Printable View
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thaatu
The Paracas culture was probably not disimilar to the Incas. This period was their time of greatness in South America.
No, I don't think it's worth wasting provinces and unit slots on.
Partly because I don't believe it ever happened. Rowing around a coastline must be different to crossing open ocean.
Even if it did happen, it wasn't part of the EB time frame and so would go the way of Lorica Segmentata anyway.
Still, links from Europe to all sorts of places in Asia are far better documented than links to America. AFAIK China had contacts with the Roman Empire. So expanding the map eastward would be much more relevant than expanding it westward.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarcasm
Of course it is. I'm just saying it's theoretically feasible.
Also as far as I know, Rome had contact with China only through certain ambassadors who travelled through land. Contacts with India, however, were made by sea as well.
I got to admit a rome vs. china battle would be kick ass .
Yes I know it would attrach sinophiles but it would be kick ass to see an Augustian legion charging some Chinese halberdier .
Your friend The Persian Cataphract can tell you about sinophiles.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zaknafien
wait were you kidding or do u mean this? cuz i coulda sworn i heard of humanoids and other animals being in antartica b4 it froze over.. or maybe not humanoids but i know for a fact animals were there and im probly 70~80% sure i heard of humanoids but idk maybe my tired mind is making things up :inquisitive:
Oh, its well known fact.
The civilization was called Bartix & they will be replacing Armenia in EB2.
Dunno what units they get though.
:tumbleweed:
:tomato2:
Okay, yes it is very possible that a few of them did go to SA, but its not important enough to add it to the map. Thats it, you see, I would definitely go with India rather than America.
It MIGHT be a good idea to add some trade resources like tobacco to the area, but only if this evidence is confirmed.
And about animals in Antarctica, yes in both the past, and in modern times.
1-Penguins, duh
2-Seals, duh
3-Fish, duh
4-Prehistoric Fish living in an unfrozen lake under the Ice in Antarctica.
5-Dinosaurs that used to live there before the continent shifted.
6-The scientists.
I do not know about Prehistoric humans.
This is one of the few factions that have been concepted in public. You can read all about them and see screenshots of some of their units.Quote:
The civilization was called Bartix & they will be replacing Armenia in EB2.
Dunno what units they get though.
7-Bugs!Quote:
Originally Posted by Olaf The Great
There are several types of cricket that live there. And man brought the 'house fly' to Antarctica (the only species [unless you count humans] that live on all seven continents).
Indeed but he sailed along the coast he never ventured too far into the ocen. and I don't see anywhere in his trip where he'd encounter as heavy a storm as sailors did in the middle of the atlantic.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarcasm
Cheers...
For South American warfare there is Inca:Total War (which I'm very much looking forward to). America for EB is, I agree, not a good idea.
Don't forget the..Quote:
Originally Posted by MarcusAureliusAntoninus
8.Mutated scientist Seals with cricket feelers, fly wings, penguin feet and a dino saur faces.
RAWRBEEPSQUACKCHEHCHEHCHEE HI MY NAMES FRANK
This one's right up my alley... Maritime and Naval history are my thing (from reed and skin canoes to steam, effectively)Quote:
Originally Posted by mAIOR
In abstract: No, they didn't. Or if they did, it would not have been repeated.
Phoenicians would've been using Pentecosters or other similar galley style vessels such as Biremes, maybe Triremes (trieres, in Greek). Even the big round ships used for grain trade by Greek and Roman times weren't fully envisioned yet.
Those Phoenician galleys, like all galleys up to the end of their major use in the 16th century, where not ocean-crossing craft. Even the relatively fair waters of the Aegean could cause issues, as shown by the number of shipwrecks found. A storm could be their end, easily. You have to remember that these ships are built using a mortise and tennon joint, which is rather flimsy. If the ship is shaking about in rough seas, the water is going to come in and cause catastrophic flooding. There was also no waterproofing, nor was the hull coppered or in some other way treated to prevent rot and the shipworm Teredo navalis from slowly ruining their hull.
For these reasons, most galleys would stick within sight of land, and pull their ships up onto land at night to let them dry out. So, assuming even that these Phoenicians followed the African coast, then jumped over to, say, Cape Verde to repair, refit, and resupply, they still have an aproximately 1500 mile journey with no stops to South America. The modern Trireme reconstruction, the Olympias, can only make about 10 knots under sail. To use that as a base, you can see that the trip would have an entire week period where they were in the middle of nowhere, effectively, and subject to storm and current. If it was cloudy, they could easily get lost, since they lacked compass and sextant. A storm, if they survived it, could blow them way off course, and a current could move them in completely the wrong direction.
But here's the kicker: the prevailing winds go East to West. Getting back, even if they made it, would be practically impossible. Those ships had no effective way to tack into the wind, and would be obliged to row back into the eye of the wind. The Olympias could sustain about 4 knots, so using that, we can see that the trip would take almost 3 weeks to get back (since they'd be rowing into the wind, and thus slowed, any advantage skilled Phoenician rowers would have against the Olympias is negligable) Again, this assumes that there was no storm, current, or clouds. That amount of constant, sustained rowing would drain fresh food and water supplies quickly, and is even enough time for the crew to start getting scurvy if they did not carry proper foods with them. I can't say they'd starve, because I don't know how much food they might carry for such a voyage, but its easy to see why there could be issues with this passage in a vessel with little to no protection to the crew from the elements. Sunstroke and sunburn are issues that would not have been prevelant on the way to South America, but devestating on the trip back, as well.
