Civ Talk

[Burzum]

Well here we now have a thread devoted to civilizations and ... who's who?

To start off, I it would be interesting to see what civilizations you think were the most influential and to what degree did each one benefited us today, which one ultimately was just ahead of it's time.

Whilst I fall into the Roman rank category, and my votes and money are on Rome... There are other civilizations which deserve a closer inspection and from you the members tell us what they are?

Lets hear your thoughts.

Edited April 4, 2013 by Burzum

[Pedro Falcão]

To start off, I it would be interesting to see what civilizations you think were the most influencial and to what degree did each one benefited us today, which one ultimately was just ahead of it's time.

It is true that the Romans influenced our modern society a lot. But let's face the facts: Rome held power over vast land masses and subjugated an uncountable number of other civilizations, but most deeply the Europeans. Guess what? By many reasons the Europeans also influenced the rest of the world. So it is unfair to judge each civ by how much they influenced.

But let's see: What religions are the dominant, today?

The Christianism, the dominant religion, above all, was influenced by the Judaism. The main compilation of books by which those who follow the Judaism guide themselves is called Torah. The first 5 books of the Torah were written thousands of years ago, in fact they are the oldest surviving documents from that time. See the influence here? It is directly from a people called the Hebrews, the same who were "enslaved" in Egypt and subjugated (directly or not) by the Romans and Greeks, and yet their influence survived.

City-states is what Rome was, so as Athens and Sparta and Corinth and Thebes and many others that represented the region we now call Greece. But a city itself is an invention which is credited to another civilization, and the first cities were raised fram from Greece and Italy, they were raised close to the rivers Tigris and Euphrates, a region known nowadays as Iraq, and that is considered the "cradle of civilization".

But let's see, who raised the first army? The Egyptians. The Bronze age also started in Mesopotamia. The Egyptians and Sumerians were the first iron users. The iron melting began either in India, Anatolia or Caucasus.

The Egyptians themselves left some feats and are yet to be revealed, like how did they precisely align the pyramids with the equatorial line (missing perfect alignment by mere centimeters)? They were also the inventors of the first condoms. And it's not even fair to say that was all, since much knowledge was lost when their priests destroyed their books when the Egypt was first invaded.

And what about the Chinese? The true inventors of the Gunpowder and Pizza.

And the Huns? That defied the powerful Rome and would have won, even with all their military training, superior equipment and master minds behind the troops. You'd say that Rome was crippled by that time, uh? And couldn't any other civ Rome subjugated be "crippled" too?

It is just not fair to point Rome and Greece as the best. They may have conquered a lot, but they aren't that powerful as you think they. And our history classes are very ethnocentric, too, one must strive to see that not everything is like that and that there are many unknown/unconsidered aspects, yet.

[Burzum]

I do undoubtedly admit the Egyptians are one of the fathers and pioneers of technology and civilizations... but...

The dominant religion in the world happens to be Catholicism... which is a matter of fact Roman... a once dominant Roman empire changed their colours as it were like a chameleon when power was dwindling and they simply didn't do it out of a last leap of desperation to retain power or anything of that likelihood, but realistically, I will conclude the Catholics were more dominant in medieval times than in their own Roman glory days of empire. They could dictate crusades and dictate war and rule in every kingdom of the Medieval era.

This is not in anyway voiding the Roman civilization in defense to your statement, because once again I it anyone with Roman achievements in the face of individuals who aspire to talk down on Rome, Rome... The mighty civilization that spearheaded society with technology and arts and culture and promoted literacy throughout their empire without a strangling effect of religion and flavors most notably promoted by the Hebrews and lesser known religions which impeded progress in technological advancement rather than to support it.

The fact remains the same that without Rome, mankind would be still running in skins arguing which tribesmen has bigger balls, rather than which aqueduct carries the most volume of water.

Rome can be expressed like the classical little Irish girl in the village Torrots, she was walking in the garden and suddenly two leprechauns appeared... one wearing a red Roman skirt and the other a barbaric Gallic Kelt, the one wearing the Roman red skirt taught her how read and write and showed her how to channel water to her doll house. She could read and read lots of philosophy from the Roman historians and Greek philosopher her father was amazed. But the other in dirty Gallic cloth taught her how to drink and how to talk and embellish tales of the day. But after two weeks of practicing two cultures she checked, she couldn't remember what the Gallic clothed leprechaun taught and forgot everything because of excessive amounts of alcohole and lavished indulgently in bore alcohol she suffered from long tedious hangovers the following mornings. But the Roman leprechaun she could recapitulate and re-read everything she did those night while drunk on wine and remember the 'history' and gained knowledge from those events.

