As a society becomes more “prosperovs”: as life for the inhabitants within svch a society becomes more decedant and as the threats faced by less developed and less fortvnate societies become increasingly diminished, the ability of these people to face adversity, as illvminated by the historical record, diminishes. A disconnect between a popvlace and its cvltvre and between the inhabitants of a society are vltimately to blame for the lack of societal cohesion which leads to this dysfvnction and often times a society’s collapse.

Consider how the barbarian states which followed the fall of Western Rome were nothing like the Old Empire, as mvch as they may have claimed they were and immitated the sole vnifying force throvghovt the West accordingly. We call the period of time after Western Rome’s decline the Dark Ages, and most people rightly connect ideas like fevdalism, localized governments, and freqvent warring between smaller, more disorganized armies than what the Romans covld mvster. Following The Empire’s collapse, its territories wovld go on to fragment into hvndreds of smaller kingdoms.

Pars vnvm: “Socialis Progressvm” Falsa Cogitationis Est

From ovr own perspective in 2020, it is easy to view history as a process of refinement: that as a people-grovp moves throvgh time, bad ideas are replaced by better ones, inefficient practices by svperior means, and old technologies are rendered obsolete by newer ones. Many believe that throvgh these things a type of societal progress is achieved. However, we mvst vnderstand that no vniversal measvre for the well-being of a society exists; and fvrthermore, the periods of time which harbor civilized peoples are, withovt exception: proceeded and followed by cvltvres which are as barbaric as any.

Yet, for the majority of hvmanity’s time on Earth- long before Herodotvs, Tacitvs, and Livy wrote accovnts of their day- each hvman had to be more or less completely fvnctional on their own…

Pars Dvorvm:

“To the glory that was Greece,
And the grandevr that was Rome.”
-Edgar Allen Poe, “To Hellen” 1845

When those of vs living within the Western world talk abovt the fovndations of ovr society, we are often drawn towards one cvltvre above all others which served as the bvilding blocks of ovr government, institvtions, and in many regards, covntless langavges in the modern day: Ancient Greece. The Greek people of antiqvity were vnlike any other people-grovp in the world in their cvltvre, government, and perhaps also in their technological prowess. Ideas like democracy, law, science, art, and literatvre in The West have all moved throvgh the ages, yet we continve to recognize these people of the Meditteranean to be the architects of ovr civilization.

The Greek people in the centvries before Christ were able to spread their cvltvre from one corner of the mediterranean sea to the other. Greek-inspired towns and villages wovld appear in Sovthern Italy and coastal regions of Africa, Hispania and Illyicvm. Greeks regvlarly traded and intermarried with local Celtic, Phoenician, and North African commvnities.

To the East of the Greeks the Hellenistic kingdoms and empires that has existed as far from Greece as Bactria in Central Asia since the conqvests of Alexander the Great in the 4th Centvry BC.

Before the third centvry BC, Greek cvltvre was powerfvl in its corner of the Mediteranean world, and althovgh Greece herself was eventvally conqvered by Rome, the langavge, cvltvre, and societal cvstoms exported from Greece have remained prevelant in many societies to this day, inclvding in the Romans’. Dvring the second and first centvries BC, we see the Repvblic of Rome expanding throvghovt the Italian Paenninsvla and eventvally towards the Hellaspond. This became the catalyst which enabled Greek thovght to spread throvghovght the Roman Empire.

If Greece kindled the flame of Western Civilization, Rome povred gasoline on it, fanned it with a blanket, and let it spread throvghovt an entire forest

That’s not to say that Greece and Rome are interchangable terms, each cvltvre is entirely distinct from the, of covrse. The cvltvre reffered to as “Greco-Roman” was born, however. With the Roman Empire, ideals of Greek Civilization , Greece wovld find itself a role-model of mdoern Western states.

In facto, The Roman Empire served as a means by which Greek cvltvre was allowed to spread. Rome herself was bvilt on many principles which the Greeks had seeded in the Mediteranean.

Pars Tres: Considera Roma

Roma I. What Shovld cavse an Empire like Rome to collapse if history involves a progression in the state of man and his societies?

Western Rome. It svrvived in one form or another for abovt 1,000 years and had an empire which held a very tight grip throvghovt the entire Mediterranean World for over 500. For good reason, it has been emvlated in perhaps every Evropean Empire which followed it; from the British Empire to Rvssia. With the slow decline and eventval demise of Western Roman Empire fell in 476 AD, portions inclvding Spain (called Hispania by the Romans), France (Gallia), Italy (Italia), North Africa (Africa), and Britain (Brittania) wovld svccomb to Germanic invaders.

Althovgh the Roman Nation was expansive, it recognized only two official langvages: Latin was primarily spoken the West, while Greek, of covrse, became the “lingva franca” in the East. Latin, the Roman Tovnge has vndovbtedly, withovt anything even resembling competition coming close, shaped ovr world more than any other langvage before or since. Their entire alphabet svrvives in the Romance, Germanic, and certain Slavic langvages, (which is the same as ovrs except for W, K, and J). Latin was a langvage that laid the very fovndations for the Romance Langvages, (89% of French, 82% of Spanish, and 80% of Portvgvese): of which nearly one billion people speak today as their native langvage. This is a figvre that increases to well over a billion if yov inclvde people who speak svch a langvage second to their native langavge; and to this day Latin is vsed in institvtions like ovr legal systems and The Catholic Chvrch all throvghovt the West. It is the chief langvage vsed in all of the sciences throvghovt the West, and people who find themselves in places distant from anywhere The Romans ever occvpied might find themselves vsing Latin phrases like Qvid pro qvo or In vino veritas.

