OK, here's an issue which has always fascinated me.
What is the greatest civilisation in history? Ignore the quibbles about categorization for the purposes of this thread as much as possible, and consider the answer in terms of originality, historical influence and duration.
Some crude lumping together occurs on the poll for the purpose of avoiding an infinite number of choices and some important individual civs are grouped into broader categories. (Unavoidable).

My vote goes firmly with the Greeks, my reasons are that while civs like the Egyptians, Babylonians and others stagnated intellectually for thousands of years BY COMPARISON and dissapeared by the time of the Romans, the Greeks gave us rational science and gave birth in most important respects to the culture of the West. This culture has now created a global culture which may last until the end of history. There are other reasons as well, but these seem to me to be the most important.

PS: there is a similar thread:

forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=14985

YOU FORGOT THE ROMANS :aargh: :aargh3:

I intentionally didn't include them because:
1. They could be included among the European or even the Hellenic civs
2. using the terms in the first post, they do not compare with the other two as a separate civ, and because of the similarity they are not realistic contenders for greatest civ ever.

Romans are unqualified?:eek: My vote goes with them, hands down.

I'm gonna have to go with romans as well.

While the Europens are not the most interesting civiliziation ever in history, it is pointless to say that any has had such a great efect on the world as the Europeans. They(we) went from being a back water, impoverished group of small towns controlled by pety lords, to being conguered by the germanic tribes, to becoming the most powerful, influential, and rich civilization in the world. Now, the Americans who have become the center of the European civilization efect every corner of the Earth as well as space.
Any thoughts?

Aren't threads on my-empire-is-bigger-and-better-than-your-puny-one banned? :rolleyes:

It is that important to put up yet another argument about who's the biggest contributor to human civilisation again? All civilisations have their roles to play, and had made their individual contributions.

And that's good enough for me. :)

Knight Dragon, are you going to argue that some civiliziations are not more influential than others? Its not like in kindergarden when the says, "Now everyone is special in there own way". This is the real world, there are winners and losers, and as they say, history is writen by the victors.

Originally posted by RenegadeXH
Knight Dragon, are you going to argue that some civiliziations are not more influential than others? Its not like in kindergarden when the says, "Now everyone is special in there own way". This is the real world, there are winners and losers, and as they say, history is writen by the victors. So there are. But after seeing the umpteeth thread about the greatest civilisation in the world, one is bound to get a bit :sleep:. :) Ever notice most posters will always argue for their own civilisation grouping/kingdom/nation/whatever? :rolleyes:

Oh, if I have to argue, I'll say China. :p It's here as a powerful entity a few thousand yrs ago, it's here (becoming a powerful entity) today and it'll probably be here in the future too. Where would we be w/o paper, gunpowder and the compass? :p

There are real winners and losers! Well said!
I would have to say it is China.British would not have its industrial revolution that forever change the status of the west of being economically inferior than China ,without the iron technology from China .
Their production output continues to be the world largest from the time of Han Dynasty till the middle of Qing Dynasty around 1800's .During these period,their economy is even larger than the ENTIRE WEST.During the 19,20th century China was in a dark age as she faced the most humiliation period of her history and during these period China was sleeping.
China have a bright future ahead in the 21st century,the West do not ,many of the Western experts have claimed the West is going to fall during the 21 st century.
"When China wakes,it will rock the world"Napeleon
Just think one nation China has a bigger and larger production output(economy) than the entire west till the 18 th century.This country alone is richer than the combined Germany,France,Russia,British,Italy,Spain,Greece and other western nation combined is not as rich as China
During the late 18 th century ,China had 1/3 of the worlds output while the west had only about 20 % of the world's output.One nation miracle
When China becomes a superpower it can do much a better job than the west.why?When our great explorers sailed as far as America ,Africa and Australia ,he didnt colonise any land or take slavery of those people.During that time China definitely had the military strenth to colonise land,but China didnt want to colonise them,China is not a big bully.To those people who think China colonise Tibet,listen Tibet is a

Well my favorite civs are:
The Romans- because they had such a great military and its quite interesting to read about their tactics and strategies.
Seljuk Turks- Kicked those Crusaders @*%s! Oh well the Mongols came and destroyed them mostly.
Mongols- Like to read about their war tactics also. Very interesting bunch.
Persians-They had great names. :D. They also had one of the largest if not the largest empire in BC times(Rome reached its height IMO btw 0AD-186AD, which is a bit later). I'm not sure about this but did the Persians at their height have a larger empire then the Romans at their height?
Prussia- Bismarck, another intersting guy, again with the war stuff.
Celts- The wildest group ever! The Romans were so scared off them they built every fortification and trap possible to destroy their last stronghold.

Now if you ask the greatest civ ever? Thats really hard to answer. I'd say the top 4 to be: China, England, Rome, India.

Are we talking about most influential, powerful, culturally advanced, or just our personal preference?

China has been productve because it has a lot of people. Yes, Napoleon will probably be right about China. However, China won't be able to get much done in the near future. The world is to small. If the Chinese even try to get aggressive, she'll have to fight Europe, the United States, Russia, other Asian powers, anyone else belonging to the U.N., and whoever they went after originally. Any fool can see that nobody can fight the world and win. Thus, I won't worry about them for now.

The Egyptians
They built great wonders which have lasted since their time. They are currently the longest surving civ but probably not for much longer with China catching up. at one point their empire stretch from Libya and Nubia to Asia minor and India. Their religion was the most diverse religion compared to everyone elses and still survives in pockets today e.g. My House

America! :D

Originally posted by Sa~Craig
The Egyptians
They built great wonders which have lasted since their time. They are currently the longest surving civ but probably not for much longer with China catching up. at one point their empire stretch from Libya and Nubia to Asia minor and India. Their religion was the most diverse religion compared to everyone elses and still survives in pockets today e.g. My House The ancient Egyptians, as we knew it fr archaelogy and ancient records, had been pretty much assimilated by foreign invaders, ever since the time when the New Kingdom had been overrun.

And the Egyptians' power never reached India. Heck, they never even reached Mesopotamia or Persia. Their furthest extent was into Syria AFAIK and then they bumped into the Hittites. And then only briefly for a couple of decades.

acctually during the ptlomic dynasty egypt became the richest empire in the world as well as as large as stated in my previous post and as the Ptlomeys worship the Egyptian gods i think its fair to say that it was an egyptian empire

Originally posted by Sa~Craig
acctually during the ptlomic dynasty egypt became the richest empire in the world as well as as large as stated in my previous post and as the Ptlomeys worship the Egyptian gods i think its fair to say that it was an egyptian empire Conceded but arguable. Egypt had always been a wealthy place, which was why so many peoples wanted to conquer it as a province.

But richest in the world.... :hmm:

Even so, that can hardly account for them being the longest surviving civ; Pharaonic Egypt had long been dust by the time the modern day Arabic rulers came along. There's no much of a cultural continuity betw Ancient Pharaonic Egypt and modern Arabic Egypt.

And the Ptolemies never reached Mesopotamia either IIRC; the Seleucids got in the way...

Add : And the Ptolemies only practised the forms of the Egyptian kingly rites; to legitimize their rule over Egypt. To say that they actually practise the ancient Egyptian religion...

Greeks.

Greeks, for what we know they were: inventors of democracy.
We're speaking of the greatest civ, not the greatest empire: Romans were barbarians. Europeans are barbarians.
In fact: they didnot and dont speak greek !

where are the jews?
they are the ONLY civ that almost havn't been changed since he've been created...

