[NFP] Civilization VI: Possible New Civilizations Thread

[Wielki Hegemon]

You know there is something like old academical term of The Celts and Celtic culture. I rather don't think there is any based on archeology, language, or genetics classification as "North American Indians". The most generalizing classification is: Northeast, Southeast, Plains, Great Basin, California, Plateau, Northwest Coast, Arctic, Subartcic, Southwest. None of them is even close to The Celts common attributes in generalization. I wouldn't say Iroquois Confederation is lesser generalized than The Celts.

Let's start with the term "Celtism" which is a kinda political term. In Great Britain, this term first appeared to describe linguistic groups. Celtic languages. The theory that Celtic people came to the British Isles from Central European habitats of origin is an old theory from I think XVII or XVIII Century (the fun fact it was based on the biblical assumption of repopulating the Earth after deluge). In Britain, this theory is criticized. Academics rather think that the British Isles were settled by indigenous people and what we describe as Celtic culture spread through Atlantic connectivity. Proto Celtic language was lingua Franca for traders and Celtic culture and language from the continent were adopted alongside Atlantic Coast from Spanish Galicia to Ireland. The term Celtic and Celtism in Britain was used to help establish Great Britain ( historical glue bonding England, Scotland, and Ireland. Later it was mythologized by common culture etc. Let's put aside this popular leprechaun-Celtism and even the British Isles for a while.

What is important for me (when it comes to making a playable civ) is the question can we talk about common Celtic culture and can we name it Celtic? This was an Iron Age culture, we don't have any existing written documents except Roman and Greek ones about The Celts.
So who are The Celts and what does it mean:
- Celtic-self identity (we don't have any historical document about it)
- Celtic languages (we do have proto Celtic language and even British theory assuming it was Lingua Franca of trade. It was not written and codified langue as we may understand language today. There were dozen of dialects, but in this period of time it was common.
- Celtic social structure
- Celtic warfare (Celtic units and typical weapons were almost the same from Atlantic to Balkans)
- Celtic religion and position of druids
- La Tene art style of weapon, jewelry, etc.
- La Tene artifacts and coins
- The culture we are talking about in Roman and Greek sources is described as Gauls or The Celts. Gaius Julius Ceasar claims that they are calling themselves The Celts. Gauls was a roman term later used by Franch to politically distinct them from The Celts and include them to build French national consciousness. (The same reason British wanted to call them The Celts not Gauls which could Irish or Scottish population tie with France - politics again). Let's call it Asterix-Celtism.
etc.
We are talking about iron age culture. Remember this.
All this for me is enough to recognize distinct (similar way distinct as Scythians for example) enough not to call them blob Civ. Just consider them as a la Tene culture that called itself The Celts if it will help you.
this is really my last post about it. Please if you want to respond don't use any Native American blob reference absurds and similar stuff.

 

[Zaarin]

All this for me is enough to recognize distinct (similar way distinct as Scythians for example) enough not to call them blob Civ. Just consider them as a la Tene culture that called itself The Celts if it will help you.

"Lugus leads the La Tène Culture in Sid Meier's Civilization VI." That's going to sell well, I'm sure. Will Lugus speak Proto-Celtic? Shall we have Cernunnos as an alternate leader?

We are talking about iron age culture. Remember this.

Yes, and only one Iron Age Celtic culture achieved any level of prominence, and that was the Gauls. So why not simply call the civilization the Gauls?

we do have proto Celtic language and even British theory assuming it was Lingua Franca of trade. It was not written and codified langue as we may understand language today. There were dozen of dialects, but in this period of time it was common.

Unless we're talking about the La Tène period, i.e., the proto-culture, this is 100% untrue. The exact degree of intelligibility between Gaulish and British or Gaulish and Lepontic is open for debate, but it's 100% certain that a speaker of Gaulish could not understand a speaker of Celtiberian or Gallaecian or Primitive Irish. By the time you have Celtic peoples to give names to or build a civ around, they were most certainly speaking distinct languages.

The culture we are talking about in Roman and Greek sources is described as Gauls or The Celts. Gaius Julius Ceasar claims that they are calling themselves The Celts.

