Indigenous Consultation - Shawnee

[Zaarin]

i don’t understand why ppl talk like this about them as if we have all this knowledge publicly available. most of us americans grew up being told the natives willingly gave us crops and farming techniques during thanksgiving and that pocohantas loved her husband when in reality thanksgiving celebrates a raid of an indigenous village and pocohantas was a child who was kidnapped, raped and stripped of her cultural upbringing

Mostly agree except that I don't think we have the resources to know what Pocahontas felt about John Rolfe. The thing with John Smith was either a misunderstanding of a ritual (there are similar rituals among related cultures) or, more likely in my opinion, despite its resemblance to Eastern Woodland adoption rituals, made up by Smith (he describes the exact same thing happening to him all over the world). Most accounts we have available describe Rolfe as a gentle and caring man; he probably didn't mistreat Pocahontas. However, we have no records about what she felt about anything that was happening because no one bothered to ask her. About all we can say is that she probably went into the marriage willingly and with the understanding of what political marriages meant, given one of the few things we do know about her from multiple sources is that she was her father's favorite among his many children.

 

[Thormodr]

the key difference here is that the popular understanding of history of america, china, etc. largely has not been whitewashed by a dominating, colonizing party that tried to wipe them out for the better part of 400 years, and continues to limit their access to resources, sovereignty, and cultural dignity.

we don’t need to consult congress on us history because a) congress doesn’t have some insight on us history that the rest of us don’t have; b) congress aren’t the last keepers of knowledge that a greater power has actively tried to wipe out and c) depicting americans in stereotypical light will not directly affect america (and we have the resources to not depict america in such a way readily available)

i don’t understand why ppl talk like this about them as if we have all this knowledge publicly available. most of us americans grew up being told the natives willingly gave us crops and farming techniques during thanksgiving and that pocohantas loved her husband when in reality thanksgiving celebrates a raid of an indigenous village and pocohantas was a child who was kidnapped, raped and stripped of her cultural upbringing

Agree with you up until the last paragraph. I, uhhhh, do not agree at all with this strange revisionist version of Thanksgiving.

I have ancestors who came over on the Mayflower. William Brewster was my 10th Maternal Great Grandfather. I have researched and know a bit about the subject.

The history is well attested. The pilgrims were not well equipped at all and would have all starved to death if the first nations peoples had not helped them. The pilgrims didn't steal from the first nations people or use coercion. The First Nations peoples took pity on them, more than anything.

 

[Thenewwwguy]

Mostly agree except that I don't think we have the resources to know what Pocahontas felt about John Rolfe. The thing with John Smith was either a misunderstanding of a ritual (there are similar rituals among related cultures) or, more likely in my opinion, despite its resemblance to Eastern Woodland adoption rituals, made up by Smith (he describes the exact same thing happening to him all over the world). Most accounts we have available describe Rolfe as a gentle and caring man; he probably didn't mistreat Pocahontas. However, we have no records about what she felt about anything that was happening because no one bothered to ask her. About all we can say is that she probably went into the marriage willingly and with the understanding of what political marriages meant, given one of the few things we do know about her from multiple sources is that she was her father's favorite among his many children.

true, i specifically was referring to her being a child at the time of marriage rather than how he treated her, but yeah, i do know what you mean

even if she was treated relatively well, the fact that her history has been whitewashed/pop-culture-ified is indicative of the problem i was trying to highlight

this country, and world, are not at a point where we can just represent a historically oppressed people and expect for it to automatically be respectful and historically accurate. we see the impacts of nationalist mythmaking creating lies about indigenous peoples *all the time*, to *this day*, *around the world*

 

[Thenewwwguy]

Agree with you up until the last paragraph. I, uhhhh, do not agree at all with this strange revisionist version of Thanksgiving.

I have ancestors who came over on the Mayflower. William Brewster was my 10th Maternal Great Grandfather. I have researched and know a bit about the subject.

