(poll) What civs would you like to see in a hypothetical third expansion?

[Boris Gudenuf]

I know that and you know that. I'm not convinced Firaxis knows that.

An EXTREMELY Valid Point, which is why this is about the third time I've repeated the arguments for the 'historical' as opposed to the 'Romantic' Druids in these Forums!

On titles and names being the same, this was really common in North America, where a man would take a new name upon taking a position associated with that position (so that a chief of a certain tribe or headman of a certain clan would always have the same name which was also his title). I know of no similar custom in Europe. True, regnal names or throne names were common enough, but I can think of none where the regnal name and the title were considered the same thing.

It is so far only a possibility, but the Cretan Pre-Indo-European Civilization may have had this: it is now considered likely that 'Minos' was a title rather than an individual name, and no individual ruling family or personal names have been ferreted out of Linear A yet. On the other hand, it is widely considered likely that the 'Minoans' were not speaking or writing an Indo-European language, so this may also reinforce your point that for most of Europe, certainly most/all of Europe after the Indo-Europeans arrived, regnal or throne names were as close as they got.

 

[Solomonic Wisdom]

The Franks, led by Charlemagne. Civ ability: Carolingian Renaissance.

 

[Zaarin]

It is so far only a possibility, but the Cretan Pre-Indo-European Civilization may have had this: it is now considered likely that 'Minos' was a title rather than an individual name, and no individual ruling family or personal names have been ferreted out of Linear A yet. On the other hand, it is widely considered likely that the 'Minoans' were not speaking or writing an Indo-European language, so this may also reinforce your point that for most of Europe, certainly most/all of Europe after the Indo-Europeans arrived, regnal or throne names were as close as they got.

Deciphering Linear A and Minoan Hieroglyphics is sitting at the top of my linguistic wishlist. But yeah, the admittedly limited evidence is definitely against it being either Indo-European or Semitic.

The Franks, led by Charlemagne. Civ ability: Carolingian Renaissance.

He borrowed his renaissance from the Anglo-Saxons who in turn got it from the Irish, so I'd rather have the Medieval Irish and Anglo-Saxons instead.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

Glad to see my thread is still flourishing, now a little summary:

FIVE OLD HEGEMONS - over 100 votes or over 50% of all votes

Maya 143 vote(s) 73%
Portugal 123 vote(s) 62.8%
Byzantium 114 vote(s) 58.2%
Babylon 114 vote(s) 58.2%
Ethiopia 104 vote(s) 53.1%

NEXT FIVE - over 50 votes, 25% of all votes

6) Vietnam 82 vote(s) 41.8%
7) Native Americans
- not Navajo 68 vote(s) 34.7%
- Navajo 58 vote(s) 29.6%
8) Italy 57 vote(s) 29.1%
9) Morocco/Moors 55 vote(s) 28.1%
10) Assyria 50 vote(s) 25.5%

This is definitely classic heavy but I would definitely take the top 8 and if they want to add the other two it would be just as appreciated.

 

[Solomonic Wisdom]

Deciphering Linear A and Minoan Hieroglyphics is sitting at the top of my linguistic wishlist. But yeah, the admittedly limited evidence is definitely against it being either Indo-European or Semitic.


He borrowed his renaissance from the Anglo-Saxons who in turn got it from the Irish, so I'd rather have the Medieval Irish and Anglo-Saxons instead.

Civ ability: Carolingian Renaissance. Get Great Writer Points from other civilisations if their nearest city is within ten tiles of your borders. Palace provides +1 Great Writer Point.

The Franks shaped Europe (as of course many others did as well) and deserve to be included. That we have modern European nations in the game should not exclude them automatically. A DLC covering early medieval civilisations?

 

[Zaarin]

Civ ability: Carolingian Renaissance. Get Great Writer Points from other civilisations if their nearest city is within ten tiles of your borders. Palace provides +1 Great Writer Point.

That works.

The Franks shaped Europe (as of course many others did as well) and deserve to be included. That we have modern European nations in the game should not exclude them automatically. A DLC covering early medieval civilisations?

I don't think including Francia as a distinct civ from France is warranted. Charlemagne as an alternate leader for France, however, is a compelling figure, and I'd love to see him included along with other Early Medieval civs/leaders--Alfred of Wessex, Æþelflæd of Mercia, Brian Boru of Ireland, Gruffydd ap Llywelyn of Wales, etc. I don't see it happening, though: the Early Middle Ages seem to be a much more niche interest compared to the High and Late Middle Ages, especially as the myth of the "dark ages" still weighs heavy on the popular imagination (thanks, GRRM).

