from all the barbarians docus i've seen today, this one is the worst hahah bloodshed battle bloodshed fight fight one after the other, hard to imagine today's brits descend from all this violent tribal chaos
Why every time when i watch a movie about 'barbarians' some irritating guys always seem to complain about who we descent from with bloodgroup this and bloudgroup that...
We al descend from hairy monkeys ho scratched their asses with out shame...
So get over with it!! I'm blond and green-eyed does this mean i descent from a Saxon?? or a viking or someone else? NO!! It's possible but... you know this is crap!!
If you're white this doesn't mean that you are a saxon! There are white people in SPAIN!
The 'awful' maths is not mine. I teach English. Challenge, pocket, castle, veal, pork, count, Fletcher, mansion, manner...are Franco-Norman or Old French words. I could go on for hours.
Besides, I'm a Norman myself and keen on history. In 1066, very few Normans still spoke Norse. Their language was more Romance than Germanic after more than 150 years of living in what was North Western France. You don't have to believe me, just check more sources.
@Ingremance Right so we just have to list words and there provenance(?) and that proves the point does it?
My point about the Normans was not related to the language, but the fact they were not really french in the modern sense.
You could also go on for hours about germanic words if you wanted to. But you have made your choice and consider yourself a Norman and want to find info that supports that view
"Even William the Conqueror could not extinguish 600 years of progress..." He he. As a Norman, this lie/line makes me smile. A strange way to put it.The Norman kings, nobles, etc. and their descendants truly unified England, brought their architecture, culture and language. 28% of the English language comes from Franco-Norman - its largest influence, more so than Saxon itself. It must be hard to acknowledge a major inheritage from the continent in an age when French bashing is SO cool...
@Ingremance Your maths on the language influence is awful. The french norman influence is not greater than the germanic, its easy learn a little french then a little german, then think about English a bit.
Besides the normans were vikings who adopted parts of french culture, not the french.
@Ingremance I. The is language is German based and would agree that it was the Plantagenets from Henry II of Angevin till the 14th century that the English starting to use French words. The English spoke 25,000 words according to Tom Shippey (LOTR movie advisor) and others and there were 10,000 loan words introduced over 300 years.
The common tongue and most words spoken by the English daily are Anglo-Saxon German Danish.
@Ingremance II. Theres one thing yr forgetton the langauge explosion happened during the industrial transformation of the 18th cent and the colonising of other nations. I've mistyped the number of Old English words. It was 50k. You have over exagerated the number of Franco words by 15%........also it all means that the French don't have their own lang. The French originally spoke German, the Normans:- Norse, & the Gauls spoke a Celtic dialect....Yr all speaking Latin......with an accent!
@Ingremance III. Also yr completely wrong about the unification of England. It was a unified nation with the most advanced government, and taxation system in Western Europe. The system of Government and it's civil service was so advance it was easly for William to take over the country because all systems were in place. Why do you thing that it's impossible to take of Afganistan now? If England or France was taken over now by Afganistan it would be easier than us taken the Afgans
@Ingremance IV. The Franks never had full control over their new nation. They always had problems with Burgudians, and the country was to vast to rule effectively. At least with the English when the Danes took over the North the house of Wessex took it back for his family and the English.
Also after king John, the Barons (who signed Magna Carta, only one of which was truely English) became Franco-phobic & they & descendants inter-marry and become English.
@mrken001 I am not talking about southern european. I am talking about northern european. That is what is white to me. I do not see slavs where I live so I do not think about them often.
@SpadaccinoLuciano But then the Germanic tribes starting expanding south wards and settled and probobly raped alot of latin women in what will be Northen italy. and makes millions of italians white and some dark mostly around the southern regions witch are alot poorer then the north aswell.
@12345678909269 Yes, but Latin genes are dominant, it would take several generations to "whiten" them, which is why most Spaniards, Southern French, and Italians are darker skinned with latin features. We're still Latin, and we're still not white.
