Turn on thread page Beta

whose got the greatest history in Europe? watch

    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SurreyJake)
    That doesn't make their history greater it just makes it bigger. Why can't a single building decide that Macedonia has the greatest history in Europe?
    Define: greater - of an extent, amount, or intensity considerably above average.

    I would say it pretty much satisfies the definition. A nations 'greatness' in any is measured by its contemporary cultural presence. Note this greatness does not have any moral implications but is simply a game of who's the best imperialist which essentially goes hand in hand with scientific contribution and linguistic reach.
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ales79)
    Greek influence and control is highly overstated and its mainly done by Europeans to compensate for the lack of European presence on the global stage for most of modern history. 'Greece' at its peak was a cultural, economic and military subject state to Persia.
    Ah, I kind of misread the question.. Thought it said most interesting LOL

    And actually, not necessarily... Look at Alexander the great, he defeated the persians and his empire stretched as far east as to India.....


    But as its the greatest history in europe... I guess it's Italy in terms of ancient history... The Romans at their peak conquered nearly most of the known world at that time...
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ales79)
    Define: greater - of an extent, amount, or intensity considerably above average.

    I would say it pretty much satisfies the definition. A nations 'greatness' in any is measured by its contemporary cultural presence. Note this greatness does not have any moral implications but is simply a game of who's the best imperialist which essentially goes hand in hand with scientific contribution and linguistic reach.
    That's just your opinion of what greatness means.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SurreyJake)
    That's just your opinion of what greatness means.
    No that is a practical, working definition and interpretation of what people refer to when they say greatness. If you want to straw man and partake in some PC mental gymnastics in order to not offend anyway feel free. People like you would go into a safari and berate a lion for chasing Zebra's, stop trying to force your unnatural equality upon a nature which is intrinsically unequal.


    (Original post by Bustamove)
    Ah, I kind of misread the question.. Thought it said most interesting LOLAnd actually, not necessarily... Look at Alexander the great, he defeated the persians and his empire stretched as far east as to India.....But as its the greatest history in europe... I guess it's Italy in terms of ancient history... The Romans at their peak conquered nearly most of the known world at that time...
    Such was Persia's power at the time that Alexander considered himself to be a Achaemenid (read Persian) after his conquest on Persia, married the crown Princes of Persia, settled in Persia and essentially took control of Persia + a little extra....

    Historically the Roman empire (who's greatness isn't singularly attributable to once country or culture) might have been great but did it ever reach as far as England? Did it ever create several offshoots of itself all across the world? Was its cultural and linguistic reach anywhere as great? The Romans had their hands full with the Sassanids and such, show me one such match to England over the last 400 years?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    France of course.

    Although it's over now.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ales79)
    No that is a practical, working definition and interpretation of what people refer to when they say greatness. If you want to straw man and partake in some PC mental gymnastics in order to not offend anyway feel free. People like you would go into a safari and berate a lion for chasing Zebra's, stop trying to force your unnatural equality upon a nature which is intrinsically unequal.
    No, by your logic ants are more great than lions because there are more of them everywhere!
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    I'd say Russia just because there's so much, constant changing and intrigue.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SurreyJake)
    No, by your logic ants are more great than lions because there are more of them everywhere!

    In an evolutionary sense sure it is arguable whatever specie adapts best and spreads itself widest is the better animal strictly in those terms. Also since ants are a heck of a lot more important to the planet than lions.

    However, to compare biological factors of animal adaptation and reproduction to conscious, human attempts to project its power globally is ridiculous. The two are not comparable.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ales79)
    In an evolutionary sense sure it is arguable whatever specie adapts best and spreads itself widest is the better animal strictly in those terms. Also since ants are a heck of a lot more important to the planet than lions.

    However, to compare biological factors of animal adaptation and reproduction to conscious, human attempts to project its power globally is ridiculous. The two are not comparable.
    So you'd rather see an ant than a lion?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Russia/ukraine/eastern europe....................& Maybe Britain from it's very, very ancient history... just 'cos I'm British, and all the invaders and gene pools
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SurreyJake)
    So you'd rather see an ant than a lion?

    What I rather see or think is irrelevant. Opinions are worthless, you go to China, Bolivia, Iraq, Iceland, what language will be the most likely spoken by some? What music will most likely be heard by some? What movies will be most likely be seen by some? Anglo.

