What 5 Civilizations Should Always Be In Civ?

[Hellas Man]

My opinion is:1.Greece
2.Egypt
3.America
4.China
5.Russia

Also i think Rome,Persia and Germany

 

[Spacer One]

My List:
1) Greece (I disagree with Rome, greeks are still around today, Romans are Italian)
2) China (reasons meantioned above...3000 years)
3) Russia and
4) Germany (these IMO have too much hisrtorical value to be removed)
5) Egypt (Again still around, HUGE impact on History)

runners up:
Well first off, Id like to see Africa represented better than Zulu's. IMO a bit of a racist move...Europe is flooded with Civs, Africa gets 1 (2 if Egypt counts)
Second...add Java, Aboriginies(spelling sucks) or Australia (just to fill in the SE of the world)
[edit] oh yeah, cant forget Persia
Aztecs/Inca
Sioux/Algonquin/Cherokee/Seminole (at least one or two, make Iroquois less "token" N. Am.)
CELTS????? can we get Ireland/Scotland?
some better S.America that arent Inca/Maya/Aztec...Bahia?
Vietnam/Thailand/Siam or some other "smaller" Asian civ...

well that was certainly more than 5, but sorry bout that(the forum was down for almost 2 days, I have more than my 2 cents to add)

 

[The Q-Meister]

This is really tough and I'm sure glad we don't have to pick just 5, but if we do, I'd guess I'd have to go with these:

1. China
2. India
3. England
4. Rome
5. Babylon

Rome and China are two "musts" for me because of their longevity and influence in world history. One being the foundation of Western culture the other of East Asian culture. India for being an ancient culture that has lasted thousands of years. England for its incredible influence in the world. The fifth spot was really tough for me as there are many worthy contenders: Greece for one, Persia, Egypt, etc. As much as I hated to do it, I felt I had to choose either Greece or Rome as they are too similar both culturally and geographically to both be in a top 5 world civilization list; it would mean taking out a country an entire region of the world like the Middle East or non-Eastern Asia and that to me was unacceptable. I am a great admirer of the pre-columbian American Civs, particularly the Incas, but I just felt that they could not be included simply for their lack of influence outside their own area. I felt it would be criminal not to include a mid-east civ so after a tough decision I went with the Babylonians, I'm open to consider another middle eastern civ though. It was not easy!

Very glad we don't have to choose only 5!

 

[The Q-Meister]

My List:
1) Greece (I disagree with Rome, greeks are still around today, Romans are Italian)
2) China (reasons meantioned above...3000 years)
3) Russia and
4) Germany (these IMO have too much hisrtorical value to be removed)
5) Egypt (Again still around, HUGE impact on History)

The ancient Greeks are very different than modern Greeks are today (think about it: look at all the different invasions and occupations of Greece over the last 2000 years) Rome had a much larger impact in world/European history and its system of government also lasted far longer. I am an admirer of the Greeks as well but I can't agree with including them over the Romans when you look at their huge influence. Yes much of Roman culture is "borrowed" from the Greeks, but the Romans were able to spread it out over a much larger area than the Greeks ever did, or could.

The ancient Egyptians are also very different than modern Egyptians today; perhaps even more so than the Greeks. I am curious to see your views regarding leaving out India; also an ancient culture, lasted a very long time, "still around" according to the method you used with over civs. One of the largest populations in the world as well as the birthplace of many highly influential world religions, such as Buddhism.

Germany is just way too recent for me. I'd rather have America than Germany and I'm no fan of including America in the top 5. Germany was not even a unified country unti the 1870s, I'm sorry but when comparing that with the likes of India it's just a joke. And honestly, outside of the two "big" wars I don't see the global impact. How many people outside Europe speak German? Post WWII, Germany was divided (yet again) and only recently unified, I don't see the global impact post WWII and 1870 - 1945 is just way too small a time period to be considered.

Curious to see your reasons for including Russia and Germany over England.

As far being civ being racist; I think that's rather amusing considering 3 out of the 5 civs you chose were European.

 

[Akka]

Babylon
China
Egypt
Greece
Rome

A sixth place for India is REALLY needed.

These civilizations are the cornerstones, the pillars of history.
China is one of the, if not the oldest civilization in the world still alive today, and the whole Asia revolve around it.
Greece is the origin of all the western philosophy, and even today their cultural heritage dominate the world.
Rome is "the Ancient Great Empire", the colossus from which the rest of history of the western world spawned.
Egypt and Babylon are the craddle of history, the oldest great creations of humanity.

Seeing so many votes for England makes me rolling my eyes. England is a cultural and historical dwarf compared to these ancient ones. It's really not the same league.
I'm ready to bet that these votes come mainly from people with an anglo-saxon cultural background, who voted so because they felt somehow connected to it...

 

[Stuie]

I completely agree with Akka, which saves me a lot of typing.

