The difference between civilization and nation

[Mauritania]

I know it's probably a very subjective opinion which seperates what makes a civilization and what makes a nation however I was wondering if we could get a consensus.

My interpretation is that nations contribute to civilization. Civilization being a collection of nations with common goals and culture.

Going by the 'empires' in Civilization IV, it seems less ambigious.

For example, Sparta wasn't a civilization, it was nation (or to break it down further, a city-state) of Greece. The Greeks being lumped together into a civilization fine.

However now there are nations such as the Dutch which are being called civilizations. I suppose it could be fair using colonies to mascarde as nations in the sense of culture.

But what about in the modern era. Surely post-WWII, the allies can be lumped together to form 'Western' civilization which is probably the most powerful cultural unit that has ever existed ever yet I don't see that as I scroll down through the leaderheads.

And now I see people whinging that the semi-Independent Republic of Narnia has'nt been included in civilization despite the fact they invented the electric bubblewrap and they helped score a crucitial victory for the history of the modern world because they sent two men and a dog onto the battlefield.

To summerise my arguement, Ethiopia why?

 

[FourthThunder]

Well, Ethiopia is as old as dust for one thing. The Axum Empire was considered one of the four great civilizations by Manni and it was the second "nation" to introduce Christianity to it's populace. The whole Solomonic Dynasty type thing that happened there is also incredibly unique in culture.

 

[Mauritania]

Well the Axum Empire isn't Ethiopia, it is an entirely different civilization.

Most of that went away when Ahmad Gran and his merry men invaded in the 16th century. I believe Ethiopia came into being a nation in the 19th century when Lij Kasa turned up.

 

[DigitalBoy]

I don't think you could have a nation without first having something fitting the description of civilization, so I'd say that civilization is something more basic and fundamental than nationhood.

 

[anonymous4402]

Well the Axum Empire isn't Ethiopia, it is an entirely different civilization.

Most of that went away when Ahmad Gran and his merry men invaded in the 16th century. I believe Ethiopia came into being a nation in the 19th century when Lij Kasa turned up.

That's crazy. You don't know anything about Ethiopia's history if you think there was a void between Granye's invasions and the end of the Age of Princes. Remember that Granye was defeated by Emperor Galadewos after the Portuguese under de Gama were massacred. The Empire wasn't destroyed at all! Just a lot of people killed, lands despoiled, churches burnt, and many writings irrecoverably lost. But the Empire carried on, just as full of history as it always was. A few Emperors later in the early 1600s Emperor Susenyos converted to Catholicism and submitted to Rome, but the Jesuit that replaced the man who converted him was a hardliner and ordered the immediate prohibition of native Ethiopian customs, resulting in rebellions and Susenyos abdicating after realizing, with horror, that he was killing his fellow Christians. Emperor Fasilidas took over and restored the Orthodox Church and I believe it was under his reign that the first bridge in Ethiopia and Gondar was founded, and the castles their built, likely with Portuguese assistance. The Age of Princes started in 1755 I believe when Emperor Iyasu II was murdered. Throughout the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries the Oromo continued their advance northwards, isolating Amhara settlements in the south from each other and weakening imperial power. The Age of Princes was characterized by the Emperor being a mere figurehead, with the nobles and generals being the kingmakers, and constantly fighting over each other in the provinces. But even though the Emperor was just a figurehead, he still was in the same bloodline as the emperors of the Solomonic dynasty stretching back all the way to the overthrow of the Zagwe in the 1300s. There still was an Ethiopia, it just was in a state of civil war, though I did read a book that suggested that it was actually in a state that was typical to feudal Europe and no more lawless than that. But anyways, during the eighteenth century the Oromo would become legitimized and many Christianized, to the point where Ali I of Yejju, an Oromo, was able to become Ras and the de facto ruler. His grandson Ras Ali II was the one whom Kasa fought, who restored the actual power of the Emperor while usurping the throne.

So basically, saying that Ethiopia ceased to exist during the Age of Princes is like saying that Japan ceased to exist during the Sengoku period. And Ethiopia had two hundred years of rule, parts of which were almost a golden age, between Granye's invasions and the Age of Princes anyway.

 

[anonymous4402]

And in an expansion that included such civilizational luminaries as 'Native America' and 'Holy Rome', why do people feel the need to pick on the second oldest (and first oldest to continually stay independent take that Armenians) Christian state, with its own legal code (the Fetha Negast) and unique brand of Christianity; an empire with a thousand years of history worth of expansion and contraction all over the Horn over dozens and scores of different nations and tribes; and the only African state to participate in the Scramble for Africa? (Well it was the only African state that could, but the imperialism that Menilek II practiced was so well-executed it would have put many European nations to shame). I just hope it's ignorance and not something darker.

 

[FitzRoySomerset]

And in an expansion that included such civilizational luminaries as 'Native America' and 'Holy Rome', why do people feel the need to pick on the second oldest (and first oldest to continually stay independent take that Armenians) Christian state.... (etc)

I don't know anything about the history of Ethiopia, but I agree with you that the inclusion of the Holy Roman Empire sets a low bar.

 

[DrewTate]

technically, a to be a nation, a state has to have four things:

1) territory
2) government
3) population
4) sovereignty

Dunno if that adds to it at all i didnt read all the posts above.