God,
hereafter tend to the glory of His Divine Majesty, in propagating of
Christian
religion to such people, as yet live in darkness and miserable
ignorance of the true
knowledge and worship of God, and may in time...."
Various Colony Declarations
New England
"The synod of the New England churches met at Cambridge, Mass, Sept
30, 1648,
and defined the nature of civil government, the functions of the civil
magistrate,
and the duties of the citizens, as follows:
I. God, the Supreme Lord and King of all the world, hath ordained
civil magistrates
to be under him, over the people, and for his own glory and the public
good; and to
this end hath armed them with the power of the sword for the defense
and
encouragement of them that do well, and for the punishment of
evil-doers.
II. It is lawful for Christians to accept and execute the office of
magistrate when
called thereunto. In the management whereof, as they ought especially
to maintain
piety, justice, and peace, according to the wholesome laws of the
Commonwealth,
so for that end they may lawfully now, under the New Testament, wage
war upon
just and necessary occasions.
III. They who, upon pretense of Christian liberty, shall oppose any
lawful power,
or the lawful exercises of it, resist the ordinances of God,. . .may
be called to
account and proceeded against by the censure of the church and by the
power of
the civil magistrate.
IV. It is the duty of the people to pray for magistrates, to honor
their persons, to
pay them tribute and other dues, to obey their lawful commands, and to
be subject
to their authority for conscience's sake."
Massachusetts
"In the charter granted to Massachusetts, in 1640, by Charles I., the
Colonies are
enjoined by 'their good life and orderly conversation to win and
invite the natives of
the country to a knowledge of the only true God and Savior of mankind,
and the
Christian faith which, in our royal intention and adventurer's free
possession, is the
principal end of this plantation"'
Connecticut
"In Connecticut the first organization of civil society and
government was
made, in 1639, at Quinipiack, now the beautiful city of New Haven...A
constitution
was formed, which was characterized as 'the first example of a written
constitution;
as a distinct organic act, constituting a government and defining its
powers."' Listed
below are some of the articles which made up the constitution of
Connecticut:
I. That the Scriptures hold forth a perfect rule for the direction
and
government of all men in all duties which they are to perform to God
and men, as
well in families and commonwealths as in matters of the church.
II. That as in matters which concerned the gathering and ordering
of a
church, so likewise in all public offices which concern civil
order,-as the choice of
magistrates and officers, making and repealing laws, dividing
allotments of
inheritance, and all things of like nature,-they would all be governed
by those rules
which the Scripture held forth to them.
III. That all those who had desired to be received free planters
had settled in
the plantation with a purpose, resolution, and desire that they might
be admitted
into church fellowship according to Christ.
IV. That all the free planters held themselves bound to establish
such civil
order as might best conduce to the securing of the purity and peace of
the
ordinance to themselves, and their posterity according to God.'
"The governor was then charged by the Rev. Mr. Davenport, in the
most
solemn manner, as to his duties, from Deut. i. 16, 17:-'And I charged
your judges
at that time, saying, Hear the causes between your brethren, and judge
righteously
between every man and his brother, and the stranger that is with him.
Ye shall not
respect persons in judgment, but ye shall hear the small as well as
the great; ye
shall not be afraid of the face of man; for the judgment is God's: and
the cause that
is too hard for you, bring it unto me, and I will hear it'. The
General Court,
established under this constitution, ordered,-'That God's word should
be the only
rule for ordering the affairs of government in this commonwealth"'.
New Hampshire
"In 1679, NEW HAMPSHIRE, was separated from Massachusetts and
organized as an independent province. The colonists, having been so
long a part of
the Christian commonwealth of Massachusetts, constituted their
institutions on the
same Christian basis. Its legislature was Christian, and the colony
greatly prospered
and increased in population".
Pennsylvania
"The first legislative act, December, 1682, "announced the ends of
a true civil
government. 'Whereas the glory of Almighty God and the good of mankind
is the
reason and end of government, and, therefore, government in itself is
a venerable
ordinance of God..."' And it is the purpose of civil government to
establish "laws as
shall best preserve true Christian and civil liberty, in opposition to
all unchristian,
licentious, and unjust practices, whereby God may have his due, Caesar
his due,
and the people their due, from tyranny and oppression".
". . . . . But religion, as a life, as an inward principle, though
specially
developed and fostered by the Church, extends its domain beyond the
sphere of
technical worship, touches all the relations of man, and constitutes
the inspiration of
every duty. The service of the Commonwealth becomes an act of piety to
God.
The State realizes its religious character through the religious
character of its
subjects; and a State is and ought to be Christian, because all its
subjects are and
ought to be determined by the principles of the Gospel. As every
legislator is bound
to be a Christian man, he has no right to vote for any laws which are
inconsistent
with the teachings of Scriptures. He must carry his Christian
conscience into the
halls of legislation" (The Collected Writings of James Henley
Thomwell, Vol. IV, p.
