Meanwhile, on 100 AD Sup Forums

Is there any chance the Senate will stop this virtue signaling and just stop accepting Germanics and other barbarians into the Legion? They're not Romans and they never will be. You have to be properly raised in the culture.

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teotihuacan
conservapedia.com/Pirenne_thesis
researchgate.net/publication/267236790_THE_PIRENNE_THESIS_REVISITED_THE_HEIRS_OF_ROME_THE_PIRENNE_THESIS_REVISITED_THE_HEIRS_OF_ROME_THE_PIRENNE_THESIS_REVISITED_THE_HEIRS_OF_ROME_THE_PIRENNE_THESIS_REVISITED_THE_HEIRS_OF_ROME_AND_THE_MEDI
twitter.com/AnonBabble

barbarian pride world wide

We have more important matters, let's acecpt these barbarians and make them fight against the ottomans
free canon fodder, if we invented black powder

*eats you*

i went to see martellus' wive in the gladiatorial arena with the other proscribed yesterday for the armenian embassy, it was lewd as fuck

i am gallo-roman and white ok my moustache doesn't make me not-a-citizen i am more roman than you and i have absolutely nothing to do with germans i swear

what

AYO FUCK YOU SAYIN RÖMERSCHWEIN VE GERMANS VILL KILL ALL Y'ALL RACIST HURENSÖHNE THOR AKBAR

what what

I am a Grecus

>ottomans
Tu es un retard

Have fun being subjects to the Romans
>Dances around a fire and makes wolf noises

yeah sorry I don't play Europa universalis or whatever you nerds play

obligatory ancient shitposting

>100 AD
>the Senate

>A small problem gets larger if you ignore it
such wise, he knew

These Feathered Serpent followers seem like nice fellows, surely people who doesn't even sacrifice human blood can do no harm.

>un veritable retard

>Not knowing the senate existed during the Imperial period and even past the eventual split of the empire

quetzalfags get out reeee

>100AD
>Aztecs

not Aztecs m8, but Teotihuacans:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teotihuacan

"Pulqui, I got an idea my friend, what if we roll some guanaco leather on our feet so stupid europeans think we have big foots when they find our footprints? Go and kill some guanacos, I'll go to the cordillera to trhow some boleadoras at those filthy mapuches."

*scares romans so bad they build hadrians wall*

time to eat some tree bark

Scotland just wasn't worth the hassle.

Running Deer where are the berries?

Impero thread.
Only one Italian.

We need to fix this.

Europe would be much better with gladiatorial combat.

Italy you know what you must do, make Rome great again.

This, put 100 migrant in coliseum and the last man standing gets to stay
many such problems solved

But when we tried y'all bullied us.

Well, I'll give you that teaming up with barbaric northerns was a stupid move.

We only wanted a Confy Mediterranean alliance with Spain.

Also, we still have a some sort of "gladiatorial sport" It's called "calcio in costume".

Like football but you can punch and people from time to time lose ears.

I've seen that. That's the thing they play in Florence, isn't it?

Fucking alpha. Looks so cool. Manly af.

Third Rome reporting in

Yes, they play it only here in Florence.
City cuts itself in teams and they go on.
It's basically a bunch of dudes punching one another. I've honestly never understood the rules that well but hey, go santa croce, go azzurri.

That's because you weren't doing it properly.

Thank you Gaul.

*trashes city*
*shits on statue of Jupiter*

> tfw no qt Nubian slave
I'm thinking of joining the auxilia. I must give those African barbarian ladies a taste of my BIF (big Iberian falcata).

I know that feel, what a bunch of brown manlets...
Wana worship some tree together?

you ruined the thread

...

FOR THE EMPIRE!!!

what about history, do they still teach it in french schools or is it considered offensive to immigrants?

France must be LIBERATED!

i'll say it once and i'll say it again.

letting in these germanic rapefugees fleeing attila was a mistake. they will destroy our empire from the inside.

wagga wagga wollongong digeridoo dream time noonga.

REFORMS ARE NEEDED!

>Romans are STILL this assblasted
Just stay out of our forests you stupid fucking manlets

>Well, I'll give you that teaming up with barbaric northerns was a stupid move.

ackshully Rome only fell when islam came and took away your whole North-African province, and blocked the mediterrean trade with barbary pirates. Franks did a decent job of saving Rome when Roman had become Italians, they did for a couple of centuries; but muslims started the dark ages.

Read Pirenne for this btw.

Legends say, Augustus is still weeping.

ODA CLAN IS BEST CLAN!
JUBEI BTFO!

Let us Anglos and Allemanics free our brothers from the fascists!
FOR WODEN!

>just because they could kill, rape, enslave, and tax a bunch of Celts means they could take Germania
Teutoberg Forest best day of my life. Praise Woden.

...

>Western Rome fell ~400-500 AD
>Islam rose ~600 AD
Shoo non country

I... I weep :(

What tribes were at Teutoberg anyhow? Arminius was Cherusci, but Angels would've been too far north, no?

