/lit/ - Literature

>>6345246
damn, that's my favorite book
my favorite part was the ending
what was your favorite part?

That's some nice chainmail, OP.

>>6345246
Well, I don't think many psuedo-historian-tinfoil-hat-atheists ever looked into the problems the Roman Empire had with over-extension and its armies. Nor do many people realize how long Rome was around.

Historian and atheist here: You would have to be a fucking idiot to believe that... if anything, Christianity (along with Islam) ensured the continuity of it.

>>6345468
>You would have to be a fucking idiot to believe that
A lot of idiots out there anon. Wouldn't surprise me if many of them believed in this as well.

>>6345246
Don't forget muh lead pipes!

>he thinks that the birth and death of empires and governments aren't just a natural occurrence of a conglomerate of individual wills through history

>>6345468
>along with Islam

Maybe I'm being silly but didn't Muslims end ending Rome?

>>6346043
Well most don't last 2100 years

>>6346038
DEUS VULT!

>>6346049
You mean the Byzantine Empire? Yes, Constantinople was sacked by the Ottomans, but Rome was sacked by the Visigoths much earlier.

>>6346038
>>>/pol/

>>6346144
That image actually mocks the pagan crowd of /pol/. In particular, the ones who think that Christianity is an evil Jewish plot and that pagan Europe was pure and without any degeneracy.

Well meme'd

>>6346152

>>6346038
>misinterpreting holy scripture to bitch about racemixing
Stormfags please leave my bible alone.

>>6346049
There is some validity to seeing the Abbasid Empire as a Roman successor state along the lines of the Holy Roman Empire.

Decadency caused Christianity, not the other way around. Learn your Nietzschean cause and effect, lads.

>>6346269
>Nietzschean

>>6346280
I don't even need to open that pic to know that is nothing else but pure *sniff* propaganda, trying to bend reality to fit into some personal view of the world.

>>6346291
Yeah and Nietzche is soooooo impartial and objective. . .

>>6345252
One of my favorites as well.

The history may be too bookish and incomplete but the prose is goat.

>>6346280
>/pol/ and christfagging combined

Can't handle this stupid

>>6346304

>>6346269
Rome had been decadent and corrupt since the time of the Republic, and the Early Church was actually highly decentralized. Nietzsche railed against the later Roman Catholic and Protestant Churches for promoting what he considered and ideology of the weak.
>>6346280
And I'm not even going to get started on that pile of shit you just posted. The Kikes had little to no influence in Napoleons Meritocracy, and it was the French Republicans who kicked the Catholics out along with the formal calender, roughly 10ish years earlier.

You really think the Jews had that much power? Even a hundred years later, during the Dreyfus affair?
Get the fuck off /lit/

I just read "Corruption and Decline of Rome" by Ramsay Macmullen. Definitely the most well-researched book on the subject yet.

His conclusion:

>Rome only functioned because of the patronage system
>The emperor had his dudes out in the provinces who owed him favors. He'd send them orders, they'd carry out those orders by having locals who owe them favors help them out
>this is why the civil bureaucracy was so goddamn tiny on paper until Diocletian
>some of these dudes serving the emperor were slaves and freedman
>it was normal for slaves to skim some money off the top, because they were degenerate slaves and most slaves collected "tips" so they could buy their freedom
>eventually everybody was collecting bribes, slaves, freedman, and freemen alike
>bribing government officials became the only way to entice them to help you
>the entire command structure is now fucked because everyone in the chain of command is now self-interested
>you can't stop it because nobody wants to be the one guy not making huge profits
>empire loses its ability to mobilize resources and troops
>soldiers are now stationed in cities so they could bully locals for money
>barbarians become the only reliable soldiers, because the chieftains don't lie about how many men they have who can fight, and they aren't stationed in the cities becoming an ill-disciplined rabble

But Catholicism did oppress science during the middle ages...

>>6346352

>>6346352
The only reason science survived through middle ages was the Church.

>>6346352
get out

>>6346355
>>6346361
>>6346362

What about the infamously cited Heliocentric scientists?

