Who should the 18th Civ be?

[Neomega]

I'mma jump on the bandwagon.



The Mongols created the largest contiguous empire in history. They terrorized Europe and Asia, and possibly Africa, but they didn't have as much success there. And the three continents that never heard of them weren't discovered until a while after their time. If Ogedai hadn't died, they probably would have WTFPWNED western europe too. Their successor states also lasted quite a whil.

As for Germay not existing for over a couple hundred years, this simply isn't true. While they didn't really have political unity until Bismarck forged the Prussian empire of iron and blood, they've been around since Roman times (the Germanic tribes).

African tribes have been around for a long time, and Ethiopia as a polity, as well as the Mali, were around for over 8 centuries. Germany's reach beyond Europe was quite anemic and quite short lived.

The Mali will always beat Germany on size and time of existence, and arguably worldwide comparative power at their peak.

The mongols were like the wind, they came, made a terrible noise, and then got scattered and broken up. A blip on the radar of history, really. Culturally there is a lot more left of the Ethiopian Kingdom than that of the Mongols. They were just great battleaxers, and calling them a "contigious Empire" is a little funny, seeing how much of the Empire was left to native rulers paying tribute. In fact, the Scythians had quite an "Empire" too. Too bad they came before the Europeans could write about them.

 

[Thormodr]

I'd like to see Thailand/Siam. My girlfriend is from there and she'd probably be more interested in playing if they were in the game.

 

[Thormodr]

African tribes have been around for a long time, and Ethiopia as a polity, as well as the Mali, were around for over 8 centuries. Germany's reach beyond Europe was quite anemic and quite short lived.

The Mali will always beat Germany on size and time of existence, and arguably worldwide comparative power at their peak.

The mongols were like the wind, they came, made a terrible noise, and then got scattered and broken up. A blip on the radar of history, really. Culturally there is a lot more left of the Ethiopian Kingdom than that of the Mongols. They were just great battleaxers, and calling them a "contigious Empire" is a little funny, seeing how much of the Empire was left to native rulers paying tribute. In fact, the Scythians had quite an "Empire" too. Too bad they came before the Europeans could write about them.

A blip on radar in history? Nearly 200 years is a long time and their legacy lasts to this very day. Are you familiar with the Forbidden Palace for example? Guess who built that? An architectural triumph, the Forbidden City contained elements of Arabic, Mongolian, western Asian, and Chinese architectural styles.

The Mongols connected East and West and much knowledge was brought to Europe which in turn sparked the Renaissance.

They had a very progressive empire for its day. Religious freedom was something pretty much of unheard of at the time.

The Mongol rulers were very preoccupied with religions. Kublai Khan in particular invited all sorts of faiths to debate at his court. He allowed Nestorian Christians and Roman Catholics to set up missions, as well as Tibetan lamas, Muslims, and Hindus. The Yuan period, in fact, is one of vital cultural transmission between China and the rest of the world. Europe formally met China during the reign of Kublai Khan with the arrival of Marco Polo, an Italian adventurer, who served as an official in Kublai's court from 1275-1291.

http://www.wsu.edu/~dee/CHEMPIRE/YUAN.HTM

and calling them a "contigious Empire" is a little funny, seeing how much of the Empire was left to native rulers paying tribute.

I call that smart. The Mongols by and large left people alone to their own devices as long as they paid their taxes. The Mongols didn't wish to change anyone's culture but they took a great interest in cultural interaction.

The Mongols were one of the most interesting, innovative and enlightened Empires in history.

 

[Neomega]

I call that smart. The Mongols by and large left people alone to their own devices as long as they paid their taxes. The Mongols didn't wish to change anyone culture but they took a great interest in cultural interaction.

The Mongols were one of the most interesting, innovative and enlightened Empires in history.

Mongols... enlightened. Interesting. That's a first.

 

[Thormodr]

Mongols... enlightened. Interesting. That's a first.