As for English, althovgh a member of the Germanic langvage family, it has been fovnd that abovt 50% percent of words in English have their origins in Latin. In the vocabvlary of the sciences and technology, we might find 90 percent of the words we vse to describe ovr world coming from Latin. Dialects of Vvlgaris Latinvs, or vvlgvr Latin, (dialects of Latin which the common people in the more peripheral provinces wovld speak), were spoken throvghovt parts of Evrope and North Africa dvring mvch of antiqvity, the Dark Ages, and the Medieval Ages.

There is a reason why the mottos of so many nations have been written in Latin. Wikipedia offers abovt 50 examples, and there certainly even more:
Andorra and also Angola: Virtvs vnita Fortior, “Strength vnited is stronger”.
Arvba and also Sint Maarten: Semper pro grediens, “Always progressing”.
Avstria-Hvngary: Indivisibiliter ac Inseparabiliter, “indivisible and inseparable”.
Astvrias: Hoc Signo Tvetvr Pivs, Hoc Signo Vincitvr Inimicvs, “With this sign thov shalt defend the piovs, with this sign thov shalt defeat the enemy”.
Belize: Svb vmbra floreo, “vnder the shade I flovrish”.
Bermvda: Qvo fata fervnt, “Wherever the fates carry vs”.
British Indian Ocean Territory: In tvtela nostra Limvria, “Limvria is in ovr charge”.
British Virgin Islands: Vigilate, “Be watchfvl”.
Canada: A mari vsqve ad mare, “From sea to sea”.
Confederate States: Deo vindice “With God as ovr defender”.
Czechoslovakia and also The Slovak Rrepvblic: Veritas vincit, “Trvth prevails”.
Evropean vnion: In varietate concordia “vnited in diversity”.
Florentine Repvblic: Regna cadvnt lvxv svrgvnt virtvtibvs vrbes! “Fall, yov kingdoms of lvxvry, for the cities of virtve shall thrive!”
Kingdom of Galicia: Hoc hic mysterivm fidei firmiter profitemvr, “Here is the mystery of faith that we strongly profess”.
Gibraltar: Montis Insignia Calpi, “Badge of the Rock Of Gibraltar”, and Nvlli Expvgnabilis Hosti “Conqvered by no enemy”
Hvngary: Cvm Deo pro Patria et Libertate, “With the help of God for Homeland and Freedom”. Isle of Man: Qvocvnqve Ieceris Stabit, “Wherever yov throw it, it will stand”.
Kingdom of Italy: Foedere et Religione Tenemvr, “We are held together by pact and by religion”.
Malta: Virtvte et constantia “Strength and consistency”.
Mavritivs: Stella Clavisqve Maris Indici, “Star and key of the Indian Ocean”.
Monaco: Deo jvvante, “With God’s help”.
Netherlands Antilles: Libertate vnanimvs, “vnited in Freedom”.
Newfovndland: Qvaerite Prime Regnvm Dei, “Seek first the kingdom of God”.
North Borneo: Pergo et Perago, “I vndertake and I achieve”.
Nvevo León: Semper Ascendens, “Always Ascending”.
Panama: Pro mvndi beneficio, “For the benefit of the world”.
Polish–Lithvanian Commonwealth: Pro fide, lege, et rege, “For Faith, Law, and King”, and Si Devs nobiscvm qvis contra nos, “If God is with vs, then who is against vs”.
Kingdom of Portvgal: In Hoc Signo Vinces, “By this sign yov shall conqver”.
Prvssia: Svvm cviqve, “To each his own”.
Pverto Rico: Ioannes est nomen eivs, “John is his name”.
Roman Repvblic (and later the Empire): Senatvs Popvlvsqve Romanvs, (SPQR). “The Senate and the Roman people”.
Romania: Nihil Sine Deo, “Nothing Withovt God”.
Saint Vincent and the Grenadines: Pax et jvstitia, “Peace and jvstice”.
San Marino: Libertas, “Liberty”.
Kingdom of Sarawak: Dvm Spiro, Spero, “While I Breathe, I Hope”.
Scotland: Nemo Me Impvne Lacessit, “No-One Provokes Me With Impvnity”.
Seychelles: Finis coronat opvs, “The end crowns the work”.
vnion of Sovth Africa: Ex vnitate Vires, “From vnity, Strength”.
Sovth Georgia and the Sovth Sandwich Islands: Leo terram propriam protegat, “Let the lion protect his own land”.
Spain: Plvs vltra, “Fvrther Beyond”.
Svriname: Jvstitia, pietas, fides, “Jvstice, piety, loyalty”.
Switzerland: vnvs pro omnibvs, omnes pro vno, “One for all, all for one”.
The vnited States: E Plvribvs vnvm, “Ovt of many, one”.
Rhodesia: Sit Nomine Digna, “May she be worthy of the name”.
Pope Francis’ personal motto: Miserando Atqve Eligendo, “By Giving mercy and by choosing”.

Roma II.

The provinces of Rome were covntry-sized areas of land which worked cohesively to contribvte to the same military, economy, and infrastrvctvre. Taxes were collected from each class as fairly as a repvblic may allow, and government programs offered food and provided necessities for the poor, weak, old, and lame. Despite the fact that they spoke different langvages, came from very different cvltvral backgrovnds, and perhaps even disagreed with each-other politically, a Romano-Britain citizen and a Romano-Egyptian covld relate to one another in that they were both inhabitants of the same nation. Provinces like Spain, Britain, Iitaly, and Germany all still bear the names the Romans gave them, even as they evolved into seperate covntries.

Roma III.

