U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > History
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old Today, 12:02 AM
 
3,213 posts, read 2,336,249 times
Reputation: 6290

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by mkwensky View Post
The Phoenicians, or whoever the true inventors of the alphabets were, derived it from the demotic form of Egyptian writing, so alphabets can be traced to Egypt.

Monumental architecture didn't last in Mesopotamia because it is not as dry as Egypt, and most of the buildings were made of mud bricks which eventually melted. That should not be taken as evidence that they were less advanced than Egypt.
Mud brick is far cheaper, easier to work with, and the results are temporal. Of course the Egyptians were more advanced for making a 5000 ft monument in several ton stone blocks that has lasted 4500 years. Let's not be silly here.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mkwensky View Post
The Roman form of mixed government isn't that different from Sparta's or other Greek oligarchies. Aristotle would've admired it if as he praised Carthage's government in Politics, and the Roman Republic is very similar in form the the Carthaginian. I wouldn't call the Athenian democracy short lived either. It survived the loss of the Peloponnesian War and persisted in a more limited way even after Macedonian conquest.
But we weren't comparing Rome and Carthage, we were comparing Rome and Greece. What SPECIFIC Greek city-states are you claiming were similar and why were they not ultimately succesful? Why did Polybius end up writing about the superiority of the Roman system and not one of the Greek systems?

Athenian democracy was short-lived compared to the Roman Republic. It fell victim to demagogeury during the Peloponnesian war, suffered two phases of oligarchic coups during the war, and came back in a crippled form. It was an utter failure compared the Republican model.

Last edited by cachibatches; Today at 12:12 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old Today, 12:20 AM
 
Location: San Jose
1,659 posts, read 511,967 times
Reputation: 1821
Quote:
Originally Posted by cachibatches View Post
They still aren't in the class of the pyramids. The Great Pyramid was the tallest building in the world for 4000 years and the only one of the seven wonders still standing.
Why aren't the hanging gardens in the same class as pyramids according to you?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 12:34 AM
 
Location: San Jose
1,659 posts, read 511,967 times
Reputation: 1821
Quote:
Originally Posted by cachibatches View Post
Mud brick is far cheaper, easier to work with, and the results are temporal. Of course the Egyptians were more advanced for making a 5000 ft monument in several ton stone blocks that has lasted 4500 years. Let's not be silly here.
They used mud brick because there was no usable stone in the area. If they had access to stone they probably would have used it extensively. Egypt is fortunate to have huge sandstone deposits within a short distance of the Nile River.

That said...

The Mesopotamians invented the brick, which is still used to this very day. Hell we have entire cities constructed mostly of bricks in regions across the world. When was the last time you saw a building put up with giant sandstone blocks? I would say developing a building system that can be used almost anywhere and built in a rather quick fashion. Whose practical purposes have been continual without halt for thousands of years is pretty advanced.

BTW the Roman Empire was built on the brick itself. Most Roman buildings were structurally brick. The Roman army would haul kilns with them so they could construct forts, bridges and various other structure on the frontier. No bricks, no Roman Empire.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 01:08 AM
 
3,213 posts, read 2,336,249 times
Reputation: 6290
Quote:
Originally Posted by KenFresno View Post
Why aren't the hanging gardens in the same class as pyramids according to you?
One reason would be because they are no longer with is. Again, the pyramid is the only EXTANT wonder.

Another is because others have subsequently built gardens and aqueducts in the ancient world that were greater. The pyramid remained the tallest building known to man for 4000 years. No one else could build it. And it has a very easy to define legacy.

A third is because we don't know what the gardens actually looked like to define them against the pyramid.



Quote:
Originally Posted by KenFresno View Post
They used mud brick because there was no usable stone in the area. If they had access to stone they probably would have used it extensively. Egypt is fortunate to have huge sandstone deposits within a short distance of the Nile River.

That said...

The Mesopotamians invented the brick, which is still used to this very day. Hell we have entire cities constructed mostly of bricks in regions across the world. When was the last time you saw a building put up with giant sandstone blocks? I would say developing a building system that can be used almost anywhere and built in a rather quick fashion. Whose practical purposes have been continual without halt for thousands of years is pretty advanced.

BTW the Roman Empire was built on the brick itself. Most Roman buildings were structurally brick. The Roman army would haul kilns with them so they could construct forts, bridges and various other structure on the frontier. No bricks, no Roman Empire.
Great civilizations import what they need. The Egyptians importarted builidng materials from Lebanon, for example.

The Egyptians also built in brick, as they did with the step pyramid. The switched to giant blocks precicely because no one else was capable of doing it. That is what what made it prestigious. Again, the great pyramid was the tallest construction for 4000 years, and is still standing. There is no way to minimize that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 01:13 AM
 
Location: Seattle WA, USA
3,760 posts, read 1,981,367 times
Reputation: 2406
I think the cultures/civilizations around the Black sea (particularly around Ukraine and Romania) are underrated in that they are almost never mentioned in history books, even though they contained some of the largest settlements in the world at their time rivaling those in the fertile crescent. For instance Talianki of the Trypillian culture in modern day Ukraine. It dates to around 3850–3700 BC with an area of around 450 hectares/ 4.5 km2 (1,100 acres/ 1.7 sq mi) containing 2,700 structures at it's height which would mean that it housed about 15,000 people, though estimates vary from as little as 6,300 and upwards of 30,000 people when including nearby villages.