 

[Spacer One]

while Rome and Greece are both undenyably very influential cultures...England has a colorful history of expension and medival war...you must remember that the game doesnt take into account what acomplishments a Civ has made...Thats why it starts at the begining...you say the Inca/Aztac/Mayans didnt influence much outside of their area?...well maybe thats thanx to the Portugese who invaded them, Cortez and such...what I like about Civ is that you can expand races that didnt get that chance...thats what makes it fun for me, playing the Iroquois(who by your standard shouldnt even be in the game) and beating the tar outta America hold a certain satisfaction, that playing Rome just cant compete with...again, this is all My Opinion...

 

[kryszcztov]

As stated above, I didn't vote for Egypt. I'd like to know the reasons why Egypt is over-represented in this poll. It is sure one of the cradle of civilization (like I said). It lasted for a long time, was one of the main force in the Ancient Times... But then, what is Egypt's legacy ? No one speaks its language today, nor worships its gods, no country has Pharaoh, etc... and modern Egypt is an Arabic country and has little to do with Ancient Egypt. Modern Greece also is very different from Ancient Greece, but in terms of legacy Greece isn't in the same league... I feel like many people here are biaised by the fact that the West got over-excited by Ancient Egypt (archeology). As said before as well, to me Egypt is a very peculiar civilization, that is restricted to its area and time, and that's why it can't make it into my top 5. I have Rome and Greece, and though I fully reckon the latter's influence over the former, I don't think that Rome is a rip off, nor do I think that Greece was too restricted. As said in other threads (where I was a bit dubious about it), Greece's legacy isn't only felt in the West.

For a reminder, I chose : Babylon, China, Greece, India, Rome.

 

[Rowain deWolf]

As stated above, I didn't vote for Egypt. I'd like to know the reasons why Egypt is over-represented in this poll. It is sure one of the cradle of civilization (like I said). It lasted for a long time, was one of the main force in the Ancient Times... But then, what is Egypt's legacy ? No one speaks its language today, nor worships its gods, no country has Pharaoh, etc... and modern Egypt is an Arabic country and has little to do with Ancient Egypt. Modern Greece also is very different from Ancient Greece, but in terms of legacy Greece isn't in the same league... I feel like many people here are biaised by the fact that the West got over-excited by Ancient Egypt (archeology). As said before as well, to me Egypt is a very peculiar civilization, that is restricted to its area and time, and that's why it can't make it into my top 5. I have Rome and Greece, and though I fully reckon the latter's influence over the former, I don't think that Rome is a rip off, nor do I think that Greece was too restricted. As said in other threads (where I was a bit dubious about it), Greece's legacy isn't only felt in the West.

For a reminder, I chose : Babylon, China, Greece, India, Rome.

I'm quite surprised that after your sermon why Egypt doesn't deserve a place you do include Babylon a civ which even more then Egypt is restricted to area and time.

 

[Akka]

As stated above, I didn't vote for Egypt. I'd like to know the reasons why Egypt is over-represented in this poll. It is sure one of the cradle of civilization (like I said). It lasted for a long time, was one of the main force in the Ancient Times... But then, what is Egypt's legacy ?

It's true that Egypt's legacy has waned, and is now practically only in tourism and history book.

But what you have to remember is the INCREDIBLE accumulated worth it has.
Egypt has been conquered and submitted shortly after the dawn of our history : Western civilizations really started a bit before the Classical Greece (which means, started in something like 600 BC), when Greece itself was starting to comes along together as a great nation (if fractionned). Egypt was conquered by invaders, converted them to its culture, and then was assimilated by Rome some centuries later, never to get back on its feet.
So the disappearance of Egypt is clouded far into the past. But what we have to realize, is that, as far in the past as it ceased to be, it stayed the center of the civilization in the world for an even longer time, than the time between its dying breath and today !
The Pharaoh date back to 3500 BC, at a time were even China, the pillar of civilization in the world, was only a bunch of barbarians. Egypt has been a civilized nation, dominating its surrounding, for longer than our history exist.
To say that it was restricted "to its time", is to forgot what "its time" represent. An Ancient Egyptian could rightly say that WE are restricted to "our time", considering "our time" is shorter than "his", and that even the incredible Roman civilization has existed for barely more than half the existence of Egypt, and even half of that if you count the Byzantine Empire separately.

And in addition to that, it has been one of "the first", practically creators of civilization with a handful of others like Babylon and the like, which is definitely a lot worth.

Oh, and I'd like to say that if there is a seventh place, the Arabic civilization takes it easily, far before and above any German or English one.

 

[kryszcztov]

I'm quite surprised that after your sermon why Egypt doesn't deserve a place you do include Babylon a civ which even more then Egypt is restricted to area and time.