Perhaps you should read up on the Mongols more then.

Here's a book I quite enjoyed. I picked it up when I was on vacation in Mongolia.

Genghis Khan & the Making of the Modern World” by Jack Weatherford
Copyright © 2004 by Jack Weatherford,
Published by Crown Publishers, Random House, ISBN 0-609-61062-7

Here are a few excerpts:

Weatherford also makes his connections between the Mongols and the Renaissance and emergence of modern Europe. Weatherford states that it was the importation of the printing press, blast furnace, compass, gunpowder, as well as Persian and Chinese painting styles from the Mongol Empire that spawned the Renaissance. Indeed, Weatherford writes during the Renaissance period, "The common principles of the Mongol Empire-such as paper money, primacy of the state over the church, freedom of religion, diplomatic immunity, and international law-were ideas ... gained new importance" (p. 236). Weatherford states his case very eloquently and with an abundance of evidence demonstrating not only the indirect influence of the Mongols in Europe but also the transformation of the Mongols from agents of innovation in the Renaissance into agents of destruction in the European mind during Enlightenment.

Excerpt from pages 232 to 234

The Mongols Adoption of Modern Printing Technology

The volume of information produced in the Mongol Empire required new forms of dissemination. Scribes could no longer handle the follow of laboriously hand copying everything that need to be written. They compiled the records, wrote letters, and sent information to those who need it, but they did not have time to copy agricultural manuals, medical treatises, atlases, and astronomical tables. Information had to be mass-produced for mass dissemination, and for this task, the Mongols turned again to technology, to printing.

The Mongols adopted printing technology very early. In addition to the printings sponsored by Toregene during the reign of her husband, beginning in 1236 Ogedei ordered the establishment of a series of regional printing facilities across the Mongol-controlled territory of northern China. Printing with moveable letters probably began in China in the middle of the twelfth century, but it was the Mongols who employed it on a massive scale and harnessed its potential power to the needs of state administration. Instead of the printing with thousand of characters, as the Chinese did, the Mongols used an alphabet in which the same letters were used repeatedly. Under the Mongols, printers carved out many copies of each letter that could be then arranged in whatever word was needed. Each time the printer wanted a new page of print, instead of carving the whole text, he needed to merely place the right sequence of already carved letters into position, use them, and then wait until the next printing job, when they could be rearranged and then used again.

General literacy increased during the Mongol dynasty, and the volume of literary materiel grew proportionately. In 1269, Khubilai Khan established a printing office to make government decisions more widely disseminated throughout the population, and he encouraged widespread printing in general by nongovernmental groups as well. This included religious books and novels in addition to government publications. The number of books in print increased so dramatically that their price fell constantly throughout the era of Mongol rule. Presses throughout the Mongol Empire were soon printing agriculture pamphlets, almanacs, scriptures, laws, histories, medical treatises, new mathematical theories, songs, and poetry in many languages.

Whether in their policy of religious tolerance, devising a universal alphabet, maintaining relay stations, playing games, or printing almanacs, money or astronomy charts, the rulers of the Mongol Empire displayed a persistent universalism. Because they had no system of their own to impose upon their subjects, they were willing to adopt and combine systems from everywhere. Without deep cultural preferences in these areas, the Mongols implemented pragmatic rather than ideological solutions. They searched for what worked best; and when they found it, they spread it to other countries. They did not have to worry whether their astronomy agreed with the precepts of the Bible, that their standards of writing followed the classical principals taught by the mandarins of China, or that Muslim imams disapproved of their printing and painting. The Mongols had the power, at least temporarily to impose new international systems of technology, agriculture, and knowledge that superseded the predilections or prejudices of any single civilization; and in so doing, they broke the monopoly on thought exercised by local elites.

