Greatest civilisation ever?

[Gayle29uk]

Arising from a comment in another thread, here we go...

In the interests of keeping this short I won't go into details (I'm sure Belgy and Leshy will provide as many as are needed) but what in your view was the greatest civilisation ever?

Babylonian Empire
Home of Astrology and weird pyramids. Big on human sacrifice.

Ancient Greek
The home of philosophy and advanced mathematics. Great proponents of peace (compared to other civilisations in their day).

Ancient Egyptian
Big on mystic arts and building, also not adverse to the odd human sacrifice.

Roman Empire
Transport infrastructure, education, the home of advanced military tactics.

British Empire
The largest empire the world has ever known, but was it a good thing?

20th century America
I hardly need to say anything here do I?

I haven't included the Prussian Empire or the Persian (and a few others) because I don't think they are serious contenders, if you disasgree I'm sure you'll explain why

Any mod want to make this a poll?

[edit]DAMN DAMN DAMN! I meant to include China, a civilisation that were living in cities before we even discovered mud huts. A civilisation which had medicine thousands of years before we worked out that a headache wasn't a sign of the thunder God's displeasure. I guess you can see my own preference coming through here which is probably why I forgot it [/edit]

[Bloomers III]

British Empire, because it spread scyphillis across the world.

[JonnyBGood]

You were supposed to propose one, ah well.



Plus you didn't even deign to mention anything outside the evolutional history of our own civilisation heh.The chinese civilisation practically spans all of those for gods sake. The great river valleys of the world (bar the Amazon) are where civilisation sprang from, Yangzte, Nile, Mississipi-Missouri, Euphrates-Tigris and the Ganges. Whilst I'll admit not enough information on native American civilisation survives for one to propose a proper argument without significant background research surely some of the others can be included in the initial list?





PS Bloomers the British did not spread syphilis, it came from the Americas and arrived in Europe through Spain.

[W]

You forgot

• The Inca Empire
• The Aztec Empire
• The Zulu Empire
• The Norse/Viking Empire
• The Chinese Empire
• The Soviet Union
• The Nazi Empire
• Post-WWII Norway

[LHC]

Romans and Greeks were good. The Egyptians didn't do anything, except have slaves and make big buildings. The Babylonians didn't really do much for the better either. The British empire was nice, but I'm probably only saying that because I'm British.

In order then;
Roman
Greek
British
Babylonian
Egyptian

[Belgarath The Sorcerer]

Originally posted by Gayle28uk

Ancient Egyptian
Big on mystic arts and building, also not adverse to the odd human sacrifice.

Is the winner.

If it wasn't for the fact I am going out at 7pm, I would comment more fully on each of the options given, and fanny about and make the thread a poll. I'm afraid I don't have time, sorry.

[Bloomers III]

Originally posted by JonnyBGood
PS Bloomers the British did not spread syphilis, it came from the Americas and arrived in Europe through Spain.

I thought it was the british who spread it throughout asia, especially India.

but anyway, the Spanish are dirty and greasy.

[Vermillion]

Of course there are dozens more that have not been mentioned, the most glaring of omissions would be the two or three islamic empires, probably the High Ottoman at its peak. The Holy Roman Empire is of massive significance and cannot be excluded, the Portugese trading Empire predating and paving the way for the British, the Mongols conquered vast stretches of the world, but never really had an empire in the classical sense.


However, for any such discussion to take place, you need to define your terms. 'Greatest' is an uterly subjective phrase, and cannot be used to measure anything. So define what you mean: strongest militarily? Strongest economically? Largest area of dominion? or some combination?

The fact is, if you ask for the 'greatest car ever bult' person A: wil say this is the fastest, person B will say this was the first, person C will say this is the most historically significant... without a narrowing of terms there will be no discussion.

[W]

Originally posted by Vermillion
Of course there are dozens more that have not been mentioned, the most glaring of omissions would be the two or three islamic empires, probably the High Ottoman at its peak. The Holy Roman Empire is of massive significance and cannot be excluded, the Portugese trading Empire predating and paving the way for the British, the Mongols conquered vast stretches of the world, but never really had an empire in the classical sense.


However, for any such discussion to take place, you need to define your terms. 'Greatest' is an uterly subjective phrase, and cannot be used to measure anything. So define what you mean: strongest militarily? Strongest economically? Largest area of dominion? or some combination?

The fact is, if you ask for the 'greatest car ever bult' person A: wil say this is the fastest, person B will say this was the first, person C will say this is the most historically significant... without a narrowing of terms there will be no discussion.

When someone say "greatest civilization" I assume they mean the empire that was most civilized. Which doesn't narrow it down much.

