Hacker News Reader

Comment by tayo42 | Hacker News Reader

How exactly is the US a continuation of Rome?

Western Civilization saw its start in Rome, and continued through the rise and fall of the Roman Empire when it contracted. The core of Western Civilization reemerged in England in the 15th century and expanded again, with the core moving to France in the early 19th century, before moving again to Germany in the middle of the 20th century. Post-WWII the core moved once again, this time to the United States, and after the expansion of the US Empire, we now see Western Civilization faltering and contracting under unpopular wars driven by a long series of self-serving poloticians. Whether Western Civilization can reorganize and expand (with the core migrating once again) or wither and die under the expansion and invasion by other civilizations remains the great question of the present day.

Agree but “reemerge” implies it may have disappeared; of course it never truly died.

Taking a semi-opinionated swag, the core went from Rome to Constantinople, then Venice, then London.

That's fair, but I would argue that Constantinople and the Byzantine Empire was the genesis of the Eastern Orthodox Civilization, with the core now in St. Petersburg (or maybe Moscow.)

If you go that way, then there is definitely a civilizational split between Protestants and Catholics, as well as between Europe and America.

Looking from a Finnish perspective, Sweden and Estonia are culturally closest to us, but Russia is also pretty close. Britain and France already feel less familiar, not to speak of something like Italy or the US.

Other than the senate, eagle statues, architecture, philosophical/intellectual tradition?

Not as much of a parallel as people tend to think, but the Roman empire fell apart partly because it was based on the theory of constant outward expansion. If your model, say economic, is based on infinite expansion in a finite arena you'll have trouble.

Are you actually saying that a particular aspect of the Roman economy/society is applicable to something entirely different and completely irrelevant in the modern day?

The European colonies in eastern North America were started by the successor states of the Roman provinces of Gaul, Hispania, Batavia and Britannia. Two of these spoke Latin derived languages, and the other two spoke languages heavily indebted to Romance languages. (Much of English core vocabulary is either French or Latin in origin — 60% according to one estimate.)

Other Roman influences on the USA include Christianity and to a lesser extent Judaism (since the major US versions come out of post-Roman Judaism.)

The USA is the product of the British empire which consciously modelled itself on Rome. It was influenced by various European countries, including England and France, which mostly developed in the Roman Empire's former territories.

The European Renaissance and the Enlightenment both used Roman and Greek ideas as inspiration. You can see this in early US architecture, and the models for some institutions such as the Senate. Some of this was ironically as a revolt against English institutions (even though England and Wales were successors of a Roman province).

The early USA's language(s) and Judaeo-Christian heritage are partly products of the Roman Empire. (Spanish most definitely is, and French is. English is heavily influenced by French and Latin.)

> The USA is the product of the British empire which consciously modelled itself on Rome

By this logic, Turkey is a continuation of the Roman Empire too. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ottoman_claim_to_Roman_success...

At what point does something stop being a continuation of something else?

When it fundamentally changes? It's hard to imagine something else while living in this. The Chinese formula might be different enough since so few in the west can even superficially understand what they are doing. Over there wealth and power are trying to be two separate things.

Turkey is an inheritor of the Eastern Roman Empire tradition/influences. So is Russia. It depends on your historical influences and political role models.

There was a prophecy in the Koran that Islam would conquer the Romans and Muslims see the capture of Byzantium/Constantinople as its fulfilment.

Byzantium was certainly a continuation of Rome and its subjects called themselves Romans. It all depends on whether you consider the Ottoman Empire to be a continuation of Byzantium or not (there are arguments both ways).

Ancient Greece then?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com