517).
Various State Constitutions
The Connecticut Constitution (until 1818):
"The People of this State...by the Providence of God. . .hath the
sole and
exclusive right of governing themselves as a free, sovereign, and
independent State.
. . and forasmuch as the free fruition of such liberties and
privileges as humanity,
civility, and Christianity call for, as is due to every man in his
place and
proportion...hath ever been, and will be the tranquility and stability
of Churches
and Commonwealth; and the denial thereof, the disturbances, if not the
ruin of
both."
The Delaware Constitution (1831):
"...no man ought to be compelled to attend any religious
worship..." but it
recognized "the duty of all men frequently to assemble together for
the public
worship of the Author of the Universe." The following oath of office
was in force
until 1792: "I. ..do profess faith in God the Father, and in Jesus
Christ His only
son, and in the Holy Ghost, one God, blessed for evermore; I do
acknowledge the
holy scriptures of the Old and New Testaments to be given by divine
inspiration."
The Maryland Constitution (until 1851):
"That, as it is the duty of every man to worship God in such a
manner as he
thinks most acceptable to him; all persons professing the Christian
religion, are
equally entitled to protection in their religious liberty; wherefore
no person ought by
any law to be molested...on account of his religious practice; unless,
under the
color [pretense] of religion any man shall disturb the good order,
peace or safety of
the State, or shall infringe the laws of morality. . .yet the
Legislature may, in their
discretion, lay a general and equal tax, for the support of the
Christian religion."
The Constitution of 1864 required "a declaration of a belief in the
Christian
religion" for all State officers.
The Massachusetts Constitution (until 1863):
This state Constitution included the "right" of "the people of
this
commonwealth to. . . invest their Legislature with power to authorize
and require,
the several towns, parishes, precincts, and other bodies-politic or
religious societies
to make suitable provision, at their own expense, for the institution
of the public
worship of God and for the support and maintenance of public
Protestant teachers
of piety, religion, and morality in all cases where such provision
shall not be made
voluntary."
The North Carolina Constitution (until 1876):
"That no person who shall deny the being of God, or the truth of the
Protestant
religion, or the divine authority of the Old or New Testaments, or who
shall hold
religious principles incompatible with the freedom and safety of the
State, shall be
capable of holding any office or place of trust or profit in the civil
department
within this State."
Past Presidents of the United States
From George Washington's "Inaugural Speech to Both Houses of
Congress,"
April 30, 1789:
"Such being the impressions under which I have, in obedience to the
public
summons, repaired to the present station, it would be peculiarly
improper to omit,
in this first official act, my fervent supplications to that Almighty
Being who rules
over the universe, who presides in the councils of nations and whose
providential
aids can supply every human defect, that His benediction may
consecrate to the
liberties and happiness of the people of the United States a
government instituted
by themselves for these essential purposes....No people can be bound
to
acknowledge and adore the Invisible Hand which conducts the affairs of
men more
than the people of the United States. Every step by which they have
advanced to
the character of an independent nation seems to have been
distinguished by some
token of providential agency. . . . We ought to be no less persuaded
that the
propitious smiles of Heaven can never be expected on a nation that
disregards the
eternal rules of order and right which Heaven itself has ordained and
since the
preservation of the sacred fire of liberty and the destiny of the
republican model of
government are justly considered as deeply, perhaps finally, staked on
the
experiment...."
Thomas Jefferson
In Jefferson's Second Inaugural Address of March 4, 1805, he made the
following
comment:
"In matters of religion, I have considered that its free exercise
is placed by the
Constitution independent of the powers of the General Government. I
have
therefore undertaken, on no occasion, to prescribe the religious
exercise suited to it;
but have left them, as the Constitution found them, under the
direction and
discipline of state and church authorities acknowledged by the several
religious
societies".
From Abraham Lincoln's "Proclamation Appointing a National Fast Day,"
March 30, 1863:
"Whereas, the Senate of the United States devoutly recognizing the
Supreme
Authority and just Government of Almighty God in all the affairs of
men and of
nations, has, by a resolution, requested the President to designate
and set apart a
day for national prayer and humiliation:
And whereas, it is the duty of nations as well as of men to own
their
dependence upon the overruling power of God, to confess their sins and
transgressions in humble sorrow yet with assured hope that genuine
repentance will
lead to mercy and pardon, and to recognize the sublime truth,
announced in the
Holy Scriptures and proven by all history: that those nations only are
blessed whose
God is the Lord:
And, insomuch as we know that, by His divine law, nations like
individuals
are subjected to punishments and chastisements in this world may we
not justly
fear that the awful calamity of civil war, which now desolates the
land may be but
a punishment inflicted upon us for our presumptuous sins to the
needful end of our
national reformation as a whole people; We have been the recipients of
the choicest
bounties of Heaven. We have been preserved these many years in peace
and
prosperity. We have grown in numbers, wealth and power as no other
nation has
ever grown. But we have forgotten God. We have forgotten the gracious
Hand
which preserved us in peace, and multiplied and enriched and
strengthened us; and
we have vainly imagined,, in the deceitfulness of our hearts, that all
these blessings
were produced by some superior wisdom and virtue of our own.
