What was/is the greatest civilisation in history?

[9/11-investigator]

To top it off, while Europe was dominated by the barbarians of Europe, China and the Indus were thriving civilisations that were far ahead of anything else at the time. Babylon and Egypt were also great powers as well as the Assyrians, Hittites, the Israelites and the Persians.

While Europe was in the dark ages, who formed the largest empire in the world? The Mongol Empire.

The Maya in Central America as well as the Toltecs and the Olmecs were very advanced as well.

So, Europe is not the greatest civilisation.

Before I make my case I'm interested to know your opinion on this matter.

[Ryokan]

Norway, of course. Has there been any doubt?

[Piscivore]

Define "greatest".

[Undesired Walrus]

Ancient Egypt.

[Twiler]

Identify criteria. Also, are we talking 'greatest' in an absolute sense, or in 'greatest' when compared to contemporaries?

[themusicteacher]

Is that even an answerable question? I mean, we could talk about it in terms of sheer landmass, per capita income, amount of freedom, total GDP, military superiority, cultural achievements, scientific/engineering feats and on and on. "Greatest" seems to be a relative term meant to invite an endless debate.

[TexasJack]

Before I make my case I'm interested to know your opinion on this matter.

Does your electrical engineer friend, Arthur Butz, have an opinion on this?

[UNLoVedRebel]

I told you before Steinberg, if European civilization is so 'great' then start using Roman Numberals. PM Lisa Simpson and have her change your name to IX/XI-Investigator. You wouldn't want to be a hypocrite, would you?

[Piscivore]

I told you before Steinberg, if European civilization is so 'great' then start using Roman Numberals. PM Lisa Simpson and have her change your name to IX/XI-Investigator. You wouldn't want to be a hypocrite, would you?

"European" civilisation =/= Ancient Roman civilisation.

ETA: One of the "greatest" characteristics of any "great" civilisation IMO is the ability to take what works better from another civilisation and discard what doesn't.

I suppose that makes the Borg ultimately the "greatest" civilisation possible.

[paximperium]

In terms of sheer landmass, military superiority, technological advancements, great archeological achievements? China and the Mongol Empire.

[paximperium]

"European" civilisation =/= Ancient Roman civilisation.

ETA: One of the "greatest" characteristics of any "great" civilisation IMO is the ability to take what works better from another civilisation and discard what doesn't.

I suppose that makes the Borg ultimately the "greatest" civilisation possible.
Well, the brown folk of Northern Africa, Egypt and Turkey etc. were Roman.

[Fnord]

What was/is the greatest civilisation in history?
.
Atlantis.









(Well? No one said that it had to be a real civilisation, now did they?)

[lionking]

You can only have greatest civilisations of their time in my opinion. There are many.

[UNLoVedRebel]

"European" civilisation =/= Ancient Roman civilisation.

ETA: One of the "greatest" characteristics of any "great" civilisation IMO is the ability to take what works better from another civilisation and discard what doesn't.

I suppose that makes the Borg ultimately the "greatest" civilisation possible.

What continent is Rome located?

[Thunder]

Before I make my case I'm interested to know your opinion on this matter.

The Chinese have existed for thousands of years. I think they may be the best.

i think the important factors are territorial integrity and cultural survival.

the Chinese got us all beat.

[shadron]

What continent is Rome located?

Well, if you're going to lump them altogether, then I guess you'd have to start with the Minoans, add the Greeks (ancient and classical), the Romans, the Franks, the Goths and other barabrians, the Swedish empire, the Russians, the English, French, Spanish and Austrians, then round it out with the USSR (European part only) and EU. Sounds like a real mish-mash to call all that "a culture" to me.

Who said the cultures have anything to do with continents?

[Piscivore]

What continent is Rome located?

Where's your anus? Does that make you an ass?

Let's keep the tone civil, folksies.

[NewtonTrino]

The Great Goat Cult!

[shadron]

In terms of sheer landmass, military superiority, technological advancements, great archeological achievements? China and the Mongol Empire.

The Mongols had a big one; so did the Islamists of various stripes, Tamerlane, Rome, Alexander and the English in the 18th-19th century (and the Spanish in the 16th-17th, for that matter).

For long lasting, I don't think anyone can beat the Egyptians; maybe the Chinese, but I don't think so.

Science? Western culture, 20th. Secondarily is early Islamic culture and classical Greek.

War? Alexander, Tamerlane, G & K Khan, Mohammad and company. Japan.

Architecture? Roman, Greek, medieval Western European, Mayan, ancient Indus Valley

Peace? Balinese.

Politics? enlightenment Europe, Classical Greece

Just my thoughts. Probably shows a lot of my biases as well.

[Thunder]

but, in the end, we ALL know who was really the greatest civilization on Earth.

http://www.arqnet.pt/imagens2/imag010304.jpg

Right 9-11 Investigator? I mean..the Nazis lasted how long? 12 years? wow!!!

[George152]

The current set of civilized nations.

And so it will continue into the future

[lionking]

but, in the end, we ALL know who was really the greatest civilization on Earth.

http://www.arqnet.pt/imagens2/imag010304.jpg

Right 9-11 Investigator? I mean..the Nazis lasted how long? 12 years? wow!!!

Aw, don't steal the punchline. :)

[Thunder]

Aw, don't steal the punchline. :)

had to do it. couldn't take the excitement any longer.

[UNLoVedRebel]

Where's your anus? Does that make you an ass?
Don't answer a question with a question. What numeral system did the Europeans use before they adapted Indian Numerals?

[Simon39759]

Post mid-century industrialized world is a strong contender, both in term of luxury and comfort, freedoms, scientific achievement and all.

China is pretty damn impressive too.

The Islamic kingdoms were great for a few centuries...


It really depends of what are your criteria. It's not like a Sid Meier's game where everybody starts at the same time and progress together.

[timhau]

Right 9-11 Investigator? I mean..the Nazis lasted how long? 12 years? wow!!!

In Aryan Math, that rounds up to thousand.

[Skeptic]

Norway, of course. Has there been any doubt?

Well, we mean EXCEPT for that.

[Skeptic]

Ancient Greece, which gave us the two things without which there is no modern world: science and political freedom. Strictly speaking, Greece was the only civilization -- that is, a culture "of or related to citizens" (who have political rights, as opposed to subjects, who only have rights if the ruler allows them) -- in the ancient world. The rest -- including imperial Rome, by the way -- were cultures, but not civilizations.