The one civilization no one has mentioned is India.
This civilization has produced the basis of mathematics with the discovery of the current numbers we use, zero, decimals, and algebra. It has also invented Sanksrit, the language which all others (Greek, Latin) derive from. They were the first country to invent plumbing (Mohendajaro), the first written text in the world, as well as a great deal of astronomy.

If it werent for the Muslim and British who pillaged and robbed India it would still be the richest nation in the world.

Aren't Hellens really Europeans ? Ethnically, they are West Aryans, like Europeans (East Aryans being Indians and Persians). It is said that Ancient Greeks had blond hair and blue eyes. Greek language has pervaded all Europeans language. They are almost the only words similar in all European languages (I remind that Hungarian, Finnish or Basque are not in the European family of languages). Academic words like geography, democracy, physics, philosophy, psychology... and modern words such as telephone, pharmacy or biotechnology are all Greek in origin. Europeans (includind Americans, Australians...) are Hellenistic ! That is why this civilization fascinates us so much. So the European is my choice, eventhough I live in Japan.

Originally posted by Navinist
The one civilization no one has mentioned is India.
This civilization has produced the basis of mathematics with the discovery of the current numbers we use, zero, decimals, and algebra.

Mathematics weren't invented at a single place in the world. It is very possible that prehistoric men could already calculate. Because the most ancient remnants proving the use of maths were found in India (or actually present-day Pakistan, in the Indus valley) doesn't prove that Indians were their sole inventors.

It has also invented Sanksrit, the language which all others (Greek, Latin) derive from.

This is false. The original common Indo-European language was the Aryan language. The Aryans lived North of the Black Sea, in what is now roughly Ukraine. The only horses on earth also come originally from this region, which might have propelled the Aryan expension in 5000BC.

If it werent for the Muslim and British who pillaged and robbed India it would still be the richest nation in the world.

Aren't you being somewhat nationalist Hindu there. May I remind you that if the Aryans hadn't invaded India in 5000BC, there would be no Hinduism, no Sanskrit, etc. South Indians (Dravidians) could argue that India would have been more uniform if they hadn't been invaded by Aryans. Anyway, Islam entered India, but the Afghans kings stayed in India and built incredible monuments such as the 3 red forts (Lahore, Dehli, Agra) or the Taj Mahal. They didn't plundered anything. Britsih unified India after the Moghul collapse and laid the foundation for the modern democratic country nowadays.

Originally posted by erez87
where are the jews?
they are the ONLY civ that almost havn't been changed since he've been created... And that is a good thing? :confused:

Unchanging civs are dead civs - as the Manchus, Moghuls, Ottomans had found for themselves over the last few centuries.

Besides, except for religion, modern Israelis had changed dramatically fr the ancient Jews I think. In terms of govt, dress, technology, social norms etc.

Originally posted by Julien
Aren't Hellens really Europeans ? Ethnically, they are West Aryans, like Europeans (East Aryans being Indians and Persians). It is said that Ancient Greeks had blond hair and blue eyes. Greek language has pervaded all Europeans language. They are almost the only words similar in all European languages (I remind that Hungarian, Finnish or Basque are not in the European family of languages). Academic words like geography, democracy, physics, philosophy, psychology... and modern words such as telephone, pharmacy or biotechnology are all Greek in origin. Europeans (includind Americans, Australians...) are Hellenistic ! That is why this civilization fascinates us so much. So the European is my choice, eventhough I live in Japan. But the Greeks never considered themselves European, or as part of the European scene... They thought of themselves as civilised Hellas and the rest as barbarians. And they looked eastwards and southwards at the Mid-east and Egypt, rather than northwards at Europe.

I think the original poster meant Europeans as in West Europeans, in the modern sense of the word.

And as for all those words, they're modern inventions, based on Greek words... Doesn't mean they had been passed down fr the ages when the Greeks ruled the roost and permeated into modern European languages. ;) Otherwise, the Malay language is Hellenistic too, since many of those words had been adopted into modern Malay too, going by the same logic.

BTW, long time no see, Julien. :)

Originally posted by Navinist
The one civilization no one has mentioned is India.
This civilization has produced the basis of mathematics with the discovery of the current numbers we use, zero, decimals, and algebra.Decimals are invented by the Chinese. :p Recent research by a Singaporean mathematician (who can read the Chinese records describing it). I had posted about it somewhere in this subforum... Also left a space for zero.

It has also invented Sanksrit, the language which all others (Greek, Latin) derive from.Like Julien said, Sanskrit is only one of many Indo-European languages; hardly the progenitor of Latin and Greek. Unless you're saying the ancient Indians invaded the Mediterranean world and became the Greeks and Romans somehow? :)

They were the first country to invent plumbing (Mohendajaro), the first written text in the world, as well as a great deal of astronomy.Also the first flush toilet. :) Cool invention.

If it werent for the Muslim and British who pillaged and robbed India it would still be the richest nation in the world.Correction, collection of nations. The Mughals were in the process of losing their grip on India, with the individual states and regions separating back into their historical powerbases, when the British came. Which was why a few thousand Brits could take over India - they were playing off one Indian state against another. Were it not for the British, modern India today would only be a geographic term for the collection of states taking up space on the Indian subcontinent.

Just look at how fervent Pakistan and India are at loggerheads with each other...

the pre-communist-Kuomintang Chinese were in my opinion the greatest and most civilized nation in the world, now its probably America.

I'd say the Great Ottoman Empire and now Turkey was the greatist civ of all time because the were the only Arabs that made it through Constanipoline to Europe and still have a strong foothold in the middle east and are the Gateway of the middleeast and Africa into Europe, if not for ships and planes.

Originally posted by Navinist
The one civilization no one has mentioned is India.
This civilization has produced the basis of mathematics with the discovery of the current numbers we use, zero, decimals, and algebra. It has also invented Sanksrit, the language which all others (Greek, Latin) derive from. They were the first country to invent plumbing (Mohendajaro), the first written text in the world, as well as a great deal of astronomy.

If it werent for the Muslim and British who pillaged and robbed India it would still be the richest nation in the world.

I am happy this kind of topic is back.Dont you find the forum boring without these arguments?
Well I always agree India is a great civilization.In medieval age they are the second most productive civ in the world after China.The Richest nation title for pre-industrial age belongs to China ,I think India is second

Originally posted by Wildbore
I'd say the Great Ottoman Empire and now Turkey was the greatist civ of all time because the were the only Arabs that made it through Constanipoline to Europe and still have a strong foothold in the middle east and are the Gateway of the middleeast and Africa into Europe, if not for ships and planes.

The Ottomans/Turks were/are not Arabs, they were/are Turks.

Are you serious when you say that this is the reason that the Turks are the greatest civ of all time?

Lynx, the pre-communist-Kuomintang Chinese is Republic of China which is today's Taiwan; even today on a Taiwan passport you will see "Republic of China, Taiwan province, issued in 90th year of the republic."

I wouldn't vote for them though, Generalismo Jiang was a dictator, when he died he given the presidency to his son, remind you of something? yes the emperors. And his policies were hardly good for the ppl, hyperinflation 1947; mass conscription especially after 1946; and peace at home before war with Japan, he ordered quater a million well equiped troops out of the northeastern three provinces so the Japs can roll in their tanks.

