外國網友評論：古代羅馬帝國和現在的美國在世界的地位一樣嗎

羅馬帝國是歐洲古代最巔峰的時代，無論是軍事、經濟還是文化都是超級一流的存在，現在的美國也是世界公認的老大，經濟和軍事以及文化實力都是最強大的存在，那麼古代羅馬和現在美國在世界的地位一樣嗎。

Was the Roman Empire comparable to the U.S. today?

曾經的羅馬帝國能與如今的美國相提並論嗎？

ohnfrancis (John) Evans former this and that. at DHSS/DSS/BA/DWP (1980-2005)

While I agree with Ernest W. Adams』 answer I wonder whether the question relates to the ability to control or influence the behaviour of another State or States. If so then while not directly comparable there are similarities (in my mostly ignorant opinion)

然而我同意Ernest W. Adams的回答，我想知道這個問題是否涉及擁有控制或影響另一個國家或多個國家行為的能力。如果是這樣的話，雖然不能直接比較，但其中有著相似之處（我的看法多半不太成熟）。

There are many countries around the World who modify their behaviours to avoid facing the wrath of the United States; as was the case in some respects of those that feared the might of ancient Rome.

當今世界上有很多國家他們為避免正面激怒美國而曲意逢迎。這種情形也出現在那些畏懼古羅馬帝國的國家身上。

Similarly; there are nations who adopt Pro-American policies in order to encourage funding or financial/technological Aid from the U.S. This too was seen in some of the friendly States in or adjacent to the Roman areas of interest.

類似地;有些國家奉行親美的政策，為的就是得到美國的資金或財政及技術上的援助，這在一些友好的國家或毗鄰羅馬的利益區內也是司空見慣的。

Rik Andino Proud American Former Sergeant US Marine Corps

No not even close. Yes America (the US) does have many similarities to the Romans but that's because Americans have always tried to emulate the Romans (much like every other Western Nation that's risen up after Rome).

錯，錯得離譜。的確，美國與羅馬人還真有很多相似之處，但那是因為美國人總是試圖模仿羅馬人(就像在羅馬之後崛起的其他西方國家一樣)。

The Roman Empire lasted for almost 500 years and that is if you just you look at it from the rise of Cesar to the fall of Rome. However if you count the Roman Republic from it's rise into an empire it's much closer to 800 years. And if you count the Eastern Roman Empire you can say that the Roman Empire lasted over 1500 years. That's impressive by any standards.

羅馬帝國持續了差不多500年，如果你從凱撒的崛起到羅馬的衰落算起的話。然而，如果你把羅馬共和國到它掘起成為一個帝國計算在內，它就更接近800年了。如果你算上東羅馬帝國你可以說羅馬帝國持續了1500年。任何標準都讓人印象深刻。

The US by comparison has only been a Superpower for less 100 years. And an unrivaled Global power much more recently.

相比較而言美國成為超級大國的時間不到100年，而成為無可匹敵的全球力量的時間則更短。

While Rome actively sought to become the unrivaled World Power and was able to rise numerous times from devastating tragedies (like the Punic Wars the burning of Rome a plague etc...) to conquer much of the known World; the US pretty much became a Superpower by happenstance.

羅馬是在積極地探尋中成為無敵的世界強權，它能在各種臨近毀滅的節點中不斷崛起（像布匿戰爭、燃燒的羅馬、瘟疫等等），並且去征服大部分的已知世界。相比而言美國成為超級大國更像是一個偶然。

The US's rise to Global Dominance came about by being relatively independent and patient. They developed their resources relatively free from outside interference and by staying out of many of the disputes between European Powers they were able to maximize their power and energy projecting it when it was most useful. When the US finally entered WW1 they were able to claim victory by being fresh and bringing fresh ideas and tactics.

美國崛起成為一個全球統治者依賴於相對的獨立和耐心。他們發展自己的資源，通過遠離歐洲列強之間的紛爭從而更少地受外界干預。這使他們能有效最大化其力量並保護這力量。當美國最終介入到一戰時，他們通過採用、帶來新思路和新戰術來獲得勝利。

As for WW2 the US was able to minimize the damage they incurred by keeping the fighting outside of their borders. Contrast this to the Soviets who had to rebuild their Empire from scratch after Germany savagely destroyed much of their infrastructure and ravaged their lands in much of Western Europe. The US on the other hand became very wealthy from both World Wars by selling weapons and assisting in the rebuilding process. And very unlike Rome they became a Superpower by letting their enemies defeat each other in massive Global Royal Rumbles with the US being the strongest man standing at the end.

