The greatest civilization of all

Chris 62 · January 21, 2001, 16:28

Discussing the merits of civilizations in another thread, it got me to thinking: what was the most important single one of all? I'll post mine first, with my main reasons. Let's here what the membership thinks. My choice is Greece, for the following reasons: Human freedom was born and given voice by a small land on the agean sea. It was these people who stood agaisnt the greatest tyrants(up to that time), the Persians. They gave law and a democratic sprit that still lights the world by it's glow. They embraced science and rational thought as no one ever did before. They spread their wings and their culture through out the world, to such a degree that it is still felt to this day. And to me these are the most important things of all.
[This message has been edited by cpoulos (edited January 21, 2001).]

Smokey tha nuke man · January 21, 2001, 17:04

the romans, who gave us our language,our government (most governments are based upon the roman republic, not the greeks direct democracy and oligarchy) aqueducts, the arch, the road, civilized barbarian lands (gaul, britain, etc.), and, on the silly side, the only ever horse in government (he was a senator).

Anodyne · January 21, 2001, 17:32

Greeks could be it, though if the Phoenicians really introduced alphabet, etc. to the Greeks, then it'd be the Phoenicians, but since it's so uncertain, I guess I'll say Greeks, though one can't actually name the most 'important' civ. I'd rather speak about the most INFLUENTIAL civilizations.
Greeks/Phoenicians/Romans, perhaps.
Though all the Mesopotamian civilizations (Sumerians, Babylonians, Assyrians) also had a huge influence on all civilized world, for inventing mathematics, writing, astronomy, etc. So, if the Greeks/Phoenicians/Romans were socially most important, the Mesopotamian civs were scientifically the most ifluential.

------------------
Eating people is fun.

Anodyne · January 21, 2001, 17:34

...and I almost forgot the Chinese. They were the ones to invent gunpowder, the invention that changed the whole world. So, maybe they had the most influence. Who knows? ...and they did research a writing system, mathematics and astronomy of their own, though before the gunpowder they had no influence on western world.
Hmm. I guess I'll have to change my opinion; Chinese were the most influential.

Emperor10 · January 21, 2001, 17:58

quote:

They embraced science and rational thought as no one ever did before.

This brings up interesting questions. Do we really embrace science and rational thought as much as we say we do? I don't think so. When people run out of ideas, or when science conflicts with what they want or believe , they always seem to go back to "But ::insert Deity here:: said so!"...doesn't seem very rational to me.

Chris 62 · January 21, 2001, 19:39

quote:

Originally posted by Emperor10 on 01-21-2001 04:58 PM
This brings up interesting questions. Do we really embrace science and rational thought as much as we say we do? I don't think so. When people run out of ideas, or when science conflicts with what they want or believe , they always seem to go back to "But ::insert Deity here:: said so!"...doesn't seem very rational to me.

Unfortunatly that's all to true. For smokey: That horse is probably a better senator then the two from N.Y. I have now!
[This message has been edited by cpoulos (edited January 21, 2001).]

Caesar the Glutton · January 24, 2001, 14:33

The Romans, of course.

------------------
Nam si violandum est ius, regnandi gratia violandum est: aliis rebus pietatem colas

Bereta_Eder · January 24, 2001, 16:21

So eloquent

Caesar the Glutton · January 24, 2001, 17:05

I would have expanded more on my claim, but I'm supposed to be working

I'll try to make my argument a little more persuading: There are two clues to an understanding of the Romans: they borrowed much from the Greeks and others, and they modified what they took. Rome was the great intermediary - the bridge over which passed the rich contributions of the ancient Near East and especially Greece, to form the basis of modern Western civilization. The Romans replaced the anarchy of the Hellenistic Age with law and order and embraced the intellectual and artistic legacy of the conquered Greeks. As Rome's empire expanded, this legacy was spread westward throughout most of Europe. The growth of Rome from a small city-state to the dominant power in the Mediterranean world in less than 400 years (509-133 B.C.) is a remarkable success story. Roman expansion was not deliberately planned; rather, it was the result of dealing with unsettled conditions, first in Italy and then abroad, which were thought to threaten Rome's security. Rome always claimed that its wars were defensive. By 270 B.C. the first phase of Roman expansion was over. Ringed by hostile peoples - Etruscans in the north, predatory hill tribes in central Italy, and Greeks in the south - Rome had subdued them all after long, agonizing effort and found itself master of all Italy south of the Po valley. (After Rome's fall in the fifth century A.D., Italy was not again unified until 1870.) In the process the Romans developed the administrative skills and traits of character - both fair-minded and ruthless - that would lead to the acquisition of an empire with possessions on three continents by 133 B.C. Instead of slaughtering or enslaving their defeated foes, the Romans treated them fairly, in time creating a strong loyalty to Rome throughout the peninsula. Roman citizenship was a prized possession that was not extended to all peoples on the peninsula until the first century B.C. Most defeated states were required to sign a treaty of alliance with Rome, which bound them to adhere to Rome's foreign policy and to supply troops for the Roman army. No tribute was required, and each allied state retained local self-government. Rome did, however, annex about one fifth of the conquered lands, on which nearly thirty colonies were established by 250 B.C.

