Civilization Most Overrated in Influence.

[carmen510]

I was thinking Rome, in how most of their stuff had origins in Greece/Greek culture.

America and maybe Spain. (Don't know where I got that, maybe colonization)

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

If not for the Romans, Greek culture would have been a curiosity in one corner of the Mediterranean. Sometimes spreading something is just as influential as creating it.

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

yeah but they got us the aqueducts and peace and citizenship....

And the sanitation, the medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, a fresh water system, and public health...

 

[Damnyankee]

And the sanitation, the medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, a fresh water system, and public health...

and a little thing called Latin

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

and a little thing called Latin

Somebody doesn't watch too many movies.

 

[GoodSarmatian]

Rome is overrated. Not because Rome was not important but because many other civilizations are underrated compared to Rome.
Romanes eont domus !

 

[luiz]

to support China: just the very invention of Gunpowder (and Rocketry along with it) is enough to make it one of the top influential nations in post-classical history, even if not culturally. If it weren't for that, there wouldn't an invansion of Iraq by America.

This is making the extremely unlikely assumption that nobody else would have invented gunpowder. Fact is modern gunpoweder has very little to do with the ancient one, and was not invented in China but in the West.

 

[Head Serf]

I'm going to have to go with either Egypt or Japan.

 

[Evie]

This is making the extremely unlikely assumption that nobody else would have invented gunpowder. Fact is modern gunpoweder has very little to do with the ancient one, and was not invented in China but in the West.

The same asumption could be made about any other civilization. Anyoneelse could have invented democracy, or capitalism, anyone could have been first to discover the Americas, China COULD have decided under some dynasty to build a globe-spanning empire...but they didn't.

Yes, the European refined and perfected gunpowder to the point that it hasn't that much to do today with the original design, but the Chinese still invented it in the first place.

 

[silver 2039]

Rome is too ovverated.

 

[cybrxkhan]

Fact is modern gunpoweder has very little to do with the ancient one, and was not invented in China but in the West.

the same overlying principles, to my understanding, used in modern gunpowder and ancient gunpowder are still similar and related. also, i'm not sure if rifles were first made in China, but i know rockets, even extremely primitive and extremely not-as-awesome prototype two-stage rockets were made in China (not enough to blast to space, but eough to deal some serious damage)

 

[luiz]

The same asumption could be made about any other civilization. Anyoneelse could have invented democracy, or capitalism, anyone could have been first to discover the Americas, China COULD have decided under some dynasty to build a globe-spanning empire...but they didn't.

Yes, the European refined and perfected gunpowder to the point that it hasn't that much to do today with the original design, but the Chinese still invented it in the first place.

Certainly, gupowder is chinese. My main point is that it is not so complicated as to not be invented elsewhere.

However, many devices that are sometimes credited or partially credited to the chinese are not, at all, chinese.

the same overlying principles, to my understanding, used in modern gunpowder and ancient gunpowder are still similar and related. also, i'm not sure if rifles were first made in China, but i know rockets, even extremely primitive and extremely not-as-awesome prototype two-stage rockets were made in China (not enough to blast to space, but eough to deal some serious damage)

The chemical composition of modern gunpowder is disticnt from ancient gunpowder. The modern version is usually made of nitrocellulose combined with nitroglycerin, as well as a number of stabilizers and ballistic modifiers. Really not the similar to the old, saltpeter-based one.

As for fire arms, to the best of my knowledge they were first used by the byzantines and the turks. Muskets were invented in Europe (Italy?).

 

[Evie]

And my main point is that there are very few things that are so complicated they couldn't have been invented elsewhere.

Ultimately, we can only measure civilizations by what actually happened, not might-have-been.

(And which specific inventions do you have in mind, out of curiosity? I don't doubt you that there are, I'm just curious which ones you are thinking of)

 

[cybrxkhan]

The chemical composition of modern gunpowder is disticnt from ancient gunpowder. The modern version is usually made of nitrocellulose combined with nitroglycerin, as well as a number of stabilizers and ballistic modifiers. Really not the similar to the old, saltpeter-based one.

i dont mean composition. i mean the general concept of how it works - something pops out and hits somebody.

