How old does something have to be to be considered ancient?
1,000 years?
2,000 years?
3,000?
And is ancient really the appropriate term for civilizations like "ancient" Egypt, and "ancient" rome.
Despite the fact that there was a roughly 2,000 year difference between them?
It has to be older than classical civilization, typically.
You've got ancient, then classical, then medieval (there may be the dark ages in between classical and medieval depending on who you ask) then renaissance, early modern, and modern.
None of these have definite dates, but you don't really see Hellenic Greeks and Romans as much in ancient times.
>>3359126
But that still means ancient is roughly 2,000 years, when the rest don't even have half of that. Are those all truly ancient?
And what about before the ancient-era, assuming that started with the unification of upper and lower Egypt in 3,000 BC.
What would upper and lower egypt be called pre-3000 BC?
>>3359136
The ancient era would begin with writing.
Before that it's prehistoric.
Also, the first like two thousand years of written word are kind of sparse compared to the thousand years after that.
>>3359120
before 1901
>>3359126
classical is still refered to as ancient, I say everything pre medieval is ancient