/his/ - History

>>34068

>Were Ancient Greeks really part of "Western Civilization"?

It depends on the definition of Western civilization, and I don't have one. But consider the following: it is not possible to fully understand the world we live in disregarding the Graeco-Roman civilization that preceded it. You mentioned Christianity. Without a Greek koine a Jewish prophet couldn't have brought a Latin- and Greek-speaking empire literally to its knees. Can you imagine Rome and Florence without Athens?

I have no doubt, whatever the West is, it includes Ancient Greece. On the other hand, I don't know if it should include Babylon.

are you the same guy who made the cyclic history thread? 'cause it looks like you mixed up the pics

I wonder if Persians/Iranians could be considered Western too. Most likely not, but they are pretty caucasoid and the also speak an Indo-European language. However, they were a lot more into depostism than Westerners and are obviously more dark skinned.

>>34072

Obviously, I am not referring to current Iranians, but pre-Islamic Iran.

>>34073

I wouldn't say so.

Being Indo-European doesn't mean much, apart from the fact that the aristocracy had the same roots. In all cases, Indo-Europeans came as a "barbarian" nomadic steppe people into an area that already had a developed culture, so Indo-Europeans adapted to the local way of life. In case of Persians, this means they adopted customs close to the ones in Mesopotamia, in India they adopted customs of the Harappan culture (Dravidians?). Balkans had an earlier pre-Indo-European culture too (Vinča), so Greeks were probably influenced by them too. Similar with Armenians, who obviously show strong Urartian and general Caucasian influences. So considering Persians Western would kind of imply that entire India should be considered Western too.

>>34068

pre Byzantium Greece is absolutely western, as much of western culture and all of western philosophy is derived from greek culture/philosophy. the distinction gets fuzzy after Byzantium, but the connection to western civilization definitely ends after the fall of Byzantium, much like the Hellenistic territories are no longer considered western after the rise of islam.

>>34072

I've seen the Near East labelled as a part of "Western" civilization by some people. I guess it depends on your definition of "Western" civilization, do the Hittites count? They were Indo-European speakers who weren't in the vicinity of the "West" but probably looked like Europeans.

Could you consider everyone up to the Indians as western civilization and then east of that as eastern civilization?

>>34083

no because sand niggers.

>>34084

okay minus the Arabian peninsula then

>>34085

> Arabian peninsula

sand niggers include the kurds anon. everything east of greece and south of italy (or maybe malta) hasnt been western in any sense of the word since the rise of islam.

>>34075

>as much of western culture and all of western philosophy is derived from greek culture/philosophy.

Seems pretty fuzzy to me. What does this mean? Pretty sure medieval Muslims derived their philosophy from Ancient Greece as well and even Khomeini studied Plato and Aristotle and the like.

I don't deny that the Roman Empire was western, since western Europe spoke Latin in many areas of life. But Greece…

To be precise, what parts of Ancient Greek culture did Westerners "recycle" that Muslims didn't use?

>>34086

Probably a dumb question, but what part of Islam/Muslim culture is most responsible for you judging it as non-western, even more than Hindus or Zoroastrians?

>>34090

Hmm. Maybe the problem here is that while Western and Islamic culture are clearly separate now, they share at least a part of their roots, namely Ancient Greece.

Honestly, this whole thread is mostly just humanity's obsession with categorising everything, even where you can't draw sharp lines.

>>34090

>Pretty sure medieval Muslims derived their philosophy from Ancient Greece as well and even Khomeini studied Plato and Aristotle and the like.

It's not like they can steal Greece from us, man.

>>34092

m8 they're stealing the entire continent right now

>>34092

>>34105

it's nothing about stealing, there isn't an "us" and "them", just History, there isn't a direct split between West and East.

>>34082

>I've seen the Near East labelled as a part of "Western" civilization by some people.

I've seen this bizarre trend recently, too. I was reading a translation of Gilgamesh that made bizarre claims about Western Civilization starting in Sumeria in the introduction. Probably part of the mental illness caused by being a rootless cosmopolitan?

The East/West distinction started with Ancient Greece, they made it themselves. There wasn't really any civilization of note in the West before the Greeks.

>>34086

>south of italy

Only Sicily and Malta were heavily influenced by Saracens, that's why they have both language ties.

Southern Italy remains of Graeco/Roman Identity.

>>34114

>I was reading a translation of Gilgamesh that made bizarre claims about Western Civilization starting in Sumeria in the introduction. Probably part of the mental illness caused by being a rootless cosmopolitan?

Have you been to /pol/ recently? I've seen them paint Sumerians as ancient Aryans (kind of reminds me of Turks claiming them for their own with the proof of dingir = tengri) and how they got swarmed by Akkadian sandniggers then who claimed their accomplishments as their own.

>>34127

christs sake

>>34114

I see ancient Sumer as the start of Civilization outside of Asia in general, Western or other wise. While we're on the topic just out of curiosity's sake, what ethnicity would the ancient Sumerians be?

>>34135

Aryan

>>34137

literally same 😂😂😂😂😂👌👌👌👌👌👌👌

>>34344

Can you break down, like you would explain it to a retard, how modern Sweden is linked to Ancient Greece?

>>34114

>I was reading a translation of Gilgamesh that made bizarre claims about Western Civilization starting in Sumeria in the introduction.

That's right, Greece has its deep cultural roots in the Near East, including Mesopotamia, and therefore in Sumer - the Epic of Gilgamesh is not on a line parallel to that of the Iliad, but on a more basal one, so to speak.