Amazing how much detail and imagination portrayed as fact. A good story but there should be a disclaimer as this is from the History Channel. This seems based on the scant texts there exists and as mentioned by others ignores more recent DNA finds. The languages are quite amusing and quite rightly kept at low volume. Having said that, I enjoyed the series and am able to take with a generous pinch of salt.
@LeeHoxton1 They have been looking for DNA evidence that it hapopened as later anglo saxon historians like Gildas and Bede suggest, some evidence has suggested it did happen other evidence has shown it did not, anyone that says the evidence shows it did not happen is wrong, it may not have been like this.
@dorianleakey I read Oppenheimer & Sykes' 06 books recently & hadn't been interested in history since I started drinking 15 years ago, but got back into it after reading the books. I thought they must be correct but researching genetic mapping of Europe, it shows that they were wrong. If the English paternal line was directly from Iberia we'd all be a YDNA marker 312/116 undefined. That Y marker is one of the earliest to arrive & colonised Europe. It's right across Wales & Ere.
@dorianleakey II. I've looked at what's published and if R1b U106 & I1a-M253 are markers suggesting the large scale Anglo-Saxon Viking Dane migration, the fact is that they are not exclusive racial markers. L21 & U152 branches out from the Alps and arrives in Germania, so in the 1-500 a.d. the Dane penin has mostlt I1a, U106, L11* and about 10% L21 & 10% U152, so in England U152 & a small number of L21 would have arrived with the Anglo-Saxons. R1a arrives from the east later.....
@dorianleakey III. so I am sure that R1a arrived with the Angles, Jutes and the Danes. The French (Normans) don't make any impact of England. The Normans were a admix across Northern France.
I estimating that i.e. in Essex if R1b is 60% split 30% U106, 20% L21 and 10% U152,
then U106 is A-S/Viking. 6/10 U152 is A-S/V. And if U106 have displaced 312* & L21 and significant number of L21 would have arrived with the A-S/V.....L21 isn't exclusively Celtic but there are subclades that are
@dorianleakey IV. going on a bit...Any opinion on this would be appreciated.....moving on
I1a is both A-S and Viking. A down stream marker of I-P37 is probably A-S although very low %....as is I2b-M223
As for E1 which is extremely high in Wales and is thought to be from early Neolithic hunters and retired Roman Soldiers, it is extremely low in England. 2.5% This could be an A-S admix, Roman soldiers, and earlier hunter-gatherers.......But it's so low and insignificant.
@LeeHoxton1 I feel a bit daunted by the amount of research you have done but my thoughts are that people will find the research tends to show what they expect it too unless its really clearly not in support of the opinion they already hold.
I suspect we will learn the truth from how they examine each others research. But you have looked into this more than me to be honest.
@dorianleakey As I've mentioned when I read Sykes & Oppenheimers' books last year I immediate believed most of us had arrived directly from Iberia as this upload has stated, so I hadn't been obsessed with the idea that the English had arrived with the A-S/Vikings. I will admit that it's not a certainty that all of the marker suggest that they all arrived with A-S/Vikings, but I'd put my money on it.....not my house!
@dorianleakey II. The Romans wrote extensively about the Germans. A. Marcellenus said that he couldn't begin to count the number of Goths crossing the Danube. There could have been as many as 200K. That's only 2 Wembley stadiums full! So it is plausable that over 2 centuries 200,000 Anglo-Saxons arrived. If only we had a definitive written a/c by the Romans.
@dorianleakey P.S. Looking specifically at the YDNA R1b U106 downstream marker it's spread is parallel to the movement of the German tribes. It a/c's for 1/3 of English YDNA in densest areas of Anglo-Saxon settlements. It's extremely low in France & Italy so if this movement had been going on for 1500 prior to Rome's fall we'd see higher levels of U106 in France. It is only high in England, Frisian, Germany and Denmark
@CerdicTheGreat What YDNA markers are you talking about exactly? I can't remember if I asked that before....
