Most Important and Influential River in Human History?

[The imperial canadian dutchy]

Obviously the Tiber
Yangtze,Indus,Euphrates,Tigris, Nile ,Danube , Volga, Thames

[OMGeverynameistaken]

This topic makes me cry.

>India is a monoculture

Map of primary Indian language groups:

[img]http://media.sais-jhu.edu/openpublish/sites/default/files/India-Style-08.jpg[img]

And that's just the major families. I have had it asserted to me that every Indian child learns at least five dialects and three languages just to function within any given province.

Map of primary religious groups in India:

Historically this would have been far more intermingled, to the point where doing this sort of map would have been impossible, of course, given the odd mix of religion and politics in India, particularly with the competition of the Mughals and Marathas in the 18th century. I imagine some people switched religion quite a bit.

[Pacifornia]

If you have time, check out this video about the Colorado river and the Hoover dam. It's kinda long and old but very informative as to why this river important to my area's history.
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=dXv9V7qsjN ... Xv9V7qsjNI

[Alleniana]

I really can't think of anyway they have affected anything particularly majorly, except for perhaps Incan/Aztec/Mayan gold.

Contributions in trading, discovery, agricultural technology, industrialization, the culinary field, hunting, realm of politics, the english language, fishing, healing, even where cities are today are largely built over already existing Indian settlements.

Trading: I suppose, but a lot of that is hardly used today
Discovery: Same; it would've happened without them
Agricultural technology: Alright, granted, potatoes and stuff
Industrialization: Eh?
Culinary: I don't think there is a single culture on earth that did not contribute to this in some way
Hunting: Same as discovery, though probably a bit more valid
Politics: Hmm? Don't see it...
English: Aborigine, Chinese, Indian, South African, Irish, etc. all those cultures have contributed to English in the same way
Fishing: Same as hunting
Healing: I don't see much there except for perhaps some folk knowledge
Cities: Well, considering how many settlements there were and how they took over all the good spots, that's kind of hard NOT to do...

[Arumdaum]

Native American cultures have had a fair amount of underestimated influence and the mississipi river happened to be important to the many nations living on it, it was also an important center for the extensive trade networks crossing the Americas and continued the be an important center after colonial invasion.

I really can't think of anyway they have affected anything particularly majorly, except for perhaps Incan/Aztec/Mayan gold.

I don't think the Mississippi was relevant to any of them...

Especially Tawantinsuyu. The distance between it and the Mississippi is like France and the Congo so there's that

[Arumdaum]

Contributions in trading, discovery, agricultural technology, industrialization, the culinary field, hunting, realm of politics, the english language, fishing, healing, even where cities are today are largely built over already existing Indian settlements.

Trading: I suppose, but a lot of that is hardly used today
Discovery: Same; it would've happened without them
Agricultural technology: Alright, granted, potatoes and stuff
Industrialization: Eh?
Culinary: I don't think there is a single culture on earth that did not contribute to this in some way
Hunting: Same as discovery, though probably a bit more valid
Politics: Hmm? Don't see it...
English: Aborigine, Chinese, Indian, South African, Irish, etc. all those cultures have contributed to English in the same way
Fishing: Same as hunting
Healing: I don't see much there except for perhaps some folk knowledge
Cities: Well, considering how many settlements there were and how they took over all the good spots, that's kind of hard NOT to do...

American crops made a major, major impact upon human civilization. We shouldn't see every contribution as being of similar value.

They sent populations in the "Old World" skyrocketing, and is largely the reason for China's massive population growth in the past few centuries. Things such as potatoes, chili peppers, sweet potatoes, cassava, and corn have found themselves everywhere, and are found in cuisines in places all over.

Kimchi? Impossible without the chili pepper. French fries? Impossible without the potato. Polenta? Wouldn't exist without corn. However, this goes much farther, with crops such as cassava being a staple in large parts of Africa, potatoes being staples in places such as Russia and Ireland, and corn and sweet potatoes being treats enjoyed in East Asia.

[Arumdaum]

Obviously the Tiber
Yangtze,Indus,Euphrates,Tigris, Nile ,Danube , Volga, Thames

Was the Thames really that important?

It was sort of just there. It didn't really cause industrialization or create the British Empire or anything. This is unlike the Nile, Indus, Tigris & Euphrates, or Yangtze & Huang He, which were largely responsible for the creation of agriculture/civilization in those areas.

[Mushet]

Contributions in trading, discovery, agricultural technology, industrialization, the culinary field, hunting, realm of politics, the english language, fishing, healing, even where cities are today are largely built over already existing Indian settlements.

