What Is The Greatest Ancient Civilization?

History
41

No, that’d be impossible because the Rubicon is in Northern Italy. Campus Martius, the place where the army resided in full readiness, was outside of Rome proper, but not too far from city walls, according to my memory. And besides, by the time of Julius Caesar, most Romans have ceased to adhere to such silly notions as honor and morals; from my understanding by that time Campus Martius had ceased to serve its ancient purpose and armies were all over the place.

The reason Caesar wasn’t allowed to cross the Rubicon is because he was assigned the province of Gaul north of Italy, and the Rubicon is the border between Gaul and Italy. A general assigned to a provice was not allowed to lead his armies outside of it unless allowed by the Senate, which he wasn’t. He especially wasn’t allowed to lead his armies south toward Rome, which would obviously mean revolution. That’s why they knew the intentions behind his crossing as well as he did.

42

I think “vir” which means manliness,

Actually ‘vir’ just simply means man, or hero. You will find it a lot in common Latin usage for “man”.

43

Actually ‘vir’ just simply means man, or hero.  You will find it a lot in common Latin usage for “man”.

Oops my mistake, I know there’s a word resembling vir, which denotes force of character.

44

Oops my mistake, I know there’s a word resembling vir, which denotes force of character.

Heh-the word is “virtus”. It means “manliness, courage, excellence” and is where we get the word “virtue” from.

That would be an interesting discussion eh? From manliness to virtue :slight_smile: .

45

Heh-the word is “virtus”.  It means “manliness, courage, excellence” and is where we get the word “virtue” from.

That would be an interesting discussion eh?  From manliness to virtue :frowning: .

It would indeed. Virtue can also mean power, possibilty like medicinal virtues of a plant, virtues of a lifestyle. Men, in ancient civilisations where considered stronger then women. In ancient Rome men did the fighting etc. So it is not strange that manliness and virtue where designed by the same word. Saying of a man, what’s his manliness could be like saying what his virtue in battle, his virtue for Rome?

46

Gathering an understanding of cultural values from reading books is difficult, unless these values are stated explicitly. But from my reading of Classical texts so far, both Greeks and Romans viewed women as fickle, unstable, ruled by emotions, and untrustworthy with the decisions of the greatest importance. Manhood was viewed as the opposite - sturdy, reliable, stable, based upon solid foundation, rational.

Nobody claimed that all men were like this, but this was the ideal aspired to, and man’s nature was seen to be predisposed to development of these moral habits. That’s why, although it looks incredible to us, it’s not at all strange that for Romans virtue and literal manliness were synonimous.

47

Just a small addition to this, but one of Aristotle’s primary virtues is “courage”. The original Greek for it is “andrea”, which literally translates as manliness, in the most obvious meaning of having to do with the male. So both the Greeks and the Romans narrowed down manliness as one of the the essential qualities in a virtuous person.

48

Herodotus mentions womenly virtue in his books, what could he be refering to there?

49

Perhaps you could be a little more specific as to where? :slight_smile: The ancients do talk of womanly virtues, but these are qualitatively different in many ways from manly virtues.

50

To be honest I have no idea. He mentions once, maybe twice so far (Im into the third book now).

51

I voted Babylon, since they were the first to have written laws, and amazingly liberal laws. They had incredibly advanced sciences as well.

I also like the Aztecs, though, and I’m disappointed they weren’t on the list.

52

I voted Babylon, since they were the first to have written laws, and amazingly liberal laws. They had incredibly advanced sciences as well.

I also like the Aztecs, though, and I’m disappointed they weren’t on the list.

What do you like about the Aztecs?

53

I voted Babylon, since they were the first to have written laws, and amazingly liberal laws.

Since the first written law were invented by the Sumerians (esp. the Code of Lipit-Ishtar), would that change your opinion.

You may be correct in judging Hammurabinical law to be liberal, but I kind think liberals stink so I don’t know if that was supposed to be a complement or an insult about the laws. Some examples of Babylonian liberalism:

  1. If any one ensnare another, putting a ban upon him, but he can not prove it, then he that ensnared him shall be put to death.

