Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

What do we know about the Iroquois?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    And I am still waiting for an answer to my question...
    The problem with leadership is inevitably: Who will play God?
    - Frank Herbert

    Comment


    • #62
      Originally posted by Martinus
      Yeah, Locke spent his youth among Iqroquis. Actually he was brought up by chimpanzee who taught him basics of liberalism as we know it.
      Will you please refrain from such racist remarks.
      A horse! A horse! Mingapulco for a horse! Someone must give chase to Brave Sir Robin and get those missing flags ...
      Project Lead of Might and Magic Tribute

      Comment


      • #63
        Originally posted by Ribannah
        Are you in favour of deleting all the ancient civs, then? Because otherwise I don't understand why you make this comparison.
        Mathematics
        Sorry if my statement was confusing. I was simply trying to point out that the egyptians mathematical skills were not very advanced. And as Boris Godunov stated they never passed it on. Of course the Greeks may have been influenced but this has not been confirmed. Again it is their application (building the pyramids) that is remarkable, the arithmatics in itself was not.
        At the same time I tried to point out that the time of the European Enlightenment was not part of the 'dark ages' in Europe. I got the feeling that you think Europe was all corrupted, cruel and non-developing before the Europeans encountered the Iroqouis people.

        Originally posted by Ribannah
        (Machiavelli)
        For the purposes of the game and progress of human civilization: yes. As a histiorical figure: of course not.
        Machiavelli
        OK, I don't want him in the game or anything, but this man laid the foundations for European absolutism and he was an inspiration to Nietzsche and Hitler. This may not seem very nice but is part of human civilization and progress none the less, just like nuclear weapons.

        Originally posted by Ribannah
        That is not true. He was beheaded because he was against Henry proclaiming himself head of the church.
        ...and Henry proclaimed himself head of the church, because then he didn't have to obey the pope and could then marry again!

        Originally posted by Ribannah
        There were other important factors such as the Printing Press (with Enlightenment, allowing Nationalism), as well as the wealth gained from Colonialism (together with Coal Mining -> Railroad leading to Industrialization in my tech tree).
        I agree with you on your other factors, but I consider the Printing Press to be part of the Enlightenment. (The Enlightenment wouldn't have been the same without the printing press neither would the printing press have been such a success without the Enlightenment.)

        Originally posted by Ribannah
        Or a democracy of one city, as I said earlier. Very true. Developments didn't stop after the Iroquois! All I am saying (with Firaxis) is that they played a part.
        I agree with you completely, modern democracy hasn't anything else in common with the democracy in Athens than the name.
        And maybe the Iroqouis played a part but this part is so tiny. And maybe only restricted to federal unions. And they were around two centuries ago, Babylonians on the other hand haven't been around for thousands years - and there's still sixty minutes in my clock.

        Originally posted by Ribannah
        Well, talk to a random group of Iroquois and they won't know where Denmark is. Still they did business with each other, albeit briefly, in the 17th century.
        You know, I'm not saying Danes should be in Civ3 - I even think the Vikings were a silly idea. I never played them!

        Originally posted by Ribannah
        But this is why I think that the choices Firaxis makes about which civs to include in the game are relevant. A few months from now, at least some people will know a little about the Iroquois and their role in the advance of human civilization. Kudos to Firaxis! (That is, if they're going to drop that dog soldier as the Iroqouis UU .)
        I like this part too. It's great if you learn a little history playing civ. But I think Firaxis chose the Iroqouis because they were:

        1) Colorfull and unlike the other civs, and
        2) Linving in America

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by Ribannah

          Will you please refrain from such racist remarks.
          What? Yeah, since you cannot produce counterarguments, just call me a racist (I didn't know chimpanzee had human rights, though).

          And you still did not answer my question. What historical training do you have???
          The problem with leadership is inevitably: Who will play God?
          - Frank Herbert

          Comment


          • #65
            Originally posted by Fiil
            Mathematics
            Sorry if my statement was confusing. I was simply trying to point out that the egyptians mathematical skills were not very advanced.
            That is true, but the first steps in mathematics were extremely difficult to make as it required a revolution in abstract thinking. Today most of us are still counting only to 10 on our fingers, while it's just as easy to count to 1023!

            At the same time I tried to point out that the time of the European Enlightenment was not part of the 'dark ages' in Europe. I got the feeling that you think Europe was all corrupted, cruel and non-developing before the Europeans encountered the Iroqouis people.
            I am very much aware of that, you might want to take a look at my technology tree (the accompanying posts must be somewhere in Apolyton's cellar by now ). Comments are always welcome.