Caesar should be taken with a heaping mountain of salt, but yes, they probably did call themselves Celtoi. I'd still rather they be called the Gauls, however, because 1) that is the term preferred in academia (while "Celts" is used to describe all Celtic peoples from Hallstatt culture to Republic of Ireland), 2) it removes the temptation to create a stereotyped neopagan tree hugging civ, and 3) it removes the temptation to use Boudicca as a leader or incorporate anachronistic elements like ceilidhs or Guinness or Highlanders (and don't tell me making Scotland its own civ removes the temptation ).

 

[Thenewwwguy]

You know there is something like old academical term of The Celts and Celtic culture. I rather don't think there is any based on archeology, language, or genetics classification as "North American Indians". The most generalizing classification is: Northeast, Southeast, Plains, Great Basin, California, Plateau, Northwest Coast, Arctic, Subartcic, Southwest. None of them is even close to The Celts common attributes in generalization. I wouldn't say Iroquois Confederation is lesser generalized than The Celts.

Let's start with the term "Celtism" which is a kinda political term. In Great Britain, this term first appeared to describe linguistic groups. Celtic languages. The theory that Celtic people came to the British Isles from Central European habitats of origin is an old theory from I think XVII or XVIII Century (the fun fact it was based on the biblical assumption of repopulating the Earth after deluge). In Britain, this theory is criticized. Academics rather think that the British Isles were settled by indigenous people and what we describe as Celtic culture spread through Atlantic connectivity. Proto Celtic language was lingua Franca for traders and Celtic culture and language from the continent were adopted alongside Atlantic Coast from Spanish Galicia to Ireland. The term Celtic and Celtism in Britain was used to help establish Great Britain ( historical glue bonding England, Scotland, and Ireland. Later it was mythologized by common culture etc. Let's put aside this popular leprechaun-Celtism and even the British Isles for a while.

What is important for me (when it comes to making a playable civ) is the question can we talk about common Celtic culture and can we name it Celtic? This was an Iron Age culture, we don't have any existing written documents except Roman and Greek ones about The Celts.
So who are The Celts and what does it mean:
- Celtic-self identity (we don't have any historical document about it)
- Celtic languages (we do have proto Celtic language and even British theory assuming it was Lingua Franca of trade. It was not written and codified langue as we may understand language today. There were dozen of dialects, but in this period of time it was common.
- Celtic social structure
- Celtic warfare (Celtic units and typical weapons were almost the same from Atlantic to Balkans)
- Celtic religion and position of druids
- La Tene art style of weapon, jewelry, etc.
- La Tene artifacts and coins
- The culture we are talking about in Roman and Greek sources is described as Gauls or The Celts. Gaius Julius Ceasar claims that they are calling themselves The Celts. Gauls was a roman term later used by Franch to politically distinct them from The Celts and include them to build French national consciousness. (The same reason British wanted to call them The Celts not Gauls which could Irish or Scottish population tie with France - politics again). Let's call it Asterix-Celtism.
etc.
We are talking about iron age culture. Remember this.
All this for me is enough to recognize distinct (similar way distinct as Scythians for example) enough not to call them blob Civ. Just consider them as a la Tene culture that called itself The Celts if it will help you.
this is really my last post about it. Please if you want to respond don't use any Native American blob reference absurds and similar stuff.

didn’t you say ireland wasn’t celtic? i think that invalidates any of your opinions regard celticism and it’s justification as a unified civ or not, since that would imply that your understanding of celticism isn’t deep enough to make a judgement regarding the validity of a unified celtic civ

 

[Kupe Navigator]

You know there is something like old academical term of The Celts and Celtic culture. I rather don't think there is any based on archeology, language, or genetics classification as "North American Indians". The most generalizing classification is: Northeast, Southeast, Plains, Great Basin, California, Plateau, Northwest Coast, Arctic, Subartcic, Southwest. None of them is even close to The Celts common attributes in generalization. I wouldn't say Iroquois Confederation is lesser generalized than The Celts.

