Tribes v. 0.1

[DarkCloud]

*BUMP* (To correspond with an update)

[S. Kroeze]

Dear Dark Cloud,

Of course you can modify or edit my contributions. I can live with that. You put effort in your project, so it should be applauded. But please:

Don't confuse the United Provinces (=the Dutch Republic) with the Spanish/Austrian Netherlands, who in the end became Belgium!!

Until 1568 all seventeen provinces of the Low Countries were ruled by the King of Spain. Then we had our national revolt resulting in civil war and de facto partition of the country. Urban Ranger will doubtless argue that Dutch independence dates from 1648, because in that year the Spanish recognized Dutch independence and sovereignty. Most serious historians use the date of 1581, the year our government, the Staten-Generaal, declared independence, abjuring the legitimate king.

Anyway, after about eighty years of civil war the front stabilized and the country was de facto and de iure partitioned. The northern part, the Republic of the United Provinces, was economically the leading nation of the world, a great maritime power and one of the great European powers, sailing all the seven seas and acquiring many profitable colonies, producing a magnificent school of painters (Rembrandt, Vermeer, Hals, etc).

The south became gradually poorer and relatively backward, since its economy was effectively strangled by the north. Ruled by foreign dynasts, the Habsburg, it became a battle field during the wars of Louis XIV. Because of the suffocating Catholic climate, where the Spanish Inquisition ruled, most artists and intellectuals migrated to the north.

Please do not confuse my country with Belgium!
(this is our only chauvinistic trait)
By the way: Belgians don't exist, there are only Flemings and Walloons!

I am also disappointed and surprised that you rubbed out the magnificent Indus civilization, the third oldest civilization after Sumer and Egypt. For the present moment I do not want to argue their importance. In this thread I considered their importance extensively, quoting a specialist in the field.

Did you see my post as follows in the same thread?

quote: I cant resist the temptation of including a historically correct list of the Great Civilizations of History. Most people identify a civilization with a nationality; I'm not against a national element in the game, but everyone should understand the enormous difference separating these concepts. 1. Sumerian/Babylonian 2. Egyptian 3. Indus/Dravidian 4. Chinese 5. Greek 6. Roman 7. Mayan/Meso-American 8. Inca/Andes 9. Byzantine/Orthodox 10. Latin/Catholic 11. Islamic/Near Eastern 12. Germanic/Protestant 13. Russian/Slav 14. Indian/Hindu 15. Japanese 16. Tibetan 17. South East Asian 18. sub-Saharan civilization?? Of course every list is open to debate. As one should acknowledge its religion that identifies all civilizations! One could still argue the existence of a Celtic, Persian or Turkish civilization. But that would be the limit. McNeill, the authority who more or less introduced the concept of civilization in historiography, recognizes even less: Mesopotamian, Egyptian, merging into Near Eastern, (3)Indian, Chinese, Japanese and (6)Western, which he only divides into Greek Orthodox and Latin Catholic. Those asking for Hunnish or Mongol civilazations absolutely miss the point: those were the barbarians!

Sincere regards,

S. Kroeze

PS: Those ridiculous Nordicums are still there! And there are many 'essential' tribes, which in my view are not essential at all, e.g. A/Etruscans, Nubians, Afghans, Pakistani. I had never heard before of Tarascs! Mexicans are essentially Spaniards; I could go on for hours.....
Please do not become angry, I intend to be positively critical!

[DarkCloud]

I'll fix the list up in my next post.
My gosh! The Nordiums are still there, I thought I deleted them...

There be strange forces at work here...

The Nubians and Etruscians will stay where they remain.

The Afghans and Pakistani could be moved to 'minor tribes' and will be.

Mexico will stay in the Major tribes, for Mexico has had a rich culture and have a great history of betrayal, loss, and gain. i.e. Santa Anna kept coming back, and coming back, and coming back, etc.

The Indus may or may not belong. I cannot say having not researched them as extensivley as I have the others.

According to my 'Map of History' they did not exist as of 612 B.C. but that stands to reason since they were an old civilization, however I will look into it more.

For now I will add the Indus to the list of major civs.

I will delete the belgians and replace them with the United Provinces.

However the only reason i put [Belgium] in brackets was so people could know exactly where the 'United Provinces' were.

Thank you for your patience and corrections.
The additions will be in version 9.0

[DarkCloud]

I'll fix the list up in my next post.
My gosh! The Nordiums are still there, I thought I deleted them...

There be strange forces at work here...

