Designing Egypt in Civ7: Which Ramses should lead?

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

Could go all the way back to Neithhotep for Old Kingdom rep. 2nd ruler of the 1st dynasty of a unified Egypt was a female leader, the first woman ruler in history. That's pretty noteworthy.

How much do we know about her reign, in which potential abilities could be made from?

The general idea that people are lesser leaders options for originating from a different ethnic group is not one I’m a big fan of, personally. It feels, again to me, I don’t believe this is anyone’s argument, too close to a form of exclusionary essentialism in identity, whereas to me cultural identity is a profoundly messy matter with no easily drawn borders, far more complex than ethnic origin.

Now, if the argument is that Cleo, while fascinating, is not so remarkable that she should constantly get in the game at the expanse of all other remarkable Egyptian options, then yes.

I too have no problem with Cleo being of Macedonian origin, leading Egypt. She was officially a Pharoah and is interesting in game and as a historical person. Though after getting two different iterations of her in Civ 6, I agree it's time for a change.

Well, to be honest, I don't think there's much, at all, exeptional about Piye, either, compared to quite a few other choices, here, relatively speaking, other than him being definitely Black, which is, admittedly, the sole trait Henri is focused on. I don't think that is nearly enough.

I mean Nubia conquering Egypt isn't something that needs to be ignored. That being said I wouldn't consider Piye to be the first choice, or only choice, for an Egyptian leader. I would rather make him a leader of Nubia, or a leader of both Nubia and Egypt, if dual leaders were ever to return.

 

[Dale]

Regardless, with a notable number of good choices of Egyptian Pharoahs to choose from (we're not really hurting for choice), as it is, I think a radical iconoclast whose bucking of the trends only ended up being undone after his death by his own son (who, himself, is better known in common parlance than the father) should be much lower down the list of priorities, to be honest.

Could you please stop saying Tutankhaten dismantled all of Akhenaten's reforms? Also, Monotheism in Egypt lasted past Akhenaten's reign. After Akhenaten was Smenkhkare and Neferneferuaten (disputed as to which order) who maintained Atenism. Tutankhaten also wished to maintain Atenism, but due to his extreme weakness of rule, Ay has the ultimate influence to force Tutankhaten to revert Akhenaten's reforms, and change his name to Tutankhamun. It's speculated that Ay was in the pocket of the High Priests of Amun, and ultimately they were the ones who facilitated Ay's rise to Pharaoh when Tutankhamun mysteriously died at such a young age.

Akhenaten I think would make a really fun religious leader of Kemet.

Could go all the way back to Neithhotep for Old Kingdom rep. 2nd ruler of the 1st dynasty of a unified Egypt was a female leader, the first woman ruler in history. That's pretty noteworthy.

Neithhotep isn't exactly confirmed, there are hints and speculation she held rule, but no absolute confirmation. For that, you need to go to Merneith. Merneith has been attested as a ruler on the tomb seal of Den, whereas Neithhotep is not. Merneith's tomb is also in comparison to male rulers of Kemet at the time. Merneith I think would also be a more "fun" ruler, as she was noted as using the Nile to extend Kemet's influence to include more of the Nile valley tribes.

I suppose really, it doesn't matter to me who leads Kemet. As long as it isn't a Ptolemy, or bloody Cleopatra! No Greeks! They did more to wipe out Kemet history, or downright translated it incorrectly, than any other entity on the planet in the history of Man.

 

[pineappledan]

Having Egypt led by Cleopatra is like having the Netherlands led by Louis Napoleon Bonaparte.

 

[Henri Christophe]

Having Egypt led by Cleopatra is like having the Netherlands led by Louis Napoleon.

I need to disagree. Cleopatra behave as a pharaoh, as Isis, the wife of Osíris.
Meanwhile Napoleon is just a dude who conquer lands outside his country, he belongs to it's own country.

 

[pineappledan]

Louis Bonaparte - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

I think the comparison is fairly apt, actually. A foreign monarch determined to rule in the interests of his/her native subjects in the face of a larger regional power led by a close relation.

 

[pokiehl]

I don’t think that’s a fair comparison at all and I don’t think most people do either.

 

[dagriggstar]

Hatshepsut is my vote.

Honestly, putting Piye as the leader of Egypt to me feels more like a disservice to Nubia. Like "oh, Nubia itself isn't worth depicting so here have Piye of Egypt instead".

 

[Henri Christophe]

Honestly, putting Piye as the leader of Egypt to me feels more like a disservice to Nubia. Like "oh, Nubia itself isn't worth depicting so here have Piye of Egypt instead".

