[undefined discussion subject]

Just now, Nescio said:

Yes, the term genocide was coined only in 1943, however, with specifically the archetypical Armenian (and Assyrian and Greek) genocide(s) of 1915-1923(?) in mind, therefore applying this modern concept retrospectively is not inappropiate.

That's why it's an interesting discussion  

 

Just now, Nescio said:

Nonetheless, mass murder is not necessarily genocide. Intentional ethnic cleansing is.

Agreed, random mass murder doesn't equate to genocide... The Roman massacres I've been referring to aren't random killings though. 

 

Just now, Nescio said:

I don't consider just being at the wrong place at the wrong time, e.g. Ieper/Ypres, Dresden, or Nagasaki, genocides; would you?

Nope, because those places were part of a larger demographic/cultural/ethnic/religious whole, which weren't ever targeted in their entirety e.g. wiping out the Belgians, Germans or Japanese was never on anybody's agenda. Wiping out the Atuatuci after they rejected Roman authority was part of the agenda. It wasn't an accident, and it targeted the tribe in its entirety.

 

5 minutes ago, Nescio said:

Don't you think the broad way you seem to apply the term could make almost all sieges, bombings, colonizations, military campaigns, etc. genocides?

As I said, it's about what you're targeting. Carthage, the city was destroyed, but Carthaginians as a people and a culture were targeted in their entirety as well, making it genocide... The same goes for Corinth.

A random massacre during a random siege doesn't equate to genocide, unless the entirety of a people, culture, history traditions or religion are embedded in that city (or town). It depends on the political reality on the ground, and the scope of the target. If all the Germans were rounded up in Dresden, and then Dresden was bombed, for example, that would constitute genocide. Since that wasn't the case, it's not...

In the case of the Atuatuci, the Lusitanians, the Carthaginians, and the annihilation of Corinth, we see 4 unequivocal cases of genocide, committed by Rome. And those are just the clearly documented ones. 

[undefined discussion subject]

Ok, so let me just remark that the silliness of discussing "genocide" in the ancient world is not lost on me... The term came into existence in 1944...

We're just testing wether or not the word can be applied to the actions of the Romans, e.g., in a modern international court of law, would the Romans be tried under The Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, as defined by the United Nations General Assembly, as:

Quote

Article 2 of the Convention defines genocide as

...any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

(a) Killing members of the group;

(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;

(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;

(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;

(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

— Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, Article 2^[4]

Article 3 defines the crimes that can be punished under the convention:

(a) Genocide;

(b) Conspiracy to commit genocide;

(c) Direct and public incitement to commit genocide;

(d) Attempt to commit genocide;

(e) Complicity in genocide.

— Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, Article 3^[4]

 

Under the only internationally accepted definition of genocide, the actions of the Romans, in many instances, WITHOUT QUESTION, amount to genocide...

 

8 hours ago, Nescio said:

Even according to Roman standards, what Galba did was wrong.

That's completely besides the question and somewhat inappropriate... Hitlers actions in Auschwitz and other sites were repugnant "even" according to German standards... The fact that Galba wasn't even punished just rubs salt in the wound.

 

8 hours ago, Nescio said:

Later, as a consul, he was not allowed to return to Hispania when he tried to gain command of the Roman army there.

Poor Galba... Poor Consul Galba... They even promoted this clown.... smh... 

 

8 hours ago, Nescio said:

The Atuatuci were besieged by the Romans, they surrendered, opened their gates, handed over some weapons, and Caesar recalled his soldiers in the evening. However, the Atuatuci then launched a night attack on the Romans, during which many were killed, the Romans won, and retook the city. The survivors were sold into slavery.

The sale of prisoners of war as slaves was common practice. As a consequence tribes could die out, yes. However, there is a difference between "to destroy that people, let's enslave them" and "we now have these prisoners of war, let's sell them". Was it Caesar's intention to destroy the Atuatuci? Not really, therefore I won't call it genocide.

.... The Atuatuci ceased to exist as a people, as a deliberate attempt by Caesar to eradicate their opposition to Rome, and send a clear message to other tribes. 