            Machiavelli
            OK, I don't want him in the game or anything, but this man laid the foundations for European absolutism and he was an inspiration to Nietzsche and Hitler. This may not seem very nice but is part of human civilization and progress none the less, just like nuclear weapons.
            Maybe they will put him in as a Spanish hero to appease the Bee

            I agree with you on your other factors, but I consider the Printing Press to be part of the Enlightenment.
            Hmm, that is a way of looking at things. I'd like to hear your suggestions for the
            changes this would have in my tree.

            And maybe the Iroqouis played a part but this part is so tiny.
            Well, all we have to on is what the historians report, and they seem to agree that it was more than tiny. As a politician, I was impressed when I first saw the (English translation of) their constitution.

            You know, I'm not saying Danes should be in Civ3 - I even think the Vikings were a silly idea. I never played them!
            I tried them out - once! They ran all over the place unwilling to follow my lead

            I like this part too. It's great if you learn a little history playing civ. But I think Firaxis chose the Iroqouis because they were:
            1) Colorfull and unlike the other civs, and
            2) Living in America
            Very true. They did not have the same impact as the Dutch or the Arabs. But they were picked over other north-american tribes, and I think for good reasons.
            A horse! A horse! Mingapulco for a horse! Someone must give chase to Brave Sir Robin and get those missing flags ...
            Project Lead of Might and Magic Tribute

            Comment


            • #66
              And you still did not answer my question. What historical training do you have???
              By the lack of answer I assume the answer is "none". You know what, it shows.
              The problem with leadership is inevitably: Who will play God?
              - Frank Herbert

              Comment


              • #67
                Originally posted by Ribannah

                Maybe they will put him in as a Spanish hero to appease the Bee
                Dear, dear, remember: Macchiavelli was not Spanish. If you are going to try a silly joke at least do it the way your ignorance does not show in such a blatant manner. Uh, and the Spanish aren't in the game either just inncase you forgot it.

                Comment


                • #68
                  J.M. Roberts is perhaps the most widely-respected historian out there, and his books are quite authoritative. I will take his word over yours any day. His work is also well-cited from scholarly sources, unlike yours. I'm sorry, but the Egyptian tourism bureau is not a scholarly source, and they made no effort to back up their very dubious claims except with superficial similarities. That was government propoganda, my friend, and I'm a little disappointed you would believe it or introduce it to a debate as some sort of scholarly, factual evidence. It is nothing of the kind.

                  You also are displaying a disturbing tendency to introduce elements into the argument, and when I refute them making it sound like I brought them up as a point in my argument. This is highly disingenuous and wasting my time in the argument.

                  First, neither Roberts nor I made no claim (if you had actually read the quotes carefully, you'd see) that the Egyptians did not EMPLOY complex mathematics, masonry, surveying, etc. But the facts of history are that they did not propogate lasting cultural instutions beyond their controlled territory of the Nile. Had they not been so geographically isolated, it is unlikely they would have lasted for the 1000s of years they did. Proof? When they encountered civs that had the technology and means infiltrate their lands (Hyksos, Greeks, Romans), they crumpled easily. They had some very brief spurts of expansion, but these always ended in failure and failed to spread their culture. Egyptian culture took root nowhere else but Egypt.

                  As Roberts points out quite correctly, Egypt was surpassed by CONTEMPORARY civs, not later ones. Sumeria, Babylon and Judea all possessed far more complex and influential cultural achievements, whether it be in literature, art, mathematics, architecture, religion or philosophy. Your claim the Egyptians invented irrigation is 100% false. They weren't the first to use irrigation, the Sumerians were, and the Sumerian methods were for more effective and transferable to other regions. Egyptian irrigation was rudimentary and never used beyond the banks of the Nile, as it relied on the unique flooding patterns. Likewise, they used rudimentary math that wasn't remotely as complex as that of their contemporary neighbors in the Fertile Crescent.

                  Contrary to what another poster said, Egyptian religion and philosophy (which was actually non-existent outside very superficial religion) influenced neither the Greeks or Jews in religion or philosophy any great deal. Plato was Greek, and Ptolemy was a Greek Egyptian. Many historians actually think Greek religion influence the Egyptians rather than the other way around. As a side not, Ankhaton's monotheism did not take hold in Egypt and ended after his death. Egypt was not monotheistic from his rule on. In fact, he was most likely murdered by the Egyptian religious leaders for what they saw as heresy.

                  Overall, Roberts' thesis is quite correct in that aside from their extraordinary staying power and public works, Egyptian culture was not all that remarkable or rich. It did not offer a significant lasting contribution to future civilizations on the level other ancient cultures did. I understand why you and others fall prey to the common myths and misconceptions about Egypt's importance, but you should really rely more on scholarly work!

