Which darkhorses do you want?

[unpossible251]

Nope. You're all wrong.

What you need for the real dark horse is King Leonard of the Principality of the Hutt River!!!

Never heard of him? He's this awesome aussie farmer who managed, almost by accident, to successfully secede from the Damn Imperialist Dogs who run Australia. His territory is huge - larger than Monaco - and he gets away with not paying tax. He even declared war on australia! (I think he threw a rock at a post office)

 

[inaki]

I really think that a good choice to balance South American Civs would be to add the Guarani or Tupi-Guarani civilization. They had a huge influence on the Southern cone, especial Argentina, Paraguay and Brazil. I really liked the addition of native american civs in the last 2 civilizations and I think the push now should be to expand South American, Caribbean and African civs.

 

[daft]

Moderator Action: When quoting multiple people please use the multiquote feature of the forums instead of making several new posts one after another.

Yeah, and I'd love adding Lan Xang.

What, you didn't hear about it? It was medieval Laotian state, was very cool. How could you now know about it? It's basic knowledge of South-East Asia.

What do I mean, let's be serious, this game is the place for
a) Great civilisations, empires, or strong culturally influential nations
b) Very few exceptions from this rule if particular nation was exotic or very unique (Polynesia, Iroquis)

Not for whatever minor tribes somebody has sympathies towards, and which are completely obscure to the global public (Wends are completely obscure for me, and I am Polish with interest in obscure civilisations )

My words may be a bit brutal but let's be honest, devastating majority of global Civ community doesn't want to see, out of all possible empires, Polabian Slavic tribe in the game.

Of course everybody can have his own fantasies - I'd genuinely like to see Lan Xang (Laotian medieval kingdom) in civ game... But I am aware how small chances of such obscure nations are to appear in a game (and Lan Xang was treated by its neighbors with far greater respect than Polabian Slavs by theirs )

And you're from Poland? A Slavic nation? With interest in obscure civilizations?
You don't know much about Slavic history, that is a given.
Why don't you read up about the Wends and quit making such worthless statements and instead do some research first?
The only thing that saved your nation from the German/Frankish hands/conquest was the fact your predecessors converted to Christianity-Catholicism, unlike the Wends-placed to the West of you, and guess what? they were more advanced than your Poles at the time, and if they only chose Christianity/Catholicism-lets be real!(we're not talking about protestant/orthodox Christians here, but the much more aggressive Catholics) , and did not fight among themselves all the time, they, no doubt, would have forged a far greater empire than your Poland ever was!.
Heck!, if it wasn't for the Union with Lithuania-a non Slavic country, your Poland, and thus you as a citizen of it, would be just part of an obscure, tiny European state.

What about Wallachia under Vlad the Impaler?

Wallachia is a great suggestion, but the country could hold several names, changing overtime from:
DACCIA-WALLACHIA-ROMANIA.

A fine, distinctive European civilization, with own language and culture and a rich and tumultuous history, so why not?

I really think that a good choice to balance South American Civs would be to add the Guarani or Tupi-Guarani civilization. They had a huge influence on the Southern cone, especial Argentina, Paraguay and Brazil. I really liked the addition of native american civs in the last 2 civilizations and I think the push now should be to expand South American, Caribbean and African civs.

Fine, fine, just include real CIVILIZATIONS, not village only builders (they never actually contructed a city), or nomads again.

GRAN COLOMBIA, NAZCA, TIWANAKU, ARGENTINA, MOCHE?, perhaps Arawak?-not really a civ though, ASHANTI, ZIMBABWE, CONGO, SOUTH AFRICA (Mandela as one of the leaders).
I guess there are several other choices.

Nope. You're all wrong.

What you need for the real dark horse is King Leonard of the Principality of the Hutt River!!!

Never heard of him? He's this awesome aussie farmer who managed, almost by accident, to successfully secede from the Damn Imperialist Dogs who run Australia. His territory is huge - larger than Monaco - and he gets away with not paying tax. He even declared war on australia! (I think he threw a rock at a post office)

right, moving along...

What about the Gauls?/Galls/Gaels.
Separate them from Celts, create their own leaders (VERCINGETORIX, BRENNUS), gallic swordsman as fast moving swordsman as UU, DRUID as the other.