[bobble]

Egyptian

[JonnyBGood]

As I'm going to guess warfalcon will propose the USA up until the 1930s I'll go for Ancient Greece. Despite their incredible racism (which most great civilisations have had in some form or another) they created the systems which form our world today. The greeks, specifically the sophists and Socrates, created philosophy as we know it today. They didn't just advance it as one can claim the enlightenment era philosophers did, they invented the methods which we utilise when discussing anything in the field of morals and ethics. Socratic argument is perhaps the most important tool of knowledge we have ever been given.


In terms of sheer philosophical thought they are also the first great civilisation. Before the Greeks there was very little free thought. Plato and Aristotle gave to the world the very foundations upon which we build our way of life. Advance this slightly further along and you can but come to the conclusion that they also had the first non-tyrannic civilisations that lasted any significant length of time. Athens, democracy, Sparta, timocracy, the list goes on.

Just look at their contributions though, without the Greeks would Roman civilisation really have arisen? Without the writings of the Pythagoreans would we have maths as it is now? Without the writings of Aristotle would anyone have dared to criticise their own civilisations on the sole basis of rational thought? The Renaissance, the enlightenment and to a large extent the founding of the USA all have their origins in Ancient Greece.

They were not the largest civilisation ever seen, but they had the ability to resist those that were on the grounds that theirs was the better way and the stronger way. The Persians battered at them for generations but in the end it took the Greeks to destroy the Greeks. After all what is size? The Mongols ruled most of Eurasia at one point but point their achievements to me now.

Creativity and intelligence. The two greatest gifts one can have, and they were more present in Graecian society more than any other. From the diversity and variety there sprung the beginnings of real thought and the foundations of real morality.




PS If the rest of you won't propose one and just sit there like a pack of indecisive idiots claiming that the relative merits of different civilisations are too varied to be discussed in a rational and reasonable fashion I might just cry. Knowledge is impossible!

[Vermillion]

Originally posted by JonnyBGood

PS Bloomers the British did not spread syphilis, it came from the Americas and arrived in Europe through Spain.

That is conjecture. Nobody actually knows th origins of syphilis, the two most common theories are either from central America with the Spanish, of from the Middle East with the Crusaders. Another possibility is that it developped on its own in Europe, a theory evidenced by sre-new-world skeletal remains showing evidence of syphilis degeneration.

For the New World Theory:

http://www.archaeology.org/9701/news.../syphilis.html

For the Old World theory:

http://www.rahul.net/starwolf/shm/mo...pugh_mon1.html

[JonnyBGood]

I've got a book in front of me that claims the first case to have occured in Barcelona in 1493 and to have been assumed to have crossed the Atlantic with Columbus' returning ships. And then have spread as far as Naples and to have been dispersed by the invading French armies. Strangely enough, considering it's one of the best histories of Europe I've ever read, he doesn't mention any other theories.

[Leshy]

Hm, bit of a tough call. There have been several great empires, as well as smaller ones, which have added their mark to history. I would personally not be able to state whether an empire has been greater than any other. Is the Roman law system more important than the Babylonian astrology? Is the Greek philosophy more important than the Assyrian quest for knowledge?

As such, I'll refrain from naming one empire as having been the 'greatest', on grounds that all empires have brought different insights, developments and discoveries

[JonnyBGood]

'I used to be indecisive but now I'm not so sure.' Christ one would think the whole point of a thread asking for the greatest civilisation would be a discussion on which one gave most if you include all areas, not sitting here refusing to call a pot black for fear of it spontaneously mutating before your eyes.

[Nusselt]

Eskimos

You dare to laugh!

Tell me, who have the Eskimos ever harmed?

[Vermillion]

Originally posted by JonnyBGood
I've got a book in front of me (...) Strangely enough, considering it's one of the best histories of Europe I've ever read, he doesn't mention any other theories.

I mean no offense, but just because its one of the best histories of Europe you have ever read does not necessarily mean much. What is the book?

As for the other theories, they do not need you to have heard of them in order to exist, and be quite well known. If you like I can recommenda liberal asortment of books to you on the subject...

[Vermillion]

Originally posted by JonnyBGood
As I'm going to guess warfalcon will propose the USA up until the 1930s I'll go for Ancient Greece.

See this is exactly what I meant by defining terms.

You present an excellent argument about why Greek civilisation was important and historically significant. However in no imaginable way was this an empire, it was an era, a time and place. I could just as easily say that in the 1700s the Greatest Empire was Europe, as everything was happening there.

Now Ancient Greece did give rise to several empires: The Athenian league, the Spartan league, the Theban Empire, and an assortment of smaller ones. Each of these lasted a fairly short time, was not terribly significant and was dedicated as a general rule to the slaughter of other Greeks.

