Before the 2nd Punic War there were no marble temples or villas in Rome. In the 180s bce the first marble temple was dedicated. It wasn't until decades later the first citizen built a like mansion. The temple of Jupiter Optimus Maximus was a wooden structure until...
...the 80s bce. To put this on a timeline, Julius Caesar was a young man by then and this was the most important religious site in Rome. Greek style statuary came in around the same time frame, and until then most temples had clay or wood images of the gods.
Roman society in general was devoid of most arts like theater, poetry, and sculpture. No literature, they had writing but didn't write things for entertainment. The first theater ever built in Rome was after 200 bce, and the Senate had it demolished as a threat to morality.
Marriage, at least the true sacred marriage, was nearly impossible to divorce from. The Romans had memory of the first to ever get a divorce. The society was something like the Spartans in how they treated religion and law.
If you looked at Rome as it was building its empire, you'd have seen a cramped and primitive city with no great marble edifices or statues. Brick and wood. Uncultured compared to the Greeks. Fanatically dedicated to their religion(theyd stop entire political processes over it).
The Romans even considered cooking beyond the simple meals they made to be a foreign and immoral practice.
The society transformed rapidly in Caesar's day and through the reign of Augustus. By the end it was cosmopolitan, hellenized, and obsessed with aesthetics and experiences.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Greek influence did far far more than the Jews at this point.
They wouldn't have considered sex to be degeneracy. Before early modernity or so, there wasn't much sense of privacy. People in medieval towns would walk naked to go bathe
People shared beds with other people, strangers or family depending on the situation. People would have sex and use the bathroom in front of other people. This only started to change 300 years ago, a bit earlier in some places. Among the wealthier first, who could afford it.
Medieval courts of say, the 11th century had dogs running around and men fighting duels to the death. 17th century palaces like Versailles had courtiers and servants alike shitting out in the open
The new testament is full of gnosticism and often looks like something gnostic that later got edited by mora rabbinic leaning Jews. Paul's epistles go back and forth with numerous contractions even within the same text because of this editing.
For example he says eating meat sacrificed to idols is okay and can't hurt you...then goes on to say absolutely don't do it or God may kill you. You had an editor trying to make it more rabbinic. Paul also calls the Torah a ministry of death graven in stone...
...and denies that God gave the Torah(he says angels gave it to Moses, in line with gnosticism) and certainly doesn't have Jesus as the source of the law.
But then we get the editor again trying to dial all this back.
I've seen this so many times from various angles. Starting in high school where I beat the fuck out of a guy and his gf was hitting on me a day later. I was disgusted at the time. Something about her complete lack of loyalty. I figured she'd feel bad about it all. Nope.
Even at my most cold and violent I always did understand basic loyalty. I wouldn't turn on my bro or my gf like that, I guess I thought back then women were similar to to that. She says she loves the guy, surely that counts for at least as much as it would for me.
You might tell me that it's just a phase. No, I've seen the pattern recur. In college a guy lost his gf of several years because he got punched in a drunken fight at a house party. Laid out in front of her, left him 3 days later.
Roger II King of Sicily. From the St. Mary of the Admiral cathedral in Palermo. Norman era artwork from the 12th century. The Normans(Frenchy Vikings) came down there as warlords and ended up taking to the local Greek, Italian cultures.
Roger II was Roman Catholic but also liked the Byzantine aesthetic. He depicted himself like a Byzantine ruler and had himself addressed as a Roman emperor. And the local artstyle was taken right off the Byzantines.
The Normans never had the best relationship with the Roman Pope. The Byzantine idea of the emperor over the church and receiving his authority directly from God, seems to be what this says here. Similar disputes with the Kaiser of the Holy Roman Empire took place as well.
Hindoos engage like crazy and one when reacts to something more come in. They are very supportive and like to retweet.
Pajeets also engage a lot. They also come one then another then a swarm, but usually to argue in your comments with each other or go on about stupid shit.
Aside from all that though this dumbfuck commie is attributing some cunning dogwhistle plan where it isn't needed. You don't need a secret scheme to appeal to Hindoo Nazis when it's basic shit she's saying. Islam wipes out polytheism, really damn obvious to all people.
We also see from studies that in western Europe the upper class(from at least the 14th century) had double the children of the lower classes and naturally replaced the lower class every few generations. This seems to have resulted in a more evenly distributed population iq wise.
Now really think about this. Modern western egalitarian drive makes a bit more sense. And it also tells something else. For all the talk about western compassion or whatever our comfortable condition and the power that made it possible...