Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
BCM
Durkin Tactical Franklin Armory
User Panel

Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 3
Posted: 6/17/2006 9:00:57 PM EDT
(Yes, I know it's supposed to be "Spartans," but I want it to fit my question)

If you were taken back in time to the height of the Roman Republic (not the later Empire - this way, you could affect more of history), presuming that you were able to communicate with the Romans and they did not kill you out of hand, what would be the single most important piece of information you could give them? I'm talking about things that you know, right now, without any consultation of books or Google. What is in your head that could most change the course of history?

For me, it'd have to be germ theory. I understand the causative agents of disease in a way that even the most brilliant of Roman doctors could not, considering they had no microscopes, no concept of bacteria or viruses. I could share what I know about germs, teach about disinfectants (high-proof alcohol, if nothing else, and boiling water for medical instruments), demonstrate sterile techniques, explain wound cleansing, closing, and protection. The lives this information would save through history would be uncountable.

I expect for a lot of people the answer will be "gunpowder," but I can't share that one. I know it involves sulfur, charcoal, and saltpeter, but I don't know the ratios, and I don't even know what saltpeter looks like, much less where to find it.

So, what is the most important thing inside your mind?
Link Posted: 6/17/2006 9:03:36 PM EDT
[#1]
The threat of religion.
Link Posted: 6/17/2006 9:08:57 PM EDT
[#2]

Quoted:
The threat of religion.

They'd kill you for that one.  Religion at that time (and up to this one) was a major component of rule.  No way they'd abandon it.

I'd say medicine is high up on the list.  

I'd also say "Lead plumbing and lead-based makeup is not a bright idea."
Link Posted: 6/17/2006 9:21:25 PM EDT
[#3]
Actually, from what I can tell, the Romans weren't really hardcore about religion until Christianity came along. They had lots of cults of greater or lesser standing, worshipping many different gods, including non-Roman gods like Mithras (initially Persian).

I mean, the pre-Christ Jews were allowed to practice their religion as they pleased, after the initial conquest and crushing of military resistance. The Romans weren't driven by religious zeal to convert or kill nonbelievers (they killed huge numbers of people, yes, but not for religious reasons).

It was when Christianity started becoming a major issue that they started paying attention, first by persecution and then by adopting it for themselves and prohibiting other religions.
Link Posted: 6/17/2006 9:26:59 PM EDT
[#4]
learn English.
Link Posted: 6/17/2006 9:31:48 PM EDT
[#5]
I would bring them the true glory of MARPT and the proven theory of get both.


And just maybe convince them that they need to invest in better bread makers.
Link Posted: 6/17/2006 10:24:42 PM EDT
[#6]
ummm....   buy Microsoft stock!
Link Posted: 6/18/2006 3:32:58 AM EDT
[#7]
"Over two thousand years from now there will be a civilisation much like yours.  Our civilisation fell.  We gave away our wealth and granted the rights of citizenship to those who did not earn it."
Link Posted: 6/18/2006 3:45:50 AM EDT
[#8]

Quoted:
learn English.

That Latin was a real killer. Would have made high school much easier too
Link Posted: 6/18/2006 4:23:48 AM EDT
[#9]
This sci fi novell was written in the 1960s by  L Sprague de Camp.
Link Posted: 6/18/2006 4:35:56 AM EDT
[#10]

Quoted:
This sci fi novell was written in the 1960s by  L Sprague de Camp.




This SF novel has been done over . . . and over . . . in greater and lesser forms ever since then.


Oh, SteyrAUG, religion is what made Western society great.  What other religion in the world has gotten their citizens to the places we are at now?  While there are some loons (okay, a lot of loons) who are currently getting most of the press, the majority of those who believe are well grounded.

For instance, it was the monks in Scotland (IIRC) who preserved the knowledge from destruction by the Norsemen and the Danes.  This provided the foundation on which Britain was built and allowed our nation to come into being.
Link Posted: 6/18/2006 4:41:05 AM EDT
[#11]
Link Posted: 6/18/2006 4:50:16 AM EDT
[#12]
Don't... Kill... Julis... Ceasar.....
Link Posted: 6/18/2006 4:54:07 AM EDT
[#13]
teach better war tactics. the whole stand everybody in line and charge is just a way to lose troops. I prefer sneaky bastage fighting much more than stand and die techniques.
Link Posted: 6/18/2006 4:54:13 AM EDT
[#14]
I'd tell them to ease up with the whole civil-war thing, and they will do just fine.