There was no central rule, or even an attempt at central rule, or government, or politics or anything of the sort. These city states cannot be considered an empire any more than Europe could. Certainly this time and place was very significant and many developments emerged from it, but it cannot be in any way referred to as an Empire.


If you want a thread about the most historically significant civilisations, you might have a case, but then again, most of the Greek developments had their origins in Egyptian thought... and so on back... Civilisations is in the title of the thread, but not in the first few posts: so once again, some definitions might clear up this confusion.

[Leshy]

Originally posted by JonnyBGood
'I used to be indecisive but now I'm not so sure.' Christ one would think the whole point of a thread asking for the greatest civilisation would be a discussion on which one gave most if you include all areas, not sitting here refusing to call a pot black for fear of it spontaneously mutating before your eyes.

The Akkadians gave us the institution of an empire, the Babylonians gave us basic maths, education and basic medicine, the Assyrians gave us the thirst for knowledge, the Greek gave us philosophy, the Romans gave us laws.

I find all of those things important in a modern society, and would not be able to name one empire or civilization to be significantly more important than another.

[Vermillion]

Originally posted by Nusselt
You dare to laugh!

Tell me, who have the Eskimos ever harmed?

Ever heard of Thorfinn Karlsefni? He tried to establish a colony in 'Vinland' or Northern Canada in 1008 or thereabouts, but was forced to flee after his people were massacred by 'skraelings', natives matching the description of Inuit.

[JonnyBGood]

Originally posted by Vermillion
I mean no offense, but just because its one of the best histories of Europe you have ever read does not necessarily mean much. What is the book?

As for the other theories, they do not need you to have heard of them in order to exist, and be quite well known. If you like I can recommenda liberal asortment of books to you on the subject...

A history of Europe by Norman Davies. It got suggested to me by the ex chair of history in Cambridge who's my second cousin. But I'd agree I usually don't read much specific history. I fail to see the point in knowing precisely where syphilis came from whereas I could be reading something with a real contribution to thought and philosophy.




PS Actually if you have many books to recommend to my poor deprived self could you recommend one or two on 19th century America which are a) not written by somone who's so uncriticising they can't bring themselves to mention slavery or b) written by someone who thinks the development of the US is the sole cause of the downfall of modern civilisation ta!

[LISELOTTE]

ancient egyptian

due to pyramides, a healthy relationship to cats and cleopatra.

[JonnyBGood]

Originally posted by Vermillion
See this is exactly what I meant by defining terms.

You present an excellent argument about why Greek civilisation was important and historically significant. However in no imaginable way was this an empire, it was an era, a time and place. I could just as easily say that in the 1700s the Greatest Empire was Europe, as everything was happening there.

Now Ancient Greece did give rise to several empires: The Athenian league, the Spartan league, the Theban Empire, and an assortment of smaller ones. Each of these lasted a fairly short time, was not terribly significant and was dedicated as a general rule to the slaughter of other Greeks.

There was no central rule, or even an attempt at central rule, or government, or politics or anything of the sort. These city states cannot be considered an empire any more than Europe could. Certainly this time and place was very significant and many developments emerged from it, but it cannot be in any way referred to as an Empire.


If you want a thread about the most historically significant civilisations, you might have a case, but then again, most of the Greek developments had their origins in Egyptian thought... and so on back...

To address your final point first, maybe we can go back to the very first man who built himself a house and told his fellow men to stay off or he'll shoot them as the most significant civilisation in history. After all it was the first! I was picking that which I felt to have done most in terms of creative thought, that's all.

Secondly, I never claimed it was an empire or anything of the sort. It was however a civilisation. It did also unite on occasion against the Persians. One can hardly blame them for not coming together under one central ruler, it has proved the downfall of many. Stability doesn't always come through a single government, their diversity gave them strength. And whilst we can sit here and discuss terms pedantically for the next 50 years that will get us nowhere in particular.

Therefore I'll retract my statement of ancient greece and use the city-state of Athens, just knock out everything not concerning Athens and there you go. Personally I'd find it hard to discuss Athens without referring to the Spartans and the other cities by which they practically defined themselves. Would Athens without Sparta have been even half as great as it was?

[Vermillion]

Originally posted by JonnyBGood
A history of Europe by Norman Davies.

Yes, as survey texts go its quite good. Norman Davies has quite a few political biases (dont we all) but he is fairly good at identifying them in his text, one of the signs of a good Historian. Keep in mind, anyone who tries to write a history of 'Europe' in one book is writing just that, a generalist survey text.

