The Reason why the Iroquois are in Civ 3

[Ribannah]

Originally posted by red_jon
OK, let's think about this in Civ terms...
Reasons why (in civ) the Native Americans count as barbarians
(BTW, I'm not saying they were in real life, just in civ terms).
1- They never built cities (they could be represented by a settler wandering round in circles) - they were nomadic.

I take it you're talking about North-Amerind tribes
The Iroquois and many other tribes built permanent villages of longhouses.
Further to the south, there were the pueblo towns.

2- They certainly didn't build city improvements

The Iroquois had community buildings, granaries and village walls, followed by churches and other city improvements after European influence. They also had saunas, which compensates for the Finnish being left out .
The Hopi had a.o.t. temples and terraces.

3- They only produced 1 type of military unit

Braves, scouts, archers, canoes, musketeers, riflemen, guerillas ...

4- They had no united leader of significant unified government.

Most nations had a high chief, sometimes an additional war chief.
All nations as well as the confederacies had high councils.
Many of them still have.

[Fiil]

Hey Ribannah, which civ2-techs would you say the iroquois had in real life?

[Ironwood]

Originally posted by Christantine The Great


The Aztecs, as AoK puts it, were at a cultural dead end. They were simply more advanced barbarians who barely held on to that empire (I bet that...800 men could topple it).

I bet that, oh, 800 men *did* topple it.

At any rate, I am beginning to be more inclined to see them as worthy of being a civ. The Aztecs had little more than a tributary empire (you'd need an entire game of Civ to simulate that); the Iroqois had a genuine confederation.

Oh, and for those that have given up on that other Iroqois thread, regarding scripts:

Has anyone else ever heard of the Cherokee script? I read, a long time ago, a story about a Cherokee who developed a genuinely *phonetic* script, specially tailored for the Cherokee language. I don't know if it's true, of if so, if it ever had any real application, but it's cool, nonetheless.

Ah, the Cherokee; now there's a real civilization. Permanent villages, agriculture, independent dealings with other powers; were it not for the fact that the Iroqois were more influential in the long run, I'd say the Cherokee are a better bet for a genuine civ.

[Guynemer]

Originally posted by Ironwood


I bet that, oh, 800 men *did* topple it.

I bet that they had help from, oh, a certain lethal virus.

[orange]

Guy

[Dr. Nick]

Ribannah, if the Iroquois were so advanced, how come the Incas were not included?

The Incas had a much more technologically advanced Empire with a better organised central government. They literally carved themselves an empire out of the stone of the Andes. They had cultivation terraces, temples, observatories, their architecture was perfect and they had seismic proof cities.

And yet, they are not included. Sounds like there is never a good outline on why one civ is included and why one is not.

[Wernazuma III]

Need for clarification

Some points made in this thread need clarification.

At first there was mentioned the point that Olmecs and the Mississippi-culture would qualify better than the Iroquois.
Although I oppose the Iroquois inclusion, I don't think this holds. From the Olmecs we know mainly their giant stone heads and the remains of some settlements. Their pictographic writing was definitely not superior to those from the Iroquois presented in this thread. Their importance merely lies in the age of the Olmec culture, significantly BC, as the creddle of mesoamerican culture. With town names we would face the same difficulties as with the Iroquois: 75% have spanish names, the other 25% native names, but from a much later period (toltec, aztec etc.)
The Mississippi culture had maybe higher achievements than the Iroquois (can't really judge), but they definitely lack to have a name, I mean a tribe or nation, we have in mind when thinking about them. and again: no city names.