Celts on the other hand, since lead by Baudica, should be WALES/CORNWALL/Isle of Man/Ireland Celts, with cities such as: CAERDYDD, TINTAGEL, BAILE ATHA CLIATH, IONA.
Leave Pictish warrior as one of their uniques, and, let them have the LONGBOWMAN-share it with England, for it the WELSH BRITONS/Galls who invented the unit, the English stole the idea after they conquered Wales-in the 12th century-from what I recall off hand, and then used the unit with great success on battlefield.

Has anyone ever really proven that Israel is being kept out because of Middle East sales? If that is the case then I worry that naming it something else won't help the matter. I really hope its some kind of oversight rather than politics.

Just call them HEBREWS instead, not to piss off the Arabs, how is that?
The influence of the Jewish monotheism on the course of Earth's Civilization cannot be denied!

I`d like to think Canada has a unique enough culture to warrant a civilization of it's own. Perhaps have peace keeping as a special trait.

Right on!
Peace keeping, CN Tower and hockey rinks.
Should I go into Canadian inventions and great people?

The Kievan Rus wasn't Baltic though.

Yes, yes, however, the Kievan Rus' does have a lot to offer as a Civilization!
Kievan Rus'-brought by Slavic and Norse/Viking ,converted to /Orthodox Christian traditions as one of the 1st Slvic/slavian (forgive for the using the pan-Slavic name) Christian Empires, the Kievan Rus' was a vast, prosperous kingdom, until the partitions after Vladimir the Great's death.
The Ukrainian: KIYEVAN RUS's medieval name should change to UKRAINE, kossacks were a fierce infantry, using muskets (samopaly), pikes (spisy) and sabres to fight off invaders.

Kiyevan Rus'/Ukraine sure deserves a look as a distinct civ.

 

[AtlantaMarty]

Civ's Persia is kinda only retained to pre-Islamification. I think that the Civ4 entry outright ended with the conversion.

I'm sorry, but I don't understand what the second sentence means. Could you please explain?

Has anyone ever really proven that Israel is being kept out because of Middle East sales? If that is the case then I worry that naming it something else won't help the matter. I really hope its some kind of oversight rather than politics.

I don't really see the point in adding a country that is not even 70 years old to a game that begins in 4000 BC.

Brazil is already pushing it.

 

[NN23]

I think it would be wonderful to have more Balkan civs, an area of the world that i feel has been underrepresented throughout the series. Here are some interesting cadidates IMO:

-Serbia under Tsar Stefan Dusan (under him Serbia reached its greatest territorial extent and was known as a great lawmaker and builder of great churches and monasteries)

-Bulgaria under Simeon I (During his reign Bulgaria reached its greatest territorial extent and his reign was also a period of unmatched cultural prosperity and enlightenment later deemed the Golden Age of Bulgarian culture)

-Montenegro in the 17th and 18th centry (The are some interesting candidates, but the most impressive was Petar II Petrović Njegoš. He laid the foundation of the modern Montenegrin state and the subsequent Kingdom of Montenegro. He was the most acclaimed Montenegrin poet.)

-Republic of Ragusa, modern-day Dubrovnik (A maritime republic, oligarchy and an aristocracy that reached its commercial peak in the 15th & 16th century. Also the Croatian language works from the Republic of Ragusa had a large role in the developing of Croatian literature, as well as modern Croatian language.)

-Bosnia in the late middle ages (notable for their diplomatic approach to religion and becoming a refuge for Christians deemed "undesirable" in their neighboring countries. Also they changed their state religion numerous time to ensure their survival and well being)

-Wallachia under Vlad the Impaler ('nuff said)

 

[Thormodr]

Been campaigning for an Inuit Civ for over 10 years. It would be nice to have a Civ that filled up the Arctic areas of the map.

 

[Gucumatz]

If we are going to suggest darkhorse civs, we should consider their potential "fun level" (highly subjective I know), by which I mean the civ has to still have a degree of recognizability for a western audience.

Take for example the Pueblo, we know for a fact that the Pueblo was going to be in Civ 5 - most likely instead of the Shosone-Comanche. The fact that the Pueblo uprising and defeat of a Major colonial power [Spain] remains legendary, particularly in the southwest US (a big portion of the civ market) was a big plus that almost got them included as a darkhorse civ. Unfortunately when the civ developers contacted the Pueblo ruling body to try and get a speaker for the depiction of Pope, religious reasons got in the way of the Pueblo's inclusion.