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

I don't think including Francia as a distinct civ from France is warranted. Charlemagne as an alternate leader for France, however, is a compelling figure, and I'd love to see him included along with other Early Medieval civs/leaders--Alfred of Wessex, Æþelflæd of Mercia, Brian Boru of Ireland, Gruffydd ap Llywelyn of Wales, etc. I don't see it happening, though: the Early Middle Ages seem to be a much more niche interest compared to the High and Late Middle Ages, especially as the myth of the "dark ages" still weighs heavy on the popular imagination (thanks, GRRM).

The 'Dark Ages' concept is a product of the Classical Education of the universities in Europe in the 19th - early 20th centuries,` wherein Everything Good was classical Greek and Roman, rediscovered in the 'Renaissance' and therefore in between the two there had to be a benighted era without the benefits of the Greco-Roman Golden Age.
The fact that technologies like the waterwheel-driven mill were never lost but constantly improved throughout this period and new plows and harnesses invented that made extensive field agriculture in northern Europe possible, and even the Latin and Greek writings were never lost, merely 'misplaced' to Islamic Cordoba where as early as 1000 CE Christian European scholars were allowed to study them and commentary on them was circulating among scholars, monks, and other literati in Europe, was all forgotten, glossed over or simply ignored. We (well, Some Of Us) know better now, but the Popular View is still 19th century Academic.

Not GRRM's fault, though - the 'Dark Ages' mindset and technology level has been mined by Fantasy Writers ever since Tolkien (who, remember, in his academic specialty was a philologist of 'Dark Age' Era languages in Britain, and so all too familiar with the lack of surviving 'native' written work from the period). GRRM is the latest and current Most Popular, but you'd be hard put to find anybody from the Grand Masters of Fantasy list that hadn't written one or more stories set in Early Medieval/Dark Age European-type background. In fact, L. Sprague DeCamp, one of the original GMOF members, wrote a series of fantasy novels using an Urban, Civilized protagonist, because he was sick and tired of all the Barbarian/Dark Age Heroes running around in the genre!

As an aside, there is a Mod of Charlemagne as an Alternate Leader for either France or Germany, which is probably the way to represent him.

 

[Solomonic Wisdom]

That works.


I don't think including Francia as a distinct civ from France is warranted. Charlemagne as an alternate leader for France, however, is a compelling figure, and I'd love to see him included along with other Early Medieval civs/leaders--Alfred of Wessex, Æþelflæd of Mercia, Brian Boru of Ireland, Gruffydd ap Llywelyn of Wales, etc. I don't see it happening, though: the Early Middle Ages seem to be a much more niche interest compared to the High and Late Middle Ages, especially as the myth of the "dark ages" still weighs heavy on the popular imagination (thanks, GRRM).

From the little I know, their origins can be traced back to a tribe allied with Rome somewhere in what is today Belgium and they also ruled what are today the Netherlands and what is today the west of Germany as well as of what is today the north of Italy. They were initially alien to the Gallo-Romanic population and spoke a different language. Personally I think that a DLC including Byzantium, Mercia, etc., should include them as well. The Lombards would be a great addition as well. I agree it sadly will not happen ...

 

[Solomonic Wisdom]

The 'Dark Ages' concept is a product of the Classical Education of the universities in Europe in the 19th - early 20th centuries,` wherein Everything Good was classical Greek and Roman, rediscovered in the 'Renaissance' and therefore in between the two there had to be a benighted era without the benefits of the Greco-Roman Golden Age.
The fact that technologies like the waterwheel-driven mill were never lost but constantly improved throughout this period and new plows and harnesses invented that made extensive field agriculture in northern Europe possible, and even the Latin and Greek writings were never lost, merely 'misplaced' to Islamic Cordoba where as early as 1000 CE Christian European scholars were allowed to study them and commentary on them was circulating among scholars, monks, and other literati in Europe, was all forgotten, glossed over or simply ignored. We (well, Some Of Us) know better now, but the Popular View is still 19th century Academic.