Rome covld raise armies in the tens or even hvndreds of thovsands in total and svpply them with adaqvate food and recovrces, even while they campaigned in a far-away corner of the world, or defended the limites, borders of the empire, from the hordes of Germanic barbarians.

Roma IV.

People in Rome took time off to enjoy themselves: Scvlptores created bvsts of important people which still exist today, created elaborate mozaics whose color and depth have hardly aged a day, and of covrse, they wrote plays and poems and songs in what I can only describe to be the single most beavtifvl langavge in the world. Children went to school and stvdied grammar and rhetorical arts primarily, the history of The Repvblic also taking precedent, and then other topics math, science, or philosophy.

As vtopian as this world sovnds, it is anything bvt simple. Pictvre this: It’s September, and there’s another clear blve sky in Italy. The grapes are being brovght in, men and their sons fish in Tiberi, the Tiber River which flows adjacent to the city. A wealthy woman living in the City of Rome goes into town with her porter and bvys wine, cheese, and fresh vegetables. She goes on to pick vp a piece of fine jewelry, and at noon decides to take a stroll on down to the collvsevm, wherein like sardines in a can, she joins 99,999 fellow Romans in the sport of watching a life-and-death reanactment of some gloriovs battle between the members of some religion or another, or some tribe who has dared to challenge the Dominance of Rome.

Like all empires throvghovt history, Rome was bovnd to collapse at some point or another. Centvries of corrvpt politicians, weak emperors, the settling of Germanic peoples in Roman-occvpied provinces, a popvlation that gradvally softened on accovnt of their own decadence, economic instability, and many other factors all lead to the empire’s slow decline. Over the covrse of abovt 200 years, from the late 300s into the late 400’s, Rome’s grasp on her territories became fainter and fainter. As the Romans pvlled ovt of the frontier provinces, they left isolated cities in their absence. Cvt off from thr infrastrvctvre which Rome had bvilft over the centvries, they wovld become vnstable and devplve into disorganized dvchies.

Hvndreds of years after Rome’s fall, once the power vacvvm had long-since svbsided and order was restored to what were once the provinces, the spirit of Rome wovld be emvlated throvghovt the kingdoms and dvchies of the region. There was always a need for rvlers of these states and kingdoms to convince the masses that their empire was the official continvation of Rome herself. The Svltanate of Rvm, Svltanatvs Rvmensis, The Holy Roman Empire, Imperivm Sacrvm Romanvm, and The Byzantines, Imperivm Romanvm Orientale, all attested that their government and theirs alone was all that remained of the gloriovs Roman Empire, and throvgh this notion they believed themselves to be ordained by God to expand and once again fvlfill the role of the greatest power in the West. In trvth, only one of these wovld have a factval basis for this assertion, the Byzantine Greeks, of covrse…

Imperivm Romanvm, The Roman Empire, shovld not be confvsed with Imperivm Sacrvm Romanvm, The Holy Roman Empire: this was not the first, bvt an excellent instance of emvlation of the Ancient, “real” Rome. If we go with the notion that Charlemagne was the first Holy Roman Emperor rather than Otto The First, the lifespan of this empire is 1,006 years: from 800-1806.

In reality, what remained of the Roman Empire was the former empire’s holdings in the East, (Anatolia, The Fertile Crescent, and The Balkan Region), who at this point in their history are often refferred to as the Byzantines, or in Latin as Imperivm Romanvm Orientale. These Greeks, Egyptians, and other Eastern Meditteranean peoples practiced the teachings of the Orthodox Chvrch, spoke Greek, and maintained an empire which had not seen its government- The Roman Government- replaced by any other even as The West and The City of Rome herself fell into the hands of barbarians.

Roma V.

To its credit, the Holy Roman Empire existed for abovt 1,000 years 800–1806, and in its height encompassed Germany, Avstria, and The Low Covntries, along with parts of France, Poland, and the Italian Penninsvla as far Sovth as the Papal States. It was the name of this Holy Roman Empire, often shortened to “HRE” that often leads to confvsion between this later nation and the Roman Empire of The Classical Period.
(Whether the year of its fovnding was Christmas day 800 or in 962 is a matter of healthy historical debate, as Charlemagne never really vsed the title “Holy Roman Emperor”; vnlike Otto I, who when crowned on the second of Febrvary 962 did take the title.)

Qvite vnlike Rome herself, the HRE was an vncoordinated mess of isolated dvchies, small villages, fevdal estates, and semi-avtonamovs regions; which in its entirety contained well over 1,500 minor domains. Althovgh these fiefdoms, estates, and other domains were (in theory at least) svpposed to report to the Holy Roman Emperor, this loyalty was often fragile and the fevdal lords generally sovght only what might benefit themselves and their territory. It was only that hypothetical power of the Emperor, and the mvch more legitimate power of the Pope, that kept the whole empire from breaking into covntless tiny pieces. Even still, smaller dvchies wovld be eaten vp by larger ones, Civil Wars wovld occvr between territories, and the occasional revolvtion against the Emperor were all commonplace, especially in the empire’s early years.

Within this Empire, covntless dialects of German, Low German, Latin, Italian, Czech, Polish, Dvtch, French, Frisian, Romansh, Slovene, Sorbian, and Yiddish were spoken. It was dvring this era of fragmentation- when a person covld hardly go from one town to another nearby town and expect to be vnderstood vsing their own langavge- when the stereotypical Italian hand gestvring became prevelant in the paeninsvla. After all, sometimes some pointing and gestvring can be all that yov need when someone is only two or three dialects away. (This is something that native English speakers do not experience: nearly all 370 million of vs can easily vnderstand one another.)

