4 ms·

Shouldn't one look at genetics as well? When a completely different ethnicity invaded and called themselves Roman, and copied the parts they wanted from Roman c

by flexie 5y ago

Shouldn't one look at genetics as well? When a completely different ethnicity invaded and called themselves Roman, and copied the parts they wanted from Roman civilization, but without having almost any Roman ancestry, are we to consider them a continuation of the Roman civilization?

inawarminister 5y ago
Well then Rome died in the 600s as the Empire abandoned Latin language and adopted the language of the majority of it's population. Greek. If you're talking about ancestry, most Turks in Turkey are descended from Anatolian and Balkans populations so...
sandworm101 5y ago
>> to consider them a continuation of the Roman civilization? Yes. A civilization is not a race. It is something above biology. The fact that nobody running things is related to the founder of a civilization does not mean that civilization has somehow fallen and been replaced anew. It means that, at most, a particular regime has fallen from power. Civilizations are larger than their leadership, even their founders. Would anything really change if one day we realized that nobody in the US congress was a blood relation of the founding fathers? I doubt anyone would see that as anything other than an interesting blip in a new cycle.
- agent327 5y ago
  There should, however, be a significant continuation of the culture for that to be true. A civilisation is also not just a bunch of people living in a geographical location. As an example, the current state of Egypt is not the heir to (or continuation of) the Egypt of the pharaohs. Instead they are the heirs to their conquerors, descended from Arab armies that conquered Hellenistic Egypt (which itself already had a dubious claim to any links with the original, pre-Greek invasion pharaohs). They speak a different language, pray to different gods, and have an altogether different culture; they just happen to live where the pharaohs once had their kingdoms.
  - dragonwriter 5y ago
    > Hellenistic Egypt (which itself already had a dubious claim to any links with the pharaohs). The claim that the Egypt under the Pharaohs of the 31st Dynasty had a “dubious claim to any link with the pharaohs” has some obvious logical difficulties.
    - agent327 5y ago
      I've added a clarification so people with willfully minimal reading comprehension skills can also understand what was meant.
  - sandworm101 5y ago
    Egyptian culture certainly evolved, but I don't see that having new gods and a new leadership cast means that the civilization is new. The basic precepts are still there. They share the same religious and technological linages.
bumbada 5y ago
are we to consider them a continuation of the Roman civilization? Yes, because being Roman had nothing to do with ethnicity. Even people from Italy were not Romans at first. The Latins people allies of Romans(socii) fought wars to be recognized as fully Romans and only after winning some battles they got it. In Jesus time only 10% of the population had Roman citizenship, like St Paul, but after some centuries everyone had it. Something similar happened in the US, black people were certainly not fully Americans or even people at first, they were slaves, let alone native Americans, devoid of any right. The survivors that were not exterminated(like native Americans) fought for their rights and eventually they got it, after having lots of their houses burned,their women raped and their men murdered. They were sent to World wars in the worst conditions at the most risky positions. Rome was a way of living, way beyond ethnicity. You only understand it when you travel to places without this heritage, like China or Afghanistan. When I traveled to China I was surprised to live in a place with no rule of law for example. The Rule is whatever the CCP leaders want today. I took so many things from the West for granted.

by flexie 5y ago

inawarminister 5y ago

Well then Rome died in the 600s as the Empire abandoned Latin language and adopted the language of the majority of it's population. Greek. If you're talking about ancestry, most Turks in Turkey are descended from Anatolian and Balkans populations so...

sandworm101 5y ago

>> to consider them a continuation of the Roman civilization? Yes. A civilization is not a race. It is something above biology. The fact that nobody running things is related to the founder of a civilization does not mean that civilization has somehow fallen and been replaced anew. It means that, at most, a particular regime has fallen from power. Civilizations are larger than their leadership, even their founders. Would anything really change if one day we realized that nobody in the US congress was a blood relation of the founding fathers? I doubt anyone would see that as anything other than an interesting blip in a new cycle.

agent327 5y ago
There should, however, be a significant continuation of the culture for that to be true. A civilisation is also not just a bunch of people living in a geographical location. As an example, the current state of Egypt is not the heir to (or continuation of) the Egypt of the pharaohs. Instead they are the heirs to their conquerors, descended from Arab armies that conquered Hellenistic Egypt (which itself already had a dubious claim to any links with the original, pre-Greek invasion pharaohs). They speak a different language, pray to different gods, and have an altogether different culture; they just happen to live where the pharaohs once had their kingdoms.
- dragonwriter 5y ago
  > Hellenistic Egypt (which itself already had a dubious claim to any links with the pharaohs). The claim that the Egypt under the Pharaohs of the 31st Dynasty had a “dubious claim to any link with the pharaohs” has some obvious logical difficulties.
  - agent327 5y ago
    I've added a clarification so people with willfully minimal reading comprehension skills can also understand what was meant.
- sandworm101 5y ago
  Egyptian culture certainly evolved, but I don't see that having new gods and a new leadership cast means that the civilization is new. The basic precepts are still there. They share the same religious and technological linages.

bumbada 5y ago

are we to consider them a continuation of the Roman civilization? Yes, because being Roman had nothing to do with ethnicity. Even people from Italy were not Romans at first. The Latins people allies of Romans(socii) fought wars to be recognized as fully Romans and only after winning some battles they got it. In Jesus time only 10% of the population had Roman citizenship, like St Paul, but after some centuries everyone had it. Something similar happened in the US, black people were certainly not fully Americans or even people at first, they were slaves, let alone native Americans, devoid of any right. The survivors that were not exterminated(like native Americans) fought for their rights and eventually they got it, after having lots of their houses burned,their women raped and their men murdered. They were sent to World wars in the worst conditions at the most risky positions. Rome was a way of living, way beyond ethnicity. You only understand it when you travel to places without this heritage, like China or Afghanistan. When I traveled to China I was surprised to live in a place with no rule of law for example. The Rule is whatever the CCP leaders want today. I took so many things from the West for granted.