Posted on 04/23/2018 12:41:08 PM PDT by SunkenCiv
This undated photo released by the Egyptian Ministry of Antiquities, shows the head of Roman Emperor Marcus Aurelius that was found in the Temple of Kom Ombo, in Aswan, 585 miles (940 kilometers) south of Cairo, Egypt. (Egyptian Ministry of Antiquities via AP)
(Excerpt) Read more at yahoo.com ...
I’ve seen better heads on a glass of beer. — Groucho Marx
Considering what a crap job he did raising his son, I could consider him a good philosopher and writer, but (and I know this includes the supposedly wisest man ever), I can’t consider somebody a great MAN if their kid is an idiot and/or psychopath.
I can’t consider somebody a great MAN if their kid is an idiot and/or psychopath.
——
Sometimes great people’s kids turn out crappy through no fault of the parents. It is one good argument against having hereditary monarchies.
Nice legs.
Shame about your face.
He really only liked Roman history because of the orgies and using slaves for sex, but that didn't test well with the focus groups..
“Best book I was ever given in high school was “Meditations’ by Marcus Aurelius”
Did he autograph it for you?
You know King Solomon said who knows if my son will be a wise man or a fool. It’s not always the parent’s fault. The child still has free will and makes choices.
It would test well with the modern democrat base though. He was ahead of his time.
It took a while to perfect the concept of Flat Stanley...
I dunno, looks kinda like Beethoven to me. :)
“Marcus Aurelius was an energetic persecutor of the Christians, and for zealous intolerance was a star of the first magnitude in a galaxy of persecuting emperors. During Aurelius’s reign and with his full sanction, Felicitas, Justin Martyr, Polycarp, and many thousands of less renowned Christians were cruelly tortured to death.”
I liked his “Letters to Lesbia” one of his mistresses.
When the muslims took over Egypt they afttack all art depicting humans. They are commanded to by their so-called holy book.
Marcus was actually the last of the good emperors. Starting with his son, the Roman Empire began a slow but steady decline.
It had to do with the fact that the Romans kept their wine in lead containers. They were suffering from arsenic poisoning.
bttt
This is somewhat of a misnomer that is usually popularized by liberal arts programs. It was only because of Rome's complete control and dominance that resources derived from tribute & taxes were able to be directed towards engineering and arts, primarily infrastructure, architecture and literature.
Secondly, Gibbon estimated that slaves represented approximately 50% of the total population of 120m under Roman control. With no possible means of escape, and certain torture and death for non-compliance, Rome was able to utilize this labor pool to manage all forms of food/raw materials/weapons production and build out/maintain vast infrastructure projects.
The reason for Rome's complete (military) control was their development & deployment of advanced (iron) weapons systems. Rome eventually failed because they lost their technological edge in maintaining this military superiority. As the Goths, Vandals and tribes from other outlying regions eventually acquired similar technology, the odds were evened. Combined with more disciplined tactics and renewed vigor, the tribes overwhelmed the depleted Roman legions.
So, why the collapse in commerce, trade and arts during the middle ages? Simple: level playing field. Everyone had access to the same military technology and state of art weapons. This had a two-fold effect: no one had a monopoly on revenue extraction, and all free capital available for investment was poured into military technology.
So, while the arts and commerce suffered, military defense systems aka castles increased in tremendous complexity and engineering capabilities. Two, metallurgy continued to develop apace, resulting in extremely complicated & refined personal armor. Third, and perhaps most importantly, even with all available resources devoted to military funding, it would still take 1000 years before the next great leap in military weaponry was developed: firearms.
As we know, it wasn't until the development of firearms that nation-states began to finally form and (once again) exert territorial control. Only after firm regional boundaries like Britain, France & Germany (HRE) emerged, do we see the return of available funding to arts & the protection of commerce (highway safety). It's not a coincidence that the Renaissance began only around 100 years after effective firearms allowed technology leaders to control regional economies. That is, surplus wealth was finally once again available to divert from military programs.
Rome had a monopoly and lost it. We look to the areas they influenced and see this great body of work, but in general, monopolies always produce stagnation. Competition is what creates innovation. Technology - military and building - is what advanced at a tremendous pace after the fall of the Western empire.
Thank you for your comments.
Rome split the territory and was relying on vandals and others to be their military presence in many provences. Paying mercenaries to be your army is a losing proposition, loyalty and so forth.
I like that the Romans used local governors and some tribal chiefs, to serve alongside theirs and took family members hostage back to rome to indoctrinate them and serve as a warning what would happen if you don’t cooperate.
It is remarkable to me that a city could have such power for so long.
Best wishes.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.