Influence of varying empires throughout history

So today (the 14th) marks the 2000th anniversary of Augustus, first emperor of Rome, dying.

On facebook, Kadagar_AV and I were debating which empires had the most influence on today's world and I figured we should bring it to here. While I do not think that the Romans had the most influence, I do believe they are are easily top 5, which Kadagar seems to disagree with.

Thoughts?

Hmm. Let's list the big influence empires/states/nations for a start.

USA is the largest today of course. Immense cultural influence.
The British Empire.
The Roman Empire.
The Spanish Empire.
The Ottoman Empire.
The Mongols.
China.
The Seleucid Empire.
Persia.
Russia, mainly as the Soviet Union.
France.

Globally, 5 or 6.
I'd say USA, British, Spanish, Mongols, Rome, Ottomans in order, but honestly, I got great problems guessing where the Ottomans should be.

For Western Europe: Second, after the US.

Edit: Change place with the Mongols and Rome.

Making a top 5 is a subjective matter, but Rome should probably be on anyone's list.

- Latin language formed the basis for the Romance languages, which have 600 million to somewhere around 1 billion speakers (latter figure if you count those who speak it as a second language)
- our alphabet
- Roman law is the root for all European legal traditions except the English, and even common law was heavily influenced
- the fact that Europe, north Africa and the near east were part of a single Empire greatly helped the spread of christianity
- related to the above: it's called Roman Catholic for a good reason
- "the Roman Empire" is/was seen as a civilization without equal that a lot of people and pretentious monarchs tried to emulate or imitate; like the Germans (HRE), Russians, Ottomans, Napoleon etc.

A lot of the empires or states that Ironside mentioned where certainly powerful and influential in their day, but I question wether they had a lasting impact on history after their demise. Seleucids and Ottomans, for example.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kralizec

A lot of the empires or states that Ironside mentioned where certainly powerful and influential in their day, but I question wether they had a lasting impact on history after their demise. Seleucids and Ottomans, for example.

---

I was thinking of the creation of the Middle East as the Arabic block and the scientific and cultural achivements they had in that region. But that's earlier than the Ottomans and was done in a more fractioned state afaik. The Ottomans acted as preserver, but didn't add much.

The list was a bit more to think less Eurocentric, but I don't know enough to judge on how much influence you can trace from the Seleucids today in the Middle East. I agree that it probably isn't much.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kralizec

Making a top 5 is a subjective matter, but Rome should probably be on anyone's list.

- Latin language formed the basis for the Romance languages, which have 600 million to somewhere around 1 billion speakers (latter figure if you count those who speak it as a second language)
- our alphabet
- Roman law is the root for all European legal traditions except the English, and even common law was heavily influenced
- the fact that Europe, north Africa and the near east were part of a single Empire greatly helped the spread of christianity
- related to the above: it's called Roman Catholic for a good reason
- "the Roman Empire" is/was seen as a civilization without equal that a lot of people and pretentious monarchs tried to emulate or imitate; like the Germans (HRE), Russians, Ottomans, Napoleon etc.

A lot of the empires or states that Ironside mentioned where certainly powerful and influential in their day, but I question wether they had a lasting impact on history after their demise. Seleucids and Ottomans, for example.

---

Thats along the lines of what I argued, though Kadagar_AV argued that because the Romans imitated much of what the Greeks did, most of their achievements should really be credited to the Greeks. I disagree in the sense that while the Greeks might have pioneered them, it was the Romans who made them widespread in Europe.

Much of what we know of Greek and Roman culture and engineering was preserved by the Arab and Ottoman centers, however.

The rediscovery of the material is what led to the Renaissance. We owe several other development to them as well, either by their invention or as a conduit for their transmission to the west.

So, how do you assess that? If not for them the knowledge would have been lost. In that regard we may owe them more than any of the ancient civilizations.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hooahguy

Thats along the lines of what I argued, though Kadagar_AV argued that because the Romans imitated much of what the Greeks did, most of their achievements should really be credited to the Greeks. I disagree in the sense that while the Greeks might have pioneered them, it was the Romans who made them widespread in Europe.

---

That's true for some things. The things I listed are all pure Roman achievements, with the exception of the alphabet. The Romans/Etruscans derived it from the Greeks, but if we go way back, the Greeks derived their writing system from the Phoenicians.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fisherking

Much of what we know of Greek and Roman culture and engineering was preserved by the Arab and Ottoman centers, however.

The rediscovery of the material is what led to the Renaissance. We owe several other development to them as well, either by their invention or as a conduit for their transmission to the west.

So, how do you assess that? If not for them the knowledge would have been lost. In that regard we may owe them more than any of the ancient civilizations.

