The Carthage Thread

[reddishrecue]

My bad again i meant ancient Greeks. They're the ones who had the city states without the idea of slavery.

 

[Patine]

My bad again i meant ancient Greeks. They're the ones who had the city states without the idea of slavery.

Um, the Greeks were prolofic slavers, especially the Spartans, with the Helots, but the others had quite a fair number, too. But then again, most large-population, urbanized, heavily-sedentary civilizations in that era, everywhere, practiced slavery.

 

[reddishrecue]

Really? I thought Greeks had liberty until they got conquered and were enslaved.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

For a last note on elephants, both general and specific:

The earliest evidence for Elephants as work animals is from the Harappan or Indus Valley civilization, around 2000 BCE.

The earliest evidence for elephants as war animals is much later, 550 - 540 BCE in the Magadha Kingdom of central - northern India and by the Derbices, a tribe living east of the Caspian Sea who used them against Cyrus the Great of Persia - and who got their elephants from India. A bit later, in 506 BCE the Ch'u state in southern China used elephants in battle. These were all Asian ("Indian") elephants, (Elephas maximus) which therefore have the longest history of working with humans (Note that since elephants are tamed and trained, but rarely bred in captivity except in modern zoos, they are not considered Domesticated like dogs, cats, cattle, sheep, pigs, or horses)

It isn't until about 326 BCE that there is any evidence for towers or 'howdahs' on the war elephants' backs: before that men simply sat astride the elephant's back with no protection or cover.

324 BCE Alexander the Great brings hundreds of elephants back to Babylon from India and the Diadochi ("Successors" - Seleucids, Lysimachids, etc) start using them in 'western' warfare by 321 BCE and with towers to protect the men on them by 317 BCE. Having no direct access to India, Ptolemaic Egypt starts using the North African elephant species a few years later.

Virtually everyone who could get their hands on them used elephants, including Pyrrhus of Epirus, who introduced them to Rome and the Italian states and, by 278 BCE, to Carthage, who also started catching North African elephants and training them, and had its own 'elephant corps' by 264 BCE.

The first evidence of elephant armor, in the form of large iron plates, doesn't appear until the first century BCE, in northwestern India.

By 500 CE the White Huns (Ephthalite) of Central Asia are said to have had over 2000 elephants in their armies, all obtained by trading with India.

By 1023 CE Mahmud of the Ghaznavids in Afghanistan has over 1300 elephants and among the missile weapons used by the elephant crews are 'naptha' grenades (incendiaries), In the same century the Khmer of (modern) Cambodia are using double-bow siege crossbows from elephant-back.

1388 CE saw the beginning of the end of elephants in battle when a charge by elephants was stopped by MIng Chinese gunpowder weapons firing in volleys - one of the first instances of the use of that technique with gunpowder firearms (the Chinese were already using volley firing with crossbows from multiple ranks)

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

Really? I thought Greeks had liberty until they got conquered and were enslaved.

Exactly right, only many Greek cities that were beaten by other Greek cities wound up with much of their population as slaves to the conquering Greeks.
Only Athens after the Cleisthenian 'reforms' had anything even vaguely resembling a democracy, and even then only male citizens of Athens could vote - no women or foreign-born, no matter how long they lived in the city, had any political input. The other Greek city states each had their own governments, which ranged from near-totalitarian monarchy like Sparta to oligarchic, aristocratic, or tyrannical - all Greek terms, along with kakistocracy (government by the worst people) and kleptocracy (government by thieves) - probably the two most common forms of modern government!

 

[pokiehl]

The Ptolemaics and Seleucids were ruled by Greeks.

Not really, not in in civ terms of talking about factions. They’re separate civilizations.

Also I assume you never were able to find anything to back up your claim about Egypt earlier.

 

[Patine]

Not really, not in in civ terms of talking about factions. They’re separate civilizations.

In the same way as the Byzantines from the Romans, I suppose. Thank-you for giving me some ammunition in old debate...

 

[Patine]

Also I assume you never were able to find anything to back up your claim about Egypt earlier.

No, I had found the stuff, and could dig it up, but I'm not sure it's worth the effort of revisiting old sources just on the demand of a forum poster who - with all due respect - often tends to dismiss a lot of what I say, whether it's reasonable or backed or not, with coy one-liners.

