[NFP] Civilization VI: Possible New Civilizations Thread

[riddleofsteel]

Are there really no ‘documents’ we know from Mesopotamia which identify rulers of Harappan city states or are written in both cuneiform and indus script?



aren’t the Sea People Phonecians?

Wow, you ninja-quoted me! I meant to say Hyksos. It's my understanding that the Sea People were a composite of many different Mediterranean people and maybe some exiles from places like Knossos and Anatolia.

 

[Zaarin]

Equally lamentable is the major dearth of knowledge about the Oxus civilization in Bactria/Margiana. They were a major link in the trade network between Meluhha and Mesopotamia and the source of all the ANE’s tin for bronze-working.

Anatolia was also a source of tin early on before the deposits ran dry.

 

[The Kingmaker]

The Oxus civ was also the major exporter of lapis lazuli, very popular in the ancient near east, especially Egypt.

 

[riddleofsteel]

The Oxus civ was also the major exporter of lapis lazuli, very popular in the ancient near east, especially Egypt.

Yeah! The Sumerians must have traded for lapis lazuli from them. The Sumerians even believed that the gods lived in lapis lazuli stones, since it looked like starry dark heavens to them. They described the land of the gods as being to the eastern sunrise from Mesopotamia, which would certainly describe the land of the Oxus civilization.

 

[Zaarin]

Yeah, true. I'm just a hopeless fanboy of mysterious dynasties. Would it be too much to ask for Gutians or Hyksos?

Yes. And no. The Hyksos were probably close cousins of the Amorites so it probably wouldn't be too hard to have a Hyksos pharaoh speak Ugaritic. Gutians are more problematic. For one thing, it was kind of a term the Babylonians and Assyrians used generically to describe "all those horse-riding barbarians to the east," like Greek "Scythian." And like the Scythians they were probably Iranians. But considering Hyksos rule was kind of a dark age for Egypt and the Gutians aren't really a specific people and little is known about them, both are pretty unlikely.

Are there really no ‘documents’ we know from Mesopotamia which identify rulers of Harappan city states or are written in both cuneiform and indus script?

None. There are some Sumerian cuneiform documents that mention a kingdom with whom they traded that is tentatively identified as the Indus Valley Civilization, but it may also be in Africa or Sri Lanka.

aren’t the Sea People Phonecians?

The identity of the Sea People is still debated, but it's generally accepted that the people the Egyptians called Peleset and the Babylonians called Palištu are the Philistines. The Philistines were probably Indo-European, and more specifically probably Anatolian, before assimilating to the native Canaanite culture. I think the most widely accepted theory about the Sea People, though, is that they were multi-ethnic from across the Aegean and Eastern Mediterranean, that they weren't just one people. The Phoenicians, however, have been in Canaan long enough to safely call them autochthonous; I don't think they're a good candidate for the Sea People.

 

[SirMediocrity]

If I remember correctly, the Sherden have been closely associated with Sardinia (mostly due to helmets and shields of their kind being found on the island). The more popular theories are that they either originated there or a bunch of them ended up there. Pretty interesting stuff.

EDIT: I forgot to mention that the Sherden were one of the Sea Peoples, for those of you who don't know.

 

[The Kingmaker]

The working theories for identifying the Sea Peoples include Greeks (Denyen = Danaoi?, Ekwesh = Achaean?), Lycians (Lukka?), Sardinians (Sherden?), Siculi (Shekelesh?), Tyrrhenians (Teresh?), and the Philistines (Peleset?) as stated above.

Seems likely they were a confederacy of Mediterranean tribes. The horsehair (?) headdresses they wear in Egyptian art may reinforce this theory.

 

[riddleofsteel]

Yes. And no. The Hyksos were probably close cousins of the Amorites so it probably wouldn't be too hard to have a Hyksos pharaoh speak Ugaritic. Gutians are more problematic. For one thing, it was kind of a term the Babylonians and Assyrians used generically to describe "all those horse-riding barbarians to the east," like Greek "Scythian." And like the Scythians they were probably Iranians. But considering Hyksos rule was kind of a dark age for Egypt and the Gutians aren't really a specific people and little is known about them, both are pretty unlikely.

No, I know. I was trying to be facetious, but only partially so, because I'd still take those civs! Would it be fair to say that some Gutians could have been proto-Persians or at least proto-Iranic? I was given to understand that the Hyksos were an umbrella group of Semitic or Canaanite migrants, which probably lines up with what you're saying. They were depicted as bearded "asiatics" in Egyptian art.

The identity of the Sea People is still debated, but it's generally accepted that the people the Egyptians called Peleset and the Babylonians called Palištu are the Philistines. The Philistines were probably Indo-European, and more specifically probably Anatolian, before assimilating to the native Canaanite culture. I think the most widely accepted theory about the Sea People, though, is that they were multi-ethnic from across the Aegean and Eastern Mediterranean, that they weren't just one people. The Phoenicians, however, have been in Canaan long enough to safely call them autochthonous; I don't think they're a good candidate for the Sea People.

For sure. I've read research that wants to say that the Philistines came from possibly Crete, but who knows. That, and were settled in the Levant by the Egyptians after they were defeated. Phoenicians are definitely thalassocratic Canaanites, as you say.

 

[SirMediocrity]

There's a pretty hilarious theory that the Denyen are related to the tribe of Dan.

