As a historian specialized in the study of the Atlantic World I have found this thread to be highly entertaining!
I agree with the opinion that the Civilization series should have much more ethnic and geographic diversity. I have a number of complaints about Africa, North and South America, and Europe. I am much less familiar with Asian history and so I yield to the voices of others regarding specific civilizations to add from there.
It was not until after the conquests of the Aztecs and the Incans that European civilizations obtained real, long-term advantage over other Old World civilizations in Africa, the Middle East, and Asia. Spain flooded Europe with gold and silver from the New World and though Spain itself never really managed its economy very well, suddenly wealthy Spaniards, eager to spend on consumer goods, ultimately provided the funding necessary for the growth of manufacturing in other European countries that eventually led to very significant technological advantages over the rest of the world. After the Spanish Reconquista and despite the Inquisition Spain was the dominant power in Europe. For 700 years Spanish soldiers had fought against Muslims and by 1492 they were pretty darned good at doing things like laying siege to towns. New World armies had difficulty competing against them. Even still, smallpox and a host of other Old World diseases had much more to do with the beginnings of European hegemony in the New World than any advantage that the Europeans possessed in technology or resources.
I begin with Europe because my objections with how that continent has been portrayed in the game are smallest. Let me put this out first - I like the fact that lots of European civilizations are in the game. Super, really! But not if it comes at the expense of all other continents in the world. Let's make one thing clear right off the bat - in its present configuration (as well as CIV III and IV and likely before that but I wasn't playing) Civilization is blandly and almost pointlessly Euro-Centric. Still, with that said, I do not fully understand why Portugal is not represented in Civ V. The accomplishments of the Portuguese Empire quite frankly demand their inclusion in the game as a fully playable civilization. I do not believe this point is debatable.
Why no Zulu? Southern Africa deserves at least one civilization! The history of West Africa is very interesting and the inclusion of Mali would make a pretty neat scenario when paired with Songhai. Perhaps even a broader West African scenario might include the many African empires that fought for control of the slave trade? Perhaps this theme might be a bit too dark - but powerful kingdoms like Ashanti, Dahomey, and Kongo helped shape the modern world and would enrich the Civilization franchise with or without a scenario. However, labor systems in and of themselves have played a crucial role in history among all cultures and civilizations and would make for interesting content for another expansion or VI.
The lack of diversity in the Americas is absolutely atrocious. One argument against further inclusion has been that the peoples of the Americas were somehow not meeting the criteria for being labelled a civilization. This is preposterous and ample archeological evidence and the historical record refuse this out and out. Primarily as a result of massive depopulation due to disease, Native societies changed to become less sedentary post-contact in much of the Americas and until then a number of powerful polities and cultures existed in the Americas.
Examples abound - Mississippian culture is completely missing from the game. What a waste! The American southeast should somehow be represented - here again, archaeology and the historic record, most notably the account of the De Soto expedition show that the Mississippian peoples who became Cherokees, Choctaws, Creeks, Chickasaw, and Seminoles in response to disease epidemics deserve inclusion. They aren't called the Five Civilized Tribes for nothing and should be represented somehow in the game. Native resistance to US removal policies in the American Southeast sounds like another awesome scenario to me! Too, in the American west and mid-west options abound! I can see the Sioux with a very powerful cavalry UU and imagine a culturally or religiously focused Navajo civilization with bonuses in deserts! Moving to Canada - apparently completely devoid of civilization - how about the Inuit, maybe they can travel or even settle on ice. Algonkians? Chippewas? Hurons? Could make for a really cool cross-Atlantic fur and musket trade scenario. Before I go off on too much of a rant, I will end by saying simply that South America cannot be represented solely by the Incas.
Oh, and nobody in the Caribbean? Or Australia for that matter?
Give us more choices!!!
) and that the Sweden would have been better.
