taaruoort Jul 25th 2011 10:38AM
You are very susceptible, and you confirm to be inintelligent: first: I don't said you have said that Romans passed without traces in Egipt, but this way to represent history (anti-roman, substantially), is typical of german (mostly), french and english way to studies mediterranean-european civilizations (if you want I may to make a "great" example of this). Then, the "nationalism" which you speak is a typical barbaric - and idiot - product of those cultures; not of mine!!! I don't know where you came from, but your (no) knowledge says that your preparation is product by the "nationalism" about you speak, without realize that one which you accuse me, is exactly that you demonstrate for yourself.
Second: the no-real knowledge that you say about my preparation is exactly the mirror of your no-real knowledge; I've said that the portraits that you've showed are presents in manuals of roman history of art; I've invited you to look them; but is evident like is more easy to believe yourself more prepareted of all the world, than entry in a normal argumentation.
Third: your formula: "and the fact that you have given no hard evidence that the portraits are only Roman" is the finally demonstration of your inability to understand a simply historical fact, and to understand my simply words (also if I can understand that my english are not correct; I speak better french and spanish, apart italian obviously... and you?), and, mostly, to unanderstand an argumenation that come down a bit more in depth than your "analysis". I've well tried to explain because the particular portraits that you've showed are a product of the roman domain in Egipt, and for this you accuse me of "nationalism"!!! I mean that your stupid susceptibility are the direct daughter of your "nationalism", and, unfortunately, of the desolate german-anglo-saxon "culture" which you are, evidently, infected.
No comments:
Post a Comment