History Community ~ All Empires Homepage


This is the Archive on WORLD Historia, the old original forum.

 You cannot post here - you can only read.

 

Here is the link to the new forum:

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Forum LockedGeneral Observations

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12
Author
pinguin View Drop Down
Editorial Staff
Editorial Staff
Avatar

Joined: 29-Sep-2006
Location: Chile
Status: Offline
Points: 7508
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-May-2009 at 16:43
Just an observation. Europeans of course would focus on Europe above all, because it is theirs land. Other countries overseas will consider Europe important but not the focus of everything. Chinese, Indians, Middle Eastern and other peoples consider theirs local history as important as European, if not more. With respect to people of the Americas, it is true that North Americans still focus mainly in Europe, but in Latin America, particularly in Hispanic America, our local civilizations  (Mayan, Aztec, Moche, Incas, etc.) and cultures (Taino, Guarani, Tupi, Quechua, Mapuche) are important to us. With respect to Europe, we see that continent from the Iberian perspective.
 
So, I don't agree that Europe is the center of the pie, at least not anymore. If anything, the focus is in the U.S. since last century.


Edited by pinguin - 21-May-2009 at 16:45
"He who attempts to count the stars, not even knowing how to count the knots of the 'quipus'(counting string), ought to be held in derision."

Inca Pachacutec (1438-1471)
Back to Top
Parnell View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 04-Apr-2007
Location: Ireland
Status: Offline
Points: 1367
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Parnell Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-May-2009 at 17:12
Its all relative. The political developments of Chile in the 1970s are of much greater significance to 'your' world than they ever could be for mine. Similarily the Irish troubles of the second half of the 20th century have shaped my world, and hence of relevance and interest to me.

But for the broader picture, as in the very basics of globalisation and international trade, the history of Europe has to be considered most important to the shaping of the modern world. Since it all essentially emerged from Europe. (And of course you could point out that both the cradle of life and civilisation was in the African continent)
"Neither apathy nor antipathy can ever bring out the truth of history" Eoin Mac Neill.
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
Editorial Staff
Editorial Staff
Avatar

Joined: 29-Sep-2006
Location: Chile
Status: Offline
Points: 7508
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-May-2009 at 18:20
Indeed. That's true. However, Europe global importance has declined since the end of World War II. In the beginning of the 20th century most of the globe was under European rule, and the exceptions were the Americas, China and most of the Muslim World. The Europeans ruled India, Congo, Algiers, Vietnam and even controlled China. Besides, Europe had a large percentage of world population and was a main source of immigrants, capitals, ideas, etc.
 
Today, that is not true anymore. Europe is today just a region more, or equally or less importance than North America or East Asia. Today, the center of change is in the United States, and not in Europe. The fastest growing economies are in East Asia, a region that probably will surpass Europe in the near future. India is free, the Middle East is free, even Africa is free.
 
Even more, if you ask anyone outside Europe they will tell you that the most important region (or country) to shape the modern world is United States and not Europe! Most of modern culture, from Rock to Jazz, from the movie industry and Walt Disney to Broadway, and the leaders in science, economical ideas, social changes, fashion, name it; everything comes from the United States, and not Europe.
 
Add to that list, the development of nukes, the space program, the development of the computer, modern mathematical techniques, modern economy, etc. Without even taking into account the U.S. military power! The contribution of the United States is outstanding and surpasses by far the European.
 
And when those ideas don't come from Europe they come from Japan: from Mario Bros. to the mangas, I bet Japan has more weight in pop culture than Europe. If anything, Europe is anecdotical, but the center is in the states.
 
In such landscape, Europe has lost a lot of its importance. Of course the intelectual contribution of Europe's golden age aren't forgotten, but that doesn't means Europe is the center of the wheel anymore. You can notice it as well in the interest of people for China, India, Arab and other cultures.
 
 
 


Edited by pinguin - 21-May-2009 at 18:36
"He who attempts to count the stars, not even knowing how to count the knots of the 'quipus'(counting string), ought to be held in derision."

Inca Pachacutec (1438-1471)
Back to Top
AksumVanguard View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai
Avatar

Joined: 01-Feb-2009
Status: Offline
Points: 125
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote AksumVanguard Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27-May-2009 at 09:45
This post just reasserts of how some people are stuck in their own turtle shelled point of viewof the world. There is a reason why I posted the civilized establishments Tarchitt Walata and Taganat Cliffs of Maurentania,
http://www.allempires.net/forum_posts.asp?TID=27072
those settlements were very important becasue they gave rise to the Ghana civilization we  know today.

Of course European  and Middle Eastern civilization should be studied they've had more impact throughout the world. But to say Sub-Sahran Africa was incapabable of producing civilzations,as metal working,building stone buildings,having a commerce system,having roads, of its borne ingenuitey  then your wrong.

Originally posted by pinguin pinguin wrote:

However, if you measure the developments in science and technology, field by field, and compare Subsaharan Africa with Europe, of course the comparison would be a disaster for Subsaharan Africa. The simply fact is that European culture developed a lot more and invented a lot more things than Subsaharan Africa.

