The Forgotten Tribes: Join the project or suggest ideas!

[CivOasis]

Well, in South America, stuff has been recorded for a lot of civilizations, albeit orally.
If there is a Muskogean name for an actual leader, I'd use that. That's along the analog of using anglicized names for some of the official civs.
But, I really don't want to use a "fake" name. That was one of the parts of the Hukkak civ pack that I really disliked...

 

[johny smith]

Are you using Tuskaloosa? He was Mississippian for sure. Although you might be using it for the later Muskogee or Creek. Which if trying to be more correct Mississippian should be used for Tuskaloosa.

 

[SinniX613]

I have not looked at the civ forums for a long time, but when seeing this. It got my attention.

The only question/suggestion I was thinking over after reading this is. Are you looking back in time at cultures like Cahokia ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cahokia ) or are you going to only use modern tribes to represent the area of the US for tribes?

If you are just going to use Muskogee and not have anything linking them for example from past Mississippian culture then I think you are missing the peak in height of the culture. I am not an expert on all, but I have done a bit of Southeast US Archaeology. I am currently finishing my Archaeology major. So if you are interested in any input from me send me message.

Do you use MSN at all? I could use some research help. We're looking at the creation of around 45 civilizations (not counting minor ones) in total throughout the whole project (with North America and Mesoamerica already having around 13 each and counting). That's a lot of research for one guy

 

[johny smith]

Do you use MSN at all? I could use some research help. We're looking at the creation of around 45 civilizations (not counting minor ones) in total throughout the whole project (with North America and Mesoamerica already having around 13 each and counting). That's a lot of research for one guy

Sure I can help, but usually don't use MSN. Usually don't text chat at all. I could do it when a time could be arranged.

I would just say if you are going for that many I am confused as why really. I am not saying that is bad just a lot of similarities may appear in each tribe. My opinion as somewhere stated earlier is it would be better to start with culture areas because those areas will share similar characteristics. I would think it would be more interesting to have differences that you would find by grouping them by geographical culture areas. Then after needing something more detailed from the area versus culture I would go to language families.

1. I could see for example in the USA regions like California, Oasis America, Great Basin, Pacific Northwest, Great Plains, Great Lakes, American Bottom, and etc..

2. Then the biggest groups from each and if no info for past details use modern descendant languages for to fill in naming details.

I would just decide what number of these first if it was me. Then start attaching tribes for each region. I have an pretty much dead idea (because are group thought that Civ 5 was pointless to mod without editing the dll) that split the world into regions first.

I had 8 super regions in the Americas in mind. Then wanted to zoom in to 16, next 32, and etc by cultures changing. Just saying 32 sounds like it would be large amount of work. Anyway it will give you an idea of what I was thinking before. You probably do not want this.

 

[johny smith]

Well I think this atlas could help for some info.

http://books.google.com/books?id=P2HKD9PgC6wC&source=gbs_similarbooks_r&cad=2

This page gives a culture map of North America and more details in the chapter

http://books.google.com/books?id=P2HKD9PgC6wC&lpg=PA15&pg=PA42#v=onepage&q&f=false

And here is an overview of language families.

http://bks3.books.google.com/books?...zoom=1&sig=ACfU3U0lsIuWvpk7if0auUxE0VXQVtCBoA

I hope that helps. If I am just bothering you guys I can just go away as quickly as I found this thread.

 

[johny smith]

I spent a lot of time looking for free credible online sources. I hope this is not in vain.

Here is another source on North America.

http://www.4shared.com/document/2ktS-ImP/Waldman_Carl_-_Encyclopedia_of.html

One source possibly for South America.

http://www.4shared.com/document/ZHmZiEmz/The_Cambridge_History_of_the_N.html

Another source for Meso I found at the same place.

http://www.4shared.com/document/DhA9h6az/The_Cambridge_History_of_the_N.html

Some architecture of Native Americans.

http://books.google.com/books/about/Native_American_architecture.html?id=Bd2L9xc_D9AC

Wiki link for the Southeast Complex which has some possilble symbols that could be used.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southeastern_Ceremonial_Complex

Mound Builders possible source.

http://books.google.com/books?id=Tm...of American Indian&pg=PP1#v=onepage&q&f=false

Another South American source that might be used.

http://books.google.com/books?id=5t...ook_result&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CDQQ6AEwAA

There is some that could be checked out of my university library but only as hard-books.