It is one of the ironies of history that Rome, hardly a beacon of democracy or scientific progress, spread the Greek ideas throughout the empire. Until recently, the "western world" was, in effect, that world which had the Greek (and Christians) ideas spread into it by the Romans, allowing, later on, the Renaissance and the scientific, industrial, and political revolutions.

[DC]

Helvetians, everyone in Switzerland knows that

8NvLO9CWXyk

[NWO Sentryman]

What Pax Imperium said.

You know what else? Who developed the first mathematics and literature? the Babylonians.

Who wrote the first laws? the babylonians.

Who had the first bill of rights? the Persians.

All this while, the Europeans were nothing more than tribes butchering each other and sacrificing each other in wicker men.

[dafydd]

but, in the end, we ALL know who was really the greatest civilization on Earth.

http://www.arqnet.pt/imagens2/imag010304.jpg

Right 9-11 Investigator? I mean..the Nazis lasted how long? 12 years? wow!!!

I guess that we can take 911 Investnazi's answer for granted.

[Dr. Tobias Fünke]

Before I make my case I'm interested to know your opinion on this matter.

"History" as in "all of it up to and including today"?

[DDWW]

Tahiti

The ladies there never thought of covering up their chests….until the Europeans came along.:eek:


DD (yes, I am a pig) WW

[Dr. Tobias Fünke]

Tahiti

The ladies there never thought of covering up their chests….until the Europeans came along.:eek:


DD (yes, I am a pig) WW

Bali, too. I was amazed to see a topless old woman (on her own property, and in the countryside) going about her chores there. That was ten years ago, I guess that tradition is literally dying.

[/derail]

[themusicteacher]

Don't answer a question with a question. What numeral system did the Europeans use before they adapted Indian Numerals?

I thought it was Arabic numerals.

[Travis]

Since when is Europe a single civilization?

[GlennB]

Ancient Greece, which gave us the two things without which there is no modern world: science and political freedom. Strictly speaking, Greece was the only civilization -- that is, a culture "of or related to citizens" (who have political rights, as opposed to subjects, who only have rights if the ruler allows them) -- in the ancient world.

Ancient Greece's 'democracy' was a tad superficial. Taking Wiki at face value, for the Attica area only :
"there may well have been some 250,000–300,000 people in Attica. Citizen families may have amounted to 100,000 people and out of these some 30,000 will have been the adult male citizens entitled to vote in the assembly.", giving about 1 in 10 eligible to vote. Which is about what I recall from school history lessons.

[GlennB]

In terms of sheer landmass, military superiority, technological advancements, great archeological achievements? China and the Mongol Empire.

For land mass I'd say that the height of the British Empire must be tops, given that it included Canada, a large lump of USA, India, Pakistan, Australia and a very large chunk of Africa (plus many little bits).

map here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:The_British_Empire.png) (though not all of it was under Brit rule at the same time)

Not Norway though. Too tough for the Brits.

[Piscivore]

Don't answer a question with a question. What numeral system did the Europeans use before they adapted Indian Numerals?

It isn't relevant. Europeans don't use either system now. Europeans do not wear togas or use the gladius in battle, either. "European" civilisation has adapted and changed since Roman times, thus "European" civilisation =/= Roman civilisation.

Neither is it relevant that Rome is in Europe. Eggs are in cake, but cake isn't eggs.

And do heed Travis.

[dogjones]

Depends on which faction I'm playing. Right now it's the French.

[dogjones]

Oh wait... wrong forum. Sorry.

[MattC]

My team of mutant atomic supermen!

~ Matt

[DDWW]

Bali, too. I was amazed to see a topless old woman (on her own property, and in the countryside) going about her chores there. That was ten years ago, I guess that tradition is literally dying.

[/derail]

In thinking further; They lived in a tropical paradise, the men spent the day fishing, they were not sexually inhibited, and they lived a relatively simple peaceful existence.

What could be a greater civilization than that?

DDWW

[Simon39759]

For land mass I'd say that the height of the British Empire must be tops, given that it included Canada, a large lump of USA, India, Pakistan, Australia and a very large chunk of Africa (plus many little bits).

map here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:The_British_Empire.png) (though not all of it was under Brit rule at the same time)

Not Norway though. Too tough for the Brits.


Indeed, England had already lost the 13 colonies by the time it seriously started to expand in India and Australia (the second British empire (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_empire#Rise_of_the_.22Second_British_Empir e.22_.281783.E2.80.931815.29) started with the independence of the U.S.


Also, I still need to buy the 'beyond the sword' expansion... Especially as I like to rule through cultural and Religious hegemony rather than pure force of might.

[Piscivore]

In thinking further; They lived in a tropical paradise, the men spent the day fishing, they were not sexually inhibited, and they lived a relatively simple peaceful existence.

What could be a greater civilization than that?

DDWW

Win.

[ddt]

In thinking further; They lived in a tropical paradise, the men spent the day fishing, they were not sexually inhibited, and they lived a relatively simple peaceful existence.

What could be a greater civilization than that?

DDWW

Did they have internet? :)

[HansMustermann]

The Chinese have existed for thousands of years. I think they may be the best.

i think the important factors are territorial integrity and cultural survival.

the Chinese got us all beat.

Only if you're also OK with saying that the Roman Empire existed until 1922, when the Sultan Mehmed VI abdicated.

Seriously. "China" didn't just have several dynasties, but was basically conquered by vastly different people who just chose to claim that they inherited the imperial claim of the one before them. The Qing dynasty for example was pretty much China being occupied by the Manchu, and the Yuan dynasty before it was really the mongolian occupation, and so on.

China has just about as solid a claim to being an uninterrupted country, as the Ottoman Empire had to claim it is the Roman Empire. I.e., bugger-all.

[Skeptic]

Ancient Greece's 'democracy' was a tad superficial.

Absolutely. And they had slavery, subjugation of women, what have you.

Still, the point is that while everybody had slavery and subjugation of women, including the Greeks, they were the only ones who had something more -- real citizens.

[HansMustermann]

Actually, that's false. The persians were Zoroastrians, and their religion explicitly forbade slavery. Xerxes like his father Darius only used paid workers and paid soldiers, unlike such "defenders of freedom and democracy" as the Spartans and Athenians who brought slaves as support troops at sword point.

So, you know, give me a break. The "greek democracy" was a bad joke.

[Praktik]

It's not like a Sid Meier's game where everybody starts at the same time and progress together.