------------------
Nam si violandum est ius, regnandi gratia violandum est: aliis rebus pietatem colas

Chris 62 · January 24, 2001, 17:54

For Caesar: A most eloquent answer, but I beg to differ. The chaos of the hellenistic world cannot be denied. For the greeks, this was brought about by their own desire for independance from other greeks. I think of Rome more as the lords of order, whose main contriubution was in warfare(Almost all roman weapons and armor were adapted from their defeated foes!), and their ability in organize and unify themselves. Slavery, bloodsports, tyranny, and injustice are also Rome's legacy. In economic matters, rome was a subsistance agricultural nation, who's own civil wars bankrupted their ability to expand. Much to be admired, but much to be loathed. And I am also at work as I write this!
[This message has been edited by cpoulos (edited January 24, 2001).]

Caesar the Glutton · January 24, 2001, 18:08

cpoulos, you make some good points. the great ones are always loathed. if i had to pick my top five favorite Civ2 tribes, it would look like this:
Romans
Carthaginians
Greeks
Babylonians
English

cool, it's after 5pm...time to go home and start a new game

------------------
Nam si violandum est ius, regnandi gratia violandum est: aliis rebus pietatem colas

Chris 62 · January 24, 2001, 18:57

quote:

Originally posted by Caesar the Glutton on 01-24-2001 05:08 PM
the great ones are always loathed

for rome

for end of work!

Bereta_Eder · January 24, 2001, 19:53

It only took two words

Bereta_Eder · January 24, 2001, 20:07

Through a quick reading of ceasar's anthem I cannot help but notice that it's all about empires not civs. Some how I cannot understand what the colloseum contributed to civilization and why it's «wrong» to loath such practices because they are «great» or of «great people»? Ancient tragedies were played in greek theaters long before that!

Isn't the spirit that always preveils? Rome conquered an already inner divided greece and took away the DEMOCRACY of it - not the «anarchy» as it may seem to those who have not fully understood it.
Still the spirit preveils. Greece conquered rome in spirit by imposing its culture on the romans and that's why the roman empire was not just one more massive acquisition of lands but actually divided the world into «civilized» and «barbaric». And romes practises towards conquered people were nothing new.

Hmm, I think I am saying the same things as Ceasar. The only difference is that I think that civs are not only about the size of their (no) lands.

Chris 62 · January 24, 2001, 21:38

The only difference is that I think that civs are not only about the size of their (no) lands.[/quote]
This was my point about the whole thing. Someone in the thread said we got our language from the romans. If you look at any dictionary, you will see far more words are derived from greek then latin. Western society(sorry,I know you don't like that term paiktis, but it best describes what I'm going for) is patterned far more closly on the Hellenes then the latins. Modern democracy is much closer to the greek one man one vote concept then the roman concept of plebians and equites. Where are the great thinkers of rome? Greece is repleat with them. Rome had plenty of orators and many fine soldiers, but the learning arts suffered under rome. To speak of free choice in the roman empire(not republic) is a mockery. Remember, this topic is not about empire size or longevity, but lasting impact on the human mind and spirt.

popcornvendor · January 24, 2001, 21:58

um...... so how many of u carry around encyclopedias?

------------------
Enjoy the war while you can, the peace will be terrible

Action · January 24, 2001, 23:26

C'mon now, guys this is obvious. The U.S.A is the world's greatest civ due to a combination of factors.

1) Power. Military might. etc. Number one in history. Only the USSR stood a chance, but they lose out in every other factor. Sure we lost Vietnam (for political reasons), but otherwise undefeated.

2)Standard of living. Our standard of living while not the highest is very high.

3)Economy. Strongest in history.

4)Political system. Has been a stable representative republic for longer than anyone else.

5)Science. Won the race to the moon, built the manhattan project. Definately up there.

Now I know it is not "cool" to say this and you will have tons of little objections, such as how certain groups were opressed etc but most civs have similar problems. If you look at the facts it will be hard to deny that the U.S.A is number one, although hardly perfect.
[This message has been edited by Action (edited January 24, 2001).]

weird god · January 24, 2001, 23:49

romans.....at least when i play them

chinese: they were never conquered and ruled vast lands in eastern asia for thousands of year. culture and inventions were the most developed until the late middle ages.

japanese: deto never got conquered. they had an old-fashioned feudalistic system until the late 19th century. within a few decades they boomed to a major power through adapting european ideas.

romans: they definetly took a major role in european history but had a luck of culture. if they weren´t neighbours of the "barbarian" tribes they would barely look so civilized.

arabs: i miss them in civ2. definetly a civilized through periods very liberal and innovative countries.

johnmcd · January 25, 2001, 07:46

I would say the Italians in general, If we can credit them with the achievements of the Romans, and then the Renaissance then there is surely nobody that can hold a candle to them.

