Africa

[Lonecat Nekophrodite]

Other civ than I forgot to put in the poll is the Boers.
What do you think of Boers be lead by Paul Kruger in Civ 7?

It will be fun to have someone close to the Zulus to start early domination victory.

I don't know either Paul Kruger or leader of The Borderbund (Who usured Apartheid era in ZAR) are better leaders to lead ZAR, using Borderbund leader might lead to protests and boycotts (or even legal ban outright) in ZAR but since Boers are whites then the two leaders may be a choice.
While Dutch formed a majority of the Boers. I believe French Hugernote emigre were as well a member of these particularly with them were disowned and despised by Bourbon 'Catholic Idolatry Tyrants' and any other Catholic powers (At that time being Heretic equals 'evil'). What are the Hugernote roles (And other Calvinists or similiar 'Reformation Churches') in Apartheid era whether did they support, oppose or their opinions towards the regine vary? But two Christian church in ZAR (with strong international connections) openly opposed the regime--Anglicans (Led by Desmonde Tutu), and Roman Catholicism (John Paul II). Is South Africa regions (ZAR and beyond) a stage for the second contentions between two Christian camps?

 

[Henri Christophe]

I don't know either Paul Kruger or leader of The Borderbund (Who usured Apartheid era in ZAR) are better leaders to lead ZAR, using Borderbund leader might lead to protests and boycotts (or even legal ban outright) in ZAR but since Boers are whites then the two leaders may be a choice.
While Dutch formed a majority of the Boers. I believe French Hugernote emigre were as well a member of these particularly with them were disowned and despised by Bourbon 'Catholic Idolatry Tyrants' and any other Catholic powers (At that time being Heretic equals 'evil'). What are the Hugernote roles (And other Calvinists or similiar 'Reformation Churches') in Apartheid era whether did they support, oppose or their opinions towards the regine vary? But two Christian church in ZAR (with strong international connections) openly opposed the regime--Anglicans (Led by Desmonde Tutu), and Roman Catholicism (John Paul II). Is South Africa regions (ZAR and beyond) a stage for the second contentions between two Christian camps?

What is ZAR?

 

[Saxo Grammaticus]

ZAR is the Dutch abbreviation for South Africa.

But two Christian church in ZAR (with strong international connections) openly opposed the regime--Anglicans (Led by Desmonde Tutu), and Roman Catholicism (John Paul II). Is South Africa regions (ZAR and beyond) a stage for the second contentions between two Christian camps?

Would you care to elaborate on your question here?

 

[Krajzen]

Imagine having South Africa spawn in the north.

Yeah it is annoying when certain country or civilization names are just damn awkward and there is simply no way to replace them.

Ghana, awesome modern day African country to put in the game. Randomly named after completely and utterly unrelated African civilization located thousands of kilometres away millenium earlier - this itself is imo rather questionable choice. So you can never have both in the same game! It is still better than, iirc, its original purely eurocentric colonial name of "Gold Coast".
Its neighbour is "Ivory Coast" (to make it even more awkward its official name is often specifically French "Côte d'Ivoire"), good luck introducing the country to the game, it generates in the middle of continent with no ivory. No native name

Islamic Egypt led from Cairo (doesn't matter if medieval or modern). Civilization almost completely different from ancient pagan Egypt in almost everything, usually made as part of "Arabian" civ and nobody bats an eye. Still, definitely deserves a separate slot apart from "Arabia" civ with Medina etc, it has always been a very distinctive part of Islamic world, seat of Egypt - centered Islamic empires. Too bad, it is simply named "Egypt" and we can't have two Egypts in the game! On top of that, I would also argue that Greek/Christian Egyptian civ led from Alexandria would deserve a third slot sometimes...
Greece has a similar problem, where you can't ever have a modern (last 200 years) Greece because you can't have two Greeces and once and they are so different putting them in one civ feels ridiculous.

Then there are The Philippines. It is just such an awkward name in a game like this. It is a plural name of a very multi - cultural archipelago of islands named after a European monarch whose empire brutally subjugated them. Filipino themselves are mostly fine with this name and they have built their common identity around it - though there were indeed attempts to change the name to native... And there is none which wouldn't favor one ethnic group over another. But I just can't get that awkwardness out of my head when thinking of "The Philippines" inland empire next to Spain (who actually is leaded by Philip II in civ6 lol) in the context of a game.

Charlemagne. Awesome historical character, very important civilization which you can't name 'France' or 'Germany'. Your choices are to name it Franks (Frankish) which sounds almost identical as France (French), especially for non - Europeans. Or to name it "Holy Roman Empire" which is simply terrible in countless ways (especially when it is modern secular republic next to modern Roman Empire). Or give such civ some artificial stupid dynasty name.

Polish - Lithuanian Commonwealth (which was de facto Polish - Lithuanian - Ruthenian/Ukrainian state). Awesome civ, good luck with the name. You name it Poland - very undesirable, you name it Poland - Lithuania - very awkward (and is capital in Poland or Lithuania, who is "dominant"?), you exclude Belarus and Ukraine - terrible, you name it Commonwealth - ridiculous.

 

[Henri Christophe]

Ghana, awesome modern day African country to put in the game. Randomly named after completely and utterly unrelated African civilization located thousands of kilometres away millenium earlier - this itself is imo rather questionable choice. So you can never have both in the same game! It is still better than, iirc, its original purely eurocentric colonial name of "Gold Coast".