I knew I shouldn't have clicked this thread. I've been on the wagon for 6 months and this thread, and your Sid Meier reference have me dangerously close to a relapse. (http://www.civanon.org/)

[Wally]

Originally Posted by DDWW http://forums.randi.org/helloworld2/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?p=5018510#post5018510)
In thinking further; They lived in a tropical paradise, the men spent the day fishing, they were not sexually inhibited, and they lived a relatively simple peaceful existence.

What could be a greater civilization than that?

DDWW



Did they have internet? :)

They had live bare brestesess, what the hell did they need the internet for?????:confused::confused::confused:

[Simon39759]

They had live bare brestesess, what the hell did they need the internet for?????:confused::confused::confused:


I was going to make that exact same point!


Also, I like the Minoan dress code even better. Plus, they had a more impressive architecture.

[Simon39759]

I knew I shouldn't have clicked this thread. I've been on the wagon for 6 months and this thread, and your Sid Meier reference have me dangerously close to a relapse. (http://www.civanon.org/)


Come on, come back.
You know you want to!


Come on, all the cool nerdy white kids, are doing it!
Come on, first game is free...

[Pardalis]

I would say the Inuit (it's more a culture than a civilization, but I think they should also be considered). To survive in such inhospitable conditions for so long it must take alot of ingenuity and strength of character.

[Piscivore]

I would say the Inuit (it's more a culture than a civilization, but I think they should also be considered). To survive in such inhospitable conditions for so long it must take alot of ingenuity and strength of character.

Nope. Way too much clothing.

[Christiaan]

Coming from a historian buffs point of view, I would have to say Rome. I say this because Rome not only had the military might to destroy all of their opponents but also had political, philosophical, civil, and general military technology which greatly outpaced anyone of the time. Also Rome is the basis of European civilization, the general ideas and principles seeped into European principles and morals. And the Renaissance would never have occurred without Rome's ideas. What most people don't think of when they think of the renaissance is that the Eastern Roman Empire (sadly the most successful) is the source of the renaissance. As the ERE evolved into the Byzantine Empire, most of the literature and thought were preserved at Constantinople, and thus when the city fell to the Turks in 1453 the literature and thought that created the renaissance was taken with many of the thinkers and as they spread across Europe, so did the renaissance. Though most credit of the renaissance is given to Venice, it is the people of Constantinople (many fled to Venice) and thus Rome. And I have a deep passion for Roman History.

[Pardalis]

Nope. Way too much clothing.

They made up for it by having alot of imagination.

[themusicteacher]

In thinking further; They lived in a tropical paradise, the men spent the day fishing, they were not sexually inhibited, and they lived a relatively simple peaceful existence.

What could be a greater civilization than that?

DDWW

Doesn't that just illustrate the thinking of most people? When the answers we overwhelmingly get are about prestige, military conquest, landmass and economics, what does that reveal about us as a culture? Of course, while many good things come from the great eastern and western cultures, what of a culture such as this? I mean, to fish all day, have sex all night and hang out on the beach in your free time? Most people, even today, would give up everything they had to live such a life.

[Skeptic]

Actually, that's false. The persians were Zoroastrians, and their religion explicitly forbade slavery. Xerxes like his father Darius only used paid workers and paid soldiers, unlike such "defenders of freedom and democracy" as the Spartans and Athenians who brought slaves as support troops at sword point.

So, you know, give me a break. The "greek democracy" was a bad joke.

No, it was not. Slavery forbidden or not, the Persians were an absolute dictatorship where all were subjects of the emperor. To be sure it was (at least compared to others at the time) quite an enlightened dictatorship, but a dictatorship nonetheless. It is THAT that the Greeks talked about when they said the Persians were slaves.

As the Greeks said, according to tradition, when the Persians asked them to surrender: "You know not what you ask. Since you Persians have never known anything but servitude, you think it is a small thing to submit. But we have known freedom, and will never cease to fight for it."

[Lonewulf]

Everyone forgets the Etruscans.

[Damien Evans]

I'm gonna go with the Roman Republic, and the Principate, but not the Post-Aurelius Roman Empire.

[lionking]

9/11 Investigator? You there?

Where's your nomination?

[Piscivore]

Though most credit of the renaissance is given to Venice, it is the people of Constantinople (many fled to Venice) and thus Rome. And I have a deep passion for Roman History.

I find Venice fascinating. Am I wrong, or are they (excepting the Phonecians) one of the first to base political power to a much greater degree on merchanting than force of arms?

[HansMustermann]

No, it was not. Slavery forbidden or not, the Persians were an absolute dictatorship where all were subjects of the emperor. To be sure it was (at least compared to others at the time) quite an enlightened dictatorship, but a dictatorship nonetheless. It is THAT that the Greeks talked about when they said the Persians were slaves.

As the Greeks said, according to tradition, when the Persians asked them to surrender: "You know not what you ask. Since you Persians have never known anything but servitude, you think it is a small thing to submit. But we have known freedom, and will never cease to fight for it."

Bullcrap. 99% of the greeks were in worse slavery than any persian, and 1% were the rich pricks playing "democracy" among themselves.

My standard example are the Spartans -- defenders of freedom and stuff, right? -- for whom the rite of passage into adulthood was to go _murder_ a few Helots (slaves) to keep them terrorized and thus in line. I'm sorry, but that doesn't sound to me like actual freedom in any form or shape.

Or the Athenians, where a free woman -- precisely _because_ she was no longer a slave -- could not speak for herself in court, and could be used by her husband in a settlement as, literally, another guy can screw her too.

And generally, the "despots" and "tyrants" of the greek world used to tend to happen by popular support. Greek "democracy" was insanely unpopular among anyone but the rich elite, and really lacked any freedom or rights for anyone but them.

[Foolmewunz]

Italy in the 1930s. They gave us Sophia Loren. Say no more.

[timhau]

9/11 Investigator? You there?

Where's your nomination?

Mr. Bialystok and Mr. Bloom intercepted it and turned it into a Broadway musical.

[Cainkane1]

Before I make my case I'm interested to know your opinion on this matter.
I think ancient Rome was a great civilization. However Europe might have been a great civilization has Rome not interferred with their developement. Had Rome shared its knowledge and technology with Europe and had they traded and otherwise dealt fairly with the Europeans Europe would have been a great civilization much sooner than it was.

China had a great civilization. Greece had a great civilization and who is to say which one was greater? many other fine examples of great civilizations in history.

[Christiaan]

I find Venice fascinating. Am I wrong, or are they (excepting the Phonecians) one of the first to base political power to a much greater degree on merchanting than force of arms?