The Nubians and Etruscians will stay where they remain.

The Afghans and Pakistani could be moved to 'minor tribes' and will be.

Mexico will stay in the Major tribes, for Mexico has had a rich culture and have a great history of betrayal, loss, and gain. i.e. Santa Anna kept coming back, and coming back, and coming back, etc.

The Indus may or may not belong. I cannot say having not researched them as extensivley as I have the others.

According to my 'Map of History' they did not exist as of 612 B.C. but that stands to reason since they were an old civilization, however I will look into it more.

For now I will add the Indus to the list of major civs.

I will delete the belgians and replace them with the United Provinces.

However the only reason i put [Belgium] in brackets was so people could know exactly where the 'United Provinces' were.

Thank you for your patience and corrections.
The additions will be in version 0.9

[Youngsun]

Darkcloud

quote: Siamese (Siam 1900 AD in Asia (Now Cambodia etc.))

Didn't you read my post about Annam(Vietnam) & Siam(Thailand) from the "List of civilisation" thread? and Cambodia inherits more from Khmer empire.

Old names/dynasties for Asian civilisations(generalised)

BC2000~100
Shang/Zhou/Qin/Han(China)
Choson(Korea)
Hung(Vietnam)

AD300~1000
Sui/Tang/Song(China)
Kokuryo/Shilla/Koryo(Korea)
Wa/Yamato/Fujiwara(Japan)
Annam/Ly(Vietnam)

AD1000~1800
Ming/Qing(China)
Choson(Korea)
Hojo/Tokugawa(Japan)
Nguyen(Vietnam)
Siam(Thailand)
Tibet(Tibet?)
[This message has been edited by Youngsun (edited August 28, 2000).]

[DarkCloud]

BUMP!

Any new ideas for additions?

[Christantine The Great]

No, but some reductions.

Byzantine - Extended Roman Empire which was a blend of Roman and Greek customs, therefore not a real civilizaton.

Austro-Hungarians - Austrian (German) + Hungarian (Magyars). The Austro-Hungarian Empire was simply an Austrian Emperor who happened to be the King of the Magyars (Hungary).

Canada - I don't care what the Canadians say, Canada is a blend of French and English culture therefore not a real civilization.

Sorry if I sounded a bit harsh with Canada.

------------------
"Freedom, Trade, Christantine!"

The Official Webpage of the Chrisonian Republic

The Viking Archives

[S. Kroeze]

quote: Originally posted by Christantine The Great on 10-07-2000 11:00 PM No, but some reductions. Byzantine - Extended Roman Empire which was a blend of Roman and Greek customs, therefore not a real civilizaton. Austro-Hungarians - Austrian (German) + Hungarian (Magyars). The Austro-Hungarian Empire was simply an Austrian Emperor who happened to be the King of the Magyars (Hungary).

That someone doesn't acknowledge the importance of the Byzantine civilization is beyond my powers of comprehension. It shows he doesn't understand the denotation of the word 'civilization'.

The Byzantine empire lasted more than a thousand years(330-1453; do you know any other empire lasting so long? The empire was unified by
-one dominant religion: the Greek Orthodox Church, being its unique variety of Christianity
-one dominant language and literature, spoken by all members of the ruling elite; the literary language was an imitation of Classical Attic, the spoken language(Byzantine) differed as much from Classical Attic as Latin differs from Italian
-one unique style in architecture, painting and music every layman will immediately recognize; no one will ever confuse the Parthenon with the Hagia Sophia
-an ideology according to which the emperor was the representative of Christ on earth

Of course it is true that this civilization was a continuation of older civilizations, the Greek and Roman. But the old gods were forgotten and denied, while a foreign religion, origination from another world, was embraced as the unifying ideology dominating all aspects of human life. With it came many elements and ideas of Persian or Near Eastern origin.
And when this reasoning would be accepted there would be only about five civilizations in the entire history of mankind. Because the Roman civilization was a combination of Greek, Etruscan and Italic elements; the Classical Greek civilization was a combination of Dorian, Helladic, Egyptian and Mesopotamian elements; the Helladic civilization was triggered by the Minoans, while the Egyptian civilization was triggered by the Sumerians.

The influence of the Byzantine civilization and ideology can be traced to the present day. The Cold War could be described as a struggle between two ideologies: the Byzantine Orthodox, where the emperor rules supreme, and the Latin Catholic (maybe Protestant) where the individual is a lot more important. It also declares why during the Kosovo crisis the Russians and Greeks supported the Serbs.

