ubergeneral
Warlord
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2013
- Messages
- 262
Persia is the only ancient middle eastern empire to stand the test of time. Other empires like the Akkadians, Babylonians, and Asseryians are all gone. For most of them there are no people that identify with those groups left. The nations have crumbled and been replaced with new ones.
But Persia has stood the test of time and it known to the world as Iran. Firaxis doesn't acknowledge this fact insisting the Persia is only the Achaemenid dynasty. However I think the way people think about the nation needs to reassessed and rethought.
In this topic i'll briefly go over it's history and why it deserves to be in civ. Then i'll make a few really shocking statements and expose a double standard, next we will look at Iran and decide if having them in Civilization V is offensive. finally ending with a pretty powerful political statement and how it effects what Persia is in civ 5, and my opinion on how it should be.
First off the name is wrong. The Persians never called themselves by that name. Since the beginning of the empire until it's modern day, the people of Persia have called themselves Iranians. The world Iran is derivative from the word Aryan.
Persia was a name giving to them by outsiders many of which looked down on them. As we know the first Persian dynasty tried and failed to conquer Greece and later one was conquered by Alexander. The Greeks who tended to look down on just about everyone who isn't Greek. So when they wrote their account of what happened they did it in a way that put them down, or implied and Greece was number 1 and everyone else was number 2.
Even when the Greeks didn't conquer anyone militarily they conquered them culturally. The Romans conquered Greece with their army but Greece conquered Rome with it's Culture. Unfortunately Rome was also a world power and became the yardstick for the next generation of nations like France and England. As history would have it these nations settled the new world, while poor Persia had issues with poor leadership and foreign invasions. As people say the winners write history and for the whole middle east and Persia, it really got screwed over.
A big part of why Persia isn't portray right is because of what Greece means to Americans. Greece is where democracy was invented. When the founding fathers of the United States wrote our constitution they used Greece and Rome as the basis. On the other hand Persia are the "bad guys" that tried to conquer Greece. What's worse is that relations with Iran and the western world has really been shaky since the 1979 revolution, making the whole image of Persia being "bad" appealing. In a sense, a parallel can be drawn between Greece and the Americans, and the Persian Empire and The Republic of Iran. Also since the ideas of Democracy is so prevalent in the west people raise of Alexander the Great as a amazing hero.
Treating Alexander as a hero is a hypocrisy and a double standard
1. Alexander was a warmonger.
He wanted to conquer the whole world. He loved battle and would do anything on expand his domain, he coveted all lands around him.
2. Alexander was a dictator. If he lived today he would not follow democracy and probably be treated the same way as other dictators are.
In the respect of the first two points he's not any better than any other fascist!
It's generally agreed that taking your army and conquering another nation is unethical and immoral. So why is Alexander regarded so highly? Conquest wasn't any more moral in 300bc than it is now?
I think what Firaxis did wrong was make Persia only be the Achaemenid dynasty. Persia has been a part of world history for 2000 years, and Iran will outlive the United States. It's true that in recent time Iran has had problems with the western world, but this should bar them from being in the game! After all China represents all parts of their history from the founding all the way up to Communist China. The same is true for Russia where all three parts are represented, from the days it was a kingdom, to the communist nation and lastly to democracy. Why can't Persia be the same?
Iran and Persia are the same nation and it should be represented the same way as China and Russia. It has a long and colorful history. It's also true there is a Clash of Ideologies coming from Iran and the west. But that is what Civilization is all about, there are many different ideas about how a nation should be run. It's also true that some really dumb things have been said by Iranian Leaders in the past about Isreal. Which brings me to my next point Isreal.
Saying statements about the destruction of Isreal is just really dumb. If any nation destroys another history will not remember them very well. To say that one should destroy another nation simply because they disagree with their religion is a good way to ruin your reputation. Also denying the Holocaust is also wrong and is racism. It's very true that dumb things have been said. I also think that we can move past those things and see Iran in a positive way.
Let put it this way. In Civilization 5 there are lost of countries that have been part of terrible wars and crimes of humanity. Genghis khan had his army just about everything and took thousands of lives, Isabella promoted the Spainish Inquisition and was already planning to have Spain "convert" the native Americans to Christianity. Past Civ games had both Stalin and Mao Zedong as leaders and last time I checked a lot of Americans don't like communists either. Compared to what other "bad" people have done Iran has been pretty tame. Yes it's true we do have differences, but not everyone has the same belief system as the United States, that is what makes history interesting.
Changed I'd make
1. Keep the leader Darius. Like many other civs there are other people that could be their leader. I personally like Cyrus a little more but it's a matter of opinion. This could be a discussion for another topic.
2. Keep the civ mostly the same. The cultural focus feels really good. Even when I think of modern Iran, I think of golden ages. Iran has had many ups and downs, but I truly believe that it can have another golden age if it can change how the western world sees it.
3. Make the city list reflect Iran from all eras. Take some city names from the Achaemenid era, the Safavid era and The Republic of Iran, as well as every era in between. Iran needs to represent the whole history of the nation, not just one part.
4. Change the name of the Civ. It shouldn't be called Persia anymore. The whole reason why Persia became known as Iran is because the last Shah, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi asked the world to called his nation by the name they always known themselves as.
In the end Iran has every reason to be taken more seriously. It had significance in ancient times, and still has significance today. Past events are in the past, we have their opinions and they have theirs, we can acknowledge those differences and still make peace. While the clash of cultures is important its not enough to simply ignore the rest of Iranian history. As a result they should be better represented in Civilization 5.