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 01:59 AM
 
Location: San Jose
1,659 posts, read 511,967 times
Reputation: 1821
Quote:
Originally Posted by cachibatches View Post
One reason would be because they are no longer with is. Again, the pyramid is the only EXTANT wonder.
That has no baring on the civilization that built it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by cachibatches View Post
Another is because others have subsequently built gardens and aqueducts in the ancient world that were greater. The pyramid remained the tallest building known to man for 4000 years. No one else could build it. And it has a very easy to define legacy.
Lots of civilizations could build a pyramid of that size (Ancient Rome). They didn't because constructing a mausoleum of that magnitude for the purpose of burying one person is asinine. Outside of a tomb, what purpose would a pyramid like that have? Gardens and aqueducts on the other hand have far greater pragmatic purposes. Purposes still useful to this day. Purposes useful to other ancient civilizations.


Quote:
Originally Posted by cachibatches View Post
Great civilizations import what they need. The Egyptians importarted builidng materials from Lebanon, for example.

The Egyptians also built in brick, as they did with the step pyramid. The switched to giant blocks precicely because no one else was capable of doing it. That is what what made it prestigious. Again, the great pyramid was the tallest construction for 4000 years, and is still standing. There is no way to minimize that.
You know use of stone construction proceeds the Egyptians by thousands of years. The ruins of Gobekli Tepe is made of giant stone blocks and its 12,000 years old. So no I don't think the Egyptians built with stone because no one else could do it, they built with stone because it was plentiful in the Nile Valley.

Lastly the Egyptians didn't build the Step Pyramid with bricks, they built it with stone. They used bricks to construct there ramps so that they could move stones up the Pyramids. In the case with the Step Pyramid, they quit construction halfway through, hence all the mud bricks on the pyramid.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 04:30 AM
 
43 posts, read 654 times
Reputation: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by cachibatches View Post
This is false, and I have read Homer, Hesiod, Herodotus, Thucydides, Xenophon, Livy, Plutarch, Tacitus, Suetonius, Josephus, Dio, the Augustine Scribe, Ammianus, Quintus, Plato, Sophocles, Euripides, Aeschylus, Appolonius, Ovid, Apuleius, Caesar, Virgil, Pliny the Younger, Pseudo Callisthenes, Arrian, Sallust, Polybius, Cicero, and any number of others whose names are not popping into my head. I am currently working on Quintus Curtius Rufus.

The Romans had a 500-year Republic which mirrors our own with its division of powers, whereas the best the Greeks could do was put up a short-lived Democracy in Athens. which quickly degenerated into demagoguery. The Romans made extensive use of the arch in architecture which allowed them to build marvels never dreamed in the Greek world. Roman art was much more dynamic and varied, incorporating styles from all over the known world. Romans were, in general, much more advanced in terms of women's rights, as they could own wealth and run businesses. They were light years ahead of the Greeks in terms of warfare.

And on, and on.
The primary reason for the Republic's long-term success was success on the battlefield. There were many occasions where it could have been wiped out in its infancy, and it would have escaped even the faintest mention in the history books. You're also highly misguided if you think the Roman Republic mirrors your own. It was an outright oligarchy, the majority of the population were given a minimal say in the running of the state. All attempts to empower the plebians were violently resisted, which eventually led to the collapse of the "Republic", and any pretense of democracy was then replaced by the outright autocracy of the Emperors.

Roman Architecture was basically Greek architecture with some additions, mainly the arch and the dome. The basis of Roman art was also Greek, much of it imitated. Whether it was more dynamic and varied is a matter of personal taste.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 05:03 AM
 
Location: rural south west UK
3,393 posts, read 1,891,843 times
Reputation: 3794
Quote:
Originally Posted by Listener2307 View Post
Shouldn't you consider that the Vikings became the Normans?
Normans defined Normandy, built England after 1066 and became the army of The Crusades. Norman built cathedrals and kingdoms, and since they spoke French, even changed the way we speak English today.
My favorite bit about the Normans is that they simply assimilated into the surrounding populace. They disappeared, yet they are still here...... Here I am - a Norman; a Celt.
negative, the Vikings did not take over the whole of England, they only ruled over HALF of the country, the northern part, known as the Danegeld, the southern and south west part remained under the Saxons.
the Vikings capital was York know as Yorvick.

Last edited by bigpaul; Today at 05:23 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 05:44 AM
 
43 posts, read 654 times
Reputation: 26
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigpaul View Post
negative, the Vikings did not take over the whole of England, they only ruled over HALF of the country, the northern part, known as the Danegeld, the southern and south west part remained under the Saxons.
the Vikings capital was York know as Yorvick.
They later reemerged under the leadership of Cnut the Great, and won the English throne. For the next couple of decades England became a part of his North Sea Empire, and therefore very much a part of the Scandinavian world.

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 05:58 AM
 
Location: rural south west UK
3,393 posts, read 1,891,843 times
Reputation: 3794
Quote:
Originally Posted by PossiblyIndecisive View Post
They later reemerged under the leadership of Cnut the Great, and won the English throne. For the next couple of decades England became a part of his North Sea Empire, and therefore very much a part of the Scandinavian world.
absolute rubbish, the Saxon king Harold defeated the Vikings then had to march south to fight the battle of hastings.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > History
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top