Please don't mention any nonsense like the English arrived directly from Iberia! Because the English ancestors were never in Iberia..I won't elaborate on which idiot advocated that.
The makers of these 'documentaries' (americans...) have reduced the history of the Island Brittanica to a series of 're-enactment groups' fighting in the same costumes and locations to represent the 'hollywoodised' version......typical and quite innacurate!!
This entire early narrative is from a misreading of Nennius, and yet, as of 12:10, no one has mentioned his name. It is gob-smacklingly ignorant. Just as a for-instance, there is no evidence of poor crop output or famine; yet the documentary repeats this fantasy. The more likely reason, according to the historical documentary evidence here (and elsewhere) is that the Britons decide that with the Pict menace gone, they didn't have to pay the Saxons for their services -- just like the Romans did.
Not to mention that the Saxons were placed in such a place as to defend Britain from invasion from the Continent, and not the Irish (Scotti) or Picts (Caledonii). Or that the Romans did not recall limitanei (frontier troops, like those stationed in Britain); or that Arthur is always not equated with Ambrosius -- Merlin is equated with Ambrosius; or that genetic studies have shown that less than 20% of all genetic materials in the British Isles is undeniably A/S in origin.
@DneilB007 Chritian Capelli in 02 come to conclusion that Eng. DNA was 55% continental Saxon or Danish. Weale & Thomas agreed that it could be as much as 90% across East Eng. & Midlands. That was sampling in 2002/3. Myers/Sims/Jim Wilson, & Faux have found late dated mutation in R1b that show that the paternity of the English is from the Dutch, Deutscher, Danish penninsula.
Bryan Sykes in 2005 underestimates Saxons incursion but says that it's 20%
@DneilB007 II. Sykes underestimates because he see R1b as indiginous, but he was incorrect. From his publication it appeared that he took I1 as the Saxon, Danish Y chromo, dismissing R1b as Saxon. There are two major mutations R1b S21/U106/S28/U152 to consider which link the English with Friesland and have a joint ancestor. about 75% of Frisians samples have the mut. & 40% of English. 10% of Eng. have S28 but it's not clear whether it's come from Angles, Cimbric, or Belgae
@DneilB007 According to geneticists Welsh samples (10% in Eastern Welsh boarder) show I1 as being very old & almost exclusive to Wales. Whereas in Eastern England there are variations, which link English samples to continental Europe (Danish pennin) There are mutations exclusive to a British hunter-gatherer ancestor (I1-M284) But there are a lot of I1-M253 which links us to Danish pennin. These mutations are young so it's not a migration across Doggerland
@DneilB007 The Welsh samples taken are different, as is the indiginous Irish. Wales, Spain, France have little of these mutations. Which are being called or referred to as Ango-Saxon, or northern continental.
Bryan Sykes 6000 samples produced Haplogroups of England in the ratio:- 60% R1b 25% I1 7% R1a
Strangely enough Cornwall's ratio was completely different at 80% R1b 12% I1 & 2% R1a
Pagan may very well be a city in south east asia. but here, pagan is latin for "country-dweller" or "rustic". the early christians in roman cities used it for the people living in the countryside who still clung to the old gods. Also, no real case can be made that the Romans were any more or less barbaric than the barbarians. Both sides were bent on conquest plunder and domination. The Romans may seem more civilized because they had codified law that applied only to Roman Citizens
Nero would light the hair of Christians on fire and use them as torches in festivals, hindus kill thousands of christians every year in India, In edo Japan samurai would hunt and kill any christian with a determination that would impress the T2000 from Terminator. Pagan was a city in south east asia, they were Buddhist. I would rather call the european's Polytheists, as they had nothing to do with the ancient city of Pagan.
Nonsence documentary. Primative and threachery culture? Fearsome paganisme? Does not make any sence! They had a culture and code with true loyalty, that's why they were so well trained. Paganisme also isn't something to fear. I would fear chistianity in that time more than paganism. And besides that, the Romans were the true barbarians.. they conquered great parts of Europe and Africa and massacred thousends and thousends of people!
