Cilpot
Pretentious Schmuck
Dearmad said:
Could you be more pathetic??
It's official: Mali is in as a civ. -snicker-
- Thread starter Dearmad
- Start date
Could you be more pathetic??
The Mongols aren't my particular field of interest. As a Chinese, I have more reason than you to detest them.Xen said:
Gunpowder being invented by Arabs? Come on...
XIII said:The Mongols aren't my particular field of interest. As a Chinese, I have more reason than you to detest them.
Gunpowder being invented by Arabs? Come on...
I dont detest them; they just have nothing that gives them any merit in the first place
as for Arab-Gunpowder connection; its late, but tommorrow I'll do a little scouting, and hopefulyl can find soem good internet sites to give credence to the claim; either way, if the arabs didnt invent gunpowder, they very rapidlly surpassed everythign the chinese ever did with it very, very quicklly; thsi dosent seem particuraley plausible, and leads to thier being some logic behind the thought that the arbas just wholesale invented it; thiers more evidence to back up this claim, but as I said before, it'll have to wait until tomorrow to be fleshed out.
Xen said:I dont detest them; they just have nothing that gives them any merit in the first place
WHAT
!?!? The Mongols created the largest empire in history. Maybe the British Empire was slightly larger (not sure about this) but there's was all spread out in little colonies. The Mongols were one chunk of land.Just an interesting fact, during on of ugly's campaign's, his army travelled 275 miles in 3 days. That is insane.
Reprisal
Warlord
Greek Stud said:
I dunno about anyone else, but this seems to skirt a little too close to breaking some sort of Code of Conduct. I'm going to hazard that the fact that you're Greek has a lot to do with the enmity you're showing towards the Ottomans, and by extension Turkey itself.
I would caution you by saying that no empire is without faults, none at all.
- Rep.
Greek Stud
Prince
Well if people can be Anti-American on here, I will protest against the Agressor State that occupies Northern Cyprus and just flew 44 Fighter Jets over my hometown island a couple of days ago. They also moved their military base from inner Anatolia to Izmir and Turkey only has offensive Military units and transports to carry tanks island to island. I have a right to speak out against policies of nations too. Otherwise all of you have to stop the Bush bashing and complement him on his war on Iraq. well then? let me speak what I want.
Greek Stud
Prince
Tanurian Turks, are early Central Asian Turks that roamed the areas of present-day Turkic States like: Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, Uzabekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, (another State that is in China: T****stan, I forget) and the Alans or Caucasian Albanians or Azerbaijani Turks.
During the early Islamic Jihad, when Arabs attacked Zoroastrian Persia, the Tanurian Turks, China and Mongolia were allied up against the Islamic Arabs, the pre-Islamic Seljuks and pre-Islamic Ottoman Turks. After a successful Jihad, the Ottomans and Seljuks slowly converted to Islam as they married Arab princesses.
During the early Islamic Jihad, when Arabs attacked Zoroastrian Persia, the Tanurian Turks, China and Mongolia were allied up against the Islamic Arabs, the pre-Islamic Seljuks and pre-Islamic Ottoman Turks. After a successful Jihad, the Ottomans and Seljuks slowly converted to Islam as they married Arab princesses.
Mongoloid Cow
Great Khan
Yeah, and I'm sure the Turks can be pissed off too that the Greeks invaded Cyprus in the first place, and a whole heap of crap the Greeks have done to Turkey. I don't hold anything against you, but sheesh! Get over it. There is a world of difference between the Ottoman Turks and the Mongols. And for the people who say the Mongols never did anything for trade or the spread of technology, you are quite simply wrong. The largest thing they did was actually made the Silk Road safe. Especially in the Middle East, the Silk Road had become run down and plagued with bandits, and the Mongols reestablished the trade and killed the bandits off. And that they never built any cities or did anything worthwhile in a good sense is a load of bull**** too. Many cities (such as Samarqand and Bokhara) they rebuilt to state greater than before.Greek Stud said:
I still don't know what that has to do with Mali BTW
Own said:WHAT
Just an interesting fact, during on of ugly's campaign's, his army travelled 275 miles in 3 days. That is insane.
*yaaaaaay, good for them, they had a fast army that coudl travel over soem of thoe most land mark lacking, open land in the world on horseback. wonderful, really.
Xen said:
*yaaaaaay, good for them, they had a fast army that coudl travel over soem of thoe most land mark lacking, open land in the world on horseback. wonderful, really.