Anglo-Saxons were on the Western German coast from Schleswig to Friesland. This is why English and Dutch are communicable.

How do you tell the different from Germans, vikings, romans, anglo saxons, and franks?

seriously

Read Henri Pirenne you fucking lardass. That was his thesis and has recently (2012) been reviewed and re-accepted.

Basically Western Rome didn't fell, Franks just took it over, they even adopted Latin. There is a continuity of governance, not that there was any chance in governance between the last Roman emperor Romulus Augustus and the first Germanic one.

What we call "the dark ages" really started when the khalifate took North-Africa, one of the richest and most strategic provinces of the Empire. When islam took it, they flooded the Mediterranean with pirates, blocked effectively all trade on it.

Frankish and Saxonic tribes (Chatti, Cherusci, Chattuari, Sicambri...)

>Western Rome never fell
>Arabs caused the dark ages and not the northern barbarians.
Belgian """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""education""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

Franks = federation of Celto-Germanic tribes living in Belgium and southern NL

Vikings = North-Germanic pirates (Denmark and Sweden)

Anglii = small West-Germanic tribe from Denmark

Saxons = federation of West-Germanic tribes living in Northern Germany

Germans = inhabitants of the former Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation, speakers of the High German language. Romans named all Suevi "Germani" after losing a battle against one of the tribes of the Hermunduri, the Tungri (Tongeren in Belgium)

Anglos were at Angeln, north of the Saxons and south of the Jutes in present day Denmark.
English and Dutch are almost never communicable, but our closest non-Anglic language brother, Friscian, is much more intelligible to most West Germanics.

>Germans
West Germanics that take from the Alemanni to the South (mostly), and Saxons to the north and the Franks across the board. They're a hodgepodge of Germanic ethnicities.
>vikings
The Norse, are North Germanics that started in Scandinavia while everyone else left during the fall of Rome to git gud and settle land and make kingdoms. Overrated, truthfully.
>romans
Italic Latins who founded Rome. Only distantly related to the Germanics by way if being Indo-Europeans that asked Europe along with the Celtic folks
>anglo saxons
West Germanic Angels and Saxons who invaded and settled Great Britain and replaced the Romano-Britons outside of the Gaels, Welsh, and Cornish.
>and franks
West Germanics who made Francia that gave their language to the Dutch and really set about making the modern states of France (West Francia, where they were gradually replaced by the Gallo-Roman population) and Germany (East Francia, and then the Kingdom of Germany). Very underrated.

All worshipped the same gods initially and all once spoke the same language (besides Rome).

That is where you are wrong. Do you even know who Pirenne was? What you state is a popular myth.

conservapedia.com/Pirenne_thesis

"Mohammed and Charlemagne" by Henri Pirenne

researchgate.net/publication/267236790_THE_PIRENNE_THESIS_REVISITED_THE_HEIRS_OF_ROME_THE_PIRENNE_THESIS_REVISITED_THE_HEIRS_OF_ROME_THE_PIRENNE_THESIS_REVISITED_THE_HEIRS_OF_ROME_THE_PIRENNE_THESIS_REVISITED_THE_HEIRS_OF_ROME_AND_THE_MEDI

>let me tell you about your history

>Franks
>Celto-Germanic
No such thing

Franks: Northern French tribes
Vikings: I think you mean Norse, which were essentially Germans who migrated North
Anglos: Dutch and German tribes that migrated to Britain in the dark ages
Saxons: Low (Northern) Germans

Germans: Pretty much all of the above to varying degrees.

>West Germanics who made Francia that gave their language to the Dutch

No, Franks were Celto-Germanic. Gaulish was spoken here and in NL as late as the 3rd century AD. Most names of the Frankish tribes are known and half of them are Celtic in name: Sicambri, Tencteri, Usipetes. They also absorbed the Celtic/Celto-Germanic Belgae tribes, who were a key figure in financing the early Frank confederation by salt trade (salt was expensive, Roman legionaires were partly paid in salt). Basically retired Nervian cohorts financed it by acquiring salt from the salt mines of the Menapii and Morini in today's coastal Flemish provinces. Menapii and Morini were pure Celts btw, the same ones that colonised the British and Irish coastline.

>All worshipped the same gods initially and all once spoke the same language (besides Rome).

The West-Germanic language split off from the North-Germanic one around 700 BC.

While this is true, you're also forgetting that the some Saxons tagged along too when some od the Anglos migrated. The modern Anglo in England is often a bit of both.

It's pointless user. Ignoring him is the nest option

>settled Great Britain and replaced the Romano-Britons outside of the Gaels, Welsh, and Cornish.

another myth, the bulk of modern England still has Celtic genes, they were never replaced, the Anglo-Saxons just became the new ruling class (which the Romans were before).

Why do people always think that an invading tribe replaces the old one? In such a case, who will do the hard, dirty work of plowing the fields? Of course not, the invaders become the land-owners, the nobility, wh sit on their ass all day or go to fight. The conquered natives are the ones who have to work the land in the sweat of their brow.