So what are potentially fun civs that people may have heard of?

- Tibet: People in the west nowadays think of Tibet and the Dalai Lama. While Buddhism is a huge part of Tibet's history, Tibet was also once a major empire on its own right. Its a recognizable potentially "fun" civ [Con: Chinese market issues]

- Wallachia/Romania: People love charismatic/memorable leaders. Vlad the impaler and Wallachia would probably see a significant amount of play time as a "fun" civ. The role of Wallachia as a vassal to Ottomans and actor in between west and east makes Romania an interesting choice in Europe, a civ that has never been chosen before

- Khazaria: Instead of Israel (which may be a bit too controversial, seeing how Civ's developers have always tried to shy away from controversy - see the Pueblo civ incident that I mentioned above), we could have the other interesting Jewish empire/kingdom. The Khazars were a semi-nomadic steppe Empire that adopted Judaism as a means of managing the European and Middle Eastern worlds the empire bordered. The Crimean and tartar peoples still derive significant history from the Khazar empire - and the inclusion of the Khazars would intrigue those with Eastern European ancestry and Jewish roots alike

- Inuits: A civ based on taking advantage of snow and tundra has been an oft asked inclusion by players. A civ that would be quite fun to play and appeals to Canadians and Americans alike (both important consumer demographics)

- Pueblo: I know I already mentioned the problems the developers had when they wanted to add the Pueblo to Civ 5. I am only mentioning them since they would be a fun recognizable civ, if something changes with leader intros perhaps they could still be part of civ.

 

[sukritact]

The Maurya as opposed to an India blob. Probably not gonna happen though, since Gandhi is already staring at us on the front page of civfanatics.

The small bit of me that is patriotic hopes Siam makes a return, but that seems unlikely as well. At least I'll be able to mod it back in!

 

[Navelgazer]

Man, a lot of thoughts from this thread, but to keep it simple and as non-combative as possible...

The Zulu have a pretty fascinating history, with Shaka as a compelling figure, and I'm fine with them being in Civ games forever. They're a staple by this point. They were much more of a "Kingdom" than an "Empire" and their inclusion is based largely on putting up a great fight against the British Empire with much less advanced technology, however. Part of me finds that an odd reasoning for inclusion, though I'd like to see more African Civilizations included, for sure. Mali/Songhai, Kongo, Swahili, etc.

Oh, and I feel like dismissing civilizations not respected by 18th century European classical studies as "barbaric" is pretty ridiculous on its face and it makes me happy to know that Firaxis, rather than feel "shamed" over including them, will absolutely continue to do so.

It appears to me that the games have taken (and I started with Civ IV) quite a bit from Guns, Germs & Steel, which makes a very strong case for environment being the most important factor for how a culture adapts and thrives, or fails to do so. The little we know about VI indicates that they're going even further in that direction, which I'm glad for.

Anyway, my "dark horse," and I mean truly "dark horse" candidate would be for the Sea Peoples who raided the classical-era mediterranean. They don't need to be a playable civ, even. It'd just be cool to see variation in our barbarians. Like, if fighting the classical barbs can help one to research their military techs, then fighting the Sea Peoples could help them research naval warfare.

Anyway, that's my hopeless wish.

 

[lp_04]

I guess someone developing a civilization game should consider three points upon making choices about one (or more) dark horses to include on a game:
1) Must be a civilization which had an impact on regional (non global) history;
2) Must be a civilization that provides options upon building new strategy possibilities according to their historical action
3) Must not be present on any previous civilization games

I wouldn't consider the geographic factor though... It is secondary IMO.

Given these factors, the Huns were perhaps the most adequate civ for this definition so far. They wrecked a continent, even though their action was short in time.

But if I may choose, like many else in this thread, I would really like to see TIBET. It seems the most reasonable option.

 

[daft]

If we are going to suggest darkhorse civs, we should consider their potential "fun level" (highly subjective I know), by which I mean the civ has to still have a degree of recognizability for a western audience.

Take for example the Pueblo, we know for a fact that the Pueblo was going to be in Civ 5 - most likely instead of the Shosone-Comanche. The fact that the Pueblo uprising and defeat of a Major colonial power [Spain] remains legendary, particularly in the southwest US (a big portion of the civ market) was a big plus that almost got them included as a darkhorse civ. Unfortunately when the civ developers contacted the Pueblo ruling body to try and get a speaker for the depiction of Pope, religious reasons got in the way of the Pueblo's inclusion.

