historical inaccuracy on civ3.com

[kingbill555]

"England's success in repelling the Spanish fleet saved England and the Netherlands from potential consolidation into the Spanish empire, but despite the armadas' defeat, the blow dealt by the Spanish upon England's reputation as the greatest European power was palpable."

This is taken from the spanish civ profile on civ3.com.

At the time of the armada, spain was definitely the most powerful country in the world both economically and militarily ( although England's navy was better trained). This error should be corrected.

 

[andrewgprv]

It's more a Typo then a Historical Innacuracy it's obvious that they swapped Engalnd and Spain in accident.

 

[kingbill555]

No it's not a typo. We know this because they use the word "despite." "Despite" is used when you are going say to say something bad about something but then say something redeeming about it. If you switched England and Spain around then both comments on Spain would be bad and despite would no longer be the appropriate word to use.

 

[Fayadi]

Originally posted by kingbill555
"England's success in repelling the Spanish fleet saved England and the Netherlands from potential consolidation into the Spanish empire, but despite the armadas' defeat, the blow dealt by the Spanish upon England's reputation as the greatest European power was palpable."

This is taken from the spanish civ profile on civ3.com.

At the time of the armada, spain was definitely the most powerful country in the world both economically and militarily ( although England's navy was better trained). This error should be corrected.

Spanish as the most powerful country in the world?That's bull****,
you people really think Europeans owned the history.THE ENTIRE EUROPE'S Economy was smaller than China in the medieval age.Not until Industrial Revolution does the west economy exceed China.

 

[Panda]

Originally posted by Fayadi
Spanish as the most powerful country in the world?That's bull****,
you people really think Europeans owned the history.THE ENTIRE EUROPE'S Economy was smaller than China in the medieval age.Not until Industrial Revolution does the west economy exceed China.

China was a regional superpower due to it's isolationist policies, whereas Europeans turned Africa, the Americas, Australia and large parts of Asia into their colonies. Due to it's larger sphere of influence in the 16th century, Spain is credited as the most powerful country in the world.

It's like scoring in Civ3: the larger the territory you hold, the more points you get.

 

[kingbill555]

Fayadi, you are an idiot, stay awake in history class from now on, moron.:die:

 

[Stefan Haertel]

kingbill555, that is not an appropriate way to express yourself.
Fayadi has a very good point there.
Just because you don't agree with him doesn't mean you can insult him in such way.

 

[kingbill555]

No, he doesn't have a point. The Spanish army would have massacred the Chinese. What would the chinamen have used against the spanish tercios? Bicycles?

 

[Silverflame]

Originally posted by kingbill555
No, he doesn't have a point. The Spanish army would have massacred the Chinese. What would the chinamen have used against the spanish tercios? Bicycles?

Actually, no. At that time, China was still strong, enjoying a trade surplus and causing a trade deficet in Europe. It wasnt until much later when more advances in gunpowder were made the European nations could beat China, and that was Britain, not spain.

 

[kingbill555]

Silverflame, in the middle ages China was superior to Europe but by the 16th century they were a militarily backwards nation. Civil wars between Mongol imperial heirs had weakened them. Japanese incursions into Korea and raiding of Chinese coastal cities by the Japanese further weakened China.

 

[Silverflame]

Originally posted by kingbill555
Silverflame, in the middle ages China was superior to Europe but by the 16th century they were a militarily backwards nation. Civil wars between Mongol imperial heirs had weakened them. Japanese incursions into Korea and raiding of Chinese coastal cities by the Japanese further weakened China.

No, it was not until the Industrial Revolution when Europe began to outpace China. And the Industrial Revolution did not start until the late 1700s. And the Opium War was in 1839, and that was the switching point for Europeans and China.

 

[Fayadi]

Originally posted by kingbill555
No, he doesn't have a point. The Spanish army would have massacred the Chinese. What would the chinamen have used against the spanish tercios? Bicycles?

China during the early Qing Dynasty managed to fight off Russian Cossacks on its northen border.At that time Russian Cossacks can be considered one of the best cavalry in Europe.Before 1800 No European power dares to challenge China

About the Japanese raiding Chinese coastal cities and Korea,it happened during the Ming Dynasty even then we managed to repel them.Early Qing Dynasty was quite powerful ,I dont think the Japs had the power to raid us.

