Does anyone else think this thread is a bit pointless? Loads of civilizations contributed loads of stuff, you couldnt really say that one has contributed "the most".
Of course it's pointless, but what's your point? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Through discussion of the various civilizations one might learn of civilizations that one had not studied previously. It might just spark a bit of curiosity and sholarship. It is a topic that will never (can never) be resolved, but the discussion of such topics might shed enlightenment. And as to other civilizations existing before the Romans and the fact that the Romans could not have been without these previous civilizations, it's true. But, Rome had the most direct influence upon western society. The earlier civilizations affect us only vicariously through Rome.
Yup, but for the Romans the Greek ideals most likely would have faded into oblivion. The Romans may not have been original, but they were efficient administrators and spread their way of life far and wide. The greeks would come in as a close second to the Romans, in my eyes.
The Romans were a bitch, they stole alot of other people's cultural achievements (Greece obviously, Carthage, even Persia) to make their own. But i suppose they can be awarded for spreading that civilized culture to everyone else.
Actually the Romans were either conquered or overrun by the Etruscans somewhere around 600-700 BC. The "original" Romans (Rome was really a melting pot) would be the Latin tribe, which inhabited that region (called Latium) from ancient times. The Etruscans were a trading people who had maybe six city-states in their little empire, and their influence is still seen today in architecture. They died out at some point, and Rome began to exert its own power, first as a monarchy, then as a republic. We don't know a whole lot about this period, because it's prior to the 390 BC sacking of Rome by the Gauls, in which all records were lost. Interestingly, the Romans themselves claimed descendence from Troy. The story goes that when Troy fell, Aeneas took the Palladium and roamed the Mediterraean, eventually settling on the hill known as Alba Longa (near Rome). Later this settlement produced the children Romulus and Remus, who's mother fell into disfavor with the king, and the children were cast out, to be suckled by a female wolf, and on the story goes. Point being that this was one of the ways in which Romans differentiated themselves from Greeks. (Caesar claimed *direct* descendence from these Trojans, believing that Iulus was a Julian and so later was Rhea Silva, mother of Romulus and Remus. We have no way to know if that's true, of course.)
One of the main differences between the greeks and the romans was that the Greeks were a collection of city-states. There was no real central authority. I suppose Alexander the Great changed that somewhat. But it was against their nature to maintain such a state. And Alexander wasn't Greek he was Macedonian. I'm not too sure about the way his empire ended. Didn't he die of a wasting disease while attempting to conquer Persia? What happened to his empire afterwards? Did it just fall apart and return to the squabbling city-states? The Romans were efficient organizers and rulers. They ruled their empire from Rome and maintained that empire after the death of a charismatic ruler. The Romans had that desire to be part of a greater whole. The Greeks were far more loyal to their immediate locales. They didn't necessarily think of themselves as Greeks. They were Spartans, they were Athenians, etc...
well I think the Egyptians definitely played a big part, after inventing written language and agriculture, and many other very advanced technologies at the time. Although I cannot think, at the moment, of a specific technological advancement made in ancient China or Middle East area, I am sure they have contributed an essential part in the shaping of our modern society, they have made numerous important discoveries and developments in architecture and literacy, which had a profound influence on the world.
weren't china and the middle east practically modern societies at the time europeans were still impressed by the wheel? I'm exaggerating of course but they were quite advanced, quite a while before us weren't they? I'd assume they'd have an ass load of technical advances to their name.
yes they were definitely very advanced in the ancient world, China had developed several architectural breakthroughs such as the Terra Cotta Army, the Great Wall, Babylon had already built the Hanging Gardens so yeah they were indeed very advanced
Unfortunately, they were also very self-centered and not out to share their civilization with foreign barbarians.
that's not completely true first of all, they did not know there was anything more outside of their empire borders and long-distance transportation, travel and exploration methods were not developed significantly back then secondly, I thought that China was responsible for transporting and introducing silk to the west and middle east area, and isn't our current international numbering system (1, 2, 3, ...) first developed in India and distributed by the arabics
I recall reading somewhere that china found america very early, earlier even than vikings by quite a lot if I remember correctly and they decided not to persue colonization thinking it wouldn't be worth it. You guys know if there's anything to that?
Would be news to me, buffys. I've read a fair amount about the Vikings, I think that evidence is pretty solid, but the Chinese... that I'm not familiar with.
There are many possibilities on China's exploration of the America's. I recall hearing a long time ago about ancient chinese anchor stones being found. There is also theories based on skulls found in baja that suggest that they were more related to southeast asians rather than northeast asians. It's all up in the air though, some say they indicate colonization from asians by boat, while others point to genetic drift. If you have access to discover magazine, there was a brief article about it in the jan 2004 issue. It's number 88 on their top science stories of 2003. You can get the article on discover.com as well, but you have to register (I think it's free.)
that's it, thanks invert. I haven't read discover lately but your post describes what I'd read fairly accurately.
I heard that the Chinese sailed to Africa as well, and brought back Girraffes and things. And they had firearms, or at least rockets in about 1100, they were just miles ahead of everyone else. I cant believe i didnt put them up here actually.
