The Roman Empire or The Chinese Dynasty?
2006-08-31 17:25:23 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous in Arts & Humanities ➔ History
Well my dad likes to say: "...they copy it from the Chinese"; "...is invented by the Chinese" in fact, he believes that virtually everything as we know it has its orgins in China.
Well okay, I do think that I exaggerated a bit here, I mean the man is biased but not quite to the extent that I've portrayed before. However, he is partially right--a lot of great inventions and cultural innovations did come from China, and Chinese culture has held sway across Far East and South East Asia prior to the European Imperialist invasions.
For instance, paper, silk, the compass, gun powder all came from China, and they are all inventions that had changed the whole world (not just Asia). For more information on how China's technology and civilisation had affected the world check out this link: http://www.ecotao.com/holism/hu_mod.htm (as it is a pretty long page, just scroll down to around half way through the Technological Civilisation section to find a pretty comprehensive survey of China's civilisation from its first dynasty).
The Chinese civilisation has definitely emerged earlier and has lasted longer than the Roman Empire, but unfortunately most of us that visits this site tends to have received an Eurocentric education. Because of that, very often other really truly inspirational and important civilisations will tend to be downplayed in our schooling in favour for a European-centred version of history (the focus being on European and Colonial histories).
To be honest, I really don't think that any culture/civilisation can claim to be better than the rest as all history is written according to the point of view or ideology of the people it is written for. To debate about superiority is to forget the true implications of humanity--that all civilisations play a role in shaping the world as we know it.
2006-09-01 07:09:15 · answer #1 · answered by spudnik8 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
You totally need to provide a context to make a judgement like that because the two societies had very different degrees of success. For example the Roman Empire played a huge role in the spread of western mono-theism whether it was in Judaism, Christianity, or even Islam yet it was all based on religious thought that they "borrowed" from a conquered people. Their philosophical thought was all "borrowed" as well. Sure the doctrine the espoused spread all over the magority of the world, but even the language in which most of this thought was concieved wasn't even done in their own language (All philosophical thought AND the New Testament of Christ were all written in GREEK) On the other hand, the Chinese inspired some great philosophical thought all on their own but largely failed to project beyond their own Imperial domain like the Romans did even though this thought has been around way longer than Greek philosophy of the Christian ethic. So how do you judge that? Is it by the actual achievement of thought which the Romans did piss-poor at or is the projection of that thought which they excelled at? Is it about the number of converts? The square milage of the empire? The technology?
2006-09-01 04:45:47 · answer #2 · answered by Johnny Canuck 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There were a few Roman Empires and more than a few Chinese dynasties. I think they all fell kind of hard. But the modern nations that emerged from the Roman empires seem to have better economies than the modern nations that emerged from the Chinese dynasties.
2006-09-01 00:34:04 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Roman Empire was much more influential as far as language, culture, government are concerned. Most Indo-European languages have Latin roots. Our government has borrowed ideas from Greek and Roman governments.
The Romans built roads, aqueducts, condominiums, stadiums, etc. etc. But the Chinese built the Great Wall and the underground Terra Cotta army tomb.
But I'd give the Romans the props overall.
2006-09-01 01:04:44 · answer #4 · answered by chrstnwrtr 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The Chinese, because they're still around after 4.000 years, whereas the Roman empire was just a short parenthesis ...
2006-09-03 16:20:02 · answer #5 · answered by juexue 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Chinese were around a lot longer but they both brought serious advancements in war and in the way they secured their territories striking fear in the hearts of all their enemies. The Chinese however survived through the ages and amassed huge amounts of land, which are still, part of it today.
I'd say the Chinese have to be it.
2006-09-01 00:40:45 · answer #6 · answered by searing 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Which dynasty are you referring to? There were many of them. While Rome was indeed more influential, the Chinese were longer lived and rarely intervened with foreign countries
2006-09-01 01:48:08 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
both have brought so much advancement to the world. HMMMM I really cannot decided I keep going back and forth, leadership, territory, culture, technology; and there is tons to list for both. Both cultures are still present today. I think that I would say Roman just because I am a fan of democracy.
2006-09-01 01:01:23 · answer #8 · answered by Sue S 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The Romans...hence the saying all roads lead to Rome.
2006-09-01 00:28:47 · answer #9 · answered by shanggonwootangclan 1 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I say the ancient Mesopotamians--Assyrians, Babylonias, Sumerians--they invented countless innovations (wheel, lens, number zero, etc...)
2006-09-02 13:26:44 · answer #10 · answered by ImAssyrian 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