Thread replies: 13
Thread images: 3
Thread images: 3
File: Exekias's Vatican amphora 2.jpg (579KB, 1600x1200px) Image search:
[Google]
579KB, 1600x1200px
Why were the Classic Greeks so great?
Their Mycenaean ancestors were just a bunch of barely-civilized chiefdoms who emulated the Minoans and made some pretty trinkets, before collapsing and reverting back to pretty much nothing.
They were reduced to a bunch of illiterate tribes living in thatched huts, then they start copying the Egyptians and Mesopotamians and suddenly they shoot to the top, master and revolutionize every form of art, shit out a billion philosophies, kick-start scientific inquiry, conquer the known world and make stuff like mechanical orreries. In a few centuries they innovated more than the Egyptians or Mesopotamians had in more than a thousand years.
The Mycenaeans and the Greeks were the same people and roughly the same culture living in the same place. Why did one just sort of exist, while the other went on to surpass all of its contemporaries and transform civilization forever?
>>
>>2231426
tough times create strong men
>>
File: 1474635799874.jpg (22KB, 400x250px) Image search:
[Google]
22KB, 400x250px
>>2231426
>conquer the known world
you're talking about the macedonians
>>
>>2231447
Get back to /FYROM/.
>>
>>2231426
>I don't know anything about the topic xD
Myceneans literally sailed as far Syria and the Western Mediterranean, a feat that no one before them achieved, they gave birth to a network that extended from Europe to Syria, they colonized Cyprus and Anatolia, expert sailors and traders
>>
>Their Mycenaean ancestors were just a bunch of barely-civilized chiefdoms
Wtf are you talking about? Just because their civilization was younger doesn't mean they were barely civilized. They meet pretty much all the criteria of "civilized" for their time.
They had extensive trade networks, advanced and monumental architecture, highly organized societies and cities and probably the most advanced bronzeworking of the period.
>>
>>2231465
You're completely missing the point. I'm asking about why the Classic Greeks accomplished so much, not why the Mycenaeans didn't. The Mycenaeans had some nice art and architecture, sailed around a bit, but they achieving nothing comparable to what the Classic Greeks did.
>>
>>2231468
Did the Mycenaeans have cities? I thought they just had citadels and palaces.
>>
File: dendra reconstruction.jpg (72KB, 682x833px) Image search:
[Google]
72KB, 682x833px
>>2231468
Not to mention sweet bronze age plate armour.
>>
>>2231484
Yeah, you're right, they just had massive buildings standing in the middle of nowhere.
>>
>>2231477
Maybe because the time of the Mycenaeans coincides also with one of the most destructive periods of human history? Where cities and civilizations were destroyed and a surprisingly sophisticated trade and diplomatic system collapsed onto itself?
>>
>>2231426
Tight communities.
Mediterranean diet.
>>
>>2231895
Well the Nuragics built massive structures without cities, as did many other cultures, so I don't see why you're acting like that's something extraordinary. Anyway, they did have cities in a sense, but they were very small compared to their eastern contemporaries and the later Greek poleis.
>>2231991
Again, I'm asking why the later Greeks were so accomplished, not why the Mycenaeans weren't on par with them. I just mentioned them to point out that it's not just some inherent Greek trait nor pure environmental determinism.
Thread posts: 13
Thread images: 3
Thread images: 3