P.S. Wipe the Seleucids from the face of the Earth.
Link Posted: 6/18/2006 4:56:11 AM EDT
[#15]

Quoted:
Yes,  Religon is, in many cases, good for society.  Christianity is one of the reasons this country became great.  It instilled a moral compass in society that we now miss and it part of the reason of the multitude of problems we have today.

I really feel sorry for all you that have NO religon.



Religion was the worst invention of mankind. It has killed more people than any disease, and still does.

Why do you think i need to look to the sky with a book in my hand to see what's right and wrong?
Link Posted: 6/18/2006 4:56:19 AM EDT
[#16]

Quoted:
teach better war tactics. the whole stand everybody in line and charge is just a way to lose troops. I prefer sneaky bastage fighting much more than stand and die techniques.





Of all the faults with Rome, their war machine was not one of them. Even at the end, they very rarely lost battles against external foes.
Link Posted: 6/18/2006 4:58:44 AM EDT
[#17]
Imagine the world we'd have today if the Romans knew about gun/blackpowder.

Maybe there wouldn't be    a world.
Link Posted: 6/18/2006 4:59:22 AM EDT
[#18]
I'd tell them to watch out for Commodus -- since Maximus, one of their best generals ever, ends up getting enslaved and killed because of this lame emperor who has a striking resemblence to a young Johnny Cash.
Link Posted: 6/18/2006 5:01:00 AM EDT
[#19]
Do yourself a favor,LEAVE ATTILLA ALONE.(in fact,support him against the visagoths)
Link Posted: 6/18/2006 5:02:09 AM EDT
[#20]
I'd tell them to go kill all the muslims.
Link Posted: 6/18/2006 4:35:19 PM EDT
[#21]

Quoted:


Oh, SteyrAUG, religion is what made Western society great.  What other religion in the world has gotten their citizens to the places we are at now?  While there are some loons (okay, a lot of loons) who are currently getting most of the press, the majority of those who believe are well grounded.

For instance, it was the monks in Scotland (IIRC) who preserved the knowledge from destruction by the Norsemen and the Danes.  This provided the foundation on which Britain was built and allowed our nation to come into being.



Religion DESTROYED the Roman Empire within a few hundred years of becoming a Christian nation. The theocracy that was created in Europe as a result gave us the Dark Ages.

Islam isn't doing the world too many favors either.
Link Posted: 6/18/2006 7:03:48 PM EDT
[#22]

Quoted:

Quoted:


Oh, SteyrAUG, religion is what made Western society great.  What other religion in the world has gotten their citizens to the places we are at now?  While there are some loons (okay, a lot of loons) who are currently getting most of the press, the majority of those who believe are well grounded.

For instance, it was the monks in Scotland (IIRC) who preserved the knowledge from destruction by the Norsemen and the Danes.  This provided the foundation on which Britain was built and allowed our nation to come into being.



Religion DESTROYED the Roman Empire within a few hundred years of becoming a Christian nation. The theocracy that was created in Europe as a result gave us the Dark Ages.

Islam isn't doing the world too many favors either.



Christianity did not do the Empire many favors.

HOWEVER, Byzantium survived for anouther 1000 years as a Christian state, so the new religion cannot bear the whole blame.

And Byzantine Christianity was a lot different than that practiced in the West, it was not the enemy of learning like Rome was.  In part because Byzantium had to deal with Persia, a equally large, equally advanced, even more ancient NON-Christian state.  Byzantium was forced to learn tolerance of other ideas.

What the Roman Republic needed was the printing press.

The Republic fell simply because the public knew only what the small college of 500 or so senatorial families WANTED them to know.

The Republic fell because bad communication prevented transpericy in goverment.  The Empire was much better suited to the communications means available- but in the end even it proved too much for one man to handle.  Byzantium survived largely because it was only half the size of the early Empire.

Both Imperial Rome and Byzantium suffered MOSTLY from the fact that there was no fixed method of selecting a new emperor or replacing a incompitent one.  When there had been a fixed method of chosing a leader- the Republic- the politicians allowed so many exceptions for expediency- both demanded and enabled by a lack of communications and general ignorance because so much was not written down and what was could not be deseminated- that they wound up creating the Empire that for 500 years they had fought against.

