BTS FALLACY - Charlemagne has NEVER ruled the Holy Roman Empire !

[Marla_Singer]

Weren't the Franks Germanic though?

Yeah well so what ? The Dutch people are Germanic too and to some extent so are the English too. What's your point ?

The French, Spanish and Roman civilizations are all latin. So what ?

 

[Marla_Singer]

Let's face it. Fireaxis wanted Charlemagne not HRE.

And if they really wanted to include them, why not include him as a non-civ related leader. As the new Matching system between civ and leader, You could've made Charlemagne with Germany, France and for all you care, the romans!

Instead of adding HRE the above idea is excellent in my opinion.

Yeah I agree it could have been an interesting option to be able to select Charlemagne either as a leader of Germany or as a leader of France. But anyway, the best option to get Charlemagne in is to make of the leader of what he has really ruled, hence the Frankish Kingdom. As I've said in another thread, there aren't that many civilization representing that era of History between 500 AD and 1,000 AD. So why not ?

 

[onedreamer]

Technically according to these arguments Stalin should not rule Russia but the USSR. Actually it would be a stronger argument, since with the revolution many illustrious people were killed or escaped, leaving a huge cultural gap. Many cultural values were lost in Russia with the revolution.
Considering that the civs start in 4000 BC, it doesn't really matter if Charlemagne ruled the HRE during his lifespan, because he's going to live from 4000 BC to 2025 (if I'm not wrong ?) AD, which covers the historical period of HRE. Add to that that he was the one who made it possible for the HRE to exist in a near future, that he was the first emperor crowned in the same fashion the holy roman emperors will be crowned, and that his empire was exactly the same as HRE plus the current France, and lastly that unlike what Marla Singer keeps stating, he did NOT only rule over the Frankish Kingdom, that was at the beginning of his reign, he then became king of the Franks and Longboards, and then Emperor. Essentially since his death an the appearance of the name HRE to define the empire, the people and the culture of those territories were also the same.

 

[Pangur Bán]

Considering that the civs start in 4000 BC, it doesn't really matter if Charlemagne ruled the HRE during his lifespan, because he's going to live from 4000 BC to 2025 (if I'm not wrong ?)

This is one of the best arguments for having Germany cover the HRE. Since HRE is Germany between the 10th century and 1806; what is the point of civilization's time span if every culture is going to get a different civ for each era of its history?! Anglo-Saxons, Anglo-Norman England, England, British Empire ... anyone think they should all be added? Better still, we could add all these and remove China, Mali, the Arabs, and the Incas to make room. That'd be fair, wouldn't it?!

 

[Gaius Octavius]

Thunderfall just posted an interesting quote from a preview of BtS:

There's Afterworld, a tip of the hat to X-Com, with hit-points and campaigns where you control a team of five futuro body-tanks quelling an uprising of machines gifted with human sentience. There's Next War, a tip of the hat to DEFCON, that's set after 2050 and comes with a full armoury of devastating nuclear strikes and gigantic Mechs. Then there's Charlemagne, a tip of the hat to the legendary French king. In this, you have to conquer all of western Europe, kissing up to the Pope by spreading his brand of religion and warring with Saladin, then receiving some natty fighting units.

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=229434

Just thought I'd add more fuel to the fire.

 

[TheLastOne36]

So fireaxis is smart enough to know what HRE is doing civ 4. they want it for the market. they clearly know that Charlemgane never ruled he HRE. They just think we'red dumb enough to believe them and go for a "cool" civ called the HRE.

And they just forgot to reread there preview paragraphs

 

[cybrxkhan]

wow... i want to jump in the Quote Wars too!

So fireaxis is smart enough to know what HRE is doing civ 4. they want it for the market. they clearly know that Charlemgane never ruled he HRE. They just think we'red dumb enough to believe them and go for a "cool" civ called the HRE.

but not all of us are dumb... some of us are smart and some of us are children of immigrants too! the "Holy Roman Empire"... might as well make the "United States of America" or "The People's Republic of China" or the "United Soviet Socialist Republic" civs.

 

[cybrxkhan]

Yeah I agree it could have been an interesting option to be able to select Charlemagne either as a leader of Germany or as a leader of France. But anyway, the best option to get Charlemagne in is to make of the leader of what he has really ruled, hence the Frankish Kingdom. As I've said in another thread, there aren't that many civilization representing that era of History between 500 AD and 1,000 AD. So why not ?

the two only reasonable solutions are to either change the HRE to the Franks or to make Charlemagne leader of two civs (France and Germany), as listed above. the question is, which one would be better, and which one would be more supported?

 

[The Thracian]

I didn't like the fact the HRE Was added when you already have Germany so you have two civs the same in location just in different eras. Barbossa would have been my immediate choice.

 

[TheLastOne36]

How about Charlemagne as a stand alone leader? with the new mix-and-match you don't need him to have a certain civ.

 

[cybrxkhan]

^that has been suggested before... it sounds funny, it would be a decent solution though

 

[Phlegmak]

The French Kingdom is as much the heir of the Carolingian Empire as is the Holy Roman Empire.

