GhostWriter16
Deity
We need more brown in England then as England was definitely more developed than America.
New Forum Game: History Rewritten Development Thread
- Thread starter ilduce349
- Start date
We need more brown in England then as England was definitely more developed than America.
ilduce349
(Financial, Philo)
Southern England was, but the Scotts where just as barbaric as the Iroquois
Mad Man
Your lord and master
More developed then Tenochtitlan?
Mad Man
Your lord and master
The Iroquois weren't as barbaric as there invaders, but nevertheless I see what your trying to say
The Iroquois probably had a more politically complex system of government than England did, for one.
ilduce349
(Financial, Philo)
The Europeans where more developed then the Americans. Tenochtitlan didn't have any roads.
The Iroquois may have been less barbaric, maybe it wasn't the right word to use. But they weren't as developed.
ilduce349
(Financial, Philo)
I guess my history teacher was wrong then. My bad.
FYI, the Indians never had as much need for roads as Europeans because they lack horses and wheeled vehicles to travel along them. The Incans did however build an impressive network of roads (for people on foot and llamas) radiating out from Cuzco to every part of their empire.
ilduce349
(Financial, Philo)
I knew the Incas did, I thought the Aztecs didn't. The Aztecs and Incas still weren't as developed as the Europeans or Asians. You can't deny that.
I don't know about the Incas. This was an empire that managed to unite people from Ecuador to Chile speaking hundreds of languages traversing all types of terrain imaginable and were some of the finest metalsmiths and builders in the world at the time. Politically and economically it was often compared to the Soviet Union since they had a sort of proto-Communism going, complete with a sort of collectivist, cash-less society and regime which tried to be totalitarian. I'd say the Incas were on par, or almost, in most criteria with most of Europe and Asia at the time of conquest. The decisive factors in their defeat were civil war (the Spanish arrived in the middle of a succession crisis), a smallpox outbreak (which caused said succession crisis), guns, horses and steel.
It's not like Washkar was much better. The original heir died with Huayna Capac and they were stuck between bad choices. Atahuallpa was just more ruthless and had more strength on the account of inheriting Huayna's Ecuadorian army.
ilduce349
(Financial, Philo)
Guns and steel could have been invented in America, but it wasn't due to lack of development, population and trade. Please note: By development I mean that each Brown territory has 1 population 1 infra higher then the white territories, thats the only difference.
Link
Scarves
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2009
- Messages
- 1,706
Because the Native American's ways of killing each other aren't sophisticated enough for your tastes?
EDIT- Oh, and Europeans didn't invent guns either.
ilduce349
(Financial, Philo)
Hence why I said Europe and Asia
The new world wasn't as advanced as the old world
The new world wasn't as advanced as the old world
ilduce349
(Financial, Philo)
You saying Inca was better then Spain, China, France, England etc?
