History questions not worth their own thread II

[Karalysia]

And convincing people in an age of industrial warfare that using swords in combat is totally awesome.

 

[Ancient Grudge]

With regards to the Nootka convention of 1790.

Can the convention be used as evidence that the British renounced their claims to the Falkland Islands and thus support the claims of the Argentinians? Even though the Spanish broke the terms of the convention by establishing colonies in areas prohibited by it?

 

[GoodGame]

Bushido was invented in the 1920s as a way iof galvanisaing the Japanese Imperial Army.

It was coined before 1900, according to wikipedia.

Apparently it's more appropriate as a collective term for the different honor codes of different samurai houses.

I'd guess Bushido and Chivalry overlap somewhat (feudalistic honor codes for elite soldiery to obey), but Chivalry is probably even vaguer and inspired by Christianity. I'd guess Bushido is more pragmatic and centered on the training of the samurai.

 

[GoodGame]

If you could mod any portion of history into any version of Civilization, what portion of history would be most deserving of such a mod?

 

[LightSpectra]

I'm curious about battles in the 18th century that were decisive despite a very low casualty amount. At Hastenback for example, 35,000 Allies engaged 60,000 French, but there were only something like 3,000 casualties altogether. Was this because only a tiny fraction of their armies fought before withdrawing (presumably over some important tactical position), or did their full armies engage for just an hour or something before regiments started to rout?

 

[GoodGame]

I'm curious about battles in the 18th century that were decisive despite a very low casualty amount. At Hastenback for example, 35,000 Allies engaged 60,000 French, but there were only something like 3,000 casualties altogether. Was this because only a tiny fraction of their armies fought before withdrawing (presumably over some important tactical position), or did their full armies engage for just an hour or something before regiments started to rout?

Googling a bunch of tertiary sources (reviews etc...) it sounds like the victor was the French because they were slower to order a retreat. Both sides failed to achieve success fast enough so they both felt like withdrawing. Also sounds like the Allied commander, Duke of Cumberland, though not green was appointed by nepotism (son of the King) and not very skilled. http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/146401/William-Augustus-Duke-of-Cumberland.

EDIT: Reading more, it might not have been that the Allies weren't winning fast enough but the Duke was too stupid to realize he was beginning to win.

All-in-all, this reminds me that officers sometimes bought their rank through purchasing commissions, so I'd hypothesis that the general trend is ineptitude in leadership and reluctance to lose one's command through losing all one's men, which might explain a trend of low casualty, low success battles.

Most Officers entered the Commissioned Ranks as Ensigns either by purchasing that rank

http://www.janeausten.co.uk/magazine/page.ihtml?pid=101&step=4


EDIT: But I was just reading a much later counterpoint example. Napleon essentially achieved one 'bloodless' victory primarily through maneuver. Sizeable casualties but still only a fraction (at most 12% for the losing side ) of total manpower.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Ulm

 

[Lord Baal]

If you could mod any portion of history into any version of Civilization, what portion of history would be most deserving of such a mod?

I can't mod worth a damn, but I'd choose a really detailed, accurate mod of the period post-Alexander the Great's death. Kind of like the Rome scenario in Civ II, but obviously much bigger and better. I think I'd go with just as the Diadochi were about to go to war, but weren't quite there yet.

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

If you could mod any portion of history into any version of Civilization, what portion of history would be most deserving of such a mod?

I always thought a Rise of Islam scenario would be fun. Start with the Hijra and go all the way to Ain Jalut. A timed Mongol invasion would be key, or someone could bribe Tilapia into telling us how he made the events in Rise and Fall of the Roman Empire. Lots of opportunity for wars, cultural wonders, trade, etc etc. I even went so far as to make most of a map for this scenario, but nothing became of it.

 

[Louis XXIV]

I feel this is a question that probably is worth it's own thread.

I'm used to thinking in terms of modding scenarios, but a full mod should be something bigger. In that case, the answer for me would be an Ancient Mediterranean mod (perhaps similar to TAM ). I feel that it was different enough of a period, but diverse enough to build a Civ-style game around it.

 

[Ajidica]

I personaly think a Reformation to Thirty Years War mod would be interesting. Most people skip over the time once the Reformation is over to the Enlightenment.

 

[Tee Kay]

If you could mod any portion of history into any version of Civilization, what portion of history would be most deserving of such a mod?

Civ3 seriously lacks a good Mongol mod (unless someone have made one since the last time I checked). I have a Mongol Conquests mod I've been working on and off for Civ3 since 2006. I haven't done any actual coding, just making a map and collecting information.

 

[GoodGame]

Non-Civ question, with respect to ACW:

How much of General MacClellan's timidity/indecisiveness was strictly due to his own personality flaws? E.g. His just standing behind his defenses when in Virginia (IIRC).

How much of it was due to issues beyond his control? E.g. lack of national committment to decisive battles, poor morale of troops, poor logistics, etc...

I gather that towards the end of MacClellan's term Lincoln simply wanted a general "who fights", but I'm just wondering if MacClellan's behaviors weren't partly reflections of externalities.

 

[GoodGame]

I always thought a Rise of Islam scenario would be fun. Start with the Hijra and go all the way to Ain Jalut. A timed Mongol invasion would be key, or someone could bribe Tilapia into telling us how he made the events in Rise and Fall of the Roman Empire. Lots of opportunity for wars, cultural wonders, trade, etc etc. I even went so far as to make most of a map for this scenario, but nothing became of it.

That'd be interesting but what would be the final victory? Fall of Byzantine? Plant the Green Cresent in Rome? Prempt the HRE?

 

[ParkCungHee]

I'm probably horribly biased, but I think a Tudor Britain Mod would would be fun.

 

[vogtmurr]

I'm curious about battles in the 18th century that were decisive despite a very low casualty amount. At Hastenback for example, 35,000 Allies engaged 60,000 French, but there were only something like 3,000 casualties altogether. Was this because only a tiny fraction of their armies fought before withdrawing (presumably over some important tactical position), or did their full armies engage for just an hour or something before regiments started to rout?

two other famous battles that were limited engagements between sizable armies are Burkersdorf 1762 and valmy 1792, both of which had decisive consequences.

One idea for a mod came from looking at this map Trojan War

All the protagonists and their starting locations are pointed out, and we even have a rough idea of their relative strength. Combine it with the invasions of the Sea Peoples, with Egypt, Mitanni, and Hittite empires in the near east, and Canaanite-Aramaic people in the Levant. Should easily scale on a Huge map with enough detail.

 

[Dachs]

A Diadochoi mod would be cool and I would sign myself up for "advisor without portfolio" to most fools who'd want to try to make one.

 

[Cull]

During the course of the Middle Ages, did the Papal States ever own Sicily?

 

[madviking]

During the course of the Middle Ages, did the Papal States ever own Sicily?

Byzantine Empire -> Emirate of Sicily -> County of Sicily -> Kingdom of Sicily -> Kingdom of the Two Sicilies -> Italy

So no.

 

[Dachs]

Define "own".

 

[Cull]

Control by any means.