The history is well attested. The pilgrims were not well equipped at all and would have all starved to death if the first nations peoples had not helped them. The pilgrims didn't steal from the first nations people or use coercion. The First Nations peoples took pity on them, more than anything.

perhaps i’m mistaken on that specific point, in which case that’s my bad—my understanding is that the modern wampanoag people consider the story of thanksgiving largely a myth that masks the level of violence the new englander colonists presented to the natives. The idea of a peaceful thanksgiving is something that even the Smithsonian Museum of the American Indian has recently pushed back against, to my understanding. Even if thanksgiving itself was peaceful, I’ll maintain the pilgrims did ultimately kill many of the wampanoag and their leaders in king philip’s war just a couple of years later, and a lot of the history of “they just agreed to give us the land in treaties” is woefully misunderstood and whitewashed to avoid presenting the atrocities the early americans conducted against indigenous peoples

 

[Thormodr]

perhaps i’m mistaken on that specific point, in which case that’s my bad—my understanding is that the modern wampanoag people consider the story of thanksgiving largely a myth that masks the level of violence the new englander colonists presented to the natives. The idea of a peaceful thanksgiving is something that even the Smithsonian Museum of the American Indian has recently pushed back against, to my understanding. Even if thanksgiving itself was peaceful, I’ll maintain the pilgrims did ultimately kill many of the wampanoag and their leaders in king philip’s war just a couple of years later, and a lot of the history of “they just agreed to give us the land in treaties” is woefully misunderstood and whitewashed to avoid presenting the atrocities the early americans conducted against indigenous peoples

That, of course, is not to say that the descendents of the Pilgrims and other settlers did not take advantage of and brutalize the First Nations people. That history is also well attested, to the shame of the USA and Canada.

The First Nations people saw the early settlers as another tribe and made alliances with them in order to fight and/or wipe out other tribes. Sadly, we aren't much different in the end.

 

[BuchiTaton]

The Iroquois and Sioux are represented in media a lot, and historical games, so I wouldn't be surprised if they would be the easiest to include.

For the new version of AoE3 they wanted to be Haudenosaunee and Lakota, something that is fine, but also changed the way they get coin from mineral deposits since they argued that mining was not OK with their traditional ways. So I wonder if for CIV7 they would not have mines and industry?

 

[Thenewwwguy]

For the new version of AoE3 they wanted to be Haudenosaunee and Lakota, something that is fine, but also changed the way they get coin from mineral deposits since they argued that mining was not OK with their traditional ways. So I wonder if for CIV7 they would not have mines and industry?

iirc they’ve done things like this in the past, no? like the maori couldn’t get great works of writing in civ 6 because their historical record was oral rather than written (executed weirdly but a similar premise).

i think in civ’s context it makes more sense to provide an alternative within their abilities that is incentivized, but doesn’t block off the option to mine (which can often read as infantile —something akin to “omg the natives didn’t know how to mine” rather than “mining represents a form of environmental exploitation they ideally wouldn’t participate in”

 

[Thenewwwguy]

That, of course, not to say that the descendents of the Pilgrims and other settlers did not take advantage of and brutalize the First Nations people. That history is also well attested, to the shame of the USA and Canada.

The First Nations people saw the early settlers as another tribe and made alliances with them in order to fight and/or wipe out other tribes. Sadly, we aren't much different in the end.

yeah for sure. it’s hard to understand the “truth” of situations when the reclamation of a narrative isn’t by-nature required to be honest either. Obviously we all want to understand the “truth of history” but history is by-nature political. I think the general premise of my argument though is undeniable—consulting indigenous peoples is a requirement in this day and age because of how they’ve been treated in the past and how it’s been represented in the dominant culture’s pop history/cultural narrative

 

[BuchiTaton]

the key difference here is that the popular understanding of history of america, china, etc. largely has not been whitewashed by a dominating, colonizing party that tried to wipe them out for the better part of 400 years, and continues to limit their access to resources, sovereignty, and cultural dignity.