    Opinions don't change the objective truth that the English language has the greatest reach of all languages in Europe. For the purposes of the debate that suffices the definition of greatest, you're strawmanning.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ales79)
    What I rather see or think is irrelevant. Opinions are worthless, you go to China, Bolivia, Iraq, Iceland, what language will be the most likely spoken by some? What music will most likely be heard by some? What movies will be most likely be seen by some? Anglo.

    Opinions don't change the objective truth that the English language has the greatest reach of all languages in Europe. For the purposes of the debate that suffices the definition of greatest, you're strawmanning.
    Greatest reach doesn't make it the greatest history. That's your measure you've used to fit your opinion!
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SurreyJake)
    Greatest reach doesn't make it the greatest history. That's your measure you've used to fit your opinion!
    The term greatest by definition and contextually implies who's language and culture have the longest reach/influence and who's nation projected power the furthest. Yes that makes it England in Europe or do you have any other measures to measure greatness of a nation?

    Again if you wanna argue semantics and say it could interpret greatest as who made the best paintings, has the nicest food, has the 'coolest' history feel free to. You're being disingenuous.
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ales79)
    Such was Persia's power at the time that Alexander considered himself to be a Achaemenid (read Persian) after his conquest on Persia, married the crown Princes of Persia, settled in Persia and essentially took control of Persia + a little extra....
    yea, even though Alexander's empire didn't stay intact for very long because he died before he could appoint an heir, this is probably one of Greece's greatest historical moments.. well, in my opinion anyway.. I love Alexander the great..

    (Original post by ales79)
    Historically the Roman empire (who's greatness isn't singularly attributable to once country or culture) might have been great but did it ever reach as far as England? Did it ever create several offshoots of itself all across the world? Was its cultural and linguistic reach anywhere as great? The Romans had their hands full with the Sassanids and such, show me one such match to England over the last 400 years?
    Actually yes... The roman empire actually did reach England.. it didn't conquer the whole of Britain, but it reached pretty much where the border for scotland his.. hence why we have a wall built in England called Hadrians wall... Rome couldn't conquer the Picts so they just decided to build a wall there...
    According to wikipedia, the Romans have held on to England for 400 years during their rule, from 43-410AD... thats more or less 400 years
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Britain

    And what you are referring to with the "sassanids and such" is when rome is in decline... I'm talking about when rome has reached it's peak..probably around Augustus Caesar's rule or Trajan's rule....
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_...ajan_117AD.png
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ales79)
    The term greatest by definition and contextually implies who's language and culture have the longest reach/influence and who's nation projected power the furthest. Yes that makes it England in Europe or do you have any other measures to measure greatness of a nation?

    Again if you wanna argue semantics and say it could interpret greatest as who made the best paintings, has the nicest food, has the 'coolest' history feel free to. You're being disingenuous.
    Why not economically greatest or relative to scale? You're just being opinionated and saying you're objective!
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Greek history I would say. They inspired the Italians and even made the Caesar himself cry comparing himself to Alexander! Don't forget they created the concept of a city state.It makes me sad when people only mention Ancient Greece as if Byzantium didn't last for 1000+ years even after the Western Roman Empire fell. Although all European nations have strikingly interesting and different types of history only a handful of nations' history are taught throughout the world. Greece, Italy and Egypt are the only nations every country learns about. Dammit, I grew up in England and all I was taught about its history wasivorcedBeheadedDiedDivorcedBehea dedSurvived
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SurreyJake)
    Why not economically greatest or relative to scale? You're just being opinionated and saying you're objective!

    Because economic and scientific strength converts into military prowess which in turn is the driving factor behind the spread of a language and culture. Cause, Causation, can you see it?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Anglocentric means that the Germans have the most influence because they created Britain to expand their influence. Work backwards and everyone is the same culture with the same central influence! Equal.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    Greece or Italy/Rome easily.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ales79)
    Because economic and scientific strength converts into military prowess which in turn is the driving factor behind the spread of a language and culture. Cause, Causation, can you see it?
    Correlation doesn't imply causality!
 
 
 
Poll
How are you feeling in the run-up to Results Day 2018?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.