@BudoMaarten back then everyone was killing each other. Polytheists killing Christians. Christians killing Polytheists. Christians killing Muslims. Muslims killing Christians. The Romans took on the enemies military and gave new citizens a great deal of freedom. If you are talking of Carthage, they tossed toddlers in fires. Rome was doing the civilized world a favor eliminating them. Any religion with to much power and a military can be a threat due to our zealous natures.
from all the barbarians docus i've seen today, this one is the worst hahah bloodshed battle bloodshed fight fight one after the other, hard to imagine today's brits descend from all this violent tribal chaos
nephildevil 3 weeks ago
Why every time when i watch a movie about 'barbarians' some irritating guys always seem to complain about who we descent from with bloodgroup this and bloudgroup that...
We al descend from hairy monkeys ho scratched their asses with out shame...
So get over with it!! I'm blond and green-eyed does this mean i descent from a Saxon?? or a viking or someone else? NO!! It's possible but... you know this is crap!!
If you're white this doesn't mean that you are a saxon! There are white people in SPAIN!
utubetubernub 3 weeks ago 3
The 'awful' maths is not mine. I teach English. Challenge, pocket, castle, veal, pork, count, Fletcher, mansion, manner...are Franco-Norman or Old French words. I could go on for hours.
Besides, I'm a Norman myself and keen on history. In 1066, very few Normans still spoke Norse. Their language was more Romance than Germanic after more than 150 years of living in what was North Western France. You don't have to believe me, just check more sources.
Ingremance 1 month ago
@Ingremance Right so we just have to list words and there provenance(?) and that proves the point does it?
My point about the Normans was not related to the language, but the fact they were not really french in the modern sense.
You could also go on for hours about germanic words if you wanted to. But you have made your choice and consider yourself a Norman and want to find info that supports that view
dorianleakey 1 month ago
"Even William the Conqueror could not extinguish 600 years of progress..." He he. As a Norman, this lie/line makes me smile. A strange way to put it.The Norman kings, nobles, etc. and their descendants truly unified England, brought their architecture, culture and language. 28% of the English language comes from Franco-Norman - its largest influence, more so than Saxon itself. It must be hard to acknowledge a major inheritage from the continent in an age when French bashing is SO cool...
Ingremance 1 month ago
@Ingremance Your maths on the language influence is awful. The french norman influence is not greater than the germanic, its easy learn a little french then a little german, then think about English a bit.
Besides the normans were vikings who adopted parts of french culture, not the french.
dorianleakey 1 month ago
@Ingremance I. The is language is German based and would agree that it was the Plantagenets from Henry II of Angevin till the 14th century that the English starting to use French words. The English spoke 25,000 words according to Tom Shippey (LOTR movie advisor) and others and there were 10,000 loan words introduced over 300 years.
The common tongue and most words spoken by the English daily are Anglo-Saxon German Danish.
LeeHoxton1 1 month ago
@Ingremance II. Theres one thing yr forgetton the langauge explosion happened during the industrial transformation of the 18th cent and the colonising of other nations. I've mistyped the number of Old English words. It was 50k. You have over exagerated the number of Franco words by 15%........also it all means that the French don't have their own lang. The French originally spoke German, the Normans:- Norse, & the Gauls spoke a Celtic dialect....Yr all speaking Latin......with an accent!
LeeHoxton1 1 month ago
@Ingremance III. Also yr completely wrong about the unification of England. It was a unified nation with the most advanced government, and taxation system in Western Europe. The system of Government and it's civil service was so advance it was easly for William to take over the country because all systems were in place. Why do you thing that it's impossible to take of Afganistan now? If England or France was taken over now by Afganistan it would be easier than us taken the Afgans
LeeHoxton1 1 month ago
@Ingremance IV. The Franks never had full control over their new nation. They always had problems with Burgudians, and the country was to vast to rule effectively. At least with the English when the Danes took over the North the house of Wessex took it back for his family and the English.