  2. If any one bring an accusation of any crime before the elders, and does not prove what he has charged, he shall, if it be a capital offense charged, be put to death.

  3. If any one steal the property of a temple or of the court, he shall be put to death, and also the one who receives the stolen thing from him shall be put to death.

  4. If any one buy from the son or the slave of another man, without witnesses or a contract, silver or gold, a male or female slave, an ox or a sheep, an ass or anything, or if he take it in charge, he is considered a thief and shall be put to death.

  5. If any one steal cattle or sheep, or an ass, or a pig or a goat, if it belong to a god or to the court, the thief shall pay thirtyfold therefor; if they belonged to a freed man of the king he shall pay tenfold; if the thief has nothing with which to pay he shall be put to death.

  6. If the purchaser does not bring the merchant and the witnesses before whom he bought the article, but its owner bring witnesses who identify it, then the buyer is the thief and shall be put to death, and the owner receives the lost article.

  7. If the owner do not bring witnesses to identify the lost article, he is an evil-doer, he has traduced, and shall be put to death.

  8. If any one take a male or female slave of the court, or a male or female slave of a freed man, outside the city gates, he shall be put to death.

  9. If any one receive into his house a runaway male or female slave of the court, or of a freedman, and does not bring it out at the public proclamation of the major domus, the master of the house shall be put to death.

  10. If he hold the slaves in his house, and they are caught there, he shall be put to death.

  11. If any one is committing a robbery and is caught, then he shall be put to death.

  12. If a chieftain or a man (common soldier), who has been ordered to go upon the king’s highway for war does not go, but hires a mercenary, if he withholds the compensation, then shall this officer or man be put to death, and he who represented him shall take possession of his house.

  13. If a … or a … enter himself as withdrawn from the “Way of the King,” and send a mercenary as substitute, but withdraw him, then the … or … shall be put to death.

  14. If a … or a … harm the property of a captain, injure the captain, or take away from the captain a gift presented to him by the king, then the … or … shall be put to death.

  15. If conspirators meet in the house of a tavern-keeper, and these conspirators are not captured and delivered to the court, the tavern-keeper shall be put to death.

  16. If a “sister of a god” open a tavern, or enter a tavern to drink, then shall this woman be burned to death.

  17. If a man violate the wife (betrothed or child-wife) of another man, who has never known a man, and still lives in her father’s house, and sleep with her and be surprised, this man shall be put to death, but the wife is blameless.

  18. If the “finger is pointed” at a man’s wife about another man, but she is not caught sleeping with the other man, she shall jump into the river for her husband.

  19. If a man is taken prisoner in war, and there is a sustenance in his house, but his wife leave house and court, and go to another house: because this wife did not keep her court, and went to another house, she shall be judicially condemned and thrown into the water.

  20. If a son of a paramour or a prostitute say to his adoptive father or mother: “You are not my father, or my mother,” his tongue shall be cut off.

  21. If the son of a paramour or a prostitute desire his father’s house, and desert his adoptive father and adoptive mother, and goes to his father’s house, then shall his eye be put out.

  22. If a man give his child to a nurse and the child die in her hands, but the nurse unbeknown to the father and mother nurse another child, then they shall convict her of having nursed another child without the knowledge of the father and mother and her breasts shall be cut off.

  23. If a son strike his father, his hands shall be hewn off.

etc.

54

I like the Aztecs’ sense of honor, bravery, community, and investigation–all of which were nearly as present in Greek culture. And were the famous practices of ritualistic murder which the Greeks almost certainly shared as well, though Aztecs admittedly had it on a much larger scale. All the same, their knowledge of mathematics and astronomy were comparable to that of the Europeans when they invaded. They had massive religious and political structures, and an even stronger agriculture and population basis. At the time of the conquest, Tenochtitlan was the largest city in the world–larger than Paris. They simply had the foible to have very few natural ores that were necessary to have wide-spread access to metal, and thus to develop advanced weapons. My bet is that the one and only reason the Europeans ever obtained a foothold on the Americas was because of disease, and I often wonder what would have become of the Aztecs had they been immune.