So... what this tells you is that... Romans taught man how to record and said Hay! get your heads out of the gutter (i.e. Booze, meaningless prattling and embellishment) and showed man how to channels the waters and how to sing operas, poetry taught man how to be great artists and how to pave roads to speed economy and commerce and military movement. How to construct towns out of marble and and cultures that could be effective in the way it promoted thinking in which provoked more innovation to better accelerate progression for the benefit of all....

So really from this little lesson we can see Rome was quite something. Sure others were something, but did they actually achieve much? Like Rome did? I don't think so.

Edited April 5, 2013 by Burzum

[Pedro Falcão]

Undoubtedly Rome achieved something. It would be very strange otherwise, considering all the power and influence it achieved. But you are forgetting some points. Theaters and arts are really Greek ideas, not Roman, to start with. Long before the Romans, the Greeks did poetry (do you know Homer?). Long before the Romans, other cultures did their recordings (what is the Torah if not recordings? What about the lost Egyptian records i talked about?). You then pointed Catholicism as a Roman invention. Catholicism is just the standardization of Rome's religion as Christianism, after losing the fight against it. But the Catholicism itself is built upon the beliefs of a foreign culture, though, guess which? Jews. And, don't get me wrong, i don't have anything against catholics (i myself was raised as catholic), but it did more bad than good. No wonder the medieval age is also known as the "Dark Age", the age in which Europe stopped in time, the age in which the elite (in this case, the church) enslaved mentally the people with their lies, lies these that only generated conflicts, oppressed the poor and protected the rich, but let's not forget the main point here: Catholicism is one of Rome's legacies.

And you say "without Rome, mankind would be still running in skins arguing which tribesmen has bigger balls", but let's cite this text from... Alpha 13 release article:

Years later, the third monarch of the dynasty, Ashoka, would become famous for renouncing all violence, converting to Buddhism, and spreading the faith throughout the empire. Ashoka is also remembered as one of the most exemplary rulers in world history for his advanced social and animal welfare programs.

Well, let's thank Romans for the aqueduct invention, yes, but if we're going down this road, let's also thank someone for discovering fire, and another for inventing the wheel, let's thank Hammurabi for inventing laws, let's thank the Sumerians for inventing the writing (and also the Mesoamericans, who invented it independently some 2400 years later, but still much before contacting the cultures of the old world).

And you say they built on Marble. What's the deal with marble? Egyptians did just fine before marble, in fact their Pyramids were the highest buildings all around the world for centuries without needing marble, the mesoamericans also built enourmous cities just without marble (when Hernán Cortés arrived in America, Tenochtitlán was one of the biggest cities, with only 3 bigger cities all around the world: Constantinople, Venice and Paris).

Oh, and let's not forget about their legacy in other cultures: Latin, although still used, is a dead language, Rome failed the simple job of imposing their language to the subjugated, meanwhile the Hebraic language is still alive and is spoken even around here (a friend of mine discovered he has Jew ancestry and started having Hebraic courses. He now speaks and writes it fluently, so as the rest of his family).

Edited April 5, 2013 by Pedro Falcão

[lilstewie]

Aqueducts are older then the Roman empire.

People in Mesopotamia, Indus valley, etc were moving water long before the Romans.

Roman-style aqueducts were used as early as the 7th century BCE, when the Assyrians built an 80 km long limestone aqueduct, which included a 10 m high section to cross a 300 m wide valley, to carry water to their capital city, Nineveh.

http://en.wikipedia...._(water_supply)

The fact remains the same that without Rome, mankind would be still running in skins arguing which tribesmen has bigger balls, rather than which aqueduct carries the most volume of water

Maybe large parts of Europe, sure.

Egypt, Mesopotamia, Indus valley people, Yellow river people weren't thinking like that. And they predated Rome by 1000s of years. Those guys were creating the first civilizations on the planet when the ancestors of the Romans were a bunch of tribals.

People were sophisticated outside of Rome much before and after it.