The printing press and maybe also how to make paper (but if you go AFTER Ceasar had taken Egypt they had papyrus that would have probably worked as well)
Link Posted: 6/18/2006 7:07:14 PM EDT
[#23]
The end is near...it really is...
Link Posted: 6/18/2006 7:08:00 PM EDT
[#24]

Quoted:
I'd tell them to go kill all the muslims.



The Roman empire fell 476 CE

Islam arose around the 600s-700s CE.

Tell me, how could they have done that? Or are you just blindly following your hatred and wishing facts wouldn't keep getting in your way?

Edit: I wouldn't tell the Romans anything. It's impossible to know how history would be affected by any given change that's made. Too many decisions rely on other decisions, too many people are unpredictable. You tell the Roman empire to ally with the other Germans against the Visigoths, it may be a world Roman empire who suppress free speech and weapons ownership by the time you get back here.
Link Posted: 6/18/2006 7:10:14 PM EDT
[#25]
Steam turbines.
Link Posted: 6/18/2006 7:17:20 PM EDT
[#26]

Quoted:

Quoted:
I'd tell them to go kill all the muslims.



The Roman empire fell 476 CE

Islam arose around the 600s-700s CE.

Tell me, how could they have done that? Or are you just blindly following your hatred and wishing facts wouldn't keep getting in your way?

Edit: I wouldn't tell the Romans anything. It's impossible to know how history would be affected by any given change that's made. Too many decisions rely on other decisions, too many people are unpredictable. You tell the Roman empire to ally with the other Germans against the Visigoths, it may be a world Roman empire who suppress free speech and weapons ownership by the time you get back here.



That was only the fall of the western empire. The eastern empire lasted
for another 1000 years.
Link Posted: 6/18/2006 7:18:28 PM EDT
[#27]

Quoted:

Quoted:
I'd tell them to go kill all the muslims.



The Roman empire fell 476 CE

Islam arose around the 600s-700s CE.

Tell me, how could they have done that? Or are you just blindly following your hatred and wishing facts wouldn't keep getting in your way?



Wrong

The Roman Emprie fell TO THE MUSLIMS on May 29, 1453
Abandoned by his fellow Christians, the Emperor Constantine XIII died defending one of the breaches blown in the great walls of Constantinople by Sultan Sulimans hired Roman Catholic Hungarian artillerymen..

Edward Gibbon was a moron and the Rise and Fall of the Roman Empire is very bad scholarship.  It should not be used.

476 was merely the end of the Empires control of the West- France, Germany, England.   The Empire got back Italy, Sicily, and much of Spain- but lost it again in the 700s
Link Posted: 6/18/2006 7:21:03 PM EDT
[#28]

Quoted:
Steam turbines.



The plans for which existed in the works of Hiero of Alexandria and were lodged in the Library in that same city.

And have you ever seen a Roman boiler?  They only used them for baths and central heating, but they could run a simple steam engine.  Watt certainly had nothing better in 1770 when he started.

But without the printing press, people who might have been interested had to travel TO Alexandria to find it.
Link Posted: 6/18/2006 7:24:57 PM EDT
[#29]

Quoted:

Quoted:
The threat of religion.

They'd kill you for that one.  Religion at that time (and up to this one) was a major component of rule.  No way they'd abandon it.

I'd say medicine is high up on the list.  

I'd also say "Lead plumbing and lead-based makeup is not a bright idea."



We only recently caught up to the Romans in that aspect.
Link Posted: 6/18/2006 7:25:28 PM EDT
[#30]
Link Posted: 6/18/2006 7:26:07 PM EDT
[#31]

Quoted:
teach better war tactics. the whole stand everybody in line and charge is just a way to lose troops. I prefer sneaky bastage fighting much more than stand and die techniques.



In the days of swords and spears, that was what won wars.
Wonder why all the people who tried sneaky bastage fighting against the Romans lost?
You did not want to face the Roman Legions in battle.
Link Posted: 6/18/2006 7:33:28 PM EDT
[#32]

Quoted:
Watch your borders, and don't turn over the defense of them to barbarians.



Another myth.