 

[johny smith]

Ill keep this short since I probably gave too much information before. Wiki has the regions somewhat correct. This is from the site.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Culture_areas_of_North_America

1 Canada, Greenland, United States, and northern Mexico

1.1 Arctic
1.2 Subarctic
1.3 California
1.4 Northeastern Woodlands
1.5 Great Basin
1.6 Plateau
1.7 Pacific Northwest Coast
1.8 Great Plains
1.9 Southeastern Woodlands
1.10 Southwest

2 Mexico and Mesoamerica

2.1 Aridoamerica
2.2 Mesoamerica

3 Circum-Caribbean

3.1 Caribbean
3.2 Central America
3.3 Colombia and Venezuela

4 South America

4.1 Guianas
4.2 Eastern Brazil
4.3 Andes
4.3.1 Pacific lowlands
4.4 Amazon
4.4.1 Northwestern Amazon
4.4.2 Eastern Amazon
4.4.3 Southern Amazon
4.4.4 Southwestern Amazon
4.5 Gran Chaco
4.6 Southern Cone

 

[SinniX613]

I'll have to read through all of this, been busy with work but I'll get to it!

 

[KIEJ.MANIK]

Yeah, I said we should use the culture areas earlier in the thread too, but here's the ones I found

http://www.native-languages.org/culture-areas.htm

Ofcourse also have specific civilizations

 

[CivOasis]

I know I posted this before, but do we have leaders for the Mesoamerican civs yet?

 

[johny smith]

The only thing I want to say is basically within the United States you have 2 major areas of large city builders that did not last through the diseases brought by Europeans. One is the mound builders in general that were very large in population, and the southwest area which is still debated on a proper name.

Mostly none of the Native Americans remembered these cultures as their own until later introduced again to them by archaeologists. Because of this archaeologists stupidly say they were not connected initially. The other problem Native Americans do not like the same white men that destroyed there previous lifestyle now trying to give information that may make it happen again. So anyway Native Americans had a large distrust of archaeologists for some good reasons.

Anyway many modern tribes share features that were found in the older cultures. The Southeast Ceremonial Complex has features gathered from all that can be seen with roots in Mississippian beliefs. I am tired of seeing only historical tribes from European documents(usually wrong information) being used for aka names and garbage that they believed to be true.

One detail for example that get dramatized is human sacrifice. Most cultures around the world performed human sacrifices. Rome had to ban human sacrifice, Greeks had women eat a young men alive during a festival, in India people were sacrificed, and in Nordic traditions when a important male died his wife was made as an offer alongside his death with semen from most of male tribe members. Wiki article on human sacrifice.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_sacrifice

It applies here as well. So I am making it clear. I hate sacrifices being a feature of some bad Aztecs alone. As well if there is no name, the European written names does not mean it is really correct either. So in the search of names you can always find something that a modern tribe usually uses as a title for their leader. I am picky.

I played Civ5 on a demo, and said it sucks and never played it again. So I am unaware of other things that would be needed for each civilization in game. You can disregard all of my comments if you do not care, but if you want some help from me that is what I would like to see recognized. Sorry for the rant. Just tired of seeing the same garbage over and over.

 

[CivOasis]

Trust me, were trying our best not to be Euro-centric in this, right down to the names.

 

[CivOasis]

Although, I don't think the Iriquois got renamed...
The Aztecs did, though, and split up to represent the actual groups in the city-list.

 

[SinniX613]

Trust me, were trying our best not to be Euro-centric in this, right down to the names.

Exactly.

 

[mbkkbm]

Oh....my.... I can't believe I only just discovered this mod! By the way, if you need ideas try reading "1491". It's a whole book about pre-Columbian socities.

 

[mbkkbm]

And for an idea, what about the Seminole? Or the Arawak. Or anything from Civilization Colonization.

 

[CivOasis]

I'd say Arawak'd be cool, but this is pretty in-depth as is.

BTW, any updates on this? Did it die, or...?

 

[malcolm01234]

I can make some city states if you want just tell me how you want them and ill make em

 

[CivOasis]

This project's dead (unfortunately), because Sinni (who had all of the files) dissapeared.

However, if you are still interested in helping, I have a similar (inspired from this) mod (Terra Novus, in my sig) that is looking for help.

 

[malcolm01234]

Alright I could help, but I am just learning this kind of stuff, but I'll so everything I can.