we don’t need to consult congress on us history because a) congress doesn’t have some insight on us history that the rest of us don’t have; b) congress aren’t the last keepers of knowledge that a greater power has actively tried to wipe out and c) depicting americans in stereotypical light will not directly affect america (and we have the resources to not depict america in such a way readily available)

i don’t understand why ppl talk like this about them as if we have all this knowledge publicly available. most of us americans grew up being told the natives willingly gave us crops and farming techniques during thanksgiving and that pocohantas loved her husband when in reality thanksgiving celebrates a raid of an indigenous village and pocohantas was a child who was kidnapped, raped and stripped of her cultural upbringing

In a similar way have the Maya as an Ancient only civ perpetuates the idea of a "lost civilization" whose whole culture is no more.
If Japan or India can have 3 representatives Maya can too, and if the 19th century Shawnee resistance deserve be repersented the 17th, 19th, 20th and even 21th century Maya resistance deserve it too.

 

[AntSou]

So what you're saying is that

Civ7 shouldn't be out before another 30-40 years

No.

because Firaxis needs to organize a series of world conferences to validate with every nation / ethnic group / culture or anyone who can trace back an origin to them

No.

That Firaxis should do their research and ask for external expertise so as not to blunder and involuntarily carry on spreading clichés or untruths, that's certainly a good thing.
But that any group should have a say in the game's development based on their preferred historical narrative... that's a big no.

I don't think requesting to be omitted is equivalent to pressures to be depicted in a given way, any more than a right to be forgotten implies individuals can force companies to glamorize their data.

It's not the first time Firaxis are denied and they just went for somebody else.

 

[Thenewwwguy]

In a similar way have the Maya as a Ancient only civ perpetuates the idea of a "lost civilization" whose whole culture is no more.
If Japan or India can have 3 representatives Maya can too, and if the 19th century Shawnee resistance deserve be repersented the 17th, 19th, 20th and even 21th century Maya resistance deserve it too.

yeah in an ideal world for sure—ofc, civ needs to balance having recognizable names that get people to buy the game as well, which makes this ambition difficult, but obviously the goal is to make a game where lesser known civs *can* become recognizable names as well.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

For the new version of AoE3 they wanted to be Haudenosaunee and Lakota, something that is fine, but also changed the way they get coin from mineral deposits since they argued that mining was not OK with their traditional ways. So I wonder if for CIV7 they would not have mines and industry?

Since every civ has unique civics now, it might be something that could be tied to them. I doubt it would be for both of them, because you would still need some distinction between the two, and it's not present in the Shawnee either. That is, I don't even know if there is a taboo on mining for the Shawnee and I just assumed it would be that way for all of them.

In a similar way have the Maya as an Ancient only civ perpetuates the idea of a "lost civilization" whose whole culture is no more.
If Japan or India can have 3 representatives Maya can too, and if the 19th century Shawnee resistance deserve be repersented the 17th, 19th, 20th and even 21th century Maya resistance deserve it too.

I have a feeling that the way they are going to go with this is having Mexico being the Modern civ, that was built on the culture of Maya and Aztecs from an earlier period. I do understand their logic, even if it's not presented in a way that works with regards to the Americas. The logical thing to do would be what Humankind did and have a choice to keep the current civ, especially if you survive your crisis.

 

[Thormodr]

In a similar way have the Maya as an Ancient only civ perpetuates the idea of a "lost civilization" whose whole culture is no more.
If Japan or India can have 3 representatives Maya can too, and if the 19th century Shawnee resistance deserve be repersented the 17th, 19th, 20th and even 21th century Maya resistance deserve it too.

Agree with the Maya. Would love to play them all the way, through. There is this idea of romanticizing them as a lost Civ, yeah.

Would like to do the same in South America. Andean precursor Civ -> Inca -> Bolivia?

 

[Thenewwwguy]

Agree with the Maya. Would love to play them all the way, through. There is this idea of romanticizing them as a lost Civ, yeah.

Would like to do the same in South America. Andean precursor Civ -> Inca -> Bolivia?