• Step 1: march your Roman legions into sovereign non-Roman territory. (a territory known to despise Romans) 
• Step 2: terrorize the people into submission
• Step 3: defeat a last desperate attempt of a free people to maintain their freedom
• Step 4: Sell the entire tribe, old men, women and children (non-combatants) into slavery as punishment for their resistance to Rome
• Step 5: congratulate yourself on this "not-genocide"

I can just imagine Julius scratching his head after the whole affair: "Did we just "accidentally" annihilate an entire tribe? Again? Oops.... Luckily the term genocide doesn't get coined until 1944, so I think we're good".  

 

9 hours ago, Nescio said:

Correlation does not imply causation.

That's not the question, unless you're trying to argue that the Romans accidentally drove entire tribes into extinction... I'm not receptive to that kind of rhetoric... If you march tens of thousands of trained fighters into a sovereign territory that doesn't belong to you, then kill all the resisting enemy combatants, and subsequently sell off their women children and elderly as slaves, while demolishing their strongholds and burning their fields, and inviting other, more friendly tribes to inhabit the area, effectively erasing the the original ethnic, cultural, tribal or even linguistic character of the region, you're committing genocide... Not just any old genocide, no, we're talking textbook genocide here.

 

9 hours ago, Nescio said:

Tribes that opposed the Romans were targeted, yes, but were they targeted because of their tribe (genocide) or because they opposed the Romans? Hard to say and hard to separate the two.

Dude, it's not hard to say... "but were they targeted because of their tribe (genocide) or because they opposed the Romans?" ... Rhetorics... The TRIBES resisted Rome, so those entire TRIBES were targeted and disappeared off the face of the earth, as a result of mass-murder, mass enslavement and deportation (let's not forget rape) and the destruction of their property and livelihood... The fact that other tribes were left intact, even patronised, proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that these were targeted extermination campaigns... Whether they decided to exterminate them when they first set off on campaign, or whether they only decided to exterminate them after having subjugated them already is irrelevant. The point is that there was a deliberate effort to erase from Gaul, any people (tribe) that resisted Rome.     

 

9 hours ago, Nescio said:

And innocent until proven guilty

 Caesar was not innocent, he confessed to many of his crimes in a rather braggadocious manner in his De Bello Gallico, which would definitely get him convicted on innumerable counts of genocide under The Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, as defined by the United Nations General Assembly.

 

On another note, the examples discussed here are only some of the more clearly documented events. The majority of genocides in the ancient world would not have even entered the records, simply because the whole point of genocide is to erase a people...

[undefined discussion subject]

38 minutes ago, Nescio said:

However, these two cases were exceptional; I can't think of any other instances of genocide.

Servius Sulpicius Galba's massacre of the Lusitani in 150 BC is a pretty blatant example of a Roman committed genocide... 10.000 dead, 20.000 sold into slavery....

Murdering the living daylights out of the Atuatuci after they rejected Roman domination and counterattacked in a last desperate gasp for freedom, and then selling 53.000 survivors in to slavery is another compelling example...

 

38 minutes ago, Nescio said:

if it resisted and was taken by force, it was razed and its population enslaved; that doesn't make it genocide.

lol, actually it does... The wholesale destruction of a community, with intent, is the definition of genocide...

Nobody "accidentally" sells an entire town or city into slavery...

 

38 minutes ago, Nescio said:

a significant part of Gaul's population died, many because of starvation, since prolonged warfare disrupted food production and led to chronic shortages.

That's also a part of genocide... 

 

38 minutes ago, Nescio said:

there is not any evidence that the Romans did intend to wipe out the Gauls;

Completely not taking into account that "Gaul" is a Roman invention, that says next to nothing about the actual cultural and political nature of the tribes and states existing in Gaul... Celts have a shared culture and language, to a degree, sure, but identified themselves primarily by tribe. Caesar and everybody else knew these tribes, their political disposition, and knew what the results of marching legions into their homelands would be. They specifically targeted some of these tribes for wholesale destruction. Through murder, enslavement and deportation, as well deforestation, burning of settlements and farms. Textbook examples of genocide...

[Graphics Improvements]

I barely understand what's going on here... But I like it! 

I love how the dof comes into its own now..

[undefined discussion subject]

@Alexandermb Daaayum... Good luck... Please stay away from American bombs though... Things can always get worse (look at Syria), so be careful what you wish for... How come Maduro is so entrenched??? The army supports him, I guess, but isn't the army part of the people, or are there other divisions I'm not seeing, because even a socialist can see the guy is messing up the otherwise beautiful country... 