Thats not a bad thing, but it carries with it obvious massive limitations. By the way, which X-Chair? Dr. Christopher Andrew?

PS Actually if you have many books to recommend to my poor deprived self could you recommend one or two on 19th century America

Let me take a look this evening. My area of speciality is Europe and Russia, so that is the majority of my collection, but I know I have several that might fit your bill...

[JonnyBGood]

Cheers. Dr. Lucy Riall actually, I'm trying to remember when it was she was there but I can't to be honest. I know she didn't like it much as she's living in Italy now heh.

[Aryn]

you forgot Atlantis :\

[Archi]

The great river valleys of the world (bar the Amazon) are where civilisation sprang from, Yangzte, Nile, Mississipi-Missouri, Euphrates-Tigris and the Ganges. Whilst I'll admit not enough information on native American civilisation survives for one to propose a proper argument without significant background research surely some of the others can be included in the initial list?

I am from the Mississppi valley near the largest Native American city north of Mexico. It is called Cahokia (city of the sun) and it had a population of around 50k people at it's height. They were mound builders and made dozens of mounds for burial, ceremonial and living (Cahokia is situated on a flood plain). Also they had what is now called a woodhenge (similar in purpose to stonehenge but made with logs). Their trade goods have been found as far away as New Mexico and Canada, which is pretty good considering they had no horses. One odd quirk though is the Piasa bird, a giant painting on the river bluff of a strange creature with the body of a dragon and the head of a bearded man. It was thought to eat babies, the weak and the old, until it was slain by an Indian hero who's name escapes me atm. For some reason that remains a mystery the people of Cahokia simply vanished long before the Europeans landed on the American continent (the 13th century is the last recorded dating on artifacts found there ).

I know this is not the greatest civilization, but with someone asking about Native American civilizations I had to say something since I live next door to one.

Btw I have several books on 19th century America spanning the period, I am at work atm and dont have them handy for the author's name but the titles are:

History of the American people: covers up to WW2 from the revoloutionary war

History of the Whig party: covers the American political evoloution from the founding of the country to the Civil War.

Empire by Default: covers the Spanish American War and America at the turn of the 20th century.

I have others at home, if you are interested contact me and I can give you more info on them.

[JonnyBGood]

Heh, thanks for that I've never really managed to get around to read anything about native american history. I don't think it's that easy to obtain in Dublin heh.

[Radical Edward]

The galactic empire. Anyone who can build a whole empire by manipulating a handful of Jedi has got to be good.

[Tietäjä]

Originally posted by Gayle28uk
[b]
Ancient Egyptian
Big on mystic arts and building, also not adverse to the odd human sacrifice.
[b]

I used exclusion system after choosing three alternatives - The Ancient Rome, The Ancient Egypt, and the 20th Century America. The third one would obviously be the most powerful one, militarywise - though Rome carried immense military power too. The ignorance and stupidity of some American people (and opinions from some of my friends who have visited the US) made me turn 20th Cen USA down, and Roman Empire's embarassing collapsion with 'bread and circus' to keep citizens happy and excessive spanning made the Roman empire, in the end, inefficient. I'm not arsed to specify too much more.

I've always been a keen admiror of Egyptian architechture - Pyramids, obelisks and sphinxes have always amazed me. The religious structure is very interesting, and the fact that they were able to keep people under control in despotic system without using excessive military police as for example Romans did, is a feat of amazing propaganda or ability to keep people happy.

[JonnyBGood]

Originally posted by Radical Edward
The galactic empire. Anyone who can build a whole empire by manipulating a handful of Jedi has got to be good.

In the battle between Radical Edward and reality there can be only one victor. I know who my money's on.

[Archi]

I used exclusion system after choosing three alternatives - The Ancient Rome, The Ancient Egypt, and the 20th Century America. The third one would obviously be the most powerful one, militarywise - though Rome carried immense military power too. The ignorance and stupidity of some American people (and opinions from some of my friends who have visited the US) made me turn 20th Cen USA down, and Roman Empire's embarassing collapsion with 'bread and circus' to keep citizens happy and excessive spanning made the Roman empire, in the end, inefficient. I'm not arsed to specify too much more.

Actually the similarity between Rome and America is so similar it is spooky. Both were Republics in the beginning (America still is and the Roman Republic lasted 200 or so years). Both had their capitals sacked early in their histories. The "plebs" of both civilizations had a passion for bread and circuses. Both military's are the most powerful of their times. The strength and weaknesses of both are almost identical (yes the Romans had mideastern terrorists too). Even the architecture and the titles of the political offices are similar (though the US used the Roman model).

[Mirai]

Originally posted by W
When someone say "greatest civilization" I assume they mean the empire that was most civilized. Which doesn't narrow it down much.

that isn't what I say.

