accent? what accent?And the Scots would rule too, if only for their accent in speech!!!
As for cultural diversity New York is number one with London a close second.loui89 said:Looking at a few things, it would actually be far more better to have Britain than England, or maybe both. I came to this thought, when it crept up on me just how important britain was to world history.
Early 1900's Britain became the single biggest empire in history with over a quatre of the worlds land and population. "the sun never set on the British Empire"
First country to have industrial revolution,
Country that saved Europe from imprisonment of German barbarism in WW1 and WW2.
Was a country that was never conquered, unlike a few... France, Germany, Poland, etc.
Invented some of the worlds most used technology, like radar, and tanks.
Today has the most culturally diversed city in the world, London.
im not going to go on, mainly because il probably end up insulting a few people, not intentionally though![]()
The Roman Emperor Augustus came to an agreement with Axum that went along the lines of you stay on your side of the line Upper Egypt/Northern Sudan and we will stay on our side. They fought several skirmishes that were never fully documented; but the Axumites are reported to have given a good accounting of themselves. They were primarily a merchant power that traded back and forth from India down to Madagascar. Their naval marine units were known throughout the Indian Ocean and Red Sea for their lethality. There are even historical references to Axumite/Abyssinian Beserkers (I forget their true name) that went into battle wired on coffee beans (coffee was first cultivated in Ethiopia) that they would chew mouthfulls prior to battle. They retained close ties with the Eastern Roman Empire, especially under Theodosius.Breunor said:Hmm,
There is no question that the ancient kingdom of Axum was a powerhouse; the Persians considered it one of the great empires. They controlled a lot of East Africa and modern Yemen.
Not sure about the attack on Judah? There were clearly powerful ties, though.
I'd be interested in any information on this!
Best wishes,
Bruce
Except for the Ethiopian (Abyssinian) Orthodox Church - Everything is written in Ge'ez or Amharic. The Coptic Church in Egypt and up until the Muslim conquest Nubia (Sudan) used Coptic; basically a modernized form of the language of the Pharoahs.Panther_GR said:Yes and no![]()
The Greek Churches have Greek inscriptions. All Orthodox Churches around the world have Greek in them. Exept the Russian Orthodox Churches who use Cyrrilic texts. That's the yes.
Latin are used in Catholic or Agglikan (Protestant) churches and latin is a translation of the original Greek text. That's the no (going to Greek being a translation)
![]()
Ankenaton said:The Roman Emperor Augustus came to an agreement with Axum that went along the lines of you stay on your side of the line Upper Egypt/Northern Sudan and we will stay on our side. They fought several skirmishes that were never fully documented; but the Axumites are reported to have given a good accounting of themselves. They were primarily a merchant power that traded back and forth from India down to Madagascar. Their naval marine units were known throughout the Indian Ocean and Red Sea for their lethality. There are even historical references to Axumite/Abyssinian Beserkers (I forget their true name) that went into battle wired on coffee beans (coffee was first cultivated in Ethiopia) that they would chew mouthfulls prior to battle. They retained close ties with the Eastern Roman Empire, especially under Theodosius.
Ankenaton said:As for cultural diversity New York is number one with London a close second.
Kawn said:As a Swede, i definetly hope that the expansion involves Wikings or Scandinavians![]()
Kawn said:As a Swede, i definetly hope that the expansion involves Wikings or Scandinavians![]()
Mmmm Butter said:I hear ya, Israel definitely does have more than enough historical significance to be included, and I'd like to see them included personally. I suppose I'm just scared about the religion stuff being first put into this installation. Like the developers were, as shown in that disclaimer in the manual![]()
But, it certainly seems like noone's gotten offended by religion, not most people, so I think there's no reason they shouldn't be in an expansion, definitely.
I guess I'll field that, since I said I'd like to see them... It may seem blasphemous, but I feel they should be included at least for the fact that Canada's got a broad gaming population. I know the Civ series isn't about that, it's about historical accuracy, and by no means would I want it to "sell out", for lack of better termnology... but, as a casual gamer, I know if I were Canadian I'd like to see my country in the game, same for any country. Just my opinion, of course, and I saw a Canadian in an earlier post say he/she doesn't particularly care if Canada is included. As for historical significance, cause someone asked that, I like the idea that they became autonomous without war, hehe... What can I say, I like Canada
Edit: One other reason, one of Canada's leaderheads would probably be Sir John MacDonald, which is my name, except grossly mispelled. And I haven't been knighted yet, hehe
I think I better come up with some better reasons![]()
Ankenaton said:Except for the Ethiopian (Abyssinian) Orthodox Church - Everything is written in Ge'ez or Amharic. The Coptic Church in Egypt and up until the Muslim conquest Nubia (Sudan) used Coptic; basically a modernized form of the language of the Pharoahs.
Guerra said:But if they add the Gauls, like they said they would, then I'm not going to buy it. There are the French, we don't need to add the Gauls.
QUOTE]
Actually Gauls are Celts that lived in and around france specifically during roman times. It is what the romans called the Keltoi which is where we get the name celts from.
The french however came from the Franks, a germanic tribe that settled in gaul and later became romanized adopting latin as their language and given the area in peace times