Trading: I suppose, but a lot of that is hardly used today
Discovery: Same; it would've happened without them
Agricultural technology: Alright, granted, potatoes and stuff
Industrialization: Eh?
Culinary: I don't think there is a single culture on earth that did not contribute to this in some way
Hunting: Same as discovery, though probably a bit more valid
Politics: Hmm? Don't see it...
English: Aborigine, Chinese, Indian, South African, Irish, etc. all those cultures have contributed to English in the same way
Fishing: Same as hunting
Healing: I don't see much there except for perhaps some folk knowledge
Cities: Well, considering how many settlements there were and how they took over all the good spots, that's kind of hard NOT to do...

Trading: Had quite the effect didn't it, if it wasn't for Indians where would the Hudson Bay company, the first corporation have been?
Discovery: Indian guides were used extensively, hell European explorers would fake out Indians on boats pretending they were in trouble, then drag them in and force them to help.
Agricultural technology: The world would be a much different place without the plants Indians developed, even just the potato where would Russia be without it, hell they wouldn't even have vodka, and that goes without mentioning Maize, beans, squash, chocolate, vanilla, a much better cotton, tobacco, tomatoes, list goes on and on, there was also the way they farmed them, very different, they had to teach.
Industrialization: The quechua came up with the guayra ie, wind oven, without it Spanish mining at Potosi wouldn't have been nearly as effective, their smelting methods didn't really work with the thin air.
Culinary: Yes but think of all the ingredients developed by the natives, unique position.
Hunting: There were methods taught.
Politics: The enlightenment was inspired by seeing the politcal state of Indians, they were exposed to much more egalatarian structures, Sir Thomas More's Utopia incorporated what he heard about the "New World", and of course in the less explicity political books about Indians this perception of the Indian filtered in, of course it was a lot of projections, noble savage romanticization but it had it's effect, descriptions by Montaigne and Lahontan. it inspired Rousseau in his Discourse on the origins of Inequality, Paine used them as a model, so did Alexis de Tocqueville, Thomas Hobbes was a hater though, but it inspired him negatively for Leviathan. Indians became a symbol for liberty among colonists, y'know before they hated 'em, colonists dressed up as Indians for the boston tea party, not to mention Haudenosaunee influence on the founding fathers.
English: Well yeah, still had that influence as well.
Fishing: spurred innovation, non-natives started adopting gill nets like them
Healing: Quechua discovered the cure for malaria, quinine, Huron gave Jacques Cartier the cure for scurvy, Quechua knew how to prevent goiter with Macrocystis, Indians of Northern California and Oregon used the bark of Ramnus purshiana to cure constipation, now it's the most common laxative, there's a lot more, some adopted by European science, some not, I don't wanna make a list too extensive though.
Cities: It's influence isn't it, oh and the colonists were the ones TAKING it over

[Alleniana]

Trading: I suppose, but a lot of that is hardly used today
Discovery: Same; it would've happened without them
Agricultural technology: Alright, granted, potatoes and stuff
Industrialization: Eh?
Culinary: I don't think there is a single culture on earth that did not contribute to this in some way
Hunting: Same as discovery, though probably a bit more valid
Politics: Hmm? Don't see it...
English: Aborigine, Chinese, Indian, South African, Irish, etc. all those cultures have contributed to English in the same way
Fishing: Same as hunting
Healing: I don't see much there except for perhaps some folk knowledge
Cities: Well, considering how many settlements there were and how they took over all the good spots, that's kind of hard NOT to do...

American crops made a major, major impact upon human civilization. We shouldn't see every contribution as being of similar value.

They sent populations in the "Old World" skyrocketing, and is largely the reason for China's massive population growth in the past few centuries. Things such as potatoes, chili peppers, sweet potatoes, cassava, and corn have found themselves everywhere, and are found in cuisines in places all over.

Kimchi? Impossible without the chili pepper. French fries? Impossible without the potato. Polenta? Wouldn't exist without corn. However, this goes much farther, with crops such as cassava being a staple in large parts of Africa, potatoes being staples in places such as Russia and Ireland, and corn and sweet potatoes being treats enjoyed in East Asia.

Alright, I suppose, though getting back on topic, neither the Mississippi nor the Amazon contributed to a majority of those crops.

Obviously the Tiber
Yangtze,Indus,Euphrates,Tigris, Nile ,Danube , Volga, Thames

Was the Thames really that important?