As for fire arms, to the best of my knowledge they were first used by the byzantines and the turks. Muskets were invented in Europe (Italy?).

the first known firearms were made by the Song Dynasty, 1200s, bamboo muskets. but it is quite posisble they were made as early as two centuries past, maybe even eariler. chinese rockets were also used at the same time.

 

[Mirc]

There is also the fact that we cannot give all the credit for an invention to a civilization that was the first to do it. For example, the Sumerians were the first to have an alphabet, but "the concept of alphabet" was "discovered" in many parts of the world independently, and we don't have to thank the Sumerians for the myriad of alphabets existing in India. It is of course important who the first one was, but it's also important how extensively it was used, promoted, in what way it was used there, and from the worldwide use of the invention, how much it happened in the country that had the honor of being the motherland of its inventor(s).

 

[Eran of Arcadia]

In other words, influence is about impossible to quantify.

 

[luiz]

And my main point is that there are very few things that are so complicated they couldn't have been invented elsewhere.

Ultimately, we can only measure civilizations by what actually happened, not might-have-been.

I never claimed otherwise. My reply was to the claim that the american invasion of Iraq was somehow related to the chinese invention of gunpowder, which is completely false. The way we make our gunpowder and the way we use it has nothing to do with the way the chinese alchemists did.

(And which specific inventions do you have in mind, out of curiosity? I don't doubt you that there are, I'm just curious which ones you are thinking of)

Severall. For exemple, it is frequently stated that the seismometer is a chinese invention because of a device that Zhang Heng built in the 2nd Centrury that could, it is claimed, point to the place where an earthquake was happening. I don't see how this can be called a seismometer if it is not measuring anything.

I've seen people claim that steel, the parachute, the odometer, the camera obscura, etc, all are chinese inventions, and all of that is pretty debatable to say the least.

 

[scherbchen]

Rome is too ovverated.

overrated? maybe. influential though? hell yeah.

in civ terms this would be the culture that would flip cities in a heartbeat. about a thousand years after your civilization has vanished you still manage to have a huge impact on basically all of Europe to adhere to your (perceived) ideals (although you somehow have to share it with the greek, which makes sense)?

I don't think you can call that overrated anymore. so much of what Europe -and by extension the Americas- makes Europe what it is is based on Roman/greek influence. Maybe excessive would be the right and politically correct word. The classic world had an excessive influence on Europe during it's formation period. Dunno, sounds better to me. By terming it overrated you somehow question your entire heritage if you are European, North American or Latin American. Seems like a paradox to me. If you were not part of that heritage you would not be able to state such a claim. Anybody outside of Roman influence can fire away as they please, however.

 

[Tee Kay]

If not for the Romans, Greek culture would have been a curiosity in one corner of the Mediterranean. Sometimes spreading something is just as influential as creating it.

Actually, the Greek colonies around the Mediterranean (Syracuse, Massilia, Neapolis, Alalia, Zacynthus, Miletus, Naucratis, Cyrene, Olbia, Cumae, Salamis, Tanais, Panticapaeum, Chersonesus, etc) and post-Alexander Hellenistic states (Ptolemaic, Seleucid, Bactrian, etc) were doing a fine job of spreading Greek culture until the Romans come around.

 

[Plotinus]

By terming it overrated you somehow question your entire heritage if you are European, North American or Latin American. Seems like a paradox to me.

The notion that our "entire" heritage is of Mediterranean derivation is just a Renaissance myth. I'd be inclined to see the cultural influences from Rome as pretty analogous to the linguistic influences we're discussing in the other thread. English culture, for example, has a primarily Germanic and northern European heritage, sprinkled over with a considerable seasoning from the Mediterranean.