YouTube Historians/HistoryTube/PopHistory

  • 🔧 Issue with uploading attachments resolved.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
Sargon's wife's son said:
Are you mean the Roman Emperor who raped the Vestal Virgin? And had people pray to little piles of mutilated children. Yeah, that guy is not someone you should idolize.
Click to expand...
Well, guess who the Trannys idolize.

4757.png
 
I will state: Anything to do with Marcus Aurelius Antoninus/Sextus Varius Avitus Bassianus AKA Heliogabalus or Elagabalus should be marked with a fat fucking ALLEGEDLY. All the scandalous behaviors that he is ALLEGED to have engaged in were standard slanderous accusations made by Romans towards people they didn't like, including Nero and Caligula. If ANY of it happened, we have no idea because the only sources hated him for being a non-Roman and a weird, decadant oriental. "LGBTQIA+" "people" will believe any slanderous accusation of being faggot if it suits their worldview of imagining their twisted lifestyle is not the product of modern insanity, and has about it any degree of tradition whatsoever. Considering that the Romans who reported on these accusations also got pretty basic facts about the cult he was the hereditary leader of straight up wrong, has never inclined me to believe them to nearly the degree it is made out, if at all.
 
Regarding Atun-Shei, I think this article about eunuchs was posted somewhere on this website before. Here are the best parts.

Eunuchs are generally represented as being vindictive and revengeful in disposition; this, if true, cannot be wondered at, for if they have been made eunuchs in their childhood, and against their own inclination, the injustice and barbarity perpetrated on them, as they grow up and fully perceive its greatness, must naturally rankle in their minds and tend to breed and develop all those vices for which we give them credit. On the other hand, should they have arrived at a period of adolescence, and have enjoyed intercourse with the opposite sex previous to castration or mutilation--either with or without their own consent--no punishment can be conceived more horrible than that which they daily and hourly endure--that of seeing women in their most abandoned moments, and knowing at the same time they have for ever lost their virility, and consequently, all power of the greatest enjoyment in life. They may beg and are, at the time, physically dead to all feeling of sensual pleasure, but it is impossible their minds and memories can be dead or oblivious of what had been or might still have been theirs, but for their mutilation. Those, therefore, who have indulged in sexual intercourse previous to castration, must feel the loss of their virility much more keenly than those who have been made eunuchs before they felt or experienced those mysterious workings of nature which accompany the adolescence of both sexes; and this also would tend to embitter and envenom all their after lives, and fill them with but ill-concealed envy and hate.
...
All eunuchs, when they are emasculated, lose their natural voices, those who underwent the operation when children can scarcely be distinguished from young women by the voice; while those who had the operation performed on them after arrived at maturity speak in a cracked falsetto--as a Billingsgate fish-fag might. In fact, there is something grotesque--if I may be allowed the expression--in their voices, not by any means pleasant to listen to.
...
Emasculation seems to take all manhood away from eunuchs; they age rapidly, looking sixty when only forty; they are like children; will burst into tears at a trifle, or give away to ungovernable rage for what another person would scarcely notice, and are as quickly pacified as they are to become angry. They are not by any means bloodthirsty--as eunuchs are usually represented to be--but exactly the reverse, being harmless and conciliating in manner, as if they sought to ingratiate themselves with those stronger than they are, by confessing--in their fawning demeanor--their own weakness and inferiority.
 
Briananderson1138 said:
The bizzare thing is that the actual Indians weren't even a fraction as bloodthirsty as Atun-Shei is. They were pretty accepting of White frontiersmen assimilating into their society, as in the case of Sam Houston.
Click to expand...
One of the reason why so many late planes natives chose cultural genocide over warring with the US government for a reason. Again just look at last names if you see something like proudfoot, longpaw, Chances are its a native name.
WelperHelper99 said:
The noble savage was never real. Sure there might have been a few good ones. But in general, there is a reason these people have stayed stuck in the stone age until the white man came. They don't understand what they have, and won't even when its all gone.

On twitter, I remember seeing a video of some slants net fishing in a fucking US river like a Chinese fishing trawler. No tags, nothing. Things that have been drilled into me since I was a child, these people didn't get. It's insane. People like Aten Suei should chop their nuts off, since they want to bring these raiders in
Click to expand...
When you live in a mostly white middle class suburb and the only people who annoy you that surround you are anti woke white people its no surprise why he acts like this. He doesn't want to be labeled a nazi/bigot for the last 40 years the worst thing someone could be was a bigot especially if you're white.
His entire worldview is fed by media and journalists who all are left wingers but not tankies who insist that they are going to lead us into utopia.
Again a lot of these people 20 years ago were probably normal teens who were fascinated by the civil war and history. He probably heard the america is evil speech and believes firmly that conservatives are the same as the people who wanted to enslave black people.
Again a younger Atun-Shei probably was a bit more right leaning was very much were against injustice then turned into conservatives are evil and nazis through the slow leftist programming of white people are evil and brown people are good.
To quote Feral historian recently In many ways its hard to be a good historian and hate the people you study and be objective.
He hates the confederacy deeply because it represents a shadow of himself he cannot shake away this is why the neoconfederates have to hate black people and want slavery because to him he thinks some groups are horrible and need to be genocided because of their effects on the environment.
 