It was sort of just there. It didn't really cause industrialization or create the British Empire or anything. This is unlike the Nile, Indus, Tigris & Euphrates, or Yangtze & Huang He, which were largely responsible for the creation of agriculture/civilization in those areas.

Indeed; same for Tiber, or Seine. It just was.

Trading: I suppose, but a lot of that is hardly used today
Discovery: Same; it would've happened without them
Agricultural technology: Alright, granted, potatoes and stuff
Industrialization: Eh?
Culinary: I don't think there is a single culture on earth that did not contribute to this in some way
Hunting: Same as discovery, though probably a bit more valid
Politics: Hmm? Don't see it...
English: Aborigine, Chinese, Indian, South African, Irish, etc. all those cultures have contributed to English in the same way
Fishing: Same as hunting
Healing: I don't see much there except for perhaps some folk knowledge
Cities: Well, considering how many settlements there were and how they took over all the good spots, that's kind of hard NOT to do...

Trading: Had quite the effect didn't it, if it wasn't for Indians where would the Hudson Bay company, the first corporation have been?
Discovery: Indian guides were used extensively, hell European explorers would fake out Indians on boats pretending they were in trouble, then drag them in and force them to help.
Agricultural technology: The world would be a much different place without the plants Indians developed, even just the potato where would Russia be without it, hell they wouldn't even have vodka, and that goes without mentioning Maize, beans, squash, chocolate, vanilla, a much better cotton, tobacco, tomatoes, list goes on and on, there was also the way they farmed them, very different, they had to teach.
Industrialization: The quechua came up with the guayra ie, wind oven, without it Spanish mining at Potosi wouldn't have been nearly as effective, their smelting methods didn't really work with the thin air.
Culinary: Yes but think of all the ingredients developed by the natives, unique position.
Hunting: There were methods taught.
Politics: The enlightenment was inspired by seeing the politcal state of Indians, they were exposed to much more egalatarian structures, Sir Thomas More's Utopia incorporated what he heard about the "New World", and of course in the less explicity political books about Indians this perception of the Indian filtered in, of course it was a lot of projections, noble savage romanticization but it had it's effect, descriptions by Montaigne and Lahontan. it inspired Rousseau in his Discourse on the origins of Inequality, Paine used them as a model, so did Alexis de Tocqueville, Thomas Hobbes was a hater though, but it inspired him negatively for Leviathan. Indians became a symbol for liberty among colonists, y'know before they hated 'em, colonists dressed up as Indians for the boston tea party, not to mention Haudenosaunee influence on the founding fathers.
English: Well yeah, still had that influence as well.
Fishing: spurred innovation, non-natives started adopting gill nets like them
Healing: Quechua discovered the cure for malaria, quinine, Huron gave Jacques Cartier the cure for scurvy, Quechua knew how to prevent goiter with Macrocystis, Indians of Northern California and Oregon used the bark of Ramnus purshiana to cure constipation, now it's the most common laxative, there's a lot more, some adopted by European science, some not, I don't wanna make a list too extensive though.
Cities: It's influence isn't it, oh and the colonists were the ones TAKING it over

Trade: That could have happened anywhere else.
Discovery: It still would've happened, just not as quickly. Not to mention, it happened everywhere else too; Australia, most of Africa, etc.
Agriculture: Yeah, Arumdaum said that too.
Industrialization: As important as Potosi was, I don't think you can really assign much of industrialization to it.
Culinary: China has an even larger culinary tradition which had been absorbed to a greater level, to give one example.
Hunting: As happened with most other native cultures, and it only added to a large body that already existed.
Politics: Granted, but any old stone-age culture could've worked for that. Hell, you could've transplanted Celts into that position and the same thing would've happened
English: Alright, but it wasn't much
Fishing: Interesting... but not particularly major
Healing: That's... quite major. I'll give you that one, but really, a lot of cultures had more influence on medicine, for example, Asian folk remedies
Cities: Uh... ehh...?

[OMGeverynameistaken]

Obviously the Tiber
Yangtze,Indus,Euphrates,Tigris, Nile ,Danube , Volga, Thames

Was the Thames really that important?

It was sort of just there. It didn't really cause industrialization or create the British Empire or anything. This is unlike the Nile, Indus, Tigris & Euphrates, or Yangtze & Huang He, which were largely responsible for the creation of agriculture/civilization in those areas.

British people like to feel important. Just let them be.

[Alleniana]

Was the Thames really that important?