Let's start with the term "Celtism" which is a kinda political term. In Great Britain, this term first appeared to describe linguistic groups. Celtic languages. The theory that Celtic people came to the British Isles from Central European habitats of origin is an old theory from I think XVII or XVIII Century (the fun fact it was based on the biblical assumption of repopulating the Earth after deluge). In Britain, this theory is criticized. Academics rather think that the British Isles were settled by indigenous people and what we describe as Celtic culture spread through Atlantic connectivity. Proto Celtic language was lingua Franca for traders and Celtic culture and language from the continent were adopted alongside Atlantic Coast from Spanish Galicia to Ireland. The term Celtic and Celtism in Britain was used to help establish Great Britain ( historical glue bonding England, Scotland, and Ireland. Later it was mythologized by common culture etc. Let's put aside this popular leprechaun-Celtism and even the British Isles for a while.

What is important for me (when it comes to making a playable civ) is the question can we talk about common Celtic culture and can we name it Celtic? This was an Iron Age culture, we don't have any existing written documents except Roman and Greek ones about The Celts.
So who are The Celts and what does it mean:
- Celtic-self identity (we don't have any historical document about it)
- Celtic languages (we do have proto Celtic language and even British theory assuming it was Lingua Franca of trade. It was not written and codified langue as we may understand language today. There were dozen of dialects, but in this period of time it was common.
- Celtic social structure
- Celtic warfare (Celtic units and typical weapons were almost the same from Atlantic to Balkans)
- Celtic religion and position of druids
- La Tene art style of weapon, jewelry, etc.
- La Tene artifacts and coins
- The culture we are talking about in Roman and Greek sources is described as Gauls or The Celts. Gaius Julius Ceasar claims that they are calling themselves The Celts. Gauls was a roman term later used by Franch to politically distinct them from The Celts and include them to build French national consciousness. (The same reason British wanted to call them The Celts not Gauls which could Irish or Scottish population tie with France - politics again). Let's call it Asterix-Celtism.
etc.
We are talking about iron age culture. Remember this.
All this for me is enough to recognize distinct (similar way distinct as Scythians for example) enough not to call them blob Civ. Just consider them as a la Tene culture that called itself The Celts if it will help you.
this is really my last post about it. Please if you want to respond don't use any Native American blob reference absurds and similar stuff.

Question I have for you is this. Did celts ever see themselves as united race? Did they saw themselves as one people?

Yes, and only one Iron Age Celtic culture achieved any level of prominence, and that was the Gauls. So why not simply call the civilization the Gauls?

I wouldn't have any problems seeing Gauls civ.

 

[Wielki Hegemon]

"Lugus leads the La Tène Culture in Sid Meier's Civilization VI." That's going to sell well, I'm sure. Will Lugus speak Proto-Celtic? Shall we have Cernunnos as an alternate leader? .

I'd still rather they be called the Gauls, however, because 1) that is the term preferred in academia (while "Celts" is used to describe all Celtic peoples from Hallstatt culture to Republic of Ireland), 2) it removes the temptation to create a stereotyped neopagan tree hugging civ, and 3) it removes the temptation to use Boudicca as a leader or incorporate anachronistic elements like ceilidhs or Guinness or Highlanders (and don't tell me making Scotland its own civ removes the temptation )
.

And here is the real reason why we are in dispute I think . Thanks, Zaarin for this post.
I would still call them The Celts, why:
1. They call themselves The Celts. Why should we change this? Especially if we seem to like the original naming in the Game (Inca cities)
2. As I said the term Gauls was popularised by French to isolate them as a distinct tribe and include them into their national identity in XVIII, XIX Century. We neglect The Celts because of their pop culture connotation, but we are ok with Asterix Gauls?
3. The fact The Celts are stereotyped as tree lovers don't mean we should not tell the truth about them and show them as they are. Native Indians are also stereotyped. I think it's better to show them as they were and put it straight rather than silent.
4. As for Boudica. Again this is the problem of bad design, not the name. The fact I would like Celts to be back doesn't mean I want The Celt design from Civ V I don't.

Question I have for you is this. Did celts ever see themselves as united race? Did they saw themselves as one people?