as for the aztecs and mayans it's different.
Someone mentioned the aztecs were not very different from "barbarians" and to be a "dead end society". The first was only true until the 14th century, when the aztecs arrived to the high valley of Anahuac. Then they soon adapted the great achievements of the zapotecs, toltecs et. al. Their capital Mexico-Tenochtitlan had, according to the lowest (!!!) estimates 150000 inhabitants, some even say it was the world's biggest city around 1500. One doesn't have to be a specialist to see that this makes them stand highly civilized. They had a very differentiated social hierarchy, totally untypical to tribal organization, they had a huge administration, built massive structures etc. etc.
And for the "dead end society". This idea refers to the fact that when the spanish arrived, most conquered peoples flocked to the spanish because they were treated badly by the aztecs. The "800" spanyards (which actually had been over 2000 when they finally managed to overcome the aztecs) were supported by several 10000s or even more than 100000 natives. Without their support, the conquest would have failed completely. Read a book from someone who was among the conquerors: Bernal Diaz, The conquest of Mexico, and you'll see what I mean.
Yes, the aztec empire was a tributary empire and thus fragile. It might have fallen even if the spanish would not have arrived, but that would not have meant the end of their culture. Aztec culture was highly influenced by predecessors like Toltecs or Zapotecs and they added their "spice" to the culture. The next power would have built on a substrate of a toltec/zapotec/aztec substrate.

Lamentably it's 8 in the morning and I have to go to bed, so I can't write about the mayans now. Good night to ya all, Tlazocamati, Wernazuma Nahuixtelotzin

[El hidalgo]

Originally posted by Ironwood

Oh, and for those that have given up on that other Iroqois thread, regarding scripts:

Has anyone else ever heard of the Cherokee script? I read, a long time ago, a story about a Cherokee who developed a genuinely *phonetic* script, specially tailored for the Cherokee language. I don't know if it's true, of if so, if it ever had any real application, but it's cool, nonetheless.

Yes, you're thinking of Sequoia. You can read about his story (and his crazy wife ) here: http://www.friesian.com/ross/calif.htm#sequoia

[Imran Siddiqui]

I bet that they had help from, oh, a certain lethal virus.

And thousands of Indians that hated the Aztecs .

[Ribannah]

Originally posted by El Awrence
Ribannah, if the Iroquois were so advanced, how come the Incas were not included?

Ehhm, because they weren't Iroquois? (While the Cherokee, on the other hand, could be considered as part of the 'greater Iroquois tribe', as they are closely related to the six nations.)

The main reason Firaxis hasn't even considered the Incas is that because a certain someone got his wish and we aren't allowed to build cities on mountains in civ3!!

Originally posted by Fiil
Hey Ribannah, which civ2-techs would you say the iroquois had in real life?

That is an excellent question Fiil , I have been waiting for someone to ask this for ages! Note, however, that the tech tree is of course a product of the Americans, the Iroquois would make a different tree!! Before contact with the Europeans, I think they had the following:

Pottery, Alphabet, Warrior Code, Bronze Working, Masonry, Ceremonial Burial, Map Making, Writing, Code of Laws, Mathematics, Feudalism, Construction, Mysticism, Polytheism, Monarchy, Chivalry, Engineering, Trade, Astronomy, Philosophy, Navigation, The Republic, Chemistry, Leadership, Medicine, Monotheism, Tactics, Democracy, Theology, Communism, Guerilla Warfare, Environmentalism

Not all of these to the same extent as other tribes, as well as without some accompaning units, because certain links were missing. Some of what are modern techs to us, are in its basic form ancient to the Iroquois.

Typically lacking:
Horseback Riding, Masonry(?), The Wheel, Iron Working, Currency, Seafaring, Literacy, University, Bridge Building, Gunpowder

for which they had: The Sled, Woodcraft, Copper & Silver Working.

The Iroquois Golden Age, however, did not start until contact with the Europeans was made, and they quickly started filling the gaps, while the Europeans picked up much of where the Iroquois were ahead.

Edit: Dropped Invention, Masonry and Metallurgy (only the related Shawnee had some knowledge in this field); note that (simple) wampums were used as Currency after European contact.

[Dr. Nick]

Ribannah, that reply was pathetic. I won't even bother answering it.

