Leaderhead Requests

[Wolfshanze]

I hate to ruin surprises but I'm excited about how this one is turning out!

While the LH looks great, there's just a simple logistical problem of the Hunnic Empire in general... they left little history or culture beyond a brief but well-known drive into Europe. By contrast, the Huns make the Mongols look like a highly-developed and cultured civilization. Heck, historians are still debating what exactly a Hun is/was.

 

[Ekmek]

man, the cold water! Thats a good argument to not include by firaxis but I'm making him for fun and as a what-if. besides the huns are turkic so optionally he can be added there.

 

[Wolfshanze]

man, the cold water! Thats a good argument to not include by firaxis but I'm making him for fun and as a what-if. besides the huns are turkic so optionally he can be added there.

Says who?

Research and debate about the Asian ancestral origins of the Huns has been ongoing since the 18th century. For example philologists still debate to this day which ethnonym from Chinese or Persian sources is identical with the Latin Hunni or the Greek Chounnoi as evidence of the Huns' identity.

The most recent genetic and ethnogenesis based scholarship shows that many of the great confederations of steppe warriors were not entirely of the same race, but rather tended to be ethnic mixtures of Eurasian clans. In addition, many clans may have claimed to be Huns simply based on the prestige and fame of the name, or it was attributed to them by outsiders describing their common characteristics, believed place of origin, or reputation. Similarly, Greek or Latin chroniclers may have used "Huns" in a more general sense, to describe social or ethnic characteristics, believed place of origin, or reputation. All we can say safely, is that the name Huns, in late antiquity, described prestigious ruling groups of steppe warriors.

Heck, the Hunnic Empire doesn't even really include any Turkish territory...

The Hun invasions were a very important time in history... I'm not debating they don't deserve some sort of nod in Civilization... I'm just saying, it's really hard to pin them down to a race, a group of cities, even a culture... they are almost the epitome of the true "Barbarian".

If I were to use Atilla for instance, I'd love to make a Hunnic Empire... it would just be a little hard to come up with all the things that normally go into a new civ in Civ4 (plus the whole "what do you do with them in the modern age" thing!

 

[Ekmek]

I agree its hard to pin them down. But the Turks themselves consider them a precursor tribe from Eurasia (most of central asia is turkic and thats where they came from). the turkish territory your thinking of is from the mongol-turkic expansion of the 12th century which redrew the map. Granted claiming them and dna proofing it is different, but the turks are a melting pot themselves (they looked more asia when I was in Bishkek, more European when I went to Edirne and the west coast and more Arabic when I ran into ones from Eastern Turkey).

I'm planning on adding them and I plan on using a mix of european for the earlier stuff but make it more turkish as the go through the ages. I guess it up to the downloader.

 

[Huayna Capac357]

That Attila is turning out awesome, Ekmek! This could be your magnum opus

 

[Wolfshanze]

I would call the Huns "Eurasian" long before I'd pin them down as "Turks". Heck the Magyars insist they are the true Huns... Which goes back to my original point... it's a fine LH, very well done... but without actually making a Hunnic Empire civ, there's really not a good home for him.

Just my 2-cents... but it is very well done. The problem is what to do with him, not that the LH needs more work.

 

[Ekmek]

Magyars actualy comes from a turkic dialect for "ten tribes". hate to go all wiki on you. Huns weren't ottoman but the turkic peoples cover a large swath of eurasian peoples, and the huns are included. But I think the origin debate goes to the academics.

I have no problem putting in a hun civ, and cool3a2, the requestor wanted him, so i guess its up to the community. but i have to say this LH has been fun to do (up there with caligula). So I'm glad you like it, hopefully you can come to some accommodation.

 

[Wolfshanze]

hate to go all wiki on you.

Yeah... note in the very article you quoted from Wiki it says "Turkic theory"

You keep stating as fact, what is well-regarded as conjecture in the scientific community... NOBODY KNOWS FOR SURE what the Huns were ethnically... well, except you of course... you seem certain while all the scientists with PHDs aren't sure at all.

Huns being Turkish is both a theory and one of MANY theories... none of it is proven, as quoted in your very own Wiki article, Hunnish decent is not known and only conjecture exists.

This goes back to my original point, that while we all know Atilla and his Huns existed, in Civ4 terms he's very hard to place... he doesn't fit well into any existing Civ, and cling tightly and without a doubt to all the Turkish theories that exist about the Huns, nothing on the face of this planet confirms the ethnicity of the Huns... it's widely accepted in scientific circles that their ethnicity and cultural history is pretty much a mystery. Stick him in with the Ottomans all you want... I could just as easily tie the Huns to the Americans and Zulu for all it matters... their Turkish ethnicity is by no-means scientific fact, or even the prevailing theory... there are many, and none of them are proven.

 

[Vrenir]

Not that all the other civ divisions in the game make perfect sense either. (cough - Native Americans - cough) I honestly think that the whole civ division needs a major overhaul more strongly in favor of ethnic and geographic groupings over European historic powers.

