The most glaring omission...

[orange]

...better yet...

so you don't have to follow the link...

[Ribannah]

Originally posted by orange
scroll to the map. It was the second hit on google

Thanks. It is a map of the Fourth Voyage, I'm thinking. Unfortunately no source is mentioned. On the page I found there was no mention of a visit to Chittagong, instead it sounds like they always sailed due west to Sri Lanka.
Did you see the size of that ship? Amazing!

[Jay Bee]

Originally posted by Ribannah
but I think they had the Azores as an intermediate point.

See? You yourself have shown the world what your level of knowledge about Columbus' era is. Tell me dear, why Columbus would want to stop in Portuguese lands? It really escapes me...

Columbus made a stop in the Canary Islands which are considerably closer to mainland than the Azores. The main reason for that was quite obvious for anybody knowing just a bit about sea travel.

[Waku]

Originally posted by Ribannah
Waku Waku, how small is your world? Did you forget the Vikings, even? Not to mention the Chinese, Phoenicians, Ethiopians, did we not learn from them? Even the Polynesians were able to cross the oceans. There was nothing essential to be taught by the Spanish, all the seafaring tribes already possessed the 'skill'.
Why can you not be happy by proudly saying that the Spanish rediscovered the Americas, ahead of their rivals, instead of adding and adding to it until it turns into a blatant nothing (and making it so easy to counter)?

Honey, you're again rebating things I haven't said. you see ghosts everywhere. There are only 18 words in my first post, please read it, and remember that the ocean was full of monsters before Colombus.

Originally posted by Ribannah
But it was only a small part of Dutch trade

LMAO

[Chris 62]

Originally posted by Ribannah
Soon, Firaxis will tell us everything about the Iroquois

So your the one my hermanos always talk about, who thinks she knows history, but doesn't really.
Fascinating.
Perhaps they will tell you that American indian culture is akin to Cro-Magon man before the coming of Europeans, and are only included in the game as a poltically correct choice.

I would replace the Persians with the Arabs, and the Zulus with the Ethiopians.

There is no "Arab" society per se, they were Islam.
Why is there such confusion on this? The tribes of the Arabian penninsular are still the same, they didn't spread "Arab" culture, they spread Islamic culture, and such a civ could include the Ottomans, Al-Andalus, as well as Persia, even the Moguls of India.

Mongols, Spanish and Vikings (better: Norse) definitely don't belong in the top 16 IMHO. Sure, they had empires, but what did they give human civilization?

Showing extreme ignorence here.
Proto-Mongol tribes were present as far back as 2500BC
They were the spur that caused the Chiese to build their great wall, they developed, for the first time in human history, the concept of concentration of force by indirect means at selected points against far numerically superior forces, and made a science of the applied use of terror in warfare.
They were also far more open then many of the cultures they crushed, such as the insular Sung, the despotic kuorozeim, and the petty Russian principalities.
They also held the largest empire in human history, bar none.
Don't belong? You don't know what your talking about.
Spanish culture is dominate on an entire continent, and extremly influential on 2 others (The Americas and europe).
What did they give history? The fact you even dare to ask betrays your ignorence.
As for our Norse friends, they gave western civilization the beginings of it's law code (ever hear of the althing? If you had, you would have kept silent).
They also founded most of the cities of modern Russia, as well as being the basis for the Normans, who took britain, from OTHER vikings (The Danelaw, in case your un-informed), so we see their influence was ENORMUS, far outstripping the petty Indians (what is their contribution, BTW? ZERO).

Let's talk about this foolishness:

That may be so, but I think they had the Azores as an intermediate point.
Also note that at the time Columbus expected the journey to be much shorter, and they were very lucky to make it. It was a formidable feat.

