Empire Or Republic?

[Ursus]

I think our culure is more a combination of Germanic and Latin influences with very little Celtic.

 

 

Depends on whom one reads. Some of the Celtophile scholars I have read try to suggest the Celts invented everything since sliced bread. Of course, I think they have a biased agenda to say so. But I was flabbergasted to learn the Celts had (wooden) roads and such before the Roman arrived.

 

In the sum of things I pretty much agree with you that the Greco-Roman influence shaped the continent, the Germanic legacy dominated the anglosphere, and the Celtic legacy outside Ireland is largely overshadowed by the two.

[Lost_Warrior]

It depends on who you ask, and it depends on where you are at. The american govt. was shaped by Rome, as was much of its architecture. But alot of the people...are still Celtic (thats me!! lol) and German (also me!!! i'm part english and native american too) and we still act accordingly lol. You see me eating beef & potatoes or strudel (got some strudel right here as a matter of fact) and not usually...whatever it was they ate in Rome I don't know. My "religion" if you can call it that, is Celtic, etc. etc. and I know there are lots more of me out there. So...are we talking about the "well known" and "out in full view" culture? or are we talking about the people?

[Ursus]

I dont know what you're asking, actually. I think the evolving theme in the thread is which culture or cultures had more of an impact on the development of Western history.

 

On that point, if you look at the legal and governmental systems of the West, most either come from Roman Jurisprudence, or Anglo-Saxon common law. Most of the languages in Western Europe and its former colonies are also either Germanic, Romance or some combination of the two.

 

The Celts used to hold large stretches of Continental Europe, but they were mostly absorbed by Roman and/or Germanic overlords. I'm sure while some traditions and sense of identity survive, they didn't shape the West in the sense that the Romans and the Germanics did.

 

Things might have been very different if the ancient Celtic peoples had united and blocked the rising Roman threat. Rome might have been confined to central and south Italy, or destroyed altogether, and Western Civilization would be Celtic and Germanic. But the Celts couldn't unite, and the rest is history. *shrugs*

 

As an aside, I'm mostly Germanic and Celtic

with the standard Native American thrown in the usual mix of a North American mutt. I've always preferred Mediterranean civilizations though. Although I've considered the whole Celto-Roman thing.

[Ursus]

Having just reread Goldsworthy, it seems there was one critical failure in the empire.

 

Goldsworthy mentions that the quest for honor and glory is what motivated the Republican generals to all their great exploits. In the Empire that scheme of advancement was largely nullified, as the Princeps did not allow his subordinates to win sufficient glory to become rivals. It's one of the reasons why the empire stopped expanding.

 

Now that I think about it, this is probably one of the critical faults of the empire. The quest for honor and glory which had produced such great men from the republic was stifled by the nature of the principate. If the empire had found constructive ways to encourage the ancient honor scheme .... Hmmm, I need to ponder this.

[P.Clodius]

Which Goldsworthy did you read?

[Iulius]

republic was best when the army was not profesional but the empire kick ass b 4 all the civil wars every where. Emperor was a very popular place, no?

[Favonius Cornelius]

Interesting observation Ursus with the honor and glory, I had not thought of that before but it rings with truth.

 

Of course, that same drive caused great instability, and stability is what the empire brought. I wonder if the ancients could somehow combine both.