So what are potentially fun civs that people may have heard of?

- Tibet: People in the west nowadays think of Tibet and the Dalai Lama. While Buddhism is a huge part of Tibet's history, Tibet was also once a major empire on its own right. Its a recognizable potentially "fun" civ [Con: Chinese market issues]

- Wallachia/Romania: People love charismatic/memorable leaders. Vlad the impaler and Wallachia would probably see a significant amount of play time as a "fun" civ. The role of Wallachia as a vassal to Ottomans and actor in between west and east makes Romania an interesting choice in Europe, a civ that has never been chosen before

- Khazaria: Instead of Israel (which may be a bit too controversial, seeing how Civ's developers have always tried to shy away from controversy - see the Pueblo civ incident that I mentioned above), we could have the other interesting Jewish empire/kingdom. The Khazars were a semi-nomadic steppe Empire that adopted Judaism as a means of managing the European and Middle Eastern worlds the empire bordered. The Crimean and tartar peoples still derive significant history from the Khazar empire - and the inclusion of the Khazars would intrigue those with Eastern European ancestry and Jewish roots alike

- Inuits: A civ based on taking advantage of snow and tundra has been an oft asked inclusion by players. A civ that would be quite fun to play and appeals to Canadians and Americans alike (both important consumer demographics)

- Pueblo: I know I already mentioned the problems the developers had when they wanted to add the Pueblo to Civ 5. I am only mentioning them since they would be a fun recognizable civ, if something changes with leader intros perhaps they could still be part of civ.

Some very good civ choices.
I absolutely agree about TIBET, used to be an empire on it's own.
A strongly spiritual, highland/mountain dwelling nation.
Would definitely be fun to play as/against.

I do not agree about INUITS, why? because they are simply not a Civilization! Just tribe(s) of cold climate dwelling, primitive tribes. If they want them included, fine, just not as one of the Great Wonder building civs.
If you want a civilization with winter/cold climate bonuses in the game, then why not include Canada? Finland, or Norway? (Sweden and Russia are already in but gets no bonuses)
These are all cold climate based nations, and by the way, real civilizations.

PUEBLO? The tribe that constructed the Pueblo were called the ANASAZI, the only problem with them is other city names and great leaders.

KHAZARIA - definitely a yes!
The only other than Israel civ that had Judaism as it's official great religion. They were merchants (slave merchants), good warriors too (cavalry), distinct from the neighbouring mainly because of their choice of religion.

I would also add:

TATARS - Crimean Tatars was an empire (Khanate) that existed for centuries. Islam's their religion of choice, brilliant horsemen and archers. They were very aggressive and ruthless to their Christian neighbours, taking in thousands of slaves yearly and selling them in slave markets in Istanbul and even Baghdad.
They grew stagnant and failed to switch to gunpowder weapons and paid the price for it as Russian Tzarate finally conquered them.

PRUSSIA - Originally an aggressive, polytheistic(pagan) Balt tribe (closely related to Lithuanians and Latvians), the Prussians were conquered by the German Teutonic Knights. After that Prussia gradually grew in power, and threatened all neighboruring tribes. Prussia grew into a real European power and thrived under their great leader, Frederick II(the great).
I imagine Prussia being separate from Germany, a militaristic, industrial, yet cultured and scientific nation, overall a very difficult adversary.
Their cities including: Ko(e)nigsberg, Memel, Danzig-as opposed to Gdansk-one of the cities of Poland (namely same city, but why not give both nations a city, even if same one, because of how important it is to their history, and due to the fact each uses a different city name?) and many, many others (including Berlin if Germany is not in the game).
This is a worthy civilization, a real civilization, not nomadic barbarians who happened to be ruled one time by ruthless, brilliant military strategist (Huns-Attila)

NABATAENAS
creators of the Great Wonder of Petra, industrial/desert tribe, why not include them? (or Arameans)
Let this tribe get food bonuses from desert tiles/hexes, might be fun to play as.

 

[Gucumatz]

Some very good civ choices.
I absolutely agree about TIBET, used to be an empire on it's own.
A strongly spiritual, highland/mountain dwelling nation.
Would definitely be fun to play as/against.

