Was Rome the perfect civilization?

Parthian , chinese and Gupta civilisation was superior to roman IMO.
Even celtic and germanic society of the time was better since there was a meritocracy in the ruling class.

But Roman slavery was literally the best form of slavery. You get to be a citizen after you've done your time.

GLORY TO ROME

>Even celtic and germanic society of the time was better since there was a meritocracy in the ruling class.
By "meritocracy" you of course mean who's the better warrior 1on1, right?

I think the most beautiful in Rome's law as republice was no-parthy system basied on people-politicis who have themselves fortune (for example from farm activiti) and didn't have to earn money from public cash.

So they used the state to annex new lands, so they could confiscate the parts they wanted, after which it would be protected by the state at the states expense, so they could then make money from the land, without relying on the state to provide for them.

Rome and also Persia are magnificent civilizations. Born from embers they would turn into fires that illuminated the entire world and whose ashes fostered great things.

Didn't a big portion of the population starve and were very poor?

No scientific progress whatsoever, almost no worthwhile art, complete political chaos and civil war all the time, no sense of long term planning...

It was pretty shit, no wonder it died so quickly.

Define "perfect"

>0/10 bait

Considering the technology available at the time, i am firmly convinced that Rome was divinely glorious and maybe the masterwork of mankinds achievement. If a civilization like Rome appeared today, with modern technology, it would at the very least unite the entire world, and probably populate other planets as well, at least Mars.

This.

What is a plutocracy?

>No scientific progress
>No worthwhile art
>No sense of long-term planning
Shit bait famalamadingdong.

strawpoll.me/10319555
Between Rome and Greece then, which is objectively more important and interesting?

>tfw true heir of rome
feels great tbqh desupai

yes

If you wear a fedora, yea

Made me kek

Perfect?

no

The greateat to ever exist?

Most definitely

I don't have an answer for your question, but I feel like, if Romans had a bit more tolerance for the abstract, and had adopted Sanksrit numerals, they would have been industrious to the point of being unstoppable, and, if not for the fall of the empire, and the plagues thereafter, we might have gotten an industrial age around 700 CE

>it died so quickly.
But Rome has existed for over 1500 years.

>eastern
>roman
>empire

Rome was born a city.
It was not founded on a set of ideals or higher meaning.
Rome operated mechanically, aristocratically.
It worked very well, its gears were beautiful human engineering, true masterpieces, however its existence was meaningless and immoral.
I say America is the perfect civilization.

This tbhfam

its still a pile of poop but the best we've got so far

>maybe of I keep repeating my epic maymays then it might become true!

Isn't Eastern Rome more of a Byzantine

This is also a dumb question, without greece rome wouldn't have had existed as we had seen it (or at all maybe?) and without rome the legacy of the greeks would have been confined to the diadochi

Rome

This.

Rome is overrated as fuck. It just got to expand in Europe which was filled with less advanced and severely disunited tribes of Celts and Germanics. And even then they still got rekt when Celts or Germanics united. Of course to those Celts and Germanics "Roman" civilisation seemed like a huge progress, but it was all just a shitty knockoff of Greek stuff.

In fact Rome's only achievement of note ever is defeating Carthage.

...

Only after Constantine
Yes.

Of course not.

However polytheist Rome was closer to perfect than christian 'Rome'.

lolno

Kek

Roman culture wasnt just greek stuff . It had Etruscan stuff aswell. Roman culture was and will be the culture of europe. Rone is "overrated" because in the time when europe was made up of germanic and celt tribes they were the ones with a big empire with central power and armies

Amerifag detected

Get out, Franciscus.

Roman culture was Greek, but our culture isn't Roman.

Funny since Rome is basically America. A non-culture that just came to dominate the civilisation it was a part of through might. I'm sure in 1000 years people like you will cream their pants over what an amazing civilisation America was.

Republic, yeah.
Empire, no.

>It was not founded on a set of ideals or higher meaning.
>Rome operated mechanically
>its existence was meaningless and immoral.

read evola pham

REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
ROME WAS IMMORAL SURELY AMERICA ISN'T
REEEEEEEE
ROME'S EXISTENCE WAS MEANINGLESS REEEEEEEEEE

Yes
Republican Rome

Rome lasted from -753 to 1453
That's a long ass time for an empire to last

read it for me

I always thought the 4 real successors to rome were the Holy Roman Empire, Byzantine Empire, Ottoman Empire and Roman Catholic Church.

>ottomans

fucking cuck
>muslim shitskins
>rome

Defeating Carthage.
Not like expanding on several fronts even when struck by uncountable civil wars and uprisings is noticeable nooo....

