Which of these Empires do you have a higher opinion of: British, or Roman?

[TheReckoning]

I would personally say the British Empire as the Roman Empire contributed very little to the world beyond spreading Christianity.

[𝕭𝖆𝖕𝖙𝖎𝖘𝖙𝖆 𝕸𝖎𝖓𝖔𝖑𝖆]

We already know that your historical takes aren't the best but the idea that Christianity is the only thing which was spread by the Roman Empire is just utterly laughable.

[TheReckoning]

We already know that your historical takes aren't the best but the idea that Christianity is the only thing which was spread by the Roman Empire is just utterly laughable.

A lot of accomplishments that people prescribe to the Roman Empire were actually completed by the Roman Republic.

[Donerail]

I would personally say the British Empire as the Roman Empire contributed very little to the world beyond spreading Christianity.

The Romans are responsible, historically speaking, for the development of lasagna, chicken parm, Buffalo wings, fettuccine alfredo, calzones, Italian beef, and Chicago-style pizza. That is contributing very much to the world. The British, on the other hand, are responsible for "haggis" and "jellied eels" and something called "f****ts." Choice here is obvious imo

EDIT: tikka masala is good, rare W for the British Empire there

[KaiserDave]

I would personally say the British Empire as the Roman Empire contributed very little to the world beyond spreading Christianity.

......

[parochial boy]

We already know that your historical takes aren't the best but the idea that Christianity is the only thing which was spread by the Roman Empire is just utterly laughable.

Look, there is absolutely no connection between the Roman Empire and the Latin alphabet, or the Romance language, or the word « empire ». None whatsoever.

[Alben Barkley]

I would personally say the British Empire as the Roman Empire contributed very little to the world beyond spreading Christianity.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

What a bizarre and pointless question.

[certified hummus supporter 🇵🇸🤝🇺🇸🤝🇺🇦]

Why is this even a question?

[TheReckoning]

What a bizarre and pointless question.

Yeah, because the question about Glenn Greenwald vs. Arthur Chu was certainly important and enlightening…

[𝕭𝖆𝖕𝖙𝖎𝖘𝖙𝖆 𝕸𝖎𝖓𝖔𝖑𝖆]

We already know that your historical takes aren't the best but the idea that Christianity is the only thing which was spread by the Roman Empire is just utterly laughable.

A lot of accomplishments that people prescribe to the Roman Empire were actually completed by the Roman Republic.

1. The word is "ascribe", not "prescribe". I doubt anyone has any prescriptions to make for the Roman Empire since it's been dead for centuries now.

2. Wow, I can't possibly imagine that the following half millennium and more of history could have contributed to the development and spread of accomplishments and inventions from the Republican era.

3. Not to mention all sorts of things which were unambiguously started by the Roman Empire, an eminent example of which being... London, the very capital of the British Empire.

[𝕭𝖆𝖕𝖙𝖎𝖘𝖙𝖆 𝕸𝖎𝖓𝖔𝖑𝖆]

We already know that your historical takes aren't the best but the idea that Christianity is the only thing which was spread by the Roman Empire is just utterly laughable.

Look, there is absolutely no connection between the Roman Empire and the Latin alphabet, or the Romance language, or the word « empire ». None whatsoever.

我不明白 - 我说中文

[TheReckoning]

We already know that your historical takes aren't the best but the idea that Christianity is the only thing which was spread by the Roman Empire is just utterly laughable.

A lot of accomplishments that people prescribe to the Roman Empire were actually completed by the Roman Republic.

1. The word is "ascribe", not "prescribe". I doubt anyone has any prescriptions to make for the Roman Empire since it's been dead for centuries now.

2. Wow, I can't possibly imagine that the following half millennium and more of history could have contributed to the development and spread of accomplishments and inventions from the Republican era.

3. Not to mention all sorts of things which were unambiguously started by the Roman Empire, an eminent example of which being... London, the very capital of the British Empire.

Most of the territories that the Roman Empire conquered on top of the Roman Republic were in the Middle East and North Africa which don’t even have much Roman influence today. Even Britannia has more Celtic/Germanic influence than Roman influence. The Roman Republic, NOT the Roman Empire, had a much more lasting influence on the world in the Long run.

[TheReckoning]

We already know that your historical takes aren't the best but the idea that Christianity is the only thing which was spread by the Roman Empire is just utterly laughable.

Look, there is absolutely no connection between the Roman Empire and the Latin alphabet, or the Romance language, or the word « empire ». None whatsoever.

Most of the spread of the Roman Language and Alphabet that is used today is from the Roman Republic, not the Roman Empire.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

We already know that your historical takes aren't the best but the idea that Christianity is the only thing which was spread by the Roman Empire is just utterly laughable.