Ever hear of a man named El Cano?
Bet you didn't, he was the first man to circumnavigate the earth, he took over for Magellan when the latter was killed in the Phillipennes, half way round the world.
El Cano was a Spaniard.
How many Chinese navigators did that? What? Can't hear you...Speak up...
The answer is none.
Iberia INVENTED the ships that sailed the world's seas for the first time (Caravels, Carrecks, Gallions, ECT are all Iberian creations), the Chiese Junks would be and were incapable of deep sea travel, and were in fact, akin to Mederterain Galleys, and it is laughable to call them graet seafarers.
Cheng Ho's journey was a series of costal trips.
He could not, as the Iberians could, navigate in deep water, and no ship built in Asia could have survived a trip around the Cape of Good Hope, let alone Cape Horn.

So what do we learn from this?
When you discuss history, you don't know what your talking about.

Oh, BTW, I hold a masters in history, just in case your wondering.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Chris 62


Oh, BTW, I hold a masters in history, just in case your wondering.

You should check out the thread "What do we know about the Iroquois?" and see my ongoing exchange with her.

I have to disagree with comparing the Iroquois to Cro-Magnon man in Europe. There was a level of sophistication to Iroquois culture that far surpassed this. While I don't agree with their inclusion, I would not go so far as saying this.

[orange]

Hey no kidding Chris? Masters in History? That's my major at Uni Where did you go to college?

[Guynemer]

Originally posted by Chris 62
So your the one my hermanos always talk about, who thinks she knows history, but doesn't really.
Fascinating.
Perhaps they will tell you that American indian culture is akin to Cro-Magon man before the coming of Europeans, and are only included in the game as a poltically correct choice.
...
Oh, BTW, I hold a masters in history, just in case your wondering.

Hmmm... for someone who holds a masters in history, that Iroquois crack is remarkably ignorant and foolish. And before you argue, I also hold a history degree, so don't try to get high-and-mighty.

[orange]

now now, lets play nice

Where'd you go to college, Guy?

[Jay Bee]

Guynemer, no need to get so harsh

Chris may have exaggerated a bit to get his point straight, but he's right in the end. The Iroquois, like all other Native American tribes, were hundreds of years behind the Europeans at the time of their encounter. That's an undisputed fact and that's what Chris meant to say.

That the Iroquois add flavor to the game, right; that they are an exotic and most-likely fun addition to the game, right... AND that they are in only por PC reasons, right.

[Guynemer]

You folks are correct, I was perhaps a little harsh. I've noticed Chris has a tendency to also get a little over-the-top and insulting when it comes to people who disagree with him (certainly not always), and I suppose I got prematurely defensive. I apologize.

To answer your question, Orange, I went (and still go) to the University of Michigan. Anxiously awaiting tomorrow night's hockey season opener against Michigan State, outdoors at Spartan Stadium. 70,000+ will be there; highest ever attendance at a hockey game. Now THAT is a great achievement for civilization.

Also, I don't think that it is fair to say that the Iroquois are only in for PC reasons. If we are rewriting history, it seems fair to include representatives of a variety of different cultural groups--Asian, European, Classical, Ancient, North & South American. I can't think of a better choice for a North American civilization than the Iroquois. Strictly speaking, if you just wanted civilizations that dominated the world (or a large portion of it), you'd see a lot of Europe and very, very little else--maybe China and Japan. Again, we're trying to rewrite history; to that end, we need a variety of civilizations.

[Boris Godunov]

[SIZE=1]
Also, I don't think that it is fair to say that the Iroquois are only in for PC reasons. If we are rewriting history, it seems fair to include representatives of a variety of different cultural groups--Asian, European, Classical, Ancient, North & South American. I can't think of a better choice for a North American civilization than the Iroquois. Strictly speaking, if you just wanted civilizations that dominated the world (or a large portion of it), you'd see a lot of Europe and very, very little else--maybe China and Japan. Again, we're trying to rewrite history; to that end, we need a variety of civilizations.

Wow, in one paragraph you've made the best argument for including the Iroquois, something that has eluded our Dutch friend throughout 100,000 words of posts.

[Waku]

All these arguments prove civ3 will be stillborn, it will only be a game, not the best game ever I was waiting for

[Ribannah]

[Jay Bee]

Got to agree again with Boris. Guy, you have made a very solid point there. I couldn't agree more and have stated it so several times in the past... but I also agree with Waku