What are your thoughts?
But Persia has stood the test of time and it known to the world as Iran. Firaxis doesn't acknowledge this fact insisting the Persia is only the Achaemenid dynasty. However I think the way people think about the nation needs to reassessed and rethought.
In this topic i'll briefly go over it's history and why it deserves to be in civ. Then i'll make a few really shocking statements and expose a double standard, next we will look at Iran and decide if having them in Civilization V is offensive. finally ending with a pretty powerful political statement and how it effects what Persia is in civ 5, and my opinion on how it should be.
First off the name is wrong. The Persians never called themselves by that name. Since the beginning of the empire until it's modern day, the people of Persia have called themselves Iranians. The world Iran is derivative from the word Aryan.
Persia was a name giving to them by outsiders many of which looked down on them. As we know the first Persian dynasty tried and failed to conquer Greece and later one was conquered by Alexander. The Greeks who tended to look down on just about everyone who isn't Greek. So when they wrote their account of what happened they did it in a way that put them down, or implied and Greece was number 1 and everyone else was number 2.
Even when the Greeks didn't conquer anyone militarily they conquered them culturally. The Romans conquered Greece with their army but Greece conquered Rome with it's Culture. Unfortunately Rome was also a world power and became the yardstick for the next generation of nations like France and England. As history would have it these nations settled the new world, while poor Persia had issues with poor leadership and foreign invasions. As people say the winners write history and for the whole middle east and Persia, it really got screwed over.
A big part of why Persia isn't portray right is because of what Greece means to Americans. Greece is where democracy was invented. When the founding fathers of the United States wrote our constitution they used Greece and Rome as the basis. On the other hand Persia are the "bad guys" that tried to conquer Greece. What's worse is that relations with Iran and the western world has really been shaky since the 1979 revolution, making the whole image of Persia being "bad" appealing. In a sense, a parallel can be drawn between Greece and the Americans, and the Persian Empire and The Republic of Iran. Also since the ideas of Democracy is so prevalent in the west people raise of Alexander the Great as a amazing hero.
Treating Alexander as a hero is a hypocrisy and a double standard
1. Alexander was a warmonger.
He wanted to conquer the whole world. He loved battle and would do anything on expand his domain, he coveted all lands around him.
2. Alexander was a dictator. If he lived today he would not follow democracy and probably be treated the same way as other dictators are.
In the respect of the first two points he's not any better than any other fascist!
It's generally agreed that taking your army and conquering another nation is unethical and immoral. So why is Alexander regarded so highly? Conquest wasn't any more moral in 300bc than it is now?
I think what Firaxis did wrong was make Persia only be the Achaemenid dynasty. Persia has been a part of world history for 2000 years, and Iran will outlive the United States. It's true that in recent time Iran has had problems with the western world, but this should bar them from being in the game! After all China represents all parts of their history from the founding all the way up to Communist China. The same is true for Russia where all three parts are represented, from the days it was a kingdom, to the communist nation and lastly to democracy. Why can't Persia be the same?
Iran and Persia are the same nation and it should be represented the same way as China and Russia. It has a long and colorful history. It's also true there is a Clash of Ideologies coming from Iran and the west. But that is what Civilization is all about, there are many different ideas about how a nation should be run. It's also true that some really dumb things have been said by Iranian Leaders in the past about Isreal. Which brings me to my next point Isreal.
Saying statements about the destruction of Isreal is just really dumb. If any nation destroys another history will not remember them very well. To say that one should destroy another nation simply because they disagree with their religion is a good way to ruin your reputation. Also denying the Holocaust is also wrong and is racism. It's very true that dumb things have been said. I also think that we can move past those things and see Iran in a positive way.
Let put it this way. In Civilization 5 there are lost of countries that have been part of terrible wars and crimes of humanity. Genghis khan had his army just about everything and took thousands of lives, Isabella promoted the Spainish Inquisition and was already planning to have Spain "convert" the native Americans to Christianity. Past Civ games had both Stalin and Mao Zedong as leaders and last time I checked a lot of Americans don't like communists either. Compared to what other "bad" people have done Iran has been pretty tame. Yes it's true we do have differences, but not everyone has the same belief system as the United States, that is what makes history interesting.
Changed I'd make
1. Keep the leader Darius. Like many other civs there are other people that could be their leader. I personally like Cyrus a little more but it's a matter of opinion. This could be a discussion for another topic.
2. Keep the civ mostly the same. The cultural focus feels really good. Even when I think of modern Iran, I think of golden ages. Iran has had many ups and downs, but I truly believe that it can have another golden age if it can change how the western world sees it.
3. Make the city list reflect Iran from all eras. Take some city names from the Achaemenid era, the Safavid era and The Republic of Iran, as well as every era in between. Iran needs to represent the whole history of the nation, not just one part.
4. Change the name of the Civ. It shouldn't be called Persia anymore. The whole reason why Persia became known as Iran is because the last Shah, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi asked the world to called his nation by the name they always known themselves as.
In the end Iran has every reason to be taken more seriously. It had significance in ancient times, and still has significance today. Past events are in the past, we have their opinions and they have theirs, we can acknowledge those differences and still make peace. While the clash of cultures is important its not enough to simply ignore the rest of Iranian history. As a result they should be better represented in Civilization 5.
What are your thoughts?