Intoxicated with
unbroken success, we have become too self-sufficient to feel the
necessity of
redeeming and preserving grace, too proud to pray to the God that made
us!
It behooves us then to humble ourselves before the offended Power,
to
confess our national sins and to pray for clemency and forgiveness. [.
. . ]
All this being done, in sincerity and truth, let us then rest
humbly in the hope
authorized by the Divine teachings, that the united cry of the nation
will be heard
on high and answered with blessings no less than the pardon of our
national sins
and the restoration of our now divided and suffering country to its
former happy
condition of unity and peace.
In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the
seal of the
United States to be affixed. By the President: Abraham Lincoln.
Warren G. Harding
It is my conviction that the fundamental trouble with the people of
the United
States is that they have gotten too far away from Almighty God.
Dwight D. Eisenhower
The purpose of a devout and united people was set forth in the
pages of The
Bible … (1) to live in freedom, (2) to work in a prosperous land… and
(3) to obey
the commandments of God… This Biblical story of the Promised land
inspired the
founders of America. It continues to inspire us.
Ronald Reagan
All are free to believe or not believe, all are free to practice a
faith or not, but those
who believe must be free to speak of and act on their belief, to apply
moral
teaching to public questions… Tolerant society is open to and
encouraging of all
religions, and this does not weaken us; it strengthens us… Without
God, there is no
virtue, because there's no prompting of the conscience. Without God,
we're mired
in the material, that flat world that tells us only what the senses
perceive. Without
God, there is a coarsening of the society and without God, democracy
will not and
cannot long endure.
Return to "America's Godly Heritage" page or look further into US
History:
The Mayflower Compact
The Federalist Papers
The Declaration of Independence
The United States Constitution
Lincoln's Gettysburg Address
US History Archives
Tom Goodman
wrote:
>On Mon, 24 Aug 1998 06:51:15 -0400, Boris Docevski
><drg...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>>remove alt.news.macedonia from the thread.
>
>Sorry - it had been taken out. Someone stuck it back in just to be
>annoying (probably Tom Goodman).
Grow up, Mike. Why don't you just admit you did it ?
T*o*m G*o*o*d*m*a*n
Luke 17:1-2
Jesus said to his disciples:
"Things that cause people to sin are bound to come,
but woe to that person through whom they come.
It would be better for him to be thrown into
the sea with a millstone tied around his neck than for
him to cause one of these little ones to sin.
Tom Goodman
wrote:
>Actually paper(but not the writing) can be traced from China to Europe
>fairly well. The first use of paper in China is thought to have been
>developed before the Christian era and was widely used by the 3rd
>century AD. Some Chinese paper craftsmen were captured at the battle of
>Talas River in 751 which eventually led to the establishment of a paper
>mill at Baghdad in the late 8thc. In the 10th century paper reached
>western Europe via Moslem Spain. I've left out several of the
>intermediate steps.
PAPER. Long ago the Chinese discovered that a thin, wet layer of tiny,
interlocking fibers becomes paper when it dries. For many centuries
paper was used mainly for printed works, for writing letters, and for
keeping records.
The first papermaking materials were those used by the Chinese and
consisted of fibers from rags, the bark of trees, and plants and
grasses such as hemp, bamboo, jute, and straw.
Paper gets its name from the Egyptian papyrus plant, used to make
paperlike sheets as early as 2300 BC (see Papyrus Plant). The Chinese,
before discovering how to make paper, wrote on tablets of silk or
bamboo. Europeans recorded documents on the skins of calves, lambs,
sheep, and goats.
The Arabs learned the secret of papermaking from the Chinese and
introduced paper to Europe in the 12th century AD. Europeans soon
developed their own papermaking methods.
---------------------------------------------------------
Excerpted from Compton's Interactive Encyclopedia
Copyright (c) 1994, 1995 Compton's NewMedia, Inc. All Rights Reserved
T*o*m G*o*o*d*m*a*n*
The True Christian Church Is Communism.
Acts 2:44 And all that believed were together,
and had all things common;
45 And sold their possessions and goods, and
parted them to all men, as every man had need.