I say it's the civilization that had the largest impact on a global scale.

Being civilized has nothing to do with it.

vikings > all

[Gayle29uk]

Okay, now I'm at home I'll make the case for ancient China

The history of The Middle Kingdom is one of ups and downs, great periods of study interspersed with invasions and wars. Duting their times of plenty the ancient Chinese developed a society way ahead of anything in the western world at the time.

While the Greeks were responsible for algebra there is record of Chinese (decimal) mathematics going back to 1400BC, nearly a thousand years before the advent of Greek mathematics. If take the evidence of the Chinese calendar as primitive mathematics this date can be extended back another 1600 years leaving the Chinese way ahead of all western and middle eastern civilisations of the period. With the realisation that zero was an integral part of mathematics (something that escaped the Greeks until the knowledge filtered through) they opened the way for Greek mathematicians to advance their own knowledge, without this Chinese realisation they may not have advanced nearly so far as they did.

Moving on to Chinese medicine, the Chinese have always recognised the medicinal value of herbs and plants, although (like Western cultures) they had their wizards and 'faith' healers the greatest faith was placed in the hands of a doctor. Admittedly many of the medical discoveries were related to the alchemists search for the philosophers stone but unlike Western cultures these serendipitous (always wanted to use that word \o/) findings were recorded and shared, leading to a wealth of anatomic, physiological, and pharamaceutical knowledge thousands of years ahead of any other society's accomplishments. They even developed the (only now becoming widely accepted) practice of acupuncture, records of which go back over a thousand years. In fact the earliest recorded medical instruments are a pair of gold acupuncture needles.

In warfare the Chinese philosophy differs from that of the west, the widely read Art of War by Suntzi (can you tell I'm Googling? ) details what to many seem simple brutal tactics yet over 2000 years ago when it was written they were unheard of, most warriors being more inclined to the berserker mentality of the Scandinavians. His ideas on maintaining discipline among the troops were ahead of even the Roman equivalents although not so well noted amongst the general populace. With the invention of gunpowder the destructive forces available to the Chinese empire were far in excess of those available to any other civilisation and it is probably only the isolationist philosophy of the Emperors that China did not spread to cover half the globe.

On to the societal structure, for many years China was as many other countries, a collection of (often warring) states with no real identifiable leader. That changed with the advent of the Emperors though, from the time of the first Emperor right up to to recent times China has been a monolithic society with a rigid feudal system, the God-Emperor being the final word in justice and disputes. Like the other oriental cultures which were heavily influenced by China they had a rigid code of honour, to dishonour one's ancestors was to have no meaning, the ritual of Hiri-Kiri being the only way to redeem oneself. Politeness and protocol have run deep within China for thousands of years, all aspects of society were prescribed by tradition leading to a system where every person knew exactly where they stood in the social order, possibly this sense of order allowed the Chinese society to advance at the rate it did.

As briefly as I can, that's my case for China. I await the rebuttals with baited breath

[Smugs]

British Empire


1, It was the Biggest Empire Ever seen.
2, It brought alot of primitive Countrys up to where they are today IE Australia/India etc, with out it aalot of the countrys today would still be way behind the UK/USA
3, Im British

[Add]

Originally posted by JonnyBGood
Secondly, I never claimed it was an empire or anything of the sort. It was however a civilisation. It did also unite on occasion against the Persians.

They united once, however the states around the Agean Sea felt that sparta (the elected leader and strongest fighter) was getting too ahead of themselves? So they decided to elect Athens as the leader, sparta left them to it, the formed the delian league with oath of alliance until the metal rose from the bottom of the ocean etc etc. my point is there was only one real 'occasion' (not counting marathon + the evacuation of attica, although both highly important events).

oh, and after c451, the delian league does become classed as an athenian empire, although there was never a 'greek' empire...

Originally posted by JonnyBGood

Therefore I'll retract my statement of ancient greece and use the city-state of Athens, just knock out everything not concerning Athens and there you go. Personally I'd find it hard to discuss Athens without referring to the Spartans and the other cities by which they practically defined themselves. Would Athens without Sparta have been even half as great as it was?

yes. the second pelloponnesian war utterly devistated athens. athens power came from the delian league, and the tribute payed by the member states, in monitary or ship form. a lot of athenian wealth also came from the clerikies formed after a city state revloted...

also, athens may have produced many great philosephers and historians, plato, thuc, etc, but they a much, much darker side than i think you are aware...

i'm pretty out of it and i'm writing from memory to plz excuse the lack of making sense thing, and any inaccuracies...

personally, I think that the british empire achieved the most (perhaps not a good thing, but they still did...), however the Egyptian empire was the 'greatest', as in most spectacular, which is what i consider 'greatest' to mean in this contex...