True and not true, Venice did have quite the military and navy and used it not only in defense. Though Carthage was a Mercantile Republic, they also had quite the military. So it is an arguable question.

[Christiaan]

I think that the easy conquest of Greece by Roman forces shows that the Greek culture had greatly deteriorated. Also The Battle of Thermopylae shows that the Greeks stood no chance against Roman arms. Of course I'm not talking about the battle that everyone now seems to know, I couldn't care less about that. I'm talking about The Battle of Thermopylae (191 BC), when Roman troops slaughtered the Greek army, 200 Romans dead, 10,500 Greeks dead.

And also EVERYONE used slavery!!! It is foolish to say that the Persians did not because they believed in Zoroastrianism. Most nations used slavery as a driving force behind civil projects. Though slaves (post Servile Wars) in Rome were generally treated very well. Killing a slave had the same punishment as killing a citizen. And slaves would almost always receive their freedom at some point in their lives, or buy it themselves.

[paiute]

Which civilization had the best-tasting flavor of ice cream? And which flavor was it?

[Blackadder]

I knew I shouldn't have clicked this thread. I've been on the wagon for 6 months and this thread, and your Sid Meier reference have me dangerously close to a relapse. (http://www.civanon.org/)

sites like that one make me realize how much I love the internet and (certain) people all over the world .

[Simon39759]

I think ancient Rome was a great civilization. However Europe might have been a great civilization has Rome not interferred with their developement. Had Rome shared its knowledge and technology with Europe and had they traded and otherwise dealt fairly with the Europeans Europe would have been a great civilization much sooner than it was.

China had a great civilization. Greece had a great civilization and who is to say which one was greater? many other fine examples of great civilizations in history.


I don't know, they actually did a lot of sharing, the cultures under their control quickly assimilated Romans know-how, we have six centuries of gallo-Roman culture, for example.

[DC]

Which civilization had the best-tasting flavor of ice cream? And which flavor was it?

ah thats easy, i know the answer


http://www.polyvore.com/cgi/img-thing?.out=jpg&size=l&tid=1806067

[HansMustermann]

I think that the easy conquest of Greece by Roman forces shows that the Greek culture had greatly deteriorated. Also The Battle of Thermopylae shows that the Greeks stood no chance against Roman arms. Of course I'm not talking about the battle that everyone now seems to know, I couldn't care less about that. I'm talking about The Battle of Thermopylae (191 BC), when Roman troops slaughtered the Greek army, 200 Romans dead, 10,500 Greeks dead.

And also EVERYONE used slavery!!! It is foolish to say that the Persians did not because they believed in Zoroastrianism. Most nations used slavery as a driving force behind civil projects. Though slaves (post Servile Wars) in Rome were generally treated very well. Killing a slave had the same punishment as killing a citizen. And slaves would almost always receive their freedom at some point in their lives, or buy it themselves.

Partially false.

Slaves in Rome, as in, the city of Rome itself, yes, were mostly home servants and secretaries and such, and generally well treated and freed after a while.

But even there, to borrow your expression, it's foolish to say that a slave in the Colliseum had anything else than an almost guaranteed death sentence in the long run. About half didn't even survive their first fight.

And outside of Rome itself it got worse pretty fast. For example it was known that being a slave in the mines is a slow death sentence, or that the slaves they use to process asbestos (yes, literally) will soon die a horrible death. But it was considered just part of the costs of business. Both continuously bought new slaves, and just factored that in the cost of ore or respectively asbestos products.

[Praktik]

Come on, come back.
You know you want to!


Come on, all the cool nerdy white kids, are doing it!
Come on, first game is free...

That's it. I'm reporting you to my sponsor as an "enabler".

i think i can i think i can i think i can

[Skeptic]

Doesn't that just illustrate the thinking of most people? When the answers we overwhelmingly get are about prestige, military conquest, landmass and economics, what does that reveal about us as a culture?

Except that most answers aren't. Most answers we get here, I think, are about cultural, political, or scientific achievements (democracy, continuity of cultural traditions, writing, physics...), not military conquest. Rome conquered less area than the Mongols, for example, but they are a great civilization because they spread culture -- theirs and the Greeks' -- wherever they went, while the Mongols didn't.


Of course, while many good things come from the great eastern and western cultures, what of a culture such as this? I mean, to fish all day, have sex all night and hang out on the beach in your free time? Most people, even today, would give up everything they had to live such a life.

You think you would, but you won't. You'd be bored out of your skull within a month.

This is the problem with the so-called "leisure society". If we ever do achieve the goal of society without work, or nearly without work, what would we have? A society where some fish or hunt, some like trekking and the great outdoors, some prefer chess or go, some paint, some sing, others collect stamps, and so on. I love to do some of these things, and the list can be extended, but it is a picture, not of heaven, but of hell. There is nothing important being achieved, nothing lasting, nothing that matters. You just cannot waste away all those lives this way.

[Piscivore]

There is nothing important being achieved, nothing lasting, nothing that matters. You just cannot waste away all those lives this way.

Dude, nothing "lasts". And what is "important", what "matters" isn't the same for everyone.

[Skeptic]

Bullcrap. 99% of the greeks were in worse slavery than any persian,

Not true, of course.

and 1% were the rich pricks playing "democracy" among themselves.

Except that "democracy", as Aristotle noted, is precisely not that, but the rule of the free citizens, the vast majority of whom were poor. There were Greek states ruled by the few rich, or by a single ruler -- they were known as oligarchies or monarchies, respectively. (Side note: actually, Aristotle distinguished between different types of democratic, oligarchial, and monarchic rule, so the names I am using are a bit inaccurate, but that's a different issue).

Greek democracy was simply not the case of "a few rich playing democracy among themselves" but of the citizens as a whole, including and especially the many poor, making policy. The trial of Socrates, to give one example, was certainly not a case of a few rich men deciding his fate over wine as their slaves fan them, but of the community of free citizens -- hundreds of people, in this case, naturally mostly poor -- deciding it.

My standard example are the Spartans

Who were the most undemocratic of the Greek city-states -- they were, indeed, explicitly monarchic -- and for that reason, with all probability, the one city-state that did not produce a single noted poet, writer, philosopher, artist, or scientist.

[Lonewulf]

You think you would, but you won't. You'd be bored out of your skull within a month.

