Carthaginian or Phoenician?

[orange]

Carthaginian/Phoenician civ is doing quite well on the poll, and is likely to be included in the XP. However, which would be better? Carthaginian or Phoenician?

My vote is for the former, as explained in another thread. Maybe we can have some debate on this, if it's a close poll. VOTE!

[August Borms]

I can't pronounce "Carthaginian" and I don't even how to translate that to my language so I vote for the Phoenicians

[ogotai]

I'm for Carthaginians - they were fight in great wars with Romans
I voted for Carthaginians in my voting poll

[Gramphos]

See Phoenicians/Carthaginians

Other of interest:
Turks/Ottomans
Hebrew/Israelis
Ethiopians/Aksumites

[Be Quicker]

Carthaginian all the way. IMHO much better name recognition, because it IMHO is the most "powerfull" incarnation of this civilization.

[Martinus]

I say Phoenicians, as they are a civilization in general, while Carthaginians are just an offshoot of them.

If we follow the logic presented by Be Quicker, we would have Athenians or Spartans instead of Greeks and Prussians instead of Germans. On the other hand, Firaxis seemed to follow the same logic with Iroquis, so they may call the civilization Carthaginians, because the name is more widely known.

Personally, I would prefer the Civ called Phoenicians with Hannibal as its leader (just as far fetched, imho, as Alexander as the leader of Greeks).

[Gangerolf]

On a world map, the Phoenicians, with the capital Tyre (in present day Lebanon IIRC), would start out very close to the Babylonians, Greeks and Egyptians.

[Martinus]

Originally posted by Gangerolf
On a world map, the Phoenicians, with the capital Tyre (in present day Lebanon IIRC), would start out very close to the Babylonians, Greeks and Egyptians.

Actually, this is the only good point about making them Carthaginians I have heard so far. Too bad I already voted

[Rosacrux]

Carthagenian is definitely better - the off shot argument could have been counterd with numerous arguments: English and American, Slavs and Russians (or Poles or whatever) Mongols and Turks etc. etc.

But Carthago had more impact than Phoenice (just as USA has more impact than UK today) in the ancient history and has been widely known for it's constant wars against Rome...

...and don't forget we'll be able to say (when we finally do them) Carthago delenda est

PS: The world map issue is definitely a serious one, and it's a valid pro-Carthago argument. Additionaly, if they include the Arabs (hopefully they will...) we'll have another stacked up in that very same region...

[Vlad Antlerkov]

Phoenician. Lessee, there's the alphabet...

Plus, they're some of the earliest great explorers. IIRC, they circumnavigated Africa and possibly made it to Mexico... That, and they had colonies not just in North Africa, but all over the Mediterranean, as far west as Spain (which Carthage eventually took over).

In fact, the settlements they had in Italy effectively halted the Greeks' westward colonization during the Archaic period, redirecting their efforts toward the Black Sea and Ionia. As I recall, one of the colonies the Greeks founded after stopping their westward expansion was this place called Byzantium. You may have heard of it.

Two problems, though-- who'd be the leader, and what'd the unique unit be? I'll be the first to admit that Hamilcar Barca might be a good choice...

[Ironwood]

In a way, asking "Phonecian or Carthagenian" is like asking "English or American." Still, I voted for "Phonecian" because it is comparable to the question: Greek or Macedonian?

The Greeks, even before Alexander, had influence in a lot of places through their colonies, but each Greek community was considered, at least in theory, independent of other greek communities (poleis). And their influence was expanded considerably under Alexander, but Alexander wasn't a Greek, but rather a Macedonian.

Still, the name "Greek" is used in Civilization, because, first off, it's more recognizable than "Macedonian," secondly, it was truly Greek culture that was extended, and that any culture Macedonia had was attained by their claim of fundamental "Greekness" (they were wannabe Greeks). Finally, simply calling them "Greek" includes other Greek areas that Alexander never touched, i.e. the colonies west of Greece proper (particularly Sicily and southern Italy, which feel the influence of their Greek ancestors to this day).

Carthage, by this logic, is just the last remaining independent Phonecian city (after Alexander conquered the entirity of the East) which managed to retain it's prosperity despite that.

For the record:

Civilization: Phonecian
Culture: Commercial, Scientific
Capital: Tyre
Leader: Hannibal
Unit: Big Question Mark. Any ideas? Maybe some improved ship.

Why Hannibal? Because everybody knows his name. It's not historically accurate, I know. But who else could it be? (Please tell me. I am very interested in such things.)

Actually, none of the popular myths regarding this figure are historically accurate. Does anyone know his race? I once saw a poster at the university calling him a "black historical leader." (This was right next to one calling Cleopatra the "Black Queen." Why either of these pieces of propaganda were placed in a place of learning is beyond me.)

[Rosacrux]

Originally posted by Ironwood
Alexander wasn't a Greek, but rather a Macedonian.

Still, the name "Greek" is used in Civilization, because, first off, it's more recognizable than "Macedonian," secondly, it was truly Greek culture that was extended, and that any culture Macedonia had was attained by their claim of fundamental "Greekness" (they were wannabe Greeks

I should say that most Greeks on this board (and probably the coowner of this site too...) would be more than willing to point out how wrong you are here.

Historical facts and data suggest that the Macedonian (if not all of the subjects of that kingdom, then definitely the "genuine" Macedonian) were of Greek (Doric, actually, like the Pelloponesian) ancestry.

The rest should be considered bad propaganda.

As for your question about Hanibal's race, well, since his ancestry was semitic, we can assume he was white. In the middle eastern way, of course, but still white.

[Ironwood]

Regarding Hannibals race, that is the assumption I have made, as well. I wondered, however, if anyone had any verifiable facts in this regard.

Regarding the Macedon/Greece question: Yes, they shared a Doric herritage, but regardless of that, there were those among the Greeks that considered themselves to be little more than barbarian interlopers. (And yes, there were others that considered them the saviors of Greek cultures.) Nonetheless, the center of it was Greece and Greek culture.

[Leppersson]

Originally posted by Vlad Antlerkov
Phoenician. Lessee, there's the alphabet...

And currency, trade...
Phoenicians, absolutely.

[Alexander I]

You folks may also want to see the thread:

Expansion Pack Civs Explained: Phoenicians and Dutch

My preference is:

Civ: Phoenicians
Leader: King Hiram of Tyre (see 2nd Samuel, Old Testament, the Bible)
Capital: Tyre
Unit: Quinquireme (faster Trireme with less cost)
Attributes: Commercial, Expansionist

Thoughts?