Ethiopians?

[cybrxkhan]

um... I support the addition of the Ethiopians!!!

 

[dutchking]

^Yeah, they are pretty cool...But I think their leader is another one of those religious nutjobs, read his civilopedia entry on the website. A christian psycho who founds buddhism...Isabella has some competition!
BtW, @cybrxkhan, is your internet (gamespy) screename "Owner"? I looked at the civ of the week screenshot...If it is I might've played with you online...

 

[Florian]

dh,

No I get your point, and I agree. My previous posts should make that clear. I just genuinely think it would be cool to try to imagine a civ-like game from the perspective of medieval Christian Europe. And cool to play it if it were done well.

 

[brianshapiro]

It's definitely not of subjective importance, but it IS subjective. But as I stated earlier in the thread, it's not based on prejudice or arbitrary bias. To use your terminology, this coloring of history is more "natural" than any hidden agenda. Again, Europe IS dominant today. Civilization DID start in Mesopotamia. It's only natural that history follows that trajectory, and it's only natural that certain peoples' history or perspectives are left out of that story.

When I talk about Eurocentricism, it isn't to undermine the achievements of Europeans, which are obviously quite tremendous. But by shining the spotlight on how Eurocentricism works, it becomes easier to see what "gaps" there are in history that still need to be filled in. Those gaps are even in a game like Civilization 4: Eurocentricism explains why they would add more detail in the form of the Holy Roman Empire or Byzantine Empire (which are extensions of Germanic, Roman, and Greek Civilizations) sooner than adding another leader to India's illustrious and influential history -- let alone pulling India apart into Mughals and Mauryans.

dh,

I think thats very important, that the "gaps" need to be filled in, and I think its important when historians do that work. But I also think that also happens naturally also. Even though we get the impression there is one 'official' telling of history, there are always different versions of history books around with different focuses and different levels of detail. There are regional histories as well. When it becomes necessary there will be scholars that come in to integrate these things. And what would have happened if Europe didn't undergo all those transformations and entered in amicable trade relations with foreign states earlier in its history?--I think we would have had an integrated world history earlier. History becomes a function of what people understand as important to talk about.

My only point, is , that besides the fact that history is obviously written from a subjective perspective, there's an objective aspect to it, which makes it more than arbitrary, as long as its scholarly, and generally when people see the word subjective they assume its an arbitrary telling of history.

 

[dh_epic]

I think we're all in agreement then.

... yay, Ethiopia!

 

[Yeekim]

Thanks for answers, guys!

@dh_epic: No, I do not assume that science (or technological innovation, in a narrower sense) is absolutely the only thing contributable to civilization. It is simply one pretty good indicator and I was interested to know if there might be a genuine invention of African origin somewhere in our collective pot . Of course, I fear that these cultures are relatively less studied and therefore we simply might not know.

@troytheface: Now that is interesting! I was pretty sure that moveable type was first used somewhere in China well in AD-s... Seems the book you mentioned is worth a read also... at least judging from the synopsis on Wiki.

 

[MagisterCultuum]

Block print (which is essential to movable type, but doesn't have a system to hold the pieces together to allow them to all print at once) is usually believed to have been invented in China in the early middle ages, but as the GG&S says the Minoans used it to represent the characters in their syllabary before the chinese used it for their logogram charachters.

Guns, Germs, and Steel is a pretty good book, but is is extremely redundant. It would have been an excellent 100 page book, but is unfortunately well over 400 pages long. Several pages in different chapters (and several chapters for that matter) are practically identical except for the fact that he is using examples from different continents. I also feel that his repeated attempts to disprove various racist views of history give too much attention to those theories, making Diamond seem a little desperate to disprove something that most of us don't believe anyway. He seems to give opposing view too much credit in my view, and is often given too much credit for pointing out the role of geography in history (my history classes in elementary school emphasized most of his main points before he wrote the book)

I much prefer 1491. This reviews most of the same concepts (focusing on the Americas), but goes further to explain how some supposedly primative groups were more advanced than we thought, and how native americans probably could have beaten the European invaders.

 

[Yeekim]

I much prefer 1491. This reviews most of the same concepts (focusing on the Americas), but goes further to explain how some supposedly primative groups were more advanced than we thought, and how native americans probably could have beaten the European invaders.

I found an excerpt on the net. Incredible read. Thank you, I'll go and try to find out, under what conditions Amazon ships their stuff in EU

 

[Gecko1]

What would happen if it was the Holy Roman Empire or Prussia that got to America first what then. Would the natives say, "hey you don't deserve to be in the game"? Don't ask I don't know what I said either.

 

[dh_epic]

What would happen if it was the Holy Roman Empire or Prussia that got to America first what then. Would the natives say, "hey you don't deserve to be in the game"? Don't ask I don't know what I said either.

For sure Germanic Civilization would increase in importance, as if it wasn't already top tier. But other Germanic civilizations who are not German-proper would also get more attention, since history would take on a more Germanic trajectory. The Dutch and the Vikings come to mind. Not to mention that Austria might get in there sooner. The Celts might be replaced with the Gauls or Goths (I don't know enough about the early Germanic Tribes), since the United Kingdom would probably be downplayed in its importance.

 

[Gecko1]

Or the Spanish would wipe them out and history would continue as normal. The Portugese where the first to the Americas and the Spanish built the largest and longest lasting to date. Civ isn't centerd around them.

 

[dutchking]

The Spanish built the largest and longest lasting to date. Civ isn't centerd around them.

Do you mean the "largest and longest lasting" empire to date, because if you do, you're wrong by far (worldwide). Just clarifying.

 

[Gecko1]

Sorry forgot to write "empire".

 

[dutchking]

Sorry forgot to write "empire".

So what you're saying is that Spain was the largest empire in the world...aHem! It's fourth next to Britain, France, and Russia (all at the height of their power). Britain had the largest colonial empire in history, consisting of nearly half of the world's land size and population, France was Second in colonial empires, and Russia was even larger than it is today. Beat that!

 

[Gecko1]

In the Americas. Sheesh you know that's what I ment.

 

[dutchking]

In the Americas. Sheesh you know that's what I ment.

You never did completely clarify that! I admit, they were one of the largest in the Americas...

 

[Gecko1]

They owned all of South America. That's big enough to be considerd a domination. "The Domination of the Spanish".

 

[dutchking]

They owned all of South America. That's big enough to be considerd a domination. "The Domination of the Spanish".

Not all of it, just about a little more than half, the Portuguese got Brazil. And that's like, a third of south america.

 

[Gecko1]

They still had all of mexico and a lot of North America.

 

[dutchking]

They still had all of mexico and a lot of North America.

Yeah, but the part they had in North America was split in half with our (US of A) expansion to the west.