As for the Sumerians, I know nothing about them. I have read in a few places that the Babylonians were the first to have codified laws–if this is distinct from written laws, I’m not aware. Perhaps by being “codified” that implies that the government could not reject them at its convenience, meaning they are significant in their invention of the Rule of Law. Which is itself a very impressive contribution to the history of humanity.

As for liberalism, the American revolutionaries were liberals, as were the French revolutionaries. They did not adhere to traditional dogmas for their own sake. Compared to other laws and practices at the time of the Babylon, women in Babylonians society were amazingly free and protected by law. So were children and those not of the ruling class. Hammurabi was not simply preserving tyrannical authority but looking after the freedom and rights of his citizens. In that sense, he was liberal. Today’s left-wing/Democrat is not the ideal of liberalism.

Certainly there are laws that we consider, some 4,000 years later, to be cruel and barbaric. Athens had them as well. Socrates was murdered, in essence, for asking questions. We still consider Greece to have had a relatively liberal society because of it’s relatively greater freedom of expression and its inchoate system of democracy.

55

The Greeks have to win this poll since, thanks to Zeno, they will live on forever!

56

It is hard to say which is the “greatest.” If you mean which was most influential to our current Western culture, then the Greeks and Romans are certainly at the top of the list.

But if you mean military power, or extent of territory, or technological, social, architectural achievement however other civilizations particularly the Chinese rank equally with the Greco-Romans.

We are simply biased in favor of the Greco-Roman civilizations because they are what heavily influenced out own societal structure. China was far in advance of the west in many respects, but eventually became too introverted and bureaucratic, meaning its influence and power lessened even as western power grew. If China had continued its technological expansion and sea explorations, we might have had much more of a respect for their accomplishments in the west.

Other civilizations, like the Ancient Egyptians, simply fell too early to be an appreciable influence.

57

But if you mean military power, or extent of territory, or technological, social, architectural achievement however other civilizations particularly the Chinese rank equally with the Greco-Romans.

Could you provide some evidence, or at the very least some examples of how the Chinese rank equally with the Greeks and Romans. It is my understanding that Chinese armies were mostly peasant armies, which lacked the training and discipline one would associate with a major military power. It was, after all, Alexander the Great who demolished army after army of peasant armies, to say nothing of the Persian Wars. So what made these Chinese armies special that they could face down a disciplined, heavily armed, highly trained, and highly motivated force such as the Greek and Roman armies?

58

I am not sure where I talked about who would win between a theoretical military confrontation between the Chinese and the Greeks/Romans.

My point was more that “best” is a rather subjective and multi-faceted determination when talking of ancient cultures, because it is the Greco-Roman tradition which led to our current Western Civilization. Obviously there were political, military and social advantages to the Greeks and Romans versus their enemies such as Persia. Still, the problem is that the civilizations listed in the poll are too spread out geographically and chronologically to make mere military power or social structure at a certain time relevant as the only factor. You have to analyze the civilization in comparison to others existing at the time, in its part of the world. And when you do so, the strong points of other civilizations, even the non-western ones, become evident.

59

The Chinese were advanced, certainly, but the problem is that they had very little (no?) formalized science of things. They would have a good tradition of herbs and healing but no science of medicine, a discovery of gunpowder but no chemistry, three thousand years of complete historical record but no science of history, much interest in philosophy but no formalized philosophy, etc. This may be traced to the fact that they were on the other side of the world an thus isolated from the civilizations that fueled Western civ: Old Egypt, Sumeria, Babylon, Greece, Rome. So they did very well having to do everything from scratch, but the fact remains that they were nowhere near as advanced as the West. They achieved sophistication without achieving formalization, if it can be put that way.

60

I voted for Egypt. I read in elementary school eons ago and later that it was Egypt. I will read more on the subject matter.