Terrible explanation

you must have burgermeat for brains

fucking mutts why do I bother

If Franks absorb a Celtic tribe into their confederation, that doesn't make the Franks not-Franks.
Maybe I'm talking ethnic groups while you're talking Kingdoms, but the Belgae are the Belgae and the Franks are Franks from an ethnic standpoint. As for confederations and kingdoms, I'm fairly certain you're right.

>Anglos
>Dutch

They lived in Denmark, Angeln is still a toponym there.

God damn you burgers are stupid know-it-alls.

Genetically, I'm certain that Celts weren't eradicated, but rather that they were assimilated thoroughly enough that they stopped worshipping Celtic gods and speaking Brythonnic languages in favor of Germanic ones. A ruling class only rules, but in the case of the Germanic migrations, they truly actually changed the face of Great Britain.

Ethnicity is much more culture than genes, you're thinking of genealogy not ethnology.

m8 I'm a full-blown autist when it comes to historic anthropology, and Germanics are my favorite.

SATOR
AREPO
TENET
OPERA
ROTAS

>but the Belgae are the Belgae and the Franks are Franks from an ethnic standpoint.

No you dolt, both the Belgae and the Franks were federations of tribes. The names are known. Back in the pre-Roman days the Celts were militarily stronger than the Germanics, so a lot of Germanics crossed the Rhine, settled here and adopted Gaulish language and costums, intermarried. Why? Because pagans believed that if you adopt the costums and language of a more succesful neighbour, you adopt his strength. Caesar for one wrote extensively about this.

The Franks were the same local tribes, fortified by their kin across the Rhine, who wanted to live in the Roman Empire but not pay taxes. Hencer the name Frank "free ones". Hence why the motto of Flanders in medieval days (and today) was VRANK EN VRIJ (Frank and Free).

m8 Franks would've spoken the Frankish language, would've hailed from the Germanic Urheimat further back in antiquity, and have worshipped Germanic gods.
Gauls would've spoken Gaulish, come from the Celtic urheimat further back in antiquity, and have worshipped Celtic gods.

I'm not talking about these ethnicities on a political/kingdoms/confederations basis, nor a genetic one, but on a purely ethnocultural one.
They are two different ethnicities with two origins (that hilariously reconnect, but that's other matters).

Well then why did you use the word "replaced". They only replaced the Romans as a ruling class, the bulk of the population were the same Brythonic Celts. Ruling class is like what, 1-3% of the population, at most.

So do I, and I also speak Dutch, French and German, hence I have easy access to and can read local historical documents. This combined with the screening of our genetics only supports what I am saying. Next to that there is the local toponymy which says a lot. Funny how all the Belgic pagan holy places became the Frankish ones.

Everything I stated here you can google for yourself. Look at the renowned modern Dutch historian Lauran Toorians for example. I literally quoted him.

Franks were clearly Celto-Germanic. Their tribal names, the names of their chieftains, half of them were Celtic.

When I say "replaced" I mean on an ethnic identity basis, not an extinguishing of life sort of way.

I think we speak to two separate phenomenons. The Frankish tribes, as a political confederation, especially as they moved into Gaul, would've absorbed and taken in Gauls, and that would've been reflected just as you said, with holy sites and place names and the lot of it.
But when I say Franks I mean as an ETHNICITY, not a confederation, not as controlled lands and kings, but as language and religion.

It sure is great being roman here in england, surely technology and society will continue advancing and we will be immortals unto gods in the next few hundred years.

The first thing the Franks did was to adopt Latin. They were huge Romanboos. The whole idea was to take over the Roman Empire and establish themselves as the new rulers, not to destroy it.

Carausius the Menapian tried it in the early Frankish days. He wanted to be recognized as fellow Roman emperor.

>The best known temples on the Isla Batavia in our country are (as far as I know) dedicated to Hercules Magusanus and Mithras. The first is a Belgian god, probably originating in Menapian culture, the other one comes original from Persia. As far as I know there is not much specific "germanic" about the Batavii. Their material culture hardly differed from the local Belgic Menapians. The same can be said of Caninifatii, Sicambri and Tungri. The archeologic uncoverings of the 358-migration of the Salii has not shown settlements of new temples as far as I know. johanthon 20:08, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Batavii were Chatti (proto-Saxon West-Germanic) who split off after a feud, and settled in southern NL. They adopted both Gaulish and Roman as late as the 3rd century, yet were ethnically pure Germanic.

Sicambrii became the Salians, and Tungri were also part of the Franks.

>But when I say Franks I mean as an ETHNICITY, not a confederation, not as controlled lands and kings, but as language and religion.

But that's like saying that all black sub-Sahara Africans who adopted French and catholicism are now ethnically French.

>The Frankish tribes, as a political confederation, especially as they moved into Gaul, would've absorbed and taken in Gauls, and that would've been reflected just as you said, with holy sites and place names and the lot of it.

I was saying that the northern Gaulish tribes were a part of the Franks in the very early formative days. For this there is ample proof. They did adopt the Frankish language.

Just horsing around

>Ottomans
and they say American schools are shit

>you just have to, like, philosophize n shiet