so you find yourself in 272 bc....

[bobbin]

Yep i'm from Britian, Scotland to be exact and I can tell you it pleases me to see someone use the correct spelling of sulphur! none of this silly "sulfur" business.

[Aemilius Paulus]

Yep i'm from Britian, Scotland to be exact and I can tell you it pleases me to see someone use the correct spelling of sulphur! none of this silly "sulfur" business.

Yes, that and the fact you spelled "distil" with one "L" at the end, and not "distill". I also choose British English, despite living in America. American is a mere bastardisation, a dialect, deviating from the original and purer British English , 1/2.

Excuse me? Generalization much?

A generalisation, and a true one. I do not know if it is too much or just enough, but I do know that Americans value quick and easy things perhaps overtly so. Just look at their inventions , e.g.: "drive-thru" restaurants, banks, vaccinations, medicine. The vaccinations clearly overstepped it, especially so due to their significantly smaller effectiveness (anywhere from 20-50% less effective)

[Azathoth]

Yes, that and the fact you spelled "distil" with one "L" at the end, and not "distill". I also choose British English, despite living in America. American is a mere bastardisation, a dialect, deviating from the original and purer British English , 1/2.

Who do you think you are, Lovecraft?

Vaccination? Seriously?

[satalexton]

@Ibrahim

Perhaps you could introduce them the steam engine first, I'm sure they'll be overjoyed.

[bobbin]

@Ibrahim

Perhaps you could introduce them the steam engine first, I'm sure they'll be overjoyed.

Steam "engines" have been around for ages IIRC the first known evidence of one is is the 1st century AD. It was considered a toy, for some reason none ever had the idea to use for anything else

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

[satalexton]

the seres might use it =/ they already use natural gas to boil salt...

[Dewirix]

I'm still not convinced it's as easy as picking a side and then giving them guns.

Aside from the cost of mass production of guns, powder and shot and the military and social conservatism you'd have to overcome, once you managed to prove the concept how long would it be before your enemies developed the same weapons? Obviously this is more likely to be the case if you're fighting settled states rather than nomads.

Diffusion of weapons technology is certain to outpace imperial expansion, especially one that's reliant on siege trains and fixed infrastructure like gun foundries and powderworks.

In short, any advantage conferred by guns would be at best temporary and might be outweighed by the costs. In the short to medium-term, I'd imagine that you wouldn't field all-gun armies, but I suppose some units might adopt them.

As to the use of steam engines, I recently read Robert Allen's The British Industrial Revolution in Global Perspective. In it he argues that steam only developed because in coalfield areas of the UK engines could burn cheap, low-quality fuel and could be used to replace relatively expensive labour.

Everywhere else in the world had to wait until the engines became more efficient before it was cost-effective to use them. I would have thought that in the ancient world the relative costs of labour, capital and raw materials would mean that labour-intensive processes were preferred over those that needed investments of money or raw materials.

I think this is why they call economics the dismal science. It always spoils the fun...

[Cute Wolf]

I'd love to simply land myself on any steppe nomads, and create gunpowders and teaching them how to fight with guns and muskets. Well, the nomads are naturally better missile fighters, so I'd expect I could conquer the wolrd in 10 years with my "nomadic dragoon" army.

But I'd also love to land in Athens, and write several scrolls about Chemistry, Physics, and Biology, as well as maybe math...

Oh yeah, to create nitroglyverins, you'll just need a bunch of animal fat, boil them with ash, add some ammount of salts and then you harvest the thick liquid on the bottom, yeah, glycerine.

And about the nitrates, I'll go the nearby saltpeter deposits, and a big jar of redistilled vinegar is more than enough to made nitric acid. BUt hey... I'll start to taught them (either nomads or hellenes) how to create a good fertilizers first, and then made solar cells instead of oil based engines.



And at least, when I got bored, I'll just go to Barbaropolis with my dragoons and start shooting them. And yeah.... create a large, 5 meter deep, 20 meters square pit when a lot of Romaioi barbaroi thrown naked and free to run inside, while they become a moving target practice.

[Aemilius Paulus]

Who do you think you are, Lovecraft?

Huh? Are you referring to my outlandish plans for improving Roman Empire? Then why did you quote that post of mine?

Vaccination? Seriously?

Yeah, just Google it...

[Azathoth]

Huh? Are you referring to my outlandish plans for improving Roman Empire? Then why did you quote that post of mine?

Just Google it.

And I was referring to the part where you said that Americans invented banks, vaccination, and medicine.

[Ibrahim]

Yes, that and the fact you spelled "distil" with one "L" at the end, and not "distill". I also choose British English, despite living in America. American is a mere bastardisation, a dialect, deviating from the original and purer British English , 1/2.

actually, taken from a historical perspective, American english is hardly a bastardization; if anything, one could make a better case for american english being "purer" than the british english of today: some southern dialects in the Carolinas** are the closest living dialects to that spoken by shakespeare*; almost all the dialects retain archaic features and terms (rhoticism being the most prominent), to varying degrees, and lastly, they are older than modern british english, which in only ~200 yesr old. most dialects in the US east of the mississipi, as well as canadian english, are anywhere from ~400 to ~250 years old. so no, pver schwa'd a's and missing postvocalic r's are not features of a "pure" dialect-just the features of one of many dialects. besides, I find the idea of "bastardized" and "pure" to be entirely pointless. am I going to go to an egyptian and tell him my dialect is purer because I use wala instead of yala?