Originally posted by Wildbore
I'd say the Great Ottoman Empire and now Turkey was the greatist civ of all time because the were the only Arabs that made it through Constanipoline to Europe and still have a strong foothold in the middle east and are the Gateway of the middleeast and Africa into Europe, if not for ships and planes.
There is a difference between Turks and Arabs: TURKS ARE NO ARABS! The Turks were a horseriding steppe tribe (related to the Mongols) who made it to the Middle East.

Originally posted by Knight-Dragon
So there are. But after seeing the umpteeth thread about the greatest civilisation in the world, one is bound to get a bit :sleep:. :) Ever notice most posters will always argue for their own civilisation grouping/kingdom/nation/whatever? :rolleyes:

Oh, if I have to argue, I'll say China. :p It's here as a powerful entity a few thousand yrs ago, it's here (becoming a powerful entity) today and it'll probably be here in the future too. Where would we be w/o paper, gunpowder and the compass? :p

Sorry KD, but Im voting for Europe. (Im also chinese) It was a difficult choice between China and Europeans, but I always found how fascinating the Europeans managed to conquer the rest of the world and never being able to conquer each other.

But I do agree with your points on china too. China was indeed really influential, and its economy is growing faster than ever now.

Originally posted by William528
I wouldn't vote for them though, Generalismo Jiang was a dictator, when he died he given the presidency to his son, remind you of something? yes the emperors. And his policies were hardly good for the ppl, hyperinflation 1947; mass conscription especially after 1946; and peace at home before war with Japan, he ordered quater a million well equiped troops out of the northeastern three provinces so the Japs can roll in their tanks.Those weren't his troops. The Manchurians were the soldiers of the Young Marshal Zhang. Surprisingly, Zhang submitted to the KMT and obeyed Jiang's orders (his father had opposed the KMT until he was killed in a train-bomb by the Japanese). The Manchurians weren't as well-equipped or well-trained as the Imperial Japanese Army; they weren't likely to be able to hold Manchuria anyway.

Jiang Jieshi wanted to destroy the Communists, before taking on Japan. He thought that eventually America and the West would take care of Japan; hence he always planned with a final countdown with the Communists in mind - even during the years of the so-called United Front against Japan.

In the end, he was right; but events got out of hand and he had lost too many of his best people during the war. The surviving KMT high officials and generals were too keen to pursue their own powers after the war (many were ex-warlords); and hence eventually they were booted out to Taiwan.

Originally posted by Knight-Dragon

In the end, he was right; but events got out of hand and he had lost too many of his best people during the war. The surviving KMT high officials and generals were too keen to pursue their own powers after the war (many were ex-warlords); and hence eventually they were booted out to Taiwan.

My grandfather was one of those people that were exiled to Taiwan. :cool: So you are absolutely correct. :)

Other: Tibet

They seem to be the civilisation that respects other cultures the most, and that is what I consider 'great'.

Originally posted by anarres
Other: Tibet

They seem to be the civilisation that respects other cultures the most, and that is what I consider 'great'. Respect other cultures? When the Tibetans first got their act together and found their first kingdom around 600-800 AD, the first thing they set out to do is to raid and attack China (the Tang empire) all along the border, fr the Chinese fortresses in Central Asia to the Sichuan province in the south-east. At one time successfully burning down cities in the Sichuan province.

Then after the Tibetans broke up and began fighting among themselves, somehow they got converted to Buddhism (Lamaism specifically). Worse, the Mongols somehow got converted to this Buddhism sect too; and they viewed Tibet sort of like how Catholics viewed the Papacy.

And the Tibetans seemed to be 'influencing' the Mongols, to China's disadvantage. Eventually the Manchus (the new rulers of China) got fed up, sent a few banners into Tibet and ruled it as a special region. Mainly to control the religious impulses of the ever troublesome Mongols.

Originally posted by anarres
Other: Tibet

They seem to be the civilisation that respects other cultures the most, and that is what I consider 'great'.

Let us not forget that Tibet has long been (and still is, under Chinese rule) one of the most isolated and close places on Earth. Foreigners have been forbidden to enter the country for centuries, whih I wouldn't consider as respect for other culture or openness.

Tibet has been popular for a few decades because it needs international support to kick the Chinese out - eventhough they first invaded them, as Knight-Dragon said. Let's say they are affable, but hypocritical and incredibly opportunistic. Who know how they would behave to the outside world now if they hadn't been invaded by China. Like in the rest of Asia, you get pointed and laughed at by children or stared at by adults if you don't look like them. For having travelled a lot in Asia (and living there), sometimes I know that most Asians (Japanese as much as others) have behaviours that would be interpreted as racist in Europe or America. Ever noticed that anywhere you go they have a word for "foreigner" that everybody repeat pointing at Caucasians whenever they see one ? In Japanese it's "Gaijin", in Chinese "gaikuoren" (?), in Thai "farang", etc. Tibetans are no exceptions.

I thought 'gaijin' meant 'barbarian'. :hmm:

But then, in their mind set all foreigners used to be barbarians, so the word could have those two meaning.

Originally posted by Julien
Tibet has been popular for a few decades because it needs international support to kick the Chinese out - eventhough they first invaded them, as Knight-Dragon said. Let's say they are affable, but hypocritical and incredibly opportunistic. Who know how they would behave to the outside world now if they hadn't been invaded by China.They would probably be living in the Middles Ages, and the only flush toilet you'd find in all of Tibet would probably be in the Potala Palace. The Lamas and the religious establishment kept a 100% lock on all aspects of Tibetan life, while they're in power, under the guise of 'tradition' and 'customs'.

The Dalai Lama is no democrat, and the mirage of a benevolent pacifist Tibet is an image carefully cultivated thru decades of PR efforts in the West, to shore up support for the Dalai Lama's return to absolute power in Tibet.

Like in the rest of Asia, you get pointed and laughed at by children or stared at by adults if you don't look like them. For having travelled a lot in Asia (and living there), sometimes I know that most Asians (Japanese as much as others) have behaviours that would be interpreted as racist in Europe or America. Ever noticed that anywhere you go they have a word for "foreigner" that everybody repeat pointing at Caucasians whenever they see one ? In Japanese it's "Gaijin", in Chinese "gaikuoren" (?), in Thai "farang", etc. Tibetans are no exceptions.The term in Mandarin Chinese would be meaning something more like 'foreign devil' or yanggui. And each Chinese dialectic group has their own term as well.

Originally posted by Panda
I thought 'gaijin' meant 'barbarian'. :hmm:

But then, in their mind set all foreigners used to be barbarians, so the word could have those two meaning.

Gaijin is the short for gaikokujin ŠO�‘�l (same character as in Chinese), which literally means "out (gai) country (koku) people (jin)", so outsiders or foreigners. They have other word for barbarians, but they aren't used anymore. Japanese argue that the term "gai(koku)jin" isn't derogatory, even respectable. I can tell you it's irritating to hear people behind your back saying "gaijin, gaijin !!" when they see you. I thought that was the attitude of third-world countryside people who have never seen a foreigner before. All Japanese see foreigners on TV or in real (at least in Tokyo or main cities) everyday. Even Japanese having lived abroad (US, Australia, Europe...) still refer to any Caucasian foreigners (strangely not Koreans, Chinese, etc) as "gaijin" between them. Black people are refered to as "kokujin" (lit. "black people" :lol: ) whereever they come from (US, Caribbean, Africa...). It's stereotypically the same almost everywhere in East Asia (except, I think, Malaysia and Singapore because they already have mixed population).