First of all, we must make I distinction who is calling themselves The Celts today, and who were calling themselves The Celts in the period of the Roman Empire. I want The Celts from Roman Empire times, not today's Irish-like Civilization. We have no idea about it and there is a problem with a large group of Civilizations like Scythians etc because we cant ask them , The best way to find an answer to that question about self-identity is the question "how the people called themselves". This is the best way to establish any self-identity question. They called themselves The Celts. They share a common distinct culture, warfare, society, etc. For academic discussion, it's maybe not enough. For video-game based on history it fair enough for me.

EDIT: BTW this forum is sometimes weird. We can create ten pages of topic convincing one another that vampires are justified in Civilization because this or that, but at the same time we stick to the orthodox academical criteria when it comes to the introduction of some civilization like The Celts We are ok with ley-lines but somehow we are afraid including The Celts because devs will make them tree lover blob Civ This is really extraordinary.

 

[Kupe Navigator]

First of all, we must make I distinction who is calling themselves The Celts today, and who were calling themselves The Celts in the period of the Roman Empire. I want The Celts from Roman Empire times, not today's Irish-like Civilization. We have no idea about it and there is a problem with a large group of Civilizations like Scythians etc because we cant ask them , The best way to find an answer to that question about self-identity is the question "how the people called themselves". This is the best way to establish any self-identity question. They called themselves The Celts. They share a common distinct culture, warfare, society, etc. For academic discussion, it's maybe not enough. For video-game based on history it fair enough for me.

From Wikipedia:"The first recorded use of the name of Celts – as Κελτοί (Keltoi) in Greek – to refer to an ethnic group was by Hecataeus of Miletus, the Greek geographer, in 517 BC,[19] when writing about a people living near Massilia (modern Marseille).[20] In the fifth century BC, Herodotus referred to Keltoi living around the head of the Danube and also in the far west of Europe.[21] The etymology of the term Keltoi is unclear. Possible roots include Indo-European *kʲel 'to hide' (present also in Old Irish ceilid), IE *kʲel 'to heat' or *kel 'to impel'.[22] Several authors have supposed it to be Celtic in origin, while others view it as a name coined by Greeks. Linguist Patrizia De Bernardo Stempel falls in the latter group, and suggests the meaning "the tall ones".[23]" the name celts didn't came from... well celts themselves.

 

[Wielki Hegemon]

iSeveral authors have supposed it to be Celtic in origin, while others view it as a name coined by Greeks.
your conclusion: he name celts didn't came from... well celts themselves.

 

[Kupe Navigator]

iSeveral authors have supposed it to be Celtic in origin, while others view it as a name coined by Greeks.
your conclusion: he name celts didn't came from... well celts themselves.

And who lead this so callec unified celts in history? Not Boudica she only lead wales- I doubt she even realised Gauls are a thing. Not vercingetorix. He only ruled Gaul.
There never was unifed celts.

 

[Wielki Hegemon]

I just want to remind you that you have Kupe Navigator a mythical leader (no historical evidence he ever existed) as an avatar and Maori people were never organized as a united state.
But it is still good to have their culture represented in the game. Isn't it?

 

[SammyKhalifa]

There's an adage when discussing baseball greats, that if you have to have an argument on whether a player deserves to be in the Hall of Fame or not then they probably don't.

Now I would not necessarily treat inclusion in CivVI as a civ hall of fame exactly (and the developers aren't this time around) but there are quite a few civs I'd like to see included before any sort of celtic civilization.

 

[Kupe Navigator]

I just want to remind you that you have Kupe Navigator a mythical leader (no historical evidence he ever existed) as an avatar and Maori people were never organized as a united state.
But it is still good to have their culture represented in the game. Isn't it?

But mythical or not Kupe represents Maori people- and Maori people are united. Sure they did not start as united but in the middle of their interaction with European power there was idea amongst Maoris that they need unified kings and even today Maoris have their own king-Kiingi Tūheitia
Hawaiians would never see Kupe as their leader

Celts NEVER had unified kings. mythical or otherwise. Give me any leader-mythical or otherwise that ruled ALL of celts

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

And who lead this so callec unified celts in history? Not Boudica she only lead wales- I doubt she even realised Gauls are a thing. Not vercingetorix. He only ruled Gaul.
There never was unifed celts.

