Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Beyond Greece and Rome

aeon.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 61 posts

Re: Beyond Greece and Rome

#11

Post by never_inline »

WelkinFolk wrote: post #4

There tends to be a knee-jerk reaction from the Western world anytime South Asians even try to say that they had grand civilisations. I see an onslaught of comments about their current economic conditions and how a call centre agent having a "bad" accent means that South Asians deserve to be criticised for every little thing.

as a ~~south asian~~ (stupid label) Indian, some knee-jerk reaction is justified because people tend to believe in exaggerated time scales (for instance, based on projected dates of astronomical events in the Hindu Epics, which predates the bronze age and the war chariot), whereas the westerners don't have a religious attachment and speak a realistic timeline for Homeric epics.

If we are speaking of the classical times: yes, India was on-par with the greco-roman and chinese world; left a cultural imprint on east and south-east asia and traded with the western world too. But the rise of pacifist religions, being in a nice position to be attacked from central asia, and internal strifes basically rendered it useless in the last millenium. Huge population, uncontrolled urbanization and a corrupt education system is the bane of this century. If we don't solve that, no amount of classical civilization is going to help. Germanic people were considered primitive by the greeks and romans, now look where they are!

Re: Beyond Greece and Rome

#12

Post by kazinator »

never_inline wrote: post #11
WelkinFolk wrote: post #4

There tends to be a knee-jerk reaction from the Western world anytime South Asians even try to say that they had grand civilisations. I see an onslaught of comments about their current economic conditions and how a call centre agent having a "bad" accent means that South Asians deserve to be criticised for every little thing.

as a ~~south asian~~ (stupid label) Indian, some knee-jerk reaction is justified because people tend to believe in exaggerated time scales (for instance, based on projected dates of astronomical events in the Hindu Epics, which predates the bronze age and the war chariot), whereas the westerners don't have a religious attachment and speak a realistic timeline for Homeric epics. If we are speaking of the classical tim…

Oh we have some westerners who believe that the world is 6000 years old due to a particular combination of interpretations of circumstances in the Bible.

Re: Beyond Greece and Rome

#13

Post by WelkinFolk »

seszett wrote: post #10
WelkinFolk wrote: post #4

There tends to be a knee-jerk reaction from the Western world anytime South Asians even try to say that they had grand civilisations. I see an onslaught of comments about their current economic conditions and how a call centre agent having a "bad" accent means that South Asians deserve to be criticised for every little thing.

> from the Western world You might be overgeneralising just a little bit here as outside the US and the UK, I think few people in the Western world care about the accent of Indians when they speak English, and are not exposed to their call centers anyway. I think most people are somewhat aware of the civilisations that occurred there.

I agree that I have over-generalised, although in my mind the UK and the US have the most cultural imprint from amongst the Western nations.

Re: Beyond Greece and Rome

#14

Post by WelkinFolk »

never_inline wrote: post #11
WelkinFolk wrote: post #4

There tends to be a knee-jerk reaction from the Western world anytime South Asians even try to say that they had grand civilisations. I see an onslaught of comments about their current economic conditions and how a call centre agent having a "bad" accent means that South Asians deserve to be criticised for every little thing.

as a ~~south asian~~ (stupid label) Indian, some knee-jerk reaction is justified because people tend to believe in exaggerated time scales (for instance, based on projected dates of astronomical events in the Hindu Epics, which predates the bronze age and the war chariot), whereas the westerners don't have a religious attachment and speak a realistic timeline for Homeric epics. If we are speaking of the classical tim…

Don't disagree with any of your points.

I can understand some push-back from other countries, especially when the right-wing tends to embarrassingly parade past achievements as a way to suppress criticism of current conditions, but at the moment the sheer hatred and poison have blown way past what is understandable.

Re: Beyond Greece and Rome

#15

Post by chrisco255 »

rayiner wrote: post #9
bashmelek wrote: post #7

To be honest, though many historians today might disagree, I still think there is something we can call “Western Civilization,” even if it is a vague family of things that cannot be strictly defined. I know they are trying to correct for certain harmful attitudes out there, but articles like these feel to me to put the social message above all. It is especially when a certain perceived problematic attitude is the foc…

> I still think there is something we can call “Western Civilization" This is perhaps the least controversial statement in history. It's obviously true. Western Civilization is: 1) Greece 2) Rome, borrowing from the Greeks 3) Christianity taking over Rome 4) Germanic tribes adopting Roman law + the Christian religion 5) Protestantism 6) The Renaissance 7) The Enlightenment You can read Plato, and it all makes sense t…

Sun Tzu is quite popular even in the west today.

Agree with your general points. It is hard to know the boundaries of your culture if you've never been intimate with another, as in really getting to know the memes and patterns of thought that make up cultures outside of your own.

