Roman era York may have been more diverse than today

It seems totally in line.. after all one of the earliest Queens of Britian was black.

The Roman Empire was a multicultural empire, when Rome invaded Britain and settled, it wasn't as if all these citizens of Rome suddenly came to live - the 'invasion' was more a Romanisation of the inidgenous culture - as it was the world over.

To be precise: The prevailing language in the east was Greek. Not only during the times of Hellenism and the times of the Byzantine Empire. To speak of a "Romanization the world over" does simplify things a little bit.

True, they started the ball rolling on a few key things. But that pales in comparison the to achievements of both Republican and Imperial Rome.

It seems totally in line.. after all one of the earliest Queens of Britian was black.

Greece was more intellectual, Rome more engineering. The Romans admired the earlier Greek culture and adopted many of its principles.

Indeed, the Greek were great thinkers, the Romans were great a putting these greek thoughts into practical use, kind of like the Chinese today, mass producing products based on principles developed/discovered by western science over the last 200 years.

But don't forget the heirs of the western Roman Empire who threw all of Europe into 1000 years of cognitive darkness while other cultures flourished.

t could also be argued that it was the constitutional catholic church that plunged everyone into the Dark Ages, rather than Rome itself.

It could also be argued that it was the constitutional catholic church that plunged everyone into the Dark Ages, rather than Rome itself.

It could also be argued that it was the constitutional catholic church that plunged everyone into the Dark Ages, rather than Rome itself.

That's what I meant by "heirs of the Imperium Romanum".

What does 'black' mean?
What defines 'black' and why?

t could also be argued that it was the constitutional catholic church that plunged everyone into the Dark Ages, rather than Rome itself.

It can be argued that it was the corrupt Roman welfare state and cooling climate brought on by Krakatoa that ushered in the 'dark ages'.

It can also be argued that Christian monks kept knowledge alive in that time.

They established the "House of Wisdom" in Baghdad, where scholars, both Muslim and non-Muslim, sought to gather and translate all the world's knowledge into Arabic in the Translation Movement. Many classic works of antiquity that would otherwise have been forgotten were translated into Arabic and later in turn translated into Turkish, Persian, Hebrew and Latin.

Although many local Spaniards embraced Islam, Christians and Jews were free in all aspects of their lives. The Muslims respected their religion and institutions. The result was the birth of the first true cosmopolitan culture in the West. ...
Muslims and Christians of Spain did not live in their ghettos, isolated and not cooperating in various aspects of daily life together. It was in Spain that Aristotle's works on physics and natural history were translated into Arabic from Greek in Muslim Spain. Historians generally acknowledge that the Muslim world proved to be a major conduit of ancient scholarship into the West, especially through Muslim Spain. It wasn't just Muslims and Christians who thrived in Spain, though. Jews, who were reviled and hated elsewhere, were not only living safely and peacefully alongside non-Jews in Muslim Spain, they were learning and contributing to its culture and knowledge which Muslim scholars had established.

Christians started as a 'grass roots', literally underground movement, in Rome. In the region, they were again, a grass roots movement persecuted by Rome.

in other words either this is the absolute first case of black being used to desribe someone who is brown all over or it means something else altogether.

It's interesting to note that you regard an economy which is based on killing and enslaving millions of people as "welfare state".

[1] It's interesting to note that you regard an economy which is based on killing and enslaving millions of people as "welfare state".

Christians started as a 'grass roots', literally underground movement, in Rome. In the region, they were again, a grass roots movement persecuted by Rome.

That's true - for their first two or three centuries. Afterwards they were cohabiting with the powerful.

The challenge for grass roots Christians then and now is to understand faith cannot be forced.

There's nothing grass roots about Christianity today.

There's nothing grass roots about Christianity today.

Of course there is.

Why did Constantine 'get religion'? It couldn't be he would have considerable wide spread popular support?

Real power rises from below. Politicians attempt to tap into that power and sway it their way. Obama tried that and is not having much success.

Saying it's so doesn't make it so.

"True power comes from the barrel of a gun."

"True power comes from the barrel of a gun."

US citizens have many firearms in spite of government attempts to take them away.
If politicians want to go that route, they will fail miserably.

Saying it's so doesn't make it so.

It works both ways.

And how about outside of the US? You do remember that there are another 193 countries to account for, correct?

And approval ratings are relevant how?

He comes across as a centrist which is ideal for a president. The extremes are not feasiable to implement in any government.

get rid of lobbyist

. . .
But don't forget the heirs of the western Roman Empire who threw all of Europe into 1000 years of cognitive darkness while other cultures flourished.

Mere pikers compared to the Muslims who have shut down the productivity and creativity of now 1 billion people for ~1400 years.

A significant majority of citizens oppose Congress' take over of the medical industry.

A significant majority of citizens oppose Congress' take over of the medical industry.

Hey marjon, your real name wouldn't be Frank Luntz by any chance?

So you ARE Frank Luntz! Well, that does explain a lot...

I'll toss you a bone, Frankie: those polls might actually have meant something, if only the people polled knew what they were opining about.

Personally, I *still* have no idea what's in that bill. And I don't believe any person outside of DC has any more clue than do I.

I will not support it, because I have no idea what it's about. Neither will I oppose it, for exactly the same reason: because I have no idea what it's about.

You, on the other hand, will oppose it, not because you know what's in it, but because that's Frank Luntz' prescribed reaction.

If the legislation was so great, why were three states exempted from certain provision to buy votes?
When senators from the same party must be bribed to vote for a bill, it must not be a very good bill.

North Africans are not black. Why is the woman depicted as being so?