[Tzencath]

Up with the new empire.

invade america again, blow up france, and get good ol' queen lizzy back as the empress

[Nodrog]

Originally posted by JonnyBGood
As I'm going to guess warfalcon will propose the USA up until the 1930s I'll go for Ancient Greece. Despite their incredible racism (which most great civilisations have had in some form or another) they created the systems which form our world today. The greeks, specifically the sophists and Socrates, created philosophy as we know it today. They didn't just advance it as one can claim the enlightenment era philosophers did, they invented the methods which we utilise when discussing anything in the field of morals and ethics. Socratic argument is perhaps the most important tool of knowledge we have ever been given.

etc

The greatness of one or two individuals within a society does not make that society 'great'. Thats like saying Nazi germany was great because their scientists were 'quite clever'.

Ancient Greece was backwards, stupid, and morally bankrupt. Bear in mind Socrates was sentenced to death by the state for his 'ground breaking philosophy'.


American civilisation was the greatest in my opinion, because it was the only civilisation in world history to my knowledge that has been genuinelly based on the concept of human rights and happyness, rather than on power, slavery and misery.

[Leshy]

Originally posted by Add
They united once

Actually, there was peace between Sparta and Athens on several occasions, though they had their fair share of wars.

however the states around the Agean Sea felt that sparta (the elected leader and strongest fighter) was getting too ahead of themselves?

Not sure what you mean here. The initiative to the formation of the Delian-Attic Sea League was an initiative going out from Athens against the Persians. If you mean the alliance that was led by Sparta before the Delian-Attic Sea League came into existence, that dissolved when Sparta withdrew from the fight against the Persians because they had no fleet, and the main battlefield was across the sea and too far away from Sparta.

my point is there was only one real 'occasion' (not counting marathon + the evacuation of attica, although both highly important events).

The Spartans didn't fight at Marathon, but I would say that the evacation of Attica was only possible because the Spartan king Leonidas with 300 Spartiates fought himself to death at Thermopylae, halting the Persian army long enough for Athens to move to Salamis.

oh, and after c451, the delian league does become classed as an athenian empire, although there was never a 'greek' empire...

The Delian-Attic Sea League wasn't created until 477BC. I'm not sure if you mean the earlier alliance between several Greek city-states, in which case the Spartans already withdrew from that in 479BC. By 451BC Athens and Sparta had been at war for about a decade. I concur there never really was a unified Greek Empire, but seeing as all of the city-states were in fact, Greeks, one can speak of the Greek civilization.

also, athens may have produced many great philosephers and historians, plato, thuc, etc, but they a much, much darker side than i think you are aware...

A darker side? By all means, explain

[Add]

Originally posted by Leshy
Actually, there was peace between Sparta and Athens on several occasions, though they had their fair share of wars.

yes, there were also numerous treaties between sparta and argos, this doesn't mean they were best friends.

Not sure what you mean here. The initiative to the formation of the Delian-Attic Sea League was an initiative going out from Athens against the Persians. If you mean the alliance that was led by Sparta before the Delian-Attic Sea League came into existence, that dissolved when Sparta withdrew from the fight against the Persians because they had no fleet, and the main battlefield was across the sea and too far away from Sparta.

sparta didn't withdraw from the fighting because it was too far away, that is utter crap, the spartan general who was leading the alliance(can't remember his name off-hand), fell into dis-favour with the other allies and was sent away. sparta pulled her troops out after this and it was decided athens would now lead.

The Spartans didn't fight at Marathon, but I would say that the evacation of Attica was only possible because the Spartan king Leonidas with 300 Spartiates fought himself to death at Thermopylae, halting the Persian army long enough for Athens to move to Salamis.

my mistake, i thought marathon was the battle where the 300 spartans stood to the death.

sparta was involved at marathon though, wasn't there some guy who ran 20/26 miles to sparta to warn them or something

The Delian-Attic Sea League wasn't created until 477BC. I'm not sure if you mean the earlier alliance between several Greek city-states, in which case the Spartans already withdrew from that in 479BC. By 451BC Athens and Sparta had been at war for about a decade. I concur there never really was a unified Greek Empire, but seeing as all of the city-states were in fact, Greeks, one can speak of the Greek civilization.

478-77BC is before 451 BC. c450BC is the supposed peace of callias, the point at which the DL becomes, in effect, pointless.

the second peloponnesian war started in 431 and lasted until 404.