That was just an interesting fact I felt like posting. You've avoided my real point. They created the LARGEST empire in history.
Xen, I think you're going a bit far in your criticism of the Mongols. The point should be whether the Mongols are worthy of being in the Civ games as an actual civilization -- I don't think so myself and there we probably agree. They were great achievers yet they were strictly not a civilization (although they were of course a people, an ethnicity with its own culture).
The fact remains that the Mongol invasions were a huge event in world history. Empires were toppled, dynasties wiped out and once great cities burnt to the ground - across Asia from China all the way to Central Europe. That an obscure race of nomads was able to achieve this seems against all odds! They contributed greatly to history if only by the radical changes that they brought to the political map.
We could have a long debate of whether they made a positive contribution but then we're truly on thin ice since it's unclear what is truly positive and negative in this context.
I still don't want to see the Mongol as a civ in Civ4 - to have them build up an enlightened and productive urban empire and then steamroll their enemies with their industrial might and endless armies of conscript infantry.... hmm, something's wrong there!
The fact remains that the Mongol invasions were a huge event in world history. Empires were toppled, dynasties wiped out and once great cities burnt to the ground - across Asia from China all the way to Central Europe. That an obscure race of nomads was able to achieve this seems against all odds! They contributed greatly to history if only by the radical changes that they brought to the political map.
We could have a long debate of whether they made a positive contribution but then we're truly on thin ice since it's unclear what is truly positive and negative in this context.
I still don't want to see the Mongol as a civ in Civ4 - to have them build up an enlightened and productive urban empire and then steamroll their enemies with their industrial might and endless armies of conscript infantry.... hmm, something's wrong there!
On the Arab invention of Gunpowder
If you have a beef with anything presented here, dont take it up with me; take it up with the origional authors; I'm just presenting what they have already written here.
Thier seems to be some evidence that the chinese were using gunpowder in "firelances" as early as 919; but considering that the components used in :Greek fire" which had a counter part in china coudl be used for similer effect, and that if the chinese had been using it for such purposes, did not exapand on its deveopment for over a huindred years, when, apperentlly, the arabs and europeans immediatelly saw the potentials for it, and promptlyl left the chinese eating thier tracks in gunpowder application dosent strike me as somthing all that likelly- to this end, thier is no doubt that the chinese made use if at least soem fo the lememnts of blackpowder; but the invention itself is a specific ratio of these elements.
- "Whether such technology originated in China, or in the Middle East, is still open to some question.
The fact that no "arms", nor high power explosives were mentioned by the Polos as late as 1299, yet Arabic works exist describing Black Powder prior to their journeys, strongly suggests that Black Powder was of Arabic and not Chinese invention. "
("A chronology of Black Powder" by Richard D Frantz)
-"The earliest known reference to the refining of saltpetre appears in an Arabian text dated 1240. Therefore it is extremely unlikely gunpowder was discovered prior to that year. Among the many claims to have discovered it are the Chinese, Hindus, Greeks, Arabs, Germans and English. Within the well-recorded histories of the first four there is no written evidence which would satisfy a historian that any of them discovered or used gunpowder before it came into use in Europe. If one of their people had discovered it some writer doubtless would have mentioned the fact."
(http://riv.co.nz/rnza/hist/gun/gunpdr.htm)
-Specifically, "Saltpetre, the principal ingredient of Black Powder first appears in the writings of Arabian, Abd Allah, in 1200."
("A chronology of Black Powder" by Richard D Frantz)
-while not important in the slightest, while looking over sources for the use of Guns at the Italian siege of Forli(which is apperentlly accurate, but it comes in the late 11th century, which would around 80 years after an arabic invention, so while it supports the arab invention, its just worth this passing note really, as it obviouslly didnt take off in europe outside Italy- which in itself isnt surprsing; Italy was europe's technological, and military heartland anyway), I found out that infamous siege weapon, the Petard, has a name that is French for "little fart".
-thier was an intriuging source lending credent to an Arabic invention of blackpowder as early as the 10th century; the article itself is relitivlly well writtin, but it slinks are borken, and the article is somewhat suspect; I'll give the link to it however http://www.apomie.com/arabhistory.htm
-I would continue my search; but once you start getting porn advertisements on google for this stuff, you know its time to call it quits perhaps I'll coem back in a while, and look for more sources
If you have a beef with anything presented here, dont take it up with me; take it up with the origional authors; I'm just presenting what they have already written here.