It was sort of just there. It didn't really cause industrialization or create the British Empire or anything. This is unlike the Nile, Indus, Tigris & Euphrates, or Yangtze & Huang He, which were largely responsible for the creation of agriculture/civilization in those areas.

British people like to feel important. Just let them be.

[Immoren]

Kymi river obv.

[Mushet]

American crops made a major, major impact upon human civilization. We shouldn't see every contribution as being of similar value.

They sent populations in the "Old World" skyrocketing, and is largely the reason for China's massive population growth in the past few centuries. Things such as potatoes, chili peppers, sweet potatoes, cassava, and corn have found themselves everywhere, and are found in cuisines in places all over.

Kimchi? Impossible without the chili pepper. French fries? Impossible without the potato. Polenta? Wouldn't exist without corn. However, this goes much farther, with crops such as cassava being a staple in large parts of Africa, potatoes being staples in places such as Russia and Ireland, and corn and sweet potatoes being treats enjoyed in East Asia.

Alright, I suppose, though getting back on topic, neither the Mississippi nor the Amazon contributed to a majority of those crops.

Was the Thames really that important?

It was sort of just there. It didn't really cause industrialization or create the British Empire or anything. This is unlike the Nile, Indus, Tigris & Euphrates, or Yangtze & Huang He, which were largely responsible for the creation of agriculture/civilization in those areas.

Indeed; same for Tiber, or Seine. It just was.

Trading: Had quite the effect didn't it, if it wasn't for Indians where would the Hudson Bay company, the first corporation have been?
Discovery: Indian guides were used extensively, hell European explorers would fake out Indians on boats pretending they were in trouble, then drag them in and force them to help.
Agricultural technology: The world would be a much different place without the plants Indians developed, even just the potato where would Russia be without it, hell they wouldn't even have vodka, and that goes without mentioning Maize, beans, squash, chocolate, vanilla, a much better cotton, tobacco, tomatoes, list goes on and on, there was also the way they farmed them, very different, they had to teach.
Industrialization: The quechua came up with the guayra ie, wind oven, without it Spanish mining at Potosi wouldn't have been nearly as effective, their smelting methods didn't really work with the thin air.
Culinary: Yes but think of all the ingredients developed by the natives, unique position.
Hunting: There were methods taught.
Politics: The enlightenment was inspired by seeing the politcal state of Indians, they were exposed to much more egalatarian structures, Sir Thomas More's Utopia incorporated what he heard about the "New World", and of course in the less explicity political books about Indians this perception of the Indian filtered in, of course it was a lot of projections, noble savage romanticization but it had it's effect, descriptions by Montaigne and Lahontan. it inspired Rousseau in his Discourse on the origins of Inequality, Paine used them as a model, so did Alexis de Tocqueville, Thomas Hobbes was a hater though, but it inspired him negatively for Leviathan. Indians became a symbol for liberty among colonists, y'know before they hated 'em, colonists dressed up as Indians for the boston tea party, not to mention Haudenosaunee influence on the founding fathers.
English: Well yeah, still had that influence as well.
Fishing: spurred innovation, non-natives started adopting gill nets like them
Healing: Quechua discovered the cure for malaria, quinine, Huron gave Jacques Cartier the cure for scurvy, Quechua knew how to prevent goiter with Macrocystis, Indians of Northern California and Oregon used the bark of Ramnus purshiana to cure constipation, now it's the most common laxative, there's a lot more, some adopted by European science, some not, I don't wanna make a list too extensive though.
Cities: It's influence isn't it, oh and the colonists were the ones TAKING it over

Trade: That could have happened anywhere else.
Discovery: It still would've happened, just not as quickly. Not to mention, it happened everywhere else too; Australia, most of Africa, etc.
Agriculture: Yeah, Arumdaum said that too.
Industrialization: As important as Potosi was, I don't think you can really assign much of industrialization to it.
Culinary: China has an even larger culinary tradition which had been absorbed to a greater level, to give one example.
Hunting: As happened with most other native cultures, and it only added to a large body that already existed.
Politics: Granted, but any old stone-age culture could've worked for that. Hell, you could've transplanted Celts into that position and the same thing would've happened
English: Alright, but it wasn't much
Fishing: Interesting... but not particularly major
Healing: That's... quite major. I'll give you that one, but really, a lot of cultures had more influence on medicine, for example, Asian folk remedies
Cities: Uh... ehh...?

They weren't all stone age, all I'm saying is they had quite the influence, as for the rivers I was just objecting to your only 400 years of history premise.