I for one think that Babylon's legacy (even if you don't extend it to Sumeria, Akkad and Assyria) is far greater than Egypt's. A few examples : the division of a circle into 360°, the division of an hour into 60 minutes (from their sexagecimal system), Hammurabi's Code of Laws, their presence in the Bible and all kind of fantasy stories (up to "Matrix" with the Nebuchadnezzar), etc... In fact, Babylon as a nation started around 1800BC and ended around 500BC, with wars inbetween... If you take the whole Mesopotamian pack, it starts before Egypt, and ends after Egypt. Where Egypt was forgotten and replaced by Greek, Roman and Arabic cultures, Babylon's heritage is felt through the Middle-East and the West even today. Egypt has an amazing fame because of their pyramids, graves, and all of that, but even if you look closely, you'll notice that, in Ancient Times, the Egyptian influence almost wasn't felt outside Egypt (Nubia of course, and the few places conquered by Egypt during the New Empire), whereas the Babylonian influence was felt outside the Fertile Crescent, and in other nations such as Assyria, Phoenicia, etc...

I know the attraction power of Ancient Egypt... But to represent the greatest civs in History, Babylon is my pick over Egypt.

 

[Spacer One]

well it seems to me that how worthwhile a Civ is, is based on its Modern status?...
Well then if we have to pick just the winners:
China, England, Rome, Spain, France...

Having open mindedness to imagine what the "conquered"civs might have done is half the game...What would have become of the Aztec, Inca, Tibetan, Egyptians, Native Americans, or Africans if left alone?...Egypt made enough of a mark in history to be at least equal to Rome...Military doesnt equal culture...some wonderful poeples were wiped out by conquest...

 

[genovais]

Ad Hominem: for "Chinafied," a good option would be "sinicized"-- technically correct, but Latin based, so maybe not so well known.

Ozymandous: actually I'm an Atlanta native, but I've done a bit of traveling. IMHO, there really aren't a lot of differences between the UK and the US; sure, class is much more flexible in America (or at least it's meant to seem to be that way) and we have a slightly different form of government, but culturally speaking, the puritanical values of today's America all are born from the UK. Ooops -- I may have gotten way off topic here.

 

[Guled Orwell]

Babylon
Rome
Mali
Russia
Ottoman

 

[Willem]

And which country is now a fragment of it's former self and is no longer much of a power? Appearance wise anyway.

I was thinking of powers from each era that are still solvent and able to handle simple things like infrastructure, etc. In that case the USSR (different than Russia) is no longer in existance.

I thought they taught that up int he Great White North? That the USSR was the empire that Russia formed, but they are two seperate entities, which was obvious to see when all the conquered tetrritories under USSR rule broke off about 10-15 years ago. That's relatively modern history, I'm surprised you don't know it.

My aren't we hostile!

The fact remains that the USSR was formed by Russia. It wasn't some alien experiment that suddenly disappeared from the face of this earth. You brag about the accomplishments of the US, but in many way those were matched by the Russians. They are still the one of the world's largest nuclear powers after all, and they did come up from behind all the European nations and surpassed them.

And by your rationale, does that mean that the Babylonians, Sumerians, Byzantines etc. will never be in a civ again, since they are no longer solvent? The USSR may not be, but Russia still is. Just the fact that they're the largest country in the world gives them a certain amount of prestige.

 

[Willem]

Seeing so many votes for England makes me rolling my eyes. England is a cultural and historical dwarf compared to these ancient ones. It's really not the same league.
I'm ready to bet that these votes come mainly from people with an anglo-saxon cultural background, who voted so because they felt somehow connected to it...

But none of those ancient cultures had a global impact like English culture has had. People all over the world are at least learning the language. For that reason alone I feel England should be included.

 

[Willem]

It lasted for a long time, was one of the main force in the Ancient Times... But then, what is Egypt's legacy ?

The fact that it did last a long time was it's legacy, it kept essentially the same form of government for thousands of years. And with minimal internal turmoil. Look at today's world, how many countries can live up to that record?

 

[Grohan]

1. China
2. Rome
3. Egypt
4. India
5. France

Those five are must haves in every civ. After those would come Greece,England, Babylon and Russia.

 

[weakciv]

interesting. at this point the top 5 are
Rome
China
Egypt
Greece
England

 

[Dearmad]

A dynastic system is not a social system- it is imposition from a power source down through to the people. By definition, a social system requires participation and influence (by use of power) at each strata of the system. If this does not occur, it is a one social system affecting another system.

So, when a new king/queen comes along and reforms the government, a historigrapher would take certain levels of change to indicate a newly formed social system: something like Queen Mary going to Queen Elizabeth, for example. Sure, same family- but not by any means the SAME system anymore.

There is no set piece to roman history where the system of governance remained in place for more than 100 to 150 years, tops.

England has had periods lasting nearly 200 years (say the run through Henries up to the VIII) but no longer. The development of the "parliamentary constitutional" government England is currenly under began AFTER Victoria. Victoria significantly set forieng policy along with her PMs. This does not happen anymore. A young system of governance by any means. The US government is currently the oldest government on the planet. England's is pretty young.


Swizterland may be older... I grant that. But I'm not sure, they rewrote the constitutional core in 1999 or parts of it I think.