Some forgotten-but-important technologies

A few ideas....

The stirrup - made cavalry more effective and horse archers possible.

The keel - made ocean-going ships possible. I note that the Maoris, Micronesians and Vikings all had ocean-going ships well before Civ4's technology trees would allow them.

General staff - introduced around the time of Napoleon, made it possible to effectively coordinate multiple armies. In game terms, you might increase all ground movement by +1.

Telegraph/Telephone - made it possible to coordinate business and government across geographic distances more effectively. In game terms, it would reduce penalties for distant cities.

The Stirrup is a tech in Civ, its called horseback ridding,

aronnax said:

The Stirrup is a tech in Civ, its called horseback ridding,

Click to expand...

The stirrup was introduced by the Mongols, I think. That is the main reason why they had such a vastly superior cavalry. Without the stirrup, for instance, the concept of "horse archer" is flawed - no stability for precise shots, no shots in other directions rather than forward. Riding with a lance becomes a joke. What is left is riding with a melee or a short range weapon, like a sword or short spear - precisely what cavalry did, up to the mongols.

I think that truly great techs are those which were invented independently ONLY ONCE, and then passed on. Of these, I would single out three:
the alphabet, the stone arch, and the concept of zero.

Invented probably in India by the not-yet-well-studied ancient civilization of the Indus, the stone arch passed to Babylon (Sumer, Egypt and Greece did not have it) and, through the Etruscans (a pre-roman central italian civ coming likely from Anatolia) to the Romans.
Without the stone arch, the only piece of big architecture possible is the pile-of-rock type: Pyramid, Ziqqurat. Otherwise you are limited to small temples and theaters leaning on hills, like Greece.
With the stone arch, on the other hands, you can raise aqueducts, anphitheaters, cathedrals...
So let's rename "construction" into "stone arch"!

Without the concept of zero, algebra is impossible. Greece did not have the concept, so its great mathematicians could not do much beyond geometry. No positional representation of numbers, no differential calculus. Again, the concept of zero was invented in India, passed to Persia and to the Arab world, and then to Europe. What europeans call "the arab numbers" 0, 1, 2, 3, ..., 251,... are actually Indian.
There should be a new tech called "algebra" between mathematics and scientific method.

So let's give credit to at least ONE of the awesome inventions of India and put it in the game, shall we? On the other hand, I would add the Phoenicians civ, who invented the alphabet...

Zongo said:

The stirrup was introduced by the Mongols, I think. That is the main reason why they had such a vastly superior cavalry. Without the stirrup, for instance, the concept of "horse archer" is flawed - no stability for precise shots, no shots in other directions rather than forward. Riding with a lance becomes a joke. What is left is riding with a melee or a short range weapon, like a sword or short spear - precisely what cavalry did, up to the mongols.

Click to expand...

Stirrup was not introduced by Mongols -- see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stirrup.

Zongo said:

The stirrup was introduced by the Mongols, I think. That is the main reason why they had such a vastly superior cavalry. Without the stirrup, for instance, the concept of "horse archer" is flawed - no stability for precise shots, no shots in other directions rather than forward. Riding with a lance becomes a joke. What is left is riding with a melee or a short range weapon, like a sword or short spear - precisely what cavalry did, up to the mongols.

I think that truly great techs are those which were invented independently ONLY ONCE, and then passed on. Of these, I would single out three:
the alphabet, the stone arch, and the concept of zero.

Click to expand...

How on earth would alphabet come under this definition? There's more than one alphabet. The ancient egyptians had their own way before the Phoenicians, as did the chinese. The mayans had an alphabet all of their own too.

Julian Delphiki said:

Stirrup was not introduced by Mongols -- see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stirrup.

Click to expand...

The stirrup paternity is not 100% certain, but there is nothing in the article you point that says that the stirrup was not introduced by mongols.

In fact, if you read it, you will notice how it says that the first representation of the stirrup is in China in AD 322, then the stirrup appears in Sweden in the 6th century after the migration age, and it is introduced in europe likely by the Avar migration in the 7th century.

Now, let us make 2+2: if we look at what lies between Sweden, China and the Balcans (occupied by the Avars) we see it is exacty the area which will become soon the Mongol Empire.
China would be overrun by the Mongols too, and the Avar, rather than invading Europe, where running away, together with all the other people in the Middle Age's "barbarian invasions", from somebody else in the east.

So, although not certain, it is nevertheless plausible that the mongols stumble upon the bright new idea, and started to capitalize on it.

jimbob27 said:

How on earth would alphabet come under this definition? There's more than one alphabet. The ancient egyptians had their own way before the Phoenicians, as did the chinese.

Click to expand...

Sorry, I was not precise. Not a symbolic or syllabic alphabet, but a letter alphabet - which is the "narrow sense" of the meaning of the word.