As for other early arrivals to the Americas, well, the Chinese could (and likely did, there's some strong evidence to support that one) have done it before Columbus. We all know that the Vikings did, but they had Iceland and Greenland to hop from. Pacific Islanders? Easily done, but if they did they didn't leave much of a mark. But Phoenicians? Unlikely, or at least unlikely to be repeated after a few ships tried and never came back. Besides, they were traders... It would be a very expensive, dangerous, and long voyage. The profit would be huge, but would it offset the cost of the trip and the multitude of failures that would likely occur?
agreed with that post.
still though if i could mod the map id sure as hell make it to go to america, that would be sweet!
A little rock of an Island (Manana island) off of Monhegan Island near Maine, supposedly has Viking runes on it -- and some people claim that these might be Phoenecian runes. I've seen the "runes" and they looked almost just like cracks to me... but then I certainly knew nothing about Viking runes, and, at the time, hadn't even heard of Phoenicians. :p I'm skeptical, but it's interesting nonetheless.
Really? I'd always assumed that Homer's regular reference to 'black ships' referred to the use of bitumen as a sealant.Quote:
Originally Posted by Larkaan
If the Phoenician (without doubt an excellent seafaring people) sailors didn't use any kind of ocean worthy ships, what were the traders along the Atlantic coast using, and why wouldn't the Phoenicians use such vessels?
Well, the black ships probably refer to tar.
What exactly would be the problem with using cheaply made vessels designed for carrying lots of cargo quickly from A to B if the distance from A to B isn't all that much and if such voyages mostly, if not only, occured during the quiet times of year? I imagine that people back then would've regarded it as not too much of a risk - one worth taking at least. Even if you did get stuck in a storm you could save yourself by getting rid of the cargo couldn't you?
They'd use Bitumen, sure. But the wood is not treated, the Bitumen slowly washes away in water (and could not be reapplied to the hull while underway), and because of the mortise and tennon joins water can come in between the planks. Any spot that was not sealed would provide a point for rot to start spreading, and since the ship is underway for two to three weeks straight at one point without a chance to dry out, the rot can progress pretty rapidly. Those were thin planks of wood, after all. Water could easily come in from over the deck of the vessel, and then settle in the hold.Quote:
Originally Posted by Maeran
As for the ships along the Atlantic Coast, who are you referring to? The Pheonicians traded all the way up to England (for tin), but they would stay along the coast and pull up to the shore often. If you mean the Gallic and Celtic peoples, they would use clinker-built boats, similar to Viking longboats. They'd be used in the same way as a Phoenician galley, but in further Northern waters they didn't have to worry about Teredo navalis and other barnacly things due to the cold water.
As for your question, Tellos Athenaios, cheap vessels would be more likely to suffer in a crossing... poor fitting joints would quickly flood a vessel, and flimsy construction could snap it in two. A well built Phoenician galley is a very light vessel to begin with. As for the calm times of the year... well, if its too calm, then the trip to South America is slower, prolonging the time that the ship is subjected to all the conditions I've described.
I'm not saying that those ships would fall about after 48 hours in the ocean, but 2 to 3 weeks with no overhaul, no drying out, while being tossed on the open ocean would be very hard on the vessel and the crew.
You're talking about Gavin Menzie's 1421 theory correct?Quote:
Originally Posted by Larkaan
That's mostly unproven fiction. The Fleet of the Ming could have gone to America, but there is no evidence that they did. Infact, the vast majority of Chinese and East Asian historians think Gavin Menzies's idea is ridiculous.
Nah, my question was aiming at showing why cheap & cheerful vessels wouldn't have seemed such a bad choice to people back then. Relatively short distances, at the quiet times of year...Quote:
Originally Posted by Larkaan
Its not Menzie that I was thinking of, as far as I can remember. I've read some of his stuff. It's interesting, but like you said, not proven. I wouldn't call it fiction, though... People thought Troy was fiction, after all. The Ming definitely had the ability to do it, though. The Ming Admiral Zheng He had a fleet that would've made Europe collectively soil themselves.Quote:
Originally Posted by Intranetusa
Somewhere I saw a reference talking about Chinese-style stone anchors and/or ballast found off the California coast, geologically and chemically matching Chinese anchors cut from Chinese quarries in the 14th and 15th centuries. I don't know how one geologically and chemically matches a stone to another stone, but I've seen similar comparisons made with, say, marble statues. Unfortunatly, I can't find that reference, and I complete forget where it came from.
The fact of it is the only thing I can remember. Whether an article I bumped across searching through Academic Journals, or a book, or what, I don't know. I had been doing research on JSTOR (an online catalogue of Academic Journal articles) on some Asian history in May, and I might have seen it then, but I can't find it now.
If I'm just crazy and got completely confused, let me know, though...
Well, somewhere in the deep-down hidden sections of my mind there's the faint sound of a ringing bell: IIRC there was this 'Chinese map of America' discovered some time ago which promted the thesis that the Chinese, after the Vikings, were the first to 'discover' the New World?
EDIT: :google: is yer friend: http://images.google.nl/imgres?imgur...%3Dnl%26sa%3DG
A map drawn in 1763 supposedly being copied from an earlier one.....Quote:
Originally Posted by Tellos Athenaios
So - if I compose a tune now and claim I copied it from an original Mozart manuscript which I can't produce you'll just take my word for it? :stupido:
Somehow methinks you're going to have to come up with a wee bit more proof than that especially when the purchaser of the map got the idea from....you guessed it...Gavin Menzies.
I am completely blank as to whether I should believe the stories. Possible? Certainly, many Chines ships were actually of much better quality than the European ships - after all the Chinese ones needed to be able to function again after waiting out a Typhoon or two. But if it actually happened... :juggle: The fact that it's a copy doesn't make the story more credible either...