Not GRRM's fault, though - the 'Dark Ages' mindset and technology level has been mined by Fantasy Writers ever since Tolkien (who, remember, in his academic specialty was a philologist of 'Dark Age' Era languages in Britain, and so all too familiar with the lack of surviving 'native' written work from the period). GRRM is the latest and current Most Popular, but you'd be hard put to find anybody from the Grand Masters of Fantasy list that hadn't written one or more stories set in Early Medieval/Dark Age European-type background. In fact, L. Sprague DeCamp, one of the original GMOF members, wrote a series of fantasy novels using an Urban, Civilized protagonist, because he was sick and tired of all the Barbarian/Dark Age Heroes running around in the genre!

As an aside, there is a Mod of Charlemagne as an Alternate Leader for either France or Germany, which is probably the way to represent him.

Charlemagne also as an officially released alternate leader for France and Germany would be good to see.

 

[Zaarin]

Not GRRM's fault, though - the 'Dark Ages' mindset and technology level has been mined by Fantasy Writers ever since Tolkien (who, remember, in his academic specialty was a philologist of 'Dark Age' Era languages in Britain, and so all too familiar with the lack of surviving 'native' written work from the period). GRRM is the latest and current Most Popular, but you'd be hard put to find anybody from the Grand Masters of Fantasy list that hadn't written one or more stories set in Early Medieval/Dark Age European-type background.

I have to disagree with this very strongly. Tolkien had a great affection for the Middle Ages and understood that there was much that was beautiful as well as much that was ugly in the Middle Ages. Tolkien understood and loved his subject matter. NB that Tolkien was himself a Catholic, which gave him a very personal link to the pre-Protestant history of Europe. GRRM just strips out the beautiful and exaggerates the ugly. He's certainly not alone, but as he perpetuates two ugly stereotypes I despise (the Middle Ages were uncivilized and fantasy is all pulp quality) he'll get no quarter from me.

From the little I know, their origins can be traced back to a tribe allied with Rome somewhere in what is today Belgium and they also ruled what are today the Netherlands and what is today the west of Germany as well as of what is today the north of Italy. They were initially alien to the Gallo-Romanic population and spoke a different language. Personally I think that a DLC including Byzantium, Mercia, etc., should include them as well. The Lombards would be a great addition as well. I agree it sadly will not happen ...

Francia was the result of Frankish and Romance cultures, and it doesn't really bring anything to the table that France doesn't. Charlemagne would work better as an alt French/German leader.

 

[Solomonic Wisdom]

Francia was the result of Frankish and Romance cultures, and it doesn't really bring anything to the table that France doesn't. Charlemagne would work better as an alt French/German leader.

Let's agree to disagree. When Francia split into essentially three successor realms following the Treaty of Verdun in 843, only one of these developed into France, another into the Holy Roman Empire and Germany, and another into Lorraine (with a bit of a messy future involving Burgundy etc.). As someone who grew up in the region where France, Germany, and the Benelux meet, I have a bit of a different take on this. (Ask anyone in Aachen or Aix-la-Chapelle, and they probably will as well.) Having said that, I can see your point of view.

 

[SirMediocrity]

My votes:

Babylon
Hittites
Maya
Zimbabwe
Ethiopia
Italy
Portugal
Native Americans: Inuit

 

[Lonecat Nekophrodite]

1. Babylon: Who shall be leader? Neb II or Hamburabi?
2. Hittites. A big fan of chariot, actually the first to do so
3. Ethiopia. Under whom? Sheeba? or Haile Selase?
4. Why miss portugal. but who shall lead? John II (Contemporary leader to Mvemba a Nzinga), Maria II or Henry the Navigator?

 

[Patine]

My votes:

Babylon
Hittites
Maya
Zimbabwe
Ethiopia
Italy
Portugal
Native Americans: Inuit

Inuit don't consider themselves "Native American" or "First Nations," but view themselves - and are mostly officially viewed - as separate and distinct, given the ancestors of the Native Americans/First Nations crossed a land bridge during a Great Ice Age 400 000 to 600 000 years ago, and are racially (genetically) distinct from any other people in the world, and other than a proposed link of the Na-Dene Languages with the Yaneisian Languages of Siberia (whose provenance is unknown if it has true validity) all of their languages have their oldest traceable origins in the New World. Inuit crossed by sea from Eastern Siberia about 5000-7000 years ago, are racially North Asian, not Native American/First Nations, and still retain verifiable linguistic and cultural relative ethnic groups in Eastern Siberia.

 

[Lonecat Nekophrodite]

So sayin' that Inuits were more related to either Siberian or Ainu than related to Crees or Nooktas?

 

[Patine]

So sayin' that Inuits were more related to either Siberian or Ainu than related to Crees or Nooktas?

