Why does Spain get no love?

[kochman]

I don't think anyone spoke poorly of Spain. I, for one, love Spain, and would definitely live there if a good job arose for me there.

 

[kochman]

P.S In a calmer mood: I only continued this argument because your line of thought included a circular reasoning: Spain is filled with catholics. We know they are catholics because they participate in catholic events. We know those events are catholic because they are done by catholics.... when I tried to ask from you a clearer definition of what is catholic event you were unable or unwilling to give a solid definition. IMHO the only possible definition of a catholic ( or Muslim, Jew, Ba'hai or whatever ) event is simple: has a priest of that religion presiding to it and it is mandated by the religion rules. People carrying images of saints in the streets don't fill that definition in case of RC, given that you don't need to make that to be a catholic ( and worse, there are people that do that and aren't catholics ) . So using that to define a country as filled with catholics is falacious ( if you use my definition OFC, but given that you failed to produce your own, I don't have other to use here )

Let it go, dude... let it go. Its clear you want to argue some innane point here, but no one is debating against you anymore, because the point is that innane.

 

[r_rolo1]

The point may be inane or not, but I simply hate the act of throwing a affirmation and then run away when a clearer definition is asked or when inconsistencies are pointed. That is pretty much why I had not stopped this discussion 2 pages ago and not because I had some interest in the discussion of how much religious the inhabitants of a country are.

 

[kochman]

No maybe about it...
I guess you think I am going to address it if you keep going, but I am not.

Anyhow, so, I did see in the download database there is a Phillip II, so, we have an answer, and I have no reason to remain on this thread.

 

[FriscoDanconia]

As some have said in previous posts, a second Spanish leader might seem a re-skin to many.
However, I think there are deeper reasons why Spain gets so little recognition in Civ4 (and elsewhere).

Spanish eclectic history swings from being extremely dominant to being extremely dominated. At the crossroads of Africa and Europe, as well as at the crossroads of the Mediterranean and the Atlantic, Spain is uniquely posed to be the ideal conqueror and the ideal conquered, and it has been both, so many times. Spain was been partially or totally occupied many times (Celts, Phoenicians, Greeks, Carthaginians, Romans, Goths, Vandals, Suebi, Alans, Muslims, English, French, etc.) and it has held positions around the world (the Netherlands, Austria, Northern Italy, the Spanish Main, a large part of South America, a large part of North America, parts of Africa, the Philippines, Taiwan, etc.)
Think of any civ and if they have not threatened Spain, then probably the Spaniards have found some way to mess with them (the only exception in civ4 would be the Mesopotamian civs, I’d say). It was the Spanish Legions at the Catalaunian Fields along the Romans who defeated the Huns.

Spain has also swung from extremely backwards and regressive (legendary religious intransigence, political corruption, they even coined the saying “let them [foreign nations] invent [rather than us]” and “Spain is different [for not being a democracy in the 1970s]”) to extremely innovative and daring (leading in conceiving the modern nation-state under the Catholic Monarchs, leading in experimenting with anarchy during the Spanish Civil War, both the debate on slavery and the development of monetary theory by the scholastics of the School of Salamanca, the development of guerilla warfare during the Napoleonic occupation, etc).

When extremely dominant, which is what we mostly think about when we think of historic Spain, arguably most Spanish leaders might look as clones, in Civ4 terms: Expansive and Spiritual (as Isabella), and one might add Imperialistic.
And this eclipses (in no small part due to the Black Legend) the amazing Cultural significance of Spain: the Siglo de Oro (talk of a Golden Age!), the spread of language and religion through all South America while maintaining a surprising variety of languages and dialects at home, this is the nation of Cervantes, Velazquez, Dali, and Picasso among so many others.

But when extremely dominated, such as under Rome and Islam, Spain has also had an overwhelmingly unrecognized impact. This is a very odd trait and yet quintessential of Spain. Consider this: three great and decisive Roman emperors, Trajan, Adrian, and Theodosius I were from Hispania (The Roman name for Spain). As some scholars have noticed, at that time Rome was more Hispanic than Italic. Likewise, some Spanish Islamic leaders such as Al-Hakam II and Abd-ar-Rahman III who dominated Al-Andalus (the Islamic name for Spain, not just the present-day region of Andalusia) were also great leaders who achieved a remarkable prosperity for Spain while maintaining a staunch independence from other Islamic centers of power.

So to sum it all up, who will notice that Spain is creating amazing works of art in the Golden Century while it is also busy conquering the world? And who will notice that Spain is leading Rome or Islam at a time when it is not visible on the map?

 

[Ruman]

Philip II is one of the more well-known Spanish monarchs. He would be nice.

 

[MazeMouse]

does an entire continent speak Dutch?

No, but we have been a major player in overseas colonization (if not for stupid decisions New York would still be called New Amsterdam And the wallstreet NW in CIV4 would have been called Muurstraat instead )

 

[r_rolo1]

Spoiler snip :

As some have said in previous posts, a second Spanish leader might seem a re-skin to many.
However, I think there are deeper reasons why Spain gets so little recognition in Civ4 (and elsewhere).