I do not agree about INUITS, why? because they are simply not a Civilization! Just tribe(s) of cold climate dwelling, primitive tribes. If they want them included, fine, just not as one of the Great Wonder building civs.
If you want a civilization with winter/cold climate bonuses in the game, then why not include Canada? Finland, or Norway? (Sweden and Russia are already in but gets no bonuses)
These are all cold climate based nations, and by the way, real civilizations.

PUEBLO? The tribe that constructed the Pueblo were called the ANASAZI, the only problem with them is other city names and great leaders.

KHAZARIA - definitely a yes!
The only other than Israel civ that had Judaism as it's official great religion. They were merchants (slave merchants), good warriors too (cavalry), distinct from the neighbouring mainly because of their choice of religion.

I would also add:

TATARS - Crimean Tatars was an empire (Khanate) that existed for centuries. Islam's their religion of choice, brilliant horsemen and archers. They were very aggressive and ruthless to their Christian neighbours, taking in thousands of slaves yearly and selling them in slave markets in Istanbul and even Baghdad.
They grew stagnant and failed to switch to gunpowder weapons and paid the price for it as Russian Tzarate finally conquered them.

You are confusing the Pueblo with the "Anasazi" [The Anasazi is a made up term that is used to describe a particular epoch/culture of the region, the Pueblo peoples of the 1400s onward are actually well documented - unlike the Anasazi]. The Pueblo also built various towns, aqueducts, etc. [similar to the older Anasazi period]. The Pueblo would have made a particularly good choice in civ 5 because they did in fact unify under a leader named Pope, who led the revolt against the Spanish - kicking the Spanish out of the Pueblo lands [This made a huge impact on American history, it caused the Spanish to rethink their plans of colonization further inland and it led to the sale of countless captured horses to other inland tribes. Tribes like the Comanche and Apache grew to prominence because of the horse trade that the Pueblo controlled]

And as for the Inuit not being a civ, I am not going to make an argument one way or the other about them being a civ - other than the fact that every culture group has thousands of years of history. While certainly the inuit may not have built as many grand structures as other civs, the modern definition of what a civ is effectively means a cultural group. As long as a civ would be interesting to Americans, that is the strongest criteria.

A civ has to be entertaining/semi-known/offer something interesting in order to be included as a darkhorse civ. Its why predicting a native American civ is something that is logical to predict. Perhaps instead of the Shoshone we might get the Haida for instance. The problem with Prussia is that it approaches to much on Germany (I mean Prussia eventually formed Germany...) and offers little "new". The tartars could be a good choice though, semi-well known, offers potential for interesting mechanics, appealing to a European audience (which while less important than the US, is still somewhat important)

 

[Human Crouton]

I don't really see the point in adding a country that is not even 70 years old to a game that begins in 4000 BC.

Do a google search for "Ancient Israel".

 

[Haig]

Poland

Sweden

Austria

Romania/Wallachia

These are all civs that have been in the game before(except Wallachia) but I'd like to have them in vanilla or dlc to get proper "30 years war/renaissance" experience.

I know Ed Beach is a nut for that era so there's hope. Remember the scenario Into the Renaissance? Stuff like that but with Civ 6 systems.

 

[BenSisko]

I'm going to raise my flag here. I want Argentina.

Yeah, not a big "Civ" in terms of overall world history. And you can even say the country cultural significance in the modern world isn't really big enough to feature in Civ VI.

But. But... look at Ed Beach words in the 5:15 minute mark here:


Link to video.

Civ needs more representation for South America!. Sure we always can count on the good old Tawantinsuyu, and Brazil get its chance under the spotlights in BNW. Now is turn for Argentina.

There are a few pretty iconic leaders for the Civ: San Martin and Peron may be the best choice from the perspective of History. But for raw market appeal Firaxis can use Evita. yeah yeah.. she wasn't a leader in the political sense, but she can fill the role in Civ perfectly and she is widely popular (thanks Madonna...)

 

[TheSpaceCowboy]

Here's one that's extremely minor, but could prove fun and full of character:

The Crusader-States
The leader could be Godfrey of Bouillon or Baldwin I.
Unique units could include Hospitaller (replaces Swordsmam; automatically receives the Medic and March Promotions) and Templar (replaces Longswordsman; automatically receives the siege and Cover promotions).
Of course, their unique ability would have to be Penitential Warfare. Perhaps they could gain faith for killing enemy units or receive a bonus when fighting against units from a civilization that's adopted a different religion.