                  As for the Iroquois, I think someone almost hit the nail on the head when they wondered if you were just trying to assert a position that is historically unsupportable. Certainly, the Iroquois culture was unique and, when not confronted with significant outside forces, strong within its own realm. But just like with the Egyptians, the onset of much stronger cultures revealed their own culture's inherent weaknesses and allowed them to crumple before European civilization. I say "weakness" not as a judgement call on the quality of their culture, merely on its influence and adaptability. One of the fundamental weaknesses of Egyptian civilization was its incredible resistance to change.

                  Any assertion the Iroquois have had any more than a miniscule impact on world history is baseless and can only be inferred, as you have done, with superficial and dubious stretches of assumptions from non-scholarly sources. I hate to seem like a defender of the status quo, but the mere fact that in all the wealth of historical writings and documentation of the world the Iroquois figure as a mere footnote at best says something. And this it:

                  When compared to other cultures and civilizations of the world, the Iroquois culture is minor and mostly devoid of influence on world events.

                  Did they have some peripheral influence on American and Canadian cultures? Yes. Dramatic and world-altering? No. European culture has proven to be, to this point, history's most invasive and overpowering force. No culture in history has spread as far and wide to more people with such dramatic and world-altering results. After that, the next such great force is unquestionably Islam, particularly as it was propogated under the spread of Ottoman dominions from 600-1600 A.D. You can then go down the list. The Iroquois will not be high on that list, I guarantee you, for the vast majority of historians.

                  But please, continue. Say how you are right and the rest of the world is mad. We will watch in amusement!
                  Tutto nel mondo è burla

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Boris, two thumbs up. It has been said many times in the recent past but I do not think anybody has put it in such a brilliant manner.

                    BTW, her exact punchline is: "you guys are awfully ignorant". Go figure

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Great post, Boris.

                      Both for knowledge and keeping your head cool. I applaud.
                      The problem with leadership is inevitably: Who will play God?
                      - Frank Herbert

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        * Another member of the Armada is summoned *

                        Hey, Ribannah rides again! So what's your latest claim again? Democracy and civil rights were given to the world by the Iroquois?

                        Oh, and I thought that the ancient Greeks...
                        "An intellectual is a man who doesn't know how to park a bike"
                        - Spiro T. Agnew

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Originally posted by Fiera
                          * Another member of the Armada is summoned *
                          BTW, what is that Armada stuff? I thought it reffers to the Spanish Armada, but I am a Pole and was called the same. Anyone knows why?
                          The problem with leadership is inevitably: Who will play God?
                          - Frank Herbert

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Boris, much of what you say is true, but to say that the Egyptians were surpassed by their contemporaries is problematic on various fronts.

                            #1--They not only used mathematics, astronomy, surveying, architecture, etc... they excelled at them. Study the Giza pyramid complex. It is, quite simply, a marvel of engineering. It is still not known how they accomplished such a task, and with such precision.

                            #2--Were they conquered by other peoples? Yes. But why is this a measure of a "superior" culture? Was German society superior to Polish society in the 1930s? Many of the invaders of Egypt had been warlike out of necessity, living amongst other cultures, all striving for supremacy. As you said, the Egyptians were insulated--they didn't have the military might their invaders did simply because they did not need such military might. This makes them inferior?

                            Please understand that I agree with most of your basic points, including as they regard the Iroquois, in general. Not a major force in history, but simply fascinating nonetheless, and they certainly fill a need within the game. And, after all, the game is about rewriting history, not reliving it.
                            "My nation is the world, and my religion is to do good." --Thomas Paine
                            "The subject of onanism is inexhaustable." --Sigmund Freud

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Originally posted by Martinus

                              BTW, what is that Armada stuff? I thought it reffers to the Spanish Armada, but I am a Pole and was called the same. Anyone knows why?
                              It's an attempt at "Everyone is against me but I can take 'em all on at once" heroism.

                              That's pretty easy to do when one will simply ignore the facts one finds "inconvenient."
                              Tutto nel mondo è burla

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Originally posted by Guynemer
                                Boris, much of what you say is true, but to say that the Egyptians were surpassed by their contemporaries is problematic on various fronts.

                                #1--They not only used mathematics, astronomy, surveying, architecture, etc... they excelled at them. Study the Giza pyramid complex. It is, quite simply, a marvel of engineering. It is still not known how they accomplished such a task, and with such precision.
                                Yeah, and to add...

                                Eratosthenes of Egypt theorized that the Earth was round, and tried to calculate the circumference based on limited data (the angle of the sun over two different cities in Egypt)

                                Estimated circumference: 43,000 km
                                Real polar circumference: 39,942 km

                                This was in 200 B.C.
                                "Chegitz, still angry about the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991?
                                You provide no source. You PROVIDE NOTHING! And yet you want to destroy capitalism.. you criminal..." - Fez

                                "I was hoping for a Communist utopia that would last forever." - Imran Siddiqui

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X