>>6346352
lolno most scientists were monks you dumb shit

>>6346352
Okay friend, while I do agree with this>>6346355, lemme actually give you a response.

Yes, the Catholic Church did oppose Heliocentric theory.

But the Church was, for many, many years, the center of learning in the west. Monks transcribed old works, many classics imported and translated from the east, and the first Universities were founded there as well. Oxford, Cambridge, many others.
Not to mention the encouragement of Da Vinci, Copernicus, Botticelli, Descartes, etc.

It's not one sided either way for friend.

We need to talk about this nasty habit you've developed of taking every comic and info-graphic you find online as fact instead of reading a damn textbook, /lit/.

>>6346427
We need to talk about this nasty habit you've developed of getting booty blasted by every comic and info-graphic you find online instead of appreciating a dank meme, /lit/.

>>6346338

So the empire died because of the self-interests of individuals?

There is sure no other thing that happened and was overlooked because muh common sense?

The Donation of Constantine was a legitimate historical document penned by a Christian Roman Emperor. Addressed to the barbarians, Constantine announces that he intends to move his capital East, and grants the barbarians absolute dominion over his western territories.

>>6346456

I'm no expert and Ramsay MacMullen admitted he was only scraping the tip of the iceberg by tackling it from a sociological perspective. It's a very complicated book that examines a very simple chain of logic.

The point was that Rome wasn't great because of a sprawling and efficient bureaucracy; because there never was one. The Empire only functioned because Roman "honor" allowed orders to be passed from the top of the pyramid to the bottom without too much alteration or embezzlement. At first it was mostly well-to-do elites who were in the government for the short-term, and slaves and freedman who were the emperor's dependents and could be trusted to an extent. This allowed the system to work.

Then (I assume because MacMullen barely touched on this aspect) you get long-term bureaucrats in the government who start taking bribes like the emperor's slaves and freedmen did, and the powerful Senatorial elites are phased out of the government because the emperors felt threatened by them.

Corruption becomes endemic by this point. It was always part of Roman government but it hits critical mass by the third century, now it's so common that it's unusual for officials to not be corrupt.

What MacMullen proved very well was that Diocletian's reforms made it much much worse. More government meant more opportunities for corruption, and the fact that the emperor now advertised himself as being "inviolable" and screened himself behind a circle of courtiers made him more ignorant as to what was going on further down the chain of command. Imperial orders became vague as well, and lawyers made good business by serving as interpreters (which made money dominate the law even more).

Soldiers started being stationed in the cities. Apparently this was supposed to transform them into a cheaper militia force, but instead they walked around the cities as soldiers bullying the locals for money. This makes them ill-disciplined, spoiled, and hated. Then commanders start lying about how many men they have serving under them so they could pocket the extra pay.

So you have an imperial government that can't issue orders effectively, and 600,000 shitty soldiers (over half of which only exist on paper).

So then the emperor needs to fight a war. His only hope is to rely on those barbarians over there who may or may not be Romanized, but they're useful because they're doing their own thing and aren't part of this broken system. The rest is history.

>>6346515

Thanks anon, i will take a look at the book

Imo it was changes in production and exchange in combination with external invasions

At the same time, Christianity is going to eventually destroy Empire

>>6345468
>ensured it's continuity
>empire still deteriorates
>probably thinks the Church is its successor as well

>>6346447
Shitposting is not dank.

>>6346566
>implying

>>6346038
Is this pic for real or is it trolling? Either way I don't think I've ever encountered something so idiotic in my time here

>>6346615
It's trolling on /lit/, its fact on /pol/

>>6346038
>that bigus dickus

>>6346320
>Rome had been decadent and corrupt since the time of the Republic
>People actually believe this.

This is one of those things that gets repeated enough times to become an accepted nugget in the minds of people not versed in the subject.
Yet they couldn't tell you exactly what decadent means in this context. It's the historical version of 4chan's buzzwords.

