Black America

[Kyriakos]

But when there are 50 civs in the game, it'd be a tall order finding 50 very obviously historically important civs.
I suppose it only makes sense to "argue" about the civs in the original game, and maybe the first expansion ^^
By the way, how many civs are in Africa (including north Africa) in the 50-civ set? If the subsaharan ones are four, going by this thread, I'd expect the total number to not really exceed eight, given the lack of space north of the Sahara. Egypt/Carthage are obvious choices, but then I'd be struggling to find others. Maybe some NA specific arab (with or without arab ruling class) civ and a generic "berbers" (which imo also isn't as important as the others)? Ok, if you get to the bonus choices, you could also use Mauretania or even Algiers, but there is overlap as usual (not only an issue with african civs).

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

But when there are 50 civs in the game, it'd be a tall order finding 50 very obviously historically important civs.
I suppose it only makes sense to "argue" about the civs in the original game, and maybe the first expansion ^^
By the way, how many civs are in Africa (including north Africa) in the 50-civ set? If the subsaharan ones are four, going by this thread, I'd expect the total number to not really exceed eight, given the lack of space north of the Sahara. Egypt/Carthage are obvious choices, but then I'd be struggling to find others. Maybe some NA specific arab (with or without arab ruling class) civ and a generic "berbers" (which imo also isn't as important as the others)? Ok, if you get to the bonus choices, you could also use Mauretania or even Algiers, but there is overlap as usual (not only an issue with african civs).

For Sub-Saharan Africa there's the Zulu, Ethiopia, Kongo, and Mali. Then there's Nubia and obviously Egypt for North Africa. That's it considering Carthage was made into a Phoenician civ instead in this iteration. I do wish though we could have gotten a "Berber" civ, or something else from the Maghreb region though, considering Morocco was at least in Civ 5.

I guess you could count Arabia if you wanted to because Saladin's capital in game is Cairo.

 

[CaffeineJunkie]

Take it up with Firaxis, then, and convince them, also, to alienate a big chunk of their fanbase who enjoy, for many reaons, having the greater breadth of available civ's

No one would be alienated because the total breadth of civs isn't being impacted. You can have a million civs in the game and not have an of them be Vikings, Celts, Sumerians, Sioux, or Iroquois.

I'm obviously referring to when the codified academic disciples of history we've long become accustomed to emerged out of previous ages of more parochial, localized schools and viewpoints on the issue being the way history was studied.

So, not anything that has anything to do with what we're talking about. Then why'd you bring it up?

The term is used to describe a Constiutional mechanism that, when descibed purely as the text of the document states, is too unwieldy for common and repeated use.

Either you are choosing to explain yourself poorly or no such mechanism exists. The powers of Congress are very specifically enumerated and health care isn't one of them.

 

[Henri Christophe]

No, they're not comparable. The USA has a capital city, a code of laws, and, despite the best efforts of Democrats, it has well-defined national borders. It has also had a huge impact on world history. We can't say the same of any Native American tribe north of the Aztecs. And in case you're wondering, I'm not singling the Native Americans out here. The Celts, Vikings, Sumerians, and several other old-world cultures shouldn't be included either.

I don't understand your toughts... You are saying native americans don't have a capital city? a code of laws?
First a capital city is just a city where lives the ruler of a nation, some countris can have more then one capital city. Taking the example of Iroquois (modern day at the state of New York), the Iroquois are composed of 5 states, but one Onondaga was the most important (and have the privilege to be the last to vote in the councills) so we can understand the Iroquois with a capital: Onondaga.

And of course Iroquois have laws, they run the first federation of Americas, the only difference to US code of laws is it isn't write down, since Iroquois don't have a write language, but that don't mean they don't have laws.

And about huge impact in world history. US just exist for +-300 years in a world who have more then 5000 years of civilization. I would think Sumerians had way more impact globally then US. Since you are writing in a forum using latters who was just possible being invented because the Sumerians.

And world impact isn't so important to Fireaxis, since Haiti was the first country to abollish slavery in the world, leading to our society as we know today and never was in the game before.

 

[Joij21]

No, they're not comparable. The USA has a capital city, a code of laws, and, despite the best efforts of Democrats, it has well-defined national borders. It has also had a huge impact on world history.

Capital City: Does this mean in order for something to be a "civilization" it mustn't be a city state and must have had more than one city so as to proclaim a particular one as it's capital center?

-Greece wouldn't be a civilization I guess.

Code of Laws: Every single civ game has had code of laws as a technology that you have to research, implying from the very first game that civilization can be something that comes into being before a single codified set of laws is established.

Well-Defined National Borders: Oh so you mean the nation state? You do realize the nation state is historically a fairly new concept and that no such thing existed before the Westphalian Peace at the conclusion of the 30 Years War?