[undefined discussion subject]

1 hour ago, Alexandermb said:

Missing leaders from all sides, last proper lider was massacred while on transmisision and the actual "Oposition" are just traitors so yes intervention is needed no matter what is said on TV or what the false liders says.

Feel free to elaborate...  "last proper lider", who? "intervention is needed" from who?

[undefined discussion subject]

@Nescio I have a very strong preference for using dictionary definitions of words... Genocide doesn't mean the total destruction of a people, as many think.. There are still 3 million Tutsis, for example..

Quote

Definition of genocide

: the deliberate and systematic destruction of a racial, political, or cultural group

 

 

Genocide is intentional action to destroy a people (usually defined as an ethnic, national, racial, or religious group) in whole or in part. The hybrid word "genocide" is a combination of the Greek word génos ("race, people") and the Latin suffix -cide ("act of killing").^[1] The United Nations Genocide Convention, which was established in 1948, defines genocide as "acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group".^[2][3]

Romans were genocidal  They wiped out peoples, cultures, languages and religions, in a deliberate policy of Romanisation... It doesn't mean because they tolerated and even patronised some, that others weren't wiped from the pages of history... 

Necrometrics: Body count of the Roman Empire:

These are by no means precise/absolute numbers, but they give a good idea..:

http://necrometrics.com/romestat.htm

 

Those numbers by no means include all the Roman massacres... For example, studying Kushite history, I learnt of the sack of Napata, its destruction, killings and deportation of its population in to slavery are not included, but are mentioned by Strabo and possibly the Kushites themselves in the Hamadab Stele. No specific numbers are given, but there were dozens of towns and cities between the Roman border and Napata, so what happened there? The area was reported to be largely abandoned a few generations later. The Roman conquest and destruction of Germa (of the Garamantes) isn't mentioned. Roman campaigns in Dacia and Thrace aren't mentioned. Samnite wars and Roman-Etruscan wars aren't mentioned. None of the earlier Roman Gallic wars are mentioned. The invasion of the Sabaean Kingdom isn't mentioned... Each of these conflicts was accompanied by acts of genocide (and other severe human rights violations)...

I'm not trying to overly demonise Romans here, I know nearly everybody wielding so much power ends up committing atrocities (including all of our civs in game)... I'm also not trying to moralise them with my 21st century ethical standards. I'm just pointing out that they were very proficient at killing huge numbers of people, resulting in total/partial depopulation of regions, resettled by "friendly" tribes, for example after the massacres and deportations of the resisting Belgae (Nervii, Atrebates, Viromandui and Atuatuci). 

 

 

[undefined discussion subject]

@Nescio, mostly true...

 except: 

1 hour ago, Nescio said:

As for the Romans, yes, they occassionally committed mass murder, but I wouldn't call them genocidal, nor maniacs. 

"Occasionally" he says... lol, just playing, but seriously, Romans did more than just the "occasional mass murder"... lol...

Let me quote Calgacus in the words of Tacitus:

"They plunder, they slaughter, and they steal: this they falsely name Empire, and where they make a wasteland, they call it peace."

 

Spoiler

Whenever I consider the origin of this war and the necessities of our position, I have a sure confidence that this day, and this union of yours, will be the beginning of freedom to the whole of Britain. To all of us slavery is a thing unknown; there are no lands beyond us, and even the sea is not safe, menaced as we are by a Roman fleet. And thus in war and battle, in which the brave find glory, even the coward will find safety. Former contests, in which, with varying fortune, the Romans were resisted, still left in us a last hope of succour, inasmuch as being the most renowned nation of Britain, dwelling in the very heart of the country, and out of sight of the shores of the conquered, we could keep even our eyes unpolluted by the contagion of slavery. To us who dwell on the uttermost confines of the earth and of freedom, this remote sanctuary of Britain's glory has up to this time been a defence. Now, however, the furthest limits of Britain are thrown open, and the unknown always passes for the marvellous. But there are no tribes beyond us, nothing indeed but waves and rocks, and the yet more terrible Romans, from whose oppression escape is vainly sought by obedience and submission. Robbers of the world, having by their universal plunder exhausted the land, they rifle the deep. If the enemy be rich, they are rapacious; if he be poor, they lust for dominion; neither the east nor the west has been able to satisfy them. Alone among men they covet with equal eagerness poverty and riches. To robbery, slaughter, plunder, they give the lying name of empire; they make a solitude and call it peace.