A lot of accomplishments that people prescribe to the Roman Empire were actually completed by the Roman Republic.

1. The word is "ascribe", not "prescribe". I doubt anyone has any prescriptions to make for the Roman Empire since it's been dead for centuries now.

2. Wow, I can't possibly imagine that the following half millennium and more of history could have contributed to the development and spread of accomplishments and inventions from the Republican era.

3. Not to mention all sorts of things which were unambiguously started by the Roman Empire, an eminent example of which being... London, the very capital of the British Empire.

Most of the territories that the Roman Empire conquered on top of the Roman Republic were in the Middle East and North Africa which don’t even have much Roman influence today.

What? The vast majority of asian territories were won by Pompey the Great, Egypt (which had long been drawn into Rome's influence due to dynastic incompetence) was conquered in the final war of the Republic and Carthage was conquered in the damn Punic Wars. Sure there were bits and pieces where the Empire consolidated its rule, normally through converting client kingdoms into actual territory (infamous story where Caligula killed the client king of Morocco for banter, leading to its eventual incorporation by Claudius) and the eternal feuds with Persia over Armenia, but the Republic settled that dispute. The major annexations of the empire was modern Switzerland, Germania, Dacia and Britannia.

[𝕭𝖆𝖕𝖙𝖎𝖘𝖙𝖆 𝕸𝖎𝖓𝖔𝖑𝖆]

We already know that your historical takes aren't the best but the idea that Christianity is the only thing which was spread by the Roman Empire is just utterly laughable.

Look, there is absolutely no connection between the Roman Empire and the Latin alphabet, or the Romance language, or the word « empire ». None whatsoever.

Most of the spread of the Roman Language and Alphabet that is used today is from the Roman Republic, not the Roman Empire.

Well if you want to put it that way then most of the spread of the Latin alphabet (and of Romance languages) has to do neither with the Roman Republic nor with the Empire but is the product of Modern European colonialism.

[Alben Barkley]

Why is this even a question?

There's another great clip from this movie relevant to... other threads that have gained traction lately. I almost hesitate to post it, but I will just as a reminder that some of these new ideas about gender are indeed VERY new to most people. And if you wanna sell them on these ideas which are hard to grasp for generations of people who were raised to believe strongly that sex=gender, you probably are gonna have to do a little better than trying to brow-beat everyone who raises any questions about these concepts and contradictions at all into submission. (Very stark contrast to the much smarter approach activists took to get people sympathetic to the idea of gay marriage.) Even a clearly left-leaning group like Monty Python could make a clip like this back in the day which would get them canceled on arrival today. Really telling how much and how rapidly things have changed:

[If my soul was made of stone]

Why is this even a question?

There's another great clip from this movie relevant to... other threads that have gained traction lately. I almost hesitate to post it, but I will just as a reminder that some of these new ideas about gender are indeed VERY new to most people. And if you wanna sell them on these ideas which are hard to grasp for generations of people who were raised to believe strongly that sex=gender, you probably are gonna have to do a little better than trying to brow-beat everyone who raises any questions about these concepts and contradictions at all into submission. (Very stark contrast to the much smarter approach activists took to get people sympathetic to the idea of gay marriage.) Even a clearly left-leaning group like Monty Python could make a clip like this back in the day which would get them canceled on arrival today. Really telling how much and how rapidly things have changed:

can you not

[parochial boy]

We already know that your historical takes aren't the best but the idea that Christianity is the only thing which was spread by the Roman Empire is just utterly laughable.

Look, there is absolutely no connection between the Roman Empire and the Latin alphabet, or the Romance language, or the word « empire ». None whatsoever.

Most of the spread of the Roman Language and Alphabet that is used today is from the Roman Republic, not the Roman Empire.

As much as it being weirdly pedantic and pointless to try and treat the two as two totally discrete political entities (France didn't colonise Quebec you see, because it was the Kingdom of France, a totally different thing), at the time the Republic became the Empire, Gaul was very definitely not predominantly Latin speaking.

In fact even beyond that, if you just get rid of Rome in 47 BC you never have the development of vulgar latin which goes on to be the language that most contemporary romance languages derive from. You know, because otherwise Latin was going to that one unique language that doesn't change at all in 500 years. Likewise, if Gaul never starts speaking Latin, the French language never develops and consequentially modern English is a completely unrecognisable and incomprehensible language compared to what it is today.

So, uh, yes. Even with your logic, no Roman empire = no modern romance languages and no modern English either and god knows how much that changes the modern world.

[TheReckoning]

We already know that your historical takes aren't the best but the idea that Christianity is the only thing which was spread by the Roman Empire is just utterly laughable.

