Hi!

I've discovered two historical mistakes made by the creators of Civilization IV!

Peter the Great fought Gustavus Adolphus around 1700?
In the civilopedia on Peter I of Russia, it says that Peter the Great fought the Swedes and their king Gustavus Adolphus around 1700. This is wrong! The Swedish king that Peter fought was actually Charles XII.
Gustavus Adolphus was killed in the battle of Lützen in 1632, he had been dead for almost 70 years!

Ragnar Lodbrok has got a stave church behind him
Behind the Viking chief Ragnar Lodbrok in the Warlords-expansion, there is a large stave church. As Ragnar Lodbrok is believed to have lived during the 8th or 9th century, there were probably no churches in Scandinavia by then. At least no real stave church of that size, that close to Ragnar Lodbrok, who held churches as a favorite target on his raids. He was not a christian.

Now it's your turn! What historical blunders have you found in the game?

Alexander killed cleitus in babylon near the end of his own life?

In the civilopedia article on Alexander it says that Alexander in his final days killed cleitus in babylon. In fact the murder was done a few years earlier in Bactria.

In the Hagia Sophia wonder movie, it is being built with minarets. Hagia Sophia is a church, and thus had no minarets built besides it originally. When the muslims conquered Constantinopolis, they converted it into a mosque and added the minarets. So I think that wonder movie could offend a lot of people. Nice job Firaxis!:sarcasm:

Alexander killed cleitus in babylon near the end of his own life?

In the civilopedia article on Alexander it says that Alexander in his final days killed cleitus in babylon. In fact the murder was done a few years earlier in Bactria.

My dog slobbers a lot. I call him "Slobberdog Milosivec," though that's not his real name. No, I don't think highly of Milosevic (warding off accusations), in fact I think it's a pretty good way to make fun of Slob-o. :lol:

Here's something you might get a kick out of:

Defiant Milosevic Eats Big, Sloppy Sandwich During Trial (http://www.theonion.com/content/node/34432)

Some of the Civilopedia articles are written quite poorly. I can't remember the example, but I was reading something and just the way it was written made it seem like it was a sixth grade essay or something.

Some of the Civilopedia articles are written quite poorly. I can't remember the example, but I was reading something and just the way it was written made it seem like it was a sixth grade essay or something.

Yeah, I've noticed such things as well. Most of it in the third game, but then I've also played it a lot more to this date.
I remember that the Viking civilopedia article in the third game was quite poor. Most of it didn't sound very credible, or something...

I guess the Civ-creators learn a lot from reading on the forums :)

Some of the Civilopedia articles are written quite poorly. I can't remember the example, but I was reading something and just the way it was written made it seem like it was a sixth grade essay or something.

I find the Redcoats Civelopedia article weird. One of the most storied type of unit in history and the talk about how Irish people still Call the British Army (And don't forget that sometimes they call the entire population it to!) Redcoats... :rolleyes:

Wait a minute. Are you trying to suggest that there might be some historical faults and inaccuracies within this video game? You scoundrel!

I find the Redcoats Civelopedia article weird. One of the most storied type of unit in history and the talk about how Irish people still Call the British Army (And don't forget that sometimes they call the entire population it to!) Redcoats... :rolleyes:

It's things like that in the Civilopedia that bug me. Or, in the Roosevelt bio, the mention Germany's "huge strategic blunder" when they declared war on America. That may be true, but the way it's written doesn't really fit the theme of an encylopedia.

Civ IV is rife with historical inaccuracies, but the game wasn't meant to be historically accurate anyway.

http://www.nuklearpower.com/comics/070801.png

Thanks for posting that comic, suits the topic perfectly :)

In the civilopedia it says that Julius Caesar was the first Roman emperor, this is wrong it was Augustus Caesar the first one who proclaimed himself princep (first citizen). This is the title that would latter be know as emperor.