Rome didnt turn over its borders to barbarians.  The Frontier Troops remained "Roman" (although before they got convertied to frontier troops the original units came from all over the Roman sphere of influence).  What Rome DID do was that a succession of Imperial canidates kept bringing in contingiants of foreign troops to pad their side in a incessant series of civil wars caused by the lack of a succession formula

Between 180 and 284 Rome went through 81 emperiors.  One year they had FOUR die.

The incessant fighting destroyed the economy and made it impossible to support the Army. Then they were forced to let in whole peoples because they could not assemble a Army large enough to fight the tribes and maintain the borders.

Besides the lack of a succession method, the biggest problem in both the Western Empire, and later the Byzantine empire, was that no one seemed to think their actions had any consequence.  It seems that every rebel or imperian canidate thought that everything that they destroyed in their civil wars would simply grow back, and there would not be any lasting concequence...
Link Posted: 6/18/2006 7:34:36 PM EDT
[#33]

Quoted:
I'd tell them to go kill all the muslims.



And I'd call you a dumbass for not realising that Muhammad didn't even found Islam until the early 600's.
Link Posted: 6/18/2006 7:41:48 PM EDT
[#34]

Quoted:

Quoted:
I'd tell them to go kill all the muslims.



And I'd call you a dumbass for not realising that Muhammad didn't even found Islam until the early 600's.



NO your the one who is mistaken.

The Roman Empire existed from 28BC to May 29, 1453.

It was a Roman army that was defeted at Yarmouk in 640 and lost Jeruselum to the Arabs.
Link Posted: 6/18/2006 8:13:35 PM EDT
[#35]
Vital reading:

Byzantium and Its Army 284-1081

There was a unbroken lineage for the Imperial Roman Army untill the twin disasters of Manzikert in 1071 and Dyrrachium in 1081- the second disaster at the hands of a Christian Norman army

A History of the Byzantine State and Society

is also very useful.
Link Posted: 6/18/2006 8:20:38 PM EDT
[#36]
I would just brag about all the cool shit we've done in the past 50 years or so.  Then say neener neener neener.
Link Posted: 6/18/2006 8:21:05 PM EDT
[#37]
I wouldn't tell them shit.  History will go down the same path just as certain as the stages of growth in a tree.  I would just sit back and fornicate with the vesuvians before they get covered in ash.

Link Posted: 6/18/2006 8:25:19 PM EDT
[#38]

Quoted:

Quoted:

Quoted:
I'd tell them to go kill all the muslims.



And I'd call you a dumbass for not realising that Muhammad didn't even found Islam until the early 600's.



NO your the one who is mistaken.

The Roman Empire existed from 28BC to May 29, 1453.

It was a Roman army that was defeted at Yarmouk in 640 and lost Jeruselum to the Arabs.




Take the stick out of your ass Professor.
When someone says "the Romans" one assumes they are speaking of the Empire when it was intact.
No one cares about your nuances.
Go back to your ivory tower.
Link Posted: 6/18/2006 8:27:11 PM EDT
[#39]

Quoted:

Quoted:

Quoted:

Quoted:
I'd tell them to go kill all the muslims.



And I'd call you a dumbass for not realising that Muhammad didn't even found Islam until the early 600's.



NO your the one who is mistaken.

The Roman Empire existed from 28BC to May 29, 1453.

It was a Roman army that was defeted at Yarmouk in 640 and lost Jeruselum to the Arabs.




Take the stick out of your ass Professor.
When someone says "the Romans" one assumes they are speaking of the Empire when it was intact.
No one cares about your nuances.
Go back to your ivory tower.



You like to enshrine ignorance?

Plus people keep using Rome to make value judgements about the United States- yet when refering to a "fall" in 476-or 410 is another popular number- you are refering to something that does not exist.
Link Posted: 6/18/2006 8:59:08 PM EDT
[#40]

Quoted:

Quoted:

Quoted:
I'd tell them to go kill all the muslims.



And I'd call you a dumbass for not realising that Muhammad didn't even found Islam until the early 600's.



NO your the one who is mistaken.

The Roman Empire existed from 28BC to May 29, 1453.

It was a Roman army that was defeted at Yarmouk in 640 and lost Jeruselum to the Arabs.



So who was Emporer of Rome in 1453?

According to my history the last Roman emporer was Romulus Augustus 31 October 475 to 4 September 476.
Link Posted: 6/18/2006 9:14:29 PM EDT
[#41]

Quoted:

Quoted:

Quoted:

Quoted:
I'd tell them to go kill all the muslims.