Thier seems to be some evidence that the chinese were using gunpowder in "firelances" as early as 919; but considering that the components used in :Greek fire" which had a counter part in china coudl be used for similer effect, and that if the chinese had been using it for such purposes, did not exapand on its deveopment for over a huindred years, when, apperentlly, the arabs and europeans immediatelly saw the potentials for it, and promptlyl left the chinese eating thier tracks in gunpowder application dosent strike me as somthing all that likelly- to this end, thier is no doubt that the chinese made use if at least soem fo the lememnts of blackpowder; but the invention itself is a specific ratio of these elements.
- "Whether such technology originated in China, or in the Middle East, is still open to some question.
The fact that no "arms", nor high power explosives were mentioned by the Polos as late as 1299, yet Arabic works exist describing Black Powder prior to their journeys, strongly suggests that Black Powder was of Arabic and not Chinese invention. "
("A chronology of Black Powder" by Richard D Frantz)
-"The earliest known reference to the refining of saltpetre appears in an Arabian text dated 1240. Therefore it is extremely unlikely gunpowder was discovered prior to that year. Among the many claims to have discovered it are the Chinese, Hindus, Greeks, Arabs, Germans and English. Within the well-recorded histories of the first four there is no written evidence which would satisfy a historian that any of them discovered or used gunpowder before it came into use in Europe. If one of their people had discovered it some writer doubtless would have mentioned the fact."
(http://riv.co.nz/rnza/hist/gun/gunpdr.htm)
-Specifically, "Saltpetre, the principal ingredient of Black Powder first appears in the writings of Arabian, Abd Allah, in 1200."
("A chronology of Black Powder" by Richard D Frantz)
-while not important in the slightest, while looking over sources for the use of Guns at the Italian siege of Forli(which is apperentlly accurate, but it comes in the late 11th century, which would around 80 years after an arabic invention, so while it supports the arab invention, its just worth this passing note really, as it obviouslly didnt take off in europe outside Italy- which in itself isnt surprsing; Italy was europe's technological, and military heartland anyway), I found out that infamous siege weapon, the Petard, has a name that is French for "little fart".
-thier was an intriuging source lending credent to an Arabic invention of blackpowder as early as the 10th century; the article itself is relitivlly well writtin, but it slinks are borken, and the article is somewhat suspect; I'll give the link to it however http://www.apomie.com/arabhistory.htm
-I would continue my search; but once you start getting porn advertisements on google for this stuff, you know its time to call it quits
perhaps I'll coem back in a while, and look for more sourceshr_oskar said:
perhaps I'm not clear; I never said they had no impact; but they had relitivlly little impact, compared to *rea; civlization* (mind you, the Mongols of Gengis Khan couldnt even forge metal; all thier weapons were gotten from the chinese, who had wished to play the mongols against each other; which had been a good tactic in the past (and one similerlly empolyed by the Roman empire often enough in its day). but the impacts of it are overexaggerated, while the effects of the arabs, or rather, islamic based civlization as a whole, are hugelly donwplayed at the same time. The mongol empire lasted only a short while as a unfied entirty, and once split up. the situations was, all said, one marginally different then before the mongols had invaded; the same old empires, but new names and new leaders.
Gabryel Karolin
Gammelgädda
But the Mongols drove hordes of peoples in front of them when they expanded towards Europe, those people ened up settling in Europe and some even got as far as northern Africa. Without the Mongols Germany would have laid somewhere in the Ukraine (so to speak).
Im not saying they had a very advanced culture but much of Asia and Europe (and in extension America) is what it is today because of the Mongols.
Im not saying they had a very advanced culture but much of Asia and Europe (and in extension America) is what it is today because of the Mongols.
Gabryel Karolin
Gammelgädda
Was I really being that unclear, or do you find my statement so absurde that you choose to talk about something that has nothing to do with the topic?
Ivan the Kulak
King
Xen said:prove it.
are my eyes decieving me? for I see no technology
Xen, the Mongols invented the technology of the steppes horse archer. While the Huns used similar tactics, the Mongols perfected the concept, using superb mounted archers divided into Tens, Hundreds, and Thousands to simply mow down anyone who stood against them. This innovation has to be regarded as on a par with Chivalry, which gives you knights in Civ3, or Military tradition giving you Cavalry. If there was a branching tech tree that each civ followed on its own, Steppe Horsemanship would certainly be the tech that would give the Mongols the Keshik. While they left no lasting legacy in terms of art, temples or education, conquest has a culture all its own.