Sums it up pretty nicely... 

Entire regions were depopulated... More cultures and languages went extinct during the Roman occupation than any other period in European history (I think). Sure, they also brought about innovations and infrastructure, but the wholesale destruction of pre-Roman cultures makes it almost impossible to ascertain exactly at what cost.

[undefined discussion subject]

@Lion.Kanzen it think all the violence and oppression has more to do with power groups maintaining a certain status quo that benefits them, using both soft, and hard power, where "appropriate". 

Quote

The term hard power describes a nation or political body's ability to use economic incentives or military strength to influence other actors' behaviors.

Coined by Nye in the late 1980s, the term "soft power" -- the ability of a country to persuade others to do what it wants without force or coercion

In the 19th century, hegemony came to denote the "Social or cultural predominance or ascendancy; predominance by one group within a society or milieu". Later, it could be used to mean "a group or regime which exerts undue influence within a society".^[7] Also, it could be used for the geopolitical and the cultural predominance of one country over others, from which was derived hegemonism, as in the idea that the Great Powers meant to establish European hegemony over Asia and Africa.^[8]

In international relations theory, hegemony denotes a situation of (i) great material asymmetry in favour of one state, who has (ii) enough military power to systematically defeat any potential contester in the system, (iii) controls the access to raw materials, natural resources, capital and markets, (iv) has competitive advantages in the production of value added goods, (v) generates an accepted ideology reflecting this status quo; and (vi) is functionally differentiated from other states in the system, being expected to provide certain public goods such as security, or commercial and financial stability.^[9]

The Marxist theory of cultural hegemony, associated particularly with Antonio Gramsci, is the idea that the ruling class can manipulate the value system and mores of a society, so that their view becomes the world view (Weltanschauung): in Terry Eagleton's words, "Gramsci normally uses the word hegemony to mean the ways in which a governing power wins consent to its rule from those it subjugates".^[10] In contrast to authoritarian rule, cultural hegemony "is hegemonic only if those affected by it also consent to and struggle over its common sense".^[11]

In cultural imperialism, the leader state dictates the internal politics and the societal character of the subordinate states that constitute the hegemonic sphere of influence, either by an internal, sponsored government or by an external, installed government.

 

The idea behind the "necessity of violence" is part of the process of manufacturing consent (e.g. "the enemy has weapons of mass destruction" or "the infidels are corrupt in their ways", "Ashur is supreme, the gods have abandoned our enemies"). These kind of rhetorical arguments have been used since the very first states in ancient Sumer and Egypt 

 

This is also interesting:

 

At the end of the day, it's about power and resources, and the two are very much interlinked... Violence will be used where possible and "appropriate", in large scale (war) or personal attacks (persecution/executions) to maintain status, but this usually has very little to do with the actual necessities of the masses.

I'm not a pacifist, but violent conflict usually only benefits a select few... 

[undefined discussion subject]

11 hours ago, Alexandermb said:

Remember to always enjoy even that, you may never know when that could become what i see here, i hope someday i'll see again shopping malls, highways whitout the inminent and highly possibility to be robbed or killed.

Sorry to hear that. I understand Venezuela is going through some rough times... I wish you all strength! 

How is it on the ground? It's difficult to figure out exactly what's going on from the news... Are there any "good guys" in the picture, or is proper leadership missing from all sides? How do you see the situation evolving? 

Spoiler

 

I'm sorry, I'm just a bit of a cynic... 

Over here we have shopping malls, but most people can't really afford to shop there... We have highways, but most people can't afford a car... We have netflix... But I don't really care about that, neither do most other people. We have peace and stability, economic growth and such, but for how long. Rich get richer, poor get poorer... An age old story... Like much of the world, it's basically a pressure cooker... 

People took to the streets recently because the Americans pressured/bribed the government to expand their military activity here and get access to our military installations, and be able to ship stuff in and out of country without customs checking it (duty free, off course)... We're not even allowed to arrest them if they commit a crime... And everybody knows, where American soldiers show up, Al Qaeda and the likes are soon to follow (see what happened in Mali, Northern Nigeria, Niger...). They want to use our country as a stepping stone to launch attacks on other regions in West Africa. We're allowing the same clown that called us "s-h-i-t-hole countries" just a few months ago to bring in his barely grown up soldier boys with big guns... Oorah... 