Originally posted by Julien
It's stereotypically the same almost everywhere in East Asia (except, I think, Malaysia and Singapore because they already have mixed population).The Chinese in S'pore - M'sia have their own terms too, depending on the dialectic group. Like 'angmoh' for Hokkiens and 'gweilou' for Cantonese. ;)

But nowadays, the terms are hardly used derogatorily, since the Chinese here are better educated, with many going abroad to study in the Anglo-Saxon countries (sometimes marrying foreigners as well, and staying on). Except in the more isolated places...

But nowadays, the terms are hardly used derogatorily, since the Chinese here are better educated, with many going abroad to study in the Anglo-Saxon countries (sometimes marrying foreigners as well, and staying on). Except in the more isolated places... [/B]

The most isolated places of S'pore ? That must be the zoo, in the middle !:lol:

Originally posted by Julien
The most isolated places of S'pore ? That must be the zoo, in the middle !:lol: I'm referring to the isolated places in Malaysia. I consider myself native to both countries, nowadays. ;)

Yes, I knew. Just kidding ! ;)

i'm too lazy to read all 3 pages so if someone already said this then sorry. i think that the Romans are considered Hellenic or some division of Hellenic since most of their culture was taken from the Greeks.

I can't believe 4 people have voted for the Arabs yet none have voted for Mesopotamia, the oldest civilization in the poll.

THE EUROPEANS!!!

The British had a huge empire. Germans had land superiority over everyone from 1820-1043 with the exception of 1918-1933.
The French had a large empire. The Russians were huge.

Originally posted by West German
THE EUROPEANS!!!

The British had a huge empire. Germans had land superiority over everyone from 1820-1043 with the exception of 1918-1933.
The French had a large empire. The Russians were huge.

The Europeans began to have superiority over the rest of the world ONLY after Industrial Revolution.
Russia is not a western civilization nor they were asian civ

Originally posted by Fayadi


The Europeans began to have superiority over the rest of the world ONLY after Industrial Revolution.
Russia is not a western civilization nor they were asian civ

Sorry to contradict you one more time, Fayadi. Actually West German's examples were not very well chosen, but Western European began their world domination from about year 1500 (colonisation of America, settlement, trade and colonies in Africa and Asia...), while the industrial revolution took place in the late 18th century in Britain and mainly in the 19th century in most of Europe.

Before that, Romans and Greeks already kind of dominated their neighbours in Africa and West Asia, but nothing world-wide.

Originally posted by Julien
Sorry to contradict you one more time, Fayadi. Actually West German's examples were not very well chosen, but Western European began their world domination from about year 1500 (colonisation of America, settlement, trade and colonies in Africa and Asia...), while the industrial revolution took place in the late 18th century in Britain and mainly in the 19th century in most of Europe.

Before that, Romans and Greeks already kind of dominated their neighbours in Africa and West Asia, but nothing world-wide. Yes, but China still had a vaster 'industrial' productive capacity that's unsurpassed by any nation worldwide until the Industrial Revolution took hold in Britain, then Europe.

And as a political entity, China was seen as an Utopia by the intellectuals of the West, free fr the religious turmoil plaguing Europe at this time. People like Voltaire wrote stuff about admiring China's political structure and aristocrats collected Chinoise, or Chinese items like porcelain etc.

It was only after 1800, when the Qing weakened (as they headed towards their end of the dynastic cycle), that Westerners began to view China as the 'Sick Man of Asia'.

Collecting chinoiseries or admiring China was a kind of fashion. There has been the same with Japan a bit later, but studying Japanese history and society, I wonder why there had been so much admiration (then everybody forgot about it again). Probably because it was so different and nobody knew it really well because they hadn't been there to study it.

As a European, I will of course defend our filthy, war mongering, fanatical ancestors.;)

No, I think China was a much better place to live in then dark Europe. However, comparing China and Europe is about as naive as to compare US with Europe. Europe is a bunch of very different states, that during history has spent most of their time fighting each other. This made us very good at producing weapons and to wage war, but quite backwards at having a good life.

China in the long run.

For centuries and centuries they were the world's number one, a world superpower for far longer than any other country or empire.

Even so, I would like to go with Europe, but they vary.

And also I think Rome is overrated in terms of the amount of territory they eventually conquered. At the end of the day they never even got near to the size that China was, and culturally they were heavily influenced by the Greeks rather than being unique in their own right.

I don't agree with the last post. If you consider the Mediteranean Rome's territory was larger than China's. Look at a world map and compare Europe's size with China. The Roman empre stretch from the Scottish border North-West to Morocco SW, to Northern Sudan SE and Eastwards to the border of present-day Saudi Arabia and Iran, then all along Turkey, Romania, Hungary and Southern Germany to the Netherlands. That area is bigger than present day China, which is itself bigger than the Chinese empire during most of the history, because Tibet and Central Asia were not Chinese (and still aren't really culturally, though Chinese try hard to send settlers to replace the native population), except during a few periods like the Qing. Even Mandchuria has not always been part of China.

Just for information, the distance from Portugal to the Caspian sea is longer than from Beijing to the Caspian sea, which is almost twice the maximum East-West length of the Chinese empire. From the Scottish border to Sudan, it's about like from North Korea/Russia to the middle or south of India !

I've found this map of 116 AD :

http://www.sct.gu.edu.au/~sctwiseh/Roman/Eurasia116.gif

Seems to me, you're comparing the Romans' greatest extent with China's non-greatest extent. I don't recall the Romans remained in Mesopotamia for very long, and Armenia was only an ally, or client state at times, as with many other 'Roman' territories. The Romans didn't head down to the Sudan too, that often, IIRC.

I think it's pointless to compare. Both were astounding empires, with their own interesting aspects and shld be treated as such, rather than compared against, or judged according to the other. They were completely different entities, and had no firsthand knowledge of each other.

In any case, China took territories it could and would hold down to the present day (intermittently in some places though), while the last pitiful vestiges of the Roman empire was wiped out in 1453. :p

Originally posted by Knight-Dragon
In any case, China took territories it could and would hold down to the present day (intermittently in some places though), while the last pitiful vestiges of the Roman empire was wiped out in 1453. :p

Nominally maybe (well the Holy Roman Empire of Germany lasted until Napoleon came), but why do you think most official buildings (parliament, courts of justice, museums, universities, banks, stock exchange...) in virtually all Western countries, in Europe, America, Australia, etc., have Graeco-Roman style architercture ? That's as clear a continuation as anything in China during the same period. Since communism, China has lost almost all connection with its past, which isn't the case in the West where people still learn Latin and Ancient Greek at school (when in France, Italy, Germany, etc. people usually do learn at least one, I am not sure about the US, Canada, Australia or even the UK...). Europe has diversified so much that it's now a mosaic of countries, while China has remained unified and relatively homogenous (90% of ethnic Han, most people can speak Mandarin...).

What about if China split into several countries in the future ? I don't think borders are very important nowadays. Look at the EU ; borders have disappeard since 1992, and people have a common parliament, government (EU Commission, soon to have 2 elected presidents, BTW), pay in the same currency, have the same passports/visas, etc. I would say that EU countries are more unified now than China. China has several special economic zones, which have very different laws, economic systems, immigration policies... For instance, no visa required for HK or Shanghai for short stays for most Westerners, but needed even for a single day outside that, while if you enter the EU, your visa is valid everywhere. The EU is also more homogenous economically (one system). There are also more languages or dialects in China (more than 250, have I read) than in the EU nowadays. It's not because Europe has a more complex history and system that it isn't united or lost its roots (Roman, Greek, Germanic, Celtic...).