Spanish eclectic history swings from being extremely dominant to being extremely dominated. At the crossroads of Africa and Europe, as well as at the crossroads of the Mediterranean and the Atlantic, Spain is uniquely posed to be the ideal conqueror and the ideal conquered, and it has been both, so many times. Spain was been partially or totally occupied many times (Celts, Phoenicians, Greeks, Carthaginians, Romans, Goths, Vandals, Suebi, Alans, Muslims, English, French, etc.) and it has held positions around the world (the Netherlands, Austria, Northern Italy, the Spanish Main, a large part of South America, a large part of North America, parts of Africa, the Philippines, Taiwan, etc.)
Think of any civ and if they have not threatened Spain, then probably the Spaniards have found some way to mess with them (the only exception in civ4 would be the Mesopotamian civs, I’d say). It was the Spanish Legions at the Catalaunian Fields along the Romans who defeated the Huns.

Spain has also swung from extremely backwards and regressive (legendary religious intransigence, political corruption, they even coined the saying “let them [foreign nations] invent [rather than us]” and “Spain is different [for not being a democracy in the 1970s]&#8221 to extremely innovative and daring (leading in conceiving the modern nation-state under the Catholic Monarchs, leading in experimenting with anarchy during the Spanish Civil War, both the debate on slavery and the development of monetary theory by the scholastics of the School of Salamanca, the development of guerilla warfare during the Napoleonic occupation, etc).

When extremely dominant, which is what we mostly think about when we think of historic Spain, arguably most Spanish leaders might look as clones, in Civ4 terms: Expansive and Spiritual (as Isabella), and one might add Imperialistic.
And this eclipses (in no small part due to the Black Legend) the amazing Cultural significance of Spain: the Siglo de Oro (talk of a Golden Age!), the spread of language and religion through all South America while maintaining a surprising variety of languages and dialects at home, this is the nation of Cervantes, Velazquez, Dali, and Picasso among so many others.

But when extremely dominated, such as under Rome and Islam, Spain has also had an overwhelmingly unrecognized impact. This is a very odd trait and yet quintessential of Spain. Consider this: three great and decisive Roman emperors, Trajan, Adrian, and Theodosius I were from Hispania (The Roman name for Spain). As some scholars have noticed, at that time Rome was more Hispanic than Italic. Likewise, some Spanish Islamic leaders such as Al-Hakam II and Abd-ar-Rahman III who dominated Al-Andalus (the Islamic name for Spain, not just the present-day region of Andalusia) were also great leaders who achieved a remarkable prosperity for Spain while maintaining a staunch independence from other Islamic centers of power.

So to sum it all up, who will notice that Spain is creating amazing works of art in the Golden Century while it is also busy conquering the world? And who will notice that Spain is leading Rome or Islam at a time when it is not visible on the map?

Just two points.

1- The roman legions in the Catalaunian Fields were relegated to the right side of the battle line into the more easily defendable spot, and were told simply to stay put. Even Attila said to his warriors to not fear the romans, that were ( IIRC ) "cowardly hidden behind their shields" , but the visigoths and the other foederati that Aecius managed to convince to fight Attila. To prove this right ,it was the visigoth prince Torismund that had the oportunity to capture Attila ( just to be stopped by Aecius ) . To be honest, the battle happened as there were no Roman troops there, from Hispania or not.

2- Spain != Hispania .... Spain , at best , appeard in the time of the catholic kings ( I would prefer to say that Spain as we know it appeard in 1668, but I guess that is too much for most stomachs ). I know that it is usual in Spain to consider that Spain exists since atleast the times of the Visigoths, but that is simply not true...

 

[FriscoDanconia]

r_rolo1, if we take your date of 1668, then nor Isabella nor Alfonso X or Phillip II should appear as leaders of Spain.

So do you think it would be more adequate to have some of them in Civ4 as leaders of Castilla maybe completely replacing Spain?

 

[r_rolo1]

r_rolo1, if we take your date of 1668, then nor Isabella nor Alfonso X or Phillip II should appear as leaders of Spain.

So do you think it would be more adequate to have some of them in Civ4 as leaders of Castilla maybe completely replacing Spain?

true enough, but that is my point of view ( as specifically stated in the quoted post ) , not the one of Firaxis Firaxis, by putting Isabella and by the talk in the civilopedia, expliticely states that considers that Spain exists atleast since Isabella and Ferninand days.

In the end it is the same discussion than the one that raged here 2 years ago about HRE and Germany civs ... some will consider that Castille is a lesser and older Spain, so with no right to appear in game, some will consider that Castille and Spain are diferent entities and , because of that, they deserve to be treated diferently. My opinion is that Castille lasted atleast as much time as the current Spain and had a big hand in the european history of the Middle ages, as big as England or France, so I wouldn't be shocked to see a Castilian civ in the game. But I bet that most people would

 

[Lyoncet]

That account of Spain (the dominated/dominating one) sounds an awful lot like Russia, who, incidentally, get 3 leaders. Good analysis though.

 

[Nilmerf]

This is simpler than the thread makes it out to be. For one, you have to choose a leader that's a different feel than Isabella.. let's say Alfonso X the Wise. Traits that would fit him are Philosophical, Creative, and Organized. No combination of these three is possible without overlapping an existing ruler. So give him an available trait combination like Creative/Charismatic. Done.

Actually, I would consider bumping Frederick the Great to Creative/Charismatic and giving Alfonso the Wise Philosophical/Organized. Seems to fit better.