The egyptian and chinese ones are symbolic (one word = one symbol) while the Japanese and many others are syllabic (one syllable = one symbol).
It is only when you go down to "one sound = one symbol" that dramatic simplification takes place, allowing for speed of writing, ease of education, and flexibility.

It is basically the invention that decouples writing from religion, allowing theoretically the common man to read and write, or at least crippling the monopoly of priests and central bureaucracies. All the letter alphabets in the world are derived from only one.

Zongo said:

The stirrup paternity is not 100% certain, but there is nothing in the article you point that says that the stirrup was not introduced by mongols.

In fact, if you read it, you will notice how it says that the first representation of the stirrup is in China in AD 322, then the stirrup appears in Sweden in the 6th century after the migration age, and it is introduced in europe likely by the Avar migration in the 7th century.

Now, let us make 2+2: if we look at what lies between Sweden, China and the Balcans (occupied by the Avars) we see it is exacty the area which will become soon the Mongol Empire.

Click to expand...

Mongols were dominant around 1200-1400AD -- thats quite a lot later, not soon. Historians also debate about the possibility of Huns bringing stirrup to Europe, but there is no 100% certainty (i still think there are enough earlier examples for not crediting it to Mongols).

Julian Delphiki said:

Mongols were dominant around 1200-1400AD -- thats quite a lot later, not soon.

Click to expand...

When was Rome dominant, and when did it showed first its potential?
Moreover, central Asia was still technologically backward and nomadic, these scales are not really "big" in their context. It took some time to perfect the stirrup and then expand with its advantage, and again it took some time before some leader was born to make a political union of an hitherto chaotic domain.

In the mean time the idea spilled over to neighbouring countries (China) and tribes (Avars, Huns, etc) which somehow did not have the extreme cavalry focus of the Mongols, and so did not make the innovation shine to its full potential.

But of course, this is only one possible reconstruction. A romantic one, if you want.

Zongo said:

When was Rome dominant, and when did it showed first its potential?
Moreover, central Asia was still technologically backward and nomadic, these scales are not really "big" in their context. It took some time to perfect the stirrup and then expand with its advantage, and again it took some time before some leader was born to make a political union of an hitherto chaotic domain.

In the mean time the idea spilled over to neighbouring countries (China) and tribes (Avars, Huns, etc) which somehow did not have the extreme cavalry focus of the Mongols, and so did not make the innovation shine to its full potential.

But of course, this is only one possible reconstruction. A romantic one, if you want.

Click to expand...

Hear Ye. Hear Ye. Civ designers... there may be some dispute about its origin but there is considerably agreement about its significance. Cavalry became dramatically more effective-- and horse archers possible-- when the stirrup was introduced. It would be a logical technology to introduce to the game, with, say, "heavy cavalry" and "horse archers" both dependent on it. Light cavalry-- essentially fast warriors on horses, based on horseback riding-- would come first....

I would have said the stirrup is more an invention than a technology.

Telephone/telegraph seems to me the big one the designers overlooked.

stirups could be taken as part of the horseriding tech.

general staff doesn't seem too special by itself. Most armies prior to napolean even giong back into antiquity had some kind of command structure and information network (rider messengers).

keels I suppose are bundled with the optics tech that gives caravels. Maybe it is a fair point that is historically too late.

But the telephone/telegraph is a huge communication upgrade and should be represented in the tech tree somehow. It seems in civ4 people are still sending messengers around on horseback until radio... Perhaps telephone/telegraph lines should be laid down like railroads as an improvement. Cities connected to the capital should have their maintenance reduced. and perhaps the improvement itself should give a commerce bonus to the tile if the tile is producing more than 5 commerce for example.

Then again, isn´t wheel or railroad more an invention than a technology? For me it´s the same, if an invention is important and necessary then there´s nothing bad about having it as a technology.

Zongo said:

The stirrup was introduced by the Mongols, I think. That is the main reason why they had such a vastly superior cavalry. Without the stirrup, for instance, the concept of "horse archer" is flawed - no stability for precise shots, no shots in other directions rather than forward. Riding with a lance becomes a joke. What is left is riding with a melee or a short range weapon, like a sword or short spear - precisely what cavalry did, up to the mongols.

Click to expand...

So why are the Parthians famous for the Parthian shot - accuractly shooting backwards from a running horse?

I think that truly great techs are those which were invented independently ONLY ONCE, and then passed on. Of these, I would single out three:
the alphabet, the stone arch, and the concept of zero.

Without the concept of zero, algebra is impossible. Greece did not have the concept, so its great mathematicians could not do much beyond geometry.

Click to expand...

So how was Pythagoras able to use algebraic methods to construct Pythagorean triples before zero was invented?