Look, there is absolutely no connection between the Roman Empire and the Latin alphabet, or the Romance language, or the word « empire ». None whatsoever.

Most of the spread of the Roman Language and Alphabet that is used today is from the Roman Republic, not the Roman Empire.

Well if you want to put it that way then most of the spread of the Latin alphabet (and of Romance languages) has to do neither with the Roman Republic nor with the Empire but is the product of Modern European colonialism.

Correct. Which is why the British Empire is superior.

[TheReckoning]

We already know that your historical takes aren't the best but the idea that Christianity is the only thing which was spread by the Roman Empire is just utterly laughable.

Look, there is absolutely no connection between the Roman Empire and the Latin alphabet, or the Romance language, or the word « empire ». None whatsoever.

Most of the spread of the Roman Language and Alphabet that is used today is from the Roman Republic, not the Roman Empire.

As much as it being weirdly pedantic and pointless to try and treat the two as two totally discrete political entities (France didn't colonise Quebec you see, because it was the Kingdom of France, a totally different thing), at the time the Republic became the Empire, Gaul was very definitely not predominantly Latin speaking.

In fact even beyond that, if you just get rid of Rome in 47 BC you never have the development of vulgar latin which goes on to be the language that most contemporary romance languages derive from. You know, because otherwise Latin was going to that one unique language that doesn't change at all in 500 years. Likewise, if Gaul never starts speaking Latin, the French language never develops and consequentially modern English is a completely unrecognisable and incomprehensible language compared to what it is today.

So, uh, yes. Even with your logic, no Roman empire = no modern romance languages and no modern English either and god knows how much that changes the modern world.

There’s a difference between “contributing” and “influencing.” Nazi Germany influenced the modern world greatly- it’s pretty difficult to imagine what the world would be like has it never existed, and it hasn’t even been 80 years since their fall. But Nazi Germany didn’t “contribute” anything to the modern world. The Roman Empire existed for 500 years and controlled a massive amount of territory, and many many shoot-offs, therefore was guaranteed to have a great deal of influence.

Anyways, conflating the Roman Empire and the Roman Republic is like conflating Turkey with the Ottoman Empire. It’s definitely not “pointless” to treat those as separate entities.

Modern-day England is more influenced by German and Celtic people than Romance ones, lol. 

[LAKISYLVANIA]

The British perhaps, but I do think Roman Empire is a bit overrated in comparison with other "empires" throughout history.

But comparing the two makes no sense, British Empire existed mainly 2-3 centuries ago (at it's height). Roman Empire was at it's height like 19-20 centuries ago. The world was different.

[Conservatopia]

When people talk about the Roman Empire they are talking about the Roman Republic era too generally. In fact the constitution of the late Roman Republic wasn't all that different in effect from the early Principate. Therefore all achievements and setbacks under the Roman Republic should be included with the Roman Empire when dealing with this question.

Thus, with a heavy heart, I pronounce the Roman Empire the greater of the two.

[dead0man]

While I'm not going to say the Roman Empire did nothing but spread Jesus, isn't it true that nearly everything good they did spread they just stole from conquered people or were things their people already had as part of their culture from before Romulus and Remus ever started beating up cattle rustlers?

[parochial boy]

There’s a difference between “contributing” and “influencing.” Nazi Germany influenced the modern world greatly- it’s pretty difficult to imagine what the world would be like has it never existed, and it hasn’t even been 80 years since their fall. But Nazi Germany didn’t “contribute” anything to the modern world. The Roman Empire existed for 500 years and controlled a massive amount of territory, and many many shoot-offs, therefore was guaranteed to have a great deal of influence.

Anyways, conflating the Roman Empire and the Roman Republic is like conflating Turkey with the Ottoman Empire. It’s definitely not “pointless” to treat those as separate entities.

Modern-day England is more influenced by German and Celtic people than Romance ones, lol. 

Adding to Conservatopia's point. The transition of the Ottoman empire to Turkey involved a massive territorial restructuring; waves of genocide and ethnic cleansing; a complete reorientation of the institusions of state; the place of religion and of national identity. That's quite... different.

On the other point, about half of the modern English lexicon consists of originally Latin, principally French ones. Just to cite a few example in your recent posts: "modern", "influence", "people", "romance", "contribution", "election" and "Britain" all come from Latin originally. All bar the last coming through the medium of medieval French. It's why English is so distinct from other germanic language.

England was also ruled by a French speaking (ie romance) ruling class for centuries - which can still be seen in the names of many of it's modern institutions. You know "parliament", "prime minister", the "city" of London. That's quite a lot of influence; or "contribution" to what makes modern Britain Britain.

It's a large part of why English is so distinct from every other germanic language