I know it is still debatable as who is the most powerful nation at that time,but economically China is the largest.Our steel production in Ming Dynasty in 1400's is larger than the steel production in Britain during the early industrial revolution.Imagine China's steel production in the 1700's......

 

[Silverflame]

Originally posted by Fayadi


China during the early Qing Dynasty managed to fight off Russian Cossacks on its northen border.At that time Russian Cossacks can be considered one of the best cavalry in Europe.Before 1800 No European power dares to challenge China

About the Japanese raiding Chinese coastal cities and Korea,it happened during the Ming Dynasty even then we managed to repel them.Early Qing Dynasty was quite powerful ,I dont think the Japs had the power to raid us.

I know it is still debatable as who is the most powerful nation at that time,but economically China is the largest.Our steel production in Ming Dynasty in 1400's is larger than the steel production in Britain during the early industrial revolution.Imagine China's steel production in the 1700's......

Exactly. Of course, China did go downhill after Britain entered the Indutrial Revolution, and soon after Britain became industrialized, spain was basically out of the picture in europe, conquered by Napoleon, losing mexico...

 

[kingbill555]

Spain was the ONLY global power in the world in the 16th century, China was a regional power. At the height of Spain's power, its empire was larger than China's.

The Chinese were conquered by the Mongols because the Chinese were weak militarily. The Europeans and Arabs successfully fought off the Mongols. And the Russians fought them off too. MUCH of Russia remained unconquered.

 

[Silverflame]

Originally posted by kingbill555
Spain was the ONLY global power in the world in the 16th century, China was a regional power. At the height of Spain's power, its empire was larger than China's.

The Chinese were conquered by the Mongols because the Chinese were weak militarily. The Europeans and Arabs successfully fought off the Mongols. And the Russians fought them off too. MUCH of Russia remained unconquered.

16th century was the Renaissance! There werent any powers during then! And China remained strong under the mongols, and the Qing dynsasty successfully kicked the mongols out. It was then when the age of exploration began that spain gained power. By then, China had already recovered, and even if it was regional, spain did not have enough standing armies to take over china.

And if Europe was more powerful than china, why did Britain have to resort to drugs to get silk and tea out of china?

 

[Illustrious]

Originally posted by Silverflame
16th century was the Renaissance! There werent any powers during then!

So many things wrong there that it's hard to know where to begin.

First, the Renaissance was a process which lasted for more than a single century. It began (at differing times for different locations) in the 14th and 15th centuries. By the 16th, the process was at its height.

More important, where on earth do you get the notion that there were no powers in Europe during the Renaissance? Both Spain and Portugal were recognisable as major colonial powers by the 16th century (in fact, Portugal was past its peak by then).

The papacy had endorsed this in the Treaty of Tordesillas (1494) which authorised Spain to colonise any unclaimed territory west of a line drawn 370 leagues west of the Cape Verde Islands, and Portugal to colonise any unclaimed territory east of this line. During the next decades, both countries took active steps to fulfil the Treaty.

That, for example, is why Portugal had colonised Brazil and large chunks of Africa, and Spain controlled the Caribbean and much of Central America, by the early part of the 16th century. So far as local domination is concerned, Spain also controlled what is now Belgium and the Netherlands.

 

[Silverflame]

Originally posted by Illustrious


So many things wrong there that it's hard to know where to begin.

First, the Renaissance was a process which lasted for more than a single century. It began (at differing times for different locations) in the 14th and 15th centuries. By the 16th, the process was at its height.

More important, where on earth do you get the notion that there were no powers in Europe during the Renaissance? Both Spain and Portugal were recognisable as major colonial powers by the 16th century (in fact, Portugal was past its peak by then).

The papacy had endorsed this in the Treaty of Tordesillas (1494) which authorised Spain to colonise any unclaimed territory west of a line drawn 370 leagues west of the Cape Verde Islands, and Portugal to colonise any unclaimed territory east of this line. During the next decades, both countries took active steps to fulfil the Treaty.