 

[ehecatzin]

I'm going to raise my flag here. I want Argentina.

Yeah, not a big "Civ" in terms of overall world history. And you can even say the country cultural significance in the modern world isn't really big enough to feature in Civ VI.

If I had to fill South America, I'd go with Gran Colombia and Mapuche. Bolivar is a very recognizable figure and could add interesting flavour with Agendas, persuing any warmongers and forcing them to release CS or civs back to life. The Mapuche are really unique as well, and could play as a very hard to crack horse civ.

That way we would have 2 Post colonial (Spanish and Portuguese) and 2 natives.


I guess you could also flip it and have Argentina and Muisca, I just find the other 2 way more interesting.

 

[Sevaljevic]

I think it would be wonderful to have more Balkan civs, an area of the world that i feel has been underrepresented throughout the series. Here are some interesting cadidates IMO:

-Serbia under Tsar Stefan Dusan (under him Serbia reached its greatest territorial extent and was known as a great lawmaker and builder of great churches and monasteries)

-Bulgaria under Simeon I (During his reign Bulgaria reached its greatest territorial extent and his reign was also a period of unmatched cultural prosperity and enlightenment later deemed the Golden Age of Bulgarian culture)

-Montenegro in the 17th and 18th centry (The are some interesting candidates, but the most impressive was Petar II Petrović Njegoš. He laid the foundation of the modern Montenegrin state and the subsequent Kingdom of Montenegro. He was the most acclaimed Montenegrin poet.)

-Republic of Ragusa, modern-day Dubrovnik (A maritime republic, oligarchy and an aristocracy that reached its commercial peak in the 15th & 16th century. Also the Croatian language works from the Republic of Ragusa had a large role in the developing of Croatian literature, as well as modern Croatian language.)

-Bosnia in the late middle ages (notable for their diplomatic approach to religion and becoming a refuge for Christians deemed "undesirable" in their neighboring countries. Also they changed their state religion numerous time to ensure their survival and well being)

-Wallachia under Vlad the Impaler ('nuff said)

Yes, there are loot of interesting facts about Montenegro, here are just 10:

1. Ivo Vizin from Kotor who was the first of all sloven people who circumnavigated the globe in a vessel called Splendido.

2.The Crnojević printing house (Montenegin: Штампарија Црнојевића / Štamparija Crnojevića) or Cetinje printing house (Цетињска штампарија / Cetinjska štamparija), was the first printing house in Southeastern Europe; the facility operated between 1493 and 1496 in Cetinje, Zeta (modern Montenegro)

3.The first radio station in the Balkans and South-East Europe was established in Montenegro with the opening of a transmitter situated on the hill of Volujica near Bar by Knjaz Nikola I Petrović-Njegoš on 3 August 1904.

4. In terms of volume, the Tara River Canyon is Europe’s biggest and second in the world.

5. According to the website www.averageheight.co, which collects data from a variety of sources, only the Dutch are taller, globally, than Montenegrins.

6. Place Crkvice, close to Mount Orjen, is reputed to be the wettest inhabited place in Europe but our capital Podgorica is one of the sunniest capital in Europe

What’s more, it gets 2,480 hours of sunshine a year. London gets a measly 1,410.
7. For a whole lot of heritage packed into a relatively small area, it’s hard to beat Montenegro. It has four World Heritage Sites inside its 13,812 km², or one site per 3,363 km². Only Malta, Lebanon, Israel, Belgium, Cyprus and Switzerland can do better. Durmitor National Park is one; another is the spectacular Bay of Kotor.

8. Oldest olive tree in the world is in Montenegro town Bar

9. Dušan Vukotić is Montenegrin Oscar winner, being the first foreigner to do so. He won an Oscar for best animated short in 1961 for Surogat ("Ersatz"). Another of his films, Igra ("The Game"), was nominated for an Academy Award in 1964.

10. Nikola Tesla is actually from Montenegro, other famous Montenegrin descent: https://www.slavorum.org/10-famous-people-of-montenegrin-descent/

More info about Montenegrin history: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Montenegro