Just like Noah couldn't have been a Semite, I wouldn't say that Sumer belongs to the West or to the East in itself, whatever that means. But I see nothing wrong with the claim you call "bizarre" (though it is ambiguous).

>>34348

scandinavian countries only came into western civilzation within the last 2 centuries, three at best.

>>34553

meaning their ties to western civilization are tenuous at best, and has only been a parasitic relationship, and you could even say that it has been antagonisitc. but this is getting into pol territory, if you wish to further speak about the subject of modern sweden, i suggest you do it there.

>>34553

That sounds retarded, you should consider the introduction of christianity at the very least.

>>34572

fair enough. at what point would you consider the Scandinavian counties to be peaceably assimilated into the catholic europe?

is your contention that all you need to be western is to be catholic?

>>34572

fair enough. at what point would you consider the Scandinavian counties to be peaceably assimilated into the catholic europe?

is your contention that all you need to be western is to be catholic?

fuck this shitty site. every time i get an error, im just going to shil for alternatives

http://finalchan.net/

https://314chan.org/

http://endchan.xyz/

nntpchan

Ancient Greece was admired by Western Civilization the same way Ancient Egypt was admired by the Ancient Greeks. I think people are confusing admiration and emulation with direct continuity. Neoclassicism went out of its way to forge a connection between early modern Western Europe and the Classical world, but it doesn't make Ancient Greece the same civilization as Tudor England any more than Abbasid philhellenes could make Ancient Greece the foundation of Medieval Islam.

In religious terms it's like taking the lineage of Jesus back to the Israelite kings and then confusing Ancient Israel as a part of Christendom.

>>34596

your contention is foolhardy. there are clear, traceable points in which englands culture, language, and civics can be traced back to the Greeks. namely their roman influence, the Etruscan influence on the Romans, and the Greek influence on the Etruscan in turn.

now you may say these influences were deliberately contrived in the middle ages, and to that i would say what part of culture is not deliberately created?

>>34598

>there are clear, traceable points in which englands culture, language, and civics can be traced back to the Greeks

You said it yourself, these are influences, and especially contrived ones that deliberately skirt the Anglo-Saxon and Norman foundations of many of England's cultural and political institutions to recast them in a Roman image.

There remains a gap between what is Western civilization and what is Ancient Greek civilization, and that is the gap between what Ancient Greece actually was and what medieval and early modern Latin and Germanic Europeans imagined Ancient Greece was (and who they are in relation to them).

The Medieval Franks also thought themselves a lost tribe of Israel and purposefully cast themselves as Biblical figures in much of their art, politics, and theology, but this similarly doesn't make Ancient Israel part of Western Civilization.

>>34600

i must admit i didnt read your original poost very well. apologies.

and what of roman colonization? you can not deny that does add an amount of legitimacy to the claim of their being at least an indirect continuity, for i wont deny that the dark ages happened. i must admit that medival history or western european history isnt my forte, wouldnt the carolingian empire be an indication of a return to romanesqe governance?

>>34607

In the case of England, almost all Roman influence had been uprooted and gone from the low lands by the 7th century or so, and what Roman inspired institutions that existed prior to the Renaissance came indirectly through Carolingian contact and later continental influence from Norman and Angevin dynasties.

>legitimacy

That's really the crux of the matter for Neoclassicism. Unless something could be said to have been Greek or Roman in origin, then Renaissance and Enlightenment thinkers considered it illegitimate. So it's actually difficult to tell the difference looking back between what actually survived the fall of Rome as an intact institution or cultural ark and what was Medieval in origin but given a Classical paint job. The Carolingian Franks are especially notable in this regard, but essentially there was a dual government structure working in parallel, one Gallo-Roman and the other Frankish, that melded together into one while altogether new institutions began to spring up around the ad hoc privileges conferred upon monasteries and communes.

But again, if some legal continuity was all that mattered, then the Umayyad Caliphate is probably the most Roman of the major Mediterranean cultures that followed the collapse of Justinian's empire. Even more than the Byzantines at times, they maintained Roman civic and economic legal systems the longest with the least alteration from Arab law.

>>34608

what did england return to, celtic tribalism? and i dont wish to derail the topic, but from where do you get your information? i am legitimately interested in acquiring the level of knowledge you have on the subject.

perhaps we could get to the truth quicker if we are to define western civilization first, and see what places fit that criteria, rather than the other way around. its certainly a tricky thing, considering one of its central pillars is an offshoot of Judaism.

the clearest deliniation i can make is from the difference between the teachings of man and the universe being one and the same to varying degrees (Upanishads, Buddhism, presumably Confucianism) and the, while not a philosophical treatise nor a set of teachings in the conventional sense, the idea of the creators of the universe on the whole rather indifferent to the plights of man, which is to say man and the universe are quite separate, shown in the Iliad and the odyssey at the earliest. in a word, western civilization begins at the notion that man is a distinct being, wholly separate from god and the universe. so, beginning from here, we can easily say that greece and all whom she influenced, including the celts, can be considered a part of western civilization.

but what then of islam? how is it not western?

>>34595

>is your contention that all you need to be western is to be catholic?

No, in fact i was going to argue that it goes way back, but i don't really know that much about ancient and early middle ages scandinavia, so i'd rather not say a thing in that regard.

>>34611

so western civilization didnt exist until after the fall of rome?