Implying Rome's conquests were not absolutely unparalleled by any other nation aside for the Persians in Antiquity..
Implying Rome only conquered Celts and Germans when that was only about 1/3 of it's land
Implying Rome isn't by far the greatest Empire of all times comparing it to the technology of the time, the social development of the time, the military development and organization of the time the economical foundation of Anciant Europe.
What was the best Empire then?
Macedonian empire? didn't even last 30 years.
Persian empire? All they needed was defeating the Medians(who were very weak and severely unorganized).
Mongol Empire? Lasted less than a century
Ottoman Empire? Rising on the ashes of the Byzantine Empire which was destroyed by a millennium of almost no peace.
The British Empire? Killing spear-armed niggers with firearms was a very hard task wasn't it.
They were even defeated by the French....
The Spanish Empire? 80% of it's land was almost completely unhabitated or severely underdeveloped.
The Russian Empire? Same as the Spanish except fot Peter the Great and Catherine, wich were pretty based...
The Chinese Empire? Which at the same time of the Romans had an economic production comparably pathetic and didn't even go close to the Civil and Military development of Rome?
I don't even think the Arab caliphate is comparable, because it's duration was too short as a unitary nation...
All the rest is pathetic, all the "Holy Roman Empires" that Weren't Holy nor Roman and barely Empires...
French Empire was too short duration and German reich too.... Portuguese Empire was a joke Songhai was pathetic, Inca was pathetic.

Funny how the only other Empire that has shown some relevant resiliency through History was the Byzantine Empire, and it was a remnant of the Roman...

youtube.com/watch?v=nSmEMqC6kUs

Constantinople was the new Rome, when they took it, the Ottomans made it better.

No, Republic is good but it's an early form of government. Democracy is best for scientific output and fundamentalism is best if you want to go to war.

>they made it better

Hello Britain, hows your cultural enriching going?

For Roman citizens, life was usually really good for the time. You have to specify which Rome you're talking about. I'm assuming you are talking about the Roman Empire since the image has a red backdrop instead of a purple one.

you also had to do unpaid, involuntary work for your enemies if you were taken as a war slave

Roman conquests were colonial tier. There's absolutely nothing impressive about conquering disorganised primitive tribes by setting them against each other.

There are plenty of countries which despite being much smaller have achieved far more than Rome in arts, sciences, political stability, military accomplishments, and everything really, like France, Britain, Germany, Italy, possibly even America.

Yes, so much that everyone ever since has tried to mimic them and their ideas influence us to this very day.

Only if they let you collect tips, which might be easy for a slave working as a musician in a busy patrician household where they throw parties but not so easy for a slave working the salt mines.

t. Washington

>pacifying iberians was easy
>pacifying jews was easy
>pacifying fucking germans was easy

you're a fool

>slave-based agrarian empire
>good

There's a reason why the Western empire fell, namely that when the barbarians arrived the slaves usually joined them in ransacking anyone above them.

So perfect that it collapsed from reasons that are so subtle that they are complete mystery for any person today.

got too strong, so its muscles started to atrophy while other countrys still had to fight maintaining and building muscle while rome went the oposite way untill the scale tiped

lel they didn't pacify any of those, Jews revolted every few years and the Germans ended up destroying Rome.

>Morality didn't exist before christianity/the enlightenment

wew lad

Rome was way too nice to Judea and Barbarians, I'll give you that

ebin

Specify the time period.
Also there's no such thing as a perfect civilization.

roman slavery wasn't cattle slavery. accountants, teachers, and physicians (!) were slaves.

no the entire society was depended on the loot of war and on the influx on slaves from other partes of the world

>the true roman successors will always be the mongols

and this is a problem why?

>there are people who prefer the greeks to the romans

fucking why?

>you'll never serve in the legions for 20 years building forts and roads and plundering germanic villages with your cohort bros before retiring to a nice quiet plot of land to farm and raise a qt family of virtuous roman plebs

honestly seems like one of the best accessable life paths you could hope for in the ancient world. Shit, sounds a whole lot better than the deadening wage slavery and consumerism we have now

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Library_of_Alexandria

No

>muh book burnings
The Romans hardly touched the place. If anything most of the knowledge was lost to time and the Arabs.

oh look it's the Roman Internet Defense Force. Don't mind me.

Brits had guns at Rorkes drift. The Romans didn't have guns at Alesia, Walting street or any of the other wars they fought.

>civilization
>perfect

It's facts. The Romans weren't the only people who damaged the library of Alexandria. Besides there'd be nothing but some scrolls with alligator drawing and maybe some half true calculations. It was bound to happen so it doesn't matter since it was worthless to begin with.

because it's definitely up to some autist on Veeky Forums to determine the value of the largest library before modern times :^)

This may be news to you, but Rome still exists to this day, and is a nuclear power.

Absolutely nothing of value was lost.

reported

For what? I simply said that it is pointless to discredit the Romans for the alleged destruction of the library of Alexandria. The Arabs would've also left their mark on it which begs the question how much would the Romans have had to destroy for there to be enough so that the Arabs did the same centuries later. The burning of the library is just another footnote in history.

No, but it was the best one we've had so far.

>America
>Not a creation of what were almost entirely Virginians and New Yorkers.
>Not literally based on the ideals and higher meanings that Rome itself created during the Republic.
>Not an aristocracy when it was literally founded by and for aristocrats.
>Nations ever being moral or having inherit meaning.

not even good enough to use as bait.

> even our law system is based on Roman law.
Nah, our law system is a mix of public (roman) and private law

If you like disease, poverty and corruption.