Despite I would like to see Piye in this game, I don't think he is the best pick to Nubia, who can have queens as in civ6.
But Piye should fit perfectly if civ7 bring back the a leader for two nations mechanic

 

[Dale]

I disagree with Kemet being ruled by anyone other than a native Pharaoh. That means no Pharaoh after Nectanebo II in 342BC when the Persians entered Men-nefer. That also means, no Pharaoh of the 15th Hyksos Dynasty.

I also pose the question, why go outside a native Pharaoh, when you have such brilliant leaders to choose from?

- Hatshepsut: infrastructure construction, trade, wonders.
- Thutmose III: military genius, expansionist.
- Ramesses II: chariot master, monument builder.
- Amenhotep III: art & culture, diplomacy, trade.
- Amenhotep IV/Akhenaten: art & culture, religious reformer, diplomacy, monument builder (especially Akhetaten and the Great Temple of the Aten).
- Khufu & Djoser: these two are similar as monument builders.
- Pepi II: ruled for 94 years, longest of any Pharaoh, trade, diplomacy.
- Tutankhaten/Tutankhamun: okay I'll include Tut here, he was a very weak ruler, with almost nothing to attest his reign, except Ay's influence over the boy, his early death under mysterious causes, and his tomb.

PS: You'll also notice I call the country Kemet. Because that's what it was called. Egypt is a Greek invention, from Aegyptus. Signifying a son of Zeus, the Greek's called Kemet Aegyptus because the patron God of Kemet at that time was Ptah, the son of Ra. Ra is to Zeus, as Ptah is to Aegyptus.

 

[pokiehl]

The Ptolemaic Kingdom was a massively important and interesting time in Egyptian history. (and indeed world history). It's no accident that Cleopatra, a Ptolemaic pharaoh, is among the most enduring icons of ancient Egypt. Representing Egypt via the Ptolemies is not a snub to the other aspects of Egyptian history. I'd just rather Ptolemy I himself be included in the game rather than Cleopatra.

 

[Henri Christophe]

PS: You'll also notice I call the country Kemet. Because that's what it was called. Egypt is a Greek invention, from Aegyptus. Signifying a son of Zeus, the Greek's called Kemet Aegyptus because the patron God of Kemet at that time was Ptah, the son of Ra. Ra is to Zeus, as Ptah is to Aegyptus.

Thanks for this explanation, I thought Egypt word derives from a geografical perception (south of Egeu)
But Kemet means land of blacks, once @Patine said it's a counter part of Desheret, the red land.
And since Egypt also call they self as lord of the two lands (What I assume was Kemet and Desheret).
Why do you choice call they Kemet and not Desheret?

 

[pokiehl]

But Kemet means land of blacks

Here, "black land" refers to the fertile black soil of the Nile's flood plains.

 

[Henri Christophe]

Here, "black land" refers to the fertile black soil of the Nile's flood plains.

That's a good point!
How can we be sure about that?
Because I read at the Unesco book about African History and they put in doubt if it's mean the black land (because the land isn't black) or means the people were black

 

[pokiehl]

That's a good point!
How can we be sure about that?

Mainstream serious scholarship of ancient Egypt contends that the name refers to the soil. I think it's rather self-evident when looking at the other part of this dual name, "red land" which refers clearly to the desert. Thus it's a dichotomy - black fertile soil contrasting with harsh red desert.

And since Egypt also call they self as lord of the two lands (What I assume was Kemet and Desheret).

"Lord of the Two Lands" does not refer to that. It refers to Upper (southern) and Lower (northern) Egypt--another clear example of the Egyptians' fondness for dualistic concepts.

 

[Dale]

Ah crap, now you gunna get me talking..... *sigh*

Okay...... I'll cover a couple of things.
Kemet (kmt in their language) is "black land", which represents the black soil brought down the Nile by the yearly floods to the Nile Delta (Lower Egypt). We know this to mean the land not people through the use of the hieroglyph 𓊖 which denotes a location. The same hieroglyph is used at the end of city names.
Deshret (dsrt in their language) is "red land", which represents the deserts surrounding the Nile Valley. Deshret came to represent "outside Kemet", or foreign lands, since Kemet was seen as the safe, fertile lands of the Nile, and deshret was seen as the hostile lands outside the safety of the Nile valley. It also means the red crown which is part of the Pschent double crown for Kemet.
Remen Kemet (rmn-kmt) is "people of the black land", which represents the people of Kemet themselves.

The word Pharaoh (pr-ꜥꜣ in their language) is "great house". This is from the hieroglyphs representing the house (box with opening on the bottom) and great (horizontal wooden column). From the earliest time of Kemet through to the 18th Dynasty, Pharaoh represented the line of Pharaohs. Not a specific Pharaoh, but the line itself (from the column). Hm was used when referring to the person who was King. Sometime in the 18th Dynasty, possibly Thutmose III, but definitely by Akhenaten, Pharaoh's use changed from the line of Pharaohs, to Pharaoh themself as a ruler. It became a title. And by the 23rd Dynasty the use of Hm had all but disappeared.