I'm sorry but I'm French, and I can tell you that it does matter for me to see all of a sudden Charlemagne being removed from the History of my country. At least Hannibal was from Carthages and Gandhi was from India. The same would be true with Joan of Arch being from France.

Charlemagne IS NOT from the Holy roman empire. He's a FRANKISH KING.

Would you consider Queen Victoria as Australian ? Would you consider George II of England as American ? I'm sorry but this does not make sense at all !

I agree with you, Marla_Singer. It's the same with Alexander being the leader of the Greeks. Since Alexander was Macedonian, he clearly should be the leader of the Macedonians.

 

[Uberfrog]

There are plenty of historic fallacies in Civ-

The Civilopedia says Julius Caesar was First Emperor of Rome- he wasn't, Augustus was.

Alexander leads the Greeks, despite being King of Macedon.

Queen Victoria ruled the British Empire, not the English.

Stalin was leader of the USSR, not the Russian Empire.

Frederick (Germany) was Holy Roman Emperor, not German Emperor.

Camulodunum and Verulamium are Celtic cities in the game, despite really being built by Romans- the Celts sacked them.

Boudicca wasn't a Celt- she was an Iceni, and should really be a Britanni. Her picture also shows here in front of a clearly Scottish highland landscape with late medieval castles behind her.


However, as you're probably sick of hearing, I don't really care. The game is good- I don't play it for a history lesson.

Anyway, it's all about changing history- hence you can have Rome invade the Aztecs, or the Indians plundering coast lines.

And hey- if they were 100% right all the time, we'd have nothing to complain about, and then where would we be?

Edit: and anyway, stuff like this is what changing 'Your Details' in-game is for- with a quick Google for Macedonian city names, I am currently playing as Alexander of Macedon with the proper Macedonian cities.

 

[Carolingian]

Frederick (Germany) was Holy Roman Emperor

No, he wasn't. Frederick the Great was king of Prussia.

 

[Vietcong]

Hannibal never ruled Carthage, and Gandhi never ruled India.
(Not debating the argument of Charlemagne as leader of the HRE, just pointing out that this isn't new territory for Firaxis)

after the 2nd punic war and befor hannibals exile, he did become a senetor in the carthage senit

 

[Saim]

Just wondering Uberfrog, are you using Greek (it's Greek now) cities, like Thessaloniki, or are you using Slavic Macedonian cities, like Sarajevo? Because only the first one would be accurate.

 

[Gladi]

And Charlemagne doesn't come out of nowhere, he's a Frankish King from the Carolingian dynasty

Bright day
Pippin-Arnulf dynasty...

 

[Breunor]

No, he wasn't. Frederick the Great was king of Prussia.

Well, that also depends on how picky you are!! I'm not an expert on the following, so somebody maybe should correct me, but this shows what 18th century politics was like .......

The Hohenzollern holdings by the 17th century included their power base, as the Elector of Brandenberg, which held the title of Margrave, and of the ruler of the Dukedom of Prussia.

Frederick the Great's Grandfather, Frederick I (I think he had a different title as Elector of Brandenberg, maybe Frederick III?) was needling to become a 'king'. Under the treaty of the Holy Roman Empire, the only kingdom allowed in the empire was Bohemia, and only the Emperor, who at the time was Leopold I of Habsburg, could give him the title.

Leopold wanted Frederick I's help against France in the War of Spanish Succession, so he allowed a compromise. Frederick could be a King IN Prussia. That is, since Prussia was not part of the Holy Roman Empire, Leopold agreed that Frederick could call himself King in Prussia, and that was his title, but not in Brandenberg. He was NOT 'King OF Prussia'!

Of course, Frederick I went around calling himself 'King in Prussia' and not as often 'Elector of Brandenberg'. (Similarly, Frederick the Great's enemy, Maria Theresa, called herself 'Queen', since she was Queen of Hungary but she was Archduchess of Austria).

Frederick I son, Frederick the Great's father, was Frederick William I, who also called himself 'King in Prussia'.

Frederick the Great, when he took over in 1940, stopped the pretense and started calling himself 'King of Prussia' (not sure exactly when). So, yes, I guess we can say that he was the 'King of Prussia', but, of course, scholars often point out that it wasn't technically correct. But, we are talking about Frederick the Great, who was going to stop him?

Anyway, this shows that modern day lawyers could have had a field day in previous times. Could you imagine how many people would be arguing about this if it happened today!

Best wishes,

Bruenor

 

[Uberfrog]

No, he wasn't. Frederick the Great was king of Prussia.

See- I can't even get the facts right!

Just wondering Uberfrog, are you using Greek (it's Greek now) cities, like Thessaloniki, or are you using Slavic Macedonian cities, like Sarajevo? Because only the first one would be accurate.

I'm using the ancient Macedonian city names I found on a map in Wikipedia, with the capital as Pella. So I guess I'm using the Greek ones.

 

[Saim]

Well that's wierd... I always that that the capital of Macedon was Thessaloniki/Salonica.