I was wondering... If you could choose one aspect of a culture or civilization that you would study that would be most capable in allowing you to define the character or nature of that culture or civilization, what would it be? Examples are things like music, language, money, wars, clothing, fiction, movies, etc...
Damn fine question which kinda takes me back to my undergrad days when I majored in English. I then had a reality check and picked up an MBA and that's where I've been ever since. In my opinion, music and writing are important in defining a culture (money, stock markets, economic systems, etc. don't seem to mean (*)(*)(*)(*)), but there are other things. For example, the kinds of science a culture pursues says a lot, as does the buildings it constructs. That's why the Babylonians, Egyptians, Greeks, Mayans, etc. are definitive.
This is really hard to define. For example, look at what was probably the largest "culture" in the world, the British Empire. Now it had it's own distinction, but as segments broke off, they initially started out just like their parent culture, then as the years went by, they developed very differently. First you had the US, which took about 50 years to really develop it's own culture. And now, over 200 years later it is very different. Although there is still to this day considerable "bleed over" between one and the other. The same with Canada. Much of their influence is from the larger nation to their South, yet they are still in many ways very much like the country they are still tied to. And today, even decades after many of their former colonies left their Empire, they still tend to follow England more then the cultures they followed before they joined the Empire.
I wrote about this in my thesis to an extent. The notion of a "nation" always fascinated me. How can you feel connected to people you've never met? This fact takes a lot of education. There are three major indicators for "nations" (or civilizations of you prefer the term): connection thru a common history, connection thru a language and connection thru a common culture. There are exceptions to the big three. For example the United States of America which is not defined as a nation thru common history, culture or language, it is defined by a common idea. The constitution and flag connects the people rather than common backgrounds or language. Either way, all of the things mentioned here have to be taught. When you're born, you are not connected to people outside your family and friends, therefore it has been implemented into our education system that it is explained to you constantly what you are and how that is different for another person elsewhere on the planet. This is highlighted constantly in sporting events or even news. If there is a plane crash for example they'd say where it was and how many people on board happen to be your nationality so you'd feel extra bad for those individuals you never met. Independent of your personal heritage, nationalism has been drilled into us for about 200 years, depending on location. The interesting part of history for me was always to go back and look with who came up with stereotypical ideas and how they got it into the education system in a way that it is wide spread now. But to answer your question, I'd choose history. I think it can connect people and define their culture best.
The educational system is easy to explain, our government controls what and how it is taught to students. History taught in school which most likely is not factual in content but meets the approval of government, programs it into the ideas of student's minds.
History is a very subjective subject. It's full of subjective beliefs with only a few really understanding the connections. I my opinion I believe that the Germans are most evolved in that subject, because they are the only people to actively and openly discuss the war crimes of their ancestors. Maybe another country is doing it too, but I believe that Germans are rather unique in that aspect. They are even far ahead of Austria who still likes to think as themselves as one of the first victims of the Nazis rather than talk about the huge role we had. I think that this is the only right path of history if you don't "protect" your own, but rather question that behavior. I feel like education is mostly determent not by what is said, but what is avoided. Every education system is full of BS of some sort, the question rather is, if the kids have been educated to question the content and research for themselves.
First, it would be Culture, meaning language, music, cuisine, political leanings, religion, values etc. Second would be History: Common history serves as a social mortar, and make different people feel like patriots. As a matter of fact, common history is what transform a nation into a country. Third would be genetics. This is a modern time's view... a few centuries ago, genetic stuff and religion would play a bigger part.
socio-economic organisation is the best way to broadly categorise cultures. For example, turks and mongols both used to be nomadic.. Thei nomadic lifestyles made their cultures more similar than the relatively minor difference in language made them different. Similarily, the difference between medieval european kingdoms were overshadowed by all similarities they had because they were all feudal.. Most things in a culture is ultimately based on simple things like wheter it's agricultural or pastoral. I have to agree with marx when he says that moral and political systems are based on the mode of production. Therefore, the modes of production is the most important part of culture in my view.
Culture is a vague concept and you need to look into genetics behind ancient civilisations. For example, the Mycenaean culture in ancient Greece commenced circa 1,650 BCE as an imported steppe culture from the northern Russian forest-steppes, which was known for the great mobility of its nomadic warriors. It is likely that the Mycenaeans originally migrated from South Russia to Greece between 1,900 and 1,650 BCE, where they intermingled with the locals, and their Y-DNA haplogroups were R1a, E-V13, G2a, I2a and J2. A following study on mitochondrial DNA from Grave Circle B in Mycenae (Hiller 1991) found that the ancient Mycenaean samples belonged to U5a1 or U5a1a and U5a lineages have also been found in Mesolithic Russia (U5a1) and Sweden (U5a1 and U5a2).