Now here is a double edge sword to what you are saying.First and foremost alot of Roman inventions were based on greek knowledge,the catapult, Crossbow,Water Mill,Aqueducts,etc were based on knowledge of the greeks. Archimededes,Hero,and Pythagorus were studied extensively by the Romans later on.Later on the Romans such capitulated a vast majority these ideas and knowledge and disperesed to other lands they conqured in Europe.Most of which relatively didn't have a establishments.

Before Hadrian conquered Brtiain  most the inhabitants were living relatively simple,after he built Hadrians Wall,the ancestors of the Scottish were considered to be inferior to that of the new Roman citizens of Brittania,this Roman impact still reverberates to this day.   During the Laws of Conquest English and Irish were forbade to marry because of the  outlook of Brtainians to Irish.After the fall of the Roman empire did the Varangians Vikings,Saxons,Jutes,Anglos,Suevi,Goths build up a civilzation right away ,No. They wre gradullay christanized and brought into the old roman culture.The forst Post Roman in old Roman structures such as St.Angelos ,the Collessium and so on. The encastellions  and absolutism would be the rise of Europe.Europe in the Medieval times did not really sprout up their own advance societes until the end of Medieval times. They were basically living on the vestiges of the past.

The Vedic math,ALgebra,and Technolgical innovations in the east were all transported to Europe. They were stil later on able to rule over most of the people that created it would you those were inferior.



Originally posted by pinguin pinguin wrote:

That's simply the truth. In inventions alone Subsaharan Africa can compare with Australia and New Guinea, but hardly with the Pacific Cultures, Southeast Asia or the Americas, and of course it can't compare at all with China, India, the Muslim world or Europe.

 


In what way exactly? See the flaw here is that "the Americas", are 2 continents not to mention another sub region compared to that of the Central America. And most historians will say that throughout the majority of time most of North America didn' t have any urban developments or technology equivalent to Europeans ,according to European historians themselves.And the fact is that throughout time Meso-AMerica had dozens  civilizations just as that of Those regions in East Africa in tha past. So did the Andean region in South America,which had Half a dozen or more advanced ancient societies, but what about the rest of South America,which lived in relatively simple.
 
[/QUOTE]

Originally posted by Parnell Parnell wrote:

Its not that people deny sub saharan Africa has been an equally valid example of human experience, its just that we don't believe it is or should be considered amongst the pinnacles of human achievement.


Human achievement,Shocked I think the phrase your looking for is "human influence". To say there wasn't any achievements is hogwash, they didn't spread throughout the world,but they did Nonetheless occur in certain regions.Despite the fact that East africans did conquer some portions of Semitic regions in the Middle East whose to know what would of happened if circumstances were different.


Originally posted by Parnell Parnell wrote:


To be blunt, liberal democracy and all which that entails did not emerge from the African savannah.


I would't say liberal democracy actually emerged in Europe either. They were accidental occurences due to circumstances. For example the Greeks didn't really have a republic, but democratic  state was not to much of the same of democracy today. The Romans had a republic but they didn't hold any elections of their  Emperors. Actually the Rajputtins of India did have a republics.The French Revolution and Napoleon  invading in Prussia,Holland,and other place threaten the Monarchal systems of Europe.The modern democracy was refined during different periods of time


 
Originally posted by Parnell Parnell wrote:

the Second World War are all of superior importance to the development of the western world and of the human mind in general.



What do you mean?That the Colonial European powers dragging other nations into war is of importance.

Originally posted by pinguin pinguin wrote:


Simple, by the number of inventions, and the impact of them in the development of science and technology.
 
Alright,we know about the Meso American and Andean inventions were good but how did the rest of the world incorporate them into their societies, They were great but you have to state the impact.

Originally posted by pinguin pinguin wrote:


hat's simply the truth. In inventions alone Subsaharan Africa can compare with Australia and New Guinea, but hardly with the Pacific Cultures, Southeast Asia or the Americas, and of course it can't compare at all with China, India, the Muslim world or Europe.



What exactly are you taking about  do you know that the 1000s of kingdoms spread throught the IndoChina,Indonesia,Malaysia and the rest of Polynesia came from Sino-Asian and  Indian cultures.
Originally posted by Dolphin Dolphin wrote:


 If all we have to offer each other is inventions, then by God, you'd be right, Sub Saharan Africa has nothing to offer any of us.
 

Heres a few enginners from africa you might not know about

Haile Shawul and Kitaw Ejigu







Edited by AksumVanguard - 27-May-2009 at 21:31
Back to Top
Dolphin View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar
Níl a fhios agam cad ata ag tharlu

Joined: 06-Feb-2007
Location: Ireland
Status: Offline
Points: 1554
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Dolphin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27-May-2009 at 11:42
You just took me out of context Aksumvanguard! It was meant ironically. I agree with what you are saying in general though.
Am not I Dametas? Why, am not I Dametas?
Back to Top
AksumVanguard View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai
Avatar

Joined: 01-Feb-2009
Status: Offline
Points: 125
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote AksumVanguard Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27-May-2009 at 14:34
Originally posted by Dolphin Dolphin wrote:

You just took me out of context Aksumvanguard! It was meant ironically. I agree with what you are saying in general though.

LOL

I know no offense taken,I'm just trying to make my point clear
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.10
Copyright ©2001-2017 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.047 seconds.