到了二戰，通過把戰場控制在國界之外，美國能夠最小化他們遭受的傷害。與此相反，俄國必須重建他們滿目瘡痍的帝國，在基礎設施被德國野蠻地破壞，大部分歐洲土地被其劫掠之後。另一方面，通過販賣武器和援助重建，美國在每次世界大戰中都變得富有了。與羅馬很大不同，美國讓他們的敵人在全球大戰中互相擊敗對方，而自己成為站到最後的勝利者。

Besides this the US best asset to becoming a Global power was being more amenable then their rivals. It has allowed them to gather allies who would rather be their friends than the friends of their enemies. The Romans by contrast were known for beaten their rivals to pulp and threatening and subjecting regions to their iron-fisted rule.

除此之外，美國成為全球強權最大的資本是比他們的對手更善於控制 。與其成為美國敵人的盟友，還不如成為美國的盟友，這讓美國得到了許多盟友。而羅馬則與之大相徑庭，其手段是徹底擊敗他的對手，脅迫和命令各地區服從他們鐵拳統治。

As for culture. The Roman people were much more resilient than Americans. They had a stronger warrior spirit and a much higher desire to dominate and rule the world. Americans by contrast love to brag about being the best Yet they have a dilemma with being involved in foreign affairs and they don't enjoy ruling other regions.

至於文化，羅馬人比美國人更有活力。他們有更強的武士精神，有更高的野心去統治世界。相反，美國人喜歡自誇自己國家最好。但他們卻常陷入其他國家的事務，而且他們並不喜歡統治其他地區。

Lastly America's Hegemony is waning. If you just look at the state of our foreign affairs in recent years you can clearly see a decline. That decline has in fact accelerated recently with the rise of a proto-isolationist Presidency. In the absence of US influence on the global stage other nations mainly our strongest rivals; China Russia and Iran have risen to challenge our power. This will be the most crucial dance to study in theGlobal Politics 21st Century. The fall of US Influence may be minor blip or an event of historical significance. The most important question for us (Americans) however is: can we behave like the Romans and rise back to power?

最後，美國的霸權是逐漸衰落的。如果你看看最近外交事務的聲明，你能確切的看到這種衰落。事實上，隨著原孤立主義總統的上任，這種衰落正在加速。當美國在全球舞台上缺席時，其他國家，主要是我們最強大的對手——china、俄羅斯還有伊朗，已經崛起並且開始挑戰我們（美國人）。這將會是學習21世紀全球政治最關鍵的舞曲。美國衰落的影響可能是一個歷史意義的事件，或是一個小插曲。然而對我們而言最重要的問題是，我們能像羅馬人一樣重新崛起為強權嗎？

I don't think Americans are like the Romans but perhaps we can evolve to become them. `

我不覺得美國人像羅馬人，但或許我們能進化成為他們。

Presently there is no real comparison between Rome and the US. However maybe in the next few centuries the US will develop an Empire that rises and behaves like the Ancient Romans however currently that is not the case.

目前無法拿美國和羅馬作真正的比較。然而或許在幾個世紀後，美國將會建立起一個帝國，像古代羅馬人一樣崛起。但現在事實並非如此。

Jan Meyer studied History & English at University of Münster

Answered Jul 31

Yes and no.

是也不是。

Certain features in the political make-up jump to the fore like the strong oligarchic element in the political system a very strong executive patrician families with huge influence on the countries fortunes.

某些表面上的政治上特點，如行政體系中強大的寡頭政治、對國家財政有巨大影響的強大而有權力的貴族家庭，都很相似。

There is also the element of including foreigners… to a point.

還有就是都接納外國移民·····從某種程度上。

But the differences are just as many.

但是不同點也很多。

Rome was never self-sufficient in terms of ressources not even food the USA is.

羅馬帝國就資源上來說從不是自給自足的，特別是食物。而美國可以。

The US does not fight wars of conquest but colonial and proxy wars.

美國不進行征服戰爭，但進行殖民和代理人戰爭。

etc.

等等。

Katherine Bailey Have Never Seen Bigfoot

Answered Aug 4

I』m no historian but I have read opinions that the USA like the Roman Empire relied too much on panem et circenses (bread and circuses) meaning that it appeased its citizenry with superficial entertainments and comforts to distract them from the fact that those at the top were not acting in the citizens』 interests.

我不是歷史學家但是我的觀點是美國和羅馬帝國一樣都極度依賴小恩小惠政策，這意味著他們用膚淺的娛樂和舒適來安撫國民並轉移他們的注意力，使他們忽略掉上層人士並沒有為國民們的利益服務的事實。

John Dewar Gleissner Auburn & Vanderbilt graduate; lifelong student of history

No. The Roman Empire had abandoned the republican system the USA still has still had slaves was not geographically isolated like the USA and was subject to barbarian attacks on a massive scale. The 50 United States preserve sovereignty over many aspects of life which provides more flexibility than the Roman Empire had. The Roman Empire had two capitals for many years Rome and Constantinople which kept the Empire divided.

