Greateat civilization in history (Debate I)

[Wernazuma III]

Originally posted by Proteus_MST
Why would someone include England in this Poll?
the country wasn´t more special than other european states of the time,
for example the Holy roman empire (Germany), Spain or France.

The role of the HRE was not so big. Politically speaking, it was rather limited, symbolically it drew from Rome (making this a plus rather for Rome as a significant civilization), in cultural matters it was never leading.

Spain ertainly comes somewhat closer, yet Spanish dominance in Europe was more short lived, the decline more complete, the cultural impact directed rather backwards...

France or England is a tough call, but ultimately England wins . Politically, England could compete with France even when France was strongest, while when Britannia ruled the waves, the French could only duck and cover.
Culturally/scientifically it's a tie. The British were overshadowed by France mainly in the 18th century (even then, the British were major scientific/philosophical competitors) , for the last 200 years however Britain was much more expansive and successful in culture and science until it was rivaled and finally replaced as first power by its very former colony...
Economically,as the birthplace of industrialization and (together with the Dutch and Italians) modern capitalism, I can't see France competeing even closely.

[Will9]

Originally posted by DAVOUT
Civilization was defined in the OP as a sum of 8 significant criteria. I gave 1 to 5 stars to each criterium, and made the total.

Italy
1. Historical Significance -
2. Military Power - *
3. Political Power - *
4. Cultural Power - *****
5. Economic Power - ***
6. Scientific Development - ***
7. Architectural - ***
8. Centraliztion- *
Total : 17/40

This could make a bit clearer the comparison between basically (and literally) incomparable civilizations.

Historical significance is 0? Does the Renaissance mean nothing to you? Political 1? Do you deny that the Pope had more political power than any person in Europe? Economy 3? These states were built on trade and banking.

[LordShiva]

Originally posted by Will9
Do you deny that the Pope had more political power than any person in Europe?

Yes

[Will9]

Originally posted by LordShiva


Yes

Then who had more?

[Alexander I]

Originally posted by Will9
Then who had more?

Hmm, sometimes the Holy Roman Emperor did.

Ahh, Heinrich IV besieging the Eternal City while his Holiness hides in a tower...
Ahh, Friedrich I Barbarossa causing the Milanese to wet themselves...
Ahh, Karl V making his own Pope-puppet...

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Wernazuma III
wtf kucispam.

why aren't you finally banned?

PolyPLUS

[LordShiva]

Originally posted by Will9


Then who had more?

Don't you watch Teh Tudors? Teh King of Spain/Holy Roman Emperor took teh Pope prisoner and tortured him.

Then Henry teh 8th told teh Pope to go screw himself, and teh Pope couldn't do anything about it.

[DAVOUT]

Originally posted by Will9


Historical significance is 0? Does the Renaissance mean nothing to you? Political 1? Do you deny that the Pope had more political power than any person in Europe? Economy 3? These states were built on trade and banking.

I have a problem with historical significance; what could it means that is not included in the seven following points?
The Renaissance is referred to in point 4 Cultural power (5 stars)
Political power is rated 1 star by its small, if any, influence outside Italy, and very late inside with the unity made in the second half of the XIX° century, and with foreign help.
The Pope does not belong politically to Italy and has a political influence as a person not as a state; and we cannot be sure that Jean-Paul II power will be totally inherited by Benoit XVI.

But I was only trying to assess my judgement on civilizations in order to be able to explain why I am of such opinion on one civ and of another one on another civ.

[lord of the mark]

No influence outside Italy? Genoese colonies on the black sea, Venetian position in the balkans and the eastern med, Genoese and Venetian influence in the late Byz empire.

That declines, but so what?

And what civ was it, really, that established colonies on the Canary Islands? It was the Spanish STATE, but it was largely Genoese who did it. And Italian merchants were all over africa, an Italian discovered (for the europeans) the Americas. Italians were all over under different flags.

Is a civ a state?

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
wtf Inca, wtf Maya?

Incas are shortlived. They are the last rep of what is the very impressive Andean civilization.


This is the problem with confusing Civs and States. Its ok for games, but why does it belong in the history forum? Historical discussion shouldnt be limited by the categories of a game.

[DAVOUT]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
No influence outside Italy? Genoese colonies on the black sea, Venetian position in the balkans and the eastern med, Genoese and Venetian influence in the late Byz empire.

That declines, but so what?

It was about political power; commercial and cultural influence fall in another category.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by DAVOUT


It was about political power; commercial and cultural influence fall in another category.

Venice held territory on the Adriatic coast and in the eastern med islands, and genoa held territory in the crimea.

In Byz, its real hard to seperate commercial influence from political influence.

But again, the notion of political influence biases us towards a "state" like definition of what a civilization is.

Really, are there many folks who dont play computer games who think of a civilization as having an army, or a diplomatic corps? Whod think of the US, or UK or France as a "civilization"?

[DAVOUT]

Originally posted by lord of the mark

Is a civ a state?

Good question indeed. It wust likely be answered as soon as asked.

My answer is that it depends of the content given to a civ. If it includes laws and centralization and military power and political power, it is a state, if it is limited to culture, science and commerce, it is not necessaruly a state.

[DAVOUT]

Originally posted by lord of the mark


Really, are there many folks who dont play computer games who think of a civilization as having an army, or a diplomatic corps? Whod think of the US, or UK or France as a "civilization"?

Most people think that a civilization reflects their culture which include fine arts, architecture, litterature, theater, style of furniture and clothes and cooking, way of life, and laws. The way of life includes the personal life, and the collective organization of life, many points that history has often linked to states.
Even limited to these points, civilizations with small difference like UK and France are considered as insuportably bizarre by both populations, and they are clearly two quite old states. But if we compare their attitude toward diplomacy or military, which are state matters, and even if they can, less than rarely, disagree on related subjects, they are not deeply different.