---

There are several conduits through which Roman culture was 'rediscovered'. Muslim preserving was one of them, but so was the church and the Byzantines.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gelatinous Cube

I will make a controversial statement that nobody will like: The USA will be remembered as the most culturally profound society in the history of the human race. What the Roman Empire was to western civilization, the American Empire is to global civilization--and perhaps beyond, some day. In the way that the Romans enforced peace, commerce, and cultural exchange so has America. In the same way Rome became a global power overnight by virtue of its military supremacy, only to find itself seduced further and further into Empire by the lure of international glory, so has America. Everything about the world we live in today is American. But not for the reasons a flag-waving sycophant would say. It is our Armies they'll remember us for, not our constitution. Our enforced global peace, not our democratic values.

To be a fly on the wall in a library a thousand years from now.... ~:smoking:

---

Now that one I'm more dubious about. US is a cultural superpower, but this time of history also has a hundredfold abillity to spread culture compared to the past. So it'll depend on what the future brings, both in the rise of other powers and how long the US stays on top.
As of now, the current internal problems could end up in history as an example of how self indulgence causes a decline among the mighty. Or they'll be overcome, we'll see.
English will probably continue to evolve into the new Latin though. Both UK and USA ensured that.

Armies? Hopefully not. Getting your armies to be more than a few lines (and during that time, the American army spent more than half of all military spending), they'll need to be used and tested. Destroying the Iraqi army doesn't count that way. You don't have the Alexander the Great, Mongols, Romans etc, yet.

I agree that your constitution and democracy won't be the big things you'll be remembered about though. Not without something major happening and a very successful revival and renewal of those ideals are unlikely. The foreign policy shift from preventing democracy to promoting it will be noted, probably baked into the global shift on it. Democracy is the new legitimation, even among the dictorships after all.

You really are missing out the French Empire. That is responsible for a lot, including the metric system, the reason Europeans and Americans use the right-side of the road, and a lot of ideology which is incorporated into modern civilisations, amongst other things.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gelatinous Cube

To be a fly on the wall in a library a thousand years from now.... ~:smoking:

---

我们伟大的领导人带来和平与安全的这片土地，从美洲的腐朽没落的状态。

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gelatinous Cube

Hah, bold words. China will be lucky to survive its industrialization without succumbing to another all-consuming civil war. The Romans were not the most populous, or the most advanced, or the most "cultural" in the sense that they appreciated art or whatever. They merely spread their culture through a perfect storm of opportunity, method, and motivation. China is a lonely giant, shedding good ideas all over everybody else, and that's not likely to change as long as the same factors are in place that have always kept China at home. It takes so much authority and so much energy to rule such a place that I find cheeky comments about how they'll some day rule the world to be kind of.. eh.. trite?

Ya, ya, lots of European states have contributed to lots of things. The Roman empire was also founded on the cultural detritus of its predecessors. But even the Romans would be in awe at what America has accomplished. The whole world speaks our language, does business the way we want them to do it, toes the line around our military, and commits every single international act for our benefit. The very fact that we're having this discussion is thanks to America--we're speaking in a common language on a common forum using common technology to discuss a common history. Even China is defined by America.

---

Ahem.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gelatinous Cube

And ironside, its not about winning. Its about cultural transmission. Every time our Armies park somewhere for a few years, the place changes. And our Armies have been parked in a lot of places.

---

Getting known by is surface knowledge, not deeper stuff. Cultural transfer due to military is deeper stuff. The Mongols are known for their dangerous armies and brutality, not for their religious tolerance.
You'll be known by your cultural influence and if you keep your current position for 100-200 years more, then only a world goverment with a very unexpected start would have more influence in a 1000 years.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gelatinous Cube

And why is that!? This is so important, and I hope you people meditate on it. After the Romans fell, European "state" after European "state" tried to crown another Ceasar. As recently as Napoleon, you can see someone directly trying to recreate the Roman Empire for the sake of legitimacy. Now, thanks to America, nations do the same with "Democracy." And they do it poorly, because when you learn by the sword you often learn the wrong lessons.

---

Nah, the development for democracy for a standard has to do with the development of an urban class that wanted rights and an educated middle class that framed it as democracy. Add that communism and facism got burned in practice and are no longer considered valid. The US spent most of the cold war as a democracy destroying nation, due to fearing the elected reds or simply for profit. So basically, have a certain population composition and the people will start to demand to have some influence, and yarn for democracy. That the west is democratic certainly helps a lot, but that's not a US invention (outside of WWII), but came by itself earlier. The 100% approval rating is for their own population, not for the world as large, who knows that it's a sham.

For a while I would say the Byzantines had a considerable influence, from around the 6th century, given that they kept the idea of civilisation alive in those Dark Ages. :book:

Militarily they didn't have a considerable impact and they weren't as influential as others, but they should at least be mentioned. They have a considerable legacy.