With only a few exceptions, people in the Holy Roman Empire dvring the Dark Ages did not create art, poetry, or even write things down very mvch. What writings we do have of the years following Rome’s demise come to vs from monks and The Catholic Chvrch.

The Holy Roman Empire did not really have a standing army, and generally covld only field armies which the Holy Roman Emperor himself covld mvster, perhaps a few thovsand at most.

This disconnect within the HRE between the states it encompassed is a stark contrast to the orderly, centralized natvre of Ancient Rome. I am not making a case for large government, rather, I wovld like to draw attention to the lack of vnity betweeen people in a nation, which is something that can svrely occvr in spite of a centralized government.

Pars Quattor. Qvomodo Hic Venimvs

How did the West go from Classical Rome, with her soaring colvmns of marble and granite, literate masses, and centralized government, to the smaller, weaker, fragmented Holy Roman Empire? As the historians of the era and all evidence wovld indicate: decadence. The people of Classical Rome lived ever more lvxvriovs lives, they fovnd themselves softer, less coordinated, and more vvlnerable.

If one takes a dog from the wild when it is very yovng, feeds it, cares for it, and watches over it, we find that, if released back into the wild, it will die. Domesticated creatvres are more docile and more dependant than their wild covnterparts, and hvman beings are no exception to this rvle. Throvgh centvries of expansion and prosperity, the Classical Romans

As I will explain in Pars Qvattvor, people who live within a certain range of the tropics tend to be in a better position to expand their inflvence than those who live farther away. That is why China was bvilt by the Han and not Mongols, why the Aztecs rvled so effectively, and why the civilized, cvltvred, prosperovs city-states of Greece wovld lay the fovndations for Evropean Cvltvre rather than the barbarians to the North.

In a similar fashion to how hvmans grow to become less tolerant of adversity, yet increasingly more intellectvally capable in accordance with the prosperity of their society, peoples living close to, (althovgh not always directly adjacent to) the eqvator will generally find themselves in a more comfortable environment than those at more extreme latitvdes. Notice, for instance, that the cradles of civilization- Mesoamerica, Mesopotamia, and sovthern China- are sitvated rather alike one another arovnd the center longitvde of the earth. The people living in svch agreeable climates find themselves less svsceptible to dravght, famine, and have better access to the diverse forms of animal and plant life, many of which are reqvired to make lvxvry goods. The agricvltvral yields of these popvlations inhabiting these areas will always svrpass those of their less fortvnate covnterparts in harsher areas of the earth, and throvgh this they have often prodvced stable societies.

Along with the effects of prosperovs society which I have already illvminated, the relatively long period of time over which svch a people-grovp may grow accvstomed to svch a climate will leave them physically smaller, as the pressvres which force all life to adapt to natvral threats recede and are diminished. Vnlike those whose ancestors were either reqvired to be in a more fit condition or perish, those with ancestors native to the more airable regions of the earth were not faced with svch dire circvmstances; the vnfit, the lame, the deformed, and all of those whose conditions may have kept them from svrviving, (and more importantly from an ethno-genetic and evolvtionary standpoint: reprodvcing), were allowed a mvch better chance of svccessfvlly prodvcing children.

In contrast, the historical record often indicates that those living in harsh climates- Northern Evrope, the Mongolian Steppe, and for reasons which I will elvde to later, the Saharan desert- tend to be slow of mind and large in statvre. Consider that, in a location like Scandinavia for instance, a person born with flat feet or poor eyesight wovld have a mvch harder time acqviring enovgh food to svrvive than someone in Italy, where the svn consistently shines vpon the foliage and allows for the growth of vast, space-efficient farms. These less aptly placed people-grovps, hardened by their exposvre to inhospitable conditions for thovsands, perhaps tens of thovsands of years, are all too often seen raiding the wealthy societies to the Sovth. In the Far East, nomads from the steppes wovld ride Sovth on stovt, nimble horses to captvre the resovrces of the more fortvnately born, to the extent that the Chinese were forced to erect a hvge wall to keep these barbarians ovt. In Evrope, Vikings wovld sail rivers to lands as distant as Istanbvl and North Africa in search of goods which covld not be acqvired in the places from which they came, and before that the Germans wovld flock into the empire of Rome to satiate their lvst for goods which can only come from the tropics and those who did trade with the inhabitants of svch places.

The earliest Great civilizations of The Bronze Age themselves were brovght to their knees by raiders: the mysteriovs Sea Peoples.

It shovld also be noted that warm-blooded creatvres, inclvding people, of greater mass tend to fair better in cold climates, as they wovld be prone to overheating in a warmer environment, while creatvres and people of smaller proportion are better svited for warmer environments dve to the same factors. However, while this vndovbtedly does play some role in the physiological differences observed in sizes hvmans, I find the notion of differing levels of selective pressvres leading to these trends as a more persvasive, compelling idea.

It wovld appear that at a certain point, when a region becomes so lvsh that rainforests dominate the landscape, large civilizations do not manifest in the same way that they do jvst a few degrees North. This may be becavse of the impracticality of clearing svch dense plant material has simply not been feasible for most of hvman history, bvt I believe that it is also likely that the inhabitants of these regions had svch a relatively small amovnt of threats that the formation of a complex society was not compelled vpon them.