Sargon's wife's son said:
Are you mean the Roman Emperor who raped the Vestal Virgin? And had people pray to little piles of mutilated children. Yeah, that guy is not someone you should idolize.
Click to expand...
Only the second worst emperor from that particular dynasty btw.
LovisXVI said:
Considering that the Romans who reported on these accusations also got pretty basic facts about the cult he was the hereditary leader of straight up wrong, has never inclined me to believe them to nearly the degree it is made out, if at all.
Click to expand...
Some people are eager to believe every wacky thing they hear about historical figures, it's extremely tiresome. Caligula joking about making his horse a consul one time quickly turns into "Did you know there was a HORSE that reigned as a Roman emperor??". For my part, I believe that Elagabalus was a flamboyant faggot, but not much beyond that.
 
The Secret Sauce said:
Caligula joking about making his horse a consul one time quickly turns into "Did you know there was a HORSE that reigned as a Roman emperor??"
Click to expand...
Are you telling me that Caligula didn't make his horse Consul and that he DIDN'T go to invade Britain, decided once he went to Calais or wherever he was going to invade from that Neptune was a bitch, have his soldiers stab the ocean and then take seashells as war trophies?

Because honestly, Caligula becomes a lot less interesting if he didn't do those things.
1778565592569.png

1778565610254.png

1778565617367.png
 
Professor Donger said:
Oh definitely. I just dislike how modern leftists will point to them and go "Look it's just like the LGBT!" they do the same shit with that one Roman Emperor who chopped his dick off and declared himself the sun god.
Click to expand...
The only person they could appropriate is Antinous, who was the gay slave lover of Hadrian. But even then, it's speculated he later killed himself out of shame or was ritually sacrificed. He even had a notably sized religious cult devoted to him, mostly due to Hadrian depicting him as various gods in temples throughout the empire and the fact that he was deified slave, not too different from modern celebrity worship. The whole story is like a gay inversion of the Adonis myth.

LovisXVI said:
I will state: Anything to do with Marcus Aurelius Antoninus/Sextus Varius Avitus Bassianus AKA Heliogabalus or Elagabalus should be marked with a fat fucking ALLEGEDLY. All the scandalous behaviors that he is ALLEGED to have engaged in were standard slanderous accusations made by Romans towards people they didn't like, including Nero and Caligula. If ANY of it happened, we have no idea because the only sources hated him for being a non-Roman and a weird, decadant oriental. "LGBTQIA+" "people" will believe any slanderous accusation of being faggot if it suits their worldview of imagining their twisted lifestyle is not the product of modern insanity, and has about it any degree of tradition whatsoever. Considering that the Romans who reported on these accusations also got pretty basic facts about the cult he was the hereditary leader of straight up wrong, has never inclined me to believe them to nearly the degree it is made out, if at all.
Click to expand...
Middle Eastern priest kings were historically known to take part in transgressive rites and act feminine, so some of the rumors could be true or just exaggerated for propaganda purposes. The accusations of oriental decadence are overblown, as the Romans deliberately imported a eunuch cult centuries before.
 
LovisXVI said:
a weird, decadant oriental. "LGBTQIA+" "people" will believe any slanderous accusation of being faggot if it suits their worldview of imagining their twisted lifestyle is not the product of modern insanity
Click to expand...
Imagine how in 100 years your descendants will find old text messages by your friends, calling you a faggot, and then going "omg I never knew he was gay!"
 
Wiggerlicious said:
Chances are he's also vehemently against the death penalty, despite a child molester having the same carbon output as the children he won't be having.
Click to expand...
The dude is just a self hating antiwhite. They are inconsistent in their veiws because their ideology just boils down to revenge and hatred of whites. Atun-Shei finger wags and lectures whites about having kids because of "muh carbon footprint", but won't do the same for the sub 70 IQ Somali who pops out 12 kids.
 
Franz Joseph said:
The dude is just a self hating antiwhite. They are inconsistent in their veiws because their ideology just boils down to revenge and hatred of whites. Atun-Shei finger wags and lectures whites about having kids because of "muh carbon footprint", but won't do the same for the sub 70 IQ Somali who pops out 12 kids.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately after being outed as a slav, he can't even be rightly called a self-hating white.
 
Caligula was a rape slave on his uncles, Tiberius’ Epstein island for years and his whole family was slaughtered by his grandmother - anyone left even remotely close to him was his sister, who he, unsurprisingly, fetishized. And although I don't personally believe they had sex as is claimed often, I wouldn't be surprised if they did.

He probably hated the senatorial class because of their inactivity and unwillingness to stop the injustice he suffered. Remember, Rome still WAS a republic, and on paper, tyranny of one man was to be checked by the senate, neither caligula nor his family were saved from this tyranny be the senate.

