Are the Chinese the GOAT civilization?

[Akrazotile]

Lol no. It's the exact opposite. The stereotypical western ways of looking at it is exactly what you are doing now, saying that Chinese history is in some way "lesser" and not a real single civilisation like ancient Egypt or ancient Greece (wat).

Chinese themselves are very proud of their supposed 5000 year history and will always view it and explain it as such.


I don't know about "greatest", but Chinese history and civilisation is very cool.

Chinese =/= Shang, Zhou, etc.

China is a broad region, which had many factions which were often ununified. It would be like claiming "Scandanavia" was a civilization under the Vikings. Yes, people LIVED in civilizations there and had common cultural ties, but it wasnt one large empire/country kind of thing. Egypt had a single ruler. Rome had a united army. Babylon had a single (main) language. That's the distinction I'm making versus places like ancient china or scandanavia. Those are large regions with much looser central rule. So yeah, theyre def civilizations, but I guess I was interpreting the question (perhaps incorrectly) as more like a unified kingdom/empire like the Mongols, Byzantines, whatever. Those types of kingdoms existed WITHIN China at different periods. But "China" was not really an empire or a single civilization. IMO.

[LJJ]

Chinese =/= Shang, Zhou, etc.

China is a broad region, which had many factions which were often ununified. It would be like claiming "Scandanavia" was a civilization under the Vikings. Yes, people LIVED in civilizations there and had common cultural ties, but it wasnt one large empire/country kind of thing. Egypt had a single ruler. Rome had a united army. Babylon had a single (main) language. That's the distinction I'm making versus places like ancient china or scandanavia. Those are large regions with much looser central rule. So yeah, theyre def civilizations, but I guess I was interpreting the question (perhaps incorrectly) as more like a unified kingdom/empire like the Mongols, Byzantines, whatever. Those types of kingdoms existed WITHIN China at different periods. But "China" was not really an empire or a single civilization. IMO.

Unified China started with the Qin. It has splintered off and come back together multiple times with different rulers, but it was always the same area with roughly the same overarching, evolving culture, same written language, same tribes.

The same very much goes for Ancient Greece, Rome, Egypt and all the others you mentioned.

Ancient Egypt had many different dynasties and many different capitals and warring factions. Ancient Greece was composed of multiple constantly fluctuating kingdoms. What about Rome going from a small republic to an empire, to an east-west split, etcetera. It's all the same. The only one surviving with such a long history and the same cultural strain is China.

It's really quite arbitrary to call it "A" when the Egyptians or Greeks did it, and then suddenly "B" when China did it. You really think the civilisation we refer to as Ancient Greece continuously had one "united army"? They didn't. And neither did any of the other ones.

[sammichoffate]

I feel like we're the Bill Russell or Kareem of civilizations, all-time winner with longevity in the top 3 but still with visible flaws.

[Akrazotile]

Unified China started with the Qin. It has splintered off and come back together multiple times with different rulers, but it was always the same area with roughly the same overarching, evolving culture, same written language, same tribes.

The same very much goes for Ancient Greece, Rome, Egypt and all the others you mentioned.

Ancient Egypt had many different dynasties and many different capitals and warring factions. Ancient Greece was composed of multiple constantly fluctuating kingdoms. What about Rome going from a small republic to an empire, to an east-west split, etcetera. It's all the same. The only one surviving with such a long history and the same cultural strain is China.

It's really quite arbitrary to call it "A" when the Egyptians or Greeks did it, and then suddenly "B" when China did it. You really think the civilisation we refer to as Ancient Greece continuously had one "united army"? They didn't. And neither did any of the other ones.

Fair enough, and I agree that my view is probably tinged by the way in which western history records itself. It still feels to me like other nations/empires, not even strictly in the west, had more of a concrete "identity" than what you could pin down under the broad label of "Chinese." But I guess it's mostly semantics. The empires/dynasties endemic to China, whether you want to connect them or not connect them under the umbrella of "Chinese" were certainly profoundly influential.