Iván de España
Chieftain
Moors aren't a people, you're confusing with Berbers. Al-Mansur was Arab.
For this discussion it might be fruitful to discuss what exactly constitutes a civilization in the context of civ. It seems (to me) to be a somewhat abstract concept. Civs, are not nation states nor are they geographical locations. They are very much a game abstraction that does not necessarily rhyme with exact ethno-historical background.
IMHO the core of a civilization is a cultural group that identifies themselves as members of that civilization and/or is indentified by others as being such a group. This group does not need to form any political union, per se. (Although to be notable and civworthy it probably does.)
In this sense the americans very much form a civilization. There is a large group of people that first and foremost identify themselves as american. This group has strong cultural identity (they have their own foods and sports, etc), which they like to spread across the globe.
Similarly, the Germans form a civilization. From classical times there have been various tribes living in the northern regions of Europe, that have collectively identified themselves as "German" and were collectively known to others (the Romans in particular) as German. Throughout most of history, they have only been very loosely bound as a political entity, achieving political unification only from the 19th century. But they where a civ long before that. Prussia, for example, was simply an aspect of this civ.
The Hapsburg empire on the other hand is not a civ. It was a political union created through intermarriage. There never was a cultural group that identified themselves as Hapsburgers (other than the family themselves). There were large cultural difference between the different parts of the empire.
Similarly, the HRE should probably not make an appearance as a civ. This was much more a political rather than a cultural entity. If Charlemagne needs a vessel, there is a better case to include the Franks.
I think there probably a good case for the Hungarians as a civ. They have been around for a while as a cultural entity, as such they've quite a bit of influence on European culture. As for political influence, they have been part of larger political entities which have had a big influence (HRE, Austria-Hungary), but these are better represented as alliances in the game. In the big what if game they should appear independently.
I know. But The Frankish Charlemagne or Charles I is the leader of the HRE in civ4. The only reason for the HRE to exist in civ seems to be to give Charlemagne a civ to lead. (Putting him as a leader of Germany or France would cause problems.)Charles V. of the HRE is not the Frankish Charles living hundreds of years earlier!
My logic is not about national identity, but cultural identity. The first notion of an English people, I think, appeared in the late dark ages.I partly agree to your definition of a Civ, for instance I see a point in adding an amalgam Civ for South america like Alex suggested, since they see themselves as one culture (at least those I spoke to).
In your logic, France and England are Civs, because there's a nation left nowadays with a national identity. But some hundred years ago, they didn't feel as much as a nation. Nationalism is a fairly new concept, born around the french revolution and its aftermath.
I admit, middle european history is more complicated than in western europe. But there was a big empire on the maps of all those years that cannot be counted into germany!
And while the Austrian/Habsburg Empire had no clear national identity, I would call it a strenght, not a weekness. A lot of people/players nowadays could identify with it. We all know what happened later when the Austrians lost their Habsburg traditions and found a replacement in Nationalism - it was the rise of a notorious scumbag...
Assuming we're thinking of the same scumbag, aren't you sort of counting Austria into Germany yourself? He was Austrian-born, but he certainly identified as German.And while the Austrian/Habsburg Empire had no clear national identity, I would call it a strenght, not a weekness. A lot of people/players nowadays could identify with it. We all know what happened later when the Austrians lost their Habsburg traditions and found a replacement in Nationalism - it was the rise of a notorious scumbag...
By the way, to merit my sig, I don't suggest that Austria is the most important Civ on Earth, but please don't count us into Germany, it's like throwing together the Irish with the British...
Similarly, the Germans form a civilization. From classical times there have been various tribes living in the northern regions of Europe, that have collectively identified themselves as "German" and were collectively known to others (the Romans in particular) as German.
Thankfully there is one thread in this forum where intelligent discussion can be had about various civilizations and isn't derailed by morons.
Keep up the good work Alezander01.
My point is that the Mughals do not represent a separate civilization, only a dynasty from a different civilization that was ruling India at the time. The Mughals represent both an aspect of Islamic/Arabic civilization and Mongol civilization, but they ruled India. Indian workers built their monuments, Indian people were their subjects. When determining if something is an independent civilization, you cannot think of the ruling class only.
Then what makes something qualify as a "Civilization", rather than a Dynasty?Most westerners do not think of the Mughals at all - they think of the Taj Mahal as being Indian, and if they know of the Mughals, they think of them as the dynasty that built the Taj Mahal in India. It's "Civilization," not "Dynasty."
On what grounds?As for your analogies, I find them just a little bit insulting. Celts/France/Germany/HRE/Vikings/England are not the same civilization.
England and France and Germany and China and Spain and.... are political entities. Therefore they cannot be Civilizations?"Al-Andalus" by definition cannot be a civilization, as it is a political entity. "Moors" is not the most accurate name for them, but it is the most recognizable.
Brazil: Covered by Portugal