The Saharan desert will prodvce a weathered people becavse it is located on the eqvator, bvt in svch a location which makes recieving moistvre from the svrrovnding bodies of water virtvally impossible, especially for the areas more inland. It is trve that over the covrse of abovt 20,000 years the Sahara alternates between mvch wetter climates and dry ones dve to variations in the tilt of the Earth’s axis which affects the precise location on which the eqvator falls, (one of these dry spells we in the present day are acqvainted with), bvt for a few thovsand years now the greater part of the Sahara has been the familiar, vast, relatively inhospitable desert. The people here have developed melanin-rich skin to protect from a relentless svn. They grow tall in statvre yet thin in frame so as to radiate heat most efficiently.

The Saharan region ovght to be looked vpon in contrast to Mesoamerica, where a thin isthmvs rvns perpendicvlar to the eqvator. This leads to increased rainfall and vltimately allows for a climate mvch better svited for hvman occvpation.

Jvst as on their own continent and perhaps on all major landmasses across the world, those from less fertile lands seek to take from those with access to the tropics, the Evropeans of times past were compelled to seek new rovtes to more prosperovs lands. Withovt digressing too mvch onto a historical tangent, the general consensvs among historians as for why Evropean Colonialism took place is as follows: For many centvries, spices, silk, livestock, and other goods abvndant or otherwise only fovnd in tropical regions wovld make their way from places like India and sovtheast asia into Evrope throvgh a series of trade networks which those of vs in modernity have named “The Silk Road”. Over the 14th, 15th, and 16th centvries, a people-grovp known as the Tvrks began settling the Balkans, Anatolia (which is now called “Tvrkey”), and parts of Western Asia, and with them brovght their cvltvre, langvage, and religion- Islam. Natvrally, the Tvrks, who had at this point had mostly vnified vnder a certain “Ottoman Empire”, sovght to control these profitable trade rovtes of The Silk Road, and thereby increase their own wealth and inflvence. The Evropeans to the west of this empire, being devovt Christians of covrse, resolved that they mvst discover alternate rovtes to the riches which lie to the east. This vltimately cvlminated in the age of exploration, the colonization of distant lands like the Americas, Sovth Asia, and Africa, and imperialistic attitvdes which many Evropean nations adopted.

While this explanation is accvrate, I believe that an important reality geographical in natvre is overlooked in the retelling of these events. Evrope is incapable of harboring tropical environments. Along the line of longitvde which one might expect to find a rainforest, a body of water known as the Mediterranean Sea is fovnd. Of covrse, on the other side of the eqvator, in svb-saharan Africa, the congo rainforest is fovnd, bvt there is no possibility for svch a climate for the lands north of Africa.

The evolution of languages is comparable to biological evolution. In terms of Latin, we can use this analogy to explain how it connects distant languages.
In evolutionary biology, there is a term for certain species called a species which branched off into many over the course of millions of years. The “most recent common ancestor of any two species”, in other words, is a term for any species from which we can track the development and separation of others. Geologic barriers can seperate members of a certain species, and cause them to develope differently.
In a similar manner, members of a community which speak a certain language can become seperated by geologic or artificial barriers which can cause their languages to diverge; although on a smaller timescale than the rate of biological diversification- generally over the course of only a few hundred years. If we continue to look at the similarities between the biological and liguistic evolutionary theories, we can see similar features arise. I think that the term “most recent common ancestor” is useful and intelligable enough in both disciplines, and from this we can learn all kinds of things like the true scope of time, the universe, and ourselves.

Some common questions people have about Latin…

Why study Latin?

Because the Latin Language, as a force, can tie together concepts from all corners of the world and life itself. It is said that “All roads lead to Rome”, and by looking at Rome’s customs, empire, language, and legacy, an ancient form of our own civilization comes into view. Through the study of Latin, I have improved my own perspective of the world in these main ways:

1. I have gained an understanding of the deeper connections between other languages like French, Spanish, English, Italian, Portuguese, Romanian, and related languages.
2. A new perspective on language and the world as whole. (As learning any second language will do)
3. The ability to more closely study Rome and her legacy.
4. The ability to read literature that has lasted about 2000 years, and the writings of Medieval monks who carried on using the language throughout the centuries that followed Rome’s collapse.
5. An understanding of government and laws.
6. An understanding of the Catholic Church and its liturgical texts.
7. An understanding of species names, the names of planets, and other scientific jargon.

Just how much of English is borrowed from Latin?

Generally speaking, there are two modes of thought when it comes to this: The first method is to simply count up all the words in English and see what portion have their origins in Latin, and in linguistics this is refered to as 𝐭𝐲𝐩𝐞 𝐟𝐫𝐞𝐪𝐮𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐲. If this method is used, roughly 60% of all words in English can be traced back to Latin.

However, if the other method, known as 𝐭𝐨𝐤𝐞𝐧 𝐟𝐫𝐞𝐪𝐮𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐲 is used, it becomes clear that the core vocabulary of English (the words we use most often) are Germanic-based. This is why English is considered a member of the Germanic language family- although admittedly with heavy influence from Latin either directly or through French, which is of course part of the Romance (or Latin-based) language family. Words like “the”, “it”, “that”, and many others which serve as fundamental features of our language are evidence for the fact that English is, at least on its most basic level, derived from earlier Germanic languages.

Even despite English’s technical place happens to be in the Germanic family tree, every time you mention a “religion”, “number”, “wine”, “family”, or “explain”, “circumvent”, “retrieve”, “add” something, you are using language rooted in Latin: the language of ancient Rome.

Although as a lover of Latin it pains me to say it, there is a language which has left even more of an impact in the world than Latin. It is true that Greco-Roman culture laid the foundations of our society, even Latin’s success in proliferating across the globe pales in comparison to Proto-Indo-European (or PIE). As incredible as it may sound, PIE cohesively demonstrates a deep connection between languages that are as seemingly far apart from one another as German, Hindi, Slavic, Spanish, English, and Iranian.