Excerpt from pages 254 and 255

Development of European Anti-Asian & Anti-Mongol Views During the Enlightenment Period

Whereas the Renaissance writers and explorers treated Genghis Khan and the Mongols with open adulation, the eighteenth-century Enlightenment in Europe produced a growing anti-Asian spirit that often focused on the Mongols, in particular, as the symbol of everything evil or defective in that massive continent. As early as 1748, the French philosopher Montesquieu set the tone in his treatise The Spirit of the Laws, holding the Asian in haughty contempt and blaming much of their detestable qualities on the Mongols, whom he labeled, “the most singular people on earth.” He described them as both servile slaves and cruel masters. He attributed to them all the major attacks on civilization from ancient Greece to Persia: “They have destroyed Asia, from India even to the Mediterranean; and all the country which forms the east of Persia they have rendered a desert.” Montesquieu glorified the tribal origins of Europeans as the harbingers of democracy while he condemned the tribal people of Asia: “The Tartars who destroyed the Grecian Empire established in the conquered countries slavery and despotic power: the Goths, after subduing the Roman Empire, founded monarchy and liberty.” Based on this history, he summarily dismissed all of Asian civilization: “There reigns in Asia a servile spirit, which they have never been able to shake off, and it is impossible to find in all the histories of that country a single passage which discovers a freedom of spirit; we shall never see anything there but the excess of slavery.”

Genghis Khan became the central figure of attack. Voltaire adapted a Mongol dynasty play, The Orphan of Chao, by Chi Chün-hsiang, to fit his personal political and social agenda by portraying Genghis Khan, whom Voltaire used as a substitute for the French king, as an ignorant and cruel villain. The Orphan of China, as he renamed it, debuted on the Paris stage in 1755 while Voltaire enjoyed safe exile in Switzerland. “I have confined my plan to the grand epoch of Genghis Khan,” he explained. “I have endeavored to describe the manners of the Tartars and Chinese: the most interesting events are nothing when they do not paint the manners; and this painting, which is one of the greatest secrets of the art, is no more than an idle amusement, when it does not tend to inspire notions of honor and virtue.” Voltaire described Genghis Khan as “The king of kings, the fiery Genghis Khan/Who lays the fertile fields of Asia waste.” He called him “a wild Scythian soldier bred to arms/And practiced in the trade of blood.” In Voltaire’s revisionist history, the Mongols warriors were no more than the “wild sons of rapine, who live in tents, in chariots, and in the fields.” They “detest our arts, our customs, and our laws; and therefore mean to change them all; to make this splendid seat of empire one vast desert, like their own.”
Genghis Khan’s only redeeming quality, in Voltaire’s play, was that he reluctantly recognized the moral superiority of the better educated. “The more I see,” Voltaire quoted Genghis Khan as saying, “the more I admire this wondrous people, great in arts and arms, in learning and in manners great; their kings on wisdom’s basis founded all their power.” Genghis Khans ended the play with a question: “…what have I gained by all my victories, by all my guilty laurels stained with blood?” To which Voltaire answered: “…the tears, the sighs, the curses of mankind.” With these words, Voltaire himself began the modern cursing of the Mongols.

 

[Hypernova]

African tribes have been around for a long time, and Ethiopia as a polity, as well as the Mali, were around for over 8 centuries.

The Mali will always beat Germany on size and time of existence, and arguably worldwide comparative power at their peak.

Again, this is a ludicrous thing to say. How in the world could you possibly conclude the Mali Empire had more worldwide comparative power than Germany at their respective peaks? The Mali Empire may have greatly influenced West Africa, but was only vaguely known about in Europe let alone anywhere further away! Ethiopia is notable as an ancient African civilization, I agree with you there, but the Mali Empire lasted under 400 years, so I don't know where you get the figure that they lasted, as a polity, for over 8 centuries.

 

[Hypernova]

Seems it may not be 18 after all. Also, apparently Siam/Thailand who I voted for is in, wow, I thought that was a long shot! Also looks like Persia is confirmed.