This is the problem with the so-called "leisure society". If we ever do achieve the goal of society without work, or nearly without work, what would we have? A society where some fish or hunt, some like trekking and the great outdoors, some prefer chess or go, some paint, some sing, others collect stamps, and so on. I love to do some of these things, and the list can be extended, but it is a picture, not of heaven, but of hell. There is nothing important being achieved, nothing lasting, nothing that matters. You just cannot waste away all those lives this way.

You're assuming that people would be unable to write a book, tend a garden, create a sculpture, express themselves through artwork, dance, song, or any number of ways. If you think that books or sculptures cannot last, then you obviously haven't done any looking into history at all.

Your own "hell" seems to be a lack of imagination.

[marksman]

I would figure the Jewish civilization is the greatest in history as it has been pretty much running the show for 3,000 years. Right, 9/11 investigator?

[ddt]

Greek democracy was simply not the case of "a few rich playing democracy among themselves" but of the citizens as a whole, including and especially the many poor, making policy. The trial of Socrates, to give one example, was certainly not a case of a few rich men deciding his fate over wine as their slaves fan them, but of the community of free citizens -- hundreds of people, in this case, naturally mostly poor -- deciding it.

To add to that: while the leaders in the Athenian were rich men and mostly from aristocratic background, the democratic institutions were filled by the common people, and often by lottery. Those who sat on the Boule, the Athenian parliament, or on the juries of the courts, also got their time reimbursed at the rate of a normal wage, so that they indeed could participate in the democratic process.

(this discussion reminds me of an earlier one (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?p=4770983#post4770983)).

[Praktik]

I would figure the Jewish civilization is the greatest in history as it has been pretty much running the show for 3,000 years. Right, 9/11 investigator?

LOL!

gold

[Retrograde]

One in which I could achieve a modicum of comfort, autonomy, and responsibility by my own efforts. Being a middle-aged woman, that leaves out quite a few classical civilizations, unless I happened to born to just the right family.


For land mass I'd say that the height of the British Empire must be tops, given that it included Canada, a large lump of USA, India, Pakistan, Australia and a very large chunk of Africa (plus many little bits).

A rather small lump of the USA, actually: 1/3 of the continental US used to be part of Mexico, and there was that huge chunk that belonged to France. [Grumbling about East Coast bias omitted] The 19th century is a good choice in terms of technological and scientific advancements,though: the roughly a century between Napoleon and WWI is my nominee for when things changed most.

[dafydd]

Originally Posted by marksman View Post
I would figure the Jewish civilization is the greatest in history as it has been pretty much running the show for 3,000 years. Right, 9/11 investigator?
LOL!

gold


Yes,the smartest people in the world.How long did the Nazis last 911? Remind us.

[Thunder]

One could argue that the Jews are one of the greatest civilizations in history, by the mere fact that we have survived every single attempt to destroy us.

The Romans.
The Christians.
The Persians.
The Arabs.
The Crusaders.
The Nazis.
The Assyrians.

We survived em' all. We get hit hard..sometimes very hard. But we stick around and come back stronger then ever.

:)

[theprestige]

I think the greatest civilization has to be the one that gives the largest number of people the opportunity to falsly claim some sort of responsibility for its achievements, simply by virtue of having been born into that civilization after those achievements.

[I Ratant]

Egypt's dynastic civilization ran pretty much unchanged for about 3000 years.
The west as we know it can destroy everything in 20 MAD minutes.

[Thunder]

Honestly, the greatest civilization is the one which contributed the most to knowledge and humanity.

USA!!!! USA!!!

;)

[themusicteacher]

Except that most answers aren't. Most answers we get here, I think, are about cultural, political, or scientific achievements (democracy, continuity of cultural traditions, writing, physics...), not military conquest. Rome conquered less area than the Mongols, for example, but they are a great civilization because they spread culture -- theirs and the Greeks' -- wherever they went, while the Mongols didn't.




You think you would, but you won't. You'd be bored out of your skull within a month.

This is the problem with the so-called "leisure society". If we ever do achieve the goal of society without work, or nearly without work, what would we have? A society where some fish or hunt, some like trekking and the great outdoors, some prefer chess or go, some paint, some sing, others collect stamps, and so on. I love to do some of these things, and the list can be extended, but it is a picture, not of heaven, but of hell. There is nothing important being achieved, nothing lasting, nothing that matters. You just cannot waste away all those lives this way.

I don't think I've seen many arguments about cultural achievements here. Most of the arguments I see are about landmass (directly linked with military conquest) and longevity (also associated closely with military might and power).

That's a pretty cynical outlook on a society free of the bonds of endless work. I was being a little tongue-in-cheek but to think that these people simply went from fishing to screwing around the clock is silly. There most certainly is time made for cultural achievements, sports and games, etc. Besides, meaning is highly internalized. If you feel as though you've lived a full life but somebody else doesn't, does that mean you actually lived a meaningless life?

[themusicteacher]

I think the greatest civilization has to be the one that gives the largest number of people the opportunity to falsly claim some sort of responsibility for its achievements, simply by virtue of having been born into that civilization after those achievements.

Not sure what you're implying there. Care to elaborate? Every civilization at some point claims the victories of their predecessors as their own. This is the idea of civilization. Would you rather we reinvented civilization with each successive generation so that each generation could honestly lay claim to their civilizations' achievements?

[theprestige]

Not sure what you're implying there. Care to elaborate? Every civilization at some point claims the victories of their predecessors as their own. This is the idea of civilization. Would you rather we reinvented civilization with each successive generation so that each generation could honestly lay claim to their civilizations' achievements?
I'm not implying anything here. The words as written, with the literal, surface meanings commonly associated with them, convey exactly the message I mean to convey. Make of it what you will.

[Skeptic]

I would figure the Jewish civilization is the greatest in history as it has been pretty much running the show for 3,000 years. Right, 9/11 investigator?

"1500 BC -- God makes covenant with Jews. Nothing bad happens to the Jews ever again." -- Jon Stewart.

[Skeptic]

I don't think I've seen many arguments about cultural achievements here. Most of the arguments I see are about landmass (directly linked with military conquest) and longevity (also associated closely with military might and power).

"Land mass" maybe, "Longevity" not necessarily. China, India, and Egypt achieved longevity not by conquest (unless you consider the prehistoric conquests that made different tribes into nations in the first place) but by virtue of sheer size and (relative) geographical isolation. None of these countries ever were, or attempted to be, a world empire.

In any case the civilizations praised here, even when praised for their land mass, are precisely those which also had great cultural achievements, such as England or China. Nobody here praised, I think, the mideaval Russians, or the Huns, or the Mongols, since their cultural achievements were few, even if the land mass they controlled was as large or larger than Egypt or Rome.