Once I read somewhere there the Ghana people, of the nowadays country of Ghana, have their heritage linked with the ancient Ghana empire. The history goes as the Ghana emigrate from the desert to nowadays Ghana country to escape from the Mali empire and maintian their faith in their gods, I mean, to avoid be muslim.

Just to add in your list other country if a weird name is nowdays Benin, who was called Dahomey during the French colonialism, this country change it's name for Benin, who was another slave empire but in Nigeria. Why they do it I don't know, I don't think Dahomey and Benin was correlated before, I guess they just change the name because Benin made very beatifull artworks.

 

[FishFishFish]

Once I read somewhere there the Ghana people, of the nowadays country of Ghana, have their heritage linked with the ancient Ghana empire. The history goes as the Ghana emigrate from the desert to nowadays Ghana country to escape from the Mali empire and maintian their faith in their gods, I mean, to avoid be muslim.

That is completely absurd. Modern Ghana was simply named after the ancient Ghana Empire, but they do not have any affiliation with each other.

In the 13th century, Ghana experienced serious warfare over control of trans-Saharan trade with the Almoravids based in the Maghreb which lead to their decline. This period of fragmentation ended with the rise of Malinke Mande-speakers based in Niani (related to the Soninke of Ghana) taking power and forming the Mali empire. Both the Ghana empire and the Mali empire were primarily made up of Mandinka peoples.

Modern Ghana was originally a British colony called the Gold Coast, but it declared independence in 1957 and renamed itself Ghana, in honor of the original empire. They are primarily made up of Akan speaking peoples.

So you can never have both in the same game!

They could always just call the Ghana empire "Wagadou". Or they could refer to the ethnicity and call it "Mandinka" (thus merging it with Mali). Either way I'd expect them to go for a civ based on the Ashanti empire rather then the modern country of Ghana.

it has always been a very distinctive part of Islamic world, seat of Egypt - centered Islamic empires.

The small problem I have with post-Islamic Egypt is that all of their great empires weren't actually created by native Egyptians. The Fatimids started in the Maghreb, the Ayyubids were Kurds and the Mamluks were Turkic. Muhammad Ali Pasha is probably the best pick for a more modern Egypt, and even he is Albanian...

Ideally I'd want a post-Islamic Egypt civ representing the Mamluks and Fatimids, Arabia to only represent the Rashidun, Umayyad and Abbasid Caliphates and the Ottomans being... the Ottomans. That way all of the (legitimate) Caliphates would be in the game.

 

[Lonecat Nekophrodite]

ZAR is the Dutch abbreviation for South Africa.

Would you care to elaborate on your question here?

I asked which Christian Churches actives in ZAR during Apartheid Era support the regime, and which church opposes, and which one is neutral, and which one gives liberty to each specific holymen to support or oppose Apartheid Regime?

The Roman Catholic Church (particularly during John Paul II's reign) openly hostile to Apartheid regime, to the point that the Pope in question chose not to visit ZAR during his African tour. Also Bishop Desmond Tutu of ZAR Chapter of Anglican Church also openly oppose the regime (Tutu himself is Black, and thus despised by the regime by default), as well as another priest (who's White) who also despised the regime to the point of getting himself in danger and almost killed by assassination attempts with bomb mail (one such attempt is almost successful, though the end results was that it removed his hands permanently rather than outright killings, it is suspected that the Apartheid Regime did indeed ordered his death but couldn't yet find any lawful means to liquidate him). The regime however lasts for roughtly half a century (if the Independent of ZAR marks the beginnings of the regime). I really guessed that some Christian movements, or even some churches did support the regime, if the Hugernote ever indeed support this regime to the very end, this makes the whole church an opposition to Roman Catholic Church and thus the 500+ years of hostility between the two (which presumably died out about a century ago) might have resumed. (One such reasons why Hugernote hated (and maybe still hates) Catholicism is that the latter practices 'Idolatry' which itself violations to The Ten Commandments to the very core, in addition to open hostility of the latter as well.)

 

[Saxo Grammaticus]

Thank you for clarifying. I am not familiar with religious stances regarding the Apartheid regime, but I do recall generally that racism and religious identity were intertwined during the earlier Dutch colonial period.

My understanding is the Catholic Church has recently expressed a more conciliatory attitude toward other Christian denominations, including those in whose persecution it took part, for instance apologies and visits to other denominations' places of worship. As for hostilities between the Huguenots and the Catholic Church, apart from their stances during Apartheid, it would be better to discuss this question outside of the Africa thread. Perhaps Zaarin will even chime in!

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

Charlemagne. Awesome historical character, very important civilization which you can't name 'France' or 'Germany'. Your choices are to name it Franks (Frankish) which sounds almost identical as France (French), especially for non - Europeans. Or to name it "Holy Roman Empire" which is simply terrible in countless ways (especially when it is modern secular republic next to modern Roman Empire). Or give such civ some artificial stupid dynasty name.

I'd call it the Frankish Empire, with the Franks to describe the people, personally. Though I could also see the Carolingian Empire being used. Just wait for Civ 7 to have both Australia and Austria.

They could always just call the Ghana empire "Wagadou". Or they could refer to the ethnicity and call it "Mandinka" (thus merging it with Mali). Either way I'd expect them to go for a civ based on the Ashanti empire rather then the modern country of Ghana.

I don't see the Ghana Empire happening when we have much more information on civs such as Mali or Songhai who inhabited the same area, and pretty much have the same gameplay niches.
Sure they got into Humankind, but Humankind also doesn't have historical leaders which is I think finding one with enough info is their main problem of inclusion.
That being said I'd also expect Ashanti before the modern country of Ghana.