The best proof of continuity of the Roman culture nowadays is the Roman alphabet, Latin's influence on English and evolution into Italian, French, Spanish and Portuguese, and finally the architectural and artistical style that shapes the greatest capital such as London, Paris, Berlin or Madrid (and Rome of course) and most US cities.

Yes, but while Roman practises, culture and customs were adopted by their successors (and invaders) and lasted till today, it's still not quite the same as the Romans themselves surviving as a separate people with their Empire intact and still using the same language. As in the case of the Chinese.

Any modern Chinese reader can still read the stuff written down in ancient times, albeit with many ancient characters having fallen out of modern common usage. Communism is only a thin veneer covering modern China; beneath it, Chinese culture is alive and well. Which was why it was simply so easy for Deng and his regime to shake off 'Communism' and embark on economic reforms.

Modern Chinese see the Qin, Han and so on as their direct ancestors; but I don't think Americans, the British or Germans today think of themselves as modern-day Romans.

But enough on comparisons. Both empires were unique and shld be treated as such accordingly, not judge and compare who's the most land...

Add : - Didn't Voltaire quip that the Holy Roman Empire is neither holy, nor Roman, nor an empire?

Any modern Chinese reader can still read the stuff written down in ancient times, albeit with many ancient characters having fallen out of modern common usage.

That's because Chinese characters have a meaning in themselves. Pronunciation has changed and as you said some (a few thousands..,) characters are not used anymore. Japanese people (or me, with my 1000+ kanji so far) could read and understand quite a lot of Chinese, but would be at a complete loss to hear it or know how to read it. So it doesn't mean anything that Chinese can read ancient text.

Basically, the difference between ancient and modern Chinese is the same as between Latin and Italian or ancient and modern greek. Of course, it's still possible for an Italian (or a french speaker like me) to understand half of a Latin text. It's even easier to understand ancient Greek knowing modern greek or vice-versa. A friend of mine learnt ancient Greek at school and when we went to Greece, he could read relatively easily modern Greek. Strange enough that a Belgian should study ancient Greek (and Latin in his case), will you think. Not at all. My grand-father was fluent in both and my father learnt Latin during years as well. About 20% of all secondary school students (in Europe, not just Latin countries) still learn Latin at school. How many Chinese people learn ancient Chinese nowadays ?

it's still not quite the same as the Romans themselves surviving as a separate people with their Empire intact and still using the same language. As in the case of the Chinese.

I understand your point but are you saying that European people (especially Latin) do not descend from Romans ? Italians do consider themselves modern day Romans. Even as a Belgian, I would play Roman soldier when I was a child. Americans also do. They even make movies such as "Gladiator". Have a look at the first Hollywood movies, especially in the 50's and 60's ; most of them were "peplum", i.e. historical movies set in Ancient Rome or Greece. Why would they choose to make such movies instead of stories set in the middle ages, renaissance or anytime between the 16th and 19th century ? Because they still feel their Roman heritage. That's also why so many people have voted for the Romans and so many games are made about them.

For the language, see my replies above.

That map is crap! India is much bigger then Sweden, not like it is shown in this map.

Although I am Roman at heart, I fear China will win the "who's biggest" competition.

I want to add that if Westerners do not feel Romans nowadays, it's just because Rome was such a "small" empire compared to the regions the Europeans have colonised and settled till then. Take the Spanish, Portugues, French English and Dutch empires, even the German and Italian ones afterwards and that is most of the world that was under European domination. So Romans seem somewhat primitive next to that. But the people and culture is of course a continuation. I don't see it as a problem that each country was independant (and not in China), because anyway the monarchies of each country were like a big families and culturally, Europeans have always been united against the rest of the world (similar languages, ethny, religion, system, history, etc.)

Originally posted by Julien
That's because Chinese characters have a meaning in themselves. Pronunciation has changed and as you said some (a few thousands..,) characters are not used anymore.They're not used in common everyday words, but still in use by specialists and scholars (there're maybe 30000-50000 characters in existense, depending on how you classify them, I understand). The 2000 or so 'common' characters we use today are the same as those used 2200 years ago. The grammar is the same; the language is the same; the meaning of the characters is the same. Despite the pronounciation having changed.

But Latin as a common spoken language today is not and has been replaced by a whole lot of languages, depending on the inheritor nation in question.

Japanese people (or me, with my 1000+ kanji so far) could read and understand quite a lot of Chinese, but would be at a complete loss to hear it or know how to read it. So it doesn't mean anything that Chinese can read ancient text.Modern Chinese can read and understand perfectly the ancient classics and poems written more than 2000 years ago, not just grasping at their perceived meaning. It's the same language, despite pronounciations. Some of the stuff kids learned in school are from that long ago - direct quotes fr the Analects or whatever.

Like English, there're peoples who pronounce it differently worldwide, but generally all its regional variants are still considered as English.

Basically, the difference between ancient and modern Chinese is the same as between Latin and Italian or ancient and modern greek.The difference for the former is much lesser than for the later IMO.

How many Chinese people learn ancient Chinese nowadays ?There's no such thing as 'ancient Chinese' and 'modern Chinese'. They're the same... Read above.

Originally posted by Julien
I don't see it as a problem that each country was independant (and not in China), because anyway the monarchies of each country were like a big families and culturally, Europeans have always been united against the rest of the world (similar languages, ethny, religion, system, history, etc.)Yeah, and some of worst wars in history were fought between these 'cousins'. Like WW1, despite the royal houses of Britain, Germany and Russia being all inter-related. Wasn't the Kaiser related to Queen Victoria?

It's a problem alright. ;)

Originally posted by Knight-Dragon
Yeah, and some of worst wars in history were fought between these 'cousins'. Like WW1, despite the royal houses of Britain, Germany and Russia being all inter-related. Wasn't the Kaiser related to Queen Victoria?

It's a problem alright. ;)

Why, didn't China have internal wars ? What about the original kingdoms, the Warring states period, North and South Song, Kuomintang Vs Communist, etc. Weren't they among the bloodiest war in the history ? In the middle ages, the society as feudal, so vassals fought with one another, or a lord against his neighbour, etc. This situation last more than 1000 years in Japan (in about 1500 years of recorded history) and nobody would argue (certainly not the Japanese) that the different daimyo formed separate countries, eventhough they hacked each other with swords like everywhere else in the world. China was also a feudal society and had its fair share of wars inside its borders. You'll notice that after the WWII, the first thing done was to reconciliate France, Germany and Italy, which eventually lead to the European Union, which is as much a country as China is.

Originally posted by Knight-Dragon
They're not used in common everyday words, but still in use by specialists and scholars (there're maybe 30000-50000 characters in existense, depending on how you classify them, I understand). The 2000 or so 'common' characters we use today are the same as those used 2200 years ago. The grammar is the same; the language is the same; the meaning of the characters is the same. Despite the pronounciation having changed.

If you know well about Chinese languages, I am not sure your are being honest here. Japanese (and still some Koreans) also use Chinese characters (about 2000 common, but otherwise maybe 6500), though these are completely different languages (not even Sino-Tibetan). If Japanese can read Chinese character, they can do it as easily for ancient or modern Chinese.