*no, I'm not making it up-they often pronounce things in an archaic manner: check this out: http://www.renfaire.com/Language/ . it is confirmed by wikipedia, and any entry of "great vowel shift")

**some, not all varieties.

@stalexon: yeah, yeah, when you lose you respond with petty jabs

[satalexton]

Yeah, it -can- be done...you're merely accelerating a process that happened during the Ming dynasty (silly Qing nomads and their obscession with HAs)

OT-ish: Can volleys of bolts, destroy a cavalry charge? How did the Seres do it?

[bobbin]

actually, taken from a historical perspective, American english is hardly a bastardization; if anything, one could make a better case for american english being "purer" than the british english of today: some southern dialects in the Carolinas** are the closest living dialects to that spoken by shakespeare*; almost all the dialects retain archaic features and terms (rhoticism being the most prominent), to varying degrees, and lastly, they are older than modern british english, which in only ~200 yesr old. most dialects in the US east of the mississipi, as well as canadian english, are anywhere from ~400 to ~250 years old. so no, pver schwa'd a's and missing postvocalic r's are not features of a "pure" dialect-just the features of one of many dialects. besides, I find the idea of "bastardized" and "pure" to be entirely pointless. am I going to go to an egyptian and tell him my dialect is purer because I use wala instead of yala?




*no, I'm not making it up-they often pronounce things in an archaic manner: check this out: http://www.renfaire.com/Language/ . it is confirmed by wikipedia, and any entry of "great vowel shift")

**some, not all varieties.

I was aware of that americans used some more archaic parts of the language but surely those dialects changed as much over time as british english did so the notion of one being older than the other is a bit of a moot point?

ps scots english still contains a lot of the old aspects of english, rhoticism being the most obvious.

[Phalanx300]

Well the Sweboz forests, I would fit in best there, maybe even have a chance to do some raids and get filthy rich.

Though I'm not sure whether I would get accepted seeing I don't really speak ancient Germanic it would be very hard to understand. Though I definately have the physical appearance of a Germanic more then any other.

[Ibrahim]

I was aware of that americans used some more archaic parts of the language but surely those dialects changed as much over time as british english did so the notion of one being older than the other is a bit of a moot point?

ps scots english still contains a lot of the old aspects of english, rhoticism being the most obvious.

they chaneged since then, as do all dialects, but not nearly as much as British english.

and yes, I did make the point of age(and "pureness") being moot. language is never standardized; even in middle english we find one dialect pronuncing knee as "k-ney" while another has it "k-no" (damn I wish I were making this up)

however, the distinction between dialects is begining to die out, replaced by a "general american" accent, which is modelled on northern midlands english (western Pennsylvania, Ohio, northern Indiana), with western influence (on is pronunced "an" as opposed to northern midlands "oon" or "o-an*"). and the area round the great lake is also going through a "norther-cities shift", with changes almost as extreme as the great vowel shift.


*there has to be a better way of representing this

@Dewirix: even socially conservative society, such as the japanese in the 16th century, will adopt it; an awesome weapon is just that. and as I pointed out, the costs are actually advantageous for cetralized government, placing a premium on more efficient (i.e modern) government structures. In fact, when I get around to installing EB-alex.exe, I'll make an experiment with that in mind.

[Aemilius Paulus]

And nevertheless Oxford English is the world standard. Which is what I use, and which is what I learned since I was five, giving my speech the distinct flavour of accent as well.

[A Very Super Market]

The Tidewater accent is limited to a few islands around Chesapeake bay. All other dialects, be they British or American, are bastardisations.

[Azathoth]

But the point is, how are you going to make those guns? The principle alone isn't enough. Then, you can't really mass produce them - the best you can get would be a stockpile of a few thousand primitive firearms after a couple of years.

however, the distinction between dialects is begining to die out, replaced by a "general american" accent, which is modelled on northern midlands english (western Pennsylvania, Ohio, northern Indiana), with western influence (on is pronunced "an" as opposed to northern midlands "oon" or "o-an*"). and the area round the great lake is also going through a "norther-cities shift", with changes almost as extreme as the great vowel shift.

What about the Brooklyn accent, buddy?

And nevertheless Oxford English is the world standard.

Is it? Most seem to use American English.

[bobbin]

however, the distinction between dialects is begining to die out, replaced by a "general american" accent, which is modelled on northern midlands english (western Pennsylvania, Ohio, northern Indiana), with western influence (on is pronunced "an" as opposed to northern midlands "oon" or "o-an*"). and the area round the great lake is also going through a "norther-cities shift", with changes almost as extreme as the great vowel shift.

Interesting, I've always assumed that the american accent came from the dutch. if you've heard dutch people speaking english you'll know what i mean.

*there has to be a better way of representing this

Don't worry i understand what you mean

[Ibrahim]

Interesting, I've always assumed that the american accent came from the dutch. if you've heard dutch people speaking english you'll know what i mean.

nope-its basically english from the english

its, as I said, more archaic than modern british english, with modifications. general American is considered the "ideal" compramise between the dialects. the only reason its based on Northern midlands is because its the dialect with the most features seen as "compramise". the first dictionaries that show "general american" pronunciation was, not surprisingly, from Ohio, where northern midlands is anchored. the closest accent however to GA is in Nebraska/Iowa, since its the area where eastern dialects meet western ones.

What about the Brooklyn accent, buddy?

well, the brooklyn accent isn't from the great lakes now, is it?

and even it has been mellowing-though at a slower rate.