Rome peaked with Romulus

>>6346652
>Romulus
>not Aeneas

>>6346659

Rome peaked with Pericles

>>6346338
>eventually everybody was collecting bribes, slaves, freedman, and freemen alike
>bribing government officials became the only way to entice them to help you
>the entire command structure is now fucked because everyone in the chain of command is now self-interested
>you can't stop it because nobody wants to be the one guy not making huge profits
What we call corruption (taking bribes etc) was an accepted part of the patronage system that actually fulfilled many functions which a pre-modern bureaucracy couldn't meet. It's a phenomenon observable in multiple complex states, even outside of Europe and beyond antiquity.

>empire loses its ability to mobilize resources and troops
This had causes beyond mere corruption. Inflation is a big one.

>soldiers are now stationed in cities so they could bully locals for money
They were stationed in or near cities (centres of distribution) because they were paid in kind from the 3rd century, although there was a return to currency later on. It was impractical to transport so much food over long distances.

>barbarians become the only reliable soldiers, because the chieftains don't lie about how many men they have who can fight, and they aren't stationed in the cities becoming an ill-disciplined rabble
Roman soldiers were probably always more reliable than barbarians. I think the criticism of ill-disciplined soldiers comes from Christian authors attacking Diocletian's reforms to standardize army pay in kind and locate soldiers in or near cities. The use of barbarians was ultimately cheaper; the empire's financial difficulties prevented the continued use of well-trained Roman units. Barbarian settlement within the borders and the use of them as units was easier than mounting expensive defensive campaigns.

>>6345468
>ensured the continuity of it.

>Constantine makes Christianity State religion
>Couple of decades later, Empire falls
>Continuity

Topkek. This is what "historians" actually believe.

>>6346038
>being surprised by race mixing in the provinces
>paintings of dark Romans, Italians and Mediterraneans mistaken for blacks

>>6346693
Constantine did not make Christianity the state religion, nor did the empire fall a couple of decades after him.

>>6346680
Rome peaked with the Great Flood.

Rome peaked when the Lord said "there be light".

Rome was that light, and it's been fading ever since.

>>6346724
if rome was the light, what was the darkness?

>>6346724
>this guys implying the greatest thing that has happened to Rome wasn't the Void.

>>6346724
Personally, I'd rather live in the Middle Ages

>>6346748
Hope you like shitting yourself to death at the age of 27.

>>6346038
What was pointing to instances of race mixing meant to prove?

Is the creator of that pic actually surprised that there was some race mixing in an empire which spanned three continents and multiple races, who all congregated in the major urban centres?

If he looks at the history of medieval and later Europe (and non-Europe) he's in for a shock.

>>6346374
Most of the scientists killed by the church for "teaching controversial astronomy" were also outspoken heretics: see Bruno.

>Publicly denies the Trinity, Virgin Birth, and other core parts of Catholic doctrine
>Live in fucking Italy
>Doesn't apologize, despite being given multiple opportunities
>Executed (okay, that's a bit harsh)
>"Bbbut it's because the church hates Science!!"

>>6346787
It's meant to upset babby reactionaries who think that when you go back far enough in history you arrive in utopia at some point.

>>6346860
>being burned to death was Bruno's fault
>for thinking the three imaginary people are one
>being this stupid

>>6346860
He was executed for practicing the Scientific method. Either that or he was executed for speaking his mind, which was that there's no evidence for the Virgin Birth; take your pick.
>Unironically being reactionary trash on April 2nd

>>6346903
>He was executed for practicing the Scientific method. Either that or he was executed for speaking his mind,

>>6346893
>>6346903

Hey, when you live in that kind of environment you've gotta play by the rules.

Imagine if you took off your pants on the subway and rubbed your dick on all the seats. Would you be surprised when the cops bust your ass?
>INB4 my radical freedum makes the law against public indecency unjust

>>6346893
>>being burned to death was Bruno's fault
The point of the ebin greentext was to show that he wasn't executed for his scientific reasoning, but his theology

>>6346916
I'd be surprised if they burnt me at the stake.
>It's black people's fault when they got lynched in the early 20th century if they pushed for civil rights. Hey, when you live in that kind of environment you've gotta play by the rules.
>>6346930
Even worse

>>6346933
Being burnt at the stake was par for the course back then. He knew exactly what he was getting into, and chose not to apologize. Don't try to apply modern justice to a centuries-old case

>>6346903
>He was executed for practicing the Scientific method

Bruno was not a scientist, he was a Neoplatonist mystic, Kabbalist, and Hermeticist.