Of course I agree with the analysis of the Austrian-Hungarian empire, which was unified neither by religion, language or art. It was held together by the Habsburg dynasty and by having a common enemy: the Turks. On the other hand, ruling such a mixed bunch could present an interesting challenge.

[DarkCloud]

The Canadians are not on the list Christantine, as either Major or even Minor civs...

Byzantine perhaps should be taken off... (I'll note that)

Austria-Hungary should stay "I believe because they were a more important civ than the Magyars, WWI, WWII, etc."

[Lonestar]

Glad to see you includede the Texabs in a "if the US split's" deal.

May I make a suggestion? CA was independent for a whopping 6months, and it mostly consisted of John Fremont and the US Army running it. Try replacing it with the Cajuns.

------------------
"You may not be interested in war, but war is interested in you"

"Soylant Green is people. PPPeeeoooppllleee!"

[Lazy Jay]

Some may disagree with this, but I'm pretty sure that at a cultural level the Celts and Gauls were the same. To the best of my knowledge the only difference is the name.

[DarkCloud]

Culture-

The Celts were stationed in the England part of the world at the time of the Roman Empire but technically were 'barbarians' (I use the word loosely)

The Gauls are the ancestors of the Franks who are the ancestors of the French. The Gauls resided in the area that is now France at the time of the Roman Empire and were not quite as good at defeating the Romans as the Germanic Tribes, but succeeded to fail. They were technically 'barbarians'.

However the Celts were roughly more advanced and had some 'magical workings' (Rudimentary Root Knowledge and that of Science)

[S. Kroeze]

quote: Originally posted by Lazy Jay on 11-26-2000 07:40 PM Some may disagree with this, but I'm pretty sure that at a cultural level the Celts and Gauls were the same. To the best of my knowledge the only difference is the name.

The Celts were stationed in the England part of the world at the time of the Roman Empire but technically were 'barbarians' (I use the word loosely)

The Gauls are the ancestors of the Franks who are the ancestors of the French. The Gauls resided in the area that is now France at the time of the Roman Empire and were not quite as good at defeating the Romans as the Germanic Tribes, but succeeded to fail. They were technically 'barbarians'.

However the Celts were roughly more advanced and had some 'magical workings' (Rudimentary Root Knowledge and that of Science)

I beg your pardon!?

Celt

"also spelled KELT, Latin CELTA, plural Celtae, a member of an early Indo-European people who from the 2nd millennium BC to the 1st century BC spread over much of Europe. Their tribes and groups eventually ranged from the British Isles and northern Spain to as far east as Transylvania, the Black Sea coasts, and Galatia in Anatolia and were in part absorbed into the Roman Empire as Britons, Gauls, Boii, Galatians, and Celtiberians. Linguistically they survive in the modern Celtic speakers of Ireland, Highland Scotland, the Isle of Man, Wales, and Brittany.

The oldest archaeological evidence of the Celts comes from Hallstatt, Austria, near Salzburg. Excavated graves of chieftains there, dating from about 700 BC, exhibit an Iron Age culture (one of the first in Europe) which received in Greek trade such luxury items as bronze and pottery vessels. It would appear that these wealthy Celts, based from Bavaria to Bohemia, controlled trade routes along the river systems of the Rhône, Seine, Rhine, and Danube and were the predominant and unifying element among the Celts. In their westward movement the Hallstatt warriors overran Celtic peoples of their own kind, incidentally introducing the use of iron, one of the reasons for their own overlordship.

For the centuries after the establishment of trade with the Greeks, the archaeology of the Celts can be followed with greater precision. By the mid-5th century BC the La Tène culture, with its distinctive art style of abstract geometric designs and stylized bird and animal forms, had begun to emerge among the Celts centred on the middle Rhine, where trade with the Etruscans of central Italy, rather than with the Greeks, was now becoming predominant. Between the 5th and 1st centuries BC the La Tène culture accompanied the migrations of Celtic tribes into eastern Europe and westward into the British Isles.

Although Celtic bands probably had penetrated into northern Italy from earlier times, the year 400 BC is generally accepted as the approximate date for the beginning of the great invasion of migrating Celtic tribes whose names Insubres, Boii, Senones, and Lingones were recorded by later Latin historians. Rome was sacked by Celts about 390, and raiding bands wandered about the whole peninsula and reached Sicily. The Celtic territory south of the Alps where they settled came to be known as Cisalpine Gaul (Gallia Cisalpina), and its warlike inhabitants remained an ever-constant menace to Rome until their defeat at Telamon in 225.