And I'd call you a dumbass for not realising that Muhammad didn't even found Islam until the early 600's.



NO your the one who is mistaken.

The Roman Empire existed from 28BC to May 29, 1453.

It was a Roman army that was defeted at Yarmouk in 640 and lost Jeruselum to the Arabs.



So who was Emporer of Rome in 1453?

According to my history the last Roman emporer was Romulus Augustus 31 October 475 to 4 September 476.



Here is a list of the Byzantine Roman Emperors, the last of which is Constantine XI.
Link Posted: 6/18/2006 9:32:59 PM EDT
[#42]

Quoted:

Quoted:

Quoted:

Quoted:

Quoted:
I'd tell them to go kill all the muslims.



And I'd call you a dumbass for not realising that Muhammad didn't even found Islam until the early 600's.



NO your the one who is mistaken.

The Roman Empire existed from 28BC to May 29, 1453.

It was a Roman army that was defeted at Yarmouk in 640 and lost Jeruselum to the Arabs.



So who was Emporer of Rome in 1453?

According to my history the last Roman emporer was Romulus Augustus 31 October 475 to 4 September 476.



Here is a list of the Byzantine Roman Emperors, the last of which is Constantine XI.



Wouldn't those simply be Byzantine Emperors?

You know...like how wikipedia lists them?
Link Posted: 6/18/2006 9:37:13 PM EDT
[#43]

Quoted:

Quoted:

Quoted:

Quoted:

Quoted:

Quoted:
I'd tell them to go kill all the muslims.



And I'd call you a dumbass for not realising that Muhammad didn't even found Islam until the early 600's.



NO your the one who is mistaken.

The Roman Empire existed from 28BC to May 29, 1453.

It was a Roman army that was defeted at Yarmouk in 640 and lost Jeruselum to the Arabs.



So who was Emporer of Rome in 1453?

According to my history the last Roman emporer was Romulus Augustus 31 October 475 to 4 September 476.



Here is a list of the Byzantine Roman Emperors, the last of which is Constantine XI.



Wouldn't those simply be Byzantine Emperors?

You know...like how wikipedia lists them?



Steyr! Tsk tsk:

"This is a list of the Emperors of the late Eastern Roman Empire, called Byzantine by modern historians."
Link Posted: 6/18/2006 9:47:59 PM EDT
[#44]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Steam turbines.



The plans for which existed in the works of Hiero of Alexandria and were lodged in the Library in that same city.

And have you ever seen a Roman boiler?  They only used them for baths and central heating, but they could run a simple steam engine.  Watt certainly had nothing better in 1770 when he started.

But without the printing press, people who might have been interested had to travel TO Alexandria to find it.



I would agree with ar15_rifleman.  A steam turbine of some type could have possibly sparked an industrial revolution of some sort.  I think even without the advent of the printing press, it would have been possible, had some tinkerer had made the leap to join a gear with the turbine engine.

I would also say that the empire shouldn't have expanded as far as it did.  Leave Britian be, and try to form an alliance with the Germanic tribes (a nice buffer against Attilla).
Link Posted: 6/18/2006 9:51:42 PM EDT
[#45]

Quoted:
I would agree with ar15_rifleman.  A steam turbine of some type could have possibly sparked an industrial revolution of some sort.  I think even without the advent of the printing press, it would have been possible, had some tinkerer had made the leap to join a gear with the turbine engine.



They wouldn't even have the technology to replicate it, except for the very basic one (I believe Archimedes designed it?).

Remember, you could give the Romans machine guns...

And then they need to develop the steel, and the basic tools, and the more complicated tools, and the techniques, and the understanding to replicate it. And each of these is many, many, many technological generations removed from them.
Link Posted: 6/18/2006 10:01:24 PM EDT
[#46]

Quoted:
They wouldn't even have the technology to replicate it, except for the very basic one (I believe Archimedes designed it?).

Remember, you could give the Romans machine guns...

And then they need to develop the steel, and the basic tools, and the more complicated tools, and the techniques, and the understanding to replicate it. And each of these is many, many, many technological generations removed from them.



A steam engine is a very basic concept and Herod had developed an interesting steam engine, but never  enhanced it much.  Archimedes developed things like the screw drive to move water.