By far, that is the case. Yes.

 

[Michaelf7777777]

My choices if I was choosing currently and assuming that this would be the final expansion would be as follows:

Byzantines - Pulcheria
Hittites - Puduhepa
Iroquois - Jigonhsasee
Italy - Matilda of Tuscany
Matamba - Nzinga
Maya - Lady Xoc
Mughals - Nur Jahan
Portugal - Afonso de Albuquerque
Vietnam - Trung Trac and Trung Nhi
Alternate Leader: Hatshepsut (Egypt)

 

[SirMediocrity]

Inuit don't consider themselves "Native American" or "First Nations," but view themselves - and are mostly officially viewed - as separate and distinct, given the ancestors of the Native Americans/First Nations crossed a land bridge during a Great Ice Age 400 000 to 600 000 years ago, and are racially (genetically) distinct from any other people in the world, and other than a proposed link of the Na-Dene Languages with the Yaneisian Languages of Siberia (whose provenance is unknown if it has true validity) all of their languages have their oldest traceable origins in the New World. Inuit crossed by sea from Eastern Siberia about 5000-7000 years ago, are racially North Asian, not Native American/First Nations, and still retain verifiable linguistic and cultural relative ethnic groups in Eastern Siberia.

I'm not saying that the Inuit are exclusively native americans. When I say that they're native americans, I mean in the sense that they are an "indigenous" people group that lives (to some capacity) in north america

 

[Zaarin]

Inuit don't consider themselves "Native American" or "First Nations," but view themselves - and are mostly officially viewed - as separate and distinct, given the ancestors of the Native Americans/First Nations crossed a land bridge during a Great Ice Age 400 000 to 600 000 years ago, and are racially (genetically) distinct from any other people in the world, and other than a proposed link of the Na-Dene Languages with the Yaneisian Languages of Siberia (whose provenance is unknown if it has true validity) all of their languages have their oldest traceable origins in the New World. Inuit crossed by sea from Eastern Siberia about 5000-7000 years ago, are racially North Asian, not Native American/First Nations, and still retain verifiable linguistic and cultural relative ethnic groups in Eastern Siberia.

A few corrections about the timeline from last I read on the subject: Native Americans reached the New World across the Bering Land Bridge ~20,000 years ago (up from the initial theory of 12,000); the Na-Dene entered the New World ~6,000 years ago; and the Eskimo-Aleut entered the New World ~3,000 years ago (before some of them crossed back to Siberia to become the Siberian Yupik--so NB the Siberian Yupik aren't Eskimo-Aleut who remained behind in Siberia). The "Paleo-Eskimos," the people who inhabited the regions now inhabited by the Inuit, are believed by many scholars to have been cousins of the Na-Dene. Dene-Yeniseian is a promising start but has yet to be demonstrated; Ket, the only surviving Yeniseian language, is so poorly documented that I imagine such a relationship may never be irrefutably demonstrated.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

A few corrections about the timeline from last I read on the subject: Native Americans reached the New World across the Bering Land Bridge ~20,000 years ago (up from the initial theory of 12,000); the Na-Dene entered the New World ~6,000 years ago; and the Eskimo-Aleut entered the New World ~3,000 years ago (before some of them crossed back to Siberia to become the Siberian Yupik--so NB the Siberian Yupik aren't Eskimo-Aleut who remained behind in Siberia). The "Paleo-Eskimos," the people who inhabited the regions now inhabited by the Inuit, are believed by many scholars to have been cousins of the Na-Dene. Dene-Yeniseian is a promising start but has yet to be demonstrated; Ket, the only surviving Yeniseian language, is so poorly documented that I imagine such a relationship may never be irrefutably demonstrated.

Right now, as I understand it, the 'Ancient DNA' databases are most complete for Europe and western Asia (Russia to Siberia) but are expanding rapidly. IF they can get enough samples from eastern/northern Asia and the pre-European migrants into the Americas, there is now a real possibility of confirming or denying some of the scant linguistic an archeological evidence as to relationships. It's a real crapshoot, because to get useable samples from thousands of years back requires that specific small bones survive to be found (a bone in the inner ear is the densest bone in the body, and I've read that microscopic DNA can survive in it for up to 4 - 6000 years and still be analyzed, which was an Absolute Impossibility just ten years ago - but the bone is tiny and whether it survives to be found at all is by no means certain, even in intact graves)
Stay tuned: everything we thought we knew is subject to change . . .