Also after king John, the Barons (who signed Magna Carta, only one of which was truely English) became Franco-phobic & they & descendants inter-marry and become English.
French starts dying by 1350
LeeHoxton1 1 month ago
poor sheep 03:04
haloreachlover99 1 month ago
If you are white, you are descended from one of these tribes, just be fucking proud.
ExecutionerOfThySon 1 month ago 10
Comment removed
mrken001 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ExecutionerOfThySon Slavs are white and they are not from any of these tribes (?)
mrken001 1 month ago
@mrken001 I am not talking about southern european. I am talking about northern european. That is what is white to me. I do not see slavs where I live so I do not think about them often.
ExecutionerOfThySon 1 month ago
@ExecutionerOfThySon Are Romans and greeks white to?
12345678909269 1 week ago
@12345678909269 Hell fucking no! We're brown! Romans are Latin!
SpadaccinoLuciano 4 days ago
@SpadaccinoLuciano But then the Germanic tribes starting expanding south wards and settled and probobly raped alot of latin women in what will be Northen italy. and makes millions of italians white and some dark mostly around the southern regions witch are alot poorer then the north aswell.
12345678909269 3 days ago
@12345678909269 Yes, but Latin genes are dominant, it would take several generations to "whiten" them, which is why most Spaniards, Southern French, and Italians are darker skinned with latin features. We're still Latin, and we're still not white.
SpadaccinoLuciano 3 days ago
@SpadaccinoLuciano Allright Allright, your not white we get it. Go back to Africa then
12345678909269 3 days ago
@12345678909269 You display the ignorance of whites that makes it clear you never should have risen above barbarian status.
SpadaccinoLuciano 3 days ago
knitted maille coifs...
ajcvikingboy 2 months ago
Amazing how much detail and imagination portrayed as fact. A good story but there should be a disclaimer as this is from the History Channel. This seems based on the scant texts there exists and as mentioned by others ignores more recent DNA finds. The languages are quite amusing and quite rightly kept at low volume. Having said that, I enjoyed the series and am able to take with a generous pinch of salt.
CerdicTheGreat 2 months ago 6
@CerdicTheGreat What DNA finds?
LeeHoxton1 2 months ago
@LeeHoxton1 They have been looking for DNA evidence that it hapopened as later anglo saxon historians like Gildas and Bede suggest, some evidence has suggested it did happen other evidence has shown it did not, anyone that says the evidence shows it did not happen is wrong, it may not have been like this.
dorianleakey 1 month ago
@dorianleakey I read Oppenheimer & Sykes' 06 books recently & hadn't been interested in history since I started drinking 15 years ago, but got back into it after reading the books. I thought they must be correct but researching genetic mapping of Europe, it shows that they were wrong. If the English paternal line was directly from Iberia we'd all be a YDNA marker 312/116 undefined. That Y marker is one of the earliest to arrive & colonised Europe. It's right across Wales & Ere.
LeeHoxton1 1 month ago
@dorianleakey II. I've looked at what's published and if R1b U106 & I1a-M253 are markers suggesting the large scale Anglo-Saxon Viking Dane migration, the fact is that they are not exclusive racial markers. L21 & U152 branches out from the Alps and arrives in Germania, so in the 1-500 a.d. the Dane penin has mostlt I1a, U106, L11* and about 10% L21 & 10% U152, so in England U152 & a small number of L21 would have arrived with the Anglo-Saxons. R1a arrives from the east later.....
LeeHoxton1 1 month ago
@dorianleakey III. so I am sure that R1a arrived with the Angles, Jutes and the Danes. The French (Normans) don't make any impact of England. The Normans were a admix across Northern France.