All the while, people here are systematically cutting down the once lush forests, (many of which are supposed to be protected)... Even the ministry of forestry is in on it... Makes me want to cry... The rains and weather patterns have changed, so traditional farming methods are becoming impossible without irrigation, fertilizer, pesticides... Hordes of Chinese miners are illegally mining gold in the more remote regions, scarring the land and polluting our rivers with mercury... They come in their THOUSANDS, no matter how many we deport. They even bring along their own mafia and prostitutes. We used to be a self-sufficient country in terms of food-production and other things (not so long ago), but Western dumping tactics have destroyed our local industries, and when government tries to protect the local economy, we get threatened with sanctions, because, "unfair trade-practices"... 

Oh god, and don't even get me started on our local superstars... Televangelists... Evangelical preachers rambling on for hours, telling everybody they should give (even) more money to the "church", and naming any kind of social progress/development, naturconservation, traditional culture as devilish... I normally wouldn't mind them, but the under-educated masses have become brainwashed by these charlatans... 

I'd like to look on the bright side of things, and there are really good and exciting things happening as well... But so much needs to change, and I barely know where to begin...

 

 

14 hours ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

for example the idea to make a new roman is great

Euhm, not really, no... lol

I mean, what have the Romans ever done for us?

But seriously though, Romans were genocidal maniacs... Most Imperial civilizations actually... 

[undefined discussion subject]

Here's some Ethiopian nationalism for you guys  

At the beginning of the second Italo-Abyssinian war, the various Ethiopian princes (Ras), chieftains, generals, warlords and regular soldiers pledged allegiance to the Emperor, Haile Selassie I, in spectacular ceremonious splendor. After months of heavy fighting, in which the Italians used hundreds of tons of poison gas (sprayed from airplanes), Haile Selassie (who actually fought in the trenches with his troops) was forced into exile. Addis Ababa was captured by the Italians, and the remaining Ethiopian forces formed a resistance movement, called "the Black Lions". Resistance fighters heavily restricted the movement of Italian troops outside of Addis Ababa and Axum, making Italian attempts to control the countryside a nightmare. The frustration led to several major massacres of civilians and clergy, the destruction churches and even archaeological sights. Monuments like some of the Stelae of Axum were taken back to Italy in their entirety, and more bad stuff... This war was a major prelude to WWII, as it showed the ineffectiveness of the League of Nations. 5 years later Ethiopia was liberated with help from allied forces, and Selassie was reinstalled. Some of the dudes in the video are major commanders, turned resistance fighters in the later part of the war... There's dudes "riding" lions in this video... Like, seriously... Anyway, it's this spirit of resistance that inspired Rastafarians so much. Ethiopian nationalism is very strong among most Rastafarians, which is why you see the red, gold and green so often in association with the movement. This imperial iconography and spirit of resistance permeates Rastafarian art, including music, and since Rastas make some of the best Reggae music out there.... 

 

 

Haile Selassie during the war:

 

Traditional warriors (chiefs/commanders)

 

Elite, personal guard (European equipment) Zabagna

 

Selassie and Mussolini

 

 

Selassie haunts the dreams of Mussolini:

 

Selassie and Rastafarians:

Mortimo Planno (Rastaman) was an important mentor to Bob Marley...

 

"Be Good Rasta, Be Good",  

  

 

Check out dr Kwame Nkrumah, first president of Ghana meeting with Haile Selassie, and one of his lions... Hilarious, the way they're scared and excited at the same time to pet a lion. These are absolute heavyweights in African/world history:

 

And Menelik II, Haile Selassie's uncle and predecessor. It was under him that the Italians were first defeated at Adwa, 1896.

[undefined discussion subject]

The world used to be so beautiful in all its diversity... Now it's just shopping malls, highways and Netflix... 

 

 

[undefined discussion subject]

The Garima Gospel (Aksumite)

The Garima Gospel (Aksumite) earliest surviving complete illuminated Christian manuscript, IN THE WORLD, written in Ge'ez, ancient Ethiopic script. Supposedly written by Syriac monks, but apparently that's not so certain anymore... 