Edited April 6, 2013 by lilstewie

[Shield Bearer]

Undoubtedly Rome achieved something. It would be very strange otherwise, considering all the power and influence it achieved. But you are forgetting some points. Theaters and arts are really Greek ideas, not Roman, to start with. Long before the Romans, the Greeks did poetry (do you know Homer?). Long before the Romans, other cultures did their recordings (what is the Torah if not recordings? What about the lost Egyptian records i talked about?). You then pointed Catholicism as a Roman invention. Catholicism is just the standardization of Rome's religion as Christianism, after losing the fight against it. But the Catholicism itself is built upon the beliefs of a foreign culture, though, guess which? Jews. And, don't get me wrong, i don't have anything against catholics (i myself was raised as catholic), but it did more bad than good. No wonder the medieval age is also known as the "Dark Age", the age in which Europe stopped in time, the age in which the elite (in this case, the church) enslaved mentally the people with their lies, lies these that only generated conflicts, oppressed the poor and protected the rich, but let's not forget the main point here: Catholicism is one of Rome's legacies.

I think, my friend, you need to re-read your history No scholar any longer believes that stuff about the dark age, instead the use the word Christendom. If you read the Catholic fathers you'll see that Catholicism had to fight against a lot of Roman beliefs and other pagan ideas. Once you do this, you will also see that the basic Catholic beliefs then, are the same basic Catholic beliefs now.

And Catholicism took a lot from all cultures, not just Roman. Philosophy from the Greeks, the Bible from the Jews and other things from different cultures as the ages progressed, which is why it is called what it is. Catholic means universal, hence it spread across all cultures, yet it doctrine is the same everywhere.

Before attacking a living religion, you might just want to get the real facts from it, instead of repeating some age old hate speech (which is both heinous and outdated)

Also as a reply to everything else you said, Roman invented very little new things if you go to compare it all, but what it did was it took all the good things from all the other civilizations and spread them abroad, unlike the Greeks, who imposed their culture on the people they conquered. I'm not on the Roman side here, I just wanted to point it out to balance the bias

The whole "Rome is superior" mentality has originated from the Renaissance and we should very careful from anything that comes from that time, because, frankly speaking, the Renaissance was very biased in this area.

[sanderd17]

Let me argue for the Germanics. Not a lot was known about the germanics, as they didn't bother to write something down, and didn't make long lasting structures.

But some things were known. F.e., the Romans have never concurred a lot of Germanic tribes. After beating and murdering some Germanic tribes (s.a. the Eburones), he didn't move any further, and even called the Germanic Gauls the bravest of all Gauls (http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Julius_Caesar).

Germanic tribes also invaded the Western Roman Empire, without a lot of fighting. The Franks concurred France, and called it after them. The Angels concurred England, and called it after them. They did all that without a lot of fighting. It all went quite easy. In fact, the only big wars they had were between different Germanic tribes and their offspring. They concurred North America without much trouble, Africa, India, big cities in China .... The only big wars they had to fight were between offspring of Germanic tribes. See the American civil war, the 100 years' war, the world wars...

Guess which language we're talking now

[greenknight32]

Yes, the main innovation of the Romans was their military system - those they couldn't outfight they could generally outlast, due to superior logistics. They gave up trying to conquer the Germanics, though - too costly, for too little gain. Rome depended on plunder from its conquests to finance its very expensive military establishment. The Germans were tough fighters, and had very little to plunder. After losing an entire field army when it was ambushed in the forest, Rome realized it made more sense to hire the Germans as mercenaries than to try and take their land.

[Pedro Falcão]

I'm talking about the Roman Apostolic Catholic Church, the one created with a big and clear hierarchy for easier control. The one that killed as much people in pyres as nothing else in history with accusations of witchcraft and sentenced them to death without enough proof of what was said and worst: most times, popular traditions such as herbal medicine was treated as witchery. Not to mention the sessions of torture before people finally "admitted" their "malicious craft". Against the teachings of Jesus himself, "salvation" was sold to everyone who could afford, which is also a mass manipulation of the poor to make them work the whole life and spend all the little they had to for a place in the heavens. Crusades were fought again and again because "that was the will of god". The churches, where people should learn more about the teachings of Jesus and the plans of God, where they should acquire a deeper understanding of their own belief, was a ritual of rambling a language no one understood (except for the "preachers") and a way to detect who possibly refused to follow their lead. And they absorbed all knowledge for themselves, transparently stealing all the books and burning those that weren't interesting to later purposes. Those who didn't agree with what they said were marginalized (and likely killed, afterwards). And the vast majority (thank god we had some good souls) of those who had access to the words of Jesus, the same who were to be dedicated to god above all, refused to follow the teachings and lived the "lifes of sin" they accused others to live. Well, that time is over, the catholic church may be much more tolerant and forgiving and humble, now, but one can't deny that a past like that is no mere "age old hate speech", Stálin in Russia killed less.