Next we get to the "two lands" bits. Still with me?
Lower Egypt is regarded as the Nile delta, and some way up river (southwards). Think from around modern Faiyum to the sea. Bjtj means "one with the bee". The bee is the symbol of Lower Egypt. When the bee hieroglyph is combined with a loaf and sitting person with the red deshret crown hieroglyphs, means King of Lower Egypt.
Upper Egypt is regarded as the Nile from where Lower Egypt ends, to the first cataract south of modern day Aswan. Nswt means "of the sedge". The sedge is the symbol of Upper Egypt. Again, when the sedge hieroglyph is used with the loaf and water hieroglyphs, means King of Upper Egypt. The King of Upper Egypt wore the white hedjet crown.

Together, nswt-bjtj is the combined King of Upper and Lower Egypt. The pschent is the combined crown of Upper and Lower Egypt, being the white crown placed inside the red crown. Nswt-bjtj means "of the sedge and the bee", and is the title given to the current King of both lands. In this way, the pschent, nswt-bjtj, and "the sedge and the bee", became known as "the two lands".

Note that "the two lands" does not mean Kemet and Deshret. It means Upper and Lower Egypt.

EDIT: Just to note that "Hm", used when referring to the King, is similar in meaning to the English HM Charles III. Hm in Kemet was pretty much "his/her majesty".

 

[Dale]

The Ptolemaic Kingdom was a massively important and interesting time in Egyptian history. (and indeed world history). It's no accident that Cleopatra, a Ptolemaic pharaoh, is among the most enduring icons of ancient Egypt. Representing Egypt via the Ptolemies is not a snub to the other aspects of Egyptian history. I'd just rather Ptolemy I himself be included in the game rather than Cleopatra.

Yeah, I do agree the Ptolemaic era was a pretty interesting one for Egypt. But at the end of the day, it's akin to saying the Civ ruler of Tibet should be Xi. A technically correct statement, but a very poor representation of native Tibet. I would much prefer my Civ leaders to be native leaders. Specially when there are so many awesome native leaders.

 

[Henri Christophe]

it's akin to saying the Civ ruler of Tibet should be Xi

Xi Jinping? I don't think it's a fair comparasion, because Xi is leading a China after the conquest of Tibet.
It would be the same of advocate Otávio Augusto to be leader of Egypt, because Egypt was a Roman province under the reign of Otávio.

On other hand, the Ptolomeus and Cleopatras behaves as pharaohs, they fought to protect Egypt of Roman invasion

I would much prefer my Civ leaders to be native leaders. Specially when there are so many awesome native leaders.

But I understand your point, it is a fair point.
Egypt is very important civ and could have more then one leader, some natives and other not, in a way where everybody stay happy.

 

[pokiehl]

Yeah, I do agree the Ptolemaic era was a pretty interesting one for Egypt. But at the end of the day, it's akin to saying the Civ ruler of Tibet should be Xi. A technically correct statement, but a very poor representation of native Tibet. I would much prefer my Civ leaders to be native leaders. Specially when there are so many awesome native leaders.

I don't think that's a fair comparison. Unlike in your example, the Ptolemies were Egyptian rulers, ruling Egypt from Egypt, immersed in all aspects of the Egyptian state and religious apparatuses. Some of the greatest achievements in all of Egyptian history occurred under their dynasty; the best preserved Egyptian temple dates to their time. In short, Ptolemaic rule of Egypt was of markedly different character than say, Achaemenid dominion.

I think treading down the "native rulers only" path might prove intellectually perilous. The grandchildren and onward of Ptolemy I Soter who took up the mantle of the empire would have been born and raised in Egypt. Should we exclude Saladin from ruling Arabia because he was not ethnically Arab? Napoleon was born in Corsica; does his heritage preclude him from being included as leader of France? Do you similarly dislike Nader Shah, an ethnic Turkoman, leading Persia?

Moreover, focusing this much on race is ahistorical. You are looking at this through a very modern nativist lens.

 

[Patine]

Xi Jinping? I don't think it's a fair comparasion, because Xi is leading a China after the conquest of Tibet.
It would be the same of advocate Otávio Augusto to be leader of Egypt, because Egypt was a Roman province under the reign of Otávio.

On other hand, the Ptolomeus and Cleopatras behaves as pharaohs, they fought to protect Egypt of Roman invasion

The Ptolemies were not foreign conquerors of Egypt, you say?

 

[Patine]

Moreover, focusing this much on race is ahistorical. You are looking at this through a very modern nativist lens.

Race and ethnicity are quite different concepts, despite being very often disingenuously and irresponsibly conflated in modern polemics.