Dearmad said:Heh. On this argument the Fuggers, and Medici, should be a Civ.
A)learn how to Quote
B) In all fairness, while thier exact poltical entities wont be represented, nations in thier areas will be, and on a real world map, one can easilly imagine that the economic prosperity, or decline fo such nations, if it were translated ot the real world, would be based ont he actions of such internal structures.
of course, thats assuming you look beyond face value, which you seem to have a hard time doing with west african civlization already, so perhaps you shouldnt bother.
Dearmad said:
1)proove thier culture "died with out without a trace" when I look to west Africa today, I see a group of nations who, unliek most of the rest of Africa, arnt constantlly in turmoil (though they have, and have had thier fair share, I suppose), and arnt in a constant spirl of economic and social declinel rather I see countires whom are are the slow path of success, after being delt a rather terrible hand in the game fo geographic resources, nations whos only great binder since civilizations arose in the region has been, and continues to be thier unique civlization and culture
2)Do they still control the gold in Africa; no.
Do the Mongol still control a quarter of the world? no.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Are the Mali still and important regional plyaer in Africa? Yes
Are the Mongol still in important in any regard? No.
Dearmad said:
Acadmies were closed down in Greece by Justininan; or rather, the last one was (because Acadmies and the other traditions of higher learning were all sponsored by Pagans; which the devotley christian Justinian couldt stand apperentlly, so he closed 'em down, and kicked them out)
after the closing of the greatest Athenian Academy, thier were no more institution of higher learning and reserch until the rebith of classical civlization in Italy; influnced, weather you want to accept it or not, by the prestigious islamic school in Timbuktu, which had world renowned fame at the time (because, belive it or not, things that you, an dother have never heaqrd of do still still have importance, and in this case, a great deal of it)
Don't call me stupid, who are the Malinese?
There will be no mercy, neo-Roman scum 
It is kind of pointless arguing about who is more deserving than who, and arguing about it without shades of grey. I wouldn't have expected anything more than what has been shown, and I wasn't disappointed. Objectively speaking, there is pathetic difference between France, England, and Germany as opposed to Mali, Mongolia and the Inca, and yet all three are considered worthy of inclusion by most and the latter three considered unworthy by the same majority. Personally, I would consider the latter three better inclusions than say Germany, the Vikings or Spain, but hey - who gives a rat's arse right? Mali was a great empire, and the Mongols had a great one two. Both were incredibly important in world history in different respects. Get over it.
when somthing is commodity in a particuler, such as Gold in the Niger area, it dosent have a great deal of local value; yet, the mali were still rich- why were they still rich? because they were a source for megalithic trade routes that stretched into Europe and Mid east liek no others, and were ten fold more important then the sil rout which the Mongols monopolized ever was