Edited April 6, 2013 by Pedro Falcão

[Burzum]

Theres been a lot of misleading information so far but most of you, and not that's it your fault but it is just misconceptions related to the current sources within our standard yet mainstream education.

However, someone mentioned the aqueducts were older than the Roman Empire, this and that... sources? References? We have credible proof the Romans built such things. Techniques and methodology can be redone today in Italy and across the States. But heres a question... How do you age a piece of stone? If that was the case, then we can better conclude the age of the pyramids lolz

The cultures and civilizations prior to Rome were the fathers of our culture (e.g. Egyptians, Greeks, Persia, etc) they really were the fathers of literacy, reading, writing, because without this, you don't have a vital foundation to support much let alone a empire built to last. These prerequisites of literacy were the pillars and backbone of any civilization, one that promotes education, civilization and one that definitely promotes sophistication. Your barbaric tribes and cultures didn't have the capacity in reading and writing and just general literacy to do anything. Thus was true for the Gauls for example and countless others.

It is true the Romans copied heavily from surrounding cultures and those before, but the credit goes to how they used them to enforce progress. Bottom line.

The Roman military was extremely complex and sophisitcated than any other ancient army of the time hence 'ahead of it's of time, and our military today uses concept of the Romans.

So the conclusion is, Rome was quite a force to be reckoned with, and they really showed the world how to be civilized.,

[idanwin]

Even though the Greek were, in certain ways, much more civilized...

[Shield Bearer]

Theres been a lot of misleading information so far but most of you, and not that's it your fault but it is just misconceptions related to the current sources within our standard yet mainstream education.

However, someone mentioned the aqueducts were older than the Roman Empire, this and that... sources? References? We have credible proof the Romans built such things. Techniques and methodology can be redone today in Italy and across the States. But heres a question... How do you age a piece of stone? If that was the case, then we can better conclude the age of the pyramids lolz

The cultures and civilizations prior to Rome were the fathers of our culture (e.g. Egyptians, Greeks, Persia, etc) they really were the fathers of literacy, reading, writing, because without this, you don't have a vital foundation to support much let alone a empire built to last. These prerequisites of literacy were the pillars and backbone of any civilization, one that promotes education, civilization and one that definitely promotes sophistication. Your barbaric tribes and cultures didn't have the capacity in reading and writing and just general literacy to do anything. Thus was true for the Gauls for example and countless others.

It is true the Romans copied heavily from surrounding cultures and those before, but the credit goes to how they used them to enforce progress. Bottom line.

The Roman military was extremely complex and sophisitcated than any other ancient army of the time hence 'ahead of it's of time, and our military today uses concept of the Romans.

So the conclusion is, Rome was quite a force to be reckoned with, and they really showed the world how to be civilized.,

There is much truth in most of what you said. But Rome's power was in its inclusivity. It adapted and adopted and then built upon such foundations. But I don't think 'influence' can be calculated or even judged as there are a lot of factors we don't know and some we can't know at all. We can say the American culture has influenced much of the West today, but where did they get their culture? The list goes on.

Rome wasn't the only civilized nation then, but it surely was the most powerful at its peak. But then again, Rome was influenced by the Greeks, so then why can't we say it was the Greeks that were the most influential?

[Mythos_Ruler]

An important point to always consider when discussing ancient and modern cultures is that all cultures influence others and are influenced by others. You would need to find a very isolated pocket of humanity to find a culture that has not been influenced by another. Cultures are living and breathing animals that adapt to new ideas and surroundings or they die.

[Burzum]

But then again, Rome was influenced by the Greeks, so then why can't we say it was the Greeks that were the most influential?

It is true that the Greeks were heavily influencial over the Romans, but they weren't totally. Rome borrowed extensivly from Gaul and the Etrscans, Iberians and the Egyptians.

What we all should focus on, is to ask the question. How did Greece and the other factions influence the world? In what way? To what benefit?

Did Rome do a better job? If so how?

[Loki1950]

So what goes further trade goods or soldiers that seems to be the main thrust of your argument in favor of Rome.

Enjoy the Choice

[Shield Bearer]

But then, what world are you talking about? The same world that influenced the Romans, were, in turn influenced by them

I admit that Rome did a good job at spreading that knowledge and incorporating different things from different civilizations. But remove just one civilization from the world and history would turn out differently.