What you seem to have overlooked is that China has lots of dialects that are not intelligible to one another. I have checked phrasebooks of Mandarin and Cantonese, and it's much more different than French, Italian, Spanish and Portuguese. To give you an idea, I speak French, Italian and Spanish and that's enough to understand written Portuguese very well. The grammar is the same between these 4 languages and 80% of the vocabulary is similar. Spanish can converse with Italian or Portuguese and understand each other fairly well, while a Cantonese and a Mandarin speaker wouldn't.

Moreover, Chinese characters are not the same everywhere in China. There are the traditional ones (HK, Taiwan, Japan, Korea...) and the simplified ones (most of China). The latter are too different from the traditional for the average people to be able to read old Chinese text.

You are saying that there are 30-50000 characters, but only 20.000 are listed in modern dictionaries and nobody know them all. Even university educated people would hardly know half of that (which really is a lot, as Japanese do very well with 6500 even for ancient literature !).

[/quote]But Latin as a common spoken language today is not and has been replaced by a whole lot of languages, depending on the inheritor nation in question. [/b]

I've read several studies that confirmed that Chinese dialects are at least as different as Latin languages are between them. China just prefer to have one language with "dialects" rather than several languages. It's just a question of denomination.

[/quote]Modern Chinese can read and understand perfectly the ancient classics and poems written more than 2000 years ago, not just grasping at their perceived meaning. It's the same language, despite pronounciations. Some of the stuff kids learned in school are from that long ago - direct quotes fr the Analects or whatever.

Like English, there're peoples who pronounce it differently worldwide, but generally all its regional variants are still considered as English.

The difference for the former is much lesser than for the later IMO.

There's no such thing as 'ancient Chinese' and 'modern Chinese'. They're the same... Read above. [/B][/QUOTE]

Read above

Originally posted by Julien
If you know well about Chinese languages, I am not sure your are being honest here. Japanese (and still some Koreans) also use Chinese characters (about 2000 common, but otherwise maybe 6500), though these are completely different languages (not even Sino-Tibetan). If Japanese can read Chinese character, they can do it as easily for ancient or modern Chinese.Yes, the Japanese can make out the individual word here and there, but they can't make out the whole sentence. For the Chinese, the whole sentence structure is just as valid today as it was when written down then, mayhaps sounding a bit archaic but completely understandable.

What you seem to have overlooked is that China has lots of dialects that are not intelligible to one another.I'm well-aware of the dialects - I can understand 3 of them myself and am from a 4th dialectic group. :)

I have checked phrasebooks of Mandarin and Cantonese, and it's much more different than French, Italian, Spanish and Portuguese.Cantonese is great for swearing...

Moreover, Chinese characters are not the same everywhere in China. There are the traditional ones (HK, Taiwan, Japan, Korea...) and the simplified ones (most of China). The latter are too different from the traditional for the average people to be able to read old Chinese text.That's only a recent exercise by the PRC to simplify Chinese writing (which is a good thing). Mayhaps I exaggerate a bit, but a lot of Chinese can read both scripts I think.

You are saying that there are 30-50000 characters, but only 20.000 are listed in modern dictionaries and nobody know them all. Even university educated people would hardly know half of that (which really is a lot, as Japanese do very well with 6500 even for ancient literature !).Many were archaic ones fallen out of modern usage or complicated variants only known by scholars and unlisted in dictionaries. No point.

I've read several studies that confirmed that Chinese dialects are at least as different as Latin languages are between them. China just prefer to have one language with "dialects" rather than several languages. It's just a question of denomination.Yes, but they all use the same writing. A Mandarin speaker can communicate with a Cantonese speaker simply thru writing.

But not so for the 'Latin' alphabet. E.g. I can read English fairly well, but don't understand a word of German (except guesses). Oh, I can identify the individual letter, but I don't know what's the word or its meaning. But between the Chinese dialects, there's no such problem; with even the grammar having evolved enough to be similar nowadays.

Originally posted by Julien
Why, didn't China have internal wars ? What about the original kingdoms, the Warring states period, North and South Song, Kuomintang Vs Communist, etc. Weren't they among the bloodiest war in the history ?Those were civil wars (except for the first time when China was really unified). All is be done with when one emerged in victory over the rest and assumed hegemony, with the defeated submitting to the victor. The wars between the European powers were different. Compared with the Chinese, the Europeans seemed to have fought amongst themselves continually - Thirty Years War, Seven Years War, Napoleonic War, WW1 etc - in rapid succession.

You even have names for your wars; something the Chinese never really bother with, until coming into contact with Europe.

And not really the bloodiest wars in history, compared with the trenches of WW1 and the Eastern Front during WW2. Except maybe for the Taiping uprising in the mid 1800s.

In the middle ages, the society as feudal, so vassals fought with one another, or a lord against his neighbour, etc. This situation last more than 1000 years in Japan (in about 1500 years of recorded history) and nobody would argue (certainly not the Japanese) that the different daimyo formed separate countries, eventhough they hacked each other with swords like everywhere else in the world. China was also a feudal society and had its fair share of wars inside its borders. You'll notice that after the WWII, the first thing done was to reconciliate France, Germany and Italy, which eventually lead to the European Union, which is as much a country as China is.China is different fr Japan and Europe - its feudal structure had been destroyed when the Qin unified the country 2200 years ago. There's no real bloodline aristocracies in China, only the Confucian gentry.

The people would rally immediately behind the victor in the civil wars quickly, once it's clear who's won the war for hegemony within China. There're wars, but only to decide who'll rule the country - there're no permanent 'states'.

That's the reason why Chiang Kaishek went all out against the Communists, when he could have easily settled for peace and the giant share of the land, after WW2. The winner takes all.

You even have names for your wars; something the Chinese never really bother with, until coming into contact with Europe.

That's just a difference of mentality. If European observers had been in China at the time, they would have given a name to these wars. Any rebellion or war, civil or not has a name so that historians can discuss more easily about it. Maybe is it just that most Chinese didn't (and still don't) really care about history and putting name on events. Nowadays, most events happening outside Western countries are given a name by Western media. For example a war or revolution in Africa. Most African don't give a **** to give a name to what they have experienced and probably know less about their own country than Western observers (because of government censorship, lack of education, poor media coverage or disponibility, etc). Even in communist China, most people have been kept in the total darkness about what was really going on during Mao and co's regime. There has always been a tradition for secrecy in East Asia, be it in China, Korea or Japan. Who'd know that even modern "democratic" Japan conceal about all fishy affairs regarding the government or big corporation. The media censorship is almost as strong as in a dictatorship - so that they can maintain the group "harmony" by avoiding protest and demonstrations. It's deeply ingrained into Eastern society and is not going to change soon. BTW, Singapore isn't as democratic as it seems either. I would be affraid to make a false move when I know that I could be fined 500 US$ for picking up a flower or eating chewing gum. Worst of all, there is death penalty for drug possession, and they consider even cannabis as a drug, which is legal for possession and private use (not sale) in my country. The law is the same in Malaysia and a few Australians have been sentenced to death just for having a joint on them. Really scary ! At least Japan is not very strict for such things, even too lenient on pornography and child prostitution... There should be a middle ground (and you won't find it in the US either, which sides more towards Singapore).

But not so for the 'Latin' alphabet. E.g. I can read English fairly well, but don't understand a word of German (except guesses). Oh, I can identify the individual letter, but I don't know what's the word or its meaning. But between the Chinese dialects, there's no such problem; with even the grammar having evolved enough to be similar nowadays.