The romans had the material such as copper, iron, and bronze.  The fact that a steam engine could be used as a motor could have sparked many new inventions, such as a steam ship - which would allow troop transport across the mediterranean at incredible speeds and mass production of weaponery, which could be used to create huge armories in a fraction of the time at a fraction of the cost (which we know the later emperors squandered away most of the tax money anyway).
Link Posted: 6/18/2006 10:31:25 PM EDT
[#47]

Quoted:
"Over two thousand years from now there will be a civilisation much like yours.  Our civilisation fell.  We gave away our wealth and granted the rights of citizenship to those who did not earn it."




Oh how history repeats itself
Link Posted: 6/18/2006 10:33:57 PM EDT
[#48]
Beware the ides of March.
Link Posted: 6/18/2006 10:50:17 PM EDT
[#49]

Quoted:

Quoted:

Quoted:

Quoted:

Quoted:

Quoted:
I'd tell them to go kill all the muslims.



And I'd call you a dumbass for not realising that Muhammad didn't even found Islam until the early 600's.



NO your the one who is mistaken.

The Roman Empire existed from 28BC to May 29, 1453.

It was a Roman army that was defeted at Yarmouk in 640 and lost Jeruselum to the Arabs.



So who was Emporer of Rome in 1453?

According to my history the last Roman emporer was Romulus Augustus 31 October 475 to 4 September 476.



Here is a list of the Byzantine Roman Emperors, the last of which is Constantine XI.



Wouldn't those simply be Byzantine Emperors?

You know...like how wikipedia lists them?



Nope.  Calling them Byzantine simply denotes their era, there authority is continuous, there was no
They always called themselves Roman, used latin untill the 7th century.  It was all one continuous Empire.

The whole idea there even was a break lies soley with Gibbons Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire which was manditory reading in British and American schools untill the middle of the 20th Century.
150 years of habit is the only reason why everything before the 5th century is considered "Roman" and everything afterward "Byzantine"

Well that and the fact that the American and British peoples come from those lost provences.  WE have a dark age in our history - but the bulk of the former Roman Empire did not have such a thing till the Arabs finally overran them.

All that happened in 476 was that the last Italian contender to the throne- in Ravenna by the way NOT Rome- died and the Eastern contender did not have the troops to take over the west.  And by the time Justinian DID have the military power 50 years later, it was too late to win more than Italy and part of Spain back.

Link Posted: 6/18/2006 10:57:48 PM EDT
[#50]

Quoted:

Quoted:

Quoted:

Quoted:

Quoted:

Quoted:

Quoted:
I'd tell them to go kill all the muslims.



And I'd call you a dumbass for not realising that Muhammad didn't even found Islam until the early 600's.



NO your the one who is mistaken.

The Roman Empire existed from 28BC to May 29, 1453.

It was a Roman army that was defeted at Yarmouk in 640 and lost Jeruselum to the Arabs.



So who was Emporer of Rome in 1453?

According to my history the last Roman emporer was Romulus Augustus 31 October 475 to 4 September 476.



Here is a list of the Byzantine Roman Emperors, the last of which is Constantine XI.



Wouldn't those simply be Byzantine Emperors?

You know...like how wikipedia lists them?



Nope.  Calling them Byzantine simply denotes their era, there authority is continuous, there was no
They always called themselves Roman, used latin untill the 7th century.  It was all one continuous Empire.

The whole idea there even was a break lies soley with Gibbons Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire which was manditory reading in British and American schools untill the middle of the 20th Century.
150 years of habit is the only reason why everything before the 5th century is considered "Roman" and everything afterward "Byzantine"

Well that and the fact that the American and British peoples come from those lost provences.  WE have a dark age in our history - but the bulk of the former Roman Empire did not have such a thing till the Arabs finally overran them.

All that happened in 476 was that the last Italian contender to the throne- in Ravenna by the way NOT Rome- died and the Eastern contender did not have the troops to take over the west.  And by the time Justinian DID have the military power 50 years later, it was too late to win more than Italy and part of Spain back.




I thought it was when ROME no longer had an Emporer.

Does this mean George Lincoln Rockwell was a leader of the Third Reich and it still exists under Rocky Suhayda?
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 3
Close Join Our Mail List to Stay Up To Date! Win a FREE Membership!

Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!

You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.


By signing up you agree to our User Agreement. *Must have a registered ARFCOM account to win.
Top Top