Even after all that, beginning years of Caligula are considered to be "good", as he became beloved by the people and the army (notice how I don't mention the senate). but then he had a near death experience after an "Illness™" and supposedly went mad. I personally believe he was poisoned by the senate because A) They had delusions of restoring the republic (lol) or B) They were jealous of Caligula's popularity/were aware of how much he hated them. but even if he wasn't poisoned and actually had a Brain Fever™, a near death experience probably left him paranoid and pushed him towards exacting his revenge more swiftly on the people he despised.

The Horse Consul Incident® is for example a clear mockery of the senate, intended to show how much of a façade the "republic" was.
Same goes for the war with Neptune, he either did it to display his absolute power, or more likely did it to punish the soldiers who mutinied and refused to invade Britain.

I believe that most shit brought against Caligula and Domitian is a case of the senatorial class seething in their little diaries about the emperors - while I'm more inclined to believe the allegations against Nero and Elagabalus because they were genuinely hated by all classes of society, unlike Domitian and Caligula.
 
LovisXVI said:
I will state: Anything to do with Marcus Aurelius Antoninus/Sextus Varius Avitus Bassianus AKA Heliogabalus or Elagabalus should be marked with a fat fucking ALLEGEDLY. All the scandalous behaviors that he is ALLEGED to have engaged in were standard slanderous accusations made by Romans towards people they didn't like, including Nero and Caligula. If ANY of it happened, we have no idea because the only sources hated him for being a non-Roman and a weird, decadant oriental. "LGBTQIA+" "people" will believe any slanderous accusation of being faggot if it suits their worldview of imagining their twisted lifestyle is not the product of modern insanity, and has about it any degree of tradition whatsoever. Considering that the Romans who reported on these accusations also got pretty basic facts about the cult he was the hereditary leader of straight up wrong, has never inclined me to believe them to nearly the degree it is made out, if at all.
Click to expand...
Serious hat.jpg
>Biggus Dickus is a biased and probably made everything up about this specific topic and/or person I care about.
>Unless Biggus Dickus agrees with one of my takes about the past being boring and NOTHING EVER FUCKING HAPPENING TM
I find this notion thoroughly homosexual and retarded. We either trust the ancient historians or we don't and if we don't then our knowledge of the ancient world becomes fuck and all and after seeing how toughly inept Archeologists are at divining any sort of functional narrative that isn't their barely disguised fetish I find the blatantly biased original sources 110% more accurate then some cope about how Caligula wasn't mad or how Ege-whatever the fuck wasn't just a Hon.
 
Smashed & Slamed said:
We either trust the ancient historians or we don't and if we don't then our knowledge of the ancient world becomes fuck and all
Click to expand...
I agree with this a 100%, especially when (((modern historians))) refute army sizes and then offer some bullshit number they made up in their own heads. however, different interpretations of the same source can exist, a historian can tell us that "Caligula did X, and his motives were Y". but only factual information in that sentence is X. Y in most cases is head canon of the author or just propaganda.
 
Smashed & Slamed said:
We either trust the ancient historians or we don't
Click to expand...
It's not about trusting or not, but taking the context of the sources and the number we have. We have a relative paucity of sources for the lives of the Emperors, and as such must take everything said about them with skepticism. Caligula and Heliogabalus were both assassinated by the class who turned around and promulgated a narrative (true or untrue) that they were wicked people by the standards of the Roman public to justify their deaths and bolster the legitimacy of the new regime. What they were accused of could be a total fabrication, partially, mostly, or even wholly true, but that wouldn't change the fact that the sources we have have a strong reason to promote such a narrative.

These scandalous accounts do definitively prove one thing: the culture of the day saw that sort of behavior as completely unacceptable, contrary to the notion promoted by revisionists that the Mediterranean society, which includes the Romans and Greeks, was as libertine as they would have you believe.
 
Last edited:
LovisXVI said:
It's not about trusting or not, but taking the context of the sources and the number we have. We have a relative paucity of sources for the lives of the Emperors, and as such must take everything said about them with skepticism. Caligula and Heliogabalus were both assassinated by the class who turned around and promulgated a narrative (true or untrue) that they were wicked people by the standards of the Roman public to justify their deaths and bolster the legitimacy of the new regime.
Click to expand...
Absence of evidence is not evidence. There are plenty of "controversial" people in history where we can easily compare and contrast. Justinian, Vlad the Impaler or Nero. And in all those cases there is a counter narrative be it other sources or historians or oral tradition. For Caligula and Heliogabalus there is almost 0 to go against the historical narrative. So using your logic Caligula was either insane or such an unremarkable person that nobody would bother saying he wasn't insane. Heliogabalus was such a massive faggot nobody even bothered to say he didn't suck dick.
You can also just use deductive reasoning. We can take less interesting characters that are also insane like Justinian the 3rd or Ivan the Terrible or faggots like Radu the Fair and see how people at the time wrote about them. The golden source is one where a historian writing soon after Caligula or Heliogabalus wrote about some other mad faggot you agree they were a mad faggot and then compare and contrast.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom