by Manu Rodríguez (translated from Spanish)
Rome not only opened Europe’s doors to our Greek brothers, but also to the Syrians, and the Phoenicians, and Jews, and the Persians, and to the Egyptians…
It was a flood, a deluge of Eastern cults. Finally, nothing could be saved because we were not anchored onto anything solid. Uprooted, we went astray after a process of self-destruction that had even corroded our very roots, our very fundamentals (courtesy of our Cynic and Skeptic philosophers and Stoics). We navigated adrift, without a North; a wind without North. We laid at the mercy of anyone, of any clever devil. And that’s what happened to us: a clever devil caught us, and we were held captive in his cave for more than a thousand and five hundred years.
In no way did we need any morality or Eastern cult. The European natives (indigenae, born of the interior) had their own gods (indigetes, divinities of the interior), i.e., their own laws, norms, morals. We were doing well: they were the treasures of the families, the ancestral legacy. While these values were maintained nothing bad could happen to us.
It was the contempt for such symbolic significances what marked the beginning of our decline and ruin: the neglect of our being. We should have been stronger. Instead, notice our superficiality in detaching ourselves from the highest value; our folly, our decline, our stupidity, our decadence, our weakness. We disappointed our parents who are in heaven. We were perfidious, unfaithful, disloyal, infidels; unfair.
Anyone who abandons his people, his mother country, is an outcast, a bastard. Those who abandon their Fathers and their legacy, these are the true stateless. They have no country, no parents; they’re only infidels. But that was precisely our behavior. That’s what they did, by force or degree, all of our ancestors: the Romans, Greeks, Germans, Celts, Slavs… All of them disowned the Fathers during the fateful Christianization of Europe. I speak for our ancestors. Upon us falls such guilt, such error, such treachery.
We, the present generations of Europeans, have to repair such perfidy, such disloyalty. We must reclaim the thread with our ancestors, the legacy; give it life again.
Here’s what we missed, what we throw overboard, what was lost of our sight. I speak of the genius of Rome, from her being and her becoming, of a living branch of the Indo-European tree that has not perished. Of her success and failure we must all learn. They succeeded in both keeping their identity, which made them strong, and their ethical significances, moral and civic, so familiar.
The symbolic significances I mention below are taken from the Atlas of World History by Hermann Kinder and Werner Hilgemann, page 88. They are slogans that provide strength and firmness, and moral courage. They were the weapons that we could have used then, and failed to do; but we can use them now. There is still time. It is time to recover what makes us strong and asserts us. Let’s see if those significances remain valid. The following is a summary.
The preservation ( disciplina potestas) of the domestic or household order is made by the father (both parents we would say today without objection), by the authority (sapientia), the maturity of judgment (consilium) and integrity (probitas). The circumspection (diligentia), the rigor (severitas), and self-control (continentia, and temperantia) define the solemn character (gravitas) of their actions, acquired by the industriousness (industria) and tenacity (constantia). The offspring are educated in adult models (mos maiorum). Humility (modestia) and worship (reverentia) are the virtues that should govern the relationship of the younger generation with the older. Young people are also demanded obedience (obsequium), respect (verecundia) and purity (pudicitia, integritas morum).
As for the training of citizens this is what it says: Valor (virtus), independence of judgment and action (libertas), glory, devotion (pietas), fidelity or reliability (fides) and propriety in public life (dignitas) constitute the ideal virtues of a Roman citizen; something that he must put in the service of the community (res publica) in order to contribute to a greater power and greatness of his people (maiestas populi romani). The common good is the highest law (salus populi suprema lex).
I also recommend the reading of the treatise De officiis (On Duties) of Cicero.
Each of these Latin terms has a wider semantic field that expresses the translation (that I copied from the original). The auctoritas had a sense of moral standing, as when we say “so and so is an authority in a particular science or branch of knowledge.” The sapientia is both the wisdom, knowledge as intelligence, sanity. Pietas is the devotion we owe to the manes or Parents, the elder (mos maiorum) and to the res publica, the mother country. Sacrae patria deserere and deserere patriam were Roman expressions that designated desertion of the Fathers and the adoption of a foreign religion. Gloria is precisely fame, good reputation, be renown; reaching general and public honors after a cursus honorum full of merit, in the service of my people, for the greater glory of my people.
These values can be reclaimed today with dignity and without any demerit.
I remind my fellow citizens this past story because presently Europe (and the Magna Europe) runs a similar risk to that loss in the ancient world. This time it will be much worse because it is foreign people and foreign to our being what will dominate us. That was a purely ideological domination; this will also be a demographic domination. We will be clearly disadvantaged on earth and in heaven.
The decline was soon shown in Greece (since the Alexandrian period) and Rome (since the Carthaginian wars): corruption, despotism, injustice, immorality, treachery—in all areas of life. Polybius and Cicero warned in Rome, and Columella and Sallust, Tacitus, Persius and Juvenal. Everyone noticed it and pleaded: “Go back to the sources, Roman: return to the Fathers, purify and recover the aura, the prestige (auctoritas), the majesty.” All in vain. The echo of that failure still resonates today.
No, it was not the alien cults, nor the Jews or the Christians… It was us, our indifference and our nihilism, the cause of our destruction. There laid our weakness. We were not up to par. We failed to respond adequately to the Christian apologists, for example. There was no Demosthenes, no Cicero in the first Christian centuries. We watched them destroy our foundations. The philosophical schools provided arguments to the Christian propagandists (criticism of our gods, traditions and customs, our values). We weakened the security and confidence in ourselves, in our science, knowledge and powers. The future lords of Europe had little to add.
Doesn’t this story sound familiar to you, European? Behold our times. Haven’t we for more than two centuries been destroying ourselves? Which result we get from our current nihilism, our skepticism, our relativism, our political, moral and cultural indifference; our profound boredom? We repeat that history. We make the same mistakes. Again, we will be defeated.
8 replies on “The Roman legacy”
“We failed to respond adequately to the Christian apologists, for example. There was no Demosthenes, no Cicero in the first Christian centuries…”
Actually, we did not fail. But the imperial Church’s hate speech laws of the time managed to silence its critics to the point that only scholars of early Christianity have heard about the names of those who debunked and refuted the apologists. Joseph Hoffmann said about the wisest Roman intellectual during the first centuries of our era:
Porphyry’s Against the Christians: The Literary Remains, translated by Hoffmann (Prometheus Books, 1994), is a must read for post-Christian nationalists.
Europe as a political entity didn’t even exist before Christianity, Europe’s greatest moments were during Christianity’s apex, Europe conquered the world during the Christian era, but it has been brought to its knees after Europeans ditched Christianity in the name of liberalism, atheism and paganism, get your facts straight
The return to pagenism is a result of the flowering of Christianities inherit liberalism.
Only when Christianity remained local, obsorbing and expressing European ideals and traditions, was Europe able to conquer. This was in-spite of Christianity, not because of Christianity.
Dear Chechar, hoped that you would leave some days the post dedicated to the anniversary of the birth of Hitler, but soon we have the anniversary of his death.
With regard to your note, you’re right, there were defenders of ancestral traditions as Porphyry and Celsus (of which do not conserve but fragments –his complete work was destroyed by Christian clerics, and the fragments we owe it to the critical work of Christian Origen –‘Against Celsus’). I meant that we didn’t have defenders of our traditions likes Demosthenes or Cicero. Although these nor had success with his words (Demosthenes trying to prevent the conquest of the Greek lands by Fillip of Macedonia, and Cicero, against Caesar, seeking a return to the Republic).
As for the comment that says that our greatness and our strength it must to Christianity first particularly some fragments you have already made in a previous post:
“Christianized or Islamized peoples have been deprived of our history, deprived of the natural evolution of our traditions. Our own future has been usurped. We have had a imposed history, Christian or Muslim. These ideologies have led our literary, architectural, scientific, philosophical, and musical creations. For centuries the themes of Biblical or Koranic characters have filled our literature, our architecture (temples dedicated to foreign gods), our music… In our European Middle Ages, for example, you won’t find on the windows, walls, cathedrals, or mosques our historical or legendary characters; our thinkers or the milestones of our history. Those are not, therefore, places of worship for ancient Europeans, but for Christians or Muslims.
For hundreds of years our cultural genius was forced to speak in alien terms for our being. Think of the literature, the music or the architecture we would have had if we had not been dominated by a foreign ideology or culture; if we had remained Romans, Greeks, Germans, Celts, Slavs…”
Certainly Christianity usurped our history. And would subvert the affirmation of the comment: without the genius and the power arya or Indo-European Christianity had sunk in misery. We were those who made great judeo-messianism, and not the contrary. This assertion can be checked if you look at what has been achieved by Christianity in other lands and in other peoples, in Ethiopia, for example. There we will find nothing of what our people sought him to this damn Eastern sect in Europe and to length and width of the planet (land, wealth, and power). We were the perfect vector for these parasites.
Christianity was for our people not only a burden, an obstacle, also was a mask, an instrument of alienation and control into the hands of unscrupulous men.
Another thing is not behind the Christianization of Europe, when Constantine and Theodosius (and later, with the German monarchs-warriors and later Slavs). These used the Jewish-messianic ‘values’. So did the Alliance between warriors pugnacious and priests wily; the Alliance between the sword and the cross. The purpose was just to dominate peoples through appropriate ideologies and beliefs.
“Christianity is Judaism for gentiles: a half-Judaism, a decaffeinated Judaism, a castrated and castrating Judaism; an ideology for slaves, servants, and subordinates.”
Our peoples had lost not only the freedom and light when the Christianization, also had lost dignity, pride, and honor –overcome this humiliating period is the only way to retrieve them.
“The common good is the highest law.”
This is not true for the Germanic people. Ancient Germanic law was personal and subjective, not public and objective and thus the Germanic law made no provisions for the public welfare.
“Power, whose origins were at once magical, divine and military, as Michel Rouche has pointed out, was exercised jointly by the “throne-worthy” elected king and his free warrior companions.”
Thus Roman law like the Mosaic and Canonical law, was a word-construct that advocated the pseudo-morality of the supremacy of the group over sovereign individuality.
German law allowed individual warriors the right to fight each other in a trial by combat that was not a tradition of Rome, as long as it was a fair fight. The readiness to fight eliminated all the ‘dastards’ and unscrupulous employing underhanded methods to gain their ends. This is the appeal of Jesus to the Germanic people. The Mosaic law restrained the killing of the unscrupulous among them, giving an evolutionary preference to those who used legal means, a collective force, to destroy individuals who were not legally minded.
Thanks for the book recommendations.
A remediation plan that simply focused on home schooling, of any sort, even Christian, might get 80% of the way to inculcating those virtues. After all, what parent doesn’t want their children to absorb all those good values.
An 80/20 approach, battle-hospital triage so to speak, might be the most we could hope for in the immediate future.
I’m reminded of the home-school teaching program of the trivium by the Bluedorn family. Yes, they’re Christian, but the trivium is an Aryan intellectual toolset if ever there was one, which goes way back to Aristotle. Just watch out for its sophist misuse.
Here’s the scoop on the imperial role of Christianity, as I would summarize it:
The Roman government (the Flavian Caesars) had their tame Jew scholar reverse-engineer and Judaism to create a docile version as an antidote to the violent, messianic Judaism that was raging at the time. they hoped to bring the Jews under control with this deracinated version of Judaism. (cf. Joe Atwill).
But this new religion eventually worked better as a means of controlling the non-Jews. Contantine formalized this usage by building a whole new social system around it (i.e., feudalism) which lasted a thousand years.
Some Jews down the centuries knew what had been done, what Christanity’s origins were. We now know this because Shakespeare’s plays have been shown, by typological analysis (cf. Atwill, again) to be written by a Marrano who was reversing, in the plays, the cannibalism jokes in the New Testament.
Since Jewish insiders have all along understood, better than gentiles, the importance of mythos in general and the slave-religion nature of Christian, then they were well-positioned to mind-fuck us from the mid-19th century onwards with the profusion of universalist derivatives of Christianity.
So you are asking me to believe also that Shakespeare’s plays, because of the claims of this Atwill, were written by a non-white, a converso? For the third time, I don’t buy this guy’s “research”.