[Alleniana]

Alright, I suppose, though getting back on topic, neither the Mississippi nor the Amazon contributed to a majority of those crops.


Indeed; same for Tiber, or Seine. It just was.


Trade: That could have happened anywhere else.
Discovery: It still would've happened, just not as quickly. Not to mention, it happened everywhere else too; Australia, most of Africa, etc.
Agriculture: Yeah, Arumdaum said that too.
Industrialization: As important as Potosi was, I don't think you can really assign much of industrialization to it.
Culinary: China has an even larger culinary tradition which had been absorbed to a greater level, to give one example.
Hunting: As happened with most other native cultures, and it only added to a large body that already existed.
Politics: Granted, but any old stone-age culture could've worked for that. Hell, you could've transplanted Celts into that position and the same thing would've happened
English: Alright, but it wasn't much
Fishing: Interesting... but not particularly major
Healing: That's... quite major. I'll give you that one, but really, a lot of cultures had more influence on medicine, for example, Asian folk remedies
Cities: Uh... ehh...?

They weren't all stone age, all I'm saying is they had quite the influence, as for the rivers I was just objecting to your only 400 years of history premise.

That's quite true, not stone age.

Anyway, I get what you saying, though in any case, I don't think their influence was quite as great as the majority of other societies.

[Trelso]

The Seine is probably the most influential river in history. Purely because it became important earlier than the Thames, which would be second place. No other river has really seen the scale of intercontinental trade (mostly because Spain landed their trade at coastal ports rather than any of their rivers... do they even have rivers? I can't think of one) that the Seine and Thames have, mostly due to the introversion of the Chinese and Indians (until recently of course, but rivers are pretty useless nowadays anyway) the repeated sacking of the various Tigris region civilisations every few centuries since the Romans arrived, the Nile due to the decline in importance of, well, the Nile region, since the Roman era (....seeing a pattern there) or were highly isolated from the rest of the world such as the Amazon and Mississippi to name the most obvious American rivers.

Also hard to rank the Don, Danube and Rhine (and I'm sure I'm missing a Russian River, it'd get the same response as the Don however) as they sort of weren't important prior to the medieval era (well the Rhine and Danube were basically Roman borders) and then never became quite as important as the Thames in the post medieval era.

However if forced to pick a top three...

Seine
Thames
mmmh Yangtze just purely due to the number of people who live on it and thus their influence in the various times that China hasn't been ultra introverted.

[Alleniana]

The Seine is probably the most influential river in history. Purely because it became important earlier than the Thames, which would be second place. No other river has really seen the scale of intercontinental trade (mostly because Spain landed their trade at coastal ports rather than any of their rivers... do they even have rivers? I can't think of one) that the Seine and Thames have, mostly due to the introversion of the Chinese and Indians (until recently of course, but rivers are pretty useless nowadays anyway) the repeated sacking of the various Tigris region civilisations every few centuries since the Romans arrived, the Nile due to the decline in importance of, well, the Nile region, since the Roman era (....seeing a pattern there) or were highly isolated from the rest of the world such as the Amazon and Mississippi to name the most obvious American rivers.

Also hard to rank the Don, Danube and Rhine (and I'm sure I'm missing a Russian River, it'd get the same response as the Don however) as they sort of weren't important prior to the medieval era (well the Rhine and Danube were basically Roman borders) and then never became quite as important as the Thames in the post medieval era.

However if forced to pick a top three...

Seine
Thames
mmmh Yangtze just purely due to the number of people who live on it and thus their influence in the various times that China hasn't been ultra introverted.

Probs missing Volga
Also, intercontinental trade, silk road probably takes the cake/dumpling

[Trelso]

The Seine is probably the most influential river in history. Purely because it became important earlier than the Thames, which would be second place. No other river has really seen the scale of intercontinental trade (mostly because Spain landed their trade at coastal ports rather than any of their rivers... do they even have rivers? I can't think of one) that the Seine and Thames have, mostly due to the introversion of the Chinese and Indians (until recently of course, but rivers are pretty useless nowadays anyway) the repeated sacking of the various Tigris region civilisations every few centuries since the Romans arrived, the Nile due to the decline in importance of, well, the Nile region, since the Roman era (....seeing a pattern there) or were highly isolated from the rest of the world such as the Amazon and Mississippi to name the most obvious American rivers.

Also hard to rank the Don, Danube and Rhine (and I'm sure I'm missing a Russian River, it'd get the same response as the Don however) as they sort of weren't important prior to the medieval era (well the Rhine and Danube were basically Roman borders) and then never became quite as important as the Thames in the post medieval era.