[Ironwood]

Originally posted by Ribannah

That is an excellent question Fiil , I have been waiting for someone to ask this for ages! Note, however, that the tech tree is of course a product of the Americans, the Iroquois would make a different tree!! Before contact with the Europeans, I think they had the following:

Pottery, Alphabet, Warrior Code, Bronze Working,

I follow you up until

Originally posted by Ribannah
Masonry,

Can you give an example? Masonry, I associate with big monoliths, walls (*stone* walls), stone buildings, etc.

Because I don't feel like playing with tags, how about Writing? I do believe they did have potentially Alphabet, but Writing? That piece of Wampum, unless you're prepared to explain how their written language *worked*, I have difficulty believing it. Ditto for Code of Laws, since this implies law is written, not simply memorized (and therfore in the hands of the memorizers).

Construction? Construction isn't simply the building of buildings (log houses don't count), but the building of *large* buildings, such as, oh, say, the Colloseaum? The Arch, at least, would be something needed to say one has "construction."

And Chivalry? This, I see, as an advanced form of Warrior Code (which the Iroqois most assuredly had), dependent on a horse (and therfore land) based aristocracy. The Iroqois did not have this. People say Chivalry is dead. This is so; it died with the advent of the modern army.

ENGINEERING?! Dear Ribannah, what exactly do you think Engineering is? In giving them this, you suggest they had considerable structural and mechanical capabilities. Give an example of Iroqois "engineering."

Navigation. This is more than simply utilizing landmarks; this is the ability to naviagate using nothing more than the stars... which enables people to travel out to sea farther than one can see the land. This suggests they knew the world was round, they knew how to determine their lattitude (at least) using the stars an an astrolobe, etc. I would be *very* surprised if they had this.

Chemistry is more than herbal remedies; it implies knowledge of the basic mechanisms of chemical reactions. It suggests the principles that underlie the periodic table. It's not only being able to mix stuff and see the reaction, and then use it, but also being able to *predict* (or at least make the attempt) what may happen when you mix two substances.

Leadership is, if I'm reading it correctly, basically an excuse to have knights come before dragoons... or is that cavalry? It's been a while. It basically exists to ensure a proper flow of military units, and lengthen the development cycle, so far as I can tell. Somebody else can strike this down, probably.

I won't even go into invention.

Tactics. Same as leadership. Another way to get better horsies.

Theology? I think this is basically a way of making religeon (happy buildings) more advanced, but at the very least, it suggests an extensive educated class that considers matters of religeon, melding them with the current secular beliefs. This hooks directly into my arguments regarding writing. In a hunter-gatherer society (for, whatever else they may have accomplished, they were still reliant on this for their welfare... unlike certain tribes to the south), who has time to be a "Theologian?" An oral tradition does not a theology make. By that logic, you could say Theology, in the West, originated with the Druids. (And yes, they had a prereq: philosophy... but not Theology.)

And if they can't even work iron, how can you call them metallurgists?

[Ribannah]

You seem to have overlooked the line right below my list. Instead, many of your definitions go the opposite way and would need the word 'advanced' added to the name of the tech. That the Iroquois certainly did not have in some of the 'technical techs' until after contact with the Europeans. But, as an example, today Mohawk construction workers are most celebrated as they have no fear of heights. I'll get back to you in more detail later.

[Fiera]

Originally posted by Ribannah
You seem to have overlooked the line right below my list. Instead, many of your definitions go the opposite way and would need the word 'advanced' added to the name of the tech. That the Iroquois certainly did not have in some of the 'technical techs' until after contact with the Europeans.

Most of this technical knowledge that you're adressing as 'advanced' was already old news to the Babylonians, Persians or Greeks 2000 years before the Iroquese "had contact with the Europeans".

[Ribannah]

You mean like the compass, the periodic table and gunpowder?
Wow! Put them in the game! Er ...

LOVE HIAWATHA!! LOVE HIAWATHA!!