Re: Beyond Greece and Rome

#16

Post by chrisco255 »

WelkinFolk wrote: post #4

There tends to be a knee-jerk reaction from the Western world anytime South Asians even try to say that they had grand civilisations. I see an onslaught of comments about their current economic conditions and how a call centre agent having a "bad" accent means that South Asians deserve to be criticised for every little thing.

I can say as an American I've never really had that impression. My impression of all ancient societies including Greeks and Romans but of course Egyptians, Chinese, Persians, Indian cultures, etc there have been periods of rise and periods of fall.

Americans are most acquainted with the Romans and our system of government was designed to take the best aspects of their republic and to prevent the conditions that led to Roman imperialism. The fall of Rome is ingrained in our culture as something to be wary of, that all great civilizations fall prey to.

But it is generally understood that other parts of the world were more advanced at different times or advanced in certain technology beyond their peers at the time.

Marco Polo trade routes to China and through the silk road were popular because of the goods and products europeans couldn't make or cultivate. Even Christopher Columbus was attempting to sail to India as a more efficient trade route and that is why the natives were called Indians.

The ancient temples in India are impressive and certainly many grand civilizations rose and fell on the subcontinent. We are just less familiar with those stories as their origins didn't shape our own as directly.

Re: Beyond Greece and Rome

#17

Post by kakacik »

kazinator wrote: post #12
never_inline wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

as a ~~south asian~~ (stupid label) Indian, some knee-jerk reaction is justified because people tend to believe in exaggerated time scales (for instance, based on projected dates of astronomical events in the Hindu Epics, which predates the bronze age and the war chariot), whereas the westerners don't have a religious attachment and speak a realistic timeline for Homeric epics. If we are speaking of the classical tim…

Oh we have some westerners who believe that the world is 6000 years old due to a particular combination of interpretations of circumstances in the Bible.

A bit more than "some" I would say given the quality and attitude towards teaching creationism ie in bible belt public schools

Re: Beyond Greece and Rome

#18

Post by zkmon »

Our perception about the ancient times, is moulded by sayings that have other goals other than recording of facts and events. Those "swords-and-sandals" movies focus on sensationalism, gory, shock that will sell. Even the historians of ancient times have goals of pleasing the rulers or maintaining the social layers and secrecy. Ancient times were far more slower and peaceful than present times. The stories pick only those spicy parts and fast forward everything else.

The only fact-recording machine is the structures built by people, fossils, geological features etc. All written stuff is decorated and colored.

Re: Beyond Greece and Rome

#19

Post by frollogaston »

never_inline wrote: post #11
WelkinFolk wrote: post #4

There tends to be a knee-jerk reaction from the Western world anytime South Asians even try to say that they had grand civilisations. I see an onslaught of comments about their current economic conditions and how a call centre agent having a "bad" accent means that South Asians deserve to be criticised for every little thing.

as a ~~south asian~~ (stupid label) Indian, some knee-jerk reaction is justified because people tend to believe in exaggerated time scales (for instance, based on projected dates of astronomical events in the Hindu Epics, which predates the bronze age and the war chariot), whereas the westerners don't have a religious attachment and speak a realistic timeline for Homeric epics. If we are speaking of the classical tim…

No comment on the rest, just wanted to say I was thrown off by the "South Asian" thing too. Not tip-toeing around calling Greece "Southwest Europe."

Re: Beyond Greece and Rome

#20

Post by GolfPopper »

rayiner wrote: post #9
bashmelek wrote: post #7

To be honest, though many historians today might disagree, I still think there is something we can call “Western Civilization,” even if it is a vague family of things that cannot be strictly defined. I know they are trying to correct for certain harmful attitudes out there, but articles like these feel to me to put the social message above all. It is especially when a certain perceived problematic attitude is the foc…

> I still think there is something we can call “Western Civilization" This is perhaps the least controversial statement in history. It's obviously true. Western Civilization is: 1) Greece 2) Rome, borrowing from the Greeks 3) Christianity taking over Rome 4) Germanic tribes adopting Roman law + the Christian religion 5) Protestantism 6) The Renaissance 7) The Enlightenment You can read Plato, and it all makes sense t…

And yet, Rome borrowed from far more than the Greeks. Norse deities are popular, and seemingly more recognizable than classical Greek myth to those in North America with whom I've spoke about such things. Rome was taken over by a particular flavor of Christianity, which was changed by the Empire at least as much as it changed the Empire, and changed more by those who claimed it. (Christmas and Easter are not originally Christian holidays.) "Protestant" now, means a lot of different things to a lot of different people. The Renaissance was significantly tied to the Muslim world's own traditions of Civilization, and a major thrust of contemporary politics is that the Enlightenment was not a positive thing. And hardly anyone is a farmer anymore, even though that's what 90% of Western Civilization was until the last century or so. So yes, all of those influence any definition of Western Civilization, but they're neither some direct line of succession, nor a list of the most massive influences - they're a selection of popular nodes in a vast web of connections.
Post reply on HN