 

[Ekmek]

Yeah... note in the very article you quoted from Wiki it says "Turkic theory"

You keep stating as fact, what is well-regarded as conjecture in the scientific community... NOBODY KNOWS FOR SURE what the Huns were ethnically... well, except you of course... you seem certain while all the scientists with PHDs aren't sure at all.

First off yeah it says turkic theory, but it also doesn't list any other theories either, so it is the leading theory. Besides inferences are made on much less (and i'm not even going into the alex macedon thing either)

Besides that the opening article states that it had a turkic aristocracy with several references. And if you analyze the article the debate is whether they were wholly turkic or they were confederation of turkic peoples and other tribes - and those other tribes have close roots to the turkic people (like the mongols). I for one am making a Hun civ. if I add him to a civ it would be to the ottomans if i renamed them turks instead of ottomans or I would add him as a mongol leader. nothing is perfect and we aren't going to get the answer - I'm making a hun civ with eurasian and mongol and turkish units mixed. who cares its what if and its for fun.

 

[Wolfshanze]

First off yeah it says turkic theory, but it also doesn't list any other theories either, so it is the leading theory.

Well then you didn't read the article, it goes well into length about possible ethnicity from MULTIPLE sources... please read before you make huge assumptions... why do you INSIST in something that even in the Wiki article you read stating it's a theory, you treat it as God-given fact?!?! I must have also missed the part where it said "this is the leading theory"... guess that's something you just scribbled-in yourself, because it clearly didn't say that.

Did you even read the article, or just the parts that you wanted to believe?

 

[Ekmek]

chill.

I'm going with the first line:
The Huns were an early confederation of Central Asian equestrian nomads or semi-nomads,[1] with a Turkic core of aristocracy.[2]

and its just a game - its not fact and we'll never know. but the theory is reasonable enough to me. if you got a better idea - say it. but all i get from you is this wishwashy "gee what do I do" stuff

I'm making a civ (for my personal mod) of the huns based on the turkic theory - your free to make an alternative.

 

[Vrenir]

So, back to leaderhead requests....

 

[Wolfshanze]

its not fact and we'll never know. but the theory is reasonable enough to me. if you got a better idea - say it. but all i get from you is this wishwashy "gee what do I do" stuff

No, what you get from me is what is commonly accepted in the scientific community... they don't know either, and neither do you or I. Don't blame me for not telling you with a firm conviction the ethnicity of the Huns, because NOBODY KNOWS FOR SURE... well, except you seem to be absolutely convinced when nobody else knows for sure... which was my point... nobody seems to know but you, yet you sure get upset that I haven't told you if they're not the Turks, who are they... duh... I've been telling you all along they could be anybody... that's not a wishy-washy answer, that's THE TRUTH.

I suppose you'll also hold it against me if I don't tell you with a firm conviction what the meaning of life is next?

Everything in this life doesn't have to have concrete answers. Sometimes there are mysteries... and the origin of the Huns is one of them. Don't be angry at me, I didn't invent the mystery, I'm only reporting what it is in the scientific community... a mystery... they may well be Turks, they may not be and have absolutely nothing to do with the Turks... just because you don't like my answer doesn't mean it's not based on what's known... and what's known is that nobody knows for sure. I'm not wishy on the subject, I'm relating what is known... if you want to grasp to ONE THEORY, that's all you... maybe you're right, maybe you're wrong... just don't get mad at me for pointing out nobody has proven anything regarding the ethnic origins of the Hun... it's entirely possible they're not related to anyone at all.

 

[Huayna Capac357]

Does it matter if the Huns were Turkic or not? (Personally I heard they were Tungusic)

 

[Ekmek]

i moved attila discussion to a very old Hun thread. I posted new screenshots but need background suggestions.

edit: tried a burning ravenna background (he burned that city not rome)

see here
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=7091693&postcount=49

 

[Huayna Capac357]

Background? Rome on fire!!

 

[MadmanOfALeader]

Your Attila looks good, but I agree with the Wolf. I've always thought of them as barbarians rather than an actual civilization.

I'd use him as Tamerlane of the Mongols, though... (Tamerlane was Turkic, but not Ottoman)

Ekmek, you remember versatility from when you made that Cesar Vallejo leaderhead, but mentioned he could work as Santa Anna. Civ Gold uses him as Bernando O'Higgins of Chile.

 

[Huayna Capac357]

BTW, one widely held theory holds that the Huns are the descendents of the Xiongnu Tatars of Inner Mongolia. That means that they are in fact Turkic.

 

[Wolfshanze]

BTW, one widely held theory holds that the Huns are the descendents of the Xiongnu Tatars of Inner Mongolia. That means that they are in unproven theory Turkic.

Corrected.

So in your book all Mongolians and Chinese (another Hun theory) = Turkish...

I suppose you could say that... and since the theory that all men on earth originated in Africa, you could also say that all Germans and English are also of African descent.

I think the Huns are mysterious enough and with enough scientific evidence that leads to nowhere concrete not to be labeled as "just another turk", and I certainly don't think they should be used as a LH for the Ottoman Empire, which was my whole point as to not buying ONE theory hook-line-and-sinker and labeling them as Turks and using Atilla as a Turk.