[Burzum]

But remove just one civilization from the world and history would turn out differently.

I'm not just defending Rome, I'm stroking her like a kitty. Can you hear her purring? lolz

All civilizations gave something, including the barbarian ones.

Would Rome have been so famous without them for her to trample on? Or what of their increments of influence that shaped Roman society etc?

Like you mentioned above, take Rome away ... It's like taking trees and the oceans away.. we starve of oxygen, and isn't (wasn't) Rome the oxygen of civilization in that respect?

For those who otherwise bash and hate Rome and cast a shadow of misogyny on her marks that person illiterate, and is generally a byproduct through hundreds of generations of mighty Rome having the misfortune of been stomped on by her. But lest these people keep in mind that their honourable sacrifice to Rome gave us progression and hence this acknowledgement we accept this fact and therefor think of it in a positive manner and treat it as a vital narrative in our past which educates us and teaches us the value of morals and enriches our culture. This is strength and Rome represents strength, this is also wisdom and Rome represented wisdom and knowledge giving our ancestors literacy and fruit of spiritual freedom in the practices of multiple religions and didn't clutch people in a vise of phobia and allowed free expression and this also shows Rome was quite open minded to this as well.

As much as the hatred of Rome is seeped in deep in various people's veins and the hatred erupts a sudden burst of anger fueled by resentment, the truth is always there to remind you of our fluctuations in the strife of progression. We can never be settled as long as we unfettered to take our ideas and carry them beyond infinity and disregarding the obstacles in the way. This is quite simply dear fellow... Human Nature. Understanding this we can understand our past and therefor make sense of it.

I may have had the same dose of Rome's mighty dominance in the past because I have German ancestry... But do I throw my toys out the cot when someone praises Rome? ... No I just accept it and embrace it, and cherish Rome for her wine (this must of tasted like sweet heaven back then) and the brain development in my ancestors that they were given the chance to learn, and had the opportunity to become educated.

We often have two choices in life, we get born and we can either hate or love our mother but we can't change the fact we came from her. So too we have this mark in our being, the sweet mark tattooed in our psyche and out genes through the time living under and by Rome's dominance... We can neither hate or love her we can only accept and know it was good and the good of all.

How retched are we and how uncivilized are we? If we spit on the people who went through much hardships laying down the roads in which we travel, crafting the knowledge in which we utilize to construct a better world regardless of we use this knowledge whats important is to remember and pay our gratitude to those before and honour them in a glorious triumph for Rome and Rome's victorious legions which thrusted this all into being. We here today, because Rome was yesterday. We live today, because Romans died yesterday. We remember today, because Rome recorded yesterday. We can drink wine today, because... that's what Romans drank

Embrace the Rome, embrace the world.

Thank you

[Loki1950]

I prefer the drink that the Celts gifted the world with Beer thou the Egyptians and Assyrians may have beat then to it they did not use hops.

Enjoy the Choice

[MishFTW]

So much of what we give credit to Western civs was in fact done before ages before them. Its not our fault however (for the most part), as we have yet to uncover more about ancient history. I am just thankful Byzantium survived as long as it did otherwise Roman and to an extent Greek influence wouldn't have been preserved or wide spread as it is today.

[Shield Bearer]

We must also not forget the extensive part played by the monks of the Middle Ages in preserving culture after the fall of Rome. One could very well say that it was them who formed the West into the great super power we have today.

[Mythos_Ruler]

The Byzantines, Arabs, Christian monks. Let's credit them all!

[Shield Bearer]

Give credit where credit is due

[Burzum]

Now, I am please you sensible lot of added the Muslims into the equation.

I'll just say this. Who were the people that preserved education and built libraries when Europe were running around in the Dark Ages....?

T h e A r a b s ....................................

Credit is due right there... You know what I mean?

Edited April 29, 2013 by Burzum

[kosmo]

I think Arabs are not specifically important in the considered timeframe (Part 1 500 BC - 0, Part 2 0 - 500 AD).

Islam did not even exist in this timeframe.

[Shield Bearer]

Now, I am please you sensible lot of added the Muslims into the equation.

I'll just say this. Who were the people that preserved education and built libraries when Europe were running around in the Dark Ages....?

T h e A r a b s ....................................

Credit is due right there... You know what I mean?

So, you're saying that the Middle East was developed and educated for a longer time than the West, right?