Carthage?

[Capt Ajax]

What I was meant was, instead of aborting these children that no one wants, let us create camps in the desert for these children and sacrifice them to Ba-al in the wake of a national emergency, war, or natural disaster. I mean.....they're dead already, why not make their deaths mean something??

ALL ROMANS MUST DIE

 

[BlueStar]

that is perhaps the single most absurd line of reasoning I have ever seen.

Abortion is one thing;the baby is unborn, it hasnt truelly lived- taking a 5 year old and cutting his throat in the name of Ba-al is a different story entirelly- and altogether a more cruel and barbaric affair, anyway you want to look at it. The Romans likelly did all the world a favor when they stamped out Carthage all together.

Fairs fair-like the Romans were a holiday? The games' the masacre of wild animals for yuppie sport-cruciying all that stood in their way-killing Woody Strode in Spartacus!!! It was a slave culture folk's-with all that that implies-yeah i know everybody did it in those days but they led the league-and who wrote the history anyway-not the Carthagenians! How do we know the sacrifice stories are true? If Rome had continued we would have been taking them out in the 40's instead of the 3rd Riech!

 

[BlueStar]

Oh yeah-I voted for Carthage-Hanibal is the greatest general of all time.1

 

[MRM]

-and who wrote the history anyway-not the Carthagenians! How do we know the sacrifice stories are true?

Agree - propaganda was not an invention of the modern age ...

-If Rome had continued we would have been taking them out in the 40's instead of the 3rd Riech!

Or maybe you would have to hail the roman emperor ...

 

[Xen]

Fairs fair-like the Romans were a holiday? The games' the masacre of wild animals for yuppie sport-cruciying all that stood in their way-killing Woody Strode in Spartacus!!! It was a slave culture folk's-with all that that implies-yeah i know everybody did it in those days but they led the league-and who wrote the history anyway-not the Carthagenians! How do we know the sacrifice stories are true? If Rome had continued we would have been taking them out in the 40's instead of the 3rd Riech!

1)Wel, in comparison to the Carthaginians The Romans were a holiday!; the represseive ways of carthage treatings its subjegated cities (Unlike Rome, which could always be counted on offering those areas that had proven loyal to its rule to be a part of the republic, and empire as equals, the Carthaginians made no pretensis of equality; they were the best all those under thier control slaves, and would eventually culminate is soem very bloody rebellions in the Lybian coastline)

2)How do we know the "stories" of sacrifice are true? because archeologust have uncovered the burial pits where the remains fo the children were placed after thier killing, that how

3)The 3rd riech perverted the image of Rome for its own uses; the fact that America itself enshrines all things Roman in its own government shoudl be proof enough that Romes culture has influenced the world for both good and bad, and that it woudl be Rome taking out barbarian userpers in the eastern empier, not outsiders conqoring rome in the 40's.

4)it shoudl also be added that unlike most slave cultures the Romans had a practice of manumission that is, unliek many slave keeping cultures, slaves coudl be expected to be freed after a time; either by death of a master, buying themselves out fo freedom (slaves were allowed to have side jobs on thie rown accord, as long as it didnt interfere with thier duties), or for exemplery service for thie rmasters; a surprinsglly civlizaed practice for the people you coin as "leading the league" in terms of cruelty- were the Romans crule? Yes,. they delt out harsh punishments; but they did so as punishment, and not out of sheer perverse cruelty.

 

[Capt Ajax]

I agree with Xen about the Germans.
All in all, I admire and respect the Romans and think they are probably the greatest example of empire that the world has ever known............but you see, I am a Southerner and we are often fond of the underdog, having walked in those shoes quite nicely in our own time. For a while, every citizen of Rome held their breath and their empire hung on and watched as Hannibal Barca rolled over their glorious Legions. Much the same way the Union watched as "Marse Robert" defeated one Union general after another. The underdog is not always glorious and memorable, but sometimes thier efforts are worth noting.

It all comes down to this:
Would the ROMANS feel the Carthaginians worthy of mention in a game about civilizations and empire? I would wager so.

 

[Comrade Pedro]

Carthage should enter the list of civ4, just because it had protagonism on the general History. In spite of not having contributed too much with a unique culture, they definetively marked the afermath of Rome as a great military nation.

 

[BlueStar]

1)Wel, in comparison to the Carthaginians The Romans were a holiday!; the represseive ways of carthage treatings its subjegated cities (Unlike Rome, which could always be counted on offering those areas that had proven loyal to its rule to be a part of the republic, and empire as equals, the Carthaginians made no pretensis of equality; they were the best all those under thier control slaves, and would eventually culminate is soem very bloody rebellions in the Lybian coastline)

2)How do we know the "stories" of sacrifice are true? because archeologust have uncovered the burial pits where the remains fo the children were placed after thier killing, that how

3)The 3rd riech perverted the image of Rome for its own uses; the fact that America itself enshrines all things Roman in its own government shoudl be proof enough that Romes culture has influenced the world for both good and bad, and that it woudl be Rome taking out barbarian userpers in the eastern empier, not outsiders conqoring rome in the 40's.