[Skeptic]

I think the greatest civilization has to be the one that gives the largest number of people the opportunity to falsly claim some sort of responsibility for its achievements, simply by virtue of having been born into that civilization after those achievements.

But we SHOULD feel proud of our predecessors' civilizing achievements, just like we should be proud of their bravery or of their generosity. Americans should be proud of George Washington and Thomas Jefferson (just to name two); Western civilization should be proud of Homer and the enlightenment, again, just to name two. Egypt should be proud of its ancient civilization. The Greeks should be proud of Aristotle.

If you are proud of an achievement of your predecessors, chances are you will try to emulate them, or at least retain their achievements in your memory -- showing the importance of being civilized. As G. K. Chesterton said, being proud of one's tradition is a "democracy of the dead" -- of talking seriously the views and opinions of those who lived before, instead of only considering those who happen to be walking about.

When people claim tradition and history are unimportant, that all that matters is what WE personally achieve, the results are often catastrophic. Attempts to create utopias by breaking completely with the past had invariable resulted in dictatorships.

[Skeptic]

(this discussion reminds me of an earlier one (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?p=4770983#post4770983)).

Ah, yes:

Not bad words for a democracy of the rich male slave owners.

Male, yes. Rich and slave owner, almost always not.

"For its time", maybe. By modern standards, though, I find the whole thing abominable.

That's like saying Newton was an idiot because the Principia ignores quantum mechanics.

A far more important problem here is that the modern standard itself -- the idea of democracy, human, and political rights -- is the daughter of those very same "abominable" Greeks with their hypocritical, imperfect, slavery-allowing, non-feminist democracy, to say nothing of their science and philosophy.

If it were not for the Greek ideals, and quite apart from their innate value, chances are the Renaissance would never have occurred (to name once thing), let alone the enlightenment or the scientific revolution, which were a hit-or-miss thing in any case, and that we today would be living in society far less free -- one where we would not have the leisure, education, or freedom to sit back and tut-tut those primitive, male-chauvinist-pigs Greeks in the first place.

[Travis]

I'm still waiting to hear about how awesome this mythical "Europe Civilization" was and why it is the best in history.

[Skeptic]

Well, Travis -- we can start with your computer. The technology used to make it has its origins in the 18th and 19th century European science, and 20th century european engineering. The basic ideas go back to the scientific revolution -- a 16th century European idea, based on the original 5th century BC European, or Greek, one.

Just one example.

While it's fashionable nowadays to declare one does not believe in the greatness of European civilization, the "What's so great about European civilization?" claim is the same as the "what have the Romans ever done to us?" claim -- denying the palpably obvious in order to declare oneself belonging to the "correct" and "right-thinking" political group.

[Giraffe107]

Doesn't that just illustrate the thinking of most people? When the answers we overwhelmingly get are about prestige, military conquest, landmass and economics, what does that reveal about us as a culture? Of course, while many good things come from the great eastern and western cultures, what of a culture such as this? I mean, to fish all day, have sex all night and hang out on the beach in your free time? Most people, even today, would give up everything they had to live such a life.

Reminds me of a joke I heard recently:

A businessman on holiday in Fiji and asks a local man what he doing. He says, "I've finished fishing for the day, I am going to go home and play with my kids."
Business man: "But if you kept finishing, you could sell your extra fish and make more money."
Fijian man: "Great, what do I do then?"
BM: "Save up and buy a boat, then you can fish even more!"
FM: "Ok, what then?"
BM: "Use your earnings to build a fishing empire! Sail around the Pacific in your fleet, selling your fish to the Japanese, Aussies and Kiwis for big bucks!"
FM: "And what then?"
BM: "After you have worked hard for years, you will eventually have earned enough to retire to a tropical island, play with your kids and do a little fishing!"

[Travis]

My point was that, to the best of my knowledge, Europe has never been united as one mono-culture. When Rome ruled most of it Scandinavia and Russia were still independent. Napoleon never got the British Isles. The Third Reich got France, Poland, quite a bit of Scandinavia and a lot of the USSR but failed to get the UK, Switzerland, Sweden or Iceland.

If you can call Europe a single "Civilization" then we can also call all of the Americas as one too. I'm sure Chavez would just love that.

[timhau]

My point was that, to the best of my knowledge, Europe has never been united as one mono-culture.

True. And even today, despite the EU and our common currency, I definitely do not feel like I'm among 'my own people' when I visit Italy or Spain or even Germany. (To those who don't get the hint in my profile, I'm Finnish.)

[Skeptic]

Yes, but there is, nevertheless, European civilization. Indian was never a monolithic culture, either -- let alone Persia, Egypt, China -- but there are nevertheless Indian, Persian, Egyptian and Chinese cultures. In the same way there is European culture.

[funk de fino]

My point was that, to the best of my knowledge, Europe has never been united as one mono-culture. When Rome ruled most of it Scandinavia and Russia were still independent. Napoleon never got the British Isles. The Third Reich got France, Poland, quite a bit of Scandinavia and a lot of the USSR but failed to get the UK, Switzerland, Sweden or Iceland.

If you can call Europe a single "Civilization" then we can also call all of the Americas as one too. I'm sure Chavez would just love that.

You wanna try telling that to a few posters from the USA.

[lionking]

9/11 Investigator? Your nomination please.

[DC]

9/11 Investigator? Your nomination please.

and what is your Nomination?
and when there are to many, how about posting a list?
or do you prefer just bickering around?

[lionking]

and what is your Nomination?
and when there are to many, how about posting a list?
or do you prefer just bickering around?
What on earth are you talking about? Go back to the OP and you will see that 9/11 said that he would give his nomination after others have. I'm asking him to put up.

I have already commented BTW.

[DC]

What on earth are you talking about? Go back to the OP and you will see that 9/11 said that he would give his nomination after others have. I'm asking him to put up.

I have already commented BTW.

you didnt provide your nomination nor a list of possible ones.

but i didnt really expect you to take part in a debate :) you love just bickering around and post off topic how offtopic other posts are :rolleyes:

[lionking]

you didnt provide your nomination nor a list of possible ones.

but i didnt really expect you to take part in a debate :) you love just bickering around and post off topic how offtopic other posts are :rolleyes:

And you are trying to pick a fight (or are you just sticking up for your mate 9/11 Investigator?)

I said that it's silly to try to nominate one "greatest" civilisation. They can only be judged by their greatness at their time. Is that too hard for you?

