Do you ever wonder if the Roman Empire had never fallen how great the world would be right now?....

I was quoting someone when I said "What good came out of the middle ages. NOTHING!"
As for gunpowder well the chineses had that much earlier than the dark ages, and the scientific revolution well that started in 1543 and the dark ages were a period between AD 500 to AD 800

The Romans were by far one of the most advanced and revered civilizations that ever existed. You can't judge them by their superficial flaws. They were masters of engineering, politics, warcraft, and diplomacy. It was just their "golden moment" in history. The Egyptians, the Macedonians, Sumerians, Babylonians, Mongols, Ottomans, to name a few, all had their 'shining time'. Later in history, it was the English, French, Spanish, Dutch and Portugese. And now, it is America's time. I'm sure someday in the future, it'll be someone else.

Wow...this is shocking.

Simply shocking.

let's lesson you up, children.

1. Rome was not a technologically advanced place. For an empire that lasted just over a millenia, there were remarkably few innovations. And, as a student of history, I mean REMARKABLY. Sure, they had some engineering feats, but that's about it.

2. Rome fell because it stagnated. The social order was as such: Rich, extraordianrily rich, and people starving in the streets. the plebes ahd no power, and due to above mentioned lack of innovation, the goths (visi and othi) ran the empire under. It fell, and it feel hard. Rome was sacked twice.

3. The middles ages was a fairly indifferent time, really. The term "middle ages" refers to the time between teh Dark Ages and the Renaissance.

4. "The glory that was Rome" is a lie. There was slavery and poverty is spades, and countless major wars fought. It was only a pleasant place to be if you were rich, and even then there was even odds you wouldn't die a natural death.

I'll post more as I see fit, but please get a handle on what you're talking about before you shoot your mouth off.

DE

Maybe the question should be reverted to " China " 200 years ago.

Deep

Originally posted by DeusEx
Wow...this is shocking.

Simply shocking.

let's lesson you up, children.

1. Rome was not a technologically advanced place. For an empire that lasted just over a millenia, there were remarkably few innovations. And, as a student of history, I mean REMARKABLY. Sure, they had some engineering feats, but that's about it.

--No? compared to who else?

2. Rome fell because it stagnated. The social order was as such: Rich, extraordianrily rich, and people starving in the streets. the plebes ahd no power, and due to above mentioned lack of innovation, the goths (visi and othi) ran the empire under. It fell, and it feel hard. Rome was sacked twice.

--Generally true, but when most empires fall once then are down and out and that did not happen with Rome.

3. The middles ages was a fairly indifferent time, really. The term "middle ages" refers to the time between teh Dark Ages and the Renaissance.

--They call it the dark ages primarily because not a lot is known about conditions of that time and NOT because everything was so bad.

4. "The glory that was Rome" is a lie. There was slavery and poverty is spades, and countless major wars fought. It was only a pleasant place to be if you were rich, and even then there was even odds you wouldn't die a natural death.

--Rome was a glory and it was not perfect but that did not stop it from becoming a Mecca for most of the known world. Roman citizenship was one of the most valuable things a person could 'own.'

I'll post more as I see fit, but please get a handle on what you're talking about before you shoot your mouth off.

--Be my guest but I think your history lessons have been insufficient.

DE

Well, my enjoyment of spas and the steam room would be the same but I would probably have sensible underfloor heating.

MA,

I see you as a collector of togas? right?

Romans hardly invented anything they just had a knack for improving on others inventions, Gods, culture, etc.

A centeral government tends to cause things to stagnate, Inovation thrives in chaos

The romans invented a lot of things. Again I do not understand your assertion otherwise. Who did more? the chinese? Furthermore, while their technology was not always understood to us today, it was accessible with effort. For example the Coliseum in Rome contained much advanced technology for its time which has in recent years been plausibly understood (quite unlike Egypt though by comparison).


here are links on Roman inventions, many of which I was not aware of either: for example the abacus is strongly believed to be a Roman invention.

www.cyesis.org...
www58.gu.edu.au:4500...
cooltech.iafrica.com...


I'm sure others can add to this list and I didn't even touch the arts, warfare, architecture etc.

he romans invented a lot of things. Again I do not understand your assertion otherwise.