No positional representation of numbers, no differential calculus. Again, the concept of zero was invented in India, passed to Persia and to the Arab world, and then to Europe. What europeans call "the arab numbers" 0, 1, 2, 3, ..., 251,... are actually Indian.
There should be a new tech called "algebra" between mathematics and scientific method.

So let's give credit to at least ONE of the awesome inventions of India and put it in the game, shall we? On the other hand, I would add the Phoenicians civ, who invented the alphabet...

Click to expand...

sagji said:

So why are the Parthians famous for the Parthian shot - accuractly shooting backwards from a running horse?So how was Pythagoras able to use algebraic methods to construct Pythagorean triples before zero was invented?

Click to expand...

Apparently, the Parthians archers were superb riders. AFAIK, Parthians did not have the stirrup, and their cavalry was manned by well-trained noblemen, while the mongols have an entire people capable of the feat.

It is like the difference between copying books by hands, or printing them. Of course you can have books in Roman times. It only takes a lot of time and money to obtain them, while after printing every house in Europe could own a Bible, for instance.

Pythagorean triples were discovered with geometric methods first - and not by Pythagoras, but by the Egyptians. Pythagoras was, after all, a genius, and was able to devise and deploy cutting-edge mathematical tools to get some new results: new pythagorean triples, the discovery of irrational numbers.

But without the concept of zero real algebra, intended as group theory applied to numbers, was impossible, and with it were also many results that we teach now in elementary school. Today kids of the age of 6 learn how to multiply abritrarily big numbers, while this was an excruciating feat in ancient times (try multiply 658x237 with roman numbers). This is due to positional representation, which is a by-product of the concept of zero.

Lordclane said:

The stirrup - made cavalry more effective and horse archers possible.

Click to expand...

Horseback Riding

The keel - made ocean-going ships possible. I note that the Maoris, Micronesians and Vikings all had ocean-going ships well before Civ4's technology trees would allow them.

Click to expand...

Optics or Astronomy.

General staff - introduced around the time of Napoleon, made it possible to effectively coordinate multiple armies. In game terms, you might increase all ground movement by +1.

Click to expand...

Military Tradition.

Telegraph/Telephone - made it possible to coordinate business and government across geographic distances more effectively. In game terms, it would reduce penalties for distant cities.

Click to expand...

Electricity / radio?

Diamondeye said:

Stirrup = Horseback Riding

Click to expand...

Not quite. That is precisely the point people here are discussing. Care to contribute with beefier arguments?

Diamondeye said:

Telegraph/Telephone = Electricity / radio?

Click to expand...

Radio certainly not. You need Maxwell electromagnetic theory for that, which is not strictly required for the telegraph.

Electricity, maybe. That is, if we consider electric power and electric communication to be the same thing.

Still, I would like to see the power grids and phone cables implemented in the game. Like roads and rails. Work boats could build sea telephone lines, under the ocean with fiber optics...

HoMM3 fanatic said:

Then again, isn´t wheel or railroad more an invention than a technology?

Click to expand...

Yeah, but not everybody is a scientist and appreciates the difference between theories, discoveries, technologies and inventions. So I'd guess we should leave it as simple as it can get. For instance:

Mathematics is a theory
I guess this is self-evident. Abstract thought with remarkable consequences in the real world.

Bronze working is a discovery
Somebody stumbled it upon while mixing, probably by mistake, 2 different metals. From then on, killing was easier, and women prettier.

The wheel is an invention
Stumbling upon it is not enough, a relatively new application is required. For instance, nobody ever built a civilization on hand-pushed carts. But using the wheel to make wagons and chariots attached to horses or oxes is quite another thing. That's why the wheel did not find its role in pre-colombian american civilizations. There ARE ancient indian toys with wheels, but the transport and military applications of the wheel remained untapped because there wasn't any animal powerful enough, and without it no "invention" of the connection between animal power and wheel "amplifier".

Electricity is a full fledged technology
comprehensive of discoveries, like reproducible electrical phenomena (Volta), theories like the physics of electricity, and inventions like power production, engines, telegraph, ,lightbulbs etc.

Wikipedia is lacking much info.

The Huns and Avars first introduced the stirrup to the West in the 5th century. It was first adopted by the Romans under the Emperor Justinian the Great and his general Belisarius in the 6th century, allowing him to reconquer most of the former Empire.

HoMM3 fanatic said:

Then again, isn´t wheel or railroad more an invention than a technology? For me it´s the same, if an invention is important and necessary then there´s nothing bad about having it as a technology.

Click to expand...

Perhaps, but there are some inventions that are so life-changing that they warrant being called a technology. Using your description, I don't think the stirrup deserves its own technology. Doesn't horseback riding already cover it? It does enable horse archers after all. Maybe you could update its civilopedia entry.