Jabberwockxeno
Prince
- Joined
- Jul 10, 2012
- Messages
- 507
I think it's a little ironic that everybody is saying the chart should exclusively show the Classic Maya, meanwhile the literal Civ icon is based on serpent head sculptures at Chichen Itza, a Postclassic Maya site.
Granted, other elements of the Maya in Civ 7 and most other Civ games is primarily influenced by Classic Mayas, so that's really more on Firaxis, but I do think it's ironic especially when Civ 7 finally switched out the Temple of Kukulcan (ever misnamed as "Chichen Itza" as if that's not the name of a whole city) for the Lost World complex at Tikal (though I would have erred on making Tikal's waterworks network a wonder over that, or maybe the Tonina Acropolis, etc)
I will say that as somebody into Mesoamerican history and archeology, I have always been a bit iffy about the 2000BC date I often see used as the start of Maya Civilization. To be clear, this is something that does come up in reputable sources, and the Formative/Preclassic period is what I am least familiar with, and i'm sure there's research I'm not aware of which that date is based in, but I don't know why that is selected, especially when that largely, if not entirely predates monumental architecture in the region, certainly urbanism and what we'd define as "cities". For reference, Aguada Fenix made headlines for being a impressive example of a very early monumental Maya site with a large platform complex, and that dated to 1000BC. The earliest site often defined as the regipon's first city, the Olmec center of San Lorenzo, dates to 1400BC.
Maybe the 2000BC date is based on that being the earliest examples of any sort of art or iconography with a distinctly Maya style or something of that nature, that'd be my assumption, but if we're putting the emphasis on "Civilization" in "Maya Civilization", it's definitely too early.
However, I don't know enough about... well, any other civ here, to really gauge how their start/end dates are being defined and if they include or exclude periods somewhat analogous to that.
Granted, other elements of the Maya in Civ 7 and most other Civ games is primarily influenced by Classic Mayas, so that's really more on Firaxis, but I do think it's ironic especially when Civ 7 finally switched out the Temple of Kukulcan (ever misnamed as "Chichen Itza" as if that's not the name of a whole city) for the Lost World complex at Tikal (though I would have erred on making Tikal's waterworks network a wonder over that, or maybe the Tonina Acropolis, etc)
I will say that as somebody into Mesoamerican history and archeology, I have always been a bit iffy about the 2000BC date I often see used as the start of Maya Civilization. To be clear, this is something that does come up in reputable sources, and the Formative/Preclassic period is what I am least familiar with, and i'm sure there's research I'm not aware of which that date is based in, but I don't know why that is selected, especially when that largely, if not entirely predates monumental architecture in the region, certainly urbanism and what we'd define as "cities". For reference, Aguada Fenix made headlines for being a impressive example of a very early monumental Maya site with a large platform complex, and that dated to 1000BC. The earliest site often defined as the regipon's first city, the Olmec center of San Lorenzo, dates to 1400BC.
Maybe the 2000BC date is based on that being the earliest examples of any sort of art or iconography with a distinctly Maya style or something of that nature, that'd be my assumption, but if we're putting the emphasis on "Civilization" in "Maya Civilization", it's definitely too early.
However, I don't know enough about... well, any other civ here, to really gauge how their start/end dates are being defined and if they include or exclude periods somewhat analogous to that.