HISTORY SILLY THOUGHTS

Remove this Banner Ad

Log in to remove this ad.

MaddAdam said:
The idea owing the Romans for modern law is a bit overblown. In continental Europe yes but Australian law owes far more to the English common law. As for the law that really counts, as in the primacy of parliament and the people over the sovereign king, the old butcher Oliver Cronwell and then the Glorious Revolution of 1688 take the biscuits there. We owe as much to Hammurabi as Rome.

We tend to focus on the Western Empire and often the Republican or immediate post Republican era but this was actually just a small period of true Roman history. While the Western empire had effectively ceased to exist by 500AM (subsumed under waves of alternating refugees/assailants from the east and north) the eastern empire prospered and existed up until 1483AD.

The richest and most valuable Roman provinces were in North Africa (the breadbasket of Rome) and the Near East. Most of what we'd consider modern day Europe was a wild and thickly forested place inhabited by tribes largely hostile to Roman forces. The Romans never attempted to conquer germany, by and large letting the Alps act as a natural Hadrian's Wall.
Click to expand...

All true, but those later European, English ideas and laws had some basis from Rome. And words , we use Roman words and Greek words still don't we in law and general life. Rome got a lot of their stuff from the Greeks so it all follows.
 
GG said:
Before Rome tho there was an earlier civilization that invented common laws. Hammurabi was the guys name
Click to expand...

What we got from the Romans was not laws but the idea of our legal system, that being fair(ish) trials, individuals rights etc.

For example Rome was the first civilisation to develop law as an actual system. Before that laws were seen as sacred and could only be interpreted by priests.

Even the idea that a person is innocent until proven guilty comes from ancient rome.
 
Sydney Bloods said:
What we got from the Romans was not laws but the idea of our legal system, that being fair(ish) trials, individuals rights etc.

For example Rome was the first civilisation to develop law as an actual system. Before that laws were seen as sacred and could only be interpreted by priests.

Even the idea that a person is innocent until proven guilty comes from ancient rome.
Click to expand...
You mean like what Jesus got :p
 
Some feminists claim that if women were leaders, we would have peace or at least, less war than we do.

They insinuate war is a product of males. History though has a secret, a big secret. Cleopatra got into a lot of shit. Margret Thatcher sent Britain to war to alleviate her own poor polling. Hillary Clinton was in libya before the sovereign goveremnt actually fell, organizing deals with the various insurgent groups she helped fund and arm. Julia Gillards foreign minister was one of the loudest supporters and proponents of the air strikes against the sovereign government of Libya.
 
little graham said:
Some feminists claim that if women were leaders, we would have peace or at least, less war than we do.

They insinuate war is a product of males. History though has a secret, a big secret. Cleopatra got into a lot of shit. Margret Thatcher sent Britain to war to alleviate her own poor polling. Hillary Clinton was in libya before the sovereign goveremnt actually fell, organizing deals with the various insurgent groups she helped fund and arm. Julia Gillards foreign minister was one of the loudest supporters and proponents of the air strikes against the sovereign government of Libya.
Click to expand...
Power gets to people's heads. Absolutely crazy to make it out like it's a male thing.
 
Women politicians are worse because males think with their dicks (when it comes to power-tripping), whereas women being put down for centuries, have more of a crusade to show they're capable, over-compensating by being tougher and more aggressive than they are naturally.
 
Some women hated Gillard because she wasn't the woman they expected her to be. It's like, who do you think like, a man?

oh wait, they have dicks, you don't? um or do you?
 
Just on Hammurabi...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Code_of_Hammurabi

The Code of Hammurabi was one of several sets of laws in the ancient Near East.[8] The code of laws was arranged in orderly groups, so that everyone who read the laws would know what was required of them.[9] Earlier collections of laws include the Code of Ur-Nammu, king of Ur (ca. 2050 BC), the Laws of Eshnunna (ca. 1930 BC) and the codex of Lipit-Ishtar of Isin (ca. 1870 BC), while later ones include the Hittite laws, the Assyrian laws, and Mosaic Law.[10] These codes come from similar cultures in a relatively small geographical area, and they have passages which resemble each other.[11]
Click to expand...

All pre-date Rome.

Law as an actual system included.

