Like was there some sort of pedophiliac relationship going on as well?  I don't actually have any knowledge to confirm or deny that, but then again I haven't heard anything that would indicate it to be so.  I should add here that Michelangelo was an exception in that he didn't use apprentices to help him with his work.I don?t know if ?pedophiliac? is the appropriate word because, as someone on this forum pointed out, we need to envision this from the perspective of the indicated times, and we?re talking about an age when teenage girls would commonly be married. Nevertheless, intercourse did take place. Hey, I guess this response means I'm no longer an auxiliary... My first rise in rank!

The west, in large part, destroyed itself from within. Political rivalries for power, corrupt politicians and mismanagement of state funds weakened the west, to the point it that it did not have enough unity to defend against the Germans. We also have to consider another topic that's been discussed in this forum regarding multiculturalism. The non-Roman population in western Rome adopted some of the concepts surrounding the culture, but there were divisions within the empire which made it difficult unite everyone in a common cause.

That?s an interesting piece on technology and warfare. After reading it I start to consider that if wars were originally fought on land, then land and sea, air, space and now cyberspace. Where will the future battlefield be?One thing we need to remember about technology is that, although the side with superior technology doesn?t always win the war, the side with technology that enables them to dominate the newest battlefield always wins the major battles. 

Scout, your views are highly probably, but I hope for the sake of us all there is a third option. As a current resident in Hong Kong, however, I don?t see it being the example set by China, because I have come across top university students from the mainland, who know nothing about the Tiananmen Squared crackdown, the famines caused by Mao?s industrial blunders nor the consequences of the cultural revolution. They are perplexed as to why complaints are made about their country when, as they see it, China never bothers anyone. This type of extreme censorship in order to produce an obedient labor force na?ve of whom and what they really are is not something the west would put up with. Perhaps, however, globalization may be the light at the end of the tunnel. Through joint ventures where companies extend their branches throughout the world, meaning that one branch can?t hurt another without injuring themselves in the process, we may all acquire a common goal. Digital communications, English as a lingua Franca, and interracial partnerships of various types may force nations which insist on segregating themselves to integrate with others, forming a global culture. This would still consist, no doubt, of aggressive competition, but it may avert wars or Islamic dominance. To some extent, this may already be happening in Europe, because the natural birth rate of countries such as Germany and Spain is so low they cannot maintain their societies without the immigrants they?re taking in. In other words, they cannot annihilate the Muslims without destroying themselves. I don?t have a crystal ball either, but I?m just being hopeful.

Hello Jake10.  That is an absolutely true point about the importance of writing in the development of civilizations.  But as to the importance of writing and Egypt, I think that Sumerian civilizations existed for nearly 1000 years, which is quite significant in the scheme of things.  Yes, the mighty Egypt lasted about twice as long as a great power, and a bit longer from end to end.  But these numbers are all relative; some civilizations are but a blip on the radar (think Phoenician) but they can still provide a lot to wider culture.As for the Egyptians, I'm not even sure that they invented papyrus.  They may have, and if that is the case, it would likely be there great "contribution" in this regard.  Writing on large stone blocks is one thing, but writing on a scroll that can be easily transported would have been a major development, even if the underlying idea wasn't all that original.

Thank you for your response, Phidippides.You?re right, papyrus would indeed be a great contribution, but according to my studies, it was the Chinese Monks who first made writing more facile by putting it on silk, as opposed to wood or stone carvings, which were the norm before that. As far as I know, the Sumerians and the Egyptians started developing their writing systems in and around 3000 BC. The Chinese and Greeks followed in and around 2200 BC. Archeologists are constantly changing these dates because the whole idea of writing was often ridiculed back then, so the developers often worked hidden away. But, it was the status of Egypt that influenced other cultures to be more open to writing, despite its complexity and time consumption. It took a lot of vision to see how communicating through symbols would elevate a culture, despite its apparent uselessness on battlefields or daily necessities. Today, of course, the saying ?the pen is mightier than the sword? is a clich?. Yet, I think it?s fascinating to picture ourselves back in a time when communications were only oral. How many of us would have the persistence to dedicate our research to developing a writing system?

An interesting discussion, making me very glad to have joined this forum. Actually, if we observe the cultural trends that Rome took where gladiators became extremely expensive, revered and influential, can we not say it mirrors the current image of top American athletes? If we consider the amount of money spent on pro teams, to the point that several cities in the US are not able to pay for stadiums they've built but, nevertheless, have no trouble finding support for further funding to maintain or attract pro teams, does it not make us think of the amount spent on the games in the coliseums?When we consider Vietnam and Afghanistan, I automatically make a correlation between guerrilla war campaigns that the British and Saxons waged against Rome. In all, the Roman treasury was depleted by these long frustrating struggles. Despite having superior technology and military might, Rome became weary of having to look for an enemy who could camouflage itself among the locals. I think America is almost repeating history.In fact, I find the similarities such that it may explain aspects of human nature. Yet, while changes occur faster in our age of communications, we can also see that Rome faced downfalls in its history which it rebounded from, in large part due to the patriotism of its citizens and the admiration of its rivals. The US is now facing economic problems, health (largely due to drugs) and educational problems. I wonder if this will make the society force itself to make the necessary changes to stay on top, or will it crumble being unable to? Rome made changes, can the US?