Even your links admit that the romans MAINLY improved on others tech.

The baths were Minoan for example. ALMOST everything they "invented" came from somewhere else what the romans had was an ability to take someones Idea and improve it beyond the originals wildest dreams. The Japanese were kinda like that for a long time, they would take an american (for example) invention and make it smaller faster and cheaper.

I am not saying they, Romans or Japanese, did not invent anything just that there strong point lay in improving not inventing

Okay so how many new inventions in the last 50 years man? Exclude that which is rumoured to be alien tech btw. See not much and we are in an age of technology.

Exclude that which is rumoured to be alien tech btw.

That would be everything from the wheel to computer chips, rumored is a big word.

And most of todays tech is just an improvement on exsisting things too.

Very little is new, mostly in medicane, science and the like, you know alien tech

Yeah I concur with that.

It's called the "Catholic Church". Constantine "saved" the empire by corrupting the teachings of Jesus, and adding pagan elements to the budding Christianity.

In the early years of the Holy Roman Empire it was policy to incorporate local philosophy to ensure that the "locals" accept the church. Christmas, itself, was an extention of the Roman,pagan, festival of Saturnalalia, which is actually the new year.

Im suprised no one know that rome didnt fall by the barbarians it just changed location. It was called Bizyatium. THE BIZENTINE EMPIRE. After Constancetanopol( bad spelling) Was invaded by the turks they sized control. Rome didnt fall it collapsed on its self. There was to much greed. The cesars like Nero Burned Rome because he was bored and wanted to get rid of the Christains. The guy was having a party and playing his harp watching Rome burn. As far as inventions the best thing I think they did was architecture the aquaducts. And the Roman road which these roads are still used today. As far as what would happen if it didnt collapse well the Renisance would have come sooner and we probably be more advanced. But its a fact that from wars come the greatest inventions and applications.

Originally posted by THENEO

Originally posted by DeusEx
Wow...this is shocking.

Simply shocking.

let's lesson you up, children.

1. Rome was not a technologically advanced place. For an empire that lasted just over a millenia, there were remarkably few innovations. And, as a student of history, I mean REMARKABLY. Sure, they had some engineering feats, but that's about it.

--No? compared to who else?

+ The greeks, whose empire they prettymuch inherited. Renaissance Italy, for example, the sumerians, babylonians, and egyptians.

2. Rome fell because it stagnated. The social order was as such: Rich, extraordianrily rich, and people starving in the streets. the plebes ahd no power, and due to above mentioned lack of innovation, the goths (visi and othi) ran the empire under. It fell, and it feel hard. Rome was sacked twice.

--Generally true, but when most empires fall once then are down and out and that did not happen with Rome.

+It never fell a first time. it was still a city state (sacked in 533 BC by Brunnus and the Celts), then repeatedly sacked as the empire went down in flames.

3. The middles ages was a fairly indifferent time, really. The term "middle ages" refers to the time between teh Dark Ages and the Renaissance.

--They call it the dark ages primarily because not a lot is known about conditions of that time and NOT because everything was so bad.

+No, they call it the dark ages because the literacy rate plummeted, poverty soared and people lived in squalid conditions because they were too busy knocking each other over the head to do much else. The reason why there were virtually no records between 400-800 AD is because nearly no one was literate.

4. "The glory that was Rome" is a lie. There was slavery and poverty is spades, and countless major wars fought. It was only a pleasant place to be if you were rich, and even then there was even odds you wouldn't die a natural death.

--Rome was a glory and it was not perfect but that did not stop it from becoming a Mecca for most of the known world. Roman citizenship was one of the most valuable things a person could 'own.'

+Yes, given between 30-70% of the given population of Rome was enslaved, and citizenship was not exactly doled out regularly to the colonies. Having citizenship offered you SOME protection, but not much. it was more a badge of honor.

I'll post more as I see fit, but please get a handle on what you're talking about before you shoot your mouth off.

--Be my guest but I think your history lessons have been insufficient.

+I pack as much as I can between classes, friend.

DE

Byzantium, Byzantine Empire

"what if" ? who cares about "what if"

what if the Nazis won the war? theoretical fantasy's, lighten up people