That, for example, is why Portugal had colonised Brazil and large chunks of Africa, and Spain controlled the Caribbean and much of Central America, by the early part of the 16th century. So far as local domination is concerned, Spain also controlled what is now Belgium and the Netherlands.

You are absolutely correct, I just didnt really mean that. What I was saying was that during the Renaissance, there was not as much competition and rivalry then later. And youre right about Portugal being past its peak by then. I guess I suddenly became sort of ignorant

Spain was a power of Hapsburgs by the Age of Absolutism, but then the French Revolution rolled around, and Napoleon conquered spain. So I guess I just used really bad phrasing because now I dont even know what I was trying to say.

 

[Knight-Dragon]

Originally posted by kingbill555
No, he doesn't have a point. The Spanish army would have massacred the Chinese. What would the chinamen have used against the spanish tercios? Bicycles?

Bicycles weren't invented then. If you want to debate, pls come up with at least a few reasonable points.

The Spanish coming to China to 'massacre' them would find themselves hard-pressed; these weren't the Stone Age-types you find in the Americas. The Chinese had an empire, held together by culture and the Confucian philosopy; and still had an army of more than a million men. The Chinese forces still had their cavalry, cannons (with all sorts of evil projectiles), projectile weopans, support and logistics corps etc to meet the projected Spanish 'threat'.

In the 16th century, India and China both had economies and a production bases that were larger than all of Europe. The China trade drew the annual Spanish trading fleets fr Mexico, carrying Mexican silver (silver is the medium of exchange in China; more valuable than gold) in exchange for Chinese produce (tea, silks, lacquer, metals etc), to Manila (the trade around Chinese waters were still carried by Chinese junks). It led to a worldwide silver crisis, because so much silver had been sucked into the Chinese economy thru this annual trade.

And later, the Dutch, English, French and what-have-you came too, for the rich trade in the region. The Dutch even set up shop in Formosa (Taiwan), but they were driven off by Koxinga, the Ming Chinese loyalist.

 

[Knight-Dragon]

Originally posted by kingbill555
Silverflame, in the middle ages China was superior to Europe but by the 16th century they were a militarily backwards nation.

Ever heard of a Chinese dynasty called the Ming? Ever heard of the seven naval expeditions sent out to explore all the way to East Africa by the Yongle emperor?

Each fleet consisted of hundreds of vessels and manned by 25000 men (according to one record). How many in the Spanish Armada (which headed only for England)?

Ever heard of the five Ming army expeditions (of tens of thousands of troops) into the steppes to search and hunt down Mongol tribes?

Civil wars between Mongol imperial heirs had weakened them.

??? The Mongols had been driven out of China in 1368; whatever civil war they had wasn't any cause for Chinese 'weakness', more of strength I think...

Japanese incursions into Korea and raiding of Chinese coastal cities by the Japanese further weakened China.

Hideyoshi thought he could walk over Korea and take China, but the Ming armies sent down into the Korean penisular, and the Korean navy showed him otherwise; decimating his precious army of samurai. Few made it back to Japan.

If you're referring to the 'waku' pirates raiding China's coasts, well, most of them were actually Chinese...

 

[Knight-Dragon]

Originally posted by Silverflame
16th century was the Renaissance! There werent any powers during then!

Spain comes to mind, along with France, Austria, England, Poland (very strong at this time)...

And China remained strong under the mongols, and the Qing dynsasty successfully kicked the mongols out. It was then when the age of exploration began that spain gained power. By then, China had already recovered, and even if it was regional, spain did not have enough standing armies to take over china.

The Mongols were kicked out by the Ming, who ruled fr 1368 till 1644, before the Manchus came in. And the Manchus only managed to grab the country, because the Chinese were embroiled in civil wars, with peasant rebels stalking the land, due to bad times. Even so, they took half a century before really consolidating their hold on action.

And if Europe was more powerful than china, why did Britain have to resort to drugs to get silk and tea out of china?

Aye, the reason is simple - Britain had nothing the Chinese wanted to buy (that they can use), so they sold them Bengal opium... The Chinese economy is self-sufficient at this time, before being wrecked by massive internal uprisings (think Taiping Uprising) with casualties more than that occurred during WW2...