However if forced to pick a top three...

Seine
Thames
mmmh Yangtze just purely due to the number of people who live on it and thus their influence in the various times that China hasn't been ultra introverted.

Probs missing Volga
Also, intercontinental trade, silk road probably takes the cake/dumpling

Volga, that's the one (I think, unless I'm missing more!)

Silk road lacks a key feature for this discussion otherwise I would agree with you... that key feature is water

[Alleniana]

Probs missing Volga
Also, intercontinental trade, silk road probably takes the cake/dumpling

Volga, that's the one (I think, unless I'm missing more!)

Silk road lacks a key feature for this discussion otherwise I would agree with you... that key feature is water

Not really; I think it goes over or around Aral, Caspian and Black or something, and there is a naval Silk Road that goes through/near Mekong, Indus & Ganges.
Though nobody has quite argued for that, and I'm not about to.

[L Ron Cupboard]

Obviously the Tiber
Yangtze,Indus,Euphrates,Tigris, Nile ,Danube , Volga, Thames

Was the Thames really that important?

It was sort of just there. It didn't really cause industrialization or create the British Empire or anything. This is unlike the Nile, Indus, Tigris & Euphrates, or Yangtze & Huang He, which were largely responsible for the creation of agriculture/civilization in those areas.

I'd say the Royal Greenwich Observatory has had quite an impact, and that was there because of the Thames and British Admiralty. The Greenwich Meridian. Greenwich Mean Time, its work on mapping the world and on longitude.

[Alleniana]

Was the Thames really that important?

It was sort of just there. It didn't really cause industrialization or create the British Empire or anything. This is unlike the Nile, Indus, Tigris & Euphrates, or Yangtze & Huang He, which were largely responsible for the creation of agriculture/civilization in those areas.

I'd say the Royal Greenwich Observatory has had quite an impact, and that was there because of the Thames and British Admiralty. The Greenwich Meridian. Greenwich Mean Time, its work on mapping the world and on longitude.

GMT kind of pales into insignificane compared to east-west trade, or billions or people, or the invention of bread.

[OMGeverynameistaken]

I'd say the Royal Greenwich Observatory has had quite an impact, and that was there because of the Thames and British Admiralty. The Greenwich Meridian. Greenwich Mean Time, its work on mapping the world and on longitude.

GMT kind of pales into insignificane compared to east-west trade, or billions or people, or the invention of bread.

Or allow for the concentration of enough people to necessitate the invention of government, floodplain agriculture, stimulate the development of religion, metallurgy, economics and trade. You know, things which resulted from people's proximity Indus, Yangtze, Yellow, Euphrates, Tigris and Nile rivers.

But all that, naturally, pales into insignificance next to the glorious British Empire, which naturally the single most influential thing ever in the history of humanity.

[Mushet]

They weren't all stone age, all I'm saying is they had quite the influence, as for the rivers I was just objecting to your only 400 years of history premise.

That's quite true, not stone age.

Anyway, I get what you saying, though in any case, I don't think their influence was quite as great as the majority of other societies.

I think they had at least as much influence as any other continent.

[Northwest Slobovia]

GMT kind of pales into insignificane compared to east-west trade, or billions or people, or the invention of bread.

Or allow for the concentration of enough people to necessitate the invention of government, floodplain agriculture, stimulate the development of religion, metallurgy, economics and trade. You know, things which resulted from people's proximity Indus, Yangtze, Yellow, Euphrates, Tigris and Nile rivers.

But all that, naturally, pales into insignificance next to the glorious British Empire, which naturally the single most influential thing ever in the history of humanity.

Well, it is. I mean, the Scott Expedition alone dramatically increased the number of corpsicles in Antarctica, all by itself. Insignificant countries like Norway couldn't even manage to contribute one. Sheesh!

[Alleniana]

That's quite true, not stone age.

Anyway, I get what you saying, though in any case, I don't think their influence was quite as great as the majority of other societies.

I think they had at least as much influence as any other continent.

Ehh... today, true, but in pre-Columbian times, the only continents less influential were Antarctica and Australia, one home to stone-age people with some fancy stories and concepts, and the other with no people at all.

[Mushet]

I think they had at least as much influence as any other continent.

Ehh... today, true, but in pre-Columbian times, the only continents less influential were Antarctica and Australia, one home to stone-age people with some fancy stories and concepts, and the other with no people at all.

That's because of the lack of interaction with the rest of the world.