Now where's 9/11 Investigator's nomination?

[DC]

And you are trying to pick a fight (or are you just sticking up for your mate 9/11 Investigator?)

I said that it's silly to try to nominate one "greatest" civilisation. They can only be judged by their greatness at their time. Is that too hard for you?

Now where's 9/11 Investigator's nomination?

we holocaust denieng Nazi fans always stick together, didnt you know that?

[lionking]

we holocaust denieng Nazi fans always stick together, didnt you know that?
9/11 CTers do though.

[Travis]

True. And even today, despite the EU and our common currency, I definitely do not feel like I'm among 'my own people' when I visit Italy or Spain or even Germany. (To those who don't get the hint in my profile, I'm Finnish.)

The bickering between fellow EU members is great evidence of the fractured nature of said cultures.

Yes, but there is, nevertheless, European civilization. Indian was never a monolithic culture, either -- let alone Persia, Egypt, China -- but there are nevertheless Indian, Persian, Egyptian and Chinese cultures. In the same way there is European culture.

Which perhaps serves as a good example of how nebulous our differentiations of cultures are.

You wanna try telling that to a few posters from the USA.

I do try. ;)

[DC]

9/11 CTers do though.

:rolleyes:

yeah especially the No Planers and the Remote Controll Planers.

[Simon39759]

Well, Travis -- we can start with your computer. The technology used to make it has its origins in the 18th and 19th century European science, and 20th century european engineering. The basic ideas go back to the scientific revolution -- a 16th century European idea, based on the original 5th century BC European, or Greek, one.
Just one example.
While it's fashionable nowadays to declare one does not believe in the greatness of European civilization, the "What's so great about European civilization?" claim is the same as the "what have the Romans ever done to us?" claim -- denying the palpably obvious in order to declare oneself belonging to the "correct" and "right-thinking" political group.

But, you'd be leaving out the Americans and Japanese that greatly contributed to the development of electronic.
At the other hand of the spectrum, you 'd be leaving out the Arabs (among others) and their more than substantial contribution to mathematics and engineering.
It's not like a civilization springs out of the vacuum, especially 'modern' civilization. It might be the product of the 18th century and up European culture, but this culture was, in turn greatly enriched by other civilizations. Since then, this originally Western civilization integrated more viewpoints from all over the world.



My point was that, to the best of my knowledge, Europe has never been united as one mono-culture. When Rome ruled most of it Scandinavia and Russia were still independent. Napoleon never got the British Isles. The Third Reich got France, Poland, quite a bit of Scandinavia and a lot of the USSR but failed to get the UK, Switzerland, Sweden or Iceland.

If you can call Europe a single "Civilization" then we can also call all of the Americas as one too. I'm sure Chavez would just love that.

Well, I think that, as a term of civilization, most of the Western world is part of the same civilization.
Highly technological with strong consideration for human rights.
Modern Spain, to use an example, looks more like modern American than it looks like Spain just a couple of centuries ago...

I don't think you can speak of the 'European civilization' anymore, more like a 'global civilization'.

[themusicteacher]

I'm not implying anything here. The words as written, with the literal, surface meanings commonly associated with them, convey exactly the message I mean to convey. Make of it what you will.

So I will assume you are talking about pretty much every civilization that has ever existed. I can't think of any civ that would ever not claim their predecessors achievement as their own or, at the very least, a springboard for their own achievements. Have to crawl before you walk, right? I'm interested in what you think about whether or not a civ that stakes a claim to their predecessors achievement(s) has a right to do so and if that is a good or a bad thing.

[themusicteacher]

"Land mass" maybe, "Longevity" not necessarily. China, India, and Egypt achieved longevity not by conquest (unless you consider the prehistoric conquests that made different tribes into nations in the first place) but by virtue of sheer size and (relative) geographical isolation. None of these countries ever were, or attempted to be, a world empire.

In any case the civilizations praised here, even when praised for their land mass, are precisely those which also had great cultural achievements, such as England or China. Nobody here praised, I think, the mideaval Russians, or the Huns, or the Mongols, since their cultural achievements were few, even if the land mass they controlled was as large or larger than Egypt or Rome.

Upon re-reading the first few pages, I can concede that there are many references to cultural achievement but I would argue that is due, in large part, to the absorption of other smaller, less powerful cultures into the larger culture. Sometimes that takes place peacefully and at other times it takes place through military conquest or the forcing of other cultures to accept their dominance. I do think you have a point in saying that those cultures who were, for all intents and purposes, strictly militaristic (the Huns, Mongols, etc.) are rarely remembered because their influence was short-lived and shallow due to their lack of cultural depth.

[I Ratant]

... I do think you have a point in saying that those cultures who were, for all intents and purposes, strictly militaristic (the Huns, Mongols, etc.) are rarely remembered because their influence was short-lived and shallow due to their lack of cultural depth.
.
I was struck by the inclusion of those short-termed mostly destructive episodes as being civilizations at all.
Just loose collections of aberrant folk bent on wreaking havoc, with no long-term intent or desire at all.

[Skeptic]

Upon re-reading the first few pages, I can concede that there are many references to cultural achievement but I would argue that is due, in large part, to the absorption of other smaller, less powerful cultures into the larger culture. Sometimes that takes place peacefully and at other times it takes place through military conquest or the forcing of other cultures to accept their dominance. I do think you have a point in saying that those cultures who were, for all intents and purposes, strictly militaristic (the Huns, Mongols, etc.) are rarely remembered because their influence was short-lived and shallow due to their lack of cultural depth.

It's amazing how often culture in the long run defeats armies. The pen, apparently, is mightier than the sword sometimes, after all.

The Greek influence on Rome, by the way, is no modern analysis. The Romans were well aware of it themselves: Horace says, "Greece eventually conquered her own conquerors" by taking Rome over culturally, while Rome merely took it over militarily.

[dudalb]

I have to point out that Chinese Civlization and the Mongol empire are two different animals. The Mongol empire was very shortlived.

[theprestige]

But we SHOULD feel proud of our predecessors' civilizing achievements, just like we should be proud of their bravery or of their generosity. Americans should be proud of George Washington and Thomas Jefferson (just to name two); Western civilization should be proud of Homer and the enlightenment, again, just to name two. Egypt should be proud of its ancient civilization. The Greeks should be proud of Aristotle.

If you are proud of an achievement of your predecessors, chances are you will try to emulate them, or at least retain their achievements in your memory -- showing the importance of being civilized. As G. K. Chesterton said, being proud of one's tradition is a "democracy of the dead" -- of talking seriously the views and opinions of those who lived before, instead of only considering those who happen to be walking about.