A darker side? By all means, explain

forced membership of the DL
later conversion of the DL to the athenian empire
execution of generals who do not rely decisions back to debate by the ekklisia before carrying them out
executions of generals "as an example to others" -> see pericles' son, won huge naval victory, but put to death as 25 ships were lost.
not to mention the whole lesbos/packes thing (see thuc III,37 mytilenian debate...)

i could probably go on but i can't be arsed...

[inf]

What does 'the greatest civillisation' mean?

Surely, the most civillised? However, most people aren't considering this in their replies.

Our view of civillised is subjective, and will change as we develop.

We lack vital understanding of previous civilisations, hence cannot decide upon a greatest civillisation.

Any views are not impartial, and are distorted on information that is unlikely to be accurate.

[Leshy]

Originally posted by Add
yes, there were also numerous treaties between sparta and argos, this doesn't mean they were best friends.

I'd say the act of Leonidas certainly wasn't one born out of hatred. There may not have been friendship, but there was the feeling of being part of the same 'country', which needed protecting. Also, the Athenians tried to help out the Spartans with an army to suppress an uprising around 460 or so, but the general Cimon was sent away. It was this insult that led to a war between Sparta and Athens for a decade or two.

sparta didn't withdraw from the fighting because it was too far away, that is utter crap, the spartan general who was leading the alliance(can't remember his name off-hand), fell into dis-favour with the other allies and was sent away.

The main problem was that the Spartans couldn't afford to have an army fighting a long war away from home, due to the constant threat of an uprising among the helotes. Which led to them withdrawing from the war with Persia in 479, leaving command to Athens, which in turn led the Athenians to start the Delian-Attic Sea League.

sparta was involved at marathon though, wasn't there some guy who ran 20/26 miles to sparta to warn them or something

Sparta stayed out the battle at Marathon, which took place before Thermopylae. The story you think of is someone who ran 42 kilometres to Athens to inform the people there that the battle at Marathon had been won. According to the story, upon uttering the words of victory, he died from exhaustion.

478-77BC is before 451 BC.

D'oh. Have been throwing around too many BC's and AD's in my exams this week

c450BC is the supposed peace of callias, the point at which the DL becomes, in effect, pointless.

Yup.

forced membership of the DL
later conversion of the DL to the athenian empire
execution of generals who do not rely decisions back to debate by the ekklisia before carrying them out
executions of generals "as an example to others" -> see pericles' son, won huge naval victory, but put to death as 25 ships were lost.

The forced membership actually didn't happen until 450 when several city-states wanted to leave the DASL. As for the execution of Pericles' son, I do remember that story, but not the exact details. He wasn't just executed for the losses of ships, there was a lot more to it, but I can't recall all the details so I'd have to look that up.

As for a 'dark side', I'd hardly refer to Athens' actions as dark, unless you acknowledge that a whole lot of empires have an even darker side

[Add]

Originally posted by Leshy
The main problem was that the Spartans couldn't afford to have an army fighting a long war away from home, due to the constant threat of an uprising among the helotes. Which led to them withdrawing from the war with Persia in 479, leaving command to Athens, which in turn led the Athenians to start the Delian-Attic Sea League.

the sea is the agean (agaen?), and you are wrong. if it wasn't 1:30 on a friday night i would look it up and proove it to you.

[Leshy]

Originally posted by Add
the sea is the agean (agaen?), and you are wrong. if it wasn't 1:30 on a friday night i would look it up and proove it to you.

I'd be curious about that, as I looked it up myself as well, and according to the books I have here, I am correct

According to http://www.ualberta.ca/~csmackay/CLA...sian.Wars.html:

Delian League
Especially after their heroic defence of Thermopylae, the Spartans were the most respected military power, and it seemed natural that they should lead a crusade against the Persians. Two problems:

* Their parochial natural made them unsuited to campaigning outside the Peloponnesus. They'd shown repeatedly a disinclination to operate beyond the Isthmus. The idea that they would operate for years on end across the Aegean against the Persians was inconceivable.
* Such an operation would clearly involve naval forces. The major naval power in Greece was Athens. The Spartans didn't even have a fleet.

Hence, once it became obvious that the Spartans were both unwilling and unable to oversee the war against the Persians, it was natural for the Athenians to be given it. In the winter of 478-7 an assembly of the Greek states from the Aegean formed an alliance under the leadership of the Athenians.

[acropolis]

I look at the list and I see

Human sacrifice
Vivisection
Human sacrifice
Crucifixion

And I kinda cross them off:/ (I like Greece though. Liberals tend to poo poo on anything that was ever good)

I'll just combine the last two and call them the same one. It really is the same civilization, and the governments have closer ties than greek city states.

For obvious reasons. Moral superiority, military power, influence over the world, etc.