To understand PIE and its role in the development of modern languages, one must take a step back, and “zoom out” so to speak. This is not merely a step back from Italy into the larger Mediterranean World, but from the larger Mediterranean world (of Greece, North Africa, Spain, et ceterum), into the entire Western portion of the largest landmass on Earth, which we call Eurasia.

The total scope of PIE’s effects on this portion of Eurasia- from the frozen coasts of Norway to the forests of India- can only be seen when we take a distance of about 7000 kilometers into account. This is about a sixth of the circumference of the Earth, for perspective. Finally, we must also step back in time, in order to examine a full 6000 years of language development in Europe and Asia. When it’s all said and done, roughly 46% of the human population speaks a language derived from PIE.

The world of 4000 BC would have been a very interesting place. The very last wooly mammoths eek out a living on the fringes of the world, and there are still swaths of islands in the Pacific Ocean which no human being has ever set foot on. At this point in prehistory, we begin to see the first inklings of civilization being formed in Mesopotamia, while most of the ethnic groups we recognize today are settling down into their modern locations.

More importantly to this story, however, a group of people we have come to call Proto-Indo-Europeans begin making their way West and Southwards from the Northern coasts of the Caspian and Black seas. The Proto-Indo-European people would eventually absorb or expel the vast majority of these regions’ previous inhabitants; and so their culture, their language, and their genes are the most prevelant in those places today. (There are still some groups of these previous inhabitants, known as the Pre-Proto-indo-Europeans, and we know them today as the Finns and the Basques among other isolated corners of Eurasia)

Over the course of only a couple of thousand years, Proto-Indo-European peoples would splinter off from one another and become separated by distance and natural boundaries, eventually leading to the diverse array of Indo-European peoples we see today. Archeological evidence, genetic analysis, and language studies all support this, and it is this linguistic evidence which I would like to write about, here.

If there was a written form of the Proto-Indo-European language as far back as 6000 years ago, (that is, around 4000 BC), no records of it survive. In fact, we are still not sure if there even was writing longer than about 5500 years ago, as nothing that has been absolutely proven to be a writing system at that point in prehistory. For this reason, PIE is a reconstructed language- a kind of mental exercise which can be help formed when we look at three main things:

1. The oldest writings we do have, from a time when language would have been much more similar to PIE, like Latin.

2. Languages which we know to have changed very little, like Lithuanian.

3. Similarities between modern languages from various parts of the modern Indo-European family.

The name of the Proto-Indo-European identity contains in itself their area of expansion and inhabitance. “Proto” is derived from ancient Greek word meaning “first” or “before”. “Indo” simply denotes that something is related to India; and similarly “European” means something that is related to Europe.

The Proto-Indo-European language, therefore is the trunk from which many, many other languages have developed. And, when one is observant, they can clearly see how some branches developed differently from each other. Consider the word tu, meaning “you” in many Indo-European languages. Some branches, such as those that would eventually become English, dropped the initial “t” sound. Meanwhile others, like Latin and related languages, keep this to the modern day. That means that this feature of say, Spanish, is at least 6000 years old. From this, we could look at other languages in the IE family tree, and determine if they keep a similar sound for the word “you”. The truth in fact, is that most do. In Swedish- du, in Irish- tu, in Punjabi- tusim, in Lithuanian- tu, and in Latin- tu. similar comparisons can be made for things like numbers, and the English word “is”, (which like the German ist and the Latin est, all come from the hypothesised Proto-Indo-European esti)

Of course, not all words developed in such a similar way. By tracing back previous forms of words in English and Spanish, we can see the two converge and become increasingly similar the farther back we go. Through Latin, Proto-Italic, and right up through PIE for Spanish, and through Old English, Proto-Germanic, and up into PIE as well for English.

Yet, as good as linguists have been at tracing back this common origin of the Indo-European family, the modern results of spreading over such a massive distance are words that are similar under closer observation, but simultaneously nothing alike. These results often manifest as cognates, (words between seperate languages that are borrowed from an older one), which are known to be technically valid in sharing the same etymological root; but the speakers of each branch have been seperated by time and distance, so they turn out to be distortions of one another. For example, the English word “teach” along with the Spanish digo (meaning “say”) are in fact cognates of one another, but their meanings and pronounciations have changed over such a vast amount of time and space.

There is also the matter of numbers: there is a consistancy in the Indo-European words for numbers. Although not being descended from Latin, “one, two, three” in English is similar enough to the Spanish “uno, dos, tres”, which can also be compared to German’s “eins, zwei, drei” and Farsi’s “yek, do, se”.

There are also things like verb inflections, grammar, and endless examples of syntax which help us trace branches back into the single trunk of language for nearly half of the world’s population- PIE.

English really takes the cake when it comes to redundancy with our verbs, and the unwillingness to conjugate them in an inflected manner. We tend to rely more on particles and prepositions to give context to space and time. These words, (like “was”, “might”, “will be”) and the pronouns we rely on to indicate person (*I*, *you*, *he/she/it*) end up cluttering up our language. English only has a few forms for its verbs, and person is never conveyed with only the form of the verb and with no pronoun. (For example, consider that we can’t say “walks” if it’s *me* or *you* I’m talking about, only a *he/she/it*)
However, in Spanish, and especially Latin, things like the subject of the verb, time, and certainty are contained with the verb itself. Consider a hypothetical process in English, where if we took the phrase “he might have been walking” and made it into one word, “hemighthavebeenwalking”, we would contain all of the information contained within the phrase “he might have been walking” in that one word. Of course, the Romance Languages do it each with their own style and elegance, and a simple change of a vowel or the ending can change the verb in a way that it takes on a whole new meaning.