Well, let's take a few example :

German = Ich muss lernen. / Mein Haus ist grün / Die Apfel ist reif
English = I must learn. / My house is green / The apple is ripe

Is that so difficult to understand ? When you read it, it's even more similar. Old English is much more difficult to understand for modern English speakers, written or spoken.

Let's have a look at Latin languages :

Spanish = El treno parte a las tres y arriva a las seis.
Italian = Il treno parte alle tre e arriva alle sei.
French = Le train part a trois heure et arrive a six heure.
English = The train departs at three and arrive at six.

One more :

Spanish = Estudiar una lengua es relativemente dificil y consuma mucho energia.
Italian = Studiare una lingua e relativemente difficile e consuma molto energia.
French = Etudier une langue est relativement difficile et consume beaucoup d'energie.
English = To study a language is relatively difficult and consumes a lot of energy.

Even a child can understand if they speak at least one of these languages.

Can you give me similar examples with Chinese dialects (written in pinyin)

Originally posted by Julien

Well, let's take a few example :

German = Ich muss lernen. / Mein Haus ist grün / Die Apfel ist reif
English = I must learn. / My house is green / The apple is ripe

Is that so difficult to understand ? When you read it, it's even more similar. Old English is much more difficult to understand for modern English speakers, written or spoken.
German-English. That's not too bad. But is not the same as Chinese-Chinese.

Originally posted by Julien

Let's have a look at Latin languages :

Spanish = El treno parte a las tres y arriva a las seis.
Italian = Il treno parte alle tre e arriva alle sei.
French = Le train part a trois heure et arrive a six heure.
English = The train departs at three and arrive at six.

One more :

Spanish = Estudiar una lengua es relativemente dificil y consuma mucho energia.
Italian = Studiare una lingua e relativemente difficile e consuma molto energia.
French = Etudier une langue est relativement difficile et consume beaucoup d'energie.
English = To study a language is relatively difficult and consumes a lot of energy.

Even a child can understand if they speak at least one of these languages.
The Romance languages are easy too. But still no comparison to Chinese-Chinese.


Originally posted by Jilien

Can you give me similar examples with Chinese dialects (written in pinyin)

Easy. But you probably won't believe me either!
Go to any web site using the traditional Chinese character set:
1. Remember the characters.
2. Repeat after me. "As it is written on this web site, every Chinaman, in EVERY part of China, Taiwan, and Hong Kong would write EXACTLY the same character in the same sentence when all parties have agreed to communicate in traditional chinese."

A Chinaman in Beijing writing to a Chinaman in Taiwan, or Hong Kong, using the traditional character set...

is like...

An American in Washington writing to an American in Texas or California, using the English language! :) ...

which is not at all the same as a Frog communicating in French with a Wop in Italian. :)

Originally posted by Julien


...What you seem to have overlooked is that China has lots of dialects that are not intelligible to one another.

Not exactly. Chinese consists of multiple SPOKEN dialects that are not mutually intelligble to one another.

I have checked phrasebooks of Mandarin and Cantonese, and it's much more different than French, Italian, Spanish and Portuguese. To give you an idea, I speak French, Italian and Spanish and that's enough to understand written Portuguese very well. The grammar is the same between these 4 languages and 80% of the vocabulary is similar. Spanish can converse with Italian or Portuguese and understand each other fairly well, while a Cantonese and a Mandarin speaker wouldn't.

Partially correct. Cantonese and Mandarin would have difficulties speaking to one another. However, they would write 99% IDENTICALLY to each other. Both vocabulary and grammar are 99% identical.

Moreover, Chinese characters are not the same everywhere in China. There are the traditional ones (HK, Taiwan, Japan, Korea...) and the simplified ones (most of China). The latter are too different from the traditional for the average people to be able to read old Chinese text.

Not exactly. Traditional character set is still used in China. Most in China know BOTH the traditional AND simplified (Mao) character sets. The simplified (Mao) set is a "recent" written character set, so you can imagine that MOST can still read old Chinese text.

I've read several studies that confirmed that Chinese dialects are at least as different as Latin languages are between them. China just prefer to have one language with "dialects" rather than several languages. It's just a question of denomination.

Not exactly. It is not a matter of choice of denomination. Dialects are mutually intelligible between two persons of different dialects. Languages are not mutually intelligible between two people of different languages.

WRITTEN Chinese is ONE language - the traditional character set is universal to all chinese regardless of dialect.

SPOKEN Chinese is MULTIPLE languages. No. Not dialects. Spoken Chinese between a Mandarin and Cantonese speaker are not mutually intelligible.

Chinese does not fit into the western language classification scheme of dialect vs. language very well. It is an odd ball. The written language is identical, but spoken it is totally different.

You want to say it is multiple dialects because they all understand each other when it is written. But actually, they write identically, so it is just one language/dialect!

However, you also want to say it is multiple languages because they do not understand each other when it is spoken. But how can it be multiple languages when they write exactly the same!?

So if I decide to write English with Chinese character and Chinese people can read it (but noe pronounced it), then English is a Chinese dialect maybe ? Let's try :D

’¹‹�’†–Ø (bird is in tree) => the bird is in the tree. That's English isn't it ? I have no idea how to pronounce it in Chinese but I can pronounce it in English, so English is a Chinese language !

”_—Ñ�…ŽY�È (agriculture, forest, water production ministry)
ŠO�‘�l�î•ñ (foreigner information)

I am just reading as a Chinese would translating in their own dialect. My dialect is called English and it's written in Chinese character. If I can it, I must be Chinese, right ? Do you see my point ? The writing system is not all. What makes a language is how you pronounced it. Could you argue that languages that had no writing system a lot time ago were not languages ? If Chinese didn't have its ideograms and pictograms, would all dialects be distinct languages then ?

I do not understand what you mean?

I said in my post:

A. Chinese consists of ONE written language; and,
B. Chinese consists of MULTIPLE spoken languages.

Further I made it clear that they (the spoken languages) can not be considered dialects, but should be considered LANGUAGES because they are not mutually intelligible, orally. As in the speaker of cantonese cannot understand the speaker of mandarin. Obviously, unless of course they took the time to learn both languages.

The ONE written language is true. Do you mean that you do not understand that it is possible to have one written language where every written word has the same meaning eventhough different people (Taiwanese, Hong Kong, Hokkien) pronounce them differently? It may be hard to believe, but it is true.

Edit:

Hmm... maybe this might help....

Cantonese vs. Mandarin:
A. They are pronounced entirely differently
B. They are written IDENTICALLY
C. There does NOT exist written Mandarin
D. There does NOT exist written Cantonese
E. Written Cantonese is NOT discernable from written Mandarin
F. As said, neither exist in written form. :)
G. A Masters thesis written in Taipei Taiwan, is fully legible in Hong Kong or Beijing.

Italian vs. Portugese
A. Thay are pronounced differently
B. They are written SIMILARLY
C. There DOES exist written Italian
D. There DOES exist written Portugese
E. Written Italian is DISCERNABLE from written Portugese.
F. As suggested, BOTH exist and are discernable in written form. :)
G. A Masters thesis written in Rome requires a translator in Lisbon.

1. IDENTICAL and SIMILAR are not synonymous.
2. You can discern text written in Portugese from text written Italian.
3. You CAN NOT discern text written in Taipei from text written in Beijing or Hong Kong. As said, neither written Mandarin (Taipei/Beijing) nor written Cantonese (Hong Kong/Guangdong) exist!