I estimating that i.e. in Essex if R1b is 60% split 30% U106, 20% L21 and 10% U152,
then U106 is A-S/Viking. 6/10 U152 is A-S/V. And if U106 have displaced 312* & L21 and significant number of L21 would have arrived with the A-S/V.....L21 isn't exclusively Celtic but there are subclades that are
LeeHoxton1 1 month ago
@dorianleakey IV. going on a bit...Any opinion on this would be appreciated.....moving on
I1a is both A-S and Viking. A down stream marker of I-P37 is probably A-S although very low %....as is I2b-M223
As for E1 which is extremely high in Wales and is thought to be from early Neolithic hunters and retired Roman Soldiers, it is extremely low in England. 2.5% This could be an A-S admix, Roman soldiers, and earlier hunter-gatherers.......But it's so low and insignificant.
Any ideas?
LeeHoxton1 1 month ago
@LeeHoxton1 I feel a bit daunted by the amount of research you have done but my thoughts are that people will find the research tends to show what they expect it too unless its really clearly not in support of the opinion they already hold.
I suspect we will learn the truth from how they examine each others research. But you have looked into this more than me to be honest.
dorianleakey 1 month ago
@dorianleakey As I've mentioned when I read Sykes & Oppenheimers' books last year I immediate believed most of us had arrived directly from Iberia as this upload has stated, so I hadn't been obsessed with the idea that the English had arrived with the A-S/Vikings. I will admit that it's not a certainty that all of the marker suggest that they all arrived with A-S/Vikings, but I'd put my money on it.....not my house!
LeeHoxton1 1 month ago
@dorianleakey II. The Romans wrote extensively about the Germans. A. Marcellenus said that he couldn't begin to count the number of Goths crossing the Danube. There could have been as many as 200K. That's only 2 Wembley stadiums full! So it is plausable that over 2 centuries 200,000 Anglo-Saxons arrived. If only we had a definitive written a/c by the Romans.
LeeHoxton1 1 month ago
@dorianleakey P.S. Looking specifically at the YDNA R1b U106 downstream marker it's spread is parallel to the movement of the German tribes. It a/c's for 1/3 of English YDNA in densest areas of Anglo-Saxon settlements. It's extremely low in France & Italy so if this movement had been going on for 1500 prior to Rome's fall we'd see higher levels of U106 in France. It is only high in England, Frisian, Germany and Denmark
LeeHoxton1 1 month ago
@CerdicTheGreat Yeah they tried to make the Germanic languages sound as guttural as possible
DestroyerOfSense000 2 months ago
@CerdicTheGreat What YDNA markers are you talking about exactly? I can't remember if I asked that before....
Please don't mention any nonsense like the English arrived directly from Iberia! Because the English ancestors were never in Iberia..I won't elaborate on which idiot advocated that.
LeeHoxton1 1 month ago
The makers of these 'documentaries' (americans...) have reduced the history of the Island Brittanica to a series of 're-enactment groups' fighting in the same costumes and locations to represent the 'hollywoodised' version......typical and quite innacurate!!
macbrack04 2 months ago 2
@macbrack04 I guess the only way for it to be realistic is to find some real Celts and Saxons then :|
DestroyerOfSense000 2 months ago
This entire early narrative is from a misreading of Nennius, and yet, as of 12:10, no one has mentioned his name. It is gob-smacklingly ignorant. Just as a for-instance, there is no evidence of poor crop output or famine; yet the documentary repeats this fantasy. The more likely reason, according to the historical documentary evidence here (and elsewhere) is that the Britons decide that with the Pict menace gone, they didn't have to pay the Saxons for their services -- just like the Romans did.
DneilB007 4 months ago
Not to mention that the Saxons were placed in such a place as to defend Britain from invasion from the Continent, and not the Irish (Scotti) or Picts (Caledonii). Or that the Romans did not recall limitanei (frontier troops, like those stationed in Britain); or that Arthur is always not equated with Ambrosius -- Merlin is equated with Ambrosius; or that genetic studies have shown that less than 20% of all genetic materials in the British Isles is undeniably A/S in origin.