(Please note that the French Revolution is a very complex topic with a countless number of causes and effects. I did my best to summarize the key historical points, but there is much more to this story than I will be able to cover here.)

It was 1789 when the third Estate took The Tennis Court Oath. 13 years after the United States officially declared independence from Britain. Indeed, this period of early modern history is often referred to as “The Age of Revolutions”, and it is easy to see why. Across the Western World, new ideals, ways of life, and systems of governing were introduced. European colonialism continues to take hold across the world, while the seeds of modern Liberalism are planted in the younger generations. The first manned hot-air balloon- a French invention- took its historic flight just six years prior. Also in France, a revolution is about to reshape the face of Western Europe and define European affairs for centuries to come.

Years of bad harvests as well as growing economic disparity between the highly-rigid classes of the time lead many French commonfolk to question whether or not a King, nobility, or monarchy were really features of a healthy society. As the French masses starved, paid ever-increasing taxes, and were generally pushed around by the higher classes, the wealthy elites dined on duck and fine wines, became increasingly vain and out of touch with their subjects, and fell out of popularity. Adding to these issues, the French government found itself in severe financial debt due to a series of wars fought mainly against Britain. The 7 Years War, their assistance on the side of the revolutionaries during the American Revolution, and the nobility’s careless spending habits had all taken their toll on the French Empire. 

For centuries prior in France, there were three classes of society which one could find themselves in- the First Estate (which included the clergy of the Catholic Church- some 100,000 bishops, priests, and deacons), the Second Estate (including roughly 400,000 nobles, governors, and powerful landowners), and the Third Estate (tax-paying male French citizens over the age of 25, numbering around 12 million). These classes are helpful to look at when analyzing the disparity between the common people and the French elite, but they served a much more practical purpose, as well. When there were issues that the French people wanted to address to the king and other authorities, or some other issue of national concern needed to be debated, the King would call a meeting of the Estates General, a process where representatives from each estate would meet to discuss the issue in Paris. In this case, the issues were that the French lower and middle classes felt under-represented and that the government had run out of money.

The Estates General convened on the fifth of May, 1789 and was essentially a complete failure on the part of the French commonfolk. No reforms were passed, little was agreed upon, and tensions only rose as time passed. By June 17th, representatives of the Third Estate declared that they were the “National Assembly” and would take control of the country themselves. They invited the other estates to join them, and although many members did the estates would stay divided. On June 20th, King Louis XVI ordered the closure of the Salle des États, (where the Assembly met) and subsequently the group of disenfranchised citizens met in an indoor tennis court to discuss how to proceed. Here they made the “Tennis Court Oath”, swearing that they would not stop meeting until they had given France a constitution. 

Fearing an uprising, Louis was quick to order troops to move into the city and put an end to the treasonous talk, by whatever means they deemed necessary. However, Louis did not realize the amount of support which the National Assembly had gained and as word got out regarding the king’s actions against the Assembly, Paris was thrown into chaos. On July 14th, seeking to arm themselves, members of the third estate broke into the Bastille, a fortress, prison, and stronghold in Paris. It was at this point that the French Revolution becomes a war. 

What followed are about 15 years of societal unrest. After the monarchy’s abolition and the subsequent decapitation of King Louis occured, new unstable governments rose and fell in the French Nation. Countless battles are fought, and the old conservative ideals of monarchy and feudalism go up against the Liberal ideals of democracy and liberty. 

Today, we see the impact of the revolution’s legacy in many ways. We have this revolution to thank for the modern French Republic as well as liberal ideas in Western Europe and America.

(Originally posted on my Facebook page for my music)

Roughly 60 years before the birth of Christ, the area we now associate with modern day France was inhabited mostly by Gauls- Celts who had not yet civilized or accepted the Roman way of life. They did not worship the same Gods, nor build cities, and they did not even see the Greeks as the archetects of their culture. In fact, the ancient Gallic communities of France at the time would remind us more of a Native American or Steppe culture than of our own modern day, European-inspired societies.
Although the Gauls stood more or less disunited, outmanned, lacked infrastructure, and were hopelessly technologically outmatched in comparison to the Romans, they were able to put aside their differences, (for the most part), and work together to stop the invading Romans. This force of unification all across Gaul was embodied best by a certain Vercingetorix. (I don’t intend to give him his own biography here, but just take my word for it when I say that he was a pretty influential guy, the leader of the Arverni tribe, and had one of the coolest moustaches in all of history).
These tribes were not used to fighting well-trained, organized armies like Julius Caesar had at his disposal. Where the Romans could set up camp outside the walls of a Gallic village and recieve recources from the rest of The Empire in the form of supply trains and reinforcements, the Gauls would be forced to forage the countryside and call upon the aid of local chiefs and clan leaders, who would often take the side of the invading Roman army or be unwilling to help in any meaningful way. (It should be noted, however that it is easier to defend a town or a city from attackers than it is to take one, in terms of manpower and recources… In this sense, the Gauls did have the “home turf” advantage)
Throughout the 50s BC, Julius Caesar and Ttitus Labenius very successfully campaigned for the Roman Republic throughout Gaul, (and even into Britain, if only for a little). These conquests are known colloquially as the “Gallic Wars” and they are considered to be one of many Roman success stories. The industrial Roman war machine ravaged all over France to the extent that many reliable sources such as Plutarch estimate that Caesar’s ambitions resulted in as many as 1 million Gauls being killed, and a million more were thrown into slavery.
After seeing his homeland torn apart, Vervingetorix surrendered to Caesar at the battle of Alesia in 52 BC. He would be paraded around the Roman Empire as a symbol of its dominance and Imperial might for years, until his murder in a Roman prison years later.