 

[The_J]

@Existence of germany: I think, it has already been said, that the civs in civ more represent a culture than a state .

Somebody is just going to have to endure a national insult and be left out.

And i can feel with them .

 

[The Q-Meister]

I'm just sad that Persia and Spain have to contend for my vote. They're both very deserving civilizations, and yet somehow one of them (or, heaven forbid, both of them) will have to be out.

I agree.

They did this for Civ 3 if my memory's not mistaken; Spain wasn't included in the initial release and players had to wait for the expansion.

Maybe the 1st expansion will have an Exploration theme with Spain Portugal Vikings and Netherlands included?

 

[Neomega]

Again, this is a ludicrous thing to say. How in the world could you possibly conclude the Mali Empire had more worldwide comparative power than Germany at their respective peaks? The Mali Empire may have greatly influenced West Africa, but was only vaguely known about in Europe let alone anywhere further away! Ethiopia is notable as an ancient African civilization, I agree with you there, but the Mali Empire lasted under 400 years, so I don't know where you get the figure that they lasted, as a polity, for over 8 centuries.

The time the Mali were vaguely known about in Europe was the time the Europeans were convinced everything in the world was an iconic message from god, and only washed out their cracks twice a year, wondering why in the world they kept getting plague. They were ignorant as hell, so what the Europeans knew at that time doesn't count for much. Now, what the Muslims knew, is important. And they knew about Mansa Musa and Abu Bakr quite well.

Mali and Songhai together were around for about 7-800 years.

 

[Hypernova]

Well the first part of that was just a largely unrelated vulgar rant, but you said that Mali had more comparative worldwide power than Germany at their respective peaks. The Mali's may have been well known among Muslim nations, but everywhere else they weren't known. Germany at its peak massively affected the decisions of countries all around the world.

And you have merged two polities of Songhai's (the Songhai Empire and the Later Dendi Kingdom) with the Mali's to justify your claim that the Mali polity lasted 8 centuries (well even that only adds up to 7 centuries). The Mali Empire was of course related to the Songhai Empire but they were not the same thing. The Songhai are an ethnic group that the later Dendi Kingdom represented.

 

[Neomega]

Well the first part of that was just a largely unrelated vulgar rant,

Not really, you implied that European Knowledge of an empire was some sort of essential qualifier by saying:

but was only vaguely known about in Europe let alone anywhere further away!

I merely pointed out the Europeans at the time were one of the many more backwards parts of the world.

Germany at its peak massively affected the decisions of countries all around the world.

The entire world knew about itself by 1870. Germany only seems more relevant because it was a modern nation, and involved in two world wars, so it is closer to you and the history you are familiar with.

And you have merged two polities of Songhai's (the Songhai Empire and the Later Dendi Kingdom) with the Mali's to justify your claim that the Mali polity lasted 8 centuries (well even that only adds up to 7 centuries). The Mali Empire was of course related to the Songhai Empire but they were not the same thing. The Songhai are an ethnic group that the later Dendi Kingdom represented.

When comparing apples to apples, Mali beats the Germans either way. Mansa Musa caused an inflationary economic crash amongst the Arab nations by all the gold he was giving away on his travels to Mecca.

Germany kind of affected the world, but realistically, its effect was never beyond Europe. It only affected the world because of a more technologically and politically connected world. I mean Mexico America Japan India and China realistically were voluntary in the war, or dragged in by Britain.

anyways, Im done with this discussion. Say what you will. Good game, chap.

 

[Hypernova]

Not really, you implied that European Knowledge of an empire was some sort of essential qualifier

Hense why it was a largely unrelated rant, and I don't see how anything that I said implied it was an essential qualifier, I just used it as a benchmark. The Mali empire was known for the richness of its rulers, I doubt there would have been much difference between the hygiene and education of a Mali peasant and a European peasant.

