• 📚 A new project from the admin: Check out PictureBooks.io, an AI storyteller that lets you create personalized picture books for kids in seconds. Give it a try and let me know what you think!

Istanbul AND Constantinople

History is wrong, Firaxis never is.
Do we also get New Amsterdam in the game? Have only seen the Dutch once and they got slaughtered by my friend who was playing Monty.
 
And it was Byzantion by the Greeks before that (I don't know if it is in the Greek city list).

So it could be in 4 civs with 4 different names.
 
There's also a London and a Londinium. The conclusion is: It's a game. Stop complaining.
 
Istanbul(Byzantion,Konstantinople,Konstantiniyye,Islambol) was founded by Megaranian king Byzas.And named from his founder Byzantion.Centuries later,by divide of Roman Empire,Konstantin was the leader of east romans.And he renamed the city Konstantinople.Until the city conquered by Mehmet 2,Ottomans called it Konstantiniyye(this -iye make a name feminin,actually.other names are Şehriazam,Tekfuriye etc.).After Mehmet 2 entered the city and prayed in Hagia Sophia,the city is renamed as Islambol.(like House of Islam,i think,not sure about).This names spelling changed in years and at last it is Istanbul.:)
Both of them is the same city,same land.But Constantinople was not so big like todays Istanbul.(18 million population.)
 
I thought after WWI and the surge of Ataturk in former Ottoman Empire, it was changed the name to reflect a more modern Turkey and break links with the imperial past.
 
No, the Turks have always called it Istanbul. It has not, however, always been the capital of the Ottoman Empire, though it was for a large part of its history.

What puzzles me is how Russia's city name list includes things like Minsk and Kiev even though they're not in Russia any more, on the (quite right) grounds that they played an important role in the history of the nation. Why then do the Germans not get Kongingsberg? It was and remains very important place.
 
No, the Turks have always called it Istanbul. It has not, however, always been the capital of the Ottoman Empire, though it was for a large part of its history.

What i said is,true:D It was not always Istanbul.Trust me:D
The name has changed,even now man remember the old names.Sometimes it is asked by competitions.:D
 
What i said is,true:D It was not always Istanbul.Trust me:D
The name has changed,even now man remember the old names.Sometimes it is asked by competitions.:D

I think something similar. Perhaps some people called it Istanbul, but in maps it still appeared as Constantinople. At least maps made by westerners. I've got an atlas of the early 1900's from a great grandpa to support it!

It's something similar to Persia = Iran
 
I saw a german map from 1967.They called european part as Istanbul,and the asian part as Üsküdar(just a city part now).European called it difference,but since 1923(the Republic was founded) it is Istanbul.:) Just one name now:D

And it is a really difficult challenge,forcing any Turk to call it Konstantinople.:D
 
No, the Turks have always called it Istanbul. It has not, however, always been the capital of the Ottoman Empire, though it was for a large part of its history.

What puzzles me is how Russia's city name list includes things like Minsk and Kiev even though they're not in Russia any more, on the (quite right) grounds that they played an important role in the history of the nation. Why then do the Germans not get Kongingsberg? It was and remains very important place.

No, turks have not always called it Istanbul.
But you are half right about the capital. Istanbul was never the capital, earlier it was Bursa, and became Ankara later on....
 
After Istanbul conquered it was until dissolution The Capital.Ottomans Capitals are Söğüt,Bursa,Edirne(Adrianople),Istanbul.After republic it is Ankara(Ankuwash)
 
Making Edirne the capital would have been one of the dumbess things they did...it's too far west...
 
Dumb?

There was no threat from east.But west...
European states made every year an alliance and attacked for wiping out Ottomans from Europe.The army must be near to any threat.And living in Edirne,gived them much more time for getting ready to war.Do you want really pass the Bosphorus before a slaughter?I dont want it.Any real commander dont want it.
 
The capital need not be where your army is...
The capital by definition is where decisions are made.

EDIT: Hitler would have been dumb to move his capital to Warsaw :P Haha..
 
By Ottomans,regular soldiers(i mean with it,the soldiers they are paid),staying at capital.Sipahis and the others are not staying at capital.But at this time they were very few.

Anyway,last posts are too offtopic.:D
 
There's also a London and a Londinium. The conclusion is: It's a game. Stop complaining.

For once I agree. It's convoluted and a bit annoying at times, but what other choice do we have? Adopt a system whereby one city name can't be used if X is already in? That could work, but it would be even more convoluted.

There are several cities that used repeatedly in Civ. Take Thebes, for instance.

Thebes is perhaps a bad example, as there was a Thebes, Greece, and a Thebes, Egypt (two totally different cities), but your point is well taken. :)

Ironically I suspect the game engine won't allow these two to be in simultaneously, but Constantinople, Byzantium and Istanbul are perfectly fine. :crazyeye: :lol:
 
Back
Top Bottom