Why add orthodoxy and protestantism but not an African or Native american religion?

They didn't. There were different religious backgrounds in the Ottoman Empire itself.
 
I don't think all Native American religious practices were just empty, passive pantheons. These traditions made serious demands on their members, and that is part why these religions are often still taken seriously by native american tribes to this day. They didn't do what the Greek and Roman slaves did and abandon their religion as a bunch of empty mythology :p



There were tens of millions of Aztecs and Mayans at the time of conquest, meaning that theirs were world religions too. The whole point is that this game includes inquisitors.

Why can't my Spanish Catholics find any human-sacrificing Aztecs to throw to the inquisition? because they founded catholicism :crazyeye:



Hinduism is a term invented by Europeans to translate a term invented by the Persian and Arab world to refer to Hindus. The Hindus never historically referred to themselves as such. Hinduism goes back to a phrase that means just "on the other side of the Indus river". Some Hindus refer to themselves as Sanatana Dharma but they are referred to as "Hindus" in game because that is what most people (and probably most Hindus nowadays) know themselves as. If you had gone to the founding figures of Hinduism though and called them that, they might look at you funny. Incidentally I dont think Zoroastrians call themselves "Zoroastrian" either.

Its undeniable that the Aztecs and Mayans shared a wholly distinct world vision informed by their religion, and that it was utilized as state ideology frequently too. I'm sure a better term could be found, but the point is that we could isolate and refer to particular parts of their theology to come up with a term. There are plenty of scholars on Aztec religion particularly in Mexico who could provide Firaxis with that kind of info.

Nagualism might work for the reason that it refers to a common belief in Mesoamerican religion that seems to go back to the Olmecs of a spiritual connection between man and animal. Teotlism for the fact that it refers to a particular vision of the creator (like Christianity, which in a sense is "Godism" as Christ is the god who is the savior). Maybe they're not the best but it would be more interesting to use those terms and reflect the religious diversity (then perhaps bring in some religion options for founder and follower beliefs that reflect the Aztec and Mayan vision)

Consider too that in this game the default is for the Huns to follow "Tengriism" despite the fact that they never identified themselves as such. If the Huns are "Tengriist" by default there's nothing wrong with using a Nahuatl word for the Mayans, especially considering the fact that the Mayan city states were ruled by a Nahuatl elite at some point who brought their language and further synthesized their religious ideas.



Yeah they are Catholic because Spain went on its biggest mission of mass conversion in history!

And for the syncretism to occur, they needed to have a bunch of religious beliefs which they were already seriously committed to. It seems that having a religion for the indigenous peoples would better reflect that history of mass conversion and syncretism which went on.



I'm aware of the syncretism of the rebels in the Yucatan and other Mayan movements. It's pretty interesting stuff. I dont know if thats a reason to make them Catholic though. Pacal sure wasn't a Catholic, nor were the various later kings ruling from Chichen Itza.

The books of Chilam Balam and other texts indicate that the beliefs died hard and some people still try to practice them, even if mixed with Catholic belief.

That's interesting on Hinduism - I was unaware of that. Either way yea I am aware that its because of Spain that Mesoamerica became so Catholic. And I know there are some people who still practice the old ways, as you may or may not have noticed I am half Kaqchikel myself and I have family who still goes to the old priests when sick. In some regions and for some peoples the beliefs died harder than others, but I would still say Central America is unique in the world for its religious syncretism. Countless saints have dual identities as ancient gods and are subsequently found in the landscape on their former pre-conquest religious cult territories.

But as for Pacal not being Catholic, you are right - but neither was Dido a Muslim, Ashurbanipal a Zoroastrian, nor was Shaka a protestant. Although perhaps this is only a tepid counter-example, I just think it would be too hard to come up with a just name for a Mesoamerican religion that isn't a complete western bastardization that commonly happens with native names and places. Its kind of insulting and various peoples still have to deal with these bastardizations today (IE the Pueblo against the Navajo/Western Archaeologist bastardization and made up term known as Anasazi). I am just not really in favor of making up any more bastardized terms that may stick.

With Hinduism and Tegriism at the very least over the centuries they have been established to be called that on an international level. There is no equivalent in the Mesoamerican world
 
When did the Ottomans converted to Orthodoxy!?!?!?!?!?!?

The Ottoman Empire was Byzantium conquered. So the leaders were Muslim and the populace were Orthodox, at least until the people started converting to the faith of their new leaders.
 
When did the Ottomans converted to Orthodoxy!?!?!?!?!?!?

They didn't, they converted what was the Byzantine Empire from Orthodoxy.
 
But as for Pacal not being Catholic, you are right - but neither was Dido a Muslim, Ashurbanipal a Zoroastrian, nor was Shaka a protestant. Although perhaps this is only a tepid counter-example, I just think it would be too hard to come up with a just name for a Mesoamerican religion that isn't a complete western bastardization that commonly happens with native names and places. Its kind of insulting and various peoples still have to deal with these bastardizations today (IE the Pueblo against the Navajo/Western Archaeologist bastardization and made up term known as Anasazi). I am just not really in favor of making up any more bastardized terms that may stick.

With regard to the bastardization, technically speaking every single word ever translated has been bastardized because there is no literal translation or understanding across languages which provide a different cultural outlook. Assigning a word to something in another language is fine as a means of communicating its meaning, it becomes a problem when the meaning of the new word is confused and the subject of the foreign language word is then lost in translation. I would say that situation would be a bastardization, but supposing we understood aztec religion and called it teotlism, this would simply be translation.

However, even were this outlook to be adopted, i still think it would be hard not to bastardize mesoamerican religion as i don't think its fully understood. But then we get into issues of history and its relevance to society, whether the study of foreign cultures is appropriate when we cannot achieve accuracy etc. At the end of the day i don't think we could come to a satisfactory involvement of mesoamerican religion in civ 5 purely because of the way it is constructed. But i also don't think there is a satisfactory way to represent mesoamerican civs with the current gameplay implementation either and that hasn't stopped them from adding them :p It's all a very difficult situation where diversity is good, but also difficult to get right, and compromise has to be found in order to have something for everyone :goodjob:
 
They didn't. There were different religious backgrounds in the Ottoman Empire itself.

That is correct. The way I read it thought one could gather that it was implied that they were, hence my question.

The Ottoman Empire was Byzantium conquered. So the leaders were Muslim and the populace were Orthodox, at least until the people started converting to the faith of their new leaders.

That is not correct entirely. Otaman1 has it correct. Also after the first brutal persecutions of the initial years the leader of the Orthodox Patriarchate was given leeway and most of the church property was exempt from the occupation (even now Greek priests use those documents to claim land). There were still persecutions till the late eras (up to and including the Greek revolt and later years up to 1930s in modern Turkey) but it was generally a multy religious state. And the prosecutions were a matter of leadership. Suleiman (the one in CiV) is regarded as one of the most lax on the matter. The empire encompassed much of the Balkans and parts of Aftica up to morocco and Iran. Those lands were lost to Byzantium centuries ago. Orthodoxy survived partly to subterfuge, false converting to the Muslim faith (they lied that they did convert) and official pardoning by the Ottoman state.

They didn't, they converted what was the Byzantine Empire from Orthodoxy.

See my reply to Arachnofiend.
 
Top Bottom