4)it shoudl also be added that unlike most slave cultures the Romans had a practice of manumission that is, unliek many slave keeping cultures, slaves coudl be expected to be freed after a time; either by death of a master, buying themselves out fo freedom (slaves were allowed to have side jobs on thie rown accord, as long as it didnt interfere with thier duties), or for exemplery service for thie rmasters; a surprinsglly civlizaed practice for the people you coin as "leading the league" in terms of cruelty- were the Romans crule? Yes,. they delt out harsh punishments; but they did so as punishment, and not out of sheer perverse cruelty.

By leading the league I meant they were the #1 empire of all time-so whatever anyone else did the Romans trump it.. You want to excuse them as nice slave masters- go ahead- a slave is a slave-Not Cruel? The games?Ask a Jew-Christian-or or wild animal. I believe all empires are perverse-that's just me.

 

[DrMadd]

I always played Carthage. In Civ 3.. In the Industrial age, Hannibal bears an Uncanny resemblence to me. I hope they return.

 

[Tee Kay]

Three words: bring back Carthage.

May I remind you also that the child sacrifice theory have not been proven. The accounts were written by Greeks and Romans who don't like the rich city very much and could be just propaganda. The urns found at the Topht (religious centre in the city) could be just of kids dead of natural causes.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

that is perhaps the single most absurd line of reasoning I have ever seen.

it hasnt truelly lived

It would probably be better not to start judging who has trully lived and whose deaths would be cruel and barbaric, unless one is going to err on the side of caution (after all there are studies showing humans don't properly develop reason till the age of 20-30....even if they do seem an awful lot like real persons before that)

He was making the point that certain types of cruelty (abortion, child sacrifice), when widely socially accepted, don't necessarily entail an overall cruel society (at least not anymore than normal human cruelty) because those who suffer that cruelty are so weak that no overall social cruelties are needed to keep them in line.

 

[Capt Ajax]

He was making the point that certain types of cruelty (abortion, child sacrifice), when widely socially accepted, don't necessarily entail an overall cruel society (at least not anymore than normal human cruelty) because those who suffer that cruelty are so weak that no overall social cruelties are needed to keep them in line.

BRAVO!
We are just humans living in a different age. Perhaps in 3005 they will look back at us and call us barbaric for the things we have done and the policy we've supported?

 

[KrikkitTwo]

Yes I can see it now,

History class 3145
"... Now the people of those days practiced something that was called Domecracy. Can anyone explain what that is?...yes Fetyl.

"Domecracy was the abandonment of people's minds to their unguided, animal thoughts. It was a result of uncivilized people's lack of understanding of proper programming, and resulted in a wide range of cruel and barbaric illnesses such as leisure time and police."

"Thank you, Fetyl exactly as it is said."

 

[Xen]

By leading the league I meant they were the #1 empire of all time-so whatever anyone else did the Romans trump it.. You want to excuse them as nice slave masters- go ahead- a slave is a slave-Not Cruel? The games?Ask a Jew-Christian-or or wild animal. I believe all empires are perverse-that's just me.

you've got a bit of a problem with over generalization of all history into a modern sterotype; just because we think of slavery in a particule rmanner dosent mean that our way of viewing th ematter has always been "THE WAY", primarilly, is a slave a slave? Yes and no; different ypes of slavery; from those captured in war, to those people who have run so much debt that they can never afford to pay it, and so the loan sharks get thier freedom as forfiet. but primarilly, the biggest difference comes into what the definition of a slave was; now no one can deny it, slavery is a cruel institution, and one that dosent offer any sort fo real benifits, when you look at the long term- but of a cruel institution the Romans were surpsringlyl advanced in outlook; slaves were people; just the same as any citzen, but for whatever reason, now had thier freedom lost; could be from supporting the loseing side in a war; could be from debt (The Romans severlly frowned on "slave breeding", as being a very, very nasty institution, and so while while soem children where born into slavery, it was a severe minority- one of the better aspects of the Roman view on slavery, that people shouldnt be born and raised for slavery itself) and as said earillier; many salves who werent sent to the mines (which was a very cruel place to be, no doubt) had th eoppoertunity to gain thie rmanumission, and even subsequent citizenship

2)As for the games; not as cruel as you may think' violent, yes; deadlly; occasionally- gladiatorial sport was never as deadlly as people imagine it, and if you take no other reasoning, that consider that if ever game exactly half the number fo trained, willing gladiators dies, then very soon, you run out of gladiators- instead, it was afight to first blood, as a rule, and the gladiators where treated to medical care that wouldnt be surpssed until doctors were willign to risk diggin up corpses to learn anatomy; in some ways, it is only recentlly that medical sicence has cought up to Rome, in the fac tthat while for centuries, stitches have been the normal wound-mending device the Romans used silver (which is hypoallergenic) silver staples, and slatherd wounds in honey- a substance which naturally kills off bacteria- add ot this the known fact that Gladiators where known to love thier profession, and that by the 1sr century, about half of all gladiators were free-men who had entered the arena, and you begin to see a blood-sport that, while bloody and dangerous, dosent diserve the modern stigma of sadistic cruelty anymore then football or wrestling dose.

