Greeks are better than romans

First a few links to the rules. http://www.nflonline.org... http://www.neisd.net.... ( page 9) Let's begin. "Great things about both empires, but for an opening statement, I would say that Rome admired all things Greek. They took their Gods, and renamed them. A Roman General, when speaking about why they had victories over other cultures, his answer to each was "but we practiced more", naming each cultures strong points they had to overcome, e.g. when he came to certain uncivilized cultures, and Great Britain he said they were more ferocious, but we practiced more. When he came to the Greeks he said they were smarter than us, but we practiced more. Sorry, you'll have to research the Roman General who said this, I don't remember his name, but it is a famous quote. The Roman culture, considered the Greek culture the most advanced in the world,,,,,,,,,,excepting their own. Democracy, though often given credit to "the cradle of civilization" Rome, was borrowed from Greece. " https://answers.yahoo.com... Some people like you and me say: "The Greeks invented science and philosophy, so they get my vote. The greatest Roman scientist/philosopher was Lucretius, and there is hardly anything which is not derived from Greek sources in his doctrine. The Romans were engineers, architects, and administrators, not scientists and philosophers. They were practical men. They lacked the generalising genius of the Greek mind. They only surpassed the Greeks in law, administration and other things of only material or practical value." "The Greeks outlasted the Romans by a thousand years and also lead to the Soviet Union- the greatest country the world has ever known." http://www.politicsforum.org... "I think this one boils down to personal taste more than rationality. The Greeks were often just as ruthless and bloodthirsty as the Romans, but were less unified and more anarchic and so achieved less in the way of lasting political hegemony. Looking simply at the arts, the Greeks put the Romans w-a-a-a-y in the shade. Every halfway decent Roman artist or poet stole at least half their technique from the Greeks. At least." "And yes, Romans were not great engineers. The Etruscans and later the Greeks working for them were. More or less" The Ancient Greeks and Romans both began their histories as city-states. While the irregular coastline and the mountainous terrain of the Greek peninsula isolated the various Greek city-states from one another, the city of Rome was located in the geographical middle of a generally north-south plain bordered on the east with mountains and on the west by the sea. Therefore, Rome was exposed to the migrations and invasions of people from the Po River in the north and Sicily in the south." The two primary ethnic and cultural influences upon the Romans were determined to a degree by this geography. That is, the first influence was that of the Etruscans in the north, and the second major influence was that of the Greeks in the south. By the time the city-state of Rome had emerged as a distinct entity out of its Etruscan origins and was prepared to expand its own unique influence, Greek civilization had spread throughout the Mediterranean basin. However, the fierce exclusiveness of the Greek city-states from one another, stemming from their geographical isolation, had determined that Greek colonization of the Mediterranean would be an extension of isolated city-states. The Greek polis did not permit the building of a Greek empire, and the strict barriers to the extension of citizenship prevented any one city-state from becoming dominant. As we have seen from Greek history, the Athenians were on the way to creating an empire through their domination of the Delian League, but this trend was reversed in the Pelopponesian Wars. The Greek city-states had to be united by force, first through the invasion of the Macedonians, and then by the Romans. But the Greeks would, in a sense, have the last laugh. Their culture was more sophisticated, their learning and philosophy more advanced, and Roman culture would be overwhelmed as the Romans absorbed the cultural influences of the Hellenistic east. In the final outcome, as the Roman Empire declined in the west, Roman emperors transferred their capitol from Italy to Asia Minor. Long after the Roman empire was gone, the Byzantine Empire, an amalgam of Roman and Greek culture, centered in the city of Constantinople, would endure. The Greeks had conquered their conquerors. http://www2.sunysuffolk.edu... Plus read as many if these essays on why Greeks are better than Romans. http://www.studymode.com... Here is why America is closer to being Greek than roman. Why America is more like Athens than Rome I've been having an interesting email conversation with Elizabeth Bowen, who's been lurking on this site for some time, I suspect, without ever making a comment. I'm going to out her (with permission) because she had some interesting things to say about why people learn Roman history more than Greek, the core of which is: That prevalence -- at least, in the United States -- probably has a lot to do with the parallels between Rome and America. History teachers here (the ones who still bother to teach the classics) tend to drive home this point that the Romans were the Americans of antiquity. (Modest, I know.) So Rome is something people feel they can relate to, whereas Greece can seem a little more remote. Here are my reasons why America is closer to Athens than Rome. Feel free to tell me how totally wrong I am! (In fact, I'm sort of looking forward to it.) America is a very strong democracy. Athens was a very strong full democracy. Rome wasn't. (Yes, they had elections, which did have some effect. But the Senate was essentially an oligarchy, and come the Roman Empire, any democratic pretense was gone.) Any modern democracy has a lot to learn from how the course of the democracy ran in Athens. It's hard to say the same of Rome. Fun though it might be to study the power politics, the correspondence just isn't there. Pax Romana was implemented by conquering and subsuming anyone who caused trouble. Pax Americana (such as it is) is implemented through economic dominance and diplomatic alliances. This is much closer to how Athens dominated its world. America+NATO is structurally most similar to Athens+Delian League. The geographic influence of Rome was vast. So also for America. Score one for the Romans. In fact, this is the only close similarity between the two. But also the one everyone notices. The Athenians were hyper-enthusiastic about their system of government and their culture. So too Americans! The Athenians usually liked to install democracies in any city they conquered (with a few notable exceptions). American behaviour is virtually the same. The Romans were sort of meh on the whole thing and simply imposed their own rule on the countries they captured and never left. (Yes I realize there are some sensitivities with current issues, but if you think back over the last 100 years, particularly around WW2, it's clear US policy is Athens-like, not Roman.) Athens was a hugely innovative and artistic culture. So too America. Rome was outstanding at implementing stuff, but innovative is not an adjective most people would apply. America has the most powerful navy in the world. Athens had the most powerful navy in the world. Romans loathed getting wet. I therefore claim modern America has more lessons to learn from Athens than Rome. http://www.garycorby.com... So please side with me that Greeks are better than Romans. I am now open to any comments, questions, or concerns.