When people claim tradition and history are unimportant, that all that matters is what WE personally achieve, the results are often catastrophic. Attempts to create utopias by breaking completely with the past had invariable resulted in dictatorships.
There you go then. And my point is essentially unchanged. If you like, the greatest civilization is surely the one that has produced the greatest number of people who feel legitimate pride in its past accomplishments.

So I will assume you are talking about pretty much every civilization that has ever existed. I can't think of any civ that would ever not claim their predecessors achievement as their own or, at the very least, a springboard for their own achievements. Have to crawl before you walk, right? I'm interested in what you think about whether or not a civ that stakes a claim to their predecessors achievement(s) has a right to do so and if that is a good or a bad thing.
Of course I'm talking about pretty much every civilization that ever existed. That's the whole point of this exercise, isn't it?

Out of all the civilizations that ever existed, the greatest one is surely the one that has has produced the greatest number of people that feel pride in its prior accomplishments. This is my central point, and it remains unchanged regardless of whether or not you believe this pride is a good and legitimate thing (as Skeptic does), or not (as I often suspect). But even if I think the pride is illegitimate, that doesn't mean I think it's a bad thing, or that it diminishes a civilization's greatness. Quite the contrary: the greater the number of people running around claiming a part in their civilization's achievement--legitimately or not--the greater that civilization. That's my standard of measurement, anyway.

[Leif Roar]

The greatest civilization is the one which first gets its spaceship to Alpha Centauri. I thought everybody knew that.

[DC]

The greatest civilization is the one which first gets its spaceship to Alpha Centauri. I thought everybody knew that.

HAHA you just won the thread

[Marduk]

the Sumero-akkadian civlisation has had more influence over the modern world than any other, by quite a wide margin, and the best part of it is nobody knows why, until they study it outside of the movies, and when they find out, they aren't impressed enough to write books about it.

[dudalb]

The greatest civilization is the one which first gets its spaceship to Alpha Centauri. I thought everybody knew that.


Or takes over the world, which I find a lot more fun.

[dudalb]

the Sumero-akkadian civlisation has had more influence over the modern world than any other, by quite a wide margin, and the best part of it is nobody knows why, until they study it outside of the movies, and when they find out, they aren't impressed enough to write books about it.


You would say that, would'nt you?

[zerospeaks]

I cast a vote for the empire created by Alexander the great.
It was short lived, but it was the first attempt to unite everyone under one banner and allow the scientist to come together without persecution.

Too bad the church had to screw it up when they decided to burn down the library of alexandria.

[Skeptic]

It remains unchanged regardless of whether or not you believe this pride is a good and legitimate thing (as Skeptic does), or not (as I often suspect).

It all depends on what is meant by "legitimate". Pride in one's forefathers or civilization and its achievement is not the same as chauvinism, let alone jingoism, or dismissal of other people's achievements.

To be sure, people can use their civilization's achievement to attempt to justify all kinds of crimes they themselves want to commit. But every single human virtue can be abused -- love of country can lead to jingoism, love of family to snobism, and so on and so forth. This hardly means love of one's country, civilization, or family are illegitimate.

[I Ratant]

Genghis Khan said when asked about life's sweetest pleasure:
"Man's greatest good fortune is to chase and defeat his enemy; seize his total possessions, leave his married women weeping and wailing, ride his gelding and use the bodies of his women as a nightshirt and support".
"A History of Warfare" by John Keegan.

[Pardalis]

but i didnt really expect you to take part in a debate :) you love just bickering around and post off topic how offtopic other posts are :rolleyes:

You really think there's a legitimate debate to be had in a thread started by a neo Nazi?

[coldcanuk]

Before I make my case I'm interested to know your opinion on this matter.

Well, what are you using as a barometer for "best civilization"? It sounds like you are basing it solely on technological advancement. One could be general and say, "The Western Civilization". It is of course, long lasting. Generally when any western civ was thriving, there was alot of wealth. Another way of looking at it, when Europe was in the Dark Ages, we gained alot of military knowledge. Born from it was the feudal middle-ages. Alot of money made back then as well, it then gave birth to liberalism and capitalism. If you are looking towards thriving nations (or tribes), then we have a good argument for comparing the Mongols to the Romans etc... You can also gauge based on structures built ...

I guess before giving an answer, I would like to know how you are evaluating different civs.

[Uzzy]

I usually go for the Cultural or Diplomatic victories anyway. Screw Alpha Centauri.

I'd also say that the British Empire makes quite a good claim for 'greatest', given it's impact upon the world. English is the lingua franca, British style democracy and rule of law can be seen in many large parts of the world and culturally we've had some great achievements, Shakespeare, Cricket. ;)

[dudalb]

The Numernoreans, before they pissed off the Valar by their little Valinor expedition....

[Skeptic]

I must be living a very sheltered life -- I have no idea whom dudalb is talking about.

[Skeptic]

Okay, so I googled it.

Damn. Not only did google take all the fun out of being a trivia maven, it also ruined all the fun of being able to confess ignorance of something, with the implied moral superiority that you would never waste your time watching that TV program, playing that computer game, having sex with that sort of furry little animal, etc.

Google ruined my life's two greatest past-times. (trivia showing-off and claiming ignorance of socially inferior diversions, I mean, not having sex with that sort of furry little animals.)

Curse you! Google! Curse you to hell!

[dudalb]

I must be living a very sheltered life -- I have no idea whom dudalb is talking about.

That was because Peter Jackson has not gotten around to filming the Silmarallion yet......
Yeah, I am a Tolkien Geek. I admit it.

[Praktik]

I usually go for the Cultural or Diplomatic victories anyway. Screw Alpha Centauri.

I'd also say that the British Empire makes quite a good claim for 'greatest', given it's impact upon the world. English is the lingua franca, British style democracy and rule of law can be seen in many large parts of the world and culturally we've had some great achievements, Shakespeare, Cricket. ;)


And kate beckinsdale

[JJM 777]

Size and "influence" aside, it would be interesting to discuss, in which country (and time in history) life has been best for people generally? Well Monaco sounds like a good call, or some other tax paradise, or modern West. But we haven't produced all of our wealth, clothes or toys, much of it was made by slaves or very poor people outside of our own culture. "Chinese small hands" (= child labour etc.) play a big role in creating our western standard of life, so we cannot honestly say that "western culture" is so nice and comfortable as it looks like.