Germany kind of affected the world, but realistically, its effect was never beyond Europe. It only affected the world because of a more technologically and politically connected world. I mean Mexico America Japan India and China realistically were voluntary in the war, or dragged in by Britain.

Yes, but you said "worldwide". The Mali Empire never had any sort of worldwide effect. Yes, the Mali Empire caused an inflationary crash, but simply because they could mine gold. That they could do that was a result of the convenience of being situated on the resource. The Mali Empire largely affected West Africa, and was gone in under 400 years.

Germany affected Europe for centuries, and has been a very big player on the world, to imply that it mainly affected Europe and then only affected the world through world wars betrays a lack of knowledge in current affairs - Germany has only just been overtaken as the world's largest exporter by China.

You are comparing an admittedly distinguished though rather brief medieval empire with a thousand year old great power that has had a profound affect on the whole world.

 

[Zenon_pt]

You ask, I say: PORTUGAL!!!!

 

[Ingvina Freyr]

It's easy to be carried-away or mislead by all the hints and clues that can be found in articles and previews. Aztec warrior artwork alone doesn't necessarily confirm the Aztecs. I remember the civ4 artfiles included images of scrapped leaders such as Richard Lionheart for example. I bet that among the so called "confirmed 17" civs there are some that will appear first in the expansions, and I would be very much surprised if Spain and Persia were not both in from start.

 

[bob rulz]

Wow, people are arguing that Germany was not important on a global scale?

Germany was a major cause of both World War I and World War II - you could say they were the catalyst for both of them, as WW1 likely never would have inflated to the scale it did were it not for Germany's invasion of Belgium. Of course the world was more interconnected at the time, but that is no reason to diminish Germany's importance in world history, especially in the 20th century.

 

[Sicky]

If Persia doesn't make it to ciV vanilla, I'm gonna eat Sid Meier alive and sacrifice all his family and friends to dark gods...

Just joking, but i still voted Persia since i would be sad if Persia didn't make it :s

 

[Nicopol]

HRE ftw

 

[Ingvina Freyr]

Well br, with so many comments on Scandinavia I can't refrain myself from answering.

Scandinavia isn't even a civilization. Ever since the Viking Age, Scandinavia has been politically divided, and at several points in history, the countries of Scandinavia have even been enemies of each other. The period people refer to should be referred to as the Vikings, and only the Vikings, in the game.

Scandinavia was never a united political entity. [...]
Vikings may not be entirely accurate, but if we're referring to the Dark Ages period of raiders and pillagers, then it's more accurate than Scandinavia.

But when someone refers to the Vikings, people will know exactly what you're talking about.

Of course, the name of the nation is a different issue and Scandinavia would probably be the only real compromise there that would work. The people should still be referred to as Vikings though if that's the era they wish to represent in-game (whenever the Vikings do end up being introduced).[...]

Arguably Scandinavia is more a civilisation in it's own right than all those post-roman countries in the game like France, Germany, England etc (don't get me wrong though, I do want them in the game as well).

Scandinavia has been suffering from internal powerstruggles that's true, but so has Germany and Greece for example, and apart from the fact that it was completely united for some time, having the same language, culture and traditions to me qualifies as being a civilisation.

When Firaxis renames the Japanese empire to the Samurai Empire and the English/British to the Redcoats, the Zulus to the Impis etc, then I will agree to having the Viking Empire and not Scandinavia.
If Firaxis for some rason wants to single out the viking era from the rest of Scandinavias history (wich they wouldn't do to most other civs) then IMO they can elaborate the citylist (as in Civ4).

Oh, and the Finns voting for Vikings. Shouldn't they be voting for the Russians? *shot*

 

[FarbrorKudde]

I vote for Vikings/Scandinavia. Vikings add a unique flavour that none of the other civilization has and it balances quite nicely, even though Persia is important I voted for Vikings. Also I'd love to have a civilization I can identify with, i.e. Scandinavia since I'm Swedish.