Dates associated with the Celts in their movement into the Balkans are 335 BC, when Alexander the Great received delegations of Celts living near the Adriatic, and 279, when Celts sacked Delphi in Greece but suffered defeat at the hands of the Aetolians. In the following year, three Celtic tribes crossed the Bosporus into Anatolia and created widespread havoc. By 276 they had settled in parts of Phrygia but continued raiding and pillage until finally quelled by Attalus I of Pergamum about 230. In Italy, meanwhile, Rome had established supremacy over the whole of Cisalpine Gaul by 192 and, in 124, had conquered territory beyond the western Alps--in the provincia (Provence).

The final episodes of Celtic independence were enacted in Transalpine Gaul (Gallia Transalpina), which comprised the whole territory from the Rhine River and the Alps westward to the Atlantic. The threat was twofold: Germanic tribes pressing westward toward and across the Rhine, and the Roman arms in the south poised for further annexations. The Germanic onslaught was first felt in Bohemia, the land of the Boii, and in Noricum, a Celtic kingdom in the eastern Alps. The German assailants were known as the Cimbri, a people generally thought to have originated in Jutland (Denmark). A Roman army sent to the relief of Noricum in 113 BC was defeated, and thereafter the Cimbri, now joined by the Teutoni, ravaged widely in Transalpine Gaul, overcoming all Gaulish and Roman resistance. On attempting to enter Italy, these German marauders were finally routed by Roman armies in 102 and 101. There is no doubt that, during this period, many Celtic tribes, formerly living east of the Rhine, were forced to seek refuge west of the Rhine; and these migrations, as well as further German threats, gave Julius Caesar the opportunity (58 BC) to begin the campaigns that led to the Roman annexation of the whole of Gaul.

The Celtic settlement of Britain and Ireland is deduced mainly from archaeological and linguistic considerations. The only direct historical source for the identification of an insular people with the Celts is Caesar's report of the migration of Belgic tribes to Britain, but the inhabitants of both islands were regarded by the Romans as closely related to the Gauls.

Information on Celtic institutions is available from various classical authors and from the body of ancient Irish literature. The social system of the tribe, or "people," was threefold: king, warrior aristocracy, and freemen farmers. The druids, who were occupied with magico-religious duties, were recruited from families of the warrior class but ranked higher. Thus Caesar's distinction between druides (man of religion and learning), eques (warrior), and plebs (commoner) is fairly apt. As in other Indo-European systems, the family was patriarchal. The basic economy of the Celts was mixed farming, and, except in times of unrest, single farmsteads were usual. Owing to the wide variations in terrain and climate, cattle raising was more important than cereal cultivation in some regions. Hill forts provided places of refuge, but warfare was generally open and consisted of single challenges and combat as much as of general fighting. La Tène art gives witness to the aesthetic qualities of the Celts, and they greatly prized music and many forms of oral literary composition."
(source: www.britannica.com, article 'Celt')

So while most Gauls were linguistically Celts, the Gauls formed only one of many Celtic language groups!
And the Gauls were indeed the ancestors of the French, but not of the Franks. The Franks were one of the many Germanic tribes which from about350AD overran and invaded the Roman empire.

I have never before encountered the idea that the culture of the British Celts was superior to the culture of the Gaulish Celts. It would surprise me highly, because the Gauls had from about 600BC regular contact with the Greeks in southern France (Massilia), with the Etruscans, with Carthaginians in Spain and from about 200BC with the Romans.
And the culture of those Celts, both Britons and Gauls, was certainly more advanced than that of the Germanic tribes.
[This message has been edited by S. Kroeze (edited November 27, 2000).]

[DarkCloud]

Well, I was mostly right on most subjects;

*England WAS conquered by Romans and the Celts were conquered. (At one time)
*The Gauls resided in France

However I apologize about my statement about the Franks who were a barbarian tribe from the East.

[Ribannah]

Some tribes that haven't been mentioned yet:

[1] Apaches
[2] Cheyennes
[3] Crow
[4] Inuit

These North-American tribes formed nations like the Sioux and Navahos did.

[4] Jemenites
[5] Kurds

[6] Polynesians (major)

[7] Ethiopians (major)
[8] Ghanese (includes Ashanti)
[9] Kongo (Zairese)
[10] Masai
[11] Tanzanians (includes Zanzibar)
[12] Tuareg


------------------
If you have no feet, don't walk on fire