 

[reddishrecue]

Not really, not in in civ terms of talking about factions. They’re separate civilizations.

Also I assume you never were able to find anything to back up your claim about Egypt earlier.

The ptolemaic and seleucids lean more towards the Macedonian empire which is different than Greece.

In the same way as the Byzantines from the Romans, I suppose. Thank-you for giving me some ammunition in old debate...

Yeah sort of like the Macedonians to the Greeks.

 

[Evie]

No, frankly the Macedonians and Greeks are the *least* justifiable of those four civ splits. The Macedonians were greek in every meaningful way, one of the greatest greek philosopher was Alexander's personal tutor, and the chief reason Greek culture spread as far as wide as it did is precisely because the Macedonian Greeks spread it.

The Seleucid and Ptolemaic at least evolved a little at the contact of their host cultures (and whether they should be separate civs, greeks, persians, egyptians, or whatnot is a wash to me) but the pre-Successor states Macedonians are greeks.

Byzantium and Rome is by far the most justifiable of the four (and even it isn't absolutely necessary).

 

[pokiehl]

No, I had found the stuff, and could dig it up

"I found the evidence, and believe me, it decisively proves me correct, but you can't see it." Gotcha. I am sure you are self-aware enough to know how this reads.

but I'm not sure it's worth the effort of revisiting old sources just on the demand of a forum poster who - with all due respect - often tends to dismiss a lot of what I say, whether it's reasonable or backed or not, with coy one-liners.

I am far from dismissive of you and in fact I have agreed with you and "liked" your posts on many occasions. Do I challenge your claims that don't have any proof behind them? Yes, and that's not unique to my interactions with you. I don't know how to disagree with you any less offensively than literally doing what I've already done: "I disagree with you and I think that is a broad and vague claim to make. Here is why I disagreed with you. I am reasonable and could have my mind changed if you can provide even one example to back up your claim."

I can freely admit when I am wrong. Can't say that about many people here though.

I don't think challenging someone on their assertions is rude at face value, and resisting it is not conducive to the exchange of ideas here. Maybe that's not what you're looking for, and fair enough, but that's not going to stop me from kindly calling out assertions here that I think are wrong.

 

[Patine]

"I found the evidence, and believe me, it decisively proves me correct, but you can't see it." Gotcha. I am sure you are self-aware enough to know how this reads.

I am far from dismissive of you and in fact I have agreed with you and "liked" your posts on many occasions. Do I challenge your claims that don't have any proof behind them? Yes, and that's not unique to my interactions with you. I don't know how to disagree with you any less offensively than literally doing what I've already done: "I disagree with you and I think that is a broad and vague claim to make. Here is why I disagreed with you. I am reasonable and could have my mind changed if you can provide even one example to back up your claim."

I can freely admit when I am wrong. Can't say that about many people here though.

I don't think challenging someone on their assertions is rude at face value, and resisting it is not conducive to the exchange of ideas here. Maybe that's not what you're looking for, and fair enough, but that's not going to stop me from kindly calling out assertions here that I think are wrong.

Another issue, I admit, is the material I have found could be considered contentious and subjective interpretations by those I would be quoting the material of, that could easily lead to a big back-and-forth that will further detract from the subject of Carthage in civ. I'm trying to cut this discussion short, because it could end up taking as many pages as, "Black Rameses." I may not have worded as well as I should have. There is no, "gotcha."

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

So thinking about everything in this thread here is how I would like to handle Phoenicia/Carthage in Civ 7:

Civ: Phoenicia
Unique Ability: Mediterranean Network- Starts the game with access to a free Dye resource. Trade routes may only occur if both cities are on the coast, or they have a Harbor/Cothon. International trade routes gain extra gold for each luxury resource you own.
Unique Unit: Bireme which replaces Galley and is stronger.
Unique Infrastructure: Cothon which replaces Harbor. The Cothon must be built on land adjacent to the coast. Fortified strength.

Leader: Either Dido again or Hiram I (Capital Tyre).

Leader: Hannibal (Capital Carthage). It costs less gold to hire units from minor tribes and city-states. May build a North African War Elephant unique unit. Can cross mountains at the cost of health.