Even the Roman Empire didn't have well defined borders, things were quite fluid in the times before the Westphalian System of geopolitics was established by treaty necessitating the laws of "Balance of Power" to prevent genocidal Catholic vs. Protestant conflict between nations which then requires those nations to begin to accurately keep track of what specific area belongs to whom so as to prevent such genocide by ensuring that both the Catholic bloc and Protestant bloc of nations each have equal amounts of specific lands so that they become militaristically equal and economically/productivity equal so neither side would ever feel paranoid and insecure so as to start something and cause a repeat of the 30 Years War altogether.

Huge Impact On Worlds History: You don't consider these other cultures to have had a significant impact on history?

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

No one would be alienated because the total breadth of civs isn't being impacted. You can have a million civs in the game and not have an of them be Vikings, Celts, Sumerians, Sioux, or Iroquois.

Well to be fair I wouldn't want Vikings or Celts either. What I would want is Norway or Denmark representing the Vikings and Gaul or Ireland etc. representing the Celts.
I'm also not sure what you have against the Sumerians either, considering they are one of the prime examples of a civilization?
As for the various Native Americans I believe that certain tribes in my opinion, like the Iroquois can work.

 

[Joij21]

The Celts, Vikings, Sumerians, and several other old-world cultures shouldn't be included either.

The Sumerians are by scholarly definition considered to be the absolute FIRST CIVILIZATION in world history. It would be insane not to include them.

FYI what defines a civilization in the scholarly sense is that the culture in question has organized themselves around permanent cities and who's people are no longer nomadic but sedentary, has a stratified and hierarchical division of labour and class, and yeah that's basically it. So the Sumerians fit the definition.

 

[Evie]

I’d very much be alienated (as would be clear from the fact I already said I wouldn’t play a game with your civ list), and it’s rather plain from the other reactions to your posts here that I wouldn’t be alone. So your “no one would be” reeks of wilful ignorance.

 

[Kyriakos]

Capital City: Does this mean in order for something to be a "civilization" it mustn't be a city state and must have had more than one city so as to proclaim a particular one as it's capital center?

-Greece wouldn't be a civilization I guess.

Most "city states" you know had far more than one area. Typically even the smallest ones would have separate harbor settlements, even far enough to consequently require separate defense (Athens had to build the long walls to its new port, and it was a novelty). Sparta, Athens, basically everything in the Peloponnese, Thebes, Aetolia, Locris, Thessaly etc, all had a number of settlements as their "civ". A famous argument in the running up to the Sparta-Thebes showdown at Leuktra was that if Sparta could ask that Thebes doesn't lord over the rest of towns in Boetoia, Sparta should lose its own control of Laconia and Messenia. Megara, one of the most spacially confined city states, still lost its important port to Athens during the war, while Megara itself continued to exist.

 

[CaffeineJunkie]

I don't understand your toughts... You are saying native americans don't have a capital city? a code of laws?

They didn't have these things until introduced to them by Europeans/US-ians and becoming part of our civilization.

Taking the example of Iroquois (modern day at the state of New York), the Iroquois are composed of 5 states, but one Onondaga was the most important (and have the privilege to be the last to vote in the councills) so we can understand the Iroquois with a capital: Onondaga.

The Onondaga are a tribe, not a state or a city.

the only difference to US code of laws is it isn't write down, since Iroquois don't have a write language, but that don't mean they don't have laws.

(1) A constitution is not the same thing as a code of laws.

(2) The Iroquois "Constitution" was more of a story than a set of rules for how their government was supposed to work; the rules that did exist mostly dictated rituals and ceremonies rather than legislative procedures.

US just exist for +-300 years in a world who have more then 5000 years of civilization.

And in those <300 years, we led the Industrial Revolution, fought the first-ever naval battle between two metal warships, split the atom, landed on the moon, developed entirely new communication media including film and the Internet (though not the Web, which was invented by a British guy working in Switzerland), and started a political revolution that spread to almost every country on Earth.

I would think Sumerians had way more impact globally then US. Since you are writing in a forum using latters who was just possible being invented because the Sumerians.

Actually, the Latin alphabet is derived from Greek, which is derived from Phoenician.

The Sumerians used cuneiform, which is no longer used.

Capital City: Does this mean in order for something to be a "civilization" it mustn't be a city state and must have had more than one city so as to proclaim a particular one as it's capital center?

No, that is not what it means. Work on your reading comprehension.

-Greece wouldn't be a civilization I guess.

Greece has been unified, or otherwise featured a capital city, at several times in its history. Remember the Athenian League, of which Athens was the capital? Remember Alexander the Great? Remember the country called Greece that currently exists?

Code of Laws: Every single civ game has had code of laws as a technology that you have to research, implying from the very first game that civilization can be something that comes into being before a single codified set of laws is established.

That's one of the mistakes in the game series that I wish they'd get around to fixing.

Well-Defined National Borders: Oh so you mean the nation state? You do realize the nation state is historically a fairly new concept and that no such thing existed before the Westphalian Peace at the conclusion of the 30 Years War?

I would realize it, if it was true. It isn't.

Huge Impact On Worlds History: You don't consider these other cultures to have had a significant impact on history?

