And I am still waiting for an answer to my question...
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
What do we know about the Iroquois?
Collapse
X
-
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.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
-
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.
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.
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.
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).
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.
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.
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 .)
1) Colorfull and unlike the other civs, and
2) Linving in America
Comment
-
Originally posted by Ribannah
Will you please refrain from such racist remarks.
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
-
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.
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.
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.
I agree with you on your other factors, but I consider the Printing Press to be part of the Enlightenment.
changes this would have in my tree.
And maybe the Iroqouis played a part but this part is so tiny.
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 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 AmericaA 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
-
Originally posted by Ribannah
Maybe they will put him in as a Spanish hero to appease the Bee
Comment
-
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
-
* 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
-
Originally posted by Fiera
* Another member of the Armada is summoned *The problem with leadership is inevitably: Who will play God?
- Frank Herbert
Comment
-
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
-
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?
That's pretty easy to do when one will simply ignore the facts one finds "inconvenient."Tutto nel mondo è burla
Comment
-
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.
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
Comment