A Japanese may understand some Chinese as well as an Italian may understand some Portugese.
They are distinct languages that share some similarity.

However, EVERY Chinese will understand ALL written Chinese. They are different languages verbally. They are identical languages in the written form.

Does that make any sense?

Edit:
You can't count "simplified chinese". It's a recent Mao invention, not part of Chinese culture! If it dies... thank goodness!

Cheers!

Muppet is correct. Chinese is written the same, and spoken differently in different dialiacts. Ever read Tom Sawyer? Or Tale of Two Cities? Theyre both in english, but pretty hard to read. Same thing with Chinese dialiacts! Hard to read, but can still be understood!

And also, about the traditional and simplified versions, China is actually slowly switching back to the traditional one. :p

I understand very well that Chinese is written the same everywhere. But if you decide to READ it with English words, instead of Mandarin or Cantonese words, then couldn't it be considered as an international semantic form of writing rather than a language. I mean, I can alreday read more than 1000 Chinese characters (i know what they mean), though I have never learned Chinese and cannot utter a word of it. It's like mathematical symbols (+, 0, :, *, %, =,...) or other symbols ($, ?, !., &...), the sign language or even html code or any programming language ; everybody is able to understand them and read them, but pronouce them differently according to their language. I don't see the difference with Chinese characters. It's a language without being one, because it is only written.

I disagree when you say that Mandarin or Cantonese have cannot be written. You can write them in Roman characters. There are several convention such as the pinyin. Chinese children are now learning the Roman alphabet first because it's easier and if they haven't learn a kanji, they can still write something.

It's the same in Japanese, you can write the language in kanji (chinese character) + hiragana + katakana or everything in hiragana or everything in romaji (Roman alphabet). All are acceptable. Only the kanji are not phonetical and convey a meaning in themselves.

So, if you write everything is Roman alphabet or any other alphabet, Chinese dialects are as much different languages as Italian, Spanish and Portuguese. If you write Italian and Mandarin in Chinese characters, they might be understood by anybody who can read the charcacters, whatever language they speak.

Youre right Julien, but now I cant remember what youre original argument was. :crazyeye:

I'm getting confused as well :); I've never really given much thought to our language, its written form, the assorted dialects and all the inter-relationships between them before now.

Let's do it this way : -

Cantonese - Lei hou mah?
Hokkien - Lu ho bo?
Mandarin - Ni hao ma?
English - You are well?

The grammar for each dialect is the same or similar enough. Each dialectic group simply pronounces a Chinese character differently - I think a result of thousands of years of using the same written language.

You know - this will make for a very interesting thesis by a language specialist... Any takers? :)

And Julien, Chinese can never be written using the Latin alphabet, because the same sound and tone is recycled for characters with different meanings. We differentiate them based on the context in which they're used... ;)

Originally posted by Knight-Dragon

And Julien, Chinese can never be written using the Latin alphabet, because the same sound and tone is recycled for characters with different meanings. We differentiate them based on the context in which they're used... ;)

Ah yes. That is so confusing. Thats probably why I suck at Chinese more than any other language. :p

Missed this ones...

Originally posted by Julien
That's just a difference of mentality. If European observers had been in China at the time, they would have given a name to these wars. Any rebellion or war, civil or not has a name so that historians can discuss more easily about it. Maybe is it just that most Chinese didn't (and still don't) really care about history and putting name on events.IMO the Chinese really do care about their history - because we had been such a powerful nation all till history. :)

The Chinese do not glamourise war and naming them. Simply that. Just get it done with, then forget about all the miseries of war, and then get on with the reconstruction.

Nowadays, most events happening outside Western countries are given a name by Western media. For example a war or revolution in Africa. Most African don't give a **** to give a name to what they have experienced and probably know less about their own country than Western observers (because of government censorship, lack of education, poor media coverage or disponibility, etc).That's 'cause they don't have the luxury to do so (like us) - they need to make ends meet, put food on the table, work like hell to survive. Not that they don't care - just no time to care IMO.

Even in communist China, most people have been kept in the total darkness about what was really going on during Mao and co's regime. There has always been a tradition for secrecy in East Asia, be it in China, Korea or Japan. Who'd know that even modern "democratic" Japan conceal about all fishy affairs regarding the government or big corporation. The media censorship is almost as strong as in a dictatorship - so that they can maintain the group "harmony" by avoiding protest and demonstrations. It's deeply ingrained into Eastern society and is not going to change soon.It's one of the remnants of the Confucian mandarinate - govt policies are not subjects for popular debate, not really.

BTW, Singapore isn't as democratic as it seems either. I would be affraid to make a false move when I know that I could be fined 500 US$ for picking up a flower or eating chewing gum. Worst of all, there is death penalty for drug possession, and they consider even cannabis as a drug, which is legal for possession and private use (not sale) in my country. The law is the same in Malaysia and a few Australians have been sentenced to death just for having a joint on them. Really scary !S'pore and M'sia are democratic; yes the laws are draconian and the govt authoritarian, but the party in power is voted into office. And general elections are held every 5 years to ensure that the parties in power don't get lax.

The picky rules S'pore has are rather easy to 'explain'. The govt spent huge amounts of time and effort to create and maintain a very nice environ for the people to live in - because the small island is all the people is ever going to have; so they went all out to improve it. You know - trees, flowers, cleaniness everywhere... The streets and gardens are swept and cleaned everyday.

I think a lot of people are going to get pissed if a few s come around and begin spitting, throwing rubbish, spitting out rubber gums etc. I know I would... :mad:

Originally posted by Knight-Dragon

I think a lot of people are going to get pissed if a few s come around and begin spitting, throwing rubbish, spitting out rubber gums etc. I know I would... :mad:

Calm down KD. I dont have any problem with the "picky" rules in Singapore at all. In fact, I think most people (or at least myself) view the rules in a sense of awe. Id like to visit Singapore someday and see how it really is the largest clean and quiet city in the world. :)

Originally posted by Silverflame
Calm down KD. I dont have any problem with the "picky" rules in Singapore at all. In fact, I think most people (or at least myself) view the rules in a sense of awe. Id like to visit Singapore someday and see how it really is the largest clean and quiet city in the world. :) One is not mad. ;) Just explaining S'pore's point of view. S'poreans had been the butt of jokes for too often because of these rules - even I used to make such jokes until I have to live here. :p

If you want to know what it's like w/o such 'small' rules, cross the border and visit my hometown, Johor Bahru in M'sia. Even the industrial estates in S'pore are probably cleaner than my housing estate... :o

Also, the Chinese, esp of the older generation, have the disgusting habit of spitting in public, amongst other stuff. :rolleyes: Still happens in M'sia now and then.

For conquest, I voted for the European civs, at their high-time (lets say before WW2) they controlled pritty much of the globe together.
For technology, I would vote for China, since they were pretty advanced in time, at least more advanced than Europeans untill about 1400.

Originally posted by puglover
America! :D

No, i dont think so.
U.S. cant compare to ancient Mesopotamia or Rome.
America Rules, though! ;)

i think i saw somebody say the celts had died out or europe had lost it's celtic roots or something.

but they haven't completely died out. i mean, there are still 7 celtic nations in europe (even if one of them is cornwall).

i voted for european btw.

oops, double post.

how silly to have a poll on empires/civs and not have britain even with its own option.

Ellie

The British are the perfect European cocktail : ethnically and culturally (language at least) they are Germanic, Latin and Celtic, which are the 3 main Western European groups.