Why the Past Feels Slower Than It Was - Ada Palmer
Ada Palmer argues that the popular video game Civilization perpetuates a false narrative that time moved slower in the past, showing antiquity turns as 50 years versus modern turns as 1 year. She contends this misconception is also found in textbooks, but historians studying any specific decade find it moved as fast as the present.
Summary
Ada Palmer discusses her research on the video game Civilization (Civ) and its impact on historical perception. She notes that Civ is the world's number one teacher of history, having shipped 70 million copies, and reaches a massive audience since 65% of people with access to technology play video games. The game structures time progression to suggest that historical periods moved at different speeds - with turns representing 50 years in antiquity, 25 years in medieval times, 10 years during the industrial revolution, and just 1 year in modernity. This design implies that as much change happens in one modern year as happened in 50 ancient years. Palmer identifies this as a fundamental misrepresentation that extends beyond gaming into educational materials like textbooks. She challenges this narrative by pointing to historical scholarship, noting that whenever historians examine any specific decade from any time period and location, that period feels as dynamic and fast-moving as our contemporary era. This suggests that the perception of accelerating historical time is a modern bias rather than an accurate reflection of how change actually occurred in different eras.
Key Insights
- Palmer claims that the video game Civ is the number one teacher of history in the world, having shipped 70 million copies
- Palmer states that 65% of people on Earth who have technology play video games, giving games massive educational influence
- Palmer argues that Civ teaches a false progression where antiquity turns represent 50 years while modern turns represent just 1 year
- Palmer contends that textbooks perpetuate the same lie that time moved slower in the past
- Palmer observes that historians studying any specific decade from any era find it feels as fast-moving as the present
Topics
Transcript
[0:00] I'm working on a paper right now about the video game Civ. Civ is the number one teacher of history in the world and it has shipped 70 million copies and 65% of people on Earth who have technology play video games. And what does Civ tell you? Civ tells you that in antiquity a turn is 50 years. And then in the middle ages a turn is 25 years. And then once you get into industrial revolution a turn is 10 years and then 5 years. And in modernity a turn is just one year. Because in one year as much happens now as happened in 50 years in antiquity. [0:32] And that lie is also what our…
Full transcript available for MurmurCast members
Sign Up to AccessMore from Dwarkesh Patel
The Army Sent to Stop Cortés Joined Him Instead - Si Sheppard
Spanish conquistador Cortés faced a threat from Governor Velázquez of Cuba, who sent Don Narvaez with a larger force to arrest him for exceeding his authority. Rather than being defeated, Cortés defeated Narvaez in battle and persuaded the expeditionary force to join him by promising shared wealth from the empire, turning potential enemies into reinforcements.
How 168 Men Captured the Inca Emperor - Si Sheppard
Francisco Pizarro, with only 168 men, captured the Inca Emperor Atahualpa in 1532 at Cajamarca by using psychological tactics with horses and an ambush strategy. Despite Atahualpa's show of dominance and his large army, Pizarro's surprise attack and capture of the emperor allowed him to control the entire Inca social hierarchy.
The Myth of the Helpless Aztecs and Inca - Si Sheppard
Si Sheppard argues that the Aztecs and Incas were not helpless victims but actively developed countermeasures and adaptive strategies against Spanish conquistadors, including terrain manipulation, weapon improvisation, and tactical learning—though they lacked sufficient time to fully master foreign technologies.
How Conquistadors Conquered the Aztecs - Si Sheppard
Conquistador success against the Aztecs relied primarily on steel weapons, horses, and psychological tactics rather than firearms. Steel armor and swords proved far more effective than indigenous weapons made of wood, stone, and obsidian, while horses—animals unknown to the Aztecs—provided decisive military and logistical advantages.
How did a few hundred Spanish soldiers topple two empires? – Si Sheppard
Military historian Si Sheppard explains how a few hundred Spanish conquistadors were able to conquer the Aztec and Inca Empires within just a few years through a combination of technological advantages (horses, steel weapons), psychological warfare, diplomatic manipulation of existing divisions among indigenous peoples, and the catastrophic impact of disease. The conquests were contingent on individual leadership decisions and geographic factors, but were fundamentally enabled by the conquistadors' ability to exploit internal rifts within empires that appeared monolithic from the outside.