3)different emperors delt with christians differentlly; Trajan, when confronted by Pliny the Younger on the subject of christians (which was viewed as dishonest religion, the mainstay of thieves and murderurs looking for quick redemption at the hands of a strange god- which, mind you, for the first and second centuries, it was exactly that) he willed that christians shoudl essentially be left alone, unless cuasing trouble and openlly practicing the religion- practioners of Judaism had nothing to fear from the empire; the citizens of Judea had three religion based revolts, but these didnt affect imperial policy in the rest of the empire, and Rome has had a longer continuous Jewish population in its walls then Jersulam itself- counting all the times the jews have been forced from its walls; its possibel Rome may have the oldest Jewish community in all europe in fact.

 

[Xen]

It would probably be better not to start judging who has trully lived and whose deaths would be cruel and barbaric, unless one is going to err on the side of caution (after all there are studies showing humans don't properly develop reason till the age of 20-30....even if they do seem an awful lot like real persons before that)

He was making the point that certain types of cruelty (abortion, child sacrifice), when widely socially accepted, don't necessarily entail an overall cruel society (at least not anymore than normal human cruelty) because those who suffer that cruelty are so weak that no overall social cruelties are needed to keep them in line.

the point is mute; we dont have to rely on how Greek, and eventually Roman historians bend the words, the simple fact is that we know from well documanted events that everyone living under Carthaginian rule felt that they were bastards- fioarlly indicitive of cruel society.

 

[BlueStar]

Xen-Your entire line of reasoning is colored by a modern steryotype-that you can comprehend someone elses reality thru others knowledge- any system based on the subjegation of others poisons itself-why do slave cultures fear slave revolt so much? As for Gladiators and slaves-why Spartacus? The conditions he lived in led him to a set of actions that dont support your intellectual arguments-and he was there. I'll take his views on the subject over any others anyday.

 

[Capt Ajax]

OK....OK....So we are all bastards and probably will still be in 3045. I have a confesion to make, I am actualy a ROMAN LOVER!
I actually sponcer a ROMAN clan known as "The Obsidian Order" (historically a secret faction of the Famos Roman Praetorian Guard). We are a multigaming clan, support CIV, and also have a really strong Guild Wars following. We support PC and XBOX games. Many of us are Star Wars Geeks. I welcome you to our forums. Guest have access to most of the forums. If you like, sign up and become a "Citizen of the Order". Here is the site:

http://obsidianorder05.proboards62.com/index.cgi

BTW - I might be the Procurator of a Roman Clan, but I am still a HUGE fan of Carthage and feel they should be, at the very least, in the next expanson.

 

[Xen]

Xen-Your entire line of reasoning is colored by a modern steryotype-that you can comprehend someone elses reality thru others knowledge-

hardly a modern "sterotype" its a simpel fact that you havt to base ones reasonings on information passed down, in regards to this subject, by what is writen; and obviouslly, what is written must coem from the hand of a person- however, you make your mistake in attempting to loop my argument in thinking that I whole-heartedlly am drawing someones opinion; this is not true; whiel it true that many others share my opinion, it is perhaps based on seeing the events in s imiler frame of mind

any system based on the subjegation of others poisons itself-why do slave cultures fear slave revolt so much? As for Gladiators and slaves-why Spartacus? The conditions he lived in led him to a set of actions that dont support your intellectual arguments-and he was there. I'll take his views on the subject over any others anyday.

alright, give me three other slave uprising in Roman history please; if you cannot, then accept the incident as a fluke- the fact of the matter is that slave upriseing were exceedinglly rare, and they occured in areas of heavy labour-based agriculture, such as in southern Italy, in the greater aristocratic estates, and the Romans aristocrats could be a very petty bunch indeed- yet, keeping this in mind, your going to have a fiarlly hard time coming up with further evidence to back your claim.

 

[BlueStar]

Afluke because it got off the ground? I dont need any other examples{altho I'll look} My point is Spartacus led a revolt of gladiators and slaves-quite an army of them-which indicates they didn't feel they're life was so ducky-it is real evidence that counters your argument and all you can counter is that it"s a fluke? How about three examples of happy slaves-from any slave culture?

am i nuts arguing with a guy with 14.000 posts

 

[DrMadd]

Actually, the burned bones inside the topht prove otherwise.