Well she wouldn't lead Wales either. She would lead the Iceni tribe that was located in modern day-England. But the point still stands that there is even a mod of an Iceni civ with her as the leader instead of leading all of the Celts.

 

[Kupe Navigator]

I just want to remind you that you have Kupe Navigator a mythical leader (no historical evidence he ever existed) as an avatar and Maori people were never organized as a united state.
But it is still good to have their culture represented in the game. Isn't it?

just stop avoiding and answer the question- were celts EVER united in any time in their history. ANY time. And if so WHEN? Maoris have a time usually when Maori king movement started and first Maori king was crowned in 1858.
Did celts ever had a leader like this?


And as for why we are picky about this while I tolerate mythological aspect like a secret society? Because Secret Society is optional while leaders and civs are not. It is EVEN MORE important who gets represented in civ

 

[Thenewwwguy]

We are ok with ley-lines but somehow we are afraid including The Celts because devs will make them tree lover blob Civ This is really extraordinary.

I care far more about leader and civ accuracy than an optional game mode.

I just want to remind you that you have Kupe Navigator a mythical leader (no historical evidence he ever existed) as an avatar and Maori people were never organized as a united state.

The maori had a unified religion, culture, origin story and background history that was well understood and agreed upon by all maori people.

Contrast that with the celts where their only commonality is a shared language sub-group in the Indo European language and a shared culture according to pop culture (which isn’t even true, the gauls, for example, had very little in common culturally with the iceni, the picts, the welsh or the irish.

In the cases of nations like Greece, Maya, Maori, Phoenicia, despite their past being a collection of ununified city states, they had a united culture, language and history. They viewed each other as one—Greeks, Mayans and Maori.

In the cases of blob civ’s like ‘Native Americans’, ‘Polynesia’, ‘India’ and ‘The Celts’, not only were they not unified, the blobbed in cultures shared maybe 1 or 2 things in common—in India’s case a religion, in Polynesia and the Celts’ case, a general language group. But they never viewed themselves as one people for most of history, and their cultures varied significantly.

 

[Kupe Navigator]

I care far more about leader and civ accuracy than an optional game mode.


The maori had a unified religion, culture, origin story and background history that was well understood and agreed upon by all maori people.

Contrast that with the celts where their only commonality is a shared language sub-group in the Indo European language and a shared culture according to pop culture (which isn’t even true, the gauls, for example, had very little in common culturally with the iceni, the picts, the welsh or the irish.

In the cases of nations like Greece, Maya, Maori, Phoenicia, despite their past being a collection of ununified city states, they had a united culture, language and history. They viewed each other as one—Greeks, Mayans and Maori.

In the cases of blob civ’s like ‘Native Americans’, ‘Polynesia’, ‘India’ and ‘The Celts’, not only were they not unified, the blobbed in cultures shared maybe 1 or 2 things in common—in India’s case a religion, in Polynesia and the Celts’ case, a general language group. But they never viewed themselves as one people for most of history, and their cultures varied significantly.

I don't get what Wielki Hegemon's obsession with insisting that unified celts were ever a thing. Celts are no more united then Asians were ever united into one nation.

 

[Wielki Hegemon]

Now I would not necessarily treat inclusion in CivVI as a civ hall of fame exactly (and the developers aren't this time around) but there are quite a few civs I'd like to see included before any sort of celtic civilization.

Bingo. And in most cases, that's the whole point here.
.

 

[Kupe Navigator]

Bingo. And in most cases, that's the whole point here.
.

If that's case why not have Indochina civ and have ramkhamhaeng as a leader? Yeah and watch Vietnam fans erupt in anger!

 

[Thenewwwguy]

If that's case why not have Indochina civ and have ramkhamhaeng as a leader? Yeah and watch Vietnam fans erupt in anger!

Subsaharan Africa civ led by Shaka?

 

[Kupe Navigator]

Subsaharan Africa civ led by Shaka?

don't know if you are being serious...
but just in case Shaka only less Zulus

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

Subsaharan Africa civ led by Shaka?

I mean that's basically what happens on a TSL map unless Kongo can survive.