 

[reddishrecue]

So thinking about everything in this thread here is how I would like to handle Phoenicia/Carthage in Civ 7:

Civ: Phoenicia
Unique Ability: Mediterranean Network- Starts the game with access to a free Dye resource. Trade routes may only occur if both cities are on the coast, or they have a Harbor/Cothon. International trade routes gain extra gold for each luxury resource you own.
Unique Unit: Bireme which replaces Galley and is stronger.
Unique Infrastructure: Cothon which replaces Harbor. The Cothon must be built on land adjacent to the coast. Fortified strength.

Leader: Either Dido again or Hiram I (Capital Tyre).

Leader: Hannibal (Capital Carthage). It costs less gold to hire units from minor tribes and city-states. May build a North African War Elephant unique unit. Can cross mountains at the cost of health.

Sounds decent enough.

 

[Caesar of Bread]

So thinking about everything in this thread here is how I would like to handle Phoenicia/Carthage in Civ 7:

Civ: Phoenicia
Unique Ability: Mediterranean Network- Starts the game with access to a free Dye resource. Trade routes may only occur if both cities are on the coast, or they have a Harbor/Cothon. International trade routes gain extra gold for each luxury resource you own.
Unique Unit: Bireme which replaces Galley and is stronger.
Unique Infrastructure: Cothon which replaces Harbor. The Cothon must be built on land adjacent to the coast. Fortified strength.

Leader: Either Dido again or Hiram I (Capital Tyre).

Leader: Hannibal (Capital Carthage). It costs less gold to hire units from minor tribes and city-states. May build a North African War Elephant unique unit. Can cross mountains at the cost of health.

I love this. Keep it up.

 

[pokiehl]

Turns out that Netflix is producing a Hannibal Barca biopic, and Denzel Washington has been tapped to play Hannibal:

Denzel Washington to Star as Carthaginian General Hannibal in Antoine Fuqua Reteam at Netflix

"Gladiator" scribe John Logan will write the Roman wartime epic The post Denzel Washington to Star as Carthaginian General Hannibal in Antoine Fuqua Reteam at Netflix appeared first on TheWrap.

www.yahoo.com

Just saw this recent news and thought the Carthage fans in this thread would find it interesting.

 

[reddishrecue]

Turns out that Netflix is producing a Hannibal Barca biopic, and Denzel Washington has been tapped to play Hannibal:

Denzel Washington to Star as Carthaginian General Hannibal in Antoine Fuqua Reteam at Netflix

"Gladiator" scribe John Logan will write the Roman wartime epic The post Denzel Washington to Star as Carthaginian General Hannibal in Antoine Fuqua Reteam at Netflix appeared first on TheWrap.

www.yahoo.com

Just saw this recent news and thought the Carthage fans in this thread would find it interesting.

Thats nice. Sort of like a 300 with Leonidas and the Greeks.

 

[Evie]

Putting aside any issue one may have with complexion (no, Hannibal was not black, in case any one here needed to be told), Washington is about twenty five years too old even for Hannibal at the *end* of the Second Punic War - and about forty years older than the Hannibal who crossed the Alps.

 

[Patine]

Turns out that Netflix is producing a Hannibal Barca biopic, and Denzel Washington has been tapped to play Hannibal:

Denzel Washington to Star as Carthaginian General Hannibal in Antoine Fuqua Reteam at Netflix

"Gladiator" scribe John Logan will write the Roman wartime epic The post Denzel Washington to Star as Carthaginian General Hannibal in Antoine Fuqua Reteam at Netflix appeared first on TheWrap.

www.yahoo.com

Just saw this recent news and thought the Carthage fans in this thread would find it interesting.

I get the feeling this choice will cause a similar controversy to the recent, "Black Cleopatra," casting in that recent Netflix series. But then, historical casting NEVER pleases everyone - but some actors for some roles are more contentious then others. Like John Wayne as Genghis Khan in the 1972 movie, "The Conqueror," and many other examples.

 

[reddishrecue]

Putting aside any issue one may have with complexion (no, Hannibal was not black, in case any one here needed to be told), Washington is about twenty five years too old even for Hannibal at the *end* of the Second Punic War - and about forty years older than the Hannibal who crossed the Alps.

They're all north African. North African were white like Europeans.