Only one provision appears to impose obligations on an official; this provision establishes that a judge who reaches an incorrect decision is to be fined and removed from the bench permanently.[3]
Click to expand...
 
GG said:
You mean like what Jesus got :p
Click to expand...

Actually Jesus was charged under Jewish laws and faced a Jewish trial, This was because Jesus was a Jew and not a citizen of rome in a Jewish administered province.

The jew's took him before the Roman authorities for permission to execute after being found guilty if a crime under Jewish law not Roman law.

In atleast one account it's even suggested that Pontius (or whatever his name was) said he "found no fault with this man" but due to him refusing to say he wasn't a Jew he's bound by Jewish law, under Jewish law he was guilty as such the Roman's were forced to carry out the sentience.

Think of it in terms of limited sharia law in some country, I can't remember the exact one (it's an Asian country) they have police that check the lengths of Muslim women's dresses, if found guilty then they are taken before a Islamic court and tried once found guilty. A normal judge ensures the woman is guilty under sharia law and is then sentenced in line with the agreed upon punishment.

The state carries out the punishment but a non Muslim would never be charged with that offence nor tried by a sharia court.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

GG said:
Just on Hammurabi...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Code_of_Hammurabi



.
Click to expand...

I can see sense in this one..
Ex. Law #133: "If a man is taken prisoner in war, and there is a sustenance in his house, but his wife leave house and court, and go to another house: because this wife did not keep her court, and went to another house, she shall be judicially condemned and thrown into the water."
Click to expand...
But I also see it is that of a war monger trying to keep his soldiers on side.
 
little graham said:
I can see sense in this one..

But I also see it is that of a war monger trying to keep his soldiers on side.
Click to expand...
**** if a female strays or even just enjoys her god-given right to seek pleasure.
But a stud if a male does similar.

:rolleyes:
 
I constantly shake my head at planet Earth. It's like 2013 and they STILL have a ton of stupid draconian attitudes, beliefs, rules, etc. It's not even that long ago there was slavery, apartheid, women unable to vote or have rights, etc etc.

What a pathetic unintelligent backward species. Beam me up to 5013.
 
GG said:
**** if a female strays or even just enjoys her god-given right to seek pleasure.
But a stud if a male does similar.

:rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Didn't say that, I was coming from the point of view of a east timor vet I once worked with. he said to me that they were advised to sign a power of attorney over to their wives and girlfriends when the first UN force went in after the Indonesian withdrawal. many men came back to find their women had done a runner with their assets.

However the point you make does have merit, we have different standards for the same behavior depending on culture.
 
little graham said:
Didn't say that, I was coming from the point of view of a east timor vet I once worked with. he said to me that they were advised to sign a power of attorney over to their wives and girlfriends when the first UN force went in after the Indonesian withdrawal. many men came back to find their women had done a runner with their assets.

However the point you make does have merit, we have different standards for the same behavior depending on culture.
Click to expand...
Sorry, I wasn't intimating you suggested that, etc. That rolling eyes was just at ancient history. And how that attitude still exists.
 
GG said:
I constantly shake my head at planet Earth. It's like 2013 and they STILL have a ton of stupid draconian attitudes, beliefs, rules, etc. It's not even that long ago there was slavery, apartheid, women unable to vote or have rights, etc etc.

What a pathetic unintelligent backward species. Beam me up to 5013.
Click to expand...

Did you ever think that the reason we still draconian attitudes is because apartheid, slavery, women's rights are still fairly recent history?

Hell I saw a thing about racism and what not and the hatred continuing well into the 20th century.

What was interesting was they interviewed many African Americans who were only 3 or 4 generations removed from being slaves and how it affected their culture, suddenly the extreme racism (KKK and all that) in America made alot more sense, I mean if there's black people who grew up in the 20th century who's parents were slaves. It stands to reason there were white people who grew up in the 20th century who's parents were slavers.
 
Helicopter Punt said:
, but none of the countries would be talking to each other.
Click to expand...

I Imagine the G20 summit would be split between those that make up the G8 and the rest and gossip and bad mother the other group and vote accordingly...............

So pretty much nothing would change.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

HISTORY SILLY THOUGHTS

Similar threads

perthblue
What are your thoughts on home schooling?
2
Replies
34
Views
2K
Off The Couch
Off The Couch

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top