Note that greatest doesn't mean 'good'. Just better than anything else.

[Dante Hicks]

I think it's a bit dodgy to consider a lot of these civilisations as seperate entities. The US "civilisation" especially is so heavily interlinked with Europe since it's inception that I don't think you can divide it "realistically".

Especially nowdays (but even over the last hundred or so years) if something amazing was invented on one side of the Atlantic it would pretty much be implemented on the other side very quickly.

I think it might be more accurate to define it as the North-West Civilisation or Ethno-European civilisation or something like that. As time goes on though those types of terms will be increasingly irrelevent since I think it would be dubious to claim Japan, Singapore, etc aren't part of the same civilisation as us.

However, using the terms of the original question I would say my three noteworthy choices (in no particular order) would be :

China
For being pretty much the only contender to European civilisation. "They" have been ahead of "us" for most of the last five thousand years or so, and if the Pacific wasn't bigger than the Atlantic they would have easily eclipsed Europe over the last two hundred years or so. Of course, it is and now most of their populace still lives in rural squalor.

Greece
On the whole a civilisation filled with pretty crappy things : slavery, intolerance, superstition, etc. However, the individual philosophers they did produce were so ahead of their team they deserve some sort of merit. Aristotle's texts still stand-up to some examination now while much more modern figures like Aquinas are a joke (imho).

The "US" Civilisation
As I've said, I find this term dodgy but we'll stick with it. It's slightly unfair since it's most modern, and on the whole :

Capitalism > Feudalism > Despotism.

So obviously the US does best in those terms. Far freerer and more egalitarian than any of the other civilisations mentioned, and obviously unsurpassed in scientific-technical achievements. More rational, more logical (well, amongst the elite), etc. Of course, it's debatable how the beliefs of the masses fit in their though.

In strict terms America is "best" but that's de-historicising it a bit.

mine would be the civilisation that Vermillion mentioned...the mongul empire. i believe it was larger than the british empire..(im not sure if that is on population or land mass,) though i might be wrong..one of those little things which is sticking in the back of my memory is mongul being largest empire.

anyways my reason for them being the greatest is what they had to work with yet they managed to maintain such a large empire just by their sheer cruelty..yet they conquered most before them. starting with mixed warring tribes they (were) united and then set off to conquer..as for their benefit for mankind, im sure there was some..maybe bringing a few civilisations together even though under a rule of iron. ive always wondered as they tore through asia and west towards middle east and europe etc why the conquered behind them didnt rise up so the effect was like a wave ..mongols tearing across europe strong at the front and weak and tranquil at the rear--musta been the fear or the fact they recruited many they conquered.

im british so i hope im not looked down upon by my peers for saying this but i dont think the british was the greatest empire..my reasoning being they were strong in a period with other strong empires in their region such as French, Prussian, Dutch and Spanish..British may have been largest and i think had more stickability but it still wasnt that much greater.


the most beneficial to mankind i think was probably the roman empire for their organisation and infrastructure...they are not known only for their conquering even though they were fairly proficient.

the egyptians were a great civilisation for their minds and alphabet and writing but i do not believe them far greater than similar empires like the Assyrians or Babylonians..i think Egypt had more of a civilisation than an empire.

Apologies to Greeks but ive always thought of the Greek Empire, though strong as being a more interested and proficient in the Arts and Pastimes and Homelife side of empiring if there was one..sure they waged war but i dont think they were that proficient on land..at sea i think they were better.

Most empires as stated earlier have contributed something to life so deciding the greatest is surely a matter of conjecture..id go for mongols followed by roman.

[Ste]

Originally posted by LHC
The Egyptians didn't do anything, except have slaves and make big buildings.

Except mathematics...

[JonnyBGood]

Originally posted by Nodrog
The greatness of one or two individuals within a society does not make that society 'great'. Thats like saying Nazi germany was great because their scientists were 'quite clever'.

Ancient Greece was backwards, stupid, and morally bankrupt. Bear in mind Socrates was sentenced to death by the state for his 'ground breaking philosophy'.


American civilisation was the greatest in my opinion, because it was the only civilisation in world history to my knowledge that has been genuinelly based on the concept of human rights and happyness, rather than on power, slavery and misery.

Thing was that they were a 'ground-breaking' civilisation. There was no model of morality or example of a great state to pursue to all effects. They had to create everything themselves. And socrates was sentenced to death, but likewise every civilisation has made horrible mistakes. Bear in mind American civilisation kept slaves at the same time they proclaimed individual freedom and liberty.




PS Nod just because you've only heard of socrates, plato and aristotle does not mean the rest of them didn't do anything heh.