DneilB007 4 months ago
@DneilB007 Chritian Capelli in 02 come to conclusion that Eng. DNA was 55% continental Saxon or Danish. Weale & Thomas agreed that it could be as much as 90% across East Eng. & Midlands. That was sampling in 2002/3. Myers/Sims/Jim Wilson, & Faux have found late dated mutation in R1b that show that the paternity of the English is from the Dutch, Deutscher, Danish penninsula.
Bryan Sykes in 2005 underestimates Saxons incursion but says that it's 20%
LeeHoxton1 3 months ago
@DneilB007 II. Sykes underestimates because he see R1b as indiginous, but he was incorrect. From his publication it appeared that he took I1 as the Saxon, Danish Y chromo, dismissing R1b as Saxon. There are two major mutations R1b S21/U106/S28/U152 to consider which link the English with Friesland and have a joint ancestor. about 75% of Frisians samples have the mut. & 40% of English. 10% of Eng. have S28 but it's not clear whether it's come from Angles, Cimbric, or Belgae
LeeHoxton1 3 months ago
@DneilB007 According to geneticists Welsh samples (10% in Eastern Welsh boarder) show I1 as being very old & almost exclusive to Wales. Whereas in Eastern England there are variations, which link English samples to continental Europe (Danish pennin) There are mutations exclusive to a British hunter-gatherer ancestor (I1-M284) But there are a lot of I1-M253 which links us to Danish pennin. These mutations are young so it's not a migration across Doggerland
LeeHoxton1 3 months ago
@DneilB007 The Welsh samples taken are different, as is the indiginous Irish. Wales, Spain, France have little of these mutations. Which are being called or referred to as Ango-Saxon, or northern continental.
Bryan Sykes 6000 samples produced Haplogroups of England in the ratio:- 60% R1b 25% I1 7% R1a
Strangely enough Cornwall's ratio was completely different at 80% R1b 12% I1 & 2% R1a
What genetic publication did you read?
LeeHoxton1 3 months ago
Comment removed
DneilB007 4 months ago
Pagan may very well be a city in south east asia. but here, pagan is latin for "country-dweller" or "rustic". the early christians in roman cities used it for the people living in the countryside who still clung to the old gods. Also, no real case can be made that the Romans were any more or less barbaric than the barbarians. Both sides were bent on conquest plunder and domination. The Romans may seem more civilized because they had codified law that applied only to Roman Citizens
matchstickdave 4 months ago
Nero would light the hair of Christians on fire and use them as torches in festivals, hindus kill thousands of christians every year in India, In edo Japan samurai would hunt and kill any christian with a determination that would impress the T2000 from Terminator. Pagan was a city in south east asia, they were Buddhist. I would rather call the european's Polytheists, as they had nothing to do with the ancient city of Pagan.
evildnalor 4 months ago
Nonsence documentary. Primative and threachery culture? Fearsome paganisme? Does not make any sence! They had a culture and code with true loyalty, that's why they were so well trained. Paganisme also isn't something to fear. I would fear chistianity in that time more than paganism. And besides that, the Romans were the true barbarians.. they conquered great parts of Europe and Africa and massacred thousends and thousends of people!
BudoMaarten 4 months ago
@BudoMaarten back then everyone was killing each other. Polytheists killing Christians. Christians killing Polytheists. Christians killing Muslims. Muslims killing Christians. The Romans took on the enemies military and gave new citizens a great deal of freedom. If you are talking of Carthage, they tossed toddlers in fires. Rome was doing the civilized world a favor eliminating them. Any religion with to much power and a military can be a threat due to our zealous natures.
evildnalor 4 months ago
AWESOME!! Thank you for uploading these awesome informative and very entertaining videos!!
TheCrazyCosplayerz 6 months ago
hey thanks for uploading these vids :)
MsMetallicgirl 7 months ago