不能相比，羅馬帝國廢除了共和制度，但是美國仍有奴隸，雖然他們沒有像美國一樣在地理上被隔絕，但卻遭受到野蠻人的大規模襲擊。美國的這50個國家在生活多方面上維護其主權，與羅馬帝國相比更具靈活性。羅馬帝國常年保有兩個首都，羅馬和君士坦丁堡，這在最後使帝國分裂。

Mason Alexander Dencker Songwriter and history enthusiast

Answered Sep 4

Yes but but not quite the Roman Republic. (a multi-ethnic superpower republic) was more similar to America than any other civilization in history American government was largely based on Rome and it is arguable that America today is falling into many of the same traps Rome』s failing republic experienced.

是的，但羅馬帝國並不是這樣。（多種族超強共和國的羅馬）在歷史上比其他的文明更象美國。美國政府很大程度是以羅馬帝國為基礎，有爭論說今天的美國落入了羅馬帝國曾經歷過的陷阱。

But perhaps the root cause of it all was their cultural decentralization from their rapidly expanding multi-ethnic population which allowed for aristocratic corruption to go unchecked. They absorbed more different people than the system could adequately handle political dialogue eroded and politicians exploited the confusion. Eventually culminating in Julius Caesar in a bloody civil war starting the empire. To say that any of that would be America』s fate would be a stretch but Rome』s republic took 100 years to fall.

但是，這一切的根本原因可能是他們的文化權力分散於他們迅速擴張的多民族人口中，他們允許貴族腐敗不受控制。他們吸收了太多不同種族的人，以至於制度不能夠妥善處理政治對話，政客們利用混亂。最終，Julius Caesar在血腥的內戰中開創了帝國。要說，這一切都將是美國的命運，但羅馬共和國花了100多年時間才衰落。

So no one really knows but I do know congress and its relation to big money is corrupt exploitative full of lies and the people can't stand it. Trump is perhaps the first big symptom of a period of drawn out political turmoil.

所以沒人真正知道，但我知道國會與大財團之間勾結有著腐敗的聯繫，並且滿口謊言，人們已經無法忍受。特朗普可能是一段曠日持久的動亂時期的第一大徵兆。

Mark Tygart works at RSM Equico

Answered Jul 31

No. The U.S. is a postindustrial modern nation-state republic with a mixed economy. Rome was a pre-modern slave economy oligarchy with a profoundly different culture than any in the modern world.

不，美國是一個後工業時代的現代民族國家的共和國，有著混合經濟。羅馬是一個前現代奴隸經濟寡頭，與任何在現代世界的文化完全不同。

Tim Brennan studied at Oswego High School

Answered Aug 31

No but I suspect more than a few presidents for a variety of reasons wish they were.

The ability to kill your opponents might be attractive to a few though I cant see any president wanting to have a garden party lit up by burning bodies it would put modern guests at ill ease.

The fact that just with your word you could kill a senator and take all his assets would be popular in any century . Then there were the orgies….bugger your opponents wife or daughter right in front of him is always a crowd pleaser.

One advantage a president has is he doesnt have to worry that a general will try to overthrow him or the secrete service kill him. Seriously there were good and wise emperors but that was due to who they were not any constraints placed on them .

不能相比，但我懷疑，由於種種原因，有幾個總統希望他們也能做到這樣。

擁有擊敗對手的能力可能會吸引一些人，雖然我看不到任何總統想舉辦一個由燃燒的屍體點燃的遊園會，這會讓現代的客人感到不自在。

事實上用你的話來說，你可以殺死一個參議員，拿走他所有的財產，這一行為在任何一個世紀都會受到歡迎。還有瘋狂的傢伙，在對手的面前欺辱其老婆或女兒的這類人也是很受歡迎的。

總統有一個優勢，那就是他不必擔心將軍會試圖推翻他，或者擔心會被暗殺。說真的是有好的和明智的皇帝，但這因人而異，而且對於皇帝，沒有任何限制。

Michael Chaplan College English Teacher at Nihon University School of Law (1975-present)

Answered Sep 2

One thing that is comparable: the fact that both the Roman empire and the US are overextended. The US has bases in Europe and Asia. Those bases are not popular in those countries but they rarely disappear.

有一點可以相比：事實上，無論是羅馬帝國還是美國都過度擴張。美國在歐洲和亞洲有基地。這些基地在這些國家並不受歡迎，但它們很少消失。

It costs the US money to keep those bases there…. and it cost the Romans to keep their bases where they were.

保留這些基地的花費美國大量錢財……而羅馬人把他們的基地保留在他們羅馬自已的地方。

The US is in debt. It would make some sense to remove the bases but that will never happen.

美國負債了。移除基地的話是有意義的，但這永遠不會發生。

喜歡這篇文章嗎？立刻分享出去讓更多人知道吧！