The Celts and Native American tribes didn't. Sumerians are debatable; we know they were the first civ to have certain technologies but we don't know if those techs spread elsewhere from Sumer or were invented independently in several places around the world.

The Sumerians are by scholarly definition considered to be the absolute FIRST CIVILIZATION in world history...

FYI what defines a civilization in the scholarly sense is that the culture in question has organized themselves around permanent cities and who's people are no longer nomadic but sedentary, has a stratified and hierarchical division of labour and class, and yeah that's basically it. So the Sumerians fit the definition.

Nobody is disputing any of that. Work on your reading comprehension.

I’d very much be alienated (as would be clear from the fact I already said I wouldn’t play a game with your civ list)

I never presented any civ list. Work on your reading comprehension.

and it’s rather plain from the other reactions to your posts here that I wouldn’t be alone.

The only thing that's plain is that multiple people in this thread need to learn how to read... or how to stop committing strawman fallacies. I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt by assuming that you're doing this unintentionally.

Moderator Action: Please be civil in your discussions here. Stop trolling other site members. leif

 

[Evie]

You’ve presented your priciples regarding who is a civ and who is not and stated who were the only American people worthy of inclusion in your mind.

More than enough for even someone with passable reading compression to get a good idea of who you would have or not have.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

Greece has been unified, or otherwise featured a capital city, at several times in its history. Remember the Athenian League, of which Athens was the capital? Remember Alexander the Great? Remember the country called Greece that currently exists?

Being considered a civilization does not mean a people have to be politically unified with one capital city. A collection of culturally related city-states such as Sumer, Phoenicia and Maya etc. still count.

 

[Patine]

They didn't have these things until introduced to them by Europeans/US-ians and becoming part of our civilization.

I'm wondering how you figure these civ's didn't have any sort of law codes or centres of power until Europeans and Americans, "gave such to them?" You must have a very narrow and myopic view and definition of what a, "code of laws," and a, "capital," entail.

 

[Kyriakos]

Imo some native civs to the north of Aztec/Maya make sense to include, but mostly for gameplay, not importance. I mean, many people play world maps, and it is rather bad to have only the US cover the area.
Aztec and Maya are too close, but then again so are Khmer and Siam - in both cases they essentially took over the previous power. Also, in both cases they have distinct architecture (even more so for Khmer and Siam, who have stone and wood-based respectively). Goes without saying that I am fine with having both Khmer/Siam and Aztec/Maya.
Were there ever (in the Civ games) any other official civs in continental South America, apart from Inca?

 

[CaffeineJunkie]

You’ve presented your priciples regarding who is a civ and who is not

Wrong. Learn how to read.

Moderator Action: If you cannot explain your point so other's can understand it, please do not blame them. This is trolling. leif

I'm wondering how you figure these civ's didn't have any sort of law codes or centres of power until Europeans and Americans, "gave such to them?" You must have a very narrow and myopic view and definition of what a, "code of laws," and a, "capital," entail.

A capital city would require, at a minimum, having cities at all. That excludes the Sioux and Iroquois.

 

[Patine]

A capital city would require, at a minimum, having cities at all. That excludes the Sioux and Iroquois.

A, "capital," or centre-of-power and governance of a civilization does not have to be, and has not historically always or necessarily been, a, "city."

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

Aztec and Maya are too close, but then again so are Khmer and Siam - in both cases they essentially took over the previous power. Also, in both cases they have distinct architecture (even more so for Khmer and Siam, who have stone and wood-based respectively). Goes without saying that I am fine with having both Khmer/Siam and Aztec/Maya.

The Aztecs and the Maya never had an overlap in territories. The Maya never went farther than the Yucatan Peninsula in Mexico and spread throughout the northern part of Central America.
Khmer and Siam were much closer, though. I still would like to see an iteration where both Khmer and Siam were in the game instead of it being one or the other.
The group of civs that come to mind that have too much overlap are Mali/Songhai and potentially the Ghana Empire, though the latter is least likely to get in because of lack of known leaders.

Were there ever (in the Civ games) any other official civs in continental South America, apart from Inca?

Brazil was also in Civ 5.
Civ 6 had Brazil, Inca, Gran Colombia, and the Mapuche.

 

[Evie]

That's not 100% accurate, Alexander's Hetaroi - the southeast most province of the Aztec empire, Xoconochco/Soconusco, was in marginal Mayan territorry.

But the spirit of it is correct - the Aztec and the Mayans essentialy occupied neighboring but distinct regions and neither civilization ever had any meaningful sway in the core area of the other.

 

[Lexicus]

The term is used to describe a Constiutional mechanism that, when descibed purely as the text of the document states, is too unwieldy for common and repeated use.

I think you confused it with the Necessary and Proper Clause.

 

[Patine]

I think you confused it with the Necessary and Proper Clause.

Yes, I believe you're correct. I was thinking of the name of an old Congressional committee in the 1800's that later got broken up into several more specific ones.