As for the USA.
1) Mightiest for all of ten years so far…and even then you can’t fight a war without worrying that someone might get hurt which leaves all those guns impotent. Even if you did fight you couldn’t win against any other nuclear power, relatively, you are one of the weakest mightest civs of all time.
2) Its all relative, standard of living is hard to measure with any historical accuracy. Anyway, there are people in the States that live in conditions that would not look too out of place in the third world.
3) For fifty years, with interruptions, not the same as the Romans with the strongest for hundreds of years without interruption.
4) Oh please. Two achievements that aren’t even that good. The USSR got to space first which is better than the moon and the Chinese got gunpowder which is better than the bomb. Your real achievements are things like electric lighting and, um, the phonograph. Look at the Scots, we do TV, Penicillin, Malaria vaccine, Telephone etc. On top of that we do some genuinely good civilising things like the first public education policy and I wouldn’t say we come in the top ten. Maybe in a hundred years time the states will have done enough to be the greatest ever, but at the moment the states are just starting, and to be honest its not that impressive a start, if they are aiming at civilisation.

East Street Trader · January 25, 2001, 10:46

I have a regard for the aborigine's of Australia and for some of the N. American indian tribes.

They seem to have established really stable societies which had adapted harmoniously with their environment and in which individuals could flourish.

Plainly by the tests proposed in this thread (military might, invention, influence on others) they do not figure. But if the test were to be the creation of a happy and stable society I suspect they would rate high. Their religious thinking was certainly of a sophistication far in advance of any of the other civs championed here.

So, if by "most important" we can say "most to be emulated" I'll go for one of those.

Action · January 25, 2001, 11:27

>1) Mightiest for all of ten years so far…and even then you can’t fight a war without worrying that someone might get hurt which leaves all those guns impotent. Even if you did fight you couldn’t win against any other nuclear power, relatively, you are one of the weakest mightest civs of all time.<

More like 50 years. Every since WW2 ended it's been USA and USSR neck and neck for #1 with no one (maybe China) close. Most powerful Civ in history.

>2) Its all relative, standard of living is hard to measure with any historical accuracy. Anyway, there are people in the States that live in conditions that would not look too out of place in the third world.<

That's why I did not say that USA is #1 in standard of living but they are high. This differentiates us from the USSR and the Ancient civs. Rome might have conquered more of the world, but where would you want to live USA right now, or in the Roman empire?? Technology aside.

>4) Oh please. Two achievements that aren’t even that good. The USSR got to space first which is better than the moon and the Chinese got gunpowder which is better than the bomb. Your real achievements are things like electric lighting and, um, the phonograph. Look at the Scots, we do TV, Penicillin, Malaria vaccine, Telephone etc. On top of that we do some genuinely good civilising things like the first public education policy and I wouldn’t say we come in the top ten.<

How about: the automobile, the airplane, the internet,
the first real computer, the telephone (Bell immigrated to the US before inventing it.), the binary circut, high resolution radar, I can go on.

Plus, our political freedom helps make it not even a close comparison with the Romans.

Bereta_Eder · January 25, 2001, 12:19

quote:

Originally posted by Action on 01-25-2001 10:27 AM

Plus, our political freedom helps make it not even a close comparison with the Romans.

Can someone be a coommunist in USA or the FBI will take over or (worst still) is it considered «bad»?

P.S. This is not a «retaliation», this is a geniune question. I don't live in USA (which is only one of the MANY democratic countries in the world) and I don't know how things go there

Chris 62 · January 25, 2001, 14:20

quote:

Originally posted by weird god on 01-24-2001 10:49 PM

chinese: they were never conquered and ruled vast lands in eastern asia for thousands of year. culture and inventions were the most developed until the late middle ages.

Let me introduce you to the Mongols...

Caesar the Glutton · January 25, 2001, 14:33

quote:

Originally posted by paiktis22 on 01-25-2001 11:19 AM
Can someone be a coommunist in USA or the FBI will take over or (worst still) is it considered «bad»?

P.S. This is not a «retaliation», this is a geniune question. I don't live in USA (which is only one of the MANY democratic countries in the world) and I don't know how things go there

You can be a Communist here in the states. There is a Communist party in the US, but it's not very popular. It depends on what part of the country you live in, too. The Pacific Northwest and California are probably the most liberal areas, so being a Commie there would probably go unnoticed. I've been to the deep South and I'd say if there are Communists there, they probably don't tell anyone.

--Workers of the World, Unite!!!

------------------
Nam si violandum est ius, regnandi gratia violandum est: aliis rebus pietatem colas

Chris 62 · January 25, 2001, 14:35

quote:

Originally posted by popcornvendor on 01-24-2001 08:58 PM
um...... so how many of u carry around encyclopedias?

Believe it or not, this all comes from the top of my head most of the time. I only check for dates and spelling, since I usally forget trivial things(like spelling)