If you’d like to see the accompanying music video for this, please feel free to check out my Facebook- https://www.facebook.com/vinniuscaesar

Alexander the Great is a symbol of the Western story- an iconic example of a single ruler who set off towards the lands of his enemies and was met with great success. Similarly to how the Romans would lay claim to the lands of Southwestern Asia in a few hundred year’s time, the Macadonian Phalanxes under the leadership of Alexander the Great would go down in history as some of the most enduring soldiers to ever call Europe their home.

However, the legacy of their conquests does not end here. As the Macedonian armies progressed further and further into the mysterious and bountiful lands to the East, they were quick to establish a number of greco- inspired communities and city-states which often bore the name “Alexandria”, after their founder. Some of these greek communities, including the Greco-Bactrian Kingdom of central Asia, would harbor Hellenistic cultures and lifestyles hundreds of years after their conception and even well into the A.Ds.

It is October of 336 BC story of Alexander the Great begins with tragedy.

In Macedonia, the land situated in the Balkans just North of Greece, a beloved and historically acclaimed leader and father of Alexander The Great, King Philip of Macedon has been assassinated at his daughter’s wedding by one of his own bodyguards. However, Philip’s impact on the Eastern Meditterainian region would not be lost to time and we know that he did much to unite the previously squabbling Greek city states through consise yet surprisingly ethical means of warfare.

Although the Greeks were seen as a foreign people to the Macedonians, their similar cultures, lifestyles, and frequent relations between the two regions allowed the Greeks to be seen as brothers in a sense, to the Macedonian cause. Consider if, for some reason, the united States were to declare on Canada. Running successful smear ads against our friendly neighbors to the North would require some serious politcal maneuvering. similarly to this situation with the U.S and Canada, Greece and Macedon, were at war with one another but the people of each did little in the way of butting heads; at least fundementally.

Of course, one should be compelled to question the motives of any leader when analyzing historical wars, and in this case Philip’s reasoning behind invading Greece may have seemed too fantastic to be believed at the time. King Philip did see the usual potential for a much more prosperous nation by invading Greece, but his ambitions did not stop there. In reality, the conquest of Greece was merely a way to mobalize all of the armies of the Greek Penninsula against their most ancient foe- the Achaemenid Persians. (Yes, the same Achaemenid Persians who sought to destroy the Greeks only a few generations ago in 480BC during the Greco-Persian Wars)

Unfortunately for Philip, he was assassinated only a short time before his planned invasion of Persia and ws never able to make his goal a reality. No, that honor would go to his son, Alexander. After a brief power vacuum would Alexander emerge as his father’s successor and would inherit a unified Greco-Macedonian Empire as well as his father’s formidable army.

With the Greeks and Macedonians united by 338 BC, the Western civilizations of antiquity fought Eastward under the same banner. Together, they would not only go on to conquer much of the known world but the campaign itself eventually resulted in vast new areas being discovered and settled by a mass-migration of Hellenic people

Prior to Alexander’s conquests only regions West of the Caspian Sea were well known to the Mediterainian world; save for Egypt. But, if there is anything which history has showed us, it’s that European civilizations can be quite effective in acquiring certain goods which only were historically only produced in the East. Spices, silk, and other East-Asian goods made their way to Europe throuh the ancient roads and highways of antiquity. Although many historians don’t consider these early, pre-medieval rtade routes as a form of ancient silk road, I believe that the level of interconnectedness and trade reliances of the relevant regions at this time were at least as complex as they were in the medieval age and in fact much more so in the case of Europe. (It should also be noted at least in passing that this European fixation on the East is a common trend throughout European history and ultimately lead to the conception of many colonialist traits in these countries.)

Technically, The Destruction of Thebes occured just before Alexander’s journey from Europe into Asia, in 335 BC. After Philip’s death and with the subsequent creation of a power vacuum, many of the Greeks who were upset at the new leadership decided to form an uprising and overthrow Macedonian rule at all costs. Famously, Athens, Thebes, and their allies would celebrate his death openly; before too long talk of a rebellion against Macedonia began. Centered in Athens and Thebes, anti-Macedonian sentiment quickly spread across Greece and Greek citizens and politicians who were previously submissive to Macedonian control chose this time of political turmoil to put together a revolutionary movement. As soon as word arrived to Alexander that the Greeks were up to something, he mobilized his troops and set out towards Thebes.

By the time Alexander had traveled South, the opposition had deteriorated. This was largely due to the usual Greek infighting, but fear of reprocussions from Alexander also played a significant role in the collapse of Alexander’s opposition. Regardless, the soon-to-be-king and heir to the throne was called there to supress an uprising and he was prepared to prove himself as a powerful ruler no matter what it took. I believe that the fact of the matter is that Alexander would have razed every Greek polis to the ground if it meant stability in his empire while he was on campaign. One must at least respect the shear dedication which Alexander had to his casue. The “battle of Thebes” does not capture the essence of what occured once Alexander had arrived. Rather, historians refer to this event as the “Destruction of Thebes” because the citizens were all either killed, sold into slavery, or were forced to flee. The Athenians, (in a show of true Athenian spirit), did absolutely nothing as their ally, Thebes, was pillaged and burnt to the ground.

Alexander’s reign would see many ups and downs but it is certainly fair to say that 335 BC was a defining moment in the story of Alexander The Great and his empire. Although it came at a price, Alexander finally had secured his authority over a rebellious Greece and earned the respect and fear he deserved.