Quote

The Gospels are housed in Ethiopia's Abba Garima Monastery. Abba Garima Monastery is an Ethiopian Orthodox church, located around five kilometres east of Adwa, in the Mehakelegnaw Zone of the northern Tigray Region in Ethiopia. It was established in the sixth century by one of the Nine Saints, Abba Garima, and built by King Gabra Masqal (also Gebre Meskel). The monastery became known for its early manuscript copy of the gospels and its treasury.^[1][2]

recent radiocarbon analysis; samples from Garima 2 proposed a date of c. 390-570, while counterpart dating of samples from Garima 1 proposed a date of c. 530-660.

Monastic tradition ascribes the gospel books to Saint Abba Garima, said to have arrived in Ethiopia in 494.^[2] Abba Garima is one of the Nine Saints traditionally thought to have come from Syria, and to have evangelized the rural populations of the ancient Ethiopian kingdom of Axum in the sixth century; and the monks regard the Gospels less as significant antiquities than as sacred relics of Abba Garima.^[2] According to tradition, Abba Garima wrote and illustrated the complete Gospels in a single day; God stopped the sun from setting until the Saint completed his work.^[1] Definitive radiocarbon tests have indeed supported the dating Abba Garima 2, the earlier of the two books, to the sixth century,^[3] but otherwise recent research tends to contra-indicate many aspects of the traditional account; proposing instead that the text-base for the Garima gospels is Greek not Syriac, that the iconography and palaeography looks to Egyptian not Syrian sources, and that the gospel translation witnessed in the Garima gospels had been completed over a century before the traditional dates for the Nine Saints. Furthermore, the supposed Syrian origin of the Nine Saints is no longer maintained in most recent scholarship.^[6]

 

 

 

Evangelist portrait of Saint Mark from Garima 2

 

 

Other ancient illuminated manuscripts:

This all belongs to the  Ethiopian Orthodox Tewahedo Church, by the way..

 

Other Ethiopian Monks:

 

 

The Bahitawi are a specific type of Ethiopian hermit monk, separate from society. They follow similar Old Testament commandments as (strict) Rastafarians, which makes them look similar. A great source of spiritual inspiration for Rastafarians and Ethiopians alike. Cross-continetal mysticism...

 

 

Two Rastafarians and a Bahitawi monk  

 

 

[undefined discussion subject]

13 minutes ago, Lion.Kanzen said:

First African Churches outside Roman control.

Some of the earliest surviving churches anywhere, lol... Ezana, King of Axum was the first Ethiopian monarch to convert to Christianity... In 330's AD!  

Ezana is also the King who invaded and totally destroyed the Kingdom of Kush... lol... Don't know whether to hate him or to love him  

Ethiopian coins minted bearing Ezana's name are even found in India...!

 

Just now, Lion.Kanzen said:

Why not propose African faction to Millennium AD?

Kush is still taking up too much time,  

In due time, lol  But Aksumites are super-cool... Pagan, Jewish, Christian and even Islamic elements. Had intense relations with Byzantine empire. Built rock cut churches... Conquered Kush... Conquered Yemen... Sent an army (including a whole lot of elephants) to conquer Mecca not so long before the advent of Islam. Conquest of Mecca didn't go so well... During the Higira (Mohammed's flight to Medina), a significant number of the first Muslims emigrated to Axum, to seek refuge from persecution in Mecca (instructed by Mohammed, because he knew the Christian King would protect his people from the Pagan persecutors, because the Mohammedans worshipped the same god as the Christian King) and built the walled town of Harar, the earliest Muslim community outside of Arabia. Supposedly the Ark of the Covenant (or Tabot) is located in a treasury near the Church of Our Lady Mary of Zion. Axum has some of the largest standing monoliths in the world...

 

Original location of the supposed "Ark of the Covenant", in Axum:

 

Current location in Axum

 

Stelae of Axum

 

Underneath the stelae field are an underground network of tunnels and chambers:  the burial chambers of Aksumite kings:

 

[undefined discussion subject]

@Lion.Kanzen

Yeah, I'm absolutely in love with Ethiopia... Every aspect of their history, from the Kingdom of D'mt, to the Aksumite Empire, the Zagwe Dynasty and the Abyssinian Empire are all simply delicious... 

 

[undefined discussion subject]

Yes, Haile Selassie is seen as the Christ... "The Lion of Judah, shall break every chain". According to the Ethiopian national history, he descends from the line of King Solomon and David, through Menelik I, son of Queen Makeda of Sheba and Solomon. Haile Selassie and his people are actually confirmed to be of Afro-Semitic ancestry, and an ancient Jewish population still lives in Ethiopia (although most migrated to Israel not long ago), known as Beta Israel (or archaic "Falasha")...