>>6346916
Surely you jest, anon.

>/pol/tards
>reddit-tier fedoras
>this isn't even about literature

What the fuck?

>>6346947
I'm all jokes today

It is national joking around day after all

>>6346951
Are you new here?

christianity didn't destroy rome, but christianity was a sign of roman decadence and the drift from democratic republic into oriental despotism.

>>6346951
/lit/ is now just /b/ with slightly higher literacy rates.

>>6346937
>>6346938
CIDF please just go

>>6346970

>>6346937
What a stupid opinion. Obviously we have a clearer view when we look back through history, we don't live in a time of absolute fear, bars and prohibitions on knowledge, and life being considered cheap. But taking up the position of cultural relativism isn't defending the actions of the church, Chesterton. If you're willing to abandon any moral law when it suits you, what tradition can you possibly say you truly uphold? The man insulted the church and was killed by a thin-skinned clergy who feared any asshole poking holes through their shoddy dogma was a threat, and it was. He was killed for doing what he loved and speaking against an absolute authority who had no legitimacy to their claim on truth, and had to kill people who asked them to justify their organization's existence.

I bet if he got raped by some Cardinals, he would've been asking for it because he should've known not to walk in alleys.
>>6346938
He could have been the village ass-wiper, and it'd been no difference.

>>6346960
>roman decadence
>oriental despotism
These terms are practically meaningless.

Also Christianity only became significant in the empire long after the Republic was over.

>>6347003
>if he got raped by some Cardinals, he would've been asking for it because he should've known not to walk in alleys.
:^)

>>6347006
>>roman decadence
>>oriental despotism
>These terms are practically meaningless.

no they aren't. you're just stupid.

Christianity was a last attempt to keep it alive. Funny how it launched an entirely new civilization in so doing.

>>6346960
Reminder the Christianity was struggling in irrelevancy with low membership for it's first 300 years. Thankfully when tax-breaks for Christians came, those numbers shot up.

Muslims did the same tax when they snatched chunks of the Byzantine Empire.

>>6347014
>Christianity was a last attempt to keep it alive.
How?

>>6347013
Explain how they aren't more than useless, vague generalizations that don't point to anything specific or concrete.

I don't know if it destroyed the empire, but it destroyed the soul of it. Banned philosophy in Greece. The biggest intellectual cache was kept in Byzantine Imperial Library, which the Crusaders burned, I think (thankfully most of it was taken out by the librarians when the Muslims invaded, so the loss to the Crusaders wasn't too great, and anyway the Pope was explicitly telling them not to do shit like that, so Christianity can't be held entirely responsible, if at all).

No doubt a lot of Christian scholars and such preserved certain parts of Roman culture, but presumably such intellectuals wouldn't need Christianity to exist, they were just Christian scholars because Christianity was the major apparatus of power at the time.

In Christianity's defense, it did create a new soul for Europe, and ended up salvaging what was left of Rome's with the Renaissance, which flourished in no small part because of church patronage. Liturgical music is also the foundation of Western art music, although how great music was before then is debatable, the Greeks apparently had polyphony.

All in all, Christianity did some great shit for Western culture, and some bad shit as well. Mixed bag. Neither aspect should be exaggerated at the expense of the other.

>>6347032

Read Paul Veyne's work on Constantine.

Without him it's not sure if Christianity would have ever taken off the way it did.

>>6346739

Africa

>>6347032
The Catholic Church was a concession to a centralized empire under Rome. Despite all the kings and barons, there was only one Pope, and they all (in theory) held him to be the highest religious authority. They also kept alive Latin as the lingua franca of Europe.

>>6346774
Middle Ages were pretty laid back compared to Roman times tbh. No more slavery, small skirmishes instead of enormous wars, decentralisation, cute kingdoms, lots of free time and holidays, drinking beer, singing songs, farming crops, nice religion, forgiveness for fuck ups, contemplative monasteries for the NEETS etc.