Favorite new civ

[Xen]

I admit, it was an exxageration- little sleep and flaring pride are not good bedmates (unless ther're hot! ) but now, thats solved, and I'm much better suited for a good discussion

though the latter quote only serves to emphisize my point- it was BYZANTINE scholars who initiated it(the re-emergence of classical thought in the "west")

as for the other stuff- it will come back around in time, let me defend Byzantium, and then I'll get around to going offensive again

 

[Sarevok]

You know I really dont care, although this "Fencing Match" has been fun, I think im prett much done with it. My farovie new civs are the Dutch and Portugese, yours is the byzantines, those are the lines.

 

[Xen]

sheer preservernce on my part has a lot to do with why no one argues with me anymore either

 

[Hygro]

Well for what it's worth I still think that Byzantium should just be Rome.

 

[Xen]

why?
-differnent culture (based on the same principals, but its more distnit then was greece, and Imperial Romes)
-diferent language
-different government structure
-different people
-and other stuff that I'm to lazy to post

 

[Sarevok]

- they spoke greek
- they were the same people who lived under rome
- they had a government structure mixing greece and rome

 

[Xen]

- greek is differnt from latin, langauage of the Roman empire
- had a goverment structure 10 fold more efficeint then the Greeks had, based on the Roman structure, but with heavey differnces none the less
- living under Romes rule, and being a "true" Roman are two differnt things

 

[Sarevok]

true, but the east empire spoke greek anyway as a split from the wester empire that spoke latin. It was basically roman culture, but a new and improved rome. VERY improved rome at that.

 

[wilbill]

Originally posted by Xen
though the latter quote only serves to emphisize my point- it was BYZANTINE scholars who initiated it(the re-emergence of classical thought in the "west")

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The traditional picture of the Byzantine exiles in fifteenth-century Italy, as painted by Gibbon, does represent something of an exaggeration. It ignores the fact that Greek studies had not been entirely moribund in the previous century, as Bruni claimed, and stresses the role of a small number of individuals. Yet by their teaching, translation, and involvement in scholarly debate, the Byzantine scholars helped to transfer to Italy an aspect of their own culture, ancient Greek literature, which was in turn to have a profound influence on the literature and thought of early modern Europe.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"helped to transfer" = "initiate re-emergence" ??

You make good arguments. Why do you insist upon taking them all a step or two further than you need to?

 

[Xen]

what do you mean?

 

[Sarevok]

hes saying you go a bit too far with what you say and that you are continuously shouting off facts and making them seem more grand than they actually are.

 

[Birdjaguar]

When Constantinople fell in 1453 and the learned people who could, fled to western Europe, culturally it was similar to (on a different scale) the British musical invasion of America in the 1960s. The immediate impact was huge, but over time Europe took what the Arabs had chased their way and made it their own. Yes it changed European Culture and thinking, but many events have done that in the past 2000 years. The Black Death probably had a greater influence on an evolving Europe than the Fall of Constantinople. In the 1400s Byzantium was like an over the hill movie star living on old glories without any hope of a comeback and no fan mail.

It's probably worth including as a civ choice. But no more important than most others fringe civs.

 

[Sarevok]

veryt well said

 

[Birdjaguar]

It is easy to get lost in the details, especially if one is passionate about the topic. Stepping back can put things into a more realistic perspective.

 

[Novaya Havoc]

Originally posted by Xen
not that- I meant civ acheivement wise- i could care less if I was the only non dutch on the forum, it still dosent change anything- there are better civs to choose from for the game then sticking another european civ in an already over crouded europe

<feeds troll>

Right. And an Eastern Orthodox, Ottoman/Russian redundant civ is the best choice ever. They just fit perfectly on the world stage next to the Ottomans or the Arabs.

I agree. There shouldn't be any more European civs. Axe Byzantium, and put up a better nation like, oh, say, Nepal.

-Ben

 

[Xen]

and how might Nepal be a better choice for Byzantium?

look- i dont care how eurocentric I might appear to the rest of you, I dont care how I might come accross as disregarding all other cultures in favor of Byzantium, I dont, I do care however, that at the very least you dont disagree with what facts i present to you, and know this, they are facts, just because you dont like me, or hoe I deal with situations- and thats how most people at the moment come across- more like they dont like me then really beliving other wise of Byzantine glory

well ya know what?

you can go -I let you use your assorted immaginations for the assorted insults I would sling your way here-

face it, byzantium is a unique culture, differnt from both Roman,Greek, arabic, and Russian eastern orthadox culture, it holds one of the most profound places in the western heritage, and while the most important civ, it has contributed more then a great deal of others.

 

[Sarevok]

Byzantum i a better choice tyhan nepal, but again you keep making hte byzantines spund bigger than they actually were.

 

[Xen]

in comperison to most medieval civs, they were the best (at least in the west, and middle east)

 

[Birdjaguar]

Originally posted by Xen
I do care however, that at the very least you dont disagree with what facts i present to you, and know this, they are facts, [/B]

Well Xen, your over zealous personality aside, your point about the enormous influence of Byzantium on western Civilization is your opinion. Cultural influence and the impact of one culture on another is mostly up to the story teller, especially when conquest is not invloved.

Yes, the collapse of the Eastern Empire had an impact on Europe. But I would wager that the Empire had little impact on Western European culture until it collapsed. How much and on whom is very debatable. Was its influence more on Italy than England? Spain or Germany? It certainly changed the Balkans; they were over run by the Arabs. At the time I'm sure those folks were not happy. And which European traditions were driven by byzantine practices? For how long?

Your tunnel vision about how important the Byzantines were to western European culture is off the mark. Like most empires that last centuries they can take credit for innovation and as a keeper of traditional knowledge. But, I could make the case that Martin Luther had a bigger impact on modern Europe than the Byzantines.

None of this is to imply that the Byzantines shouldn't be included in Civ. They might even be fun to play. Play them and make your own history, but don't force feed the rest of us on your version of the past.

 

[Xen]

perhaps the word culuture is off the mark a bit- perhasp way of thinking is more spefic as to what I want to present- Byzantine had a profound influence of=n the west way ot thinking- the re-establishement of the classical sceientifinc method, that said, would you care to explain ti me how byzantium did not have have direct, or indirect influence on the west way of thinking, and thereofore modern culture?- its a hard case to argue, perhps impossible, becuase like it or not, byuzantium is a major player in our cultueral history- when I refoer to western history I couldnt give a damn weather a tradition originated in England, Italy, Denmark, or Holland- its the united western way which I refer to