 

[Zaarin]

Would it be fair to say that some Gutians could have been proto-Persians or at least proto-Iranic?

They were more than one people, but some of them at least were clearly the same people who were elsewhere identified as Medes.

I was given to understand that the Hyksos were an umbrella group of Semitic or Canaanite migrants, which probably lines up with what you're saying. They were depicted as bearded "asiatics" in Egyptian art.

Yeah, they were definitely an assortment of Canaanites/Northwest Semites, as evident by their names.

For sure. I've read research that wants to say that the Philistines came from possibly Crete, but who knows. That, and were settled in the Levant by the Egyptians after they were defeated.

Yeah, their exact identity is unknown, but Philistine pottery resembles Indo-European Aegean pottery and Indo-European etymologies have been proposed for most known Philistine names. In fact, there's a Luwian king whose name may well be cognate to Goliath. So while early theories pointed to the idea that the Philistines were Greeks or Para-Greeks, a lot of scholars are getting behind the Anatolian hypothesis. At any rate, their names, pottery, weapons, and non-practice of circumcision all point to Indo-European origins, and linguistic evidence, though small, is increasingly lending credence to the idea they came from Anatolia; however, it's also pretty clear that within a few generations they adopted a Canaanite language and Canaanite gods.

 

[Jeppetto]

Anatolia was also a source of tin early on before the deposits ran dry.

The true source of protection against aliens. It all began there!

 

[leif erikson]

Moderator Action: Please return to the topic of this thread. If you cannot stay on topic, thread bans will be applied.

 

[Thenewwwguy]

Assuming each pack represents a region and Pack 1 represented South and Central America

May: S&C America: Maya and Colombia

July: North Africa pack? Sub-saharan Africa pack? Africa Pack? I’m hoping it’s North Africa so we can get the Shona or Swahili but I doubt.

September: The most likely candidate for two civs is Asia as a whole, but I could imagine Asia getting 3 civs, with two representing one region in this pack, like the Middle East or Mesopotamia, plus an east asian civ later. It could also theoretically be two European civs, like Portugal and Byzantium.

November: just one civ could be Portugal representing Europe, or a Native North American civ

January: This seems like what would be the east/central asian civ pack, simply cuz those would be the regions which would fit with either Korea or Mongolia, assuming those are the two major candidates for a second leader.

March: Again, could be Europe or North America, or perhaps it could be another Asian civ. This could also be a second African civ, whether that be ‘Southern Africa’ if Ethiopia represents North Africa or ‘Saharan Africa’ if Ethiopia represents Sub-Saharan Africa

That means, in September, imo, what is most likely is we’ll see two middle eastern civs. So maybe we’ll see two of Babylon, the Hittites, Palmyra/Syria Oman and Assyria. If they count the Byzantines as middle eastern, perhaps them.

November, I’d guess, would be like July, where the interest can afford to be lower, since it would come off a pack, assuming September is the middle east, that would generate a lot of interest, like how Ethiopia was less hyped up than Maya and Colombia. That to me sounds like they wouldn’t put the European civ here, so I’d guess this’ll be the Native civ, whether that be the Iroquois, Navajo or a PNW nation.

January is the big one, with the alt leader, likely Kublai Khan. My guess is they’ll pick a civ with some connection to Mongolia, China or Kublai in that capacity, so perhaps the Timurids or Vietnam.

March is the final one, so they’d want to maintain interest, so I’d make a wager that this is where we see the most commonly requested civs: Portugal or the Byzantines

It’s completely possible that we only see one middle eastern civ and two european ones though. I can’t say that there isn’t some of my bias in here.

 

[SammyKhalifa]

I should be, Timur is an interesting character and they would tick a lot of boxes, and this is pretty shallow; but the name "Timurids" is keeping me from getting excited about that option. What did they call themselves?

 

[Zaarin]

I should be, Timur is an interesting character and they would tick a lot of boxes, and this is pretty shallow; but the name "Timurids" is keeping me from getting excited about that option. What did they call themselves?

They called themselves Gurkani. Personally I'd rather see a pre-Islamic Central Asian civ like the Sogdians or Kushans, but I wouldn't say no to the Timurids/Gurkani so long as they weren't Mongolians 2.0.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

Timur already replaced Genghis Khan as a Great General in R&F. Would they replace the same one again with the same ability?

 

[Zaarin]

Timur already replaced Genghis Khan as a Great General in R&F. Would they replace the same one again with the same ability?

I mean, they replaced the Seoul city-state with Babylon, but there's a pretty good chance they'll be replacing Babylon again--so never say never.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

I mean, they replaced the Seoul city-state with Babylon, but there's a pretty good chance they'll be replacing Babylon again--so never say never.

That means Bologna would also have a chance of getting replaced too.
Don't forget about Antioch possibly either.

 

[Zaarin]

Don't forget about Antioch possibly either.

Palmyra when?

 

[SammyKhalifa]

They called themselves Gurkani. Personally I'd rather see a pre-Islamic Central Asian civ like the Sogdians or Kushans, but I wouldn't say no to the Timurids/Gurkani so long as they weren't Mongolians 2.0.

Thanks, heh. It was many years ago and I forget much, but in the only class where I learned about him he seemed to only reference himself as the Mongolians 2.0