Bolivia is an interesting one. Peru is prob more “correct” geographically, since I’d associate Bolivia more with the Aymara, but the Quechua people do also live in Bolivia, which has staked its national identity more on being a state of indigenous peoples (hence the title of plurinational state and the use of the wiphala dlag)

 

[Zaarin]

Agree with you up until the last paragraph. I, uhhhh, do not agree at all with this strange revisionist version of Thanksgiving.

I have ancestors who came over on the Mayflower. William Brewster was my 10th Maternal Great Grandfather. I have researched and know a bit about the subject.

The history is well attested. The pilgrims were not well equipped at all and would have all starved to death if the first nations peoples had not helped them. The pilgrims didn't steal from the first nations people or use coercion. The First Nations peoples took pity on them, more than anything.

The Pilgrims and Massasoit was one of the happier chapters in European/Native relations--especially in contrast to the nakedly genocidal policy of the broader Massachusetts Bay Colony.

Agree with the Maya. Would love to play them all the way, through.

Hopefully eventually we can. Maya > Mayapan > Yucatec would be a very viable development chain.

Bolivia is an interesting one. Peru is prob more “correct” geographically, since I’d associate Bolivia more with the Aymara, but the Quechua people do also live in Bolivia, which has staked its national identity more on being a state of indigenous peoples (hence the title of plurinational state and the use of the wiphala dlag)

From the beginning, the Quechua maintained more influence in Peru than just about any other colonial state (only the Nahua in Mexico came close). In both cases, the Spaniards intermarried with the native nobility to cement their authority, which would have been considered horrifying by Europeans just about anywhere else.

 

[BuchiTaton]

Agree with the Maya. Would love to play them all the way, through. There is this idea of romanticizing them as a lost Civ, yeah.

Would like to do the same in South America. Andean precursor Civ -> Inca -> Bolivia?

Tupac Amaru II lead an Aymara and Quechua rebelion at the 1780's so considering the liberties they are taking for the modern civ this could work for the Aymara as the Modern civ after the Exploration Incas (Quechuas).

Mapuche are also a South American option that were independent until late 19th century, but I think they represent their own region.

 

[Arent11]

One of the take aways from the PAX West Panel was that Firaxis has been consulting heavily with the Shawnee people regarding their depiction in Civ 7.

After their issues with the Pueblo in Civ 5, and the mixed consultation with the Cree in Civ6 [though that may of helped the push for Chief Poundmaker Exoneration], it has been good to see the company be proactive on this front.

*Sigh* Why are the Shawnee consulted but not the Italians, Greek, French, Germans, English and Americans?

All of them want to have their civs being depicted in a cool & great way? What makes the Shawnee different from Italians?

The Italians maybe also want the Romans to go to Renaissance Italy and modern Italy? And the Greek might want to have the Greek go to Byzantium and then modern Greece. And the Germans might want to have Saxons to go to Germans/English and then to America/Germany.

 

[Thenewwwguy]

*Sigh* Why are the Shawnee consulted but not the Italians, Greek, French, Germans, English and Americans?

All of them want to have their civs being depicted in a cool & great way? What makes the Shawnee different from Italians?

The Italians maybe also want the Romans to go to Renaissance Italy and modern Italy? And the Greek might want to have the Greek go to Byzantium and then modern Greece. And the Germans might want to have Saxons to go to Germans/English and then to America/Germany.

they wrote their own historical books. they are consulted when the devs go read..you know…their histories.

 

[Zaarin]

What makes the Shawnee different from Italians?

Yes, I'm sure the Italians have been deeply traumatized by the pervasive and harmful stereotype that they over-gesticulate. Also, it must trouble the Italians deeply that Italy is to this very day in the hands of non-Italians, and that they have been relegated to reservations.

 

[Thenewwwguy]

Yes, I'm sure the Italians have been deeply traumatized by the pervasive and harmful stereotype that they over-gesticulate. Also, it must trouble the Italians deeply that Italy is to this very day in the hands of non-Italians, and that they have been relegated to reservations.

god forbid that the germans risk their history being lost to their colonists if we don’t include the saxons in game so that they can lead to the us if they so desire