Beta Israel, ancient Ethiopian Jews:

 

The Rastafarian movement is a strong mix of literal and spiritual interpretations. Judeo-Christian ideology, mixed with Imperial Ethiopian iconography and a dash of mysticism.

Check out the battle of Adwa... Italians were literally outgunned by the Ethiopians. One of the few occasions where an indigenous African army used artillery against a European army, to terrifying effect...

 

Just now, Nescio said:

Actually reggae is not African, it's Jamaican; its colours are black, green, and gold, the colours of Jamaica's

Dude, he's talking about the colours of the flag carried by Rastas/Reggae artists... 

[undefined discussion subject]

@Lion.Kanzen

You mean the red, gold and green? Those are the colours of the Imperial Ethiopian flag. 

In 1896, in the Battle of Adwa, the Ethiopian (Abyssinian) army under Emperor Menelik II, (commanded by among others, Ras Makonnen, Haile Selassie's father) decisively defeated a major invasion by the Italians, who sought to colonize Ethiopia. This was the largest single defeat of a modern European army in the history of Africa. A traumatizing event for the Kingdom of Italy, but an event that catapulted Ethiopia to the forefront of African liberation struggles. All around the world people of African descent rallied behind the Ethiopian colours, and with the wave of decolonisation that swept over Sub-Saharan Africa, in no small part due to the efforts and support of Haile Selassie I, many African countries (including Ghana  ) adopted the red, gold and green as their own national colours (in remembrance and respect for the early liberation struggles).

Among Rastafarians, Haile Selassie has a divine status, and Ethiopian Imperial iconography is widely used, including the imperial flag (and Lion of Judah), which is strongly preferred to the Jamaican National flag, or any other flag for that matter..

Quote

The green-yellow-red flag appeared in 06 October 1897. It was the flag of Ethiopia that became the basis for the Pan African colours. Before the end of the Ethiopian Empire the colours were interpreted as: red for power and faith; yellow for church, peace, natural wealth and love; and green for land and hope.

Although I've heard/read different explanations as well including: Red for the blood of the martyrs; Gold for the riches of the country/culture and Green for the land/nature.  

 

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

 

 

Emperor Haile Selassie I, born under the name and title: Ras Lij Tafari Makonnen, or simply Ras Tafari.

 

The Kebur Zabagna, Imperial troops carrying the flag

 

Haile Selassie visits Jamaica, is welcomed by thousands of Ethiopian flags  

[===[TASK]=== Ptolemaic Emblem]

@Lion.Kanzen I can't promise to redraw that particular coin in the coming days (time...) 

I did use the other eagle's face as inspiration to adjust my earlier version.. 

[Faction : Nomads Xiongnu]

Special Exhibit: Xiongnu, Henan Provincial Museum, Zhengzhou, China. 

Shamans: Dudes on the left and right, with their drums are perfect for our Xiongnu Shaman. Some animated drumming for healing process would be awesome  Big white Yurt with a golden dome and cattle skull decorating entrance as our temple...

 

Other dudes:

 

Xiognu meet Han Chinese delegation:

[Faction : Nomads Xiongnu]

3 hours ago, Tomcelmare said:

What about Xiongnu's religion? Was it tengrism? Should there be a shaman unit available to this civ? Like these:

 

Basically yes...

[===[TASK]=== Ptolemaic Emblem]

@Nescio, eyes and a little bit more curvature. 

[===[TASK]=== Ptolemaic Emblem]

@Nescio, hmmm, I looked at like a bajillion Ptolemaic eagles from their coins and it's all kind of the same strict iconography that I followed literally. The references are in the original post... In the majority of the coins, the talons are all angled weirdly like that. Maybe that's why he's so angry? It's just a bit of an awkward eagle... It's up to you guys...

[===[TASK]=== Ptolemaic Emblem]

@stanislas69 @Lion.Kanzen, just updated my interpretation of angry bird one last time, png's in original post. Do with it as you will  

[===[TASK]=== Ptolemaic Emblem]

37 minutes ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

That is one angry bird.

 

 

Don't know whatchu talkin bout...

Spoiler

 

 

 

[===[TASK]=== Hellenic Helmet - Part I]

off-topic: Doesn't that lambda have a wrong rotation?